瑜伽論記 10.46

10.46

Within the former, regarding the statement 'one should seek the bodhisattva basket and the śrāvaka basket': this divides inner science into two dharmas. 'All non-Buddhist treatises': this combines reasoning science, grammatical science, and medical science into external dharmas; because treatises of non-Buddhist traditions first expounded reasoning science, grammatical science, and so forth, while the Buddhadharma also occasionally spoke of reasoning science without widely practicing or using it, and only when it reached Master Manoratha did scholars begin to compile, study, and guard against the objections of non-Buddhist treatises, gradually putting it into practice without yet being able to crush opponents, and only when it reached Dignāga did it begin to flourish, with all non-Buddhists coming to listen and study; therefore, fundamentally those three sciences are combined as non-Buddhist treatises. 'All worldly treatises on stations of crafts and arts': the activities conducted in the station of the science of arts and crafts are numerous, so it is independently established as one, making the fourth. Regarding the statement 'It should be known that among the twelve divisions of teachings, the single vaipulya division is solely the bodhisattva basket, and the remaining divisions are the śrāvaka basket': the old Bodhisattvabhūmi states: 'The remaining eleven divisions are solely the śrāvaka basket'; that would mean the Mahāyāna lacks the twelve divisions. Now it states: 'The remaining divisions contain the śrāvaka basket'; that means the Mahāyāna completely possesses the twelve, while the śrāvaka [canon] has only eleven, excluding the vaipulya division. A discrepancy of a single word makes the doctrinal intent as distant as Hu and Yue. What is its meaning? The single vaipulya division explains the Mahāyāna principle, hence it is solely the bodhisattva basket; the remaining eleven are the śrāvaka basket, yet there are also those that are not the śrāvaka basket. If, as the Abhidharma states, 'The five such as sūtra are subsumed under the sūtra basket within the śrāvaka basket', the Mahāyāna also possesses the meaning of these five divisions; because they all clarify vaipulya matters, they are not separately established outside of vaipulya, whereas the Hīnayāna lacks vaipulya and so separately establishes these five. Because these five do not correspond to two separate baskets, they are simply subsumed under the sūtra basket. Later that treatise states: 'Nidāna, avadāna, itivṛttaka, and jātaka—these four, within the two baskets, are subsumed under the vinaya basket and the retinue of the bodhisattva; vaipulya and adbhutadharma—these two, within the bodhisattva basket, are subsumed under the sūtra basket.' Where other sūtras, treatises, and the subsequent text of this treatise's Piṭaka differ, it is comprehensively explained as in the notes to the previous fourth and fifth fascicles.