廣弘明集 26.128

26.128

he accepts them, it is not compassionate, yet he does not break the precepts." After the recitation of the sūtra was concluded, an imperial edict again addressed the monks, saying: "The lesser monks have not read through the sūtras completely, and say to one another that there is no statement about cutting off meat. What does this sūtra today speak of? The reason for chanting this passage about leather shoes was originally not aimed at this matter, but precisely because on the twenty-third, Dharma Master Fayun lectured on the matter of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra cutting off meat. At that time, the Monastic Controller Huichao and Dharma Master Fachong raised an objection, saying: 'If the scriptural text definitively cuts off all meat, even to the point that an animal that died of itself may not be eaten, then this is the same as the Nirgranthas cutting off leather such that one must not wear leather shoes. If leather is permitted and one may wear leather shoes, then eating meat should also be permitted.' Dharma Master Fayun had already given a reconciling explanation, but the objection from the two Dharma Masters had not yet ceased. At that time, [I] myself further resolved it, saying: 'If one is a sage, he naturally does not wear this item; if one is a middling practitioner, he also does not wear this; those who wear this are all lower practitioners. The reason this is not the same as the Nirgranthas is that the words have an implicit meaning. If it is a region without hemp or ramie, there is also the argument for permitting leather. Where there is hemp and ramie, those with great compassion truly ought not to wear it. But this matter cannot be categorized as identical with eating meat. Generally speaking, when wearing a pair of leather shoes, they last a long time without deteriorating. But if one eats sentient beings, in just a single meal one harms countless bodies and lives, to say nothing of chewing and dining day after day in numbers like the sands of the Ganges. Leather shoes cannot be placed on a par with cutting off meat.' At that time the monks had no further dispute, yet I feared the lesser monks would cling to it in doubt, which would then turn into a great obstruction. The reason for chanting this passage on not accepting leather shoes was precisely to resolve the doubt of that day; it was not related to the earlier prohibition. In general, consuming meat is a great karmic obstacle. The scriptural text states that in the past, sentient beings were once one's parents and relatives. How can the assembly of monks not reflect on this, and still bear to eat sentient beings? If one cannot cast one's body to the hungry tigress or cut one's flesh to ransom the dove, how can one instead go so far as to consume the physical parts of others? All monks and dharma masters leading disciples, as well as all nuns and those leading disciples, should each return to their own monasteries and proclaim this to the lesser monks and nuns, so that they understand this intention."