---
title: "南山律在家備覽略編 · 第一節　約三心明止持"
description: "南山律在家備覽略編由近代高僧弘一法師編撰。該書成於民國時期，是對唐代道宣律祖南山律的系統整理與精要闡釋，旨在為在家居士提供清晰可行的戒律指南。內容涵蓋皈戒、持戒、懺悔等核心議題，提煉南山律精髓，並結合時代需求予以簡明詮釋。此書被譽為漢傳佛教在家律學的權威入門典籍，對現代居士持戒修行具有重要指導意義，在佛教律學傳承中佔有承先啟後的關鍵地位。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmgn0mjjr2y92l404d10sov6f"
---

### 第一節　約三心明止持

> Section 1: Three Minds and the Practice of Cessation

▲戒疏云『前將止持對心以明。　若無染汙以明止持、行前三心得有持義。　謂識想受、此之三心非業非記。流入行心方成別業。故分四陰以為二分。　豈非本有戒體、外無染汙、光潔純淨、名之為持。三心非記、受體是記、故得持也。』

> The Commentary on the Precepts says: "Earlier, the ceasing-and-holding aspect was explained in relation to the mind. If there is no defilement, the ceasing-and-holding aspect is shown. In the first three mental states, there can be the meaning of 'holding.' These are perception, thought, and feeling—these three minds are neither karma nor karmic record. Only when they flow into the volitional mind do they become distinct karma. Therefore, the four aggregates are divided into two parts. Is this not the originally possessed essence of the precepts—outwardly free of defilement, luminous and pure—which is called 'holding'? The three minds are not karmic record; the received essence is karmic record. Thus, one can speak of 'holding.'"

行宗釋云『上句標舉。　若下正釋為三、初通示。據此非持、取本受體說名為持、故云有義。古人目為端拱止持、以非造作、任運成故。　謂下別簡四心分二所以。統論四行、止持有二、餘之三種並局行心故也。　豈下結顯。三心下釋疑。　問、三心何分。答。了別所緣境名識即通指六識。取所領之相名想謂取所領六塵之相則為六想。領納所緣名受謂六觸因緣生六受、一一各有苦樂不苦不樂三受之異、皆從違順非違非順而生。造作之心能趣於果名為行。謂六受之後、各起善不善不動業等。亦名六思、思即是業。若大乘經則受想行識、列次不同。由受生想、從想起行、由行成識。今依小論則識想受行、以取最初一念了別之心名識、次起想像名想、復次領納名受、後起業思造作名行。　問、破毀之人有此持否。答。據事鈔中、犯一重戒、餘戒常淨儼然。是則持毀皆有持義、今文且從持說故云無耳。』見戒疏記卷四

> The Commentary on the Precepts says: "The first line is a heading. 'If...' begins the main explanation, which has three parts. First, a general indication. According to this, it is not 'keeping' in the sense of the received precept-body that is called keeping; therefore it says 'there is a meaning.' The ancients called this 'folding the arms and refraining'—the precept of restraint—because it is not produced by deliberate action but is accomplished spontaneously. 'It is said...' begins the specific analysis of why the four mental factors are divided into two. Generally speaking, of the four practices, restraint-precepts involve two, while the remaining three are all limited to the active mind. 'How could...' begins the concluding revelation. 'The three minds...' begins the resolution of doubt. Question: How are the three minds distinguished? Answer: The awareness that distinguishes objects is called consciousness. Grasping the characteristics of what is experienced is called perception. Experiencing and receiving objects is called feeling. The active mind that propels one toward results is called volition. In Mahayana scriptures, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness are listed in a different order. Here, following the Lesser Vehicle treatise, the order is consciousness, perception, feeling, volition—taking the very first moment of distinguishing awareness as consciousness, the next arising of grasping at characteristics as perception, the next experiencing and receiving as feeling, and the subsequent arising of karmic volition and action as volition. Question: Does one who has broken and destroyed the precepts still have this keeping? Answer: According to the 'Monastic Code,' if one has violated one grave precept, the remaining precepts remain pure and intact. Thus both keeping and breaking have the meaning of keeping; the present text speaks only from the standpoint of keeping, and therefore says 'none.'"

資持云『謂分四心以明二止、三心中止此科所明、行心中止則如後述。　三心非業、本不名持、但望受體說有持義。以持是記業、無記非持故。此由古謂但不作惡、即名止持。今約四心分為二別、則無前濫。』見事鈔記卷二十六

> Zichi says: "It divides into four minds to explain the two forms of restraint. The cessation-restraint discussed in this section pertains to the first three minds; the cessation-restraint of the action-mind will be explained later. The first three minds are not karma, so fundamentally they cannot be called 'restraint.' It is only in relation to the received precept-body that they are said to have the meaning of restraint. This is because restraint is recorded karma, while neutral (non-recording) states are not restraint. <note place="inline">This is because the ancients held that merely not committing evil is called cessation-restraint. Now, by dividing into the four minds and distinguishing two categories, the earlier confusion is avoided.</note>" <note place="inline">See Commentary on the Vinaya Pitaka, Fascicle 26</note>