Dharma · AI Companion

犯戒

śīla-vipatti

违犯所受持的戒条律仪AI-generated

Type PhenomenaDifficulty IntroductoryTruth-level span outside the four-fold two-truths frameworkInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

律制违犯之事相,谛层框架外(框架外)。了义再读痕迹补记:《维摩·优波离章》「彼罪性不在内、不在外、不在中间」及天台实相忏悔(《普贤观经》「端坐念实相,众罪如霜露」)皆对犯戒之罪性作性空/实相再读;然细则「究竟指向例外」明文只及行门/果位,事相类不适用,故记 note 不入跨度。〔若口径扩至事相,则 究竟层 至少 2、实相忏悔镜头可至 4,待裁〕

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

Here is a deep and comprehensive exploration of the concept of "犯戒" (Breaking Precepts / *Śīla-vipatti*), tailored for a contemporary audience.


Welcome. When we encounter Buddhist terminology, our modern minds often rapidly map it onto familiar concepts. When we hear "犯戒" (Breaking Precepts), it is tempting to equate it with breaking a law, violating a social contract, or defying a commandment from a divine authority. But in the context of the Buddhist path of liberation (解脫道), this is a profound misunderstanding.

To understand *Śīla-vipatti* (犯戒), we must first understand that Buddhist precepts (*Śīla* / 尸罗) are not arbitrary rules imposed from the outside; they are the underlying physics of a liberated mind. Let us walk through this concept step by step, moving from its fundamental mechanisms to its profound Mahayana expansions, and see how it operates in our daily lives.

这个概念在说什么 (What is this concept saying?)

At its core, 犯戒 (*Śīla-vipatti*) means the violation or disruption of the ethical boundaries and behavioral guidelines established by the Buddha. However, the classical texts unpack this not as a mere legal infraction, but as the catastrophic disruption of an entire spiritual ecosystem.

1. The Destruction of the Liberation Sequence (The Root and the Tree) In the early Buddhist discourses (Agamas), the path to Nirvana is a strictly causal sequence. Precepts are not the final goal, but they are the absolute prerequisite. The venerable Śāriputra (舍梨子) provided a precise structural metaphor: Holding precepts is like the root of a tree. If a practitioner commits *Śīla-vipatti* (harms the root), the entire tree dies. Specifically, the texts maintain a strict mapping: without the root, the stem, trunk, core, nodes, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit all fail to mature. What are these branches and fruits? The sutras define them as a psychological and spiritual chain reaction: When one breaks a precept, they destroy non-regret (不悔). Without non-regret, one cannot experience joy (欢悦). Without joy, there is no rapture (喜), which means no tranquility (止), no bliss (乐), and consequently, no concentration (定). Without a concentrated mind, one cannot achieve knowing and seeing things as they truly are (见如实、知如真). Lacking this insight, one cannot develop disenchantment (厌) with worldly suffering, leading to a failure to achieve dispassion (无欲), liberation (解脱), and ultimately, Nirvana (涅槃). Therefore, breaking precepts is not just "doing something bad"; it is severing the very root of the liberation sequence.

2. The Psychology of Concealment and The Corrupted Vessel When an offense occurs, a specific psychological mutation happens. The texts describe this as the arising of "impurity" (秽). This impurity is the desperate ego-driven desire: *"May others not know I broke the precept,"* or *"If I am reprimanded, let it be in private, not in public."* Because of this internal rot, the scriptures use fierce metaphors for those who break precepts while continuing to accept the offerings and respect of others. They are compared to a "vicious horse refusing armor" (恶马不受被甲), resisting the protection of discipline. They are called a "śramaṇa trunk" (沙门篋)—outwardly pristine and beautifully decorated, but inwardly filled with foulness and stench.

3. The Mahayana Expansion: Non-Duality, Great Compassion, and Skillful Means As we move into the Mahayana teachings (such as the *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra* and *Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra*), the concept of *Śīla-vipatti* undergoes a breathtaking, multi-dimensional expansion. It is evaluated not just by the action, but by the presence of the ego (the "view of self" / 身见 - *satkāya-dṛṣṭi*) and the Bodhisattva's vow to save others.

* The Equality of Holding and Breaking (持犯平等): The texts state, *"Those who teach non-self do not grasp at precepts."* (说无我者不取戒). In the ultimate sense, the dualistic judgment of "I am pure, you are a precept-breaker" is itself rooted in the ego (身见). If one truly realizes emptiness, the rigid, arrogant attachment to being a "good precept holder" dissolves. * The Compassionate Exception (大悲方便): For a Bodhisattva, motivation alters the gravity of the offense. The texts categorize offenses by the three poisons: Greed, Hatred, and Delusion. * Breaking a precept out of Hatred (瞋): This is considered a "Major Downfall" (大破戒), because anger inherently *abandons* sentient beings. * Breaking a precept out of Greed (贪): Surprisingly, in the Bodhisattva path, this is seen as a lesser offense, or sometimes "not even an offense" (不名为犯), if the attachment is driven by a desperate desire to *gather and save* sentient beings. A Bodhisattva might willingly accept the hellish karmic consequences of a "simulated offense" (似犯) to rescue someone in despair, trading their own purity for another's survival. * Compassion in the Dharma-Ending Age (末法怜愍): The Buddha prophesied an era where only "nominal monks" (名字僧) exist—those who shave their heads, wear robes, but feel no shame in breaking precepts. Yet, the sutras urge kings and the laity not to harass them. Because true spiritual treasures are lost in this dark age, even these broken vessels symbolize the Triple Gem. The Buddha out of boundless compassion, stated he leaves a third of his own karmic merit to sustain these precept-breaking monastics of the future.

生活里的走查 (Life Walkthrough)

Let us map this concept onto a contemporary scenario. We will strictly follow the "Root to Fruit" sequence of the Agamas.

Imagine you are a mid-level manager. You made a significant error on a project that will cost the company money. Out of fear for your reputation (and your bonus), you alter a report to shift the blame onto a systemic glitch or a junior colleague.

In Buddhist terms, you have just committed *Śīla-vipatti* (violating the precept of false speech). Let us walk through the resulting internal collapse: 1. The Root is Harmed: You lied. 2. Loss of Non-Regret (害不悔): You go home, but there is a subtle tension in your chest. You are now carrying the "impurity of concealment" (秽). You hope no one audits the data. You hope the junior colleague doesn't speak up. 3. Loss of Joy and Tranquility (害欢悦、喜、止): You are doom-scrolling on your phone at 11 PM. You try to watch a show, but you can't focus. Your baseline mental state is no longer peaceful; it requires constant, low-grade energy to maintain the facade. 4. Loss of Concentration (害定): The next day at work, or during meditation, your mind is scattered. You are constantly calculating risks and defending your ego. You cannot be present in the moment. 5. Failure to See Reality (害见如实): Because your mind is agitated and defensive, you start viewing your junior colleague not as a human being, but as a "threat." You view your boss as an "interrogator." Your perception of reality is entirely distorted by paranoia. 6. The Result: You are trapped in a self-made mental hell (a psychological precursor to the literal hells warned about in the sutras). The sequence of liberation is completely jammed.

Where people map this wrong: People often think, "I'll just apologize later (say sorry) and it's fine." But the Buddhist mechanism of healing—Confession (发露 / Deśanā)—is not about saying sorry to wipe a slate clean. *发露* literally means "to expose, to uncover." It means publicly dropping the ego's defense mechanism, laying the "impurity" out in the open in front of respected elders, and bearing the discomfort of transparency. Only by fully exposing the rot can the root of the tree heal and the sequence of tranquility begin again.

当代人为什么需要它 (Why do contemporary people need it?)

Contemporary individuals live in an era of ethical relativism, where "right and wrong" are often reduced to "what you can get away with" or "what maximizes personal gain." We need the concept of *Śīla-vipatti* because it shifts ethics from a *moralistic* framework to a *pragmatic, psychological* one.

Modern cognitive science and psychology offer an interesting, albeit limited, parallel. We now know about "cognitive load" and the physiological toll of cognitive dissonance. When a person lies or violates their internal ethical compass, the brain's amygdala and prefrontal cortex must expend immense metabolic energy to suppress the truth and maintain the fabrication. This chronic stress leads to anxiety and fractured attention. *(Note: We must be careful here. Science merely observes the physiological friction of lying; Buddhism aims at the total uprooting of the illusion of the self. They are parallel, but not equal.)*

Buddhism tells the contemporary person: You don't hold precepts to please a deity, nor to be a "good person" in the eyes of society. You hold precepts because you cannot afford the cognitive and spiritual tax of breaking them. *Śīla-vipatti* is a warning that spiritual freedom is mathematically impossible if the mind is busy guarding its own lies and defending its own ego.

常见误读与澄清 (Common Misreadings and Clarifications)

* Misreading 1: Precepts are a cage, and breaking them is "reclaiming my freedom." * *Clarification:* This is a profound inversion. The sutras compare breaking precepts to a "vicious horse refusing armor." The armor restricts the horse's raw, wild movements, yes—but it prevents the horse from being slaughtered by arrows in battle. Precepts are not a cage; they are the perimeter wall that creates a safe, quiet space inside for the mind to settle (Concentration) and observe reality (Insight). * Misreading 2: Mahayana emptiness means "I can do whatever I want because it's all empty anyway." (Crazy Wisdom syndrome). * *Clarification:* This is a dangerous distortion. The *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra* says that transcending the duality of holding and breaking precepts only occurs when the "view of self" (身见) is completely eradicated. If you are breaking a boundary to serve your own desires, your ego is fully intact, and you are simply committing *Śīla-vipatti*. The Bodhisattva's "skillful means" (conveniently breaking a rule) is strictly anchored in *Great Compassion*—they do it to save others, fully willing to fall into hell to pay the karmic price for it. It is an act of ultimate self-sacrifice, not self-indulgence. * Misreading 3: If a monk or teacher breaks precepts, Buddhism itself is fake, and we should destroy them. * *Clarification:* While the Agamas strictly dictate that unrepentant precept-breakers cannot live with the pure Sangha (using the "three reprimands" to expel them), the Mahayana texts offer a nuanced sociologically compassionate view for the Dharma-ending age. The presence of corrupted "nominal monks" (沙门篋) is a tragic symptom of a declining era, not a reason to lose faith in the Dharma. The texts advise practitioners to protect their own minds, avoid giving rise to hatred or arrogant judgment, and recognize that even a broken vessel, if it still points toward the Buddha, holds a fragment of the ancient light.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

1. 定义与核心要义

犯戒(śīla-vipatti),又称破戒、毁戒,指毁犯佛陀所制戒律的行为。在阿含部经典中,犯戒被视为修行次第的彻底中断与堕落地狱的直接因缘;而在大乘宝积部与大集部经典中,犯戒的内涵得到了多维度的拓展,既包括在究竟义上对“持犯对立”的超越,也涵盖了菩萨因大悲方便而进行的“似犯”,以及在末法时代对破戒“名字僧”的特殊怜愍与护持。

2. 主要阐述

(一)犯戒的恶报与譬喻 各经对犯戒受施的恶报进行了极其严厉的警告。在《中阿含经》中,世尊指出愚痴之人若“犯戒不精进,生恶不善法,非梵行称梵行,非沙门称沙门”,虽生前享受施主供养,命终必堕地狱。经中以抱炽燃木积、热铁鍱缠身、吞热铁丸等极端肉体痛苦为喻,强调宁受此苦而死,也绝不犯戒受施。《大宝积经》则指出破戒比丘虚受礼敬信施将得“八轻法”恶报(如愚痴、瘖瘂、转女身等),并损施主福报;经中将破戒者比作“恶马不受被甲”、“旃陀罗沙门”、“败坏沙门”、“沙门篋”、“沙门构栏荼”及“失血气沙门”。《大方等大集经》亦详述破戒受施的惨烈果报,现世感得恶名、重病恶死等,来世则堕地狱或转生为残缺畜生饿鬼,以致迦叶叹言“宁处地狱具受众苦,终不受此破戒身”。

(二)犯戒对修行的摧毁与心理状态 犯戒会彻底摧毁修行的次第。《中阿含经》指出,比丘若犯戒,便会“害不悔、欢悦、喜、止、乐、定、见如实、知如真、厌、无欲、解脱,若无解脱,便害涅槃”;尊者舍梨子以树为喻,将持戒比作树根,若犯戒害根,则枝叶花实皆不得成就。在心理上,犯戒者若产生“莫令他人知我犯戒”等覆藏之心,即是“秽”;若其在受诃责时产生瞋恚,诸比丘会“观令早灭”。《大宝积经》则定义了四种表面持戒、实则破戒的“似善持戒”状态,如持戒但身见不灭、说有我论等。《大方等大集经》将破戒分为“初相”(不敬三宝、无惭愧、贪利养等)与“等相/具足相”(受畜八种不净物、盗僧物,属于波罗夷)。

(三)僧团对待犯戒者的态度与忏悔机制 对于犯戒者,僧团有不同的处置与救济机制。《中阿含经》规定了“自发露止诤律”与“如弃粪扫止诤律”,犯戒者应向长老至心发露、不敢覆藏;对于轻犯但有信爱之比丘,僧团则会如护眼般善共将护。《大宝积经》指出菩萨若犯“波罗夷”,应在十位清净比丘前殷重忏悔;若破戒比丘因不欲虚受施而退戒还俗,则是“顺法”。《大方等大集经》则强调如法僧众不得与破戒者共住,应通过“三谏”驱逐,若国王不予驱逐,如法比丘应默然离去。

(四)大乘视角的持犯平等、大悲方便与末法怜愍 大乘经典引入了更为宽广的视角。首先是持犯平等:《大宝积经》指出,若除遣身见,了知“尸罗”本不可得,则无持犯之分别,“说无我者不取戒,说无我者戒无依”。其次是大悲方便:菩萨若为度脱众生,即使“似犯罪”而需堕地狱亦甘愿忍受,如树提梵志毁坏净行;且因贪犯戒能摄受众生,其罪尚轻,而因瞋犯戒(弃舍众生)与因痴犯戒则罪极重。最后是末法怜愍:《大方等大集经》指出,在佛灭后“斗诤坚固”的后五百年中,虽有“剃头破戒无羞耻”的“名字僧”,但供养他们仍能获无量福;佛陀甚至将自身功德报果的第三分留给破戒读诵者,并嘱托弥勒护持,劝诫国王不应恼乱彼等。

3. 不同部类与译本的表述差异

在不同经典及译本中,关于“犯戒”的术语和表述存在显著差异: 1. 《中阿含经》:使用“犯戒不精进”、“轻犯禁戒”等表述。在描述犯戒类型时提到“除偷罗柘”(即偷兰遮)。在译名上,将舍利弗译为“舍梨子”。 2. 《大宝积经》(唐菩提流志译):使用音译“尸罗”指代戒律;以“波罗夷”指代极重罪;以“毘尼”指代调伏。提出“二犯戒”(瞋、痴相应犯)与“大破戒”的概念。该经亦被命名为“节解破戒者”。 3. 《大方等大集经》(北凉昙无谶译):广泛使用“破戒”、“毁禁戒”、“破禁戒”、“毁戒”、“犯禁戒”、“毁犯净戒”等词。将破戒过程细分为“初相”与“等相(具足相)”,并使用“沙门中贼”、“滓、曲、幻、贼、醉、旃陀罗”等极具贬义的词汇来形容破戒者。

4. 与相关概念的关系

1. 与“持戒”的关系:在《中阿含经》中,持戒与犯戒是绝对对立的,持戒如树根,犯戒则害根;《大方等大集经》亦称“持禁戒者即佛弟子,毁禁戒者即魔弟子”。然而《大宝积经》从无我究竟义出发,认为执着于持戒与犯戒皆因“身见”而起,若达无我,则超越持犯分别。 2. 与“忏悔/发露”的关系:犯戒是忏悔的前提。犯戒后必须通过“自发露”、“如弃粪扫”或在十位清净比丘前忏悔来消除罪障。 3. 与“大悲方便”的关系:在菩萨道中,为了利益众生,大悲心的“方便犯戒”(如因贪相应或为救度众生而犯)在性质上不同于普通的自私犯戒,甚至“不名为犯”。

5. 代表性原文引用

1. “愚癡人犯戒不精進,生惡不善法,非梵行稱梵行,非沙門稱沙門。”——《中阿含經》 2. “若有比丘犯戒者,便害不悔、歡悅、喜、止、樂、定、見如實、知如真、厭、無欲、解脫,若無解脫,便害涅槃。”——《中阿含經》 3. “說無我者不取戒,說無我者戒無依。”——《大寶積經》 4. “持禁戒者,即佛弟子;毀禁戒者,即魔弟子。”——《大方等大集經》

By SutraAI-generated

中阿含經T0026 · 阿含部

本經以「犯戒」一詞為核心概念,貫穿多品,論述比丘違犯所受持戒條律儀之過患與對治。

首先,經中屢以「愚癡人犯戒不精進」立論,指出犯戒者「生惡不善法,非梵行稱梵行,非沙門稱沙門」,雖受剎利、梵志、居士、工師之信施(衣被、飲食、按摩、禮拜、房舍等),卻因長夜不善不義,致「身壞命終,趣至惡處,生地獄中」。此處並以「抱木積洞燃俱熾」「力士以緊索毛繩絞勒其𨄔」「瑩磨利刀截斷其髀」「鐵銅鍱洞燃纏絡」「熱鐵丸著口中」「鐵銅床強逼坐臥」「鐵銅釜倒著其中」等七種酷刑為喻,強調寧受如此現世極苦而死,亦不可犯戒而受信施,蓋現身苦死僅止一身,而犯戒之果報直墮地獄。經中亦明言「不以犯戒,受世信施」。

其次,從修證次第論之,經云:「若比丘犯戒,便害不悔、歡悅、喜、止、樂、定、見如實、知如真、厭、無欲、解脫,若無解脫,便害涅槃」。舍梨子復以樹根為喻:若樹根被砍伐,則莖、幹、心、節、枝、葉、華、實皆不得成;比丘犯戒亦然,一切善法功德悉皆不成;持戒則反是,便得習此諸法乃至涅槃。

再者,經中深入辨析犯戒所引生的「穢」——「無量惡不善法從欲生,謂之穢」。所列諸穢相中,包括「我所犯戒,莫令他人知我犯戒」「我所犯戒,當令他人於屏處訶,莫令在眾訶」「我所犯戒,令勝人訶,莫令不如人訶」等種種覆藏、避訶之欲。若比丘生如是欲,「彼非沙門非沙門想,非智沙門非智沙門想,非正智非正智想,非正念非正念想,非清淨非清淨想」,不應親近禮事;反之,若心不生如是欲者,「心無惡,心不生欲」,是為二俱善。

最後,就僧團運作而言,經文亦論及處理犯戒之律制:對於頻頻犯戒比丘,眾應觀其「數數犯戒」之情形並予以相應處置;另有「應與憶律」「不癡止諍律」「自發露止諍律」「展轉止諍律」「如棄糞掃止諍律」等斷諍程序,其中「自發露」即令犯戒比丘「至心發露,自說顯示,不敢覆藏,更善護持,後不復作」。

本經所用術語以「犯戒」「持戒」為主,亦見「禁戒」「違犯」「所犯」等詞,未見其他異名。全文一貫以「犯戒」與「持戒」相對立論,強調犯戒之果在於斷善根、墮地獄,而其根本對治在於不自覆藏、心無穢欲、至心發露。

增壹阿含經T0125 · 阿含部

本經對「犯戒」一詞的論述,核心在於將「犯戒」與「持戒」對舉,並從布施獲福、犯戒心行兩個層面加以闡明。經中所用「犯戒」之語與本條所立概念(違犯所受持的戒條律儀)完全一致,並未另立異譯名稱,讀者可逕以「犯戒」一詞總攝。

一、「犯戒」與「持戒」之對照 本經反覆以「犯戒人」「持戒人」對舉,明示施福高下懸殊。波斯匿王自述曾聞:「施畜生食者,獲福百倍;與犯戒人食者,獲福千倍」。佛陀亦明言:「施持戒人,其福益多,勝於犯戒之人」。此對照貫穿全經,反覆申明。

二、犯戒比丘之心行剖析 經中詳細列舉犯戒比丘的種種隱覆心態:或作念「我今犯戒,使諸比丘不知我犯戒」;或念「不使餘比丘語我言犯戒」;或念「使清淨比丘告我,不使不清淨比丘告我」;或念「若有比丘告我者,當在屏處,不在大眾之中」。凡此種種,經中判定「既有不善,又有貪欲,此二俱不善」,並指此為「結使」之根本。此段為本經對「犯戒」概念最具體之心態刻劃。

三、犯戒表裡不一之困境 經中指出,犯戒比丘即便宣稱行阿練若、著五納衣、恒行乞食、行不卒暴、坐起動靜言語默然,四部之眾仍不會隨時供養,因其「惡不善行未除故,見聞念知」。此處以「清淨銅器盛以不淨」為喻,喻示犯戒之事終究掩飾不住。

四、施福等級之次第 本經依次列舉布施對象與獲福關係:施畜生獲福百倍、施犯戒人獲福千倍、施持戒人福難量、施外仙道獲一億之福、施須陀洹乃至阿那含、阿羅漢、辟支佛及如來,其福不可量。此外另別出「賢聖之眾」(向阿羅漢、得阿羅漢乃至向須陀洹、得須陀洹),明「施少獲福多,施多獲福多」之理。

五、田地之喻 佛陀以田為喻:田家子善治其地、除穢惡而播良種,所獲無量;不修治地、不除穢而下種,收穫不足言。持戒比丘「捨五就六,護一降四」,其施惠者福無量;施邪見人則不足言。

以上五端,顯示本經論「犯戒」,乃環繞施福優劣比較展開,並深入刻劃犯戒者貪欲覆藏之心態,以及其與外在頭陀行持之間的虛妄落差。

大寶積經T0310 · 寶積部

《大寶積經》論「犯戒」涵蓋聲聞比丘與菩薩兩個層面,術語形式以「犯戒」「破戒」「毀犯」「尸羅」並用,呈現多重面向。

一、聲聞比丘的犯戒亂相。經中預言未來比丘「貪著有見住不善行」,聞持法者教誡卻瞋蔽謗毀經典,喻如愚夫服蘇飲水而死,亦如惡馬不受被甲。又列四種「破戒比丘似善持戒」:說有我論者、身見不滅者、取眾生相而行慈心聞無生心驚怖者、具足十二頭陀見有所得者。破戒比丘若受持戒者禮敬供養,將得八種輕法——愚癡、口瘂瘂、身矬陋、顏貌醜惡、轉受女人身、形羸瘦夭壽、人所不敬常惡名、不值佛世。經中更廣列破戒之沙門異名:旃陀羅沙門、敗壞沙門、沙門篋、构欄荼、沙門求利、失血氣沙門等,皆以破戒故「臭穢不淨」,命終當墮大地獄。自稱菩薩而行狗法者,「內自犯戒惡欲惡行」,為衣食故讚歎如來功德。

二、菩薩犯戒的特殊分類與輕重。經中明示:「一切菩薩有二犯戒:何等為二?一者瞋相應犯,二者癡相應犯,如是二犯名大破戒。」因貪犯者攝受眾生,過微細難斷;因瞋犯者棄捨眾生,過麁重;因癡犯者當墮八種大地獄,過深重難捨離。進而判斷輕重:「若諸菩薩修行大乘如恒沙劫,貪心相應而犯戒者,其罪尚輕;若一瞋心而犯於戒,其罪甚重。」故「因貪犯戒攝受眾生」,大乘之人因貪犯戒不名為犯;「因瞋犯戒為大犯戒」,名大過患、名大墮落,於佛法中是大留難。

三、菩薩對持犯的深觀。經中以尸羅(śīla)為術語,闡明菩薩由觀解力故,「不見妙行及以尸羅,亦不見有具尸羅者」:「有身見故可有觀察,此是持戒、此是犯戒」,菩薩不取著自他而行於行,「若知尸羅是不可得,即不毀犯所有律儀」。偈頌中云:「若住我見諸愚夫,計我具戒能持戒,彼受護戒果終已,於三惡趣常纏縛。若有斷盡諸我見,彼無有我及我所,是真持戒無見故,無復怖畏墮諸惡」,「尚不觀我及三有,況見持戒及犯戒」。

四、菩薩為度眾生的方便犯戒。眾尊王菩薩言:「若為一人起大悲心合集善法,若似犯罪、若實犯罪,於百千劫墮大地獄,此菩薩堪受諸惡及地獄苦,以此善根願不捨一人」。

此經以「犯戒」「破戒」「毀犯」「尸羅」多詞並用,既重聲聞持犯之辨,亦別判菩薩三心(貪瞋癡)相應之犯,尤以瞋相應犯為大過患,並以無我觀超越持犯分別,又許菩薩為攝眾生而方便犯戒,為其獨特論述。

Related