四分律行事鈔資持記 3.105

3.105

In the second subsection, there are three parts. First, it cites the circumstances to show the falsity. One hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, the Vṛjiputraka bhikṣus of Vaiśālī arbitrarily practiced the ten points. The bhikṣu Yaśas Kākaṇḍakaputra declared to the lay community that these were illegal. The Vṛjiputrakas said: 'You previously slandered the saṃgha; do you see your offense?' Kākaṇḍaka replied: 'I did not slander the saṃgha.' The Vṛjiputrakas together with their assembly then performed an act of suspension (utkṣepana-karman) against him. Kākaṇḍaka then sought Revata as a companion; traversing the realm of Jambudvīpa, they assembled seven hundred arhats, who convened together to confirm and determine [the teaching], rehearsing the Dharma collection anew—hence its name. Possessing an unsevered sitting mat is precisely one of the ten points. Under 'According to...', it next reveals their error in terms of doctrinal principle. The first two lines state their attachment. 'Adding threads' means increasing the measurement; in the *Daśādhyāya Prātimokṣa* it is called 'adding threads', meaning that threads are added to weave and enlarge from the border. They claimed that one need only take the mark of increasing the measurement, without needing to sever it. The next three lines make manifest their unreasonableness. Under the ninety [pāyattikas], exceeding the measurement is prohibited as an offense of pāyattika; now since it is not severed, one commits the principal offense of exceeding the measurement. Citing that to cross-examine this makes the illegality quite evident. Regarding the note on the ten points: ancient records cited them mistakenly, and arbitrary explanations were not solitary; now, entirely relying on the primary text of the Vinaya, they are cited fully and shown here: (1) One may take food with two fingers (meaning that after finishing a meal, having abandoned deportment without performing the ritual of remaining food, one may take food with two fingers); (2) One may [eat] between villages (having finished a meal, without performing the ritual of remaining food, one may eat between two villages); (3) One may [perform karman] within a monastery (performing a karman of a separate assembly within a monastery); (4) Subsequent approval (a karman of a separate assembly within the boundary is subsequently approved, meaning that one gives one's consent afterward); (5) Customary practice (they claimed that when a bhikṣu performs an action, he should examine the Vinaya of the Tripiṭaka; if he does not examine the Vinaya and goes against the Dharma, whether already done or not yet done, none should be done; if he examines the Vinaya and does not contravene the original Dharma, whether already done or not yet done, it should be done; just as during famine exemptions were made for entering [stores], which does not contravene the Vinaya and thus may always be exempted, hence called 'customary practice'); (6) One may mix (having finished a meal, abandoning deportment, mixing ghee, yeast, raw butter, honey, rock sugar, and curd in one place to eat); (7) One may stay overnight with salt (one may use salt that has been kept overnight and put it into food to eat); (8) One may drink jālūra liquor (liquor fermented from various fruits); (9) One may possess an unsevered sitting mat (which is precisely what is cited now); (10) One may receive gold and silver (a bhikṣu may receive and store it himself; they claimed that these ten points were pure dharmas, permitted by the Buddha, and taught them to convert people, which led to the second council). Under 'This...', it rebukes the worldly erroneous practice. It had already been stopped at that time, hence it says 'long fallen into disuse.' Under '*Daśādhyāya*...', thirdly, it determines the offense based on the text. In the *Daśādhyāya*, 'without adding threads it is pure' is because the Vṛjiputrakas considered it pure. Below it cites the marks of offense to resolve the illegality above; the *Gāthā-śāstra* is an explanation of the *Daśādhyāya*. The offense determined in the note is entirely committing the precept of the ninety pāyattikas on exceeding the measurement. (Nowadays, using silk as a base and cutting and adding on top all commits the offense of exceeding the measurement; according to the principle, it must be severed and repented.)