四教義 12.8

12.8

一明權實者，權是暫用之名，實以永施為義。方便波羅蜜隨情近益，故名為權；智慧波羅蜜稱理究竟，故名為實也。是則三教暫赴物情，故名為權；圓教究竟利物，故名為實。分別權實應須四義：一明一切非權非實，二明一切皆權，三明一切皆實，四明一切佛法非權非實而權而實。一明一切非權非實者，若論四不可說，無說則無四教可分，無三教即非權，無圓教則非實，是則一切佛法皆非權非實。二明一切皆權者，若論四不可說有因緣而說，是則四教皆是權巧化物也。故佛言：「我坐道場時，不得一法實，空拳誑小兒，以度於一切」也。三明一切皆實者，無說而說之，必應機赴緣之益，其義皆實，故四教皆名實也。故《智度論》云：「有世界、對治、為人故實，有第一義故實」，此即皆實不虛之義也。四明一切佛法非權非實而權實者，若四不可說則無權實之可分，故言非權非實。不說而說三教即是權也，而說圓教即是實也。但一家明權實義有三種：一化他權實，二自行化他權實，三自行權實。若是化他權實，前三教非但是權，就此權中亦各說權實也。若明自行化他權實，即是前三教並是權用，圓教所明一向是實。若論自行權實，即就圓教之位辨，照中道為實，雙照二諦為權也。

First, explaining the expedient and the ultimate: 'Expedient' is a name for provisional application; 'ultimate' takes permanent bestowal as its meaning. Because the pāramitā of expedient means accords with sentiment to provide proximate benefit, it is called expedient; because the pāramitā of wisdom accords with principle to be definitive, it is called ultimate. Thus, because the three teachings provisionally conform to the sentiments of beings, they are called expedient; because the perfect teaching definitively benefits beings, it is called ultimate. To distinguish the expedient and the ultimate requires four meanings: first, explaining that all is neither expedient nor ultimate; second, explaining that all is expedient; third, explaining that all is ultimate; fourth, explaining that all Buddhadharmas are neither expedient nor ultimate, yet both expedient and ultimate. First, explaining that all is neither expedient nor ultimate: If one discusses the four ineffables, where there is no exposition there are no four teachings to distinguish; where there are no three teachings, there is no expedient, and where there is no perfect teaching, there is no ultimate; thus, all Buddhadharmas are neither expedient nor ultimate. Second, explaining that all is expedient: If one discusses the four ineffables being spoken due to causes and conditions, then the four teachings are all skillful expedients to transform beings. Hence the Buddha said: 'When I sat at the site of enlightenment, I did not obtain a single real dharma; with an empty fist I deceived small children so as to deliver all.' Third, explaining that all is ultimate: Expounding without exposition must respond to capacities and conform to conditions to benefit them; its meaning is entirely real, and hence the four teachings are all called ultimate. Thus the Dà zhìdù lùn says: 'Because of the worldly, counteractive, and individual [siddhāntas] they are real, and because of the paramārtha they are real'; this is the meaning of being entirely real and not empty. Fourth, explaining that all Buddhadharmas are neither expedient nor ultimate, yet both expedient and ultimate: If there are the four ineffables, then there is no distinguishing of expedient and ultimate, hence it is said they are neither expedient nor ultimate. In expounding without exposition, the three teachings are the expedient, while expounding the perfect teaching is the ultimate. However, our lineage's explanation of the meaning of the expedient and the ultimate has three types: first, the expedient and ultimate of transforming others; second, the expedient and ultimate of one's own practice and transforming others; third, the expedient and ultimate of one's own practice. If it is the expedient and ultimate of transforming others, the preceding three teachings are not only expedient, but within this expedient they also each speak of the expedient and the ultimate. If one explains the expedient and ultimate of one's own practice and transforming others, then the preceding three teachings are all expedient applications, while what is elucidated by the perfect teaching is entirely ultimate. If one discusses the expedient and ultimate of one's own practice, then determining them in terms of the stages of the perfect teaching, illuminating the middle way is the ultimate, and simultaneously illuminating the two truths is the expedient.