法華文句記 5.121

5.121

「今謂」下正示義宗，宗旨別故，故云「正是」等也。「前直法說」下欲破諸師立譬不能盡理，故先騰三周理同。次「若作」下辯古譬之失，故云「若作三六十譬，於三周不合」也。如前所列瑤三、暢龍各六、光宅有十，然今文非不立於三六等數，但分節盈縮與他不同。言「於三周不合」者，法譬不合已略如上，於宿世文秖可分為二譬三譬，故多不可。言「四人信解乖離」者，若對信解秖可總六別四，若對他五三六及今十八，則乖張離分，具如前破光宅十譬，故破古已自立三等，今立三者如下文云。又一時三譬，若為五者如總一別四，若為六者如總別各六，若為十者即總六別四，亦可為十一即總一別十，亦可為十六即總六別十，亦可十八如前十八句也，但本下承上，不相應耳。若欲通於上下不差，但依三節銷文；若應四處，但為三譬四譬；若但在法譬，則略六廣六。「安隱」至「住處」者，佛既已證，亦令眾生住於此處，而今眾生尚住三界不安隱處，扣佛大悲致令驚入。言「種種法門即對不種種」者，亦是從佛本意以說。如來本以一門利物，事不獲已施種種門，施權之意本在顯實，故云宣示於佛道。佛道唯實，以權對實、引權入實，故云相對，相對秖是感應意耳。「本末相承」等者，本法說也，末譬等也。「云云」者，如下所引。

Under “I now state”, the fundamental doctrine is directly demonstrated; because the essential purport is distinct, it says “is precisely”, etc. Under “The preceding direct dharma explanation”, desiring to refute the various masters' formulation of similes as incapable of exhausting the principle, it first brings up the identity of principle in the three cycles. Next, under “If one makes”, it distinguishes the errors of the ancient similes; hence it says, “If one makes three, six, or ten similes, they do not accord with the three cycles.” As listed before: Yao has three, Chang and Long each have six, and Guangzhai has ten. However, our present text does not reject establishing numbers such as three or six; it is only that our division of sections and their expansion or contraction differ from theirs. As for “do not accord with the three cycles”: that dharma and simile do not accord has already been briefly explained above; in the text on past lives, it can only be divided into two similes or three similes, so many are impossible. Regarding “the faith and understanding of the four persons is discordant and separated”: if matched against faith and understanding, it can only be a general six and specific four; if matched against their five, three, or six, and our present eighteen, they are discordant and divided, fully as in the previous refutation of Guangzhai’s ten similes. Therefore, having refuted the ancients, we establish our own three, etc.; our present establishment of three is as stated in the text below. Furthermore, in one instance there are three similes; if made into five, it is like the general one and specific four; if made into six, it is like the general and specific six each; if made into ten, it is the general six and specific four; it can also be eleven, namely the general one and specific ten; it can also be sixteen, namely the general six and specific ten; it can also be eighteen, like the previous eighteen lines; it is just that the lower basing on the upper and the upper receiving the lower do not correspond. If one wishes to make it run through from top to bottom without error, one need only interpret the text according to the three divisions; if corresponding to four places, it is only three similes or four similes; if only in the dharma and simile, then it is the abridged six and expanded six. Regarding “peaceful” to “dwelling place”: since the Buddha has already realised it, he also causes sentient beings to dwell in this place; but now sentient beings still dwell in the unpeaceful place of the triple world, stimulating the Buddha’s great compassion to cause him to be alarmed and enter. Regarding “various dharma gates contrasts with not various”: this is also spoken from the Buddha’s original intention. The Tathāgata originally benefited beings with a single gate; unable to do otherwise, he bestowed various gates. The intention of bestowing the provisional was originally to reveal the real; hence it says, “proclaiming and demonstrating the Buddha path.” The Buddha path is solely real; contrasting the provisional with the real and leading the provisional into the real, it is therefore called contrasting; contrasting is merely the meaning of stimulus and response. Regarding “the root and branch mutually succeeding each other”, etc.: the root is the dharma explanation; the branch is the similes, etc. Regarding “and so on”: it is as cited below.