法華文句記 8.36

8.36

釋五百由旬中先出他解，「基師」中先述，次破云「今謂非別非通」者，七地斷習非正別義，八地斷無明又非通義，正似別接通耳。《論》云「初地見道，二地去入修道」者，應知地前是伏別惑，登地是斷同體見思。若不爾者，豈有大乘迴向而齊小乘上忍？十住已斷界內惑盡，故《瓔珞》云：「七心不退，何處煖位名不退耶？十行遍入十方世界，頂法仍退，何能遍遊？忍無出觀之文，安能法界迴向？」《瓔珞》初地三觀現前，如何初地始入見道？請將四十心位，一一以消凡文，伏斷義殊功用天隔。論中破外破小，本令入正入大，焉存定性而令永滅？小乘自謂住果，大判終無不生，故知滅後彼土得聞，不可復依不聞之論。論宗既無開權之說，永滅乃是蔽實之文，有定不定秖可用申斥奪之經廢偏廢小權實之路永隔，具消此意諸教自顯。

In explaining the five hundred yojanas, other interpretations are first brought forth. Under “Master Ji,” it is first recounted, and next refuted, saying: “We now state that it is neither specific nor shared”: that the seventh ground severs habitual propensities is not the proper sense of the specific [teaching], and that the eighth ground severs ignorance is again not the sense of the shared [teaching]; it exactly resembles the specific connecting to the shared. The Treatise says: “The first ground is the path of seeing, and from the second ground onward one enters the path of cultivation.” One should know that prior to the grounds one suppresses specific defilements, and ascending the grounds one severs the views and thoughts of identical substance. If this were not so, how could the dedication of the Great Vehicle be equated with the superior acceptance of the Hinayana? The ten abodes have already severed the defilements within the realm completely; hence the Yingluo [jing] says: “Seven minds do not retrogress; at what stage of heat is it named non-retrogression? The ten practices enter the worlds of the ten directions everywhere; if the summit stage still retrogresses, how could one roam everywhere? Acceptance has no text of emerging from contemplation, so how could there be dedication of the dharmadhātu?” In the Yingluo [jing], the three contemplations manifest before the first ground; how could the first ground only begin to enter the path of seeing? Please take the ranks of the forty minds and resolve ordinary texts one by one: the senses of suppression and severance are distinct, and their efficacy is as far apart as heaven and earth. The refutations of non-Buddhists and the Hinayana in the treatise originally aimed to lead them to enter the correct and enter the great; why maintain a determinate nature and cause them to enter extinction permanently? The Hinayana claims to abide in the fruit, but the Great [Vehicle] determines that there are none who are not reborn; hence we know that after extinction they hear [the Dharma] in that land, and one must not again rely on treatises asserting they do not hear it. Since the treatise school lacks the exposition of opening the provisional, permanent extinction is merely a text that obscures the real. The determinate and indeterminate can only be used to express the sūtras of rebuke and deprivation; if the provisional and real are permanently separated by abolishing the one-sided and abolishing the Hinayana, [then error arises]; fully clarifying this meaning, the various teachings will naturally become apparent.