清淨道論 活命遍淨戒Visuddhimagga · Virtue Consisting in Purification of Livelihood
出家人的日子靠什麼過？這一戒守的是謀生。先立法源：為活命而制的六學處，由重到輕——假稱上人法是波羅夷，討一碗飯是突吉羅。「為活命」可以壞到什麼程度、細到什麼程度，一目瞭然。
然後是五邪法：詐、虛談、現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利。五個定義同一個開頭——「依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者」。根只有一個。
詐有三事：拒絕人家奉上的衣食，等對方深信「這位聖者少欲」再「出於悲愍」領受；說「穿這樣的衣的沙門有大威勢」讓人推重；刻意安立行住坐臥、像入了定那樣走路、在人看得見的地方坐禪。從操作別人怎麼給，到操作別人怎麼看，到操作自己怎麼被看見——最後只剩一個表演的自己。虛談十三目：搶先開口、留餘地、抬人、纏著不放、把自己抬出來、只說可愛的話、把自己放低、話裡只有一顆豆是真的。現相是暗示；瞋罵示相是刮去別人的德來求利，像用竹片刮膏油、像磨碎香料求香；以利求利是把這裡的拿到那裡去。
從這一切邪命而離，就是活命遍淨——「活命」是求覓資具的努力，「遍淨」是它的清淨之性。謀生的方式，不扭曲你這個人。
What sustains a renunciant’s daily life? This virtue guards livelihood. First comes the legal basis: six training rules laid down on account of livelihood, from gravest to lightest. A false claim to a superhuman state entails defeat; asking for a bowl of rice is wrongdoing. The list makes immediately visible both how far corruption “for livelihood” can go and how subtle it can become.
Then come five wrong practices: scheming, talking, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain. All five definitions have one opening—“a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes.” There is only one root.
Scheming has three bases: refusing offered robes and food, waiting until others firmly believe “this venerable is of few wishes,” and then accepting “out of compassion”; saying “the ascetic who wears such a robe is of great power” so that others esteem him; deliberately composing walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, walking as though concentrated, and meditating where people can see. From manipulating how others give, to manipulating how they see, to manipulating how the self is seen—at the end there remains only a performed self. Talking has thirteen items: speaking first, leaving room, elevating people, wrapping them up, putting oneself forward, saying only agreeable things, lowering oneself, and speaking with only one true bean in the whole pot. Hinting suggests without asking; belittling scrapes away another’s qualities in pursuit of gain, like a bamboo scraper removing unguent or spices ground in search of fragrance; pursuing gain with gain carries what is received here over there.
Abstinence from every such wrong livelihood is purification of livelihood—“livelihood” is the effort of seeking requisites, and “purification” is its purified state. The way you make a living must not distort the person you are.
本單元白話為本編自巴利原典之譯疏（tr. mine）；底本事項詳本單元考據。
§1 因活命而制之六學處 〔CSCD §16〕
現在，在根律儀戒之後所說的活命遍淨戒之中，「為活命故而制的六學處」，是指這樣制立的六條學處：
「為活命故、以活命為因，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，虛稱不實不有的上人法：犯波羅夷¹。
為活命故、以活命為因，作媒：犯僧殘。
為活命故、以活命為因，說『住在你寺裡的那位比丘是阿羅漢』：對方領解的，犯偷蘭遮。
為活命故、以活命為因，比丘無病而為自己乞求美食來食：犯波逸提。
為活命故、以活命為因，比丘尼無病而為自己乞求美食來食：犯波羅提提舍尼。
為活命故、以活命為因，無病而為自己乞求羹或飯來食：犯突吉羅。」
——這樣制立的六條學處，「這六條學處」〔所指的就是它們〕。
§2 五邪法之聖典文 〔CSCD §16〕
「詐」等等之中，這是聖典之文：
「這裡，什麼是詐（kuhanā）？依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，凡是以資具受用為名者、或以近語者、或於威儀者的不安立、安立、善置立，顰蹙、顰蹙之性，詐、詐者之行、詐者之性——這叫作詐。
這裡，什麼是虛談（lapanā）？依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，凡是對他人的先語、應語²、善語、高舉之語、遍高舉之語、纏縛之語、遍纏縛之語、舉揚之語、遍舉揚之語、隨愛語、諂媚、綠豆湯之性³、抱持之性——這叫作虛談。
這裡，什麼是現相（nemittikatā）？依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，凡是對他人的相、作相、明示、作明示、近語、迂迴之語——這叫作現相。
這裡，什麼是瞋罵示相（nippesikatā）？依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，凡是對他人的罵詈、輕蔑、呵責、舉罪、遍舉罪、譏笑、遍譏笑、令墮、遍令墮、傳惡名者、食他背肉之性——這叫作瞋罵示相。
這裡，什麼是以利求利？依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者，把從這裡得到的財物拿到那裡去，或者把在那裡得到的財物拿到這裡來。凡是這樣以財物而對財物的欲求、尋求、遍求，希求、尋覓、遍尋——這叫作以利求利。」
§3 詐之三事與其三引 〔CSCD §17〕
這一段聖典之文的意義，應當這樣知道。
先說詐之解釋中：「依利養、恭敬、名聲者」，是指依於利養、恭敬與名聞之聲者，意思就是希求它們的人。「惡欲者」，是指想要顯示不實之德的人。「為欲所壞者」，是指被欲所壞的人，意思就是被欲所惱的人。
此後，由於在《大義釋》中依資具受用、近語、依威儀三種，來有三種詐之事，所以為了顯示這三種，才開始說「或以資具受用為名者」等等。
這裡：有人被居家們以衣等等邀請，他其實正想要那些東西，卻依於惡欲而拒絕；等到知道那些居家對他已生起堅固的信心，說「啊，聖者少欲，什麼都不肯領受；假如他肯領受一點點，那對我們該多好」，因而以種種方便奉上美好的衣等等的時候，他這才顯出「唯是為了攝受他們」的樣子而領受——由此之後，那成為他們甚至用車載來奉上之因的令人驚異之行，應當知道就是以資具受用為名的詐之事。《大義釋》中這樣說：
「什麼是以資具受用為名的詐之事？這裡，居家們以衣、團食、座臥處、病緣藥資具邀請比丘。他是惡欲者、為欲所壞者，正想要衣……乃至（廣說如前）……資具，卻由於想要更多而拒絕衣。〔拒絕〕團食……乃至（廣說如前）……座臥處。拒絕病緣藥資具。他這樣說：『沙門要昂貴的衣做什麼？沙門從墓地、或糞堆、或店鋪撿取碎布，作成僧伽梨而穿——這才相稱。沙門要昂貴的團食做什麼？沙門以行乞、以團食之摶而營生——這才相稱。沙門要昂貴的座臥處做什麼？沙門作樹下住者、或露地住者——這才相稱。沙門要昂貴的病緣藥資具做什麼？沙門以腐尿、或訶梨勒之片作藥——這才相稱。』由此，他穿粗劣的衣，受用粗劣的團食，受用粗劣的座臥處，受用粗劣的病緣藥資具；於是居家們就這樣認定他：『這位沙門少欲、知足、遠離、不雜、精進、說頭陀之行。』他們就一再地以衣……乃至（廣說如前）……資具邀請他。他這樣說：『由三者的現前，有信的良家子生起許多福。由信的現前，有信的良家子生起許多福。由所施之物的〔現前〕……乃至（廣說如前）……由應施者的現前，有信的良家子生起許多福⁴。你們既有這信，所施之物也具備，而我就是領受者；假如我不領受，你們就要被排除在福之外了。我對這個並沒有需要，然而正是出於對你們的悲愍，我才領受。』由此，他領受許多衣。領受許多團食……乃至（廣說如前）……藥資具。凡是這樣的顰蹙、顰蹙之性，詐、詐者之行、詐者之性——這就是以資具受用為名的詐之事。」
其次，僅僅是惡欲的人，以顯示自己證得上人法的話語，這樣那樣地令人驚異——應當知道這就是以近語為名的詐之事。如說：
「什麼是以近語為名的詐之事？這裡有一種人，是惡欲者、為欲所壞者，以求人推重為意圖，心想『這樣人們就會推重我』，而說依於聖法的話：他說『凡是穿這樣的衣的，那位沙門就有大威勢』。他說『凡是持這樣的缽、銅缽、濾水器、濾水囊、鑰匙、腰帶、鞋的，那位沙門就有大威勢』。『凡是有這樣的親教師、阿闍梨、同親教師者、同阿闍梨者、朋友、相識、親厚者、伴侶的〔那位沙門就有大威勢〕。』他說『凡是住在這樣的精舍、半覆屋、樓房、平頂屋、山窟、石室、小屋、重閣、台觀、圓堂、高柱屋⁵、侍者堂、幕亭、樹下的，那位沙門就有大威勢』。或者，〔他為了使人說〕『這位沙門是矜嚴又矜嚴的⁶、顰蹙又顰蹙的、詐而又詐的、談而又談的、以面貌博取推重的，他是這樣寂靜的住與等至的獲得者』，而說那樣深奧、隱密、微細、覆藏、出世間、與空性相應的話。凡是這樣的顰蹙、顰蹙之性，詐、詐者之行、詐者之性——這就是以近語為名的詐之事。」
其次，僅僅是惡欲的人，以為求人推重而作的威儀令人驚異——應當知道這就是依威儀的詐之事。如說：「什麼是以威儀為名⁷的詐之事？這裡有一種人，是惡欲者、為欲所壞者，以求人推重為意圖，心想『這樣人們就會推重我』，而〔刻意〕安立其行、安立其住、安立其坐、安立其臥；他存心而行，存心而住，存心而坐，存心而臥；他像入了定那樣地行，像入了定那樣地住、坐、臥；還在人所能見之處而坐禪。凡是這樣的威儀之不安立、安立、善置立，顰蹙、顰蹙之性，詐、詐者之行、詐者之性——這叫作以威儀為名的詐之事。」
§4 詐之逐語釋 〔CSCD §17〕
這裡，「以資具受用為名者」，是說以這樣被稱為「資具受用」的資具受用〔而作〕，或者〔就是〕以這樣被稱呼的〔事而作〕。「以近語者」，是說以近旁之語。「或於威儀者」，是說於四威儀。「不安立」等等之中：「不安立」就是安立，或者是慎重地安立。「置立」，是置立的樣子。「善置立」，是造作，意思是說作出令人喜悅之相。「顰蹙」，是以顯示自己安住於精勤之首位而蹙面，意思是說皺縮其面。以蹙面為習性的，就是顰蹙者；顰蹙者的狀態，就是「顰蹙之性」。「詐」，是令人驚異。詐者的行為，就是「詐者之行」。已詐者的狀態，就是「詐者之性」。
§5 虛談之逐語釋 〔CSCD §17〕
虛談之解釋中：「先語」，是見到來到精舍的人，就說「諸位為什麼來？是要邀請比丘們嗎？若是這樣，你們走吧，我隨後拿了缽就來」——這樣一開頭就說話。或者把自己抬出來說「我是帝須（Tissa），國王對我有信心，某某大臣、某某大臣也對我有信心」——這樣以自己為引的話，就是「先語」。「應語」，是被問了之後，才照上面所說的方式而說。「善語」，是害怕居家們厭煩，於是一再地留出餘地而巧妙地說話。「高舉之語」，是說「大居士」「大船主」「大施主」，這樣把人抬高了說。「遍高舉之語」，是從一切方面把人抬高了說。
「纏縛之語」，是說「優婆塞們，從前這樣的時節你們布施新穀之施，如今為什麼不施呢」，這樣一直說到他們說出「尊者，我們會施的，只是還沒有機會」等等為止——這是一層又一層地縛，意思是說纏繞。或者見人手裡拿著甘蔗，就問：「優婆塞，這是從哪裡拿來的？」「尊者，從甘蔗田拿來的。」「那裡的甘蔗甜嗎？」「尊者，這要吃了才知道。」「優婆塞，說『把甘蔗施給比丘』這樣的話，是不合適的。」——凡是這樣，對方雖然要解開、他仍然纏繞的話，就是「纏縛之語」。從一切方面一再地纏縛，就是「遍纏縛之語」。
「舉揚之語」，是說「這一家只認得我；若這裡有所施之物出現，就只施給我」，這樣舉起來而照亮，就是「舉揚之語」，意思是說顯揚。此處應當說帝羅乾陀利迦（Telakandarika）之事。而從一切方面一再地舉揚，就是「遍舉揚之語」。
「隨愛語」，是不顧是否隨順真實、是否隨順法，只一再地說可愛之語。「諂媚」，是卑下的行止，把自己一再地放在低處而行。「綠豆湯之性」，是與綠豆湯相似之性。譬如煮綠豆的時候，總有那麼一顆煮不熟，其餘的都熟了；同樣地，某個人的話裡只有一點點是真實的，其餘都是虛假的——這個人就叫作「綠豆湯」。他的狀態，就是「綠豆湯之性」。「抱持之性」，是抱持者的狀態。凡是像乳母那樣，以懷抱或以肩膀抱持人家的孩子——「抱持」的意思就是「持」。那抱持者的行為，就是「抱持之業」；抱持之業的狀態，就是「抱持之性」。
§6 現相・瞋罵示相・以利求利與活命遍淨之語義 〔CSCD §17〕
現相之解釋中：「相」，是任何能令他人生起「要布施資具」之想的身業與語業。「作相」，是見到人拿著噉食走過，就以「你們得到什麼噉食了嗎」等等方式而作相。「明示」，是與資具相關的話。「作明示」，是見到牧犢的孩子們，就問「這些小牛是吃乳的小牛呢，還是吃酪漿的小牛」，他們答「尊者，是吃乳的小牛」，他就說「不是吃乳的小牛吧；假如是吃乳的小牛，比丘們也該得到乳才對」——以這等等的方式，讓那些孩子告知他們的父母，而使他們施乳等等，這就是作明示。「近語」，是拉近了而說。此處應當說親近居家的比丘之事。
據說，有一位親近居家的比丘想要吃東西，就進到一戶人家坐下。主婦見了他，不想布施，就說「沒有米了」，裝出要去拿米的樣子，往鄰家去了。比丘卻走進內室察看，見到門角有甘蔗，器皿裡有糖，簍子裡有鹹魚片，甕裡有米，罐裡有酥，然後出來坐下。主婦回來說：「沒拿到米。」比丘說：「優婆夷，我事先就見到一個相，〔知道〕『今天乞食不會成就』。」「尊者，是什麼〔相〕呢？」「我見到一條蛇，像放在門角的甘蔗那樣；〔心想〕『我要打牠』，一看，就見到一塊石頭，像放在器皿裡的糖塊那樣；被土塊打了的蛇張起頸部，像放在簍子裡的鹹魚片那樣；牠想要咬那土塊而露出牙齒，像甕裡的米那樣；接著牠發怒，從口中流出混著毒的涎沫，像倒在罐裡的酥那樣。」她心想「這禿頭是騙不過的」，就給了甘蔗，煮了飯，連同酥、糖、魚一起全都布施了。應當知道，這樣拉近了而說，就是「近語」。「迂迴之語」，是為了得到那樣東西，繞著它而說。
瞋罵示相之解釋中：「罵詈」，是以十種罵詈之事而罵。「輕蔑」，是輕慢了而說。「呵責」，是以「無信」「不淨信」等等方式而加以過失。「舉罪」，是以「你們別在這裡說這個」這樣的話而舉。從一切方面，連事帶因地舉，就是「遍舉罪」。或者，見到不布施的人就說「啊，施主呀」，這樣地舉，就是「舉罪」；說「大施主呀」，這樣好好地舉，就是「遍舉罪」。「譏笑」，是說「這個連穀種都吃掉的人，算什麼活命」，這樣地嘲弄。「遍譏笑」，是說「你們怎麼說這個人是不施者呢？他可是常常對所有人都施出一句『沒有』的呀」，這樣更厲害地嘲弄。「令墮」，是使他落到不施者之名或惡名上。從一切方面而令墮，就是「遍令墮」。「傳惡名者」，是心想「這樣他也會因為怕惡名而布施給我」，就從這家到那家、從這村到那村、從這國到那國地傳播惡名。「食他背肉之性」，是當面說好話，背後說惡名。因為這對於不敢正面相視的人來說，就像吃那些背過臉去的人的背肉一樣，所以叫作「食他背肉之性」。「這叫作瞋罵示相」：由於它像用竹片刮去膏油那樣，把他人的德刮去、擦掉；又由於它像把香料磨碎而求香那樣，把他人的德磨碎、粉碎而求利——所以叫作「瞋罵示相」。
以利求利之解釋中：「求」，是求覓。「從這裡得到的」，是從這一家得到的。「在那裡」，是在某一家。「欲求」，是欲。「尋求」，是求覓。「遍求」，是一再地求覓。此處應當說那位比丘之事：他從最初起，把每次得到的乞食一處一處地施給人家的孩子們，最後得到乳粥而去。「希求」等等，正是「欲求」等等的同義語；所以「欲求」就是希求，「尋求」就是尋覓，「遍求」就是遍尋。這裡的配合應當這樣知道。以上就是「詐」等等的意義。
現在，「以及這樣等等的惡法」——這裡的「等等」一語，應當知道是攝取《梵網經》中以這樣的方式所說的許多惡法：「或者又有一些沙門、婆羅門，吃了信施的食物，卻以這樣的畜生明、以邪命而營生：就是說，支節之相、〔徵〕相、變怪、夢、〔身〕相、鼠嚙、火供、杓供」等等。
這樣，凡是由於違犯這些為活命故而制的六學處、以及由於「詐、虛談、現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利」等等這些惡法而轉起的邪命——從那一切種類的邪命而離，這就是活命遍淨戒⁸。這裡的語義是這樣：依它而活，所以叫作「活命」。它是什麼呢？就是求覓資具的努力。「遍淨」，就是清淨之性。活命的遍淨，就是「活命遍淨」。
註
¹ 波羅夷以下六名皆律所立罪類之名，本論於此唯各繫其一事，其目與犯相不在本品之面。
² 應語：此語與上文五邪法之第二「虛談」，在底本同為一詞（lapanā）；本處為虛談十三目之一，依其位而別譯。
³ 綠豆湯之性（muggasūpyatā）：直譯為「與綠豆湯相似之性」。本論即以煮綠豆時總有一顆不熟為喻，謂其人之語唯有一分真實——其釋見本篇後文虛談之逐語釋。
⁴ 底本此一句式三度分寫，末一度之三詞連寫而詞界失落；今依同段前二度之句式讀。
⁵ 高柱屋：底本作 uddaṇḍa，本論未釋其義；今依其構詞（「舉起」與「竿・柱」）而作此讀。
⁶ 矜嚴又矜嚴的：底本作 korajikakorajika，本論未釋其義；今依其與「顰蹙又顰蹙的」等貌狀之語並舉而作此讀。
⁷ 論主自標此事作「依威儀」，而其下所引之聖典文則作「以威儀為名」——二語不同而所指是一，今各依其文而譯。
⁸ 資具之受用與受用時的省思，在本品次篇資具依止戒。
The vernacular of this unit is this edition’s own rendering-with-exposition from the Pāli original (tr. mine); see this unit’s apparatus for the base-text particulars.
§1 Six Training Rules Laid Down on Account of Livelihood 〔CSCD §16〕
Now, within the virtue consisting in purification of livelihood stated after virtue consisting in restraint of the faculties, “the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood” means the following six rules:
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, a person of evil wishes, overcome by wishes, makes a false and groundless claim to a superhuman state: an offense entailing defeat (pārājika).”¹
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, he acts as a go-between: an offense entailing a formal meeting of the Order (saṅghādisesa).”
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, he says, ‘The bhikkhu living in your monastery is an arahant’: if the other person understands, an offense of grave wrongdoing (thullaccaya).”
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, a bhikkhu who is not ill asks for fine food for himself and eats it: an offense requiring expiation (pācittiya).”
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, a bhikkhunī who is not ill asks for fine food for herself and eats it: an offense requiring acknowledgement (pāṭidesanīya).”
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason, a person who is not ill asks for curry or rice for himself and eats it: an offense of wrongdoing (dukkaṭa).”
Thus were the six training rules laid down; “these six training rules” refers to them.
§2 The Canonical Text on the Five Wrong Practices 〔CSCD §16〕
In the passage beginning with “scheming,” this is the canonical text:
“Here, what is scheming (kuhanā)? In a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes, there is the feigning, posing, and studied posing of deportment by way of what is called using requisites, by way of indirect talk, or by way of deportment; there is scowling, the state of scowling, scheming, the conduct of a schemer, and the state of being schemed—this is called scheming.”
“Here, what is talking (lapanā)? In a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes, there is initiating talk with others, talking in reply, skillful talk, elevating talk, all-round elevating talk, binding talk, all-round binding talk, extolling talk, all-round extolling talk, ingratiating speech, flattery, bean-soup behavior, and fondling behavior—this is called talking.”
“Here, what is hinting (nemittikatā)? In a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes, there is making a sign to others, working a sign, giving an indication, working an indication, speaking indirectly, and speaking around the subject—this is called hinting.”
“Here, what is belittling (nippesikatā)? In a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes, there is abusing others, disparaging them, censuring them, reproaching them, thoroughly reproaching them, ridiculing them, thoroughly ridiculing them, denigrating them, thoroughly denigrating them, carrying tales of discredit, and the state of eating the flesh of another’s back—this is called belittling.”
“Here, what is pursuing gain with gain? In a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes, there is taking goods obtained here to someone there, or bringing goods obtained there to someone here. Whatever coveting, seeking, and repeated seeking of goods by means of goods there may be—whatever searching, looking for, and repeated looking—this is called pursuing gain with gain.”
§3 The Three Bases of Scheming and Their Three Citations 〔CSCD §17〕
The meaning of this passage from the canonical text should be understood as follows.
First, in the explanation of scheming, “a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown” means one who relies on gain, honor, and the voice of fame—that is, one who longs for them. “A person of evil wishes” means a person who wants to display qualities that do not exist. “Overcome by wishes” means impaired by wishes—that is, harassed by them.
Next, because the Mahāniddesa presents three bases of scheming according to the use of requisites, indirect talk, and dependence on deportment, the passage begins with “by way of what is called using requisites” and the rest in order to show these three.
Here someone is invited by householders to accept robes and so forth. He actually wants those things, but, relying on evil wishes, refuses them. When he knows that the householders have acquired firm confidence in him, thinking, “Oh, the venerable is of few wishes and accepts nothing; how good it would be for us if he would accept just a little,” and they then offer fine robes and so forth by various means, he finally accepts while making it appear that he does so “only to embrace them with compassion.” The astonishing behavior that thereafter causes them even to bring offerings by the cartload should be understood as the basis of scheming called the use of requisites. The Mahāniddesa says:
“What is the basis of scheming called the use of requisites? Here householders invite a bhikkhu to accept robes, almsfood, lodging, and medicinal requisites for the sick. He is a person of evil wishes, overcome by wishes; though he wants robes … up to … requisites, he refuses a robe because he wants more. He refuses almsfood … up to … lodging. He refuses medicinal requisites for the sick. He says: ‘What use has an ascetic for an expensive robe? It is fitting for an ascetic to gather scraps from a charnel ground, a rubbish heap, or a shop, make them into an outer cloak, and wear it. What use has an ascetic for expensive almsfood? It is fitting for an ascetic to live by wandering for alms, by morsels of almsfood. What use has an ascetic for expensive lodging? It is fitting for an ascetic to dwell at the root of a tree or in the open. What use has an ascetic for expensive medicinal requisites for the sick? It is fitting for an ascetic to make medicine from fermented urine or a piece of myrobalan.’ Accordingly, he wears a coarse robe, consumes coarse almsfood, uses coarse lodging, and uses coarse medicinal requisites for the sick. The householders then think of him in this way: ‘This ascetic is of few wishes, content, secluded, unsociable, energetic, and an advocate of the ascetic practices.’ Again and again they invite him to accept robes … up to … requisites. He says: ‘Through the presence of three things, a faithful son of good family produces much merit. Through the presence of faith, a faithful son of good family produces much merit. Through the presence of the gift … up to … through the presence of those worthy of offerings, a faithful son of good family produces much merit.⁴ You possess this faith, the gift is available, and I am the recipient. If I do not accept, you will be excluded from merit. I have no need of this; nevertheless, I accept solely out of compassion for you.’ Accordingly, he accepts many robes. He accepts much almsfood … up to … medicinal requisites. Whatever such scowling, state of scowling, scheming, conduct of a schemer, and state of being schemed there may be—this is the basis of scheming called the use of requisites.”
Next, a person of evil wishes alone creates astonishment in various ways through words that suggest he has attained superhuman states. This should be understood as the basis of scheming called indirect talk. As it is said:
“What is the basis of scheming called indirect talk? Here a certain person is of evil wishes and overcome by wishes. Intending to be esteemed and thinking, ‘In this way people will esteem me,’ he speaks words that rely on noble qualities. He says, ‘The ascetic who wears a robe such as this is of great power.’ He says, ‘The ascetic who carries a bowl, a metal bowl, a water strainer, a straining cloth, a key, a belt, or sandals such as these is of great power.’ ‘The ascetic who has such a preceptor, teacher, fellow pupil of the same preceptor, fellow pupil of the same teacher, friend, acquaintance, intimate, or companion is of great power.’ He says, ‘The ascetic who lives in such a monastery, lean-to, mansion, roof terrace, cave, rock shelter, hut, storied dwelling, watchtower, round house, raised-column house,⁵ attendant’s hall, pavilion, or under such a tree is of great power.’ Or, so that people may say, ‘This ascetic is grave upon grave,⁶ scowling upon scowling, scheming upon scheming, talking upon talking, and winning esteem through his expression; he is an obtainer of such peaceful abidings and attainments,’ he speaks words that are deep, hidden, subtle, concealed, supramundane, and connected with emptiness. Whatever such scowling, state of scowling, scheming, conduct of a schemer, and state of being schemed there may be—this is the basis of scheming called indirect talk.”
Next, a person of evil wishes alone creates astonishment through deportment performed in order to be esteemed. This should be understood as the basis of scheming dependent on deportment. As it is said: “What is the basis of scheming called deportment?⁷ Here a certain person is of evil wishes and overcome by wishes. Intending to be esteemed and thinking, ‘In this way people will esteem me,’ he deliberately composes his walking, standing, sitting, and lying down. He walks deliberately, stands deliberately, sits deliberately, and lies down deliberately. He walks as though concentrated, stands as though concentrated, and sits and lies down as though concentrated; he also meditates while sitting where people can see him. Whatever such feigning, posing, and studied posing of deportment, scowling, state of scowling, scheming, conduct of a schemer, and state of being schemed there may be—this is called the basis of scheming called deportment.”
§4 Word-by-Word Explanation of Scheming 〔CSCD §17〕
Here, “by way of what is called the use of requisites” means by using requisites in the manner called “use of requisites,” or by way of an act bearing that designation. “By way of indirect talk” means by speech in the vicinity of the matter. “Or by way of deportment” means in the four postures. Among “feigning” and the rest, “feigning” is posing, or deliberate posing. “Posing” is the manner of composing oneself. “Studied posing” is contrivance, meaning the production of an attractive appearance. “Scowling” is knitting the face so as to present oneself as foremost in strenuous practice; it means contracting the face. A person habituated to knitting the face is a scowler; the condition of a scowler is the “state of scowling.” “Scheming” is creating astonishment. The action of a schemer is the “conduct of a schemer.” The condition of a person who has schemed is the “state of being schemed.”
§5 Word-by-Word Explanation of Talking 〔CSCD §17〕
In the explanation of talking, “initiating talk” is speaking at once on seeing people arrive at the monastery: “Good people, why have you come? Is it to invite the bhikkhus? If so, go on ahead; I shall take my bowl and come after you.” Or it is talk that puts oneself forward: “I am Tissa; the king has confidence in me, and such-and-such ministers have confidence in me.” Talk introduced with oneself in this way is “initiating talk.” “Talking in reply” is talking, after being asked, in the manner just described. “Skillful talk” is speaking cleverly while repeatedly leaving room, for fear that the householders may become weary. “Elevating talk” is speaking while raising people up with such expressions as “great householder,” “great shipowner,” and “great donor.” “All-round elevating talk” is raising people up in every way.
“Binding talk” is saying, “Lay followers, formerly you gave a gift of new grain at this season; why do you not give now?”, and continuing until they say, “Venerable sir, we shall give, but we have not yet had the opportunity,” and so on. It is binding layer upon layer; the meaning is wrapping around. Or, on seeing someone carrying sugarcane in his hand, he asks: “Lay follower, where did you get that?” “Venerable sir, from the sugarcane field.” “Is the sugarcane there sweet?” “Venerable sir, that can only be known by eating it.” “Lay follower, it is not proper to say, ‘Give sugarcane to the bhikkhu.’” Any such talk, in which the other person tries to unbind himself but the speaker continues to bind him, is “binding talk.” Binding again and again in every way is “all-round binding talk.”
“Extolling talk” is saying, “This family knows only me; if anything to be given appears here, they give it only to me.” Thus raising something up and illuminating it is “extolling talk”; the meaning is making it conspicuous. The story of Telakandarika should be told here. Repeatedly extolling from every side is “all-round extolling talk.”
“Ingratiating speech” is repeatedly saying only agreeable things, without regard for whether they accord with truth or with the Dhamma. “Flattery” is lowly behavior, repeatedly placing oneself in an inferior position. “Bean-soup behavior” is the state of resembling bean soup. When beans are being cooked, there is always a single bean that remains uncooked while all the others are cooked; in the same way, only a very little in a certain person’s speech is true and the rest is false—that person is called “bean soup.” His condition is “bean-soup behavior.” “Fondling behavior” is the condition of a fondler. Someone who, like a nurse, carries another family’s children in his lap or on his shoulder is “fondling,” in the sense of “carrying.” The action of such a fondler is the “work of fondling”; the condition of that work is “fondling behavior.”
§6 Hinting, Belittling, Pursuing Gain with Gain, and the Meaning of Purification of Livelihood 〔CSCD §17〕
In the explanation of hinting, a “sign” is any bodily or verbal action capable of producing in others the thought, “I should give a requisite.” “Working a sign” is working a sign on seeing people pass while carrying food to be eaten, by asking, “What food have you obtained?”, and so forth. An “indication” is talk connected with requisites. “Working an indication” occurs, for example, when he sees children tending calves and asks, “Are these milk-drinking calves or buttermilk-drinking calves?” They answer, “Venerable sir, they are milk-drinking calves,” and he says, “They cannot be milk-drinking calves; if they were, the bhikkhus too would receive milk.” In such ways he gets the children to tell their parents and causes them to give milk and so forth. “Speaking indirectly” is speaking by drawing close to the matter. Here the story of the bhikkhu who frequented a family should be told.
It is said that a bhikkhu who frequented a family wanted something to eat, so he entered a house and sat down. The mistress of the house saw him and did not want to give anything, so she said, “There is no rice,” and went to a neighbor’s house, pretending that she was going to fetch some. The bhikkhu entered the inner room to inspect it and saw sugarcane in the corner by the door, sugar in a vessel, a slice of salted fish in a basket, rice in a jar, and ghee in a pot; then he came out and sat down. The woman returned and said, “I could not get any rice.” The bhikkhu said, “Laywoman, I saw a sign beforehand and knew, ‘Today the alms round will not succeed.’” “Venerable sir, what was the sign?” “I saw a snake like the sugarcane set in the corner by the door. Thinking, ‘I shall strike it,’ I looked and saw a stone like the lump of sugar in the vessel. The snake, struck with the clod, raised its neck like the slice of salted fish in the basket. When it tried to bite the clod, it showed teeth like the rice in the jar. Then it grew angry, and froth mixed with venom flowed from its mouth like the ghee poured into the pot.” She thought, “This shaveling cannot be deceived,” gave him the sugarcane, cooked the rice, and gave everything together with the ghee, sugar, and fish. Speaking by thus drawing near to the matter should be understood as “speaking indirectly.” “Speaking around the subject” is circling around the thing wanted in order to obtain it.
In the explanation of belittling, “abusing” means abusing through the ten grounds for abuse. “Disparaging” is speaking after showing contempt. “Censuring” is imputing faults in such ways as calling someone “faithless” or “without confidence.” “Reproaching” is reproaching with words such as “Do not say that here.” Thoroughly reproaching in every respect, together with the matter and its reason, is “thorough reproaching.” Or, on seeing a person who does not give, saying, “Oh, donor!” is “reproaching”; saying, “Oh, great donor!” is reproaching him thoroughly. “Ridiculing” is mocking with such words as, “What kind of livelihood does this seed-eater have?” “Thoroughly ridiculing” is mocking more forcefully with such words as, “Why do you say this person gives nothing? He always gives everyone the word ‘nothing.’” “Denigrating” is causing him to fall into the name or disrepute of one who does not give. Denigrating him in every way is “thorough denigrating.” A “tale-bearer of discredit” spreads discredit from house to house, village to village, and country to country, thinking, “In this way he too will give me something out of fear of disrepute.” “The state of eating another’s back-flesh” is speaking pleasantly to his face and speaking discredit behind his back. Because for someone who does not dare look another in the face this resembles eating the back-flesh of those who have turned their faces away, it is called “the state of eating another’s back-flesh.” “This is called belittling”: because it scrapes and wipes away the qualities of others as a bamboo scraper scrapes away unguent, and because it crushes and pulverizes the qualities of others in pursuit of gain as spices are ground in search of fragrance, it is called “belittling.”
In the explanation of pursuing gain with gain, “pursuing” means seeking. “Obtained here” means obtained from this family. “There” means at a certain other family. “Coveting” is desire. “Seeking” is looking for. “Repeated seeking” is looking again and again. Here the story should be told of the bhikkhu who, from the beginning, gave each portion of almsfood he received to the children of families in the different places and finally obtained milk-rice and left. “Searching” and the rest are synonyms of “coveting” and the rest: thus “coveting” is searching, “seeking” is looking for, and “repeated seeking” is repeatedly looking. The correspondence should be understood in this way. This completes the meaning of scheming and the rest.
Now, in the phrase “and other evil practices of this kind,” the word “other” should be understood to include the many evil practices described in this way in the Brahmajāla Sutta: “Or there are some ascetics and brahmins who, after eating food given in faith, maintain their livelihood by such animal knowledge and wrong livelihood, namely, knowledge of bodily marks, omens, portents, dreams, bodily characteristics, mouse-gnawings, fire oblations, ladle oblations,” and so forth.
Thus, whatever wrong livelihood proceeds from transgressing these six training rules laid down on account of livelihood, and from evil practices such as scheming, talking, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain—abstinence from every kind of wrong livelihood is virtue consisting in purification of livelihood.⁸ Its word meaning is as follows: by depending on it they live, so it is “livelihood.” What is it? The effort of seeking requisites. “Purification” is the state of being purified. The purification of livelihood is “purification of livelihood.”
Notes
¹ The six names beginning with pārājika are all classes of offense established in the Vinaya. Here the treatise merely connects each with a single case; the taxonomy and constitutive conditions of those offenses do not lie within the scope of this part.
² “Talking in reply”: this expression and the second of the five wrong practices above, “talking,” represent the same word in the working base (lapanā). Here it is one of the thirteen items under talking and is rendered separately according to its position.
³ Bean-soup behavior (muggasūpyatā): literally, “the state of resembling bean soup.” The treatise itself gives the simile of a single bean that always remains uncooked and applies it to a person whose speech has only one part that is true. Its explanation occurs below in this part’s word-by-word explanation of talking.
⁴ The working base writes this sentence pattern separately three times, but in the last occurrence three words run together and the word boundary is lost. The present reading follows the pattern of the first two occurrences in the same passage.
⁵ Raised-column house: the working base has uddaṇḍa, whose meaning the treatise does not explain. The present reading follows its compound elements, “raised” and “pole or column.”
⁶ Grave upon grave: the working base has korajikakorajika, whose meaning the treatise does not explain. The present reading follows its occurrence among descriptions of demeanor such as “scowling upon scowling.”
⁷ The author labels this basis “dependent on deportment,” while the canonical passage cited beneath it says “called deportment.” The two expressions differ but refer to the same basis; each is translated here according to its wording.
⁸ The use of requisites and reflection at the time of using them are treated in the next part of this chapter, on virtue dependent on requisites.
一份「怎麼把日子過壞」的清單：詐、虛談、現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利
大局 — 活命遍淨在四遍淨戒中的位置
四遍淨戒之第三（十單元之序見 01-05 大局）。前二戒守身口與六根，這一戒守謀生——出家人的資具從哪裡來、怎麼來。論主的寫法是先立法源（為活命而制的六學處，白話 §1），再引聖典給五種邪法下定義（§2），然後花最長的篇幅逐語釋這五種邪法（§3–§6）——詐之三事、虛談之十三目、現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利——每一目幾乎都帶一件事、一個譬喻，最後收於「活命遍淨」四字的語義。它讀起來像一份行為清單，其實是一面鏡子：每一條都是「為了利養恭敬名聲」而扭曲自己的一種姿勢。〔所見〕
§01 六學處——為活命而制的六條戒，由重到輕 → 白話 §1
「為活命故、以活命為因」——六條學處依罪之輕重排開：虛稱不實的上人法（波羅夷）；作媒（僧殘）；說「住在你寺裡的那位比丘是阿羅漢」而對方領解（偷蘭遮）；比丘無病而為己乞美食來食（波逸提）；比丘尼同此（波羅提提舍尼）；無病而為己乞羹或飯來食（突吉羅）。〔讀法〕注意這張表的兩端：最重的一條是假稱證量，最輕的一條是討一碗飯——「為活命」可以壞到什麼程度、細到什麼程度，一目瞭然。
§02 五邪法的聖典定義 → 白話 §2
詐、虛談、現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利，各有一段定型的聖典之文，開頭都是同一句：「依利養、恭敬、名聲者，惡欲者、為欲所壞者」——五邪法共一個根。詐是「以資具受用為名、以近語、於威儀」的不安立・安立・善置立，顰蹙、詐者之行、詐者之性；虛談是對他人的先語、應語、善語、高舉之語……乃至綠豆湯之性、抱持之性；現相是對他人的相、作相、明示、作明示、近語、迂迴之語；瞋罵示相是罵詈、輕蔑、呵責、舉罪……乃至食他背肉之性；以利求利是把這裡得的財物拿到那裡、那裡得的拿到這裡，以財物對財物的欲求、尋求、遍求。這一段是目錄；§3–§6 是逐目的展開。
§03 詐之三事——資具受用、近語、威儀 → 白話 §3
先釋共通的三語：「依利養、恭敬、名聲者」是希求它們的人；「惡欲者」是想要顯示不實之德的人；「為欲所壞者」是被欲所惱的人。然後依《大義釋》，詐有三事：
以資具受用為名——居家以衣等相邀，他其實正想要，卻依惡欲而拒絕；等對方生起「啊，聖者少欲，什麼都不肯領受」的堅固信心，用車載來奉上時，他才顯出「唯是為了攝受他們」的樣子而領受。《大義釋》的長引把這齣戲演完：拒衣、拒食、拒座臥、拒藥，口口聲聲「沙門要昂貴的東西做什麼」；穿粗劣、食粗劣，令居家認定他「少欲知足遠離不雜精進說頭陀之行」；待人一再邀請，再開示「由三者的現前有信的良家子生起許多福……假如我不領受，你們就要被排除在福之外了。我對這個並沒有需要，然而正是出於對你們的悲愍，我才領受」——於是領受許多。以近語為名——僅僅是惡欲的人，以顯示自己證得上人法的話語令人驚異：說「穿這樣的衣的沙門有大威勢」「持這樣的缽、濾水器、鑰匙、腰帶的沙門有大威勢」「有這樣的親教師、阿闍梨的」「住這樣的精舍、山窟、重閣、台觀、幕亭、樹下的」——或者為了讓人說「這位沙門是矜嚴又矜嚴、顰蹙又顰蹙、詐而又詐的，他是寂靜的住與等至的獲得者」，而說深奧隱密微細覆藏出世間與空性相應的話。依威儀——刻意安立其行住坐臥，存心而行住坐臥，像入了定那樣行住坐臥，還在人所能見之處而坐禪。〔讀法〕三事的次第值得看：從「操作別人怎麼給」到「操作別人怎麼看」到「操作自己怎麼被看見」——詐越來越不需要對象，最後只剩一個表演的自己。
§04 詐之逐語釋 → 白話 §4
「以資具受用為名」是以資具受用而作；「以近語」是以近旁之語；「於威儀」是於四威儀。「不安立」就是安立、慎重地安立；「置立」是置立的樣子；「善置立」是造作，作出令人喜悅之相。「顰蹙」是為顯示自己安住於精勤之首位而蹙面；以蹙面為習性的是顰蹙者，其狀態是顰蹙之性。「詐」是令人驚異；詐者的行為是詐者之行；已詐者的狀態是詐者之性。
§05 虛談之十三目——從「先語」到「抱持之性」 → 白話 §5
十三目逐一有相：先語——見人來精舍就搶先開口「諸位為什麼來？是要邀請比丘們嗎？若是這樣，你們走吧，我隨後拿了缽就來」，或把自己抬出來「我是帝須，國王對我有信心」；應語——被問了才照上面的方式說；善語——怕居家厭煩，一再留餘地而巧妙地說；高舉之語——「大居士」「大船主」「大施主」；遍高舉之語——從一切方面抬高。纏縛之語——「從前這樣的時節你們布施新穀，如今為什麼不施」，一直說到對方說出「我們會施的，只是還沒有機會」；或見人手持甘蔗，「從哪裡拿來的」「甜嗎」「說『把甘蔗施給比丘』這樣的話是不合適的」——對方要解開、他仍纏繞；遍纏縛之語——從一切方面一再纏縛。舉揚之語——「這一家只認得我；若有所施就只施給我」（此處應說帝羅乾陀利迦之事）；遍舉揚之語——從一切方面舉揚。隨愛語——不顧真實與法，只說可愛之語；諂媚——把自己一再放在低處；綠豆湯之性——煮綠豆總有一顆不熟，其餘都熟：某人的話裡只有一點點真實、其餘皆虛；抱持之性——像乳母那樣以懷抱或肩膀抱持人家的孩子。〔讀法〕十三目的鋒利在於它不只列「說謊」，連「說得太好聽」「太會留餘地」「太會抬人」都列進去了——虛談的本質不是假話，是為了利養而說的話。
§06 現相、瞋罵示相、以利求利，與「活命遍淨」的語義 → 白話 §6
現相：「相」是任何能令他人生起「要布施資具」之想的身業語業；「作相」如見人拿噉食走過就問「你們得到什麼噉食了嗎」；「明示」是與資具相關的話；「作明示」如問牧犢的孩子「這些是吃乳的小牛還是吃酪漿的」，再說「假如是吃乳的小牛，比丘們也該得到乳才對」，讓孩子回去告訴父母；「近語」是拉近了而說——那位親近居家的比丘，見主婦推說沒米，卻已入內室看見門角甘蔗、器皿糖、簍中鹹魚、甕中米、罐中酥，便說「我事先就見到一個相：見一條蛇像門角的甘蔗，一塊石頭像器皿裡的糖……」，主婦心想「這禿頭是騙不過的」，全都布施了；「迂迴之語」是繞著要的東西說。瞋罵示相：罵詈（十種罵詈之事）、輕蔑、呵責（「無信」「不淨信」）、舉罪（「你們別在這裡說這個」）與遍舉罪（連事帶因；或見不施者說「啊，施主呀」「大施主呀」）、譏笑（「這個連穀種都吃掉的人，算什麼活命」）與遍譏笑（「他可是常常對所有人都施出一句『沒有』的呀」）、令墮與遍令墮（使落於不施者之名或惡名）、傳惡名者（從家到家、村到村、國到國）、食他背肉之性（當面說好話，背後說惡名，如吃背過臉去的人的背肉）；之所以叫瞋罵示相，因為它像用竹片刮去膏油那樣刮去他人之德、像磨碎香料求香那樣粉碎他人之德而求利。以利求利：從這一家得的拿到那一家去；欲求・尋求・遍求即希求・尋覓・遍尋，同義而配合；那位比丘把每次得到的乞食一處一處施給人家的孩子，最後得到乳粥而去，正是其事。「以及這樣等等的惡法」的「等等」，攝取《梵網經》所說的畜生明、邪命——支節之相、徵相、變怪、夢、身相、鼠嚙、火供、杓供等等。
收束：由於違犯為活命而制的六學處、以及由於詐等惡法而轉起的邪命——從那一切種類的邪命而離，就是活命遍淨戒。語義：依它而活，故名「活命」，它就是求覓資具的努力；「遍淨」是清淨之性；活命的遍淨，就是活命遍淨。
給一般讀者
〔解碼者的讀法〕這一單元最好的讀法是把它當一面鏡子而不是一份罪狀。五邪法共一個開頭：「依利養、恭敬、名聲者」。你不必是出家人才會犯它——為了被喜歡而說得太好聽（虛談）、暗示別人該給你什麼（現相）、貶低別人來顯出自己（瞋罵示相）、拿這裡的好處去換那裡的（以利求利）、裝出「我不要」好讓人更想給（詐）——這些姿勢在任何一份工作裡都認得出來。活命遍淨守的是：謀生的方式，不扭曲你這個人。
想讀本單元全文：白話 §1–§6 即活命遍淨戒之全段逐段全譯。
A List of Ways to Ruin a Life: Scheming, Talking, Hinting, Belittling, and Pursuing Gain with Gain
The Big Picture — The Place of Purification of Livelihood within the Fourfold Purification of Virtue
This is the third of the fourfold purification of virtue (see the Larger Frame of 01-05 for the sequence of the ten units). The first two virtues guard bodily and verbal action and the six faculties; this one guards livelihood—where a renunciant’s requisites come from and how they are obtained. The author’s method is first to establish the legal basis (the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood, Vernacular §1), then to cite the canonical definitions of five wrong practices (§2), and finally to devote the longest span to a word-by-word explanation of those five (§§3–6): the three bases of scheming, the thirteen items of talking, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain. Almost every item comes with a story or simile, and the passage finally gathers them under the meaning of “purification of livelihood.” It reads like a behavioral checklist, but it is really a mirror: every item is a posture that distorts the self for the sake of gain, honor, and renown. 〔What Is Seen〕
§01 Six Training Rules—Six Precepts Laid Down on Account of Livelihood, from Gravest to Lightest → Vernacular §1
“On account of livelihood, with livelihood as the reason”: the six training rules are arranged according to the gravity of the offense. Falsely claiming a superhuman state entails defeat (pārājika); acting as a go-between entails a formal meeting of the Order (saṅghādisesa); saying “The bhikkhu living in your monastery is an arahant,” when the other person understands, is grave wrongdoing (thullaccaya); a bhikkhu who is not ill and asks for fine food for himself commits an offense requiring expiation (pācittiya); the corresponding act by a bhikkhunī requires acknowledgement (pāṭidesanīya); and asking for curry or rice for oneself when not ill is wrongdoing (dukkaṭa). 〔Reading〕Notice the two ends of this list: the gravest item is a false claim to attainment, the lightest is asking for a bowl of rice. The list makes immediately visible both how far corruption “for livelihood” can go and how subtle it can become.
§02 Canonical Definitions of the Five Wrong Practices → Vernacular §2
Scheming, talking, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain each receive a fixed canonical definition, and all five open with the same phrase: “a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown, who has evil wishes and is overcome by wishes.” The five wrong practices share one root. Scheming is the feigning, posing, and studied posing, the scowling, conduct of a schemer, and state of being schemed that occur “by way of the use of requisites, by way of indirect talk, or by way of deportment.” Talking comprises initiating talk, talking in reply, skillful talk, elevating talk … up to bean-soup behavior and fondling behavior. Hinting comprises a sign, working a sign, an indication, working an indication, indirect talk, and talk around the subject. Belittling comprises abusing, disparaging, censuring, reproaching … up to the state of eating another’s back-flesh. Pursuing gain with gain means taking goods obtained here to someone there, or goods obtained there to someone here, and coveting, seeking, and repeatedly seeking goods by means of goods. This passage is the contents page; §§3–6 unfold it item by item.
§03 Three Bases of Scheming—the Use of Requisites, Indirect Talk, and Deportment → Vernacular §3
First come the three shared expressions. “A person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown” is someone who longs for them; “a person of evil wishes” is someone who wants to display qualities that do not exist; “overcome by wishes” means harassed by wishes. Then, according to the Mahāniddesa, scheming has three bases:
By way of the use of requisites—householders invite him to accept robes and the rest. He really wants them but refuses out of evil wishes. Only after they gain firm confidence that “this venerable is of few wishes and accepts nothing” and bring offerings by the cartload does he accept while presenting it as “solely to embrace them with compassion.” The long citation from the Mahāniddesa plays the scene to its end: he refuses robes, food, lodging, and medicine, repeatedly saying, “What use has an ascetic for expensive things?” He wears and eats what is coarse, leading the householders to regard him as “of few wishes, content, secluded, unsociable, energetic, and an advocate of the ascetic practices.” When they invite him again and again, he explains that “through the presence of three things, a faithful son of good family produces much merit … if I do not accept, you will be excluded from merit. I have no need of this; nevertheless, I accept solely out of compassion for you”—and so he accepts much. By way of indirect talk—a person of evil wishes creates astonishment through language implying that he has attained superhuman states: “The ascetic who wears such a robe is of great power”; “The ascetic who carries such a bowl, water strainer, key, or belt is of great power”; “The ascetic with such a preceptor or teacher”; “the ascetic living in such a monastery, cave, storied dwelling, watchtower, pavilion, or beneath such a tree.” Or, to make people call him “grave upon grave, scowling upon scowling, scheming upon scheming, an obtainer of peaceful abidings and attainments,” he speaks words that are deep, hidden, subtle, concealed, supramundane, and connected with emptiness. Dependent on deportment—he deliberately composes his walking, standing, sitting, and lying down, walks and stands as though concentrated, and even meditates where people can see him. 〔Reading〕The order of the three bases deserves attention: from “manipulating how others give,” to “manipulating how others see,” to “manipulating how the self is seen.” Scheming needs less and less of an object until all that remains is a performed self.
§04 Word-by-Word Explanation of Scheming → Vernacular §4
“By way of what is called the use of requisites” means acting through the use of requisites; “by way of indirect talk” means speech near the intended matter; “by way of deportment” means in the four postures. “Feigning” is posing, deliberate posing; “posing” is the manner of composing oneself; “studied posing” is contrivance, producing an attractive appearance. “Scowling” is knitting the face to display oneself as foremost in strenuous practice; a person habituated to doing this is a scowler, and his condition is the state of scowling. “Scheming” is creating astonishment; the schemer’s action is the conduct of a schemer; the condition of someone who has schemed is the state of being schemed.
§05 Thirteen Items of Talking—from “Initiating Talk” to “Fondling Behavior” → Vernacular §5
Each of the thirteen items has its own shape. Initiating talk—on seeing people arrive at the monastery, he speaks first: “Why have you come? To invite the bhikkhus? If so, go ahead; I shall take my bowl and follow,” or puts himself forward: “I am Tissa; the king has confidence in me.” Talking in reply—after being asked, he talks in the same way. Skillful talk—for fear of wearying the householders, he speaks cleverly while repeatedly leaving them room. Elevating talk—“great householder,” “great shipowner,” “great donor.” All-round elevating talk—raising them up in every way. Binding talk—“At this season in former years you gave new grain; why do you not give now?”, continuing until they say, “We shall give, but we have not yet had the opportunity”; or, when someone carries sugarcane, asking, “Where is it from?” “Is it sweet?” and saying, “It would be improper to say, ‘Give sugarcane to the bhikkhu.’” The other person tries to unbind himself, but the speaker keeps wrapping him up. All-round binding talk—binding again and again in every way. Extolling talk—“This family knows only me; if anything is given, they give it only to me” (the story of Telakandarika should be told here). All-round extolling talk—extolling in every way. Ingratiating speech—saying only agreeable things without regard for truth or Dhamma. Flattery—repeatedly placing oneself in an inferior position. Bean-soup behavior—when beans are cooked, one remains uncooked and all the others are done; just so, only a little in a person’s speech is true and all the rest is false. Fondling behavior—carrying another family’s children in the lap or on the shoulder like a nurse. 〔Reading〕The sharpness of these thirteen items lies in their reach beyond “lying”: “sounding too agreeable,” “leaving room too skillfully,” and “raising someone up too artfully” all appear on the list. The essence of talking is not false speech but speech deployed for gain.
§06 Hinting, Belittling, Pursuing Gain with Gain, and the Meaning of “Purification of Livelihood” → Vernacular §6
Hinting: a “sign” is any bodily or verbal action capable of making another person think, “I should give a requisite.” “Working a sign” includes seeing someone carry food and asking, “What food did you get?” An “indication” is talk connected with requisites. “Working an indication” includes asking children tending calves, “Are these milk-drinking calves or buttermilk-drinking calves?”, then saying, “If they were milk-drinking calves, the bhikkhus too would receive milk,” so the children tell their parents. “Indirect talk” draws near to the intended matter. A bhikkhu who frequented a family heard the mistress of the house claim that she had no rice, though he had entered the inner room and seen sugarcane by the door, sugar in a vessel, salted fish in a basket, rice in a jar, and ghee in a pot. He therefore said, “I saw a sign beforehand: a snake like the sugarcane by the door, a stone like the sugar in the vessel …” The woman thought, “This shaveling cannot be deceived,” and gave him everything. “Speaking around the subject” circles the desired thing. Belittling: abusing (through the ten grounds for abuse), disparaging, censuring (“faithless,” “without confidence”), reproaching (“Do not say that here”) and thorough reproaching (including both the matter and its reason, or addressing a non-giver as “Oh, donor!” and “Oh, great donor!”), ridiculing (“What kind of livelihood does this seed-eater have?”) and thorough ridiculing (“He always gives everyone the word ‘nothing’”), denigrating and thorough denigrating (making someone fall into the name or disrepute of a non-giver), carrying tales of discredit (from house to house, village to village, country to country), and the state of eating another’s back-flesh (pleasant speech to his face, discredit behind his back, like eating the back-flesh of someone who has turned away). It is called belittling because it scrapes away the qualities of others as a bamboo scraper removes unguent and crushes those qualities for gain as spices are ground in search of fragrance. Pursuing gain with gain: taking what is obtained from one family to another; coveting, seeking, and repeated seeking correspond synonymously to searching, looking for, and repeated looking. The bhikkhu who gave each portion of almsfood he received to different families’ children and finally obtained milk-rice exemplifies it. In “and other evil practices of this kind,” “other” includes the animal knowledge and wrong livelihood described in the Brahmajāla Sutta—knowledge of bodily marks, omens, portents, dreams, bodily characteristics, mouse-gnawings, fire oblations, ladle oblations, and so forth.
The conclusion: wrong livelihood proceeds from transgressing the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood and from evil practices such as scheming. Abstinence from every such kind of wrong livelihood is virtue consisting in purification of livelihood. Its word meaning is this: since people live by depending on it, it is “livelihood,” namely, the effort of seeking requisites; “purification” is the state of being purified; the purification of livelihood is “purification of livelihood.”
For the General Reader
〔The Decoder’s Reading〕The best way to read this unit is as a mirror, not an indictment. All five wrong practices share the same opening: “a person who depends upon gain, honor, and renown.” A person need not be a renunciant to recognize them: speaking too agreeably in order to be liked (talking), hinting at what somebody should give (hinting), lowering another person to elevate the self (belittling), using benefits received here to obtain benefits there (pursuing gain with gain), or performing “I do not want it” so that others become still more eager to give (scheming). These postures are recognizable in any line of work. Purification of livelihood guards this: the way you make a living does not distort the person you are.
To read this unit in full: Vernacular §§1–6 give the complete sequential translation of the passage on virtue consisting in purification of livelihood.
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
譯底 本單元之譯底＝CSCD（內用不上站）。本層一切巴利逐字取自本單元原典欄之譯底，
定位一式：〔CSCD §NN〕式對譯底欄逐字可核。本品無自家對頁之巴利，故頁域一概不記。
本品《總覽》movement 表所載之章§，本層唯得援其字面，不以之與段號互換。
篇名 譯底欄自帶 ### 小節 1 個，即本篇之題 ### Ājīvapārisuddhisīlaṃ。
段號域 譯底欄之段號自〔CSCD §16〕至〔CSCD §17〕，實落段號 2 個，號序連續無缺。 本篇於譯底欄之幅為 16,184 位元組——本品十單元中次長之篇。
篇內之二段之分 〔CSCD §16〕聖典之文（因活命而制之六學處與五邪法之逐一定義， 論唯錄不釋）・〔CSCD §17〕逐字之釋（先開詐之三事並引其三，次逐一釋五邪法之每一目， 末以「等」字所攝者與活命遍淨之語義收）。二段之比為 1 比 9 強 （〔CSCD §16〕實測 2,539 位元組・〔CSCD §17〕實測 13,613 位元組；篇題行 32 位元組不入二數）。
前後接點 前承根律儀之單元；本篇首句 Idāni indriyasaṃvarasīlānantaraṃ vutte ājīvapārisuddhisīle ājīvahetu paññattānaṃ channaṃ sikkhāpadānanti 逐字承其次第，
並自標其所釋之語出於分別之單元〔CSCD §13〕。後接資具依止之單元〔CSCD §18〕，
其首句 Yaṃ panetaṃ tadanantaraṃ paccayasannissitasīlaṃ vuttaṃ 逐字承本篇之次第。
movement 品夾《總覽》繫本單元於 §H 四遍淨戒〔Vism I.42 起〕。
二、詞義與譯語
本目只記本篇用法與其定位；名相定讀以規範詞表為準，詞表所未定者，本目不代定。 前五單元已立之讀不重解——本篇所涉之既立詞為 ājīvapārisuddhi（活命遍淨）・ vīriyasaṃvara（精進律儀）・cāṭukamyatā（諂媚）・muggasūpyatā（綠豆湯之性）・ pāribhaṭyatā（抱持之性）。以下唯列本篇新出者。
因活命而制之六學處〔CSCD §16〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ājīvahetu ājīvakāraṇā | 為活命故・以活命為因 | 六學處之共通冠語，六條逐一以之起 | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pārājika | 波羅夷 | 第一：asantaṃ abhūtaṃ uttarimanussadhammaṃ ullapati（虛稱上人法） | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| saṅghādisesa | 僧殘 | 第二：sañcarittaṃ samāpajjati（作媒） | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| thullaccaya | 偷蘭遮 | 第三：'yo te vihāre vasati so bhikkhu arahā'ti bhaṇati（對方領解者犯） | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pācittiya | 波逸提 | 第四：比丘無病而自乞美食 | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pāṭidesanīya | 波羅提提舍尼 | 第五：比丘尼無病而自乞美食 | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| dukkaṭa | 突吉羅 | 第六：無病而自乞羹或飯 | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
五邪法之定義語〔CSCD §16〕聖典之文
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| lābhasakkārasilokasannissita | 依利養・恭敬・名聲者 | 五邪法之共通冠語，五條逐一以之起 | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pāpiccha | 惡欲者 | 同上；論釋為 asantaguṇadīpanakāmassa（欲顯不實之德） | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| icchāpakata | 為欲所壞者 | 同上；論釋為 icchāya apakatassa, upaddutassā（為欲所壞、所惱） | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| kuhanā | 詐 | 第一邪法；論釋為 vimhāpanā（令人驚異） | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lapanā | 虛談 | 第二邪法 | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| nemittikatā | 現相 | 第三邪法 | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| nippesikatā | 瞋罵示相 | 第四邪法 | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatā | 以利求利 | 第五邪法；論釋 nijigīsanatā 為 magganā（求覓） | 〔CSCD §16〕・〔CSCD §17〕 |
詐之三事〔CSCD §17〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| tividhaṃ kuhanavatthu | 三種詐之事 | 論自標其出於所引之書：paccayapaṭisevanasāmantajappanairiyāpathasannissitavasena mahāniddese tividhaṃ kuhanavatthu āgataṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| paccayapaṭisevanasaṅkhāta | 資具受用之詐 | 先辭而後受——paṭikkhipanena 而令居家更信，終 tadanuggahakāmataṃyeva āvikatvā paṭiggahaṇena 而受，其後 api sakaṭabhārehi upanāmana | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sāmantajappanasaṅkhāta | 近語之詐 | 以近似之語令人推知其得上人法——ariyadhammasannissitaṃ vācaṃ bhāsati | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| iriyāpathasannissita | 依威儀之詐 | gamanaṃ saṇṭhapeti、samāhito viya gacchati、āpāthakajjhāyī ca hoti（於人所見處而坐禪） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| bhākuṭikā・bhākuṭiyaṃ | 顰蹙・顰蹙之性 | 論釋為 padhānapurimaṭṭhitabhāvadassanena bhākuṭikaraṇaṃ, mukhasaṅkoco（現精勤第一之相而蹙面） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| aṭṭhapanā・ṭhapanā・saṇṭhapanā | 安立・置立・善置立 | 威儀之三度：末者作 abhisaṅkharaṇā, pāsādikabhāvakaraṇanti（作可喜之相） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
虛談之十三目〔CSCD §17〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ālapanā | 先語 | 見人入寺即先招呼、自持缽隨往；或自舉「王與大臣皆信我」 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lapanā | 應語 | puṭṭhassa sato vuttappakārameva lapanaṃ（被問而後如上而語） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sallapanā | 善語 | 畏居家之厭而處處給便而巧語 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ullapanā・samullapanā | 高舉之語・遍高舉之語 | 稱人為大居士・大船主・大施主 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| unnahanā・samunnahanā | 纏縛之語・遍纏縛之語 | 論釋為 uddhaṃ uddhaṃ nahanā, veṭhanā；甘蔗之問答為其例 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ukkācanā・samukkācanā | 舉揚之語・遍舉揚之語 | 論釋為 ukkhipitvā kācanā ukkācanā, uddīpanā；並自標一事而不錄其文——Telakandarikavatthu cettha vattabbaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| anuppiyabhāṇitā | 隨愛語 | saccānurūpaṃ dhammānurūpaṃ vā anapaloketvā punappunaṃ piyabhaṇanameva（不顧實與法而但說愛語） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| muggasūpyatā | 綠豆湯之性 | 論以喻立之：煮豆有不熟者，喻其語有一分實而餘皆虛 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pāribhaṭyatā | 抱持之性 | Yo hi kuladārake dhāti viya aṅkena vā khandhena vā paribhaṭati（如乳母抱持人家之子） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
現相・瞋罵示相・以利求利之目〔CSCD §17〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| nimitta・nimittakamma | 相・作相 | yaṃkiñci paresaṃ paccayadānasaññājanakaṃ kāyavacīkammaṃ（令他起施想之身語業） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| obhāsa・obhāsakamma | 明示・作明示 | paccayapaṭisaṃyuttakathā；牧犢者之問答為其例 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sāmantajappā | 近語 | samīpaṃ katvā jappanaṃ；親近居家之比丘之事為其例（本篇最長之事例） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| parikathā | 迂迴之語 | yathā taṃ labhati tassa parivattetvā kathananti | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| akkosanā | 罵詈 | dasahi akkosavatthūhi akkosanaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| vambhanā・garahaṇā | 輕蔑・呵責 | 前者 paribhavitvā kathanaṃ；後者 assaddho appasannotiādinā nayena dosāropanā | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ukkhepanā・samukkhepanā | 舉罪・遍舉罪 | 論出二釋：一為以語制止（mā etaṃ ettha kathethāti vācāya ukkhipanaṃ），一為反語譏之（adentaṃ disvā ''aho dānapatī''ti） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| khipanā・saṃkhipanā | 譏笑・遍譏笑 | uppaṇḍanā；kiṃ imassa jīvitaṃ bījabhojinoti（以食種為活） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pāpanā・sampāpanā | 令墮・遍令墮 | adāyakattassa avaṇṇassa vā pāpanaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| avaṇṇahārikā | 傳惡名者 | 自家至家・村至村・國至國而傳其惡名 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| parapiṭṭhimaṃsikatā | 食他背肉之性 | purato madhuraṃ bhaṇitvā parammukhe avaṇṇabhāsitā；論自釋其名之由 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| eṭṭhi・gaveṭṭhi・pariyeṭṭhi | 欲求・尋求・遍求 | 以利求利之三度；論並出其同義語 esanā・gavesanā・pariyesanā | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
活命遍淨之語義〔CSCD §17〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ājīva | 活命 | Etaṃ āgamma jīvantīti ājīvo；論自問自答其所指——Ko so, paccayapariyesanavāyāmo（即求資具之勤） | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pārisuddhi | 遍淨 | Pārisuddhīti parisuddhatā. Ājīvassa pārisuddhi ājīvapārisuddhi | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| tiracchānavijjā | 畜生明 | 「等」字所攝者：所引之經列 aṅgaṃ, nimittaṃ, uppātaṃ, supinaṃ, lakkhaṇaṃ, mūsikacchinnaṃ, aggihomaṃ, dabbihoma 諸目 | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| micchājīva | 邪命 | 本篇之所離；活命遍淨戒即 sabbappakārāpi micchājīvā virati | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
本編既有校讀須併觀之一處 既有校讀之 §H 第三目作「活命遍淨戒（ājīva-pārisuddhi） ——離邪命：不以詐（kuhanā）· 虛談（lapanā）· 現相（nemittikatā）· 瞋罵示相 （nippesikatā）· 以利求利（lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatā） 等邪法活命」， 與譯底欄之五目逐一相合，定讀逐字保入。唯既有校讀未及因活命而制之六學處 （波羅夷至突吉羅）與詐之三事之分，本目誌其實，不代裁。
三、異讀
材料之面 本篇無自家對頁之巴利，故無校勘段可錄；可查之面唯譯底欄自身。誌錄不判。
普查之實測 譯底欄全篇逐字普查：異讀括注式（(sī.)・(syā.)・(kaṃ.)・(pī.) 等）
零命中；異誦之標識詞 pāṭho 零命中；方括注唯二式（[§NN] 段號 2 個與版頁記
14 個，後者皆在註解之內）。全篇之圓括注 6 處，逐一檢之，皆為所引之出處標記，
無一載異讀。查無即記無：譯底欄自身無異讀之記。
本欄自出之二處異形 譯底欄之內，同一詞而二形並見者二處，逐處誌之不判：
| 處 | 甲形 | 乙形 | 其別 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 詐之第三事之標 | 論自標三事時作 iriyāpathasannissitaṃ kuhanavatthūti veditabbaṃ | 其下所引之聖典文則作 katamaṃ iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu 與 idaṃ vuccati iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthū''ti | 論之標作「依」（iriyāpathasannissitaṃ），所引之文作「所謂」（iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ）——二語不同而所指一 |
| 所引之文之分寫 | 〔CSCD §17〕之第一引作 saddho kulaputto bahuṃ puññaṃ pasavati（三度分寫） | 同引之第三度作 dakkhiṇeyyānaṃ sammukhībhāvāsaddhokulaputto bahuṃ puññaṃ pasavati（sammukhībhāvā・saddho・kulaputto 三詞連寫無隔） | 同一句式三出而末一出之詞界失落 |
本欄之界 上表二列皆為譯底欄之字面之實，其為清檔之疵或傳本之形，本欄不判； 未與 PTS 掃描頁對勘。 本欄之零命中唯就譯底欄一面，不以之推斷他本。
四、論主引據
論主自引之處，逐處繫段號錨；出處唯本文自標者記之，不代考定。「本文自標之出處」欄 之括注逐字照錄，不代譯其經名。
| 位置 | 引式〔逐字〕 | 所引之要 | 本文自標之出處 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §16〕 | ''ājīvahetu ājīvakāraṇā pāpiccho icchāpakato asantaṃ abhūtaṃ uttarimanussadhammaṃ ullapati, āpatti pārājikassa. | 因活命而制之六學處，逐一列其罪 | (pari. 287) |
| 〔CSCD §16〕 | Kuhanātiādīsu ayaṃ pāḷi, ''tattha katamā kuhanā? | 五邪法之逐一定義——本篇所釋之本，逐字錄之不省 | (vibha. 862-865) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ mahāniddese –／''Katamaṃ paccayapaṭisevanasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu? | 資具受用之詐之全文 | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathāha –／''Katamaṃ sāmantajappanasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu? | 近語之詐之全文 | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathāha – ''katamaṃ iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu. | 依威儀之詐之全文 | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | ''yathā vā paneke bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saddhādeyyāni bhojanāni bhuñjitvā te evarūpāya tiracchānavijjāya micchājīvena jīvikaṃ kappenti. | 「等」字所攝之諸邪法——畜生明之列 | (dī. ni. 1.21) |
論自標而不錄其文之二事 本篇有二處論自標「此中應說某事」而不錄其文：
①Telakandarikavatthu cettha vattabbaṃ（舉揚之語之例）
②Ādito paṭṭhāya laddhaṃ laddhaṃ bhikkhaṃ tatra tatra kuladārakānaṃ datvā ante khīrayāguṃ labhitvā gatabhikkhuvatthu cettha kathetabbaṃ（以利求利之例——
此處雖標其事之梗概而不錄其全）。另有一處自標而錄其全文：
Kulūpakabhikkhu vatthu cettha vattabbaṃ，其下即以 Kulūpako kira bhikkhu 起而錄之
——同一標式而處置不一，誌其實不代考定。
引式之數〔本欄實測〕 Vuttañhetaṃ 1 處・Yathāha 2 處。
Vuttampi cetaṃ・Tenāha 諸式零命中。kira（傳說之詞）1 見，
在親近居家之比丘之事之起句 Kulūpako kira bhikkhu bhuñjitukāmo gehaṃ pavisitvā nisīdi。
本文自標之圓括注出處 6 處。此數唯就本篇之域，不及全書。
所引之類〔本欄實測〕 6 處括注析為 6 個出處分項，就其標識分：mahāni. 3・
pari. 1・vibha. 1・dī. ni. 1。本篇之特色在 mahāni. 之密度——
詐之三事逐一各引其全文一段，三引皆出同書，為本品他篇所無之式。
五、譬喻·修辭
本目只記本篇譬喻之所在與其所配，不作文學評價。
甲・譬喻
| 位置 | 譬喻 | 所配之義 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | samāhito viya gacchati, samāhito viya tiṭṭhati, nisīdati, seyyaṃ kappeti | 行住坐臥皆如入定者——依威儀之詐 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathā hi muggesu paccamānesu kocideva na paccati, avasesā paccanti | 煮綠豆時有一二不熟，餘皆熟——喻其語唯一分實而餘皆虛 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yo hi kuladārake dhāti viya aṅkena vā khandhena vā paribhaṭati | 抱人家之子如乳母——抱持之性 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | taṇḍule āharitukāmā viya paṭivissakagharaṃ gatā | 主婦不欲施而託言取米，如往鄰家取米 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Kavāṭakoṇe nikkhittaṃ ucchuṃ viya sappaṃ addasaṃ | 比丘以「見蛇」之語一一配其所窺之物：門角之甘蔗如蛇・器中之糖塊如石・簍中之鹹魚片如蛇頸・瓶中之米如蛇齒・罐中之酥如蛇口所出之毒涎 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | veḷupesikāya viya abbhaṅgaṃ parassa guṇaṃ nippeseti nipuñchati | 以竹片刮去膏油——喻刮除他人之德 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | gandhajātaṃ nipisitvā gandhamagganā viya paraguṇe nipisitvā vicuṇṇetvā | 磨香而求香——喻磨碎他人之德而求利 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | parammukhānaṃ piṭṭhimaṃsaṃ khādanamiva hoti | 不敢當面而背後說惡，如食其背肉 |
乙・事例 本篇所舉之人事，唯記其所證之義，不代考定其人其地。
| 位置 | 事例 | 所證之義 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | 甘蔗之問答——Kiṃ tattha ucchu madhuranti. Khāditvā, bhante, jānitabbanti | 纏縛之語（unnahanā）之例 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | 牧犢者之問答——kiṃ ime vacchā khīragovacchā udāhu takkagovacchā | 作明示（obhāsakamma）之例 |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | 親近居家之比丘之事——入其家而窺見甘蔗・糖・鹹魚・米・酥，出而託言「見蛇之相」，主婦知不可欺而盡施之 | 近語（sāmantajappā）之例；本篇最長之事例，實測 1,240 位元組 |
〔上表人地之名，本層唯逐字照錄譯底欄之巴利；漢語定讀不於本目立。〕
丙・修辭之可核觀察 ①本篇之骨為聖典先錄、逐語後釋：〔CSCD §16〕錄五邪法之
定義而一字不釋，〔CSCD §17〕以 Imissā pana pāḷiyā evamattho veditabbo
（此聖典之義應如是知）起而逐語釋之——錄與釋分段而立，為本品他篇所無之體。
②逐語釋之提綱句以「所釋之目＋niddese」之定式串之，實測 4 見：
Kuhananiddese・Lapanāniddese・Nemittikatāniddese・Nippesikatāniddese；
第五目改作 Lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatāniddese（連寫），5 目而 5 式。
③本篇之語多以單複並舉成對：ukkācanā／samukkācanā・unnahanā／samunnahanā・
ukkhepanā／samukkhepanā・khipanā／saṃkhipanā・pāpanā／sampāpanā
——Sabbatobhāgena（以一切分）一語為其轉語，實測 4 見。
④viya 全篇 8 見（詞界），連聲之比況形 1 見（khādanamiva）；Yathā 起首之語 1 見
（綠豆之喻）。⑤本篇無偈頌——縮排 4 空格之行零命中；所引之三段各以 2 空格縮排出之，
實測 2 行為其起。⑥省略式 …pe… 全篇 5 見，皆在所引之三段內。
以上諸數唯就本篇之域實測，不及全書。
六、章內互讀
每指皆帶段號錨；所指之處唯就本篇文中可核之名相立——本篇之段號與章§二系不明對映， 故所指不繫章§，亦不推估換算。不代考定。
| 本篇之處 | 所指 | 可核之由 |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §16〕 Idāni indriyasaṃvarasīlānantaraṃ vutte ājīvapārisuddhisīle | 根律儀之單元〔CSCD §15〕 | 論自標本篇緊接其後 |
〔CSCD §16〕 ājīvahetu paññattānaṃ channaṃ sikkhāpadānanti | 分別之單元〔CSCD §13〕 | 所釋之語出於彼段 |
〔CSCD §17〕 cāṭukamyatā muggasūpyatā pāribhaṭyatā | 別解脫律儀之單元〔CSCD §14〕 | 三目於彼為非行之目而未釋，其釋在本篇 |
〔CSCD §17〕 sabbappakārāpi micchājīvā virati, idaṃ ājīvapārisuddhisīlaṃ | 戒之自性之單元〔CSCD §6〕 | 論於彼自標活命遍淨攝於精進律儀 |
〔CSCD §17〕 Ko so, paccayapariyesanavāyāmo | 資具依止之單元〔CSCD §18〕 | 活命即求資具之勤，資具之受用之法在彼 |
〔CSCD §17〕 paccayapariyesanavāyāmo | 成就法之單元〔CSCD §19〕 | 論於彼自標活命遍淨以精進成之，並判清淨與不清淨之受用 |
七、傳本
作者、傳本與注疏源流諸問題，本編不於考據內立說。
I. Placement in the Outline
Working base This unit’s working base is CSCD (internal use only; never published). Every Pāli form in this layer is taken verbatim from the working base in this unit’s source column.
One location form, 〔CSCD §NN〕, can be checked verbatim against the working-base column. Because this chapter has no internally collated Pāli pagination, no page range is recorded.
This layer may reproduce only the literal chapter-and-section wording listed in this chapter’s Overview movement table and does not convert between it and the paragraph numbers.
Title The working-base column itself contains one ### subsection, namely the title of this part, ### Ājīvapārisuddhisīlaṃ.
Paragraph-number range The paragraph numbers in the working-base column extend from 〔CSCD §16〕 to 〔CSCD §17〕. Two paragraph numbers actually occur, and the sequence is continuous without a gap. This part spans 16,184 bytes in the working-base column—the second-longest of the ten units in this chapter.
Division of the two paragraphs within the part 〔CSCD §16〕 contains the canonical text (the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood and the definitions of each of the five wrong practices, which the treatise merely records without explanation); 〔CSCD §17〕 contains the word-by-word explanation (first opening the three bases of scheming and citing all three, then explaining each item of the five wrong practices, and finally gathering what is included by the word “other” and the meaning of purification of livelihood). The ratio between the two paragraphs is slightly more than 1 to 9 (2,539 bytes measured for 〔CSCD §16〕 and 13,613 bytes measured for 〔CSCD §17〕; the 32-byte title line is excluded from both totals).
Preceding and following junctions The preceding unit is on restraint of the faculties. This part’s opening, Idāni indriyasaṃvarasīlānantaraṃ vutte ājīvapārisuddhisīle ājīvahetu paññattānaṃ channaṃ sikkhāpadānanti, takes up that sequence verbatim
and identifies the phrase explained here as coming from the unit on classification at 〔CSCD §13〕. The next unit is on virtue dependent on requisites at 〔CSCD §18〕;
its opening, Yaṃ panetaṃ tadanantaraṃ paccayasannissitasīlaṃ vuttaṃ, takes up the sequence of this part verbatim.
Movement The chapter Overview links this unit with §H, the Fourfold Purification of Virtue 〔Vism I.42 ff.〕.
II. Terms and Renderings
This heading records only the usage and location of terms in this part. The normative glossary governs established renderings; this heading does not decide terms that the glossary has not settled. Terms established in the preceding five units are not re-explained here: ājīvapārisuddhi (purification of livelihood), vīriyasaṃvara (restraint by energy), cāṭukamyatā (flattery), muggasūpyatā (bean-soup behavior), and pāribhaṭyatā (fondling behavior). Only terms newly occurring in this part are listed below.
Six training rules laid down on account of livelihood 〔CSCD §16〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| ājīvahetu ājīvakāraṇā | on account of livelihood; with livelihood as the reason | the shared opening of the six training rules, repeated at the beginning of each | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pārājika | defeat | first: asantaṃ abhūtaṃ uttarimanussadhammaṃ ullapati (falsely claiming a superhuman state) | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| saṅghādisesa | formal meeting of the Order | second: sañcarittaṃ samāpajjati (acting as a go-between) | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| thullaccaya | grave wrongdoing | third: ''yo te vihāre vasati so bhikkhu arahā''ti bhaṇati (an offense if the other person understands) | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pācittiya | expiation | fourth: a bhikkhu who is not ill asks for fine food for himself | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pāṭidesanīya | acknowledgement | fifth: a bhikkhunī who is not ill asks for fine food for herself | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| dukkaṭa | wrongdoing | sixth: a person who is not ill asks for curry or rice for himself | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
Terms in the definitions of the five wrong practices 〔CSCD §16〕, the canonical text
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| lābhasakkārasilokasannissita | dependent upon gain, honor, and renown | the shared opening of the five wrong practices, repeated at the beginning of each | 〔CSCD §16〕 |
| pāpiccha | person of evil wishes | as above; explained by the treatise as asantaguṇadīpanakāmassa (wanting to display qualities that do not exist) | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| icchāpakata | overcome by wishes | as above; explained by the treatise as icchāya apakatassa, upaddutassā (impaired and harassed by wishes) | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| kuhanā | scheming | the first wrong practice; explained by the treatise as vimhāpanā (creating astonishment) | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lapanā | talking | the second wrong practice | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| nemittikatā | hinting | the third wrong practice | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| nippesikatā | belittling | the fourth wrong practice | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatā | pursuing gain with gain | the fifth wrong practice; nijigīsanatā is explained as magganā (seeking) | 〔CSCD §16〕 and 〔CSCD §17〕 |
Three bases of scheming 〔CSCD §17〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| tividhaṃ kuhanavatthu | three bases of scheming | the author identifies their source in the cited work: paccayapaṭisevanasāmantajappanairiyāpathasannissitavasena mahāniddese tividhaṃ kuhanavatthu āgataṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| paccayapaṭisevanasaṅkhāta | scheming through the use of requisites | refusing and then accepting—refusing (paṭikkhipanena) causes the householders to acquire still greater confidence, after which he accepts while tadanuggahakāmataṃyeva āvikatvā paṭiggahaṇena, leading thereafter to api sakaṭabhārehi upanāmana | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sāmantajappanasaṅkhāta | scheming through indirect talk | causing people to infer attainment of superhuman states through suggestive speech—ariyadhammasannissitaṃ vācaṃ bhāsati | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| iriyāpathasannissita | scheming dependent on deportment | gamanaṃ saṇṭhapeti, samāhito viya gacchati, and āpāthakajjhāyī ca hoti (meditating while sitting where people can see him) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| bhākuṭikā・bhākuṭiyaṃ | scowling; state of scowling | explained by the treatise as padhānapurimaṭṭhitabhāvadassanena bhākuṭikaraṇaṃ, mukhasaṅkoco (knitting the face to present oneself as foremost in strenuous practice) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| aṭṭhapanā・ṭhapanā・saṇṭhapanā | feigning; posing; studied posing | three degrees of deportment; the last is abhisaṅkharaṇā, pāsādikabhāvakaraṇanti (producing an attractive appearance) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
Thirteen items of talking 〔CSCD §17〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| ālapanā | initiating talk | seeing people enter the monastery and greeting them first, then taking his bowl and following; or putting himself forward by saying, “The king and his ministers all have confidence in me” | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| lapanā | talking in reply | puṭṭhassa sato vuttappakārameva lapanaṃ (talking in the way described above only after being asked) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sallapanā | skillful talk | speaking cleverly while leaving an opening at each point, for fear that the householders will become weary | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ullapanā・samullapanā | elevating talk; all-round elevating talk | addressing people as great householder, great shipowner, and great donor | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| unnahanā・samunnahanā | binding talk; all-round binding talk | explained as uddhaṃ uddhaṃ nahanā, veṭhanā; the sugarcane dialogue is its example | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ukkācanā・samukkācanā | extolling talk; all-round extolling talk | explained as ukkhipitvā kācanā ukkācanā, uddīpanā; the text also identifies a story without recording it—Telakandarikavatthu cettha vattabbaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| anuppiyabhāṇitā | ingratiating speech | saccānurūpaṃ dhammānurūpaṃ vā anapaloketvā punappunaṃ piyabhaṇanameva (saying only agreeable things again and again without regard for truth or Dhamma) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| muggasūpyatā | bean-soup behavior | established through a simile: when beans are cooked, some remain uncooked; likewise, one part of his speech is true and the rest false | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pāribhaṭyatā | fondling behavior | Yo hi kuladārake dhāti viya aṅkena vā khandhena vā paribhaṭati (carrying another family’s children in the lap or on the shoulder like a nurse) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
Items under hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain 〔CSCD §17〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| nimitta・nimittakamma | sign; working a sign | yaṃkiñci paresaṃ paccayadānasaññājanakaṃ kāyavacīkammaṃ (a bodily or verbal action that produces in others the thought of giving requisites) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| obhāsa・obhāsakamma | indication; working an indication | paccayapaṭisaṃyuttakathā; the dialogue with the children tending calves is its example | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| sāmantajappā | indirect talk | samīpaṃ katvā jappanaṃ; the story of the bhikkhu who frequented a family is its example (the longest story in this part) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| parikathā | speaking around the subject | yathā taṃ labhati tassa parivattetvā kathananti | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| akkosanā | abusing | dasahi akkosavatthūhi akkosanaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| vambhanā・garahaṇā | disparaging; censuring | the former is paribhavitvā kathanaṃ; the latter is assaddho appasannotiādinā nayena dosāropanā | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| ukkhepanā・samukkhepanā | reproaching; thorough reproaching | the treatise gives two explanations: restraining with words (mā etaṃ ettha kathethāti vācāya ukkhipanaṃ) and ironic rebuke (adentaṃ disvā ''aho dānapatī''ti) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| khipanā・saṃkhipanā | ridiculing; thorough ridiculing | uppaṇḍanā; kiṃ imassa jīvitaṃ bījabhojinoti (living by eating seed grain) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pāpanā・sampāpanā | denigrating; thorough denigrating | adāyakattassa avaṇṇassa vā pāpanaṃ | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| avaṇṇahārikā | tale-bearer of discredit | carrying someone’s discredit from house to house, village to village, and country to country | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| parapiṭṭhimaṃsikatā | state of eating another’s back-flesh | purato madhuraṃ bhaṇitvā parammukhe avaṇṇabhāsitā; the treatise itself explains the reason for the name | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| eṭṭhi・gaveṭṭhi・pariyeṭṭhi | coveting; seeking; repeated seeking | three degrees of pursuing gain with gain; the treatise also gives the synonyms esanā, gavesanā, and pariyesanā | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
Meaning of purification of livelihood 〔CSCD §17〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| ājīva | livelihood | Etaṃ āgamma jīvantīti ājīvo; the treatise asks and answers what it denotes—Ko so, paccayapariyesanavāyāmo (the effort of seeking requisites) | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| pārisuddhi | purification | Pārisuddhīti parisuddhatā. Ājīvassa pārisuddhi ājīvapārisuddhi | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| tiracchānavijjā | animal knowledge | included by the word “other”: the cited discourse lists aṅgaṃ, nimittaṃ, uppātaṃ, supinaṃ, lakkhaṇaṃ, mūsikacchinnaṃ, aggihomaṃ, dabbihoma | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
| micchājīva | wrong livelihood | what is abandoned in this part; purification of livelihood is sabbappakārāpi micchājīvā virati | 〔CSCD §17〕 |
One point to be read together with this edition’s established construal The third item under §H in the established construal reads, “Purification of livelihood (ājīva-pārisuddhi) —abandoning wrong livelihood: not living by evil practices such as scheming (kuhanā), talking (lapanā), hinting (nemittikatā), belittling (nippesikatā), and pursuing gain with gain (lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatā).” This agrees item by item with the five in the working-base column and is retained verbatim as the established reading. The existing construal, however, does not cover the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood (from defeat through wrongdoing) or the division of the three bases of scheming. This heading records that fact without deciding in its place.
III. Variant Readings
Extent of the materials This part has no internally collated Pāli on facing pages, so there is no collation section to record. The only surface available for checking is the working-base column itself. What follows records without deciding.
Measured general scan A verbatim scan of the entire part in the working-base column found zero occurrences of parenthetical variant formulas such as (sī.), (syā.), (kaṃ.), and (pī.);
the marker of a variant recitation, pāṭho, has zero occurrences. Square brackets occur only in two forms: two [§NN] paragraph numbers and fourteen edition-page marks,
all of the latter inside comments. Six parenthetical notes occur in the whole part; each was checked and all are citation markers,
none recording a variant. When none is found, none is recorded: the working-base column itself records no variant readings.
Two internally occurring variant forms Within the working-base column, two instances contain two forms for the same expression. They are recorded individually without decision:
| Place | First Form | Second Form | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| heading of the third basis of scheming | when the treatise itself identifies the three bases, it has iriyāpathasannissitaṃ kuhanavatthūti veditabbaṃ | the canonical text cited beneath it has katamaṃ iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu and idaṃ vuccati iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthū''ti | the treatise’s heading says “dependent on” (iriyāpathasannissitaṃ), while the cited text says “called” (iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ); the expressions differ but refer to the same basis |
| word division in the cited text | the first citation at 〔CSCD §17〕 writes saddho kulaputto bahuṃ puññaṃ pasavati separately three times | its third occurrence has dakkhiṇeyyānaṃ sammukhībhāvāsaddhokulaputto bahuṃ puññaṃ pasavati, with sammukhībhāvā, saddho, and kulaputto run together without spaces | the same sentence pattern occurs three times, but the word boundaries are lost in the last occurrence |
Scope of this column Both rows in the table above are facts of the wording in the working-base column. This layer does not decide whether they are defects in the clean file or forms in its textual tradition. This column has not been collated against the scanned PTS pages. The zero counts in this layer concern only the working-base column and do not support an inference about other editions.
IV. The Commentator’s Citations
Each place where the author cites a source is tied to a paragraph-number anchor. Sources are recorded only where the text itself identifies them, without independent determination. The parenthetical references in the “Source Identified by the Text” column are reproduced verbatim, without supplying translated titles.
| Location | Citation Formula [Verbatim] | Substance Cited | Source Identified by the Text |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §16〕 | ''ājīvahetu ājīvakāraṇā pāpiccho icchāpakato asantaṃ abhūtaṃ uttarimanussadhammaṃ ullapati, āpatti pārājikassa. | the six training rules laid down on account of livelihood, with their offenses listed one by one | (pari. 287) |
| 〔CSCD §16〕 | Kuhanātiādīsu ayaṃ pāḷi, ''tattha katamā kuhanā? | definitions of each of the five wrong practices—the basis explained in this part, recorded verbatim without omission | (vibha. 862-865) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ mahāniddese – / ''Katamaṃ paccayapaṭisevanasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu? | the complete passage on scheming through the use of requisites | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathāha – / ''Katamaṃ sāmantajappanasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu? | the complete passage on scheming through indirect talk | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathāha – ''katamaṃ iriyāpathasaṅkhātaṃ kuhanavatthu. | the complete passage on scheming dependent on deportment | (mahāni. 87) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | ''yathā vā paneke bhonto samaṇabrāhmaṇā saddhādeyyāni bhojanāni bhuñjitvā te evarūpāya tiracchānavijjāya micchājīvena jīvikaṃ kappenti. | wrong practices included by “other”—the list of animal knowledge | (dī. ni. 1.21) |
Two stories identified but not recorded by the treatise At two places this part says “a certain story should be told here” but does not record the story:
(1) Telakandarikavatthu cettha vattabbaṃ (the example of extolling talk), and
(2) Ādito paṭṭhāya laddhaṃ laddhaṃ bhikkhaṃ tatra tatra kuladārakānaṃ datvā ante khīrayāguṃ labhitvā gatabhikkhuvatthu cettha kathetabbaṃ (the example of pursuing gain with gain—
the text identifies the outline of the story but not its complete form). At another place it identifies a story and does record it in full:
Kulūpakabhikkhu vatthu cettha vattabbaṃ, followed by the complete story beginning Kulūpako kira bhikkhu
—the same identifying formula thus receives different treatment. This is recorded without independent determination.
Number of citation formulas [measured in this column] Vuttañhetaṃ occurs once and Yathāha twice.
Vuttampi cetaṃ, Tenāha, and similar formulas have zero occurrences. kira (the word marking a report) occurs once,
in the opening of the story of the bhikkhu who frequented a family: Kulūpako kira bhikkhu bhuñjitukāmo gehaṃ pavisitvā nisīdi.
There are six parenthetical source markers identified by the text. These counts apply only to this part’s range, not the whole work.
Types of sources cited [measured in this column] The six parenthetical markers resolve into six source entries; by their labels they comprise three mahāni.,
one pari., one vibha., and one dī. ni.. This part is distinguished by the density of mahāni. citations:
the three bases of scheming are each cited in full, and all three citations come from the same work, a pattern not found in another part of this chapter.
V. Similes and Rhetoric
This heading records only where the similes occur and the meanings to which they are applied; it offers no literary evaluation.
A. Similes
| Location | Simile | Meaning Applied To |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | samāhito viya gacchati, samāhito viya tiṭṭhati, nisīdati, seyyaṃ kappeti | walking, standing, sitting, and lying down as though concentrated—scheming dependent on deportment |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yathā hi muggesu paccamānesu kocideva na paccati, avasesā paccanti | when beans are cooked, one or two remain uncooked and the rest cook—his speech has only one true part and all the rest is false |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Yo hi kuladārake dhāti viya aṅkena vā khandhena vā paribhaṭati | carrying another family’s children like a nurse—fondling behavior |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | taṇḍule āharitukāmā viya paṭivissakagharaṃ gatā | the mistress of the house does not wish to give and claims she is fetching rice, going as though to obtain it from a neighbor |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | Kavāṭakoṇe nikkhittaṃ ucchuṃ viya sappaṃ addasaṃ | in his “seeing a snake” speech, the bhikkhu pairs each thing he had glimpsed with an image: sugarcane by the door as a snake, sugar in the vessel as a stone, salted fish in the basket as the snake’s neck, rice in the jar as its teeth, and ghee in the pot as venomous froth from its mouth |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | veḷupesikāya viya abbhaṅgaṃ parassa guṇaṃ nippeseti nipuñchati | scraping away unguent with a bamboo scraper—scraping away another’s qualities |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | gandhajātaṃ nipisitvā gandhamagganā viya paraguṇe nipisitvā vicuṇṇetvā | grinding spices in search of fragrance—crushing another’s qualities in pursuit of gain |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | parammukhānaṃ piṭṭhimaṃsaṃ khādanamiva hoti | not daring to speak face to face but speaking discredit behind someone’s back, like eating his back-flesh |
B. Stories and Examples The human incidents presented in this part are recorded only for the meaning they establish, without independent determination of person or place.
| Location | Story or Example | Meaning Established |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | the sugarcane dialogue—Kiṃ tattha ucchu madhuranti. Khāditvā, bhante, jānitabbanti | example of binding talk (unnahanā) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | the dialogue with the children tending calves—kiṃ ime vacchā khīragovacchā udāhu takkagovacchā | example of working an indication (obhāsakamma) |
| 〔CSCD §17〕 | the story of the bhikkhu who frequented a family—he enters the house and glimpses sugarcane, sugar, salted fish, rice, and ghee, then emerges and claims to have “seen the sign of a snake”; the woman knows he cannot be deceived and gives all of it | example of indirect talk (sāmantajappā); the longest story in this part, measured at 1,240 bytes |
[In the table above, names of people and places are reproduced in this layer only in the verbatim Pāli of the working-base column; no established English reading is set here.]
C. Verifiable Observations on Rhetoric (1) The skeleton of this part is canonical text first, word-commentary afterward: 〔CSCD §16〕 records the definitions of the five wrong practices
without explaining a word, while 〔CSCD §17〕 begins with Imissā pana pāḷiyā evamattho veditabbo
(“the meaning of this canonical text should be understood as follows”) and explains them word by word. Record and explanation stand in separate paragraphs, a form not found in another part of this chapter.
(2) The word-commentary is linked by a stock heading consisting of “the item explained + niddese,” measured at four occurrences:
Kuhananiddese, Lapanāniddese, Nemittikatāniddese, and Nippesikatāniddese;
the fifth item instead has the compound Lābhena lābhaṃ nijigīsanatāniddese: five items and five formulas.
(3) Much of this part’s vocabulary is presented in simple and comprehensive pairs: ukkācanā / samukkācanā, unnahanā / samunnahanā,
ukkhepanā / samukkhepanā, khipanā / saṃkhipanā, and pāpanā / sampāpanā.
The word Sabbatobhāgena (“in every respect”) serves as their turn of phrase and occurs four times by measurement.
(4) viya occurs eight times in the part as a bounded word, and one contracted comparative form occurs in khādanamiva; one statement begins with Yathā
(the bean simile). (5) There are no verses in this part: no line is indented by four spaces; each of the three citations is set off with two spaces,
with two measured lines serving as their openings. (6) The elision formula …pe… occurs five times in the whole part, all within the three cited passages.
All these figures were measured only within this part’s range, not the whole work.
VI. Intratextual Cross-Reading
Every reference carries a paragraph-number anchor. The places referenced are established only from terms verifiable in this part—this part’s paragraph numbers and the chapter’s § system have no established correspondence, so the references are not tied to chapter §§ and no conversion is estimated. No independent determination is made.
| Place in This Part | Refers To | Verifiable Basis |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §16〕 Idāni indriyasaṃvarasīlānantaraṃ vutte ājīvapārisuddhisīle | unit on restraint of the faculties 〔CSCD §15〕 | the treatise itself states that this part follows immediately afterward |
〔CSCD §16〕 ājīvahetu paññattānaṃ channaṃ sikkhāpadānanti | unit on classification 〔CSCD §13〕 | the phrase explained here occurs in that paragraph |
〔CSCD §17〕 cāṭukamyatā muggasūpyatā pāribhaṭyatā | unit on restraint by the code 〔CSCD §14〕 | the three items occur there among what should not be practiced but are not explained until this part |
〔CSCD §17〕 sabbappakārāpi micchājīvā virati, idaṃ ājīvapārisuddhisīlaṃ | unit on the nature of virtue 〔CSCD §6〕 | the treatise there identifies purification of livelihood with restraint by energy |
〔CSCD §17〕 Ko so, paccayapariyesanavāyāmo | unit on virtue dependent on requisites 〔CSCD §18〕 | livelihood is the effort of seeking requisites; the method for using requisites is treated there |
〔CSCD §17〕 paccayapariyesanavāyāmo | unit on ways of accomplishing virtue 〔CSCD §19〕 | the treatise there states that purification of livelihood is accomplished by energy and distinguishes purified from unpurified use |
VII. Transmission
Questions of authorship, textual transmission, and the lineage of commentaries are not adjudicated in this apparatus.