諸經要集 17.46

17.46

問曰。罪有遮性。酒體生罪。今有耐酒之人。能飲不醉。又不蔽神亦不生罪。此人飲酒應不得罪。斯則能飲無過不能招咎。何關斷酒以成戒善。可謂能飲耐酒常名持戒。少飲即醉是大罪人。答曰。制戒防非本為生善。戒是止善身口無違。緣中止息遮性兩斷。乃名戒善。今耐酒之人。既不亂神未破餘戒。實理非罪。正以飲生罪因。外違遮教緣中生犯。仍名有罪。以乖不飲。猶非持戒。

Question: Sins have restrictive and intrinsic natures. Liquor by its nature gives rise to sin. Now there are people with alcohol tolerance who can drink without becoming drunk, and without obscuring the spirit, nor do they give rise to sin; such a person drinking liquor should not incur sin. In that case, being able to drink has no fault and cannot incur blame; what does cutting off liquor have to do with fulfilling the goodness of precepts? One could say that being able to drink with alcohol tolerance is always called keeping precepts, while being drunk from a little drink makes one a great sinner. Answer: Formulating precepts to guard against wrongdoing is originally to generate goodness. Precepts are the goodness of cessation, with body and speech not violating [them]. Ceasing amidst conditions, both restrictive and intrinsic [sins] are severed—only this is called the goodness of precepts. Now as for the person tolerant of liquor, since he does not disorder his spirit and has not yet broken the other precepts, in actual principle it is not an intrinsic sin; but precisely because drinking generates causes of sin and externally violates the restrictive teaching, incurring an infraction amidst conditions, he is still termed sinful. Because it departs from not drinking, it is still not keeping the precepts.