一　法華開示抄第二 - 翻刻

翻刻

【枠外右上】
四八【但し算用数字】
【枠外右横上】
法華經第八卷開示抄第一　普門品
【枠外右横下】
四八四
【本文二段構成】
【上段】　
非＿二海中＿一非＿レ入＿二巖穴間＿一。無＿レ有＿二他方所＿レ脱之不＿一レ受＿レ難。亦據＿乙
不＿下逢＿二佛菩薩等＿一起＿二悔愧心＿一而入＿上レ道者決定業報＿甲。由＿レ此業
報差別經說。若業增上心。作＿二無慙無愧＿一。作已更作無＿二心
改悔＿一。是業決定。若業非＿二增上心《割書：ヲ以》作＿一。雖＿レ作＿二悪業＿一常懷＿二
慙愧＿一。是業不定。但知＿下諸業非＿レ悔非＿三道之處＿二損伏＿一。可＿レ有＿二
受＿レ果被＿一レ損。便無＿中受＿レ果之義＿上。然經說＿二指鬘＿一及阿羅漢猶受＿二
業果＿一者。時猶住＿レ凡。或初二果￣ナリ。今身必定得＿二阿羅漢＿一。
從＿レ當爲＿レ名。非＿三受＿レ果時名＿二阿羅漢＿一。又遇＿二良緣＿一。要自發＿レ心
悔愧入＿二聖道＿一。罪業方排。雖＿レ遇＿二良緣＿一。無＿二心悔愧＿一。亦不＿レ入＿レ
聖。《割書：乃至》諸佛亦不＿レ能＿レ轉。迦毘羅城￣ノ釋種被＿レ殺。雖＿レ得＿二初
果＿一。別報業在＿二初果＿一不＿レ排。又非＿下 聽＿二-聞大乘＿一悔愧懇切深
心＿上故。受＿二先業＿一。脱（モシ）聞＿二大乘＿一。勵懇深悔亦不＿レ被＿レ殺。得＿二阿
羅漢＿一。一切不＿レ受。設有＿レ被＿レ殺非＿二業果＿一故。不＿レ爾指鬘殺＿レ 人
滿＿レ千。唯少＿二於一＿一。云何得＿レ聖。又無＿三悔愧及伏＿二-斷-滅諸罪
業＿一者。有情便無＿レ得＿二受＿レ聖期＿一。由＿レ此故知。初說爲＿レ善。應＿レ
同＿二𣵀槃瑜伽＿一爲＿レ正《割書：云云》。
十一面經云。我亦不＿レ見。以＿二此神呪＿一隨＿二所住處＿一。若遠若
【下段】　
近結＿二-作界＿一已。有＿二能越之來相＿一嬈害。唯除＿二決定惡業應＿一
熟《割書：云云》。
又云。世尊我此神呪有＿二大威力＿一。若誦一遍。卽能除＿二-滅四根
本罪及五無間＿一。令＿レ無＿レ有＿レ餘。況能如＿レ說而修行者￣ヲヤ《割書：云云》。

問。玄贊中引＿二瑜伽論＿一。依＿二未解脱者＿一建＿二-立定受業＿一《割書：云云》。爾
者指＿二何位＿一名＿二《割書：考【四角で囲む】名下一｜本有位字》解脱＿一耶。　玄贊云。言＿二解脱＿一者。謂
世道伏斷《割書：乃至》。得＿レ聖成＿二無學＿一等《割書：云云》。　付＿レ之有漏世道對
治力尤劣。何轉＿二決定應受業＿一耶。瑜伽說＿二已解脱＿一。定可＿二
聖位斷道＿一。是以大師略纂釋＿二彼文＿一作＿二 二釋＿一。或云。得＿二有
餘𣵀槃＿一已去名＿二已解脱＿一。或得＿二無餘𣵀槃＿一已去名＿二已解脱＿一
《割書：云云》。准＿レ之以＿二資糧加行等有漏道＿一。屬＿二未《割書：考【四角で囲む】屬未二字｜一本作爲已》解脱＿一
《割書：見タリ》。
會云。瑜伽論未解脱￣ト已解脱￣ト相對￣シテ論＿二定業有無＿一。可＿レ有＿二
多重＿一。初全不＿レ發＿レ道。名＿二未解脱＿一。發＿二世出世對治道＿一云＿二已
解脱＿一。次世出世二道相對。次有學無學相對。故玄贊云。
言＿二解脱＿一者。謂世道伏斷乃至得＿レ聖成＿二無學等＿一《割書：文。等言等＿二｜無餘＿一歟。》
【左頁】
【枠外左上】
四九【但し算用数字】
【枠外左横上】
法華經第八卷開示抄第一　普門品
【枠外左横下】
四八五
【上段】
其中取＿二世道＿一者。三業資糧加行漸頓伏＿二 二障＿一故也。旣
名＿二損力益能轉＿一。何無＿下轉＿二定業＿一力＿上。若不＿レ爾者。地前菩薩
可＿レ不＿レ生＿二浄土＿一。知。本論意。已解脱義通＿二凡位＿一也。瑜伽抄
二釋者。倶依＿二極位＿一論。玄贊成＿二無學等意＿一也。強不＿二相違＿一。
玄贊云。第六十說。依＿二未解脱者＿一建＿二-立定受業＿一故。言＿二解
脱＿一者。謂世道伏斷《割書：乃至》得＿レ聖成＿二無學＿一等《割書：云云》。
鏡水抄云。言＿二第六十說等＿一者。三依＿レ 人辨＿レ異。依＿二未解脱＿一。
建＿二-立定業＿一。依＿二已解脱＿一。建＿二-立不定業＿一。解脱者卽是若世道
無漏道。若斷若伏皆名＿二解脱＿一。《割書：乃至》得＿レ聖。聖有學無學卽羅
漢等也。乃至兩字中間攝＿二慚愧懺悔＿一也。■【謩ヵ】云。依＿二未解
脱＿一者。且據＿二顯相＿一說。據＿二定未解脱＿一者。亦有＿二不定業＿一《割書：云云》。

問（禾　）。付＿下轉＿二決定應受業＿一之義＿上。且未入僧祇位。可＿レ有＿下轉＿二定
業＿一之義＿上耶。　兩方。若有＿二此義＿一者。未入僧祇位。未＿レ起＿二世
出世道＿一。由＿レ何轉＿二定業＿一耶。初二果聖者。已得＿二聖道＿一。猶不＿レ
免＿二宿惡＿一。況乎於＿二未發心異生＿一耶。是以𣵀槃經中。若入＿二
佛法＿一名＿二不定業＿一《割書：云云》。已入佛法之位。當＿二已發心＿一耶。依＿レ之
【下段】
釋＿二依未解脱者建立定受業文＿一。世道伏道已去名＿二已解
脱＿一《割書：云云》。樞要中釋＿二損力益能轉＿一。有＿下轉＿二定業＿一之義＿上《割書：云云》。知。
已前無＿二此義＿一云事。若由＿レ之爾者。大乘懺悔。威力難思。
設雖＿二未發心人＿一。至誠懺悔者。何不＿レ轉＿二決定業＿一耶。就＿レ 中觀
音救＿二未發心衆生難＿一。令＿レ解＿二-脱衆苦＿一。而玄贊釋＿二若有百千
萬億衆生受諸苦惱《割書：乃至》皆得解脱文＿一。轉＿二決定應受業＿一云
釋爲＿レ正。知。許＿三未發心衆生轉＿二定業＿一云事如何。
私云。未入僧祇轉不轉輒難＿レ定。瑜伽嫌＿二未解脱＿一。𣵀槃經
除＿二未入佛法＿一。論擧＿レ勝兼＿レ劣。經表＿レ初許＿レ後。付＿二經文入
位＿一又有＿レ諍。大旨當＿二内凡＿一。内凡又及＿二 二釋＿一。但爲＿二位相＿一轉
者。可＿二僧祇以去＿一。正名＿二損力益能轉＿一。若論＿二少分＿一以前何
無＿レ之。則今品玄贊解釋之趣。誠如＿二難中推知＿一。若全嫌＿レ之。
恨於＿二末代＿一難＿レ資＿二大乘妙力＿一歟。
玄贊云。《割書：如＿レ意》

問。轉重輕受事。　唯識尋思抄十卷記＿レ之。
問。　就＿二諸業配立＿一有＿二多論議＿一。依＿レ爲＿二傍論＿一略＿レ之。

現代語訳

【右頁】

空中にも非ず、海中にも非ず、岩穴の間に入るにも非ず、これを脱れて難を受けない他の場所は存在しない。これもまた、仏菩薩等に逢わずして悔愧の心を起こし道に入る者の決定業報について述べたものである。これによって『業報差別経』に説く。もし業を増上心をもって作し、無慚無愧であり、作し已ってさらに作して改悔の心がなければ、この業は決定である。もし業を増上心をもって作すのでなく、悪業を作したといえども常に慚愧を懐けば、この業は不定である。ただ知るべきは、諸業が悔いもなく道の力で損伏されることもなければ、果を受けることがあり得るが、損伏されれば果を受ける義はなくなる。しかし経に指鬘（鴦堀摩羅）及び阿羅漢がなお業果を受けると説くのは、その時はなお凡夫に住し、或いは初果・二果であった。今身で必定して阿羅漢を得るから、当来によって名づけたのであって、果を受ける時に阿羅漢と名づけたのではない。また良縁に遇っても、要するに自ら心を発して悔愧し聖道に入ることで、罪業がようやく排される。良縁に遇っても、悔愧の心がなければ、また聖に入らない。諸仏もまた転ずることができない。迦毘羅城の釈種が殺されたのは、初果を得たといえども、別報業が初果では排されず、また大乘を聞聞して悔愧懇切の深心でなかった故に、先業を受けた。もし大乘を聞いて、励まし懇ろに深く悔いれば、また殺されることもなく、阿羅漢を得て一切を受けない。設い殺されることがあっても業果ではない故である。そうでなければ指鬘が人を殺すこと千に満ち、ただ一人を少くしただけで、どうして聖を得ることができようか。また悔愧もなく諸罪業を伏断滅することもなければ、有情は聖を受ける期を得ることがない。これによって故に知る。初説を善とし、涅槃・瑜伽に同じくすることを正とすべきである。

『十一面経』に云う。「我もまた見ない。この神咒をもって住処に随い、

【下段】

若しくは遠く若しくは近く結界を作し已って、これを越えて来たって相嬈害できる者があることを。ただ決定悪業の応熟を除く。」

また云う。「世尊よ、我がこの神咒には大威力がある。もし一遍誦すれば、即ち四根本罪及び五無間を除滅することができ、余りあることがないようにする。況んや説の如くして修行する者においてをや。」

問：玄賛中に瑜伽論を引いて「未解脱者に依って定受業を建立する」とある。それでは何の位を指して解脱と名づけるのか。　玄賛に云う。「解脱と言うのは、謂く世道の伏断から聖を得て無学と成る等である。」　これについて、有漏の世道は対治力が最も劣っている。何故決定応受業を転ずるのか。瑜伽に「已解脱」と説くのは、定んで聖位の断道であるべきである。そこで大師の略纂がその文を釈して二釈を作す。或いは云う。「有余涅槃を得た已去を已解脱と名づける」。或いは「無余涅槃を得た已去を已解脱と名づける」。これに准ずれば、資糧・加行等の有漏道をもって、未解脱に属すると見える。

答える：瑜伽論が未解脱と已解脱とを相対して定業の有無を論ずるのには、多重があり得る。初めに全く道を発さないのを未解脱と名づけ、世出世の対治道を発すのを已解脱と云う。次に世道と出世道の二道を相対し、次に有学と無学とを相対する。故に玄賛に云う。「解脱と言うのは、謂く世道の伏断から聖を得て無学と成る等である。」

【左頁】

その中で世道を取るのは、三業の資糧・加行が漸頓に二障を伏する故である。既に「損力益能転」と名づけるのに、何故定業を転ずる力がないことがあろうか。もしそうでなければ、地前の菩薩は浄土に生じることができないであろう。知るべし。本論の意は、已解脱の義が凡位に通ずるのである。瑜伽抄の二釈は、共に極位に依って論じ、玄賛が「無学等」と成す意である。強いて相違しない。

玄賛に云う。「第六十に説く。未解脱者に依って定受業を建立する故に。解脱と言うのは、謂く世道の伏断から聖を得て無学と成る等である。」

『鏡水抄』に云う。「『第六十に説く等』と言うのは、三つは人に依って異を弁ずる。未解脱に依って定業を建立し、已解脱に依って不定業を建立する。解脱者とは即ち世道であれ無漏道であれ、断であれ伏であれ皆解脱と名づける。聖を得る。聖とは有学・無学、即ち羅漢等である。乃至の両字の中間に慚愧・懺悔を摂する。」■に云う。「未解脱に依る者は、しばらく顕相に拠って説く。決定未解脱に拠る者について、また不定業もある。」

問：決定応受業を転ずる義について、そもそも未だ僧祇位に入らない者に、定業を転ずる義があり得るか。　両方面から考えて、もしこの義があるとすれば、未だ僧祇位に入らない者は、未だ世出世道を起こしていない。何によって定業を転ずるのか。初果・二果の聖者は、已に聖道を得たのに、なお宿悪を免れない。況んや未発心の異生においてをや。そこで涅槃経中に「もし仏法に入れば不定業と名づける」とある。已に仏法に入った位は、已発心に当たるか。これに依って

【下段】

「未解脱者に依って定受業を建立する」文を釈して、「世道・伏道已去を已解脱と名づける」とある。『枢要』中に「損力益能転」を釈して、定業を転ずる義があるとする。知るべし。已前にはこの義がないということを。もしそうであるとすれば、大乗の懺悔は威力が思議し難い。設い未発心の人であっても、至誠に懺悔する者は、何故決定業を転じないのか。この中で観音が未発心の衆生の難を救い、衆苦を解脱せしめるについて、玄賛が「もし百千万億の衆生ありて諸の苦悩を受け、皆解脱を得る」文を釈して、「決定応受業を転ずる」という釈を正とする。知るべし。未発心の衆生の定業転換を許すということを。如何。

私に云う。未だ僧祇に入らない者の転・不転は、たやすく定め難い。瑜伽は未解脱を嫌い、涅槃経は未だ仏法に入らない者を除く。論は勝を挙げて劣を兼ね、経は初を表して後を許す。経文の入位についてもまた諍いがある。大旨は内凡に当たる。内凡もまた二釈に及ぶ。ただ位相として転ずる者は、僧祇以去であるべきで、正しく「損力益能転」と名づける。もし少分を論ずれば以前に何故これがないことがあろうか。則ち今品の玄賛の解釈の趣は、誠に難中の推知の如くである。もし全くこれを嫌えば、末代において大乗の妙力を資することが難しいのを恨むであろうか。

玄賛に云う。（意の如し）

問：重きを転じて軽く受ける事。　『唯識尋思抄』十巻にこれを記す。
問：諸業の配立について多くの論議がある。これを傍論とするために略す。

英語訳

[Right Page]

Neither in emptiness, nor in the ocean, nor entering between rock caves - there exists no other place where one can escape and not receive suffering. This also refers to the fixed karmic retribution of those who do not encounter Buddhas and bodhisattvas, do not arise minds of regret and remorse, and do not enter the path. Based on this, the *Karma Retribution Distinctions Sūtra* explains: If karma is created with an intensely focused mind, being shameless and without regret, and after creating it one creates more without a mind of reform and repentance, this karma is fixed. If karma is not created with an intensely focused mind, and although one creates evil karma, one constantly harbors shame and remorse, this karma is unfixed. One should simply know that if various karmas are neither repented nor subdued and damaged by the power of the path, there can be receiving of results, but if they are subdued and damaged, there is no principle of receiving results. However, when sūtras explain that Aṅgulimāla and arhats still received karmic results, at that time they were still dwelling in ordinary status, or were at the first or second fruit stages. Since they would definitely attain arhatship in this life, they were named according to the future, not named arhats at the time of receiving results. Also, even when encountering good conditions, it is essential to personally generate a mind of regret and remorse and enter the noble path for sinful karma to finally be eliminated. Even when encountering good conditions, if there is no mind of regret and remorse, one also does not enter sagehood. Even all Buddhas cannot transform it. The Śākya clan of Kapilavastu were killed because, although they attained the first fruit, individual retribution karma was not eliminated at the first fruit stage, and also because they had not heard the Mahāyāna with earnest regret and sincere deep mind, they received previous karma. If they had heard the Mahāyāna and deeply repented with encouragement and earnestness, they also would not have been killed, would have attained arhatship, and would not have received anything. Even if there were killings, it would not be due to karmic results. Otherwise, how could Aṅgulimāla, who killed people reaching a thousand with only one person lacking, attain sagehood? Also, if there were no regret and remorse and no subduing, cutting off, and extinguishing of various sinful karmas, sentient beings would have no period for receiving sagehood. Based on this, we know that the first explanation should be considered good, and accordance with the Nirvana and Yogācāra should be correct.

The *Eleven-Faced Sūtra* states: "I also do not see that with this divine mantra, according to wherever one dwells,

[Lower section]

whether far or near, after creating a boundary, there could be any who can cross over and come to cause harm. Only except for fixed evil karma that should ripen."

It also states: "World-Honored One, this divine mantra of mine has great awesome power. If recited once, it can immediately eliminate and extinguish the four root transgressions and the five heinous crimes, leaving nothing remaining. How much more so for those who practice according to the teaching."

Question: In the Xuanzan, the Yogācāra treatise is quoted: "Fixed karma to be experienced is established based on those not yet liberated." Then what stage is pointed to and called liberation? The Xuanzan states: "Speaking of liberation means from the worldly path's subduing and cutting off to attaining sagehood and becoming no-more-learning, etc." Regarding this, the conditioned worldly path has extremely inferior remedial power. How does it transform fixed karma that must be experienced? The Yogācāra's explanation of "already liberated" should definitely refer to the cutting-off path of the noble stages. Therefore, the master's *Abbreviated Compilation* interprets that passage with two explanations. One states: "From attaining liberation with remainder onward is called already liberated." Or "From attaining liberation without remainder onward is called already liberated." Based on this, using the conditioned paths of accumulation, preparation, etc., they belong to not yet liberated.

Answer: The Yogācāra treatise's discussion of the presence or absence of fixed karma by contrasting not yet liberated and already liberated can have multiple levels. Initially, completely not generating the path is called not yet liberated; generating worldly and transcendent remedial paths is called already liberated. Next, the two paths of worldly and transcendent are contrasted. Next, learning and no-more-learning are contrasted. Therefore the Xuanzan states: "Speaking of liberation means from the worldly path's subduing and cutting off to attaining sagehood and becoming no-more-learning, etc."

[Left Page]

Taking the worldly path among these is because the three karmas of accumulation and preparation gradually and suddenly subdue the two obstructions. Since it is already called "the stage of diminishing power and increasing transformative capacity," how could there be no power to transform fixed karma? If not so, pre-ground bodhisattvas could not be born in pure lands. Know that the original treatise's meaning is that the meaning of already liberated extends to ordinary stages. The two interpretations in the Yogācāra commentary both discuss based on ultimate stages, which is the Xuanzan's meaning of "becoming no-more-learning, etc." There is no strong contradiction.

The Xuanzan states: "The sixtieth fascicle explains that fixed karma to be experienced is established based on those not yet liberated. Speaking of liberation means from the worldly path's subduing and cutting off to attaining sagehood and becoming no-more-learning, etc."

The *Mirror Water Commentary* states: "Saying 'the sixtieth explains, etc.' means three [levels] distinguish based on person. Based on not yet liberated, fixed karma is established. Based on already liberated, unfixed karma is established. The liberated ones are whether worldly path or uncontaminated path, whether cutting off or subduing, all are called liberation. Attaining sagehood - sages are learning and no-more-learning, namely arhats, etc. The two characters 'up to' include shame, remorse, and repentance." ■ states: "Those based on not yet liberated temporarily speak based on manifest characteristics. Regarding those based on definitely not yet liberated, there are also unfixed karmas."

Question: Regarding the principle of transforming fixed karma that must be experienced, can there be the principle of transforming fixed karma for those not yet entered into the incalculable eon stage? From both sides: if there were this principle, those not yet entered into the incalculable eon stage have not yet aroused worldly and transcendent paths. By what would they transform fixed karma? First and second fruit sages have already attained the noble path yet still cannot escape past evil. How much more so for ordinary beings who have not yet aroused [bodhicitta] mind? Therefore in the Nirvana Sūtra: "If one enters the Buddha Dharma, it is called unfixed karma." Does the stage of having already entered the Buddha Dharma correspond to having already aroused the mind? Based on this,

[Lower section]

interpreting the passage "fixed karma to be experienced is established based on those not yet liberated," it states "from the worldly path and subduing path onward is called already liberated." In the *Pivotal Essentials*, interpreting "diminishing power and increasing transformative capacity," there is the principle of transforming fixed karma. Know that before this there is no such principle. If so, then Mahāyāna repentance has inconceivable awesome power. Even for those who have not yet aroused the mind, if they repent with utmost sincerity, why would they not transform fixed karma? Among this, regarding Avalokiteśvara rescuing the difficulties of sentient beings who have not yet aroused the mind and causing them to be liberated from various sufferings, the Xuanzan's interpretation of the passage "if there are hundreds of thousands of millions of sentient beings experiencing various sufferings... all obtain liberation" takes the interpretation of "transforming fixed karma that must be experienced" as correct. Know that this permits sentient beings who have not yet aroused the mind to transform fixed karma. How is this?

I say privately: Whether those not yet entered into the incalculable eon can transform or not is difficult to determine easily. The Yogācāra dislikes "not yet liberated," the Nirvana Sūtra excludes "those not yet entered into Buddha Dharma." The treatise raises the superior while including the inferior; the sūtra expresses the initial while permitting the later. Regarding the entry stage in the sūtra text, there are also disputes. The general meaning corresponds to inner ordinary beings. Inner ordinary beings also extend to two interpretations. However, those who transform as stage characteristics should be from the incalculable eon onward, properly called "diminishing power and increasing transformative capacity." If discussing partial [transformation], why would there be none before this? Then the tenor of the Xuanzan's interpretation of this chapter is truly as inferred in the difficult questions. If one completely dislikes this, would one regret the difficulty of accessing the marvelous power of Mahāyāna in the final age?

The Xuanzan states: (As intended)

Question: The matter of transforming heavy [karma] to receive it lightly. The *Consciousness-Only Inquiry Commentary* in ten fascicles records this.
Question: Regarding the assignment and establishment of various karmas, there are many debates. Considering this a side discussion, [I] abbreviate it.