四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 3.78

3.78

五負債進不者。先以義分。若佛法別人負亡人物，亡人負佛法別人物，並含輕重者；有則相當還，無則交絡還。以並收入，須依本物；重則入常住，輕入現前僧。若先負輕物，今追得重，還須賣取輕物，依法分之；若本負重，還輕者，入常住僧中，不同共僧之法。若常住僧負亡者重物，不須索取（以還入常住故）；若負輕物，追入現前僧，得重物還者，依前易取輕物分之；若全無可得者，便止。《十誦》云：若比丘生時負三寶物，應歸；若三寶貸比丘物，索取入現前僧（故知並索，依本而斷）；乃至四方現前客舊比丘等，亦同上。若賖酒不還便死，取衣鉢還；若無者，取僧物償，恐出諸比丘惡名聲故（亦不言常住、現前之別，至時隨緣）。若先與他衣價，死時還索取。取他衣，未與價，若死，還本衣；無者，賣衣鉢還。又債息異處，有五句：一衣鉢寄在餘處，身在餘處死，隨物處僧得。二負債處、死處，負債處僧得。三死處、出息處、保任處，保任處僧得。四死處、質物處、取錢處，質物處僧得。五死處、取錢處、執券書處，執券處僧得。此中文猶不了。若息物在俗邊，索未得者，可準《十誦》，依券徵取。若物在僧邊者，亡後隨物處僧得；終不得以券書故，攝他異界僧物，如初句斷；以彼此俱僧故。若論重物，亦不得取；以不聽移此僧物而送彼僧，除羯磨法。若負物在俗，同無住處；五眾先來者得，重物隨見者送寺。若多人所知，共爭不決者；如《十誦》五斷，或同前人處二寄斷。《毘尼母》：若有生息物在外，遣寺內僧祇淨人，推求取之，入此寺常住僧。《五百問》云：比丘借人物，前人死；要須白僧，得取本物，不白而取得罪。若僧不與彊取，或僧知而不還，自他俱犯。《祇》云：若索債者，當看前人；持戒可信者與，不可信者不應與；若有可信人證明者應與，不信證者不應與。

Fifth, the collection and payment of debts. First, distinguishing by principle: If the Buddha, Dharma, or individual persons owe goods to the deceased person, or the deceased person owes goods to the Buddha, Dharma, or individual persons, in both cases encompassing heavy and light [goods]; if they exist, they are repaid with equivalent goods, and if not, they are repaid cross-wise. Because in all cases of collecting income one must rely on the original goods: heavy goods enter the permanent property (saṃghika), and light goods enter the present saṃgha. If one originally owed light goods and now heavy goods are recovered in pursuit, one must still sell them to obtain light goods and divide them according to Dharma; if one originally owed heavy goods and repays with light goods, they enter into the permanent saṃgha, not following the rule for shared saṃgha property. If the permanent saṃgha owes heavy goods to the deceased, it need not demand them (because they would return into the permanent property anyway); if it owes light goods, they are pursued and enter the present saṃgha; if heavy goods are received in repayment, one follows the former rule of exchanging them to obtain light goods and divide them; if absolutely nothing can be obtained, then it stops. The Daśādhyāya-vinaya states: If a bhikṣu while alive owes goods to the Three Jewels, they should be returned; if the Three Jewels borrow goods from a bhikṣu, they are demanded and enter the present saṃgha (hence we know that both are demanded, judged according to the original goods); down to cāturdiśa, present, visiting, and resident bhikṣus, it is also the same as above. If one buys wine on credit, does not repay, and then dies, one takes the robes and bowl to repay it; if there are none, one takes saṃgha property to compensate, for fear of generating bad reputation for the bhikṣus (it also does not specify the distinction between permanent and present, following circumstances when the time comes). If one previously gave someone the price for a robe, at the time of death one seeks it back. If one took another's robe and has not yet given the price, if one dies, one returns the original robe; if it is gone, one sells the robes and bowl to repay. Furthermore, regarding debt interest in different places, there are five propositions: 1. Robes and bowl are deposited in another place and one dies in another place: the saṃgha where the goods are located obtains them. 2. The place where the debt was incurred and the place of death: the saṃgha at the place where the debt was incurred obtains them. 3. The place of death, the place where interest is generated, and the place of the guarantor: the saṃgha at the guarantor's place obtains them. 4. The place of death, the place of the pledge, and the place where money was taken: the saṃgha at the pledge's place obtains them. 5. The place of death, the place where money was taken, and the place where the contract deed is held: the saṃgha at the contract-holding place obtains them. The text here is still not completely clear. If the interest goods are with a layperson and have been demanded but not yet obtained, one may follow the Daśādhyāya-vinaya to demand them according to the contract. If the goods are with the saṃgha, after death the saṃgha where the goods are located obtains them; one must never, because of the contract deed, seize goods of a saṃgha in another boundary, judged as in the first proposition, because both are the saṃgha. If considering heavy goods, one also must not take them, because it is not permitted to remove this saṃgha's goods and send them to that saṃgha, except through a karman procedure. If the owed goods are among the laity, it is like having no fixed place: whichever of the five assemblies arrives first obtains them; heavy goods are sent to the monastery according to whoever sees them. If it is known to many people who dispute without resolution, it is judged as in the five determinations of the Daśādhyāya-vinaya, or determined in the same manner as the two deposits of person and place above. The Vinayamātṛkā states: If there are interest-bearing goods outside, one dispatches the monastery's saṃghika kappiyakāraka to investigate and collect them, entering them into the permanent saṃgha of this monastery. The Five Hundred Questions states: A bhikṣu borrows goods from someone, and that person dies; one must inform the saṃgha to take the original goods; taking them without informing incurs an offense. If the saṃgha does not give them and one takes them by force, or if the saṃgha knows and does not return them, both oneself and the other commit an offense. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: If someone demands a debt, one should look at that person: if they uphold the precepts and are trustworthy, give it; if they are not trustworthy, it should not be given; if there is a trustworthy person to bear witness, it should be given; if there is untrustworthy testimony, it should not be given.