觀無量壽經義疏 1.3.2

1.3.2

云何不同？ 如龍樹釋說我有三：一、見心說我，謂諸凡夫見使未忘，我見心中稱說有我。 二、慢心說我，謂諸學人見使雖除，慢使猶在，我慢心中稱說有我。 三、隨世流布宣說有我，謂無學人見慢已除，隨世流布宣說其我。 然今阿難結集法時，身居無學，見慢已除，隨世流布宣說其我，故不同凡。 問曰：無我道理精勝，阿難今者何不就勝宣說無我，乃隨世俗宣說我乎？ 化我眾生，法須如是。 若不說我，何由可得標別彼此使人識知？ 是故乃至諸佛化人亦自說我。 「一時」已下，義雖兩兼，對前一向證信序故，自下偏就發起以釋。 就中隨處開分為二，文別有五。 言處二者，一異處起化序。 佛在耆闍，玄起後時王宮之化。 二佛從耆闍崛山沒下身往攝化序。 此與《勝鬘》大況相似。 諸經之中此例非一。 文別五者，初言「一時」，明起化時。 第二明「佛」，標其化主。 三「在王舍」下，明起化處。 四「與大」下，辨列徒眾。 五「爾時王舍大城」已下，明起化事。 初一時者，有人異解，備如常破。 今正論之。 為化之晨目之為時。 於佛一代化時眾多，簡別餘時是故言一。 與《涅槃》中我於一時在迦尸國、我於一時在王舍城、我於一時在恒河岸、我於一時在尸首林，其言相似，勿得異釋。 佛如前解。 第三處中在王舍城，就寬通舉。 此城古昔多在王住，名王舍城。 耆闍崛山，隨處別指，此翻名為靈鷲山也。 多有仙靈居住此山，並有鷲鳥居在此，山名靈鷲山。 又亦翻名為鷲頭山，以諸鷲鳥居此山頂，名鷲頭山。 又此山頂像似鷲頭，名鷲頭山。 遊化處中目之為在，法身平等實無栖託，示化有方故云在耳。 以何義故偏在此處？ 此義如彼《法華論》釋，為顯勝法故在斯耳。 以諸城中王舍最勝，五山之中耆闍最好，故寄表法。 第四眾中先列聲聞後彰菩薩，諸經多爾。 何故而然？ 解有三義：一、近遠分別。 以諸聲聞常隨如來，故明佛後，隨近先列； 菩薩不爾，是故後論。 何故聲聞偏近如來？ 解有兩義：一、謂諸聲聞智解微劣未閑道法，雖得聖果，進止威儀常須佛教，故多近佛，是故如來乃至雙林常為制戒，如《涅槃》中制諸聲聞不食肉等； 菩薩人深閑道法，不假佛教，故不近佛。 二、以聲聞現蒙佛度，越凡成聖荷恩深重，故常隨佛圍侍供養； 菩薩隨感遊化不定，故不近佛。 此是第一近遠分別。 二、形相分別。 聲聞之人威儀嚴整，世共尊敬，故列在前； 菩薩隨化形儀不定，故彰在後。 如經中說「文殊一夏三處安居，迦葉呵罰」即其事也。 三、就德分別。 如龍樹說教有二種：一祕密教。 菩薩德尊，理宜在先； 聲聞德劣，法須在後。 二、顯示教。 聲聞辟支同佛漏盡，故列在先； 菩薩之人隨化現凡，不斷諸漏。 若聞菩薩在羅漢上，人多驚怪，故列在後。 今依顯示，先列聲聞後彰菩薩。 聲聞眾中、初言「與」者、以身兼彼，稱之為與。 「大比丘」者，標列其眾。 大，外國名曰摩訶，此翻有三：一名為多，如多人聚名曰大眾； 二名為勝，勝過餘道； 三名為大，廣備高德。 「比丘」，胡語，此方義翻備含五義：一名怖魔。 將出家時令魔戰怯，故曰怖魔。 比丘出家，何豫魔事而生恐怖？ 魔性姡弊，懼他勝己，故生怖畏。 又畏比丘化他同出，空其境界，是故恐怖。 如《涅槃》說。 此之一義，就初彰名。 二名乞士。 既出家已，無所貯畜，乞求自活，故名乞士。 三名淨名。 正命乞求，離邪命法，故曰淨命。 此二就其中間立稱。 四名淨持戒。 精進持戒，無有毀犯。 五名破惡。 以持戒故，破離諸惡。 此後兩義，據終為目。 非一稱「眾」。 言「千二百五十人」，俱列其數也。 此千二百五十比丘，諸經多列。 何故而然？

How are they not the same? As Nāgārjuna explains, there are three types of stating "I": First, stating "I" with a view-tainted mind, meaning ordinary people whose view-afflictions have not yet been abandoned, and who proclaim an "I" within a mind possessed of the view of self. Second, stating "I" with a proud mind, meaning trainees who, although they have eliminated view-afflictions, still retain the affliction of conceit, and proclaim an "I" within a mind of self-conceit. Third, stating "I" in conformity with worldly convention, meaning those beyond training whose views and conceits have already been eliminated, and who proclaim an "I" in conformity with worldly convention. Now, when Ānanda compiled the Dharma, he was established in the state beyond training, with views and conceit already eliminated, and proclaimed an "I" in conformity with worldly convention; therefore he was not like an ordinary person. Question: The principle of selflessness is refined and supreme; why does Ānanda not now base himself on what is supreme and proclaim selflessness, rather than conforming to the worldly to proclaim an "I"? [Answer:] To transform sentient beings who cling to a self, the teaching must be like this. If one did not say "I," how could one distinguish one from another and enable people to recognize them? For this reason, even the Buddhas, when transforming people, also speak of "I" themselves. From "at one time" onwards, although the meaning has a dual aspect, in contrast to the preceding strictly verifying-faith preface, from here down it is explained strictly in terms of the initiating preface. Within this, according to place, it is divided into two, with five distinct textual units. Speaking of the two places: first, the preface of initiating transformation from a different place: while the Buddha was at Gṛdhrakūṭa, he initiated in advance his later transformation in the royal palace. Second, the preface of the Buddha disappearing from Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa and descending in person to gather and transform [them]. This is broadly similar to the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra. Such instances are not unique among the sūtras. As for the five distinct textual units: first, stating "at one time" clarifies the time when the transformation was initiated. Second, clarifying "the Buddha" indicates the lord of the transformation. Third, from "in Rājagṛha" clarifies the place where the transformation was initiated. Fourth, from "together with a great" distinguishes and lists the assembly of followers. Fifth, from "at that time, in the great city of Rājagṛha" downwards clarifies the events initiating the transformation. Regarding the first, "at one time," there are divergent interpretations by others, all of which are refuted as usual. Now we discuss it correctly: the period of transformation is designated as "time." Among the Buddha's numerous times of transformation in a single lifetime, in order to differentiate it from other times, it therefore says "one." It is similar to the words in the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra], "At one time I was in Kāśi," "At one time I was in Rājagṛha," "At one time I was on the banks of the Ganges," and "At one time I was in the charnel ground"; one should not interpret it differently. "Buddha" is as explained before. In the third [unit], regarding the place, "in the city of Rājagṛha" is stated in a broad and general sense. In ancient times, kings frequently dwelt in this city, hence it is named the City of the Royal Residence (Rājagṛha). "Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa" points specifically to the particular place; here translated, it means Divine Vulture Mountain. Many immortals and spirits dwell on this mountain, and vulture birds also live on it, so the mountain is called Divine Vulture Mountain. It is also translated as Vulture Peak Mountain, because vultures dwell on the peak of this mountain, hence the name Vulture Peak Mountain. Moreover, the peak of this mountain resembles a vulture's head, hence the name Vulture Peak Mountain. Staying in the place of wandering and transforming is designated as "residing"; the Dharma body is impartial and truly has no fixed abode, but to show transformation appropriately in a specific place, it simply says "residing." For what reason was he in this specific place? This meaning is as explained in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa: it was to reveal the supreme Dharma that he resided here. Because among all cities Rājagṛha is the most supreme, and among the five mountains Gṛdhrakūṭa is the finest, it was used to signify the Dharma. In the fourth [unit], regarding the assembly, first the śrāvakas are listed and then the bodhisattvas are displayed; most sūtras are like this. Why is that? There are three meanings in explanation: First, distinguishing between near and far. Because all śrāvakas constantly follow the Tathāgata, they are clarified after the Buddha, listed first according to proximity; bodhisattvas are not like this, which is why they are discussed later. Why are śrāvakas especially close to the Tathāgata? There are two meanings in explanation: First, because the śrāvakas' wisdom and understanding are slight and inferior, and they are not yet thoroughly conversant with the Dharma of the Path, although they have attained the noble fruit, their deportment in moving and pausing constantly requires the Buddha's instruction; therefore they mostly stay close to the Buddha. For this reason, even up to the Twin Trees the Tathāgata constantly laid down precepts for them, as in the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] where he prohibited the śrāvakas from eating meat, and so forth; whereas bodhisattvas are deeply conversant with the Dharma of the Path and do not rely on the Buddha's instruction, so they do not stay close to the Buddha. Second, because the śrāvakas are currently delivered by the Buddha, crossing beyond the ordinary to become noble ones and bearing deep gratitude, they constantly follow the Buddha to attend upon and make offerings to him; whereas bodhisattvas wander and transform in response to conditions without fixed abode, so they do not stay close to the Buddha. This is the first: distinguishing between near and far. Second, distinguishing by outer appearance. The śrāvakas' deportment is strict and orderly, revered by the world together, hence they are listed first; the bodhisattvas' appearance and conduct are not fixed as they respond to transformation, hence they are displayed after. As the sūtra says: "Mañjuśrī spent one summer retreat in three places, and Kāśyapa reprimanded and punished him"—this is just such an affair. Third, distinguishing in terms of virtue. As Nāgārjuna said, teachings are of two kinds: First, the esoteric teaching. The bodhisattvas' virtue is venerable, so in principle they should come first; the śrāvakas' virtue is inferior, so by rule they must come after. Second, the explicit teaching. The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are identical to the Buddha in the exhaustion of outflows, hence they are listed first; bodhisattvas manifest as ordinary beings in accordance with transformation and do not sever all outflows. If people heard that bodhisattvas were placed above arhats, many would be astonished and perplexed, hence they are listed after. Now, following the explicit teaching, the śrāvakas are listed first and the bodhisattvas are displayed after. In the śrāvaka assembly, first stating "with" (yu) means accompanying them in person, which is called "with." "Great bhikṣus" designates and lists their assembly. "Great" in foreign languages is mahā; this translation has three meanings: first, "numerous," as a gathering of many people is called a "great assembly"; second, "superior," excelling other paths; third, "great," being broadly endowed with lofty virtues. "Bhikṣu" is the foreign language; the semantic translation in this land fully contains five meanings: first, "terrifier of Māra": when on the verge of leaving home, he causes Māra to tremble in fear, hence called "terrifier of Māra." When a bhikṣu leaves home, why does it concern Māra's affairs so as to give rise to terror? Māra's nature is jealous and deceitful, fearing that others will surpass him, and therefore gives rise to fear. Moreover, he fears that the bhikṣu will transform others to leave home together with him and empty his realm; therefore he is terrified. As the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] says. This single meaning is designated in terms of the initial stage. Second, he is called "mendicant." Having already left home, he stores nothing up and begs for food to sustain his life; therefore he is called a "mendicant." Third, he is called "one of pure livelihood." Begging with right livelihood and staying free from wrong livelihood, he is therefore called "pure livelihood." These two names are established in terms of the intermediate stage. Fourth, he is called "purely observing precepts." He vigorously observes precepts without any transgression. Fifth, he is called "destroyer of evil." Because he observes the precepts, he destroys and departs from all evils. These last two meanings are designated on the basis of the final stage. An assembly that is not singular is called a "multitude" (saṅgha). Saying "one thousand two hundred and fifty people" together lists their number. These one thousand two hundred and fifty bhikṣus are listed in most sūtras. Why is that?