[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) › [出三藏記集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145) › 5.17 # 出三藏記集 5.17 出三藏記集 5.17 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5.17) 夫至人應世觀眾生根。根力不同設教亦異。是以三乘立軌隨機而發。五時說法應契而化。沿麁以至妙。因小以及大。階漸殊時教之體也。自正法稍遠受學乖互。外域諸國或偏執小乘。最後涅槃顯明佛性。而猶執初教。可謂膠柱鼓琴者也。元嘉中。外國商人竺婆勒。久停廣州。每往來求利。於南康郡生兒。仍名南康。長易字金伽。後得入道。為曇摩耶舍弟子。改名法度。其人貌雖外國。實生漢土。天竺科軌非其所諳。但性存矯異。欲以攝物。故執學小乘。云無十方佛。唯禮釋迦而已。大乘經典不聽讀誦。反抄著衣。以此為法常用銅鉢無別應器。乃令諸尼作鎮肩衣。似尼師壇。縫之為囊。恒著肩上而不用坐。以表眾異。每至出路相捉而行布薩悔過。但伏地相向而不胡跪。法度善閑漢言。至授戒先作胡語。不令漢知。案律之明文授法資解。言不相領不得法事。而竺度昧罔面行詭術。明識之眾咸共駭棄。唯宋故丹陽尹顏竣女。宣業寺尼法弘。交州刺史張牧女。弘光寺尼普明等。信受其教以為真實。雖出貴族而識謝慧心。毀呰方等既絕法雨。妄學詭科乖背律儀。來苦方深良可愍傷。自正化東流大乘日曜。英哲頂受遍寓服膺。而使迷偽之人專行偏教。莫或振止。何其甚哉。昔慧導拘滯疑惑大品。曇樂偏執非撥法華。罔天下之明。信己情之謬。關中大眾固已指為無間矣。至如彭城僧淵誹謗涅槃舌根銷爛。現表厥殃。大乘難誣。亦可驗也。尋三人之惑並惡止其躬。而竺度之悖。以毒飲人。凡女人之性。智弱信強一受偽教則同惑相埏。故京師數寺遂塵異法。東境尼眾亦時染此風。將恐邪路易開淄污不已。嗟乎斯豈魔斷大乘故先侮女人歟。此實開士之所痛悼。而法主所宜匡制也。大方便經云。釋迦如來昔為比丘。專以四阿含教化謗毀方等。於無數劫受大苦報。從阿鼻出發大乘心。致成正覺。後進之賢宜思防斷。古今明誡可不慎乎。 > Now, when the Perfected One responds to the world, he observes the capacities of sentient beings. Because their capacities and faculties are unequal, he institutes diverse teachings. Thus the three vehicles establish ordinances that arise in response to aptitudes; the five periods preach the Dharma to transform them according to what accords with their inclinations. Advancing from coarse to subtle, proceeding through the small to reach the great, gradual stages at diverse times are the very embodiment of the teaching. Since the True Dharma gradually receded, receiving and learning have grown discordant. Diverse states in the outer regions have sometimes obstinately clung to the Hīnayāna. The final Nirvāṇa \[Sūtra\] made manifest and clear the Buddha-nature, yet some still cling to the initial teaching: one might well call them people who play the zither with the bridge glued down. In the Yuanjia era, a foreign merchant named Zhu Pole had long resided in Guangzhou, frequently traveling back and forth in pursuit of profit. In Nankang commandery he had a son, whom he accordingly named Nankang. When he grew up, his courtesy name was changed to Jinquie. Later he was able to enter the Path, becoming a disciple of Dharmayaśas, and changed his name to Fadu. Although this man's countenance was foreign, he was actually born in the land of Han. The regulations and ordinances of Tianzhu were not what he was familiar with; but by nature he harbored an inclination to feign singularity, desiring thereby to gather followers. Therefore, he obstinately studied the Hīnayāna, asserting that there are no buddhas of the ten directions and that one should pay homage only to Śākyamuni. He did not permit the chanting and recitation of Mahāyāna scriptures, and had his robes worn wrapped backwards, taking this as his rule. He always used copper almsbowls, having no other vessel of response. He even ordered the nuns to make "shoulder-pressing robes" that resembled niṣīdanas, sewing them into sacks to wear constantly on their shoulders without using them to sit upon, so as to display a mark distinct from the congregation. Whenever they went out on the road, they walked holding hands. During the poṣadha repentance, they merely prostrated themselves facing each other without kneeling in the foreign manner. Fadu was well versed in the Chinese language, yet when conferring the precepts, he first spoke in the Hu language, not letting the Chinese understand. In accordance with the explicit texts of the Vinaya, conferring the Dharma relies upon comprehension: if the words are not understood, the legal act is invalid. Yet Zhu Fadu practiced deceit and openly conducted deceptive arts, so that those of clear discernment all held him in alarm and rejected him. Only the daughter of the late Song Prefect of Danyang Yan Jun, the nun Fahong of Xuanye Monastery, and the daughter of Zhang Mu, Regional Inspector of Jiaozhou, the nun Puming of Hongguang Monastery, and others believed in and received his teachings, taking them to be authentic. Although born into noble clans, their discernment was deficient in wisdom: having slandered the Vaipulya scriptures, they cut themselves off from the rain of Dharma; falsely learning deceptive rules, they turned against the monastic discipline. Their future suffering will be deep indeed, truly worthy of pity and sorrow! Ever since the correct conversion flowed eastward, the Mahāyāna has shone like the sun. Outstanding and wise people receive it on the crowns of their heads, and all in the realm take it to heart. Yet to let a deluded and spurious person exclusively propagate a partial teaching without anyone putting a stop to it—how extreme this is! Formerly, Huidao was rigidly confined and doubted the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra; Tanle was obstinate and rejected the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra. Belittling the illumination of the world, they trusted in the errors of their own sentiments. The great assembly of Guanzhong already pointed them out as destined for the Avīci Hell. As for Sengyuan of Pengcheng, who slandered the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, the root of his tongue melted and rotted, visibly displaying his misfortune in this life. That the Mahāyāna cannot be deceived can also be verified by this. Examining the delusion of these three men, their evil stopped with themselves; but Zhu Fadu's perversion poisoned others. In general, the nature of women is weak in wisdom and strong in credulity: once they receive a spurious teaching, the mutually deluded shape one another. Consequently, several monasteries in the capital were befouled by this deviant Dharma, and the assembly of nuns in the eastern regions was also tainted by this trend from time to time. One must fear that the deviant path is easily opened and the defilement will not cease. Alas! Could it be that Māra, desiring to sever the Mahāyāna, first took advantage of women? This is truly something over which the Great Being grieves, and which the Master of the Dharma ought to rectify and regulate. The Mahā-upāyakauśalya-sūtra states: "In the past, Śākyamuni Tathāgata was a monk who exclusively used the four Āgamas to teach and convert, slandering and reviling the Vaipulya scriptures. For innumerable kalpas he suffered great retributions of torment; emerging from Avīci, he gave rise to the Mahāyāna aspiration and thereby attained complete enlightenment." Worthies of later generations ought to contemplate preventing and severing such paths. How could one not be cautious before the clear warnings of past and present? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5.16) - [Next: 5.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5.18) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145~en-mt.5.17) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2145.5.17) · Pramāṇa