跨時空而來7-4 Across Time and Space—7-4

 跨時空而來7-4

意解脫身做證

想起才兩三年前，有一天我在讀純德社長給我的《雜阿含經》資料，想給他一些建議。

讀到「意解脫身作證」的時候，
台灣新竹的斌宗法師現身，

指著「意解脫身作證」，這六個字問我這是什麼意思？
他看不懂。

這也是我從未有的經驗，我一時楞住了！
然後馬上解釋給他聽。

他們那個時代完全沒看過《雜阿含經》，
都已經往生那麼久，他的意識還是這麼用功的在努力前進。

（「意解脫身作證」，
是指佛法完全明白以後，肉身會跟著起變化——證入。）

這之前的文章也解釋過了，

這件事在南禪的讀書會上我有提起過。

南禪惠淑師姐，很高興地把她家斌宗法師解釋的《般若心經》拿來給我看。

真正有修行的佛法大德，努力的精神一直都在的。

難道這樣的經歷也是魔境嗎？

台灣人你夠了吧？
不要再誣蔑聖者，請自重。
這是我最後一次提出最嚴厲的指控。
半寄

（參考出處）
雜阿含1091經[正聞本1194經/佛光本1079經](魔相應/八眾誦/祇夜)(莊春江標點)
　　如是我聞：
　　一時，佛住王舍城毘婆羅山七葉樹林石室中。
　　時，有尊者瞿低迦住王舍城仙人山側黑石室中，獨一思惟，不放逸行，修自饒益，時受意解脫身作證，數數退轉，一、二、三、四、五、六反退，還復得時受意解脫身作證，尋復退轉。

AI 摘要

斌宗法師（1911年—1958年），臺灣彰化鹿港人，俗姓施，是日治及戰後時期臺灣著名的天台宗高僧、詩人，被譽為「詩僧」。他開創了臺灣佛教界重視經教、公開講經弘法的先河，對正法在臺灣的流布影響深遠。

（日本奈良東大寺）

Across Time and Space—7-4
“Experiencing and Realizing Liberation of the Mind”

I remember that only two or three years ago, there was a day when I was reading the materials from the Saṃyukta Āgama that President Chunde had given me, in order to offer him some suggestions.

When I came across the phrase “experiencing and realizing liberation of the mind,” Venerable Master Binzong from Hsinchu, Taiwan, appeared before me.

Pointing to the six Chinese characters “意解脫身作證,” he asked me, “What does this mean?”
He could not understand it.

This was also an experience I had never had before, and I was stunned for a moment!
Then I immediately explained it to him.

In their era, they had never seen the Saṃyukta Āgama at all.

Even though he had passed away such a long time ago, his consciousness was still diligently striving to move forward.

(“Experiencing and realizing liberation of the mind” means that after one has completely understood the Buddha Dharma, the physical body will undergo corresponding changes—this is what it means to realize the teaching directly.)

This was also explained in an earlier article.

I mentioned this experience at a NanZen study club before.

Huishu, a senior laywoman of NanZen, was very happy to bring me a copy of the Heart Sutra as explained by her teacher, Venerable Master Binzong, for me to read.

True great practitioners and eminent Buddhist masters retain this spirit of diligent striving all the way through.

Could an experience like this possibly also be a demonic state?

People in Taiwan, enough already, okay?

Please stop slandering the saints and show some self-respect.
This is the last time I will make such a serious accusation.
Master Banji

(Reference)
Saṃyukta Āgama, Sutra 1091 [Zhengwen edition, 1194 / Foguang edition, 1079] (Corresponding to the Māra section / Eight Assemblies Recitation / Geya), punctuation by Zhuang Chunjiang.

“Thus have I heard:
At one time, the Buddha was staying in the stone chamber in the Seven-Leaf Grove on Mount Vepulla in Rājagṛha.

At that time, the Venerable Godhika was staying in a black stone chamber on the side of the Sage Mountain in Rājagṛha. Living alone, he contemplated inwardly, practiced diligently without negligence, and cultivated for his own welfare. At times he experienced and realized liberation of the mind, but repeatedly fell back from it—once, twice, three, four, five, and six times. He again attained that state of experiencing and realizing liberation of the mind, and soon afterward fell back from it again.”



AI Summary

Venerable Master Binzong (1911–1958), born in Lukang, Changhua, Taiwan, with the lay surname Shi, was a renowned Tiantai Buddhist monk and poet in Taiwan during the Japanese colonial period and the postwar era. He was known as the “Poet Monk.” He pioneered the emphasis on Buddhist scriptures and the public teaching and propagation of Buddhism in Taiwan, and his influence on the spread of authentic Buddhist teachings in Taiwan was profound.

跨時空而來7-3 Across Time and Space — 7-3

 跨時空而來7-3

只想涅槃

那一天我在思考讀者要求我寫出「無明」的時候，印度聖者出手制止，
我心想「無明」沒有解釋，也應該把它解釋出來，完整整個「四聖果」內容，
就沒有多加理會。

有時間的時候，會慢慢去想為什麼祂想趨於沉默了？

因為祂已經知道，反對者的聲音又在高漲了！
這種相處，讓我理解到佛教的聖者為什麼紛紛離去，只願意遠遠的站在天邊。

這兩天我不斷在說服祂克服人群的壓力，要把佛法延續下來，
只想要清淨，徒讓整個佛法的傳承更加的淹沒。

我請祂為印度著想。

所有的事都是願意犧牲的人做出來的。
半寄

Across Time and Space — 7-3
I Only Seek Nirvana

That day, while I was thinking about a reader’s request that I explain “ignorance” (avidyā), the Indian enlightened Sage intervened and stopped me.

I thought to myself, “If ignorance is left unexplained, I should explain it properly and present the complete teaching of the Four Stages of Enlightenment.”So I did not pay much attention to the intervention.

When I had time later, I slowly reflected on why He wanted to remain silent and withdraw.

Because He already knew that the voices of those who oppose Him were rising again!

This kind of interaction has helped me understand why the enlightened ones in Buddhism have gradually departed, choosing instead to stand far away, at the edge of the heavens.

For the past two days, I have been trying to persuade Him to overcome the pressure of the crowd and continue the transmission of the Buddha Dharma.

He only wishes for purity and peace, but this would only allow the entire Buddhist tradition to become even more submerged and forgotten.

I asked Him to consider India’s interests.

Everything that has ever been accomplished has been brought about by those who were willing to make sacrifices.

Master Banji

跨時空而來7-2 Across Time and Space — 7-2

跨時空而來7-2

請提供論述

我個人在年輕時期研究「大天五事」時，內心感到深沉的困惑與不安。

佛陀入滅後不久，僧團對此問題仍無法給出清楚的答案。

我不禁懷疑：是否所有已證阿羅漢果的聖者都已入於涅槃，

以致再也沒有人能說明證果的真實狀態？

在當時的部派佛教中，
或許已經沒有真正的阿羅漢——
甚至連初果的證入者都不存在。

因此，各種見解紛歧，疑惑加深，最終陷入僵局。

如果當時哪怕有一位修行者證入初果，
親歷其過程洗禮，必定能明白證悟的真實面貌。

正因為沒有這樣的人，爭論才不斷延續，並促成了後來的重大分裂。

這個現象由印度聖者一現身，就把「想跟識」解釋的清清楚楚便可知道，

一位真實的證悟者，不容誣蔑。

如果造謠者只會貼標籤佛跟魔，卻不能具體說出佛或魔的內容，我只能說那是佛法ㄧ種不斷地不幸。

我南禪的教育是不准用佛跟魔的表達，

佛法敘述者，只能說明哪邊說錯了，或者哪裡說的扭曲，請具體說明指出。

半寄

（大天五事資料提供：

主要文獻記載的年代定位如下：

北方文獻（說一切有部系，如《大毘婆沙論》、《異部宗輪論》）

 歷史定位： 認為大天五事發生於阿育王（Ashoka）時期，約為佛滅後一百百年（即佛滅後約100年至116年間）。

 西元換算： 約為西元前270年至西元前232年間。

 背景描述： 說一切有部文獻將大天描繪為破僧壞法的罪人，認為他提出了貶抑阿羅漢聖格的「五事偈」（餘所誘、無知、猶豫、他令入、道因聲故起），進而導致僧團首次根本分裂，分化為上座部與大眾部。

南方文獻（赤銅鍱部系，如《島史》、《大史》）與現代學者研判

 歷史定位： 南傳文獻記載阿育王時期的第三次結集主導者為目犍連子帝須，並未提及大天致使根本分裂；而是將「大天」記載為阿育王時期前往南方（摩醯沙曼陀羅國）弘法的尊者。

 西元換算： 若依大眾部後續的分化（如制多山部之崛起），部分學者（如印順法師、呂澂等）研判，提出五事的大天可能生活於佛滅後二百年頃（約西元前2世紀至西元前1世紀）。

 觀點轉折： 現代學術研究多認為「根本分裂」的主因在於十事非法（戒律爭議）；大天五事更可能是發生於**大眾部內部進一步分化（枝末分裂）**時的教理爭議，後來被說一切有部論師回溯追記於根本分裂之際。

大天五事核心內容

1. 餘所誘： 阿羅漢仍有生理遺精（餘所誘惑）。

2. 無知： 阿羅漢仍有染污以外的無知（不染污無知）。

3. 猶豫： 阿羅漢對世俗事理仍可能有疑問（處非處疑）。

4. 他令入： 阿羅漢需依他人記別始知自身證果。

5. 道因聲故起： 聖道之現起需至誠呼喊「苦哉」等聲。

日本學者普遍認為這是說一切有部（論敵立場）為抹黑大眾部而後起建構的傳說，非客觀歷史事實。  

2. 根本分裂的真正起因：戒律 vs. 教義  

非根本分裂的主因：傳統說法常將大天五事視為佛教僧團第一次分裂（上座部與大眾部）的唯一原因。但近代日本學者（如平川彰、塚本啟祥等）比對律藏後提出，根本分裂的主因更有可能是戒律理解的分歧（如「十事非法」或「廣律與略律」的誦出問題）。  

進一步的作用：大天五事反映的是思想與教義上的爭議，它加速了思想上的陣營化，但直接導致僧伽組織破裂的關鍵往往是布薩與戒律執行。  

3. 教理內涵：阿羅漢理想的降溫與大乘思想的萌芽

阿羅漢的局限性：日本學者指出，五事（餘所誘、無知、猶豫、他令入、道因聲故起）本質上是在討論**「阿羅漢是否依然保有肉體與事理上的局限」**：  

染污 vs. 不染污無知：阿羅漢斷盡了導致輪迴的煩惱（染污無知），但對世俗事理（如植物名稱、地理）仍可能不了解（不染污無知）。  

為大乘佛陀觀鋪路：大眾部透過五事將阿羅漢「降格」（承認其仍有缺憾），進而凸顯出佛陀的圓滿無缺與超世間性（如平川彰在《印度佛教史》中所析述）。這種對阿羅漢的批評，成為後來大乘佛教批判小乘阿羅漢、提倡菩薩道的重要思想前驅。  

代表性日本學者與著作參考  

宇井伯壽：《印度哲学研究》，早期針對部派分裂文獻進行嚴密比對的奠基之作。  

水野弘元：《部派佛教與阿毘達磨》，深入分析大眾部與上座部在阿羅漢觀上的教理分歧。  

平川彰：《印度佛教史》（A History of Indian Buddhism），全面梳理了大天五事在部派形成與大乘崛起過程中的歷史定位。

日本學者的研究將「大天五事」從單純的「教內邪說」討論，提升到了僧團社會史、文獻批判與早期大乘思想源流的學術高度。）

Across Time and Space — 7-2

Please Provide Your Counterarguments and Supporting Points.

When I was young and studying the “Five Great Matters,” I felt deeply confused and uneasy in my heart.

 

Not long after the Buddha’s passing, the monastic communities still could not provide clear answers.

 

I questioned whether all Arhats had already entered nirvāṇa, leaving no one who could explain the actual reality of attainment.

 

Within sectarian Buddhism at that time,

there may have been no true Arhats—

perhaps not even stream-enterers.

Thus, conflicting views arose, doubts deepened, and a deadlock formed.

 

If even one practitioner had attained stream-entry,

they would know the reality of realization.

Because none did, disputes continued and contributed to the great schisms.

 

This is evident when an Indian sage appeared and clearly explained the difference between “perception” and “consciousness.”

 

A true awakened being should not be slandered.

 

If people merely label things as “Buddha” or “Māra” without clear explanation,

this reflects an ongoing misfortune in Buddhism.

 

In NanZen, such labels are not permitted.

 

When discussing the Dharma, one must clearly identify and explain errors or distortions.

 

Master Banji

 

 

AI-Compiled Notes on the “Five Points of Mahādeva” 

 

1. Historical Dating in Major Sources

Northern Sources (Sarvāstivāda tradition, e.g., Mahāvibhāṣā, Samayabhedoparacanacakra)

• Historical view: These texts place the Five Points during the time of King Ashoka, about 100–116 years after the Buddha’s passing. 

• Approximate dates: Around 270–232 BCE. 

• Narrative: Sarvāstivāda sources portray Mahādeva as a figure who harmed the Dharma and caused a schism in the Sangha. They claim he proposed the “Five Points,” which diminish the status of the Arhat, leading to the first major split between the Sthavira (Elders) and Mahāsāṃghika schools. 

Southern Sources (Theravāda tradition, e.g., Dīpavaṃsa, Mahāvaṃsa) and Modern Scholarship

• Historical view: Theravāda records of Ashoka’s time describe the Third Council led by Moggaliputta Tissa and do not mention Mahādeva as the cause of the original schism. Instead, Mahādeva is described as a monk who went south (to Mahisa-mandala) to spread the Dharma. 

• Reassessment: Based on later developments within the Mahāsāṃghika school, some modern scholars (such as Yinshun and Lü Cheng) suggest that the figure who proposed the Five Points may have lived around 200 years after the Buddha (roughly 2nd–1st century BCE). 

• Shift in interpretation: Many modern scholars believe the original schism was mainly caused by disputes over monastic discipline (the “Ten Points”), while the Five Points likely emerged later during internal divisions within the Mahāsāṃghika. These teachings may have been retrospectively linked to the earlier schism by rival traditions. 

 

2. The Five Points (Core Doctrines)

1. Residual temptation: An Arhat may still experience involuntary physical emissions (e.g., in dreams). 

2. Ignorance: An Arhat may still have non-defiled ignorance (lack of knowledge about worldly matters). 

3. Doubt: An Arhat may still have uncertainty regarding certain conventional truths. 

4. Learning from others: An Arhat may need confirmation from others to know that they have attained enlightenment. 

5. Path arises through sound: Realization of the Path may be triggered by a sincere verbal expression, such as an exclamation of suffering. 

Japanese scholars often argue that these claims were likely constructed later by opposing schools (such as the Sarvāstivādins) to criticize the Mahāsāṃghika, rather than being historically reliable accounts.

 

3. The Real Cause of the First Schism: Discipline vs. Doctrine

• Not the main cause: Traditional accounts often treat the Five Points as the direct cause of the first Buddhist schism. 

• Modern view: Comparative study of Vinaya texts by modern Japanese scholars (e.g., Hirakawa Akira, Tsukamoto Keishō) suggests that the primary cause was disagreement over monastic discipline, especially issues like the “Ten Improper Practices.” 

• Role of the Five Points: These ideas reflect doctrinal debates and may have intensified ideological divisions, but the actual institutional split of the Sangha was more closely tied to disagreements over rules and communal practices. 

 

4. Doctrinal Significance: Rethinking the Arhat and the Rise of Mahāyāna Thought

• Limits of the Arhat: The Five Points essentially question whether an Arhat still has human limitations—physical, cognitive, or practical. 

o They distinguish between defiled ignorance(which leads to rebirth and is eliminated) and non-defiled ignorance (ordinary lack of knowledge about the world, which may remain). 

• Opening the way for Mahāyāna:
By presenting the Arhat as not entirely perfect, the Mahāsāṃghika perspective elevates the Buddha as uniquely complete and transcendent.
This critique of the Arhat ideal later became an important foundation for Mahāyāna Buddhism, which emphasizes the Bodhisattva path over Arhatship. 

 

5. Key Japanese Scholars and Works

• Ui Hakuju – Studies in Indian Philosophy: Early foundational work comparing sectarian sources. 

• Mizuno Kōgen – Sectarian Buddhism and Abhidharma: Analysis of doctrinal differences, especially regarding the nature of the Arhat. 

• Hirakawa Akira – A History of Indian Buddhism: A comprehensive study situating the Five Points within the broader development of Buddhist schools and the rise of Mahāyāna. 

 

Summary

Japanese scholarship has shifted the understanding of the Five Points of Mahādeva from a simple “heretical teaching” into a complex issue involving historical reconstruction, sectarian debate, and the early development of Mahāyāna thought.

 

跨時空而來7-1 Across Time and Space — 7-1

跨時空而來7-1

依法不依人

 

7月15號黃昏我照例在外面庭院走動，

 

有意念提醒我，抬頭看照起來，

ㄧ仰頭，

我看到雲端那邊有一股我不能想像的力量，沒有多想，

拿起手機照起來後，馬上消散，速度之快令我咋舌！

 

如果不是我已經拍照，我根本連第二眼都沒辦法再看到，太快了！

 

我不能確定那是什麼？

所以我7月15號拍到的時候也沒有貼出來。

 

是7月18號開完讀書會當晚，

其實我自己連趕兩天的讀書會，一天還在新竹，10點多的時候我已經很累了！

祂跟我提起17號在社團那邊的「想與識」講的不夠完善，

我才確認他是誰！（見7月19號跨時空而來1）

 

有人放謠言說：我已經走火入魔了，入了魔道。😄😄😄

似乎別人都是無知的，只有放謠言的那個人最睿智。

 

印度聖者依佛法而說：

如果「依法不依人」是正確的，那麼祂所說的句句都是佛法，就這麼簡單。

半寄

 

（我沒什麼事，

只是在告訴檢查我照片的台灣人，

檢查半天，不要檢查出是真的，

順手牽羊拿去盜用。）

 

 Across Time and Space — 7-1

Rely on the Dharma, Not the Person

On the evening of July 15, I was walking in my courtyard as usual.

 

A thought told me to look up and take a photo.

When I did, I saw an unimaginable force in the clouds. I quickly took a picture, and it disappeared instantly. The speed was astonishing.

 

Without that photo, I wouldn’t have seen it again. It vanished too fast.

 

I cannot confirm what it was,

so I did not share the photo at that time.

 

On the night of July 18, after the study club,

I was exhausted after two consecutive days of sessions, including one in Hsinchu. Around 10 p.m.,

He mentioned that my explanation of “perception” and “consciousness” on the 17th was incomplete.

That’s when I confirmed who He was. (See July 19: Across Time and Space 1.)

 

Some people spread rumors that I’ve gone astray or fallen into delusion. Haha 😄

It seems everyone else is ignorant, while only the rumor-maker is wise.

 

The Indian enlightened Sage said in accordance with the Buddha-Dharma:

If “rely on the Dharma, not the person” is correct, then every word He speaks is the Dharma. It is that simple.

 

Master Banji

 

(I’m fine.

This is just a reminder to those in Taiwan examining my photos—

after checking so carefully, don’t end up confirming that it’s real,

only to quietly take it for yourselves and misuse it.)