Some modern Tendai scholars such as Fukuda Gyōei and Kimura Shūshō have suggested that Saichō’s proposal that the Ssu fen lü ordination be used as an expedient was primarily a conciliatory gesture to the Nara monks. They have argued that once circumstances changed, the Tendai School could abandon provisional Hinayāna ordinations without violating Saichō’s proposals.

Their position ignored an important aspect of Saichō’s thought. In making his proposals, Saichō may also have been trying to reconcile some differences between his plan and the position of the Chinese Tien t’ai School. Chih-i and Chan-jan had maintained that if a candidate received the Hinayāna precepts with a Mahāyāna mind, he could observe those precepts as a Mahāyāna practitioner. Since the Ssu fen lü precepts ultimately were devised to lead people to Buddhahood, they potentially revealed that final goal. This explanation was called the kaie (revealing and harmonizing) interpretation of the precepts.

The term kaie refers to the One-vehicle teaching of the Lotus Sūtra. According to this teaching the Buddha’s statements about the Three Vehicles in other sūtras can all be revealed to be in harmony with the teaching of the one ultimate vehicle which leads to Buddhahood. Chih-i used the principle of kaie as a basic mode in his classifications of the Buddha’s teachings. All of the Buddha’s teachings, even Hinayāna doctrines, pointed towards and could be shown to potentially contain the Buddha’s final teaching, which was fully revealed in the Lotus Sūtra. When this teaching was applied to the precepts, it resulted in a rationale that enabled monks who considered themselves to be Mahāyāna Buddhists to observe the Ssu fen lü precepts. Although the precepts had Hinayāna origins, they could still be observed by Mahāyāna monks because they ultimately pointed towards Buddhahood.

In the Shijōshiki Saichō proposed that Tendai monks be ordained with the Fan wang precepts at the beginning of their twelve-year training period. He also asked that they be allowed to receive Ssufen lü ordinations at Tōdaiji after they had completed their training on Mount Hiei. Thus while the Fan wang ordination qualified the candidate to be a Tendai monk, the Ssufen lü ordination was taken only as an expedient measure to benefit other sentient beings, not for any spiritual qualification it might bestow on the Tendai monk. The Ssu fen lü ordination would enable Tendai monks to live in harmony with the monks of Nara and to avoid disputes over monastic discipline, seniority, or the procedures for holding assemblies. Because the Ssufen lü ordination did not qualify a person to be a Tendai monk and was taken primarily to smooth relations with other sentient beings, Saichö called it a ‘provisional Hinayäna ordination’ (keju shōkai).

Saichō died before the court had agreed to his proposals and thus never saw them put into effect. Administering Ssufen lü ordinations to Tendai monks proved to be unworkable and was quickly abandoned by his successors. After the bitter debates which had occurred between Saichō and the Nara schools, the monks of the two sides could not forget their differences so readily. The very concept of a provisional Ssufen lü ordination provoked heated arguments between the Tendai and Nara monks. The terms ‘provisional’ and ‘Hinayāna’ implied that the Ssu fen lü ordination was inferior.

If Saichō’s proposal for provisional Hinayāna ordinations had been adopted, it would have placed Tendai monks at a disadvantage in their relations with Nara monks.

The Ssu fen lü precepts had been formulated by the historical Buddha, Śākyamuni, in response to specific situations. The Fan wang precepts, in contrast, were said to be eternal and universal, the precepts of a thousand Buddhas. Saichō considered them to be the source from which all Buddhas and bodhisattvas proceeded. Moreover, they were based in the Buddha-nature which everyone possessed and thus were called the Busshōkai (Buddha-nature precepts). Everyone could and should follow these precepts. Holding the precepts made one a true disciple of the Buddha and allowed him to enter the ranks of the Buddhas. Thus the Fan wang precepts were considered to be the ultimate teaching, not a provisional one. The Fan wang precepts enabled the practitioner to enter the Direct Path (jikidō) to enlightenment without any danger of backsliding.

The Perfect precepts were much more than mere rules of conduct. All elements of the Perfect threefold learning were essentially expressions of the Buddha. They were grounded in one’s own inherently pure nature (jishō shōjō). Complete adherence to the precepts would result in complete mastery of meditation and wisdom. Perfect observance of the precepts in which the practitioner would never even be tempted to violate a rule would necessarily entail a profound understanding of the nonsubstantiality of all things. In such a case the practitioner’s observance of all three elements of the threefold learning would be immovable and unhindered (kokū fudō) by any obstacle.

[T]he precepts could be practiced by anyone. Even people who were too slow witted to understand doctrine or who did not have enough time to practice meditation could observe the precepts. Saichō repeatedly argued in the Kenkairon that the Fan wang precepts and the Anrakugyō [Peaceful Practices chapter of Lotus Sutra] were for everyone, including monks and nuns, laymen and laywomen. They could even be conferred between husband and wife. If people with Perfect faculties (enki) would follow Perfect practices, then they would be able to ameliorate the calamities which might befall the state. Conferring the Perfect precepts would protect the nation (denkai gokoku).

Saichō was clearly dissatisfied with the traditional T’ien-t’ai position that monks should be ordained with the Ssu fen lü precepts, but practice them with a Mahāyāna spirit. The precepts needed to be reformed as thoroughly as meditation and wisdom had been. For Saichō the Perfect threefold teaching consisted of the Fan wang precepts as the Perfect precepts, the four types of Tendai meditation (shishu sanmai) as Perfect meditation, and the study of the Perfect teachings expounded in such texts as the Lotus Sūtra as Perfect wisdom. By following Perfect practices Saichō claimed that “even a person with the dullest faculties would surely receive some sign (from the Buddha that his efforts were effective) after spending twelve years (on Mount Hie).”

Chinese T’ien-t’ai masters such as Chih-i and Chan-jan were more interested in meditation and doctrinal issues than in the precepts. In the Mo ho Chih kuan, Chih-i discussed the precepts as a preliminary practice for meditation, a position which was consistent with traditional theories of the threefold learning. He also applied the Tendai kaie (reveal and harmonize) mode of exegesis to the Ssu fen lü precepts in order to explain their significance for Mahāyāna practice. Chan-jan argued that the attitude of the practitioner, not the Hinayāna origin of the precepts, was the crucial factor in the interpretation of Ssu fen lü ordinations.

Saichō was deeply dissatisfied with these interpretations. Previous efforts to interpret the Ssu fen lü precepts as a form of Mahāyāna monastic discipline or to supplement them with the bodhisattva precepts were unconvincing to Saichō. What was needed, he argued, was a set of precepts which were exclusively Mahāyāna. He stated his position in the Kenkairon:

Although the ten major precepts (of the Fan wang Ching) have been transmitted before, this was in name only; their (true) meaning was not transmitted. How do I know that their (true) meaning was not transmitted? Because their Perfect meaning has not yet been understood and because they have been followed together with the Hinayāna precepts.

Saichō explained his reasons for stressing that the Fan wang precepts must be practiced without reference to the Ssu fen lü precepts in the following passage:

The monastic leaders (sōtō) state: The Lotus Sūtra teaches that one should not consort with anyone who seeks Hinayāna goals, but in Japan there are no monks who seek Hinayāna goals.

Saichō replies: Although (those who board) the sheep vehicle or elephant vehicle do not seek Hinayāna rewards, still they backslide to the realms of the two (Hinayāna) vehicles and take 80,000 kalpas to recover (and attain Buddhahood). Although no monks in this country seek Hinayāna goals, they do follow the Hinayāna rules of conduct and thus follow Hinayāna practices. How can this not lead to a Hinayāna result (in the end)?