新華嚴經論 3.26

3.26

第二智光法師，遠承文殊、龍樹，近稟提婆、清辯，依《般若》等經《中觀》等論亦立三教。謂佛初鹿園為諸小根說小乘法，明心境俱有。第二時中，為彼中根說法相大乘，明境空心有唯識道理。以根猶劣故，未能全入平等真空，故作是說。第三時中，為上根說無相大乘，辯心境俱空、平等一味，為真了義。又此三位亦三義釋。先攝機者，初時唯攝二乘人機；第二通攝大小二機，以此宗許一分二乘不向佛果；三唯攝菩薩通於漸頓，以諸二乘悉向佛果，更無餘路故。二約教者，初說小乘，二說通三，後唯一乘。三約顯理者，初破外道自性故，說緣生法定是實有。二漸次破二乘緣生實有執，故說此緣生以為假有，以彼怖畏此真空故，猶存假有而接引之。後時方就究竟大乘，說此緣生即是性空平等一味不礙二諦。是故法相大乘有所得等，屬第二教，非真了義。此三教次第，如智光論師說。

Second, the Dharma master Jñānaprabha—tracing his lineage remotely from Mañjuśrī and Nāgārjuna, and proximately receiving it from Āryadeva and Bhāviveka—also established three teachings based on the Prajñāpāramitā and other sūtras, and the Madhyamaka and other treatises. That is to say, when the Buddha was first in the Deer Park, he spoke the Hīnayāna Dharma for those of inferior faculties, clarifying that mind and objects both exist. In the second period, for those of intermediate faculties, he taught the Mahāyāna of phenomenal characteristics (dharmalakṣaṇa), clarifying the Consciousness-Only principle that objects are empty while mind exists. Because their faculties were still inferior, they were unable to enter fully into the equal, true emptiness; hence he gave this teaching. In the third period, for those of superior faculties, he taught the Mahāyāna of signlessness, discerning that mind and objects are both empty and of one equal taste, which is truly of definitive meaning. Moreover, these three stages are also explained by three criteria. First, regarding the capacities embraced: the first period embraces only the capacities of the two vehicles; the second comprehensively embraces both the greater and lesser capacities, because this school maintains that a portion of the two vehicles never proceeds toward the fruit of buddhahood; the third exclusively embraces bodhisattvas, spanning both gradual and sudden, because all those of the two vehicles proceed toward the fruit of buddhahood, with no other path remaining. Second, regarding the teachings: the first expounds the Hīnayāna; the second expounds what is common to the three [vehicles]; and the last expounds exclusively the One Vehicle. Third, regarding the principles revealed: the first refutes the innate nature of external paths and therefore teaches that conditioned phenomena are definitely real existents; the second gradually refutes the two vehicles' attachment to conditioned phenomena as real existents, and therefore teaches that these conditioned phenomena are provisional existents—retaining provisional existence to guide them because they fear this true emptiness; in the final period, only then, with reference to the ultimate Mahāyāna, does he teach that these conditioned phenomena are identical to emptiness of nature, of one equal taste, without obstructing the two truths. Therefore, the Mahāyāna of phenomenal characteristics, having something to attain and so forth, belongs to the second teaching and is not truly of definitive meaning. The sequence of these three teachings is as master Jñānaprabha explained.