[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) › 8.9 # 法華文句記 8.9 法華文句記 8.9 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [8.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8.9) 五對他經辨有無者，又二，初明今有，次「瓔珞」下辨無明有。又諸經為對菩薩，多授法身究竟果記，今此品中秖記八相，如前後說。「瓔珞八記」者，今經已眾無不知者，故前四句中，今經唯有第三句，純顯露故，於中不必在第七地，如不輕中一句通記，故他經記深。後四句中，初句雖云遠處不覺，化道同故亦非不覺，故今經有第三句義同初三二句也。故知諸經實義未暢。言「未得無著行及以七地」者，無著之言應約通判，別圓教中初入地住已名無著，或在別教約教道耳。入無功用方無著故，據空觀成秖合在通。言「七地」者，在於通教，以過二乘堪與記故。然論文中先列四種聲聞，則退大應化與記增上決定不與。有人救云，決定亦記。此亦不然。他計決定即是定性永不發心，須指經文雖生滅想，彼土得聞，彼義自壞，何須別求？但以滅想者作凡夫釋，曲會經文令成己義。又《寶性論》秖云聲聞出界根鈍不云根敗。言根敗者，迦葉於方等即是其人。若至法華敗根還復，若入滅者出界方生。生公云：「會理無累豈容有國，雖曰無土而無不土，無身無名而身名逾有，故國土名號應物而然，引之不足耳。若得今意但云八相誘物。」斯言蔽諸，《法華論》云：「二乘有佛性法身故與記，非修行具足。」《論》言未足者，據極果耳。豈可不修淨土行耶？據斯灼然更須供佛，若緣覺人入聲聞數，即同聲聞，出無佛世同決定性。 > Fifth, distinguishing presence and absence with respect to other sūtras also has two parts: first, explaining the presence in the present \[sūtra\]; next, from the Yingluo \[jing\] onward, distinguishing absence and clarifying presence. Moreover, because other sūtras address bodhisattvas, they mostly bestow prophecies of the ultimate fruition of the dharmakāya; in the present chapter, prophecies are bestowed merely of the eight aspects, as explained before and after. As for the 'eight prophecies of the Yingluo', in the present sūtra the assembly already has none who do not know them; therefore, among the first four lines, the present sūtra has only the third line, because it is purely explicit. Therein, it need not be in the seventh stage, just as in \[the chapter on Never Disparaging\] a single line serves as a comprehensive prophecy; therefore, the prophecies in other sūtras are profound. Among the latter four lines, although the first line says that in a distant place one is unawakened, because the guiding path is identical, one is also not unawakened; therefore, the present sūtra possesses the third line whose meaning is identical to both the first and third lines. Thus we know that in other sūtras the real meaning was not yet fully expressed. Regarding 'not yet having attained unattached practice and the seventh stage': the words 'unattached' should be judged according to the shared teaching; in the distinct and perfect teachings, upon first entering the stages and abodes, one is already named 'unattached', or perhaps in the distinct teaching this is merely according to the instructional path. Because one is unattached only upon entering effortless activity, and based on the completion of the contemplation of emptiness, it ought only to be in the shared \[teaching\]. As for 'the seventh stage', it is in the shared teaching, because having surpassed the two vehicles one is competent to be bestowed a prophecy. However, in the treatise text, four kinds of voice-hearers are first listed; thus those who regress from the Great and nirmāṇakāya \[voice-hearers\] are bestowed prophecies, while those of arrogant presumption and determined \[nature\] are definitely not bestowed prophecies. Someone mounted a defense, saying: 'Those of determined \[nature\] are also bestowed prophecies.' This too is incorrect. Others maintain that the determined \[nature\] is precisely the fixed nature that will never generate the aspiration \[for awakening\]; one must point to the sūtra text: 'Though they give rise to the notion of extinction, in that land they will hear \[the Dharma\].' Their proposition collapses of itself; why seek elsewhere? They merely interpret those with the 'notion of extinction' as ordinary beings, distorting and fitting the sūtra text to construct their own position. Furthermore, the Ratnagotravibhāga merely says that voice-hearers have dull faculties when transcending the realm, but does not say their faculties are destroyed. As for 'destroyed faculties', Kāśyapa in the Vaipulya was precisely such a person. When reaching the Lotus Sūtra, destroyed faculties are restored; if they enter extinction, only upon transcending the realm are they born. Master \[Dao\]sheng said: 'Joining with the principle without encumbrance, how could there possibly be a land? Though it is said there is no land, there is nowhere that is not a land; without body and without name, yet body and name are ever more present. Therefore, land and name arise responsively according to living beings; to draw upon this is simply inadequate. If one grasps the present meaning, one merely speaks of the eight aspects to entice living beings.' These words obscure everything. The Fahua lun says: 'Because the two vehicles possess the buddha-nature and the dharmakāya, they are bestowed prophecies; it is not because their cultivation of practice is complete.' The Treatise's statement that they are 'not yet complete' is based merely on the ultimate fruition. How could they not cultivate pure land practices? Based on this, it is radiant and clear that they still must make offerings to buddhas. If pratyekabuddhas are counted among the voice-hearers, they are identical to voice-hearers; arising in an era without a buddha, they are identical to those of fixed nature. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 8.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8.8) - [Next: 8.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8.10) - [Up: 8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719~en-mt.8.9) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.8.9) · Pramāṇa