---
title: "律抄第三卷手決 · 有主房戒"
description: "律抄第三卷手決是佛教律宗重要典籍，相传为唐代高僧道宣律师所著。该书成书于中国佛教律学鼎盛时期，系统总结了佛教戒律的精要，尤其侧重比丘、比丘尼的日常行为规范与戒律实践。内容涵盖衣、食、住、行等僧团生活细节，并阐释持戒与修行的内在关联。作为南山律宗的核心文献之一，该手決不仅为唐宋时期僧团提供了权威戒律指南，更对汉传佛教律学体系的形成产生深远影响，至今仍被视为了解佛教戒律思想的重要参考。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcwplq4a2771js04w1gomrhk"
---

### 有主房戒第七

> Chapter 7: The Precept of Having a Main Residence

佛在拘睒彌。憂填王為闡陀比丘造房。便斫路中神樹。惱亂非人。以舉白佛。佛因為說呵責制戒。若死遠去不還等者。此是多論文。今具寫之云。若房主死若遠行者。絕不還隨意處分。若與三寶。若隨親與。若乞白衣。若自賣得錢。自在隨心。若賣房不得賣地。若房主不處分與屬四方僧。言若房主死竟屬四方僧。不同遠行不還歟。依處分不得也。如殺父羅漢等者。相解不同。如但殺父有非羅漢。無有是謗不假虛成故不同也。妄語兩舌者。如離間他兄弟知他實無有惡意。欲離間他必須惡語。兩邊破和名為兩舌。舉此二對意。從上謗僧之事必是假妄語而成。妄語墮罪也。後得僧殘。羅漢妄語其事雖一而得前罪殘。亦示又得提也。下二眾者。沙彌沙彌尼也。式叉尼指入沙彌尼中也。相心謂淨等者。比丘實知彼淨。諸人亦知不淨。自相心亦為言是淨。違自相心說不言淨。但違相心即結謗罪也。如打破戒犯墮者。破戒持戒但打皆墮。違心起謗不間淨穢也。語實者舉實也。相實者即相心云根也。又相實者。前雖是女要須相心不擬也。事實者。如殺王人眾還道殺王等事實也。逮于下篇者。指下九十中利吒違諫戒也。謂五篇中下篇。非抄下篇也。事希者破僧事希也。法隱者。其事既希諫法亦隱也。或但有因用者。謂一寺之內各自相朋。善惡相乖。即是破僧之因。又如說欲不障道。即是犯提之因。終不辦果者。謂無諫法終不成僧殘之果。行寔網生者。網者恒也。既行惡行即違教法。生在地獄也。廣如戒本疏者。彼諫云。破羯磨僧輕蘭非逆。破法輕者重蘭得逆。三諫者三屏諫。四違屏諫。五違僧諫。言乖趣合者。謂戒雖即言乖理趣並合。五現法樂者。謂貪坐禪習定也。其事實爾者。謂所諫之人實有其行。能人不善諫他。設違無犯。

> The Buddha was staying in Kaushambi. King Udayana had a dwelling built for the monk Chanda. In the process, they cut down a sacred tree by the roadside, disturbing the spirits dwelling there. This was reported to the Buddha, who then gave a discourse and established a rule of discipline. Concerning cases where the owner dies or goes far away and does not return: this is a matter of extensive commentary. Here is the substance of it. If the owner of the dwelling dies, or travels far away and never returns, the dwelling may be disposed of at will. It may be given to the Three Jewels, given to relatives, given to laypeople, or sold for money—whatever one wishes. If the dwelling is sold, the land itself may not be sold. If the owner does not make such arrangements and dies, the dwelling belongs to the monastic community of the four directions. If the owner dies but had arranged for it to go to someone else, that arrangement stands. Regarding the case of killing one's father or an arhat: interpretations differ. For instance, killing one's father alone does not necessarily make one an arhat—there is no such equivalence, so the cases are distinct. False speech and divisive speech: For example, if one sows discord between brothers, knowing full well they have no ill intent, one must use harsh words to separate them. Breaking the harmony on both sides is called divisive speech. These two examples are cited to show that the offenses of slandering the Sangha from earlier are necessarily accomplished through false speech. False speech incurs a falling offense. Later, a sangha-avasesa offense is incurred. Although an arhat's false speech is a single act, it entails both the earlier offense and the residual offense. This also demonstrates that a wrongdoing offense (dukkata) is incurred as well. The two lower groups: novices and female novices. The female trainee (shikshamana) is included among the female novices. Regarding "matching one's own mind" in the case of purity: when a monk truly knows someone is pure, but others consider that person impure, and he himself also thinks "this person is pure," yet he says "impure"—contradicting his own inner awareness—this constitutes the offense of slander. Concerning the case of beating a monk who has broken precepts: whether one strikes a precept-breaker or one who keeps precepts, both constitute a falling offense. Slander that contradicts one's own mind applies regardless of whether the person is pure or impure. "True speech" means reporting actual facts. "True by appearance" refers to what matches one's own perception. Furthermore, "true by appearance" means that even if the other person was previously a woman, one must not act with intent based on appearance. "True by fact" is like reporting that someone killed a king—the fact is true as stated. Regarding the later chapter: this refers to the offense of Licchavi violating the admonition, found in the eighty-odd rules later in the text. It is in the later section of the five categories—not the abbreviated later section. "Rare occurrence" refers to the fact that schism in the Sangha is rare. "The teaching hidden" means that because such events are rare, the rules for admonishing against them are also obscure. "Or only causes exist": within a single monastery, monks may factionalize, with good and evil in conflict—this is the cause of schism. Likewise, saying that "desire does not obstruct the path" is a cause of wrongdoing offenses. "Never attaining the result" means that without the admonishment procedure, one never completes the sangha-avasesa offense. "Walking in sin, caught in the net": "net" means ceaseless. When one commits evil deeds and transgresses the teachings, one is reborn in hell. As extensively discussed in the Commentary on the Precept Handbook: the admonishment there says—breaking up the Sangha by ritual act is a minor transgression, not an unpardonable offense. Breaking up the Sangha by doctrine is a heavier minor transgression and is unpardonable. The three admonishments are three private admonitions. The fourth violation follows the private admonitions; the fifth violation follows the communal admonition. "Words that diverge but meaning that accords": although the words of the precepts may seem to diverge, their underlying principle is consistent. "Five kinds of present happiness": this refers to delighting in sitting in meditation and practicing concentration. "When the facts are indeed so": if the person being admonished truly has such conduct, and the admonisher does not admonish well, then even if the admonishment is violated, there is no offense.