佛祖歷代通載 13.33

13.33

論曰。自大教東流。諸僧間以神異助化。是皆功行成熟契徹心源。自覺本智現量發聖。絕非呪力幻術所致也。殆自東晉尸利密已降。宣譯祕呪。要其大歸。不過祀鬼神驅邪妄為人禳災釋患而已。其間往往不無假名比丘自外國來挾術驚愚。有所謂羅漢法者。正公[序-予+(林/骨)]邪術下劣之技。亦猶道家雷公法之類也。茲豈高道巨德弘禪主教者齒哉。及開元中西域金剛智無畏不空三大士。始傳密教。以玄言德祥開佑至尊。即其神功顯効幾與造化之力均焉。故三大士雖宏密教。抑本智現量發聖與。嘗慨資治通鑑稱。貞觀中有僧自西域來。善呪術能令人立死。復呪之使蘇。太宗擇飛騎中壯者試之。皆如其言。因以問傅奕。奕曰。此邪術也。臣聞邪不干正。請使呪臣必不能行。帝命僧呪奕。奕初無所覺。須臾僧忽僵仆。若為物所繫。遂不復蘇。此恐好事者曲為之辭。何則若使果有是。則僧非真僧呪非真呪。正謂邪術耳。固不足以張吾教之疵也。矧萬萬無此理。向使彼能自西域遠至長安厥術能死人而復蘇。乃不暇自衛其身。對常人無故而僵死。雖兒童莫之信也。又當是時三大士者雖俱未至。若京城大德僧惠乘玄琬法琳明贍諸公。其肯坐視絕域偽僧破壞教門。不請峻治乃留帝命傅奕辨耶。佛制戒律。雖春蹊生草猶不許比丘踐之。恐害其生。況說斷人命呪傳于世乎。故予謂好事者曲為之辭斷可見矣。

The appraisal says: Since the Great Teaching flowed eastward, various monks from time to time aided conversion through miraculous transformations. These were all instances where their cultivation and practice had matured, penetrating to the very source of mind; their intrinsically enlightened fundamental wisdom arose as direct perception (pratyakṣa) and manifested holiness. They were definitely not brought about by mantra power or deceptive conjuring. Ever since Śrīmitra of the Eastern Jin came down to propagate and translate esoteric mantras, their ultimate purport amounted to no more than sacrificing to ghosts and spirits, expelling evils and falsities, and dispelling calamities and relieving misfortunes for people. In the period in between, there were often so-called bhikṣus who arrived from foreign lands wielding arts to astound the foolish. What was termed the 'arhat method' was precisely a base technique of unorthodox arts and vulgar craft, also akin to the Daoist thunder-lord methods. How could lofty masters of the Way and eminent exemplars of great virtue who propagate Chan and uphold the teachings stoop to mention such things? Not until the three great masters of the Western Regions in the Kaiyuan era—Vajrabodhi, Śubhakarasiṃha, and Amoghavajra—did the Esoteric Teaching first begin to be transmitted. Using profound words and virtuous omens to enlighten and assist the Sovereign, their spiritual efficacy and manifest power were almost equal to the workings of the creative transformation of nature. Thus, although the three great masters propagated the Esoteric Teaching, did not their fundamental wisdom arise as direct perception to manifest holiness? I have often lamented that the Zizhi tongjian records that in the Zhenguan era, a monk arrived from the Western Regions who was adept in spellcraft: he could make someone die on the spot, and then by reciting a spell bring him back to life. Taizong selected strong men from among the elite cavalry to test him, and all occurred just as he said. The emperor then asked Fu Yi about it. Fu Yi said, 'This is unorthodox sorcery. Your subject has heard that the unorthodox cannot assail the upright. Please order him to cast a spell on me; he will surely not be able to execute it.' The emperor ordered the monk to cast the spell on Fu Yi. At first, Fu Yi felt nothing at all. In a brief moment, the monk suddenly collapsed stiffly as though bound by something, and thereupon did not revive. I fear that busybodies fabricated this biased account. Why so? For if indeed there had been such an event, then the monk was no true monk and the spell no true spell; it was precisely just unorthodox sorcery, certainly insufficient to expose any flaw in our teaching. How much more so since there is utterly no such principle! If previously he had been able to travel all the distant way from the Western Regions to Chang'an, and his arts could kill a person and bring him back to life, yet he had no time to defend his own body, collapsing stiff and dead before an ordinary person without cause, even a child would not believe it! Furthermore, at that time, although none of the three great masters had yet arrived, would eminent monks of great virtue in the capital—such gentlemen as Huicheng, Xuanwan, Falin, and Mingshan—ever sit by and watch a bogus monk from a distant realm ruin the gateway of the teaching, without requesting severe punishment, leaving the emperor to order Fu Yi to debate it? The Buddha instituted the monastic precepts such that even on a spring path with growing grass, a bhikṣu is not permitted to tread upon it, fearing to harm its life; how much less would a mantra that cuts short a person's life be expounded and transmitted to the world? Therefore, my assertion that busybodies fabricated this biased account can be seen with utter certainty.