四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 2.77

2.77

Fourth, mutual use among specific types of property within their respective categories. First, regarding Buddha property, there are four kinds: First, property used by the Buddha. This must not be diverted or exchanged; that is, buildings, robes, beds, curtains, and other items that were once used by the Buddha are to be placed inside a stūpa for worship and must not be exchanged, as stated earlier in the *Ratnarāśi-sūtra*. The *Wubai wenshi* states: one must not sell the silks on the Buddha's body to make robes for the Buddha. Furthermore, when the pillars of a Buddha hall deteriorated and the donor replaced them, offering the old pillars to the saṃgha, the saṃgha was not permitted to use them. In the Vinaya, the Buddha said: regarding sitting mats in the Buddha's garden, all gods and humans make offerings to them, and they must not be used arbitrarily, because they all belong to the stūpa. The extensive veneration is as described in the ritual for 'Paying Homage to the Saṃgha and Images'. Second, property donated to belong to the Buddha. The *Wubai wen* states: Buddha property may be bought to procure offering requisites for worship. The *Daśādhyāya* states: when Buddha stūpa property was lent out for interest, the Buddha said he permitted it. The *Wubai wen* states: Buddha property must not be moved to another monastery; [to do so] is an offense of parājika. If the assembly of monks all depart, and one announces it to the saṃgha, and the saṃgha permits it, taking it away is without offense. If a visiting monk makes Buddha images or copies sūtras and receives property for it, he must not take it. If one obtains oxen or livestock belonging to the Buddha, one also must not put them to work; putting the Buddha's oxen or slaves to work incurs a great offense. Third, property offered to the Buddha. The *Mahāsāṃghika* states: if flowers offered to the Buddha are plentiful, one is permitted to resell them to purchase incense and lamps; if they are still plentiful, resell them and place [the proceeds] into the Buddha's inexhaustible wealth. The *Wubai wen* states: if Buddha banners are plentiful and one wishes to use them for other Buddha affairs, it is permissible; if the donor does not permit it, it is not permissible. Based on this, redirecting and altering them preserves them without transforming their original substance. As the *Mahāvibhāṣā* (or *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*) states: as when painting a Buddha image, if one destroys it because it is ugly, one gains merit; if one destroys it with an evil mind, one incurs an offense. Fourth, food presented to the Buddha. The Vinaya states: as for food offered to the Buddha's stūpa, those who maintain the stūpa may eat it. The *Sudarsana* states: as for meals presented before the Buddha, the bhikṣu who attends the Buddha may eat them; if there is no bhikṣu, a layperson attending the Buddha may also eat them. Based on this, the Buddha dishes in lay households did not originally belong to the Buddha, so there is no need to arrange for redemption; to speak of redemption comes from apocryphal scriptures. Next, to clarify Dharma property, which also has four distinctions: First, property used by the Dharma. Such items as cases, boxes, chests, baskets, covers, and labels originally belong to the scriptures; once they have been put to use, they cannot be altered or diverted. Whether the other three kinds are permissible or not can be known by analogy with the above. Third, to clarify saṃgha property. Regarding the two kinds of permanent property, their location is already fixed and cannot be transferred, as clarified above; if used to relieve another monastery in common, it may be obtained through the harmony of a karman. The former kind of permanent property may only be enjoyed in its use. Regarding the permanent property of the ten directions, at the time the gaṇḍī is struck, one is immediately entitled to a share of food; if one of bad precepts participates on time, or a virtuous one participates at an improper time, using it unlawfully, both incur a thullaccaya. Whether the mutual use of the two kinds may be permitted through harmony can be known by analogy with the above. The permanent persons and livestock must under no circumstances be bought or sold; based on the scriptures the offense is severe, though the various Vinayas have no text on this. Therefore, in the *Mahāsāṃghika*, the donation of female slaves to the saṃgha was entirely unacceptable, as may be understood implicitly. Regarding the two kinds of current property, the offenses of mutual use are as described above. Deciding between light and heavy property is not found in the text; those who violate this doubly incur both offenses.