四分律行事鈔資持記 2.423

2.423

《四分》十種。疏云：律中，具出二五盜心，前是五心，後名五取；取是其業，對境行事也。一中。可學迷者，教是可學，不學故迷。二中。規，求也。壅，猶積也。三中。兩釋，虛實分之。四中。準疏又云：或說王官勢力。此與第八，名同相別；但約心取，兩以分之；言心未必取，言取必兼心。第九。律本注戒及疏，並作見便取；今文多一便字，必是傳誤，不勞異解。（或可下便字訓即。）十中。五相釋之，前三身業，後二口業；又前三中，一是倚自，二倚他名，三倚他力；後二中，前但巧言，後是虛誑。今時講士，多尚乞求；諂笑趨時，巧言媚俗；或厚於餉遺，豈避污家；或勤於請謁，寧知屈道；不識者詐識，非親者強親；口說多方，心謀百計；終朝役慮，畢世勞形。一言蔽諸，無非愛物；雖云為眾，實乃治生。未知祝髮壞衣，意圖何事？談經講律，目矚何言？諒乎！惑業日增，故使奔趨忘倦；可謂徒生徒死，深嗟不覺不知。請細覽斯文，反求諸己；忠言逆耳，當自深思。嗚呼！

The ten kinds in the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya. The Commentary says: In the vinaya, two groups of five minds of theft are fully set forth: the former are five minds, and the latter are called five takings; taking is the action, carrying out the deed in relation to the object. In the first: "Confused regarding what can be learned" means the teaching can be learned, but not learning it leads to confusion. In the second: "Guī" (規) means seeking. "Yōng" (壅) is like accumulating. In the third: There are two explanations, dividing them into false and true. In the fourth: According to the Commentary, it also says: Or speaking of the power and influence of royal officials. This shares the same name with the eighth, but their marks are distinct; they are distinguished merely on the basis of mind and taking: speaking of the mind does not necessarily mean taking; speaking of taking necessarily includes the mind. The ninth: In the root text of the vinaya, the annotations to the precepts, and the Commentary, all read "taking upon seeing an opportunity"; in the present text there is one extra character "biàn" (便), which must be a scribal error; there is no need to make a divergent explanation. (Or perhaps the character 便 below glosses "namely.") In the tenth: It is explained through five marks: the first three are bodily actions, and the latter two are vocal actions. Furthermore, among the first three, one relies on oneself, the second relies on another's name, and the third relies on another's power. Among the latter two, the former is merely clever speech, and the latter is deceit and falsehood. Nowadays, lecturing scholars mostly esteem begging and seeking; with flattering smiles they cater to the times, using clever words to curry favor with the vulgar. Either they are lavish with gifts—how could they avoid corrupting families?—or they are diligent in seeking audiences—how could they recognize debasing the Way? To those they do not know, they pretend to know them; with those who are not kin, they force kinship. Their mouths speak in manifold ways, and their minds scheme in a hundred ways; all day long exhausting their thoughts, all their lives toiling their bodies. To sum it up in one phrase: it is nothing other than clinging to material goods. Although they say it is for the saṃgha, in reality it is running a business. One wonders: when they shaved their hair and dyed their robes, what did they intend to seek? When discussing the sūtras and lecturing on the vinaya, on what words were their eyes fixed? Truly! Delusion and karma increase daily, causing them to rush about without weariness; it can be called living in vain and dying in vain, deeply lamented for remaining unaware and unknowing. Please examine this text closely and reflect upon yourselves; faithful words grate on the ear, but one should deeply contemplate them. Alas!