止觀輔行傳弘決 10.6

10.6

次明《入大乘論》四宗。「作與作者一」者，《大論》云「身手足等名之為作。妄計神我能有所作，名為作者。若計手等與神我一，是計神與作業一也。」義同計於色即是我。「相與相者一」等者，相謂身色四大生等四相，相者即是神我。此計神我與四相一。「分與有分一」者，分謂手足頭等身之少分，有分謂身，身有手足等分故也。計身即是頭手足等。雖有前來三種不同，前二秖是計身與神一，後一秖是計於身分與身一耳。若優樓佉計異，乃至泥中有瓶等，亦復如是。細歷四見（云云），秖是神與身異。相與分等，準前可知。三四兩句例亦可知。又《破四宗論》云「僧佉計一、毘世計異、尼乾計一異、若提計非一非異。」又準《破涅槃論》，有二十師所計不同，各計一種而為涅槃。此之二論，若提所造。準《殃掘經》明立異元由者，佛問文殊：「汝聞有外道不？過去時有佛名俱留孫，彼佛出時無有外道，唯一佛乘。佛涅槃後，有一比丘住阿蘭若，名曰佛慧。有人施其無價寶衣，為獵師所劫奪，將此比丘去至山中，壞身躶形懸首繫樹。有婆羅門見而歎曰：『先著袈裟而今躶形，必知袈裟非解脫服。』因此効之，自懸躶形以為真道。此比丘自解得身，以赤石塗身，樹皮自障，結草以拂蚊虻。見者復謂著如此衣、捉如是拂是解脫道，即便效之。出家外道婆羅門因此而起。比丘至暮入水洗瘡，以衣覆頭，取牧牛人弊衣纏身。見者復效，一日三洗，被髮苦行外道因此而生。此比丘洗己身瘡，復為蠅蜂所唼，白土塗瘡。見者復效，塗身外道從此而起。此比丘然火炙身。見者復效，五熱炙身外道因此而起。炙身轉痛不能堪忍，投巖自害。見者復效，投巖外道從此而起。乃至九十五種，皆是諸婆羅門效此比丘，至今未絕。」

Next, explaining the four doctrines in the *Introduction to the Mahāyāna* (*Rù dàchéng lùn*). Regarding 'action and the agent are one': the *Dazhidulun* states, 'The body, hands, feet, and so forth are called action. Delusionally positing a spiritual self (*ātman*) capable of performing action is called the agent. If one posits that the hands and so forth are one with the spiritual self, this is positing that the spirit and bodily actions are one.' In meaning, this is the same as positing that form is the self. Regarding 'the mark and the possessor of the mark are one': 'mark' refers to the four marks of birth and so forth of the physical form and four great elements; the 'possessor of the mark' is the spiritual self. This posits that the spiritual self and the four marks are one. Regarding 'the parts and the whole are one': 'parts' refers to portions of the body, such as the hands, feet, and head; 'the whole' refers to the body itself, because the body possesses parts such as hands and feet. This posits that the body is identical to the head, hands, feet, and so forth. Although there are the preceding three different kinds, the first two merely posit that the body and the spirit are one, and the latter one merely posits that the parts of the body and the body itself are one. If [one considers] Ulūka's positing of difference, up to [the view that] the clay contains the jar and so on, it is also like this. Passing in detail through the four views (and so on), it is merely that the spirit and the body are different. The marks, parts, and so forth may be understood accordingly by analogy to the above. The third and fourth lines may also be understood likewise. Furthermore, the *Po sizong lun* states: 'Sāṃkhya posits oneness; Vaiśeṣika posits difference; the Nirgrantha posits both oneness and difference; the Jñāti[putra] posits neither oneness nor difference.' Moreover, according to the *Po niepan lun*, there are twenty masters whose doctrines differ, each positing one kind [of state] as nirvāṇa. These two treatises were composed by Jñāti[putra]. According to the *Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra*, which clarifies the origin of the establishment of these heterodoxies: the Buddha asked Mañjuśrī, 'Have you heard of whether there were non-Buddhists? In the past, there was a Buddha named Krakucchanda. When that Buddha appeared, there were no non-Buddhists, but only the one Buddha vehicle. After that Buddha's parinirvāṇa, there was a monk dwelling in an araṇya named Fotihui (Buddhabuddhi). Someone gave him an invaluable jeweled robe, which was seized by hunters. They took this monk into the mountains, stripped his body naked, and tied him by his head hanging from a tree. A brāhmaṇa saw this and sighed, saying, "Formerly wearing the kāṣāya, but now naked; I certainly know that the kāṣāya is not the garment of liberation!" Following this example, he hung himself up naked, taking this to be the true path. This monk untied himself and freed his body; he smeared his body with red stone, covered himself with tree bark, and tied grass to brush away mosquitoes and gnats. Those who saw this again said that wearing such clothing and holding such a whisk was the path of liberation, and immediately imitated it. Renunciant non-Buddhist brāhmaṇas arose from this. In the evening, the monk entered the water to wash his wounds, covered his head with clothing, and wrapped his body in the worn-out rags of cowherds. Those who saw this again imitated it: bathing three times a day, and the ascetic non-Buddhists with unkempt hair were born from this. This monk, having washed his body's wounds, was again bitten by flies and bees, so he smeared his wounds with white earth. Those who saw this again imitated it; the body-smearing non-Buddhists arose from this. This monk lit a fire to scorch his body. Those who saw this again imitated it; the non-Buddhists who scorch their bodies with five fires arose from this. The pain from scorching his body grew unbearable, and he cast himself from a cliff to commit suicide. Those who saw this again imitated it; the non-Buddhists who cast themselves from cliffs arose from this. Thus, up to ninety-five kinds [of non-Buddhists], all were brāhmaṇas imitating this monk, and they have not ceased to this day.'