律相感通傳 1.10

1.10

Past conditions brought good fortune, and recently, at the end of the second month of this year, I was repeatedly moved by devas, who appeared as if they were speaking face to face with me, saying: "The writings you have composed, such as the Xu gaoseng zhuan and Guang hongming ji, assist the holy transformation; unseen spirits rejoice in accordance, and all praise and take joy in them. As for the commentaries, outlines, and ritual manuals excerpted from the Vinaya section, there are none that can rival them. However, in determining light property and heavy property, there were slight oversights; this was not your fault, benevolent one, but rather to be blamed on the translators. How could you equate the noble robes of kings with the secular clothing of laypersons and treat them as entering the heavy category together? Even down to the kocava robes that match the form and dimensions of Dharma robes, being also collected among light property? Moreover, the noble robes worn by kings are equivalent to a monk's three robes. Those valued at a hundred thousand are called noble robes; if used to bestow upon the saṅgha, they may be treated in accordance with the limit for light property. As for the clothing of laypersons and non-Buddhists, these are originally things that renunciants cut off. The three robes were designated solely by the Buddha's regulation; those who wear them will certainly attain liberation. For this reason, secular clothing of laypersons was strictly forbidden by the Buddha's regulation; if anyone dies [possessing them], they are all collected under heavy property. As for the kocava three robes, their form and dimensions match the three robes. In border regions, leather bedding is permitted, which is also [part of] the three robes, with strips and leaves on the outside and soft fur on the inside. In countries of bitter cold, the Buddha permitted them for the sake of the Path; but when arriving in regions where cloth is available, they again do not fall within the limit for light property. You may rectify your previous delusion, and it is proper to follow this subsequent awakening. When the Tathāgata was in the world, there were still subsequent regulations that abolished previous ones; how much more so nowadays can one not retain the distinction between delusion and awakening?"