釋集僧篇
Collection of Monastics
案下分題，集僧即目能集，謂作相軌度；通局即召所集，謂約界用人。是則集僧不收通局，通局得兼集僧，此即〈羯磨篇〉中三四兩緣合為一篇耳。又解，集謂能集，即是軌度；僧屬所集人，即下用僧分齊；通局目所集處，即下界之分齊。並如文中。古記並云〈標宗〉是僧體，〈集僧〉已下明僧用。此由不識僧體，故此妄判。且《業疏》廣明僧體，正取四人假用，何甞以戒為體；用彼決此，不攻自破。故今科判，迥異前修；〈標宗〉止是勸學；〈集僧〉已下，始明行事。若爾，鈔文無處明僧體耶？答：此篇下科用僧分齊有文明體，如後所辨。
The question is: (The text below) is divided into topics. "Gathering the Saṅgha" refers to the ability to gather, that is, the procedures and standards for summoning. "Scope and limits" refers to what is gathered, that is, the qualifications within a boundary and the category of people employed. Thus, "gathering the Saṅgha" does not include "scope and limits," while "scope and limits" can encompass "gathering the Saṅgha." This is why the third and fourth conditions in the "Karma Chapter" are combined into one chapter. Another explanation: "gathering" refers to the ability to gather—this is the procedure and standard; "Saṅgha" refers to those who are gathered—this is the sub-category of employing the Saṅgha; "scope and limits" indicates the place where they gather—this is the boundary of the location. All of this is as explained in the text. Ancient commentaries all say, "Placing the Principles" is the essence of the Saṅgha, while "Gathering the Saṅgha" onward clarifies the functions of the Saṅgha. This comes from not understanding the essence of the Saṅgha, leading to this mistaken judgment. Furthermore, the *Karmic Summary* discusses the essence of the Saṅgha in detail, clearly taking the provisional concept of the four-person group as its essence. How could it take the precepts as its essence? Using that text to decide this issue, this critique defeats itself. Therefore, our classification here is entirely different from those of the past: "Placing the Principles" is merely to encourage study; "Gathering the Saṅgha" onward begins to clarify the actual practice. If so, is there nowhere in the *Manual* that clarifies the essence of the Saṅgha? Answer: In the "Employing the Saṅgha" section within this chapter, there is a text that clarifies the essence, as will be discussed later.
敘意中，初句標僧義。僧者通目七位。一二三人，雖不秉眾法，亦得名僧；以僧假別成，從因彰號；不同古記謂簡別人。和者有六：戒見利三，名體和；身口意三，名相和。又初果已去名理和，所證同故；內凡已還名事和，即六和也。若下，反明須集之意。上二句明人非。乖離者，總三種別。御下法非。被下事非。法事縱如，由人非故，二並不成。故下，文含三意：一釋首題，二結篇意，三即分章。
In the explanation of the meaning, the first line indicates the meaning of "Sangha." "Sangha" generally refers to seven types of practitioners. Even one, two, or three individuals, although they do not carry out communal monastic procedures, can still be called Sangha. This is because the Sangha is formed through individual members, and the name is established based on the cause; this differs from ancient commentaries that interpreted it as distinguishing individuals.
"Harmony" has six aspects: harmony in precepts, views, and material benefits constitutes harmony of essence; harmony in body, speech, and mind constitutes harmony of form. Furthermore, those from the first stage of enlightenment onward are said to have harmony in principle, as they realize the same truth. Those from the ordinary practitioner stage within the inner circle are said to have harmony in worldly matters, which is the sixfold harmony described above.
The phrase "if [they are not harmonious]" explains the need to gather together. The first two lines indicate when people are not in harmony: "discord" generally refers to three types of disunity. The next line, "control," refers to when the Dharma (teachings) is not in harmony. The following line, "being directed," refers to when matters are not in harmony. Even if the Dharma and matters are proper, if the people are not in harmony, neither practice will succeed.
The following text contains three meanings: first, explaining the title; second, summarizing the purpose of the treatise; third, dividing into chapters.
示前後中。文出〈說戒揵度〉。必先設座，後方鳴鐘；疏云：由聲告即集，床座未施，佇待悽惶，非成㢡務；制先定座，良在茲也。
The text explains the sequence of events—before, during, and after—as outlined in the "Explanation of the Pratimoksha Chapter." First, a seat must be prepared; only then should the bell be rung. As the commentary says: "If people gather after hearing the sound, the seats may not yet be set up. They would have to wait, feeling unsettled and confused, which would not be conducive to the purpose of the gathering. Therefore, it is fitting to arrange the seats first."
制法中，初緣起。佛言下，立制，初列示四相。使下，明能打人。不下，明打法。三通如後說。吹螺倣上打人，故云亦爾；彼云沙彌守園人吹。除下，簡物。漆毒樹，相傳云恐傷手故。上明布薩時。若下，明大小食時。住處多者，別房散遠故。若下，明開許。疏云：此召僧法制，非具道者所為；必無二人，方聽兼助也。
In the section on establishing the precepts, the initial part discusses the origins. The passage beginning with "The Buddha said" sets forth the rules, first listing the four aspects of the offense. The phrase starting with "allows" clarifies who may strike a person. The following "does not" explains the method of striking. The third part will be explained later as usual.
Blowing a conch shell is analogous to striking a person, so the rule applies similarly. The text there refers to a novice or garden keeper blowing it. The word "except" indicates exceptions regarding the materials used.
Regarding the lacquer poison tree, it is traditionally said this exception exists for fear of injuring the hand. The previous part explained the time of the Uposatha (observance day). The passage beginning with "if" clarifies times for the main meal and small meals. In places with many dwellings, the residential quarters are scattered and far apart. The section beginning with "if" explains the allowances. A commentary says: This is the procedure for summoning the monastic community; it is not something that can be done by those lacking full ordination. Only when there is no second person may assistance be permitted.
明俗打中，初引背請戒文。彼明居士作食持入祇桓打犍槌；諸比丘問，答云請比丘食耳。乃至下，出提舍中，初句出第二戒。彼因居士請佛及一部僧；明日食至，晨朝敷座，遣使白佛時到。(此證唱令。)及下，出第四戒。彼云諸女持食入僧坊，打犍槌與僧分食等。中食下，未詳何文。
This clarifies the section on laypeople's actions, beginning with the Precept against refusing an invitation. In the Precept against refusing an invitation, a layperson prepared food and brought it into Jetavana, and struck the gong; the monks asked about it, and he replied that he was inviting the monks to a meal. The section beginning "乃至" below appears in the Prāyaścitta section: the first sentence marks the second Precept. There, a layperson invited the Buddha and one group of monks; when the next day's meal arrived, seats were spread at dawn, and a messenger was sent to inform the Buddha that the time had come. (This substantiates the announcement.) And the section below marks the fourth Precept. Theravāda texts say that women brought food into the monastery, struck the gong, and shared the meal with the monks. The unclear phrase "middle meal" below—it is not known which text it is from.
道打中，初文。出彼十六。佛在舍衛鹿母園中，夏竟受歲，令阿難打之。此是下，即阿難語。信鼓者，於事則告眾有期，在法則歸心無二。鼓謂擊動發聲，名通鐘磬。
The Path is struck, the first passage. It comes from the sixteenth. The Buddha was in the Deer Mother's Park at Shravasti. When the summer retreat ended and the year was received, he had Ananda strike it. "This is the following" — these are Ananda's words. "Faith drum": in terms of events, it announces to the assembly that there is a set time; in terms of the Dharma, it means returning the mind without duality. "Drum" means striking to produce sound — the term also covers bells and chimes.
《十誦》，緣起闕事有八，四段明之。無人下，即闕作相；正是今用，下並因引。又下，即闕作務。及下，是闕指授；彼作苦酒中蟲，今言食者，改局從通。飲下，即闕理眾。佛下，明立法。顯上作相，比丘為之。(又準行水亦通比丘。)下引他文釋名可了。
In the *Ten Recitations*, concerning the section on the origin story that is missing, there are eight items, which the four passages clarify. Under "no one," this is precisely the missing procedure; this is exactly what is being applied here, and below it is all introduced by way of citation. Again, what follows is the missing duty. And what follows is the missing instruction; where it says "insects in sour wine," the present text says "eater," changing from the specific to the general. Under "drinking," this is the missing governing of the assembly. Under "Buddha," the establishing of the rule is clarified. This shows that the procedure above is performed by monks. (Furthermore, by the same standard, distributing water is also permissible for monks.) Below, other texts are cited, and the explanation of the names can be understood.
通意中。律列八種，第三打地作聲；今略為七，未詳何意。量影者，謂剋時令集。八中，烟影是色，餘六是聲。又唱告是情，餘並非情。亦下，示通。此明律不局道，意彰通俗。上引諸文，證定能打，乃是暗破當時妄執。《尼鈔》云：今時諸寺僧尼立制，不許沙彌白衣打鐘，此迷教甚矣。
Within the general meaning, the Vinaya lists eight kinds, the third being striking the ground to make a sound; here it is abbreviated to seven, and it is not clear why. "Measuring the shadow" means fixing the time to gather the assembly. Among the eight, smoke and shadow are form, while the other six are sound. Also, calling out is sentient, while the rest are not sentient. "Also below" indicates the general meaning. This shows that the Vinaya is not limited to monastics, making clear that it extends to laypeople. The various passages cited above prove that striking is permissible, and this is in fact an implicit refutation of the mistaken attachment of that time. The Nisi Chao says: Today monks and nuns in various monasteries establishment regulations forbidding novices and laypeople from striking the bell — this is a grave misunderstanding of the teachings.
梵號中。若諸律論，並作犍槌，或作犍稚，如字而呼，乃是梵言訛轉，唯獨《聲論》正其音耳。今須音槌為地。又《羯磨疏》中直云揵地；未見稚字呼為地也；後世無知，因茲一誤，至於鈔文前後，以及一宗祖教，凡犍槌字並改為稚，直呼為地；請尋古本寫鈔，及大藏經律考之，方知其謬。但以稚椎相濫，容致妄改；今須依律論並作犍槌；至呼召時，自從《聲論》。(或作椎亦爾。世有不識梵語，云是打鐘之槌及砧槌等，此又不足議也。)若準《尼鈔》云：西傳云：時至應臂吒犍槌；臂吒此云打，犍槌此云所打之木，或用檀桐木等；彼無鐘磬，故多打木集人。此則與今全乖，不可和會；且依鈔疏鐘磬翻之，謂金石二物也。(應法師《經音義》大同《尼鈔》。然《祇桓圖》中多明鐘磬，而云彼無者，或恐少耳。)《音義》又云：舊經云揵遲，亦梵言訛轉；宜作稚，直致反。(明知稚字不呼為地，此迷久矣，故為辨之。)
In the Sanskrit transliterations, the Vinaya and Abhidharma texts all use 犍槌, or sometimes 犍稚. If you pronounce it as the characters literally read, that is a corrupted transliteration of the Sanskrit; only the *Sheng Lun* (Treatise on Sound) gives the correct pronunciation. Now it should be pronounced "地" (dì). Furthermore, in the *Karmavācanā Commentary* it is written directly as 揵地; nowhere do we see the character 稚 pronounced as "地." Later generations, out of ignorance, because of this one error, went so far as to change every occurrence of 犍槌 in the *Chaowen* and throughout the patriarchal teachings of the entire school to 稚, and to pronounce it directly as "地." Please consult the ancient manuscripts of the *Chaowen* and examine the Vinaya texts in the great canon, and only then will you realize the error. It is simply because 稚 and 椎 are easily confused that this careless alteration was allowed to occur. Now one should follow the Vinaya and Abhidharma texts and consistently write 犍槌; when it comes to pronunciation, follow the *Sheng Lun*.
(Or written as 椎, the same applies. There are those in the world who do not understand Sanskrit and say it refers to a hammer for striking bells or a mallet for an anvil—this is not even worth discussing.)
According to the *Nun's Commentary*: Western tradition says: when the time arrives, one should strike the arm-bell 犍槌; 臂吒 (bìzhà) means "to strike," and 犍槌 means "the wood that is struck," which may be made of sandalwood, paulownia, or other woods. In those regions there are no bells or chimes, so they mostly strike wood to gather people. This is entirely at odds with current practice and cannot be reconciled. For now, following the *Chaowen* and the commentaries, translate it as "bell and chime," referring to the two objects of metal and stone.
(Master Yingfa's *Scripture Sounds and Meanings* largely agrees with the *Nun's Commentary*. However, the *Jetavana Diagram* frequently mentions bells and chimes, so to say they had none may simply mean they were few.)
The *Sounds and Meanings* also says: Old scriptures write 揵遲, which is likewise a corrupted transliteration of the Sanskrit; it should be written 稚, with the fanqie spelling 直致 (zhízhì).
(This clearly shows that the character 稚 is not pronounced as "地." This confusion has persisted for a long time, and so it is explained here.)
義設者。以前諸教，雖令作相，尚無倫序。故須酌理安布儀式。而先文後義者，欲彰行事並出正教，非是徒然。
(Setting up the meaning: In the earlier teachings, although practitioners were told to contemplate characteristics, there was still no orderly arrangement. Therefore, one must weigh the principles and lay out the ritual forms. The reason for putting the text first and the meaning after is to make clear that the practice and the authentic teaching are presented together, and not in vain.)
明鋪設中，指集僧法，即今現行《軌度圖經》，武德七年撰。
In the section explaining the arrangements, it refers to the procedure for assembling the monks, which is the Ritual Procedures Illustrated Sutra currently in use, composed in the seventh year of the Wude era.
敘昔中，初二句斥時。若下，引示。彼第二卷，前明五事，後明七法，名十二時揵槌。一常會時，謂說恣羯磨講法等集(先從小起至大二十下，稍小二十一下，小小十下，復大三下，共五十四下，此似《五分》三通；但多少有異，準下又名一通耳。)、二旦食時(八下，謂小食也。)、三晝食時(一通，同前常會，謂中齋也。)、四暮投槃時(一通同上，如今昏鐘，投槃疑是梵語，未詳所翻。)、五無常(多少隨時，上並常用，下七卒緣。)。一縣官、二大火、三大水、四賊盜(此四並隨時)、五會沙彌(三下)、六會優婆塞(二下)、七呼私兒(一下)。科要即十二時。節解即打數。解猶段也。但下，明不行所以。事非深奧故易，不知法制則難。
In recounting the past, the first two phrases criticize the time. "If below," cite and show. In that second fascicle, first the five matters are explained, then the seven rules, called the twelve-hour gong-striking. First, the regular assembly time, meaning gatherings for the confession ceremony, karma proceedings, Dharma lectures, and so on(First, from a small strike up to twenty strikes for the great; then slightly fewer at twenty-one; then very small at ten; then again three great strikes—fifty-four strikes in total. This resembles the three rounds of the *Five-Part Vinaya*; only the number differs. According to what follows, it is also called one round.). Second, the morning meal time(Eight strikes, meaning the small meal.). Third, the midday meal time(One round, the same as the regular assembly above, meaning the midday meal.). Fourth, the evening bell-casting time(One round, the same as above, like the present-day dusk bell. "Casting the pan" is suspected to be Sanskrit; the translation is not known in detail.). Fifth, impermanence(The number varies according to circumstance. The above are all regular uses; the following seven are sudden occurrences.). First, a county official; second, a great fire; third, a great flood; fourth, bandits(These four are all according to circumstance.); fifth, assembling the novices(Three strikes.); sixth, assembling the laymen(Two strikes.); seventh, calling the private boys(One strike.). The section summary is thus the twelve hours. The phrase-by-phrase explanation is the number of strikes. "Explanation" means section. "But below," explains the reason for not practicing. The matters are not profound, hence easy; not knowing the Dharma regulations makes them difficult.
量時法者。不定打數。此法至要，必在智者斟酌而用。
Assessing the timing of the Dharma: there is no fixed number to it. This method is of the utmost importance, and must be applied by a wise person according to their own judgment.
三通中，非謂單三下也，始終共四十下，生下二句明初十下。《圖經》云：執杵定心，虛楷十下。《尼鈔》云：不得大打驚動眾心。漸稀下，明中間二十七下。希，疎也。乃下，示後三下。即目此三名為三通。《圖經》云：集三乘也。(今時眾法講說，宜準此式，頗得其中。)
Among the three rounds, this does not mean simply three strikes; from beginning to end there are forty strikes in total. The next two phrases describe the first ten strikes. The Illustrated Sutra says: "Holding the pestle, settle the mind, and tap ten times in empty space." The Nuns' Commentary says: "One should not strike hard, startling the assembly." "Gradually thinning" describes the middle twenty-seven strikes. "Thinning" means sparse. "Then" introduces the final three strikes. These three together are called the three rounds. The Illustrated Sutra says: "It gathers the Three Vehicles." (Nowadays, for assemblies and lectures, it is appropriate to follow this pattern; it is quite well balanced.)
長打中，初明佛世本無。後下二句，示滅後緣起。如下所引。其下，正明打法。接前四十，增兩四十，共百二十。初明第二四十下。指生起同前者，謂虛揩漸大，共十八下。中間四槌，十九至二十二，此救四惡趣苦，地獄餓鬼畜生修羅，次第配之。如是下，從二十三已去後十八下。斂謂收聲。穊，密也。方下，明第三，四十下。指同前者，亦有少異。從三十六去打三下，名三通，末後二下名息槌。《圖經》云：念三寶存五眾；眾各八輩，故以四十為差；三道乘之，則百二十為節。(八輩謂四果四向，三道謂三乘。)
指出中。經律即如前引。非出一處，故云參校。亦下，此指當時，今亦多有。
立誓中，初標勸。徵，驗也。應下，示威儀。我下，出誓詞。上明生善；又下，即滅惡。餘更隨時，不必專此。
顯功中，初引傳。罽膩吒王，即月氏(音支)國主。與安息國王戰，殺九億人。尋生悔心，於馬鳴所。鳴為說法，令其重罪得輕，尚受是報。隨生下，彼云須臾之間，頭滿大海。若聞下，彼因羅漢為僧維那，依時打鐘，功加於彼；後受彼白，即為長打；過七日已，受苦即畢。即下，引經會傳，初正引。此下，顯意。因緣者。疏云：罪者遇善為因，打者發願為緣；故得聲傳苦滅，自然感應；今文語簡，可用彼釋。召謂如相呼召。亡猶失也。余下，引現事合經。即智興律師，初依首師講會。大業五年仲冬，次掌維那。時至鐘所，役奉倍勤；寺僧有兄從帝南幸江都，中路亡歿，初無凶告；忽通夢於妻曰：吾不幸病死，生於地獄，受苦叵言。今月初一日，蒙禪定寺智興鳴鐘，響震地獄；同受苦者一時解脫，今生樂處，思報其恩，可具絹十匹奉之，並陳吾意。睡覺告人，初無信者。尋又重夢。後經旬日，凶問奄至，恰與夢同，乃奉絹與之。而與並施大眾，有問其故。興曰：余無他術，因見《付法藏傳》及《阿含經》鐘聲功德，敬遵此轍苦力行之；每至冬登樓，寒風切肉；僧給皮袖，余自勵意露手捉之，掌中凝血，不以為辭；又始願諸賢聖同入道場，次願諸惡趣俱時離苦等，眾伏其言(所謂斂念者也)。貞觀六年季春卒。此即祖師目覩，故著之為傳。今時新學，忽為小事，多不存誠；請詳上諸文，冀因斯一悟；或次掌維那，準上威儀，仍須重誓；則拔苦與樂，成大行也。
斥濫中，初二句引濫斥妄。彼謂比丘使人打鐘，須云知鐘，是為淨語；若直云打鐘，名不淨語。諸下二句，約教顯非。文舉經論，言略於律。打如前引四五十律，擊如《阿含》，檛出《智論》。知下，以理難破。前明打鐘，能教所教，俱通道俗；然知淨語，能不通俗，所不通道；事非相例，故用難之。知淨不通俗者，能教局道也；鐘則不爾，通彼俗士，使人打故。及自為者，所教局俗也；鐘亦不爾，通彼比丘，受教自打故。早下，勸勉。疏云：知鐘之言，雖非巨害，然是知法者之大忌。(《古記》妄解，以疏對照，曲而釋之。)
第二辨來處。總標通局，分科云分齊者何耶？答：通謂體同，局謂相別。同則略分，別須委示。從局標名，故言分齊。下科用人，例亦同此。問：通局何相？答：一處，二人。言處者，作法自然二界是通；作法有三，自然分六，則為局也。人中，別人及僧二位為通；別有三階，僧分四種，故為局也。語冠首題，一篇綱要；略知條目，始可尋文。
標示中。制意開緣，下篇既顯，不可兩繁；故指如後。以類相從，此之謂矣。
作法三者，場及大小。然有場四集，雖兼大界，正意明場。又集僧約事有通有別：通謂說恣，內外俱集；別即餘法隨界各行。今文兩界，並從別論。問：如通集中，場上不來，犯別眾否？答：法成得罪。不妨異界，無別眾過。問：小界說恣有通集否？答：本由說恣，開結遮訶。是則三小唯有別集。
次明自然，初科分二，初示相。四中，聚蘭各二，則為六相。皆下，釋名。對彼作法，緣搆成故。當下，標所出。問：所以當律都不立者？答：止是闕略，義必具之。準三小界，明指集處；疏云雖當部中無自然界，異處下道，即是誠文；道是一界，下是蘭若。今言無者，或非明文，或無分齊故也。
初明聚落，可分別中。準疏分二：謂僧則在無易委(人可分別)，聚亦周院可悉(處可分別)。《尼鈔》云：城外村坊，邊夷城邑，人民稀尠，可得分別故。應作四句。初人處俱可分，則依此相。二人處俱不可分，如後步量。三人可、處不可，四處可、人不可，並依後集。故知此相必須具二。文引《十誦》二十二卷。彼因比丘問佛，初至結界，即引問詞。彼接云：爾時界應幾許？言無僧坊者，人可分也。聚落即處可分。隨下，是佛答。謂隨處廣狹，即是界限。注。行來處見四十七，故云下文。此下，先以義決。分齊即同勢分，顯非聚落界體；意不取之。故《業疏》云：縱彼文中齊行來處，此制通攝，恐妨界內；必作法時身在門外，亦得兩成等。《四分》下，次引文決。即盜戒聚落，止取四相。(一、四周牆，二、柵籬，三、籬牆不周，四、四周有屋。)則顯彼此村聚相同，不須遠取。此由他執，故特注顯。(《古記》妄解，準疏為正。)
問中。以蘭若處本是空曠；今有僧坊，非蘭非聚，集僧難定；立問明之。
例決中，初準前文。今下，比例。即指僧坊便同聚落，復是蘭若，得同可分。
反顯中，下文還指四十七。初引文，故下，反例。無聚落者，顯是空逈之處。初起僧坊者，此約創起院相未完先結界者，為言。
會同中。疑謂聚落乃是民居，伽藍相異，安得例同。故此會之。言律中者，即指盜戒具出四相，如上所引；及後離衣釋伽藍界，更不別列，略指如上，故知是同。必下，簡濫。準不周淨，三邊有相，須準聚集；兩面一面，還依蘭若。有人迷此，謂城邑中院相周匝處，並可分別；請觀〈結界篇〉中圖相，藍院四周，自然四出，即知謬妄，不勞攻之。今謂上明伽藍，同可分聚；唯局蘭若，不通餘處；學者詳辨，在文皎然。
不可分別中分二，初約人明。僧下，二約處辨。疏云：或約僧之來去，難可知之；或約處所散落，不知際域；隨有一種，即歸此收。《尼鈔》云：中華之處，人民繁多，不可分故。用下，示量。彼因有人問佛種樹法，佛教令七弓種一樹；續後波離問集僧量，即用答之。異眾相見者，約兩向作法為言。準下計數。五肘弓一肘尺八，弓長九尺，七九共成六丈三尺，六尺為步，一間計十步半，如是合之。不同下，破古。疏云：昔云七十三步半者，錯算七間也；或執舊云樹限兩頭各有勢分，又云周圓種樹，又改《僧祇》為八樹字。餘廣如彼。下指《義鈔》，即刪繁意；彼文已亡，意如前示。古記不知所以，例云指誤；假令是誤，一處可爾；況此上卷凡十餘處，指廣如彼；檢彼並無，豈皆誤耶！誣聖辱祖，不慮招殃；引誤後生，何可窮也。
次明蘭若。上略阿字，亦云阿練若，即空靜處。有六不同，恐名相濫，故先標簡。六中寄衣，即三十恐怖離衣戒；僧界有二，如此所明；難事，即提舍末戒，餘可知。
無難中，初示不定。疏云諸部皆云一拘盧舍，而互說不定；大則二千弓，弓長五肘(出《僧祇》，計十里。)；小則五百弓，弓長四肘(出《十誦》，計六百步為二里。)。注引《了疏》，翻同本律；然鼓有大小，聲有遠近，亦不可準。雜下，明今取。彼經云一拘屢奢，注云秦言五里。
有難中，初引文示。言於外者，謂訶法人不同界也。計下，示數。百九十六肘，總三十五丈二尺八寸；三十丈為五十步，四丈八尺為八步，所餘如數。問：何名有難？答：昔人但云惡比丘作留難，故多妄解。今須簡定。此謂本界得訶之人，心不同忍，故來訶法，令事不成，故名難耳。即《善見》云不同意者。豈不明乎！(有以隣寺難集而名有難，謬矣。)問：有難一種，何法用之？答：此局三小，不通餘法，故知有難從三小得名。疏釋三小集僧文云：既有難緣，不比常途，宜用《善見》七盤陀集。豈非明據！此是定義，不勞驚惑。(有人不肯，請以〈結界篇〉中三小對之，是非可見；若不爾者，有難自然為行何法，思之。)
道行中二，初引云文出別眾食戒。若論別眾，道行不犯。今云不得者，此約停住為言。無別所以，至〈隨相〉為辨。亦下，定量，初句指論通漫。此下，引律會釋。問：蘭若道行，並一拘盧，而大小別者？答：蘭若諸部既別，宜取其中。道行止出多宗，理同彼律；疏云部別有由，當取《十誦》是也。
水界中，初引《五分》。水中行者，謂徒涉也。水灑及處者，示界限也。次引《善見》分三，初定分齊。準下離衣勢分，相傳以十三步為定。取下，次簡可否。取常流者，界相定故。潮水不得者，疏云：以乍溢故。若下，三明乘船又二；初明下矴。疏云若橦。所以爾者，或恐自然界限不定，或結船界相有參差故。不下，明繫纜。得否可尋。若準《善見》，水中不得結作法界；疏云：此論以水相虛浮，體相難識故也；今則約岸分標，義亦可得，如〈結界〉中。問：所以唯六相者？答：攝處盡故。問：幾事用之？答：結法未興，唯除說恣，通行餘法；制後僧事，局開結界；心念對首及別眾食，並須約界。問：用有通局，可得聞乎？答：有難蘭若，唯局三小；自餘五相，並通大界；水道二處，義無戒場；別眾食中，亦止五相，除有難蘭若。問：相或相涉，何以分之？答：聚蘭二種相別易知。道行非二攝。水界通三處。
論體中。前明分齊，即界體量。然諸家所判廣狹方圓，是非異論，故重辨定。不隨別顯，故云總論。
三種作法，大界戒場，各隨標相；小界一種，隨人多少。
自然中，可分聚落，亦隨四相。同上作法，故云亦無。
不可分別，標中。不同有三，即三問答，並有多說。
初問。前明六十三步，為約四面各取，為約一面取半而兩向共成耶？
答中，初判定。故下，引證。此下，點示。
第二問中。正定界體，故約兩處秉法設問。
答中，初科，初句刪異說。今下，申正解為二，初定量。注中釋疑。此約秉法顯相，恐謂不秉不勞界故。故下，引證。還即前文。既約二處，則知各半明矣。
次科，初約無人顯體。若下，約有人明集。準此六十三步，須以二名表異彼此；此名隨分自然，彼名異界自然，據下亦號限分深防。
三中，初明深防。不問有無，慮有別眾，過分倍集，故曰深防。實下，示限分。故下，引證。此明凡為比丘，隨處有界。則知《僧祇》七樹，不屬一人；證上半減，義無差矣。
第三問中。由古異執，故問以闢之。
答文，初科，上句牒古。彼謂六十三步，但據東西南北四方量之，不約四維，故定方也。今下斥非。俗中算法，方五斜七；且約限分自然，四方六十三步，四維則剩二十餘步；深防準知。方準《僧祇》，維無所據，故此斥之。
顯正中，初二句立義宗。若下，釋定不定兩相。可知。有別界者，或是作法，或約自然；水陸相侵，則隨遠近故也。
遮妄中，初引彼所據。但云方各，不言維故。謂不，釋通文意。身面所向者，則通一切，不局方維也。非下，遮簡。略音測。文下，舉事例難。彼執《十誦》方各二字，不量四維，故以此並而質之。〈受戒犍度〉明弟子法云：若師遣往方面周旋，不得辭設託因緣住，故云隨師也。
正解中，引文有三，初引《五分》證不局方。但云身面，可決《十誦》。次引《善見》，證必須圓。言方圓者，方指四向，圓即界體。乃下，引《了論》證取四維。然彼是作法，今明自然；但量法不殊，故得引證。合猶和也。角即四隅，論中正遮取方餘角故。
結勸。可知。文中但明不可分聚，餘四例準。
二明用僧，明僧義中，初句示位。律云：有四種僧。一者四人僧，除受戒(白召對問二單白，中受一白四。)、自恣(五德和僧一白)、出罪(懺殘一白四)，餘一切羯磨應作。(疏云：除三單白，二白四，自餘皆四僧攝。)二者五人僧，除中國受戒、出罪。三者十人僧，除出罪。四者二十人僧，一切羯磨應作。汎下，示名義。若下，簡濫。略舉非相，委如〈足數〉。文中五句。初句及四，並約能秉。次句是所為。第三通能所，如對眾問難捨墮受懺；能秉之人，即所量故。第四相乖，如四儀差互等。上四別示，下句總括。通下，指廣。言七種者，總收眾別也。疏云：對心念法，立一人僧；對於對首，立眾多人僧(二三人也)；對於眾法，立四人僧。又云：莫不弘秉，通號僧焉。(舊云僧簡別者，謬矣。)下指《義鈔》文逸。(舊云檢彼無文，非也。)《業疏》總義中廣明體相，非可卒示；須學方知；即下〈羯磨篇〉，亦明七位；法事如非，尋之可領。
別列中。別位易解，略而不明。此篇集僧，且據大眾。初四人者。疏云：僧雖有四，體相分二。初一為體，非四不名為僧。後隨事分，故有三別。文中且舉說結；其實百三十四法中，除上五種，餘並四人作之。五人中，初示本宗。邊受二法，教授白召，戒師對問，自恣白和，唯此三白，是五人用。若約僧體，四人能辦；但由事緣相假，非五不成；故四外加一，為五人僧；邊受白四，還四人攝。若下，次取他部。本宗受懺，亦止四人；今依《祇律》加入五中。彼云：五眾羯磨者，自恣邊受一切尼薩耆是也。十人者。疏云：中國僧多，前受生慢，故倍前五為十人僧。二十人者。二篇隣重，犯悔情浮，故倍中受，為二十人僧。準疏問曰：受開邊五，例準出罪亦應開十？答：受是生善，開之有益；出罪滅惡，開則增過；餘廣如彼。
體用中，初句通括四位。若下，別示僧體，初明體通。今下，明用別。上即依律略示僧體，律本但有約數明體，謂一人、眾多人、四人也。若取假用，乃準《成論》。詳今文意，雖非正辦，四人實辦，非體而何！則顯古記指前標宗為僧體者誤矣。
簡淨穢中，初文。自行取淨，唯約自知；微有所犯，悔已同法；不爾，必約三根檢勘清濁；清可預數，濁必擯治。根不外彰，亦容參預故也。
次科，簡淨中，初三句簡定。文略自恣。以下，釋成，初釋說戒。上句制能說，下句制所聽。後釋懺罪。上句制能懺，下句制所受。問：一切羯磨，生善滅惡二門統收，如何分之？答：如諸悔罪治擯滅諍設諫等法，名為滅惡；已外一切，並號生善；昔見下云生善，便科此為滅惡；致令後學妄謂說恣同滅惡收。當知文中具明二種，說戒是生善，懺悔屬滅惡；有智考之，幸無混亂。
次通穢中，初正明。故下，引例有二。初律開白停僧殘，赴前受戒。二律中有人受戒已，疑和尚犯戒；有四句，三句不知皆得，後句知故不得，如次篇具引。薩下，引證。問：為約所為不知，為能秉互不知？答：且論受戒。所為之人不疑微犯，方得成法。若論能秉，唯據四重；各不相知，亦成法事。下篇具委，故此指之。