[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [法華文句記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719) › 7.31 # 法華文句記 7.31 法華文句記 7.31 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7.31) 「未曾向人」等者，文約兩意以申此義：先方便，次此土。初方便者，彼方便中非但唯有地前住前，亦有垂迹登地登住，即臣佐等豈全不知窮子機性，但約窮子說時未至，主伴相與覆實未宜，權從物機故云不說；以由界內五人斷通惑者，未堪影灼聞如是言，故云不向臣佐等說，以為臣佐意在僮僕故也。於中指小故云「不向」。所以在長者心無非己子，從機異故立以小名，漸漸誘之方成臣佐，故知法身本自懸鑑。「又應世已來」下第二意者，進明此土昔教顯露未說，對此蔽彼故云不說。是則前立勝應之義，義兼兩處，劣應之語逗彼偏機，故不說之言通及四味，四味之內具足臣佐及僮僕等。「既非」下釋第二意中小乘人也。「如聾瘂」等，指華嚴席；「或華著」等，指方等也。不逮之言兼於般若，而無希取即其事也。華著即身子，棄鉢即空生，故知不說之言何關法身菩薩。「心懷」下却釋遠由，遠由即是不說之緣。良由昔結大時未入相似，省己斥彼故云「不勤」。由此退大失中途調熟，故云「無訓」。背自向他故云「逃走」。逃走三義：一機息應謝，二背自向他，三居不得所即五道也。故使如來無緣而憶。「恨子」下專斥於子，非但悔應早息，亦乃恨子機生致令疎我正法親他六塵。「內合」等者，為論免難須淨六根，準理退者多在五品位前，為對不退位且以五品為退位耳。文釋悔恨分對自他，準意亦可並對彼此。「化期」等者，約後意釋，即應世來至法華前，故云「老朽」。「亦不約此」等者，不約應化聲聞故也。 > "Never yet having spoken to anyone," and so forth: the text relies on two meanings to explain this idea: first, skillful means; next, this land. First, as for skillful means: within those skillful means, there are not only those prior to the stages and prior to the abodes, but also those who have manifested traces and ascended to the stages and ascended to the abodes—that is, the ministers and assistants. How could they be completely ignorant of the impoverished son's capacity and nature? It is only that, as far as the impoverished son was concerned, the time had not yet arrived; host and retinue interacting together, to conceal the real was not yet appropriate, and skillfully adapting to the capacities of living beings, it is therefore said not to have been spoken. Because those of the five persons within the realm who had severed common delusions were not yet capable of bearing hearing such words clearly and openly, it is therefore said not to have been spoken to the ministers and assistants, taking the ministers and assistants as intending the servants. Therein, pointing to the Hinayāna, it is therefore said "did not speak to." Therefore, in the mind of the elder, none was not his own son; because of differences in capacity, he established them with Hinayāna names, gradually enticing them, and only then made them ministers and assistants. Thus we know that the dharmakāya originally possessed suspended foreknowledge. Under "Furthermore, since appearing in the world," the second meaning further clarifies that in the former teachings of this land, it had not been overtly spoken; contrasting this with that which was concealed, it is therefore said not to have been spoken. Thus, while the previously established meaning of the superior nirmāṇakāya extended to both places, the words of the inferior nirmāṇakāya adapted to those one-sided capacities. Therefore, the statement of not speaking extends throughout the four flavors, and within the four flavors, ministers, assistants, servants, and so forth are fully present. Under "Since they were not," it explains the persons of the Hinayāna in the second meaning. "Like the deaf and dumb" and so forth refers to the assembly of the Avataṃsaka; "or flowers adhering" and so forth refers to the Vaipulya. The words regarding not keeping up also encompass the Prajñā; and having no desire to seek it is precisely that affair. The adhering flowers were Śāriputra, and abandoning the bowl was Subhūti; thus we know: how could the words of not speaking pertain to the bodhisattvas of the dharmakāya? Under "bearing in mind," it turns back to explain the distant cause; the distant cause is precisely the conditions for not speaking. Truly, because when forming the Mahāyāna bond in the past they had not yet entered the stage of resemblance, reflecting on oneself and reprimanding the other, it therefore says "not diligent." Thereby retrogressing from the Mahāyāna, they lost the seasoning and maturing along the way, hence it says "without instruction." Turning one's back on oneself and going toward others, it therefore says "ran away." Running away has three meanings: first, the capacity ceases and the response dissolves; second, turning one's back on oneself and going toward others; third, abiding where one ought not, which is the five paths. Thus it caused the Tathāgata to remember without any prior condition. Under "regretting the son," it exclusively reprimands the son: not only did he regret that the response ceased early, but he also deplored that the son's capacity arose, resulting in estrangement from my true Dharma and intimacy with the six dusts of others. Under "internal match" and so forth: to discuss escaping difficulties, one must purify the six sense faculties. Accords with principle, those who retrogress are mostly prior to the rank of the five grades; by contrast with the non-retrogressing rank, the five grades are tentatively taken as the rank of retrogression. The text's explanation of regret and deploring divides them between self and other; following the intended sense, they can also both pertain to both sides. Under "period of transformation" and so forth, it is explained in terms of the latter meaning—namely, from appearing in the world down to before the Lotus \[Sūtra\]; hence it says "old and decrepit." Under "Nor does this rely on," and so forth: it is because it does not rely on the manifested śrāvakas. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.30](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7.30) - [Next: 7.32](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7.32) - [Up: 7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719~en-mt.7.31) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7.31](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.7.31) · Pramāṇa