法華文句記 4.60

4.60

次「今明」下正解中，先述標章，次正釋中文為三意：初列章，次引聖言為證，三正釋。引證文中初二文可見，次引離合中云「止止不須說」等者，以此十法隨自隨他，唯佛決了，故云「我法妙難思」。但引合文義兼於離，既云難思方能遍逗，故須離也。引約位中云「唯佛與佛等」者，三德極理非七方便所知故也。雖復不知諸位法爾，故分此十所屬不同。三正釋者，初十界中為十：先標列，次「法雖」下界如攝法，三「如地獄」下示相，四「故毘曇」下以小例大，五「當知」下以理準例知有界如，六「若照」下判。言「自位」者，雖明十界界界各十，且照當界以九為權、以一為實，故須結云一中無量，一界具十，一一十如，若自若他、若因若果在一心故，故云無量中一、一中無量，不可以一說、不可以多說，不可以權說、不可以實說，因果善惡空有大小、凡聖漸頓開合心法依正，一多自在，一切諸法悉皆如是。是知譚法界者未窮斯妙，致使惑果事而迷因理。七「若照六道」下兼破光宅，光宅既無十界，今且依彼破之。縱依十界各具十如，當分歷歷思議境耳。況復光宅但在四聖四五不同。八「所以」下結位，先重立境云「一中無量」。「凡夫絕理」等者，自鄙無分故云「絕理」，隨想異見故云「情迷」，既絕且迷徒具何益？「二乘」等者，即二教二乘，三道即是捨而不觀，避空求空反資小脫。「菩薩」等者，藏通照六、別照次第，故云不周，皆迷己界不達佛界，不了了言尚該十地，故今應指別地及因。「橫竪具足」者，一中無量為橫，無量即一為竪，多一相即故云具足。九「唯獨」下引證，結意如文。十「上玄義」下指廣，具如《玄》文境妙末云「舒之則充滿法界，不知從何而來？收之則莫知所在，不知從何而去？」及釋法中廣釋十界十如也。

Next, in the correct explanation below 'Now to clarify': first, he states the presentation of the section; next, in the main explanation, the text has three points: first, listing the headings; second, citing the holy words as proof; third, the main explanation. In the text citing the proof, the first two passages are evident. Next, in citing the separation and combination, the text says 'Stop, stop, there is no need to speak' and so on; because these ten dharmas—whether following oneself or following others—are definitively understood by the Buddha alone, it says: 'My Dharma is wondrous and inconceivable.' Merely citing the combined text implicitly contains the separated; since it says 'inconceivable,' it can only then universally adapt to capacities, and so there must be separation. In citing according to stages, the text says 'Only a buddha together with a buddha' and so forth, because the ultimate principle of the three virtues cannot be known by the seven expedients. Although they do not know it, the natural state of the various stages is so; therefore these ten are divided as belonging differently. Third, regarding the main explanation, within the first, the ten realms, there are ten [sections]: first, indicating and listing them; second, below 'Dharmas, though...', the realms and suchnesses subsuming dharmas; third, below 'Like hell...', showing the characteristics; fourth, below 'Therefore the Abhidharma...', taking the small as an analogy for the great; fifth, below 'One should know...', inferring by principle to know that the realms and suchnesses exist; sixth, below 'If illuminating...', making the evaluation. Regarding 'one's own stage': although he clarifies that the ten realms each have ten, for now, illuminating the present realm, he takes nine as provisional and one as real; therefore he must conclude by saying that within the one there is the immeasurable, and one realm is endowed with ten. Each of the ten suchnesses, whether self or other, whether cause or fruit, resides in a single thought; therefore it is said that the one is within the immeasurable and the immeasurable is within the one. It cannot be spoken of as one, nor can it be spoken of as many; it cannot be spoken of as provisional, nor can it be spoken of as real. Cause and fruit, good and evil, emptiness and existence, great and small, ordinary and holy, gradual and sudden, opening and combining, mind and dharma, primary and environmental rewards—the one and the many are unobstructed; all dharmas are completely like this. Thus we know that those who discuss the dharma realm have not plumbed this wonder, causing them to be confused by the phenomena of the fruit and deluded about the principle of the cause. Seventh, below 'If illuminating the six destinies...', he also refutes Guāngzhái. Since Guāngzhái lacked the ten realms, for now he refutes him on his own terms. Even if one relies on the ten realms as each possessing the ten suchnesses, distinctly discerned within their own portions, this is still merely a conceivable realm of cognition. How much more so given that Guāngzhái merely stays within the four noble [realms] with their difference of four and five! Eighth, below 'Therefore...', he concludes the stages, first re-establishing the realm of cognition by saying 'within the one there is the immeasurable.' Regarding 'Ordinary beings are cut off from principle' and so on: despising oneself as having no share, he says 'cut off from principle'; following conceptualizations and divergent views, he says 'deluded by emotion.' Being both cut off and deluded, what benefit is there in merely possessing [these suchnesses] in vain? Regarding 'The two vehicles' and so on: these are the two vehicles of the two teachings; regarding the three paths, they abandon them without contemplating them, evading emptiness to seek emptiness, which on the contrary merely aids their small liberation. Regarding 'Bodhisattvas' and so on: the Tripiṭaka and Shared illuminate the six, while the Distinct illuminates them in sequence; hence it is said to be 'not comprehensive.' All are deluded about their own realm and do not reach the Buddha's realm; the statement about 'not seeing clearly' still covers the ten grounds, so now it should refer to the grounds and causes of the Distinct [teaching]. Regarding 'complete both horizontally and vertically': the immeasurable within the one is horizontal; the immeasurable being identical to the one is vertical. Because the many and the one are mutually identical, it is called 'complete.' Ninth, below 'Only alone...', he cites the proof; the intended conclusion is as in the text. Tenth, below 'The above Profound Meaning...', he directs the reader to the extensive explanation: it is fully as in the text of the Profound Meaning, at the end of the Wondrous Realm of Cognition, which says, 'Expanded, it fills the dharma realm, not knowing whence it comes; contracted, its location cannot be known, not knowing whither it goes,' as well as the extensive explanation of the ten realms and ten suchnesses within the explanation of the dharma.