一　四宗要文纂補三巻 - 翻刻

翻刻

【三六ページ上段】
無雖＿レ寂。若不＿レ修＿レ道。無＿レ由＿二契會＿一。故言＿二佛子＿一。《割書：至》。佛＿一也。《割書：文》。
△疏記九《割書：本｜十七》云。問。一切諸經。乃至草木。理無＿レ不＿レ等。
何獨法華。　答。敎之同異。具如＿二玄文＿一。雖＿二 一切理同＿一。説
在＿二今經＿一。今所＿レ歎者。歎＿二能詮敎＿一。故諸經中無。《割書：文》。
△弘決四《割書：本卅｜五》云。《割書：諸方｜無行》經。說＿二欲是道＿一者。《割書：英曰。經次文云。終｜不＿二破戒＿一等。云云。》
只云＿三道性不＿レ出＿二於欲＿一。亦云＿二欲性不＿レ離＿レ道＿一。約＿レ理云＿レ卽。
約＿レ事須＿レ離。《割書：已｜上》
○傳法正宗論云。昔隋之智者顗公。最爲＿レ知＿レ敎。《割書：云云》
△摩訶止觀十《割書：廿｜七》曰。行＿レ惡者。執＿三大乘中。貪欲卽是道。三
毒中。具＿二 一切佛法＿一。如＿レ此實語。本滅＿二煩惱＿一。而僻取著。還
生＿二結業＿一。稱毁憂愛。欺慢嘊喍。競＿二於名利＿一。《割書：文》。
○𣵀槃經云。心作＿二善業＿一者。自身卽知識。心作＿二惡業＿一者。
自身卽怨敵。《割書：云云》。
○同《割書：會疏廿六｜《割書：三十七八九》》云。願作＿二心師＿一。不＿レ師於心＿一。《割書：已下取｜意文乎。》欲＿レ得＿二不
退菩薩＿一。當＿レ發＿二此願＿一。《割書：文》。
○正法念經。獄率■【呵ヵ】＿二-責罪人＿一曰。心是第一怨。此怨最爲＿レ
惡。此怨能縛＿レ 人。送＿二炎羅所＿一。汝獨地獄所＿レ燒。爲＿二惡業＿一所＿レ

【三六ページ下段】
食時。妻子兄弟眷屬。不＿レ能＿レ救。《割書：云云》。
○楞伽經三《割書：一切佛語心品｜對＿二-告于大慧＿一。》云。我某夜成道。至＿二某夜𣵀槃＿一。
於＿二此二中間＿一。我都無＿二所說＿一。《割書：文》。
○又云。我從＿三某夜得＿二最正覺＿一。乃至某夜入＿二般𣵀槃＿一。於＿二某
中間＿一。乃至不＿レ說＿二 一字＿一。《割書：文》。
△無量義經說法品云。自＿二我得＿レ道初起說＿レ法＿一。至＿二于今日＿一
演＿二-說大乘無量義經＿一。未曾不＿レ說＿下苦空無常無我。非眞非
假、非大非小。本來不＿レ生。今亦不＿レ滅。一相無相。法相法
性。不來不去。而諸衆生。四相所＿レ遷＿上。《割書：文》。
△山家註釋中《割書：廿｜八》曰。言＿二自我得道＿一者。指＿二釋迦得道＿一。初起＿二
說法＿一者。擧＿二 二初乳酪時＿一。言＿二至于今日演說大乘無量義
經＿一者。明＿二醍醐初分時＿一。自＿二未曾不說＿一 下。明＿二不說一字＿一。是
卽二夜經意也。言＿二而諸衆生四相所遷＿一者。明＿二隨他意說＿一。
未字不＿レ用＿二重二返讀＿一。例如＿二應當之當字。不＿レ用＿二 二返讀＿一。
不＿レ說＿二眞如隨緣苦＿一。不＿レ說＿二眞如隨緣空＿一。不＿レ說＿二隨緣之無
常＿一。不＿レ說＿二隨緣之無我＿一。不＿レ說＿二偏眞之非眞＿一。不＿レ說＿二依他之
非假＿一。不＿レ說＿二權大之非大＿一。不＿レ說＿二權小之非小＿一。不＿レ說＿二心性

【三七ページ上段】
本來不生＿一。不＿レ說＿二心性今亦不滅＿一。不＿レ說＿二卽中之一相＿一。不【レ点脱ヵ】
說＿二卽空之無相＿一。不＿レ說＿二卽假之法相＿一。不＿レ說＿二 一心之法性＿一。
不＿レ說＿二 一心之不來＿一。不＿レ說＿二 一心之不去＿一。雖＿レ然隨＿二衆生生
等四相所＿レ遷＿一。說＿二苦空等＿一。是卽權說隔歷三諦。未＿レ説＿二眞實
圓融三諦＿一。法華之前。四十餘年。四時所說。四敎八敎。結
成已竟。《割書：文》。
△弘決三《割書：下十八｜評楞伽》云。多辨＿二通別＿一。少明＿二藏圓＿一。若論＿二智行＿一。通
具＿二 四敎＿一。《割書：至》。驗知。彼部方等明矣。《割書：上》。
△釋籤《割書：本四｜十八》云。世人判＿二楞伽＿一。或同＿二華嚴＿一。或同＿二法華＿一。具如＿下
止觀記。己有＿二 二處＿一。引＿二楞伽文＿一。判屬＿中方等＿上。《割書：文》。
△弘決五《割書：下五｜十六》云。楞伽七空。多在＿二藏通＿一。以＿二自證中。云＿レ離＿二
過習＿一故。縱容取＿レ之。稍通＿二圓別＿一。《割書：上》。此《割書：四｜左》引妙樂併考。
△妙樂曰。釋＿レ義須＿レ望＿二本經＿一。《割書：記｜八》此言也盡矣。應＿三用鑑＿二乎
萬世＿一。夫達磨所依之楞伽經者。偏圓大小帶縈之說。而是
方便麤法者也。故以＿二本經＿一覩＿二-見達磨之心目＿一。卽斯隔-歷-
偏-空之見解也。亦亡＿レ諍矣。蓋其可說不可說者。此二門
通說＿二於一代群典＿一也。楞伽一字不說。二法不說者。且擧＿二

【三七ページ下段】
其一邊＿一耳。勿＿二固執＿一。
△𣵀槃經德王品《割書：會疏十｜九《割書：三十》》云。佛言。善哉善哉。善男子。不生
生不可說。生生亦不可說。生不生亦不可說。不生不生
亦不可說。生亦不可說。不生亦不可說。有＿二因緣＿一故。亦可＿二
得說＿一。《割書：文》。止觀五《割書：六十｜九》弘決《割書：下三｜已下》鷹峰群譚四《割書：十｜七》等。今避＿レ繁。
須者往考。
△弘決五《割書：下十｜四》云。凡諸文中。不可說後。必明＿二可說＿一者。先
自證已。必化＿レ他故。《割書：文》。
△止觀五破法遍文《割書：七十｜三右》云。又楞伽云。我從＿二【三点ヵ】得道夜。至＿二
𣵀槃夜＿一。不＿レ說＿二 一字＿一。佛因＿二 二法＿一。作＿二如＿レ此說＿一。謂緣＿二自法及
本住法＿一。自法者。彼如來所得。我亦得＿レ之。無＿レ增無＿レ減。離＿二
言說妄想文字二趣＿一。釋曰。緣＿二自法＿一是聖證＿二眞諦實性＿一也。
離言說妄想者。不可思議也。離文字者。離＿二假名＿一也。離二
趣者。離＿二說所說想所想名所名＿一也。本住法者。謂古先聖
道。法界常住。如＿下道趣＿レ城道爲＿二 人行＿一。非＿二行者作＿一レ道。城由＿レ
道至。非＿中至者作＿上レ城。經曰。士夫見＿二平坦道＿一。卽隨入＿レ城。受＿二
如意樂＿一。我及先佛法界常住。亦復如＿レ是。故二夜不＿レ說＿二 一

現代語訳

【三十六ページ上段】
無は寂であるといえども、もし道を修しなければ、契会する由がない。故に「仏子」と言う。仏なり。

△『疏記』九（本）に云く。問う。一切諸経、乃至草木まで、理として等しからざることなし。何故独り法華なのか。答う。教の同異は、『玄文』の如し。一切の理は同じといえども、説は今経にある。今歎ずる所は、能詮教を歎ず。故に諸経中に無し。

△『弘決』四（本）に云く。『諸方無行経』に「欲はこれ道なり」と説くは、ただ道性は欲を出でずと云い、また欲性は道を離れずと云う。理について即と云い、事について須らく離るべし。

○『伝法正宗論』に云く。昔、隋の智者顗公は最も教を知る者であった。

△『摩訶止観』十に曰く。悪を行う者は、大乗中の「貪欲即是道」、三毒中に一切仏法を具すという、このような実語を執するも、本来煩悩を滅すべきなのに、偏取著して、還って結業を生じ、称毀憂愛、欺慢嘊喍し、名利を競う。

○『涅槃経』に云く。心が善業を作す者は、自身即ち知識なり。心が悪業を作す者は、自身即ち怨敵なり。

○同（会疏二十六）に云く。願わくは心の師と作りて、心を師とせず。不退菩薩を得んと欲せば、当にこの願を発すべし。

○『正法念経』に、獄卒が罪人を呵責して曰く。心はこれ第一の怨なり。この怨最も悪し。この怨能く人を縛り、炎羅の所に送る。汝独り地獄に燃やされ、悪業に食される時、妻子兄弟眷属も救うこと能わず。

【三十六ページ下段】
○『楞伽経』三（一切仏語心品、大慧に対告）に云く。我某夜に成道し、某夜の涅槃に至るまで、この二中間に於いて、我都て所説無し。

○また云く。我某夜に最正覚を得てより、乃至某夜般涅槃に入るまで、某中間に於いて、乃至一字も説かず。

△『無量義経』「説法品」に云く。我道を得て初めて法を説き起こしてより、今日に至るまで大乗無量義経を演説するに、未だ曾て苦空無常無我、非真非偽、非大非小、本来不生、今また不滅、一相無相、法相法性、不来不去を説かずということなし。しかるに諸衆生は、四相の遷る所となる。

△山家註釈中に曰く。「自我得道」と言うは、釈迦得道を指す。「初起説法」は、二初の乳酪時を挙ぐ。「至于今日演説大乗無量義経」と言うは、醍醐初分の時を明かす。「自未曾不説」以下は、「不説一字」を明かす。これ即ち二夜経の意なり。「而諸衆生四相所遷」と言うは、随他意説を明かす。「未」字は重二返読を用いず。「応当」の「当」字が二返読を用いざるが如し。真如随縁の苦を説かず、真如随縁の空を説かず、随縁の無常を説かず、随縁の無我を説かず、偏真の非真を説かず、依他の非偽を説かず、権大の非大を説かず、権小の非小を説かず、心性

【三十七ページ上段】
本来不生を説かず、心性今また不滅を説かず、即中の一相を説かず、即空の無相を説かず、即仮の法相を説かず、一心の法性を説かず、一心の不来を説かず、一心の不去を説かず。然りと雖も衆生の生等四相の遷る所に随って、苦空等を説く。これ即ち権説隔歴三諦なり。未だ真実円融三諦を説かず。法華の前、四十余年、四時所説、四教八教、結成已に竟る。

△『弘決』三（下、楞伽を評す）に云く。多く通別を弁じ、少なく蔵円を明かす。もし智行を論ずれば、通じて四教を具す。験して知る。彼の部は方等なること明らかなり。

△『釈籤』（本四）に云く。世人、楞伽を判じて、或いは華厳に同じ、或いは法華に同じとす。『止観記』の如く、已に二処あり。楞伽の文を引いて、方等に判属す。

△『弘決』五（下）に云く。楞伽七空は、多く蔵通にあり。自証中に、過習を離ると云うを以っての故に。縦容してこれを取れば、稍や円別に通ず。この文を引いて妙楽と併せ考うべし。

△妙楽曰く。義を釈するには須らく本経を望むべし。この言尽きたり。応に万世の鑑に用うべし。夫れ達磨所依の楞伽経とは、偏円大小帯纓の説にして、これ方便粗法なり。故に本経を以って達磨の心目を覩見すれば、即ちこの隔歴偏空の見解なり。また諍い亡し。蓋しその可説不可説とは、この二門、通じて一代群典を説くなり。楞伽の一字不説、二法不説とは、且くその一辺を挙ぐるのみ。固執することなかれ。

【三十七ページ下段】
△『涅槃経』「徳王品」（会疏十九）に云く。仏言う。善哉善哉。善男子。不生生不可説、生生もまた不可説、生不生もまた不可説、不生不生もまた不可説、生もまた不可説、不生もまた不可説。因縁あるが故に、また得て説くべし。『止観』五、『弘決』下三以下、『鷹峰群譚』四等。今繁を避く。須いる者は往きて考えよ。

△『弘決』五（下）に云く。凡そ諸文中、不可説の後、必ず可説を明かすは、先ず自証已りて、必ず他を化するが故なり。

△『止観』五「破法遍」の文に云く。また楞伽に云く。我得道の夜より、涅槃の夜に至るまで、一字も説かず。仏は二法に因って、かくの如き説を作す。謂わく自法及び本住法に縁る。自法とは、彼の如来の得る所、我もまたこれを得。増無く減無し。言説妄想文字の二趣を離る。釈して曰く。自法に縁るは、これ聖の真諦実性を証するなり。言説妄想を離るとは、不可思議なり。文字を離るとは、仮名を離るなり。二趣を離るとは、説所説、想所想、名所名を離るなり。本住法とは、謂わく古先聖道、法界常住なり。道の城に趣くに、道は人の行く為なれども、行者の道を作すに非ず。城は道に由りて至るも、至る者の城を作すに非ず。経に曰く。士夫、平坦の道を見て、即ち随いて城に入り、如意の楽を受く。我及び先仏の法界常住も、また是の如し。故に二夜一

英語訳

**Page 36 Upper Section**
Although mu (nothingness) is quiescence, if one does not cultivate the Way, there is no means to achieve spiritual union. Therefore it says "Buddha-son" - meaning Buddha.

△The Commentary (Shuiki) Volume 9 states: Question: All sutras, even grass and trees, have principle that is without inequality. Why only the Lotus Sutra? Answer: The similarities and differences of teachings are as explained in the Profound Text (Genmon). Although all principles are the same, the explanation is found in this sutra. What is praised here praises the teaching that can express [truth]. Therefore it is not found in other sutras.

△The Extensive Decisions (Kōketsu) Volume 4 states: The Sutra of Non-Action in All Directions explains "desire is the Way," but this merely says that the nature of the Way does not transcend desire, and also that the nature of desire does not separate from the Way. Regarding principle, one speaks of "immediate," but regarding phenomena, one must separate.

○The Treatise on Orthodox Transmission of Dharma states: In ancient times, Master Zhiyi of the Sui dynasty was most knowledgeable about teachings.

△The Great Calming and Contemplation Volume 10 states: Those who practice evil cling to teachings from the Mahayana that "greed is immediately the Way" and that "the three poisons contain all Buddha-dharmas." Though these true words originally aimed to eliminate afflictions, they grasp them incorrectly and instead generate karmic bonds, competing for fame and profit through praise, slander, worry, love, deception, arrogance, and clamor.

○The Nirvana Sutra states: When the mind creates good karma, one's own body becomes a wise friend. When the mind creates evil karma, one's own body becomes an enemy.

○The same [sutra] states: Vow to become master of the mind, not to make the mind your master. If you wish to attain the non-retreating bodhisattva [stage], you should make this vow.

○The Sutra of Mindfulness of True Dharma records a hell-guard rebuking a sinner: "Mind is the foremost enemy. This enemy is most evil. This enemy can bind people and send them to Yama's realm. When you alone are burned in hell and consumed by evil karma, wives, children, brothers, and relatives cannot save you."

**Page 36 Lower Section**
○The Laṅkāvatāra Sutra Volume 3 (Chapter on All Buddha-Word-Mind, addressing Mahāmati) states: From the night I achieved enlightenment until the night of nirvana, in this interval between, I had nothing to say.

○It also states: From the night I attained supreme perfect enlightenment until the night I entered parinirvana, in this interval, I did not speak even a single word.

△The Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings, "Chapter on Expounding Dharma," states: From when I first attained the Way and began expounding dharma until today when I expound the Mahayana Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings, I have never failed to speak of suffering, emptiness, impermanence, non-self, neither true nor false, neither great nor small, originally unborn, now also not extinguished, one characteristic without characteristics, dharma-characteristic and dharma-nature, neither coming nor going. Yet all sentient beings are subject to the four characteristics of change.

△The Tendai Commentary states: "From when I attained the Way" refers to Śākyamuni's enlightenment. "First began expounding dharma" indicates the initial period of milk and cream. "Until today expounding the Mahayana Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings" clarifies the initial phase of ghee. From "never failed to speak" onward clarifies "not speaking a single word." This is precisely the meaning of the "two nights" sutra. "Yet all sentient beings are subject to the four characteristics" clarifies teaching according to others' capacity. The character "not" (mi) should not be read with double inversion, like the character "should" (tō) in "should be" is not read with double inversion. [The Buddha] did not speak of suffering as true-suchness following conditions, did not speak of emptiness as true-suchness following conditions, did not speak of impermanence as following conditions, did not speak of non-self as following conditions, did not speak of partial truth as non-true, did not speak of dependent nature as non-false, did not speak of provisional great as non-great, did not speak of provisional small as non-small, did not speak of mind-nature

**Page 37 Upper Section**
[continuing from previous] as originally unborn, did not speak of mind-nature as now also not extinguished, did not speak of the one characteristic of the Middle, did not speak of the no-characteristics of Emptiness, did not speak of the dharma-characteristics of the Provisional, did not speak of the dharma-nature of One Mind, did not speak of the non-coming of One Mind, did not speak of the non-going of One Mind. Nevertheless, following sentient beings subject to the four characteristics of birth and so forth, [the Buddha] spoke of suffering, emptiness, etc. This is precisely the provisional teaching of the separate and sequential Three Truths. He had not yet expounded the true circular and harmonious Three Truths. Before the Lotus, for over forty years, the teachings of the four periods, four teachings and eight teachings, have been completed.

△The Extensive Decisions Volume 3 (evaluating the Laṅkāvatāra) states: It extensively discusses the Shared and Distinct [teachings] but little clarifies the Tripiṭaka and Perfect [teachings]. If discussing wisdom and practice, it generally encompasses the four teachings. This verifies that this collection clearly belongs to the Vaipulya period.

△The Explanatory Notes states: Worldly people judge the Laṅkāvatāra as either equivalent to the Avataṃsaka or equivalent to the Lotus. As in the Śamatha-vipaśyanā Commentary, there are already two places that quote Laṅkāvatāra passages and classify them as belonging to Vaipulya.

△The Extensive Decisions Volume 5 states: The seven emptinesses of the Laṅkāvatāra mostly belong to Tripiṭaka and Shared [teachings]. Because it speaks of being free from habitual faults in self-realization. Even if taken tolerantly, it slightly connects to Perfect and Distinct [teachings]. This should be considered together with Myōraku's citation.

△Myōraku said: "In explaining meaning, one must look to the original sutra." These words are complete. They should serve as a mirror for ten thousand generations. The Laṅkāvatāra Sutra that Bodhidharma relied upon contains teachings that intermingle the one-sided and perfect, great and small - it is provisional and coarse dharma. Therefore, viewing Bodhidharma's mind and vision through the original sutra reveals this view of separate, sequential, one-sided emptiness. Disputes also cease. The "expressible and inexpressible" - these two approaches generally apply to all the collections of teachings throughout [the Buddha's] lifetime. The Laṅkāvatāra's "not speaking a single word" and "not speaking two dharmas" merely indicate one aspect. Do not cling rigidly to this.

**Page 37 Lower Section**
△The Nirvana Sutra, "Chapter on King Virtue," states: The Buddha said: "Excellent, excellent, good man! Non-arising arising is inexpressible, arising arising is also inexpressible, arising non-arising is also inexpressible, non-arising non-arising is also inexpressible, arising is also inexpressible, non-arising is also inexpressible. Because there are causes and conditions, it can also be expressed." See Śamatha-vipaśyanā Volume 5, Extensive Decisions below Volume 3 and following, Eagle Peak Collected Discussions Volume 4, etc. I now avoid complexity - those who need [more detail] should go and investigate.

△The Extensive Decisions Volume 5 states: Generally in various texts, after [discussing] the inexpressible, [the text] necessarily clarifies the expressible because after first achieving self-realization, one necessarily teaches others.

△The Śamatha-vipaśyanā Volume 5, "Breaking Through All Dharmas" section states: Also, the Laṅkāvatāra says: "From the night I attained the Way until the night of nirvana, I did not speak a single word." The Buddha made this kind of statement based on two dharmas - namely, being conditioned by self-dharma and originally abiding dharma. Self-dharma means: what that Tathāgata obtained, I also obtained it - without increase or decrease, free from the two directions of verbal expression, false thinking, and written words. The commentary says: Being conditioned by self-dharma is the sage's realization of the true nature of absolute truth. Being free from verbal expression and false thinking is inconceivable. Being free from written words means being free from provisional names. Being free from two directions means being free from speaking and what is spoken, thinking and what is thought, naming and what is named. Originally abiding dharma refers to the ancient sagely way, the dharma-realm's permanent abiding. Like a path leading to a city - the path exists for people to travel, but is not made by the traveler. The city is reached through the path, but is not made by those who arrive. The sutra says: "A person sees a level path, immediately follows it to enter the city, and receives blissful enjoyment as desired. The permanently abiding dharma-realm of myself and previous Buddhas is also like this." Therefore, in the two nights, not one