出三藏記集 11.41

11.41

Now, the precepts are that whence humans and devas are born, that whereby the Three Vehicles are realized, and the critical nexus of nirvāṇa. Therefore, when the World-Honored One conferred medicine, he prioritized the precepts. Precepts are one of the Tripiṭaka. If one does not restrain oneself with precepts and lets the mind race after the six sense objects while hoping to escape the three evil destinies, is it not like seeking to cross a vast sea without a boat? It is also like a fish coming out of a deep abyss, or a wild goose's feather entering a blazing fire—to hope that it will not die or be scorched has never happened. If a practitioner adorns himself with precepts and fiercely applies his mind to the fifty-eight rules, what difficulty is there in attaining the Way? Since I was imbued with the transforming teachings, I have set my mind on the vinaya. Formerly, when I was in Mount Lu at the place of Zhu Sengshu, I obtained a copy of the precepts and kept it with me for nearly twenty years. Each time I examined it, I lamented that its text was plain and heavy. It happened that the rules of the precepts brought out by Dharmanandi were identical with it; however, [Dharma]nandi's precepts had many [rules], setting forth one hundred and ten matters [in the śaikṣa section], so that the precepts totaled two hundred and sixty. Master Shi [Dao'an] asked [Dharma]nandi, and [Dharma]nandi said, 'I orally received them from a vinaya master, recording them one by one, and do not know the reason.' The bhikṣuṇī precepts also set forth many [rules] in the same way, having one hundred and ten. Among the thirty [naiḥsargika-prāyaścittika] rules, the twenty-first in the two-hundred-and-fifty-rule version says that keeping an extra bowl past ten days entails forfeiture and repentance; it continues that this bhikṣu must hand over this bowl to the bhikṣusaṅgha. The twenty-second in the two-hundred-and-sixty-rule version says that if a bowl is broken and mended up to five times, and one has not yet obtained a new bowl, the old one should be surrendered to the saṅgha. Examining its logic and import, it should be as in the two-hundred-and-fifty-rule version, placed after the extra bowl; merging the matter with the broken bowl makes it duplicate and redundant. I have annotated the matter following the extra bowl beneath the broken bowl, because the child should follow the mother. Among the ninety [prāyaścittika] rules, many are intermingled and the matters do not match up. I again shifted them to follow the two-hundred-and-sixty-rule version, making categories of matters correspond to one another, though at times there are still dissimilarities. 'Eating a second meal without remaining cause' entails falling [into repentance]; it should correspond to 'eating a second meal without belonging to another's invitation'—since it lacks this 'except for cause' matter, and is merged with 'individual invitation', I therefore placed it against 'individual invitation'. One precept is under 'eating a second meal', and one precept is under 'individual invitation', meaning that if there is a remaining cause, one may eat a second meal and also accept an invitation out of turn. 'Not extending the hand to receive food' and 'frightening oneself or teaching others to be frightened'—these two precepts have no counterparts. Was this an omission in transmission and copying, or was the original text deficient? The [rules] set forth in abundance also have some that do not correspond or are dissimilar; I do not know the reason. Availing myself of leisure, I compiled this comparative collation of the three editions, roughly marking their beginnings and ends. I took the two-hundred-and-sixty precepts as the root, the two-hundred-and-fifty-rule version as the child, and appended the full lines of the previously translated commonly used precepts to the end of each matter. Yet there are some that diverge entirely and are dissimilar; some divide one into two, and some merge three into one. I again separated and merged them to make the matters accord with one another. However, these two precepts might divide lines and lose the import. If virtuous talents of sharp brilliance should peruse this, may they reflect further to establish the definitive text and pardon my shortcomings. (Afterward, the bhikṣu Sengxiang brought an original text again from Chang'an and was able to collate it again; with occasional additions and omissions, it became the most definitive text.)