法華文句記 8.40

8.40

次引《大品》辨非故來，彼《大品》中明通菩薩過二乘地，既未彰言此城是化，故知彼部兼權顯實。若云化城即須引進，若引進者須記二乘；既未記二乘，是故彼部城仍是實。「既未論」下今文設徵，既未云城是化，即未開權，若未開權應亦無實。何故？般若已明實慧，實慧即是實所故也。答意者，顯實語通開權局此十義。別中「行因六百劫」者，恐文誤，應云「六十劫百劫」。聲聞六十、支佛百劫，餘者可見。「火宅三車今為二百」者，今文假立難也。何故？譬品三車須廢化城，但云二百須進，意以二百但是二乘。「三根」下答。先答三車者，三乘根性俱為火燒，俱求出宅以喻三車。次「佛道」下答二百。言「佛道」者指圓果也。故藏通二乘去佛果遠，是故須過二乘二百方至佛果。言「佛乘非障」者，藏通菩薩亦名佛乘，爾前皆進故云「非障」。又三藏菩薩若據斷惑劣於二乘，三百須離豈二百耶？但此菩薩已發大心，雖未斷惑且名佛乘。人見佛乘便為一概，若爾，牟尼說法蘊應已攝九會，五百阿羅漢應是四菩薩，世品應說蓮華藏海，賢聖品應說四十二位，定品應是楞嚴三昧，智品應是諸陀羅尼。若法若眾既其不同，化主化事安能不別？如是別相無量無邊不可具舉，菩薩求此乘故，亦且名為摩訶薩耳。

Next, the Pañcaviṃśati is cited to discern that it did not intentionally come [from this]. In that Pañcaviṃśati, it clarifies that the shared [teaching's] bodhisattva surpasses the stage of the two vehicles; since it does not yet clearly state that this citadel is transformed, we know that that text combines the provisional while revealing the real. If it were to speak of a transformed citadel, it would have to lead them forward; if it were to lead them forward, it would have to confer prediction upon the two vehicles; since it has not yet conferred prediction upon the two vehicles, for that reason, in that text the citadel is still real. From “Since it has not yet discussed” onward, the present text sets up a question: since it does not yet say the citadel is transformed, it has not yet opened the provisional; if it has not yet opened the provisional, there should also be no real. Why? Because the Prajñā [sūtras] have already clarified real wisdom, and real wisdom is precisely the place of the real. The intent of the answer is that the words revealing the real are common, whereas opening the provisional is restricted to these ten meanings. Among the distinct ones, as for “cultivating causes for six hundred kalpas,” it is feared to be a scribal error; it should read “sixty kalpas and one hundred kalpas”: sixty for śrāvakas and one hundred kalpas for pratyekabuddhas; the rest can be seen. As for “the three carts of the burning house are now the two hundred,” the present text hypothetically raises an objection: why must the three carts of the Parable Chapter be abolished, whereas the transformed citadel only says that the two hundred must be advanced through, meaning that the two hundred is merely the two vehicles? From “Three faculties” onward is the answer. First, in answering the three carts: the faculties of the three vehicles are all burned by fire, and all seek to escape the house, which serves as a metaphor for the three carts. Next, from “The Buddha-path” onward answers the two hundred. The “Buddha-path” refers to the perfect fruit. Therefore, the two vehicles of the Piṭaka and Shared teachings are far removed from the Buddha-fruit; for this reason, they must cross the two hundred of the two vehicles before reaching the Buddha-fruit. As for “the Buddha-vehicle is not an obstacle,” the bodhisattvas of the Piṭaka and Shared teachings are also named the Buddha-vehicle; prior to this, they all advanced, hence it is said to be “not an obstacle.” Furthermore, if judged by severing delusions, the Piṭaka bodhisattva is inferior to the two vehicles; the three hundred must be left behind, so why only the two hundred? However, this bodhisattva has already brought forth the great aspiration, and although delusions are not yet severed, he is tentatively named the Buddha-vehicle. When people see “the Buddha-vehicle,” they treat it as identical. If so, Śākyamuni's preaching of the aggregates of Dharma should already have subsumed the nine assemblies; the five hundred arhats should be the four bodhisattvas; the Worldly Chapter should speak of the ocean of the Lotus Treasury; the Chapter on Worthies and Nobles should speak of the forty-two stages; the Chapter on Samādhi should be the Śūraṅgama Samādhi; the Chapter on Wisdom should be the various dhāraṇīs. Since both the doctrines and the assemblies are different, how could the converting master and the converting activities not be distinct? Such distinct characteristics are measureless and boundless, impossible to enumerate fully; because the bodhisattva seeks this vehicle, he is also tentatively named a mahāsattva.