俱舍論疏 14.201

14.201

論「又諸聖者至謂定不作」，第三因也。《正理論》云「經生聖者亦不行故，離非梵行則不如是。若異此者，經生有學應不能持近事性戒（非梵行應是性罪，應不能持性罪，理實亦能持遮罪，謂不飲酒，況性罪也。又解：以是性戒名性罪，非五種不作皆是性罪）。於欲邪行，一切聖人定得不作，名為律儀，此不作律儀無有別體，前戒已捨、今生未受故。但是前身曾受五戒，雖復經生更不受戒，欲邪行等必定不作。非梵行即不如是，雖有學曾受具戒，經生捨戒更未受戒，即犯非梵行也。」《正理論》云「若諸近事，後復從師要期更受離非梵行：得未曾得此律儀不？有餘師說得此律儀。有說不得未得律儀，然獲最勝杜多功德，名獲最勝遠離法者，謂能遠離婬欲法故。」今詳後解為勝。不得律儀，應得別遠離無表。所以者何？離非梵行律儀無獨受者，必以五、十、二百五十、五百等同受得故，此等闕支不發律儀故。

The treatise says, "Furthermore, as for the noble ones, [...] because it is said that they definitely do not commit it." This is the third reason. The *Nyāyānusāra* says: "Because noble ones who have undergone rebirth also do not perform it; while with abstaining from non-celibacy it is not so. If it were otherwise, a noble one in training (śaikṣa) who has undergone rebirth would be unable to maintain the natural precepts of a lay follower (upāsaka). (Non-celibacy should be a natural offense; they would be unable to uphold natural offenses, whereas in actual principle they can even uphold prohibitory offenses, namely not drinking alcohol, how much more so natural offenses. Another explanation: because it is a natural precept, it is called a natural offense, not that all five kinds of non-action are natural offenses). With regard to sexual misconduct, all noble persons definitely obtain its non-action, which is termed 'restraint' (saṃvara). This restraint of non-action has no separate real entity, because the previous precepts have already been abandoned and in the present life they have not yet been received. It is merely that in a previous life they had once received the five precepts, and though having undergone rebirth they have not received the precepts again, they definitely do not commit sexual misconduct and the like. Non-celibacy is not like this: although a noble one in training had once received the full precepts, having undergone rebirth they abandoned the precepts and have not yet received them again, so they would commit non-celibacy." The *Nyāyānusāra* says: "If lay followers afterwards further resolve before a teacher to receive [the precept of] abstaining from non-celibacy: do they obtain this restraint that they had never obtained before, or not? Some masters say they obtain this restraint. Others say they do not obtain a previously unobtained restraint, yet they acquire the most supreme dhūta merit, and are called those who 'acquire the most supreme dharma of renunciation', meaning being able to renounce the dharma of sexual lust." Now, examining this, the latter explanation is superior. Though they do not obtain [a separate] restraint, they should obtain a distinct non-manifesting [action] (avijñapti) of renunciation. Why is this? The restraint of abstaining from non-celibacy is never received alone; it must be received together with the five, ten, two hundred and fifty, five hundred, and so forth. Because these lack the [full] limbs, they do not engender the restraint.