法華文句記 9.77

9.77

"Nor must one speak of Zhao's merits to Zhang" and so forth: by referring to Zhang's family's merits while speaking to Zhao's family, one causes Zhao's family to assume one is speaking of Zhang's merits to mock their own shortcomings. This is like seeing Zhao practicing repentance and saying that Zhang's family is diligent—how could that not cause Zhao to think one uses Zhang's diligence to mock his own indolence? Because this resembles scolding by means of wholesome dharmas, it should not be done. If one speaks of Zhao's shortcomings to Zhang, that again causes Zhang to assume one is speaking of his own shortcomings to Zhao. Therefore the Dazhidulun states: "Praising oneself, reviling oneself, praising others, reviling others—the wise do not do these four dharmas. Why? One who praises oneself is an arrogant and deceptive person; one who reviles oneself is a bewitched and delusional person; one who praises others is a flattering and fawning person; one who reviles others is a slanderous and treacherous person." The wise should consider with the four siddhāntas and protect both self and others. Regarding "If one praises the two vehicles" and so forth: praising the small in contrast to the great causes them to lose the great. If one reviles the two vehicles, one may cause the two vehicles to lose both great and small. This refers to beginners of the two vehicles. They are also those who practice the small to assist the great, such as the two vehicles in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. Regarding "not harboring thoughts of resentment or dislike": the character "resentment" (yuan) is in the falling tone; harming oneself is called resentment, and violating one's feelings is called dislike. If it were in the level tone, it would mean that when injury to oneself is not yet grave, one's mind accumulates great hatred. Practitioners of peaceful practices even cast aside joy that accords with themselves; how much more would they construct hatred where there is no resentment? The Mahāsaṃnipāta states: "In a past life, there was a rākṣasa king who went forth under the Dharma of Krakucchanda Buddha, generated the bodhicitta, and recited and upheld eighty-four thousand aggregates of Dharma of both the Mahāyāna and the Hīnayāna. Because his mind disliked dhūta monks, saying that those who do not recite sūtras are like tree stumps, he fell into hell and suffered great distress. Having emerged from hell, he received a rākṣasa body, and only at the end of the Auspicious Eon in the presence of Rucika Buddha did he shed that rākṣasa body." Ordinary people are still like this; how much more so for the peaceful practices in propagating the great scripture, where one should protect and care for small practices? Furthermore, resentment is blaming, and dislike is faultfinding; resentment is deep and dislike is shallow. Only when both the shallow and deep are discarded does it accord with correct practice. The mention of "mind" within this peaceful practice of speech is for the sake of restraining speech. Regarding "contemplating all dharmas as empty" and so forth: the mind has already abided in the principle of ultimate emptiness. Reiterating the preceding practice, one certainly does not grasp the great and disparage the small, but merely accords with the characteristics of dharmas and further accords with the feelings of beings. One does not even cause them to accord with the Dharma while violating the feelings of beings; how much less would one cause them to violate the Dharma while also turning against their capacities? Therefore, from "if not seeing" onward, one answers only with the great Dharma. To answer according to the meaning has three aspects: three kinds of speech. The speech of the wise may be answered; the speech of kings and the speech of fools may not be answered.