四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.131

2.131

七舍界。《四分》無相，此謂村外別舍；若據村聚相，後當廣說。《僧祇》：若樓閣梯隥道外二十五肘，名衣界；若著衣在閣上，下宿，有梯通，無犯。準《四分》庫倉界，據明內為言。兩無任得。對上舍界，因解聚落。《四分》云村界。《善見》：無市云村，有市名聚落。《薩婆多論》，四句相對：一是聚非家界，如二聚落各有一家。二是家非聚，如一大聚落，更無異聚，而有多家。三亦具二界，聚落有二，各多家是。四俱非者，蘭若界也。聚落者，《十誦》、《多論》：人民共住，名聚落界。言別界者，雞飛不及，棄糞掃外，箭射及外，名為異界。言同界者，四邊聚落，各有一家，若有車梯迴轉相及，得登出入；身在梯根下臥，置衣在四聚落，不失衣；以梯梁相接，無隔礙故。聚落止有一家，衣在家內，車梯上下臥，不失衣（以無別家可對故也）。若自然界內，箭射及處，至明相出不失衣；若衣在外，身在家中亦爾。若眾多家，衣在家內，身在梯車下，失衣；以家界各別故。家有一界、別界。別界者，父母兄弟兒子，若異食異業，雖同一處，事各不同，是名族界；若同食業，名一家界。族亦有一界、別界。別界住處，是名一界；別界者，若作食處、取水處、便利處是。若在二處，皆失衣。《僧祇》：四聚相接，衣枕頭臥；頭及手脚各在一界，衣在頭底。明相出，衣離頭，犯捨；若手脚至衣所，不犯。《十誦》、《多論》云：若安衣二界中，在二界上臥，不失衣，各有身分故。《十誦》：舍界者，若外道舍，門屋食堂中庭廁處。衣在一外道舍，身在餘舍者，失衣；若同見同論，不犯。若諸戲笑人遊行營處，如前取水處等，失衣；若同屬一主，不犯（此謂情礙）。《多論》：重舍屬一主，人衣互上下重，不失；若是異主，衣人上下，中間不通，故失。上並《四分》無文，理須通允。

Seventh is the house boundary (gṛha-sīmā). The Dharmaguptaka has no description; this refers to an isolated house outside a village; as for the characteristics of villages and settlements, they will be expounded below. The Mahāsāṃghika states: Outside a multi-storied pavilion's staircase, twenty-five cubits is called the robe boundary. If one places the robes upstairs and sleeps downstairs, since the staircase connects them, there is no transgression. According to the storehouse boundary in the Dharmaguptaka, it is spoken of with reference to the dawn being inside. Neither is preferable over the other. With respect to the above house boundary, the settlement is explained accordingly. The Dharmaguptaka speaks of the village boundary. The Samantapāsādikā states: One without a market is called a village; one with a market is named a settlement. The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā sets up four alternatives: First, it is a settlement boundary but not a house boundary, as when two settlements have only one house each. Second, it is a house boundary but not a settlement boundary, as in a single large settlement with no other settlement, which has many houses. Third, it possesses both boundaries, as when there are two settlements, each with many houses. Fourth, it is neither, which is the araṇya boundary. Regarding a settlement: The Daśādhyāya-vinaya and the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā say: Where people live together is called a settlement boundary. As for what is a distinct boundary: Beyond the flight of a chicken, beyond where refuse is thrown, and beyond where an arrow shot reaches is named a distinct boundary. As for what is the same boundary: In a settlement of four quarters, each has one house; if carts or ladders can turn and reach one another so that one can climb up, enter, and exit; if one lies down at the base of the ladder and leaves the robes in the four settlements, one does not forfeit the robes, because the ladder and beams connect them without obstruction. If the settlement has only one house, the robes are inside the house, and one sleeps up or down the cart or ladder, one does not forfeit the robes (because there is no other house to set against it). If within the natural boundary, within the range of an arrow shot, until the appearance of dawn, one does not forfeit the robes; if the robes are outside and the person is inside the house, it is also thus. If there are multiple houses, the robes are inside a house, and one is under the ladder or cart, one forfeits the robes, because the house boundaries are each distinct. A house has a single boundary and distinct boundaries. As for distinct boundaries: If parents, brothers, and sons eat separately and pursue different livelihoods, though they are in the same place, their affairs are each different; this is called a clan boundary (kula-sīmā). If they share food and livelihood, it is named a single-house boundary. A clan also has a single boundary and distinct boundaries. The dwelling place within distinct boundaries is named a single boundary; as for distinct boundaries, they are places like the cooking area, the water-drawing area, and the latrine. If one is divided between two places, one forfeits the robes in both. The Mahāsāṃghika states: Where four settlements border one another, one sleeps pillowed on one's robes; if head, hands, and feet are each in a different boundary, and the robes are under the head: when dawn appears, if the robes are separated from the head, one incurs a forfeiture; if the hands or feet reach the place of the robes, there is no transgression. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya and the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā state: If one places the robes between two boundaries and sleeps across the two boundaries, one does not forfeit the robes, because each boundary contains part of the body. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya states: Regarding the house boundary: In the case of a tīrthika house, its gatehouse, dining hall, courtyard, and latrine: if the robes are in one tīrthika house and one's body is in another, one forfeits the robes; if they share the same views and treatises, there is no transgression. In the touring encampments of various entertainers, like the aforementioned water-drawing places, one forfeits the robes; if they belong to the same master, there is no transgression (this refers to emotional obstruction). The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā states: If a multi-storied house belongs to one master, and the person and robes are mutually on the upper and lower stories, one does not forfeit them; if they belong to different masters, and the robes and person are on upper and lower stories with no passage between, they are forfeited. The above points have no text in the Dharmaguptaka, but in principle they must be reconciled.