法華玄論 7.37

7.37

答：義門各異。前就三乘判有無以明權實，正欲斥二乘病，故明佛乘實有、二乘偽無。所以然者，二乘人謂二乘及佛乘俱是實有，故作此斥之，以二乘是無故索，菩薩乘是有故不索。今明無五者，就正道望之，是法不可示，何曾有五與不五？言五不五者，並隨物說之，皆是權也。

Answer: The approaches of meaning are distinct. Earlier, existence and non-existence were judged with respect to the three vehicles to explain the provisional and the real, precisely wishing to rebuke the sickness of the two vehicles; thus it clarified that the Buddha vehicle is real and existent, while the two vehicles are false and non-existent. Why is this? Persons of the two vehicles considered the two vehicles and the Buddha vehicle to both be real and existent, so this rebuke was made. Because the two vehicles are non-existent, they were sought out [and dismantled]; because the bodhisattva vehicle is existent, it was not sought out [and dismantled]. Now, in explaining that there are no five [vehicles], looking at it from the perspective of the true path, this dharma cannot be demonstrated—how could there ever be five or not-five? Speaking of five and not-five is entirely preaching in accordance with beings, and both are provisional.