[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [維摩義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776) › 1.22 # 維摩義記 1.22 維摩義記 1.22 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1.22) 序中有三：一、明佛化主；二、從「與大比丘」已下，辨其徒眾；三、「彼時佛與無量眾」下，總明佛眾雲集所為。前中有三：初言「一時」，明佛化時；第二「佛」，標列化主；第三「在毘耶」下，彰其化處。釋一時中，先序異說、次辨過非、後正議。異說如何？昔來相傳。傳言佛說時、阿難聞時更無先後。簡去傳聞，成上我聞，故云一時，異說如是。次辨過非，先以事驗、後引文證。事驗如何？如經說「阿難是佛得道夜生」。如小乘中，佛成道已過六七日即便說經，阿難爾時猶在懷抱，身不豫會。佛成道已過二十年方始出家，三十年後方為侍者，自斯已前所說諸經多不親聞。雖不親聞，而所集經亦云一時，明知一時非簡傳之辭。又小乘中不得說言阿難是權，何由得言說聽一時？人復反徵：云何得知阿難是佛得道夜生？將來破我。為證此義，須知阿難立字因緣。阿難陀者，是外國語，此名歡喜。歡喜之名，三因緣立：一、過去因緣。如經中說「釋迦過去行菩薩道時，作一陶師名曰大光。值過去世釋迦文佛，父名淨飯、母名摩耶、侍者弟子名曰阿難，國土眷屬如今無別。因即發願：『願我當來成得佛道，還如今佛。』由斯本願今得成佛，故今侍者還字阿難。」二、現在因緣。阿難比丘面貌端正，世人見者莫不歡喜，故字歡喜。是故經中讚歎阿難，面如滿月目若青蓮，佛法海水入阿難心。三、父母立字因緣。與字歡喜，喜時生故。何者喜時？所謂如來得道夜時。如來十九踰城出家。既出家已，五年習定、六年自餓身極羸瘦。父王遣人恒往瞻伺，知極微惙常恐不全。菩薩後時知餓非道，受食乳麋欲取正覺。魔作是念：「若佛道成，空我境界。曼道未成，當敗其志。」遂卒官屬十八億萬，持諸苦具來怖菩薩。菩薩于時入勝意慈定，令魔眷屬顛倒墮落。魔既被降，便作是念：「菩薩力大，非我能勝。當惱其父。」遂便往詣淨飯宮上，唱如是言：「悉達太子昨夜了矣。」王時聞已從床而墮，良久乃甦，更為傷歎。念子在家當為輪王，何期出家空無所拔？未久之間，菩提樹神以佛道成，復持天華慶賀父王。當成佛時，天雨妙華而為供養，故持慶王。其時亦往淨飯宮上唱如是言：「大王當知。地天太子昨夜明星出時，降魔兵眾成佛得道。」王時生疑：「向者有天言我子死。今復有天云子成道。何者可信？」菩提神曰：「我言可信。向者是魔，故相惱耳。我是菩提樹神，以佛於我樹下得道，故相慶賀。」王時作念：「我子在家當為輪王，今日出家為法輪大王，彼此無失。」自者聞死，今忽聞活，一重大喜。復聞道成，兩重大喜。未久之間王弟斛飯夜生阿難，寅抱詣王：「弟於昨夜生此一男。」王時對曰：「我子成道，汝復生男。眾慶并集，與字歡喜。」以斯準驗，定知阿難成道夜生。阿難既是得道夜生，何由得言說聽一時？事驗如是。次以文證。佛初成道，在波羅捺仙人鹿苑為五比丘轉四諦法，名轉法輪經。佛滅度後，阿難比丘先集此經。將集此經先昇高坐，說偈自言：「佛初轉法輪，爾時我不見，如是展轉聞。佛遊波羅捺，為五比丘眾，轉四諦法輪。」彼經之中道己傳聞，復言一時，明知一時非簡傳之辭。辨非如此。次顯正義。言「一時」者，就佛解釋。為化之辰，目之為時。於佛一代化時眾多，為簡餘時，是故言一。一時之言，經中大有。如《涅槃》說「我於一時在加尸國。我於一時在恒河岸。我於一時在尸首林。我於一時在王舍城。」如是非一。今言一時，共彼相似。云何得知一時從後非是屬前？準依《地經》所以得知。《華嚴》大本〈十地品〉初云言「爾時佛在天中」，龍樹別傳，改「爾」為「一」。爾時之言不可成上，改爾作一寧不屬下？ > The preface comprises three \[parts\]: first, explaining the Buddha as the teaching master; second, from "with a great \[assembly of\] bhikṣus" onward, identifying his disciples and assembly; third, from "at that time the Buddha and an immeasurable assembly" onward, collectively explaining what the cloud-like gathering of the Buddha and the assembly was for. The first \[part\] contains three \[points\]: first, the phrase "at one time" explains the time of the Buddha's teaching; second, "the Buddha" designates and lists the teaching master; third, from "in Vaiśālī" onward reveals his place of teaching. In explaining "at one time," we first set forth differing views, next point out their errors, and finally establish the correct interpretation. What are the differing views? Traditionally handed down of old, it was said that the time when the Buddha spoke and the time when Ānanda heard were without before or after; to exclude hearsay and validate the preceding "thus have I heard," it therefore says "at one time." Such are the differing views. Next, to point out the errors: first through factual verification, and then by citing textual evidence. What is the factual verification? As the sūtras say: "Ānanda was born on the night the Buddha attained the Way." According to the Hīnayāna, after the Buddha attained the Way, he expounded the sūtras after only six or seven days had elapsed; Ānanda was then still an infant in arms and did not personally attend the assembly. Twenty years after the Buddha attained the Way, he first went forth from the household life; thirty years \[after the enlightenment\], he became his attendant. Most of the sūtras expounded prior to this were not personally heard by him. Though not personally heard, the sūtras he compiled also say "at one time"; thus we clearly know that "at one time" is not an expression meant to exclude hearsay. Furthermore, in the Hīnayāna it cannot be maintained that Ānanda was an expedient manifestation; on what grounds, then, could it be claimed that the expounding and hearing occurred at the same time? People might counter-challenge: How is it known that Ānanda was born on the night the Buddha attained the Way, so as to refute my position? To substantiate this point, one must know the cause and condition for giving Ānanda his name. Ānanda is a foreign word; here it is translated as "Joy." The name "Joy" was established through three causes and conditions: First, past causes and conditions. As it is said in the sūtra: "When Śākya in the past was practicing the bodhisattva path, he was a potter named Daguang. He encountered the Buddha Śākyamuni of a past age, whose father was named Śuddhodana, mother was named Māyā, and attendant disciple was named Ānanda, with lands and retinues no different from those of today. He thereupon made a vow: 'May I in the future, when I attain the Buddha Way, be just like this present Buddha.' Owing to this fundamental vow, he has now attained Buddhahood, and therefore his present attendant is likewise named Ānanda." Second, present causes and conditions. The monk Ānanda had a handsome appearance; among worldly people, whoever saw him was filled with joy, and therefore he was named Joy. Hence in the sūtras Ānanda is praised: "His face is like the full moon, his eyes like blue lotuses, and the ocean of the Buddha's Dharma waters enters Ānanda's heart." Third, the cause and condition of his parents naming him. He was given the name Joy because he was born at a joyful time. What was the joyful time? It was the night the Tathāgata attained the Way. At nineteen, the Tathāgata leaped over the city walls and went forth from the household life. Having gone forth, he practiced meditation for five years and starved himself for six years, his body becoming extremely emaciated. His royal father constantly sent people to watch over him, and knowing he was extremely weak and exhausted, always feared he would not survive. Later, the bodhisattva knew that starvation was not the Way, accepted the milk gruel, and wished to attain correct awakening. Māra thought: "If the Buddha Way is accomplished, it will empty my realm. While the Way is not yet accomplished, I must ruin his resolve." Thereupon, rallying eighteen hundred million of his retinue and bearing various implements of suffering, he came to terrify the bodhisattva. At that time, the bodhisattva entered the samādhi of supreme loving-kindness, causing Māra's retinue to tumble down headlong. Having been subdued, Māra thought: "The bodhisattva's power is great; he cannot be overcome by me. I should torment his father." He then went to Śuddhodana's palace and proclaimed: "Prince Siddhārtha died last night." Upon hearing this, the king fell from his couch, and only after a long while regained consciousness, lamenting even more bitterly. He reflected that if his son had remained at home, he would have become a wheel-turning king; what could have been expected of his going forth, only to end in empty vain? Shortly thereafter, because the Buddha Way was accomplished, the Bodhi tree deity brought heavenly flowers to congratulate the royal father. When the Buddha attained Buddhahood, the heavens rained down wonderful flowers as an offering, which is why \[the deity\] brought them to congratulate the king. At that time, \[the deity\] likewise went to Śuddhodana's palace and proclaimed: "Great King, you should know: last night, when the morning star appeared, Prince Deva-of-the-Earth subdued the hosts of Māra's army and attained Buddhahood, realizing the Way." The king then became doubtful: "Just now a deity said my son died. Now another deity says my son attained the Way. Which is to be believed?" The Bodhi deity said: "My words are to be believed. The former was Māra, who merely sought to torment you. I am the Bodhi tree deity; because the Buddha attained the Way beneath my tree, I come to congratulate you." The king then thought: "If my son had remained at home, he would have been a wheel-turning king; today, having gone forth, he has become the great king of the Dharma wheel—in neither case is there any loss." Having previously heard of his death, he now suddenly heard he was alive: this was one layer of great joy. Then hearing that the Way was accomplished: this was a second layer of great joy. Shortly thereafter, the king's younger brother Droṇodana had Ānanda born to him that night, and carrying him in his arms at dawn, went to the king, saying: "Last night, your younger brother had this boy born to him." The king replied: "My son has attained the Way, and you have also borne a son. All celebrations have gathered together; let him be named Joy." By this verification, we know for certain that Ānanda was born on the night \[the Buddha\] attained the Way. Since Ānanda was born on the night \[the Buddha\] attained the Way, on what grounds could it be said that the expounding and hearing occurred at the same time? Such is the factual verification. Next, textual evidence: When the Buddha first attained the Way, in the Ṛṣipatana Deer Park in Vārāṇasī, he turned the Dharma of the four truths for the five bhikṣus, which is called the Dharmacakrapravartana Sūtra. After the Buddha's extinction, the monk Ānanda first compiled this sūtra. About to compile this sūtra, he first ascended the high seat and recited a verse, saying of himself: / "When the Buddha first turned the wheel of the Dharma, / at that time I did not see it; / thus I heard it by transmission: / The Buddha wandered to Vārāṇasī, / and for the assembly of five bhikṣus, / turned the Dharma wheel of the four truths." / In that sūtra, he states that he himself heard it by transmission, yet it also says "at one time"; thus we clearly know that "at one time" is not an expression meant to exclude hearsay. Such is the refutation of the error. Next, to reveal the correct meaning: The phrase "at one time" is explained in relation to the Buddha. The period of teaching is referred to as "time." During the Buddha's lifetime, the times of teaching were manifold; to distinguish it from other times, it is therefore called "one." The phrase "at one time" occurs abundantly in the sūtras. As the Nirvāṇa \[Sūtra\] says: "At one time, I was in the country of Kāśi. At one time, I was on the banks of the Ganges. At one time, I was in the Śītavana charnel ground. At one time, I was in Rājagṛha." Instances such as these are not singular. The present "at one time" is similar to those. How do we know that "at one time" modifies what follows rather than belonging to what precedes? We know this based on the Daśabhūmika Sūtra. At the beginning of the "Chapter on the Ten Bhūmis" in the large version of the Avataṃsaka, it says: "At that time (尔时), the Buddha was among the gods." In Nāgārjuna's separate transmission, "that" (尔) was changed to "one" (一). The expression "at that time" cannot complete what precedes; if "that" is changed to "one," how could it not belong to what follows? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1.21) - [Next: 1.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1.23) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776~en-mt.1.22) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [大般涅槃經義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.1.27) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1776.1.22) · Pramāṇa