四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.175

2.175

Precept 30: Diverting saṃgha property to oneself through speech. It consists of four conditions: (1) it is generally intended as saṃgha property; (2) one conceives of it as promised; (3) one diverts it toward oneself; (4) upon receiving it into one's hands, the offense is committed. The Vinaya states: 'There are three kinds of saṃgha property: (1) that already promised to the saṃgha (meaning it was generally clarified as offered to the saṃgha, without distinguishing between the community as a whole or an individual; diverting this constitutes an offense requiring forfeiture); (2) made for the sake of the saṃgha, but not yet promised to the saṃgha (meaning a lay family makes bedding and utensils to provide for the saṃgha; diverting this incurs a duṣkṛta); (3) already given to the saṃgha: already promised to the saṃgha and already relinquished to the saṃgha (this has been definitively offered to the saṃgha and is not allowed to belong to an individual; diverting this constitutes a pārājika).' The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'If someone brings an article and asks the saṃgha, 'Where should I give this?' the answer should be, 'Give it to wherever you respect.' If they ask, 'Where is the fruit of merit greatest?' the answer should be, 'Give to the saṃgha.' If they ask, 'Who keeps the precepts purely?' the answer should be, 'The saṃgha has no breach of precepts that is impure.' If they say, 'I have already offered it to the saṃgha, but now offer it to the Venerable,' one may accept it without offense. If they say, 'Where should this article be placed so that I may constantly see it being used?' the answer should be, 'Bhikṣu So-and-so sits in meditation, recites sūtras, and observes the precepts; if you give it to him, you will constantly see it being used.'' The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: 'If an item promised to the saṃgha is transferred to a stūpa, or promised to the cāturdiśa-saṃgha is diverted to the saṃgha present, or promised to the bhikṣu-saṃgha is diverted to the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha, or promised to a different place is diverted to another different place, or even promised to a different place is diverted to this place, all incur a duṣkṛta (all of these refer to where it was not definitive; if it was definitively and distinctly offered, one incurs the earlier offense accordingly).' The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya states: 'Diverting an animal of this or that [party] requires repentance for a breach of intention.' The Daśādhyāya-vinaya and Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā state: 'If a dānapati offers items to this pravāraṇā saṃgha, but one diverts them to that pravāraṇā saṃgha, the items must be returned to these monks, and one repents for a duṣkṛta. If one does not return them to these monks, the value is calculated and constitutes a grave offense. Even diverting the property of a single person from here to there also constitutes a grave offense. Following this, if an item definitively belongs to the saṃgha rota and one diverts it to another person, it constitutes a grave offense.' Among non-offenses in the Vinaya: if one did not know; if it was already promised but one thought it was not promised; or if an inferior item was promised and one encouraged the giving of a good one—in all these there is no offense.