維摩經略疏垂裕記 3.37

3.37

二、「約教」下，別釋，二：初、正約教。「單複具足」者，複，重也。有無兩亦雙非單四也。有有、有無，乃至非有非無有、非有非無無，複四也。有有、有無有、亦有亦無有、非有非無無，乃至雙非為頭亦爾，具足四也。「尚無」下，向無二教非有之空，何況別圓非無之中。「若得方便等」者，荊溪云：此約奪邊但云非有。雖有四門，奪但成無，故云非有。三藏教去，雖復與之，有此滅故亦得是有。但成有無，尚無第三，何但雙非？故前二教必無雙非。次「別教云藏性」者，須簡別圓。真如為惑所覆，名藏別也。即惑是理，理具諸法，名藏圓也。「一門即四門」等者，既達三諦互融，豈有四門隔異？空門真諦、有門俗諦，兩亦雙非，秖是中諦遮照。「於此」下，圓著須破，何況偏小及以凡外。金鐵二鎖貴賤雖殊，繫縛一也。

Second, from "In terms of teachings" below, the specific explanation, [which has] two [parts]: First, correctly [explaining] in terms of teachings. Regarding "simple, compound, and complete": "compound" means reiterated. Existence, non-existence, both, and neither are the simple four. Existence of existence, non-existence of existence, up to the neither-existence-nor-non-existence of existence, and the neither-existence-nor-non-existence of non-existence, are the compound four. Existence of existence, non-existence of existence having existence, both-existence-and-non-existence having existence, neither-existence-nor-non-existence having non-existence, up to double negation at the head being likewise, are the complete four. Regarding "Even lacking" below: previously it lacked the emptiness of non-existence of the two teachings, how much more so the middle [way] of non-non-existence in the separate and perfect [teachings]? Regarding "If one attains expedients and so forth": Jingxi says: this is said in terms of the side of negation, merely saying "non-existent." Although there are four gates, negation merely results in non-existence, hence it says "non-existent." Passing to the Tripiṭaka teaching, although it again grants it, because there is this cessation it may also be existence. It merely results in existence and non-existence, and still lacks the third, so how could it have double negation alone? Therefore the former two teachings certainly lack double negation. Next, regarding "The separate teaching speaks of the storehouse nature": one must distinguish between the separate and the perfect. True suchness covered by afflictions is called the storehouse of the separate [teaching]. Afflictions are identical to principle, and principle inherently contains all phenomena—this is called the storehouse of the perfect [teaching]. Regarding "One gate is immediately four gates" and so forth: once one realizes that the three truths are mutually interfused, how could the four gates be mutually separated? The emptiness gate is the true truth, the existence gate is the conventional truth; both-existence-and-non-existence and double negation are simply the concealment and illumination of the middle truth. Regarding "Herein" below: attachment to the perfect must be dismantled, how much more so the partial, the lesser, as well as ordinary and heterodox [views]? Although gold and iron chains differ in value, their binding is the same.