四分律行事鈔資持記 1.111

1.111

正判中，初文即約三業相對以分，上三句判化教。經論明心顯理，是故心業以理為宗。下三句判行教。施為即事也。律藏約事辨行，故身口業以事為宗。如〈篇聚〉中，起業輕重，受報淺深；篇聚即約行，起業即依化。又〈持犯〉中，單心三時辨犯；八句重輕，此依化也；八殺俱重，即約行也。又如〈懺篇〉，三品理觀，即是化教；六位悔法，即準行教。又〈沙彌篇〉，凡福聖道，即依化教；剃落與戒，即是行教。餘更尋之。若爾，化教應不禁身口，行教應不制內心？答：此據道眾雙稟二教為言，世多不曉，故為委示。初約違明四句。一違化不違制（瞥爾貪嗔，律宗不制；及在家人作十不善是也。）；二違制不違化（即犯諸遮戒也）；三俱違（犯諸性戒）；四俱不違（理觀內照，戒律外撿。）。次約順四句。一順化不順制（性相唯識三觀破迷）；二順制不順化（心無慧觀，專守事戒。）；三俱順（如上第四）；四俱不順（造業凡愚）。三約受戒四句。一稟化不稟制（《淨名》云：汝但發心，即名具足是。）；二稟制不稟化（自智不明，循律軌度。）；三俱稟（心希出離，受律禁戒，趣向聖道。佛世利根，善來三語，即得道果。又《涅槃》出家菩薩是也。）；四俱不稟（可知）。四約懺罪四句。一化淨制不淨（如犯篇聚，理觀明照，達罪性空；而不依律懺，縱得好相，不入淨僧。）；二制淨化不淨（犯依律悔，而無觀慧，但滅違制，業性確然。）；三俱淨（篇聚依教滅，業道任靜思。）；四俱不淨（愚者犯不肯懺）。問：化行二教，為大為小？答：化收大小，制唯局小。若爾，《梵網》善戒，大乘行教，那判為化？答：大乘三藏制不制別，得名為行。若望今宗，還屬於化，以菩薩戒通道俗故。問：五八二戒，既是戒制，應是行攝；然局俗人，不通兩眾，如何判之？答：化教所攝，律中明者，隨律之經，引證如別。如是簡判，略識化行；更須精辨，恐繁且止。今時學者，尚不知名，況明行相！若不曉此，大小三藏，一切皆迷。

In "Direct Determination": the first passage makes distinctions based on the mutual confrontation of the three karmas. The first three lines determine the teaching of transformation. Sūtras and treatises illuminate the mind and reveal the principle; therefore, karma of the mind takes the principle as its primary concern. The lower three lines determine the teaching of practice. "Bodily and verbal enactment" refers to concrete affairs. The Vinaya Piṭaka determines practice by way of concrete affairs; hence karma of body and speech takes affairs as its primary concern. As in the chapter on "Classes and Groups [of Offenses]", the heaviness or lightness in originating karma, and the shallowness or depth in receiving retribution—the classes and groups are grounded in practice, whereas the origination of karma is based on transformation. Furthermore, in "Maintenance and Violation", analyzing offenses at three times purely by way of mind, and the heaviness and lightness in the eight propositions—these are based on transformation; whereas all eight types of killing being equally heavy is grounded in practice. Furthermore, as in the chapter on "Confession", the three grades of contemplation on the principle belong to the teaching of transformation, while the methods of repentance for the six positions conform to the teaching of practice. Furthermore, in the chapter on "Śrāmaṇeras", ordinary merit and the noble path are based on the teaching of transformation, while shaving the head and conferring the precepts belong to the teaching of practice. The rest may be sought similarly. If so, should the teaching of transformation not prohibit body and speech, and should the teaching of practice not regulate the internal mind? Answer: This is spoken in terms of the ordained assembly doubly receiving both teachings. Because many in the world do not understand this, it is explained in detail. First, explaining four propositions in terms of transgression: 1. Transgressing transformation but not transgressing prohibition (fleeting moments of greed or anger, which the Vinaya School does not prohibit; and laypeople committing the ten unwholesome deeds). 2. Transgressing prohibition but not transgressing transformation (namely, violating the various prescribed precepts). 3. Transgressing both (violating the various inherently wrong precepts). 4. Transgressing neither (the contemplation on the principle illuminating internally, and the Vinaya precepts regulating externally). Next, four propositions in terms of compliance: 1. Complying with transformation but not complying with prohibition (the three contemplations on nature, characteristics, and consciousness-only breaking through delusion). 2. Complying with prohibition but not complying with transformation (having no wisdom contemplation in the mind, exclusively keeping to concrete precepts). 3. Complying with both (like the fourth above). 4. Complying with neither (ignorant worldlings creating bad karma). Third, four propositions in terms of receiving precepts: 1. Receiving transformation but not receiving prohibition (as the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says: "If you simply arouse the mind, it is called full ordination"). 2. Receiving prohibition but not receiving transformation (one's own wisdom being unclear, merely following the rules and standards of the Vinaya). 3. Receiving both (the mind aspiring to transcendence, receiving the prohibitions and precepts of the Vinaya, heading toward the noble path; those with sharp faculties in the Buddha's lifetime attained the fruit of the path upon the "Come, bhikṣu" and the three phrases; also, the home-leaving bodhisattvas in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra). 4. Receiving neither (readily understood). Fourth, four propositions in terms of repenting offenses: 1. Transformation is purified while prohibition is not purified (such as violating the classes and groups, where contemplation on the principle illuminates clearly, realizing that the nature of offenses is empty, yet one does not repent according to the Vinaya; even if one attains an auspicious sign, one cannot enter the pure saṃgha). 2. Prohibition is purified while transformation is not purified (repenting a violation according to the Vinaya, yet lacking contemplative wisdom; one only eradicates the transgression of prohibition, while the nature of the karmic path remains steadfast). 3. Both are purified (classes and groups are eradicated according to the teaching, and the karmic path is calmed through quiet reflection). 4. Neither is purified (a foolish person who commits an offense and is unwilling to repent). Question: Are the two teachings of transformation and practice Mahāyāna or Hīnayāna? Answer: Transformation encompasses both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; prohibition is strictly confined to Hīnayāna. If so, why are the wholesome precepts of the Brahmajāla-sūtra, which are the Mahāyāna teaching of practice, determined to be transformation? Answer: In the Mahāyāna Tripiṭaka, by distinguishing between what is prohibited and not prohibited, it can be called "practice"; yet looking from the perspective of our school, it still belongs to transformation, because the bodhisattva precepts apply commonly to monastics and laypeople. Question: The five and eight precepts are already precept-prohibitions and should be subsumed under practice; yet being confined to laypeople, they do not apply to both assemblies—how should they be determined? Answer: They are subsumed under the teaching of transformation. Those explained in the Vinaya are sūtras following the Vinaya; citations and proofs are as found elsewhere. By such differentiation and determination, one may briefly know transformation and practice; further refined discrimination is omitted here for fear of being too verbose. Scholars nowadays do not even know their names, let alone clarify their active marks! If one is not clear about this, one will be utterly deluded concerning all of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna Tripiṭaka.