妙法蓮華經玄義 10.183

10.183

然《大品》、《法華》及《涅槃》，三教淺深，難可輒言。何者？涅槃佛性亦名般若，亦名一乘，一乘是《法華》之宗，《般若》是大品所說，即是明性，復有何未了乎？《大品》中說第一義空，與《涅槃經》明空無異，皆云色空，乃至大涅槃亦空。又《大品》說「涅槃非化」，《維摩》說佛身離五非常，與涅槃明常說涅槃不空，有何異而自生分別，言《維摩》偏詺明常，《大品》一向說空也？

However, regarding the shallowness and depth of the three teachings—the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, the Lotus Sūtra, and the Nirvāṇa Sūtra—it is difficult to speak hastily. Why is that? The buddha-nature of the Nirvāṇa is also called prajñā, and also called the one vehicle. The one vehicle is the central purport of the Lotus Sūtra; prajñā is what was expounded in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā; since it clarifies the nature, what else remains incomplete? In the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, paramārtha-śūnyatā is expounded without difference from the emptiness clarified in the Nirvāṇa-sūtra; both state that form is empty, right down to the great nirvāṇa being empty as well. Furthermore, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā states that "nirvāṇa is not an illusion," and the Vimalakīrti states that the Buddha's body is free from the five impermanences; what difference is there between these and the Nirvāṇa's clarifying permanence and stating that nirvāṇa is not empty, such that one would arbitrarily make distinctions, claiming that the Vimalakīrti exclusively clarifies permanence, while the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā solely expounds emptiness?