法華文句記 6.102

6.102

列二藏者，行稱理故、理藉行故，更互相收方堪等賜。「一切」下引證二藏，如其不了陰入理藏，徒自虔修諸度行藏。言「一切趣」者，文在《大品．發趣品》中，「趣」謂趣入，即一切法入一法中，一法既然諸法皆爾，行理具攝一切法也。一切法趣文相開合，如《止觀》第二引。「自行此行理」下，次釋充溢。先直約行理，次「實智」下能導能照，即是修得三德意也。果極利物故名「充溢」。雖有二釋，佛智不殊。廣等心中亦二，但以心釋子故云心耳。文具三義乃名心等：一者財富，二者皆子，三者無偏。是故心等，亦應更云所以心等由皆子故；財富無量，自行滿也；皆子無偏，化緣熟也。「若富」下反以不等用釋於等，由財子互闕令心不等，應知非子及財不等，寄在昔教，故昔偏教教主化機二義並闕，如兩教教主貧法財，故不得云富；不知常住不得皆子；縱當教名子收機不遍，故亦非子則成有偏，互闕非等並闕可知。別教教道雖云皆子，兩義尚無，證道自同分等無缺，下釋子等例之可知。是故今經一實之外更無餘法，一切眾生皆是吾子，緣因尚收於散善，了種通攝於一句，正乃不棄無間，方稱一切之說。是故《玄》文明利益中，則序正流通未來永永，嚴王調達不輕龍女以義準知。況應以之言何簡於四趣，隨宜之教靡擇於順違？此等賜之大體也。故知子等心等之言，豈獨四大聲聞而已？所以諸法皆藏咸子無偏。

Listing the two treasuries is because practice matches principle and principle relies on practice; only when they mutually contain each other are they worthy of being bestowed equally. From "all [dharmas]" onward, it cites proof for the two treasuries: if one does not understand the treasury of principle of the aggregates and sense-bases, one vainly and devoutly cultivates the treasury of practice of the perfections. The words "all tend toward" are found in the chapter "Setting Forth" in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra: "tend toward" means to enter into, namely all dharmas enter into one dharma; one dharma being so, all dharmas are likewise so—practice and principle completely subsume all dharmas. The opening and combining of the textual expressions of all dharmas tending [toward one] is as cited in the second fascicle of Great Cessation and Contemplation. From "cultivating this practice and principle for oneself" onward, it next explains "filling and overflowing." First, it directly refers to practice and principle; next, from "real wisdom" onward, being able to guide and illuminate refers to the intention of the three virtues acquired through cultivation. Because the fruit reaches the ultimate in benefiting sentient beings, it is called "filling and overflowing." Although there are two explanations, the Buddha's wisdom is not different. Within the broad and equal mind there are also two [aspects]; it merely explains the children by way of the mind, and therefore speaks of the mind. The text possesses three meanings, and only then is it called "the mind is equal": first, great wealth; second, all are children; third, without bias. Therefore the mind is equal. It should also be further said: the reason the mind is equal is because all are children; wealth is immeasurable, which is the fullness of one's own practice; all are children without bias, which is the maturation of the conditions for conversion. From "if rich" onward, it conversely uses inequality to explain equality: because wealth and children are mutually lacking, the mind is made unequal. It should be understood that "not children" and "inequality of wealth" are lodged in the past teachings; hence, in the past one-sided teachings, both meanings—the lord of the teaching and the capacities to be converted—were lacking. For example, the lords of the two teachings were impoverished of the wealth of the Dharma, and therefore could not be called rich; not knowing the eternal abiding, they could not have all as children. Even if someone in those teachings was called a child, it did not subsume capacities universally; therefore, they were also not children, which resulted in bias. Mutually lacking is not equal, and lacking both can be known. Although the instructional path of the separate teaching says that all are children, both meanings are still absent; the realized path is identical to the equal share without deficiency, which can be understood by analogy with the explanation of the equality of children below. Therefore, outside the one real in the present sūtra there is no other dharma: all sentient beings are my children. The contributing cause still gathers in scattered goodness, and the cognitive seed universally subsumes even a single verse; the direct [cause] does not abandon even the Avīci [hell]—only then does it match the statement of "all." Therefore, in the Profound Meaning, when explaining the benefits, it covers the preface, main body, transmission, and on to the eternal future; King Śubhavyūha, Devadatta, Sadāparibhūta, and the dragon girl can be known by reasoning along these lines. How much more so the words "should by means of"—how could they exclude the four lower destinies? And the teachings suited to the occasion—do they discriminate between compliance and opposition? This is the great essence of equal bestowal. Therefore we know that the words "equal children" and "equal mind"—how could they refer only to the four great śrāvakas? Thus, all dharmas are treasuries, all are children, without bias.