瑜伽師地論略纂 13.83

13.83

The treatise says: "This volition of evil vows operates together with lack of faith, indolence, and so forth." This identifies the essential nature. Disclosing the essential nature strictly, it is merely posited nominally upon the seeds of evil volition. Here, taking the antithesis of the predominance of the five [spiritual] faculties, it therefore says "lack of faith and so forth"; in reality, ten dharmas always operate together, up to evil desire, evil resolved determination, and so forth. This volition is precisely the volition capable of initiating action; as below among the eight restraints, it is the second: the restraint capable of initiating [karma]. The aforementioned non-restraint: the timing of its establishment occurs upon a single set intention—namely, until it is abandoned, the seven factors increase cumulatively from moment to moment. As for the timing of abandonment, it refers to four occasions: taking the precepts, death, attaining meditative absorption, and the arising of two sets of sexual organs. In Mahāyāna now, although one does not take the precepts, an intention to vow abandonment of the practice is also called abandonment, and thus there are five occasions. Hence the treatise says: "Up until this volition has not been abandoned, it is called non-restraint." This clearly shows that when the mental karma of volition is abandoned, non-restraint is also abandoned. As for the expression "evil śīla": *śīla* means cool and refreshing. A person who practices evil hates what is cool and refreshing; hence it is designated "evil śīla," not that its evil essence is itself śīla. An old objection stated: "If one explains precepts as preventing wrongdoing, there would be precepts that do not prevent wrongdoing, etc." This does not properly understand its designation; if explained as we do now, there is no error, just as with the name "non-restraint." Another objection stated: "The essence of evil is not śīla, but because one who practices evil hates śīla, it is called 'evil śīla'; accordingly, the essence of a view would not be evil, but because one who practices evil hates that view, it should be called 'evil view.'" The explanation is: *view* means conceptual discernment, and both good and evil discernment are called views; *śīla* means cool and refreshing, and the essence of evil is not cool and refreshing, so it cannot be analogized to views. The essential nature of restraint also encompasses good and evil simultaneously, and also takes five mental factors; strictly as its essence, it is merely posited nominally upon the seeds of volition. Now in Mahāyāna, according to the text, it also takes the ten virtuous courses of karma and the five aggregates of volition as its essence. Non-restraint is the reverse of this. As for the timing of receiving the precepts: for the five monastic assemblies, they obtain the precepts upon the conclusion of the third karmavācanā. For śrāmaṇeras, śrāmaṇerikās, and the three lay assemblies, they obtain the precepts immediately upon taking the three refuges. For the two fully ordained monastic assemblies, they must receive them from another because they are included under bhikṣus; the three lay assemblies may receive them by self-initiation, and also obtain the precepts immediately upon taking the three refuges. As for the bodhisattva precepts, they are open to self-initiation; although they subsume all precepts completely, after subsequently going forth as a monastic, one must receive them from another. Here we elucidate the precepts of the two vehicles, which are received from another. "The two kinds of factors that attend and guard the reception, namely, moral shame and fear of blame": moral shame enables receiving on one's own; fear of blame refers to [receiving] from another; both operate concurrently. However, on the basis of predominance, when there is one precept, there is not the second; it does not mean there is none at all. If one receives the precepts from another, the seven factors are initiated by the body, as in going to the master's presence, etc.; the precepts' seven factors are initiated by speech, as in uttering words to request the master, etc. If received by self-initiation, there is only mental manifest karma. Here, without taking body and speech as preliminary means, taking only the mind as preliminary means, one receives and obtains the non-manifest [karma] of the seven factors of body and speech. Question: "Then there would be non-manifest [karma] that is not produced from manifest karma, since there is no body and speech, and mind itself constitutes manifest [karma]. If so, when receiving on one's own, in bowing to the Buddha and uttering words, how is that not manifest karma?" We now explain: it is said to lack body and speech because it is non-manifest to others, not that one personally lacks bodily and vocal karma; hence it is also produced from manifest karma. Just as when sending another to perform an action, or when vocal karma serves as a manifestation for the body, bodily and vocal [actions] can manifest each other. Furthermore, these are stated in terms of all rituals: for instance, a severely ill person cannot move their body or utter words; though receiving from another, they also have non-manifest [karma] not produced from manifest karma; or if one generates a set intention on one's own, there is only non-manifest karma—hence this exposition is made. Adopting the explanations of the three Western masters concerning the hundred kinds of practices of the precept-essence: some say "one part," etc., which is the same as the Sautrāntika view that when taking one or two precepts, precepts are also initiated; non-restraint and so forth are also like this. Vowing to undertake it for a single period of time is also called non-restraint; if one carries out killing without a vow to undertake it, it is merely called intermediate. Undertaking them at different times and in different ways yields a total designation of ten. Here it is asked: "If we now divide them like this, what difference is there between 'short duration' and the others, such that there are said to be a hundred? Or what difference is there between the ten 'up to the end of life' and 'receiving by oneself' or 'instructing another'?" The meaning explained is: because the objects and the aims sought differ. However, herein are three positions: the first three positions concern the matter, the next three positions concern the time, and the last four positions concern the person. Yet within the last, the third, one's own speech, is divided into two. Regarding "śīla is without regret, and so forth": as *Prakaraṇāryavācā* fascicle seven states: "Because of accomplishing śīla, there is no regret; because there is no regret, joy arises; because joy arises, the mind is delighted; because the mind is delighted, the body is tranquil; because the body is tranquil, one experiences pleasure; because one experiences pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated; because the mind is concentrated, one contemplates in accordance with reality; because one contemplates in accordance with reality, revulsion arises; because revulsion arises, one is freed from desire; because one is freed from desire, one is liberated; because one is liberated, one knows for oneself: 'I have realized liberation, my rebirths are exhausted,' and so forth." As for the restraint of dhyāna, herein there are only the four fundamental [absorptions], as in *Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya* fascicle eight: in the immaterial realm, matter or restraint is briefly not established. Texts such as the *Prakaraṇāryavācā* state that the immaterial realm also possesses absorption-concomitant precepts; however, with respect to the desire realm or the path of seeing produced through cultivation, they serve as distant antidotes. Here, in accordance with the logical approach, the immaterial realm is not mentioned. In the unarrived dhyāna, there is also an uninterrupted path, which is omitted without discussion. If it is uncontaminated: for one who has previously attained dhyāna, relying on the five stages they enter the path of seeing and attain the fruit of non-returner, attaining the precepts of the path of seeing; the nine uninterrupted paths serve as the antidote paths to the evil courses of karma, and the subsequent paths of liberation up to the non-learner, viewed in relation to the evil precepts of the path of seeing, are called distant antidotes. As for the path of cultivation: the subtle transgressions in the body of a noble one, according to the first dhyāna or other stage relied upon, are called antidote paths in the nine grades of uninterrupted paths viewed in relation to what is to be abandoned; the paths of liberation are also called distant antidotes. However, the Mahāyāna now further binds together the nine stages of the three realms, from the first fruit directly to the non-learner, as nine grades of counteracting abandonment. In its abandoning step by step, according to whichever stage one relies upon, one takes the nine grades of uninterrupted paths as the antidote path, while the other stages are called distant antidotes, with the sole exception of the peak of existence and the intermediate dhyāna. This is based on a learner who has newly attained the third fruit; because the defilements are abandoned through the abandonment of what is to be abandoned, it is superior. If abandonment is gradual, from the third fruit onward it is also like this, but because the counteracting capacity is superior, it receives the designation of non-learner. If one abandons the nine grades of the three realms instantaneously, up until the uninterrupted path of the non-learner is attained, all are superior because what is to be counteracted is abandoned; only the non-learner is superior because the counteracting capacity is superior. As for entering the path of seeing: here, in terms of the four fundamental [dhyānas], the method is for those of jumping progression; in terms of the unarrived dhyāna, it is the method for persons of the first fruit. In fact, in the unarrived dhyāna one can also attain the skipping fruits; having attained the seven modes of attention, relying on the unarrived [dhyāna] one attains the fruit of non-returner, and at the seventh attention—the attention of the culmination of preliminary practice—one inevitably enters the fundamental [dhyāna]. Here the discussion is framed around the completion of the fruit. This treatise describes skipping just like those of gradual fruits: in the immaterial realm, one can abandon the seeds of precept violation of the desire realm. The Dharma Master says that the path of seeing relies on the six stages including the intermediate dhyāna; this is incorrect. According to the six abhisamayas, three rely on five, excluding the intermediate dhyāna. Although texts elsewhere state that uncontaminated [dharmas] exist there, it is because the dwelling of the Brahmā kings is full of distraction. How could it be like the peak of existence, where although uncontaminated [dharmas] are spoken of, they do not accomplish the abandonment of defilements? This is analyzed extensively elsewhere. However, regarding these absorption-concomitant and path-concomitant precepts, the Dharma Master says: they are posited upon the active volition concomitant with the path of seeing, because they are designated "matter that conforms to the movements of mind." Question: "Why are the path-concomitant ones non-manifest? As in right speech and right action giving rise to speech, how can they be manifest? Moreover, according to the prātimokṣa precepts being posited upon seeds of volition, this should also be the case here. Just as the prātimokṣa precepts, from the time of reception onward, increase cumulatively moment by moment, and when abandoned upon meeting conditions, the old seeds are not destroyed—unlike the Hīnayāna where the severance of attainment is called abandonment, but rather that the non-arising of new moments of the seven factors is called abandoning the precepts. Path-concomitant and absorption-concomitant are also like this: when the mind is present, they increase moment by moment, and the seven factors are doubled; once mind is absent, for homogeneous states, the seeds arise in succession without any new increase, which is described as abandonment. It is not like the prātimokṣa precepts where once received, whether the mind is present or absent, they both increase. Therefore they are named 'conforming to the movements of mind.'" Question: "How can active volition be the essence of the absorption precepts?" Someone says: "Posited upon these seeds, they should again be posited upon the seeds of volition in the preceding preliminary path, just as the volition initiating the prātimokṣa precepts takes the karma of the preceding preliminary volition." In the preliminary path, this explanation is not yet established, because the preliminary paths before absorption and path are neither absorption nor path precepts, but belong to the distracted mind or are bound to other stages and realms; how could one determine the essence of the precepts in accordance with the preliminary practice? They should only be posited in accordance with the volition concomitant with absorption and path. *Upāsaka* means departing from bad conduct. Bad conduct refers to the first three factors and mind; within this, there is departing from drinking various liquors, which belongs to conduct of desire, but here the discussion is based on the majority. As for the two causes of the *upavāsa*: namely, observing day and night the departure from the two conducts of desire and evil serves as the cause for observing throughout life; because their faculties and nature are inferior, the cause abides near the fruit, hence it is called *upavāsa* [abiding near]. Regarding unchaste conduct: for the laity, sexual misconduct is prohibited while proper conduct is not; proper conduct is called the conduct of desire. For monastics, neither is permitted, which is called departing from bad conduct. Departing from bad conduct is an intrinsic offense; hence it is identical to the first three, all being intrinsic offenses. Departing from bad conduct arises from greed; because it is prohibited and not permitted, it is like the latter four offenses, all of which prohibit greed. A bhikṣu has four factors: first, taking up the training rules, which refers to what was initially taught regarding the four parājikas, the four dependences, and so forth, as in fascicle seven of *Prakaraṇāryavācā* on accomplishing śīla; second, being well able to guard the prātimokṣa restraint; third, deportment and spheres of action being entirely complete; fourth, seeing great dread in minute offenses, and accomplishing śīla, meaning not transgressing, and being able to emerge after transgression, corresponding in *Prakaraṇāryavācā* to undertaking the training in various training rules. Thus, here the first is the sixth, and the sixth is the first, which constitutes the six grounds of the śrāvaka. *Upa* means near; *ka* means service; *sa* is masculine, and *sī* is feminine. Affixing *sa* or *sī* to *upavāsa/upāsaka*—*sī* being feminine—distinguishes male and female. As for the term "mother-group": the proper translation should be "mother-village"; women within a household are akin to mothers, hence women are called "mothers," akin to the category of a village or hamlet.