大乘義章 1.23

1.23

第五門中，明其大小有無之義。通而為論，大小皆具。小乘三者，四《阿含》等是修多羅，五部戒律是其毘尼。《毘婆沙》等是阿毘曇。大乘三者，《華嚴》等經是修多羅，《清淨毘尼》等是其毘尼，《大智論》等是阿毘曇。若別論之，小乘具三，大乘不具。何以得知？如《大智論》龍樹釋云「迦葉、阿難於王舍城結集三藏，為聲聞藏。文殊、阿難於鐵圍山集摩訶衍，為菩薩藏。」又《法華》云「不得親近三藏學者，名習小乘，為三藏學。」准驗斯文，定知小乘備明三藏，大乘不論。何故如是？此就如來本教故爾。如來所化小乘眾生，鈍根難悟，聞說經律不能廣解，是故如來重以毘曇分別開示，方能悟入，故有三藏。如來所化大乘眾生，利根易悟，聞說經律即能深解，不假如來重以毘曇分別解釋，是故不具。以不具故，不說三藏。其猶大乘九部經中無論義經，與此相似。以義細推，如來本教亦得具有，但無部別，所以不論。若通末代，並具不疑。末代之中，雖有眾生聽受大乘，不能悟入，是故菩薩為之作論解釋佛經，故有大乘阿毘曇也。大小有無，略辨如是。

In the fifth section, the meaning of presence and absence regarding Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna is clarified. Speaking generally, both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna possess all three. Regarding the three of Hīnayāna, the four Āgamas and so forth are sūtra; the vinayas of the five schools are vinaya; the Vibhāṣā and so forth are abhidharma. Regarding the three of Mahāyāna, the Avataṃsaka and other sūtras are sūtra; the Śuddhavipāka-vinaya and the like are vinaya; the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa and so forth are abhidharma. If treated separately, Hīnayāna possesses all three, while Mahāyāna does not possess them fully. How is this known? As Nāgārjuna explains in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: "Kāśyapa and Ānanda compiled the three baskets at Rājagṛha as the śrāvaka-piṭaka; Mañjuśrī and Ānanda compiled the Mahāyāna at the Iron Ring Mountains as the bodhisattva-piṭaka." Furthermore, the Lotus Sūtra says: "Do not become intimate with practitioners of the three baskets; those who practice the Hīnayāna are called practitioners of the three baskets." Relying on and verifying this text, one definitely knows that Hīnayāna fully clarifies three baskets, whereas Mahāyāna does not treat them so. Why is this? This is because of the original teachings of the Tathāgata. The Hīnayāna sentient beings transformed by the Tathāgata had dull faculties and were difficult to awaken; hearing sūtra and vinaya expounded, they were unable to understand broadly. Therefore, the Tathāgata again analyzed and revealed them through abhidharma before they could awaken and enter; hence there are three baskets. The Mahāyāna sentient beings transformed by the Tathāgata had sharp faculties and easily awakened; hearing sūtra and vinaya expounded, they were immediately able to understand deeply, without requiring the Tathāgata to again analyze and explain them through abhidharma; therefore [the Mahāyāna] does not possess all three. Because it does not possess all three, it does not speak of three baskets. This is similar to the fact that among the nine divisions of scripture in the Mahāyāna there is no scripture of doctrinal debate (upadeśa). Drawing out the meaning in detail, the original teachings of the Tathāgata could also possess them, but because there are no separate divisions, they are not discussed. If applied to later ages, they unquestionably both possess them fully. In later ages, although there are sentient beings who hear and receive the Mahāyāna, they are unable to awaken and enter; therefore bodhisattvas compose treatises for them to explain the Buddha's sūtras, and thus there is a Mahāyāna abhidharma. Presence and absence in Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna are briefly distinguished in this way.