四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 1.343

1.343

初中，寺別立制，多不依教。飲酒醉亂，輕欺上下者。罰錢及米，或餘貨賕；當時同和，後便違拒，不肯輸送；因茲犯重。或行杖罰枷禁鉗鎖。或奪財帛以用供眾。或苦役治地、斬伐草木、鉏禾、收刈；或周年苦役。或因遇失奪，便令倍償。或作破戒之制，季別依次鉏禾刈穀，若分僧食及以僧物，科索酒肉，媒嫁淨人，賣買奴婢及餘畜產。或造順俗之制，犯重囚禁，遭赦得免；或自貨賕，方便得脫；或奪賊物，因利求利。或非法之制，有過罪者，露立僧中，伏地吹灰，對僧杖罰。如是眾例，皆非聖旨。良由綱維不依法網，同和而作；惡業深纏，永無改悔。眾主有力，非法伴多；如法比丘，像末又少；縱有三五，伴勢無施。故佛預知有，不令同法，如後引之。《僧祇》云：若作非法制者，應訶令止；不者，當說如法欲已，起去。若眾中有力者不聽，當語旁人言：此非法制。止得三人，不得趣爾而作，應知識邊作。若不得者。說見不欲，與護心相，應云：彼自有業行，何關我事；如失火燒舍，脫身便罷。《毘尼母》云：見眾非法事，獨不須諫，應作默然，如上說。問：非法制中，罰取財物，犯重罪不？答：不犯重罪。由當時僧眾，同和共作，後依制罰，得不犯。非不犯作非法制罪。

In the first part, monasteries establish separate regulations, most of which do not accord with the teachings. For drinking alcohol, intoxication, disorder, and slighting superiors or inferiors, they fine people with money and grain, or other goods and bribes; at that moment everyone agrees in harmony, but later they violate and resist it, refusing to pay, and because of this commit grave offenses. Or they inflict beatings, the pillory, detention, manacles, and fetters. Or they seize wealth and silks to supply the community. Or they impose hard labor to clear the ground, fell trees and vegetation, hoe grain, and harvest crops; or assign a full year of hard labor. Or if property happens to be lost or stolen, they compel double compensation. Or they formulate regulations that break the precepts: each season, hoeing grain and harvesting crops in turn, distributing saṃgha food and saṃgha property, demanding wine and meat, acting as matchmakers for kappiyakārakas, and buying and selling slaves and other livestock. Or they create regulations conforming to secular customs: those who commit grave offenses are imprisoned, but freed upon an amnesty; or they offer bribes and find expedient means to escape; or they confiscate thieves' property, seeking profit through opportunistic gain. Or they make unlawful regulations where offenders must stand exposed in the midst of the saṃgha, lie prone on the ground blowing ashes, or be beaten before the saṃgha. Such precedents as these are entirely contrary to the sage's intent. This is truly because the monastic administrators do not rely on the net of the Dharma, but act in concord [with worldly custom]; entangled deeply in evil karma, they never reform or repent. The monastery leaders have worldly power, and unlawful companions are many; while bhikṣus who accord with the Dharma are few in the Semblance and Final ages. Even if there are three or five, the influence of their companions is of no effect. Therefore, the Buddha foresaw this and forbade conforming to their practices, as cited below. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: If anyone makes an unlawful regulation, one should reprimand him to stop it; if he does not, one should declare one's accordance with the Dharma's intent and leave. If a powerful person in the assembly does not permit this, one should say to a bystander: “This is an unlawful regulation.” If only three persons can be gathered, one must not act rashly, but should act in the presence of good spiritual friends. If one cannot find any, one should declare one's dissenting view and maintain a protective mind, saying: “He has his own karma and deeds; what does it have to do with me? It is like a fire burning down a house—once you escape with your life, that is enough.” The Vinayamātṛkā states: Seeing an unlawful affair of the community, one should not remonstrate alone, but should remain silent, as explained above. Question: Among unlawful regulations, if property is taken as a fine, does one commit a grave offense? Answer: One does not commit a grave offense. Because the saṃgha assembly acted together in harmony at the time, and later penalized according to the regulation, one is deemed not to commit [a grave theft offense]. It does not mean one does not commit the offense of formulating an unlawful regulation.