釋門章服儀 1.14

1.14

答：「尋夫西梵之與東華，音義乖越；聖種之與凡習，理絕名言。故《薩婆多論》云：『如來立此三名，異於外道也。』斯則三名，出於金口，殊非管識所籌，如彼呪詞，祖而不譯也。或以名含多義，從本不可翻之。自道化東漸，經律所傳，號曰袈裟，通稱法服。然則袈裟之目，因於衣色，即如經中壞色衣也。聖色異俗，有目同知。知何等衣？但見其色，即目此色為袈裟衣。律中所顯，微附衣形，故《十誦》以為敷具，謂同氈席之形也。《四分》以為臥具，謂同衾被之類也。如尼師壇，本唯梵僧所坐之物。如此所坐之具，即而正翻名為坐具。至於衣服，猶迷莫練。然經律中但名僧伽梨者，未曾有法也。所以者何？名出俗道標，此無有比相，如氈被之具，故名臥具也。尋名之師，依名取義，即解云『氈臥具等須加羯磨而捨受』也。《論》稱五過，正在其人。故《薩婆多》云『臥具者，三衣名也』，即《僧祇》云『老病比丘持氈僧伽梨，從僧乞法』，即其義也，安用羯磨而加氈席乎？縱有前聞，未行其事，不可虛也。今以義約，終須建名。故文云：『無名相中，假名相說。』如《律》名為調伏衣，故文云『結使已調伏，乃應披袈裟』也。如《經》中『內起瞋心，外著袈裟，無不息滅』是也。或《經》云：『法衣應器者，謂懷道者服之，名法衣也；堪受供者用之，名應器也。』深思其名，聽言觀行，不徒設也。自餘眾名，具如《鈔》、《疏》說也。」

Answer: 'In examining Western India and the Eastern Flower (China), sounds and meanings diverge; between the holy lineage and worldly habits, the principle transcends words and names. Thus the Sarvāstivāda-śāstra states: "The Tathāgata established these three names to distinguish [Buddhists] from tīrthikas." These three names issued from the golden mouth and are by no means something that petty understanding can fathom; like dhāraṇī spells, they are transmitted from our forebears without being translated. Or it is because a name encompasses many meanings that from the beginning it could not be translated. Ever since the transformation of the Way spread eastward, what has been transmitted in the sūtras and Vinayas is called kāṣāya, commonly termed "Dharma robe." However, the designation "kāṣāya" derives from the color of the garment—that is, the "discolored robe" found in the sūtras. The holy color differs from the worldly, as anyone with eyes knows. Knowing what sort of robe it is, merely upon seeing its color, one designates this color as the kāṣāya robe. What is revealed in the Vinaya slightly accords with the shape of the robe; hence the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya treats it as a mat (敷具), meaning it shares the form of a felt rug. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya treats it as a bedding robe (臥具), meaning it is of the same class as quilts and covers. Just as the niṣīdana was originally an item for Indian monks to sit upon, this sitting utensil is properly translated as "sitting mat." As for clothing, people are still confused and unclear. However, what is called saṃghāṭī in the sūtras and Vinayas is something unprecedented. Why is that? Its name surpasses worldly conventions and marks the path, having no comparable counterpart; since it is an article like a felt blanket, it is called a bedding robe. Teachers who investigate names grasp the meaning based on the names, and thus explain that "felt bedding robes and the like must be relinquished and received through karman." The treatise refers to the five faults, which fall squarely on such persons. Therefore, the Sarvāstivāda states, "'Bedding robe' is a name for the three robes," which corresponds to the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya stating, "An old or sick monk holding a felt saṃghāṭī requests the act from the saṃgha"—this is its meaning; why would one use a karman rite to perform adhiṣṭhāna on a felt mat? Even if there was earlier tradition, the practice was never carried out; it must not be asserted in vain. Now, summarizing by its meaning, a designation must ultimately be established. Therefore the text states: "Within what is without name or mark, provisional names and marks are spoken." Just as the Vinaya names it the "robe of subduing," so the text states: "Only when the defilements are already subdued should one wear the kāṣāya." This is also like the sūtra saying: "If wrath arises within, wearing the kāṣāya outwardly causes it without fail to be extinguished." Or as a sūtra says: "'Dharma robe and patra' means that those who cherish the Way wear it, so it is called a Dharma robe; those worthy of receiving offerings use it, so it is called a patra." Deeply reflect on its name, hear the words, and observe the conduct—they are not established in vain. The remaining various names are fully explained in the commentaries and subcommentaries.'