From the perspective of this Hossō doctrine [Dharma Characteristics school], called “the distinction of five natures” (goshō kakubetsu), Tokuitsu argued that the division of the Dharma into three vehicles represented the Buddha’s true intent: some people really were destined to become arhats, pratyeka-buddhas, or bodhisattvas. On the other hand, the Lotus Sūtra’s teaching of the one vehicle was a provisional expedient set forth to encourage those of the undetermined group, some of whom might be capable of practicing the bodhisattva path and becoming Buddhas. For Saichō, however, it was just as the Lotus declared: the three vehicles were provisional and the one vehicle, true; Buddhahood was the final destiny of all. In support of his position, Saichō drew on a variety of sources. One was Fa-tsang’s commentary on the Awakening of Faith, specifically, its distinction between suchness that is unchanging (fuhen shinny) and suchness that accords with conditions (zuien shinny). Like Fa-tsang, Saichō argued that suchness has a dynamic as well as a quiescent aspect. In its dynamic aspect, it expresses itself as all phenomena and also has the nature of realizing and knowing (kakuchi shō). Thus there is no need to postulate seeds in the ālaya consciousness as the source of the phenomenal world or as the cause, in some individuals, for achieving Buddhahood. Saichō equated suchness in its dynamic aspect with gyō-bussō; since suchness is universal, he argued, everyone has the potential to realize Buddhahood. (Page 13-14)