[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) › 5.43.1 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 5.43.1 止觀輔行傳弘決 5.43.1 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.43.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.43.1) 「安心」下，正明別安。 乃是望總名別，不得以為次第之別。 若望下文結會數中，別仍成總。 總即是圓下之一心，即指此圓也。 以於法性分於信、法及四悉檀，迴轉相資故別。 還用總中一止一觀對法對信，自他並然。 於中先明「教他」者，菩薩運懷利他為本，故先他後自。 「聖師三力」者，中道空慧名為慧眼，慧眼鑒機名為法眼，任運逗藥名為化道，此是不可思議之三力也，故於一眼以分二名。 「如毱多」下，次引毱多化弟子相以證聖師。 毱多雖在羅漢之位，既在付法聖師之類，故知即是四依人也。 教弟子上樹者，如第四卷引。 以食悟者，有一比丘性嗜飲食，由此嗜欲不得聖果。 毱多請令就房，以香乳麋與之，語言：「待冷可食。 」比丘口吹尋冷，白尊者曰：「麋已冷也。 」尊者曰：「麋雖冷，汝欲火熱，應以觀水滅汝心火。 」復以空器令吐食出，還使食之。 比丘曰：「涎唾已合，云何可食？ 」尊者語云：「一切飲食與此無異，汝不觀察妄生貪著。 汝今當觀食不淨想。 」即為說法，得阿羅漢。 「應以訶責」等者，像者似也，《文選．海賦》云「倣像其色。 」毱多現者，似女人故。 多弟子中有一比丘信心出家，獲得四禪謂為四果。 毱多方便令往他處，於路化作群賊，復化作五百賈客，賊劫賈客殺害狼藉。 比丘生怖，即便自念：「我非羅漢，應是第三果。 」賈客亡後，有長者女語比丘言：「唯願大德與我共去。 」比丘答言：「佛不許我與女人行。 」女言：「我望大德而隨其後。 」比丘憐憫，相望而行。 尊者次復變作大河，女人言：「大德可共我渡。 」比丘在下，女在上流，女便墮水，白言：「大德濟我。 」爾時比丘手接而出，生細滑想起愛欲心，即便自知非阿那含。 於此女人極生愛著，將向屏處欲共交通。 方見是師，生大慚愧，低頭而立。 尊者語言：「汝昔自謂是阿羅漢。 云何欲為如此惡事？ 」將至僧中教其懺悔，為說法要，得阿羅漢。 故知習聖教者薄知次位，縱生逾濫亦易開解。 曾聞有人自謂成佛，待天不曉謂為魔障。 曉已不見梵王請說，自知非佛，仍便自謂是阿羅漢。 他人罵之心生異念，自知非是阿羅漢，仍謂是第三果也。 見女起欲，知非聖人。 此亦良由知教相故。 不待不過者，非未熟而化名「不待時」，非機熟不化名「不過時」。 故《金光明》第一釋化身云「以自在力隨眾生心行，隨眾生界多種了別，不待時、不過時，處相應、時相應、行相應、說法相應，現身而度。 」今但引兩句，攝經意盡。 故知聖師位在初住，初住得法身之本，能起應化也。 「盲龜」下，譬聖師難遇。 如大海中有一盲龜，爾時海中復有浮木，木唯一孔可立龜身。 此龜三千年方得一出，億百千出何由可值浮木之孔？ 故《大經》第二云「生世為人難，值佛生信難，猶如大海中盲龜遇浮木，亦如針鋒竪閻浮提，以一芥子從忉利天投閻浮提，何由可得貫針鋒上？ 」佛去世後非無四依，眾生薄德，何由可值？ 次明凡師施化劣於聖師，無三力故。 「譬如」下，譬有三力而亦無益。 故令凡師施化，如世醫法，上醫視色、中醫聽聲、下醫診脈。 猶如聖師觀諸眾生三業之機，現三輪化，視色如觀身業、聽身如觀口業、診脈如觀意業。 障重無機，雖是聖師亦不能化，故云「亦不能起死」等也。 「若不解」下，明無三術或亦有益。 但牒不能觀於意業、但觀餘兩，依語作方亦有得益。 則大師自斥我為凡師，眾生既無值聖之緣，遇此凡師亦遇然得益，故云「挑脫」，即大師自謙被物不周也。 兼示後代勿廢化道。 皆問病者，故云「依語」。 如下諸文皆云師應問言，及其人若言等，即是其相。 「身子」下，舉小乘中善說法者，轉法輪將智慧第一，尚自差機。 「大經」三十四云「雖有身子、目連，非真知識，生一闡提心因緣故。 > From "calming the mind" onwards, the text directly explains particular calming. It is called "particular" in contrast to the general; it must not be taken as a distinction of sequential progression. If viewed in relation to the subsequent integration and synthesis of numbers, the particular still constitutes the general. The general is precisely the single mind under the perfect \[teaching\], pointing directly to this perfect \[nature\]. It is because within the dharma-nature one differentiates between faith and Dharma, and the four siddhāntas, turning and mutually assisting one another, that it is termed "particular." Still, using the one calming and one contemplation within the general corresponds to Dharma and corresponds to faith; this is so for oneself and for others alike. Among these, the first to be explained is "teaching others": because a bodhisattva's intent takes benefiting others as primary, others come first and oneself follows. As for "the three powers of the holy master," the Middle Way's wisdom of emptiness is called the wisdom-eye; the wisdom-eye's discernment of capacities is called the dharma-eye; and the spontaneous application of medicine is called the transformation path. These are the three inconceivable powers; hence, from a single eye, two designations are distinguished. From "as with \[Upagupta\]" onwards, it next cites the details of Upagupta's transformation of his disciples to attest to the holy master. Although Upagupta was at the stage of an arhat, since he was ranked among the holy masters who transmitted the Dharma, one knows that he was a person of the four reliances. As for teaching a disciple to climb a tree, it is as cited in the fourth fascicle. As for the one who awakened through food: there was a monk whose nature was fond of food and drink, and on account of this craving he could not attain the holy fruit. Upagupta invited him to his room, gave him fragrant milk porridge, and said: "Wait until it cools before eating." The monk blew on it with his mouth and it immediately cooled; he said to the Venerable One: "The porridge has cooled." The Venerable One said: "Although the porridge is cool, the fire of your desire is hot. You should extinguish the fire of your mind with the water of contemplation." He then used an empty vessel to make him vomit the food out, and had him eat it again. The monk said: "It has mixed with saliva; how can it be eaten?" The Venerable One told him: "All food and drink is no different from this. Because you do not contemplate, you wrongly arouse greedy attachment. You should now contemplate the notion of the impurity of food." He then expounded the Dharma for him, and he attained arhatship. As for "one should use rebuking" and so forth: "image" (xiang) means similarity; the "Hai fu" in the Wen xuan says, "imitating its appearance." That which Upagupta manifested was because it resembled a woman. Among Upagupta's disciples, there was a monk who had gone forth with a faithful mind and, having attained the fourth dhyāna, thought it was the fourth fruit. Upagupta employed an expedient to send him elsewhere. On the road, he magically manifested a band of robbers, and further manifested five hundred merchants. The robbers pillaged the merchants, killing and slaughtering indiscriminately. The monk became terrified and immediately thought to himself: "I am not an arhat; I must be at the third fruit." After the merchants had perished, an elder's daughter said to the monk: "I only beg the Venerable One to go with me." The monk replied: "The Buddha does not permit me to walk with a woman." The woman said: "I will keep my eyes on the Venerable One and follow behind." Out of compassion, the monk walked within sight of her. The Venerable One then transformed \[the road\] into a great river. The woman said: "Venerable One, you may cross with me." The monk was downstream and the woman was upstream; the woman fell into the water and cried: "Venerable One, save me!" At that time, the monk took her by the hand to pull her out, and experiencing the notion of smooth softness, he aroused lustful thoughts; immediately he knew he was not an anāgāmin. He aroused intense craving for this woman and took her toward a secluded place, wishing to have intercourse. Only then did he see it was his master. Arousing great shame, he stood with his head bowed. The Venerable One said to him: "You previously called yourself an arhat. Why do you wish to do such an evil deed?" He brought him into the saṅgha to have him repent, and expounded the essentials of the Dharma for him, whereupon he attained arhatship. Therefore, one knows that those who practice the holy teachings have a slight understanding of stages and positions; even if they give rise to transgressions and overstepping, they are easily enlightened. I once heard of a person who called himself a buddha: waiting for dawn, when it did not dawn, he thought it was a demonic obstacle. Once it dawned and he did not see the Brahma King requesting him to expound the Dharma, he knew he was not a buddha, yet immediately called himself an arhat. When another person cursed him, he aroused aberrant thoughts in his mind; knowing he was not an arhat, he still thought he was at the third fruit. Seeing a woman and arousing desire, he knew he was not a holy person. This was also truly because he knew the aspects of the teaching. As for "neither waiting nor passing by": not transforming when \[capacities\] are not yet ripe is called "not waiting for the time"; not failing to transform when capacities are ripe is called "not passing by the time." Therefore, the first fascicle of the Suvarṇaprabhāsa, in explaining the transformation body, says: "Through the power of sovereignty, following the mental activities of sentient beings and following their various discernments in the realms of sentient beings, neither waiting for the time nor passing by the time, fitting the place, fitting the time, fitting the practice, and fitting the exposition of the Dharma, it manifests bodies and delivers them." Now, citing only these two lines fully encompasses the intention of the sūtra. Thus one knows that the stage of a holy master is at the initial abodement; the initial abodement attains the basis of the dharmakāya and is able to initiate responses and transformations. From "blind turtle" onwards, it uses an analogy for the holy master being difficult to encounter. It is like a blind turtle in the great ocean; at that time, there is also a floating log in the ocean, and the log has only a single hole that fits the turtle's body. This turtle comes up only once every three thousand years; in hundreds of millions of appearances, how could it encounter the hole of the floating log? Therefore, the second fascicle of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "To be born in the world as a human is difficult; to encounter a buddha and arouse faith is difficult; it is like a blind turtle in the ocean encountering a floating log, and it is also like raising a needle point in Jambudvīpa and casting a single mustard seed down from Trāyastriṃśa Heaven onto Jambudvīpa: how could it ever be pierced upon the needle's point?" After the Buddha passed into extinction, it was not that there were no persons of the four reliances; but because sentient beings have meager virtue, how could they encounter them? Next, it explains that an ordinary master's conferring of transformations is inferior to that of a holy master because he lacks the three powers. From "for example" onwards, it uses an analogy to show that even having the three powers may also be of no benefit. Thus it makes an ordinary master confer transformations like the methods of worldly physicians: a superior physician observes the complexion, a middling physician listens to the voice, and an inferior physician feels the pulse. This is like a holy master observing the capacities of the three karmas of sentient beings and manifesting the three wheels of transformation: observing the complexion is like observing bodily karma; listening to the voice is like observing verbal karma; and feeling the pulse is like observing mental karma. When obstacles are heavy and there are no capacities, even a holy master cannot transform them; hence it says "he also cannot revive the dead" and so forth. From "if one does not understand" onwards, it explains that lacking the three arts may also bring benefit. Merely repeating that one cannot observe mental karma, but only observes the remaining two: prescribing formulas according to their words also yields benefit. Thus the Great Master criticized himself as an ordinary master: since sentient beings lack the conditions to encounter a holy one, encountering this ordinary master may also accidentally bring benefit; hence he speaks of "plucking them free," which is the Great Master's self-deprecation that his reach to beings is not comprehensive. It also shows future generations not to abandon the path of transformation. In all cases, one inquires of the sick; hence it says "according to words." As in the various passages below, where it always says that the master should ask, and what the person says, and so forth—these are precisely its aspects. From "Śāriputra" onwards, it cites the one skilled at expounding the Dharma among the Hīnayāna, the general who turns the wheel of the Dharma and foremost in wisdom, who still personally erred regarding capacities. Fascicle thirty-four of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Although there were Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana, they were not true spiritual friends, because of the causes and conditions for arousing an icchantika mind." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.42) - [Next: 5.43.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.43.2) - [Up: 5.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.43) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.5.43.1) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [法苑珠林](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2122.45.36) — 道世, Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.43.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.43.1) · Pramāṇa