法華文句記 5.25

5.25

「昔方便教」等者，別初地已去以分四義，即初地為開、從二至六為示、七八為悟、第十為入，而帶地前非佛知見，故別知見不可即為眾生開之，既依別義，亦可通取三賢十地次第對之。或準古師，如前諸釋判八恒中後四恒是，故別知見信經劫數，頗到故也。通教見地開、薄地示、離欲悟、已辦入。三藏教中若約二乘準通教說，若約菩薩，則初祇為開、二祇為示、第三為悟、百劫為入，若兼聖位則以第三百劫為悟、三十四心斷結為入，此之二教始終不明佛知見也。以當教不說是故云無，不可將《婆沙》四階、《般若》三共、《瓔珞》次第，能消《法華》佛之知見。故知知見開示等名，名可通用，佛之一字唯局此經。若其欲以佛義通用，則以當教發心皆求當教佛果，故使開等亦得云佛，而須簡部簡教而已。釋人一中言但化菩薩者據佛意說，窮子自謂準次第論，今從開說故云人一，教行準知。行一中光宅為教一者，約今判文與光宅不同，非立名也，光宅立名多同舊師。「為圓故諸即是一事」者，所作名諸，一是所為，一秖是圓，即是一家之諸諸無不一故也。「亦可」等者，兩向釋也。約教主者，諸有所作常為六字，以明說意，意在所為故云一，一家之事故云事，却指所作為事，故云教化。「若就行」下牒約行釋，準前初意。若準前文既以智為行，至今釋行應具指四智，若不爾者用是行為教指四門，此亦如是。能稟之人還修前觀，下二準此，釋理具列良由此也。「然四句」下，今家一一兩向釋之。若論義有兩向，且依今文，古亦無妨；約經文勢所歸須依今釋，文勢雖爾，若以義兼皆具四義。

"The expedient teachings of the past," and so forth: dividing the four meanings from the first stage of the separate [teaching] onward, namely, the first stage is opening, from the second to the sixth is revealing, the seventh and eighth are awakening to, and the tenth is entering; yet since they carry what is prior to the stages, this is not the buddha-knowledge and vision, so the separate knowledge and vision cannot immediately be opened for sentient beings. Since this relies on the separate meaning, one may also comprehensively take the three worthies and ten stages in sequence to match them. Or, conforming to the ancient masters, as in the previous various explanations determining that among the eight kalpas of the Ganges the latter four are it, because the separate knowledge and vision believes through kalpas and quite reaches it. In the common teaching, the stage of seeing is opening, the stage of thinning is revealing, the stage of freedom from desire is awakening to, and the stage of what has been done is entering. In the Tripiṭaka teaching, if in terms of the two vehicles, it is spoken of by analogy with the common teaching; if in terms of bodhisattvas, the first asaṃkhyeya is opening, the second asaṃkhyeya is revealing, the third is awakening to, and the hundred kalpas are entering; if combining the noble stages, then the third asaṃkhyeya and hundred kalpas are awakening to, and the thirty-four minds severing bonds are entering. These two teachings from beginning to end do not clarify the buddha-knowledge and vision. Because their respective teachings do not speak of it, it is therefore said to be absent; one cannot take the four stages of the Vibhāṣā, the three common [paths] of Prajñā, or the sequence of the Yingluo to interpret the buddha-knowledge and vision of the Lotus. Therefore one knows that the names "knowledge and vision," "opening and revealing," and so forth can be used generally, but the single word "Buddha" is restricted exclusively to this sūtra. If one wishes to use the meaning of "Buddha" generally, then because those who generate the mind in each teaching all seek the buddha-fruit of that teaching, opening and the rest are also allowed to be called "Buddha," but one must merely distinguish the category and distinguish the teaching. In explaining the oneness of persons, the statement "only transforming bodhisattvas" is spoken from the perspective of the Buddha's intent; the poor son's own understanding is discussed according to sequence; here, speaking from the perspective of opening, it is therefore called the oneness of persons, and teaching and practice are known by analogy. In the oneness of practice, that Guangzhai takes it as the oneness of teaching is because according to the present determination of the text it differs from Guangzhai; it is not establishing a name, for Guangzhai's establishment of names mostly agreed with the old masters. In "being perfect, the many are simply the one thing," what is performed is called "the many," the one is that which is intended, and one is simply perfect; this is because within our one school's "many," none are not one. "It may also," and so forth, is an explanation in two directions. In terms of the lord of the teaching, the six words "all that is performed is constantly for" are used to clarify the intent of the teaching: the intent lies in what is performed, hence it says "one"; it is the matter of one single school, hence it says "matter," pointing back to what is performed as the matter, hence it says "teaching and transforming." From "if in terms of practice" downward reiterates the explanation in terms of practice, by analogy with the first intent above. If by analogy with the previous text, since wisdom was taken as practice, now in explaining practice it should fully point to the four wisdoms; if not, using this practice as the teaching points to the four gates, and this is also like this. The person capable of receiving it in turn cultivates the previous contemplation; the subsequent two follow this, which is precisely why the explanation of principle lists them fully. Below "However, the four phrases," our school explains each in two directions. If discussing the meaning, there are two directions: provisionally relying on the present text, the ancient is also no hindrance; in terms of where the text's force leads, one must rely on the present explanation; although the text's force is such, if viewed comprehensively in terms of meaning, both possess all four meanings.