大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.26

7.26

疏「故藏通別圓之義」下，第二總釋四教難。謂有難言：三藏教亦有通別圓義，乃至圓教亦有藏通別義，何以不得互名而局定耶？故今答云：四教雖皆四義互有餘三義，傍不成本義。如三學大德禪師，雖有戒定慧，但成禪義，以禪長故；餘但兼故，不盡妙故，不名律法。餘二亦然。言「互有」者，三藏教中亦通有無常，三乘同稟；亦別為菩薩說四弘六度；亦為菩薩說一切種智故，故藏教有三矣。通教有三者，亦說三藏故，應名三藏；亦說道種智故，應名別教；亦說一切種智，應名為圓教。別教具三者，亦說三藏故，亦說無生空理故，亦說中道一切種智故。圓教亦說三藏故，亦說真空之理故，亦說歷劫階位修行故，亦應得有餘三名。故總答云：雖則四教各傍兼有，覈定不成。云何不成？初藏教通等不成者，雖有同稟無常，二乘一生得發真斷結，菩薩三祇不證，故通義不成。雖為菩薩別說四弘六度，不詮別理、不斷別惑，由約生滅四諦而起於見，豈得稱別？雖說一切種智者，菩薩因中不得即具種智。又此種智唯照二諦、不照中道，豈得稱圓？是則覈後三義不成，但成當教三藏義耳。通教三不成者，雖說三藏，一相無相故。又已得故，雖說道種智，秖照界內俗，非如來藏恒沙功德故。雖說一切種智，秖照二諦，非照中道不思議二諦故。故覈三教之義不成，但成通教義耳。別教三不成者，雖說三藏恒沙佛法、無量戒定慧，異生滅三故。雖說無生空理，是不可得空，非但是空二乘同見故。雖說中道一切種智，非初住發心即具一切種智故。故藏通圓三義皆不成，但成別義耳。圓教三不成者，雖說三藏，皆約真如實相佛性涅槃故。雖有真空之理，即佛性真空，二乘不知，何況得入。雖說歷別階位法門，無不與實相相應，一攝一切故。是則藏通別三義皆不成，但圓教義耳。故云覈其定實，餘三不成，但成當教中義耳。

Regarding the commentary's phrase, 'Therefore, the meaning of the Piṭaka, Shared, Distinct, and Perfect [teachings],' this is the second [section], which comprehensively resolves the objections concerning the four teachings. An objection states: 'The Piṭaka Teaching also contains the meanings of the Shared, Distinct, and Perfect, and even the Perfect Teaching also contains the meanings of the Piṭaka, Shared, and Distinct; why then can they not be designated interchangeably, but must be fixed [to their respective categories]?' Hence the reply now states: Although the four teachings mutually contain the other three meanings across all four meanings, these secondary aspects do not constitute their fundamental meaning. For instance, an elder Chan master of the three learnings possesses discipline, concentration, and wisdom, yet he is established only by the meaning of Chan, because Chan is his forte; since the others are merely secondary and not fully perfected [by him in that role], he is not called a vinaya master or Dharma master. The remaining two [types of master] are also like this. As for 'mutually containing': within the Piṭaka Teaching, it also shares impermanence, which the three vehicles equally receive; it also distinctively explains the four vast vows and six perfections for bodhisattvas; and it also explains the knowledge of all forms for bodhisattvas; thus the Piṭaka Teaching possesses [the other] three. As for the Shared Teaching possessing the other three: because it also speaks of the three piṭakas, it should be called the Piṭaka Teaching; because it also speaks of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, it should be called the Distinct Teaching; and because it also speaks of the knowledge of all forms, it should be called the Perfect Teaching. As for the Distinct Teaching possessing the other three: because it also speaks of the three piṭakas, also speaks of the empty principle of non-arising, and also speaks of the Middle Way's knowledge of all forms. The Perfect Teaching also speaks of the three piṭakas, also speaks of the principle of true emptiness, and also speaks of cultivating across stages throughout kalpas; therefore, it too should be entitled to the names of the other three. Hence the comprehensive reply states: although the four teachings each secondarily combine them, when critically examined and determined, these [other three] are not established. How are they not established? First, regarding the Shared and other [meanings] not being established in the Piṭaka Teaching: although there is a shared reception of impermanence, the two vehicles can bring forth the truth and sever the fetters in a single lifetime, whereas a bodhisattva does not realize it for three asampkhyeya kalpas; thus the meaning of 'Shared' is not established. Although it distinctively explains the four vast vows and six perfections for bodhisattvas, it does not expound a distinct principle nor sever distinct defilements, but gives rise to views based on the four noble truths of arising and ceasing—how could this be called 'Distinct'? Although it speaks of the knowledge of all forms, a bodhisattva in the cause-stage cannot immediately possess the knowledge of all forms. Furthermore, this knowledge of all forms illuminates only the two truths and does not illuminate the Middle Way—how could this be called 'Perfect'? Thus, when critically examined, the latter three meanings are not established; only the meaning of the three piṭakas of this very teaching is established. As for the three not being established in the Shared Teaching: although it speaks of the three piṭakas, [their] single characteristic is signlessness. Furthermore, [the vehicles] have already attained [cessation]; although it speaks of the knowledge of the aspects of the path, it only illuminates conventional phenomena within the three realms and not the Ganges-sand merits of the tathāgatagarbha. Although it speaks of the knowledge of all forms, it only illuminates the two truths and does not illuminate the inconceivable two truths of the Middle Way. Hence, when critically examined, the meanings of the [other] three teachings are not established; only the meaning of the Shared Teaching is established. As for the three not being established in the Distinct Teaching: although it speaks of the three piṭakas, these are the Ganges-sand buddhadharmas and immeasurable discipline, concentration, and wisdom, which differ from the three [trainings] of arising and ceasing. Although it speaks of the empty principle of non-arising, this is an ungraspable emptiness, not merely an emptiness seen in common with the two vehicles. Although it speaks of the Middle Way's knowledge of all forms, this is not the immediate endowment with the knowledge of all forms upon giving rise to the mind in the first abidance. Therefore, the three meanings of Piṭaka, Shared, and Perfect are all not established; only the Distinct meaning is established. As for the three not being established in the Perfect Teaching: although it speaks of the three piṭakas, they are all framed in terms of tathatā, the true characteristic, buddha-nature, and nirvāṇa. Although it has the principle of true emptiness, it is the true emptiness of buddha-nature, which the two vehicles do not know, let alone enter. Although it speaks of sequential stages and doctrines, every single one corresponds with the true characteristic, one subsuming all. Thus, the three meanings of Piṭaka, Shared, and Distinct are all not established; only the meaning of the Perfect Teaching is established. Therefore it is said: when critically examined and determined in reality, the other three are not established, and only the meaning within that teaching itself is established.