法華文句記 2.117

2.117

「尋諸」下總覽破之。先總破，次「若言」下去取也。破序不成為去，判屬方便為取。初判印先對彼無相，況立有相判入三藏，次「若言無相」下，正判印師，次「若言」下破注家。此二既然，餘例可見。故諸家所釋不出三教，故指權教通名為他。次「若法華論」下今文消論，既云法華是無量義異名，故知無量義亦是法華異名，則序中立名於理無咎。前說《無量義經》以為《法華》序竟。更依論意即是先說《法華》異名，還入法華之妙定。

From “Searching through the various” below, they are collectively reviewed and refuted. First, a general refutation; next, from “If it is said” below, rejection and acceptance are made. Refuting the introduction as unestablished constitutes rejection; classifying it as belonging to skillful means constitutes acceptance. First, classifying Yin: first contrasting with his “signless,” and moreover establishing that “having signs” is classified into the Tripiṭaka [teaching]; next, from “If it is said to be signless” below directly classifies Master Yin; next, from “If it is said” below refutes the commentator. Since these two are such, the rest can be seen by analogy. Thus, the explanations of the various masters do not exceed the three teachings, and so the provisional teachings are designated by the general term “other.” Next, from “If according to the Lotus Treatise” below, the present text explains the treatise: since it says that the Lotus is an alternate name for the Amitārtha, one knows that the Amitārtha is also an alternate name for the Lotus; thus, positing the name in the introduction is, in principle, without fault. The preceding explanation that the Amitārtha Sūtra serves as the introduction to the Lotus is completed. Relying further on the meaning of the treatise, it is simply first expounding an alternate name of the Lotus and then entering the wondrous samādhi of the Lotus.