四分律行事鈔資持記 1.37

1.37

大段第二諸篇大綱，敘意中。統大綱者，諸篇事相，皆別目故。言條流者，總中別相，義類異故。上二句即顯前文。但敘述作，不明義例，故云未委。更以下，生後意。括謂包收。鏡，明也。遠詮謂教相大旨。將釋十門，略知次第。大聖立教，為顯一乘，欲使群迷咸歸實道。不堪受化，暫用權方。適物隨宜，凡心叵測。然則將傳遺教，必曉來源；俾夫學有所歸，行非虛造，教興之意，故在初明。既達此門，粗知來旨。何因制度輕重不倫，故次明也。上列二門，通論律藏；宗部既別，教相莫融。必有事興，依何處斷，故有三也。雖知用教約體有宗；此土受緣，並遵《四分》；或於本部攝事不周，餘部誠文，如何取用，故有四也。上且據文，文容乖闕；乖須義定，闕必文通；廢立既難，須明軌式，故有五也。已前辨教，並約能詮。教不徒施，必詮正行；行非一轍，須指大宗，故有六也。上來六意，教行具彰；教行被機，機分多異，故七八九通局次明。前之九段，機教兩明，頗彰化意。然教傳此土，真偽相參；若不甄除，容生疑濫；又斯文之作，特異前修；元意所存，來學須曉，故次第十委而示之。次第相由，大略已顯；至下別釋，隨更明之。

In the second major section, “The Broad Outline of the Various Chapters,” in the introductory remarks: “Unifying the broad outline” means that the operational matters of the various chapters each have their individual headings. “Specific branches” means that, within the general [framework], there are distinct marks because the doctrinal categories differ. The preceding two sentences clarify the previous text. Because it merely narrated the authorship without clarifying the doctrinal principles, it says: “not yet fully detailed.” The passage from “further” onward gives rise to the meaning that follows. “Comprising” means encompassing and collecting. “Mirror” means clarifying. “Profoundly expressing” refers to the overarching purport of the doctrinal marks. To explain the ten sections, one must briefly know their sequence. The Great Sage established the teachings in order to reveal the One Vehicle, desiring that all the deluded might return to the real path. Since they were incapable of receiving [this directly], he temporarily employed provisional expedients. Adapting to beings according to circumstances, [his intent] cannot be fathomed by the minds of ordinary mortals. However, if one is to transmit the bequeathed teachings, one must understand their origin; to enable students to have a recourse and ensure their practice is not fabricated in vain, the intent behind the arising of the teaching is therefore clarified first. Having understood this section, one roughly knows the purpose of its arrival. The reason why the regulations differ in weight and lack uniformity is clarified next. The above two sections generally treat the Vinaya Piṭaka; but since schools and divisions have diverged, their doctrinal marks do not harmonize. When an affair arises, on what should one base the adjudication? Hence there is the third. Although one knows that using the teaching by reference to the [precept-]essence entails having a specific school, yet in this land the conditions for ordination entirely follow the Dharmaguptaka; if within our own school it does not fully cover an affair, how are the authentic texts of the other schools to be adopted and used? Hence there is the fourth. The above merely refers to texts, but texts allow for conflict and lacunae; conflict must be determined by principle, and lacunae must be resolved through texts; since abrogating and establishing are difficult, one must clarify the model and standards. Hence there is the fifth. What has been distinguished before all concerns the expressive teaching. A teaching is not set forth in vain; it must express correct practice. Practice is not of a single track, so one must point out the grand school. Hence there is the sixth. In the six purposes above, teaching and practice are both fully displayed; teaching and practice cater to capacities, and capacities are divided into many differences; hence the seventh, eighth, and ninth successively clarify the general and specific. The preceding nine sections clarify both capacities and teaching, displaying the intent of the transformation quite clearly. Yet as the teaching was transmitted to this land, the authentic and spurious were intermingled; if they are not sifted out, doubts and confusion may easily arise; furthermore, the composition of this text differs uniquely from previous masters; the original intent behind it must be understood by future students; hence the tenth explains it in full detail. The causal sequence among them has thus been broadly revealed; when we come to the individual explanations below, it will be clarified further.