Dharma · AI Companion

大義

mahārtha

大义(mahārtha),指如来圣教中广大重要的义理,或菩萨自他二利的广大行果。AI-generated

Type FrameworkDifficulty IntroductoryTruth-level span outside the four-fold two-truths frameworkInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What this concept is saying

大義 (*mahārtha*, “great meaning” or “great import”) is not simply an idea that sounds profound. In the Buddhist treatises considered here, it has two distinct but connected senses:

1. In the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra* (《瑜伽師地論》), it means the vast and consequential meaning of the Buddha’s sacred teaching. 2. In the *Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra Śāstra* (《大乘莊嚴經論》), it means the vast practice and fruition through which a bodhisattva benefits both self and others.

The first concerns what makes a teaching worthy of being established and communicated. The second concerns what happens when that teaching becomes aspiration, cultivation, realization, and liberative activity. One might say: in the first text, 大義 is the great import of Dharma; in the second, it is the great import made into a life.

In the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra*, the phrase is 「廣顯如來聖教大義」—“extensively revealing the great import of the Tathāgata’s sacred teaching.” Here 大義 does not refer to isolated terminology, an impressive amount of information, or an exhaustive catalogue of doctrines. It refers to teachings of such breadth and consequence that they disclose how experience, bondage, cultivation, and liberation fit together.

This is why the treatise associates 「具大義」—“possessing great import”—with 「善建立一切法」, the sound establishment of all dharmas. Sound teaching has two sides: it must be 「離諸過」, free from relevant faults, and it must possess 大義. Mere absence of error is not enough. A discourse can be technically unobjectionable yet spiritually barren. Conversely, an emotionally powerful claim is not thereby Dharma if it is confused or misleading. A well-established teaching must be both defensible and consequential.

The consequence is practical. The treatise links 大義 with a “superior result” worthy of the effort made by speaker and listener. This does not mean every Dharma talk must produce an immediate dramatic experience. It means that Buddhist teaching is not intended to consume attention without transforming understanding, conduct, or the conditions of release. If speaking and listening can never bear such fruit, both parties’ labor has been spent in vain.

This usage must be distinguished from 「廣、略義」—“meaning expressed extensively and in summary.” Broad and brief are modes of exposition; great is a quality of import. A short formulation may carry 大義, while a very long explanation may not. Length is not depth, and detail is not yet liberative significance.

The *Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra Śāstra* moves the term into the bodhisattva path. Its most direct definition is:

「大義謂自他利行」 “Great import means the practices benefiting oneself and others.”

Here 自利 (*svārtha*, benefit of oneself) is not worldly self-advancement. It is the immeasurable growth of wholesome qualities and liberating capacities. The treatise describes this growth as without limit in three respects: it cannot be fully measured by thought, cannot be numerically exhausted through repetition, and is not bounded by a limited span of time.

利他 (*parārtha*, benefit of others) is equally precise. It arises by directing attention and compassion toward all sentient beings, and by employing extensive diligence and skillful means to spread the 「大聖法」, explicitly explained there as the Mahāyāna Dharma. It therefore means neither indiscriminate helpfulness nor imposing beliefs on people “for their own good.” It requires compassion, sustained effort, appropriate means, and an orientation toward liberation.

The two benefits are inseparable but not interchangeable. Without self-cultivation, service easily becomes projection, exhaustion, control, or a search for moral identity. Without benefiting others, cultivation can shrink into a private refuge organized around one’s own comfort. 大義 names a path on which wisdom and capacity grow precisely so that the field of care can grow as well.

The term shifts emphasis according to context within this treatise:

- In one discussion, 大義 is the bodhisattva’s “fruit of one’s own embodiment,” the great result belonging to self-benefit, while vow and practice serve the benefit of others. - Elsewhere it includes the whole of self-benefiting and other-benefiting practice. - As one of four accomplishments supported by the bodhisattva lineage or disposition, being a cause of 大義 is explained as 「成就無邊眾生」—bringing immeasurable beings to maturity. - In the sequence of arousing the mind, undertaking practice, and attaining the fruit, the bodhisattva first makes the 「大取」, the great undertaking that embraces all beings; then bears the 「大忍」, the great endurance of immense hardship; and at fruition realizes 「大義」, the accomplishment of the work of benefiting beings widely. - It can also directly mean 「利益一切眾生」—benefiting all sentient beings.

These are contextual perspectives, not definitions to be collapsed into one vague translation. 大義 may designate the bodhisattva’s own vast attainment, the complete course of twofold benefit, the maturation of beings, or the fulfilled liberative work of buddhahood. What unites them is not merely size. It is an unbounded relation between awakening and the welfare of beings.

The treatise’s striking expression 「大義依大我」—“great benefit rests upon the great self”—needs particular care. It does not restore an eternal or metaphysical self after Buddhism has denied one. The text first says that the bodhisattva understands the world as conditioned formations and that no real self is found, thereby relinquishing the defiled self-view. 「大我」, “great self,” then names taking all beings as oneself. Because the narrow, appropriating “I” is no longer the unquestioned center, the boundary of concern can become immeasurably wide. Acting for beings on that basis is called 大義.

This is not “make the ego infinitely large.” It is closer to releasing the possessive structure that asks, “Why should their suffering matter to me?” Emptiness of self does not produce indifference; on the bodhisattva path, it removes a principal justification for indifference.

Finally, the treatise speaks of 「七種大義」, seven great dimensions:

1. 緣大 — greatness of the object or scope of engagement 2. 行大 — greatness of practice 3. 智大 — greatness of wisdom 4. 勤大 — greatness of diligence 5. 巧大 — greatness of skillful means 6. 果大 — greatness of fruition 7. 事大 — greatness of liberative activity

The supplied passage explicitly defines 行大 as the completeness of both self-benefiting and other-benefiting practices. It defines 事大 through the repeated manifestation of great awakening and great nirvāṇa. The sevenfold list should therefore be preserved as a structured account, but details not supplied by the passage should not be invented merely from the labels. Its clear purpose is to show that the “greatness” of Mahāyāna pervades the path’s scope, conduct, understanding, effort, methods, result, and awakened activity—not only its ideals.

This locates 大義 within the path to liberation. It prevents doctrine from becoming sterile learning and prevents altruism from becoming ungrounded activism. The sacred teaching discloses the structure of bondage and release; practice transforms the practitioner; compassion directs that transformation toward beings; wisdom keeps compassion from hardening into attachment; and fruition is expressed as continuing liberative activity. 大義 is the scale and consequence of that entire movement.

A walkthrough in ordinary life

Imagine that during your commute you see a message from your partner: “You never really listen to me.” Your body tightens. You immediately compose a defense, delete it, open social media for relief, and spend the next twenty minutes rehearsing the case against them.

First consider 大義 in the sense found in the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra*. A teaching with great import does not merely give you a Buddhist label for the episode. Being able to say “attachment,” “anger,” or “karma” proves very little. The teaching must help disclose what is happening, what sustains suffering, what can be cultivated, and what result is possible.

You notice the difference between the message itself and the meanings rapidly added to it: “I am being accused”; “I am not appreciated”; “I must win.” You notice that these interpretations condition emotion and impulse. You also notice that compulsive scrolling has not resolved the hurt—it has interrupted awareness of it. A sound teaching enables investigation without simply blaming you or your partner. Its value appears in a possible fruit: less automatic retaliation, clearer understanding, and a response less likely to reproduce suffering.

That is 「具大義」 in miniature. The doctrine earns its place by illuminating a path through the event. But this does not mean whatever feels helpful is therefore true. “Free from faults” and “possessing great import” belong together: the account must be coherent, ethically responsible, and capable of bearing liberative fruit.

Now walk through the same scene using the bodhisattva-path sense.

Self-benefit begins when you refrain from instantly sending the defensive reply. You turn toward the contraction, resentment, fear, and demand to be seen. You cultivate patience, discernment, non-harming, and enough inner steadiness to recognize your own contribution. This is not self-care in the narrow sense of making yourself feel better. It is the growth of qualities that reduce delusion and make a wiser response possible.

Other-benefit begins when your partner ceases to be merely the source of your discomfort. You ask what pain or unmet need might be expressed through the message. Compassion does not require assuming that every accusation is accurate, nor does it require accepting manipulation or abuse. It means that the other person’s suffering remains morally visible even while you establish necessary boundaries.

Then comes 巧, skillfulness. Perhaps an immediate text exchange will inflame both of you, so you answer: “I can hear that you feel alone in this. I don’t want to fire back while I’m defensive. Can we talk tonight?” That response is not automatically the one correct formula. Skillful means depends upon conditions, capacities, safety, and timing.

行大, greatness of practice, requires both sides: examining and transforming your own mind, while acting for the other’s genuine welfare. If you only calm yourself so that you can win more elegantly, self-benefit has been confused with strategic self-management. If you sacrifice all discernment to keep the other person pleased, other-benefit has been confused with appeasement.

勤大, greatness of diligence, appears when this is not a one-time performance. You return to the work after the conversation, during future conflicts, and when old habits reappear. The classical account stresses a practice not readily bounded by calculation, repetition, or time.

智大, greatness of wisdom, guards against treating “me,” “my position,” and “my image” as fixed realities. Yet the analogy must be used carefully: noticing that identity is constructed in a conflict is not by itself the full Buddhist realization of selflessness.

緣大 widens the field. The episode is not only about securing your own emotional comfort. You recognize a pattern shared by innumerable beings: fear becomes defense, defense becomes injury, and injury perpetuates fear. Your practice begins with this conversation but is oriented beyond it.

果大 points to complete awakening, not merely a successful relationship conversation. A calmer exchange is a proximate benefit, not buddhahood.

事大 likewise cannot be reduced to “doing a good deed.” In the treatise it belongs to awakened activity, including repeated manifestations of great awakening and great nirvāṇa. Your response on the train is practice within the causal course; it should not be mistaken for the consummate activity described by the classical category.

Finally, 「大義依大我」 changes the emotional geometry of the encounter. You do not inflate yourself into the heroic savior of the relationship. You loosen the assumption that only your pain is immediately real. Your partner’s welfare is received as intimately significant, while neither person is turned into a permanent, self-existing identity.

The same walkthrough applies to parenting, management, online argument, and caring for an aging relative. Each time, ask:

- What teaching reveals the causes and possible cessation of suffering here, rather than merely naming the situation? - What quality must be cultivated in me? - What actually benefits the other, as distinct from gratifying, controlling, or rescuing them? - What form of effort and skill fits these conditions? - Am I confusing a small improvement with the final fruit? - Does insight into non-self narrow responsibility, or release it from the prison of “mine versus yours”?

Why contemporary people need it

Contemporary life rewards circulation more reliably than significance. A statement succeeds online when it is repeated, reacted to, and remembered; none of these guarantees that it is true, profound, or liberatively useful. 大義 offers a demanding criterion: does a teaching clarify bondage and release, withstand examination, and justify the labor of giving and receiving it through meaningful fruit?

This matters in an age of compressed spiritual language. “Let go,” “be present,” and “everything is empty” can function as slogans, avoidance strategies, or tools for silencing legitimate pain. 大義 recalls that Buddhist instruction belongs within a structured path. Letting go is not neglect; presence is not passive observation; emptiness is not nihilism. Their significance lies in how they transform view, conduct, cultivation, and one’s relation to suffering.

The twofold benefit is equally corrective. Contemporary self-development often treats other people as part of one’s optimization environment: relationships are valuable if they increase performance, calm, or self-esteem. At the opposite extreme, cultures of constant availability can make self-erasure appear virtuous. The bodhisattva account accepts neither. One cultivates wisdom, stability, virtue, and compassion in oneself, and those attainments become capacities for benefiting others. Care for others, in turn, exposes the limits of a purely self-enclosed practice.

AI and recommendation algorithms provide a useful but limited comparison. An algorithm can optimize for an assigned measure such as engagement, retention, or reported satisfaction. It cannot thereby determine whether the measure embodies liberation, compassion, or wisdom. Similarly, a human life can become highly efficient at pursuing an unexamined objective. 大義 asks a prior question: is the objective itself worthy, and does its pursuit loosen greed, aversion, delusion, and the suffering they condition?

The comparison must not be overstated. Machine optimization is not equivalent to karmic intention, Buddhist consciousness, or awakening. Nor do current sciences settle the Buddhist questions of non-self or liberation. Cognitive science may illuminate attention, habit, affect, and constructed aspects of identity, but its methods, definitions, and unresolved debates differ from the contemplative and soteriological purposes of Buddhist analysis. Such comparisons can open a door; they cannot serve as proof of Dharma.

Most importantly, 大義 restores scale. A person may begin with one breath before sending a hostile message, yet the bodhisattva horizon is not merely personal composure. It encompasses immeasurable cultivation, all beings as the field of compassion, unsurpassed awakening as fruition, and awakened activity that does not abandon the world. The small practice is honored precisely because it belongs to a path greater than self-improvement.

Common misunderstandings and clarifications

“大義 just means the main idea.” Not here. A “main idea” can be a summary of any text. In the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra*, 大義 is the vast and consequential import of the Tathāgata’s teaching and a positive condition of sound doctrinal establishment. The text retains 大義 as a technical expression; it should not casually be replaced by “gist.”

“Great meaning means a long or comprehensive explanation.” No. 「廣、略義」 concerns extensive and concise modes of presentation. 大義 concerns magnitude of import and fruit. A concise teaching can bear great import; a lengthy exposition can remain trivial.

“If a teaching produces a strong experience, it possesses 大義.” Not necessarily. The treatise pairs freedom from faults with possession of great import. Emotional force, charisma, novelty, and short-term comfort do not establish doctrinal soundness or liberative consequence.

“In the *Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra Śāstra*, 大義 always has one fixed reference.” No. Context matters. It can designate the fruit of self-benefit, the whole practice of benefiting self and others, the maturation of immeasurable beings, the accomplished work of benefiting beings at fruition, or the seven great dimensions of Mahāyāna. These uses are related, but they should not be flattened.

“Self-benefit means looking after my interests first.” No. It means the immeasurable increase of wholesome and liberating qualities. Comfort, status, productivity, and emotional insulation may or may not support that cultivation; they are not its classical definition.

“Other-benefit means pleasing, rescuing, or converting everyone.” No. The definition includes universal compassionate orientation, great diligence, and appropriate means. Genuine benefit may require patience, truthfulness, boundaries, silence, teaching, material assistance, or recognition that one presently lacks the capacity to intervene wisely.

“Because the bodhisattva benefits others, outcomes are all that matter.” No. The structure includes wisdom, practice, diligence, skillful means, fruition, and activity. A noble intention does not make an unskillful method harmless, while an outwardly favorable result does not by itself establish liberative wisdom.

“Great self is a Buddhist version of an eternal Self.” That reverses the passage. The “great self” is introduced after the defiled grasping at self has been relinquished through understanding that the world consists of conditioned formations and contains no real self. It means taking all beings as oneself for the purpose of benefiting them. It is a distinctive relational expression, not the establishment of a permanent metaphysical ego.

“If there is no self, there can be no responsibility for others.” The treatise draws the opposite ethical conclusion. When attachment to a narrow self is relinquished, concern need not stop at the border of “me” and “mine.” Selflessness and universal benefit are mutually illuminating dimensions of the bodhisattva path.

“The seven great dimensions are seven synonyms.” No. They preserve distinct aspects: object, practice, wisdom, diligence, skill, fruition, and activity. In particular, 行大 includes both self-benefit and other-benefit, while 事大 refers to repeatedly manifesting great awakening and great nirvāṇa. A translation that simply renders all seven as “greatness” without retaining their one-to-one structure loses the architecture of the teaching.

“Any socially useful work is automatically 大義.” Social benefit can be admirable and may participate in bodhisattva practice, but the classical term has a wider and more exact horizon. It joins benefit to the cultivation of wisdom and virtue, the maturation of beings, unsurpassed awakening, and the relinquishment of self-grasping. It should neither be confined to private spirituality nor diluted into a generic label for doing good.

Ultimately, 大義 asks whether Dharma has become consequential. Has understanding reached conduct? Has conduct matured the mind? Has the maturing mind widened rather than narrowed compassion? Has insight into selflessness made the suffering of beings less dismissible? And has concern for beings been guided by wisdom rather than possession?

In the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra*, the great import makes sacred teaching worth establishing, speaking, and hearing. In the *Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra Śāstra*, it expands into the immeasurable course and fruit of the bodhisattva: cultivating what liberates oneself, employing it for others, and bringing the work of universal benefit to fulfillment. The deepest sense of “great” is therefore not grandiosity. It is a wisdom too consequential to remain verbal and a compassion too spacious to stop with oneself.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

一、定义与核心要义

「大义」(mahārtha)为佛学重要术语,于不同经论中所指略有差异:在《瑜伽师地论》中,特指如来圣教中广大而重要的义理,并作为「善建立一切法」的正面条件之一;在《大乘庄严经论》中,则统摄菩萨自利、利他之广大行果,其内涵涵盖无量功德、成熟众生及大乘七种「大」义等。两部论书虽皆以「大义」一词立说,但其侧重点不同:前者着重圣教义理的建立,后者着重菩萨行果的广大。

二、主要阐述

(一)《瑜伽师地论》的论述

1. 广显如来圣教大义:论中以「广显如来圣教大义」说明颂文旨趣。此处「大义」直接隶属于如来圣教,所指不是零散名相,而是圣教中有待广为显发的重要义理;「广显」表明论述方式在于展开、彰明此义。

2. 具大义为善建立之条件:论中以「善建立一切法」说明法的成立,继而解释「善建立」在于「离诸过」与「具大义」。「大义」在此不仅是内容广大,也与教说能否妥善建立一切法相连。论中进一步从说者、听者的劬劳应具殊胜果效申明其意义,若能说、能听而无胜果,便是徒然废弃各自所作之业。

3. 广、略义与大义的区分:论中另列「诸地、相、作意、依处、德、非德、所对治、能治、广、略义应知」。此处使用「广、略义」术语形式,从广说与略说两面标示所应知之义,与「大义」字面不同,不宜混同。

4. 列举中的大义:另有一处在连续列举中直接出现「大义」,前后为「黑异熟等、大义、后难得」,仅将「大义」列作论说项目之一,未提供界说或展开内容。

(二)《大乘庄严经论》的论述

1. 自他二利中的大义:论中以自他二利说明发大志意之所为:弘誓胜愿与历经无量劫之胜行皆甚难起、难成,故须发大志意以成就他利与自利。其中愿行为他利,能成名闻之因;「大义」属自利,是「自体果」。

2. 大义即自他利行:论中直接界定「大义谓自他利行」。自利行是功德增长,其量在思度、数数与时节三方面皆不可限量;他利行则以作意与悲普遍缘一切众生,并以广大精勤方便流布「大圣法」(即大乘法)。

3. 偈颂中的大义:偈颂以「大体及大义,无边及无尽」并举;另以「明净及普摄,大义亦无尽」表明其具有普遍摄持与无尽的特征。

4. 种性与大义:大义是四种成就之一,菩萨种性为大菩提、大智、大定与大义之因;其中「为大义因」的具体解释是「成就无边众生」。

5. 发心、发行、得果次第中的大义:大依是依止大菩提而发心,大行是为自他利益而起行,大果是证得无上菩提;相应又说发心时「大取」,发行时「大忍」,得果时则名「大义」,即广利一切众生之业已得成就。

6. 大义依大我:论中以「大义」直称「利益一切众生」。菩萨了知世间唯是诸行、实无有我,灭除染污身见所成的自我执取;同时以一切众生为自己,称为「大我」,依此而作众生利益事,名为「大义依大我」。

7. 七种大义:论中又用「七种大义」一语:缘大、行大、智大、勤大、巧大、果大、事大。其中行大明说自利利他行皆具足,事大则指数数示现大菩提、大涅槃。

三、不同部类与译本的表述差异

两部论书同属瑜伽部系统,但对「大义」的具体所指存在明显差异:

1. 《瑜伽师地论》(《瑜伽師地論》):以「大义」指如来圣教中广大而重要的义理,并与「善建立」相关,强调义理建立的正面条件。同时另用「广、略义」术语形式,二者并存而不混同。

2. 《大乘庄严经论》(《大乘莊嚴經論》):以「大义」统摄菩萨自他二利的广大行果,兼摄无量功德的自利与普遍济益众生的利他。其用法形式多样:既可单指自利之自体果,也可指自他利行全体;既可作为种性所成就的对象,也可作为得果位之名称;又有「七种大义」的总称形式与「利益一切众生」的直称用法并行。此外,《大乘庄严经论》中另立「大我」与「大义依大我」之特色术语,其义由正文限定为舍自我见而以一切众生为己,并非另立一般性的我义。

四、与相关概念的关系

「大义」与以下概念关系密切:

1. 与「广、略义」的关系:两词皆见于《瑜伽师地论》,但所指不同。「大义」用于圣教根本而重大的义理及「善建立」所具条件;「广、略义」则是论述义理时广略两种表达层次,二者为相关而不同的术语。

2. 与「自利、利他」的关系:《大乘庄严经论》以「大义」直接界定为「自他利行」,可作为自利之自体果,也涵盖利他之成熟众生。

3. 与「大乘七种大」的关系:《大乘庄严经论》以「大义」总称缘大、行大、智大、勤大、巧大、果大、事大七种「大」,是「七种大义」的总称。

4. 与「大我」的关系:《大乘庄严经论》立「大我」与「大义依大我」,表明大义以大我为所依,即以一切众生为己而作利益事。

五、代表性原文引用

- 《瑜伽师地论》:「广显如来圣教大义」 - 《瑜伽师地论》:「善建立一切法……离诸过、具大义」 - 《瑜伽师地论》:「诸地、相、作意、依处、德、非德、所对治、能治、广、略义应知」 - 《瑜伽师地论》:「黑异熟等、大义、后难得」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「大义谓自他利行」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「大体及大义,无边及无尽」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「明净及普摄,大义亦无尽」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「为大义因……成就无边众生」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:发心「大取」,发行「大忍」,得果「大义」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「大义依大我」 - 《大乘庄严经论》:「七种大义:缘大、行大、智大、勤大、巧大、果大、事大」

By SutraAI-generated

瑜伽師地論T1579 · 瑜伽部

《瑜伽師地論》對「大義」的首要表述,是以「廣顯如來聖教大義」說明頌文的旨趣。此處「大義」直接隸屬於「如來聖教」,所指不是零散名相,而是聖教中有待廣為顯發的重要義理;「廣顯」則表明論述方式在於展開、彰明此義。原文以「大義」為固定術語,並未另用「大意」、「要義」等名稱代替。

《瑜伽師地論》又以「具大義」說明「善建立」一切法的成立條件。論中先說「善建立一切法」,繼而解釋「善建立」在於「離諸過」與「具大義」;因此,「大義」在此不僅是內容廣大,也與教說能否妥善建立一切法相連。「離諸過」與「具大義」並列,呈現其正面條件:所建立之法既須免離過失,也須具有重大的義理內涵。

同一段進一步從說法與聽法的成果申明其意義:為說者與聽者所付出的劬勞,應當具有殊勝果效;若非如此,能說與能聽便只是徒然廢棄各自所作之業,虛設功勞而終無所得。依此文脈,「具大義」亦表現在聖教並非空設言說,而能使說、聽雙方的努力獲得勝果。原文著重的是義理、建立與果效之間的聯繫,未另行列舉「大義」的具體內容。

此外,論中另列「諸地、相、作意、依處、德、非德、所對治、能治、廣、略義應知」。這段使用的是「廣、略義」的術語形式,即從廣說與略說兩面標示所應知之義;它與原文明言的「大義」字面不同,不宜逕自混同。由此可見,《瑜伽師地論》在用語上同時保留「大義」與「廣、略義」:前者用於聖教根本而重大的義理及「善建立」所具條件,後者則是論述義理時廣略兩種表達層次。

另一處在連續列舉中直接出現「大義」,其前後為「黑異熟等、大義、後難得」。此處僅將「大義」列作論說項目之一,未在該原文塊內提供界說或展開內容;因此可確定的是,《瑜伽師地論》確實沿用「大義」這一術語,但不能僅據此排列而推定它與相鄰諸項的具體關係。

總括而言,《瑜伽師地論》以「大義」稱如來聖教中廣大而重要的義理,並以「廣顯」說其彰明方式,以「具大義」說善建立一切法所不可少的正面條件,又藉說者、聽者劬勞而有勝果,顯示此義並非徒設。其可記錄的特定用詞正是「大義」;至於「廣、略義」,則應作相關而不同的術語分別保存。

大乘莊嚴經論T1604 · 瑜伽部

《大乘莊嚴經論》以「大義」統攝菩薩自利、利他之廣大行果,並從發願修行、種性、成果、眾生觀及大乘名義等側面反覆申明。其核心不是抽象名理,而是以無邊功德成就自身、以廣大事業成熟眾生。

一、論中先以自他二利說明發大志意之所為:弘誓勝願與歷經無量劫之勝行皆甚難起、難成,故須發大志意以成就他利與自利。其中願行為他利,能成名聞之因;「大義」屬自利,是「自體果」。此處明確以「大義」標示菩薩自身所得之廣大成果。

二、論中又直接界定「大義謂自他利行」。自利行是功德增長,其量在思度、數數與時節三方面皆不可限量:不可思度、不可數知,又畢竟恆行而無時間分際。他利行則以作意與悲普遍緣一切眾生,並以廣大精勤方便流布「大聖法」;論中隨即解釋「大聖法者,大乘法故」。因此,「大義」兼攝無量功德的自利與普遍濟益眾生的利他。

三、偈頌以「大體及大義,無邊及無盡」並舉,將大義置於善法、世間與出世間、成熟及神通等廣大成就的脈絡中;另以「明淨及普攝,大義亦無盡」表明其具有普遍攝持與無盡的特徵。這些是本論描述大義時所用的固定語彙。

四、從菩薩種性說,大義是四種成就之一。妙寶性依真、色、形、量四種成就,菩薩種性亦相應成為大菩提、大智、大定與大義之因;其中「為大義因」的具體解釋是「成就無邊眾生」。故此處的大義突出種性所支持的廣大成熟眾生能力。

五、從發心、發行、得果的次第說,大依是依止大菩提而發心,大行是為自他利益而起行,大果是證得無上菩提;相應又說發心時「大取」,攝一切眾生,發行時「大忍」,忍一切大苦,得果時則名「大義」,即廣利一切眾生之業已得成就。此處特別把大義安置於果位及利生事業的完成。

六、論中亦以「大義」直稱「利益一切眾生」。菩薩了知世間唯是諸行、實無有我,滅除染污身見所成的自我執取;同時以一切眾生為自己,稱為「大我」,依此而作眾生利益事,名為「大義依大我」。本論在此所用的特色術語是「大我」與「大義依大我」,其義由正文限定為捨自我見而以一切眾生為己,並非另立一般性的我義。

七、在解釋大乘時,論中又用「七種大義」一語:緣大、行大、智大、勤大、巧大、果大、事大。其中行大明說自利利他行皆具足,事大則指數數示現大菩提、大涅槃。此處「大義」是七種「大」的總稱,與前述單稱利益眾生或自他利行的用法並存,正是本論術語形式上應予區分之處。

Related