Chinese
。且始教许出。终教不许者。其终教不许。如弥勒所问经论法华经等。其始教许出。如瑜伽声闻决择杂集等论。今记家尽将空有二宗经论义实多含。一发判为终教。是谁许出邪。问曰。大乘始教。为将愚法二乘教。即羊鹿邪。非羊鹿邪。若非羊鹿者。何以许彼出界可归邪。若即羊鹿者。何以文中三车外又有界内二乘邪。又问曰。大品云。欲得声闻乘当学般若波罗蜜等。断惑中。初义邪。后义邪。罗汉实义在大乘中。初义邪。后义邪。普超三昧经云。唯大乘中。得有三藏。初义邪。后义邪。瑜伽声闻决择杂集等论。与婆沙俱舍等不同。初义邪。后义邪。章文云。大乘必具三。初义邪。后义邪。然当知章旨双备二义。其初义如文可见。其后义良由影在实证。在大已下。故不言也。三宝章云。谓彼愚法二乘无漏。亦非可归。以非究竟安隐处故。如彼化城。终顿舍故。乃至如经中归声闻僧犯菩萨戒等。此约三乘终教说。解曰。即此初义终教不许出也。且彼云。亦非可归。即此约大乘终教已去。并不名究竟出三界也。今此不能如实修四无量。即彼云。归声闻僧犯菩萨戒者。是也。彼又曰。如前愚法。亦是可归。以诸趣寂皆究竟故。诸不定性必回心故。此约始教说。解曰。即此初义。始教许出也。故下章云。以下同上。亦许二乘全 现代汉语译本：而且始教允许出离，终教不允许出离。终教不允许出离，例如《弥勒所问经论》、《法华经》等。始教允许出离，例如《瑜伽师地论》、《声闻地》、《决择分》、《杂集论》等。现在著述者完全将空有二宗的经论，其中义理实际上包含很多内容，一旦判定为终教，是谁允许出离的呢？ 问：大乘始教，是将愚法二乘的教法，即羊车、鹿车吗？不是羊车、鹿车吗？如果不是羊车、鹿车，为什么允许他们出离三界可以归依呢？如果是羊车、鹿车，为什么经文中三车之外又有界内二乘呢？ 又问：《大品般若经》说：‘想要得到声闻乘，应当学习般若波罗蜜等。’断惑方面，是初义还是后义？阿罗汉的真实意义在大乘中，是初义还是后义？《普超三昧经》说：‘只有大乘中，才有三藏。’是初义还是后义？《瑜伽师地论》、《声闻地》、《决择分》、《杂集论》等论，与《婆沙论》、《俱舍论》等不同，是初义还是后义？章文说：‘大乘必定具备三藏。’是初义还是后义？ 然而应当知道，章文的旨意兼备两种含义。初义如文字可见。后义是因为影子存在于真实证悟中，所以在‘大乘’之后，就不再说了。《三宝章》说：‘所谓的愚法二乘的无漏，也不是可以归依的，因为不是究竟安稳之处，如同化城，最终会被舍弃。’乃至如经中所说归依声闻僧会触犯菩萨戒等，这是就三乘终教来说的。 解释：就是这个初义，终教是不允许出离的。而且他们说：‘也不是可以归依的’，就是说从大乘终教开始，就不算究竟出离三界了。现在这些人不能如实修习四无量心，就是他们说的‘归依声闻僧会触犯菩萨戒’的意思。 他们又说：‘如前面的愚法，也是可以归依的，因为诸趣寂灭都是究竟的，诸不定性必定会回心。’这是就始教来说的。 解释：就是这个初义，始教是允许出离的。所以下面的章节说：‘以下同上，也允许二乘完全…’
English
English version: Moreover, the initial teaching (始教) allows for liberation, while the final teaching (终教) does not. The final teaching that does not allow for liberation is exemplified by texts such as the *Maitreya-paripṛcchā-sūtra* (弥勒所问经论, The Sutra on the Questions of Maitreya) and the *Lotus Sutra* (法华经). The initial teaching that allows for liberation is exemplified by treatises such as the *Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra* (瑜伽师地论), *Śrāvakabhūmi* (声闻地), *Viniscaya-saṃgrahaṇī* (决择分), and *Abhidharma-samuccaya* (杂集论). Now, commentators completely categorize the sutras and treatises of both the Emptiness (空) and Existence (有) schools, whose meanings actually contain much, as belonging to the final teaching. Who allows for liberation in that case? Question: Does the initial teaching of the Mahāyāna (大乘始教) regard the teachings of the ignorant two vehicles (愚法二乘), namely the sheep cart (羊车) and deer cart (鹿车), as such? Or not? If not, why is it allowed for them to leave the Three Realms (三界) and be able to take refuge? If so, why are there two vehicles within the realms (界内二乘) in the scriptures, in addition to the three vehicles (三车)? Another question: The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra* (大品般若经) says: 'If you want to attain the Śrāvakayāna (声闻乘), you should study the *Prajñāpāramitā* (般若波罗蜜) etc.' Regarding the cutting off of delusions, is it the initial meaning (初义) or the later meaning (后义)? Is the true meaning of an Arhat (阿罗汉) in the Mahāyāna the initial meaning or the later meaning? The *Pusa chao sanmei jing* (普超三昧经) says: 'Only in the Mahāyāna are the Three Baskets (三藏) found.' Is it the initial meaning or the later meaning? Are the *Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra*, *Śrāvakabhūmi*, *Viniscaya-saṃgrahaṇī*, *Abhidharma-samuccaya*, etc., different from the *Vibhāṣā* (婆沙论) and *Kośa* (俱舍论)? Is it the initial meaning or the later meaning? The commentary says: 'The Mahāyāna must possess the Three Baskets.' Is it the initial meaning or the later meaning? However, it should be known that the meaning of the commentary encompasses both meanings. The initial meaning is visible in the text. The later meaning is because the shadow exists in the actual realization, so it is not mentioned after 'Mahāyāna'. The *Sanbao zhang* (三宝章) says: 'The non-outflow (无漏) of the so-called ignorant two vehicles is also not something to take refuge in, because it is not an ultimate place of peace, like a phantom city (化城), which will eventually be abandoned.' Even as the sutra says that taking refuge in the Śrāvakasaṃgha (声闻僧) violates the Bodhisattva precepts (菩萨戒), etc., this is spoken of in terms of the final teaching of the Three Vehicles (三乘终教). Explanation: It is this initial meaning that the final teaching does not allow for liberation. Moreover, they say: 'It is also not something to take refuge in,' which means that from the final teaching of the Mahāyāna onwards, it is not considered ultimate liberation from the Three Realms. Now, these people cannot truly cultivate the Four Immeasurables (四无量心), which is what they mean by 'taking refuge in the Śrāvakasaṃgha violates the Bodhisattva precepts'. They also say: 'Like the previous ignorant Dharma, it is also something to take refuge in, because the quiescence of all destinies is ultimate, and all those of undetermined nature will surely turn their minds.' This is spoken of in terms of the initial teaching. Explanation: It is this initial meaning that the initial teaching allows for liberation. Therefore, the following chapter says: 'The following is the same as above, and it also allows the two vehicles completely...' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
断惑障分断所知障也。彼又曰。此大乘中自有二无漏故。又亦自有三乘法故。故说通二。非摄愚法。此通始终渐教说也。解曰。即此第二义。愚法则始。亦不许通大。则终亦许出也。彼云。亦自有三乘法。即此文是故大乘必具三也。此云罗汉实义在大乘中。即彼云此大乘中自有二无漏者。是也。以彼证此。二义宛然。上兼一乘。下并愚法。三宗备矣。斯盖法真大师。有唐亲承。承三宗也。一时开悟。悟三宗也。三昧酝酿。酿三宗也。纵辨而说三宗也。则知吾教宗部虽繁。要归不出三宗。舍三宗不足以明贤首道。不足以议贤首教。故学者不可不思。思者不可不学也。 记曰。此中下三科拣通大示要。问曰。仍诸共教上下相望。有共不共等。 评曰。此中合引探玄。共大之小非愚法。共小之大非别教。却引要问共教之下共不共。于章何用。 记曰。依此三义者。进指智论。远则指其开三本义通文。 评曰。智论唯有共不共二种般若。何三义之可指耶。 记曰。前二不融为同教。后一圆融为别教。则一乘宗中。离同别外。亦无余法。是故诸祖并无二种同教。对一别也。 评曰。既曰诸祖并无二种。何忽判孔目。横依方便者。圆通不圆通之异邪。当知非即圆通自在。双结二义。并皆不融 现代汉语译本： 断惑障，是断除所知障。彼宗又说：‘此大乘中自有二种无漏智故，又也自有三乘法故，所以说通于二者，并非摄取愚法。’这是通于始终的渐教所说。解释说：即此第二义，愚法则始，也不允许通于大乘，则终也允许超出。彼宗说：‘也自有三乘法’，即是此文的意思，所以大乘必定具备三乘。这里说罗汉的真实意义在大乘之中，即彼宗所说‘此大乘中自有二种无漏’，就是这个意思。用彼宗来证明此宗，二义宛然。上面兼顾一乘，下面包括愚法，三宗完备了。这大概是法真大师，在唐朝亲自承传，承传了三宗。一时开悟，悟了三宗。三昧酝酿，酿成了三宗。纵然辩论而说三宗。那么就知道我们教宗的宗部虽然繁多，要归根结底不出三宗。舍弃三宗不足以阐明贤首之道，不足以议论贤首之教。所以学者不可不思考，思考的人不可不学习。 记中说：此中下三科拣选通大，显示要义。问：仍然是诸共教上下相望，有共与不共等。 评：此中应该合并引用《探玄记》，共于大乘的小乘不是愚法，共于小乘的大乘不是别教。却引用《要问》，共教之下的共与不共，对于本章有什么用处？ 记中说：依据这三种意义，往前指《智度论》，往远指其开三本义通文。 评：智度论只有共与不共两种般若，哪里有三种意义可以指代呢？ 记中说：前二种不融合为同教，后一种圆融为别教。那么在一乘宗中，离开同教别教之外，也没有其余的法。所以诸位祖师并没有两种同教，来对应一种别教。 评：既然说诸位祖师并没有两种同教，为什么忽然判孔目，横向依据方便呢？是圆通与不圆通的差异吗？应当知道不是即圆通自在，双重总结两种意义，都不能融合。
English
English version: ‘Severing the illusions and obstructions’ means severing the Obstruction of the Known (所知障). That school also says: ‘Within this Mahayana (大乘, Great Vehicle) itself, there are two types of non-outflow wisdom; moreover, it also contains the teachings of the Three Vehicles (三乘), therefore it is said to encompass both, not including the ignorant teachings.’ This refers to the gradual teachings that encompass the beginning and the end. The explanation says: ‘Precisely this second meaning, the ignorant teachings are the beginning, and it is not allowed to encompass the Mahayana; then the end is also allowed to transcend.’ That school says: ‘It also contains the teachings of the Three Vehicles,’ which is the meaning of this text, therefore Mahayana must possess the Three Vehicles. Here it says that the true meaning of Arhat (罗汉, one who is worthy) is within Mahayana, which is what that school says: ‘Within this Mahayana itself, there are two types of non-outflow,’ that is the meaning. Using that school to prove this school, the two meanings are clear. Above, it encompasses the One Vehicle (一乘), below, it includes the ignorant teachings, the Three Schools are complete. This is probably Master Fazhen (法真), who personally received the transmission in the Tang Dynasty, receiving the transmission of the Three Schools. He attained enlightenment at once, understanding the Three Schools. Samadhi (三昧, meditative consciousness) brewed, brewing the Three Schools. Even in debate, he spoke of the Three Schools. Then we know that although the schools of our teachings are numerous, ultimately they do not go beyond the Three Schools. Abandoning the Three Schools is not enough to clarify the Way of the Worthy Head (贤首), not enough to discuss the teachings of the Worthy Head. Therefore, scholars must think about it, and those who think about it must learn it. The Record says: ‘The following three sections select the encompassing Great, showing the essentials.’ Question: ‘Still, the various common teachings look up and down to each other, having common and uncommon, etc.’ Commentary: ‘Here, one should combine and cite the ‘Record of Exploring the Profound (探玄记)’, the Small Vehicle (小乘) common to the Great Vehicle is not the ignorant teachings, the Great Vehicle common to the Small Vehicle is not the Separate Teaching (别教). Yet, it cites the ‘Essential Questions (要问)’, the common and uncommon under the common teaching, what is the use for this chapter?’ The Record says: ‘According to these three meanings, it points forward to the ‘Great Wisdom Treatise (智度论)’, and far away it points to its opening of the three original meanings, encompassing the text.’ Commentary: ‘The Great Wisdom Treatise only has two types of Prajna (般若, wisdom): common and uncommon. Where are the three meanings that can be pointed to?’ The Record says: ‘The first two do not merge into the same teaching, the last one is perfectly merged into the Separate Teaching. Then, within the One Vehicle school, apart from the same teaching and the separate teaching, there is no other Dharma (法, teachings). Therefore, all the patriarchs do not have two types of the same teaching, to correspond to one separate teaching.’ Commentary: ‘Since it says that all the patriarchs do not have two types, why suddenly judge the categories, horizontally relying on expedients? Is it the difference between perfect penetration and non-perfect penetration? It should be known that it is not the freedom of perfect penetration, doubly concluding the two meanings, and both cannot be merged.’ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 。为同教一乘也。
Chinese
记曰。为相宗学人有不信者。是故再三指示也。 评曰。贤首所以重示三宗者。圣者格言不可舍也。谓治相学。妄诞太甚。 记曰。二从理成行门。此有三义。初中约一乘辨者。以大乘拣二乘故。小乘则回心也。就普机说。故知约一乘辨。 评曰。就普机说。故知约一乘辨者。科家云。从理成行门。太一曰。于方便中。从理成行分三。就普机否。前记曰。是故下同教中。始自一乘二三乘等。皆是眷属经摄。良由是方便等。且眷属方便。就普机否。苟尔。其九本更被何器。又况焚薪自明此义。 记曰。总开意者。约三世门及人天为四。 评曰。此约何三世间。若智正觉等三世间。总开中将何乘配器世间。若出出世等三世间。何云及人天为四。若作此释。三转本子不胜愤闷也。 记云。上来下三结指。是知大小人天等法皆入此门。良由是方便故。 评曰。据上统列方便。总入正乘。今云皆入此门者。乃是大小人天皆入正乘也。且下云。三一无碍皆入此门。应是正乘邪。既失旨归。莫知所主。是知用三宝章者。迷东为西也。 记曰。吾祖曰。然此教海最深。包含无外。语其横收。全收吾教。乃至人天总无不包。乃至真不晓者也。 评曰。 现代汉语译本：为了同归于一乘佛法啊。 记录中说：因为相宗（Xiangzong，唯识宗， Consciousness-only school）的学人有不相信的，所以再三指示。 评论说：贤首（Xianshou，法藏，Fazang，华严宗实际创始人）之所以再三阐释三宗，是因为圣者的格言不可抛弃。这是为了治理相宗学说中虚妄荒诞的说法太过分的情况。 记录中说：第二是从理而成行门。这里有三重含义。最初是就一乘佛法来辨析，因为用大乘佛法来拣择二乘佛法，小乘佛法则是回心转意。这是就普遍的根机来说的，所以知道是就一乘佛法来辨析。 评论说：就普遍的根机来说，所以知道是就一乘佛法来辨析。科判家说：‘从理而成行门’。太一说：‘在方便法门中，从理而成行分为三，是就普遍的根机吗？’之前的记录说：‘所以下面的同教中，开始于一乘、二乘、三乘等，都是眷属经所摄。’正是因为这是方便法门等，且眷属是方便法门，是就普遍的根机吗？如果这样，那么其他的九本经典又被什么根器所接受呢？更何况焚烧柴火是为了自证此义。 记录中说：总括开显的意义是，约三世间以及人天道为四。 评论说：这里是约哪种三世间？如果是智正觉等三世间，那么总括开显中将什么乘法匹配于器世间？如果是出世间、出出世间等三世间，为什么说以及人天道为四？如果这样解释，三转法轮的本意恐怕要愤懑了。 记录中说：上面以下三段总结指明，是知道大小人天等法都进入此门。正是因为这是方便法门。 评论说：根据上面统摄列举的方便法门，总括进入正乘。现在说都进入此门，乃是大小人天都进入正乘。而且下面说，三一无碍都进入此门，应该是正乘吗？既然失去了宗旨归宿，就不知道所主张的是什么。因此知道用三宝章的人，是迷失了东西方向。 记录中说：吾祖（Wuzu，指华严宗的祖师）说：‘然而此教海最深，包含无外。说它的横向收摄，完全收摄吾教，乃至人天都无不包含，乃至真正不晓得的人啊。’ 评论说：