梵網經古迹記 2.73

2.73

述曰：此即第三結成門也。此有三文：勸不毀犯故，示犯失壞故，誡學指廣故。初者，如經「善學諸人者」至「犯十戒」。言「善學」者，簡外道諸不善學及以二乘不究竟學。如八十云：「又彼聲聞雖到究竟，而不為彼諸天人等供養讚歎，如住新業修菩薩行。」此云「不應一一犯微塵許」者，雖過輕微積成大故。如經頌曰：「莫輕小惡以為無殃，水渧雖微漸盈大器。」或復愚人犯小罪重，故微塵許亦不應犯。如有頌曰：「愚者罪小亦墮惡，智為罪大亦脫苦，如團鐵小亦沈水，為鉢鐵大亦能浮。」即《智論》云「智慧心虛，如鉢能浮」也。問：知而故作世間所責，非如狂夫所作無怪。智愚作罪亦復應然，如何智輕愚者為重？答：此難不爾，自作自受非他制故。謂如狂夫觸刀被害，智者雖觸避刃無損。又如闇室知柱觸輕，不知有柱打著即重。愚智作罪道理亦然。《十住論》中智所作罪如投鹽池，如彼頌曰：「斗鹽投大池，其味無有異；若投小器水，醎苦不可飲。」第二、犯失壞者，如經「若有犯者」至「一一犯」。此中「若犯不得現身發菩提心」者，若犯十重入七遮者，更不能受菩薩戒故。所餘不爾，《瑜伽》、《本業》許重受故。問：犯重失戒，何故《本業經》云菩薩戒有受法而無捨法，乃至廣說？答：此有多釋。元曉師云：若於三乘教，發心即有失；若聞一乘教，永無退失故。然新教宗難可依定。義寂師云：功能雖失，種體常留，《瑜伽》、《本業》如次說異。此亦難解，聲聞戒種亦常留故。今解如宗要。言「亦失國王位」等，顯因亡故，失果利也。當墮惡趣，失壞世間及二乘果，何況大乘三賢十聖三身妙果。言「佛性」者，謂法身也，以體性故。言「常住」者，通餘二身，如次自性無間相續常故。「不聞父母三寶名」者，謂顯世間及出世間無能救也。餘文可解。

The commentary states: This is the third gate, concluding and establishing. Here there are three passages: encouraging non-transgression, revealing the loss and destruction incurred by offense, and admonishing training while indicating the broader exposition. Regarding the first, as the sūtra states, "Those who train well..." down to "...transgress the ten precepts": "train well" excludes the non-wholesome training of non-Buddhists as well as the non-ultimate training of the two vehicles. As fascicle eighty states: "Furthermore, although those śrāvakas have reached culmination, they are not venerated and praised by those devas, humans, and others as is a bodhisattva residing in initial practice cultivating the bodhisattva deeds." Here, "should not violate even a speck of dust's worth" means that although a fault is trifling, when accumulated it becomes great. As a sūtra verse states: "Do not slight a small evil, thinking it brings no calamity; though water drops are minute, they gradually fill a large vessel." Or again, when a foolish person commits a small offense it is heavy, hence one should not transgress even a speck of dust's worth. As a verse states: "A fool falls into evil even with a small sin; the wise escapes suffering even when committing a great sin. Just as a small ball of iron sinks in water, yet when made into a large iron bowl it can float." That is, as the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "The mind of wisdom is hollow [within], just as a bowl can float." Question: Doing an act intentionally while knowing it is blamed by the world, unlike the acts of a madman which are not blamed. Should it not also be so when the wise and the foolish commit offenses? Why is it light for the wise and heavy for the foolish? Answer: This objection is not so; one reaps what oneself sows, and it is not imposed by another. It is like a madman touching a blade and being harmed, whereas a wise person, though touching it, avoids the edge and suffers no injury. Again, it is like in a dark room: knowing there is a pillar, one touches it lightly; not knowing there is a pillar, one strikes it heavily. The principle of the foolish and the wise committing offenses is also like this. In the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā, a sin committed by the wise is like throwing salt into a pond, as its verse says: "If a bushel of salt is thrown into a great pond, its flavor does not change; if thrown into a small vessel of water, it is salty, bitter, and undrinkable." Second, regarding the loss and destruction incurred by offense: as the sūtra states, "If anyone violates..." down to "...violate each one." Here, "if one violates them, one cannot generate the bodhicitta in this present life" means that if one commits the ten major offenses and enters the seven impediments, one can never again receive the bodhisattva precepts. The remainder are not like this, since the Yogācārabhūmi and Benye allow receiving them again. Question: If committing a major offense loses the precepts, why does the Benye jing state that for bodhisattva precepts there is a method of receiving but no method of abandoning, and so forth at length? Answer: There are many explanations for this. Master Wŏnhyo says: according to the teaching of the three vehicles, giving rise to the aspiration [for bodhi] entails loss; but if one hears the teaching of the one vehicle, there is never any regression. However, the tenets of the new teaching are difficult to rely upon as definitive. Master Uijŏk says: although the functional efficacy is lost, the seed-substance always remains; the Yogācārabhūmi and Benye state differences respectively. This too is difficult to understand, since the precept-seed of the śrāvaka also always remains. The present explanation accords with the Essentials. As for "also losing the position of a wheel-turning king," etc.: this shows that because the cause is destroyed, the resultant benefit is lost. One will fall into evil destinies, losing and destroying the results of the mundane world and the two vehicles, not to mention the wonderful fruits of the Great Vehicle's three classes of worthies, ten classes of sages, and three bodies. "Buddha-nature" refers to the dharmakāya, by virtue of its substantial nature. "Ever-abiding" applies to the remaining two bodies, because in order, their nature is eternal and their uninterrupted continuity is eternal. "Not hearing the names of parents and the Three Jewels" reveals that there is no one in the mundane or supramundane world who can save them. The rest of the text is easy to understand.