法華文句記 3.151

3.151

「六十小劫如食頃」者，六十與五十、食頃與半日，數似少異，皆即長而短，故云同也。生公云：「豈實然乎？表重法心志故寄時云耳。」若云寄時，應言如六十小劫，何得直云六十小劫謂如食頃？故但情謂非實短也。信六十小劫經文非虛，聞法之志加以佛威，一坐經時忘其久耳。注家初引《淨名》「促劫為日、演日為劫」者，乃是佛促以為食頃，此則違經謂如之言，猶不如於重法之志，但言寄時與經背耳。引奢促已，乃云況玄匠真一之門，何為不以歷劫為數刻耶？雖復況釋，理竟未彰。今謂且如世人苦則以短為長、樂則以長為短，此亦情謂之長短也。有云：受佛法食美未飽故。此喻稍通。有人於此立以四句，如《中論》破，此亦不然。必非聽者於中修觀，乃是佛力及聽者忘時，故知《中論》觀法但被末代鈍根者耳。《經》「梵魔」等者，梵即色主亦三界主，魔為欲主。沙門此云勤息，勤息惡故。婆羅門者，此云淨行，外道中出家云淨行種也。古人濫以此釋四眾者，若攝眾足，何以更云及天人等，所列不同並趣舉耳。此中先舉欲色二主，四姓舉勝六道標善，並且從勝。略餘惡道者，皆取入佛法易者耳。古昔既爾今佛亦然。「迦葉佛」下「云云」者，應明佛興土有淨穢，涅槃進不以例燈明，是故迦葉以土淨故，法華唱滅即入滅也。「今佛」等者，長行末云「即時釋迦牟尼佛以神通力，接諸大眾皆在虛空，以大音聲普告大眾，誰能於此娑婆國土，廣說此經？今正是時，如來不久當般涅槃。」但今佛雖唱而未即滅，故云「不久」。〈信解〉亦云「將死不久」，以在穢土須說贖命為捃拾故，扶律說常令久住故，兼權明實助發實故，帶實用權顯權力故，過常未常始末一故，色身常身無生滅故，雖此不同唱滅事等。

Regarding 'sixty small kalpas were like the space of a meal,' sixty and fifty, and the space of a meal and half a day, seem slightly different in number, but both identify the long with the short; hence they are said to be the same. Master Daosheng said: 'Could it be truly so? It merely borrows time to express the mind and resolve that value the Dharma.' If one says it borrows time, it should say 'like sixty small kalpas'; how could it directly say 'sixty small kalpas were thought to be like the space of a meal'? Therefore it is merely an emotional impression, not genuinely short. Trusting that the sūtra text of sixty small kalpas is not false, the resolve of listening to the Dharma combined with the Buddha's awe-inspiring power caused them, in a single sitting as time passed, to forget its duration. The commentator initially cited the Vimalakīrti saying 'compressing a kalpa into a day, extending a day into a kalpa'—this would mean the Buddha compressed it to make it the space of a meal, which then contradicts the word 'thought to be' in the sūtra; this is not as good as the resolve that values the Dharma, whereas merely saying 'borrowing time' contradicts the sūtra. Having cited extension and compression, he then says: 'How much more so for the gateway of the true one of the mysterious master—why would he not take kalpas passed through as a few moments?' Although this is an a fortiori explanation, the principle is ultimately not made clear. We now say: just as when worldly people suffer they take the short to be long, and when joyful take the long to be short, this too is an emotional impression of long and short. Some say: Because they tasted the delicious food of the Buddha's Dharma without being sated. This analogy is somewhat passable. Someone here constructed a tetralemma regarding this, which is refuted as in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā; this too is not so. It was certainly not that the listeners cultivated contemplation therein; it was rather the Buddha's power and the listeners forgetting the time. Hence we know that the contemplation methods of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā only cater to the dull-rooted in the latter age. Regarding 'brahmās, māras' and so forth in the sūtra: brahmā is the lord of form and also the lord of the three realms; māra is the lord of desire. Śramaṇa is translated here as 'diligently putting to rest,' because one diligently puts to rest evil. Brāhmaṇa is translated here as 'pure conduct'; among non-Buddhists, those who leave home are called the lineage of pure conduct. Ancient commentators loosely used this to explain the fourfold assembly; but if it subsumed the assembly completely, why would it further mention 'gods, humans, and so forth'? The various listings are not the same, and both merely give general indications. Here, it first lists the two lords of desire and form; among the four castes it cites the superior, and among the six destinies it indicates the good, moreover following the superior. In omitting the other evil destinies, it takes those who easily enter the Buddha's Dharma. As it was in ancient times, so it is with the present Buddha. Regarding 'and so forth' following 'Kāśyapa Buddha': one should clarify that in the arising of buddhas, lands have pure and defiled, and nirvanic advancement or non-advancement is analogized to Candrasūryapradīpa; therefore, because Kāśyapa's land was pure, upon proclaiming extinction in the Lotus he immediately entered extinction. Regarding 'the present Buddha' and so forth: the end of the prose section says, 'Immediately Śākyamuni Buddha, using his supernatural power, took the great assembly up into the empty sky and with a great voice universally addressed the great assembly: "Who is able in this sahā world to broadly preach this sūtra? Now is precisely the time; the Tathāgata will soon enter parinirvāṇa."' But although the present Buddha proclaimed it, he did not immediately enter extinction; hence it says 'soon.' The 'Faith and Understanding' chapter also says 'about to die soon.' Because he was in a defiled land, it was necessary to preach the redemption of life as a gleaning; to uphold the vinaya and preach permanence to make it abide long; to combine the provisional and clarify the real to assist in revealing the real; to carry the real and employ the provisional to manifest the power of the provisional; because transcending permanence and not yet permanent are one from beginning to end; and because the physical body and the permanent body have neither birth nor extinction—though differing in these regards, the matter of proclaiming extinction is equal.