妙法蓮華經文句 3.51

3.51

廣釋者，先出舊解五時權實，十二年前，照無常事為權，照無常理為實，指阿毘曇，今謂《釋論》破無常是對治法，皆屬三悉檀，云何有實耶？非今所用。十二年後《般若》照假有為權，照假有即空為實，《釋論》亦破此義，念想觀已除，言語法皆滅，照假有即空者，猶是觀想耳。非今所用。次《淨名》、《思益》，內諍鑒空有二境為實智，外變動應用為權智。今謂內鑒外用為二，非入不二門，非今所用。次《法華》照三三為權，照四一為實。今謂三權一向不會實，一實不關三權，非今所用。次《涅槃》金剛前無常為權，金剛後常為實。今謂道前真如亦是常，道後如量智亦是權。此五時權實非今所用，乃至半滿四宗所明權實二智，亦非今所用。

As for the extensive explanation: first, the old interpretations regarding the expedient and real across the five periods are set forth. In the period before the twelve years, illuminating impermanent phenomena was considered the expedient, and illuminating the principle of impermanence was considered the real, referring to the Abhidharma. We now say: the *Dazhidu lun* refutes impermanence as a counteractive dharma, which entirely belongs to the three siddhāntas; how could there be the real? This is not what is adopted here. In the period after the twelve years, the *Prajñā* illuminated nominal existence as the expedient, and nominal existence as identical to emptiness as the real. The *Dazhidu lun* also refutes this idea: 'Conceptualizations and contemplations are already eliminated, and the path of speech is entirely extinguished.' Illuminating nominal existence as identical to emptiness is still merely contemplation and thought; this is not what is adopted here. Next, in the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa* and *Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā*, internally resolving and discerning the two spheres of emptiness and existence was taken as real wisdom, and externally transforming and operating responsive applications was taken as expedient wisdom. We now say: taking internal discernment and external application as two does not enter the non-dual gate; this is not what is adopted here. Next, in the *Lotus Sūtra*, illuminating the three [vehicles as] three was taken as the expedient, and illuminating the four [returning to] one was taken as the real. We now say: [in their view] the three expedients completely fail to integrate with the real, and the one real has no connection with the three expedients; this is not what is adopted here. Next, in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*, impermanence prior to the vajra[-like samādhi] was taken as the expedient, and permanence after the vajra[-like samādhi] was taken as the real. We now say: tathatā prior to the Path is also permanent, and wisdom of quantitative knowledge after the Path is also expedient. The expedient and real of these five periods are not what is adopted here; nor are the expedient and real wisdoms explained by the half-word and full-word teachings or the four doctrines what is adopted here.