四分律行事鈔資持記 1.545

1.545

斥非中。即光師羯磨，彼執緣起立結次第。故疏云：律文雖有先後，由緣起故，不即因此明結法式，理如《五分》，不可依人。又《壇經》云：若先結大界，後結戒場，約何法制以分兩界；雖預開空域，終是無法之地。鈔中直破云不讀等。

In the refutation of errors, this refers to Master Guang's karmavācanā: he relied on the causal origins [of the rules] to establish the sequence of binding. Hence the Commentary states: “Although the Vinaya text contains a sequence, because it stems from causal origins, one should not simply use this to determine the procedure for binding; the principle should be like that of the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, and one must not rely on persons.” Furthermore, the Altar Sūtra states: “If one first binds the great boundary and only afterwards binds the ordination platform, by what legal regulation can one separate the two boundaries? Even if an empty precinct is reserved in advance, it ultimately remains a place devoid of legal basis.” In the Manual, it directly refutes this, saying that they do not read [the Vinaya], and so on.