法華文句記 5.24

5.24

次正釋者，先約位中已略明行相，此中重明但直述而已；有釋有結。釋中二：初正釋，次「又道慧」下重以《攝大乘》意消之，令可見故。初文者，慧因智果各通總別，因果之上各加種者故得別名，各加一切故受果稱。初言道者，故受因稱，慧之與智一往且然。若依諸經未必全爾，具如《止觀》第三記。次「此亦」下結文意，亦是融通。言結意者，既屬圓智故理量相即，非因果總別而因果總別。前文雖有如理等言，非文正意，今釋四智正應用之，但須融通耳。如彼俗境數量、如於實理契之，各云如者各稱境也。然一一位各具二智不二雙入，且寄四位四名便故，不別而別初後理同。次約門者，門既是教理應先列，今在此者各有其意。若專釋此四，則先教次觀後方智位，此中釋理四皆能詮，於四法中親者先列，具如下文逆順生起，以親先故，故先位智次及教觀，於位智中位為所涉智為能證，則所親能疎故先位次智。於教觀中非教不觀，故教前觀後。於中亦先正釋、次融通。初云「橫」者，初心所稟教法具四，以法相望無復優劣，故名為橫。應知位智多約於豎，約觀乃成非橫非豎，通論並是約非橫豎以論橫豎，觀門亦有淺深故也，教四相望似亦淺深。於中初釋，次「能通」下以理攝教，攝即融也。故門門中皆通智位，從淺至深以歷有等，皆通於觀以至於住，故門成橫。雖對開等但明有等義同開等，非對深淺約位開等。又一一門中皆云一切者，本顯互通互具故也。猶恐不了，故下更以理性融之。次觀心釋，且語大略以消開等，委論觀法具如《止觀》。觀本無障不須融通，所以前之三釋初不述理，故一一釋文後融通，並是附理，理是文義正意故也。觀親依理，是故初論三諦之理。「是為」下結歸也。結於三觀以歸開等。次「所以」下逆順生起者，初明所由於能，次明能顯於所。總而言之，結撮四釋以歸理二。既知四釋並釋開等，應知開等一一四重，況復四文親疎互攝、能所映顯，此乃教行人三寄理以辯，理既如是餘三例然，故知今家似借《論》文而冥符《論》旨。

Next, the direct explanation: previously, in terms of stages, the aspects of practice were already briefly clarified; here, in clarifying them again, it simply describes them directly; there are explanations and conclusions. In the explanation there are two parts: first, the direct explanation; next, from "furthermore, the wisdom of the path" downward, reinterpreting it with the purport of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha to make it evident. In the first text, wisdom as cause and knowledge as fruit each apply to both general and specific: by adding "species" to both cause and fruit, they obtain their specific names, and by adding "all" to each, they receive the designation of fruit. By initially saying "the path," it therefore receives the designation of cause; this is provisionally so for wisdom and knowledge. If relying on various sūtras, it is not necessarily entirely like this, as fully stated in the commentary on the third fascicle of the Great Calming and Contemplation. Next, from "this also" downward, concludes the text's meaning, which is also a harmonization. Speaking of concluding the meaning: since it belongs to perfect wisdom, principle and measure are mutually identical; it is not cause, fruit, general, or specific, yet it is cause, fruit, general, and specific. Although the previous text has words such as "conforming to principle," they are not the primary meaning of the text; now, in explaining the four wisdoms, they should properly be applied, but must only be harmonized. Like the number of conventional objects, like tallying with the real principle: each saying "conforming" means each corresponds to the object. However, each stage is fully endowed with the two wisdoms, non-dually entering both; provisionally relying on the convenience of the four stages and four names, they are distinguished without being distinct, and the beginning and end share the same principle. Next, regarding the gates: since the gates are the teaching, in principle they should be listed first, but here they are placed here, each having its own reason. If explaining these four exclusively, then first the teaching, next contemplation, and only then wisdom and stages; here, in explaining principle, all four are capable of expressing it, and among the four dharmas, the intimate ones are listed first, fully as in the forward and reverse sequences below. Because the intimate comes first, stages and wisdom come first, followed next by teaching and contemplation; between stages and wisdom, the stage is what is traversed and wisdom is that which realizes, so what is intimate and what is distant differ, hence first stages and next wisdom. Between teaching and contemplation, without teaching there is no contemplation, hence teaching comes before contemplation. Here also, first is the direct explanation, next the harmonization. When it first says "horizontal," the dharma of the teaching received by the initial mind is fully endowed with the four; comparing the dharmas with one another, there is no longer superiority or inferiority, hence it is called horizontal. One should know that stages and wisdom mostly pertain to the vertical; in terms of contemplation it becomes neither horizontal nor vertical; generally speaking, all are speaking of horizontal and vertical in terms of neither horizontal nor vertical, because contemplation gates also have shallow and deep, and the four teachings compared with one another also seem to have shallow and deep. Here, first is the explanation; next, from "capable of accessing" downward, integrates the teaching with principle, integration being harmonization. Therefore, within every gate wisdom and stages are accessed, running through [the gate of] existence and the rest from shallow to deep, all accessing contemplation up to abiding, so the gates become horizontal. Although contrasted with opening and the rest, they merely clarify existence and the rest as having the same sense as opening and the rest, not opening and the rest in terms of the depth of the stages. Furthermore, each gate stating "all" is originally to reveal mutual access and mutual endowment. Still fearing lack of understanding, below it further harmonizes them with the nature of principle. Next, the explanation by contemplating the mind: it provisionally speaks in broad outline to interpret opening and the rest; a detailed discussion of contemplation methods is fully given in the Great Calming and Contemplation. Contemplation originally has no obstacles and requires no harmonization; for this reason, the first three explanations do not initially describe principle, and so after each explanatory text harmonization is attached to principle, because principle is the primary intent of the textual meaning. Contemplation intimately relies on principle, and therefore it first discusses the principle of the three truths. From "this is" downward is the conclusion, concluding with the three contemplations to subsume them under opening and the rest. Next, from "the reason why" downward is the forward and reverse sequence: first clarifying that what is based upon depends on what can base; next clarifying that what can reveal discloses what is revealed. In summary, it brings together the four explanations to return to the two aspects of principle. Having understood that the four explanations all interpret opening and the rest, one should know that opening and the rest are each fourfold; moreover, the four texts intimately and distantly subsume each other, and the active and passive illuminate each other. This is teaching, practice, and persons, the three relying on principle to be distinguished; since principle is like this, the remaining three follow this pattern. Therefore we know our school seemingly borrows the text of the treatise while secretly tallying with the treatise's purport.