西方合論 8.15

8.15

四、狂恣墮者，有等魔民專逞狂慧，不肯持戒修行，妄引經中相似語言，如「煩惱即菩提、婬怒癡即梵行」之類，隨語生解，隨解發毒。果如彼說，迦文悟道，應親寶女；阿難婬舍，何須提𭒝；六祖初隨獵人，尚未受戒，何苦但食肉邊菜也。經云：「尚無不殺不盜不婬，何況更有殺盜婬事。」豈有聞人呵沈水香，便謂應住坑廁者也！昔五天有僧達磨達者，有辯慧，師事師子尊者；尊者知其悟解，對眾稱之。至傳法嗣祖，則以授婆舍斯多。磨達心恨之曰：「尊者蓋知我之深，何故嗣位不以見授？」一日獨行度水，有女子浣露其足，磨達念曰：「此脛白晢乃爾。」尊者忽在旁曰：「今日之心，可授祖位乎？」磨達于是攝念，禮足求哀。即一婬戒，餘行可例。《般若經》曰：「罪不罪不可得故，應具足尸羅波羅蜜。」釋云：「罪不罪不可得者，非為邪見粗心言不可得。菩薩深入諸法相，行空三昧，慧眼觀故，罪不可得；罪無故，不罪亦不可得。若人貪著無罪，見破戒罪人則輕慢，見持戒善人則愛敬，如是持戒，是名起罪因緣，不名具足。」故知住戒即破，何況棄毀。戒執亦戒，始名持戒。諸大經言梵行不可得等，皆即此義。永明曰：「帶習尚被境牽，現行豈逃緣縛？猶醉象無鉤，癡猿得樹，奔波乍擁，生鳥被籠。是故菩薩，稟戒為師，常懷大懼。」又曰：「末代宗門中學大乘人，多輕戒律，所以《大涅槃經》扶律談常，則乘戒俱急，故號此經為續常住命之重寶。何以故？若無此教，但取口解脫全不修行，則乘戒俱失。」故乘謂悟第一義，戒謂止一切黑業。祖師于此分四料簡：一、戒急乘緩。以戒急故，生人天中，如箭射空，力盡還墜；以乘緩故，雖聞大法，如聾若啞。二、乘急戒緩。以戒緩故，生惡趣中；以乘急故，常聞大法。如華嚴會上，八部鬼神是也。三、乘戒俱急，則生人天中，而常聞大法。四、乘戒俱緩，則墮三惡道，而永不聞法。是故乘戒二法如車二輪，廢一不可得。故龍樹曰：「破戒之人，如清涼地而有毒蛇，不中澡浴；其家如塚，人所不到，失諸功德。譬如枯樹，如田被雹，不可依仰。如大病人，人不欲近。譬如吐食，不可更噉。」菩薩如是苦口呵責，曾許人破戒不是？故千日學解，不如一日持戒，何得貪悟道之虛名，受泥犁之實禍，欺己誑人，枉遭王難。夫狂吠之人，無所不破，今獨言戒者，以邪見惡火，首燒戒寶故。又則戒是淨業之基，一切白法由戒生故。

Fourth, those who fall into wild recklessness: there are certain demonic people who exclusively indulge in wild wisdom and are unwilling to maintain the precepts and cultivate, falsely citing similar words from the sūtras, such as 'afflictions are bodhi' and 'lust, anger, and delusion are pure conduct (brahmacarya),' generating understanding according to words, and venting poison according to their understanding. If it were truly as they say, then when Śākyamuni awakened to the Way, he should have been intimate with the precious maiden; when Ānanda was in the house of lust, why was there any need for Trapuṣa and Bahalika; when the Sixth Patriarch initially followed the hunters and had not yet received the precepts, why did he bother only eating vegetables from beside the meat? A sūtra says: 'There is not even non-killing, non-stealing, and non-unchastity, how much less could there be acts of killing, stealing, and unchastity!' How could someone, upon hearing someone scold eaglewood incense, say that one should dwell in a cesspool! In the past, in the Five Indias, there was a monk named Dharmada who had eloquence and wisdom, and served the Venerable Siṃha as his master; the Venerable knew of his awakening and understanding, and praised him before the assembly. But when it came to transmitting the Dharma and succeeding to the patriarchate, he conferred it upon Basiasita. Dharmada felt resentment in his heart and said, 'The Venerable knows me so deeply, why did he not confer the succession upon me?' One day, walking alone across a stream, there was a woman washing who exposed her feet; Dharmada thought, 'These shins are so fair and white.' The Venerable suddenly appeared at his side and said, 'With today's mind, could you be conferred the patriarchal seat?' Thereupon Dharmada gathered his thoughts, bowed at his feet, and begged for mercy. Taking this one precept against unchastity, the remaining practices can be deduced. The Prajñā-sūtra says: 'Because sin and non-sin are ungraspable, one should fully possess the śīlapāramitā.' The commentary explains: 'That sin and non-sin are ungraspable does not mean they are ungraspable for coarse minds with wrong views. It is because the bodhisattva deeply enters into the characteristics of all phenomena, practices the samādhi of emptiness, and observes with the eye of wisdom that sin is ungraspable; because sin does not exist, non-sin is also ungraspable. If a person is attached to being without sin, looking down with arrogance upon sinful people who break the precepts, and looking with affection and reverence upon good people who maintain the precepts, maintaining the precepts in this way is called the cause and condition for giving rise to sin, not called full possession.' Therefore know that dwelling in the precepts is already breaking them, how much more so casting them aside and destroying them! Only when attachment to the precepts is also guarded against is it first called maintaining the precepts. When various great sūtras say that pure conduct is ungraspable and so forth, they all mean this. Yongming said: 'Carrying residual habits, one is still dragged by objects; in manifest activity, how could one escape the bondage of conditions? It is like a drunken elephant without a hook, or a foolish monkey finding a tree; suddenly trapped while dashing about, or a living bird caught in a cage. Therefore, the bodhisattva takes the precepts as teacher and constantly harbors great fear.' He also said: 'In the degenerate age, practitioners of the Mahāyāna in the Chan school mostly slight the vinaya rules; therefore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra supports the vinaya and speaks of the eternal, so that both vehicle and precepts are urgent; hence this sūtra is named the weighty jewel that continues the life of the eternally abiding. Why is this? If not for this teaching, merely taking verbal liberation and not cultivating at all, then both vehicle and precepts are lost.' Therefore, 'vehicle' means awakening to the primary truth, and 'precepts' means putting a stop to all dark karma. The patriarchs divided this into four alternatives: First, the precepts are urgent and the vehicle is lax. Because the precepts are urgent, one is born among humans and devas, but like an arrow shot into the sky, when its force is spent it falls back down; because the vehicle is lax, even if one hears the great Dharma, one is as if deaf or mute. Second, the vehicle is urgent and the precepts are lax. Because the precepts are lax, one is born in the evil destinies; because the vehicle is urgent, one constantly hears the great Dharma, such as the ghosts and spirits of the eight classes in the Avataṃsaka assembly. Third, both vehicle and precepts are urgent, then one is born among humans and devas and constantly hears the great Dharma. Fourth, both vehicle and precepts are lax, then one falls into the three evil destinies and never hears the Dharma. Therefore, the two dharmas of vehicle and precepts are like the two wheels of a cart; one cannot dispense with either. Hence Nāgārjuna said: 'A person who breaks the precepts is like a cool, refreshing place that has a poisonous snake, unfit for bathing; his house is like a tomb where people do not go, losing all merits. He is like a withered tree, like a field struck by hail, unable to be relied upon. He is like a seriously ill person whom people do not wish to approach. He is like vomited food that cannot be eaten again.' When a bodhisattva rebukes so earnestly, did he ever allow people to break the precepts? Therefore, studying intellectual understanding for a thousand days is not as good as maintaining the precepts for one day; how can one covet the empty fame of awakening to the Way and suffer the real calamity of Niraya, deceiving oneself and duping others, vainly incurring punishment from the King [of the Underworld]? Those who wildly bark break everything; the reason I now speak solely of precepts is that the evil fire of wrong views first burns the jewel of precepts. Moreover, precepts are the foundation of pure karma, for all white dharmas are born from precepts.