止觀輔行傳弘決 8.54

8.54

從「魔界即佛界」去，發心也。慈與眾生，魔界即佛界之樂，故云「慈無量佛」。悲拔眾生，佛界即魔界之苦，故云「悲無量魔」。從「欲滿此願」去，安心。文中寄事，故約悉達降魔以明止觀。從「但以」下，結成行人用安心相。次「隨魔」下，破遍。初總、次歷教。歷教中，三藏伏四在三祇百劫，坐道場時三十四心破煩惱魔，爾時乃名為菩提道。入無餘後名法性身，由菩提滿故成佛果，由成佛故故入無餘，入無餘故破於陰魔。由破煩惱及得法性身故，永無分段故也。是故此兩共破死魔。故三藏佛雖降天魔、斷煩惱魔，有餘身在仍未免陰，八十入滅仍未免死。故得菩提，及入滅已至法性身，方免陰死二魔。文中存略，但言死耳。「得不動三昧」等者，具如《大集》云「天主初令諸軍、次遣太子、次遣三妃，皆不能壞。後自領軍，為佛所降。大軍退敗，王顛倒墮冠蓋劍三，各在一處。」此並《大論》第六文也。今文義通至後三教。通教見位同三藏伏，至六地時得菩提道，同三藏斷。兩教聲聞不破天子魔，故初為所惱。修得神通，雖復調伏，亦不名斷，據教全未識於赤色三昧。別依教道，故前後斷。是則前之三教並屬教道。若不爾者，豈有斷通惑、伏利惑而能破魔？圓教俱破無復前後，應約六即以辯淺深。「初住俱破八魔」者，《大論》二十云「若欲修習首楞嚴定，須破八魔，應當親近大般涅槃，謂陰等四及無常等四。」義通內外，如前所說。從「於上一一」下，通塞。道品，如文。從「門若未開」下，助道。此之六種，於魔成度，於行人成蔽，為生死故即成魔度，違菩提道所以成蔽。今以依理而斥事度，以此事六治於魔六。此六蔽者，雖似六度，不為菩提，皆屬魔攝。前之四度灼然生死，所得禪定與鬼交通，所得船若不離見著。言正度者，四教六度皆名為正，具如助道攝法中說。兼治者，以魔中兼二，故須借用。若雜煩惱及業，如前兩境中用治。「雜業借念二佛」者，謂色身、法門身，雜中有惡當用念色，雜中有善當念法門。「聞慧」者，四教並在外凡，故今圓教在於五品。「黜」者，退也、貶去也。此十法後，亦應以大車為譬，文無者略，但云直至道場。「復次通用一意為觀」下，結觀通別。十乘觀法有通別二意，一以陰境十法冠下九境，名之為通，秖是一法不思議觀。人根鈍故，開對十法。先了通意節節入別，境境皆然，觀法易了。故引《中論》通別為例。次料簡中，問如文。答中先違問答，故云「緣別」。次引論文證者，即順問答。雖順問答，此成不定，故不同於寒去春來。魔若去已好法來者，不必全爾，是故不同。《大論》云「樂法梵志於十二年遍閻浮提求知聖法，而不能得。時世無佛，佛法亦盡。有婆羅門言：『我有聖法一偈。若實樂法，當以與汝。』答言：『實樂。』婆羅門言：『若實樂法，當以皮為紙、以骨為筆、以髓為水、以血為墨。』即如其言書得佛偈。偈言『如法應修行，非法不應行。今世若後世，行法者安隱。』」又有說云：魔來誑樂法令剝皮等者，意欲退樂法心。樂法心堅，即便剝皮等，魔便隱去，感下方佛為其說偈。後釋與文合，與論稍別。

From "the realm of māras is identical to the realm of buddhas" onward is arousing the aspiration for awakening. Bestowing upon sentient beings the joy of the realm of māras being identical to the realm of buddhas is called "limitless buddhas of kindness". Relieving sentient beings from the suffering of the realm of buddhas being identical to the realm of māras is called "limitless māras of compassion". From "wishing to fulfill this vow" onward is calming the mind. In the text, matters are drawn upon as analogies, so the subjugation of māra by Siddhārtha is used to illuminate calming and contemplation. Below "merely by...", the practitioner's characteristics of employing calming the mind are concluded. Next, below "following māra...", is universal refutation. First general, then proceeding through the teachings. In proceeding through the teachings: in the Tripiṭaka [teaching], the four [māras] are suppressed over three asaṃkhyeyas and one hundred kalpas; when sitting at the bodhimaṇḍa, thirty-four mind[-moments] refute the affliction-māra, and only then is it named the path of bodhi. After entering [nirvāṇa] without remainder, it is called the dharma-nature body; because bodhi is perfected, the fruit of buddhahood is attained; because of attaining buddhahood, one enters without remainder; because of entering without remainder, one refutes the aggregate-māra. Because afflictions are refuted and the dharma-nature body is attained, there is forever no fragmented [birth and death]. Therefore, these two jointly refute the death-māra. Thus the Buddha of the Tripiṭaka [teaching], although he subdued the heavenly māra and severed the affliction-māra, his body with remainder was still present and so he had not yet escaped the aggregates, and entering extinction at eighty [years old], he still had not escaped death. Therefore, having attained bodhi, and after entering extinction and arriving at the dharma-nature body, only then did he escape the two māras of aggregates and death. The text preserves brevity, mentioning only death. Regarding "attaining the unshakeable samādhi" and so forth: as detailed in the *Mahāsaṃnipāta*, "The heavenly lord first ordered the armies, next sent the crown prince, and next sent the three consorts, none of whom could destroy [the Buddha]. Afterwards he personally led his army and was subdued by the Buddha. The great army retreated in defeat, and the king fell upside down, his crown, parasol, and sword falling in three separate places." These are all texts from fascicle 6 of the *Dazhidulun*. Now the meaning of the text extends through the subsequent three teachings. In the shared teaching, the stage of seeing is the same as the suppression in the Tripiṭaka [teaching], and upon reaching the sixth ground one attains the path of bodhi, the same as the severing in the Tripiṭaka [teaching]. The śrāvakas of both teachings do not refute the devaputra-māra, which is why they were initially harassed by it. Through cultivation they attain supernormal powers; although they tame it, it is not called severing, because according to the teaching they do not know the red-colored samādhi at all. In the distinctive [teaching], relying on the pedagogical path of the teaching, they are severed sequentially. Thus the preceding three teachings all belong to the pedagogical path. If this were not so, how could one sever common afflictions and suppress acute afflictions while being able to refute māra? In the perfect teaching, all are refuted together without sequence; one should discern depth according to the six identities. Regarding "the initial dwelling refutes all eight māras": fascicle 20 of the *Dazhidulun* says, "If one wishes to cultivate the Śūraṅgama samādhi, one must refute the eight māras and should draw near to the Mahāparinirvāṇa—namely, the four beginning with the aggregates, and the four beginning with impermanence." The meaning applies to both internal and external, as explained before. From "in each of the above..." onward is pass and blockage. The aids to the path are as in the text. From "if the gate is not yet open..." onward is auxiliary paths. These six kinds become perfections for māra, but become hindrances for the practitioner: because of birth and death they become māra's perfections, and because of contradicting the path of bodhi they become hindrances. Now, relying on principle, active perfections are criticized, and these six active [practices] are used to cure māra's six [hindrances]. These six hindrances, although resembling the six perfections, are not for bodhi and all belong to what māra subsumes. The first four perfections clearly belong to birth and death; the dhyāna-concentration attained involves intercourse with ghosts, and the prajñā attained does not leave views and attachments. As for "correct perfections": the six perfections of the four teachings are all called correct, as explained fully in the section on auxiliary paths subsuming dharmas. Regarding "simultaneous curing": because within māra two are combined, one must borrow and use [other methods]. If mixed with afflictions and karma, one applies the cure as in the preceding two objects. "Mixed with karma, borrowing mindfulness of two buddhas" means the form-body and the dharma-gate body; when evil is among what is mixed, one should use mindfulness of form; when good is among what is mixed, one should be mindful of the dharma-gate. Regarding "wisdom from hearing": in the four teachings, it is entirely at the external ordinary stage, so now in the perfect teaching it is at the five grades. "Chuch" means to demote or dismiss. After these ten methods, one should also use the great cart as a metaphor; that it is absent from the text is an omission, stating only "directly arriving at the bodhimaṇḍa." Below "Furthermore, universally employing one intention as contemplation...", the general and particular of the contemplation are concluded. The contemplation method of the ten vehicles has two meanings, general and particular: first, using the ten dharmas of the object of aggregates to head the nine objects below is called "general"; it is simply the single dharma of the contemplation of the inconceivable. Because human faculties are dull, it is unfolded to correspond to ten dharmas. First understanding the general meaning and segment by segment entering the particular, it is the same with every object, and the contemplation method is easy to understand. Therefore, the general and particular of the *Madhyamaka-śāstra* are cited as an example. Next, in the catechism, the question is as in the text. In the answer, it first answers by countering the question, hence saying "conditions are distinct." Next, citing the treatise text as proof aligns with the question and answer. Although it aligns with the question and answer, this becomes indefinite, so it is not like the departure of cold and the arrival of spring. If, when māra has left, good dharmas arrive, this is not necessarily completely so, which is why it is not the same. The *Dazhidulun* says: "The Dharma-loving brāhmaṇa sought to know the sacred Dharma everywhere throughout Jambudvīpa for twelve years, but could not obtain it. At that time there was no buddha in the world, and the Buddha Dharma was also exhausted. There was a brāhmaṇa who said: 'I have one verse of the sacred Dharma. If you truly love the Dharma, I will give it to you.' He answered: 'I truly love it.' The brāhmaṇa said: 'If you truly love the Dharma, you must use your skin for paper, your bones for a pen, your marrow for water, and your blood for ink.' He immediately wrote and obtained the Buddha's verse according to his words. The verse said: 'One should practice according to Dharma; one should not practice contrary to Dharma. In this world and in future worlds, the one who practices Dharma is at ease.'" There is also an explanation saying: Māra came to deceive the Dharma-lover, ordering him to strip his skin and so forth, with the intention of making the Dharma-lover's mind regress. The Dharma-lover's mind was steadfast, so he immediately stripped his skin and so forth; māra then vanished, and a buddha of the subterranean direction was moved to preach the verse for him. The latter explanation accords with our text, but differs slightly from the treatise.