大乘法苑義林章 2.12

2.12

Seventh, elucidating whether the Buddha's own teaching is of general or distinct textual divisions: speaking generally of the two piṭakas, there are either distinct divisions or no distinct divisions. Why is this? In an assembly where only śrāvakas are addressed and not bodhisattvas, as in the Āgamas and so forth, this is called the distinct-division Śrāvaka Piṭaka. In an assembly where only bodhisattvas are addressed and not śrāvakas, as in the "Daśabhūmika" and so forth, this is called the distinct-division Bodhisattva Piṭaka. If an assembly addresses both capacities, and the teaching benefits both kinds, it is called having no distinct division, as when preaching the Saṃdhinirmocana. The sentient beings of the three vehicles are each boundless, entering their respective vehicles. When the Buddha preached the doctrine of the three non-natures for the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata, six hundred thousand sentient beings gave rise to the bodhicitta, three hundred thousand śrāvakas became free from dust and defilement and attained the purity of the Dharma eye, one hundred and fifty thousand śrāvakas exhausted all outflows forever and their minds were liberated, and seventy-five thousand bodhisattvas attained the forbearance of non-arising phenomena. Therefore we know that the two piṭakas both have distinct divisions and have no distinct divisions. This explains the general and distinct divisions of the two piṭakas. As for the general and distinct aspects of the three, sūtras and so forth: the Sautrāntika masters say that sūtra and vinaya have distinct divisions, but the abhidharma has no distinct divisions spoken. Among the Sarvāstivādin masters, there are the statements of two masters. Some say that the World-Honoured One also had distinct divisions expounding the Abhidharma Piṭaka, namely the Jñānaprasthāna. Because its title subsumes them, it is said to have been composed by Kātyāyanīputra. Some say that the World-Honoured One did not expound the Abhidharma Piṭaka as distinct divisions; how could the Buddha himself compose sections, verses, and chapters? If this interpretation were made, it would not differ from what the Sautrāntikas say. Since the Nyāya masters extensively debated this, they made it clear that the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, separately preached the abhidharma. Due to this reasoning, the Vibhāṣā preserves both interpretations. Now in the Mahāyāna there are also two explanations, the tradition in the Western Regions being thus. One master says: the World-Honoured One also expounded them as distinct divisions; sūtras such as the Avataṃsaka and Prajñāpāramitā are the Sūtra Piṭaka, sūtras such as the Abhidharma-sūtra and Saṃdhinirmocana are the Abhidharma Piṭaka, and sūtras such as the Vinaya and *Ghoṣa-sūtra are the Vinaya Piṭaka. As for the Sanskrit text of this piṭaka, a small portion still exists in the Western Countries at the Abhayagirivihāra, though the greater part has been lost. The elders transmitted that the Vinayaviniścaya-sūtra is the Vinaya Piṭaka. The second master says: the three piṭakas are divided according to what they express, without distinct divisions. The Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra mostly expresses the training in wisdom, the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra and so forth mostly express the training in morality, and the Śūraṅgamasamādhi-sūtra mostly expresses the training in concentration; the three piṭakas are divided according to what they predominantly express. Like the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, from 'thus' at the beginning to 'faithfully practiced' at the end, it is entirely sūtra. In the Abhidharma-sūtra, it also completely contains direct and indirect teachings, so that is certainly not a distinct abhidharma. Therefore, the piṭakas are established based on what is predominant. Where all three trainings are abundant, it is only the sūtras; where morality and concentration are abundant, it is only the vinaya; where wisdom alone is abundant, it is subsumed under the Abhidharma Piṭaka. This applies to the Buddha's teaching. If spoken by disciples, there are also distinct divisions, but only for the Abhidharma Piṭaka. As for the three piṭakas spoken of in the Lalitavistara and the Ajātaśatrukaukṛtyavinodana-sūtra, only the Pratyekabuddha Piṭaka has no distinct divisions; because its teaching is minor, it is combined with what is preached for śrāvakas. There are only the remaining two; because there are slight differences regarding capacity, practice, fruit, and what is expressed, they are divided into three piṭakas, definitely without distinct divisions. Among the six piṭakas, it corresponds to what was said before. Since the first master accepts that the Mahāyāna separately has the Vinaya and *Ghoṣa-sūtra as the Vinaya Piṭaka, distinct divisions stating six different piṭakas is also without error. The intention of the second master does not accept distinct divisions, but only follows what is expressed. If masters and disciples are discussed together, the teachings of distinct divisions may also be six; if solely the Buddha's preaching, there are no distinct six. According to what is appropriate, with differences in quantity, six are established according to what is expressed. This is the seventh section, elucidating whether the Buddha's own teaching is of general or distinct textual divisions.