止觀輔行傳弘決 3.62

3.62

○次明半滿者，名在《大經》。菩提流支用此判教未為盡理，故《玄》文破之，今此但約法門以論。況復餘四共成此意，是故且與大小門同，非判一期義可通用。一往且以從別判之，故以九及十二以分半滿，通義具如《玄》文分別，或大小俱九俱十一十二等也。「世傳」下，破判教義。多師所計總云世傳。涅槃是滿，義稍可通；餘兼《法華》乃至《華嚴》，如何並半？流支所判復非通方，《般若》去滿、不簡二乘，義復不可。三藏為半，義稍可爾。「今明」已下，正出今意。既扶成大小，準彼所明，滿通二理兼帶小人，半唯在小永隔於大，《方等》則具存半滿，《般若》、《法華》、《涅槃》、《華嚴》唯滿不半，鹿苑唯半不滿。故知半滿之語有兼有全，故不同他剋定齊限。

Next, in explaining the half and the full [teachings], the names are found in the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*. Bodhiruci used this to classify the teachings without fully exhausting the principle, so the text of the *Fahua xuanyi* refuted it; now we discuss it here only in terms of doctrinal gates. Furthermore, since the other four [pairs] together accomplish this meaning, for now it is treated the same as the gate of great and small, not as an overall classification whose meaning can be universally applied to a single lifetime. For the time being it is classified from a distinctive perspective; therefore nine and twelve [divisions of scripture] are used to divide the half and the full. The comprehensive meaning is fully distinguished as in the text of the *Xuanyi*, where both the small and the great may have nine, or both eleven, or twelve, and so forth. From "the world conveys" onward, it refutes theories of classifying teachings. The theories held by many masters are collectively called "the world conveys." Nirvana being full is somewhat acceptable in meaning; but along with it, why should the *Lotus* and even the *Avataṃsaka* all be regarded as half? Bodhiruci's classification is likewise not universally applicable: the *Prajñā* being made full without distinguishing the two vehicles is also unacceptable in meaning. The Tripiṭaka being half is somewhat acceptable. From "now we clarify" onward, our own view is directly set forth. Since it supports and establishes the great and the small, according to what they explain: the full runs through the two principles and also embraces the small person; the half is solely in the small and forever segregated from the great; the *Vaipulya* fully contains both the half and the full; the *Prajñā*, *Lotus*, *Nirvana*, and *Avataṃsaka* are solely full and not half; the Deer Park is solely half and not full. Therefore we know that the terms half and full have both shared and exclusive senses; hence they are not like others who rigidly fix definite boundaries.