法華文句記 7.26

7.26

上句既云求子不得，即依自受用土一實慈悲求子不得，故今止於自他中間住於方便，還用本所依慈悲而思於子，故國為居民，城元安主，家本養性。為未入圓者，即七方便民，垂形方便，住彼有餘思求圓機，是故居彼化事無廢，思同居機其義文成。家既是舍，於彼有餘運無緣慈，故云處此。所以止於無緣慈家，起於勝劣偏圓兩應。然彼秖應但用勝應。言勝劣者，勝兼兩處，劣唯鹿園，小機若起理當赴之，始末雙明故云勝劣。既云五人彼土生者，皆為菩薩，故八六等至彼土時不須小化，漸趣圓實豈仍滯偏？習方便者多迷其教。《止觀》第七判八六等教道須廢，法華開顯方堪此聞。菩薩機成所應何別，五人即是四果、支佛，從本立名，云須陀洹乃至支佛。斷盡乃云斷通惑者，或取三藏二乘及通三乘為斷通惑者，此亦可爾。三藏五人自攝通五，通教菩薩先名菩薩，不可更云至彼皆是菩薩，當知全指兩教二乘兼通菩薩。若以四人例通菩薩名皆為菩薩，有何不可？但彼對勝應其義不成。但兩教二乘彼尚迴心，通教菩薩豈應守舊？若準改觀通別菩薩並須發心，故云「訓令修學」。不云別者，以此五人證同故也。若也通論方便人數，則應云九，藏二通三別三圓一，不得云五，今且對小故云五耳。

Since the preceding line states that he sought his son without finding him, this means that relying on the one real loving-kindness and compassion of the Land of Self-Enjoyment, he sought his son without finding him. Therefore, he now halts midway between self and other, abides in expedient means, and still using his fundamentally relied-upon loving-kindness and compassion, thinks of his son. Thus, the country is for dwelling the people; the city originally secures the lord; the home fundamentally nurtures the nature. For those who have not entered the perfect [teaching]—that is, the people of the seven expedient means—he manifests forms in expedient means, abides in that [land with] remainder, and contemplates and seeks the perfect capacity. Therefore, dwelling there, the work of transformation is not abandoned, and the meaning of contemplating the capacity of co-dwelling is accomplished in the text. Since "home" is "house," exercising conditionless loving-kindness in that [land of] remainder is called "dwelling here." Therefore, halting in the home of conditionless loving-kindness gives rise to the two responses of superior and inferior, one-sided and perfect. However, there he should only use the superior response. Regarding "superior and inferior": the superior encompasses two places, while the inferior is solely the Deer Park. If a lesser capacity arises, in principle he should respond to it; explaining both beginning and end together is why it says "superior and inferior." Since it is said that the five kinds of persons born in that land are all bodhisattvas, when the eight, the six, and so forth arrive in that land, there is no need for lesser transformation. As they gradually advance toward the perfect and real, how could they still linger in the one-sided? Those who practice expedient means mostly go astray regarding its teaching. Fascicle 7 of the *Zhǐguān* determines that the instructional paths of the eight, the six, and so forth must be abandoned, and only with the opening and revealing of the *Lotus Sūtra* are they capable of hearing this. When a bodhisattva's capacity matures, how could what is responded to differ? The "five kinds of persons" are the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha; establishing names according to the origin, it says from the srotāpanna up to the pratyekabuddha. As for severing completely, it means severing common afflictions; or taking the two vehicles of the Tripiṭaka and the three vehicles of the common [teaching] as those who sever common afflictions, this is also permissible. The five persons of the Tripiṭaka naturally subsume the five of the common [teaching]. Bodhisattvas of the common teaching were already named bodhisattvas, so one cannot further say that upon arriving there they are all bodhisattvas; know that this refers entirely to the two vehicles of both teachings together with the bodhisattvas of the common [teaching]. If, by analogy with the four persons, the common bodhisattvas are also called bodhisattvas, what is improper about that? It is only that their corresponding to the superior response does not hold in meaning. Yet, if even the two vehicles of both teachings turn their minds there, how could the bodhisattvas of the common teaching cling to the old? If one accords with changing contemplation, bodhisattvas of both the common and separate teachings must generate the aspiration; hence it says "instructed them to cultivate and learn." It does not mention the separate [teaching] because these five persons are identical in realization. If one discusses the number of persons of expedient means comprehensively, then one should say nine: two for the Tripiṭaka, three for the common, three for the separate, and one for the perfect; one cannot say five. Here, for now, facing the lesser, it says five.