華嚴經探玄記 6.115

6.115

In the second, the storehouse of moral discipline, there are three [parts]: the statement of the topic, the explanation, and the conclusion. Within the explanation there are two: first, setting forth the ten sections; and second, taking up each section one by one and explaining them in detail. Master Guangtong states: the first is the discipline of gathering sentient beings; the next eight are the discipline of gathering wholesome qualities; and the last is the discipline of moral restraint. Furthermore, regarding the second [section], one does not adopt the heterodox disciplines of the crow, the rooster, the deer, the dog, and so forth; in the fourth, because one previously has not transgressed, subsequently one has no doubt or regret. According to this text, it seems that someone who intentionally transgresses all precepts has in the past committed the five heinous transgressions—it is that evil habituation. Moreover, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: “Why uphold moral discipline? So as not to regret. Why not regret? To have joy. Why have joy? To have delight, up to attaining great nirvāṇa.” In the fifth, not eating butter, salt, and so forth, refers to freshly inventing [practices]; furthermore, abstaining from grains, consuming qi, and the like, are fabricating rules outside the Dharma. In the seventh, if one upholds moral discipline based on views of annihilationism or eternalism, it is mingled with ignorance, and thus called a transgression of moral discipline. In the eighth, wrong livelihood may be of four kinds: 1. livelihood with mouth facing down; 2. livelihood with mouth facing up; 3. livelihood with mouth facing the four intermediate directions; and 4. livelihood with mouth facing down. Furthermore, the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā, fascicle two, says: “What are the five practices of wrong livelihood? First, feigning abnormalities; second, ingratiating intimacy; third, instigating hints; fourth, alternately belittling and praising; fifth, seeking gain out of gain. ‘Feigning abnormalities’: someone, out of craving for material gains, may stay in an araṇya, wear rag-robes, constantly beg for food, eat at one sitting, constantly sit [without lying down], or abstain from drinks after midday—undertaking such dhūta practices with the thought: ‘By doing such practices one obtains offerings and respect; if I do such practices, I might obtain them too.’ Altering one’s deportment for the sake of material gain is called feigning abnormalities. Second, ‘ingratiating intimacy’: someone, greedy for gain, goes to a donor’s house and says: ‘You are no different from my parents, brothers, sisters, and relatives. If you need anything, I can give it to you. If you have work to do, I will do it for you. Regardless of distance, I can come to pay my respects. The only reason I stay here is for your sake.’ Seeking offerings out of attachment to donors, being able to sway people’s hearts with verbal eloquence—such things are called ingratiating intimacy. Third, ‘instigating hints’: someone, indifferent to the fault of greed, wishes to acquire possessions and forms the idea of obtaining things, speaking thus: ‘This bowl is fine; or this robe is fine, or this door-hook is fine, or this niṣīdāna is fine; if I obtained it, I could make good use of it.’ Or saying: ‘One who gives freely as one wishes is hard to find.’ Or going to a donor’s house and speaking thus: ‘Your household’s soup, rice, cakes, and meat are fragrant and delicious, and your clothes are fine; you ought to make offerings to me. Because we are old acquaintances, you will certainly give them to me.’ Thus displaying signs of greed is called instigating hints. Fourth, ‘alternately belittling and praising’: someone, greedy for gain, says to a donor: ‘You are extremely stingy; you cannot even give to your parents, brothers, sisters, wife, children, and relatives—who could ever obtain anything from you?’ The donor, shamed and humiliated, hesitantly gives. Or going to another’s house and speaking thus: ‘You have merit, your human life has not been in vain; arhats constantly enter and leave your house, and you sit, rise, and converse with them,’ fashioning such indicative ideas. The donor may give rise to this thought: ‘No one else enters and leaves my house; he surely means me.’ This is called alternately belittling and praising. Fifth, ‘seeking gain out of gain’: someone takes robes, bowls, saṃghāṭīs, niṣīdānas, or other requisites for living and displays them to people, saying: ‘Kings, royal figures, and other eminent people gave me these items.’ Thinking: ‘The donor may form the thought: Even those kings and eminent people could make offerings, how much more should I give to this person.’ Using this gain to seek further gain—hence it is called seeking gain out of gain.” In the ninth, the Sarvadharmāpravṛtti-nirdeśa says: “If one sees a person who has broken the precepts, do not speak of his faults and evils. One should reflect that that person will also attain the Path after a long time.” Question: The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: “Seeing one who breaks the precepts, one should ostracize him in silence, rebuke him, and expose his wrongdoing. Know that this person obtains immeasurable merit.” Why does this text protect [such a person] and not rebuke him? Could this be for the sake of gathering sentient beings? Answer: That [passage] refers to rebuking out of a compassionate mind to make them repent their wrongdoing, because their faculties are mature; this [passage] refers to protecting them out of fear of further increasing their evil mind, because their faculties are not yet mature. The rest of the text is easy to understand.