菩提道次第广论手抄稿:旧版第五十二卷B面
（手抄稿 第七册 p123）[00:03]
(1) perceiving a living being (the basis) to be a living being;
(2) perceiving a living being not to be a living being;
(3) perceiving what is not a living being not to be a living being;
(4) perceiving what is not a living being to be a living being.【谓如于有情事作有情想及非情想，于非有情作非情想及有情想，】
这个我们要了解一下。譬如说我想杀一个人，或者想杀这一条蛇，或者想什么，这样。然后呢刚才我看见外面有一条毒蛇，我准备去杀它，这样。那个时候“有情有情想”。然后你跑出去，欸！没错，真是你要杀的，这个是“想”对了。对吧！还有呢，如果你虽然想杀这条蛇，结果你杀错了，那这个“想”就不对。因为你本来想的当中，要想杀这个蛇，结果你杀错了，杀了另外一样东西，结果杀的那个是个蚯蚓，那个不对了。你本来对那个蚯蚓，并没有起杀心对不对？杀错咧！[00:50]
反过来呢，你想去杀那个蛇，结果跑得去你看见那个绳，那个时候你眼睛近视眼，你 (p124) 以为这是蛇。这个明明非有情，你跑得去杀它，那个时候又错了。所以这个里边，它“非有情是非有情想”。你觉得这个不是有情，这个是条草绳，然后你随便去跑得去，拿一个石头丢过去，反正丢在那个草绳上没有关系。欸！偏偏它是一个有情的东西，你石头丢下去把它打死了。虽然打死了，但是你并没有想要打死它呀！这个概念不一样啊！对不对？所以它分成功四部分：有情─有情想、非有情想；还有呢，非有情─是有情想、非有情想。分成四部分。[01:41]
p. 122 (6)
The first and third perceptions are accurate,
【初及第三是不错想，】
初是第一个，第一个是什么？“有情有情想”，没错嘛！你说你想他，欸，你杀的就是他，那没错。第三个“非有情非有情想”，它不是有情，你做不有情想，它的确。你说这是根绳，它是绳，然后你没有伤，并没有错。[02:05]
whereas the second and fourth are mistaken.
【二四错误，】
第二是什么？他─你想的这个有情，结果呢，他不是有情想，你想错了。第四，非有情有情想。这两个。[02:20]
In some cases, there may be a specific motivation. For example, someone may plan to kill only someone called Devadatta, and he or she then commits murder. However, if this person mistakes Yajñadatta for Devadatta and kills him instead, there is no actual sin.
(p125) 【此中等起若有差别，譬如念云，唯杀天授，若起加行误杀祠授，无根本罪，】
“等起”的话就是你的心里面，由于你想这件事情，那么你心里想，你准备要杀，你就心里面跟着这个想法而起的这个行为。譬如说你要想杀人家天授，天授。这印度人的习惯生了儿子，通常去求那个、那个天，或者求什么祠堂，结果求到了，所以叫天授，是这样，然后求那个祠堂的叫祠授。他要杀的那个人叫天授，结果杀的人杀错了，杀到另外一个人是祠授，那没根本罪，因为你的“想”不对啊！但是，其他的罪还有哦！[03:15]
Hence, such an action of killing requires an accurate perception.
【故于此中须无错想。】
这个是“想”。第二呢？[03:20]
If at the time of performance the killer has a general motivation, thinking that no matter what happens he or she will kill, an accurate perception is not necessary.
【若其等起于总事转，念加行时，任有谁来悉当杀害，是则不须无错误想。】
这个“想”是─说你准备想这个，结果杀错了。如果你想的时候，你想：不管什么人来，反正来我就要杀。结果来了一个人，你就把他杀了。那本来你的原意就是这样的，所以那个时候不管他谁，都有根本罪。[03:45]
Know this to be the case for any of the remaining nine nonvirtuous actions.
【如是道理，于余九中，如其所应，皆当了知。】
(p126) 上面这个道理，说下面的都是这样的。[03:54]
The affliction is any of the three mental poisons,
【烦恼者，谓三毒随一，】
烦恼就是贪、瞋、痴。就是你杀的时候，的的确确有不同的心情。有的是为贪而杀，譬如说吃荤的人，欸，欢喜：“喔唷！看见这个地方有一只什么东西，正好弄来吃啊！”他就杀它，这是为贪心。为瞋心的话，这个我们容易了解。为痴心，还有一种什么叫痴心？譬如印度的外道说：“哎哟，杀了这个东西以后，会得到什么福报啊！”这个为痴，为痴。就是你不了解，到杀的时候并没有贪、瞋之心。乃至于现在有太多的，“啊，这个动物本来是天生来要被我们吃的！”就是这样。他心里面并没有贪、瞋之心，那个就是为痴。[04:41]
and the motivation is the desire to kill.
【等起者，谓乐杀害，】
“等起者”就是说，那么由于这个烦恼，烦恼相应的这种行为，就是说不管是什么，你自然而然对于这个杀生很欢喜。有很多人哪，欸！他欢喜了，尤其是小孩子，他看见这小动物，他又跑得去要弄它，把它弄死。就是你问他心里面为什么，他也说不上为什么耶！的的确确你问他现在的心理，他也并没有贪什么，也并没有对它瞋什么，也没痴什么，这种心情什么？叫烦恼的等起。就是说由于这个烦恼的心，他现在心里面并没有直接 (p127) 的这个烦恼的行相，确实由这个而来的，所以这个叫“等起”。[05:30]
As for the performance,
【加行中能加行者，谓若自作，或教他作，】
那么我们加行要……这个去杀了。杀，谁来杀的？能作杀的这个动作，或者自己，或者教别人。[05:44]
it makes no difference whether the performers do it themselves or cause someone else to do it.
【二中谁作，等无差别。】
真正杀的时候不管你自己作也是，你教别人作也是。[05:51]
The nature of the performance is killing by way of a weapon, poison, a spell, or the like.
【加行体者，谓用器杖，或用诸毒，或用明咒，随以一种起加行等。】
加行的本体是什么呢？那当然你杀人的时候，或者是你用刀，或者用杖把他打死，或者用药把他药死，或者用咒，“随以一种起加行等”。[06:06]
The culmination is
【究竟者，】
什么叫究竟呢？[06:08]
the death of another on account of the performance, either at that point in time or at another point in time.
(p128) 【谓即由其加行因缘，彼尔时死，或余时死。】
因为你这样伤害了他，那个时候死了，死了嘛！对了。杀生的意思是什么？把他的生命杀死，结果到那个时候他死了，那你的罪行就圆满了。什么时候死，什么时候就圆满。所以当你杀的时候圆满了，就杀的时候圆满；杀了以后没死，到了后来死，那死的时候，你这个杀生这个罪就圆满。[06:35]
Further, the 《Treasury of Knowledge》 says: If the killer dies prior to or at the same time as the victim There is no actual infraction, since the killer has then assumed another life. I concur.
【此复如《俱舍》云：“前等死无本，已生余身故。”此中亦尔。】
这个什么意思呢？这个譬如说我，我去杀一个人，伤害一个动物乃至于。结果我伤害了他，被伤害了，他没死；结果他没死，我先死了。结果我先死了，这根本罪没有，根本罪没有。为什么？我虽然伤了他，可是我已经死了。所以如果我死了，那么这一生我造的业到此为止。因为我到此为止之前他没死，所以这根本罪没有，这样。实际上呢，这个是小乘上面，当然现在是照《俱舍》上面。“已生余身故”，因为你这一生已经完了嘛！你到下一生，到了中阴身也不晓得到哪里去了！[07:30]
所以实际上，真正的律部当中，它有各部的开合，各部的不同，这上座部怎么判的，大众部怎么判的。譬如说以我们现在来说，我并没有仔细认真地研究，据我所了解，譬如 (p129) 大众部，根据南山道宣律祖说它的戒体的话，经过《法华》、《涅槃》开权显实以后，这个说法跟上座部的很多，它有一点不太一样。这我们这里不谈，在真正谈到戒的时候，我们仔细研究。第一个杀，第二个，[08:11]
2. Stealing
【◎ 不与取。】
那么在说“不与取”之前，我们这里重新再提一下。说做任何一件事情的究竟圆满的，需要几个条件。第一个，你所做这件事情的对象，譬如杀生，那么所杀的对象；偷盗，你所盗的东西。那么盗的时候你一定起心动念，你心里是什么心，什么心情；根据了这个心情，然后你采取的行动是什么行动；采取了行动以后，这件事情做究竟圆满了。譬如你偷人家东西，他原来的东西在那里，你把那个东西搬走了，欸！那时候就成了，对吧？你要杀这个东西，把他杀死，那时就成了。每一样东西，都是这个四个，这四个的内容是如此。所以关于这一点，后面每一个项目都是如此。所以第一个呢详细解说，后面呢我就把文这么念一下，大概有一个正确的了解。实际上这后面的每一部分，你们都应该仔细地去认识它，仔细地认识它。所以我讲虽然讲得简单，你们真正应该好好地把这个把握得很牢，然后呢如法行持。[09:27]
(p130) “不与取”嘛，就是盗，他没有给你，你自己去拿。这个“盗”的行相，通常我们总是觉得好像狭；“不与取”的范围很广，凡是他没有给你，你拿，这个都是，都是。这一点我们要了解得清清楚楚。[09:46]
The basis of stealing is anything owned by another.
【事者，谓随一种他所摄物。】
这个“事”就是随便拿一种别人，这是属于别人的，别人所摄持的。[09:55]
Among the three aspects of attitude,
【意乐分三，】
心里面。[09:57]
the perception and the affliction are the same as above.
【想与烦恼俱如前说，】
“想”还是前面，就是说“这个是他的”吗？还是“不是他的”吗？“不是他的”吗？还是“是他的”吗？就是分四样。烦恼就是贪、瞋、痴。[10:11]
The motivation is the desire to take the thing from another person even though he or she has not given it to you.
【等起者，谓虽未许令离彼欲，】
就是由于你这个心情，心里想，他虽然没有允许，得到的允许，但是你心里想： (p131) 欸，要把它拿走，要把它拿走。就是这种心情。这种心情你倒不一定是说有什么烦恼，你不一定贪，不一定瞋，但你也莫名其妙看见了。所以我们往往看见那个，随手你就把它拿了，但是你说不上来你是什么心情耶！你好像“我并没有贪这个东西”，你也没有讨厌它，这个就是什么？烦恼相应的“等起”。这个是我们常常容易犯这个毛病。有太多的情况之下，对不起哦！这个还是烦恼相应的哦！[10:56]
p. 123
As for the performance, the performer is as before.
【加行中能加行者如前。】
就是前面，或者自己做，或者叫他做。[11:02]
The nature of the performance in the act of stealing is either robbing by force or theft by subterfuge—they are equivalent.
【加行体者，谓若力劫，若闇窃盗，任何悉同，】
加行的时候，或者你用了力把人家手上拿下来，或者偷偷摸摸地拿下来，都一样。[11:15]
Further, whether people engage in deceit about debts and trusts, or take what is not given by other deceitful means, and
【此复若于债及寄存，以诸矫诈欺惑方便，不与而取，】
那么盗别人是这样。另外还有一种呢，债，或者是说别人存在那个地方，或者你欠了别人，或者人家放在那地方，到那时候你要骗、诈的方式，把它……。欸，别人存在那地方，到那时候你把它吞掉了，反正没凭据。对不起，那就是盗。诸如此类。[11:43]
whether they act for the sake of their own interests or others' interests, or to harm another—these are all equally considered stealing.
(p132) 【或为自义，或为他义，或为令他耗损等故，所作悉同成不与取。】
不管你这个“不与取”是为了自己，为了别人；或者虽然你不为自己，为了对他不好，要伤害他、损坏他、要害害他：“这个家伙摆在那里，把它丢掉！”这样。你只要这样去做，那个结果都是一样。[12:10]
As for the culmination, the 《Compendium of Determinations》 says, "moving it to another location."
【究竟者，〈摄分〉中说：“移离本处。”】
什么是究竟呢？就是这东西本来在那里的，你把它拿，从那地方移开了，拿到别地方，对了。此中，[12:18]
While there are many cases that are incompatible with the meaning of this passage, moving the thing from its original place to another is merely an illustration.
【于此义中，虽多异说，然从物处，移于余处，唯是一例，】
这个里边有很多意义，很多意义。最主要的就是说，那个东西摆在这里的，你搬到另外一个地方去，那就算。但是有一些东西你不能搬哪！譬如田，田你怎么搬哪？[12:38]
In the case of things such as fields, moving it is not possible, yet you must be able to posit a culmination. Therefore, in such a case the culmination is thinking that you have acquired it.
【犹如田等无处可移，然亦皆须安立究竟，是故应以发起得心，】
所以这个田这个东西，你没办法搬动的呀，那么怎么办呢？这个也有究竟的。换句话说，你想办法把那个人家的田吞没，然后呢你经过了这番，你觉得：欸！我得到了。那时候 (p133) 你觉得得到的时候，那这个究竟罪就成立了。[13:08]
Further, if you cause another to rob or cause them to steal, it is enough that the other person has that thought.
【此复若是教劫教盗，彼生即可，】
假如你教别人这样去做，他这样地听着你，你告诉别人想办法把他那块田弄下来，他然后经过了，他得到的时候，你虽然自己不知道，你得到了这个盗的根本罪。[13:26]
This is like the case in which someone is killed without your knowledge, but by some person whom you have sent. When the victim dies, the one who caused the murderer to kill incurs an actual sin.
【譬如遣使往杀他人，自虽不知，然他何时死，其教杀者，即生本罪。】
同样地，就这样，叫别人去杀人一样。当这个人去杀人的时候，你不知道他杀了没有，但是你所受你教的人去杀人，这个人，被杀的人杀死的时候，你就得到了根本罪。这个是盗。平常我们“杀”容易看得清楚，盗相非常细微，唉，这个盗相非常细微。盗相是最难防，最难防的！“盗”跟“妄语”两样东西难防极了，难防极了！所以当年我看那个大祖师的这些语录，乃至于《沙弥律仪》，我记得二十多年以前我第一次看，觉得一看就懂了。就过了几天去看的话，一看哪！啊，心里面起个大警惕，发现我简直根本没懂，乃至于一点都做不到。所以现在很多人说看了一遍：“唉，这个《沙弥律仪》，我早就懂了，叫我再听，我就听不进。”唉！我心里面听了，真是呀！一个，我钦佩他，我说这个真是个大菩萨再来，我听了这么多都不懂，他一听，居然就懂了。还有一个，我真是心里 (p134) 面可怜，我说这种人他是边都没碰到，他自然觉得懂了。[14:54]
所以为什么要说这个话？我看见他们那个祖师的行持。古代的人固然如此，譬如近代的印光大师，他刚出家的时候在红螺山行堂，手上沾到一点糖，沾到了以后，那我们随便的话，可惜的，那舔一舔，那属于一种满好的─爱惜呀！或者抖掉了。他不！沾到了糖，马上那个手，马上拿起来，跑到那个存糖的地方，抖得干干净净，就这样。这样哦！然后呢跑到水上面去洗得干干净净。就是一点盐，哪怕是。这个常住的东西就这样。[15:34]
以后我另外跟着我的老师的时候，他就告诉我们：“私财如土，公财如命。”自己的钱像土，为什么？舍嘛！那个土这个东西，哎，那东西你看见就讨厌，最好人家拿去，最好！“公财如命”，或是说公家的东西，像命一样。喔唷，一点点损害呀，现在我们不要说命啊，小小蚂蚁叮我、咬我一口，蚊虫叮你一下，喔唷，你赶快赶走，反正公家的事情就保护得这样。那时候我就晓得：哦！原来真正的这个沙弥律仪不是那么简单哪！这是值得我们警惕啊！哦，现在我们自己的一点点事情，大家努力得不得了，公家的事情谁都不在乎，这是我们自己的业障太重，没有贤善相。所以这里顺便一提，真正恳心修学的，要从这个地方着眼努力，要从这个地方着眼努力啊！[16:36]
(p135) 你能够这样去努力去做，即使你做不到，烦恼重，你能够这样恭敬、努力的话，贤劫千佛当中一定有你份，一定能够真解脱！刚才经上面佛亲口说的，告诉我们清清楚楚，这就是我们的正知见。由于这个增上力故，尽管你这一世做错了，到了龙当中，再出来碰见下一个佛，好，解脱！如果发了大心那是更好！一直成佛。这点概念我顺便一提。[17:08]
所以现在我们有情，有眼前的状态，的的确确的，是，是。所以我刚才特别说商那和修这个公案，这么了不起的大祖师，欸，对不起！跑得去，一来，不如佛世的时候专门捣蛋的六群比丘啊！这是千真万确的事实啊！所以我们不要以为说：“哦！我做到了。”我们怎么可能做得到？你拚命地努力都做不到，何况现在懒懒瘫瘫哪？不可以呀！所以我们要起大惭愧、大恭敬，拚命努力去做。你能够这样的话，那没问题，贤劫千佛当中一定有我们份。
菩提道次第广论卷四终
菩提道次第广论卷五
p. 124
现在我们继续下去，欲邪行，那是卷五。那么就是：[18:01]
3. Sexual Misconduct There are four possible bases of sexual misconduct:
【◎ 欲邪行。事者，略有四种，】
这个说对象分四方面。[18:08]
a person with whom you should not have intercourse,
【谓所不应行，】
不应该做的事情。[18:12]
inappropriate body parts, inappropriate places, and inappropriate times.
(p136) 【非支，非处，及以非时。】
每一个地方，非支、非处。“支”就是，所以因为男女的行淫，淫一定是指特别的。“非处”，不是地方，不是地方。“非时”，不是时间。[18:32]
Those with whom one should not have intercourse
【此中初者，】
第一个，什么是不应行的。[18:35]
in the case of men are women with whom you should not copulate, all men, and eunuchs.
【谓行不应行所有妇女及一切男，非男非女。】
换句话说，这个就是一切的男女等等。[18:45]
The 《Compendium of Determinations》 refers to the first: Those indicated in the sūtras—such as your mother and those protected by mothers—are "those with whom you should not have intercourse."
【此之初者，〈摄分〉中云，若于母等，母等所护，如经广说名不应行。】
说凡是有人保护的，说母及母等。这个说明：譬如说她在家的，一个是父母所守护，或者呢特别的公家，总归有她一个保护的人；就是她是属于，她有一定她的身分的，这样的一个人，像经上面说。[19:25]
The meaning of this is as the scholar Asvaghosa said: "Those with whom you should not copulate" are those held by another, those having a religious insignia, those under the protection of family or king, a prostitute who has been taken by another, and those related to you — These are the ones with whom you should not copulate.
【如马鸣阿阇黎说此义云：“言非应行者，他摄具法幢，种护至王护，他已娶娼妓， (p137) 诸亲及系属，此是不应行。”】
他下面就解释。[19:40]
"Those held by another" are others' wives.
【他所摄者，谓他妻妾，】
什么叫“他摄”？就是所谓他人的妻妾，就是这个别人所摄持的。[19:47]
"Those who have a religious insignia" are renunciate women.
【具法幢者，谓出家女，】
什么是“具法幢”？那是出家的，具法幢。然后，[19:53]
"Those protected by family" are those who have not yet become brides and are protected by kinsfolk such as their fathers,
【种姓护者，谓未适嫁，】
欸！没出嫁的。[19:59]
who are protected by a father-in-law or a mother-in-law, who are protected by a guard, or who—in the absence of these—are protected even by themselves.
【父母等亲，或大公姑，或守门者。或虽无此，自己守护。】
虽然没有父母什么等等，她自己一个人，欸！但是对不起，她自己，自己守护自己。[20:14]
"Those protected by a king" or his representative are those concerning whom a punitive law has been laid down.
【若王若敕而守护者，谓于其人制治罚律，】
(p138) 这样等等，她虽然自己没有守护，犯了罪关在监牢里。譬如关在监牢里嘛，这个监牢里边的人管的就是他呀！你也不能随便侵犯她。还有，[20:31]
The line stating that sex with a prostitute for whom another has paid is sexual misconduct shows that there is no sexual misconduct in hiring a prostitute yourself.
【于他已给价金娼妓，说为邪行，】
就算，这个邪行的话，就是不应该的。那这个里边，这个指世间哦！世间的人到这个绿灯户，绿灯户那个妓女她本来是卖淫的，然后呢你给了钱，那个不算邪行。反过来，虽然是一个绿灯户的妓女，可是别人已经说：“欸，这个。”那你再去，那个不可以。[21:03]
The Great Elder also taught this in a similar way. "Men," the second in the list of those with whom you should not have intercourse, refers both to oneself and to others. Inappropriate body parts are body parts other than the vagina.
【显自给价，非欲邪行。大依怙尊，亦作是说。男者俱通自他。非支分者谓除产门所有余分，】
这个真正的行淫一定是个“产门”，其他的地方就不是应该地方，其他地方就错了，其他地方就错了。所以现在有种叫“鸡奸”哪！那个就是非支，这些东西都是更糟糕、更糟糕！[21:34]
The master Asvaghosa says: What are inappropriate body parts? The mouth, the anus, the calves or Thighs pressed together, and the hand in motion.
【马鸣阿阇黎云：“云何名非支，口、便道、婴童、腿逼，及手动。”】
这个我们容易了解。这现在说起来这个世界是每况愈下，那个时候我在国外有一个地 (p139) 方，也不去说它是哪里了，居然要求法律通过准许同性恋，要立法去保护他。唉！这个世间是每况愈下，颠倒！颠倒，这个我们就不去谈它了。[22:06]
This accords with what the Great Elder says: The "inappropriate body parts" are
【大依怙云：“言非支者，】
这个是不应该的。[22:10]
the mouth, the anus, the front or rear orifices of a boy or girl, and your own hand.
【谓口、秽道及童男女前后孔户，并其自手。”】
这种都是不应该的。此说亦同，此说亦同。这个“自手”，通常我们说自慰，自慰。这个自慰这点注意喔！这个往往我们容易去犯，往往容易犯，男女都会。所以睡觉的时候，这个手千万不要碰到下体。尤其是你有的时候不知不觉会去碰，这个不可以，这个就是它的等起，非常糟糕！非常糟糕！要注意的。[22:52]
Inappropriate places are
【非处所者，】
什么是“非处”，不是地方。[22:56]
areas such as the vicinity of gurus, for instance; a place where there is a stupa; in the presence of many people; and on uneven or hard places that are harmful to the person with whom you are having intercourse.
【谓诸尊重所集会处，若塔庙处，若大众前，若于其境有妨害处，谓地高下及坚硬等，】
(p140) 这都不是，不是应当的地方。这个通常我们说，所以平常在……以前老规矩我所晓得的，如果说男女，就是夫妇一起出门，到人家的亲戚，到任何地方去的话，通常一定到那地方去，男的跟男的，内眷内眷住，男眷男眷住，分得开，清清楚楚，绝不可以，到任何地方去，除非自己出门到旅馆里去。那时古代的人这个礼仪的确是操守得很严哪！[23:40]
The Master Asvaghosa says: In this case, inappropriate places are ones that are locations of the sublime teaching, Stupas, images, and the like, and bodhisattvas; And the vicinity of an abbot, a preceptor, or one's parents. Do not have intercourse in these inappropriate places.
【马鸣阿阇黎云：“此中处境者，在法塔像等，菩萨居处等，亲教及轨范，并在父母前，非境不应行。”】
这种尊长前面。[23:52]
The Great Elder also taught this.
【大依怙师亦如是说。】
这个地方常常说“大依怙”、“大依怙”，就是阿底峡尊者。[23:59]
Inappropriate times are
【非其时者，】
那么再下面呢？最后的就是说“时”，这个时间不对。[24:06]
when the woman is menstruating,
【谓秽下降】
(p141) 秽下，什么是“秽下”？就是女性这个月事来的时候。[24:13]
when she is at the end of a term of pregnancy,
【胎满孕妇，】
这个都不可以。[24:18]
when she has an infant who is nursing, when she is observing a one-day vow, and when she has an illness which makes sexual intercourse inappropriate.
【若饮儿乳，或受斋戒，若有疾病，】
或者这个女的生产了以后，这个小孩子还吃奶；或者受斋戒，那当然。“若有疾病”，还有病。[24:33]
Sexual intercourse is also inappropriate in excess of a proper amount.
【匪宜习故，】
这个都不应该。[24:38]
A proper amount is having intercourse up to five times a night.
【若道量行量谓极至经于五返。】
这个就是讲这个男女交的时候。[24:48]
p. 125
The master Asvaghosa says: In that case, inappropriate times are when A woman is menstruating, pregnant, Has an infant, is unwilling, Is in pain or is unhappy and the like, Or is maintaining the eight-part one-day vow.
【马鸣阿阇黎云：“此中非时者，秽下及孕妇，有儿非欲解，及其苦忧等，住八支非时。”】
(p142) 就是解释上面。上面“有儿”，就是有小孩子吃奶。“非欲解”的话，就对方不想，那个时候要去强。这个普通我们当然不会，我们乃至于不知道。当然实际上有人说：“哎呀，我们谈这个干什么？”是！对我们来说，我们了解这个行相以后，固然是。还有一个，作为一个出家人，将来是人天导师，引导人家的各式各样的人，如果在家人来问你，你不清楚的话，你怎么回答人家？所以我们还是对这个行相要弄得很清楚，然后呢告诉人家：什么是可以，什么是不可以，什么地方防范起。“及其忧苦等”，不但是欲解，就是忧愁苦恼，所以上面说疾病是生病，实际上就是心里面不对的时候，这个也不要。“住八支”，还有呢就是受斋戒的时候，八支斋戒的一切的淫都断，这个不是时候，不可以。像关于这种问题的话，特别的就是，如果说在家人来问，我们出家的法师回答他，就应该了解：“喏！就应该这样。”[26:18]
Again, the Great Elder is similar to Asvaghosa
【大依怙尊亦复同此，】
凡是上面特别说马鸣阿阇黎、大阿阇黎、大依怙尊等等，说明这种说法的确是有师承的。凡是这种地方注意哦！现在我们同学当中，常常有这种同学，晓得了一点点就欢喜乱开口，告诉别人这个样、那个样。看看他们这些大成就者，说任何一件事情啊，这个传 (p143) 承源源本本，说得清清楚楚。所以我们现在学习这件事情的时候，也一定要了解得明明白白。不晓得的话，你宁愿存疑说：“欸，对不起！这个我不大懂，这个问题你去问某大律师。”凡是这种事情的话，所以这个律师，为什么叫作律师呢？不是说他持律叫作律师，所有的出家人必定要持律，所以称为律师的话，他除了自己持律以外，对开遮的行相，非常清楚、非常明白，他能够决断任何疑惑。譬如说我们现在禅师，他根本的做好了，他一心一意深入禅观，他自己不会犯，可是很多细致的行相，他不一定弄得清楚，这个才是大的差别，不是说那些人不要持戒，这个我们要弄清楚的。所以我们刚才说，凡是碰见这种情况，自己不了解，那请问某大律师。那么下面继续：[27:49]
with the difference that he says that daytime is an inappropriate time.
【稍差别者，谓昼日时，亦名非时。】
那么大阿阇黎又特别说，这个“时”那支，除了上面跟那个马鸣阿阇黎所说的一样以外，说白天也不可以。[28:03]
Given that the three bases—sexual intercourse using inappropriate body parts, in an inappropriate place, or at an inappropriate time—become sexual misconduct even in regard to your own wife, it is certainly the case that they become sexual misconduct in regard to others.
【非支等三，虽于自妻，尚成邪行，况于他所。】
这个前面所说的这个“非支”，就是自己的夫妇都不可以啊，都错的，何况是别人哪！注意喔！这个我们要了解的。[28:19]
Of the three aspects of the category of attitude—perception, motivation, and affliction—perception is spoken of in the 《Compendium of Determinations》 and in the texts on discipline. The 《Compendium of Determinations》 says that the "perception of this as that" must be accurate. However, the Buddha says in the texts on discipline that in the case of the cardinal transgression of unchastity, it is the same whether the perception is mistaken or accurate.
(p144) 【意乐分三，想者〈摄分〉中说：“于彼彼想，是须无误。”《毗奈耶》中；“于不净行他胜处时，说想若错不错皆同。”】
这个有两个不同。“想”的话，〈摄分〉，〈摄决择分〉说“彼彼想”，就是说你要犯行，你要对象找对了，如果不是的话不算。可是《戒经》当中，《毗奈耶》当中不！《毗奈耶》当中说那个不净想，不管他错不错，你想这个，换了另外一个人，对不起，还是犯！[28:54]
The《Treasury of Knowledge Auto-commentary》 explains that if you have approached another's wife with the perception that she is your own wife, then this does not become an actual path of nonvirtuous action. Vasubandhu presents two systems in regard to when intercourse under the perception that another person's wife is the wife of a third person—one in which intercourse becomes a path of nonvirtuous action and one in which it does not.
【《俱舍释》说：“作自妻想而趣他妻，不成业道，若于他妻作余妻想而趣行者，有二家计，谓成不成。”】
这个是辨，这个辨，这个辨没关系。原则上面呢，我们了解各家有各家的判这个罪的轻重不同。以我们来说的话，我主要的，总是像这种事件从严，从严总没有错，从严只有好处。[29:21]
万一另外一个，“从严啦，大家做不到啊！”[29:30]
52b Commentary
ENGLISH LR V.1 P.218 (COMMENTARY V.7 P.123) [00:03]
(1)perceiving a living being (the basis) to be a living being;
(2)perceiving a living being not to be a living being;
(3)perceiving what is not a living being not to be a living being;
(4)perceiving what is not a living being to be a living being.
We need to understand this some more. For example, if I want to kill a person, or kill a snake, or perceiving something, like that. Let us say that I saw a snake outside earlier, so I was prepared to kill it. So at this time, it would be called "perceiving a living being to be a living being." Then when you go out, ah! It is right. It is what you had planned to kill. This is means you "perceived" correctly. Right! And then, if you wish to kill this snake, but killed the wrong being, then you have "perceived" incorrectly. That is, in your original perception, you had wished to kill the snake, but instead you killed the wrong being. You killed something else, say you ended up killing a worm instead. Then it is an incorrect being. You originally did not have the thought of killing the worm right? It is a wrong kill![00:50]
Contrarily, if you had wished to kill the snake, but in the end you realized that it was only a rope. However, because you are nearsighted, you thought it was a snake. This is not a living being, but you tried to kill it, so you thought wrong again. There is also the "perceiving what is not a living being not to be a living being." If you do not think it is a living being, you think that it is a rope, so you casually run by it and throw a rock on it. Since it is thrown on a rope, so it is okay. Ah! But it happened to be a living being. So when you threw the rock down, you killed it. Though it got killed, but you did not wish to kill it! The concept is different! Right? Therefore it is divided into the four parts, (1) perceiving a living being (the basis) to be a living being; (2) perceiving a living being not to be a living being; (3) perceiving what is not a living being not to be a living being; (4) perceiving what is not a living being to be a living being. It is divided into these four parts.[01:41]
The first and third perceptions are accurate,
What is the first one? It is "perceiving a living being (the basis) to be a living being," it is correct! You thought about this being, ah, you have killed this being, it is correct. Then the third one is the "perceiving what is not a living being not to be a living being." It is not a living being so you do not think of it as a living being. You say that it is a rope, and it is a rope. So you did not hurt it, there is no wrong perception.[02:05]
whereas the second and fourth are mistaken.
What is number two? Him, the living being that you thought of, as a result, you think of it as a non-living being. You thought wrong. Number four, it is to perceive a nonliving being to be a living being. These are the two.[02:20]
In some cases, there may be a specific motivation. For example, someone may plan to kill only someone called Devadatta, and he or she then commits murder. However, if this person mistakes Yajnadatta for Devadatta and kills him instead, there is no actual sin.381
"Motivation" is that in your mind, because you have thought of this, then in your mind, you are prepared to kill. This is the mental action which arises from pursuing your thought. For example, you want to kill Devadatta. Devadatta (Given by heaven). It is a tradition of the Indians to pray to the heavens or the ancestral hall to be given a son. If the wish is fulfilled, the child will be called "Given by heaven." If you had prayed to the ancestral hall, then the child will be called Yajnadatta, "Given by the ancestral hall." So if one wishes to kill Devadatta, but in the end, he killed the wrong person. He killed another one who is Yajnadatta. Then there is no actual sin because your "perception" is wrong! But, there are other sins![03:15]
Hence, such an action of killing requires an accurate perception.
This is “perception.” What is the second one?[03:20]
If at the time of performance, the killer has a general motivation, thinking that no matter what happens he or she will kill, an accurate perception is not necessary.
This "perception" is such that you are thinking and preparing to do this, but as a result, you have had the wrong kill. But when you think about this, you think: it does not matter who comes, I will kill anyway. Since your original intention is as such, then no matter who was killed, you have will have committed the actual sin.[03:45]
Know this to be the case for any of the remaining nine non-virtuous actions.
The preceding principle can be applied for the following [nine actions].[03:54]
The affliction is any of the three mental poisons,
Afflictions are attachment, hostility and ignorance. When one kills, one may have different mentalities for doing so. Some would kill for attachment. For instance, for those who eat meat and other foods produced by fowls or animals, ah, they just enjoy it: "Oh! Look at this animal here, just the right moment to make it into a meal!" So, he would then kill it. That is attachment. [To kill] for hostility, this is easy to understand. For ignorance, what is ignorance? For instance, a non-Buddhist in India would say, "Ah, if you kill this thing, you will gain certain merit!" This is done out of ignorance, out of ignorance. That is, you do not really understand the meaning behind this. When you killed it, you did nothave the thoughts of attachment or hostility. Therefore, there are far too many people who hold this [view] now, "Ah, the animals are born to be eaten by us!" Just like that. But in his mind, there is no attachment or hostility. That is ignorance.[04:41]
and the motivation is the desire to kill. [166]
Motivation is such that due to this affliction, there is an affliction concordant action. Therefore, it does not matter what it is, you just naturally enjoy killing. There are many people, eh! They are happy about it, [it is true] in particular for little children. When they see little animals/insects, they will play with it and kill it. When you ask him, why did you do that? He cannot tell you why! If you really ask him what he thought of, there was no attachment, nor was there hostility, or ignorance. What kind of mentality is this? It is a motivation concordant to the afflictions. Due to the afflictions, though he does not have the direct subjective aspects of afflictions, but the motivation is truly derived from them (the afflictions). Thus, this is called motivation [concordant to the affliction.][05:30]
As for the performance, it makes no difference whether the performers do it themselves or cause someone else to do it.
As for the performance....this is at the point of killing. When you kill, who does the killing? Who will carry out the act of the killing? It could be oneself, or causing someone else to do it.[05:44]
When you really kill, it would not matter if you did so yourself or caused others to do it, it is the same thing.[05:51]
The nature of the performance is killing by way of a weapon, poison, a spell, or the like.
What is the nature of the performance? Of coursewhen you kill, you may use a knife, a stick to beat him to death, use poisons, or use a spell. This is "killing by way of..."[06:06]
The culmination
What is culmination?[06:08]
is the death of another on account of the performance, either at that point in time or at another point in time.
After you have injured him, then he died, he died! Yes. What does it mean to kill? To end a being's life. So by the time of his death, your sin would be completed. The time of death will mark the time of completion. Thus, your kill becomes complete when you have killed. If at the time you tried to kill, he did not die, but instead died at a later time, then your sin of killing will be complete upon this death.[06:35]
Further, the Treasury of Knowledge says:382
If the killer dies prior to or at the same time as the victim
There is no actual infraction, since the killer has then assumed another life. I concur.
What does this mean? For instance, let us sayI have gone to kill a person, or perhaps to harm an animal. But in the end, though I harmed him, he was injured, but he did not die. He did not die yet, but instead, I died before that happened. Then there is no actual infraction, no actual infraction. Why? Though I have harmed him, but I am already dead. Should I die first, then the karma which I create [for this life] will stop at this point. Since he has not died before I stopped creating karma, therefore, there is no actual infraction. Like that. Actually, this is said so in Hinayana. Of course, this is now quoting from the Treasury of Knowledge." Since the killer has then assumed another life," because your life is done! You will have moved on to your next life, gone somewhere else in the intermediate state.[07:30]
Therefore, within the sects of the vows, each sect's determination of the specifics will be different. How does "The school of the presiding elders" (Mahāsthavirāḥ) view this, how does the Mahāsānghikāḥ sect view this. For instance, for us now, I have not carefully studied this, but according to what I understand, for example, for the Mahāsānghikāḥ sect, according to the Master of Nanshan Daoshuan's explanation on the substance of the vows, through the exposing and disposing of the temporary or partial teaching, and the revelation of the final and real truth as in the Lotus Sūtra and the Great Final Nirvana sutra, there are many places which are a little different from the school of the presiding elders. So, we will not go into them today. But when we actually explain the vows of ethical discipline, we will go into this in detail. The first one is killing. The second one,[08:11]
2. Stealing
Before we explain "stealing", we can revisit something again. That is in order to reach full culmination, you will need a few conditions. The first one is the basis for your action. For example, with killing, it is the being you kill. For stealing, it is the thing that you are stealing. Well then when you steal, there must be thoughts. What is your attitude, the mentality? Based on this attitude, what is the course of action that you have taken? Then after taking actions, this event reaches full culmination. For instance, let us say you are going to steal things from others. If his things are set in a place, but you have moved it, eh! That is the time it is done. Right? If you are going to kill someone, by the time of this death, it is done. For every action, you will have to go through these four categories. The content of these four categories are explained as such. Thus, regarding this point, this is the same for the rest of the ten non-virtuous actions. Therefore, this is then described in detail for the first action. For the later portions, I will just read through the text so that you have a general correct understanding. But actually, for every part of the succeeding section, you have to understand them in detail, understand them in detail. Though I may only be explaining them in a simple manner, but you should really have a firm grasp of it and practice according to the teachings.[09:27]
"Taking what has not been given to you" would be stealing. You just take it. For the subjective aspects of "stealing," when we think of this, we would ordinarily think of this being stricter in its definition, where as the meaning of "taking what you should not" seems to encompass a broader range of things. This would mean for whatever that was not given to you, if you take it, then it will count, will count. We should know this point very well.[09:46]
The basis of stealing is anything owned by another.
The "basis" is to take anything owned by another, something that belongs to another, properties of another.[09:55]
Among the three aspects of attitude,
This is in the mind.[09:57]
the perception and the affliction are the same as above.
"Perception" is the same as [discussed] before. This is to say "this is his," "this is not his," "this is not his," or "this is his"? This is divided into these four perceptions. Afflictions are attachment, hostility and ignorance.
1.Owned by William and you think it is owned by William.
2.Owned by William and you think it is not owned by William.
3.Not owned by William and you think it is not owned by William.
4.Not owned by William and you think it is owned by William.[10:11]
The motivation is the desire to take the thing from another person even though he or she has not given it to you.
Due to your mentality, in your mind, though he did not permit this, you did not get permission from him, but you think, "Ah, I am going to take it away, take it away." This is the kind of mentality. In this state of mind, you may not particularly have afflictions at the moment; you are not necessarily attached or hostile. Yet you have come to meet this object for some unknown reason. Then often when we see something, we will just conveniently pick it up. But you cannot really describe with some sense of how you feel! It may seem as if "I was not greedy for this thing." Yet neither do you resent it. This is then what? This is the "motivation" that concords with afflictions. This is easily a recurring problem of ours. This type of situation occurs in so many instances. But sorry! This is still concordant to afflictions![10:56]
As for the performance, the performer is as before.
This is what was said earlier, either you do this yourself, or you cause others to do it.[11:02]
The nature of the performance in the act of stealing is either robbing by force or theft by subterfuge—they are equivalent.
For the performance, either you rob from others by force, or you covertly steal it. They are equivalent.[11:15]
Further, whether people engage in deceit about debts and trusts, or take what is not given by other deceitful means,
Well then this is so when you steal from others. What is another type [of stealing]? This could be debts or trusts. Either you owe others, or others have put their assets somewhere. So, then you deceive or cheat in order to take it. Ah, others have deposited this somewhere and you took possession of it. [And you thought] since there will be no proof anyway. Sorry, that would make it stealing. So, it would be things of this sort.[11:43]
and whether they act for the sake of their own interests or others' interests, or to harm another— these are all equally considered stealing.
This is true whether your act of "taking what has not been given to you" is for your own interest or for others. Even if you are not doing this for self interest, but in order to harm another, to hurt him, to damage him, to destroy him, [you think,] "This person put this here, I will throw it away!" Like that. As long as you do this, the result will be the same.[12:10]
As for the culmination, the Compendium of Determinations says,383 "moving it to another location."
What is culmination? If something is originally here, you pick it up and move it to somewhere else, then that is it.[12:18]
While there are many cases that are incompatible with the meaning of this passage, moving the thing from its original place to another is merely an illustration.
There is a great amount of meaning in here, a great amount of meaning. But this primarily says that if something is set here, if you move it somewhere, this would qualify [as stealing]. But there are some things that you cannot move away! Such as fields, how do you move fields?[12:38]
In the case of things such as fields, moving it is not possible, yet you must be able to posit a culmination. Therefore, in such a case the culmination is thinking that you have acquired it.
Therefore, for things such as fields, you would not be able to move it. What would you do? There is culmination for this as well. In other words, as you think about how to take possession of another person's field, you go through some kind of process of taking possession, and you then realize, "Ah! NowI have got it." By the time you feel that you have got it, that is the time the sin of culmination is established.[13:08]
Further, if you cause another to rob or cause them to steal, it is enough that the other person has that thought.
To cause another to do this, this would be someone listening to you telling him how to go about getting possession of another person's field. Then he goes about it. By the time he obtains it, though you might not even be aware of that, you will have committed the actual sin of stealing (or root infraction).[13:26]
Similarly, this is the same when you ask others to kill. When this person goes to kill another, you may not even know if he has done it. But as the person whom you have given an order goes to kill, when the victim dies, you will have incurred an actual sin (or root infraction). Here it is about stealing. Normally, it is easier to see whether we are "killing." But the subjective aspects of stealing are very subtle. Ah, the subjective aspects of stealing are the most difficult to guard against, most difficult to guard against! "Stealing" and "lying" are extremely difficult to guard against, extremely difficult to guard against! I used to study sayings of former teachers and have read through the Vows of Shramanera. I remember reading it more than 20 years ago. I thought I understood it as I read it. But after a few days, I read it again! Ah, this heightened my vigilance. I discovered that I absolutely did not understand it. I would not be able to even accomplish a small portion of it. Yet there are far too many people who would read this now and say, "Ah, the Vows of Shramanera, I already know it. If you ask me to listen to it again, I could not hear it again." Ah! When I hear this, my heart....truly! One perspective of this can be that I admire him. He must be a great Bodhisattva coming back to the world to help us. I have heard this teaching numerous times and I still do not understand it. But he knows it just by hearing it once. Another perspective on this is that I feel pity for him. For this type of people, they have not even come close to the boundary of the real thing. But he thinks he knows.[14:54]
Why do I say this? I have seen the conducts of former teachers. This was so for those in the ancient times. For the recent times, we can see this in Venerable YingGuang. When he was first ordained, he had duties in the kitchen of the Red Conch mountain temple. His hand had gotten some sugar on it. If this happened to us, we would think what a waste and lick it. That would seem pretty good because it shows that we value it! Or we may just shake it off. But he did not do either! After he got the sugar on his hand, he immediately went to where the sugar was stored, and completely shook the sugar off. He did that. He did that! Then he went to thoroughly wash his hands. This would be done even if there was a little bit of salt, even just that. This is how it is with things of the temple [15:34]
Then later when I followed my teacher, he told us, "Personal asset is like the dirt, but the communal asset is like one's life." View your own money like the dirt. Why? You need to give it away! Well, then for something like dirt, you will feel disgusted when you see it. It is best if others would just take it away. That would be best! "Communal money is like one's life" or you can say communal properties are like your life. Oh, when you suffer a little, no need to mention your life, even when a little ant stings or bites you, when an insect stings you, oh, you just quickly drive them away. In any case, this is how we should protect and care for communal things. By then I knew that, "Oh! The real vows of Shramanera are not that easy to understand!" This is something worthy of our vigilance! Oh, now, for our own things, we would all work very hard for it, but for the communal duties, no one cares. That is because our karmic obscurations are too weighty. We do not have noble and virtuous characteristics. Therefore, here I will just briefly mention this. For those of you who sincerely wish to learn and practise, you must work hard from this point, must begin to work hard from this point![16:36]
If you can strive to practice, even if you cannot accomplish things due to your strong afflictions, but if you can pay much respect and strive, you will rise in the auspicious eon (Bhadrakalpa where a thousand Buddhas appear). You will obtain true liberation! This is what Buddha has said in the scriptures. He has told us this plainly and clearly. This is the correct view for us. Thus, due to the strength of this force, though you may have done wrong in this life and will be reborn among the nagas, you will come out of that and meet another Buddha. Then you will be fine. You will obtain liberation! If you have developed an even greater aspiration (Bodhicitta), that is even better! You will continue until you become Buddha. I just wanted to mention this concept while we are here.[17:08]
Therefore, for us now, we are who we are now. This is true, yes, yes. That was why I specifically told the story of Śāṇakavāsa. He was such a great master. Eh, sorry! When he went there, his deportment was not as good as the six common-herd bhikshus who always made trouble during Buddha's time! This is absolutely the truth! Therefore we should not be saying something like, "Oh! I have accomplished it." How can we have accomplished it? You could not accomplish this even if you desperately strive, needless to say when you are lazy. You cannot be like that! Therefore, we must develop a great shame, a great respect and mightily strive. If we can do this, then we will rise in the auspicious eon. So now let us continue. Sexual misconduct, this is the number five scroll. This is...[18:01]
3. Sexual Misconduct There are four possible bases of sexual misconduct:
There are four bases.[18:08]
a person with whom you should not have intercourse,
Things you should not do.[18:12]
inappropriate body parts, inappropriate places, and inappropriate times.
For every aspect, inappropriate body parts, inappropriate places. Body parts are such that, since an intercourse is between men and women, thus things mentioned here are pointing to other ways specifically. Inappropriate places, this means you are not at the proper place, not at the proper place. Inappropriate time means you do so at an improper time.[18:32]
Those with whom one should not have intercourse
The first one is those with whom one should not have intercourse.[18:35]
in the case of men are women with whom you should not copulate, all men, and eunuchs.
In other words, this includes all the men and women.[18:45]
The Compendium of Determinations refers to the first:384 [167]
Those indicated in the sutras—such as your mother and those protected by mothers— are "those with whom you should not have intercourse."
Anyone who is protected...this says your mother and those protected by mothers. This explains that, for instance, let us say this woman is a householder, she is protected by her parents. Or she is one particularly protected by the officials. Anyhow, she is protected by someone. Which means she belongs there, she has a certain status, this type of person is as said in the scriptures.[19:25]
The meaning of this is as the scholar Asvaghosa said:385
"Those with whom you should not copulate" Are those held by another, those having a religious insignia, Those under the protection of family or king, A prostitute who has been taken by another, And those related to you— These are the ones with whom you should not copulate.
He then explains.[19:40]
"Those held by another" are others' wives.
What are "those held by another"? They are others' wives. They are held by others.[19:47]
"Those who have a religious insignia" are renunciate women.
What is "Those who have a religious insignia"? They are renunciate women, they have a religious insignia. Then,[19:53]
"Those protected by family" are those who have not yet become brides
Ah! They are not married yet. [19.59]
and are protected by kinsfolk such as their fathers, who are protected by a father-in-law or a mother-inlaw, who are protected by a guard, or who—in the absence of these—are protected even by themselves.
Though they may not have parents....etc, but this is so even if she is by herself. Ah! Sorry, even though she is by herself, she protects herself. [20.14]
"Those protected by a king" or his representative are those concerning whom a punitive law has been laid down.
These are the sorts. Though she does not protect herself, but she has committed a crime and is locked in a jail. For instance, if she is in a jail, then the guard is guarding her! So you cannot just violate her. And then,[20:31]
The line stating that sex with a prostitute for whom another has paid is sexual misconduct shows that
Even this, this sexual misconduct is something one should not do anyway. But here, this points to the mundane world here! The people of the mundane world will go to the brothels. The prostitutes are those who make money by selling sex. Thus, once you have given money for this, then it does not count as a sexual misconduct. Conversely, though she is a prostitute, but if someone has already claimed, "Ah, she is the one." Then if you go ahead and do that with her, that is not allowed here.[21:03]
there is no sexual misconduct in hiring a prostitute yourself. The Great Elder also taught this in a similar way.
"Men," the second in the list of those with whom you should not have intercourse, refers both to oneself and to others.
Inappropriate body parts are body parts other than the vagina.
The only place for intercourse must be the vagina. Other places are inappropriate places. Any other places will be wrong. Any other places will be wrong. Therefore, now there is a type of sexual activity called "sodomy"! That is inappropriate body parts. These are even worse, even worse![21:34]
The master Asvaghosa says:
What are inappropriate body parts?
The mouth, the anus, the calves or Thighs pressed together, and the hand in motion.
This is easy for us to understand. Now when we look at the world now, the situation is getting worse and worse. When I was outside the country, there is no need to mention where, but they have asked to pass the law to recognize homosexuality. They wish to set laws to protect that. Ah! The mundane world is getting worse and worse. This is so upside down! So upside down. We would not talk about this.[22:06]
This accords with what the Great Elder says:386
This is what we should not do.[22:10]
the mouth, the anus, the front or rear orifices of a boy or girl, and your own hand.
These are all forbidden. Using "your own hand," normally we would call this masturbation, masturbation. Note this point about masturbation! This is something that is easy for us to do, easy for us to do. Both men and women would do so. Therefore, when you sleep, you should absolutely not touch your private parts below. Sometimes you will touch it without being aware, one should not do that. This is a causally concordant motivation, it is very terrible! Very terrible! You need to pay attention to this.[22:52]
Inappropriate places are
What are "inappropriate places"? That means you are not at the right place for doing this [22:56]
areas such as the vicinity of gurus, for instance; a place where there is a stupa; in the presence of many people; and on uneven or hard places that are harmful to the person with whom you are having intercourse.
These are all inappropriate, not the correct places. We in general will say this, therefore normally...there are some rules that people abide by in the older times. Let us say for a man and a woman, which means a husband and wife who are travelling to their relative's house or anywhere else. In general, when they get there, the men will stay with the men, and the women will stay with the women. They are split up, very clearly, never will they sleep together wherever they go, unless of course if they go to a hotel. The etiquettes of the people in the older times were strictly enforced![23:40]
The Master Asvaghosa says:387
In this case, inappropriate places
Are ones that are locations of the sublime teaching, Stupas, images, and the like, and bodhisattvas; And the vicinity of an abbot, a preceptor, or one's parents. Do not have intercourse in these inappropriate places. [168]
This is before the respected elders.[23:52]
The Great Elder also taught this.
This place often says "The Great Elder," "The Great Elder," this means Je Atisha.[23:59]
Inappropriate times are
Well then next? The last one is the "time", the timing is wrong.[24:06]
when the woman is menstruating,
Menstruating, what is "menstruating"? That is when women have their monthly period.[24:13]
when she is at the end of a term of pregnancy,
These are all not permitted[24:18]
when she has an infant who is nursing, when she is observing a one-day vow, and when she has an illness
Or if after the woman had given birth, she is still nursing. Also, when she is observing one-day vow. Then of course. "When she has an illness," there is also sickness.[24:33]
which makes sexual intercourse inappropriate.
These are all inappropriate.[24:38]
Sexual intercourse is also inappropriate in excess of a proper amount. A proper amount is having intercourse up to five times a night.
This talks about the time when a man and a woman have intercourse.[24:48]
The master Asvaghosa says:388
In that case, inappropriate times are when
A woman is menstruating, pregnant,
Has an infant, is unwilling,
Is in pain or is unhappy and the like,
Or is maintaining the eight-part one-day vow.
This explains the above. The above stated "has an infant," that is the time when an infant is still being nursed. "Is unwilling," that is the other party does not wish to do this, but one forces it upon her. Normally of course we would not be doing any of this. we may not even know all that is described. Of course, there are people who would actually say, "Ah, why do we bother to talk about this?" Yes! To us, it is for us to understand the different characteristics of this. But there is one more thing, as a renunciate, one is the teacher for both humans and deities in future. One has to be able to guide all sorts of people. If a householder comes to ask you this and you do notknow it clearly, how would you be able to respond to him? Therefore, we still need to know clearly the different ways described here. Then you can tell others what are appropriate, what are inappropriate and where do you begin to be on guard. "Is in pain or is unhappy and the like," not only is she unwilling, but also when she is suffering from sorrows and worries. Therefore, the above stated an illness. Actually, it is whenever the mind is not quite well, that is when you should not. "Maintaining the eight-part one-day vow," this is when one is observing the vows. When you are observing the eight-part one-day vow, all sexual activities are not permitted. This is not the appropriate time, not permitted. Regarding questions like this, if householders come to ask, then we as renunciate Dharma Masters can answer him, we should have already understood these [and be able to say], "There! This is what you should do."[26:18]
Again, the Great Elder is similar to Asvaghosa
Whenever the text mentions Asvaghosa, the Great Elder…etc, it is explaining that there is in fact a lineage source for the statement. Therefore, whenever this appears, you need to pay attention! Now among our fellow students, there will often be a type of student, who as soon as they know a little, they like to open their mouths and speak loosely. They will tell others this and that. Look at the ones who already have great achievements here. When they say anything, the exact lineage source for this is disclosed very clearly. Therefore, when we are learning this, we should certainly make sure we understand it clearly as well. If we do not know, we would rather doubt ourselves and say, “Ah, sorry! I do not understand this that much yet. You may want to take your question and ask a particular great teacher of the vinaya,” for things as such. Therefore, why do we refer to them as a “teacher of the vinaya”? It is not just because he upholds the ethical discipline so we call him that. All the renunciates must uphold vows. In order to be called a “teacher of the vinaya,” besides upholding the vows himself, knowing how to uphold the vows in different circumstances, he has to be very clear and very unequivocal. He is capable of providing a resolute answer for any question raised. For instance, we have our Zen master here. He has done the fundamentals well and he devotes his entire attention on meditation. He will therefore not incur any infractions against the vows. However, for many of the delicate and subtle subjective aspects, he may not know it so clearly. This is the great difference. It is not that those people do not need to uphold the vows. This is what we should make clear. Therefore, we have just said that whenever you encounter situations where you do not know the answer, then you need to ask a certain great teacher of the vinaya. So let us continue:[27:49]
with the difference that he says that daytime is an inappropriate time.
So the Great Elder also particularly said that for “time”, other than the similar things that he has said, [the difference is that] even saying daytime is not allowed.[28:03]
Given that the three bases—sexual intercourse using inappropriate body parts, in an inappropriate place, or at an inappropriate time—become sexual misconduct even in regard to your own wife, it is certainly the case that they become sexual misconduct in regard to others.
This was the “inappropriate body parts” said earlier. Even with your spouse, you could not do this. These would be wrong. No need to mention if it is someone else! Make note of this! This is what we should understand.[28:19]
Of the three aspects of the category of attitude— perception, motivation, and affliction— perception is spoken of in the Compendium of Determinations and in the texts on discipline. The Compendium of Determinations389 says that the "perception of this as that" must be accurate. However, the Buddha says in the texts on discipline that in the case of the cardinal transgression of unchastity, it is the same whether the perception is mistaken or accurate.
There are two differences here. With respect to “perception,” the Compendium of Determinations says, “perception of this as that.” This means if you carry out sexual misconduct, you will have to have the correct basis of person. If you do not have that, then it does not count. However, in the texts on discipline, in Vinaya, this is stated differently! The Vinaya says that whether the perception is mistaken or not, itdoes notmatter if you have made a mistake, if you think it is this person, but the person was switched, then sorry, you will have still incurred a cardinal transgression.[28:54]
The Treasury of Knowledge Auto-commentary390 explains that if you have approached another's wife with the perception that she is your own wife, then this does not become an actual path of non-virtuous action. Vasubandhu presents two systems in regard to when intercourse under the perception that another person's wife is the wife of a third person—one in which intercourse becomes a path of non-virtuous action and one in which it does not.
This is to make a distinction, to make a distinction and it is okay that they differ. In principle, we can understand that various sects may place the weight of sin on this differently. For us, my primary way of looking at this is to follow the strictest determination. There can be no wrong in going by the strictest determination. There are only benefits to be stricter.