第九宝品

Nine: The Valuable Chapter

第九宝品

83	八十三
Should any bhikkhu, unannounced beforehand, cross the threshold of a consecrated noble king’s (sleeping chamber) from which the king has not left, from which the valuable (the queen) has not withdrawn, it is to be confessed.	如果任何比丘，未经事先通知，跨过神圣高贵国王（寝宫）的门槛，而国王尚未离开，宝贵（王后）也尚未撤离，波逸提。
“As he was sitting to one side, King Pasenadi of Kosala said to the Blessed One, ‘It would be good, venerable sir, if the Blessed One would appoint a bhikkhu to teach Dhamma in our harem’…. So the Blessed One addressed Ven. Ānanda, ‘In that case, Ānanda, go teach Dhamma in the king’s harem.’	「他坐在一旁时，拘萨罗国波斯匿王对世尊说：『大德，如果世尊能指派一位比丘到我们后宫说法，那就太好了…』于是世尊对阿难尊者说：『既然如此，阿难，你去国王的后宫说法吧。』
“Responding, ‘As you say, venerable sir,’ Ven. Ānanda entered the king’s harem time and again to teach Dhamma. Then (one day) Ven. Ānanda, dressing early in the morning, taking his bowl and (outer) robe, went to King Pasenadi’s palace. At that time King Pasenadi was lying on a couch with Queen Mallikā. Queen Mallikā saw Ven. Ānanda coming from afar and, on seeing him, got up hurriedly. Her cloth of burnished gold slipped off. Ven. Ānanda turned around and went back to the monastery.”	「尊者阿难答道：『如你所说，大德。』尊者阿难多次进入国王的后宫说法。后来（有一天），尊者阿难清晨著装，带著他的钵和（外）衣，前往波斯匿王的宫殿。当时，波斯匿王正与摩利王后躺在卧榻上。摩利王后远远地看见阿难尊者走过来，便急忙起身，金光闪闪的衣袍滑落下来。阿难尊者转身返回了寺院。」
The factors for the full offense here are two: object and effort.	构成完全违犯的因素有二：对象和努力。
Object	对象
A king—a consecrated (“crowned” in Western terms) member of the noble warrior class, pure in his lineage through the past seven generations—is in his sleeping chamber with his queen. Sleeping chamber means any place where his bed is prepared, even if it is outside, surrounded only by a curtain or screen wall (as was the custom on royal excursions in those days, a custom often depicted in murals on the walls of Thai temples).	一位国王——一位神圣（用西方术语来说是「加冕」）的贵族武士阶层[译注:刹帝利]成员，其血统在过去七代中保持纯正——正与他的王后在他的寝宫中。寝宫指的是任何铺好床的地方，即使是在室外，仅用帷幔或屏风墙围起来（就像当时皇家出游时的习俗一样，这种习俗经常在泰国寺庙墙壁上的壁画中描绘）。
Effort	努力
If, unannounced, one steps over the threshold of the sleeping chamber with one foot, the penalty is a dukkaṭa; when both feet are over the threshold, a pācittiya. Perception as to whether one has been announced is not a mitigating factor here (see Pc 4).	若未经通知，单脚踏入寝室门槛，惩罚是《突吉罗》；若双脚踏入门槛，惩罚是《波逸提》。在此，是否已事先通知的感知在此并非减轻惩罚的因素（参见《波逸提》四）。
Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense if—	不构成犯戒，如果——
one has been announced,	已通知，
the king is not a member of the noble warrior class or has not been consecrated,	国王并非贵族武士阶级[译注:刹帝利]成员，或者没有接受过加冕仪式，
either the king or the queen has left the sleeping chamber, or	国王或王后离开了寝宫，或者
the room is not a sleeping chamber.	该房间不是寝宫。
Obviously, there is little chance that a bhikkhu will break this rule at present. However, in the course of formulating the rule, the Buddha mentioned ten dangers for a bhikkhu who enters the king’s inner palace even at the king’s request, and some of these dangers still apply to any situation in which a bhikkhu is on familiar terms with a person of influence, royal or not:	显然，目前比丘违反此戒条的可能性很小。然而，佛陀在制定此戒条时，曾提及比丘即使应国王之邀进入国王内宫，也会面临十种危险。其中一些危险至今仍然适用于比丘与有影响力的人物（无论是否为王室成员）关系密切的任何情况：
1) “‘There is the case where the king is on a couch together with the queen. A bhikkhu enters there. Either the queen, seeing the bhikkhu, smiles; or the bhikkhu, seeing the queen, smiles. The thought occurs to the king, “Surely they’ve done it, or are going to do it”….	1）「有这样一个场景：国王和王后同在卧榻上。一位比丘走了进来。若非王后看到比丘后微笑；就是比丘看到王后后微笑。国王心想：『他们肯定已经做了，或者即将要做』…
2) “‘And furthermore, the king is busy, with much to do. Having gone to a certain woman, he forgets about it. On account of that, she conceives a child. The thought occurs to him, “No one enters here but the one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	2）「此外，国王繁忙有许多事要做。他去到了某一位女子处，却忘记了此事。结果，那女子怀了孕。他心想：『除了那位出家人，没有人能进来。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
3) “‘And furthermore, some valuable in the king’s inner palace disappears. The thought occurs to the king, “No one enters here but the one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	3）「此外，国王内宫里的一些贵重物品不翼而飞。国王心想：『除了那位出家人，没有人能进来。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
4) “‘And furthermore, secret consultations in the confines of the inner palace get spread abroad. The thought occurs to the king, “No one enters here but the one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	4）「此外，宫廷内部的秘密磋商传到外面去。国王心想：『除了那位出家人，没有人能进来。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
5) “‘And furthermore, in the king’s inner palace the son is estranged from the father, or the father from the son. The thought occurs to them, “No one enters here but the one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	5）「此外，在国王的内宫里，儿子与父亲疏远失和，或父亲与儿子疏远失和。他们心想：『除了那位出家人，没有人能进来。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
6 & 7) “‘And furthermore, the king establishes one from a low position in a high position… (or) one from a high position in a low position. The thought occurs to those displeased by this, “The king is on familiar terms with one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	6和7）「此外，国王置地位低者于高位…（或）置地位高者于低位。对此不满者心想：『国王与一位出家人关系密切。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
8) “‘And furthermore, the king sends the army out at the wrong time. The thought occurs to those displeased by this, “The king is on familiar terms with one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	8）「此外，国王派军的时机不对。对此不满者心想：『国王与一位出家人关系密切。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
9) “‘And furthermore, the king sends the army out at the right time, but has it turn around mid-way. The thought occurs to those displeased by this, “The king is on familiar terms with one gone forth. Could this be the work of the one gone forth?”….	9）「此外，国王在适当的时间派军，却让军队在中途掉头。对此不满者心想：『国王与一位出家人关系密切。这会不会是那位出家人所为？』…
10) “‘And furthermore, bhikkhus, the king’s inner palace is crowded with elephants… horses… chariots. There are enticing sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tactile sensations unsuitable for one gone forth. This, bhikkhus, is the tenth danger for one who enters the king’s inner palace.’”	10）「『此外，诸比丘，国王的内宫里挤满了大象……骏马……战车。那里有诱人的景象、声音、气味、味道和触觉感，不适合出家者。诸比丘，这就是进入国王内宫者的第十个危险。』」
Summary: Entering a king’s sleeping chamber unannounced, when both the king and queen are in the chamber, is a pācittiya offense.	摘要：未通知进入国王的寝宫，且国王和王后都在其内，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪。

* * *

84	八四
Should any bhikkhu pick up or have (someone) pick up a valuable or what is considered a valuable, except in a monastery or in a dwelling, it is to be confessed. But when a bhikkhu has picked up or had (someone) pick up a valuable or what is considered a valuable (left) in a monastery or in a dwelling, he is to keep it, (thinking,) “Whoever it belongs to will (come and) fetch it.” This is the proper course here.	如果任何比丘捡起或令（某人）捡起一件贵重物品或被认为是贵重物品，除了在寺院或住所内，波逸提。但是，当比丘捡起或令（某人）捡起寺院或住所中（被遗留下）的贵重物品或被视为贵重物品时，他应收藏它，（思考）「无论它属于谁，都会（过来）拿它。这于此是如法的。
The general purpose of this rule is to prevent a bhikkhu from picking up misplaced valuables belonging to other people, for as the origin story shows, there are dangers inherent in such an act even when done with the best intentions.	本戒条的总体目的是防止比丘捡起属于其他人的遗失的贵重物品，因为正如起源故事所示，即使是出于最好的意图，这种行为也存在固有的危险。
“Now at that time a certain bhikkhu was bathing in the Aciravatī River. And a certain brahman, having placed a bag of 500 gold pieces on the river bank, bathed in the river and left, forgetting it. The bhikkhu, (saying to himself,) ‘Don’t let this bag of the brahman’s be lost,’ picked it up. Then the brahman, remembering, rushed back and said to the bhikkhu, ‘My good man, have you seen my bag?’	「尔时，有一位比丘正在阿致罗筏底河沐浴。某一位婆罗门，将一袋五百金币放在河岸上，沐浴在河中，忘记它而离去。比丘（自言自语）『不要让这个婆罗门的袋子丢失』，把它捡起来。这时，婆罗门想起来了，冲回来对比丘说：『善男子，你看到我的袋子了吗？』
“‘Here you are, brahman,’ he said, and gave it to him.	「『给你，婆罗门，』他说，把它交给了他。
“Then the thought occurred to the brahman, ‘Now by what means can I get away without giving a reward to this bhikkhu?’ So (saying,) ‘I didn’t have 500, my good man, I had 1,000!’ he detained him for a while and then let him go.”	「然后，婆罗门想到，『现在我怎么能不给这位比丘报酬而逃脱呢？』所以（说）『我没有 500 ，善男子，我有 1,000 ！』拘留了他一段时间，然后就放了他。」
However, a bhikkhu who comes across a fallen valuable in a monastery or in a dwelling he is visiting—if he does not pick it up—may later be held responsible if it gets lost: thus the two situations mentioned as exemptions in the rule. In situations such as these, a bhikkhu is allowed even to pick up money and other items he is not normally allowed to take. In fact, the Vinaya-mukha states that if he does not pick up the valuable and put it in safe-keeping, he incurs a dukkaṭa. None of the other texts mention this point, although it is probably justified on the grounds that the bhikkhu is neglecting his duty in not following the “proper course” here.	然而，比丘在寺院或他所拜访的住处中发现掉落的贵重物品，如果他没有捡起来，之后如果丢失的话，可能要承担责任：因此，戒条中提到的两种情况是豁免的。在这类情况下，比丘甚至可以拿走金钱和其他他通常不被允许拿走的物品。事实上，《戒律入口》指出，如果他不捡起贵重物品并将其妥善保管，他犯《突吉罗》。其他文献都没有提到这一点，尽管这可能是合理的，因为比丘在这里没有遵循「适当的方针」而忽视了他的职责。
The Vibhaṅga advises that if a bhikkhu has picked up a fallen valuable in this way and put it in safe keeping, he should take note of its features. (The Commentary adds that if it is a bag of money, he should open the bag and count how much it contains. The same would hold for such things as wallets at present.) He should then have an announcement made, “Let him come whose goods are lost.” If a person comes to claim the item, the bhikkhu should ask him/her to describe it. If the person describes it correctly, the bhikkhu should hand it over. If not, he should tell the person to “keep looking.” If the bhikkhu is going to leave the monastery to live elsewhere, he should entrust the item to another bhikkhu or—if no suitable bhikkhu is available—to a suitable lay person (§).	《经分别》建议，如果比丘以这种方式捡起掉落的贵重物品并将其妥善保管，他应该记下它的特征。（《义注》补充说，如果是一袋金钱，他应该打开袋子数一下里面有多少钱。在目前，钱包之类的东西也应如此做。）然后他应该宣布：「谁的东西丢了请过来。」如果有人来领取物品，比丘应该请他/她描述它。如果此人描述正确，比丘应该交给他。如果不正确，他应该告诉这个人「继续寻找」。如果比丘要离开寺院到其他地方居住，他应该将物品托付给另一位比丘，或者－－如果没有合适的比丘－－托付给合适的在家人（§）。
The Commentary adds that if, after a suitable length of time, no one comes to claim the item, the bhikkhu should have it exchanged for something of lasting use to the monastery. If, after that, the owner does come to claim the item, the bhikkhu should tell him/her of the use to which it was put. If the owner is satisfied, there is no problem. If not, the bhikkhu should arrange to have the owner compensated. However, as we noted in the discussion of compensation under Pr 2, the Canon imposes only one potential penalty on a bhikkhu in a situation such as this: The Community, if it sees fit, can force him to apologize to the owner (Cv.I.20; see BMC2, Chapter 20).	《义注》补充说，如果在一段适当的时间后，没有人来领取该物品，比丘应该将其换成对寺院持久使用的东西。如果之后，所有者真的来领取该物品，比丘应该告诉他/她该物品的用途。如果所有者满意的话就没有问题。如果不满意，比丘应该安排对所有者进行补偿。然而，正如我们在讨论《波罗夷》二下的赔偿时所指出的，在这种情况下，《圣典》只对比丘施加一种潜在的处罚：如果僧团认为合适，可以强迫他向所有者道歉（《小品》.一.20；见《佛教比丘戒律第二册》第二十章）。
The factors for the offense here are four.	这里的犯戒因素有四个。
1) Object: a valuable or anything considered a valuable that one finds left behind, except in a monastery or a dwelling that one is visiting.	1）对象：发现留下的有价值的东西或任何被认为有价值的东西，除了在拜访的寺院或住处中。
2) Perception: One does not perceive it as discarded.	2）感知：不认为它是被丢弃的。
3) Intention: One wants to keep it in safe keeping for the owner.	3）意图：希望为所有者保管它。
4) Effort: One picks it up or has someone else pick it up.	4）努力：自己捡起或让别人捡起。

Object	对象
The Vibhaṅga defines a valuable as jewels, gold, or silver. At present, money would be included here. What is considered a valuable means anything that people use or consume. Items meeting these definitions at present would include wallets, watches, keys, eyeglasses, cameras, etc.	《经分别》将有价值的物品定义为珠宝、黄金或白银。目前，金钱也包含在这里。被认为有价值的东西是指人们使用或消费的任何东西。目前符合这些定义的物品包括钱包、手表、钥匙、眼镜、相机等。
According to the K/Commentary, the object has to belong to someone else to fulfill the factor of effort here. The Vibhaṅga does not state this point explicitly, but it does make the point implicitly with the activities it discusses under this rule: putting an item in safe keeping, quizzing those who come to claim it, taking an item on trust, borrowing it. These are all activities that pertain to the belongings of others, and not to one’s own belongings. The K/Commentary adds that if the owner has given one permission to take the article, it does not fulfill the factor of object here. This comment has to be qualified, of course, by noting that if the item is a valuable, then taking it would involve an offense under another rule.	根据 K/《义注》，物品必须属于其他人才能满足此处的努力因素。《经分别》没有明确说明这一点，但它确实透过在本戒条下讨论的活动隐含地表达了这一点：妥善保管一件物品，询问那些前来索取它的人，托付一件物品，借用它。这些都是与他人的财物有关的活动，而不是与自己的财物有关的活动。 K/《义注》补充说，如果所有者已给予拿取该物品的权限，则不满足此处的对象因素。当然，这个评论必须是有限制的，留意到如果该物品是贵重物品，那么根据另一条戒条，拿走它就会涉及犯戒。
The Vibhaṅga defines in a monastery as follows: If the monastery is enclosed, then within the enclosure. If not, then in the immediate vicinity (according to the Commentary, a radius of two leḍḍupātas—approximately 36 meters—around the monastery buildings). As for in a dwelling: If the area around the dwelling is enclosed, then within the enclosure. If not, then in the immediate vicinity (according to the Commentary, the distance one can throw a basket or a pestle (!) from the dwelling).	《经分别》对寺院里的定义如下：如果寺院是封闭的，那就在封闭的范围内。如果不是，那么就在紧邻范围里（根据《义注》，围绕寺院建筑的半径为两个 leḍḍupāta，大约 36 公尺）。至于住处里：如果住处周围的区域是封闭的，则在封闭范围内。如果不是，那么就在紧邻范围里（根据《义注》，可以从住处扔篮子或杵（！）的距离）。
For some reason, the Commentary says that if the item has fallen in an area of the monastery where many people come and go—e.g., the doorway to the Bodhi tree or public shrine—one should not pick it up. Its reasoning here is hard to guess. It notes that the Kurundī—one of the ancient commentaries—interprets the range of a bhikkhu’s responsibility in the opposite direction. In other words, the Kurundī holds that if a bhikkhu walking alone along a road outside a monastery comes across a valuable or anything considered valuable in such circumstances that he might later be suspected of being responsible for its disappearance, he should stop and wait by the roadside until the owner appears. If no owner appears, he should make it “allowable” and take it with him. The Sub-commentary adds that making it allowable means deciding that it has been thrown away, and applies only to items classed as “considered a valuable.” All of this, however, lies outside the allowances in the Vibhaṅga, and at most can be adopted, where appropriate, as a wise policy.	由于某种原因，《义注》说，如果该物品落在寺院内人来人往的地方，例如菩提树的门口或公共圣坛，则不应捡起它。这里它的推理很难猜测。它指出，《Kurundī》——古代注释之一——从相反的方向解释了比丘的责任范围。换句话说，《Kurundī》认为，如果一个比丘独自走在寺院外的路上，遇到一个贵重的东西或任何被认为有价值的东西，并且在这种情况下他可能会被怀疑对它的失踪负有责任，他应该停下来在路边等待，直到所有者出现。如果所有者没有出现，他应该让它成为「允许的」并带走它。《复注》补充说，让它成为允许的意思是决定它已被丢弃，并且仅适用于被归类为「被认为有价值」的物品。然而，所有这些都超出了《经分别》的允许范围，最多可以在适当的情况下作为明智之举而采用。
The Commentary also notes that if someone asks to put his/her belongings in safe keeping with a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should not accept—so as to avoid being responsible for them—but if he/she leaves the things with the bhikkhu and goes off in spite of his objections or before giving him a chance to object, he should take the belongings and put them away in safe keeping.	《义注》还指出，如果有人要求将自己的物品交给比丘保管，比丘不应接受——以免对这些物品负责——但如果他/她将物品留给比丘，并且尽管他反对，或者在给他反对的机会之前离开，他应该拿走财物并妥善保管。

Perception & intention	感知及意图
According to the Commentary, if one picks up money for one’s own use, for the Community, or for anyone aside from the owner, the case would come under NP 18, rather than here. The same holds true with dukkaṭa objects, such as jewels and semi-precious stones. This judgment, though, would seem to hold only in the case where one perceives the money, etc., as thrown away or left behind for the use of the person or Community for whom one is taking it. If one does not perceive it as thrown away or abandoned, and one is not borrowing it or taking it on trust, the case would come under Pr 2, regardless of what the item is.	根据《义注》，如果捡取金钱用于自己、僧团或除所有者之外的任何人，则该情况将属于《舍堕》一八，而不是这里。对于珠宝和半宝石等《突吉罗》物件也是如此。然而，这项判定似乎仅在以下情况成立：认为金钱等被丢弃，或留下供拿取者或拿取者僧团使用。如果不认为它被丢弃或遗弃，并且没有借用它或亲厚取，则该情况将属于《波罗夷》二，无论该物品是什么。
The Commentary also makes the peculiar point that if one sees an item belonging to one’s mother or other close relative left behind on the roadside, one would incur the full penalty under this rule for picking it up to put in safe keeping for the owner, but no offense if one took the item, on trust, for one’s own. Of course, after taking it on trust like this, one could then without penalty give it back to the owner as one liked.	《义注》还提出了一个奇特的观点，如果看到属于自己母亲或其他近亲的物品留在路边，根据本戒条，拾起该物品并妥善保管将受到全额惩罚，但如果出于亲厚而拿取这件物品，则没有犯戒。当然，这样亲厚取之后，就可以依照自己的喜好，不受惩罚地还给所有者了。

Effort	努力
When getting someone else to pick up the item, the offense is incurred not in the asking but only when the other person does as asked.	当让别人拿起物品时，犯戒行为不是在要求时发生的，而是在对方按照要求行事时才发生的。

Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense if, within a monastery or a dwelling, one picks up a valuable or what is considered a valuable—or if one has it picked up—with the thought, “Whoever this belongs to will come for it.” (§)	如果在寺院或住处内，捡起一件贵重物品或被认为是贵重物品—或如果令其被捡起—心里想：「无论这东西是谁的，都会来拿它。」并没有犯戒。（§）
Also, according to the Vibhaṅga, there is no offense in taking an item “considered to be a valuable” no matter where it is found if one takes it on trust, borrows it, or perceives it as having been thrown away (§).	此外，根据《经分别》，如果基于信任拿走一件「被认为是有价值的」物品、借用它或认为它已被扔掉，那么无论它在哪里被发现，都不会构成犯戒（§）。
Summary: Picking up a valuable, or having it picked up, with the intention of putting it in safe keeping for the owner—except when one finds it in a monastery or in a dwelling one is visiting—is a pācittiya offense.	摘要：捡起或让人捡起贵重物品，并意图为所有者将其妥善保管——除非在寺院或正在拜访的住处中发现它——是《波逸提》罪。

* * *

85	八十五
Should any bhikkhu, without taking leave of an available bhikkhu, enter a village at the wrong time—unless there is a suitable emergency—it is to be confessed.	如果任何比丘，有比丘在而未告假，在非时进入村庄——除非有适当的紧急情况——波逸提。
As the origin story here indicates, the purpose of this rule is to prevent bhikkhus from passing their time among householders engaged in animal talk (see the discussion under Pc 7).	正如这里的起源故事所表明的那样，这条戒条的目的是防止比丘们把时间消磨在与在家人从事畜生论（参见《波逸提》七下的讨论）。
The factors for the full offense here are two.	完全违犯的因素有二。
1) Object: a village (this would include larger inhabited areas, such as towns and cities, as well).	1）对象：村庄（这也包括较大的居住区，如城镇和城市）。
2) Effort: One enters the village at the wrong time—without having taken leave of an available bhikkhu—except when there is an emergency.	2）努力：在非时进入村庄——有比丘在而未告假——除非有紧急情况。

Object	对象
The Vibhaṅga says that if the village as a whole is enclosed, everywhere inside the enclosure is considered to be in the village. If not, the area in the village includes all the buildings and their immediate vicinity. According to the Sub-commentary, this means everywhere within a two-leḍḍupāta radius of the buildings.	《经分别》指出，如果整个村庄被围起来，那么围起来的所有区域都属于村庄范围。如果没有被围起来，村庄的范围则包括所有建筑物及其周边区域。根据《复注》，这意味著建筑物半径为两个 leḍḍupāta 内的所有区域都属于村庄范围。
Thus if one is staying in a monastery located within a village or town, the area covered by this factor would apparently begin at the vicinity of the nearest buildings outside the monastery.	因此，如果住在位于村庄或城镇内的寺院里，那么这个因素所涵盖的区域显然会从寺院外最近的建筑物周围开始。
Effort	努力
The Vibhaṅga defines the wrong time as from after noon until the following dawnrise. This rule thus dovetails with Pc 46, which deals with the period from dawnrise until noon on days when one has been invited to a meal.	《经分别》将非时定义为中午过后至隔天黎明。这条戒条与《波逸提》四六相衔接吻合，该条规定了受邀赴餐食日子里，从黎明到中午这段时间。
Perception as to whether the time is right or wrong is not a mitigating factor here (see Pc 4).	关于是否非时的感知在这里并不构成减轻惩罚的因素（参见《波逸提》四）。
As under Pc 46, another bhikkhu is said to be available for taking one’s leave if, in the Vibhaṅga’s words, “It is possible to go, having taken leave of him.” That is, if there is another bhikkhu in the monastery, and there are no obstacles to taking one’s leave from him (e.g., he is asleep, he is sick, he is receiving important visitors), one is obliged to go out of one’s way to inform him.	如同《波逸提》四六，如果，用《经分别》的话来说，「告别他之后，就可以离开了。」，那就是有另一位比丘在可以告假。也就是说，如果寺院里有另一位比丘，并且向他告假没有任何障碍（例如，他正在睡觉、生病、接待重要访客），那么就必须特意去通知他。
According to the K/Commentary, taking leave in the context of this rule means the simple act of informing the other bhikkhu that, “I am going into the village,” or any similar statement. In other words, one is not asking permission to go, although if the other bhikkhu sees that one is doing something improper in going, he is perfectly free to say so. If one treats his comments with disrespect, one incurs at least a dukkaṭa under Pc 54. (See the discussion under that rule for details.)	根据 K/《义注》，在此戒条的脉络中，「告假」仅指告知另一位比丘「我要入村」或类似表述。换言之，并非征求前去的许可，但若另一位比丘认为在前往时会做不恰当的事情，他完全可以指出来。若对他的指正不敬，则至少会根据《波逸提》五四犯《突吉罗》（详情请参阅该戒条下的讨论）。
The Commentary states that if there is no bhikkhu in the monastery to take leave from, there is no need to inform any bhikkhu one may meet after leaving the monastery. If many bhikkhus are going together, they need only take leave from one another before entering the village.	《义注》指出，如果寺院里没有比丘可以告假，那么离开寺院后遇到的任何比丘都不需要告知。如果很多比丘一同前往，他们只需在进入村庄前互相告假即可。
For a new bhikkhu still living in dependence (nissaya) on his mentor, though, the protocols in Cullavagga VIII indicate that taking leave is a matter of asking permission from his mentor at all times, “wrong” or not. (See the discussion of this point under Pc 46.)	然而，对于一位仍依止于其导师（nissaya）的新比丘而言，《小品》第八卷的行仪表明，无论「非」时与否，告假随时都要征得导师的同意。（参见《波逸提》四六对此的讨论。）
As for the suitable emergencies under this rule—which would seem to exempt even new bhikkhus from having to take leave from their mentors—the Vibhaṅga gives the example of a bhikkhu rushing to get fire to make medicine for another bhikkhu bitten by a snake. Examples more likely at present would include rushing to get a doctor for a sick bhikkhu or to get help when a fire has broken out in the monastery.	至于这条戒条下适用的紧急情况——这似乎意味著即使是新比丘也不必向他们的导师告假——《经分别》举例说，一位比丘急忙去取火，为另一位被蛇咬伤的比丘熬制药物。而如今更常见的例子则包括急忙为生病的比丘请医生，或在寺院发生火灾时寻求帮助。

Further action	进一步行动
Although there is no penalty for engaging in animal talk, a bhikkhu who enters a village frequently and engages in it, even if he takes leave of other bhikkhus, can be subject to an act of censure for “unbecoming association with householders” (see BMC2, Chapter 20).	虽然从事畜生论并没有惩罚，但经常进入村庄从事畜生论的比丘，即使向其他比丘告假，也可能因「与居士交往不当」而受到呵责的处分（见《佛教比丘戒律第二册》第二十章）。
Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense in entering a village when one has taken leave of another bhikkhu, or in going when one has not taken leave if:	在向另一位比丘告假后进入村庄，或未告假就进入村庄并符合以下条件，均不犯戒：
There is an emergency.	有紧急状况。
There is no bhikkhu available (e.g., one is living alone or all the other bhikkhus have left).	没有比丘在（例如，自己独自居住，或其他比丘都离开了）。
One is on one’s way to another monastery (§), to bhikkhunīs’ quarters, to the residence of people ordained in another religion (located in a village, says the Commentary), or one is returning from any of these places.	正前往另一个寺院（§），前往比丘尼的住所，前往外道受戒者的住所（《义注》中说，位于村庄内），或从这些地方返回。
One is going along a road that happens to pass through a village. (According to the Commentary, a bhikkhu who wants to leave the road and enter the village proper should take leave of another bhikkhu if one is available.)	正沿著一条路走，这条路刚好穿过村庄。（根据《义注》，如果比丘想要离开这条路进入村庄，应该向另一位比丘告假，如果有比丘在的话。）
There are dangers. (Examples in the Commentary include seeing lions or tigers approaching, or clouds building up and threatening a storm.)	有危险。（例如，《义注》中例子包括看到狮子或老虎靠近，或乌云密布，预示著暴风雨即将到来。）
Summary: Entering a village, town, or city during the period after noon until the following dawnrise, without having taken leave of an available bhikkhu—unless there is an emergency—is a pācittiya offense.	摘要：在中午之后到第二天黎明之前，有比丘在而未向其告假并进入村庄、城镇或城市——除非有紧急情况——是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪。

* * *

86	八十六
Should any bhikkhu have a needle box made of bone, ivory, or horn, it is to be broken and confessed.	如果任何比丘拥有用骨头、象牙或角制成的针盒，就应当将其打碎并忏悔[波逸提]。
The origin story here echoes the one for NP 22.	这里的起源故事与《舍堕》二二的起源故事如出一辙。
“Now at that time a certain ivory-worker had invited the bhikkhus, saying, ‘If any of the masters needs a needle box, I will supply him with a needle box.’ So the bhikkhus asked for many needle boxes. Those with small needle boxes asked for large ones; those with large ones asked for small ones. (§) The ivory-worker, making many needle boxes for the bhikkhus, was not able to make other goods for sale. He could not support himself, and his wife and children suffered.”	「其时，一位象牙匠邀请比丘们，说：『如果哪位大德需要针盒，我可以给他提供。』于是比丘们索要许多针盒。有小针盒的就去要大的，有大的就去要小的。（§）这位象牙匠为比丘们制作了许多针盒，却无力制作其他商品出售。他无法养活自己，妻子和孩子也因此受苦。」
Here there are three factors for the full offense.	此处完整违犯包含三个因素。
1) Object: a needle box made of bone, ivory, or horn.	1）对象：用骨头、象牙或角制成的针盒。
2) Effort: One obtains it after making it or having it made	2）努力：透过自己或他人制作而获得它。
3) Intention: for one’s own use.	3）意图：供自己使用。
Two of these factors involve permutations: effort and intention.	其中两个因素涉及排列组合：努力和意图。

Effort	努力
The permutations under this factor are as follows: the act of making the needle box or having it made—a dukkaṭa; obtaining the finished box—a pācittiya. This last penalty applies regardless of whether the box was made entirely by oneself, entirely by others either partly or entirely at one’s instigation, or whether one finished what others began or got others to finish what one began oneself. In any event, one must break the box before confessing the offense.	此因素下的排列组合如下：制作针盒或让人制作针盒的行为——《突吉罗》；取得成品盒——《波逸提》。无论针盒是完全由自己制作，还是完全由他人制作（部分或全部受自己唆使），亦或是自己完成了他人开始之物，或令他人完成了自己开始之物，最后一种惩罚均适用。无论如何，必须在忏悔罪行前打碎该盒。
If one obtains a bone, ivory, or horn needle box made by another—not at one’s instigation—then using it entails a dukkaṭa (§).	如果获得了由他人制作的骨头、象牙或角针盒——并非是应自己的唆使要求制作的——那么使用它犯《突吉罗》（§）。
Intention	意图
There is a dukkaṭa in making a bone, ivory, or horn needle box—or having it made—for another’s use.	为了他人而制作或令人制作骨头、象牙或角针盒，犯《突吉罗》。
Non-offenses	不犯
The non-offense clauses, instead of listing materials from which a needle box might be made, list allowable items made of bone, ivory, or horn: a fastener (§) (for a robe), a fire-starter (according to the Commentary, this means a bow used with the upper stick of a fire-starter), a belt fastener, an ointment box, a stick for applying ointment, an adze handle, and a water wiper (§) (see BMC2, Chapter 1). This list was apparently intended simply to be illustrative, because the Khandhakas contain allowances for many other items to be made from bone, ivory, or horn as well—although it’s worth noting that the non-offense clauses here are the only passages in the Canon stating that the fire-starter, adze handle, and water wiper can be made of these materials.	不犯条款并未列举制作针盒的可用材料，而是列出了允许用骨头、象牙或角制成的物品：扣件（§）（用于袈裟）、引火物（根据《义注》，这指的是与引火物上杆配合使用的弓形物）、腰带扣、药膏盒、涂抹药膏的棍子、斧头柄和擦水器（§）（参见《佛教比丘戒律第二册》第一章）。这份清单显然只是为了举例说明，因为《犍度》中也允许用骨头、象牙或角制作许多其他物品——尽管值得注意的是，此处的不犯条款是《圣典》中唯一明确指出引火物、斧头柄和擦水器可以用这些材料制成的段落。
Pc 60 mentions a needle box as one of a bhikkhu’s requisites, so apparently one would be allowable if not made of bone, ivory, or horn. Cv.V.11.2 contains an allowance for a “needle tube” (or “needle cylinder”—sūci-nāḷika) for keeping needles, but does not explain how it differs from a needle box. Apparently both the box and the tube may be made of reed, bamboo, wood, lac (resin), fruit (e.g., coconut shell), copper (metal), or conch-shell, as the Khandhakas often list these materials as allowable for other items as well.	《波逸提》六十提到针盒是比丘的必备物品之一，因此，如果不是用骨头、象牙或角制成的，针盒显然是允许的。《小品》.五.11.2允许使用「针筒」（或「针管」－sūci-nāḷika）来存放针，但并未解释它与针盒有何不同。显然，针盒和针筒都可以用芦苇、竹子、木头、紫胶（树脂）、水果（例如椰子壳）、铜（金属）或海螺壳制成，因为《犍度》也经常将这些材料列为其他物品的允许材料。

The general principle	一般原则
The Vinaya-mukha derives a general principle from this rule: The Buddha, in formulating this rule, was putting a halt to the sort of fad that can occur among bhikkhus when certain requisites become fashionable to the point of inconveniencing donors, and senior bhikkhus at present should try to put a halt to any similar fads.	《戒律入口》从这条戒条中引申出一条普遍原则：佛陀制定这条戒条，是为了阻止比丘中出现某种风尚，即某些必需品变得时髦，以至于给布施者带来不便。如今，上座比丘应该尝试阻止任何类似的风尚。
Summary: Obtaining a needle box made of bone, ivory, or horn after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one break the box before confessing the offense.	摘要：获得为自己使用而制作或让人制作的用骨头、象牙或角制成的针盒，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先打碎针盒才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

87	八十七
When a bhikkhu is having a new bed or bench made, it is to have legs (at most) eight fingerbreadths long—using sugata fingerbreadths—not counting the lower edge of the frame. In excess of that it is to be cut down and confessed.	比丘制作新床或凳子时，脚的长度（至多）应为八指宽——使用善逝指宽——不包括框架的下缘。超过此长度应被砍掉并忏悔[波逸提]。
The purpose of this rule is to prevent bhikkhus from making and using furnishings that are high and imposing.	这条戒条的目的是防止比丘们制作和使用高大而气派的家具。
The factors for the offense here are three.	此处犯戒的因素有三。
1) Object: a bed or bench whose legs, measuring from the lower side of the frame to the floor, are longer than eight sugata fingerbreadths (16.7 cm.)	1）对象：床或凳子的脚，从框架下缘到地面的长度，超过八善逝指宽（16.7 公分）。
2) Effort: One obtains it after making it or having it made	2）努力：自己制作或他人制作后而获得它。
3) Intention: for one’s own use.	3）意图：供自己使用。
Object	对象
The Canon contains many rules dealing with furnishings, especially in the Khandhakas, and because furnishings in the time of the Buddha were somewhat different from what they are now, it is often a matter of guesswork as to what, precisely, the rules are referring to. The bed (mañca) here almost certainly refers to what we mean by a bed. The bench (pīṭha), according to the K/Commentary, is shorter than a bed, but not so short that it is square. This last stipulation comes from Cv.VI.2.4, which allows bhikkhus to use an āsandika—apparently a square stool, large enough to sit on but not to lie on—even if the legs are long. Another piece of furniture with long legs allowed in the same passage is the sattaṅga, a chair or sofa with a back and arms. The Vinaya-mukha includes a pañcaṅga—a chair or sofa with a back but no arms—under this allowance as well. The Canon and commentaries make no mention of this point, but it seems valid: Armless chairs and sofas are less imposing than those with arms.	《圣典》中包含许多关于家具的戒条，尤其是在《犍度》中。由于佛陀时代的家具与现在有所不同，因此这些戒条的具体意义往往需要推测。这里的床（mañca）几乎可以肯定是指我们今天所说的床。根据 K/《义注》，凳子（pīṭha）比床短，但又不至于短到呈正方形。最后这项规定出自《小品》.六.2.4，其中允许比丘使用 āsandika ——显然是方形凳子，这种凳子足够大，可以坐，但不能躺——即使凳腿很长。在同一段落中允许使用的另一种长腿家具是 sattaṅga ，一种有靠背和扶手的椅子或沙发。《戒律入口》中也允许使用 pañcaṅga ——一种有靠背但没有扶手的椅子或沙发。《圣典》和注释书中都没有提到这一点，但这似乎是合理的：没有扶手的椅子和沙发不如有扶手的椅子和沙发那么引人注目。
The sugata measures are a matter of controversy, discussed in Appendix II. For the purposes of this book, we are taking the sugata span to be 25 cm. Because there are twelve sugata fingerbreadths in a sugata span, eight sugata fingerbreadths would be equal to 16.7 cm.	善逝的度量衡存在争议，在附录二中讨论。本书中，我们将善逝张手定为 25 公分。因为一善逝张手有十二善逝指宽，所以八善逝指宽等于 16.7 公分。

Effort	努力
The permutations under this factor are as follows: the act of making the bed/bench or having it made—a dukkaṭa; obtaining the finished article—a pācittiya. This last penalty applies regardless of whether the bed/bench was made entirely by oneself, entirely by others either partly or entirely at one’s instigation, or whether one finished what others began or got others to finish what one began oneself. In any event, one must cut the bed/bench down to the proper size before confessing the offense.	此因素下的排列组合如下：制作床/凳的行为（或让人制作）——《突吉罗》；获得成品——《波逸提》。无论床/凳是完全由自己制作，或是完全由他人制作（部分或全部受自己唆使），亦或是完成他人开始之物，或令他人完成自己开始之物，均适用此最后一种惩罚。无论如何，在忏悔罪行之前，必须将床/凳切成合适的尺寸。
If one obtains a tall bed/bench made by another—not at one’s instigation—then using it entails a dukkaṭa (§). Cv.VI.8 allows that if furnishings of the sort unallowable for bhikkhus to own themselves are in a lay person’s house (and belong to the lay person, says the Sub-commentary) bhikkhus may sit on them but not lie down on them. There are three exceptions to this allowance, the one piece objected to on account of its height being a dais (āsandī)—a square platform, large enough to lie on, and very high. Bhikkhus are not allowed even to sit on such a thing, even in a lay person’s house.	若获他人所造的高床/凳——并非是应自己的唆使要求制作的——那么使用它犯《突吉罗》（§）。《小品》.六.8允许在居士家中（且属于居士所有，《复注》中如此描述）摆放比丘不得拥有的家具，比丘可以坐在上面，但不能躺在上面。此开缘有三个例外，其中一例外因其高度而遭禁，即高台（āsandī）——一种方形平台，足够大，可躺之，且高度极高。比丘即便在居士家中，亦不可坐其上。

Intention	意图
There is a dukkaṭa in making a bed or bench with extra long legs—or having it made—for the sake of another person.	为了他人的缘故，制作或请人制作脚特别长的床或凳，犯《突吉罗》。
Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense in making a bed or bench—or having one made—if the legs are eight sugata fingerbreadths or less; or in receiving a bed or bench with overly long legs made by another if one cuts the legs down to regulation size before using it. The Commentary notes that if one buries the legs in the ground so that no more than eight fingerbreadths separate the ground from the lower frame, that is also allowable.	制作床或凳子，或请人制作，只要脚长不超过八善逝指宽，不构成犯戒；或接受他人制作的脚过长的床或凳子，只要在使用前将腿截短至规定尺寸，也不构成犯戒。《义注》指出，如果将脚埋入土中，使框架底部与地面之间的距离不超过八指宽，也是允许的。
Summary: Obtaining a bed or bench with legs longer than eight sugata fingerbreadths after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one cut the legs down before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——脚长超过八善逝指宽的床或凳子之后并获得它，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先将脚切短才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

88	八十八
Should any bhikkhu have a bed or bench upholstered with cotton down, it (the upholstery) is to be torn off and confessed.	如果任何比丘的床或凳子是用棉绒填充的，它（填充物）应该被撕掉并忏悔[波逸提]。
Upholstery & cushions	坐椅填充物及垫子
Cotton down was apparently the most luxurious material known in the Buddha’s time for stuffing furniture, cushions, and mattresses, inasmuch as bhikkhus are forbidden by this rule from making beds and benches upholstered with cotton-down. Cv.VI.8 forbids them from sitting on cushions or other articles of furnishing upholstered or stuffed with cotton down (this would include meditation cushions), even in the homes of lay people. The only article of furnishing stuffed with cotton down allowed to bhikkhus is a pillow (§), although the pillow should be made no larger than the size of the head (Cv.VI.2.6).	在佛陀时代，棉绒显然是已知最奢华的材料，用来填充家具、坐垫和床垫，因此，此戒条禁止比丘制作以棉绒为填充物的床和凳子。《小品》.六.8 禁止比丘坐在以棉绒为填充物的垫子或其他家具物上（包括禅坐垫子），即使在居士的家中也不例外。比丘唯一被允许的以棉绒为填充物的家具是枕头（§），但枕头不得超过头部的大小（《小品》.六.2.6）。
The Commentary’s explanations of this point show that the pillow used in those days was an oblong cushion, looking like a rectangle when viewed from above and a triangle when viewed from either the right or left side (like the old style of pillow still in use in Thailand). Such pillows, the Commentary says, should be no more than two cubits (1 meter) long, and one span plus four fingerbreadths (32 cm.) from corner to corner on the sides (although this seems considerably larger than a pillow “the size of the head”). A bhikkhu who is not ill may use such a pillow for his head and feet; an ill bhikkhu may line up a series of pillows, cover them with a cloth, and lie down on them with no offense. According to Cv.VI.14, if bhikkhus are presented with cushions stuffed with cotton down, they may use them only after tearing them up and making them into pillows.	《义注》对此的解释表明，当时使用的枕头是一种长椭圆形的垫子，从上方看呈长方形，从左侧或右侧看呈三角形（类似于泰国至今仍在使用的旧式枕头）。《义注》说，这种枕头的长度不应超过两肘（1公尺），从边角到另一边角不超过一张手加四指宽（32公分）（尽管这似乎比「头部大小」的枕头要大得多）。无病的比丘可以用这种枕头垫头和脚；生病的比丘可以摆放一排枕头，用布盖好，然后躺下，并不犯戒。根据《小品》.六.14，如果比丘获赠填充棉绒的垫子，他们只能将其撕碎，重新制成枕头后才能使用。
Human hair was another forbidden form of stuffing. Mattresses and cushions stuffed with other materials, though, are allowed even for use in the monastery. Cv.VI.2.7 mentions five kinds of allowable stuffing: wool, cloth, bark, grass, and leaves. (According to the Commentary, wool here includes all kinds of animal fur and bird feathers. Goose down would thus be allowable. Synthetic fibers and synthetic down would apparently come under “cloth.” The Commentary also mentions that, according to the Kurundī, mattresses and cushions stuffed with these materials are allowable whether covered with leather or cloth.)	人类头发是另一种被禁止的填充物。不过，即使在寺院内也允许使用填充有其他材料的床垫和垫子。《小品》.六.2.7 提到了五种允许的填充物：羊毛、布、树皮、草和树叶。（根据《义注》，这里的羊毛包括各种动物毛皮和鸟类羽毛。因此，鹅绒是允许的。合成纤维和合成绒显然属于「布」。《义注》还提到，根据《Kurundī》，用这些材料填充的床垫和垫子是允许的，无论覆盖著皮革还是布料。）
The purpose of all this is to keep bhikkhus from using furnishings that are extravagant and ostentatious. As the Vinaya-mukha mentions, though, standards of what counts as extravagant and ostentatious vary from age to age and culture to culture. Some of the things allowed in the Canon and commentaries now seem exotic and luxurious; and other things forbidden by them, common and ordinary. Thus the wise policy, in a monastery, would be to use only those furnishings allowed by the rules and regarded as unostentatious at present; and, when visiting a lay person’s home, to avoid sitting on furnishings that seem unusually grand.	这一切的目的是为了防止比丘使用奢侈、炫耀的家具。然而，正如《戒律入口》中提到的那样，奢侈和炫耀的标准因时代和文化的不同而有所不同。《圣典》和注释书中所允许的一些事物现在看来显得异国情调和奢华；以及其所禁止的其他事物，现在看来显得常见和普通。因此，在寺院里，明智之举是只使用那些戒条允许的、目前被认为不炫耀的家具。当拜访居士家中时，避免坐在看起来异常华丽的家具上。
The factors for the offense here are three.	这里的犯戒因素有三个。
1) Object: a bed or bench stuffed with cotton down.	1）对象：填充棉绒的床或凳。
2) Effort: One obtains it after making it or having it made	2）努力：在制作或令人制作之后获得它
3) Intention: for one’s own use.	3）意图：供自己使用。

Object	对象
Cotton down, according to the Vibhaṅga, includes any down from trees, vines, and grass. The Commentary to Cv.VI.2.6 interprets this as meaning down from any plant, inasmuch as “trees, vines, and grass” is the Canon’s usual way of covering all plant life. Kapok, flax fibers, jute, and cotton would thus all come under this category.	棉绒，根据《经分别》，包括树木、藤蔓和草类的任何绒毛。《小品》.六.2.6的《义注》将其解释为任何植物的绒毛，因为「树木、藤蔓和草类」是《圣典》通常用来指称所有植物的方式。因此，木棉、亚麻纤维、黄麻和棉花都属于此种类。
Because cotton-down cushions are forbidden in all situations, bed and bench here would seem to include all forms of furniture, including the stools, chairs, and sofas exempted from the preceding rule.	由于在任何情况下都禁止棉绒垫子，因此这里的床和凳似乎包括所有形式的家具，包括前一条戒条中豁免的凳子、椅子和沙发。
Effort	努力
The permutations under this factor are as follows: the act of making the bed/bench or having it made—a dukkaṭa; obtaining the finished article—a pācittiya. This last penalty applies regardless of whether the bed/bench was made entirely by oneself, entirely by others either partly or entirely at one’s instigation, or whether one finished what others began or got others to finish what one began oneself. In any event, one must tear off the upholstery before confessing the offense.	此因素下的排列组合如下：制作床/凳的行为（或让人制作）——《突吉罗》；获得成品——《波逸提》。无论床/凳是完全由自己制作，或是完全由他人制作（部分或全部受自己唆使），亦或是完成他人开始之物，或令他人完成自己开始之物，均适用此最后一种惩罚。无论如何，在忏悔罪行之前，必须先撕掉填充物。
If one obtains an upholstered bed/bench made by another—not at one’s instigation—then using it entails a dukkaṭa (§).	如果获得一张由他人制作的软垫床/凳——并非应自己的要求——那么使用它犯《突吉罗》（§）。
Intention	意图
There is a dukkaṭa in making a bed or bench upholstered with cotton down—or having it made—for the sake of another person.	为了他人而制作或请人制作用棉绒填充的床或凳，犯《突吉罗》。
Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense in using cotton down to stuff a pillow, a knee strap (§), a belt, a shoulder strap, or a bag for carrying the alms bowl; or to form the filter in a water strainer. If one obtains a bed or bench stuffed with cotton down made for another person’s use, there is no offense in using it if one removes the upholstery first.	用棉绒填充枕头、膝带（§）、皮带、肩带或用来装钵的袋子，或制作滤水器的滤芯，并不犯戒。若获得他人使用的、填充棉绒的床或凳，只要先移除其内部的填充物，使用它也不犯戒。
Summary: Obtaining a bed or bench stuffed with cotton down after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one remove the stuffing before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——填充了棉绒的床或凳之后并获得它，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先取出填充物才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

89	八十九
When a bhikkhu is having a sitting cloth made, it is to be made to the standard measurement. Here the standard is this: two spans—using the sugata span—in length, one and a half spans in width, the border a span. In excess of that, it is to be cut down and confessed.	当比丘制作坐具时，必须按照标准尺寸制作。这里的标准是这样的：长度为两张手（使用善逝张手），宽度为一个半张手，边框为一张手。超过那者，应该被裁掉并忏悔[波逸提]。
The origin story here follows on the passage in Mv.VIII.16.1, where the Buddha allows bhikkhus to use a sitting cloth in order to protect their robes from getting soiled by their furnishings, and their furnishings from getting soiled by their robes and bodies.	这里的起源故事延续《大品》.八.16.1 的段落，佛陀允许比丘使用坐具，以保护他们的袈裟不被他们的家具弄脏，以及他们的家具不被他们的袈裟和身体弄脏。
“Now at that time the Blessed One had allowed a sitting cloth for the bhikkhus. Some group-of-six bhikkhus… used sitting cloths, without any limit in size, that hung down in front and behind even on beds and benches.” (As a result, the Buddha set the limit at 2 by 1.5 spans.) Now, Ven. Udāyin was very large. Setting out his sitting cloth in front of the Blessed One, he stretched it out on all sides before sitting down. The Blessed One said to him, ‘Why is it, Udāyin, that when setting out your sitting cloth you stretch it out on all sides like a worker in old leather? (§)’	「其时世尊允许比丘们使用坐具。某六群比丘……使用坐具，没有任何尺寸限制，甚至在床和凳子上都前后垂下。」（因此，佛陀将限制设为 2 x 1.5 张手。）其时，优陀夷尊者身体非常大。在世尊面前铺其坐具，向四面八方展开，然后坐下。世尊对他说：『优陀夷，为什么在铺你的坐具时，你像一个穿著旧皮革的工人一样将它向四面八方展开呢？(§)』
“Because the sitting cloth the Blessed One has allowed for the bhikkhus is way too small.’” (Thus the Buddha added the allowance for the border.)	「因为世尊允许比丘们的坐具太小了。』」（因此佛陀增加了边框的开缘。）
There are three factors for the full offense here.	这里完全违犯的因素有三个。
1) Object: a sitting cloth larger than the standard measure.	1）对象：比标准尺寸大的坐具。
2) Effort: One obtains it after making it or having it made	2）努力：在制作或令人制作之后获得它
3) Intention: for one’s own use.	3）意图：供自己使用。

Object	对象
A sitting cloth, by definition, has to have a border, regardless of whether it is made of felted or woven material. However—as none of the texts give any clear indication as to how many sides should have a border or how the borders should be patterned—there is no definitive measurement as to how large the overall cloth should be. A wise policy, then, is to take the origin story as a guide: Make the cloth large enough so that one can sit cross-legged on it without soiling one’s robes or furnishings, but not so large that it extends out on any side.	坐具，根据定义，必须有边框，无论其材质是毡制还是编织。然而，由于没有任何文献明确指出坐具多少边应该有边框，或者边框的图案应该如何设计，因此坐具的整体尺寸并没有确切的标准。所以，明智之举是以起源故事为指导：制作坐具要足够大，以便可以双盘腿而坐而不会弄脏袈裟或家具，但又不能太大，以至于向四面八方延伸。
Effort	努力
The permutations under this factor are as follows: the act of making the sitting cloth or having it made—a dukkaṭa; obtaining the finished article—a pācittiya. This last penalty applies regardless of whether the cloth was made entirely by oneself, entirely by others either partly or entirely at one’s instigation, or whether one finished what others began or got others to finish what one began oneself. In any event, one must cut the cloth down to the proper size before confessing the offense.	此因素下的排列组合如下：制作或让人制作坐具的行为——《突吉罗》；获得成品——《波逸提》。无论坐具是完全由自己制作，或是完全由他人制作（部分或全部受自己唆使），亦或是完成他人开始之物，或令他人完成自己开始之物，均适用此最后一种惩罚。无论如何，在忏悔罪行之前，必须将坐具裁剪至合适尺寸。
If one obtains an oversized sitting cloth made by another—not at one’s instigation—then using it entails a dukkaṭa (§).	如果获得一块由他人制作的过大尺寸的坐具——并非应自己的要求——那么使用它犯《突吉罗》（§）。
Intention	意图
There is a dukkaṭa in making an overly large sitting cloth—or having it made—for the sake of another person.	为了他人而制作或请人制作过大的坐具，犯《突吉罗》。
Non-offenses	不犯
There is no offense if one receives an overly large sitting cloth made by another person (§)—not at one’s instigation—and cuts it down to size before using it oneself. The non-offense clauses also state that there is no offense in a canopy, a floor-covering, a wall screen, a mattress/cushion, or a kneeling mat. This apparently means that if one receives an overly large sitting cloth, one may use it as a canopy, etc., instead.	若收到他人制作的过大坐具（§），且并非应自己的要求，并在使用前将其裁剪至合适尺寸，则不构成犯戒。不犯条款也规定，天篷、地垫、屏风、床垫/垫子或跪垫也不构成犯戒。这显然意味著，如果收到过大的坐具，可以将其用作天篷等其他用途。
Summary: Obtaining an overly large sitting cloth after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one cut the cloth down to size before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——过大的坐具后，获得该坐具，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先将坐具裁剪到合适的尺寸才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

90	九十
When a bhikkhu is having a skin-eruption covering cloth made, it is to be made to the standard measurement. Here the standard is this: four spans—using the sugata span—in length, two spans in width. In excess of that, it is to be cut down and confessed.	当比丘制作覆疮布时，必须按照标准尺寸制作。这里的标准是这样的：长度为四张手（使用善逝张手），宽度为两张手。超过那者，应该被裁掉并忏悔[波逸提]。
Object	对象
Mv.VIII.17 allows bhikkhus to use a skin-eruption covering cloth to protect their robes when they are suffering from boils, running sores, rashes, or “thick scab” diseases (large boils? psoriasis?). The Vibhaṅga to this rule states that the cloth is to cover the area from the navel down to the knees, thus suggesting that the cloth is intended to be worn as an inner robe beneath the lower robe. As we already mentioned under NP 1, one should determine these cloths for use when one is suffering from such a disease and place them under shared ownership when not.	《大品》.八.17 允许比丘在患疖、溃烂、皮疹或「厚痂」疾病（大疖？牛皮癣？）时，使用覆疮布来保护袈裟。此戒条的《经分别》指出，布料应覆盖从肚脐到膝盖的区域，这表明布料应作为内衣穿在下衣之内。正如我们在《舍堕》一中所述，应在患此种病时决意这些布料使用，并在非患病时将其置于共享所有权之下。
As mentioned under Pc 87, above, the sugata measures are discussed in Appendix II. Here we take the sugata span to equal 25 cm., which would put the standard measurement for the skin-eruption covering cloth at 1 meter by 50 cm.	如上文《波逸提》八七所提到，善逝尺寸在附录二中讨论。这里我们取善逝张手为 25 公分，这将使覆疮布的标准尺寸为 1 公尺 x 50 公分。
Effort, intention, & non-offenses	努力，意图，及不犯
The permutations of these factors are the same as under the preceding rule.	这些因素的排列组合与前一条戒条下的排列组合相同。
Summary: Obtaining an overly large skin-eruption covering cloth after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one cut the cloth down to size before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——过大的覆疮布后，获得该覆疮布，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先将覆疮布裁剪到合适的尺寸才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

91	九十一
When a bhikkhu is having a rains-bathing cloth made, it is to be made to the standard measurement. Here the standard is this: six spans—using the sugata span—in length, two and a half spans in width. In excess of that, it is to be cut down and confessed.	当比丘制作雨浴衣时，必须按照标准尺寸制作。这里的标准是这样的：长度为六张手（使用善逝张手），宽度为两个半张手。超过那者，应该被裁掉并忏悔[波逸提]。
Object	对象
The rains-bathing cloth has already been discussed in detail under NP 24. Taking the sugata span as 25 cm., the standard measurement for the rains-bathing cloth would be 1.5 m. by 62.5 cm.	雨浴衣已在《舍堕》二四中详细讨论过。以善逝张手为 25 公分，雨浴衣的标准尺寸为 1.5 公尺 x 62.5 公分。
Effort, intention, & non-offenses	努力，意图，及不犯
The permutations of these factors are the same as under Pc 89.	这些因素的排列组合与《波逸提》八九下的排列组合相同。
Summary: Obtaining an overly large rains-bathing cloth after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one cut the cloth down to size before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——过大的雨浴衣后，获得该雨浴衣，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先将雨浴衣裁剪到合适的尺寸才能忏悔罪行。

* * *

92	九十二
Should any bhikkhu have a robe made the measurement of the sugata robe or larger, it is to be cut down and confessed. Here, the measurement of the Sugata’s sugata robe is this: nine spans—using the sugata span—in length, six spans in width. This is the measurement of the Sugata’s sugata robe.	若任何比丘所造的袈裟尺寸与善逝袈裟相同或更大，应该被裁掉并忏悔[波逸提]。这里善逝袈裟的尺寸是这样的：长度为九张手（使用善逝张手），宽度为六张手。此乃善逝袈裟的尺寸。
Object	对象
The term sugata—meaning well-gone or accomplished—is an epithet for the Buddha.	「sugata（善逝）」一词意为善逝或成就，是佛陀的别称。
Robe is not defined in the Vibhaṅga here but apparently means any of the three basic robes: the lower robe, the upper robe, and the outer robe. This raises an interesting point: Perhaps in the Buddha’s time all three of the basic robes were approximately the same size. This would have made it much more convenient than it is at present to hold to the practice of using only one set of three robes. When washing one robe, one could wear the other two without looking out of line.	「袈裟」一词并未在《经分别》中对其进行定义，但显然指的是基本的三衣：下衣、上衣和外衣。这引出了一个有趣的观点：或许在佛陀时代，所有基本三衣的尺寸大致相同。这样一来，坚持只使用一套三衣的修行就比现在方便得多。当清洗一件袈裟时，可以穿著另外两件，而不会显得不协调。
At any rate, taking the sugata span to be 25 cm. would put the size of the Buddha’s robes at 2.25 m. by 1.50 m.—much larger than the lower robes used at present, but much smaller than present-day upper and outer robes.	无论如何，如果将善逝张手取为 25 公分，那么佛陀的袈裟尺寸将为 2.25 公尺乘以 1.50 公尺——比现在使用的下衣大得多，但比现在的上衣和外衣小得多。
As we will see under Appendix II, various theories have been offered over the centuries as to the length of the sugata span. Beginning at least with the time of the Mahā Aṭṭhakathā, one of the ancient commentaries, the Buddha was assumed to be of three-times normal height, and so his handspan, cubit, etc., were assumed to be three-times normal length. Only recently, within the last century or so, have Vinaya experts taken evidence from the Canon to show that the Buddha, though tall, was not abnormally so, and thus the estimate of the sugata span, etc., has shrunk accordingly. Still, the traditional estimates of the Buddha’s height continue to influence the size of the robes that bhikkhus wear today throughout the Theravādin countries. There was a movement in Thailand during the mid-19th century to return to the original size and style as shown in the earliest Indian Buddha images, but the idea never caught on.	正如我们将在附录二中看到的，几个世纪以来，关于善逝张手的长度的各种理论被提出。至少从古代注释书之一《Mahā Aṭṭhakathā》时期开始，佛陀被认为身高是常人的三倍，因此他的张手、肘长等也被认为是常人的三倍。直到最近一个世纪左右，律藏专家才从《圣典》中寻找证据，显示佛陀虽然身材高大，但并非异常高大，因此对张手等的估计也相应缩小。尽管如此，关于佛陀身高的传统估计仍然影响著当今上座部佛教国家比丘所穿袈裟的尺寸。19世纪中期，泰国曾出现过一场运动，试图恢复最早期印度佛像所展现的原始尺寸和样式，但这一理念并未流行起来。
Effort, intention, & non-offenses	努力，意图，及不犯
The permutations of these factors are the same as under Pc 89.	这些因素的排列组合与《波逸提》八九下的排列组合相同。
Summary: Obtaining an overly large robe after making it—or having it made—for one’s own use is a pācittiya offense requiring that one cut the robe down to size before confessing the offense.	摘要：为自己使用而制作——或请人制作——过大的袈裟后，获得该袈裟，是《波逸提》（《单堕》）罪，必须先将袈裟裁剪到合适的尺寸才能忏悔罪行。