English
English version If a Bhikkhu (Buddhist monk) touches a woman, it constitutes a Sanghavasesa (a serious offense requiring a meeting of the Sangha, the monastic community), involving four clauses. If a woman touches a Bhikkhu, it constitutes a Thullaccaya (a less serious offense), involving two clauses. These six clauses are omitted here for brevity. Below, the cases of 'with clothing' and 'without clothing', which constitute Thullaccaya, will be explained in detail. In the above two cases, if both are 'without clothing', and if there is doubt about the Bhikkhu's actions, it constitutes a lesser Thullaccaya (attempted Thullaccaya). Previously, if a woman touched a Bhikkhu and the Bhikkhu did not accept this pleasure, it constitutes two instances of attempted Thullaccaya. If there is doubt that two instances of Dukkata (a minor offense) were committed in one event. Regarding the cases of 'with clothing' and 'without clothing', there are ten clauses of Thullaccaya for each of the nine situations. The first eight clauses, one is 'with clothing', one is 'naked', the text is brief and not fully explained. The first clause should say 'moves the body, accepts the pleasure of touch'. The second clause should say 'does not move the body, does not accept the pleasure of touch'. These two clauses refer to a Bhikkhu touching a woman. The third and fourth clauses are the same as the above two, but the difference is that the woman touches the Bhikkhu. The fifth and sixth clauses also refer to a Bhikkhu touching a woman. The seventh and eighth clauses also refer to a woman touching a Bhikkhu. The ninth and tenth clauses refer to both man and woman being 'without clothing'. However, if the woman is a corpse, half-decayed, or even completely decayed, it constitutes Thullaccaya. There should be a total of ninety clauses. Possessing all four conditions constitutes ultimate Thullaccaya. If there is doubt, it constitutes ninety instances of attempted Dukkata. If there is doubt that each constitutes six instances of attempted Dukkata. If one rubs or touches a woman and lacks any one of the four conditions, it constitutes attempted Thullaccaya. For example, if one thinks of a human as a non-human, or doubts whether it is a human, these two cases lack the condition of inner intention. If one thinks of a non-human as a human, it lacks the condition of the object. If one doubts whether it is a non-human, it lacks both the conditions of object and inner intention. These four cases all lack the four conditions, so the severity may vary, but all constitute attempted Thullaccaya. If one touches a non-human, a Hermaphrodite, or a Dual-gendered person, and possesses all four conditions, it constitutes ultimate Thullaccaya. If one doubts that it is a man or thinks it is a man, it constitutes attempted Dukkata. If one touches a human, a man, an animal, or a woman, and possesses all four conditions, each constitutes ultimate Dukkata. Because there is no further action in these cases, it is called 'ultimate'. Because there can be a result acting as a cause, it is called 'attempted'. The Third Precept on Harsh Speech: Using harsh speech also requires four conditions to constitute Sanghavasesa. What are the four conditions? First, a human woman; second, the perception of a human; third, having lustful intent; fourth, the harsh speech is understandable. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
是四也。若四缘阙一犯方便偷兰。若广解究竟方便同如前摩触中无异。但从此戒以下尽二谤有七戒。通初漏失八戒。若沙弥时教人作方便。事究竟进受具戒。先所事今始成败。此比丘任运更不营助得犯僧残罪。所以尔者。此七戒容得教人为已作故尔。漏失虽教人同犯。但沙弥时作方便后漏失犹无故。尔余之五戒不尔。无有教为已作我成究竟也。粗粗恶恶语得僧残者。然前人解语故得罪。非是已解便得罪。已不解不得罪。何以知之。律云。不以不知故得脱。是故但使内有染心。前人解语便得其罪。不待已知是粗恶也。下一句亦如是。第三句非粗恶已。谓粗恶下句亦同也。 赞叹语戒第四 作余食。不食者明青旦食粥。日中食饭。一坐食者。明此人一食。揣食者一受食也。常坐者昼夜不卧。随坐者三衣常随身。持三衣者三衣外无长财。若从受经者女人就比丘诵经。而经中有叹身语不犯。若二人共受诵者然。女比丘二人就他受诵经。而经文有叹身语不犯。若同诵者女人比丘共诵一部经叹身语亦不犯。 媒嫁戒第五 就此戒五段文。就因缘中有三子段。第一从初讫可与此男已来。明起过。第二从时诸比丘以下讫具白世尊已来。明诸比丘举白佛。第三从世尊尔时以下讫正法文住已来。明举过呵啧。就广解中有三段。 现代汉语译本： 是第四条戒。如果促成四种缘起中的任何一种缺失，则犯方便偷兰罪（Thullananda，一种僧侣戒律中的罪名）。如果广义地解释究竟方便，则与之前的摩触（触摸）戒中没有区别。但从此戒以下，所有涉及二谤（诽谤）的情况都有七条戒。如果包括最初的漏失，则有八条戒。如果沙弥（Sramanera，佛教出家沙弥）时期教人作方便，事情究竟完成，之后才受具足戒（Upasampada，佛教比丘或比丘尼的正式出家仪式），那么先前所做的事情现在才构成违犯。此比丘（Bhiksu，佛教比丘）自然而然地不再营助，则犯僧残罪（Sanghavasesa，一种较重的僧侣戒律罪名）。之所以如此，是因为这七条戒允许教人为自己做事。漏失虽然教人也会同样犯戒，但沙弥时期所作的方便，之后漏失仍然没有罪过。其余五戒则不然，没有教人为自己做事而我成就究竟的情况。粗俗恶劣的语言导致僧残罪的情况是，因为之前的人理解了语言才构成犯罪。不是因为已经理解就构成犯罪，不理解则不构成犯罪。为什么知道这一点呢？律中说：‘不能因为不知情而免罪。’因此，只要内心有染污之心，之前的人理解了语言，就构成犯罪，不必等到已经知道是粗俗恶劣的语言。下一句也是如此。第三句并非粗俗恶劣，而是粗俗恶劣的下一句也相同。 赞叹语戒第四：制作剩余的食物，不食用的人，说明青旦（早上）食用粥，中午食用饭。‘一坐食’说明此人一次性食用。‘揣食’指一次接受食物。‘常坐’指昼夜不卧。‘随坐’指三衣（Tricivara，比丘或比丘尼的三件袈裟）常随身。‘持三衣’指三衣之外没有长财（长期拥有的财产）。如果从（比丘处）接受经文，女人就比丘诵经，而经文中有赞叹身语的内容，则不犯戒。如果是两个人一起接受诵经，那么女比丘两个人就他（比丘）接受诵经，而经文中有赞叹身语的内容，则不犯戒。如果是共同诵经，女人和比丘共同诵一部经，其中有赞叹身语的内容，也不犯戒。 媒嫁戒第五：关于此戒有五段文字。关于因缘中有三个子段。第一段从最初到‘可以给这个男人’为止，说明了过失的产生。第二段从‘当时诸比丘’以下到‘具白世尊’为止，说明了诸比丘向佛陀禀告。第三段从‘世尊尔时’以下到‘正法文住’为止，说明了举出过失并加以呵斥。关于广义解释有三段。
English
English version: This is the fourth precept. If any of the four conditions are lacking, it constitutes a Thullananda offense (a type of monastic offense) through expedient means. If the ultimate expedient means are broadly interpreted, there is no difference from the previous precept regarding touching. However, from this precept onwards, all instances involving two slanders have seven precepts. Including the initial omission, there are eight precepts. If a Sramanera (novice monk) teaches someone to create an expedient means, and the matter is ultimately completed, and then he receives full ordination (Upasampada, the formal ordination ceremony for a Bhiksu or Bhiksuni), then what was done previously now constitutes a violation. If this Bhiksu (monk) naturally ceases to assist, he commits a Sanghavasesa offense (a more serious monastic offense). The reason for this is that these seven precepts allow teaching others to act for oneself. Although omission also constitutes an offense when teaching others, the expedient means created during the Sramanera period, followed by omission, still does not constitute an offense. The remaining five precepts are not like this; there is no situation where teaching others to act for oneself results in my ultimate accomplishment. In the case of coarse and malicious language leading to a Sanghavasesa offense, it is because the previous person understood the language that the offense is constituted. It is not that the offense is constituted simply because it has been understood; if it is not understood, then no offense is constituted. How is this known? The Vinaya (monastic code) states: 'One cannot be excused due to ignorance.' Therefore, as long as there is defilement in the mind, and the previous person understands the language, the offense is constituted, without needing to already know that it is coarse and malicious language. The next sentence is also like this. The third sentence is not coarse and malicious; rather, the sentence following coarse and malicious is the same. The fourth precept regarding praising speech: Making leftover food, for those who do not eat it, specifies eating porridge in the morning and eating rice at noon. 'Eating in one sitting' specifies that this person eats all at once. 'Eating a handful' refers to receiving food once. 'Always sitting' refers to not lying down day or night. 'Following sitting' refers to always keeping the three robes (Tricivara, the three robes of a monk or nun) with oneself. 'Holding the three robes' refers to having no long-term possessions other than the three robes. If receiving scripture from (a monk), and a woman recites scripture to a monk, and there is praise of the body or speech in the scripture, then no offense is committed. If two people receive and recite scripture together, then if two nuns receive and recite scripture from him (a monk), and there is praise of the body or speech in the scripture, then no offense is committed. If reciting scripture together, and a woman and a monk recite a scripture together, and there is praise of the body or speech in it, then no offense is committed. The fifth precept regarding matchmaking: Regarding this precept, there are five sections of text. Regarding the causes and conditions, there are three sub-sections. The first section, from the beginning to 'can be given to this man,' explains the arising of the fault. The second section, from 'at that time, the monks' down to 'fully reported to the World Honored One,' explains the monks reporting to the Buddha. The third section, from 'the World Honored One at that time' down to 'the Dharma text remains,' explains pointing out the fault and scolding. Regarding the broad explanation, there are three sections. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
第一从初讫女种亦知是已来。明二十种女人二十种男。第二从母谁女以下讫现相还报四句亦如是已来。正明所行媒。第三从若比丘受语往彼还报以下讫末。明结罪轻重。第二正明媒嫁。若自受语语彼还报有十六句。自受书作头亦作十六句。指印现相亦皆有十六句。都合六十四句。下复有四十八句。但经文隐。但出自受语自持书往彼自持指印报作十二句。自受书作头但出四句便止。亦应有十二句。自受书作头但出四句便止。亦应有十二句。何者初四。律文自有第二四句。应言。受书自持指印往彼自持语还报。自受书自持指印往彼遣使持语还报。自受书遣使持指印往彼自持语还报。自受书遣使持指印往彼遣使持语还报。第三四句自受书自持现相往彼自持语还报。自受书自持现相往彼遣使持语还报。自受书遣使持现相往彼自持语还报。自受书遣使持现相往彼遣使持语还报。指印作头亦应作十二句。初四句。自受指印自持现相往彼自持语还报。自受指印自持现相往彼遣使持语还报。自受指印遣使持现相往彼自持语还报。自受指印遣使持现相往彼遣使持语还报。第二四句。自受指印自持现相往彼自持书还报。自受指印自持现相往彼遣使持书还报。自受指印遣使持现相往彼自持书还报。自受指印遣使持现相往彼遣使持书还报。第三 现代汉语译本： 第一部分从一开始到‘女种亦知是已来’，阐明了二十种女人和二十种男人。第二部分从‘母谁女’以下到‘现相还报四句亦如是已来’，明确说明了所进行的媒合行为。第三部分从‘若比丘受语往彼还报’以下到结尾，阐明了结罪的轻重，并再次明确说明了媒嫁行为。 如果自己接受话语并前往对方处回报，共有十六句。如果自己接受书信并作为开始，也有十六句。如果指示印记和呈现相貌，也各有十六句。总共有六十四句。下面还有四十八句，但经文有所隐藏。只是从自己接受话语，自己拿着书信前往对方处，自己拿着指印回报，构成了十二句。自己接受书信作为开始，只出现了四句就停止了，也应该有十二句。自己接受书信作为开始，只出现了四句就停止了，也应该有十二句。哪最初的四句呢？律文本身就有第二组四句，应该说：接受书信，自己拿着指印前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；接受书信，自己拿着指印前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报；接受书信，派遣使者拿着指印前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；接受书信，派遣使者拿着指印前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报。第三组四句：自己接受书信，自己拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；自己接受书信，自己拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报；自己接受书信，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；自己接受书信，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报。以指印作为开始，也应该有十二句。最初的四句：自己接受指印，自己拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；自己接受指印，自己拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报；自己接受指印，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着话语回报；自己接受指印，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着话语回报。第二组四句：自己接受指印，自己拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着书信回报；自己接受指印，自己拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着书信回报；自己接受指印，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，自己拿着书信回报；自己接受指印，派遣使者拿着现相前往对方处，派遣使者拿着书信回报。第三