法華文句記 3.182

3.182

四敘附傍五時非者，義勢多是嘉祥舊立，故今上下三兩處破之，令知得失。如其無失何以歸心？其失乃是歸心之前，破之則是光其後也。於中有三：初略立，次「初二」下略判，三「此諸」下約諦教智三重三轉。先述其立。初文意者，彼以初重二慧為本，故但云「一權一實」，意以權是凡夫、實是二乘，謂二乘實破凡夫權，而迷凡夫未有權名。此亦未可，此附鹿苑非也。次「空有」等者，意以雙離向來空有，而以觀空不證為權，涉有無染為實，故以觀空非空、觀有非有以顯中道，此乃附般若非也。不知般若之中中道非一故也。次云「空有內靜」者，意云：息向空有權實為實，以此外用為權，非但內靜雙非，復能外用雙照，前雖雙非但同內靜。此亦不知二教共有，此附方等非也。次更以此雙非雙照在金剛前仍為無常，在金剛後方是於常。此乃非其內靜外照，此附涅槃非也。此師雖見涅槃五時，不語法華真實，況亦除於乳味？總論雖五，唯附四時。

Fourth, summarizing the error of appending to the five periods: in their doctrinal force, these were mostly established of old by Jiāxiáng; therefore they are refuted here in two or three places from beginning to end, to make people understand the strengths and weaknesses. If they had no weakness, why take refuge in them? The weakness existed before taking refuge; refuting it is what brings luster to what follows. In this there are three parts: first, a brief presentation; next, from "The first two" downward, a brief judgment; third, from "These various" downward, the threefold three turnings regarding truths, teachings, and wisdom. First, stating their presentation: the meaning of the initial passage is that they took the two wisdoms of the first tier as fundamental, hence they simply said "one provisional and one real"; their intention was that the provisional is the ordinary person and the real is the two vehicles, asserting that the reality of the two vehicles refutes the provisionality of the ordinary person, but the deluded ordinary person does not yet have the name of provisional. This also will not do; this is the error of appending to the Deer Park. Next, "emptiness and existence" and so forth: the intention is to doubly transcend the previous emptiness and existence, taking contemplating emptiness without realizing [it] as provisional, and engaging existence without defilement as real; thus by contemplating emptiness as not empty and contemplating existence as not existent, the middle way is revealed. This is the error of appending to Prajñā. They do not know that within Prajñā, the middle way is not single. Next, saying "internal tranquility regarding emptiness and existence" means: bringing to rest the previous provisional and real of emptiness and existence is the real, and taking external function from this is provisional; not only is there internal tranquility doubly negating [both], but there is also external function doubly illuminating [both]; although the former doubly negates, it is identical only to internal tranquility. This also fails to recognize what is common to both teachings; this is the error of appending to Vaipulya. Next, further taking this double negation and double illumination as still being inconstant before the vajra[-like concentration], and only being constant after the vajra[-like concentration]: this denies its internal tranquility and external illumination; this is the error of appending to Nirvāṇa. Although this master saw the five periods of the Nirvāṇa, he did not speak of the real truth of the Lotus Sūtra, and moreover omitted the milk flavor. Although in general five are discussed, he only appended to four periods.