Speaking of a Monk's Faults Is Itself Evil

From the day the first monastics appeared, Buddhism established the Saṅgha; when the monastic Saṅgha perishes, Buddhism perishes—this has scriptural basis. All those who have been shaved and ordained and received monastic precepts belong to the Three Jewels, serving a representative function and standing for Buddhism. As for how well they represent it, that is an internal matter of the monastics and the Saṅgha, and outsiders have no right to interfere.

Monastics are bound and regulated by precepts and by cause and effect; even if they violate the precepts, laypeople are not permitted to gossip about it. Therefore the Buddha did not allow laypeople to read the monastic precepts, lest they measure monastics' words and deeds against the precept clauses, then give rise to arrogance, accuse them of offenses, and publicize the faults of monastics, thereby creating the evil karma of slandering the Three Jewels, whose retribution is fearsome. Monastics are governed by the Saṅgha, and the Saṅgha will deal with their faults and offenses; for those without a Saṅgha, or those the Saṅgha cannot govern, the Dharma-protecting deities and cause and effect will govern them. But laypeople have no standing to govern, and laypeople must absolutely never speak of any fault of the Saṅgha.

On the day of self-confession (pravāraṇā), monastics confess their own violations of the precepts and expose one another's violations and faults; laypeople are not allowed to eavesdrop. If anyone eavesdrops, the Dharma-protecting deities will cut off their head with a sword. This is precisely to prevent laypeople from learning of the precept violations and faults committed by monastics and then criticizing and publicizing them. If a layperson criticizes and publicizes the faults of monastics—whether or not the faults are true—it is the evil karma of slander, and at death the retribution is rebirth in the three evil destinies or in hell. For those with grave evil karma, the flowering retribution manifests in this very life; they cannot even wait for the retribution of future lives.

Some people only see where monastics fall short, but are blind to the worldly benefits monastics have renounced. Even if monastics frequently violate precepts and often commit evil, could they possibly commit more evil than laypeople? Laypeople eat fish and meat every day and are constantly entangled in desires hard to cut off. Comparing the two, whose karma is greater? Otherwise, with so many people who consider themselves lofty and pure, why don't they go forth and take on the identity of a monastic? Is it hard to leave home? It is not hard—it is only because they cannot let go of the various desires and pleasures of the world; worldly benefits are hard to renounce. And so they regard the lay status as superior and exalted, criticizing monastics and the Saṅgha at every turn. Since the Saṅgha is supposedly so wretched, why not give rise to a great resolve, renounce worldly desires, and bravely go forth for the sake of Buddhism, for sentient beings, and for one's own long-kalpa career on the Path? Would not protecting Buddhism and sentient beings with a monastic body be far more beneficial?

In the Buddha's time, whether Devadatta or the bhikṣu Sunakṣatra committed evil, it was the Buddha and the Saṅgha who restrained and punished them; others had no right to interfere. If the Buddha could not govern them and the Saṅgha could not govern them, cause and effect would sanction them—falling into hell while still alive. In the Buddha's time, the group of six bhikṣus committed countless evils, yet even after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa they remained bhikṣus. At the time of the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, the group of six bhikṣus drank alcohol and ate meat, clamoring loudly in celebration of the Buddha's parinirvāṇa. The Buddha, having no recourse, covered the eyes and ears of the devas so they would not hear it, but the Buddha did not manifest supernatural powers to punish them.

When the Buddha was in the world, the Buddha was supreme; after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, the precepts are supreme—whichever precepts carry the greatest authority, that one is regarded as supreme and exalted. The manifestations of regarding the precepts as supreme are: first, monastics and laypeople do not live together, and those with different precepts do not live together—even among monastics, if their precepts differ, they still may not live together; second, in walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, in performing Buddhist affairs, and at the uposatha (poṣadha), those who received precepts earlier come first and those who received them later come after; monastic bodhisattva precepts rank before lay bodhisattva precepts, and lay bodhisattva precepts rank before the lay five precepts and eight precepts.