御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.143

2.143

准釋上二句隨他義答。雖是無記而能為彼大菩提因。以遠離所說法不能得大菩提故。下二句據自我答。汝小乘等教法無而記我大乘性是其善故。一法寶勝無量寶。令知教善為菩提因成大勝利。亦與此同。此文分二。初施設法利。後安立第一義教授。初中分三。初舉劣次明勝後校量意明持經既有勝福應將此法。以利群生。此初也。問。何故地前四重校量捨身命等所況極多。此中唯說三千須彌所校却劣有何所以。答。有三釋。一云。對所化生隨舉爾所。地前難化不舉勝福。而作校量難以發心希求持學。地上根勝少聞即悟知經福勝而行法施。是故不同。二云。前後文中隨舉勝劣為顯經福非彼世福。所能校量故。彼偈言。一切世間法不可得為喻。下更校量。皆應准知。三云。承前校量不分。經福以為多分。此分經福故。與前文亦無勝劣。

According to the explanation, the upper two lines answer in accordance with the other’s position: although it is indeterminate, it can nevertheless serve as the cause of that great bodhi, because without the expounded Dharma one cannot attain great bodhi. The lower two lines answer based on one’s own position: “Your Hīnayāna teaching dharma may be indeterminate, but my Mahāyāna nature is wholesome; therefore a single Dharma jewel surpasses measureless treasures.” Causing one to know that the teaching’s goodness serves as the cause of bodhi and accomplishes great benefit is also the same as this. This text divides into two: first, provisionally establishing the benefit of the Dharma; second, the instruction establishing the ultimate truth. The first divides into three: first, bringing up the inferior; next, clarifying the superior; and later, the comparative evaluation. The intention clarifies that since upholding the sūtra yields superior merit, one should take this Dharma to benefit sentient beings. This is the first. Question: Why is it that in the fourfold comparative evaluations prior to the stages, giving up bodies and lives and so forth are used as comparisons in such vast numbers, whereas here it mentions only the Mount Sumerus of the three-thousandfold [world], which is actually inferior in comparison? What is the reason? Answer: There are three explanations. One says: It is mentioned in such amount in accordance with the beings to be transformed. Those prior to the stages are difficult to transform; if superior merit were not brought up as a comparative evaluation, it would be difficult for them to generate the mind that aspires to uphold and study it. Those on the stages have superior faculties; hearing little, they awaken immediately and know the sūtra’s merit is superior, thus practicing the gift of Dharma; therefore it is not the same. The second says: The superior and inferior are brought up throughout the text before and after to reveal that the merit of the sūtra cannot be compared to that worldly merit. Thus that verse says: “All worldly dharmas / cannot be taken as an analogy.” The comparative evaluations further below should all be understood accordingly. The third says: Continuing from the prior comparative evaluation that did not divide, the sūtra’s merit is taken as multiple parts; because here the sūtra’s merit is divided, there is also neither superiority nor inferiority with the preceding text.