English
English version One must first break through the pure realms of the four Dhyanas (meditative states) in the Form Realm (Rupadhatu) to attain this Samadhi (state of meditative consciousness). Hence, it is called 'Cessation of Perception of Form' (Rupa-samjna-nirodha). Samadhi without cessation of perception of form is the Samadhi of the Sphere of Consciousness (Vijnanaskandha-samadhi). Samadhi with the cessation of (some) perception of form is the Samadhi of Different Spheres. Samadhi with the cessation of all (perception of form) is the Samadhi of the Sphere of Neither Perception Nor Non-Perception (Nasaṃvāda-samadhi). The eleven aspects of the path (Ekadasanga-magga) must be equipped with eleven types of Samadhi. The initial realization of emptiness of self-nature, in harmony with the subsequent attainment of various wisdoms, is called 'Dharma is Empty' (法已空). Similarly, understanding the past and future as also empty is called 'Comparative Wisdom' (比智). The text says 'good form' is the cause of goodness, and 'evil form' is the cause of evil. Good realms are the result of happiness, and evil realms are the result of suffering. Good actions lead to good results, bad actions lead to bad results, noble actions lead to happy results, and base actions lead to painful results. Regarding Bhikkhunis (female monastics) and below, the fourth general precept involves offenses related to the five aggregates (Skandhas). The severity of the offense of false speech differs slightly from killing and stealing. Killing and stealing require actual harm to the object, and the intention may also be considered when determining the offense. False speech is different; as long as one knows that one's heart is false and speaks falsely, one can be convicted, and the intention may also be considered. If the intention is difficult to determine, the offense is determined based on the object to which it is directed. Therefore, if a person thinks of a non-human as a human, the offense is determined as a Sthulanacchaya (a serious offense) based on the actual situation. Even if it is an actual offense, deceptive means were still used. If one thinks of a human as a non-human, one commits a Prayascitta-sthaulatya (a serious offense of attempt). If there is doubt as to whether a person is a non-human, both cases constitute a Prayascitta-laghutva (a minor offense of attempt). If one thinks of a non-human, one commits a Niravadya-laghutva (a minor offense of completion). If one deceives an animal, one commits a Dushkrta (a minor offense) and needs to confess once. If one deceives a non-human who does not understand, one commits a Prayascitta-dukkhata (a minor offense of attempt). Question: If one instigates another to commit adultery or false speech, is the offense a Sthulanacchaya, a Prayascitta, or a single offense? Answer: Causing another to commit a serious offense can also be considered a Prayascitta. Stopping oneself (from committing the offense) ultimately cannot (prevent others from committing the offense). Accomplishing (the offense) through one's own (actions) is also called a Niravadya. The fifth part below explains the opening up. The Vinaya text says: 'As before and after, so it is.' 'As before' refers to when one was a Upasaka (layman) or Sramanera (novice), one could not be counted as part of the Sangha's quorum to perform Karma (Sangha affairs) or Posadha (bi-monthly recitation of precepts) before a Mahasramana (senior monastic). Later, after becoming a Bhikkhu (monk), if one commits one of the four Parajikas (cardinal offenses), one cannot participate in asking questions or consulting, so it is said 'after, so it is.' Another explanation is that 'as before' refers to previously committing adultery and receiving a serious offense, and later killing, stealing, or deceiving also results in a serious offense, so it is said 'after, so it is.' Another explanation is that 'as before' refers to initially committing adultery and receiving a serious offense, and later committing adultery again results in a serious offense. It's like using this to verify and compare. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
丘犯戒不失其戒。但业障重故现身不皆圣道。未来复有苦对 问曰。此律言。比丘初作重恶犯重。又更作亦犯重罪。僧祇毗婆沙第二重犯得突吉罗。何故不同 答曰。诸律互说一罪。随用不同故作二名。此律言。重者比丘虽不足僧数。由在僧中得听说戒。异于沙弥故言犯。余律言。犯轻者正以不足僧数故。便同沙弥故结突吉罗。半月说戒唯列罪事非戒。何故言说戒。戒本对防罪事。若不列罪事戒无由可识知差别。半月唱说罪事。五遍轻重不同。为破欲使人识知。能防戒体差别。从所为作名。故言说戒。亦可本说罪事为欲持戒。由说戒而生。故言说戒。 第二遍 僧伽者重举初遍。名为无余。犯之净戒永尽故曰无余。婆尸沙者名曰有余。犯之净戒不尽。谓之有余。后一解。僧伽者言属。婆尸沙者言僧。此罪要由僧灭故曰属僧。就此遍中。若欲料简可有六种。第一明此僧残中或有是性恶者。或有是遮恶。何者是。初四戒。后六戒。此十戒性是不善。中有三戒非是性恶。但媒嫁和合死生。二房长其贪求。皆是障道。是故圣教通制。第二明僧残。是初遍种类初五戒皆是欲心所起。是淫戒种类。二房从贪心起。是盗戒种类。二谤从瞋心起。是妄语种类。后四戒亦从瞋心起。是妄语种类。第三明配三业。初二戒身业成就。次 现代汉语译本： 比丘（bhiksu）即使犯戒，也不会完全失去戒体。但由于业障深重，所以显现的身相并不都是圣道。未来还会有相应的苦果报应。有人问：‘此律中说，比丘初次犯下重罪（指僧残罪），再次犯同样的罪也是犯重罪。但在《僧祇律》（Samghika-vinaya）和《毗婆沙论》（Vibhasa）中说，第二次犯同样的罪只判突吉罗（dukkhata，轻罪）。为什么会有不同呢？’回答说：‘各种律典对同一罪行的描述各有侧重。因为侧重点不同，所以使用了不同的名称。此律典中说，犯重罪是因为比丘即使人数不足僧团的要求，但由于身在僧团中，可以听闻戒律，这与沙弥（sramanera）不同，所以说犯重罪。其他律典中说，犯轻罪是因为人数不足僧团的要求，与沙弥相同，所以判突吉罗。半月诵戒只是列举罪行，并非传授戒律，为什么说是诵戒呢？戒本是为了防止罪行发生。如果不列举罪行，就无法识别戒律的差别。半月诵戒时，五次唱诵罪行，轻重不同，是为了破除（比丘的）欲念，使人能够识别，从而防止戒体的破坏。这是从所做的事情来命名的，所以说是诵戒。也可以说，诵戒的根本目的是为了持戒，持戒是由诵戒而产生的，所以说是诵戒。’ 第二遍：‘僧伽’（samgha）是指重复第一次唱诵，名为‘无余’，意思是犯了这种罪，清净的戒体就永远丧失了，所以说是‘无余’。‘婆尸沙’（vasesa）的意思是‘有余’，意思是犯了这种罪，清净的戒体不会完全丧失，所以说是‘有余’。另一种解释是，‘僧伽’是指‘属于’，‘婆尸沙’是指‘僧团’。这种罪必须由僧团来处理，所以说是‘属于僧团’。就这一遍而言，如果要进行分析，可以有六种情况。第一，说明僧残罪中，有些是性恶（本质上就是恶的），有些是遮恶（佛陀为了防止某种不好的结果而制定的）。哪些是性恶，哪些是遮恶呢？前四条戒和后六条戒，这十条戒的本质是不善的。中间的三条戒不是性恶，只是媒合婚姻、调解争端、建造房屋，这些行为本身如果过于贪求，都会成为修道的障碍，所以佛陀制定戒律来禁止。第二，说明僧残罪的种类。前五条戒都是由欲心引起的，属于淫戒的种类。建造房屋是从贪心引起的，属于盗戒的种类。两次诽谤是从嗔心引起的，属于妄语的种类。后四条戒也是从嗔心引起的，属于妄语的种类。第三，说明如何与身、口、意三业相对应。前两条戒是身业成就的，其次
English
English version: A bhiksu (monk) who violates a precept does not entirely lose their precepts. However, due to heavy karmic obstacles, their manifested form is not always aligned with the noble path. There will be corresponding suffering in the future. Someone asks: 'This Vinaya (code of conduct) states that if a bhiksu initially commits a grave offense (referring to sanghavasesa offenses), committing the same offense again is also a grave offense. However, the Samghika-vinaya and Vibhasa state that committing the same offense a second time only incurs a dukkhata (minor offense). Why is there a difference?' The answer is: 'Various Vinayas describe the same offense with different emphases. Because the emphasis differs, different names are used. This Vinaya states that it is a grave offense because the bhiksu, even if the number of monks is insufficient for a formal sangha (community), is still within the sangha and can hear the precepts, which is different from a sramanera (novice monk), hence it is called a grave offense. Other Vinayas state that it is a minor offense because the number of monks is insufficient for a formal sangha, making them similar to a sramanera, hence it incurs a dukkhata. The fortnightly recitation of precepts only lists offenses and does not transmit precepts, so why is it called reciting precepts? The Pratimoksha (code of monastic discipline) is to prevent offenses. If offenses are not listed, the differences in precepts cannot be recognized. During the fortnightly recitation of precepts, offenses are chanted five times with varying degrees of severity to break (the monks') desires and enable people to recognize and prevent the destruction of the precepts. This is named based on the actions performed, hence it is called reciting precepts. It can also be said that the fundamental purpose of reciting offenses is to uphold the precepts, and upholding the precepts arises from reciting the precepts, hence it is called reciting precepts.' Second recitation: 'Samgha' (community) refers to repeating the first recitation, called 'without remainder,' meaning that if this offense is committed, the pure precepts are lost forever, hence it is called 'without remainder.' 'Vasesa' means 'with remainder,' meaning that if this offense is committed, the pure precepts are not completely lost, hence it is called 'with remainder.' Another explanation is that 'Samgha' means 'belonging to,' and 'Vasesa' means 'sangha.' This offense must be dealt with by the sangha, hence it is called 'belonging to the sangha.' Regarding this recitation, if we want to analyze it, there can be six situations. First, it explains that among the sanghavasesa offenses, some are intrinsically evil (evil in nature), and some are preventively evil (established by the Buddha to prevent certain bad consequences). Which are intrinsically evil, and which are preventively evil? The first four precepts and the last six precepts, these ten precepts are intrinsically unwholesome. The three precepts in the middle are not intrinsically evil, but mediating marriages, settling disputes, and building houses, if these actions themselves are excessively greedy, they will become obstacles to cultivation, so the Buddha established precepts to prohibit them. Second, it explains the types of sanghavasesa offenses. The first five precepts are all caused by desire, belonging to the category of sexual misconduct. Building houses is caused by greed, belonging to the category of theft. The two slanders are caused by anger, belonging to the category of false speech. The last four precepts are also caused by anger, belonging to the category of false speech. Third, it explains how they correspond to the three karmas of body, speech, and mind. The first two precepts are accomplished by bodily karma, and the next --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
三戒多是口业成就。亦有身业成就。二房身口业成就。后六戒多是口业。亦容有身业。一切戒尽有意业。第四明二部僧轻重不同。初大僧犯重。尼波逸提。摩触大僧轻。尼波罗夷。二粗恶语二房。尼尽偷兰遮。所以尔者。皆有其意漏失。比丘所以重者。能感苦果相续。男要由外失。是故重也。女人能感生死相续。要由内入。不由外失。是故外所以轻也。女人生患处深。复是志弱。以受摩触必成大恶。是故制重。二粗恶语是成重方便。是偷兰遮罪。尼本独宿。私独作房仪少。是故但得偷兰。第五料简僧残。自作教人犯罪轻重不同。初二戒后四戒。此六戒自作正犯。教人自犯轻。中间七戒自作教人容有俱犯。所以然者。凡犯戒由于贪瞋如犯。初二戒皆由内有染情。自作称心与乐受相应。是故正犯。若使教人适不在已。是故不得同犯。直以由教他为恶但犯偷兰。后有四戒。犯本由于瞋心。自作违僧三谏。有称情之义。是故犯僧残。若教人犯者瞋心则少。僧不设谏。是故犯轻。中间七戒如二粗恶语犯。虽由爱心恶由前人知解。自作教人皆得表。已有染来已知染不殊。是故同犯。媒嫁一戒犯。由作使和合。自作教人皆得作使。是同犯。二房犯由贪心欲自资已。又恼乱处旷。自作教人为已作。皆是资已。又恼处不异。是故同犯。若 现代汉语译本 三戒（指前三条戒律）多半是由于口业而成就的，也有因身业而成就的。第二类（指中间的）两条戒律是因身口业而成就的。后面的六条戒律多半是口业，但也可能包含身业。一切戒律都与意业有关。第四点说明了比丘（bhiksu，男性僧侣）和比丘尼（bhiksuni，女性僧侣）在犯戒时的轻重不同。一开始，比丘犯重罪，比丘尼则犯波逸提（payattika，一种轻罪）。如果（比丘尼）触摸比丘，比丘犯轻罪，比丘尼则犯波罗夷（parajika，最重的罪）。对于两类粗恶语，比丘尼都犯偷兰遮（stulatyaya，一种中等罪），这是因为她们都有意念上的缺失。比丘之所以罪重，是因为他们能感召连续不断的苦果，而且男性的精要在于向外流失，所以罪重。女性能感召生死相续，精要在于向内摄入，而不是向外流失，所以（触摸比丘）罪轻。女性的生患之处很深，而且意志薄弱，如果接受触摸必然酿成大恶，所以制定重罪。两类粗恶语是构成重罪的方便，是偷兰遮罪。比丘尼原本是独自居住，私下独自建造房屋的仪式很少，所以只判偷兰遮罪。第五点辨析僧残（samghavasesa，仅次于波罗夷的重罪），自己做和教唆他人犯罪的轻重不同。最初的两条戒律和最后的四条戒律，这六条戒律自己做是正犯，教唆他人自己犯则罪轻。中间的七条戒律，自己做和教唆他人可能都是同犯。之所以如此，是因为凡是犯戒都是由于贪婪和嗔恨，比如犯最初的两条戒律都是由于内心有染污的情感，自己做时称心如意，与快乐的感受相应，所以是正犯。如果教唆他人，自己并不参与，所以不能同犯，只能因为教唆他人作恶而犯偷兰遮罪。后面的四条戒律，犯戒的根本在于嗔恨心，自己做时违背僧团的三次劝谏，有称心如意的意味，所以犯僧残罪。如果教唆他人犯戒，嗔恨心就少，僧团也没有进行劝谏，所以犯轻罪。中间的七条戒律，比如两类粗恶语，虽然由于爱心，但恶行是由于前人的知解。自己做和教唆他人都能构成表罪，因为自己已经有染污，知道染污并不不同，所以是同犯。媒嫁这一条戒律，犯戒是由于作为使者促成和合。自己做和教唆他人都能作为使者，所以是同犯。二房（指建造房屋）的犯戒，是由于贪心想要自己资用，又在恼乱之处空旷。自己做和教唆他人为自己做，都是为了资用自己，而且恼乱之处没有不同，所以是同犯。如果