四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.47

2.47

三出體狀。二論不同；今依本宗，約《成論》以釋。先明作戒體。論云：用身口業思為體；論其身口，乃是造善惡之具。所以者何？如人無心殺生，不得殺罪，故知以心為體。文云：是三種業，皆但是心；離心無思，無身口業。若指色為業體，是義不然；十四種色，悉是無記，非罪福性。又有論師，以身口二業相續善色聲，為作戒體；以相續色聲，法入所攝，意識所得，是罪福性也。言無作戒者，以非色非心為體。非色者，非塵大所成，以五義來證：一色有形段方所，二色有十四二十種別，三色可惱壞，四色是質礙，五色是五識所得；無作俱無此義，故知非色。言非心者，體非緣慮，故名非心，亦有五證：一心是慮知，二心有明暗，三心通三性，四心有廣略，五心是報法；無作亦不具此。故以第三聚非色非心為體。文云：如經中說，精進人得壽長，隨壽長得福多，以福多故久受天樂。若但善心，云何能得多福？是人不能常有善心故。又意無戒律儀。若人在不善無記心，亦名持戒，故知爾時無有作也。《涅槃》云：戒者雖無戒色，而可護持；雖非觸對，善修方便，可得具足。《十住婆沙》云：戒有二種，作者是色，無作非色。故以多文，證成非色。

Third, setting forth their essential characteristics. The two treatises differ; now, relying on our own school, we explain according to the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*.
First, explaining the essence of the manifest precept. The treatise states: It takes the volition of bodily and vocal karma as its essence; as for the body and speech, they are merely the instruments for creating good and evil. Why is this so? If a person unintentionally kills a living being, he does not incur the offense of killing; therefore, we know that it takes the mind as its essence. The text states: "These three kinds of karma are all merely mind; apart from mind there is no volition, and no bodily or vocal karma." If one points to physical form as the karmic essence, this principle is incorrect; the fourteen kinds of physical form are all indeterminate, and not of the nature of demerit or merit. There are also treatise masters who consider the wholesome physical form and sound continuous in the two karmas of body and speech to be the essence of the manifest precept; because continuous form and sound are subsumed under the sense field of dharmas and obtained by mental consciousness, they are of the nature of demerit and merit.
As for the unmanifest precept, it takes that which is neither form nor mind as its essence. "Neither form" means it is not composed of the sense data and great elements, which is proved through five points: 1. Form has shape, parts, and spatial location; 2. Form has fourteen or twenty kinds of distinctions; 3. Form can be afflicted and destroyed; 4. Form has tangible obstruction; 5. Form is perceived by the five consciousnesses. The unmanifest lacks all of these meanings, so we know it is not form. "Nor mind" means its essence does not cognize objects, hence it is called non-mind, which also has five proofs: 1. Mind is cognitive awareness; 2. Mind has brightness and darkness; 3. Mind extends across the three moral natures; 4. Mind has broad and concise aspects; 5. Mind is a fruition dharma. The unmanifest also does not possess these. Therefore, it takes the third category—that which is neither form nor mind—as its essence. The text states: As it says in the sūtra, an energetic person obtains long life, and along with long life obtains much merit; because of having much merit, he enjoys heavenly pleasure for a long time. If it were only a wholesome mind, how could he obtain much merit? Because this person cannot constantly have a wholesome mind. Moreover, the mind has no precept restraint. If a person is in an unwholesome or indeterminate state of mind, he is still termed one who observes precepts; thus we know that at that time there is no manifest [precept]. The *Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]* states: "Although the precept lacks precept form, it can be guarded and maintained; although it is not touched, by cultivating skillful expedients it can be fully obtained." The *Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā* states: "Precepts are of two kinds: the manifest is form; the unmanifest is not form." Therefore, through numerous texts, it is proved to be non-form.