法華文句記 3.44

3.44

Because of two meanings: first, among the princes, Mañjuśrī's virtue is singled out; second, across the sūtras, Mañjuśrī is universally the head of the bodhisattva assembly. Next, in explaining the first thought, there is first the explanation by cause and condition. Where it says 'inner and outer spiritual transformations', this clarifies distinguishing characteristics, which requires this distinct explanation; if explained generally, as in the Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra, all dharmas are called spiritual transformations, as fully cited in the first record of the Śamatha and Vipaśyanā. From 'the spirit's name' downwards, it explains the name and also distinguishes the characteristics. From 'śūraṅgama' downwards, it clarifies the dharma relied upon. From 'Dharma King' downwards, it is the functional operation, and is also the reason for the question. Next, from 'as for' downwards, it is according to the teaching, and is also a further explanation of the functional operation as well as the reason for the question. Furthermore, although this reason for the question arises from not fathoming the spiritual transformation, it properly arises from deciding for oneself; thus, when the capacity to benefit others is triggered, one responds accordingly. Through the combination of causes and conditions, this question is posed, making it known that Maitreya does not understand the reason; thus, the various stages must be compared and evaluated in turn. 'Distracted' refers to ascetic non-Buddhists and ordinary beings. 'Concentrated' refers to non-Buddhists who have attained dhyāna and faithful ones who practice concentration. 'Holy' refers to the śrāvakas in the Tripiṭaka other than Śāriputra. Where it says 'approaching the ultimate stage, one also does not know', the phrase 'as for' generally clarifies that the meaning is comprehensive; thus, step by step, the lower does not know the higher. If it is the ultimate stage, then none of the lower stages can know it. Therefore, regarding the three stages—bodhisattva, successor [to the Buddha's seat], and the supremely revered—if following the provisional path of teaching, they should span the four teachings and be compared with one another in turn; the text temporarily treats it thus. Here, being at the utmost extreme, the ultimate of the successor does not know the supremely revered. Furthermore, from 'Maitreya' onwards, the meaning pertains to origin and traces: concealing his original bright wisdom, his traces resemble darkness and hesitance. If explained in terms of contemplating the mind, the miraculous penetration of wisdom's illumination changes in accordance with the six identities. The initial text on causes and conditions corresponds to the four siddhāntas, and its meaning is vivid and clear. Because the inner and outer differ, seeing and hearing brings joy; as the six portents are outwardly manifested, when beings behold them, good arises. Adapting and penetrating in accordance with principle, it universally tames all; the Dharma King is the culmination of principle, so nothing surpasses him. Where it says 'if taking the lower verses' to reveal that the assembly’s thoughts of doubt are threefold just like Maitreya’s: this great assembly together beheld the six portents; since entering their stages, they had traversed many assemblies and long known that Mañjuśrī’s spiritual function could not be fathomed. Thus, when Maitreya gave rise to the thought, the assembly also devotedly and single-mindedly concentrated on Wondrous Virtue (Mañjuśrī). Hence, when Maitreya posed the question, he first observed the great assembly and only then voiced his long-held doubt, knowing for certain that Mañjuśrī was the ground for resolving doubts. The old explanations are understood. Based on the intention of the present questions and answers, since the cited verses state that the three thoughts were not exclusive to Maitreya, he merely naturally took the lead in raising the question because he was occupying the primary position. As for questioning and answering, Mañjuśrī is the most capable; why should it only be Maitreya? One should say that the capacity of living beings rests with the questioner and the answerer; therefore, the text is resolved with four explanations—that is, causes and conditions, and so on. The opening 'question and answer' downwards is causes and conditions: just as Mañjuśrī deferred his competence to inquire about illness to Vimalakīrti and was nonetheless rebuked by him, hence it says 'resting on nothing'. Furthermore, 'dharma-gate' downwards is according to the teaching, because the four teachings do not go beyond the provisional and the real. 'Traces also' downwards is origin and traces. 'Names also' downwards is contemplating the mind. Although the phrasing in the first explanation by cause and condition is narrow, if established in principle, it also possesses the four siddhāntas: questioning and answering in accordance with what is pleasing is the mundane [siddhānta]; responding to what the assembly delights in is for individual persons; completely resolving the doubts of the assembly is therapeutic; the parity of stage and practice is the ultimate meaning.