四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 3.110

3.110

十明雜分物法。若在私莊寺致死，或作僧使，在莊檢校而死。若有家人及比丘守者，重物入亡者本寺，輕物隨現分之；亦不得尼眾分也；縱令近僧來攝重物，亦不須與，以非佛正制。若亡者無住處，而隨有常住處，隨近通攝（寺無僧法，亦不得取）。若無比丘守掌，同白衣家法。《四分》：若比丘在無住處，白衣家死，彼有信心檀越，應掌錄此物；若有五眾，先來者應與；若無來者，應送與近處僧伽藍僧。準此文者，若比丘共尼同至，隨所同眾死，各自取之，不得共分此物；當部亦不須加法，直爾攝取，不同共住，閑豫加法也。重物如上量之，隨情遠近。若至白衣家，知有亡物，必須捉執，作屬己意，方成；雖見，不得。縱捉入手，而俗人自攝入己，此則屬俗已定，盜僧成就，亦不得反奪；當勸示之與僧，令無業道（僧得作俗人物受）。《僧祇》：比丘持他衣行，衣主命過，便將衣別受，不與同界比丘，越（準《四分》：不成，有比丘無想）。若作羯磨已，量影；恐客比丘來，應知在羯磨前後（謂攝僧界大，不知僧有無）。律中：有比丘，無想，別眾分衣，不成。

Tenth, explaining the miscellaneous procedures for dividing property. If someone dies at a private estate temple, or while serving as an emissary for the saṃgha and overseeing affairs at an estate, if there are family members or bhikṣus guarding it, the heavy property goes to the deceased's original temple, and the light property is divided according to those present; the bhikṣuṇī saṃgha may not share in it. Even if bhikṣus from nearby come to take the heavy property, it should not be given to them, as it is not the Buddha's correct regulation. If the deceased had no permanent dwelling place, but wherever there is a permanent dwelling, the nearest [monastery] takes it altogether (if the temple lacks saṃgha regulations, they also may not take it). If there are no bhikṣus guarding and administering it, the procedure is the same as that for a layperson's house. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: If a bhikṣu dies in a layperson's house without a dwelling place, and there is a faithful dānapati there, that person should record and take charge of this property; if members of the five assemblies come first, it should be given to them; if none come, it should be sent to the bhikṣus of a nearby saṃghārāma. Based on this text, if bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs arrive together, depending on which assembly [the deceased] belonged to when dying, each takes their own; they may not divide this property together. For one's own school, it is also not necessary to add formal ritual procedures; one directly gathers it up, unlike the case of living together where one calmly performs formal ritual procedures. Heavy property is evaluated as above, depending on proximity according to circumstances. If one arrives at a layperson's house and knows there is property of the deceased, one must take hold of it and form the intention that it belongs to oneself for it to be valid; merely seeing it does not secure it. Even if one takes it in hand, if the layperson gathers it for themselves, then it is already definitively belonging to the laity, constituting stealing from the saṃgha, and one may not take it back by force; one should exhort and instruct them to give it to the saṃgha so they incur no karmic retribution (the saṃgha may receive it as property of a layperson). The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: If a bhikṣu travels carrying another's robes, and the owner of the robes dies, and he then individually accepts the robes without giving them to the bhikṣus within the same boundary, it is a duṣkṛta (according to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, it is invalid: bhikṣus were present, but he had no perception of them). If after performing the karman one measures the shadow, fearing that guest bhikṣus might come, one should ascertain whether it is before or after the karman (meaning that when the boundary gathering the saṃgha is large, one does not know whether there are bhikṣus or not). In the Vinaya: If there are bhikṣus present, but one has no perception of them and divides robes as a separate saṃgha, it is invalid.