維摩經略疏 4.103

4.103

「彼外道至出家」，二、約六師問。所以問者，既不見佛、不聞法，從誰受學？神通智慧應是從彼六師受學。何以知然？六師前生、善吉後習，既不見佛聞法，其外更無師軌之處。若如是者，其師既邪，弟子豈正？何故不同悲田受食？富蘭那是名，迦葉是姓，所說諸法皆不生不滅。末伽梨是名，𤘽賒梨母也，說於眾生雖有苦樂，無有因緣，自然而爾。刪闍夜是名，毘羅胝母也，說於眾生任運時熟得道，如縷丸，所投極則停住，又言八萬劫滿自然得道。阿耆多翅舍是名，欽婆羅麁衣也，說於眾生應受苦報，今以苦行拔髮熏鼻麁衣代之，謂後受涅槃樂也。迦羅鳩馱是名，迦旃延姓也，說於眾生亦有亦無。尼揵陀是出家外道通名，若提母也，所說皆由業作，定不可改，無逃避處。今大士以少分折之，如罵人為驢，未必即有四足髦尾。三藏未極與邪相似，取此而呵。言相似者，三藏有四門入理，六師亦有四門邪計。如富蘭那所見無因無果、無生無滅，無生即不有、無滅即不無，即是非有非無門。末伽梨說一切自然無有造者，此即破因不破果，如莊周所計自然，此似空門。刪闍夜計邪因無因未詳。迦旃延計有無門，餘二所計皆是有門。故知六師亦有四執。聲聞教中明過去佛出世時人壽長短得道皆有定數，後彌勒出世人壽八萬歲時得道，餘時不得，故佛不出。《大論》所彈，此與刪闍夜何異？此教又明剃髮染衣糞掃苦行，與欽婆羅何異？又明施重，毘尼作擯及諸遮道之罪妨於聖道，與若提子何異？亦云相似，故用為彈。又外道有三種：一一切智、二神通、三韋陀。於四句中各有所習，精思徹入者見心分明，各於其門辨說無盡，難不可屈，即一切智外道。雖有此智，若未得禪定，則無神力，水火山壁觸處有礙。若得禪定，因發神通，能停河在耳、變釋為羊，手握三光、口含四海。如此之力與聖不殊，是為神通外道。雖復智慧神變，未能通達四韋陀論，是則星文地理、醫方呪術觸事不知，多為屈滯，此則有慧無聞。若能讀四韋陀者，於其道中最為上首，一切世間無不師之，十六大國敬之如佛。將此三種以約六師，一師有三，三六十八外道師也。三藏亦有三種羅漢，初修三種念處謂性共緣，是故得果成三羅漢，謂慧、俱、無礙。若約四門，則有十二羅漢。一切智、神通、韋陀事亦相似。所以引此邪人而為折者，將恐善吉自謂我是羅漢，見真斷結得一切智。又得三明六通，又精通三藏為大羅漢，豈比外道？故大士取三種六師為折。若外道三種是邪，汝三豈正？心行理外，自此之前皆名邪見，非無作故。大士知其心有伏難，故迴轉結過、展轉呵之，令無所對。如此進退難責，與彼何殊？汝既同彼，即因其出家，以從受學一切智等。

"Those heterodox teachers [...] [you took] ordination": second, rebuking him in reference to the six masters. As for why he asks this: since [Subhūti] neither saw the Buddha nor heard the Dharma, from whom did he receive his instruction? His supernormal powers and wisdom must have been learned from those six masters. How do we know this to be so? The six masters were born before him, and Subhūti practiced later; since he neither saw the Buddha nor heard the Dharma, outside of them there was no other source of masterly guidance. If this is so, then their master being heterodox, how could the disciple be orthodox? Why does he not comply with the field of compassion and accept food? 'Pūraṇa' is the name, 'Kāśyapa' is the clan name; he taught that all phenomena are neither arising nor ceasing. 'Maskarī' is the name, 'Gośālī' is the mother; he taught that although sentient beings experience suffering and pleasure, there are no causes and conditions—it is naturally so of itself. 'Sañjaya' is the name, 'Vairāṭī' is the mother; he taught that sentient beings naturally attain the Way when their time ripens, like a ball of thread that comes to rest only when it has run its full course of unrolling; he also said that when eighty thousand kalpas are fulfilled, one naturally attains the Way. 'Ajita Keśakambala': 'Keśa' is the name, 'Kambala' means coarse hair-garment; he taught that sentient beings ought to undergo painful retribution, and that by now replacing it with ascetic practices such as pulling out one's hair, smoking one's nose, and wearing coarse garments, one will afterwards experience the bliss of nirvāṇa. 'Kakuda' is the name, 'Kātyāyana' is the clan name; he taught that sentient beings are both existent and non-existent. 'Nirgrantha' is the generic name for renunciant heterodox practitioners, and 'Jñātī' is the mother; he taught that all things are produced by karma, are definitively unalterable, and have no place of escape. Now the Great Being refutes him with a slight measure [of similarity], just as scolding a person as a donkey does not necessarily mean he actually has four legs, a mane, and a tail. Because the Tripiṭaka [teaching] is not ultimate, it resembles heterodoxy; taking this [resemblance], he rebukes him. As for their resemblance: the Tripiṭaka has four gates of entry into reality, and the six masters also have four gates of heterodox reckonings. Pūraṇa's view of no-cause and no-effect, no-arising and no-ceasing—no-arising meaning not existent, and no-ceasing meaning not non-existent—is the gate of neither existence nor non-existence. Maskarī's teaching that all is spontaneous nature without an agent of creation—which refutes the cause but does not refute the effect, like Zhuang Zhou's reckoning of spontaneous nature—resembles the gate of emptiness. Sañjaya's reckoning of heterodox cause and no-cause is not yet clear. Kātyāyana reckons the gate of existence-and-non-existence, and the reckonings of the remaining two are both the gate of existence. Thus we know that the six masters also have the four attachments. In the Śrāvaka teaching, it is explained that when past Buddhas appeared in the world, the lifespan of human beings and their attainment of the Way were all fixed in number; later, when Maitreya appears in the world, human lifespan will be eighty thousand years, at which time they will attain the Way, while at other times they cannot, and therefore the Buddha does not appear. As the Dàzhìdù lùn rebukes: how is this different from Sañjaya? This teaching also explains shaving the head, dyeing the robes, and the ascetic practice of rags from the dust heap—how is this different from Kambala? It also explains that giving is serious, while vinaya imposes expulsion, and various sins that obstruct the Way impede the noble Way—how is this different from Jñātiputra? It also speaks of them as resembling each other, and hence uses them for rebukes. Furthermore, there are three kinds of heterodox practitioners: first, those of omniscience; second, those of supernormal powers; third, those of the Vedas. Among the four propositions, each has what they practice: those who deeply penetrate through refined reflection have a distinct and clear vision of mind, and within their respective gates their eloquence is inexhaustible and their arguments cannot be refuted; these are the heterodox practitioners of omniscience. Although possessing this wisdom, if they have not attained meditative concentration, they lack supernormal powers, encountering hindrances at every turn with water, fire, and mountain walls. If they attain meditative concentration, they manifest supernormal powers on that basis, being able to halt a river in an ear, transform Indra into a sheep, hold the three luminaries in their hand, and contain the four oceans in their mouth. Such power is no different from that of a sage; these are the heterodox practitioners of supernormal powers. Even if they have wisdom and supernormal transformations, if they cannot penetrate the treatises of the four Vedas, then regarding astrology, geography, medical recipes, and incantations, they are ignorant of everything they encounter and frequently stumble; this is having wisdom but lacking learning. If one is able to recite the four Vedas, one is the foremost leader within their path; everyone in the world takes them as master, and the sixteen great kingdoms revere them like a Buddha. Applying these three kinds to the six masters, each master has three, making eighteen heterodox masters. The Tripiṭaka also has three kinds of arhats: at first cultivating the three kinds of applications of mindfulness—namely nature, shared, and conditioned—they therefore attain the fruit to become three [types of] arhats: namely wisdom-liberated, doubly liberated, and unobstructed. If classified according to the four gates, there are twelve [types of] arhats. The matters of omniscience, supernormal powers, and the Vedas are also similar. The reason he adduces these heterodox persons to refute him is that he feared Subhūti might consider himself to be an arhat who, having seen truth and severed fetters, has attained all-knowledge, possesses the three clarities and six supernormal powers, and is well-versed in the Tripiṭaka as a great arhat—how could he be compared to heterodox practitioners? Therefore, the Great Being takes the three kinds of the six masters to refute him: 'If the three kinds of the heterodox practitioners are heterodox, how could your three be orthodox?' Thoughts moving outside of principle—everything prior to this is called heterodox view, because it is not effortless action. The Great Being knew that [Subhūti] harbored implicit objections in his mind, and therefore turned around to conclude his faults, unfolding rebukes upon rebukes to leave him with nothing to reply. With such pressing interrogations back and forth, how are you different from them? Since you are the same as them, you took ordination under them and received instruction from them in omniscience and the rest."