仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏 3.37

3.37

Exposition: 'Breaking the four grave precepts' refers to sexual misconduct, theft, killing, and lying, which are the inherently grave precepts. Regarding 'committing the five sins of immediate retribution,' as explained in fascicle eighteen of the *Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya*, these are killing one's father, killing one's mother, killing an arhat, disrupting the harmonious Saṃgha, and causing blood to flow from the body of a Buddha. Among these five, four are bodily and one is verbal, along with their respective equivalent categories, as fully explained there. 'And violating the various precepts' refers to all the precepts such as the saṃghāvaśeṣas and so on. The prātimokṣa vows each have their distinct components and causes; though there are eight types of moral discipline, their real essence comprises only four, differing in the presence or absence of conditions, as usually explained. As for their essence, the Sarvāstivāda school takes it to be non-informative form (avijñapti-rūpa), whereas the *Satyasiddhi* holds it to be unassociated (cittaviprayukta-saṃskāra). Now, in our Mahāyāna school, relying on the seeds of volition and aspiration, it is nominally established as the essence; it does not follow the mind-precepts, and can be present in all four minds and three natures. Regarding the different conditions for forfeiting the precepts, the Sarvāstivāda school posits five conditions, as verse fifteen of fascicle fifteen of the *Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya* states: 'The prātimokṣa discipline is forfeited through intentional abandonment, death, the simultaneous emergence of two sexes, the severance of roots of goodness, or the passing of the night.' The Sautrāntikas add the commission of a grave offense, and the Dharmaguptakas add the extinction of the Dharma; hence the conditions for forfeiture differ. In fascicle fifty-three of the *Yogācārabhūmi*, forfeiture has five conditions: abandoning the training rules, committing a fundamental offense, the emergence of two sexes, the severance of the roots of goodness, and abandoning the common allotment of existence—these constitute the forfeiture of the bhikṣu discipline. If the True Dharma is destroyed and the True Dharma disappears, although there is no new receiving [of vows], because the old ones have not been abandoned, one possesses the precepts and has not forfeited them. When bodily discipline is possessed and one encounters conditions leading to transgression, this is called 'violating the various precepts'; without distinct conditions for repentance, one is bound to fall into hell, as ordinarily differentiated. If there are conditions for repentance, according to the Mahāyāna teaching, as stated in the *Sūtra on the Making of Images*, through making sūtras and images, one's karma leading to the three evil destinies is briefly experienced and quickly escaped without enduring torment, like an arrow shot through a forest passing through without stopping. Furthermore, the *Contemplation of Amitāyus Sūtra* states: 'Even those who commit the five sins of immediate retribution may also be born in the Western realm.' Moreover, fascicle twenty of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* states: 'King Ajātaśatru aroused the bodhicitta and did not enter hell.' It extensively praises the arousal of the bodhicitta, as in that text. Furthermore, fascicle one of the *Mahāvaipulya Dhāraṇī Sūtra* states: 'If one violates the twenty-four bodhisattva precepts or any one of the precepts of a bhikṣu, if one repents with single-mindedness, it is impossible that they will not be restored.' Now, when this sūtra says 'immeasurable faults and offenses are all completely annihilated,' it means that by hearing, upholding, reading, and reciting the sūtra, the sins are all extinguished.

From here, the second section cites ancient kings who protected their states. This is divided into two: first, citing ancient kings who protected their states; second, concluding with an exhortation to uphold it. Under the first, citing the ancients, the text is divided into three: 1. explaining the ancient heavenly king, 2. explaining the ancient human kings, 3. referring by analogy to all kings. Under the first, the heavenly king, the text is further divided into three; first, pointing to King Mūrdhata.