四分律行事鈔資持記 1.73

1.73

第四門。上明考體專用一宗；然或被事不周，須通他部，故此明之。欲曉此門文相大意，須以三問前以激之。問：受體既從《四分》，秖合專依本宗；何以今鈔備引諸部，約體明隨，其義安在？問：三藏所詮，事理兩異；既宗律藏，何以下引《阿含》等經及餘小論，豈非化制不分耶？問：律是小乘，教限須別；安得輒用《華嚴》、《涅槃》、《地持》、《智論》，豈非大小濫耶？若不明示，學者俱疑；故此決之，尋文可見。問：今鈔通用三藏，何以但標諸部？答：諸律體相既殊，須明引用分齊，是故此門正明諸律。至後六師，方通經論。（有云諸部通收經論，非也。）

The fourth section. The above clarified that examining the essence exclusively employs a single school; however, perhaps in covering matters it is not comprehensive, and one must draw upon other schools; hence this is clarified here. If one wishes to understand the general purport of this section's textual marks, one must first stimulate it with three questions. Question: Since the reception-essence derives from the Dharmaguptaka, one should merely rely exclusively on one's own school; why does the present manual fully cite the various schools to clarify subsequent practice in terms of the essence? What is the rationale for this? Question: What the three piṭakas expound differs between phenomena and principles; since the Vinaya Piṭaka is taken as the primary authority, why does it cite below sutras like the Āgamas and other Hīnayāna treatises? Does this not fail to distinguish transformational teaching from disciplinary regulations? Question: The Vinaya belongs to the Hīnayāna, and the scope of teachings must be differentiated; how can it arbitrarily employ the Avataṃsaka, the Mahāparinirvāṇa, the Bodhisattvabhūmi, and the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa? Is this not a confusion of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna? If not clearly shown, students will all be in doubt; therefore, this is resolved here, and can be seen by examining the text. Question: The present manual generally uses all three piṭakas; why does it merely specify "the various schools"? Answer: Since the essence and marks of the various vinayas differ, one must clarify the limits of citation; therefore, this section directly clarifies the various vinayas. Only when reaching the six masters later does it draw upon sutras and treatises. (Some say that "the various schools" comprehensively includes sutras and treatises; this is incorrect.)