廬山蓮宗寶鑑 10.2

10.2

夫奉教念佛之士，叨法正之遺廕、作如來之所使，必以摧邪顯正、激濁揚清，為後學蓍龜、作生靈耳目為己任也。苟弗能而默默自守，則尸祿備員於佛門矣。雖講授亦奚以為。豈不聞因筌然後得魚、體教然後修行？名教未正行如之何哉？故不得不論也。是以仲尼為政，正其不正；涅槃遺誡，急在糾過。余嘗觀吾佛世尊之主西竺也，象無象之象、言無言之言，以復群生之性，由是頓教漸教、大乘小乘，盈溢乎龍宮海藏，無非摧邪顯正、激濁揚清之旨，而大地生民率其化而復其性者可勝計乎？其間偏讚西方，謂捷徑修行之道者，蓋以阿彌陀佛有廣大願力，攝娑婆眾生而歸淨邦，是令反妄而證真也，所以諸佛共讚、菩薩同遵。晉社創修，千古之高風不墜；慈照集懺，十方之正化流通。大矣哉淨土之道！其為體也，以彌陀即本性；其為宗也，以淨國即唯心；其為用也，以仁恕即滅惡生善。此之三者，蓋顯三世報應。制其事一心，空寂窮其理，俾達乎理者反其妄、信其事者遷乎善，以斯而利于上下，實助於周孔之教、贊翊皇化，其亦至矣。使一人能行是道，以訓于家，家以導於鄉，鄉以達於邦，以至於無窮，則天下之民涵道泳德、融神實相，高步無何而極佛境界，豈止以為善人君子而已哉。夫如是，則何患乎忠孝不修、禮讓不著歟？以此觀之，豈非能仁之道與仲尼之道共為表裏以訓于民耶？洎乎歷朝敬之廣其教，像法事之非其人，廣其教則弊倖生，非其人則淳朴泯，而乃以佛堂高大為奢誇、聲利溫飽為能事，徒以多為貴，則壞其道者眾矣；言以怪為美，則惑其聽者庶矣。遞相沿襲，以成鄙吝，日復一日紅紫亂朱，使夫清靜仁恕之風消蕩矣，於是蠶食蠧耗之謗由茲而盛焉。斯乃敬之事之者之失，非其教之咎也。今之人多不察其所由，視其徒之不肖者而遷怒於善人教法焉，亦何異乎以丹朱而罪堯、因商均而過舜，服藥失度歸咎於神農、縱火致焚反怨於燧人也耶。愚乃不佞，學佛之道有年矣。既粗領其旨，而頗有扶傾之心，非敢私於己而欲公於眾，以救其弊也。嘗謂教門之利害有四：一曰師授不明，邪法增熾而喪其真；二曰戒法不行，綱常紊亂而犯其禁；三曰教理未彰，謬談非義而惑其眾；四曰行願不修，迷入邪岐而墮於魔。由是亂名改作，聾瞽後學非止一端，可傷乎哉。自是叨濫之徒，一以傳十、十以傳百、百以千萬，流毒於海內速若置郵。何以知其然？正說難行、邪風易染，此必然之理也。噫！祖道之不傳也久矣，欲人之無惑者難矣。吾雖不敏，而實悲焉。思欲分條析理廣被前聞，截偽續真開茲後學，恨無慧辯徒事管窺。由是齋沐一心投誠三寶，詢求大教參考玄文，楷定正宗破諸異說，總成念佛正論。剖證佛祖格言，普告諸方咸躋覺路，庶使聖教隱而復彰，眾生罪而還福。有客至而問之曰：修行了自己生死，何須論他人長短？予應之曰：理不然也。豈不聞如來出世，無一法不是利生；菩薩修行，肯纖毫而為自己。佛子示同外道，方便轉彼邪心。楞嚴十種魔民皆因錯解，華嚴十類魔業示其正歸。嗟惡慧之邪修，自甘心於險道。遇斯境界，豈可緘言？念彼愚癡，寧容坐視？況世尊悲心付囑，留大願而普濟迷津；菩薩如教修行，示同事而化令成佛。是其本行，夫復何疑。如其見迷路而不指正途，慈悲安在？覩沈溺而不思拯接，方便何存？隨順正法而破魔，是無上大智之業；調伏眾生而入道，是諸佛之所攝持。誓當捨命而立真宗，終不為已而忘佛囑，眾生盡而悲心益固、空界殞而我願無窮。倘逢有識之賢，必能助弘斯道。可謂將此深心奉塵剎，是則名為報佛恩。

Those who uphold the teaching and practice buddhānusmṛti enjoy the legacy of Dharma leaders and serve as emissaries of the Tathāgata. They must take it upon themselves to crush the heterodox and manifest the orthodox, to stimulate the turbid and extol the clear, serving as a divinatory guide for later students and as the ears and eyes for living beings. If one is unable to do so and merely remains silent in self-preservation, then one is a mere sinecurist filling a post within the Buddhist gate. Even if one gives lectures and teachings, of what use are they? Have you not heard that only by means of the fish trap does one catch the fish, and only by embodying the teaching does one engage in practice? If the conventional teachings are not corrected, how can one proceed with practice? Hence, one cannot fail to offer this treatise. For this reason, when Zhongni governed, he corrected what was unrighteous; the testamentary admonition of the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] was urgent in censuring faults. I have observed that when our Lord, the World-Honoured Buddha, ruled the Western realm of India, he manifested forms of the formless, and spoke words of the wordless, so as to restore the true nature of all living beings. Thereupon, the sudden and gradual teachings, the Mahāyāna and the Hīnayāna, overflowed from the Dragon Palace and the ocean storehouses; they were none other than the purpose of crushing the heterodox and manifesting the orthodox, stimulating the turbid and extolling the clear. Can one even count the living mortals across the great earth who have followed his conversion and restored their true nature? Among these teachings, his particular praise of the West as the shortcut path of cultivation is because Amitābha Buddha possesses vast vow-power to gather the sentient beings of the Sahā world and return them to the pure realm, causing them to turn back from delusion and realize reality. Therefore, all Buddhas join in praising it, and bodhisattvas unite in complying with it. When the society of the Jin dynasty was first founded, its high standard was preserved across a thousand ages without falling; when Cizhao compiled the repentance liturgy, orthodox conversion was circulated throughout the ten directions. Great indeed is the Way of the Pure Land! As its essence, Amitābha is one's fundamental nature; as its doctrinal core, the pure realm is Mind-only; as its application, benevolence and forbearance mean extinguishing evil and giving rise to good. These three manifest retribution across the three periods of time. Harnessing practice to one-pointedness of mind and plumbing principle to emptiness and stillness, it causes those who reach principle to turn away from delusion, and those who have faith in phenomena to turn toward the good. Benefiting both high and low through this truly assists the teachings of the Duke of Zhou and Confucius, and supports imperial transformation—it is supreme indeed. If one person can practice this Way and instruct his family with it, the family can guide the village, the village can reach the state, and this can extend without limit. Then the people of the world will immerse themselves in the Way and bathe in virtue, harmonizing their spirits with the real mark; they will stroll loftily in the realm of nothingness and reach the ultimate Buddha realm—how could it merely stop at making them good men and gentlemen? If it is like this, why worry that loyalty and filial piety will not be cultivated, or that propriety and yielding will not be manifest? Viewed from this perspective, are not the Way of the Munificent One and the Way of Zhongni the exterior and interior to each other in instructing the people? But through successive dynasties, as it was revered, its teaching was expanded, and those who practiced it in the semblance age were not the right men. When its teaching was expanded, abuses and opportunism arose; when the people were not the right men, simplicity and honesty perished. Consequently, they took high and grand Buddha halls as extravagant displays, and considered sound, profit, warmth, and repletion to be their proper business. Merely valuing quantity, those who destroyed the Way grew numerous; taking the bizarre to be beauty, those who confused listeners became manifold. Transmitting this from one to another, vulgar stinginess took shape; day after day the reddish-purple confused the vermilion, causing the ethos of purity, benevolence, and forbearance to dissipate, and from this, slanders about 'eating away like silkworms' and 'wasting like woodworms' flourished. This was the fault of those who revered and practiced it; it was not the blame of the teaching itself. Most people today do not examine where it originated; seeing unworthy disciples, they shift their anger onto good people and the Dharma. How is this any different from blaming Yao because of Danzhu, censuring Shun on account of Shangjun, attributing the blame to Shennong when taking medicine without moderation, or conversely resenting the Fire-Maker when letting a fire loose leads to a conflagration? I am foolish and untalented, but I have studied the Way of the Buddha for years. Having grasped its general purport and harboring some desire to prop up the falling, I dare not keep it private to myself, but wish to make it public to all, so as to rescue them from these abuses. I have often said that there are four harms to the doctrinal school: first, the master's instruction is unclear, so heterodox teachings blaze forth and lose its truth; second, the monastic precepts are not practiced, so social norms and regular principles fall into chaos and their prohibitions are violated; third, the doctrinal principles are not illuminated, so erroneous talk of what is unrighteous deludes the masses; fourth, practice and vows are not cultivated, so people become confused, enter heterodox branches, and fall into the demonic. Because of this, names are disordered and practices altered; later students are blinded and deafened in more than one way—how lamentable! From then on, presumptuous impostors transmitted it, one to ten, ten to a hundred, a hundred to thousands and myriads; the poison spread across the country as swift as relay couriers. How do we know this to be so? Orthodox explanations are difficult to practice, while heterodox winds are easily contracted; this is an inevitable principle. Alas! The ancestral Way has not been transmitted for a long time, and it is hard to keep people from doubt. Though I am dull, I am truly grieved by it. I wished to analyze the articles and dissect the principles to broadly encompass what was previously heard, to sever falsehood and continue the truth so as to open the minds of these later students, yet I regret that I have no wise eloquence and merely look at things through a tube. For this reason, with a purified body and single mind, I devoted myself wholeheartedly to the Three Jewels, inquired into the great teachings, consulted the profound texts, definitively established the orthodox lineage, and refuted various divergent views, bringing them together into this 'Orthodox Treatise on Buddhānusmṛti'. Dissecting and verifying the maxims of the Buddhas and patriarchs, I proclaim them everywhere to all regions so that all may ascend the path of awakening, in the hope that the sacred teaching, having been obscured, may be illuminated once more, and that sentient beings, having sinned, may return to blessing. A guest came and questioned me, saying: 'Cultivation is meant to resolve one's own birth and death; why must you discuss the strengths and weaknesses of others?' I answered him, saying: 'The principle is not so. Have you not heard that when the Tathāgata appeared in the world, not a single dharma failed to benefit living beings? When bodhisattvas cultivate practice, would they ever do even a hair's breadth for themselves? Sons of the Buddha display forms identical to non-Buddhists to convert their heterodox minds by expedient means. The ten kinds of demonic beings in the Śūraṅgama[-sūtra] all arise from mistaken understanding; the ten kinds of demonic karma in the Avataṃsaka[-sūtra] show their orthodox return. Alas for the heterodox practice of vicious intelligence, willingly resting content with dangerous paths! Encountering such circumstances, how could one remain silent? Thinking of their foolishness, how could one tolerate sitting idly by? Furthermore, the World-Honoured One with a compassionate heart gave his entrustment, leaving vast vows to universally ferry across the deluded ford; bodhisattvas cultivate practice in accord with the teaching, manifesting identity of actions to transform and cause them to become Buddhas. This is their fundamental conduct; what further doubt could there be? If one sees someone lost on the road and does not point out the correct path, where is compassion? If one witnesses someone drowning and does not think of rescuing them, where do expedient means abide? Overcoming Māra by complying with the true Dharma is the work of unsurpassed great wisdom; taming sentient beings to enter the Way is that which all Buddhas uphold. I vow to sacrifice my life to establish the true lineage; in the end I will not forget the Buddha's entrustment for my own sake. When sentient beings are exhausted, my compassionate mind will be all the firmer; when empty space perishes, my vows will be endless. If I should meet worthy individuals of understanding, they will surely be able to assist in propagating this Way. It can be said that offering this profound mind to the dust-mote lands is called repaying the Buddha's kindness.'