法華玄論 2.7

2.7

答：至人善巧，一往對麁說妙，封執名者謂道乃非麁，理應是妙。是故次云待麁說妙，未是好妙。所以然者，雖復絕麁猶未絕妙，若非麁非妙麁妙兩絕，乃名為妙也。絕待之目起自於斯。觀公經序云「寄花宣微而道玄像表，稱之為妙而體絕精麁。」頌曰：是法不可示，言辭相寂滅。二乘所以息慮，補處所以絕望，唯佛與佛乃能究盡。評曰：觀公冥同今意也。難曰：詳此釋者唯明果妙，乘通因果者不應偏執。答：以理言之唯果妙耳，因乘未極則非妙也，但因學果行故隨分說妙耳。有人但以因乘為妙者，未究妙源也。

Answer: The Perfect Person possesses skillfulness; provisionally, in contrast to the coarse, he speaks of the sublime. Those who cling to names claim that the Way is indeed not coarse, and its principle must be sublime. Therefore, it is said next that speaking of the sublime in contrast to the coarse is not yet the genuine sublime. Why is this? Although it cuts off the coarse, it has not yet cut off the sublime. If it is neither coarse nor sublime, with both coarse and sublime cut off, only then is it called 'sublime'. The designation of the absolute sublime originates from this. Master Sengguan's preface to the sūtra says: 'Using the flower to proclaim the subtle, the Way is profound and beyond images; naming it sublime, its essence transcends the fine and the coarse.' A verse says: 'This Dharma cannot be shown; the marks of words are tranquil and extinguished.' It is that by which the two vehicles cease their deliberations, and those bound to one last birth abandon hope; only Buddhas together with Buddhas can exhaust its depths. Evaluation: Master Guan's view silently coincides with our present intention. Objection: If one examines this explanation, it clarifies only the sublimity of the fruit; since the vehicle extends across cause and fruit, one should not grasp one side. Answer: Speaking from the perspective of principle, it is only the fruit that is sublime; the causal vehicle is not yet ultimate, so it is not sublime. It is only because the cause emulates the practice of the fruit that it is called sublime in accordance with its share. Those who hold only the causal vehicle to be sublime have not plumbed the source of sublimity.