四分律刪補隨機羯磨 2.332

2.332

（《薩婆多》云：「衣已捨，罪已悔，畜心斷，當日、明日或得本財及得異財，並不犯。二者，衣已捨，罪已悔，畜心不斷，當日、明日得本、異財，並犯，由心染故。三者，衣已捨，罪未悔，畜心斷者，若即日得本財、異財，犯吉羅。」今按諸律論，捨墮還財，並由僧量，不自專已，或永棄捨、或永入僧、或還本道俗、或通施七眾，如《律本》斫壞、入庫之例等是也。故捨心決絕，曾無顧錄，若還本財，事同新得，如法說淨，應本白法。今此律宗，言非虛設。既捨與僧，心亦無繫。故《律本》云：「若不還衣，若著用、破壞、受作三衣，但犯吉羅。」止是失法之罪。）

(The Sarvāstivāda says: "When the robe has been relinquished, the offense repented, and the intent to keep it severed, whether on that day or the next day one receives the original property or different property, there is no offense. Second, when the robe has been relinquished, the offense repented, but the intent to keep it not severed, if on that day or the next day one receives the original or different property, one commits an offense in both cases, due to defilement of mind. Third, when the robe has been relinquished, the offense not yet repented, and the intent to keep it severed, if on that day one receives the original or different property, one commits a duṣkṛta." Now, examining the various vinayas and treatises, returning property in forfeiture is entirely determined by the saṃgha's discretion and not by oneself; it may be permanently discarded, permanently incorporated into the saṃgha, returned to the original monastic or layperson, or distributed universally to the seven classes of disciples, just as in the root Vinaya examples of cutting it to pieces or placing it in the storehouse. Therefore, the mind of relinquishment must be resolute, without lingering attachment; if the original property is returned, it is treated as newly acquired, and having formally performed purification in accordance with the Dharma, it conforms to the original pure Dharma. In this Vinaya tradition, words are not set forth in vain. Since it has been relinquished to the saṃgha, the mind is also unattached. Thus the root Vinaya says: "If one does not return the robe, but wears it, destroys it, or adopts it to make the three robes, one commits only a duṣkṛta." This is merely an offense of failing the procedural rule.)