應學

CHAPTER TEN	第十章
Sekhiya	應學
This term means “to be trained in.” There are 75 training rules in this category, divided by subject into four groups: etiquette in dressing and behaving when in inhabited areas; etiquette in accepting and eating almsfood; etiquette when teaching the Dhamma; and etiquette in urinating, defecating, and spitting.	這個術語的意思是「應當學」。此類別共有75條學處，依主題分為四類：在俗家間的穿著和行為的禮儀；接受和食用缽食的禮儀；講授佛法的禮儀；以及小便、大便和吐痰的禮儀。
The rules themselves do not impose a direct penalty. Instead, they simply say, “(This is) a training to be observed.” The Vibhaṅga, though, says that to violate any of these rules out of disrespect incurs a dukkaṭa. The non-offense clauses state in each case that to violate them unintentionally, unthinkingly, or unknowingly, or to disobey them when there are dangers or (in most cases) when one is ill, incurs no penalty. (The exemption for dangers is not in the Burmese edition of the Canon.)	這些戒條本身並沒有直接規定懲罰，只是僅僅說：「（這是）應當學。」然而，《經分別》指出，出於不敬而違反任何這些戒條都會犯《突吉羅》。每條戒條的不犯條款都明確規定，無意、不經思考或不知情地違反戒條，或在危險情況下或（大多數情況下）生病時違反戒條，都不會受到懲罰。（緬甸版的《聖典》中沒有關於危險情況的豁免條款。）
The Commentary adds that unknowingly in this case does not mean not knowing the rule. For a new bhikkhu not to make the effort to know the rules, it says, would qualify as disrespect. So unknowingly here means not knowing that a situation contrary to the rules has developed. For instance, if one does not know that one’s robes have gotten out of kilter, that would not count as a breach of the relevant rule.	《義註》補充道，此處的「不知情地」並非指不知道戒條。它指出，對於一位新比丘而言，若不努力去知道戒條，則構成不敬。因此，此處的「不知情地」指的是不知到已出現違反戒條的情況。例如，若不知曉自己的袈裟歪斜，則不算違反相關戒條。

One: The 26 Dealing with Proper Behavior	第一二十六條關於適當行為
The Canon contains several stories in which a bhikkhu’s behavior causes another person to become interested in the Dhamma. The most famous example is the story of Ven. Sāriputta’s first encounter with Ven. Assaji.	《聖典》中記載了幾個比丘的行為如何使他人對佛法產生興趣的故事。其中最著名的例子是舍利弗尊者與阿說示尊者初次相遇的故事。
“Now at that time the wanderer Sañjaya was staying in Rājagaha with a large company of wanderers—250 in all. And at that time Sāriputta and Moggallāna were practicing the celibate life under Sañjaya. They had made this agreement: Whoever attains the Deathless first will inform the other.	「當時，遊方者刪若與一大群遊方者——共250人——住在王舍城。當時，舍利弗和目犍連隨刪若修習梵行。他們約定：誰先證得不死，就通知對方。
“Then Ven. Assaji, dressing early in the morning, taking his bowl and (outer) robe, entered Rājagaha for alms: gracious in the way he approached and departed, looked forward and behind, drew in and stretched out (his arm); his eyes downcast, his every movement consummate. Sāriputta the wanderer saw Ven. Assaji going for alms in Rājagaha: gracious… his eyes downcast, his every movement consummate. On seeing him, the thought occurred to him: ‘Surely, of those bhikkhus in this world who are arahants or have entered the path to arahantship, this is one. What if I were to go to him and question him: “Friend, on whose account have you gone forth? Or who is your teacher? Or in whose Dhamma do you delight?”’	「時，阿說示尊者在清晨穿戴整齊，帶著缽和（外）衣，進入王舍城托缽乞食：他進入離開，前瞻後顧，（手臂）伸展都行止優雅；目光低垂，一舉一動都堪稱完美。遊方者舍利弗見阿說示尊者在王舍城托缽乞食，優雅……目光低垂，一舉一動都堪稱完美。見到他，他心中想道：『這世間是阿羅漢、阿羅道具足的比丘中，此人即其中一人。若我上前問他：「朋友，你依誰而出家？你的老師是誰？你好樂誰的法？」會如何』
“But then the thought occurred to Sāriputta the wanderer: ‘This is the wrong time to question him. Having entered among houses, he is going for alms. What if I were to follow behind this bhikkhu, (to know) the path found out by those who seek it?’”—Mv.I.23.1-3	「但遊方者舍利弗心中想：『現在不是問他的時候。他已進入民家，正要去托缽乞食。如果我跟隨這位比丘，（了解）那些尋求者所找到之道，會如何呢？』」——《大品》.一.23.1-3
Even though the following rules deal with minor matters, a bhikkhu should remind himself that the minor details of his behavior can often make the difference between sparking and killing another person’s interest in the Dhamma.	即使以下戒條涉及的是小事，比丘也應該提醒自己，他行為中的一些小細節往往能決定是激發還是扼殺他人對佛法的興趣。

1 [2]	一 [二]
I will wear the lower robe [upper robe] wrapped around (me): a training to be observed.	我將身披下衣[上衣]：應當學。
To wear the lower robe wrapped around means to wear the upper edge circling the waist, covering the navel, and the lower edge covering the kneecaps. This is called covering the “three circles.” The Commentary states that when one is standing, the lower edge should be not more than eight fingerbreadths below the knees, although if one’s calves are disfigured, it is all right to cover them more than that.	身披下衣是將上邊緣環繞腰部，遮住肚臍，下邊緣遮住膝蓋骨，此稱為遮蓋「三輪」。《義註》中說，站立時，下邊緣不應超過膝蓋以下八指寬，但如果小腿畸形，可以遮蓋得更寬。
To wear the upper robe wrapped around means, according to the Vibhaṅga, keeping both ends of the top edge in line with each other, and the same with both ends of the bottom edge. The bottom edge of the upper robe, though, does not have to be level with the bottom edge of the lower robe. Given the size of the upper robe in the Buddha’s time, it would not have extended down that far.	身披上衣，根據《經分別》，意指將上邊緣的兩端彼此對齊，下邊緣的兩端也一樣。但是，上衣的下邊緣不必與下衣的下邊緣齊平。考慮到佛陀時代的上衣尺寸，它不會垂到那麼低的位置。
Intentionally to wear either robe hanging down in front or in back is a breach of these rules. The Commentary states that the purpose of these rules is to prevent bhikkhus from wearing their robes in any of the various ways that lay people in those days wore theirs—e.g., pleated “with 100 pleats,” tied up, or tucked up between the legs. It also comments that because these rules are not qualified, as the following ones are, with the phrase, “in inhabited areas,” they should be followed in the monastery and wilderness areas as well. However, the wilderness protocols (Cv.VIII.6.2-3) clearly show that bhikkhus were not expected to wear the upper robe wrapped around them in the wilderness; and the sauna protocols (Cv.VIII.8.2) seem to indicate that bhikkhus on their way to and from the sauna were not required to wear their lower robes covering the three circles as long as they covered their private parts front and back.	故意將任一件袈裟垂於身前或身後均違反了這些戒條。《義註》指出，這些戒條的目的是防止比丘以當時在家人的各種方式穿著袈裟，例如，將「打一百個褶」、綁起來，或塞在兩腿之間。它也指出，由於這些戒條不像接下來的戒條那樣附加「俗家間」的措辭限定，因此在寺院和林野也應遵守。然而，林野行儀（《小品》.八.6.2-3）明確表明，比丘在林野中無需身披上衣；蒸汽(桑拿)浴室的行儀（《小品》.八.8.2）似乎也表明，比丘在往返桑拿房的途中，穿下衣時只要遮蓋住前後私處，不必遮蓋三輪。
As a practical matter, if one is working on a high ladder or in a tree—whether in a village, a monastery, or the wilderness—a wise policy is to tuck one’s lower robe up between the legs for decency’s sake.	從實際角度來說，如果在高高的梯子上或樹上工作——無論是在村莊、寺廟還是林野——明智之舉是出於禮貌，將下衣塞到兩腿之間。

3 [4]	三 [四]
I will go [sit] well-covered in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將善披覆而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
The Vibhaṅga does not define inhabited areas in this or any of the following rules. The term thus probably has the same meaning as under Pd 1: in the homes of lay people, or along the streets and alleys of villages, cities, or towns. This does not include, however, monasteries located in inhabited areas, for the incoming bhikkhu’s protocols (Cv.VIII.1.2) show that when the Canon was composed, bhikkhus were not required to wear their upper robes in the monastery. At present, though, many monasteries located in inhabited areas require that bhikkhus living with them observe many of these rules when outside of their personal quarters but still within monastery grounds.	《經分別》在本戒條及以下任何一條戒條中均未對「俗家」進行定義。因此，該術語的含義可能與《應悔過》一中的含義相同：即在家人的家中，或村莊、城市或城鎮的街道和小巷。然而，這並不包括位於俗家區域的寺院，因為客住比丘的行儀（《小品》.八.1.2）表明，在《聖典》編纂之時，比丘在寺院內無需穿著上衣。但如今，許多位於俗家區域的寺院要求與其同住的比丘們在離開個人住所但仍在寺院範圍內時，遵守其中許多戒條。
Well-covered, according to the Commentary, means not exposing one’s chest or knees. One should have the upper edge of the upper robe around the neck, and the lower edge covering the wrists. The lower edge of the lower robe, as stated above, should cover the knees. When seated, only one’s head, hands, and legs from the calves on down should show.	善披覆，根據《義註》，意指不露出胸部和膝蓋。上衣的上緣應圍繞頸部，下緣應遮住手腕。如上所述，下衣的下緣應遮住膝蓋。坐著時，只露出頭部、雙手和小腿以下的部分。
Sk 4 here has an added non-offense clause: There is no offense if one sits not “well-covered” within one’s residence (§). According to the Vinaya-mukha, this means within one’s room when staying overnight in a lay person’s home; when outside of one’s room, though, one should follow the rule.	《應學》四在此增加了一條不犯條款：如果在自己的住所內（§）坐著時沒有「善披覆」並不犯戒。根據《戒律入口》的解釋，這指的是在在家人的家中過夜時，在自己的房間裡；但如果在房間外，則應遵守此戒條。

5 [6]	五 [六]
I will go [sit] well-restrained in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將善攝護而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
Well-restrained, according to the Vibhaṅga, means not playing with the hands or feet. This would include such things as dancing, cracking one’s knuckles, or wiggling one’s fingers or toes.	善攝護，根據《經分別》，意指不玩弄手腳。這包括跳舞、掰手指關節、擺動手指或腳趾等行為。

7 [8]	七 [八]
I will go [sit] with eyes lowered in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將垂目而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
The Vibhaṅga says that a bhikkhu should keep his gaze lowered to the ground the distance of a plow’s length ahead of him—this equals two meters, according to the Commentary. The purpose of this rule, it adds, is to prevent one from gazing aimlessly at the sights here and there as one walks along. There is nothing wrong, though, in looking up when one has reason to do so. An example given in the Commentary is stopping to look up and see if there are dangers from approaching horses or elephants. A more modern example would be checking the traffic before crossing a road.	《經分別》說，比丘應將目光向下，看向前方一犁長的距離的地面——根據《義註》，這相當於兩公尺。它補充說，這條戒條的目的是為了防止比丘在行走時漫無目的地四處張望。然而，有理由時抬頭看也無妨。《義註》中舉例說，停下來抬頭看看是否有靠近的馬匹或大象的危險。一個更現代的例子是，過馬路前先查看交通狀況。

9 [10]	九 [十]
I will not go [sit] with robes hitched up in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不撩起袈裟而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
According to the Vibhaṅga, to hitch up one’s robes means to lift them so as to expose either side or both sides of the body. Sk 10 here, like Sk 4, does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area (§).	根據《經分別》，撩起袈裟是指提起袈裟，露出身體的一側或兩側。此處的《應學》十，如同《應學》四一樣，不適用於在俗家間（§）的住所內坐著的情況。

11 [12]	十一 [十二]
I will not go [sit] laughing loudly in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不放聲大笑而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
According to the Vibhaṅga, if there is any reason for amusement, one should simply smile. It also states that there is no offense in laughing loudly when ill or there are dangers. The editors of the Thai edition of the Pali Canon question these exemptions on the grounds that they see no reason why anyone would laugh loudly in either of these situations, but this objection shows a lack of imagination.	根據《經分別》，若有什麼消遣的理由，只應微笑即可。它也指出，生病或有危險時，放聲大笑並無不妥。泰國版巴利《聖典》的編者質疑這些例外情況，認為在上述兩種情況下，都沒有理由放聲大笑，但這種反對意見顯示出缺乏想像力。

13 [14]	十三 [十四]
I will go [sit] (speaking) with a lowered voice in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將放低聲音（說話）而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
The Commentary defines a lowered voice as follows: Three bhikkhus are sitting in a row at intervals of three meters. The first bhikkhu speaks. The second can hear him and clearly catch what he is saying. The third can hear his voice but not what he is saying. If the third can clearly catch what he is saying, it maintains, the first bhikkhu is speaking too loudly. As the Vinaya-mukha notes, though, when one is speaking to a crowd of people, there is nothing wrong in raising one’s voice provided that one does not shout. And as the non-offense clauses show, there is nothing wrong in shouting if there are dangers—e.g., someone is about to fall off a cliff or be hit by a car. It would also seem that there is no offense in shouting if one’s listener is partially deaf.	《義註》對放低聲音的定義如下：三位比丘坐成一列，間隔三公尺。第一位比丘說話。第二位比丘能聽到他的聲音，並且清楚地聽清了他在說什麼。第三位比丘聽見他的聲音，但聽不清楚他在說什麼。它認為，如果第三位比丘能聽清楚他在說什麼，那麼第一位比丘說話的聲音就太大了。然而，正如《戒律入口》所指出的，當對著一群人說話時，只要不喊叫，提高音量並沒有錯。而且，正如不犯條款所示，如果存在危險——例如，有人即將墜落懸崖或被車撞——喊叫也沒有錯。如果聽者部份耳聾，喊叫似乎也沒有犯戒。

15 [16]	十五 [十六]
I will not go [sit] swinging my body in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不晃動身體而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
This means that one should keep one’s body straight. Sk 16, like Sk 4, does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area (§).	這意指應該保持身體挺直。《應學》十六與《應學》四一樣，不適用於坐在俗家間的住處裡（§）。

17 [18]	十七 [十八]
I will not go [sit] swinging my arms in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不晃動手臂而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
According to the Commentary, this means that one should keep one’s arms still, although as the Vinaya-mukha points out, there is nothing wrong in swinging one’s arms slightly to keep one’s balance as one walks. The non-offense clauses indicate that Sk 18, like Sk 4, does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area.	根據《義註》，這意指應該保持手臂靜止，但正如《戒律入口》所指出的，行走時為了保持平衡而輕微晃動手臂並無不妥。不犯條款表明，《應學》十八與《應學》四一樣，不適用於坐在俗家間的住處裡。

19 [20]	十九 [二十]
I will not go [sit] swinging my head in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不晃動頭部而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
This refers to swinging the head from side to side or letting it droop forward or back. Of course, there is no offense if one is dozing off, and like Sk 4, Sk 20 does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area.	這指的是頭部左右搖晃或向前或向後垂落。當然，如果是在打瞌睡則不犯戒，而且與《應學》四一樣，《應學》二十也不適用於坐在俗家間的住處裡。

21 [22]	二十一 [二十二]
I will not go [sit] with arms akimbo in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不雙手叉腰而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
Akimbo means with the hand on the hip. This rule, the Vibhaṅga says, forbids having one arm or both arms akimbo. Sk 22 does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area.	雙手叉腰指的是手叉腰。《經分別》說，這條戒條禁止單臂或雙臂叉腰。《應學》二十二不適用於坐在俗家間的住處裡。

23 [24]	二十三 [二十四]
I will not go [sit] with my head covered in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不覆頭而行[坐]於俗家間：應當學。
Covered here means covered with a robe, a scarf, or other similar piece of cloth. Sk 24 does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area. The allowance for “one who is ill” under both rules means that one may cover one’s head when the weather is unbearably cold or the sun unbearably hot.	覆蓋在此指的是用袈裟、圍巾或其他類似布料遮蓋。《應學》二四不適用於坐在俗家間的住處裡。兩條戒條中都有「生病的人」的開緣，這意味著在天氣難以忍受地寒冷或陽光難以忍受地炎熱時，可以遮蓋頭部。

25	二十五
I will not go tiptoeing or walking just on the heels in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不踮著腳尖或只用腳跟走路而行於俗家間：應當學。
This translation of the rule follows the Commentary.	本戒條的翻譯遵循《義註》。

26	二十六
I will not sit clasping the knees (§) in inhabited areas: a training to be observed.	我將不抱膝而坐（§）於俗家間：應當學。
This, the Vibhaṅga says, refers to sitting with one or both arms or hands hugging one or both knees; or with a strap or a strip of cloth around one or both knees and the torso (§). The bas-reliefs at Borobudur show royalty using this latter position as a way of keeping the body erect when tired or weak.	《經分別》說，這指的是一種坐姿，即一隻或兩隻手臂或手抱一隻或兩隻膝蓋；或者用帶子或布條纏繞一隻或兩隻膝蓋和軀幹（§）。婆羅浮屠的浮雕描繪了皇室成員在疲憊或虛弱時採用後一種姿勢來保持身體直立。
This rule does not apply when one is sitting in one’s residence in an inhabited area (§).	這條戒條不適用坐在俗家間的住處裡（§）。

* * *

In addition to the rules listed here, there are others in the Khandhakas concerning behavior in inhabited areas. These include:	除了這裡列出的戒條外，《犍度》裡還有其他關於在俗家間行為的戒條。這些包括：
A bhikkhu entering an inhabited area must wear all three of his basic set of robes unless—	比丘進入俗家間時，必須穿著全部的基本三衣，除非——
he is ill;	他生病；
there is sign of rain;	有下雨跡象；
his kaṭhina privileges are in effect;	他的功德衣方便利益仍然有效；
he is going to cross a river; or	他要過河；或者
he has a secure dwelling (or other hiding place, the Commentary says, such as a hollow in a tree or a rock) in which to place the robe he leaves behind (Mv.VIII.23.2-3).	他有一個安全的住所（或其他隱藏之處，《義註》說，例如樹洞或岩石中的洞穴），可以把他留下的袈裟放在那裡（《大品》.八.23.2-3）。
He should also wear his waistband. The bhikkhu who instigated this rule had the unforgettable experience of having his lower robe slip off in front of a group of people who thoroughly enjoyed the spectacle (Cv.V.29.1).	他也應該繫上腰帶。導致制定這條戒條的比丘曾有過一次難忘的經驗：他的下衣在眾人面前滑落，眾人看得津津有味（Cv.V.29.1）。
A bhikkhu entering an inhabited area, though, should not spread out his outer robe to sit on (Cv.VIII.4.3) and, unless he is ill, should not wear footwear—shoes, sandals, boots, etc.—(Mv.V.12) or use an umbrella or sunshade (Cv.V.23.3). The Commentary to the umbrella rule includes physical or mental discomfort under ill in this case, and says that one may also use the umbrella to protect one’s robes from the rain.	比丘進入俗家間時，不應鋪外衣而坐（《小品》.八.4.3），而且除非生病，否則不應穿鞋——鞋子、涼鞋、靴子等——（《大品》.五.12），也不應使用傘或遮陽傘（《小品》.五.23.3）。傘戒條的《義註》中將身體或精神上的不適歸類為「生病」之列，並指出也可以用傘保護袈裟免受雨淋。

Two: The 30 Dealing with Food

第二三十條關於食物

27	二十七
I will receive almsfood appreciatively: a training to be observed.	我將恭敬地接受缽食：應當學。
This rule was formulated in response to an incident in which some group-of-six bhikkhus accepted almsfood unappreciatively, as if—to quote the Vibhaṅga—“they wanted to throw it away.” The Commentary explains appreciatively as “with mindfulness established.” One should also remind oneself of the trouble and expense the donors incurred in providing the food.	這條戒條是為應對一起事件而製定的，六群比丘接受布施食物時態度冷漠，彷彿——用《經分別》的話來說——「他們想把它丟掉」。《義註》解釋說，恭敬地是指「建立正念」。也應該提醒自己，布施者為了提供食物付出了多少心血和金錢。

28	二十八
I will receive almsfood with attention focused on the bowl: a training to be observed.	我將注意缽而接受缽食：應當學。
The purpose of this rule is to prevent one from looking at the donor’s face (see Cv.VIII.5.2) or gazing aimlessly in other directions while he/she is placing food in the bowl. However, one of the “duties to be observed on alms round,” (Cv.VIII.5) is that one should not stand too long or turn away too soon. This means that one should glance at what the donor has prepared to give, so that one will not stand waiting for more when the donor has finished giving, or turn away when he/she has more to give.	這條戒條的目的是為了防止盯著布施者的臉看（參見《小品》.八.5.2），或者在布施者往缽裡放食物時漫無目的地看向其他方向。然而，「托缽乞食時應遵守的儀法」（《小品》.八.5）之一是不要站太久，也不要轉身離開太早。這意味著應該瞥一眼布施者準備施捨的食物，這樣就不會在布施者施捨完畢後還站著等要更多，或者在布施者還有食物要施捨時轉身離開。

29	二十九
I will receive almsfood with bean curry in proper proportion: a training to be observed.	我將接受適當比例的豆咖哩缽食：應當學。
This rule refers specifically to eating habits at the time of the Buddha. Bean curry means dishes made with gram, pulses, vetch, etc., thick enough that they can be placed in the bowl by the hand. In proper proportion, according to the Commentary, means no more than one-quarter of the total food. The Vinaya-mukha tries to interpret this rule as covering curries and soups of all kinds, but the Vibhaṅga and commentaries state unequivocally that it covers only bean curries. Other gravies, soups, stews, and sauces are exempt.	這條戒條特指佛陀時代的飲食習慣。豆咖哩指的是用鷹嘴豆、豆類、野豌豆等製成的菜餚，濃稠到可以用手放入缽中。根據《義註》，適當比例是指不超過總食物量的四分之一。《戒律入口》試圖將這條戒條解釋為涵蓋所有種類的咖哩和湯，但《經分別》和註釋書明確指出，它只指豆咖哩。其他肉汁、湯、燉菜和醬汁均不在此列。
This rule probably refers to situations in which bhikkhus are offered food from a serving dish from which they help themselves—as was the custom when they were invited to homes in the Buddha’s time, and is still the custom in Sri Lanka and Burma—for the Vibhaṅga states that there is no offense in receiving more than the proper proportion if one is invited to accept more than that. There is also no offense in taking more than the proper proportion if one is ill, one is accepting it from relatives, one is accepting it for the sake of another, or one has obtained the food through one’s own resources. (This interpretation follows the Commentary. The K/Commentary, for some reason, maintains that these latter non-offense situations—accepting from one’s relatives, from people who have offered an invitation, for the sake of another, or from food obtained through one’s own resources—apply only to dishes that are not bean curries, but this interpretation does not fit with the Vibhaṅga.)	這條戒條可能指的是比丘們從盛放食物的盤子裡自行取用的情況——這在佛陀時代是比丘們受邀到家中的習俗，在斯里蘭卡和緬甸至今仍是這種習俗——因為《經分別》指出，如果被邀請接受超過適當比例的食物，那麼接受過此並無犯戒。如果生病了，或者接受的是親戚提供的，或者是為了他人而接受，又或者食物是透過自己的資源獲得的，那麼拿取超過適當比例也無犯戒。（這種解釋遵循《義註》。而 K/《義註》出於某種原因認為，後一種不犯的情況——接受從親戚提供的、從已提出邀請者、為了他人，或者食物是透過自己的資源獲得的——僅適用於非豆咖哩的菜餚，但這種解釋與《經分別》不符。）

30	三十
I will receive almsfood level with the edge (of the bowl): a training to be observed.	我將接受缽食，其高度與（缽）邊齊平：應當學。
Iron bowls in the past had a hoop approximately 1 cm. wide around the inside of the mouth. According to the Commentary, edge here means the bottom edge of this hoop. A bhikkhu is prohibited from accepting so much food that it would pile up above this level, although of course there is nothing against accepting less.	過去的鐵缽開口內壁有一圈大約1公分寬的環狀邊緣。根據《義註》，這裡的「邊緣」指的是這圈環狀邊緣的底部。比丘被禁止接受過多的食物，以致食物堆積超過這個高度，當然，接受較少的食物則沒有問題。
The Commentary contains a long discussion of what does and does not come under almsfood in this rule, and concludes that the term covers only staple and non-staple foods. Thus if one receives a sweet, the “tail” of whose leaf-wrapper extends above the edge of the bowl (such sweets are still common in Asia today), it would not count as an infraction of this rule. The same holds true if one receives foods that do not fill the bowl but extend above the edge—such as a length of sugar cane—or if the donor places on top of one’s bowl another vessel containing food, such as a box of sweets or a bag of fruit.	《義註》中詳細討論了這條戒條中哪些屬於缽食，哪些不屬於，並得出結論：缽食僅涵蓋主食和副食。因此，如果收到一塊甜點，其葉子包裹的「尾巴」超出缽的邊緣（這種甜點在當今亞洲仍然很常見），則不視為違反此戒條。同樣，如果收到未裝滿缽但超出缽的邊緣的食物——例如一段甘蔗——或者布施者在缽上放置另一個裝有食物的容器，例如一盒甜點或一袋水果，也不算違反此戒條。
The Vinaya-mukha, in discussing this rule, makes the following point: “In terms of present-day customs, receiving a lot of food in a way that demonstrates greed is unacceptable. There is nothing wrong, however, in receiving a lot in a way that demonstrates compassion. For instance, when a newly-ordained bhikkhu goes to receive alms at his family home, if he accepts only one bowlful, not everyone will have a chance to put food in his bowl. If they take his bowl and pour out the contents (into a basin), and he then continues accepting food until everyone has had a chance, this is no breach of manners, and no one would criticize him as greedy.” Because this is an instance of breaking the rule not out of disrespect, it would incur no offense; the same observation can be applied to similar situations as well.	《戒律入口》在討論這條戒條時，提出了以下觀點：「就現代習俗而言，以貪婪的方式接受大量食物是不可接受的。然而，以慈悲的方式接受大量食物則並無不妥。例如，一位新受戒的比丘回到家中托缽乞食，如果他只接受一缽，就無法讓每個人都有機會往他的缽裡放食物。如果他們拿走他的缽，把裡面的食物倒進盆裡，然後他繼續接受食物，直到每個人都有機會，這並不算失禮，也沒有人會批評他貪婪。」因為這是一個違反戒條但並非出於不敬的例子，所以不會犯戒；同樣的道理也適用於其他類似情況。

31	三十一
I will eat almsfood appreciatively: a training to be observed.	我將恭敬地食用缽食：應當學。
According to the Vinaya-mukha, this rule forbids doing other things—such as reading—while eating one’s food. The Recollection at the Moment of Using One’s Requisites requires that one reflect that one is eating “not playfully, nor for intoxication, nor for putting on bulk, nor for beautification; but simply for the survival and continuance of this body, for ending its afflictions, for the support of the celibate life, (thinking) ‘I will destroy old feelings [of hunger] without creating new feelings [from overeating]: Thus will I maintain myself, be blameless, and live in comfort.’” One should also remind oneself of the effort and expense the donors went to in providing the meal.	根據《戒律入口》，這條戒條禁止在進食時做其他事情，例如閱讀。在「使用必需品時的省思」中，需要反思自己在進食「並非為了玩樂、沉醉、增肥或美化身體，而僅僅是為了維持身體的生存和延續，為了消除痛苦，為了支持梵行生活，（心想）『我將消除舊的[飢餓]感受，而不產生新的[暴飲暴食]感受：如此我才能保持自我，無咎，安住。』」還應該提醒自己施主為提供這頓飯所付出的努力和費用。

32	三十二
I will eat almsfood with attention focused on the bowl: a training to be observed.	我將注意缽而食用缽食：應當學。
The purpose of this rule is to prevent one from gazing aimlessly about while eating. The Vinaya-mukha notes, though, “To look elsewhere in ways related to one’s eating—e.g., looking with the thought of providing a nearby bhikkhu with whatever he is lacking—is not prohibited.” (See Sk 38, below.)	這條戒條的目的是為了防止人們在進食時漫無目的地四處張望。《戒律入口》指出：「若以與進食相關的方式看向別處——例如，想著如何給予附近的比丘所缺乏的東西而看——則並不禁止。」（見下文《應學》三八。）

33	三十三
I will eat almsfood methodically (§): a training to be observed.	我將有條不紊地（§）食用缽食：應當學。
The aim of this rule is that a bhikkhu work steadily across his food from one side to another while eating and not pick at it here and there. Special treats, though, may be passed over—either as a form of self-denial or to save them for the end of the meal. Also, there is no offense in picking here and there when taking food from one’s bowl to give to another person (§).	這條戒條的目的是讓比丘在進食時，從缽的一側均勻地吃到另一側，而不是隨意地挑取。不過，可以略過特別的點心──既可以是一種自我克制，也可以留到用餐最後享用。此外，從自己的缽中取食給別人時，隨意地挑取並不犯戒（§）。

34	三十四
I will eat almsfood with bean curry in proper proportion: a training to be observed.	我將以適當比例的豆咖哩而食用缽食：應當學。
This rule does not apply to foods that are not thick bean curries, or to situations where one is ill or where one has received bean curry from relatives, from people who offered an invitation to take more, or from one’s own resources.	這條戒條不適用於非濃稠豆咖哩類食物，也不適用於生病、從親戚那裡得到豆咖哩、被人邀請多取，或者從自己的資源的情況。

35	三十五
I will not eat almsfood taking mouthfuls from a heap: a training to be observed.	我將不從一堆中取食而食用缽食：應當學。
This refers to the food on one’s plate or in one’s bowl. The Commentary explains from a heap as from the top or from the middle. As noted under Sk 33, one should work across one’s food systematically; this rule indicates that one should start from the side when taking mouthfuls and not from the middle of the heap. The non-offense clauses state that if a little food remains scattered in one’s bowl, there is no offense in gathering it together in a small heap and eating from that (§). The Vinaya-mukha maintains that it is a custom among bhikkhus before eating to level off the food in their bowls so that its surface is even, but I have found no reference to this point in any of the other texts. However, the Vinaya-mukha does make the helpful point that if one is served other foods—such as sweets—stacked on a platter, it would be impolite to level them off (or to take from the edge in a way that would collapse the heap), so in such cases one may take from the top of the heap.	這指的是盤中或缽中的食物。《義註》解釋說，從一堆中，是指從頂部或中間。如《應學》三三所述，應有系統地食用；這條戒條表明，取食時應從側邊開始，而不是從堆疊的中間開始。不犯條款指出，如果缽中還剩下一些散落的食物，將其聚攏成一小堆食用（§）並無犯戒。《戒律入口》認為，比丘們在進食前有將碗中食物抹平的習慣，但我沒有在其他任何文獻中找到相關記載。然而，《戒律入口》確實提出了一個有幫助的觀點：如果被供養堆放在盤子上的其他食物（例如甜點），將它們抹平（或從邊緣取食，導致堆疊坍塌）是不禮貌的，因此在這種情況下，可以從堆疊的頂部取食。

36	三十六
I will not hide bean curry and foods with rice out of a desire to get more: a training to be observed.	我將不因為想要得到更多而以米飯隱藏豆咖哩和食物：應當學。
Some donors, if they see that a bhikkhu has nothing but rice in his bowl, will go out of their way to provide him with extra food. This rule is to prevent bhikkhus from taking advantage of their kind intentions.	有些布施者，如果看到比丘缽裡只有米飯，就會不遺餘力地為他提供額外的食物。這條戒條是為了防止比丘們利用他們的善意。
According to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense if donors cover the food in one’s bowl with rice, or if one covers it with rice oneself for some reason other than a desire for more.	根據《經分別》，如果施主將米飯蓋在缽中的食物上，或者如果出於某種原因（除了想要更多）而自己將米飯覆蓋在食物上，並沒有犯戒。
The Commentary takes special note of the fact that the Vibhaṅga gives no exception here for a bhikkhu who is ill.	《義註》特別指出，《經分別》在此對於生病的比丘沒有給予例外。

37	三十七
Not being ill, I will not eat rice or bean curry that I have requested for my own sake: a training to be observed.	無病，我將不吃為自己所要求的米飯或豆咖哩：應當學。
The Commentary to Pc 39 says that rice or bean curry here covers all foods not covered in that rule.	《波逸提》三九的《義註》說，這裡的米飯或豆咖哩涵蓋了該戒條中未涵蓋的所有食物。
There is no offense in requesting these foods from relatives, from people who have offered an invitation to request, or if one is ill (weak from hunger would be included here). There is also no offense in obtaining these foods by means of one’s own resources. The Sub-commentary raises the question of how the blanket Sekhiya exemptions for the bhikkhu acting “unintentionally” or “without mindfulness” apply to this rule, and comes up with the following example: A bhikkhu takes the food into his mouth and then, on feeling regret, spits it out in displeasure. A better example might be that of a bhikkhu who asks for these foods from a lay person and then eats them, having forgotten that the lay person’s invitation to ask for such foods has expired.	向親戚、已提出請求邀請者索取這些食物，或者有病（這裡包括因飢餓而虛弱）而索取這些食物並沒有犯戒。利用自己的資源獲得這些食物也沒有犯戒。《複註》提出了關於比丘「無意」或「無正念」行為的概括性《應學》豁免如何適用於這一戒條的問題，並提出了以下例子：比丘將食物放入口中，然後感到後悔，不高興地將其吐出。一個更好的例子可能是，一位比丘向在家人索取這些食物，然後吃了它們，卻忘記了向在家人索取這些食物的邀請已經過期。
The Meṇḍaka Allowance (Mv.VI.34.21) permits a bhikkhu to search for provisions of husked rice, kidney beans, green gram (mung beans), salt, sugar, oil, and ghee when going on a journey through a wilderness area where almsfood will be hard to find. For details, see the discussion under Pc 39.	Meṇḍaka 開緣（《大品》.六.34.21）允許比丘在穿越難以找到施食的林野地區旅程時尋找稻米、腰豆、綠豆、鹽、糖、油和酥油的供應。細節請參閱《波逸提》三九下的討論。

38	三十八
I will not look at another’s bowl intent on finding fault: a training to be observed.	我將不意圖找過錯而看他人的缽：應當學。
The K/Commentary defines finding fault as taking note of the fact that the other bhikkhu or novice has something. What this probably means is that he has some especially nice food that he is not sharing. The Vinaya-mukha provides an alternative suggestion, that this rule refers to finding fault with another’s sloppy manner of eating. Sloppiness, though, is something about which bhikkhus may admonish one another, so the K/Commentary’s interpretation seems more to the point.	K/《義註》將「找過錯」定義為注意到其他比丘或沙彌擁有某物。這可能意指他有一些特別美味的食物卻不與人分享。《戒律入口》則提出了另一種解釋，認為這條戒條指的是對他人邋遢的進食方式找過錯。然而，邋遢是比丘之間可以互相勸誡的事情，因此K/《義註》的解釋似乎更為切題。
The Vibhaṅga states that there is no offense in looking at another’s bowl if one is not meaning to find fault or if one wants to provide him with whatever he may be lacking.	《經分別》指出，如果沒有找過錯的意思，或者想要提供他所缺乏的東西，那麼看他人的缽並沒有犯戒。
Here again, the Commentary notes that there is no exception for a bhikkhu who is ill.	《義註》此處再次指出，生病的比丘也沒有例外。

39	三十九
I will not take an extra-large mouthful: a training to be observed.	我將不拿取過大的一口[食物]：應當學。
According to the Commentary, a mouthful the size of a peacock egg is too large, while one the size of a chicken egg is too small (!). One midway between these two sizes is just right. This seems hard to fathom unless chicken eggs in those days were much smaller than they are now.	根據《義註》，孔雀蛋大小的一口[食物]太大，而雞蛋大小的一口[食物]太小（！）。介於兩者之間的大小才剛剛好。這似乎難以理解，除非當時的雞蛋比現在小得多。
According to the Vibhaṅga, this rule does not cover fruits, solid foods such as roots, or special confections (sandwiches at present would fit here). Apparently, if these items are a little large, it is all right to stick them whole into the mouth, although if they are very large it would be better to take bites out of them (see Sk 45).	根據《經分別》，這條戒條不適用於水果、根莖類等固體食物或特殊甜食（目前三明治就屬於此類）。顯然，如果這些食物只稍大一些，可以整個塞入口中；但如果非常大，最好咬幾口（參見《應學》四五）。

40	四十
I will make a rounded mouthful: a training to be observed.	我將做圓的一口[食物]：應當學。
People at that time ate food with their hands, and formed mouthfuls of the food with their fingers before taking them to the mouth.	當時的人們用手進食，用手指捏成一口大小的食物，然後再送到嘴裡。
This rule, like the preceding one, does not cover fruits, solid foods such as roots, or special confections such as sandwiches. In other words, one does not have to mash these things up and form them into rounded mouthfuls before eating.	這條戒條和前一條一樣，不適用於水果、根莖類等固體食物，也不適用於三明治等特殊甜食。換句話說，吃這些東西之前不需要把它們搗碎捏成圓形。

41	四十一
I will not open the mouth when the mouthful has yet to be brought to it: a training to be observed.	在一口[食物]送到嘴巴之前我將不張開口：應當學。

42	四十二
I will not insert the whole hand into the mouth while eating: a training to be observed.	在吃東西時我將不把整隻手放進嘴裡：應當學。
The Commentary and K/Commentary are in agreement that this is the proper translation for this rule. The Sub-commentary insists that it should be “any part of the hand” rather than “the whole hand,” but according to the Commentary the act of sticking a finger in one’s mouth while eating comes under Sk 52. Although there are people with small hands and large mouths who have actually succeeded in inserting their whole hands into their mouths, the rarity of this ability has given rise to alternative interpretations for this rule. For instance, although the verb in the rule clearly means “insert,” some have suggested that this rule forbids taking a handful of food in the palm of the hand and pushing the palm right up against the mouth. Others have suggested that it forbids inserting all five of one hand’s fingers into the mouth. However, even though these suggestions promote good manners, they do not fit the precise act mentioned in the rule, and so at most can be taken on an individual basis as wise policies to follow.	《義註》和 K/《義註》一致認為這是本戒條的適當翻譯。《複註》堅持應該是「手的任何部分」而不是「整隻手」，但根據《義註》，吃飯時把手指放進嘴裡的行為屬於《應學》五二的範疇。雖然有些人手小嘴大，確實能把整隻手放進嘴裡，但這種能力的罕見性導致了對這條戒條的其他解釋。例如，雖然戒條中的動詞明確意指「插入」，但有人認為這條戒條禁止用手掌抓一把食物，然後把手掌直接貼在嘴上。還有人認為這條戒條禁止把一隻手的五根手指都放進嘴裡。然而，儘管這些解釋都提倡良好的禮儀，但它們並不完全符合戒條中提到的具體行為，因此至多只能作為個人遵循的明智之舉。

43	四十三
I will not speak with the mouth full of food: a training to be observed.	我將不嘴裡塞滿食物說話：應當學。
According to the Commentary, if the amount of food in one’s mouth is not enough to affect the clarity of one’s pronunciation, it is all right to speak.	根據《義註》，如果嘴裡的食物量不足以影響發音的清晰度，那麼說話是沒問題的。

44	四十四
I will not eat from lifted balls of food: a training to be observed.	我將不從被舉起的食物團球而食：應當學。
What this means is that one should not lift food from the bowl in one hand and then use the other hand to take parts of that handful to put in the mouth. According to the Vibhaṅga, this rule does not cover fruits or solid foods. Thus, for example, it is all right to pick up a bunch of grapes in one hand and then take the grapes one by one with the other hand to put them in the mouth.	這指不應該用一隻手從缽裡舉起食物，然後再用另一隻手從這把食物中取出一部分放入口中。根據《經分別》，這條戒條不適用於水果或固體食物。因此，例如，可以用一隻手拿起一串葡萄，然後再用另一隻手一顆一顆地將葡萄放入口中。
This rule is often translated as, “I will not eat tossing up balls of food,” but it seems unlikely that there would be an allowance for tossing fruit, etc., into the air and catching it in the mouth. Because the Pali term ukkhepa can mean “lifting,” the above translation is probably more correct.	這條戒條通常被翻譯為「我不拋擲食物團球而食」，但似乎不太可能允許將水果等食物拋向空中再用嘴接住。由於巴利語詞彙 ukkhepa 可以表示「舉起」，因此上述翻譯可能更為準確。

45	四十五
I will not eat nibbling at mouthfuls of food: a training to be observed.	我將不咬斷食物團球而食：應當學。
After forming a mouthful of food (see Sk 39 & 40), one should place it all into the mouth at one time, rather than biting it off bit by bit.	在做成一口食物之後（見《應學》三九及《應學》四十），應該一次全部放進嘴裡，而不是一點一點地咬。
Again, this rule does not cover fruits, solid foods, or special confections (§—these last two items are missing in the PTS edition of the Canon). In other words, there is nothing wrong in taking bites from any of these foods that are too large to fit into the mouth, although the etiquette in many Asian countries at present frowns on taking bites even out of things such as these.	再一次，這條戒條不適用於水果、固體食物或特殊甜食（§—後兩項在PTS版《聖典》中缺失）。換句話說，如果任何這些食物太大無法一口吞下，分幾口吃並沒有什麼不妥，儘管目前許多亞洲國家的禮儀對這類東西分幾口吃仍會皺眉頭。

46	四十六
I will not eat stuffing out the cheeks: a training to be observed.	我將不塞滿口而食：應當學。
This is another rule that does not cover fruits, solid foods, or special confections. Apparently this allowance covers cases where the fruits, etc., would make up a mouthful a little on the large side, as defined under Sk 39.	這條戒條不適用於水果、固體食物或特殊甜食。顯然，這項開緣適用於水果等would make up a mouthful a little on the large side [TODO: 譯者看不懂，要請教原作者]的情況，如《應學》三九所定義。

47	四十七
I will not eat shaking (food off) the hand: a training to be observed.	我將不甩手（將食物甩掉）而食：應當學。
According to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense in shaking the hand while throwing away scraps.	根據《經分別》的說法，在丟棄殘羹剩飯時甩手並無犯戒。

48	四十八
I will not eat scattering lumps of rice about: a training to be observed.	我將不散落一地的米粒而食：應當學。
The Vibhaṅga states that there is no offense in throwing away lumps of rice while throwing away scraps.	《經分別》指出，在丟棄殘羹剩飯時丟棄米粒並無犯戒。

49	四十九
I will not eat sticking out the tongue: a training to be observed.	我將不伸舌頭而食：應當學。

50	五十
I will not eat smacking the lips: a training to be observed.	我將不咂嘴脣[作喳噗喳噗聲]而食：應當學。

51	五十一
I will not eat making a slurping noise: a training to be observed.	我將不發出吸溜噪音聲[作囌嚕囌嚕聲]而食：應當學。
In the origin story to this rule, a certain brahman prepared a milk drink for the bhikkhus, who drank it making a hissing or slurping sound. One of the bhikkhus, a former actor, made a joke about the fact: “It’s as if this entire Saṅgha were cooled.” (This of course, is a pun on the higher meaning of the term, cooled.) Word got to the Buddha, who in addition to formulating this rule, also imposed a dukkaṭa on the act of making a joke about the Buddha, Dhamma, or Saṅgha.	這條戒條的起源故事是這樣的：一位婆羅門為比丘們準備了牛奶，比丘們喝的時候發出嘶嘶聲或啜飲聲。其中一位比丘，曾是演員，就此開玩笑說：「好像整個僧團都被涼了一樣。」（這當然是藉用了「涼」這個字的更深層含義。）此事傳到了佛陀耳中，佛陀除了制定這條戒條外，還規定拿佛、法或僧開玩笑犯《突吉羅》。

52	五十二
I will not eat licking the hands: a training to be observed.	我將不舔手而食：應當學。
According to the Commentary, this rule also covers the act of sticking a finger into the mouth. There are times, though—it says—when one is eating a semi-liquid food with one’s hand, in which case it is all right to stick the tips of the fingers into the mouth so as to get as much of the food as possible into the mouth without spilling it.	根據《義註》，這條戒條也涵蓋了將手指放入口中的行為。不過，它也指出，有時用手吃半流質食物時，可以將指尖放入口中，以便盡可能地將食物送入口中，同時避免食物灑出。

53	五十三
I will not eat licking the bowl: a training to be observed.	我將不舔缽而食：應當學。
The Commentary shows that the verb lick here also means scrape, when it says that scraping the bowl even with one finger is a breach of this rule. The Commentary is surely correct here, for otherwise there is no making sense of the Vibhaṅga’s allowance that if there are a few scattered crumbs left in the bowl, one may gather them into one last mouthful, “lick” them up, and eat them.	《義註》表明，此處的動詞「舔」也指「刮」，即使只用一根手指刮缽也違反了這條戒條。《義註》在此無疑是正確的，否則就無法理解《經分別》中為何允許將缽中剩餘的少量食物碎屑聚攏成最後一口，然後「舔」著它們吃掉。
If the crumbs are not enough to form a mouthful, though, the Vinaya-mukha recommends leaving them as they are. One would then throw them out with the bowl-washing water (see Sk 56). This practice of leaving a little food uneaten is a point of etiquette common throughout Asia. If one is a guest and has been offered food or drink, one should not eat it to the last crumb or drink it to the last drop, for that would imply that one was not offered enough and is hungry or thirsty for more. Wasting a few bits of food is less serious than hurting the feelings of one’s host. (For more on this point, see Pc 35.) Even when one is eating in a situation where the donor is not around to watch, it is generally a good practice to leave a few crumbs—to be thrown away a good distance from one’s dwelling—as a gift to insects or other small, hungry beings.	如果食物碎屑不足以湊成一口，《戒律入口》建議就留在那裡。然後將它們隨洗缽水一起倒掉（參見《應學》五六）。這種留一些食物不吃的做法是亞洲各地普遍存在的禮儀規範。如果自己是客人，被供養了食物或飲料，不應該吃到最後一點，也不應該喝到最後一滴，因為那樣會意味著自己被供養得不夠，仍然飢餓或口渴想要更多。浪費一些食物並沒有比傷害自己的東道主的情感嚴重。（更多關於這一點，請參閱《波逸提》三五。）即使在施主不在場觀看的情況下用餐，通常來說，留下一些食物碎屑（扔到離住處相當距離的地方）作為布施給昆蟲或其他飢餓的小動物是一種不錯的做法。

54	五十四
I will not eat licking the lips: a training to be observed.	我將不舔嘴唇而食：應當學。

55	五十五
I will not accept a water vessel with a hand soiled by food: a training to be observed.	我將不以沾有食物的手接受盛水的容器：應當學。
The Vibhaṅga says that if one’s hand is soiled, one may take the water vessel with the thought that, “I will wash it or get it washed (§),” although this allowance might be qualified with the consideration that one should try to get it washed before anyone else wants to use it.	《經分別》說，如果手髒了，可以拿著盛水的容器，心想「我會把它洗乾淨或者讓它被洗乾淨（§）」，儘管這種開緣可能會受到這樣的限制：在其他人想使用它之前，應該盡量把它洗乾淨。
According to the Commentary, this rule was formulated to prevent unclean habits, and so it changes the verb in the Pali—“accept” or “receive”—to “take” or “take hold of.” In other words, it applies this rule not only to situations where one is accepting the water vessel from someone else, but also to those in which one simply picks it up on one’s own. It adds that water vessel here applies to anything from which one would drink water, whether it belongs to oneself or to others. If one’s hand is partially soiled, it says, one may pick up a water vessel with the unsoiled part.	根據《義註》，這條戒條是為了防止不潔的習慣而制定的，因此將巴利語中的動詞——「接受」或「接收」——改為「拿取」或「抓住」。換句話說，它不僅將這條戒條適用於從他人接受盛水的容器的情況，也適用於自己拿起盛水的容器的情況。它還補充道，這裡的「盛水的容器」適用於任何用來飲水的東西，無論它屬於自己還是他人。它說，如果手上部分骯髒，可以用乾淨的部分拿起盛水的容器。

56	五十六
I will not, in an inhabited area, throw away bowl-rinsing water that has grains of rice in it: a training to be observed.	於俗家間，我將不倒掉含有米粒的洗缽水：應當學。
The custom in those times, when bhikkhus were invited to eat at a lay person’s home, was for the donor to offer water to the bhikkhus to rinse out their bowls before the meal and again after it. In both cases, each bhikkhu was to hold his bowl in both hands, receive the water into the bowl, swish it around without scraping it (against the ground or floor), and pour it into a receptacle if there was one—or on the ground if not—taking care not to splash any nearby people or his own robes (Cv.VIII.4.4-6).	當時的習俗是，當比丘受邀到在家人家中用餐時，施主會在餐前和餐後為比丘們提供清水，以便他們沖洗他們的缽。每次沖洗時，比丘都要雙手捧缽，接過清水到缽裡，輕輕晃動缽，但不要刮擦（地面或地板），然後將水倒入容器中（如果有容器），如果沒有容器，則倒到地上，注意不要濺到附近的人或自己的袈裟上（《小品》.八.4.4-6）。
This rule applies to the after-meal rinsing. The Vibhaṅga says that there is no offense in throwing away bowl-rinsing water if the rice grains are removed or if they are squashed so as to dissolve in the water. Different editions of the Canon have variant readings for the remaining non-offense clauses. According to the PTS edition, there is no offense “in having received or in having carried out,” but it is hard to tell what having received would mean here. According to the reading given in the Thai and Sri Lankan editions of the Canon, as well as the Commentary, there is no offense “in a receptacle (paṭiggahe) or in having carried out.” The reading “receptacle” here is supported by the Meal-hall Protocols in Cv.VIII.4.6 (BMC2, Chapter 9), and so is probably correct. Thus, as the Commentary explains, there is no offense in pouring the water with rice grains into a receptacle, nor is there an offense in carrying the bowl containing water with rice grains outside the inhabited area to throw it away there.	這條戒條適用於餐後沖洗。《經分別》指出，如果將缽中的米粒去除或碾碎至溶於水中，則倒掉洗缽水並無犯戒。不同版本的《聖典》對其餘不犯條款有不同的解讀。根據 PTS 版本，「已接受或已攜帶出去」並不構成犯戒，但此處什麼「已接受」的具體含義難以確定。根據泰國版和斯里蘭卡版《聖典》以及《義註》中的解讀，「在容器（paṭiggahe）中或已攜帶出去」並不構成犯戒。此處「容器」的解讀得到了《小品》.八.4.6（《佛教比丘戒律第二冊》第九章）中「食堂行儀」的支持，因此可能是正確的。因此，正如《義註》所解釋的那樣，將米粒水倒入容器中並無犯戒，將含有米粒水的缽帶到俗家間外扔掉也無犯戒。

* * *

In addition to the above rules, the duties observed on alms round and in eating at a lay person’s home include the following points of etiquette:	除了上述戒條外，在托缽乞食和在俗人家中用餐時應遵守的義務包含以下禮儀要點：
While on alms round. One should go unhurriedly, and stand neither too close to nor too far from the donor (Cv.VIII.5.2).	托缽乞食時。應不慌不忙地走，既不要站得離布施者太近，也不要離布施者太遠（《小品》.八.5.2）。
While eating in a home. One should select a seat that does not encroach on the senior bhikkhus’ spaces but that also does not preempt the seats of the junior ones (Cv.VIII.4.3).	在家中用餐時。應選擇不侵占上座比丘空間，也不佔用下座比丘空間的座位（《小品》.八.4.3）。
If there are any special foods, the most senior bhikkhu should tell the donor to make sure that everyone gets equal portions. He should also not begin eating until everyone is served rice (Cv.VIII.4.4), nor should he accept water for rinsing his bowl until everyone has finished eating (Cv.VIII.4.6).	如果有特殊的食物，戒臘最高的比丘應該告知布施者，確保每個人都能得到均等的份量。他也不應該在每個人都被供養米飯之前開始進食（《小品》.八.4.4），也不應該在每個人都吃完之前接受用來洗缽的水（《小品》.八.4.6）。
For more details, see BMC2, Chapter 9.	更多詳情請參閱《佛教比丘戒律第二冊》第九章。

* * *

The Vinaya-mukha notes that some of the rules and allowances in this section outline table manners that would be regarded as either excessively fussy or messy by polite modern standards. Thus wherever ancient and modern codes of etiquette are at variance, the wise policy would be to adhere to whichever code is more stringent on that particular point.

《戒律入口》指出，本部分的一些戒條和開緣，概述以現代禮貌標準來看會被認為過於講究或邋遢的餐桌禮儀。因此，凡是古代與現代禮儀規範存在衝突之處，明智之舉是遵循在該方面更為嚴格的規範。

Three: The 16 Dealing with Teaching Dhamma	第三十六條關於說法
SN 6:2 records that the Buddha himself had the highest respect for the Dhamma he had discovered; that, as others might live under the guidance of a teacher, honoring and revering him, the Buddha lived under, honored, and revered the Dhamma. He enjoined his followers to show the same respect for the Dhamma not only when listening to it but also when teaching it, by refusing to teach it to a person who shows disrespect.	《相應部》6:2經記載，佛陀本人對他所發現的法懷有最高的敬意；正如其他人會在老師的指導下生活，尊敬並敬仰老師一樣，佛陀也生活在法之下，尊敬並敬仰法。他告誡追隨者們，不僅在聆聽法時，而且在傳授法時，也要對法表現出同樣的敬意，拒絕向不敬法的人傳授之。
The following set of rules deals with situations in which a listener, in terms of the etiquette at that time, would be regarded as showing disrespect for a teacher or his teaching. As the Vinaya-mukha notes, a few of these cases—such as those concerning footwear—are not considered disrespectful under certain circumstances at present, although here the exceptions given for listeners who are ill might be stretched to cover any situation where the listener would feel inconvenienced or awkward if asked to comply with the etiquette of the Buddha’s time. On the other hand, there are many ways of showing disrespect at present that are not covered by these rules, and an argument could be made, reasoning from the Great Standards, that a bhikkhu should not teach Dhamma to a person who showed disrespect in any way.	以下的戒條集闡述了在當時的禮儀下，聽眾會被視為對老師或其教導不敬的情況。正如《戒律入口》所指出的，其中一些情況——例如關於鞋履的規定——在當今特定情況下並不被視為不敬。然而，此處針對生病聽眾的例外情況或許可以延伸至涵蓋任何聽眾若被要求遵守佛陀時代的禮儀而感到不便或尷尬的情況。另一方面，當今存在著許多不敬的行為，這些戒條並未涵蓋。根據《四大教示》，可以論證，比丘不應向任何表現出不敬之人宣講法。
Dhamma here is defined as any statement spoken by the Buddha, his disciples, seers, or devatās, connected with the teaching or with its goal. See Pc 7 for a more detailed discussion of this point.	此處「法」的定義是指佛陀、其弟子、先知或天人所言的任何與教義或其目標相關的陳述。有關這一點的更詳細討論，請參見《波逸提》七。

57	五十七
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with an umbrella in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而手持傘者說法：應當學。
An umbrella or sunshade, at that time, was considered a sign of rank. According to the Commentary, this rule applies regardless of whether the umbrella is open or closed, as long as one’s listener has his/her hand on it. If, however, the umbrella is on the listener’s lap, resting against his/her shoulder, or if someone else is holding it over the listener’s head, there is no offense in teaching him/her any Dhamma. This last point may have been offered as a concession to royalty at the time.	在當時，傘或遮陽物被視為身份的象徵。根據《義註》，無論傘是開著還是合著，只要聽者將手放在傘上，這條戒條都適用。然而，如果傘放在聽者的腿上、靠在肩上，或由他人舉在聽者的頭頂上，那麼其說法並無犯戒。最後這一點可能是當時對皇室做出的讓步。

58	五十八
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a staff in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而手持杖者說法：應當學。
According to the Vibhaṅga, a staff is a pole two meters long. For some reason, any pole shorter or longer than that would not come under this rule—perhaps because a two-meter pole was used as a weapon, whereas other poles, such as walking sticks, were not.	根據《經分別》，杖是指兩公尺長的桿子。不知何故，任何短於或長於兩米的桿子都不屬於本戒條的範疇——或許是因為兩米長的桿子曾被用作武器，而其他桿子，例如拐杖，則沒有這種用途。

59	五十九
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a knife in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而手持刀者說法：應當學。
The term knife here includes anything with a blade. According to the Commentary, if the knife is not in the listener’s hand—e.g., it is in a sheath attached to a belt—there is no penalty in teaching him/her any Dhamma.	這裡所說的「刀」指的是任何帶刃的物品。根據《義註》，如果刀不在聽者的手中——例如，刀放在繫在腰帶上的刀鞘裡——那麼向他/她說任何法都不會受到懲罰。

60	六十
I will not teach Dhamma to a person with a weapon in his hand who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而手持武器者說法：應當學。
The Vibhaṅga defines weapon as a bow, and the Commentary includes arrows here as well. The Vinaya-mukha adds guns; and in fact any weapon that does not have a blade would seem to fall under this rule.	《經分別》將武器定義為弓，《義註》中在此也包含了箭。《戒律入口》則將槍械也納入其中；事實上，任何沒有刀刃的武器似乎都符合本戒條。
Again, if the weapon is not in the listener’s hand—e.g., it is in a holster attached to the belt—there is no penalty in teaching him/her any Dhamma.	再一次，如果武器不在聽者手中——例如，在繫於腰帶上的槍套裡——那麼向他/她說任何法都不會受到懲罰。

61 [62]	六十一 [六十二]
I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing non-leather [leather] footwear who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而穿非皮革[皮革]鞋者說法：應當學。
The Pali terms for non-leather and leather footwear—upāhanā and pādukā—cover all forms of shoes, sandals, and boots (see Mv.V.1.30-8.3).	巴利語中表示非皮革鞋和皮革鞋的術語——upāhanā 和 pādukā——涵蓋了所有形式的鞋子、涼鞋和靴子（參見《大品》.五.1.30-8.3）。
Wearing means any one of three things: placing one’s feet on top of the footwear without inserting the toes; inserting the toes without fastening the footwear; or fastening the footwear with the toes inside.	穿指的是以下三種情況之一：將腳放在鞋子上但不伸入腳趾；伸入腳趾但不繫緊鞋子；或腳趾伸入鞋內繫緊鞋子。

63	六十三
I will not teach Dhamma to a person in a vehicle who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而坐在車上者說法：應當學。
The Commentary makes the point that if the vehicle is large enough to seat two or more, the bhikkhu may sit together with his listener and teach Dhamma without penalty. The same holds true if the bhikkhu and his listener are in separate vehicles, as long as the bhikkhu’s vehicle is the same height or higher than his listener’s and is not following along behind it.	《義註》指出，如果車輛夠大，可以容納兩人或兩人以上，比丘可以與聽者同坐並說法而不犯戒。如果比丘和聽者分別乘坐不同的車輛，只要比丘的車輛高度不低於聽者的車輛，且不跟隨在聽者的車輛後面，說法也不犯戒。

64	六十四
I will not teach Dhamma to a person lying down who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而躺臥者說法：應當學。
The Commentary goes into great detail on this rule, listing the various permutations of the bhikkhu’s position and his listener’s, saying which ones are allowable and which ones not:	《義註》對此戒條進行了詳細闡述，列舉了比丘及其聽者的各種位置組合，並說明了哪些組合是允許的，哪些組合是不允許的：
A bhikkhu lying down may teach any listener who is standing or sitting down. He may also teach a listener lying down on a piece of furniture, a mat, or the ground, as long as the bhikkhu’s position is on an equal level or higher than his listener’s.	躺著的比丘可以為站立或坐著的聽者說法。他也可以為躺在家具、墊子或地上的聽者說法，只要比丘的姿勢與聽者的姿勢處於同一水平或比聽者更高即可。
A bhikkhu sitting down may teach a listener who is standing or sitting down (see also Sk 68 & 69), but not one who is lying down, unless the listener is ill.	坐著的比丘可以教導站著或坐著的聽者（參考《應學》六八和《應學》六九），但不能教導躺著的聽者，除非聽者有病。
A bhikkhu standing may teach a listener who is also standing, but not one who is sitting or lying down, again unless the listener is ill (see Sk 70).	站著的比丘可以教導同樣站著的聽眾，但不能教導坐著或躺著的聽眾，除非聽眾有病（參見《應學》七十）。

65	六十五
I will not teach Dhamma to a person who sits clasping his knees and who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而抱膝坐著者說法：應當學。
The position of clasping the knees is discussed in detail under Sk 26.	《應學》二六詳細討論了抱膝的姿勢。

66	六十六
I will not teach Dhamma to a person wearing headgear who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而戴頭部穿戴物者說法：應當學。
This rule applies only to headgear—such as turbans or hats—that hide all of the hair. If the hat/turban does not hide all of the hair, or if the listener adjusts it so as to expose some hair, it would not come under this rule.	這條戒條只適用於能完全遮蓋頭髮的頭部穿戴物，例如頭巾或帽子。如果帽子/頭巾無法完全遮蓋頭髮，或聽者調整帽子/頭巾使其露出部分頭髮，則不適用此戒條。

67	六十七
I will not teach Dhamma to a person whose head is covered (with a robe or scarf) and who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不對無病而覆蓋頭部（用袈裟或圍巾）者說法：應當學。
There is no offense in teaching if the listener adjusts the robe or scarf to uncover his/her head.	如果聽者調整袈裟或圍巾以露出其頭部，則說法並不犯戒。

68	六十八
Sitting on the ground, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a seat who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不坐在地上對無病而坐在座位者說法：應當學。
According to the Commentary, a seat here includes even a piece of cloth or a pile of grass.	根據《義註》，這裡的座位甚至包括一塊布或一堆草。

69	六十九
Sitting on a low seat, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting on a high seat who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不坐在低座對無病而坐在高座者說法：應當學。
The Commentary states that this rule also covers cases where the bhikkhu and his listener are both sitting on the ground but the listener is sitting on a higher piece of ground than the bhikkhu.	《義註》中指出，這條戒條也適用於比丘和聽者都坐在地上，但聽者坐在比比丘更高的地面上的情況。

70	七十
Standing, I will not teach Dhamma to a person sitting who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不站著對無病而坐著者說法：應當學。

71	七十一
Walking behind, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking ahead who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不走在後面對無病而走在前面者說法：應當學。
There is no offense, the Commentary says, if the bhikkhu and his listener are walking side by side; or if two bhikkhus are walking along, one in front of the other, and they practice reciting a passage of Dhamma together.	《義註》說，如果比丘和他的聽者並肩而行；或者如果兩個比丘一前一後地走著，並且他們一起練習背誦一段佛法，都不犯戒。

72	七十二
Walking beside a path, I will not teach Dhamma to a person walking on the path who is not ill: a training to be observed.	我將不走在路旁對無病而走在路中者說法：應當學。

Four: The 3 Miscellaneous Rules

第四三條雜戒

73	七十三
Not being ill, I will not defecate or urinate while standing: a training to be observed.	無病我將不站著大便或小便：應當學。
Arguing from the Commentary’s allowance under the following rule, it would seem that a bhikkhu who needs to urinate, finds himself in a public restroom, and can no longer hold himself in while waiting for a toilet, would qualify as “ill” here and so would be able to use a urinal without penalty.	根據《義註》中下一條戒條的開緣來論證，似乎一個需要小便的比丘，發現自己身處公共廁所，並且無法再憋住等待廁所的時間，就符合這裡的「生病」的定義，因此可以使用小便池而不會受到懲罰。

74	七十四
Not being ill, I will not defecate, urinate, or spit on living crops: a training to be observed.	無病我將不在活的作物上大便、小便或吐痰：應當學。
The Vinaya-mukha says that crops here includes all plants that are tended—such as in gardens, farms, or lawns—but not plants growing wild. The Commentary includes roots of living trees that appear above ground, in addition to green plants running along on top of the ground. It also notes that the Mahā Paccarī, one of the ancient commentaries on which it is based, includes blowing the nose under the term spitting in this rule and the next.	《戒律入口》指出，此處的「作物」包括所有人工栽培的植物，例如花園、農場或草坪上的植物，但不包括野生植物。《義註》中不僅包含了生長在地面上的綠色植物，還包括露出地面的活樹根系。此外，《義註》也指出，《Mahā Paccarī》（《義註》所依據的古代註釋書之一）在本戒條及下一條戒條中，將擤鼻涕歸入「吐痰」的範疇。
According to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense if—after defecating, urinating, or spitting on a place where there are no plants—the feces, urine, or saliva then spreads to a place where there are plants (§). The Commentary adds that if a bhikkhu looking for a place without crops to do his business can’t find one and is unable to hold himself in any longer, he would qualify as “ill” under this rule.	根據《經分別》，如果在沒有植物的地方大便、小便或吐痰後，糞便、尿液或唾液擴散到有植物的地方，則不犯戒（§）。《義註》補充道，如果比丘尋找沒有作物的地方方便，卻找不到，且無法再憋住，則根據此戒條，他會被認定為「有病」。

75	七十五
Not being ill, I will not defecate, urinate, or spit in water: a training to be observed.	無病我將不在水中大便、小便或吐痰：應當學。
According to the Commentary, water here includes water fit for drinking or bathing, but not water unfit for such use—e.g., salt water, stagnant water, water already befouled with spit, urine, or feces—or water in a toilet. If there is a flood with no dry ground available, there is no offense in relieving oneself in the water.	根據註釋，此處所指的水包括適於飲用或沐浴的水，但不包括不適於飲用或沐浴的水，例如鹽水、死水、已被唾液、尿液或糞便污染的水，或廁所裡的水。如果洪水氾濫且沒有可用的乾燥地面，那麼在水中方便並不犯戒。
As under the preceding rule, the Vibhaṅga says that there is no offense if—after defecating, urinating, or spitting on the ground—the feces, urine, or saliva then spreads into the water (§).	如同前一條戒條，《經分別》說，如果在地上大便、小便或吐痰後，糞便、尿液或唾液擴散到水中（§），不構成犯戒。

* * *

Cv.VIII.10 contains a series of rules on the etiquette in using a restroom. Among them:	《小品》.八.10 包含一系列關於使用洗手間的禮儀規定。其中包括：
—The restroom should be used in order of arrival, rather than in order of seniority. (“Now at that time, bhikkhus used the restroom in order of seniority. Newly-ordained bhikkhus, having arrived first and having to wait, keeled over in a faint from holding themselves in.”)	—使用洗手間的順序應依到達的先後順序，而非依戒臘順序。（「當時，比丘們按戒臘順序使用洗手間。新受戒的比丘們先到，卻不得不等待，結果憋不住，暈倒在地。」）
—One’s robes should be hung up on a line or rod before entering. This, according to the Vinaya-mukha, refers to one’s upper and outer robe (inasmuch as one is not to lift up one’s lower robe until astride the toilet—see below).	—進入之前，應將袈裟掛在繩子或桿子上。根據《戒律入口》，這指的是上衣和外衣（因為在跨坐廁所之前，不能掀起下衣——見下文）。
—One should not go bursting into the restroom. Before entering, one should cough or clear one’s throat; if a bhikkhu is inside, he should cough or clear his throat in response.	—不應貿然闖入洗手間。進入前應咳嗽或清喉嚨；若裡面有比丘，也應咳嗽或清喉嚨回應。
—One should not have one’s lower robe open or pulled up while entering, and instead should wait to pull up one’s robe only when astride the toilet.	—進入廁所時，不應敞開或撩起下衣，而是應等到跨坐在廁所上時再撩起袈裟。
—One should not make grunting or groaning noises while relieving oneself.	—如廁時不應發出哼哼或呻吟的噪音。
—If the toilet or restroom is dirty, one should clean it for the next person.	—如果廁所或洗手間髒了，應該為下一個人打掃乾淨。
—One should not go bursting out of the restroom when finished—again, taking care not to have one’s lower robe pulled up or open.	—用完洗手間後，不應該猛地衝出來－同樣地，要注意不要把下衣撩起來或敞開。
Cv.VIII.9 adds that after one has defecated—inside a restroom or not—one should always rinse oneself if water is available.	《小品》.八.9 補充說，在大便後，無論是否在洗手間裡，如果有水，就須沖洗自己。
For more details, see BMC2, Chapter 9.	更多詳情請參閱《佛教比丘戒律第二冊》第九章。