---
title: "大乘法苑義林章 · 6 諸藏相攝"
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/cmcz6dopr0036l1049i1ljg6t"
---

第六諸藏相攝寬狹者。初以諸藏對十二分通相相攝。後以諸藏對十二分別相相攝。初以諸藏對十二分通相相攝者。於中有三。初二藏對。次三藏對。後六藏對。二藏對者。二藏之中皆有十二。瑜伽第二十一。佛為聲聞說十二分。一一具列。又涅槃經中第三卷說。護大乘者受持九部。彼自說九。謂除因緣．譬喻．論議。不說聲聞無此九部。故知聲聞具有十二。不可說言除九餘三名為聲聞。聲聞藏中亦有契經應頌等。故瑜伽二十五說。聲聞藏中無方廣者。無有能得無上果故。說之為無。理實通有。法花經中第一卷說小乘有九。我此九部法隨順眾生。說入大乘為本。以故說是經。彼自說九。謂除記別．自說．方廣。大遮大乘具有十二。故知二藏取互不遮。由此應作四句分別。一大全非小。如法花經。二小全非大。如涅槃經。三二俱不全。合二小分。四二俱全。合二全分。故二藏中皆具十二。三藏對者。既許契經緣起論議通相。皆有十二分教故竝相攝。如前所引教理廣成。於三藏中一一具有十二分故。記別之義既具有三。隨其所應毘奈耶攝。菩薩戒等既名方廣。毘奈耶攝理亦不違。因請因事說諸深理。故因緣經通對法藏。既從如是終至奉行。皆脩多羅。故知三藏皆有十二。六藏對者。既言通相十二互通。故六藏中皆有十二。正法廣陳名為方廣。故通聲聞藏記諸弟子死生之事。通聲聞中毘奈耶故。

> Sixth, regarding the breadth and narrowness of how the various collections interrelate: first, discuss how the collections correspond to the twelve divisions in terms of their general characteristics; afterward, discuss how the collections correspond to the twelve divisions in terms of their specific characteristics. First, regarding how the collections correspond to the twelve divisions in terms of their general characteristics: this is divided into three parts. First, the correspondence of the two collections; next, the correspondence of the three collections; finally, the correspondence of the six collections. Regarding the correspondence of the two collections: within both collections, all twelve divisions are present. In the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 21, the Buddha explains the twelve divisions to the Śrāvakas, listing each one in detail. Also, in the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\*, Volume 3, it says that those who uphold the Mahāyāna accept and uphold nine divisions. They themselves list nine, namely, excluding \*nidāna\* (cause and condition), \*avadāna\* (illustrative stories), and \*upadeśa\* (discussions). It does not say that Śrāvakas lack these nine divisions. Therefore, it is known that Śrāvakas possess all twelve. It cannot be said that excluding these nine, the remaining three are specifically for Śrāvakas. The Śrāvaka collection also includes \*sūtra\* (discourses), \*geya\* (verses), and so on. Therefore, the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 25, states that the Śrāvaka collection lacks \*vaipulya\* (expansive teachings) because there is no one who can attain the supreme fruit, so it is said to be absent. In principle, it is actually present in both. In the \*Lotus Sūtra\*, Volume 1, it says that the Hīnayāna has nine divisions: "These nine divisions of Dharma, in accordance with sentient beings, are taught as the foundation for entering the Mahāyāna. Therefore, this sūtra is expounded." It lists nine, namely, excluding \*vyākaraṇa\* (prophecies), \*udāna\* (inspired utterances), and \*vaipulya\* (expansive teachings). This broadly indicates that the Mahāyāna possesses all twelve. Therefore, it is known that the two collections do not mutually exclude each other. Based on this, four distinctions should be made: 1) The Mahāyāna is entirely not the Hīnayāna, as in the \*Lotus Sūtra\*; 2) The Hīnayāna is entirely not the Mahāyāna, as in the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\*; 3) Both are not entirely complete, combining partial aspects of both; 4) Both are entirely complete, combining the full aspects of both. Therefore, both collections contain all twelve divisions. Regarding the correspondence of the three collections: since it is acknowledged that \*sūtra\*, \*vinaya\*, and \*abhidharma\* in their general characteristics all contain the twelve divisions of teachings, they are mutually inclusive. As extensively established by the teachings and principles cited earlier, within each of the three collections, all twelve divisions are present. Since the meaning of \*vyākaraṇa\* (prophecies) encompasses all three, it is included in the Vinaya as appropriate. Since the Bodhisattva precepts and others are called \*vaipulya\* (expansive teachings), their inclusion in the Vinaya is also not contradictory. Because profound principles are explained based on requests or events, the \*nidāna\* (cause and condition) sūtras correspond to the Abhidharma collection. Since from "Thus have I heard" to "rejoicing in faith," all are \*sūtra\*, it is known that all three collections contain the twelve divisions. Regarding the correspondence of the six collections: since it is said that in their general characteristics, the twelve divisions are mutually inclusive, all six collections contain the twelve divisions. The extensive exposition of the true Dharma is called \*vaipulya\* (expansive teachings). Therefore, it is included in the Śrāvaka collection when recording the births and deaths of disciples, as it pertains to the Vinaya within the Śrāvaka tradition.

已上總說通相相攝。後以諸藏對十二分別相相攝者。於中亦三。初以二對。次以三對。後以六對。以二對者。涅槃第三說。大乘有九。唯無因緣．譬喻．論議。小乘具十二。經文不遮故言具有。瑜伽二十一言具有十二。法花經說小乘有九。謂除記別．自說．方廣。大乘有十二。瑜伽論中第三十八說。方廣分唯菩薩藏。所餘諸分有聲聞藏。此說大乘具有十二。小乘有十一。唯除方廣。又瑜伽論八十五說。十二分中除方廣分。餘名聲聞乘相應契經。即方廣分獨名大乘相應契經。此說小乘有十一。大乘唯方廣。四文不同各有別意。此中皆依別相門故。且涅槃經中。依因犯制戒說為因緣。諸大菩薩本來無犯。不因制戒說無因緣。非無因請因事說法因緣經也。夫說喻況開中下根。諸大菩薩多分利根不須譬瑜。聞法便解。說無譬喻理非無也。諸大乘經現見。大有說喻者故。又大菩薩性皆利根舉宗便解。不假徵詰方生慧心說無論議。理實非無。解深密經．瑜伽論等是大乘故。明論議經通大乘。有問既說菩薩由利根故不假論議。應無應頌不假重說故。答為益後來故須重頌。非前菩薩假重頌言。涅槃一往依此別義。說大乘中無此三分。其實具有。又護法者誦三藏中。多分唯誦素呾纜藏不誦餘二。故但說九略無餘三。餘三即是二藏攝故。理實大乘非無十二。諸聖教中皆說大乘有此三故。又法花經中。依授弟子得成佛記名為記別。說聲聞無彼不求於大菩提故。猶如以寶示其愚人愚人便咲。聲聞聞記亦復如是。故說為無。記諸弟子死生事等理實亦有。又聲聞人多聞淺法。若不待請憍慢便生。說無自說其實亦有。又聲聞法但證小果。不得無上正等菩提。理非至極行不包弘說無方廣。其實亦有。正法廣陳云方廣也。又法花一會宗說一乘。為引一切不定聲聞趣佛果故。彼類已前未聞記彼得成於佛。今迴心已方乃得聞。故說聲聞略無記別。初方便品顯法深妙。欲令聲聞起尊重意。無問不說三請方說。故說聲聞略無自說。恐聲聞等於先所聞四諦等法生無上意。今顯彼非無上大法。無上大法唯大乘是故說聲聞略無方廣。法花一往化不定人。依一義中說聲聞人唯有其九。實可具有。瑜伽論第三十八中。同法花經。亦依小乘理教非勝不得菩提。名無方廣有十一部。小乘經中亦記弟子死生之事。分明顯示諸法密意亦有記別。小乘經中亦顯佛慈悲所有法相。不待請問而便自說。如初轉法輪故有自說。不同法華略無此二。說大乘中有十二者。大乘經中亦有因請因事說法。故有因緣。又勝鬘經云。毘尼者即大乘學。故有因緣。顯法深難亦有況說。故有譬喻。法相幽邃往復方明。故有論議。故說大乘具有十二。又瑜伽論八十五文同三十八。然以十一分既為聲聞藏。對此但說方廣一分為菩薩藏。其實菩薩具十二分。又八十五所說方廣。通相方廣攝十二故。更不假說餘十一分名菩薩藏。聲聞藏中八十五說。若通若別俱無方廣。故須除之。此即四文不同意也。

> Above, we have generally discussed the mutual inclusion of characteristics. Next, we will examine how the various collections correspond to the twelve divisions in terms of their characteristics. This is also divided into three parts: first, a comparison with the two collections; second, with the three collections; and third, with the six collections. \*\*Comparing with the Two Collections:\*\* The \*Nirvana Sutra\*, Volume 3, states that the Mahayana has nine divisions, lacking only the \*Nidāna\* (causes and conditions), \*Avadāna\* (parables), and \*Upadeśa\* (discussions). The Hinayana, on the other hand, possesses all twelve divisions, as the sutra text does not exclude them, so it is said to have them all. The \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 21, also states that it includes all twelve divisions. The \*Lotus Sutra\* says the Hinayana has nine divisions, excluding \*Vyākaraṇa\* (predictions), \*Udāna\* (self-spoken teachings), and \*Vaipulya\* (expansive teachings), while the Mahayana has all twelve divisions. The \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 38, states that the \*Vaipulya\* division belongs exclusively to the Bodhisattva collection, while the remaining divisions belong to the Śrāvaka collection. This means the Mahayana has all twelve divisions, while the Hinayana has eleven, lacking only \*Vaipulya\*. Furthermore, the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 85, states that among the twelve divisions, excluding \*Vaipulya\*, the rest are called sutras corresponding to the Śrāvaka vehicle, while \*Vaipulya\* alone is called the sutra corresponding to the Mahayana. This means the Hinayana has eleven divisions, and the Mahayana has only \*Vaipulya\*. These four texts differ, each with its own specific meaning. Here, we are all following the perspective of distinguishing characteristics. \*\*Regarding the \*Nirvana Sutra\*:\*\* It states that \*Nidāna\* refers to the establishment of precepts based on causes of transgressions. Since great Bodhisattvas fundamentally do not transgress, there is no need to establish precepts based on causes, so it is said there is no \*Nidāna\*. However, this does not mean there are no sutras that explain the Dharma based on requests or events. Parables are used to enlighten those of middling or inferior faculties. Since great Bodhisattvas are mostly of sharp faculties, they do not require parables; they understand upon hearing the Dharma. Thus, it is said there are no parables, but this does not mean they are entirely absent. Many Mahayana sutras clearly contain parables. Moreover, great Bodhisattvas, being of sharp faculties, understand the essence upon hearing it and do not need questioning and discussion to generate wisdom. Thus, it is said there is no \*Upadeśa\*, but in reality, it is not absent. Sutras like the \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\* and the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* are Mahayana texts, clearly showing that \*Upadeśa\* sutras exist in the Mahayana. If it is said that Bodhisattvas, due to their sharp faculties, do not require discussion, then they should also not require \*Geya\* (reiterative verses), as they do not need repetition. However, \*Geya\* exists to benefit later generations, not because the earlier Bodhisattvas required repetition. The \*Nirvana Sutra\*, in this specific context, says the Mahayana lacks these three divisions, but in reality, it possesses them all. Furthermore, those who uphold the Dharma often recite only the \*Sūtra-piṭaka\* and not the other two collections, so it is said there are only nine divisions, omitting the other three, which are included in the other two collections. In truth, the Mahayana is not without all twelve divisions, as all sacred teachings state that the Mahayana contains these three. \*\*Regarding the \*Lotus Sutra\*:\*\* It states that \*Vyākaraṇa\* refers to predictions given to disciples who will attain Buddhahood. Since Śrāvakas do not seek the great enlightenment, they are said to lack \*Vyākaraṇa\*. Just as showing a treasure to a foolish person makes them laugh, so too do Śrāvakas laugh when they hear such predictions. Thus, it is said they lack \*Vyākaraṇa\*, but in reality, predictions about the births and deaths of disciples do exist. Moreover, Śrāvakas often hear shallow teachings and, if not requested, may become arrogant. Thus, it is said they lack \*Udāna\*, but in reality, it exists. Furthermore, Śrāvaka teachings only lead to minor fruits and not the supreme, perfect enlightenment. Thus, they are said to lack \*Vaipulya\*, but in reality, it exists, as the extensive exposition of the true Dharma is \*Vaipulya\*. The \*Lotus Sutra\* primarily teaches the One Vehicle to guide indeterminate Śrāvakas toward Buddhahood. Previously, such individuals had not heard predictions of their attainment of Buddhahood, but after turning their minds, they now hear them. Thus, it is said Śrāvakas lack \*Vyākaraṇa\*. In the initial "Expedient Means" chapter, the profound and wonderful Dharma is revealed to make Śrāvakas develop respect. Since no one asked, it was not spoken until after three requests. Thus, it is said Śrāvakas lack \*Udāna\*. To prevent Śrāvakas from regarding the previously heard teachings on the Four Noble Truths as supreme, it is now revealed that they are not the supreme Dharma—only the Mahayana is. Thus, it is said Śrāvakas lack \*Vaipulya\*. The \*Lotus Sutra\*, in guiding indeterminate individuals, says Śrāvakas have only nine divisions based on one perspective, but in reality, they possess all. \*\*Regarding the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 38:\*\* It aligns with the \*Lotus Sutra\*, stating that because Śrāvaka teachings and principles are not superior and do not lead to enlightenment, they are said to lack \*Vaipulya\*, having only eleven divisions. However, Śrāvaka sutras also contain predictions about the births and deaths of disciples, clearly revealing the hidden meanings of the Dharma, so \*Vyākaraṇa\* exists. Śrāvaka sutras also display the Buddha’s compassion by speaking without being asked, as in the first turning of the Dharma wheel, so \*Udāna\* exists. Unlike the \*Lotus Sutra\*, which omits these two, it is said the Mahayana has all twelve divisions because Mahayana sutras also contain teachings based on requests or events, so \*Nidāna\* exists. The \*Śrīmālā-sūtra\* states, "The Vinaya is the study of the Mahayana," so \*Nidāna\* exists. To clarify profound and difficult teachings, parables are used, so \*Avadāna\* exists. Because the principles are deep and require repeated explanation, \*Upadeśa\* exists. Thus, it is said the Mahayana possesses all twelve divisions. \*\*Regarding the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, Volume 85:\*\* It aligns with Volume 38 but states that since the eleven divisions belong to the Śrāvaka collection, only \*Vaipulya\* is said to belong to the Bodhisattva collection. In reality, Bodhisattvas possess all twelve divisions. Moreover, the \*Vaipulya\* mentioned in Volume 85 encompasses all twelve divisions in a general sense, so there is no need to separately name the other eleven as belonging to the Bodhisattva collection. In the Śrāvaka collection, whether viewed generally or specifically, \*Vaipulya\* is excluded. Thus, these four texts differ in their perspectives.

上來第一二藏對訖。以三對者。三有二種。一普曜經中三。謂獨覺等三。二素呾纜等三。獨覺之教無別部類。不可別說有此十二教之差別。但同聲聞。聲聞．菩薩前二藏中已具釋訖。顯揚第六．瑜伽論第二十五說。十二分中契經．應頌．記別．諷頌．自說．譬喻．本事．本生．方廣．希法。是為素呾纜藏。所說因緣是為毘奈耶藏。所說論議是為阿毘達磨藏。此說十部是素呾纜。唯說一部是毘奈耶。唯說一部是對法藏。素呾纜中雖具十二。因事制戒正毘奈耶。論難甚深亦唯對法。略此二部非素呾纜。素呾纜中非無此二。譬喻．本事．本生三種。理實亦通毘奈耶攝。對法說為毘奈耶藏。律中多說譬喻等故。是眷屬攝。自性即非。顯揚等論。依自性非毘奈耶攝。故說彼三是素呾纜。對法依眷屬說是毘奈耶。各望一邊不相違也。

> Now, the first two collections have been addressed. Regarding the third, there are two types: first, the three from the \*Lalitavistara Sūtra\*, namely the three vehicles of the Śrāvaka, Pratyekabuddha, and Bodhisattva; second, the threefold division of Sūtra, Vinaya, and Abhidharma. The teachings for the Pratyekabuddha do not form a separate category and cannot be distinguished as a distinct set of twelve divisions of scripture. They are essentially the same as those for the Śrāvakas. The Śrāvaka and Bodhisattva teachings have already been fully explained in the first two collections. As stated in the sixth chapter of the \*Prakaraṇāryavācā-śāstra\* and the twenty-fifth chapter of the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, among the twelve divisions of scripture, the Sūtra, Geya, Vyākaraṇa, Gāthā, Udāna, Avadāna, Itivṛttaka, Jātaka, Vaipulya, and Adbhuta-dharma belong to the Sūtra Piṭaka. The Nidāna division belongs to the Vinaya Piṭaka, and the Upadeśa division belongs to the Abhidharma Piṭaka. This means that ten divisions are classified under the Sūtra Piṭaka, while only one division is assigned to the Vinaya Piṭaka and one to the Abhidharma Piṭaka. Although the Sūtra Piṭaka contains all twelve divisions, the establishment of precepts based on specific events is the primary concern of the Vinaya, while profound analytical discussions belong exclusively to the Abhidharma. Thus, these two aspects are briefly distinguished from the Sūtra Piṭaka, though the Sūtra Piṭaka is not entirely devoid of them. As for the Avadāna, Itivṛttaka, and Jātaka divisions, they are, in principle, also connected to the Vinaya Piṭaka. The Abhidharma classifies them under the Vinaya Piṭaka because the Vinaya often includes narratives such as Avadāna. Therefore, they are considered subsidiary to the Vinaya, though not its core essence. According to the \*Prakaraṇāryavācā-śāstra\* and other treatises, based on their core nature, these three divisions are not part of the Vinaya Piṭaka and are thus classified under the Sūtra Piṭaka. The Abhidharma, considering their subsidiary role, classifies them under the Vinaya. These perspectives are not contradictory but reflect different points of emphasis.

上來總是三藏對也。以六對者。對法論中第十一說。契經．應頌．記別．諷誦．自說．聲聞藏中素呾纜攝。緣起．譬喻．本事．本生。此二藏中毘奈耶藏并眷屬攝。因緣一種正毘奈耶。譬喻等三是彼眷屬。方廣．希法菩薩藏中素呾纜攝。方廣廣博正菩薩藏。希法難思亦菩薩藏。論議一種。通二藏中阿毘達磨藏攝。此中意說。十二分教於六藏中。五唯聲聞素呾纜攝。四通二藏毘奈耶攝。二唯菩薩素呾纜攝。一通二藏阿毘達磨。依此聲聞但有十種。菩薩藏內唯有其七。據實初五亦通菩薩素呾纜攝。以聲聞中略無方廣。但說彼五以為聲聞素呾纜攝。非菩薩中無有彼五。三十八云。十二皆通菩薩藏故。緣起等四亦非二藏中素呾纜不攝。以說自性及助伴為毘奈耶故。略不說為二素呾纜。但說因犯而制於戒名為因緣。因緣自性毘奈耶攝。眷屬隨之亦彼藏攝。涅槃經說始從如是終至奉行皆脩多羅經故。二十五說十部名為素呾纜故。譬喻等三亦素呾纜。因請因事而說於法名曰因緣。故亦說為素呾纜也。此三相從亦毘奈耶攝。又非聲聞藏素呾纜中亦無方廣．希法。涅槃不遮十二皆通聲聞有故。正法廣陳義亦通故。又說十一為聲聞藏。故知希法亦通聲聞素呾纜也。今以理極能得菩提名為方廣。唯說諸佛菩薩大威神名為希法故。說聲聞素呾纜中無此二分。理實皆有如前已說。又無方廣諸文共同。無希法者眷屬所攝。唯菩薩藏其實通也。論議多分唯是對法。或約弟子所造論等名為論議。故唯攝在阿毘達磨。理實亦通二素呾纜。以菩薩聲聞素呾纜藏對餘聊簡。初文且舉一邊之義。又以二藏各毘奈耶．阿毘達磨。互對十二部義皆通有。若隨別義相對聊簡義准應知。恐文煩廣故略不述。涅槃經云。從十二部出脩多羅。從脩多羅流出方廣。此以別中流出於總。始從如是終乃至奉行皆脩多羅。故從十二分出脩多羅也。又從總中流出於總。方廣亦具有十二分故。從脩多羅流出方廣。又有釋云。初從別出總。後從總出別。欲顯總別互流出也。今准諸文。別相正說應云。方廣唯是菩薩素呾纜攝。論議通是菩薩．聲聞阿毘達磨。因緣亦通聲聞．菩薩毘奈耶攝。契經．應頌．記別．諷誦．自說．希法。此之六種亦通聲聞．菩薩藏中素呾纜攝。譬喻．本事．本生三種。通是聲聞及菩薩藏。素呾纜及毘奈耶二藏所攝。對法所說據其別義。非違理文。此據多分。或方廣分亦通二種。如是所說不違諸教。若約通門相對攝者。以藏分部成三十六。以部分藏亦三十六。若以別相相攝為門。以藏分部等隨應廣說。由此三藏對十二分中脩多羅等。互有寬狹。四句分別。有三藏中脩多羅非十二中脩多羅。謂應頌等脩多羅藏。十二分中約別相故。有十二分中修多羅非三藏中脩多羅藏。謂通相脩多羅因緣．論議等。有二俱是。謂別相脩多羅入藏中故。有二俱非者。謂十二中別相緣起等。三藏中別毘奈耶等。或外道典籍。其餘藏中互為句者名既差別。唯體有寬狹亦可為之。准義應知。上來所辨相攝之義合。是第六十二分教相攝寬狹。

> The classification of the twelve divisions of the teachings into the six collections is explained in the eleventh chapter of the \*Abhidharma-kośa\*. The \*\*Sūtra\*\* (契經), \*\*Geya\*\* (應頌), \*\*Vyākaraṇa\*\* (記別), \*\*Gāthā\*\* (諷誦), and \*\*Udāna\*\* (自說) are all included within the \*\*Śrāvaka-piṭaka\*\* under the category of Sūtra. The \*\*Nidāna\*\* (緣起), \*\*Avadāna\*\* (譬喻), \*\*Itivṛttaka\*\* (本事), and \*\*Jātaka\*\* (本生) are included within the \*\*Vinaya-piṭaka\*\* and its associated texts. Among these, \*\*Nidāna\*\* itself constitutes the core Vinaya, while \*\*Avadāna\*\* and the other three are considered its auxiliary texts. The \*\*Vaipulya\*\* (方廣) and \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\* (希法) are included within the \*\*Bodhisattva-piṭaka\*\* under the category of Sūtra. \*\*Vaipulya\*\* represents the extensive and profound teachings of the Bodhisattva canon, while \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\* refers to the inconceivable teachings also belonging to the Bodhisattva canon. The \*\*Upadeśa\*\* (論議) is included within the \*\*Abhidharma-piṭaka\*\*, which is common to both canons. According to this interpretation: - Among the twelve divisions, five belong exclusively to the Śrāvaka Sūtra collection. - Four are shared between the two canons and belong to the Vinaya collection. - Two belong exclusively to the Bodhisattva Sūtra collection. - One is shared between the two canons and belongs to the Abhidharma collection. Thus, the Śrāvaka canon contains only ten divisions, while the Bodhisattva canon contains only seven. In reality, the first five divisions are also included in the Bodhisattva Sūtra collection. However, in the Śrāvaka canon, the \*\*Vaipulya\*\* is omitted, so only those five are classified under the Śrāvaka Sūtra collection. This does not mean that the Bodhisattva canon lacks these five. As stated in the \*Abhidharma-kośa\* (38), all twelve divisions are present in the Bodhisattva canon. Similarly, the four divisions—\*\*Nidāna\*\*, \*\*Avadāna\*\*, \*\*Itivṛttaka\*\*, and \*\*Jātaka\*\*—are not excluded from the Sūtra collections of both canons. However, because they are classified based on their nature and auxiliary role within the Vinaya, they are not explicitly listed under the two Sūtra collections. For example, \*\*Nidāna\*\* refers to the establishment of precepts based on specific causes and violations, so it is classified under the Vinaya collection. Its auxiliary texts follow the same classification. The \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* states that from "Thus have I heard" to "rejoicing in faith" all constitute the Sūtra collection. Therefore, the twelve divisions emerge from the Sūtra collection. Furthermore, the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* (25) states that the ten divisions are called Sūtra. Thus, \*\*Avadāna\*\* and the other three are also considered part of the Sūtra collection. \*\*Nidāna\*\* refers to teachings given in response to specific requests or events, so it is also classified as Sūtra. However, due to their close association, these three are also included in the Vinaya collection. Moreover, the Śrāvaka Sūtra collection does not lack \*\*Vaipulya\*\* and \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\*. The \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* does not deny that all twelve divisions are present in the Śrāvaka canon, as the broad exposition of the Dharma is also applicable to it. Some texts list eleven divisions for the Śrāvaka canon, indicating that \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\* is also included in the Śrāvaka Sūtra collection. In terms of ultimate principle, teachings that lead to Buddhahood are called \*\*Vaipulya\*\*, while those describing the great spiritual powers of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are called \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\*. Therefore, it is said that the Śrāvaka Sūtra collection lacks these two divisions, though in reality, they are present as previously explained. The absence of \*\*Vaipulya\*\* is commonly acknowledged in various texts, while the absence of \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\* is due to its classification as an auxiliary text. However, in the Bodhisattva canon, both are fully present. \*\*Upadeśa\*\* is mostly associated with Abhidharma, though it may also refer to commentaries composed by disciples. Thus, it is classified under the Abhidharma collection. In reality, it is also present in both Sūtra collections. When distinguishing between the Bodhisattva and Śrāvaka Sūtra collections, the initial explanation presents one perspective. Furthermore, since both canons have their own Vinaya and Abhidharma collections, all twelve divisions can be found in both. Detailed distinctions should be understood based on their specific meanings, though they are not elaborated here to avoid excessive length. The \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* states: "From the twelve divisions emerges the Sūtra, and from the Sūtra emerges the \*\*Vaipulya\*\*." This means that the specific emerges from the general, as all teachings from "Thus have I heard" to "rejoicing in faith" constitute the Sūtra. Thus, the Sūtra emerges from the twelve divisions. Furthermore, the general emerges from the general, as \*\*Vaipulya\*\* also contains all twelve divisions. Thus, \*\*Vaipulya\*\* emerges from the Sūtra. Another interpretation states: "First, the specific emerges from the general; then, the general emerges from the specific." This illustrates the mutual flow between the general and the specific. Based on various texts, the correct classification according to their distinct characteristics is as follows: - \*\*Vaipulya\*\* belongs exclusively to the Bodhisattva Sūtra collection. - \*\*Upadeśa\*\* is shared between the Bodhisattva and Śrāvaka Abhidharma collections. - \*\*Nidāna\*\* is shared between the Śrāvaka and Bodhisattva Vinaya collections. - \*\*Sūtra\*\*, \*\*Geya\*\*, \*\*Vyākaraṇa\*\*, \*\*Gāthā\*\*, \*\*Udāna\*\*, and \*\*Adbhuta-dharma\*\* are shared between the Śrāvaka and Bodhisattva Sūtra collections. - \*\*Avadāna\*\*, \*\*Itivṛttaka\*\*, and \*\*Jātaka\*\* are shared between the Śrāvaka and Bodhisattva canons and belong to both the Sūtra and Vinaya collections. The classification in the \*Abhidharma-kośa\* is based on specific meanings and does not contradict the principles of the teachings. This classification is generally applicable, though \*\*Vaipulya\*\* may also be shared between both canons in some contexts. Such explanations do not contradict the scriptures. If analyzed from a general perspective, the classification of the three collections into the twelve divisions results in thirty-six categories, and vice versa. If analyzed from a specific perspective, the classification should be elaborated accordingly. Thus, the relationship between the three collections and the twelve divisions, such as the Sūtra collection, varies in breadth and specificity. This can be analyzed through four propositions: 1. What belongs to the three collections but not to the twelve divisions (e.g., \*\*Geya\*\* and others within the Sūtra collection, as the twelve divisions are defined more specifically). 2. What belongs to the twelve divisions but not to the three collections (e.g., the general Sūtra, \*\*Nidāna\*\*, \*\*Upadeśa\*\*, etc.). 3. What belongs to both (e.g., specific Sūtra texts included in the collections). 4. What belongs to neither (e.g., specific \*\*Nidāna\*\* texts within the twelve divisions and specific Vinaya texts within the three collections, or non-Buddhist texts). Similar analyses can be applied to other collections, with distinctions based on their specific characteristics and breadth of content. This should be understood according to the principles explained. The above discussion covers the classification and interrelationships of the twelve divisions, which constitutes the sixth topic: the breadth and specificity of the twelve divisions of the teachings.