[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) › [佛祖統紀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035) › 3.104 # 佛祖統紀 3.104 佛祖統紀 3.104 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.104](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3.104) 第三方等時者。示一佛土令淨穢不同。示現一身巨細各異。一音說法隨類各解。神力不共故見有淨穢。聞有褒貶。嗅有贍匐不贍匐。華有著身不著身。慧有若千不若千。此如淨名方等（玄十○補注若千當作若干若萬數也音乾者無義）次說方等者。即是次小說大。佛本授大眾生不堪。故抽大出小。令斷結成聖。雖有此益非佛本懷。次說方等維摩思益殃掘摩羅（殃掘摩羅。此云一切世間現。婆羅門子。年十二色力人相具足第一。對佛說偈。佛言善哉。即成沙門。稽首佛足。成阿羅漢。釋梵四王十弟子文殊等皆被訶斥。佛云。南方有國。名一切寶莊嚴。有佛名大精進。即殃掘摩羅是也。妙玄十云。殃掘之經。六年所說○此經說在成道後六年。今大師引證。第三時教。以故及此耳）彈訶小乘保果之癖（偏在聲聞）譏刺三藏斷滅之非（兼於鈍根菩薩）故身子善吉。齊教專小。初不聞大乘威德。善吉茫然失鉢（淨名經云。須菩提言。我昔乞食。維摩詰。取我鉢盛滿飯。謂我言。若能於食等者諸法亦等。諸法等者於食亦等。如是行乞乃可取食。謗諸佛毀於法。不入眾數。終不得滅度。汝若如是乃可取食。時我世尊聞此茫然。不識是何言。不知以何答。便置鉢欲出其舍）身子怖畏却華（維摩詰室。有一天女謂舍利弗曰。結習未盡。華著身耳。結習盡者。華不著也）不知是何言。不知以何答（籤云。以空智為入道之主。故寄此二人）然方等彈訶教。在三藏之後。被訶之時應在十二年前（以鹿苑十二年在方等前也。舊云中者應是誤）何以得知。皆追述昔訶。驗是前事。何者前已稟教得道。證於無學。荷佛恩深。心相體信。不復恚怒。自昔至今。恣殃掘之譏。任淨名之折。得為恥小慕大之益（玄十）彈偏折小歎大褒圓（玄十○彈偏。如淨名菩薩品。訶彌勒云。世尊授仁者記。為用何生授記乎。過去耶未來耶。現在耶。又云。一切眾生習菩提相。若彌勒滅度者。一切眾生亦當滅又云。菩提者。不可以身得。不可以心得。又摩羅經云。殃掘阿羅漢。偏斥文殊十弟子釋梵四王。是為以圓彈三教之偏○折小。如弟子品。目連為居士說法。淨名訶云。夫說法者。當如法說。無有名字。言語斷故。法無有說。離覺觀故。是用衍門三教。破目連三不當。一者外如法相說。內如法相解。是用通教即空斥不即空。說法不當理。二者外解根緣。內善知見。得無罣礙。是用別破。三者外慈念眾生。內念報佛恩。是用圓破。又殃掘斥十弟子。是為以聖門三教之大折藏之小○歎大。如眾生品。譬如幻師見所患人。菩薩觀眾生為若此也。如智者見水中月。鏡中象。熱時焰。菩薩觀眾生為若此也。今通譬眾生者。即通圓二教意○褒圓。文殊白佛云。彼上人者。難為酬對。深達實相。善說法要。此褒淨名也。文殊入淨名室。淨名曰。善來文殊。不來相而來。不見相而見。此褒文殊也）四教俱說。藏為半字。通別圓為滿字。對半說滿。故言對教（涅槃經云。譬如長者唯有一子。心常愛念晝夜殷勤。但教半字不教滿字。良由其子力未堪故。半是小乘九部。滿是大乘十二部。約人約理。比說可知）。 > Third, regarding the Vaipulya period: One Buddha-land was shown to appear distinct in purity and defilement; one body was manifested to be variously great or minute; preaching the Dharma with a single voice was comprehended differently according to category. Because their supernatural powers are not shared, some saw purity and some defilement; some heard praise and some reprimand; some smelled campaka and some did not; flowers clung to some bodies and did not cling to others; wisdom seemed many or not many. This is like the Vimalakīrti and Vaipulya \[sūtras\] (Profound Meaning, scroll 10; supplementary note: ruogan should be written as ruogan, meaning a quantity such as myriad; pronouncing it gan has no meaning). Preaching the Vaipulya next means that after the small, the great was preached. Originally the Buddha bestowed the great, but sentient beings could not bear it, so he drew out the small from the great to enable them to sever bonds and become sages. Although there was this benefit, it was not the Buddha's original intention. Next, he preached the Vaipulya, Vimalakīrti, Viśeṣacintā, and Aṅgulimāla (Aṅgulimāla: translated here as 'Manifesting in All Worlds', the son of a brāhmaṇa, twelve years old, foremost in appearance, strength, and human marks. He spoke a verse facing the Buddha, and the Buddha said, 'Excellent!' Thereupon he became a śramaṇa, bowed his head at the Buddha's feet, and became an arhat. Śakra, Brahmā, the Four Heavenly Kings, the ten disciples, and Mañjuśrī were all rebuked by him. The Buddha said: 'In the south there is a land named Adorned with All Jewels; there is a Buddha named Great Vigour, who is none other than Aṅgulimāla.' Scroll 10 of the Wonderful Profound Meaning says: 'The Aṅgulimāla Sūtra was spoken in the sixth year.' This sūtra was spoken six years after attaining awakening; now the Great Master cites it as evidence for the teaching of the third period because of this). It rebuked the Hinayana addiction to preserving results (confined to the śrāvakas) and criticized the Tripitaka error of annihilationism (extending to dull-rooted bodhisattvas). Thus Śāriputra and Subhūti, identically trained, focused exclusively on the small and initially did not hear of the awe-inspiring virtue of the Mahāyāna. Subhūti stood dazed and dropped his bowl (the Vimalakīrti Sūtra states: Subhūti said, 'In the past when I was begging for food, Vimalakīrti took my bowl, filled it with rice, and said to me: "If you can be equal toward food, all dharmas are also equal; if all dharmas are equal, one is also equal toward food. Only by begging like this may one take food. Slandering all Buddhas, disparaging the Dharma, not entering the assembly, and ultimately not attaining extinction—if you are like this, then you may take the food." At that time, World-Honoured One, when I heard this I was dazed, not knowing what words these were, nor how to respond, so I set down the bowl and wished to leave his house'). Śāriputra was terrified and brushed off the flowers (in Vimalakīrti's room, a goddess said to Śāriputra: 'Because habit-energy is not yet ended, the flowers cling to your body; for those whose habit-energy is ended, the flowers do not cling'). They did not know what words these were, nor how to respond (the Commentary on the Profound Meaning notes: because wisdom of emptiness is principal in entering the path, these two persons were used). However, the teaching of Vaipulya rebukes came after the Tripitaka; the time of being rebuked must have been prior to the twelve years (because the twelve years at the Deer Park preceded the Vaipulya; the old reading 'within' must be an error). How is this known? They all retrospectively recount former rebukes, proving these were earlier events. Why? Formerly having received the teaching and attained the path, realized non-learning, deeply received the Buddha's grace, and inwardly trusted each other, they no longer felt anger. From the past to the present, they let Aṅgulimāla mock and yielded to Vimalakīrti's reproof, thereby gaining the benefit of feeling ashamed of the small and aspiring to the great (Profound Meaning, scroll 10). Rebuking the one-sided, reproving the small, praising the great, and commending the perfect (Profound Meaning, scroll 10; rebuking the one-sided: as in the Bodhisattva Chapter of the Vimalakīrti, rebuking Maitreya: 'When the World-Honoured One gave you, Benevolent One, the prophecy, with what birth did he give it? Past, future, or present?' It also says: 'All sentient beings practice the characteristics of bodhi. If Maitreya is extinguished, all sentient beings should also be extinguished.' It also says: 'Bodhi cannot be attained with the body, nor can it be attained with the mind.' Moreover, the Aṅgulimāla Sūtra says that the arhat Aṅgulimāla singled out for rebuke Mañjuśrī, the ten disciples, Śakra, Brahmā, and the Four Heavenly Kings; this is using the perfect to rebuke the bias of the three teachings. Reproving the small: as in the Disciple Chapter, when Maudgalyāyana preached the Dharma to householders, Vimalakīrti rebuked him: 'One who expounds the Dharma should preach in accord with the Dharma. It has no name or character, because speech is severed; the Dharma cannot be preached, because it is free from vitarka and vicāra.' This uses the three teachings of the Mahāyāna to demolish Maudgalyāyana's three inadequacies: first, outwardly expounding according to the characteristics of dharmas, inwardly understanding according to the characteristics of dharmas—this uses the Shared Teaching's identity with emptiness to rebuke non-identity with emptiness, since preaching the Dharma does not accord with principle; second, outwardly understanding faculties and conditions, inwardly skilled in seeing and knowing without hindrance—this uses the Distinct Teaching to refute; third, outwardly having compassionate regard for sentient beings, inwardly thinking of repaying the Buddha's kindness—this uses the Perfect Teaching to refute. Furthermore, Aṅgulimāla rebuking the ten disciples uses the greatness of the three teachings of the noble gate to reprove the smallness of the Tripitaka. Praising the great: as in the Sentient Beings Chapter, 'Just as an illusionist sees the person he created, so does the bodhisattva contemplate sentient beings. Just as a wise person sees the moon in the water, an image in a mirror, or a mirage in the heat, so does the bodhisattva contemplate sentient beings.' Now broadly analogizing sentient beings conveys the intention of both the Shared and Perfect teachings. Commending the perfect: Mañjuśrī addressed the Buddha, 'That superior person is difficult to converse with; he deeply penetrates true reality and skillfully expounds the essentials of the Dharma'—this commends Vimalakīrti. When Mañjuśrī entered Vimalakīrti's room, Vimalakīrti said, 'Welcome, Mañjuśrī! Coming without characteristics of coming, seeing without characteristics of seeing'—this commends Mañjuśrī). All four teachings were expounded: the Tripitaka is the half-word, while the Shared, Distinct, and Perfect are full-words. Because the full is expounded against the half, it is called the comparative teaching (the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'For instance, an elder has only one son, whom he always cherishes with earnest love day and night; he only teaches him the half-word and not the full-word, solely because the son's capacity is not yet able to bear it.' The half is the nine classes of the Hinayana; the full is the twelve classes of the Mahāyāna. In terms of persons and principles, it can be understood through comparison). > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.103](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3.103) - [Next: 3.105](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3.105) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035~en-mt.3.104) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [妙法蓮華經玄義](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1716.10.75) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3.104](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2035.3.104) · Pramāṇa