法華義疏 1.20

1.20

尋天竺之與震旦，著筆之與口傳，敷經講論者不出二種：一者科章門，二者直解釋。如天親解涅槃有七分，龍樹釋般若無章門，蓋是天竺論師開、不開之二類也。河西製《涅槃疏》開為五門，道融講新《法華》類為九轍，至如集解淨名之說、撰注法華之文，但拆其玄微又不豫科起盡，蓋是震旦諸師開、不開兩義也。今所釋者其義云何？

Examining India and China, written works and oral transmissions, those who explicate scriptures and lecture on treatises do not exceed two kinds: the first is dividing into sectional headings, and the second is directly explaining. For example, Vasubandhu in explaining the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] had seven divisions, while Nāgārjuna in commenting on Prajñā had no sectional headings; these are simply the two classes of dividing and not dividing among Indian treatise masters. Hexi, in composing the Nirvāṇa Commentary, divided it into five sections; Daorong, in lecturing on the new Lotus, categorized it into nine tracks; while in cases such as the collected commentaries on the Vimalakīrti or the authored annotations on the Lotus, they merely dissected their profound subtleties without pre-dividing their beginnings and ends. These are simply the two approaches of dividing and not dividing among Chinese masters. What is the meaning in the present explanation?