[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [天台菩薩戒疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812) › 1.21 # 天台菩薩戒疏 1.21 天台菩薩戒疏 1.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1.21) 第六、料簡者。問：無作戒體，唯實相心。緣體護持，因果宗趣，亦唯實相。如何差別？答：體是宗教之宗，不即不離。譬如屋空，與梁柱等。空譬於體，梁等譬宗。不即不離，思之可見。應知體是能持能領之心相，宗是所持所領之戒法。問：《涅槃》篇聚，並是別教菩薩律儀。云何而言此菩薩戒，別、圓菩薩同稟？答：別教菩薩，行布而修，四教法門，無不行學。故《涅槃》次第五行，軌範別教之人初心厭世出家，白四羯磨先稟藏通律儀，禁防三業故先明篇聚，乃至十戒五支名戒聖行，豈非漸具十重四十八輕？故知此二義通別圓菩薩毘尼之藏。問：若爾，教利根有入別圓之義，亦應有此律儀之分？答：且約當教鈍根未稟佛性之戒，同依三藏律儀，利根被接入於別圓，還從能接名別圓人，或有接入之義，故四教外別立位名。問：聲聞制於身口，菩薩唯制於心，云何三藏三乘同稟五篇七聚？答：大小律儀俱制三業，自行化他之異，故得大小乘名。小戒若不制心，方便蘭吉從何而立？菩薩雖云「剎那造罪殃墜無間」，但云剎那為無間因，十重四十八輕莫不皆從身口具緣而結，況三藏菩薩是彼小中之大，對此料簡殊不相應。問：如前十戒乘戒互通，如何取別？答：制教所明從禁惡邊而得戒名，化教所明從修禪學慧而立乘稱，此則別也。若其通者，三學相須如目足，並能運載所趣之處，通得名乘，並有斷惡之能十總名戒。今菩薩戒三義互通，從制止惡名之為戒，從制起行常住慈悲則是乘也。故一一戒，乘戒具足。戒即法身，乘即般若。乘戒不二，慈悲應化，即是解脫。解脫德，假觀為因，應身為果；般若德，空觀為因，報身為果；法身德，中觀為因，法身為果。故知戒戒三聚互融，三觀三身相即。三聚三身，既無優劣，四十八輕十重，等持心性，寧有淺深？假分乘戒兩名，一一無非實相，方是圓融菩薩戒也。故序中云：「一切色心，是情是心，皆入佛性戒中。」言可驗矣。不別而別，輕重宛然。止惡為正文廣，起觀是傍語略。從多從正，律儀防禁，三業義邊，名菩薩戒。 > Sixth, critical analysis. Question: The unmanifest precept-essence is solely the mind of the true mark. Upholding it by conditions, cause and effect, principle and purpose, are likewise solely the true mark. How do they differ? Answer: The essence is the fundamental principle of the teaching's doctrine; they are neither identical nor separate. It is like the empty space of a room compared with the beams, pillars, and so on: the empty space is an analogy for the essence, and the beams and so on are an analogy for the doctrine. Being neither identical nor separate can be seen upon reflection. One should know that the essence is the mental characteristic of being able to uphold and receive, while the doctrine is the precept Dharma that is upheld and received. Question: The categories and classes of precepts in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra are all the bodhisattva vinaya of the distinct teaching. Why then is it said that the bodhisattvas of the distinct and perfect teachings jointly receive these bodhisattva precepts? Answer: Bodhisattvas of the distinct teaching cultivate sequentially; among the Dharma gates of the four teachings, there are none they do not practice and learn. Therefore, the sequential five practices of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra serve as a model for someone of the distinct teaching who, in their initial mind weary of the world, goes forth into homelessness, first receiving the vinaya of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings via the fourfold karman motion, and in order to restrain the three types of karmic actions, first explains the categories and classes of precepts, up to the ten precepts and five divisions termed the holy practice of precepts. Does this not gradually encompass the ten major and forty-eight minor precepts? Thus we know these two meanings apply to the vinaya piṭaka of bodhisattvas of both the distinct and perfect teachings. Question: If so, if those of sharp faculties within the teaching have the principle of entering the distinct and perfect teachings, should they also have a share in this vinaya? Answer: Provisionally speaking, regarding dull faculties within that teaching who have not yet received the precepts of Buddha-nature, they all rely upon the Tripiṭaka vinaya; those of sharp faculties are drawn in to enter the distinct and perfect teachings, and following that which draws them in, they are named persons of the distinct and perfect teachings. Or, because they possess the principle of being drawn in, stage names are established separately outside the four teachings. Question: Śrāvakas are restricted in body and speech, while bodhisattvas are restricted solely in mind; why do the three vehicles of the Tripiṭaka teaching jointly receive the five categories and seven classes? Answer: Both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna vinayas restrict all three types of karmic actions; because of the difference between self-cultivation and transforming others, they obtain the names Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. If the Hīnayāna precepts did not restrict the mind, from where would preparatory offenses and duṣkṛta arise? Although for bodhisattvas it is said that 'committing a transgression in a single kṣaṇa causes one to fall disastrously into Avīci', this merely states that a single kṣaṇa is the cause for Avīci; the ten major and forty-eight minor precepts are all without exception established through the full assembly of conditions of body and speech. Moreover, the bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka teaching are the 'great' within that 'small', so this critical analysis does not correspond at all. Question: If the vehicle and precepts are mutually pervasive as in the previous ten precepts, how does one distinguish them? Answer: What the teaching of restraint explains derives the name 'precept' from the aspect of prohibiting evil; what the teaching of transformation explains establishes the designation 'vehicle' from cultivating dhyāna and learning wisdom. This, then, is their distinction. As for their mutual pervasion: the three trainings are mutually dependent like eyes and feet, and both can transport one to where one is heading, so they both can be called 'vehicle'; both possess the ability to sever evil, so all ten are generally called 'precept'. Now, the bodhisattva precepts mutually encompass these three meanings: from the restraint that ceases evil, it is called a 'precept'; from restraint initiating practice with eternal compassion, it is a 'vehicle'. Therefore, each and every precept is fully endowed with both vehicle and precept. The precept is itself the dharmakāya; the vehicle is itself prajñā. Precept and vehicle being non-dual, with compassionate response and transformation, is itself liberation. The virtue of liberation has the contemplation of provisionality as its cause and the nirmāṇakāya as its result; the virtue of prajñā has the contemplation of emptiness as its cause and the saṃbhogakāya as its result; the virtue of the dharmakāya has the contemplation of the middle as its cause and the dharmakāya as its result. Thus we know that each precept mutually integrates the three cumulative precepts, and the three contemplations and three bodies are mutually identical. Since the three cumulative precepts and the three bodies have neither superiority nor inferiority, how could the forty-eight minor and ten major precepts, equally upholding the mind-nature, have shallowness or depth? Provisionally distinguishing the two names of vehicle and precept, each and every one is nothing other than the true mark; only then is it the perfectly integrated bodhisattva precept. Therefore, the preface states: 'All forms and minds, whatever is sentient and whatever is mind, all enter into the Buddha-nature precepts.' These words can be verified! Though not distinct, they are distinct, with the minor and major clearly defined. Ceasing evil is the primary subject, so the text is extensive; generating contemplation is secondary, so the words are brief. In terms of the predominant and primary aspect, from the aspect of vinaya prevention and restraint of the three karmas, it is named the bodhisattva precepts. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1.20) - [Next: 1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1.22) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812~en-mt.1.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1812.1.21) · Pramāṇa