四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.522

2.522

二明捨心法。前明捨財，乃離罪緣法；後明捨罪，除感報法；今明捨心，正除罪因。以貯畜相續，無心捨淨，今故犯罪；捨已猶畜，貪心尤結；罪因不除，雖懺還犯。此謂長財之捨，不同餘雜罪種；若取通理，要斷後畜為先。故文中，由決捨與他，彼不還者，但得小罪，止是失法之愆。《四分》一律，宗是大乘，虛通無係，故發言誠，事無滯結；若依他部，一捨已後，無反還求，任僧處斷。或入常住，或入四方，或觀所須，或棄山水。即同此律，斬壞入厨，施僧施俗。故知行者，若欲捨墮，先須捨心；若心不捨，兩相勞擾。但人見狹，性非通遠；口雖世表，行寔庸陋。今若不捨，要必歸死；捨身任業，一毫莫隨。而不思大事，任世送終；以此經生，生亦虛過。但知僧能除罪，行紹佛蹤；何得以世浮財，勞心役慮。豈唯故為虛誡，聖論明文須知。《薩婆多》云：衣已捨，罪已悔，畜心斷；當日得本財及意外財，得受。二衣已捨，罪未悔，畜心斷；當日得本財及外財，得吉羅。三衣捨與他，罪已悔，畜心不斷；當日餘日，得本財及意外財，並犯捨墮。此句正是捨心之模要，餘句如《疏》。

Second, explaining the procedure for the relinquishing mind. The previous explanation of relinquishing property is the method for parting from the conditions of the offense; the subsequent explanation of relinquishing the offense is the method for eliminating the experienced retribution; the present explanation of the relinquishing mind directly eliminates the cause of the offense. Because of continuous hoarding without the mind to relinquish and purify, one now intentionally commits an offense; if after relinquishment one still keeps it, greedy attachment will be especially knotted; if the cause of the offense is not eliminated, even if repented, one will transgress again. This refers to the relinquishment of extra property, unlike other miscellaneous classes of offenses; if we take the general principle, cutting off future hoarding must come first. Therefore in the text, because one has resolved to give it to another, if the other person does not return it, one only incurs a minor offense, which is merely an error of procedural failure. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya takes the Mahāyāna as its principle, being open, unobstructed, and without attachment, so when sincere words are uttered, the matter is free from stagnation; but according to other schools, once relinquished, there is no asking for it back, and it is left to the saṃgha to decide. It either enters the permanent property, or enters the cāturdiśa-saṃgha, or is considered according to need, or discarded in mountains and waters. This is the same as in this Vinaya, where it is cut into pieces and put into the kitchen, or given to the saṃgha, or given to the laity. Therefore we know that if a practitioner wishes to perform niḥsargika-pāyattika, they must first possess a relinquishing mind; if the mind does not relinquish, both parties will be troubled. Yet people's views are narrow and their natures lack breadth; though their speech appears otherworldly, their practice is truly base. Now if one does not relinquish, one is bound to die; leaving the body to karmic retribution, not a single hair can follow. Yet without reflecting on this great matter, they leave it to worldly conventions to see them to the end; spending their lives like this, life passes in vain. Know merely that the saṃgha can eliminate offenses and that their conduct continues the Buddha's footsteps; why should one exhaust the mind and wear out thoughts over worldly, fleeting wealth? How could this merely be an idle admonition? One must know the clear passages of the sacred treatises. The Sarvāstivāda says: 'If the robe is already relinquished, the offense is already repented, and the intent to keep is severed; on that day, if one obtains the original property or unexpected property, one may accept it. Second, if the robe is already relinquished, the offense is not yet repented, and the intent to keep is severed; on that day, if one obtains the original property or external property, one incurs a duṣkṛta. Third, if the robe is relinquished to another, the offense is already repented, but the intent to keep is not severed; on that day or on other days, if one obtains the original property or unexpected property, one incurs a niḥsargika-pāyattika in both cases.' This clause is precisely the essential pattern of the relinquishing mind; the remaining clauses are as in the Commentary.