四分比丘戒本疏 2.11

2.11

Third: the precept regarding seeking new material to replace old robes of the set of three up to one month. Nanshan named this the precept of robes awaited for a month; of old it was named the one-month robe precept. As both meanings are subtle and obscure, it is emended here. The prātimokṣa text has five clauses: first, allowing for the perpetrator; second, excluding exceptional conditions, because during the robe-making time there is no fault of extra robes; third, urging prompt completion. The text says "obtains an out-of-season robe": this means that outside the one-month or five-month robe-making period, when one awaits newly cut material, it is called an "out-of-season robe." For ten days within this out-of-season period, because this is an ordinary exemption, one does not need to complete it promptly. On the tenth day, if one has obtained sufficient material, it must be completed promptly on that day; if it is insufficient, an exemption is granted up to the eleventh day; if it is sufficient on the eleventh day, it must be completed promptly on that day. If it is insufficient, an exemption is granted up to the twelfth day, and applying this successively up to the twenty-ninth day, every day holds the sense of requiring prompt completion on that day; hence it says "promptly complete the robe." It also says "if it is sufficient, it is good," which means there are twenty instances of the goodness of prompt completion. Fourth: properly clarifying the continuing search for new material up to one month. The text says: "If it is insufficient, one is permitted to keep it for up to one month": from the tenth day to the twenty-ninth day, there are twenty days in all during which continuing to acquire material has not yet reached sufficiency, and one is permitted to keep it until the thirtieth day without committing the offence of keeping extra robes; hence it says "permitted to keep it for one month." The text says "in order to make it sufficient": this means there are twenty instances of continuing to acquire it in order to make it sufficient. Fifth: specifying the offence of keeping it beyond the limit. Upon reaching the thirtieth day, regardless of whether the new material is sufficient or insufficient, one must immediately perform vikalpana, send it to another person, make it into a robe, and so forth. If one exceeds thirty days, it is categorically an offence; hence it is stated thus. Ancient tradition explained the intention of this precept by saying that a practitioner of superior conduct keeps only the three robes, and when the old robes become worn and ruined, they are suitable only for formal keeping, not for wearing; now, having obtained new material, one does not intend to perform vikalpana, so one is permitted to wait for sufficiency up to a maximum of one month. In my present examination, I fear this may not be correct: if a practitioner of superior conduct did not wish to perform vikalpana, how could he suddenly be made to perform vikalpana on the thirtieth day, ruining the resolve of his superior conduct? Thus we know that as long as one has set one's intention on replacing the old robes, one may extend the period of keeping them, without distinguishing practitioners of superior conduct.