毘尼心 1.20.2

1.20.2

將和誨謝也）五不見罪舉羯磨（此人不信有惡業體。 此名無因見。 作此羯磨。 舉棄眾外不與同僧事）六不懺悔舉羯磨（此人不信業能感果。 此名異因見。 作此羯磨。 在眾外不與同事）七惡見不捨舉羯磨（此人不信愛欲煩惱能障聖道。 此名邪見。 作此羯磨。 棄在眾外不與同事）前四羯磨治其無行。 後之三舉治其無信。 云無行者無內護行無外護行。 就內護中呵嘖羯磨治。 不護眾依止羯磨治不護行。 就外護中儐出羯磨檀越未信護使生信。 遮不至羯磨檀越已信護使增長。 故有四羯磨也。 次云三舉者。 不信集諦業體障道用能牽報。 故不見不懺二舉也。 煩惱緣助故不捨一舉也。 既不斷集還招苦果。 苦既不亡滅在。 無常既不求滅。 於道路乖學中無用作法舉。 置此七羯磨治人之法。 若不受罰當以惡罵羯磨治之。 一往驅出　有四種污他家　一依利養污他家（持彼家。 食與一家。 不與一家）二依家污家（持彼家衣物與一家不與一家）三依親友污家（依貴勢檀越為一人不為一人）四依僧伽藍污家（持眾僧物果菜等隨情逐意與一家不與一家也）比丘犯此四事者。 污他檀越淨信之心合與作儐出羯磨驅離聚落　破僧方便行五法　一盡形著糞掃衣。 二盡形乞食。 三盡形露坐。 四盡形不食蘇鹽。 五盡形不食魚及肉此五是上人所行中下不堪。 初聞信受。 後必有退。 前三句相似語。 後二句妄語　破僧用十八法。 有九對　一法非法（如經順理名為法。 違經背理名非法）二律非律（義合毘尼名為律。 義乖毘尼名非律）三犯非犯（七聚之中緣具名犯。 緣差名非犯）四若輕若重（犯威儀罪是輕。 犯戒則罪）五有餘無餘（僧殘已下是有餘。 波羅夷名之無餘）六麁惡非麁惡（方便偷蘭是麤惡。 餘輕遮性非麤惡）七常所行非常所行（開則常行。 遮則非行）八制非制（如法羯磨約限是制。 非法別眾失度非制）九說非說（廣略十六種布薩成就說戒是說。 違則非說）此十八法中。 前二對明教法。 次五對明行法。 後二對明眾法。 若是法而言非法。 若非法而言是法。 如是等反用名破。 若是法而言是法。 若非法而言非法。 如是等順用名和合僧法。 乃至說非說亦如是。 僧以和忍為體。 若異見異忍則乖和合之義　二種僧　一法輪僧（依法進行轉有情。 昇能摧見諦煩惱者）二羯磨僧（依教作法次成僧事）三種僧　一真實僧（聖人）二和合僧（賢人）三假名僧（凡人）　四諍　一言諍（諍理是非）二覓諍（互相覓罪）三犯諍（一評犯不定。 二互相犯觸）四事諍（諍羯磨事如法非法）此四諍之中。 初一教法。 次二行法。 後一眾法。 彼此交競為鬪。 朋黨相助為諍。 徹斷事官為言。 各說其理為訟　言諍有四法　一所說文義相應。 二所說文異義同。 三所說文同義異。 四所說文義俱異（諫曰何須共諦）覓諍根中六諍所起　一恨戾難共語。 二惡性戲鬪。 三諂曲。 四邪命。 五無慚無愧。 六多貪嫉。 因此六事起覓諍。 出中阿含諍緣根本有六。 一瞋恚。 二惱害。 三約偽。 四慳嫉。 五見取。 六邪邊。 二見（此覓諍根出摩夷中）犯諍根中六犯所起處　一有身犯非口心。 二有口犯非身心。 三有身口犯非心。 四有身心犯非口。 五有口心犯非身。 六有口心犯。 又摩夷云。 有心犯非身口。 如錢寶戒身口不受。 但自默念作已有想即犯　七滅　一現前毘尼（現用此法對於前人。 評和詳事因以得息。 此一毘尼通滅四諍）二憶念毘尼（此人清淨橫為他謗。 從僧乞羯磨。 記識不犯諍事得息。 此滅於覓諍也）三不癡毘尼（此人顛狂時犯戒非。 是故心癡犯差互實不有犯。 從僧乞羯磨以息覓諍）四自言治毘尼（他人評犯不定。 要取犯者自說所犯輕重相分。 准法治罪滅於犯諍也）五罪處所毘尼（亦名覓罪相。 此人評罪前言不覆。

[…] will conciliate, admonish, and apologize.) Fifth is the karman of suspension for not seeing an offense (this person does not believe that there is the substance of bad karma; this is called the view of non-causality. One performs this karman to suspend and cast them outside the Saṃgha, not engaging in Saṃgha affairs together with them). Sixth is the karman of suspension for not repenting [an offense] (this person does not believe that karma can result in retribution; this is called the view of different causality. One performs this karman, keeping them outside the Saṃgha, not engaging in affairs together with them). Seventh is the karman of suspension for not abandoning an evil view (this person does not believe that defilements of sensual desire can obstruct the noble path; this is called wrong view. One performs this karman to cast them outside the Saṃgha, not engaging in affairs together with them). The first four karmans deal with a lack of proper conduct; the latter three suspensions deal with a lack of faith. 'Lack of conduct' means lacking the conduct of internal protection and lacking the conduct of external protection. Within internal protection: the karman of reprimand deals with not protecting the Saṃgha; the karman of niśraya deals with not protecting conduct. Within external protection: the karman of banishment protects the dānapatis who have not yet developed faith so that they give rise to faith; the karman of turning over the bowl (prohibiting visits) protects the dānapatis who already have faith so that it increases. Thus there are four karmans. Next, as for the three suspensions: not believing that the substance of karma belonging to the truth of the origination [of suffering] obstructs the path and possesses the efficacy of bringing retribution—therefore there are the two suspensions of not seeing and not repenting. Defilements serve as supporting conditions—therefore there is the one suspension of not abandoning. Since they do not sever origination, they bring on painful retribution in return; since suffering is not extinguished, [their] cessation is [lost in] impermanence; since they do not seek cessation, they deviate from the path and are useless in training—thus the ritual procedure of suspension is carried out. These seven karmans are methods for punishing people. If they do not accept punishment, one should deal with them by the karman of harsh scolding, driving them out straightaway. There are four ways of corrupting other families: 1. Corrupting other families based on material gain (taking food from that family and giving it to one family while not giving it to another); 2. Corrupting families based on families (taking clothing and items from that family and giving them to one family while not giving them to another); 3. Corrupting families based on relatives and friends (relying on noble and influential dānapatis for the sake of one person and not for another); 4. Corrupting families based on the saṅghārāma (taking Saṃgha goods, fruits, vegetables, etc., and according to one's own desires giving them to one family and not to another). If a bhikṣu commits these four matters, corrupting the pure faith of other dānapatis, one must perform the karman of banishment against him, driving him away from the village. The five practices employed as expedients to cause a schism in the Saṃgha: 1. Wearing rag-robes for one's whole life; 2. Begging for food for one's whole life; 3. Sitting in the open for one's whole life; 4. Not eating ghee or salt for one's whole life; 5. Not eating fish or meat for one's whole life. These five are practices of superior persons, which middling and inferior [practitioners] cannot endure; hearing them initially, they accept them with faith, but later they will inevitably backslide. The first three statements are plausible speech; the latter two statements are false speech. Schism in the Saṃgha employs eighteen points, consisting of nine pairs: 1. Dharma and non-Dharma (conforming to the sūtras and being in accord with principle is called Dharma; contradicting the sūtras and defying principle is called non-Dharma); 2. Vinaya and non-Vinaya (what accords in meaning with the Vinaya is called Vinaya; what departs in meaning from the Vinaya is called non-Vinaya); 3. Offense and non-offense (among the seven categories, when the conditions are fully present, it is called an offense; when conditions are lacking, it is called non-offense); 4. Light and heavy (transgressing an offense of deportment is light; transgressing śīla is a heavy offense); 5. Having remainder and without remainder (saṃghāvaśeṣa and below are having remainder; pārājika is called without remainder); 6. Coarse and non-coarse (sthūlātyaya by expedient means is coarse; the remaining light proscriptive and naturally [unwholesome offenses] are not coarse); 7. Customary practice and non-customary practice (what is permitted is customary practice; what is prohibited is non-practice); 8. Promulgated and non-promulgated (what restricts within bounds by a legal karman is promulgated; illegal separate assemblies that lose measure are non-promulgated); 9. Recited and non-recited (accomplishing the recitation of the precepts in the sixteen kinds of poṣadha, whether extensive or abbreviated, is recited; contradicting this is non-recited). Among these eighteen points: the first two pairs clarify the Dharma of teaching; the next five pairs clarify the Dharma of practice; the last two pairs clarify the Dharma of the community. If it is Dharma and one says it is non-Dharma, or if it is non-Dharma and one says it is Dharma—inverting them like this is called schism. If it is Dharma and one says it is Dharma, or if it is non-Dharma and one says it is non-Dharma—following them like this is called the law of harmony in the Saṃgha; down to 'recited and non-recited', it is also like this. The Saṃgha takes harmony and forbearance as its substance; if views and forbearance differ, it departs from the meaning of harmony. There are two kinds of Saṃgha: 1. The Saṃgha of the Dharma Wheel (those who advance in practice according to the Dharma, transform sentient beings, ascend, and can destroy the defilements abandoned by seeing [the truth]); 2. The Saṃgha of Karman (those who perform ritual actions according to the teachings, thereby completing Saṃgha affairs). There are three kinds of Saṃgha: 1. The true Saṃgha (noble persons); 2. The harmonious Saṃgha (worthy persons); 3. The Saṃgha of nominal designation (ordinary persons). Four disputes: 1. Disputes over speech (disputing the truth or falsehood of principle); 2. Disputes over investigation (seeking out offenses against one another); 3. Disputes over offenses (first, evaluating an offense without certainty; second, mutually committing offenses against one another); 4. Disputes over affairs (disputing whether a karman affair is legal or illegal). Among these four disputes: the first one concerns the Dharma of teaching; the middle two concern the Dharma of practice; the last one concerns the Dharma of the community. Contending with each other is called strife; gathering factions to support one another is called dispute; presenting the case to an adjudicating officer is called pleading; each stating their own reasoning is called litigation. Disputes over speech have four points: 1. What is spoken is consistent in both text and meaning; 2. What is spoken differs in text but is identical in meaning; 3. What is spoken is identical in text but differs in meaning; 4. What is spoken differs in both text and meaning (admonishing them, saying: 'Why must you contest this?'). Among the roots of disputes over investigation, there are six from which disputes arise: 1. Resentful and obstinate, difficult to converse with; 2. Vicious by nature, prone to quarreling and strife; 3. Flattery and deceitfulness; 4. Wrong livelihood; 5. Lacking shame and conscience; 6. Much greed and envy. Based on these six things, disputes over investigation arise. In the Madhyama-āgama, the fundamental conditions of dispute are six: 1. Anger; 2. Malice; 3. Hypocrisy and deceit; 4. Stinginess and envy; 5. Clinging to views; 6. Wrong and extreme views (these roots of disputes over investigation appear in the Mātṛkā). Among the roots of disputes over offenses, there are six places from which offenses arise: 1. There are bodily offenses, not verbal or mental; 2. There are verbal offenses, not bodily or mental; 3. There are bodily and verbal offenses, not mental; 4. There are bodily and mental offenses, not verbal; 5. There are verbal and mental offenses, not bodily; 6. There are verbal and mental offenses [and bodily offenses]. Moreover, the Mātṛkā says: there are mental offenses, not bodily or verbal; as with the precept against [handling] money and treasures, where body and mouth do not receive it, but merely contemplating mentally and generating the thought that it has become one's own constitutes an offense. The seven settlements of disputes (adhikaraṇa-śamatha): 1. Settlement in the presence (pratimukhā-vinaya: applying this method directly in the presence of the person involved, deliberating and harmonizing the matter, whereby it is brought to an end; this single vinaya applies generally to settling all four disputes); 2. Settlement by recollection (smṛti-vinaya: this person is pure, but is falsely slandered by others; he requests a karman from the Saṃgha, certifying that he has not committed the offense, and the dispute is brought to an end; this settles disputes over investigation); 3. Settlement for the non-insane (amūḍha-vinaya: when this person was mad, he violated the precepts; therefore, because of his deranged mind, his offenses were irregular and he did not genuinely commit an offense; he requests a karman from the Saṃgha to bring disputes over investigation to an end); 4. Settlement by voluntary admission (pratijñā-kāraka-vinaya: when others evaluate an offense without certainty, one must take the transgressor's own statement detailing the lightness or heaviness of the offense committed, and punish the offense according to the law, thereby settling disputes over offenses); 5. Settlement by inquiry into specific depravity (yadbhūyasikīya-vinaya / tatsvabhāvaiṣīya-vinaya: also called seeking the marks of the offense; when this person is judged for an offense, his earlier and later statements do not correspond […]