成唯識論了義燈 1.20

1.20

不爾，彼非善通。應云清辨等言，此對俗諦說，最為勝名為了義，不望勝義。若以有違，云非佛語，便令聖教皆不可信。了、不了義，《法苑》分四，今《要集》云：更加一門。執著名字，名為不了。不著名了。故《自在王菩薩經》上云：了義經者，一切諸經皆是了義。以依義故，一切諸法不可說故，菩薩如是，名為了義。若人於一切經，不能如是依義，是名不了義。何故名不了？是人不了義故。准此經文云：是人不了義故，名不了義。不判經為不了義。

Not so; his explanation does not resolve it well. One should say: Bhāviveka and the others mean that speaking in terms of conventional truth, this is the supreme, and is therefore called 'definitive meaning', but not in view of ultimate truth. If, on the grounds that there is a contradiction, one says it is not the Buddha's word, that would make the noble teaching altogether untrustworthy. As for definitive and provisional meaning, the Fayuan distinguishes four [categories]. Now the Yaoji says that one more category should be added: clinging to names and words is called provisional, while not clinging to names is definitive. Thus the Susthitamatidevaputraparipṛcchā-sūtra says in its first part: 'As for definitive sūtras, all sūtras are definitive. Because they rely on the meaning, and because all dharmas are inexpressible, when a bodhisattva understands in this way, it is called definitive meaning. If someone, regarding all sūtras, cannot rely on the meaning in this way, this is called provisional meaning. Why is it called provisional? Because that person does not understand the definitive meaning.' According to this sūtra passage, it says: 'Because that person does not understand the definitive meaning, it is called provisional meaning.' It does not judge the sūtra itself to be of provisional meaning.