法華文句記 2.96

2.96

Next, from "assembly gathers" downward, is the specific explanation proper. First, in explaining the deportment, first citing the treatise: the text of the treatise has four accomplishments: first, encircling; second, before and after; third, offering; fourth, honoring and praising. The sūtra text lacks "before and after"; it should say "encircling, before and after." Venerable She said: "Although it is the text of the treatise, it does not accord with the meaning of the sūtra"; this was because Venerable She still doubted the translator. However, our school mostly relies on the text of the treatise, only failing to use it entirely in one or two places. The treatise using four to explain three does not warrant this rebuke—just as it uses eight phrases to explain the five phrases of "pondering," uses fifteen phrases to explain the five phrases praising the virtues of the arhats, and adds "difficult to awaken to" and so forth to explain "difficult to understand and difficult to enter." Therefore, adding them incurs no fault. Having previously searched through two or three fascicles of his commentary, the many formidable points cease here. Among the four deportments, setting aside the other three deportments: wishing to hear something, which differs from an improper abiding, is therefore called "in accordance with Dharma"; how much more must one await this sūtra before it is called "in accordance with Dharma"! If speaking generally, those in this section and of this capacity who abide encircling are all "in accordance with Dharma." In the direct explanation, first rebuking the ancient [teachers]: merely speaking of the four such as monks, some saying the four such as heavenly dragons, or the four such as Brahmā and Māra. Although there are these listings of greater and lesser, guests and hosts, they do not distinguish common and sagely, reverse and forward, provisional and real, speaking and silence, present and past, subtle and prominent, shared and distinct, combined and exclusive, setting forth and opening, origin and traces—they have no core purport whatsoever. The four now listed encompass all fourfold [categories] and gather the aforementioned ten pairs, without confusion from common and sagely down to origin and traces. Furthermore, Venerable She said: "Tiantai's establishment of the influential assembly and so forth has principle but lacks scriptural text, and should not be relied upon or trusted." If so, if that which has principle but lacks text is not to be trusted, should that which has text but lacks principle be relied upon? We say now: ordinary people use what has both text and principle; wise people use what lacks text but has principle; deluded people use what has text but lacks principle; confused people use what lacks both text and principle. Thus the sūtra says "rely on the meaning, not on the words"—this is precisely the meaning. Therefore, external, provisional, and trace [teachings] of the Small [Vehicle], viewed against internal, real, and origin [teachings] of the Great [Vehicle], all have names without reality; hence the Buddha rebuked Kāśyapa: "In the past you only heard the name of nirvāṇa, but had not heard its meaning." The Dharma master himself established the two sagely assemblies of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas, and the two common assemblies of dragon spirits and human rulers; we now ask: do these four possess the Tiantai four or not? If they do not, what do they have to do with the *Lotus Sūtra*? They would not even have persons of current capacity who gain benefit, let alone the initiators and so forth! If they lack them, it is unacceptable; if they have them, then they have both text and principle, so how could one say they lack text? Therefore, this sūtra's listing of the assembly must possess these four—that is its text. The meaning necessarily requires the four such as initiators—that is its principle. Having both text and principle, it can well be relied upon and received; what the Dharma master established has text without principle, and on the contrary incurs this blame. How much more so as the four meanings pervade all sūtras! In the present context, one must speak of initiation, origin and traces, in terms of the teaching, and conditioned origination. As for the sequence of these four: although capacity can be stimulated, it must depend on guidance; once guided capacity has been stimulated, influence spreads out; and those who lack all three benefits are the assembly of karmic connection. If one says there is no text: are Mañjuśrī and Maitreya not initiators? Are those who receive prophecies in the three cycles not the current capacity? Apart from the initiators, are the great bodhisattvas not the influence? Apart from the assembly of current capacity, are those like the ones who stood up and left not the karmic connection? Moreover, among the mixed assembly, although there is no striking and stimulating, they can also guide, broadly named initiators; although not adorning majestically, they can also assist, broadly named influence. The *Vimalakīrti* says "and born in the five destinies" to manifest oneself, together with those who are guided—the meaning of the four assemblies is complete.