四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.28

2.28

"Venerable sirs, I have recited the thirteen saṃghāvaśeṣa dharmas: nine are offenses at the first commission, and four become offenses after up to three admonitions." This concludes the preceding thirteen precepts. Within this there are two parts: the first nine and the latter four. Because of the distinction between needing admonition and not needing admonition, it says "nine are offenses at the first commission, and four become offenses after up to three admonitions." Now, to explain the rationale of admonition versus non-admonition: If we speak of private admonition, it is required in all cases, hence it is said "mutually admonish one another." When one does not accept admonition, if with a diffident mind, an offense of prāyaścittika is incurred; if with a resolute mind, the fifth [offense], and even concerning the transgression of admonition here, admonition must also be stated. Therefore, the text states: "Do not, by being rebuked by the Saṃgha, commit a grave offense again." Hence we know that words of admonition apply universally to all cases. As for formal admonition by the Saṃgha, it applies to those possessing four conditions, and does not apply to those lacking them. The four conditions are: first, inherent badness; second, manifest exposure; third, causing vexation to the Saṃgha; fourth, relying on pretexts. The first three conditions are self-evident. As for "relying on pretexts": the previous nine precepts are distinct; right and wrong are unequivocally clear. Since right and wrong are already distinguished by relying on the sacred teaching, the fault is obvious and easy to recognize; what need is there to establish an admonition to reveal it to that person? These four precepts all involve relying on pretexts: their statements appear similar [to the teaching], causing confusion between doctrine and practice, with right and wrong intertwined and genuine and false difficult to discern. The Saṃgha must establish admonitions to reveal right and wrong, enlighten their corrupted [views], cause them to change their delusion, cast off evil and turn to good, and abandon error to follow correctness. Therefore, admonitions must be established. For instance, the first two precepts concerning admonition rely on the Tathāgata's teaching of the four reliances; their claims sound similar, and their insistence on begging for food, etc., share the same names, hence they are called "relying on pretexts." In corrupting families and slandering the Saṃgha, they insist that six persons acted together, confusing the matter of expulsion versus non-expulsion. The fourth precept relies on the pretext of the Śākya clan's status to disparage the bhikṣus. This meaning of "relying on pretexts" should be explained in detail. Because of such reasons, the Saṃgha must establish admonitions; when these are absent, there is no admonition. Now, in asking about presence or absence, one does not ask about the nine saṃghāvaśeṣas, as to why they lack admonitions; rather, one asks about the conditions giving rise to offenses, as to why their saṃghāvaśeṣa offenses are of the same rank. The latter four arise due to admonition, whereas the former nine are incurred immediately upon commission. This means that among all matters, those possessing the four conditions require an admonition, and transgressing it incurs a saṃghāvaśeṣa. The others, lacking pretexts, etc., do not require an admonition by the Saṃgha; directly committing them according to the facts constitutes an offense. Although the distinction of whether admonition is required or not differs, their rank as saṃghāvaśeṣa is the same; thus they share the same section.