五戒の細則
Chapter 8: Miscellaneous Talks on Precepts (2)
XI. Observing the Five Precepts Is Learning to Be a Human Being
In fact, the five precepts only involve body and speech, not mind. No matter what the mind is like, as long as body and speech do not transgress, it does not count as breaking the precepts. Therefore, the five precepts do not address guarding the mind, only guarding body and speech; they belong to the Hīnayāna precepts. Watch over the body and guard the mouth; if one keeps them well, one's cultivation as a human being will also be good, and in the next life one can continue to be a human being, and can also eradicate the view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi) and attain realization of the fruits. But if one wishes to cultivate the Mahāyāna dharma and attain enlightenment, one must receive the bodhisattva precepts and uphold the bodhisattva precepts. If one keeps the five precepts well, one has virtue and personal moral cultivation; if one cannot uphold the five precepts, one's character is incomplete, one's cultivation is not good enough, and one's human virtue is not perfect. If even an ordinary person's moral cultivation is not complete, then it is impossible to transcend being human, impossible to eradicate the view of self and become a sage.
If one dares not even receive the five precepts, and after receiving them cannot keep them well, then how could one uphold the several hundred precepts of a monastic? So many lay Buddhists always slander monastics, saying how bad they are—but what about themselves? How great is the gap between them and the monastics' mental conduct of renouncing and turning away from worldly life, and their mental capacity to accept the constraint of several hundred precepts? The gap is too great to describe in detail. The five precepts are only five items; they seem simple and easy, but in fact they are neither simple nor easy. Those who can fully keep the five precepts are extremely few. The precept against stealing and the precept against false speech are hard to keep; the vast majority of people do not clearly understand their content and scope, and those who violate them are not few.
Keeping the five precepts is being a human being. If one cannot even be a good human being, what is there to talk about regarding fruits or no fruits? In the next life, one falls into the three lower realms. Many people, without even receiving the five precepts, hint that they have attained realization and enlightenment. If one cannot even keep the body and speech of the Hīnayāna five precepts, how can one keep the mind precepts of the Mahāyāna bodhisattva? Guarding the mind is the most difficult of all; it is very hard to avoid creating unwholesome karma with every arising thought, so the bodhisattva precepts in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra are even harder to keep. If one has not eradicated the fundamental afflictions, do not even think about keeping these yoga bodhisattva precepts; they are for bhūmi-level bodhisattvas who have eradicated afflictions and can receive and uphold them. Bodhisattvas only care whether their arising thoughts are wholesome, compassionate, and wise; they do not care about the surface behavior of body and speech. As long as it can benefit sentient beings, what should be done must be done; otherwise one violates the bodhisattva precepts.
As for whether sentient beings can understand—of course sentient beings at their level of wisdom cannot understand—then try not to let sentient beings know, because the bodhisattva has already grown into an adult, while sentient beings are still children with shallow wisdom and little experience, so sometimes adults' affairs cannot be let known to children. Even bodhisattvas before the bhūmis cannot achieve such precepts, let alone ordinary sentient beings. Yet quite a few people study and receive these precepts—who knows where they could obtain such a bodhisattva precept essence? Ignorant people just make a mess of things.
Body and speech are the actions of the six consciousnesses; mind is the mental conduct of the manas. If one can control the manas, body and speech will certainly not transgress. Conversely, even if the manas's thoughts are not upright, if the mind consciousness forcibly suppresses them and feigns purity, body and speech can still not transgress; if body and speech do not transgress, the five precepts are not violated. Controlling and subduing the manas is extremely difficult; transforming the manas successfully through cultivation, eradicating afflictions so that it is automatically and spontaneously pure without needing restraint—that is even harder.
Without eradicating afflictions, mental karma will inevitably be violated. Therefore, eradicating afflictions must mean eradicating the manas's afflictions, so that one becomes automatically and spontaneously pure without the mind consciousness forcibly suppressing. If only the mind consciousness's afflictions are eradicated, it can only count as suppressing afflictions, not eradicating them. When the mind consciousness is careless, the manas will suddenly manifest afflictions, and the river will burst its banks and flood.
XII. What Is the Difference in Karmic Retribution for Unwholesome Karma Between Those Who Have and Have Not Received the Five Precepts?
Whenever unwholesome karma is created, it is because of an evil mind and afflicted mind; it all results from a bad mental disposition, and therefore carries intrinsic offense (svabhāva-pāpa). The retribution for intrinsic offense is the same whether or not one has received the precepts. Because sentient beings all have the afflictive obstructions (kleśāvaraṇa) of greed, hatred, and delusion, all sentient beings undergo evil retribution in the six realms of saṃsāra, with beings of the three evil realms comprising the vast majority. For those who have not received the precepts, creating unwholesome karma does not count as breaking precepts; there is no offense of precept-violation, only the retribution of intrinsic offense, not the retribution of precept-offense. When a precept-holder creates unwholesome karma, besides the retribution of intrinsic offense, they also undergo the retribution of precept-offense.
For example, even if a person has not received the five precepts, after killing someone they still must fall into hell to repay the evil retribution; after emerging from hell, upon meeting the person they killed again, they must still repay a life to the one killed. It is the same with killing animals: there is the offense of killing, requiring retribution and repayment of a life. It is the same with creating other unwholesome karma—whatever evil retribution is due, that retribution is undergone. But a precept-holder who creates the same unwholesome karma incurs an additional retribution of precept-offense, because knowingly violating is itself a disrespect for the precepts, and thus constitutes an offense. Knowingly violating involves heavier afflictions than violating unknowingly, so the retribution is heavier. It is the same with wholesome karma: for a person who has not received the five precepts, if their bodily, verbal, and mental actions accord with the five precepts and their mental disposition is wholesome, they will receive wholesome retribution, gain merit and enjoy happiness, and the sentient beings they benefit will also repay them with corresponding benefits. When a precept-holder does good, they additionally receive the wholesome retribution of keeping precepts, such as obtaining a human body, ascending to heaven to enjoy blessings, and so on.
XIII. The Fundamental Criterion for Judging Whether a Precept Is Broken Is the Intention
Question: If one has received the five precepts, does the kind of stealing the Master gave as an example (taking family members' things to give to others) also count as prohibited, as breaking the precept? Can such well-intentioned "stealing" only be done before receiving the five precepts?
Answer: Whether it counts as violating the precept against stealing mainly depends on whether there is an intention to steal, whether there is the purpose of taking things into one's own hands for one's own enjoyment, and whether it harms the other party's interests. If there is no such evil intention, but rather a wholesome intention to benefit the other party, then it does not count as stealing. Both precepts and cause-and-effect take the mind as primary: a wholesome mind receives wholesome retribution, an evil mind receives evil retribution. These questions must be considered comprehensively, including whether the final ultimate result is wholesome or unwholesome, whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. If benefits outweigh drawbacks, do it; if drawbacks outweigh benefits, do not do it. The altruistic bodhi mind is the most important and most precious. If one cannot think it through clearly and cannot generate the altruistic mind, then strictly keep the precepts, being cautious and careful, not violating in the slightest. This applies to both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna precepts.
Bodhisattvas who have cultivated to a certain level have minds that are mostly wholesome with almost no evil; they will not harm others to benefit themselves, and everything they do is for the benefit of sentient beings, without considering their own gains and losses. Therefore, they do not care about some things; as long as the result is wholesome, they do not consider the superficial unwholesomeness of the process. For the sake of my cultivation and for the sake of spreading the dharma, there are some Hīnayāna precepts I cannot uphold; if I upheld the Hīnayāna precepts, I could not cultivate, and would necessarily violate the Mahāyāna precepts. Weighing Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna precepts, of course the Mahāyāna precepts are more important, sentient beings are more important, the development of Buddhism is more important, and I personally am not important. But personally I would absolutely not commit any precept violation or incur any offensive retribution, because in reality there is no offense but rather merit.
Dharma Master Kumārajīva came from East India to China (Zhendan) to spread the dharma. To keep him, the emperor married several women to him. If he did not accept, he could not spread the dharma; in order to spread the dharma smoothly, the master could only accept, living together with several women every day. On the surface it seems he broke the precepts, but in reality he upheld the bodhisattva precepts. A bodhisattva is one who benefits sentient beings and benefits Buddhism; the fundamental goal was achieved, and other things could not be perfect. Of course, ordinary people cannot imitate such things; imitating them would be breaking the precepts, because their cultivation is insufficient and their mental conduct is not pure enough.
Whether a precept is broken lies in the mind. If there is no mind to break precepts, no arising thought, it does not count as breaking precepts—how could the precept essence be lost? To avoid breaking precepts, one must have first-dhyāna meditative concentration, must eradicate the view of self and become a Hīnayāna anāgāmin, and in the Mahāyāna one's stage must be at the first bhūmi. Then the fundamental afflictions are eradicated, there is no evil mind, unwholesome mind, or defiled mind, and one does not violate the precepts. Otherwise, violating precepts is hard to avoid.
The Venerable Upāli was the Hīnayāna Vinaya master; he often judged bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs as having broken precepts, whereas in the view of the layman Vimalakīrti and the Buddha, some had not broken them at all. The Buddha would observe the bhikṣus' and bhikṣuṇīs' mental state at the time—whether thoughts arose. If no thoughts arose, then according to the Mahāyāna, no precept was broken.
For bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs who broke precepts, Hīnayāna precept masters would expel them from the saṅgha, but the Buddha was very tolerant toward some disciples who appeared to break precepts but actually had not. For example, a bhikṣuṇī who was raped and became pregnant—according to the Hīnayāna, this would be breaking a fundamental precept and she should be expelled from the saṅgha, yet the Buddha determined that the bhikṣuṇī had not broken the precepts, and even allowed her to give birth to the child in the royal palace. So whether a person has broken precepts requires great wisdom to judge, and can even be determined through direct perception using superknowledge, observing the intention and mental state at the time, not looking at surface behavior.
Sentient beings today have extremely limited wisdom; their judgments of people and matters are based on emotions and superficial cognition. They cannot distinguish wholesome from unwholesome, true from false; cannot distinguish good teachers from bad ones; cannot observe people's intentions and motivations, the starting points and fundamental purposes of their actions. They blindly reject and blindly worship, taking the wholesome as unwholesome and the unwholesome as wholesome, inverting right and wrong—extremely hard to teach and transform.
XIV. Under What Circumstances Can One Take Precepts Through Self-Vow?
Question: If one makes a vow to receive the precepts and silently keeps them, or mentally requests the precepts from the Buddha without requesting them from a precept master, does that count as receiving the precepts? If one breaks them, is there an offense of breaking precepts? When through self-discipline one almost never violates the precepts, can one then go to a precept master to receive them?
Answer: Although one mentally requested the precepts from the Buddha, if formally one did not request and receive them, and the Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and dharma-protecting deities did not confer the precepts, it does not count as receiving or obtaining the precepts. Keeping precepts one has not received and obtained does not count as upholding precepts, but it still generates blessings and merit. Upholding precepts carries the blessings and merit of precepts; without the precepts, there is no such blessing, merit, and virtue of upholding precepts.
When one's self-restraint has reached the point of being able to consciously keep the precepts without violating them, one should go to monks at a monastery to request the precepts, because precepts must be requested from the saṅgha jewel; lay bodhisattva precepts can be transmitted by lay precept-holders. If there is no saṅgha jewel within a forty-li radius, one may take the precepts through self-vow before the Buddha; self-vow reception also requires the form of receiving precepts, with the Buddhas and bodhisattvas conferring them in secret. The purer the precept conduct of the transmitter, the more easily the recipient obtains the precept essence and the higher the grade of precepts. If the transmitter has broken precepts and has no precept essence, the precepts they transmit have no effect, and the recipient does not obtain the precepts. Since no precepts were obtained, there is no such thing as breaking them.
XV. How to Repent Quickly and Dissolve Karma?
For those who have created unwholesome karma, whose bodily, verbal, and mental actions are not in accord with the dharma, open repentance dissolves karma quickly. For those with heavy verbal karma, open repentance makes it less likely to reoffend. Subdue the mind, and bodily, verbal, and mental actions will gradually become purified, with defilement gradually transforming into purity. Associate much with good teachers and beneficial friends, and the benefit will be great; do not associate with false teachers, bad friends, or harmful friends, and the wealth of wholesome dharmas will only increase and never decrease. Befriend gentlemen, not petty people—unless you have the ability to turn them around and transform them. If you obey petty people in everything, you will quickly become one yourself.
After making a mistake, repenting to the person involved (between two people) and repenting before an assembly have completely different effects. Repenting before an assembly dissolves karma more and faster, because once the fault is known to others, it is equivalent to having undergone retribution; the more people who know, the more retribution is undergone, and the greater the constraint on oneself, so karma dissolves quickly. Another way is repenting before the Buddha, but for most people, repenting before the Buddha has little effect, because they do not regard the Buddha as truly present before them, so their sincerity is insufficient. Repenting before an assembly is most effective—change comes quickly, and the more one is condemned by others, the faster karma dissolves. So when there is an issue, speak face to face; do not speak behind backs. Speaking behind backs is not candid, carries the suspicion of spreading gossip, does not help others recognize and correct their mistakes, and also makes others bear your karma. Speaking candidly face to face helps people know and correct, and one gains blessings.
Those who wish to achieve great things must be hard on themselves, not easily letting their own shortcomings slide. Once certain principles pass the psychological threshold, nothing is a big deal anymore. A person without self is inwardly open and at ease; nothing is that serious, even face is unimportant. Being strict with oneself does no harm; do not let sand into your eyes—do not tolerate your own mistakes, especially the afflictions of greed, hatred, and delusion.
XVI. Is It Reasonable for Monastics to Charge Fees for Conferring the Five Precepts and Bodhisattva Precepts?
From the monastics' perspective, it is proper and fitting for monastics to confer the three refuges and five precepts on lay Buddhists, and even the bodhisattva precepts; it is a responsibility and duty that monastics must undertake, and even universally ferrying sentient beings when capable is a proper responsibility and duty, because monastics have made the resolve to leave home and cultivate the path, and receive offerings from sentient beings, so they have an obligation to serve sentient beings.
But serving sentient beings—the act of conferring the three refuges, five precepts, and bodhisattva precepts itself—requires bearing a certain amount of karmic obstruction on behalf of the lay Buddhists, and this cost can be great or small. Speaking of it in the largest terms, if measured in money, probably no amount of money is of any use before karmic obstruction. No matter how much money sentient beings spend in this world, they cannot eliminate the drag and oppression of karmic obstruction, and cannot escape the suffering of saṃsāra it brings. When monastics serve sentient beings and universally ferry them, they knowingly or unknowingly bear these karmic obstructions, which will create various obstacles in worldly life and on the path of cultivation. Who would willingly set up obstacles for their own cultivation and worldly life? No one can understand what effects bearing others' karmic obstructions brings, or how much benefit sentient beings gain from it. While sentient beings consider it proper and fitting, how many are grateful and ashamed? When everyone makes demands of others, what demands do they make of themselves?
It is like the medical profession: everyone thinks it is proper and fitting for doctors to treat illness and save lives, because they thereby gain this job and monetary benefit—it is an equal exchange. But who has considered whether this exchange is really equal? After saving someone, how much karmic obstruction must the doctor bear for the patient, and what effects and consequences does this obstruction bring to the doctor? Just witnessing the patients' suffering brings psychological pressure, and enduring the impact of a magnetic field full of sick energy already makes one feel ashamed, heartbroken, and pitiful—let alone facing the suffering of many patients every day, and moreover personally setting about resolving these sufferings. The effects and pressures on both body and mind—how much affliction do they add, how much sick energy do they bring home, how much do they shorten one's lifespan, how many karmic creditors among patients do they offend? No one has thought of these things, so naturally people do not feel gratitude or sympathy toward doctors.
Then from the patient's perspective: after the patient's life is saved, how great is the benefit the patient receives? Has anyone calculated the value of the patient's health and life? This value cannot be estimated. Although extremely many people accomplish nothing in their lives, achieve nothing, and are even supported by others, everyone in their limited life is steeping themselves in human habits, learning to be a human being, and knowingly or unknowingly accumulating blessings and merit, to elevate the quality and grade of their life.
From this perspective, all lives, including the lives of animals, have great value and are extremely precious. Sentient beings, whether high or low, noble or lowly, are all in the process of advancing toward higher forms of life. This process is necessary and cannot be abolished or canceled. Without this process, one would not accumulate life experience and blessings, would not advance into higher life groups, and would not allow life to be sublimated and blossom. That is why the common saying goes: "A poor life is better than a good death." Sentient beings have shallow wisdom and only see the surface monetary transaction, but cannot see the actual benefits and gains-and-losses behind it. Respecting everyone's service and contribution—whether the contribution brings benefit or not—is respect for one's own life, and its significance is great.
XVII. The Influence of Environment Cannot Be Ignored
The constraining and permeating power of the environment is great. A person's power of wholesome karma, power of merit, and power of wisdom are sometimes insufficient to resist and escape the environment's influence; one may still be unconsciously and quietly influenced and permeated without being aware of it, and end up assimilated. If assimilated by wholesome dharmas, that is fine; but if assimilated by unwholesome dharmas, the defilement and afflictions of ignorance in one's own mind increase, binding one even more tightly in the ocean of saṃsāra and karma. So the environment in which a person lives is very important.
The environment of the secular world is generally defiled, with very little purity, because sentient beings' afflictive habits are very heavy, almost deeply rooted, manifesting greed, hatred, and delusion at all times. The environment within the Buddhist community is mixed, containing both defilement and purity, but defilement far exceeds purity in proportion and has somewhat greater influence. Many people cannot discern whether the environment they are in is mostly defiled or mostly pure; they only look at surface phenomena. Some people, after taking up Buddhism, follow groups heavy with defiled afflictions and are greatly influenced—the more they learn, the heavier their afflictions become, without their own awareness. Such Buddhist practice is very dangerous. If sentient beings' afflictions are light, they can transcend external things, remain unaffected, and maintain their original aspiration in studying Buddhism. What is feared is a Buddhist environment heavy with defilement and great in influence, which most easily causes people to lose awakening and vigilance, and unknowingly create defiled karma along with it.
XVIII. Can a Precept-Breaking Monk Be Given Offerings?
All sentient beings can be given offerings, including precept-breaking monks. Even making offerings to cats, dogs, fish, or birds yields a hundredfold blessing—how much more so making offerings to human beings? A precept-breaking monk is, first, a human; second, a monastic; third, one who broke precepts—making offerings still yields a thousandfold blessing. Monastics even give food offerings to ghosts and spirits—how much more should laypeople make offerings to precept-breaking monks? However much a monastic has broken precepts, they still have more blessings and virtue than animals and hungry ghosts, and the blessings gained from offering to them far exceed those gained from offering to animals and hungry ghosts. Everyone can make offerings, without exception, including extremely evil people like Hitler; but providing evil people with tools and funds to commit evil deeds makes one complicit in their crimes, while providing basic food, drink, and clothing poses no problem.
XIX. The Relationship Between the Manas and the Karmic Actions of Body, Speech, and Mind
What is the relationship among bodily karma, verbal karma, and mental karma? Which karma is easy to guard against, and which is hardest to guard against? Which karma is coarse and easy to eradicate, and which is subtle and hard to eradicate? Which karma should be eradicated first?
The three karmic actions of body, speech, and mind are all directed and mobilized by the manas. Bodily karma is the behavioral activity of the six consciousnesses; verbal karma is the behavioral activity of the six consciousnesses; mental karma is divided into the mental conduct and mental factors of the mind consciousness and the mental conduct and mental factors of the manas. Bodily and verbal actions are directed by the mind; without mind, bodily and verbal karma cannot be created. Bodily and verbal karma are created by the six consciousnesses, which are directed by the manas. But the mind consciousness, understanding principles, can subdue the manas and forcibly prevent the creation of bodily and verbal karma. Therefore bodily karma is easiest to eradicate, verbal karma next; for both, subduing them with the mind consciousness suffices. What is hard to eradicate is the mind consciousness's mental conduct, and hardest to eradicate is the manas's mental conduct.
The manas is very difficult to subdue and conquer, and even harder to eradicate its afflictions; therefore the manas's mental karma certainly has greed, hatred, and delusion unceasing. It is only that the mind consciousness understands principles, knows cause and effect, and will subdue and suppress body and speech from creating unwholesome karma. If the manas's afflictions are heavy, even body and speech cannot be suppressed, and unwholesome karma will certainly be created. So it is relatively easy for the body not to commit killing, stealing, or sexual misconduct, and somewhat easier for the mouth not to commit divisive speech, false speech, frivolous speech, or harsh speech; the hardest is the manas—its thoughts of greed, hatred, and delusion cannot be subdued or suppressed, and are even harder to eradicate.
Some people, seeing that keeping precepts with the body is rather difficult and keeping precepts with speech is also rather difficult, make excuses saying, "I'll just guard my mental karma; as long as my mind is pure and my mental karma is not violated, then no matter what my body and speech do, it doesn't count as breaking precepts." This is the most inverted, foolish idea and practice. If one cannot even control the body's actions, one even less can control the manas's afflicted thoughts; if one cannot even stop the creation of verbal karma, one even less can stop the manas's afflicted thoughts. If the manas's afflicted thoughts can be stopped, that is something only sages of the third fruit and above can achieve—how could an ordinary person directly guard the manas's mental karma and make the manas pure and precept-keeping?
The Hīnayāna five precepts, the eight precepts of the fasting day, and the monastic bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī precepts generally focus mainly on restraining the unwholesome karma of body and speech; as long as body and speech do not transgress, even evil thoughts and musings in the mind do not count as breaking precepts. Mahāyāna precepts, such as the Brahmajāla bodhisattva precepts, mainly restrain and cultivate the mind-ground, and also restrain body and speech incidentally. The bodhisattva precepts in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra are mind-ground precepts that should be observed by bhūmi-level bodhisattvas who have already eradicated afflictions; everything takes sentient beings' benefit as primary and paramount. As long as it can benefit sentient beings, body and speech may be inconsistent with Hīnayāna precept conduct, as long as they are consistent with the pure mind-ground of the manas, and as long as the manas does not violate the Hīnayāna precepts. Then this mental conduct of acting entirely for sentient beings is the Mahāyāna bodhisattva's mental conduct, conforming to the norms of the Mahāyāna bodhisattva precepts. If ordinary beings and stage-of-merit bodhisattvas whose greed, hatred, and delusion afflictions have not been eradicated attempt to receive and keep the bodhisattva precepts in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, they cannot, because of selfishness and afflictions.
