法華玄義釋籤 16.8

16.8

次義本中云「尋一句詮一義」等者，如《大經》三十一「因佛答迦葉闡提善根不定有斷不斷，迦葉復問：何故世尊作不定說？佛言：譬如醫方皆為治病。或於一名下說無量名，如大涅槃亦名無生、無出、無作、歸依、窟宅、解脫、燈明、彼岸、無畏等；或有一義說無量名，如天帝釋，名憍尸迦、婆蹉婆、摩佉婆、因陀羅、千眼天、舍脂夫、金剛寶頂等；或有無量義說無量名，如佛、如來義異名異；復有一義說無量名，如五陰亦名顛倒、苦諦、四念處、四識住道時、眾生、第一義身戒、心慧解脫、十二緣、三乘、六道、三世等也。」名是能詮，義是名旨，《大經》從義故義為名本，故後二句並義居先。初立一名無量名，不立一義一名，及無量義一名者，為酬迦葉是故不立。若一義一名即當定義，即是迦葉所難之辭，是故不立。此中文意為釋經名，從名詮義，是故四句以名為先，前後雖殊其意不別。《涅槃》云「名」此中云「句」者，如云「名詮自性，句詮差別」，今為存於詮差別名，是故云「句」。如云「妙法蓮華殊於諸典」，即差別也。

Next, in [the section on] the root of meaning, where it says 'examining a single phrase reveals a single meaning' and so forth, it is as in fascicle thirty-one of the *Great Sūtra*: 'Because the Buddha replied to Kāśyapa that the wholesome roots of an icchantika are indeterminate as to whether they are severed or not severed, Kāśyapa asked again: Why does the World-Honoured One make an indeterminate statement? The Buddha said: It is like medical prescriptions, which are all for curing illness. Sometimes under a single name immeasurable names are spoken, as the Great Nirvāṇa is also named unarisen, unproduced, unconditioned, refuge, cavern, liberation, lamp, the other shore, fearlessness, and so on; sometimes for a single meaning immeasurable names are spoken, as the heavenly lord Śakra is named Kauśika, Vāsava, Maghavan, Indra, the Thousand-Eyed God, Husband of Śacī, Diamond Crest, and so on; sometimes with immeasurable meanings immeasurable names are spoken, as with Buddha and Tathāgata, where the meanings are different and the names are different; again, for a single meaning immeasurable names are spoken, as the five aggregates are also named inverted, truth of suffering, the four stations of mindfulness, the four abodes of consciousness, paths, times, sentient beings, the body of ultimate truth, the liberation of discipline, mind, and wisdom, the twelve links of conditioning, the three vehicles, the six paths, the three periods of time, and so on.' The name is that which expresses, and the meaning is the purport of the name; the *Great Sūtra* proceeds from meaning, and therefore meaning is the root of names; thus in the latter two lines, meaning comes first in both cases. Initially, establishing 'one name, immeasurable names' while not establishing 'one meaning, one name' and 'immeasurable meanings, one name' was to answer Kāśyapa, and therefore they were not established. If it were 'one meaning, one name', that would correspond to a determinate meaning, which was precisely the objection raised by Kāśyapa; therefore it was not established. The textual intention here is to explain the scripture's title, revealing meaning from names; therefore, in the four lines, names come first. Although the order is different, their intent is not different. The *Nirvāṇa Sūtra* speaks of 'names' while here it speaks of 'phrases': as it is said, 'names express intrinsic nature, phrases express distinctions'; here, in order to preserve the designation of expressing distinctions, it therefore says 'phrases'. For instance, saying that the 'Lotus of the Wonderful Dharma is distinct from other scriptures' is precisely a distinction.