[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [四分律行事鈔資持記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805) › 2.22 # 四分律行事鈔資持記 2.22 四分律行事鈔資持記 2.22 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2.22) 合證者，有戒重犯，義不相離故；引文中，初敘宗意。律儀從境，故名別脫；道定從心，即是總脫。如下，引論委釋，初舉文。受是懸擬，故可總發；犯是臨境，故唯別犯。旦下，歷示，初明總發。準〈釋相〉中，彼論但約三毒，以歷七支；誰三為七，是今義推，具如後釋。文中，別舉淫支以明，餘可例顯。淫境約道，女三男二；淫心三毒，三單三複一具；隨緣間起，以心歷境，故發多戒，如文所列。今下，明別犯。問餘淫不犯，故有重者；若還以貪心，復於前女本道行淫，為成重不？問：《十誦》不立重犯，那取彼論，以證今宗耶！問：不可一時犯諸戒者，不學之罪，那得頓犯耶。如是思之。 > Regarding "combining proof": this is because having precepts and committing repeated violations are conceptually inseparable. In citing the text, it first recounts the school's doctrinal intention: The code conforms to objects, so it is called "individual liberation" (prātimokṣa); the path and concentration conform to the mind, so they are "general liberation." As below, it cites the treatise to explain thoroughly; first, it adduces the text. Reception is a prospective projection, so it can be universally generated; violation is confronting the specific object, so it is only violated individually. Following "Now," it illustrates them one by one; first, it clarifies universal generation. According to the chapter "Explaining the Marks," that treatise only applies the three poisons across the seven paths of action; that the three become seven is a deduction made by our present interpretation, fully explained below. In the text, it specifically cites the path of sexual misconduct to clarify, and the rest can be understood by analogy. The objects of sexual intercourse are classified by path: three for female, two for male; the mind of sexual desire has the three poisons: three single, three compounded, and one fully combined; arising intermittently according to conditions, traversing objects with the mind, many precepts are generated, as listed in the text. Following "Now," it clarifies individual violations. Question: If other acts of sex are not violated, there is a repeated violation; but if, with a mind of greed, one again engages in sex with the former woman via the original path, does it constitute a repeated violation or not? Question: The Daśādhyāya-vinaya does not establish repeated violations; why take its treatise to substantiate our own school? Question: If one cannot violate various precepts at the same time, how can the offense of non-learning be violated simultaneously? Reflect upon it like this. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2.21) - [Next: 2.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2.23) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805~en-mt.2.22) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1805.2.22) · Pramāṇa