大般涅槃經義記 3.238

3.238

自下第四重顯向前有犯中義，於中初言「犯突吉羅，忉利天上八百萬歲墮地獄中，況偷蘭遮」，翻上邪中說突吉羅八百萬歲墮在地獄如來怖人，故今明其實墮不虛。舉輕況重，故言「何況故犯偷蘭」。此中重罪通名偷蘭，不唯方便。「此大乘」下翻上邪中五篇諸罪非是佛制，明一切罪皆是佛制，先制盜戒，次制殺戒、飲酒、妄語，後制邪婬。以制婬中問答重顯，故迴在後。就制盜中，句別有三：一總舉偷蘭勸人莫親、二「何等」下三番別顯、三「如是比丘名無根」下總呵顯過。制殺等中，文相可知。下制婬戒，即是翻上行婬非過，明是過矣。初先正制，「迦葉白」下問答重顯，先問、後答。答中，初先正答前問，明夢不犯。下乘教之，句別有五：一教於婬欲當生穢想；二教於女人莫生愛想；三夢行婬已教生悔意；四教比丘生厭食想，食是婬因故教厭之；五若生婬心，教疾捨離。「如是」下結。下明受人。

From here below, the fourth [part] re-elucidates the meaning of having an infraction spoken of above. Therein, it first says: "Transgressing a duṣkṛta, one falls into hell for eight million years in the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven, how much more so for a sthūlātyaya!" This overturns the claim in the deviant [teachings] above that falling into hell for eight million years for a duṣkṛta is the Tathāgata frightening people; therefore, it now clarifies that one truly falls, and this is not false. Raising the light to contrast with the grave, it therefore says: "How much more so intentionally committing a sthūlātyaya!" Here, grave offenses are called sthūlātyaya in general, not merely preliminary offenses. From "This Mahāyāna" below, it overturns the claim in the deviant [teachings] above that the offenses of the five classes are not instituted by the Buddha, clarifying that all offenses were instituted by the Buddha: first instituting the precept against stealing, next instituting the precepts against killing, drinking alcohol, and false speech, and afterward instituting [the precept against] sexual misconduct. Because the question and answer within instituting [the precept against] sexual misconduct re-elucidates it, it is turned to the end. Concerning instituting [the precept against] stealing, there are three distinct phrases: first, generally raising sthūlātyaya to admonish people not to associate with them; second, from "What are" below, specifically revealing them in three turns; third, from "Such a monk is called rootless" below, generally rebuking them to reveal the fault. In instituting [the precepts against] killing and the rest, the textual phrasing can be understood. Below, instituting the precept against sexual misconduct is precisely the overturning of the claim above that engaging in sexual desire is not a fault, clarifying that it is a fault. First, it directly institutes it; from "Kāśyapa addressed [the Buddha]" below, the question and answer re-elucidates it, first questioning, then answering. In the answer, it first directly answers the preceding question, clarifying that [emissions in] dreams are not an infraction. Below, taking the occasion to instruct them, there are five distinct phrases: first, instructing that regarding sexual desire one should arouse the perception of foulness; second, instructing that regarding women one should not arouse the perception of love; third, instructing to arouse thoughts of repentance after having engaged in sexual conduct in a dream; fourth, instructing the monk to arouse the perception of repulsive food, since food is a cause of sexual desire and therefore instructing them to feel repulsion toward it; fifth, if a lustful mind arises, instructing to quickly abandon it. From "Thus" below, it concludes. Below, it clarifies receiving people.