四分律行事鈔資持記 2.893

2.893

示犯中，初科，前引二律。法師比丘者，《四分》象力，《五分》沙蘭。《戒疏》云：因論善法，便行誑妄，以為因起，況餘雜事而得成信。僧中下，《五分》說：慈地謗沓婆，佛語云：若於堅信比丘前妄語，重殺傷無量眾生（內凡已去名堅信）；於一堅法比丘前妄語，罪過堅信百倍（初果已去名堅法）；於僧前妄語，罪過百羅漢。（四人已上，凡聖僧也。）通引此文者。以世講師，或臨眾說法，或有所言論，率多虛誑，故持誡之。百羅漢者，且舉多聖以況少凡；罪猶過之，勉勵深矣。言罪重者，此約業道，非制罪也。次引《多論》。彼云若說法義論，若傳人語，則顯所說所論從他傳者。自稱，論作自攝，謂攝取他說以為己是。寄，附也。有本者，或覽他文，或從口授，必推所得以示於人。古今學者，孰逃此過；聖教明約，豈不內盾；不下，文出《智論》。彼偈云：夫士之生，斧在口中；所以斬身，由其惡言。（此偈喻顯，下偈對合。）應訶而讚，應讚而訶；口集諸惡，終不見樂。（上三句合斧在口中，下一句合斬身，此喻非理言論；妄業即成，先自損故。）

In revealing offenses, in the first section, two Vinayas are cited earlier. The "Dharma master bhikṣu" was Hastibala in the Four-Part Vinaya and Śāraṇa in the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya. The Precept Commentary says: "Because they practiced deception and falsehood on account of discussing wholesome dharmas, taking this as the occasion of arising, how much less could trust be established in other miscellaneous matters!" From "in the Saṃgha" down, the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya states: When Ciñcā slanderous Maitreya, the Buddha said: "If one speaks falsely before a bhikṣu of firm faith, it is heavier than killing and wounding immeasurable sentient beings (those from internal ordinary beings upward are called firm faith); if one speaks falsely before a bhikṣu of firm Dharma, the offense exceeds [that before one of] firm faith a hundredfold (those from the first fruit upward are called firm Dharma); if one speaks falsely before the Saṃgha, the offense exceeds [that before] a hundred arhats (four persons and above, whether ordinary or noble Saṃgha)." Universally citing this text: because worldly lecturers, when preaching Dharma before the assembly or making statements, are mostly false and deceptive, this is held to admonish them. "A hundred arhats" merely adduces many noble ones to compare to a few ordinary ones; the offense still exceeds it, so the exhortation is profound. The statement that the offense is heavy concerns the course of karma, not the prescribed offense. Next, the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya Vibhāṣā is cited. It says that if one expounds on Dharma and discusses doctrine, or relays another person's words, this reveals that what is spoken and discussed is relayed from another. "Calling it one's own": the treatise has "appropriating it for oneself", meaning taking another's explanation and regarding it as one's own. "Entrust" means "to attach". "Having an original source": whether inspecting another's text or receiving it orally, one must attribute what was acquired to show it to people. Among ancient and modern scholars, who escapes this fault? The noble teachings are explicit; how can one not feel internal shame? From "not" down, the text comes from the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa. Its verse says: "When a man is born, an axe is in his mouth; / that by which he cuts his body is due to his evil words." (This verse reveals it by metaphor; the verse below matches it.) "Praising what should be reproved, reproving what should be praised; / the mouth gathers all evils, and in the end never sees joy." (The upper three lines match "an axe is in his mouth"; the lower line matches "cuts his body"; this is a metaphor for irrational discourse; as soon as false karma is formed, one harms oneself first.)