法華文句記 7.88

7.88

「窓牖」者，《說文》云：「在屋曰窓，在牆曰牖。」非戶故偏，明處仍彼。今亦如是，非中故偏、不遍故狹，故法身地觀無大機，唯見偏狹先熟故也。乃由子隔窓牖之外，何關長者偏視之非？況是長者欲取偏機，於圓仍遠故名為「遙」。「脫妙」至「之具」者，如前已釋。「生忍法忍」等者，忍有情惱名為生忍，忍無情惱名為法忍，謂寒熱風雨等屬法故也。「左手」等者，小中權實。「狀有所畏」者，「狀」似也，權以實也，具如《釋籤》引《成論》文。「又有寒風」等者，《大論》第九佛有惱，謂六年苦行、孫陀利謗、金鏘、馬麥、瑠璃殺釋、乞食空鉢、旃遮女謗、調達推山、寒風索衣，加雙樹背痛為十；若依《興起行經》但有七緣，無孫陀利謗及乞食不得。《大論》直列，《興起行經》委悉釋之。次「語諸作人」下「譬四念處」去，即對位也。今但略對無復行相，七覺在八正前，《婆沙》中具有料簡，略如《止觀》第七記。不云五停者，停心但是對治除障，令堪修觀故，從念處正修以說，雖云約位須兼相生，方堪消此，故下文云「勤修念處」等。「生空如來」等者，此教作法所有生法不涉大乘，即《阿含》中是老死誰老死，故生法二空並屬正道，具如《止觀》第三記。「無常等為助」者，若諦觀中云無常者，乃是正觀，今以二空望於事中對治無常，但得名助，況復更以一期念念以之為助？如《大經》中大乘治門，乃至用常何但無常。「近指煖等四位」者，外道求理在此位前，故名為「遠」。應云念處等四但是隨便為言耳。「此文」等者，以世第一是五力位無五過也。「下忍十六剎那」下至「世第一法位」者，忍應上下各十六行，乃成三十二觀。今文且以四諦言之，於三十二漸減緣行，二十四周減行，七周減緣，乃至最後唯留一行，觀一剎那入世第一，略如《玄》文、《釋籤》略引《俱舍》文也。「阿含」至「子義未成」者，既《阿含》中亦明不斷結惑菩薩，而《大論》斥權非謂全無，《論》云「迦旃延造」者，從所造論及所計者說，豈以會二還歸《阿含》？《法華》準舊十二年前，一何可笑。「若得初果」至「大乘」者，意云：從見道後不發大心，還令小乘道中斷結，故云「由是之故」。若準《大論》，至初果已名之為死，不任復發。大師從容於《止觀》中進退二釋，所以初果亦名死等，故可發心。

As for 'window and lattice': the Shuowen says: 'In a room it is called a window; in a wall it is called a lattice.' Not being a doorway, it is one-sided, yet the illuminated place remains there. The present case is also like this: not being the middle, it is one-sided; not being pervasive, it is narrow; therefore, the contemplation on the ground of the dharmakāya had no great capacities, seeing only that the one-sided and narrow had matured first. This was due to the son being separated outside the window and lattice; how could it be the fault of the elder's one-sided looking? How much more so when the elder wished to seize the one-sided capacities, which are still far from the perfect, and thus it is called 'afar.' From 'taking off the wondrous' down to 'utensils': this has already been explained above. Regarding 'acceptance of beings and acceptance of dharmas' and so forth: accepting the afflictions caused by sentient beings is called the acceptance of beings; accepting the afflictions caused by insentient things is called the acceptance of dharmas, meaning that cold, heat, wind, rain, and so forth belong to dharmas. Regarding 'left hand' and so forth: the provisional and the real within the small. Regarding 'as if in fear': 'as if' means appearing so; it uses the provisional to conceal the real, fully as in the passage from the Tattvasiddhi cited in the Clarifying Commentary. Regarding 'moreover, having cold wind' and so forth: the ninth fascicle of the Great Treatise mentions that the Buddha experienced afflictions, namely the six years of austerities, Sundarī's slander, the iron barb, the horse grain, Virūḍhaka slaying the Śākyas, the empty alms bowl when begging for food, Ciñcā-māṇavikā's slander, Devadatta pushing down a mountain, asking for clothes in the cold wind, plus the backache between the twin trees, making ten; according to the Xingqixing jing, there are only seven conditions, lacking Sundarī's slander and failing to obtain food when begging. The Great Treatise directly lists them; the Xingqixing jing explains them in detail. Next, from 'spoke to the laborers' down to 'analogous to the four applications of mindfulness' onward: this correlates with the stages. Here it merely correlates them briefly without further details of practice; that the seven factors of awakening precede the eightfold noble path is fully analyzed in the Vibhāṣā, briefly as in the seventh fascicle of the Notes on the Great Calming and Contemplation. That it does not mention the five methods of stilling the mind is because stilling the mind is merely an antidote to eliminate obstacles to enable one to cultivate contemplation; therefore, it is spoken from the perspective of the direct cultivation of the applications of mindfulness. Although it is spoken in terms of stages, it must combine their mutual production to be able to interpret this; therefore, the text below says 'diligently cultivate the applications of mindfulness' and so forth. Regarding 'the Tathāgata of the emptiness of beings' and so forth: the ritual practices of this teaching regarding the emptiness of beings and dharmas do not involve the Mahāyāna; that is, in the Āgama, 'who undergoes old age and death? What is old age and death?' Therefore, both the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas belong to the correct path, fully as in the third fascicle of the Notes on the Great Calming and Contemplation. Regarding 'impermanence and so forth serving as aids': if one speaks of impermanence in the contemplation of the truths, it is the direct contemplation; here, looking from the two emptinesses at the antidotes to impermanence in phenomena, it can only be named an aid, let alone further taking momentary change throughout a single lifespan as an aid. As in the Great Sūtra's antidotal gates of the Mahāyāna, they even employ permanence, how much more impermanence? Regarding 'proximately pointing to the four stages such as heat': non-Buddhists seek the principle before these stages, so they are called 'distant.' One should say that the four, such as the applications of mindfulness, are merely spoken as convenient. Regarding 'this text' and so forth: because the mundane supreme dharma is the stage of the five powers, it lacks the five faults. From 'the sixteen moments of lower acceptance' down to 'the stage of the mundane supreme dharma': acceptance should have sixteen practices each for higher and lower, thus forming thirty-two contemplations. The present text discusses it briefly in terms of the four truths: among the thirty-two, gradually reducing conditions and practices, reducing practices in twenty-four rounds and reducing conditions in seven rounds, until finally only one practice is retained, contemplating one moment and entering the mundane supreme dharma, briefly as in the text of the Profound Meaning and the Kośa passage briefly cited in the Clarifying Commentary. From 'Āgama' to 'the meaning of the son is not yet accomplished': since the Āgamas also clarify bodhisattvas who do not cut off the fetters and defilements, the Great Treatise's reprimand of the provisional does not mean they are completely absent. When the Treatise says 'composed by Kātyāyana,' it speaks from the perspective of the treatise composed and what was asserted; how could harmonizing the two return to the Āgamas? To take the Lotus Sūtra as prior to the twelve years following the old [theory]—how laughable! From 'if obtaining the first fruit' to 'Mahāyāna': the meaning is that after the path of seeing, not generating the great mind, they are made to cut off fetters within the path of the Hīnayāna, so it says 'for this reason.' If based on the Great Treatise, reaching the first fruit is already called death, no longer capable of generating [the bodhicitta]. In the Great Calming and Contemplation, the Great Master leisurely provided both positive and negative explanations; hence the first fruit is also called death and so forth, yet [such a one] can generate the mind.