四分律行事鈔資持記 1.479

1.479

引證中，《四分》證上乞為。《五分》下，彰部別。和諫亦制，故云通也。《母論》及下《四分》，竝證治舉。文中四五伴可諫，不慮擯治；則知不得加眾明矣。十五種默者，〈雜犍度〉中，舍利弗見作非法，佛聽默然；因說五法不應默，若作如法羯磨（事雖如法，緣有差違，須訶令止。），若得同意伴（不慮眾治，此同《母論》。），若見小罪（眾有犯輕，僧體不失。），為作別住（謂在界外），在戒場上（界中別界，此二處非。）；如是五法，默然者非法（非法有罪，又不同意可訶不訶，復是默妄。）；又云：有五法應默然，見他非法默然（即舍利弗），不得伴（亦同《母論》，鈔云大同唯伴二句耳。），犯重（眾有犯重，僧體已壞，訶無益故。），同住（非別界也），在同住地（非場上也，此二處如，故不應訶。），如是五法應默然（此雖不同，由是開故，則非默妄。）；又有五事應和合，若如法和合（應來者來，三業俱集。），若默住之（得訶不訶），若與欲（應與欲者與欲），若從可信人聞（自不違故，他云如法，我亦同和。），先在眾中默然而坐（前約作法時和，此明先在眾中忍可所作。）。下文指廣，彼亦略示。

In citing supporting evidence: the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya corroborates the above "requesting on behalf of." "The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya..." highlights sectarian differences. Concurring and admonishing are also prohibited, hence it says "universal." The Mātṛkā and the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya below both corroborate disciplining and censuring. In the text, four or five companions may admonish without fear of ostracism or punishment; from this, it is evident that it must not be extended to a quorum. The fifteen kinds of remaining silent: in the "Miscellaneous Chapter" (Kṣudrakavastu), Śāriputra saw un-Dharmic acts being done, and the Buddha permitted him to remain silent; on that occasion, he spoke of five cases where one should not remain silent: if a Dharmic karmavācanā is performed (though the matter is Dharmic, if conditions are non-compliant, one must rebuke it to stop it); if one obtains like-minded companions (with no fear of communal censure, which is the same as the Mātṛkā); if one sees a minor offense (someone in the assembly commits a minor offense, but the essence of the Saṅgha is not lost); performing separate residence for someone (meaning outside the boundary); and being on the precept platform (a separate boundary within a boundary—these two locations are improper). In these five cases, remaining silent is contrary to the Dharma (being contrary to the Dharma entails an offense; furthermore, failing to rebuke what should be rebuked when having disagreement is also a lie by silence). It also says: there are five cases where one should remain silent: seeing another's un-Dharmic act and remaining silent (namely, like Śāriputra); not obtaining companions (also the same as the Mātṛkā; the Manual says they largely agree, differing only in the two lines on companions); committing a grave offense (someone in the assembly commits a grave offense, so the essence of the Saṅgha is already broken, and rebuking is useless); dwelling together (not in a separate boundary); and being on common dwelling ground (not on a precept platform—these two locations are proper, so one should not rebuke). In these five cases one should remain silent (although these are dissimilar, because they are permitted exceptions, they are not lies by silence). Furthermore, there are five matters where one should be harmonious: if harmonious according to the Dharma (those who should come have come, and all three types of action are assembled); if dwelling in silence (able to rebuke but not rebuking); if giving consent (those who should give consent give consent); if hearing it from a trustworthy person (since one does not object oneself, when another says it is according to the Dharma, I also concur in harmony); and previously sitting in silence among the assembly (the former pertains to harmony at the time of performing the ritual, whereas this explains earlier consent to what was done while among the assembly). The text below refers to a fuller treatment, which is also briefly indicated there.