法華玄義釋籤 19.29

19.29

次破第五時中又二：初牒，次難。又二：初以二諦為難，次「眾生佛性」下例難。初言欲破第五，先難成論師二諦判教。古人雖云二諦，而不分共別含顯之異，故將常住以例諸教，諸教並是十二年後所明二諦，與十二年前二諦何別？若言無別，自涅槃已前、法華已來，應俱無常；若其別者，那同名二諦？次例難者，二諦既同，應俱明佛性，並云云。二諦既同，應俱明闡提作佛，並云云。已難漸中五時。

Next, within refuting the fifth period, there are also two parts: first, restating [the opponent's thesis]; next, refuting it. This also has two parts: first, refuting it with the two truths; next, from "Sentient beings' Buddha-nature" onward, refuting by analogy. The first says that to refute the fifth, one must first refute the doctrinal classification of the two truths of the master of the Chengshi lun. Although the ancients spoke of the two truths, they did not distinguish the differences between common and distinct, concealed and manifest; therefore, using eternal abiding as an example to parallel the various teachings: if the various teachings all illuminate the two truths after the twelve years, what difference is there between them and the two truths before the twelve years? If one says there is no difference, then from prior to the Nirvāṇa down to the Lotus, all should be impermanent; if they are different, how could they equally be named the two truths? Next, regarding refuting by analogy: since the two truths are the same, they should both illuminate the Buddha-nature, and so forth. Since the two truths are the same, they should both illuminate that icchantikas become Buddhas, and so forth. This concludes the refutation of the five periods within the gradual.