瑜伽師地論略纂 13.86

13.86

論云「他所得」者，謂小時父母失等，與他得收養，雖非父母，亦是他得。此等戒有是遮難，受戒不得戒；有但得罪，非不得戒。　「守園」者，謂守寺門人。　比丘五緣捨戒中，法師云：准〈菩薩地〉犯罪捨，要上品心犯方失，此亦如是。此不成釋，如菩薩上品心無慚愧故。此聲聞戒中但犯即失，不論上、中、下心，皆越教故，皆犯性罪故。若五戒，無犯重，以不名非梵行故，悔亦還淨，二形生仍成近事性故。近住戒無斷善，日夜俱故，不獲斷善，要先加行方能故；亦無犯重，非畢竟離非梵行故。此中，唯日出捨。法師云：准上百行中有一日乃至一年，故知近住戒亦得多時，期心廣故。若爾，如比丘戒期心至多生，豈即相續？期限勢分不至多故。若經一日等，但是處中善律儀，非是律儀。百行之中，何妨攝處中善？又五戒誓唯一日，豈成律儀戒？但是處中故。

The treatise says, "Obtained by another": this means that when young, one's parents were lost or the like, and one was given to another and adopted; although they are not the parents, one is also obtained by another. Among these precepts, some are impediments and obstructions such that upon receiving the precepts one does not obtain the precepts; some only incur an offense, but do not prevent one from obtaining the precepts. "Park-keeper" means the gatekeeper of a monastery. Regarding the five conditions under which a bhikṣu relinquishes the precepts, the Dharma Master said: according to the "Bodhisattvabhūmi," relinquishment upon committing an offense requires an intention of the highest grade for it to be lost, and it is the same here. This explanation does not hold, for a bodhisattva with a mind of the highest grade lacks shame and remorse. In these śrāvaka precepts, upon merely committing an offense they are lost, without regard to whether the intention is of the upper, middling, or lower grade, because in all cases the teaching is transgressed, and in all cases an offense by nature is committed. As for the five precepts, there is no violation of the gravest offenses, because it is not termed celibacy; upon repentance one also becomes pure again, and when the two sexual characteristics arise, the status of an upāsaka still holds. The upavāsa precepts do not involve the severing of roots of goodness, because they cover day and night together, and one does not achieve the severing of roots of goodness, which requires prior preparatory application; neither is there a violation of the gravest offenses, since it is not an ultimate departure from non-celibacy. Here, they are relinquished only at sunrise. The Dharma Master said: according to the hundred practices above, there is from one day up to one year, so we know that the upavāsa precepts can also extend over much time, because the intended duration is broad. If so, just as with the bhikṣu precepts, if one's intended duration extends to many lifetimes, could they possibly continue? The potency of the intended term does not extend to much [time]. If it spans one day and so on, it is merely intermediate good discipline, not the [true] discipline. Among the hundred practices, what prevents it from subsuming intermediate goodness? Moreover, if one vows to take the five precepts for only one day, how could that constitute the moral discipline? It is merely intermediate.