法華玄論 6.186

6.186

次辨空有。舊云：空有二解但取有解，空解無動是故不取。又盡無生智也但是有智也。評曰：不然。於小乘斷結為宗，正是空解，應以空解為正。故下文云「但念空無相無作之法」，此是果德空解也。「我等長夜修習空法，得盡三界苦惱之患。」故二乘之人正證空法，應以空慧為車，云何乃取有智耶？今所明，空有二智皆是小車體也，大車亦以實慧、方便慧為車之體。

Next is to distinguish emptiness and existence. The old masters said: Between the two understandings of emptiness and existence, it takes only the understanding of existence; the understanding of emptiness involves no movement, and therefore is not taken. Furthermore, the wisdoms of exhaustion and non-arising are also merely wisdom of existence. I evaluate this: It is not so. In the Hīnayāna, severing the defilements is the primary purpose, which is precisely the understanding of emptiness; one should take the understanding of emptiness as primary. Hence the text below states: "Constantly mindful only of the dharmas of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness"—this is the understanding of emptiness in fruit-virtue. "Through the long night we practiced the dharma of emptiness, and were able to end the afflictions of suffering in the three realms." Therefore, practitioners of the two vehicles directly realize the dharma of emptiness, and one should take the wisdom of emptiness as the carriage; how could one merely take the wisdom of existence? What is clarified now is that both wisdoms of emptiness and existence constitute the substance of the small carriages, and the great carriage likewise takes real wisdom and skillful wisdom as the substance of the carriage.