法華文句記 5.126

5.126

「用頌歎法敦信」者，然上文料簡有無中云頌中無真偽者，即無敦信也。今此中用頌歎法敦信者，但是通方敦勸凡夫使其生信，故云歎法敦信，以無專敦聲聞之語，故前云無耳。「今但頌數名體三也」者，此中從六道已去頌上五濁，此五即數，六必五故。「此貧窮」等即是出體，以此五法即名濁故，亦無別名。「舉下證上」等者，此引長者在門外文，入即起應、外即法身，復云佛眼，故所見機即佛法界。「若根」下思無大機，方入鹿苑。鹿苑之初既云圓照乃至一乘，故知華嚴佛慧無別，不可於此強生分別。「佛眼」下「云云」者，應廣分別此之五眼次及不次，而辯體用，故觀色等用於四眼，從本為名仍名佛眼。「貧窮等為眾生濁」者，貧故由無福，癡故由無慧，癡貧眾生聚在一處，故名濁也。「入生死為命濁」者，於生死中又加嶮道，嶮道之中命易斷故，即短壽處而猶相續，為命濁也。「五欲為煩惱濁」者，名體最顯。「不求大勢佛等為劫濁」者，劫中無佛故名為濁，四濁生此亦無所求。劫若有佛，雖濁能破。入邪為見濁名體，亦顯六十二多，故名為「諸」。「或云諸見是即受」者，由此見故則有三受，見家之受故云「見即是受」。三受皆苦，以此苦受欲捨苦者，無有是處。「五道源來」者，五道，因也。從一至一故名為「趣」，「衰」秖是賊，能損耗故。「毘曇地獄初生念」者，一切地獄初生之時皆有三念：知此處是地獄，由某因故生，從某處而來。此文似不足，義已具三。「又云」者，亦《婆沙》文也。「五道各有自爾法」者，具如前釋不思議中。「解脫達分」者，涅槃名解脫，所修善根不住生死名之為達，聲聞三生、支佛百劫解脫之分，名解脫分。「得正決定」者，初果也。《婆沙》云：「云何得禪即根本禪，云何決定即是無漏，以無漏心修諸禪定得入初果，即此禪定而得解脫，解脫是初果即決定也。」「天中」至「所須即得云云」者，應明諸天自然報相，一切依報悉是化有，及山河流出其實報得，約受報時說名為自然。「地獄」至「中間可知」者，過去人中有順後業，其業未滿，至地獄中遇緣能起如是等心，業即成就，於地獄中無有身口現行故也。唯在輕報非無間也。廣簡可知，故今不論。「中陰倒懸」者，《俱舍》云：「天首上三橫，地獄頭歸下」，此約人中天在人上，旁生及鬼同在此洲，故非上下，獄在此下故頭歸下，從獄生人理合首上，鬼畜亦然。天來生人其首必下，他皆例此。「初將罪人至閻王所」等者，有情非情並是共業所感，而為心變。「初皆正語」等者，初至地獄如本有語，後時但作波波等聲，不復可辯。「劫初時」等者，諸教相中畜生能言，皆此時也。「後生云祖父」者，從初受名，二者後生亦是後生之祖父也。「前是因緣」等者，從引《阿含》下即觀心解，前因緣中亦可具有四悉意也。五道不同即世界也，人是所為，惡是所破，天是第一義也。後似觀心者，從心判義義當觀心。六道不同，略如《止觀》第二記。諸論及以小乘諸經分別甚廣，不要不列。「我始坐」等者，準下引小雲疏意指《華嚴》也。故《地論》云：「佛成道後第二七日說華嚴也。」世講說者嗔《法華經》應佛所說，或責《地論》失於圓宗。今問，此之二七日與法華中三七何別？縱賒促不同及所說各異，秖是機別顯密有殊，說時既然，身相亦爾。當知《法華》報佛所說，如《論》云：「一者報佛菩提，如經我成佛來等也。」應佛菩提則指伽耶，古德皆云：伽耶既非彼長何獨是乎！即成法佛說也。《地論》既云二七日，乃表應佛說之。豈報佛成及以說法必第二七耶？理而言之，彼此無別，機見不一大小分途，小見三七停留，大覩始終無改，故二七之言知非盡理。若云不起道樹而遊鹿苑，此即迹中圓佛成相。復準部意義兼於別，小機所覩弊服宛然。今此正當小化之首，道場在摩竭提國西南，去尼連河不遠。《西域記》云：「菩提樹所周匝累甎，崇峻嶮固，東西長南北狹，周五百餘步，正中有金剛座」，此即迹中化佛之道場也。

Regarding “using verses to praise the Dharma and urge faith”: in the earlier distinction between presence and absence, it stated that because there is no [distinction between] true and false in the verses, there is no urging of faith. Here, “using verses to praise the Dharma and urge faith” merely means generally urging and exhorting ordinary beings to cause them to generate faith; therefore it is said to “praise the Dharma and urge faith.” Because there are no words specifically urging the śrāvakas, it previously said there were none. Regarding “now only versifying the three of number, name, and essence”: herein, from the six destinies onward, the five defilements above are versified; these five are the number, for the six necessarily entail the five. “These impoverished...” and so forth is the presentation of the essence, because these five dharmas are named the defilements; there are no other separate names. Regarding “citing what follows to verify what precedes” and so forth: this cites the passage where the Elder is outside the gate; entering is manifesting the response [body], and being outside is the dharmakāya. Furthermore, it speaks of the “buddha-eye,” so the capacity seen is the buddha-dharmadhātu. From “if faculties...” below, contemplating that there is no great capacity, he then enters the Deer Park. Since the beginning of the Deer Park is already said to be “perfectly illuminating” up to the “One Vehicle,” we know that between the Avataṃsaka and buddha-wisdom there is no difference; one must not forcibly make distinctions here. Regarding the “etc.” under “buddha-eye”: one should extensively distinguish whether these five eyes are sequential or non-sequential, and differentiate essence and function; thus, contemplating colors and the like employs the four eyes, while named from the root it is still called the buddha-eye. Regarding “the impoverished and so forth are the defilement of sentient beings”: impoverished because of lacking merit, and ignorant because of lacking wisdom; ignorant and impoverished sentient beings gathered together in one place is called the defilement. Regarding “entering birth-and-death is the defilement of life span”: within birth-and-death, the perilous path is further added; because life easily ends on the perilous path, even in a place of short life span continuity persists, which is the defilement of life span. Regarding “the five desires are the defilement of afflictions”: its name and essence are most obvious. Regarding “not seeking the Buddha of great power and so forth is the defilement of the kalpa”: because there is no Buddha in the kalpa, it is named defilement; the four defilements arise here, and there is also nothing sought. If there is a Buddha in the kalpa, though defiled it can be shattered. Entering the heterodox is the defilement of views; its name and essence are also evident, and because the sixty-two [views] are many, it is called “various.” Regarding “some say various views are themselves feeling”: through these views, the three feelings arise; feelings belonging to views are therefore called “views are themselves feeling.” The three feelings are all suffering; using this suffering feeling to wish to abandon suffering is impossible. Regarding “the origin of the five destinies”: the five destinies are causes. Going from one to another is called “gati” (destiny). “Decay” is simply a thief, because it can diminish and consume. Regarding “the initial thought upon being born into hell in the Abhidharma”: at the initial moment of birth in all hells, there are three thoughts: knowing that this place is hell, that one is born due to a certain cause, and that one has come from a certain place. This passage seems incomplete, but the meaning already contains the three. Regarding “it also says”: this is also a passage from the Vibhāṣā. Regarding “the five destinies each have their spontaneous dharma”: it is fully as explained earlier under the inconceivable. Regarding “the stage of attaining liberation”: Nirvāṇa is called liberation; the wholesome roots cultivated not dwelling in birth-and-death is called attaining; the śrāvaka's three lives and the pratyekabuddha's hundred kalpas of the portion of liberation are called the stage of attaining liberation. Regarding “attaining correct determination”: this is the first fruit. The Vibhāṣā states: “What is attaining dhyāna? It is fundamental dhyāna. What is determination? It is the undefiled (anāsrava). Cultivating various dhyānas with an undefiled mind allows one to enter the first fruit; from this very dhyāna one attains liberation, and liberation is the first fruit, which is determination.” From “in the heavens” to “what is needed is immediately obtained, etc.”: one should clarify the natural reward-characteristics of the heavens; all environmental rewards are manifested transformations, and even the flowing of mountains and rivers is obtained as their actual reward, spoken of as “spontaneous” in terms of experiencing the reward. From “hell” to “the intermediate can be understood”: in the past among humans, there was karma to be experienced subsequently; when that karma was not yet exhausted, upon reaching hell and encountering conditions, such minds can arise and the karma is fulfilled, for in hell there is no physical or vocal active manifestation. This applies only to light rewards, not the Avīci hell. Being extensively differentiated and understandable, it is not discussed now. Regarding “intermediate existence suspended upside down”: the Kośa says, “Heads of devas are upward; the three are horizontal; heads of hell beings face downward.” This is said in reference to the human realm: devas are above humans; animals and ghosts share this continent, so they are neither above nor below; hells are below here, so their heads face downward. When born into humanity from hell, their heads naturally face upward; the same is true for ghosts and animals. When devas come to be born as humans, their heads must face downward; other cases are all modeled on this. Regarding “first taking the sinful person to King Yama’s place” and so forth: the sentient and the insentient are both influenced by shared karma, yet transformed by the mind. Regarding “at first, all speak properly” and so forth: when first arriving in hell, they speak as in their original state; later, they only make sounds like “bobo” and can no longer be discerned. Regarding “at the beginning of the kalpa” and so forth: in the doctrinal characteristics, when animals can speak, it is always at this time. Regarding “later-born called grandfather”: first, taking the name from the beginning; second, the later-born is also the grandfather of the later-born. Regarding “the preceding is causes and conditions” and so forth: from the citation of the Āgamas onward is the interpretation from contemplation of mind; the preceding causes and conditions can also contain the intent of the four siddhāntas. The differences among the five destinies are the mundane [siddhānta]; humans are [the siddhānta of] for the sake of persons; evil is [the siddhānta of] diagnosis; heaven is the supreme truth [siddhānta]. The latter resembles contemplation of mind because determining the meaning from the mind corresponds to contemplation of mind. The differences among the six destinies are briefly as in the second fascicle of the Notes on Cessation and Contemplation. The various treatises and Hīnayāna sūtras distinguish them very extensively; what is not essential is not listed. Regarding “when I first sat...” and so forth: according to the commentary of Master Xiaoyun cited below, the intent refers to the Avataṃsaka. Thus the Daśabhūmika-śāstra states: “The Buddha taught the Avataṃsaka on the second seventh-day after attaining awakening.” Lecturers in the world are angry that the Lotus Sūtra was spoken by the response buddha, or reproach the Daśabhūmika-śāstra for losing the perfect teaching. Now I ask: what difference is there between this second seventh-day and the three seventh-days in the Lotus? Even if the duration differs and what was preached is distinct, it is merely that capacities differ and the manifest and secret diverge. Since the time of preaching is such, the physical marks are also like this. One should know that the Lotus was preached by the reward buddha, as the treatise states: “First is the reward buddha’s bodhi, as in the sūtra’s ‘since I attained buddhahood’ and so forth.” The response buddha’s bodhi points to Gayā. The ancient worthies all said: “Since Gayā is not that long ago, how could this alone be so?” Thus it is preached by the dharma buddha. Since the Daśabhūmika-śāstra says the second seventh-day, it indicates that the response buddha spoke it. Could the reward buddha's attainment and preaching of the Dharma necessarily be on the second seventh-day? In terms of principle, between this and that there is no difference; capacities and views are not uniform, and the Great and Small diverge. The Small sees three seventh-days of lingering; the Great sees beginning and end without alteration. Hence we know the statement of two seventh-days does not exhaust the principle. If it is said that without rising from the bodhi tree he traveled to the Deer Park, this is the mark of attainment of the perfect buddha within traces. Furthermore, matching the doctrinal division, the meaning also includes the distinct teaching; what the small capacity sees is clearly the impoverished garb. Now, this directly corresponds to the head of the small conversion: the place of awakening is in the southwest of the country of Magadha, not far from the Nairañjanā River. The Records of the Western Regions says: “The site of the bodhi tree is surrounded by piled bricks, high, steep, and secure, long from east to west and narrow from north to south, over five hundred paces around; directly in the center is the vajrāsana.” This is the place of awakening of the transformation buddha within traces.