大乘法苑義林章 3.32

3.32

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.