四分律行事鈔資持記 3.302

3.302

四人法中，初示僧位。衣下，明賞勞。口和者，準《羯磨》云：諸大德憶念！今持此亡比丘某甲衣鉢（坐具等物）與某甲看病比丘。（三說。）餘下，正分衣。準《注羯磨》四句成。白云：大德僧聽！若僧時到僧忍聽，某甲比丘命過，所有衣物現前僧應分，白如是。（準或合須牒本云僧今分是衣物。）《羯磨》云：大德僧聽！比丘某甲命過所有衣物現前僧應分。（準前牒本。）誰諸長老忍僧分是衣物者默然等；結詞云，僧已忍分是衣物竟等。（此依《母論》出法，改正不妨。）作此下，示改法。未入手者，明入手已，則不須改。更共作法者，改從五人法也。注中引類顯上須改。準非時施中，本亦直分；因客比丘數數來分衣疲極，佛言，應差一人令分。今無人故，依論直分；後有人來，類彼須改。有下，證成。

In the procedure for four persons: first, it indicates the status of the Saṃgha. From 'Robes' onward, it clarifies rewarding labor. Verbal consensus is based on the Karmavācanā, which says: 'May the Venerable Ones remember! Now we take these robes and bowl (sitting mat and other items) of this deceased Bhikṣu So-and-so and give them to Bhikṣu So-and-so who nursed the sick.' (Spoken three times.) From 'Remainder' onward, it treats the actual division of robes. Based on the Annotated Karmavācanā, it is accomplished in four phrases. The motion says: 'May the Venerable Saṃgha listen! If the time has arrived for the Saṃgha and the Saṃgha approves, Bhikṣu So-and-so has passed away; all the robes and items should be divided by the present Saṃgha; such is the motion.' (By analogy, it should perhaps itemize the original text stating 'the Saṃgha now divides these robes and items.') The karmavācanā says: 'May the Venerable Saṃgha listen! Bhikṣu So-and-so has passed away; all the robes and items should be divided by the present Saṃgha.' (Following the previous itemization of the original text.) 'Whichever venerable elders approve of the Saṃgha dividing these robes and items, remain silent,' etc. The concluding phrase says, 'The Saṃgha has already approved dividing these robes and items completely,' etc. (This derives the procedure from the Mātṛkā; making corrections is unproblematic.) From 'Having performed this' onward, it shows the modification of the procedure. 'Not yet into hands' clarifies that once they have entered the hands, modification is not required. 'Jointly performing the procedure again' means modifying to follow the procedure for five persons. In the note, citing a similar case clarifies that the above requires modification. Based on untimely giving, originally it was also directly divided; because visiting bhikṣus repeatedly came to divide robes and caused great fatigue, the Buddha said that one person should be appointed to divide them. Now, because there is no one, it is directly divided according to the treatise; when someone arrives later, it must be modified analogous to that. From 'There is' onward, it provides corroboration.