[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) › [熾盛光道場念誦儀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951) › 1.85 # 熾盛光道場念誦儀 1.85 熾盛光道場念誦儀 1.85 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1.85) 或日：「變災為福，報應之說，出乎釋典。儒宗則天命所賦，何所祈禳？」解曰：「《尚書．金縢》，歷代所寶，遇有災變，開取其法以禳之。又曰：『作善，降之百祥；作不善，降之百殃。』《周易》所謂『一言善，千里之外應之。一言不善，千里之外違之，況其邇者乎？』如宋景公，一言善，熒惑三徙。布在方冊，明如日星，有見作法、持呪？即引仲尼云：『吾禱久矣！』且仲尼聖人也。聖人無過，言豈虛哉？仲尼之徒，皆其弟子，同乎聖人無過，豈免濫聖之非？且子夏喪明，乃云：『天乎！予之無罪。』友人謂曰：『子居河上，人疑汝如夫子，而罪一也。』親奉聖師，尚或惑之。狥名之徒，堅守偏見，雖曰排釋，實是破儒。或云：『此法專為國主、大臣、一切庶民及諸眷屬，除災難法，得大吉祥。出家之人視身如寄，小乘乃無常、苦、空，念念生滅；大乘則心安實相，造境即中。何災可消？何福可禳？』今謂不然，經云：『若有苾芻、苾芻尼、族姓男、族姓女，受持、讀誦此陀羅尼者，能成就八萬種吉祥事，能除滅八萬種不吉祥事。』據乎經文，何隔道、俗？聖人以祕密語詮微妙法，非凡所知。況三乘行人，引道修行，或遇梵命及諸災難，障乎道法，不得熏修。詎有守愚，弗遵勝法？世有苟名之徒，挾邪拒正。如經所謂：『口雖說空，行在有中。』見有變災為福之言，又弗細尋經旨，便云俗事，豈非偏執？且生善滅惡，諸經率同，何非此而是彼乎？如《金光明》中，惡星、災異，令當聽是經。《請觀音經》生身十地，未免虎、狼、師子等難，當須稱名持呪。在聖尚然，居凡奚捨？縱是內有實德，必須外假熏修，障道因緣以之寂滅，是故經云『功德無比』，良在茲焉！」 > Someone might say: “The notion of transforming calamity into blessing and the doctrine of karmic retribution originate from Buddhist texts. In the Confucian school, it is what Heaven’s mandate confers; what is there to pray to avert?” I explain: “The ‘Metal-Bound Coffer’ in the Book of Documents has been treasured by successive dynasties: whenever a calamity occurred, they opened it and took out its method to avert it. It also says: ‘On the doer of good, it sends down all blessings; on the doer of evil, it sends down all calamities.’ What the Book of Changes calls: ‘If one's words are good, they will be responded to from beyond a thousand li; if one's words are not good, they will be opposed from beyond a thousand li—how much more so by those who are near!’ As with Duke Jing of Song, because of a single good word, Mars moved back three degrees. This is recorded in the classical registers, bright as the sun and stars. Seeing ritual practice and mantra chanting, some immediately cite Confucius saying: ‘My praying has been for a long time!’ But Confucius was a sage. A sage is without fault—how could his words be empty? The followers of Confucius were all his disciples; are they, like the sage, without fault? How could they avoid the error of presumptuously claiming sagehood? Furthermore, when Zixia lost his sight, he cried: ‘O Heaven! I have committed no sin.’ A friend said to him: ‘You dwelt by the River, and people mistook you for the Master—that is your first sin.’ Even one who personally served the holy master was still susceptible to delusion. Those who pursue fame rigidly cling to biased views: though they claim to reject Buddhism, they are actually destroying Confucianism. Some say: ‘This ritual is exclusively for state rulers, ministers, all the common folk, and their families, as a method to avert disasters and attain great auspiciousness. Monastics regard their body as a transient lodging: in the Hīnayāna, it is impermanence, suffering, and emptiness, arising and ceasing thought after thought; in the Mahāyāna, the mind rests in the true mark, and reaching any condition, it is directly the middle. What calamity is there to extinguish? What blessing is there to pray for?’ I now say this is not so. The sūtra states: ‘If there are bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, men of good family, or women of good family who receive, uphold, read, and recite this dhāraṇī, they can accomplish eighty thousand kinds of auspicious matters and eliminate eighty thousand kinds of inauspicious matters.’ Relying on the text of the sūtra, what separation is there between monastic and lay? Sages express subtle and wondrous Dharma through esoteric words, which is not what ordinary people can know. Furthermore, when practitioners of the Three Vehicles advance along the path in cultivation, they may encounter danger to their religious life and various disasters that obstruct the path and Dharma, preventing them from training. How could anyone cling to ignorance and not comply with the superior Dharma? There are those in the world who pursue worldly fame, harboring perversity and resisting orthodoxy. As the sūtra says: ‘Though their mouths speak of emptiness, their actions dwell in existence.’ Seeing words about transforming calamity into blessing, yet not carefully investigating the sūtra's purport, they immediately call it secular business—is this not rigid prejudice? Moreover, producing good and destroying evil is generally the same across all sūtras; why reject this and approve that? For instance, in the Golden Light Sūtra, when evil stars and calamitous anomalies occur, it instructs that one should listen to this sūtra. In the Sūtra on Invoking Avalokiteśvara, even one who has attained the tenth ground in this physical body is not exempt from the dangers of tigers, wolves, lions, and the like, and must invoke the name and uphold the mantra. If it is so even for sages, why should ordinary beings discard it? Even if one internally possesses true virtue, one must externally rely on cultivation, so that the causes and conditions obstructing the path are brought to tranquility. Therefore the sūtra says, ‘Its merit and virtue are incomparable’—it is truly found in this!” > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.84](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1.84) - [Next: 1.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1.86) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951~en-mt.1.85) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1951.1.85) · Pramāṇa