佛祖統紀 6.21

6.21

義神智曰。吾佛出世雖說諸經。而本懷得暢唯在法華。自阿難結習之後。天親作論。雖曰通經。然但約文申義。舉其大略而已。至於斯經大事教化始終。則晦而未明。暨羅什翻譯東傳此土。造疏消釋者。異論非一。唯我智者。靈山親承大蘇證悟發揮妙旨幽贊上乘。以五義釋經題。四釋消文句。而又能以十章宣演明淨法門。於是解行俱陳義觀兼舉。可謂行人之心鏡巨夜之明燈。雖天竺大論尚非其類。豈震旦人師所能跂及（云云）。又設問曰。輔行引九師相承。謂北齊已前非今所承。且北齊既用覺心重觀三昧。今此何故斥於覺覓但是一轍耳。將非智者斥於北齊耶。答妙玄開演法華十妙。尚云莫以中論相比。又云。天竺大論尚非其類。蓋智者用如來之意明法華之妙。故龍樹北齊亦所不及。若無生宗旨三觀行門。其實祖龍樹。宗北齊。稟南岳。師資相承宛如宿契（云云）。又曰。天台所談三諦三觀。出乎仁王及瓔珞經。三智三德本乎涅槃大品。所用義旨以法華為宗骨。以智論為指南（云云）。

Shenzhi of the Yixue said: 'Although our Buddha appeared in the world and preached various sūtras, his original intention was fully expressed only in the Lotus Sūtra. After Ānanda compiled the teachings, Vasubandhu composed a commentary; although it is said to clarify the sūtra, it merely interpreted the meaning according to the letter, presenting only a general outline. As for the great matter of this sūtra and the beginning and end of its teaching and transformation, it remained obscure and unclear. When Kumārajīva translated it and it was transmitted east to this land, those who composed commentaries and explanations offered diverse and discordant theories. Only our Zhiyi personally received it at Vulture Peak, achieved awakening at Mount Dasu, elucidated the wondrous import, and profoundly extolled the Supreme Vehicle. He interpreted the sūtra title with the five meanings, explained the text with the four interpretations, and was further able to proclaim the pure Dharma gate with the ten chapters. Thereupon, understanding and practice were both presented, and doctrinal meaning and contemplation were both advanced. He may indeed be called the mind-mirror of practitioners and a bright lamp in the great night! Even the great treatises of India are not of its class; how could the teachers of Cīnasthāna ever hope to equal it?' (and so forth). He also posed the question: 'The Fuxing cites the succession of the nine masters, saying that those prior to the Northern Qi are not what is now succeeded to. Moreover, since the Northern Qi used the awakening mind to repeatedly contemplate samādhi, why does the present text reject searching with the awakening mind, stating that it is merely one and the same track? Is it not that Zhiyi rejected the Northern Qi?' He replied: 'The Miaoxuan expounds the ten subtleties of the Lotus Sūtra, yet still says: "Do not compare it with the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā." It also says: "Even the great treatises of India are not of its class." This is because Zhiyi used the intention of the Tathāgata to illuminate the subtlety of the Lotus Sūtra; hence even Nāgārjuna and the Northern Qi could not match it. If we speak of the fundamental principle of the unarisen and the practice-gate of the three contemplations, he truly took Nāgārjuna as ancestor, the Northern Qi as primary model, and received [the teaching] from Nanyue; the transmission between master and disciple was just like a past-life bond.' (and so forth). He also said: 'The three truths and three contemplations spoken of by Tiantai come from the Humane King and Yingluo Sūtras. The three knowledges and three virtues are rooted in the Nirvāṇa and Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras. The doctrinal meaning employed takes the Lotus Sūtra as its backbone and the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa as its guide.' (and so forth).