四分律行事鈔資持記 1.1186

1.1186

一月法中。不得雙誦者，以律本中不別出法。於十五日下，連書一月；翻譯省文，意令隨改；往往愚者依文謹誦，故此遮之；疏云則四十五日故也。疏又問云：受一月不云過半月者？解云：七日別人，餘皆眾法；但云過七日，明知餘二俱白二也。又云：若受半月，數日滿足，以加法云十五日故；若受一月，則隨大小。私謂，若從初一受則可隨月，或中間受而遇小月，如何數之？準亦依小得二十九日，以受月故。（如十六日受，至月盡止，得十四日，後更數十五日耳。）

In the method for one month: 'Must not recite both together' is because the vinaya text does not set forth a separate transaction. Below 'fifteen days', 'one month' is written continuously; the translation abbreviated the text, intending for it to be changed accordingly. Often foolish people rigidly recite following the text, so this is prohibited; the Commentary states it is because it would mean forty-five days. The Commentary also asks: 'Why does receiving one month not say "exceeding half a month"?' The explanation states: 'Seven days is by a single person; the rest are all transactions of the Saṅgha. Only saying "exceeding seven days" makes it clear that the other two are both jñaptidvitīyā karmavācanās.' It also states: 'If receiving half a month, the number of days is complete, because the transaction says "fifteen days"; if receiving one month, it follows whether [the month is] long or short.' I privately suggest: If one receives it from the first day, it can follow the month; but if one receives it midway and encounters a short month, how is it counted? According to analogy, one also gets twenty-nine days based on the short [month], because one received a month. (As when receiving it on the sixteenth day, reaching the end of the month stops it, obtaining fourteen days, and thereafter one counts another fifteen days.)