妙法蓮華經玄義 研詳去取
地名可能都是真的，路線卻可能畫錯。判教也是如此：找得到五味的經文，不等於把五味固定配成五時便掌握了經意；說得出有相、無相、同歸、常住，也不等於每個名稱都已用得周全。
研詳去取先不急著丟掉地圖。它逐項核對：有相若只留一門，其餘三門去了哪裡？無相若只等於空門，共與不共的其餘門如何安置？只說貶小褒大，偏圓、權實是否仍在視線之外？只說同歸一乘，所歸的佛性常住是否真正顯出？
最深的病，是把本來相須的兩面拆開。權與實一旦乖離，像父母乖離，導師無從出生；只取一音之實而失權，又像鰥夫寡婦不能共同生活，沒有子孫。真實若沒有方便，便無法向眾生宣說；方便若沒有真實，也失去印定所說的根據。
所以，去取不是把舊名全刪掉。病除去，法仍可用，只是用法已經不同。有相須具四門，無相須具八門；褒貶須照見小大、偏圓、權實；常住須讓常與無常雙用，如二鳥共同遊息。半與滿也不只分成兩格，而有開、破、帶、廢等不同關係。
舊名之所以能留，是因它仍可指路；舊義之所以必改，是因偏取會把別的路封死。研詳去取的心要，就在這一句：不因名字有病便毀掉一切法，也不因名字可用便沿襲原來的錯配。
真正的去取，不只是決定留下什麼、捨棄什麼。它使每一個留下的名稱重新容得下被遺漏的門，使權與實、有相與無相、常與無常不再各走一邊。名可以相同，路已經不同。
An old map: is the error in its place-names, or in the way its routes were drawn? The place-names may all be genuine while the routes are wrong. Classifying the teaching is the same. Finding scriptural passages on the five flavors does not mean that fixing those flavors into five periods has grasped the scriptures’ intent. Being able to name teachings of marks, no marks, common return, and permanence does not mean that each name has been used comprehensively.
Examining in detail what to accept and reject does not begin by throwing the map away. It checks each point in turn. If the teaching of marks retains only one gateway, where have the other three gone? If the teaching without marks is equated only with the gateway of emptiness, where are the remaining gateways of shared and unshared prajñā to be placed? If one speaks only of reproaching the small and praising the great, do the partial and perfect, provisional and real, still remain outside the field of view? If one speaks only of the myriad wholesome practices returning to the One Vehicle, has their destination in permanently abiding buddha-nature truly been revealed?
The deepest illness is separating two aspects that originally require one another. Once the provisional and real pull apart, it is like parents separating: no guide can be born. To take only the reality of the one sound while losing the provisional is again like a widower and widow unable to share a household, with no descendants. Without skillful means, reality cannot be taught and revealed to sentient beings; without reality, skillful means loses the seal that confirms what it teaches.
Acceptance and rejection therefore do not mean deleting every old name. Once the illness is removed, the Dharma can still be used, but its manner of use has changed. The teaching of marks must fully employ four gateways, and the teaching without marks eight. Praise and reproach must take in small and great, partial and perfect, provisional and real. Permanence must employ permanence and impermanence together, like two birds ranging and resting side by side. Half and full are likewise not two static compartments, but stand in different relations of opening, breaking, carrying, and abolishing.
The old names can remain because they can still indicate a road. Their old meanings must change because one-sided acceptance seals off other roads. The heart of this detailed examination lies here: do not destroy every Dharma because a name has become diseased, and do not preserve the old miscorrespondence merely because the name can still be used.
True acceptance and rejection do more than decide what to retain and what to discard. They make every retained name capacious enough to hold the gateways it had omitted, so that provisional and real, marks and no marks, permanence and impermanence no longer go their separate ways. The name may be the same; the road is now wholly different.
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 0805b09〕。段/行首〔T33 …〕＝大正藏頁·欄·行錨（換頁一枚）。
〔T33 0805b09〕○四研詳去取者，覈實故言研，覈權故言詳，適法相故言去取。 若五時明教，得五味方便之文，而失一道真實之意。雖得其文，配對失旨，其文通用，其對宜休。 若言十二年前明有相教，此得小乘一門而失三門。何者？三藏有四門得道，或見有得道，如阿毘曇；或見空得道，如成實；或見亦有亦空得道，如昆勒；或見非空非有得道，如車匿。故知泥洹真法寶，眾生各以種種門入，若欲舉一標四，應總言三藏，若欲廣明，備立四種，何意偏存有相，失沒三耶？疑誤後生，空有成諍。若三藏中菩薩，須廣學四門，通諸方便，後得佛時，名正遍知。若但標有相之教，唯得見有得道一門聲聞，全失三門，入泥洹路，則於小乘義闕。若但有相，秖偏知一門，不解三門，非正遍知，於菩薩義闕。其闕則眾，故須棄；其得則寡，唯存一。 若十二年後明無相，無相者，此得共般若，失不共般若。共般若有四門：如幻如化即有門，幻化即無是空門，幻化有而不有是亦空亦有門，雙非幻化即非空非有門。若言般若無相者，秖得共般若一空門，全失三門，亦失七門。尚不是因中正遍知，況果上正遍知。其失則去，其得則取〔云云〕。 若言第三時，抑挫聲聞褒揚菩薩，此得斥小一種聲聞，全失七種聲聞；得顯大一意，全不得折挫諸偏菩薩，褒揚極圓菩薩；亦不得折挫諸權菩薩，褒揚於實菩薩。又不識偏、圓、權、實四門，所得處少，不得處多。 若言第四時同歸之教，唯得萬善同歸一乘之名，不得萬善同歸一乘之所。所者，即佛性。同歸常住等也。秖得會三歸一，不得會五歸一，不得會七歸一；唯得歸於一，不得歸佛性常住，有如此等失〔云云〕。 第五時，若依二諦論常住，則非常住；若不依二諦，無所間然。彼雖明常，全失非常非無常，雙用常無常，唯得四術之一，永失七術，復不得其正體〔云云〕。 四時教，三時教，無文可依，無實可據，進退無所可取〔云云〕。 北地五時亦無文據，又失實意，其間去取，類前可知。半滿教得實意，失方便意。四宗教失五味方便意，又失實意。五宗、六宗例如此。二種大乘教，權實乖離，父母乖離，導師云何得生？權若離實，無實相印，是魔所說。實若離權，不可說示。一音教得實失權，鰥夫寡婦，不成生活，永無子孫。 眾家解教，種種不同，皆是當世之師，各各自謂有於深致。時既流播，義亦添雜，晚賢情執，苟諍紛紜，所以上來研難，次論去取，略知大意〔云云〕。 若除其病，如上所說，若不除法，用之則異。云何用異？有相則具用四門；無相則用共不共八門。褒貶則用貶小褒大，貶偏褒圓，貶權褒實。同歸則用同歸一乘，常住佛性，究竟圓趣。常住則用非常、非無常，雙用常無常，二鳥俱遊，八術具足。用五味則次第如文，在下當說。用提謂波利，亦不止是人天之乘。用半滿則有五句：滿、開滿立半、破半明滿、帶半明滿、廢半明滿。用因緣、假名，則為三藏兩門耳。用誑相，是通教一門耳。用真秖是常，常秖是真。法界不獨在《華嚴》；圓宗不偏指《大集》。用有相無相者，約有相明無相，約無相明有相，二不相離。用一音者，有慧方便解，有方便慧解。設取其名，用義永異〔云云〕。
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.
為何名為研詳去取
第四，說研詳去取。核驗真實的一面，所以稱為『研』；核驗方便權宜的一面，所以稱為『詳』；衡量一種說法是否契合法相，然後決定捨取，所以稱為『去取』。
若用五時來說明教法，雖然取得五味方便次第的經文，卻失去一道真實的旨意。雖然取得那段經文，這樣配對卻失去宗旨；經文本來可以通用，那個固定配對則應停止。
逐項核驗所得與所失
若說佛成道後最初十二年只宣說有相教，這只取得小乘四門中的一門，卻失去另外三門。為什麼？三藏教有四種入道門：有人由見有而得道，如阿毘曇；有人由見空而得道，如成實；有人由見亦有亦空而得道，如昆勒；有人由見非空非有而得道，如車匿。因此可知，泥洹是真實法寶，眾生各由種種不同的門進入。
若想舉出一個總名來標示四門，就應總稱三藏教；若想廣泛說明，就應完整建立四種門。為何偏偏只保留有相一門，把其餘三門隱沒？這會使後學疑惑誤解，讓空、有兩邊成為爭論。
三藏教中的菩薩必須廣學四門，通達種種方便，成佛之後才名為正遍知。若只標舉有相教，對聲聞而言，只得到見有得道的一門，完全失去另外三條進入泥洹的道路，小乘之義便有欠缺。對菩薩而言，若只有有相，便只偏知一門而不了解另外三門，不能稱為正遍知，菩薩之義也有欠缺。這種說法缺失很多，所以必須捨棄；所得很少，只保住一門而已。
若說十二年後宣說無相教，這雖取得共般若，卻失去不共般若。共般若也有四門：如幻如化而當下是有，是有門；幻化當下即無，是空門；幻化雖有而不實有，是亦空亦有門；對幻化的有、無兩邊都加以否定，是非空非有門。若只說般若無相，便只取得共般若四門中的一個空門，完全失去其餘三門，也失去七門。這樣在修因時尚且不能稱為正遍知，何況成佛之後的正遍知？所失的應當除去，所得的可以保留。
若說第三時的教法只是貶抑聲聞、褒揚菩薩，便只得到斥責小乘中一種聲聞的意思，完全失去另外七種聲聞；只得到顯揚大乘的一層意思，卻完全沒有折伏偏教菩薩、褒揚圓教菩薩，也沒有折伏權教菩薩、褒揚實教菩薩。這種說法又不明白偏、圓、權、實四門，所得之處少，未得之處多。
若說第四時是同歸之教，便只得到萬善同歸一乘的名稱，沒有得到萬善同歸一乘的歸處。所謂歸處，就是佛性，也就是同歸常住。這種說法只得到會三乘歸一，沒有會五歸一，也沒有會七歸一；只得到歸一，沒有歸於佛性常住，因此有這些缺失。
說到第五時，若依二諦來談常住，所說的便還不是真正的常住；若不依二諦，才沒有可以非議之處。那一家雖然說常，卻完全失去既非常又非無常，也失去同時運用常與無常；只得到四術中的一項，永遠失去其餘七術，又沒有得到正體。
至於四時教與三時教，沒有經文可以依憑，也沒有實義可以作根據，進退之間都沒有可取之處。
北地所立五時也沒有經文依據，又失去真實旨意；其中應捨應取之處，可以依前面各項類推而知。半滿教得到真實的一面，卻失去方便的一面。四宗教失去五味方便的旨意，也失去真實旨意；五宗教、六宗教也依此類推。
二種大乘教把權與實分離；這就像父母分離，導師如何能夠出生？權若離開實，便沒有實相印，是魔所說；實若離開權，便無法向眾生宣說顯示。一音教得到實而失去權，如同鰥夫與寡婦不能共同生活，永遠沒有子孫。
各家解釋教相，說法種種不同，都是當時的老師，各自認為自己的見解有深刻旨趣。這些說法既已流傳，義理也不斷有所增添、混雜；後來的賢者又各隨自己的情執，苟且相爭，紛紜不已。因此，上文先作研核辨難，現在再論應捨應取，使人略知其中大意。
除去病，仍可使用那些法
若要除去舊說的病，方法已如上文；若不把法本身除去，使用方式便與舊說不同。怎樣不同？
使用『有相』這個名稱時，要完整使用四門；使用『無相』時，要使用共般若與不共般若的八門。說褒貶時，要同時使用貶小褒大、貶偏褒圓、貶權褒實三組。說同歸時，要說萬善同歸一乘，也要說常住佛性與究竟圓滿的歸趣。說常住時，要使用非常、非無常，也要同時使用常與無常，使二鳥一同遊行，八術完整具足。
使用五味時，要依經文所說的次第，具體內容在下文說明。使用提謂波利時，也不能把它限作人天乘。
使用半滿時，有五句：第一是滿；第二是開滿而立半；第三是破半而明滿；第四是帶半而明滿；第五是廢半而明滿。
使用因緣與假名，只把它們作為三藏教的兩門；使用誑相，只把它作為通教的一門。使用真時，真就是常；使用常時，常就是真。法界不只在《華嚴》中，圓宗也不偏指《大集》。
使用有相與無相時，要依有相說明無相，也依無相說明有相，兩者不能分離。使用一音時，有慧方便解，也有方便慧解。即使採取舊有名稱，實際運用的義理也永遠不同。
Why Is It Called Examining in Detail What to Accept and Reject?
Fourth comes examining in detail what to accept and reject. Verifying the side of reality is called “investigating.” Verifying the side of provisional skillful means is called “examining in detail.” Measuring whether an account accords with the characteristics of the Dharma and then deciding what to discard or retain is called “rejecting and accepting.”
If the teaching is explained through five periods, one may obtain the scriptural wording on the expedient sequence of the five flavors yet lose the intent of the one path of reality. Although the passage has been obtained, its purport is lost through this correspondence. The scriptural wording itself can be generally applied, but that fixed correspondence should cease.
Verifying in Each Case What Was Obtained and What Was Lost
Suppose one says that during the first twelve years after the Buddha’s awakening he taught only a teaching of marks. This obtains only one of the four gateways of the Lesser Vehicle and loses the other three. Why? The Tripiṭaka Teaching has four gateways of entry into the path. Some see existence and attain the path, as in the Abhidharma. Some see emptiness and attain the path, as in the Satyasiddhi Treatise. Some see both existence and emptiness and attain the path, as in the Kunle Treatise. Some see neither emptiness nor existence and attain the path, as with Channa. One therefore knows that nirvāṇa is the true Dharma treasure and that sentient beings enter through various gateways.
If one wishes to use a single comprehensive name to designate all four gateways, one should call them the Tripiṭaka Teaching. If one wishes to explain them extensively, all four gateways should be established in full. Why preserve only the gateway of marks and conceal the other three? Doing so causes later students to become doubtful and mistaken and turns the two sides of emptiness and existence into a dispute.
Bodhisattvas within the Tripiṭaka Teaching must study all four gateways broadly and master the various skillful means; only after becoming buddhas are they called those of right and universal knowledge. If only the teaching of marks is designated, then for śrāvakas one obtains only the single gateway of seeing existence and attaining the path, while entirely losing the other three roads into nirvāṇa. The meaning of the Lesser Vehicle is therefore incomplete. For bodhisattvas, if there are only marks, they know one gateway one-sidedly and do not understand the other three. They cannot be called those of right and universal knowledge, and the bodhisattva meaning is likewise incomplete. Such an account has many omissions and therefore must be rejected; what it obtains is scant, preserving only one gateway.
Suppose one says that a teaching without marks was taught after the twelfth year. This obtains shared prajñā but loses unshared prajñā. Shared prajñā also has four gateways. Illusory and transformational phenomena are immediately existent: this is the gateway of existence. Illusion and transformation are immediately nonexistent: this is the gateway of emptiness. Illusory and transformational phenomena exist yet are not truly existent: this is the gateway both empty and existent. Both the existent and nonexistent sides of illusion and transformation are negated: this is the gateway neither empty nor existent. If one says only that prajñā has no marks, one obtains merely the single gateway of emptiness among the four gateways of shared prajñā, entirely loses the other three, and also loses seven gateways in all. Such an account is not yet right and universal knowledge even while cultivating the cause, much less right and universal knowledge upon the fruit. What it loses should be rejected; what it obtains can be accepted.
Suppose one says that the teaching of the third period does no more than suppress śrāvakas and praise bodhisattvas. This obtains only the reproach of one kind of śrāvaka within the Lesser Vehicle and entirely loses seven other kinds of śrāvaka. It obtains one meaning of revealing the Great Vehicle, but entirely fails to subdue bodhisattvas of the partial teaching and praise bodhisattvas of the Perfect Teaching, and likewise fails to subdue provisional bodhisattvas and praise real bodhisattvas. It also does not recognize the four gateways of partial, perfect, provisional, and real. Little is obtained and much remains unobtained.
Suppose one says that the fourth period is a teaching of common return. This obtains only the name “the myriad wholesome practices returning together to the One Vehicle,” without obtaining the destination to which those practices return. The destination means buddha-nature, which is also the permanently abiding to which they return together. This account obtains only the gathering of the three vehicles into the one; it does not gather five into the one and does not gather seven into the one. It obtains only return to the one, not return to permanently abiding buddha-nature, and therefore has all these deficiencies.
As for the fifth period, if permanence is discussed in reliance upon the Two Truths, what is stated is still not true permanence. Only if it does not rely upon the Two Truths is there nothing to criticize. Although that school teaches permanence, it entirely loses both neither permanence nor impermanence and the simultaneous employment of permanence and impermanence. It obtains only one of the four operations, forever loses the other seven operations, and also fails to obtain their proper substance.
As for teachings of four periods and three periods, they have no scriptural passage upon which to rely and no real meaning to use as a basis. Whether advancing or withdrawing, there is nothing in them that can be accepted.
The Northern teaching of five periods likewise lacks scriptural warrant and also loses the real intent. What should be rejected and accepted within it can be inferred from the preceding items. The half-and-full teaching obtains the side of reality but loses the side of skillful means. The teaching of four schools loses the expedient intent of the five flavors and also loses the real intent; teachings of five and six schools can be understood by analogy.
The teaching of two kinds of Great Vehicle separates the provisional and real. This resembles parents separating: how could a guide be born? If the provisional is separated from the real, it lacks the seal of the true mark and is what Māra teaches. If the real is separated from the provisional, it cannot be taught and revealed to sentient beings. The one-sound teaching obtains the real and loses the provisional. It is like a widower and widow who cannot share a household and will never have descendants.
The various masters explain the characteristics of the teaching in many different ways. All were teachers of their respective times, and each regarded his own understanding as possessing profound intent. As those accounts circulated, their meanings were continually augmented and mixed. Later worthies then followed their own affective attachments and contended carelessly, producing endless confusion. The preceding discussion therefore investigated and challenged these views, and the present discussion next considers what to reject and accept, so that their general intent may be known in outline.
Remove the Illness, Yet Continue to Use Those Dharmas
How to remove the illness of the old explanations has already been stated. If the Dharma itself is not removed, however, its manner of use differs from theirs. How does it differ?
When using the name “teaching of marks,” employ all four gateways in full. When using “teaching without marks,” employ the eight gateways of shared and unshared prajñā. When speaking of praise and reproach, employ all three pairs: reproaching the small and praising the great, reproaching the partial and praising the perfect, reproaching the provisional and praising the real. When speaking of common return, speak of the myriad wholesome practices returning together to the One Vehicle, and also of permanently abiding buddha-nature and the ultimately perfect destination. When speaking of permanence, employ neither permanence nor impermanence and also employ permanence and impermanence together, so that the two birds range together and all eight operations are complete.
When using the five flavors, follow the sequence stated in scripture; the details will be explained below. When using Tiwei and Boli, do not confine them to the human-and-deva vehicle.
When using half and full, there are five formulations: first, full; second, opening the full to establish the half; third, breaking the half to clarify the full; fourth, carrying the half while clarifying the full; fifth, abolishing the half to clarify the full.
When using causes and conditions and provisional names, take them only as two gateways of the Tripiṭaka Teaching. When using deceptive marks, take them only as one gateway of the Shared Teaching. When using the real, the real is precisely the permanent; when using the permanent, the permanent is precisely the real. The Dharma realm does not belong only to the Avataṃsaka, and the perfect school does not refer exclusively to the Great Collection.
When using marks and no marks, clarify no marks in terms of marks and clarify marks in terms of no marks; the two cannot be separated. When using the one sound, there is liberation through skillful means endowed with wisdom and liberation through wisdom endowed with skillful means. Even if the old names are adopted, their actual meaning in use is wholly different.
研詳去取不是先把諸家分成可留與可棄，再整家保留或整家刪除。它先問三件事：這個判法真正取得了什麼？又遺失了什麼？若仍採其名，應當怎樣使用，才不再重犯原來的偏失？
本相的回答分成前後兩面。前半研核各家判教，逐項指出所得與所失；後半轉說去取，除去的是錯配之病，法與名目仍可依完整義理重新運用。
文句可通用，固定配對為何應停
以五時配五味，看來最有經文可依。本論先承認它得到五味方便之文，隨即指出它失去一道真實之意。問題不在五味經文本身，而在把經文固定配成一套次第後，方便與真實不能同時被看見。
因此，本論說經文仍可通用，舊有配對卻應停止。這一句立下全相的方法：經文有它真實承擔的作用，不因舊判失當而一併作廢；判法也不能只因找到相似文句，就算掌握經意。
研是核實，詳是核權。只見真實而失方便，不完整；只見方便而失真實，也不完整。去取所衡量的，正是兩面能否各得其位而不相離。
一門為何不能代替四門
有相教的問題，首先出在以一門概括四門。三藏中，有見有得道、見空得道、見亦有亦空得道、見非空非有得道四條入路。泥洹是真法寶，眾生各由種種門入；既有四門，便不能偏舉有相一門，使其餘三門隱沒。
若求總名，三藏可以總攝；若要廣說，四門便須完整呈現。偏存一門，不只使聲聞少了三條入泥洹路，也使菩薩不能廣學四門、通諸方便。聲聞一邊有所闕，菩薩一邊也有所闕；所得只是一門，所失卻多。
無相教也有同樣的偏取。共般若以如幻如化開四門：即有、即無、有而不有、雙非幻化。若只把無相等同其中空門，便只得一門而失其餘，連不共般若也未能收攝。名稱看似與般若相應，實際所容仍太窄。
所以，本相反覆列出三門、七門、七種聲聞、五與七，不是為了讓判教變成數目競賽，而是用所得與所失顯出偏取的代價。一種說法若只看見自己所取的一格，便會把未被收進來的入道門與眾生根機留在外面。
褒貶與同歸，為何也會有所未盡
第三時若只說貶聲聞、褒菩薩，便只抓住小與大的一組對照。偏與圓、權與實也各有應斥、應揚之處；只說一組，所得便少，所未得仍多。
第四時若只說萬善同歸一乘，便只得同歸之名，未得同歸之所。歸處是佛性與常住；只說會三歸一，而五與七尚未會入，也還沒有把歸一與常住佛性相連。『同歸』若沒有指出所歸，便仍停在名稱。
第五時若只立常，也仍是一端。真正的常住不能停在一個孤立的『常』，還須非常、非無常，也須常與無常雙用。只得一術，便失其餘；常與無常不能雙用，二鳥也不能俱遊。
權實一分，為何連教化也無從成立
二種大乘教把權與實拆開，本論以父母乖離為譬：父母既離，導師無從出生。權若離實，所說失去實相印；實若離權，真實又無法向眾生宣說顯示。權使真實可說、可示，實使方便有所印定；兩者相離，任取一邊都不能完成教化。
一音教只取實而失權，本論再用鰥夫與寡婦作譬。兩人各自孤立，不能成家生活，也沒有子孫。前一譬說不能出生導師，後一譬說不能延續生活，所指都在分離之後無法生起利益。
眾家各自認為所說有深意，流傳之後又不斷添雜；後人各執一端，爭論便更加紛紜。研詳逐項追問所得與所失，正要使名稱不再成為護持一端、排斥另一端的旗號。
除病而用法，用法便須改義
全相最重要的轉折，在『若除其病』之後。上文所除，是一門吞沒多門、方便與真實分離、同歸而不知所歸等病；法與名目本身並未因此消失。若仍使用那些名稱，內容就要重新打開。
有相須具用四門，無相須具用共與不共八門。褒貶須同時照見小與大、偏與圓、權與實。同歸須通向一乘、常住佛性與究竟圓趣。常住須非常、非無常，也須常與無常雙用，使二鳥俱遊、八術具足。
五味依經文次第而用，提謂波利不只限在人天乘。半與滿之間不是靜止的兩格，而有滿、開滿立半、破半明滿、帶半明滿、廢半明滿五種關係。因緣、假名各作三藏一門，誑相作通教一門；真與常互相顯明，法界不專屬《華嚴》，圓宗也不偏限《大集》。
有相可用來明無相，無相也可用來明有相，兩者不相分離。一音之用則同時保有慧方便解與方便慧解。這些不是把舊說原封收回，而是使舊名進入新的義理關係；名雖可取，用義已經永遠不同。
釋籤之眼
湛然先把本相分為釋章名與正作研詳兩層，並用數目補出本論略說。無相只取共般若空門，所失七門，是共般若其餘三門加不共般若四門；斥小只取藏、通八門中三藏有門的一種聲聞，故失其餘七種。會五為人、天、三乘；會七則聲聞、支佛各開為二。
八術一段，湛然以常樂等四及非常非無常等四說明總數，使『只得常』之失更清楚：八種關係只保住一端。後出古注對配置另有異議，故總數可明，古德在配置上仍有兩說。
二鳥之譬，湛然略去鳥名音義之爭，取雌雄共遊共息。他連破兩種分離：一鳥在生死低處、一鳥在涅槃高處，不能雙遊；兩常同成二雄、兩無常同成二雌，也失相偶。鏡中所取，是生死與涅槃都具常無常，事理相即，再以六即縱貫雙遊。
至一音教，湛然把慧判為實、方便判為權，重點在二義相即而不相離。五時若只留漸誘方便，一音若只留平等實慧，都還是一邊；只有慧與方便彼此成就，『有慧方便解』與『有方便慧解』才真正成為解。
Examining in detail what to accept and reject does not first divide the various masters into those to retain and those to discard, then preserve or delete each system wholesale. It begins with three questions. What has this classification genuinely obtained? What has it omitted? If its name is still adopted, how must it be used so that its original one-sided error is not repeated?
The root treatise answers from two successive sides. The first half investigates the classifications of the various masters, identifying in each case what was obtained and what was lost. The latter half turns to acceptance and rejection: what is removed is the illness of false correspondence, while the Dharmas and their names can still be used anew according to their complete meanings.
Why Should Scriptural Wording Remain Usable While Fixed Correspondence Ceases?
Matching the five periods to the five flavors appears to have the strongest scriptural basis. The root treatise first acknowledges that this account obtains the scriptural wording concerning the expedient sequence of the five flavors, then immediately points out that it loses the intent of the one path of reality. The problem does not lie in the scriptural passage on the five flavors itself. It lies in fixing that passage into a single sequence of correspondences, after which skillful means and reality can no longer be seen together.
The treatise therefore says that the scriptural wording remains generally usable, while the old correspondence should cease. This statement establishes the method of the entire section. A scriptural passage has a real function that it bears and is not abolished along with an erroneous old classification. At the same time, a classification cannot claim to have grasped a scripture’s intent merely because it has found similar wording.
Investigation verifies the real; detailed examination verifies the provisional. To see reality while losing skillful means is incomplete, and to see skillful means while losing reality is likewise incomplete. Acceptance and rejection measure precisely whether these two sides can each take their proper place without separating.
Why Can One Gateway Not Stand for Four?
The problem with the teaching of marks begins in using one gateway to encompass four. Within the Tripiṭaka Teaching are four paths of entry: seeing existence and attaining the path, seeing emptiness and attaining the path, seeing both existence and emptiness and attaining the path, and seeing neither emptiness nor existence and attaining the path. Nirvāṇa is the true Dharma treasure, and sentient beings enter it through various gateways. Since there are four, one cannot single out only the gateway of marks and cause the other three to disappear.
If a comprehensive name is sought, Tripiṭaka can gather them all. If they are to be explained extensively, all four gateways must be presented. Preserving only one gateway not only leaves śrāvakas without three roads of entry into nirvāṇa, but also prevents bodhisattvas from studying the four gateways broadly and mastering the various skillful means. Something is missing on the śrāvaka side and on the bodhisattva side alike: only one gateway is obtained, while much is lost.
The teaching without marks involves the same one-sided acceptance. Shared prajñā opens four gateways through the illusory and transformational: immediately existent, immediately nonexistent, existent yet not truly existent, and the double negation of illusion and transformation. If no marks is equated only with the gateway of emptiness among these, one gateway is obtained and all the others are lost, while unshared prajñā is not gathered at all. The name appears to correspond to prajñā, but what it can actually contain remains too narrow.
This is why the passage repeatedly counts three gateways, seven gateways, seven kinds of śrāvakas, five, and seven. It is not turning the work of classifying the teaching into a contest of numbers. It uses what is obtained and lost to reveal the cost of accepting only one side. When an account sees only the single compartment it has retained, it leaves outside all the gateways of entry and faculties of sentient beings that compartment does not contain.
Why Can Praise and Reproach and Common Return Still Fall Short?
If the third period is described only as reproaching śrāvakas and praising bodhisattvas, it grasps only one contrast between small and great. Partial and perfect, provisional and real, each also have what must be reproached and what must be praised. To state only one pair is to obtain little while leaving much still unobtained.
If the fourth period is described only as the myriad wholesome practices returning together to the One Vehicle, it obtains only the name of common return, not the destination of that return. The destination is buddha-nature and permanence. To speak only of gathering the three into the one, while five and seven have not yet been gathered, also fails to connect return to the one with permanently abiding buddha-nature. “Common return” remains merely a name if it does not reveal where the return leads.
If the fifth period establishes only permanence, it too remains at one extreme. True permanence cannot stop at an isolated “permanent.” It must also include neither permanent nor impermanent, and must employ permanence and impermanence together. To obtain only one operation is to lose the others; if permanence and impermanence cannot be used together, neither can the two birds range together.
Once Provisional and Real Are Divided, Why Can Teaching No Longer Be Established?
The twofold Great Vehicle teaching splits the provisional from the real. The root treatise compares this to parents separating: once the parents have separated, a guide cannot be born. When the provisional is separated from the real, what is taught loses the seal of the true mark. When the real is separated from the provisional, reality cannot be taught and revealed to sentient beings. The provisional makes reality teachable and revealable, while the real gives skillful means the seal that confirms it. Once the two are separated, taking either side alone can no longer complete the work of teaching and transformation.
The one-sound teaching takes only the real and loses the provisional, so the root treatise next uses the simile of a widower and widow. Each remains alone; they cannot make a household and have no descendants. The first simile concerns the failure to give birth to a guide, and the second the failure to sustain a shared life. Both point to the same inability to produce benefit after what belongs together has been separated.
The various masters each regarded their own explanation as possessing profound intent. As these accounts circulated, their meanings were continually augmented and mixed; later worthies then grasped their respective extremes, and disputes grew still more tangled. Detailed examination asks item by item what was obtained and what was lost so that names no longer become banners for defending one extreme and excluding another.
Removing the Illness and Using the Dharma: Why Must Its Meaning in Use Change?
The decisive turn of the entire section comes after the words “if the illness is removed.” What the preceding discussion removes is the illness of one gateway swallowing many, skillful means and reality being separated, common return being asserted without knowing its destination, and similar errors. The Dharmas and their names do not thereby disappear. If those names continue to be used, their contents must be opened again.
The teaching of marks must fully employ four gateways, and the teaching without marks the eight gateways of shared and unshared prajñā. Praise and reproach must simultaneously illuminate small and great, partial and perfect, provisional and real. Common return must lead to the One Vehicle, permanently abiding buddha-nature, and the ultimately perfect destination. Permanence must include neither permanent nor impermanent and must also employ permanence and impermanence together, so that the two birds range together and all eight operations are complete.
The five flavors are used in the sequence stated in scripture, while Tiwei and Boli are not confined to the human-and-deva vehicle. Half and full are not two static compartments but stand in five relations: full; opening the full to establish the half; breaking the half to clarify the full; carrying the half while clarifying the full; and abolishing the half to clarify the full. Causes and conditions and provisional names each serve as one gateway of the Tripiṭaka Teaching, while deceptive marks serve as one gateway of the Shared Teaching. The real and the permanent reveal one another; the Dharma realm is not exclusive to the Avataṃsaka, and the perfect school is not confined to the Great Collection.
Marks can be used to clarify no marks, and no marks to clarify marks; the two do not separate. The one sound likewise retains both liberation through skillful means endowed with wisdom and liberation through wisdom endowed with skillful means. This does not take the old explanations back unchanged. It makes the old names enter new doctrinal relations: the names may be accepted, but their meaning in use has become wholly different.
Through the Eye of the Shiqian
Zhanran first divides this section into two layers: explaining the chapter heading and then properly undertaking the detailed examination. He also uses numbers to make explicit what the root treatise states briefly. When the teaching without marks takes only the gateway of emptiness within shared prajñā, the seven gateways lost are the remaining three gateways of shared prajñā together with the four of unshared prajñā. When reproaching the small takes only one kind of śrāvaka in the Tripiṭaka gateway of existence among the eight Tripiṭaka and Shared gateways, the remaining seven kinds are lost. Gathering five means humans, devas, and the three vehicles; gathering seven further divides śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas into two kinds each.
In the passage on the eight operations, Zhanran explains the total through the four of permanence, bliss, and the rest, together with the four of neither permanence nor impermanence and the rest. This makes the error of “obtaining permanence alone” clearer: of eight relations, only one extreme has been retained. A later ancient commentary disagrees over their arrangement. The total can therefore be clarified, while two ancient interpretations of the arrangement remain.
In the simile of the two birds, Zhanran sets aside disputes over the sounds and meanings of the birds’ names and takes the female and male ranging and resting together. He refutes two forms of separation in succession. If one bird remains below in birth-and-death and one above in nirvāṇa, they cannot range together. If two instances of permanence become two males and two instances of impermanence become two females, the paired relation is likewise lost. The Mirror takes birth-and-death and nirvāṇa each to possess permanence and impermanence, with phenomena and principle mutually implicative, and then threads their ranging together vertically through the six identities.
At the one-sound teaching, Zhanran identifies wisdom as the real and skillful means as the provisional, emphasizing that the two meanings are mutually implicative and cannot be separated. If the five periods retain only the gradual guidance of skillful means, or the one sound retains only the equal real wisdom, each still holds one side. Only when wisdom and skillful means accomplish one another do “liberation through skillful means endowed with wisdom” and “liberation through wisdom endowed with skillful means” genuinely become liberation.
考據Apparatus
研詳去取先核各家判教所得與所失，再轉入真正的去取。前半逐項指出：有些舊說得其經文而失其旨，有些只取一門而遺其餘，有些把權與實分作兩途。後半不把舊名一概廢棄，而以『除病不除法』為轉折：名目容可沿用，用義必須重定。
一、科判定位
本相起於「○四研詳去取者，覈實故言研，覈權故言詳，適法相故言去取。」〔T33 0805b09〕，止於「設取其名，用義永異〔云云〕。」〔T33 0806a13〕；下一行「○五、判教相者」〔T33 0806a14〕已轉第五相。
《法華玄義釋籤》（T1717）以「○四研詳中二：先釋章名」〔T33 0956a18〕總開本相，次就『若五時』以下正作研詳，並說「尋之可見，不復分節。」〔0956a19〕。其正釋止於「故今斥之。義同縛慧及縛方便。」〔0956c12〕；下一行「○五判教中，列章，解釋。」〔0956c13〕已入後相。
《法華三大部科文》（X0584）另把本相細分為「初明研詳去取」〔X 0678a09〕與取名用義兩大段。前段先「初研詳南三」〔0678a11〕，其中廣論五時，繼以四時、三時略斥餘二；再以「二北地下研詳北七」〔0678a21〕轉北地諸判。後段自「二若除下明取名用義同異」〔0678a23〕起，以「三設取下結」〔0678a28〕收束。這是後出科文所補的操作節界，不倒作《釋籤》正文已逐列的細科。
全相可依論勢分作四步：先釋研、詳、去取；次研詳南方三家所判，以五時為廣、四時與三時為略；再研詳北地七家諸判；最後由『若除其病』結前生後，說明舊名如何取、舊義如何改。
二、成立與傳本
本論緣起所誌為智者於江陵說玄義、灌頂受聞筆錄，並明記《玄》《文》各十卷〔T33 0681a16–a23〕；本相未見另標記者附語，依題署仍作智者說、灌頂記。
三、所引經論覆核
五味、四門與泥洹法寶
| 《玄義》原句 | 今本對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 「若五時明教，得五味方便之文，而失一道真實之意。」〔T33 0805b10〕 | 《大般涅槃經》（T0374）作「善男子！譬如從牛出乳，從乳出酪，從酪出生穌，從生穌出熟穌，從熟穌出醍醐」〔T12 0449a05〕 | 今本完整列五味次第；本論只取五味名目來核其方便文與真實意，不是逐字引錄此段。 |
| 「或見有得道，如阿毘曇；或見空得道，如成實；或見亦有亦空得道，如昆勒；或見非空非有得道，如車匿。」〔T33 0805b14〕 | 《大智度論》（T1509）作「入阿毘曇門則墮有中，若入空門則墮無中，若入蜫勒門則墮有無中。」〔T25 0194a29〕 | 有、空、有無三門場景相合；今本在失般若力的語境說墮邊，本論則說由門得道，兩說各守其本。 |
| 「故知泥洹真法寶，眾生各以種種門入」〔T33 0805b17〕 | 《成實論》（T1646）作「泥洹是真法寶，以種種門入。」〔T32 0373a03〕 | 本論省『是』而增『故知』『眾生各』，兩處字句有異。 |
| 「或見亦有亦空得道，如昆勒」〔T33 0805b15〕 | 《大智度論》記「摩訶迦旃延，佛在時，解佛語作蜫勒〔蜫勒秦言篋藏〕，乃至今行於南天竺。」〔T25 0070a20〕 | 本論作『昆勒』，今本作『蜫勒』；只可繫《大智度論》的傳述，未得現存獨立《昆勒論》藏本。 |
| 「或見非空非有得道，如車匿」〔T33 0805b16〕 | 《大智度論》作「車匿比丘，我涅槃後，如梵法治；若心濡伏者，應教《刪陀迦旃延經》，即可得道。」〔T25 0066c11〕 | 人物、所教經與得道場景直接相合；內嵌經題不能因此等同《大智度論》題名。 |
| 同上 | 《中論》（T1564）說「《刪陀迦旃延經》中，佛為說正見義離有離無。」〔T30 0020b03〕；《雜阿含經》（T0099）說「世間有二種依，若有、若無」〔T02 0085c21〕 | 兩處補足離有、離無的場景，只作旁證；不據此裁定本論車匿故事直接出自其中一部。 |
『阿毘曇』在本段是論類通稱，《大智度論》雖有阿毘曇門，仍不足以唯一指定一部今本。『昆勒』有《大智度論》傳述而無現存獨立論本；車匿故事可定位，故事中《刪陀迦旃延經》的獨立所屬仍待考。三項皆缺乏唯一可據的今本藏號。
共不共般若、實相印與權實
本論以「如幻如化即有門，幻化即無是空門」〔T33 0805b27〕開共般若四門，續列有而不有與雙非兩門。『如幻如化』散見多部經論，此四門配式則是本論當段的判釋，未見可安全指定的單一所屬今本。
本論又說「權若離實，無實相印，是魔所說。實若離權，不可說示。」〔T33 0805c22〕。《妙法蓮華經》（T0262）有「無量眾所尊，為說實相印。」〔T09 0008b03〕及「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅」〔0005c25〕，分別提供實相印與不可示的根經場景，卻沒有合成本論整句。《大智度論》另說「無我是實。如法印中說：「一切作法無常，一切法無我，寂滅是安隱涅槃。法印，名為諸法實相。」」〔T25 0253c13〕，可證法印與諸法實相的關係；本論他處雖明署「《釋論》云：「無實相印，是魔所說。」」〔T33 0793a11〕，今本精確所出仍待考。
八術、二鳥與慧方便
| 《玄義》原句 | 今本對讀 | 關係 |
|---|---|---|
| 「常住則用非常、非無常，雙用常無常，二鳥俱遊，八術具足。」〔T33 0806a03〕 | 《大般涅槃經》作「復有明醫曉八種術，善療眾病，知諸方藥，從遠方來。」〔T12 0378a22〕 | 『八術』名目直接可見；經文此處沒有逐列天台所配八義。 |
| 「二鳥俱遊，八術具足」〔T33 0806a04〕 | 《大般涅槃經》作「善男子！鳥有二種：一名迦隣提，二名鴛鴦，遊止共俱，不相捨離。是苦、無常、無我等法，亦復如是，不得相離。」〔T12 0414b19〕 | 二鳥共遊共止、不相捨離的場景直接相合；本論不在此列鳥名。 |
| 同一鳥喻 | 《佛說大般泥洹經》（T0376）作「云何善化現，如鴈鶴舍利？」〔T12 0863c19〕，又說「鴈鶴舍利鳥者，所謂種種無常苦空非我等法」〔0889a16〕 | 這是《釋籤》所引六卷《泥洹》的今本對讀；『鴈』與《釋籤》所寫『雁』各守其本。 |
| 「用一音者，有慧方便解，有方便慧解。」〔T33 0806a12〕 | 《維摩詰所說經》（T0475）作「又無方便慧縛，有方便慧解；無慧方便縛，有慧方便解。」〔T14 0545b06〕 | 本論只取兩個正向句，且把『有慧方便解』列在先，與今本所列次序相反。 |
《止觀輔行傳弘決》（T1912）又明說「言八術者。大經第二云。復有明醫曉八種術從遠方來。」〔T46 0418b07〕，並以「無常常等各四為八。」〔0418b16〕作一種配置，末說「餘在釋籤中明。」〔0418b19〕。這是《釋籤》所稱『《止觀》第八記』的現存對讀；典名依今本題署，不把部內指稱改作書名。
所指待考
| 本論項目 | 覆核結果 |
|---|---|
| 阿毘曇 | 論類通稱；無單一今本可唯一承擔本段『見有得道』。 |
| 昆勒 | 《大智度論》有『蜫勒』傳述；未得現存獨立《昆勒論》今本。 |
| 車匿 | 人物與得道場景有逐字旁證；故事內嵌《刪陀迦旃延經》的獨立所指待考。 |
| 如幻如化四門 | 配式是本論判釋，無單一今本可作整段原引。 |
| 提謂波利 | 智銓記舊錄有二卷而其時藏中無；現存資料未得可據的大正藏本，所指仍待考。 |
| 《華嚴》《大集》 | 本論用以反對法界、圓宗專屬一經，沒有給出卷品引句，無從唯一繫定某一譯本。 |
四、釋籤釋要〔鏡〕
《法華玄義釋籤》卷首〈釋籤緣起序〉署「君山除饉男普門子屬辭」〔T33 0815a05〕，是普門子敬序；逐文正文另署「天台沙門湛然述」〔0815b04〕。本相正釋須從後一層讀，不把敬序倒作湛然自序。
湛然先補足數目。共般若若只取空門，則「既但得一，全失共三及不共四，故云「失七」。」〔T33 0956a22〕。第三時只斥三藏有門一種，則「藏通八門各有聲聞，若斥有相，但斥三藏有門一種，全失餘三及通中四」〔0956a24〕。同歸只會三而未會五、七，鏡中解作「五謂人天及三」〔0956a26〕，又以聲聞、支佛各有二說七；它沒有在此逐列七個具名人物。
對常住教的八術，湛然作「常樂等四及非常非無常等四，總成八術」〔T33 0956a28〕。此讀把只得『常』的一端放回八種完整關係中；後出從義另有異議，留在諸家異釋，不代改《釋籤》正文。
二鳥一段先列鳥名諸說，再轉向譬義。湛然引章安說「然漢不善梵音，秖增諍競，意在況喻」〔T33 0956b11〕，取雌雄共遊止息來譬一中無量、無量中一。其後破兩種拆開常、無常的讀法：若一鳥窮生死、一鳥窮涅槃，便高下永乖；若兩常同作二雄、兩無常同作二雌，也不成雌雄相偶。鏡中所取是「今言雙遊者，生死涅槃中俱有常無常，在下在高雙遊並息，事理相即，二即中、中即二，非二中而二中，事理雌雄義並成也。」〔0956b24〕，並說「故此雙遊須約六即，此中具有凡共聖等，如前三句。」〔0956b27〕。
到一音教，湛然以「慧即是實，方便是權，二義相即不得相離。」〔T33 0956b29〕定其取用底線。若五時只得漸誘方便而失實慧，或一音只取實慧而無權方便，都不能成解。《釋籤》把愛見悲配在『無慧方便縛』一邊，而《維摩詰所說經》今本在「以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生」〔T14 0545b08〕前承『無方便慧縛』，又以「住貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等諸煩惱，而植眾德本」〔0545b14〕解『無慧方便縛』；兩種配屬呈現明確差異。
五、諸家異釋
智銓《法華經玄籤證釋》
智銓《法華經玄籤證釋》（X0592）正文署「苕上沙門 智銓 述」〔X 0557b12〕。其本相直接材料自「四、去取。」〔0630b05〕起，至淨名條〔0630b13–b14〕止；提謂與一條八術配置在此前相鄰前相尾注，不屬本相科內材料。
相鄰材料有二。其一說「大唐內典錄有提謂波利經二卷，今藏中無。」〔X 0630a13〕；這只證智銓自述當時藏中無，無從外推至其他時地。其二作「常樂等四，及無常非無常等四，總成八術也。」〔0630b01〕；其中『無常非無常』與《釋籤》『非常非無常』字句不同。
本相科內材料全列如下：
| 節點 | 智銓原文與作用 |
|---|---|
| 止觀記 | 「○止觀第八記在第九記。輔行三十七卷。」〔X 0630b05〕，誌其所見卷次。 |
| 二鳥合法 | 「二鳥遊止共俱，不相捨離。大經合法云：是苦、無常、無我等法，亦復如是，不得相離。」〔0630b06〕，補出鳥喻合法句。 |
| 鳥名次序 | 「○文云：鳥有二種：一名鴛鴦，二名鄰堤。」〔0630b07〕，與《大般涅槃經》及《釋籤》的次序、字形不同。 |
| 餘三 | 「○餘三亦爾，謂苦、樂、我也。」〔0630b08〕，解《釋籤》略語。 |
| 事理雙遊 | 「今言雙遊等，疏云：生死具常無常，涅槃亦爾，在下在高，雙飛雙息，即事而理，即理而事，二諦即中，中即二諦，非二中而二中。」〔0630b08〕，直接詳釋雙遊。 |
| 六即 | 「事理雙遊，其義既成，名字觀行，乃至究竟雙遊皆成。」〔0630b11〕，展開六即。 |
| 三共 | 「此中備有凡凡共行、凡聖共行、非凡非聖共行。」〔0630b12〕，補《釋籤》略說。 |
| 淨名 | 「○淨名云：無慧方便縛等，維摩問疾品文。」〔0630b13〕，只指認經品，未處理愛見配屬差異。 |
從義《法華經三大部補注》
從義《法華經三大部補注》（X0586）署「永嘉沙門釋 從義 撰」〔X 0128a05〕。其提謂條在相鄰前相：先錄「諸師咸云：此是偽經。今謂天台靈山親承，豈引偽經誤人者哉？」〔0185c10〕，再分一卷舊錄與曇靖二卷本的文字、時代問題〔0185c11–c17〕。所見足以確立古注已有真偽爭議，尚不足以斷定其真偽。
從義對八術明言「恐誤也」〔X 0186b11〕，改作「應云無常等四，及常等四也。」〔0186b11〕；又分雙遮與雙照，說「中道雙非，八倒皆破，故云非常非無常等。復能雙照，二用宛然，故云能常能無常也。」〔0186b12〕，結為「今明雙照，故云八術也。若指雙非，即是八術之體耳。」〔0186b13〕。這是明確異議，與湛然原說分立。
對二鳥段，從義說「其間頗有訛略，今粗點出」〔X 0186b15〕，逐項提出：
| 《釋籤》節點 | 從義校議 |
|---|---|
| 一中無量、無量中一 | 「應更添云非一非無量，而一而無量也。」〔X 0186b16〕 |
| 問三句 | 「應云問為凡與凡共行，聖與聖共行，凡與聖共行也。」〔0186b18〕 |
| 二解不分 | 「應云不明也。」〔0186b19〕 |
| 事理相即 | 「應云即事而理，即理而事也。」〔0186b20〕 |
| 凡共聖等 | 「應云凡凡共行，凡聖共行，非凡非聖共行，約人約法，分別俱成也。」〔0186b21〕 |
對慧方便配屬，從義直接校議：「準彼經中，無方便慧縛，即愛見之心，成就眾生耳。無慧方便縛，即住三毒，而植德本耳。」〔X 0186b24–0186c01〕，又說「有方便慧解，有慧方便解，翻此可知。」〔0186c02〕。此與《維摩詰所說經》今本場景相應，並與《釋籤》現文構成異解。
智圓《涅槃經疏三德指歸》
智圓《涅槃經疏三德指歸》（X0662）署「錢唐沙門釋 智圓 述」〔X 0309c05〕，序稱其「為山外宗師」〔0308a23〕。此書不是直接注本相，而是詳解與《釋籤》共享的鳥喻場景；故只作跨疏互讀。
其綱領說「二行並觀者，中邊不二，故曰並觀。中即是常，邊即無常，二法互融，如鳥遊息。」〔X 0458a03〕，又以「非一下。遮則非真非俗，照則而真而俗。即照而遮名雙息，即遮而照名雙遊。」〔0458a19〕解遊息。鳥名方面，智圓說「娑羅翻鴛鴦者，此釋非也。梵語斫迦羅，此云鴛鴦，非娑羅也。」〔0458a12〕，另寫『鴈鶴舍利』〔0458a14〕；本相無梵本可據，現僅能確定智圓有此說，鳥名仍未定。
智圓對今釋、六即與三共的節點如下：
| 節點 | 智圓原文與作用 |
|---|---|
| 今釋 | 「今言下。明今釋。先橫約理事解義。」〔X 0458c02〕 |
| 二法相即 | 「是知生死、涅槃二法相即。如云波具動、靜，水具亦爾。」〔0458c07〕 |
| 事理相即 | 「即事下。生死即事故無常，涅槃即理故是常，事理相即則共行義成」〔0458c20〕 |
| 非二而二 | 「即是非常非無常，而常而無常。」〔0459a05〕 |
| 六即 | 「事理下。豎約。六即結成。」〔0459a10〕 |
| 凡凡共行 | 「凡凡共行者，謂彼彼眾生各具事理，一一互遍」〔0459a23〕 |
| 聖聖共行 | 「應云聖聖共行」〔0459a24〕，以現文為省略。 |
| 凡聖共行 | 「凡聖共行者，此答前第三、聖與凡共問也。」〔0459b05〕 |
| 非凡非聖 | 「非凡下一句」〔0459b09〕，判作對前問長出。 |
| 人法兩軸 | 「約人約法者，事理是約法，六即是約人。」〔0459b12〕 |
三家於八術、二鳥與慧方便各有補釋或校議，彼此不齊；現有材料不足以將三說合併為一。
六、術語
研、詳、去取。 本論自釋：研是覈實，詳是覈權，去取以是否適合法相為準。研詳不是泛稱鑽研，去取也不是憑好惡捨取。
五味方便之文、一道真實之意。 舊判可取得方便次第的文字，卻可能錯失真實旨意。『其文通用，其對宜休』正說文字仍可用，固定配對應停。
三藏四門。 有、空、亦有亦空、非空非有四門都能入道。若以有相一門概括全體，聲聞與菩薩兩邊都成欠缺。
共、不共般若八門。 共般若有四門，不共般若又有四門；只把無相定作共般若空門，所得一、所失七。
七種聲聞。 本論只說斥小一種而失七種；《釋籤》以藏、通八門各有聲聞解之。這是門類計數，不是七位具名人物。
會五、會七。 同歸若只會三歸一，尚未窮盡其所。《釋籤》以人、天、三乘說五，並以聲聞、支佛各有二說七；本段沒有展開七項全名。
八術。 本論說只立常便得一失七，正用須非常、非無常與常、無常雙用。《釋籤》作常樂等四加非常非無常等四；從義另以雙遮為體、雙照為用提出異議。
二鳥俱遊。 本論取二鳥不離的意象表常、無常雙用。《釋籤》進一步以生死、涅槃各具常無常及事理相即解之；鳥名諸說不決定本相所取譬義。
權、實。 權離實便失實相印，實離權便不可說示。父母乖離與導師不生，正顯兩者不能各自獨立完足。
除病、不除法。 所除是偏執與錯配之病，不是把舊有名目全部抹去；法名可取，運用方式另定。
取名、用義。 『設取其名』承認舊名未必全廢；『用義永異』則說新用不是小幅修補，而是依完整門數與權實相即重建。
七、譬喻、互讀與承衍
父母乖離，導師便無從出生；鰥夫寡婦不能成家生活，也永無子孫。兩譬都指向同一病：權與實若被拆成各自孤立的教線，既不能印可所說，也不能把真實示與眾生。這裡沒有把權、實各派給父或母；譬喻只取離則不生。
二鳥俱遊把同一關係換成動態圖像。鳥有二而遊止不離，故常與無常不能被分放在永不相交的高下兩域。與《大般涅槃經》互讀，可見鳥喻原有苦、無常、無我等法不得相離的合法；與《釋籤》互讀，則展成生死、涅槃各具常無常及事理相即。
本相也有病與法的隱喻。前半逐項診斷，是除病；後半重新使用四門、八門、褒貶、同歸、常住、半滿、因緣、假名與一音，是不除法。醫治不以燒毀全部藥材為能事，而在辨明何病、何藥、何用。
與《維摩詰所說經》互讀，一音之用落在慧與方便兩種正向解；與《大智度論》《成實論》互讀，三藏四門顯示不同入道門不能由一門吞沒；與《妙法蓮華經》互讀，實相印與不可示又使權實兩面各有根經場景。
本相承上前文所列眾家判教而作實際檢驗，也為下一相判教清理方法：先承認舊說真正得到之處，再指出偏取與錯配，最後保留可用之名而重定其義。去取至此不是簡單刪留，而是使每一名目回到較完整的法相關係中。
八、校本定位
一、本單元以 T1716 為底，起於 0805b09，止於 0806a13；0806a14 已入第五相。本相有五枚所傳夾註『〔云云〕』，分別在 0805c03、0805c13、0805c16、0805c18、0806a13。
二、T1716 本相範圍內無正文大正本異讀標記；最近前一項在 0804b21，最近後一項在 0810b03。這只證指定範圍清單為空，不擴作全書或諸傳本無異讀。
三、T1717 本相正釋有七組異讀、八個正文位置，全列如下：
| 錨號 | 位置 | 大正本文 | 甲本異文 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0956002 | 0956a26 | 「者，五」〔T33 0956a26〕 | 省此二字。 |
| 0956003 | 0956b03、b04 | 「鄰」〔T33 0956b03〕、同字再見〔0956b04〕 | 兩見皆作『憐』。 |
| 0956004 | 0956b06–b07 | 「或云娑羅一隻，鄰提一隻」〔T33 0956b06〕 | 省此十字。 |
| 0956005 | 0956b09 | 「云」〔T33 0956b09〕 | 省此字。 |
| 0956006 | 0956b18 | 「升」〔T33 0956b18〕 | 作『昇』。 |
| 0956007 | 0956b24 | 「今」〔T33 0956b24〕 | 作『今不』。 |
| 0956008 | 0956c11 | 「名」〔T33 0956c11〕 | 作『名無』。 |
Examining in detail what to accept and reject first verifies what the several classifications obtained and lost, then turns to acceptance and rejection proper. The first half identifies each point in turn: some old explanations obtained a scriptural passage but lost its purport, some took only one gateway and omitted the rest, and some separated the provisional and real into two paths. The latter half does not abolish all the old names, but turns upon “removing the illness without removing the Dharma”: names may still be used, while their meaning in use must be established anew.
1. Doctrinal-Outline Placement
This section begins with 「○四研詳去取者，覈實故言研，覈權故言詳，適法相故言去取。」 tr. “Fourth, examining in detail what to reject and accept: because it verifies the real, it is called investigation; because it verifies the provisional, it is called detailed examination; because it fits the characteristics of the Dharma, it is called rejection and acceptance”〔T33 0805b09〕 and ends with 「設取其名，用義永異〔云云〕。」 tr. “Even if their names are adopted, their meaning in use is forever different [and so forth]”〔T33 0806a13〕. The following line, 「○五、判教相者」 tr. “Fifth, classifying the characteristics of the teaching”〔T33 0806a14〕, has already turned to the fifth part.
The Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian (T1717) opens the whole section with 「○四研詳中二：先釋章名」 tr. “Fourth, detailed examination has two parts: first explaining the chapter heading”〔T33 0956a18〕. It then undertakes the examination proper from “if [one uses] five periods” onward and says, 「尋之可見，不復分節。」 tr. “This can be seen by examining the text; it is not further divided into sections”〔0956a19〕. Its direct explanation ends with 「故今斥之。義同縛慧及縛方便。」 tr. “Therefore it is now rejected. Its meaning is the same as bound wisdom and bound skillful means”〔0956c12〕. The following line, 「○五判教中，列章，解釋。」 tr. “Fifth, within classifying the teaching: listing the chapter and explaining it”〔0956c13〕, has already entered the next part.
The Fahua San Dabu Kewen (X0584) divides this section more finely into 「初明研詳去取」 tr. “first clarifying detailed examination and rejection and acceptance”〔X 0678a09〕 and a second major passage on adopting names and using their meanings. The first begins with 「初研詳南三」 tr. “first examining in detail the three Southern classifications”〔0678a11〕, treating the five periods extensively and then briefly rejecting the four- and three-period systems. It then turns to the Northern classifications with 「二北地下研詳北七」 tr. “second, from ‘the Northern regions’ onward, examining in detail the seven Northern classifications”〔0678a21〕. The latter passage begins with 「二若除下明取名用義同異」 tr. “second, from ‘if [the illness] is removed’ onward, clarifying similarities and differences in adopting names and using their meanings”〔0678a23〕 and closes with 「三設取下結」 tr. “third, from ‘even if [their names] are adopted’ onward, the conclusion”〔0678a28〕. These are operational divisions supplied by a later outline and are not retrojected as fine subdivisions already enumerated in the text of the Shiqian.
Following the movement of the treatise, the section can be read in four steps: first explaining investigation, detailed examination, and rejection and acceptance; next examining the three Southern classifications, treating the five periods extensively and the four and three periods briefly; then examining the seven Northern classifications; and finally using “if the illness is removed” to conclude what precedes and generate what follows, explaining how old names can be adopted while their old meanings change.
2. Formation and Transmission
The treatise’s account of its origins records that Master Zhiyi taught the Profound Meaning at Jiangling, Guanding heard and transcribed it, and the Profound Meaning and Words and Phrases each comprised ten fascicles〔T33 0681a16–a23〕. No separate interpolation by the recorder is marked in this section; following the title attribution, it remains Master Zhiyi’s teaching as recorded by Guanding.
3. Scriptures and Treatises Cited by Zhiyi
The Five Flavors, Four Gateways, and the Dharma Treasure of Nirvāṇa
| Root-treatise wording | Received-text comparison | Relationship |
|---|---|---|
| 「若五時明教，得五味方便之文，而失一道真實之意。」 tr. “If the teaching is clarified through five periods, one obtains the scriptural wording on the skillful means of the five flavors but loses the intent of the one path of reality”〔T33 0805b10〕 | The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (T0374) reads, 「善男子！譬如從牛出乳，從乳出酪，從酪出生穌，從生穌出熟穌，從熟穌出醍醐」 tr. “Good man, it is like milk coming from a cow, curds from milk, raw ghee from curds, refined ghee from raw ghee, and clarified essence from refined ghee”〔T12 0449a05〕. | The received text lists the complete sequence of the five flavors. The root treatise uses only the names of the five flavors to examine their expedient wording and real intent; it is not quoting this passage verbatim. |
| 「或見有得道，如阿毘曇；或見空得道，如成實；或見亦有亦空得道，如昆勒；或見非空非有得道，如車匿。」 tr. “Some see existence and attain the path, as in the Abhidharma; some see emptiness and attain the path, as in the Satyasiddhi Treatise; some see both existence and emptiness and attain the path, as in the Kunle Treatise; some see neither emptiness nor existence and attain the path, as with Channa”〔T33 0805b14〕 | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (T1509) reads, 「入阿毘曇門則墮有中，若入空門則墮無中，若入蜫勒門則墮有無中。」 tr. “Entering the Abhidharma gateway, one falls into existence; entering the gateway of emptiness, one falls into nonexistence; entering the Kunle gateway, one falls into existence and nonexistence”〔T25 0194a29〕. | The scenes of the gateways of existence, emptiness, and existence-and-nonexistence correspond. The received text speaks of falling into extremes in the absence of the power of prajñā, while the root treatise speaks of attaining the path through the gateways; each account retains its own wording. |
| 「故知泥洹真法寶，眾生各以種種門入」 tr. “One therefore knows that nirvāṇa is the true Dharma treasure and that sentient beings each enter through various gateways”〔T33 0805b17〕 | The Satyasiddhi Treatise (T1646) reads, 「泥洹是真法寶，以種種門入。」 tr. “Nirvāṇa is the true Dharma treasure, entered through various gateways”〔T32 0373a03〕. | The root treatise omits “is” and adds “one therefore knows” and “sentient beings each”; the wording differs between the two places. |
| 「或見亦有亦空得道，如昆勒」 tr. “Some see both existence and emptiness and attain the path, as in the Kunle Treatise”〔T33 0805b15〕 | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom records, 「摩訶迦旃延，佛在時，解佛語作蜫勒〔蜫勒秦言篋藏〕，乃至今行於南天竺。」 tr. “While the Buddha was present, Mahākātyāyana understood the Buddha’s words and composed the Kunle [Kunle in the Qin language means ‘basket repository’], which circulates even now in southern India”〔T25 0070a20〕. | The root treatise writes 『昆勒』, while the received text writes 『蜫勒』. This can be tied only to the transmission in the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom; no independently extant canonical text of the Kunle Treatise has been obtained. |
| 「或見非空非有得道，如車匿」 tr. “Some see neither emptiness nor existence and attain the path, as with Channa”〔T33 0805b16〕 | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom reads, 「車匿比丘，我涅槃後，如梵法治；若心濡伏者，應教《刪陀迦旃延經》，即可得道。」 tr. “Bhikṣu Channa: after my nirvāṇa, discipline him according to the brahma penalty. If his mind becomes softened and subdued, he should be taught the Śāṇḍa Kātyāyana Sūtra and can then attain the path”〔T25 0066c11〕. | The person, scripture taught, and scene of attaining the path correspond directly. The embedded scripture title cannot therefore be treated as the title of the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom. |
| Same item | The Treatise on the Middle (T1564) says, 「《刪陀迦旃延經》中，佛為說正見義離有離無。」 tr. “In the Śāṇḍa Kātyāyana Sūtra, the Buddha explained that the meaning of right view is apart from existence and apart from nonexistence”〔T30 0020b03〕. The Saṃyukta Āgama (T0099) says, 「世間有二種依，若有、若無」 tr. “The world relies upon two kinds, existence and nonexistence”〔T02 0085c21〕. | These two passages supplement the scene of leaving existence and nonexistence and serve only as collateral evidence; they do not adjudicate that the root treatise’s Channa story derives directly from either work. |
“Abhidharma” in this passage is a general name for a class of treatises. Although the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom mentions an Abhidharma gateway, it remains insufficient to identify a single received text uniquely. The Kunle is transmitted by the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom, but no independent text of the treatise survives. The Channa story can be located, while the independent identity of the Śāṇḍa Kātyāyana Sūtra embedded in the story remains under investigation. None of the three has a uniquely warranted canonical number in a received edition.
Shared and Unshared Prajñā, the Seal of the True Mark, and Provisional and Real
The root treatise opens the four gateways of shared prajñā with 「如幻如化即有門，幻化即無是空門」 tr. “The illusory and transformational are immediately the gateway of existence; illusion and transformation are immediately nonexistent and are the gateway of emptiness”〔T33 0805b27〕, then continues with the gateways of being existent yet not existent and the double negation. “Like illusion and transformation” appears throughout many scriptures and treatises, while this four-gateway correspondence is the root treatise’s own classification in the present passage. No single received source can safely be designated for the whole.
The root treatise further says, 「權若離實，無實相印，是魔所說。實若離權，不可說示。」 tr. “If the provisional is separated from the real, it lacks the seal of the true mark and is what Māra teaches. If the real is separated from the provisional, it cannot be taught and revealed”〔T33 0805c22〕. The Sutra of the Lotus Blossom of the Wondrous Dharma (T0262) has 「無量眾所尊，為說實相印。」 tr. “Honored by immeasurable multitudes, he teaches them the seal of the true mark”〔T09 0008b03〕 and 「是法不可示，言辭相寂滅」 tr. “This Dharma cannot be revealed; the marks of words are quiescent and extinguished”〔0005c25〕. These provide root-scripture scenes for the seal of the true mark and what cannot be revealed, respectively, but do not combine into the root treatise’s complete sentence. The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom also says, 「無我是實。如法印中說：「一切作法無常，一切法無我，寂滅是安隱涅槃。法印，名為諸法實相。」」 tr. “No-self is real. As stated in the Dharma seal: ‘All conditioned dharmas are impermanent; all dharmas are without self; quiescent cessation is secure nirvāṇa.’ The Dharma seal is called the true mark of all dharmas”〔T25 0253c13〕, attesting the relation between the Dharma seal and the true mark of all dharmas. Elsewhere the root treatise explicitly introduces 「《釋論》云：「無實相印，是魔所說。」」 tr. “The Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says: ‘Without the seal of the true mark, it is what Māra teaches’”〔T33 0793a11〕, but its precise locus in the received text remains under investigation.
The Eight Operations, the Two Birds, and Wisdom with Skillful Means
| Root-treatise wording | Received-text comparison | Relationship |
|---|---|---|
| 「常住則用非常、非無常，雙用常無常，二鳥俱遊，八術具足。」 tr. “For permanence, employ neither permanence nor impermanence and employ permanence and impermanence together; the two birds range together and all eight operations are complete”〔T33 0806a03〕 | The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra reads, 「復有明醫曉八種術，善療眾病，知諸方藥，從遠方來。」 tr. “There was also a skilled physician who understood eight kinds of arts, skillfully treated the many illnesses, knew the various medicines, and came from a distant place”〔T12 0378a22〕. | The name “eight arts” is directly attested; the scripture does not list here the eight meanings assigned by Tiantai. |
| 「二鳥俱遊，八術具足」 tr. “The two birds range together and all eight operations are complete”〔T33 0806a04〕 | The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra reads, 「善男子！鳥有二種：一名迦隣提，二名鴛鴦，遊止共俱，不相捨離。是苦、無常、無我等法，亦復如是，不得相離。」 tr. “Good man, there are two kinds of birds: the first is called jialinti, and the second mandarin duck. They range and rest together and do not abandon or separate from one another. Dharmas such as suffering, impermanence, and no-self are likewise so and cannot be separated”〔T12 0414b19〕. | The scene of the two birds ranging and resting together without separation corresponds directly; the root treatise does not name the birds here. |
| The same bird simile | The Fo Shuo Da Ban Nihuan Jing (T0376) reads, 「云何善化現，如鴈鶴舍利？」 tr. “How do skillful transformations appear, like wild geese, cranes, and śārī birds?”〔T12 0863c19〕, and also, 「鴈鶴舍利鳥者，所謂種種無常苦空非我等法」 tr. “Wild geese, cranes, and śārī birds mean the various dharmas of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, no-self, and the like”〔0889a16〕. | This is the received text corresponding to the six-fascicle Nirvāṇa cited by the Shiqian. The graph 『鴈』 here and 『雁』 in the Shiqian each retain the form of their own text. |
| 「用一音者，有慧方便解，有方便慧解。」 tr. “When using the one sound, there is liberation through skillful means endowed with wisdom and liberation through wisdom endowed with skillful means”〔T33 0806a12〕 | The Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T0475) reads, 「又無方便慧縛，有方便慧解；無慧方便縛，有慧方便解。」 tr. “Again, wisdom without skillful means is bound, while wisdom endowed with skillful means is liberated; skillful means without wisdom is bound, while skillful means endowed with wisdom is liberated”〔T14 0545b06〕. | The root treatise takes only the two positive statements and places “skillful means endowed with wisdom is liberated” first, reversing the order in the received text. |
The Zhiguan Fuxing Chuanhong Jue (T1912) further says explicitly, 「言八術者。大經第二云。復有明醫曉八種術從遠方來。」 tr. “As for the eight arts: fascicle two of the Great Scripture says, ‘There was also a skilled physician who understood eight kinds of arts and came from a distant place’”〔T46 0418b07〕. It gives one arrangement with 「無常常等各四為八。」 tr. “Impermanence, permanence, and the rest each have four, making eight”〔0418b16〕 and concludes, 「餘在釋籤中明。」 tr. “The remainder is clarified in the Shiqian”〔0418b19〕. This is the received text corresponding to what the Shiqian calls “the eighth commentary on the Zhiguan.” The title follows the received work’s heading; an internal designation is not converted into a book title.
Referents under Investigation
| Root-treatise item | Result of verification |
|---|---|
| Abhidharma | A general name for a class of treatises; no single received text can uniquely bear “seeing existence and attaining the path” in this passage. |
| Kunle | The Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom transmits 『蜫勒』; no independently extant text of the Kunle Treatise has been obtained. |
| Channa | The person and the scene of attaining the path have verbatim collateral evidence; the independent referent of the Śāṇḍa Kātyāyana Sūtra embedded in the story remains under investigation. |
| The four gateways of illusion and transformation | The correspondence is the root treatise’s classification; no single received text serves as the source for the whole passage. |
| Tiwei and Boli | Zhiquan records that an old catalog listed two fascicles and that the text was absent from the canon in his time. No warranted Taishō text has been obtained from the surviving materials, and the referent remains under investigation. |
| The Avataṃsaka and Great Collection | The root treatise uses them to reject confining the Dharma realm and the perfect school to a single scripture. It gives no quoted passage or fascicle title, so no particular translation can be uniquely identified. |
4. Essential Explanations from the Shiqian [the Mirror]
The “Preface on the Origins of the Shiqian” at the beginning of the Fahua Xuanyi Shiqian is signed 「君山除饉男普門子屬辭」 tr. “Composed by Pumenzi, a śramaṇa from Junshan”〔T33 0815a05〕 and is Pumenzi’s reverential preface. The line-by-line commentary is separately signed 「天台沙門湛然述」 tr. “Exposition by the Tiantai śramaṇa Zhanran”〔0815b04〕. The direct commentary on the present section must be read from the latter layer; the reverential preface is not retrojected as Zhanran’s own preface.
Zhanran first completes the numbers. If shared prajñā takes only the gateway of emptiness, then 「既但得一，全失共三及不共四，故云「失七」。」 tr. “Since it obtains only one, it entirely loses the other three shared gateways and the four unshared gateways; therefore the text says ‘loses seven’”〔T33 0956a22〕. If the third period reproaches only the single Tripiṭaka gateway of existence, then 「藏通八門各有聲聞，若斥有相，但斥三藏有門一種，全失餘三及通中四」 tr. “The eight gateways of the Tripiṭaka and Shared Teachings each have śrāvakas. If one reproaches only marks, one reproaches merely one kind within the Tripiṭaka gateway of existence and entirely loses the other three and the four within the Shared Teaching”〔0956a24〕. Where common return gathers only three and not five or seven, the Mirror explains, 「五謂人天及三」 tr. “Five means humans, devas, and the three [vehicles]”〔0956a26〕, and reaches seven by dividing śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas into two kinds each. It does not enumerate seven named persons here.
For the eight operations of the teaching of permanence, Zhanran writes, 「常樂等四及非常非無常等四，總成八術」 tr. “The four of permanence, bliss, and the rest, together with the four of neither permanence nor impermanence and the rest, make eight operations in all”〔T33 0956a28〕. This reading places the one extreme of obtaining only “permanence” back within eight complete relations. A later disagreement by Congyi is retained under Explanations of Various Masters and does not replace the text of the Shiqian.
The passage on the two birds first lists several accounts of their names, then turns to the meaning of the simile. Zhanran cites Zhang’an: 「然漢不善梵音，秖增諍競，意在況喻」 tr. “The Chinese are not skilled in Sanskrit sounds; this only increases contention. The intent lies in the illustrative simile”〔T33 0956b11〕. He takes the female and male ranging and resting together to illustrate the immeasurable within the one and the one within the immeasurable. He then refutes two readings that separate permanence from impermanence. If one bird exhausts birth-and-death and the other exhausts nirvāṇa, high and low remain forever divided. If two instances of permanence both become males and two instances of impermanence both become females, the male-female pairing is likewise not established. The Mirror instead says, 「今言雙遊者，生死涅槃中俱有常無常，在下在高雙遊並息，事理相即，二即中、中即二，非二中而二中，事理雌雄義並成也。」 tr. “To speak now of ranging together means that birth-and-death and nirvāṇa both possess permanence and impermanence. Below and above, they range and rest together. Phenomena and principle are mutually implicative; the two are precisely the middle and the middle precisely the two. Neither the two nor the middle, yet both the two and the middle: the meanings of phenomena and principle, female and male, are all established”〔0956b24〕. It further says, 「故此雙遊須約六即，此中具有凡共聖等，如前三句。」 tr. “Therefore this ranging together must be discussed in terms of the six identities. It includes ordinary beings together with sages and the rest, as in the preceding three statements”〔0956b27〕.
At the one-sound teaching, Zhanran establishes the boundary for acceptance and use with 「慧即是實，方便是權，二義相即不得相離。」 tr. “Wisdom is precisely the real, and skillful means the provisional. The two meanings are mutually implicative and cannot be separated”〔T33 0956b29〕. If five periods obtain only gradual, inducing skillful means while losing real wisdom, or one sound obtains only real wisdom without provisional skillful means, neither can establish liberation. The Shiqian places the compassion of craving and views under “skillful means without wisdom is bound,” while the received Vimalakīrti Sūtra places “wisdom without skillful means is bound” before 「以愛見心莊嚴佛土、成就眾生」 tr. “adorning the buddha-land and bringing sentient beings to fulfillment with a mind of craving and views”〔T14 0545b08〕, and explains “skillful means without wisdom is bound” through 「住貪欲、瞋恚、邪見等諸煩惱，而植眾德本」 tr. “abiding in such afflictions as craving, anger, and wrong views while planting the roots of the many virtues”〔0545b14〕. The two assignments clearly differ.
5. Explanations of Various Masters
Zhiquan’s Fahua Jing Xuanqian Zhengshi
The main text of Zhiquan’s Fahua Jing Xuanqian Zhengshi (X0592) is signed 「苕上沙門 智銓 述」 tr. “Exposition by the śramaṇa Zhiquan of Tiaoshang”〔X 0557b12〕. Its material directly belonging to this section begins with 「四、去取。」 tr. “Fourth, rejection and acceptance”〔0630b05〕 and extends through the Vimalakīrti item〔0630b13–b14〕. The Tiwei item and one arrangement of the eight operations appear in the note at the end of the immediately preceding section and do not belong within the outline of the present section.
There are two pieces of adjacent material. The first says, 「大唐內典錄有提謂波利經二卷，今藏中無。」 tr. “The Datang Neidian Lu lists the Tiwei Boli Sūtra in two fascicles; it is absent from the present canon”〔X 0630a13〕. This establishes only Zhiquan’s report that it was absent from the canon in his own time and cannot be extrapolated to other times and places. The second reads, 「常樂等四，及無常非無常等四，總成八術也。」 tr. “The four of permanence, bliss, and the rest, together with the four of impermanence and neither-impermanence and the rest, make eight operations in all”〔0630b01〕. Its 『無常非無常』 differs in wording from the Shiqian’s 『非常非無常』.
The materials within the outline of this section are listed in full below:
| Node | Zhiquan’s wording and its function |
|---|---|
| Commentary on the Zhiguan | 「○止觀第八記在第九記。輔行三十七卷。」 tr. “The eighth commentary on the Zhiguan is in the ninth commentary; the Fuxing has thirty-seven fascicles”〔X 0630b05〕, recording the fascicle arrangement he saw. |
| Scriptural application of the two birds | 「二鳥遊止共俱，不相捨離。大經合法云：是苦、無常、無我等法，亦復如是，不得相離。」 tr. “The two birds range and rest together and do not abandon or separate from one another. Applying the simile, the Great Scripture says: dharmas such as suffering, impermanence, and no-self are likewise so and cannot be separated”〔0630b06〕, supplying the scriptural application of the bird simile. |
| Order of the birds’ names | 「○文云：鳥有二種：一名鴛鴦，二名鄰堤。」 tr. “The text says: there are two kinds of birds; the first is called mandarin duck and the second linti”〔0630b07〕, differing from the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and the Shiqian in order and graph forms. |
| The remaining three | 「○餘三亦爾，謂苦、樂、我也。」 tr. “The remaining three are likewise so, namely suffering, bliss, and self”〔0630b08〕, explaining the abbreviated wording of the Shiqian. |
| Phenomena and principle ranging together | 「今言雙遊等，疏云：生死具常無常，涅槃亦爾，在下在高，雙飛雙息，即事而理，即理而事，二諦即中，中即二諦，非二中而二中。」 tr. “As for ‘ranging together’ and the rest, the commentary says: birth-and-death possesses permanence and impermanence, and nirvāṇa likewise. Below and above, they fly and rest together. Phenomena are precisely principle, and principle precisely phenomena. The Two Truths are precisely the middle, and the middle precisely the Two Truths; neither the two nor the middle, yet both the two and the middle”〔0630b08〕, directly expanding the paired ranging. |
| Six identities | 「事理雙遊，其義既成，名字觀行，乃至究竟雙遊皆成。」 tr. “Once the meaning of phenomena and principle ranging together has been established, ranging together is established at identity in name, identity in contemplative practice, and so forth through ultimate identity”〔0630b11〕, unfolding the six identities. |
| Three forms of sharing | 「此中備有凡凡共行、凡聖共行、非凡非聖共行。」 tr. “This fully includes ordinary beings practicing together with ordinary beings, ordinary beings practicing together with sages, and neither ordinary beings nor sages practicing together”〔0630b12〕, supplementing the abbreviated wording of the Shiqian. |
| Vimalakīrti | 「○淨名云：無慧方便縛等，維摩問疾品文。」 tr. “The Vimalakīrti says, ‘skillful means without wisdom is bound,’ and so forth; this is the text of the ‘Inquiring about Illness’ chapter of the Vimalakīrti”〔0630b13〕. It only identifies the scripture and chapter and does not address the difference in assigning craving and views. |
Congyi’s Fahua Jing San Dabu Buzhu
Congyi’s Fahua Jing San Dabu Buzhu (X0586) is signed 「永嘉沙門釋 從義 撰」 tr. “Composed by the śramaṇa Shi Congyi of Yongjia”〔X 0128a05〕. Its Tiwei item appears in the adjacent preceding section. It first records, 「諸師咸云：此是偽經。今謂天台靈山親承，豈引偽經誤人者哉？」 tr. “The various masters all say this is an apocryphal scripture. I now say that Tiantai personally received the teaching at Vulture Peak; how could he cite an apocryphal scripture and mislead people?”〔0185c10〕, then distinguishes questions of wording and period between a one-fascicle old-catalog text and Tanjing’s two-fascicle version〔0185c11–c17〕. The surviving evidence establishes that ancient commentators already disputed authenticity, but remains insufficient to adjudicate it.
Congyi says directly of the eight operations, 「恐誤也」 tr. “This is perhaps mistaken”〔X 0186b11〕, and emends the text to 「應云無常等四，及常等四也。」 tr. “It should say the four of impermanence and the rest, together with the four of permanence and the rest”〔0186b11〕. Distinguishing double negation from double illumination, he says, 「中道雙非，八倒皆破，故云非常非無常等。復能雙照，二用宛然，故云能常能無常也。」 tr. “The Middle Way doubly negates, and all eight inversions are broken; therefore it says neither permanence nor impermanence and the rest. It can further illuminate both, with both functions perfectly clear; therefore it says capable of permanence and capable of impermanence”〔0186b12〕. He concludes, 「今明雙照，故云八術也。若指雙非，即是八術之體耳。」 tr. “The present passage clarifies double illumination and therefore speaks of eight operations. If it points to double negation, that is only the substance of the eight operations”〔0186b13〕. This is an explicit disagreement and remains separate from Zhanran’s original explanation.
Concerning the two birds, Congyi says, 「其間頗有訛略，今粗點出」 tr. “There are rather many errors and omissions in this passage; I will now indicate them in outline”〔X 0186b15〕, and proposes the following items:
| Shiqian node | Congyi’s textual proposal |
|---|---|
| The immeasurable within the one and the one within the immeasurable | 「應更添云非一非無量，而一而無量也。」 tr. “It should further add: neither one nor immeasurable, yet both one and immeasurable”〔X 0186b16〕. |
| The three-part question | 「應云問為凡與凡共行，聖與聖共行，凡與聖共行也。」 tr. “The question should say: do ordinary beings practice together with ordinary beings, sages with sages, or ordinary beings with sages?”〔0186b18〕. |
| The two explanations are not distinguished | 「應云不明也。」 tr. “It should say ‘unclear’”〔0186b19〕. |
| Phenomena and principle mutually implicative | 「應云即事而理，即理而事也。」 tr. “It should say: phenomena are precisely principle, and principle precisely phenomena”〔0186b20〕. |
| Ordinary beings together with sages and the rest | 「應云凡凡共行，凡聖共行，非凡非聖共行，約人約法，分別俱成也。」 tr. “It should say: ordinary beings practicing together with ordinary beings, ordinary beings practicing together with sages, and neither ordinary beings nor sages practicing together; distinguished in terms of persons and Dharmas, both are established”〔0186b21〕. |
On the assignment of wisdom and skillful means, Congyi directly proposes, 「準彼經中，無方便慧縛，即愛見之心，成就眾生耳。無慧方便縛，即住三毒，而植德本耳。」 tr. “According to that scripture, wisdom without skillful means is bound precisely in a mind of craving and views bringing sentient beings to fulfillment. Skillful means without wisdom is bound precisely in abiding in the three poisons while planting roots of virtue”〔X 0186b24–0186c01〕. He further says, 「有方便慧解，有慧方便解，翻此可知。」 tr. “Wisdom endowed with skillful means is liberated, and skillful means endowed with wisdom is liberated; the inversions of these can be known”〔0186c02〕. This corresponds to the scenes in the received Vimalakīrti Sūtra and forms a distinct interpretation beside the present text of the Shiqian.
Zhiyuan’s Niepan Jing Shu Sande Zhigui
Zhiyuan’s Niepan Jing Shu Sande Zhigui (X0662) is signed 「錢唐沙門釋 智圓 述」 tr. “Exposition by the śramaṇa Shi Zhiyuan of Qiantang”〔X 0309c05〕, and its preface calls him 「為山外宗師」 tr. “a lineage master of Shanwai”〔0308a23〕. This work does not comment directly upon the present section but explains in detail the bird-simile scene that it shares with the Shiqian. It is therefore used only for cross-commentarial reading.
Its outline says, 「二行並觀者，中邊不二，故曰並觀。中即是常，邊即無常，二法互融，如鳥遊息。」 tr. “Contemplating the two practices together means that middle and extremes are nondual, and is therefore called contemplation together. The middle is permanence and the extremes impermanence; the two Dharmas mutually interpenetrate, like birds ranging and resting”〔X 0458a03〕. It also explains ranging and resting with 「非一下。遮則非真非俗，照則而真而俗。即照而遮名雙息，即遮而照名雙遊。」 tr. “From ‘neither one’ onward: in negation, neither true nor conventional; in illumination, both true and conventional. Negation precisely within illumination is called resting together, and illumination precisely within negation is called ranging together”〔0458a19〕. On the birds’ names, Zhiyuan says, 「娑羅翻鴛鴦者，此釋非也。梵語斫迦羅，此云鴛鴦，非娑羅也。」 tr. “The explanation that sāla translates as mandarin duck is incorrect. The Sanskrit cakravāka means mandarin duck; it is not sāla”〔0458a12〕, and elsewhere writes 『鴈鶴舍利』〔0458a14〕. There is no Sanskrit source for the present section. The evidence establishes only that Zhiyuan made this proposal; the birds’ names remain undetermined.
Zhiyuan’s explanations of the present interpretation, the six identities, and the three forms of sharing can be mapped as follows:
| Node | Zhiyuan’s wording and its function |
|---|---|
| Present interpretation | 「今言下。明今釋。先橫約理事解義。」 tr. “From ‘to speak now’ onward, it clarifies the present interpretation, first explaining the meaning horizontally in terms of principle and phenomena”〔X 0458c02〕. |
| The two Dharmas mutually implicative | 「是知生死、涅槃二法相即。如云波具動、靜，水具亦爾。」 tr. “One thereby knows that the two Dharmas birth-and-death and nirvāṇa are mutually implicative. It is like saying that waves possess motion and stillness, and water likewise possesses both”〔0458c07〕. |
| Phenomena and principle mutually implicative | 「即事下。生死即事故無常，涅槃即理故是常，事理相即則共行義成」 tr. “From ‘phenomena are precisely’ onward: birth-and-death is phenomena and therefore impermanent; nirvāṇa is principle and therefore permanent. When phenomena and principle are mutually implicative, the meaning of practicing together is established”〔0458c20〕. |
| Neither two, yet two | 「即是非常非無常，而常而無常。」 tr. “This is precisely neither permanence nor impermanence, yet both permanence and impermanence”〔0459a05〕. |
| Six identities | 「事理下。豎約。六即結成。」 tr. “From ‘phenomena and principle’ onward, the vertical treatment concludes through the six identities”〔0459a10〕. |
| Ordinary beings practicing with ordinary beings | 「凡凡共行者，謂彼彼眾生各具事理，一一互遍」 tr. “Ordinary beings practicing together with ordinary beings means that each and every sentient being possesses phenomena and principle, each universally pervading the others”〔0459a23〕. |
| Sages practicing with sages | 「應云聖聖共行」 tr. “It should say sages practicing together with sages”〔0459a24〕, treating the present wording as an omission. |
| Ordinary beings practicing with sages | 「凡聖共行者，此答前第三、聖與凡共問也。」 tr. “Ordinary beings practicing together with sages answers the preceding third question, concerning sages practicing with ordinary beings”〔0459b05〕. |
| Neither ordinary beings nor sages | 「非凡下一句」 tr. “The single statement from ‘neither ordinary beings’ onward”〔0459b09〕, judged to extend beyond the preceding question. |
| Axes of persons and Dharmas | 「約人約法者，事理是約法，六即是約人。」 tr. “As for treatment in terms of persons and in terms of Dharmas: phenomena and principle concern Dharmas, while the six identities concern persons”〔0459b12〕. |
The three masters each supplement or criticize the eight operations, the two birds, and wisdom with skillful means in ways that do not agree. The surviving materials are insufficient to merge the three accounts into one.
6. Terminology
Investigation, detailed examination, rejection and acceptance. The root treatise explains its own terms: investigation verifies the real, detailed examination verifies the provisional, and rejection and acceptance depend upon whether an account accords with the characteristics of the Dharma. Investigation and detailed examination do not mean research in a generic sense, and rejection and acceptance are not determined by personal preference.
Scriptural wording on the skillful means of the five flavors; intent of the one path of reality. An old classification may obtain the wording of an expedient sequence while missing the real intent. “The wording is generally usable; the correspondence should cease” means precisely that the wording remains usable while the fixed correspondence stops.
The four gateways of the Tripiṭaka Teaching. The gateways of existence, emptiness, both existence and emptiness, and neither emptiness nor existence can all give access to the path. If the one gateway of marks is used to encompass the whole, both śrāvakas and bodhisattvas are left with omissions.
The eight gateways of shared and unshared prajñā. Shared prajñā has four gateways and unshared prajñā another four. If no marks is fixed as only the gateway of emptiness within shared prajñā, one gateway is obtained and seven are lost.
Seven kinds of śrāvakas. The root treatise says only that reproaching one kind within the small loses seven kinds. The Shiqian explains this through śrāvakas in each of the eight gateways of the Tripiṭaka and Shared Teachings. This is a count of gateway categories, not seven named persons.
Gathering five; gathering seven. If common return gathers only three into the one, it has not yet exhausted the destination. The Shiqian explains five as humans, devas, and the three vehicles, and makes seven by dividing śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas into two kinds each. The passage does not enumerate seven complete names.
Eight operations. The root treatise says that establishing permanence alone obtains one and loses seven. Proper use requires neither permanence nor impermanence and the simultaneous employment of permanence and impermanence. The Shiqian gives the four of permanence, bliss, and the rest together with the four of neither permanence nor impermanence and the rest. Congyi separately proposes double negation as substance and double illumination as function.
The two birds ranging together. The root treatise uses the image of the two birds remaining inseparable to represent employing permanence and impermanence together. The Shiqian further explains it through birth-and-death and nirvāṇa each possessing permanence and impermanence, with phenomena and principle mutually implicative. The several accounts of the birds’ names do not determine the meaning for which the simile is used here.
Provisional and real. If the provisional is separated from the real, it loses the seal of the true mark; if the real is separated from the provisional, it cannot be taught and revealed. The separation of the parents and the guide’s failure to be born show precisely that neither side can be independently complete.
Removing the illness; not removing the Dharma. What is removed is the illness of one-sided attachment and false correspondence, not every old designation. A Dharma-name may be adopted while its manner of use is established anew.
Adopting the name; using the meaning. “Even if their names are adopted” acknowledges that old names need not all be abolished. “Their meaning in use is forever different” says that the new use is not a minor repair, but a reconstruction grounded in the complete number of gateways and the mutual implication of provisional and real.
7. Similes · Cross-Reading · Carrying Forward
When the parents separate, the guide cannot be born. A widower and widow cannot make a household and will never have descendants. Both similes point to the same illness: if provisional and real are split into isolated lines of teaching, they can neither confirm what is taught nor reveal reality to sentient beings. The passage does not assign the provisional and real individually to father or mother; the simile takes only the meaning that separation prevents generation.
The two birds ranging together render the same relation as a dynamic image. There are two birds, yet they range and rest without separation; permanence and impermanence therefore cannot be assigned to upper and lower domains that never meet. Read with the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, the simile’s original application shows that suffering, impermanence, no-self, and the other Dharmas cannot be separated. Read with the Shiqian, it unfolds into birth-and-death and nirvāṇa each possessing permanence and impermanence, with phenomena and principle mutually implicative.
The section also carries an implicit image of illness and Dharma. The item-by-item diagnosis in the first half removes the illness. The latter half’s renewed use of four gateways, eight gateways, praise and reproach, common return, permanence, half and full, causes and conditions, provisional names, and one sound does not remove the Dharma. Treatment does not demonstrate its skill by burning all the medicines, but by discerning the illness, the medicine, and its use.
Read with the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, the one sound is used through the two positive liberations of wisdom and skillful means. Read with the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom and the Satyasiddhi Treatise, the four Tripiṭaka gateways show that different entrances to the path cannot be swallowed by one gateway. Read with the Sutra of the Lotus Blossom of the Wondrous Dharma, the seal of the true mark and what cannot be revealed provide root-scripture scenes for each side of provisional and real.
This section takes the various classifications listed earlier and subjects them to practical examination, while also clearing the method for the next part’s classification of the teaching. It first acknowledges what an old account genuinely obtained, then identifies one-sided acceptance and false correspondence, and finally retains usable names while establishing their meanings anew. Rejection and acceptance here are not simple deletion and retention, but the restoration of each designation to a more complete relation among the characteristics of the Dharma.
8. Placement of the Editions
First, this unit uses T1716 as its base text, beginning at 0805b09 and ending at 0806a13; 0806a14 has already entered the fifth part. The present range has five transmitted bracketed notes 『〔云云〕』, at 0805c03, 0805c13, 0805c16, 0805c18, and 0806a13.
Second, the T1716 range of this section has no Taishō variant marker in the main text. The nearest preceding item occurs at 0804b21 and the nearest following item at 0810b03. This establishes only that the list for the specified range is empty; it is not extended into a claim that the whole work or all witnesses contain no variants.
Third, the direct commentary on this section in T1717 has seven variant groups at eight main-text positions. All are listed below:
| Anchor | Position | Taishō main text | Witness A variant |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0956002 | 0956a26 | 「者，五」 tr. “the [graph sequence] ‘zhe, five’”〔T33 0956a26〕 | Omits these two graphs. |
| 0956003 | 0956b03、b04 | 「鄰」 tr. “the graph lin”〔T33 0956b03〕, with the same graph appearing again at〔0956b04〕 | Both occurrences read 『憐』. |
| 0956004 | 0956b06–b07 | 「或云娑羅一隻，鄰提一隻」 tr. “Some say one sāla bird and one linti bird”〔T33 0956b06〕 | Omits these ten graphs. |
| 0956005 | 0956b09 | 「云」 tr. “the graph yun”〔T33 0956b09〕 | Omits this graph. |
| 0956006 | 0956b18 | 「升」 tr. “the graph sheng”〔T33 0956b18〕 | Reads 『昇』. |
| 0956007 | 0956b24 | 「今」 tr. “the graph jin”〔T33 0956b24〕 | Reads 『今不』. |
| 0956008 | 0956c11 | 「名」 tr. “the graph ming”〔T33 0956c11〕 | Reads 『名無』. |