續高僧傳 22.21.3

22.21.3

若存此計與外不殊。 半滿經論皆陳此過。 戒之受也但啟虛願之門。 戒之隨也須遵實行之務。 知受而不明隨。 修願而無其行。 可謂隻輪無轉於地。 折翮有墜於空。 信哉。 世有鄙斯戒者。 皆為煩累形神弊其持犯。 故同輕削指為小道。 小可捐也。 宜即捨之。 矜重情多緘言無報。 誠以攝御門學非戒不弘。 相善住持非戒不立。 其猶行必涉戶言必有由。 故名利將及。 爭位夏而斂容。 師授尊模。 趍壇場而整帶。 豈非貪決情勇攬戒奉以為師。 行絕綱猷委戒填諸溝壑。 專志在於本毒。 去取匠於方寸。 用斯弘濟誠未敢聞。 此則愛大憎小。 為迷一也。 若能關鍵身口附相攝持。 虛蕩慮知體道懷德。 則安遠光憑斯其人矣。 世學諸論詞數區分。 傍大乘而通小徑。 委本筌而尋章句。 時連界繫乍別色心。 一行六歷之相攝。 名教頻繁之包富。 聖列為存道行。 凡學止在聲譽。 於是讎討終身博綜詞義。 輕蔑戒誥陵犯色聲。 邪說富於脣吻。 邪求滿於胸臆。 謂捧鉢為鈍丁。 號持瓶為竪子。 半月說戒惟列麁言。 衣鉢受持極成煩碎。 遂即顛倒形服雷鼓言聲。 侮弄尊儀斜眄經律。 故使依藥受淨永絕其身。 戒約住持生緘其口。 斯豈不聞於本業也。 知業則不然乎。 但騰焰於舌端。 曾未圓為心約。 此則尊高矜伐賤委本基。 為迷二也。 若能深討使性妙識治能。 念動惟是我人事對。 但明塵識則未悉何賢當斯目也。 慧休論士樹以風聲。 然其專大深小。 騰實復光其美又有行福末凡。 稟素疎野廣讀多誦。 情見特隆偏略戒科。 謂講生例不如。 常飲淳乳飽我心神。 靜處幽閑何過相及。 斯皆靡聞教行動事疑遲。 不學無知隨念交集。 所以每講聽採坐列群僧。 就務鑽研其人無幾。 學猶不解況不學乎。 牛毛麟角頗為近實。 又有成樹塔寺繕造田園。 舉鍤牽材未思物命。 燎原溉隰豈避生靈。 惟恐福業不成實。 未懷諸慈惻。 是則不聞大聖之明誡也。 十誦三相正在斯人。 或謂為福行罪功過相補。 是又不聞律緣之初禁也。 緣修佛堂方制地戒。 意在隨念附相策心。 不惟事業無益之咎。 故世思微務靜之士。 招引寔希。 躁擾經營之夫。 騰擲者眾。 麁法易染妙理難弘。 為迷三也。 若能依准教行不越常刑。 賢聖所同寔當弘護。 至如澄寺九百神道映於趙都。 遠林不刊戒德流於晉世。 可龜鏡矣。 專門奉律之客。 立志貞梗之夫。 薄誦戒緣粗知文句。 時登元坐引眾闡揚。 慢水覆心更無依學。 是則不聞明律之清誡也。 法身成具方免師資。 今乃易從止足未思弘贍。 魚睨雲漢爵躍僧倫。 惟我律師餘皆師律。 顧諸經論事等石田。 斜𭿤高名約同稊稗。 知法世寡誰辯熏蕕。 任縱科治是非一亂。 輕重由其量處。 禍福自其心神。 出語成刑曾無再覆。 傳而不習孔門所輕。 習而不經釋宗所誡。 何異讀禮而存倨傲。 誦易而忽陰陽。 勗哉斯言。 令終宜始。 但以時遭像季法就澆漓。 律部邪緣宗仰繁矣。 並由本尋學語義指誦文。 搯紙籤行題鞭記掌。 有則依述闕則絕言。 縱有異徵取通無路。 便言律無正斷故是前聖開聽。 遂即冒世輕生漫行章句。 飲杏湯者為清齋。 畜錢寶者為小犯。 坐具無勞截淨。 鉢量未必姬周。 斯皆強於鉛刃。 易取思齊。 其迷四也。 若能廣尋群典備閱行藏。 挹酌四印昭融三制。 臨機剖斷。 則文理相循。 隱括舉例。 則物我同曉。 如斯御眾世有人哉。 尋夫戒律之筌筌於持犯。 定慧之學務在治。 能治則亂惑可銷。 能則神機清遠。 餘外浮遊章句。 等捐月而執指端。 矜誕教相。 同詠藥而迷愈疾。 論者試開四學終墜兩迷。 非言何以致詞。 列域心寧盡。 故經陳曰。 種種法喻咸存離著。 律又述云。 常爾一心念除諸蓋。 固復懷斯試敘。

If one harbors such views, they are no different from the non-Buddhists; both the partial and complete sūtras and treatises set forth this error. The receipt of the precepts merely opens the door to an empty vow, whereas compliance with the precepts requires adherence to actual practice. Knowing how to receive them without understanding how to comply with them, and cultivating the vow without the corresponding practice, may truly be called a single wheel that cannot roll upon the earth, or broken wings that cause one to fall from the sky. How true this is! Those in the world who despise these precepts do so because they are vexed and weary in body and mind, worn out by observing and transgressing; thus they join in slighting and belittling them, pointing to them as a lesser path, [saying] that what is lesser may be cast aside and should be abandoned at once. When their self-important sentiments grow strong, they hold their tongues without a reply. Truly, in guiding a lineage of learning, it cannot be promoted without the precepts; in sustaining good forms of practice, it cannot be established without the precepts. It is just as when walking one must pass through the door, and when speaking there must be a reason. Thus, when fame and profit are at hand, they contend over ranks and monastic age, straightening their countenances; and when a master confers the venerable model, they hasten to the altar platform and adjust their sashes. Is this not to boldly grasp the precepts with a greedy, resolute heart and serve them as a teacher, yet when practice abandons the fundamental guidelines, to discard the precepts and fling them into ditches? Their single-minded intent lies in their original poisons, while taking and leaving are crafted within their minds. That such people should broadly deliver others is something I truly have never dared to hear. This is loving the great and detesting the small: the first delusion. If one can lock the doors of body and mouth, adhere to the phenomenal forms and uphold them, empty and quiet thoughts and cognition, and embody the Way and cherish virtue, then Dao'an, Huiyuan, Faguang, and Sengping are such men. Scholars of the world who study the treatises differentiate words and numbers: skirting the Mahāyāna while treading the small paths, abandoning the original fish-trap to search for phrases, at times connecting realms and bonds, at times distinguishing form and mind, the mutual subsumption of the one practice and six stages, and the vast abundance of doctrinal teachings. The array of sages preserved them for the practice of the Way, yet the ordinary scholar stops at sound and reputation. Thereupon they spend their whole lives in collation and investigation, extensively combining verbal meanings, looking down upon the admonitions of the precepts, and infringing upon form and sound. Heterodox speeches abound upon their lips, and heterodox pursuits fill their breasts. They call one holding an almsbowl a dull fellow, and dub one carrying a water pitcher a stripling. When reciting the precepts at the half-month, they recite only the coarse words; and receiving and keeping robes and bowls they make exceedingly troublesome and trivial. They then invert the proper robes, thunder with their voices like drums, mock the venerable decorum, and look askance at the sūtras and vinaya. Consequently, relying on medicines and accepting pure food are severed forever from their persons, and in restraining through precepts to sustain [the Dharma] their mouths are permanently sealed. Have they not heard of the fundamental practices? If they knew the practices, could they be like this? They merely spout flames from the tips of their tongues, never having rounded it into a restraint of the mind. This is honoring the lofty and boasting of one's merits while treating the basic foundation as base and abandoning it: the second delusion. If one can deeply investigate the nature of the propensities and wondrously understand how to cultivate and overcome them, then the movements of thought are merely matched to the person and the matter; but if one only illuminates the dusts of consciousness, I do not yet know what worthy would deserve this title. The treatise master Huixiu established a breeze of renown; yet his devotion to the great was profound in the small, and his bringing truth to light again shone upon its beauty. Furthermore, there are late ordinary persons who practice merit: of a naturally crude and wild nature, they read broadly and recite much; their personal views are exceptionally inflated, and they partially neglect the categories of the precepts, saying that the rules of lecturers are not as good as 'constantly drinking pure milk to satisfy my mind and spirit; residing quietly in secluded leisure, what fault can reach me?' These are all people who have never heard of religious practice, and when they act they are hesitant and uncertain; without learning and knowledge, their thoughts entangle and gather. Therefore, every time there are lectures and listeners, with rows of monks seated in ranks, few are those who apply themselves to drilling and investigating the matter. If those who study still do not understand, how much less those who do not study! An ox's hair and a unicorn's horn are quite close to the truth. Furthermore, there are those who build pagodas and monasteries, and lay out fields and gardens: raising shovels and hauling timber, they do not consider the lives of creatures; scorching the plains and irrigating the lowlands, how do they avoid living beings? Fearing only that their meritorious works will not be accomplished, they truly harbor no mercy or sorrow. This is not to have heard the clear admonitions of the Great Sage. The three characteristics of the Ten Recitations are present in precisely such people. Or they say that committing sin for the sake of merit allows merit and error to offset each other: this again is not to have heard the initial prohibitions of the vinaya causes and conditions. It was only on account of repairing a Buddha hall that the precept against digging the ground was instituted, the intent being to rein in the mind in accordance with thoughts and phenomenal forms, rather than merely the fault of useless undertakings. Thus, among the men of the world who contemplate subtleties and pursue tranquility, those who can be summoned and drawn in are truly few, whereas among the men of restless agitation and worldly management, those who throw themselves forward are many. The coarse teaching is easy to absorb, but the wondrous principle is difficult to propagate: this is the third delusion. If one can rely upon the scriptural practices without exceeding the constant rules, which is the same as the worthy and holy, one should truly propagate and protect it. As when Fotudeng's nine hundred temples and spiritual Dao shone upon the capital of the Zhao, and Huiyuan's Mount Lu did not alter and the virtue of his precepts flowed through the Jin dynasty: these can serve as tortoises and mirrors. Those who exclusively uphold the Vinaya and men of staunch and upright resolve, having lightly recited the occasions of the precepts and roughly knowing the texts and phrases, at times ascend the prominent seat to lead the assembly and expound, yet the waters of pride cover their minds and they no longer rely on study. This is not having heard the pure admonitions of the clear Vinaya. Only when the Dharma-body is fully perfected does one escape master and pupil; yet nowadays they easily follow contentment and do not consider broad propagation. Looking askance like fish at the clouds, hopping like sparrows in the monastic ranks, [they say,] 'Only I am a vinayadhara, while all the rest merely follow the vinaya.' Looking at the various sūtras and treatises, they treat them like stony fields; glancing sideways at high reputations, they reckon them like darnel and tares. Those who know the Dharma are rare in the world; who can distinguish the fragrant from the foul? Arbitrarily applying the regulations and punishments, right and wrong are thoroughly thrown into confusion. Light and heavy depend on their own estimation; misfortune and blessing arise from their own minds. Their utterings become penalties, never twice examined. 'Transmitting without practicing' is despised in the school of Confucius; 'practicing without the scriptures' is admonished in the school of Śākya. How does this differ from reading the Rites while harboring arrogance, or chanting the Changes while ignoring yin and yang? Take heed from these words: a good ending requires a good beginning. But because the times have encountered the Semblance Age and the Dharma has become decadent and thin, the heterodox conditions of the vinaya schools and the objects of reliance are numerous. All this is because they initially sought only to recite words and phrases, marking lines on paper slips and writing on whips to memorize on palms. Where a text existed, they followed and recited it; where it was lacking, they fell silent. Even if there were divergent evidence, they had no way to resolve it, and straightway declared that because the vinaya had no explicit ruling, it was therefore permitted by the former sages. Thereupon they braved the world and made light of life, recklessly practicing passages and phrases: drinking apricot decoction they counted as a pure fast; accumulating money and treasures they counted as a minor infraction; the sitting cloth needed no cutting and purification; the size of the almsbowl did not necessarily follow the Zhou standard. These are all blunter than lead blades, yet easily taken as models to emulate: this is the fourth delusion. If one can broadly seek among the various canons and fully examine what to practice and avoid, imbibing the four seals and illuminating the three regulations, then when making decisions in response to circumstances, text and principle will follow each other; and when synthesizing and citing precedents, others and oneself will understand alike. Where in the world is there such a one to guide the multitude? Indeed, the fish-trap of the vinaya traps observing and transgressing; the study of concentration and wisdom aims at cultivating and overcoming. Cultivating, then disordered confusions can be dissolved; overcoming, then the spiritual capacity becomes clear and far-reaching. As for the rest who drift about in passages and phrases, it is equal to discarding the moon and grasping the fingertip; and to boastfully exaggerate the doctrinal forms is like chanting the names of medicines while failing to cure the disease. When commentators attempt to unfold the four studies, they ultimately fall into two delusions. Without words, how could speech be conveyed? How could a partitioned mind exhaust it? Thus the sūtra declares: 'All kinds of dharmas and parables are all aimed at freedom from attachment.' The vinaya also relates: 'Always be single-minded, mindful of eliminating all hindrances.' Truly harboring this, I have attempted this narrative.