四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.13

2.13

The sixth precept: building a hut without an owner, for oneself, exceeding the measurement, and without the Saṃgha's designation. 1. The intent behind exceptions and prohibitions: First we examine the intent of prohibition, afterward clarify the intent of exception. As for the intent of prohibition: Superior practitioners possess strong karmic retribution and vitality, and are able to endure disturbing conditions without falling away from what is right. Therefore, the Great Sage instituted that they should rely on charnel grounds and beneath trees, minimizing external conditions to cultivate the Path, and not store away dwellings. But middling practitioners have weak retribution and vitality, and cannot endure cold and hardship; if regulated the same as superior practitioners, it would mutually hinder their proper cultivation, becoming a condition for people to ruin their Path. Therefore, an exception was made allowing them to keep a small hut. Monks, seizing upon the exception, engaged in extensive construction, becoming entangled and hindering cultivation, increasing their own bonds of greed, ruining the practice of contentment, and building huts in violation of the rules. Their mental faults being not light, following upon the exception, the prohibition was restored. 2. Explaining the name: Acting entirely on one's own initiative without receiving instruction is called "without the Saṃgha's designation." Being oversized and not conforming to the standard is called "exceeding the measurement." Hence it is called the precept of building a hut without the Saṃgha's designation and exceeding the measurement. 3. Possessing the conditions: General conditions are as above. Specific conditions are six: (1) without an owner; (2) for oneself; (3) begging by oneself; (4) exceeding the measurement and without designation; (5) the perception of exceeding the measurement and lacking designation; (6) the offense is committed as soon as the hut is completed. 4. Deficiencies in the conditions: If lacking the first condition, one violates the subsequent precept, incurring either three, two, or one offense; if one makes a lawful hut, one can be completely free of offense. If lacking the second condition, building an unlawful hut for another, there are either two sthūlāccayas and two duṣkṛtas, or three, two, or one, or possibly no offense. If lacking the third condition, not begging by oneself, there is no [offense of] exceeding the measurement, though it may allow the remaining three down to no offense. If lacking the fourth condition, building without exceeding the measurement and with designation, then there is completely no offense, though it may allow four sthūlāccayas: namely, truly not exceeding the measurement but perceiving it as exceeding is a sthūlāccaya; doubt is also a sthūlāccaya; truly designated but perceiving it as designated is a sthūlāccaya; doubt is also a sthūlāccaya. In the above, if lacking the fifth, one also incurs four sthūlāccayas: truly exceeding the measurement but perceiving it as not exceeding is a sthūlāccaya; doubt is also a sthūlāccaya; not designated but perceiving it as designated is a sthūlāccaya; doubt is also a sthūlāccaya. If lacking the sixth condition, before the final two lumps of plaster are finished, all are light sthūlāccayas; when one lump of plaster remains, it is a grave sthūlāccaya. Below, the Prātimokṣa text is directly clarified. This precept was instituted because the monks of Āṭavī built large huts with excessive begging, troubling and disturbing householders; hence this precept was instituted.