一　一乗義私記三巻 - 翻刻

翻刻

【右頁】
【枠外右上】
一九八 【但し算用数字】
【枠外右横上】
一乘義私記卷第三
【枠外右横下】
一〇六
【本文二段構成】
【上段】
牛＿一。卽是大白牛車也。宅内所＿レ許但云＿二牛車＿一。不＿レ云＿三白牛
故頌文云＿二羊車鹿車大牛之車＿一。若三車中。牛車卽白牛者。
可＿レ云＿二羊車鹿車大白牛車＿一。何故無＿二白字＿一。更有＿二之字＿一。旣云＿二
大牛之車＿一。明知。亦有＿二別大白牛車＿一也。《割書：云云》此如何破耶。
答。依學大師故中算大法師口傳云。此義有＿レ理。然應＿二返
難云＿一。安樂行品。明珠喩中。長行云。譬如＿二強力轉輪聖王＿一。
欲＿下以＿二威勢＿一降＿中-伏諸國＿上等。《割書：云云》　頌中云＿二譬如強力轉輪
之王＿一。是卽與＿二長行＿一同也。長行中轉輪聖王。頌中云＿二轉輪
之王＿一。無＿二聖字＿一有＿二之字＿一。若無＿二聖字＿一有＿二之字＿一。故轉輪之王
外。亦可＿レ有＿二轉輪聖王＿一歟。此旣不＿レ然。彼云何爾耶。此義
可＿レ祕。莫＿二輒傳＿一耳。　問。章云。又大乘一乘。解行何別。而
言＿三捨＿レ 三而趣＿二於一＿一。新發意菩薩。疑網除者。卽十義中。任＿二-
持所餘＿一未＿レ說＿二 一乘＿一。恐＿下於＿二精進＿一且壊起＿レ疑將＿上レ退。令＿レ聞＿二 一
乘＿一。除＿二其疑意＿一。此乃捨＿二 下位＿一。而趣＿二 上階＿一。非＿下捨＿二大乘＿一而
入＿中於一＿上。不＿レ爾十地捨＿レ 下趣＿レ 上。皆應＿三亦名＿二破＿レ 三歸＿一レ 一。又
亦應＿レ言＿二餘三非＿一レ 眞。何獨言＿レ 二。《割書：云云》意何。　答。是前答中
第八。明＿三若破＿レ 三者有＿二大乘一乘不＿レ同之失＿一也。珠云。玄
【下段】
隆師云。三藏解云。大乘一乘。語別義同。言＿二大乘＿一者。對＿レ小
之名。言＿二 一乘＿一者。對＿レ果之名。今亦同＿レ之。《割書：云云》云＿二不＿レ爾十地
捨＿レ 下趣＿一レ 上。皆應＿三亦名＿二破＿レ 三歸＿レ 一＿一之文者。與＿下 上破別中。
云＿三設爾許亦破。卽應＿レ破＿二無窮＿一之文＿上同也。《割書：如＿レ彼可＿レ｜知＿レ之。》問。天
台宗立＿二 四敎＿一云＿二大乘一乘各別＿一。何對＿二此人＿一云＿二何別＿一耶。
答。今云何別者。卽破＿二其義＿一。令＿レ信＿下-知大乘一乘。名別義
同之旨＿上也。《割書：可＿レ見＿二慧日論｜及六足等＿一也。》　問。章云。勝鬘亦言。若如來隨＿二
彼意欲＿一。而方便￣ヲモテ 說＿三卽是大乘。無＿レ有＿二 二乘＿一故。會＿二 二
乘＿一入＿二於一＿一者。是方便說。非＿二眞實理＿一。經雖＿下說言＿レ開＿二方便
門＿一。顯＿中眞實相＿上。說＿レ有＿二不定性二乘＿一者。是方便門。遠令＿レ入＿レ
眞故。今說＿二 一乘＿一。令＿レ趣＿二極果＿一。名爲＿二眞實＿一。非＿レ謂＿下都無＿レ 二
唯有＿レ 一名＿上レ眞。《割書：云云》意何。　答。是前答中第九。依＿二勝鬘經＿一。
明＿下破＿二 二乘＿一故。說＿二 一乘＿一之所以＿上也。言＿二經雖說言等＿一者。會＿二
勝鬘法華相違＿一。遂歸＿二勝鬘＿一也。善珠云。引＿二勝鬘文＿一有＿二 二
意＿一。一者又旣唯云＿レ無＿レ有＿二 二乘＿一。不＿レ言＿二 三乘＿一。故知。不＿レ會＿二
大乘＿一。二云。旣云＿二而方便說＿一。不＿レ言＿二眞實＿一。會＿二不定性＿一。不＿レ　
會＿二定性＿一。《割書：云云》又釋＿二法華＿一云。是方便門。遠令＿レ入＿レ眞者。攝＿二
【左頁】
【枠外左上】
一九九【但し算用数字】
【枠外左横上】
一乘義私記卷第三
【枠外左横下】
一〇七
【本文二段構成】
【上段】
遠傍＿一義。卽昔說＿二 二乘果等＿一。令＿レ趣＿二極果＿一。名＿二眞實＿一者。攝＿二近
正＿一義也。《割書：云云》近正者。大乘果等也。　問。章故法華云。密
遣＿二 二人眇目矬陋＿一。不＿レ言＿二 三人＿一。又云。息處故說＿レ 二。不＿レ
言＿レ 三故。《割書：云云》意何。　答。是前答中第十。依＿二此經＿一明＿二不＿レ破＿レ
大之由＿一也。玄贊云。實無＿二 二體＿一。設有＿二 二乘之敎＿一。故言＿二密
遣＿一。方便之敎。但化＿二 二乘＿一。故言＿二 二人＿一。《割書：云云》又云。眇目者。
視不＿レ正。爲＿二 二乘＿一說＿二安立諦敎＿一。能詮顯＿レ義不＿レ圓。名爲＿二眇
目＿一。所詮生空理短故名＿レ矬。無＿二法身功德＿一醜故名＿レ陋。《割書：云云》
息處等義如＿二先 記（イ說）了＿一。　問。章云。若言＿下迂會入＿二於大位＿一
名爲＿二大乘＿一。若直往者。所＿レ入大位。名爲＿中 一乘＿上。經論一乘。
實爲＿二不定＿一。今此所釋。未＿レ《割書：考【四角で囲む】未恐｜求歟》爲＿二典據＿一。未＿レ見＿二誠文＿一。法
華一乘。是由＿二直往＿一。今二行位。有＿二何差別＿一。故知。方便隱＿レ
無＿二 二乘＿一。而說＿二 一乘＿一。化＿二 一會＿一 中。所＿レ宜＿レ聞故。《割書：云云》意何。
答。是前答中第十一破＿二轉救＿一也。　問。此轉救及破意何。
答。轉救意云。前難云。若云＿下大乘與＿二 一乘＿一各別＿上者。豈會＿二
頓悟＿一令＿レ入＿二漸悟＿一耶。卽救＿レ之云。迂會人入＿レ大名爲＿二大乘＿一。
直往人所＿レ入名爲＿二 一乘＿一。故尚大乘與＿二 一乘＿一別也。今破云。
【下段】
若爾經論所說一乘。實爲＿二不定＿一。未＿レ有＿下 漸悟人廻心所＿レ被
之敎名＿二大乘＿一。頓悟人所＿レ被之敎名＿二 一乘＿一之誠文＿上。有＿二何典
據＿一。法華一乘爲＿二不定性二乘＿一所＿レ說。是經論中。明￣ニ 所＿レ說
也。豈云＿下但爲＿二直往＿一所＿上レ說乎。又迂會人。廻小入大。所＿レ修
之行。所＿レ入之位。直往人所＿レ修之行。所＿レ入之位。有＿二何差
別＿一。彼名＿二大乘＿一。此名＿二 一乘＿一。故知。但以＿二方便＿一隱＿レ無＿二 二乘＿一。
密說＿二 一乘＿一。化＿二 一會中所被機＿一也。《割書：爲言》　問。若爾何云＿下大
乘者。對＿レ小之名。一乘者對＿レ因之名＿上。是（イ盡）不＿レ同＿二轉救之意＿一
耶。　答。此難不＿レ然。約＿二 一體法＿一。隨＿レ義得＿レ名。故云＿レ爾也。
轉救意不＿レ爾。漸悟入＿レ大名＿二大乘＿一。頓悟所＿レ入名＿二 一乘＿一。其
體各別。故二乘人。廻小入大。得＿レ名＿二大乘＿一。又更會＿二其漸
悟大乘＿一。入＿二頓悟一乘之位＿一故。名＿二會三歸一＿一也。《割書：爲言》是故
章主破＿レ之。破意如＿レ 上也。　問。章云。有說執＿下佛三劫滿
已。猶是凡夫。三十四念成＿中菩提位＿上。今破＿三此執故說＿二 一
乘＿一。亦是破＿レ 三者不＿レ然。此乃佛滅已後小乘曲見。豈是佛
在世有＿下作＿二此執佛以爲＿一レ眞。而今說＿上レ破。故但破＿レ 二。《割書：云云》意
何。　答。是前答中第十二破＿二有說＿一也。善珠云。此破＿下依＿二

現代語訳

【右頁】

牛である」と。即ちこれ大白牛車である。宅内で許した所は但「牛車」と云い、「白牛」と云わない。故に頌文に「羊車鹿車大牛之車」と云う。若し三車中の牛車が即ち白牛なら、「羊車鹿車大白牛車」と云うべきである。何故「白」字が無く、更に「之」字があるのか。既に「大牛之車」と云う。明らかに知る、亦別の大白牛車があるのである」と。これをどのように破すか。

答：学大師の故中算大法師の口伝に依れば「この義には理がある。然し応に返難して云うべきである。安楽行品の明珠の譬喩中、長行に『譬えば強力転輪聖王の如し。威勢を以って諸国を降伏せんと欲す』等と云う。頌中には『譬えば強力転輪之王の如し』と云う。これは即ち長行と同じである。長行中の転輪聖王を、頌中では『転輪之王』と云い、『聖』字が無く『之』字がある。若し『聖』字が無く『之』字があるから、転輪之王の外に、亦転輪聖王があるのか。これは既に然らず。彼はどうして爾るか」と。この義は秘すべきで、軽々に伝えてはならない。

問：章に「又大乗一乗は、解行何んぞ別ならん。而るに三を捨てて一に趣くと言う。新発意菩薩の疑網を除くとは、即ち十義中、所余を任持して未だ一乗を説かず、精進において且く壊起して疑いを起こし退かんことを恐れて、一乗を聞かしめ、其の疑意を除く。此れ乃ち下位を捨てて、上階に趣くなり。大乗を捨てて一に入るに非ず。不爾なれば十地下を捨て上に趣く、皆応に亦三を破して一に帰すと名づくべし。又亦応に『余三非真』と言うべし。何ぞ独り二と言うや」とあるが、意味は何か。

答：これは前の答の中の第八で、若し三を破するなら大乗一乗不同の失があることを明かすものである。珠に云う「玄

【下段】

隆師が云う『三蔵の解に云う、大乗一乗は、語は別だが義は同じである。大乗と言うのは、小に対する名である。一乗と言うのは、果に対する名である』と。今も亦これに同じ」と。「不爾なれば十地下を捨て上に趣く、皆応に亦三を破して一に帰すと名づくべし」の文は、上の破別中に「設い爾く許すとも亦破す、即ち応に無窮を破すべし」の文と同じである。

問：天台宗は四教を立てて「大乗一乗各別」と云う。何故この人に対して「何んぞ別ならん」と云うのか。答：今「何んぞ別ならん」と云うのは、即ちその義を破して、大乗一乗は名は別だが義は同じであることの旨を信知せしめるためである。

問：章に「勝鬘亦言う『若し如来彼の意欲に随って、方便をもって説けば即ちこれ大乗なり。二乗有ること無き故に』と。二乗を会して一に入るとは、これ方便説にして、真実理に非ず。経は『方便門を開き、真実相を顕す』と説言すと雖も、不定性二乗有りと説くは、これ方便門なり。遠く真に入らしむる故に。今一乗を説いて、極果に趣かしむ。名づけて真実と為す。都て二無く唯一有るを真と名づくるに非ず」とあるが、意味は何か。

答：これは前の答の中の第九で、勝鬘経に依って、二乗を破する故に一乗を説く所以を明かすものである。「経は説言すと雖も等」と言うのは、勝鬘と法華の相違を会して、遂に勝鬘に帰するものである。善珠に云う「勝鬘の文を引くに二意がある。一つは又既に唯『二乗有ること無し』と云い、『三乗』と言わない。故に知る、大乗を会しない。二つは既に『而るに方便説』と云い、『真実』と言わない。不定性を会して、定性を会しない」と。又法華を釈して「これ方便門なり、遠く真に入らしむ」とは、遠傍の義を摂する。即ち昔二乗果等を説いて、極果に趣かしめ、真実と名づくるとは、近正の義を摂するものである。近正とは、大乗果等である。

【左頁】

問：章に「故に法華に云う『密かに二人眇目矬陋を遣わす』と。『三人』と言わず。又云う『息処の故に二を説く』と。『三』と言わず。故に」とあるが、意味は何か。

答：これは前の答の中の第十で、此経に依って大を破らない由を明かすものである。玄賛に云う「実には二体無し。設い二乗の教有りとも、故に『密遣』と言う。方便の教は、但二乗を化する。故に『二人』と言う」と。又云う「眇目とは、視ること正しからず。二乗の為に安立諦教を説く。能詮義を顕すこと円からず。名づけて眇目と為す。所詮生空の理短き故に矬と名づく。法身の功徳無く醜き故に陋と名づく」と。息処等の義は先に記した如くである。

問：章に「若し『迂会して大位に入るを名づけて大乗と為す。若し直往なら、入る所の大位を名づけて一乗と為す』と言わば、経論の一乗は、実に不定の為なり。今此の所釈は、未だ典拠と為すに求まらず。未だ誠文を見ず。法華一乗は、これ直往に由る。今二行位に、何の差別か有る。故に知る、方便もて二乗無きことを隠して、一乗を説く。一会中の所宜聞を化する故に」とあるが、意味は何か。

答：これは前の答の中の第十一で転救を破すものである。

問：この転救及び破の意味は何か。答：転救の意味は「前の難に『若し大乗と一乗が各別と云うなら、豈に頓悟を会して漸悟に入らしむるか』とある。即ちこれを救って『迂会の人が大に入るを名づけて大乗と為し、直往の人の入る所を名づけて一乗と為す。故に尚大乗と一乗は別である』と云う」ということである。今破して云う「

【下段】

若し爾らば経論所説の一乗は、実に不定の為である。未だ漸悟人の廻心する所の被教を大乗と名づけ、頓悟人の所被の教を一乗と名づくる誠文は有らない。何の典拠があるか。法華一乗は不定性二乗の為に所説である。これは経論中に明らかに所説である。豈に但直往の為の所説と云うか。又迂会人が小を廻して大に入る所修の行、所入の位と、直往人の所修の行、所入の位と、何の差別があるか。彼を大乗と名づけ、此を一乗と名づく。故に知る、但方便を以って二乗無きことを隠し、密かに一乗を説いて、一会中の所被機を化するのである」と。

問：若し爾らば何故「大乗とは、小に対する名。一乗とは因に対する名」と云うのか。これは転救の意と同じではないか。答：この難は然らない。一体の法について、義に随って名を得る。故に爾く云うのである。転救の意は爾らない。漸悟が大に入るを大乗と名づけ、頓悟の入る所を一乗と名づけ、其の体は各別である。故に二乗人が小を廻して大に入るを大乗と名づく。又更に其の漸悟大乗を会して、頓悟一乗の位に入る故に、会三帰一と名づけるのである。是の故に章主はこれを破す。破の意は上の如くである。

問：章に「有説『仏三劫満已も、猶これ凡夫なり。三十四念にして菩提位を成ず』と執す。今此の執を破する故に一乗を説く。亦これ三を破すとは然らず。此れ乃ち仏滅已後の小乗の曲見なり。豈にこれ仏在世に此の執を作して仏以って真と為して、而るに今説破するや。故に但二を破す」とあるが、意味は何か。

答：これは前の答の中の第十二で有説を破すものである。善珠に云う「これは依って破す

英語訳

[Right Page]

oxen." This is the great white ox-cart. What was promised within the house only said "ox-cart" and did not say "white ox." Therefore the verse text says "goat-cart, deer-cart, and great ox cart." If the ox-cart among the three carts were white oxen, it should say "goat-cart, deer-cart, and great white ox-cart." Why is there no "white" character, yet there is a "zhi" (之) character? Since it says "great ox cart," clearly there are also separate great white ox-carts." How is this refuted?

Answer: According to the oral transmission of the late Dharma Master Zhongshan of Master Xue: "This reasoning has merit. However, one should counter-argue: In the Peaceful Practices chapter, in the bright jewel analogy, the prose says 'Like a mighty wheel-turning sage king who wishes to use his威势 to subdue various countries,' etc. In the verse it says 'Like a mighty wheel-turning king.' This is the same as the prose. The 'wheel-turning sage king' in the prose is called 'wheel-turning king' in the verse, without the character 'sage' but with the character 'zhi.' If because there is no 'sage' character but there is a 'zhi' character, can there also be wheel-turning sage kings beyond wheel-turning kings? This is clearly not so. How then is that case different?" This principle should be kept secret and not transmitted carelessly.

Question: The chapter states: "Also, how do Mahāyāna and One Vehicle differ in understanding and practice? Yet you say 'abandon the three and proceed to the one.' Removing the doubts of newly aspiring bodhisattvas means: among the ten meanings, sustaining the others without yet explaining the One Vehicle, fearing they might become discouraged in their diligence and arise doubts leading to retreat, making them hear the One Vehicle to remove their doubts. This is abandoning lower positions to proceed to higher stages, not abandoning Mahāyāna to enter the one. Otherwise, the ten bhūmis abandoning lower to proceed to higher should all also be called 'breaking the three to return to the one.' Also, it should say 'the other three are not true.' Why does it only say 'two'?" What does this mean?

Answer: This is the eighth part of the previous answer, clarifying that if the three were broken, there would be the error of Mahāyāna and One Vehicle being different. Pearl states: "Master Xuanlong says: 'The Tripiṭaka master explains: Mahāyāna and One Vehicle have different names but the same meaning. Saying "Mahāyāna" is a name in contrast to the lesser. Saying "One Vehicle" is a name in contrast to causes.' I also agree with this." The passage "Otherwise, the ten bhūmis abandoning lower to proceed to higher should all also be called 'breaking the three to return to the one'" is the same as the passage in the above "Breaking the Separate" section: "Even if this were granted, it would also break, leading to infinite regress."

Question: The Tiantai school establishes four teachings, saying "Mahāyāna and One Vehicle are separate." Why do you say "how are they different" to such people? Answer: Saying "how are they different" now breaks their doctrine and makes them trust and understand that Mahāyāna and One Vehicle have different names but the same meaning.

Question: The chapter states: "Śrīmālā also says: 'If the Tathāgata follows their inclinations and speaks expediently, this is Mahāyāna. Since there are no two vehicles.' Harmonizing the two vehicles to enter the one is expedient explanation, not true principle. Though the sutra speaks of 'opening expedient gates to reveal true characteristics,' saying there are indeterminate-nature two vehicles is an expedient gate. Because it distantly makes them enter truth. Now explaining the One Vehicle makes them proceed to the ultimate fruit, which is called true reality. It does not mean there are no two and only one is called true." What does this mean?

Answer: This is the ninth part of the previous answer, depending on the Śrīmālā Sutra to clarify the reason for explaining the One Vehicle to break the two vehicles. Saying "though the sutra speaks, etc." harmonizes the apparent contradiction between Śrīmālā and Lotus, ultimately returning to Śrīmālā. Good Pearl states: "Citing Śrīmālā has two meanings: First, since it only says 'there are no two vehicles' and doesn't say 'three vehicles,' we know it doesn't harmonize Mahāyāna. Second, since it says 'expedient explanation' and doesn't say 'true reality,' it harmonizes the indeterminate-nature but not the determinate-nature." Also explaining the Lotus: "'This is an expedient gate, distantly making them enter truth' encompasses the meaning of distant and indirect. That is, formerly explaining two vehicle fruits, etc., making them proceed to ultimate fruit, called true reality, encompasses the meaning of near and direct." Near and direct refers to Mahāyāna fruits, etc.

[Left Page]

Question: The chapter states: "Therefore the Lotus says: 'Secretly sent two people, blind and short and ugly.' It doesn't say 'three people.' Also it says: 'For the sake of a resting place, explained the two.' It doesn't say 'three.' Therefore." What does this mean?

Answer: This is the tenth part of the previous answer, depending on this sutra to clarify the reason for not breaking the great. Xuanzan states: "Actually there are no two essences. Even if there are teachings of two vehicles, therefore it says 'secretly sent.' Expedient teachings only transform two vehicles, therefore it says 'two people.'" It also says: "'Blind' means not seeing correctly. For the two vehicles, established truth teachings are explained. The verbal expressions revealing meaning are not complete, called 'blind.' The principles they explain are short in emptiness of persons, hence called 'short.' Without dharma-body merit and virtues, ugly, hence called 'ugly.'" The meanings of resting place, etc., are as previously recorded.

Question: The chapter states: "If you say 'those who enter great positions through indirect approach are called Mahāyāna, and if direct-path practitioners, their entered great positions are called One Vehicle,' then the One Vehicle in sutras and treatises is truly for the indeterminate. This present explanation lacks canonical basis and explicit texts. The Lotus One Vehicle is based on direct approach. What difference is there between these two practice-positions now? Therefore know: through expedients, hiding that there are no two vehicles, the One Vehicle is explained to transform those in the assembly who should hear it." What does this mean?

Answer: This is the eleventh part of the previous answer, breaking counter-rescues.

Question: What do this counter-rescue and refutation mean? Answer: The counter-rescue means: "The previous objection said: 'If you say Mahāyāna and One Vehicle are separate, wouldn't this be harmonizing sudden enlightenment to make it enter gradual enlightenment?' They rescue this by saying: 'Those who indirectly approach enter the great, called Mahāyāna. What direct-path practitioners enter is called One Vehicle. Therefore Mahāyāna and One Vehicle are still different.'" Now refuting this:

[Lower Section]

"If so, the One Vehicle explained in sutras and treatises is truly for the indeterminate. There are no explicit texts where teachings received by gradual-enlightenment people with changed minds are called Mahāyāna, and teachings received by sudden-enlightenment people are called One Vehicle. What canonical basis is there? The Lotus One Vehicle is explained for indeterminate-nature two vehicles. This is clearly explained in sutras and treatises. How can you say it's only explained for direct-path practitioners? Also, what difference is there between the practices cultivated and positions entered by indirect-approach people who turn from small to enter great, and the practices cultivated and positions entered by direct-path people? Calling that 'Mahāyāna' and this 'One Vehicle.' Therefore know: only through expedients hiding that there are no two vehicles, secretly explaining the One Vehicle to transform the appropriate recipients in the assembly."

Question: If so, why say "Mahāyāna is a name in contrast to the lesser; One Vehicle is a name in contrast to causes"? Isn't this the same as the counter-rescue's meaning? Answer: This objection is incorrect. Regarding one essential dharma, names are obtained according to meanings, therefore we say so. The counter-rescue's meaning is different: gradual enlightenment entering the great is called Mahāyāna; what sudden enlightenment enters is called One Vehicle; their essences are separate. Therefore two-vehicle people turning from small to enter great are called Mahāyāna. Furthermore, harmonizing that gradual-enlightenment Mahāyāna to enter sudden-enlightenment One Vehicle positions is called "harmonizing three to return to one." Therefore the chapter master refutes this. The refutation's meaning is as above.

Question: The chapter states: "Some say: 'Even after the Buddha completed three kalpas, he was still an ordinary person. In thirty-four moments he achieved the bodhi position.' Now explaining the One Vehicle to break this attachment is also not breaking the three. This is merely the distorted view of Lesser Vehicle after the Buddha's extinction. How could there be those in the Buddha's lifetime who held this attachment, with the Buddha taking it as true and now explaining to break it? Therefore only break the two." What does this mean?

Answer: This is the twelfth part of the previous answer, breaking certain explanations. Good Pearl states: "This breaks those who depend on