翻譯名義集 3.133

3.133

【阿輸迦】或名阿輸柯，《大論》翻無憂華樹。《因果經》云：「二月八日，夫人往毘藍尼園，見無憂華，舉右手摘，從右脇出。」後漢《法本內傳》云：「明帝問摩騰法師曰：『佛生日月可知否？』騰曰：『昭王二十四年，甲寅之歲，四月八日，於毘嵐園內，波羅樹下，右脇而誕。』故《普耀》云：『普放大光，照三千界。』即《周書異記》云：『昭王二十四年，甲寅之歲，四月八日，江河泉池，忽然泛漲，井皆溢出。宮殿人舍，山川大地，咸悉震動。其夜即有五色氣，入貫太微，遍於西方，盡作青紅之色。昭王即問太史蘇由：「是何祥耶？」蘇由曰：「有大聖人生於西方，故現此瑞。」昭王曰：「於天下何如？」蘇由曰：「即時無他，至千年外，聲教被此。」昭王即遣鐫石記之，埋在南郊天祠前。周第六主穆王滿，五十二年，壬申之歲，二月十五日，佛年七十九，方始滅度。』故《涅槃經》云：『二月十五日，臨涅槃時，出種種光，大地震動，聲至有頂，光遍三千。』即《周書異記》云：『穆王即位五十二年，壬申之歲，二月十五日旦。暴風忽起，發損人舍，傷折樹木，山川大地，皆悉震動。午後天陰雲黑，西方有白虹十二道，南北通貫，連夜不滅。穆王問太史扈（音广）多曰：「是何徵也？」扈多對云：「西方有大聖人滅度，魂相現耳。」』」魏曇謨最，及唐法琳，北山神清，法上答高麗問，朝代並同。荊溪《輔行》亦云：「當此周昭王甲寅之歲。」第二，齊王簡栖述頭陀寺記云：「周魯二莊，親昭夜景之鑒。」洎隋翻經學士費長房，撰《開皇三寶錄》，佛以周莊王他十年，即《春秋》、《左傳》云：「魯莊公七年，歲次甲午，四月八日也。」生相既顯，故《普耀》云：「普放大光，照三千界。」即《左傳》說，恒星不現夜明也。《瑞應經》云：「沸星下現，侍太子生。」故《左傳》云：「星隕如雨。」《本行經》說虛空無雲，自然而雨。《左傳》又稱與雨偕也。又云：「成道即當第十八主，惠王十九年癸亥也。示滅即第二十一主，匡王五年癸丑，二月十五日也，時年八十矣。」孤山注《四十二章》，淨覺造《通源記》，依此費氏朝代。由《淨名疏》云：「周時佛興，星隕如雨故也。」法琳評曰：「但據恒星為驗，而云佛生，未悟恒星，別由他事。案《文殊師利般涅槃》云：『佛滅度後二百五十年，文殊至雪山化五百仙人訖，還歸本土，放大光明，遍照世界，入於涅槃。』恒星之瑞，即其時也。又長房言『佛以周惠王十九年癸亥成道』者，亦有大過。何者？案劉向古舊二錄云：『周惠王時已漸佛教，一百五十年後，老子方說五千文。』若以惠王之時始成佛者，不應經教已傳洛矣。」第三，後周道安法師《述二教論》云：「慧光遐照，莊王因覩夜明；靈液方津，明帝以之神夢。」注云：「《春秋》、《左傳》云：『魯莊公七年，歲次甲午，四月辛卯夜，恒星不現，星隕如雨，即周之莊王十年也。』莊王別傳曰：『遂即易筮之，云：「西域銅色人出也，所以夜明，非中夏之災也。」』又依什法師年紀，及石柱銘，並與春秋符同。如來，周桓王五年歲次乙丑生；佛，襄王十五年歲在甲申而滅度。」法琳評曰：「安之為論，據羅什記；羅什記者，承安世高；安世高者，以漢桓帝時在洛陽翻譯，信執筆者，據桓帝時。但羅什秦時始來，世高漢朝先至，二師相去，垂三百年。信彼相承，依而為記，非是安論，造次繆陳，並由當時傳者之過。」又《法顯傳》云：「聖出殷世，武乙二十六年甲午時生者。」辯正評曰：「雖外游諸國，傳未可依。年月時乖，殊俗實為河漢。」又《像正記》定平王時戊午歲，法琳評曰：「依《像正記》，罕見依憑。」案通慧《鷲嶺聖賢錄》，說佛生時，凡有八別：一、夏桀時，二、商末武乙時，三、西周昭王時，四、穆王時，五、東周平王時，六、桓王時，七、莊王時，八、趙伯休梁大周元年。於廬山遇弘度律師，得佛滅後，眾聖默記，推當前周二十九主，貞定王亮，二年甲戌。前後所指，時既紛雜，故唐貞觀十三年，勅遣刑部尚書劉德威等，問法琳法師，何故傳述乖紊，無的可依？由是琳師先列其真，後陳其妄。遂定周昭丙寅歲生，周穆壬申，世尊示滅。從此起算，至今紹興十三年，歲次癸亥，總計二千九十四年（此依𦣱禪師《清規集》算，若依文律師年譜，少十三年）。《西域記》云：「自佛涅槃，諸部異議。或云已過或九百，未滿千年；或云一千二百餘年；或云一千三百餘年；或云一千五百餘年。然既古今綿遠，東西杳邈，不宜確執，是一非諸。」故南山律師問天人云：「此土常傳佛是殷時、周昭、魯莊等，互說不同，如何定指？」答曰：「皆有所以。弟子夏桀時生天，具見佛之垂化。且佛有三身。法報二身，則非人見，並化登地已上。唯有化身，普被三千百億天下。故有百億釋迦，隨人所感，前後不定。或在殷末，或在魯莊，俱在大千之中。前後咸傳一化，感見隨機前後，法報常自湛然，不足疑也。」辨朝代竟，若論月分，如《浴佛經》云：「一切佛皆四月八日生也。」《瑞應》亦云四月八生，《薩婆多》云二月八生，費長房云仲春二月八夜生，神清云二月八日大聖誕于迦維。洎乎示滅之辰，《涅槃經》曰二月十五日臨涅槃時。然此諸文，出有異者，蓋西域以寅月十六為歲首，以寅月十五為歲終。彼分三際之殊，此立四時之別，加復震旦立正，三代有異。夏正建寅，殷正建丑，周正建子。佛之生滅，既準《周書》，日月之數，當依姬世。三寶紀定四月為二月，故《北山》云：「周之二月，今十二月也。」而大聖在乎周年，故得以十一月言正，異今之世也。是月也，天地否閉，龍蛇斯蟄，微陽潛布於下泉，句萌未達於上土。以茲而生者，應氣運而來；以茲而滅者，應代謝而去。然考二月涅槃，屬十二月，此盡美矣。其定誕生，亦十二月，未盡善也。故《二教論》云：「周以十一月為正，春秋四月，即夏之二月也。依天竺用正與夏同。」又《僧史略》云：「江表以今四月八日為佛生日者，依《瑞應經》也。如用周正，合是今二月八日，今用建巳，乃周之六月也。詳此濫用建巳月者，由聞聲便用，不摭實求時也。」又《二教論》云：「杜預用晉曆算，辛卯二月五日，安共董供奉。用魯曆算，即二月七日；用前周曆，即二月八日也。」又今北地，尚﨟八浴佛，乃屬成道之節。故《周書異記》云：「周穆王二年癸未，二月八日，佛年三十成道，正當今之﨟八也。」《西域記》云：「菩薩以吠舍佉月後半八日，當此三月八日。」上座部，則以吠舍佉月後半十五日，當此三月十五日。《聞諸先記》曰：「佛以生年八十，吠舍佉月後半十五日，入涅槃，當此三月十五日也。說一切有部，則佛以迦剌底迦月後半八日，入涅槃，當此九月八日也。今詳西域，如奘師云：『建寅為歲首』，二月則當建卯，四月乃屬建巳。況《涅槃》、《瑞應》，翻傳到此，適當漢魏之後，皆遵夏曆。所以天下相傳，以卯月為涅槃，以巳月為降生者，殊有由也。」諸文所載年月日異，故附此集，錄示後世。

[Aśoka] Also called ashuke (aśoka); the Great Treatise translates it as "tree of sorrowless flowers" (aśoka-flower tree). The Sūtra of Causes and Effects says: "On the eighth day of the second month, the Lady went to the Lumbinī Grove, saw the sorrowless flowers, raised her right hand to pluck [one], and [the child] emerged from her right side." The Later Han Faben neizhuan says: "Emperor Ming asked Dharma Master Dharmaratna, 'Can the month and day of the Buddha's birth be known?' Dharmaratna said, 'In the twenty-fourth year of King Zhao, the jiayin year, on the eighth day of the fourth month, within the Lumbinī Grove beneath a parākṣa tree, he was born from the right side.' Thus the Lalitavistara says: 'He widely radiated a great light illuminating the trichiliocosm.' This corresponds to the Zhoushu yiji, which says: 'In the twenty-fourth year of King Zhao, the jiayin year, on the eighth day of the fourth month, rivers, springs, and pools suddenly surged and rose, and wells all overflowed. Palaces, houses, mountains, rivers, and the great earth all shook. That night, a five-colored vapor arose and penetrated the Taiwei enclosure, spreading across the western quarter, completely turning blue-green and red. King Zhao immediately asked the Grand Astrologer Su You, "What omen is this?" Su You said, "A great sage has been born in the western regions; therefore this auspicious sign appears." King Zhao said, "What will become of All-under-Heaven?" Su You said, "For the moment there is nothing else, but after a thousand years, the sound of his teachings will reach here." King Zhao then sent men to carve a stone to record it, burying it before the heavenly shrine in the southern suburbs. The sixth ruler of Zhou, King Mu, Man, in his fifty-second year, the renshen year, on the fifteenth day of the second month, when the Buddha was seventy-nine years of age, he only then entered extinction.' Thus the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'On the fifteenth day of the second month, when approaching nirvāṇa, he emitted various lights, the great earth shook, his voice reached the Peak of Existence (bhavāgra), and the light pervaded the trichiliocosm.' This corresponds to the Zhoushu yiji, which says: 'In the fifty-second year of King Mu's reign, the renshen year, on the dawn of the fifteenth day of the second month, a violent wind suddenly arose, damaging people's houses and breaking trees; mountains, rivers, and the great earth all shook. After noon the sky clouded over and turned black, and in the west were twelve white rainbows running through from south to north, not extinguishing throughout the night. King Mu asked the Grand Astrologer Hudu (pronounced guang), "What portent is this?" Hudu replied, saying, "In the west a great sage has entered extinction; it is merely the appearance of his departed spirit."'" Tanmozui of the Wei, as well as Falin of the Tang, Shenqing of Beishan, and Fashang's answer to the inquiry from Goguryeo, all agreed on this dynastic era. Jingxi's Fuxing also says: "It corresponds to this jiayin year of King Zhao of the Zhou." Second, Wang Jianqi of Qi in his Record of the Dhūta Monastery states: "The two Zhuangs of Zhou and Lu personally witnessed the mirror of the night illumination." Later, the sutra-translating scholar Fei Changfang of the Sui compiled the Lidai sanbao ji, [stating that] the Buddha [was born] in the tenth year of King Zhuang of Zhou, which corresponds to what the Spring and Autumn Annals and the Zuo Commentary state: "The seventh year of Duke Zhuang of Lu, the year being jiawu, on the eighth day of the fourth month." As the sign of his birth was already manifest, the Lalitavistara therefore says: "He widely radiated a great light, illuminating the trichiliocosm." This is what the Zuo Commentary describes as the fixed stars not appearing and the night being bright. The Ruiying jing says: "A bubbling star appeared below to attend the prince's birth." Therefore the Zuo Commentary says: "Stars fell like rain." The Lalitavistara (Benxing jing) states that the sky was cloudless and it naturally rained. The Zuo Commentary also states that it was accompanied by rain. It also says: "Achieving enlightenment corresponded to the eighteenth ruler, the nineteenth year of King Hui, guihai. Manifesting extinction corresponded to the twenty-first ruler, the fifth year of King Kuang, guichou, on the fifteenth day of the second month, when he was eighty years of age." Gushan's commentary on the Sūtra of Forty-two Chapters and Jingjue's Tongyuan ji rely on this dynastic reckoning of Fei. This is because the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti says: "When the Buddha arose in the time of Zhou, stars fell like rain." Falin commented: "Relying solely on the fixed stars as proof to claim the Buddha's birth fails to realise that the fixed stars were due to another matter. Inspecting the Mañjuśrīparinirvāṇa Sūtra, it says: 'Two hundred and fifty years after the Buddha's extinction, Mañjuśrī went to the Snow Mountains, and having converted five hundred ṛṣis, returned to his native land, emitted a great light, illuminated the world everywhere, and entered nirvāṇa.' The auspicious sign of the fixed stars was precisely at that time. Furthermore, Changfang's statement that 'the Buddha attained enlightenment in the nineteenth year of King Hui of Zhou, guihai' also contains a great error. Why is this? Inspecting Liu Xiang's two old catalogues, they say: 'In the time of King Hui of Zhou, Buddhism had already gradually spread, and one hundred and fifty years later, Laozi only then spoke his five-thousand-word text.' If he only began to become a Buddha during the time of King Hui, the scriptural teachings should not have already been transmitted to Luoyang." Third, Dharma Master Dao'an of the Later Zhou in his Treatise on the Two Teachings says: "The light of wisdom shone afar, and King Zhuang thereby beheld the night illumination; the spiritual fluid just flowed, and Emperor Ming thereby had the divine dream." The note says: "The Spring and Autumn Annals and the Zuo Commentary say: 'In the seventh year of Duke Zhuang of Lu, the year being jiawu, on the night of the xinmao day of the fourth month, the fixed stars did not appear and stars fell like rain, which was the tenth year of King Zhuang of Zhou.' King Zhuang's Biezhuan says: 'He then consulted the Yijing by divination, which said: "A bronze-colored man has appeared in the western regions; the reason the night is bright is that it is not a calamity for the Central Xia."' Moreover, according to Master Kumārajīva's chronology and the stone pillar inscriptions, both tally with the Spring and Autumn Annals. The Tathāgata was born in the fifth year of King Huan of Zhou, the yichou year; the Buddha entered extinction in the fifteenth year of King Xiang, the year being jiashen." Falin commented: "Dao'an's treatise relies on Kumārajīva's record; Kumārajīva's record follows An Shigao; and An Shigao translated in Luoyang during the time of Emperor Huan of Han. Trusting the scribes, they relied on Emperor Huan's time. But Kumārajīva only arrived in the Qin period, whereas Shigao arrived earlier in the Han dynasty; the two masters were nearly three hundred years apart. Trusting that succession and recording accordingly was not Dao'an's fault in hastily making a false presentation; it was entirely the error of the transmitters of that time." Furthermore, the Faxian zhuan says: "The Sage appeared in the Yin period, born in the twenty-sixth year of Wu Yi, the jiawu year." Bianzheng commented: "Although he travelled abroad to various countries, his transmission cannot be relied upon. The years and months are contradictory; strange customs are truly far-fetched." Furthermore, the Xiangzheng ji fixes it to the wuwu year in the time of King Ping; Falin commented: "Relying on the Xiangzheng ji has rarely seen any basis." Inspecting Tonghui's Record of Sages on Vulture Peak, in explaining the Buddha's birth, there are altogether eight different accounts: first, the time of Jie of Xia; second, the time of Wu Yi at the end of Shang; third, the time of King Zhao of Western Zhou; fourth, the time of King Mu; fifth, the time of King Ping of Eastern Zhou; sixth, the time of King Huan; seventh, the time of King Zhuang; eighth, Zhao Boxiu in the first year of the Great Zhou under the Liang, who met Vinaya Master Hongdu at Mount Lu and obtained the silent record of the various sages after the Buddha's extinction, deducing that it corresponded to the twenty-ninth ruler of the former Zhou, the second year of King Zhending (Liang), jiaxu. Since the times indicated earlier and later were so tangled and mixed, in the thirteenth year of the Zhenguan reign of the Tang, an imperial decree dispatched the Minister of the Ministry of Justice, Liu Dewei, and others to ask Dharma Master Falin why the transmissions and narrations were discordant and lacked anything reliable. Thereupon Master Lin first set forth what was genuine and then presented what was erroneous. He then determined that the Buddha was born in the bingyin year of King Zhao of Zhou, and that the Bhagavat manifested extinction in the renshen year of King Mu of Zhou. Counting from this up to the present thirteenth year of Shaoxing, the guihai year, it is altogether 2,094 years (this is calculated according to Chan Master Yun's Pure Regulations; if according to Vinaya Master Wen's chronological biography, it is thirteen years less). The Xiyu ji says: "Since the Buddha's nirvāṇa, the various schools have different opinions: some say more than nine hundred and not yet a full thousand years have passed; some say more than one thousand two hundred years; some say more than one thousand three hundred years; some say more than one thousand five hundred years. However, since antiquity and modern times are distantly separated, and east and west are far removed, one should not rigidly adhere to asserting that one is right and the others are wrong." Therefore Vinaya Master Nanshan [Daoxuan] asked a heavenly being: "This land constantly transmits that the Buddha was from the Yin period, the time of King Zhao of Zhou, or Duke Zhuang of Lu, with differing accounts; how can it be definitively designated?" [The heavenly being] replied: "All have their reasons. I, a disciple, was born in heaven during the time of Jie of Xia and fully witnessed the Buddha's manifestations. Furthermore, the Buddha has three bodies. The dharmakāya and saṃbhogakāya are not seen by ordinary humans; they only transform those who have ascended to the stages (bhūmi) and above. Only the nirmāṇakāya universally covers the three thousand, ten thousand kotis of worlds. Thus there are ten thousand kotis of Śākyamunis who, in accordance with people's receptivity, are not fixed in their earlier or later appearances. Whether at the end of the Yin or under Duke Zhuang of Lu, all are within the great chiliocosm. Early and late all transmit a single transformation; receptivity and perception occur earlier or later according to capacity, while the dharmakāya and saṃbhogakāya are eternally quiescent in themselves, which is not to be doubted." Having concluded the discrimination of the dynastic eras, if one discusses the months: the Bathing the Buddha Sūtra says, "All Buddhas are born on the eighth day of the fourth month." The Ruiying jing also says born on the eighth of the fourth month; the Sarvāstivāda says born on the eighth of the second month; Fei Changfang says born on the night of the eighth day of the mid-spring second month; Shenqing says the Great Sage was born in Kapilavastu on the eighth day of the second month. As for the date of manifesting extinction, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says the fifteenth day of the second month when approaching nirvāṇa. However, these various texts differ because the Western Regions take the sixteenth of the yin month as the start of the year and the fifteenth of the yin month as the end of the year. They distinguish the three periods, while here we establish the four seasons; moreover, in setting the first month in the Eastern Land, the Three Dynasties differed: the Xia began the year with the yin month, the Yin began the year with the chou month, and the Zhou began the year with the zi month. Since the Buddha's birth and extinction are based on the Zhoushu, the count of months and days should follow the Ji house (Zhou). The Sanbao ji determines the fourth month to be the second month; hence Beishan says: "The second month of Zhou is the present twelfth month." And as the Great Sage was during the Zhou years, taking the eleventh month as the start of the year differed from the present age. In this month, heaven and earth are shut up, dragons and snakes hibernate, subtle yang is secretly distributed beneath the deep springs, and sprouts have not yet reached above the earth. Being born at this time is coming in response to the movement of cosmic qi; entering extinction at this time is departing in response to the cycle of succession. Now, examining the nirvāṇa in the second month as belonging to the twelfth month, this is completely fitting; but fixing the birth also to the twelfth month is not yet fully sound. Thus the Treatise on the Two Teachings says: "The Zhou took the eleventh month as the first month; the fourth month of the Spring and Autumn period is the second month of the Xia. According to India, the use of the first month is the same as the Xia." Furthermore, the Sengshi lüe says: "That Jiangbiao takes the present eighth day of the fourth month as the Buddha's birthday relies on the Ruiying jing. If using the Zhou first month, it should be the present eighth day of the second month; the present use of the month of the si branch is the sixth month of Zhou. Examining this improper use of the si month, it stems from using it upon hearing the sound, without grasping the reality to seek the actual time." Furthermore, the Treatise on the Two Teachings says: "Du Yu calculated using the Jin calendar, [finding it to be] the fifth day of the second month, xinmao; Dao'an together with Dong Gongfeng calculated using the Lu calendar, finding it to be the seventh day of the second month; using the former Zhou calendar, it is the eighth day of the second month." Moreover, today in the northern regions, bathing the Buddha is still observed on the eighth day of the twelfth month (la ba), which belongs to the festival of achieving enlightenment. Hence the Zhoushu yiji says: "In the second year of King Mu of Zhou, guiwei, on the eighth day of the second month, the Buddha attained enlightenment at the age of thirty, which corresponds precisely to today's eighth day of the twelfth month." The Xiyu ji says: "The Bodhisattva, on the eighth day of the second half of the month of Vaiśākha, which corresponds to the eighth day of the third month here—" The Sthavira school takes the fifteenth day of the second half of the month of Vaiśākha, which corresponds to the fifteenth day of the third month here. The Wenzhu xianji says: "The Buddha, at the age of eighty, on the fifteenth day of the second half of the month of Vaiśākha, entered nirvāṇa, which corresponds to the fifteenth day of the third month here." The Sarvāstivāda school holds that the Buddha, on the eighth day of the second half of the month of Kārttika, entered nirvāṇa, which corresponds to the eighth day of the ninth month here. Now, examining the Western Regions, as Master Xuanzang said: "They take the yin month as the start of the year"; the second month then corresponds to the mao month, and the fourth month belongs to the si month. Moreover, when the Nirvāṇa and Ruiying sūtras were translated and transmitted here, it coincided with the period after the Han and Wei, which all followed the Xia calendar. Therefore, that throughout All-under-Heaven it is traditionally held that the mao month was the nirvāṇa and the si month was the birth indeed has its reasons. As the dates recorded in the various texts differ, they are appended to this collection to be recorded and displayed for future generations.