大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 5.38

5.38

疏「若別說者」下，二論別釋。言「廣如彼論」者，論云「犯罪者，謂五眾罪。等起者，為無知故、放逸故、煩惱盛故、不尊敬故而犯諸罪。還淨者，謂由意樂不由治罰，如受律儀。出離者，有七種：一各各相對說悔所犯。二誓受治罰，謂受學等。三等有妨害，為先制學處，後由異門還復開許。四別立止息，謂僧和合，還捨所制。五轉根，謂苾芻苾芻尼轉男女形故，捨不共罪。六由真實觀，謂作殊勝法嗢拕南等諸行相觀。七由法爾得，謂由見諦法爾而得，謂無小隨小罪。應知毘奈耶復有四義：一補特伽羅故，世尊依彼制所學處。二制立故，謂告白彼補特伽羅所犯過已，大師集僧制所學處。三分別故，謂制學處已，更廣解釋先所略說。四決擇故，謂於此中決判所犯，云何有罪，云何無罪。」然《明了論》釋無小隨小罪，自有二說：一云小謂第二篇罪，隨小謂二種方便罪。一云小謂性罪，隨小謂諸戒中制罪。問：今明大乘，那引小教？有答云：理實三藏大小不同，今且就引接教說。古來同此。今更一解，謂持心雖異，名意大同，故得引小。又上所引論名，分明易曉故。又上云「如受律儀」者，梁論云「如本受持對治」。

In the commentary, from “If explained specifically” downwards is the specific explanation based on the treatise. As for “as detailed in that treatise”, the treatise says: “Committing transgressions refers to the offences of the five assemblies. Arising refers to committing various offences due to ignorance, negligence, intense defilement, or lack of respect. Restoration of purity refers to doing so through inclination and not through punishment, as in receiving the vows of discipline. Renunciation has seven kinds: (1) confessing transgressions individually to another; (2) vowing to undergo penalties, such as taking on further training, and so forth; (3) mutual impediment, where a training rule was first instituted and later reopened through a different approach; (4) separately establishing cessation, where the Saṃgha forms a harmonious consensus to relinquish what was instituted; (5) change of faculty, where a monk or nun changes gender and thus relinquishes offences non-common [to both]; (6) through contemplation of reality, where one contemplates the characteristics of practices such as the supreme Dharma summaries (dharmoddāna); (7) naturally obtained, where through seeing the truths one naturally obtains freedom from minor and secondary infractions. One should know that vinaya has four further meanings: (1) due to the person: the World-Honoured One instituted the training rule based on that person; (2) due to promulgation: after announcing the fault committed by that person, the Great Master convened the Saṃgha and instituted the training rule; (3) due to differentiation: having instituted the training rule, he further elaborated on what had previously been stated in brief; (4) due to determination: deciding and judging the transgression herein as to what constitutes an offence and what does not.” However, the Vinayavibhāṣā gives two explanations for the absence of minor and secondary infractions: one says that “minor” refers to offences of the second division (saṃghāvaśeṣa) and “secondary” refers to two kinds of preparatory offences; the other says that “minor” refers to offences in their nature, and “secondary” refers to offences of institutional prohibition among the precepts. Question: In clarifying the Mahāyāna now, why cite the Hīnayāna teachings? Some answer: in reality the three piṭakas differ between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; here it is provisionally cited from the pedagogical perspective of accommodating and leading disciples. Ancients all agreed with this. Here is an additional interpretation: although the mind that upholds them differs, the name and intent broadly coincide, so it is permissible to cite the Hīnayāna. Moreover, the treatise cited above is clear and easy to understand. Furthermore, regarding the earlier phrase “as in receiving the vows of discipline”, the Liang translation says: “as in originally upholding the antidote”.