四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.536

2.536

六懺突吉羅法。此篇懺儀，亦有多別；先出方軌，後立條例。突吉羅罪，依律文中二種不同：一故作故犯，應懺突吉羅，又犯非威儀突吉羅；二若不故作，犯非威儀突吉羅。亦不分二懺之法。若依《摩夷論》說，故作者，對人一說悔；誤作者，責心悔。《明了論》、《薩婆多》亦同如此。此則兩懺灼然，通衢自顯。比來諸師，相㳂舊解，依文謹誦，同皆責心；又引律文，小罪不從人懺；此文未了，須論解之。當律明故誤二法，諸論明兩懺不同；正理自明，何得固執；人言易毀，聖論難違。今立論律二種懺法，先出罪種，後明懺儀。

Sixth, the rite of confession for duṣkṛta [offenses]. The confession ritual for this class also has many distinctions; first I set forth the standard model, and later establish the specific rules. Duṣkṛta offenses, according to the Vinaya text, are of two different kinds: first, intentionally acting and intentionally committing, where one should confess a duṣkṛta, and also commits a duṣkṛta of non-decorum; second, if one did not act intentionally, one commits a duṣkṛta of non-decorum. It also does not divide the methods of the two confessions. If one follows what the Mātṛkā-śāstra says: for intentional acts, one repents with one recitation facing another person; for inadvertent acts, one repents with mental self-reproach. The Vinayavibhāṣā and the Sarvāstivāda are also both like this. Thus the two confessions are completely clear, and the broad path reveals itself. Practitioners recently have followed old interpretations, carefully reciting according to the literal text, all using mental self-reproach alike; they also cite the Vinaya text stating that minor offenses are not confessed before another person. This text is not definitive and must be explained by treatises. When the Vinaya clarifies the two methods of intentional and inadvertent, the treatises clarify that the two confessions differ. The correct principle is self-evident; how can one be obstinate? Human words are easily corrupted, but sacred treatises are difficult to contravene. Now, establishing both treatise and Vinaya confession rites, I first set forth the types of offenses, and then explain the confession ritual.