[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) › [止觀輔行傳弘決](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912) › 2.40 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 2.40 止觀輔行傳弘決 2.40 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.40.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40.1) 次諸惡中，初明觀境中，云「夫善惡無定」等者，先明通相善惡也。 此則未可盡為觀境。 何者？ 展轉相望得善惡名，是則人誰無善？ 誰不有惡？ 是故不以為今觀境。 言「寧起」等者，心凶為「惡」，身病曰「癩」。 乍起三途之心，不生二乘之念。 「毒器」者，《大論》斥三藏菩薩云「具足三毒，云何能集無量功德？ 譬如毒瓶，雖貯甘露，皆不中食。 菩薩修諸純淨功德乃得作佛。 若雜三毒，云何能具清淨法門？ 」菩薩之身猶如毒器，具足煩惱名為有毒。 修習佛法如貯甘露。 此法教他，令他失於常住之命。 「大經云自此」等者，引證別教。 故〈四相品〉中迦葉序云「自我未聞四德之前，皆是邪見。 」此是迦葉謙退自斥義同於邪，豈此已前頓同三外？ 今亦如是，未稱理故，義云邪見。 邪即是惡，是故當知唯圓為善。 復有二意：一者以順為善、以背為惡，相待意也。 次「若達」下，以著為惡、以達為善。 相待絕待俱須離惡。 圓著尚惡，況復餘耶？ 「如此」下，結成通相。 「今就」下，別明極惡方為觀境。 於中初出惡體，即六蔽也。 「善法」下，結前生後。 「前雖」下，明觀惡意。 以純惡故不可不觀，若不觀者唯惡無善。 自他俱然，故須修觀。 「縱不」下，縱釋也。 他人縱不全起不善，偏惡不無。 「出家離世」下，況釋偏起。 出家不備，理當偏惡。 白衣純惡，況復偏耶？ 羅漢殘習，亦仍偏惡。 「凡夫」下，明用觀所以。 聖猶殘習，凡何可縱？ 「如佛世」下，先舉佛世用觀有益，引人為證。 前觀惡意中言「不可樂想」者，《大論》十想中釋一切世間不可樂想云「世間有二種：一眾生、二國土。 言眾生不可樂者，三惡、八苦、十四等惡（云云）。 或貧而好施、多財而慳（約六蔽互說），或貧妍富醜，或憍高不下，或接物欺誑。 如是無量不可稱說。 國土不可樂者，或多衰無告，飢渴寒熱、惡疫毒氣如是種種，乃至上界亦生大惱甚於下界，如極高墜下苦不可說。 」文云「無好人」者，略語眾生以他望己唯純不偏，是故不可不觀於惡。 次縱釋中云「多慳」等者，略舉六蔽以釋偏起。 前四如文。 酒為亂原，即亂意蔽。 「根性易奪」，即愚癡蔽。 若有慧者，不為惡易。 能生為根，數習成性。 數數改換，故云易奪。 又隨境而轉為易，惑彊失真為奪。 又以愚替智為易，智被真掣為奪。 次況釋中云「羅漢殘習」者，身子瞋習，以過去世從蛇中來。 畢陵慢習，宿世曾為婆羅門來。 如佛在世有一比丘，而常以鏡自照，世世從女人中來。 有一比丘常好跳染，以世世從獼猴中來。 引人證中，「在家」等者，即且通舉有惡之人。 「央掘」下，別舉惡人，先明惡人有道。 「央掘」等者，《央掘經》云「舍衛城北村名薩那，有貧婆羅門女名跋陀。 有一子，名一切世間現。 少失其父。 厥年十二，色力人相悉皆具足，聰明善說。 有異村名破訶私，有婆羅門師名摩尼跋陀，善四韋陀，一切世間現從其受學。 師受王請，留世間現守舍而去。 婆羅門婦見世間現端正，而生染心，前執其衣。 時世間現而白之言：『汝是我母。 我豈於尊而生不善？ 』內心懷愧，捨衣遠避。 婦人不遂，以爪自獲、以繩自繫，足不離地。 夫既還已，恐世間現露其不善，便以惡事誣世間現：『汝行已後，世間現於我有不如事。 』師言：『其初生時有大瑞相，必無是過。 』然語之言：『汝殺千人，可得免罪。 』世間現尊師教故，即白師言：『嗚呼和尚！ 殺害千人，非我所應。 』師云：『汝是惡人，不樂生作婆羅門耶？ 』答言：『善哉！ 奉命。 』便禮師足。 師聞見已生希有心：『汝大惡人，故不死耶。 當令殺一一人，取指為鬘，冠首乃成婆羅門耳（以是緣故名央握摩）。 』『善哉！ 受教。 』」《增一》云「如是次第殺千人已，取指為鬘。 > Next, in the section on various evils, first, in clarifying the object of contemplation, the words "Now, good and evil are not fixed..." and so forth first clarify good and evil in their general characteristics. These cannot yet entirely serve as objects of contemplation. Why? It is by viewing them in relative comparison that the names 'good' and 'evil' are acquired; this being so, who among humans lacks good? Who does not possess evil? For this reason, they are not taken as the present object of contemplation. As for the words "Rather arouse..." and so forth, ferocity in mind is 'evil' and disease of the body is called 'leprosy.' One would rather temporarily arouse the mind of the three destinies than give rise to the thought of the two vehicles. Regarding the 'vessel of poison,' the Dazhidulun rebukes the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching, saying: "Fully endowed with the three poisons, how could you accumulate immeasurable merits? It is like a poisoned vase: though it stores sweet dew (amṛta), none of it is fit to consume. A bodhisattva cultivates all purely clean merits and only then attains buddhahood. If mixed with the three poisons, how could you be endowed with the pure dharma-gates?" A bodhisattva's body is like a vessel of poison: being fully endowed with afflictions is called being poisonous. Practicing and learning the Buddha-Dharma is like storing sweet dew. Teaching this Dharma to others causes them to lose their life of eternal presence. The words "The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra states: 'From this \[time forward\]...'" and so forth cite proof for the distinctive teaching. Thus, in the "Chapter on the Four Marks," Kāśyapa's introductory words state: "Before I had heard the four virtues, all was false views." This was Kāśyapa humbly rebuking himself, \[his views\] being equivalent in meaning to false ones; how could he have suddenly become identical to the three outer paths prior to this? The present case is also like this: because it does not accord with the principle, it is called a false view in meaning. The false is precisely the evil; therefore, one should know that only the perfect \[teaching\] is good. Furthermore, there are two senses: first, taking compliance as good and defiance as evil—this is the sense of relative comparison. Next, from the words "If one penetrates..." downward, attachment is taken as evil and penetration is taken as good. In both relative comparison and absolute transcendence, one must abandon evil. Even attachment to the perfect is still evil, how much more so the rest? From the words "Like this..." downward, the general characteristics are concluded. From the words "Now with regard to..." downward, it specifically clarifies that only extreme evil becomes the object of contemplation. Therein, it first sets forth the substance of evil, namely the six coverings. From the words "Wholesome dharmas..." downward, it concludes the preceding and introduces what follows. From the words "Although previously..." downward, it clarifies the intention of contemplating evil. Because it is pure evil, one cannot fail to contemplate it; if one does not contemplate it, there is only evil and no good. Since this is so for both oneself and others, one must cultivate contemplation. From the words "Even if not..." downward, it is an explanation by concession. Even if others do not give rise exclusively to the unwholesome, partial evil is not absent. From the words "Renouncing the household and leaving the world..." downward, it explains the partial arising by way of comparison. If those who have left the household are not complete, in principle they must have partial evil. In the white-robed (laity) there is pure evil, so how much more must there be partial evil? The residual habit-energies of arhats are also still partial evil. From the words "Ordinary persons..." downward, it clarifies the reason for applying contemplation. If even sages still have residual habit-energies, how could ordinary persons indulge themselves? From the words "Like in the time of the Buddha..." downward, it first cites the benefit of applying contemplation in the time of the Buddha, quoting individuals as proof. In the preceding \[explanation of\] the intention of contemplating evil, the words "the notion of displeasure" refer to the Dazhidulun's explanation of the notion of displeasure regarding all the world among the ten notions: "There are two kinds of worlds: first, sentient beings; second, lands. To say that sentient beings are unpleasant refers to the three evils, the eight sufferings, the fourteen evils, and so forth (and so on). Some are poor yet fond of giving; some have much wealth yet are stingy (spoken mutually in terms of the six coverings). Some are poor and attractive, while some are wealthy and ugly; some are arrogant and haughty, refusing to bow, or deal with things deceitfully. Immeasurable instances like this cannot be fully stated. That the lands are unpleasant means that there is much misfortune without recourse, hunger, thirst, cold, heat, malignant epidemics, poisonous vapors, and various things of this kind, and even being born into the higher realms brings great distress exceeding that of the lower realms, just as falling from a supreme height brings suffering beyond words." When the text says "there are no good persons," it speaks briefly of sentient beings: viewing others from oneself, it is solely pure and not partial; therefore, one cannot fail to contemplate evil. Next, in the explanation by concession, the words "great stinginess" and so forth briefly cite the six coverings to explain partial arising. The first four are as in the text. Wine is the source of disorder, which is the covering of a disordered mind. "Root nature easily snatched away" is the covering of foolishness. If one has wisdom, one is not easily changed by evil. That which can generate is the 'root'; repeated habituation becomes the 'nature.' Constantly altering and changing is therefore called 'easily snatched away.' Furthermore, turning in accordance with objects is 'easy \[to alter\]'; delusion being strong and losing the real is 'snatched away.' Moreover, substituting foolishness for wisdom is 'easy \[to alter\]'; wisdom being pulled away by the real is 'snatched away.' Next, in the explanation by comparison, the words "residual habit-energies of arhats" mean: Śāriputra's habit of anger was because in a past lifetime he came from among the snakes. Pilindavatsa's habit of conceit was because in past lifetimes he had been a brāhmaṇa. For instance, while the Buddha was in the world, there was a bhikṣu who would constantly look at himself in a mirror, having come from among women lifetime after lifetime. There was a bhikṣu who was always fond of leaping and bounding, having come from among monkeys lifetime after lifetime. In quoting individuals as proof, the words "In the household..." and so forth broadly cite those who have evil. From "Aṅguli..." downward, it specifically cites evil persons, first clarifying that evil persons possess the Path. Regarding "Aṅguli..." and so forth, the Aṅgulimāla-sūtra states: "In a village named Sana north of the city of Śrāvastī, there was a poor brāhmaṇa woman named Bhadrā. She had a son named All-World-Appearance. He lost his father when young. When he was twelve years old, his complexion, strength, and human marks were all fully complete, and he was clever and skilled in speech. In a different village named Pohasi, there was a brāhmaṇa master named Maṇibhadra, well-versed in the four Vedas, under whom All-World-Appearance studied. The master accepted a king's invitation, and left All-World-Appearance to guard the house while he departed. The brāhmaṇa's wife saw that All-World-Appearance was handsome, and giving rise to a lustful mind, went forward and seized his clothes. At that time, All-World-Appearance addressed her, saying: 'You are my mother. How could I give rise to unwholesomeness toward an elder?' Feeling ashamed in his heart, he abandoned his clothes and kept far away from her. The woman, thwarted, scratched herself with her nails, tied herself with ropes, and kept her feet off the ground. After the husband returned, fearing that All-World-Appearance would expose her unwholesomeness, she slandered All-World-Appearance with evil deeds, saying: 'After you left, All-World-Appearance did improper things to me.' The master said: 'When he was first born, there were great auspicious signs; he surely does not have this fault.' Yet he said to him: 'If you kill a thousand people, you may be freed from your guilt.' Because All-World-Appearance respected the master's teachings, he addressed the master, saying: 'Alas, Preceptor! Killing a thousand people is not what I should do.' The master said: 'You are an evil person; do you not delight in being born as a brāhmaṇa?' He replied: 'Excellent! I obey your command.' Thereupon he bowed at the master's feet. Having heard and seen this, the master conceived an extraordinary thought: 'You are a greatly evil person, so why have you not died? You must be made to kill people one by one, take their fingers to make a garland, and crown your head with it; only then will you become a brāhmaṇa (for this reason he was named Aṅgulimāla).' \[He replied:\] 'Excellent! I receive your instruction.'" The Ekottarika-āgama states: "Having thus killed a thousand people in succession, he took their fingers to make a garland." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.40.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40.2) 人白匿王：『國有人蟒，害人無數。 』比丘乞食，聞之白佛。 佛尋往彼，諸取薪人及守牛羊者皆不得過，云：『此有賊。 』佛乃前進。 遙見佛來，云：『我之指鬘數猶未足。 』母因送食，復自念言：『我聞師言，害母生天。 』便撮母頭，以手拔劍欲害於母。 佛放光照，掘云：『非天伐我乎？ 』母曰：『非天日月等光，必是世尊。 』掘聞佛名云：『我師亦云：「若害沙門，必得生天。 」』語母云：『且住。 我往害沙門。 』放母逐佛。 見佛如金山，佛復道而去，奔趁不及。 」白佛說偈，與《央掘經》同，《央掘經》云「住住大沙門，淨飯王大子。 我是央掘摩，今當稅一指。 」如是總有三十九偈，但易第二句云「無貪染衣士，毀形剃髮士，知足持鉢士」等。 佛以二百六十七偈答云「住住央掘摩！ 汝當住淨戒。 我是等正覺，輸汝慧劍稅。 」但易第三句，餘句並同。 餘第三句云「我住無生際，我住於實際，我住無作際。 」並用所證以答央掘。 央掘聞已，以佛力故，令悟梵本中語「如來出世，億劫乃值，未度者度等（四弘），有見佛者，即為說滅。 」走逐不及，必是如來，捨劍深坑，即便禮佛。 佛言：「善來。 」便成沙門，得法眼淨。 淨梵王領四兵而往伐之，王念先見世尊。 見已，具白佛。 佛問其意，王具答其意。 佛告王言：「見其出家為道者如何？ 」王曰：「當供養禮事。 彼無毫善，能發此心乎？ 」時央掘去佛不遠，正意結加。 佛遙示王，王禮供已，歎佛能降如是惡人。 後佛復為說法，得阿羅漢果，具六神通。 入城乞食，見者識之。 有婦人胎產甚難，見佛。 佛言：「賢聖已來，不曾殺人。 」婦人無他。 諸比丘問佛本緣等（云云）。 本為婆羅門法求欲生天，不違師教兼護婦人諂誑之情而行於殺，故今文云「彌殺彌慈」。 「祇陀末利」等者，準《未曾有經》下卷云「祇陀太子白佛：『昔受五戒，制酒難持，欲捨五戒持於十善。 』佛言：『飲時何過？ 』答：『國中豪賢時齎共飲，亦無餘過。 』佛言：『若如此者，終身無過。 』」夫善有二種，有漏、無漏。 飲不起惡業，是善報也，名有漏善。 佛因為說往昔因緣：「昔舍衛有剎利，因小諍致大怨，興兵相伐。 王有大臣名提韋羅，恃豪輕慢，於時太子實欲誅滅。 父王不聽，抱恨煩惱。 太后見之，負好酒勸我，我言：『先祖已來不曾飲酒。 若飲酒者，那羅天瞋、婆羅門伐我。 』太后夜分密開宮門，再三勸我，飲已忘憂。 三日之中受樂歡喜，因是仇息。 父王復諫：『夫修德歷代，何於小事致怨如此？ 若不忍者，亡失國土。 』因是和平，飲之力也。 」末利者，經言「元是王舍城耶若達多婆羅門婢，名黃頭，常知守園。 因將乾飯供佛之福，後波斯匿王遊獵入園見之，婢乃為王種種供給按摩，極稱王意。 王問婆羅門：『賣不？ 』答言：『婢賤何堪？ 』王重問之，答云：『千兩金。 』王遂以百千兩金從其買取，為第一夫人。 」《未曾有經》云「匿王白佛：『如佛所說，心歡喜故不起惡業，名有漏善者。 是事不然。 如人飲酒，心則歡喜不起煩惱，不起煩惱故則不殺害。 憶念我昔遊獵之時，忘將厨人，山中覺飢。 左右言王：「朝不勅令將厨人，即時無食。 」我聞是已走馬還宮，勅令索食。 厨人名修迦羅云：「即現無食，今方當作。 」飢逼瞋怒，令殺厨人。 諸臣共議：「國中唯有此之一人，殺已無人為王知厨稱王意者。 」時末利夫人聞已，即令辦好酒美肉，沐浴名香莊嚴身體，將諸妓女來至我所。 我見夫人瞋心即息，夫人輒遣黃門詐傳令勿殺厨人。 我至明旦深自悔恨，憂愁不樂。 夫人問我：「有何不樂？ 」王云：「我因昨日飢火所逼，錯殺厨人。 為是之故，悔恨愁耳。 」夫人笑曰：「其人猶在，願王莫愁。 」王言：「為實爾耶？ 為是戲耶？ > people reported to King Prasenajit: 'In the country there is a human serpent who has killed countless people.' Monks begging for food heard this and reported it to the Buddha. The Buddha straightaway went there. All the firewood gatherers and herders of cows and sheep could not pass through, saying, 'There is a brigand here.' The Buddha nevertheless advanced forward. Seeing the Buddha coming from afar, \[Aṅgulimāla\] said, 'The count for my garland of fingers is still incomplete.' His mother had just brought him food, and he thought to himself: 'I heard from my master that by killing one's mother one will be born in heaven.' He then grabbed his mother's head and drew his sword with his hand, intending to kill her. The Buddha emitted light that shone upon him, and \[Aṅguli\]māla said, 'Could this be a deva coming to strike me down?' The mother said, 'This is not the light of devas, the sun, or the moon; it must be the World-Honoured One.' Hearing the Buddha's name, \[Aṅguli\]māla said, 'My master also said, "If you kill a śramaṇa, you will definitely attain birth in heaven."' He told his mother, 'Wait here for now. I will go kill the śramaṇa.' Releasing his mother, he pursued the Buddha. He saw the Buddha like a mountain of gold; the Buddha walked along the road, and though he ran to chase him, he could not catch up." Speaking verses to the Buddha—which are identical to those in the \*Aṅgulimālīya-sūtra\*, where the \*Aṅgulimālīya-sūtra\* states: "Stop, stop, great śramaṇa, / eldest prince of King Śuddhodana! / I am Aṅgulimāla; / now I must levy a toll of one finger!" In this manner there are thirty-nine verses in all, differing only in the second line, saying: "O man in dyed robes free from greed," "O man of broken appearance with shaven head," "O man content holding an alms-bowl," and so on. The Buddha answered with two hundred and sixty-seven verses, saying: "Stop, stop, Aṅgulimāla! / You must abide in pure precepts. / I am the Equanimous and Fully Awakened One; / I offer you the toll of the sword of wisdom!" He altered only the third line, with the remaining lines being identical. The other third lines say: "I abide in the limit of non-arising," "I abide in the reality limit," "I abide in the limit of non-action." In all cases he used what he had realized to answer Aṅgulimāla. Having heard this, through the Buddha's power, \[Aṅgulimāla\] was made to awaken to the words of the Sanskrit original: "The Tathāgata appears in the world / only to be encountered after kotis of kalpas; / he delivers those who are not yet delivered, and so forth (the four universal vows); / for whoever sees the Buddha, / he immediately explains cessation." \[Thinking,\] "Since running after him I could not catch up, this must surely be the Tathāgata," he cast his sword into a deep pit and straightaway bowed down to the Buddha. The Buddha said, "Welcome, \[monk\]." He immediately became a śramaṇa and attained purity of the Dharma-eye. King Śuddhodana led the fourfold army to go attack him. The king thought he should first see the World-Honoured One. Having seen him, he reported everything to the Buddha. The Buddha asked his intention, and the king fully replied with his intention. The Buddha said to the king, "If you see that he has left home to practice the Path, what then?" The king said, "I would make offerings and bow down in service to him. But he has not the slightest good in him—how could he arouse such a mind?" At that time Aṅgulimāla was not far from the Buddha, upright in thought and seated cross-legged. The Buddha pointed him out to the king from afar. After paying homage and making offerings, the king praised the Buddha for being able to subdue such an evil person. Later, the Buddha again preached the Dharma for him, and he attained the fruit of an arhat, endowed with the six spiritual penetrations. Entering the city to beg for food, those who saw him recognized him. A woman was having a very difficult childbirth, and \[her family\] saw the Buddha. The Buddha \[instructed Aṅgulimāla to say\], "Since becoming a noble sage, I have never killed anyone." The woman suffered no harm. The monks asked the Buddha about the past causes, and so forth. Originally, in following the Brahmanical teaching to seek birth in heaven, not disobeying his master's instruction and moreover preserving the woman's deceptive flattery, he engaged in killing; therefore the present text says, "The more he killed, the more compassion \[he thought he had\]." As for "Jeta and Mallikā" and so on: according to the lower fascicle of the \*Sūtra on the Unprecedented\*, it states: "Prince Jeta said to the Buddha: 'Formerly I received the five precepts, but the prohibition on alcohol is difficult to uphold; I wish to relinquish the five precepts and uphold the ten wholesome \[actions\].' The Buddha said, 'What fault is there when you drink?' He answered, 'The eminent and worthy of the country sometimes bring \[wine\] to drink together with me; there is no other fault.' The Buddha said, 'If it is like this, there is no fault throughout your whole life.'" Now, wholesome \[actions\] are of two kinds: with outflows and without outflows. If drinking does not give rise to evil karma, this is a wholesome retribution, called wholesome with outflows. The Buddha thereupon explained the past causes and conditions: "Formerly in Śrāvastī there was a kṣatriya who, because of a minor quarrel, incurred great enmity and raised troops to attack each other. The king had a great minister named Tivera, who relied on his high status and was arrogant; at that time the prince truly wished to execute him. His royal father would not permit it, and \[the prince\] harbored resentment and vexation. The queen mother, seeing this, brought fine wine and encouraged me \[to drink\]. I said, 'Since the time of my ancestors, we have never drunk wine. If I drink wine, the god Nārāyaṇa will be angered, and the brahmins will attack me.' In the middle of the night, the queen mother secretly opened the palace gates and urged me repeatedly. Having drunk it, I forgot my worries. For three days I experienced joy and happiness, and because of this, the enmity ceased. The royal father again admonished \[me\]: 'Virtue has been cultivated for successive generations; why incur such enmity over a small matter? If one does not endure it, the kingdom will be lost.' Because of this there was peace and harmony; this was the power of drinking." As for Mallikā, the sūtra states: "Originally she was the slave girl of the brahmin Yajñadatta in Rājagṛha, named Yellow-Head, who was constantly assigned to guard the garden. By the merit of offering dried rice to the Buddha, later King Prasenajit, while on a hunting excursion, entered the garden and saw her. The slave girl provided various services and massages for the king, greatly pleasing the king's mind. The king asked the brahmin, 'Is she for sale?' He replied, 'A lowly slave girl, what is she fit for?' The king asked him again, and he replied, 'One thousand ounces of gold.' The king then bought her from him for one hundred thousand ounces of gold and made her his foremost consort." The \*Sūtra on the Unprecedented\* says: "King Prasenajit said to the Buddha: 'As the Buddha has spoken, because the mind is joyful and does not give rise to evil karma, it is called wholesome with outflows. But this matter is not so. Just as when a person drinks wine, their mind is joyful and does not give rise to afflictions; because afflictions do not arise, they do not kill. I remember formerly, when I was hunting, I forgot to bring the cook, and in the mountains I felt hungry. My attendants said to the king, "This morning you did not order the cook to be brought; right now there is no food." Having heard this, I galloped back to the palace and ordered food to be brought. The cook, named Śukra, said, "Right now there is no ready food; I am just about to make it." Oppressed by hunger, I was enraged and ordered the cook to be executed. The ministers discussed together: "In the entire country there is only this one person; after he is killed, there will be no one who understands cooking to suit the king's taste." At that time Consort Mallikā, having heard this, immediately had fine wine and delicious meat prepared, bathed, adorned her body with famous perfumes, and brought various singing girls to my presence. Seeing the consort, my anger immediately subsided. The consort, on her own initiative, sent a eunuch to falsely transmit an order not to execute the cook. When next morning came, I deeply regretted and reproached myself, being melancholy and unhappy. The consort asked me, "Why are you unhappy?" The king said, "Yesterday, pressed by the fire of hunger, I mistakenly killed the cook. For this reason, I am full of remorse and sorrow." The consort smiled and said, "The man is still alive; may the king not sorrow!" The king said, "Is this true, or is it a joke?" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.40.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40.3) 」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. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [2.40.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40.4) 若永為凡，不應證得離欲法門。 故知央掘且從迹說。 若從本說，亦是昔於殺等惡中能出離故，是故迹中亦以殺為利他法門。 又凡云示者，示為實行，令無量人不復為惡。 從實行說，於理無傷。 世人多迷權迹之意，凡諸勝行咸撥為權。 若如此者，諸菩薩行事同虛構。 秖緣實惡者墜、改惡者升，是故聖人示為升墜，令實行者改惡從善。 是故文云「雖行眾蔽而得成聖」。 言「不妨」者，謂惡可改，勸令於惡而修止觀，不可恣惡永作凡夫，非謂存惡名為無妨。 「又道不妨惡」下，明雖復得道，猶有餘惡。 「須陀洹」者，《出曜經》第十一云「昔有初果，意專女色通于夢想，婦大弊之，遇於親族知識比丘，婦人白言：『我欲陳情，為可爾不？ 』比丘答言：『無苦。 隱密之事當為覆之。 』婦人言：『我夫多欲不容食息，由是生疾，恐命不全。 』比丘曰：『夫若近汝，汝當語言：「須陀洹人法應爾耶？ 」』後時如教，夫聞慚愧，得第三果，便不復與女人從事。 婦人問夫：『何故永息？ 』夫曰：『我審見汝，何由更往？ 』婦曰：『我有何咎，汝云審見？ 』即集親族云：『夫見疎棄，永息情親。 』夫曰：『引證自明。 』乃作畫瓶，滿中盛糞，蓋口令弄。 見其弄已，以杖打破，穢污流溢。 『汝今更能弄此瓶不？ 』婦曰：『寧抱死屍、火坑深水、高山下墜，終不能近。 』夫言：『我觀汝身復過於此。 』乃說偈曰： > If she had remained an ordinary person forever, she could not have realized the dharma-gate of detachment from desire. Hence we know that Aṅgulimāla is discussed provisionally from his traces. If discussed from the source, it is also because in the past he was able to escape from evil deeds such as killing; therefore, in his traces, he also took killing as a dharma-gate for benefiting others. Furthermore, whenever “manifesting” is spoken of, it is manifested as actual practice to cause immeasurable people to no longer commit evil. Speaking in terms of actual practice does no harm to the principle. Worldly people are often confused about the meaning of provisional traces, dismissing all superior practices as merely provisional. If it were like this, all the practices of the bodhisattvas would be equivalent to empty fabrication. It is precisely because those who do actual evil fall, while those who reform evil ascend, that the sages manifest ascending and falling, in order to make those of actual practice turn from evil to good. Therefore the text says, “Although practicing the various hindrances, one is able to achieve sagehood.” When it says “does not obstruct,” it means that evil can be changed, and it encourages one to cultivate calming and contemplation in the presence of evil; one must not indulge in evil and remain an ordinary person forever. It does not mean that retaining evil is called being unobstructive. Below, “Furthermore, the path does not obstruct evil,” explains that although one has attained the path, there is still residual evil. Regarding “stream-enterer (srotāpanna)”: the eleventh fascicle of the Avadāna Sūtra (Chuyao jing) says: “Formerly there was an attainer of the first fruit whose mind was focused on female form even to the point of dreaming of it. His wife was greatly distressed by this. Encountering a monk who was a relative and an acquaintance, the woman said: ‘I wish to confide my feelings; may I do so?’ The monk answered: ‘There is no problem. Secret matters should be kept covered.’ The woman said: ‘My husband has so much lust that he leaves no room to eat or rest; because of this he has fallen ill, and I fear his life will not be preserved.’ The monk said: ‘When your husband approaches you, you should say to him: “Is this how a stream-enterer is supposed to act?”’ Later she acted as instructed. Hearing this, the husband felt ashamed, attained the third fruit, and no longer engaged in affairs with women. The woman asked her husband: ‘Why have you stopped forever?’ The husband said: ‘I have seen you thoroughly; why would I go to you again?’ The woman said: ‘What fault do I have, that you say you have seen me thoroughly?’ She then gathered their relatives and said: ‘My husband has become estranged from me and cast me aside, ending our intimacy forever.’ The husband said: ‘I will adduce proof to make it clear myself.’ He then took a painted vase, filled it with feces, covered its mouth, and told her to play with it. Seeing that she had finished playing with it, he struck and broke it with a stick, and the filth flowed out. \[He asked:\] ‘Can you still play with this vase now?’ The woman said: ‘I would rather embrace a corpse, enter a fire pit or deep water, or throw myself from a high mountain; I could never approach it.’ The husband said: ‘I view your body as worse even than this.’ He then spoke a verse: > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.2.40.1) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.2.40) · Pramāṇa