妙法蓮華經玄義 正顯經體
梁很重要，柱也很重要。沒有梁柱，房屋不能成立。可是，真正讓人走進去、住下來的，是梁柱圍成而能容受的空間。
智者用這棟房子說經體。梁柱譬喻因果，修行與成就共同構成一部經的莊嚴。實相卻像屋內之空：不是梁，也不是柱；從未離開梁柱所成的屋，又使整棟房屋有了容受之用。
所以，最宏大的名稱不一定就是體。一乘可以含許多義，真諦可以通於多種說法，因果可以展開萬善萬德；它們都重要，卻仍要問：這一切依什麼成立，又共同歸向哪裏？
牛車的圖像把答案說得更細。般若如白牛，五度如莊挍，方便如儐從，慈悲如軒。牛能牽引，裝飾使車完具，隨從與車軒各有功用；但能運、能助與所依，不能混成同一位置。
正顯經體，就是從眾多功用中指出那個共同所依：一實相印。它不是在實相之外再蓋一枚印章；正因諸法實相是全經指歸，它才有辨明佛說、不容邪說混雜的印信之力。
三軌因此不縱不橫，不即不離。辨體偏舉真性，不是丟下觀照與資成；如同指出屋內空間，不是拆掉梁柱。所偏舉的，是此刻問題所要找的那一面。
最後，所有譬喻仍須回到經中。佛放光明，是為顯實相；開方便門，是為示真實相；使眾生開佛知見，也是要見這一實之理。
辨體的心要，不是把一部經縮成一個抽象答案，而是在萬千名義、修行與果德之中，認出它們從未離開的共同指歸。梁柱各安其位，屋內便有空；因果各安其位，一實相印便顯。
What is it that truly lets someone enter and dwell in a house? Beams are important, and columns are important. Without beams and columns, a house cannot stand. Yet what truly lets someone walk in and dwell there is the space enclosed by those beams and columns, capable of receiving them.
Zhiyi uses this house to explain the sutra’s substance. Beams and columns represent cause and fruit; practice and attainment together constitute a sutra’s adornment. The true mark, however, is like the empty space within the house: it is neither a beam nor a column, has never departed from the house formed by beams and columns, and enables the whole house to receive.
Thus, the grandest name is not necessarily the substance. The One Vehicle can encompass many meanings, true truth can apply to many teachings, and cause and fruit can unfold into myriad wholesome deeds and qualities. All are important, yet one must still ask: upon what are they established, and to what do they jointly return?
The image of the ox cart makes the answer more precise. Prajñā is like the white ox, the five perfections like the cart’s adornments, skillful means like its attendants, and compassion like its carriage. The ox can draw, adornments complete the cart, and attendants and carriage each have their function; but what transports, what assists, and what serves as the basis cannot be conflated into one position.
Directly revealing the sutra’s substance means pointing out, amid these many functions, their common basis: the one seal of the true mark. It is not another seal stamped outside the true mark. Precisely because the true mark of all dharmas is the whole sutra’s destination, it has the confirming power to distinguish the Buddha’s teaching and prevent false teaching from being mixed into it.
The three tracks are therefore neither vertical nor horizontal, neither identical nor separate. Discerning the substance singles out true nature without abandoning contemplative illumination or supporting accomplishment, just as pointing to the interior space does not dismantle the beams and columns. What is singled out is the aspect sought by the present question.
Finally, every simile must return to the sutra. The Buddha emits light in order to reveal the true mark; he opens the gateway of skillful means in order to show the true mark; and he enables sentient beings to open the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing so that they may see this principle of the one reality.
The heart-essence of discerning the substance is not to reduce a sutra to an abstract answer. It is to recognize, amid myriad names and meanings, practices, and fruits, the common destination from which they have never departed. When beams and columns each occupy their place, there is space within the house; when cause and fruit each occupy their place, the one seal of the true mark becomes manifest.
隋天台智者大師說《妙法蓮華經玄義》〔私記緣起＝沙門灌頂述〕· 大正藏 T33n1716〔起 T33 0779a06〕。段/行首〔T33 …〕＝大正藏頁·欄·行錨（換頁一枚）。
〔T33 0779a06〕△第二、顯體者，前、釋名總說，文義浩漫；今、頓點要理，正顯經體，直辨真性。真性非無二軌，欲令易解，是故直說。後顯宗用，非無初軌，偏舉當名耳。 體者，一部之指歸，眾義之都會也。非但會之至難，亦乃說之不易。文云：「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅。」《大經》云：「不生不生不可說。」又云：「有因緣故，亦可得說。」 今略開七條：一、正顯經體。二、廣簡偽。三、一法異名。四、入體之門。五、遍為眾經體。六、遍為諸行體。七、遍一切法體。 正顯體，更明四意：一、出舊解。二、論體意。三、正明體。四、引文證。北地師用一乘為體，此語奢漫，未為簡要。一乘語通，濫於權實，若權一乘，都非經意；若實一乘，義該三軌，顯體不明，故不用。又有解言：真諦為體。此亦通濫，小、大皆明真諦，小乘真諦，故不俟言；大乘真諦，亦復多種，今以何等真諦為體？故不用。又有解言：一乘因果為體。今亦不用。何者？一乘語通，已如前說。又因果二法，猶未免事，云何是體？事無理印，則同魔經。云何可用？有人解乘體通因果，果以萬德為體，因以萬善為體，引《十二門論》云：「諸佛大人所乘，文殊觀音等所乘。」又引此經：「佛自住大乘」，即果也；「諸子乘是寶乘」，是因乘也。又引《普賢觀》：「大乘因果皆是實相。」私問因果之乘為變？為不變？若變，誰是能通？誰是所通？若不變，因果則並，皆無此理。若別有法通因果，當知因果非果者，經體也。《十二門論》云：「大人佛不行故名乘。」豈應以不行證因果乘也？《法華》「佛自住大乘」者，此乃乘理以御人，非住果德也。《普賢觀》明因果皆指實相，云可將實相證於因果耶？今皆不用。有人明因乘，以般若為本，五度為末；果乘以薩婆若為本，餘為末。又因乘狹，果乘廣。又般若相應心是一體乘，不相應心是異體乘。又無所得相應行是近乘，低頭舉手有所得是遠乘。又六度有世、出世雜是遠乘，三十七品但出世名近乘。又四句、度與品悉無得，又度與品俱有得。又度雜品不雜，又品雜度不雜〔云云〕。 私謂般若為乘本者，於今經是白牛，非經體也。薩婆若為乘本者，於今經是道場所成果，亦非乘體。因乘狹者是縱義，果乘廣者是橫義，悉非今經乘體。般若相應心無所得近遠等，於今經悉是莊校儐從，都非乘體。那忽於皮毛枝葉而興諍論耶！喧怒如此，誰能別之？有人引《釋論》，以六度為乘體，方便運出生死，慈悲運取眾生；於今經般若是牛，五度是莊挍，方便是儐從，慈悲是軒，亦非乘體。 《中邊分別論》云：乘有五：一、乘本，謂真如佛性。二、乘行，謂福慧。三、乘攝，謂慈悲。四、乘障，謂煩惱，是煩惱障；行、解等是智障。五、乘果，謂佛果也。《唯識論》云：乘是出載義，由真如佛性出福慧等行，由此行出佛果，由佛果載出眾生。《攝大乘論》：乘有三：一、乘因，謂真如佛性。二、乘緣，謂萬行。三、乘果，謂佛果也。《法華論》明乘體，謂「如來平等法身」，又云：如來大般涅槃。此兩文似如隱顯耳；發心低頭舉手等名乘緣。《十二門論》明乘本，謂諸法實相；乘主，謂般若；乘助，謂一切行資成，乘至至薩婆若。此五論明乘體同，而莊挍小異；於今經明乘體，正是實相，不取莊挍也。若取莊挍者，則非佛所乘乘也。 二、論體意者，何意須用此體？《釋論》云：諸小乘經，若有無常、無我、涅槃三印印之，即是佛說，修之得道。無三法印，即是魔說。大乘經，但有一法印，謂諸法實相，名了義經，能得大道。若無實相印，是魔所說。故身子云：「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」何故小三大一？小乘明生死與涅槃異，生死以無常為初印，無我為後印，二印印說生死，涅槃但用一寂滅印，是故須三。大乘，生死即涅槃，涅槃即生死，不二不異。《淨名》曰：「一切眾生常寂滅相」，即大涅槃。又云：「本自不生，今則無滅。」本不生者，則非無常無我相，今則無滅者，則非小寂滅相，唯是一實相。實相故言常寂滅相即大涅槃，但用一印也。此大、小印，印半滿經，外道不能雜，天魔不能破。如世文符，得印可信。當知諸經畢定須得實相之印，乃得名為了義大乘也。 三正顯體者，即一實相印也。三軌之中，取真性軌。十法界中，取佛法界。佛界十如是中，取如是體。四種十二因緣中，取不思議不生不滅。十二支中，取苦道即是法身。四種四諦中，取無作四諦。於無作中，唯取滅諦。七種二諦中，取五種二諦，五二諦中，唯取真諦。五三諦中，取五中道第一義諦。諸一諦中，取中道一實諦。諸無諦中，取中道無諦也。若得此意，就智妙中簡，乃至十妙一一簡出正體，例可知也。 〔T33 0780a07〕若譬喻明義，如梁柱綱紀一屋，非梁非柱，即屋內之空。柱梁譬以因果；非梁非柱譬以實相，實相為體，非梁柱也。屋若無空，無所容受，因果無實相，無所成立。《釋論》云：若以無此空，一切無所作。又譬如日月綱天、公臣輔主，日月可二，太虛空天不可二也；臣將可多，主不可多也。為此義故，須簡出正體。如三軌成乘，不縱不橫，不即不離，顯示義便，須簡觀照等，唯指真性當名，正意分明，三軌既然，餘法例爾〔云云〕。 四、引證者，〈序品〉云：「今佛放光明，助顯實相義。」又云：「諸法實相義，已為汝等說。」〈方便品〉云：「唯佛與佛，乃能究盡諸法實相。」偈中云：「諸佛法久後，要當說真實。」又云：「我以相嚴身……為說實相印。」身子領解云：「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」又云：「安住實智中，我定當作佛。」〈法師品〉云：「開方便門，示真實相。」〈安樂行〉云：「觀諸法如實相。」〈壽量〉云：「如來如實知見。」《普賢觀》云：「昔於靈山，廣說一實之道。」又云：「觀於一實境界。」故知諸佛為大事因緣出現於世，秖令眾生開佛知見，見此一實非因非果之理耳。經文在茲，可為明證也。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
從釋名轉入顯體
第二章是顯明經體。前面釋名時作總體說明，文字與義理都十分廣博；現在要立刻點出其中最關要的道理，正面顯明這部經的體，直接辨明真性。雖然直接說真性，並不是說真性之外沒有觀照、資成另外兩軌；只是為了使人容易明白，所以依眼前辨體的題目直說真性。後面顯明宗與用時，也不是沒有真性這一軌，只是各依宗、用當前名稱，偏舉最相應的一軌罷了。
所謂體，是一整部經的指歸，也是眾多義理共同會歸之處。人要契會它固然極難，要用言語把它說出來也不容易。《法華經》的意思是：這一法不能用形相顯示，言辭之相本來寂滅。《大般涅槃經》的意思是：不生不生不可說；又說，因為有相應因緣，所以仍然可以宣說。
以下把辨體略開為七條：第一，正面顯明經體；第二，廣泛簡別虛偽之體；第三，說明同一法的不同名稱；第四，說明進入經體的門；第五，說明它普遍作眾經之體；第六，說明它普遍作諸行之體；第七，說明它普遍作一切法之體。
七條中的第一條正顯經體，又分四個用意：第一，列出舊有解釋；第二，論說為何必須立體；第三，正面說明經體；第四，引用經文作證。
第一意：先簡別舊解
北方有師家以一乘作經體。這個說法範圍過寬，還不夠簡明確切。因為一乘一語通於權與實，若指方便權教的一乘，完全不是今經的本意；若指真實一乘，它的義理又通含真性、觀照、資成三軌，仍然沒有把體單獨顯出，所以現在不用這個說法。
又有人說以真諦為體。這同樣過於通泛。小乘與大乘都說真諦；小乘真諦不必再談，大乘真諦也有多種。若只說真諦，究竟是以哪一種大乘真諦作經體，仍未確定，所以也不用。
又有人說以一乘因果為體，現在也不用。理由是，一乘一語通泛，已如前面所說；因與果這兩法仍然沒有離開事相，怎能直接成為經體？事相若沒有真理之印，便與魔說之經相同，如何可以取用？
還有人解釋說，乘體通於因與果：果以萬德為體，因以萬善為體。他引用《十二門論》的意思說，這是諸佛大人所乘，也是文殊、觀音等所乘；又引用本經所說佛自己安住大乘，把它解作果，又把諸子乘寶乘解作因乘；再引用《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》的意思說，大乘因果全是實相。
章安在這裏私下追問：這個因果之乘究竟會變，還是不變？若會變，誰是能通達者，誰是所通達處？若不變，因與果便同時並存，也沒有這種道理。若另有一法貫通因果，就應知道因果本身並不是所說的經體。
所引《十二門論》又說，大人佛不行，所以名為乘；怎能反用不行來證明因果之乘？《法華經》說佛自己安住大乘，是說乘著真理而駕御、化導眾生，不是說安住果德。《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》明因果都指向實相，怎能反過來拿實相證明因果本身就是體？因此，這一說也不採用。
又有人把因乘分成本末，以般若為根本、其餘五度為枝末；把果乘也分成本末，以薩婆若，也就是一切智，為根本，其餘功德為枝末。又說因乘狹、果乘廣；般若相應之心是一體乘，不相應之心是異體乘；與無所得相應的行是近乘，低頭舉手而仍有所得的行是遠乘；六度混有世間與出世間法，所以是遠乘，三十七品只屬出世間，所以名為近乘。
這一舊說又列四句：六度與道品全都以無所得心修；六度與道品全都有所得；六度雜有世間、出世間法而道品不雜；道品有雜而六度不雜。原文以此四句略示更多分別。
章安接著私下評說：若以般若為乘的根本，在今經牛車譬中，般若只是大白牛，並不是經體。若以薩婆若為乘本，它是道場所成的果，也不是乘體。因乘狹是縱向之義，果乘廣是橫向之義，都不是今經所說的乘體。般若相應心、無所得、近乘、遠乘等，在今經都屬牛車的裝飾與隨從，不是乘體。為何忽然只在皮毛枝葉上興起爭論？爭辯喧怒到這種地步，誰還能分辨真正所指？
又有人引用《大智度論》，以六度為乘體，說方便能運載行人出離生死，慈悲能運取眾生。章安依今經牛車譬判說，般若是牛，五度是車上裝飾，方便是隨從，慈悲是車軒，仍都不是乘體。
章安引五論會明乘體
章安再引五部論，從各論的乘義中找出所指的乘體。
第一，《中邊分別論》說乘有五義。一是乘本，指真如佛性；二是乘行，指福與慧；三是乘攝，指慈悲；四是乘障，指各種障礙，其中煩惱是煩惱障，行與解等則是智障；五是乘果，指佛果。
第二，《唯識論》說，乘有出與載的意思。由真如佛性生出福慧等行，由福慧等行生出佛果，再由佛果載運眾生出離。這是一條從真如、修行、佛果直到化度眾生的展轉關係。
第三，《攝大乘論》說乘有三義。一是乘因，指真如佛性；二是乘緣，指萬行；三是乘果，指佛果。
第四，《法華論》說乘體是如來平等法身，又說是如來大般涅槃。章安認為，這兩段文字看來像是在說同一體的隱與顯；發心、低頭、舉手等，則名為乘緣。
第五，《十二門論》說乘本是諸法實相，乘主是般若，乘助是一切能資助成就的行，由此乘而到達薩婆若。
這五部論所明的乘體相同，都指向真如、佛性或諸法實相；至於車乘上的裝飾與配置，彼此略有差別。今經所明的乘體正是實相，不取那些裝飾。若把裝飾當成乘體，便不是佛所乘的正乘。
第二意：為何必須立經體
第二，論說立體的用意。為什麼一定要用這個體？《大智度論》的意思是，小乘經若有無常、無我、涅槃三種法印印可，就是佛說，依之修行能夠得道；若沒有三法印，就是魔說。大乘經只用一種法印，就是諸法實相；有實相印，才名為了義經，能使人得到大道；若沒有實相印，就是魔所說。所以舍利弗說，世尊宣說真實之道，魔王波旬不可能有這件事。
有人問：為何小乘須用三印，大乘只用一印？回答說，小乘把生死與涅槃分開。生死以無常為第一印、無我為第二印，兩印共同印可生死法；涅槃則只用寂滅一印，所以總共須三印。
大乘則明生死就是涅槃，涅槃就是生死，兩者不二不異。《維摩詰所說經》的意思是，一切眾生常是寂滅之相，這就是大涅槃；又說，本來不生，現在也就沒有滅。本來不生，便不是以無常、無我相來說；現在無滅，也不是小乘所取的寂滅相，所指只有一實相。因為是實相，所以說眾生常寂滅相就是大涅槃，只須用一印。
這大小法印分別印可半字、滿字之經，使外道不能混雜，天魔不能破壞。這像世間往來公文得到印信便可取信。由此可知，諸經必定須得實相之印，才能名為了義大乘。
第三意：正面顯明一實相印
第三，正面顯明經體，所指就是一實相印。三軌之中，取真性軌；十法界中，取佛法界；佛法界十如是中，取如是體。
四種十二因緣中，取不思議、不生不滅的十二因緣；十二支中，取苦道當下就是法身。四種四諦中，取無作四諦；在無作四諦中，只取滅諦。
七種二諦中，取五種二諦；在這五種二諦中，只取真諦。五種三諦中，取五種中道第一義諦。各種一諦中，取中道一實諦；各種無諦中，取中道無諦。
若能掌握這種簡擇之意，就可在智妙中簡出正體，乃至十妙每一妙都依同一原則簡出正體，其他情形可以類推。
三組譬喻如何顯體
若用譬喻說明，就像梁與柱共同維持一棟房屋；不是梁、也不是柱的，是屋內可容受的空間。柱梁譬喻因與果，非梁非柱的屋內空間譬喻實相；實相是體，不是梁柱。
房屋若沒有其中的空間，就沒有地方容受人物；因與果若沒有實相，也沒有依處可以成立。《大智度論》的意思是，若沒有這個空，一切作為都無從成立。
又像日月維繫天空，公卿臣將輔佐君主。日與月可以有兩個，廣大的虛空與天空卻不可分成兩個；臣將可以很多，君主卻不可很多。為了顯明這一層關係，所以須從眾法中簡出正體。
三軌共同成乘，本來不是縱向排列，也不是橫向並列；不是彼此完全相同，也不是彼此分離。只是為了使所顯之義清楚，辨體時須從觀照等軌中簡別出來，只指真性最切合體名，使正意分明。三軌如此，其餘法門也可依例理解。
第四意：引經文證明
第四，引用經文作證。
〈序品〉的意思是：現在佛放出光明，幫助顯出實相之義；又說，諸法實相之義已經為大眾宣說。
〈方便品〉的意思是：只有佛與佛，才能究竟窮盡諸法實相。偈中又說，諸佛之法經過久遠之後，必定要宣說真實；又說，我以相莊嚴自身……宣說實相之印。
舍利弗領解時說，世尊所說的是真實之道，魔王波旬不可能做到；又說，自己安住在真實智慧之中，決定將會成佛。
〈法師品〉的意思是：開啟方便之門，顯示真實之相。〈安樂行品〉教人觀察諸法如實之相。〈如來壽量品〉說如來如實知見。
《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》的意思是：如來昔日在靈山廣說一實之道；又教人觀察一實境界。
因此可以知道，諸佛為一大事因緣而出現於世，只是要使眾生開啟佛的知見，見到這一實、非因非果的真理。經文都在這些地方，足以作為正顯經體的明證。
From Explaining the Name to Revealing the Substance
The second chapter reveals the sutra’s substance. The preceding explanation of the name gave a general account whose words and meanings were exceedingly extensive. Now the most essential principle is to be pointed out at once: the substance of this sutra is directly revealed by discerning true nature. Speaking directly of true nature does not mean that the other two tracks, contemplative illumination and supporting accomplishment, are absent from it. True nature is stated directly only to make the matter easy to understand under the present heading of discerning the substance. When clarifying the purport and revealing the function later, true nature will not be absent there either; in each case, the track most closely corresponding to the name then under discussion is singled out.
Substance is the destination of an entire sutra and the place where its many meanings jointly converge. It is extremely difficult to meet, and it is also difficult to express in words. The meaning of the Lotus Sutra is that this Dharma cannot be shown through forms and that the characteristics of words are originally quiescent and extinct. The meaning of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra is that what is unborn and unborn cannot be spoken; it also says that because the appropriate causes and conditions exist, it can nevertheless be taught.
Discerning the substance is briefly opened into seven topics: first, directly revealing the sutra’s substance; second, broadly distinguishing a false substance; third, explaining the different names of one Dharma; fourth, explaining the gateways for entering the sutra’s substance; fifth, explaining how it universally serves as the substance of the sutras; sixth, explaining how it universally serves as the substance of all practices; and seventh, explaining how it universally serves as the substance of all dharmas.
The first of these seven topics, directly revealing the sutra’s substance, has four intents: first, presenting old interpretations; second, discussing why a substance must be established; third, directly clarifying the substance; and fourth, citing scripture as evidence.
First Intent: Distinguishing Earlier Interpretations
Masters of the North took the One Vehicle as the sutra’s substance. This statement is too broad and not yet concise or precise. The term One Vehicle applies to both the provisional and the real. If it means a One Vehicle of provisional teaching, it is entirely contrary to the intent of the present sutra. If it means the real One Vehicle, its meaning includes all three tracks of true nature, contemplative illumination, and supporting accomplishment, so it still fails to reveal the substance separately. This interpretation is therefore not adopted.
Others say that true truth is the substance. This is likewise too general. Both the Lesser and Great Vehicles clarify true truth. Lesser Vehicle true truth need not be discussed here, while the Great Vehicle also has multiple kinds of true truth. If only true truth is named, which kind of Great Vehicle true truth is the sutra’s substance remains undetermined. This interpretation is therefore likewise not adopted.
Others say that the cause and fruit of the One Vehicle are the substance. This too is not adopted. The reason is that the expression One Vehicle is general, as already explained, and the two Dharmas of cause and fruit still have not departed from phenomenal affairs. How could they directly be the sutra’s substance? If affairs lack the seal of true principle, they are no different from a scripture taught by Māra. How could they be used?
Still others explain that the substance of the vehicle pervades cause and fruit: the fruit takes myriad qualities as its substance, while the cause takes myriad wholesome deeds as its substance. They cite the meaning of the Twelve Gate Treatise, saying that this is what the great persons, the buddhas, ride and what Mañjuśrī, Perceiver of the World's Sounds (Guanshiyin/Avalokiteśvara), and others ride. They further cite the present sutra’s statement that the Buddha himself abides in the Great Vehicle and interpret this as fruit, while interpreting the children’s riding the jeweled vehicle as the causal vehicle. They then cite the Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra as meaning that the cause and fruit of the Great Vehicle are entirely the true mark.
Zhang’an privately asks here: does this vehicle of cause and fruit change or not change? If it changes, who is that which passes through and what is that through which it passes? If it does not change, cause and fruit remain side by side, which is equally untenable. If another Dharma passes through cause and fruit, one should know that cause and fruit themselves are not the sutra’s substance under discussion.
The cited Twelve Gate Treatise also says that because the great person, the Buddha, does not travel, it is called a vehicle. How could the Buddha’s not traveling be used instead to prove a vehicle of cause and fruit? When the Lotus Sutra says that the Buddha himself abides in the Great Vehicle, it means that he rides principle to guide and transform sentient beings, not that he abides in the qualities of the fruit. The Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra clarifies that cause and fruit both point to the true mark. How could one reverse this and use the true mark to prove that cause and fruit themselves are the substance? This interpretation is therefore not adopted.
Others divide the causal vehicle into root and branches, taking prajñā as the root and the other five perfections as branches. They likewise divide the fruitional vehicle into root and branches, taking sarvajñā—that is, omniscience—as the root and the other qualities as branches. They further say that the causal vehicle is narrow and the fruitional vehicle broad; that a mind corresponding with prajñā is a one-body vehicle, while a mind not corresponding with it is a different-body vehicle; that practice corresponding with nonattainment is a near vehicle, while bowing one’s head or raising one’s hand with a sense of attainment is a distant vehicle; and that because the six perfections mix worldly and world-transcending Dharmas they are a distant vehicle, whereas the thirty-seven factors of the path are solely world-transcending and are therefore a near vehicle.
This old interpretation also lists four alternatives: both the six perfections and the factors of the path are practiced with a mind of nonattainment; both are practiced with attainment; the six perfections mix worldly and world-transcending Dharmas while the factors of the path do not; or the factors of the path are mixed while the six perfections are not. The root text uses these four alternatives to indicate further distinctions in brief.
Zhang’an next privately judges: if prajñā is made the basis of the vehicle, then in the present sutra’s ox-cart simile prajñā is only the great white ox and is not the sutra’s substance. If sarvajñā is made the basis of the vehicle, it is the fruit accomplished at the place of awakening and likewise is not the substance of the vehicle. The causal vehicle’s narrowness is a vertical meaning, while the fruitional vehicle’s breadth is a horizontal meaning; neither is the substance of the vehicle taught in the present sutra. A mind corresponding with prajñā, nonattainment, the near vehicle, the distant vehicle, and the rest all belong, in the present sutra, to the cart’s adornments and attendants and are not the substance of the vehicle. Why suddenly raise disputes over nothing more than fur, twigs, and leaves? When argument becomes this noisy and angry, who can still distinguish what is actually intended?
Others cite the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom and take the six perfections as the substance of the vehicle, saying that skillful means transports practitioners out of birth-and-death while compassion transports and gathers sentient beings. Applying the present sutra’s ox-cart simile, Zhang’an judges prajñā to be the ox, the five perfections the cart’s adornments, skillful means the attendants, and compassion the carriage. None is the substance of the vehicle.
Zhang’an Uses Five Treatises to Clarify the Substance of the Vehicle
Zhang’an then cites five treatises to find within each account of the vehicle what is intended as its substance.
First, the Madhyānta-vibhāga says that a vehicle has five meanings. The first is the vehicle-basis, namely true suchness and buddha-nature. The second is vehicle-practice, namely merit and wisdom. The third is vehicle-gathering, namely compassion. The fourth is vehicle-obstruction, namely the various obstructions: afflictions are the afflictive obstruction, while practice, understanding, and the like are the cognitive obstruction. The fifth is vehicle-fruit, namely buddhahood.
Second, the Vijñaptimātratā Treatise says that a vehicle has the meanings of issuing forth and carrying. From true suchness and buddha-nature issue practices such as merit and wisdom; from these practices issues buddhahood; and through buddhahood sentient beings are carried forth. This is a successive relation extending from true suchness through practice and buddhahood to the liberation of sentient beings.
Third, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says that a vehicle has three meanings. The first is vehicle-cause, namely true suchness and buddha-nature. The second is vehicle-condition, namely the myriad practices. The third is vehicle-fruit, namely buddhahood.
Fourth, the Treatise on the Lotus Sutra says that the substance of the vehicle is the Tathāgata’s equal Dharma-body and also speaks of the Tathāgata’s great nirvāṇa. Zhang’an judges that these two passages appear to speak of the hidden and manifest aspects of one substance. Arousing the mind, bowing one’s head, raising one’s hand, and the like are called conditions of the vehicle.
Fifth, the Twelve Gate Treatise says that the vehicle-basis is the true mark of all dharmas, the vehicle-master is prajñā, and the vehicle-assistant is every practice that supports accomplishment; by this vehicle one reaches sarvajñā.
The five treatises clarify the same substance of the vehicle: each points to true suchness, buddha-nature, or the true mark of all dharmas. Their adornments and arrangements differ slightly. The substance of the vehicle clarified in the present sutra is precisely the true mark, not those adornments. If the adornments were taken as the substance of the vehicle, this would not be the true vehicle ridden by the Buddha.
Second Intent: Why the Sutra’s Substance Must Be Established
Second comes the intent of establishing the substance. Why must this substance be used? The meaning of the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom is that if a Lesser Vehicle scripture bears the three Dharma seals of impermanence, no-self, and nirvāṇa, it is the Buddha’s teaching, and practicing it enables one to attain the path. If it lacks the three Dharma seals, it is Māra’s teaching. A Great Vehicle scripture uses only one Dharma seal, the true mark of all dharmas. Only when it bears the seal of the true mark is it called a sutra of definitive meaning and able to lead one to the great path; if it lacks the seal of the true mark, it is taught by Māra. Śāriputra therefore says that the World-Honored One teaches the real path and that Māra Pāpīyas can do no such thing.
Someone asks: why does the Lesser Vehicle require three seals while the Great Vehicle uses only one? The answer is that the Lesser Vehicle separates birth-and-death from nirvāṇa. Birth-and-death is sealed first by impermanence and second by no-self; these two seals jointly confirm the Dharmas of birth-and-death. Nirvāṇa is sealed only by the single seal of quiescent cessation. Three seals are therefore required in all.
The Great Vehicle clarifies that birth-and-death is immediately nirvāṇa and nirvāṇa immediately birth-and-death; the two are neither dual nor different. The meaning of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra is that all sentient beings constantly bear the mark of quiescent extinction, which is great nirvāṇa. It further says that what is originally unborn is now therefore unextinguished. Originally unborn means that it is not explained through the marks of impermanence and no-self; now unextinguished means that it is not the mark of quiescent cessation selected by the Lesser Vehicle. What is indicated is only the one true mark. Because it is the true mark, the constant quiescent extinction of sentient beings is itself great nirvāṇa, and only one seal is required.
These Great and Lesser Vehicle Dharma seals respectively confirm the scriptures of the half-word and the full word, preventing non-Buddhist teachings from being mixed in and Māra from destroying them. This is like an official document becoming trustworthy once it bears a seal. One should therefore know that the sutras must possess the seal of the true mark before they can be called Great Vehicle scriptures of definitive meaning.
Third Intent: Directly Revealing the One Seal of the True Mark
Third, directly revealing the sutra’s substance means precisely the one seal of the true mark. Among the three tracks, the track of true nature is selected; among the ten Dharma realms, the Buddha Dharma realm is selected; and among the ten suchnesses of the Buddha Dharma realm, such-a-substance is selected.
Among the four kinds of twelve links, the inconceivable, unborn, and unextinguished twelve links are selected; among the twelve links, the path of suffering itself as the Dharma-body is selected. Among the four kinds of Four Truths, the unconstructed Four Truths are selected; within the unconstructed Four Truths, only the truth of cessation is selected.
Among the seven kinds of Two Truths, five kinds are selected; within these five kinds, only true truth is selected. Among the five kinds of Three Truths, the five kinds of the Middle Way’s ultimate truth are selected. Among the various one truths, the Middle Way’s one-real truth is selected; among the various no-truths, the Middle Way’s no-truth is selected.
Once this method of selection is grasped, the true substance can be selected within the subtlety of wisdom, and likewise from each of the ten subtleties. The remaining cases can be understood by analogy.
How the Three Groups of Similes Reveal the Substance
To explain the meaning through simile, consider how beams and columns jointly frame a house. What is neither beam nor column is the space within the house that can receive. Columns and beams represent cause and fruit, while the interior space that is neither beam nor column represents the true mark. The true mark is the substance, not the beams or columns.
If a house had no interior space, it could receive no person or thing. If cause and fruit lacked the true mark, they too would have no basis upon which to stand. The meaning of the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom is that if this emptiness did not exist, nothing could be established or done.
It is also like the sun and moon spanning the sky, and dukes and ministers assisting a sovereign. Sun and moon can be two, while vast empty space and the sky cannot be divided into two. Ministers and generals can be many, while the sovereign cannot be many. This is why the true substance must be selected from among the various Dharmas.
The three tracks together form the vehicle. They are not vertically arranged or horizontally juxtaposed; they are neither entirely identical nor separate. Only to make what is revealed clear does discerning the substance distinguish it from contemplative illumination and the other tracks and point solely to true nature as what most directly corresponds to the name of substance. The three tracks are understood in this way, and the remaining Dharma gates can be understood by analogy.
Fourth Intent: Citing Scripture as Evidence
Fourth comes citation of scripture as evidence.
The meaning of the “Introduction” chapter is that the Buddha now emits light to help reveal the meaning of the true mark. It also says that the meaning of the true mark of all dharmas has already been taught to the assembly.
The meaning of the “Skillful Means” chapter is that only a buddha together with a buddha can ultimately exhaust the true mark of all dharmas. Its verse further says that after the Dharma of the buddhas has remained for a long time, the real must be taught. It also says: I adorn my body with marks … and teach the seal of the true mark.
When Śāriputra expresses his understanding, he says that the World-Honored One teaches the real path and that Māra Pāpīyas can do no such thing. He further says that, abiding in real wisdom, he will certainly become a buddha.
The meaning of “The Dharma Teacher” chapter is that the gateway of skillful means is opened and the true mark shown. The “Peaceful Practices” chapter teaches one to contemplate all dharmas as the true mark. “The Lifespan of the Tathāgata” chapter says that the Tathāgata knows and sees as it really is.
The meaning of the Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra is that in the past on Vulture Peak the Tathāgata extensively taught the path of the one reality. It further teaches one to contemplate the sphere of the one reality.
One can therefore know that the buddhas appear in the world because of the conditions of one great matter solely to enable sentient beings to open the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing and to see this principle of the one reality that is neither cause nor fruit. The scriptural passages are present in these locations and provide clear evidence for directly revealing the sutra’s substance.
釋名已經把一部經的義理廣泛說開，辨體卻要做相反的工作：從浩漫眾義中，直接點出全經所歸。這不是另找一個藏在經文背後的東西，而是問，名、宗、用與一切因果究竟依什麼而立，又共同歸向哪裏。
本論先給出兩句話：體是一部的指歸，也是眾義的都會。前一句從全經看它，後一句從萬義看它。萬義可以向四方展開，指歸卻使它們不致散失；一部可以有無數言說，體卻是所有言說共同要顯出的真實。
為何不能直接說一乘就是體
第一個舊解說，一乘就是經體。問題在於，一乘這個名稱既可用於方便，也可用於真實；即使專指真實一乘，其中又含真性、觀照、資成三軌。它能總攝許多內容，卻還沒有回答辨體所問的『究竟是哪一軌』。
另一個舊解說，真諦就是體。這也同樣太寬。大小乘都使用真諦之名，大乘內部又有多種說法。若只給出一個能在多處通用的名稱，定指仍未完成。
還有人以一乘因果為體。因可以是萬善，果可以是萬德；兩者都重要，卻仍屬所修、所成的事。事若沒有真實之理作印，便沒有可以成立的依據。因此，因果顯示修證所由，經體則落在使因果成立的真實之理。
辨體的關鍵於是漸漸明朗：最宏大的名稱未必最準確，最豐富的內容也未必就是所依。這一章保全一乘、真諦與因果各自的意義，並把它們安放在恰當位置。
因變成果，還是因與果同時並存
有人把乘體貫通因果，說因乘與果乘共同成體。章安在此私下設問：因成為果時，究竟是變，還是不變？
若因變成果，原來的因已不在，能通與所通的關係也隨之消失。若因不變，因到了果位仍保持為因，因果便並列而存，也說不通。若另外立一法貫通因果，恰好證明真正作貫通者另有所在，因果本身便不是經體。
這個追問也改變了幾段經文的讀法。佛安住大乘，不只是停在某個果德上，而是乘理以化導眾生；諸子乘寶乘，顯示因位行人乘車而進；大乘因果指向實相，顯示因果不離實相。這些場景都把因果指回實相，使真實之理居於所依。
實相與因果因此相依而有方向。因果若離實相便不能成立；實相貫通因果，成為修證共同所依。辨體便在這相依關係中定出一實相。
白牛、莊挍、儐從與軒，各在什麼位置
另一組舊說把般若與六度分為本末、廣狹、一體異體、近乘遠乘，又依有所得、無所得與世間、出世間列出多重組合。這些分別都在說乘上有哪些修行、哪些心行較近、哪些較遠，仍未直接指出乘所依的體。
章安借牛車把位置重新排清。般若是白牛，五度是莊挍，方便是儐從，慈悲是軒。白牛能牽引，莊挍使車完具，儐從隨行，軒承載人物；每一樣都有作用，卻沒有一樣因作用重大便自動成為經體。
這幅圖最有力之處，是它沒有貶低任何一物。沒有白牛，車不能進；沒有諸度、方便與慈悲，修行與度生也不能圓成。辨體所作的，只是把能運、能助、能承與所依分明。若一直爭論車上皮毛枝葉的配置，真正要找的乘本反而被遮住。
五部論為何同指乘本
章安繼續引五部論。第一部列乘本、乘行、乘攝、乘障、乘果；第二部從真如佛性生福慧行，由行成果，再由果載出眾生；第三部列乘因、乘緣、乘果；第四部說平等法身與大般涅槃；第五部列乘本、乘主、乘助。
名目與次序不全相同，共同點卻在最初所依：真如、佛性、諸法實相。福慧是行，慈悲是攝，煩惱與智障是障，佛果是果，般若能作主，一切行能資助；這些都在乘中有自己的位置。當辨體之問落下時，所取的是乘本，整張乘義圖則各守原有位置。
因此，五論所明乘體相同，不表示五部論的每個名目都相同。『同』落在實相這個指歸，『小異』保留各論如何安排修行、攝受、障礙、果德與助成。
為何經體又叫一實相印
經體不只是全經的共同題目，還有辨別真偽的作用，所以本論轉而說法印。
小乘從生死與涅槃有別而立三印。生死法以無常、無我兩印來印，涅槃以寂滅一印來印。三印使行人知道何者是佛說，依之修行可以得道。
大乘則從生死與涅槃不二而立一印。生死即涅槃，涅槃即生死；本自不生，今則無滅。所指不再是把兩域分開印可，而是以諸法實相貫通。這一實相印使外道不能混入，天魔不能破壞，如世間文書得印而可取信。
三印依生死與涅槃分說，一印依二者不二而統攝；所要保護的都是正法不被錯認。到了今經辨體，一實相印不在實相之外另加印章，印就是體所具有的辨真之力。
從眾多法門中，如何只取一個正體
本論正面回答：經體就是一實相印；在三軌中，取真性軌。
接著，一連串『取』字從不同教義架構中定出同一指向。十法界取佛法界，佛界十如是取如是體；四種十二因緣取不思議、不生不滅，十二支取苦道即是法身；四種四諦取無作四諦，再取其中滅諦；七種二諦取五種，再取其中真諦；五種三諦取五種中道第一義諦；一諦取中道一實諦，無諦取中道無諦。
每一次簡擇都依辨體的目的，把最能直接顯出中道實相的一面指出來；各套架構仍保存其餘項目的原有位置。掌握這個方向後，從智妙乃至其餘諸妙，也都能依例簡出正體。
一棟房屋，梁柱與空間缺一不可
梁與柱共同綱紀一棟房屋，譬喻因與果；屋內非梁非柱、可以容受人物的空間，譬喻實相。梁柱使房屋有形，空間使房屋能住，兩者相依而各有其義。
房屋若沒有空間，便無所容受；因果若沒有實相，也無所成立。實相不是在因果之外另造一物，正如屋內之空不在房屋之外。它既不等於梁柱，也從未離開梁柱所成的屋。
日月綱天、公臣輔主又從多與一說同一關係。日月可以有二，太虛空天不可分二；臣將可以很多，所輔之主不能因此變成多主。種種因果、行門與功德可以多，作共同指歸的正體卻不隨之分裂。
所以三軌成乘，不縱不橫，不即不離。真性、觀照、資成不是前後排成三截，也不是互不相干地橫列；它們不全同，也不相離。辨體偏舉真性，只為使當前所問有明確答案。
為何最後仍要回到經文
排除舊解、說明法印、歷法簡體之後，論證仍要回到《法華經》自身。
佛放光明，助顯實相義；諸法實相義已為大眾宣說；唯佛與佛才能究盡諸法實相。這幾處先把正體直接點出。諸佛久後必說真實、以相嚴身而說實相印、舍利弗聞實道而安住實智，又把真實之理與領解、作佛相連。
開方便門而示真實相，觀諸法如實相，如來如實知見，則讓方便、觀行與佛知見同歸真實。《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》再以一實之道、一實境界相照，使所見不落在單獨的因或果，而落在因果所依的一實。
諸佛為大事因緣出現於世，使眾生開佛知見。辨體至此不再只是排除哪一個名稱太寬，而是把一部經為何出世、眾生要見什麼，收在同一指歸之中。
釋籤之眼
湛然先把本單元放回五章的前後關係：釋名是總說，名中已含體、宗、用三別；顯體則點出三軌中屬於體的真性。偏舉真性不是割裂三軌，而是從總名轉入別義時，使體的所指明確。
鏡中又把說體之意分成四層：一部所歸、行解難會、體不可說、因機仍可說。這使『眾義之都會』不只是眾多概念集合，而是全經諸門都契於實相。
說者層次也由此照清。『私問』一段是章安私破古人，『私謂』以下是章安判前師，五論連段則是章安引論出乘體。如此分層，既保存智者正說，也使灌頂在記錄中所加的設難、判釋與引論各有位置。
對因果通體之說，湛然把方向辨得最細：因果不離實相，可以證因果為宗；要證體，則須看實相不離因果，這才是宗家之體。體與宗互相不離，卻不因相依便失去能取、所取的方向。
五論之中，鏡文逐一只取第一乘本。真如居初，所以是本；平等法身與大般涅槃則被照成隱與顯，同一經體在纏、成滿的兩面。乘主如白牛能使車到達所在，正因它有能運之用，更可見主用與乘本各守其位。
三印與一印在鏡中有兩層。從生滅與無生滅看，真實本一而說有廣略；從今經看，又須特別指出此經獨明實相為一法印。廣略之會通與今經之定指並行，不能只留下數目上的三與一。
空屋譬被湛然直分為空譬體、屋譬宗。屋是因果所成的能取，空是所取之體；能取可多，所取不可多。這一眼使屋、空相依的譬喻精準落回體、宗，不讓空間成為離屋獨立之物。
末後引證又分正引與結意。諸經句先共同顯出實相，『故知』以下才由智者收為大事因緣與一實非因非果之理。經證與論主結語各守其層，整個正顯經體才從釋名而來，又穩穩回到佛知見。
A sutra contains myriad meanings; which one is its substance? Explaining the name has already unfolded a sutra’s meanings broadly, whereas discerning the substance performs the opposite task: amid the vastness of many meanings, it directly points out where the whole sutra returns. This does not mean finding another thing hidden behind the text. It asks upon what name, purport, function, and every cause and fruit are established, and toward what they all jointly tend.
The treatise first gives two statements: substance is the destination of the whole work and the convergence of its many meanings. The first views it from the whole sutra, the second from its myriad meanings. Myriad meanings can unfold in every direction, but their destination keeps them from dispersing. One work can contain innumerable statements, yet its substance is the reality that all those statements jointly seek to reveal.
Why Can the One Vehicle Not Simply Be Called the Substance?
The first old interpretation says that the One Vehicle is the sutra’s substance. The problem is that the name One Vehicle can be used for both the provisional and the real. Even when it refers specifically to the real One Vehicle, it contains the three tracks of true nature, contemplative illumination, and supporting accomplishment. It encompasses a great deal, but it has not yet answered the question posed by discerning the substance: which track is meant here?
Another old interpretation says that true truth is the substance. This too is overly broad. Great and Lesser Vehicles both use the name true truth, and there are multiple accounts even within the Great Vehicle. Merely giving a name that applies in many places does not complete the act of specifying the substance.
Others take the cause and fruit of the One Vehicle as the substance. Cause may consist of myriad wholesome deeds and fruit of myriad qualities. Both are important, yet they remain affairs cultivated and accomplished. If affairs have no seal of true principle, they have no basis upon which to stand. Cause and fruit therefore reveal the course of cultivation and realization, while the sutra’s substance lies in the true principle that enables them to be established.
The key to discerning the substance gradually becomes clear: the grandest name is not necessarily the most precise, and the richest content is not necessarily the basis upon which it rests. This chapter preserves the respective meanings of the One Vehicle, true truth, and cause and fruit while placing each in its proper position.
Does Cause Change into Fruit, or Do Cause and Fruit Remain Side by Side?
Someone takes the substance of the vehicle to pervade cause and fruit, saying that the causal and fruitional vehicles together form the substance. Zhang’an privately raises a question here: when cause becomes fruit, does it change or not change?
If cause changes into fruit, the original cause is no longer present, and the relation between what passes through and that through which it passes disappears with it. If cause does not change, then after reaching the stage of fruit it still remains cause, leaving cause and fruit side by side, which is likewise untenable. If another Dharma is established to pass through cause and fruit, that proves precisely that what truly passes through them lies elsewhere and that cause and fruit themselves are not the sutra’s substance.
This question also changes how several scriptural passages are read. The Buddha’s abiding in the Great Vehicle is not merely his remaining in a particular quality of the fruit; he rides principle in order to guide sentient beings. The children’s riding the jeweled vehicle reveals practitioners at the causal stage proceeding by means of the cart. The cause and fruit of the Great Vehicle pointing to the true mark shows that neither departs from the true mark. Each scene directs cause and fruit back to the true mark and places true principle in the position of their basis.
The true mark and cause and fruit are therefore mutually dependent in a definite direction. Cause and fruit cannot be established apart from the true mark; the true mark runs through cause and fruit as the common basis of cultivation and realization. Discerning the substance identifies the one true mark within this interdependence.
Where Do the White Ox, Adornments, Attendants, and Carriage Belong?
Another group of old explanations divides prajñā and the six perfections into root and branches, broad and narrow, one-body and different-body, near vehicle and distant vehicle. It then establishes multiple combinations according to attainment and nonattainment and to worldly and world-transcending practice. All these distinctions concern which practices are present in the vehicle and which mental practices are nearer or more distant; they still do not point directly to the vehicle’s underlying substance.
Zhang’an uses the ox cart to put these positions back in order. Prajñā is the white ox, the five perfections are the adornments, skillful means are the attendants, and compassion is the carriage. The white ox can draw, adornments complete the cart, attendants accompany it, and the carriage bears its passengers. Each has a function, yet none automatically becomes the sutra’s substance merely because its function is important.
The force of this image is that it belittles none of its elements. Without the white ox, the cart cannot move; without the perfections, skillful means, and compassion, practice and the liberation of beings cannot be completed. Discerning the substance simply distinguishes what transports, assists, and carries from the basis upon which they rely. If debate remains fixed on the arrangement of the cart’s fur, twigs, and leaves, the vehicle-basis actually being sought is obscured.
Why Do the Five Treatises Point to the Same Vehicle-Basis?
Zhang’an continues by citing five treatises. The first lists the vehicle-basis, vehicle-practice, vehicle-gathering, vehicle-obstruction, and vehicle-fruit. The second proceeds from true suchness and buddha-nature to practices of merit and wisdom, from practice to fruit, and then from fruit to carrying sentient beings forth. The third lists vehicle-cause, vehicle-condition, and vehicle-fruit. The fourth speaks of the equal Dharma-body and great nirvāṇa. The fifth lists the vehicle-basis, vehicle-master, and vehicle-assistant.
Their names and sequences are not wholly identical, but they share the same initial basis: true suchness, buddha-nature, and the true mark of all dharmas. Merit and wisdom are practice, compassion is gathering, afflictions and cognitive obstructions are obstructions, buddhahood is fruit, prajñā can serve as master, and all practices can assist. Each occupies its own place within the vehicle. When the question of discerning the substance is posed, what is selected is the vehicle-basis, while every part of the full account of the vehicle retains its original position.
Thus, saying that the five treatises clarify the same substance of the vehicle does not mean that all their terms are identical. Their sameness lies in the true mark as their destination, while their small differences preserve how each arranges practice, gathering, obstructions, qualities of the fruit, and assistance.
Why Is the Sutra’s Substance Also Called the One Seal of the True Mark?
The sutra’s substance is not merely the shared topic of the entire scripture. It also distinguishes true from false, and the treatise therefore turns to the Dharma seals.
The Lesser Vehicle establishes three seals because it treats birth-and-death and nirvāṇa as distinct. The dharmas of birth-and-death are sealed by impermanence and no-self, while nirvāṇa is sealed by quiescent cessation. The three seals allow practitioners to recognize the Buddha’s teaching and to attain the path by practicing in accordance with it.
The Great Vehicle establishes one seal because it treats birth-and-death and nirvāṇa as nondual. Birth-and-death is immediately nirvāṇa, and nirvāṇa immediately birth-and-death; originally unborn, they are now therefore unextinguished. What is indicated is no longer the sealing of two separate domains, but the true mark of all dharmas running through them. This one seal of the true mark prevents non-Buddhist teachings from being mixed in and Māra from destroying the Dharma, like an official document that becomes trustworthy when it bears a seal.
The three seals speak separately according to birth-and-death and nirvāṇa, while the one seal encompasses them according to their nonduality. Both protect the true Dharma from being mistaken. In the present discerning of the sutra’s substance, the one seal of the true mark is not a stamp added outside the true mark; the seal is the true mark’s own power to distinguish what is genuine.
How Is One True Substance Selected from Many Dharma Gates?
The treatise answers directly: the sutra’s substance is the one seal of the true mark; among the three tracks, the track of true nature is selected.
A continuous series of selections then specifies the same direction within different doctrinal frameworks. Among the ten Dharma realms, the Buddha Dharma realm is selected, and among its ten suchnesses, such-a-substance. Among the four kinds of twelve links, the inconceivable, unborn, and unextinguished is selected; among the twelve links, the path of suffering itself as the Dharma-body. Among the four kinds of Four Truths, the unconstructed Four Truths are selected and, within them, the truth of cessation. Among the seven kinds of Two Truths, five are selected and, within those five, true truth. Among the five kinds of Three Truths, the five kinds of the Middle Way’s ultimate truth are selected. Among the one truths, the Middle Way’s one-real truth is selected, and among the no-truths, the Middle Way’s no-truth.
Each selection follows the purpose of discerning the substance and points out the aspect that most directly reveals the true mark of the Middle Way. The remaining items in each framework retain their own positions. Once this direction is grasped, the true substance can likewise be selected from the subtlety of wisdom and each of the remaining subtleties.
A House Needs Both Beams and Interior Space
Beams and columns together frame a house and represent cause and fruit. The space within the house that is neither beam nor column and can receive people and things represents the true mark. Beams and columns give the house form; space makes it habitable. They depend upon one another while retaining distinct meanings.
If a house had no interior space, it could receive nothing. If cause and fruit lacked the true mark, they too would have nothing upon which to stand. The true mark is not another thing constructed outside cause and fruit, just as interior space is not outside the house. It is not identical to the beams and columns, yet it has never departed from the house they form.
The sun and moon spanning the sky and ministers assisting their sovereign express the same relation through plurality and unity. Sun and moon can be two, but the vast open sky cannot be divided into two skies. Ministers and generals can be many, but the sovereign they assist cannot thereby become many sovereigns. Causes and fruits, practices, and qualities can be many, while their common destination does not split into many substances.
Thus, the three tracks form the vehicle without being vertical or horizontal, identical or separate. True nature, contemplative illumination, and supporting accomplishment are not three segments arranged in sequence or three unrelated things set beside one another. They are not entirely the same, yet neither are they separate. Discerning the substance singles out true nature only to give a definite answer to the present question.
Why Must the Account Finally Return to the Sutra?
After rejecting old interpretations, explaining the Dharma seals, and selecting the substance through different frameworks, the demonstration must still return to the Lotus Sutra itself.
The Buddha emits light to help reveal the meaning of the true mark; the meaning of the true mark of all dharmas has already been taught to the assembly; only a buddha together with a buddha can ultimately exhaust the true mark of all dharmas. These passages first point directly to the true substance. The buddhas’ necessarily teaching the real after a long time, adorning the body with marks and teaching the seal of the true mark, and Śāriputra’s hearing the real path and abiding in real wisdom further connect true principle with understanding and becoming a buddha.
Opening the gateway of skillful means to show the true mark, contemplating all dharmas as the true mark, and the Tathāgata’s knowing and seeing as it really is return skillful means, contemplative practice, and the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing to the real. The Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra further illuminates them through the path of the one reality and the sphere of the one reality, so that what is seen does not fall on cause or fruit separately but on the one reality upon which both rely.
The buddhas appear in the world because of the conditions of one great matter in order to enable sentient beings to open the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing. At this point, discerning the substance is no longer merely a matter of rejecting names that are too broad. It gathers into one destination why a sutra appears in the world and what sentient beings are to see.
Through the Eye of the Shiqian
Zhanran first places this unit back within the sequence of the Fivefold Profound Meaning. Explaining the name is a general account, and the name already contains the three distinctions of substance, purport, and function. Revealing the substance then points out true nature as the aspect of the three tracks belonging to substance. Singling out true nature does not sever the three tracks; as the account moves from the general name to a specific meaning, it makes the referent of substance precise.
The Mirror further divides the intent of explaining the substance into four layers: the destination of the whole work, the difficulty of meeting it through practice and understanding, the substance’s inexpressibility, and its continued expressibility in response to capacities. Thus, the “convergence of many meanings” is not merely a collection of concepts; every gate of the sutra accords with the true mark.
The layers of speakers are also illuminated. The passage beginning “I privately ask” is Zhang’an’s private refutation of earlier masters; the passage beginning “I privately say” is Zhang’an’s judgment of the preceding teachers; and the continuous citation of five treatises is Zhang’an’s use of treatises to disclose the substance of the vehicle. Distinguishing these layers preserves Zhiyi’s direct teaching while giving Guanding’s questions, judgments, and citations their proper places within the record.
Regarding the claim that the substance pervades cause and fruit, Zhanran distinguishes the direction with particular precision. That cause and fruit do not depart from the true mark can establish cause and fruit as purport. To establish the substance, one must instead see that the true mark does not depart from cause and fruit; this is the substance belonging to the purport. Substance and purport do not depart from one another, but their interdependence does not erase the direction between what takes and what is taken.
Among the five treatises, the Mirror selects only the first vehicle-basis in each case. True suchness comes first and is therefore the basis. The equal Dharma-body and great nirvāṇa are illuminated as hidden and manifest, the two faces of one sutra-substance while bound in affliction and when fully accomplished. The vehicle-master, like the white ox, enables the cart to reach its destination; precisely because it exercises the function of transport, the master’s function and the vehicle-basis must retain their respective positions.
The three seals and one seal have two levels in the Mirror. From the standpoint of arising and ceasing and non-arising and non-ceasing, reality is one while its explanation is broad or brief. From the standpoint of the present sutra, it must also be specially stated that this scripture alone clarifies the true mark as the one Dharma seal. Integrating the broad and brief accounts and determining the substance of the present sutra proceed together; they cannot be reduced to the numbers three and one.
Zhanran directly divides the empty-house simile: space represents substance, and the house represents purport. The house formed by cause and fruit is what takes; space is the substance taken. What takes can be many, while what is taken cannot be many. This perspective returns the interdependence of house and space precisely to substance and purport, without turning space into something existing independently outside the house.
The final evidence is likewise divided into direct citation and concluding intent. The scriptural passages first reveal the true mark together; only from “therefore one knows” onward does Zhiyi gather them into the conditions of the one great matter and the principle of the one reality that is neither cause nor fruit. When scriptural evidence and the treatise master’s conclusion each retain their layer, the whole direct revelation of the sutra’s substance proceeds from explaining the name and returns securely to the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing.
考據Apparatus
辨體章先以七條展開，本單元只處理第一條正顯經體。其行文次第是先排除過寬、通濫或仍落因果事相的舊解，再說明大乘經何以必須有實相之印，繼而正指一實相印與真性軌，最後由空屋、綱天、輔主三譬及經文引證收束。
一、科判定位
本單元起於《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「△第二、顯體者，前、釋名總說，文義浩漫；今、頓點要理，正顯經體，直辨真性。」〔T33 0779a06〕，止於「經文在茲，可為明證也。」〔T33 0780a28〕；下一行「○二、廣簡偽者，夫正體玄絕，一往難知」〔T33 0780a29〕已入次單元。
章首自題作『顯體』，全書開章列題作『辨體』，兩形各守其位。本章先列七條：「今略開七條：一、正顯經體。二、廣簡偽。三、一法異名。四、入體之門。五、遍為眾經體。六、遍為諸行體。七、遍一切法體。」〔T33 0779a13〕本單元完整展開第一條；第一條又開四意：「正顯體，更明四意：一、出舊解。二、論體意。三、正明體。四、引文證。」〔T33 0779a15〕
《法華玄義釋籤》（T1717）以「已前釋通別名竟。次第二釋體中二：先總明來意，次開章正釋。」〔T33 0931a26〕總判來意與正釋，又以「正解中自為七門，初正顯體，又開四意。」〔T33 0931b08〕核定本單元內外層次。其對位正釋止於「四引證文二：初正引證」〔T33 0932b24〕一科，繼而以『故知』以下為結意；0932b26 起已釋廣簡偽，故鏡文範圍為 0931a26–0932b25。
依本論次第，可分十一節：一、由釋名轉入顯體；二、體義與可說、不可說；三、七條與四意；四、出一乘、真諦、因果等舊解；五、章安私破因果通體；六、述般若本末、近遠等舊說並由章安私判；七、章安引五論會乘體；八、論小乘三印與大乘一印；九、正指一實相印並歷法簡體；十、以空屋、綱天、輔主三譬簡體；十一、引《法華》與《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》為證。
二、成立與傳本
本論卷前緣起與《國清百錄》（T1934）所誌相合：智者在江陵玉泉講說玄義，灌頂受聞筆錄，並自誌《玄》《文》各十卷〔T33 0681a15–a23；T46 0823b28〕。
本單元內部另須分出記者附語。自「私問因果之乘為變？為不變？」〔T33 0779b01〕起至反破古人引證，《法華玄義釋籤》明判為「私破古人此體通因果及引經論」〔T33 0931b13〕。自「私謂般若為乘本者，於今經是白牛，非經體也。」〔T33 0779b16〕起，《法華玄義釋籤》又說這是「章安判前諸師所解」〔T33 0931c21〕；自《中邊分別論》以下五論連引，則判為「章安引五論以出乘體」〔T33 0931c23〕。因此，0779b01–b08 是章安私破，0779b16–c10 是章安私判與引論；其餘沒有同等明文換層處，仍依題署作智者講說、灌頂記錄，不擴大改判作者界線。
本單元的傳本問題不只在正文校記，也在引文層次。智者或章安所引，常見節引、撮引、跨句合引與題名所指未能由現存一書唯一承擔等情形。本論所書之形、今本所見之形及說者層次因而並列，後見今本不取代本論字面。
三、所引經論覆核
不可說與因緣可說
| 本論所引 | 今本對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅。」〔T33 0779a11〕 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅，」〔T09 0005c25〕 | 字同，句末標點各守其本。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「不生不生不可說。」〔T33 0779a11〕 | 《大般涅槃經》（T374）「不生不生亦不可說、」〔T12 0490b23〕 | 今本多『亦』，標點亦異。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「有因緣故，亦可得說。」〔T33 0779a12〕 | 《大般涅槃經》（T374）「有因緣故，亦可得說。」〔T12 0490b24〕 | 同文；今本句末跨至下一行。 |
因果乘舊解及章安私破
| 本論所引或轉述 | 今本對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「諸佛大人所乘，文殊觀音等所乘。」〔T33 0779a27〕 | 《十二門論》（T1568）先說「諸佛最大，是乘能至，故名為大；諸佛大人乘是乘故，故名為大；」〔T30 0159c15〕，後說「又觀世音、得大勢、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等，是諸大士之所乘故，故名為大；」〔T30 0159c18〕 | 本論壓縮兩段，換序並省得大勢、彌勒，不是今本一條連句。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「佛自住大乘」〔T33 0779a28〕 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）「佛自住大乘，如其所得法，定慧力莊嚴，以此度眾生。」〔T09 0008a23〕 | 本論摘上半立果乘；章安私破時依完整場景解作乘理御人。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「諸子乘是寶乘」〔T33 0779a29〕 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）「諸子是時，歡喜踊躍，乘是寶車，遊於四方，嬉戲快樂，」〔T09 0014c17〕 | 本論撮成一句，『寶乘』與今本『寶車』並錄。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「大乘因果皆是實相。」〔T33 0779a29〕 | 《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》（T277）「汝今應當觀大乘因。大乘因者，諸法實相是。」〔T09 0392b01〕 | 今本直說大乘因，未於同場連說大乘果；本論以因果合說。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「大人佛不行故名乘。」〔T33 0779b04〕 | 《十二門論》（T1568）現文未得此句，相關場景仍是諸佛大人乘是乘〔T30 0159c15〕 | 約義引，具體逐字所指待考；不以相近文冒充同文。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「此乃乘理以御人，非住果德也。」〔T33 0779b06〕 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）完整場景以「以此度眾生。」〔T09 0008a24〕收句 | 前者是章安反破之語，不是經文續句。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「因果皆指實相，云可將實相證於因果耶？」〔T33 0779b07〕 | 《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》（T277）仍只直接說大乘因與諸法實相〔T09 0392b01–b02〕 | 章安轉述並反問；今本所見不可倒灌本論。 |
般若、六度、方便與慈悲
本論述舊師援《大智度論》之說：「有人引《釋論》，以六度為乘體，方便運出生死，慈悲運取眾生；」〔T33 0779b22〕現存《大智度論》（T1509）可見三組相扣材料：般若「導五波羅蜜到薩婆若」〔T25 0632c28〕；五波羅蜜、三十七品、大慈悲等「諸善法皆不能至薩婆若。」〔T25 0637a22〕；又說「眾生故受生死，憐愍汝等故具足大悲。」〔T25 0701b08〕。三場景可說明舊說的組織背景，卻沒有一處能單獨承擔本論整句，故只作多處撮引並錄。
章安所引五論
| 本論所引 | 現存對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「《中邊分別論》云：乘有五：一、乘本，謂真如佛性。二、乘行，謂福慧。三、乘攝，謂慈悲。四、乘障，謂煩惱，是煩惱障；行、解等是智障。五、乘果，謂佛果也。」〔T33 0779b25〕 | 《攝大乘論釋》（T1595）引《中邊論》作「《中邊論》說乘有五義：一出離為體，謂真如；二福慧為因，能引出故；三眾生為攝，如根性攝令至果故；」〔T31 0265a01〕，續作「四無上菩提為果，行究竟至此果故；五三惑為障，除此三惑，前四義成故。」〔T31 0265a03〕 | T1716 以本、行、攝、障、果重述，T1595 次第為體、因、攝、果、障。《中邊分別論》（T1599）現存總綱另作「相障及真實，研習對治道，修住而得果，無上乘唯爾。」〔T31 0451a11〕，隨後自釋「此七義是論所說。何者為七？一相、二障、三真實、四研習對治、五修住、六得果、七無上乘。」〔T31 0451a13〕，〈無上乘品〉又作「無上有三種，大乘中因此三義乘成無上。」〔T31 0460b11〕，故題名與直接傳引分層。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「《唯識論》云：乘是出載義，由真如佛性出福慧等行，由此行出佛果，由佛果載出眾生。」〔T33 0779b28〕 | 《唯識論》（T1588）與《大乘唯識論》（T1589）均未能唯一鎖定；《法華玄論》（T1720）有平行文「乘是顯載義，由真如佛性故出福慧等行，由福慧等行故出佛果，佛果載出眾生。」〔T34 0390c22〕 | 《唯識論》具體今本所指待考；T1720 是隋代平行見證，不是所名論書的替身。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「《攝大乘論》：乘有三：一、乘因，謂真如佛性。二、乘緣，謂萬行。三、乘果，謂佛果也。」〔T33 0779c01〕 | 《攝大乘論釋》（T1595）作「《摩訶般若經》說：乘有三義，一性義、二行義、三果義。」〔T31 0264c26〕，並以真如、十度十地、四德釋三義〔T31 0264c27–c29〕 | 現文來源鏈可對，但 T1716 題《攝大乘論》，T1595 則是釋論引經，題名不可偷換。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）先引「如來平等法身」〔T33 0779c03〕，又舉「如來大般涅槃」〔T33 0779c04〕 | 《妙法蓮華經憂波提舍》（T1519）作「一乘體者，所謂諸佛如來平等法身；」〔T26 0007c07〕，又說「唯有如來證大菩提，究竟滿足一切智慧名大涅槃」〔T26 0007b27〕 | 第一處本論省『諸佛』；第二處是濃縮。章安以隱顯會二文，不是論書原有連句。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「《十二門論》明乘本，謂諸法實相；乘主，謂般若；乘助，謂一切行資成，乘至至薩婆若。」〔T33 0779c05〕 | 《十二門論》（T1568）現文未得本、主、助三分；《法華玄論》（T1720）平行文作「乘具四事：一者乘本，謂諸法實相」〔T34 0391a11〕，續列乘主、乘助、乘果 | 約義引，所指待考；古代平行只誌錄，不判依存方向。 |
五論段的共同收束由章安明說：「此五論明乘體同，而莊挍小異；」〔T33 0779c07〕所謂同，指所取皆落真如、佛性、實相的乘本；行、攝、障、果、主、助仍各有字面與位置差別。這種同異不能擴成五論全文完全一致。
三法印、一法印及維摩經場景
| 本論所引或綜述 | 今本對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「諸小乘經，若有無常、無我、涅槃三印印之，即是佛說，修之得道。」〔T33 0779c10〕 | 《大智度論》（T1509）「佛法印有三種：一者、一切有為法念念生滅皆無常，二者、一切法無我，三者、寂滅涅槃。」〔T25 0222a28〕 | 本論綜述同一法印場景，另加有印為佛說、無印為魔說的辨真功能。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「大乘經，但有一法印，謂諸法實相，名了義經，能得大道。」〔T33 0779c12〕 | 《大智度論》（T1509）以「諸法不生不滅，一相，所謂無相」〔T25 0222b27〕表明大乘一相 | 本論以諸法實相概括今本不生不滅、一相、無相。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」〔T33 0779c15〕 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）「世尊說實道，波旬無此事，」〔T09 0011b01〕 | 字同，句末標點異；本單元後文再次引此偈。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「一切眾生常寂滅相」〔T33 0779c19〕 | 《維摩詰所說經》（T475）今本未得完整同句；可對讀「無以生滅心行說實相法。」〔T14 0541a17〕及「法本不然，今則無滅，是寂滅義。」〔T14 0541a20〕 | 本經逐字所指待考；《維摩經略疏》（T1778）後出近同句見 T38 0708c14，不倒作經文。 |
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）「本自不生，今則無滅。」〔T33 0779c20〕 | 《維摩詰所說經》（T475）一處作「本自不然，今則無滅。」〔T14 0540b05〕，另一處作「生滅為二。法本不生，今則無滅，得此無生法忍，是為入不二法門。」〔T14 0550c02〕 | 本論像合取『本自』與『不生』兩處結構；兩場景並錄不判。 |
空屋譬所引大智度論
《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）引《釋論》作「若以無此空，一切無所作。」〔T33 0780a11〕；《大智度論》（T1509）今本連偈作「若信諸法空，是則順於理；若不信法空，一切皆違失。若以無是空，無所應造作，未作已有業，不作有作者。」〔T25 0245c09〕。本論的『此』『一切無所作』與今本的『是』『無所應造作』有別，只宜並錄。
末段法華引證全表
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）所引 | 《妙法蓮華經》（T262）今本 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 「今佛放光明，助顯實相義。」〔T33 0780a17〕 | 「今佛放光明，助發實相義。」〔T09 0005b19〕 | 『顯／發』異。 |
| 「諸法實相義，已為汝等說。」〔T33 0780a18〕 | 「諸法實相義，已為汝等說，」〔T09 0005a10〕 | 字同，句末標點異。 |
| 「唯佛與佛，乃能究盡諸法實相。」〔T33 0780a19〕 | 「唯佛與佛乃能究盡諸法實相」〔T09 0005c10〕 | 本論多逗號、句號。 |
| 「諸佛法久後，要當說真實。」〔T33 0780a20〕 | 「世尊法久後，要當說真實。」〔T09 0006a23〕 | 『諸佛／世尊』異。 |
| 本論以「我以相嚴身」〔T33 0780a20〕與「為說實相印。」〔T33 0780a21〕跨『……』合引 | 今本先作「我以相嚴身，光明照世間，」〔T09 0008b02〕，後作「無量眾所尊，為說實相印。」〔T09 0008b03〕 | 本論兩段之間的省略號是現存字面；今本中間八字完整列出。 |
| 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」〔T33 0780a21〕 | 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事，」〔T09 0011b01〕 | 字同，句末標點異。 |
| 「安住實智中，我定當作佛。」〔T33 0780a22〕 | 今本先作「疑悔永已盡，安住實智中。」〔T09 0011b06〕，後作「我定當作佛，為天人所敬，」〔T09 0011b07〕 | 本論跨相鄰兩偈合引。 |
| 「開方便門，示真實相。」〔T33 0780a23〕 | 「經開方便門，示真實相。」〔T09 0031c17〕 | 今本多『經』。 |
| 「觀諸法如實相。」〔T33 0780a24〕 | 「又復於法無所行，而觀諸法如實相，亦不」〔T09 0037a19〕 | 本論抽取句中語。 |
| 「如來如實知見。」〔T33 0780a24〕 | 「如來如實知見三界之相，無有生」〔T09 0042c13〕 | 本論省後接賓語。 |
末段普賢觀引證
| 《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）所引 | 《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》（T277）今本 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 「昔於靈山，廣說一實之道。」〔T33 0780a25〕 | 「如來昔在耆闍崛山及餘住處，已廣分別一實之道；」〔T09 0389c10〕 | 本論以靈山約耆闍崛山，省其餘住處，『說／分別』亦異。 |
| 「觀於一實境界。」〔T33 0780a26〕 | 「修行大乘方等經典、正念思惟一實境界？」〔T09 0389c05〕 | 本論作撮語，今本是問句的一部分。 |
本論最後說「故知諸佛為大事因緣出現於世，秖令眾生開佛知見，見此一實非因非果之理耳。」〔T33 0780a26〕，是智者由前引作結，不是《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》引號的延續。《妙法蓮華經》相應場景分見「諸佛世尊唯以一大事因緣故出現於世？」〔T09 0007a22〕與「欲令眾生開佛知見，使得清淨故，出現於世；」〔T09 0007a24〕；本論以一實非因非果之理收束前文對因果為體的簡擇。
四、釋籤釋要〔鏡〕
《法華玄義釋籤》先把來意分成對上釋名、對下宗用兩向，並解『總說』為名中總含體、宗、用三別。顯體所作，是「頓點三軌之中體屬真性。」〔T33 0931b02〕所以偏舉真性是依當前名目定指，不是否定觀照、資成二軌。
說體之意又分四層：全部經義皆有所歸、行解會體至難、體不可由言詮顯示、又因眾生機緣而仍可說。《法華玄義釋籤》以「本迹二門皆歸實相，一代義旨咸契於體」〔T33 0931b06〕釋『眾義之都會』；這是鏡中釋語，不是本論原句。
出舊解時，鏡文先指出泛稱真諦會有大小相濫，於大乘內也仍未定指。對因果通體，章安所設變與不變雙難，分別落在能所消失及因果並存。更關鍵的是體、宗方向：經文說因果不離實相，可證因果為宗；若要證體，須反看實相不離因果，方稱宗家之體〔T33 0931b29–c03〕。
章安所引五論，鏡文都只取居初的乘本、真如或實相為體。行、攝、障、果、主、助並未被抹去，只是不在辨體時冒充所依正體。法身與涅槃兩文則被釋成隱、顯，同是一體在纏與成滿的兩面；此亦是鏡中判釋，不倒作《妙法蓮華經憂波提舍》逐字。
論法印時，《法華玄義釋籤》既以生滅、無生滅『其實是一，說有廣略』〔T33 0932a22〕解三印、一印，又另說今經獨明實相為一法印〔T33 0932b01〕。前者是廣略層，後者是今經定體層，不能混成單純數目的多寡。
正顯體被科為先約法、次譬，再約諸三法；約法內又有指體、三軌簡、歷諸妙簡。所謂簡，是「今取權實相對的示體相，是故簡之。」〔T33 0932b08〕不是判其餘法永遠與體無關。
空屋譬中，鏡文直判「空譬於體，屋譬於宗」〔T33 0932b12〕；屋是因果所成的能取，空是所取之體。宗可由多種因果顯出，體不可因此分裂成多體。末段又分正引證與『故知』以下結意，使大事因緣的收束不被誤加為另一條經引。
五、諸家異釋
智銓《法華經玄籤證釋》（X0592）自「二、顯體。」〔X 0620b02〕起連續直釋本單元，至 0621a11 止。對《十二門論》兩處疑難，他分別說今玄之引是約義引，又明記「大人佛不行，故名乘。全論不見此句，亦是約義引。」〔X 0620b12〕；對法印與體的關係，則說「既云無實相印，是魔所說，故知印即是體。」〔X 0620c09〕。這些是後出古注的辨源與判釋，只誌錄，不反作原論文字證據。
智旭《法華經玄義節要》（X0589）保留『辨體／顯體』兩形、七條架構與正顯核心，卻省去出舊解長段，直接由「一、正顯體者，何意須用此體？」〔X 0537c11〕轉入法印。這是節本的結構選擇，不表示所省五論段被判為無義。
知禮《觀無量壽佛經融心解》（X0408）在另一部經的五章語境說：「此經以修心妙觀為宗，實相為體。若不爾者，宗非顯體之宗，體非宗家之體。」〔X 0333b20〕可見宗、體互顯而不相混的同構讀法；其母經不是《法華》，故只作比較見證。
智圓十二部著作的限定範圍中，《阿彌陀經疏》（T1760）說「二、辨體者，方等實相為經正體。」〔T37 0352a10〕，《涅槃經疏三德指歸》（X0662）說「三法印者，大論云：大乘經用一實相印，生死即涅槃，涅槃即生死，不二不異，故小乘三法印。」〔X 0497a07〕；《涅槃玄義發源機要》（T1766）另有五章與體、宗、用互具的鄰近框架：「題玄義者，五章釋題妙盡經旨，故稱玄義。」〔T38 0015c23〕、「下明體宗用三各各互具，即此意也。」〔T38 0016c22〕。此範圍未見逐句注本單元之文，也未見重演五論次第的連續場景，故不據此擴成傳統史總斷。
六、術語
體。 本論自釋為一部經的指歸、眾義的會歸處。此處不是把『體』立成與萬法隔絕的物件，而是問全經名義、因果與力用以何理為所歸、所依。
辨體、顯體。 『辨體』是開章列題，『顯體』是本章入口自題。前者著眼辨別定體，後者著眼正面顯出，兩形同屬現存本文。
真性軌。 三軌中依『體』當名而偏舉的一軌。偏舉不取消觀照、資成；本論已明說真性非無二軌，宗用也非無初軌。
一實相印。 正顯經體的直接名稱。『印』在此不是體外另加的證章；有實相印，才足以辨大乘了義與魔說，所以印的辨真功能正由體而立。
三法印、一法印。 三印依生死與涅槃分說無常、無我、寂滅；一印依生死與涅槃不二而說諸法實相。此處的三與一服務於法印如何統攝，不能化成教法價值的數量競賽。
乘本、乘行、乘攝、乘障、乘果。 章安所引《中邊分別論》五義。辨體時只取乘本所指真如佛性；其餘四項仍保存各自位置。
乘主、乘助。 本論所題《十二門論》段以般若為主、諸行為助。主能運載，助能資成，都不可與所依乘本交換位置；其現存原論逐字所指仍待考。
莊校、莊挍、儐從、軒。 本論同段保留『莊校』『莊挍』兩個字形，分別出現在不同句中。般若、五度、方便、慈悲被安置在牛、裝飾、隨從、車軒等能運或助成位置，不因不是體而被說成無用。
半滿經。 本論以大小法印分印半字、滿字之經，著眼外道不能混雜、天魔不能破壞的辨真功能，不是現代書目分類語。
正顯、簡體。 正顯先從諸體系中定指一實相；簡體則依辨體目的，從三軌、法界、十如、因緣、四諦、二諦、三諦等各取能直接顯中道實相的一項。簡擇所指，不等於消滅其餘法門。
七、譬喻、互讀與承衍
本單元先用牛車諸物分辨乘體與助成。章安以般若為白牛、五度為莊挍、方便為儐從、慈悲為軒；各物都在運載中有作用，卻不因此成為所要定指的實相。這組譬把『有功用』與『是正體』分開。
空屋譬再把因果與實相分開而不割裂。本論說「若譬喻明義，如梁柱綱紀一屋，非梁非柱，即屋內之空。」〔T33 0780a07〕柱梁譬因果，屋內之空譬實相；「屋若無空，無所容受，因果無實相，無所成立。」〔T33 0780a10〕因果宗須依實相體而立，實相也不是離屋另有的空物。
日月綱天、公臣輔主兩譬同樣分能顯與所歸。日月可二，太虛空天不可二；臣將可多，主不可多。數目不是用來建立一個物質性的唯一體，而是說明眾多因果、行門與作用須有共同指歸。
與《妙法蓮華經》互讀，序、方便、法師、安樂行、壽量諸場景都把實相、真實與如實知見指向同一經體；與《佛說觀普賢菩薩行法經》互讀，一實之道與一實境界再把行法收回實相。引證不是用相似詞堆成定義，而是讓經中不同場景共同承擔辨體之問。
本單元承上由釋名總說轉入體，向下則為宗與用預留各自當名。它又只完成七條中的第一條；後續廣簡偽、一法異名、入體之門及三種遍體，將從不同方向展開此處已正指的一實相印。
八、校本定位
一、本單元以《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T1716）為底，範圍為 T33 0779a06–0780a28；《法華玄義釋籤》（T1717）正釋對位為 T33 0931a26–0932b25。
二、本單元大正正文校記共一組，在 0779b26：校本文字作『二、乘行，謂福慧』，大正原讀作『三』。兩讀並列，本版正文仍依校本文字，不判其優劣。
三、同段另有兩枚所傳夾註『云云』，分在 0779b16、0780a16；它們是正文夾註，不併入正文異讀的一組計數。
四、章首『顯體』與開章『辨體』、同段『莊校』與『莊挍』皆各守所在字形，不為表面整齊而齊一。
五、《唯識論》的具體今本、《十二門論》的『大人佛不行』及乘本、主、助三分、《維摩詰所說經》的『一切眾生常寂滅相』，皆未由單一今本取得足以承擔本論逐字的場景，故分別標作所指待考或約義引。後出近同文與古代平行文只作見證，不倒配成原引。
The chapter on discerning the substance first unfolds through seven topics; this unit treats only the first, directly revealing the sutra’s substance. Its sequence first excludes old interpretations that are too broad, indiscriminate, or still confined to the affairs of cause and fruit; next explains why a Great Vehicle scripture must bear the seal of the true mark; then directly identifies the one seal of the true mark and the track of true nature; and finally concludes through the three similes of the empty house, spanning the sky, and assisting the sovereign, together with scriptural evidence.
1. Doctrinal-Outline Placement
This unit begins in the Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) with 「△第二、顯體者，前、釋名總說，文義浩漫；今、頓點要理，正顯經體，直辨真性。」 tr. “Second, as for revealing the substance: the preceding explanation of the name gave a general account whose words and meanings were vast; now the essential principle is pointed out at once, directly revealing the sutra’s substance and immediately discerning true nature”〔T33 0779a06〕 and ends with 「經文在茲，可為明證也。」 tr. “The scriptural passages are present here and can serve as clear evidence”〔T33 0780a28〕. The next line, 「○二、廣簡偽者，夫正體玄絕，一往難知」 tr. “Second, as for broadly distinguishing the false: the true substance is profound and transcendent, and at first is difficult to know”〔T33 0780a29〕, has already entered the next unit.
The chapter’s opening styles itself 『顯體』 tr. “revealing the substance,” while the heading in the work’s opening list reads 『辨體』 tr. “discerning the substance”; each form retains its own location. The chapter first lists seven topics: 「今略開七條：一、正顯經體。二、廣簡偽。三、一法異名。四、入體之門。五、遍為眾經體。六、遍為諸行體。七、遍一切法體。」 tr. “Seven topics are now opened in brief: first, directly revealing the sutra’s substance; second, broadly distinguishing the false; third, one Dharma with different names; fourth, gateways into the substance; fifth, universally serving as the substance of the sutras; sixth, universally serving as the substance of all practices; seventh, universally serving as the substance of all dharmas”〔T33 0779a13〕. This unit unfolds the first topic in full. The first topic in turn has four intents: 「正顯體，更明四意：一、出舊解。二、論體意。三、正明體。四、引文證。」 tr. “Directly revealing the substance further clarifies four intents: first, presenting old interpretations; second, discussing the intent of substance; third, directly clarifying the substance; fourth, citing passages as evidence”〔T33 0779a15〕.
The Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian (T1717) gives the general judgment of reason for introduction and direct explanation with 「已前釋通別名竟。次第二釋體中二：先總明來意，次開章正釋。」 tr. “The preceding explanation of the shared and specific names is complete. Next, the second chapter, explaining the substance, has two parts: first, generally clarifying the reason for its introduction; next, opening the chapter and directly explaining it”〔T33 0931a26〕. It further confirms the unit’s external and internal divisions with 「正解中自為七門，初正顯體，又開四意。」 tr. “The direct explanation itself has seven gates; the first, directly revealing the substance, further opens four intents”〔T33 0931b08〕. Its corresponding direct explanation ends with the section 「四引證文二：初正引證」 tr. “Fourth, the passages cited as evidence have two parts: first, the direct citations”〔T33 0932b24〕, after which it treats everything from 『故知』 tr. “therefore one knows” onward as the concluding intent. At 0932b26 it has already begun to explain broadly distinguishing the false, so the mirror-text range is 0931a26–0932b25.
Following the sequence of the root treatise, the unit can be divided into eleven sections: first, the transition from explaining the name to revealing the substance; second, the meaning of substance and what can and cannot be spoken; third, the seven topics and four intents; fourth, the old interpretations concerning the One Vehicle, true truth, cause and fruit, and the rest; fifth, Zhang’an’s private refutation of cause and fruit as a shared substance; sixth, the account of old views concerning the root and branches of prajñā, near and distant vehicles, and the rest, followed by Zhang’an’s private judgment; seventh, Zhang’an’s use of five treatises to integrate the substance of the vehicle; eighth, the Lesser Vehicle’s three seals and the Great Vehicle’s one seal; ninth, the direct identification of the one seal of the true mark and the selection of substance through various Dharma frameworks; tenth, the selection of substance through the three similes of the empty house, spanning the sky, and assisting the sovereign; and eleventh, citations from the Lotus Sutra and the Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra as evidence.
2. Formation and Transmission
The prefatory account in the root treatise accords with what is recorded in the Guoqing Bailu (T1934): Zhiyi lectured on the Profound Meaning at Yuquan in Jiangling; Guanding heard and recorded it; and Guanding himself recorded that the Xuanyi and Wenju each comprised ten fascicles〔T33 0681a15–a23；T46 0823b28〕.
The recorder’s appended statements must also be distinguished within this unit. From 「私問因果之乘為變？為不變？」 tr. “I privately ask: does the vehicle of cause and fruit change or not change?”〔T33 0779b01〕 through the counter-refutation of the earlier citations, the Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian explicitly judges the passage to be 「私破古人此體通因果及引經論」 tr. “a private refutation of the ancients’ claim that this substance pervades cause and fruit and of their scriptural and treatise citations”〔T33 0931b13〕. Beginning with 「私謂般若為乘本者，於今經是白牛，非經體也。」 tr. “I privately say: those who take prajñā as the basis of the vehicle make it, in the present sutra, the white ox, not the sutra’s substance”〔T33 0779b16〕, the Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian further says that this is 「章安判前諸師所解」 tr. “Zhang’an’s judgment of the preceding masters’ interpretations”〔T33 0931c21〕. It judges the continuous citations of five treatises beginning with the Madhyānta-vibhāga to be 「章安引五論以出乘體」 tr. “Zhang’an’s citation of five treatises to disclose the substance of the vehicle”〔T33 0931c23〕. Thus 0779b01–b08 is Zhang’an’s private refutation, while 0779b16–c10 is Zhang’an’s private judgment and use of treatises. Where no equally explicit change of layer occurs, the work’s attribution to Zhiyi’s spoken teaching recorded by Guanding remains in force; the authorial boundary is not expanded beyond the evidence.
The transmission issues in this unit concern not only variants in the root text but also the layers of its citations. Citations by Zhiyi or Zhang’an often appear as excerpts, synopses, composites spanning separate sentences, or titles whose referents cannot be borne uniquely by a single extant work. The form written in the root treatise, the form found in the received witness, and the speaker’s layer are therefore recorded side by side. A later received form does not replace the wording of the root treatise.
3. Scriptures and Treatises Cited by Zhiyi
What Cannot Be Spoken and What Can Be Spoken through Conditions
| Wording Cited in the Root Treatise | Received Text Compared | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅。」 tr. “This Dharma cannot be shown; the characteristics of words are quiescent and extinct”〔T33 0779a11〕. | The Lotus Sutra (T262) reads 「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅，」 tr. “This Dharma cannot be shown; the characteristics of words are quiescent and extinct”〔T09 0005c25〕. | The graphs agree; the final punctuation follows each witness. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「不生不生不可說。」 tr. “What is unborn and unborn cannot be spoken”〔T33 0779a11〕. | The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (T374) reads 「不生不生亦不可說、」 tr. “What is unborn and unborn likewise cannot be spoken”〔T12 0490b23〕. | The received text adds 『亦』 tr. “likewise,” and its punctuation also differs. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「有因緣故，亦可得說。」 tr. “Because causes and conditions exist, it can nevertheless be spoken”〔T33 0779a12〕. | The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (T374) reads 「有因緣故，亦可得說。」 tr. “Because causes and conditions exist, it can nevertheless be spoken”〔T12 0490b24〕. | The wording agrees; the sentence in the received text continues across the next line. |
The Old Interpretation of the Cause-and-Fruit Vehicle and Zhang’an’s Private Refutation
| Citation or Synopsis in the Root Treatise | Received Text Compared | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「諸佛大人所乘，文殊觀音等所乘。」 tr. “What the great persons, the buddhas, ride and what Mañjuśrī, Perceiver of the World's Sounds (Guanshiyin/Avalokiteśvara), and the others ride”〔T33 0779a27〕. | The Twelve Gate Treatise (T1568) first reads 「諸佛最大，是乘能至，故名為大；諸佛大人乘是乘故，故名為大；」 tr. “The buddhas are greatest, and because this vehicle can reach them it is called great; because the buddhas, those great persons, ride this vehicle, it is called great”〔T30 0159c15〕. It later reads 「又觀世音、得大勢、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等，是諸大士之所乘故，故名為大；」 tr. “Moreover, because Perceiver of the World's Sounds, Mahāsthāmaprāpta, Mañjuśrī, Maitreya Bodhisattva, and the other great beings ride it, it is called great”〔T30 0159c18〕. | The root treatise compresses two passages, changes their order, and omits Mahāsthāmaprāpta and Maitreya. It is not a single continuous sentence in the received text. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「佛自住大乘」 tr. “The Buddha himself abides in the Great Vehicle”〔T33 0779a28〕. | The Lotus Sutra (T262) reads 「佛自住大乘，如其所得法，定慧力莊嚴，以此度眾生。」 tr. “The Buddha himself abides in the Great Vehicle and, according to the Dharma he has attained, adorns it with the powers of concentration and wisdom, using it to liberate sentient beings”〔T09 0008a23〕. | The root treatise excerpts the first part to establish the fruitional vehicle; Zhang’an’s private refutation reads it in the complete scene as riding principle to guide people. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「諸子乘是寶乘」 tr. “The children ride this jeweled vehicle”〔T33 0779a29〕. | The Lotus Sutra (T262) reads 「諸子是時，歡喜踊躍，乘是寶車，遊於四方，嬉戲快樂，」 tr. “At that time the children joyfully leapt about, rode this jeweled cart, traveled in the four directions, and played in delight”〔T09 0014c17〕. | The root treatise condenses the passage into one sentence. Its 『寶乘』 tr. “jeweled vehicle” and the received text’s 『寶車』 tr. “jeweled cart” are both recorded. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「大乘因果皆是實相。」 tr. “The cause and fruit of the Great Vehicle are both the true mark”〔T33 0779a29〕. | The Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra (T277) reads 「汝今應當觀大乘因。大乘因者，諸法實相是。」 tr. “You should now contemplate the cause of the Great Vehicle. The cause of the Great Vehicle is the true mark of all dharmas”〔T09 0392b01〕. | The received text directly speaks of the cause of the Great Vehicle and does not in the same scene jointly speak of its fruit; the root treatise combines cause and fruit. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「大人佛不行故名乘。」 tr. “Because the great person, the Buddha, does not travel, it is called a vehicle”〔T33 0779b04〕. | This sentence has not been found in the extant Twelve Gate Treatise (T1568); the related scene remains the great persons, the buddhas, riding this vehicle〔T30 0159c15〕. | This is a citation according to meaning, and its precise verbatim referent remains under investigation; similar wording is not passed off as identical. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「此乃乘理以御人，非住果德也。」 tr. “This means riding principle to guide people, not abiding in the qualities of the fruit”〔T33 0779b06〕. | The complete scene in the Lotus Sutra (T262) concludes with 「以此度眾生。」 tr. “using it to liberate sentient beings”〔T09 0008a24〕. | The former is Zhang’an’s counter-refutation, not the continuation of the scriptural quotation. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「因果皆指實相，云可將實相證於因果耶？」 tr. “Cause and fruit both point to the true mark; how could one use the true mark to prove cause and fruit?”〔T33 0779b07〕. | The Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra (T277) still directly speaks only of the cause of the Great Vehicle and the true mark of all dharmas〔T09 0392b01–b02〕. | This is Zhang’an’s synopsis and counter-question; what is found in the received text is not projected backward into the root treatise. |
Prajñā, the Six Perfections, Skillful Means, and Compassion
In presenting an old master’s use of the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom, the root treatise says: 「有人引《釋論》，以六度為乘體，方便運出生死，慈悲運取眾生；」 tr. “Someone cites the Explanatory Treatise, taking the six perfections as the substance of the vehicle: skillful means transports one out of birth-and-death, while compassion transports and gathers sentient beings”〔T33 0779b22〕. Three related groups of material can be found in the extant Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (T1509): prajñā 「導五波羅蜜到薩婆若」 tr. “guides the five pāramitās to sarvajñā”〔T25 0632c28〕; the five pāramitās, the thirty-seven factors, great compassion, and other wholesome Dharmas 「諸善法皆不能至薩婆若。」 tr. “are wholesome Dharmas that cannot reach sarvajñā”〔T25 0637a22〕; and it further says 「眾生故受生死，憐愍汝等故具足大悲。」 tr. “For the sake of sentient beings one undergoes birth-and-death; out of pity for you all one perfects great compassion”〔T25 0701b08〕. These three scenes can explain the organizational background of the old interpretation, but no single one bears the root treatise’s entire sentence. They are therefore recorded only as a synopsis drawing on multiple places.
The Five Treatises Cited by Zhang’an
| Wording Cited in the Root Treatise | Extant Text Compared | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「《中邊分別論》云：乘有五：一、乘本，謂真如佛性。二、乘行，謂福慧。三、乘攝，謂慈悲。四、乘障，謂煩惱，是煩惱障；行、解等是智障。五、乘果，謂佛果也。」 tr. “The Madhyānta-vibhāga says that a vehicle has five meanings: first, the vehicle-basis, namely true suchness and buddha-nature; second, vehicle-practice, namely merit and wisdom; third, vehicle-gathering, namely compassion; fourth, vehicle-obstruction, namely afflictions—the afflictive obstruction—while practice, understanding, and the like are the cognitive obstruction; fifth, vehicle-fruit, namely buddhahood”〔T33 0779b25〕. | The Commentary on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (T1595), citing the Madhyānta, reads 「《中邊論》說乘有五義：一出離為體，謂真如；二福慧為因，能引出故；三眾生為攝，如根性攝令至果故；」 tr. “The Madhyānta says that a vehicle has five meanings: first, deliverance as substance, namely true suchness; second, merit and wisdom as cause, because they can lead one forth; third, sentient beings as what is gathered, because beings are gathered according to their faculties and brought to the fruit”〔T31 0265a01〕. It continues, 「四無上菩提為果，行究竟至此果故；五三惑為障，除此三惑，前四義成故。」 tr. “Fourth, unsurpassed bodhi as fruit, because practice ultimately reaches this fruit; fifth, the three delusions as obstruction, because when these three delusions are removed the preceding four meanings are accomplished”〔T31 0265a03〕. | T1716 restates the sequence as basis, practice, gathering, obstruction, and fruit, while T1595 orders it as substance, cause, gathering, fruit, and obstruction. The extant Madhyānta-vibhāga Treatise (T1599) gives a different general outline: 「相障及真實，研習對治道，修住而得果，無上乘唯爾。」 tr. “Characteristics, obstructions, and reality; studying the counteractive path; cultivation, abiding, and attainment of the fruit—the unsurpassed vehicle consists only of these”〔T31 0451a11〕. It then explains, 「此七義是論所說。何者為七？一相、二障、三真實、四研習對治、五修住、六得果、七無上乘。」 tr. “These seven meanings are taught in the treatise. What are the seven? First, characteristics; second, obstructions; third, reality; fourth, studying the counteractive; fifth, cultivating and abiding; sixth, attaining the fruit; seventh, the unsurpassed vehicle”〔T31 0451a13〕. Its chapter on the unsurpassed vehicle further reads 「無上有三種，大乘中因此三義乘成無上。」 tr. “The unsurpassed has three kinds; in the Great Vehicle, through these three meanings, the vehicle becomes unsurpassed”〔T31 0460b11〕. The title attribution and direct transmitted witness are therefore kept in separate layers. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「《唯識論》云：乘是出載義，由真如佛性出福慧等行，由此行出佛果，由佛果載出眾生。」 tr. “The Vijñaptimātratā Treatise says: a vehicle means issuing forth and carrying. From true suchness and buddha-nature issue practices such as merit and wisdom; from these practices issues buddhahood; and through buddhahood sentient beings are carried forth”〔T33 0779b28〕. | Neither the Vijñaptimātratā Treatise (T1588) nor the Mahāyāna Vijñaptimātratā Treatise (T1589) can be uniquely locked as the referent. The Fahua Xuanlun (T1720) has the parallel wording 「乘是顯載義，由真如佛性故出福慧等行，由福慧等行故出佛果，佛果載出眾生。」 tr. “A vehicle means disclosing and carrying: because of true suchness and buddha-nature, practices such as merit and wisdom issue forth; because of the practices of merit and wisdom, buddhahood issues forth; buddhahood carries sentient beings forth”〔T34 0390c22〕. | The specific extant text intended by the title Vijñaptimātratā Treatise remains under investigation. T1720 is a Sui-dynasty parallel witness, not a substitute for the treatise named in the root text. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「《攝大乘論》：乘有三：一、乘因，謂真如佛性。二、乘緣，謂萬行。三、乘果，謂佛果也。」 tr. “The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says that a vehicle has three meanings: first, vehicle-cause, namely true suchness and buddha-nature; second, vehicle-condition, namely the myriad practices; third, vehicle-fruit, namely buddhahood”〔T33 0779c01〕. | The Commentary on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (T1595) reads 「《摩訶般若經》說：乘有三義，一性義、二行義、三果義。」 tr. “The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says that a vehicle has three meanings: first, the meaning of nature; second, the meaning of practice; third, the meaning of fruit”〔T31 0264c26〕 and explains the three as true suchness, the ten perfections and ten grounds, and the four virtues〔T31 0264c27–c29〕. | The extant transmission chain can be compared, but T1716 names the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, whereas T1595 is its commentary citing a sutra. The title attribution is not silently exchanged. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) first cites 「如來平等法身」 tr. “the Tathāgata’s equal Dharma-body”〔T33 0779c03〕 and then presents 「如來大般涅槃」 tr. “the Tathāgata’s great nirvāṇa”〔T33 0779c04〕. | The Treatise on the Lotus Sutra (T1519) reads 「一乘體者，所謂諸佛如來平等法身；」 tr. “The substance of the One Vehicle is the equal Dharma-body of the buddhas, the tathāgatas”〔T26 0007c07〕. It also says 「唯有如來證大菩提，究竟滿足一切智慧名大涅槃」 tr. “Only the Tathāgata realizes great bodhi and ultimately perfects all wisdom; this is called great nirvāṇa”〔T26 0007b27〕. | In the first citation, the root treatise omits 『諸佛』 tr. “the buddhas”; the second is a condensation. Zhang’an’s integration of the two as hidden and manifest is not a continuous statement in the treatise cited. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「《十二門論》明乘本，謂諸法實相；乘主，謂般若；乘助，謂一切行資成，乘至至薩婆若。」 tr. “The Twelve Gate Treatise clarifies the vehicle-basis as the true mark of all dharmas, the vehicle-master as prajñā, and the vehicle-assistant as all practices that support accomplishment; by the vehicle one reaches sarvajñā”〔T33 0779c05〕. | The extant Twelve Gate Treatise (T1568) does not contain this threefold division into basis, master, and assistant. The Fahua Xuanlun (T1720) has the parallel wording 「乘具四事：一者乘本，謂諸法實相」 tr. “A vehicle possesses four matters: first, the vehicle-basis, namely the true mark of all dharmas”〔T34 0391a11〕, followed by vehicle-master, vehicle-assistant, and vehicle-fruit. | This is a citation according to meaning, and its referent remains under investigation. The ancient parallel is recorded but does not establish a direction of textual dependence. |
Zhang’an expressly gives the shared conclusion of the five-treatise passage: 「此五論明乘體同，而莊挍小異；」 tr. “These five treatises clarify the same substance of the vehicle, while their adornments differ slightly”〔T33 0779c07〕. Their sameness means that what is selected in each falls on the vehicle-basis of true suchness, buddha-nature, or the true mark. Practice, gathering, obstruction, fruit, master, and assistant retain their different wording and positions. This limited sameness cannot be expanded into a claim that the five treatises agree in every respect.
The Three Dharma Seals, One Dharma Seal, and the Vimalakīrti Scene
| Citation or Synthesis in the Root Treatise | Received Text Compared | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「諸小乘經，若有無常、無我、涅槃三印印之，即是佛說，修之得道。」 tr. “If Lesser Vehicle scriptures bear the three seals of impermanence, no-self, and nirvāṇa, they are the Buddha’s teaching, and practicing them enables one to attain the path”〔T33 0779c10〕. | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (T1509) reads 「佛法印有三種：一者、一切有為法念念生滅皆無常，二者、一切法無我，三者、寂滅涅槃。」 tr. “The seals of the Buddha-Dharma are of three kinds: first, all conditioned dharmas arise and cease moment by moment and are impermanent; second, all dharmas are without self; third, nirvāṇa is quiescent cessation”〔T25 0222a28〕. | The root treatise synthesizes the same Dharma-seal scene and adds the truth-distinguishing function that what bears the seals is the Buddha’s teaching and what lacks them is Māra’s teaching. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「大乘經，但有一法印，謂諸法實相，名了義經，能得大道。」 tr. “Great Vehicle scriptures have only one Dharma seal, namely the true mark of all dharmas; they are called sutras of definitive meaning and enable one to attain the great path”〔T33 0779c12〕. | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (T1509) states the one mark of the Great Vehicle as 「諸法不生不滅，一相，所謂無相」 tr. “All dharmas are unborn and unextinguished, of one mark, namely no-mark”〔T25 0222b27〕. | The root treatise summarizes the received text’s unborn, unextinguished, one mark, and no-mark as the true mark of all dharmas. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」 tr. “The World-Honored One teaches the real path; Pāpīyas can do no such thing”〔T33 0779c15〕. | The Lotus Sutra (T262) reads 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事，」 tr. “The World-Honored One teaches the real path; Pāpīyas can do no such thing”〔T09 0011b01〕. | The graphs agree and the final punctuation differs. The root treatise cites this verse again later in the unit. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「一切眾生常寂滅相」 tr. “All sentient beings constantly bear the mark of quiescent extinction”〔T33 0779c19〕. | The complete wording has not been found in the extant Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T475). Related passages read 「無以生滅心行說實相法。」 tr. “Do not teach the Dharma of the true mark through mental activity of arising and ceasing”〔T14 0541a17〕 and 「法本不然，今則無滅，是寂滅義。」 tr. “Dharma was originally not burning and is now therefore unextinguished; this is the meaning of quiescent extinction”〔T14 0541a20〕. | The verbatim referent in the scripture remains under investigation. The later Abridged Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T1778) has closely similar wording at T38 0708c14, but that later parallel is not projected backward as scripture. |
| The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) reads 「本自不生，今則無滅。」 tr. “Originally unborn, it is now therefore unextinguished”〔T33 0779c20〕. | In one place the Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T475) reads 「本自不然，今則無滅。」 tr. “Originally not burning, it is now therefore unextinguished”〔T14 0540b05〕. Elsewhere it reads 「生滅為二。法本不生，今則無滅，得此無生法忍，是為入不二法門。」 tr. “Arising and ceasing are two. Dharma is originally unborn and is now therefore unextinguished. Attaining this patience with the nonarising of dharmas is entry into the Dharma-gateway of nonduality”〔T14 0550c02〕. | The root treatise appears to combine the structure 『本自』 tr. “originally” from one place with 『不生』 tr. “unborn” from another. Both scenes are recorded side by side without adjudication. |
The Great Treatise Cited in the Empty-House Simile
The Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) cites the Explanatory Treatise as reading 「若以無此空，一切無所作。」 tr. “If this emptiness did not exist, nothing could be done”〔T33 0780a11〕. The continuous verse in the extant Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (T1509) reads 「若信諸法空，是則順於理；若不信法空，一切皆違失。若以無是空，無所應造作，未作已有業，不作有作者。」 tr. “If one trusts the emptiness of all dharmas, one thereby accords with principle; if one does not trust the emptiness of dharmas, everything is contrary and lost. If this emptiness did not exist, nothing should be made or done; before anything was done karma would already exist, and one who does nothing would be an agent”〔T25 0245c09〕. The root treatise’s 『此』 tr. “this” and 『一切無所作』 tr. “nothing could be done” differ from the received text’s 『是』 tr. “this” and 『無所應造作』 tr. “nothing should be made or done”; they are recorded only side by side.
Complete Table of the Final Lotus Evidence
| Wording Cited in the Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) | Received Lotus Sutra (T262) | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| 「今佛放光明，助顯實相義。」 tr. “The Buddha now emits light to help reveal the meaning of the true mark”〔T33 0780a17〕 | 「今佛放光明，助發實相義。」 tr. “The Buddha now emits light to help disclose the meaning of the true mark”〔T09 0005b19〕 | 『顯』 tr. “reveal” and 『發』 tr. “disclose” differ. |
| 「諸法實相義，已為汝等說。」 tr. “The meaning of the true mark of all dharmas has already been taught to you”〔T33 0780a18〕 | 「諸法實相義，已為汝等說，」 tr. “The meaning of the true mark of all dharmas has already been taught to you”〔T09 0005a10〕 | The graphs agree and the final punctuation differs. |
| 「唯佛與佛，乃能究盡諸法實相。」 tr. “Only a buddha together with a buddha can ultimately exhaust the true mark of all dharmas”〔T33 0780a19〕 | 「唯佛與佛乃能究盡諸法實相」 tr. “Only a buddha together with a buddha can ultimately exhaust the true mark of all dharmas”〔T09 0005c10〕 | The root treatise adds a comma and full stop. |
| 「諸佛法久後，要當說真實。」 tr. “After the Dharma of the buddhas has remained for a long time, the real must be taught”〔T33 0780a20〕 | 「世尊法久後，要當說真實。」 tr. “After the Dharma of the World-Honored One has remained for a long time, the real must be taught”〔T09 0006a23〕 | 『諸佛』 tr. “the buddhas” and 『世尊』 tr. “the World-Honored One” differ. |
| The root treatise forms a composite citation across 『……』 tr. “…” with 「我以相嚴身」 tr. “I adorn my body with marks”〔T33 0780a20〕 and 「為說實相印。」 tr. “and teach the seal of the true mark”〔T33 0780a21〕. | The received text first reads 「我以相嚴身，光明照世間，」 tr. “I adorn my body with marks, and light illuminates the world”〔T09 0008b02〕 and then 「無量眾所尊，為說實相印。」 tr. “Revered by immeasurable assemblies, I teach the seal of the true mark”〔T09 0008b03〕. | The ellipsis between the two portions is part of the extant wording of the root treatise; the received text supplies the intervening eight graphs in full. |
| 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事。」 tr. “The World-Honored One teaches the real path; Pāpīyas can do no such thing”〔T33 0780a21〕 | 「世尊說實道，波旬無此事，」 tr. “The World-Honored One teaches the real path; Pāpīyas can do no such thing”〔T09 0011b01〕 | The graphs agree and the final punctuation differs. |
| 「安住實智中，我定當作佛。」 tr. “Abiding in real wisdom, I will certainly become a buddha”〔T33 0780a22〕 | The received text first reads 「疑悔永已盡，安住實智中。」 tr. “Doubt and regret are forever exhausted; I abide in real wisdom”〔T09 0011b06〕 and then 「我定當作佛，為天人所敬，」 tr. “I will certainly become a buddha, revered by gods and humans”〔T09 0011b07〕. | The root treatise joins portions across two adjacent verses. |
| 「開方便門，示真實相。」 tr. “Opening the gateway of skillful means, showing the true mark”〔T33 0780a23〕 | 「經開方便門，示真實相。」 tr. “The sutra opens the gateway of skillful means and shows the true mark”〔T09 0031c17〕 | The received text adds 『經』 tr. “the sutra.” |
| 「觀諸法如實相。」 tr. “Contemplate all dharmas as the true mark”〔T33 0780a24〕 | 「又復於法無所行，而觀諸法如實相，亦不」 tr. “Moreover, without practicing with regard to dharmas, contemplate all dharmas as the true mark, and do not…”〔T09 0037a19〕 | The root treatise extracts a phrase from within the sentence. |
| 「如來如實知見。」 tr. “The Tathāgata knows and sees as it really is”〔T33 0780a24〕 | 「如來如實知見三界之相，無有生」 tr. “The Tathāgata knows and sees the characteristics of the three realms as they really are; there is no birth…”〔T09 0042c13〕 | The root treatise omits the following object of the verb. |
Final Evidence from the Contemplation of Samantabhadra
| Wording Cited in the Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) | Received Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra (T277) | Relation |
|---|---|---|
| 「昔於靈山，廣說一實之道。」 tr. “In the past on Vulture Peak, he extensively taught the path of the one reality”〔T33 0780a25〕 | 「如來昔在耆闍崛山及餘住處，已廣分別一實之道；」 tr. “In the past, on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa and in other dwelling places, the Tathāgata already extensively distinguished the path of the one reality”〔T09 0389c10〕 | The root treatise uses Vulture Peak for Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, omits the other dwelling places, and differs in 『說』 tr. “taught” and 『分別』 tr. “distinguished.” |
| 「觀於一實境界。」 tr. “Contemplate the sphere of the one reality”〔T33 0780a26〕 | 「修行大乘方等經典、正念思惟一實境界？」 tr. “How does one cultivate the Great Vehicle vaipulya scriptures and correctly recollect and contemplate the sphere of the one reality?”〔T09 0389c05〕 | The root treatise makes a synopsis; the received text is part of a question. |
The root treatise finally says, 「故知諸佛為大事因緣出現於世，秖令眾生開佛知見，見此一實非因非果之理耳。」 tr. “Therefore one knows that the buddhas appear in the world because of the conditions of the great matter solely to enable sentient beings to open the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing and see this principle of the one reality that is neither cause nor fruit”〔T33 0780a26〕. This is Zhiyi’s conclusion drawn from the preceding citations, not a continuation of a quotation from the Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra. Corresponding scenes in the Lotus Sutra separately read 「諸佛世尊唯以一大事因緣故出現於世？」 tr. “Do the buddhas, the World-Honored Ones, appear in the world only because of the conditions of one great matter?”〔T09 0007a22〕 and 「欲令眾生開佛知見，使得清淨故，出現於世；」 tr. “They appear in the world because they wish to enable sentient beings to open the Buddha’s knowing-and-seeing and become purified”〔T09 0007a24〕. The root treatise’s conclusion through the principle of the one reality that is neither cause nor fruit gathers the preceding rejection of cause and fruit as the substance.
4. Essential Explanations from the Shiqian [the Mirror]
The Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian first divides the reason for introduction into two directions, one toward the preceding explanation of the name and the other toward the following purport and function. It explains 『總說』 tr. “general account” as the name’s general inclusion of the three distinctions of substance, purport, and function. The work of revealing the substance is 「頓點三軌之中體屬真性。」 tr. “to point out at once that, among the three tracks, substance belongs to true nature”〔T33 0931b02〕. Singling out true nature follows the name currently under discussion and does not deny the tracks of contemplative illumination and supporting accomplishment.
The intent of speaking about substance is further divided into four layers: all the sutra’s meanings have a destination; practice and understanding meet the substance only with great difficulty; the substance cannot be shown through words; yet it can still be spoken because of sentient beings’ capacities and conditions. The Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian explains the “convergence of many meanings” with 「本迹二門皆歸實相，一代義旨咸契於體」 tr. “Both the Origin and Trace Gates return to the true mark; the purports of the teachings of the whole period all accord with the substance”〔T33 0931b06〕. This is explanatory language in the Mirror, not a sentence from the root treatise.
When treating the old interpretations, the Mirror first notes that the general term true truth confuses the Great and Lesser Vehicles and remains insufficiently specific even within the Great Vehicle. Regarding the claim that cause and fruit jointly form the substance, Zhang’an’s twofold difficulty concerning change and nonchange respectively causes subject and object to disappear or leaves cause and fruit side by side. More crucially, the directions of substance and purport differ: when scripture says that cause and fruit do not depart from the true mark, this can establish cause and fruit as purport; to establish the sutra’s substance, one must instead see that the true mark does not depart from cause and fruit, and only then is it the substance belonging to the purport〔T33 0931b29–c03〕.
Among the five treatises cited by Zhang’an, the Mirror selects only the vehicle-basis, true suchness, or true mark placed first in each. Practice, gathering, obstruction, fruit, master, and assistant are not erased; they simply do not impersonate the underlying substance when substance is being discerned. The passages on Dharma-body and nirvāṇa are interpreted as hidden and manifest, the same substance bound in affliction and fully accomplished. This too is the Mirror’s interpretive judgment and is not projected backward as verbatim wording in the Treatise on the Lotus Sutra.
In discussing the Dharma seals, the Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian explains arising and ceasing and non-arising and non-ceasing with 『其實是一，說有廣略』 tr. “In reality they are one; the explanation is broad or brief”〔T33 0932a22〕. It also separately states that the present sutra alone clarifies the true mark as the one Dharma seal〔T33 0932b01〕. The former concerns the broad and brief modes of explanation, while the latter determines the substance of the present sutra. They cannot be collapsed into a simple comparison of quantities.
The direct revelation of the substance is outlined as first through Dharma, next through simile, and then through the various sets of three Dharmas. The treatment through Dharma is itself divided into indicating the substance, selecting through the three tracks, and selecting through the various subtleties. Selection means that 「今取權實相對的示體相，是故簡之。」 tr. “Now the substance’s mark is indicated precisely through the correlation of provisional and real, and therefore selection is made”〔T33 0932b08〕. It does not mean that every unselected Dharma is forever unrelated to the substance.
Within the empty-house simile, the Mirror directly judges 「空譬於體，屋譬於宗」 tr. “Space represents substance, and the house represents purport”〔T33 0932b12〕. The house formed by cause and fruit is what takes, while empty space is the substance taken. Purport can be revealed through multiple causes and fruits, but the substance is not thereby divided into multiple substances. The closing passage further distinguishes the direct citations from the concluding intent beginning with 『故知』 tr. “therefore one knows,” preventing the conclusion on the conditions of the great matter from being misread as another scriptural quotation.
5. Explanations of Various Masters
Zhiquan’s Fahua Jing Xuanqian Zhengshi (X0592) gives a continuous passage-by-passage explanation of this unit from 「二、顯體。」 tr. “Second, revealing the substance”〔X 0620b02〕 through 0621a11. Regarding the two difficult citations attributed to the Twelve Gate Treatise, he separately says that the present Xuanyi cites according to meaning and explicitly records 「大人佛不行，故名乘。全論不見此句，亦是約義引。」 tr. “Because the great person, the Buddha, does not travel, it is called a vehicle. This sentence is not found anywhere in the complete treatise; it too is a citation according to meaning”〔X 0620b12〕. Regarding the relation between the Dharma seal and the substance, he says 「既云無實相印，是魔所說，故知印即是體。」 tr. “Since it says that what lacks the seal of the true mark is taught by Māra, one knows that the seal is the substance”〔X 0620c09〕. These are a later old commentary’s source identifications and interpretive judgments. They are recorded but not turned backward into evidence for the root treatise’s wording.
Zhixu’s Fahua Jing Xuanyi Jieyao (X0589) preserves the two forms 『辨體／顯體』 tr. “discerning the substance / revealing the substance,” the seven-topic structure, and the core of the direct revelation, but omits the long passage presenting old interpretations. It proceeds directly from 「一、正顯體者，何意須用此體？」 tr. “First, as for directly revealing the substance: why must this substance be used?”〔X 0537c11〕 to the Dharma seals. This is a structural choice in the abridged text and does not mean that the omitted passage on the five treatises was judged meaningless.
Zhili’s Guan Wuliangshoufo Jing Rongxin Jie (X0408), in the context of the five chapters of another scripture, says 「此經以修心妙觀為宗，實相為體。若不爾者，宗非顯體之宗，體非宗家之體。」 tr. “This sutra takes the wondrous contemplation of cultivating the mind as its purport and the true mark as its substance. Otherwise, the purport would not be a purport that reveals the substance, and the substance would not be the substance belonging to the purport”〔X 0333b20〕. This supplies a structurally comparable reading in which purport and substance mutually reveal without being conflated. Its root scripture is not the Lotus, so it is used only as comparative testimony.
Within the delimited range of Zhiyuan’s twelve works, the Amitābha Sūtra Commentary (T1760) says 「二、辨體者，方等實相為經正體。」 tr. “Second, discerning the substance: the true mark of the vaipulya is the scripture’s true substance”〔T37 0352a10〕. The Niepan Jing Shu Sande Zhigui (X0662) says 「三法印者，大論云：大乘經用一實相印，生死即涅槃，涅槃即生死，不二不異，故小乘三法印。」 tr. “As for the three Dharma seals, the Great Treatise says that Great Vehicle scriptures use the one seal of the true mark: birth-and-death is immediately nirvāṇa, and nirvāṇa immediately birth-and-death, neither dual nor different; hence the Lesser Vehicle has three Dharma seals”〔X 0497a07〕. The Niepan Xuanyi Fayuan Jiyao (T1766) additionally has the adjacent framework of the five chapters and the mutual inclusion of substance, purport, and function: 「題玄義者，五章釋題妙盡經旨，故稱玄義。」 tr. “Entitling it ‘Profound Meaning’ means that the five chapters explain the title and wondrously exhaust the sutra’s purport; hence it is called Profound Meaning”〔T38 0015c23〕 and 「下明體宗用三各各互具，即此意也。」 tr. “Below, substance, purport, and function are clarified as three that each mutually contain the others; this is precisely the meaning here”〔T38 0016c22〕. No passage in this range has been found that comments on the present unit sentence by sentence or reproduces the sequence of the five treatises continuously. The evidence is therefore not expanded into a general conclusion about the history of the tradition.
6. Terminology
Substance (體). The root treatise itself explains this as the destination of an entire sutra and the place where its many meanings converge. Substance is not established here as an object isolated from myriad dharmas. The question is to what principle the sutra’s name and meanings, cause and fruit, and effective function return and upon what they rely.
Discerning the substance (辨體) and revealing the substance (顯體). “Discerning the substance” is the heading in the work’s opening list, while “revealing the substance” is the self-designation at the entrance to this chapter. The former emphasizes distinguishing and determining the substance, the latter directly disclosing it. Both forms belong to the extant text.
The track of true nature (真性軌). This is the track singled out among the three under the present name “substance.” Singling it out does not cancel contemplative illumination or supporting accomplishment. The root treatise expressly says that true nature is not without the other two tracks and that purport and function are not without the first track.
The one seal of the true mark (一實相印). This is the direct name for the sutra’s substance as revealed here. The seal is not a warrant added outside the substance. Only what possesses the seal of the true mark can distinguish Great Vehicle definitive meaning from Māra’s teaching, so the seal’s truth-distinguishing function stands precisely through the substance.
The three Dharma seals and one Dharma seal (三法印、一法印). The three seals speak of impermanence, no-self, and quiescent cessation according to the distinction between birth-and-death and nirvāṇa. The one seal speaks of the true mark of all dharmas according to the nonduality of birth-and-death and nirvāṇa. Three and one here serve different modes of doctrinal inclusion and cannot be turned into a numerical contest over the value of teachings.
Vehicle-basis, vehicle-practice, vehicle-gathering, vehicle-obstruction, and vehicle-fruit (乘本、乘行、乘攝、乘障、乘果). These are the five meanings in the Madhyānta-vibhāga passage cited by Zhang’an. In discerning the substance, only the vehicle-basis, true suchness and buddha-nature, is selected; the other four retain their respective positions.
Vehicle-master and vehicle-assistant (乘主、乘助). The passage attributed by the root treatise to the Twelve Gate Treatise takes prajñā as master and all practices as assistants. The master transports, while the assistants support accomplishment. Neither can exchange positions with the vehicle-basis upon which they rely, and their verbatim referent in the extant root treatise remains under investigation.
Adornments, attendants, and carriage. The root treatise preserves both graph forms 『莊校』 tr. “adornments” and 『莊挍』 tr. “adornments” in different sentences of the same passage. Prajñā, the five perfections, skillful means, and compassion are placed respectively as ox, adornments, attendants, and carriage—positions that transport or assist accomplishment. Their having a function does not make them the substance.
Half-word and full-word scriptures (半滿經). The root treatise uses the Great and Lesser Vehicle Dharma seals to confirm half-word and full-word scriptures, emphasizing a truth-distinguishing function through which non-Buddhist teachings cannot be mixed in and Māra cannot destroy them. This is not terminology for a modern bibliographic classification.
Direct revelation and selection of substance (正顯、簡體). Direct revelation first identifies the one true mark within the various systems. Selection then takes from the three tracks, Dharma realms, ten suchnesses, dependent origination, Four Truths, Two Truths, Three Truths, and other frameworks the item that directly reveals the true mark of the Middle Way. Selecting what is intended does not eliminate the remaining Dharma gates.
7. Similes · Cross-Reading · Carrying Forward
This unit first uses the parts of the ox cart to distinguish the vehicle’s substance from what supports its accomplishment. Zhang’an takes prajñā as the white ox, the five perfections as adornments, skillful means as attendants, and compassion as the carriage. Each has a function in transport, but none thereby becomes the true mark that is being directly identified.
The empty-house simile then distinguishes cause and fruit from the true mark without severing them. The root treatise says 「若譬喻明義，如梁柱綱紀一屋，非梁非柱，即屋內之空。」 tr. “To clarify the meaning through simile: beams and columns frame a house; what is neither beam nor column is precisely the empty space within it”〔T33 0780a07〕. Beams and columns represent cause and fruit, while the empty space within the house represents the true mark as substance. It continues, 「屋若無空，無所容受，因果無實相，無所成立。」 tr. “If the house had no empty space, it could receive nothing; if cause and fruit lacked the true mark, they could not be established”〔T33 0780a10〕. The purport of cause and fruit must stand upon the substance of the true mark, while the true mark is not empty space existing as a separate object outside the house.
The similes of the sun and moon spanning the sky and dukes and ministers assisting the sovereign likewise distinguish what reveals from what serves as destination. Sun and moon can be two, while the vast empty sky cannot be two. Ministers and generals can be many, while the sovereign cannot be many. Number does not establish a materially unique substance; it shows that many causes and fruits, Dharma gates, and functions require a common destination.
Read together with the Lotus Sutra, scenes from the “Introduction,” “Skillful Means,” “The Dharma Teacher,” “Peaceful Practices,” and “The Lifespan of the Tathāgata” chapters all direct the true mark, the real, and knowing and seeing as it really is toward the same sutra-substance. Read with the Sutra on the Practice of Contemplating Bodhisattva Samantabhadra, the path of the one reality and the sphere of the one reality return practice to the true mark. The citations do not build a definition by accumulating similar words; different scriptural scenes jointly bear the question of discerning the substance.
This unit carries forward the preceding general account in explaining the name and reserves their own names for purport and function below. It completes only the first of the seven topics. The later topics—broadly distinguishing the false, one Dharma with different names, gateways into the substance, and the three modes in which the substance pervades—will unfold from different directions the one seal of the true mark directly identified here.
8. Placement of the Editions
First, this unit uses the Fahua Xuanyi (T1716) as its base text, spanning T33 0779a06–0780a28. The corresponding direct explanation in the Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian (T1717) spans T33 0931a26–0932b25.
Second, the unit has one group of Taishō textual notes, at 0779b26. The edited text reads 『二、乘行，謂福慧』 tr. “Second, vehicle-practice, namely merit and wisdom,” while the original Taishō reading has 『三』 tr. “third.” Both readings are recorded side by side; this edition retains the edited text without adjudicating between them.
Third, the same passage contains two transmitted inline notes reading 『云云』 tr. “and so forth,” at 0779b16 and 0780a16. They are inline notes in the text and are not added to the count of one group of variants in the main text.
Fourth, the chapter-opening 『顯體』 tr. “revealing the substance” and the opening-list 『辨體』 tr. “discerning the substance,” together with 『莊校』 tr. “adornments” and 『莊挍』 tr. “adornments” in the same passage, retain the graph forms found at their respective locations and are not regularized for surface consistency.
Fifth, the specific extant text intended by the Vijñaptimātratā Treatise, the Twelve Gate Treatise passages on “the great person, the Buddha, does not travel” and on vehicle-basis, master, and assistant, and the Vimalakīrti Sūtra passage “all sentient beings constantly bear the mark of quiescent extinction” have not been secured from a single received witness capable of bearing the root treatise’s verbatim wording. They are therefore marked respectively as referent under investigation or citation according to meaning. Later near-parallels and ancient parallel texts are recorded only as witnesses and are not retroactively assigned as the original citations.