---
title: "大乘法苑義林章 · 5 問答料簡"
description: "窥基，唐代高僧，唯识宗实际创始人玄奘的嫡传弟子，撰写了《大乘法苑义林章》。此书创作于佛教鼎盛的唐朝，是唯识宗的重要论著。全书系统阐述唯识教义，分章辨析法相、唯识、三性等核心义理，组织严密，义理精深。它被誉为大乘佛教的教理百科全书，是研究唯识学不可或缺的权威典籍，对汉传佛教思想发展影响深远。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcz6dohs0013l104dnehzlse"
---

第五問答分別者。此中一乘理。應唯一無餘二三。法花經言。聲聞若菩薩。聞我所說法。乃至於一偈。皆成佛無疑。涅槃亦言。凡有心者。悉皆當得無上菩提。何故乃言為引不定。乃至五乘一切有情皆有佛性。究竟皆至大乘極果。何故究竟有人天乘不歸於佛。答攝大乘論以十因故佛說一乘。顯揚二十以六因故佛說一乘。如前已辨。今釋意者。據實而言五乘各異。如前所引教理成立。為引一類故說一乘。非乘唯一無二三等。法花論言。聲聞有四。一趣寂。二退菩提心。亦名迴向菩提心。三應化。四增上慢。經但為化退菩提心及應化故。世尊授記非餘二種。應化聲聞者。即經所說耽三昧酒。經劫不覺。後從彼起方發大心。佛菩薩等作此化形。作聲聞類。先聖入滅經劫久時。今尚發心。況於我等。故為應化。而說一乘受記作佛。攝論十因第九化故。即是此也。舍利弗等先發大心。因施眼故退求小果。今為彼說一乘受記。故說亦為退菩提心說一乘等。不爾便違楞伽莊嚴五種種姓。又涅槃言。我於一時。說一乘一道一行一緣。說須陀洹．乃至阿羅漢等皆得佛道。我諸弟子不解我意。於大眾中唱如是言。如來說須陀洹．乃至阿羅漢皆得佛道。若皆作佛即解佛意。何故稱為不解佛意。故知但應如此中說。問經自說言十方佛土中。唯有一乘法。無二亦無三。除佛方便說。即是破二破三而明一乘。何故乃言三五乘別。答依梵本說經頌應言無第二第三。數三乘中獨覺為第二。聲聞為第三。為引不定任持所餘故。方便言無第二第三。非真破也。法花自言。唯此一事實。餘二即非真。終不以小乘。濟度於眾生。若破三者。何故乃言餘二非真不以小濟。亦應言不以大乘濟度。經既但言餘二非真不以小濟。明知大乘非所破也。彼經又言。尚無二乘何況有三。二謂第二。三謂第三。非謂二乘三乘名為二三。勝鬘經云。聲聞．辟支佛乘者。即是大乘。又言大乘即是一乘。故但會二不定姓乘。亦非會彼定性二乘。何況大乘。又無三乘顯即一故。非破大乘唯有一乘。斯理何爽。若會破三者。三中之大。即火宅內所許牛車。出門等給皆亦牛乘。若破前牛後別與牛。二牛何別。又三中之大即是頓悟。會令入一。豈令頓悟成漸悟耶。又大乘一乘解行何別。而言捨三而趣於一。新發意菩薩疑網除者。即十義中任持所餘。未說一乘。恐於精進且壞起疑將退。今聞一乘除其疑意。此乃捨下位而趣上階。非捨大乘而入於一。不爾十地捨下趣上。皆應亦名破三歸一。又亦應言餘三非真。何獨言二。勝鬘又言。若如來隨彼意欲。而方便說即是大乘無有二乘。故會二乘入於一者。是方便說。非真實理。經雖說言開方便門顯真實相。故說有不定姓二乘者。是方便門。遠令入真故。今說一乘令趣極果名為真實。非謂都無二唯有一名真。故法花言密遣二人眇目矬陋。不言三人。又言。息處故說二不言三故。若言迂會入於大位名為大乘。若直往者所入大位名為一乘經論一乘實為不定。今此所釋未為典據。未見誠文。法花一乘豈由直往。今二行位有何差別。故知方便隱無二乘而說一乘。化一會中所宜聞故。有說執佛三劫滿已猶是凡夫。三十四念成菩提位。今破此執故說一乘亦是破三者。不然。此乃佛滅已後小乘曲見。豈是佛在有作此佛執以為真。而今說破故但破二。問何故立一乘．五乘。不說一藏五藏。說有六藏不說六乘。阿闍世王經等所說二藏三藏。與二乘三乘同。答乘是運載義。約機行以明乘。藏是含容義。教對理而為藏。一五之與六種所以不同。經中所說二．三藏二．三乘。以機行而彰運。對機理而辨教。所以可同。未可即令皆同皆異。隨宜且分乘．藏。有此異同相對。總有可同相於理未爽。然未見文。又準菩薩藏第一卷說。十度．十弊相治數齊。四輪．八難相治數別。不應齊責。問乘是運度義。菩薩可有乘。如來既已度。應不立佛乘。答自他皆可乘。菩薩具二度。度他非自度。何妨立佛乘。問何故有處說佛乘。亦名菩薩乘。但名聲聞乘。不名獨覺乘。答以果相對但說佛乘。二運可修說菩薩乘。行等廣故名為大乘。遮餘二故亦名一乘。獨覺無別教門。初業亦由聲起。故名聲聞乘不名獨覺乘。二乘通論總名小乘。由機行等同狹劣故。不相違也。問既以果對名為佛乘。亦應果對名為佛藏。何故但名菩薩藏不名佛藏。聲聞．獨覺俱得藏名。如藏章中自當廣釋。問教．理．行．果俱為一乘體為同為異。答一雨普潤教同機異。三獸渡河理同證異。六處大因行同修異三車誘引果同設異。或異或同。未勞定準勝鬘會因會果。法花乃會教．行．果三。一雨教也。九部行也。三車果也。顯唯教．行．果。密實有四。如涅槃經說為同異。

> Question Five: Analysis of the distinctions. Here, the principle of the One Vehicle should be exclusively one, with no second or third. The Lotus Sutra says: "Whether voice-hearers or bodhisattvas hear the Dharma I teach, even if only a single verse, all shall without doubt attain Buddhahood." The Nirvana Sutra also says: "All who have a mind shall all attain supreme Enlightenment." Why then do you say it is spoken to guide those of uncertain lineage? And further, the five vehicles — all sentient beings all possess Buddha-nature — ultimately all reach the supreme fruit of the Great Vehicle. Why then do some ultimately in the human and heavenly vehicles not return to Buddhahood? Answer: The Summary of the Great Vehicle states that the Buddha taught the One Vehicle for ten reasons. The Abhidharma-samuccaya states that the Buddha taught the One Vehicle for six reasons. As already explained above. Now the intended meaning: To speak according to reality, the five vehicles are each distinct, as established by the teachings and reasoning cited above. To guide a certain type, the One Vehicle is taught. It is not that the vehicle is only one with no second or third. The Lotus Sutra Treatise says: Voice-hearers are of four kinds: first, those who aspire to quiescence; second, those who have retreated from the aspiration to Enlightenment, also called those who turn toward Enlightenment; third, those who are manifestations of transformation; fourth, the arrogant. The sutra teaches the One Vehicle only to convert those who have retreated from the aspiration to Enlightenment and those who are manifestations of transformation. The World-Honored One's prediction of Buddhahood is not for the other two kinds. As for voice-hearers who are manifestations of transformation: they are those described in the sutra as intoxicated by the wine of concentration, unaware for kalpas, and only after emerging from that state do they arouse the great aspiration. Buddhas and bodhisattvas create such transformation bodies, appearing in the category of voice-hearers. Even after former sages entered cessation for long kalpas, they still arouse the aspiration — how much more should we? Therefore, for the sake of those who are manifestations of transformation, the One Vehicle is taught and the prediction of Buddhahood is given. The ninth of the ten reasons in the Summary — transformation — refers to this. Shariputra and others first aroused the great aspiration, but because of giving away their eyes, they retreated and sought the lesser fruit. Now the One Vehicle is taught to them and the prediction given. Therefore it is also said that the One Vehicle is taught for those who have retreated from the aspiration to Enlightenment. Otherwise it would contradict the Lankavatara Sutra and the Ornament of the Sutras, which speak of five kinds of lineage. Furthermore, the Nirvana Sutra says: "At one time I taught the One Vehicle, One Path, One Practice, One Condition, saying that stream-enterers and even arhats all attain the Buddha-path. My disciples, not understanding my intention, proclaimed before the assembly: 'The Tathagata says that stream-enterers and even arhats all attain the Buddha-path.' If all become Buddhas, that would be understanding the Buddha's intention. Why are they called those who do not understand the Buddha's intention? Therefore know that it should be explained as stated here." Question: The sutra itself says: "In the Buddha-lands of the ten directions, there is only the One Vehicle Dharma, with no second and no third, except as the Buddha's skillful means." This is breaking the second and third and proclaiming the One Vehicle. Why then do you say the three and five vehicles are distinct? Answer: According to the Sanskrit original, the verse should read "no second, no third." In the enumeration of the three vehicles, the solitary-realizer is second and the voice-hearer is third. To guide those of uncertain lineage and sustain the rest, it is provisionally said there is no second or third. It is not a true refutation. The Lotus Sutra itself says: "Only this one matter is true; the other two are not real. Never by the lesser vehicle do I save sentient beings." If the three were refuted, why does it say the other two are not real and that the lesser does not save? It should also say that the Great Vehicle does not save. Since the sutra only says the other two are not real and the lesser does not save, clearly the Great Vehicle is not what is refuted. That sutra also says: "There is not even the two vehicles, how much less the three." "Two" means second, "three" means third. It does not mean the two vehicles and three vehicles are called "two" and "three." The Srimala Sutra says: "The vehicle of voice-hearers and solitary-realizers is itself the Great Vehicle." It also says the Great Vehicle is the One Vehicle. Therefore it only reconciles the two vehicles of uncertain lineage; it does not reconcile those of fixed nature in the two vehicles, much less the Great Vehicle. Moreover, "no three vehicles" reveals that there is only one. It is not refuting the Great Vehicle and asserting only the One Vehicle. How is this reasoning flawed? If it were reconciling and refuting the three, then the greatest among the three — the ox-cart promised within the burning house — and the ox-cart given upon exiting the gate would be the same ox-cart. If the former ox is refuted and a different ox is given afterward, how do the two oxen differ? Furthermore, the greatest among the three is sudden Enlightenment. Would reconciling it into the one cause sudden Enlightenment to become gradual Enlightenment? Also, how do the Great Vehicle and the One Vehicle differ in understanding and practice, such that one abandons the three and proceeds to the one? As for "newly resolved bodhisattvas have their net of doubt removed" — this refers to the tenth reason, sustaining the rest. Before the One Vehicle was taught, they feared that their diligence might waver and doubt might arise. Now hearing the One Vehicle, their doubts are removed. This is abandoning a lower stage and proceeding to a higher stage — not abandoning the Great Vehicle and entering the one. Otherwise, at each of the ten stages, abandoning the lower and proceeding to the higher would also be called refuting the three and returning to the one. Also it should say the other three are not real — why only say two? The Srimala Sutra also says: "If the Tathagata speaks in accordance with their wishes as skillful means, that is the Great Vehicle; there are no two vehicles." Therefore reconciling the two vehicles into the one is a skillful means, not the ultimate truth. Although the sutra says "opening the gate of skillful means and revealing the true mark," the teaching that there are two vehicles of uncertain lineage is the gate of skillful means. Ultimately guiding them to enter the true is why the One Vehicle is now taught, leading to the supreme fruit, which is called the real. It is not that there are absolutely no two and only one is called real. Therefore the Lotus Sutra says "secretly sending two men, one-eyed and dwarfish" — it does not say three men. It also says: "Because of the place of rest, two are spoken of" — it does not say three. If one says that circuitously reconciling and entering the great stage is called the Great Vehicle, and for those who go directly, the great stage entered is called the One Vehicle, then the One Vehicle in the sutras and treatises is truly for the uncertain. This interpretation is not yet authoritative; no definitive text has been seen. How could the One Vehicle of the Lotus Sutra be due to direct progression? What difference is there between the two stages of practice? Therefore know that skillful means conceals the absence of the two vehicles and teaches the One Vehicle, because it is what should be heard in that assembly. Some say that the Buddha, having completed three kalpas, was still an ordinary being, and after thirty-four moments of thought attained the stage of Enlightenment. To refute this view, they say the One Vehicle is also a refutation of the three. This is not so. This is a distorted view of the Lesser Vehicle after the Buddha's nirvana. How could the Buddha while alive have held this view of Buddhahood as real? Now the refutation only refutes the two. Question: Why establish one vehicle and five vehicles, but not speak of one treasury and five treasuries? Why say six treasuries but not six vehicles? The Ajatashatru Sutra and others speak of two treasuries and three treasuries, corresponding to the two vehicles and three vehicles. Answer: "Vehicle" means conveyance; it designates the vehicle in terms of faculties and practice. "Treasury" means containment; it designates the treasury in terms of teaching and principle. The difference between one and five versus six is thus. The two and three treasuries and the two and three vehicles are spoken of in the sutras in terms of faculties and practice to reveal conveyance, and in terms of faculties and principle to distinguish teachings. Therefore they can be the same. It is not that all must be the same or all different. According to what is appropriate, vehicles and treasuries are provisionally distinguished. Having these similarities and differences in contrast, the overall possibility of sameness is not contrary to reason. But no text has been seen. Furthermore, according to the first volume of the Bodhisattva Treasury, the ten paramitas and ten remedies correspond in number, while the four wheels and eight difficulties correspond in a different number. One should not demand equal correspondence. Question: Vehicle means conveyance. Bodhisattvas may have a vehicle. The Tathagata has already crossed over; therefore a Buddha Vehicle should not be established. Answer: Both self and others may be conveyed. Bodhisattvas possess both conveyances. Conveying others is not self-conveyance. What prevents establishing a Buddha Vehicle? Question: Why in some places is the Buddha Vehicle spoken of, also named the Bodhisattva Vehicle, but only named the Voice-Hearer Vehicle and not the Solitary-Realizer Vehicle? Answer: By contrast of fruits, only the Buddha Vehicle is spoken of. The two conveyances that can be practiced are called the Bodhisattva Vehicle. Because practice and so forth are vast, it is called the Great Vehicle. To exclude the other two, it is also called the One Vehicle. The solitary-realizer has no separate teaching; initial practitioners also arise through hearing, so it is called the Voice-Hearer Vehicle and not the Solitary-Realizer Vehicle. The two vehicles taken together are generally called the Lesser Vehicle, because their faculties and practice are equal, narrow, and inferior. There is no contradiction. Question: Since by contrast of fruits it is named the Buddha Vehicle, by contrast of fruits it should also be named the Buddha Treasury. Why is it only named the Bodhisattva Treasury and not the Buddha Treasury? Voice-hearers and solitary-realizers both receive the name of treasury. This will be extensively explained in the chapter on treasuries. Question: Do teaching, principle, practice, and fruit all constitute the essence of the One Vehicle — are they the same or different? Answer: One rain moistens universally — the teaching is the same but faculties differ. Three animals cross the river — the principle is the same but realization differs. The great cause of the six senses — practice is the same but cultivation differs. The three carts entice — the fruit is the same but the setting differs. Sometimes different, sometimes the same. No need to insist on a fixed standard. The Srimala Sutra reconciles cause and reconciles fruit. The Lotus Sutra reconciles teaching, practice, and fruit — three. The one rain is teaching. The nine divisions are practice. The three carts are fruit. Explicitly there are only teaching, practice, and fruit. Secretly and truly there are four. As the Nirvana Sutra explains sameness and difference.

## 大乘法苑義林章卷第一

> Great Vehicle Dharma Garden Chapters on Meaning, Volume 1

福園院

> Blessed Garden Temple

寬文十二壬子年無神月日令修補了

> In the twelfth year of Kanbun <note>the Year of the Rat</note>, in the month of No Gods, the repairs were completed.

法印權大僧都清兼六十七歲

> Dharma Seal, Senior Archbishop Seiken, sixty-seven years old