佛祖統紀 1.74

1.74

讀教記云。六重本迹。唯體用一重。是引本文。餘五皆迹。籤云前三引迹後三引本者。斯蓋記主點經玄意。實權已今即指迹文為本門也。故云今說已今為本方是實說。然則前三不指本何也。曰前三既通。但以迹例本。後三既是通中復別。故須指迹為本。可觀通別二字。此例甚多。如文句明本迹。初引壽量品。我成佛已來甚大久遠。又方便品。我本立誓願普令一切眾生同得此道。又五百授記。內祕菩薩行外現是聲聞。妙樂釋之云。初正引本文。次方便下引迹文。以迹中密示本意故。若顯露說。即迹中本迹。下文顯已。通得引用。又妙樂釋方便品十雙權實云。然此八中。前七迹門。第八本門。本雖未至。權實理遍。故下文云是我方便諸佛亦然。故方便之名通於本迹。文既玄釋不同。今諸家商略者。或云前三是從本垂迹。後三是發迹顯本。故云三引迹文。或云前三是因為迹。後三是果為本。或云圓談大旨不分本迹之文。或云別含本意。故云三引本文。

The Dujiaoji says: Among the sixfold origin and traces, only the one pair of essence and function cites an origin text, while the remaining five are all traces. When the Shiqian says that the first three cite traces and the latter three cite the origin, this is because the commentator indicated the profound meaning of the sūtra: real and expedient, and past and present directly point to trace texts as the origin gate. Therefore it says that speaking at present of past and present as the origin is the real teaching. If so, why do the first three not point to the origin? The answer is: since the first three are general, they merely use traces to illustrate the origin. Since the latter three are specific within the general, they must point to traces as the origin. One may observe the two words 'general' and 'specific'; instances of this are very numerous. For instance, when the Wenju clarifies origin and traces, it first cites the 'Life Span Chapter': 'Since I attained Buddhahood, it has been extremely long and distant'; next the 'Expedient Means Chapter': 'Originally I made a vow to universally enable all sentient beings to attain this path together'; and further the 'Five Hundred Disciples Receiving Prediction': 'Inwardly concealing bodhisattva practice, outwardly manifesting as a śrāvaka'. Miaole explains this, saying: 'The first directly cites an origin text. Next, from Expedient Means downward, it cites trace texts, because within the traces the original intention is secretly shown. If expounded openly, it is the origin and traces within the traces; once revealed in the text below, all can be cited.' Moreover, Miaole explains the ten pairs of the expedient and the real in the 'Expedient Means Chapter', saying: 'However, among these eight, the first seven are the trace gate, and the eighth is the origin gate. Although the origin has not yet arrived, the principle of the expedient and the real is pervasive; therefore the text below says: "This is my expedient means; for all Buddhas it is also thus." Thus the name "expedient means" extends to both origin and traces.' Since the texts and profound commentaries differ, various masters discussing this nowadays say: Some say the first three are descending from the origin to project traces, while the latter three are disclosing the traces to reveal the origin, hence it is said that three cite trace texts; some say the first three take cause as trace, while the latter three take fruit as origin; some say they are complete teachings of the great purport not distinguishing texts of origin and traces; and some say they distinctively contain the original intention, hence it is said that three cite origin texts.