梵網經菩薩戒本疏 4

English (machine translation) 4

Language: English

4.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Fazang of the Western Monastery of the State of Wei

4.2

First Section: The Eighth Precept on Intentional Stinginess

First, the intent of establishing [the precept]: giving is the foremost of the myriad practices and subsumes the six pāramitās, casting aside stinginess to accomplish generosity. It is briefly based on ten intentions, as the "Joyful Practice" in the Chapter on the Ten Practices of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra states: "This bodhisattva is a great donor, completely able to renounce all possessions, bestowing them equally upon all sentient beings with an impartial mind. Having given, there is no regret, no looking for karmic reward, no seeking fame, no seeking rebirth in superior realms, and no seeking profit." As for the ten: "1. merely wishing to rescue and protect all sentient beings; 2. wishing to gather in all sentient beings; 3. wishing to benefit all sentient beings; 4. wishing to train in the fundamental practices of all Buddhas; 5. wishing to mindfully recollect the fundamental practices of all Buddhas with a correct mind; 6. wishing to purify the fundamental practices of all Buddhas; 7. wishing to accept and uphold the fundamental practices of all Buddhas; 8. wishing to manifest the fundamental practices of all Buddhas; 9. wishing to extensively expound the fundamental practices of all Buddhas; 10. wishing to cause all sentient beings to leave suffering and attain the bliss of nirvāṇa." These are the ten. From this, one should know that in principle there is no practice in which a bodhisattva does not give.

4.4

Second, explaining the name: begrudgingly clinging to wealth or Dharma and not providing what is sought is called "intentional stinginess." The precept guards against this fault; its name is formed as a determinative compound (tatpuruṣa).

4.5

Third, the sequence: previously, praising oneself and disparaging others was done to seek fame and profit, which is the fault of pursuing wealth not yet obtained; now, it concerns [wealth] already obtained and belonging to oneself, being stingy and not renouncing it, which is the fault of hoarding and storing wealth. The former is coarse and this is subtle in meaning, hence the sequence.

4.6

Fourth, completion of conditions constituting an offense: in this precept there are four situations of offense: 1. being stingy oneself, 2. instructing others, 3. rejoicing in accord, 4. praising stinginess. For now, we explain the completion of conditions regarding oneself; the other three can be inferred accordingly. For oneself, six conditions complete [the offense]: 1. possessing wealth or Dharma oneself; 2. a petitioner being present; 3. having the cognition of the preceding two; 4. giving rise to a stingy, evil mind; 5. directly defying in the face of the condition; 6. the person in front leaving empty-handed.

4.7

Fifth, the meaning of deficiency of conditions: first, deficiency of the first condition has three meanings: 1. If one has nothing at all to give, not even a needle or a blade of grass, one should console and decline the petitioner with kind words and tears from the depths of one's heart, still thinking: 'I now have little merit and cannot fulfill the wishes of sentient beings; this is my fault and blame. I shall vigorously cultivate so that their wishes will be fulfilled.' If one is then diligent and courageous as spoken, this is not an offense. 2. If one relies on having nothing oneself and with an arrogant mind does not apologize and has no shame or remorse, one incurs a minor offense. 3. If the petitioner does not believe one has nothing and repeatedly and forcefully demands, and one thereupon gives rise to resentment, one incurs a medium offense. If one then gives rise to anger, one incurs the subsequent precept on anger; the giving of Dharma is also the same. Next, deficiency of the second condition has four meanings: 1. If there is no petitioner, there is no offense. 2. Having wealth, etc., oneself, seeing a poor, suffering person who is unable to beg or is ashamed and does not beg, yet one does not give, this is also an offense. 3. Having wealth oneself, seeing a fellow cultivator lacking food and clothing and neglecting the cultivation of correct practice, and that person is frugal and does not ask, yet one does not give, this is an offense. 4. Having accumulated much wealth previously, although there is no petitioner, one does not renounce and give to fields of merit. These latter three situations all incur preparatory offenses, not a primary major offense. Deficiency of the third condition has two: the above two situations each have the distinction of cognition and doubt; with cognition there is no offense, while with doubt one commits a preparatory offense; both can be inferred accordingly. Deficiency of the fourth condition has two: if with a compassionate mind, for the sake of subduing that person, one does not give, there is no offense; if with an indeterminate mind, committing a preparatory offense can be understood. Next, deficiency of the fifth condition has four: 1. promising to give but not giving is a major offense; 2. promising much but giving little; 3. promising superior but giving inferior; 4. missing the time and giving later. The latter three are all preparatory offenses. Next, deficiency of the sixth condition has two: 1. if [the petitioner] does not leave empty-handed, there is no offense; 2. although leaving empty-handed, if their intent [to seek] has not yet ended, one commits a preparatory offense.

4.8

Sixth, degrees of gravity: there are five: 1. regarding the object, 2. regarding the field, 3. regarding the harm, 4. regarding the mind, 5. synthesizing the explanation. In the first, there are wealth, Dharma, and fearlessness. The giving of wealth has three: external, internal, and both. Regarding external wealth, generally speaking there are ten: 1. food, etc., 2. medicine, etc., 3. clothing, etc., 4. wealth, etc., 5. animals, etc., 6. male and female servants, 7. fame, 8. royal position, 9. wives and concubines, 10. sons and daughters. In all cases, not giving the former is graver, while not giving the latter is lighter. 2. Regarding the internal body, there are five: 1. temporarily requesting servitude, 2. taking hair, nails, etc., 3. taking as a servant, 4. taking limbs, flesh, and blood, 5. entirely taking physical life. Not giving the former is graver, while not giving the latter is lighter. 2. In the giving of Dharma, there are three: 1. worldly dharmas, 2. dharmas of the two vehicles, 3. dharmas of the bodhisattva path. 3. The giving of fearlessness also has three: 1. relinquishing evil, 2. relinquishing suffering, 3. saving life. In the above two categories, not giving the former is lighter, while not giving the latter is graver, as can be known. Second, regarding the fields, there are four: 1. field of gratitude, namely parents, teachers, masters, etc.; 2. field of virtue, namely the Three Jewels, etc.; 3. field of compassion, namely hungry and impoverished sentient beings, etc.; 4. field of suffering, namely distressed and destitute sentient beings, etc. In all cases, not giving to the former is graver, while not giving to the latter is lighter. Third, regarding harm: for the above four objects there are each two kinds: 1. causing their life to end due to not providing relief; 2. although life does not end, causing great distress, etc. In all cases, the former is grave and the latter light, as can be known. Fourth, regarding the mind: there are also the three poisons, single, paired, combined, etc., which can be known by inferring from the above. Furthermore, stinginess has three grades, like the householder Ruci and others being the gravest; the medium and low can be known. Fifth, regarding synthesized analysis: if one gives rise to superior stinginess toward an inferior object, when directed toward a superior field it is the gravest; or if toward a superior object directed toward an inferior field one gives rise to inferior stinginess, it should be light. The remaining permutations can all be inferred accordingly.

4.9

Seventh, karmic retribution: briefly explained in ten kinds: 1. rebirth among the hungry ghosts, like the mother of Maudgalyāyana and others; 2. suffering in other destinies, like a mangy jackal having not even a single hair to cover its body; 3. suffering poverty and destitution among humans; 4. dwindling and depleting the good roots of past lives; 5. losing the bodhisattva's dāna-pāramitā; 6. through stinginess with the Dharma, constantly suffering stupidity and delusion life after life. The Sujāta Sūtra states: 'If one gives rise to stinginess toward wealth, Dharma, or food, one should know that this person will receive the retribution of foolishness and poverty for immeasurable lives'; 7. through concealing the Dharma eye, constantly being without eyes; 8. through not giving fearlessness, constantly harboring terror life after life, without a moment of peace; 9. constantly having enemies gain the advantage over oneself; 10. causing the three kinds of giving and the six pāramitās to fail to be accomplished. The rest are as explained elsewhere.

4.10

Eighth, regarding the practices of remedy, ten kinds are briefly set forth: First, reflect that one's own body as well as material possessions are all impermanent and destructible phenomena; once ruined, stinginess cannot preserve them, so being stingy and possessive is entirely of no benefit. Second, moreover, these are all equally shared with kings, thieves, floods, fires, unfilial sons, and the like; since they have not yet seized them, one should swiftly give them away in generosity, storing them in a secure treasury to belong permanently to oneself. Third, if out of stinginess one does not give, one plants karma of poverty through successive lifetimes to follow oneself. Fourth, furthermore, because in past lives I did not habituate myself to giving, now though having wealth I am stingy and unable to give; if I do not strive to give now, this habit will not be broken, and its increase will be able to obstruct great giving; therefore, I should now exert my mind to counter stinginess and practice giving. Fifth, again, if, being poor and destitute, one fears failing to survive and is stingy and does not give, one should reflect that poverty is an obstacle to giving; to shatter this obstacle, one should endure suffering and vigorously practice giving. Due to past karma I have experienced various sufferings such as hunger and thirst without benefiting a single sentient being; now by practicing giving I can benefit others, so even if I undergo manifold sufferings up to losing my life, I will ultimately not let the requester return empty-handed, much less when there are still remaining vegetable leaves and the like with which I can sustain my life; therefore, one should endure this poverty and suffering to practice giving. Sixth, if one cannot relinquish one's body, life, and prized possessions, one should immediately reflect: "When I generated the great bodhicitta before the Great Master of the Triple World, all internal and external [things] were already relinquished; how could I now betray my original vow and fail sentient beings?" Seventh, furthermore, if it causes me to commit a bodhisattva pārājika offense, it would be deceiving the Buddhas of the ten directions, which is utterly unacceptable. Eighth, "I now relinquish these unstable things and this foul, defiled body; now I will attain the pure dharmakāya and the indestructible Dharma; since this benefits me, if I do not practice giving, I will forfeit great benefit." Ninth, this body and wealth are illusory things; if one cannot even relinquish them to fulfill the wishes of sentient beings, how could one in the future benefit sentient beings with unexcelled bodhi? Tenth, I should contemplate that all phenomena are empty, devoid of self and what belongs to a self; if now I am stingy and unyielding with this illusory body and wealth, how could I realize and enter into the equal nature of phenomena? Contemplating these ten kinds of remedies, there is no stinginess one cannot relinquish, fully as explained in the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, the Dazhidulun, the Yogācāra[-bhūmi], and so on.

4.11

Ninth, regarding the general and specific: according to the thirty-ninth [fascicle] of the Yogācāra[-bhūmi], there are briefly thirty kinds of non-giving without offense: 1. If one knows that various internal or external gifts will only bring pleasure to that sentient being but not benefit, or neither pleasure nor benefit, one does not give them. 2. If someone comes asking for oneself to be a companion with the desire to act improperly to coerce, harm, deceive, or delude others, one does not give one's body to them. 3. If bodhisattvas have a pure intention in practicing giving and see that immeasurable acts of benefiting sentient beings are presently manifest before them, even if someone comes asking for the limbs of their own body, they should not give them. 4. If members of Māra's retinue with minds bent on harassment come forward asking for limbs of the body, one should not give them, because in mind one reflects that they will incur superior guilt and, on the contrary, suffer harm. 5. If sentient beings who are insane and mentally distracted come asking for the bodhisattva's limbs, one should not give them. 6. If sentient beings, either to harm themselves or to harm others, come asking for poison, fire, swords, liquor, and the like, one should not give them. 7. One does not practice giving using another's property as if it were property given with their consent. 8. One does not act as a matchmaker by giving another's wife or concubine in charity. 9. One does not practice giving with food, drink, and the like that contain living insects. 10. If sentient beings come asking for various things that induce frivolous amusements or bring about what is meaningless, one should not give them, because it would cause them to practice much arrogance and evil conduct, falling into evil destinies after the destruction of the body. 11. One never gives items for hunting and the like to people. 12. If there are sentient beings who are about to kill, one never gives to them. 13. If someone comes asking for nets, snares, and traps to harm sentient beings or to learn how to do so, one does not give them. 14. If an enemy comes seeking out a grudge with the desire to scold, bind, murder, plunder wealth, or punish, one never gives to them. In brief, one does not give any instruments that oppress or harm sentient beings, or tools for frivolous amusement. 15. If a sick person comes asking for food and drink that are immoderate or unsuitable, one does not give them. 16. If sentient beings who are already satiated, being naturally greedy and gluttonous, repeatedly come asking for rare and delicate food and drink, one does not give them. 17. If someone comes asking for one's parents or teachers, one definitely does not give them. 18. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, regarding their own wives, children, male and female slaves, servants, relatives, and dependents, if they do not first explain with right words to make them rejoice, never forcibly coerce them to bring them sorrow and give them to requesters. 19. Even if one has first explained with right words to make them rejoice and generate willing desire, one does not give them to enemies, evil friends, poisoners, swordsmen, rākṣasas, and the like. 20. If someone who severely oppresses sentient beings and delights in committing various violent and evil acts comes asking for the throne, one never gives it. If that evil person already occupied the throne, a bodhisattva with power should even depose him, much less give it to him. 21. Furthermore, bodhisattvas never seize the possessions of their parents, wives, children, male and female slaves, servants, relatives, and dependents to use them in giving. 22. Nor do they harass parents, wives, children, male and female slaves, servants, relatives, and dependents by giving what is being given to requesters. 23. One does not practice giving unlawfully, recklessly, or by coercing and harming others. 24. Furthermore, if bodhisattvas have gone forth in the sacred teaching of the Buddhas, they never practice giving in transgression of any śikṣāpadas. 25. Furthermore, bodhisattvas never give improper items to requesters; that is, giving monks leftover, overnight food and drink, or what is mixed and defiled by excrement, urine, nasal mucus, spittle, vomit, pus, or blood, or without informing them or letting them know, like casting away [unclean] food when giving gruel and the like; that is, giving food mixed or tainted with onions to those who do not eat onions, giving food mixed or tainted with meat to those who do not eat meat, giving drink mixed or tainted with liquor to those who do not drink liquor—none of such things are given. 26. Furthermore, bodhisattvas never orally transmit any correct Dharma to tīrthikas who seek faults. 27. Nor do they give scriptures copied by them. 28. If one knows that someone is naturally very greedy, seeking scriptures and scrolls to hawk and sell them, one does not give to them. 29. If one knows they wish to keep them secret and hidden, one does not give to them. 30. If they do not seek superior wisdom, one does not give to them. It also says: Regarding all those to whom one does not give as explained above, the bodhisattva cannot bear to say directly, "I will not give to you," but must use skillful means to explain and dismiss them. All the property, utensils, and items kept by bodhisattvas, in order to make pure donations, have first been relinquished to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions. Just like a bhikṣu's rite of pure donation, if on observing the requester the time of giving accords with principle, one should think: "There is not the slightest thing that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas do not give to sentient beings." Knowing this, one takes the item and gives it. If on observing the time of giving it does not accord with the correct principle, one should then recall the rite of pure donation previously made and say: "This item belongs to another; I cannot give it to you." With gentle words one explains and skillfully dismisses them. Furthermore, the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā states: although if a newly trained bodhisattva is asked by someone for their head, eyes, and the like and cannot yet give them, they should recite a verse saying: "I have just generated the mind of the Way, / My roots of goodness have not matured; / May I swiftly attain completion, / And later I will surely give them to you." (Examine the treatise text further.) Second, regarding the specific: if one merely examines oneself and has the slightest begrudging thought, one must immediately give; otherwise, one commits an offense. From the esoteric perspective, a bodhisattva should be extremely stingy, meaning that like a life-raft of precepts, not a speck of dust is surrendered, and one still harbors great fear even regarding minor offenses, and so forth.

4.12

Tenth, regarding the explanation of the text, there are also four parts: First, clarifying the conditions of offense, meaning doing it oneself or instructing others to do it, as explained before. Second, in citing the fault to establish the formal prohibition, there are two parts: first citing the fault, meaning the causes, conditions, methods, and acts of stinginess, also with four explanations, understood as before. Second, from "When a bodhisattva sees..." onward, it clarifies the formal prohibition, meaning prohibiting [refusal] of giving to the poor and beggars. But worldly people have two kinds of poverty: 1. poverty of wealth, 2. poverty of Dharma; hence it says "all the poor." The bodhisattva gives these two things, hence it says "provides all of them." Third, from "Yet the bodhisattva, with an evil mind..." downward shows that transgressing the prohibition constitutes an offense. "Evil mind" means that the knot of stinginess is not broken, and it is also being obstinate and not giving, encompassing other afflictions. "Angry mind" means becoming wrathful toward the beggar and not giving to them. This is the mind of not giving. Below, it clarifies the objects not given, first wealth and then Dharma. "Down to not giving..." and so forth: citing the small implies the large; if one does not even give a blade of grass, how much less [would one give] what is greater? Moreover, speaking in terms of the lowest extreme, it therefore says "down to a single grass," and so forth. In the Dharma, "a single particle of dust" is meant to clarify the utmost minimum, not that there are fine particles of dust within the Dharma gates; this conforms to Western idiom, just like in the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra where "not the slightest dharma" is named "no dharma of a fine dust particle" in the Sanskrit text. "Yet on the contrary reviles and insults": this clarifies the characteristic of extreme gravity; begrudging grass and leaves while giving rise to severe anger, uttering evil words and instigating insults, hence it is properly grave. It can be seen that this is complete with the three karmas. Fourth, concluding by indicating the name of the offense, as is understandable.

4.13

The Ninth Precept of the First Section: Precept Against Intentional Anger

4.14

First, regarding the purpose of the prohibition, it is briefly due to ten intentions: 1. Among afflictions, it is the gravest, nothing preceding this; 2. It also constitutes a course of karma that is a cause for evil destinies; 3. It burns away all roots of goodness from past lifetimes; 4. It can form great animosities that are difficult to resolve for successive kalpas; 5. Because of this, one can harm various sentient beings; 6. Even up to being able to commit crimes of immediate retribution; 7. It can obstruct the bodhisattva's kṣānti-pāramitā; 8. It harms the great compassion of bodhisattvas; 9. It causes sentient beings who are to be transformed to abandon and depart; 10. It fully brings about hundreds of thousands of obstacles. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra cites this extensively. It also says: "I do not see a single evil phenomenon that exceeds a single angry thought of a bodhisattva." Since the harm is so severe, it must be prohibited.

4.15

Second, explaining the name: meaning that toward adverse circumstances one gives rise to a harmful mind; the precept guards against this fault, hence it is taken as its name.

4.16

Third, the sequence: stinginess and greed preceded, followed by anger and resentment; hence it comes next.

4.17

Fourth, having the requisite conditions: 1. Facing an adverse circumstance, 2. Conceiving that thought, 3. Not restraining the mind, 4. Giving rise to anger—then one commits [the offense]. This is regarding the mind; if it extends to body and speech, further adding beating and scolding, with five conditions one commits [the offense]. If taken to the ultimate extreme, further adding that the former person comes to apologize yet the anger is still not resolved, only with six conditions does one commit [the offense].

4.18

Fifth, the deficiency of conditions. A deficiency in the first condition has three [cases]: an error regarding a sentient being, an error regarding a non-sentient object, or an error between sentient and non-sentient. With respect to the mind, both may be major [offenses], whereas directly regarding body and speech, there is a minor [offense]. Next, a deficiency in the second condition also has three [cases]: original confusion, altered perception, and doubt. In terms of the mind, both are major; regarding body and speech, it should be known that there is a minor [offense]. A deficiency in the third condition has two [cases]: first, where one constantly and diligently cultivates antidotes but loses mindfulness, it should be a minor preparatory [offense]; second, where one does not diligently cultivate antidotes, it should be a major preparatory [offense]. Next, a deficiency in the fourth condition has three [cases]: lower, medium, and higher. If one gives rise to a lower mind of anger and immediately gives rise to remorse, it is a minor preparatory [offense]; second, if one gives rise to lower anger and does not give rise to remorse, it is a major preparatory [offense]; third, if one gives rise to medium anger and immediately gives rise to remorse, it is a major preparatory [offense]. The rest all enter into major [offenses], as can be known. Regarding body and speech, lacking striking and reviling is a major preparatory [offense]; the reverse of this is then a major [offense]. Regarding the ultimate standard: if the other person further confesses and apologizes, and one generates remorse oneself, it is a major preparatory [offense]; the reverse of this constitutes a major [offense].

4.19

Sixth, the light and heavy [degrees], briefly analyzed according to five headings: first, regarding the object; second, regarding the causal occasion; third, regarding the characteristics of affliction; fourth, regarding the harm caused; fifth, a combined analysis. Within the first, the objects of anger are briefly of ten kinds: 1. worthy and noble ones; 2. the two teachers; 3. parents; 4. transmitters of the Dharma; 5. the Saṃgha of monks; 6. laypeople; 7. one's own male and female disciples; 8. male and female servants; 9. animals; 10. non-sentient things. With respect to the precept, all are major; with respect to the path of action, all are heavier earlier and lighter later. Second, regarding the causal occasion, anger arises briefly on account of ten occasions: 1. going against one's own views; 2. going against one's own emotional desires; 3. encroaching on one's fame and gain; 4. harming one's dependents; 5. reviling [one] without guilt; 6. falsely beating and binding [one]; 7. dismembering one's limbs with a knife; 8. being about to cut off one's life; 9. harming one's parents; 10. destroying the Three Jewels. Anger arising on account of these ten occasions is in all cases heavier earlier and lighter later. Third, regarding the characteristics of affliction, ten kinds are also distinguished: 1. anger arising upon a stir of thought, with no change of facial color; 2. facial color changing in reaction; 3. the entire body trembling; 4. also striking or reviling; 5. upon what arose above, temporarily giving rise to it and immediately feeling remorse; 6. only feeling remorse after passing the night; 7. not relinquishing it for a long time; 8. dissolving it as soon as the other person temporarily apologizes; 9. only dissolving it after the other person seeks remorse for a long time; 10. not dissolving it even when sought for a long time. In all cases, they are lighter earlier and heavier later, as can be known. Fourth, regarding the harm, ten kinds are also briefly shown: 1. causing another to abandon the Buddha-Dharma on account of anger toward them; 2. further uttering evil revilement; 3. beating with sticks and binding; 4. damaging another's property; 5. dismembering another's limbs; 6. cutting off another's life-faculty; 7. harming one's own relatives; 8. abandoning the Three Jewels forever; 9. burning down monasteries and harming monastics; 10. committing the various heinous offenses. In all cases, they are lighter earlier and heavier later. Fifth, the combined analysis also displays ten levels, meaning that among the preceding four, arising on account of a minor matter toward an exalted object, with heavy anger causing great harm, is the heaviest. The rest are combined according to their sequence, as well as out of sequence, each having light and heavy degrees, which can be understood and seen by inferring accordingly.

4.20

Seventh, the retribution obtained, briefly showing ten kinds: 1. anger incurs ten offenses, as in the Dazhidulun; 2. due to anger, one enters the eight great hells, as stated in the first fascicle of the Shan jie jing; 3. one also falls into the realms of hungry ghosts and animals; the Avataṃsaka Sūtra states: "Regarding the offense of anger, the highest is the cause for hell, the medium for animals, and the lowest for hungry ghosts"—the above are retributive fruits. 4. As for concordant fruits, the sūtra states: "If born among humans, one obtains two kinds of retribution: first, others constantly search out one's faults; second, one is constantly vexed and harmed by others." 5. As for the dominant fruit, regarding the environment of retribution, the seventh fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccaya[-bhāṣya] states: "Due to anger, it causes the taste of fruits to be pungent and bitter." 6. The body is constantly ugly, and people do not delight in seeing it; 7. losing the dhyāna-bliss of the higher realms; 8. contravening the liberation of the two vehicles; 9. harming the bodhisattva's practice of the two benefits; 10. losing one's station in the five ranks of a bodhisattva. These can be known.

4.21

Eighth, the practice of cultivation and remedy, briefly distinguishing contemplation of ten kinds of antidotes to keep anger from arising: 1. Contemplating that all sentient beings, from beginningless time, have never not been my parents, relatives, upādhyāyas, revered elders, and the like; therefore, one should only give rise to a mind of loving-kindness and filial devotion—how could one have anger and add striking and reviling? 2. Contemplating impermanence. The Yogācārabhūmi states: "Those sentient beings, whether born or growing, each and every one is a phenomenon subject to impermanent death. The ultimate retaliation against an enemy is to cut off their life. Since the lives of these sentient beings are cut off moment by moment, for what reason would a wise person wish to cut them off further? Regarding such phenomena of impermanent saṃsāra among sentient beings, a wise person should not even give rise to a defiled and turbid mind toward them, much less harm them with hands, clods of earth, or sticks, and how much less permanently cut off their life altogether? Therefore, one is able to endure all harms from enemies." 3. Contemplating suffering. The Yogācārabhūmi states: "Furthermore, the bodies of oneself and others all take intrinsic suffering as their essence. Because that person lacks knowledge, they compound suffering upon my body, on top of its essence of intrinsic suffering. Since I possess knowledge, why should I add further suffering on top of their essence of intrinsic suffering? Moreover, even those sentient beings who are in great prosperity are constantly pursued by the three sufferings, not to mention those who are in decline! Now, in this situation, I should diligently employ means to cause them to be free from all sufferings, and should not add further suffering upon them." 4. Contemplating karmic conditions. That is, if I am now without fault and am struck and reviled out of nowhere, it must be due to karma from past conditions. If it were not so, how could a painful retribution arise without a cause? Since it is definitively one's own karma, one should not be angry at another. A verse in the Saṃbhāra-parikathā states: "Struck, reviled, terrified, killed, and bound, / I will never blame or resent another; / these are all my own transgressions, / manifesting as karmic retribution." 5. Contemplating the multiplication of suffering: that is, because I tormented and harmed others in the past, I incur this torment now. If I do not endure it now, I will plant the causes and conditions for even greater suffering in the future. If I do not relinquish this cause of suffering, I will be causing what is unpleasant to myself, producing fetters for myself, and giving rise to enmity and harm toward myself, not toward another. 6. Contemplating pity for the foolish. In the Dazhidulun, if one is struck and reviled by a drunken person or someone possessed by a demon, one does not get angry at them. Sentient beings are also like this: intoxicated by the liquor of ignorance and possessed and driven by the demons of afflictions, they lack autonomy, and therefore one should not get angry. One should merely think: "This is the fault of afflictions, not the blame of sentient beings. I should diligently seek bodhi and cure the disease of afflictions for all sentient beings, making sure they are permanently healed." 7. Further contemplating for oneself: "I was not born in a pure land, a place free from affliction; since I am here in this defiled land, it is natural to suffer affliction. I should only subdue my own mind to seek escape, and should not be angry at them. Just as when entering a thorn forest it is natural to be pricked, one should only seek to get out and not get angry at the thorns." 8. Further contemplating: "I have generated bodhicitta myself to bear the heavy burden for all sentient beings. If I would even suffer the pains of hell for others, how could I fail to endure such minor suffering, thereby violating my original vow? If I do not endure it, I will not subdue myself, so how could I cause others to abandon all afflictions? Therefore, I must not be angry." 9. Further contemplating: "I am now training in the various bodhisattva practices. Among bodhisattva practices, the practice of patience is foremost; keeping precepts and ascetic practices cannot match it. This practice can only be accomplished through torment and harm; without that torment, my practice would not be accomplished. That person bestows upon me a great practice, so I should feel ashamed and grateful toward them; if I am not ashamed and grateful, I also incur a grave fault—how could I turn my back on their kindness and conversely become angry and vexed? That would be utterly improper." The sūtra says: "Devadatta is a great kalyāṇamitra." This is what it means. 10. Further contemplating the lack of intrinsic nature in causes. The sūtra states: "Due to the hand, knife, stick, and my own body, striking is brought about. I should not now be angry at another out of nowhere." The explanation states: If one gets angry at the other because the striking was brought about by them, it was also brought about by my having the striking—why do I not get angry at myself? Furthermore, striking arises from conditions and must lack intrinsic nature; because it lacks intrinsic nature, it is ultimately empty. Since both the agent of striking and the object struck do not exist at all, even patience is not established—how could anger be possible? The Dharmapada states: "Knowing that anger is like a mirage, / in patience there is nothing to be endured." A verse in the Viśeṣacintibrahma-paripṛcchā Sūtra states: "The body, the enemy, knives, and sticks / all arise from the four great elements; / regarding earth, water, fire, and wind, / there has never been any injury. / Even if the body is dismembered limb by limb, / the mind remains ever unmoved; / knowing the mind is not inside, / nor does it arise outside. / All phenomena perish moment by moment, / their nature is never established; / within this there is no revilement, / nor is there any reverence."

4.22

Ninth, general application and exceptions. While the other precepts all have exceptions, this precept alone has none, because the fault of anger obstructing the path is extremely profound. If one constantly cultivates the antidotes and merely loses mindfulness when confronted with an adverse object, according to the Yogācārabhūmi there is no offense, but there are no further exceptions. If based on the esoteric meaning, in the Liang Treatise the bodhisattva also gives rise to anger in order to scold the various afflictions.

4.23

Tenth, explaining the text, which has four meanings as before: 1. citing the fault; 2. the direct prohibition; 3. the violation; 4. adjudicating the offense. Within the first, oneself and others are cited separately, which further applies generally to the four positions of cause, condition, method, and act; the four explanations are the same as before. Second, under "Yet a bodhisattva..." explaining the direct prohibition, it first clarifies the practice of benefiting others, meaning causing them to generate roots of goodness without anger, hence it says "matters of non-contention"; furthermore, it is to ensure that within the roots of goodness there are no matters of angry dispute. "Always generate a mind of compassion" refers to the mind that causes benefit to sentient beings, meaning regarding them with great compassion as oneself; how could anger be allowed to arise? Third, under "yet conversely..." explaining the violation, there are three [parts]: 1. clarifying the object of anger, meaning the two objects of sentient and non-sentient; 2. clarifying the active function of anger, meaning revilement gives rise to vocal karma, striking gives rise to bodily karma, and not ceasing gives rise to mental karma; 3. under "the other person..." clarifying the depth and gravity of anger, meaning nursing resentment that is difficult to relinquish, hence it says "unresolved." Fourth, the adjudication of offense can be known.

4.24

The Tenth Precept of the First Section: Slandering the Three Jewels

4.25

First, the intention behind the enactment, briefly due to ten intentions: 1. because the path of action is extremely heavy and none exceeds this; 2. because it burns away the roots of goodness completely without remainder; 3. because turning one's back on kindness and virtue is the extreme among evils; 4. because it destroys faithful mind and extinguishes the Dharma-eye; 5. because among wholesome practices, whether minor or major, none can be accomplished; 6. because it enters into the tīrthikas' net of wrong views; 7. because, as great wrong view, it severs the roots of goodness; 8. because it acts as an evil acquaintance to sentient beings; 9. because the lineage of the Three Jewels is severed by this view; 10. because it causes oneself and others to achieve Avīci karma. Therefore, it is enacted.

4.26

Second, explaining the name: superior virtue is worthy of cherishing, hence it is called the "Three Jewels"; defiling them contrary to reason, hence it is called "slander"; the precept prevents this fault, hence it is used as the name.

4.27

Third, the sequence: it comes here because anger came previously and wrong view follows next.

4.28

Fourth, possessing the conditions has five: 1. confronting an assembly of people; 2. the object being the Three Jewels; 3. giving rise to those three perceptions; 4. adopting wrong views; 5. uttering words of slander—then one commits an offense.

4.29

Fifth, missing conditions: if the first condition is missing because the object is non-sentient, it is a grave preparatory offense; if the second condition is missing because it is not the realm of the Three Jewels, one incurs a grave preparatory offense; if the third condition is missing, being fundamentally deluded one incurs no offense, while mistaken perception and doubt both incur a preparatory offense; if the fourth condition is missing, because [wrong] view is not broken, one incurs a grave preparatory offense; if the fifth condition is missing, because the words have not been uttered or disparate words [are spoken], all incur a grave preparatory offense.

4.30

Sixth, relative gravity: there are six [aspects]: 1. regarding the audience addressed; 2. regarding the object slandered; 3. regarding the agent slandering; 4. regarding the harm caused; 5. combined assessment; 6. oneself versus another. In the first, addressing one person, two persons, many persons, or a great assembly—the former are lighter and the latter graver. In the second, regarding the object slandered, the Three Jewels comprise three kinds: namely, the enduring, the distinct, and the identical essence, or one, two, or three—each, in sequence, is lighter before and graver after. In the third, regarding the agent slandering, minds have three grades: inferior, middling, and superior; speech has coarse, fine, and middling; their lightness and gravity can be known accordingly. In the fourth, regarding the harm caused, there are five: 1. due to this slander, causing many people who have aroused bodhicitta but are indeterminate to regress; 2. causing those who have already believed to regress; 3. causing those who have not yet believed not to believe; 4. causing those who do not yet have wrong views to generate wrong views; 5. causing those who already have wrong views to cling firmly to them. All are graver before and lighter after. In the fifth, combined assessment: slandering a superior object before a great assembly with supreme wrong view, uttering coarse words, and causing great harm constitutes the gravest. The rest, in order and in various combinations, all possess lightness and gravity, which can be understood by analogy. In the sixth, oneself versus another: 1. oneself; 2. another; 3. both. All are lighter before and graver after, as can be known.

4.31

Seventh, the retribution incurred: slandering the Three Jewels is a sin equal to the five heinous crimes, falling into the Avīci Hell, as stated in the "Niraya Chapter" of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. Furthermore, just as Dharma Master Weiyi slandered the Mahāyāna and fell into hell for many kalpas, and afterwards was born among humans always blind without eyes, as stated in such texts as the Sarvadharmāpravṛtti Sūtra; furthermore, just as Udraka Rāmaputra will be in hell, and so forth. Furthermore, the Dazhidulun states that wrong view incurs ten sins. (To be examined and recorded.)

4.32

Eighth, corrective practice: faith and wisdom mutually guide one toward the realm of the Three Jewels, with deep forbearance and pure faith that are firm and indestructible, preferring to surrender body and life for hundreds of thousands of kalpas rather than generate a single thought of doubt or the like; discerning with wisdom that among heaven and humans, mundane and supramundane, only this is supreme; therefore one's faithful mind is wholeheartedly resolute.

4.33

Ninth, scope of exception: if without slanderous intention one speaks hurriedly for the sake of subduing sentient beings, there should be no offense. All others permit no exception, as can be known. If it concerns esoteric speech refuting characteristics, there is no need to explain the rationale, so long as it is understood that one must not cause others to doubt.

4.34

Tenth, explanation of the text: the four meanings are as before: 1. citing the fault; 2. direct prohibition; 3. transgression; 4. adjudication of the offense. In the first, it first refers to the agent who slanders, namely oneself or another. Cause, condition, method, and karma are the means used to slander. The four explanations are as before; one may understand this by analogy with those explanations. Second, from "whereas a bodhisattva" downward explains the direct prohibition. Within this, the Dharma is presented first, followed by the simile. In the former, two types of persons are involved: 1. tīrthikas, due to wrong view; 2. evil persons, due to having no faith, whether internally or externally. "Slandering in a single word" clarifies that what is heard is minimal; "three hundred spears piercing the heart" clarifies that the acute pain is immense. Question: The Avataṃsaka Sūtra states: "When a bodhisattva hears the Buddha being praised or defamed, in the Buddha Dharma their mind remains steadfast and unmoved." Why does this text say that it is like spears piercing the heart? Answer: Sentient beings are of four types: 1. those who feel joy upon hearing defamation of the Buddha, due to wrong view; 2. those who feel neither joy nor sorrow, being outsiders to the Buddha Dharma; 3. those who feel pain upon hearing it, being disciples of initial aspiration; 4. those who feel neither sorrow nor joy upon hearing it, being non-retrogressing bodhisattvas, because they know that the Buddha's merit cannot be defamed, as defamation cannot reach it. That sūtra is based on the stage of non-retrogression, while this passage pertains to initial aspiration; hence they differ. If one at the initial aspiration were forcefully to identify with the latter stage and feel no pain, they would be a foolish, evil person who accords with their original evil view to endure such a thing, which is inadmissible. Question: All dharmas are empty; why must one force oneself to feel pain? Answer: True emptiness does not destroy conditioned origination and karmic fruit; therefore, superior and inferior are clearly distinct. If one destroys this as empty, it is the tīrthika view of wrongly grasping emptiness. As stated in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, five hundred brāhmaṇas slandered: "All is empty; where could there be the Buddha, bodhi, and so forth?" Due to this slander, the king killed those sorts of people, gaining merit without sin. Would you now wish to be like them? Third, from "how much more so if by one's own mouth" downward explains transgression. Here, it cites the lesser to illustrate the greater: hearing a single word already produces such pain is citing the lesser; how much more so committing slander oneself illustrates the greater. Lack of faith and lack of filial piety are the causes of slander. Fourth, from "yet instead, conversely" downward formally constitutes transgression, meaning aiding the aforementioned two kinds of persons to accomplish slanderous deeds. Below, it concludes by specifying the name of the offense. The above concludes the ten major precepts.

4.35

Next, third, concluding exhortation to cultivate and study, which comprises four [parts]: 1. concluding exhortation to guard against profound [offenses]; 2. explaining the harms of transgression to exhort upholding; 3. upholding being identical throughout the three times; 4. summarizing the abridged and pointing to the extensive. In the first, "you persons of good study" has two meanings: first, it means these persons are those who are good at studying the precepts; second, it means those who study goodness, addressing these persons, meaning the great assembly, and also future practitioners of the bodhisattva path. From "these bodhisattva..." downward concludes the count and names. From "should..." downward is a sincere warning and exhortation, which has a two-fold meaning: first, in a single precept, one should not transgress even a speck of dust, how much less transgress an entire precept. "Dust" clarifies a minute fraction, as worldly saying goes, "a minister has not a speck of dust or dewdrop of merit for the state," etc.; another interpretation is that just as one guards a flotation bladder, not transgressing even a speck of dust, and so forth. Second, among the ten precepts, one should not transgress even one, how much less transgress all ten. Second, from "if one transgresses" downward explains that transgression incurs losses, which contains two [parts]: first, explaining the loss of ten great benefits, and second, explaining incurring the great harms of the three destinies. In the former: 1. losing the great aspiration, meaning that by transgressing these ten major precepts in this present body, one becomes unfit to arouse bodhicitta, because it violates one's original vow and one is not a vessel of the Dharma; 2. losing the status of a king, meaning attaining the status of a minor king has the bodhisattva precepts as its cause, and because the cause is destroyed, the fruit is lost; 3. the status of a wheel-turning king is also like this; 4. losing [the status of] a monk, meaning that having transgressed this precept one must enter hell and definitely cannot become a monk among humans, and furthermore, due to transgressing a major precept, one is presently unviable as a monk, hence it says "losing"; 5. [the status of] a nun is also like this. The above four ranks of loss apply generally to ordinary and Hīnayāna ranks; the five types below are loss of Mahāyāna ranks. Among them, four ranks are causal stages, namely the three grades of worthies and ten grades of sages. One rank is the stage of fruition, which has two: first, the fruit of the dharmakāya, meaning the nature of the stage of fruition is called Buddha-nature; second, the fruit of the saṃbhogakāya, which, being accomplished through wondrous practice, is called the wondrous fruit. The term "eternally abiding" applies to both places; by transgressing these ten major precepts, all such ranks can no longer be accomplished, hence it says "all are lost." Second, from "falling into the three evil..." downward explains that due to transgressing these precepts one enters the hells, hungry ghosts, or animals. "For two kalpas or three kalpas": due to the relative gravity at the time of transgression, as explained before. This person, in those three destinies, according to their corresponding number of kalpas, indeterminate between two or three here or there. "Hearing not the names of parents and so forth": this clarifies that the two parents represent the depth of loving nurture, and the Three Jewels represent the utmost in rescue and protection; suffering pain in those places without hearing these names clarifies that there is no deliverance. Another interpretation: although emerging from evil destinies, one is born in remote lands among the lowly, not hearing the names of the two parents and Three Jewels for two or three kalpas. The text admits both interpretations, as can be known. "Therefore, one should not transgress them one by one" is the general conclusion exhorting upholding. Third, from "you all..." downward admonishes one to study identically with the three times, having two meanings: first, that bodhisattvas of the three times together study these precepts; second, that each bodhisattva should study these precepts across these three stages. Fourth, from "these ten precepts..." downward summarizes the abridged and points to the extensive. In the extensive text of this sūtra, there is a "Chapter on the Eighty Thousand Deportments," in which the characteristics of these ten precepts are extensively explained. The above completes the general explanation of the first section on the ten major precepts.

4.36

Section Two: Minor Defilement Offenses

First 36 of 93 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

梵網經菩薩戒本疏 — Classical Chinese