大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 7.26

7.26

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.