四分律行事鈔資持記 2.12

2.12

引論，標中，初示所出。言戒護者，舉行目體，兼收法相。謂下，釋名相，初分對惑業。彼論治三界心惑，名對治護，故云在心也；防身口邪業，則名戒護，故云在身口也。（今但云戒，一往別對）。有護下，示單複。以惑為業本，若但護心惑，不至身口，故云不必有戒；又業假惑成，若禁防邪業，必兼防心，故云其必是護。然護治惑，非謂理觀，即是戒行；彼論謂之惑毘尼是也。經中者，未詳何文，或恐《了疏》所引。（古云：論中自指者，撿彼無文。）

In 'Quoting the Treatises', under the heading, it first shows the source. Speaking of 'precept-guard', raising the title denotes the essence, and concurrently encompasses the dharmic marks. 'It means...' and what follows explains the names and marks, first dividing and matching delusions and karma. That treatise's treatment of the mind's delusions in the three realms is named 'counteractive guard', hence it says 'resides in the mind'; guarding against the deviant karma of body and speech is then named 'precept-guard', hence it says 'resides in body and speech'. (Here it only says 'precept', distinguishing them provisionally.) 'Having a guard...' and what follows shows the single and the compound. Taking delusion as the root of karma, if one only guards against mental delusions and does not extend to body and speech, it is therefore said that one 'does not necessarily have precepts'; furthermore, karma depends on delusion to be formed, so if one prohibits and guards against deviant karma, one must also guard the mind, hence it is said that it 'must certainly be a guard'. However, guarding against and treating delusions does not refer to contemplation of principle, but rather to precept practice; in that treatise it is referred to as the 'vinaya of delusion'. 'In the sūtras'—it is not yet clear which text this refers to; perhaps it is quoted by the Liaoshu. (The ancients said that it refers to itself within the treatise, but upon inspection there is no such text.)