梵網經古迹記 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

2.2

Chapter 10: The Mind-Ground Dharma Gate of the Bodhisattva Preached by Locana Buddha in the Brahmajāla Sūtra

2.3

Translated by Tripiṭaka Master Kumārajīva of the Later Qin

2.4

Sūtra: From 'At that time, Locana Buddha' to 'intrinsically pure by nature', below, eleven and a half verses.

Second, encouraging faith. Faith is the root of entering the Dharma, and precepts are the source of abiding in the Dharma; therefore, he preaches verses to further cause them to have faith in the precepts. However, the bodhisattva precepts generally have three approaches: first, the approach of receiving and obtaining; second, the approach of guarding and upholding; third, the approach of committing [offenses] and losing [the precepts].

2.6

First, as for receiving and obtaining: sentient beings of the six destinies, so long as they understand the master's words, must first give rise to the great bodhicitta—that is, vowing definitely to attain unexcelled bodhi and, exhausting the bounds of the future, to benefit and bring joy to sentient beings. As the Yogācārabhūmi says: bodhicitta has 'definite aspiration as its mental characteristic' and takes unexcelled bodhi and 'the benefit of all sentient beings as its objective sphere.' Having generated this mind, there are two kinds of reception: First is partial reception. In accordance with what the receiver's inclination can bear, whether receiving one precept or many, in each case it constitutes the precepts, and one is named a bodhisattva. This is unlike the śrāvakas, who must receive and uphold them in their entirety, and if one [receives only] a part, one is not named a bhikṣu. That is to say, in order to enable one to attain arhatship in the present body, fulfilling the rules of conduct and establishing the points of training, both the ten precepts and the full precepts must each be received entirely; whether ordinary persons or sages, they receive and train in the same single rule. Precisely through this meaning, candidates are screened, excluding those with impediments or of other destinies. The bodhisattva is not like this, because [bodhisattva] precepts are according to one's capacity—that is to say, ordinary persons definitely cannot achieve Buddhahood in the present body, for it must be cultivated through countless great kalpas. From merely understanding words up to the diamond [stage], in accordance with the strength of their stages, they gradually cultivate and fulfill them, just as the dust-mote and water-drop are the beginning of forming mountains and oceans. Since the great bodhi does not fail to encompass any virtue, when desiring to accomplish that gathering, what good is not a cause? Precisely through this meaning, there is no screening of destinies or births; so long as they understand the master's words, all can generate the mind and obtain [the precepts]. Although one merely understands words and receives only a single precept, this still surpasses all the merits of the two vehicles. The merits of an arhat are only for one's own self, having no share of grace toward the realm of sentient beings; a bodhisattva's single precept is for saving all, so there is not a single sentient being who does not bear its grace. Second is total reception, which refers to the three clusters of precepts. The precept that gathers the moral rules cuts off all evil; evil refers to all dharmas that should be severed and abandoned, from first generating the mind cutting off killing and so forth, through the three classes of worthies and ten classes of sages suppressing and cutting off the two hindrances, up to the Buddha abandoning the dharmas of birth-and-death. The precept that gathers good qualities cultivates all goods; good refers to all dharmas that should be cultivated and realized, from first generating the mind training according to one's capacity, through the ten superior practices each of the three classes of worthies and ten classes of sages, up to the Buddha realizing the two transformations of basis. The precept that benefits sentient beings saves all sentient beings, from first generating the mind converting according to one's capacity, exhausting the bounds of the future to save all. It is not that ordinary persons can immediately [do] all, because one suddenly vows the three clusters and gradually cultivates them to fulfillment. Such unimpeded vows and practices that have been generated are the most unexcelled among all vows and practices. Wherever one is born, this mind is the king among them; yet there is ultimately nothing that can serve as its fruit, except for unexcelled, correct, and equal bodhi.

2.7

Second, as for guarding and upholding, there are generally ten approaches: First, the approach of following the mind: because the mind's inclination abides according to its past habits, just like in the worldly sphere according to its original color, even within a single body of water, conditions such as blue differ; therefore, one first firms up one, and gradually completes the remaining practices. As the Benye jing says: if one receives one precept, one is named a partial bodhisattva, up to fully receiving them, when one is named a complete bodhisattva. However, as instituted by the Buddha, one should gradually train throughout all. Because of this, second is the approach of universal training: as the Yogācārabhūmi says, even śrāvakas seeking self-benefit guard the minds of others, how much more so bodhisattvas who prioritize benefiting others! Therefore, one should universally guard against all precepts concerning censure. Yet the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'A newly practicing bodhisattva cannot in one lifetime and at one time universally practice the five perfections', just as guarding the three robes prevents one from giving, and so forth. Because of this, third is the approach of according with intrinsic nature: when conflicting points of training are present before one, one only guards precepts of intrinsic nature and relaxes conventional precepts. As in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, because bodhisattvas do not manifest natural offenses, they are common with śrāvakas; because they manifest similar conventional offenses, they are not common with them. However, the Yogācārabhūmi says: if there is superior benefit, natural offenses may be manifested. Because of this, fourth is the approach of the concealed: as in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha practicing the ten non-virtues. Within this, the Yogācārabhūmi only permits seven wrongful acts, but the third is only not a natural offense, because with an unattached woman lustful conduct is permitted. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha generally permits sexual misconduct, because it speaks of the ten non-virtues being practiced upon seeing benefit, as any one of them such as killing is included. However, the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says: 'Due to the intent to benefit living beings, giving rise to greed incurs no offense; anger is contrary to that, because it constantly wishes to harm others.' Because of this, fifth is the approach of according with the superior: because affection accords with great compassion, its offense is inferior; because anger is contrary to it, its offense is heavy. As the Yogācārabhūmi says: 'These bodhisattvas mostly ought to be given offenses arising from anger, not those arising from greed', up to extensive explanations. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: not afflicting sentient beings is the precept of bodhisattvas, unlike śrāvakas who seek present nirvāṇa. Although lust does not afflict sentient beings, because it binds the mind it is established as a major offense. Bodhisattvas do not seek present-life nirvāṇa, because they go back and forth in birth-and-death to complete provisions. However, the Yogācārabhūmi says: if desiring to cut them off, one generates the inclination and exerts vigorous diligence, but defilements flare up and overwhelm one's mind, giving rise to hindrances such as ill-will, there is no violation. Because of this, sixth is the approach of inclination: because of the power of inclination, evil involves no violation. As in the Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā: when the stingy mind is unresolved and cannot give, one apologizes that it is not yet mature today and will give later. Yet sūtras also say: the mind that guards precepts is like cherishing a floating bladder or a reed-bound [person]. Because of this, seventh is the approach of fearful reverence: regarding minor conventional offenses as natural offenses. Yet the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says: 'One who is lax in the vehicle is called lax; one who is lax in the precepts is not called lax.' Because of this, eighth is the approach of achieving the superior: when doing good has superior value, one temporarily sets aside restraint. Yet the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra says: 'Although constantly dwelling in hell, it does not obstruct great bodhi; if one gives rise to a mind of self-benefit, this is an obstruction to great bodhi.' Because of this, ninth is the approach of guarding against obstructions: although doing good, one guards against the small vehicle. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: if a bodhisattva should enjoy the five wondrous desires for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, it is still not called a violation of the bodhisattva precepts; if one gives rise to a single thought of the two vehicles, it is immediately called a violation. The explanation says: although defiled by greed, the great mind is not extinguished, and there is no complete violation; hence it is called no violation. Yet the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra says: if with the mind one discriminates the characteristics of male, female, or non-male-female, this is a bodhisattva pārājika offense. Because of this, tenth is the approach of the ultimate: if one grasps at characteristics of dharmas, it is not ultimate. As in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra: 'One should fulfill the pure moral discipline pāramitā through non-guarding, because the characteristics of violation and non-violation cannot be obtained.'

2.8

Third, as for committing [offenses] and losing [the precepts]: the bodhisattva precepts have no complete violation, just as there is partial reception and partial upholding. It is not like the śrāvakas, who upon committing a single major offense break all of them and lose the status of a bhikṣu. As the Benye jing says: 'The essence of the ordinary and noble precepts of all bodhisattvas is the mind; therefore, when the mind is exhausted the precepts are also exhausted, and because the mind is inexhaustible the precepts are also inexhaustible.' 'Mind' refers to the intended resolve. If one does not give up the inexhaustible vow of the precepts, one cannot completely violate the boundless precepts. Therefore, upon rebirth the precepts also constantly follow along, continuously increasing moment by moment until one achieves Buddhahood, just as river water flows day and night without stopping, continuously coursing along until it naturally reaches the great ocean—except if one intentionally abandons the great bodhicitta, because when that mind is exhausted the precepts are also exhausted. However, committing a major precept has roughly two kinds: first, breaking; second, defiling. If committed with the entanglement of afflictions of the upper grade, according to the branch violated one loses the precept's moral restraint. If of middle or lower entanglement, it is merely defiled and not lost. As the Yogācārabhūmi says: 'If bodhisattvas transgress the four pārājika dharmas, repeatedly manifesting them with no shame or remorse at all, finding deep delight and seeing them as virtues, you should know this is called committing with upper-grade entanglement. It is not that bodhisattvas, temporarily manifesting a pārājika dharma once, immediately abandon the bodhisattva's pure moral restraint'—unlike the śrāvakas, who abandon them upon a single commission. Furthermore, although one loses the pure precepts through an upper-entanglement offense, the sūtra states that by immediately repenting one can receive them again, unlike the śrāvakas who are like one who has been beheaded and can no longer re-enter the monastic assembly in the present life. Extensively citing doctrines and reasonings is as explained in the Essentials of the Teaching.

2.9

Halting the digression for now, the verses are explained in two sections: namely, the first six verses are the section of transmitting the original master's recitation, because Śākyamuni transmits the original master's preface; the subsequent five and a half verses are the section where the later lord manifests and extols, because Śākyamuni himself expounds the essential teachings of the precepts. The first also has two kinds: the first five verses are the section showing the lord's revered supremacy; the latter one verse is the section praising the functions of the precepts. The first also has two: the first two and a half verses are the section on the root and branch of the manifest body; the latter two and a half verses are the section on the root and branch of preaching the Dharma.

2.10

Sūtra: 'I now, Locana, / Just sit upon the lotus pedestal.'

2.11

The Commentary says: The gate of manifesting the primary and derivative bodies broadly contains four tiers. Here is the first: the other-enjoyment body (parasambhogakāya). It is traditionally said that this body corresponds to the precept-pāramitā of the second ground (bhūmi), because it is the fundamental tenet of this sūtra, not the self-enjoyment body (svasaṃbhogakāya). The Avataṃsaka and other texts state that the latter is boundless. 'Presently' (fang) means 'just now' or 'properly'. The thousand-petaled pedestal collectively forms the pure land of second-ground bodhisattvas. The top of this central pedestal is where this body abides, and the thousand petals are the tribes/realms being converted. As the Benevolent Kings [Sūtra] says: 'Bodhisattvas of receptive faith manifest hundreds, thousands, and ten thousands of bodies in the lands of a hundred Buddhas, a thousand Buddhas, and ten thousand Buddhas.' The Daśabhūmika-sūtra says: 'Because bodhisattvas of the second ground enter a thousand worlds and see a thousand Buddhas, there is a separate Buddha seat upon this pedestal.' Some say that this thousand-petaled pedestal is the seat itself, which is not correct. For the earlier fascicle separately states that Locana Buddha sits on a brilliant light seat of a million lotus flowers. Since it states: 'I abide in the Lotus Pedestal Treasury World Sea, whose pedestal is surrounded by a thousand petals, each petal being a world, and I transform into a thousand Śākyamunis, and there are further a hundred kotis of Merus,' we clearly know that it is a land. An objection asks: 'Could that land be narrower than Amitābha's round aura? For the sūtra states that that Buddha's round aura is like a hundred koṭis of trichiliocosms.' This objection is not valid: a Buddha's radiance is not fixed, and Śākyamuni also illuminates immeasurable lands. Alternatively, since it says 'like', it merely compares vastness and does not necessarily signify equal measurement, just as an eye is used as a metaphor for the ocean; hence we know that the million lotus flowers serve as the seat. Why do all Buddhas take a lotus flower as their seat? It symbolizes that although a Buddha is in the world, he is like [the lotus] undefiled by water.

2.12

Sūtra: 'Surrounding it upon the thousand flowers, / He further manifests a thousand Śākyamunis.'

2.13

The Commentary says: The second is the emanation body (nirmāṇakāya) in the pure land. It is traditionally said that this body corresponds to capacities prior to the grounds (bhūmis). Some say that only [those of] the four wholesome roots are born in the pure land, but in principle this is not necessarily so, since pure land sūtras state that others are also born there. Pure and defiled realms occupy the same location yet are perceived differently according to karma, just as the four consciousnesses differ regarding the same object; as it is said, Śāriputra saw mountains and rivers, whereas the Conch-Crested Brahmā King instead saw a jewel land.

2.14

Sūtra: 'Each flower has a hundred koṭis of lands, / And each land has one Śākyamuni.'

2.15

The Commentary says: The third is the emanation body in the defiled land. 'One land' refers to one Meru realm, because according to the distinct worlds, he manifests in the southern continent (Jambudvīpa). The Yogācārabhūmi says: 'One trichiliocosm has a hundred koṭi realms.' The Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyākhyā says: 'The measure of one koṭi corresponds to a hundred million (baiyi).' Why does it speak here only of a hundred koṭis (baiyi)? There are multiple systems of 'koṭi' (yi); the Yogācārabhūmi provisionally relies on one hundred thousand as one yi. This sūtra takes ten million [as a yi], so they do not contradict each other. This is based on gross characteristics, provisionally describing one category. As for the Meru worlds in reality, whether shaped like trees, human figures, upside-down, or sideways, each accords with its type; filling all directions, different types do not obstruct one another, like the Net of Indra, layer upon layer without end, transcending what can be thought or conceived. Yet all are subsumed within the Lotus Pedestal Treasury World Sea and are the places where Locana turns the wheel of Dharma.

2.16

Sūtra: 'Each seated beneath a bodhi tree' up to 'Locana's original body.'

2.17

The Commentary says: The fourth adduces that the faculties and capacities of the pure and defiled lands are simultaneously mature, at once transforming again and gathering the branches back to the root. As the earlier fascicle says: 'The Buddhas upon the thousand flowers are my emanations. The thousand hundred koṭis of Śākyamunis are the emanations of the thousand Śākyamunis.'

2.18

Sūtra: 'The thousand hundred koṭis of Śākyamunis' up to 'the ten major and forty-eight [minor].'

2.19

The Commentary says: The second is the origin and branches of expounding the Dharma. Although Locana's body is not a mundane realm, through augmented power they see, hear, and approach in assembly; since it is a rule that runs through the three periods of time and is not instituted according to temporary expedience, it says 'I recite' and does not say 'speak'. The supreme among tastes is named 'amṛta' (sweet dew); hence it is a metaphor for the ultimate nirvāṇa among pleasures. Precepts are the gate to escaping suffering and realizing bliss; hence it says that hearing the recitation opens the gate of amṛta. Alternatively, the precept scripture is called the gate, and the precepts explained are called the amṛta. The teaching can open the gate of principle to escape the three realms; manifested according to capacity, this is termed 'opening'. The mundane mind is easily exhausted, and the supreme image is difficult to retain; thus they return to the original place to recite the original teacher's precepts. Here, 'original teacher' refers to the original body; or alternatively, the Dharma of the precepts is called the original teacher, as it is the teacher of the Buddha.

2.20

Sūtra: 'The precepts are like the bright sun and moon' up to 'From this, one accomplishes right awakening.'

2.21

The Commentary says: This is the second: the gate of praising the power and majesty of the precepts. The precepts destroy the darkness of offenses just like the sun and moon, and adorn the practitioner like strings of jewel necklaces. As the Legacy Teaching [Sūtra] says: 'The clothing of shame and conscience is the foremost among all adornments.' Alternatively, it is said that natural precepts (prakṛtiśīla) are bright like the sun and moon, while prohibitory precepts (pratiṣedhaśīla) adorn like jewel necklaces, because they destroy the darkness of natural offenses and adorn natural precepts. The beginning of the myriad practices takes precepts as the foundation, and the culmination of the myriad practices takes bodhi as the fruit; therefore, the three periods of time are all accomplished through precepts, for the Buddha's three clusters [of precepts] correspondingly accomplish the three virtues. As the Yogācāra says: 'The provisions of merit and wisdom thus accumulated cannot be subsumed by any other fruit, excepting only unexcelled right and complete bodhi.'

2.22

Sūtra: 'This was recited by Locana' up to 'and transmitted in turn to all sentient beings.'

2.23

The Commentary says: Below is the gate of the final master's manifestation and propagation. This has four gates: first, the gate of reciprocal opening and transforming; second, the gate of the characteristics of the precepts thus accomplished; third, the gate of sentient beings capable of receiving them; and fourth, the gate of granting permission to expound them extensively. This is the first. It means that the above six verses were recited by the original teacher; as I transmit and recite them, you should do likewise; when hand passes to hand with the precepts, the Buddha seed will not be severed.

2.24

Sūtra: 'Listen attentively as I properly recite' up to 'The divisions of the precepts are already complete.'

2.25

The Commentary says: This is the second gate. All the prohibitory precepts instituted by the World-Honoured One, of both the higher vehicle and lower vehicle, emerge from this; hence it says 'the treasury of precepts within the Buddha-Dharma'. To distinguish them from the precepts born of concentration (dhyāna-saṃvara) and the precepts born of the noble path (anāsrava-saṃvara), it says 'prātimokṣa'. In Sanskrit it is 'prati', rendered here as 'separate'. In full, it should say 'vimokṣa', rendered here as 'separate liberation'. Because they liberate from wrongdoing separately, they are named 'separate liberation'. Furthermore, the Legacy Teaching says: 'Precepts are the foundation that accords with liberation; hence they are named prātimokṣa.' If one receives the bodhisattva precepts, thinking, 'By means of these precepts I shall become a Buddha, just like Śākyamuni,' because the precepts have already been accomplished, one will not give rise to any disparate mind; at that time, it is called 'the divisions of the precepts are already complete'. Wholesomely contemplating limits and demarcations is what is called precepts. As the Benye [jing] says: 'The precepts of all bodhisattvas, whether ordinary beings or sages, take the mind as their essence. If the mind ceases, the precepts also cease. Because the mind does not cease, the precepts also do not cease.' The mind here is the Mahāyāna mind, which cannot be attained by those who regress from the vehicle or have not yet generated the aspiration [for bodhi].

2.26

Sūtra: 'All beings with minds' up to 'are truly the children of the Buddhas.'

2.27

The Commentary says: This is the third gate. 'Should' (ying) means 'can/is permitted'. For if there are obstacles or a lack of [Buddha-]nature, the precepts cannot be accomplished. These precepts are the most supreme; how could they be easier than those of the śrāvakas? Who says they are easy to obtain? Because it is difficult to generate the aspiration [for bodhi]. Unexcelled bodhi subsumes every virtue, and whatever is cultivated upon generating the aspiration takes every goodness as its cause; thus, those with minds can generate the great aspiration, and all of their vows and practices become causal nature. 'Promptly enters the rank of all Buddhas': there are two Buddha ranks: first, the rank of the fulfillment of generating the aspiration; second, the rank of the fulfillment of practice and fruit. Here one enters the first; the initial vow generated is universally complete and no different from a Buddha, hence it says 'equal to the Great Awakened One'. As the sūtra says: 'Generating the aspiration and the ultimate [fruit] are not two or different.' Having attained this rank, one is truly a Buddha child, born from the Buddha-Dharma, succeeding to the Buddha's position. A verse says: 'Skill in means is the father, the seed of faith, / Prajñā the mother, meditation the womb, / Loving-kindness and compassion are the wet nurse, / The Buddha child is born to succeed to the throne.' This meaning is explained extensively in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha.

2.28

Sūtra: 'The great assembly should all be reverent, / And listen with utmost sincerity to my recitation.'

2.29

The fourth gate can be understood from the text.

2.30

Sūtra: 'At that time, Śākyamuni Buddha' up to 'the Mahāyāna precepts of all Buddhas.'

2.31

The Commentary says: Below is the third section, the preface to concluding the precepts, which has two parts: first, the sūtra compiler's preface; later, the World-Honoured One's preface. This is the first. 'At that time' refers to the time he came from the heavenly palace to manifest responsively. 'Śākya' translates here as 'able'; 'muni' is 'silent'. 'Bodhi tree': located in Magadha, beneath this tree there is a vajra pedestal; attaining awakening beneath this, it is named the bodhi tree. Why did he conclude them all at once at the very beginning? Because the myriad practices of the three vehicles arise from this, and the three periods of time are fixed and do not await offenses to occur; it is not like the śrāvakas, whose precepts were instituted gradually according to circumstances. As the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra and the Nirvāṇa-sūtra say: 'Pre-instituting precepts in advance causes the world to generate doubt; hence it is like mending clothes, patching wherever it is torn.' Now, the bodhisattva precepts are not like that; hence upon first accomplishing Buddhahood he first concluded these precepts. According to the Daśabhūmikabhāṣya, in the first seven days after attaining the way he enjoyed the Dharma bliss by himself, and only in the second seven days did he initiate speech. Stating here that he first concluded them should refer to the second seven days. 'Filial' means to nurture, and 'compliant' means reverence; knowing kindness and repaying kindness is the filial path. There are two kinds of kindness: first, the kindness of nourishing the physical body, referring to parents; second, the kindness of nurturing the dharmakāya, referring to teachers and the sangha. Respectfully sustaining with material goods and Dharma the teachers, sangha, Three Jewels, and the ultimate path here, they correspond in turn to assistants, what one relies on, and cognitive objects; therefore, the term 'filial' is separately cited. 'The precepts are also called restraint': filiality is the root of the hundred practices and the essential path of the former kings; precepts are the foundation of the ten thousand goods and the origin of all Buddhas. Goodness arises from this, so filiality is called the precepts; evil is extinguished by this, so they are also called restraint. Therefore, 'filial' and 'precepts' differ in name but are identical in meaning. 'Immediately emitted from his mouth...': emitting light to summon the assembly; he emits immeasurable light to summon those with conditions, symbolizing the unobstructed gate illuminating and guiding the long night. 'Great precepts' means the Mahāyāna precepts, which is why there is no śrāvaka assembly here.

2.32

Sūtra: 'The Buddha told the bodhisattvas' up to 'it is not without cause.'

2.33

The Commentary says: Below is the Buddha's preface, setting forth in turn the characteristics of the three wheels of teacher, Dharma, and disciple. There are two kinds of teachers: first, the fundamental teacher, meaning the Buddha; second, the derivative, the bodhisattvas. Hence it says 'I recite, and you should also recite.' 'Recite every half-month': although the teacher has disappeared, they abide relying on the Dharma. Adding leads easily to regression, and subtracting makes advancement difficult. To avoid regressing from the precepts and to advance in cultivating concentration and wisdom, every half-month neither adds nor subtracts. As the Legacy Teaching says: 'The prātimokṣa is your teacher; if I remained in the world, it would be no different from this.' 'Generating the aspiration' refers to the stage of the ten faiths. The practice still has regression, so it is not an official stage of the three classes of worthies. 'Ten launchings' are the ten abodes, being the first of the three classes of worthies. 'Ten nourishings' are the ten practices, because they nourish the sacred embryo. 'Ten vajras' are the ten dedications, because they gather the five powers. In the lower fascicle of the Benye [jing], all are prior to the grounds (bhūmis). Precepts can destroy darkness, using light as an auspicious sign. What is constantly recited and held emerges from the mouth, so it says 'it has conditions and is not without cause.'

2.34

Sūtra: 'The beams of light are neither blue nor yellow' up to 'should read, recite, and skillfully learn it.'

2.35

Commentary: This is the second [section, on] the Dharma. Here, "brilliance upon brilliance" refers to the various precepts, taking its name from the metaphorical auspicious signs. Although the precepts are categorized as form, they are neither visible colors nor shapes, because they are established on the basis of the determination of wholesome volition. Because they lack physical obstruction, they are "not form"; because they are without cognitive deliberation, they are "not mind"; because they are not apart from conditions, they are "not existent"; because they are not identical with conditions, they are "not non-existent." Because they are not existent, they are "not phenomena of cause and effect"; because they are not non-existent, they are the "original source of all buddhas." Being the original source of all buddhas, they are the "root of the bodhisattvas." Because they serve as the root for cause and effect, on this account they are also the root for the assembly at this time. Therefore, sons of the Buddha first receive them, and later uphold, recite, learn, and study their meaning.

2.36

Sūtra: "Sons of the Buddha, listen attentively!" up to "are the foremost in purity."

2.37

Commentary: This is the third [section, on] the disciples who are addressed. Regarding "bhikṣu": they had previously received [the precepts of] the Śrāvaka [vehicle]. Some say: when they turn their minds and receive the [bodhisattva] precepts, these transform into bodhisattva precepts. This is incorrect. Those [former precepts] were established on the basis of the seeds of the other vehicle. The previous minor precepts merely provide great assisting power; they are produced from distinct seeds born of the bodhisattva vehicle's mind, and from that perfuming, a distinct unmanifest [form] arises. Regarding the "eighteen Brahma [heavens]": they are the assembly of the form realm. That is, each of the [first] three dhyānas has three heavens, and the fourth has nine, for it is accepted that the state of non-conception has mind at the beginning and the end. The Bodhisattva-śīla-sūtra says: one must first generate the bodhicitta, and only then can one receive the bodhisattva precepts. How then can [beings of] the Pure Abodes also receive the precepts? Some say: "eighteen" is a general term with particular reference, just as a single bhikṣu may be called [one of the] "group of six." Some say: excluding the non-conception [heaven] and the Pure Abodes, there are distinct eighteen Brahma [heavens]. As in the Benye jing, the lower three dhyānas each have four heavens, and the fourth has six. Some say: according to the fact, there are also those who attain buddhahood [there]. However, the Cheng weishi lun, having generally established that in the form realm there are those who turn their minds, incidentally remarks that dedicating [one's merit] toward bodhi has not yet been established. The Śrāvaka teachings say: if, relying on prajñā, they do not generate the great mind, then among the five Pure Abodes there are none who turn their minds; this does not mean that according to the definitive meaning there is also no turning of the mind. Among these, for now, relying on receiving the uncommon precepts, it is allowed that eunuchs and the like may also receive and obtain the precepts. If one comprehensively studies the practice and separately receives the [precepts of the] seven classes [of disciples], one should know that the impediments and obstacles are the same as for śrāvaka reception. Question: If eunuchs and the like also receive and obtain the precepts, why does the sūtra say: "If one says that without having received the upāsaka precepts, the śrāmaṇera precepts, or the bhikṣu precepts, one can obtain the bodhisattva precepts, there is no such possibility. It is just like a multi-storied tower: without climbing the first story, to reach the second story is impossible"? They themselves explain: it is necessarily by means of moral discipline that one subsequently obtains the two uncommon bodhisattva precepts; therefore this is said. It does not necessarily mean that the bodhisattva must first generate the small mind. Regarding "are all called the foremost in purity": as in the treatises, they surpass all arhats. Why is this so? As stated in the Prajñā[pāramitā-sūtras]: the wholesome roots of the two vehicles are like the light of a firefly, illuminating only one's own body, whereas the wholesome roots of the Great Vehicle are like the light of the sun, guiding all.

2.38

Sūtra: "The Buddha addressed all the sons of the Buddha:" up to "I also recite them in this way."

2.39

Commentary: The second part is the main discourse, which has two sections: first the major, and next the minor. Within the first, there are three: the general presentation, the specific recitations, and the conclusion. Within the general, there are two: citing the number to institute their observance, and showing their characteristics to exhort study. This is the first. The Yogācārabhūmi establishes four, as explained in the Zongyao. As for the Upāsakaśīla-sūtra, relying on the householder assembly it only speaks of the first six, because they are gross and prominent. According to the Bodhisattva-śīla-sūtra, for monastic bodhisattvas eight major [precepts] are established, which are the first four and the last four of these ten, because they are the common and uncommon fundamental major offenses. This sūtra and the Benye [jing] collectively establish ten major [precepts], because they subsume all comprehensively. A verse says:
"Four are bodily, three are verbal, and mental are also three;
They arise through greed, anger, and delusion: four, two, and one.
The three verbal through all three reach their culmination;
Lust, anger, and false view may also pertain to the insentient."
Among the ten, four have bodily karma as their substance. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, fascicle thirteen, says: intoxicating liquor and the preceding three are all bodily precepts. The fourth, sixth, and seventh take verbal karma as the offense; the remaining three verbal [actions] follow the characteristics to constitute the sixth and seventh. However, there are courses of karma that are not defeats, namely, singing with defilement and the like, which are subsumed under frivolous speech. Each of these major [precepts] admits of greed, anger, or delusion as its preliminary means: stealing, sexual misconduct, selling liquor, and stinginess reach culmination through greed; killing and anger through anger; false view through delusion; and the remaining three through all three. Praising oneself and disparaging others for the sake of fame and profit arises from jealousy, reaching culmination through anger. Sexual misconduct, anger, and false view may sometimes pertain to the insentient; for sexual intercourse with a corpse that has not yet decomposed belongs to the category of the insentient. The others constitute major offenses only when directed toward sentient beings; even though stealing may involve an insentient object, the offense is constituted with respect to its owner. Furthermore, a verse says:
"All can be committed by oneself against another;
Another against another can also be the same.
Oneself against oneself admits of five;
Another against oneself involves only lust."
All may be committed by oneself toward another; another toward another may also encompass all ten, meaning causing another to commit them against another. That which is committed by oneself against oneself is traditionally said to be five: killing, sexual misconduct, stinginess, anger, and false view; meaning that abandoning the benefit of others and causing one's own death is an offense. The Vinaya says: one with a supple back engaging in sexual misconduct with one's own mouth. The Upāsakaśīla-sūtra says: giving to oneself does not constitute giving; being stingy toward oneself constitutes stinginess. Generating rage against oneself, slandering the nature of reality, and the like, are all offenses committed against oneself. As for another committing against oneself, sexual misconduct has this, while the others do not; for if one is violated by a thief and complies by producing lustful attachment, it also constitutes an offense. Can there be an offense committed where one neither acts oneself nor causes another to act? There is, namely, rejoicing [in the deed]. Can there be an offense of violating the precepts incurred without initiating bodily, verbal, or mental karma? There is, namely, not doing what ought to be done, and the like. These questions and answers are explained at length in the chapter on upholding and violating in the Zongyao. Having clarified the incidental points, the primary text should now be explained. If one receives these ten major [precepts] without reciting them, one will be deluded regarding upholding and violating and will lose the bodhisattva practice; since one is no longer a bodhisattva, how could one be a seed of the Buddha? Even though I have already perfected the fruit, I still recite them in this way—how much more so should new learners! This is the meaning here.

2.40

Sūtra: "All bodhisattvas" up to "reverently accept and uphold [them]."

2.41

Commentary: This is the second section, the gate of showing the characteristics to exhort upholding. The Nirvāṇa-sūtra says: in the śrāvaka precepts, the Buddha knew the timely appropriateness, explaining the minor as major and explaining the major as minor. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: the Vinaya is entirely for restraining the mind for worldly [purposes], and does not discuss true reality. For the sake of protecting the Buddhadharma, it does not consider the gravity of offenses in future lives. Furthermore, an offense may be severe in future lives, yet light in the precepts, such as a practitioner killing oxen, sheep, and the like; praising women is severe in the precepts, yet its offense in future lives is light; and so forth at length. The bodhisattva [precepts] are not like this: what is truly major is spoken of as major, and what is in principle minor is spoken of as minor; because the Dharma-nature is constantly so, pervading the three periods of time. These are the characteristics of the bodhisattva's prātimokṣa. Those who wish to attain the great fruit should reverently uphold them. As stated in the Bequeathed Teachings: if one is diligent and vigorous, nothing will be difficult, just like a small stream constantly flowing that can pierce stone; do not die in vain, only to have regrets later. It is like an excellent physician who diagnoses the illness and prescribes medicine: whether it is taken or not is not the physician's fault.

2.42

First Precept on Willful Killing of Living Beings

2.43

Sūtra: "If a son of the Buddha kills by himself" up to "this is a bodhisattva pārājika offense."

2.44

The commentary states: Second, the individual recitation. These first ten precepts are each explained through two headings: first, clarifying the intention behind the enactment; second, explaining the text of the sūtra. Regarding the first, the intention behind the enactment: among what worldly beings fear, the suffering of death is the ultimate; among harms to others, none exceeds taking life. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: "Even if the world were filled with jewels, none would match the value of a physical life." This being so, for a bodhisattva whose fundamental intention is to rescue sentient beings to inflict the ultimate terror would cause them to lose their very nature. As the Yogācārabhūmi states: "If one asks what constitutes the essence of a bodhisattva, the correct reply should be: great compassion is the essence." It is for this reason that this precept was enacted first. Just as for the śrāvaka escaping suffering comes first and thus sensual desire was first enacted as the gravest precept. Regarding the second, explaining the text: the sūtra has four headings: 1. the heading of aspects of violation, 2. the heading of the nature of the violation, 3. the heading of the objective basis, and 4. the heading of determining the offense. As for the first: the text from "if a disciple of the Buddha kills by himself" up to "kills by incantation" constitutes the distinct aspects of violation. As for the nature of the violation: it is indicated by the text from "the karma of killing" up to "the conditions for killing," meaning that having all five limbs necessarily constitutes a violation. Herein, "the karma of killing" is the culmination; "the method of killing" is the preparatory effort; "the cause of killing" is the motivation and affliction; "the conditions for killing" is the objective matter. Relying on this, some say that if it does not constitute a karmic path, it does not enter into a major offense. As the Yogācārabhūmi states: "If a bodhisattva sees [someone] about to commit a grave crime, he generates the thought and reflects: 'If I sever the life of that evil sentient being, I will fall into hell; but if I do not sever it, his sinful karma will be completed and he will undergo great suffering. I would rather kill him and fall into Naraka than ever let him undergo uninterrupted suffering.' Thus toward him, either with a wholesome mind or with an indeterminate mind, having understood this matter, for the sake of the future he deeply engenders shame and conscience, and with a mind of pity severs his life. Because of this cause and condition, regarding the bodhisattva precepts there is no violation, and much merit is produced. Because this lacks affliction, there is no violation; because the motivation is wholesome, much merit is produced." I now explain that this is not so; even if it does not constitute a karmic path, it still constitutes a violation. Just as in cases where killing any living being constitutes a major offense, even with inverted perception it constitutes a major offense; how much more so since precepts of specific portions have different enactments according to spiritual stage! As the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra says regarding this precept: "If one has received the supramundane bodhisattva precepts and fails to give rise to a mind of loving-kindness and compassion, this is a bodhisattva pārājika offense." In matters of violation, the treatise excepts three persons: namely, the mentally deranged, those in severe pain, and those without precepts. Tradition says that one should also except those without recollection and those with superior benefit. In a subsequent rebirth, one cannot recollect; hence even if committed, there is no violation. Wherever there is superior benefit, in all such cases there is no violation. Regarding the heading of the objective basis: as the sūtra says, "up to and including all living beings, one must not intentionally kill." Thus, while in the śrāvaka precepts only killing human beings is included, here there is no distinction of destiny, hence it says "up to and including." While the former follows the gravity of the matter, the present [ruling] is enacted according to principle. As the Nirvāṇa-sūtra relates, the Buddha told King Ajātaśatru: "Great King! In your royal palace you constantly ordered the slaughter of sheep and initially felt no fear in your mind; why do you now give rise to fear only toward your father? Although there is a distinction of noble and base between humans and beasts, in treasuring life and dreading death both are no different. If, at the moment when his lifespan was exhausted, he was killed, how could that incur an offense?" The Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra states that one incurs an equal offense because the conditions for inflicting suffering on him are fully present, as explained there at length. Although the offenses of transgressing the teaching are identical in gravity, the karma varies in lightness and gravity according to mind, object, and so on, as explained at length in the treatises. Question: The strength of the afflictions in their own categories should be equal; why then does the Upāsakaśīla-sūtra say that killing out of greed is light, out of anger is intermediate, and out of delusion is heavy? Answer: Although coarse and subtle are equal, that which is transgressed differs: it is a transgression against the correct principle of the Great Vehicle of departure [from saṃsāra]. Respectively, greed and the others are heavy; the sūtra speaks in terms of general characteristics and temporarily considers delusion to be heavy. Regarding the heading of determining the offense: the text from "this bodhisattva" up to "pārājika offense" determines the offense in contrast to correct practice. "Constantly abiding in a mind of loving-kindness and compassion" refers to a sympathetic mind directed downward toward sentient beings. By the nature of things, sentient beings are bound by lineage; because those belonging to my class perish on account of me. "A mind of filial compliance" refers to a mind of shame and conscience directed upward toward superior classes. Because bodhisattvas undergo great austerities for immeasurable kalpas in order to save me, a bodhisattva should give rise to these two minds; but by killing living beings with a self-indulgent mind, one commits a major offense. The vinaya states: "If a śrāvaka has the perception of a human being [and kills], he incurs a pārājika; if he has the perception of a non-human, it is only a sthūlātyaya." The bodhisattva is not like this: merely intentionally killing any living being is in all cases a pārājika. "Pārājika" is translated here as "basis of defeat by others." Wholesomeness is the self, evil is the other; being conquered by evil dharmas, the precept being upholding and violation, the basis is called "basis." The general meaning of this text is that, among the violations of those various differing aspects, through the five conditions of violation, one incurs an offense by reversing the correct. The rest of the texts on the precepts should be explained in accordance with this. Herein, these precepts take their names through the relation of dependent determinative compound.

2.45

The second precept: against robbing and stealing the property of persons.

2.46

The sūtra: "If a disciple of the Buddha steals by himself" up to "is a bodhisattva pārājika offense."

2.47

The commentary states: In this, the first [heading], the intention behind enacting the precept: giving subsumes the six perfections and broadly delivers all sentient beings; stealing directly destroys giving, so that both benefits are lost together. The world considers stealing vile, and because it properly obstructs the path and broadly incurs suffering, one should rather forfeit one's body to avoid this fault—why disgrace oneself throughout both lifetimes for the sake of petty wealth? Hence, [the precept against] harming circumstantial retribution is enacted next after [that against harming] direct retribution. In the second [heading], explaining the text, within it there are also four [sections]. As for the first gate, it is as the sūtra states from "steals by himself" up to "the expedient means of stealing"; praising and rejoicing in it are omitted and not discussed, because in principle they must be present. Its second gate should be known as explained before. This is the mundane gate. In the case of the supramundane precepts, the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra states: "If one conceives a thought of stealing directed toward another's property, one commits a pārājika." As for the gate of the objective domain and matter, it is as the sūtra states from "down to ghosts and spirits" up to "must not steal." Here, it subsumes the major offenses, hence it says "down to." However, owned property is briefly of five kinds: first, property of the Three Jewels; second, property belonging to humans; third, property of animals; fourth, property of ghosts and spirits; fifth, property of robbers. The phrase "owned" subsumes both what precedes and what follows. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: "If managers mutually misappropriate the property of the Three Jewels, the Buddha said it is a pārājika." The Ratnarāśi-sūtra states: "Property of the Buddha and the Dharma must not be mutually misappropriated, because there is no owner of the property of the Buddha and the Dharma, and furthermore there is no one to inform. It is not like property of the saṃgha, whether permanent or of the four quarters, which may be mutually used: if the managing bhikṣu harmonizes the saṃgha, they may use it. If one uses property of the saṃgha to repair a stūpa of the Buddha, if the saṃgha is not in harmony, one should urge the laity to repair it." According to this passage, the preceding Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya is based on the saṃgha not being in harmony, which is in every case said to be a major offense. If mutual misappropriation is already so, how much more so taking with a mind of theft? If so, why does the Nirvāṇa-sūtra state: "One who steals the Buddha's property, whether knowing or not knowing, commits a sthūlātyaya. Because the Buddha has no sense of 'mine' toward property, there is no torment or harm"? The tradition in the land of Han says that it is based on there being no guardian that the sūtra speaks of a sthūlātyaya. If there is a guardian, even mutual misappropriation is already a major offense—how much less could stealing be minor? Therefore, the Upāsakaśīla-sūtra determines it to be a major offense with respect to the guardian. However, the Nirvāṇa-sūtra speaks of the Śrāvaka precepts; for a bodhisattva it is not so, because as long as it is owned property, it is always a major offense. In general, property of the Three Jewels is difficult to manage, because the rules, permissions, upholdings, and transgressions are difficult to fathom. As the Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra states: "The Buddha permits two kinds of persons: first, arhats; second, srotāpannas. Further, there are two kinds of persons: first, those who uphold the precepts and have discernment; second, those who fear transgressions and possess shame and modesty." However, in the bodhisattva precepts, one may also use the Buddha's property. As the Yogācārabhūmi states: "A bodhisattva, in order to purify the requisites they keep, with a pure intention first relinquishes them to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions. Seeing a seeker approach whose request does not accord with the principle, the bodhisattva says, 'This belongs to another,' and dismisses them with gentle words. If it accords with the correct principle, the bodhisattva should reflect: 'There is no small item that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas would not give to sentient beings.' Having known this, the bodhisattva takes the purified gift and gives it to the seeker, causing their wish to be fulfilled." Based on teachings such as these, the preceptor said: "Although the rules are as stated in the Śrāvaka-vinaya, nevertheless, just like taking life, where there is benefit one should act. All Buddhas appear solely to promote the Dharma. The intention to promote the Dharma is entirely for the sake of sentient beings. To promote the Dharma and benefit sentient beings, what would one not use? Excepting where there is an afflicted mind or no superior benefit." But in the Śrāvaka precepts, one may not mutually misappropriate it. Although the Buddha is identical with the Dharma, it would contravene the intention of the donor. However, the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya states: "Food offered to the Buddha's stūpa may be eaten by the person who tends the stūpa." The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya states: "If white-robed laity enter the monastery and the saṃgha does not give them food, they would generate resentment. The Buddha said: 'One should give it.'" Also the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: "If it causes loss or gives benefit, one should give it." The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya states: "Supply it to kings, ministers, and bandits." Even the narrow and minor Śrāvaka-yāna still sees loss and benefit—how much more so the Mahāyāna? It cannot be fixed invariantly. Question: The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya states: "If one steals a Buddha relic with a pure mind to make offerings, reflecting to oneself, 'To them it is the Teacher, and to me it is also the Teacher,' with such an intention, there is no violation. If one steals it to sell, one commits an offense." Why is stealing the Dharma judged as a major offense in the Vinaya, since the Dharma is also the Teacher? Answer: In the case of the Buddha, one can express reverence from afar, whereas in the case of the Dharma, understanding arises when facing it. However, in the bodhisattva precepts, if one knows that they do not use it and with a pure mind steals it to study, in principle there should be no violation. If one knows that it obstructs their wholesome qualities, stealing the Buddha['s relic] is also a major offense. Question: The Yogācārabhūmi and the Abhidharmakośa state: "Robbing property of the saṃgha is analogous to causing a schism in the saṃgha." Why does the Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra state that the sin of stealing the saṃgha's property exceeds the five deeds of immediate retribution? And the Vaipulya-sūtra states: "Even for the four major offenses and the five deeds of immediate retribution, I can save [them]. But one who steals the saṃgha's property is someone I cannot save"? Answer: What they have in view is distinct in each case. Causing a schism in the saṃgha is temporary; furthermore, stealing the communal property of the currently present saṃgha universally obstructs the path of the permanent saṃgha of the three times; it does not directly obstruct the noble ones, so it is called 'analogous'. As for the phrase "property of robbers": the property already belongs to them, so the Vinaya does not permit seizing it. As the Vinaya says: "A thief seizing a thief's property." The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya states: "There was a bhikṣu stripped by robbers who fought to retrieve his robes and items, but having doubts, he asked the Buddha. The Buddha said: 'There is no violation.'" For a bodhisattva it is not so. As the Yogācārabhūmi states: "A bodhisattva, seeing that an exalted sovereign or minister possesses extreme and gross cruelty, and torments sentient beings without compassion, generates a mind of pity and deposes them from their exalted rank. Seeing robbers and thieves snatch others' wealth, or saṃgha property, or stūpa property, and hold it as their own, with the intention to benefit and delight, uses power to wrest it away, so as not to allow them to enjoy it and suffer prolonged misery; and returns the wrested wealth and treasures each to their original owner," down to detailed explanations. "A bodhisattva, though thus taking what is not given, commits no violation and generates much merit." As the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya states: in the case of the bhikṣu fighting for his robes, if judged by the bodhisattva precepts, because of the offense of stinginess with wealth, if one guards against that offense, much merit is generated. Thus, as stated, as long as it is owned property, if one takes it with a mind of theft without beneficial purpose, down to a single blade of grass, one commits a pārājika. If it is one's own property or ownerless property, or if it is owned but one erroneously considers it ownerless, or although it is owned one does not generate a mind of theft, theft is not constituted. If toward one's own property one considers it another's and steals it, or toward ownerless property one considers it owned property, the tradition says that based on the mind, an expedient means toward a major offense is determined, because that item is not actually an objective domain for committing a major offense. If toward owned property one erroneously considers it ownerless and later, upon knowing, does not return it, or toward human property one considers it non-human property, or seeking another item, another person's item is substituted instead, the tradition says these are all major offenses, because they are objective domains of transgression. What is called ownerless property? Such as that which has been abandoned by others, and so forth. The Samantapāsādikā states: "A son commits evil deeds and his parents drive him out; later, when the parents die, their property is ownerless." The Mahāvibhāṣā and other works state: "Hidden treasures between two kingdoms, and so forth." If so, when commoners take from mountains and forests, should that be stealing the king's property? It is not so, because the king intends it to sustain them. In the Śrāvaka teachings, it is a major offense only at five coins; now, wishing to distinguish it, it says "a single needle or blade of grass." From the word "bodhisattva" downward is the fourth gate. "Filial compliance, compassion, and kindness" are called "Buddha-nature," because a bodhisattva is distinguished from the two vehicles by means of these. "Producing blessings" means bringing benefit; "producing happiness" means bringing peace and happiness. Yet stealing people's property produces their afflictions, which contravenes benefit; and because it deprives them of the requisites of life, it also contravenes peace and happiness. As the verse in fascicle thirteen of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: / "All sentient beings / Rely on clothing and food to sustain their lives; / If one robs or snatches them away, / One is robbing and snatching away their life."

First 47 of 238 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

梵網經古迹記 — Classical Chinese