傳法正宗記 1.23

1.23

Evaluation: At what time was the Dharma entrusted to Mahākāśyapa? By what must it be clarified? Answer: Long ago, at the beginning of the assembly of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], the Tathāgata told all the monks: "You should not speak such words. The unsurpassed true Dharma I now possess has all been entrusted to Mahākāśyapa. This Kāśyapa shall serve as a great refuge for you." This is clear (seen in the second fascicle of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]). However, as for the orthodox lineage, because it is the sages' secret transmission to one another, it is impossible to know its precise place and time with certainty. Deliberating by the scriptures, the Lotus Sūtra comes before and the Nirvāṇa Sūtra comes after. When the Lotus Sūtra was being expounded, Mahākāśyapa was present; when it came to the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, he was not in the assembly. I say that the time of entrusting the Dharma was merely between the two sūtras. Some say that when the Tathāgata held up a flower and showed it to the assembly on Vulture Peak, Kāśyapa smiled, and that this was the entrustment of the Dharma. It is also said that the Tathāgata entrusted the Dharma to Mahākāśyapa in front of the Many-Children Stūpa, and the world all regards these as the reality of the transmission. Yet the origin of these has never been seen. Though I adopt them slightly, I do not dare make them definitive either. Question: At the beginning of other books, the seven Buddhas are necessarily listed, but this one does not have them; could it be that the verses of the seven Buddhas were not in the old translations? Answer: That is not so. The orthodox lineage must take personal transmission from master to disciple as its proof. Therefore, this [work] cuts off from Śākyamuni Tathāgata downwards, which is why I did not list them again. I have investigated: the historical records of various schools, such as the Baolin [zhuan] and the Chuandeng [lu], all trace their patriarchal succession to Zhi Jianglianglou of the former Wei and Narendrayaśas of the Eastern Wei, translated by these two Indian monks. If their beginnings list the verses of the seven Buddhas, it was also derived from the two translations of Zhi Jiang[lianglou] and [Narendra]yaśas. How could one say that it was not an old text? However, the Baolin zhuan does not list the seven Buddhas at its beginning, which aligns with the intention of my book.