大般涅槃經疏 11.6

11.6

In the broad answer, the text comprises two parts: first, answering the disturbance of form; next, answering the disturbance of voice. The initial mention of "seven hundred years" refers to the one thousand years of the true Dharma being reduced by five hundred years due to the ordination of women. The six-hundredth and seven-hundredth years mark the entry into the period of the semblance Dharma. The *Māyā Sūtra* states: "In the six-hundredth year Aśvaghoṣa appears; in the seven-hundredth year Nāgārjuna appears." At this time māra flourishes, so there are the four reliances. Māra possesses outflow-tainted supernatural penetrations and is able to transform into the four assemblies, the four fruits, and the physical appearance of the Buddha, just like a hunter outwardly donning a kāṣāya while inwardly harboring lethal intent. Māra is likewise: outwardly appearing as a sagely form while inwardly harboring heretical plots. Now, outflow-free realization resides in the mind, not in physical matter; how can one speak of fabricating an outflow-free form? A sage possesses outflow-free deportment, which is also the outflow-free five aggregates; hence māra imitates it. From "that Pāpīyas will make such a statement" downward, the second part clarifies the disturbance of voice. The text comprises five sections: first, disturbing the Buddha's body; second, disturbing the establishment of precepts; third, disturbing the Buddha's virtues; fourth, disturbing the sūtras and vinaya; fifth, disturbing transgressions and merits. First, regarding disturbing the Buddha's body, there are again four aspects: first, disturbing his birth; second, disturbing his deeds; third, disturbing his entering the temple; fourth, disturbing his taking a consort. In the first text, if one says he was actually born, this is māra's preaching; if one says he was born without being born, this is the Buddha's preaching. Next, regarding his deeds, it should likewise follow this pattern. That it is not so here is because clarifying that he did not act is māra's preaching, whereas that he acted is the Buddha's preaching. Why? Heretical māras constantly wish to conceal the Buddha's virtues and display the Buddha's faults; this is called disturbing the Buddha's deeds. Entering the temple and taking a consort are all as in the text. From "when the Buddha was in Śrāvastī" onward is disturbing the establishment of precepts, as in the text. As for the sixty-four abilities, the Buddha has thirty-two marks; non-Buddhists boastfully claimed they were twice as superior as the Buddha, hence they spoke of having sixty-four abilities. Furthermore, the Buddha has thirty-two marks along with their karmic causes; non-Buddhists sought to match them as equals, hence they posited the sixty-four abilities. Third, from "if there is someone who states" onward is disturbing the Buddha's virtues. Herein it clarifies that the Buddha does not know good from bad, does not differentiate enemies from kin, and neither rejoices nor hates when slashed with a knife or smeared with incense—just as people say of an eye being poked without blinking; this is disturbing virtue through a deluded intent. Fourth, from "if there is someone who says the Tathāgata for my sake" is disturbing the sūtras and vinaya. First, it causes disturbance generally with respect to the sūtras and vinaya; subsequently, it causes disturbance with respect to permanence and impermanence, as in the text. Fifth, from "again, there are people who say" onward is disturbing transgressions and merits. The text comprises three rounds: first, clarifying orthodoxy; next, clarifying heresy; third, further clarifying orthodoxy. In the first, a monk knows himself not to be a sage; answering that he is not a sage, there is then no transgression. Next, from "again, there are those who state there is no pārājika" onward is heresy. Third, from "if it is further stated: among all precepts" onward further clarifies orthodoxy. If one transgresses a single dharma, when reciting the precepts, upon being initially asked whether one is pure, if one does not answer after three proclamations, one commits false speech, and so forth. Although all sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu, it must depend on upholding precepts: the buddhadhātu is the direct cause, and upholding precepts is the concurrent condition, and so forth.