四分律行事鈔資持記 2.676

2.676

勤慢中，義判有三，初明先慢失法得罪。若下，次明勤護法在無罪；文為二，初正判。上二句標難緣；恒下，明法在；由下，釋無罪。如下，二舉例。彼既欲在，此應法存。前下，三明失法無罪。即上不犯科中。事隔則通收諸礙，不知謂迷其在否；由事隔故失法，非情過故無罪。此亦勤護之人，但約不知望斷以為異耳。

Under "Diligence and Remissness": the doctrinal determination has three points. First, it explains that prior remissness loses the ritual status and incurs an offense. "If..." below next explains that diligent guarding preserves the status and incurs no offense; the text is divided into two. First, the direct determination: the two lines above indicate causes of difficulty; "constantly..." below explains that the status remains; "due to..." below explains non-offense. As below, the second adduces an analogy: since the intent there remains, the status here should be preserved. "The former..." below, third, explains that losing the status incurs no offense; that is, within the above non-offense section. Being obstructed by circumstances then comprehensively covers all obstructions; not knowing refers to being confused about whether they are present or not. Losing the status is due to circumstantial obstruction, and incurs no offense because it is not a subjective fault. This is also a person who diligently guards, but is differentiated solely with respect to lack of awareness and severing of expectation.