四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.21

2.21

"If a monk desires to cause a schism in the harmonious Saṅgha and obstinately clings [to this] without giving it up, the monks should admonish that monk: 'Venerable, do not cause a schism in the harmonious Saṅgha. Do not adopt means to cause a schism in the harmonious Saṅgha. Do not take up dharmas that cause a schism in the Saṅgha and obstinately cling [to them] without giving [them] up. The Venerable should be in harmony with the Saṅgha. When one is in harmony with the Saṅgha, joyful and without dispute, studying under the same teacher, blending like milk and water, there is increase and comfortable dwelling in the Buddha's Dharma.' If, when that monk is being admonished in this way, he obstinately clings and does not give it up, the monks should admonish him up to three times to abandon this matter. If he abandons it up to the third admonition, it is well; if he does not abandon it, it is a saṃghāvaśeṣa." / This complete prātimokṣa text consists of five clauses. First, an outline is provided, followed by an extensive explanation. As for the outline: First, it explains the matter for which the admonition is given. Second, from "that monk" onward, the virtuous monks admonish and encourage him in private. Third, from "that monk" onward, he obstinately clings to his own mind and refuses to comply. Fourth, from "those monks" onward, the Saṅgha admonishes and encourages him to abandon it. Fifth, from "if he does not abandon it" onward, the offense of disobeying an admonition is concluded. The first clause has two parts: "If a monk" identifies the offender, namely, the person who is to be admonished. Second, from "desires to cause a schism" onward, it directly clarifies the matter of schism for which the admonition is given. "Desires to cause a schism" recapitulates the initial intention and expedients previously mentioned. From "expedients" onward, it recapitulates the previous establishment of the deviant Three Jewels. The deviant Three Jewels refer to the five deviant dharmas. "Obstinately clings without giving it up" recapitulates his previous proselytizing—meaning that he proselytized with the five dharmas, thereby misleading the new students at that time. The text on admonishing in private has two parts: First, it cites the first three phrases of the reproof above to encourage abandonment; thus it says, "That monk should admonish... down to 'do not adopt means,' etc." Second, from "The Venerable should with..." onward, it cites phrases two through four of the reproof above to encourage blending like milk and water, etc. Although the practices of the venerables differ, the teacher from whom they received [ordination] is the same, and the teachings they study are not two; in principle, they should be in harmony without divergence, blending like milk and water to attain harmony in the Saṅgha; thus it is said: "studying under the same teacher, blending like milk and water." It can also mean water blending with water and milk blending with milk; hence it says "blending like milk and water." In the third clause, "that monk" refers to the virtuous monks. "When admonishing in this way" recapitulates the time when the virtuous monks admonished him in private. "Obstinately clings and does not give it up" refers to the monk Devadatta holding obstinately to his view and refusing the admonition. In the fourth clause, "abandoning it upon three admonitions is well" means that upon hearing it, he complies and desists, not causing a schism in the Saṅgha: first, he is free of the saṃghāvaśeṣa of disobeying an admonition; second, he is free of the sthūlātyaya offense of causing a schism in the Saṅgha. Free from these two faults, it is said that "abandoning it is well." / Question: In reality, does the master of the motion and three proclamations say that one should admonish three times, down to "if he abandons it up to three times, it is well"? / Answer: This takes the motion and two karmavācanās, hence it is called "three," excluding the fourth admonition. The reason for this is twofold: First, the distinction between the stages of committing and not committing the offense: in the first three, one has not yet committed the saṃghāvaśeṣa; when the third is completed, one commits the saṃghāvaśeṣa. Second, the distinction between light and heavy: in the first three, one incurs sthūlātyayas; with the third, one incurs a saṃghāvaśeṣa. Therefore it is said that "abandoning it upon three admonitions is well," because one has not yet incurred the saṃghāvaśeṣa. In principle, it is indeed a motion and three proclamations. Furthermore, the Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya states: "He who incurs three dharmas should abandon them," meaning that if he exceeds the three dharmas without abandoning them, he enters the grave stage. The fifth clause concludes the offense. Below is the extensive explanation of the five clauses of the prātimokṣa text. As for "if a monk," the meaning is as explained above. As for "desires to cause a schism," he desires to cause a schism in the harmonious Saṅgha through the eighteen dharmas. "Harmonious" means having the same karmavācanā and the same recitation of the prātimokṣa. "Saṅgha" means four monks, five, ten, up to an innumerable number. "Adopting means desiring to cause a schism in the dharmas of the harmonious Saṅgha and obstinately clinging without giving it up" means residing in the eighteen dharmas to cause a schism in the Saṅgha. Now, to distinguish the eighteen dharmas: 1. dharma and non-dharma; 2. vinaya and non-vinaya; 3. offense and non-offense; 4. light and heavy; 5. with remainder and without remainder; 6. coarse and non-coarse; 7. habitually practiced and not habitually practiced; 8. prescribed and non-prescribed; 9. spoken and non-spoken. "Dharma and non-dharma": the noble eightfold path can regulate and generate correct understanding; it is the proximate cause of nirvāṇa, and is called dharma. Devadatta called it non-dharma. The five deviant [practices] cannot regulate and generate true understanding; they are non-dharma, yet he called them dharma. "Vinaya and non-vinaya": the reciprocal reversal is the same. "Offense and non-offense": cutting hair and clipping nails are prescribed by the Buddha; but Devadatta maintained that hair and nails have life, and if one does not cut and clip them, he called it non-offense. In the case of evil thoughts, though in principle there is a transgression, because they are not yet prohibited for ordinary beings, it is called non-offense; yet Devadatta said it was an offense. "Light": minor transgressions. Devadatta saw that damaging leaves caused one to fall among the long-lived nāgas, and thereupon claimed that killing all grass and trees is the gravest offense. The karma of the first category (pārājika) is grave, permanently obstructing the holy life throughout one's existence; but seeing that Sudinna incurred a grave offense upon his first act, he claimed that all theft and sexual misconduct are light. "With remainder": transgressions of the lower four categories are not permanent obstructions; they have remainder, yet he called them without remainder. "Without remainder": committing the first category permanently destroys the sprouts of the path, and is called without remainder, yet he said it has remainder. The Mātṛkā says: "Coarse" refers to the preparatory bodily and verbal actions of the first two categories, committing gross, heavy sthūlātyayas without a sense of shame or conscience; this is called coarse, yet he called it non-coarse. Transgressions from prāyaścittika downwards, as well as the remaining sthūlātyayas, are non-coarse, yet he called them coarse. "Habitually practiced": the noble eightfold path and the five dharmas are spoken of reversely. "Prescribed": the five categories of precepts proclaimed from the golden mouth are called prescribed, yet he called them non-prescribed. "Non-prescribed": the five dharmas not originating from the Buddha's golden mouth are called non-prescribed, yet he claimed they were prescribed. "Spoken": the four prohibitions are grave, and the remaining categories are light; this is the correct teaching and is called spoken, yet he called it non-spoken. Reversing heavy and light is not the Buddha's teaching and is non-spoken, yet he claimed it was spoken. Second, the admonition in private: First, the monk admonishes him in private, encouraging him not to cause a schism in the Saṅgha; next, he encourages the benefits of harmony. Therefore, the Vinaya says: "One should say to him, 'You may abandon this matter.' If he listens, [well and good]; if he does not listen, another monk, or even a king or great minister, should be sent; whoever can make him listen should come and admonish him." This is called admonishing in private. The third clause, "if he does not listen," means rejecting the private admonition. / Question: What offense is incurred after the private admonition? / Answer: This is merely a duṣkṛta, because no formal Saṅgha procedure was held. Furthermore, the schismatic act of the person being admonished is not yet completed; the disobedience of the admonition is not yet fulfilled; one must await the completion of the matter to encompass the duṣkṛta and form a prāyaścittika. The fourth clause, the admonition by the Saṅgha, is as in the previous text. Fifth, from "if he does not abandon it" onward, the offense is concluded. Within this, there are two aspects of light and heavy: first, the lightness and heaviness of disobeying an admonition by oneself; second, the lightness and heaviness of instructing others. Within one's own disobedience, there are again two: First, before the admonition is performed, there is only a preparatory duṣkṛta. Second, when the admonition is performed, upon the completion of the three karmavācanās, he incurs a saṃghāvaśeṣa. If he abandons it after the motion and two karmavācanās are completed, he incurs three sthūlātyayas; if he abandons it after the motion and one [karmavācanā] is completed, two sthūlātyayas; if he abandons it after the motion is completed, one sthūlātyaya. / Question: When he incurs a saṃghāvaśeṣa at the completion of the third, does it encompass the causes to form the fruit, or not? / Answer: As in the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, relying on the momentum of the previous preparatory intentional karma mutually assisting, the subsequent mental karma is sequentially reinforced. When the saṃghāvaśeṣa is incurred, there are still sthūlātyayas and duṣkṛtas, which must be repented separately, because the lightness and heaviness of the intentional karma differ, producing different karmic retributions; thus they do not merge. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya explains that as long as evil is committed, every step incurs an offense, just as the text on generating merit proves that every step brings merit. The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā states that, as when intending to steal or kill, every step is a sthūlātyaya. Now, stating that three sthūlātyayas occur after the two karmavācanās are completed clarifies that offenses exist within the cause; yet when the fruit is attained, it encompasses the causes to form the fruit. Therefore, the Vinaya says: "Before the motion is completed, there is a duṣkṛta; once the motion is made, it directly concludes in a sthūlātyaya," not saying that there is a separate duṣkṛta that can be repented. Down to when the third karmavācanā is completed and forms a saṃghāvaśeṣa, it does not state that there are three separate sthūlātyayas that must be repented. Hence we know that although there are offenses within the cause, it uses the causes to form the fruit. Second, instructing others has three parts: 1. instructed by a monk; 2. instructed by a nun; 3. instructed by the lower assemblies. In the non-offense section, the Vinaya states: "Abandoning it at the first word comprehensively opens three kinds," meaning that one does not commit the three offenses of duṣkṛta, sthūlātyaya, and saṃghāvaśeṣa. The text says: "If one disrupts bad companions and evil spiritual friends, or two or three persons who wish to perform an improper karmavācanā, or if someone causes loss or makes homeless the Saṅgha, stupas, upādhyāyas, ācāryas, relatives, and friends—if one disrupts such persons, there is no offense."