大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 3.25

3.25

疏「法華亦云」下，引《法華》證。故下吉藏引此立三種法輪：第一名根本法輪、第二名枝末法輪、第三名攝末歸本法輪。文中便引便釋，三節具也。疏「斯則法華亦指此經以為本矣」者，結成本義。若自立為本，恐義未明。《法華》指此為本，本義方顯。始見我身入於佛慧，即《華嚴》亦令得聞《法華》入於佛慧，豈非指初為本？又《法華》第一云「於一佛乘，分別說三。」亦是從本流末，即指《華嚴》為一乘。分別說昔之三，三即鹿野四諦等。若也不指《華嚴》為本，鹿野之前以何為一乘耶？

Regarding [the passage in] the Commentary beginning with "The Lotus Sūtra also says": this cites the Lotus Sūtra as proof. Hence Jizang below cites this to establish three kinds of Dharma wheels: the first is called the root Dharma wheel, the second is called the branch Dharma wheel, and the third is called the Dharma wheel that gathers the branches back to the root. In the text, he immediately cites and explains, fulfilling all three segments. The Commentary's statement "Thus the Lotus Sūtra also points to this sūtra as the root" concludes and establishes the meaning of the root. If it were established on its own as the root, the meaning might not be evident; but with the Lotus Sūtra pointing to this as the root, the meaning of 'root' becomes manifest. 'First seeing my body entering into the Buddha's wisdom' means that the Avataṃsaka also caused them to hear the Lotus Sūtra and enter into the Buddha's wisdom; is this not pointing to the initial [teaching] as the root? Furthermore, the first chapter of the Lotus Sūtra says: 'Within the One Buddha Vehicle, he discriminatively expounds three.' This is also flowing from the root into the branches; that is, it points to the Avataṃsaka as the One Vehicle, and discriminatively expounds the former three—the three being the Four Noble Truths at the Deer Park and so forth. If one did not point to the Avataṃsaka as the root, what would be taken as the One Vehicle prior to the Deer Park?