大乘法苑義林章 3.25

3.25

Next is the explanation of relinquishment. Relinquishment is divided into two: first, the characteristics of relinquishment; second, the conditions for relinquishment. As for the characteristics of relinquishment: the capacity initially obtained increases moment by moment; when it is made not to grow anew but merely to abide conforming to the old, differing from the preceding state where it no longer freshly arises, this is called relinquishment. It is not that relinquishing the substance formerly obtained so that it becomes non-existent is called relinquishment; it is not like the Hīnayāna where non-possession belongs to oneself. As for the two manifests of body and speech generating the unmanifest: the first moment is called obtaining, and in the second moment it is called relinquishment. Although there is continuity, it is not called a manifest that generates the unmanifest, but is merely concordant, not necessarily concordant. It is not because of generating body and speech through this that it exists, because the three natures are all indeterminate. The Buddha is not like this; anyone other than a Buddha has not obtained it previously, and it freshly arises moment by moment. A Buddha has previously obtained it and merely abides conforming to the old; because it never withers or wanes, it is not called relinquishing the precepts. Therefore the *Cheng weishi lun* says: 'The unmanifest is nominally established based on the limits of good and bad intentions and vows. Because a Buddha's vows never wither, it is not called relinquishment, unlike the causal stage. Otherwise, the virtues of the Buddhas would not be complete, freshly arising moment by moment, having what was not previously obtained. Otherwise, earlier and later Buddhas would have superiority and inferiority, because an earlier Buddha's precepts would be many and a later Buddha's would be few.' The manifest that generates the unmanifest is only at the beginning; other manifest karmas are not causes of the unmanifest. As for the unmanifest karma, it refers for now to the prātimokṣa unmanifest. Fascicle fifty-three [of the *Yogācārabhūmi*] says: 'The monastic restraint of the five groups of bhikṣus is relinquished through five conditions: first, by relinquishing the training rules; second, by committing a fundamental offense; third, by the loss of gender and the arising of two genders; fourth, by the severing of roots of wholesome; fifth, by relinquishing the generic similarity of sentient beings.' Relinquishing the training rules means what the Vinaya describes as relinquishment by formal procedure. That is, kneeling opposite a bhikṣu and performing the procedure, giving voice to relinquishment, only then is the precept relinquished. If one produces the intention to relinquish, and although one gives voice to it, one does not speak the relinquishment in accordance with the Dharma opposite a bhikṣu, this is merely called weak precepts, and the precepts are not relinquished. When committing an offense later, it is then called defiled precepts; one is still subsumed under the status of a śramaṇa and is not a layperson. Thus a bhikṣu relinquishes the training rules in this way. Lay practitioners and one-day observers each produce an intention of a different class; they do not perform it opposite another person for it to become a relinquishment. As for committing a fundamental offense: according to the fourth fascicle of the *Daśacakra-sūtra*, committing a grave offense does not relinquish [the precepts]. It says: 'Good son! If there is a bhikṣu who commits any one of the fundamental natural grave offenses, although he is called a precept-breaking bhikṣu of evil conduct, yet within the harmonious Saṃgha of the preceptor, the restraint he has obtained is not yet severed. Even up to relinquishing the śīla of the training, the fragrance of white dharmas still accompanies him. Kings, ministers, and all laypeople have no restraint; they should not show disrespect, nor should they inflict punishment. Although such a bhikṣu is not a vessel of the Dharma, has fallen away from the noble Dharma, pollutes the pure assembly, and ruins all monastic rites of a śramaṇa, not being permitted to enjoy the property of the Saṃgha of the four directions, yet because within the harmonious Saṃgha of the preceptor the restraint he obtained has not been relinquished, he is still superior to all lay white-robed people. If one who commits a natural offense is still like this, how much more so for one who commits other minor proscriptive offenses! Therefore kings, ministers, and all laypeople are not permitted to show disrespect or inflict punishment.' Regarding this there are two explanations: The fortieth fascicle of the *Yogācārabhūmi*, explaining the bodhisattva precepts, says: 'If one arouses the highest entanglement and commits a fundamental offense, one immediately relinquishes the precepts, because there is no shame or remorse. It even causes all roots of wholesomeness to be incinerated, how much more so the precepts one has undertaken! As for the highest entanglement: one repeatedly engages in the fundamental four offenses, entirely lacks shame and remorse, deeply generates fondness and delight, and sees them as virtues—this is called the highest entanglement; merely engaging in them temporarily is not called relinquishment. However, because of the disciplinary rule of non-cohabitation, it does not mean the precepts are lost. If one commits them with medium or weak entanglement, one's precepts are not relinquished.' The *Yogācārabhūmi* is based on committing them with the highest entanglement, while the *Daśacakra-sūtra* is merely based on committing them with medium or weak entanglement. Therefore, in the thirty-fourth fascicle of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra*, when Bodhisattva Kāśyapa asks about the meanings of the twenty-one pairs of disputes in future ages, this corresponds to the eighteenth pair. Arriving at the thirty-fifth fascicle, the Buddha explains for him: 'Good son! In the sūtras I have spoken thus: If a bhikṣu commits the four grave offenses, he is no longer called a bhikṣu, he is called a broken bhikṣu, a lost bhikṣu; he can no longer sprout the seeds of wholesomeness. Just as a scorched seed does not produce fruit, and just as a tāla tree does not produce fruit if its crown is severed, so too is a bhikṣu who commits a grave offense. My disciples, having heard this explanation, did not understand my intention and proclaimed thus: The Tathāgata says that bhikṣus who commit grave prohibitions lose the bhikṣu precepts. Good son! In the sūtras I explained four kinds of bhikṣus for Cunda: first, one who has thoroughly attained the path—the *Abhidharmakośa* calls this the śramaṇa of the supreme path; second, one who shows the path; third, one who receives the path—the new [translation] calls this living by the path; fourth, one who pollutes the path—one who commits the four grave offenses is precisely one who pollutes the path. My disciples, having heard this explanation, did not understand my intention and proclaimed: The Tathāgata says that bhikṣus who commit the four grave offenses do not lose the prohibitive precepts.' Evaluating the textual meaning: if committing the four grave offenses unconditionally lost the precepts, then they should have understood the intention. If they were unconditionally not lost, they should also have understood the intention; why did they not understand? Therefore we know that committing them with the two grades of mind, high and low, has the distinction of losing or not losing. Although many sūtras say that if one commits the four grave prohibitions, reciting and upholding this dhāraṇī will cause all offenses to be eliminated, they do not state whether the essence of the precepts is regenerated or not. The fourth fascicle of the *Mahāvaipulya-dhāraṇī-sūtra* says: 'Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha: "If a bhikṣu after the Buddha's passing violates the four grave offenses, or if a bhikṣuṇī violates the eight grave offenses, or if a bodhisattva, a śrāmaṇerikā, an upāsaka, or an upāsikā violates each such precept, how should such transgressions be eliminated?" The Buddha said: "If an evil bhikṣu violates the four grave prohibitions, silently receives offerings, and does not reform and repent, you should know that this bhikṣu will certainly suffer the torments of hell without doubt. I shall now dispense a good medicine to rescue that bhikṣu."