肇論疏 3.45

3.45

會釋三乘之異，故云爾也。無名曰夫止此而此下，此謂有為，彼謂無為。在有則同有，在無則同無也。所以同於得者得亦得之同於失者失亦失之，《老子》云：得者同於得，失者同於失。同於得者得亦得之，同於失者失亦失之也。而在有同有在無同無，事如在得同得、在失同失。所言得失者，則善惡是非等也。我適無為我即無為者，定宗也。無為雖一何乖不一耶，法雖是一，不妨人自不一也。譬猶三鳥出網下，此喻分明歷然可見也。如是三乘眾生下，合喻分明也。樊者，籠也。《莊》云：雉十步一啄、百步一飲，不蘄畜乎樊中。郭注云：蘄，求也。樊所以籠雉也，今以惑妄樊籠繫眾生，如雉在于籠也。然則我即無為下，我謂三乘人也，無為謂三乘法也。所以無患雖同下，覆明前法喻兩種同異也。昇虛有遠近，明三鳥異也。幽鑑有深淺者，明三乘異也。無為即我我即無為也，既雙明法喻，此類可知也。今結答意偏明法耳。無為涅槃即三乘人，三乘人亦即無為涅槃，更無別也。此非我異無為，明所以有三也。

It is called so because it reconciles and explains the differences among the three vehicles. From "The Nameless One says: Stopping in this, one is this" downward: "this" refers to the conditioned; "that" refers to the unconditioned. Being in existence, one is identical to existence; being in non-existence, one is identical to non-existence. Therefore, "One who identifies with gain, gain also gains him; one who identifies with loss, loss also loses him": the Laozi says, "He who attains identifies with gain; he who loses identifies with loss. One who identifies with gain, gain also gains him; one who identifies with loss, loss also loses him." Being in existence and identical to existence, being in non-existence and identical to non-existence—this affair is like being in gain and identical to gain, being in loss and identical to loss. What is spoken of as gain and loss refers to good and evil, right and wrong, and so on. "When I go to the unconditioned, I am identical to the unconditioned" establishes the fundamental doctrine. "Though the unconditioned is one, how does it conflict with not being one?": though the Dharma is one, this does not hinder persons themselves from not being one. From "Just as when three birds leave the net" downward: this metaphor is clear and distinctly visible. From "Living beings of the three vehicles are like this" downward clearly matches the metaphor. Fan means a cage. Zhuangzi says: "The pheasant pecks once in ten steps and drinks once in a hundred steps; it does not seek to be kept in a cage." Guo Xiang's commentary says: "Qi means to seek. A fan is that which cages a pheasant." Here, living beings are bound by the cage of delusion and error, just as a pheasant is in a cage. Then from "The self is identical to the unconditioned" downward: "the self" refers to the persons of the three vehicles; "the unconditioned" refers to the Dharma of the three vehicles. Hence from "Although freedom from affliction is the same" downward, he again clarifies both the identity and difference in the preceding doctrine and metaphor. Ascending into empty space has far and near, which clarifies the difference among the three birds. The profound reflection has depth and shallowness, which clarifies the difference among the three vehicles. "The unconditioned is identical to the self, and the self is identical to the unconditioned": having clarified both doctrine and metaphor, this category can be known. The intent of concluding the answer now especially clarifies the Dharma. Unconditioned nirvāṇa is identical to the persons of the three vehicles, and the persons of the three vehicles are also identical to unconditioned nirvāṇa; there is no other difference. This does not mean the self is different from the unconditioned; it clarifies why there are three.