大乘法苑義林章 3.34

3.34

第十問答分別者，問：定、道二戒隨心法，能感異熟不？若能感者，此是現行，如何能招異熟耶？若取種子者，即非隨心戒故。解云：能招異熟果。現行不能招，種子能感，以是定道家類，亦名隨心轉也。問：仙人意嫌，無表生不？若生者，元無身語，如何言生？若不生者，豈有無表不依表生耶？解云：有二。一云：當時亦有表業，于時動脣口故，鬼神等知仙人之意，天雨石也。二云：不爾。且如五逆業中破僧為重，五見之中邪見為重，三罰業中意業為重也。若如前說，即是身業為重也。但由仙人福德力故，令諸鬼等折其讎也。若如此者，元無身語色，何得發無表耶？解云：亦有所發色，雨石等天色也。問：何故苾芻戒前但立勤策一，尼戒前即正學及勤策女二耶？答：由彼女人多有煩惱，受勤策戒已更受正學，二年陶練身心，於中住持受樂，然後可受五百戒。問：何故勤策戒中離說及不捉金銀生像，近住等戒何不亦然耶？答：出家之人於二種處極非淨妙，一者墮貪欲樂、好戲嚴身；二者多畜財寶。為斷初非淨妙故，受遠離歌舞伎樂及非時食。為斷第二非淨妙故，受遠離執受金銀，由彼金銀諸寶中最勝根本故。問：何故勤策戒中，歌舞作倡、香油塗身開為二，近住戒中合為一耶？答：於在家者非為過重。於出家者極生譏毀，為息譏嫌，故分二也。問，通受菩薩戒，攝一切戒盡，其定道戒亦在其中。菩薩若起貪心，如何得名隨心轉戒耶？答？以身中有種子故，又當可成故，亦得言通受名隨心轉戒也。問：且如因中破戒，後時更能感異熟果不耶？若言能感，戒已破訖，如何能感？若不感者，如何得言由持戒故能生天耶？答：亦言犯戒者，不損種之體，但損功能更不倍倍而增有防非力，故名犯也。非無舊時種子，功能在故，能感異熟也。問：意中既有善惡律儀，為並發無表不耶？答：有二解。一云：善中有無表，以菩薩發心極弘廣故，惡即不能。二云：惡亦有無表，且如仙人意嫌殺三國眾生，最為重故也。問：既言依身之表名身表者，且如化人發身表業時，既無實身，如何得名身表業耶？答：表現是假身，於理何妨？問：定共戒等既是現行，剎那即滅，為能感不？若不能感，如何得言有漏定共戒能感異熟？答：取種子能感也。若爾，如何名隨心戒？答：是彼種類故也。問：〈菩薩地〉云「七眾所受為菩薩律儀出家之戒。」何故菩薩二形生及捨眾同分時，猶即不捨同聲聞耶？答：菩薩受戒其心寬漫，增上猛利，故二形生，及命終時必定不捨，以能隨類而化生故。若別受者即捨也，通受之者其義不然。問：仙人意嫌但是意業，何故有處說言：仙人動脣口身，此乃名身語表耶？答：此是小乘之義，非大乘也。大乘但由心故，令鬼等雨石。此無表色，亦可得言不從表生也。問：然十業道體即是思，約彼所發所防即假名色。大乘既無身語，但是一思所發所防，唯全是意。如何得言，約彼空中雨石，而名無表色也。約三界九地、六趣四洲而差別者，表中意表通三界，身語通色界。若約定所生色及廣慧聲聞身語表色，亦通無色。若據業果及唯凡夫，如前分別。無表，如前准知。九地分別者，意表通九地，語表唯初禪，身表通五地。若約佛及菩薩，身語二表俱通五地，定道俱通三界九地思。言六趣者，別解脫唯人趣，菩薩戒通六趣。五八戒雖得通，而不成戒性。定道唯人天二趣，有餘暇故。表無表准知之。四洲別脫，五八在三天下，菩薩通四洲，表無表准知。定道亦在三天下。問：定及無漏性能遮惡，如何不取定及無漏慧為表無表體耶？答：若得定及無漏心，俱有相應思，二俱除惡，以思是業體故，但依思者乎？問：如諸如來先因位中已具別脫，如何成佛已言自然得戒？答：有二釋。一云：依隨轉門化相而說，理實如來別脫過去久遠已成。二云：得勝捨劣，所成勝戒不從師等，說自然得，亦不違理。問：如加行善心受得戒，後斷善根，何時捨耶？答：一解云：與加行善同時而捨，得捨相翻不違理故。二云：雖由邪見斷加行善，爾時但令戒漸微羸，由未名捨。與生得善同時而捨，隨善根盡方名捨故。前解應勝。

Tenth, distinction by questions and answers: Question: Do the two disciplines of absorption and the path, as mental associates, have the capacity to induce retribution? If they can induce it, being active manifestations, how could they bring about retribution? If one takes the seeds, then they would not be disciplines that conform to the mind. Explanation: They are able to bring about the fruit of retribution. The active manifestation cannot bring it about, but the seeds have the capacity to induce it; because they belong to the same category as absorption and the path, they are also called 'conforming to the mind'. Question: Regarding the ṛṣi's mental resentment, does non-manifest [action] arise or not? If it arises, originally there is no bodily or vocal [action]; how can one say it arises? If it does not arise, how could there be non-manifest [action] that does not arise depending on manifest [action]? Explanation: There are two views. One says: At that time there was also manifest action, because at that time his lips moved, so the ghosts and spirits knew the ṛṣi's thought, and heaven rained down stones. The second says: That is not so. Consider how, among the five heinous deeds, causing a schism in the Saṅgha is the gravest; among the five views, false view is the gravest; and among the actions of the three punishments, mental action is the gravest. If it were as stated previously, then bodily action would be the gravest. It was solely due to the power of the ṛṣi's merit that he caused the various spirits and [ghosts] to destroy his enemies. If it is like this, originally there was no bodily or vocal form; how could it produce non-manifest [action]? Explanation: There was also produced form, namely the celestial form such as the rain of stones. Question: Why is it that before the bhikṣu precepts only the one [stage of] śrāmaṇera is established, whereas before the bhikṣuṇī precepts both the sikṣamāṇā and śrāmaṇerikā are established? Answer: Because women have many afflictions; after receiving the śrāmaṇerikā precepts, they further receive the sikṣamāṇā precepts, training body and mind for two years, dwelling and maintaining them and experiencing joy within them, after which they may receive the five hundred precepts. Question: Why is it that in the śrāmaṇera precepts, abstaining from handling gold and silver is taught separately, while the upavāsa and other precepts do not do likewise? Answer: For one who has gone forth, two situations are utterly impure: first, falling into the pleasure of sensual desire and delighting in play and bodily adornment; second, accumulating much wealth and treasure. To cut off the first impurity, one receives [the precepts of] abstaining from singing, dancing, theatrical entertainment, and eating at improper times. To cut off the second impurity, one receives [the precept of] abstaining from holding gold and silver, because gold and silver are the most supreme root among all treasures. Question: Why is it that in the śrāmaṇera precepts, singing, dancing, making music, and anointing the body with fragrant oils are opened into two, whereas in the upavāsa precepts they are combined into one? Answer: For laypersons this is not an excessively grave fault; for renunciants it severely gives rise to ridicule and blame. To quell ridicule and suspicion, it is divided into two. Question: When one broadly receives the bodhisattva precepts, all precepts are subsumed completely, and the disciplines of absorption and the path are also among them. If a bodhisattva gives rise to a mind of greed, how can they be named 'disciplines that conform to the mind'? Answer: Because the seeds exist in the body, and moreover because they will be realized in the future, it can also be said that universally receiving them is named 'disciplines that conform to the mind'. Question: Take, for example, breaking the precepts during the causal stage: are they later still able to induce the fruit of retribution or not? If one says they can induce it, the precepts have already been broken; how could they induce it? If they cannot induce it, how can it be said that by upholding the precepts one is able to be born in heaven? Answer: It is also said that violating the precepts does not destroy the substance of the seed; it merely damages its function so that it no longer increasingly multiplies its power to prevent wrongdoing; hence it is called 'violating'. It is not that the previous seeds are absent; because their function remains, they can induce retribution. Question: Since there are good and evil disciplines in the mind, do both produce non-manifest [action] or not? Answer: There are two explanations. One says: In the good there is non-manifest [action], because the bodhisattva's arousal of the thought is extremely vast; evil cannot [produce it]. The second says: Evil also has non-manifest [action]; for instance, the ṛṣi's mental resentment killed the sentient beings of three kingdoms, which was the gravest. Question: Since it is said that what is manifest depending on the body is called bodily manifest [action], consider when a phantom person produces bodily manifest action: since there is no real body, how can it be called bodily manifest action? Answer: The manifestation is a provisional body; what contradiction is there in reason? Question: Since disciplines shared with absorption and the like are active manifestations that perish in a single kṣaṇa, are they able to induce [retribution] or not? If they cannot induce it, how can it be said that contaminated disciplines shared with absorption can induce retribution? Answer: Taking the seeds, they are able to induce it. If so, how are they called disciplines conforming to the mind? Answer: Because they are of that category. Question: The Bodhisattvabhūmi says: 'What is received by the seven assemblies is the renunciant discipline of the bodhisattva.' Why is it that when a bodhisattva develops dual sex organs or abandons the assembly-homogeneity, they still do not abandon it like a śrāvaka? Answer: When a bodhisattva receives the precepts, their mind is vast and spacious, exceedingly fierce and sharp; therefore, when dual sex organs develop or at the time of death, they definitely do not abandon them, because they are able to be born by transformation in accordance with types [of beings]. If received separately, they are abandoned; for one who receives them universally, the meaning is not like this. Question: The ṛṣi's mental resentment was merely mental action; why is it said in some places that the ṛṣi moved his lips and body, and this is what was called bodily and vocal manifest action? Answer: This is the meaning according to the Hīnayāna, not the Mahāyāna. In the Mahāyāna, it is purely by virtue of the mind that he caused the ghosts and spirits to rain down stones. This non-manifest form can also be said not to arise from manifest [action]. Question: However, the essence of the ten courses of action is volition; depending on what they produce and what they prevent, they are provisionally named form. Since in the Mahāyāna there is no bodily or vocal [essence], and they are merely produced and prevented by a single volition, they are purely mind. How can it be said that, with respect to those stones raining down in the sky, it is called non-manifest form? Regarding the distinctions in terms of the three realms, nine grounds, six destinies, and four continents: among manifest [actions], mental manifest [action] pervades the three realms; bodily and vocal pervade the form realm. If considered in terms of form produced by absorption and the bodily and vocal manifest form of śrāvakas of vast wisdom, it also pervades the formless [realm]. If based on the fruits of karma and purely ordinary beings, it is distinguished as before. Non-manifest is to be known by analogy with the above. Distinguishing by the nine grounds: mental manifest [action] pervades the nine grounds; vocal manifest [action] is only in the first dhyāna; bodily manifest [action] pervades five grounds. In the case of the Buddha and bodhisattvas, both bodily and vocal manifest actions pervade five grounds; absorption and the path both pervade the volition of the three realms and nine grounds. Regarding the six destinies: the prātimokṣa is only in the human destiny; the bodhisattva precepts pervade the six destinies. Although the five and eight precepts can be pervasive, they do not constitute the nature of discipline. Absorption and the path are only in the human and celestial destinies, because they have leisure. Manifest and non-manifest are to be known by analogy. Prātimokṣa in the four continents: the five and eight are in three continents; the bodhisattva [precepts] pervade the four continents. Manifest and non-manifest are to be known by analogy. Absorption and the path are also in three continents. Question: The nature of absorption and the uncontaminated is able to ward off evil; why not take absorption and uncontaminated wisdom as the essence of manifest and non-manifest? Answer: If one attains a mind of absorption or an uncontaminated mind, both have associated volition; both eliminate evil, and because volition is the essence of karma, it is based solely on volition. Question: Since the various Tathāgatas had already fully possessed the prātimokṣa in their prior causal stages, why is it said that upon becoming Buddhas they naturally obtain the precepts? Answer: There are two explanations. One says: It is spoken in accordance with the conventional pedagogical manifestation; in truth, the Tathāgata's prātimokṣa was already accomplished long ago in the past. The second says: Obtaining the superior and abandoning the inferior; the superior discipline that is accomplished does not derive from a master or others, so it is said to be naturally obtained, which also does not contradict reason. Question: If one receives and obtains precepts with a mind of applied good, and later severs the roots of good, at what time are they abandoned? Answer: One explanation says: They are abandoned simultaneously with applied good; that obtaining and abandoning correspond as opposites does not contradict reason. The second says: Although applied good is severed due to false view, at that time it merely causes the precepts to become gradually weak and feeble, which is not yet called abandoning; they are abandoned simultaneously with innately acquired good, for only following the exhaustion of the roots of good is it called abandoning. The former explanation should be considered superior.