法華文句記 7.202

7.202

「勸聽受」中又更為二，初二行先歎佛，次「為大眾」下能說人尊，故所說法妙，七善無不皆歸一乘，故勸聽受，此舉無差以釋於差。「佛平等說」等者，有愛憎故則有彼此，不於佛機者愛、餘機者憎。貴賤上下約位，持戒毀戒約行，利根鈍根約習，亦須具歷五乘七善，展轉說之。「有人」去次釋三草二木者，古師不同，但於大草二木不定，以名合故，小中二草經自結名必無違諍，仍不知有二種二乘，是故初師具列五位，第二三師但列三位，以二草意同三皆未稱。「然三草」下今釋，先總非云「師心反佛違經」者，無稟承故即「師心」，佛意不爾即「反佛」。「違經」者，經明受潤不同以對五乘差別，如何三位並同在一教？「別受潤中」進退兩解者，初正消經文，次以木例草，準義以釋，草既有三木亦應例。人見大草中云求世尊，謂義亦通後；見小樹中云專心佛道，謂通初後；見大樹中云度無量億，謂通前二，便作一種歷位解釋。以近代來棄舊經論諸教菩薩，此為消釋之大患也。故今別釋冥順經文。「上草為六度」者，既云行精進定，於六度中精進為最，故《大論》云：「施戒忍世間常法，欲修定慧必須精進」，況復通進遍入五中，為是義故舉進攝六，故不可二木唯在三秖。小樹中《經》既云常行慈悲自知作佛，六度菩薩第三僧祇方乃定知，故不及通，但過二地必知作佛，故與前異乃從勝標。大樹中既云轉不退輪，別人初地能轉法輪，是念不退，藏通至果方轉法輪，豈得名為如是菩薩，故知在別。次義立三木通三菩薩，令識通方故更釋之。故《正法華》初例則云「三木二草」，以小草為悠悠藥，以上草為上尊藥，頌文乃云「三藥二木」，是故今文通別二解。

In 'exhorting to listen and receive', there are again two parts: first, the two lines of verse first praise the Buddha; next, from 'for the great assembly' downward, because the person capable of preaching is venerable, the Dharma preached is wondrous, and the seven goods without exception return to the One Vehicle, one is therefore exhorted to listen and receive. This adduces the lack of distinction to explain the distinction. Regarding 'the Buddha preaches equally' and so forth: because there are love and hate, there are 'other' and 'self'; he does not love those whose capacities are for buddhahood and hate those of other capacities. Noble and base, high and low, are discussed in terms of stage; upholding precepts and violating precepts are discussed in terms of practice; sharp faculties and dull faculties are discussed in terms of habituation. It is also necessary to run through the five vehicles and seven goods, explaining them sequentially. Next, from 'Some say' onward, explaining the three grasses and two trees: the ancient masters differed; they were uncertain only regarding the large grass and two trees. Because their names matched, the small and medium grasses were explicitly designated by the sūtra itself, so there could certainly be no dispute, yet they still did not know that there are two kinds of two vehicles. Therefore, the first master fully enumerated five stages, whereas the second and third masters only enumerated three stages; because the import of the two grasses was identical, all three [interpretations] failed to fit. Next, in the present explanation under 'Yet the three grasses': first, the general refutation stating 'following their own minds, going against the Buddha, and contradicting the sūtra'—being without lineage transmission is 'following their own minds'; the Buddha's intention not being so is 'going against the Buddha'. As for 'contradicting the sūtra': the sūtra clearly explains that their receiving moisture differs so as to correspond to the distinctions among the five vehicles; how could three stages all be together in a single teaching? Regarding the two interpretations of advance and retreat in 'individual reception of moisture': the first properly interprets the sūtra text; next, using the trees as an analogy for the grasses, it explains them according to principle. Since there are three grasses, the trees should also correspond. People see that within the large grass it says 'seeking the World-Honoured One', and consider that its meaning also extends to what follows; they see that within the small tree it says 'with a single mind on the buddha-way', and consider that it extends from the beginning to the end; they see that within the large tree it says 'crossing over measureless kotis', and consider that it extends to the previous two, and thus make a single, progressive-stage explanation. That in recent times they abandon the bodhisattvas of the various teachings of the old sūtras and treatises is the great flaw in textual interpretation. Therefore, the present individual explanation subtly accords with the sūtra text. Regarding 'the superior grass is the six perfections': since it says 'practicing vigor and concentration', vigor is the foremost among the six perfections. Thus the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'Giving, morality, and patience are mundane, ordinary dharmas; if one wishes to cultivate concentration and wisdom, one must have vigor.' How much more so as vigor pervades and enters into all five! For this reason, vigor is adduced to subsume the six; therefore the two trees cannot solely reside in the three asaṃkhyeyas. Within the small tree, since the sūtra says 'always practicing compassion, knowing of oneself that one will become a buddha', the bodhisattvas of the six perfections only definitively know this in the third asaṃkhyeya, and thus do not reach [the level of] the shared [teaching]; but once they pass beyond the second ground, they must know they will become buddhas. Therefore, differing from the preceding, it is designated according to the superior. Within the large tree, since it says 'turning the wheel of non-retrogression', someone of the distinct teaching at the first ground can turn the wheel of the Dharma, which is non-retrogression of thought; in the Tripiṭaka and shared [teachings], only upon reaching the fruit do they turn the wheel of the Dharma—how could they be named such bodhisattvas? Hence we know it lies in the distinct [teaching]. Next, by principle positing three trees to cover the three bodhisattvas, so as to make known the comprehensive approach, it is explained further. Thus the first paradigm of the Zheng fahua jing says 'three trees and two grasses', taking the small grass as the ordinary medicine and the superior grass as the most honored medicine, yet the verse text then says 'three medicines and two trees'. For this reason, the present text has the two interpretations of shared and distinct.