Monks Who Flee Like Dogs, and Four Kinds of Śramaṇa
The Buddha turns from the nature of mind to the specific hazards of monastic life: monks who flee sense-objects like a dog chasing what was thrown rather than the one who threw it, sixteen bonds and afflictions catalogued in matched pairs, and four kinds of śramaṇa — appearance, false demeanor, reputation, and the real thing.
Monks Who Flee Like Dogs
「汝等，迦葉！當應求內，反去求外。當來之世，當有比丘馳走如犬。云何比丘馳走如犬？譬如有犬搏擲令怖，反走逐之不趣擲者。
如是迦葉！當有沙門、婆羅門，畏色、聲、香、味、細滑、法，而反樂中不觀於內，不知何由得離色、聲、香、味、細滑、法，不知不覺遂入人間，復為色、聲、香、味、細滑、法而得其便。彼在山澤而命終者，因持俗戒得生天中，復為天上色、聲、香、味、細滑、法而得便也，身壞命終生四惡趣。云何為四？地獄、畜生、餓鬼、阿須羅中。是謂迦葉！比丘馳走亦復如犬。云何比丘不走如犬？若人撾罵，默受不報；呵責瞋怒，比丘不報怒，但觀內身、罵誰？打誰？誰受恚責？是謂迦葉！如此比丘不走如犬。譬如御者，若馬放逸即能制之；修行比丘亦復如是，若心馳散，即隨制止、令順不亂。譬如絞人，必斷其命。如是迦葉！一切諸見有計我者，必斷慧命。譬如有人，隨其所縛則悉解之；比丘如是，隨心所縛當即除之。」
"You, Kāśyapa, should seek within, rather than turning to seek without. In an age to come, there will be monks who run about like dogs. What does it mean for a monk to run about like a dog? It is like a dog that, startled by something thrown at it, runs off chasing the thing itself rather than the one who threw it.
Just so, Kāśyapa: there will be śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who fear form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects, yet instead take delight in the midst of them, without looking within, not knowing by what means to be free of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects — and so, unaware, they fall back among ordinary people, and are again seized upon by form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects. Those who die while dwelling in mountain forests, having kept only worldly precepts, are reborn among the gods, and are again seized upon there by the heavens' own form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects — and when the body perishes and life ends, they are reborn into one of the four evil destinies. What are the four? Hell, the animal realm, the realm of hungry ghosts, and the realm of asuras. This, Kāśyapa, is what it means for a monk to run about like a dog. What does it mean for a monk not to run about like a dog? If someone beats or curses him, he receives it silently and does not answer in kind; when someone rebukes him in anger, the monk does not answer with anger, but simply looks within his own body: who is being cursed? Who is being struck? Who is receiving this angry rebuke? This, Kāśyapa, is what it means for such a monk not to run about like a dog. It is like a charioteer who, the moment his horse grows unruly, is able to bring it under control at once; a monk in practice is exactly the same — the instant his mind begins to scatter and run wild, he brings it to a halt at once, so that it complies and does not fall into disorder. It is like strangling a person, which surely ends his life; just so, Kāśyapa, any view at all that reckons a self surely severs the very life of wisdom. It is like a person who, whatever binds him, entirely undoes it; a monk is just the same — whatever binds his mind, he removes it at once."
The dog simile diagnoses a specific error in where reactivity gets aimed: the dog attacks the stone, not the hand that threw it, mistaking the proximate object for the actual source. Applied to a monk fleeing sense-objects, the same misdirection is at work — treating form, sound, and the rest as the enemy to be escaped, rather than turning to examine the mind that reacts to them in the first place. The remedy the sūtra offers is the identical diagnostic already met in Part 2's account of a compliant bodhisattva absorbing abuse without anger: when struck or cursed, ask "who is being struck? who is being cursed?" — the same self-inquiry that Part 7 pursued at far greater length in its own investigation of where mind can and cannot be found. What looked there like abstract philosophy is here given its practical form: the question is not a meditation topic reserved for quiet contemplation, but the literal response to being insulted in the moment it happens.
The Bonds, Wounds, and Sicknesses of a Renunciant's Life
「如是迦葉！出家學道有二重縛。云何為二？一者，學世經典；二者，執持衣鉢而不精進。
「復次迦葉！出家學道有二堅縛。云何為二？一者，見縛；二者，貪財名譽所縛。
「復次迦葉！出家學道有二法障礙。云何為二？一者，狎習白衣；二者，憎嫉師友。出家學者復有二垢。云何為二？一者，任取二結；二者，詣知友家而從乞食。
「復次迦葉！出家學道有二雹雨。云何為二？一者，誹謗正法；二者，犯戒而食信施。出家學者復有二瘡。云何為二？一者，觀他短；二者，自覆己短。
「復次迦葉！出家學者有二煩熱。云何為二？一者，藏濁持袈裟。二者，欲令有戒行者承順於己。出家學者復有二病。云何為二？一者，憍慢不觀其心；二者，毀呰學摩訶衍者。」
"Just so, Kāśyapa: one who has gone forth to study the path has two heavy bonds. What are the two? First, studying worldly scriptures; second, holding fast to robe and bowl without any real diligence.
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! One who has gone forth to study the path has two unyielding bonds. What are the two? First, the bond of fixed views; second, the bond of greed for wealth and reputation.
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! One who has gone forth to study the path has two dharmas that obstruct him. What are the two? First, keeping close company with laypeople; second, harboring envy toward one's own teachers and companions. One who has gone forth to study also has two further stains. What are the two? First, freely indulging the two fetters of attachment and aversion; second, going to beg for alms only at the homes of one's own friends and acquaintances.
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! One who has gone forth to study the path has two hailstorms. What are the two? First, slandering the true Dharma; second, breaking the precepts while still accepting the offerings given in faith. One who has gone forth to study also has two further wounds. What are the two? First, examining another's faults; second, concealing one's own.
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! One who has gone forth to study has two fevers. What are the two? First, wearing the monastic robe while concealing an inwardly turbid mind; second, wishing that those who keep the precepts should defer and comply with oneself. One who has gone forth to study also has two further sicknesses. What are the two? First, pride, and never examining one's own mind; second, disparaging those who study the Mahāyāna."
Sixteen items across eight matched pairs — bonds, further bonds, obstructions and stains, hailstorms and wounds, fevers and sicknesses — shift this sūtra's usual fourfold catalogue form down to pairs, and shift its audience just as pointedly: everything here is addressed specifically to "one who has gone forth to study the path" (出家學道), not to the bodhisattva in general the earlier parts addressed. The final item on the list is worth pausing on for what it reveals about the sūtra's own historical moment: "disparaging those who study the Mahāyāna" (毀呰學摩訶衍者) is named outright as a sickness of monastic life, alongside pride and self-blindness, evidence that hostility toward the Mahāyāna from within existing monastic communities was a live enough concern for this early sūtra to name and diagnose directly, rather than treating the Mahāyāna's own legitimacy as already settled.
Four Kinds of Śramaṇa
「復次迦葉！沙門稱說沙門者，云何沙門稱說沙門？有四沙門。云何為四？一者，色像沙門；二者，詐威儀沙門；三者，名譽沙門；四者，真實沙門。云何色像沙門？若有沙門成就色像，剔除鬚髮、被著法服、手持應器，彼身惡行、口意惡行，不習調御、亦不守護，犯戒作惡、貪不精進，是謂，迦葉！色像沙門。云何詐威儀沙門？若有沙門，成就禮節，遊步正智，食知止足，行四聖種，不樂眾聚道俗之會，少言少睡，然彼威儀詐不真實，不期淨心，不習止息、而有見想，於空便起如坑之想，諸有比丘習行空者，發怨家想，是謂，迦葉！詐威儀沙門。云何名譽沙門？若有沙門奉持禁戒，欲令他人知奉持戒；精進學問，欲令他人知精進學；住止山澤中，欲令他人知住山澤；少欲知足精勤獨住，欲令他知，不厭至死、不求離欲、不樂盡止、不欲求道、息心梵行不為泥洹，是謂，迦葉！名譽沙門。云何為真實沙門？若有沙門不為身命，況復貪財、著於名譽，樂聽空無相無願之法，聞則歡喜修行如法，不為涅槃而修梵行，況為三界？不作空見，況見我人壽命？依法求道，離結解脫不求外道，觀諸法性皆悉究竟清淨無穢，而自照察不由於他。如法者，不見如來況有色身，不見無欲法況有文飾，不想無為況有眾德，不習斷法、不學修法，不住生死、不樂涅槃，不求解脫、亦不求縛，知一切法究竟清淨、不生不滅，是謂，迦葉！真實沙門。是故迦葉！當學真實沙門，莫習名譽沙門。譬如貧人外有富名，於意云何，彼名有實不？」答曰：「不也。世尊！」
「如是迦葉！有沙門名、無沙門德，我說此人是為極貧。譬如有人大水所漂渴乏而死；如是迦葉！有沙門梵志習學多法，而不能除婬、怒、癡、渴，彼為法水所漂、結渴而死，生惡趣中，亦復如是。譬如醫師，持種種藥療他人病而不自治；如是迦葉！有沙門梵志，多諷誦法而不自除婬怒癡病，亦復如是。譬如病人服王妙藥，不自將節而致終沒；如是迦葉！多有沙門梵志，行不如法、起諸結病，終生惡趣，亦復如是。譬如摩尼珠墮不淨中，無所復直；如是迦葉！多有沙門梵志貪著財利，當知亦如摩尼珠墮不淨中，無所復直。譬如死人著金花鬘；如是迦葉！人不持戒被著袈裟，亦復如是。譬如長者子淨自澡浴，被白淨衣著薝蔔華鬘；如是迦葉！多聞持戒被著袈裟，亦復如是。」
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! As for śramaṇas speaking of what a śramaṇa truly is — what does it mean for a śramaṇa to speak of a śramaṇa? There are four kinds of śramaṇa. What are the four? First, the śramaṇa of appearance alone; second, the śramaṇa of false demeanor; third, the śramaṇa of reputation; fourth, the true śramaṇa.
"What is the śramaṇa of appearance alone? Suppose there is a śramaṇa complete in outward appearance — his hair and beard shaved, wearing the Dharma robe, carrying the begging bowl — yet his conduct of body is evil, his conduct of speech and mind is evil; he does not train or master himself, nor does he guard himself; he breaks the precepts and does evil, greedy and lacking any real diligence. This, Kāśyapa, is the śramaṇa of appearance alone.
"What is the śramaṇa of false demeanor? Suppose there is a śramaṇa complete in proper deportment, walking with apparent wisdom, taking food knowing when to stop, practicing the four noble modes of livelihood, taking no delight in gatherings of monks or laypeople, speaking little and sleeping little — yet this dignified manner is false, not genuine; he has no real aim toward a pure mind, does not truly practice stillness, yet still holds to fixed views, and, faced with emptiness, conceives of it as though it were a pit to fall into; toward any monk who does practice emptiness, he conceives of him as an enemy. This, Kāśyapa, is the śramaṇa of false demeanor.
"What is the śramaṇa of reputation? Suppose there is a śramaṇa who upholds the precepts, but only wishing others to know he upholds the precepts; who studies diligently, but only wishing others to know of his diligent study; who dwells in mountain forests, but only wishing others to know he dwells in mountain forests; who lives with few desires, contentment, and diligence, alone, but only wishing others to know of it — such a one is never wearied even unto death by this display, yet does not truly seek freedom from desire, takes no delight in the complete stilling of affliction, has no real wish to seek the path, and practices the holy life with a stilled appearance, but not for the sake of nirvāṇa. This, Kāśyapa, is the śramaṇa of reputation.
"What is the true śramaṇa? Suppose there is a śramaṇa who does not act even for the sake of his own body and life, how much less for wealth or attachment to reputation; who delights to hear the teaching of emptiness, marklessness, and freedom from aspiration, and, on hearing it, joyfully practices it exactly as taught; who cultivates the holy life not even for the sake of nirvāṇa, how much less for the three realms; who does not even construct a view of emptiness, how much less a view of self, of a person, or of a lifespan; who seeks the path in reliance on the Dharma, freed from every bond, seeking no outside teaching; who observes the nature of all dharmas as, every one, ultimately pure and unstained, and examines this for himself, not depending on another. As for according with the Dharma: he does not see even the Tathāgata, how much less does he see any physical form of his; he does not see even the dharma of freedom from desire, how much less any ornament upon it; he does not conceive of the unconditioned, how much less any array of virtues within it; he does not practice cutting anything off, and does not study cultivating anything; he does not dwell in birth-and-death, and does not delight in nirvāṇa; he does not seek liberation, and does not seek bondage either; he knows that all dharmas are, ultimately, pure, unborn, and unceasing. This, Kāśyapa, is the true śramaṇa. Therefore, Kāśyapa! You should train as the true śramaṇa, and not practice as the śramaṇa of mere reputation. It is like a poor man who has, outwardly, a reputation for wealth — what do you think, is that reputation real?" He answered: "No, World-Honored One."
"Just so, Kāśyapa: one who has the name of a śramaṇa but not a śramaṇa's virtue — I call this person utterly impoverished. It is like a person swept away by a great flood, who dies of thirst even so; just so, Kāśyapa, there are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who study many teachings, yet are unable to remove their own lust, anger, delusion, and thirst — swept along by the very waters of the Dharma, they die still bound by thirst, and are reborn into the evil destinies; it is exactly the same. It is like a physician who carries every kind of medicine to treat another's illness, yet does not treat his own; just so, Kāśyapa, there are śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who chant and recite the teaching at length, yet cannot remove their own sickness of lust, anger, and delusion; it is exactly the same. It is like a sick man who takes a king's own excellent medicine, yet, failing to moderate himself, still comes to his end; just so, Kāśyapa, there are many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas whose conduct does not match the Dharma, who give rise to every sickness of bondage, and who end up reborn in the evil destinies; it is exactly the same. It is like a wish-fulfilling pearl fallen into filth, worth nothing at all any longer; just so, Kāśyapa, know that the many śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas who are greedy and attached to wealth and profit are just like a wish-fulfilling pearl fallen into filth, worth nothing at all any longer. It is like a corpse adorned with a garland of golden flowers; just so, Kāśyapa, a person without the precepts wearing the monastic robe is exactly the same. It is like a nobleman's son, freshly bathed, wearing pure white garments and a garland of campaka flowers; just so, Kāśyapa, one who is learned and keeps the precepts, wearing the monastic robe, is exactly the same."
This recapitulates, at the level of monastic identity, the same "name versus substance" structure Part 3 applied to the word "bodhisattva" — three counterfeit versions of a role and only a fourth that actually is what its title claims. The middle two counterfeits are the more psychologically revealing of the three: the śramaṇa of false demeanor has genuinely disciplined outward conduct, yet fears the teaching's own most radical implication, conceiving of emptiness as "a pit to fall into" and regarding any monk who actually practices it as an enemy — a fear of the doctrine dressed as discipline against it. The śramaṇa of reputation, meanwhile, performs every correct practice — precepts, diligence, solitude, contentment — with nothing behaviorally distinguishable from the real thing except the direction the practice is aimed: toward being seen rather than toward the path itself. Only intention separates this counterfeit from Part 3's own thirty-two genuine dharmas, which include several of the identical practices named here.
The true śramaṇa's own description loops directly back to Part 5's warning against clinging to emptiness: he "does not even construct a view of emptiness, how much less a view of self" — the identical refusal to let even the antidote become one more possession, now restated as a description of a person rather than a warning against a mistake. The image that follows — a poor man with an outward reputation for wealth — supplies this whole part's own thesis in miniature: a name and the substance it claims to name can come apart completely, and the gap between them, whether in wealth, in emptiness, or in the robe of a monk, is what every fault in this part actually consists of.
Four Ways of Not Keeping the Precepts That Resemble Keeping Them
「復次迦葉！有四不持戒、似如持戒。云何為四？若有比丘護持禁戒、成就威儀，至微小事當畏懼之，持比丘淨戒，成就威儀禮節，身、口、意行正令清淨，而計吾我；是謂，迦葉！一不持戒、似如持戒。復次比丘，誦律通利、察住律法、不斷身見；是謂，迦葉！二不持戒、似如持戒。復次比丘，行慈眾生、聞說諸法不起不滅，而懷恐怖，是謂，迦葉！三不持戒、似如持戒。復次比丘，行十二法淨功德行，而起見我有我所；是謂，迦葉！四不持戒、似如持戒。如是迦葉！戒稱戒者，謂無我亦無我所，無作不作，無事非事；亦無威儀、無行不行，無名色相，亦無非相，無息不息，無取無捨，無可取者亦無不可捨。不施設眾生，亦不施設無眾生。無有口行、無不口行，無心不心，無倚不倚，無戒不戒，是謂，迦葉！無漏聖戒而無所墮，出於三界離一切倚。」
"Furthermore, Kāśyapa! There are four ways of not keeping the precepts that resemble keeping them. What are the four? Suppose there is a monk who protects and upholds the precepts, is complete in dignified deportment, and is fearful even of the smallest matter, upholding a monk's own pure precepts, complete in dignified deportment and courtesy, his conduct of body, speech, and mind made correct and pure — and yet he still reckons an 'I' and a 'mine.' This, Kāśyapa, is the first kind of not keeping the precepts that resembles keeping them. Furthermore, a monk recites the vinaya fluently, examines and abides by its rules, yet has not cut off the view of a self in the body. This, Kāśyapa, is the second kind of not keeping the precepts that resembles keeping them. Furthermore, a monk practices loving-kindness toward beings, yet, on hearing it taught that all dharmas are unarisen and unceasing, harbors fear. This, Kāśyapa, is the third kind of not keeping the precepts that resembles keeping them. Furthermore, a monk practices the twelve ascetic virtues of purifying conduct, yet still gives rise to the view of a self and of what belongs to a self. This, Kāśyapa, is the fourth kind of not keeping the precepts that resembles keeping them. Just so, Kāśyapa: what actually deserves to be called precept-keeping is this — no self and no what-belongs-to-self; no action and no non-action; no matter and no non-matter; no dignified deportment and no lack of it; no conduct and no lack of conduct; no mark of name-and-form, and no absence of that mark either; no stilling and no lack of stilling; no grasping and no relinquishing, nothing that could be grasped and nothing that could not be relinquished; not positing beings, and not positing the absence of beings either; no activity of speech and no lack of it; no mind and no absence of mind; no reliance and no lack of reliance; no precept and no lack of precept. This, Kāśyapa, is the uncontaminated, noble precept-keeping that falls into nothing at all, transcending the three realms, free of every reliance."
Each of the four counterfeits here pairs flawless outward observance with one specific residue: reckoning "I" and "mine" despite perfect deportment; reciting the vinaya fluently while never cutting off the view of a self in the body; practicing loving-kindness while still fearing the teaching that nothing truly arises or ceases; keeping the twelve ascetic virtues while still holding a self and what belongs to it. In every case the visible practice is genuinely accomplished — this is not a list of hypocrites — and the fault lies entirely in a view the practice itself never touches. The true definition of precept-keeping that closes this part then repeats, for the third time across this sūtra, its most consistent formal device: neither the position nor its negation, applied here to self and selflessness, action and inaction, grasping and relinquishing, precept and its absence. Part 5 used this structure on metaphysical extremes, Part 7 used it as a chain of implications about the mind, and here it defines what a precept actually is — the same refusal to let any fixed position, including "I keep no precepts at all," become one more thing to hold onto.
Part 8 Complete
This closes Part 8: monks who flee like dogs, the sixteen bonds and afflictions of renunciant life, four kinds of śramaṇa, and the four ways of not keeping the precepts that resemble keeping them. Part 9 closes the sūtra: verses on what true precept-keeping actually sounds like, the parable of five hundred confused monks brought to awakening by a monk the Buddha conjures for the purpose, and the sūtra's own praise of itself.
Continue to Part 9 — Five Hundred Monks, and a Monk the Buddha Conjures →