法華玄義釋籤 13.13

13.13

四明所詮者，既以能詮教被所取機，機緣不同教亦碩異。若不以所詮為教體，與邪經外論亦復何殊？故以所詮定之，知教有所離所至，功能有歸。所詮者何？所謂諸諦，於中二：先敘意，次「若說」下正明詮相。初文者，四教本中有四種意：一約四諦，二約三諦，三約二諦，四約一諦。一一意中皆具三義：一明所詮理，二明能詮教，三明所出經論。今此略用初之二意，能所合辨，從所標名，故云「詮意」。不廣分別，故但云「意」耳。於正明相中，先明人天，次明出世。初文中云「人天教永不詮真，但詮思議之俗」者，但是俗而非諦，望出世法，屬俗諦攝，故云「思議俗」耳。次出世中先漸、次頓。而先明漸者，隨便說之，應無他意。初言「若為漸」者，以人天教非五時次第，故以三藏而為漸初，初但說於無常苦等，故云「正詮思議之俗」。雖通涅槃，涅槃是小乘法性，若初詮法性，恐增邪倒，不能破於常等僻，故「俗正真傍」。無常少寬即正示真理，則無常幻化悉皆為傍，是故次云「真正俗傍」。既獲小果，正欲令其入真中道，傍以菩薩不思議真兼帶而說，故云「真正俗傍」。言「中後」者，此兼方等、般若兩意，故方等中所得小果，多因正詮思議之真，至般若中即不思議之傍正也。「乃至」去即法華開權顯實、真俗不二，故曰「雙詮」。若說頓教者，華嚴頓部，正在圓真、兼申別俗，故云「真正俗傍」。不定教者，或傍或正、或俗或真。次約漸中四教者，言「漸四」者，意旨如前。

Fourth, explaining the signified: since the teaching that signifies is applied to the capacities that receive it, and the conditions of capacities are not the same, the teachings also differ immensely. If one did not take the signified as the substance of the teaching, how would it differ from perverse sūtras and non-Buddhist treatises? Therefore, it is determined by the signified, so that one knows what the teaching departs from and what it arrives at, and that its function has a destination. What is the signified? It refers to the various truths. Within this, there are two parts: first, stating the intention; second, from 'If expounding...' onward, directly explaining the characteristics of what is signified. In the first text, within the original four teachings, there are four kinds of intentions: first, in terms of the four truths; second, in terms of the three truths; third, in terms of the two truths; fourth, in terms of the one truth. Within each single intention, three meanings are complete: first, explaining the principle that is signified; second, explaining the teaching that signifies; third, explaining the sūtras and treatises from which they emerge. Here, the first two intentions are briefly used; the signifier and signified are analyzed together, and taking the name from the signified, it is called 'the intention of what is signified.' Because it does not elaborate broadly, it merely says 'intention.' In directly explaining the characteristics: first, human and heavenly beings are explained; next, the supramundane is explained. In the first text, where it says 'The human and heavenly teachings never signify the ultimate truth, but only signify the conceivable conventional,' this means it is merely conventional and not a [noble] truth; looked at from the perspective of supramundane dharmas, it is subsumed under the conventional truth, and hence is called 'the conceivable conventional.' Next, in the supramundane, first comes the gradual, next the sudden. That the gradual is explained first is merely for convenience of exposition and should have no other meaning. First, regarding the words 'If for the gradual,' because the human and heavenly teachings are not part of the sequence of the five periods, the Tripiṭaka is taken as the beginning of the gradual; at the beginning, it only speaks of impermanence, suffering, and so on, which is why it says 'primarily signifying the conceivable conventional.' Although it extends to nirvāṇa, nirvāṇa is the Dharma-nature of the Hīnayāna; if it were to signify Dharma-nature at the beginning, it was feared that it would augment perverse inversions and fail to shatter erroneous attachments to permanence and so on; hence 'the conventional is primary and the ultimate is secondary.' When impermanence is somewhat relaxed, the ultimate principle is directly revealed, and then impermanence and illusory transformation all become secondary; therefore it next says 'the ultimate is primary and the conventional is secondary.' Having attained the lesser fruit, the primary desire is to lead them into the ultimate Middle Way, secondarily expounding it while incorporating the bodhisattva's inconceivable ultimate; hence it says 'the ultimate is primary and the conventional is secondary.' As for 'the middle and later,' this combines the two meanings of Vaipulya and Prajñā; thus the lesser fruit attained in the Vaipulya mostly results from primarily signifying the conceivable ultimate, whereas by the time of Prajñā, it is the secondary and primary of the inconceivable. From 'and so on' onward refers to the Lotus Sūtra's opening of the provisional to reveal the real, where ultimate and conventional are non-dual; hence it is called 'signifying both.' If one speaks of the sudden teaching: the Avataṃsaka sudden division is primarily centered on the perfect ultimate, while secondarily conveying the conventional of the Separate; hence it is called 'the ultimate is primary and the conventional is secondary.' As for the indeterminate teaching, it is either secondary or primary, either conventional or ultimate. Next, regarding the four teachings within the gradual: as for 'the gradual four,' the intention is as stated before.