俱舍論疏 1.23

1.23

論「諸言所表謂佛世尊」，第二隨文別解。於中有五：一述德所依人、二明自利德、三彰利他德、四明敬禮相、五述歸敬意。此文初也。「諸言所表謂佛世尊」者，如《法華》云「諸求三乘人，若有疑悔者」，諸言所表，三乘人也。今此論云諸一切種、諸冥滅者，諸言所表，具德人也。此則諸言唯表於佛，非及餘人，無三德故。諸德相傳，西方釋云：初言諸者，顯無朋黨，以德召人。諸有三德，我即歸敬。以諸外道各謂自師是一切智，若偏歸敬釋迦牟尼，恐生彼謗，故置諸言息其異論者。此乃更招異論，外道亦謂自師具三德及一切智，今置諸言豈非招謗？亦謂世親菩薩歸事外道。又云：或恐佛化根淺有情，權作彼師引入正法，故置諸言。此之諸字，起自西方母兒論師，凡欲作論皆置諸言，論主將為當理，故亦言諸者。不然。權形五趣即是化身，直言歸佛豈攝化？又佛權為外道即歸外道，佛既權形五趣，亦應兼歸鬼畜，即合諸言通於一切。論自釋云「諸言所表謂佛世尊」，又云「今欲造論，為顯自師其體尊高超諸聖眾。」《正理》、《顯宗》意同此論。即此諸言已簡外道，何得諸言顯無朋黨？此中言諸，顯一切佛。諸言具三德，皆歸敬禮故。

The treatise says: 'What is indicated by the word "whoever" refers to the Buddha, the World-Honoured One'; this is the second part, explaining individually according to the text. Within this there are five parts: first, stating the person in whom virtue resides; second, explaining the virtue of self-benefit; third, revealing the virtue of benefiting others; fourth, explaining the characteristics of paying homage; fifth, stating the intent of the homage. This passage is the first. Regarding 'what is indicated by the word "whoever" refers to the Buddha, the World-Honoured One': just as the Lotus Sūtra says, 'Whoever seeks the three vehicles, if they have doubts and regrets...', the word 'whoever' indicates the persons of the three vehicles. Now this treatise says, 'Whoever has dispelled all darkness in all kinds,' the word 'whoever' indicates the person endowed with virtues. Thus the word 'whoever' exclusively indicates the Buddha, and does not extend to other persons, because they lack the three virtues. Masters have traditionally transmitted an explanation from the West, saying: The initial word 'whoever' shows impartiality, summoning the person through virtue: 'Whoever possesses the three virtues, to him I pay homage.' Since non-Buddhists each claim their own teacher is omniscient, if one exclusively paid homage to Śākyamuni, one might fear inciting their slander; hence the word 'whoever' was placed to quell their disparate debates. This, however, only invites further disparate debates: non-Buddhists also claim their own teacher possesses the three virtues and omniscience; by placing the word 'whoever' now, does it not invite slander? It might also be thought that Bodhisattva Vasubandhu paid homage to non-Buddhists. Furthermore, it is said: Perhaps fearing that the Buddha, to convert sentient beings of shallow capacity, expediently manifested as their teachers to lead them into the true Dharma, he therefore placed the word 'whoever'. This character 'whoever' originated from the Western master Mātṛceta; whenever he wished to compose a treatise, he would always place the word 'whoever', and the treatise master, considering it reasonable, therefore also said 'whoever'. This is not so. Expediently manifesting in the five destinies is indeed the transformation body; if one simply says paying homage to the Buddha, how would it not encompass his transformations? Furthermore, if the Buddha expediently became a non-Buddhist and one then paid homage to non-Buddhists, since the Buddha expediently manifested in the five destinies, one should also pay homage to ghosts and beasts, and the word 'whoever' would have to encompass everything. The treatise itself explains: 'What is indicated by the word "whoever" refers to the Buddha, the World-Honoured One.' And it says: 'Now, wishing to compose this treatise, in order to show that one's own teacher is noble and exalted in essence, transcending all gatherings of noble beings.' The intent of the Nyāyānusāra and Samayapradīpikā is identical to this treatise. This word 'whoever' has already excluded non-Buddhists; how could 'whoever' show impartiality? The word 'whoever' here indicates all Buddhas. Whoever is endowed with the three virtues, to all of them one pays homage.