四分律行事鈔資持記 1.1180

1.1180

眾法，示緣中；先出今意又二，初示緣同者。即前三寶等五種，故律受七日中備列已，半月一月並指如上。但下，明限異。此明前緣，眾別並同；日限長短為異。不同下，次斥古非。彼以短緣而加長法。疏又云：古師用七日已，後有短緣，受月為非，令破夏去。故知有二古解。此下二句正斥。上句謂結業，下句即違教。餘下，指前重受。

Under "saṃgha procedures, showing the conditions": First, presenting the present perspective has two parts. First, showing that the conditions are the same: namely, the aforementioned five kinds, such as the Triratna, which have already been fully listed in the vinaya for taking seven days; for half a month and one month, it refers to the above. The clause beginning with "merely" explains the difference in limits: this clarifies that the preceding conditions are the same for both saṃgha and individual; the difference lies in the length and shortness of the daily limits. Below "unlike," the errors of the ancients are rebuked: they added a long procedure for a short condition. The Commentary also states: "The ancient teachers, having used seven days, later had a short condition and held that taking a month was wrong, requiring one to break the vassa and leave." Hence we know there were two ancient interpretations. The two sentences below formally rebuke them: the upper sentence refers to generating karma; the lower sentence refers to violating the teaching. Below "the rest," it refers to repeating the taking of leave as before.