[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [量處輕重儀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895) › 1.112 # 量處輕重儀 1.112 量處輕重儀 1.112 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.112](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1.112) 已前五件，種類重收。古德同詞並解云，不問能成所成，及餘模塑，皆重。此則濫通輕相，取例難分。今以文義相驗，並指能成之器如前者。是故律中，諸木作器無盛處，佛令作囊盛之。故知非所成之鉢器也。若有現成之器，如釜鑊等，瓫瓮之屬，並在諸門已收。若準古德收言，則眾具不過此攝，便妄列多位，徒費譯功。其熟皮韋具，如《十誦》中入輕。已前伊梨耄羅三皮，既是生者，《四分》不斷，但依氍氀，故知三皮不入分限。邊方皮衣開畜，無三衣相，何必在輕。若至布鄉，皮還入重。邊方開坐，何必在輕，縱許皮韋具充資下之用，以一切皮衣，不許著故。餘有錐刀雜器之屬，準例兩判，若常擬木作者，宜從重收，若常擬隨身補綻者，便從輕限故也。 > The above five items are gathered under heavy property by category. Ancient worthies unanimously explained: 'Regardless of whether they are tools that produce or things produced, as well as other molds and casts, all are heavy property.' This indiscriminately extends to characteristics of light property, making it difficult to distinguish cases. Now, verifying by text and meaning, these all refer to tools that produce, as described above. For this reason, in the Vinaya, when there was nowhere to keep various wooden utensils, the Buddha ordered bags to be made to contain them. Hence we know these are not the pātra vessels that are produced. If there are ready-made vessels, such as cauldrons, pots, basins, and large jars, they are already gathered under the various sections. If one were to rely on the classification stated by the ancient worthies, all implements would not exceed this inclusion, and the multiple categories would have been laid out in vain, wasting the translator's efforts. Finished leather and soft leather goods are classified as light property in the Sarvāstivāda. The three hides mentioned previously—irilikā, moha, and ruru—since they are raw, are not decided in the Dharmaguptaka, but only follow woolen rugs; hence we know the three hides do not enter the scope of distribution. In frontier lands, leather garments are permitted to be kept, but they lack the characteristics of the three robes; why must they be light property? If brought to a region with cloth, the leather becomes heavy property again. In frontier lands, sitting on skins is permitted; why must they be light property? Even granting that leather and soft leather goods are permitted for use as underlayments, all leather garments are not permitted to be worn. As for other awls, knives, and various implements, they are judged two ways by analogy: if they are regularly intended for woodworking, they should be gathered under heavy property; if they are regularly intended for personal mending and patching, they fall under the limit of light property. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.111](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1.111) - [Next: 1.113](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1.113) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895~en-mt.1.112) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1.112](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1895.1.112) · Pramāṇa