律戒本疏 1.13

1.13

第九異分事中取片　慈地前以無根而謗。故姊儐身展常求謗緣。以肆忿參會於靈就山。逢見陀標經行林中。時有二尼。過住問訊。問訊已坐息路側。陀標脚跌倒臥尼上。慈地見之即以為根。又於山下見群羊和合。復以羊事為根。異分者犯四重法也。犯此罪已眾不共事。分與眾別故名異分。其餘三滿是四事之片。三篇方便諸突吉通名似片。似片中有二種分別。眾學一篇名須臾片。將以心悔則除罪。不經時故名須臾。若以欲心與尼屏處倒臥其上。則是異分之片。今陀標屏突無心倒臥非故。無欲屏處及倒臥身上。突吉羅罪之輕。至片之極。假非其正片故名似片。凡謗者或取片。或取似片。陀標無正片故。是慈地取似片取及似為作罪根而謗。二俱犯殘也。

Ninth: taking a fragment from a different class of matter. Because Mettiya previously slandered [Dabba] groundlessly, causing his sister to be expelled and bringing trouble upon himself, he constantly sought grounds for slander in order to vent his fury. Meeting at Gṛdhrakūṭaparvata, he came across Dabba walking in the forest. At that time, there were two nuns passing by who stopped to pay respects. Having paid respects, they sat down to rest by the roadside. Dabba's foot slipped and he fell, lying upon a nun. Mettiya saw this and immediately took it as a root. Furthermore, at the foot of the mountain he saw a flock of sheep copulating, and again took the matter of the sheep as a root. 'Different class' refers to offenses of the four grave rules (pārājikas): having committed this offense, one is excluded from sharing saṃgha affairs; because one's class is separated from the saṃgha, it is called a 'different class'. The remaining three categories are fragments of these four matters. The preparatory actions of the three categories and all duṣkṛtas are collectively called 'resembling fragments'. Within resembling fragments there are two distinctions: the category of śaikṣa rules is called 'momentary fragments', because through mental repentance the offense is removed, and since it does not endure through time it is called 'momentary'. If with lustful desire one falls and lies on top of a nun in a secluded place, that is a fragment of a different class. Now, Dabba's secluded [act] was a duṣkṛta without mental intent; falling down was unintentional. Being without desire, the secluded place and falling upon the body were the lightest of duṣkṛta offenses, reaching the extreme of a fragment; since it was not an authentic fragment, it is called a 'resembling fragment'. Slanderers in general either take a fragment or take a resembling fragment. Because Dabba had no authentic fragment, Mettiya took a resembling fragment; taking either [an actual fragment] or a resembling [fragment] to establish the root of an offense and slandering, both incur a saṃghāvaśeṣa.