Nine Short Works on a Life Spent in the Vinaya

When I first left the household life, I read the Combined Commentary on the Brahma Net [Sutra]. Going on to read the Lingfeng Discourses, I thereupon gave rise to the vow to study the Vinaya.

At the time of receiving the precepts, I read alongside them, as opportunity allowed, the Correct Model for Transmitting the Precepts and the Collected Essentials of Vinaya Matters.

In the spring of the gengshen year [1920], I sent to Japan and obtained an old printing of the Three Great Compendia of the Nanshan and Lingzhi [masters] — in all, more than eighty volumes.

In the spring of the xinyou year [1921], I began compiling the Tabular Record of Precept-Marks. By the sixth month, the first draft was complete. After that it went through repeated revision, and I copied it out by hand several times.

That same year, in reading through the canon, I came upon the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya translated by the Tripiṭaka Master Yijing, together with his Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the Southern Seas, and was deeply moved to admiration. I judged it superior to the older Vinaya; and so, in the first and second drafts of the Tabular Record of Precept-Marks in the Four-Part Vinaya, I repeatedly cited Yijing's views in order to correct [the tradition of] Nanshan. Afterward I came to realize myself that lightly disparaging the ancient worthies was not something to be done, and so I struck those passages out. After many rounds of deletion and revision, the final settled text was completed.

After that, although I no longer dared to disparage Nanshan, I still had not applied myself to a thorough study of the Three Great Compendia; and so for a time I devoted myself exclusively to the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya. Over two years I compiled one fascicle of Gleanings on the Marks of Transgression in the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and one fascicle of my own personal notes.

At that time the layman Xu Weiru founded a sutra-carving press in Tianjin devoted exclusively to carving the Vinaya texts of the Nanshan school, spending tens of thousands in silver and continuing the work for more than ten years.

Such precepts as these, I now vow to receive, uphold, and study, to the very end of future time, never again to abandon or depart from them. By this merit, may I and all sentient beings — for all the manifold offenses committed since beginningless time — obtain their complete extinction. Should any sentient being have fixed karma for which retribution must be received, I vow to receive it in their place: throughout every land as numerous as motes of dust, passing through every evil destiny, over kalpas as numerous as motes of dust, undergoing every kind of suffering in full — enduring it joyfully, never with weariness or regret — so that those sentient beings may first accomplish the path to buddhahood. This vow that I have made is true and not false; I humbly submit it for the witness and certification of the Three Jewels.

I, Yanyin — Master Hongyi's own ordination name — have composed for myself three phrases of vow, to be called to mind constantly whether walking, standing, sitting, or lying down: whatever merit I cultivate and uphold, I dedicate entirely to the sentient beings of the Dharma-realm; and for the immeasurable evil karma that sentient beings have created, I vow that this one body of mine will receive all their suffering in their place.

I vow to give up my body and life to protect and uphold the Buddha-dharma of the three time-periods!
I vow to give up my body and life to save and deliver all sentient beings of the Dharma-realm!
I vow to receive, in the place of all sentient beings of the Dharma-realm, the whole of their suffering!
I vow to protect the Nanshan Four-Part Vinaya school, that it may spread and be transmitted throughout the world!

In the twenty-second year of the Republic of China, in the year guiyou, on the twenty-sixth day of the fifth month — that is, the third day of the fifth month by the old lunar calendar — we reverently mark the sacred birthday of the Lingfeng Ouyi Great Master. We, the disciples studying the Vinaya, respectfully before all Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and patriarchal teachers, have together given rise to the Four Universal Vows; and in addition we make four further vows: first, we vow that we, the disciples studying the Vinaya, life after life, will forever be good companions to one another, supporting and drawing each other forward, never abandoning or departing from one another — studying the Vinaya together, proclaiming the great Dharma together, carrying forward the lineage of the Sangha, and universally benefiting sentient beings; second, we vow that, while we disciples are studying the Vinaya and propagating the Dharma, body and mind will be at peace, free of every demonic obstruction, with circumstances running smoothly and the necessities of life sufficiently provided; third, we vow that in time to come a Nanshan Vinaya cloister will be established, gathering together a great assembly, and broadly propagating [the Vinaya] — not for the sake of fame, nor seeking profit or support; fourth, we vow to give rise to the great mind of bodhi and to protect and uphold the Buddha-dharma, vowing to exhaust our hearts' strength in proclaiming the teaching of the Nanshan Vinaya school, submerged and untransmitted for more than seven hundred years, and spreading it throughout the world — hoping that the True Dharma may flourish anew and the sun of the Buddha shine forth once more. And we vow that the merit of this great vow, together with the merit of these four further vows, and all the merit of studying the Vinaya from now on, be entirely dedicated to the sentient beings of the Dharma-realm; may all sentient beings together give rise to this great resolve, swiftly dissolve their karmic obstructions, be reborn in the Land of Ultimate Bliss (reading 往往 in the source as 往生, a likely transcription slip — see note below), and speedily realize bodhi! We humbly beseech all Buddhas of the ten directions, our fundamental teacher Śākyamuni Buddha, Amitābha Buddha of the Land of Ultimate Bliss, the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva Avalokiteśvara, the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva Kṣitigarbha, the Vinaya Master Dao Xuan of Nanshan, the Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao of Lingzhi, and the Lingfeng Ouyi Great Master, to hold us in compassionate regard and pity, and to bear witness and receive us!

The disciples studying the Vinaya: Yanyin Hongyi, Xingchang Zongning, Zhaorong Guangqia, Chuanjing Liaoshi, Chuanzheng Xincan, Guangyan Benmiao, Jisheng Shuiju, Jiming Ruixi, Jide Ruicheng, Tengguan Miaohui, Jihu Ruiwei, Guangxin Pingyuan.

For anyone newly resolved on the path, having already received the Three Refuges, one should go on to receive the Five Precepts. If, upon honest self-examination, one finds oneself unable for the time being to receive them all, then receiving first four precepts, or three, or even only one or two, is entirely permissible. A lay Buddhist who has heard the Dharma for some time and knows how to examine his own conduct, strictly restraining himself, not treading into impropriety, not daring to act rashly or carelessly, may well manage not to transgress the four precepts against killing, sexual misconduct, great false speech, and drinking alcohol. But for a person engaged in worldly business, avoiding a breach of the precept against stealing is the most difficult thing of all.

For example: when jointly purchasing land or a building with others, or jointly running a business with others, at the time of reporting and paying taxes it is hard to avoid reporting less than the true amount held by the majority — because when several people are in partnership, if one insists on reporting honestly, the others will regard him as a fool, or he may even meet with the shareholders' opposition. There are also cases of transgressing without realizing it, and cases of knowingly violating the law and transgressing on purpose — as when banknotes are tucked inside a letter, or a handwritten letter is cunningly disguised and sent under cover of printed matter, both of which commit the offense of evading duty, which is a form of theft. In every case of taking what is not given, and of cunningly evading what the law does not permit to go unpaid, there is both the mental trace of a thieving intention and the actual act of theft, and in every such case the offense of stealing is incurred.

It is not only in matters of money coming and going that the mind must be kept strictly pure; even down to a single blade of grass or twig, an inch of paper or a foot of thread, one must first clearly ask the owner and obtain his permission before one may make use of it. To take and use something without waiting for permission, or to help oneself to something without first inquiring, both carry the mental trace of taking what is not given, both constitute the act of stealing or of wrongfully using what belongs to another, and in every such case the offense of stealing is incurred. ...

(Editor's note, present in the original source: the remainder of this text has been lost; it will be added when the complete version is obtained.)

Question: In recent generations, when the various monastic communities transmit the precepts, they all have candidates thoroughly memorize the Essential Vinaya Verses for Daily Use (popularly called the "Fifty-Three Mantras"). Is this proper or not?

Answer: The Ouyi Great Master once explained the meaning of this; I here briefly record it. His text says: "Once one has taken one's place among the ranks of bhikṣus, one ought to make the study of the Vinaya one's first priority. The aspiration-verses of the present day [such as 'may all sentient beings...'] originate from the Avataṃsaka [Sutra]; the various mantras all belong to the esoteric division. Though the Dharma-gates involved are inconceivable, when it comes to actual cultivation and realization, each has its own proper tradition. Gathered together without discrimination, all of it may be said to be 'complete' — a single verse, a single phrase, even a single syllable, each becomes a seed of the path. Examined with discrimination, none of it is truly complete — neither properly Vinaya nor not, neither exoteric nor not, neither esoteric nor not, amounting to nothing more than scattered goodness; this is precisely why the True Dharma gradually declines, and why the fortunes of this final age fail to be revived. Those with real aspiration would do better to concentrate wholly on the precepts and the Vinaya, and attend to the fundamental duty of a bhikṣu."

(The Ten Recitations Vinaya: when bhikṣus neglected the study of the Vinaya and instead recited the sutras and the Abhidharma, the World-Honored One rebuked them in various ways — down to the teaching that it is by the Vinaya that the Buddha-dharma abides in the world; many were the elder and senior bhikṣus who studied the Vinaya.)

Question: The Baizhang Rules of Purity closely resemble the Vinaya precepts; should a student of the Vinaya today also consult it?

Answer: Baizhang compiled this text in the Tang dynasty, and afterward it went through repeated additions and deletions by others. By the Yuan dynasty it had been altered even more extensively, so that its original character can hardly be seen at all; this is why the Lianchi and Ouyi Great Masters both forcefully denounced it. I have not yet had occasion to look up and record Lianchi's remarks; I here record only those of the Ouyi Great Master, as follows: "The ruin and destruction of the True Dharma is entirely due to the Vinaya's not being understood. The Baizhang Rules of Purity long ago lost the original author's intent; it is entirely the fabricated embellishment of vulgar clerical officials who held the position of abbot in the Yuan dynasty — its text and reasoning do not even hold together. That people today follow it is entirely because they are unfamiliar with the study of the Vinaya." He also says: "What was not instituted by the Buddha is called 'not the Dharma' — such as the Yuan-dynasty concoction falsely attributed to Baizhang's Rules of Purity." He also says: "As for the Baizhang Rules of Purity — that a worldly abbot of the Yuan dynasty tampered with and distorted it is especially shameful." Considering that the various texts of the Vinaya school are as vast as a sea of mist, even if we were to devote our whole lives to studying them, our strength would still fall short; even the original Baizhang text, supposing it still existed today, need not be read — how much less this spurious version! It is fitting now to pass on the words of the Lianchi and Ouyi Great Masters to fellow companions of the path.

Question: When lay people today ask a master to certify their reception of the Refuges, they habitually say they have "taken refuge in" such-and-such a master. Is this correct or not?

Answer: It is not! What one takes refuge in is the Sangha, not merely a single master. The Ouyi Great Master says: "To take refuge in the Sangha means that all monastics are one's teachers. Yet worldly people today select one renowned and virtuous bhikṣu to revere and serve, and privately boast, 'I am the disciple of such-and-such a spiritual guide, such-and-such a Dharma master!' And that spiritual guide or Dharma master likewise privately boasts, 'Such-and-such a layman, such-and-such an official, has taken refuge with me!' Alas! If it truly comes to this, then one ought simply to say, 'I take refuge in the Buddha, I take refuge in the Dharma, and I have made the acquaintance of one great worthy' — how could this be called taking refuge in the Sangha at all!"

Question: Those who propagate the Vinaya in recent generations all take as their authority the Lianchi Great Master's Essentials of Novice Rules and Deportment; is this good or not?

Answer: Among the commentaries on the novice precepts, the Ouyi Great Master's Recorded Essentials of the Novice's Ten Precepts and Deportment is the most complete; this text was carved and printed in Yangzhou as a single volume, titled The Novice's Ten Rules together with Deportment. It costs barely more than ten cents in silver, and is the text that should be used when explaining the novice precepts to beginning students. The Lianchi Great Master was a great worthy of the Pure Land tradition; the study of the Vinaya was not his particular strength. In his Essentials of Rules and Deportment, he frequently renders judgments according to his own opinion, without taking the Vinaya canon as his authority; hence the Ouyi Great Master says: "The Lianchi Great Master devoted himself to propagating the Pure Land, and was somewhat lacking in the study of the Vinaya" (seen in the prefatory account of the Combined Commentary on the Brahma Net [Sutra] — I have not yet checked the original text, and merely give the general sense here). He also says: "The Essentials of Rules and Deportment shows considerable deliberation and is well suited to the capacities of the age, yet it has not yet made clear the methods of permission and prohibition, of light and grave offenses, and of repentance." Judging by these passages, although this text may guide ordinary people, it still seems not to be entirely satisfactory.

Question: The tenth of the novice precepts is not to handle gold or silver; by what method should a person today abide, so as not to transgress this precept?

Answer: The Compendium of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya says: if a bhikṣu obtains gold, silver, or similar items, he should seek out a lay person to serve as the "pure donor," and then, regarding the item mentally as belonging to that donor, may handle it without transgression. Even if he is at a great distance from the donor, should he later obtain more gold or silver, he need only, from a distance, form the mental attitude that it belongs to the donor, and may then hold it — and for as long as that donor remains alive, there is no transgression in any of this. If no donor can be found, he should hold the gold or silver and say to a fellow bhikṣu: "Venerable, please bear witness: I, the bhikṣu so-and-so, have obtained this impure wealth; I will hold this impure wealth in order to exchange it for pure wealth." Having said this three times, he may then carry it himself, or have someone else carry it for him, and in neither case is there any transgression. (The above records the general sense of the Compendium, not its full text.)

Question: In transmitting the precepts today, communities always gather together several hundred people and set a period of a full month; is this the Buddha's own institution?

Answer: In the Buddha's own time, whenever someone received the precepts, the tonsure-preceptor would simply invite nine monastics, and the precepts could then be conferred — this was conferral to a single individual, separately. Even in the Tang dynasty in this land, though there were cases of several people receiving together, the number never exceeded ten or twenty. Only in recent times, purely for the sake of a bustling and impressive occasion, have communities taken to gathering great multitudes together; hence the Ouyi Great Master once denounced this, saying: "One may enter the path at any time — why must it wait for the eighth day of the twelfth month or the eighth day of the fourth month? Only under conditions of genuine difficulty is a group of three permitted [to confer ordination together] — how could this permit a multitude running to hundreds or thousands?" As for the actual conferral of the precepts, it can be accomplished in less than half a day — why should it require many days? Moreover, in recent times, those who gather great multitudes for a month do so only in order to have the ordinands assist with water-and-land repentance rites and other Buddhist services, so that they are hurried and occupied all day long, with scarcely any leisure — while the actual matter of receiving the precepts is treated as of no real consequence. This is even harder to bear speaking of. Hence the receiving of precepts should certainly not require many days at all; what matters most is that the preceptor, both before and after the conferral, should shoulder the responsibility of instruction. The Tang Tripiṭaka Master Yijing says: "How can it be that, at the very moment of wishing to receive the precepts, one is utterly exhausted and worn out — and once it is obtained, the precepts are given no further thought, the precept-sutra is not recited, the Vinaya texts are not opened. Occupying a place in the ranks of the Dharma in vain, harming both oneself and others — people of this sort become those by whom the Dharma is destroyed!" The Ouyi Great Master says: "The precepts of a bhikṣu are the great regulation for transcending the world, and it is by means of them that the Jewel of the Sangha is established. What matters is study, cultivation, and practice after reception — it cannot simply be a matter of ascending the platform to go through the motions and fulfill an obligation. For this reason, guidance and encouragement ought to come beforehand, and thorough investigation and clarification requires a full five years' study. But teachers of later generations have become preoccupied with outward show, so that the method of ordinary instruction has become mixed together with the actual sequence of ascending the platform and conferring the precepts; moreover, though the moment of reception may seem solemn and weighty, once it is over people consider the whole matter finished. There is no error more upside-down than this." (The bodhisattva precepts are received separately, and this discussion does not concern them.)

Question: In transmitting the precepts today, there are titles such as "foremost in precepts" and "chief in precepts" — what do these mean?

Answer: These are obtained, before the precepts are even conferred, by having the ordinand pay a sum of money for them — no different from the practice, at the end of the Qing dynasty, of purchasing an official rank or title. They have nothing to do with the superiority or inferiority of one's actual precept-virtue. This is a corrupt custom that ought most urgently to be abolished.

Question: In this Final Dharma Age, the conferral of precepts can no longer be carried out as the Dharma prescribes, so that the precepts are certainly not obtained. I do not know by what further expedient means one might still obtain the full monastic precepts.

Answer: The Ouyi Great Master says: "In this Final Age, if one wishes to obtain genuinely pure precepts, apart from this method of the sign-wheels of the divination [ritual], there is no other way." This refers to the divination-repentance ritual established according to the Sūtra on Divination of the Effects of Good and Evil Karma, spoken by Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva. The Sūtra on Divination says (first briefly showing the outline of the repentance method): "Sentient beings of future ages who wish to go forth from the household life, and those who have already gone forth, if they are unable to find a good and virtuous precept-master and a pure assembly of monastics, and their minds are full of doubt, unable to receive the precepts as the Dharma prescribes — they need only learn to give rise to the mind set upon the unsurpassed path, and thereby cause body, speech, and mind to become pure" (after seven days of performing the repentance, each morning casting the three wheels for body, speech, and mind three times; when all show purely wholesome signs, this is called obtaining the sign of purity). "One who has not yet gone forth should shave the head and don the Dharma robes, and, looking up, address the Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions, requesting them to serve as preceptor and witness. With single-minded resolve one establishes the vow and recites the marks of the precepts — first speaking the ten root grave precepts of the bodhisattva, and next comprehensively raising the three collections of the bodhisattva's moral discipline, namely the collection of the moral codes (the five, the eight, the ten, the full precepts, and so on), the collection of wholesome dharmas, and the collection of benefiting sentient beings. Receiving these by one's own vow alone, one is then said to have fully obtained the prātimokṣa precepts of one who has gone forth, and is called a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī." It was for this reason that the Ouyi Great Master, at the age of thirty-five, stepped back to the status of a novice, and thereafter devoted himself wholly to performing the divination-repentance ritual, until, on the first day of the first month at the age of forty-seven, he obtained the sign-wheels of purity and thereby obtained the full monastic precepts.

Prior to this: considered in terms of having precepts, he stepped back to become a gone-forth upāsaka; his disciples Chengshi and Xingdan likewise received the long-term eight precepts. Considered in terms of having no precepts, he received by self-administered vow the Three Refuges and the Five Precepts, the long-term Eight Precepts, and a partial portion of the bodhisattva precepts. As for the fourth condition for conferring the full monastic precepts — the correspondence of mind and object — either the mind fails to match the object, or the object fails to correspond to the mind, or mind and object both fail to correspond with one another; in every such case, the conferral is not in accordance with the Dharma.

Question: If someone has already broken one of the four gravest precepts, can he still receive the full monastic precepts again?

Answer: A lay person may break one of the four gravest among the five precepts or the eight precepts; one who has gone forth may break one of the four gravest among the precepts of a novice, a female novice, a probationer, a bhikṣu, or a bhikṣuṇī — in every case this is called a "marginal offense." According to the Hīnayāna Vinaya, such a person cannot receive the precepts again. According to the Brahma Net Sutra, though repentance is generally permitted, it must continue until one obtains a vision of the auspicious marks [of a buddha or bodhisattva]. Now, following the repentance method of the Sūtra on Divination, the criterion instead becomes obtaining the sign-wheels of purity. The Sūtra on Divination says: "In the time to come, whether lay or gone-forth, sentient beings who wish to receive the pure and wondrous precepts, but who have already committed an aggravated grave offense (that is, a marginal offense) and so cannot receive them, should likewise cultivate the repentance method described above. Once they bring their minds to utmost sincerity and obtain wholesome signs of body, speech, and mind, they may then rightly receive the precepts."

Question: The great masters of the Chan school in ancient times, when dwelling in the mountains, sustained themselves purely on three strips of bamboo and a single hoe; and when leading their communities, made "a day without work is a day without food" their rule of purity — all of which runs contrary to the Vinaya's own regulations. Why was this so?

Answer: Among the great masters of the ancient Chan school, those who strictly kept the Vinaya pure and served as a great model for the three realms were such as [Hui]yuan and [Tian]tai Zhiyi. Below them were those who set aside the minor precepts and preserved only the four gravest — but even these never dared to call themselves bhikṣus, nor did they ever dare to look down upon the study of the Vinaya; they merely felt ashamed at their own inability to cultivate both together, and regarded this as a matter of gradual virtue. Long ago someone asked Chan Master Shouchang: "The Buddha's regulations forbid a bhikṣu to dig the earth or damage grass and trees — why, then, do you plow and plant for yourself?" He answered: "We have merely awakened to the Buddha's mind and are capable of transmitting the Buddha's intent, pointing things out according to the capacity at hand, so as to let people recognize the nature of mind. Measured against the True Dharma, we deserve to be called nothing more than tonsured laypeople — how could we dare to claim the name of bhikṣu?" The questioner asked further: "Suppose that, in the present age, there were someone able to carry out the duties of a bhikṣu exactly as the Dharma prescribes — how would you, master, regard him?" He answered: "Were there truly such a person, I would revere him as I would the Buddha, and treat him with the courtesy due a teacher." It is not that we of the Chan school refuse to do this — it is that we are truly unable to. Again, the Great Master Zibo, throughout his whole life, ate only a single bowl of gruel and a single meal, with no other food besides, and for more than forty years never let his side touch a sleeping-mat; yet, because he still felt unable to keep the minor precepts, he never dared, to the end of his life, to confer the novice precepts or the full monastic precepts on anyone — when it was truly unavoidable, he would confer only the five lay precepts. Alas! Such was the reverence in which the patriarchs of old held the study of the Vinaya — how could we dare to make light of it! Whoever makes light of the Vinaya is certainly possessed of false views, and is no genuine master of this tradition. (The above is excerpted according to the writings of the Ouyi Great Master.)

The ten sections listed above were not set down in careful order; and, having been compiled and recorded in haste, there may be passages where the wording or meaning is not entirely satisfactory — these may be corrected at a later time.

The following appears in the source as a set of terse outline notes and a rough diagram of the wooden divination blocks, evidently Hongyi's own working notes appended after Question 8 above; it is translated here as literally as its abbreviated, diagram-like form allows.

The Divination Method. The wooden sign-wheels — marked, for example, "not-killing" on one face — nineteen wheels in all.

The sign-wheels admit of three kinds of distinction: (1) they can show the distinctions among the seeds of good and evil karma created in past lives (simply observing whether the seed of good or evil is present or not); (2) they show the relative strength or weakness of the force of good or evil karma; (3) they comprehensively show the distinctions in the retribution received across the three time-periods.

First: ten wheels in all, inscribed with the names of the ten good and ten evil courses of action — one face inscribed with the good, the opposite face with the evil, so that the two are set against each other, leaving the remaining two faces of each wheel blank; this is what allows the good or the evil to appear or not appear when cast. Second: a wheel marked with the character for "body." Third: a wheel marked with the numeral "one."

When divining, the first two sets of wheels are used: with the first wheel one considers whether the two casts correspond (if both show the same result, one does not cast again; otherwise one casts again); with the second wheel, one takes up only the question that corresponded on the first wheel — if it does not match, one casts again.

The bodhisattva precepts: received by self-administered vow, following the Yogâcāra karman-procedure (the formal karman-procedure first, the marks of the precepts after). The precepts of a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī: the karman-procedure is the same as above (one procedure for the bodhisattva precepts, two for the bhikṣu precepts). For one who has not yet reached full age, it likewise appears one should receive by the same karman-procedure as above; and when full age is reached, one again receives by the same karman-procedure as before.

The Procedure. First: begin by sprinkling for purification — an addition to the basic rite (circumambulating the platform while reciting the Śūraṅgama Mantra). After seven days of performing the repentance rite, cast for the three types of karma (best to use nine wheels, casting three times with eyes closed, and only then looking).

Question: We who have received the precepts have been unable to do so in strict accordance with the Dharma — how are we to make sense of this for ourselves? And if it is said that receiving the precepts without strict accordance with the Dharma means the precepts are certainly not obtained, what clear textual evidence supports this?

Answer: Let me first explain the meaning of "not obtaining the precepts." The conditions for obtaining the bhikṣu precepts, according to the record of karman-procedures, are six: (1) the boundary of the ordination platform has been properly established (a boundary formed by proper procedure); (2) there is a monastic capable of carrying out the ordination procedure (a genuine bhikṣu); (3) the assembly of monastics is sufficient in number (ten, or five, each of pure precepts and clear understanding); (4) the whole assembly within the boundary is gathered together in harmony (not a partial assembly); (5) there is the karman teaching-procedure itself (recited and performed as the Dharma prescribes); and (6) the necessary provisions are complete (the three robes and the bowl). If even one of these six conditions is lacking, the precepts are not obtained. In our case today, every one of them is lacking; hence the conclusion that the precepts are not obtained may be regarded as settled beyond doubt. As for the novice precepts, before the master's own conferral, a formal single-motion karman-procedure must be performed within the assembly of monastics; the first five conditions above therefore apply equally, and this too must be judged as not obtained.

Question: Given that we know we have not been able to obtain the bhikṣu precepts, what proper course of action should there be?

Answer: According to my own humble view, I would propose a course of action divided into two matters. First, I urge that people perform the divination-repentance rite, seeking to obtain the bhikṣu precepts by that means. The Ouyi Great Master said: "In this Final Age, if one wishes to obtain genuinely pure precepts, apart from this method of the sign-wheels of the divination ritual, there is no other way." The Great Master himself obtained the bhikṣu precepts by following exactly this method. This matter is easily understood, and I will not elaborate on it further here. Second, prior to actually obtaining the precepts, for the sake of protecting the spirit of the Dharma and maintaining the present situation so that it does not lapse entirely, those who have received but not truly obtained the precepts should be made to study the bhikṣu Vinaya. This matter involves considerable difficulty, and the clarifications that follow are all concerned with it.

Of the two matters stated above, the first is the fundamental course of action, and the second is the course of action for maintaining the present situation. These two must proceed together at the same time, and neither may be dispensed with. If there were only the second without the first, then no genuine bhikṣu would ever appear. If there were only the first without the second, then the present situation of this transitional age could not be maintained. Hence the two must proceed together at the same time — this is what is fitting.

Question: For one who is not a bhikṣu to study the bhikṣu Vinaya — is there sacred-teaching evidence for this? Before answering this question, the term "not a bhikṣu" must first be explained. There are three categories of "not a bhikṣu": first, with reference to a novice (this is not what the questioner has chiefly in mind); second, with reference to one who has received the novice or bhikṣu precepts but, not in accordance with the Dharma, has not truly obtained them (this is chiefly what the questioner has in mind, and the answer below is concerned with clarifying this case — though the text sometimes refers to both the first and third categories together for the sake of a fuller explanation, this is not its main intent); third, with reference to one who has never received either the novice or the bhikṣu precepts at all.

Answer: If one seeks, within the Vinaya, an explicit ruling that one who has not obtained the precepts must study the bhikṣu Vinaya, this is simply not to be found. But one can cite passages to prove that one who is not a bhikṣu studying the bhikṣu Vinaya does not thereby commit the fault of a "thief-dweller" [one who fraudulently poses as ordained]. One can also cite passages to prove that a layperson who has received the bhikṣu precepts but, not in accordance with the Dharma, has not obtained them, does not become a "thief-dweller" even if he is present within the assembly and hears a formal karman-procedure being carried out. On this basis it may be judged: such a layperson may perhaps also study the bhikṣu Vinaya; and even his being present within the assembly and hearing a formal karman-procedure carried out seems to present no great obstacle.

Question: It was said above that one who is not a bhikṣu studying the bhikṣu Vinaya commits no fault of "thief-dweller" — what textual evidence supports this?

Answer: Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao's Zichi Commentary says: "Question: 'If one privately studies the conferral-recitations before being fully ordained, and happens to hear them; or, before receiving the precepts, has already read the sutras and Vinaya, and through reading the karman-procedures comes to understand their wording and meaning — does this constitute an obstruction to the precepts, that is, does it constitute being a thief-dweller?' Answer: 'According to the surrounding text, the offense applies specifically to fraudulently participating in a formal proceeding actually carried out within the assembly — how could merely reading a text constitute an obstruction to the precepts? Among eminent monks of old, many had already read through the whole canon while still laypeople; and among believers today, many likewise do so. If all of this obstructed the precepts, this would surely be far too severe a standard — let students consider this carefully.'" The karman-text also says: "Second, there is a person who, though not counted toward the quorum, ought not to be rebuked — namely, one who wishes to receive the full precepts." Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao's Jiyuan Commentary explains this: "This refers to a novice receiving the precepts, who may have already read the Vinaya, or who may be attending again, and clearly understands what is proper and improper. If there is no one present to rebuke him, he is permitted to restrain himself of his own accord." Since one who has already read the Vinaya may go on to seek the full precepts, this is sufficient proof that no fault of "thief-dweller" is thereby incurred.

Question: It was said above that a layperson who has received the bhikṣu precepts but, not in accordance with the Dharma, has not obtained them, does not become a "thief-dweller" even when present in the assembly and hearing a formal karman-procedure carried out — this claim is especially startling. What clear textual evidence supports it?

Answer: The karman-text says: "Third, one who is not counted toward the quorum and ought not to be rebuked — ... a layperson ..." The Commentary of the Nanshan Vinaya patriarch [Dao Xuan] says: "The thirteen difficulties listed earlier involve actual faults that obstruct the precepts. This good layperson, attempting to receive the ten full precepts, even though his mind is entirely pure, finds that the formal procedure simply fails to succeed owing to some discrepancy — he still retains his original designation as a layperson because of this." Considering this now: those of us who have received the precepts but, not in accordance with the Dharma, have not obtained them belong precisely to this category. Though we are present within the assembly and hear a karman-procedure being performed, we are judged only as "not counted toward the quorum, not to be rebuked" — it is never said that this constitutes the difficulty of being a "thief-dweller," precisely because there is no fraudulent intent involved, and hence it is called "this good layperson."

Question: If a layperson who has received but not obtained the precepts incurs no difficulty of "thief-dweller" upon hearing a formal karman-procedure carried out within the assembly, then why, at the recitation of the precepts, is a novice sent out of the hall?

Answer: Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao's Zichi Commentary says: "At the recitation of the precepts, those not yet fully ordained are sent out for fear that this might give rise to a casual, light-minded attitude toward the precepts — it has nothing to do with any obstruction to the precepts. Consider: even a senior bhikṣuṇī is sent out on this occasion — is there any question of her being obstructed from the precepts?"

Question: Since we have not obtained the novice or bhikṣu precepts, are we then unfit to serve as a field of merit for the world, consuming the offerings of the faithful in vain, and unable to escape the resulting karmic consequence?

Answer: The Nanshan patriarch's Procedural Commentary says: "The Samantapāsādikā: when a donor invites bhikṣus, novices, though not yet fully ordained, are also counted among the number of bhikṣus for this purpose. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra: even one who has not yet received the ten precepts may still accept an invitation to receive offerings." Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao's Zichi Commentary explains: "The treatise permits this with reference to sameness in Dharma-status, as with a novice; the sutra permits it with reference to sameness in outward form, as with a gone-forth upāsaka — in neither case is it anything other than that both have gone forth for the sake of liberation, and this alone is sufficient to be worthy of receiving offerings." Hence it is known that one who has not gone forth for the sake of liberation, even if a nominal bhikṣu, must still be said to consume the offerings of the faithful in vain; whereas one who has gone forth for the sake of liberation, even as a mere upāsaka, is worthy to serve as a field of merit for the world.

Question: When, in time to come, genuine bhikṣus appear and transmit the precepts in accordance with the Dharma, everyone will then become a genuine bhikṣu, and there will be no further need to speak of "maintaining the present situation." At that time, if there are still those who have not received the bhikṣu precepts, may they still invoke the present precedent and study the bhikṣu Vinaya beforehand?

Answer: The text above said: "For the sake of protecting the spirit of the Dharma and maintaining the present situation so that it does not lapse entirely, those who have received but not obtained the precepts should be made to study the bhikṣu Vinaya" — and passages were cited at some length to establish this. My intention throughout has been, in this transitional age, to maintain things by whatever strained means are available, hoping to prolong a single thread of transmission. If, in time to come, everyone becomes a genuine bhikṣu, there will be no further need to establish any "maintaining of the present situation"; one should then simply follow the ordinary regulations and handle the matter with due care. Anyone who has not received the bhikṣu precepts should not, at that point, be casually permitted to study the Vinaya. And this holds not only for the future — even speaking of the present day, anyone who has not yet received the precepts at all likewise need not study it. Only those who have received the precepts but, not in accordance with the Dharma, have not obtained them, may be permitted to study the Vinaya. If matters are handled in this way, perhaps no great error will result.

(Editor's note, present in the original source: the text originally added emphasis-circles at many points throughout; for ease of typesetting these have been omitted here.)

First: the Five Precepts and the Eight Precepts properly belong to the Hīnayāna; yet in taking up and receiving these precepts, one should give rise to the great bodhi-mind. One should not merely perfect oneself alone, inclined one-sidedly toward quiescence; though the rules of permission and prohibition, of upholding and transgression, are no different from those of the śrāvakas, the arousing of the resolve and the conduct that follows from it should be the same as that of a great bodhisattva. May the companions of pure faith do their best to encourage themselves in this!

Second: the merit of the Refuges and precepts is broadly extolled throughout the sutras and treatises. Speaking in general terms of their resulting fruit, this is confined to rebirth among humans and gods; hence one must diligently cultivate pure conduct, looking toward rebirth in Amitābha's Pure Land. As the Song-dynasty Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao of Lingzhi said: first, entering the path must have a beginning; second, the resolve of the mind must have an end. To speak of having a beginning: one must receive the precepts and single-mindedly uphold and carry them out, so that at all times, in the face of every worldly object encountered, one constantly remembers the precept-essence — while putting on clothes, eating meals, walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, speaking or falling silent, moving or being still, one must never forget it even for a moment. To speak of its having an end: this means turning the mind toward the Pure Land, and resolutely vowing to be reborn there. Because in this evil age of the five turbidities, in the Final Dharma period, delusion and karma bind deeply and habituated tendencies are hard to cut off, one has no strength of the path of one's own — by what means, then, could one cultivate and realize awakening? Hence, throughout the more than fifty years since Śākyamuni appeared in the world and expounded immeasurable teachings, all those capable of being delivered have already been delivered, and even those not yet delivered have all already had the causes and conditions for their eventual deliverance established. Yet although the causes and conditions are many, it is difficult to enter through them. Only the Dharma-gate of the Pure Land is the direct road of practice. This is why the sutras and treatises give special praise to the Pure Land. When the Buddha-dharma is entirely extinguished, only the Immeasurable Life Sutra will remain in the world for a hundred years more. That the ten directions urge and praise it is a matter of genuine, not idle, faith.

Third: those receiving the Refuges and precepts should receive them from among the five assemblies of those who have gone forth from the household life (the five gone-forth assemblies being: bhikṣu, bhikṣuṇī, probationer, novice, and female novice). Receiving from a fully-ordained monastic (a fully-ordained monastic being a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī) is the ordinary, standard practice; only when there is truly no such person available should one rely on the other assemblies. (According to both the Satyasiddhi-śāstra and the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra, self-administered reception of the eight precepts is permitted in each. Yuan Zhao's Jiyuan Commentary says: "Both treatises permit self-administered reception; the wording is brief regarding the absence of a preceptor, but the sense includes cases of genuine hindrance." Ouyi says: "To receive this rite of the eight precepts of the fast, one needs a single gone-forth person to serve as witness. It does not matter whether this person belongs to the Great or Small Vehicle, or to which of the five assemblies — so long as he abstains from eating after midday for his whole life, he may serve as preceptor. Should there truly be no such person within several li, one may perhaps receive by self-administered vow before a sutra or an image instead.")

Fourth: those receiving the Refuges and precepts should, if following the Vinaya's own regulation, receive them individually and separately, one by one, before the preceptor. Cases in which a great many people receive together, all at the same time, are instances of genuine difficulty, not the ordinary standard practice. The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Miscellaneous Matters, says: "As the Tathāgata, the Great Teacher, was about to enter parinirvāṇa, five hundred stalwart men wished to receive the Refuges and precepts. Ānanda then had this thought: 'Should these stalwart men each individually and separately receive the training-rules of a near-dweller before the World-Honored One, this would take a great deal of time and would obstruct and delay the parinirvāṇa. I ought now to request that they receive these training-rules all together, at one time.'" Measured against this clear textual precedent: unless there is a genuine difficulty of this kind, group reception should not be adopted.

Fifth: when receiving the Refuges and precepts, the one conferring them speaks the words, and the one receiving them repeats them after him. This was the sole method in the Western lands [India]. The Tang Tripiṭaka Master Yijing said: "According to the sacred teaching and its transmission, in every case one receives the words of the precept by repeating them after the preceptor's own speech; there is no instance of the preceptor merely asking, without speaking the words himself, whether one is able or not. The matter of the precepts is no light thing, and admits of no careless haste." (This compilation follows exclusively the Sarvāstivāda school, and differs somewhat in places from the accounts given in other Vinaya traditions and treatises; students should not, on this account, doubt or disparage those other traditions, since each is suited to a different capacity, and all alike accord with the sacred teaching.)

Sixth: various other sutras and treatises state that one who is unable to receive the five precepts in full may receive one portion or two portions of them. Yet according to the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā: "One who does not receive the precepts in full does not obtain the precept at all. It states: Question — when one generally receives the upāsaka precepts, if one is unable to receive all five precepts, but receives one precept, or up to four, does one thereby obtain the precept? Answer: One does not. If this is so, then how is one to understand the sutras that speak of a 'minor-portion upāsaka,' a 'major-portion upāsaka,' and a 'full-portion upāsaka'? Answer: The reason such things are said is to clarify the relative degree of merit in upholding the precepts — it does not mean that there exists such a thing as a mode of receiving the precepts in fractional portions." Ouyi likewise says: "As for receiving four-fifths, three-fifths, or some other fraction — since this is not a full reception, it can only be counted among the merit-generating deeds that transcend the world, but cannot be called the study of the precepts." Weighing this consideration: a person today who wishes to receive the precepts should honestly assess his own capacity. If he truly judges his strength weak and his resolve timid, unable to sustain the distance, there is no harm in his first receiving one portion, or up to four; but otherwise, he should receive and uphold them in full, so that this may rightly be called the study of the precepts. How could one properly, out of fear of difficulty, forfeit this superior benefit?

Seventh: people today, when asking a master to certify their reception of the Refuges, habitually say they have "taken refuge in" such-and-such a master. This popular custom has been handed down and imitated without correction. Checking the name against the reality, it is considerably unsatisfactory, since what one takes refuge in is the Sangha, not merely a single master. Ouyi says: "To take refuge in the Sangha means that all monastics are one's teachers. Yet worldly people today select one renowned and virtuous bhikṣu to revere and serve, and privately boast, 'I am the disciple of such-and-such a spiritual guide, such-and-such a Dharma master!' And that spiritual guide or Dharma master likewise privately boasts, 'Such-and-such a layman, such-and-such an official, has taken refuge with me!' Alas! If it truly comes to this, then one ought simply to say, 'I take refuge in the Buddha, I take refuge in the Dharma, and I have made the acquaintance of one great worthy' — how could this be called taking refuge in the Sangha at all!" Hence one who has already received the Refuges ought, toward the whole assembly of monastics, whether worthy or foolish, to revere and honor every one of them as a teacher, and call oneself their disciple — one must not, out of arrogance, make arbitrary distinctions among them.

Eighth: people today, having just received the five precepts, at once take to wearing the five-panel robe and carrying a sitting-cloth, corrupting and confusing the proper regulations, and incurring an offense whose extent is hard to measure. According to the Buddha's own Vinaya regulation, only after one has gone forth from the household and had the head shaved is one given the plain, unpatterned robe. As for the five-panel robe, only a fully-ordained monastic is permitted to wear it. For laypeople today to confuse themselves with fully-ordained monastics in this way is deeply improper. (The Vaipulya-dhāraṇī Sutra says: "When the two lay assemblies enter the platform to carry out the rite, they wear the seamless three robes" — "seamless" meaning precisely the plain, unpatterned robe, not the five-panel robe. The Satyasiddhi-śāstra also says: "It is permitted to keep one repentance-robe, called a bota" — the bota being precisely the plain, unpatterned robe. Judging by the sutras and treatises, wearing the plain, unpatterned robe may indeed be permitted; but there is no explicit textual warrant for this within the Vinaya canon itself, so it is better still not to wear it.) As for the sitting-cloth: in Sanskrit it is called niṣīdana, formerly transliterated nishitan, and rendered in Chinese as "sitting-cloth" or "lying-cloth." It is used solely by fully-ordained monastics, spread beneath a rug or mat to guard it against soiling. That in this land it has come to be spread out for prostration is a matter of mistaken transmission. Even a fully-ordained monastic who uses it this way already departs from the sacred teaching — how much more disordered a matter it is for ordinary laypeople to do so! (The Tripiṭaka Master Yijing says: "The niṣīdana was originally intended to protect one's bedding, for fear of its being damaged, and was never meant for any other use. There is no textual warrant at all for spreading it on the ground for prostration; whoever violates the sacred word in this way must bear the offense himself.")

Ninth: once the precepts have been received, if one commits an offense of the upper grade, it cannot be repented away at all. If one commits an offense of the middle or lower grade, all of these fall within what can be repented. One should, in accordance with the Vinaya's regulation, disclose and confess the offense before the assembly of monastics, and only then can the offense be dissolved. How could one idly discourse on ultimate reality while making light of the formal procedure of confession? Ouyi says: "To confess an offense without contemplating the mind can still, at least, cut off the stream of that offense; but to discourse on principle without ever actually disclosing it makes it truly difficult to purify the offense at its source. If one insists on feeling ashamed of the formal procedure and refuses to carry it out, this is simply cherishing one's own reputation, concealing and covering things up out of endurance, and utterly failing to understand that the nature of an offense is fundamentally empty — how could this be called the sun of wisdom!" He also says: "When people are in the very act of committing an offense, it is truly a great evil, yet they feel no shame at all; but when it comes to disclosing it before others — the very best among good deeds — they instead feel ashamed of that. To be content with evil and yet pained by goodness is to become the very worst kind of evil, with never any prospect of release — there is no greater confusion or folly than this." I have now, at the end of this compilation, following the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, settled upon a fixed text for the disclosure of offenses. When this is used, one may not embellish it with additional ceremonial phrases, nor add to or subtract from its wording. This is the sacred regulation, and it must not be presumptuously altered.

Tenth: since the Final Dharma Age began, those receiving the Refuges and precepts have mostly followed the Correct Model for the Three Refuges and Five Precepts from Huashan [Baohua Mountain]. Skillfully accommodating the capacities of the age is that text's own strength; unfortunately, its ceremonial text tends toward excessive elaboration. Ouyi's own rite for receiving the Three Refuges and Five Precepts is generally recognized as concise and essential, yet those who actually follow it are few — this is truly a matter for regret! (Chen Xiyuan holds that this method is intended only for the receiver to speak the vow himself, and so gives only an abbreviated record of it — while, if received before a preceptor, one should still follow Huashan. Examining this claim carefully, it is in fact a matter of mere conjecture; the formal rite for the precepts should follow the sacred teaching. To take one's own abbreviated record and set it in opposition to a different tradition with its own different regulation, favoring elaborate ceremony instead — how could this possibly be acceptable, right and wrong so thoroughly confounded! Fearing that others might retain this earlier confusion, I venture once more to clarify and set the matter straight.) This present compilation follows exclusively the Sarvāstivāda tradition (in full, the Mūlasarvāstivāda. The Tang Tripiṭaka Dharma Master Yijing studied in India for more than twenty years, devoting himself exclusively to this school; since his return to China he translated and transmitted the Vinaya texts of this school, nineteen works in all, close to two hundred fascicles — precise, detailed, and clear, and known to the world as the "New Vinaya"). Taking that Vinaya text as authority, the reception-rite given here is simple, direct, and clear, running to no more than a few lines. This was the manner handed down in the Western lands, and all followed this same regulation; I do not say this out of mere attachment to antiquity, but simply to present one example — whether it is to be used or not, I leave entirely to worthy successors!

(Compiler's note, present in the original source: these General Notes are recorded here according to the edition printed by the Tianjin Sutra-Carving Press in November of the twenty-third year of the Republic [1934]; the version contained in the Collected Writings [文鈔] of Master Hongyi differs from this one.)

In the summer of the gengshen year [1920], I was dwelling at the Yuquan hermitage in Qiantang, studying the Vinaya of the Mūlasarvāstivāda school, and there found several passages concerning the practice of chanting the Threefold Sūtra on Impermanence. The Mūlasarvāstivāda Compendium, fascicle seven, says: "The Buddha said: 'If a bhikṣu attends at any of the five occasions, he should be given a share of the benefit. What are the five? First, the striking of the wooden gong; second, the chanting of the Threefold Sūtra on Impermanence; third, the veneration of a caitya; fourth, the passing of counting-sticks; fifth, the reading of a formal announcement.'" Several further passages are noted separately below. I also read Yijing's Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the Southern Seas, which records the rite for chanting the Threefold Sūtra on Impermanence in the greatest detail (note 1). From this I came to know that this sutra was one regularly recited by the great disciples in the Buddha's own time, and was perhaps even used as a daily practice. The sutra was translated in the Tang dynasty, but at that time it had not yet spread widely, and those who recited it were few indeed (note 2). From the Song and Yuan dynasties onward, no one at all has spoken of it. Fearing that it might sink into obscurity and cease to be transmitted, I wrote to my good friend the layman Ding, urging and requesting that it be circulated. The layman received this with delight and asked me to write a preface for it. I have humbly considered that, were this sutra to circulate in the world, its benefit would be most far-reaching, and I wish briefly to set this out.

The sutra repeatedly speaks of the three conditions of old age, sickness, and death as unlovable, without lustre, not to be dwelt upon, and unsatisfying. One who recites this sutra will feel impermanence to the very core and press forward diligently toward the path — this is its first benefit. The main text of the sutra runs to no more than three hundred characters or so, and with the added verses comes to little more than a thousand — concise in wording yet rich in meaning, and easy to hold in mind and recite — this is its second benefit. The Buddha permitted bhikṣus to chant only this sutra in a singing tone (note 3); its wondrous Dharma is rare indeed, its Sanskrit intonation pure and far-reaching, delighting all who hear it (note 4) — this is its third benefit. In this land, there has never been an established rite of sutra-recitation for funerals; but the regulation of the Buddha's own time calls for the chanting of precisely this sutra — the Vinaya-piṭaka (note 5), the appended text of this very sutra, and the Record of the Inner Law (note 6) all speak of this in detail — this is its fourth benefit. Cutting grass and felling trees is something the Great Teacher himself reproved, yet it cannot be avoided when a dwelling must be built; according to what is recorded in the Vinaya, one should on such occasions chant precisely this sutra, and also expound the ten wholesome courses of action, so that the necessary work need not be abandoned, and yet compassion is not injured either (note 7) — this is its fifth benefit. The text appended to this sutra, concerning the final determination at the moment of death, is of the utmost importance, and practitioners of the Pure Land path ought to examine it closely; and if they also chant the sutra itself, the benefit gained is wider still, for one thereby comes to understand suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and no-self — no different, in this, from the wind that stirs the musical instruments and the water flowing among the flowers in the Land of Peace and Bliss, whose sounds likewise proclaim this same subtle Dharma — this is its sixth benefit. Born as we are into the Final Dharma Age, far removed in time from the sages, we have no way to receive and follow the fine regulations of the Buddha's own era; yet fortunately this transmitted sutra remains, on which we may rely for chanting and recitation. Whenever the sun sets at dusk, and the twilight grows dim and vast, one may raise one's voice in mournful intonation and chant the verses of this sutra — and something of the lingering atmosphere and manner of the groves of Jetavana, beside their ancient stūpas, will seem, as if by chance, to be met with once again — this is its seventh benefit. The essential points of this sutra are, in brief, set out here. I wish only that it be circulated, and reach every sentient being universally, so that all who see it or hear it may joyfully receive and uphold it, together awaken to impermanence, together be reborn in the Land of Ultimate Bliss, broadly deliver sentient beings, and together accomplish the path to buddhahood.

Written on the second day of the seventh month of that year, by the Great Compassion śramaṇa Yanyin, Hongyi, composed within the Pattra-leaf Mountain of Xincheng. At the time I was about to build a dwelling and enter retreat, gathering workmen to fell trees; the evening before, I had chanted the Sūtra on Impermanence, and on this day drafted this preface, seeking thereby to dissolve karmic offense.

Note 1: The Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the Southern Seas says: "In this land of the Divine Continent, it has been handed down from ancient times that people know only how to venerate the Buddha and inscribe donors' names, and mostly do not know how to praise and extol the Buddha's virtues aloud. Why is this? To hear a name is merely to hear that name, with no way of knowing the greatness or smallness of the wisdom behind it; but to praise and extol, setting forth the virtues fully, is to embody the vast depth of that virtue. In the Western lands, at caityas and in the ordinary course of veneration, always in the late afternoon or at dusk, the assembly goes out of doors and circumambulates the stūpa three times. Incense and flowers are fully arranged, and all sit crouched down together. One capable person is asked to raise a mournful, elegant voice, clear and resoundingly strong, to praise the virtues of the Great Teacher — sometimes ten verses, sometimes twenty. They then return in order into the monastery, to the place where the assembly customarily gathers. Once all are seated together, one sutra-reciter is asked to ascend the lion-seat and read out a short portion of sutra. This lion-seat is placed at the head of the seniormost seats — sized and positioned modestly, never made especially high or grand. The sutra most often recited is the Threefold [Sūtra on Impermanence], which was compiled and arranged by the Venerable Aśvaghoṣa. It begins with about ten verses that take up the sutra's meaning to praise the Three Jewels; next comes the main body of the sutra itself, spoken directly by the Buddha; and once the reading is finished, a further dozen or so verses are recited, dealing with dedication of merit and the making of vows. Because it is divided into three sections in this way, it is called 'threefold.' At the conclusion of the sutra, the whole assembly together says 'subhāṣita' — su meaning 'wondrous,' bhāṣita meaning 'speech,' meaning that they wish to praise the sutra as wondrous speech; some instead say 'sādhu,' meaning 'excellent.' Once the sutra-reciter has stepped down, the seniormost seat rises first and venerates the lion-seat; having completed this act of reverence, he next venerates the seat of the holy Sangha, and returns to his own place. The second seniormost seat, following the same procedure, venerates these same two places in turn, and only then venerates the seniormost seat before finally taking his own seat. The third seniormost seat proceeds likewise, and so on down to the last of the assembly. If the assembly is large — more than three or five people — the rest simply rise together, face the assembly in veneration all at once, and then disperse as they wish. This method is the regulation and custom followed by the monastic community of the noble land of Tāmralipti in the East."

Note 2: The Japanese śramaṇa Saichō, in his Kenkairon (Treatise Clarifying the Precepts), in the section "Fifty-One Clear Proofs that Those Registered as Gone-Forth under the Great Tang Did Not Deceive the Government Officials," records, among others, the postulant of a certain cloister named Zhao Yuanji, aged thirty-five, registered at Xiudeli, Longyun township, Yunyang county, in the Jingzhao prefecture, whose father Zhenguan was a household head without formal registration — it is there recorded that he recited one fascicle of the Sūtra on Impermanence, and so on.

Note 3: The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Miscellaneous Matters, fascicle 4, says: "The Buddha said: bhikṣus should not use a singing tone in reciting the sutras and the Dharma, nor in reading sutras, nor in requesting instruction or making formal announcements — none of this should be done in a singing tone. There are, however, two matters for which a singing tone is permitted: first, praising the virtues of the Great Teacher; second, chanting the Threefold Sūtra. In every other case it is not proper."

Note 4: The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Miscellaneous Matters, fascicle 4, says: "At that time the bhikṣu Shanhe chanted and intoned the Dharma-texts in a singing voice; his sound was so clear and bright that it rose up and penetrated the Brahmā heavens. At that time countless sentient beings, hearing his voice, all planted within themselves the wholesome roots leading toward liberation — even animals endowed with sentience, upon hearing that voice, without exception pricked up their ears and listened to its wondrous sound. Later, on another occasion, King Prasenajit of Kosala, riding his white lotus-elephant, together with his attendants, went out of the city late at night on some business, needing to travel elsewhere. The bhikṣu Shanhe, within the Jeta Grove, was reciting a sutra in a loud voice. At that moment the king of elephants, hearing the sound and delighting in it, pricked up his ears to listen and refused to go forward. The driver at once goaded him with the hook and shook his feet, but the elephant would not move at all. The king said to the driver: 'Make the elephant go on!' He replied: 'Great King! I have used all my strength to drive him forward, but he will not move his feet — I do not know where this elephant wishes to go.' The king said: 'Release him and let him go as he wishes!' The driver then released the hook, and the elephant made his way to the Jetavana, and outside the monastery gate pricked up his ears and listened to the sound. Once the bhikṣu Shanhe had finished reciting the sutra, he spoke four verses of dedication, saying: 'May the devas, asuras, yakṣas, and so forth — down to whatever place they dwell — ever abide in peace.' When the elephant king heard these verses, he knew the sutra was finished, and at once flicked his ears and raised his feet to walk on, submitting to being driven and following the hook once more."

Note 5: The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, Miscellaneous Matters, fascicle 18, says: the Buddha said, "When a bhikṣu's body dies, offerings should be made for him." The bhikṣus did not know how to make such offerings. The Buddha said, "It should be cremated." The Venerable Upāli asked the World-Honored One: "As the Buddha has taught, this body contains eighty thousand households of worms — how, then, can it be burned?" The Buddha said, "These worms are born along with the person and die along with the person; there is no fault in this. But if the body bears wounds, one should first examine it to see there are no worms before it is cremated." If, at the time of wishing to cremate, no firewood can be obtained — the Buddha said, "It may be cast into a river; if there is no river, dig into the earth and bury it." In summer the ground is damp and full of worms and ants — the Buddha said, "In a deep thicket, lay the body with its head to the north, lying on its left side, its head propped on a bundle of grass, and cover the body with grass or leaves. Let a capable bhikṣu among those escorting the body chant the Threefold Sūtra on Impermanence, and recite verses to make dedication on the deceased's behalf."

The Mūlasarvāstivāda Compendium, fascicle 12, says: "When a bhikṣu's body dies, his corpse should be examined. If there are no worms, it should be cremated with fire; if there is no opportunity to cremate it, it should be cast into water, or buried in the earth. If there are worms, or if it is raining, the body should be carried together and left in an empty wilderness grove, lying with its head to the north, propped on bamboo and grass, covered with leaves, its face turned to look toward the west. At the place of laying-out, the Sūtra on Impermanence should be chanted, and a capable person should further recite verses of dedication. Once the funeral matter is concluded, all should return to their original place. Whoever handled the corpse should bathe, robes and all; whoever did not touch it need only wash the feet."

The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, fascicle 43, says: "His body was brought out, anointed with fragrant unguents and bathed, and placed within a bejeweled carriage. Musicians played every kind of instrument, banners and pennants filled the road, and fragrant smoke spread across the whole sky. The king and his ministers, together with the men and women of the whole city, followed the Buddha and the Sangha in escorting the body outside the city. Arriving at an open place, they piled up fragrant wood, poured fragrant oil over it, and set it aflame with fire; once the chanting of the Sūtra on Impermanence was complete, the relics were gathered and placed within a golden urn, and a stūpa was erected for them at the intersection of the four main roads, adorned with offerings of every kind of fragrance, flowers, and music, on a scale never before seen."

Note 6: The Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the Southern Seas says: "According to the Buddha's teaching, when a bhikṣu dies, once it is confirmed beyond doubt that he has died, his body is carried that same day to the place of cremation and promptly burned with fire. At the time of the cremation, relatives and friends all gather and sit together to one side — some binding grass together to sit on, some piling up earth to form a platform, some using bricks or stones as a seat. One capable person is asked to chant the Sūtra on Impermanence, half a page or a full page, without going on so long as to tire anyone; and afterward each one reflects on impermanence and returns to his own dwelling."

Note 7: The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, fascicle 27, says: "The Buddha told Ānanda: I will now explain all the proper procedure for bhikṣus engaged in construction work. Whenever one who has been appointed to oversee construction is about to fell a tree, seven or eight days beforehand he should, beneath that tree, lay out a maṇḍala, arrange incense and flowers, and set out offerings of food, and chant the Threefold Sūtra. A senior, venerable bhikṣu should perform the dedication chant, expound the ten wholesome courses of action, and praise wholesome karma; he should further announce: 'If any deva-spirit has long dwelt in this tree, let it go elsewhere to seek another dwelling-place, for this tree is now to be used in work undertaken for the sake of the Three Jewels.' After seven or eight days have passed, the tree may then be cut down. If, at the time of felling, some unusual sign appears, one should praise the merit of generosity and explain the fault of stinginess and greed; if the unusual sign still persists, the tree should not be felled. If no such sign appears, it may be felled." The Mūlasarvāstivāda Compendium, fascicle 9, records much the same account.

Since leaving the household life, throughout the Jiangsu-Zhejiang region I have never dared to lecture casually on the sutras or the Vinaya, still less to attend any precept-transmission ceremony as a lecturer, for the reason that I personally felt my own learning was insufficient. Over the past three years, in southern Fujian, I have indeed lectured on a few things, but in my own heart I have always felt deeply ashamed of doing so. This time, the elders of this temple invited me again and again to take part in this fine occasion of the precept-transmission period, and I could not in good conscience refuse; so today I have come to speak with you all. But because time is short, I have not been able to prepare, reference books are also lacking, and besides this my own spirits are in decline — I intend to speak here, together, over three days. Today I will speak first, specifically for those seeking to receive the bhikṣu precepts, on the history of the Vinaya school; for the others listening in, though they may not fully follow it, this too will be a matter of planting good roots.

Anyone who would be a bhikṣu should first know the causes and conditions by which the Vinaya was transmitted into this land, and the general outline of the rise and decline of the Vinaya school here, from ancient times to now. From the Eastern Han through the beginning of the Cao-Wei period, monastics had no rite of refuge and precepts at all — they merely shaved the head, nothing more. In the Jiaping era of Wei, the Indian monk Dharmakāla [Fashi] arrived in this land, and thereupon established the karman-procedure for conferring the precepts — this was the beginning of the Vinaya here. That moment may be reckoned the true beginning of the conferral of the bhikṣu precepts, and from it things gradually reached a flourishing period.

Among the great, extensive Vinaya-texts, the first to be transmitted was the Daśabhāṇavāra Vinaya [Ten Recitations Vinaya], translated by Dharma Master Kumārajīva in the Yao Qin period; the first patriarch of the Pure Land tradition at Mount Lu, Master Huiyuan, also exerted himself to urge and praise it. In the Six Dynasties period this Vinaya flourished most in the south. Next translated was the Four-Part Vinaya, at a time not far removed from the Ten Recitations Vinaya, though it was not until the Sui dynasty that anyone propagated and promoted it, and it did not truly flourish until the early Tang. The third was the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, translated in the Eastern Jin, with some propagation in the north during the Six Dynasties period. Following the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya in the Liu Song came the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, translated by the very same person who translated the sixty-fascicle Avataṃsaka Sutra — refined and concise in its wording, and greatly praised by Vinaya Master Dao Xuan, though unfortunately few propagated it. After this came the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, the translation-work of Dharma Master Yijing in the time of Empress Wu Zetian of the Tang, and the very Vinaya most current in the Tibetan regions. Dharma Master Yijing had spent more than twenty years in India; broadly learned and possessed of a powerful memory, he penetrated the subtleties of Vinaya study in a way no other monastic who reached India could match — truly the greatest Chinese Vinaya master before or since. Once Yijing returned to China and completed his translation work, he was already advanced in years, and passed into nirvāṇa not long after; thereafter no one propagated this Vinaya — what a pity, what a pity! Besides these there are a great many other Vinaya texts and treatises, too numerous to list here.

As for the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, I myself, upon first encountering it, was greatly delighted, and studied it for many years; afterward, on the advice of friends, I changed to studying the Nanshan Vinaya instead, the reason being that the Nanshan Vinaya is based on the Four-Part Vinaya, with certain further adaptations, and is able to suit the capacities of monastics in our own country. I will now speak briefly, specifically, about the history of the Four-Part Vinaya.

The Tang dynasty was the period when the Four-Part Vinaya flourished most. Before that, what was propagated was the Ten Recitations Vinaya, and few propagated the Four-Part Vinaya; by the early Tang, scholars of the Four-Part Vinaya had come to flourish, forming three great schools in all: first, the Xiangbu school, centered on Vinaya Master Faji; second, the Nanshan school, centered on Vinaya Master Dao Xuan; third, the Dongta school, centered on Vinaya Master Huaisu. Vinaya Master Faji preceded Dao Xuan, and Dao Xuan once studied under him; Vinaya Master Huaisu came after Dao Xuan, and also studied closely with both Faji and Dao Xuan. Although the Vinaya was thus divided into three great schools, the one that flourished most widely in the world may be reckoned the Nanshan school. The writings of the Nanshan Vinaya master are as vast as an ocean; among them the Procedural Commentary is the most renowned of all — at that time, scholars of every school without exception had to study the Procedural Commentary. From the Tang to the Song, more than sixty scholars wrote commentaries upon it, among whom Vinaya Master Yuan Zhao of Lingzhi was the finest; Yuan Zhao also left many other commentaries on sutras and Vinaya texts. After Yuan Zhao, Vinaya studies gradually sank into decline, and few gave rise to the resolve to propagate them.

After the Southern Song, as the Chan school flourished all the more, still fewer people paid any attention to Vinaya studies at all, and the several thousand fascicles of Vinaya writings by the various Tang and Song masters were entirely scattered and lost; by the early Qing, only a single fascicle — the Nanshan Karman-Procedures for Various Occasions — still survived. Considering this, one cannot help but sigh at great length! At the end of the Ming and the beginning of the Qing, great masters such as Ouyi and Jianyue wished to revive the Vinaya school anew, but the most regrettable thing was that the ancient books of the Tang and Song could no longer be seen. At that time the Ouyi Great Master wrote the Collected Essentials of Vinaya Matters; at his first lectures the audience was already small, and afterward smaller still — in the end the results came to little. Vinaya Master Jianyue achieved rather more in propagating the Vinaya, and wrote a great deal, including a commentary on the Karman-Procedures for Various Occasions and the Vinaya Practices [Piniさ Zuochi], which differ considerably from the Nanshan tradition, precisely because he was unable to see the Nanshan writings! Besides this there is also the most renowned work of all, the Correct Model for Transmitting the Precepts — from the end of the Ming down to today, this remains the sole work on transmitting the precepts, the one last ray of dawn on which the transmission of the precepts still depends; although it does not entirely agree with the Nanshan writings, its merit is very great, and it should not be regarded lightly. But the ordination rites of recent times have again been somewhat added to and subtracted from on the basis of this book, so that they are no longer even the original face of Vinaya Master Jianyue's own Correct Model for Transmitting the Precepts.

From the Southern Song to the Qing, over more than seven hundred years, one may say that virtually nothing survived of the Vinaya writings of the various Tang and Song masters; only at the very end of the Guangxu era of the Qing were a portion of these Tang and Song Vinaya texts sent back from Japan, and over the past decade or so, several hundred fascicles have already been printed in Tianjin. Besides this, several hundred more fascicles, collected in the Supplementary Canon, still remain unprinted separately.

If, from now on, there are those who give rise to the resolve to devote themselves single-mindedly to studying and propagating this, it will be possible to restore the ancient manner of the Tang dynasty — everything that Ouyi, Jianyue, and the others wished to see is now entirely available to us. We who live in this present age are, in truth, far more fortunate than the great masters Ouyi and Jianyue ever were.

But studying the Vinaya is by no means an easy matter. Although I myself have studied it for close to twenty years, I can only call this the preparation for studying the Vinaya — I have glimpsed only a little of its approach. It would take several more years of preparation before one could truly set one's hand to real research, and after that at least twenty more years of research before achieving any modest result at all. But I am old now, and fear I shall not remain long in this world; I very much hope that some among you will give rise to the resolve to devote yourselves wholly to the study of the precepts and the Vinaya, carrying forward what I myself was unable to finish — that would be the very best outcome.

We ought to know this: the Correct Model for Transmitting the Precepts now in circulation is not a perfect book, and it has moreover been carelessly added to and subtracted from besides — so it is essential that, from now on, the ancient method be restored. This is entirely your own responsibility, and I very much hope you will all encourage one another and press forward together!

Today I will go on to speak of the essentials of the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, and on up to the bodhisattva precepts.

As for the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, the Eight Precepts, the novice and female novice precepts, the probationer's precepts, the bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī precepts, and the bodhisattva precepts — speaking in the ordinary way, the bodhisattva precepts belong to the Mahāyāna and all the rest belong to the Hīnayāna, but this is not necessarily so in every case; it should really be determined according to the resolve with which the receiver receives them. I have recently been studying the Nanshan Vinaya, and within it there is a passage that says: "No matter which precept one receives, one must first give rise to the Mahāyāna mind." Looking at it this way, how could there be any precept properly named exclusively "Hīnayāna" at all! Speaking further of the method of reception: the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, and the novice and female novice precepts are all received by means of the Three Refuges formula; whereas the bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī precepts, and the bodhisattva precepts, must be received according to a karman-text. And the probationer's precepts, again, are simply a matter of performing a karman-procedure and undertaking a training-rule — this does not confer a separate precept, and differs from all the above. Considering the matter further in terms of lay and gone-forth status: speaking in the ordinary way, the lay category includes the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, the Eight Precepts, and so on, while the gone-forth category includes the novice and bhikṣu precepts and so on; but in actual fact, the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, and the Eight Precepts all apply equally to both lay and gone-forth people. Hearing this, you may well have doubts; let me now give an example to prove it. The Ming-dynasty Lingfeng Ouyi Great Master himself first received the bhikṣu precepts, but afterward stepped back to become merely a person of the Three Refuges — considering this, even the Three Refuges alone may count as making one "gone forth."

Again, even the Five Precepts alone may count as making one "gone forth," because after the head is shaved, one must first receive the Five Precepts, and only afterward receive the novice precepts — before receiving the novice precepts, one is simply a "gone-forth person of the Five Precepts." Hence the Five Precepts apply equally to lay and gone-forth people, and there is a distinction between a "lay upāsaka" and a "gone-forth upāsaka." For example, the Ming-dynasty Ouyi Great Master's two great disciples, Chengshi and Xingdan, both styled themselves "gone-forth upāsakas." Master Chengshi compiled the Ten Essentials of the Pure Land and the Lingfeng Discourses; Master Xingdan recorded the Essentials Commentary on the Amitābha Sutra — both were eminent monks of the late Ming.

Why do the Eight Precepts likewise apply to both lay and gone-forth people? The Bhaiṣajyaguru Sutra says that a bhikṣu may also receive the Eight Precepts, a bhikṣu receiving the Eight Precepts a second time for the sake of increasing his merit still further. Seen this way, the Eight Precepts likewise apply to both monastics and laypeople.

The above concludes this brief general classification; what follows takes up each item one by one in turn.

The Three Refuges: these do not belong to the category of "precept" at all — they are simply called the Three Refuges. The Three Refuges are: taking refuge in the Buddha, taking refuge in the Dharma, and taking refuge in the Sangha. Before receiving them, one absolutely must understand the reasoning behind the Three Refuges — it is by no means a matter of blindly and confusedly following along without understanding; if it is done that way, the Three Refuges are simply not obtained at all.

The "Three Jewels" are said to admit of four kinds of distinction: first, the Three Jewels of principle-substance; second, the Three Jewels of manifest form; third, the Three Jewels as sustained in the world; fourth, the Three Jewels as a single essence. To explain all of this in full would be very deep and complicated, so for now let me speak specifically of the Three Jewels as sustained in the world. What is the meaning of the Three Jewels — Buddha, Dharma, Sangha? The Buddha means an image — such as an image of Śākyamuni, of Bhaiṣajyaguru, of Amitābha, and so on; the Dharma means the sutras spoken by the Buddha — such as the Lotus Sutra, the Śūraṅgama Sutra, and so on, all of it Dharma that flowed out from the Buddha's own golden mouth; the Sangha means those who have gone forth from the household, shaved the head, received the precepts, and possess proper deportment. What has been said above about the meaning of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha may be called the most basic level, and I trust all of you can understand it clearly enough.

"Taking refuge" carries the meaning of "turning back" — because one previously turned away from and abandoned the Three Jewels, and now turns back toward the Three Jewels, this is called "taking refuge." But whether a person is gone-forth or lay, when receiving the Three Refuges, there are two most important points. First, one must pay attention to what exactly it means to take refuge in the Three Jewels. Second, at the time of receiving the Three Refuges, what the preceptor says should be entirely clear — if what the preceptor speaks is all in classical, literary language that cannot be understood, then in that case the Three Refuges are certainly not obtained; or if one is too far away to hear clearly, the Three Refuges are likewise not obtained; or even if one can hear and generally understand, but there remain one or two points of doubt, the Three Refuges are likewise not obtained. Moreover, at the moment of actual conferral, it is precisely the three utterances "I take refuge in the Buddha," "I take refuge in the Dharma," "I take refuge in the Sangha" that matter most, and to which the closest attention must be paid; what follows afterward — "refuge in the Buddha is complete," "refuge in the Dharma is complete," "refuge in the Sangha is complete" — is called the "three concluding statements," and is of no great consequence. Hence, when all of you give rise to the resolve to receive the precepts, you should first come to understand the meaning of the Three Refuges; and at the moment of actual conferral, your attention should be fixed above all on those first three utterances, "I take refuge in the Buddha" and so on — only then can the Three Refuges truly be obtained.

The above concludes what is to be said about the Three Refuges. Next I will speak of the Five Precepts.

As for the Five Precepts: here too, one should first ask the preceptor to explain them. The Five Precepts are: against killing, against stealing, against sexual misconduct, against false speech, and against drinking alcohol. When the preceptor explains the meaning of the Five Precepts, it is essential to use plain, colloquial language, simple and clear, so that people can easily understand. Once the one receiving the precepts has heard the explanation, he should first consider for himself whether he can actually keep each of these precepts; if he cannot keep them all, then receiving one, or two, or three, or four is entirely up to him — it is far better not to receive a precept at all than, under any circumstances, to receive it and not keep it! Take killing, for instance: for one who has not received the precept, transgressing it already incurs an offense in itself; but for one who has already received the precept against killing, transgressing it doubles the weight of that offense — is this not frightening indeed? Consider this well: if one is unable to receive and keep a precept, and merely goes through the motions to please others, this is truly inviting trouble upon oneself! In my own view: among the Five Precepts, the easiest to keep are the precepts against sexual misconduct and against drinking alcohol — I would suggest all of you receive these first, as the safest choice. As for killing and false speech, there is a distinction between the gravest and the lesser forms — the gravest forms, though not easy to commit, are at least not hard to avoid, but the lesser, more everyday forms are genuinely difficult to keep clean of. And of all the Five Precepts, none is harder to keep than the precept against stealing — one should on no account receive it rashly, without having first studied and thoroughly understood its exact marks of transgression. I therefore hope all of you will hold off on the precept against stealing and consider it slowly — this matters greatly, this matters greatly! But given how ordination is actually carried out today, in these large mass gatherings, it is in practice impossible to receive each precept individually, one by one, as described above; I think that when receiving the Five Precepts under present conditions, there is no harm in the whole assembly receiving all five together, and then, after the ceremony, weighing for oneself which to keep and which to relinquish — this too is entirely acceptable. For whichever precepts one finds oneself unable to uphold, one may simply relinquish them before the ritual-guide or before an ordinary person; this method is in fact entirely proper, sparing trouble for the one conferring the precepts and sparing vexation for all of you as well. There is one more important point: should anyone worry that, amid this large, mixed, and noisy assembly, the mind was unable to focus with single-pointed attention, and fear that the precept was perhaps not actually obtained, there is no harm in asking the venerable Dharma Master Xingyuan or some other good spiritual friend to confer it again a second time — they will certainly and compassionately consent. All of you! You must on no account regard the Three Refuges and Five Precepts lightly! Let me speak plainly to you: the bodhisattva precepts are not easily obtained, and the novice and bhikṣu precepts cannot be obtained at all — whether gone-forth or lay, the only thing any of us can truly hope for is the Three Refuges and the Five Precepts. If we can obtain the Three Refuges and Five Precepts, that is already very good indeed. By receiving and upholding the Five Precepts, one is assured of a human rebirth in the life to come; and if, having kept the Five Precepts, one further recites the name of Amitābha Buddha and seeks rebirth in the Western Land, one is assured at the moment of death of being reborn in the Western Land of Ultimate Bliss — how could this not be excellent? Speaking of myself: with regard to the bodhisattva precepts, I have the name but not the reality; the novice and bhikṣu precepts I have certainly never obtained; and even as to the Five Precepts, I dare not claim to have kept them completely — I can only be called, at best, a "gone-forth upāsaka of the greater portion." This is the plain truth. I therefore hope you will all give your close attention to the Three Refuges and Five Precepts. When receiving the Five Precepts, you should understand that it is in the earlier recitation of the Three Refuges that the precept-essence is actually obtained — this deserves the closest attention — while the later statement of the marks of the Five Precepts is a supplementary text, and the precept is not actually obtained at that later point. One should also ask the preceptor to explain beforehand the breadth of scope of the Five Precepts: for example, the precept against drinking alcohol forbids not only drinking wine at the wine-shops of Quanzhou, but any alcohol whatsoever, throughout the entire reach of the Dharma-realm and the realm of empty space, that falls within the scope of this precept's object. The same holds for killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, and false speech. Hence the merit of receiving these precepts extends throughout the whole Dharma-realm, truly beyond what human power could ever fully conceive.

The Correct Model for the Three Refuges and Five Precepts compiled by Vinaya Master Jianyue of Baohua Mountain gives most of its instructions in ornate parallel prose, which listeners simply cannot understand at all — amounting to no more than empty formal writing; it would be best to ask the preceptor to render it into plain colloquial speech instead. Besides this, let me add one further remark: some who confer the Five Precepts on others nowadays add, after the precept against drinking alcohol, a further clause against smoking tobacco — but this clause against smoking need not be added at all; it should instead be given as separate advice, and should not be inserted into the text of the Five Precepts themselves.

The above concludes what is to be said about the Five Precepts. Next I will speak of the Eight Precepts.

The Eight Precepts — in full, the Eight Precepts of the Fast. "Fast" means to close off and restrain wrongdoing, shutting the door on every unwholesome act; "purity" means purity itself, cutting off every kind of scattered, extraneous thought. The Eight Precepts of the Fast originally comprised nine items, but because the seventh item actually combines two, the total comes to eight. The first five are the same as the Five Precepts; the remaining three are additional. The additional three are: sixth, refraining from flower-garlands, necklaces, and perfumed oil applied to the body — this was originally an Indian custom of beautiful adornment; in our own country there are only flowers and fragrance, no necklaces and the like, but "fragrance" here should be understood to include our own country's scented powders, perfumes, scented tooth-powder, toothpaste, soap, and so on — none of these may be used either.

Seventh, refraining from sitting on a high, luxurious seat, and from going purposely to watch or listen to song and performance — this is actually two items combined into one; let me briefly analyze it. "High" refers to the Buddha's own regulation that the legs of a seat or bed must never exceed one chi six cun [roughly half a meter] in height; "luxurious" refers to ornamentation in gold, silver, ivory, horn, and the like — none of this is permitted either. But where, in some other place, it truly cannot be avoided, a brief sitting may be allowed as an exception: the Buddha's regulation treats making such a seat oneself as the properly graded offense, whereas merely using one already made by someone else, not made by oneself, is a somewhat lighter offense. As for going purposely to watch or listen to song and performance, this covers music, film, and the like; the key word here is "purposely" — encountering such things unintentionally, by chance, is not a transgression. The above — sitting on a high, luxurious seat, and going purposely to watch or listen to performance — together form a single item, and one who has received the Eight Precepts of the Fast must not do either.

Eighth, not eating after midday. The Buddha's regulation is that, after receiving the Eight Precepts of the Fast, one may eat from dawn until noon; should one eat past that time, this is called "eating at the wrong time" — what is ordinarily called "not eating after midday." But after noon, it is not merely rice and the like that may not be eaten — milk, fruit, and similar items likewise may not be taken. In the case of serious illness, when truly unavoidable, one may eat gruel and the like in a place where others cannot see.

The Eight Precepts of the Fast are ordinarily received on the six fast-days: the eighth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and twenty-third days of the lunar month, and the last two days of the month; should one be able to give rise to the resolve to receive them every single day, that would be best of all. They should be received at the moment of rising each morning, for a period of one day and one night — from dawn until night, and from night until the next dawn. Once the Eight Precepts of the Fast are received, the single item of not eating after midday should be observed without exception from noon of that day until dawn of the next. There is a further distinction between the Eight Precepts and the bodhisattva precepts on one hand, and the other precepts on the other, in that both the Eight Precepts and the bodhisattva precepts are "precepts established all at once" (the bodhisattva precepts spoken of just above are confined specifically to the account given in the Brahma Net Sutra and the Sūtra of the [Bodhisattva's] Original Acts Adorned with Necklaces; according to the Yogâcārabhūmi's own precept-text, they would instead belong to the category of "precepts established gradually"). What is the reason for this? One who has not received the Five Precepts, the novice precepts, or the bhikṣu precepts may nonetheless receive the bodhisattva precepts or the Eight Precepts directly — hence they are called "established all at once"; whereas precepts "established gradually" must necessarily follow a fixed order — first the Five Precepts, next the novice precepts, next the bhikṣu precepts, advancing rung by rung. As for the Eight Precepts of the Fast described above, lay Buddhists elsewhere in the country receive them in very great numbers; I think this practice ought in future to be promoted here in southern Fujian as well! If six days a month seems too many, there is no harm at all in reducing this to one or two days — for even receiving them a single day already carries very great merit, how much more so if all six days are kept!

The Novice Precepts: all of you must already know something of the novice precepts. These are the actual, formal precepts, ten items in all. Nine of these are the same as the Eight Precepts, with one further item added — not handling money or jewels — bringing the total to ten. But this single item, not handling money or jewels, is something ordinary people do not understand, and are frightened simply to hear of; they do not realize that this precept against handling money is actually an easy one to keep, since the Vinaya provides an expedient method for it, called "purification" — once the ritual of purification has been performed, one may go on handling it in the ordinary way just as before. What is truly troublesome is that, beyond these ten formal precepts, a novice must also study the bhikṣu precepts, and incurs an offense for transgressing them as well. I myself did not know this when I first left the household life, and only learned of it later, once I studied the Vinaya. Looking at it this way, keeping the novice precepts is likewise no easy matter at all.

The Female Novice Precepts: these apply to women; the rules and precepts are the same as for a male novice.

The Probationer's Precepts: in Sanskrit, śikṣamāṇā, rendered in Chinese as "the woman learning the Dharma." In monastic communities outside Fujian, unmarried laywomen who have taken a vow of chastity are commonly called "probationers" — this is an error. Here in southern Fujian, when the Kaiyuan Temple transmitted the precepts in a certain year, such chaste laywomen were not called "probationers" at all, but simply called by the term "chaste woman" — this is quite correct. Ordinary people mostly do not understand what a probationer actually is, so let me briefly explain.

What sort of person may receive the probationer's precepts? One who has already received the female novice precepts, upon reaching the age of eighteen, receives the probationer's rule and studies it for two years before going on to receive the bhikṣuṇī precepts — because the Buddha's regulation is that the precepts may only be received at the age of twenty, and receiving the probationer's rule at eighteen, followed by two years of study, brings one to exactly twenty. During these two years of study, the Sangha performs a karman-procedure conferring the training-rule; once the two years of study are complete, she may then receive the bhikṣuṇī precepts. But a probationer must study three things: first, the root rule — that is, the four gravest precepts; second, the six rules — against lustful bodily contact, against stealing an amount worth five coins or more, against taking the life of an animal, against minor false speech, against eating at the wrong time, and against drinking alcohol; third, the rule of conduct — that is, all the precepts and deportment of a senior bhikṣuṇī.

This is merely receiving and studying a training-rule, not obtaining a separate precept in itself, and so differs from the other precepts discussed above. Next I will speak of the bhikṣu precepts.

The Bhikṣu Precepts: because time is very short, I cannot explain these in detail now; let me first briefly state a few essential points.

We, born into this Final Dharma Age, cannot obtain either the novice precepts or the bhikṣu precepts — the reasons for this are very many indeed! Let me raise just one of them here: there is no one capable of actually conferring the novice or bhikṣu precepts. To receive the novice precepts requires two bhikṣus to confer them; the bhikṣu precepts require at least five bhikṣus. If no genuine bhikṣu can actually be found, then not only can the bhikṣu precepts not be received, the novice precepts cannot be received either. I have a very sorrowful thing to say to all of you: from the Southern Song down to the present, over six or seven hundred years, one might almost say that the lineage of the true Sangha has been cut off! To the ordinary eye, it looks as though China's monastics are extremely numerous, running to some several million; but in truth, among those several million, finding even a single genuine bhikṣu would be no easy matter at all! Given this, how could anyone actually receive the novice or bhikṣu precepts? If there is no one capable of conferring the precepts, how could the precepts ever be obtained? I imagine that hearing this leaves all of you feeling thoroughly deflated — you may well think: since the precepts cannot be obtained anyway, we have wasted our efforts for nothing, and would do better to go home early rather than exhaust ourselves here on something so utterly pointless. But to think this way is entirely mistaken. I urge all of you to go on, calmly and steadily, receiving the novice and bhikṣu precepts here all the same! Even if the precepts are not actually obtained, one can still plant good roots and, besides this, learn all manner of proper deportment — how could this not be worthwhile? And moreover, if you wish in future to study the Vinaya, you must first be nominally registered as having received the novice and bhikṣu precepts, since otherwise, studying the Vinaya as a mere layperson, you will certainly meet with others' mockery and criticism. So your giving rise to the resolve to receive the novice and bhikṣu precepts here is a very good thing indeed!

On this occasion the elders of this temple invited me to speak on the general sense of Vinaya studies, and I have felt various points of real difficulty in doing so. Why is this? Consider: if I stand here and, rather than speaking according to the principles the Buddha himself taught, simply go along with others out of regard for their feelings and get through this as a mere formality, would I not thereby be doing you actual harm? Yet if I speak the plain truth to you, I fear this may give rise to doubt and confusion among you; and so I find myself in real difficulty. For this reason I have no choice but to address you in two separate ways. First: plainly and without reservation, I must explain the true situation regarding the reception of these precepts, for fear that, once you leave the ordination hall, you might falsely call yourselves novices or bhikṣus, and thereby incur a grave offense — that would be a terrible thing! Let me offer a comparison: here in Quanzhou, suppose there are military commanders and officials of various ranks; if some ignorant commoner, not knowing better, calls himself a "commander" as well, and the actual commander hears of it, this will certainly bring an unfortunate outcome upon him — quite possibly even the danger of execution! One who has not obtained the novice or bhikṣu precepts, and yet falsely calls himself a novice or bhikṣu, will certainly meet with an evil retribution — it is exactly the same principle. It is out of the pressure of my own conscience that I must speak this plain truth to you. Second: given how people's customary feelings run at present, I still urge all of you to receive the precepts, taking on the name nominally, so that afterward you may go on to study the Vinaya; for otherwise you will certainly risk being disparaged and criticized by others. Speaking to you in this way, I trust you must now understand clearly.

Let me go one step further: if any among you genuinely wishes to carry forward the true lineage of the Sangha, and must actually obtain the novice and bhikṣu precepts, there is one further, special method available — namely, to do as the Ouyi Great Master did, performing the divination-repentance rite, and seeking to obtain the sign-wheels of purity; only by this means can the novice and bhikṣu precepts genuinely be obtained. Apart from this, there is no other way at all. Hence the Ouyi Great Master said: "In this Final Age, if one wishes to obtain genuinely pure precepts, apart from this method of the sign-wheels of the divination ritual, there is no other way." This is because, once the sign-wheels of purity have been obtained, one may then, by one's own vow alone, receive the bodhisattva precepts in their entirety, within which the novice and bhikṣu precepts are already included — and one may thereafter properly be called a "bodhisattva-bhikṣu." Performing the divination-repentance rite and obtaining the sign-wheels of purity is, admittedly, an extremely difficult thing to accomplish; yet should any among you have truly given rise to this great resolve, you may still strive with all your strength toward it — this is what I most wish for all of you. Next I will speak of the bhikṣuṇī precepts:

The Bhikṣuṇī Precepts: I cannot explain these in detail now. According to the Buddha's own regulation, the bhikṣuṇī precepts must be received twice over: first the basic rite is conferred by the bhikṣuṇī sangha, and afterward the fully-ordained bhikṣu sangha is asked to confer the precepts formally — but it is precisely at this second, formal conferral by the bhikṣu sangha that the precept is actually obtained. This method has been impossible to carry out since the Southern Song. Finally, let me speak of the bodhisattva precepts:

The Bodhisattva Precepts: because of time, I cannot explain these in detail either. Let me raise just three points briefly. First: one must possess the bodhisattva lineage-nature, and must also be able to give rise to the bodhi-mind, before one can receive the bodhisattva precepts. What is this "lineage-nature"? Simply put, it is the qualification one has already accomplished over many past lifetimes. Hence, at the time of reception, the precept-master asks: "Are you a bodhisattva?" — and one must answer, "I am a bodhisattva!" This is the bodhisattva lineage-nature. The precept-master then asks further: "Since you are a bodhisattva, have you already given rise to the bodhi-mind?" — and one must answer, "I have already given rise to the bodhi-mind." This is the giving rise of the bodhi-mind. Only in this way can the bodhisattva precepts be received. Second: ordinarily, those who receive the bodhisattva precepts receive them all in full; but according to the Sūtra of the [Bodhisattva's] Original Acts Adorned with Necklaces, one may instead receive them according to one's own capacity, one item or several — the same as what was said above concerning the reception of the Five Precepts. Third: the relative gravity of transgression differs considerably between the old and new sub-commentaries, and one should act according to one's own actual capacity; to give an example — regarding the precept against false speech, the old sub-commentary holds that only "great" false speech constitutes a pārājika offense, while the new sub-commentary holds that even "minor" false speech already constitutes a pārājika offense. As for the mere arising of the intention to kill, steal, engage in sexual misconduct, or speak falsely already constituting a pārājika offense — this applies specifically to bodhisattvas who have reached the [bodhisattva] grounds; we ordinary, unenlightened beings are simply incapable of meeting that standard.

Although the bodhisattva precepts are said to be difficult to obtain, if one has a truly sincere mind, this is in fact not so hard a thing; and moreover they may be received by self-administered vow alone, unlike the novice and bhikṣu precepts, which absolutely require someone else to confer them — because the bodhisattva precepts, like the Five Precepts and the Eight Precepts, may all be received by self-administered vow. So we do, in fact, have real hope of obtaining the bodhisattva precepts!

This concludes today's lecture on the Essentials of Vinaya Studies; I imagine there were points within it that were imprecise or mistaken, and I ask all of you to forgive them. Let me close with a few more words. Your receiving the precepts here is truly excellent. Speaking of recent times, even the most renowned places elsewhere in the country, though they do transmit the precepts, are in truth not as thoroughly prepared as this place — the earnestness, energy, and good order with which things are managed here genuinely command my admiration and praise. Take the lecturing on the Vinaya itself: that this precept-period includes lectures on the novice rules, the bhikṣu precept-text, and the Brahma Net Sutra is something rarely found elsewhere. A few years ago, when the Great Kaiyuan Temple in Quanzhou promoted the lecturing of the Vinaya during its own precept-period, everyone called it an unprecedented, epoch-making act. This temple's thoroughness in transmitting the precepts on this occasion is truly comparable to that of the Great Kaiyuan Temple those years ago — and there have even been open-air lectures here, giving outsiders too the opportunity to plant good roots, which is truly a mark of thoughtful and thorough management. This year natural disasters have come one after another, and Quanzhou has been no exception; amid such painful conditions and such a bleak, depressed state of affairs, that this temple should nonetheless have opened the precept-transmission on so great a scale, and carried it through so completely, can only be due to the moral influence of the elders and the great Dharma-protectors here. My coming to this place has genuinely filled my heart with boundless joy — this is the plain truth, and no mere flattery; that I should have the great fortune, on this occasion, to meet and gather together with all of you, brings deep comfort to my heart. Finally, let me offer my congratulations to you all as well.