四分律行事鈔資持記 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.1

Composed by Śramaṇa Shi Yuanzhao of Yuhang in the Great Song

The title of the lower fascicle is explained entirely as before. For the note on composition (撰), the note should read "composed" (著). The listing and arising of the chapters are fully explained as in the explanation of the title and the preface.

3.3

Explanation of the Chapter on the Two Robes

3.4

Although robes and requisites are numerous, they are entirely gathered within the prescribed and permitted; naming the articles after the teaching, it is called "the two robes." "General and specific" refers to the two headings below; the marks of articles being intricate and detailed, it is feared they might be difficult to distinguish; therefore, they are first arranged in general categories, and then explained specifically, so that the section headings are incorporated into the title. However, examining the establishing of chapter titles shows they each differ: the four medicines follow Dharma; bowls and utensils follow teaching; confronting gifts, dhūta, and so forth are based on practice; saṃgha images, attending invitations, and so forth are based on matters; seek them in this way.

3.5

Under "Setting Forth the Purport", there are three parts: first, setting forth the requisites to reveal their efficacy. Efficacy has two aspects: first, being able to perfect demeanor, which is the first two lines; second, being able to block defilement, which is the latter two lines. The conscious mind is fully bound, and the material body is dependent; hence they are called "worldly entanglements." Defilement refers to the impurities of the body, or that physical form generates craving and attachment in people. From "If" onward secondly explains compliance and violation to show how they arise. The upper [lines] explain compliance with the Dharma to achieve maintenance; the lower [lines] explain violation of the teaching to result in infractions. "Method" and "norm" are both glossed as rules. "Faults and offenses" refers to transgressions. From "Therefore" onward thirdly divides the sections based on the two teachings.

3.6

Under "General Division", it first indicates the names and meanings. The names and meanings of prescribed and permitted are based on the presence or absence of offenses. From "Regarding" onward is the actual division, first dividing prescribed articles. Namely, among the six articles, five belong to robes, as set forth in the text; the bowl is in the present chapter. (The procedure for distributing a deceased monk's goods to care for the sick takes the needle case as the sixth, which differs from this.) Next are listed the permitted articles: the hundred-and-one extra requisites form the first; pāṃśukūla forms the second; lay donations form the third; deceased monks' goods form the fourth.

3.7

Under "The Meaning of Prescribing the Three Robes in the Gate of Prohibition", the text lists ten passages, which are grouped into five meanings. For the first meaning, the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā* shows the meaning of rarity. The "three names" refers to saṃghāṭī and so forth. Even their northern names did not exist, how much less their actual substances! In the *Guṇaprabha-śāstra*, there are two meanings: first, corresponding to the three seasons; from "also" onward, second, to block insects. Speaking of the "three seasons" was the circumstance that gave rise to the prohibition; it does not mean that the three seasons do not allow wearing them interchangeably. Many people misunderstand this; scholars must know it. In the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*, "noble disciples" generally refers to ordinary beings and noble ones who cultivate the noble path. Non-Buddhists go naked, signifying adherence to emptiness; white-robed laity wear multiple layers, signifying adherence to existence; a bhikṣu's three articles are neither too many nor too few, signifying abiding in the middle way and not adhering to the two extremes of emptiness and existence. In the *Daśādhyāya-vinaya*, because non-Buddhists wore whole pieces of white cotton, they were cut up to distinguish them.

3.8

In the second meaning, the four immeasurables in the *Saṃyuktāgama* are benevolence, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity; the mind pervades the realm of living beings, hence they are called immeasurable. From "Following" onward indicates the names.

3.9

In the third: the three poisons in the *Avataṃsaka* and the fetters in the *Dharmaguptaka-vinaya* all refer to afflictions. The *Diagram and Scripture of the Precept Platform* states: "The five-strip lower robe cuts off bodily greed; the seven-strip middle robe cuts off verbal anger; the great robe, the upper robe, cuts off mental delusion." (Namely matching the three poisons and the three karmas.)

3.10

In the fourth, in the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā*, the first meaning can be understood. The second should say: "With one robe one cannot possess shame and modesty, but with three robes one can," and so forth. The other three are likewise. The *Commentary* explains: "Because when one constantly has only one robe, it is worn for both impure and pure [tasks], shame and modesty do not arise; because each of the three uses has its own rules, screening and exposing are guarded in practice, causing good thoughts to arise." The third conversely explains that with the three robes it is fitting to enter villages; the *Commentary* says: "Because the saṃghāṭī is worn only upon approaching a village, generating faith in living beings." Fourth, possessing the three robes gives rise to good when walking on the road; the *Commentary* says: "If walking on the road, one drapes it in reverse and folds it high (according to what follows, outside a village one may drape it in reverse or fold it upon the shoulder); revering and protecting it like a stūpa, beings seen and unseen cherish virtue." Fifth, explaining that the demeanor of the three robes is pure, the *Commentary* says: "Because among the four postures, their use each has its proper place."

3.11

In the fifth: "the worthy and noble" in the *Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya* generally refers to the three vehicles, both great and small. *Zhi* (𢡠) is pronounced *zhi*, an alternate name for a banner (it also has the two pronunciations *chi* and *shi*); the character should be *shi* (識), which is glossed as a mark. That "the bowl is the vessel of a renunciant" also means distinguishing them from non-Buddhists and the secular crowd; based on its explanation later, it is cited here in connection with it. In our own school, it was for the cold: in the "Robe Skandhaka", the Buddha, because of the night cold, sequentially took the three robes and put them on in layers during the first, middle, and late watches of the night, and therefore prescribed the three robes. The Buddha said: "In the future, good sons who cannot endure the bitter cold will find keeping three robes sufficient, and must not exceed them." "External sections" refers to the above two treatises. That "the Tathāgatas of the three periods all wore them" specifically puts forward the ultimate fruit to manifest the noble deportment, intending to cause the wearer to give rise to superior thoughts.

3.12

In [the section] "Explaining the Names": As for the general name, it is because the upper, middle, and lower robes share the same designation. The Ekottarika-āgama has only the Sanskrit name. The sūtras and vinayas cited earlier and later mostly refer to it as kaṣāya. Paramārtha's Miscellaneous Notes states: "Kaṣāya is the comprehensive name for the three robes in foreign lands. The name contains many meanings: it is either called 'clothing that departs from defilement' (because it cuts off the six dusts), or called 'clothing that reduces [passions]' (because it cuts away afflictions), or called 'lotus clothing' (because it is free from defiling attachment), or called 'clothing of intermediate colors' (because it is made of the three proper colors)." In the commentary notes, first the Sanskrit designation is shown. Being named after color refers to what the sūtras call "ruined-color robe". The text below is what is cited later stating, "this translates as dye of an improper color." As for "kaṣāya taste", this indicates that it is not the primary name for a robe; the Commentary states: "As in the six tastes there is a kaṣāya taste, how could it be a robe?" "If..." below next distinguishes ancient translations. "Among the thirty" refers to the four precepts [concerning robes made of] silkworm silk, floss, two [kinds of] wool, and [not keeping a rug for] less than six years.

3.13

In [the section] "Specific Names": In the first heading, the preceding text clarifies fabrication. "Should..." below lists the names. Below "uttarāsaṅga", the three characters "worn when entering the assembly" were dropped.

3.14

Next, regarding the translation according to meaning, in citing the sūtras: Fully named the Sūtra of Bodhisattva Jñānottara's Questions on Great Skillful Means, it has two fascicles; here the lower fascicle is cited. That the five-strip [robe] is said to be "worn in the middle" is because it is innermost. That the seven-strip [robe] is "upper" is because it is above the five-strip [robe]. Question: The saṃghāṭī is the highest of all; why is it not so named? Answer: If considered with respect to the [other] two robes, both are above the five-strip [robe]; however, since the saṃghāṭī is used rarely, its name is marked based on its specific [characteristic].

3.15

In the next heading, first it marks and explains. "Great..." below lists and explains the three names. "Fragmented" refers to its appearance. "Medium value" refers to its price, being intermediate between the two robes. "Lower" relates to its wearing and use, being innermost. For royal palaces and settlements, it causes good roots to arise in living beings; also, when preaching the Dharma and bestowing precepts, one must wear it, in order to display an exalted appearance. "Entering the assembly" is a general phrase, meaning that for assembling, lecturing, saluting, chanting, and all karmavācanā matters, one wears the seven-strip [robe]. "Within the precinct" means residing in chambers and rooms within the monastery; "walking on the road" means walking upon open roads; "miscellaneous tasks" means all types of labor—for all these one wears the lower robe.

3.16

Third, dividing according to the strips: This does not come from our own vinaya; it has been passed down in the world, hence [the text] says "the vinaya does not have..." and so on. Nineteen and seventeen merely cite the middle grade, as will be divided in detail below.

3.17

Fourth, in [the section] "Common Characteristics": The text adduces the unpatched robe (māndhāra) as an example. That is, just as the three robes serve mutually as secondary robes, it is merely applying a name according to use, without regard to their substance or form. However, although they are mutually interchangeable, the original prohibition must remain fixed; when there is a deficiency, using another is permitted as an exception, hence it says "not without a general division" and so on.

3.18

In the third [section], the Mahākāruṇika-sūtra: The text appears in the third [fascicle]. First, it adduces breaking [the precepts] to contrast with maintaining [them]; "nature" refers to the reception-essence. Next, it adduces having none to contrast with having [them]; "form" refers to demeanour and appearance. If it is so even for those without [virtue] who break [precepts], how much more so for those who receive and maintain them! When Maitreya appears in the world in the future when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years, preaching the Dharma in three assemblies, he will save immeasurable people; the disciples of Śākyamuni's bequeathed Dharma will be saved first in the initial assembly. Even if they are not saved, down to the last of the thousand Buddhas, Ruci, there will be none among Śākyamuni's disciples who is not completely saved; hence it is said "none will be left out." Ruci is written as Lūca in some sūtras, translated here as "weeping", being named after his compassion.

3.19

The Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka text appears in the eighth [fascicle]. This was the vow made by the Tathāgata on the causal ground when he was the Bodhisattva Mahākāruṇika. Among the five, the first and fourth are powers to eliminate evil: the first eliminates karmic [obscurations], and the fourth halts disputes. The remaining three are powers to generate good: the second obtains future fruits, the third brings about present joy, and the fifth increases authority and power. In the fourth, "mutually opposing each other", the sūtra states: "If there are sentient beings who do not comply with one another, full of enmity and jealousy, fighting and warring with one another, down to the time of mutual combat, if they can be mindful of the kaṣāya, they will cause those sentient beings to attain compassionate minds, soft minds, minds without enmity, and so forth." In the fifth, "overcoming others", that [sūtra] states: "If sentient beings, in fighting, warfare, or litigation, in order to protect their bodies, venerate, revere, and make offerings to the kaṣāya, always keeping it with them, they will cause those sentient beings to be constantly victorious wherever they are, with none able to oppress them; even in fighting, warfare, or litigation, they will achieve peace and liberation," and so on. Truly, when a person with shame and conscience wears the robe of compassion and suddenly gives rise to mindfulness, contentious feelings are halted; therefore bhikṣus should deeply reflect upon the Buddha's words. If the poison of anger should arise, one ought to observe one's own body: having donned the kaṣāya, how could one be without shame and remorse? "If I..." below expresses sincerity in seeking confirmation. After the Bodhisattva made this vow, Ratnagarbha Tathāgata extended his golden arm, patted the Bodhisattva's crown, and praised him: "Well done, well done, Great Man! What you have spoken is a great precious treasure, a great virtue. After you attain enlightenment, the kaṣāya will be able to accomplish these five noble merits."

3.20

The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya: Granting [the robe] to avert disasters clearly displays its supreme virtue. Xiang (禳) has the fanqie pronunciation ru-yang; it means averting calamity.

3.21

In the second [section], "Method of Fabrication", regarding "Seeking Materials": "In accordance with the Dharma" means being free from the faults below, pure wealth. "Meaning..." below shows what is not in accordance with the Dharma. The four wrong livelihoods and five wrong livelihoods are explained in "Saṅgha Regulations". "The Vinaya..." below cites evidence. Wrong livelihood summarizes the four and five above; provoking [offerings] and displaying outward signs also belong to the five wrong livelihoods, and here two marks are cited separately. Robes [obtained by offenses of] forfeiture (nissaggiya-pācittiya) are contrasted with the commerce above, additionally involving offenses such as exceeding the limit [for keeping robes], begging, and having robes washed. However, wrongful minds are difficult to recognize; let us briefly distinguish them. Nowadays, during chanting, lecturing on sūtras, or performing secular arts, if the mind hopes for other things, these are all termed wrongful conditions. Or, secretly accumulating surplus wealth, boxes and bags overflowing, when it comes to one's own things, one will not pull out a single hair, yet towards the donations of others, one hoards insatiably. Falsely relying on such conditions, one begs from others. If one weighs the intentions and examines the actions, how could there be any doubt that this is impure? Eminent practitioners endowed with discernment should fortunately change their ways.

3.22

In "Material Substance": In the first heading, the preceding text shows what accords with the Dharma. "Tightly woven" refers to pongee, fine silk, hemp, and ramie that are boiled and processed to be thick and dense. However, according to the Vinaya text, pongee and fine silk are still permissible. If following the Rituals for Monastic Robes and the Record of Miraculous Communications, neither accords with the Dharma; they are now briefly cited. In the Record, a celestial being said: "The Buddha's Dharma has been transmitted eastward for six or seven hundred years, yet Vinaya masters of north and south have never had this intention: why use wealth obtained from killing living beings to make the robe of compassion? Why do you alone extract this intention?" The Patriarchal Master replied: "When reading the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra, I saw that the Buddha wore a coarse cloth saṃghāṭī. I kept this in mind: how could I go against it? And after studying the Vinaya, I saw that as for bedding made of silkworm fabric, even if already completed, it must be chopped, ruined, and smeared over with mud; because of this, my admiration deepened further." He also said: "Furthermore, I saw Indian monks coming from the west who all wore cotton cloth. Upon inquiring in detail, they answered: 'In the five Indias, no one wears silkworm clothing.' It was from this that the thought arose to write the Rituals for Monastic Robes and other texts." Tripiṭaka Master Yijing, in his Record of the Inner Dharma, reversely slandered this; he studied the Hīnayāna Sarvāstivāda, and thus had many partial attachments. Now we take the definitive Mahāyāna as our school, which is not what he understands. "If..." below eliminates what is not in accordance with the Dharma. "Raw and coarse" means that today some use raw gauze, raw ramie, plantain, kudzu, and other materials to make kaṣāyas; all these are not in accordance with the Dharma. In the text, for gauze, whether raw or processed, both are disallowed; for pongee, raw pongee may not be used. Xiao (綃), the ancients said, is raw silk fabric; others say that the fine, thin silk produced in Shu is named xiao. Three passages of evidence are cited: The Four-Part Vinaya proves the damask and patterned silks mentioned above. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya proves the raw and coarse [materials] above; hair, tree bark, and so forth are all the clothing of non-Buddhists. In the Five Hundred Questions, pongee, fine silk, and the like that do not reveal the body—though raw, they are thick and obstruct the form without exposing it—are therefore said to accord with the Dharma.

3.23

In "Citing Exhortations": That vinaya explains that this bird's wings span five hundred and fifty yojanas, and it feeds on dragons. When it wants to seize a dragon, it parts the seawater by fanning with its wings, and the dragon palace immediately appears. Because the dragons fear this, they seek a piece of kaṣāya to place upon the palace gate; seeing it, the bird gives rise to reverence and does not dare to seize them for food. Also, at times a dragon took a kaṣāya, placed it upon its head, and walked along the shore, and the bird was unable to harm it. This is because manufacturing it according to the Dharma brings about remarkable efficacy; hence it is cited to admonish them.

3.24

In "Color as Prescribed", within the cited text: In the first heading, the first two lines eliminate what is inappropriate. "High colors" comprehensively refers to the cardinal and intermediate colors of the five directions: blue, yellow, red, white, and black are the cardinal colors of the five directions; crimson, pink, purple, green, and sulfur-yellow are the intermediate colors of the five directions. "Ought to..." below shows what is prescribed. There are two lines in the commentary note. The upper line matches the translation. The lower line indicates the source, which is the translation as "dye" in the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā below. The expression "correct translation" clarifies that the preceding names such as "bedding" are not the primary meaning. The Rituals for Monastic Robes states: "As throughout the sūtras and vinayas it is universally called 'ruined color', hence the text states: 'One should use any one of the three kinds—blue, black, or magnolia bark—to ruin it, making it into a color that accords with the Dharma.'" It also states: "Improper ruined color is only kept by the Shakyan lineage, distinguishing the wrongful from the proper." Thus we know that "improper" is the color of the kaṣāya, and so on. "If..." below explains exceptions. "Five-patch" refers to small fragments of five colors quilted together into a robe; although they are cardinal and intermediate [colors], because it is not a pure color [it is allowed]. The Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] below is cited as evidence. "Ruined color" means improper [color].

3.25

In "Broad Discrimination": The Daśādhyāya-vinaya first sets forth improper colors. These are the five cardinal colors. "Except for patchwork robes" eliminates what is permitted as an exception. "Precepts..." below shows colors that accord with the Dharma. Mud means black; zhan (棧) means magnolia bark.

3.26

The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā text has three sections: first, it explains marking for purification; next, beginning from "kaṣāya", it presents the translation of the name; and third, beginning from "genuine purple", it distinguishes improper colors. Within the first, there are also two parts: first, it explains that the five primary colors are permitted to be made into other garments. The "three spots" refer to spots of three colors. "Dark cyan" refers to a bluish-red color, which is another name for mangosteen. Next, beginning from "black is permissible", the second part separately distinguishes whether primary and secondary colors are permissible or not. "Black" is sable (by rule, it should not be a primary color). It and mangosteen both accord with the Dharma. That "red, white, and yellow are also permissible" means that, like green and turquoise, they may be used for robe linings. As for translating the name, to say "dyed" is indeed the correct translation; however, the term applies to both proper and improper colors, so in the earlier note, three characters—"improper color"—were added to assist it, whereupon both the name and its meaning became distinct. As in the case of "fetters of craving", an analogy is raised to make the meaning plain: the afflictions of fettering craving defile the pure mind; dyeing an object with color is of the same meaning as this. (Such as Mozi weeping upon seeing dyed silk.) In distinguishing improper colors: "Genuine purple" means dyed with gromwell root. "Sappan" is the name of a tree, which is the sappanwood of today. "Earth yellow" means loam yellow. "Crabapple yellow" is that dyed with crabapple bark. "Flower yellow" means dyed with safflower, pagoda-tree flowers, and so forth. Having examined the Great Canon, only the three colors—cyan, black, and mangosteen—accord with the Dharma. Nowadays, śramaṇas mostly favor purple robes. According to the Tang records, during the reign of Zetian, Xue Huaiyi threw the imperial palace into turmoil; Zetian favored and employed him, ordering him to participate in court deliberations. Because the colors of monastic robes were distinctive, she thereby ordered him to wear a purple kaṣāya and carry a golden tortoise pouch. Later, having spuriously composed the Great Cloud Sūtra, he assembled ten monks to write a commentary and present it to the throne, whereupon the ten monks were likewise bestowed purple robes and tortoise pouches. Because this source of corruption once burst forth, down to the present day there has been no return. Ignorant worldly fellows have deceitfully slipped into the Śākya gate; not attending to inner cultivation, they boast only of outer adornments. How much worse that they rashly place themselves above venerable elders and presumptuously claim the titles of Great Sages—something not closely investigated by the state, nor denounced by the monastic community. This has led greedy and miserly sorts each to vie in luxury and extravagance, while the pure traditions of few desires have thereby perished. Furthermore, according to the teachings on human relations of the Confucian school, one wears the five primary colors; according to the world-transcending deportment of the Śākya gate, one abandons both primary and secondary colors. Thus the Analects state: "Red and purple are not used for informal wear." (Informal wear is private dress; if it explicitly says not to use them for informal wear, then the rule for public dress is obvious.) Wenzhongzi says: "Unless a gentleman wears yellow or white, he does not dress." If it is not even permitted by secular propriety, how could it be the proper deportment for transcending the world? Moreover, the explicit texts of the Vinaya and treatises judge it to be against the Dharma. If one does not accept this with faith, how can one practice it at ease? Furthermore, students of the Vinaya store up impure wealth to purchase unlawful robes; when lecturing comes to this point, their eyes behold the contradiction, so they gloss over their own faults to deceive the younger generation, immediately saying: "In the Vinaya, violating the royal ordinances incurs a duṣkṛta; I am simply following the royal ordinances." But when the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā explains violating royal ordinances, it means a bhikṣu disobeying state prohibitions. As nowadays when the state binds and regulates monastics: leaving household life at twenty, having one's name registered in the registers; having verification documents and carrying prohibited items when traveling abroad—in matters such as these, violations constitute an offense. When did the state ever prohibit monks, disallowing them from wearing coarse brown? Those who speak thus not only slander the true Dharma, but also fail to understand royal ordinances. As the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: how is it that this person's tongue does not shrivel up? Surely their retribution belongs to a future life, which is why the physical signs have not yet become manifest.

3.27

In the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, it first shows whether dyeing materials are proper or improper. Saffron root can dye things yellow. Carthamus is safflower. Blue dye is indigo paste. Patterned colors refer to mottled patterns. Next, beginning from "it is permitted to use", it explains what accords with the Dharma. Gomaya is cow dung. In the western land, cattle eat fragrant herbs, and people esteem it; in this land, it is not suitable, so it should not be used. Next, beginning from "the Prātimokṣa", it explains the designations and characteristics of proper colors: first citing the Prātimokṣa to show the names, and next citing the extensive text to reveal the characteristics. "Verdigris" refers to greenish brown, like the color of ancient bronze. (Nowadays, that which is baked into verdigris is merely a primary color.) "Mixed mud" refers to soaking fruit juice in iron vessels, which consequently turns black; the dark silt at the bottom of a river can also dye things black. When it says mangosteen is fruit juice, this considerably contradicts its visible color, so a note is provided to harmonize them. "The translator of this Vinaya" refers to this very division of ours. The Yao Qin had its capital at Chang'an, hence it is called the northern region. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya was translated in Yangdu, hence it is called the Wu region. Next, beginning from "I", personal observation is cited as evidence. It can be verified that the translation and transmission of the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya lost the intended meaning. The Shu region is Sichuan; by this one knows that mangosteen (mulan) is indeed a Chinese term. Pointing to the Sudarśana refers to the bright red color in the next heading.

3.28

In refuting improper appropriations: first, it refutes the use of spurious sūtras. That sūtra divides the robe colors of the five schools, stating that the Mahāsāṃghikas wear yellow, the Mahīśāsakas wear red, the Dharmaguptakas wear black, the Kāśyapīyas wear mangosteen, and the Sarvāstivādins wear deep crimson. (Because it places the Mahāsāṃghika among the five schools, root and branches are not distinguished; furthermore, the Vātsīputrīya school is missing among the five schools.) Although this was refuted, the Meaning Commentary quotes it again; its intention is not clear. Furthermore, the Śāriputra-paripṛcchā-sūtra states that the Mahāsāṃghika and Kāśyapīya are the same as above, the Dharmaguptaka wears red, the Sarvāstivāda wears black, and the Mahīśāsaka wears blue. However, clothing adapts to the times and is not necessarily fixed; that the two sūtras give differing accounts is not enough to raise doubts. Even if one relies on their texts, it is merely a confusion of names; as with the dark blue and black of the various schools, how could they be primary colors! Next, beginning from "the Four-Part", the Vinaya and treatises are cited to verify that it is improper. The Four-Part states that one is defiled according to any of the three colors; the Sudarśana says that this was on account of being robbed, from which one clearly knows that the five great [colors] are inherently not in accordance with the Dharma. The text of the commentary has two sections: the former determines the color characteristics, because the names are confused; the latter makes a determination based on the text, for fear of erroneous attachments.

3.29

In the conclusive determination, it first points to the various teachings. "Pure colors" refers to the five cardinal primary and secondary colors. Next, beginning from "surely", it shows whether [the robe] is validly constituted or not. "Concomitant marks" refers to the precept on the ninety new robes.

3.30

Regarding the fixed dimensions: the Dharmaguptaka has both fixed and adaptable dimensions. First, it shows the fixed dimensions. The antarvāsas is seven feet two inches long and three feet six inches wide; this refers to the lower robe, used when walking on the road and performing work, so it is not suitable for it to be large. The Karma Commentary states: among the various schools, only the text of the Dharmaguptaka has the very smallest; because renunciants are impoverished, this is the norm. The other two robes are nine feet long and five feet four inches wide. Next, beginning from "however", it provides the adaptable dimensions. It merely states that the lower robe is the absolute smallest, from which it is clear that the other two robes are not the smallest. However, fearing that the height of a person's body may vary, the three robes therefore all conform to the adaptable dimensions. As for "measuring the body", there are two methods here: The first follows the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā. The Buddha's body was sixteen feet; his robe was eighteen feet long and twelve feet wide. An ordinary person is half of this: the robe is nine feet long and six feet wide. (Slightly different from the Dharmaguptaka.) Calculating according to this, for every one foot of human height, the length gets one foot one inch and two and a half tenths, and the width gets seven inches and five tenths. Increasing it like this, an eight-foot person may wear a robe nine feet long and six feet wide. Increasing it further up to the Buddha's measure also has no discrepancy. If the proportions of the body do not correspond, diminishing it results in frugality, while exceeding it requires a statement of purification. The second follows the Karma Commentary: tailor and measure according to the body. The commentary says: from the shoulders down to four finger-breadths above the ankles constitutes the body of the robe; the remaining strips and panels are sufficient to match it. This means that human bodies mostly vary in length, but rarely in thickness; even if someone is fat or thin, it does not hinder wearing it. Therefore, it only gives the dimension of width and does not explain the method for length. (Some say the remaining strips and panels refer to the length; I now say that the panels exist in both width and length, so why would it be only the long side?) Moreover, few people today reach eight feet; simply taking within nine feet is sufficient to match. This is truly because the right corner of the kaṣāya is originally on the left shoulder, or hanging under the armpit; therefore, a nine-foot garment is quite suitable for an eight-foot body. Nowadays, the right corner hangs down in front, which violates the proper method of wearing; this causes the long side to exceed twelve feet, while the width does not reach five feet. Dragging long like an elephant's trunk, with every movement they violate deportment. Deeply deluded by long-established custom, how can one admonish them? If one truly resolves to uphold the Dharma, what more need be said? Words such as "moderate the measure" in the text were originally meant to admonish against greed and cause one to know contentment; thus it says "merely taking what is sufficient." Citing it here now is intended to show adaptation to circumstances, hence it says "according to this" and so forth. The word "measure" (du) is pronounced in the entering tone, meaning to tailor and measure. The word "take" (qu) is pronounced in the departing tone, meaning roughly.

3.31

In citing the various texts: the first two characters link back to the general text above. The clause beginning from "also" introduces the subsequent citations. Although the lower robe of the Dharmaguptaka is said to be narrow and small, among the various schools the three robes are sometimes equal, which is quite sufficient as a guideline. Fearing that seeing "measuring the body", people would immediately make them arbitrarily wide or long without regulation, it therefore says "although this is so" and so forth. (Those today who cling to a twelve-foot robe and say that the Vinaya has general texts fall precisely into this error.) Next, beginning from "therefore", it cites and demonstrates the various texts: first, pointing to two Vinayas. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya: the upper robe is five cubits long and three cubits wide (the same as the Dharmaguptaka above); the lower robe is four cubits long and two and a half cubits wide (the length is the same as the Dharmaguptaka, but the width adds nine inches, making it four feet five inches); the measure of the seven-strip robe is between the upper and lower robes. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya: the three robes each have three grades. The superior is five cubits long and three cubits wide (also the same as the Dharmaguptaka); the middling is five cubits minus an unextended hand long (meaning among the five, one cubit is measured with an unextended hand, not filling five cubits; following that treatise, a cubit is measured with an extended hand), and three cubits minus an unextended hand wide; the lower robe is four and a half cubits (eight feet one inch) long and three cubits minus an unextended hand wide. The middling and lower robes also each have three grades, all as above. In the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā: the three items generally have three grades: length five, width three (the middle robe is the same as the Dharmaguptaka); if extremely large, the length is six cubits (ten feet eight inches) and the width is three and a half cubits (six feet three inches); if extremely small, the length is four cubits and the width is two and a half cubits. The above presents the three grades that accord with the Dharma. Below, it explains that exceeding or falling short is against the Dharma: first, judging the validity of reception. What exceeds can be cut off, and what falls short can be pieced together. The bowl does not have this principle, so its reception is not valid. Next, beginning from "if exceeding", it determines offenses. By this rule one knows that the twelve-foot long robes of today, since they are not stated for purification, all incur the offense of excess. The commentary explains before and after receiving purification, because whatever is outside what is maintained belongs to surplus items. (Therefore, one knows that on a Dharma robe, surplus items are joined; consulting the Bhikṣuṇī Manual now, the Patriarchal Master clearly judged that if it exceeds the measure, one must perform purification by giving.)

3.32

The initial cause in the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya also relies on measurement by cubits. However, it adapts to the person and cannot be uniformly standardized, hence it is termed 'variable'. The Buddha ordered that it adapt to the body, which must rely on [the measure from] shoulder to ankle as the standard according to the Karma Commentary. The earlier [rules of] various schools were established based on an average person of eight feet; moreover, they are divided into three grades, which adequately adapt to the body, hence those grade measurements are retained. The two measurements cited above exhaustively cover all capacities and circumstances: the fixed measurement curbs greedy inclinations, while the flexible measurement accommodates varied physical retribution. In the broad teaching of the treatises, modesty and frugality take precedence. Therefore, the Protocols for Robes states: 'Making them reduced in size accords with the decorum of frugality; multiplying them improperly beyond the limits entails the rules of transgressing.' (In some cases it incurs the offense of keeping extra cloth; in others it is prohibited as illicit.) It also states: 'In recent years the base have indulged in haughtiness and extravagance; as for discussing frugality and modesty, I have yet to see such a person.' The rest is as explained elsewhere. (Some say that the Manual's citation of the flexible text abolishes the fixed measurement; this merely complies with obstinate attachment and improperly rejects the sacred teachings.) Question: If one strictly relies on the flexible text, is exceeding the measurement permissible? Answer: Relying on the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā, if one performs the deśanā of excess for what is beyond the measurement, it is not impermissible. However, present wearers do not perform deśanā and thus incur the fault of keeping extra cloth; furthermore, wearing them brings certain inconveniences. Question: What faults are there in wearing excessively long robes today? Answer: There are many faults. First, exceeding the measurement incurs a pāyattika of keeping extra cloth; second, wearing it incurs a duṣkṛta of abandoning the proper robe; third, hanging long beyond the elbow, it bears the appearance of an elephant's trunk, incurring a duṣkṛta at every step. If one fears cause and effect, please follow the correct teaching.

3.33

Regarding the number of strips, in the first section: 'strip' means a vertical strip; from five, seven, nine, up to twenty-five, all follow odd numbers, hence the reason is queried. As for what is said in the Commentary and Manual: the Karma Commentary states that because a śramaṇa practices compassion and takes benevolence and nurturing as the foundation, which corresponds to the yang transformation of the worldly realms, the numbers are not even. (Odd numbers are yang numbers, because they can engender and generate; even numbers are yin numbers, because they can wither and contract.) As for also pointing to the Manual, this must be an omitted passage from the Yichao (Meaning Manual).

3.34

Regarding more or less, in the first section: The Dharmaguptaka-vinaya stops at nineteen strips, which is the limit of the middle grade; the Daśādhyāya-vinaya stops at fifteen strips, which is the beginning of the middle grade; both omit the upper grade, hence both say 'if exceeding'. However, since the text is not obvious, it cites the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā to list fully the three ranks and nine grades of the great robe. The Karma Commentary states: 'The reason it culminates strictly at twenty-five strips is that it intends to serve as a field of merit for the twenty-five realms of existence.'

3.35

In the next section, the Vinaya text is first cited. The 'Cīvara-skandhaka' states: The bhikṣus did not know how many strips the robes should be made of. The Buddha said: 'It should be five strips, not six strips (the lower robe); it should be seven strips, not eight strips (the middle robe); it should be nine strips, not ten strips; up to nineteen strips, not twenty strips (the great robe). If able to exceed these numbers of strips, one should keep them (omitting the three upper grades).' According to the Vinaya, the original lacked the character 'not' (不); later people who did not understand improperly annotated it at the margin; later those who knew did not immediately excise it, but added a further note below pointing out the previous error; when it came to later woodblock carving, they were unable to correct it. From 'Now' onward, it directly refutes it. 'Lacking the authorized teaching's prohibition or exception' means it is neither prohibited nor permitted by the teaching, and is insufficient to rely upon.

3.36

In the third section: The Shengji ji (Record of Sacred Traces) has two fascicles and was composed by Dharma Master Lingyu. Its text only shows the form of the strips. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra clarifies the fabric of the robe, hence it is cited to complete it. (Nowadays there are those who instead seek fine cloth that exceeds the price of silk; letting go of the former and taking up the latter is not being adept in the teaching's intention.) As for 'the general standard', it means that among robes of nine grades, one makes them according to one's capacity; originally one must make twenty-five strips, but if one's capacity is insufficient, one reduces them step by step down to nine strips; because the Buddha only wore the upper robe of the lower grade, we know this is sufficient to serve as the standard.

3.37

In the sixth section: 'Borders' (堤) means crosswise borders, like the dikes of a field. The Protocols for Robes states: 'The appearance of strips and borders is functionally identical to agricultural fields, like dyked plots storing water to nourish fine sprouts, metaphorically showing that wearing this robe engenders merit; the Buddha ordering it to resemble this was not without purpose.'

3.38

Regarding showing the numbers, in the first section: The Dharmaguptaka text on fixed measurements is as cited above. Long and short are briefly shown as above: five strips with ten divisions (one long and one short); the other two robes are based on this, meaning seven strips with twenty-one divisions (two long and one short), nine strips with twenty-seven divisions, and so forth, increasing in succession. Relying on the Vinaya's fixed measurement, it details the two robes, while the long and short are based only on the five-strip [robe]; since the text mentions them together, one must know their two differences.

3.39

In the next section, it first clarifies what is according to the Dharma. The reason the long increases up to four while the short is restricted to one is stated in the Commentary: 'The Dharma robe is a field of respect to benefit the various realms of existence; it symbolizes the holy increasing while the ordinary decreases, and allegorizes that the long are many while the short are few.' From 'If' onward, it distinguishes what is not according to the Dharma. As for the reason why the formal reception is valid but wearing it incurs an offense, the Commentary states: 'Wearing it adopts its proper decorum and form, functioning to generate goodness in living beings; if the long and short are discordant, it violates compassionate pure conduct; with each step transgressing decorum, an offense is incurred for each and every one.' (Nowadays people in the Chan assemblies mostly make nine strips with long and short irregular, sometimes using gauze or damask, sometimes variegated or green, calling them Dharma robes themselves; their material, color, measure, and form all violate the correct regulation—what Dharma is there in that?)

3.40

Regarding the purpose of cutting and severing, first the purpose is queried. Second, citations explain it. In the Dharmaguptaka, it is so as not to be stripped by thieves, because it has no value. In the Daśādhyāya, it is to differ from non-Buddhists, because they wear whole lengths of white cotton. In citing the Vinaya's 'three cheap things', it precisely takes what is debased by the knife, because it is cast off by people. The above purposes are all reliant on external conditions; summarizing what they reduce to, it is to break the bonds of greed. Does not the purport of skillful means lie precisely here?

3.41

In the seventh, explaining the number of layers, in the first passage: Relying on the various Vinayas, making it layered is either done by backing it entirely with cloth, or by sewing two robes together. Now, relying on the Gantong zhuan (Account of Spiritual Resonance), a celestial being revealed the method of filling them sequentially according to their markings. That text recounts the celestial asking: 'Regarding making the great robe double-layered, you have recently practiced this. Yet beneath the borders there are actually three layers; how could that be permissible?' He then asked about how it was made, whereupon [the Patriarch] took his robe and showed it to him. 'These marks of borders represent the balks and borders of paddy fields. By taking cut pieces of robe cloth and stitching them on the inside, keeping them away from the borders by the width of a barleycorn, the inside of the strips represents fields and above the borders represents irrigation ditches; how could it be otherwise!' Now, however, people line it throughout with cloth: first, it is not cut and severed; second, it has multiple layers. Since it is not the original regulation, it is not without the fault of wearing it. Question: Below, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā is cited as allowing tearing it into parts to carry it on the road; is that not multiple robes folded over one another? Answer: Prior to that, the Patriarchal Master followed the treatises entirely; only near the end of his life, when moved by the holy manifestation, did he revise it. Therefore, the text of this account resolves matters that were not clear in the Tripiṭaka. Just as with adding four borders to the nisīdana or placing it on the left arm, etc., which are practiced generally in the world, why doubt this alone? Even if one wishes to line it throughout with cloth, relying on the treatises it should be permissible, but the objection that it is not cut and has multiple layers cannot be resolved. Question: If the great robe is made single-layered, is the formal reception valid? The Commentary states: 'The formal reception and retention are achieved, but wearing it incurs an offense.'

3.42

Regarding mutual combination, this can only be said of the great robe; the others are not under discussion. First, the treatise is cited to show the number. From 'The remainder' onward, the Vinaya is cited to manifest the regulation. Because a new robe can only have two layers, adding an extra layer now incurs the offense of keeping extra cloth.

3.43

In the third section: rags from the dust heap are discarded things, not restricted to many layers.

3.44

Regarding tearing into parts: first, it clarifies the exception permitted in pressing circumstances. This means the robe is thick and heavy and cannot be carried on the road. 'Tearing into parts' means ripping open the seams. From 'If' onward, it clarifies to whom it belongs after death. The treatise provides two explanations: if within the original boundary, it is distributed at the place where it was left in deposit; if rewarding the sick-attendant, it is sought and brought to the place of death to give to them.

3.45

In the eighth, the first section: In the Vinaya, the upper two robes originally require cutting and severing; if cloth is scarce, overlapping borders are allowed (one kind for each), and the lower robe also permits pleated borders. (Adding this one makes three kinds. It means making small pleats to roughly delineate the borders.)

3.46

In the second section: first, the Mahāsāṃghika encourages assistance. Fearing the offense of lacking a robe, it must be finished quickly. Next, a sūtra is cited to illustrate it. Even the Holy One was like this, how much more so other people! As for the frequent use of women's work nowadays, the Protocols for Robes states: 'Nowadays there are unworthy men who hire others to indulge their tastes. Ignorant of needle and thread themselves, they must rely on others for every move. They only discuss the delicate charm of the embroidery, disregarding whether the labor cost is high or low. Sometimes the cost of hiring a tailor doubles that of the robe fabric. Entering into homes of widows and ruined houses, they incur blame and faults. Reviewing the authoritative teachings as a whole, robes are only to be sewn by oneself; now people do the opposite, and offenses arise from this.' (According to this, it is even better if bhikṣu men do it.) From 'Dharmaguptaka' onward, it clarifies the assignment of offenses. Needlework is originally the nuns' practice, so the offense is heavier for them than for monks. Here, it speaks provisionally regarding another person's robe. According to the Vinaya, a seven-strip robe is completed in four days, and a five-strip robe in two days.

3.47

In the third section: 'One bolt' (duan) is here called one pi. 'Designating to make' means intending to make it when it has not yet been made. 'Five cubits' means taking a body of five cubits in length and three cubits in width, which is the measure of a Dharma robe and does not require deśanā; beyond this, it must be declared. (Citing this corroborates the preceding, making the fixed measurement even more evident.)

3.48

In the fourth, the first section: the first part clarifies converting them into the three robes. From 'If' onward, the next part clarifies making patchwork robes.

3.49

In the Mahīśāsaka, first what is not according to the Dharma is stated. The first four incur a duṣkṛta, and the last one results in a sthūlātyaya. 'Dyeing them' means dyeing strips and borders with different colors. 'Sewing together' means not doing backstitching, hence the note refutes it. Regarding 'pleated borders', according to that Vinaya it is illicit for all three robes; the Dharmaguptaka permits it for the lower robe, but for the other two it must not be pleated either. 'Half facing upward and downward' means the openings of the borders must all follow downward and not run counter upward. From 'Ānanda' onward, next it clarifies what is according to the Dharma: first, it instructs on arranging the strips and borders. 'Mi' means to follow; it means the strips and borders overlapping one another must follow to the left and right. Taking the seven-strip robe as an example: the three strips on each of the two sides each follow one direction to the left and right, and the single strip in the middle overlaps atop both the left and right, hence it is said that 'both directions are followed'. From 'If' onward, next it clarifies cutting and tailoring according to the material: first, the text is cited. 'If one obtains robes' means either robe material or finished robes. 'Insufficient' means when making a twenty-five-strip great robe, the cloth is still scarce. Step by step it decreases, hence it says 'up to' twice. From 'According to' onward, it resolves the meaning: first, it resolves the text's phrasing; second, it shows the method of reception; third, it cites text as proof.

First 49 of 1,148 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

四分律行事鈔資持記 — Classical Chinese