English
English version: It is for the sake of the One Vehicle (Ekayana) of the same teaching. The record says: Because there are those among the students of the Consciousness-only school (Xiangzong, 唯识宗) who do not believe, it is repeatedly pointed out. The commentary says: The reason why Xianshou (贤首, Fazang, 法藏) repeatedly explains the Three Teachings is that the sayings of the sages cannot be abandoned. This is to address the situation where the false and absurd claims in the Consciousness-only school are excessive. The record says: Secondly, it is the practice door that is accomplished from principle. There are three meanings here. Initially, it is analyzed in terms of the One Vehicle, because the Mahayana (大乘, Great Vehicle) is used to distinguish the Two Vehicles (二乘, Shravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana). The Hinayana (小乘, Small Vehicle) is to turn the mind. This is discussed in terms of the universal capacity, so it is known that it is analyzed in terms of the One Vehicle. The commentary says: It is discussed in terms of the universal capacity, so it is known that it is analyzed in terms of the One Vehicle. The classifier says: 'The practice door that is accomplished from principle.' Taiyi says: 'In the expedient means (upaya), the practice that is accomplished from principle is divided into three. Is it in terms of the universal capacity?' The previous record says: 'Therefore, in the following same teaching, starting from the One Vehicle, Two Vehicles, Three Vehicles, etc., all are included in the retinue sutras.' It is precisely because these are expedient means, and the retinue is an expedient means, is it in terms of the universal capacity? If so, then what capacity will the other nine original texts be accepted by? Moreover, burning firewood is to prove this meaning oneself. The record says: The meaning of the overall opening is that it is about the three realms of existence (三世间) and the realms of humans and gods, making four. The commentary says: Which three realms of existence are being referred to here? If it is the three realms of existence such as wisdom, correct enlightenment, etc., then in the overall opening, what vehicle will be matched with the realm of vessels (器世间)? If it is the three realms of existence such as the world, the world beyond the world, etc., why is it said that it is about the realms of humans and gods, making four? If this explanation is made, the original intention of the Three Turnings of the Dharma Wheel (三转法轮) will probably be indignant. The record says: The above three sections conclude and point out that it is known that the dharmas of the Great, Small, humans, gods, etc., all enter this door. It is precisely because this is an expedient means. The commentary says: According to the expedient means listed above, everything is included in the Correct Vehicle (正乘). Now it is said that everything enters this door, which means that the Great, Small, humans, gods, etc., all enter the Correct Vehicle. Moreover, it is said below that the three ones without obstruction all enter this door, should it be the Correct Vehicle? Since the ultimate goal is lost, it is not known what is being advocated. Therefore, it is known that those who use the Three Jewels chapter are lost, mistaking east for west. The record says: Our Ancestor (Wuzu, 吾祖, referring to a patriarch of the Huayan school) said: 'However, this sea of teachings is the deepest, encompassing without exception. Speaking of its horizontal inclusion, it completely includes our teachings, even humans and gods are all included, even those who truly do not understand.' The commentary says: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
前释标数。云显全收。此引清凉。全收五教。是将诰所以。现全收释。分诸乘也。且分诸乘。是该摄门否。文呵或者不晓。是亦强酒而恶醉者也。 记曰。此同教者。指分诸乘中或三或一。权实无碍。角立互成。而总名一乘者。良由应法界。而有二门。有二门故。两宗并立。应法界故。三一无碍。 评曰。此文具三种宗法。其因有总别焉。且华严笑庵。将同一法界。作同教得名所以。法真以乘错宗。因力排之。今记仍用因一法界。有其二门。为因可乎。又云。权实无碍用立互成者。力量平等也。且揽实成权。能全成泯权归实否。既能全成。何以章云实现未必一向藉于权。又云。虽具在坏竟必有尽邪。又泯权归实全成揽实成权者。何以章云揽实实不失。又云。虽具隐显。竟恒无尽邪。 记曰。又云。此文在三乘一乘方究竟。何以故。称法界故。 评曰。此文乃约前教三乘。后教一乘为门。说因缘义。非约同教何以知者。下章云。若三乘赖耶识如来藏法无我因中。有六义名义。而主伴未具。若一乘普贤圆因中。具足主伴。无尽缘起。方究竟也。以此得知非同教也。 记曰。一泯等者。则三亡而一显。至别教唯有初门。 评曰。别教唯有初门者。诚是也。然准上记。文分诸乘。乃并列 现代汉语译本： 前文解释了标数（biāo shù，指设立名目的数量）。说的是显教全部收摄。这里引用了清凉（Qīngliáng，指清凉国师澄观）的观点，全部收摄了五教（wǔ jiào，指小乘教、大乘始教、大乘终教、顿教、圆教）。这是将诰（jiāng gào，指佛的教诲）的原因，现在全部收摄来解释，分判诸乘（zhū shèng，指各种不同的乘，如声闻乘、缘觉乘、菩萨乘）。那么，分判诸乘，是该摄一切法门的吗？文章责备那些不明白的人，就像强迫喝酒却又讨厌醉酒的人一样。 记述说：这里说的‘同教’，指的是分判诸乘中，或者三乘，或者一乘，权巧方便和真实究竟没有障碍，像牛角一样相互支撑成立，而总称为一乘（yī shèng，指唯一能引导众生达到解脱的教法），是因为应合法界（fǎ jiè，指一切诸法的总称），而有二门（èr mén，指两种不同的修行途径）。因为有二门，所以两宗并立。应合法界，所以三乘和一乘没有障碍。 评论说：这段文字具备三种宗法（zōng fǎ，指宗门的法则），其中的原因有总有别。而且华严笑庵（Huáyán Xiào'ān，人名）将‘同一法界’作为‘同教’得名的原因。法真（Fǎzhēn，人名）认为用‘乘’来错用了‘宗’，因此极力反驳。现在记述仍然用‘因为一法界，有其二门’作为原因，可以吗？又说，‘权实无碍，相互支撑成立’，是力量平等。那么，用真实来成就权巧，能够完全成就并泯灭权巧，归于真实吗？既然能够完全成就，为什么文章说‘实现未必一向凭借于权巧’？又说，‘虽然具备，最终必定有穷尽吗’？又泯灭权巧归于真实，完全成就用真实来成就权巧，为什么文章说‘用真实，真实不会失去’？又说，‘虽然具备隐显，最终恒常没有穷尽吗’？ 记述说：又说，这段文字在三乘和一乘才究竟，为什么呢？因为称合法界。 评论说：这段文字是就前教的三乘，后教的一乘作为门径，来说明因缘的意义，不是就同教来说的。凭什么知道呢？下文说：‘如果三乘依赖阿赖耶识（ā lài yé shì，指第八识，含藏一切种子）、如来藏（rú lái zàng，指一切众生皆具的佛性）、法无我（fǎ wú wǒ，指诸法无自性）的因中，有六义名义，而主伴没有具备。如果一乘普贤（Pǔxián，指普贤菩萨）圆因中，具足主伴，无尽缘起，才究竟。’用这个可以得知不是同教。 记述说：一泯等，那么三乘消失而一乘显现，到别教只有初门。 评论说：别教只有初门，确实是这样。然而按照上面的记述，文章分判诸乘，是并列的。
English
English version: The previous explanation clarified the established numerical categories (biāo shù, referring to the establishment of numerical designations). It stated that the Manifest Teaching (显教, xiǎn jiào) encompasses everything. This quotes Qingliang (Qīngliáng, referring to National Teacher Qingliang, Chengguan), encompassing all Five Teachings (wǔ jiào, referring to the Small Vehicle Teaching, the Initial Great Vehicle Teaching, the Final Great Vehicle Teaching, the Sudden Teaching, and the Perfect Teaching). This is the reason for the proclamations (jiāng gào, referring to the Buddha's teachings), now explained by encompassing everything, differentiating the various Vehicles (zhū shèng, referring to various different vehicles, such as the Hearer Vehicle, the Solitary Realizer Vehicle, and the Bodhisattva Vehicle). Then, is differentiating the various Vehicles encompassing all Dharma gates? The text scolds those who do not understand, like those who force drinking but hate being drunk. The Record states: The 'Same Teaching' here refers to, within the differentiation of the various Vehicles, either the Three Vehicles or the One Vehicle, where skillful means and ultimate reality are without obstruction, mutually supporting each other like horns, and are collectively called the One Vehicle (yī shèng, referring to the only teaching that can guide all beings to liberation), because it corresponds to the Dharma Realm (fǎ jiè, referring to the totality of all dharmas), and there are Two Gates (èr mén, referring to two different paths of practice). Because there are Two Gates, the two schools are established side by side. Because it corresponds to the Dharma Realm, the Three and One Vehicles are without obstruction. The Commentary states: This passage possesses three kinds of doctrinal principles (zōng fǎ, referring to the principles of a school), and the reasons for them are both general and specific. Moreover, Huayan Xiao'an (Huáyán Xiào'ān, a person's name) takes 'the same Dharma Realm' as the reason for the name 'Same Teaching'. Fazhen (Fǎzhēn, a person's name) believes that using 'Vehicle' misused 'School', so he strongly refuted it. Now the Record still uses 'because of one Dharma Realm, there are its Two Gates' as the reason, is that acceptable? It also says, 'Skillful means and ultimate reality are without obstruction, mutually supporting each other', which is equal strength. Then, using reality to accomplish skillful means, can it completely accomplish and extinguish skillful means, returning to reality? Since it can completely accomplish, why does the text say 'Realization does not necessarily always rely on skillful means'? It also says, 'Although it is complete, will it ultimately have an end?' Also, extinguishing skillful means to return to reality, completely accomplishing using reality to accomplish skillful means, why does the text say 'Using reality, reality is not lost'? It also says, 'Although it possesses concealment and manifestation, will it ultimately be eternally without end?' The Record states: It also says, this passage is only ultimate in the Three Vehicles and One Vehicle, why? Because it accords with the Dharma Realm. The Commentary states: This passage is about taking the Three Vehicles of the former teaching and the One Vehicle of the latter teaching as gateways, to explain the meaning of cause and condition, not about the Same Teaching. How do we know? The following text says: 'If the Three Vehicles rely on the Alaya Consciousness (ā lài yé shì, referring to the eighth consciousness, containing all seeds), the Tathagatagarbha (rú lái zàng, referring to the Buddha-nature inherent in all beings), and the Dharma Non-self (fǎ wú wǒ, referring to the non-inherent existence of all dharmas) in the cause, there are six meanings, but the principal and attendant are not complete. If the One Vehicle of Samantabhadra (Pǔxián, referring to Samantabhadra Bodhisattva) in the perfect cause, the principal and attendant are complete, and the endless arising of conditions is ultimate.' From this, we can know that it is not the Same Teaching. The Record states: When the One extinguishes the others, then the Three disappear and the One manifests, and in the Separate Teaching, there is only the initial gate. The Commentary states: The Separate Teaching only has the initial gate, that is indeed the case. However, according to the above Record, the text differentiates the various Vehicles, which are juxtaposed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
余经。皆是第九眷属经摄。良由是方便故。融本末乃是诸乘。得名一乘之因法。又应法界故。三一无碍。皆属不融同教。今问曰。此泯权归实门。分诸乘中来耶。融本末中出耶。若分诸乘中来者。眷属经中岂有别教一乘。若融本末中出者。且本是不融同教。能毓圆通华严可乎。 记曰。以义从门。则权实常在。法界理圆。其体不二。 评曰。以义从门者。其门乃义门邪。法门邪。若法门者。何以章云。义门异故权实恒存。若义门者。何以义从义。 记曰。由此下作句数。至一唯一乘。普法独立无一切故。如上别教。乃至非三非一者。性果圆极。如前所辨。 评曰。此之四句。为通结同别二门耶。独结同教一门耶。若独同教者。何以前云但为方便非主经邪。且初后二句。但为方便。非主经乎。莫是分乘窄融未宽乎。或唯一乘非一非三。引属余经眷属摄乎。若通结二门者。何科在融本末中邪。然学教菩萨在理所归。句私其党。诚欲以斯童之是务。契大经之冲玄。莫若法真大师焚折薪者也。 现代汉语译本： 这些经文都属于《第九眷属经》（Jiǔ Dì Jiànshǔ Jīng，The Ninth Family Sutra）所涵盖的内容。正是由于这种方便法门，融合了根本与枝末，才使得诸乘（zhū chéng，various vehicles/paths to enlightenment）得以被称为一乘（yī chéng，One Vehicle/Path）的因法（yīn fǎ，causal dharma）。又因为应合法界（fǎ jiè，Dharma Realm）的缘故，三（sān，three）与一（yī，one）之间没有障碍。这些都属于不融合的同教（tóng jiào，common teachings）。现在我提问：这个泯除权巧回归真实之门（mǐn chú quán qiǎo guī shízhi mén，the gate of eliminating expedient means and returning to reality），是从区分诸乘中产生的呢？还是从融合根本与枝末中产生的呢？如果从区分诸乘中产生，那么在《眷属经》中怎么会有别教一乘（bié jiào yī chéng，distinct teaching of One Vehicle）呢？如果从融合根本与枝末中产生，那么根本是不融合的同教，怎么能够孕育圆融通达的华严（Huá Yán，Avatamsaka/Flower Garland）呢？ 记曰：从意义的角度来看，权巧与真实始终存在，法界的道理圆满，其本体不是二元对立的。 评曰：从意义的角度来看，这个‘门’是义门（yì mén，gate of meaning）呢？还是法门（fǎ mén，gate of dharma）呢？如果是法门，为什么章节中说：‘因为意义之门不同，所以权巧与真实恒常存在’？如果是义门，为什么说‘意义从属于意义’？ 记曰：从‘由此’以下构成句子的数量，直到‘一唯一乘，普法独立无一切故’（yī wéi yī chéng, pǔ fǎ dúlì wú yīqiè gù，One and only One Vehicle, the universal dharma is independent and without all things），就像上面的别教，乃至‘非三非一’（fēi sān fēi yī，neither three nor one）那样，是性果（xìng guǒ，nature-fruit/result of inherent nature）的圆满极致，如同前面所辨析的那样。 评曰：这四句话，是总结贯通同教与别教二门呢？还是仅仅总结同教一门呢？如果仅仅是同教，为什么前面说‘只是为了方便，不是主要的经典’呢？而且最初和最后两句，只是为了方便，不是主要的经典吗？莫非是区分诸乘太狭窄，融合还不够宽广吗？或者说，唯一的一乘既非一也非三，是引用并归属于其他经典或《眷属经》所涵盖的内容吗？如果总结贯通二门，那么应该归属于融合根本与枝末中的哪个部分呢？然而，学习教义的菩萨在理上有所归属，语句偏袒其党羽，如果真的想用这种孩童般的努力，来契合《大经》（Dà Jīng，Great Sutra）深奥玄妙的道理，不如法真大师（Fǎ Zhēn Dàshī，Master Fazhen）焚烧柴薪的做法。