續高僧傳 22.21.1

22.21.1

試為論曰。 自法王之利見也。 將欲清澄二死翦除三障。 所以張大教網布諸有流。 雖復惑累增繁。 起惟三業。 隨業設教三學興焉。 戒本防非諒符身口。 定惟靜亂誡約心源。 慧取閑邪信明殄惑。 三法相假義刑聖量。 是故論云。 戒如捉賊。 定是縛賊。 慧如殺賊。 賊謂煩惑不可卒除。 功由漸降故立斯旨。 莫非戒具定修深知障惑。 明智觀察了見使纏。 我倒既銷諸業不集。 推其本也則淨戒為功。 舉其治也則正慧為德。 經美能生豈不然矣。 是使五乘方駕於戒道。 眾聖肩隨於行衢。 垂福祐於四生。 廣紹隆於萬載。 非夫戒德何以懋哉。 粵自金河累言爰始靈山集法。 時遵厚味道被淳源。 雖復設教不倫互裁輕重。 奉者無乖。 會聖體意兩不相非。 然夫上座大眾創分結集之場。 五部十八。 流宗百載之後。 備列前傳。 部執等陳。 自律藏久分初通東夏。 則薩婆多部十誦一。 本最廣弘持。 寔由青目律師敷揚晉世。 廬山慧遠讚擊成宗。 爾後璩頴分騼而命路。 祐瑗波騰於釋門。 澄一江淮無二奉矣。 而恨受遵四分隨依十誦。 可為商之。 其次傳本。 則曇無德部四分一律。 雖翻在姚秦。 而創敷元魏。 是由赤髭論主初乃誦傳。 未展談授。 尋還異域。 此方學侶竟絕維持。 逮及覆聰方開學肆。 有宋文世。 彌沙塞部五分一本開譯楊都。 覺壽所傳生嚴其筆。 文極鋪要深可弘通。 郢匠輟斤流味無日。 可為悲夫。 雖聞海濱披述汾願剖詞登往搜求名實乖爽。 可惜華典虛度神州。 迦葉遺部解脫一本。 梵葉久傳無人翻度。 惟出戒本在世流通。 等聚餘宗更無異轍。 世諺妄習偏備愚叢。 婆麁羅部律本未傳。 藏中見列僧祇部者。 乃是根本大眾所傳。 非是百載五宗生也。 統敘五部支分。 此方已獲其四。 若據攝末從本。 則二部是其所宗。 此方已獲其一。 自餘群部。 多是西域賢聖纘述行事。 其中聚類自分區別。 緣敘難裁略言之矣。 惟夫慧日已沈法流方被。 眾行之重無越斯經。 諒由附相束情心事易准。 動靜科據真契威容。 凡愚妄習覩相弘善。 故律緣制斯致罕乖。 試詳講導開士持奉明人。 見想紛馳互程神略。 部別廢立取捨難恒。 學觀未張易為開舉。 何以明耶。 至如受具一法。 三聖元基。 部各陳要具舒隨相。 異宗會受事類。 星張。 當受明隨同猶合契。 考夫行事之士。 則鄉壤部分。 窮其受戒之源。 宗歸四分。 今則隨學陳相不祖先模抑斷是投妄情斯託。 可謂師資訓缺教授無功。 亦是願行道殊機見互僻。 斯之糅雜二百餘年。 豈不以傳通失人故使頌聲流鄭。 今則混一唐統。 普行四分之宗。 故得終始受隨義難乖隔。 攝護雖廣其源可尋。 自初開律釋師號法聰。 元魏孝文北臺楊緒。 口以傳授。 時所榮之。 沙門道覆。 即紹聰緒。 纘疏六卷。 但是長科。 至於義舉未聞于世。 斯時釋侶道味猶淳言行相承。 隨聞奉用專務栖德不暇旁求。 魏末齊初。 慧光宅世。 宗匠跋陀師表弘理。 再造文疏廣分衢術。 學聲學望。 連布若雲峯。 行光德光。 榮曜齊日月。 每一披闡坐列千僧。 競鼓清言人分異辯。 勒成卷帙通號命家。 然光初稟定宗。 後師法律軌儀。 大聖徽猷具焉。 所以世美斯人。 行解相冠。 誠有徒矣。 有雲暉願三宗律師。 躡踵傳燈各題聲教。 雲則命初作疏九卷。 被時流演。 門人備高東夏。 暉次出疏略雲二軸。 要約誠美蹊徑少乖。 得在略文失於開授。 然雲勇於義宗。 談敘誠博。 暉則覈切詞相。 法聚推焉世諺首尾信探風骨。 汾陽法願。 眄視兩家更開甍穴。 製作抄疏不減於前。 彈糺覈於律文。 是非格於事相。 存乎專附頗滯幽通。 化行并塞故其然也。 其餘律匠。 理洪隱樂遵深誕等。 或陶冶鄭魏。 或開壃燕趙。

Let us attempt to evaluate this in discussion: Ever since the beneficial advent of the King of the Dharma, wishing to purify the two deaths and eliminate the three obstructions, the vast net of teachings was cast wide and spread throughout the realms of becoming. Though afflictions and encumbrances multiply, they arise solely from the three karmic activities. Teachings were established in accordance with karma, and thus the threefold training arose. The precepts are fundamentally to prevent wrongdoing, truly matching body and speech. Meditation is solely to still disorder, restraining the source of the mind. Wisdom takes up the defense against crookedness, its clarity and brightness extinguishing delusion. These three dharmas rely on one another, their significance modeling the holy standard. Therefore the treatises say: "Precepts are like catching a thief; meditation is like binding a thief; wisdom is like killing a thief." The thief refers to afflictions and confusions, which cannot be eradicated suddenly; since achievement comes from gradual subjugation, this purport was established. Were it not for possessing the precepts and cultivating meditation, how could one deeply understand the obstructions and afflictions? Clear wisdom observes and investigates, clearly perceiving the underlying drives and entanglements. Once the erroneous grasp of a self is melted away, karmic deeds do not accumulate. Tracing its origin, the achievement lies in pure precepts; holding up its remedy, the virtue lies in correct wisdom. The sūtras praise them as capable of generating [all qualities]—how could it be otherwise? This enables the five vehicles to ride abreast along the path of precepts, and the multitude of sages to follow shoulder to shoulder along the avenue of practice, extending blessings to the four kinds of beings and broadly sustaining the lineage for ten thousand years. Were it not for the virtue of precepts, how could one flourish? From the multiple statements by the Golden River to the assembly of teachings on Vulture Peak, the age revered profound savour, and the Tao suffused the pure source. Although different teachings were established, weighing transgressions as light or heavy according to circumstances, those who adhered to them did not deviate; joining the sacred essence and intention, neither contradicted the other. However, the Sthaviras and the Mahāsāṃghikas first divided at the site of the council. The five schools and eighteen branches flowed into separate sects after a hundred years; these are fully listed in former chronicles, and their sectarian doctrines are displayed alike. After the Vinayapiṭaka had long been divided and first reached the Eastern Xia, the Sarvāstivāda's Ten Recitations was the single text most widely promulgated and upheld. This was truly because the vinayadhara Qingmu expounded it during the Jin dynasty, and Huiyuan of Mount Lu praised it and forged it into a school. Thereafter, Qu and Ying parted company to pursue their courses, while You and Yuan surged like waves within the Buddhist fold; it made uniform the Jiang and Huai rivers, held in undivided adherence. Yet one must regret that ordination followed the Fourfold Vinaya while daily observance relied on the Ten Recitations; this can be subject to deliberation. As for the next transmitted text, the Dharmaguptaka's Fourfold Vinaya was translated under the Yao Qin, but was first expounded under the Northern Wei. This was because the treatise master Red Beard initially recited and transmitted it, but before he could unfold discussions and instruction, he soon returned to foreign lands, and the students in this region completely lacked any means of maintaining it. Only when one came to Daochuang was a lecture hall finally opened. In the time of Emperor Wen of Song, the Mahīśāsaka's Fivefold Vinaya was translated in the capital of Yang. Handed down by Buddhajīva, Daosheng and Huiyan wielded the brush; its text is concise and essential, highly worthy of broad dissemination. Yet the master craftsman laid down his axe, and its savor was cut short; is this not lamentable? Although one heard of coastal exegeses and Fayuan of Fenyang's analytical phrasing, when searching into them, names and realities fell far short; it is a pity that this splendid canon lingered in vain in the Divine Continent. As for the Kaśyapīya's Mukti Vinaya, the Indic manuscript had long been transmitted, but there was no one to translate it; only the prātimokṣa was produced to circulate in the world. Its classes of offenses and other tenets have no different path, yet worldly proverbs and erroneous practices have biasedly cluttered the ignorant throng. The Vātsīputrīya Vinaya has not yet been transmitted. What is presently listed in the canon as the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya is what was transmitted by the fundamental Mahāsāṃghika, not that which arose from the five sects a hundred years later. Summarizing the branches of the five schools, this land has already obtained four. If one considers subsuming the branches into the root, then the two divisions are their origin, and this land has already obtained one. As for the other various works, most are operational procedures compiled and related by the sages of the Western Regions; their categories divide naturally among themselves, and as their circumstances and narrations are difficult to condense, I speak of them only in brief. Since the sun of wisdom has set and the flow of the Dharma spreads abroad, among all practices of consequence, none surpasses these scriptures. This is truly because anchoring oneself to external forms binds the emotions, and the mind's actions are easy to measure; the criteria of movement and stillness truly harmonize with dignified decorum. Ordinary, foolish beings in their erroneous practices behold the forms and promote goodness; therefore, when the Vinaya was instituted out of causes and conditions, it was rare for deviations to occur. If one carefully examines the lecturing guides and the discerning masters who uphold and observe them, their views and conceptions diverge widely, each showing off his intellectual prowess; their sectarian abrogations and establishments, adoptions and rejections, are hard to keep constant. Before the vision of study has been fully unfolded, one easily begins to set forth interpretations. How is this evident? Take, for instance, the single ritual of receiving full ordination: it is the original foundation of the three sages, and each school sets forth its essentials, thoroughly expanding upon the attendant forms. When different schools gather for ordination, the proceedings spread out like stars; yet when receiving it and clarifying its attendant observance, they must still harmonize like matching tallies. If one examines the practitioners of rituals, regional distinctions emerge; but when pursuing the source of receiving precepts, the tradition traces back to the Fourfold Vinaya. Nowadays, people follow their studies and display appearances without patterning after the models of the ancients; suppressing and rejecting, they throw themselves into whatever they please, entrusting themselves to delusion. This can be called an absence of instruction between teacher and disciple, rendering teaching devoid of merit; it is also that vows and practices follow divergent paths, and capacities and views are mutually distorted. This confusion and blending has persisted for over two hundred years; is it not because transmission and dissemination lacked the right men, thus causing standard odes to drift into the music of Zheng? Today, all is unified under the Tang realm, universally practicing the tradition of the Fourfold Vinaya; hence, from beginning to end, receiving precepts and following observances hardly diverge in meaning. Though its protection and containment are vast, its source can be traced. From the first unfolding of Vinaya commentaries, the master was named Fachong. During the reign of Emperor Xiaowen of the Northern Wei, on the northern terrace, he spread the tradition; passing it down orally, he was honored by his contemporaries. The śramaṇa Daofu succeeded to Cong's heritage and compiled a six-fascicle commentary, but it was merely a broad structural outline; as for raised doctrinal discussions, none were heard in the world. At that time, the monastic community's relish for the Way was still pure, words and actions were handed down from one to another; they revered and practiced what they heard, dedicating themselves to dwelling in virtue without leisure for extraneous searches. In the late Wei and early Qi, Huiguang dwelt in the world; with Guṇabhadra as his principal model, he stood as an exemplar in propagating the principles. He newly composed commentaries and extensively divided the avenues of learning. His scholarly reputation and prestige spread continuously like cloud-capped peaks; the brilliance of his practice and virtue shone as brightly as the sun and moon. Whenever he opened an exposition, a thousand monks sat in ranks, vying to utter pure words, each demonstrating distinct eloquence. Fixed into fascicles, they were universally called renowned masters. However, Guang first received the Dhyāna tradition and only later took the Vinaya's rules as his teacher; the glorious model of the Great Sage was fully present in him. Thus the world praised this man, whose practice and understanding topped all others—and truly with good reason! There were three Vinaya masters of schools: Daoyun, Zhihui, and Fayuan. Walking in his footsteps to transmit the lamp, each set forth renowned teachings. Daoyun was the first to compose a nine-fascicle commentary, which was disseminated in his time; his disciples flourished throughout the Eastern Xia. Next, Zhihui produced a commentary that abridged Daoyun's into two fascicles; concise and truly fine, its path had few divergences. Its merit lay in its abridged text, but its flaw lay in its capacity to instruct. However, Daoyun was bold in doctrinal principles, and his discussions were truly extensive; Zhihui, on the other hand, was exacting with textual forms, commended by assemblies of the Dharma, and worldly proverbs believed he had thoroughly grasped the vital spirit from beginning to end. Fayuan of Fenyang glanced at the two houses and opened up another lineage; his compositions, abstracts, and commentaries were no fewer than those before him. In his criticisms and examinations he was exacting with the Vinaya text; in questions of right and wrong he measured by practical procedures. Relying solely on literal attachment, he was somewhat hindered from profound comprehension; yet his conversion spread throughout Bingzhou and the northern borders, and so it was. As for the rest of the Vinaya craftsmen, such as Lihong, Yinle, Zunshen, and Dan, some cultivated the regions of Zheng and Wei, while others opened frontiers in Yan and Zhao.