俱舍論記 14.79

14.79

「一由自然至表業而發」者，答。一由自然，謂佛、獨覺無師，自然盡智心時，得具足戒。故《正理》三十七云「自然謂智，以不從師。證此智時，得具足戒。」二由得入正性離生，謂阿若憍陳那等五苾芻。又《正理》云「由證見道得具足戒。」三由佛命善來苾芻，爾時得戒，謂耶舍等。耶舍，此云譽。《正理》云「由本願力，佛威加故。」四由信受佛為大師，爾時得戒，謂大迦葉。五由善巧酬答所問，謂蘇陀夷。蘇陀夷，此云善施，年始七歲，由聰明故善答佛問，稱可佛心。雖年未滿二十，佛令眾僧羯磨受具足戒。由聰明故善巧酬答，別開一緣，非酬答時即發戒也。言酬答者，佛問彼言：「汝家在何？」蘇陀夷答言：「三界無家。」六由敬受八尊重法，爾時得戒，謂大生主。舊云大愛道者，訛。梵云摩訶波闍波提。摩訶，此云大。波闍，此云生。波提，此云主。是大梵王千名中一稱也。眾生多故，名曰大生。梵王能生一切眾生，與大生為主，名大生主。從所乞所天神為名，故名大生主。是佛姨母。佛遣阿難為說八尊重法，彼即敬受，爾時得戒。此八是應尊重法，故名尊重法。於尼眾中最初出家，廣如律辨。八尊重法，舊云八敬。七由遣使得戒，謂法授尼，尼名法授，名法授尼。此尼端政欲往僧中，恐路有難，受具戒時不對大僧。大僧遣一尼受法，轉與受戒，故由遣使得具戒也。由尼端政，世尊別開此緣。八由持律為第五人，謂於邊國以無僧故，極少猶須五人。以和上不入眾數，餘四成眾，減不成眾。於五人中，必須一人持律羯摩，故言持律第五。減五不成，多即不遮。九由十眾，謂於中國僧多之處，極少猶須十人，多亦不遮。十由三說歸佛、法、僧，謂六十賢和眾部共集，佛遣阿羅漢為說三歸受具戒。如是上來所得十種別解脫律儀，非必定依表業而發，謂初二種不從表生，後八表生。問：前說別解脫從他教得，自然、見道非從他教，如何得戒？解云：前文且據從他教得，後文通據不從他得，故說等言攝此異義。問：不從他得此義可然，如何無表非從表起？如下論云「七善業道若從受生必皆具二，謂表、無表，受生尸羅必依表故。」解云：從他受生必依表發，不從他受非依表生，何違須釋？問：若有無表不從表生，何故下文論主設難云「欲無無表，離表而生。」解云：下文論主敘餘師義難，或可下文通據加行、根本兩位必有表故，故言欲無無表離表而生。若不爾者，遣使殺等根本成時，有何表耶？非言自然、見道，得戒根本無表必依表生，故不相違。又解：如是上來所得十種別解脫律儀，七支無表非必定依七表業發。如羯摩受戒，從身三表業亦發語無表。如三歸受戒，從語四表業亦發身無表，非必定依自類表發。若作此解，十種得戒皆依表發。如自然、見道，亦從表業發得無表。此解意說自然、見道，謂彼先時決定有表相續不斷，乃至聖位，從彼表發無表律儀。問：如下論云「七善業道若從受生，必皆具二，謂表、無表，受生尸羅必依表故。」准此文說，但言受生具二、受生依表，何故不言自然、見道亦具二耶？解云：下論據顯且言受生，不遮自然、見道得戒具二依表。或自然、見道要期受生故，受生類故，亦名受生。若作此解，善順下文「欲無無表離表而生。」又《正理論》中亦有兩說。如彼論云「有餘師說：非於欲界一切無表悉依表生，如得果時五苾芻等得別解脫戒。然彼先時決定有表。」解云：彼論餘師意，說欲有無表，離表而生。「然彼」已下，是正理論師意，欲無無表離表而生。然彼得果五苾芻等，先時決定有表相續不斷，乃至聖位，從彼表發無表律儀。前解同《正理》餘師說，後解同《正理論》意。又《婆沙》一百二十二明有成就現在身無表非此表中，亦有兩解，云「若住別解脫律儀及住不律儀現無身表。有作是說：此說第二剎那以後，彼初剎那必有表故。有作是說：彼初剎那亦是所說，有現無身表受不律儀故，及在定中得具戒故。」解彼論云：言有現無身表受不律儀故者，謂受事得不律儀現無身表。言及在定中得具戒故者，謂佛、獨覺及五苾芻，在定得戒亦無身表。前師意說欲無無表離表而生，後師意說欲界亦有無表離表而生。然無評家。前解同《婆沙》後師，後解同《婆沙》前師。

"[First, through self-attainment, up to:] generated from vijñapti-karma" is the answer. First, through self-attainment: this means that the Buddha and pratyekabuddhas, having no teacher, naturally obtain the full precepts (upasampadā) at the moment of the cognition of destruction (kṣayajñāna). Hence Nyāyānusāra 37 says: "'Self-attainment' refers to cognition, because it does not depend on a teacher. Upon realizing this cognition, one obtains the full precepts." Second, through entry into the certainty of rectitude (nyāma-avakrānti): this refers to Ājñātakauṇḍinya and the other five bhikṣus. Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra says: "Through realizing the path of seeing (darśana-mārga), one obtains the full precepts." Third, through the Buddha calling, "Come, bhikṣu!" (ehi-bhikṣu): at that time one obtains the precepts, as in the case of Yaśas and others. "Yaśas" translates here as "Renown". The Nyāyānusāra says: "Through the power of original vows and reinforced by the Buddha's majesty." Fourth, through accepting with faith the Buddha as the Great Master: at that time one obtains the precepts, as in the case of Mahākāśyapa. Fifth, through skillfully answering what was asked: this refers to Sudāyi. "Sudāyi" translates here as "Good Giving"; being only seven years old, due to his intelligence he skillfully answered the Buddha's question, satisfying the Buddha's mind. Although he had not yet reached twenty years of age, the Buddha instructed the saṃgha to perform a karman conferring the full precepts. Because of his intelligence, skillfully answering was established as an exceptional condition; it does not mean that the precepts were generated directly at the time of answering. As for answering: the Buddha asked him, "Where is your home?" Sudāyi answered, "There is no home in the three realms." Sixth, through reverently accepting the eight respectful dharmas (gurudharma): at that time one obtains the precepts, as in the case of Mahāprajāpatī. The older translation "Da-ai-dao" is erroneous. In Sanskrit it is Mahāprajāpatī; mahā translates here as "great", prajā translates here as "born / living beings", and patī translates here as "lord". It is one of the thousand names of the Great Brahmā-devarāja. Because sentient beings are numerous, they are called "great born". King Brahmā can give birth to all sentient beings and acts as lord to these great born beings, hence he is called "Lord of the Great Born". She was named after the god prayed to, hence she was called Mahāprajāpatī. She was the Buddha's maternal aunt. The Buddha dispatched Ānanda to expound the eight respectful dharmas to her, and she immediately accepted them with reverence, obtaining the precepts at that time. These eight are dharmas that should be respected, hence they are called respectful dharmas. She was the very first to go forth among the nuns (bhikṣuṇīs), as extensively explained in the Vinaya. The eight respectful dharmas were formerly called the eight reverences. Seventh, through sending a messenger, one obtains the precepts: this refers to the nun Dharmadinnā. The nun's name was Dharmadinnā (Law-Conferred), so she is called the nun Dharmadinnā. This nun was attractive, and wishing to go into the saṃgha, feared perils along the road, so when receiving the full precepts she did not face the great saṃgha. The great saṃgha dispatched a nun to receive the procedure and transmit it to confer the precepts on her; thus, through sending a messenger she obtained the full precepts. Because the nun was attractive, the World-Honoured One specially allowed this exceptional circumstance. Eighth, through a holder of the Vinaya as the fifth person: this means that in frontier countries, because there are few monks, at the very minimum five persons are still required. Because the upādhyāya does not count among the assembly's quorum, the remaining four constitute the quorum; with fewer, it does not constitute a quorum. Among the five persons, there must be one holder of the Vinaya to perform the karman; hence it is said, "the holder of the Vinaya being the fifth". Fewer than five does not succeed, but more is not forbidden. Ninth, through an assembly of ten: this means that in the Central Region, where monks are numerous, at the very minimum ten persons are required, and more is not forbidden either. Tenth, through three recitations of taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṃgha: this means the group of sixty Bhadravargīyas gathered together, and the Buddha sent arhats to administer the three refuges for them to receive the full precepts. The ten kinds of prātimokṣa disciplines obtained above are not necessarily generated based on vijñapti-karma: the first two kinds are not born from vijñapti, whereas the latter eight are born from vijñapti. Question: It was previously said that prātimokṣa is obtained from another's instruction, but self-attainment and the path of seeing are not from another's instruction; how then do they obtain the precepts? Explanation: The preceding text only relied on what is obtained from another's instruction, while the subsequent text comprehensively accounts for what is not obtained from another; therefore, the word "and so forth" was said to subsume this different meaning. Question: That it is not obtained from another may be granted, but how can avijñapti not arise from vijñapti? As the treatise below says: "If the seven virtuous courses of action are born from receiving [precepts], they must both possess two: namely, vijñapti and avijñapti, because the śīla born from receiving necessarily depends on vijñapti." Explanation: What is born from receiving from another necessarily arises based on vijñapti, but what is not received from another is not born depending on vijñapti; what contradiction is there that requires resolving? Question: If there is avijñapti that is not born from vijñapti, why does the author of the treatise raise an objection below, saying: "In the desire realm there is no avijñapti that is born separate from vijñapti"? Explanation: Below, the author of the treatise states the objection according to other masters' doctrine; or alternatively, the subsequent text comprehensively accounts for both the preparatory and primary stages having vijñapti necessarily, and therefore it says that in the desire realm there is no avijñapti born separate from vijñapti. If that were not so, when sending a messenger to kill and so forth is accomplished at the primary stage, what vijñapti would there be? It is not saying that in self-attainment and the path of seeing, the fundamental avijñapti of obtaining the precepts must be born based on vijñapti; hence there is no contradiction. Another explanation: The ten kinds of prātimokṣa discipline obtained above, with their seven branches of avijñapti, are not necessarily generated based on seven vijñapti-karmas. For instance, when receiving the precepts through a karman, from the three bodily vijñapti-karmas, vocal avijñapti is also generated. For instance, when receiving the precepts through the three refuges, from the four vocal vijñapti-karmas, bodily avijñapti is also generated; they are not necessarily generated based on vijñapti of their own category. If this explanation is adopted, then all ten ways of obtaining precepts are generated depending on vijñapti. As with self-attainment and the path of seeing, they also generate and obtain avijñapti from vijñapti-karma. The sense of this explanation is that in self-attainment and the path of seeing, they beforehand definitely had an uninterrupted continuum of vijñapti leading up to the noble state, and from that vijñapti the avijñapti discipline is generated. Question: As the treatise below says: "If the seven virtuous courses of action are born from receiving [precepts], they must both possess two: namely, vijñapti and avijñapti, because the śīla born from receiving necessarily depends on vijñapti." According to what this passage says, it only states that being born from receiving possesses both and being born from receiving depends on vijñapti; why does it not say that self-attainment and the path of seeing also possess both? Explanation: The treatise below, based on what is prominent, provisionally speaks of being born from receiving, but does not preclude that obtaining the precepts in self-attainment and the path of seeing possesses both and depends on vijñapti. Or, because self-attainment and the path of seeing involve a resolute undertaking to receive, being of the class of receiving, they are also called "born from receiving". If this explanation is adopted, it accords well with the subsequent text: "In the desire realm there is no avijñapti born separate from vijñapti." Furthermore, in the Nyāyānusāra there are also two explanations. As that treatise says: "Other masters say: In the desire realm, not all avijñapti is born depending on vijñapti, as when the five bhikṣus and others obtain the prātimokṣa precepts upon attaining the fruit. However, they beforehand definitely had vijñapti." Explanation: The intention of the other masters in that treatise is to say that in the desire realm there is avijñapti born separate from vijñapti. From "However, they..." onward is the intention of the master of the Nyāyānusāra, that in the desire realm there is no avijñapti born separate from vijñapti. However, those five bhikṣus and others who attained the fruit beforehand definitely had an uninterrupted continuum of vijñapti leading up to the noble state, and from that vijñapti the avijñapti discipline was generated. The former explanation agrees with what the other masters say in the Nyāyānusāra; the latter explanation agrees with the intention of the Nyāyānusāra. Furthermore, in Mahāvibhāṣā 122, in clarifying that there is possession of present bodily avijñapti not [derived] from this vijñapti, there are also two explanations, saying: "If one abides in prātimokṣa discipline or abides in non-discipline, at present there is no bodily vijñapti. Some say: This is stated of after the second moment, because in their initial moment there must be vijñapti. Some say: Their initial moment is also what is spoken of, because one may take on non-discipline while presently lacking bodily vijñapti, and because one may obtain the full precepts while in absorption (samādhi)." Explaining that treatise: stating that one may take on non-discipline while presently lacking bodily vijñapti refers to undertaking an activity and obtaining non-discipline while presently lacking bodily vijñapti. Stating that one may obtain the full precepts while in absorption refers to the Buddha, pratyekabuddhas, and the five bhikṣus obtaining the precepts while in absorption, likewise without bodily vijñapti. The former master means that in the desire realm there is no avijñapti born separate from vijñapti; the latter master means that in the desire realm there is also avijñapti born separate from vijñapti. However, there is no critical evaluation [by the author]. The former explanation agrees with the latter master of the Mahāvibhāṣā, while the latter explanation agrees with the former master of the Mahāvibhāṣā.