[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) › [北山錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113) › 7.1.3 # 北山錄 7.1.3 北山錄 7.1.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1.3) 彼犢子眾（上古有仙。 染牸而生。 故謂犢子部）或執之。 而人皆謂隨眠性我。 吾弗信也。 故天親造對法論。 所宗有二。 蓋不以一宗為盡善之門矣（天親本在有部宗出家。 說義多宗經部也）法勝造毘曇心論云。 若生諸煩惱是聖說有漏。 達磨多羅謂其生字濫於滅道。 乃別製雜毘曇心論云。 若增諸煩惱是聖說有漏也。 無著造般若論。 天親二之（無著菩薩造金剛般若論。 天親菩薩亦造故云二也）以伯仲以師資以行位。 天親俱弗先也（無著．天親．師子覺．三兄弟也。 北天竺留婁沙富羅國人。 此云丈夫土。 是天帝戰修羅處也。 俱在薩婆多出家。 無著先悟大乘。 往兜率宮請彌勒說瑜伽。 後勸天親令悟大乘也）所不然者。 止以無著智障未除。 而撾不及於馬腹。 尺有短於寸者也（智障所知障也。 左傳云。 雖鞭之長不及。 馬腹也。 喻無著雖造論猶有所不到）清辯與諸徒。 誓於修羅窟俟龍華成道。 方擬問津焉。 謂今彌勒未是遍知也（清辯菩薩以芥子擊修羅窟。 隱候彌勒佛下生。 將問不決之事。 今彌勒菩薩未是至聖者也）後德光假龍軍而得見所不致拜。 又索之以形儀焉（得至兜率見彌勒不禮以其作天人相也）先是中土未有泥洹常住之說。 但言壽命長遠而已。 遠公歎曰。 佛是至極。 至極則無變。 無變之理豈有窮耶。 遂著法性論（廬山遠也）羅什見曰。 邊國人未有經。 便闇與理合。 豈不妙哉。 竺道生講泥洹經。 謂一闡提人皆得成佛舊學以為邪說。 擯之投于虎丘。 尋往廬山。 洎大本經至。 果與玄契（泥洹經說。 有一類闡提無種性終不成佛。 及涅槃後分經至。 一切眾生皆得成佛。 果符生公之義也）生乃登法座。 論義數番。 麈尾紛然而墜。 隱机順化。 生昔不死有待故也（大本經未至。 生故待之。 今既至乃卒。 時人號之忍死生也）生今之死待竟故也。 向無生公落詮之知。 則昭昭佛性隱。 於無知之輩矣。 國初玄奘至西域。 以花請觀自在像曰。 若一切眾生實有佛性。 惟所散花挂菩薩頸。 乃輒如其願。 今謂。 若使奘有生公之知。 則不應有是祝也。 儻祝之不吉。 將不信乎。 夫卜者決猶預定嫌疑。 不疑何卜。 易云。 中心疑者其詞枝。 奘非其枝乎（校散也。 奘公不合有疑散之道）若為物而然者。 蓋是導物為疑。 乃擕人之心矣（奘本不疑。 恐後人疑。 故示此以導之也。 擕離散也。 內墮散後來之疑心也）曇延撰涅槃疏。 慮匪叶于聖衷。 置疏於舍利塔前。 焚香請徵驗其疏。 與舍利放光。 通三晝夜聯照不絕。 而淨影之徒未之允也。 長已所製終於並驅。 夫望舒既御不假載燧（望舒月光也。 月光既出。 行者不假執炬）翳號既族寧期私灑（翳號雲雷也。 雲雷既布。 甘澤普滋也）而闔戶之家華釭特舉（月影雖流蘭釭尚照）營圃之叟綆\[午/止\]自溉（芸蔬不可不灌）良以。 遐光不燭隩。 驟雨不滋本。 各惟所利為美故也。 議者以遠則文句愜當。 延則標舉宏贍。 學者彈其美。 該善而求諸不以感靈。 得延而廢遠也（彈𠜨也。 北遠與曇延俱。 著涅槃經疏。 延則文詞博贍。 遠則言旨簡當。 後多傳遠疏。 不以延疏。 有放光之靈故也）故古云。 雖有挈瓶之智。 而守不假器（杜預云。 挈瓶小智也。 雖小智所守不可假人也）其在法義匠焉。 今有行事。 皆尚中天為美。 梵語皆以新經為正。 詳夫。 五天諸國王制各異。 況年世今古風俗治亂。 原夫。 大聖隨其至邦。 因事演教。 豈得同其律度一彼量衡（量斗也衡稱也）故由旬俱盧舍。 遠近殊說（八俱盧舍為一由旬。 或云十六里。 或四十里。 遠近不同也）安居置閏。 延促多類（安居有七。 前安居四月十六日。 中安居十七至五月十五日。 後安居五月十六日。 分四心念對首忘成及界。 > Those Vātsīputrīya adherents (In antiquity, a seer engaged with a heifer and gave birth \[to an ancestor\]; hence they are called the Vātsīputrīya school) might hold to it, yet when people all claim that the dormant nature is the self, I do not believe it. Thus, when Vasubandhu composed the \*Abhidharmakośa\*, he relied on two traditions; he certainly did not take a single school to be the gateway of ultimate goodness (Vasubandhu originally went forth in the Sarvāstivāda school, but in expounding doctrines he mostly relied on the Sautrāntika). Dharmaśreṣṭhin composed the \*Abhidharmahṛdaya\*, stating: 'If afflictions arise, the Noble One calls this contaminated.' Dharmatrāta considered the word 'arise' to confound \[it with\] Cessation and the Path; he therefore separately composed the \*Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya\*, stating: 'If afflictions increase, the Noble One calls this contaminated.' Asaṅga composed a commentary on the \*Prajñāpāramitā\*, and Vasubandhu supplemented it with a second (Bodhisattva Asaṅga composed a commentary on the \*Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā\*, and Bodhisattva Vasubandhu also composed one; hence it is said he 'supplemented it with a second'). In terms of seniority, teacher-student relationship, or stage of practice, Vasubandhu was in no way ahead (Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, and Siṃhabhadra were three brothers from Puruṣapura in North India, which translates as 'Land of Heroes', the place where the Lord of Heaven fought the asuras. They all went forth in the Sarvāstivāda. Asaṅga was first to awaken to the Mahāyāna, went to the Tuṣita Palace to request Maitreya to expound the \*Yogācāra\*, and later urged Vasubandhu to awaken to the Mahāyāna). If it were not so, it was simply that Asaṅga's cognitive obscurations had not yet been eliminated: 'even a long whip cannot reach the horse's belly,' and 'a foot may fall short of an inch' (Cognitive obscuration refers to the jñeyāvaraṇa. The \*Zuo zhuan\* states: 'Though the whip is long, it cannot reach the horse's belly.' This illustrates that although Asaṅga composed treatises, there were still things he did not reach). Bhāviveka and his disciples vowed in an asura cave to await the attainment of the Way beneath the Dragon Flower tree before intending to inquire about the crossing, claiming that the present Maitreya is not yet all-knowing (Bodhisattva Bhāviveka struck an asura cave with mustard seeds and concealed himself to await the descent of Maitreya Buddha, intending to ask about unresolved matters. The present Bodhisattva Maitreya is not yet the ultimate sage). Later, Guṇaprabha, relying on Nāgasena, attained sight \[of Maitreya\] but did not pay homage, and further took issue with his physical form and deportment (Having arrived in Tuṣita to see Maitreya, he did not prostrate because \[Maitrereya\] displayed the appearance of a heavenly being). Prior to this, the central lands had no doctrine of the eternal abiding of Nirvāṇa; they spoke only of longevity and endurance. Master \[Hui\]yuan sighed, saying: 'The Buddha is the ultimate extremity; being the ultimate extremity, there is no change. How could the principle of changelessness ever have an end?' He thereupon composed the \*Treatise on the Dharma-nature\* (This is Master Huiyuan of Mount Lu). Kumārajīva saw it and said: 'People in peripheral lands have not yet received the scriptures, yet he darklingly accords with the principle—is it not marvelous?' Zhu Daosheng lectured on the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\*, claiming that even icchantikas can all attain Buddhahood. Scholars of old learning considered this a heterodox teaching and banished him, casting him out to Tiger Hill; soon he went to Mount Lu. When the large edition of the scripture arrived, it indeed tallied with profound truth (The \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* \[initially\] stated that there is a class of icchantikas who lack the spiritual lineage and ultimately never attain Buddhahood. When the latter portion of the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* arrived, \[stating that\] all sentient beings can attain Buddhahood, it indeed verified Master Daosheng's doctrine). Daosheng then ascended the Dharma-seat; after debating the doctrine for several rounds, his deer-tail flywhisk dropped with a rustle, and leaning against his armrest, he passed away in harmony. Daosheng had not died previously because he was waiting (Because the large edition of the scripture had not arrived, Daosheng waited for it; now that it had arrived, he passed away. People of the time called him 'one who endured death'). Daosheng died now because his waiting was complete. Had there not been Master Daosheng's knowledge that transcended mere words, the luminous buddhadhātu would have been concealed among the ignorant crowd. At the beginning of our dynasty, when Xuanzang reached the Western Regions, he prayed with flowers before an image of Avalokiteśvara, saying: 'If all sentient beings truly possess the buddhadhātu, may the scattered flowers hang upon the Bodhisattva's neck.' It immediately fulfilled his wish. Now I say: if Xuanzang possessed Master Daosheng's knowledge, he should not have made such a supplication. If the omen had been inauspicious, would he have disbelieved it? Now, divination resolves hesitation and settles doubts; if there is no doubt, why divine? The \*Book of Changes\* says: 'He whose heart is in doubt will speak divergence.' Was not Xuanzang divergent? (Branches refer to scattering. Master Xuanzang ought not to have had the method of doubtful scattering). If it was done for the sake of beings, it merely led beings into doubt, thereby estranging the hearts of people (Xuanzang originally had no doubt, but feared future people would doubt, so he displayed this to guide them. 'Estranging' means dispersing; inwardly dissipating the doubts of later generations). When Tanyan composed his commentary on the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\*, he worried it did not accord with the sage's intent; he placed the commentary before a relic pagoda, burned incense, and prayed for an omen. The commentary and the relic emitted light, shining uninterruptedly for three days and three nights. Yet the followers of Jingying \[Huiyuan\] did not concede to it; praising what they themselves had produced, they ended in equal rivalry. When the Moon Goddess drives her chariot, one needs not carry a firebrand (Wangshu is the moonlight. When the moonlight has emerged, a traveler does not need to hold a torch); when heavy clouds and thunder gather, how could one hope for private showers? (Dense calls refer to clouds and thunder. When clouds and thunder have spread, sweet moisture universally nourishes). Yet a closed-door household specially lights its floral lamp (Though the moonlight flows, the orchid lamp still illuminates), and an old man tending a garden draws water with a well-rope to irrigate on his own (Weeded vegetables cannot go without watering). Truly, it is because distant light does not illuminate deep recesses, and a sudden downpour does not nourish the root: each considers what is beneficial to oneself as fine. Commentators consider that \[Jingying Hui\]yuan's phrasing is fitting and apt, while Tanyan's presentation is broad and abundant. Scholars appraise their excellence, seeking comprehensiveness; they did not dismiss \[Jingying\] Huiyuan on account of Tanyan having attained a spiritual sign (To appraise means to evaluate. Northern Huiyuan and Tanyan both composed commentaries on the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\*. Tanyan's literary phrasing was broad and abundant, while Huiyuan's statements and tenets were concise and apt. Later, Huiyuan's commentary was mostly transmitted, not using the miraculous sign of light emission from Tanyan's commentary). Therefore the ancients said: 'Though one has the bottle-carrying wisdom, what one preserves cannot be entrusted to other vessels' (Du Yu said: Carrying a bottle is small wisdom; though it is small wisdom, what one maintains cannot be entrusted to others). Such are the masters of the doctrinal Dharma. Today, in religious practice, all esteem Central India as the finest, and in Sanskrit terms, all take the new translations as standard. Upon close examination, the governmental regulations of kings in the five regions of India vary from one another, not to mention the differences between past and present eras, customs, order and chaos. In truth, the Great Sage expounded the teachings according to each land he reached and in response to particular matters; how could one make their measurements uniform or standardize their balances and weights? (Measurement refers to pecks; balance refers to steelyard scales). Thus, regarding yojana and krośa, there are varying accounts of distance (Eight krośas make one yojana; some say sixteen li, or forty li—near and far are not the same); and regarding the rain retreat and the intercalation of months, lengths and durations are of many kinds (There are seven kinds of rain retreat: the former retreat begins on the sixteenth day of the fourth month, the middle retreat on the seventeenth day until the fifteenth day of the fifth month, and the later retreat on the sixteenth day of the fifth month. They are divided into four: mind-concentration, confronting a counterpart, forgetting-completion, and boundary). > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1.2) - [Next: 7.1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1.4) - [Up: 7.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113~en-mt.7.1.3) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [高僧傳](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2059.6.24) — 慧皎, Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2113.7.1.3) · Pramāṇa