華嚴經探玄記 1.50

1.50

第七顯開合者，然此三乘一乘各有二種。三乘二者：一異時三乘，如《深密經》初時唯小乘，第二唯大乘。二同時三乘，如第三時普為發趣一切乘等。於此教中，一乘相隱、三乘相顯，是故就顯總名三乘。一乘二者：一破異明一，如《法華經》破二實滅，及《涅槃經》破無佛性，俱是對權會破方說一乘。二直體顯一，如《華嚴經》不對二乘，無所破故；為大菩薩直示法界，成佛儀故。是故初說《華嚴》無權可會，終說《涅槃》會前諸權，是即非盡權無以顯實，是俱名一乘。又復更開，各有三種。初三乘三者：一始別終同三，謂始約因修四諦、緣生、六度等別，終就得果三乘之人身智同滅，如《俱舍》等說，比約初時小乘教說。二始同終別三，謂同聞般若、同觀無性，三乘之人各得自果，如前所引說。若據聖諦、緣生、六度行異，亦得名為始終各別，此是第二第三時教說也。三近異遠同三，謂《法華》等初以三乘方便誘引，後同以大乘令得度等。一乘三者：一存三之一，如《深密》等說；二遮三之一，如《法華》等；三表體之一，如《華嚴》等。是故通說有其四句：一或唯三無一，如《俱舍》等。二或唯一無三，如《華嚴》等。三或亦一亦三，此有二位：初三實一權，如《深密》等；後一實三權，如《法華》等。四或非一非三，約理絕言故。《大般若》中舍利子問善現云：「如來授諸天子記，於三乘中何乘得記？」善現答言：「於法相中無一無三，云何問言於何乘得記？」是故一乘三乘有存有泯，諸說不同。或聞唯破二乘，即謂唯約不定種性；或聞無二亦無三，即謂大乘實教亦破；或聞不破大乘，即謂大乘權教亦存。今釋有二位：一約事，破二乘實滅；二約教，亦會大乘權教。大乘權教許入寂，二乘不成佛故。但深破二乘即是破三，是故破二破三皆不相違。

Seventh, explaining opening and combining. These three vehicles and one vehicle each have two kinds. The two of the three vehicles are: First, the three vehicles of different times: as in the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, where the first period was only the Hīnayāna and the second was only the Mahāyāna. Second, the three vehicles of the same time: as in the third period, which was spoken universally for those setting out in all vehicles. In this teaching, the aspect of the one vehicle is concealed while the aspect of the three vehicles is manifest; therefore, in terms of what is manifest, it is collectively named 'three vehicles'. The two of the one vehicle are: First, refuting differences to clarify unity: as in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka Sūtra refuting the real extinction of the two [vehicles], and the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra refuting the non-existence of Buddha-nature; both address the provisional and harmonize by refuting it, only then speaking of the one vehicle. Second, directly expressing unity through the essence: as in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, which does not address the two vehicles because there is nothing to refute; for the sake of great bodhisattvas, it directly demonstrates the dharmadhātu and the manner of attaining Buddhahood. Therefore, when first spoken, the Avataṃsaka had no provisional [teachings] to harmonize, and when finally spoken, the Nirvāṇa harmonized all the previous provisional [teachings]; that is to say, without exhausting the provisional, the real cannot be revealed; thus both are named 'one vehicle'.

Furthermore, opened once more, each has three kinds. The three kinds of the three vehicles are: First, the three that are distinct at the beginning and identical at the end: this means that initially, in terms of causes, the cultivation of the four noble truths, conditioned arising, the six pāramitās, etc., are distinct, but at the end, in terms of the attainment of the result, both the body and wisdom of the persons of the three vehicles are identically annihilated; as explained in the Abhidharmakośa and so forth, this corresponds to the teaching of the Small Vehicle in the initial period. Second, the three that are identical at the beginning and distinct at the end: this means that identically hearing the prajñā and identically contemplating the absence of intrinsic nature, the persons of the three vehicles each attain their own result, as quoted previously. If based on the differences in the practices of the noble truths, conditioned arising, and the six pāramitās, this can also be called distinct at both beginning and end; this is the teaching of the second and third periods. Third, the three that are different close at hand and identical far off: this refers to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka and so forth initially enticing them by the upāya of the three vehicles, and later identically causing them to be saved through the Mahāyāna.

The three kinds of the one vehicle are: First, the one that preserves the three, as spoken in the Saṃdhinirmocana and so forth; second, the one that negates the three, as in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka and so forth; third, the one that manifests the essence, as in the Avataṃsaka and so forth. Therefore, speaking comprehensively, there are four alternatives: First, perhaps only three and no one, as in the Abhidharmakośa and so forth. Second, perhaps only one and no three, as in the Avataṃsaka and so forth. Third, perhaps both one and three; here there are two positions: first, the three are real and the one is provisional, as in the Saṃdhinirmocana and so forth; second, the one is real and the three are provisional, as in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka and so forth. Fourth, perhaps neither one nor three, because in terms of principle it transcends words. In the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Śāriputra asked Subhūti: 'When the Tathāgata bestows predictions upon the devaputras, in which of the three vehicles do they receive prediction?' Subhūti replied: 'Within the characteristics of phenomena, there is neither one nor three; how can you ask in which vehicle they receive prediction?' Therefore, the one vehicle and the three vehicles are either preserved or eliminated, and the various explanations differ. Some, hearing that only the two vehicles are refuted, claim it refers solely to the indeterminate gotra; some, hearing that there are neither two nor three, claim that even the real teaching of the Mahāyāna is refuted; some, hearing that the Mahāyāna is not refuted, claim that the provisional teaching of the Mahāyāna is also preserved. The present explanation has two positions: first, in terms of facts, refuting the real extinction of the two vehicles; second, in terms of teaching, also harmonizing the provisional teaching of the Mahāyāna, because the provisional teaching of the Mahāyāna allows that those of the two vehicles who enter cessation do not attain Buddhahood. Merely refuting the two vehicles profoundly is itself refuting the three; therefore, refuting the two and refuting the three do not contradict each other.