廣弘明集 26.28

26.28

What distinguishes those who leave the household from non-Buddhists is precisely that they believe in causes, believe in effects, believe in the sūtras, and clearly believe that what the sūtras state was spoken by the Buddha: 'Those who commit the ten unwholesome deeds receive evil retribution; those who practice the ten wholesome deeds receive good retribution.' This is the general drift of the scriptural teachings. That being so, if one says that those who have left the household may still be fond of drinking wine and eating fish and meat, their conduct is identical to that of non-Buddhists—and indeed falls short of them. Why is it identical to non-Buddhists? Non-Buddhists cling to the views of annihilationism and eternalism, holding that there are no causes, no effects, no giving, and no retribution. Now, the Buddha's disciples relish wine and indulge in meat, neither fearing the causes of sin nor fearing the effects of suffering; this is simply not believing in causes and not believing in effects. How is this any different from holding that there is neither giving nor retribution? In this matter their view is identical to non-Buddhists. Yet there are ways in which they fall short of non-Buddhists: what are these non-Buddhists? Each believes in their own teacher. What the teacher says is right, the disciple says is right; what the teacher says is wrong, the disciple says is wrong. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Kāśyapa, today I prohibit all disciples from eating any meat whatsoever.' Yet nowadays those who have left the household still eat meat themselves. The monastic codes say: 'Drinking alcohol incurs a prāyaścittika.' Yet they still drink alcohol themselves without any hesitation or scruple. In this violation of their teacher's instructions, they first fall short of non-Buddhists.