勅修百丈清規 2.59

2.59

大藏經內載。宋翰林學士楊億推原百丈立規之意。略曰。有或假號竊邢混于清眾。別致喧撓之事。即當維那撿舉。抽下本位掛搭。擯令出院者。貴安清眾也。或彼有所犯。即以拄杖杖之。集眾燒衣鉢道具。遣逐偏門而出者。示耻辱也。詳此一條制有四益。一不污清眾。生恭敬故。二不毀僧形。循佛制故。三不擾公門。省獄訟故。四不泄於外。護宗綱故。然百丈創規。折衷佛律五篇七聚。弘範三界。梵檀擯治自恣舉過。以肅其眾。國朝累聖戒飭僧徒。嚴遵佛制。除刑名重罪。例屬有司外。若僧人自相干犯。當以清規律之。若鬪諍犯分。若污行縱逸。若侵漁常住。若私竊錢物。宜從家訓。母揚外醜。蓋悉稱釋氏。准俗同親。恪守祖規隨事懲戒。重則集眾箠擯。輕則罰錢罰香罰油。而榜示之。如關係錢物則責狀追陪。惟平惟允使自悔艾。古規繩頌云（盜財并鬪諍。酒色污僧倫。速遣離清眾。容留即敗群）又云（犯重焚衣鉢。應當集眾人。山藤聊示恥。驅擯出偏門）大惠禪師住育王時。榜示堂司。僧爭無明決非好僧。有理無理並皆出院。或議有理而亦擯。疑若未當。蓋僧當忍辱。若執有理而爭者。即是無明故。同擯之息諍於未萌也。

Recorded in the Tripiṭaka, the Song dynasty Hanlin Academician Yang Yi, tracing the original intent of Baizhang’s establishment of the rules, stated in summary: “If there are those who assume false titles or steal ordination status, mingling among the pure assembly and causing disturbances, the karmadāna should investigate and cite them, remove their register tag from their assigned seat, and expel them from the monastery; this is to preserve the peace of the pure assembly. Or if one has committed an offense, he is struck with a staff, the assembly is gathered to burn his robes, bowl, and implements, and he is driven out through a side gate; this is to demonstrate shame and disgrace. Examining this single regulation, it has four benefits: first, it does not defile the pure assembly, thereby giving rise to reverence; second, it does not destroy the monastic form, thereby complying with the Buddha's regulations; third, it does not disturb public authorities, thereby sparing judicial trials; fourth, it does not leak to the outside, thereby safeguarding the ancestral lineage's principles.” Thus Baizhang created the rules, drawing from the Buddha’s vinaya of five categories and seven aggregates, establishing an extensive standard across the three realms, using brahmadanda ostracism and the pravāraṇā citing of faults to discipline his assembly. The successive sage rulers of our dynasty have admonished the monastic assembly to strictly comply with the Buddha’s regulations; except for grave penal offenses that routinely fall under the jurisdiction of official authorities, if monks transgress against one another internally, they must be regulated according to the pure rules. Whether it be contentious strife and insubordination, defiled conduct and wanton laxity, encroachment upon and embezzlement of permanent monastic property, or private theft of money and goods, these should be handled according to family discipline, without broadcasting disgrace to the outside. Since all are called followers of the Śākya clan, by worldly analogy they are like kin; strictly observing the ancestral rules, punishment should correspond to the matter: the severe are punished by flogging and expulsion before the gathered assembly; the light are fined money, incense, or oil, with notices posted. If money or property is involved, an undertaking is demanded to repay compensation, remaining fair and just so as to bring about self-remorse and reform. The verses of the Ancient Pure Rules say:
“Stealing property and engaging in fights,
Or defiling the monastic order with wine and sex—
Quickly dispatch them away from the pure assembly;
Tolerating them ruins the entire herd.”
It also says:
“For committing grave offenses, burning the robes and bowl
Should be done before the assembled community;
A mountain rattan whip merely demonstrates shame,
As they are expelled through the side gate.”
When Chan Master Dahui resided at King Yuwang Monastery, he posted a notice to the hall administration: “Monks who fight in ignorance are definitely not good monks; whether in the right or in the wrong, both shall be expelled from the monastery.” Some argued that expelling one who was in the right seemed inappropriate. However, monks ought to practice forbearance; if one clings to being in the right and fights, that itself is ignorance; hence both are expelled together to stifle contention before it sprouts.