大乘義章 1.31

1.31

次就授記、本事、本生三部相望，及對餘六明其通別。此三相望，一向是別，以其時異自他別故。若望餘六，義有通別。通而論之，授記之中具餘六部。若別分之，授記之中雖有因緣、譬喻等事，悉成授記，無其餘義。向言通時授記之中具餘六部，云何得具？籍現事緣，與人授記，即是因緣；以喻況彼未來所得，即是譬喻；無問自說，即是自陳；彰彼未來所證之理，即是方廣；說彼未來所有神變，名未曾有；問答辨宣未來三事，即是論義。具足如是。授記望餘，通別既然；本生望餘，通別亦爾。通而論之，本生之中具餘六部。具相云何？類前授記，義在可知，唯時別耳。若別分之，本生之中雖有餘義，悉成本生，無其餘義。本事望餘，通別齊然，唯有自他以為別耳。次就無問及與論義二部相對，及望餘四，辨其通別。無問、論義二部相對，一向是別，無相通理。何故如是？論義經者，因問起答；無問經者，不由問起，是故不通。望餘四部，義有通別。通而為論，無問之中得有因緣、譬喻、方廣及未曾有。論議之中，亦具此四。差別分之，無問之中設有餘義，攝成無問，無其餘義。論義之中，別亦同爾。次就方廣及未曾有二部相對，并望因緣、譬喻二部，辨其通別。方廣、未有二部相望，一向是別，事理異故。望餘二部，義有通有別。通而論之，方廣、未有二部之中，皆有因緣、譬喻之義。籍現事緣，而說方廣或說未有，即是因緣。借喻況彼方廣之理、未曾有事，即是喻經。若別分之，方廣之中雖有因緣、譬喻之義，攝屬方廣、未曾有中。因緣、譬喻，屬未曾有。自斯以外，所有因緣、譬喻言說，顯示一切陰界入等諸法相者，判屬因緣、譬喻經也。次就因緣、譬喻二部相對，以辨通別之義。此二相望，義有通別。而論之，於因緣中亦有譬喻。故《涅槃》中解因緣義「莫輕小惡以為無殃，水渧雖微漸盈大器。」水盈大器，即是譬喻，成因緣經。譬喻之中亦有因緣，如因現在事相因緣而興喻況，是譬喻中因緣經也。若別分之，因緣之中設有譬喻，攝屬因緣；譬喻之中設有因緣，判屬譬喻。如佛制戒，因於比丘犯過因緣起說義強，假令立喻，判屬因緣。《百喻經》等，為使眾生因喻知法，縱因現事而說譬喻，喻顯法強，判屬喻經。通別如是。

Next, considering the three genres of predictions of buddhahood (vyākaraṇa), past narratives (itivṛttaka), and past life accounts (jātaka) among themselves, and distinguishing their shared and distinct [scopes] in relation to the remaining six genres: Among these three themselves, they are strictly distinct, because their times differ and because of the distinction between self and other. Yet in relation to the remaining six, in meaning there are both shared and distinct [scopes]. Broadly speaking, predictions contain the remaining six genres. If distinctly divided, although predictions contain causes and conditions (nidāna), allegories (avadāna), and so forth, they all constitute predictions and possess no other meaning. When speaking of the shared sense, how can predictions contain the remaining six genres? Relying on present circumstances and conditions to bestow a prediction on someone is nidāna; using an analogy to illustrate what is to be attained in the future is avadāna; speaking without being requested is udāna; illuminating the principle to be realized in that future is vaipulya; recounting all the future supernatural transformations is called adbhutadharma; question and answer expounding the three things of the future is upadeśa. In this way it is complete. The shared and distinct [scopes] of predictions in relation to the others being thus, the shared and distinct [scopes] of past life accounts (jātaka) in relation to the others are likewise. Broadly speaking, jātaka contains the remaining six genres. What are the characteristics of this containment? It is analogous to the previous predictions; the meaning can be understood, differing only in time. If distinctly divided, although there are other meanings within jātaka, all constitute jātaka and possess no other meaning. For past narratives (itivṛttaka) in relation to the others, the shared and distinct are completely the same, differing only in self and other. Next, considering the two genres of unprompted discourses (udāna) and analytical expositions (upadeśa) against each other, and distinguishing their shared and distinct [scopes] in relation to the remaining four: The two genres of udāna and upadeśa, compared directly with each other, are strictly distinct, with no principle of sharing between them. Why is this? Upadeśa discourses arise as answers based on questions; udāna discourses do not arise from questions; therefore they are not shared. In relation to the remaining four genres, in meaning there are shared and distinct [scopes]. Broadly speaking, within udāna there can be nidāna, avadāna, vaipulya, and adbhutadharma. Within upadeśa, these four are also complete. Distinctly dividing them, even if there are other meanings within udāna, they are subsumed into udāna, and there is no other meaning. Within upadeśa, the distinction is also the same. Next, considering the two genres of comprehensive discourses (vaipulya) and unprecedented events (adbhutadharma) against each other, and in relation to the two genres of nidāna and avadāna, distinguishing their shared and distinct [scopes]: Vaipulya and adbhutadharma, compared with each other, are strictly distinct, because events and principles differ. In relation to the other two genres, in meaning there are both shared and distinct [scopes]. Broadly speaking, within the two genres of vaipulya and adbhutadharma, both possess the meanings of nidāna and avadāna. Relying on present circumstances and conditions to expound vaipulya or expound unprecedented events is nidāna. Drawing on an analogy to illustrate that vaipulya principle or unprecedented event is avadāna. If distinctly divided, although within vaipulya there are meanings of nidāna and avadāna, they are subsumed under vaipulya and adbhutadharma; the nidāna and avadāna [therein] belong to adbhutadharma. Apart from these, all expressions of nidāna and avadāna that reveal the characteristics of all phenomena such as aggregates, realms, and sense fields are classified as belonging to nidāna and avadāna sūtras. Next, considering the two genres of nidāna and avadāna against each other to distinguish the meaning of shared and distinct: Compared with each other, in meaning they have shared and distinct [scopes]. Broadly speaking, within nidāna there are also allegories. Therefore the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] explains the meaning of causes and conditions (nidāna): "Do not make light of a minor evil, thinking it brings no calamity; drops of water, though tiny, gradually fill a large vessel." Water filling a large vessel is an allegory, yet it constitutes a nidāna discourse. Within avadāna there are also causes and conditions (nidāna), just as when an allegory is raised based on the causes and conditions of present phenomenal events, this is a nidāna discourse within avadāna. If distinctly divided, even if an allegory is present within nidāna, it is subsumed under nidāna; even if causes and conditions are present within avadāna, they are classified under avadāna. For example, when the Buddha established precepts, because the causes and conditions of a monk committing an offense gave rise to the teaching, this primary sense is predominant, so even if an allegory is established, it is classified under nidāna. In works such as the Baiyu jing (Sūtra of a Hundred Parables), in order to cause sentient beings to understand the Dharma through analogies, even if an allegory is spoken based on present events, the allegory revealing the Dharma is predominant, so it is classified under the avadāna genre. Shared and distinct are like this.