法華文句記 4.24

4.24

Next, origin and traces: this is not yet the chapter's primary intention, but because there are skillful means in both origin and traces, it is explained by lodging [the meaning] here. The name "skillful means" is identical, but distant and near are eternally distinct; although they are eternally distinct, they do not exceed the ten pairs, for how could what was truly attained in the origin ever depart from self and other, cause and effect? Therefore, "when I originally practiced the bodhisattva path" and "my true realization" are precisely principle and phenomena, up to cause and effect; "since attaining buddhahood" is precisely essence and function, up to the siddhāntas. In this, the two texts on master and disciple each have two [parts]: both first clarify the three of self, other, and so forth, and next conclude with the four propositions. As for the two texts regarding the master: the first text shows that origin and traces each possess the provisional and the real; next, bundling the origin as real and bundling the traces as provisional, the coarse and wondrous in the traces are both coarse compared to the origin, while the coarse and wondrous in the origin are both wondrous compared to the traces. Therefore, now it only points to the ancient realization and names it "self"; thus within the ancient realization there is not an absence of transforming others, which is why intermediate [times] and today, even if there is discarding the three, are also called "other." People of the world do not see this and merely take the dharmakāya as the origin. What teaching lacks that? But their defect is not knowing the parents' age, which is why revealing the true realization is the origin. Next, bundling: outside of this one ancient realization, all are called "other"; therefore, within self and other, merely bundling origin and traces attains the names "provisional" and "real." Third, concluding with the four propositions. As for concluding with the four propositions: in matching them, one should say that provisional and real in the origin are both real, and provisional and real in the traces are both provisional; taking the real in the origin against the provisional in the traces is called the third proposition. The inconceivable one is because origin and traces both attain double negation. "And so forth" means to match them as just shown. Next, the disciple's traces and origin, contrasted with each other, each possess the provisional and real, also establishing the two names from origin and traces. Speaking generally, in the origin, the intermediate [stages], and down to the present day, every stage without exception possesses the four propositions. "Also possessing the four propositions, and so forth": as in the preceding regarding the master, it differs only in being the disciple, hence it says "also possessing." Although master and disciple both have four, if one minutely determines origin and traces within master and disciple, then the four propositions in the origin are all origin, and the four propositions in the traces are all traces. If one uses the names of origin and traces to make the four propositions, one should say that origin and traces are both origin, traces and origin are both traces, and origin and traces each have origin and traces, both being inconceivable; through reflection this can be seen. Furthermore, one should determine it with only two propositions, which are the first two propositions, fully as in the ten wonders of the origin section in the text of the *Profound Meaning*, down to greater or lesser, broad and narrow, which can be understood by analogy. Next, from "If proceeding from the Buddha's traces" onward concludes the explanation of the chapter. Master and disciple descend into traces from the origin; based on the original intention of transformation, both already attain the designation of the Skillful Means Chapter—how much more so when master and disciple guide [beings] to enter the perfect cause, could it not be called the Skillful Means Chapter? Someone asks: "What does the present Skillful Means Chapter take as its essence?" Others answer; someone says: "It takes subsequent-attainment wisdom as essence," citing the *Vijñaptimātra* statement that the last five pāramitās are all subsequent-attainment wisdom. "I now take fundamental wisdom as essence." Now I say: regarding what is called essence, does one take that upon which it relies, or the immediate essence of function? If taking that upon which it relies, then what is provisional yet real is the essence; if taking the immediate essence, then what is real yet provisional is the essence. How could these two meanings—fundamental and subsequent-attainment—ever be separated even for an instant? Furthermore, if one only speaks of the five, then subsequent-attainment has no essence; how much more so when dividing origin and traces, only the single ancient realization is the fundamental, and all the rest are subsequent-attainment.