四分律行事鈔資持記 2.618

2.618

次科為三，初牒釋。言取著者，謂有犯捨三衣，由失正衣，即無長過，可取著用，故列不犯。注釋頗詳。《伽論》下，次引證。過十日衣即犯長者。意以有犯必無離宿，故設此問。答中可證加受得成。何下，三釋妨。指前云者，即貿易中；彼言不得，故須通會。答中，初句釋通前文；今下，正顯今意。色猶數也。下引二文，色體不如，並許加受，足為今例。問：為開暫時，為得求作？答：文似暫開，不妨永用。今以義判，或有可別求，卒營未及，暫用彌善；或守己少欲，趣足被形義通久永。《善見》五大，通收正間。《僧祇》俗衣，彼因借被作淨安紐故。

The next section has three parts. First, it repeats and explains. Regarding "taking and wearing," it means that if one has three robes that incurred forfeiture, because of losing the primary robes, there is no fault of an extra robe, and one may take and wear them, hence it is listed under non-offense. The notes explain this quite thoroughly. Next, from "The *Mātṛkā-śāstra*" down, it cites proof. Robes exceeding ten days incur an offense of an extra robe. The intention is that if there is a violation, there is definitely no [offense of] spending the night separated from them, which is why this question was posed. The answer provides proof that adding formal determination is successful. Third, from "Why" down, it resolves difficulties. "Referring to what was stated earlier" means during bartering; there it said it was not permissible, so they must be harmonized. In the answer, the first sentence resolves and reconciles the earlier text; from "Now" down, it directly reveals the present intention. "Color" is like "number." Below, it cites two texts: where the color and substance are inferior, both permit adding formal determination, which sufficiently serves as an analogy for the present case. Question: Is this an exception granted temporarily, or may one seek to make them [permanently]? Answer: The text seems to grant a temporary exception, but this does not prevent permanent use. Now determining this conceptually: if there are other robes to be sought, but one is momentarily unable to prepare them, temporary use is especially good; or if one maintains few desires for oneself and merely suffices to cover the body, the meaning extends to long-term use. The five large items in the *Samantapāsādikā* encompass both primary and intermediate [robes]. As for the secular clothes in the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, that was because of borrowing a quilt to perform the purificatory procedure and attaching loops to it.