寶王三昧念佛直指 1.48

1.48

釋迦如來一代聖教，一本於善惡果報、因緣諸法，為始終不易之正教也。雖有百非超脫之句，豈必離乎因緣法哉？奈何今時有一等斷人善根極惡闡提之輩，不識佛祖為人破執除疑解、粘去縛之談，隨他脚後跟轉，妄謂除此心外諸行皆空，無佛無法、非善非惡，錯認妄識是真，謂此心外無法可得，遂即撥無因果排斥罪福，言一切菩薩諸佛形像秖是個金銀銅鐵土塊木頭，一大藏教亦秖是個樹皮、揩不淨底故紙，本非真實，何足依憑？於一切善行功德，無不一一掃除，謂言著相。一路談他之短、顯己之長，或存所參話頭而又謂不可固執，索性使人內外空索索谿達地了，即乃潛行諸惡及婬怒癡等，反謂於道無礙。自賺賺他，內心腐爛殆不可聞，譬如師子身中蟲，自食師子身中肉。此等見解其類甚多，必是天魔波旬昔恨未消所遣來者，令同我形服壞我道法而無遺餘。嗚呼痛哉！若如彼見，謂形像非佛，不知何者是佛？紙墨非經，不知何者是經？若自心是佛，何物非心，而獨謂聖人之像非心非佛耶？又心既是佛，何人無心，而獨謂汝心是佛，使人非像非經耶？不知眾生之心全體在迷，必假聖人形像經法而表見之，使人有所悟解也。若有悟解，則識生佛真心平等遍一切處。經云：諸佛說空法，為度於有故；若復著於空，諸佛所不化。又云：寧可說有如須彌山，不可說無如芥子許。縱證空法，猶滯小乘，豈能如大菩薩等從空入有證於俗假，於眾生界如佛度生者也。是故小乘空見是大乘菩薩所棄，佛說空法是未了義。又佛說空法，乃即有顯空，空不離有，得名真空。今人說空，離有方空，空成斷見，深為可畏，如陷坑宑永不可出。永嘉云：棄有著空病亦然，還如避溺而投火。斯之謂也。善星比丘妄說法空，寶蓮香比丘尼私行婬欲，生陷泥犁，豈不是後人龜鑑！後人不以為戒，復蹈其已覆之轍，如盲引盲眾，使師及弟子自甘沒溺，可悲甚矣。又若孝子，聞父過惡，以承彼生育之恩，猶尚不忍。況我釋氏之子負出世恩，於佛形像法言恣意輕毀，安然不懼，可不痛傷？此人必向五無間獄大熱猛焰之中，各各自受今日謬解之報，豈虛語哉？縱是德山、丹霞亦但如文殊等，一時為人破執顯理耳，豈欲以此教後世耶？今為其後者，不識先人之方便，更喫彼已吐之唾，一向謬謂拆佛殿燒木佛是究道之行，可謂顛倒。若遵彼遺說，惟能燒拆便是道者，今天下釋子皆當如文殊師利以劍自隨，有佛殺佛、無佛斫像，即是道矣，更不須以佛所傳定慧等學而為道耶。又佛法門得久住者，全賴經像形服威儀善行乘法而已，不知捨是何據而得久住者哉？是故佛說，於諸經像敬之不至尚獲大罪。況更輕毀，罪逆可知。《妙經》有云：提婆達多昔作仙人阿私陀時，為釋迦師。釋迦自以其身而為床座奉上供養，令我具足六度相好金色無畏攝法，乃至不共神通道力，成佛度生等者，皆因達多善知識也。今釋迦已得證果，欲相成其道，不說法空但逆讚其法。微損佛足小指，尚不逃於地獄長劫之痛，何況後五百歲，斷人善根妄說法空者，豈能免苦果耶？又佛說法空，蓋欲令人體空斷惡。奈何不識佛意，而反滯空退善，豈不顛倒？又彼於諸不善尚說無礙，不知善法何礙而欲不修？古人以不落因果答學者問，而五百世墮野狐身，非百丈老人不能脫之。況今妄說法空撥無因果，不懼後世恣意妄談，非止毀於經像？又將素食之人比之牛羊、說法之人叱為虛解，罪將安極？不知慧解如人之目、道行如人之足，有目無足，雖見而不能行；有足無目，雖行而不能見。以不見故必墮坑塹，以不行故奚到寶所？雖不能到，還識是非；既墮坑塹，身命俱失。如經所謂五度如盲、般若如導，以如盲故行必墮凶，以如導故必到寶所。豈可反叱經教之談為虛解也。然則解行雖各為要，設使有行無解，莫若慧解為優。譬如羅漢應供、象身挂纓，其義可了。又若有解無行，菩提可發；有行無解，難會圓乘。故知文殊解深為諸佛之師，普賢行大作群生之父，豈可偏滯一隅而自執也？禪宗南嶽尚以不似一物、不無修證、不可污染，為悟道入門之要旨。況今人邪見若是之深，豈不速疾陷於極苦之處。楞嚴云：自謂已足，忽有無端大我慢起，心中尚輕十方如來，何況下位聲聞緣覺。又云：忽然歸向永滅，撥無因果。一向入空，空心現前，乃至心生長斷滅解，不禮塔廟、摧毀經像。謂檀越言：「此是金銅或是土木，經是樹葉或是疊華。肉身真常不自恭敬，却崇土木，實為顛倒。」其深信者從其毀碎，埋棄地中。疑誤眾生，入無間獄。失於正受，當從淪墜。則知世尊於妄說法空之人，及未得謂得、未證謂證者，預已授其入獄之記。明鑑若是，今人豈能逃佛所記哉？或曰：彼達多入獄無苦，我奚畏焉？不知達多因心欲逆讚釋迦之道，故在地獄非但無苦，且如三禪天樂。然以身口似謗故，在地獄之中，還如身口所作具受無量種苦。佛師尚爾，況今人効之，使人於經像間不生尊敬，視猶土木、待如故紙，令彼不識因果、薄於罪福，遠佛教誡、近五逆行。如是惡報其能免乎？

The sacred teachings of the Tathāgata Śākyamuni throughout his lifetime are fundamentally rooted in the karmic retributions of good and evil and the dharmas of causes and conditions; they are the correct teachings that remain unchanging from beginning to end. Though there are expressions transcending the hundred negations, how could they ever be detached from the dharmas of causes and conditions? Yet how lamentable it is that nowadays there is a class of extremely wicked icchantikas who sever people's roots of goodness! They do not recognize that the talks of the Buddhas and patriarchs were meant to shatter attachments, eliminate doubt, resolve stickiness, and untie bonds for people. Turning at the heels of others, they falsely claim that apart from this mind, all practices are empty, that there is neither Buddha nor Dharma, neither good nor evil. Mistaking the deluded consciousness for the real, they say that outside this mind no dharma can be attained. Thereupon, they repudiate cause and effect and reject sin and blessing, saying that all images of the bodhisattvas and Buddhas are merely pieces of gold, silver, bronze, iron, lumps of clay, or pieces of wood, and that the entire great canon of teachings is merely tree bark or dirty old paper for wiping filth—intrinsically unreal, so how could it be worthy of reliance? Toward all virtuous practices and merits, without exception they sweep them all away, calling them attachment to marks. All along they speak of the faults of others and display their own strengths, or they hold to a huatou they investigate while also saying one must not cling stubbornly to it; they simply make people inwardly and outwardly empty, desolate, and bare, and then secretly practice all evils such as lust, anger, and delusion, claiming on the contrary that these pose no obstacle to the Way. Deceiving themselves and deceiving others, their inner minds are rotten to an unbearable degree—just like the worms in the body of a lion that feed on the flesh of the lion itself. Views such as these are extremely numerous; they must certainly have been sent by the heavenly māra Pāpīyan, whose former hatred has not subsided, causing them to wear our robes and assume our form to destroy our Way and Dharma without leaving any trace! Alas, how painful! If it were according to their view that images are not the Buddha, one wonders what is the Buddha? If paper and ink are not the scriptures, one wonders what is the scriptures? If one's own mind is the Buddha, what thing is not mind? Why then do they specifically say that the images of the sages are neither mind nor Buddha? Furthermore, since mind is Buddha, what person lacks a mind? Why then do they specifically say that your mind is Buddha, while causing people to negate images and scriptures? They do not know that the minds of sentient beings are entirely in delusion, and must rely on the images and scriptural teachings of the sages to make it manifest and visible, so that people may gain awakening and understanding. If one has awakening and understanding, then one recognizes that the true mind of sentient beings and Buddhas is equal and all-pervading. A sūtra says: 'The Buddhas teach the Dharma of emptiness in order to deliver those caught in existence; if one then clings to emptiness, the Buddhas cannot transform him.' It also says: 'It is better to assert existence as large as Mount Sumeru than to assert non-existence the size of a mustard seed.' Even if one realizes the Dharma of emptiness, one still stagnates in the Hīnayāna; how could one be like the great bodhisattvas and others who enter into existence from emptiness, realize conventional provisionality, and deliver sentient beings in the realms of living beings just as the Buddha does? Therefore, the Hīnayāna view of emptiness is abandoned by Mahāyāna bodhisattvas, and the Buddha's teaching of the Dharma of emptiness is an incomplete meaning. Moreover, when the Buddha speaks of the Dharma of emptiness, it is revealing emptiness right within existence; emptiness is not separate from existence, and thus is named true emptiness. When people today speak of emptiness, they must separate from existence before there is emptiness; their emptiness turns into a nihilistic view, which is profoundly terrifying, like falling into a pitfall from which one can never emerge. Yongjia said: 'Abandoning existence and clinging to emptiness is a sickness just the same; it is just like throwing oneself into fire to avoid drowning.' This is what it refers to. The bhikṣu Sunakṣatra falsely preached the emptiness of dharmas, and the bhikṣuṇī Ratnacandana secretly engaged in lust; both fell alive into the Avīci hell—are they not mirrors of warning for later generations? Later generations do not take them as warnings, but tread again upon their overturned tracks, like the blind leading a multitude of the blind, causing both masters and disciples willingly to drown—how deeply lamentable! Furthermore, like a filial son who, hearing of his father's faults and evils, still cannot bear it because he has received the kindness of his upbringing—how much more so for us, sons of the Śākya clan, who owe the transcendent kindness of the Buddha, yet casually slander and disparage the Buddha's images and Dharma words without fear or anxiety? How could this not be agonizing? Such people will surely each personally receive the retribution of today's erroneous understanding amidst the great scorching and fierce flames of the five Avīci hells—how could this be an empty statement? Even if Deshan and Danxia did so, they were merely like Mañjuśrī and others, temporarily breaking attachments and revealing the principle for others' sake; how could they have intended to teach this to future generations? Nowadays their descendants, failing to recognize the skillful means of their predecessors, further eat the spittle they already spat out, all along mistakenly saying that tearing down Buddha halls and burning wooden Buddhas are practices that penetrate the Way—this can truly be called upside-down. If one followed their leftover teachings, claiming that being able to burn and tear down is alone the Way, then all disciples of the Śākya under heaven today should be like Mañjuśrī carrying a sword around with him: killing the Buddha where there is a Buddha, and chopping up the images where there is no Buddha—that would be the Way, and there would be no further need to take the disciplines of samādhi, wisdom, and the like transmitted by the Buddha as the Way! Furthermore, that the gates of the Buddha's Dharma can endure long relies entirely on the scriptures, images, monastic robes, deportment, good practices, and the vehicles of Dharma. If one abandons these, what basis would there be for it to endure long? Therefore the Buddha said that if one's respect toward scriptures and images is not utmost, one still incurs great guilt; how much more so if one disparages and disdains them—the transgressive guilt can well be known. The Wondrous Sūtra says: 'When Devadatta was formerly the seer Asita, he was the teacher of Śākyamuni. Śākyamuni personally used his own body as a couch to offer to him, causing me to become fully endowed with the six pāramitās, the major and minor marks, the golden color, the fearlessnesses, the methods of attraction, and even the unshared supernormal powers and powers of the Way, attaining Buddhahood and delivering sentient beings—all because of the kalyāṇamitra Devadatta.' Now that Śākyamuni has already attained the realization of the fruit, [Devadatta], wishing to complement his Way, did not preach the emptiness of dharmas, but merely praised his Dharma through opposition. Yet for slightly injuring the small toe of the Buddha's foot, he still could not escape the pain of long kalpas in hell; how much more so in the final five hundred years, how could those who sever people's roots of goodness and falsely speak of the emptiness of dharmas escape the bitter fruit? Moreover, when the Buddha spoke of the emptiness of dharmas, it was intended to lead people to realize emptiness and sever evil. How is it that they fail to recognize the Buddha's intention, and instead stagnate in emptiness and retreat from good? Is this not inverted? Furthermore, they even say that unwholesome things pose no obstacle; one wonders what obstacle there is in wholesome dharmas that they wish not to cultivate them? The ancient master answered a student's question with 'not falling under cause and effect' and fell into the body of a wild fox for five hundred lifetimes; had it not been for Old Baizhang, he could not have escaped it. How much more so today, when people falsely preach the emptiness of dharmas, repudiate cause and effect, have no fear of future lifetimes, and indulge in reckless talk—not only destroying scriptures and images, but also comparing vegetarians to cattle and sheep, and berating those who preach the Dharma as having empty understanding—how extreme will their guilt be? They do not know that understanding of wisdom is like a person's eyes, and practice of the Way is like a person's feet. If one has eyes but no feet, though one sees, one cannot walk; if one has feet but no eyes, though one walks, one cannot see. Because of not seeing, one will surely fall into pits and trenches; because of not walking, how could one reach the treasure place? Though one cannot reach it, one still recognizes right and wrong; but once one falls into a pit or trench, both body and life are lost. Just as the sūtra says: 'The five pāramitās are like the blind; prajñā is like a guide.' Because they are like the blind, their walking will surely fall into disaster; because it is like a guide, one will surely arrive at the treasure place. How can one, on the contrary, berate the discussions of the scriptural teachings as empty understanding? Therefore, although understanding and practice are each essential, if there were practice without understanding, it would not be as good as understanding of wisdom being superior. For example, [the difference between] an arhat receiving offerings and an elephant adorned with a necklace illustrates this meaning clearly. Moreover, if there is understanding without practice, bodhi can still be generated; if there is practice without understanding, it is difficult to accord with the round vehicle. Thus we know that Mañjuśrī's understanding is profound, making him the teacher of all Buddhas, while Samantabhadra's practice is vast, making him the father of all living beings; how can one be biased and stagnate in one corner, holding stubbornly to oneself? In the Chan school, Nanyue still took 'not resembling a single thing,' 'not that there is no cultivation and realization,' and 'it cannot be defiled' as the essential guidelines for entering the gate of awakening to the Way. How much more so when the heterodox views of people today are as deep as this—how could they not swiftly sink into places of extreme suffering? The Śūraṅgama says: 'Claiming that one is already fulfilled, suddenly groundless great arrogance arises, and in their minds they even look down upon the Tathāgatas of the ten directions, not to mention the lower stages of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.' It also says: 'Suddenly they turn toward eternal annihilation, repudiating cause and effect. Exclusively entering into emptiness, the mind of emptiness manifests, and they even generate a view of perpetual annihilation in their minds, not bowing to stūpas and temples, and destroying scriptures and images. They say to donors: "These are gold and bronze, or clay and wood; the scriptures are tree leaves or fine cotton. Why do you not respect your own true and constant physical body, but instead revere clay and wood? This is truly inverted!" Those who have deep faith follow them in breaking and smashing them, burying them and discarding them into the earth. Misleading sentient beings, they enter the Avīci hell. Having lost right reception, they will fall.' Thus we know that toward those who falsely preach the emptiness of dharmas, and those who claim to have attained what they have not attained and claim to have realized what they have not realized, the World-Honoured One has in advance prophesied their falling into hell. With such a clear mirror, how could people today escape the Buddha's prophecy? Someone might say: 'That Devadatta entered hell without suffering; why should I fear it?' They do not know that because Devadatta's causal mind wished to praise Śākyamuni's Way through opposition, while in hell he not only had no suffering, but experienced joy like that of the third dhyāna heaven. Yet because his bodily and verbal actions resembled slander, while in hell he still fully underwent immeasurable kinds of suffering according to what his body and mouth had done. Even the Buddha's teacher was like this; how much more so when people today imitate him, causing people not to generate respect toward scriptures and images, viewing them as clay and wood, treating them like old paper, causing them to be ignorant of cause and effect, careless about sin and blessing, distant from the Buddha's instructions, and close to the five heinous deeds! How could such evil retribution be escaped?