四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 2.48

2.48

若比丘令非親里比丘尼浣故衣若染若打尼薩耆波逸提　此滿足文有五句。一人。二非親里尼。三所浣故衣。四所浣染打。五結罪。言比丘者。如上。非親里者。亦如上。言故衣者。下至一經身著。衣者十種衣。若新衣浣者得吉。言若染若打者。是所作業。言尼薩耆波逸提者。是犯罪。若使浣染打尼具作得三提。作二得二提。作一得一提。善見云。令出家婦浣染亦犯。五分令非親尼浣而親尼浣。如是互作五句。皆墮。若浣染尼師檀亦犯墮。十誦若犯捨墮。衣與浣犯小罪。若浣竟比丘復言未淨還使尼浣。比丘尼薩耆吉羅得二罪。若使尼浣染打。尼不浣不染不打得三吉。餘互作不作推此可知　問。使下二眾何以得吉　答。非是弟子使希故輕。有非具戒不廢正修故輕。若依多論不二同尼犯提　問。新衣何以輕　答。新衣浣希有無緣患故得小罪。不犯者。律云。若宿若謂佛法僧使浣染等無罪從。

“If a bhikṣu has an unrelated bhikṣuṇī wash an old robe, or dye it, or beat it, it is a niḥsargika-prāyaścittika.” This full text contains five clauses: 1. the person; 2. the unrelated bhikṣuṇī; 3. the old robe to be washed; 4. the washing, dyeing, or beating; 5. concluding the offense. “Bhikṣu” is as above. “Unrelated” is also as above. “Old robe” means at least having been worn once on the body. “Robe” means the ten types of robes. If he has her wash a new robe, he incurs a duṣkṛta. “Or dye it, or beat it” refers to the actions performed. “Niḥsargika-prāyaścittika” is the offense committed. If he has her wash, dye, and beat it, and the bhikṣuṇī performs all three, he incurs three prāyaścittikas; if she performs two, he incurs two prāyaścittikas; if she performs one, he incurs one prāyaścittika. The *Samantapāsādikā* states: Having a woman who has gone forth wash or dye it also constitutes an offense. The *Mahīśāsaka Vinaya* states: If he tells an unrelated bhikṣuṇī to wash it, but a related bhikṣuṇī washes it, and so on through the five permutations of mutual substitution, all result in a fall [prāyaścittika]. If she washes or dyes a niṣīdana, it also constitutes a fall. The *Sarvāstivāda Vinaya* states: If the forfeiture and fall are incurred, giving the robe to be washed incurs a minor offense; if the washing is completed and the bhikṣu says again, “It is not clean,” and sends it back for the bhikṣuṇī to wash, the bhikṣu incurs two offenses: a niḥsargika and a duṣkṛta. If he has the bhikṣuṇī wash, dye, or beat it, but the bhikṣuṇī does not wash, dye, or beat it, he incurs three duṣkṛtas. The remaining permutations of doing or not doing can be inferred from this. Question: Why does employing the lower two assemblies incur only a duṣkṛta? Answer: They are not disciples, and employment is rare, so it is light; or because they do not possess the full precepts, it does not disrupt proper cultivation, so it is light. If one relies on the *Sarvāstivāda-vinaya-vibhāṣā*, there is no difference, and like with a bhikṣuṇī, it incurs a prāyaścittika. Question: Why is a new robe lighter? Answer: Washing a new robe is rare, and it lacks the trouble of being unseemly, so it incurs a minor offense. Regarding non-offense: The Vinaya states that if it is in an inn, or if she is employed to wash or dye for the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Saṅgha, it is without offense.