法華玄義釋籤 2.43

2.43

次第二引教證五章者，又為二：初引二文通證五章，次引〈藥王〉別證教相。初文又二：初正引二文，次「所以」下明引二文意。初文二：先明〈序品〉，次明〈神力〉。初文自為四：初證名中二：初證正名，次「何但」下略引同。初文者，彌勒初以伏疑潛難，文殊因以潛釋伏疑。難云：四眾忻仰瞻仁及我，世尊何故放斯光明？文殊釋云我見等也。次引同中言「何但」者，何但如文殊引二萬燈明同爾，大通及五佛其名咸同。

Next, the second [part], citing teachings to verify the five chapters, again has two: first, citing two passages to generally verify the five chapters; next, citing the "Bhaiṣajyarāja" [chapter] to specifically verify the characteristics of the teaching. The first text again has two: first, directly citing the two passages; next, from "The reason why" onward, clarifying the intent of citing the two passages. The first text has two: first, clarifying the "Introductory Chapter"; next, clarifying the "Supernatural Powers" [chapter]. The first text itself has four: first, within verifying the name, there are two: first, verifying the proper name; next, from "How could it only be" onward, briefly citing agreements. The first text means: Maitreya initially posed a covert objection out of concealed doubt, and Mañjuśrī consequently offered a covert explanation to address the concealed doubt. The objection said: "The fourfold assembly gazes upward in admiration at you, benevolent one, and me; for what reason has the World-Honoured One emitted this radiance?" Mañjuśrī explained, saying: "I see..." and so forth. Next, where it says "How could it only be" in citing agreements: how could it only be that, as Mañjuśrī cited, the twenty thousand Candrasūryapradīpas were identical? Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū and the five buddhas also had entirely identical names.