[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) › [四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787) › 2.42 # 四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.42 四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.42 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2.42) 問。三衣六物同是資身。所以離三衣失而犯提離。餘衣等輕　答。三衣正制受通三品。今若離者違制罪重。而失受法。餘衣物等開。於中下為資道不足。今若離者對開為違。唯得吉羅。而不受。此辯失衣分齊。三護衣之界有其二種。一者自然。二者作法界。自然之界多少不定。諸部通說總有十五。一者僧伽藍界。藍有四種。二者村界。亦有四種。謂周匝垣墻柵籬籬墻不周四周有屋等。三樹界。若樹葉相連。齊與人手足蔭覆跏趺坐。十誦取日正中時蔭影覆處。水不及處。是衣界。四場界。律云。治五穀處也。謂村外空靜處。五車界。六船界。並俱在陸地律云。若車船迴轉處。此但明住車。十誦行車者。前車向中車杖所及處。中車向前後車杖所及處。後車向中車杖所及處。若不及者是名異界。七捨界。謂村外祇云。若樓閣梯橙道外二十五肘名衣界。八堂界者。律云。多敞露。九庫界。積藏諸物。十倉界。儲積穀米處。十一阿蘭若界。律云。蘭若者無界。謂迴在空野無別諸界。假以樹量大小。八樹中間一樹間七弓。弓長四肘。通計五十八步。兼其勢分七十有餘。十二道行界。十誦比丘與師持衣。通中行前後四十九尋內不失。論云。疑廣亦得四十九尋為護衣界。十三洲界。善見云。十四肘內不失衣。十四水界。見云。蘭若處坐禪。天欲曉患睡脫衣置岸入水池洗浴。明相出犯捨。祇云。水中道行界二十肘若船界者入水則異。母云。著衣岸上一脚入水一脚在岸不名異界。十五井界。僧祇道行露地井蘭傍宿。置衣在二十五肘內名護衣界。所言作法界者。依僧界結。律云。不失衣者。藍有一界。失衣者。藍有若干界。四分他部相成有四種。即染隔情界之礙。上之三礙通界並有。若論界礙彼此不通。故文云。失衣者。僧伽藍裏有若干界。謂上三礙在伽藍院內。故衣則有多界。不失衣者。僧伽藍裏有一界。謂無上三礙也。言染礙者。律云。藍內有一女人。來往衣須隨身。若女人在中人依彼此即名異界。所言隔礙者。律云。水陸道斷與衣不會者是。祇云。衣在房內。人在於外。不從籥。又無梯橙。名之為礙。言情礙者。多論王來界內大小行處。近王左右並非衣界。及以作幻作樂人皆名情礙。祇云。兄弟分齊之處亦名情礙。所言界礙者。如上所明。若有若干界即須身衣同處。若不爾即名失衣。乃至蘭若界亦復如是。准四分律加於勢分。諸部並無。言勢分者。藍分者藍外人搏石所及衣處。是名界分。乃至倉庫界亦如是。善見論云。中人擲石不健不羸人盡力擲石至落處。以量有十五步。此但道自然不通。作法必須入界方乃會衣。第五句開離分齊。言除僧羯磨者。律云。時有比丘病患因緣。三衣極重。意欲遊行。佛聽開。乞羯磨離衣九月。多論四義故開離衣。一有緣眾生應受作故。二宜遊行令病損故。三求行道所宜故四未降者降之。已降者令發喜故。開中有成不成。一要須衣重病人方成。餘三句互有俱無並作法不成。多論假使衣人互不如法。前人妄語得罪。作法得成。以羯磨防離衣宿不防病等故。五分律云。前安居人九月。後安居人八月。四分律云。留僧伽梨。祇五二律但留欝多僧。餘二不許。十多二文三衣之中俱有離義。離但一衣不得離二。第六句言尼薩耆波逸提者。明結罪分齊。於中有四。一捨所犯之衣。二懺所犯之罪。三却還本衣。四不還結罪義。如律廣說。不犯者。於中有五。一作羯磨當受不失不犯。二會故不犯。三不捨故不犯。四四想等失受故不犯。五若水陸諸難故不失而不犯。並洒明相未出之前有此四。故方可不犯。水陸諸難不失受者。心知衣在恒作頌受之意為是不失。故律云。不犯者。僧作羯磨明相未出。若會衣。若作失想。若水陸道斷。有此諸難悉皆不犯。 > Question: The three robes and the six requisites are all equally \[articles to\] support the body; why is it that being separated from the three robes results in forfeiture and incurs a prāyaścittika, whereas being separated from the other robes and items is lighter? Answer: The three robes are positively instituted, and their reception extends through the three grades \[of robes\]; now if one is separated from them, it contravenes the institution, the offense is heavy, and one forfeits the method of reception. The other robes, articles, and the like are permitted exceptions; for those of middle and inferior \[capacity\], they are for \[times when one's\] support of the Path is insufficient. Now if one is separated from them, this is a contravention against a permitted exception; it incurs only a duṣkṛta, and they are not received. This defines the scope of forfeiting the robes. 3. There are two kinds of boundaries for protecting the robes: first, natural \[boundaries\]; second, karmically determined boundaries. The number of natural boundaries is variable; according to the general explanation of the various schools, there are fifteen in total. The first is the saṅghārāma boundary. The ārāma has four types. The second is the village boundary, which also has four types: namely, being enclosed all around by walls, fences, or hedges; having an incomplete fence or wall, but being surrounded on four sides by houses, and so forth. The third is the tree boundary: if the leaves of a tree are continuous, so that their shade covers a seated person's hands and feet sitting cross-legged; the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya takes the area covered by the shadow at the exact midpoint of the day, where water does not reach, to be the robe boundary. The fourth is the threshing-floor boundary: the Vinaya states that it is a place where the five grains are processed, meaning a vacant and quiet place outside a village. The fifth is the cart boundary. The sixth is the boat boundary. Both are on land; the Vinaya states that it is the place where a cart or boat turns around. This merely clarifies a stationary cart. In the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, for moving carts: the front cart facing the middle cart as far as a staff reaches; the middle cart facing the front and rear carts as far as a staff reaches; the rear cart facing the middle cart as far as a staff reaches. If it does not reach, it is called a different boundary. The seventh is the shed boundary, meaning outside a village; the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that outside a multi-storied pavilion, ladder, or stairs, twenty-five cubits is called the robe boundary. The eighth is the hall boundary: the Vinaya states that it is largely open and exposed. The ninth is the storehouse boundary, where various goods are accumulated and stored. The tenth is the granary boundary, a place where grain and rice are stockpiled. The eleventh is the araṇya boundary: the Vinaya states that an araṇya has no boundary, meaning it is set in an open wilderness without distinct boundaries; provisionally, one measures the size by trees: between eight trees, the space between one tree \[and the next\] is seven bows; a bow is four cubits long; the total calculation is fifty-eight paces, and including its margin of influence (势分, \*prabhāva\*), it is over seventy. The twelfth is the travel boundary: in the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, when a bhikṣu carries the robes for his master, walking through the middle, within forty-nine fathoms forward and backward \[the robe\] is not forfeited; the commentary states that in breadth it is also suspected to be forty-nine fathoms as the boundary for protecting the robe. The thirteenth is the island boundary: the Samantapāsādikā states that within fourteen cubits, one does not forfeit the robe. The fourteenth is the water boundary: the Samantapāsādikā states that when meditating in an araṇya, when dawn is about to break, troubled by drowsiness, one takes off one's robe, places it on the bank, and enters a water pool to bathe; if the dawn breaks, one commits forfeiture; the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that in the water, the travel boundary is twenty cubits, but if it is a boat boundary, entering the water makes it different; the Vinayamātṛkā states that if one is wearing the robe on the bank with one foot in the water and one foot on the bank, it is not called a different boundary. The fifteenth is the well boundary: the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that when traveling and sleeping in the open beside a well enclosure, placing the robe within twenty-five cubits is called the boundary for protecting the robe. What is called a karmically determined boundary is determined according to the saṃgha's boundary. The Vinaya states: regarding not forfeiting the robe, the ārāma has one boundary; regarding forfeiting the robe, the ārāma has several boundaries. Based on the Dharmaguptaka and other schools mutually supporting each other, there are four kinds: namely, the obstructions of attachment, separation, emotion, and boundary. The upper three obstructions are present across boundaries; if one discusses the obstruction of boundary, they do not communicate with each other. Therefore the text states: regarding forfeiting the robe, within the saṅghārāma there are several boundaries, meaning the above three obstructions are inside the compound of the saṅghārāma, so there are multiple boundaries for the robe. Regarding not forfeiting the robe, within the saṅghārāma there is one boundary, meaning there are none of the above three obstructions. As for the obstruction of attachment, the Vinaya states: if there is a woman inside the ārāma, when coming and going the robe must accompany the body; if a woman is in the middle, and the person and robe are on opposite sides, it is called a different boundary. As for what is called the obstruction of separation, the Vinaya states: it is when water or land routes are severed and one cannot meet with the robe; the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that if the robe is inside a room while the person is outside, and one cannot open it with a key, nor are there ladders or steps, it is called an obstruction. As for the obstruction of emotion, the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā states: where a king comes inside the boundary to defecate or urinate, approaching the king's vicinity is not a robe boundary; and persons performing illusions or playing music are all called emotional obstructions; the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya states that places demarcated for brothers are also called emotional obstructions. As for what is called the obstruction of boundary, it is as explained above: if there are several boundaries, the person and the robe must be in the same place; if not, it is called forfeiting the robe; and down to the araṇya boundary, it is also like this. According to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, a margin of influence is added, which is absent in the other schools. Regarding the margin of influence: the margin of an ārāma is the place outside the ārāma to which a stone thrown by a person reaches the robe; this is called the margin of the boundary; and down to the storehouse and granary boundaries, it is also like this. The Samantapāsādikā states: an average person throwing a stone—neither strong nor weak—throwing a stone with all his might to where it lands; measuring this, it is fifteen paces. This only refers to natural \[boundaries\] not communicating; for a karmically determined \[boundary\], one must enter the boundary before meeting with the robe. The fifth phrase is the scope of permitted separation. As for 'except by a karmavācanā of the saṃgha', the Vinaya states: at that time, a bhikṣu had an illness, and the three robes were extremely heavy; wishing to travel, the Buddha permitted an exception, allowing him to request a karmavācanā to be separated from his robes for nine months. The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā gives four reasons for permitting separation from the robes: first, because sentient beings with whom one has affinities ought to receive one's actions; second, because it is appropriate to travel to reduce illness; third, to seek what is suitable for practicing the Path; fourth, to subdue those not yet subdued, and to cause those already subdued to rejoice. Within the exception, there is validity and invalidity: first, it is valid only if the robe is heavy and the person is sick; the other three alternatives—mutually present or mutually absent—render the rite invalid. The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā states: suppose the robe and the person are mutually non-consonant with the Dharma; the former person commits an offense of false speech, but the rite is successfully established, because the karmavācanā protects against staying separated from the robe, not against illness and the like. The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya states: for those who enter the earlier rains-retreat, nine months; for those who enter the later rains-retreat, eight months. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: leaving the saṃghāṭī behind. The Mahāsāṃghika and Mahīśāsaka Vinayas only allow leaving behind the uttarāsaṅga, not the other two. In the texts of the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and the Vibhāṣā, all among the three robes have the meaning of being permitted to be left; but one may only be separated from one robe, not two. The sixth phrase, 'niḥsargika-prāyaścittika', clarifies the scope of establishing the offense. Herein there are four \[steps\]: first, forfeiting the offending robe; second, repenting the offense committed; third, returning the original robe; fourth, establishing the offense for not returning it. The meaning is as explained extensively in the Vinaya. As for non-offenses, herein there are five: first, when a karmavācanā has been performed, one duly receives it without forfeiting, hence no offense; second, because one meets \[with the robe\], no offense; third, because one does not relinquish \[it\], no offense; fourth, because perception of the four thoughts and the like results in losing the reception, no offense; fifth, because of perils by water or land, one does not forfeit it, hence no offense. All these four must occur before dawn breaks; only then may it be a non-offense. For perils by water or land not resulting in the loss of reception: when one knows in one's mind that the robe exists and constantly maintains the intent of reciting and receiving it, therefore it is not lost. Thus the Vinaya states: as for non-offense, the saṃgha has performed a karmavācanā; dawn has not yet broken; if one meets with the robe; if one conceives the thought of loss; if water or land routes are severed—if there are these various perils, all are non-offenses. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2.41) - [Next: 2.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2.43) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787~en-mt.2.42) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1804.2.133) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2787.2.42) · Pramāṇa