一　法華開示抄第二 - 翻刻

翻刻

【枠外右上】
六二【但し算用数字】
【枠外右横上】
法華經第八卷開示抄第二　陀羅尼品
【枠外右横下】
四九八
【本文二段構成】
【上段】　
陀羅尼若心瞋持。善心雖＿レ謝＿二過去＿一。猶自彼能得＿レ持故。名＿二
不失＿一《割書：云云》。
惠影疏云。或心相應者。修＿二-得此陀羅尼＿一已。若恆心￣ト倶起
故言＿二心相應＿一。○不＿レ作＿レ念時。亦能有＿レ用。或不＿二作意＿一不＿二與＿レ
心倶起＿一故。言＿二或不相應＿一也《割書：文》。
僧偘疏云。或心不相應等者。若初￣テ學￣トキハ。作意名爲＿二相
應＿一。若任運常有￣ヲハ。名＿二不相應＿一《割書：云云》。《割書：[考【四角で囲む】云云一｜本作等文]》
大乘義章第十一陀羅尼義云。《割書：惠遠》陀羅尼者。中國語翻
名＿レ持。今此法不＿レ失。故名爲＿レ持。持別不＿レ同有＿レ 四。一法陀
羅尼。二義陀羅尼。三呪術陀羅尼。○約＿レ心辯＿レ異。如＿二龍樹
說＿一。一切三昧。唯心相應諸陀羅尼。或心相應。或心不相
應。作意念持。名＿二心相應＿一。雖＿レ起＿二瞋等＿一。不＿レ忘＿二所持＿一。名＿二不相
應＿一。相應據＿レ體。言＿二不相應＿一。辨＿二其勢力＿一。如＿下留化通心雖＿二滅
盡＿一。而有＿中化用＿上《割書：云云》。

問。經文說＿二陀羅尼功德＿一。爾者。陀羅尼者。可＿レ有＿二所詮義＿一
乎。　進云。玄贊無義文字。　付＿レ之如來所說。皆有＿二其義＿一。
【下段】　
如＿レ云＿二皆如其義咸轉法輪＿一。如何以＿二神呪章句＿一。爲＿二無義文
字＿一乎。況見＿二樸揚及 餘師（嘉祥）釋＿一。或說＿二因位萬行極果勝位＿一。或
宣＿二大力鬼神三寶名字＿一《割書：云云》。若爾。何等＿二外道吠陀敎＿一。爲＿二
無義文字＿一乎。
會云。以少略密無義文字者。不＿二疏主私詞＿一。瑜伽論正文
也。攝釋能以＿三少略而含＿二多￣ノ義＿一。復是祕密。觀＿二其文 句（字イ）＿一。而
似＿二無義＿一名＿二無義言＿一。非＿二實無＿一レ義《割書：云云》。剩含＿二無量義＿一。誰無＿二
所詮妙義＿一哉。
尋云。瑜伽論云。如＿レ是呪章句。都無＿レ有＿レ義。是圓成實《割書：云云》。
歸＿二無相空理＿一云＿二無義＿一。或無＿二所取境義＿一。故云＿二無義＿一。何攝
釋云＿下而含＿二多義＿一復是祕密。而似＿中無義＿上乎。
玄贊云。《割書：如＿レ 上》。
攝釋云。疏以少略密無義文字者。能以＿三小畧而含＿二多義＿一。
復是祕密。觀＿二其文 句（字イ）＿一。而 似（以イ）＿二無義＿一。名＿二無義言＿一。非＿二實無＿一レ義。
問。以＿レ何明＿レ之。以＿レ少苞＿レ廣。復何以少含＿レ多乎。　答。案＿二大
法炬陀羅尼經第二＿一云。此一法句。出＿二無量句＿一。是大摠持。
通說＿二諸義＿一。何以故。欲＿レ令＿下二 一切衆生＿一易受解＿上故《割書：文》。　又
【左頁】
【枠外左上】
六三【但し算用数字】
【枠外左横上】
法華經第八卷開示抄第二　陀羅尼品
【枠外左横下】
四九九
【上段】
云。　問。神呪所＿レ詮。詮＿二於何法＿一。　答。有義。不＿レ出＿二 三義＿一。一
者說＿二於極果勝德。或因中萬行＿一。二說＿二 三寶名字。或大力
鬼神之名＿一。三說＿二於諸法深理無相＿一。使＿下二聞者＿一悟＿上レ道。　問。
此方何乃不＿三譯￣シテ從＿二此音＿一乎。　答。有義。呪語含＿レ多。此問
無＿二物擬＿一レ之也。若譯＿レ之者。於＿レ義不＿レ盡。又恐失＿二其勢用＿一。傳
有＿レ譯者。未＿レ可＿レ依＿レ之《割書：云云》。

問。玄贊中。爲＿レ得＿二法義辯才詞無礙解＿一《割書：文》。樸揚大師。如何＿一
釋＿レ之乎。　答。作＿二 二釋＿一。一云。疏￣ハ錯￣レリ。辯才及詞。非＿二摠持＿一
故。二云。不＿レ錯。詞無礙解￣ハ法摠持￣ニ攝￣シテ。辯才無礙￣ハ通
於法義＿一。摠持中收《割書：云云》。
問。二釋倶不＿レ明。先付＿二初釋＿一。四無礙解中。旣以＿二法義＿一立＿二
惣持＿一。辯詞二種。何不＿レ立＿レ之。准＿二此道理＿一。疏文《割書：考【四角で囲む】文一｜本作又》非＿レ
錯。又付＿二次釋＿一。以＿二辯詞二無礙解＿一。攝＿二法義二種摠持＿一者。
可＿レ云＿二摠持有＿一レ 二。何云＿二摠持有＿一レ 四。云＿二■次說四＿一乎。
會云。見＿二攝釋＿一。牒＿二說文＿一。摠持有＿レ 四。謂法義等者《割書：云云》。所＿レ牒
本。以＿二 四種＿一。卽爲＿二摠持體＿一。無＿二爲得字＿一。仍初釋爲＿二文錯＿一。後
【下段】
釋意者。雖＿レ攝＿二法義中＿一。立＿レ《割書：考【四角で囲む】立一｜本作表》名旣有＿レ 四。故疏云＿三摠持
有＿二何失＿一。
別尋云。付＿二初釋＿一見＿レ疏。爲＿レ得＿二法義詞辯四無礙解＿一。如＿レ次
說＿二 四摠持＿一《割書：云云》。擧＿二 四無礙解＿一者。依＿二陀羅尼＿一所＿レ得之果德
也。不＿レ云＿二無礙卽是摠持＿一。何云＿三辯詞非＿二摠持體＿一。疏文爲
錯耶。
會云。攝釋牒文。異＿二于見行＿一如＿レ 上。設付＿二爲得本＿一。猶不＿レ可
然。《割書：考【四角で囲む】然一｜本作爾》呪摠持不＿レ當＿二辯無礙解＿一。因＿二無生忍摠持又不＿レ
當辯無礙解＿一故。仍爲＿レ誤歟。
攝釋云。疏摠持有四謂法義等者。然四摠持。一法。二義
三呪。四能得菩薩無生忍。疏中所＿レ言辯才詞者。而有＿二兩
義＿一。一者疏錯。辯才及詞非＿二摠持＿一故。二者不＿レ錯。詞無礙
解法摠持攝。辯才無礙通＿二於法義＿一。摠持中收。故擧＿レ之也
《割書：云云》。
決擇記云。疏摠持有四至何者。　問。然摠持有＿レ 四。謂法
義呪忍。此與＿二無礙解＿一相攝云何。　答。法詞無礙解。是陀
羅尼。義無礙解。是義陀羅尼。辯才無礙。通＿二法義呪三陀

現代語訳

【右頁】

陀羅尼が心の瞋りと共にあっても、善心が過去に謝しても、なお彼が能く持することを得るがゆえに、不失と名づける。

恵影疏に云う：或いは心相応とは、この陀羅尼を修得した後、もし恒に心と倶に起こるがゆえに心相応と言う。念を作さない時も、また能く用がある。或いは作意せず、心と倶に起こらないがゆえに、或いは不相応と言う。

僧叡疏に云う：或いは心不相応等とは、もし初めて学ぶ時は、作意を相応と名づける。もし任運して常にあるものは、不相応と名づける。

大乗義章第十一陀羅尼義に云う：（慧遠）陀羅尼とは、中国語に翻訳して持と名づける。今この法が失せないがゆえに持と名づける。持の別は同じでなく四つある。一に法陀羅尼、二に義陀羅尼、三に呪術陀羅尼。心について異なりを弁ずるに、龍樹の説の如く、一切の三昧は、ただ心相応である。諸の陀羅尼は、或いは心相応、或いは心不相応である。作意念持を心相応と名づける。瞋等を起こしても、持するところを忘れないを不相応と名づける。相応は体に拠る。不相応と言うのは、その勢力を弁ずる。留化の通心が滅尽しても、而も化用があるが如し。

問：経文は陀羅尼の功徳を説く。そうであるなら、陀羅尼には所詮の義があるべきか。玄賛では無義文字とする。これについて、如来の所説は、皆その義がある。「皆その義の如く咸く法輪を転ず」と云うが如し。いかにして神呪章句を無義文字とするのか。況んや樸揚及び余師（嘉祥）の釈を見ると、或いは因位万行極果勝位を説き、或いは大力鬼神三宝名字を宣べる。もしそうなら、なぜ外道のヴェーダ教を無義文字とするのか。

【下段】

答える：少略密無義文字とは、疏主の私詞ではなく、瑜伽論の正文である。摂釈では「能く少略をもって多くの義を含み、復た是れ秘密なり。その文句を観ずるに、無義に似たるを無義言と名づく。実に義無きに非ず」。剰えて無量の義を含む。誰が所詮の妙義無からんや。

尋ねて云う：瑜伽論に「かくの如き呪章句は、都て義有ること無し。是れ円成実なり」と云う。無相空理に帰するを無義と云う。或いは所取境義無きがゆえに無義と云う。なぜ摂釈では「多義を含み復た是れ秘密にして、無義に似たり」と云うのか。

玄賛に云う：（上の如し）

摂釈に云う：疏の「少略密無義文字」とは、能く少略をもって多義を含み、復た是れ秘密なり。その文句を観ずるに、無義に似たるを無義言と名づく。実に義無きに非ず。

問：何をもってこれを明かすか。少をもって広を苞むとは、復た何故に少をもって多を含むのか。答：大法炬陀羅尼経第二を案ずるに云う「この一法句は、無量句を出だす。是れ大総持にして、通じて諸義を説く。何を以ての故に。一切衆生をして受解し易からしめんと欲するが故に」と。

【左頁】

また云う：問：神呪の所詮は、何の法を詮するか。答：有義では、三義を出でない。一つは極果勝徳、或いは因中万行を説く。二つは三宝名字、或いは大力鬼神の名を説く。三つは諸法の深理無相を説く。聞く者をして道を悟らしめる。問：この方では何故に訳さずして、この音に従うのか。答：有義では、呪語は多を含み、この間に擬するものが無い。もしこれを訳せば、義において尽くさず、また其の勢用を失することを恐れる。伝えて訳者有りとも、未だ之に依るべからず。

問：玄賛中に「法義弁才詞無礙解を得んが為」とある。樸揚大師はいかに釈するか。答：二釈を作す。一に云う：疏は錯りなり。弁才及び詞は、総持に非ざるが故に。二に云う：錯らず。詞無礙解は法総持に摂し、弁才無礙は法義に通じて、総持中に収まる。

問：二釈共に明らかでない。先ず初釈について、四無礙解中で、既に法義をもって総持を立てるなら、弁詞二種を何故に立てないのか。この道理に准ずれば、疏文は錯りでない。また次釈について、弁詞二無礙解をもって、法義二種総持に摂するなら、総持に二有りと云うべきで、何故に総持に四有りと云い、「次に四を説く」と云うのか。

答える：摂釈を見ると、説文を牒して「総持に四有り。謂わく法義等」とある。牒する所の本は、四種をもって、すなわち総持の体とし、「為得」の字が無い。仍って初釈を文錯とする。後釈の意は、法義中に摂すといえども、立名が既に四有るがゆえに、疏に「総持に四有り」と云って何の失があろうか。

【下段】

別に尋ねて云う：初釈について疏を見ると「法義詞弁四無礙解を得んが為に、如次に四総持を説く」とある。四無礙解を挙げるのは、陀羅尼に依って得るところの果徳である。「無礙がすなわち是れ総持」と云わない。なぜ「弁詞は総持の体に非ず、疏文を錯りとする」と云うのか。

答える：摂釈の牒文は、見行と異なること上の如し。設い「為得本」に付いても、なお然るべからず。呪総持は弁無礙解に当たらず、無生忍総持もまた弁無礙解に当たらないがゆえに。仍って誤りか。

摂釈に云う：疏の「総持に四有り謂わく法義等」とは、然るに四総持は、一に法、二に義、三に呪、四に能く菩薩無生忍を得る。疏中で言う所の弁才詞には、二義有り。一つは疏の錯り。弁才及び詞は総持に非ざるが故に。二つは錯らず。詞無礙解は法総持に摂し、弁才無礙は法義に通じて、総持中に収まる。故にこれを挙げる。

決択記に云う：疏の「総持に四有り」に至るまで何者ぞ。問：然るに総持に四有り。謂わく法義呪忍なり。これと無礙解との相摂はいかん。答：法詞無礙解は、是れ陀羅尼なり。義無礙解は、是れ義陀羅尼なり。弁才無礙は、法義呪三陀羅尼に通ず。

英語訳

[Right Page]

Even when dhāraṇī is accompanied by mental anger, and though wholesome mind has passed away, because it is still capable of retention, it is called "non-loss."

The Eiyō Commentary states: "Sometimes mind-associated" means that after cultivating and attaining this dhāraṇī, if it constantly arises together with mind, it is called "mind-associated." Even when not making mindfulness, it can still have function. Sometimes not making intention and not arising together with mind, therefore it is called "sometimes non-associated."

The Sōei Commentary states: "Sometimes mind-non-associated" etc. means that when first learning, making intention is called "associated." When naturally constant, it is called "non-associated."

The Mahāyāna Compendium Chapter Eleven on Dhāraṇī states: (Eon) Dhāraṇī, translated into Chinese is called "retention." Since this dharma does not perish, it is called retention. The distinctions of retention are not the same, having four kinds: first dharma dhāraṇī, second meaning dhāraṇī, third incantation dhāraṇī. Distinguishing differences regarding mind, as Nāgārjuna explained: all samādhi are only mind-associated. Various dhāraṇī are sometimes mind-associated, sometimes mind-non-associated. Intentional mindful retention is called "mind-associated." Even when arising anger etc., not forgetting what is retained is called "non-associated." "Associated" refers to essence. Saying "non-associated" distinguishes its power. Like retained transformative penetrating mind, though extinguished, still having transformative function.

Question: The sūtra text explains the merits of dhāraṇī. In that case, should dhāraṇī have explained meaning? The Xuanzan says "meaningless letters." Regarding this, all the Tathāgata's teachings have their meaning. As it says "all according to their meaning, universally turn the Dharma wheel." How can divine incantation verses be considered "meaningless letters"? Moreover, seeing the explanations of Bokuyo and other masters (Kajō), some explain causal practices and supreme fruition positions, others proclaim the names of powerful spirits and Three Jewels. If so, why are the Vedic teachings of non-Buddhists considered "meaningless letters"?

[Lower Section]

Response: "Brief, esoteric, meaningless letters" is not the commentary master's private words but the actual text of the Yogācārabhūmi. The Shōshaku states: "Capable of containing much meaning through brevity, moreover being esoteric. Observing those textual phrases, seeming meaningless is called 'meaningless words.' Not actually without meaning." Furthermore containing infinite meanings. Who could lack profound explained meaning?

Inquiry: The Yogācārabhūmi states: "Such incantation verses have absolutely no meaning. This is perfect accomplished reality." Returning to signless empty principle is called "meaningless." Or having no grasped object meaning, therefore called "meaningless." Why does the Shōshaku say "containing much meaning, moreover being esoteric, seeming meaningless"?

The Xuanzan states: (as above)

The Shōshaku states: The commentary's "brief, esoteric, meaningless letters" means capable of containing much meaning through brevity, moreover being esoteric. Observing those textual phrases, seeming meaningless is called "meaningless words." Not actually without meaning.

Question: By what is this clarified? Using little to encompass much - moreover, why does little contain much? Answer: Examining the Great Dharma Torch Dhāraṇī Sūtra, volume two, it states: "This one dharma phrase produces infinite phrases. This is great total retention, universally explaining all meanings. Why? Because wanting to make all sentient beings easily receive and understand."

[Left Page]

It also states: Question: What do divine incantations explain? What dharmas do they indicate? Answer: According to one view, they don't go beyond three meanings: First, explaining supreme fruition merits or causal practices. Second, explaining Three Jewels names or names of powerful spirits. Third, explaining the profound principle of signlessness of all dharmas, making hearers awaken to the Way. Question: Why doesn't this region translate them but follows these sounds? Answer: According to one view, incantation language contains much; there is nothing in this realm to compare with it. If translated, the meaning would not be complete, and moreover one fears losing their power and function. Though there are said to be translators, they cannot yet be relied upon.

Question: In the Xuanzan it says "in order to attain dharma-meaning-eloquence-words unimpeded understanding." How does Master Bokuyo explain this? Answer: Two explanations are made. First: The commentary is mistaken. Eloquence and words are not total retention. Second: Not mistaken. Words unimpeded understanding is included in dharma total retention. Eloquence unimpeded extends to dharma and meaning, included within total retention.

Question: Both explanations are unclear. First regarding the first explanation: among the four unimpeded understandings, since dharma and meaning establish total retention, why not establish the two kinds of eloquence and words? According to this principle, the commentary text is not mistaken. Also regarding the second explanation: if eloquence-words two unimpeded understandings include dharma-meaning two kinds of total retention, one should say there are two total retentions. Why say there are four total retentions, saying "next explaining four"?

Response: Looking at the Shōshaku, citing the explanation: "Total retention has four, namely dharma, meaning, etc." What is cited as the basis takes the four kinds as the essence of total retention, without the character "for attaining." Therefore the first explanation considers the text mistaken. The latter explanation's meaning: though included within dharma and meaning, since the established names already have four, what fault is there in the commentary saying "total retention has four"?

[Lower Section]

Separately inquiring: Regarding the first explanation, looking at the commentary: "In order to attain dharma-meaning-words-eloquence four unimpeded understandings, accordingly explaining four total retentions." Raising the four unimpeded understandings refers to the fruition merits attained through dhāraṇī. It doesn't say "unimpeded is precisely total retention." Why say "eloquence and words are not the essence of total retention, considering the commentary text mistaken"?

Response: The Shōshaku's cited text differs from current editions as above. Even applying to the "for attaining" version, it still should not be so. Incantation total retention doesn't correspond to eloquence unimpeded understanding, and non-arising patience total retention also doesn't correspond to eloquence unimpeded understanding. Therefore it is probably an error.

The Shōshaku states: The commentary's "total retention has four, namely dharma, meaning, etc." - the four total retentions are: first dharma, second meaning, third incantation, fourth capable of attaining bodhisattva non-arising patience. What the commentary calls "eloquence and words" has two meanings. First, the commentary is mistaken, because eloquence and words are not total retention. Second, not mistaken: words unimpeded understanding is included in dharma total retention; eloquence unimpeded extends to dharma and meaning, included within total retention, therefore mentioning them.

The Ketchakuki states: Regarding the commentary's "total retention has four" - what are they? Question: Total retention has four: dharma, meaning, incantation, patience. How are these correlated with unimpeded understandings? Answer: Dharma-words unimpeded understanding is dhāraṇī. Meaning unimpeded understanding is meaning dhāraṇī. Eloquence unimpeded extends to the three dhāraṇī of dharma, meaning, and incantation.