法華文句記 5.73

5.73

各有其意。性必不改，故從現至未、從過至今，二處並得性名故爾。亦可現在名根生未來故，然根性乃可互舉，樂欲必居現在，欲名雖不從過，亦可以現望當，以名互故故重釋云「或可習欲以成性、成性生習欲」，上句現欲成未性、下句過性成現欲。「云云」者，或可過欲成現性、現性成未欲，或可過欲成過性、現欲成未性，是則欲名雖通過未仍從現說，故知欲念之名定居現在。「七方便」至「云云」者，具如《止觀》隨自意觀觀惡中云通途善惡者是。「鈍根」下至「施權意」，此是長文。今不云長者，但偈與長行不同，隨事要者則辯同異，或可略明意則可知。「我設」下三行頌理者，文多云說，如何云理？如云未曾說，說時未至隨順說等，亦是以能顯所。準前諸例略亦可知，今文正取佛慧為理之行。「聲聞兼得緣覺」者，聲聞數中有值佛緣覺故也。又三藏聲聞必兼當教緣覺。又菩薩既兼藏通，二乘必具兩教，菩薩不云別者，前以淨心為別教竟。既以聲聞菩薩共為義立，乃至一句皆悉成佛。又誡言無疑，當知此是極聖誠說，而不肯信。《大經》云：「一切二乘未來必定歸於大般涅槃，如流入海。」又菩薩與二乘合明，當知三乘悉皆被會。「牒假名三教」等者，三教是假名故也。教本一實故三是假，為物假設三藏等權，今既顯實重舉所除以示佛慧，即上句所列者是。「無二是無通教中半滿相對之二」者，通真含二故也。由闕別教故更引上餘乘來此釋成，語假則通論三教，言餘及以二三，且云相入，以有餘皆假故得相入，無餘無復相入之名，以純一故，此指乳及二酥三味文盡。初一行半舉內心。經云：「如我昔所願，今者已滿足」者，問：佛初立誓誓度一切，今眾生尚多，願云何滿？答：且從一期總而言之，但令眾生得入佛乘，即名願滿。是故經云：「如我無異」。

Each has its reason. Nature definitely does not change; therefore, from the present to the future, and from the past to the present, both positions receive the name of nature, hence this is so. Alternatively, the present may be called faculty because it gives rise to the future. However, faculty and nature can indeed be cited interchangeably; pleasurable desire must reside in the present. Although the name of desire is not derived from the past, the present can also look forward to the future; because the names interchange, it re-explains: 'Or, habituated desire forms nature, and formed nature produces habituated desire.' The upper line means present desire forms future nature, and the lower line means past nature forms present desire. Regarding 'and so forth': or, past desire forms present nature, and present nature forms future desire; or, past desire forms past nature, and present desire forms future nature. In this way, although the name of desire extends across past and future, it is still spoken from the present; hence we know that the designations of desire and mindfulness definitely reside in the present. From 'seven skillful means' to 'and so forth': this is fully as described under general wholesomeness and unwholesomeness in contemplating unwholesomeness in the Contemplation Following One's Own Mind in the Zhiguan. From 'dull faculties' down to 'the intention in deploying the provisional': this is prose. The reason it is not called prose here is simply that the verses differ from the prose, and following what is essential to the matter, their similarities and differences are distinguished; or alternatively, by briefly clarifying the intention, it can be understood. Regarding the three lines from 'I set forth' below that versify principle: the text often speaks of 'expounding,' so how can it refer to principle? For example, saying 'never yet expounded,' 'the time for expounding has not yet arrived,' 'expounding in accord,' and so forth—these also use the agent to reveal the object. By analogy with the previous examples, it can be known in brief; the present text directly takes buddha-wisdom as the practice of principle. Regarding 'voice-hearers also include pratyekabuddhas': this is because among the number of voice-hearers, there are pratyekabuddhas who encounter the Buddha. Furthermore, the voice-hearers of the Tripiṭaka [teaching] necessarily include the pratyekabuddhas of that teaching. Moreover, since bodhisattvas encompass both the Tripiṭaka and Shared teachings, the two vehicles must possess both teachings; that the bodhisattva does not mention the Distinct [teaching] is because previously 'pure mind' was already used for the Distinct teaching. Since voice-hearers and bodhisattvas together form this doctrinal construction, even down to a single phrase, all attain buddhahood. Furthermore, the admonition says to be without doubt; one should know that this is the sincere utterance of the ultimate sage, yet they are unwilling to believe. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'All [practitioners of] the two vehicles in the future will definitely return to the great parinirvāṇa, like rivers flowing into the sea.' Moreover, bodhisattvas and the two vehicles are explained together; one should know that all three vehicles are converged. Regarding 'repeating the provisional three teachings,' and so forth: this is because the three teachings are provisional names. The teaching is fundamentally one and real, so the three are provisional; for the sake of beings, the provisional forms of the Tripiṭaka and so forth were provisionally set up; now that the real is revealed, what is eliminated is reiterated to demonstrate buddha-wisdom, which is what was listed in the upper line. Regarding '"no two" means the absence of the two in the mutual opposition of half-word and full-word within the Shared teaching': this is because the Shared truth contains two. Because it lacks the Distinct teaching, the other vehicles above are cited again here to explain and complete it. In terms of the provisional, it comprehensively discusses the three teachings; speaking of 'remainder' as well as 'two and three,' it speaks for now of mutual entry: because having remainder is all provisional, they can mutually enter; being without remainder, there is no longer the name of mutual entry, because of sheer oneness; this refers to the completion of the texts of the three flavors of milk and the two curds. The initial line and a half brings up the internal mind. Regarding the sūtra saying, 'As I originally vowed in the past, now it has been completely fulfilled': Question: When the Buddha first made his vow, he vowed to deliver all beings; now beings are still numerous, so how is his vow fulfilled? Answer: Speaking for now comprehensively from the perspective of a single period, merely enabling beings to enter the buddha-vehicle is called the fulfillment of the vow. Therefore, the sūtra says: 'No different from myself.'