四分律行事鈔資持記 1.964

1.964

通列中。《律》文前後總括有九。第四犯重者，《律》云：和尚闍梨，僧為作滅擯，佛言失依止（弟子亦同）。五如上引，通七羯磨，且舉訶責。餘七種，即出〈受戒犍度〉八五句中，對文可見。彼云有五法失依止（一師訶責，二去，三休道，四不與依止，五入戒場上。），復有五事（一死，二去，三休道，四不與依止，五若五歲若過五歲。），復有五事（五見本和上，四句同前，唯第五別，自下並爾。），復有五事（五和上闍梨休道），復有五事（五弟子休道），復有五事（五和上闍梨命終），復有五事（五弟子命終），復有五事（五還在和上目下住）。第二第六，必約經宿；若即日還，如上所判；第八謂師先遠去，弟子別求依止；後見本師，還復依學，彼法即失。第九亦爾，但約弟子離師後還為異。準《律》上六通於師資，下三唯局弟子。言約教失者，別點第七；且約教限，若就行論，法身成立，方離依止，如上所明。問：訶責約教，明言不失？答：上準奪行，亦即是教。問：遠去訶責，即上二門，何須重示？答：遠去即還，《律》文判失，而義有不失；訶責等七，《律》判不失，而約義有失；所以此二先明，後方通列。問：約前三法，別配九種，同異云何？答：訶責失一，如上可知；遠去兩別，即還失二；越宿失三；餘之七種，約教失三，尋之可見。（古云死與休道，三法俱失；訶責失一，餘並失下二，非也。安有犯重入場請法仍在耶。）

In [the section on] general enumeration, the Vinaya texts summarize nine [cases] in total before and after. As for the fourth, committing a grave offense, the Vinaya states: If the Saṃgha performs a debarment (pravājanīya) against an upādhyāya or an ācārya, the Buddha said that the nissaya is forfeited (and the disciple likewise). The fifth is as cited above: it applies across the seven karmas, with reprimand (tarjanīya) cited provisionally. The remaining seven kinds derive from the eight sets of five phrases in the "Khandhaka on Receiving Precepts" (Upasampadākhandhaka), which can be seen by checking against the text. It states there that there are five things by which one forfeits nissaya: (1) the master's reprimand, (2) leaving, (3) leaving the Path, (4) not granting nissaya, and (5) ascending the simā platform; there are another five cases: (1) death, (2) leaving, (3) leaving the Path, (4) not granting nissaya, and (5) reaching five years or exceeding five years [of seniority]; there are another five cases: (5) seeing one's original upādhyāya—the [first] four phrases are the same as before, only the fifth differs, and so on below; there are another five cases: (5) the upādhyāya or ācārya leaves the Path; there are another five cases: (5) the disciple leaves the Path; there are another five cases: (5) the upādhyāya or ācārya passes away; there are another five cases: (5) the disciple passes away; there are another five cases: (5) returning to live under the direct supervision of the upādhyāya. The second and the sixth necessarily depend on spending the night; if returning on the same day, it is as judged above. The eighth refers to the master having gone far away first and the disciple seeking another nissaya; later, seeing his original master, he returns again to rely on him for learning, so that other rite is forfeited. The ninth is also like this, differing only in being framed around the disciple leaving the master and returning later. According to the Vinaya, the upper six apply to both master and disciple, while the lower three are confined exclusively to the disciple. As for saying 'forfeited by teaching', it points specifically to the seventh; this is provisional according to the teaching's limit, whereas if discussed in terms of practice, only when the Dharma-body is established may one leave nissaya, as explained above. Question: Regarding reprimand according to teaching, is it not explicitly stated that it is not forfeited? Answer: Above, based on depriving practice, that is also teaching. Question: Going far away and reprimand are the above two headings; why need they be shown again? Answer: For going far away and returning the same day, the Vinaya text judges it forfeited, yet in principle it is not forfeited; for the seven including reprimand, the Vinaya judges it not forfeited, yet based on principle it is forfeited; therefore, these two were clarified first, and only afterward was the general enumeration made. Question: In terms of the former three practices, how do the differences and similarities match the nine kinds individually? Answer: Reprimand forfeits one, as is known above; going far away has two distinctions: returning the same day forfeits two, and spending the night forfeits three; the other seven kinds forfeit three according to teaching, which can be seen upon investigation. (The ancients said that in death and leaving the Path, all three practices are forfeited; reprimand forfeits one, and the rest all forfeit the lower two—this is incorrect. How could one who has committed a grave offense, upon entering the simā platform, still retain the requesting rite?)