[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [肇論新疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860) › 1.44 # 肇論新疏 1.44 肇論新疏 1.44 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1.44) 此有二說：一則只是三乘中二乘。意云：設若小乘不見性空之理，則亦顛倒，不克果證。以二乘但見無常、不見於常，是顛倒故。此則大小形對可說。小且尚耳，況大乘耶。二則前云三乘，乃通教所被學法空者，故同觀實相為正觀；今此二乘乃藏教所被愚法者。意云：設若愚法二乘，亦須觀性空之理而取證，若不見此理則顛倒故不證。《大疏》破有教引《成實》云：「我今正明三藏中實義，實義即空。」《清涼鈔》云：「不可不見實義而得道也。」以生空亦雙空之一分，又何太異？故前云等觀。 > There are two explanations of this: First, it simply refers to the two vehicles within the three vehicles. The meaning is: if the Hinayana does not see the principle of prakṛti-śūnyatā, then it is also inverted and will not achieve fruit and realization. This is because the two vehicles only see impermanence and do not see permanence, which is inversion. In this case, it can be spoken of in terms of contrasting the Great and Small \[Vehicles\]. If the Small is already like this, how much more so the Great Vehicle? Second, what was earlier called "the three vehicles" refers to those accommodated by the Shared Teaching who study the emptiness of dharmas, so their common contemplation of dharmatā is correct contemplation; whereas the "two vehicles" here refers to those dull regarding dharmas accommodated by the Pitaka Teaching. The meaning is: even the two vehicles dull regarding dharmas must also contemplate the principle of prakṛti-śūnyatā to obtain realization; if they do not see this principle, then they are inverted and therefore do not realize it. When the Great Commentary refutes the teaching of existence, it cites the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra: "I now correctly elucidate the real meaning within the Tripitaka, and the real meaning is emptiness." The Qingliang Commentary says: "One cannot attain the Way without seeing the real meaning." Because personal emptiness is also one part of twofold emptiness, how could it be so vastly different? Therefore it was earlier said that they "equally contemplate." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1.43) - [Next: 1.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1.45) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860~en-mt.1.44) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1.44](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1860.1.44) · Pramāṇa