成唯識論了義燈 7.17

7.17

Answer: In terms of the two natures of sudden and gradual, naturelessness is later. In terms exclusively of gradual enlightenment, the beginning, middle, and end are distinct, and emptiness is the second. In this treatise, both the prior and posterior of the teachings for sudden and gradual are covered; therefore it says that relying precisely on the three natures previously heard by bodhisattvas of sudden enlightenment, he later implicitly established naturelessness for those bodhisattvas of gradual enlightenment, so there is no contradiction. The meaning clarified in the fundamental commentary contains both interpretations, which accords with the sūtra text having existence first and emptiness later. Another explanation is: the two teachings are not fixed as prior and posterior; the Saṃdhinirmocana provisionally addresses a class for whom it is suitable to hear existence and emptiness as prior and posterior. When the Śāstra states "relying precisely on this prior" and so forth, this accords with the Avataṃsaka: the Tathāgata with a single voice pronounces an ocean of boundless sūtras. Each has a rationale, left to one's disposition to accept or reject. However, the second is superior, because it differentiates according to the text and capacities.