四分律行事鈔資持記 2.121

2.121

注顯中，上二句，標示所準。條部者，律中僧尼戒本、二十犍度、五百七百結集之後，別為一篇；涉于三卷，名條部毘尼；乃條前戒本，決釋疑滯；如前淫戒，未明三道分齊，道俗二境成犯之相；波離一一別問，如來隨問答釋；使前戒本，持犯委足。然今藏中，律本多為調字；竊疑音誤，無別所以。有人釋云：佛在世時，星羅別制，波離調和部類，故云調部；以條字義顯，大師易之；此說無據，未足可取。但下，三句，先示條部所立。正本，即前戒本。下列者，以條部在第四分後故。今下，正明此篇所準。諸篇，即指此鈔上下文也。未足有二：一雖有犯名，二百五十，未必盡故；二縱有名種，未知成犯緣相揩式故。然〈條部〉在律之末，〈隨相〉當鈔之中，今但準彼未足重條之義，非謂準於前後也。

In the commentary notes revealing [the source], the upper two lines indicate that which is taken as standard. 'Sectional division' refers to the separate chapter following the monk and nun prātimokṣas, the twenty skandhakas, and the councils of the five hundred and seven hundred in the Vinaya; spanning three fascicles, it is named the Sectional Vinaya. It itemizes the previous prātimokṣa to resolve and explain doubts and ambiguities. For instance, regarding the earlier sexual misconduct precept, where the limits of the three tracts and the marks of constituting an offense with monastic and lay objects were not yet clarified, Upāli questioned each one individually, and the Tathāgata answered and explained according to each question, making the maintenance and violation of the previous prātimokṣa thoroughly complete. However, in the present canon, the Vinaya texts mostly write the character *tiao* (調, harmonization); I suspect it is a phonetic error, with no other reason. Someone explained: 'When the Buddha was in the world, distinct rules were instituted like stars spread across the sky; Upāli harmonized (*tiao*) the sections and classes, hence it is called the Harmonized Division (*Tiaobu*); because the meaning of the character *tiao* (條, itemization) is clear, the Great Master changed it.' This explanation lacks evidence and is not worthy of acceptance. Below, the three sentences of 'Only' first show the establishment of the Sectional Division. The 'principal text' is the previous prātimokṣa. 'Listed below' is because the Sectional Division comes after the fourth section. Below, 'Now' directly clarifies what this chapter takes as standard. 'Various chapters' refers to the preceding and following texts of this *Transactions Manual*. Incompleteness has two aspects: first, although there are names of offenses, the two hundred and fifty may not necessarily be exhausted; second, even if there are names and categories, one does not know the standard forms and conditions constituting offenses. However, the 'Sectional Division' is at the end of the Vinaya, while the 'Concomitant Marks' is in the middle of the *Transactions Manual*; now it merely takes as standard the meaning of re-itemizing what was incomplete, not that it takes as standard the sequence of preceding and following.