四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.1

Compiled by the Śramaṇa Shi Daoxuan of Chongyi Monastery in the Capital.

2.2

Chapter 13: Names and Retributions of the Classes and Categories of Offenses

2.3

Chapter 14: Explaining Marks According to the Precepts

2.4

Chapter 15: Patterns and Standards for Observance and Transgression

2.5

Chapter 16: Methods for Confessing the Six Categories of Offenses

2.6

Chapter 13: Names and Retributions of the Classes and Categories of Offenses

The reason why the five groups who have left the secular world serve as fertile fields for the world is truly due to the precept essence! Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: 'Receiving and maintaining the prohibitory precepts is the essence; shaving the hair and dyeing the robes are the outward marks.' Now, if one purifies one's mind like ice and moistens one's virtue like jade, one will then be able to produce good seeds and be called a field of merit; otherwise, indulging and resisting, one brings grief upon oneself, incurring the guilt of the six categories of offenses and suffering retribution in the sixteen hells. Thus the five classes clarify offenses, so that transgressing, observing, and practicing naturally establish themselves; the seven categories illuminate observance, so that keeping in accord with observance causes all offenses to be invisibly eliminated. Yet beginners are mostly ignorant and dull; not yet knowing the rules and regulations, how can they distinguish the statutes? Regarding the precepts, their confusion is like wandering in fog, and their view of the retribution of offenses is like looking out over the sea. This causes them to drift far downstream, forgetting to return out of greed for a drop of honey; while accumulating heavy karma, how could they transcend, awaken, and know to return? Therefore the Vinayamātṛkā states: 'When monks and nuns break the prohibitions yet accept offerings, if they do not receive [the retribution] in the present, it is because they are headed for hell!' Thus karma forms according to the mind, and retribution materializes following the mind; one must first spread out causes and effects and extensively clarify their marks and designations, so that Buddha-sons who observe the precepts may observe the results and recognize the causes. Therein, first clarify that precept protection is the root of transgression and loss; afterward clarify the marks of the names and retributions of the classes and categories.

2.8

First, the reason why the retribution for breaking precepts and the sinful karma are extremely grave is that precept protection is supreme among the generation of goodness and its establishment of merit is mighty; therefore violating and damaging it brings about grave retribution. The Vinayavibhāṣā describes many varieties of precept protection, which shall now be briefly cited. That which resides in the mind is called protection; that which resides in body and speech is called precept. Having protection does not necessarily entail having precepts, but having precepts must certainly be protection, and so forth. In the sūtras, the Buddha's praises of one who has obtained precept protection contain many phrases, briefly summarized into eight kinds: First, like a prince born to a king who is revered by the people; one who has obtained precept protection is born into the noble lineage and will certainly attain holiness in the future, like succeeding to the royal throne. Second, like the moonlight gradually becoming full; precept protection is likewise, with all virtues and merits increasing in due season, up to obtaining the knowledge and vision of liberation. Third, like a person obtaining a wish-fulfilling jewel, where whatever is wished for bears fruit; one who has obtained precept protection, wishing to be born in good realms or even attain bodhi, will certainly be able to obtain it. Fourth, like a king's only son, cherished so that he may succeed to the throne; one who has obtained precept protection, by virtue of precept protection, will certainly attain holiness, so reasonably it must be cherished and not damaged. Fifth, like a person with only one eye, cherishing it most heavily; this person is likewise, because of precept protection, able to leave birth-and-death and attain nirvāṇa. Sixth, like a poor worldly person cherishing a little sustenance; because of cherishing the precepts, one thereby obtains the life of wisdom. Seventh, like a king endowed with three things who then loves his kingdom: first, abundant wealth; second, sensory pleasures; third, the true Dharma; one who has obtained precept protection is likewise, abiding within precept protection with immeasurable merits, his mind peaceful without sorrow or regret, producing and growing the true Dharma. Eighth, like a sick person obtaining good medicine; precept protection is likewise, not to be cast aside, because through it one leaves all evils behind. Such causes and conditions make its merit and karma deep and weighty; it must not be lightly violated, for violating it brings about great sin.

2.9

Second, listing names and explaining statuses. This is divided into two: first, clarifying the classes and categories; second, clarifying the karmic retributions.

2.10

In the first, the five classes and seven categories are distinguished according to their nuances of meaning; when directly enacting penalties for offenses, only six standards are established. Now, relying on the six categories, their names will be explained: first, pārājika; second, saṃghāvaśeṣa; third, sthūlātyaya; fourth, pāyattika; fifth, pratideśanīya; sixth, duṣkṛta. The above six names lack direct Chinese translations; they are only translated by their meaning so as to provide a rough understanding of the path.

2.11

First, pārājika: the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya takes its meaning to be extreme evil. It is explained with three meanings: First, falling back and submerging, because by committing this offense one has no share in the fruits of the Path. Second, non-cohabitation, because not only does one lose the Path, but one no longer enters into the count of either of the two kinds of saṃgha. Third, falling down, because after relinquishing this body, one falls into the Avīci hell. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya says: falling into an undesirable place. The Sarvāstivāda explains: from fighting with Māra, by committing this offense, one immediately falls into defeat. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says: pārājika is like severing a person's head, which cannot be restored; if one commits this offense, one is no longer a bhikṣu; this is named after the practice being rendered unusable. It also says: pārājika means without remainder; this is named after having one's share cut off from communal acts; hence the verse says: 'Those who commit evil deeds / Are just like a corpse, / Not tolerated by the community; / Therefore one must maintain the precepts.' It is also called non-cohabitation because one may not cohabit within the two kinds of saṃgha of upoṣadha recitation and karman.

2.12

Question: Above it was said that if one commits this offense, it is termed decapitation. Judging by this, there can certainly be no repeated offense, nor do the precepts remain. Answer: Regarding the presence or absence of the precepts, this enters into doctrinal debate. In the Samyuktābhidharma-hṛdaya, it is explained: The precepts exist; they are not absent. If one discusses repeated offenses, the vinaya itself clearly determines it: in accordance with how many times one offends, each single one is a pārājika. In this class, the initial four precepts are distinct from one another: depending on repeated offenses of sexual intercourse, there are numerous repeated offenses; for the remaining offenses of theft, killing, and false speech, repeated offenses are also like this. This refers to the prātimokṣa precepts: because the objects and conditions are distinct, the precepts obtained are not the same; therefore, when one subsequently offends, it still accords with distinct offenses. As the Sarvāstivāda says: "It is better to arouse all precepts at one time, but one cannot violate all precepts at one time." Taking the precept against sexual intercourse as an example, on a woman's body one gives rise to and obtains twenty-one precepts, and on a man's body one obtains fourteen precepts; the same applies to men and women in the rest of the dharma-realm. Now, if out of a greedy mind one offends against one path of one woman, this is merely termed defiling one precept against sexual intercourse; for the bhikṣu, all the other precepts against sexual intercourse remain radiant and pure in their precept essence, with no conduct contrary to them, matching the essence originally received. Just as when one repents for the first class, one returns to purity; it is not said that one must receive them again, because the original precepts remain. Furthermore, as the vinaya states: striking or slandering a bhikṣu who has committed a grave offense both incur pāyattika offenses; if he had no precepts, it would merely be equivalent to a duṣkṛta. Question: Should he count toward the quorum and not be called "decapitated"? Answer: When repented, he is fundamentally pure, and in principle should count toward the quorum, such as being able to perform upoṣadha recitation, pravāraṇā karmans, and so forth; however, because the emotional fault was deep and grave, he is unfit for the saṃgha's formal use; hence it is said that "his coming is not as he pleases." The metaphor of decapitation is spoken with respect to not attaining the noble fruits. Question: Although the precept against sexual intercourse is defiled, it is merely termed a transgression of the precept; in what text does this appear? Answer: It has already been clearly shown above. Its features will be set out in greater detail, as explained below in the "Repentance Methods"; the precept essence certainly remains, eternally pure. In the world, there are people who, having violated a single precept against sexual intercourse, are initially terrified, but later reflect and delusively think that they have lost their precepts; consequently, following along uniformly, they commit all other faults. Is this not because of being ignorant of the net of the teaching and causing themselves to sink into worldly vulgarity? How could they know that having committed only one sexual offense, they have not committed any of the other sexual offenses at all? The killing and stealing within this class remain dignified and constantly pure; the five categories below are in principle the same as when first received. Therefore, companions of the same Dharma must carefully examine this. If one first purifies consciousness, when confronting the five dust-objects, defilement of desire will not arise due to prior expedient means. If originally one does not collect one's thoughts, when facing the objects one cannot help but offend. Once an offense is committed and the karma completed, one must conceal nothing, quickly repent, return to original purity, and enter the ranks of the saṃgha. If one is confused about what was set forth above, harbored faults in secret, failed to take part in saṃgha affairs, losing both wealth and Dharma, and then brazenly accepted offerings, defaulting toward both oneself and others—how is that not lamentable! Is it not a great mistake! Question: If sexual conduct is already defiled while all other precepts remain intact, why does one not attain the noble stage? Answer: The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: of these four grave precepts, whenever one grave precept is broken, the remaining portions of the precepts are powerless in their function; just as in a human body there are four places where death can occur, whenever one place is damaged, bodily life immediately dies. Because the power of the precepts is weakened, they do not engender concentration and wisdom. The Daśacakra states: if one commits the four grave offenses, ruins the Dharma, and slanders the noble ones, at death one enters Avīci; such a person, within that single lifetime, cannot exhaust their fetters and will certainly fall into the evil destinies. If there is one who leaves home within my Dharma, upholds the fundamental precepts, and is constantly diligent and courageous, all offerings will never be received in vain. Why is this? Because with the intention to seek liberation, even at the cost of life, they will never commit a breach. Why is this? Because the four fundamentals are what the three vehicles rely and abide upon.

2.13

In the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya: bhikṣuṇīs have eight pārājikas; the first four are identical to those of the fully ordained monks, and the latter four are as explained in the "Special Section".

2.14

In the Daśādhyāya-vinaya, repeated offenses differ from this vinaya. For offenses of the same name, there are repeated offenses; for offenses of the same type, there are no repeated offenses. This is spoken with reference to the first class. Therefore the text says: for a śrāmaṇera studying repentance who commits a saṃghāvaśeṣa, he is made to practice concealment in the successive saṃgha, and undergo the mānatva of six nights for rehabilitation, and so forth. The rest is as explained in the sections on other schools.

2.15

The Vinayavibhāṣā states: "In the vinaya it is said that offenses have five divisions." It explains: here [in China] they are called classes (piān). Now, relying on the original meaning, the name "divisions" (bù) is established. There are two meanings: first, the meaning of fulfilling the fundamental; second, the meaning of according with the fundamental. The first, the pārājika division, has sixteen offenses. It explains: each one has four divisions, forming sixteen offenses. The first is the distant preliminary expedient: as when engaging in sexual intercourse, one first gives rise to the thought but has not yet moved body or mouth; it is eliminated by reproving the mind. The second is the intermediate preliminary expedient: that is, moving the body toward that person, or speaking with the mouth expressing the desire to do it; this is eliminated by repenting before another person; they are generically called duṣkṛta. The third is the proximate preliminary expedient: arriving at the side of that person, or desiring to touch them, before the bodies have joined; this is a sthūlātyaya; because one touches with the expectation of engaging in sexual intercourse, not for the sake of amusement, it forms a sthūlātyaya and does not form a saṃghāvaśeṣa; this offense is repented before another person. The fourth is bodily intercourse, which is the fundamental. The preceding three preliminaries are all for the sake of completion; hence they are called "divisions." If the fundamental is not yet completed, the preceding three can be repented; if it is already completed, the preceding three follow the fundamental, and none can be repented; this is the meaning of "according with [the fundamental]". The other three [grave offenses] are modeled on this division. In the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, it is merely said that what is completed is a pārājika, and what is uncompleted is a sthūlātyaya. If one follows the Daśādhyāya-vinaya, then sthūlātyayas are divided into light and heavy. In the Vinayavibhāṣā, only a single grade is designated. However, the essences of sthūlātyaya and duṣkṛta apply across both; one should understand them by analogous explanation. This will be discussed further as in the "Repentance Methods".

2.16

The second is the saṃghāvaśeṣa category. The Samantapāsādikā states: saṃgha means the saṃgha; va means initial, referring to the saṃgha first giving the concealment karman; speaking of śeṣa, it means remainder, referring to giving the rehabilitation karman at the end. If one commits this offense, it is removed through the saṃgha's performing legal acts; therefore, the name is established from the object. The Vibhāṣā states: saṃgha means the saṃgha; vaśeṣa is remainder. If one commits this offense, defilement entangles the practitioner, and he cannot be entirely fit for pure use. Offenses with a remainder are eliminated and extinguished by the saṃgha. In the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, it directly explains saṃghāvaśeṣa, which accomplishes the above explanation; it also says "having a remainder," naming it from the fact that his religious practice is not cut off. The Vinayamātṛkā states: saṃghāvaśeṣa is like a person who has been hacked by another, with only the throat remaining; hence it is called "remainder." In principle, one must rescue him early. Therefore the precepts and vinaya say: if one commits this offense, one should forcibly grant parivāsa and so forth, because it borders on the grave offenses. In terms of its types, there are thirteen; for monks, they are as in "Observing the Manifestations"; for nuns, there are seventeen, six different and seven the same, in detail as in the "Separate Explanations". The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: the second, the saṃghātiśeṣa division, has fifty-two offenses. The various schools explain this offense differently. This is of the Sammatīya school, where the name has three meanings; the Sarvāstivāda school calls it saṃghāvaśeṣa, which shares one meaning with the Sammatīya school. It explains: through the harmony of precepts, views, and the assembly of people, that is the meaning of saṃgha. Because of these two [precepts and views] being no different, not due to concentration and wisdom, the precepts established by the Buddha are why it says "precepts in common"; sharing the same right view is why it says "views in common." Vaśeṣa means remainder; if one commits this offense, when receiving lodgings and offerings within the saṃgha, among the superior, middling, and inferior, he is at the very outermost; hence it is called "remainder." Mānatva is translated as "gladdening the minds of the assembly"; according with the instructions of the saṃgha, all cherish joy. Āhvāna is translated as "calling into the assembly." The Sammatīya school's [explanation of] tiśeṣa has three meanings: the first is as explained previously; the second is the meaning of rescue, meaning that by being delivered by the saṃgha, one can escape this offense; the third is the meaning of superiority: when newly committing the offense, one becomes an inferior person; through being delivered by the saṃgha, one regains purity, going from inferior to superior.

2.17

The third is the sthūlātyaya category. The Samantapāsādikā states: sthūla means great; atyaya means obstructing the wholesome path; subsequently one falls into evil destinies, its essence being base and vile; establishing the name from its unwholesome essence is because it can complete the offenses of the first two classes; it is also translated as great offense, and also called coarse evil. The Śabdavidyā states: the correct pronunciation is sthūla. The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: sthūla is coarse; atyaya is transgression. There are two kinds of coarseness: first, being the preliminary expedient for a grave offense; second, being able to cut off wholesome roots. What is meant by transgression is not acting in accordance with the precepts established by the Buddha, hence it is called transgression; just like an ox breaking through a fence and hedge, going outside the boundary of the monastic household. However, the name transgression also has a generic meaning. This offense is a transgression when first committed, and subsequent ones take their name from the first; just as a subsequent ox following the former ox also crosses the boundary. However, the single category of sthūlātyaya encompasses offenses both principal and secondary, and its essence combines light and heavy; when the vinaya lists seven categories or six categories, both contain sthūlātyaya; whether placed above or below, there is indeed a reason. In the vinaya, it is sometimes placed next after saṃghāvaśeṣa because it is subsumed under the precept portion, and the offense is termed heavy; such as the distant and proximate preliminaries of the first two classes, as well as independent principal offenses, schism in the saṃgha, stealing four [māṣas], and the like. Sometimes it is placed below pratideśanīya, and then it is subsumed under deportment, and the offense is termed light; such as the distant preliminary of the second class, and light independent offenses, meaning being naked, using hair, and the like. However, precept and deportment are mutually referenced in general and specific terms. In general, they are precepts; when precepts are without deportment, both are called violating precepts. If discussed specifically, the faults of the top three classes are coarse and prominent, and the antidotes are called precepts; the faults of the lower four are light, and the antidotes of conduct are called deportment. If distinguished by uniform and mixed: the first four are uniform, being nothing other than principal karmic results; the lower three are mixed, spanning both light and causal; however, sthūlātyaya is the heaviest among the mixed, so it is in fifth place.

2.18

The fourth is the pāyattika category. Its meaning is translated as "falling." The Daśādhyāya-vinaya states: because one falls into the hell of burning, boiling, and obscurity. In the Dharmaguptaka: monks have one hundred and twenty kinds; thirty are taken separately because they arise from material things, where greedy and arrogant minds are strong, so it is prescribed that they be forfeited to the saṃgha, hence they are called niḥsargika; the remaining ninety are repented solely before another person; in terms of the essence of the offense, they are repented under the same grade. The two hundred and eight precepts of nuns enter the third class: thirty are forfeiture and falling, and the rest enter separate repentance; the differences and similarities of types and features are as shown in the "Special Section". The Rules of the Essentials of Vinaya states: niḥsargika was traditionally translated as forfeiture and falling. The Śabdavidyā states: ni is translated as complete; sargika as forfeiture; pāyattika was originally called prāyaścitta. The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: the prāyaścittika division has three hundred and sixty offenses. The Sammatīya school translates it as "requiring exertion," explained with three meanings: first, the offenses are mostly light and subtle, hard to recognize whether intact or broken; second, natural offenses and prohibitory offenses; third, for those who readily break them, exertion should be made as an antidote, not letting them spread widely. The Sarvāstivāda says: prāyaścittika is translated as "requiring an antidote"; one must constantly reflect, and if one commits it, immediately become aware. The Sthavira school says: prāyaścittika is translated as "able to burn"; this offense incurs the Mahāraurava Hell; in the causal stage it can scorch the mind, and in the fruitional stage it can incinerate sentient beings. It has only three divisions, with two preliminaries. With thirty and ninety, there are therefore one hundred and twenty. There is no sthūlātyaya, but two duṣkṛtas.

2.19

Fifth is the category of prātideśanīya. Meaning-wise, it is translated as 'repenting towards another', named after the object towards which one makes remedy. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'This offense must be disclosed.' That is, the wording for repenting the fault is set out in full in the prātimokṣa. There are four types for monks, as detailed below; there are eight types for nuns, entirely different from those for monks. The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: 'The fourth class, the prātideśanīya, contains twelve offenses; it is translated as "that which ought to be spoken facing each [person]", meaning to speak of the deed done facing another person.'

2.20

Sixth is the category of duṣkṛta. The Samantapāsādikā states: 'Du means bad; kṛta means done.' The Śabda treatises give the correct phonetics as duṣkṛta. The prātimokṣa of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya calls it śikṣākaraṇīya; translated by meaning, it is 'ought to be trained in'; Central Asian monks say it means 'guarding the precepts'. Because this offense is subtle and extremely difficult to uphold, it is named after training as one goes and guarding as one goes. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya states: 'With the divine eye one sees offending bhikṣus [falling] like torrential rain.' Is it not precisely when one focuses intently on this in mind that it can be called guarding the precepts? In this Vinaya there are one hundred rules of training; the rules for nuns refer identically to those of the fully ordained monks. Among the seven categories, this single class is divided into two categories: bodily [actions] are called bad actions (duṣkṛta), and vocal [actions] are called bad speech (durbhāṣita). Or some say that duṣkṛta is bad speech; there must be an analytical explanation for this, as stated in the Commentary. The Vinayavibhāṣā explains: 'All remaining offenses not subsumed under the four classes—those of training rules, and the offenses spoken of in the Vastu Vinaya—are entirely subsumed under the fifth class, duṣkṛta.' This is the name used by the Saṃmatīya school. Because they do not distinguish separate bodily and vocal karmas, the meaning is translated as bad action. The Sarvāstivāda uses duṣkṛta for both bodily and vocal karmas, translating it as bad action. Although they share a single translation, their meanings are twofold. In distinguishing between heavy and light, the heavy is called duṣkṛta, and the light is called training rule. The Sanskrit sound is śikṣākaraṇīya, and the vernacular pronunciation in the Central Region is śikhākaraṇīya, both translated as training rule. If bodily and vocal actions are not engaged, it is light, and is eradicated through mental self-reproach; if bodily and vocal actions are engaged, it is heavy, and is only eradicated facing another person. In this land, people do not understand how to distinguish light and heavy and generally call them all 'rules of training'—this is an error. If it arises merely in the realm of the mind, there is no preliminary stage; if bodily and vocal actions are engaged, there are two preliminary stages, distant and proximate; if one repents the root, the preliminary stages are eradicated accordingly. For a heavy offense, one reproaches one's mind heavily; for a light offense, one merely says, 'I should not have given rise to such a thought'—this is called the repentance method of mental self-reproach. It also applies generally below. The precepts of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya are summarized overall into two hundred and fifty, which serve as the essential guideline.

2.21

The above has already listed them in full according to classes and categories, and roughly explained the terms. As for what remains unexhausted: the two undetermined matters (aniyata) are spoken of in reliance on circumstantial objects, generally encompassing the six categories; if one considers the offense essence, giving rise to doubt and lacking faith is a duṣkṛta. That the text specifies three offenses or two offenses merely raises instances that give rise to doubt; this is extensively described in the Commentary. Among the seven settlements of disputes (adhikaraṇa-śamatha), offenses also generally occur. But because monks dispute over the four disputes and are not in harmony with one another, seven remedies are instituted to eliminate them. Since the textual meanings are extensive and the principles and aspects are profound, laboring in vain to explain them would never exhaust them; therefore they are briefly omitted. Yet the count is the same for monks and nuns, together forming common precepts.

2.22

Question: On what grounds are the five classes and seven categories divided or combined? What was clarified above only spoke of six categories. Answer: As for establishing five classes, that which is clarified by the proper school in the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya speaks only of five kinds of offenses, five kinds of prohibitions, and five offense categories. The six categories and seven categories are found in the later text of the Dharmaguptaka. Now, to distinguish the difference between seven and five: if three characteristics are fully present, it falls into the five—first, the names are equal; second, the essences are equal; third, the consummations are equal. If these three are not fully present, they are subsumed broadly into the categories. That six and seven differ also has doctrinal significance: in the six, duṣkṛta is combined because the essence is identical; in the seven, bad speech is separated because the faults are numerous. Question: Above, you fully laid out the names and essences of the six categories; please explain the names and characteristics of the five classes and seven categories. Answer: As for the names of the five classes: first, pārājika; second, saṃghāvaśeṣa; third, pāyattika; fourth, prātideśanīya; fifth, duṣkṛta. As for the seven categories: first, pārājika; second, saṃghāvaśeṣa; third, sthūlātyaya; fourth, pāyattika; fifth, prātideśanīya; sixth, duṣkṛta; seventh, bad speech (durbhāṣita). These two sets of names are listed provisionally; they are explained extensively in the Commentary on the Prātimokṣa. Question: In the Vinaya, monks are listed with two hundred and fifty precepts, fully present in the prātimokṣa; nuns are listed with five hundred. Is this statement literal or figurative? Answer: Both lists of fixed numbers are spoken approximately; hence all schools agree that one need not rely strictly on the number. In terms of their precept essence, there is only a single unmanifest karma (avijñapti); explaining their characteristics in relation to objects, they are as numerous as dust and sand—two hundred and fifty are merely pointed to as a guiding path for observance and transgression. In the Vinaya, nuns have three hundred and forty-eight precepts, which may be pointed to as what is guarded against. Now, according to the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: 'The rules for receiving the precepts for nuns are briefly five hundred, and extensively spoken of as eighty thousand; for monks, they are briefly two hundred and fifty, and extensively identical with the nun's discipline.'

2.23

Second, clarifying the karmic retributions of what has been transgressed. This is divided into two: first, examining the light and heavy nature of the karma generated; second, citing texts to prove the future retribution.

2.24

In the first part: the generation of karma necessarily arises relying on the three poisons; but that from which the poisons arise takes the self-centered mind as its root. This principle is extensively expounded, and practitioners must know it; as in the repentance rituals, the aspects of karma are fully explained. Now, briefly stating the generation of offenses, they necessarily arise according to the three natures; the depth of the retribution received is fundamentally determined entirely by mental karma. Therefore the Vinayavibhāṣā explains: 'When breaking precepts and incurring offenses, the weight is not fixed. With a heavy mind, breaking a light precept incurs a heavy offense: with a mind devoid of shame, acting without dread; or arising from false views, claiming there is no cause and effect; or arising from lack of faith, claiming the Buddha did not institute this precept, or not believing that breaking this precept incurs this retribution; or arising from doubt—was it definitely instituted by the Buddha, or not instituted by the Buddha? Does it definitely incur retribution, or not definitely incur retribution? If one breaks it with such a mind, the offense incurred is heavy. If one does not break it with such a mind, and transgresses the precept accidentally, what is heavy turns to light.' Now, following the three natures, the aspects of offenses are fully listed.

2.25

First is transgressing precepts with a wholesome mind. For example, as in the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya: an administrative bhikṣu, ignorant of the precept characteristics, intermingled and used property of the Three Jewels; whatever was violated, all were pārājikas. Or seeing another person weary of life, one provides them with instruments of death; or watching laypeople slaughter living beings, one instructs them to kill them quickly so as not to cause them suffering. These all constitute creating offenses with a mind of compassion, yet the circumstantial object violated is heavy. One is not permitted non-transgression simply due to ignorance; because it could have been learned, all are established as root offenses. This is just as the Vinaya text says: 'Ignorant pārājika, down to duṣkṛta, is also like this.' Furthermore, as the Sarvāstivāda says: 'A young bhikṣu, not knowing the precept characteristics, pulled up grass on a stūpa; he obtained both offense and merit.' If discussing the future retribution, the suffering received is light; because of the original wholesome intention, it does not add further torment; yet he does not escape hell, because of violating the received essence. If one violates a natural precept, one fully incurs two offenses: that of the karmic path and that of violating the prohibition; if one violates a prohibitory precept, such as destroying grass and trees, one incurs only a single offense, because originally it was not prohibited in the teaching of conversion. There is no sentient being to be harmed; if one later repents and purifies it, one returns to original purity, unlike violating natural precepts. This is extensively explained below in the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa.

2.26

Second is the unwholesome mind. This means knowing and understanding the precept characteristics, or being unlearned; slighting the net of teaching and disparaging the Buddha's words. As the Vinayavibhāṣā states: 'There are four kinds of coarse, evil statements that constitute offenses: first, a turbid and heavy mind of greed, hatred, and delusion; second, lack of faith in karmic retribution; third, not cherishing the precepts received; fourth, slighting the Buddha's words; intentionally committing them brings heavy retributions.' Corroborated by this text, because there is no shame and from the beginning no reform or repentance, this is an unwholesome mind. Thus the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra states: 'Killing an ant with a harmful mind is heavier than killing a person with a compassionate mind.' Because the root karma is heavy, one definitely receives retribution; even if one repents the pāyattika offense, the karmic path is not eliminated. As in the Daśādhyāya-vinaya: Devadatta caused a schism in the saṃgha, and after committing a sthūlātyaya, the Buddha had him repent it within the saṃgha, yet as for the karmic path, he still fell into Avīci. Thus the Niraya-sūtra states: 'First, the commitment of karma is fixed; second, the reception of retribution is fixed; the spiritual power of all Buddhas cannot overturn them.' This is extensively set forth at the end of the roll.

2.27

Third is transgressing with an indeterminate mind. This means that from the start one does not exercise restraint, following the flow and indulging one's impulses; the intention is neither good nor bad, acting casually. For example, when a bhikṣu sits down, engaging in high-flown talk and idle chatter, wasting time and harming spiritual work, giving free rein to body and mouth; or hands and feet harming grass, trees, and soil; or brokering a marriage among the saṃgha; or improperly using saṃgha property; or keeping extra robes beyond the limit; or entering the lay settlement at an improper time; or touching saṃgha vessels with one's hands, spoiling the deportment of body and mouth. Numerous instances like these all generally fall into transgressions. The only exception is when one constantly harbors mindfulness of guarding [the precepts], yet commits them through mistaken forgetfulness; this is not prompted by intention and does not incur future karma. It is not like the cases above. Where there was previously a preliminary stage, and afterwards sleep, drunkenness, or madness, an action resulting in a karmic fruit is consummated; taking into account the prior intention to establish the root offense, this is just as explained in the treatises regarding the indeterminate incurring retribution. Question: Since the indeterminate lacks karmic potency, how can it have retribution? Answer: There are two explanations. First, in saying it incurs retribution, it means there was previously a preliminary stage, and afterwards one entered an indeterminate state; since the karma was completed during the indeterminate mind, it is said to incur retribution, but in reality the indeterminate does not yield karmic fruition. Second, it does not incur the general retribution, but it does not mean one does not receive particular retributions. For example, in the sūtra a dhūta bhikṣu unintentionally killed a living being; when that being ended its life, it was reborn as a wild boar, and when a boulder was dislodged on a mountain, it tumbled down and killed the bhikṣu in return. Furthermore, as in the Five Hundred Questions: an administrative monk mistakenly touched a pure vessel and became a dung-eating ghost, and so forth. As in the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra: 'Karma accomplished during sleep is indeterminate karma.' Question: In the case of indeterminate states mentioned earlier where there is no transgression, what are their characteristics? Answer: This was already briefly clarified earlier, and is now shown more extensively. It refers to someone who has learned and knows the precept characteristics, understands well observance and transgression, and whose mind is always vigilant; occasionally forgetting or confused, because it is not an object of intention, it is allowed as non-transgression. For instance, keeping an extra robe past the day because of forgetting to perform the purification of speech; well restraining the sense faculties, yet having seminal emission during sleep; or carrying wood and stones, and accidentally slipping and killing a person. Circumstances such as these are not within the limits of culpability. Conversely, whatever falls outside of such mindsets is established as a root transgression. However, the suffering of karma accumulates unceasingly, and the births received are endless; vainly indulging body and mouth, defiling the dusty realms; having none of the three wholesome paths to cleave to, one only adds to the wheel of suffering of the three evil destinies; to spend one's life like this is truly lamentable.

2.28

Second, citing textual proof for the actual retribution. As the Sūtra of Maudgalyāyana Inquiring About the Retribution for Offenses states: 'If a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī, lacking a sense of shame and conscience and treating the Buddha's words with contempt, commits a duṣkṛta offense of the saṃbahulāḥ śikṣā-karaṇīyāḥ, they fall into Avīci for [a span equivalent to] a lifespan of five hundred years in the heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, which counts in human reckoning as nine hundred thousand years. For the second, prātideśanīya, [the span is] like a lifespan of one thousand years in the Heaven of the Thirty-Three, counting in human reckoning as 3,600,000 years falling into hell. For the third, pāyattika, it is like a lifespan of two thousand years in the Yāma Heaven, counting in human reckoning as 21,400,000 years. For the fourth, sthūlātyaya, it is like a lifespan of four thousand years in the Tuṣita Heaven, counting in human reckoning as 50,600,000 years. For the fifth, a saṃghāvaśeṣa offense, it is like a lifespan of eight thousand years in the Nirmāṇarati Heaven, counting in human reckoning as 230,400,000 years. For the sixth, committing a pārājika offense, they fall into Avīci for [a span] like a lifespan of sixteen thousand years in the Paranirmitavaśavartin Heaven, counting in human reckoning as 921,600,000 years.' In the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]: 'Committing a duṣkṛta offense entails falling into hell for eight million years according to the count of days, months, and years in the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven.' As for its divergence from the preceding sūtra text, this is because counting systems have larger and smaller scales, that is, taking ten thousand ten-thousands (100,000,000) as one koṭi.

2.29

The texts cited above are all authentic translations spoken by the Buddha, not lost translations or apocrypha of dubious authenticity. One must not give free rein to the mind regarding sinful situations without ever reflecting on this! A single offense already incurs penal classification; multiple offenses by principle must entail eons [of torment].

2.30

Nowadays, those who do not understand the teachings mostly harm and ruin themselves, saying: 'What is prohibited in these Vinaya precepts belongs to the Śrāvaka vehicle; for our Great Vehicle, it is discarded like dung and dirt. It is just like yellow leaves, wooden oxen, and wooden horses used to deceive and calm small children; these Vinaya precepts are also like this, merely deceiving you, sons of the Śrāvakas.' Now, in principle there is no division between the Great and Lesser Vehicles; medicine is prescribed according to capacity, taking the removal of illness as primary. Thus, when the first proclamation was made in the Deer Park, it was originally for the Śrāvakas, yet eighty thousand devas immediately gave rise to the Great Path; when the impending extinction was announced between the twin [sāla] trees, it ultimately revealed the Buddha-nature, yet there were listeners in the assembly who consequently attained the fruit of arhat. Deducing from this, awakening and understanding reside in the mind, not solely in the verbal purport of the teaching. Therefore, when the Bhagavat dwelt in the world, he deeply understood the capacities of beings; whatever he instituted, he unfailingly took deportment as primary. Because what is expressed through body and speech fundamentally relies on the precepts for prevention, and the violent arousal of the three poisons is strictly driven by the mind, now one first captures with the precepts, next binds with concentration, and finally slays with wisdom—such is indeed the proper order of principle! Nowadays, there are base people who do not know their own station and groundlessly boast, saying they belong to the Great Vehicle; treating the true sūtras with frivolity and disrespect, they exalt their own idiosyncratic teachings. Yet the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra states: 'The Vinaya is the study of the Great Vehicle.' The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom states: 'The eighty divisions [of Vinaya] are the śīla-pāramitā.' That such sūtras and treatises do not enter their ears—is it not lamentable! Thus the Māyā Sūtra states: 'If a young monk directly vilifies the Vinaya in the midst of the saṃgha, know that this is a sign of the extinction of the Dharma.' The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] also states: 'If anyone says that the Tathāgata spoke of entering hell for the above number of years for a duṣkṛta merely as an expedient to frighten people—know that whoever speaks thus is decidedly following a demonic scripture and vinaya, not the spoken word of the Buddha.' Proved by this text, the Tathāgata foresaw that such things would arise in the future and therefore declared this in advance to determine the heterodox and orthodox and prevent confusion. As for factions that agree with the former [heretical view], they may indeed be called subjects of Māra! Furthermore, sūtras such as the Sūtra of the Buddha's Bequeathed Teaching all point to the Vinaya as the Great Master: 'If I were still in the world, it would be no different from this!' Yet they willfully violate and oppose it, casting themselves into deep calamity. Thus the Sūtra of One Hundred Parables states: 'In ancient times, a master kept two disciples, each assigned to massage one of his legs at all times. The elder disciple disliked the younger one, and struck and broke the leg assigned to him; the other likewise disliked the elder, and broke the leg assigned to the elder.' This is an analogy for contemporary scholars of the Vaipulya who negate the Lesser Vehicle, and scholars of the Lesser Vehicle who in turn negate the Vaipulya, thereby causing the Dharma scriptures of the Great Sage to be lost on both counts! That this serves as proof, we see with our own eyes today. Moreover, when the bodhisattva establishes the teachings, they penetrate the sacred and succor the worldly; they act in response to conditions without being tainted by worldly ways. Initial-stage bodhisattvas conform to the Śrāvaka moral disciplines; in guarding against precepts concerning worldly reproach, there is no difference from the naturally grave offenses. This is just like in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, where a rākṣasa begged for a dust-mote's worth of the floating bladder and the bodhisattva would not give it—an analogy for protecting the duṣkṛta precepts. Furthermore, the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom states: 'Renunciant bodhisattvas do not amass wealth because they safeguard the precepts; because the merit of precepts surpasses that of giving—for instance, when I do not kill, I give life to all sentient beings, and so forth.' These texts provide proof.

2.31

Those today who falsely claim to study the Great Vehicle perform actions unworthy of adoption and utter words exceeding reality; ashamed of their own transgressions, they erroneously praise themselves. I once said to them: 'Since the precepts are a lesser teaching, you ought to renounce them'—yet they were unwilling; 'You ought to uphold them'—yet they were again unwilling. Is this not aligning with defilements, such that admonition and explanation are exceedingly difficult? Is this not also lamentable! Now, the monks and nuns all comply with the sacred teachings and receive the precepts according to the Dharma; in principle they must safeguard and uphold them, and only then is the reception complete. If from the outset there is no safeguarding, though received, it is not accomplished. Thus the Sarvāstivāda states: 'Without a mind of earnest reverence, the non-informative [form] is not generated.' Even if the reception is accomplished and their outward deportment is respectable, for the preservation and maintenance of the Buddha's Dharma, they must by principle unite in protecting them. Nowadays, shaving the hair, dyeing the robes, the karmans of the fourfold saṃgha, establishing saṃghārāmas, and instructing the clergy and laity—whatever is undertaken is nothing other than the Vinaya. If it produces good and obtains benefit, where their person must direct and manage it, they say with their mouth, 'I should do it'; but where defiling the precepts and giving rise to wrongdoing violates the network of teachings, they immediately say, 'I belong to the Great Vehicle, which has nothing to do with the Lesser Teaching.' Therefore the Buddhapiṭaka-sūtra sets forth the analogy of the bat-like bhikṣu, and the donkey wearing a lion's skin. Since broad condemnations and rebukes abound, what need is there to set them forth in detail? Fearing that future ignorant beginners might be clouded by their dust, I have extensively quoted and laid this out, yet still fear they may be similarly tainted. How lamentable!

2.32

Chapter 14: Explaining the Specific Features Following Each Precept. (The intent of this chapter corresponds to the articles of the Vinaya; however, because the root text did not fully detail observance and transgression, they are set out below. Now, because the various chapters are not yet complete, a separate category is established so that the articles and specifics are defined in orderly succession, pointing out models and definitive rules.)

2.33

A bhikṣu has two hundred and fifty precepts. (The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom states: 'If one merely speaks of names, there are two hundred and fifty; in the Vinaya, briefly spoken of there are eighty-four thousand, and extensively spoken of they are immeasurable and boundless. Therefore, those who have left household life possess immeasurable and boundless moral disciplines; laypeople do not possess the full śīla-pāramitā, while renunciants possess the full perfection of precepts.') If one cultivates according to them and skillfully understands their six kinds of features, one will produce concentration and wisdom, and definitively eradicate defilements. If one is ignorant of the objects of conditioning, one will drift with the stream and be tainted by delusion. How could one turn back the flow of saṃsāra? Rather, one will sink further into the painful realms! Therefore, relying on the teachings, I bring out the features and fully reveal observance and transgression; if one acts definitively according to this, one may hope to avoid calamity! Now I merely point out the specific differences following each precept, directly setting forth whether to proceed or refrain; a comprehensive explanation of mind and object is fully presented in 'Models for Observance and Transgression.' The precepts are indeed the ferry across saṃsāra and the essential principle of renunciation; those who receive them take the dharmadhātu as measure, yet those who uphold them are scarcer than unicorn horns. Because they have truly not comprehended the fundamental explanation, they follow sense dust and generate defilement. Since both the noble and the wise share this revered preface, how could I suppress and endure it without discussing it? Thus I take up my brush and directly unfold it!

2.34

There are roughly four divisions: first, the precept rule, which in substance permeates the path of liberation; second, the precept essence, which refers to the root that generates the multitude of practices; third, the precept practice, which refers to cultivation accomplished through expedients in accord with the originally received essence; fourth, the precept features, which are what this chapter clarifies, extending through all classes and categories of offenses.

2.35

Regarding the first, the precept rule, the conditions for reception have already been clarified. Now I briefly outline it to make known its path, dividing it into seven gates: 1. The fundamental basis of the noble path; 2. The great function of the precepts; 3. Brief understanding of names and purports; 4. Differences in the completeness of conditions; 5. Distinctions in superiority and inferiority; 6. Permissibility and obstruction in repeated reception; 7. Differences across historical periods in the conditions for reception in China.

First 35 of 546 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 — Classical Chinese