梵網經述記卷第一 1.6

1.6

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.