四分律行事鈔資持記 1.670

1.670

造受中，《多論》，前段明造，初明常限。趣舉一斛以示其相；十斗曰斛，今所謂一石也。若減下，明增減。兩結盜罪，並約知事。既下，明人多少。多則均之，少則留之。注決論文，豐必不爾。次若下，明受須均等。不得過分。下引律論，意亦同之。論中偏食，彼約眾僧偏與故輕；不病索食，正入盜科，兼復妄語，理得二罪。餘下，指經。彼說迦葉佛時比丘，為僧上座，不能禪誦，不解戒律，飽食熟睡，但能論說無益之語；精餚供養，先僧飲食；以是因緣，入地獄中作大肉瓮，火燒受苦，至今不息；彼經事廣，須者尋之。今時眾主，多有斯過；雖傳經律，不識因果；別修異饌，對眾獨飡；縱恣貪心，侵虧常住；豈念違於佛教，傷彼眾情。著少頃之甘肥，為長夜之苦楚；深嗟鄙悋，知復何心。

In "Preparation and Receipt," in the *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā*, the preceding passage clarifies preparation; it first clarifies the standard limit. It simply mentions one *hu* to illustrate the mark; ten *dou* make a *hu*, which today is called one *dan*. "If decreasing..." onward explains increase and decrease. Both conclude with an offense of stealing, and both apply to the administrative officer. "Since..." onward explains the number of people. If many, then equalize it; if few, then keep it. The note decides upon the text of the treatise: when abundant, it is certainly not so. Next, "If..." onward explains that receiving must be equal. One must not exceed the allotted share. Below, when citing the vinayas and treatises, the intended meaning is the same. In the treatise, "eating partially/specially" refers to the monastic assembly giving partially, and hence it is light. Demanding food when not sick falls directly under the category of stealing, and additionally involves lying; in principle, one incurs two offenses. "The remainder..." points to the sūtra. It states that at the time of Kāśyapa Buddha, a bhikṣu was a senior elder in the saṃgha who could neither meditate nor chant, did not understand the Vinaya precepts, ate his fill and slept soundly, and could only speak useless talk; he took choice delicacies and offerings, eating and drinking before the saṃgha. Due to this cause and condition, he entered hell and became a great vat of flesh, burned by fire and suffering pain without cessation up to this day. The narrative in that sūtra is extensive; those who need it should seek it out. Nowadays, leaders of the assembly mostly have this fault: though they transmit the sūtras and vinayas, they do not recognize cause and effect; they separately prepare distinctive delicacies and eat alone in front of the assembly; indulging their greedy minds, they encroach upon and diminish the permanent monastic property. How could they care that they disobey the Buddha's teaching and hurt the feelings of the assembly? Clinging to a fleeting moment of sweet and rich food, they invite the bitter pain of the long night; deeply lamenting their base stinginess, what sort of mind can one say they have?