五戒の細則
Section Three: The Third Precept — The Precept Against Sexual Misconduct
Original text:佛告诸比丘。优婆塞不应生欲想欲觉。尚不应生心。何况起欲恚痴结缚。根本不净恶业。是中犯邪淫有四处。男女黄门二根。女者人女。非人女畜生女。男者人男。非人男畜生男。黄门二根。亦同于上类。
Explanation: The Buddha told the bhikṣus: An upāsaka should not give rise to lustful thoughts and lustful feelings; he should not even give rise to a lustful mind, let alone give rise to the bonds of lust, anger, and delusion, committing unwholesome karma that is fundamentally impure. In committing sexual misconduct, there are four kinds of objects: men, women, paṇḍakas, and those with both male and female sexual organs. Women include human women, non-human women, and female animals. Men include human men, non-human men, and male animals. Paṇḍakas likewise include human paṇḍakas, non-human paṇḍakas, and paṇḍaka animals. Those with both organs include humans with both organs, non-humans with both organs, and animals with both organs.
"Unwholesome karma that is fundamentally impure" refers to the afflictive unwholesome karma created by the fundamental afflictions of greed, anger, and delusion. Other afflictions, such as the major, medium, and minor derivative afflictions, are all derived from the fundamental afflictions and are subordinate to them. Therefore, unwholesome karma created by derivative afflictions is light, while unwholesome karma created by fundamental afflictions is heavy. The arising of unwholesome karma first comes from the stirring of the mind and the arising of thoughts; after lustful mind and lustful thoughts arise, the karma of lust is then committed. The mind is the root, and karma is the appendage; the mind is subtle, while the appendage karma is coarse. In cultivation, one first subdues the coarse actions, then subdues the mind. Therefore, if one cannot even subdue the coarse actions, the subtle mind is even harder to subdue.
The object of sexual misconduct committed by each sentient being is not necessarily of the opposite sex; it may be of the same sex, a paṇḍaka, one with both organs, or one may have sexual relations with both same-sex and opposite-sex partners. The object of sexual misconduct may also not be of the same species but of a different species, such as humans with non-humans, humans with animals, or non-humans with animals. There are extremely many kinds of non-humans, including ghosts, spirits, immortals, and so on. I once saw at a monastery a mentally deranged woman carrying a ghost fetus; every midnight a headless male ghost would frequently come to visit this woman, and this woman could not distinguish good from evil or right from wrong at all. Her family came to the monastery wanting to abort the ghost fetus, seeking a spirit medium at the monastery to persuade the ghost to consent to the abortion. There was also a woman carrying a snake fetus — a python fetus belonging to the immortal class; the python immortal also frequently came to visit that woman at midnight. Such women have extremely heavy karmic obstructions, brought about by extremely heavy karmic offenses of sexual misconduct in past lives.
Paṇḍakas refer to a class of beings whose male or female sexual organs are incomplete and who cannot have normal sexual organ function, with restricted physiological function. Some are congenitally without male or female organs, and some were castrated later in life, losing their male or female organs, or having them become incomplete. Such beings also have very heavy karmic obstructions, all caused in past lives by sexual misconduct and other reasons.
Those with both organs, because they possess both male and female organs, are originally neither male nor female, but there is also a predominance, with one gender being primary. Therefore, those with both organs are also divided into male and female: male dual-organ beings manifest the male organ more often, or manifest the male organ during the day and the female organ at night, while female dual-organ beings manifest the female organ more often, perhaps manifesting the female organ during the day and the male organ at night. Such dual-organ beings can neither survive in a male community nor in a female community, because their gender is indeterminate and problems arise very easily. Such beings likewise have very heavy karmic obstructions, also caused by committing sexual misconduct frequently in past lives; therefore, the retribution for sexual misconduct is also very heavy.
Original text:若优婆塞与人女。非人女。畜生女。三处行邪淫。犯不可悔。若人男。非人男。畜生男。黄门二根。二处行淫。犯不可悔。若发心欲行淫。未和合者。犯下可悔。若二身和合。止不淫。犯中可悔。若优婆塞。婢使已配嫁有主。于中行邪淫者。犯不可悔。余轻犯如上说。三处者。口处大便小便处。除是三处。余处行欲皆可悔。若优婆塞婢使未配嫁。于中非道行淫者。犯可悔罪。后生受报罪重。
Explanation: If an upāsaka commits sexual misconduct with a human woman, a non-human woman, or a female animal at the three places — the mouth, the anus, and the urethra — he commits an offense that cannot be repented. If an upāsaka commits sexual misconduct with a human man, a non-human man, or a male animal, as well as with a paṇḍaka or one with both organs, at the two places — the mouth and the anus — he commits an offense that cannot be repented. If he forms the intention to commit sexual acts but has not yet physically united with the other party, he commits a lesser offense that can be repented. If the two bodies have united but he stops midway and does not commit the act, he commits a middling offense that can be repented. If an upāsaka's maidservant is already married and has a spouse, and he commits sexual misconduct with her, he commits an offense that cannot be repented. Other lighter offenses are as stated above. The three places refer to the mouth, the anus, and the urethra. Apart from these three places, committing sexual acts at other places can all be repented and the karmic offense eliminated. If an upāsaka's maidservant is not yet married and has no spouse, and he commits sexual misconduct with her through improper means — not at the three places of the mouth, anus, and urethra — he commits an offense that can be repented, but the retributive offense suffered in future lives is very heavy.
Committing sexual misconduct at the three places refers to the mouth, the anus, and the urethra. Apart from these three places, committing sexual acts at other places can all be repented to eliminate the karmic offense. If an upāsaka's maidservant is not yet married and has no spouse, and he commits sexual misconduct with her through improper means — not at the three places of the mouth, anus, and urethra — he commits an offense that can be repented, but the retributive offense suffered in future lives is very heavy.
Original text:若优婆塞有男子僮使人等。共彼行淫二处。犯不可悔罪。余轻犯罪同上说。若优婆塞共淫女行淫。不与直者。犯邪淫。不可悔。与直无犯。若人死乃至畜生死者。身根未坏。共彼行邪淫。女者三处犯。不可悔。轻犯同上说。
Explanation: If an upāsaka, together with his boy servants and hired workers and the like, commits sexual acts with them at the two places of the mouth and the anus, he commits an offense that cannot be repented. If the upāsaka forms the intention to commit sexual acts but the bodies have not yet united, he commits a lesser offense that can be repented. If the bodies have already united in the sexual act but he stops midway and does not continue, he commits a middling offense that can be repented.
If an upāsaka commits sexual acts with a prostitute and afterward does not pay her, he commits the offense of sexual misconduct, which cannot be repented. If he pays the prostitute the corresponding value, paying the fee, then he does not commit the offense of sexual misconduct. If a human has died, or an animal has died, and the body's faculties have not yet decayed, and the upāsaka commits sexual misconduct with the corpse — if it is with a human female corpse or a female animal corpse at the three places, he commits an offense that cannot be repented. If he forms the intention to commit sexual acts but the bodies have not yet united, he commits a lesser offense that can be repented. If the bodies have already united but he stops midway and does not continue the sexual act, he commits a middling offense that can be repented.
The conduct of prostitutes belongs to transactional behavior, the purpose being to earn money and obtain living expenses, not to indulge in lust. Because their physical bodies belong to them personally and should be managed by them personally, they themselves do not violate the precept against lust; a man who has sexual relations with them must follow the rules of the transaction and pay the fee.
However, if such behavior violates public order and good morals, it will also be subject to moral condemnation in worldly terms; if it violates national laws and regulations, it will also be subject to legal sanctions. Modern people live in affluence with many channels for earning money, and there is no situation of lacking living expenses, so the prostitution industry is improper and constitutes behavior that violates precepts and the law. A definitive conclusion can only be reached by examining the specific intentions of the parties involved as well as the consequences and impact of the behavior.
Some say that paying the prostitution fee does not constitute the higher-grade offense that cannot be repented. If that is the case, then paying the fee would constitute a middling offense that can be repented, or a lesser offense that can be repented.
Then the question arises: what is the difference between paying and not paying? In both cases the sexual act was committed. Could it be that paying the fee makes the offense smaller, and not paying makes it greater? Does the severity of the offense involve the matter of payment? Then after killing someone, if one gives compensation to the dead person, does one not fall into hell? Can hell be redeemed with money? Obviously this does not work. It is the same with sexual acts: whether paying or not paying, the act was committed. If there is an offense, can the offense be divided into greater and lesser because of this? Can money solve the problem of the severity of an offense? Obviously not. Karma is not a matter of money, but a matter of the mind, and a matter of the result. Therefore, the correct interpretation of this passage is that paying the prostitution fee means no offense is committed; there is simply no such thing as greater or lesser offenses.
Why say this? Because in ancient India, being a prostitute was a profession — in modern terms, an industry — an openly operating, legal and legitimate industry that not only did not violate the law but was also protected by law. Why was it legal, legitimate, and protected? Because of the social living conditions of the time: on the one hand, some women were forced by circumstances, had no source of livelihood, and had to rely on prostitution to sustain their lives; on the other hand, the polygamous system caused some men to be unable to find wives, forcing them to seek out prostitutes. To solve these problems and stabilize people's lives, the prostitution industry emerged.
Then, for an upāsaka who has received the five precepts, paying for sexual relations does not violate the nation's laws and regulations or folk customs; it is entirely a transactional behavior with the prostitute, accepted and recognized by society, and does not violate worldly norms; therefore, it does not count as violating the precept. If society does not accept such behavior and the laws and regulations do not permit it, then committing sexual acts, no matter how much money is paid, is criminal behavior.
To judge whether a certain behavior is wrong, it is easy once one can determine what is right — whatever is outside of right is wrong. The so-called right is what is jointly acknowledged by the world's laws and regulations, national conditions, and folk customs; if everyone considers it acceptable, then it is acceptable. Sexual misconduct then refers to lustful behavior that does not conform to laws and regulations and is not recognized by social customs. If paying for sexual relations counts as a crime, then polygamy would be illegitimate and unreasonable, and an upāsaka having sexual relations with multiple women, moreover long-term and lifelong, would count as a crime. If the nation and society do not allow the phenomena of polygamy and polyandry to exist, then upāsakas with multiple wives and upāsikās with multiple husbands would all count as violating precepts and committing crimes. If multiple wives and multiple husbands are recognized by society as not constituting a crime, then paying for sexual relations does not count as a crime.
To a certain extent, when the World-Honored One established the Small Vehicle precepts, He had to conform to worldly customs and social norms; otherwise, sentient beings could not accept them, and the purpose of guiding sentient beings could not be achieved. For example, if the Buddha had stipulated that upāsakas, like the bhikṣus, must not have any sexual conduct and must not marry and have children, imagine — among worldly people mired in the mire of desire, who would still dare to come learn Buddhism and cultivate? Even if learning Buddhism and cultivating should originally be like this, if worldly people cannot accept it, the precepts cannot be established this way; otherwise, all Buddhist learners would become monastics like the monks, and there would be no distinction between laypeople and monastics.
Moreover, national conditions and folk customs must constantly change with the development of society, so the content of the precepts must also change accordingly. Certain precepts applicable in ancient times are not applicable in modern times and must change along with the times. In ancient times, polygamy or polyandry was practiced; in modern times, monogamy is practiced — this is legal and conforms to social norms and folk customs. Within this scope, it is proper sexual conduct; beyond this scope, it is sexual misconduct. But in ancient times, the prostitution industry was also legitimate and conformed to folk customs; having sexual relations with a prostitute and paying the fee was legitimate and legal, and therefore did not constitute sexual misconduct.
The original sutra text does not contain the meaning that paying for sexual relations does not constitute the higher-grade offense that cannot be repented; personal speculation does not represent the Buddha's intent. Interpreting sutras and explaining the Dharma should all take the Buddha's intent as the standard, not the intent of any individual apart from the Buddha, no matter how famous the individual may be — this is the fundamental principle of expounding Buddhist sutras. When the Buddha established precepts, He also based them on the customs, rules, and regulations of the nation and society at the time, never departing from social moral and ethical norms. If these contents change, the precepts taught by the Buddha will also change accordingly, and precepts that conflict with social laws and regulations must be abolished — this was explicitly stated by the Buddha in the precept sutras. For example, in ancient India, women had no status and were subordinate to men, so when a man went forth, he could casually give away his wife and children without his wife's consent. If the Buddha were to come to today's world to propagate the Dharma, He would not allow such things to happen.
Original text:若优婆塞自受八支。行淫者犯不可悔。八支无复邪正。一切皆犯。若优婆塞虽都不受戒。犯佛弟子净戒人者。虽无犯戒之罪。然后永不得受五戒。乃至出家受具足。
Explanation: If an upāsaka has himself received the eight precepts (the eight-fold fast precepts) and commits sexual acts during this period, no matter who the other party is — even his own wife — he commits an offense that cannot be repented. Because during the period of the eight precepts, all lust is forbidden; whether it is proper sexual relations with his wife or sexual misconduct with others, any sexual act constitutes an offense that cannot be repented. Although an upāsaka has not received any precepts, if he violates a person of the Buddha's disciples who holds pure precepts, although he has not committed the offense of breaking precepts, he will henceforth forever be unable to receive the five precepts, and likewise unable to go forth and receive the full ordination.
Original text:佛告诸比丘。吾有二身。生身戒身。若善男子为吾生身。起七宝塔。至于梵天。若人亏之。其罪尚有可悔。亏吾戒身。其罪无量。受罪如伊罗龙王。
Explanation: The Buddha told the bhikṣus: I have two bodies — the born body and the precept body. If a good son builds a seven-jeweled stūpa for my born body, reaching the height of the Brahma heaven, and someone damages it, this offense can still be repented and eliminated. But if a person damages my precept body (the precepts established by the Tathāgata), his offense is immeasurable, and the retributive suffering he undergoes will be like that suffered by the Dragon King Elā.
What does it mean to damage the Buddha's precept body? It means violating the precepts established by the Buddha, breaking the Buddha's precepts, damaging the Tathāgata, and failing the Tathāgata. Such an offense is immeasurable and boundless, like the retributive suffering undergone by the Dragon King Elapattra. The Dragon King Elapattra has seven heads, and on each head grows an elā tree. Why does an elā tree grow there? When the Dragon King Elapattra was a bhikṣu in a past life, out of anger he deliberately damaged the leaves of an elā tree, and for long kalpas he fell into the body of a dragon, with an elā tree growing on his head, suffering the pain of pus and blood flowing and maggots gnawing. Fortunately, he heard the Buddha's teaching, came to understand cause and effect, patiently endured and repented; but this karmic retribution will only end when Maitreya Buddha appears in the world. Therefore, after learning Buddhism, one should no longer follow along with afflictions — following along with afflictions is damaging the Tathāgata's precept body, and the offense is immeasurable and boundless.
