大乘起信論義記 1.15

1.15

問：若如所說，兩宗各初唯說小乘，何故《華嚴》亦最初說，而非小乘？答：此難諸德總有三釋：一云、約漸悟機立三法輪有此漸次，若頓悟機則最初亦說彼《華嚴》等。若爾，《密迹力士經》初時具說三乘之法，此為其漸、為其頓耶？若是漸教，應唯說小；若是頓教，應唯說大，是故難解。一云、若依顯了門，則如前有此三法次第；若約祕密門，則同時皆有。若爾，則初時小顯而大密，何不以大顯而小密耶？又判此顯密，出何聖教？理既不齊，又無聖教，故亦難依。一云、但是如來圓音一演，異類等解，就小結集，故唯說小；就大結集故唯說大，就通結集故說三乘。若爾，說《華嚴》時，何故聲聞不聞自所聞，乃如聾盲無所見聞？是亦難解。今解此難，汎論如來圓音說法，大例有二：一、為此世根定者說，二、為此世根不定說。初中自有三節：一、或有眾生，此世小乘限性定者，唯見如來從始至終但說小乘，如小乘諸部不信大乘者是。二、或有眾生，此世三乘根性熟者，則唯見如來從始至終但說三乘。如《密迹力士經》說「佛初鹿園說法之時，無量眾生得阿羅漢果；無量眾生得辟支佛道；無量眾生發菩提心住初地等。」廣如彼說。《大品經》中亦同此說。是故後時所說皆通三乘，如諸大乘經中說也。三、或有眾生，此世一乘根性熟者，則唯見如來初樹王下華藏界中，依海印三昧，說無盡圓滿自在法門，唯為菩薩，如《華嚴經》等說。是故，諸說各據當根所得，互不相違也。二、不定根者，有二位：一、此世小乘根不定故，堪可進入三乘位者，則初聞唯小為不了教，次唯說大亦非了教，後具說三乘方為了義，故有《深密經》中三時教也。二、此世小乘根不定故，堪可進入一乘位者，則初聞小乘為不了教，次通三乘亦非了教，後唯說一乘方為了教。智光所立當此意也。是故，由有於此世中根定不定二位別故，令此教門或有前後，或無前後也。上來總明敘會諸教竟。

Question: If, as explained, both tenet-systems hold that initially only the Hīnayāna was taught, why was the *Avataṃsaka* also taught at the very beginning and yet is not the Hīnayāna? Answer: Regarding this difficulty, the eminent masters have three explanations in all. One says: establishing the three wheels of Dharma in terms of capacities of gradual awakening has this gradual sequence; if it is a capacity of sudden awakening, then at the very beginning that *Avataṃsaka* and so forth was also taught. If so, then when the *Guhyakādhipatinirdeśasūtra* fully taught the dharmas of the three vehicles at the initial period, was this gradual or was it sudden? If it was a gradual teaching, it should have taught only the Hīnayāna; if it was a sudden teaching, it should have taught only the Mahāyāna; therefore, it is difficult to understand. Another says: if relying on the manifest approach, then there is this sequence of three dharmas as before; if in terms of the secret approach, then all exist simultaneously. If so, then at the initial period the Hīnayāna was manifest and the Mahāyāna was secret; why was the Mahāyāna not manifest and the Hīnayāna secret? Furthermore, classifying this as manifest or secret: from what sacred teaching does this derive? Since the principle is not consistent and there is no sacred teaching, it is also difficult to rely upon. Another says: it is simply that the Tathāgata's single utterance of the round voice is understood equally by diverse kinds; compiled with respect to the Hīnayāna, hence it teaches only the Hīnayāna; compiled with respect to the Mahāyāna, hence it teaches only the Mahāyāna; compiled with respect to the common, hence it teaches the three vehicles. If so, when the *Avataṃsaka* was taught, why did the śrāvakas not hear what was theirs to hear, but instead were like the deaf and blind, seeing and hearing nothing? This is also difficult to understand. Now, in resolving this difficulty, speaking broadly of the Tathāgata preaching the Dharma with the round voice, there are two general categories: 1. preaching for those whose capacities in this life are fixed; 2. preaching for those whose capacities in this life are unfixed. Within the first, there are naturally three phases: 1. there may be beings whose determinate nature in this life is fixed in the Hīnayāna, who see the Tathāgata from beginning to end preaching only the Hīnayāna, such as those of the various Hīnayāna schools who do not believe in the Mahāyāna. 2. There may be beings whose capacities and natures of the three vehicles in this life are mature, who then see the Tathāgata from beginning to end preaching only the three vehicles. As the *Guhyakādhipatinirdeśasūtra* says: 'When the Buddha first preached the Dharma in the Deer Park, immeasurable beings attained the fruit of arhatship; immeasurable beings attained the path of pratyekabuddhas; immeasurable beings generated the bodhicitta and dwelled on the first ground, and so forth,' as extensively explained there. In the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitāsūtra* it is also taught identically. Therefore, what was taught in later periods all extends to the three vehicles, as taught in the various Mahāyāna sūtras. 3. There may be beings whose capacity and nature of the One Vehicle in this life are mature, who then see the Tathāgata initially beneath the king of trees in the Lotus Store World, relying on the ocean-seal samādhi, teaching the inexhaustible, consummate, and unhindered Dharma gate solely for bodhisattvas, as taught in the *Avataṃsakasūtra* and so forth. Therefore, the various explanations are each based on what corresponds to the given capacity and are not mutually contradictory. Second, regarding those of unfixed capacities, there are two positions: 1. because their Hīnayāna capacities in this life are unfixed, so that they are capable of advancing into the position of the three vehicles, hearing only the Hīnayāna initially is a non-definitive teaching, next preaching only the Mahāyāna is also a non-definitive teaching, and fully teaching the three vehicles at last is only then the definitive meaning; hence there are the three periods of teaching in the *Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra*. 2. Because their Hīnayāna capacities in this life are unfixed, so that they are capable of advancing into the position of the One Vehicle, hearing the Hīnayāna initially is a non-definitive teaching, next extending through the three vehicles is also a non-definitive teaching, and teaching solely the One Vehicle at last is only then the definitive teaching. That established by Jñānaprabha corresponds to this meaning. Therefore, because there is the distinction between the two positions of fixed and unfixed capacities in this life, it causes these teaching approaches to either have temporal succession or have no temporal succession. The above general explanation recounting and harmonising the various teachings is concluded.