般若心經略疏連珠記 1.29

1.29

「權實」下，二、教攝。鎮國曰：「由前經藏有權實等，故有此門。」然疏主述作，隨宜制度，事非一準。且《華嚴》備張五教，《起信》無差唯約四宗，斯經但明權實，《梵網》獨開化制。蓋以欲和陽春之高唱乃追玉舌之旨歸。然則門門刃解東流、義義氷鎔三藏，戒經具說重輕、僉明持犯，約化制以釋通，豈非得旨。般若竪貫二時、橫通五教，有帶有雙、談空談有，彰權實以明之，可稱絕唱。且一大藏經雖皆佛說、然有就機方便權宜說、有稱性決了真實說，今經決了真實，故云實教攝也。但以權實多門，理須略辨。約說有三：一、就五教。前四皆權、後一方實，此如《孔目》、《教章》等說。二者前二為權、後三皆實，如《華嚴》、《圓覺》等疏所說。三者淨土說為真實、娑婆談是權宜，如《修證儀》說。疏依第二。

From "expedient and real" downward is the second [part]: subsumption under the teachings. Zhenguo says: "Because the preceding scriptural piṭakas have expedient, real, and so on, there is this section." However, in the commentator's compositions, provisions are made according to expediency; matters are not uniform. For example, the Huayan comprehensively unfolds the five teachings; the Awakening of Faith without divergence accords solely with the four doctrines; this sūtra only clarifies the expedient and the real; and the Brahmā Net uniquely institutes transformation and regulation. This is because, wishing to harmonize with the elevated singing of the White Spring, he pursues the definitive purport of the jade tongue. Thus, every gate resolves problems as easily as a blade traveling eastward, and every meaning melts the Three Piṭakas like ice; the precept sūtra explains major and minor in full and completely clarifies holding and violating, so interpreting it in terms of transformation and regulation—how could this not grasp the intent? Prajñā vertically threads the two periods and horizontally penetrates the five teachings, possessing the blended and the twofold, speaking of emptiness and speaking of existence; making manifest the expedient and the real to clarify it may be called an incomparable masterpiece. Moreover, although the entire great treasury of sūtras was all spoken by the Buddha, some were taught as expedient means adapted to capacities, while others were taught as definitive and real in accordance with nature. The present sūtra is definitive and real, hence it is said to be subsumed under the real teaching. Yet because expedient and real have many approaches, in principle they must be briefly distinguished. In terms of explanation, there are three: First, with respect to the five teachings: the preceding four are all expedient, and the last one alone is real; this is as explained in the Kongmu, the Jiaozhang, and so on. Second, the preceding two are expedient, and the latter three are all real; this is as explained in the commentaries on the Huayan, the Yuanjue, and so on. Third, what is spoken in the Pure Land is real, while what is discussed in the Sahā [world] is expedient; this is as explained in the Xiuzhengyi. The commentary relies on the second.