四部律并論要用抄 1.8

1.8

There are two kinds of sīmā: first, established sīmās (kṛtasīmā); second, natural sīmās (abaddhasīmā). As for established sīmās, they are obtained when the saṃgha performs the ritual of establishing a sīmā (sīmābandha) through a jñapti-dvitīya-karman; therefore they are called 'established sīmās'. As for natural sīmās, they exist naturally without depending on an intentional act; therefore they are called 'natural sīmās'. The texts of the four Vinayas differ and are not identical. The Caturvargika[-vinaya] states: A natural sīmā of a village extends five hundred bow-lengths away from the village. The bow is four cubits long for an average person. The Daśādhyāya[-vinaya] states: Beyond the village as far as one arrow-shot, [or] up to where modest persons go for major and minor defecation, is called a natural sīmā. The Mahāsāṃghika[-vinaya] states: Beyond the village, wherever cattle and sheep walk smoothly, is called a village natural sīmā. It also says: [A distance of] seven trees. In the ritual of sīmābandha, one cannot accept [absentee] consent (chanda); because there is no [established] sīmā yet, one orders a resident monk of long standing to announce the boundary markers (sīmānimitta) three times. When about to perform the karman to establish the sīmā, from within the natural sīmā all monks who should gather must gather completely, and then the sīmābandha is accomplished. If they do not gather, the sīmābandha is not accomplished. If the sīmābandha is not accomplished, all legal acts, ordinations, and so forth performed therein are completely invalid. If one has not yet established a non-separation from robes sīmā (avicpravāsa-sīmā), the area up to where a stone thrown by an average person reaches outside the great sīmā (mahāsīmā) constitutes the natural non-separation from robes sīmā. Once one has established the non-separation from robes sīmā, there is no natural non-separation from robes sīmā. Question: The three Vinayas explain that natural sīmās are variable. If the monks within the natural sīmā do not gather, is the ritual act invalid? Various masters say either that it is valid or that it is invalid. Which Vinaya should be taken as authoritative now? Answer: What the three Vinayas explain concerning natural sīmās does not refer to the natural [sīmā] for establishing a sīmā, but to the natural sīmā for residing alone. This was explained because empty land and village sīmās have distinct differences. Question: What is the natural sīmā for establishing a sīmā? Answer: The other Vinayas have no further clear text; we now rely on the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya to explain the natural sīmā for establishing a sīmā. At that time, in the country of Śrāvastī, there was a brahman who asked the Buddha about the method of planting mango trees. The Buddha then answered him. At that time Upāli, knowing the proper time, asked the Buddha, saying: 'We have already heard the delimitations regarding mango [trees]. We now ask further: if there is a location, a city, town, or village whose boundary cannot be known, if one wishes to perform a karman, how far an area should be circumscribed for it to be called a well-performed karman, such that different saṃghas can see one another and yet accomplish their karman without committing [the offense of] a divided assembly (bhinna-parisa)?' The Buddha told Upāli: 'Using a bow-measure of five cubits, [at intervals of] seven bows, plant mango trees; within the span of seven trees spaced that far apart, performing a karman is called a well-performed karman. Even though different assemblies see one another, there is no eating in a divided assembly.' (One cubit is one foot eight inches; five cubits is nine feet long. The space between each tree is ten and a half paces; for seven trees, it amounts to seventy-three and a half paces.) The Daśādhyāya[-vinaya] states: In the questions of Upāli, he asked, and the Buddha said: 'If monks build a monastery in a village without a monastery, and have not yet established a sīmā, how far an area is called the sīmā?' The Buddha said: 'The area through which the boundary of that village is commonly traversed.' He also asked: 'If monks initially build a monastery in an araṇya place where there is no village, and have not yet established a sīmā, how far an area therein is called the sīmā?' The Buddha said: 'One krośa on each side. The monks therein must all assemble to perform the karman. If they perform it in a divided assembly, all the monks commit an offense.' (One krośa is five li.) Question: If a monk revokes the great sīmā, is the non-separation from robes sīmā also revoked? The Buddha said: 'It is also revoked.' He also asked: 'If one revokes the non-separation from robes sīmā, is the great sīmā also revoked?' The Buddha said: 'It is not revoked.' Question: 'Without revoking the former sīmā, may one further establish a larger or smaller one?' The Buddha said: 'One may not.' The Caturvargika[-vinaya] explains ten kinds of sīmās, each having its natural sphere of influence: First, a saṃghārāma sīmā, which has four types: 1. surrounded by walls; 2. fences; 3. a mix of fence and wall; 4. surrounded by buildings. Second, a tree sīmā, which refers to the area covered by the shade of a tree. Third, a threshing-floor sīmā, which is where the five grains are processed. Fourth, a cart sīmā, which is where carts turn around. Fifth, a boat sīmā, which is where boats turn around. Sixth, a village sīmā, which has four types, as explained for the saṃghārāma. Seventh, a house sīmā, which is where laypeople with their wives and children live. Eighth, a storehouse sīmā, which is where goods are accumulated. Ninth, a hall sīmā. Tenth, a granary sīmā, which is where the five grains are stored. (Each of these ten kinds of sīmā extends from the edge of the sīmā up to where five stone-throws reach, which is called the natural robe [sīmā].) The Mahīśāsaka[-vinaya] states: If traveling on water, the distance reached by water sprinkled by a strong person in the saṃgha is the natural sīmā. The rule for establishing a sīmā permits establishing it at a maximum distance of three yojanas; exceeding this is not permitted. The Samantapāsādikā states: The smallest established sīmā enclosure may accommodate twenty-one guest [monks]. Furthermore, the Samantapāsādikā explains eight kinds of objects used as boundary markers, which may or may not be valid: First, mountain boundary markers: the large ones may be as large as Mount Sumeru; the small ones, at minimum, as small as a bird. Second, stone boundary markers: the large ones may be as large as an ox; the small ones, thirty square spans; a flat rock slab may not serve as a boundary marker, and a separate stone should be placed. Third, forest boundary markers: the large ones may be a hundred yojanas; the small ones, at minimum, down to four trees adjoining one another, which is also called a forest; bamboo and grass cannot serve as boundary markers because their substance is hollow and insubstantial. Fourth, tree boundary markers: the large ones may be as large as the Jambū tree; the small ones, down to eight inches high and as thick as a needle, may serve as boundary markers; if there are no wild trees, planted trees are also valid; dead trees cannot serve as boundary markers. Fifth, road boundary markers: either a cart road, an ox path, or even passing through three or four villages may serve as markers; paths into fields, paths toward wells to draw water, paths toward rivers for water, dead ends, and the like cannot serve as boundary markers. Sixth, anthill boundary markers: the large ones may be as large as a mountain; the small ones, down to eight inches high, may serve as boundary markers. Seventh, river boundary markers: if a good king rules and rain falls once every five days, this rainwater river cannot serve as a boundary marker; if it does not rain for four months and the river water constantly flows without interruption, being two feet deep, it can serve as a boundary marker. Eighth, water boundary markers: natural pond water can serve as a boundary marker; water channeled into fields or vessel water cannot serve as boundary markers. These are called the eight kinds. After these eight kinds of boundary markers have established a sīmā, even if the boundary markers disappear, the sīmā is not lost. Even if people dig down to the water table, it is still not lost. The Mahīśāsaka[-vinaya] states: At that time there were monks who did not announce boundary markers, but established a sīmā using the four cardinal directions as markers, or used living beings, smoke, fire, and the like as boundary markers. The Buddha said: 'The sīmābandha is not accomplished, nor are they valid boundary markers; they commit a duṣkṛta.' The Vinayavibhāṣā-śāstra states: A bhikṣuṇī's established sīmā may only be one krośa square (a monks' sīmā is ten krośas square). Question: Why, when establishing a robe sīmā, does one specifically say 'excluding villages and their boundaries'? Answer: The Vibhāṣā-śāstra says: Villages are scattered and unfixed, while a robe sīmā is fixed; therefore they must be excluded. Moreover, it is to eliminate slander, to eliminate contention, and to protect the celibate life; therefore they are excluded. Question: When there is a village, it must be excluded; why exclude it when there is no village? Answer: Such is the principle of the karman. If there is none, exclude everything. Why? If there is no village at the time of establishing it, and after the sīmā is established a village comes in, one need not establish it again, because it was already established beforehand. If there was originally a village and it later moves away, that very empty place is called the non-separation from robes sīmā. If a village was originally small and later grows large, wherever the village reaches is not a robe sīmā. If it was originally large and later grows small, whatever empty space there is, all of it is a robe sīmā. It also says: If a king enters within the monastery's sīmā and pitches a tent, his dwelling and its immediate surroundings, the place where food is prepared, and the places for major and minor defecation are all not robe sīmās. Question: If bhikṣuṇīs do not establish a separate sīmā over the great saṃgha's sīmā, can they perform legal acts? Answer: Their performance of legal acts is invalid, because the sīmās of monks and nuns are distinct and do not subsume one another; they must establish it separately. The Mahāsāṃghika[-vinaya] states: During the summer varṣā, if there are perils from kings, bandits, or threats to life or celibacy, or if the water has many insects and cannot be strained clean, they may freely establish a sīmā of three yojanas in each of the four directions. If a danger arrives suddenly so that they cannot perform the karman ritual and they leave, they are without offense. (That is, leaving into the sīmās of other regions.) The Daśādhyāya[-vinaya] states: When monks perform the karman of establishing a sīmā, if the entire saṃgha all change their faculties into women, is it called a monks' sīmā or a nuns' sīmā? When establishing a sīmā, if some change and some do not change, what sīmā is it called? The Buddha said: 'If the remaining saṃgha transforms but the person performing the karman does not transform, it is called a monks' sīmā. If the person performing the karman transforms into a woman, it is called a nuns' sīmā.' For bhikṣuṇīs establishing a sīmā, transforming or not transforming is also like this.