---
title: "雲棲淨土彙語 · 共命鳥"
description: "雲棲淨土彙語由清代虞執西和嚴培西共同錄編，成書於淨土宗興盛的清初時期。該書輯錄了蓮池大師（雲棲祩宏）的淨土法門開示、語錄及修行要義，集中闡述念佛往生、淨業三福等核心思想。作為淨土宗重要典籍，它系統傳承了雲棲大師的淨土教法，對清代淨土信仰的普及與實踐產生了深遠影響，是研究中國佛教淨土宗思想和修行的重要文獻。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcywaqn606f6lb04bjkpis28"
---

### 共命鳥

> Symbiotic Birds

非也已。改作恐非矣。然不可不辨。共命不專極樂。雪山五天竺皆有之。法華諸經屢取為喻。註釋者止言兩頭。及翻譯名義俱然。曾無人身之說。即雞頭摩所傳圖繪。然亦無存。亦未聞何經傳載。此五通菩薩。言是人身也。豈得以工匠所作為准憑耶。故前辨云。有經論出載則可。且極樂地平如掌。無有諸山。今裝塑西方境。作山形。安可信也。時人于古聖賢註疏。恒求其錯。工匠人所作。反蹈常襲。故不敢作一語辨正。獨何歟。又云。蛇身亦得稱帝。夫蛇身者。尚稱為帝。而不稱為蛇。今人身者。反不稱人。而稱鳥耶。故前辨云。既是人身。不得稱鳥。愚意。蛇身者膚鱗鱗。如蛇皮耳。非真蛇也。若真蛇者。將橫身而稱帝歟。則儼然一蛇。何以御臣民。將正身而稱帝歟。則無手無足。裊裊如竹竿。何由而立。何由而坐。何由指揮動作。而行政事。乃至神農牛首。亦狀貌似牛。如沛公龍顏班超虎頭之類耳。若真雙角指天。兩耳披風。針其毛。長其喙。世所謂牛頭馬面者。閻羅王之部卒也。人將走而避之。之不暇矣。故昔人謂。外紀不可盡信。而共工頭觸不周。王充辨云。既不周號為天柱。共工力能觸之使折。何以戰而不勝。此論不徇舊說。痛快千古。今之共命。恐亦類是。

> That would not be correct. I'm concerned that altering it might also be mistaken. However, we must still clarify this point. The "Jiaming bird" (shared-fate bird) is not exclusive to the Land of Ultimate Bliss; it is found in the Snow Mountains and the Five Regions of India as well. The Lotus Sutra and other scriptures frequently use it as a metaphor. Commentaries only mention its two heads, and the \*Translation of Buddhist Terms\* says the same—there is no mention of it having a human body. Even the depiction transmitted from Jitoumo Temple in paintings has not survived, nor have I heard of any sutra or commentary recording it. This so-called "five-spirit-power bodhisattva" being portrayed as having a human body is nothing of the sort. How can we take the work of craftsmen as authoritative? Therefore, I argued earlier: it would only be acceptable if there were evidence from sutras and treatises. Moreover, the ground of the Land of Ultimate Bliss is level as a palm, without any mountains. Nowadays, when people sculpt images of the Western Paradise with mountain forms, how can this be trusted? People of our time constantly seek errors in the commentaries of ancient sages, yet they blindly follow the works of craftsmen without daring to speak a single word of correction. Why is that? Someone says: "Even one with a snake body could be called an emperor." Now, if someone with a snake body can be called an emperor—and not "Snake"—why should a human body be called a bird instead? Therefore, I argued earlier: if it has a human body, it cannot be called a bird. In my humble opinion, "snake body" merely refers to skin patterned like snake scales; it does not mean an actual snake. If it were a real snake, then would it lie horizontally while being called emperor? Then it would just be a snake, unable to command subjects and citizens. Would it stand upright and be called emperor? Without hands or feet, swaying like a bamboo pole, how could it stand or sit? How could it gesture and act, administering government affairs? Likewise, the legend of Emperor Shennong having an ox's head simply means his facial features resembled those of an ox—like the stories of Liu Bang having a dragon-like countenance or Ban Chao having a tiger's head. If it meant actual horns pointing to the sky, ears flapping in the wind, bristly hair, and an elongated snout—like the so-called "ox-head and horse-face" minions of King Yama—then people would flee in terror, having no time to even look. Thus, ancient scholars said that legends and unofficial histories cannot all be believed. For this reason, the story of Gonggong butting Buzhou Mountain was refuted by Wang Chong, who argued: "If Buzhou was called the pillar of heaven, and Gonggong had the strength to break it, how could he be defeated in battle?" This critique does not blindly follow old claims—it is truly a great insight that stands across the ages. The "Jiaming bird" of today is likely a similar case.