四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.58

2.58

問：七支攝戒盡不？答：盡也！設有不盡，攝入七中，如配戒種類所說。又云：攝戒不盡，以罪性不同；如殺打兩別，能防體異。故《善生》云：除善惡戒已，更有業戒，所謂善惡法也！故知，根本七支所收，業戒種類所攝。宜作四句：一者善而非戒，謂十中後三是也！律不制單心犯也！二戒而不善，即惡律儀。三亦善亦戒，十善之中前七支也！以不要期，直爾修行，故名善也！反此策勵，故名戒也！四俱非者，身口無記。問：戒與律儀，行相差別如何？答：通行無涯，是律儀也！對境禁約，是戒儀也！如比丘具緣受已，見生不殺，望此一境，名持殺戒；望餘四生，名持律儀。若殺此生，名犯殺戒；餘生不殺，不犯律儀。若就惡律儀解，望殺一羊，名持惡戒；望餘通類，有生皆罪，是持律儀。

Question: Do the seven branches exhaustively subsume the precepts or not? Answer: They exhaust them! Even if some are not exhausted, they are subsumed into the seven, as explained when correlating the kinds of precepts. It is also said: They do not exhaustively subsume the precepts, because the natures of offenses are different; just as killing and beating are distinct, the essences that can guard against them differ. Therefore, the *Upāsakaśīla-sūtra* states: "Aside from the wholesome and unwholesome precepts, there are further karmic precepts, namely wholesome and unwholesome dharmas!" Thus we know that the root [precepts] are subsumed by the seven branches, while the kinds of karmic precepts subsume [the rest]. One should formulate four propositions: First, wholesome but not a precept, referring to the latter three of the ten! The Vinaya does not penalize transgressions of mere thought! Second, a precept but not wholesome, namely evil restraint. Third, both wholesome and a precept, the former seven branches among the ten wholesome deeds! Because one practices them directly without a prior pledge, they are called 'wholesome'! If one exerts effort in contrary to [evil], it is called a 'precept'! Fourth, neither, namely the morally neutral [deeds] of body and speech. Question: What is the distinction in operational characteristics between 'precept' (śīla) and 'restraint' (saṃvara)? Answer: Universal application without boundary is 'restraint'! Restraining oneself in confrontation with an object is 'precept etiquette'! For example, when a bhikṣu has received [the precepts] with conditions complete and, seeing a living being, does not kill it, with respect to this single object it is called 'upholding the precept against killing'; with respect to the remaining four classes of living beings, it is called 'upholding restraint'. If he kills this living being, it is called 'transgressing the precept against killing'; not killing the other living beings, he does not transgress restraint. If explained in terms of evil restraint, with respect to killing a single sheep, it is called 'upholding an evil precept'; with respect to other general kinds, where harm to any living being entails guilt, that is 'upholding [evil] restraint'.