Chinese
如所说行近圆戒，以及现在仪轨《义绳》中所说的布萨（斋戒）誓言等。 殊胜仪轨与共通的大乘别解脱戒，是在发愿菩提心时获得的别解脱戒，以及通过灌顶的准备阶段获得的别解脱戒等。 --- ཇ༣ 第三，[受戒对象之差别]是： 受戒对象出家在家持戒者， 共通的誓言（戒律）受持对象是具足合格条件的出家僧团；而不共通的布萨（斋戒）等，如同《示神通经》中所说，亦可由穿着在家服饰的持戒者（47页上）受持。 --- ཇ༤ 第四，[所依之差别]是： 所依亦共通，彼亦不共通， 何种菩提心，此戒便生起。 受持该誓言（戒律）的所依，与声闻共通的，则需要如彼处所说；而不共通的，则是在大乘菩提心何者能够被授予，此誓言（戒律）亦会在此处生起。 --- ཇ༥ 第五，[开遮（许可与禁止）之差别]是： 特殊需要时，七断（身语不善业）许行。 共通的学处仪轨，当自己所受的别解脱戒没有特殊开遮（需要破戒）的必要时，必须如声闻一样守护；因为在金刚乘的语境中，无故逾越两种誓言（戒律）的誓约（学处）是被说为堕罪的。如果存在为利益有情等特殊需要，则身语的七种不善业（过失）皆被允许，如同《入菩萨行论》中所说： 具悲者远观， 所禁亦许彼。 因此，若为特殊需要，七种身语不善（过失）皆可开许。 不共通的仪轨中，自己受持布萨（斋戒），与近住戒在守护方面没有差别。 --- ཇ༦ 第六，[恢复方式之差别]是： 覆藏堕罪可忏悔重受， 支分堕罪以四力忏净， 由心而离堕罪非断破。 声闻和共通的情况，如果犯了覆藏的根本堕罪，大多数持律者认为不能再次受戒。这种对于实践的存疑态度是非常好的。而如杰·赤列巴（Jey Trinley pa）等大师则认为，无论根本堕罪是覆藏还是不覆藏，都应该追悔...
English
Such as the bhikṣu (fully ordained monk) vows as explained, and the Sojong (restoration and purification) vows and so forth, as explained in the current ritual text "The Rope of Meaning". The superior rituals and the common Mahāyāna Pratimokṣa (individual liberation) vows are those Pratimokṣa vows obtained at the stage of aspiring Bodhicitta, and those Pratimokṣa vows obtained from the preparatory stages of empowerments. --- ཇ༣ Third, [the distinction of the recipients] is: Recipients are monastics, householders who uphold vows. The common vows can be received by fully qualified monastic Sangha; and for the uncommon Sojong and so forth, as explained in the Sūtra on Demonstrating Miracles, they can also be received by householders who uphold vows, even in lay attire (page 47 upper). --- ཇ༤ Fourth, [the distinction of the basis] is: The basis also is common and likewise uncommon. In whichever Bodhicitta arises, these vows are born. The basis for receiving these vows, those common with the Śrāvakas, must be as explained there; as for the uncommon ones, these vows also arise in whichever Mahāyāna Bodhicitta is suitable to be conferred upon. --- ཇ༥ Fifth, [the distinction of what is permitted and forbidden] is: For special needs, the seven renunciations (of body and speech) are permitted. Regarding the common precepts and rituals, when there is no special need to violate the Pratimokṣa vows one has received, they must be observed exactly as by the Śrāvakas; this is because transgressing the commitments of both sets of vows without need is taught to be a downfall in the context of Vajrayāna. However, if there is a special need, such as for the benefit of sentient beings, all seven non-virtues of body and speech, which are faults, are permitted. As stated in the Bodhicaryāvatāra (Engaging in the Bodhisattva's Conduct): By those endowed with compassion, having far-reaching insight, Even the prohibitions are permitted for them. Just as it is said. As for the uncommon ritual of taking the Sojong vows oneself, there is no difference from the Upavasa (one-day vows) in terms of what is to be observed. --- ཇ༦ Sixth, [the distinction of how to restore] is: Downfalls with concealment can be restored by confession and retaking vows. Branch downfalls are purified by confession with the four opponent powers. One rises from downfalls by intention, not by breaking vows. Most Vinaya-holders explain that for those common with Śrāvakas, if a defeat (root downfall) occurs with concealment, the vows cannot be retaken. This perspective of practical doubt is very good. However, masters like Jey Trinley pa and others state that whether a root downfall occurs with or without concealment, one should regret...