大般涅槃經義記 9.184

9.184

第十六門諍其五戒及與八戒具不具得。餘對皆悉共諍一法，今此乃於二種法中別起二諍。拷實具論，五戒門中別有兩諍，八戒亦爾。五中二者，依如《毘曇》，五戒要須具受乃得。但就持中，或持一者名為一分，持二戒者名為少分，持三持四名為多分，備持五戒名為具足。不畜妻者名為斷婬。若依《成實》及《大智論》，分受亦得。受一戒者名為一分，受二小分，受三受四名為多分，全受名具。加不畜妻名為斷婬。今此偏舉《成實》一諍，《毘曇》所立略而不舉。道理如何？受五戒者亦有分得、不分得義。是義云何？受五戒時先歸三寶，歸三寶時具得成體，名為具得。如昔比丘三語得戒，後列戒相，問能時不別舉別問，若堪持者答言能持、若不堪者答言不能，約就此時名不具得。義既如是，《毘曇》法中聞三歸時全得戒體，便言戒相亦不分得，所以成諍。《成實》法中聞列戒相隨堪分受，謂體亦爾，所以成諍。文中有三：一釋摩男請問如來優婆塞義，如來為解；二摩男重請一分之義，如來為釋；三人聞起諍。五戒之義，廣如別章，此應具論。就八戒中，准依餘論具有兩諍。《毘曇》所說八戒必須一日一夜具受乃得，不得增減；《成實》所說且言日夜，多少皆得。今此偏舉《毘曇》一諍，成實不論。道理如何？八戒齋中亦有具得、不具得義。若論受齋，局唯在於一日一夜，名為具得，一日一夜是齋分故。若直受戒，時分不定名不具得。義既如是，《毘曇》法中聞齋日夜，謂戒亦然，所以成諍。《成實》法中聞戒不定，謂齋亦爾，所以成諍。文中，迦旃初舉己說，問佛是非。次佛為辨，「或一日」等，但得戒善，不名得齋，一日一夜方成齋故。下明弟子不解起諍。八戒之義廣如別章，此應具論。

The sixteenth section discusses the dispute over whether receiving the five precepts and the eight precepts can be partial or must be complete. While other pairs all disputed over a single dharma, here two distinct disputes arise over two kinds of dharmas. When thoroughly and fully discussed, there are two distinct disputes within the category of the five precepts, and likewise for the eight precepts. As for the two within the five precepts: according to the Abhidharma, the five precepts must necessarily be received in their entirety to be acquired; but regarding upholding them, upholding one is called a 'single portion', upholding two is called a 'minor portion', upholding three or four is called a 'major portion', and fully upholding the five precepts is called 'complete'; not keeping a wife is called 'cutting off sexual intercourse'. However, according to the *Tattvasiddhi* (*Chengshi*) and the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* (*Dazhidu lun*), partial reception is also admissible: receiving one precept is called a 'single portion', receiving two is a 'minor portion', receiving three or four is a 'major portion', receiving all is called 'complete', and adding the non-keeping of a wife is called 'cutting off sexual intercourse'. Here, only the one dispute from the *Tattvasiddhi* is cited, while the position established by the Abhidharma is omitted. What is the principle here? For those who receive the five precepts, there are indeed both senses of partial acquisition and non-partial acquisition. What does this mean? When receiving the five precepts, one first takes refuge in the Three Jewels; when taking refuge in the Three Jewels, one completely acquires the essence [of the precepts], which is termed 'complete acquisition'. Just as monks of old acquired the precepts through the threefold recitation. Later, when the characteristics of the precepts are enumerated and one's capability is questioned, each is not individually cited and separately questioned: if one is able to uphold it, one answers 'I can uphold it'; if one is unable, one answers 'I cannot'—in terms of this moment, it is termed 'incomplete acquisition'. Since the principle is like this, in the Abhidharma tradition, upon hearing that the entire essence of the precepts is acquired at the time of the three refuges, they said that the characteristics of the precepts cannot be partially acquired either; hence the dispute arose. In the *Tattvasiddhi* tradition, upon hearing that the characteristics of the precepts are enumerated and one can partially receive them according to capability, they took the essence to be likewise; hence the dispute arose. In the text there are three parts: first, Śākya Mahānāman inquires of the Tathāgata regarding the meaning of an upāsaka, and the Tathāgata explains it; second, Mahānāman again inquires about the meaning of a 'single portion', and the Tathāgata explains it; third, when people hear this, disputes arise. The meaning of the five precepts is explained at length in a separate chapter; it should be fully discussed there. Regarding the eight precepts: following other treatises, there are also two disputes. What the Abhidharma explains is that the eight precepts must be received completely for a single day and single night to be acquired, and cannot be increased or decreased; what the *Tattvasiddhi* explains is that a day and night is spoken of provisionally, but whether more or less, both are acquired. Here, only the one dispute from the Abhidharma is cited, while the *Tattvasiddhi* is not discussed. What is the principle here? In the eight precepts of the posadha (observance), there are also both senses of complete acquisition and incomplete acquisition. If one speaks of receiving the poṣadha, it is strictly confined to a single day and a single night; this is termed 'complete acquisition', because a single day and a single night constitutes the portion of a poṣadha. If one merely receives the precepts without a fixed period of time, it is termed 'incomplete acquisition'. Since the principle is like this, in the Abhidharma tradition, upon hearing that the poṣadha is for a day and night, they thought the precepts were also thus; hence the dispute arose. In the *Tattvasiddhi* tradition, upon hearing that the precepts are indeterminate in time, they thought the poṣadha was also thus; hence the dispute arose. In the text, Kātyāyana first brings up what he himself taught and asks the Buddha whether it is right or wrong. Next, the Buddha clarifies for him: 'for a day' and so forth only acquires the good of the precepts, but is not called acquiring the poṣadha, because only a single day and a single night constitutes a poṣadha. Below, it explains that the disciples do not understand and disputes arise. The meaning of the eight precepts is explained at length in a separate chapter; it should be fully discussed there.