淨名玄論 7.25

7.25

問：此經雖是菩薩藏攝，菩薩法藏有無量法門，今四會正明何法？答：今先示法門之相，後辨四會所明。大判法門，凡有三種：一能表之教、二所表之理、三藉教悟理因果行成。此三攝三行藏，義無不盡。非唯大乘經辨此三，大乘論亦明三，如「中觀論」三字即是三義。叡法師序云「其實既宣、其言既明，於菩薩之行、道場之照，無不朗然繇解矣。」其實既宣，謂中實，謂中實之理也。其言既明，謂教門顯明，即是論也。菩薩之行、道場之照，謂因果行成，即觀義也。《攝大乘論》勝相理十，亦但明於三，謂無等境、無等行、無等果。此三但是二門所攝，明此二門，即是辨教亦具二。是故知菩薩法藏唯辨三法。今四會所明，亦辨三法。如不思議境、不思議智、不思議教也。總雖有三，但就別而言，隨義說十，先從一門次第釋之。會雖有四，同明一不可思議解脫法門。此一法門，攝一切法。如《華嚴》諸善知識各說一門，而實攝一切門；淨名即一善知識說不思議解脫法門也。問：四會同明不可思議，有何異耶？肇公云「其文雖殊，不思議一」，但寄跡不同，故門戶各異。若就人為言，初會佛明不思議；次兩會淨名辨不思議；後菴園會，佛與淨名共辨不思議，佛初略開其宗、次淨名廣辨其致、後則如來印成重復令說。次就法不同者，初會示二不思議：一合蓋現土，蓋不廣而彌八極、土不狹而現蓋中，其猶小鏡照現天下。次則案地變淨，應土則麁妙適緣、報土隨業所感，皆不思議。此二明不思議迹。其中淨土願行，不思議本也。次會亦明二不思議：一通明一切方便，現一切形、說一切教，二乘下位莫能測度，謂神通不思議。次別明現疾方便，說生死過患、歎法身功德，以別示一身、別說一教，謂別不思議也。第三會亦明二不思議：一明權實二智六度四等不二法門，謂本不思議。借座請飯、謂迹不思議。不二法門以為理本、權實二智六度四等以為行本。迹中亦明二迹：室容於座，謂大入小；請飯香土，以小充大。又借座則默感、請飯則遣化，皆不思議。掌驚大眾、手接妙喜，謂不思議迹。其中辨菩薩行本跡二身不思議本，合前有三句。借座則大入小、請飯則小充大；手移妙喜來入娑婆，以大入大、以小入小不足明之，故闕斯一句。

Question: Although this sūtra is subsumed under the Bodhisattva-piṭaka, the Bodhisattva Dharma-piṭaka contains immeasurable Dharma gates; what Dharma do the present four assemblies specifically elucidate? Answer: Now, I shall first show the characteristics of the Dharma gates, and afterward distinguish what is elucidated across the four assemblies. Broadly determined, Dharma gates are of three kinds: first, the teaching that can express; second, the principle that is expressed; third, the completion of cause-and-effect practice by relying on the teaching to awaken to the principle. These three subsume the piṭaka of the three practices, leaving no meaning unexhausted. It is not only Mahāyāna sūtras that distinguish these three; Mahāyāna treatises also elucidate three. For instance, the three characters "Zhong Guan Lun" (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) are themselves these three meanings. Master Sengrui's preface states: "When its reality has been proclaimed and its words have been clarified, then regarding the practices of a bodhisattva and the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa, there are none who are not brightly and completely enlightened." "Its reality has been proclaimed" refers to the middle reality, meaning the principle of the middle reality. "Its words have been clarified" refers to the teachings being made manifest, which is the "treatise" (lun). "The practices of a bodhisattva and the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa" refers to the completion of cause-and-effect practice, which is the meaning of "contemplation" (guan). The ten principles of supreme characteristics in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha also elucidate merely three: namely, peerless object, peerless practice, and peerless fruit. These three are merely subsumed by two gates; elucidating these two gates is also explaining the teaching as having both. Therefore, we know that the Bodhisattva Dharma-piṭaka distinguishes only three dharmas. What is elucidated in the present four assemblies also distinguishes three dharmas: namely, the inconceivable object, the inconceivable cognition, and the inconceivable teaching. Although in general there are three, when speaking in terms of particulars, ten are stated according to their meanings; I shall first explain them sequentially from one gate. Although there are four assemblies, they together elucidate the one Dharma gate of inconceivable liberation. This single Dharma gate subsumes all dharmas. Just as the various spiritual friends in the Avataṃsaka each speak of one gate, and yet it truly subsumes all gates, so Vimalakīrti is one spiritual friend who speaks of the Dharma gate of inconceivable liberation. Question: Since the four assemblies together elucidate the inconceivable, what difference is there? Sengzhao said: "Although the texts differ, the inconceivable is one." It is merely that the traces lodged are not the same, so the approaches each differ. If speaking in terms of persons: in the first assembly, the Buddha elucidates the inconceivable; in the next two assemblies, Vimalakīrti distinguishes the inconceivable; in the later assembly in Āmrapālī's grove, the Buddha and Vimalakīrti together distinguish the inconceivable, where the Buddha first briefly opens its tenet, next Vimalakīrti broadly distinguishes its purport, and afterward the Tathāgata confirms it and has him speak again. Next, regarding differences in dharmas: the first assembly shows two inconceivables: first, gathering the parasols to manifest the lands, where the parasols are not broad yet cover the eight limits, and the lands are not narrow yet appear within the parasols, like a small mirror illuminating and manifesting all under heaven. Next, pressing the earth to transform it into purity, where the manifested land is coarse or sublime according with conditions, and the retribution land is sensed according to karma—both are inconceivable. These two elucidate the inconceivable trace. The vows and practices for a pure land among them are the inconceivable root. The next assembly also elucidates two inconceivables: first, it universally elucidates all upāya, manifesting all forms and speaking all teachings, which cannot be measured by the two vehicles and those of lower ranks—this is called the inconceivable of spiritual penetrations. Next, it specifically elucidates the upāya of manifesting illness, speaking of the faults of saṃsāra and praising the virtues of the dharmakāya, specifically showing one body and specifically speaking one teaching—this is called the specific inconceivable. The third assembly also elucidates two inconceivables: first, it elucidates the two cognitions of provisional and real, the six pāramitās, the four immeasurables, and the Dharma gate of nonduality—this is called the inconceivable root. Borrowing the thrones and requesting the meal is called the inconceivable trace. The Dharma gate of nonduality is taken as the root of principle; the two cognitions of provisional and real, the six pāramitās, and the four immeasurables are taken as the root of practice. Within the trace, two traces are also elucidated: the room accommodating the thrones is called the great entering the small; requesting the meal from the Fragrant Land is using the small to satisfy the great. Furthermore, borrowing the thrones was a silent resonance, and requesting the meal was dispatching an emanation—both are inconceivable. Astounding the great assembly with the palm and holding Abhirati with the hand are called the inconceivable trace. Among these, distinguishing the bodhisattva's practice and the two bodies of root and trace is the inconceivable root; combined with the preceding, there are three propositions. Borrowing the thrones is the great entering the small; requesting the meal is the small satisfying the great; moving Abhirati with the hand to enter Sahā is neither the great entering the great nor the small entering the small, which are insufficient to elucidate it, and thus this one proposition is omitted.