大乘義章 1.122

1.122

第四門中就人辨定。人謂聲聞、緣覺、菩薩。菩薩之人具解二空；聲聞緣覺，經論不同。《毘曇》、《地持》、《十地論》等，說聲聞人但得生空，緣覺亦爾。《成實論》中說聲聞等有得二空，不簡利鈍。《大智論》中說利根者具解二空，如先尼等鈍根之者單解生空。是義云何？釋言：此等各有所以，於中略以三門釋之：一明如來所說不同、二明聲聞根有利鈍所解各異、三正會其言。所說不同者，如來於彼立性宗中唯說生空，後三宗中具說二空，如上所辨。根利鈍者，聲聞人中根有三品，謂下、中、上。此三品人，聞彼初宗立性之教，但解生空。以此教中未曾宣說法體空故。聞第二宗破性之教，鈍者但能悟解生空，中上二人通解二空；聞第三宗，中下二人但解生空，利人俱解；聞第四宗，三品之人同解生空，不解法空。以彼但於眾生所起情相法中悟解空故。次會其言。阿毘曇者，據彼初宗，是故宣說一切聲聞但解生空。《成實》執彼第二宗中中上之人能解二空，過分說言，一切聲聞莫問利鈍同解二空。《成實》有此過分之失，《大智論》中據第三宗，說彼鈍者但解生空、利解法空，此乃中下同名鈍根。《十地》、《地持》據第四宗，是故宣說聲聞之人但解生空，妄想法中而得空故，亦可從彼初宗為言。無我之義，略判如是。

In the fourth section, determinations are made with respect to persons. "Persons" refers to śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas fully understand both kinds of emptiness; regarding śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, the sūtras and treatises differ. The Abhidharma, the Bodhisattvabhūmi, the Daśabhūmikā-śāstra, and so on state that śrāvakas only attain the emptiness of sentient beings, and pratyekabuddhas are likewise so. In the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, it states that śrāvakas and others have those who attain both kinds of emptiness, without distinguishing between sharp and dull faculties. In the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra, it states that those of sharp faculties fully understand both kinds of emptiness, like Śreṇika and others, while those of dull faculties understand only the emptiness of sentient beings. What does this mean? In explanation: each of these has its rationale, which is briefly explained through three gates: first, clarifying differences in what the Tathāgata taught; second, clarifying differences in what śrāvakas understand according to whether their faculties are sharp or dull; third, properly harmonising their statements. Regarding differences in what was taught: the Tathāgata, in that tenet establishing nature, only taught the emptiness of sentient beings; in the latter three tenets, he fully taught both kinds of emptiness, as clarified above. Regarding faculties being sharp or dull: among śrāvakas there are three grades of faculties, namely inferior, middling, and superior. When these three grades of persons hear the teaching establishing nature of that first tenet, they only understand the emptiness of sentient beings, because in this teaching the emptiness of the dharmic essence was never proclaimed. When they hear the teaching refuting nature of the second tenet, the dull are only able to awaken to and understand the emptiness of sentient beings, while the middling and superior both comprehend both kinds of emptiness. When they hear the third tenet, the middling and inferior only understand the emptiness of sentient beings, while those of sharp faculties comprehend both. When they hear the fourth tenet, persons of all three grades alike understand the emptiness of sentient beings and do not understand the emptiness of dharmas, because they only awaken to and understand emptiness within the emotional and characteristic dharmas produced by sentient beings. Next, properly harmonising their statements: the Abhidharma is based on that first tenet, and therefore proclaims that all śrāvakas only understand the emptiness of sentient beings. The Tattvasiddhi holds to the persons of middling and superior faculties in that second tenet, excessively stating that all śrāvakas, without asking whether sharp or dull, alike understand both kinds of emptiness. The Tattvasiddhi has this flaw of excess. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra is based on the third tenet, stating that the dull only understand the emptiness of sentient beings while the sharp understand the emptiness of dharmas; here the middling and inferior are together called dull faculties. The Daśabhūmikā-śāstra and the Bodhisattvabhūmi are based on the fourth tenet, and therefore proclaim that śrāvakas only understand the emptiness of sentient beings, because they attain emptiness within the dharmas of deluded conceptualisation; they may also speak in accordance with that first tenet. The meaning of non-self is roughly determined in this way.