瑜伽師地論略纂 13.9

13.9

The treatise states: "I do not disclose or expound it to ordinary beings and fools." This line is the third part, directly explaining that it was not taught. For the Hīnayāna, the name existed, but not the substance and meaning; this is "I do not expound it to fools," for only the name was disclosed to them. For those who are ordinary beings, even the name was not yet disclosed; that is "I do not disclose it to ordinary beings." If the name already existed for the Hīnayāna, it was merely not expounded for them; if even the name did not exist, it was not disclosed either. Question: Since it was neither disclosed nor expounded to the two vehicles and ordinary beings, why is it taught now so that ordinary beings may hear it? There are two kinds of people among those who hear it here. Among Śrāvakas there are two kinds: first, those whose faculties are not mature; second, those whose faculties are not yet mature. The former are of determinate nature; the latter are of indeterminate nature; hence it was not disclosed or expounded to them. If those of indeterminate nature have mature faculties, why would it not be expounded to them? Ordinary beings are also like this: first, those whose faculties are not mature, people devoid of gotra; second, those whose faculties are not yet mature; hence it was not taught to them. Now, regarding those who hear it, their faculties are all already mature, and therefore they can hear it. Now, when it says "I do not disclose or expound it to ordinary beings and fools," the meaning lies precisely here. Question: Previously it said "To the ordinary I do not speak"; how does this differ? Explanation: That statement was incorrect. It only excluded ordinary beings and not the two vehicles, so the present intention is not like that.