廣弘明集 3.17

3.17

釋三曰。開闢已來不善人多而善人少。何由恚責其精潔乎。見有名僧高行。棄而不說。若覩凡猥流俗。便生非毀。且學者之不勤。豈教者之為過。俗僧之學經律。何異士人之學詩禮。詩禮之教格朝廷之士。略無全行者。經律之禁格出家之輩。而獨責無犯哉。且闕行之臣猶求祿位。毀禁之侶何慚供養乎。其於戒行自當有犯。一被法服已墮僧數。歲中所計齋講誦持。比諸白衣猶不啻山海也。

The third explanation states: Since the beginning of the world, wicked people have been many and good people few; on what grounds should one angrily demand purity from them all? When people see eminent monks of exalted conduct, they overlook them and do not speak of them; yet when they observe the vulgar and worldly, they immediately give rise to censure and slander. Furthermore, when students are not diligent, how can it be the fault of the teacher? In what way does a worldly monk's study of the sūtras and vinaya differ from a scholar's study of the Odes and Rites? The teachings of the Odes and Rites set standards for court officials, yet practically none observe them completely. The prohibitions of the sūtras and vinaya set standards for the ordained; why demand of them alone that they commit no infraction? Moreover, officials deficient in conduct still seek emoluments and positions; why should those who break the precepts feel ashamed to accept offerings? Regarding their conduct according to the precepts, there will naturally be transgressions; yet once clad in the Dharma robes, they already belong to the assembly of monks. What they accomplish in a year through fasting, lecturing, reciting, and upholding, compared to that of white-robed laymen, is more different than mountains and seas.