金光明經文句記 6.182

6.182

四、「我今」下一行，指已信不疑請現。樹神述已於佛行處明了無滯。雖知本無隱現，上舉他眾共迷佛境實有動靜，故敦請出定，云惟願慈悲為我現身。問：今佛入定、說法對告、起禮舍利，既有往來時會共見，樹神焉知如來在定未出而致請殷勤耶。答：樹神大權，久與佛同事。昔為流水救魚，樹神現半身示數。長者既已成佛，樹神豈猶滯凡？故今一動一靜皆扶佛化，何不知之有？矧凡出定入定皆有其儀。佛雖起坐往來，其如未示出定之相，樹神敦請至勤，方現出相。其相者，必須先示微微動搖其身，次乃黈氣嚬呻徐緩而起，方知如來示出定相。故《法華》謂安詳而起，此經云出微妙音，故知定起皆有其相也。問：新經自云「爾時薄伽梵於日晡時從三昧起，觀察大眾而說頌曰：『金光明妙法，最勝諸經王。』」今之讖本，何故至三番讚畢方云從三昧起耶？苟譯者所見不同，其如集經者梵本編文安次如何耶？答：梵本不同，豈須和會？其如學者無由曉經，今略試評之，在理或當冀無私隱。且夫此經，古師謂是偏方之教，即一時赴機之說也，故天台結歸方等部攝。斯由機分大小、應赴權實，赴權小者令見佛從定起說法，應實大者則知佛在定而告。亦如《華嚴》中令見女子身中入正受，男子身中起出說等。當時應物既殊，故集經者或言定起方說、或云說畢定起。然佛滅度後，集經者又匪一途，亦有窟內、窟外所集，亦云梵語有賒有切等，致譯經者所覩梵本不同。如讖師曾遊五天，必覩梵文正本，見云佛在定而說，必須信受敬譯。淨師本弘小典，晚接梵文，或見云佛從定起方說，正符所宗，故編譯無改。至列聲聞菩薩等眾，皆云於日晡時從定而起，到佛會所。古師甞推譯者未為雅當，信亦有之。然聖師所為必非徒然，凡流膚學莫盡考乎厥由也。求過得過，附贅之尤亦已甚矣。學者體而思之。問：大師既依讖本釋經，何故云入遊法性出敘經王耶？答：如來常在法性上定，應機順物示入定相。雖心遊寂理，口出其言，故謂出敘經王。蓋寂不阻照，說無妨定，非謂身出其定也。

Fourth, the single line from "I now..." points to requesting [his] manifestation having already believed without doubt. The tree goddess relates that she is clear and unobstructed regarding the place of the Buddha's practice. Although she knows that fundamentally there is neither concealment nor manifestation, because she cited above that the rest of the assembly was mutually deluded about the Buddha's realm having real motion and quiescence, she earnestly requests him to emerge from samādhi, saying: "I only pray that in your compassion you will manifest your body for me."
Question: The Buddha now enters samādhi, preaches the Dharma face to face, and rises to pay homage to the relics; since there were comings and goings seen by all in the assembly at the time, how did the tree goddess know that the Tathāgata was still in samādhi and had not emerged, such that she made this earnest request?
Answer: The tree goddess is a great expedient manifestation who has long worked alongside the Buddha. Formerly, when Jalavāhana saved the fish, the tree goddess manifested half of her body and revealed the count. Since the Elder has already become a Buddha, would the tree goddess still be stalled in the ordinary state? Therefore, every single motion and stillness now supports the Buddha's conversion; how could she not know? Furthermore, emerging from samādhi and entering samādhi both have their proper deportment. Although the Buddha rose, sat, came, and went, he had not yet displayed the marks of emerging from samādhi; only after the tree goddess made her diligent entreaty did he manifest the marks of emergence. As for these marks, he must first show a slight stirring of his body, and then yawn and stretch, and slowly and calmly rise; only then does one know that the Tathāgata has displayed the marks of emerging from samādhi. Thus the Lotus Sūtra speaks of "rising calmly and serenely," and this sūtra speaks of "emitting a subtle and wondrous voice"; hence we know that rising from samādhi always has its marks.
Question: The new translation of the sūtra itself says: "At that time, in the late afternoon, the Bhagavān arose from samādhi, surveyed the great assembly, and spoke verses, saying: 'The wondrous Dharma of the Golden Light, the most supreme king of all sūtras.'" Why does Dharmakṣema's present translation say that he arose from samādhi only after the three rounds of praises were completed? Even if the translators had differing perspectives, what was the arrangement and sequence of the text in the Sanskrit manuscripts compiled by the compilers of the sūtras?
Answer: Since the Sanskrit manuscripts differed, why must they be harmonized? However, since students would have no means to understand the sūtra, I will now attempt a brief evaluation, which may perhaps be fitting in principle, in the hope that nothing is withheld. Moreover, ancient masters held that this sūtra was a teaching of a specific quarter, that is, an exposition answering capacities at a particular time; thus Tiantai classified and subsumed it under the Vaipulya division. This is because capacities are divided into greater and lesser, and the responses correspond to provisional and real: those that respond to the provisional and lesser cause them to see the Buddha rise from samādhi to preach the Dharma, while those responding to the real and greater know that the Buddha preaches while in samādhi. It is also like the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, where one is made to see [the Buddha] enter samādhi within a woman's body and rise to expound within a man's body. Since the responses to beings at that time were different, the compilers of the sūtra stated either that he preached only after rising from samādhi, or that he arose from samādhi after completing the preaching. However, after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, the compilers of the sūtras were not of a single lineage—there were collections made inside the cave and outside the cave; it is also said that Sanskrit terms had broader and narrower usages, which led to differences in the Sanskrit manuscripts seen by the translators. For instance, Master Dharmakṣema had traveled through the five regions of India; he surely saw the authentic Sanskrit text, and seeing that it stated that the Buddha preached while in samādhi, he had to accept it with faith and translate it reverently. Master Yijing originally propagated the Hīnayāna scriptures and engaged with Sanskrit texts only late in life; perhaps seeing that it said the Buddha only preached after rising from samādhi, which precisely accorded with his own lineage's tenets, he compiled and translated it without alteration. As for listing the śrāvakas, bodhisattvas, and other assemblies, they all say that in the late afternoon they arose from samādhi and arrived at the Buddha's assembly. Ancient masters once deduced that the translator's work was not fully elegant and appropriate, and there is indeed truth to this. Yet what sacred masters did was surely not in vain; shallow scholars among the ordinary crowd cannot exhaustively investigate their reasons. Seeking faults and finding faults—such supererogatory criticism has already gone too far! Let students embody this and reflect upon it.
Question: Since the Great Master interpreted the sūtra relying on Dharmakṣema's translation, why did he say: "Entering, he roves the dharma nature; emerging, he recounts the king of sūtras"?
Answer: The Tathāgata constantly abides in the superior samādhi of the dharma nature, and in accordance with capacities and beings, he displays the marks of entering samādhi. Although his mind roves the quiescent principle, his mouth emits these words; hence it is said that "emerging, he recounts the king of sūtras." That is to say, quiescence does not obstruct illumination, and preaching does not interfere with samādhi; it does not mean that his physical body emerged from that samādhi.