法華文句記 3.19

3.19

The intention within the question and answer is: borrowing the Separate to reveal the Perfect. Saying "borrowing the Separate": it is not that the Perfect lacks stages; it merely borrows the gradations of higher and lower to reveal the non-gradual equality. May later scholars bear this meaning of "borrowing" in mind! Because scholars of this school sometimes also mistakenly think that the four wheels of the Yingluo are the meaning of borrowing the Separate. If one discusses the Perfect stages, the six identities are already sufficient; why must one further list forty-two? Because the stages of true partial realization are long, it borrows the Separate stages to distinguish their ranks, just as empty space is one in essence while flyers go shallow or deep (and so forth). Therefore, the end of the sixth fascicle of Great Calming and Contemplation says: "or borrowing the high to establish the low," and so forth. If the text of the Profound Meaning still uses "names common, meaning perfect," how much more so "names separate, meaning perfect"? The next question asks: Since the Separate stages are borrowed, and the Separate has worthies and sages, does the Perfect have them or not? The answer points to the "Profound Meaning": fully as in the ninth fascicle of the Profound Meaning, it is not that there are no worthies and sages, but only that the higher and lower differ. Furthermore, within the four applications of mindfulness, there is also distinction by four phrases: if definitively determined, before the abodes belongs to worthies; if determined by the four phrases, they are merely posited in meaning to take each other's names: the abodes are stages of worthies and yet distant from sages, hence called "worthy sages." The Separate bhūmis are called sage; those in the practices and dedications of the Perfect are close to this bhūmi, hence called "sage worthies." In the present text of the Perfect, the practices and dedications are sage, and they further enter the bhūmis, hence called "sage sages." If not contrasted with each other, the names within that teaching are fixed. From "If one says..." onwards, it again goes through the teachings to refute the old: although it is called one cause, one should recognize the essence of the cause; the bodhisattvas of the four teachings, each looking toward their respective buddha, are all one cause, yet the one cause is different. Therefore, the tenth fascicle of the Profound Meaning says: "opening the one from the one, returning to the one from the one." Since it does not distinguish the differences, what doubt is there that it is the Shared Teaching? Hence the Shared Teaching says: "The three causes are largely the same; because they are the same, they are one." Thus it says: "does not go beyond the Shared Teaching." Regarding "If one says that the four assemblies are equally the bodhisattva cause": it is because from their initial aspiration they are not in common with the Hinayana. The Lotus intention is as previously explained: fully like the four wheels down to opening and revealing.