大乘義章 19.50

19.50

次第七門明其大小所說不同。不同有五：一心體不同。小乘宣說如來無畏，事識為體。大乘宣說如來無畏，真心為體，至佛更無餘心識故。二心緣不同。小乘宣說事識之心為無畏故，攀緣分別，緣彼外難而生無畏。大乘宣說真識之心為無畏故，心如虛空無所分別，無分別德難以顯彰，故對外道四種難辭而以顯之，如寄丈尺而顯虛空之高下矣。三智行不同。小乘宣說如來無畏，十智為體，十智如上。初中所照一切智者，具十智性；能照之慧唯等智性，以通緣故。就第二中，所照之盡是無為法，十智不收。能照之慧，唯第十力應六智性，所謂滅智、法智、比智、盡無生智及與等智。今為答難，多等智性。就第三中能說障道，唯第二力應八智性，除滅道智。今據起說多等智性，能照之慧唯等智性。就第四中，能說盡道唯第七力，應十智性。今據起說多等智性，能照之慧亦等智性。小乘如是。大乘說佛無畏之德是如實智，如龍樹說「彼清淨智、一切智、無礙智，是如實智。」義如上辨。初無畏中一切智者，以清淨智、一切智、無礙智三智為體。能照之慧，是一切智、無礙智攝。就第二中所照漏盡，三智不收。能照之慧，是一切智、無礙智攝。就後二中，能說障道、能說盡苦，是一切智、無礙智攝，能照亦爾。此是第三智行不同。四照境不同。如小乘法中說佛無畏，但照前境不照自體，分別之心不能及照自己體故。大乘不爾，能照前境亦照自體。如《涅槃》說「菩薩眼根尚能自見，何況佛智而不自照。」五得處不同。小乘法中，說佛無畏唯在道樹成佛時得。大乘不爾，圓滿在佛，種性已上隨分脫得。故《花嚴》中宣說「十住初發心時便成正覺，具足慧身，等諸如來。」無畏既爾，餘德悉爾。四無畏義，厥趣麁爾。

Next, the seventh section clarifies differences between what is taught in the Mahāyāna and the Hīnayāna. The differences are fivefold:
First, their mental substances are different. The Hīnayāna teaches that the Tathāgata's fearlessness has phenomenal consciousness as its substance. The Mahāyāna teaches that the Tathāgata's fearlessness has the true mind as its substance, because when one reaches Buddhahood, there is no other mind or consciousness.
Second, their mental objects are different. Because the Hīnayāna teaches that the mind of phenomenal consciousness constitutes fearlessness, it clings to conditions and conceptualizes, generating fearlessness in reference to those external challenges. Because the Mahāyāna teaches that the mind of true consciousness constitutes fearlessness, the mind is like empty space, free from conceptual discrimination; since the virtue of non-discrimination is difficult to reveal and demonstrate, it is demonstrated in response to the four kinds of objection raised by non-Buddhists, just as one relies on a measuring rod to demonstrate the height and depth of empty space.
Third, their cognitive practices are different. The Hīnayāna teaches that the Tathāgata's fearlessness has the ten knowledges as its substance, the ten knowledges being as explained above. In the first [fearlessness], the omniscience that is cognized possesses the nature of all ten knowledges; the wisdom that cognizes it is solely of the nature of conventional knowledge, because it cognizes universally. Regarding the second, the cessation that is cognized is an unconditioned dharma, which is not subsumed under the ten knowledges. The wisdom that cognizes it, being solely the tenth power, corresponds to the nature of six knowledges: namely, knowledge of cessation, knowledge of dharmas, subsequent knowledge, knowledge of exhaustion, knowledge of non-arising, and conventional knowledge. Now, because it serves to answer challenges, it is mostly of the nature of conventional knowledge. Regarding the third, being able to explain the obstructing dharmas, being solely the second power, corresponds to the nature of eight knowledges, excluding the knowledges of cessation and the path. Now, based on its arising as speech, it is mostly of the nature of conventional knowledge, and the wisdom that cognizes it is solely of the nature of conventional knowledge. Regarding the fourth, being able to explain the path to cessation, being solely the seventh power, corresponds to the nature of the ten knowledges. Now, based on its arising as speech, it is mostly of the nature of conventional knowledge, and the wisdom that cognizes it is likewise of the nature of conventional knowledge. Such is the Hīnayāna account. The Mahāyāna teaches that the Buddha's virtue of fearlessness is knowledge of reality as it is. As Nāgārjuna said: "That pure knowledge, omniscience, and unhindered knowledge are knowledge of reality as it is," the meaning being as distinguished above. The omniscience in the first fearlessness takes the three knowledges—pure knowledge, omniscience, and unhindered knowledge—as its substance. The wisdom that cognizes it is subsumed under omniscience and unhindered knowledge. Regarding the second, the exhaustion of outflows that is cognized is not subsumed under the three knowledges. The wisdom that cognizes it is subsumed under omniscience and unhindered knowledge. Regarding the latter two, being able to explain the obstructing dharmas and being able to explain the cessation of suffering are subsumed under omniscience and unhindered knowledge, and the cognizing [wisdom] is likewise so. This is the third [difference], difference in cognitive practice.
Fourth, their cognition of objects is different. In the Hīnayāna Dharma, it is said that the Buddha's fearlessness only cognizes the external object and does not cognize its own substance, because a discriminating mind cannot extend to cognizing its own substance. The Mahāyāna is not like this; it is able to cognize the external object and also cognize its own substance. As the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Even a bodhisattva's eye faculty can see itself; how much more so could the Buddha's wisdom not cognize itself?"
Fifth, the places of attainment are different. In the Hīnayāna Dharma, it is said that the Buddha's fearlessness is attained only at the tree of awakening upon attaining Buddhahood. The Mahāyāna is not like this; it is perfected in the Buddha, but attained partially in accordance with one's capacity from the gotra-bhūmi onward. Therefore, the Avataṃsaka teaches: "At the initial generation of the mind on the ten abodes, one immediately accomplishes complete enlightenment, fully endows the body of wisdom, and equals all Tathāgatas." Fearlessness being thus, all other virtues are also thus. The meaning of the four fearlessnesses has been broadly presented in this manner.