梵網經述記卷第一 1.40

1.40

經。佛告諸佛子言至木叉　釋曰。第二正釋戒相。先重後輕。重中有三。一標章。二別釋。三勸持。前中有三。一標章。二勸學。三勸持。此即標章。然十波羅夷略作十門。一釋名。二辨體。三種數。四廢立。五犯境。六輕重。七犯相。八自他。九犯因。十受果。第一釋名。先通後別。通者十是數名。波羅夷者。梵音波羅市迦。此云他勝處。他有四種。一煩惱違性。名之為他。二不善業道。違善戒品故名為他。三魔王名他。損善行故。四惡趣名他。不如意故。若人犯十重。即他所勝他勝依處名他勝處。是依主釋。言別名者。至文當釋。第二辨體者。殺盜婬沽。以不善身業為自性。妄語說過自讚誹謗。如是四種。不善語邪見以為自性。此中妄語即妄語。若謗三寶邪見虛語誑語為自性。說過是麁惡語性。自讚虛誑及麁惡語為自性。慳貪瞋恚如次貪嗔業道為性（此即意業）又說過是離間語。且依前釋。第三種數差別者。或有處說四種他勝處。謂後四種。如瑜伽論第四十說。或有處說六重。謂此前六。如優婆塞戒經說。或有處說有八重。謂比丘四重及此後四。如善戒經。或說十重。即如此經及本業瓔珞經說。又于填三藏云。波羅摩吉羅經。此云極淨釘經說。十根本罪。同此經說。而未翻譯。問。何故如是經論不問。答。如來對機制立學處說四六八十。不可會釋。又最後四犯即成重。名他勝處。餘六不爾。於此亦有作而不犯。如前持犯。已廣分別。沽酒說過。通犯不犯。由此道理。前之六種。名隨順他勝。非根本重。而說六重者。為化在家。新學菩薩。漸令遠離對二十四戒假立重名。又善戒經。若諸比丘受具戒已受菩薩戒故。說八重。今此經中通說根本隨順他勝處說十他勝法各據一義乎不相違　第四廢立者。十不善業中。何故重中不說雜穢語。答。過失輕故。問。若殺生者皆是他勝處說。他勝處亦殺生耶。答。應作四句。或有殺生而非他勝處。謂誤殺生。此唯方便。非他勝處。及起慈心。而行殺生。如說國王殺五百婆羅門而無殺罪。亦非他勝。或有他勝而非殺生。謂餘九重。第三句者謂不善心故意殺生而不誤者。第四句除前相。如殺生對他勝處有其四句。乃至說過四句亦爾。問。為利養自讚毀他皆是他勝處。設他勝處亦是為利養自讚毀他耶。答。應作順前句答。若為利自讚毀他皆是他勝處。自有他勝處而非自讚毀他。謂餘他勝處。後之三戒應知亦爾。問。說過與謗僧有何差別。答。說過但說過而不謗無。若謗僧寶撥彼功德而不說過。第五犯境復有五種。一情非情境。二凡聖境。三漏無漏境。四勝劣境。五因果境。第一情非情境者。此十戒中。盜及誹謗通情非情。謗無因果通非情故。餘八有情境。又偷盜罪通情非情。餘九唯有情。又釋。慳貪嗔沽酒亦通二境。謂所對是有情。所沽所慳是非情。故今依前釋。雖有非情。嗔而非他勝。雖行婬死屍而不損他。非他勝處。第二凡聖境者。此十種戒皆通凡聖。沽酒戒中通犯凡聖。未離欲聖者亦有飲故。言凡境者。唯於四趣除捺落迦。第十謗戒通三界天。餘九唯於欲界。第十通凡者。通謗凡聖故。又唯聖非凡。第三漏無漏境者。說過毀他及誹謗戒通漏無漏境餘於有漏境雖有殺人者。而殺色身故。第四勝劣境者。九皆通二境。第十於勝境。第五因果境者。佛地名果。餘即名因。前六種戒唯於因境。後之四種通於因果。又釋。第十通於因果境。餘三因境。以彼不能惱世尊故。第六輕重者。若依業道判輕重者。前四後三是最重。業道性故。說過自讚次重。是麁惡語。業道性故。沽酒最輕。非業道性故。問。前四後三。何者為重。答。第十最重。又前四輕。亦許菩薩行前四故。後四最重。不應行故。問。答爾何故先說殺戒。乃至第十謗戒。答。麁細次第說。相麁先說。相細後說。相非輕重次第。第七犯相者。謂非梵行說過。毀他誹謗始行即犯殺生必持。彼命終已方成他勝。非動加行即成業道。盜妄語亦爾。所餘三種。非初非後。在中成犯。又釋婬說過。毀謗沽酒初行即犯。餘如前說。有言。婬始成犯。殺終成犯。餘於中犯。此不應理。說過等四行即有犯。如何待終。是故前說於理為善。第八自他犯者。慳貪瞋慧非梵行。二種唯自非他。所以者何。慳貪業道必無使他而行犯故。使他行時非自貪故。如貪嗔亦爾。所餘七種皆通自他。問。若自行殺亦教他殺。設教他殺亦自行殺耶。答。應作四句。或自行殺而非教他殺。謂有自殺而非使他故。或有教他殺而非自殺。如遣使殺。而自行餘業。第三句者。謂自行殺。亦使人殺。俱非者。謂除前相。如殺生有四。偷盜欲行沽酒亦爾。皆應作四句。問。若自妄語亦教他耶。設教他妄語亦自妄語耶。答。應作順後句答。若教他妄語必自妄語。教他之時必誑語故。有自妄語而非教他。如妄語戒說過自讚誹謗亦爾。皆作順後句。此依對一境說有對別境四句。問。頗有一時觸殺盜二罪耶。答。有謂使他盜自行殺等。問。頗有一時結殺盜婬三罪耶。答。有謂。遣使殺盜自行欲行。或自行殺盜遣使欲行。問。頗有一人一時觸四罪耶。答。有謂。遣使行殺盜婬行目虛誑語等。問。頗有一時觸五罪耶。答。有謂。遣使殺盜婬沽酒自行妄語。乃至有一時觸九罪。謂。自行慳貪遣使行殺等八。必無一時觸十罪者。謂以貪嗔二唯自犯故自行貪行遣使行餘八除嗔自行嗔時遣使行餘除貪如是等隨應當知。第九犯因者。謂十他勝處由三因犯。所謂貪嗔癡。此中沽酒貪為方便。由貪究竟殺生三為方便。由嗔究竟如殺生瞋恚亦爾。偷盜之為方便由貪究竟如盜欲行慳貪亦爾誹謗三為方便由癡究竟癡增上故。又由究竟由此妄語癡究竟故妄語說過毀他三為方便。於三種中隨一究竟。此中殺由貪方便者。為皮肉故。瞋恚方便者。為報怨等故。由愚癡方便者。為求生天祭祀廟等所餘盜等如應當知。第十受果者。如下經說。若有犯者不得現身發菩薩亦失國王位轉輪王位。乃至當住妙果一切皆失墮三惡道中。二劫三劫不聞父母三寶名字。至文廣說。

Sūtra: The Buddha told all the disciples of the Buddha... [prātimokṣa].
Commentary: Second, the correct explanation of the forms of the precepts. First the major, then the minor. Within the major, there are three [parts]: first, stating the section heading; second, explaining them individually; third, exhorting [practitioners] to uphold them. Within the first, there are three [parts]: first, stating the section heading; second, exhorting them to study; third, exhorting them to uphold. This is stating the section heading. Now, the ten pārājikas are briefly treated under ten headings: first, explaining the name; second, distinguishing the essential nature; third, the differences in types and numbers; fourth, exclusion and establishment; fifth, the realm of transgression; sixth, gravity and lightness; seventh, the characteristics of transgression; eighth, oneself and others; ninth, the causes of transgression; tenth, experiencing the retribution.
First, explaining the name: first the general, then the specific. As for the general, "ten" is the name of a number. "Pārājika" is in Sanskrit pārājika; here it is translated as "grounds for defeat by another" (parājaya-sthāna). "Another" is of four kinds: 1. Affliction opposes [one's true] nature, hence it is called "another." 2. Unwholesome courses of action oppose the good qualities of precepts, hence they are called "another." 3. The demon king is called "another," because he harms virtuous conduct. 4. The evil destinies are called "another," because they are disagreeable. If a person commits the ten major offenses, they are defeated by "another"; the locus of defeat by another is called the "ground of defeat by another"—this is a dependent-determinative compound (tatpuruṣa). As for the specific names, they will be explained when we come to the text.
Second, distinguishing the essential nature: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, and selling alcohol have unwholesome bodily action as their intrinsic nature. False speech, speaking of faults, self-praise, and disparagement—these four have unwholesome speech and wrong views as their intrinsic nature. Here, false speech is indeed false speech; if one slanders the Three Jewels, it has wrong views, false speech, and deceptive speech as its intrinsic nature. Speaking of faults has the nature of harsh speech. Self-praise has deceptive and harsh speech as its intrinsic nature. Avarice and anger have, respectively, the courses of action of covetousness and malice as their nature (these are mental actions). Furthermore, speaking of faults is divisive speech; for now, we follow the earlier explanation.
Third, the differences in types and numbers: In some places, four grounds of defeat by another are taught—namely, the latter four—as explained in the fortieth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi. In some places, six major offenses are taught—namely, the former six—as explained in the Upāsakaśīla Sūtra. In some places, eight major offenses are taught—namely, the four major offenses of a bhikṣu and the latter four [here]—as in the Bodhisattva-bhūmi (Shan jie jing). Or ten major offenses are taught, precisely as in this sūtra and the Pusa yingluo benye jing. Furthermore, a Tripiṭaka master from Khotan said that the *Paramagiri Sūtra* (here translated as the Sūtra of the Utmost Pure Nail) speaks of ten fundamental offenses, identical to what is taught in this sūtra, but it has not been translated [into Chinese].
Question: Why do these sūtras and treatises differ?
Answer: The Tathāgata instituted the śikṣāpadas in response to [the capacities of] beings, speaking of four, six, eight, or ten; they cannot be harmonized into a single view. Furthermore, for the last four, committing them immediately constitutes a major offense and they are named grounds of defeat by another; the other six are not like this. In the case of these [first six], there are also instances where doing them does not constitute an offense, as extensively analyzed above regarding upholding and violating. Selling alcohol and speaking of faults can both be offenses or non-offenses. For this reason, the former six are called secondary defeats, not fundamental major offenses. Yet they are called "six major offenses" in order to transform lay practitioners and newly training bodhisattvas, gradually causing them to distance themselves [from faults], provisionally establishing the name "major" in contrast to the twenty-four precepts. Furthermore, the Shan jie jing speaks of eight major offenses because bhikṣus receive the bodhisattva precepts after having received the upasampadā. Now in this sūtra, both the fundamental and secondary grounds of defeat by another are generally taught, speaking of ten dharmas of defeat by another; each is based on a distinct perspective and they do not contradict one another.
Fourth, exclusion and establishment: Among the ten unwholesome actions, why is idle chatter not mentioned among the major offenses?
Answer: Because its fault is minor.
Question: If killing living beings is always a ground of defeat by another, is a ground of defeat by another also always killing living beings?
Answer: One should construct a fourfold proposition (catuṣkoṭi):
1. There may be killing living beings that is not a ground of defeat by another: namely, accidentally killing living beings—this is only a preparatory action (prayogika) and not a ground of defeat by another; and when, generating a mind of compassion, one performs the act of killing, as when it is said that a king killed five hundred brahmins without incurring the sin of killing—this is also not a defeat by another.
2. There may be a defeat by another that is not killing living beings: namely, the remaining nine major offenses.
3. The third proposition: namely, intentionally killing living beings with an unwholesome mind and without mistake.
4. The fourth proposition: excluding the preceding characteristics.
Just as killing living beings relative to grounds of defeat by another has its fourfold proposition, so it is through speaking of faults.
Question: If praising oneself and disparaging others for the sake of gain is always a ground of defeat by another, is a ground of defeat by another also always praising oneself and disparaging others for the sake of gain?
Answer: One should answer with an affirmative-antecedent proposition: If one praises oneself and disparages others for the sake of gain, it is always a ground of defeat by another; yet there are grounds of defeat by another that are not praising oneself and disparaging others—namely, the remaining grounds of defeat by another. The last three precepts should be understood as being likewise.
Question: What is the distinction between speaking of faults and slandering the Saṅgha?
Answer: Speaking of faults merely speaks of faults without denying their existence. Slandering the Jewel of the Saṅgha denies their virtuous qualities without speaking of faults.
Fifth, the realm of transgression also has five kinds: 1. Sentient and non-sentient realms. 2. Ordinary beings and noble ones realms. 3. Defiled and undefiled realms. 4. Superior and inferior realms. 5. Cause and effect realms.
First, the sentient and non-sentient realms: Among these ten precepts, stealing and disparagement apply to both sentient and non-sentient realms, because denying cause and effect applies to the non-sentient; the remaining eight apply to the realm of sentient beings. Alternatively, the offense of stealing applies to both sentient and non-sentient, while the remaining nine apply only to sentient beings. Another interpretation: avarice, anger, and selling alcohol also apply to both realms: namely, the object addressed is sentient, while what is sold or hoarded is non-sentient. Now, relying on the former interpretation: although there are non-sentient things, anger [towards them] is not a defeat by another; although one commits sexual misconduct with a corpse, because it does not harm another, it is not a ground of defeat by another.
Second, the realm of ordinary beings and noble ones: These ten precepts all apply to both ordinary beings and noble ones. In the precept of selling alcohol, it applies to transgressions involving ordinary beings and noble ones, for noble ones who have not yet separated from desire may also drink. As for the realm of ordinary beings, it is only in the four destinies, excluding the naraka (hell). The tenth precept on slander applies to the gods of the three realms; the remaining nine apply only to the desire realm. That the tenth applies to ordinary beings is because it generally slanders both ordinary beings and noble ones. Alternatively, it applies only to noble ones and not ordinary beings.
Third, the defiled and undefiled realms: The precepts of speaking of faults, disparaging others, and slander apply to both defiled and undefiled realms; the others apply to defiled realms, for although one may kill a human being, it is the physical body that is killed.
Fourth, the superior and inferior realms: Nine of them apply to both realms; the tenth applies to the superior realm.
Fifth, the cause and effect realms: The Buddha-stage is called effect; the rest are called cause. The former six precepts apply only to the realm of causes; the latter four apply to both cause and effect. Another interpretation: the tenth applies to the realm of cause and effect, while the other three apply to the realm of cause, because they cannot distress the World-Honoured One.
Sixth, gravity and lightness: If judged according to courses of action, the first four and the last three are the gravest, because they have the nature of courses of action. Speaking of faults and self-praise are next in gravity, being harsh speech having the nature of courses of action. Selling alcohol is the lightest, because it does not have the nature of a course of action.
Question: Between the first four and the last three, which are graver?
Answer: The tenth is the gravest. Furthermore, the first four are lighter, for a bodhisattva is also permitted to perform the first four; the last four are the gravest, because they should never be performed.
Question: If that is so, why is the precept against killing spoken of first, through to the tenth precept on slander?
Answer: They are spoken in order of gross to subtle: gross characteristics are spoken first, and subtle characteristics are spoken later. It is not an order of lightness and gravity.
Seventh, the characteristics of transgression: With unchaste conduct, speaking of faults, disparaging others, and slander, as soon as they are initiated, an offense is incurred. Killing living beings must entail that the other's life has ended before it constitutes a defeat by another; mere preliminary movement does not constitute the course of action. Stealing and false speech are likewise. The remaining three are neither at the beginning nor at the end, but constitute an offense in the middle. Another interpretation: sexual misconduct, speaking of faults, disparagement, and selling alcohol constitute offenses as soon as they are initiated; the rest are as stated above. Some say: sexual misconduct constitutes an offense at the beginning, killing constitutes an offense at the end, and the rest constitute offenses in the middle. This is not reasonable: when the four such as speaking of faults are performed, the offense is incurred immediately—how could it wait until the end? Therefore, the earlier explanation is superior in logic.
Eighth, transgressions by oneself and through others: Avarice, anger, and unchaste conduct—[these] kinds are only by oneself and not through others. Why? The course of action of avarice certainly cannot be committed by causing another to perform it, for when causing another to act, it is not one's own covetousness; as with covetousness, so it is with anger. The remaining seven all apply both to oneself and through others.
Question: If one performs killing oneself, does one also instruct others to kill? If one instructs others to kill, does one also perform killing oneself?
Answer: One should construct a fourfold proposition:
1. One may kill oneself without instructing others to kill: namely, when one kills by oneself without employing another.
2. One may instruct others to kill without killing oneself: as when sending an emissary to kill while oneself performs other actions.
3. The third proposition: namely, performing killing oneself and also employing someone to kill.
4. Neither: namely, excluding the preceding characteristics.
Just as killing living beings has four propositions, stealing, sexual misconduct, and selling alcohol are likewise; all should be formed as fourfold propositions.
Question: If one speaks falsely oneself, does one also instruct others? If one instructs others to speak falsely, does one also speak falsely oneself?
Answer: One should answer with an affirmative-consequent proposition: If one instructs another to speak falsely, one must speak falsely oneself, because at the time of instructing another, one necessarily uses deceptive speech. There is speaking falsely oneself without instructing others. As with the precept of false speech, speaking of faults, self-praise, and disparagement are likewise; all form affirmative-consequent propositions. This is spoken with respect to a single object; with respect to different objects, there are fourfold propositions.
Question: Can one commit the two sins of killing and stealing at the same time?
Answer: Yes: namely, employing another to steal while killing oneself, and so forth.
Question: Can one incur the three sins of killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct at the same time?
Answer: Yes: namely, dispatching an emissary to kill and steal while performing sexual misconduct oneself; or killing and stealing oneself while dispatching an emissary for sexual misconduct.
Question: Can one person incur four sins at the same time?
Answer: Yes: namely, dispatching an emissary to commit killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct, while speaking false and deceptive words oneself, and so forth.
Question: Can one incur five sins at the same time?
Answer: Yes: namely, dispatching an emissary to kill, steal, commit sexual misconduct, and sell alcohol, while engaging in false speech oneself; and so on, up to incurring nine sins at one time: namely, harboring avarice oneself while dispatching emissaries to commit the eight such as killing. There is certainly no one who incurs ten sins at the same time, because covetousness and anger are only committed by oneself; if one performs covetousness oneself, one dispatches emissaries to perform the other eight, excluding anger; when performing anger oneself, one dispatches emissaries to perform the rest, excluding covetousness. Such cases should be understood according to their application.
Ninth, the causes of transgression: The ten grounds of defeat by another are committed due to three causes, namely covetousness, anger, and delusion. Here, for selling alcohol, covetousness is the preparatory action and it is consummated through covetousness. For killing living beings, the three [poisons] are the preparatory actions, and it is consummated through anger; as with killing living beings, so it is with malice. For stealing, [the three] are preparatory actions, and it is consummated through covetousness; as with stealing, so it is with sexual misconduct and avarice. For slander, the three are preparatory actions, and it is consummated through delusion, because delusion is predominant; furthermore, false speech is consummated through delusion. For false speech, speaking of faults, and disparaging others, the three are preparatory actions, and they are consummated through any one of the three. Here, killing by means of covetousness as a preparatory action is for the sake of hide and flesh; anger as a preparatory action is for avenging enmity, etc.; delusion as a preparatory action is for seeking rebirth in heaven, sacrifices at shrines, and the like. The rest, such as stealing, should be understood accordingly.
Tenth, experiencing the retribution: As the sūtra states below, if anyone violates them, they cannot in their present life generate the bodhisattva [vow], and they also lose the status of a king or wheel-turning king, up to and including losing all the wonderful fruits in which they should abide, falling into the three evil destinies, not hearing the names of parents or the Three Jewels for two or three kalpas. This will be explained extensively when we come to the text.