[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) › [妙法蓮華經文句](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718) › 4.80 # 妙法蓮華經文句 4.80 妙法蓮華經文句 4.80 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.80](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.80) 從「但以一佛乘」者，光宅為因一，今言教一。圓頓之教，名一佛乘，故〈序品〉云「說大乘經」即是教義也，自別教已去，皆名有餘之說，即不了義非佛一乘。光宅云：「無緣覺、聲聞之二，無偏行菩薩之三。」又有人云：「無菩薩、緣覺為無二，無聲聞為無三。」若作此解，秖是無三藏諸乘、存於通乘，何關一佛乘耶？有人言：「無緣覺為無二，無聲聞為無三，存於菩薩大乘。」若爾秖無三藏中二乘，不無三藏中菩薩，此存有餘，何關佛乘？何處經論以聲聞為第三？既無此次第，都是妄說。若依汝解，無二是無緣覺，無三是無菩薩，第一是聲聞應不被無；若如此者則大倒亂。今言「但以一佛乘」者，純說佛法之圓教乘也。「無餘乘」者，無別教帶方便有餘之說。「無二」者，無《般若》中之帶二。「無三」者，無方等中所對之三也。如此二三皆無，況三藏中三耶？ > From “Solely by means of the One Buddha Vehicle”: Guangzhai takes this as the oneness of cause, but now we say it is the oneness of teaching. The perfect and sudden teaching is named the One Buddha Vehicle; thus the 'Introductory Chapter' says 'preaching the Mahāyāna sūtras,' which is the meaning of teaching. From the distinctive teaching on down, all are called discourses with remainder; being not of definitive meaning, they are not the Buddha's One Vehicle. Guangzhai says: 'Having no two refers to no pratyekabuddhas or śrāvakas; having no three refers to no bodhisattvas of one-sided practice.' Another says: 'Having no bodhisattvas and pratyekabuddhas constitutes having no two; having no śrāvakas constitutes having no three.' If one adopts this interpretation, it merely negates the various vehicles of the Tripiṭaka and preserves the shared vehicle—how does that relate to the One Buddha Vehicle? Another says: 'Having no pratyekabuddhas constitutes having no two; having no śrāvakas constitutes having no three, preserving the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattvas.' If so, it merely eliminates the two vehicles within the Tripiṭaka and does not eliminate the bodhisattva within the Tripiṭaka; this preserves \[a teaching\] with remainder—how does that relate to the Buddha Vehicle? Where in any sūtra or treatise is the śrāvaka taken as the third? Since there is no such sequence, these are completely erroneous assertions. If one relies on your interpretation, having no two is having no pratyekabuddhas, having no three is having no bodhisattvas, and the first being the śrāvaka would not be eliminated; if that were so, it would be utterly chaotic. Now, 'solely by means of the One Buddha Vehicle' refers purely to the vehicle of the perfect teaching that expounds the Buddha-dharma. 'Having no other vehicles' means having no discourses with remainder that carry expedients as in the distinctive teaching. 'Having no two' means having none of the two carried along in the Prajñā\[pāramitā\]. 'Having no three' means having none of the three confronted in the Vaipulya. Since these twos and threes are all absent, how much more so the three within the Tripiṭaka? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.79) - [Next: 4.81](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.81) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718~en-mt.4.80) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.80](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.80) · Pramāṇa