止觀輔行傳弘決 2.40.3

2.40.3

」答曰：「實在。 」令使召來，我大歡喜。 』王白佛言：『夫人持五戒，月行六齋。 一日之內五戒之中犯酒、妄二戒，八戒之中犯於五戒，謂過中食、服華香、作倡妓、高廣床、飲酒、妄語。 破戒之罪，重耶？ 輕耶？ 』佛言：『如是犯者，得大功德。 何以故？ 為利益故。 』」此約亡犯濟物菩薩利他，乃得名為惡中有善，故云「唯酒唯戒」。 欲從斯例善自斟量，若順貪心終非持相。 「和須蜜多」等者，《說文》云「婬者，私逸也。 」《在傳》云「貪色也。 」《華嚴》云「次復南行，有城名莊嚴。 有善知識，和須蜜多名女（云云）。 善財至彼求覓是女，城中有不知者言：『此童子諸根寂靜，智慧明了，諦觀一尋，目視不瞬心不動搖。 不應於彼女有貪染心。 此童子者，不行魔縛等（云云）。 』中有先知是女智者，告善財言：『善哉善哉！ 汝今乃能求覓是女。 汝已獲得廣大善根，汝應決定求覓佛果。 』種種誡之，破一切眾生於女色所有貪染心。 『善男子！ 此女在於城內市𮠔之北自宅舍中。 』聞已歡喜往詣其門，見其住宅種種莊嚴。 見此女人容貌姿美，譚說善巧，入如幻智方便法門，種種嚴身，從身出於廣大光明普照宅中，遇光明者身得清淨。 詣其禮足，合掌白言：『聖者！ 我已先發等（云云）。 』女言：『我得解脫名離欲際。 隨其所欲而為現身，各各令其所見不同。 若欲意所纏，來至我所聞法者、見者、執手者、暫升床者、見我嚬呻者、見我瞬目者，並得離欲。 抱持接脣吻等者，各得法門。 我於過去高行王如來所，為長者妻，舍一金錢。 爾時文殊為佛侍者，為我說法，令發菩提心。 由是得菩薩離欲際法門，故知能化所化並是因欲而得離欲。 』」故云「惡中有善」。 又如《慧上菩薩經》上卷，阿難入城乞食，見重勝王菩薩與女同床而坐。 我謂：「犯穢得無異人。 學梵行者，於如來教將無犯見聞中想。 」發是語時大千六動，菩薩即時身處虛空，去地四丈九尺，語阿難言：「犯欲者乃能身升空乎？ 」阿難投地自悔：如何於大龍所而求短耶？ 此亦以欲而為法門。 比見無慚者，或稱無礙、或說理融。 若得理者，應如蜜多、慧上之流，身升虛空依正嚴麗，令彼悟入無量法門。 縱能現通，尚應問言：「通由何得？ 若自證法門，為名何等？ 從何佛所最初發心？ 曾供幾佛？ 未來幾時當成菩提？ 曾從何佛而得受記？ 未來何方淨佛國土？ 作佛名何？ 幾會說法？ 侍者補處名字何等？ 佛壽幾劫？ 正像法住其數幾何？ 」若不能答如是問者，則是鬼通。 外道根本有漏神通，生染心已此通又失，或是妄語無慚之人。 若謂此身即是佛者，釋尊已滅、慈氏未降，又復非是他方佛來。 若非魔賊，謂是誰乎？ 汝若不信有十方佛，自稱為佛，逆之甚矣。 故知此人自滅道心、破他善種。 若大權逆化，復不自稱我行無礙。 《慧上菩薩經》又云「過去無數劫有梵志名燈光，在林藪間行吉祥願。 經四百二十歲入摩竭國，有陶師女，見梵志端正投梵志前。 梵志報言：『吾不樂欲。 』女言：『設不能者，吾尋自害。 』梵志自念：吾常護戒，若數犯者則非吉祥。 離之七步，即起慈心而欲犯戒，不然女死。 『寧令女安，我入地獄。 』從其所願，經十二年，終生梵天。 」前是法身不思議化，此是實行亡梵濟物。 行效此者審自思之，世間小苦尚不能忍，而能犯戒入地獄耶？ 「提婆達多邪見即正」者，多兜二字隨存一字，若兩存者恐是文誤，略如第一卷記，現住阿鼻，受無間苦。 《法華》復云「由調達故具足相好，記當作佛號曰天王。 」除《法華》外餘一切教，但云生生為惡相惱，此乃教法權實不同。 「若諸」下，結也。 大權示迹深淺難量，一往觀文，如央掘等如似凡夫，如和須蜜久已入位。 雖已入位，即指初為長者妻時於欲能離，名惡有善。

… she answered, ‘He really is alive.’ She had a messenger summon him, and I rejoiced greatly.’ The king addressed the Buddha: ‘My lady upholds the five precepts and observes the six monthly fasts. Within a single day, among the five precepts she violated the two against intoxicants and lying, and among the eight precepts she violated five—namely, eating past noon, wearing flowers and fragrances, engaging in entertainment and dancing, sitting on high and broad beds, drinking intoxicants, and speaking falsehoods. Is her sin of breaking the precepts heavy or light?’ The Buddha said: ‘One who violates them in this manner attains great merit. Why is this? Because it was done to bring benefit.’ ” This concerns setting aside the prohibition to rescue beings, a bodhisattva benefiting others; only then can it be called “good within evil,” which is why [the text] says, “Only alcohol, only the precepts.” If one wishes to follow this precedent, one must carefully weigh matters oneself; if one merely follows a lustful mind, it is ultimately not the mark of upholding [the precepts]. Regarding “Vasumitrā” and so forth: The Shuowen says, “Yin (lust) means secret license.” The Zuo zhuan says, “Coveting sexual beauty.” The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: “Next journeying south, there was a city named Alaṃkāra. There lived a good friend, a woman named Vasumitrā (and so on). Sudhana arrived there seeking this woman. Those in the city who did not know better said: ‘This youth has senses that are tranquil, his wisdom is distinct, he has scrutinized her for a fathom’s length, his gaze does not blink, and his mind does not waver. He should not harbor a lustful mind toward that woman. This youth does not practice demonic fetters (and so on).’ Among them were wise persons who previously knew this woman, and they told Sudhana: ‘Excellent, excellent! You are now able to seek this woman. You have already obtained vast roots of goodness; you must resolutely seek the fruit of buddhahood.’ They offered varied admonitions to shatter the lustful thoughts that all sentient beings harbor toward female form. [They said,] ‘Good son! This woman lives in the city, north of the marketplace, in her own dwelling.’ Hearing this, he rejoiced and went to her gate, seeing that her dwelling was adorned in varied ways. He saw this woman of beautiful appearance and graceful form, skillful in conversation, having entered the skillful means dharma-gate of illusion-like wisdom, with varied adornments upon her body. From her body shone a vast light that universally illuminated the dwelling; those who encountered this light had their bodies purified. He went forward, paid homage at her feet, joined his palms, and addressed her: ‘Noble one! I have already aroused [the aspiration for awakening] (and so on).’ The woman said: ‘I have attained the liberation named the realm of detachment from desire. In accordance with what beings desire, I manifest my body, causing each to see it differently. If those bound by lustful thoughts come to my place, those who hear the Dharma, those who see me, those who hold my hand, those who momentarily ascend my bed, those who see me yawn, and those who see me blink their eyes—all attain detachment from desire. Those who embrace me and kiss my lips each attain a dharma-gate. Formerly, under the Tathāgata King of Lofty Conduct, I was an elder’s wife and gave a single gold coin. At that time Mañjuśrī was the Buddha’s attendant; he preached the Dharma for me and caused me to arouse the aspiration for awakening. Through this I attained the bodhisattva dharma-gate of the realm of detachment from desire. Hence we know that both the one who transforms and the one transformed achieve detachment from desire on account of desire.’ ” Thus it is said, “There is good within evil.” Furthermore, as in the first fascicle of the Bodhisattva Jñānottara Sūtra: Ānanda entered the city to beg for food and saw the Bodhisattva Vijayavikrāmin sitting on the same bed with a woman. [Ānanda] thought: “Has the committing of defilement reached someone so distinguished? Shall one practicing pure conduct commit such things within the teaching of the Tathāgata, contrary to what is seen and heard?” When he uttered these words, the great thousandfold [world] shook in six ways, and the bodhisattva immediately rose into the air, forty-nine feet above the ground, saying to Ānanda: “Could one who has committed desire rise into the air like this?” Ānanda threw himself to the ground in self-reproach: “How could I seek fault in a great dragon?” This too took desire as a dharma-gate. Recently I have seen shameless people who either claim unobstructedness or speak of the fusion of the principle. If they had attained the principle, they ought to be like the company of Vasumitrā and Jñānottara: rising into the air with their bodies, with their primary and dependent [karmic rewards] majestic and splendid, causing others to awaken and enter into immeasurable dharma-gates. Even if they could display supernormal powers, one should still ask them: “From what were these powers obtained? What is the name of the dharma-gate you have personally realized? Under which Buddha did you first arouse the aspiration [for awakening]? How many Buddhas have you served in the past? When in the future will you achieve bodhi? From which Buddha did you receive a prediction? In which direction will you purify a Buddha-field in the future? What will your Buddha-name be? How many assemblies of teaching will there be? What will be the names of your attendant and the one who succeeds your place? What will be your lifespan in kalpas? How many are the numbers of the true and semblance Dharma’s duration?” If they cannot answer such questions, then it is merely demonic power. For the fundamental, outflow-bound supernormal powers of non-Buddhists, once a lustful thought arises, these powers are lost again; or else such people are shameless liars. If they claim that this very body is already a Buddha: Śākyamuni has already entered parinirvāṇa, Maitreya has not yet descended, and this is not a Buddha coming from another world either. If not a demonic thief, who else would this be? If you do not believe in the Buddhas of the ten directions and call yourself a Buddha, this is an extreme transgression. Hence we know that such a person destroys their own aspiration for the path and shatters the good seeds of others. If it were a case of great provisional [beings] using counter-transformations, they would never declare of themselves: “My conduct is unobstructed.” The Bodhisattva Jñānottara Sūtra also says: “Incalculable kalpas ago, there was a brahmacārin named Dīpapradīpa, practicing auspicious vows in the midst of groves and thickets. After four hundred and twenty years, he entered the kingdom of Magadha. A potter’s daughter saw that the brahmacārin was handsome and cast herself before him. The brahmacārin told her: ‘I take no pleasure in desire.’ The woman said: ‘If you cannot [comply], I will immediately kill myself.’ The brahmacārin reflected: ‘I have constantly guarded the precepts; if I were to repeatedly violate them, it would not be auspicious.’ Stepping seven paces away from her, he immediately aroused compassion and wished to break the precept, for otherwise the woman would die. [He thought:] ‘Better that the woman be at peace and I enter hell.’ He complied with her wish for twelve years, and at the end of his life he was born in the Brahmā heaven.” The former case was the inconceivable transformation of the dharma-body; this case was an actual practice of abandoning pure conduct to rescue beings. Those who would emulate this must reflect carefully: if you cannot endure even minor worldly suffering, could you really break the precepts and enter hell? Regarding “Devadatta’s wrong views being identical to right [views]”: between the two characters duo and dou [in Chinese transcriptions of Devadatta], either one may be retained; if both are retained, it is likely a textual error, as noted briefly in the commentary to the first fascicle. He currently abides in Avīci suffering unremitting torment. The Lotus [Sūtra] also says: “Owing to Devadatta, [the Buddha] perfected the marks and signs, and he received the prediction that he would become a Buddha named Devarāja.” With the exception of the Lotus [Sūtra], all other teachings merely say that from life to life he was an evil companion causing affliction; this is because the teachings differ regarding the provisional and the real. Below, “If various…”, is the conclusion. The deep and shallow traces manifested by great provisional beings are difficult to fathom. Looking at the text in a general way, those like Aṅgulimāla seem like ordinary persons, while Vasumitrā entered the stages long ago. Although she had already entered the stages, it refers directly to when she was first an elder’s wife and was able to be detached from desire; this is called good within evil.