法華文句記 7.112

7.112

答意者，若據子逃父後大小俱非似位，何況真耶？仍指結緣之時，於今稍得名似。而「但合見子便識」者，上見父有四，謂由、處、相、避，見子亦四，謂處、識、喜、適，今見子便識一句，即含前來八文，文雖前後意必同時，豈非子見父時，即父見子見故便識，雖復逃走機在不久，故父亦喜，故知一文即攝於八。「我等以三苦故」等者，譬中勸誡兩門，先各論擬宜無機，後合論二門息化。今三雙合領，初從「上初」下先騰前三意，「旁追」即勸中二意，「再追」即誡門二意，「放捨」即二門息化。言「三苦」者，由三苦故五濁加重，所以二門並無大機但堪小化。五濁逼故即是三苦，無明覆故即是無知。「今合」下正合。「二門無機」者，「何為見捉」即勸門無機，「自念無罪」即誡門無機。不云二門擬宜者，即以二門無機兼之。次「樂著小法者合有小志」者，即二門息化。言「不合放捨者」，捨即是息。但上譬文息化有四：一思惟息化，二釋息化，三正息化，四息化得宜。上初思惟又二：一知大弱，二知小彊。今言「有小志」者，即第二文也。言「不合放捨」者，不合第三正息化也。是則但合初文第二，即攝下三及初第一，故上文正放捨云「我今放汝隨意所趣」，已知有小志，故於大放捨。

Regarding the meaning of the answer: if we consider the son fleeing from the father, neither the Mahāyāna nor the Hīnayāna is at the stage of resemblance, still less the real. It still refers to the time of forming the affinity, so that now it can barely be called resemblance. As for "only matching 'seeing the son, he immediately recognized him'": above, seeing the father has four aspects, namely: cause, place, appearance, and avoidance; seeing the son also has four aspects, namely: place, recognition, joy, and suitability. Here, the single phrase "seeing the son, he immediately recognized him" encompasses the preceding eight passages. Although the texts are sequential, the intent must be simultaneous: is it not that when the son sees the father, the father sees the son, and seeing him, immediately recognizes him? Although he ran away again, his capacity was not far off, so the father was also joyful; thus we know that a single passage subsumes all eight. Regarding "we, on account of the three sufferings..." and so forth: in the parable there are the two approaches of exhortation and admonition; first each discusses contemplating suitability without capacity, and later together they discuss the two approaches of resting from conversion. Now the three pairs are combined and assimilated: first, from "above, the initial..." onward, it first brings up the preceding three meanings: "pursuing from the side" is the two meanings in the exhortation; "pursuing again" is the two meanings in the admonition; "releasing and letting go" is the resting from conversion of the two approaches. Regarding "the three sufferings": on account of the three sufferings, the five defilements become heavier; hence in both approaches there is no capacity for the Mahāyāna, but they are only fit for conversion by the Hīnayāna. Being pressed by the five defilements is precisely the three sufferings; being covered by ignorance is precisely unknowing. Below, "now matching..." is the proper matching. "Neither approach having capacity": "Why am I being seized?" is the lack of capacity in the exhortation approach; "reflecting that he was guiltless" is the lack of capacity in the admonition approach. Not mentioning the contemplation of suitability of the two approaches is because it is subsumed under neither approach having capacity. Next, "those who delight in lesser dharmas matches having petty aspirations" is the resting from conversion of the two approaches. Regarding "not matching releasing and letting go": releasing is precisely resting. However, the above parable text on resting from conversion has four parts: first, reflecting on resting from conversion; second, explaining the resting from conversion; third, the proper resting from conversion; fourth, resting from conversion finding suitability. Above, the first, reflecting, also has two: first, knowing that the great is weak; second, knowing that the small is strong. Here, "having petty aspirations" is the second text. "Not matching releasing and letting go" means it does not match the third, the proper resting from conversion. Thus, merely matching the second of the initial text subsumes the lower three as well as the first of the initial; therefore, the text above on proper releasing and letting go says, "I now release you to go wherever you wish"; having already known that he had petty aspirations, he therefore released him with respect to the great.