法華文句記 4.128

4.128

From "Answer" down to "provides the resolution": It is broken because of hearing the Dharma; breaking arises from hearing the Dharma. In the expression "there is no before and after," breaking before hearing the Dharma would be "before," and breaking after hearing the Dharma would be "after"; the former is called self-breaking, and the latter is called other-breaking. Neither self nor other breaks it, and to be without a cause is unacceptable. Next, "Although there is no before and after" and so on means that although it is not broken through self or other, it is broken through causes and conditions; and because of causes and conditions, it is both before and after: both before, hence darkness is extinguished; and both after, hence light is born. Now, speaking from the perspective of breaking, there is no before and after; speaking from the perspective of establishing, ignorance definitively obstructs. Furthermore, one should also say: although there is no before and after, hearing the Dharma definitively breaks it. Next, he further analyzes knowing and not knowing: first he cites two sūtras that both state they know; why is it that after this sūtra has finished preaching the three cycles, it still states that they do not know? However, although they state that they know, the text's intention is slightly different: belonging to the Vaipulya, they should possess two meanings: first, explaining to the various bodhisattvas that the people of the two vehicles originally aroused the great mind and will ultimately return to the Great; second, provisionally reproaching them with "not foolish" and so forth, fully as at the end of the third fascicle of *Great Concentration and Insight*. He loosely cites them to use as the text of an objection.