法華玄義釋籤 2.92

2.92

次問者，若以《大論》四悉通《大品經》五章可爾，何得將通《法華經》耶？麁妙既殊通義安在？《中論》通申，用之即是，何不用耶？答中先申四悉意，次還用通申以申今意。言「中觀」者，謂觀中之觀，名為中觀，故用所觀以申於體，能觀因果以申於宗，所以引《纓珞》助申論者，破立之義與用義同，利益眾生具須破立復同用也。「論有」下次引論意同經，別以三字申三章竟。次「中觀」下總以三字共申於名，文闕教相。教相秖是分別前四意，思之可知，故不別釋。更復以論四句申者，論題是總，故總題中含於三觀，具如《止觀》第五卷破古師中意。兩論正申五章也，經但助成。

As for the next question: if one uses the four siddhāntas of the Da zhidu lun to interpret the five chapters of the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, that may well be so; but how can they be applied to the Lotus Sūtra? Since coarse and subtle are distinct, where is the sense of their application? The Madhyamaka-śāstra provides a general explanation; applying it would be correct—why not use it? In the answer, [the text] first explains the meaning of the four siddhāntas, and then turns to employ that general explanation to explain the present meaning. The phrase "middle contemplation" means the contemplation within contemplation, called the middle contemplation; thus what is contemplated is used to explain the substance, and the causes and effects of the contemplating [mind] are used to explain the gist. The reason for citing the Yingluo [jing] to help explain the treatise is that the sense of refutation and establishment is identical to the sense of function; benefiting sentient beings fully requires both refutation and establishment, which is also identical to function. From "Treatises have..." onward, it next cites the intent of the treatise as being identical with the sūtra, separately using three words to explain the three chapters. Next, from "middle contemplation" onward, it takes the three words collectively to explain the title; the text lacks the doctrinal characteristics. The doctrinal characteristics are merely the differentiation of the preceding four meanings; reflecting upon it makes this knowable, so it is not separately explained. Further using the treatise's four phrases to explain it is because the treatise's title is general; hence within the general title the three contemplations are contained, fully as in the sense of refuting the old masters in the fifth fascicle of the Zhiguan. The two treatises directly explain the five chapters; the sūtras merely help to establish them.