四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 1.450

1.450

七明失師法。和尚一種，無相失義。或可無德，更依止他。以依得戒，無再請法。依止闍梨，事須詳正，有三不同：一請師法，二相依住法，三請教授法。次明失是非者。若師被僧治罰，不失依止，謂不失請法、相依住法；失請教授法。以師有過，行法在己；弟子無義得請，令師得罪。以奪三十五事中，不得受人依止者，謂授他教誡；亦是被治人，不合作依止。若弟子被僧治，不失者，三種不失。欲令師僧教誡弟子，順從於僧，疾疾為解，開無隨順罪。《律》中，二師及弟子，互一人決意出界外宿，即日還；失依止者，失下二法，不失請師法。若還，不須更請師；但生請法，相依便有法起。廣有是非，如《律》、《大疏》。《四分》云多種：一死，二遠去，三休道，四犯重，五師得訶責，六入戒場上，七滿五夏，八見本和尚，九還來和尚目下住。若約教，失依止。

Seventh, explaining the method of forfeiting a master. With the upādhyāya alone, there is no sense of mutual forfeiture. Alternatively, if he lacks virtue, one may further rely on another. Since one obtains the precepts by relying [on him], there is no method for requesting [an upādhyāya] a second time. Relying on an ācārya must be scrutinized and rectified; there are three differences: 1. the method of requesting a master, 2. the method of mutually relying and dwelling, 3. the method of requesting instruction. Next, explaining what constitutes forfeiture: if the master is punished by the saṃgha, he does not forfeit niśraya—meaning he does not forfeit the method of requesting or the method of mutually relying and dwelling; he forfeits the method of requesting instruction. Because the master has a fault and the implementation of the Dharma lies within himself, the disciple has no basis to request, which would cause the master to incur an offense. Among the thirty-five matters revoked, being unable to accept another's niśraya refers to giving another instruction; and one under punishment is also not fit to act as a niśraya master. If the disciple is punished by the saṃgha, what is not forfeited is all three kinds that are not forfeited. This is intended to let the master and the saṃgha instruct the disciple so that he complies with the saṃgha and quickly resolves it, allowing exemption from the offense of following [an outcast]. In the Vinaya, if between either of the two masters and the disciple, one of them firmly resolves to leave the boundary and spend the night outside, returning the same day, regarding the forfeiture of niśraya: he forfeits the latter two methods, but does not forfeit the method of requesting a master. If he returns, he does not need to request the master again; merely by giving rise to the method of requesting, the Dharma of mutual reliance arises. There are extensive details on what is right and wrong, as in the Vinaya and the Great Commentary. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states many kinds [of forfeiture of niśraya]: 1. death, 2. departing far away, 3. abandoning the path, 4. committing a grave offense, 5. the master is reprimanded, 6. entering the precept platform, 7. completing five varṣās, 8. seeing one's original upādhyāya, 9. returning to dwell under the eye of the upādhyāya. If reckoned according to instruction, one forfeits niśraya.