With regard to sūtra that means garlands being tied together (flan Chieh-man), Chih-i elucidates that to tie teaching, practice and doctrine together is like garlands being tied together to prevent them from scattering. The Four Siddhāntas function to tie up either teaching, or practice, or doctrine, which accomplish the three wheels of the Buddha respectively (for Chih-i regards the verbal turning wheel as indicating teaching, body-wheel as indicating practice, and the wheel of knowing the mind of others as indicating doctrine). (Vol. 2, Page 392)

Chih-i illustrates that sūtra that is taken as the foundation for teaching (Chiao-pen) entails two aspects. On the one hand, it means that, based on single truth from the Word of the Buddha, there flow out countless speeches and teachings, such as the Common and Separate Teachings that can cause beings to attain the Path. On the other hand, based on the teaching of the Buddha, the bodhisattvas have made vast commentaries to explain the meanings in sūtras, which can also cause others to attain the Path. Sūtra that is taken as the foundation for practice (Hsin-pen) means that when one practices according to the teaching of the Buddha (whether it is Common or Separate Teaching), through these various Dharma-doors, one is able to attain the Ultimate Truth. Sūtra that is taken as the foundation for doctrine (I-pen) means that one doctrine can be derived from one sentence, and countless doctrines can be derived from countless sentences. It can also be the case that countless doctrines are derived from one sentence, and one doctrine is derived from countless sentences. Chih-i comments that summarizing these three aspects (teaching, practice and doctrine) in terms of the Dharma-door means that they are identical to the three ways to wisdom: hearing, thinking and cultivation (Wen Ssu Hsiu; Skt., śrutactābhāvanā), respectively. (Vol. 2, Page 391)

With regard to sūtra that means foundation for the dharma (Han Fa-pen), Chih-i explains that the dharma is inexpressible, but for the sake of teaching sentient beings, the Buddha expounds the dharma by means of the Four Siddhāntas. To be associated with the three perspectives, the Worldly Siddhānta is taken as the foundation for teaching; the Siddhānta for Each Person and the Siddhānta of Counteraction are taken as the foundation for practice; the Siddhānta of Supreme Truth is taken as the foundation for doctrine. (Vol. 2, Page 390)

The general analogy with the lotus indicates that regardless of whether it is the beginning stage of an ignorant being or the final stage of the Buddha, all of them possess the Buddha-nature, and are all characterized by the Ten Suchnesses. Therefore, the subtle dharma is always there, embedded within living beings. Through such a general analogy, Chih-i emphasizes that the beginning and final stages of Buddhahood are the same reality. Chih-i argues that the initial stage of Buddhahood (that is analogous with the lotus root) all the way up to the final stage of Buddhahood (that is analogous with the formation of the seed) serves as a metaphor for the subtle dharma. The beginning and final stages of Buddhahood do not differ (which are analogous with the beginning and end of the lotus) and are replete with the meanings of the Ten Suchnesses. This analogizes that although living beings in the Buddha-realm start from ignorance, they will eventually reach Buddhahood, the stage of perfection. (Vol. 2, Page 387)

In terms of the three analogies for the door of the Origin, they are spoken of by Chih-i in terms of the relationship between the Traces and the Origin. The Traces would not be correctly clarified without the introduction of the Origin, but the Origin would not be known without the Traces (serving as the prelude in preparing audiences to be capable of receiving such Ultimate Truth). The correctly recognition of the Traces being derived from the Origin is the Buddha’s tactic to enable audiences to gain freedom from their attachment to the Traces. Such a gain in freedom is what will result in final realization of the Ultimate Truth (represented by the Origin).

The first analogy indicates that in the beginning stage of the Buddha’s teaching, the Traces are misunderstood as the ultimate, due to the fact that the Buddha’s real intention for the Origin is difficult to be known. Chih-i depicts that the flower containing the seedpod analogizes that the Traces certainly contain the Origin and are contained in the Origin. Although the intention of the Buddha is for the Origin, such purpose of the Buddha is difficult to be known, just like the seedpod that is contained in the flower is hardly known before the flower blooms.

The second analogy indicates that the final teaching of the Buddha can be characterized by opening the Traces and revealing the Origin. The recognition of the Origin enables the bodhisattvas to progress to strive for Buddhahood. Chih-i states that when the flower blooms, the seedpod is revealed. This analogizes that the opening of the Traces and the revelation of the Origin is for the Traces, for it can cause the bodhisattvas to recognize the expedient means employed by the Buddha. The recognition of the Traces enables one to return to perceive the Origin.

The third analogy indicates that as the result of the final teaching of the Buddha, the Traces are abandoned when the Origin is manifested, whereby one is no longer attached to the Traces, and one practices to attain perfect enlightenment. Chih-i delineates that when the flower falls, the seed is formed. This analogizes the abolishment of the Traces and the revelation of the Origin. Since the Origin has been recognized, one is no longer ignorant about the Traces. Such recognition of the Traces leads one to pursue Buddhahood only, from which one will eventually attain perfect enlightenment. (Vol. 2, Page 385-386)

Considering that the Lotus Sūtra expresses the Ten Suchnesses as the characteristics of the Ultimate Truth, and that the Lotus Sūtra consists of the door of the Traces and the door of the Origin, Chih-i argues that the image of the lotus should be able to analogize all of these meanings. Chih-i enumerates three analogies with the lotus flower for the door of the Traces and for the door of the Origin respectively. …

The first analogy elucidates the beginning stage of the Buddha’s teaching career, which can be characterized by ignorance of beings, with which sentient beings are unable to conceive the Ultimate Truth (even though the Ultimate is contained in the Relative). Chih-i describes that when the flower grows, the seed has to be followed. The flower blooms for the formation of the seed, but the seed is not visible. This analogizes that the exposition of the Relative Truth is underlined by the Ultimate Truth, and the Buddha’s intention is for the revelation of the Ultimate Truth, but no one is yet capable of knowing such ultimate purpose at this stage, just like the seed is unknown at the moment when the flower just blooms.

The second analogy describes the final stage of the Buddha’s teaching career, which can be characterized by opening the Relative and revealing the Ultimate, whereby the Relative is made known as an indispensable expedient means for the Ultimate to be recognized. Chih-i depicts that only if the flower blooms, can the seedpod be displayed. Besides, the formation of the seedpod relies on the flower. This analogizes that the present opening of the Relative Truth and the revelation of the Ultimate Truth depends on the use of Relative Truth as expedient means, just like the seedpod depends on the flower to be nurtured and displayed.

The third analogy describes the result of the final teaching of the Buddha, which can be characterized by abandoning the Relative when the Ultimate of the One Buddha-vehicle is revealed, for the latter can lead beings to attain the Ultimate Truth of Buddhahood. Chih-i notes that when the flower falls, the seed is formed. This analogizes the abolishment of the Three Vehicles and the revelation of the One Buddha-vehicle. There is only one single Buddha-vehicle that arrives directly at the bodhimaṇḍa. Seeing that the bodhisattvas are involved in deliberate action of saving beings, they have not yet attained insight into the Ultimate Truth, and this is like the blooming of flower. In view of the non-action of all the Buddhas, the Buddhas’ insight concerns the Ultimate Truth, and this is like when the flower falls, the seed is formed. (Vol. 2, Page 384-385)

The lotus flower is defined by Chih-i as a metaphor to exemplify the subtle dharma that consists of the Relative and Ultimate Truths, for the Relative and Ultimate are difficult to be perceived without relying on metaphor. Another explanation made by Chih-i is that the lotus flower is the symbol of the Dharma-door; or rather, it is the subtle dharma. Chih-i explains that since the lotus in terms of the dharma is hard for sentient beings middle and lower faculties to grasp, it is necessary to depict the image of the lotus as an analogy. Chih-i says that the Buddha’s proclamation of the Lotus Sūtra for three weeks is for all sentient beings (e.g. beings with higher, middle and lower faculties). To be specific, the lotus, as a name for the dharma, is expounded for the beings with higher faculties, and the lotus, as an allegorical name, is for the beings with middle and lower faculties. (Vol. 2, Page 382)

In this last part of elaborating the subtlety of the Origin, Chih-i discusses it from the perspective of contemplating mind. Mind contemplation is his endeavor to show a practical way of attaining the Ultimate Truth (e.g. subtlety of the Origin). This is based on the idea that the Buddha and living beings are not different. Both the Buddha and living beings possess the Buddha-nature as suchness, and therefore, all living beings are able to emulate the Buddha, from which their Buddha-nature can be revealed and Buddhahood can be attained. Chih-i argues that since contemplating mind is the means that enables the Buddha to attain Buddhahood, all living beings are also able to attain Buddhahood by the same means. Despite the Origin being long and far, by means of contemplating mind, the subtlety of the Origin can be penetrated, as it is not apart from one’s mind. Likewise, although the function of the Traces is vast and great, and cannot be expressed and explained, given the fact that every being’s Buddha-nature is the same as that of the Buddha, great benefit can be generated by means of contemplating mind. (Vol. 2, Page 331)

Three kinds of relationship between the Relative and Ultimate in terms of the Traces and Origin are delineated by Chih-i in order to convey their inconceivable reality as one entity.

1. The Ultimate underlies the implementation of the Relative (Yüeh-shih Shih-ch’üan). Chih-i explains that the Buddha’s real intention in his teaching is for beings to recognize the Origin as the Ultimate Truth. However, the Ultimate is difficult to be measured by beings, for they have mistaken the Relative (i.e., Traces) as the Ultimate, and are unable to recognize the Relative or the Ultimate.
2. The Relative has to be abandoned in order to reveal the Ultimate (Feich’üan Hsien-shih). Chih-i asserts that this meaning indicates that the Buddha’s real intention is for beings to recognize the Relative in order to prevent them from being attached to it.
3. Opening the Relative and revealing the Ultimate (K’ai-ch’üan Hsien-shih). This is to prevent beings from being attached to the Ultimate and neglecting the importance of the Relative, since the Relative is an inseparable reality from the Ultimate (in the sense that the former reveals the latter). The relationship of these two is that the Relative contains the Ultimate as the latter underlies the former, and the Ultimate contains the Relative as the latter is derived from the former. These two are identical to each other, given that one cannot depart from the Relative to seek the Ultimate.

Respecting the teaching and practice, whereas the Origin refers to the teaching and the Traces refers to the practice, Chih-i states that the teaching functions as the foundation for practice to arise, but without practice, one cannot attain an encounter with the teaching (from which the principle can be manifested). Therefore, the indispensability of these two parties renders a single inconceivable reality. (Vol. 2, Page 320)