四分律行事鈔資持記 2.25

2.25

In answering counting toward the quorum: first, based on deśanā, it clarifies that one does count toward the quorum. That is, it excludes the two expulsions, which are not under discussion. As below, it offers analogical proof: the Daśādhyāya-vinaya permits one to perform the karmas of poṣadha and pravāraṇā (not permitting other rites), and also allows one to recite the Vinaya amidst the assembly (where there is no other capable person); since one is allowed to preside over and execute the rite, and one's person is admitted among pure monks, in principle it is the same as counting toward the quorum, hence it says "it is logically appropriate." But following "However," it clarifies not counting toward the quorum based on the fault. If the affective fault is deep, it is committing the extreme evil; if one is unfit for use, one's virtuous practice is deficient. Therefore, below it cites to show, the Vinaya saying: "When the saṃgha performs poṣadha and karmavācanā, their coming is not at their will." Therefore, know that although one repents, there is definitely no principle of counting toward the quorum; even if permitted to preside over the rite, one's person does not enter the count; it is merely regarded as superior in comparison to the two expulsions, where material goods and Dharma are forever lost, and one has no participation in the saṃgha's affairs. Above it was said "it is logically sufficient," which text contains two intentions: first, to rescue the ignorant who claim it is lost, and so commit offenses by analogy; second, to rescue offenders who cling to their faults without repentance. Therefore, these texts give detailed and indirect admonitions. Question: People commonly say that the Hinayāna has no text on repenting grave offenses; why say "repenting and becoming pure"? Answer: Both the Mahāyāna and Hinayāna equally clarify repenting grave offenses; although the Hinayāna permits deśanā, it merely blocks hell karma and cannot restore the original state, hence it says "there is none." If so, if one becomes pure by relying on Mahāyāna deśanā, may one count toward the quorum? Answer: The teaching of conversion and the teaching of regulation are different. Conversion is based on the path of karma; regulation relates to transgressing the rules. Even if, relying on the Vaipulya sūtras, the phenomenal and ultimate deśanā extinguishes [the sin], according to the present disciplinary regulations, if one does not repent, one must be expelled; if one repents, one undergoes penance. If one performs the disciplinary deśanā, even if the karma is not eradicated, one is still called pure. One must know that the methods of deśanā in conversion and regulation are as different as heaven and earth. Many people are deluded about this, so it is analyzed in detail. The rest is in the subsequent fascicle.