法華文句記 7.122

7.122

《法華論》以七譬立七對治，一顛倒功德增上慢煩惱熾然，求人天果報說火宅治。聲聞人與如來乘等，說窮子治。大乘上慢人謂無二乘，說雲雨譬治。實無涅槃生涅槃想，說化城治。不求大乘，以虛妄解脫為第一義，說繫珠治。有大乘人取非大乘，說髻珠治。無功德人不取第一乘，說醫師治。若但依此七各有對治，則為法作譬說譬領解，佛以譬述等理似不成。應知論意，火宅則不指大車邊窮子，正用領付之意，雲雨令開權二乘故，化城以寶所引之，餘則可知。他若云今品唯出生者，全達經旨，況復論文從於能潤以雨為名，經從所潤故云藥草。藥草則二乘不無，一雨則述其歸大。嘉祥云：「草木有二，一不知同，二不知異。」若有瑞草，即能知同以喻迦葉，此則但從迦葉所領可爾。若從佛述，豈可餘之藥草悉云不知？又亦不知三草二木是瑞非瑞，是故須云今昔方顯瑞之是非。今謂至此法華，何得更有非瑞之草？應云是諸草木雖元一地所生一味一澤，而不自知，忽蒙開顯莫非祥瑞，乃使彈指合掌通成妙因，生無生慧咸成種智。

The *Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra* establishes seven remedies based on the seven parables: 1. For inverted merit, excessive pride, and blazing afflictions where one seeks human and heavenly fruit-rebirths, the burning house is spoken as a remedy. 2. For voice-hearers [thinking they are] equal to the Tathāgata vehicle, the impoverished son is spoken as a remedy. 3. For people of excessive pride in the Great Vehicle who claim there are no two vehicles, the parable of the clouds and rain is spoken as a remedy. 4. For conceiving the notion of nirvāṇa where there is truly no nirvāṇa, the conjured city is spoken as a remedy. 5. For not seeking the Great Vehicle and taking false liberation to be the supreme truth, the jewel sewn into the robe is spoken as a remedy. 6. For persons of the Great Vehicle who grasp what is not the Great Vehicle, the jewel in the topknot is spoken as a remedy. 7. For persons devoid of merit who do not grasp the supreme vehicle, the physician is spoken as a remedy. If one merely relies on these seven having their respective remedies, then setting forth parables for the Dharma, speaking parables to express understanding, and the Buddha endorsing them through parables would seem logically incomplete. One must recognize the treatise's intention: 'burning house' does not refer to the great cart beside it; 'impoverished son' uses precisely the sense of expressing understanding and conferring [the property]; 'clouds and rain' cause the provisional to be opened for the two vehicles; and 'conjured city' uses the place of jewels to entice them; the rest can be known accordingly. If others claim that the present chapter only refers to 'producing and growing', they fail entirely to grasp the sūtra's purport; moreover, the text of the treatise takes its name 'rain' from that which can moisten, whereas the sūtra refers to 'medicinal herbs' from that which is moistened. With 'medicinal herbs', the two vehicles are not absent; with 'the single rain', it endorses their return to the Great [Vehicle]. Jiāxiáng stated: 'Of plants and trees there are two kinds: first, not knowing sameness; second, not knowing difference.' If there is an auspicious herb, it can know sameness, serving as a metaphor for Kāśyapa; this is acceptable if one merely follows what Kāśyapa understood. But if one follows the Buddha's endorsement, how could all the other medicinal herbs be said to be 'unknowing'? Moreover, they also would not know whether the three herbs and two trees are auspicious or inauspicious; therefore one must speak of the present and past to make clear whether the auspiciousness is right or wrong. Now I say: reaching this *Lotus Sūtra*, how could there still be any inauspicious herbs? One should say: although these plants and trees originally grow from one earth with one flavor and one moisture, they do not know it themselves; yet upon suddenly receiving the opening and revealing, there are none that are not auspicious, causing even a snap of the fingers or joining of the palms to universally become wondrous causes, and generating unproduced wisdom to all become the wisdom of modes.