釋門章服儀 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Preface to the Regulations on Monastic Robes of the Buddhist Order

The Dharma-body is formless, yet Rocana wears precious robes. When it came to suiting the capacities of the three vehicles and responding to the conditions of the defiled world, the Tathāgata in his own person manifested a sixteen-foot form and wore a coarse cloth saṃghāṭī, a rule that no follower of the Buddha failed to observe. Yet down to this degenerate age, there is much talk of mind and nature, while outward forms and deportment are abandoned. Deceitful Māra takes advantage of this to drastically alter the holy regulations: wearing damask and silk in winter, using gauze and fine silk in summer, and leaving nothing undone in extravagant, decadent luxury. They are utterly unaware that the prohibition against silken garments originated with the Tathāgata; while the residue of compassionate intention serves as a field of merit for the world, once entangled, escaping the plundering [of karma] is difficult indeed. Men of understanding and elevated standing cannot but be deeply pained and troubled by this. The Nanshan Regulations on Monastic Robes was composed precisely for this reason, so that aspiring scholars would know the proper standard and whence it derived—how could this be called a minor contribution? Yet though this book remains, in later generations those who lecture on it are rare. Why is this? The flourishing and decline of the holy regulations are bound to the turns of the times. During the semblance age, when Māra's minions were exceedingly rampant, even the wise followed the multitude, and so though [the teachings] fell into desuetude, they also rose again. But coming to the era of intense strife, the base and benighted merely preserve consciousness. Thereupon, mahāsattvas who save the world directly elucidated the principle of the eternal presence of the Buddha-nature in order to sustain the life of wisdom. Furthermore, they subsequently supported the deportment of the Vinaya to rescue what was most urgent. This is like seeing someone starving and freezing: one first gives him food and only then gives him clothing; this is the so-called blending of light with others for the sake of protecting the Dharma. Most people do not perceive the intention of these mahāsattvas; after a single meal, they let [the starving person] freeze to death—this is why the holy regulations cannot flourish. Recently, Monk Xingwo, wishing to carve blocks for the Regulations on Monastic Robes and distribute it widely throughout the world, together with writing out by hand the Record of Accordance with the Dharma, also requested that my words serve as a preface at the head of the volume. Changing my expression, I said: 'Unworthy as I am, am I not also a son of the Śākya clan? Do you wish not to reject the words on account of the man? Whose attention could my words ever attract? Yet I too have heard something; and what I have heard are not my own words, so why should I refuse to compose a preface for it?'

1.3

Winter of the yisi year, the fifth year of the Kanbun era [1665]

1.4

Inscribed by the śramaṇa Fukashigi of Caoshan

1.5

Composed by the śramaṇa Shi Daoxuan of the Divine Land

1.6

A śramaṇa of Hanyin addressed a bodhisattva of Qinshan, saying: 'I have heard that the way of compassionate salvation has been looked up to as a model throughout antiquity, and the methods of vast giving have always been revered. Is it not true that when benevolence and nurturing effect transformation, their covering and supporting surpass Heaven and Earth; and when gathering and guiding initiate deeds, their beneficent grace exceeds the three great [elements]? Surely one should broaden the level path, manifesting nature and life to the four kinds of beings, and unburden the vital spirits, extending compassion throughout the nine realms of existence. Lately I have seen various śramaṇas whose deportment and bearing are lofty and grand, and whose speech and conduct are apart from the ordinary, deeply incurring the censure of Jīvaka and heavily inviting the reproach of the Marquis of Yin. Wrapped in silken garments, they cannot indulge their minds without flowered brocades; resting upon soft cushions, they cannot settle their thoughts without light, soft fabrics. Regarding clothing and food with such shamelessness, they have already lost virtue before the Confucian school; the holy seed being abruptly destroyed, they have indeed forfeited the Way before the mysterious halls. In this manner, while specialized lineages give tranquil instructions, they vainly proclaim the decorum of admonitions; those who follow the path are few, and the restrictions of reproof are set up in vain. Might it not be that the bond of the true Dharma has collapsed, ending after sixteen hundred years? I venture to present my doubts, requesting that you untangle and explain them.'

1.7

The bodhisattva said: 'Ever since the Dharma King appeared to benefit [the world], he abundantly opened the way of compassion; the path of universal love is truly a ferry and bridge for all species. Even the distracted good deeds of the desire realm take universal salvation as their primary teaching; and the tranquil conditions of the form realm likewise hold the four great vows as their chief guide. How much more so for the Way that transcends all realms and virtue that leaps beyond the cage! One does not passively endure inhumanity—how could one harbor affection for slaughter? This can be known with certainty. Have you not heard? Let me explain it further for you. Regarding meat-eating and silken garments, permissions and prohibitions were established according to individual capacities; but regarding harming life and destroying existence, the ultimate intention is an immediate, total cessation. Thus one knows that the act of adapting to transform beings succeeds marvelously through realizing nature; and the strategy of gathering and employing ultimately aims at supporting the principle. Yet because the pure source has long since waned and the frivolous ways cannot be retrieved, kāṣāyas now show signs of turning white, and śramaṇas have severed the path of seeking the profound. Holding my knees and lost in long reflection, how could I express it in full?'

1.8

That śramaṇa said: 'I am originally from Hanyin, an outlying border of Jingchu; by a small measure of inherited fortune, I have unworthily had the privilege of following your footsteps. I have always heard that altering worldly appearance and robes is the initial gateway to entering the Way; and contemplating the subtle in a quiet place establishes the fundamental purpose of leaving the world. As for the burdens of clothing and food, they have long been cast away into worldly dust; yet the entanglements of views and attachments have not been dispersed from my heart. Therefore, not shrinking from a journey of a thousand li, I came to Sanqin to inquire about the Way. Since arriving here, my perspectives have been renewed. Just now, I was favored with your leftover discourse, which briefly showed me the model and rule. Yet my benighted understanding has not yet sprouted, and my inverted passions are difficult to illuminate. I pray that you write it down again on my sash and broadly open the thoroughfares, so that deportment and form may have a basis, the illumination of the lamp of the Dharma may shine ever bright, the obscure path may be cleared again, and the breeze of the Bodhi-tree may reach ever further.'

1.9

I instructed him again, saying: 'Originally, when the Way prospered in the world below, its guiding principle was singular. In principle, it disperses confusions and purifies the mind of burdens; in practice, it manifests auspicious signs in visible forms. Indeed, the true Way is profound and vast, not glimpsed throughout long kalpas; yet the spiritual lineage is manifest and clear, looked up to by all conscious beings. Thus one knows that the Deer Park was the initial opening, and the Twin Sāla Trees were the final term. The pattern for guiding and saving the world was initiated, and the traces of its glorious radiance were brilliantly shown. The distinction of shaving the head and dyeing the robes changes the ingrained habits of worldly custom; the decorum of proper measurements and standards must be sought deeply in correct rules. Furthermore, the four Āgamas and eight Piṭakas can hardly be fully searched; yet how can one remain confused about a single set of three robes? Since these are the constant duties of the Buddhist order, experienced at all times, their meaning is not an idle survival, and the practice accords with the true teaching. Thus, that the Dharma abides for ten thousand years is solely reliant on the efficacy of outward form and robes; that the three sages transcend worldly existence is entirely inherited from the work of previous cultivators.' Now I shall briefly set forth ten chapters for you; arranged chapter by chapter, they strive to illuminate the traces of the past:

1.10

1. Intent of the Regulations and Explanation of Names; 2. Establishing the Substance to Transcend the Worldly; 3. Superior Virtue Extending into the Distance; 4. The Dharma Color Surpassing the Worldly; 5. Tailoring and Making in Accordance with the Dharma; 6. Dimensions and Ensigns; 7. Authoritative Basis for Single and Double Layers; 8. Sewing and Cutting; 9. Faithful Teachings on Mending and Washing; 10. Protective Observance through the Karman Rite.

1.11

Chapter 1: Intent of the Regulations and Explanation of Names

1.12

The way outward form and robes inspire people causes living beings to attend to the fundamental; the way the Dharma of the Way directs [merit] opens the initial source of transformation. Therefore, when the father of the Śākya clan leapt over the city walls and passed through the forest and marsh, he saw on the road a hunter wearing a kāṣāya; he immediately took off his precious robes, bartered for the coarse cloth saṃghāṭī, put it on at once, achieved the Way of perfect enlightenment, and began his teaching. Whether for oneself or others, when first dyed by the mysterious net, one first puts on this robe. Therefore, when the voice saying 'Come, monk' was uttered, worldly garments transformed into Dharma robes, and the eight requisites accompanied the body. As the Samantapāsādikā states: 'In receiving [ordination] through karman and so forth, one must first establish the correct decorum of identical appearance.' Thus the Vinaya states: 'He shaved his hair, donned the kāṣāya, and became identical to those who have renounced the world.' This is genuine proof. Why is this? It is truly because without altering one's robes, there is no way to glorify one's deportment; without differing from the worldly, there is no way to manifest the Way. Summarizing its overarching purpose, it is nothing other than a boat to cross the ocean of suffering, a ladder to smooth the path of life. Thus the Damamūkanidāna-sūtra states: 'Wearing this Dharma robe, one will swiftly attain liberation from birth and death.' Therefore, when King Brahmā spread transformation, he preserved life and established cyclical progression; when the Śākya Honored One bequeathed his model, he extinguished the self and cast away both sin and merit, overturning the five entrenchments in the dust of the mind and dispelling the two kinds of death within and without. Thus we know that when an actress donned it once, she came to be freed from bondage through long kalpas; when a king of beasts merely saw it, he endured the agony of death and recognized taking refuge. It is truly not in vain.

1.13

Question: 'I now understand the intent of the regulations, but I do not yet know what it is called.'

1.14

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.'

1.15

Question: 'The Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra states: "Though one removes hair and beard, one does not remove defilements; wearing dyed robes, one's mind does not depart from defilement." Since discarding and adopting are thus confounded, how are they to be distinguished?'

1.16

Answer: 'Do not be confused by the word; grasp its far-reaching intent. "Dyeing" refers to breaking away from worldly colors; thus, being dyed, it is an emblem of color. Hence we know that it relies on both aspects of the Way while casting aside the worldly. Therefore, in the Vinaya, dyeing the five primary colors with the kāṣāya color produces a color that accords with the Dharma.'

1.17

Chapter 2: Establishing the Substance to Transcend the Worldly

1.18

Question: 'Renunciation is based on the Way and does not rely on outward form and robes. Hence the text states: "Merely obtain enough to support the body and relieve the distress of cold." Therefore, the ten kinds of rag robes are the original principle of the ancient sages. As for other robes and patched garments, once obtained, one simply uses them; cultivating the mind in reliance upon them is sufficient to transcend the world. As for the four wrong livelihoods and five wrong livelihoods forbidden in the Vinaya and sūtras, and the few desires and contentment permitted by the worthy and holy, they result in some having distinct robes yet lacking the path of borrowing conventions, while in their deportment they violate the rules and prohibitions, their bodies and minds falling into the net of heaven, and their receiving and upholding departing from the true Dharma. How can this be resolved and reconciled with the text that says "merely obtain"?'

1.19

I answer: When the Supreme Sage established the teaching, he accommodated practice according to the teaching; whether in right and wrong or benefit and detriment, none failed to accord with the Path. Now, the Path lies in purifying the mind, its essential meaning being unobstructedness, just as on an ordinary level path there are none who are impeded. When people today practice the Path, they divide phenomena and principle into two: speaking of phenomena, secular habits have not vanished; inquiring into principle, the true mind unites with essence. This is to forcibly divide the two truths, creating separate paths for the ordinary and the holy; thus setting up two poles, there is no constant standard of discarding and choosing. As a result, in being content with robes, one's goal is to be without fault; when phenomena are clear and the mind is pure, one then harbors entry into the Path. Therefore, the ten kinds of discarded robes are what worldly sensibilities abandon, yet the three sages wear them insatiably, and they are that to which monastic deportment returns. Contemplating phenomena, they are free from the suspicion of differing from the vulgar; engaging principle, they serve to nourish the spirit. This is indeed drawing upon the two truths, lodging practice within emptiness and existence; returning to and relying on the four resources, one will truly have no shame before traditional standards. Therefore, there was one who carried those rags of discarded clothing to wash them in a distant pool: the devas rejoiced in his liberation, and taking the foul water, used it to bathe themselves. In every case this was because the material was pure and the mind clear; they did not allow foul traces to encumber the Path. But when a tīrthika who had attained supernormal powers brought fine cotton to wash, the devas barred him from afar: 'Do not defile our water!' They told him: 'Gain induced by a corrupt mind is abhorred by both ordinary beings and sages.' Proved by this passage, we thus know that the Path lying in purifying the mind is not an empty assertion. Hence we know that when seeking material goods, if one receives and stores them according to the Dharma, does not fall into penal infractions, internally feels no guilt before the spirit of the precepts, and externally feels no shame before the expectations of the worldly, it is acceptable. How could one stumble along worldly paths, flounder in habitual practices, and through wrongful seeking or excessive seeking lose one's [religious] life? In life one is a thief of the Buddha; in death one is a prisoner among ghosts. Shaving the head and dyeing robes, one relies on the Buddha as teacher, yet one rejects the teacher's instructions and does not use them. Boasting of diminishing strength, one claims the three destinies can be averted, not considering that this body is pressed hard by the four mountains. Therefore the text says that those who harbor dread at the time of death are precisely such people. How does this differ from the wisdom and courage of a mantis resisting a chariot? Have you not heard the clear warnings of the sūtras and treatises? Robes of flesh and robes of iron arrive in accordance with what is stimulated; suffering torment and suffering scorching heat—how can words express it? The physical body of a single lifetime is abandoned to ditches and ravines; the spiritual consciousness of successive kalpas is bound to the paths of karma. Swept away at fate's whim on a long journey, there is no way to return to the source. One must indeed cast off routine habits and revere the holy words, externally committing no infraction against the statutes and internally engaging in clear purification. Harboring such a perspective, what else could one seek?

1.20

Question: "The above explains that if there is proper method in seeking, then both principle and phenomena are attained. Yet regarding what one is fortunate enough to obtain: there are hemp and silk; or felt and fine cotton combined; or hair and floss obtained together; fivefold patched robes and robes of a hundred knots are heard of among frugal practitioners; feeding on tree [fruit] and clothing in grass especially sustain mountain-dwellers. Being confused about this, I wish to hear its essentials."

1.21

I answer: "The five assemblies who have left the world take the four resources as their standard. The sages have established models, which do not pass through ordinary speculation. Permitting the relief of physical hardship, the intention lies in purifying the mind; when affairs leave no choice, these holy lineages are instituted. Yet the prohibitions and permissions of the correct Vinaya make compassion their priority: if obtaining something engenders affliction, it will never be tolerated. Therefore, eating meat and wearing silken garments do not differ in their mode: harming life and cutting short living beings are identical in fact and one in principle. Exposing cocoons and boiling silkworms are agonies that cannot be endured; hanging in the butcher's stall and placed on the chopping block constitute the cruelty of evil karma. The fisherman presenting tuna and the mulberry maid offering silk do not differ in the sense of using an intermediary's hand, nor is there any distinction in the reward of shared merit. Therefore the Supreme Sage took deep warning: examining how evil retribution is hard to escape, both sūtras and Vinayas fully make it known, completely prohibiting both. Thus the Nirvāṇa, the Elephant's Trunk, the Laṅkāvatāra, and the Great Cloud Sūtras all abundantly manifest the practice of compassion and prominently proclaim the cessation of killing. Killing is the origin of all transgressions, and stands first among worldly precepts; how could the lineage of the Path calmly practice it? When preaching and guidance are first set forth, one must transform beings with kindness and benevolence; yet when it comes to what is put on the body first, one insists on dressing in patterned silk! As patterned silk is produced, it cannot be attained without killing; how can one bear this in practice? Without reflecting that this is an infraction, having no way to comport oneself, knitting one's brows as one touches the material—this is truly lamentable. Therefore when the Eastern Land received the teachings, it became entirely disordered: the regulation prohibiting meat has long been observed, but the rule forbidding silk is not used. It is not that the sincere teachings were not restrictive, but that the fault lies in delusion regarding the texts; or perhaps, though not deluded regarding the texts, being submerged in attachment, there was no way to bring it forth. Therefore in the Vinaya, when a monk begged floss from a silkworm-raising family to make a bedding robe, he was rebuked by the laity, who called it taking life. The Buddha accordingly established the precept and did not permit wearing it; even if it had already been made, it had to be chopped into pieces and smeared onto walls. This is the extreme admonition of perpetual abandonment; it must be cut off. Just as in the Vinaya using insects and drinking water with insects are subject to the same regulation despite different situations, so too wild silkworms and domestic silkworms are uniformly restricted despite differing circumstances. Whether pure [silk] or blended, both incur offenses in the relevant chapters; whether made by oneself or made by others, all are to be chopped with axes. Today monks are confused about the terminology, taking it to mean non-Dharma robes, and thus do not put it into practice. Clarifying the terminology as above, I presume there will be no more confusion. Thus the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that kauśeya is the first silk from the mouth of the silkworm; the circumstance being the same as in the Dharmaguptaka and Mahīśāsaka, it is not permitted for robes. Even if one obtains robe material, if warp and weft are both hemp, but a single thread of silk is woven into the middle, it is also comprehensively prohibited; this is another extreme admonition. The Sarvāstivāda-śāstra says: 'In foreign countries, using floss to make robes has two varieties: either finely pulling it apart and spreading it out, as in the method of making felt, or drawing it into warp and weft, which is floss-pongee; neither is permitted.' Various masters since ancient times did not reflect on the meaning of the teaching; even granting their former confusion that it referred only to bedding robes, if that which is obtained through killing is still ordered to be chopped to pieces, how could the marks of the monastic robe—compassion and patience—be permitted to be received and upheld when obtained through killing? From this we know that when receiving and upholding the holy Dharma, unless pure, it cannot be practiced; to transmit it erroneously truly contradicts the original intention. Therefore beyond the borders of the Great Tang, along the shores of the three seas, and in the various barbarian lands of Bactria, wherever the Buddha Dharma exists, the monastic robes worn all rely on felt and hemp, and none use silk floss; this is clear evidence. In this land, famous monks of the Qi and Wei, and eminent sages of the Zhou and Sui, in the great robes they wore, all relied on hemp; although they had not thoroughly studied the teaching, they secretly conformed to the texts. Is this not because their compassion was deep, and their Dharma robes were according to the Dharma? As in common worldly practice, hemp is used for shirts; the whole country complies with this, and it cannot be abruptly changed. Thus the hemp saṃghāṭī revealed in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra makes clear that this is the monastic method of ancient buddhas: appearing as a holy insignia, it is named the holy lineage; therefore the Great Sage relied on and wore it to serve as a model for later generations. The earthenware patra of the Mahīśāsaka is also like this. From this we know that Dharma robes and patras are not what ordinary people practice; if a buddha does not appear in the world, they do not appear. Therefore let all who are clear-sighted follow the path without deviation; there is an authoritative basis for it. Thus the Saṃyuktāgama says: 'Practicing the four immeasurables and wearing the three Dharma robes, these become the robes of the compassionate.' In my youth I attended Vinaya lectures; when the lectures reached this passage, there was no session distinguishing permission and prohibition, and citations were exceedingly few. Harboring deep doubts, I did not dare to practice it openly, putting on whatever I obtained, merely to cover my body. In the final years of the Zhenguan era, taking part in translating the sūtras, I inquired into silken garments, and only then realized they must not be used, deeply regretting having learned of it so late. Moreover, as the physical body is what one relies on, it requires warmth; and given that retributions vary in strength and frailty, it is difficult to apply a uniform restriction. Therefore in the esoteric teaching of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra], permission and prohibition have their reasons, truly having special intentions. It cannot be completely prohibited like meat, for then those of inferior capacity with weak retributions would have no chance to enter the Path; nor can it be universally permitted like milk, for then those of superior practice would seek it indolently and show slackness in their studies. Therefore expedient analogies were drawn to nourish the body for the sake of the Path. Hence the various sūtras say: 'If used according to the Dharma, even receiving a hundred thousand is not considered too much; but if one is unable to practice, one is not permitted to accept even a cup of water or a single patched robe.' This is truly profound! From this we know that the effort in accepting robes lies in purifying the mind: though permitted to wear them, wearing them without attachment is acceptable. Yet for the three kinds of Dharma robes, the principle admits of no general exception; they must still be traded for felt and hemp, taking the previous standard as guide. This is because remaining skirts and cloaks are intended solely to ward off the cold; when affairs leave no choice, they are permitted to relieve physical hardship. The bodily retribution of a lifetime ultimately enters the gate of death; while karmic lifespan has not yet run out, one nourishes the mind to aid the Path. When affairs leave no choice, providing it with food and clothing is ultimately called nourishing an enemy; it brings no benefit. If one can make one's resolve and integrity lofty, sever feelings of superficial glamour, revere the true lineage, and die without regret, this is the Dharma practice of a bhikṣu, esteemed by all the sages. It is like the company of those tied with grass or floating on a board in the sea: in terms of the precepts, life-threatening difficulties are what is generally permitted; in terms of the mind, enduring death, they uphold them without abandoning them. Therefore they are protected by the unseen realm, and praised in the proclamations of sūtras and treatises. When even this prohibitory precept is upheld unto death, how much more so for the inherently heavy [precepts]? Yet practitioners indulge in them insatiably—this is truly astonishing!"

1.22

Question: "While the fault of silk and floss is fundamental and not what a benevolent person harbors, the offerings made through minor deeds possess the karmic potential to open up merit. How can it be abruptly cut off, severing the aspiring minds [of the donors]?"

1.23

I answer: "Now, as for the norm of making offerings and giving alms, it must be pure in three respects; if it is defiled in any one of them, it is called an impure gift. The treatises divide this into four propositions; how could it be otherwise? Furthermore, pure conduct eradicates afflictions, whereas creating merit is difficult to bring into accord [with liberation]. When circumstances and conditions arise, making offerings and gifts is permitted so that beings may cast off their root greed; [the Buddha] did not bar pure wealth, [yet this] leads to mixed retributions. If one were to bar and reject them completely, then the ignorant laity would have no way to plant causes [of merit]; yet if one receives mixed retributions, one will drown life after life constantly in the ocean of suffering. Both offenses and blessings are invoked together; the principle lies right here. And the Aṅgulimāla-sūtra says: 'Silk, floss, and leather goods come passing through many hands, removed from the hands of the killer; nevertheless, one who upholds the precepts ought not to wear them. If one does wear them, although it is without compassion, it does not break the precepts.' According to this doctrinal gate, opening and closing have different points of departure: closing shows that sentient beings can be saved and that causing injury and harm is truly difficult to bear; opening allows that robes may be made from the loss of life as a temporary expedient to rescue beings from cold and suffering. Moreover, the admonition that it is 'without compassion' ultimately serves as a pronouncement of permanent prohibition; the measure permitting its wearing was merely to remedy the hardship of the moment. As for cases where monks are freezing in the mountains or robbed by bandits, they are permitted to wear pelts and furs; when intensely tormented by sudden, severe illness, they are allowed to sustain themselves with milk and honey. These are not universal transformations, but slight provisions of expediency; looking up and measuring the true texts, the intended meaning is indeed reasonable. Leather garments and skin robes are fully regulated in the Vinaya: their great extravagance is eliminated, and taking contentment as the root. As for black and white felt robes, the Vinaya also has a general regulation: if seeking and demanding them is excessive, harming worldly customs and ruining the Way, they are regulated to be surrendered to the Saṃgha; but shearing wool preserves life and genuinely serves to manifest benevolence, so wearing them is permitted. That being so, the encumbrance of harming life has ramifications that are difficult to purify; I cite this briefly to serve as a lasting motto beside one's seat. Furthermore, the body is a vessel of suffering; how could one tie it up without eating? Grain rations that accompany the body are truly weightily necessary to maintain life. Yet setting fire to burn mountains and channeling water to irrigate fields turn over and kill or injure, inflicting devastation even more severely. What is more, imprisoning calves to milk cows, robbing bees of their honey, insects lodged in vegetables, and maggots and pupae gathering around food utensils—the living beings in firewood and water exceed the grains in storehouses; the conscious beings in grass and soil gather together to form villages. What passes through body and mouth can truly hardly be free of faults. Yet, among the greatest of offenses, none exceeds silk robes. Observing the procedures for rearing and killing them, the sūtras call it an evil precept; compared to the count of butchering and hunting, it is tens of thousands of times greater. People in the world speak of butchers and there is none who is not ashamed of them; yet when it comes to sharing the profit of silk and satin, they speak openly and show their tracks without any revulsion, because mutual evil aids one another. One truly ought to regulate it uniformly, so as to put an end to worldly sentiments. But the five turbidities are not yet extinguished, and the three obstacles constantly encircle us; is this not caused by the shifts of craving and desire? One should know that to live as a karmic retribution in a decadent age, dwelling in this body and spirit, using and employing them to harm others to benefit oneself, brings distress and disgrace, and is deeply to be loathed. Consider Monk Śāṇakavāsin, whose body was covered by a womb-robe, or the Śākya prince Face-King, whose karmic clothing followed his body. They pointed to the four seas as their home for a long time, seeking the Way on a single meal a day, free from desire and free from contrived action; this is truly worthy of esteem. Furthermore, in the north there are trees that produce clothing, and in the heavens above there are apparitional garments, light or heavy according to one's mind, novel and wondrous with every change. Or, yielding one's physical form in a pure land, one takes the joy of the Dharma as food; lodging one's spirit inside a lotus flower, one takes modesty and shame as clothing. This Way can be sought; practicing its cause, there is nowhere one will not reach."

1.24

Question: "How should one establish practice in order to seek that?"

1.25

I answer: "Now, all myriad transformations reside in the single mind; when practice is fulfilled, the final fruit is attained, just like an echo or a shadow. In principle, one must loathe this womb retribution and vow to exhaust the source of greed; then one's reception of birth will rely on apparitional birth. Once the body is born apparition-like, hunger, thirst, cold, and heat will be cut off from the mind; what sustains the physical clothing will not harm sentient beings. Once one rests securely in gentle forbearance, what one wears will have nothing external to it. Thus, under the Liang dynasty, Shen Yue, a scholar of vast learning and brilliant talent, held the scales of high office, yet his heart rested in benevolence and forbearance. He wrote the Treatise on Ultimate Compassion, which states: 'The external scriptures say: "At sixty, one may wear silk"; thus before this age one ought to wear hemp. "At seventy, one may eat meat"; thus before this age one ought to eat vegetables.' Now, the holy Way is noble and profound, leaving no thought unreached; benevolence covers all living beings, and in principle there are no partial omissions. The import of prohibiting meat is explicitly set forth in his words; the principle of banishing silk can definitely be known. However, at the beginning of prohibitions and purifications, silk and leather were still permitted; this was merely a procedure of expounding teachings, following the capacities of beings before they were ready. Is it not that tearing silk cloth once can last for the entire year, while slaughtering domestic animals to prepare meals extends day after day? In rescuing beings from danger and relieving them from suffering, one prioritizes what is most urgent; the sequence of expounding teachings finds its meaning here. Ever since the Nirvāṇa-sūtra crossed to the east, the conditions for eating the three kinds of meat were brought to an end; taking the supreme admonition to heart, people have long eaten vegetables without wearying, yet regarding silken garments and satin robes, they have never had any doubts. This is because their thoughts were exhausted in the mere words, and their thinking was confused about the great purport; the text is vast and will not be recorded here. Looking at this treatise by the Marquis of Dongyin, he grasped the ultimate direction. The Vinaya's regulations are strict and clear, not to be perused lightly; therefore he raised this magnificent principle. All of this, as cited above, may serve as a mirror for us."

1.26

Chapter Three: Superior Virtues Passing Far Beyond

1.27

Question: "Above, the substance of the robe was explained, with compassion and forbearance residing as the principle. Because silk and satin derive from suffocating and boiling cocoons, in principle they should be permanently prohibited; because linen cloth lies in spinning and weaving, it reasonably accords with the great instruction. It can indeed be received purely without defilement, and upheld and practiced with proper deportment. But does it possess extraordinary merit that sprouts beyond the mundane world?"

1.28

I answer: "Good causes accumulate virtue in the mind; auspicious blessings are conditioned into being in objective circumstances. Once the ensign is established, the herds of deer find peace of spirit, the king of birds harbors dread, the dragon sons preserve their lives, evil spirits conceal their forms, and humans who see it give rise to goodness; these are the very matters. How much more so if one can ancestrally inherit the true teachings and receive and use them in accord with proper deportment! In the short term, one cultivates oneself in accord with practice; in the long run, it assists in achieving the holy path. Thus the Mahākāruṇika-sūtra says: 'Those who put on the kāṣāya are śramaṇas by nature; even if they defile the conduct of a śramaṇa, from Maitreya Buddha down to Rucika Buddha, they will attain entry into nirvāṇa.' The Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka-sūtra explains five kinds of merit: 'First, those who enter my Dharma, even if they commit grave transgressions, if they produce a single thought of reverence, will receive the prediction of the three vehicles; second, heavenly beings, dragons, humans, and spirits who are able to revere those wearing the robe will not regress in the three vehicles; third, if humans and spirits obtain the robe, even down to four inches of it, their food and drink will be fully sufficient; fourth, if sentient beings turn against one another, by mindfulness of the power of the kāṣāya, they will immediately give rise to a compassionate heart; fifth, in military battlefields one will not be harmed. If it lacks these five powers, I have deceived the Buddhas of the ten directions,' and so forth."

1.29

Chapter Four: Dharma Colors Shedding Light on the World

1.30

Question: "The Mahāyāna texts cited above speak of wearing dyed robes; I do not yet know what color constitutes being according to the Dharma?"

1.31

I answer: "As the sūtras and Vinayas universally state, it is 'discolored.' Thus the text says: 'One should use any one of the three kinds—blue-green, black, or mangrove-dye—to spoil [the color], making it a color according to the Dharma.' Truly, because worldly habits are hard to change and greedy attachment is impossible to eliminate, the precepts and Vinaya follow conditions, and their forms are established accordingly—examples such as patching the old onto the new, or cutting the wide to make it narrow, are of this sort. Therefore, robes of the five primary superior colors cannot be received and upheld. Is there any among these that does not discipline the mind according to circumstances and abandon worldly habits, just like worldly vermilion and purple, which are differences of attire not worn unless one is eminent and prosperous? Improper discolored cloth is cherished only within the Buddhist order, distinguishing the heterodox from the orthodox. Thus, among the ninety-six kinds of tīrthikas, their followers are diverse: some are naked and some clothed, some in white and some in dyed clothing, with none having a fixed norm. The Buddhist order is not like this: all wear dyed robes, the colors of which are not pure or superior, cutting off extravagance and luxury. Now, the blue-green and black mentioned above share their names with the five primary colors, but as described in the treatises and Vinayas, they resemble them without being the proper colors. The single dye of mangrove-dye exists in this region; it has more red and less black, resembling a gandharva-color. A sūtra says: 'Seeing my disciples wearing red color, they thought it was blood'; a treatise states: 'When I wore red robes, reflecting against pearls they resembled flesh,' and so on. At present, when Indian monks come from the west, they all wear this color; this is the proof of it. Now, red is a primary color, but with a slight difference; genuine scarlet in this land is prohibited by the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya. Clearly knowing that improper [color] is precisely the kāṣāya color. Because the color is manifested outwardly, its luster is easy to recognize; seeing the color, one knows the person to be a liberated one, as explained above. Other miscellaneous dyed robe colors that are neither primary nor superior may immediately receive adhiṣṭhāna; so long as they depart from worldly habits, they constitute the emblem of the Way. Therefore, the dhūta fivefold patched robe is washed with water to make it pure, and a new robe is discolored and patched with old cloth to make it pure. When a sitting mat is newly made, it is also patched with old cloth. In citing many textual proofs, none fail to suppress the extravagance of greed and competition, and sever the worldly feelings of clinging and attachment."

1.32

Chapter Five: Cutting and Tailoring in Accordance with the Dharma

1.33

Question: "Renunciation prioritizes quiet discipline and saving labor, receiving and using what one happens to get to practice the Way with a peaceful mind. Recently I have seen Dharma robes crosswise cut and severed, and then pieced together again, which is called holy deportment. Could wasting effort and hindering the Way ever exceed this? I humbly request you to grant true texts to dispel this ignorance."

1.34

I answer: "Discussing the original regulation, it came from the holy mind; its principle was not established in vain, but has profound and far-reaching intent. Thus the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya says: 'The three robes are the emblems of the worthy and holy, whose principle transcends worldly minds.' Therefore, in the Vinaya, the śramaṇa's robe has three kinds of cheapness: first, cheapness of substance, being clothing discarded by the people of the world; second, cheapness of color, not being a proper, superior color; third, cheapness of the knife, being cut into pieces and joined together to cut off the profit of greedy thieves. Moreover, to distinguish oneself from tīrthikas, one wears this robe. Furthermore, the form of strips and borders is identical to fields and plots: just as dikes retain water to nourish fine sprouts, it exemplifies that wearing this robe engenders merit. The Buddha had it resemble this, and the principle was not without purpose; thus the Vinaya speaks of 'five strips and ten panels.' As for the number of strips being many or few, and the borders' measure being short or long, each has its true text, as cited elsewhere. Formerly, a Vinaya master of the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya south of the Yangtze River made presumptuous judgments with great boldness: seeing that the seven-strip robe had two long and one short, he declared that the nine-strip robe with three long was the standard, which was because he had not heard the clear teaching of the nine grades of great robes in the Sarvāstivāda-śāstra. That treatise states that the three kinds of superior-grade great robes have four long and one short, while the three kinds of lower-grade are the same as the seven-strip robe; this cannot be violated. Recently I have seen that the strips and folds do not conform to the proper deportment, being three or four inches, made broad according to personal whim, gradually becoming a worldly custom and further opening the source of vanity and laxity. Thus the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya says that the width is uniformly four finger-widths, and the small is like a grain of barley, so that the dikes and borders are distinguished to serve as a field of merit for the world. Nowadays they exceed its proper measure, and are therefore robes contrary to the Dharma. Thus, regarding the measures established for clothing, reducing what is permitted and prohibiting what is excessive both equally suppress the sentiments of greed and competition. Recently I have seen Indian monks sewing down their strips and folds; when asked about their original authority, they said it was done like that there. Now, inspecting by the Vinaya, none are sewn down; therefore, cutting and tailoring reveals the folds to manifest the mark of cutting. Now they are sewn together with no marks distinguishable, whereas the Vinaya says: 'When walking on the road, if a thorn catches and tears a fold, one should wear it reversed.' And: 'If the folds of the robe become loose and detached, one should sew them with horse-tooth or bird-foot stitches.' And the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya says: 'If the bottom of the robe is frequently torn, one should wear it upside down; when walking in the rain, if water enters into the folds, one should wear it right side up.' But nowadays they are sewn up completely; why would such [instructions] be troubled with? From this we know that when propriety is lost in the central realm, it must be sought in the four barbarian regions; that the center is turbid while the border is pure is verified by this. Moreover, sectarian attachments in India are partial, mixed, and inconsistent; whenever they obtain a single text, they never investigate it. The Vinaya's four authorities do not permit one to act arbitrarily; if one simply relies on the true teachings, one will naturally be free from fault and bias."

1.35

Chapter Six: Dimensions, Measures, and Ensign Marks

1.36

Question: "Square robes transcend the mundane, being distinct from worldly styles; between broad and narrow, how should the limits be determined?"

1.37

Answer: "The various Vinayas explain the measurements mostly based on the cubit of one's body. However, as the cubits of bodies differ from one another, fixing the standard according to one's karmic retribution can establish the norm. Thus the text states: '[The robe is made] by measuring the body.' Generally speaking, three cubits by five cubits is taken as the basic standard, adapting to the circumstances at hand without being rigidly confined to literal prescriptions. Making it below the standard accords with the etiquette of frugality; exceeding the limit and arbitrarily enlarging it constitutes a transgression according to the Dharma. Thus the text states: 'Four cubits by two cubits is not contrary to the Dharma; if it equals the Buddha's measure, a pārājika is incurred.' This is the proof. In recent years, inferior monks have been arrogant and extravagant in their measurements, and when it comes to discussing frugality and modesty, none such people are seen. Now, when the Great Sage originally instituted the three robes, the Western Regions had only these robes and no other clothing. Thus the text states, 'Only the three robes.' Later there were the saṃkakṣikā and the shoulder-covering garments, whose forms were also square; thus the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states: 'Four cubits in length and two cubits in width.' These were originally instituted solely for the bhikṣuṇī Saṃgha, yet nowadays monks wear them, arrogantly usurping what is common to lower ranks. Moreover, the saṃkakṣikā is narrow at the top and wide at the bottom, destroying and severing the pure source—just as the Biographies of Eminent Monks states: 'Who would have expected that among square robes there would again be a He Pingshu?' Furthermore, it is said: 'The kāṣāya has no collar, signifying the robe of liberation; the alms bowl has no base, symbolizing the vessel of immeasurable capacity.' Both mean that the clothing is sufficient merely to cover the body, leaving one unbound and free from ties, thereby fulfilling one's original aspiration. Nowadays, although the three robes remain unchanged from the original, there are also those who generate personal whims, improperly attaching cords and loops, covering both shoulders, overlapping left and right, and tying them tightly with large cords, taking this to be dhūta—something never heard of before. However, the Vinaya has the nirvāṇa inner garment (antarvāsas), which also, like a square robe, wraps around the waist and overlaps, tied with a cord thrice around both hips, divided directly at the back into three pleats, drawn out evenly without permitting wrinkles, like the skirts worn by bodhisattva images. Other clothing in this land is tailored according to secular customs: along the Yangtze and Huai rivers there are lined jackets, padded coats, and straight-backed vests; along the passes and Yellow River there are narrow-sleeved garments and saṃkakṣikā. Cut with sharp angles and slants, they are identical to secular clothes; though claimed to be distinct, they ultimately go against the original decorum. Mentioned here in passing, there is nothing commendable in them, and all of this is elaborated in the Regulations on Deceased Monks' Property."

First 37 of 54 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

釋門章服儀 — Classical Chinese