大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經略疏 1.186

1.186

了義者，決擇究竟顯了之說，非覆相密意含隱之譚。然諸經中何者了義？何者不了？清涼大師答順宗皇帝所問諸經了義云：「佛一代教，若約本為一事，則八萬度門莫非了義。若圓器受法，無法不圓，得之由人，亦皆為了義。」此二不足簡別，今約開方便門、示真實相，則有了不了，故《淨名》、《涅槃》、《寶積》等經皆云：「依了義經，不依不了義經。」不了義經謂小乘教，了義經者謂大乘教。大乘復有了、不了，謂有大乘雖六度、悲智兼修，而定說三乘不一，亦非了義；若有會歸一極，以玄鑪陶於群像、智海總乎萬流，無二無三、無不成佛，中道理觀不共二乘，方為了義。又《大寶積經》云：「舍利弗！何等經中名為了義？何等經中名不了義？舍利弗！若諸經中宣說世俗，名不了義；宣說勝義，名為了義。宣說作業煩惱，名不了義；宣說煩惱業盡，名為了義。宣說厭離生死、趣求涅槃，名不了義；宣說生死、涅槃無二無別，名為了義。宣說種種文句差別，名不了義；宣說甚深難見難覺，名為了義。」釋曰：據上說，了義行相皆與圓覺相當，佛自料簡，固應無惑。

"Ultimate meaning" means a definitive and fully clarified teaching, not a discourse of concealed marks or hidden esoteric intent. But among the scriptures, which are of ultimate meaning and which are not of ultimate meaning? Master Qingliang, answering Emperor Shunzong's question regarding the ultimate meaning of the various scriptures, said: "Regarding the Buddha's lifetime teaching, if considered in light of its root purpose being one single matter, then none of the eighty thousand gates of liberation is not of ultimate meaning. If a perfect vessel receives the Dharma, no dharma is not perfect; its attainment depends on the person, so all are also of ultimate meaning." These two [perspectives] are not sufficient for discriminating [between texts]. Now, considering the opening of expedient gates and the revealing of the true mark, there are definitive and non-definitive. Therefore scriptures such as the *Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa*, *Mahāparinirvāṇa*, and *Mahāratnakūṭa* all state: "Rely on the sūtras of definitive meaning, do not rely on sūtras of non-definitive meaning." Sūtras of non-definitive meaning refer to the Hinayana teachings; sūtras of definitive meaning refer to the Mahayana teachings. Within the Mahayana there are again definitive and non-definitive: if there is a Mahayana teaching which, although cultivating both the six pāramitās and compassion and wisdom, definitively asserts that the three vehicles are not one, this too is not of ultimate meaning. If there is one that unifies and returns to the single ultimate, smelting all forms in the profound furnace and gathering the myriad streams into the ocean of wisdom, so that there are neither two nor three and none who do not attain buddhahood, where the contemplation of the Middle Way is not shared with the two vehicles, only then is it of ultimate meaning. Furthermore, the *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra* states: "Śāriputra! What kinds of sūtras are called of ultimate meaning? What kinds of sūtras are called of non-ultimate meaning? Śāriputra! If sūtras expound the conventional, they are called of non-ultimate meaning; if they expound the ultimate truth, they are called of ultimate meaning. If they expound the committing of karma and afflictions, they are called of non-ultimate meaning; if they expound the exhaustion of karma and afflictions, they are called of ultimate meaning. If they expound revulsion toward saṃsāra and seeking nirvāṇa, they are called of non-ultimate meaning; if they expound that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are non-dual and without distinction, they are called of ultimate meaning. If they expound various distinctions of words and phrases, they are called of non-ultimate meaning; if they expound what is profound, hard to see, and hard to comprehend, they are called of ultimate meaning." Explanation: According to what is said above, the characteristics of ultimate meaning all correspond with perfect enlightenment. Since the Buddha himself made this distinction, there should certainly be no doubt.