法華文句記 3.30

3.30

Next, explaining further in terms of causal conditions: within the text there are naturally two explanations, general and specific. The initial statement "general" applies generally to the gradual and sudden and pervades the four periods; within the four periods each has stimulus and response, which when contrasted with the present are none other than the causal conditions of the present teaching. Therefore we know that causal conditions have many kinds: one's own practice and transforming others, oneself and others contrasted; the text accords with one's own practice, hence it says "past goodness, present teaching," and so forth. Next, from "explaining specifically" downward directly clarifies the causal conditions of the present. It may also be that these three mutually generate each other in turn: through the causal conditions of generating the aspiration, one has faith and understanding; through faith and understanding, one carries out practices. If explained specifically, it specifically points to the three teachings in the Prajñā as "various"; hence it says "after the Tripiṭaka," because the Prajñā division consists of bodhisattva practices. Next, under "moreover with respect to": because each teaching among the three teachings in the Prajñā has four doors and four siddhāntas, etc., it therefore says "there are again immeasurable forms." Saying "five hundred" clarifies that within the shared door the varieties are vast; although the five hundred belong to the existence door of the Tripiṭaka, based on their realization being identical they provisionally realize the shared [teaching], and arriving at the Prajñā they all become persons of the shared [teaching] and secretly obtain the specific benefit; now provisionally following what is manifest, one may cite them as identical, yet following the past they constitute the "various." Shared and non-shared are easy to know, merely being analogous. The names "shared" and "non-shared" appear in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa; since it says "after the Tripiṭaka," in principle it should generally point to the Vaipulya and Prajñā; the reason it mentions only the Prajñā is that the three [teachings] of the Vaipulya are identical with the three of the Prajñā, and the small is identical with the Deer Park, so it does not point to it separately. Other people divide this into three doors: namely, the door of causal conditions, the door of faith and understanding, and the door of forms. I now say that although the words are like that, the principle is not so: causal conditions refer to differences in stimulus and response; faith and understanding refers to differences in that which can be stimulated; forms refers to differences in practice after faith. Having these differences, all are called "various"; although their paths are distinct, they do not exceed the two flavors: in stimulus and response there is mutual distance and closeness, hence called causal conditions; in that which can be stimulated, one internally harbors reception, hence called faith and understanding; in cultivation of practice, it is externally displayed in body and speech, hence called forms. Because of external forms and deportment, it is called forms.