四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.16

2.16

若比丘欲作大房有主為己作當將餘比丘往指授處所彼應指授當與處所無難處無妨處若比丘有難有妨處作大房有主為己作不將餘比丘往指授處所者僧伽婆尸沙　此滿足戒本句亦有三。一犯人。二作房軌則。三違教結罪。犯人者如上。作房立法文亦有七。一欲作大房者。大者多用財作。房者屋也。言有主者。返上無主是也。為己作指授已來。僧中乞法義如上。彼應指授處所者。僧應觀察。若有信有智慧。即信彼而與白二。若不信者眾僧往看。若僧不去應遣僧中可信者看。若有妨難不應處分。無者應與作法。僧祇律云。若僧中無能羯磨者。一切僧就彼作處。一人唱言。一切僧為某比丘指授□三說亦得無難無妨處者。義如上說。第三句結罪文如前戒可知。唯過量為異。

"If a monk wishes to build a large hut that has an owner and is built for himself, he must bring other monks there to designate the site; they should designate and grant him a site that is free of peril and free of hindrance. If the monk, at a site of peril or a site of hindrance, builds a large hut that has an owner and is built for himself, not bringing other monks there to designate the site, it is a saṃghāvaśeṣa." This complete Prātimokṣa text also has three clauses: 1. The offender; 2. The standard for building the hut; 3. The conclusion of the offense for violating the instruction. The offender is as above. The text establishing the rule for building the hut also has seven points. 1. "Wishes to build a large hut": "large" means built using much wealth; "hut" means a dwelling. 2. "Has an owner": the reverse of "ownerless" above. From "for himself" to "designate": the procedure for requesting in the Saṃgha is as explained above. 3. "They should designate a site": the Saṃgha should observe; if he is trustworthy and possesses wisdom, they trust him and grant it through a jñaptidvitīyā-karman; if he is not trusted, the Saṃgha goes to inspect it; if the Saṃgha does not go, they should dispatch trustworthy monks from the Saṃgha to inspect it; if there is peril or hindrance, they should not assign it; if there are none, they should perform the karman for him. The Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states: "If in the Saṃgha there is no one capable of performing the karman, the entire Saṃgha goes to the site of construction; one person proclaims: 'The entire Saṃgha designates for monk so-and-so […]'; if spoken thrice, it is also valid." "A site free of peril and free of hindrance": the meaning is as explained above. The third clause concluding the offense is understood as in the previous precept; only exceeding the measure is the difference.