四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.174

2.174

Precept 29: Leaving the robes behind in a perilous wilderness dwelling. There are six conditions: (1) one formally possesses the three robes; (2) it is in the winter portion, an off-season time; (3) it is a place of suspicion and fear; (4) one deposits the robes in a village; (5) there is no special circumstance; (6) exceeding seven nights constitutes the offense. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: 'Suspicion means fearing there are thieves and robbers.' The Daśādhyāya-vinaya states: 'Suspecting the loss of even a single water pot; fear extends to the fear of evil monks.' As for 'inside a village,' the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'Depositing them with a suspicious lay family (because an improper family will know this monk has no robes on his person).' The Pañcavargika-vinaya states: 'Of the upper two robes, one is allowed to deposit one robe, whichever is heavier; one must not deposit the lower robe, because it stays on one's body. When making obeisance, entering the monastery, or begging for food, one must not wear a single robe, so one may deposit only one robe.' As for explaining the two circumstances, the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'During the three months of the summer, in a wilderness dwelling that is a fearful place, one is permitted to deposit one robe inside a village without setting a day limit.' The Pañcavargika-vinaya states: 'During the summer, one is not permitted to be separated from the robes, and must wait until the later varṣā concludes; due to the cause of danger from thieves and fearful circumstances, one may deposit it at a layperson's house without setting a day limit, only needing to go inspect it once every ten days, fearing faults such as dampness, rotting, insect bites, and the like.' The Samantapāsādikā states: 'If the monastic quarters in the wilderness dwelling are secure and sealed, one need not deposit the robes; if not, one may deposit them and inspect them once every six nights; having seen the robes, one returns to the wilderness dwelling.' From the various schools mentioned above, if there is an emergency or fear of thieves, depositing robes is permitted without a day limit; only if there are other circumstances is the limit of six nights instituted. In the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, the initial circumstance arose because of robbers plundering wilderness dwellings, so the Buddha had them deposit one robe in a village without instituting a day limit. Later, because village monks committed faults, another allowance was made extending up to six nights, but without clarifying the conditions, which led ancient masters to cling mistakenly [to strict limits]. Now, based on the clear texts of the various schools, whenever there are valid circumstances, allowances are made. In the Pañcavargika-vinaya, where there is terror, it is not limited to a number of days as stated above; allowances are also made for affairs of the stūpa or the saṃgha, affairs of the upādhyāya or ācārya, and other matters, for all of which one is permitted to leave one robe at a layperson's place for six nights. In the Vinayavibhāṣā: 'If a wilderness monk during the summer varṣā must go elsewhere to listen to the Dharma, he cannot constantly take the three robes with him; he is permitted to leave and deposit them elsewhere, and they are not lost for six nights; on the seventh day he returns to retrieve the robes; after the seventh night has passed, he deposits them as before; if the business is not yet finished, this is permitted continuously throughout.' Among non-offenses in the Vinaya: having deposited them for six nights, before the light of dawn appears on the seventh night; if one reaches the place of the robes, or touches the robes with one's hand (meaning, in the wilderness dwelling at a laywoman's place, one must touch the robes), or reaches the distance of a stone's throw, or relinquishes the robes. The rest is the same as the precept on being separated from one's robes in a village.