法華文句記 8.104

8.104

若從今意，門雖未開，有可開義亦得名門。如本是門，閉時豈非？但名閉門。開已無三，何妨從昔以三為門。「又三非佛因」者，破意同前。若未開者別尚非因，若其開已散心尚是。次例破餘二，準初應知。「云云」者，若委破初章，次半謂實為權門及下二章，煩碎義薄不能具述。他既破已，依今乃可更立二句，破他既壞立義自成，具如前釋。

If we follow the present intent, although the gate was not yet opened, having the meaning of being openable, it also may be called a gate. Just as what is originally a gate, when closed, how could it not be one? It is merely called a closed gate. Once opened, there are no three; what prevents following the past in taking the three as a gate? Regarding "moreover, the three are not the Buddha-cause": the intent of the refutation is the same as before. If unopened, even the distinct is not a cause; if already opened, even a distracted mind is one. Next, the parallel refutation of the remaining two should be understood according to the first. "And so forth" means that if one were to refute the first chapter in detail, then the half regarding the real serving as the gate for the provisional and the two chapters below, it would be troublesome, trivial, and slight in meaning, so it cannot be fully stated. Since he has already been refuted, relying on the present one may further establish two propositions; having broken the other, the established meaning is self-evident, fully as explained above.