法華玄義釋籤 11.4

11.4

次別義中二：初略判，次「云何」下略釋。釋中二，先釋伏順位，次「無明」下釋無生位。「唼」字所狹反。次「復次」下約諸教，中二：先且約別教，次「問」下重料簡前之三教對圓教辨。初文又五：初出舊解不同，次「此不」下斥，三「當是」下略判，四「若見」下辨非，五「今明」下結正。初二如文。第三文者，明其附傍通教小乘三藏意，亦似共地菩薩意也。四辨非中二：先明舊判見不應前盡，次「若思」下明舊判思不應前盡。初文三，初略舉過，次「地持」下引證，三「第九」下敘《地持》意結難。次明思盡非中又三：初略斥，次「何者」下引《華嚴》釋，三「若七地」下重斥。初如文。引《華嚴》中二：初引，次「此是」下釋出經意。此中為消界外同體見思，故須於界外更立三界。若不然者，此與二乘所斷何別？既分內外，見思名同，是故須立思分三界：從五塵為名故，例如欲界；從定地為名故，例如色、無色界。故知違理由見，感報由思。五「今明」下顯正，可知。

Next, in the distinct meaning, there are two parts: first, a brief classification; second, from "How is it" onward, a brief explanation. In the explanation there are two parts: first, explaining the stage of subduing and complying; second, from "Ignorance" onward, explaining the stage of the unborn. The character 唼 (*sha*) is pronounced with the fanqie *suo-xia*. Next, from "Furthermore" onward, in terms of the various teachings, there are two parts: first, tentatively in terms of the Separate Teaching; second, from "Question" onward, reiterating and analyzing the previous three teachings in contrast with the Perfect Teaching. In the first text there are again five parts: first, setting forth the discrepancies of the old interpretations; second, from "This is not" onward, reproaching them; third, from "It should be" onward, a brief classification; fourth, from "If views" onward, discerning their errors; fifth, from "Now we clarify" onward, concluding with the correct [view]. The first two are as in the text. The third text clarifies that their interpretation approximates the meaning of the small vehicle's Tripiṭaka Teaching within the Shared Teaching, and also resembles the intent of the bodhisattvas of the common stages. In the fourth, discerning the errors, there are two parts: first, clarifying that the old classification holds that views should not be exhausted prior; second, from "If desires" onward, clarifying that the old classification holds that desires should not be exhausted prior. In the first text there are three parts: first, briefly raising the flaw; second, from "Dichi" onward, citing proof; third, from "The ninth" onward, recounting the intent of the Dichi to conclude with a rebuttal. In the next part, clarifying the error of desires being exhausted, there are again three parts: first, briefly reproaching [it]; second, from "Why is that" onward, citing the Avataṃsaka to explain; third, from "If the seventh bhūmi" onward, reiterating the reproach. The first is as in the text. In citing the Avataṃsaka there are two parts: first, citing [it]; second, from "This is" onward, explaining the sūtra's intent. Here, in order to resolve the identical-essence view and thought [delusions] outside the realms, one must further establish the three realms outside the realms. If it were not so, what distinction would there be between this and what is severed by the two vehicles? Since internal and external are distinguished yet the names "view and thought" are the same, one must therefore establish that thought divides into three realms: named after the five dust-objects, for example like the desire realm; named after the stage of concentration, for example like the form and formless realms. Therefore one knows that defying principle is due to views, while incurring retribution is due to thought. Fifth, from "Now we clarify" onward, revealing the correct [view] can be understood.