四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.175

2.175

說迴僧物入已戒三十。具四緣：一是通計僧物，二作許想，三迴向己，四入手便犯。律云：僧物有三種：一是已許僧（謂通明施僧，而未分僧別二異，此迴犯捨也）。二為僧故作，未許僧（謂俗家為僧作床褥器具供僧之物，此迴得吉羅也）。三已與僧者，已許僧，已捨與僧（此決施於僧，不許別屬，迴犯棄）。《僧祇》：若人持物來，問僧何處布施？答言隨汝所敬處與。若言何處果報多？答言施僧。若言何者持戒清淨？答言僧無犯戒不清淨。若言我已施僧，今施尊者，得受無罪。若言此物置何處，使我常見受用？答某甲比丘坐禪誦經持戒，若施彼者，長見受用。《四分》：若物許僧轉與塔，許四方僧迴與見前僧，許比丘僧迴與尼僧，許異處迴與異處，乃至許異處迴與此處，一切吉羅（並謂未決定，若決別施，隨前犯）。《僧祇》：迴此彼畜生物，越心悔。《十誦》、《多論》：若檀越施此自恣僧物，迴與彼自恣僧者；物應還此比丘，作吉悔。若不還此僧，計錢成重。乃至此彼一人物，迴亦成重。準此，定屬僧次，迴與他人，成重。律不犯中：若不知，若已許作不許想，若許惡勸與好者，一切不犯。

Precept 30: Diverting saṃgha property to oneself through speech. It consists of four conditions: (1) it is generally intended as saṃgha property; (2) one conceives of it as promised; (3) one diverts it toward oneself; (4) upon receiving it into one's hands, the offense is committed. The Vinaya states: 'There are three kinds of saṃgha property: (1) that already promised to the saṃgha (meaning it was generally clarified as offered to the saṃgha, without distinguishing between the community as a whole or an individual; diverting this constitutes an offense requiring forfeiture); (2) made for the sake of the saṃgha, but not yet promised to the saṃgha (meaning a lay family makes bedding and utensils to provide for the saṃgha; diverting this incurs a duṣkṛta); (3) already given to the saṃgha: already promised to the saṃgha and already relinquished to the saṃgha (this has been definitively offered to the saṃgha and is not allowed to belong to an individual; diverting this constitutes a pārājika).' The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'If someone brings an article and asks the saṃgha, 'Where should I give this?' the answer should be, 'Give it to wherever you respect.' If they ask, 'Where is the fruit of merit greatest?' the answer should be, 'Give to the saṃgha.' If they ask, 'Who keeps the precepts purely?' the answer should be, 'The saṃgha has no breach of precepts that is impure.' If they say, 'I have already offered it to the saṃgha, but now offer it to the Venerable,' one may accept it without offense. If they say, 'Where should this article be placed so that I may constantly see it being used?' the answer should be, 'Bhikṣu So-and-so sits in meditation, recites sūtras, and observes the precepts; if you give it to him, you will constantly see it being used.'' The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: 'If an item promised to the saṃgha is transferred to a stūpa, or promised to the cāturdiśa-saṃgha is diverted to the saṃgha present, or promised to the bhikṣu-saṃgha is diverted to the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha, or promised to a different place is diverted to another different place, or even promised to a different place is diverted to this place, all incur a duṣkṛta (all of these refer to where it was not definitive; if it was definitively and distinctly offered, one incurs the earlier offense accordingly).' The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'Diverting an animal of this or that [party] requires repentance for a breach of intention.' The Daśādhyāya-vinaya and Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā state: 'If a dānapati offers items to this pravāraṇā saṃgha, but one diverts them to that pravāraṇā saṃgha, the items must be returned to these monks, and one repents for a duṣkṛta. If one does not return them to these monks, the value is calculated and constitutes a grave offense. Even diverting the property of a single person from here to there also constitutes a grave offense. Following this, if an item definitively belongs to the saṃgha rota and one diverts it to another person, it constitutes a grave offense.' Among non-offenses in the Vinaya: if one did not know; if it was already promised but one thought it was not promised; or if an inferior item was promised and one encouraged the giving of a good one—in all these there is no offense.