[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) › [觀音玄義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727) › 2.15 # 觀音玄義記 2.15 觀音玄義記 2.15 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2.15) 七、權實，三：初、釋名。暫用則權宜，非暫則究竟。二、「略言」下，辯相，二：初、泛明三種，二：初、總示三種。即唯自唯他及自他共。以諸經論所談權實其相不同，或言自行有權有實，或許化他有權有實，或經論說自行之法皆名為實、化他之法皆名為權，是故今家凡論權實須明此三。若不然者，稟學之徒則不盡知權實之相，於諸經論不免生疑。復應了知權實法相，或約理事、或約理教，教行縛脫、因果體用、漸頓開合、通別悉檀，皆通自他及自他共。今以中觀對於二觀為權實者，似用因果而辯三番：自修三觀為自行權實；若約化他，但隨他意，四悉適時不可定判；若第三番自行三觀，有權有實，以順智故只稱為實，化他之法雖有權實，以順情故唯稱為權。二、「用此」下，遍歷諸教，二：初、略指四教。隨教淺深明理事等，約自約他及自他共，義皆不闕。二、「復就」下，明圓六即。六通三教即唯在圓，復就自行明六權實，從因至果，義便故也。二、「尋此」下，別用第三。前番問答有權實，七難二求在權、永離三毒是實，以由大士用於自行一心三觀，觀其音聲令皆解脫，故都判為實。後番問答，十界身說顯有權實，以是大士隨差別機示種種應，故覩判為權。此乃判於自行化他以為權實，無第三番，如何分經兩段而對權實？三、「前問」下，結歸，二：初、結指經文。前後皆云自行化他者，簡異單自行、單化他權實。意云：前番是自他相對之實，後番是自他相對之權。二、「故知」下，結歸題目。 > Seventh, provisional and real, in three parts: First, explaining the names. What is used temporarily is expediently provisional; what is not temporary is ultimate. Second, from "Briefly speaking..." onwards, discerning the characteristics, in two parts: First, clarifying the three kinds generally, in two parts: First, generally presenting the three kinds: namely, solely for oneself, solely for others, and common to both self and others. Because the characteristics of provisional and real discussed in various sūtras and treatises are not the same—some say self-practice has provisional and real, some allow that transforming others has provisional and real, while some sūtras and treatises say that phenomena of self-practice are all termed real and phenomena of transforming others are all termed provisional—therefore, whenever our school discusses provisional and real, it must clarify these three. If not, students will not completely understand the characteristics of provisional and real, and will inevitably give rise to doubts regarding various sūtras and treatises. Furthermore, one should understand the dharmic characteristics of provisional and real: whether in terms of principle and phenomena, or principle and teaching, teaching and practice, bondage and liberation, cause and effect, substance and function, gradual and sudden, opening and uniting, or general and specific siddhāntas, they all pertain to oneself, to others, and to both self and others together. Now, pairing the contemplation of the middle against the two contemplations as provisional and real seems to use cause and effect to discern the three turns: self-cultivation of the threefold contemplation is the provisional and real of self-practice; regarding transforming others, it merely follows the intentions of others, with the four siddhāntas applied according to the occasion and not definitively determined; as for the third turn, in self-practice of the threefold contemplation there are provisional and real, but because it accords with wisdom it is only called real, while although the phenomena of transforming others have provisional and real, because they accord with sentiments they are solely called provisional. Second, from "Employing this..." onwards, traversing all teachings, in two parts: First, briefly pointing to the four teachings. According to the shallowness or depth of the teachings, principle, phenomena, etc., are clarified; whether in terms of oneself, others, or common to both, the meaning is never deficient. Second, from "Furthermore, in terms of..." onwards, clarifying the six identities of the Perfect \[Teaching\]. The six identities run through the three teachings, but identity in principle resides solely in the Perfect \[Teaching\]; furthermore, in terms of self-practice, clarifying the six provisional and real from cause to effect is due to contextual convenience. Second, from "Examining this..." onwards, specifically applying the third \[turn\]. The former turn of question and answer has provisional and real: the seven disasters and two quests pertain to the provisional, while perpetual freedom from the three poisons is the real; because the Great Being uses the single-mind threefold contemplation of his own practice to contemplate their sounds and cause them all to attain liberation, it is entirely judged as real. The latter turn of question and answer reveals provisional and real in the bodies and teachings of the ten realms; because the Great Being manifests various responses according to distinct capacities, it is entirely judged as provisional. This is judging self-practice and transforming others as real and provisional; without the third turn, how could one divide the sūtra into two sections to correspond to provisional and real? Third, from "The former question..." onwards, concluding and returning, in two parts: First, concluding by pointing to the sūtra text. That both the former and latter speak of self-practice and transforming others is to differentiate them from provisional and real of solely self-practice or solely transforming others. The meaning is: the former turn is the real relative to self and others, while the latter turn is the provisional relative to self and others. Second, from "Therefore we know..." onwards, concluding by returning to the title. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2.14) - [Next: 2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2.16) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727~en-mt.2.15) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1727.2.15) · Pramāṇa