Early versions of the bodhisattva precepts were based on the ten virtuous actions, a list of ten practices conducive to wholesome behavior which first appeared in Hinayāna literature. Early Mahāyāna practitioners then interpreted the ten virtuous acts as precepts or injunctions, and thus produced one of the earliest sets of bodhisattva precepts. The ten virtuous precepts are:

1. 1. abstention from taking life
   2. abstention from taking what is not given
   3. abstention from wrong conduct as regards sensuous pleasures
   4. abstention from lying speech
   5. abstention from malicious speech
   6. abstention from harsh speech
   7. abstention from indistinct prattling
   8. abstention from covetousness
   9. abstention from ill will
   10. abstention from wrong views

This list of restrictions included many elements that were also found in the Fan wang precepts, the set of fifty-eight precepts that Saichō proposed to follow. Although the Fan wang precepts were compiled much later than the ten virtuous precepts, the two sets shared certain characteristics. Both sets were primarily concerned with moral issues. Little attention was paid to issues of dress, decorum and manners, subjects which had been treated at great length in the Hinayāna precepts. Although subjects such as appropriate clothing for monks were discussed in the Fan wang Ching, the work was more concerned with moral issues such as lying. In fact, Saichō had to point out to the monastic leaders of Nara that the Fan wang precepts would require Tendai monks to shave their heads and wear robes.

The Fan wang precepts could not be understood as Perfect precepts until they had been interpreted according to the teachings of the Lotus Sūtra and the Tendai School. Such a view is not surprising since Saichō was defending the Lotus Sūtra in works such as the Shugo kokkaishō at the same time he was composing the Kenkairon. Saichō emphasized the role of the Lotus Sūtra by naming Śākyamuni Buddha the preceptor in the ordination ceremony and by asserting that the Ryōzen lineage was valid for the precepts. Five years after his death, Saichō’s disciples constructed a precepts platform with Śākyamuni and a Tahōtō (stūpa for Prabhūtaratna Tathāgata) occupying the central places on it.

The Fan wang Ching played the key role in the practice and interpretation of the Perfect precepts. However, the interpretation of the precepts was not complete until the Perfect sense of the Lotus Sūtra had been applied to them. This did not mean, however, that the Fan wang Ching could be ignored. Rather the Fan wang Ching specified the contents of the precepts. Saichō did not elaborate on the relative value of the two sūtras because he believed that the two texts contained Perfect teachings preached by Buddhas who were essentially the same. Elements from the Lotus Sūtra and its capping sūtra, the Kuan p’u hsien Ching, could be harmoniously combined with precepts from the Fan wang Ching because the Perfect purport of all three works was the same.

Saichō clearly advocated strict adherence to the Fan wang precepts. Later attempts to substitute the Lotus Sūtra’s precepts for them were in violation of Saichō’s intention. His only reference in the Kenkairon to the precepts of the Lotus Sūtra concerned the anrakugyō proscription on consorting with Hinayāna practitioners. Saichō thus awarded the Fan wang Ching a higher status than had Chih-i, who relegated it to the status of Kegon teachings, a mixture of Unique and Perfect teachings.

The Lotus Sūtra includes a number of passages which could be read as advocating correct behavior and thus as a form of precepts. In order to understand Saichō’s use of the Lotus Sūtra and the ways in which later scholars interpreted his references to it, these passages must be considered. Medieval Tendai scholars maintained the position that these passages described four types of precepts. First were the eternal unconditioned precepts which provided the foundation for all other sets of precepts, called the Lotus One-vehicle precepts (Hokke ichijōkai) or the Unmanifested Diamond precepts (musa kongōhōkai). These precepts were formless, without definite content, and based mainly on the second chapter of the Lotus Sūtra. No direct reference to these precepts was found in Saichō’s works.

In contrast to these formless precepts, the other three types did have definite contents. The second type concerned the behavior of those who preached the Lotus Sūtra. It was referred to in Saichō’s Final Admonitions (Yuikai).

The third type consisted of four requirements for people who would devote themselves to upholding the Lotus Sūtra (jikyō) after the Buddha’s death. They were to:

1. 1. Be under the guardianship of the Buddhas.
   2. Plant the roots of a multitude of virtues.
   3. Enter the various correct concentrations.
   4. Aspire to save all living beings.

This list did not play an important role in Saichō’s thought and was referred to only in works by later scholars.

The fourth and most important type of precepts was found in the chapter on serene and pleasing activities (Anrakugyōbon) [Peaceful Practices] in the Lotus Sūtra. This chapter described the ways in which bodhisattvas were to practice during the period of the decline of the Buddha’s teaching. These practices consisted of general instructions for preaching and for adhering to the teachings of the Lotus Sūtra rather than actual rules. They were grouped into four categories: action, word, thought and vow. Saichō was concerned mainly with the actions which the sūtra recommended. These were divided into two sets. The first set was a description of the religious practices which a devout person should follow, such as quietly meditating on things as they are. The second set was a list of the many types of people whom a Mahāyāna Buddhist was to avoid. Commentators traditionally divided this set into ten types of people, the fifth of which consisted of those who sought Hinayāna goals.

These precepts, usually called the anrakugyō (serene and pleasing activities), have long played as important role in T’ien-t’ai thought.

During the last years of his life, Saichō focused his attention on the precepts, the most basic element of the threefold learning (precepts, meditation, wisdom). He believed that if he could purge all Hinayāna elements from the precepts, he would eliminate a major reason why Tendai monks backslid in their practice and defected from the Tendai School. Saichō intended his reforms of monastic discipline and administration to be the first and most basic step in his program to reformulate all the practices of his school so that they would reflect the doctrines of the Perfect teaching. In addition to reforming the precepts, Saichō probably intended to revise the traditional Tendai meditation and doctrinal systems, possibly by supplementing them with Esoteric practices and teachings. However, he died before he could complete his plans.

Some modern Tendai scholars such as Fukuda Gyōei and Kimura Shūshō have suggested that Saichō’s proposal that the Ssu fen lü ordination be used as an expedient was primarily a conciliatory gesture to the Nara monks. They have argued that once circumstances changed, the Tendai School could abandon provisional Hinayāna ordinations without violating Saichō’s proposals.

Their position ignored an important aspect of Saichō’s thought. In making his proposals, Saichō may also have been trying to reconcile some differences between his plan and the position of the Chinese Tien t’ai School. Chih-i and Chan-jan had maintained that if a candidate received the Hinayāna precepts with a Mahāyāna mind, he could observe those precepts as a Mahāyāna practitioner. Since the Ssu fen lü precepts ultimately were devised to lead people to Buddhahood, they potentially revealed that final goal. This explanation was called the kaie (revealing and harmonizing) interpretation of the precepts.

The term kaie refers to the One-vehicle teaching of the Lotus Sūtra. According to this teaching the Buddha’s statements about the Three Vehicles in other sūtras can all be revealed to be in harmony with the teaching of the one ultimate vehicle which leads to Buddhahood. Chih-i used the principle of kaie as a basic mode in his classifications of the Buddha’s teachings. All of the Buddha’s teachings, even Hinayāna doctrines, pointed towards and could be shown to potentially contain the Buddha’s final teaching, which was fully revealed in the Lotus Sūtra. When this teaching was applied to the precepts, it resulted in a rationale that enabled monks who considered themselves to be Mahāyāna Buddhists to observe the Ssu fen lü precepts. Although the precepts had Hinayāna origins, they could still be observed by Mahāyāna monks because they ultimately pointed towards Buddhahood.

In the Shijōshiki Saichō proposed that Tendai monks be ordained with the Fan wang precepts at the beginning of their twelve-year training period. He also asked that they be allowed to receive Ssufen lü ordinations at Tōdaiji after they had completed their training on Mount Hiei. Thus while the Fan wang ordination qualified the candidate to be a Tendai monk, the Ssufen lü ordination was taken only as an expedient measure to benefit other sentient beings, not for any spiritual qualification it might bestow on the Tendai monk. The Ssu fen lü ordination would enable Tendai monks to live in harmony with the monks of Nara and to avoid disputes over monastic discipline, seniority, or the procedures for holding assemblies. Because the Ssufen lü ordination did not qualify a person to be a Tendai monk and was taken primarily to smooth relations with other sentient beings, Saichö called it a ‘provisional Hinayäna ordination’ (keju shōkai).

Saichō died before the court had agreed to his proposals and thus never saw them put into effect. Administering Ssufen lü ordinations to Tendai monks proved to be unworkable and was quickly abandoned by his successors. After the bitter debates which had occurred between Saichō and the Nara schools, the monks of the two sides could not forget their differences so readily. The very concept of a provisional Ssufen lü ordination provoked heated arguments between the Tendai and Nara monks. The terms ‘provisional’ and ‘Hinayāna’ implied that the Ssu fen lü ordination was inferior.

If Saichō’s proposal for provisional Hinayāna ordinations had been adopted, it would have placed Tendai monks at a disadvantage in their relations with Nara monks.