法華玄義釋籤 17.22

17.22

次正釋中四四十六相別不同，初三藏四門中二：標、釋。釋中四別。初有門為二：先明門中四諦，次「此是」下明申門之論。初文又二：先苦集，次滅道。初文又二：初破邪，次「乃是」下立正。又二：初略舉煩惱及業，次「煩惱」下明三道結成有門。苦道即苦諦，餘二即集。次「一切有」下明道滅。又二：先道，次滅。初道諦又三：初明門觀，次「能發」下明門中功能，三「此則」下結門。次「子果」下滅諦。又三：初正明滅，次引證，三「此則」下結門。引證中以真實證有。次空門中三：先正明四諦，次「故須菩提」下引證，三「恐」下明申門之論。初文又二：先四諦，次「發真」下功能。初又二：先苦集，次「三假」下道滅。此門不言破邪者，破邪之用事在有門，無明與老死略標二諦，三假是道諦之觀，入空是滅諦大意。次功能中二：先明功能，次「因空」下結門。次引證中二：先正引，次「因空」下結門。亦空亦有門，略云正因緣，即是略舉四諦之相。於中為四：先略明四諦；次略結門，諦相不殊故略而不辨；三「若稟」下明門功能，能有所通第一義也；四「此是」下門中通門之論。次第四門中分文不殊三門，加斥第四門中異解，有人云已去是也。次通教四門中二：初總，次別。初又二：初明衍門所通長遠，次「今」下與三藏辨異。又二：初體析不同，次「三藏」下明觀生法二空不同。又二：初正明二空不同，次「有人云」下破古釋疑。初文中云「生法二空」者，見惑若破得須陀洹名得生空，後進斷思方得法空。次文三，先破古，次「大品」下釋，三引論重立門。又三：初略總立，次「論云」下正引論立，三「佛於」下明四門通意。

Next, in the direct explanation, the four fours—sixteen aspects—are distinct and different. Within the first, the four doors of the Tripiṭaka [Teaching], there are two parts: heading and explanation. In the explanation, there are four distinctions. First, the door of existence has two parts: first, explaining the four truths within the door; second, from “This is” onward, explaining the treatises that elucidate the door. The first text also has two parts: first, suffering and origination; second, cessation and path. The first text also has two parts: first, refuting the heterodox; second, from “is rather” onward, establishing the correct. This also has two parts: first, briefly raising afflictions and karma; second, from “Afflictions” onward, explaining the three paths to establish the door of existence. The path of suffering is the truth of suffering; the remaining two are origination. Next, from “All existents” onward explains the path and cessation. This also has two parts: first, the path; second, cessation. The first, the truth of the path, also has three parts: first, explaining the door’s contemplation; second, from “can give rise to” onward, explaining the function within the door; third, from “This is then” onward, concluding the door. Next, from “Offspring and fruit” onward is the truth of cessation. This also has three parts: first, directly explaining cessation; second, citing scriptural proof; third, from “This is then” onward, concluding the door. In citing scriptural proof, it proves existence through truth. Next, within the door of emptiness, there are three parts: first, directly explaining the four truths; second, from “Therefore Subhūti” onward, citing scriptural proof; third, from “Fearing” onward, explaining the treatises that elucidate the door. The first text also has two parts: first, the four truths; second, from “giving rise to truth” onward, the functions. The first also has two parts: first, suffering and origination; second, from “three provisionalities” onward, path and cessation. The reason this door does not speak of refuting the heterodox is that the function of refuting the heterodox pertains to the door of existence; avidya and old age and death briefly indicate the two truths, the three provisionalities are the contemplation of the truth of the path, and entering emptiness is the general import of the truth of cessation. Next, within functions, there are two parts: first, explaining the function; second, from “due to emptiness” onward, concluding the door. Next, within citing scriptural proof, there are two parts: first, directly citing; second, from “due to emptiness” onward, concluding the door. The door of both emptiness and existence briefly states correct causes and conditions, which is briefly raising the aspects of the four truths. Within this, there are four: first, briefly explaining the four truths; second, briefly concluding the door, which is brief and not differentiated because the aspects of the truths are not distinct; third, from “If receiving” onward, explaining the function of the door, being able to lead through to the supreme truth; fourth, from “This is” onward, treatises within the door that communicate the door. Next, the division of text in the fourth door is not different from the three doors, with the addition of rebuking divergent interpretations of the fourth door, namely from “Some say” onward. Next, within the four doors of the Shared Teaching, there are two parts: first, general; second, specific. The first also has two parts: first, explaining that what the Mahāyāna doors lead through to is far-reaching; second, from “Now” onward, distinguishing differences from the Tripiṭaka. This also has two parts: first, difference in understanding emptiness by bodily analysis versus bodily reality; second, from “Tripiṭaka” onward, explaining difference in contemplating the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas. This also has two parts: first, directly explaining the difference in the two emptinesses; second, from “Some say” onward, refuting ancients and resolving doubts. In the first text, “the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas” means that if delusions of view are broken, one attains srotāpanna, termed attaining the emptiness of persons; subsequently advancing to sever delusions of thought, one then attains the emptiness of dharmas. In the next text, there are three: first, refuting ancients; second, from “The Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra” onward, explaining; third, citing treatises to re-establish the doors. This also has three parts: first, briefly and generally establishing; second, from “The treatise says” onward, directly citing the treatise to establish; third, from “The Buddha, regarding” onward, explaining the import of the four doors leading through.