翻譯名義集 7.139.4

7.139.4

Next, to clarify the coarseness and subtlety of the vehicles of metaphor: the *Profound Meaning* introduces the lotus: first, the blossom appearing for the sake of the lotus fruit represents deploying the provisional for the sake of the real; second, the blossoming of the flower represents opening the provisional, while the appearance of the lotus fruit represents revealing the real; third, the falling of the flower represents discarding the provisional, while the maturation of the lotus fruit represents establishing the real. One should traverse these three metaphors, elaborating and extending them. Now, as for the metaphor of the lotus flower, it was proclaimed by this sutra originally to compare to the subtle Dharma. Yet Tiantai took the first phrase, 'the blossom for the sake of the lotus fruit', to symbolize deploying the provisional for the sake of the real. In terms of this substance of the doctrine, whose application was in former times, the blossom symbolizes coarse teachings. Hence the *Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra* states: 'Furthermore, when the provisional and the real across the teachings are not yet integrated, that is the provisional; once they are integrated, opening the provisional and revealing the real, that is the real.' Because it previously accommodated capacities, the provisional obscured the real, and hence it is called 'different substance'. Therefore, this sutra breaks this biased attachment, declaring: 'Though various paths have been expounded, in truth they are for the Buddha Vehicle.' Since the Bhagavat spoke of deploying the provisional for the sake of the real, our patriarch consequently established the metaphor of the blossom appearing for the sake of the lotus fruit. According to this explanation, the moment this sutra proclaimed deploying the provisional for the sake of the real, those of sharp faculties immediately knew that this provisional is precisely the real. Because in the *Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings* they had already heard that this provisional arises from the real, their view of 'different substance' was already broken, yet it had not been opened and revealed. Those of dull faculties had to rely upon the second phrase: the blossoming of the flower represents opening the provisional, and the appearance of the lotus fruit represents revealing the real. Therefore it is said: 'Opening the gate of expedient means, demonstrating the aspect of the true reality.' The commentator (*Zhanran*) explained: 'Pointing to the real as the provisional, where the provisional obscures the real, is called the gate of expedient means being closed. Now pointing to the provisional as the real, seeing the real within the provisional, is called the gate of expedient means being opened.' This indicates that both 'dharma-utility' and 'capacity to penetrate' become secret and subtle. Third, the falling of the flower represents discarding the provisional, and the maturation of the lotus fruit represents establishing the real. It also says: 'Honestly abandoning expedient means, expounding only the unsurpassed path.' Because the three teachings of the four periods are, in their very substance, secret and subtle, once opened there is nothing outside them; coarse teachings no longer persist, which in sense corresponds to 'discarding'. In terms of the doctrine, opening and discarding are simultaneous, but in terms of the metaphor, opening comes first and discarding follows. Hence it is divided into three phrases, demonstrating the order of the beginning and the end. Second, explaining the sutra's phrase 'Opening the gate of expedient means, demonstrating the aspect of the true reality': Predecessors cited this as proof for opening the provisional of identical substance. One must realize that the patriarch cited this in two places. In the commentary, it proves the expedient means of 'capacity to penetrate'; here taking the meaning of a 'gate', one enters the realm of the perfect from the gate of capacity to penetrate of the previous three teachings, and therefore it is called 'opening the gate of expedient means'. The commentator then said: 'In former times it could only be called biased, called a gate; it did not mean that the opening of the gate was already made clear then.' But as for proving the opening of the provisional in the *Profound Meaning*, since within expedient means one immediately sees the true reality, he used this to demonstrate the mark of opening the provisional. Third, explaining the *Fuxing*'s interpretation of the provisional topknot of identical substance and the bright jewel of the true aspect: According to the 'Chapter on Peaceful and Joyful Practice', the king bestowing rewards symbolizes the Buddha imparting the path. Formerly, when the capacities fought against Māra and achieved slight merit, he merely bestowed upon them the teachings of dhyāna concentration and liberation, like rewarding them with fields and houses. When the *Lotus Sutra* thoroughly breaks through Māra's net and reaches all-knowledge, it is like the king untying the bright jewel from his topknot and bestowing it upon them. In former times, the provisional obscured the real, just as the topknot covered the jewel; from the standpoint of their capacities, they did not know it was provisional, which symbolizes the closure of 'different substance'. Now this sutra, accommodating capacities, points out that the provisional dharmas of the former three teachings are entirely secret and subtle expedient means. Therefore, it determines that the teaching of the śrāvakas is itself the king of all sutras. Since the sutra uses the king to symbolize the Buddha, in terms of when the Buddha opens the 'different substance', there is nothing that is not of 'identical substance'; hence it says 'untying the provisional topknot of identical substance'. Fourth, explaining the *Yili*'s statement: 'As citing the *Lotus Sutra*, the section consists solely of the one real.' The text recounts the past teachings as that which is opened. Tianzhu cited this 'section consists solely of the one real' to prove the refutation of identical substance. We now say that the coarse dharmas recounted, having been indicated as subtle, are such that the provisional and real are mutually identical, and the capable and the object are completely interfused; therefore it says that the *Lotus Sutra* consists solely of the one real. Fifth, explaining the section rubrics: In the chapters on the five Buddhas, there are two headings: opening the provisional and revealing the real. For the first four [Buddhas], they first open the provisional and next reveal the real. Now, for our Buddha, he first reveals the real and next opens the provisional. Tianzhu claimed that opening the provisional is the text recounting the past teachings, while revealing the real is refuting the provisional of identical substance. We now say that the moment the provisional is opened, the real is already intentionally revealed. But in terms of the sequence of exposition, when opening the provisional it has not yet explicitly stated the real, and only when the real is revealed does one understand the opening of the provisional. In setting down words to bequeath a model, two headings were consequently divided. Thus Lecturer Faming said: 'Words do not issue simultaneously; speech is not dispensed all at once.' How deeply meaningful this is! Admiring the bequeathed teachings of the Dharma King, I have studied and constantly practiced them, thereby gathering the discourses of past and present to investigate the path of the provisional and the real. Though insufficient to appraise their deep currents, I hope it does not deviate from reasoned inquiry. Compiled to present to future worthies, may it open the Buddha's wisdom.