四分比丘戒本疏 1.26

1.26

自下第二列罪名相。四戒即四，總釋一切具緣成犯。二門分別：一者通緣有三，如《明了論》云「若人已受大比丘戒，若如來已制此戒，若人不至癡法。」二者別緣，麁分三門、細分七門。言三門者，一境、二心、三業。細分七門者，境有二種：一者所損境、二者成罪境。心有三種：一者緣所損境、二者緣成罪境、三者發業心。業有二種：一者方便業、二者究竟業。隨一一戒，皆應約此通別二緣諸門分別。先釋初戒。通緣可知。於別緣中無所損境及心緣所損境，以其不約損境制故。又復不須緣成罪境，縱心不緣，但當正境即是犯故。然犯有兩：一者自心趣境犯，但具四緣：一者成罪境，境通三趣。女人二形身各三處，男及黃門身各二處，皆是正境；二有發業心決心趣境；三起方便業；四成究竟業。如律文云「入如毛頭」。二者怨逼造境，具三緣：一成罪境、二怨逼境合為方便業、三受樂為究竟業。戒文九句：一、「若比丘」者，善受得戒名為比丘。或容犯此戒，故復言若也。二、「共比丘戒」者，顯共餘僧同受得戒，儻其有犯便乖此共也。三、「同戒」者，顯與清眾同持此戒，儻其有犯便乖此同。四、「不還戒」，還者捨也，反顯捨戒即無所犯。故律文云「若有餘人不樂梵行，聽捨戒還家。若復欲出家，應度令出家受大戒。」良以犯重畢竟障道定不可治，故有此開。《增一阿含》「僧伽摩比丘七變作道，今方成道。從今已去，若欲捨戒聽至七返。」准《十誦律》尼若捨戒，轉根為男方得出家。明不聽尼捨戒更受，以醜惡故。五、「戒羸不自悔」者，亦是不捨之異名也。前句為顯雖深樂道，容煩惱逼帶戒行非。此句為顯持戒心微而戒猶在，若當犯者亦是犯位，故復舉之也。捨戒之法，廣如律論，不能繁敘。此上五句，已下諸戒皆應具有，以初貫後，後不復陳。六、「犯不淨行」，淨謂涅槃，行能趣向。今犯此戒，生死過重眾苦極源，特違涅槃，故獨標名也。七、「乃至共畜生」者，境通三趣，不簡死活，故云乃至也。八、「是比丘波羅夷」者，結以重名也。律中譬如斷人頭不可復起。比丘亦爾，犯此法者不復成比丘，故名波羅夷。九、「不共住」者，示僧儐法。律中且據羯磨、說戒二法不共，理實亦於利養、房寺亦不共住。詳其教意，佛本攝眾，近得人天遠得涅槃。今既並障必墮惡趣，故須永儐也。

From here below is the second [section], listing the names and characteristics of the offences. The four precepts are four [sections], which together explain the fulfilment of conditions that constitutes an offence for all [of them]. There is a distinction in two aspects: First, the general conditions are three, as the *Vimoksasaṃgha-śāstra* says: 'If a person has already received the great bhikṣu precepts, if the Tathāgata has already laid down this precept, and if the person has not reached the state of insanity.' Second, the specific conditions are divided broadly into three gates and finely into seven gates. As for the three gates: 1. the object, 2. the mind, and 3. the bodily or vocal action. As for the fine division into seven gates, the object is of two kinds: 1. the object harmed, and 2. the object that constitutes the offence. The mind is of three kinds: 1. being directed toward the object harmed, 2. being directed toward the object that constitutes the offence, and 3. the mind that initiates the action. The bodily or vocal action is of two kinds: 1. the preparatory action, and 2. the consummate action. In accordance with each precept, distinctions should be made regarding all these gates of both general and specific conditions. First, the first precept is explained. The general conditions are evident. Among the specific conditions, there is no object harmed nor mind directed toward an object harmed, because it was not formulated with reference to harming an object. Furthermore, there need not be [a mind] directed toward the object that constitutes the offence: even if the mind is not directed [toward it], simply encountering the exact object constitutes an offence. However, there are two [ways] of committing an offence: First, committing an offence by one's own mind approaching the object, which requires only four conditions: 1. the object that constitutes the offence—the object extends to the three destinies: women and hermaphrodites each have three orifices on their bodies, men and paṇḍakas each have two orifices on their bodies, all of which are the exact objects; 2. having the mind that initiates the action, a determined mind approaching the object; 3. generating preparatory action; 4. completing the consummate action, as the vinaya text states, 'entering to the size of a hair's tip.' Second, being forced by enemies to engage with the object, which requires three conditions: 1. the object that constitutes the offence; 2. being forced by enemies to contact the object, which combines into the preparatory action; 3. experiencing pleasure, which constitutes the consummate action. The text of the precept has nine phrases: 1. 'If a monk': one who has properly received and attained the precepts is called a monk; or because it allows that [a monk] may violate this precept, it also says 'if.' 2. 'Together with the monk precepts': this indicates that he received and attained the precepts in common with the rest of the Saṃgha; if he should violate them, he then departs from this commonality. 3. 'Sharing the precepts': this indicates that he observes these precepts together with the pure assembly; if he should violate them, he departs from this sharing. 4. 'Not relinquishing the precepts': to 'return' means to relinquish, conversely indicating that if one relinquishes the precepts, there is no violation. Therefore, the vinaya text says: 'If any other person finds no joy in the celibate life, he is permitted to relinquish the precepts and return home. If he again wishes to leave household life, he should be ordained to leave household life and receive the full precepts.' Because committing a grave offence ultimately obstructs the path and definitely cannot be remedied, this allowance exists. The *Ekottarika-āgama* states: 'The monk Saṅgāma undertook the path seven times and only now has attained the path. From now on, if one wishes to relinquish the precepts, he is permitted up to seven times.' According to the *Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya*, if a bhikṣuṇī relinquishes the precepts, she may only leave household life [again] if her faculty transforms into that of a man. This clarifies that a bhikṣuṇī is not permitted to relinquish the precepts and receive them again, because it is considered vile. 5. 'Weak in precepts and not admitting it': this is also an alternative expression for not relinquishing [them]. The preceding phrase is meant to show that although one deeply delights in the path, one may be coerced by defilements and commit wrongdoing while holding the precepts; this phrase is meant to show that although the mind for holding the precepts is weak, the precepts still exist, and if one should violate them, it is also a stage of violation; hence it is stated again. The procedure for relinquishing the precepts is detailed in the vinayas and treatises, and cannot be described at length. The above five phrases should be present in all the following precepts; being established in the first, they apply to the rest, so they will not be stated again later. 6. 'Engages in unchaste conduct': 'chaste' means nirvāṇa, and 'conduct' can advance toward it. Now, violating this precept entails an excessively grave fault of saṃsāra, the ultimate source of all suffering, which specifically contradicts nirvāṇa; therefore, it is specifically designated by name. 7. 'Even with an animal': the object extends to the three destinies, without distinguishing between dead or alive; hence it says 'even.' 8. 'This monk is defeated': this concludes it with the grave designation. In the vinaya, it is compared to severing a person's head, which cannot be restored. A monk is also like this: one who violates this rule no longer remains a monk; hence it is called pārājika. 9. 'And not in communion': this shows the procedure for expulsion from the Saṃgha. In the vinaya, it provisionally refers to non-communion in the two dharmas of karmavācanā and recitation of the prātimokṣa; in reality, it also means not living together in regards to material requisites, rooms, and monasteries. Examining the meaning of this teaching: the Buddha originally gathered the assembly so that in the short term they might attain [rebirth as] humans and devas, and in the long term attain nirvāṇa. Now that both are obstructed and he must fall into the evil destinies, he must be permanently expelled.