法華玄論 3.32

3.32

答：五味與五時義不相應，乃欲證成，反為自害。五時中以《波若》為第二時，五味中《波若》為第四，雖欲曲會云《波若》即是《法華》平等大慧，此乃迴文就義，非所以也。《大經》云「如我前於《摩訶波若》中說我無我無有二相」，可是平等大慧引《法華》耶？此出人情，深非文義也。又《攝大乘論》明乘有三：初二乘、次大乘、三一乘，一乘最勝，何不言三時耶？又《五相略經》明教有三種：第一鹿野為聲聞說四諦；第二為大根說諸法離自性不生不滅，此亦有上有餘不了義說起諍論處；第三為求一切乘者說諸法離自性不生不滅，無上無餘非諍論處。此經一卷與《攝大乘論》相應，何故不依經說三時耶？又《無量義經》且明三時：初為聲聞說四諦，而八億諸天來下聽法，發菩提心；次說甚深十二因緣，為求辟支佛人，無量眾生發菩提心住聲聞地；次說方等十二部、摩訶波若、華嚴海空，宣說菩薩歷劫修行。依此則有三時，今復說《無量義》，亦是四時，復說《法華》則為五時，《涅槃》為六時，初說人天乘應為七時。何不立七時？不應偏立四宗、定執五教也。又《釋論》云「佛於鹿園說法，無量菩薩得無生法忍，無量菩薩得一生補處現身作佛。」豈可言鹿園但小乘耶？又《大經》云「我初成道，亦有菩薩已曾問我是甚深義。」即初後皆說涅槃，不應言《涅槃》是漸而《華嚴》是頓。又《像法決疑經》云「或有見我入於涅槃，或有我是報佛為百千釋迦之所圍繞。」若爾，不應言《華嚴》是初成道時頓說，至涅槃時不說。是故漸頓不成也。又《釋論》有二種法輪：一顯示法輪、二祕密法輪。顯示者，如鹿薗說小法，五人及八萬天得道是也；祕密法輪者，於鹿薗說大法，無量人發菩提心，乃至現身成佛，如向所引也。如鹿薗有此二事以判顯密者，一切處皆例然。如在祇洹，身子等見釋迦說法，諸菩薩見祇洹舍那說法，徒眾充滿法界，說法界法門，二乘不聞不見，皆其類也。又以四句總貫眾經：一始說小終說大，如鹿薗先說小，後明大乘。二初大後小，初成道說華嚴教，鹿薗已去說小教。三始終俱大，如初後皆說涅槃。四始終俱小，如《釋論》云「從初轉法輪至大涅槃，集作《阿含》。」以顯密二教及四句不同，豈可局在五時、限以三教？但知如來隨緣說法，教無定也。

Answer: The five flavors and the doctrine of the five periods do not correspond; wishing to use it as proof, on the contrary, undermines itself. Among the five periods, Prajñāpāramitā is the second period, whereas among the five flavors, Prajñāpāramitā is the fourth. Although one may wish to make a forced reconciliation by saying that Prajñāpāramitā is the equal great wisdom of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, this is twisting the text to fit one's own doctrine and is inadmissible. The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Just as I previously in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā said that self and no-self have no two characteristics"—can this equal great wisdom be citing the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra? This stems from subjective human opinion and deeply violates the meaning of the text. Furthermore, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains that there are three vehicles: first, the two vehicles; second, the Mahāyāna; third, the one vehicle; and the one vehicle is supreme. Why not speak of three periods? Again, the Sūtra on the Five Marks in Brief explains that teachings are of three kinds: first, in the Deer Park, explaining the four truths for śrāvakas; second, for those of great capacity, explaining that phenomena are free from intrinsic nature, unborn and unceasing, which is still a teaching with a superior, with a remainder, and of inexplicit meaning, giving rise to dispute; third, for those seeking all vehicles, explaining that phenomena are free from intrinsic nature, unborn and unceasing, without superior, without remainder, and not a matter of dispute. This one-fascicle sūtra corresponds with the Mahāyānasaṃgraha; why not follow this sūtra and speak of three periods? Again, the Anantanirdeśa-sūtra for its part explains three periods: first, explaining the four truths for śrāvakas, whereupon eight hundred million devas came down to hear the Dharma and generated the bodhicitta; next, explaining the profound twelve links of dependent origination for those seeking pratyekabuddhahood, whereupon immeasurable sentient beings generated the bodhicitta while abiding in the śrāvaka stage; next, explaining the vaipulya twelve divisions, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā, and the Avataṃsaka ocean of emptiness, expounding the bodhisattvas' practice across kalpas. If based on this, there are three periods; now, further delivering the Anantanirdeśa-sūtra would be a fourth period; delivering the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra would be a fifth period; the Nirvāṇa would be a sixth period; and initially explaining the human and heavenly vehicles should be a seventh period. Why not establish seven periods? One should not unilaterally establish four tenets or rigidly cling to five teachings. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "When the Buddha taught the Dharma in the Deer Park, immeasurable bodhisattvas attained the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas, and immeasurable bodhisattvas attained the stage of being bound to one last birth to become buddhas in this very lifetime." How could one say that the Deer Park was solely Hīnayāna? Again, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "When I first achieved the Way, there were also bodhisattvas who had already questioned me on this profound meaning." That is, Nirvāṇa was taught both initially and later; one should not say that the Nirvāṇa is gradual while the Avataṃsaka is sudden. Again, the Xiangfa jueyi jing says: "Some see me entering nirvāṇa, while others see that I am the reward buddha surrounded by hundreds of thousands of Śākyamunis." If so, one should not say that the Avataṃsaka was taught suddenly only when he first achieved the Way and was not taught at the time of nirvāṇa. Therefore, gradual and sudden are untenable. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa has two kinds of wheels of Dharma: first, the manifest wheel of Dharma; second, the secret wheel of Dharma. As for the manifest, it is like the Deer Park teaching the small Dharma, where the five men and eighty thousand devas attained the Way; as for the secret wheel of Dharma, it was the teaching of the great Dharma in the Deer Park, where immeasurable people generated the bodhicitta and even attained buddhahood in this very lifetime, as was cited just above. Since there are these two aspects in the Deer Park to distinguish manifest and secret, all places are by analogy like this. For instance, in the Jetavana, Śāriputra and others saw Śākyamuni teaching the Dharma, while the bodhisattvas saw the Jetavana Vairocana teaching the Dharma, with the assembly filling the dharmadhātu and teaching the Dharma-gates of the dharmadhātu, which the two vehicles neither heard nor saw; these are all of that category. Furthermore, using four propositions to comprehensively encompass the scriptures: 1. Initially explaining the small and finally explaining the great, as in the Deer Park first explaining the small, and later clarifying the Mahāyāna. 2. Initially great and later small, as in delivering the Avataṃsaka teaching upon first achieving the Way, and from the Deer Park onward teaching the small teaching. 3. Great both initially and finally, as in teaching nirvāṇa both initially and later. 4. Small both initially and finally, as the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "From the first turning of the wheel of Dharma up to the great nirvāṇa, compiled to form the Āgamas." Since the two teachings of manifest and secret and the four propositions are distinct, how could one confine them to five periods or restrict them to three teachings? One should simply know that the Tathāgata teaches the Dharma according to conditions, and the teaching has no fixed form.