[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) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 7.21 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.21 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7.21) 疏「所以爾者」下，別為會釋。於中三段：初別釋藏教難。文有四節，以通五難。謂上四失之外，第五云何不立小乘？難言四節者，一出三藏名之所據，通違至教之失及濫涉大乘失。謂大小乘論同立此名故，濫涉之失不在於己。若有難言：《智論》之內小乘之名隨自宗語，三藏之稱隨他宗言，非共名也。故今釋云：《智論》是隨他名。《成論》小乘云何亦名三藏？豈隨他宗耶？即由上義，不違至教，以羅什譯經多依《智論》。小乘三藏為欲成文，二言雙舉。小乘之過不在三藏，但責其心小耳，故訶小乘，不責所詮三藏。 > In the commentary, from “The reason for this is” onward, a specific reconciliation and explanation is given. Within this are three sections: First, a specific resolution of the objection regarding the Tripiṭaka teaching. The text has four clauses to resolve five objections—namely, besides the four faults above, the fifth asks why it is not established as “Hinayāna.” As for the four clauses: The first provides the textual authority for the name “Tripiṭaka,” resolving both the fault of contravening the supreme teaching and the fault of conflating with the Mahāyāna. That is to say, because Mahāyāna and Hinayāna treatises equally establish this designation, the fault of conflation does not rest with oneself. If an objection were made saying: “Within the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, the name Hinayāna follows the terminology of its own school, while the designation Tripiṭaka follows the words of other schools, not being a shared name.” Therefore, it is now explained: The Upadeśa’s usage is following others’ names; how could the Hinayāna Tattvasiddhi also be named Tripiṭaka—could that possibly be following another school? Thus, on the basis of the above meaning, it does not contravene the supreme teaching, because Kumārajīva’s translations of sūtras mostly relied on the Upadeśa. The two words “Hinayāna Tripiṭaka” were mentioned together merely to form the phrasing. The fault of the Hinayāna does not lie in the Tripiṭaka; it only faults their small mind. Thus it censures the Hinayāna, but does not censure the Tripiṭaka that is expounded. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7.20) - [Next: 7.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7.22) - [Up: 7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.7.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.7.21) · Pramāṇa