法華文句記 3.46

3.46

正釋中先述古，次「觀文」下且總非之，「說法」下釋出顯是。於中先明非縮，次明非盈。初文準義在初二句中，故非縮也。於中先立，但舉放光動地之末，則知說法入定之本，若無定慧安能現變？次「他不見」下責，「今反」下引答以難。「又問」下覈出問處，「今指」下答也。前長行但總問放光，若執唯光是問餘不問者，應當非瑞，則雨華動地尚不成瑞，何獨說法及入定耶？放光既在此土瑞終，仍居他土六瑞之首，故總舉一光通收二六。況「若更」下別問導師兩字，義自兼之。

In the correct explanation, it first relates the ancient [views]; next, from 'observing the text' downwards, it temporarily negates them as a whole; from 'preaching the Dharma' downwards, it explains and reveals the correct view. Within this, it first clarifies that there is no curtailment, and next clarifies that there is no excess. The first passage, based on the meaning, is contained within the first two lines, and thus there is no curtailment. Within this, it first establishes: simply by citing the end—emitting light and shaking the earth—one knows the origin—preaching the Dharma and entering samādhi. If there were no samādhi and wisdom, how could the transformations be displayed? Next, from 'others do not see' downwards, it rebukes; from 'now conversely' downwards, it cites the answer to refute. From 'also asked' downwards, it examines the locus of the question; from 'now points' downwards, it answers. The preceding prose only asked in general about emitting light; if one insists that only the light was asked about and the rest was not, then they should not be portents, in which case the raining of flowers and the shaking of the earth would not yet constitute portents either, so why speak only of preaching the Dharma and entering samādhi? Since emitting light was the end of the portents in this land and also occupied the head of the six portents in the other lands, generally citing the single light comprehensively gathers both groups of six. How much more so, as from 'if further' downwards, it specifically asks about the two characters 'Guiding Master' (nāyaka), which by meaning naturally encompass them.