法華文句記 2.67

2.67

Regarding the questions and answers: in the first question, the opening sentence establishes the proposition, from "Tripiṭaka" onward concedes [the point], from "śrāvakas" onward sets up an example, and from "manifested traces" onward presents the objection. The intention of establishing the proposition concerns severing afflictions: from the stages (bhūmi) and abodes (vihāra) upward, the virtues are praised according to the stage of severing [afflictions] in the perfect teaching; since bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka never sever them from beginning to end, they might well not be praised in that way. Even the two vehicles are praised with respect to severing afflictions; how could the bodhisattvas of the shared and distinct teachings who sever afflictions in their manifested traces not be praised, while both horizontal and vertical praises are exclusively praises of the perfect? The intention of the answer is that while the meaning applies to both origin and traces, the intent lies solely in the perfect; though the vertical text seems to praise the distinct, according to the departmental division it exclusively praises the perfect; borrowing traces to explain the text, the intent of the sūtra follows the origin. Therefore, just as praising the śrāvakas follows the traces, the bodhisattvas should also be praised across all four teachings, yet wishing to make known the perfect purport, traces are set aside to preserve the origin, and the initial is eliminated to take the final. The next question is obvious. The answer has three parts: first, the direct answer. Second, from "the ancient [masters] said" onward, cites the stages of the distinct teaching as an example: since the eighth stage is not yet the ultimate, and the ancient commentaries still held without doubt that it was endowed with virtues, what obstacle is there to a person of the perfect [teaching] being fully endowed with all virtues in stage after stage? Third, from "the Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra" onward, cites testimony. The Treatise says: 'Those virtues of the bodhisattva are subsumed by thirteen phrases and two passages; one should know that the first is the gate of upper branches and lower branches, and the second is the gate of activities that subsume.' First, 'upper branches and lower branches' refers to general characteristics and specific characteristics; one should know that from the beginning up to 'irreversible' is general, while the remainder are specific. That Treatise says: 'Irreversibility has ten manifestations,' as fully cited now; yet setting aside the first general phrase, there remain twelve phrases. The two phrases of 'making offerings' and 'planting virtues' are combined into the fourth manifestation, and the two phrases of 'renown' and 'saving sentient beings' are combined into the tenth manifestation; thus only ten manifestations are formed, all named with respect to irreversibility. Therefore one knows that in the perfect explanation, every phrase mutually communicates; each manifestation contains the ten manifestations and contains all phrases—how could it be only ten manifestations and twelve phrases? This shares the same intent as the gate of forty-two syllables. Furthermore, in the phrase where the sūtra speaks of 'cultivating the body with benevolence,' the text of the Treatise speaks fully of cultivating both bodily and mental karmas; the reason the sūtra text abbreviates the cultivation of the mind is that benevolence is the mind itself, and since the mind perfumes the body, it is not mentioned separately; down to irreversibility based on the emptiness of self and emptiness of dharmas, whereby one knows that the stages and abodes both witness the two kinds of emptiness. Therefore, although the vertical explanation is correlated specifically in text, its intent is not distinct: first, because the subsequent horizontal explanation discusses the horizontal in terms of the vertical; second, by relying on the Treatise's phrasing and intent to correspond to the various stages, as when the first stage is said not to fall into the two extremes and to be endowed with the three contemplations, illuminating both self-benefit and benefiting others, existence and non-existence alike. Whether fortune or wisdom, they are not separate from the single mind; how could internal causes and external conditions fail to be complete? Since the first stage is thus, all following [stages] are also like this; right within this stage, both horizontal and vertical are complete. In order to respond to gradual sequence, the names of the stages are provisionally borrowed, and in order to reveal what is solely perfect, that requires a horizontal explanation. Therefore, the gate of subsuming activities in the Treatise corresponds to the vertical explanation; hence the present text employs both gates from the Treatise in its explanation. However, in the present text, following the Treatise, under 'what kind of realm,' the two characters 'what kind' are redundant. The Treatise merely says: 'because within what kind of realm they should perform what is to be performed.' The Treatise itself explains: 'Stage purity means that in the three stages from the eighth stage upward, the signless practice is quiet and pure.' The present text's intent is that those three uses of 'what kind' in the Treatise each pertain to the various stages: purity is the severing of afflictions in the various stages, skillful means is the progression through the various stages, realm is that upon which the various stages rely, and 'should perform,' etc., are the functions of the various stages. The Treatise says: 'Skillful means are of four kinds: first, the skillful means of subsuming the wondrous dharma, because one upholds the wondrous dharma and expounds it for others through the power of delight in speech'—this refers to the first four phrases, to be considered according to their meaning.