法華文句記 5.56

5.56

答中意者，具用前文第四句意。初障重也。次「若聞」下，根鈍也。佛尚未說，舊醫說於常我等名，順其計謂無常等名，能治於濁，故唯障大而不障小。如一種機，緣五濁未除不堪聞大，至鹿苑中以小治濁後方聞大，所以見若不除不堪聞常，計陰為德即四念處所治者是，騃亦癡也。故責舊醫專用邪常為不知乳，不識藥也。不知病等，不識病也。不知開等，不知授藥法也。不曉此三無客醫之術。二常不同如乳好惡，見惑輕重名曰根源，先斷後用故曰開遮。「餌」者，食也。食時異故，唯計常樂之名，故云不知好惡。說我增於邪習，故云不識根源。不了說常時異，故云不解開遮。故經云：「若佛世尊先說常者，受化之徒當言此法同彼外道」，故云「若但讚」等。兩醫具如《止觀》第三記。

The intention in the answer fully employs the meaning of the fourth proposition in the preceding text. The first is heavy obstruction. Next, from 'if they hear' onward, faculties are dull. Before the Buddha had taught, the old physicians spoke of terms such as 'permanent' and 'self'; conforming to their conceptions, terms such as 'impermanent' were spoken, which could cure the defilements; hence they obstruct only the Great and do not obstruct the small. It is like one kind of capacity: because the five defilements have not been removed, they cannot bear to hear the Great; arriving at the Deer Park, the small cures the defilements, after which they can hear the Great. Therefore, if views are not eliminated, they cannot bear to hear the permanent; conceiving the aggregates as virtues is precisely what is cured by the four applications of mindfulness; 'foolish' (ǎi) also means stupid. Therefore, blaming the old physicians for exclusively using the perverse permanence is not knowing the milk, which is not recognizing the medicine. Not knowing the illness and so forth is not recognizing the illness. Not knowing the opening [and prohibition] and so forth is not knowing the method of dispensing medicine. Not understanding these three, one lacks the art of the visiting physician. The difference between the two permanences is like good and bad milk; the lightness or heaviness of the delusion of views is called the root source; cutting off first and applying later is called opening and prohibiting. 'To feed' (ěr) means to eat. Because the times of eating differ, solely clinging to the names of permanence and bliss is said to be not knowing good and bad. Teaching the self increases perverse conditioning, hence it is said to be not recognizing the root source. Not understanding that the times for teaching permanence differ, it is said to be not understanding opening and prohibiting. Therefore the sūtra says: 'If the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, had first spoken of permanence, the disciples to be converted would say this dharma is the same as that of the non-Buddhists'; hence it says 'if only praising' and so forth. The two physicians are fully explained in the third note of the Mohe zhiguan.