[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [梵網經述記卷第一](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797) › 1.6 # 梵網經述記卷第一 1.6 梵網經述記卷第一 1.6 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1.6) 第八犯已還淨。此有二種。一犯他勝處法。二犯輕垢。如下經說。若有犯十戒者。應教懺悔。在佛菩薩形像前。日日六時誦十重四十八輕戒。發到禮三世千佛。須見好相。若一七日二三七日。乃至一年。要見好相。見好相者佛來摩頂。若見光明花種種異相。便得罪滅。若無好相。雖懺無益。是人現身亦不得戒。而得增益受戒。若犯四十八輕戒者。對手懺悔滅。若依瑜伽論。與此少異。故彼四十說。若用耎中品纏毀犯四種他勝處法。不捨菩薩戒上品纏犯。即名為捨。若諸菩薩毀犯四種他勝處法。數數現行而無慚愧。深生愛樂。見是功德。當知說名上品纏犯。非諸菩薩暫一現行他勝處法。便捨菩薩淨戒律儀。如諸苾芻犯他勝處法。即便棄捨別解脫戒。若諸菩薩由此毀犯棄捨菩薩淨戒律儀。於現法中堪任更受非不堪任。如苾芻住別解脫戒犯他勝法。於現法中不任更受。又彼論四十一說。若諸菩薩以上品纏違犯如上他勝處法。失戒律儀。應當更受。若中品纏違犯如上他勝處法。應對於三補特伽羅。或過是數。應如發露除惡作法先當稱述所犯事。名應作是說長老專志。或言。大德。我如是名違越菩薩毘奈耶法。如所稱事犯惡作罪。餘如苾芻發露悔滅惡作罪法。應如是說。若下品纏違犯。如上他勝處法。及餘違犯。應對於一補特伽羅發露悔法。當知如前若無隨順補特伽羅可對發露悔除所犯。爾時菩薩以淨意樂起自誓心。我當決定防護當來終不重犯。如是於犯還出還淨門上品纏犯他勝法。即失戒者未知犯已。至心悔過戒還生不。答。自有兩釋。一云。不能還生。而大方等陀羅尼經說。若不還生無有是處者。並依下中品纏犯者而說。上品犯者必無還生極惡煩惱而損害故。又彼經中依罪滅義。而密意說言。若不還生無有是處。勸令下劣生歡喜心故。一云。上品纏犯彼戒還生。所以者何。聖教正理為定量故。聖教者如大方等陀羅尼第一說。行此法已。若有眾生。犯五逆罪身有白癩。若不還差無有是處。若菩薩四戒。沙彌戒。式叉沙彌尼戒。比丘戒。比丘尼戒。如是諸戒。若犯一一戒。當一心懺悔。若不還生。無有是處。除不至心。所言理者。謂受戒時有殊勝思熏成種子。依此種子假立無表。若犯他勝法。即彼種子無遮止用。名捨律儀種體不捨。若有犯已至心發露生極悔心後終不犯。何能不起防護功能。既發功能是名為戒。名為還淨。如起邪見斷善根者。後起疑心。或起正見。還續善根。乃至一生離染得果。此亦如是。還起功能遮止惡行。名戒還生。准此教理。雖犯他勝法有還淨理。比丘等戒當知亦爾。如瑜伽論九十九說。最初罪聚雖可還淨。然唯依二補特伽羅非為一切無有差別。此可還淨。是故彼勝不立而還淨聚中。解云。二補特伽羅。謂佛在世時難提比丘。如來滅度後一百年。脇尊者時那陀比丘。此二比丘犯已無覆藏心。許與羯磨還住僧中。具如毘尼母論第三說。由此當知。不捨種體。但捨功能。還生淨戒。餘亦如是。至心悔除功能還生。 > Eighth, returning to purity after an infraction. This has two types: first, infractions that are pārājika offenses; second, infractions of minor defilements. As stated in the sūtra below: 'If there are those who violate the ten precepts, they should be taught to repent. Before an image of a Buddha or bodhisattva, six times a day they must recite the ten grave and forty-eight minor precepts, performing prostrations to the thousand Buddhas of the three periods of time, and must see an auspicious sign. Whether for one week, two or three weeks, or up to one year, they must see an auspicious sign. One who sees an auspicious sign is one to whom a Buddha comes and rubs their crown; or if one sees light, flowers, or various extraordinary signs, their sins are extinguished. If there is no auspicious sign, though they repent, there is no benefit; such a person will not obtain the precepts in this present life either, but only receive an increase in receiving the precepts. If one violates the forty-eight minor precepts, confessing before a counterpart extinguishes them.' If one relies on the Yogācārabhūmi, it differs slightly from this. Thus, its \[fascicle\] forty states: 'If one violates the four pārājika dharmas through weak or middling entanglements, one does not abandon the bodhisattva precepts; violating them through superior entanglement is termed abandonment. If bodhisattvas violate the four pārājika dharmas, repeatedly carrying them out without shame or remorse, taking deep delight in them, and viewing them as virtues, this is known as violating them through superior entanglement. It is not that bodhisattvas, by merely carrying out a pārājika dharma once temporarily, forthwith abandon the bodhisattva restraint of pure precepts, just as bhikṣus, upon violating a pārājika dharma, forthwith abandon the prātimokṣa precepts. If bodhisattvas, through such violations, abandon the bodhisattva restraint of pure precepts, they are capable of receiving them again in the present life, not incapable—unlike a bhikṣu abiding in the prātimokṣa precepts who, having violated a pārājika dharma, is incapable of receiving them again in the present life.' Furthermore, fascicle forty-one of that treatise states: 'If bodhisattvas, through superior entanglement, violate the above pārājika dharmas, they lose the restraint of the precepts and should receive them again. If, through middling entanglement, they violate the above pārājika dharmas, they should, before three persons or more, follow the method of revealing and clearing duṣkṛta offenses: first they should state the matter of the infraction by name, and should speak thus: "Venerable, attentively \[listen\]," or say: "Great virtuous one, I, such-and-such by name, have transgressed the bodhisattva Vinaya dharmas, committing a duṣkṛta offense as stated in the matter." The rest is as the method for a bhikṣu to reveal and extinguish a duṣkṛta offense; thus should it be spoken. If, through inferior entanglement, they violate the above pārājika dharmas or other violations, they should reveal and repent before one person, and the method should be known as before. If there is no suitable person before whom one can reveal and repent to remove what was violated, at that time the bodhisattva, with a pure resolve, arouses a self-vow in mind: "I shall definitely guard against it in the future and never violate it again."' Regarding this gate of emergence and returning to purity from infractions: if violating a pārājika dharma through superior entanglement means losing the precepts, it is unknown whether, after committing the infraction, if one repents with utmost sincerity, the precepts are regenerated or not. Answer: There are naturally two explanations. One says: They cannot be regenerated. As for the Great Vaipulya Dhāraṇī Sūtra stating that if they are not regenerated, it is impossible, this is spoken in reference to those who violate through inferior or middling entanglement; for one who violates through superior entanglement, there is definitely no regeneration, because they are harmed by extremely evil afflictions. Furthermore, in that sūtra, relying on the meaning of extinguishing sins, it is said with esoteric intent that if they are not regenerated, it is impossible, in order to encourage the inferior and arouse joy in their minds. The other says: Even if violated through superior entanglement, those precepts are regenerated. Why is that? Because sacred teachings and correct reasoning are the standard authorities. As for sacred teachings, as stated in the first fascicle of the Great Vaipulya Dhāraṇī: 'Having practiced this dharma, if there are sentient beings who have committed the five heinous sins and whose bodies have white leprosy, if they are not cured, it is impossible. If the four bodhisattva precepts, śrāmaṇera precepts, śikṣamāṇā and śrāmaṇerikā precepts, bhikṣu precepts, and bhikṣuṇī precepts—if such precepts are violated, each and every precept, one should single-mindedly repent; if they are not regenerated, it is impossible, except for those without utmost sincerity.' As for reasoning: when receiving the precepts, an extraordinary volition perfumes and forms a seed; based on this seed, avijñapti is nominally posited. If one violates a pārājika dharma, then that seed lacks the function of restraint; this is called abandoning restraint, while the entity of the seed is not abandoned. If, after committing the violation, one reveals with utmost sincerity, arouses supreme regret in mind, and ultimately never violates again, how could it not arouse the function of protection? Once the function is aroused, it is called a precept and called returning to purity. Just as one who arouses wrong views cuts off roots of virtue, and later arouses doubt or arousing right views reconnects the roots of virtue, up to abandoning defilement and attaining the fruit in a single lifetime, this is also like that: arousing the function again to restrain evil deeds is called the precept being regenerated. According to this teaching and reasoning, although one violates a pārājika dharma, there is the principle of returning to purity; the bhikṣu and other precepts should be known to be likewise. As stated in fascicle ninety-nine of the Yogācārabhūmi: 'Although the initial group of offenses may be purified, yet this relies only on two persons, not for all without distinction; this can be purified. Therefore, that pārājika is not established within the group that can be purified.' Explanation: 'Two persons' refers to the bhikṣu Nandi during the Buddha's time, and one hundred years after the Tathāgata's parinirvāṇa, the bhikṣu Nātha at the time of Venerable Pārśva. These two bhikṣus, after committing the violation, had no thought of concealment; they were granted karman and permitted to dwell again among the Saṃgha, fully as explained in the third fascicle of the Vinayamātṛkā. From this it should be known: one does not abandon the entity of the seed, but only abandons the function; the pure precepts are regenerated. The others are also like this: repenting with utmost sincerity removes it, and the function is regenerated. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1.5) - [Next: 1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1.7) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797~en-mt.1.6) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [瑜伽師地論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.darsana.yogacara.yogacarabhumi*zh-xuanzang.99.13) — Classical Chinese - [勸發菩提心集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1862.3.45) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2797.1.6) · Pramāṇa