四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 1.198

1.198

問：對僧說欲，其相云何？答：行法不同。或一時來至僧前，禮已，同時而說者；或直來僧前，一一說者；或在座一時說者；或下座一一說者。據文並成。準我與眾多欲文，及故不說等，皆成。若取義意者。律中開成，由有忘誤，或復得罪，故有成文。必無正緣，不得通用。約準外宗，一一說是。《五分》云：令至如法僧中，為我稱名字說及捉籌；若不如是，一一皆不成。《僧祇》云：不得趣爾與人欲，與堪能持欲入僧中說者。其受者應自思惟，我能傳欲不？義評云：凡取欲者，恐有別眾不集，令其送心；僧知無乖，方乃加法。今一時總說，言辭鬧亂，何得委知不來集者？《五分》、《僧祇》明文：令在上座前，稱名字說。意亦可見。《四分》文云：應更相撿挍，知有來不來者。此言彌顯。

Question: When conveying chanda to the saṃgha, what are the forms? Answer: The practices differ. Some come before the saṃgha at the same time, make prostrations, and state it simultaneously; some come straight before the saṃgha and state it individually one by one; some remain in their seats and state it simultaneously; some descend from their seats and state it individually one by one. According to the text, all are valid. Based on the text on "I grant chanda to many," as well as [cases of] intentionally failing to state it, they are all valid. If one takes the underlying principle: the allowance of validity in the Vinaya arises because there may be forgetfulness or error, or it may incur an offense, which is why there is an explicit text for its validity. Where there is definitively no proper cause, one must not use it universally. Evaluated according to other schools, stating it individually one by one is correct. The Pañcavargika-vinaya states: "He must be made to go to a proper saṃgha, state [the person's] name on their behalf, and take the counting rod; if it is not done like this, every one of them is invalid." The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: "One must not casually grant chanda to just anyone; grant it to one who is capable of conveying the chanda, entering among the saṃgha, and stating it." The recipient should reflect: "Am I able to convey the chanda?" The doctrinal appraisal states: Whenever chanda is taken, it is for fear that a separate saṃgha will form by not assembling, so that they are caused to send their consent; once the saṃgha knows there is no dissension, only then do they apply the karman. Now, if it is stated all at once in summary, the words are clamorous and disordered; how could one thoroughly know who has not come to assemble? The clear texts of the Pañcavargika-vinaya and the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya require that one stand before the sthavira and state it by reciting the name. The intention can also be seen from this. The text of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: "You should check one another to know who has come and who has not." These words make it even more obvious.