法華文句記 3.108

3.108

「大乘七善」者，既云通大小乘，《論》中又以聞思修三而為三時，《成論》又以少年中年老年所說為三，不同今人，今人老者所說非善。又亦以三乘為三，故云通也。今文以三段為三，其言仍通、其義則別；時節既爾，餘六準知。今經應云圓乘七善。「八音」者：一極好，二柔軟，三和適，四尊慧，五不女，六不誤，七深遠，八不竭。諸教悉有，從所宣異，判教不同，從所依異判佛差別，來至今教理無二途。「界內外」等者，別圓兩教攝彼二處，總名滿字故名圓滿。「師云」者，指南岳也。「又初」去重出異解。「金光明」者，如《金光明最勝王經》第四云：「此經希有難量，初中後善，其義究竟」，雖不云其語巧妙等，以餘文例可以意知，部雖方等，義圓極故可以證今。「前心」者謂住前。「中心」者謂登住。「後心」者即妙覺。理猶未顯名不思議，分證定慧名為「莊嚴」，惑究竟盡名為「不壞」。此三如來，凡有所說皆同一善。初心尚云不可思議，況復中後所說皆善，是故亦與說法同中時節同也，故但立三時，餘皆善也。有人云：「初句總，六句別，故離七為十。初離三故四義深，五語巧，六無雜，七具足，八清淨，九鮮白，十梵行。須為分其大小。」漸中不明方等般若者，但以六波羅蜜擬之，但是文略。既云答上種種修行，應具如上，頓漸既同橫竪不別，故知因光橫見，非但生彌勒問異之疑端，亦為文殊答同之先兆。又非但二聖問答之冥符，元是如來化道之玄旨，故主伴相與密設一途，使愜物機宜聞皆契轍。

As for the "seven goodnesses of the Great Vehicle": since they are said to be common to both the Great and Small Vehicles, in the Treatise they take hearing, thinking, and cultivating as the three periods, while the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* takes what is preached in youth, middle age, and old age as the three—unlike contemporary people, for what is spoken by contemporary people in old age is not good. They are also taken as the three vehicles, which is why they are called common. The present text takes the three sections as the three: its wording is still common, but its meaning is distinct. Since the time periods are like this, the remaining six [goodnesses] can be inferred accordingly. In the present sūtra, they should be called the seven goodnesses of the perfect vehicle. The "eight tones" are: first, supremely good; second, gentle; third, harmonious; fourth, dignified and wise; fifth, non-feminine; sixth, unerring; seventh, deep and far-reaching; eighth, inexhaustible. All teachings possess them; classifying the teachings differently derives from the differences in what is proclaimed, and classifying the buddhas' distinctions derives from the differences in what is relied upon; but when one arrives at the present teaching, the principle admits of no two paths. As for "within and beyond the realms" and so forth: the two teachings, distinct and perfect, encompass those two spheres; collectively named the "full letters," they are therefore called complete. "The master said" points to Nányuè. "Also, the beginning..." onward newly presents a different interpretation. As for the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa*, the fourth fascicle of the *Suvarṇaprabhāsottamarāja-sūtra* says: "This sūtra is rare and immeasurable; good in the beginning, middle, and end, its meaning is ultimate." Although it does not mention that its words are subtle and ingenious, by taking the other texts as an example, this can be known implicitly; although its division belongs to the vaipulya, because its meaning is perfect and ultimate, it can serve as evidence for the present text. "Former mind" refers to before the abodes. "Middle mind" refers to entering the abodes. "Latter mind" is wondrous enlightenment. When the principle is not yet manifested, it is called inconceivable; partial realization of samādhi and wisdom is called "adornment"; defilements being utterly exhausted is called "indestructible." Whatever these three Tathāgatas preach is identically of one goodness. If the initial mind is still called inconceivable, how much more so are the preachings of the middle and latter entirely good! Therefore, it is also identical with the time periods within the identity of preaching the Dharma; hence only three periods are established, and all the rest are good. Some say: "The first phrase is general, and the [remaining] six phrases are specific; therefore, dividing the seven makes ten. Because the first is divided into three, the fourth is deep meaning, the fifth is ingenious words, the sixth is unmixed, the seventh is complete, the eighth is pure, the ninth is immaculately white, and the tenth is brahma practice. One must divide them between Great and Small [Vehicles]." That the gradual does not clearly mention vaipulya and prajñā is merely because it considers them under the six pāramitās; this is merely an abridgment of the text. Since it is said to answer the manifold practices above, it should be fully as above; since the sudden and gradual are identical, horizontal and vertical are not distinct. Therefore, one knows that seeing horizontally due to the light not only gave rise to the grounds of Maitreya's doubt about difference, but also served as a harbinger of Mañjuśrī's answer of identity. Moreover, it is not merely the hidden correspondence of the two sages' question and answer; it was originally the profound intent of the Tathāgata's way of converting. Therefore, host and companions secretly established a single path together, causing it to suit the capacities of sentient beings so that all who hear accord with the track.