勝鬘寶窟 1.17

1.17

二者破三明一。昔赴三緣，權說三教，然三乘之人執為定實；今為破之，是故明一。三者會三歸一。如下文說「於一乘中開出諸乘」，今會之歸一，是故言一也。四者本來無別所以言一。如《法華》云「諸法從本來，常自寂滅相。」《法華論》云「三乘之人同一真如法身」，是故言一。五者三即是一。達觀之者，體悟三即是一相。六者覆三明一。所化眾生常有三一兩緣，是以如來具有三一兩教，如二鳥雙遊不相捨離。昔為三緣，覆一辨三；今為一緣，覆三以明一也。七非三非一歎美為一。如《大品》云「諸法如中，非但無有三乘，亦無獨一菩薩之乘。」故知就理未曾三一，非一非三歎美為一。所言大方便者，依《法華論》第十三名一切諸佛大巧方便經。天親釋云「依此法門成大菩提已，為眾生說人天聲聞辟支佛等諸善法故。」此意明大菩提一乘為真實，為眾生說四乘為大巧方便。依此文為正解。所以此標二名者，一乘為體、方便為用，一乘為實、三乘為權，欲明從體起用及會權歸實，結束佛教始終，故明此二也。有人言：一乘明所說之體；大方便者，明此法化義窮善巧，故云方便。若汎釋，有五種方便：一進趣方便，如見道前七方便等；二善巧名為方便，如十波羅蜜等；三善權方便，如無三說三等；四施造方便，凡所造作善巧施為，故名方便，如《地持》所說十二巧方便等；五顯此一乘離相巧成故名方便，方便中極故名為大，此即用一乘為方便也。復有人言：今此所論是其第四施造方便；又前四章，漸增向果，亦得說為進趣方便。復有人云：乘有三義，謂性、隨、得。十五章中初四後二是乘隨義、第五是得義、餘七明性義，隨義進趣善巧、性義習成善巧、得義攝益作用善巧，故名方便。今謂若爾，則方便攝十五章盡，復何用一乘？又一乘章明乘是果可是乘得，如來藏可是乘性，法身等云何乘性耶？今所明者，如《法華論》既有二名便有兩義，一乘經既是無上菩提、大巧方便經即四乘教也。此即權實兩舉，體用雙明、義無增減，故有誠文宜可依用。大方廣者，上來明別，今次辨通。如大方廣佛華嚴，亦如大方等大集，故知方廣是大乘經之通名也。所以須通者，或恐物疑勝鬘所說非方等之例，是故今明勝鬘所說即是方廣。方廣者，依《法華論》第三名方大廣，謂無礙大乘門隨順眾生根住持成就故。此意通明大乘門無礙，故名方廣。言別釋者，理正曰方、文富稱廣。又一乘無德不包曰廣、離於偏邪稱方。古注云：真解無偏為方、理包無限稱廣。所言經者，自上已來明所詮之理，今明詮理之教，即是理教一雙也。如《涅槃》七善中釋知法知義，知法者謂十二部經、知義者謂十二部經所明之義，即理教之明證也。言經者，天竺名修多羅，此方隨義翻譯非一，傳譯者多用綖、本二名以翻修多羅。若依《分別功德論》及《四分律》，并驗現今天竺僧詺縫衣之綖為修多羅，則以綖翻修多羅。若依《仁王經》及留支三藏所云，則以本翻修多羅。若綖若本並有文證，但驗方言難可偏定。所言綖者，如世間綖有貫穿攝持之用，諸佛言教亦有貫法相攝人之能，與綖大同，故從喻立名。所言本者，以教能顯理、教為理本、教能起行，故教為行本，今行為經。言綖本者，蓋是翻譯之家隨方音便，故以經名代於綖本。類如毘尼藏，正翻為滅；若依根本翻名，應言四分滅、十誦滅等。但翻譯之家見此方俗法判罪教門名之為律，是以佛法制罪教門亦為律，故名四分律十誦律等。此亦如是，若依根本翻名以為綖本，應言涅槃綖、法華綖等。亦是翻譯之家以見此方先傳國禮訓世教門名為五經，是以佛法訓世教門亦稱為經，故言涅槃經等。既隨俗代名，還依隨俗釋義，俗言經者常也；雖先賢後聖而教範古今恒然，故名為常。佛法亦爾，雖三世諸佛隨感去留，教範古今不可改易。

Second, refuting the three to clarify the one: Formerly, adapting to the conditions of the three [capacities], the provisional teaching of three [vehicles] was spoken, but people of the triyāna clung to them as fixed and real; now, in order to refute this, the one is clarified. Third, converging the three to return to the one: As the text below says, "within the ekayāna the various vehicles are opened up"; now they are converged to return to the one, and for this reason it says "one". Fourth, originally being without distinction, for which reason it says "one": As the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra says, "All dharmas from their origin / are ever characterized by quietude and extinction." The Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa says, "Persons of the triyāna share the same tathatā-dharmakāya"; for this reason it says "one". Fifth, the three are precisely the one: Those of penetrating insight realize that the three are precisely the single mark. Sixth, concealing the three to clarify the one: Sentient beings who are transformed always have both conditions—the three and the one; therefore, the Tathāgata possesses both teachings—the three and the one—like two birds flying together, never parting from each other. Formerly, for the sake of the conditions of the three, he concealed the one to expound the three; now, for the sake of the condition of the one, he conceals the three to clarify the one. Seventh, neither three nor one, praised as one: As the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says, "Within the tathatā of all dharmas, not only is there no triyāna, there is not even a single bodhisattvayāna." Thus we know that in terms of the principle there has never been three or one; being neither one nor three, it is praised as one. As for the term "mahopāya": According to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, the thirteenth title is "Sūtra of the Great Skillful Means of All Buddhas". Vasubandhu explains, "Having achieved mahābodhi based on this Dharma-gate, for the sake of sentient beings he preaches all good dharmas such as those of humans, devas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas." The meaning of this is to clarify that the ekayāna of mahābodhi is the real, and preaching the four vehicles for the sake of sentient beings is the great skillful means. Relying on this text provides the correct interpretation. The reason these two titles are designated here is that ekayāna is the essence and upāya is the function; ekayāna is the real and the triyāna is the provisional. Intending to clarify arising function from essence and converging the provisional to return to the real, thereby wrapping up the Buddhist teaching from beginning to end, these two are therefore clarified. Some say: Ekayāna clarifies the essence of what is taught; "mahopāya" clarifies that the meaning of transforming beings through this Dharma reaches the utmost of skillfulness, hence it is called upāya. If interpreted broadly, there are five kinds of upāya: First, upāya of advancing towards, such as the seven upāyas prior to the darśanamārga; second, skillfulness termed upāya, such as the ten pāramitās; third, skillful provisional upāya, such as speaking of three where there are no three; fourth, active operation upāya, where all actions undertaken are skillfully applied and operated, hence termed upāya, such as the twelve skillful upāyas taught in the Bodhisattvabhūmi; fifth, demonstrating that this ekayāna is skillfully accomplished beyond marks, hence termed upāya, and being the ultimate among upāyas it is termed "great"—this is using the ekayāna as upāya. Still others say: What is discussed here is its fourth, the active operation upāya; furthermore, the preceding four chapters gradually increase towards the fruit, so they can also be described as upāya of advancing towards. Still others say: A vehicle has three meanings: nature, following, and attainment. Among the fifteen chapters, the first four and the last two are the meaning of following the vehicle; the fifth is the meaning of attainment; and the remaining seven clarify the meaning of nature. The meaning of following is skillfulness in advancing towards; the meaning of nature is skillfulness in cultivation and accomplishment; the meaning of attainment is skillfulness in integrating, benefiting, and functioning—hence it is called upāya. Now I say: If that were so, then upāya would encompass all fifteen chapters, so what further need would there be for ekayāna? Furthermore, the chapter on ekayāna clarifies that the vehicle is the fruit, which could be the attainment of the vehicle; the tathāgatagarbha could be the nature of the vehicle; but how could the dharmakāya and so forth be the nature of the vehicle? What is clarified now is that, just as the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa has two titles and thus two meanings, since the Ekayāna-sūtra is anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, the Mahopāya-sūtra is the teaching of the four vehicles. This brings up both the provisional and the real, elucidates both essence and function, without adding or subtracting meaning; therefore, having authentic textual authority, it should properly be relied upon and used. As for "mahāvaipulya": Above was clarified the specific; now next is explained the general. Just as in the Mahāvaipulya-buddhāvataṃsaka, and also as in the Mahāvaipulya-mahāsaṃnipāta, we thus know that vaipulya is a general title for Mahāyāna sūtras. The reason a general [name] is necessary is that people might suspect what was spoken by Śrīmālā does not belong to the category of vaipulya; therefore it is now clarified that what was spoken by Śrīmālā is precisely vaipulya. As for vaipulya: According to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa, the third title is "correct, great, and broad" (fāng dà guǎng), meaning that the unimpeded Mahāyāna gate complies with the faculties of sentient beings to maintain and accomplish them. The meaning of this generally clarifies that the Mahāyāna gate is unimpeded, hence it is called vaipulya. As for specific explanations: Being correct in principle is called fāng (correct); richness in text is called guǎng (broad). Furthermore, because the ekayāna encompasses all virtues, it is called guǎng; because it is free from deviation and falsity, it is called fāng. An ancient commentary states: True understanding free from bias is fāng; principle encompassing the boundless is guǎng. As for the term "sūtra": From above until now, the principle expressed has been clarified; now the teaching that expresses the principle is clarified, which is the pair of principle and teaching. Just as in the explanation of knowing the Dharma and knowing the meaning among the seven excellences in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra: knowing the Dharma refers to the twelve divisions of sūtras, and knowing the meaning refers to the meaning clarified by the twelve divisions of sūtras, which is clear proof of principle and teaching. As for the term "sūtra": In India it is named sūtra. In this land, translations according to meaning have not been single; translators mostly used the two names "thread" (xiàn) and "root/origin" (běn) to translate sūtra. If based on the Fenbie gongde lun and the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya, and verified by present-day Indian monks naming the thread for sewing robes sūtra, then "thread" translates sūtra. If based on the Renwang jing and what Tripiṭaka Master [Bodhi]ruci said, then "root" translates sūtra. Both "thread" and "root" have textual evidence, but examining regional dialects, it is difficult to determine one exclusively. As for "thread": Just as thread in the worldly realm has the function of threading together and holding in place, the teachings of the Buddhas also have the capacity of threading dharmas and marks together and holding people; being largely identical with thread, the name is established from the metaphor. As for "root": Because the teaching can reveal the principle, teaching is the root of principle; because the teaching can give rise to practice, teaching is the root of practice; now practice constitutes the sūtra. As for "thread and root": Translators adapted to local linguistic convenience, and therefore substituted the term "classic/sūtra" (jīng) for "thread and root". This is like the Vinaya-piṭaka, which is properly translated as "extinction" (miè); if translated according to the primary name, one should say the "Four-Part Extinction", "Ten-Recitation Extinction", and so forth. But translators, seeing that worldly penal codes of this land that determine crimes are named lǜ (statutes/regulations), accordingly called the Buddhist teaching determining crimes lǜ as well; hence they are named Four-Part Vinaya, Ten-Recitation Vinaya, and so forth. This is also like that: If translated according to the primary name as thread or root, one should say the Nirvāṇa Thread, Lotus Thread, and so forth. It was also because translators saw that this land's previously transmitted national rites and world-instructing teachings were called the Five Classics (wǔjīng), and therefore the world-instructing teachings of the Buddha-Dharma were also called jīng (classics/sūtras); hence they said Nirvāṇa-sūtra and so forth. Having substituted the name in accordance with worldly custom, one also explains its meaning in accordance with worldly custom: in worldly terms, jīng means constant; though former worthies and later sages [differ], their exemplary teachings for past and present remain constantly so, hence it is called constant. The Buddha-Dharma is also like this: though the Buddhas of the three periods depart or remain in accordance with spiritual resonance, their exemplary teachings for past and present cannot be altered.