[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [法華玄義釋籤](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717) › 6.7 # 法華玄義釋籤 6.7 法華玄義釋籤 6.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6.7) 初釋三藏實有二諦者，但標總名，以解釋直銷，不復列別名。於中為二：初正釋二諦，次示三意。初文又四：初釋相，次引證，三述意，四結名。初文中言「森羅」者，須指三界依正相也。次引證中言「大品云色空空色」等者，此引《大品《以證三藏，既不云即，故且證藏，俗秖是色析滅色，故名為空色，謂色實有，名為不滅；雖不可滅，以無常故，名為色空。次述意中，以能治所治俱實有故是故互無。次「約此」下總釋隨情等三，歷下六重，意應可見。故諸文下但略點而已，故云「推之可知」。雖諸教不同，但約教異說即是隨情，約入理說即是隨智，二義相對即隨情智，皆以當教定之使無雜亂，其意可顯。 > First, in explaining the Tripiṭaka Teaching's two truths of real existence, it only sets forth the general designation to directly analyze and unpack \[the text\], and does not list separate names again. Therein are two parts: first, directly explaining the two truths; next, showing the three intents. The first text again has four parts: first, explaining the characteristics; next, citing evidence; third, stating the intent; fourth, concluding with the name. In the first text, the statement "in manifold array" must refer to the characteristics of the dependent \[environment\] and proper \[bodies\] of the three realms. In the next \[part of\] citing evidence, the statement "the Large Sūtra says form is empty, emptiness is form," etc., cites the Large Sūtra to prove the Tripiṭaka \[Teaching\]. Since it does not say "is identical," it tentatively proves the Tripiṭaka: the conventional is merely form; analyzing and annihilating form is called "empty form"; stating that form really exists is called "unannihilated"; although it cannot be annihilated, because it is impermanent, it is called "form-empty." In the third part of stating the intent, because both the antidote and that which is antidoted really exist, they are therefore mutually exclusive. Next, from "In terms of this..." downward, it generally explains the three \[intents\] of following feelings, etc.; across the six levels below, the intent should be discernible. Therefore, under all the passages, it merely briefly touches on them, hence saying "one can know it by inferring." Although the various teachings differ, merely explaining differently according to the teachings is "following feelings"; explaining in terms of entering the principle is "following wisdom"; the two meanings set in contrast are "following feelings and wisdom." All are determined according to their respective teachings so that there is no confusion; their intent can be made manifest. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6.6) - [Next: 6.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6.8) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717~en-mt.6.7) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1717.6.7) · Pramāṇa