法華玄義釋籤 19.18

19.18

○次異解中二：先明三意通用，次明諸師不同。初文者，頓、漸、不定名雖不殊，但明義不了，是故須破。初中言「南三北七」者，南謂南朝，即京江之南，北謂北朝，河北也。自宋朝已來三論相承，其師非一並稟羅什，但年代淹久文疏零落，至齊朝已來玄綱殆絕，江南盛弘《成實》，河北偏尚《毘曇》，於時高麗朗公至齊建武來至江南，難成實師結舌無對，因茲朗公自弘三論。至梁武帝勅十人止觀詮等，令學三論，九人但為兒戲，唯止觀詮習學成就。詮有學士四人入室，時人語曰「興皇伏虎朗，栖霞得意布，長干領語辯，禪眾文章勇」，故知南宗初弘《成實》，後尚三論。近代相傳以天台義指為南宗者，非也。自是山門一家相承，是故難則南北俱破，取則南北俱存。今時言北宗者，謂俱舍、唯識，南方近代亦無偏弘，其中諸師所用義意，若憑三論則應判為南宗。若今師所用《毘曇》、《成實》及三論等大小諸經，隨義引用不偏南北。若法相宗徒多依《大論》，觀門綱格正用《瓔絡》，融通諸法則依《大品》及諸部圓文，故知今家不偏朋黨。護身寺自軌法師，大乘是人為立號，以重其所習，故美之稱為大乘。

Next, in [explaining] the differing interpretations, there are two parts: first, explaining the common application of the three meanings; next, explaining the differences among the various masters. In the first text: although the names sudden, gradual, and indeterminate are not different, their explanation of the meaning was not definitive, and therefore it must be refuted. Regarding 'three in the south and seven in the north' in the first [part]: south refers to the Southern Dynasties, that is, south of the capital's river (the Yangtze); north refers to the Northern Dynasties, north of the Yellow River. Since the Liu Song dynasty, the Sanlun (Three Treatises) lineage was transmitted; its masters were not one, and all received it from Kumārajīva. But over a long period of time the texts and commentaries became scattered, and by the Qi dynasty the profound guiding thread had almost been severed. South of the Yangtze, the Satyasiddhi was widely propagated, while north of the Yellow River, the Abhidharma was exclusively favored. At that time, Master Lang of Goguryeo arrived south of the Yangtze during the Jianwu era of the Qi; when he challenged the Satyasiddhi masters, their tongues were tied and they had no response, and from this Master Lang personally propagated the Sanlun. When Emperor Wu of the Liang ordered ten men, including Zhiguan Quan, to study the Sanlun, nine treated it merely as child's play; only Zhiguan Quan mastered the practice. Quan had four disciples who entered his chamber; people of the time said: 'Lang of Xinghuang subdues the tiger; Bu of Qixia grasps the meaning; Bian of Changgan masters speech; Yong of Chanzhong excels in composition.' Thus we know that the Southern tradition initially propagated the Satyasiddhi, and later favored the Sanlun. In recent times, it has been traditionally claimed that the Tiantai teachings belong to the Southern tradition, which is incorrect. It is naturally the unique lineage transmission of our mountain school; therefore, when refuting, both North and South are refuted, and when adopting, both North and South are retained. Today, when people speak of the Northern tradition, they refer to Kośa and Yogācāra (Vijñaptimātra); in the South in recent times there has also been no exclusive propagation. Among the doctrinal meanings used by those various masters, if they rely on the Sanlun, they should be classified under the Southern tradition. If we look at what our master uses—the Abhidharma, Satyasiddhi, and Sanlun, as well as the various Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras—he cites them according to their meaning, without partiality to North or South. If we look at the followers of the Dharmalakṣaṇa school, they mostly rely on the Da zhidu lun; the framework of the contemplation gates properly uses the Yingluo jing; and the unhindered merging of all dharmas relies on the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra and the perfect texts of the various sections. Thus we know that our school does not lean toward partisan factions. Master Zigui of Hushen Temple was given the title 'Mahāyāna' by others out of respect for what he practiced, praising him by calling him 'Mahāyāna'.