English
English version III. Regarding those who use the old commentaries of Guanhe, the monk Sengrui of Guanzhong personally received the *Lotus Sutra* from Kumarajiva (translator of Buddhist texts). In the 'Introduction' (*Nidana*) to the sutra, it says, 'The manifested bodies clarify their non-reality; the duration of life determines its non-enumerability.' 'The manifested bodies clarify their non-reality' means that Shakyamuni (founder of Buddhism) and all Buddhas mutually refer to each other as manifested bodies (*Nirmanakaya*), then it is known that none are real Buddhas. The real Buddha refers to the wondrous *Dharmakaya* (body of the Dharma) of the *Tathagata* (one who has thus come). 'The duration of life determines its non-enumerability' means that the duration of life is uncountable, clarifying that the *Tathagata*'s lifespan does not fall within any numbers; it is eternal (*nitya*). This is in harmony with the profound meaning of the *Lotus Sutra Treatise*, and it also has the same meaning as the *Vimalakirti Sutra*, which says, 'The Buddha's body is unconditioned (*asamskrta*) and does not fall within any numbers.' Dao Lang of Hexi wrote a *Commentary on the Lotus Sutra*, explaining in the 'Vision of the Jeweled Stupa' (*Ratna-stupa-samdarshana*) chapter that 'it clarifies the principle of the *Dharmakaya*'s eternal abiding, without existence or extinction. The 'Duration of Life' (*Tathagata-ayu-pramana*) chapter also clarifies that the *Tathagata*'s lifespan is like empty space. In all the world, there are only body and life; now, following worldly laws, it also clarifies these two. Therefore, the former clarifies the *Dharmakaya*'s eternity, and the latter distinguishes the non-extinction of life.' This is no different from the *Nirvana Sutra*, which first clarifies longevity and then distinguishes the indestructible *Vajra* body. IV. Regarding the difficulties in clarifying the meaning, there are ten aspects in all: First, although this sutra clarifies cause and effect, the wondrous meaning lies in the effect. Because the cause has not yet reached its ultimate perfection, it is not yet wondrous. If the Buddha-fruit (*Buddha-phala*) is still impermanent (*anitya*), impermanence is suffering (*duhkha*). Since it is impermanent and suffering, then it is non-self (*anatman*) and impure (*asubha*), which is a coarse Dharma. How can it be called wondrous? Second, the sutra says, 'For the sake of one great cause and condition, [the Buddha] appears in the world.' How can [the Buddha] use impermanent and unperfected coarse Dharma to transform beings from beginning to end? This would violate the kindness between father and son and harm the original intention of all Buddhas. Third, the former clarifies that the One Vehicle (*Ekayana*) is different from the past Three Vehicles (*Triyana*), and the latter clarifies that the eternal abiding is different from the past impermanence. Because the One Vehicle is different from the past Three Vehicles, it is possible to use the One Vehicle as medicine to break the three diseases. Because the eternal abiding is different from the past impermanence, it is also possible to use the eternal abiding as medicine to break the disease of impermanence. This is the meaning of dual treatment. If it is still impermanent now, then there is only the breaking of three with one, and there is no breaking of impermanence with the eternal abiding. Then the treatment of the disease is not complete, and the manifestation of the principle is insufficient. Fourth, if the One Vehicle is different from the Three Vehicles, but the fruit of the One Vehicle is still impermanent, then it is the same as the past again. In the end, it is still the Three Vehicles, then there is no One Vehicle. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
教，都无两治也。五者、又若今一异昔三而无常犹同昔，则因果果声闻果同罗汉，都非义也。六者、前文明身子为请主，而身子小乘中之极、执异之穷，故说一乘令改小入大舍异归同，则大有接小之义、小有欣大之理，则初分经机教符会；后分经弥勒为请主，弥勒是因位之穷、无常之极，若说佛果犹是无常，则果无接因之理、因无欣果之义，便机教相乖也。七者、天亲释〈寿量品〉明于三身，伽耶成佛为化身，久已得佛寿命无量为报身，无有生死若退若出、非实非虚非如非异为法身，既具明三身，岂非是常住？八者、《涅槃经．菩萨品》云“如《法花经》八千声闻，得受记别成大果实，如秋收冬藏更无所作”，故知《法花》显了究竟，岂不明常耶？九者、二万日月灯明佛说《法花经》竟便入涅槃，当知说了义之法已竟然后灭耳，若未说了义之法则便不得灭也。十者、若言品题如来寿量便是无常者，此有四句：一、无量说无量，如《涅槃》云“唯佛睹佛其寿无量”；二、有量说有量，如释迦方八十年；三、有量说无量，如无量寿佛；四、无量说于有量，如《金光明经》乃至此经，亦如《花严》云“如来深远境界其量齐虚空”也。 次破第二说，谓此经是覆相明常者，是亦不然。即上十义明常显了，不应妄谓以为覆 现代汉语译本：教义上，也不存在两种不同的治理方式。第五，如果像现在这样，认为‘一’和‘异’、‘昔’和‘三’都是无常的，和过去一样，那么因果、声闻果和阿罗汉果就都一样了，这完全不合道理。第六，前面经文明确说明身子（舍利弗，智慧第一的佛陀弟子）是请法的主讲人，而身子是小乘佛教中最杰出的人物，执着于‘异’的极致，所以佛陀才说一乘佛法，让他改变小乘思想，进入大乘境界，舍弃‘异’的观念，归于‘同’的真理。这样，大乘佛法接引小乘根基，小乘根基欣慕大乘佛法，那么初分经的根机和教义就相符。后分经中弥勒（弥勒菩萨，未来佛）是请法的主讲人，弥勒是因位修行的极致，是无常变化的极致。如果说佛果仍然是无常的，那么果位就没有接引因位的道理，因位也没有欣慕果位的意义，这样根机和教义就相互违背了。第七，天亲（世亲菩萨，印度佛教大师）在解释《寿量品》（《妙法莲华经》的品目）时，阐明了三身（佛的三种身：法身、报身、化身）。在伽耶（菩提伽耶，佛陀成道之地）成佛是化身，早就证得佛果，寿命无量是报身，没有生死，没有退转和出现，非实非虚，非如非异是法身。既然已经明确具备了三身，怎么能说不是常住呢？第八，《涅槃经．菩萨品》（《大般涅槃经》的章节）中说：‘像《法华经》（《妙法莲华经》）中的八千声闻，都得到了授记，将来成就大果实，就像秋收冬藏一样，再也没有什么可做的了。’所以知道《法华经》显明了究竟的道理，难道不是说明常住的真理吗？第九，二万日月灯明佛说完《法华经》后就入涅槃，应当知道是说了义的佛法之后才入灭的，如果没有说了义的佛法，就不能入灭。第十，如果说品题如来寿量就是无常的话，这里有四种情况：一、无量说无量，如《涅槃经》（《大般涅槃经》）中说：‘只有佛才能看到佛，他的寿命是无量的’；二、有量说有量，如释迦（释迦牟尼佛，佛教创始人）在世八十年；三、有量说无量，如无量寿佛（阿弥陀佛）；四、无量说于有量，如《金光明经》（佛教经典），乃至此经（《妙法莲华经》），也像《华严经》（《大方广佛华严经》）中说：‘如来深远的境界，它的量和虚空一样大’。 接下来驳斥第二种说法，认为这部经是隐藏真实面貌而说明常住的，这也是不对的。以上十条理由已经明确地说明了常住的道理，不应该胡乱地说它是隐藏的。
English
English version: In doctrine, there are not two different ways of governance. Fifth, if, as it is now, 'one' and 'different,' 'past' and 'three' are all considered impermanent, just like in the past, then cause and effect, the fruit of the Śrāvakā (hearers or disciples) and the fruit of the Arhats (worthy ones), would all be the same, which is completely unreasonable. Sixth, the previous scripture clearly states that Śariputra (one of the chief disciples of the Buddha, known for his wisdom) is the main speaker requesting the Dharma, and Śariputra is the most outstanding figure in the Small Vehicle (Hinayana), clinging to the extreme of 'difference.' Therefore, the Buddha speaks the One Vehicle (Ekayana) Dharma to make him change his Small Vehicle thinking, enter the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) realm, abandon the concept of 'difference,' and return to the truth of 'sameness.' In this way, the Great Vehicle Dharma receives and guides the Small Vehicle roots, and the Small Vehicle roots admire the Great Vehicle Dharma. Then, the faculties and teachings of the first part of the scripture are in harmony. In the latter part of the scripture, Maitreya (the future Buddha) is the main speaker requesting the Dharma. Maitreya is the ultimate in the stage of cause (the path of practice), the extreme of impermanence. If it is said that the Buddha-fruit is still impermanent, then the fruit position has no reason to receive the cause position, and the cause position has no meaning in admiring the fruit position. In this way, the faculties and teachings contradict each other. Seventh, Vasubandhu (an influential Buddhist philosopher) explains the Three Bodies (Trikaya: Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, Nirmanakaya) in his commentary on the ‘Chapter on the Duration of Life’ (from the Lotus Sutra). Attaining Buddhahood in Gaya (Bodh Gaya, the place where the Buddha attained enlightenment) is the Nirmanakaya (transformation body), having long attained the Buddha-fruit and having immeasurable life is the Sambhogakaya (enjoyment body), and having no birth and death, no retreat and appearance, neither real nor unreal, neither like nor different is the Dharmakaya (truth body). Since the Three Bodies are clearly possessed, how can it be said that it is not permanent? Eighth, the ‘Chapter on Bodhisattvas’ in the Nirvana Sutra (a chapter from the Mahaparinirvana Sutra) says: ‘Like the eight thousand Śrāvakās in the Lotus Sutra, they have all received predictions and will achieve great fruits in the future, just like autumn harvest and winter storage, there is nothing more to do.’ Therefore, it is known that the Lotus Sutra clearly reveals the ultimate truth, doesn't it explain the truth of permanence? Ninth, the Buddha Two Million Sun Moon Light (a past Buddha) entered Nirvana after finishing speaking the Lotus Sutra. It should be known that he entered extinction after speaking the definitive Dharma. If he had not spoken the definitive Dharma, he could not have entered extinction. Tenth, if it is said that the title of the chapter on the duration of the Tathagata's life is impermanent, there are four situations here: First, immeasurable speaking of immeasurable, as the Nirvana Sutra says: ‘Only a Buddha can see a Buddha, his life is immeasurable’; second, measurable speaking of measurable, such as Śākyamuni (the founder of Buddhism) being in the world for eighty years; third, measurable speaking of immeasurable, such as Amitābha Buddha (the Buddha of Infinite Light); fourth, immeasurable speaking of measurable, such as the Golden Light Sutra (a Buddhist scripture), and even this scripture (the Lotus Sutra), is also like the Avatamsaka Sutra (the Flower Garland Sutra) saying: ‘The Tathagata's profound realm, its measure is as vast as space.’ Next, refuting the second view, which claims that this scripture conceals the true appearance and explains permanence, is also incorrect. The above ten reasons have clearly explained the principle of permanence, and it should not be falsely claimed that it is concealed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
相明常。又此经开二方便门、显二真实义。开二方便门者，谓乘方便、身方便也；显二真实义者，谓乘真实、身真实也。乘方便谓三因三果，乘真实谓一因一果，身方便谓生灭无常之身，身真实谓无生灭常住身。若犹是覆相，则是方便之门未开，真实之相未显。 问： 若此经已显了明常，何用《涅槃》更说也？ 答： 众经明义各有大宗，《法花》广明一乘、略辨常义，《涅槃》广明常住、略辨一乘。所以然者，《法花》既明道理唯一，则知唯一佛性，既明寿命无尽，即知是常，不复广辨。但钝根人闻《法花》一乘不悟，广明佛性释成一乘，广明常义释成寿命长远，方得了悟。 问： 何故以知《涅槃》为钝根人说耶。 答： 此经明有二子，一不失心，二失本心。从《花严》至《法花》，为不失心子说，并皆得悟之，不须说《涅槃》。失心子毒气深入失于本心，故闻《法花》不悟，唱灭说常方得解了。二者、自说于《法花》已悟，闻说《涅槃》便复进解。三者、复有众生不闻《法花》直闻《涅槃》而得悟者。相传云，《宝性论》云“《大品》等为利根菩萨说，《法华》为中根人说，《涅槃》为下根人说”。又如虽同是波若，而波若有无量部，虽同明常，明常何 现代汉语译本： 相是显明常住的。而且这部经开启了两种方便之门，显现了两种真实之义。开启两种方便之门，指的是乘方便和身方便；显现两种真实之义，指的是乘真实和身真实。乘方便指的是三因三果，乘真实指的是一因一果，身方便指的是生灭无常之身，身真实指的是无生灭常住之身。如果仍然是覆相，那就是方便之门没有开启，真实之相没有显现。 问： 如果这部经已经显明了常住之理，为什么还要用《涅槃经》（Nirvana Sutra）再来说明呢？ 答： 各部经典阐明义理各有侧重，《法华经》（Lotus Sutra）广泛阐明一乘（Ekayana，唯一佛乘），简略辨析常义；《涅槃经》广泛阐明常住之义，简略辨析一乘。之所以这样，是因为《法华经》既然阐明道理是唯一的，那么就知道佛性（Buddha-nature）是唯一的，既然阐明寿命是无尽的，就知道是常住的，不必再广泛辨析。只是钝根之人听闻《法华经》的一乘之理不能领悟，所以广泛阐明佛性来解释成就一乘，广泛阐明常义来解释成就寿命长远，才能得以领悟。 问： 为什么说用《涅槃经》是为钝根之人说的呢？ 答： 这部经说明有两种儿子，一种是不失本心，一种是失去本心。从《华严经》（Avatamsaka Sutra）到《法华经》，是为不失本心的儿子说的，他们都能够领悟，不需要说《涅槃经》。失去本心的儿子，毒气深入，失去了本心，所以听闻《法华经》不能领悟，宣唱寂灭，说明常住，才能得以理解明白。还有，自己说已经在《法华经》中领悟，听闻《涅槃经》便又进一步理解。还有，又有众生没有听闻《法华经》，直接听闻《涅槃经》而得以领悟的。相传《宝性论》（Ratnagotravibhāga）说：“《大品般若经》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra）等是为利根菩萨说的，《法华经》是为中根之人说的，《涅槃经》是为下根之人说的。”又比如虽然同是般若（Prajna，智慧），而般若有无量部，虽然同样阐明常义，阐明常义有什么不同呢？