三論玄義 1.16

1.16

次明眾論立名不同門。眾論立名，凡有三種：一、從法為名，如《成實論》等。實謂四諦之理，成謂能成之文。故云為成是法故造斯論，謂從法立名也。二、從人立名，如《舍利弗阿毘曇》等。《智度論》云「犢子道人受持此毘曇，亦名犢子毘曇」也。三、從喻立名，如《甘露味毘曇》等。亦如訶梨跋摩師鳩摩羅陀造《日出論》等也。四論立名並是從法，非人非喻。就中自開四種：《大智度論》從所釋之經立名，大謂摩訶、智謂般若、度謂波羅蜜。論釋經題，故從所釋為名；《中論》從理實立名；《十二門》從言教為目；《百論》從偈句為稱也。若通而為言，四論通顯中道理實，並得就理立名。四論同有言教開通理實，並得以教為稱。同有偈句，通得從偈立名。今欲互相開避，故有四部差別，所以立名不同也。

Next, the section on the differences in assigning names to various treatises will be clarified. In assigning names to various treatises, there are altogether three kinds: 1. Naming according to phenomena (dharma), such as the Tattvasiddhi, etc. "Tattva" (reality) refers to the principle of the four noble truths, and "siddhi" (perfection) refers to the text capable of establishing it. Hence it is said that this treatise was composed to establish this teaching; thus it is named according to phenomena. 2. Naming according to persons, such as the Śāriputrābhidharma, etc. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra states: "Because the Vātsīputrīya renunciants upheld this Abhidharma, it was also called the Vātsīputrīya Abhidharma." 3. Naming according to metaphors, such as the Amṛtarasāstrābhidharma, etc. It is also like the master of Harivarman, Kumāralāta, composing the Sūryodaya-śāstra, etc. The naming of the Four Treatises is entirely according to phenomena, not according to persons or metaphors. Within this, four kinds are distinguished: The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra takes its name from the sūtra it explains: "mahā" means great, "prajñā" means wisdom, and "pāramitā" means crossing over. Since the treatise explains the title of the sūtra, it is named after what it explains. The Madhyamakaśāstra takes its name from the reality of the principle. The Dvādaśamukha-śāstra takes its name from the verbal teaching. The Śataśāstra takes its title from the number of verse lines. Speaking generally, the Four Treatises all reveal the reality of the Middle Way principle, and could all be named with reference to the principle. The Four Treatises all possess verbal teachings that reveal the reality of the principle, and could all be named after the teaching. They all possess verses, and could all be named after the verses. It is only because one wishes to distinguish and demarcate them from each other that there are the distinctions among the four works; thus their namings are not the same.