四分律行事鈔資持記 2.894

2.894

引文中，《四分》為三，初列根塵。見聞知是根。觸即是塵。觸中含三，律云：觸者鼻識舌識身識也。是則根塵互舉，六種備矣。言違想者，即見言不見，乃至知言不知。律中更列不見言見，乃至不知言知，合成八境（別開則有十二。）；文略後四，故云乃至。所見異者，行心中見諸惡像；言見好相，故云異也。所忍異者，忍苦言樂也；或同作羯磨，不忍言忍也。所想異者，怨想言親。律更有三，今引續之。所欲異者，欲求財色，言樂正法。所觸異者，得冷云熱也。所心異者，緣此說彼也（並依疏解。）。問：上皆違想，何以分之？答：疏自判云：前是於六塵中行妄之相；所見異等，即行心思度，違反而說，約意地也。又下，次明三時。律列四句，初云本作是念我當妄語（初時），妄語時自知是妄語（正作時），妄語已知是妄語（後時）；第二前中二時知（同上），後時不憶；第三本不作是念，前時無心，中後時知；第四前後無心，正作時知。律據中時有心，四並提罪；鈔約義斷，前後得吉。（以律中本作是念，正妄語時，不憶得吉故；初中不憶，後憶亦吉。）四句中具缺不定，文中且據具者言之。問：前心吉者，與遠方便何異？答：同異不定。或復前起，不關方便；若準《戒疏》，則名前後方便。然方便言通，義須揀辨，不可濫也。若僧下，三明默妄。有犯不悔，在眾表淨；但不口言，故罪降等。

In the cited text, the Four-Part Vinaya has three [parts]: first, it lists sense faculties and objects. Seeing, hearing, and knowing are faculties. Contact is an object. Contact contains three; the Vinaya says: "Contact refers to nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, and body-consciousness." Thus, sense faculties and objects are mutually adduced, and the six kinds are fully provided. "Contravening one's conception" means saying one has not seen when having seen, and so on up to saying one does not know when knowing. The Vinaya further lists saying one has seen when not having seen, up to saying one knows when not knowing, combining into eight objects (divided separately, there are twelve); the text abbreviates the latter four, hence it says "and so on". "Difference in what is seen": in the acting mind, one sees bad omens, but says one sees auspicious signs, hence it is called "different". "Difference in what is endured": enduring suffering but calling it pleasure; or when performing a karman together, not assenting but saying one assents. "Difference in what is conceived": conceiving someone as an enemy but calling them a friend. The Vinaya has three more, which are now cited in continuation. "Difference in what is desired": desiring wealth and sex, but saying one delights in the true Dharma. "Difference in what is touched": experiencing cold but calling it hot. "Difference in what is minded": taking condition of this but speaking of that (all according to the Commentary's explanation). Question: The above are all contravening one's conception; why are they distinguished? Answer: The Commentary itself determines: "The former are marks of practicing falsehood among the six sense objects; difference in what is seen, etc., are when the acting mind reflects and speaks contrary to it, which relates to the mental ground." From "furthermore" down, it next clarifies the three times. The Vinaya lists four propositions: the first says originally forming this thought, 'I shall speak falsely' (initial time); at the time of speaking falsely, knowing oneself that it is false speech (time of actual action); having spoken falsely, knowing it is false speech (subsequent time). The second: knowing at the earlier and middle times (same as above), but not remembering at the subsequent time. The third: originally not forming this thought, having no intention at the earlier time, but knowing at the middle and subsequent times. The fourth: having no intention earlier and later, but knowing at the time of actual action. Based on having intention at the middle time, the Vinaya assigns a pāyattika to all four; the Manual decides based on the principle that the earlier and later incur a duṣkṛta. (Because in the Vinaya, if one originally formed this thought, but does not remember at the very time of speaking falsely, one incurs a duṣkṛta; if not remembering in the initial and middle times, but remembering later, it is also a duṣkṛta.) In the four propositions, completeness and deficiency are not fixed; the text provisionally speaks on the basis of what is complete. Question: As for the earlier mind incurring a duṣkṛta, how does it differ from a remote preparatory stage? Answer: Identity and difference are not fixed. Or again, it arises earlier and is not connected to the preparatory stage; if according to the Precept Commentary, it is termed earlier and later preparatory stages. However, the term "preparatory stage" is broad, and the principle must be distinguished, and not conflated. From "if the Saṃgha" down, third, it clarifies silent falsehood. Having an offense and not repenting it, one displays purity among the assembly; but because one does not speak with the mouth, the offense is reduced by a grade.