四分律行事鈔資持記 1.28

1.28

次科，引用中為二，先列所引文。有四句。初句統収諸律，即五十祇等。次句收大小乘經。經中談律，名為隨經之律，故云隨說。第三收大小乘論。第四總諸師疏鈔，及《布薩儀》、《高僧傳》、《師資傳》、《寺誥》等。此之四句，括盡一部引用之文，是則貫攝兩乘，囊包三藏；遺編雜集，𭟎聚成宗；以鈔標題，義見於此。搜下，次明取捨又二，初二句取捨三藏。搜謂摘取，駁即簡除。言同異者。初約本宗他部同異相對以明搜駁，有四句。一與本宗同故搜（《十誦》持衣加藥，諸部不足數人，《婆論》三衣局量，《五分》通量，《母論》轉欲之類。），二同故駁（魚肉正食，小教咸爾，今鈔用後廢之。），三與本宗異故搜（《僧祇》五人捨墮，在眾自說欲，《五分》通結淨地，諸部自然界量，《母論》略說戒等。），四異故駁（《僧祇》三遍說欲，牒緣入欲，通夜會衣，不立勢分；群部不開淨地，增加羯磨，如是等例。）。次就他部自明同異亦四句。一他部同故搜者（《五分》、《僧祇》於上座前一一說欲，《十誦》、《多論》盜畜物犯吉之類。），二同故駁（《十誦》、《善見》無和尚得戒，《僧祇》、《十誦》，四重無重犯。），三他部異故搜（《善見》三衣內穿失法，《婆論》緣斷，《雜寶藏》，俱盧舍五里，《多論》二里，竝取用之。），四異故駁（《十誦》受三十九夜，《僧祇》事訖。委如〈別行〉中尋之。）。長見下，取捨諸師文紀。何以知然？以三藏聖言，豈論短濫，義可見矣。初二句明取者。如下諸篇所引疏鈔，解釋問答，多不標名；至於《僧傳》、《寺誥》等，各題本號，此明取文皆屬鈔攝。（昔云補闕，誤矣。）輔即助也。濫述下，明捨。下諸篇中或直剪者，如云七樹七間，如《義鈔》廢立。或引破者，忘成及界不開中安居，解界失夏等；又《布薩儀》中唱未受具人不清淨者出等，《出要律儀》禮敬捉衣角之類。若不剪除，人情滯塞，故云成通意也。

Next heading: in citing sources, there are two parts. First, listing the texts cited. There are four lines. The first line comprehensively subsumes the various vinayas, namely the *Five-Part*, *Mahāsāṃghika*, and *Daśādhyāya*, etc. The second line subsumes Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras. Vinaya discussed within sūtras is termed "vinaya following sūtras"; hence it says "according to what was preached." The third subsumes Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna treatises. The fourth summarizes the commentaries and manuals of the various masters, as well as *Poṣadha Rituals*, *Biographies of Eminent Monks*, *Biographies of Masters and Disciples*, *Monastery Decrees*, and so on. These four lines encompass all the texts cited throughout the entire work; thus it integrates both Vehicles, embraces the three baskets, and strings together dispersed writings and diverse compilations into a single school of thought. The meaning of entitling it *Manual* is seen here. From "searched" downward, next clarifies selection and rejection, again in two parts: first, two lines on selecting and rejecting from the Three Baskets. "To search" means to extract and select; "to reject" means to winnow out and remove. As for "agreements and differences": First, explaining selection and rejection in terms of the contrast between agreements and differences of this school against other schools, there are four patterns: 1. Selected because of agreement with this school (such as the *Daśādhyāya*'s keeping robes and taking medicine as an addition, the various schools' insufficient number of persons, the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā*'s strict sizing of the three robes, the *Five-Part* general sizing, the *Mātṛkā*'s transferring consent, etc.); 2. Rejected despite agreement (meat and fish as staple food: the Hīnayāna teachings all hold this, but the present *Manual* uses later [Mahāyāna teachings] to abolish it); 3. Selected despite difference from this school (such as the *Mahāsāṃghika*'s five persons relinquishing a pāyattika and personally declaring consent in the assembly, the *Five-Part* comprehensively demarcating pure ground, the natural boundaries of the various schools, the *Mātṛkā*'s abbreviated poṣadha recitation, etc.); 4. Rejected because of difference (such as the *Mahāsāṃghika*'s declaring consent three times, stating conditions to enter consent, night-long robes-gathering, and not establishing spatial divisions; and the various schools' not allowing pure ground, or adding to karmavācanā—examples such as these). Next, explaining agreements and differences among other schools themselves also has four patterns: 1. Selected because other schools agree (such as the *Five-Part* and *Mahāsāṃghika* each declaring consent individually before the elder, or the *Daśādhyāya* and *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā* holding that stealing animal property constitutes a duṣkṛta, etc.); 2. Rejected despite agreement among them (such as the *Daśādhyāya* and *Samantapāsādikā* holding that one obtains ordination without an upādhyāya, or the *Mahāsāṃghika* and *Daśādhyāya* holding that there is no repeat offense for the four grave offenses); 3. Selected though other schools differ (such as the *Samantapāsādikā* holding that internal tearing of the three robes loses validity while the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā* holds it is the severance of the edge; or the *Saṃyuktaratnapiṭaka* holding a krośa to be five li while the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā* holds it to be two li—both are adopted and used); 4. Rejected because other schools differ (such as the *Daśādhyāya*'s receiving thirty-nine nights, or the *Mahāsāṃghika*'s "matter concluded"—examine them in detail in the "Separate Practices"). From "superior views" downward, selection and rejection among the writings of various masters. How is this known? Because the holy words of the Three Baskets could hardly be termed deficient or spurious; the meaning is evident. The first two lines clarify adoption: as in the commentaries and manuals cited in the various chapters below, explanations and dialectical exchanges often do not indicate names, whereas for works like the *Biographies of Monks* and *Monastery Decrees*, their original titles are respectively given; this clarifies that the texts selected are all encompassed within the *Manual*. (Former commentators said it was "supplementing deficiencies," which is mistaken.) "Support" means to aid. From "spurious writings" downward clarifies rejection. Among the various chapters below, some are directly excised, such as the statement of "seven trees and seven intervals," or the abrogations and establishments of the *Yichao*; or they are cited to be refuted, such as the forgetful accomplishment [of rains-retreat], rains-retreat within an unresolved boundary, or losing the retreat upon demarcating boundaries, etc.; or in the *Poṣadha Ritual*, chanting for unordained and impure persons to exit, etc., or the *Essential Vinaya Etiquette*'s holding the corner of the robe while paying homage, and the like. If they were not excised and removed, people's understanding would be obstructed; hence it says "to realize an unimpeded understanding."