大般涅槃經疏 10.19

10.19

「爾時佛告」去，是第三明四依出時。是時為用，非時無益。若佛在世正法猶興，飽德豐道何勞助弘？若佛滅後正法衰羸，無醫無藥應須治救，方假四依。文為三：初佛通說時、二迦葉別問、三迦葉料簡。通說時者，佛涅槃後時通正像末，是通說時。次從「迦葉白佛」下，是別問時。有問有答。問為兩：一滅後久近不如法時、二滅後久近如法救時。次從「佛告」去，佛答二問。後四十年者，正法八十年分為前後，即是後四十年。經說不同。一云：正像各千年。一云：各五百年。一云：正法五百，像法一千；或云正法一百，或云八十。蓋由緣有濃淡，致說有賒促。若前四十年，去佛猶近，如法人多；後四十年，去佛小遠，猶有見佛者。如《釋論》優波毱多見年百二十，尼問佛相好、比丘威儀。當知後四十年猶有見佛人也，恐是後非法起時多誹謗故。一解云：正法五百，除四百二十年，取八十年分為前後，前四十年廣行流布，後四十年隱沒於地。一云：不然。佛滅後百一十六年，王作大會，異部起計。優波毱多不能融會，爾時佛法稍有澆醨。豈唯四百六十方沒於地？當知迦葉阿難持法四十年，與佛在不異；後四十年去聖日遠，已就澆薄。而後文迦葉問佛：去後四十年沒地，何時還出？佛答：正法欲滅，餘八十年，前四十年還出，過此復沒。正當此言正道四百二十年後之興沒。又一解：佛三十成道，若年十歲人悟道者，至佛滅時其年六十，見佛始終，能融會大小。於佛滅後四十年，秉教如佛在不殊。過此已後不見佛始者，不能整理，生斷常計，故言隱沒於地。而不道百三十歲者，年耆根熟不能匡正，故不言之。問：十歲者見佛始，迦葉、阿難佛得道日生，此不見始，何能持法如佛在耶？答：此二人者，迦葉是長子，阿難得佛覺三昧，不比餘人（云云）。

From "At that time the Buddha addressed" onward is the third [section], explaining the time when the four reliances appear. When it is the proper time, they are effective; when it is not the proper time, they are of no benefit. If the Buddha is in the world and the true Dharma is still flourishing, with virtues abundant and the Way plentiful, what need is there to trouble others to assist in propagating it? If after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa the true Dharma weakens and decays, then lacking physician and lacking medicine, there must be treatment and rescue, and only then are the four reliances drawn upon. The text has three parts: first, the Buddha speaks generally of the time; second, Kāśyapa asks specifically; third, Kāśyapa evaluates and discerns. As for speaking generally of the time, the period after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa generally comprises the true, semblance, and final [Dharma ages]; this is speaking generally of the time. Next, from "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" down is the specific inquiry about the time. There are questions and answers. The questions are twofold: first, regarding how long after the parinirvāṇa will be the time of non-conformity with the Dharma; second, regarding how long after the parinirvāṇa will be the time of rescuing in conformity with the Dharma. Next, from "The Buddha told" onward, the Buddha answers the two questions. As for the "latter forty years," the eighty years of the true Dharma are divided into earlier and later, and this refers to the latter forty years. The sūtras explain this differently. One says: the true and semblance [Dharma] are each a thousand years. One says: each is five hundred years. One says: the true Dharma is five hundred and the semblance Dharma is one thousand; or it is said the true Dharma is one hundred, or it is said eighty. This is because conditions vary between thick and thin, resulting in accounts that are either protracted or brief. In the earlier forty years, being still close to the Buddha, those who conformed to the Dharma were many; in the latter forty years, being slightly further from the Buddha, there were still those who had seen the Buddha. As the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says, Upagupta saw a nun of a hundred and twenty years of age, and asked about the Buddha's physical marks and the monks' decorum. One should know that in the latter forty years there were still people who had seen the Buddha; it is feared that in the latter period, when non-Dharma arose, there was much slander. One explanation says: of the five hundred years of the true Dharma, subtracting four hundred and twenty years, the eighty years are taken and divided into earlier and later; during the earlier forty years it was widely circulated, and during the latter forty years it sank into the earth. Another says: this is not so. One hundred and sixteen years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, the king held a great assembly and different schools raised distinct views. Upagupta was unable to reconcile them, and at that time the Buddha's Dharma slightly deteriorated. How could it only sink into the earth after four hundred and sixty years? One should know that Kāśyapa and Ānanda upheld the Dharma for forty years, no different from when the Buddha was present; in the latter forty years, as the Sage became day by day more distant, it had already turned thin and corrupt. Moreover, later in the text Kāśyapa asks the Buddha: "After sinking into the earth for forty years, when will it emerge again?" The Buddha answered: "When the true Dharma is about to perish, with eighty years remaining, it will emerge again in the earlier forty years, and past this it will sink again." This directly corresponds to the statement of the flourishing and sinking after four hundred and twenty years of the true path. Yet another explanation says: the Buddha attained the Way at thirty; if a person who was ten years old awakened to the Way, by the time of the Buddha's parinirvāṇa he would be sixty years old, having seen the Buddha from beginning to end and being able to harmonize the Great and Small [Vehicles]. For forty years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, his holding of the teaching was no different from when the Buddha was present. Beyond this, those who had not seen the Buddha from the beginning could not put things in order, and gave rise to views of annihilationism and eternalism; hence it is said to have "sunk into the earth." As for not speaking of someone a hundred and thirty years old, being advanced in years and their faculties ripe, they could not rectify things, and so it is not mentioned. Question: The ten-year-old saw the Buddha's beginning; Kāśyapa and Ānanda were born on the day the Buddha attained the Way, so they did not see the beginning—how could they uphold the Dharma as if the Buddha were present? Answer: As for these two persons, Kāśyapa was the eldest son, and Ānanda attained the samādhi of the Buddha's awakening; they are not comparable to other people (and so forth).