English
English version The same applies to walls and moats. If the *dānavati* (donor) disposes of it themselves, or if the *sangha* (monastic community) disposes of it themselves, it is all called 'pure four'. If a *bhikṣu* (monk) builds a monastery and invites the *sangha* to enter, with walls around it, and after a long time wants to make this place a pure land, it is necessary to perform a *baini karmā* (a type of *sangha* meeting procedure). When establishing the boundary, it is not necessary to consider whether a *poṣadha sīmā* (area for holding the bi-monthly recitation of precepts) has been established before, as long as the *karmā* for making a pure land can be performed. Venerable *sangha*, please listen, if the *sangha* deems the time appropriate and agrees, then the *sangha* now establishes a pure land in a certain place. Announce as above. Venerable *sangha*, please listen, now we establish a boundary at a certain place as a pure land. Which elder agrees to the *sangha* establishing a boundary at a certain place as a pure land? Silence. If anyone disagrees, please speak up. The *sangha* has agreed, the establishment of a boundary at a certain place as a pure land is complete. The *sangha* agrees, silence, therefore this matter is carried out in this way. The *dānavati* (donor) of the *saṃghika* (belonging to the community) has the right to dispose of the pure land. If it is not disposed of, after one night, it is necessary to wait until the country is desolate, the people are scattered, the emperor is replaced, and the pavilions are abandoned for two years before it can be disposed of. The *Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya* (Ten Recitations Vinaya) states that abandoning a pure land, whether inside or outside the boundary, cannot be used as a pure land again. Question: If a pure land is not established, and it is said that a pure land is abandoned, then what pure food are the *bhikṣus* talking about? Answer: All the *ācāryas* (teachers) say that in the *Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya* (Ten Recitations Vinaya), abandoning a pure land also refers to laypeople making donations as donors for life, and the donated items are used for life without violating the rules, and people do this. It is like seeing things with excessive emotion. This sentence generates meaning from the text, and the thinking is immature. The reason for knowing this is that the *Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya* (Ten Recitations Vinaya) has clear textual evidence before and after. The previous text says that cooking inside (the pure land) is not allowed, so cooking is done outside the monastery, smoke rises, and many people come to ask for food, and they are divided among themselves, and the *sangha* receives very little food. They reported to the Buddha, and the Buddha said that from today onwards, the *karmā* for establishing a pure land is not allowed, and if it is done, it is a *duṣkṛta* (a minor offense). The person who did it first should abandon it. The later text, *Śubhasaṃvāda* (Good Recitation), says that in the first volume, when the Buddha was in Vaiśālī, the *dānavati* (donors) wanted to offer food to the *sangha*, thinking, if I myself give (donate) food, many acquaintances, relatives, and friends will come, and I will have to share it with them. If the Buddha allows cooking inside the monastery, I will do it inside. The Buddha said that it should be allowed. Many people come to ask for it, and if the *bhikṣus* give it to them, the offerings to the *sangha* will not be enough; if they do not give it to them, they are afraid of harming them. The Buddha allowed cooking inside the monastery. After it is cooked inside, the *śrāmaṇeras* (novice monks) and gardeners eat their fill first, and then give it to the *sangha*, and the *sangha*'s food is not enough, so the *sangha* becomes weak and feels weary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
白佛。佛言。从今如是饿时。若结净地听。大比丘自作自食。从今非饿时。结净地已。二事应用。谓内煮内宿不应食。律有明文。诸师随忘说。有四分五分。亦有成证。因饥饿开八事。内煮内宿自煮恶触残宿食不受。或年丰还制。但末法种种异论。若一向舍净地。此宿食戒即应甄却。此戒犹存故。应一向舍却。若请俗人作施主。终身听净食。复无律文可依。是故此谓应行不行不应人行。横生情论。知复奈何 四分曰。树根在不净地。枝叶荫覆净地。比丘不作意。令草自落者得名为净。树根在净地。果堕不净地。不迳宿即时取者得名为净 四分曰。比丘散种子疑不敢食。佛言。夺易故听食。若小沙弥举净食。县柱上不及听安机蹬上。大比丘不触。若苏油瓶应使净人覆。若无人比丘手捉盖县置其上。不得触。僧祇曰。不净地生果菜。使人知不迳宿。得入净厨 四分曰。比丘自残菜果及自触生果。佛言。夺变易故得名为净。若长足触者不名为净 僧祇曰。日中谷豆欲熟时。比丘入中行名为触净 四分曰。有三种人不名触净。一者恶故触他净。二者破戒比丘。三者持戒比丘。误触初二人得罪。要持戒比丘懈怠触是名触净 问曰。僧祇听净人在先。捉净器。比丘在后捉不犯净。此事云何 答曰。此人思文不审。所以者何。僧祇明 现代汉语译本： 白佛（向佛禀告）。佛言（佛说）：‘从今以后，如果因为饥饿，可以在结界清净的地上，由大比丘自己做饭自己吃。从今以后，如果不是因为饥饿，结界清净的土地后，有两种情况可以使用：在里面煮食和在里面住宿，但不应该吃东西。’ 律藏中有明确的条文。各位法师随意遗忘而说。有四分律、五分律，也有相关的佐证。因为饥饿而开许八件事：在里面煮食、在里面住宿、自己煮食、接触不洁之物、剩余的食物不接受。或者在丰收的年份又重新禁止。但是末法时代有各种不同的议论。如果完全舍弃清净地，那么这条关于宿食的戒律就应该废除。这条戒律仍然存在，所以不应该完全舍弃。如果请世俗之人作为施主，终身听许食用清净的食物，又没有律藏条文可以依据。因此，这种情况应该做与不做都可以，不应该人为地横生情论。知道又能怎么样呢？ 《四分律》说：‘树根在不净的土地上，枝叶遮蔽清净的土地，比丘不作意，让草自己掉落，可以称为清净。树根在清净的土地上，果实掉落在不净的土地上，没有经过隔夜就立刻取走，可以称为清净。’ 《四分律》说：‘比丘散播种子，因为怀疑而不敢吃。’ 佛说：‘因为改变了原来的状态，所以可以吃。’ 如果小沙弥举起清净的食物，悬挂在柱子上，因为够不着，可以安放在踏板上。大比丘不要触摸。如果是酥油瓶，应该让清净的人盖上。如果没有人，比丘用手拿着盖子悬挂在上面，不得触摸。《僧祇律》说：‘在不净的土地上生长的瓜果蔬菜，让人知道没有经过隔夜，可以进入清净的厨房。’ 《四分律》说：‘比丘自己切剩下的蔬菜瓜果以及自己触摸到的新鲜瓜果。’ 佛说：‘因为改变了原来的状态，所以可以称为清净。’ 如果是长了脚的虫子触摸到的，就不能称为清净。《僧祇律》说：‘中午时分，谷物豆类快要成熟的时候，比丘进入田中行走，称为触摸清净。’ 《四分律》说：‘有三种人不能称为触摸清净：第一种是故意触摸他人清净之物的人；第二种是破戒的比丘；第三种是持戒的比丘。’ 误触前两种人会犯戒。只有持戒的比丘懈怠地触摸，才称为触摸清净。 问：‘《僧祇律》听许清净的人先拿着清净的器具，比丘在后面拿着就不犯清净，这件事是怎么回事？’ 答：‘这个人思考经文不仔细。为什么这么说呢？《僧祇律》明确说明了。’
English
English version: The Bhikshu reported to the Buddha. The Buddha said: 'From now on, if one is hungry, one may establish a pure boundary and the senior Bhikshu may cook and eat by himself. From now on, if one is not hungry, after establishing a pure boundary, two things are permissible: cooking and lodging within it, but eating is not allowed.' The Vinaya has clear stipulations. The various teachers speak according to their forgetfulness. There are the Four-Part Vinaya and the Five-Part Vinaya, and there is also supporting evidence. Because of hunger, eight things are permitted: cooking and lodging within, cooking oneself, touching impure things, and not accepting leftover food. Or, in years of abundance, it may be prohibited again. However, in the Dharma-ending Age, there are various different opinions. If one completely abandons the pure boundary, then this precept regarding overnight food should be abolished. Since this precept still exists, it should not be completely abandoned. If one invites a layperson to be the benefactor, allowing them to eat pure food for life, there is no Vinaya text to rely on. Therefore, this situation should be permissible or not permissible, and one should not arbitrarily create emotional arguments. Knowing this, what can one do? The Four-Part Vinaya says: 'If the roots of a tree are in impure ground, and the branches and leaves cover pure ground, if the Bhikshu does not intentionally cause the grass to fall, it may be called pure. If the roots of a tree are in pure ground, and the fruit falls on impure ground, if it is taken immediately without passing the night, it may be called pure.' The Four-Part Vinaya says: 'If a Bhikshu scatters seeds and dares not eat them due to doubt,' the Buddha said: 'Because it has changed its original state, it may be eaten.' If a junior Shramanera lifts pure food and hangs it on a pillar, and cannot reach it, it may be placed on a footstool. The senior Bhikshu should not touch it. If it is a ghee bottle, a pure person should cover it. If there is no one, the Bhikshu should hold the lid with his hand and hang it above, without touching it. The Sanghika Vinaya says: 'Fruits and vegetables growing in impure ground, if people know that they have not passed the night, may enter the pure kitchen.' The Four-Part Vinaya says: 'If a Bhikshu cuts leftover vegetables and fruits himself, or touches fresh fruits himself,' the Buddha said: 'Because it has changed its original state, it may be called pure.' If it is touched by a long-legged insect, it may not be called pure. The Sanghika Vinaya says: 'At midday, when grains and beans are about to ripen, if a Bhikshu walks in the field, it is called touching purity.' The Four-Part Vinaya says: 'There are three types of people who cannot be called touching purity: the first is someone who intentionally touches the purity of others; the second is a Bhikshu who has broken the precepts; the third is a Bhikshu who upholds the precepts.' Accidentally touching the first two types of people will result in transgression. Only when a Bhikshu who upholds the precepts touches something negligently is it called touching purity. Question: 'The Sanghika Vinaya allows a pure person to hold pure utensils first, and the Bhikshu to hold them afterward without transgressing purity. How is this so?' Answer: 'This person does not carefully consider the text. Why is this so? The Sanghika Vinaya clearly explains it.' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
车驾牛时。不名为器。车中安谷米。复驾牛净人先上。比丘后上。不犯触净中。上坂时车殃断牛出车外尾离车。比丘急下不名触净。牛尾都离名为触净。非器时复有净人。复得不触净。是器时虽有净人故名触净 十诵明。净人捉器欲到地。唤比丘言。佐我。佛言。如是畏破器因缘。得暂佐已更不得触 四分明。有五种净。一水净。二创净。三乌啄净。四大净。五不中种净。除火净不中种净。余三种不得食。比丘尼残宿食内煮宿。于大僧是净。大僧残宿内煮内宿。于比丘尼净。侣人持食寄比丘。比丘共持去时与比丘。比丘得食。 三部律出僧残罪品第八 四分曰。持律人有五功德。一戒品坚牢。二善识诸怨于众中决断无畏。三有疑悔能为开解。四持毗尼。五令法久住 四分曰。犯戒人有五过失。一者或有比丘身口意业不净。如彼死尸不净。二者或有比丘身口意业不净。恶声流布。彼死尸气从身而出。破戒比丘亦复如是。三者或有比丘身口意业不净。诸善比丘畏避。如彼死尸令人恐畏。破戒比丘亦复如是。四者或有比丘身口意业不净。令善净比丘见之生恶心言。云何乃见如是恶人。如见死尸生大恐畏。令恶鬼得其便。破戒比丘亦复如是。五者或有比丘身口意业不净。与不善人共住。如彼死尸处恶狩非人共住。 现代汉语译本 当车辆由牛拉动时，这不被认为是‘器’（容器/工具）。如果在车中装载了谷米，并且由净人（负责处理杂务的在家信徒）先上车，比丘（出家僧人）后上车，这不构成触犯‘净’（清净）的规定。在上坡时，如果车轴断裂，牛脱离车辆，牛尾也离开了车辆，比丘迅速下车，这不被认为是触犯‘净’。如果牛尾完全离开了车辆，则被认为是触犯‘净’。在非‘器’的情况下，如果另有净人在场，仍然可以不触犯‘净’。但在‘器’的情况下，即使有净人在场，仍然被认为是触犯‘净’。《十诵律》中说明，净人拿着容器将要放到地上时，呼唤比丘说：‘帮助我。’佛说：‘因为害怕打破容器的缘故，可以暂时帮助，之后就不能再触碰了。’《四分律》中说明，有五种‘净’：一是水净，二是创净，三是乌啄净，四是大净，五是不中种净。除了火净和不中种净之外，其余三种不得食用。比丘尼（出家女众）将剩余的隔夜食物放入（新的食物中）煮，对于大僧（比丘僧团）来说是清净的。大僧将剩余的隔夜食物放入（新的食物中）煮或放入（新的食物中）过夜，对于比丘尼来说是清净的。同伴拿着食物寄托给比丘，比丘一起拿着食物去，（到达目的地）时交给比丘，比丘可以食用。 三部律中关于僧残罪的第八品 《四分律》中说，持律人有五种功德：一是戒品坚固，二是善于识别各种怨恨，在众人之中决断事情无所畏惧，三是对于疑问和后悔能够进行开解，四是能够持守毗尼（戒律），五是能够使佛法长久住世。《四分律》中说，犯戒的人有五种过失：一是有些比丘身口意业不清净，就像死尸一样不清净；二是有些比丘身口意业不清净，恶名声流传，就像死尸的气味从身体散发出来一样，破戒的比丘也是如此；三是有些比丘身口意业不清净，善良的比丘会畏惧躲避，就像死尸令人恐惧一样，破戒的比丘也是如此；四是有些比丘身口意业不清净，让善良清净的比丘看到后产生恶心，说：‘怎么会看到这样恶劣的人？’就像看到死尸产生巨大的恐惧一样，让恶鬼得到机会，破戒的比丘也是如此；五是有些比丘身口意业不清净，与不善的人住在一起，就像死尸与恶劣的猎人和非人住在一起一样。