法華玄義釋籤 3.49

3.49

次料簡中「問決諸權悉檀」至「不爾」者，問意者，若決麁入妙為決諸麁四悉同入妙第一義悉，為自決世界入世界，乃至決第一義入第一義耶？云「不爾」者，若不如此為如後意耶？亦有本云「為當爾不」，恐人誤改耳。答意者，二意俱通故云「自在」。言「假令」者，如初問意縱令盡入妙第一義，妙第一義既不隔三，與第二義亦何別？故云一三自在。今文且作一種解者，順第二意對開五章，名義順故；若唯入第一義，但得對體，餘義則闕。

Next, in the critical examination, from "Question: resolving the various provisional siddhāntas..." to "not so": the meaning of the question is: if one resolves the coarse to enter subtlety, does one resolve all the coarse four siddhāntas together into the subtle ultimate-truth siddhānta, or does one respectively resolve worldly into worldly, up to resolving ultimate truth into ultimate truth? In saying "not so": if it is not like this, is it like the latter meaning? Some editions also read: "is it indeed so or not?"—fearing people might alter it mistakenly. The meaning of the answer is: both meanings are valid, hence it says "unrestricted." In saying "supposing": as in the first question's meaning, even granting that all enter the subtle ultimate truth, since the subtle ultimate truth is not separated from the [other] three, how does it differ from the second meaning? Hence it says: one or three are unrestricted. The present text temporarily presents one explanation because it follows the second meaning in individually opening the five chapters, so that terms and meanings correspond properly; if they only entered the ultimate truth, they would only match the essence, and the remaining meanings would be deficient.