法華玄義釋籤 17.2

17.2

五約譬中二：初敘傍正意，次正明用譬。初言「兼明」等者，三獸二珠約開合為喻，黃石中金約破會為譬；雖此二意，正為顯體。次正明用譬中二：先正釋三譬，次「引此」下明用三譬意。初釋中文自為三，初借三獸中三：初正釋，次「如是」下示體，三「此約」下結示。初文又二：初三獸之譬本譬於通，通真諦中有空有中，取象不空為今經體。次從「到又二種」去亦約教道重簡，但中仍為小象，圓教不空方名大象。次「如是」下示於圓中異於通別，正顯今經不思議體。三從「此約」下結譬本意，本借三獸以譬通教，故重結云「約共真諦」，真諦既含一真二中，是故須簡偏真但中非今經體，此約圓別入通以簡經體，故知他人解釋尚不識小象不空，況能辨於大象不空？況能知於二中合在真諦中耶？但知大象一概大乘。次更借二珠譬者，又二：先正約二珠，次復獨約一如意珠譬。初文又二：初正釋，次結示經體。初云不能雨寶名為但空，能雨寶者名一切法空，空含二義是故須簡，空名不殊故云「相似」，但空唯空故云「但空」，此是通教偏真但空。對別教俗諦中空不具諸法，故云「但空不能雨寶」，亦空亦雨即是即中即假故也。但空非空教道權說，故以能雨正譬實中，此是圓教入別之說，別教有無共為俗諦，圓入即以兩中為真，是故真中。簡却但中非今經體，是故重喻如意摩尼，以辨得失。是則前三獸喻約別圓入通，故須於其能入之中簡却次第中也。約能所合說，故云空中合為真諦簡也。今亦如是，約所入邊即別教中道，但簡所入能入盡妙，正是經體。今亦能所合論，所入仍語俗者為辨異前，故云有無合為俗簡。

Fifth, in [the elimination] according to similes, there are two parts: first, stating the primary and secondary intentions; next, directly explaining the use of the similes. First, the statement "concurrently clarifying," and so on, means that the three beasts and the two jewels serve as similes in terms of opening and combining, while the gold in yellow stone serves as a simile in terms of refutation and integration. Although there are these two intentions, they are primarily for revealing the substance. Next, in directly explaining the use of the similes, there are two parts: first, directly explaining the three similes; next, from "citing these" onward, explaining the intention of using the three similes. The first explanation is itself divided into three. First, in borrowing the three beasts, there are three parts: first, the direct explanation; next, from "Thus" onward, showing the substance; third, from "This is according to" onward, concluding with the demonstration. In the first passage there are again two parts: first, the simile of the three beasts originally compares to the Shared [Teaching]; within the true truth of the Shared [Teaching] there is emptiness and there is the middle, and taking the elephant's non-emptiness constitutes the substance of the present sūtra. Next, from "reaching also has two kinds" onward, it also re-eliminates according to the pedagogical path: the mere middle is still the small elephant, whereas the non-emptiness of the Perfect Teaching is alone called the great elephant. Next, from "Thus" onward, showing that the perfect middle is different from the Shared and Separate [Teachings] directly reveals the inconceivable substance of the present sūtra. Third, from "This is according to" onward, concluding the original intention of the simile: originally the three beasts were borrowed to illustrate the Shared Teaching, hence it concludes again saying "according to the shared true truth." Since the true truth contains one truth and two middles, it is therefore necessary to eliminate the partial truth and mere middle as not being the substance of the present sūtra. This is an elimination of the substance of the sūtra according to the Perfect and Separate entering the Shared. Thus we know that other people's explanations do not even recognize the non-emptiness of the small elephant, how much less could they discern the non-emptiness of the great elephant? How much less could they know that the two middles are together contained within the true truth? They only know the great elephant generally as the Great Vehicle. Next, in further borrowing the simile of the two jewels, there are again two parts: first, directly according to the two jewels; next, further according to the simile of the single wish-fulfilling jewel alone. In the first passage there are again two parts: first, the direct explanation; next, concluding by showing the substance of the sūtra. First, that which cannot rain down treasures is called mere emptiness, and that which can rain down treasures is called the emptiness of all dharmas. Emptiness contains two meanings, which is why it must be eliminated. Because the name of emptiness is not different, it says "similar." Mere emptiness is solely empty, hence it says "mere emptiness." This is the partial true, mere emptiness of the Shared Teaching. In contrast to the emptiness within the conventional truth of the Separate Teaching not possessing all dharmas, it says "mere emptiness cannot rain down treasures." Being both empty and raining down treasures is precisely being identical with the middle and identical with the provisional. Mere emptiness is not [true] emptiness, but an expedient teaching of the pedagogical path; therefore, being able to rain down treasures directly illustrates the real middle. This is the exposition of the Perfect Teaching entering the Separate. In the Separate Teaching, existence and non-existence together constitute the conventional truth; when the Perfect enters, it takes the two middles as the true, and therefore it is the true middle. Eliminating the mere middle as not being the substance of the present sūtra, it therefore reiterates the simile of the wish-fulfilling maṇi to distinguish gain and loss. Thus, the previous simile of the three beasts was based on the Separate and Perfect entering the Shared, so within that which can enter, one must eliminate the gradual middle. Speaking in terms of the combination of the entering and what is entered, it says that emptiness and the middle combine to form the true truth for elimination. Here it is also like this: in terms of what is entered, it is the middle way of the Separate Teaching, but eliminating what is entered while that which enters is entirely wondrous constitutes the precise substance of the sūtra. Here also the entering and entered are discussed together; that what is entered still speaks of the conventional is to distinguish it from the previous, hence it says that existence and non-existence combine to form the conventional for elimination.