---
title: "根本薩婆多部律攝 · 34 足食學處"
description: "根本薩婆多部律攝由印度尊者勝友造唐代高僧義淨法師漢譯是根本說一切有部律典的重要釋論全書以攝頌體概括律藏核心內容系統闡述比丘戒相與行事準則反映印度佛教部派時期的戒律思想為研究說一切有部律制的重要文獻在漢傳佛教律學體系中具有權威地位對唐代及後世律宗發展影響深遠"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcwjqdkc0iezl704v0vjxnce"
---

### 足食學處第三十四

> The Thirty-Fourth Precept: Eating in Moderation

佛在室羅伐城給孤獨園，爾時佛告諸苾芻：「我為一坐食能生少欲等諸功德，汝等亦應一坐而食。」時諸苾芻食時見尊者來，遂便離座，將為足食，不敢更食。由是世尊告苾芻曰：「應飽足食，若尊者來亦不應起。既受食已，不應離座。下至行鹽及受食葉，皆不應起。」復因六眾苾芻飽已更食，貪餮無厭，事惱同前，制斯學處。

> The Buddha was residing in the monastery of Anāthapiṇḍada in Śrāvastī. At that time, the Buddha addressed the bhikkhus, saying, "I practice eating in one sitting, which gives rise to few desires and other virtues. You too should eat in one sitting." Then, while the bhikkhus were eating, they saw a senior monk approaching, so they rose from their seats, thinking they had already eaten enough and should not eat further. Because of this, the World-Honored One told the bhikkhus, "You should eat until you are satisfied. Even if a senior monk arrives, you should not rise. Once you have received food, you should not leave your seat. Even to fetch salt or receive a leaf for food, you should not rise." Later, because the group of six bhikkhus, after eating their fill, continued to eat again, being greedy and insatiable, causing the same trouble as before, this training rule was established.

「若復苾芻，足食竟，不作餘食法更食者，波逸底迦。」

> If a monk, having eaten his fill, eats again without performing the remaining-food ritual, it is an offense requiring confession.

苾芻足食竟者，謂食噉飽足作遮止言，心生棄捨。若心未捨，縱出遮言未成遮足，若更食時，但得惡作。若作了心唱言休足，此成遮足。然具五支：一、知是食，謂五正食。二、知有授食人，謂是女男半擇迦等。三、知授入手，謂已受得食。四、知足食，謂作食了心發言唱足。五、知從座起。若更食者，得根本罪。異此五種不成遮足。若食雜不淨物者，亦不成足，餘如廣文。言食者，有五蒲膳尼，即五種可噉食：一、飯；二、麥豆飯；三󰉓；四、肉；五、餅。魚是肉攝故不別言。又有五種珂但尼，即五種可嚼食：謂根、莖、葉、華、果。若先食五種嚼食及乳酪菜等，後食五噉食者無犯。若先食五噉食，更食五嚼食及乳酪菜等名犯，遮足應知。有五未足之言，謂見他人授食之時，未即須者應報彼言：「且待且去！且有且待我食！且待我盡！」若兼且聲名曰未足，若無且聲即是遮足。若未為足意，設作足言，亦不成足，得惡作罪，由言不稱法故。不作餘食法者，若病人殘，雖不作法，開食無犯。若得餘食作法食者，自身樂住施主得福。欲作法時先淨洗手，受得食已，應持就一未足苾芻、或雖已足未離本座，對彼蹲踞，告曰：「具壽存念！我苾芻某甲食已遮足，今復得此噉食嚼食，我欲更食，願與我作餘食法。」時彼苾芻取兩三口食已，報曰：「此是汝物，隨意應食。」此據前人自未遮足，得食無犯。若自足已便不合食，應以手按，告曰：「斯是汝物，隨意食之。」有五不成作餘食法：一、身在界內對界外人；二、不相及處；三、在傍邊；四、在背後；五、前人離座。翻此便成。若一人作法，設餘人食，並皆無犯。若遮足已作遮足想疑，不作餘法而吞咽者，便得墮罪。雖未遮足為遮足想疑，俱得惡作，後二無犯。若北方果、若天神藕，此是希物，或復飢年飲食難得，不作餘法食之無犯。粥若初熟豎匙不倒，󰉓若和水指畫見跡，此皆成足，異此不成足，為足想六句如常。

> A monk is considered to have finished eating when, having eaten to fullness, he makes a statement of refusal, and his mind has genuinely renounced further food. If his mind has not yet renounced it, even if he utters words of refusal, it does not constitute a valid refusal. If he eats again in such a case, he only commits a minor fault. If he forms the deliberate intention and declares aloud, "I have had enough," this constitutes a valid refusal. However, a valid refusal requires the presence of five factors: 1. Knowing it is food: This refers to the five main types of solid food. 2. Knowing there is a person offering food: This refers to a woman, a man, a eunuch, etc. 3. Knowing the food has been received: This means the food has already been accepted into one's hands. 4. Knowing one is refusing food: This means forming the deliberate intention of having finished eating and declaring it aloud. 5. Knowing one has risen from one's seat. If one eats again after this, one commits a root offense. If these five factors are not all present, it does not constitute a valid refusal. If one eats food mixed with impure substances, it also does not constitute finishing a meal. Other details are as explained in the extensive texts. Regarding food, there are five types of \*Bhojanīya\* (substantial foods to be eaten): 1. Cooked rice 2. Cooked wheat or bean meal 3. Flour-based food 4. Meat 5. Cakes Fish is included in the category of meat and is not listed separately. Furthermore, there are five types of \*Khādanīya\* (light foods to be chewed): Roots, stems, leaves, flowers, and fruits. If one first eats the five types of chewable food, or milk, curd, or vegetables, and then eats the five substantial foods, there is no offense. If one first eats the five substantial foods and then eats the five chewable foods, or milk, curd, or vegetables, this is an offense. One should understand this as a refusal of further food. There are five phrases indicating one is \*not yet\* full: When seeing another person offering food that one does not immediately need, one should reply: "Wait a moment," "Go away for now," "I already have some," "Wait until I finish eating," or "Wait until I have eaten it all." If the word "wait" or its equivalent is included, it is a statement of not being full. If such a word is absent, it is a statement of refusal. If one has not formed the intention of being full, even if one makes a statement of being full, it does not constitute being full. One commits a minor fault because the words do not correspond to the actual state of mind. Regarding not performing the \*remaining-food\* ritual: If it is food left over by a sick person, even if the ritual is not performed, it is permissible to eat it without offense. If one obtains other food and performs the ritual to eat it, one maintains one's own well-being and the donor gains merit. When intending to perform the ritual, first wash one's hands clean. After receiving the food, one should take it to a monk who has not yet finished his meal, or to one who has finished but has not yet left his seat. Squatting before him, one should say: "Venerable one, please be mindful. I, monk So-and-so, have already refused further food after eating. Now I have obtained this substantial/chewable food again. I wish to eat more. Please perform the remaining-food ritual for me." Then, that monk should take two or three mouthfuls of the food and reply, "This is your food. You may eat it as you wish." This applies when the other monk himself has \*not\* refused further food; then eating it is without offense. If the other monk has already refused food himself, he should not eat it. He should place his hand on it and say, "This is your food. You may eat it as you wish." There are five situations where performing the remaining-food ritual is invalid: 1. Being inside a boundary while facing someone outside it. 2. Being in a place not mutually accessible. 3. Being at the side. 4. Being behind. 5. The other person having left his seat. The opposite of these makes the ritual valid. If one person performs the ritual, even if others eat, they are all without offense. If one has refused food, thinks or suspects one has refused food, does not perform the remaining-food ritual, and then swallows food, one commits a downfall offense. If one has \*not\* refused food but thinks or suspects one has, in both cases one commits a minor fault. The latter two cases (thinking/suspecting one hasn't when one hasn't) are without offense. Regarding northern fruits or divine lotus roots—these are rare items, or in times of famine when food is hard to obtain—eating them without performing the ritual is without offense. If porridge is freshly cooked and a spoon stands upright in it without falling, or if flour mixed with water leaves a mark when a finger is drawn through it, these constitute finishing a meal. Otherwise, they do not. The six permutations regarding thinking one is full are as usual.