菩薩戒本疏 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

In explaining the minor precepts, there are also three general divisions: first, the concluding introduction that states the general outline; second, the specific explanation in sequential order; third, the concluding summary after the exposition. Within the specific explanation, the forty-eight minor [precepts] are concluded according to the text into five sections altogether, and at the end of each section, reference is made to the remaining text, indicating that there should be an extensive exposition. Within these five sections, when precisely taken according to the text, all pertain to the three collections [of pure precepts], because section by section they all explain the meanings of abandoning evil, embracing good, and benefiting sentient beings. Discussing in terms of the general tenor, the former ten parājika precepts are judged to be the discipline (saṃvara), while the latter forty-eight are divided into the other two. The sūtra states: 'The precept of embracing the discipline refers to the ten parājikas; the precept of embracing wholesome qualities refers to the eighty-four thousand Dharma-gates; the precept of embracing sentient beings refers to benevolence, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, transforming and reaching all sentient beings so that sentient beings all attain peace and joy.' Furthermore, among the forty-eight, the first thirty precepts mostly pertain to embracing good, and the latter eighteen precepts mostly pertain to benefiting sentient beings. Among the forty-four minor precepts of the Bodhisattvabhūmi-dhāraṇī, the first thirty-three also pertain to embracing good, and the latter eleven precepts pertain to benefiting sentient beings. Although the aspects of the precepts in both texts differ in their appearance and absence, their characteristics when judged by citing the general tenor are also similar. Furthermore, the sūtra establishes the fundamental teachings, while the treatise determines the specific doctrines; therefore, the sūtra and the treatise cannot contradict each other. In the treatise's analysis of the nine kinds of aspects of the perfection of morality, the second, 'all morality,' is stated as: 'Morality of the householder portion and morality of the renunciant portion—these are called all morality. Furthermore, relying on these two portions of pure morality, three kinds are briefly stated: first, the morality of discipline; second, the morality of embracing wholesome qualities; third, the morality of benefiting sentient beings. As for the morality of discipline, it refers to the prātimokṣa disciplines of the seven assemblies received by bodhisattvas, which are the bhikṣu precepts up to the upāsikā precepts. Such seven kinds, relying on the two portions of householders and renunciants, should be known accordingly; this is called the bodhisattva's morality of discipline. As for the morality of embracing wholesome qualities, it refers to all wholesome deeds accumulated by bodhisattvas through body, speech, and mind for the sake of great bodhi after receiving the morality of discipline, which are collectively called the morality of embracing wholesome qualities. What is this again? It means that bodhisattvas, relying on precepts and abiding in precepts, diligently study and practice listening, reflecting, cultivating calm (śamatha) and insight (vipaśyanā), and delighting in solitude; likewise, constantly toward venerable elders, they diligently cultivate the acts of joining palms, rising to greet, inquiring, prostrating, and respecting; that is, diligently cultivating respectful service toward venerable elders; with compassion and earnest care attending to, waiting upon, and supplying the sick; expressing approval with "excellent!" for subtle explanations; sincerely praising pudgalas endowed with virtue; toward all sentient beings in the worlds of the ten directions and all their meritorious karma, with superior aspiration and pure faith giving voice to rejoice [in them]; patiently enduring and forgiving all transgressions committed by others; dedicating all wholesome roots already done or not yet done through body, speech, and mind toward unexcelled, perfect bodhi; constantly giving rise to various right vows; making offerings to the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha with all kinds of supreme, exquisite requisites; constantly, vigorously, and energetically cultivating wholesome qualities; abiding in non-heedlessness through body, speech, and mind; guarding with correct mindfulness, clear comprehension, and correct practice regarding all śikṣāpadas; strictly guarding the sense doors, knowing moderation in food, constantly practicing wakefulness in the first and last watches of the night; associating with virtuous persons, relying on good spiritual friends; thoroughly and clearly knowing their own faults and deeply seeing their errors; having thoroughly known and deeply seen their errors, as for those not yet committed, single-mindedly guarding and upholding them; as for those already committed, before Buddhas, bodhisattvas, or fellow practitioners, disclosing them with the utmost sincerity and repenting of them according to the Dharma. All such precepts of embracing, upholding, and increasing wholesome qualities are called the bodhisattva's morality of embracing wholesome qualities. What is the bodhisattva's morality of benefiting sentient beings? It should be known that this briefly has eleven aspects. What are the eleven? Namely, that bodhisattvas act as companions to sentient beings in their respective undertakings that can lead to benefit and profit; toward the suffering of illnesses and the like that arise in sentient beings, they also act as companions in attending to their illnesses and the like. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, relying on various mundane and supramundane benefits, are able to explain essential dharmas to sentient beings, first speaking with skillful means, first speaking in accordance with the truth, and subsequently causing them to attain and preserve those respective benefits. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, toward sentient beings who have previously shown kindness, well remember and acknowledge their kindness, repaying them in person as appropriate. Furthermore, bodhisattvas are able to rescue and protect all sentient beings who have fallen into various fears of lions, tigers, wolves, demons, kings, thieves, water, fire, and the like, causing them to be freed from such places of terror. Furthermore, bodhisattvas provide skilled explanations to sentient beings who have lost wealth and relatives, causing them to be freed from sorrow and distress. Furthermore, bodhisattvas give all requisites of livelihood to sentient beings who lack the requisites of livelihood. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, in accordance with reason, properly provide reliance and guide the community according to the Dharma. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, in accordance with worldly affairs and speech, summon and go and come, converse and congratulate and comfort, visit and rise at appropriate times, and receive food and drink and the like from others. In brief, they distance themselves from all current activities that could lead to meaningless displeasure, and in all remaining matters, their minds follow along. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, whether covertly or overtly, display their real virtues, causing sentient beings to joyfully advance in study. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, toward those with faults, inwardly harboring affection, the intention to benefit and bring peace and joy, and superior aspiration, tame and scold them, punish and expel them, wishing to cause them to leave unwholesome states and establish them in wholesome states. Furthermore, bodhisattvas, by the power of supernormal faculties, skillfully display the characteristics of the destinies such as the hells (naraka), causing sentient beings to feel revulsion toward the unwholesome, skillfully leading them into the Buddha's holy teachings, causing them to rejoice with faith and delight, generate a mind of seeing the rare, and diligently cultivate correct practice.' I observe: among the forty-eight minor precepts, when compared with what the treatise says, the text mutually appears and disappears, with different divisions and combinations, and the order of precedence also differs. The sūtra establishes the fundamental teachings, setting them up separately according to specific matters; the treatise analyzes the doctrinal categories, speaking of them collectively according to kinds. The intent in dividing and combining needs to be weighed and considered.

2.3

In the first precept:

2.4

The first: the precept on respectfully serving venerable elders.

2.5

The Buddha said: 'Disciples of the Buddha! When about to succeed to the throne of a king, when about to succeed to the position of a wheel-turning king, or when the hundred officials receive their posts, one should first receive the bodhisattva precepts. All spirits and deities will rescue and protect the bodies of the king and the hundred officials, and all Buddhas will rejoice. Having already received the precepts, one should give rise to a filial mind and a respectful mind; seeing a senior elder (thera), upādhyāya, ācārya, great fellow student, one of identical view, or one of identical practice, one should rise to welcome them, prostrate, and inquire after them. If, on the contrary, a bodhisattva gives rise to an arrogant mind, conceited mind, ignorant mind, or angry mind, and does not rise to welcome them, prostrate, and inquire after them, failing in each case to make offerings according to the Dharma, even selling one's own body, country, cities, sons and daughters, seven jewels, and hundreds of possessions to provide for them—if one does not do so, one commits a duṣkṛta offense.'

2.6

This is what the treatise states: 'Likewise, constantly toward venerable elders, they diligently cultivate the acts of joining palms, rising to greet, inquiring, prostrating, and respecting; that is, diligently cultivating respectful service toward venerable elders.' Now, wishing to embrace good necessarily relies on superior conditions. If one is haughty toward those who should be honored, that obstructs advancement in goodness; therefore, it is instituted that they must respectfully serve them. The complete conditions for constituting an offense ought by reason to be fully discussed. However, since it is not an offense by nature (prakṛti-sāvadya), it does not necessarily possess all five conditions; hence, in the duṣkṛta [offenses], the conditions of the offense are stated briefly. Yet among the five conditions—matter, perception, desire, and skillful means to completion—although it is not a path of unwholesome karma by nature, it must definitely possess the fourth, defilement. If it is an afflicted offense, it is present; in an unafflicted offense, it is not necessarily present. Regarding the gravity of the offense: those committed intentionally with defilement are all grave; those unintentional and unafflicted are all minor. All precepts are like this, so it will not be discussed again. Regarding the identity and difference of the śikṣāpadas: both the great and small [vehicles] institute it. However, the śrāvaka institutes it under the portal of abandoning faults, while the bodhisattva institutes it under the portal of embracing good; the seven assemblies are equally subject to the offense. The fifth precept among the twenty-eight minor precepts of the householder states: 'If an upāsaka, having received and maintained the precepts, sees a bhikṣu, bhikṣuṇī, elder, or long-standing upāsaka and the like, and does not rise to welcome them, prostrate, and inquire after them, this upāsaka commits an offense of negligence, not rising, falling, being impure, and committing a transgression.' In the text, all precepts have three parts: designating the person, narrating the matter, and concluding the offense. Within narrating the matter, the various precepts differ; this precept has three: first, exhorting the reception of precepts; second, clarifying that one should show respect; third, clarifying that violating it constitutes an offense. In the initial exhortation to receive [precepts], three ranks are generally cited: the first and second are only for the laity, and the third applies to both laity and renunciants. Renunciant bodhisattvas may also happen to serve as monastic superintendents and the like; hence monastic superintendents and the like are established. Although prohibited by sūtras, it is unavoidable when circumstances allow for it. Fearing that in high positions they might indulge in unbridled behavior, the Dharma of receiving [precepts] is instituted to prevent arrogance and luxury. If they can receive and comply with it, deities and Buddhas will rejoice and protect them, which immediately preserves their person and ultimately can cause the Dharma to flourish; therefore, they are exhorted to receive them. Although previously received, when facing the occasion they should receive them again, for the purpose of respectfully serving. From 'Having already received' downward clarifies that one should show respect. 'A filial mind' means following their instructions and teachings without daring to disobey. 'A respectful mind' means venerating their virtuous conduct without daring to be slighting. 'A senior elder (thera)' means one above whom there is no person; this is a senior elder. 'Heshang' is a phonetic corruption; correctly it should be said as 'upādhyāya,' which also translates as 'intimate teacher,' meaning the one from whom one received the precepts. 'Ācārya,' correctly spoken, should be 'ācārya,' which translates as 'model.' There are five kinds of these: first, of tonsure; second, of going forth; third, of instruction; fourth, of the karman; fifth, of reliance. 'Great fellow students, those of identical view, and those of identical practice' refers to those who are senior in years among fellow students and the like; furthermore, it means those who study the same great Dharma, practice the same great view, and cultivate the same great practice. In violating it to constitute an offense, 'On the contrary gives rise to an arrogant mind, conceited mind, or ignorant mind': because of not being filial, one is arrogant; because of not being respectful, one is conceited; not knowing where respect is due is an ignorant mind. From 'even selling one's own body' downward, a comparison is cited as a grave admonition: if one should even give up one's body, how much more should one not fail to bow and show respect? The third precept among the forty-four states: 'If a bodhisattva, abiding in the bodhisattva's pure moral discipline, sees elders of virtue who are venerable fellow practitioners approaching, and being constrained by pride and conceit harbors a mind of resentment, harbors a mind of wrath, and does not rise to welcome them or yield a superior seat; or if someone else comes to speak, converse, congratulate, comfort, or inquire, and being constrained by pride and conceit, harbors a mind of resentment, harbors a mind of wrath, and does not respond in speech in accordance with right reason: this is called an offense, a transgression, an afflicted offense. If not constrained by pride and conceit, free from a mind of resentment, and free from a mind of wrath, but merely due to laziness, indolence, forgetfulness, or an indeterminate mind: this is called an offense, a transgression, a non-afflicted offense. There is no offense: if suffering from serious illness; or with a deranged mind; or sleeping oneself, while the other conceives the thought that one is awake and comes close to speak, converse, congratulate, comfort, or inquire; or expounding the Dharma, debating, and discerning doctrines oneself for others; or conversing and congratulating with others; or listening attentively while another explains the Dharma, debates, and discerns doctrines; or toward one who violates and speaks [improperly of] the true Dharma, wishing to preserve and protect the mind of the Dharma-speaker; or wishing to skillfully tame and subdue them, causing them to leave unwholesome states and be established in wholesome states; or protecting monastic regulations; or not responding in order to preserve and protect the minds of many sentient beings—in all these there is no offense.'

2.7

The second: the precept on not drinking alcohol.

2.8

"If a disciple of the Buddha intentionally drinks alcohol—and the faults of alcohol are limitless—if with one's own hands one passes a wine vessel and gives it to someone to drink alcohol, one will be without hands for five hundred lifetimes, to say nothing of drinking it oneself. One must not instruct any person to drink, nor any sentient being to drink alcohol, to say nothing of drinking alcohol oneself. One must not drink any alcohol. If one intentionally drinks it oneself or instructs another to drink, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.9

Alcohol is a basis for heedlessness (pramāda-sthāna); it can produce various faults and violates all wholesome dharmas, hence it is proscribed. It is the same for Mahāyāna and the Śrāvakayāna; both are proscribed for the seven assemblies. The second precept among the twenty-eight [minor precepts] states: 'If an upāsaka, having received and kept the precepts, indulges in drinking alcohol, he incurs a loss-of-mind offense.' In the description of the matter, there are three parts: first, revealing the loss; second, from 'one must not instruct' downward, proscribing that one should not drink; third, from 'if one intentionally drinks it oneself' downward, violating it constitutes an offense. In the first part, revealing the loss, 'intentionally drinks alcohol' appears to permit accidental drinking; yet in the Vinaya, perceiving alcohol as non-alcohol still constitutes an offense. If from beginning to end there is no intention to drink alcohol, and by error and delusion one merely believes it to be drinking water, it should logically be permitted. If originally there was an intention to drink alcohol, even if at the time of drinking one thought it was not alcohol, one should also commit an offense. 'Producing limitless faults and offenses of alcohol': although it is not inherently evil (prakṛti-sāvadya), it can open the way to inherent evils, hence it is said to have limitless faults. As stated in the treatise: when drunk, except for causing a schism in the Saṃgha, there is no evil one would not commit. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa fully sets forth thirty-six faults, and the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya lists ten kinds of faults: 'The Buddha addressed Ānanda: Whenever someone drinks alcohol, there are ten faults: first, poor complexion; second, weak strength; third, unclear eyesight; fourth, manifesting signs of anger; fifth, destroying the agriculture and livelihood assets; sixth, increasing and causing diseases; seventh, increasing disputes and lawsuits; eighth, lacking a good reputation and spreading bad fame; ninth, diminishment of wisdom; tenth, upon the breakup of the body and the end of life, falling into the evil destinies. These are called the ten faults. From this day forward, whoever takes me as master must not even place the tip of a blade of grass or wood into alcohol and put it into their mouth.' 'Passes a wine vessel' means to hand over a vessel of wine. One explanation says: passing a vessel containing wine and giving it to someone to make them drink. Another explanation says: merely passing an empty vessel to someone to have them pour it. The former explanation means sending another to drink, while the latter means instructing another to drink; neither sense is mistaken. 'Without hands for five hundred lifetimes' refers to holding a wine vessel with the hands and giving it, thereby obtaining the retribution of being without hands, like earthworms and such kinds, or being born among humans and lacking hands. Some say: there are five sets of five hundred years—one five hundred in the salty dregs hell, a second five hundred in boiling urine, a third five hundred being maggot-worms, a fourth five hundred being flies and gnats, and a fifth five hundred being human yet foolish, obtuse, and devoid of knowledge. Here, mentioning five hundred perhaps refers to the last one. In proscribing that one should not drink, 'one must not instruct any person to drink' means one must not teach others to make them drink. 'Nor any sentient being to drink alcohol' means one must not dispatch or give it to others to drink. 'To say nothing of drinking alcohol oneself' means that in order to prevent the fault of one's own heedlessness, one adduces others to contrast with oneself. The Vinaya states: 'Alcohol includes tree-alcohol, non-glutinous rice alcohol, other rice alcohol, and barley alcohol. If there are other methods of brewing alcohol, what is made is alcohol.' 'Blended alcohol: if it has the color of alcohol, the fragrance of alcohol, and the taste of alcohol, one must not drink it. Or there is alcohol that does not have the color of alcohol, fragrance of alcohol, or taste of alcohol; one must not drink it. Or there is alcohol that does not have the color of alcohol or fragrance of alcohol, but has the taste of alcohol; one must not drink it. Or there is alcohol that does not have the color of alcohol, fragrance of alcohol, or taste of alcohol; one must not drink it. If it is not alcohol, but has the color of alcohol, fragrance of alcohol, and taste of alcohol, one may drink it.' It is explained in detail as there. Regarding non-offenses: if there is an illness of this sort that cannot be cured by other medicines, using alcohol as medicine, or applying alcohol to an ulcer, none of these constitute an offense.

2.10

The third precept: not eating meat.

2.11

"If a disciple of the Buddha intentionally eats meat—one must not eat any meat. One who eats meat cuts off the seed of the Buddha-nature of great compassion, and all sentient beings will see and flee from them. Therefore, no bodhisattva should eat the meat of any sentient being. Eating meat incurs limitless offenses. If one intentionally eats it, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.12

It is proscribed because it cuts off the seed of great compassion. For śrāvakas, prior to the [Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra], three kinds of pure [meat] were permitted, while others were not; after the [Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra], none at all were permitted. For bodhisattvas, throughout, none at all are permitted. It is proscribed equally for the seven assemblies. In the text describing the matter, it also first reveals the loss, next proscribes that one should not eat it, and finally states that violating it constitutes an offense. 'One must not eat any meat' means neither pure nor impure meat may be eaten. 'Cuts off the seed of the Buddha-nature of great compassion': as the sūtra states, because there are people who eat meat, killing occurs. Knowing this and eating it thereby cuts off the seed of compassion. 'All sentient beings will see and flee from them': just as when a bird entered Śāriputra's shadow, it still trembled with fear; if one with latent tendencies is still like this, how much more so for one who has not severed the three poisons at all? 'Eating meat incurs limitless offenses': because eating leads to killing and harming, one incurs limitless offenses.

2.13

The fourth precept: not eating the pungent roots.

2.14

"If a disciple of the Buddha—one must not eat the five pungent roots: garlic, leather-leek, leek-scallion, orchid-scallion, and asafoetida. These five kinds must not be eaten in any food. If one intentionally eats them, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.15

They are proscribed because their foul stench obstructs pure dharmas. They are proscribed in both Mahāyāna and the Śrāvakayāna, and equally for the seven assemblies. According to the Vinaya, for women it should be slightly heavier because it arouses lustful complexion. As for 'leather-leek, soil-scallion, and orchid-scallion': here there are no shallots or chives, but scallions are divided into three. The distinct characteristics of these three are difficult to know. Some say: leather-leek is the Chinese shallot (xie), whose leaves resemble chives but are thicker. As for orchid-scallion: tradition says that orchid-scallions grow south of the Ridge, with leaves resembling garlic but broader, and an odor identical to garlic. As for 'asafoetida' (hingu): the Brahman language calls wild rape 'hiṅgu-rūpa', which is not permitted to be eaten in monasteries of the Western Regions. It is also said: asafoetida grows south of the Ridge, resembling Japanese chives in shape, with a scent and taste resembling garlic. If one is ill and other medicines do not cure it, it may perhaps be permitted. Just as the Vinaya describes Śāriputra's practice, it should also be permitted for bodhisattvas. There is separately a one-roll *Sūtra on the Five Pungent Roots*, which lists five kinds for each of the five pungent roots, totaling twenty-five. It also states: because of consuming pungent roots, one enters the eastern Avīci hell; washing pungent roots upstream and washing clothes downstream is also not permitted (and so forth). In these three precepts, there are no distinct characteristics under the collection of wholesome dharmas; subsuming them conceptually, they are also contained within body, speech, and mind abiding in heedfulness.

2.16

The fifth precept: pointing out offenses and instructing confession.

2.17

"If a disciple of the Buddha sees any sentient being violate the eight precepts, the five precepts, the ten precepts, break the prohibitions, [commit] the seven ānantarya sins, or [fall into] the eight difficulties, regarding all offenses of violating precepts, one should instruct them to repent. If a bodhisattva does not instruct them to repent, but dwells together with them, shares the Saṃgha's material requisites, participates in the poṣadha with them, recites the precepts in the same assembly, yet does not point out their offense and does not instruct them to repent of their fault, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.18

Seeing a violation and not instructing them to repent violates the principle of mutual benefit. A śrāvaka protecting oneself is not even permitted to do so, how much less a great being? According to the literal wording, it seems to fall under the precepts of benefiting sentient beings: towards those with faults, harboring intimacy within, with an exalted resolve (adhyāśaya) for benefit and comfort, taming, reprimanding, punishing, and expelling them in order to make them emerge from unwholesome states and establish them in wholesome states. However, a bodhisattva teaching and transforming sentient beings is itself the fulfillment of the Buddha-dharmas; therefore, this precept is also proscribed under the precepts that gather wholesome dharmas. It is also contained within accurately and clearly knowing one's own transgressions and deeply perceiving faults. Although self and other are distinct, perceiving faults and repenting to eliminate them are the same, hence it is proscribed in both Mahāyāna and the Śrāvakayāna. The two monastic assemblies fully commit it, and logically it also extends to the remaining three assemblies and the householders. 'The eight precepts and the five precepts' are householder precepts. 'The ten precepts' are the ten precepts of a śrāmaṇera. 'Breaking the prohibitions' refers to the precepts of bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs. Alternatively, the ten precepts refer to the ten parājika offenses, and breaking the prohibitions refers to the forty-eight duṣkṛta offenses. 'The seven ānantarya sins' are as explained below. As for 'the eight difficulties': some say these are the eight parājika offenses, while others say they are the eight difficulties of the three destinies and so forth. Because offenses incur the eight difficulties, the effect is spoken of in terms of the cause. We now maintain that among the thirteen difficulties, excluding the dual-gendered, the neuter, animals, non-humans, and those who disrupted the two paths, the remainder are called the eight difficulties. The four including the dual-gendered are retribution obstacles (vipākāvaraṇa) and do not have the meaning of being eliminated through repentance. As for those who disrupted the two paths, because they were in a different path and then re-entered the Buddha-Dharma, they lack the condition of dwelling together and sharing requisites. Therefore, these five do not enter into the count of instructing repentance. The seventh precept among the forty-four states: 'If a bodhisattva, towards cruel, evil, and precept-violating sentient beings, harbors a mind of resentment, harbors a mind of anger and annoyance, and taking their cruelty, evil, and precept-violation as a condition, expedites abandoning them without benefiting them, this is called an offense and a transgression; it is a defiled transgression. If, out of laziness and negligence, one abandons them, or due to mindfulness being lost one does not benefit them, this is called an offense and a transgression; it is a non-defiled transgression. Why is this? Bodhisattvas do not generate compassion and the desire to benefit those sentient beings whose physical, verbal, and mental karma is pure, keeps the precepts, and functions in tranquility, in the same way they do towards cruel, evil, and precept-violating sentient beings who are presently operating in causes of suffering. Regarding non-offenses: if one's mind is deranged, or if one wishes skillfully to tame and subdue them—explained in full as before; or in order to safeguard the minds of many sentient beings, or to safeguard the regulations of the Saṃgha, one skillfully abandons them and does not benefit them—in all such cases there is no offense.'"

2.19

The sixth precept: making offerings to teachers and requesting the Dharma.

2.20

"If a disciple of the Buddha sees a Mahāyāna Dharma master, or a Mahāyāna fellow student of identical views and identical practice, coming into a monastery, a residence, or a city, having come from a hundred leagues or a thousand leagues away, one should immediately rise to welcome them and see them off, bowing and making offerings. Three times every day one should make offerings, spending three taels of gold daily on food, offering one hundred delicacies of food and drink, beds and seats, and medicines to serve the Dharma master, providing everything they need. One should constantly request the Dharma master to preach the Dharma three times [a day], and bow three times every day, not giving rise to an angry mind or a mind of distress, giving up one's life for the sake of the Dharma, requesting the Dharma without slackening. If one does not do so, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.21

Passing over someone without requesting the Dharma loses the benefit of imbuing the spirit, hence it is proscribed. For śrāvakas, if there is one who knows the extensive and abbreviated poṣadha procedures, it is proscribed that one should serve them. Within five years [of ordination] and when not yet understanding the five dharmas, by rule one should make requests; if not, one commits an offense of the seventh class. Beyond this it is not proscribed, because self-deliverance is easily satisfied. When a bodhisattva sees one who has knowledge, one should constantly serve and request them, because the desire for wholesome dharmas is insatiable; the seven assemblies are equally subject to the offense. In the text describing the matter, there are two parts: first, making offerings to the master; second, requesting the Dharma. Making offerings to the master has two parts: first, circumambulation and making offerings; second, making offerings of food and drink. 'Three times every day one should make offerings' means three times within the proper hours; or during improper times, one may also make offerings of non-timely broths and the like. 'Spending three taels of gold daily on food' is spoken in terms of one who is capable of providing it; or it is stated thus to cause the Dharma to be held in high esteem, just as the Ascetic of the Snowy Mountains gave up his own life for the sake of a single verse, to say nothing of external wealth. Third, offering personal service, meaning giving everything else that is needed. In requesting the Dharma, 'requesting the Dharma three times' means morning, midday, and evening. 'Not giving rise to an angry mind or a mind of distress': even if the Dharma master should go against one's wishes, one ultimately does not give rise to an angry mind. Even though one's own body is exhausted from serving, one also does not give rise to a mind of distress. 'Giving up one's life for the sake of the Dharma, requesting the Dharma': this explains the reason for not giving rise to anger or distress. If there is illness or impediment, or the Dharma master has an obstacle, or if one knows that the other is inferior and oneself is superior—under such circumstances, not requesting does not constitute an offense.

2.22

The Seventh Precept: Listening to the Dharma and Consulting the Teacher

2.23

"If a disciple of the Buddha sees that anywhere the Dharma and vinaya, sūtras and precepts are being expounded, or in a large mansion or residence there is a place where the Dharma is being expounded, this newly trained bodhisattva should take up the rolls of the sūtras and vinaya and go to the Dharma master's place to listen, receive, consult, and inquire. If in mountain forests, under trees, on saṃgha grounds, or in monasteries, wherever the Dharma is being expounded, one should go to listen and receive it all. If one does not go there to listen, receive, consult, and inquire, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.24

If there is an exposition and one does not listen, one loses the path of advancing in good qualities; hence it was prohibited. The similarities and differences of the śikṣāpada are as before. Among the twenty-eight minor precepts, the eighth precept states: 'If an upāsaka has a place where the Dharma is expounded within forty li and is unable to go listen, he commits an offense of failing mindfulness.' In the text, 'expounding the Dharma and vinaya, sūtras and precepts' means: that which explains the Dharma is called sūtra, and that which explains the vinaya is called precepts; the rest of the text is easy to understand. Among the forty-four [precepts], the thirty-second precept states: 'If bodhisattvas hear the true Dharma being spoken, its arguments debated and determined, and, governed by arrogance, harboring resentment or malice in their minds, do not go to listen, this is called having an offense, having a transgression, and is a defiled transgression. If afflicted by laziness and indolence they do not go to listen, it is an undefiled transgression. There is no transgression: if one is unaware; if one has an illness; if one has no physical strength; if one knows [the teacher] expounds erroneously; if it is to protect the mind of that expounder of the Dharma; if one correctly understands the meaning expounded by him, having heard, retained, and comprehended it many times; if one has already heard much, is fully equipped with retention of what has been heard, and one's learning is amassed; if one wishes to be without hearing, fixing the mind on an object; if one strives to arouse the superior samādhi of a bodhisattva; if one knows oneself to be of the highest grade of dullness and stupidity, one's wisdom being sluggish and turbid, so that regarding the Dharma heard it is difficult to receive and retain, and difficult to gather the mind onto an object of focus to attain samādhi—if such a person does not go to listen, none commits a transgression.'

2.25

The Eighth Precept: Not Turning One's Back on the Mahāyāna

2.26

"If a disciple of the Buddha turns their mind away from the eternal sūtras and vinaya of the Mahāyāna, saying they are not the Buddha's preaching, and instead receives and upholds the pernicious views of the two vehicles and heterodox paths, all their prohibitions, precepts, and wrong-view sūtras and vinaya, they commit a duṣkṛta offense."

2.27

Abandoning the root and chasing the branches contradicts what one has trained in; hence it was prohibited. For śrāvakas it is not prohibited, because what they train in is different; it is common to all seven assemblies. In the text, 'turns their mind away from the eternal sūtras and vinaya of the Mahāyāna, saying they are not the Buddha's preaching': the old [commentary] says this directly prohibits wavering without resolution, which is an expedience of the lower grade of wrong view. If resolved, meaning that the Mahāyāna is inferior and the Hīnayāna superior, once the calculation is formed, the precepts are lost. If in one's mind one wishes to turn away, says it is not the true preaching, and wishes to receive the sūtras and vinaya of the two vehicles and heterodox paths, but the plan is not yet accomplished, one commits this duṣkṛta offense. However, when the upper or middle grades of wrong view have plans not yet accomplished, they also commit a duṣkṛta offense, conforming to the prohibition of this precept. Here, turning away from the Mahāyāna toward the Hīnayāna is cited because ordinary bodhisattvas frequently commit this matter. If one openly states it in words, there are two types: if spoken with the notion that it is the Dharma, the good qualities of the precepts have already ceased; if spoken with the notion that it is not the Dharma, one commits the tenth parājika offense. Now, it is said that regarding turning the mind away from the Mahāyāna to receive and uphold the two vehicles, even if the notion of Dharma arises, one does not necessarily lose the precepts. That is, if a person, though having aroused the great mind and received the bodhisattva precepts, has not yet studied the profound sūtras of the Mahāyāna and has only heard the small vehicle, practicing for three eons to attain the fruit under the tree, when suddenly hearing the profound meaning of the Mahāyāna, no faith arises in their mind and they say it is not the Buddha's preaching. Because they do not regress from the great mind, they do not lose the precepts; because the notion of Dharma arises, they do not commit a parājika offense. Therefore, in the Bodhisattvabhūmi, among the forty-four [precepts], the twenty-ninth precept states: 'If bodhisattvas do not arouse faith and understanding regarding the profound, supremely profound, true meaning of the Dharma and the inconceivable spiritual power of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas in the Bodhisattva-piṭaka, but hate, reject, and slander them, [claiming that] they cannot lead to the meaning, cannot lead to the Dharma, are not spoken by the Tathāgata, and cannot benefit and bring ease to sentient beings, this is called having an offense, having a transgression, and is a defiled transgression. Such slandering may be due to one's own internal improper attention, or spoken in accordance with others.' 'If, upon hearing the profound and most profound doctrines, faith and understanding do not arise in the mind, the bodhisattva at that time should forcefully generate faith and acceptance, should be without deceit, and should train thus: "I am unwholesome, blind without the eye of wisdom; regarding what is proclaimed from the Tathāgata's eye, regarding the intentional speech of the Tathāgatas, I have given rise to slander." If the bodhisattva thus recognizes their own ignorance, reverently deferring to the Tathāgata, who directly knows and equally observes all Buddha-dharmas, this correct practice incurs no transgression; though without faith and understanding, one does not slander.' When the text says 'the pernicious views of the two vehicles, śrāvakas, and heterodox paths,' pratyekabuddhas and śrāvakas are called the two vehicles and śrāvakas; these śrāvakas are outside the Mahāyāna and contradict the bodhisattva path, hence called 'the pernicious views of heterodox paths.' Furthermore, the six teachers and their followers are called the pernicious views of heterodox paths. The Bodhisattvabhūmi states: 'If bodhisattvas transgress the bodhisattva Dharma, investigating skills in the treatises of divergent paths and various non-Buddhist treatises, cherishing, enjoying, and being attached to them in their deep mind, rather than resorting to them like bitter medicine, this is called having an offense, having a transgression, and is a defiled transgression' (this is the twenty-eighth). The exceptions will be demonstrated when reaching the twenty-fourth [precept]. The above three precepts constitute what is described in the treatise under the precepts of accumulating good qualities as 'diligently training in listening and reflecting.'

2.28

The Ninth Precept: Providing for the Sick

2.29

"If a disciple of the Buddha sees any sick person, they should always make offerings to them, no differently than to a Buddha. Among the eight fields of merit, the field of merit of tending to the sick is the foremost field of merit. If parents, masters, monks, or disciples are sick, having impaired sense faculties or afflicted by hundreds of kinds of illnesses, one must make offerings to them all to heal them. Yet if a bodhisattva, with a mind of hatred, does not care for them, or even, upon seeing the sick in monasteries, cities, wildernesses, mountain forests, or on roads, does not rescue and assist them, they commit a duṣkṛta offense."

2.30

Seeing suffering and not rescuing contradicts the cultivation of compassionate practice; hence it was prohibited. For śrāvakas, this is limited to Dharma masters, companions, fellows in the Dharma, or being appointed by the saṃgha; outside this it is not prohibited. Originally [the śrāvaka] did not undertake [to save all] beings, whereas the great being must rescue all; originally aiming to encompass all, the prohibition is common to the seven assemblies. This is what the treatise explains as having deep compassion, caring for, serving, and making provisions for the sick. When the text says 'any sick person, they should always make offerings to them, no differently than to a Buddha': the Buddha is the pinnacle of what should be venerated, while the sick are the extreme of what should be pitied; though veneration and pity differ, their meaning as fields of merit is the same, hence 'no differently.' As for 'among the eight fields of merit, the field of merit of tending to the sick is the foremost field of merit': the meaning of veneration comes later, whereas the mind of rescue and pity comes first; thus, although there are eight fields, caring for the sick is supreme. As for 'if parents, masters' down to 'make offerings to them all to heal them': although above it generally mentioned rescuing all, from close to distant there is inevitably an order of priority, hence relatives are specifically cited. Among the eleven items of benefiting sentient beings in the Bodhisattvabhūmi, the second precept states: 'If bodhisattvas see sentient beings afflicted with severe illness, and harboring resentment or malice do not go to serve them, this is called having an offense, having a transgression, and is a defiled transgression. If afflicted by laziness and indolence they do not go to serve them, it is an undefiled transgression. There is no transgression: if one is sick oneself; if one lacks physical strength; if one delegates another who is capable and compliant to go serve them; if one knows the sick person has someone to rely upon and protect them; if one knows the sick person has their own strength and can serve themselves; if one understands that the chronic illness afflicting them can be borne by themselves; if it is to diligently cultivate vast, unsurpassed, and superior wholesome qualities; if one wishes to protect and maintain the wholesome qualities being cultivated so they are without interruption; if one knows oneself to be of the highest grade of dullness and stupidity, one's wisdom being sluggish and turbid, so that regarding the Dharma heard it is difficult to receive and retain, and difficult to gather the mind onto an object of focus to attain samādhi; if one has previously promised another to provide for them. As for the sick, so too it should be known for acting as a companion to those who are suffering, desiring to dispel their suffering.'"

2.31

The Tenth Precept: Not Keeping Weapons for Killing

2.32

"If a disciple of the Buddha, one must not keep any knives, staves, bows, arrows, spears, axes, or implements of warfare, nor any wicked nets, snares, or devices for killing living beings—none of these must be kept at all. A bodhisattva does not even take revenge if someone kills their parents, so how could they kill any sentient beings? If one intentionally keeps knives and staves, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.33

Seeing and thinking of weapons inevitably leads to gradual habituation; hence it was prohibited for thorough prevention. That is, it is the correct practice and guarding of the various śikṣāpadas, highlighting the abandonment of evil deeds to accomplish the accumulation of good. It is prohibited for both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, forbidden to both monastics and laity. If noble persons, kings, princes, and the like wish to defend against external dangers and prepare bows and arrows, it should reasonably be permitted, but they must not reach the point of harming or killing. Furthermore, even if one is not a noble person, if one wishes to protect the Dharma and prepares weapons for defense without the mind to harm, it should also be permitted. In the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, householders are permitted to hold weapons for the sake of protecting the Dharma, but they must not reach the point of killing; the explanation of the text is easy to understand.

2.34

"These ten precepts should be practiced and upheld with a reverent mind, as will be explained extensively in the six chapters below."

2.35

From 'These' downward is the general conclusion encouraging observance. 'The six chapters below' refers to the extensive text. Alternatively, some sūtras read 'the six-six chapters' (thirty-six chapters), meaning there should separately be thirty-six chapters.

2.36

Among the second [group of] ten precepts, the first four encompass good qualities of one's own practice, and the latter six encompass good qualities of transforming others. Among the first four:

2.37

The First Precept: Not Acting as a State Envoy

2.38

"The Buddha said: Disciples of the Buddha! You must not, for the sake of profit or with an evil mind, act as a state envoy to bring military forces together, raising armies to attack one another and killing countless sentient beings. A bodhisattva must not even come and go within an army, so how could they deliberately act as a traitor to the state? If one deliberately does so, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.39

Acting as a state envoy inevitably involves expectations of victory and defeat, deceitful schemes, and instigating battle, internally contradicting equal compassion and externally harming the lives of creatures; hence it was prohibited and cut off. It is prohibited in both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, forbidden to all seven assemblies. In the treatise, under the precepts of accumulating good qualities, 'abiding in non-negligence regarding body, speech, and mind' also contains and encompasses this precept. For the sake of profit with an evil mind is negligence of the mind; conveying missions in speech is negligence of speech; coming and going within an army is negligence of the body. When the text says 'for the sake of profit or with an evil mind': a mind scheming to enrich oneself is 'profit'; an intent hoping to harm another is 'an evil mind.' If it is for the mutual reconciliation of both sides, for householders it is logically not forbidden. 'Act as a state envoy' means acting as an envoy conveying missions between two states. 'To bring military forces together' means the clash of arms between two states. 'Raising armies to attack one another and killing countless sentient beings' means that through my acting as an envoy, this grave matter is brought about. 'Raising armies': 'raising' means initiating; 'armies' means the multitude. If the intention is to cause killing, according to the previous precept on cutting off life, a separate parājika offense is incurred; here, only the conveying of missions is forbidden, so a duṣkṛta offense is incurred. 'Must not even come and go within an army': a battlefield is clamorous and chaotic, not a place to be trodden by a person of the Way; without a grave reason, it is forbidden to both monastics and laity. If householder bodhisattvas rank among military officers and their names are renowned for courage and prowess, they cannot avoid it. For the sake of pacifying the state, they are permitted to go in, but they must not harm, as when the Śākyas fought with Virūḍhaka. If ordained bodhisattvas have a reason of being summoned, according to the vinaya they should be permitted two or three nights.

2.40

The Second Precept: Not Engaging in Evil Commerce

2.41

"If a disciple of the Buddha intentionally sells free persons, male and female slaves, or the six domestic animals, or trades in coffins, planks, and implements for holding the dead, one should not even do so oneself, so how could one instruct others to do so? If one intentionally does so oneself or instructs others to do so, one commits a duṣkṛta offense."

2.42

Harming objects [of trade] in pursuit of profit, causing deep intrusion and harassment—for this reason it is prohibited and cut off. The Great and Lesser [Vehicles] share the prohibition; it is not shared by all seven assemblies. If it is trade that harms the object, such as selling human beings and the like, both the religious and the laity are prohibited. If it is trade seeking profit, such as the exchange of cloth and silks, it is prohibited for the religious but permitted for the laity. Hence the Upāsaka-[śīla]-sūtra says: 'When a layperson acquires wealth, they should divide it into four portions: one portion for providing for parents, wife, and children; two portions for lawful trade; and the remaining one portion to be stored and gathered.' Now, this precept also prohibits pramāda of body and speech. The text says, 'intentionally trades in free persons': knowing that they are persons not belonging to oneself, yet by force or deceit trading them. 'Trading in slaves and the six kinds of domestic animals': although these belong to oneself, there may well be separation, infringement, and harm; therefore an offense is incurred. 'Trading in coffins, timber, and apparatus for containing the dead': 'coffins' are precisely 'timber'; or 'timber' refers to outer coffins and other woods outside the inner coffin. As for 'One should not even do so deliberately oneself, much less instruct another to do so': in this, citing oneself to illustrate others is because the preceding precept on drinking liquor prohibits one's own pramāda, and thus cites others to illustrate oneself; this trading precept prohibits harming other objects, and thus cites oneself to illustrate others. The mutual illustration between self and other has its intent right here.

First 42 of 177 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

菩薩戒本疏 — Classical Chinese