四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 1.225

1.225

二就事明者。謂羯磨所被之事，更不重明，即辨非者。所被事中，通情非情，並令前境是實，片無錯涉，皆成法事；若一緣有差，悉並不成。何者是也？如人法中，不覆藏者，與覆藏羯磨，不善、非法、不成，此謂無事有法；如〈瞻波〉中，應與作訶責，乃作擯出，此謂有樂有病，施不相當，佛判不成。故知事者，必須據實，方稱聖教；且約一事，餘者例之，如實犯罪自言不犯，實不犯自言犯等，並名非法；若實言實，方為相稱。而彼自言，還陳所為之事；若汎陳餘罪，不為自言。非情事中，二房羯磨，妨難不成；離衣杖等，必須兩具。此並律之誠文，臨事無忘失矣。

Second, regarding the matter: this means that the matter to which the karman is applied will not be explained again, but invalidity will be determined. In the matter to which it is applied, whether sentient or insentient, if the presented situation is entirely genuine without the slightest error or confusion, all ritual transactions will be valid; if a single condition is erroneous, none will be valid. What is meant by this? For example, among human matters: if one who has not concealed [an offense] is given a concealment karman, it is unwholesome, contrary to the Dharma, and invalid; this is called 'having a rite without a factual basis.' As in the 'Campā' [chapter], when a reprimand should have been given, an expulsion was performed instead; this is called having joy and sickness where the treatment does not match, which the Buddha ruled invalid. Therefore, we know that the matter must be based on fact before it accords with the holy teaching. Taking one matter as an example, the rest may be inferred: if one who actually committed an offense says himself that he did not, or if one who actually did not commit an offense says himself that he did, these are all termed contrary to the Dharma; only if the truth is spoken truthfully is there correspondence. Moreover, his self-admission must report the actual deed; if he vaguely reports some other offense, it does not count as a self-admission. Among insentient matters: in the karman for two types of dwellings, it is invalid if there are obstacles; for separating from robes or the staff, both sets must be present. These are all explicit statements of the Vinaya; do not forget them when facing the situation.