法華文句記 9.56

9.56

三「但以」下結者，初總結諸句莫非因緣。「上直明」下明結束意。上多明雙非，且云中觀照於中境，豈有中觀不照二邊？今此重明照於二邊，用結諸文以顯中觀不思議體。言「理性畢竟清淨」者，重牒中境是雙照境，故云「如上所說」。於中為三：初約初句以明雙照二邊境也。中體無作二邊從緣，以無作觀照緣解惑。「又因緣」下重釋者，即以初句而為空邊照於緣生，緣生故空，空名涅槃；即以次句而為有邊故云顛倒，倒亦從緣，且從倒邊故名顛倒。用前中觀無偏而照，言「意顯」者，勝以因緣一句義開兩境。然初文不釋顛倒者，顛倒即是說由，故不別釋。今從「故說」下不別釋者，故說即是妙教，教必被機，不必須云顛倒故也。「常樂」之言無別他釋，故總在後示因緣顛倒三諦，以明觀法，即常樂三觀故也。三「又但」下又合前二句，同為三諦之境。凡從因緣生顛倒之法，皆妙境體，由本有境說上諸觀。亦由第二說用觀故，故有第三結說結觀。又於結中三重釋者，由於上來諸境也。初釋由顛倒故說，次釋由二邊故說，第三釋由不思議故說。雖三釋不同，共顯一致，雖顯一致不無親疎。初說從機故云顛倒，從機語通次說漸親，由二邊故中本無說，第三全約不思議三諦體說，雖有親疎觀法無別，同觀三諦一實之境，故常樂一句無所離合，所以前後共成一意。

Third, regarding the conclusion beginning with "merely because": first, it sums up the various phrases as all being nothing other than causes and conditions. The text from "above it directly explained" onward clarifies the intention of the conclusion. Above, it mostly explained the double negation, provisionally stating that the contemplation of the middle illuminates the middle object; how could there be a contemplation of the middle that does not illuminate the two extremes? Now here it explains again that it illuminates the two extremes, using this to conclude the various passages in order to reveal the inconceivable essence of the contemplation of the middle. The phrase "the nature of principle is ultimately pure" reiterates that the middle object is an object that is doubly illuminated, hence it says "as explained above." Within this there are three parts: first, based on the first phrase, it clarifies the object doubly illuminating the two extremes. The essence of the middle is uncreated, whereas the two extremes follow conditions; with the uncreated contemplation, one illuminates conditioned delusion and awakening. The re-explanation from "furthermore, causes and conditions" onward takes the first phrase as the extreme of emptiness illuminating conditioned arising—because of conditioned arising it is empty, and emptiness is called nirvāṇa; and it takes the next phrase as the extreme of existence, hence saying "inversion"—inversion also follows conditions, and is provisionally called inversion from the side of inversion. One illuminates them without bias using the preceding contemplation of the middle. The phrase "the intention reveals" is superior because the single phrase "causes and conditions" opens up two objects in meaning. However, the reason the initial text does not explain "inversion" is that inversion is the reason for the teaching, so it is not separately explained. Now, the reason it is not separately explained from "therefore it is said" onward is that "therefore it is said" is the wondrous teaching, and the teaching necessarily accommodates the capacities [of beings], so one does not necessarily have to say "because of inversion." The words "always joyfully" have no other separate explanation, so they are gathered at the end to indicate the three truths of causes and conditions and inversion in order to clarify the method of contemplation, which is precisely the three contemplations of "always joyfully." Third, from "furthermore, merely" onward, it again combines the preceding two phrases together as the object of the three truths. All inverted phenomena born from causes and conditions are the essence of the wondrous object; based on the fundamentally existing object, the above contemplations are spoken. Also, because the second part explains the application of contemplation, there is the third part concluding the explanation and concluding the contemplation. Furthermore, the threefold re-explanation within the conclusion is due to the various objects mentioned above. The first explanation states that it is taught because of inversion; the second explanation states that it is taught because of the two extremes; the third explanation states that it is taught entirely because of the inconceivable. Although the three explanations differ, together they reveal a single accord; although they reveal a single accord, they are not without degrees of proximity and distance. The first explanation proceeds from the capacities of beings, hence it says "inversion"; speaking from the capacities of beings is general, so the next explanation becomes gradually more intimate: because of the two extremes, the middle originally has nothing to be said; the third explanation is spoken entirely in terms of the inconceivable essence of the three truths. Although there are degrees of proximity and distance, the method of contemplation is no different, equally contemplating the object of the single real of the three truths. Therefore, the single phrase "always joyfully" has no separation or combination, which is why before and after they together accomplish a single meaning.