止觀輔行傳弘決 9.27

9.27

次明大不淨。初標異名，「前所」下辯異。云「約此等」者，前小不淨，後明背捨是。總共二乘，別在菩薩，今大不淨亦復如是。次正釋中，初示相。「丘」者聚也、小陵也。「墓」者塚也。《禮》云「凡葬而無墳謂之墓。」《白虎通》云「天子墳高三仞，一仞七尺，樹之以松。諸侯半之，樹之以柏。大夫八尺，樹之以欒。欒者，《說文》云『似木欄』。士四尺，樹之以槐。庶人無墳，樹之以楊柳。」是知墳墓俱通貴賤。「汪」者，水深也。《廣雅》云「萬頃陂也」。「羹作穢汁」等者，《大經》十三，因迦葉難佛言：「如是思惟，無有實利。亦如比丘觀不淨時，見所著衣悉如皮想而實非皮，所可食噉皆作蟲想，觀好美羹作穢汁想，觀所食物猶如髓腦，觀骨碎粖猶如於[麩-夫+少]。」「於坐」下，正明發相。次譬，如文。「初觀」下，對修辯發，如文。「復次諸」下，明境轉所由。由心轉故，故引二緣以例想境感果不同。如觀不淨等，感果是過去心力，不淨是現在心力。今明發相亦由宿因，過現雖殊同皆心造，是故得以二種為例。「執石」等者，如《大經》中釋摩男執諸瓦礫皆悉成寶，亦是過去心力所致。僧護所見，意亦如是。彼經云「舍衛有五百賈客欲入海采寶，有一長者告眾人言：『我有門師名為僧護，可請為師。』咸共往請，僧護曰：『可白和尚舍利弗。』便至舍利弗所白舍利弗，舍利弗復至佛所以事白佛，佛便聽去，即共入海。未至寶所，有一龍王從海而出，眾人言：『汝是何神？』龍王現身云：『與我僧護。』賈人等即便與之，往采寶所。還至失師所，作如是言：『至世尊所，當何所言？』龍王知賈人還，即以僧護還諸賈人。賈人於是共僧護歸。賈人貪近，從陸路還。賈人夜發，誤棄僧護，失伴獨行而去。至一僧藍，即見僧溫室地獄，僧入火然。問曰：『是何人？』答：『閻浮提人難信，汝可問佛。』如是次第見五十三獄。至已問佛，佛為解說：『溫室獄者，迦葉佛時恣用僧器。楗槌獄者，不打楗槌，用僧物故。肉地被燒獄者，私耕僧地故。肉𤬪地獄者，為僧中上座無有禪律，飽食而睡說世言論，好食自噉、惡者僧中行，淨人先自噉、麁者僧中行，所受苦相亦復如是。肉瓶火燒獄者，為僧當厨，朝食留晚、晚者復留以至後日，檀越送食，隱待客去亦復如是，不均行僧，果亦如是，刀劓鼻火。燒獄者，唾僧淨地故。栓打肉獄者，釘僧壁上懸己衣鉢故。火燒肉臺獄者，當生臥具將戶鉤遊行，妨僧受用故。自住好房餘與不好者，苦亦如是。燒房獄者，住僧房如己有，不移不依次分故。火燒床獄者，用僧床不依法分故。破僧木然火，苦亦如是。火燒敷具獄者，脚踏僧具故。火燒肉廁獄者，淨地大小便故。身坐高座火燒獄者，顛倒說律故。為利說法，苦亦如是。火燒果樹獄者，私噉僧果及與白衣故。四肉樹火燒獄者，無德斷事故不均等。與僧臥具，苦亦如是。二沙彌被中火燒獄者，沙彌相抱臥故。』」彼經仍為利益檀越及比丘故，乃云如是比丘雖不持戒，四事供養猶得大果，況復供養四方僧眾。如是等獄，於海洲畔隨處而有，或身為床林瓶等也。當知色法皆隨人感，色無定體隨心所變，觀法若成皆能轉色。「若執」下，明由境轉故，有破結之功。言「此觀契轉變之道」者，假想若成，實見諸境轉為不淨。如神通人令物實變，假想變境如彼得通，故云契轉變之道。又諸物中一切皆有可轉之理，故神通人及修觀者而能轉之。此理元是如來藏中不思議法，隨心取著成外成小，汝等所行是菩薩道，平等法界方寸無虧。「若根本」下，辯漏無漏。若根本一向有漏，已如前說，小大不淨及背捨等是無漏緣，未即無漏。若正用智以斷於惑，隨依一地，故云「自上皆除」。故《俱舍》云「道展轉九地」。「若人」下，約大不淨以明背捨。「若人」等者，始終俱破依正二報。「若論」下，約於背捨以明勝處及一切處。先標。《婆沙》云「勝於煩惱名為勝處，以於依正俱不著故，故於依正轉變自在。」「大論云」下，引論辯根。《禪門》中云「修背捨竟別修勝處，下根也。若處中說，具如今文，更不別明初修勝處，但於第三背捨中，却觀前二背捨成四勝處，次於第三成後四勝處，是故不須更別修也。若上根者，亦不須待至第三竟時，方更重修前二背捨作前四也。於初背捨即能分別若多若少好醜知見，成二勝處。次於此後成餘勝處。」此仍準教辯上中下，猶約背捨以明觀法。若上上利根，又不須依向三根之法。如《育王經》第十八「摩偷羅國有一男子從毱多出家，聞說不淨觀法，自謂已作所作。後往犍馱羅國，見於女人而生欲想，即便自取鉢中之[麩-夫+少]以與女人。女人見之露齒而笑，亦於比丘而生慾想。比丘見已，乃至觀身如見齒骨，骨想成已得阿羅漢。」從「若多若少乃至好醜皆不淨」者，正明發相，初正明發相、次判位。初文者，約初背捨立二勝處。大千為多、減者為少，如此多少皆有好醜，乃至最後好醜皆悉不淨。前背捨中雖觀淨色皆是不淨，未能展轉比決好醜。今善觀知，故云「勝知」等。又復直爾約小不淨，但依正報以明好醜。若依大不淨起勝處者，亦於依正二報得勝知見，具如別教四念處中說。「若內」下，約第二背捨立二勝處。初明發相、次釋知見、次判位。「若勝處」下，明功能。「上古」下，引事。「推位讓國」者，如吳太伯為太王長子、次弟仲雍、幼弟季歷。太王有疾，讓弟承嫡，故託采藥入於東吳。餘如助道中說。「還牛」等者，堯聘許由為九州長，由聞之，詣河洗耳。巢父因飲牛而見之，問曰：「夫人洗者先洗於面，子何洗耳？」答曰：「堯聘我為九州長。惡聞其聲，故洗之也。」巢父曰：「吾聞豫章之木生於深山之巔，上無通車之路、下無涉險之逕，工匠雖巧而不能得。子欲避世何不深藏，而浮遊人間苟求名利。吾欲飲牛，污吾牛口。」乃牽牛上流而飲之。又《婆沙》中「問：勝處依何身得？答：依欲身得。問：能於佛身作不淨不？答：能作。但唯佛能，非餘聲聞等。佛身無垢，一切不淨觀者不能於佛身作不淨想。」三明後四勝處，初對位、次明大小、次辯假實。「大論青黃」等者，後四勝處但有四色。今列八色其意云何。答。經論不同今文雙列。是故判之。青等從實、地等從假，此約三昧意緣色判，非是五根所得之色。故三昧所見十方遍皆四色，故四色是實。若見地等亦是四色，而更立地等四名，故是假也。以十一切處見八色故，若但言八色，則俱從實說。若判五根所得之色，應云青等從假、地等從實。如《俱舍》云「大種謂四界，即地水火風，能成持等業，堅濕煖動性。」此明實四大種也。能成持等，明四大用，謂地能成持，等謂等取餘水等三，即水能成攝、火能成熱、風能成長。次云「地謂顯形色，隨世想立名，水火亦復然，風即界亦爾。」既云世想，故形顯色悉皆是假。顯色者，謂青等也。形色者，謂方等也。水火亦具形顯二色，故云亦然。風者，論云「風界者無色可見。」有言亦爾者，亦如水火。謂黑風等及團風等，此假實色，於五根中假色則為眼識所得，實色則為身識所得。若三昧所見，並非身眼二識所得，故判假實有此不同。況三昧所見青等地等，各見不混。若如《俱舍》秖於地等實法之上有顯形色無別地也，是故不同。故《四念處》云「《大論》但云青等，《瓔珞》云地等，此亦無在。四色是名、地等是體，名即假名、體即實體。」彼文仍云有對之色作如是說，而不云三昧所見，故知《止觀》從三昧所見邊說。若三昧成，則遍見十方無形色也。若光勢未成，有顯有形，若從成判，故應唯顯。今文雖即假實俱列，必須存四以沒於四，四兼前四名八勝處。「此四」下，辯法有無。「內外色盡」者，自骨人為內、他骨人為外，既無內外，唯有八色，故無好醜。但有多少者，骨人雖盡，非八色盡也。言「多少」者，八色廣陜也。

Next, explaining the great impurity. First, its different names are presented. From "Previously mentioned" downwards, the distinction is explained. Saying "with reference to these, etc." means: earlier was the lesser impurity, and afterwards the eight liberations are explained. In general, they are shared with the two vehicles; specifically, they pertain to bodhisattvas. Here, the great impurity is also like this.

Next, in the correct explanation, first its marks are shown. "Mound" (qiu) means a heap, a small hill. "Tomb" (mu) means a burial mound. The Liji says, "All burials without a raised mound are called mu." The Baihu tong says, "The mound of the Son of Heaven is three ren high—one ren is seven chi—and it is planted with pines. For the feudal lords, it is half that, and planted with cypresses. For grand masters, eight chi, planted with luan trees—the Shuowen says the luan is like a wood railing. For officers, four chi, planted with scholar-trees. For commoners, there is no mound, and it is planted with willows and poplars." Thus we know mounds and tombs both apply to noble and base alike. "Broad and deep" (wang) means the water is deep. The Guangya says, "An expanse of ten thousand qing." "Porridge viewed as filthy broth," etc., refers to chapter thirteen of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, where Mahākāśyapa challenged the Buddha, saying, "Such contemplation brings no real benefit. Just as when a monk contemplates impurity, he views the clothes he wears entirely with the thought of skin, yet they are not truly skin; whatever he eats, he regards with the thought of worms; he views fine, delicious soup with the thought of filthy broth; he views the food eaten as like brain and marrow; and he views crushed bone powder as like parched barley flour." From "In the seat" downwards, the manifested marks are directly explained. Next is the simile, as in the text. From "Initial contemplation" downwards, manifestation is distinguished with respect to practice, as in the text. From "Furthermore, the various" downwards, the reason for the transformation of the object is explained. Because it is transformed by the mind, two conditions are cited to show that the perceived object and the resulting retribution differ. As in contemplating impurity and the like: the resulting retribution is the power of past mind, while the impurity is the power of the present mind. Now, the manifested marks are explained as also depending on past causes. Although past and present differ, both are alike created by the mind; therefore, both types may be taken as an illustration.

"Grasping stones," etc., refers to how in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra Mahānāman grasped tiles and pebbles and they all turned to jewels; this too was brought about by the power of his past mind. What Saṃgharakṣita saw had the same meaning. That sūtra says: "In Śrāvastī there were five hundred merchants wishing to enter the sea to gather jewels. An elder said to the crowd, 'I have a family preceptor named Saṃgharakṣita; we may invite him as our master.' They all went together to invite him. Saṃgharakṣita said, 'You should inform the upādhyāya Śāriputra.' They then went to Śāriputra and informed him. Śāriputra again went to the Buddha and informed the Buddha of the matter. The Buddha then permitted him to go, and so they entered the sea together. Before reaching the treasure island, a dragon king emerged from the sea. The crowd asked, 'What spirit are you?' The dragon king revealed his form and said, 'Give me Saṃgharakṣita.' The merchants immediately gave him up, and went on to the jewel place. Returning to the place where they had lost their master, they said, 'When we reach the World-Honoured One, what shall we say?' The dragon king knew the merchants had returned, so he returned Saṃgharakṣita to the merchants. The merchants then returned together with Saṃgharakṣita. Coveting a shortcut, the merchants returned by land. Setting out at night, the merchants mistakenly abandoned Saṃgharakṣita, who lost his companions and traveled on alone. Reaching a monastery, he immediately saw a saṃgha bathhouse hell, where the monks entered into burning fire. He asked, 'Who are these people?' They replied, 'People of Jambudvīpa are hard to convince; you may ask the Buddha.' In this manner, he successively saw fifty-three hells. Upon arrival, he asked the Buddha, and the Buddha explained to him: 'The bathhouse hell is because in the time of Kāśyapa Buddha they used the saṃgha's utensils arbitrarily. The gaṇḍī hell is because they did not strike the gaṇḍī and used the saṃgha's property. The hell where flesh-ground is burned is because they privately plowed the saṃgha's land. The flesh-trough hell is because those who were senior theras in the saṃgha lacked meditation and discipline, ate their fill, slept, and engaged in worldly talk, eating the fine food themselves and distributing the bad food to the saṃgha, or pure attendants eating first themselves and distributing the coarse food to the saṃgha; the suffering they undergo is like this. The hell where flesh-pots burn with fire is because those in charge of the kitchen for the saṃgha kept morning food for the evening and kept evening food until the next day, or when donors sent food, hid it until guests left; failing to distribute food evenly to the saṃgha brings retribution like this. The hell where knives cut the nose with fire is because of spitting on the saṃgha's clean ground. The hell of flesh being struck by pegs is because of driving nails into the saṃgha's walls to hang one's own robes and bowl. The hell where flesh-platforms are burned with fire is because during life, they took door-latches while walking with their bedding, obstructing the saṃgha's use; the suffering of keeping good rooms for oneself and giving bad ones to others is also like this. The hell of burning rooms is because of dwelling in a saṃgha room as if it were one's own, not moving and not taking turns in accordance with proper order. The hell of fire burning beds is because of using the saṃgha's beds contrary to the legal distribution; splitting saṃgha timber to burn fire brings suffering also like this. The hell of fire burning spreads and cushions is because of trampling on the saṃgha's bedding with feet. The hell of fire burning flesh-latrines is because of defecating and urinating on clean ground. The hell of sitting on a high seat burned by fire is because of expounding the Vinaya perversely; preaching the Dharma for profit brings suffering also like this. The hell of fire burning fruit trees is because of privately eating the saṃgha's fruit and giving it to laypeople. The hell of four flesh-trees burned by fire is because, having no virtue, one judged disputes unfairly; distributing bedding to the saṃgha unfairly brings suffering also like this. The hell of two novices burned in a blanket is because the novices slept embracing each other.'"

That sūtra, in order to benefit donors and monks, further says that although such monks do not uphold the precepts, making the four requisites of offerings to them still obtains great fruit, how much more so offering to the saṃgha of the four directions! Such hells exist everywhere around islands in the ocean, where their bodies are turned into beds, groves, pots, and so forth. One should know that form dharmas all follow human karmic response; form has no fixed essence, but changes according to the mind. If contemplation practice is accomplished, all can transform form.

From "If grasping" downwards, it is explained that because the object is transformed, there is the function of severing defilements. The phrase "this contemplation accords with the principle of transformation" means that when the provisional thought is accomplished, one truly sees the various objects transformed into impurity. Just as a person of supernormal powers can cause things to truly transform, transforming objects through provisional visualization is like attaining supernormal powers; hence it is said to "accord with the principle of transformation." Furthermore, in all things, there is inherently a principle of transformability; therefore, those with supernormal powers and those who cultivate contemplation are able to transform them. This principle is fundamentally the inconceivable dharma within the tathāgatagarbha. Following the mind's grasping, it becomes non-Buddhist or Hīnayāna; yet what you practice is the bodhisattva path, and the equal dharma-dhātu is not deficient by the slightest inch.

From "If fundamental" downwards, outflows and absence of outflows are distinguished. If it is the fundamental dhyāna, it is exclusively with outflows, as already explained above. The lesser and greater impurities, the liberations, and so forth are conditions for the outflow-free, but are not immediately outflow-free. If one directly uses wisdom to sever delusions, one relies on whichever stage; hence it says "from above, all are eliminated." Therefore the Abhidharmakośa says, "The path progressively moves through the nine stages."

From "If a person" downwards, the liberations are explained with reference to the great impurity. "If a person," etc., means that from beginning to end, both the dependent and primary retributions are broken.

From "If discussing" downwards, the stations of mastery and spheres of totality are explained with reference to the liberations. First, they are indicated. The Vibhāṣā says, "Mastering afflictions is called a station of mastery; because one is unattached to both the dependent and primary retributions, one has sovereignty in transforming both the dependent and primary retributions."

From "The Dazhidulun says" downwards, the treatise is cited to distinguish capacities. In the Chanmen it says: "Cultivating the liberations completely and then separately cultivating the stations of mastery belongs to the inferior capacity. If speaking from the intermediate, it is completely as in the present text: one does not separately explain the initial cultivation of the stations of mastery, but merely, within the third liberation, looks back upon the previous two liberations to form the four stations of mastery, and next, in the third, forms the latter four stations of mastery; therefore, there is no need to cultivate them separately. For those of superior capacity, they do not even need to wait until the third is completed to then re-cultivate the previous two liberations to make the former four; in the very first liberation, they are able to distinguish whether [forms are] many or few, beautiful or ugly, with knowledge and vision, forming two stations of mastery, and following this, form the remaining stations of mastery." This still distinguishes superior, intermediate, and inferior according to the teachings, yet still explains the contemplation method with reference to the liberations. If one has the supreme, sharpest capacity, one need not even rely on the method of the previous three capacities. As in chapter eighteen of the Aśokarājasūtra: "In the country of Mathurā, a man left home under Upagupta. Hearing the contemplation of impurity explained, he claimed to have already done what was to be done. Later, traveling to Gandhāra, he saw a woman and aroused lustful thoughts; he then took parched barley flour from his bowl and gave it to the woman. When the woman saw it, she bared her teeth and smiled, also arousing lustful thoughts toward the monk. After the monk saw this, he went so far as to contemplate the body as seeing teeth and bones; when the visualization of bones was accomplished, he attained arhatship."

From "Whether many or few, down to beautiful or ugly, all are impure" directly explains the manifested marks: first directly explaining the manifested marks, next determining the stage. The first passage establishes two stations of mastery based on the first liberation. The trichiliocosm is 'many'; less than that is 'few'. Such 'many' or 'few' all have beauty and ugliness, down to the fact that ultimately both beauty and ugliness are completely impure. In the previous liberation, although one contemplates pure form as entirely impure, one is not yet able to comparatively evaluate beauty and ugliness successively. Now, knowing and contemplating skillfully, it says "superior knowledge," etc. Furthermore, simply speaking with reference to the lesser impurity, one merely clarifies beauty and ugliness based on the primary retribution. If one arouses the stations of mastery based on the great impurity, one also attains superior knowledge and vision regarding both the dependent and primary retributions, fully as explained in the Distinctive Teaching's four stations of mindfulness.

From "If inner" downwards, two stations of mastery are established based on the second liberation: first explaining the manifested marks, next explaining knowledge and vision, and next determining the stage.

From "If the stations of mastery" downwards, their function is explained.

From "In antiquity" downwards, historical events are cited. "Declining the throne and yielding the state" refers to Taibo of Wu, who was the eldest son of King Tai; the next brother was Zhongyong, and the youngest brother was Jili. When King Tai was ill, [Taibo] yielded so that the younger brother would succeed as heir; therefore, pretending to gather medicinal herbs, he entered eastern Wu. The rest is as explained in the Aids to the Path. "Returning the ox," etc., refers to Yao inviting Xu You to become leader of the nine provinces. When Xu You heard this, he went to the river to wash his ears. Chao Fu happened to be watering his ox, saw him, and asked, "When a person washes, he first washes his face; why do you wash your ears?" He replied, "Yao invited me to become leader of the nine provinces. Despising hearing such words, I am washing them." Chao Fu said, "I have heard that the camphor tree grows upon the summit of deep mountains, where above there is no road for carriages and below there is no path through dangerous cliffs; although craftsmen are skilled, they cannot reach it. If you wish to escape the world, why did you not conceal yourself deeply, instead of wandering among humans and fishing for fame and profit? I wish to water my ox, and [your ears] have defiled my ox's mouth." Thereupon he led his ox upstream to water it.

Furthermore, in the Vibhāṣā: "Question: Relying on what body are the stations of mastery attained? Answer: They are attained relying on a body in the desire realm. Question: Is one able to form the thought of impurity regarding the Buddha's body? Answer: One can, but only a Buddha can; it is not for the other śrāvakas and so forth. The Buddha's body is without defilement; all practitioners of the contemplation of impurity cannot form the thought of impurity toward the Buddha's body."

Third, explaining the latter four stations of mastery: first matching with the stages, next clarifying great and small, next distinguishing provisional and real. Regarding "The Dazhidulun says blue, yellow," etc.: the latter four stations of mastery have only four colors. Now, what is the meaning of listing eight colors? Answer: Sutras and treatises differ; here the text lists both. Therefore it is judged that blue and the others are classified under the real, while earth and the others are classified under the provisional. This is judged according to the form perceived by the samādhi consciousness, not the forms grasped by the five sense faculties. For what is seen in samādhi throughout the ten directions is everywhere the four colors; hence the four colors are real. If one sees earth and the like, they are also these four colors, yet four names such as earth are further established; hence they are provisional. Because in the ten spheres of totality one sees eight colors, if one merely speaks of eight colors, then both are spoken of in terms of the real. If one judges the forms grasped by the five sense faculties, one should say that blue and the others are provisional, while earth and the others are real. As the Abhidharmakośa says, "The primary elements refer to the four realms, namely earth, water, fire, and wind, which are able to accomplish activities such as supporting, having the natures of hardness, moisture, heat, and motion." This explains the real four great primary elements. "Able to accomplish activities such as supporting" explains the functions of the four great elements: namely, earth can accomplish supporting, and "such as" includes the other three, water and so forth—that is, water can accomplish cohesion, fire can accomplish heating, and wind can accomplish growth. Next it says, "Earth refers to color and shape, with names established according to worldly conceptions; water and fire are also like this; wind as realm is likewise." Since it says "worldly conceptions," shape and color are both provisional. Color refers to blue, etc.; shape refers to square, etc. Water and fire also possess both shape and color; hence it says "also like this." Regarding wind, the treatise says: "In the wind realm, there is no visible form." Where it is said "is likewise," it is also like water and fire—meaning dark wind, whirling wind, and so forth. Regarding these provisional and real forms, among the five sense faculties, provisional form is grasped by the eye-consciousness, while real form is grasped by the body-consciousness. If seen in samādhi, they are grasped by neither the body nor the eye consciousness; hence the judgment of provisional and real has this difference. Moreover, in what is seen in samādhi, blue and the like, earth and the like, are seen distinct and unmixed. If it were like the Abhidharmakośa, color and shape exist solely upon the real dharma of earth and the rest without any separate earth; therefore it is different. Hence the Sinianchu says, "The Dazhidulun only mentions blue, etc., while the Yingluo jing mentions earth, etc.; this also does not matter. The four colors are names, while earth and the rest are substances; name is provisional name, while substance is real substance." That text still says this is spoken of regarding form with resistance, and does not say it is seen in samādhi; thus we know the Mohe zhiguan speaks from the aspect of what is seen in samādhi. If samādhi is accomplished, then one sees throughout the ten directions without shape-form. If the power of light is not yet accomplished, there are both color and shape; if judged from accomplishment, there should be color alone. Although the present text lists both provisional and real, it must preserve four and submerge four; combining these four with the former four makes the eight stations of mastery.

From "These four" downwards, the existence or non-existence of dharmas is distinguished. "Inner and outer forms are exhausted" means that one's own skeleton is internal, and another's skeleton is external. Since there is neither internal nor external, there are only the eight colors; hence there is no beauty or ugliness. There is only many or few: although the skeletons are exhausted, the eight colors are not exhausted. "Many or few" refers to the breadth or narrowness of the eight colors.