[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [法華文句記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719) › 3.183 # 法華文句記 3.183 法華文句記 3.183 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.183](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3.183) 次述其略判意者，初直立二慧令信有故，故但直舉權實。次生解者，元立二智意本離著，故離二邊方解立意。第三意者，離內二著方成自行，復能不著變用益他。第四意者，非唯益他，自他俱權，論其實意本在極果，故指金剛後心為實。然今明五佛非不在果，及以本門久遠之果，理則不然，尚開凡夫即是真實，況金剛前仍判為權，權若唯在金剛之前，則佛永無權智，將何以消今品名「善權」耶？況都不判四重權實，為權為實，況都不語《法華》，全非今意，是故不用。向已通辨故云「略」也。 > Next, stating the intention of their brief judgment: first, directly establishing the two wisdoms is to cause faith in their existence, hence they merely raised the provisional and real directly. Next, generating understanding: the original intention in establishing the two wisdoms was fundamentally to transcend attachment; hence only by transcending the two extremes does one understand the intention of their establishment. The third intention: only by transcending the two internal attachments does one complete one's own practice, and furthermore can one benefit others through transformative function without attachment. The fourth intention: not only benefiting others, but self and other are both provisional; discussing its real intention, it is fundamentally in the ultimate fruit, hence designating the mind after the vajra\[-like concentration\] as real. However, now clarifying that the five buddhas are not absent from the fruit, as well as the long-distant fruit of the trace gate—in principle this is not so: it already opens ordinary persons as being the real truth, so how much more should before the vajra\[-like concentration\] still be judged as provisional? If the provisional were only before the vajra\[-like concentration\], then the Buddha would eternally lack provisional wisdom; how then could one interpret this chapter's title, "Skillful Provisional"? Furthermore, it completely fails to judge whether the four tiers of the provisional and real are provisional or real, and furthermore says nothing of the Lotus Sūtra, which is completely contrary to the present intention; therefore it is not used. Since it was already comprehensively differentiated previously, it is called "brief." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.182](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3.182) - [Next: 3.184](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3.184) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719~en-mt.3.183) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3.183](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1719.3.183) · Pramāṇa