法華玄論 6.48

6.48

Answer: There are two kinds of provisional and real: first, discussing provisional and real in terms of existence and non-existence; second, discussing provisional and real in terms of completeness and incompleteness. As for discussing provisional and real in terms of existence and non-existence: where there were not two, two were taught, hence the two vehicles are provisional; where there was one, one was taught, hence the Buddha vehicle is real. Second, as for discussing provisional and real in terms of completeness and incompleteness: the former explanation of the Buddha vehicle being inexhaustive is provisional, while the present explanation of the Buddha vehicle being exhaustive is real. The meaning of demanding the carriages pertains precisely to demanding on the basis of the existence or non-existence of the three vehicles; it does not elucidate demanding on the basis of the completeness or incompleteness of the Buddha vehicle. Furthermore, one may counter with a challenge: if you say that because it was formerly incomplete it is now demanded, then according to your view, the meaning of the Buddha-fruit clarified in the Lotus Sūtra is still impermanent, which would mean the fruit carriage is incomplete. If so, when reaching [the Mahāparinirvāṇa-]sūtra, one should demand the impermanent fruit carriage! The Lotus Sūtra provides only the conditioning causes and has not yet clarified the direct cause, which means the causal carriage is incomplete; when reaching the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], one should likewise demand the previously incomplete causal carriage! Yet at the time of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] no one demands the incomplete carriage of the Lotus Sūtra; you should know that when reaching the Lotus Sūtra, one likewise does not demand the Buddha-fruit that was incomplete prior to it.