四分律行事鈔資持記 1.290

1.290

癡鈍中，初示不足意。即不解律人，如經論禪宗及餘雜學，不霑律部，並在此收；縱稱學律，時過學肆；不了綱緣，都迷成敗；趨時附勢，濫預人師；自謂精英，實同癡鈍；故《業疏》所解，廣列五迷；今為引之，宜乎自省；彼云：誦文合眼，恐有停延；緣入非違，傍無人覺；此一迷也（總示四法，都不撿挍。）。或同誦一法，前後無乖；文相能所，不識彼我；此二迷也（此謂迷法）。或約文謹攝，深練自他；增減乖務，事法錯濫，不召令住；此三迷也（謂迷事也）。或文句乃明，牒事非濫；人有別緣，是非通默；此四迷也（即迷人也）。或人法乃具，事局界境；成不冥然，端拱送忍；此五迷也（此迷界也）。觀此五迷，深明四法；微為弘獎，僅涉僧倫；齊五所收，義歸不足。（四法即人法事界。）必言等者，言謂羯磨言義。齊字去呼。如臨說戒，止解一白言相始終，即足說戒一席之數。以人難具美，恐法事廢闕，微通此類耳。

Regarding the foolish and dull: first, it indicates the rationale for insufficiency. That is, a person who does not understand the Vinaya—such as those in sūtras, śāstras, Chan traditions, or other diverse studies who have not engaged with the Vinaya collection—are all subsumed here. Even if they claim to study the Vinaya, their time has passed in study halls; failing to understand its principles and conditions, they are completely bewildered as to what constitutes success or failure; pursuing trends and attaching to power, they illegitimately presume to be teachers of others; claiming themselves to be the elite, they are in truth identical to the foolish and dull. Therefore, in the explanation in the Karma Commentary, the five confusions are extensively listed; now I cite them so that one ought to reflect on oneself. It says: 'Reciting the text with closed eyes, one fears there might be hesitation or delays; if conditions enter inappropriately, no one alongside notices; this is the first confusion' (summarily showing the four elements of the rite, entirely failing to inspect them). 'Or, together reciting one rite, front and back do not conflict; yet concerning textual marks and subject and object, one does not recognize this from that; this is the second confusion' (this refers to being confused about the rite). 'Or, carefully regulating according to the text, deeply drilling oneself and others; additions and subtractions conflict with the business, affairs and rites are mixed up, yet one does not call out to halt it; this is the third confusion' (referring to being confused about the matter). 'Or, the phrases of the text are clear and the designated matters are not confused; yet when persons have distinct circumstances, regarding right and wrong all remain silent; this is the fourth confusion' (that is, being confused about the persons). 'Or, the persons and rites are complete, but the matter is restricted by the boundary demarcation; whether it is effected or not remains obscure, yet with hands folded they silently acquiesce; this is the fifth confusion' (this is being confused about the boundary). Observing these five confusions, one deeply understands the four dharmas; slightly promoting and praising them, one barely participates in the ranks of the saṃgha; those subsumed under all five, by meaning, revert to being insufficient. (The four dharmas are: persons, rites, matters, and boundaries.) Regarding 'must speak' and so forth: 'speech' refers to the phrasing and meaning of the karmavācanā. The character 'qi' (齊) is pronounced in the departing tone (as 'all'). If, when approaching the poṣadha, one merely understands the words and marks of one jñapti from beginning to end, that suffices for the quorum of a single seat of poṣadha. Because it is difficult for persons to possess all perfections, and fearing that the legal proceedings might be discontinued or neglected, this category is slightly accommodated.