妙法蓮華經文句 信解品 · 領解與相識譬

Sometimes it is not that we do not know a greater path exists, but that we have long since prepared reasons for ourselves not to take it.

The four great disciples had three reasons. They stood at the head of the monastic assembly and feared that suddenly changing course would make later students doubt. They were already old and felt unable to undertake the broad liberation of living beings. They also believed they had attained nirvāṇa, as though they had already reached the end. None of these three reasons was a casual excuse. Each could sound solemn, prudent, even responsible.

Yet that is precisely why they were so difficult to loosen.

Only when Śāriputra received his prediction and the parable rendered Dharma-meaning as father and son, home, and the road of return did the four disciples leap for joy. They suddenly discovered that “I no longer seek” could not prove that the great Dharma had no share in them, and “I have already attained” did not mean there was no path still ahead.

The parable of the poor son expresses this profoundly. The son abandons his father, flees, and dwells long in another land, but this does not mean the father forgets him. The father keeps searching and worrying. What has been lost is the son's understanding of where he came from and to whom he belongs. The bond of father and son remains, yet the son lives as someone who believes he has no home to return to.

Later, poverty gradually turns him toward his native land. Suffering does not automatically make him recognize his father or immediately carry him through the door. It only makes him unable to remain where he was and prompts him to seek escape. Even when he reaches his father's city, he still does not recognize him. Turning back changes his direction; recognition and receiving the family estate still require the road that follows.

The elder's treasure does more than transform the son from poor to rich. The father worries that he is old and has no son to whom he can entrust his wealth. The joy described by the root treatise is that the son can be liberated and receive a prediction, that the wealth of Dharma can finally be transmitted and entrusted, and that the buddha-seeds of living beings to come will have a place of reliance. The joy of regaining the son is thus also joy that the Dharma will not be cut off.

“Receiving of itself without seeking” does not mean that nothing need occur. The four disciples have heard the Dharma, witnessed the prediction, and had their doubt broken through the parable; only then do they know that they too can receive that treasure. “Without seeking” describes what they did not dare imagine before. “Receiving of itself” is what now exceeds their former judgment.

Our firmest boundaries are often not drawn by others, but stroke by stroke by ourselves, using our identity, our age, and what we have already attained. The “Faith and Understanding” chapter does not begin by blaming the person who has dwelt long in another land. It first lets him hear: your father still thinks of you, the road home remains open, and the family estate you thought did not belong to you was never prepared only for others.

I. First Distinguishing Several Explanations of “Faith and Understanding”

Some divide faith and understanding into three kinds of transformation: the initial transformation, the subsequent pursuing transformation, and the final thorough completion of transformation. According to the first account, the Buddha's teaching of the Great Vehicle in the past was the initial transformation; after living beings turned away from the Great Vehicle, the Buddha followed and transformed them again, which was pursuing transformation; only when father and son saw one another was transformation thoroughly completed.

Another says that the wholesome dharmas of the human and deva destinies were the initial transformation; everything from the teaching of the Lesser Vehicle through the Lotus Sutra was pursuing transformation; and only receiving a prediction in the Lotus Sutra thoroughly completed transformation. Another says that the initial teaching of the two vehicles was the initial transformation; subsequently ordering adherents of the two vehicles to turn and teach bodhisattvas was pursuing transformation; and the Lotus Sutra thoroughly completed transformation. Another says that turning the teaching was the initial transformation, passing through the Vaipulya assemblies was pursuing transformation, and awakening to the one vehicle thoroughly completed transformation. Another says that teaching the Lotus Sutra was still only the initial transformation, constant transformation after the ten grounds was pursuing transformation, and only the diamond-like mind thoroughly completed transformation. Another says that forming the saṃnāha was the initial transformation, the intervening course was pursuing transformation, and buddhahood thoroughly completed transformation.

Master Zhiyi holds that these explanations overlap layer upon layer, like a hand full of jade fragments that still do not make a complete jewel. What is called an initial establishment is by definition not the Buddha's original intent, whereas thorough completion should be the ultimate point of the purport. If the wholesome dharmas of humans and devas and the two vehicles are called initial establishments because they are not the original intent, the claim remains intelligible. Yet the Buddha taught the Great Vehicle in the past and now teaches the Lotus Sutra; these should plainly be ultimate, so how can they still be called initial? If the Lotus Sutra, originally ultimate, subsequently becomes initial, the original initial teaching for humans and devas could conversely become ultimate, and the sequence would be entirely reversed.

Again, classifying the two vehicles as initial means that the grass hermitage must be demolished. If the former Great Vehicle is classified as initial, the Great-Vehicle connection represented by the jewel in the robe must likewise be demolished. If one must be demolished and the other need not, both cannot be called initial. If father and son seeing one another is then called thorough completion, the preceding thorough completion should already have awakened to the one vehicle, leaving the later one without function. If awakening to the one vehicle must await the later occasion, the preceding occasion was not truly thorough completion. Every account encounters obstacles at each stage, so the root treatise uses none of them.

Another person says that this chapter concerns manifested traces, because the Tathāgata attained the path long ago and even His intermediate stopping was only a manifestation. Master Zhiyi says this may be maintained in principle, but it is not appropriate in the present scriptural passage. The Buddha has not yet taught Origin and Trace; how could the disciples suddenly understand them in advance? If the three vehicles have not yet been gathered together, awakening beforehand to the One Vehicle would likewise violate the textual sequence.

II. Why Is It Called Faith and Understanding?

Now the chapter title is explained directly. Living beings’ faculties may be keen or dull and their delusions thick or thin; the Buddha teaches either by directly stating Dharma-meaning or through parables; and hearers awaken earlier or later. Before the Lotus assembly, people of middling faculties were like peas. They describe themselves: although the Tathāgata had taught the Dharma for a long time and they sat in the assembly, their bodies were weary and indolent. They thought only of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, without even a single thought of delight in the dharmas practiced by bodhisattvas.

When they first heard the brief teaching, their entrenched attachment was stirred and doubt arose. When they extensively heard the Five-Buddha chapter, they remained as though covered and did not understand. Now, on hearing the parable, they finally leap for joy. Trust arises, understanding emerges, doubt is removed, and the principle becomes clear. Joy corresponds to the world, the arising of trust to adaptation to the person, removal of doubt to counteraction, and clarification of principle to the primary meaning. Because of these four causes and conditions, the chapter is called “Faith and Understanding.”

In terms of the Dharma received and the stages of practice, whether one studies the Lesser or Great Vehicle, ordinary beings first become sages in an ordered sequence. In the Lesser Vehicle, practitioners through faith produce understanding from hearing. When illumination through patience with suffering arises and practice through faith is established, they are called practitioners through faith. Practitioners through Dharma personally contemplate according to principle; when illumination through patience with suffering arises and practice through Dharma is established, they are called practitioners through Dharma. After entering the path of cultivation, practitioners through faith are renamed those liberated through faith; after entering it, practitioners through Dharma are renamed those who have attained through seeing. The Lesser-Vehicle names may be used analogically for the Great Vehicle. People of middling faculties hear the parable, initially break doubt, and enter the Great-Vehicle path of seeing, so this is called faith; they then enter the Great-Vehicle path of cultivation, so this is called understanding.

The scripture further says that, without seeking, they attain the unsurpassed cluster of treasures and only today truly become śrāvakas. Through the voice of the Buddha-path they enable all living beings to hear. They hear the Perfect teaching and enter the Perfect stages; hence the chapter is called “Faith and Understanding.”

From the standpoint of origin and trace, Subhūti and the other three great disciples entered the Great Vehicle and accomplished the Buddha-Dharma long ago. They now manifest as people of middling faculties, displaying the initial arising of faith and initial attainment of understanding; hence the chapter is still called “Faith and Understanding.”

III. How Does the Understanding Unfold?

This passage presents understanding. Proximally, it is understanding of the burning-house parable; more remotely, it is understanding of the “Skillful Means” chapter. The scripture has two parts: first, the narrator describes the disciples’ joy; second, the disciples personally address the Buddha.

The narrator first describes their inward minds and then their outward reverence. Of the four, only Subhūti is specifically called “Wisdom-Life”; the other three are called “Mahā.” In general, all four have great virtue and wisdom. Specifically, Subhūti understands emptiness well, taking the wisdom of emptiness as his wisdom-life; this is explained from his practice. Moreover, among all who possess wisdom, the Buddha's wisdom is foremost. In the Prajñā assembly, the Buddha ordered Subhūti to turn the teaching; because he was commanded by the Buddha, the one of great wisdom, he is called Wisdom-Life. This is explained from the teaching. The other three disciples were less often ordered to turn the teaching and did not take understanding emptiness as their principal practice, so they are not specifically called Wisdom-Life. The meaning of “Mahā” was explained earlier.

They rejoice because, more remotely, they have heard the Dharma through the five passages of Dharma teaching in the “Skillful Means” chapter. The narrator describes only two things: hearing a rare Dharma and seeing the prediction. One may also say that hearing the rare Dharma gathers the first four passages, while seeing the prediction is the fifth. Everything they hear and see in this way is unprecedented, and therefore becomes the cause of their joy.

The scripture says they arouse a rare mind, describing the resolve aroused from proximally hearing the four rounds of teaching by parable. Once the mind is aroused, it is called faith; entering through faith, they enter the stage of joy, precisely the meaning of “Faith and Understanding.” Rising from their seats describes outward reverence. By comparison with Śāriputra, the four should likewise understand through the three modes of action, as can be understood from the preceding passage.

Beginning when the disciples address the Buddha is their statement through verbal action. The whole has two parts: the initial prose and seventy-three and a half verses formally state that they have attained understanding; the following thirteen verses praise the Buddha's profound kindness. Because this understanding is received from the Buddha, they first state their understanding and then praise His kindness.

The prose is also divided in two: first, a brief Dharma teaching; second, extensive teaching through a parable. The brief teaching divides again into a Dharma teaching and a brief raising of the parable. The Dharma teaching also has two passages: first, in the past they received the Dharma of the three vehicles and therefore sought no further; second, now they are gathered into the one vehicle and therefore receive of itself without seeking.

IV. Why Were There Three Reasons Not to Seek in the Past?

When explaining why they did not seek, the scripture first states the reasons and then explains them. Three reasons are stated: first, they stood at the head of the monastic assembly; second, they were advanced in worldly years; third, they believed they had attained nirvāṇa.

First, they stood at the head of the saṃgha. Their monastic seniority was high, and later students took them as standards. If they suddenly changed their former path, switched to a different track, abandoned the Lesser Vehicle, and sought the Great, they feared arousing the suspicion of those who followed. To preserve themselves and protect later students, they did not seek.

Second, they were old. To become bodhisattvas, they should single-mindedly undertake the great path and widely liberate living beings. Now that their bodies were frail and old, they felt unable to perform this task and therefore did not seek.

Third, believing they had attained the proper position of the unconditioned nirvāṇa, they could no longer arouse the great mind. Lotuses do not grow upon high, dry ground. Once knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of nonarising had been established, they believed there was nothing further upon which to rely and nothing further to seek.

The scripture next explains these three reasons for not seeking, but not in the sequence of the preceding headings. It first explains that they did not seek because they had attained nirvāṇa. Next it explains old age, also encompassing leadership of the saṃgha. Alternatively, the earlier account of long hearing the Buddha teach without joy in their minds may be taken as the explanation of why leadership of the saṃgha caused them not to seek. Since the scripture says both that they sat in the assembly and that their years were already decayed and advanced, one knows that it is also explaining the failure of the heads of the saṃgha to seek. The remainder is clear from the scripture.

When the disciples then speak of being before the Buddha today, they state the cause of their understanding. More remotely, they have heard the brief and extensive opening of the three to reveal the real in the Five-Buddha chapter and therefore count themselves fortunate. Obtaining a great wholesome benefit is precisely their declaration that they have understood: proximally, they hear the rare Dharma of the four rounds of parables and thereby awaken; this awakening is the wholesome benefit.

Beginning with immeasurable treasures is the second passage, which briefly raises a parable: in the past they did not seek, whereas now the rare Dharma-treasure comes to them of itself without seeking.

V. The Five Parables and What the Elder Represents

Beginning with the disciples’ request for permission to teach through a parable is the extensive statement of understanding, which contains the opening and application of the parable. Before beginning the parable, they first ask the Buddha for permission to speak.

Five parables are opened. First, beginning with the son's abandonment of his father and flight, is the parable of father and son becoming separated; proximally, it understands the general burning-house parable, and remotely the brief verse in the “Skillful Means” chapter. Second, beginning with the poor son's employment, is the parable of father and son seeing one another; proximally, it understands the elder seeing the fire, and remotely the Buddha seeing living beings with the Buddha-eye. Third, beginning with immediately dispatching attendants to pursue him quickly and bring him back, is the parable of pursuit and inducement; proximally, it understands the elder setting aside the stool and changing to the three carts, and remotely the Buddha temporarily putting the Great Vehicle to rest and establishing the Lesser. Fourth, beginning after a period of time when father and son trust one another, is the parable of being entrusted with knowledge of the family estate. It does not understand the preceding proximate and remote meanings but reaches back to the Vaipulya assemblies’ rebukes and the Prajñā assembly's turning of the teaching. Fifth, beginning after a short further time when the father knows the son's mind, is the parable of entrusting the family estate; proximally, it understands giving the great cart in the burning-house parable, and remotely the direct abandonment of skillful means in the Dharma teaching. The fourth and fifth may also be combined as a single parable of receiving and entrusting; this will be discussed again later.

An old explanation correlates the Buddha of Immeasurable Life in the west with the elder, but the root treatise does not use it. The western Buddha and the Buddha here have different bodies and different conditions of transformation. Different Buddha-bodies cannot establish concealment and manifestation of the same Buddha-body; different conditions cannot establish one father-son relationship. Moreover, this scripture has no such purport from beginning to end. To force the correlation is only blind contrivance.

The present explanation follows the events stated in the scripture and joins them to Dharma-meaning. In explaining the poor son, it interprets the text through the adherents of the two vehicles’ half-word Dharma. In explaining the elder, it uses Vairocana Buddha's full-word Dharma-gateway. The elder inside the house removes his necklaces and puts on filthy clothing. Although the clothing and necklaces differ, the person remains the same. This illustrates Vairocana Buddha concealing immeasurable supernormal virtues, manifesting a sixteen-foot golden body, holding dung-clearing implements, and establishing the teaching of the three vehicles. Concealment and manifestation differ, but there are not two Buddha-essences. If one does not understand even Vairocana Buddha's nearby donning and removing of clothes, how can one move Amitābha from afar to this place and have Him change identities?

VI. Each of the Four Passages in the Parable of Separation Has Two Levels

The parable of father and son becoming separated has four passages: first, the son turns away from his father and leaves; second, the father searches for his son and finally stops in a city; third, the son wanders and happens to turn toward his native land; fourth, the father worries about his son. Each passage has two levels.

The first passage's two levels are turning away from the father and leaving, and turning toward home and returning. Turning away from the father and leaving understands the five hundred people in the general burning-house parable. Living beings formerly formed connections through the Great Vehicle and became Buddha-children, then lost their Great-Vehicle understanding and wandered through the five destinies. Hence the scripture says some passed ten years, twenty years, even fifty years. They are all alike Buddha-children. Because the meaning of being Buddha-children has grown faint, they are called young and childish; because they do not dwell in their original realm of connection, they are said to have dwelt long in another land.

Turning toward home and returning understands the thirty children in the general burning-house parable. The original conditions have now become slightly manifest, so he is called grown. Because those conditions have passed through suffering and distress and stirred the Buddha's great compassion, he is said to have happened upon his native land.

The second passage's two levels are the father's unsuccessful search for the son and stopping midway in a city. After living beings regress from the Great Vehicle, the Buddha keeps waiting for their Great-Vehicle capacities, but the time of encounter does not arrive; this is called seeking without finding. In the father's stopping midway in a city, the house understands the house in the general burning-house parable, while great wealth understands the elder's inner and outer virtues and wealth.

The third passage's two levels are why the son comes to the father's city and his actual arrival there. The cause of coming to the city understands the appearance of being afflicted and distressed by many sufferings when the fire arose. After losing the Great Vehicle, living beings wander everywhere and undergo every hardship. Precisely because of this, suffering becomes a capacity able to evoke a response and stir the Buddha's great compassion; hence he is said finally to reach the father's city.

The fourth passage's two levels are the father's thought of the pain of losing his son and of the joy of regaining him, understanding the single gate in the general burning-house parable. Young and unaware, the son takes the wrong gate and causes his father worry. Yet the father's original intention is to use this gate to bring him through, so he rejoices in advance that his son will gain passage. Here the general division is complete; what follows explains the wording phrase by phrase.

VII. The Son Turns Away from His Father and Leaves

The son's turning away from the father and leaving again divides in two. First, the phrase “suppose there were a person” is explained. This understands the twenty children in the burning-house parable and illustrates adherents of the two vehicles. Because bodhisattvas’ stages and practices are difficult to fathom, the explanation provisionally concerns only the part understood by the four disciples themselves.

The scripture says he was young and childish. An old explanation says he is called young because he had heard little Dharma. If so, should “grown” later be explained as having heard much Dharma? The root treatise instead says that deep ignorance obscures the mind of understanding and leaves it powerless, and therefore he is called young and childish. When wholesome roots are gradually perfumed and are about to become manifest, he is called grown.

Abandoning the father means regressing from the Great Vehicle; fleeing means ignorance concealing itself; departing means rushing toward birth and death.

Someone asks: living beings became confused only after the Buddha relinquished His responsive transformation-body. In principle, the father should have left the son, not the son abandoned the father.

The root treatise answers: it is precisely because living beings lack the capacity to evoke the Buddha that the Buddha leaves the world; ultimately, the meaning that the son abandons his father can still be established.

Dwelling long in another land means that the Dharma realm of nirvāṇa is originally the Buddha's own land, while birth and death amid the five desires are another land. Living beings originally wished to seek escape but afterward regressed and fell without returning, and therefore are said to dwell there long. Ten years represents the destiny of devas; twenty the human destiny; fifty the five destinies. This is stated of one person successively traversing the various destinies.

VIII. Growing and Gradually Turning toward His Native Land

Beginning with “when he was grown” is the second level, turning toward and returning to his native land. Being young has two meanings: first, deluded and small in mental scope; second, not yet having encountered suffering and therefore not knowing to turn back. This illustrates that, after living beings form Great-Vehicle connections, their Great-Vehicle understanding is still not deep; like the deluded, they do not return. Remaining merit persists, and they remain attached to worldly pleasure, so they still do not return. Now the force of karma habituated in the past secretly perfumes them, giving them some knowledge that they should turn toward the path. Encountering suffering and losing pleasure also make them begin to seek the essential path of escape. These two become the capacity that stirs the Buddha's transformation, and therefore this is called gradually turning toward the father's land.

The preceding passage says that, if someone undergoes pain, the Buddha teaches nirvāṇa to that person. If the two kinds of human and deva goodness are not conditions that evoke the Buddha, then living beings unable to see the Buddha-father within the three realms are called poor. Because they cannot obtain the essential method of escape, they are also called poor. The eight sufferings burn like fire, and therefore they are called hard-pressed.

Racing in the four directions in search of clothing and food receives two old explanations. The first says that the five precepts and ten wholesome acts of humans and devas each have cause and result, by which they sustain themselves in the four directions. The second says they make a living within the four modes of birth to seek clothing and food. The root treatise argues in response that the scripture says one may pass 130 kalpas before seeing one buddha. Human and deva causes and results were not absent during those 130 kalpas, yet they could not evoke the Buddha; therefore one knows that such goodness is not the capacity for seeing the Buddha.

The root treatise's explanation is that, before the Buddha appears in the world, ordinary beings give rise to four views based on body, feeling, mind, and dharmas. Within them, seeking the correct path is compared to seeking food, while seeking aids to the path is compared to seeking clothing. Seeking principle through rejection of suffering becomes a condition for teaching and transformation. Thus non-Buddhists and others were often liberated first when the Buddha initially appeared in the world. This is precisely the meaning. The Great Sutra also uses looking in the four directions as an illustration of the four truths; it may be understood accordingly.

Gradually traveling until he happens to turn toward his native land means that living beings reject suffering and hope for liberation. Although they wrongly seek nirvāṇa through wrong views and this is not the Buddha's original intention, they can still thereby encounter the Buddha; hence this is called “happened to turn toward.” The meaning of native land is as explained above.

The following passage speaks of country, city, and house together, and the three must be distinguished. All Buddha-Dharma is called the country, the broadest in scope. The city is narrower and denser: the nirvāṇa of the virtue of severance defends against what is wrong and wards off evil, and is therefore called a city. The house is still more intimate, with great compassion of shared substance as the house.

IX. The Father Searches for the Son and Stops Midway in a City

Beginning with the father's prior search for the son without finding him is the second major passage, also divided in two. First, after living beings regress from the Great Vehicle, the Buddha seeks capacities that can be taught and transformed but remains unable to meet them; this is called seeking the son without finding him. Second, the father stops midway in a city. The father does not abandon his entire family estate to search for one son; this illustrates that the Buddha does not stop teaching elsewhere because one place lacks capacities.

An old explanation says that “midway” means between the time after the twenty thousand buddhas and before Śākyamuni Buddha. The root treatise holds that calling it an interval is acceptable, but none of this account's explanations of stopping, country, city, and house can be adopted.

The root treatise instead takes the land of expedient means with remainder as the country. Because it lies between the land of shared dwelling and the land of real reward, it is called midway. Nirvāṇa with remainder is the city; dwelling in this nirvāṇa is stopping. Taking this place as the house, the Buddha manifests two responsive bodies there, superior and inferior: the inferior response corresponds to śrāvakas, the superior response to bodhisattvas. Five kinds of people who have severed shared delusions are born together in this land and all turn into bodhisattvas. The Buddha corresponds to them through the superior response and teaches them purely through the Great-Vehicle family estate. While stopping there, the Buddha awaits the capacities of His son in the land of shared dwelling. Thus not only does the meaning of “midway” agree, but country, city, and family estate are all distinct.

X. Why Is the Elder's Household So Wealthy?

Every level of the great wealth has a correspondence. The object of the true mark is called the house; possession of the myriad virtues is called wealth; merit from the five perfections is called riches; prajñā-wisdom is called treasure; guiding all dharmas back to the Great Vehicle is called immeasurability. Gold, silver, pearls, and the rest illustrate the thirty-seven factors of the path in the Great Vehicle. This understands the elder's great wealth in the burning-house parable.

Full and overflowing granaries and storehouses are also divided graph by graph. Internally is “full,” externally “overflowing”; rice is kept in a granary, objects in a storehouse. The granary illustrates meditation, which can produce 108 kinds of samādhi. The storehouse illustrates the true mark, which can generate the wisdom of the eighteen emptinesses. Capacity for one's own use is called full; capacity to transform others is called overflowing. This understands the many fields and houses in the burning-house parable.

Servants signify that skillful knowledge and vision and all the perfections are complete, able both to establish teachings flexibly according to capacities and accord with phenomena and principle. This understands the many servants. By stages, adherents of the two vehicles, bodhisattvas of the Shared teaching, and those at the thirty minds of the Distinct teaching are like servants; the ten grounds of the Distinct and Perfect teachings are like ministers, the ten dedications like assistants, the ten practices like officials, and the ten abodes like subjects.

On first entering the Buddha's domain, everyone within a country is a subject of the king. Though already subjects, they remain more distant than officials, assistants, and ministers. Those in the ten practices cultivate and train in the various dharmas through successive distinctions, running about in many ways, and are therefore like officials. In the ten dedications, phenomena and principle grow deeper and their posts approach the king, and therefore they are like assistants. Those on the ten grounds assist the Buddha in teaching and transformation, subduing demonic resentment and overcoming hostile obstructions, and therefore they are like ministers.

The vehicles are likewise correlated in sequence. The three contemplations in one mind are like the elephant, carrying the Great Vehicle of the Perfect teaching. The three contemplations in sequence are like the horse, carrying the Great Vehicle of the Distinct teaching. The contemplation of immediate emptiness and the analysis of dharmas into emptiness are like oxen, carrying the Great Vehicle of the Shared teaching and the rest. Analytical contemplation of dharmas is used in personal practice, like deer, sheep, and the rest, carrying the Dharma of the two vehicles.

“Innumerable” means that provisional and real dharmas may all be called vehicles, while provisional wisdom, real wisdom, and the various methods of contemplation may all be called elephants, horses, oxen, and sheep. Not only are teachings extremely numerous; contemplative wisdoms are equally innumerable.

Going out and coming in receive four explanations. First, two yet nondual is coming in, while nondual yet two is going out. Second, conversely, nondual yet two is coming in, while two yet nondual is going out. Third, the immeasurable returning to the one is coming in, while the immeasurable opened from within the one is going out. Fourth, the function of transforming others is going out, while the function of one's own practice is coming in. Carrying dharmas outward to benefit living beings is called returns; the merit of teaching and transformation returning to oneself is called profit.

“Even throughout other countries” means universally entering the three lands, practicing amid what is not the path while penetrating the Buddha-path. Only Dharma-nature is one's own land.

Merchants and traders also receive two explanations. First, the bodhisattvas are merchants and universally enter the three lands to seek the benefit of Dharma, and therefore they are numerous. Bodhisattvas of this land go elsewhere to hear the Dharma; great beings from other regions come here to hear the scripture; traveling back and forth, they gather the benefit of Dharma. Second, responsive and transformation bodies are like traders, carrying true Dharma into the three lands, teaching and benefiting living beings, then returning to the Dharma-body, and therefore they are called numerous. It is like worldly people entrusting others with capital to conduct business: while enabling others’ enterprise, they also accomplish their own.

XI. The Poor Son Returns Near His Father's City

Beginning with the poor son's wandering through settlements is the third major passage, the parable of the son's return near his father, also divided in two: first, seeking clothing and food; second, reaching the father's city.

In the inner meaning, seeking clothing and food means that, after living beings regress from the Great Vehicle, they undergo manifold sufferings everywhere, become deeply disenchanted, and wish to escape, but cannot correctly grasp the principle and thereby fall into wrong and deviant paths. Yet once wrong wisdom has made the mind examine objects, it can more readily turn toward correct wisdom. The wish to transcend the world becomes a cause for evoking the Buddha.

Contemplating the five aggregates is called a settlement; contemplating the twelve entrances, a town; contemplating the eighteen realms, a country. Passing through these objects while seeking principle is called seeking clothing and food.

Beginning with finally arriving where his father dwells is the actual turn toward the father. The city where the father dwells means that the painful object becomes a capacity able to evoke a response and stirs the Buddha's great compassion, and therefore this is called reaching the city. The city is nirvāṇa. Nirvāṇa includes both the half-word and full-word teachings; living beings’ habituation and understanding already contain the meaning that nirvāṇa may be attained, and therefore the scripture says he reaches the city.

XII. Why Does the Father Worry, and How Does Worry Turn to Joy?

Beginning with the father's constant thought of his son is the fourth major passage, the parable of the father's concern for his son, also divided in two.

First is his thought of the pain of losing his son. From the past until now, the Tathāgata constantly thinks of the son's Great-Vehicle capacity, and therefore the scripture says “always thought.” “More than fifty years”: fifty represents the five destinies; because the asura destiny is opened separately from the ghost destiny, the additional word “more than” appears.

“Had never told” has two explanations. First, in the land of expedient means with remainder, the Buddha had never told the ministers, assistants, officials, and subjects about this son's capacities and conditions. Second, since the Buddha responded and transformed in the world, at past Dharma seats in the Avataṃsaka, Vaipulya, the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra, and elsewhere, He had never told the great beings that these śrāvakas were originally children of the Great Vehicle. Because they did not manifest the meaning of Buddha-children, they could not understand the Buddha-Dharma. Sometimes they were as though deaf and mute; sometimes flowers fell upon their bodies and they knew only to bow; sometimes they even set down their alms bowls in bewilderment. None of these responses reached the great Dharma.

Harboring regret and resentment means that the father regrets not diligently admonishing and teaching his son in the past, so the son lacked instruction and fled; he also resents the son's failure to remember kindness and duty, distancing himself from his father and drawing near others. The inner meaning is that the Tathāgata regrets not diligently teaching living beings to enter the inner ordinary stages, causing them to regress from the Great Vehicle; He further resents their failure to apply their minds, exert themselves, and firmly maintain their resolve, instead fleeing into delusion without returning.

Thinking himself old and decrepit means that the period of teaching and transformation is about to end, yet no one can inherit the great Dharma, like an aged and decrepit man without a son.

Someone asks: bodhisattvas transformed by the Dharma-body can all become successors, so why should He be so worried?

The root treatise answers: transformations by the Dharma-body originally have no flourishing or decline, so how could aging and decrepitude be discussed? That is not the subject here. The retinue of the transformation-body now under discussion has two kinds. First are Dharma-body great beings, whose manifested forms follow like shadows. Although they manifest traces as disciples, in their origin they may be teachers, so thinking oneself old and decrepit does not concern this kind. Second are ordinary beings in the land of shared dwelling who first arouse the resolve for awakening under the teaching of a transformation-buddha; only this kind is called the son.

Only if the son inherits the father's work can the lineage of descendants continue unbroken. If Śāriputra receives a prediction and in the future becomes Padmaprabha Buddha, the buddha-seed in one direction will continue without interruption, and the Great-Vehicle family estate can be transmitted and entrusted from generation to generation. If Śāriputra lacks a capacity to be transformed and become a buddha, there will be no one to entrust with the present Great-Vehicle Dharma-wealth; where, then, could the buddha-seeds of living beings to come find reliance? This is the reason for the old father's lament.

Second is his thought of the joy of regaining his son. Maturation of a capacity for liberation is called regaining the son; giving him a prediction of buddhahood is called entrusting the Dharma-wealth; because this precisely accords with the Buddha's original intent, it is called calm happiness. Here the four disciples’ understanding of the preceding general burning-house parable comes to a close.

When the four great disciples hear Śāriputra receive his prediction, they suddenly leap for joy. What they receive is not news they have never heard before and that bears no relation to them. Just the opposite: only at this moment do they learn that the unsurpassed Dharma-treasure they formerly dared not seek, did not wish to seek, and believed did not belong to them can also be received by them.

The root treatise therefore first explains “faith and understanding,” then has the four disciples declare that they have “received of itself without seeking,” and finally opens the parable with a separated father and son. Faith and understanding are not an abstract capacity for comprehension but the process by which a relationship is recognized anew: from doubt to trust; from guarding only what one has attained to acknowledging that one can still advance; from dwelling long in another land to gradually turning toward one's native land. Father and son have never truly been severed. What has been lost is the son's understanding of and response to their original relationship.

I. Where Do Faith and Understanding Begin?

The root treatise first asks why some awaken early and others late while sitting together in the Lotus assembly. The answer lies in four differences: faculties may be keen or dull, delusions thick or thin, the Buddha may teach through Dharma or parable, and living beings may awaken earlier or later. People of middling faculties first hear the brief Dharma teaching. Their entrenched attachment is stirred, yet doubt remains. They then hear the extensive teaching but are still not clear. Only when the parable turns Dharma-meaning into visible fathers and sons, houses, and roads do they leap for joy.

Faith and understanding therefore do not descend simultaneously as a single judgment. First comes joy, followed by the arising of trust. Once trust arises, understanding can grow. As understanding grows, doubt departs; when doubt departs, the principle becomes clear. The root treatise assigns joy, the arising of trust, the departure of doubt, and clarification of principle to the effects of four kinds of teaching, showing that the faith and understanding named by the chapter encompass the entire transformation from hearing to awakening.

From the standpoint of stages of practice, the root treatise further borrows the Lesser-Vehicle names “practice through faith” and “practice through Dharma” to draw a comparison with the Great Vehicle. Faith does not mean merely believing one sentence, nor understanding merely being able to explain one concept. When people of middling faculties hear the parable, initially break through doubt, and enter the path of seeing, this is called faith. When they then advance in cultivation on the basis of the principle seen, this is called understanding. Faith corresponds to the initial breaking of doubt and entry into the path of seeing; understanding corresponds to further cultivation based upon the principle. The two follow one another.

From the standpoint of the Origin and Trace of the four disciples, they accomplished the Buddha-Dharma long ago but now manifest people of middling faculties who first trust and understand. This does not cancel the reality of their present joy. Rather, manifestation itself has a teaching function: other people of middling faculties in the assembly can see in the four disciples’ understanding how their own doubt may be broken and trust may arise.

II. Why Does Attaining Nirvāṇa Instead Lead Them Not to Seek?

Looking back on their former failure to seek the great Dharma, the four disciples give three reasons. First, they stand at the head of the monastic assembly. Because of their seniority, later students take them as standards; if they suddenly change their path, abandon the Lesser, and seek the Great, they fear arousing suspicion among those who follow. Second, they are old. Bodhisattvas should undertake the great path and widely liberate living beings, but they regard themselves as decrepit and powerless. Third, they have attained nirvāṇa. Taking the proper position of the unconditioned as the final place one can reach, they seek nothing further.

The three reasons are not identical. For the heads of the saṃgha, an established identity becomes a constraint. For the old, a judgment about their own ability becomes a constraint. For those who have realized, an existing attainment becomes a constraint. What they share is not laziness but the ability to offer a seemingly reasonable explanation of why the great Dharma no longer belongs to them.

The root treatise uses a lotus that cannot grow on a high plain to explain the third failure to seek. The problem is not that nirvāṇa has no value, but that, if practitioners establish what they have attained as a closed proper position, they can no longer arouse the great mind. Partial escape from suffering can make “I have finished” still harder to loosen. Those with no attainment at least know they are poor; those with an attainment may mistake still being on the road for having reached the end.

When the scripture explains the three reasons for not seeking, it does not follow the sequence of the headings. The root treatise specifically notes that it first explains prior realization, then old age together with leadership of the saṃgha; alternatively, long sitting at the Dharma seat without joy in one's mind may be connected with leadership of the saṃgha. This interweaving shows that the three causes are not unrelated compartments: identity, age, and attainment support one another and together form the four disciples’ former self-understanding as people who did not seek.

III. Does “Receiving of Itself without Seeking” Mean That Nothing Need Be Done?

When the four disciples say that immeasurable treasures have been received of themselves without seeking, they do not mean that Dharma-treasure bears no relation to hearing the Dharma, trusting and accepting it, or awakening. Today, before the Buddha, they have heard from afar the Dharma teaching opening the three to reveal the real and have more recently heard the parable; only then do they obtain an unprecedented wholesome benefit. “Without seeking” refers back to their former belief that they had no share in it. “Receiving of itself” describes attaining it today beyond all expectation. It does not omit causes and conditions but overturns their old judgment that “this Dharma does not belong to me.”

This also explains why the scripture's narrator describes both inward thought and outward reverence. Joy arises in the mind, while rising from their seats, arranging their robes, joining their palms, and bending respectfully make the inward transformation visible in the body. Then addressing the Buddha and describing themselves turns understanding into speech. The root treatise only briefly indicates that the four disciples too should understand through the three modes of action; it does not invent a separate correspondence for every movement. The point is that understanding is not merely an answer concealed within the mind.

The four disciples’ statement first describes attaining understanding, then praises the Buddha's kindness. The prose in turn gives a brief Dharma teaching first and then extensively teaches through a parable. The sequence is exact: they do not first take a story to ornament an answer already known. They first acknowledge that they formerly did not seek and now have attained understanding; the parable then fully unfolds why they did not seek, how they became separated, and how they can still meet again.

IV. In Their Separation, Did the Father Abandon the Son or the Son Abandon the Father?

The sharpest point in the parable of separation is that the scripture says the son abandoned his father and fled. If living beings became lost only after the Buddha manifested entry into extinction, it appears that the father should have left the son. How, then, can the son be said to have abandoned the father? The root treatise itself raises and answers this question: because living beings lack the capacities able to evoke a response from the Buddha, the Buddha departs from the world. From the standpoint of stimulus and response, it remains the son who first turns away from the father.

This answer does not simplistically place fault on one party; it distinguishes the aspect from which the scripture establishes the parable. The Buddha does not abandon living beings without cause. When living beings lose the capacity for stimulus and response, the Buddha's responsive manifestation is no longer visible. The parable's account of the son's flight does not mean that the father ceases to think of him. It locates the beginning of their separation in the son's regression from the Great Vehicle, concealment by ignorance, and movement toward birth and death.

Thus “young and childish” does not mean young in years, and “grown” does not mean having heard much Dharma. To be young and childish is to have dense ignorance, with the mind of understanding obscured and powerless. To be grown is for wholesome roots gradually to have been perfumed, with a tendency toward becoming manifest. Abandoning is regression from the Great; fleeing is self-concealment; departing is movement toward birth and death. Each verb shows that separation is not a single geographical move but a change of understanding and direction at successive levels.

Dwelling long in another land is established in the same way. The Dharma realm of nirvāṇa is the Buddha's own land, while birth and death amid the five desires become another land. One had wished to escape but regressed and fell, never returning, and so is said to dwell there long. Ten, twenty, and fifty represent in sequence the destiny of devas, the human destiny, and the five destinies. They are not the ages of three different sons but paths one person may traverse. The names father and son remain, yet the meaning of being a Buddha-child has grown so faint that it can scarcely be recognized.

V. Why Can Suffering Turn the Poor Son Gradually toward His Native Land?

Growing and turning homeward do not mean that the son suddenly recovers a complete memory. The root treatise says that “young” has two meanings: being small through delusion and not yet having encountered suffering. After forming a connection, great understanding is still not deep, as though one were deluded and did not return. Remaining merit and attachment to worldly pleasures likewise keep one from returning. Later, past habituated karma secretly perfumes and stimulates him, while encountering suffering and losing pleasure make him begin to think of and seek escape.

Suffering is therefore not liberation itself but a supporting condition that prevents one from remaining where one was. Not seeing the Buddha-father is called poverty; not obtaining a method of escape is also called poverty; pressure from the eight sufferings is called hardship. Poverty and hardship make him race about seeking clothing and food, yet he may still seek principle through wrong views. This does not mean that his direction is already entirely correct.

At “the four directions,” the root treatise specifically refutes two old explanations. The five precepts and ten wholesome acts of humans and devas have cause and result, and each of the four modes of birth sustains itself, yet these facts do not automatically constitute a capacity for seeing the Buddha. During long kalpas, humans and devas have not been absent, yet living beings may still be unable to evoke the Buddha. The present explanation instead says that ordinary beings give rise to four views based on body, feeling, mind, and dharmas: seeking the correct path amid wrong views is like seeking food, while seeking aids to the path is like seeking clothing. Though what is sought remains skewed, rejecting suffering and seeking principle can become a condition for transformation.

The two words “happened to turn toward his native land” likewise preserve this incompletion. The son has not yet settled in his native land. While rejecting suffering, hoping for escape, and wrongly seeking nirvāṇa, he encounters the Buddha even though this was not his intention. “Happened to” indicates a conjunction of conditions, while “turned toward” indicates the beginning of a change in direction. Neither permits a first turn back to be written as though he had already arrived home.

VI. Why Do Country, City, and House Draw Progressively Nearer?

The root treatise calls the entirety of Buddha-Dharma the country, the broadest referent. It calls the nirvāṇa of the virtue of severance the city, which can defend against what is wrong and ward off evil and is therefore narrower. It calls great compassion of shared substance the house, within which the father-son relation is most intimate. According to the scripture's movement from distance to nearness, the three explain how the place toward which the son travels changes from the Buddha-Dharma broadly to the home where his father dwells.

The father's failure to find his son does not lead him to abandon the family estate, nor does the Buddha cease teaching and transforming elsewhere because one place lacks receptive capacity. In “stopped at a city,” the root treatise accepts only the old explanation of “midway” but rejects its other allocations of country, city, house, and stopping. The present explanation establishes graph by graph that the land of remainder is the country, between the two lands is “midway,” nirvāṇa with remainder is the city, and dwelling in this nirvāṇa is stopping.

The elder's wealth is then unfolded item by item. The house is the object of the true mark; wealth is possession of the myriad virtues; riches are the merit of the five perfections; treasures are prajñā-wisdom; and immeasurability is the Great Vehicle guiding and encompassing everything. Granary and storehouse are also distinguished: the granary represents meditation, which can produce the 108 samādhis; the storehouse represents the true mark, which can generate wisdom of the eighteen emptinesses. Being full is inward self-support; overflowing is the outward practice of transforming others. Every object in the scripture says not only that the father's house contains wealth for the son to enjoy, but that it functions for both one's own benefit and the benefit of others.

Servants, ministers, assistants, officials, and subjects are listed by rank, while elephants, horses, oxen, deer, and sheep are listed according to the contemplations they carry. Ministers, assistants, officials, and subjects unfold in order through intimacy, distance, and assigned responsibilities; elephants, horses, oxen, deer, and sheep each carry something different. Because the scripture says they are innumerable, the root treatise notes both that the teachings are many and that contemplative wisdoms are many.

“Going out and coming in” more clearly rejects a single direction. The root treatise lists four patterns in sequence: two yet nondual and nondual yet two can each be going out or coming in; the immeasurable returning to the one and the immeasurable within the one can likewise be going out or coming in; transforming others is going out, while one's own practice is coming in. Dharmas going out to benefit living beings are called returns; the merit of teaching and transformation returning to oneself is called profit. The wealth of the father's house lies in Dharma's ability to go out and benefit others and to come in and sustain oneself, not in remaining inert and sealed in a storehouse.

VII. Why Has the Son Already Reached the City When He Still Does Not Recognize His Father?

After regressing from the Great, the poor son roams settlements, countries, and towns, suffers manifold pains, seeks escape but fails to grasp the principle correctly, and thereby falls into what is wrong and deviant. Yet the root treatise does not say that these turns serve no purpose. Once wrong wisdom has made the mind pass through objects, it can turn toward correct wisdom; the wish to transcend the world can become a reason for evoking the Buddha.

The five aggregates are like a settlement, the twelve entrances a town, and the eighteen realms a country. The son seeking clothing and food within them represents living beings seeking principle within their own bodies and the objects they encounter. “Then reached” does not mean that he has recognized his father, but that the painful objects become a capacity able to evoke a response, stirring the Buddha's great compassion. Nirvāṇa also encompasses both partial and complete; living beings’ habituation and understanding already contain a meaning that may be attained, so the scripture can first say he reached the city, while the following passage describes their meeting.

This sequence is crucial. Reaching the father's city does not mean father and son have recognized one another. A change toward the right direction does not mean old fear has disappeared. Possessing a capacity for liberation does not mean the family estate has been entrusted. The parable of separation is responsible only for bringing the son near the father. The subsequent recognition, pursuit and inducement, conferral of knowledge, and entrusting of the estate each still have their own course.

VIII. If There Are Already Many Bodhisattvas, Why Does the Father Still Worry That He Has No Son?

Whenever the father thinks of his son, he remembers both the pain of losing him and the joy of regaining him. “More than fifty years” represents the five destinies, with “more than” arising because the asura destiny is opened out from the destiny of ghosts. “Had never told” again has two levels: in the land of expedient means with remainder, he had not spoken of this son's capacities and conditions; in assemblies of the past, he had not told the great beings that śrāvakas were originally children of the Great Vehicle. The son does not fail to exist; the father-son relation has not yet been publicly recognized.

The father's regret is that he did not diligently teach in the past, so his son lacked instruction and fled. The father's resentment is that the son did not remember his kindness and duty, distancing himself from his own father and drawing near others. The inner meaning likewise has two sides: the Tathāgata regrets not having diligently led living beings into the inner ordinary stages, while living beings regressed because they could not exert themselves and firmly establish their resolve. The father always thinks of him, but the son does not know to return for a long time. The pain of separation lies precisely in one side never forgetting and the other failing to recognize.

The root treatise immediately asks: all the bodhisattvas transformed by the Dharma-body can fill the position of successor, so why worry about having no son? The answer first marks the scope of the present passage. The transformations of the Dharma-body inherently have no arising or cessation and do not involve aging and decline. The retinue of the transformation-body has two kinds: Dharma-body great beings who, though manifesting traces as disciples, may in their origin have been teachers; and ordinary beings in the land of shared dwelling who first arouse the resolve for the path through a transformation-buddha. The son who can inherit the father's work in this passage refers exclusively to the second kind.

The father's worry over having no son therefore does not mean that the Buddha-Dharma has no bodhisattvas or that the father seeks only a private heir. If Śāriputra receives a prediction and becomes a buddha, the buddha-seed in one direction can continue and the Dharma-wealth of the Great Vehicle can be transmitted and entrusted. If he has no capacity to be transformed or become a buddha, the buddha-seeds of living beings to come will have no place of reliance. The wealth of the father's house functions through transmitting the Dharma; the son's attainment means continuing the buddha-seed.

Finally, the joy of regaining the son is gathered into only three steps: maturation of a capacity for liberation is called regaining the son; bestowing a prediction of buddhahood is called entrusting the Dharma-wealth; and accord with the Buddha's original intent brings calm happiness. Only here does “receiving of itself without seeking” reveal its full meaning: what the four disciples receive is not only an individual benefit but renewed status as Buddha-children able both to receive and transmit the Great-Vehicle family estate.

Through the Eye of the Wenjuji

Zhanran first unfolds the alternative explanations before the chapter title into four permutations of faith and understanding, mental factors as their substance, and seven differences, then expressly says that the root treatise records six masters in all〔T34n1719 0274b15–0274c26〕. He traces passage by passage how the root treatise uses each school's initial approach to refute the others and says that the absence of an explicit refutation of the fourth master is merely an omission in the wording, not evidence that the explanation was adopted〔0275a01–0275a19〕. These supplementary judgments in the mirror make the root treatise's general rejection and specific refutations easier to distinguish, but remain mirror explanations.

When directly explaining the chapter title, the Wenjuji distinguishes the graph in “pea”: if written with the graph meaning “to gouge,” it is the graph for gouging with a knife; it then uses the difficulty of boring into a raw pea to illustrate how adherents of the two vehicles were difficult to penetrate before the Lotus〔T34n1719 0275b03–0275b04〕. It further specifies the Great-Vehicle paths of seeing and cultivation as the first abode and the additional practice that follows〔0275b20〕. The root treatise says only that entry into the Great-Vehicle path of seeing is faith and advancement into the path of cultivation is understanding; the specific stages supplied by the mirror cannot be retrojected as the root treatise's original statement.

The root treatise only indicates that the four disciples too should understand through the three modes of action; the Wenjuji then assigns arousing a rare mind, rising from the seat, and addressing the Buddha respectively to mind, body, and speech〔T34n1719 0275c10〕. Similarly, in the land with remainder, the root treatise says only that five persons have severed shared delusions; the Wenjuji specifies that the five are the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha〔0277b07〕. Both cases show how the mirror unfolds the root treatise's abbreviated wording; the unfolding is grounded, but the layers still may not be confused.

For the passage on the wealthy house, the Wenjuji adds that “immeasurable” means possessing all six perfections, that prajñā can guide the other five and thereby make riches and treasures all true, and that “treasure” is gathered under the seven categories and six perfections〔T34n1719 0277b20–0277b26〕. It reads servants as the provisional functioning of skillful means, connects ministers, assistants, officials, subjects, and the contemplations carried with the two aspects of provisional and real, and expressly judges that the first three of the four patterns of going out and coming in concern one's own practice, while the last concerns self and others〔0277b29–0277c27〕. These mirror explanations make the relations among the root treatise's long sequence of correspondences clearer.

The Wenjuji divides “had never told” into two meanings: first, in the land of expedient means with remainder, the Buddha had not spoken in accordance with the relevant capacities; second, since the Buddha responded and appeared in the world, the past teachings in this land had not revealed that śrāvakas were originally children of the Great Vehicle〔T34n1719 0278a23–0278b06〕. It judges that sitting as though deaf and mute belongs to the Avataṃsaka assembly, while the flowers clinging and abandoning the alms bowl belong to the Vaipulya setting〔0278b08〕. This allocation to particular assemblies is likewise specified only in the mirror. Both meanings of “had never told” in the root treatise must be preserved; the mirror's fine judgment cannot be used to delete one.

At the father's concern for his son, the Wenjuji specifies that the flowers clinging refer to Śāriputra and abandoning the alms bowl to Subhūti〔T34n1719 0278b10〕; the root treatise preserves only the two scenes of flowers clinging while one bows to the seat and bewilderment while abandoning the bowl. It further unfolds the flight into three meanings: cessation of capacity and disappearance of response, turning away from oneself and toward others, and dwelling where one does not belong〔0278b15〕. By explaining that bestowing a prediction can elicit the capacities of living beings to come, it illuminates the relation between Śāriputra's becoming a buddha and the buddha-seed's remaining unbroken〔0278b25–0278c01〕.

The mirror also explains the graph “heir” through “descendant” and “successor” and says that the prediction is bestowed in order to elicit living beings’ capacities〔T34n1719 0278b24–0278b25〕. In this light, inheriting the father's work is more than a transfer of family property: only if Śāriputra becomes a buddha will the living beings he transforms have a path to buddhahood; if Śāriputra himself entirely lacks the capacity for buddhahood, those he later transforms will have no way to inherit it〔0278b27–0278c01〕. This meaning illuminates the root treatise's concern for the continuity of the buddha-seed and Dharma-wealth. It neither erases the private affection of father and son in the scripture nor isolates that affection from Dharma-transmission.

Finally, the Wenjuji says that stimulus and response intersect and cannot be judged to have one fixed side necessarily preceding the other. The root treatise follows only the convenience of the wording, sometimes first raising the father's thought and sometimes the son's capacity〔T34n1719 0278c08–0278c12〕. This mirror illumination prevents “receiving of itself without seeking” from being misread as attainment without a cause and prevents the narrative in which the father first worries and later rejoices from being rigidified into the sole temporal order of stimulus and response. The mirror's interpretations close here; the next sentence has already turned to the subsequent parable of seeing one another.