法華義疏 8.207

8.207

據譬而言，子在宅內、車在門外，就說法輪作譬，父虛指門外明有三車，諸子出門不見有三。此就今教為譬，欲顯道理無三，為成等賜大車義，故寄諸子出門不見有三，就父索三以顯無三。城就神通輪為譬，城在逈道無物隔之，同侶諸子舉目便見。此就昔教為言，明眾人欲退，故令其見城而入城也。若以城例車，昔既見城而入城，昔亦見車而乘車，車是涅槃，昔已證涅槃，如身子云「爾時心自謂得至於滅度」。若以車例城，今出門既不見車，今中道亦不見城。但如來轉勢說法，約今昔不同，故城車有見不見異。又不見車，顯理無三，明實智義；見有城，顯方便有三，明權智義。又城車異者，車多據有為智德，取其運動為喻；城多據無為涅槃，取其靜一以立譬也。

Speaking in terms of the parable: the children were inside the house and the carriages were outside the gate. Taking the wheel of expounding the Dharma as the parable: the father falsely indicated outside the gate, stating that there were three carriages, but when the children exited the gate they did not see that there were three. This is taken as a parable with respect to the present teaching, intending to reveal that in the principle there are not three; in order to establish the meaning of equally bestowing the great carriage, it is thus framed that the children exited the gate and did not see that there were three, and sought three from the father in order to reveal that there are not three. The city is taken as a parable with respect to the wheel of supernatural powers: the city lies along a distant road without anything obstructing it, so the companion children raise their eyes and immediately see it. This is stated with respect to the past teaching, making clear that the multitude wished to retreat, and therefore he caused them to see the city and enter it. If one analogizes the carriages to the city: just as in the past they saw the city and entered the city, so too in the past they saw the carriages and rode the carriages—the carriages being nirvāṇa, they had already realized nirvāṇa in the past, as Śāriputra said: "At that time I myself thought in my mind that I had reached extinction." If one analogizes the city to the carriages: just as now upon exiting the gate they do not see the carriages, so now halfway along the path they also do not see the city. It is simply that the Tathāgata shifts the approach when expounding the Dharma, adapting to the difference between past and present; therefore between the city and the carriages there is the difference of being seen and not being seen. Furthermore, not seeing the carriages reveals that in principle there are not three, clarifying the meaning of real wisdom; seeing that there is a city reveals that in expedient means there are three, clarifying the meaning of provisional wisdom. Moreover, as for the difference between the city and the carriages: the carriages mostly refer to conditioned virtues of wisdom, drawing upon their movement as an analogy; the city mostly refers to unconditioned nirvāṇa, drawing upon its stillness and unity to establish the parable.