四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.30

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.