淨名玄論 7.20

7.20

次約開覆四句：一正顯真實、傍開方便，即《華嚴》為諸菩薩說大法門，謂正顯真實。亦令菩薩傍識小教，故傍開方便。故〈賢首品〉云「或示聲聞小乘門、或現緣覺中乘門、或說無上大乘門。」〈性起品〉又廣明先化菩薩次及二乘，譬如日出前照高山、後及平地，及平地皆是傍開小方便也。二者正隱真實、正閉方便，即鹿苑教門。說三乘教，故隱一乘真實二不二，云是方便，故閉方便門。三正顯真實、傍閉方便，即般若、淨名教也。說菩薩行，故正顯真實；未明三乘是方便，故傍閉方便。開覆四句者，可見第四句。問：既未開方便門，云何已得顯真實耶？答：顯真實，有二種：一者對開三乘方便門，顯一乘為真實；二者以大小相對，顯於真實。大開乘是究竟真實、小乘為小分真實，對小分真實，明究竟真實。問：何文證《般若》未開方便，已顯真實。答。《法華．信解品》云「一切諸佛所有祕藏，但為菩薩演其實事，而不為我說斯真要」，即指大品時事也。問：若爾，三藏中亦對中下二乘歎佛最上，何故不名顯真實耶？答：三藏教中廣明二乘法、小明菩薩法，以從多故，不名顯真實義。又三藏中雖明佛乘，猶是隱覆說，王宮實生、從凡得佛。《般若》已去，正說大法傍及小乘，又明佛乘皆已具足，故是正顯真實、傍閉方便。問：《大品》中辨真實、《法華》一乘真實，何異？答：舊云：大乘則劣，一乘則勝。今謂不然。《大品》對小明大，《法華》除小顯大，大無二也。如長者付財及委屬家業，二時乃異，而火宅七珍猶是一耳。《大品》中菩薩作佛、二乘未作佛，《法華》之中菩薩二乘並皆成佛，而佛乘不二也。問：若爾，何得《攝大乘論》云「乘有三種：一者小乘、二者大乘、三者一乘，一乘最勝」？答：《法華》正明能乘之人一切作佛，以此為勝，不言所乘之法有優劣也。

Next, regarding the fourfold propositions of opening and concealing. First, directly revealing the real and tangentially opening the provisional: this refers to the Avataṃsaka explaining the Great Dharma gate for all bodhisattvas, which is called directly revealing the real; it also caused the bodhisattvas to tangentially recognize the Hinayana teachings, which is called tangentially opening the provisional. Thus the "Bhadraśrī Chapter" says: "Sometimes showing the Hinayana gate of the śrāvakas, sometimes displaying the middle vehicle gate of the pratyekabuddhas, sometimes preaching the unsurpassed Great Vehicle gate." The "Tathāgatotpattisaṃbhava Chapter" also extensively clarifies that he first transforms bodhisattvas and next reaches the two vehicles, just as when the sun rises it first illuminates the high mountains and later reaches the plains; reaching the plains is entirely a tangential opening of the small provisional. Second, directly concealing the real and directly closing the provisional: this is the teaching gate of the Deer Park. Preaching the teaching of the three vehicles, he therefore concealed the real nonduality of the one vehicle; stating that it is provisional, he therefore closed the provisional gate. Third, directly revealing the real and tangentially closing the provisional: this is the teaching of the Prajñā and the Vimalakīrti. Preaching the bodhisattva practice, he therefore directly revealed the real; not yet clarifying that the three vehicles are provisional, he therefore tangentially closed the provisional. Regarding the fourfold propositions of opening and concealing, the fourth proposition can be seen. Question: Since he had not yet opened the provisional gate, how could he have already revealed the real? Answer: There are two ways of revealing the real: first, in contrast to opening the provisional gate of the three vehicles, revealing the one vehicle as the real; second, by contrasting the great and the small, revealing the real. The great open vehicle is the ultimate real; the Hinayana is a partial real. In contrast to the partial real, he clarifies the ultimate real. Question: What text proves that the Prajñā had not yet opened the provisional, but had already revealed the real? Answer: The "Adhimukti Chapter" of the Lotus Sūtra states: "All the secret treasuries possessed by the Buddhas / Were expounded in their true reality solely for the bodhisattvas, / And not preached to us in their genuine essence"—this refers precisely to the events during the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā period. Question: If so, within the Tripiṭaka he also praised the Buddha as supreme in contrast to the middle and lower vehicles; why is this not called revealing the real? Answer: In the Tripiṭaka teaching, he extensively clarified the Dharma of the two vehicles and minimally clarified the bodhisattva Dharma; because it follows the majority, it is not called revealing the real meaning. Furthermore, although the Buddha vehicle was clarified in the Tripiṭaka, it was still an expounding in concealment—truly born in the royal palace, attaining Buddhahood from the status of an ordinary being. From the Prajñā onwards, he directly preached the Great Dharma and reached the Hinayana tangentially, and also clarified that the Buddha vehicle was already fully complete; therefore, it is directly revealing the real and tangentially closing the provisional. Question: What is the difference between clarifying the real in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā and the real of the one vehicle in the Lotus Sūtra? Answer: The ancients said that the Mahāyāna is inferior while the one vehicle is superior. Now I say this is not so. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā clarifies the great in contrast to the small; the Lotus Sūtra eliminates the small and reveals the great. The great is not two. Just as the elder's entrusting of the wealth and his bestowing of the household estate differ in their two periods, the seven treasures of the burning house are nevertheless one and the same. In the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, bodhisattvas attain Buddhahood while the two vehicles have not yet attained Buddhahood; in the Lotus Sūtra, both bodhisattvas and the two vehicles attain Buddhahood, yet the Buddha vehicle is nondual. Question: If so, how can the Mahāyānasaṃgraha say: "There are three kinds of vehicles: first, the Hinayana; second, the Mahāyāna; third, the one vehicle; and the one vehicle is the most supreme"? Answer: The Lotus Sūtra directly clarifies that the persons capable of riding the vehicle all become Buddhas, and takes this to be supreme; it does not say that the Dharma that is ridden has superiority or inferiority.