法華義疏 7.63

7.63

Regarding the section on the purpose: according to the Fahua lun, the parable of the burning house refutes ordinary beings, while the parable of the impoverished son rebukes the grasping of persons of the two vehicles. The reason for first refuting ordinary beings and next having to rebuke the two vehicles is to demonstrate the gradual stages of the sequential dharma-gates for curing sickness. The śrāvakas thought that the nirvāṇa-dharma attained by the three vehicles is identical, that the three vehicles are all correct, and that the three classes of adepts are also without difference. Therefore, it is now clarified that the dharma attained by the two vehicles is like that thatched hut, whereas the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata is like the great mansion; the persons of the two vehicles are like the impoverished son, whereas the Tathāgata is like the great wealthy elder. For this reason, Kāśyapa himself spoke of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, fully clarifying their superiority and inferiority, in order to cause all who study the Hīnayāna to abandon the Hīnayāna and enter the Mahāyāna; hence this parable was spoken. Second, it is to cause all bodhisattvas to know that the Mahāyāna is noble and superior while the Hīnayāna is base and inferior, and to definitively abide in the Mahāyāna without retrogressing to grasp the Hīnayāna; hence this parable was spoken. Furthermore, it is to cause those who receive the Buddha's teaching to fully recognize the dharma-gates of Śākyamuni's lifetime transformation from beginning to end, knowing the teachings that are provisional and real, earlier and later, shallow and deep, exoteric and esoteric; hence this parable was spoken.