大乘法苑義林章 3.32

3.32

第八應成差別者，於中有二：一資所成、二師所成。先明資者，《瑜伽》五十三說「問：苾芻律儀由幾因緣，雖樂受戒而不應授耶？答：略由六因不應為授，出家五眾併在其中。一意樂損害、二依止損害、三男形損害、四白法損害、五繫屬於他、六為護他故。」若有為王之所逼錄，或為強賊之所逼錄，或為債主之所逼迫，或由怖畏之所逼迫，或畏不活。彼如是思：我處居家難可存活。是諸苾芻活命甚易，我今應往苾芻眾中詐現自身與彼同法，易當活命。彼由如是諂詐意樂，既出家已，雖懷恐怖守護奉行隨一學處，勿諸苾芻與我同止，知我犯戒便當驅擯。然彼意樂被損害故，不名出家受具足戒。如是名為意樂損害。若復有人作如是思：我處居家難可活命，要當出家方易存濟。如諸苾芻所修梵行，我亦如是，乃至命終常修梵行。如是出家者，不名意樂損害。雖非純淨，非不說名出家受具。依止損害者，若有身帶癰腫、白癩癲狂、大小便道合等疾，如遮法中所說病狀。如是名為依止損害。由彼如是無力能故，所受師長同梵行者供事之業，及受純信施主衣服飲食等淨信施物，此之二種淨信所施，彼極難消，不應受用，令彼退減諸善法故。是故依止被損害者，不應出家受具足戒。男形損害者，若扇𢮎迦及半擇迦，名男形損害。又半擇迦，略有三種：一全分半擇迦、二一分半擇迦、三損害半擇迦。若有生便不成男根，是名全分半擇迦。若有半月起男勢用，或有被他於已為過，或復見他行非梵行男勢方起，是名一分半擇迦。若被刀等之所損害，或為病藥若火呪等之所損害，先得男根今被斷壞，既斷壞已男勢不轉，是名損害半擇迦。初半擇迦名半擇迦，亦名扇𢮎迦。第二唯半擇迦，非扇𢮎迦。第三若不被他於已為過，唯扇𢮎迦，非半擇迦。若有被他於已為過，名半擇迦，亦名扇𢮎迦。四白法損害者，若造無間業、污苾芻尼、外道賊住，若別異住、若不共住，是名白法損害，不應為受具足戒。所以者何？彼由上品無慚無愧極垢染法，令慚愧等所有白法極成劣薄。五繫屬於他者，若諸王臣、若王所惡、若有造作王不宜業、若被債主之所拘執、若他僕隸、若他劫引、若他所得、若有諍訟、若為父母所不開許，是名繫屬於他，不應為受具足戒。六隨護他心者，若變化者，為護他心故，不應為受具足戒。所以者何？或有龍等為受法故，自化已身為苾芻像，求受具足戒。若便為彼受具足戒者，彼睡眠時便復本形，既睡悟已作苾芻像。彼假相苾芻，若守園者、若近事男率爾往趣，見彼身形如是變已，便於一切真苾芻所起憎惡心，謂諸苾芻皆非人類，誰能敬事、施彼衣食？勿令他人得此惡見，是故為隨護他心，不應為彼受具足戒。其近事戒，由二因故不得為受：一意樂損害故、二男形損害故。若意樂損害者，當知一切不應為受。若男形損害者，或有為受，然不得說名近事男。不說因緣，前已具辨。若近住戒，當知唯由意樂損害，不應為受。何以故？或有隨他轉故，或有為得財利恭敬，詐稱欲受近住律儀，然彼實無求受意樂，當知是名意樂損害。若無如上所說不應受因緣，應受如前所受律儀。第二明師，又除闕減能作羯磨、阿遮利耶、鄔波拕耶住清淨戒，圓滿僧眾，定道得緣者。經中說「尸羅不清淨，三昧不現前。」由此故知，須持淨戒。由持戒故無悔，無悔故心安，心安故得定，得定故起聖道，起聖道故依俱時思立定道戒。問：不律儀律儀更無別緣耶？答：由無慚愧故，廣犯諸戒、造諸惡業，故名不律儀，更無別緣也。

Eighth, concerning the differences in those who are qualified to receive [the vows], there are two aspects: first, the qualification of the recipient; second, the qualification of the preceptor. First, to explain the recipient: the fifty-third fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi states: 'Question: Due to how many causes and conditions should the bhikṣu discipline not be conferred, even if one wishes to receive the precepts? Answer: In brief, it should not be conferred due to six causes; the five groups of renunciants are all included therein: (1) impairment of intention, (2) impairment of physical support, (3) impairment of male characteristics, (4) impairment of pure qualities, (5) being bound to others, and (6) for the sake of protecting others.' If someone is pressed and pursued by a king, or pressed and pursued by violent bandits, or pressed by creditors, or pressed by fear, or fears the lack of a livelihood, he thinks thus: 'Remaining as a householder, it is difficult for me to survive. For these bhikṣus, obtaining a livelihood is very easy. I should now go into the assembly of bhikṣus, feign myself to follow the same Dharma as they do, and easily make a living.' Due to such deceitful intention, even though after going forth he observes and upholds any one training rule out of fear, lest the bhikṣus who dwell together with him know that he violates the precepts and therefore expel him, nevertheless, because his intention is impaired, he is not called one who has gone forth and received the complete precepts. This is called impairment of intention. If, furthermore, a person thinks thus: 'Remaining as a householder, it is difficult for me to make a living; only by going forth can I easily survive. As the bhikṣus cultivate the celibate life (brahmacarya), I too will constantly cultivate the celibate life until the end of my life'—such a person who goes forth is not called impaired in intention. Although not purely motivated, it is not uncalled going forth and receiving the complete precepts. As for impairment of physical support: if one's body is afflicted with carbuncles, swelling, white leprosy, madness, fusing of the urinary and fecal tracts, and similar illnesses, as described in the obstructive conditions—this is called impairment of physical support. Because such a person lacks strength and capability, the acts of service and support received from masters, teachers, and fellow celibates, as well as the offerings given with pure faith such as robes, food, and drink from purely faithful donors—these two kinds of offerings given with pure faith are extremely difficult for him to assimilate, and he should not partake of them, because they would cause him to deteriorate in all wholesome dharmas. Therefore, one whose physical support is impaired should not go forth and receive the complete precepts. As for impairment of male characteristics: sandhas and pandakas are called impaired in male characteristics. Furthermore, pandakas are briefly of three kinds: (1) total pandakas, (2) partial pandakas, and (3) injured pandakas. If someone from birth does not develop the male organ, this is called a total pandaka. If for half a month the male potency arises, or if others commit sexual misconduct upon him, or if male potency arises only upon seeing others engage in non-celibate conduct, this is called a partial pandaka. If someone has been injured by a knife or the like, or injured by illness, drugs, fire, incantations, or the like, so that having previously had the male organ, it is now severed and ruined, and once severed and ruined, the male potency does not function, this is called an injured pandaka. The first pandaka is named pandaka and is also named sandha. The second is solely a pandaka and not a sandha. For the third, if he is not subjected to sexual misconduct by others, he is solely a sandha and not a pandaka; if he is subjected to sexual misconduct by others, he is named pandaka and also named sandha. Fourth, as for impairment of pure qualities: if one has committed an act of immediate retribution, defiled a bhikṣuṇī, dwelt among the saṅgha as a thief from a non-Buddhist sect, dwelt as one of different standing, or dwelt as one not shared in common, this is called impairment of pure qualities; the complete precepts should not be conferred on him. Why is this so? Because through dominant shamelessness, unconscionableness, and extremely defiled dharmas, all pure qualities such as shame and conscience have been rendered extremely weak and meager. Fifth, as for being bound to others: if one is a royal minister, or despised by the king, or has performed deeds improper for the king, or is detained by a creditor, or is a slave or servant of another, or was abducted by another, or was captured by another, or is involved in a lawsuit, or is not permitted by one's parents—this is called being bound to others; the complete precepts should not be conferred on him. Sixth, as for guarding the minds of others: in the case of a transformed being, for the sake of guarding the minds of others, the complete precepts should not be conferred. Why is this so? There may be nāgas or the like who, in order to receive the Dharma, magically transform their own bodies into the appearance of a bhikṣu, seeking to receive the complete precepts. If one were to confer the complete precepts on them, when they fall asleep they revert to their original form, and upon waking from sleep they assume the appearance of a bhikṣu. When park attendants or upāsakas happen upon that counterfeit bhikṣu and see his physical form changed in this way, they would give rise to hatred and disgust toward all genuine bhikṣus, thinking that all bhikṣus are not human beings: 'Who could revere, serve, or give them robes and food?' Lest others form such an evil view, for the sake of guarding the minds of others, the complete precepts should not be conferred on them. As for the upāsaka precepts, they cannot be conferred due to two causes: first, due to impairment of intention; second, due to impairment of male characteristics. If there is impairment of intention, one should know that in all such cases they should not be conferred. If there is impairment of male characteristics, they may sometimes be conferred, yet such a person cannot be called an upāsaka. The reasons for not speaking of this were already fully analyzed earlier. As for the upavāsa precepts, one should know that they should not be conferred solely due to impairment of intention. Why is this? There are those who comply out of influence by others, or who feign the desire to receive the upavāsa discipline to gain wealth, profit, or honor, while in truth lacking the intention to seek and receive it; one should know that this is called impairment of intention. If one lacks the causes and conditions for non-reception explained above, one should receive the discipline received as before. Second, to explain the masters: furthermore, except for deficiencies, those who are able to perform the karmavācanā, the ācāryas, and the upādhyāyas must dwell in pure precepts, and the saṅgha must be complete. As for obtaining the conditions for the meditative and path [precepts]: the sūtra states, 'When śīla is not pure, samādhi does not manifest.' From this it is known that one must uphold pure precepts. Because of upholding precepts there is no remorse; because of no remorse the mind is at peace; because the mind is at peace one attains concentration; because of attaining concentration the noble path arises; because the noble path arises, the meditative and path precepts are established based on simultaneous volition. Question: Are there no other conditions for the non-discipline discipline? Answer: Because of the absence of shame and conscience, one broadly violates the precepts and performs evil deeds; therefore it is called non-discipline, and there are no other conditions.