四分律行事鈔資持記 2.293

2.293

別問，答中，示相有四，初《見論》約人家以明。西天可爾；此土屬官，則非無主。《婆論》二種。初即可用。第二須約國亂；無主物處，亦無官典守護，取則無過。封相，即封土作疆界處。即下，一種，據俗令者，恐是唐令。既不令占，即無所屬，故是無主。若下，今判加功占據，還成有主。

In the separate question and answer, four marks are shown. First, the Samantapāsādikā explains it in terms of human residences. In the Western Land (India) this may be so, but in this land (China) they belong to the state officials and thus are not ownerless. The Mahāvibhāṣā has two kinds: the first can indeed be used; the second must be in terms of a disordered state—in a place of ownerless goods, where there are also no official clerks guarding them, taking them incurs no fault. "Marking borders" refers to mounding earth to make boundary markers. The subsequent kind, from "Namely..." onward, based on secular statutes, is probably the Tang statutes. Since it does not allow claiming, it has no belonging and is therefore ownerless. From "If..." onward, the present determination is that applying labor to occupy and possess it reverts to being owned.