法華文句記 2.92

2.92

Next, the human congregation is listed. "Vaidehī" is also translated as "Thinking Excellence." Regarding "Unborn Enemy," on the day his mother conceived him, she already harbored ill intent toward King Bimbisāra; because the evil existed before he was born, he was named after this. "Fingerless" refers to the fact that when he was first born, a diviner declared it inauspicious, and the king ordered him thrown from a tower; he did not die, but only injured one finger, hence the name. "Eight dhammas" refers to either the eight heterodoxies, the eight worldly winds, or the eight inversions. Regarding the Paochao jing, the third chapter, "Resolving Doubts," says: "Because the Buddha refuted King Ajātaśatru's fixed conception of having committed the crime of parricide, he broadly expounded that the three minds across the three periods of time are ungraspable, causing him to dwell in the dharmadhātu. Having heard this, King Ajātaśatru attained the receptive acceptance." Regarding "at the time of the preaching of the Lotus Sūtra," this is based on his having attained the receptive acceptance before the Lotus Sūtra; hence at the Lotus Sūtra he was among the pure congregation, but by the time of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] bodily sores first broke out, and through repentance he attained the first fruit—thus we know this was only to guide those who have committed deadly sins. This is entirely explained in terms of great provisional displays, and thus Kāśyapa is cited as a parallel. If explained in terms of actual practice: although he is said to be pure in the Lotus assembly, no attainment of benefit is seen; according to principle, one should say that his obstacles were not yet eliminated and his capacity not yet stirred, but by the time of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] his obstacles were about to be eliminated and his capacity had already been stirred; therefore, hearing the Buddha's prediction, he understood with joy and next spoke verses praising the Buddha. Thus the seventeenth [fascicle] says: "To my father the king, innocent as he was, I outrageously did rebellious harm, until remorse and fever arose in my heart and sores broke out across my entire body. In the world there was no good physician to heal body and mind; not believing the words of the six ministers and six teachers, I received the instruction of my elder brother Jīvaka, and hearing the Buddha preach the Dharma, I obtained the prediction and made my vow." One should know that in both places these were actions in the traces; in their ground of origin, what rebellion or compliance could there be? Moreover, just as there was a brahmin named Ahisṃka (Non-harming) who, because he killed countless sentient beings, was named Aṅgulimāla, yet upon seeing the Buddha generated the bodhicitta; and in Vārāṇasī there was an elder's son named Ajita, who killed his father, harmed his mother, murdered an arhat, and burned down the monastic dwellings, yet later wished to leave the household, and when the monks would not ordain him, generated the bodhicitta on his own—these are all of that kind. As for contemplating the mind: slaying the "mother of craving," etc., is as cited from the Laṅkāvatāra in the Notes on the Śamatha-vipaśyanā. Regarding "practicing what is not the path, etc.": rebellion is itself compliance, and what is not the path is itself the path. Furthermore, "path" has the meaning of unobstructed penetration; the principle that is realized can open through contemplative wisdom from cause to fruit, and hence is called the path, whereas the minds of the nine realms are all called non-paths, how much more so a rebellious mind? Someone asked: "In the One Vehicle of the Lotus Sūtra, bowing the head or raising the hand all lead to realizing the Buddha path; why was King Ajātaśatru's heavy transgression not extinguished?" One need only rely on the previous four propositions concerning the stirring of capacity and the elimination of obstacles to determine what came earlier or later in maturity; the conversion circumstances accord with the capacity, so this question is unnecessary. The next question can be understood. In the response, although the Immeasurable Meanings Sūtra is cited, according to principle one should further cite the "Discrimination of Merits," since those in the four continents and up to the dust particles of the great chiliocosm attained the path, how could there be no humans among them? Thus we know this was merely abbreviated. From "expanding one proposition into four propositions" to "as in the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti": that text explains the four propositions with seven meanings: first, explaining differences in meeting the Buddha through the vehicle and the precepts; second, differences between the two practices of faith and dharma; third, the distinction between the Great and Small Vehicles; fourth, gradual and sudden capacities; fifth, responding traces; sixth, contemplation of mind; seventh, transforming others. First, regarding the vehicle and the precepts: where there is the vehicle, one meets the Buddha; where there is no vehicle, one does not come. Faith and dharma: whether sitting in meditation or listening, studying, and lecturing, all can meet the Buddha, differing only according to the Great or Small Vehicle practiced. Gradual and sudden: because both Great and Small have gradual and sudden. Responding traces: having attained the twenty-five samādhis, they respond to the twenty-five realms of existence, guiding practitioners of actual practice to come to the Buddha's place. Contemplation of mind: determining whether one sees the Buddha solely according to contemplative practice. Transforming others: both seeing and not seeing are considered in terms of benefiting others. The display of traces by great provisional beings is briefly as in the present text. Regarding "if one obtains, etc.": by these four propositions, one can discern the time and place of meeting the Buddha and the slowness or speed of attaining the path for oneself and others, and by the presence, absence, and numbers of congregations across the various sūtras, verify the place of one's own future rebirth, unerring like a seal; examining one's mind and reproaching oneself at the sūtra's preface, how could one fail to harbor shame at the main body of the sūtra?