法華義疏 7.236

7.236

「佛亦如是」下，第二、頌合譬。上長行合五譬，一、合初為父子譬；二、合中途相失譬；三、合誘引還家譬；四、合付財密化譬；五、合委囑家業譬。今亦合五，但轉勢頌之。第一、合喚子不得譬；第二、合誘引還家譬；第三、合付財密化譬；第四、合陶練小心譬；第五、合委囑家業譬。初文有一偈，上半明有小機，下半明不說大法。次文有一偈，上半明得小法，下半辨成小乘人。「佛勅我等」下，頌第三、付財密化譬。今就此譬大開三別：第一、合付財密化；第二、合陶練小心；第三、雙明佛昔不為顯說大乘。合初文為二：初一偈、合父付，第二、合子受。父付中上半明所付《波若》是最上之道，下半明《波若》教宗唯菩薩辨成佛，明顯教菩薩及密化聲聞並令作佛，蓋是《大品》教宗，非三乘通教意也。「我承佛教」下，第二、頌子受。前文有二：一、領父言；二、不識父意。今具領之。就領父言復開四別：初一行半，正明受命轉教；次一行，明菩薩悟道；第三一行，序佛授菩薩記；第四一行半，結大品教但為菩薩說、不為二乘也。「如彼窮子」下，第二，有三行，頌不識父意。三行即三：初偈、譬說；次偈、合譬；後偈、釋無悕取。「我等內滅」者凡有三種義：一、約大小乘明內外，大乘具滅三界內外，小乘但滅三界內，故稱內滅。二者、菩薩並濟眾生內外俱滅，二乘但滅自惑不滅他惑，故稱內滅。三者、約餘無餘明內外滅，結業既亡則未來生盡，入無餘時於外山河日月亦隨分得滅，今住有餘未得無餘，故云內滅也。「我等若聞淨佛國土」下，合第二、陶練小心譬。就文為二：初、明保小故不欣大因；二、明保小不樂大果。所以但明此二者，大品教後諸方等經陶練小心凡有二種：一者、以大因陶練，二者、以大果陶練，故今但明二種也。初文為二：前明不欣大因，次二偈解釋也。

From “The Buddha is also like this” onwards is, secondly, the verses matching the parable. The prose above matched five parables: first, matching the parable of originally being father and son; second, matching the parable of losing each other midway; third, matching the parable of luring him back home; fourth, matching the parable of entrusting wealth and secretly transforming; fifth, matching the parable of bequeathing the household estate. Now five are likewise matched, but the verses frame them differently: first, matching the parable of calling the son without success; second, matching the parable of luring him back home; third, matching the parable of entrusting wealth and secretly transforming; fourth, matching the parable of smelting and refining the small mind; fifth, matching the parable of bequeathing the household estate. In the first section there is one gāthā: the first half clarifies having small capacity; the second half clarifies not preaching the great Dharma. In the next section there is one gāthā: the first half clarifies attaining the small Dharma; the second half distinguishes becoming persons of the Hīnayāna. From “The Buddha commanded us” onwards versifies the third, the parable of entrusting wealth and secretly transforming. Now, regarding this parable, it is broadly divided into three distinctions: first, matching the entrusting of wealth and secret transformation; second, matching the smelting and refining of the small mind; third, jointly clarifying that the Buddha formerly did not openly preach the Mahāyāna for them. The first matching text has two parts: the first gāthā matches the father entrusting; the second matches the son receiving. In the father's entrusting, the first half clarifies that the Prajñā[pāramitā] entrusted is the supreme path; the second half clarifies that the doctrinal purport of the Prajñā[pāramitā] is that only bodhisattvas are distinguished as attaining buddhahood, making clear that openly teaching bodhisattvas and secretly transforming śrāvakas both cause them to become buddhas; this is indeed the doctrinal purport of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, not the meaning of the common teaching of the three vehicles. From “I, receiving the Buddha’s instruction” onwards is, secondly, the verse on the son receiving. In the previous text there were two: first, accepting the father’s words; second, not recognizing the father’s intention. Now they are fully accepted. Concerning accepting the father’s words, there are again four distinctions: the first line and a half directly clarifies receiving the commission to turn the teaching over; the next line clarifies the bodhisattvas awakening to the path; the third line relates the Buddha conferring prophecies on the bodhisattvas; the fourth line and a half concludes that the teaching of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra was spoken only for bodhisattvas and not for the two vehicles. From “Like that poor son” onwards is the second, consisting of three lines that versify not recognizing the father’s intention. The three lines are three points: the first gāthā is the parable; the next gāthā matches the parable; the final gāthā explains the lack of yearning and acquisition. “Our inner extinction” generally has three meanings: First, inner and outer are clarified in terms of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna: the Mahāyāna fully extinguishes both inside and outside the three realms, while the Hīnayāna extinguishes only inside the three realms; hence it is called “inner extinction.” Second, bodhisattvas simultaneously deliver sentient beings, so both inner and outer are extinguished; the two vehicles extinguish only their own defilements and not the defilements of others; hence it is called “inner extinction.” Third, inner and outer extinction are clarified in terms of remainder and non-remainder: when fetters and karma are destroyed, future rebirth is exhausted; upon entering the non-remainder, external mountains, rivers, sun, and moon are also extinguished in their respective portions; now abiding in remainder, having not yet attained non-remainder, it is therefore called “inner extinction.” From “If we heard of the purification of Buddha-lands” onwards matches the second, the parable of smelting and refining the small mind. The text has two parts: first, clarifying that clinging to the small, they did not rejoice in the great cause; second, clarifying that clinging to the small, they took no pleasure in the great fruit. As for why only these two are clarified: after the teaching of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the smelting and refining of the small mind across the various vaipulya sūtras generally had two aspects: first, smelting and refining by means of the great cause; second, smelting and refining by means of the great fruit; therefore now only these two kinds are clarified. The first section has two parts: first, clarifying that they did not rejoice in the great cause; next, two gāthās explain it.