English
The offense occurs when a Sanghika offense of abandonment arises from being separated from the three: the samghati, the uttarasanga, and the antarvasaka. This is about establishing the Sanghika offense of possession. "One night" refers to one day and night. "Also" refers to the second, and so on. "More than three" refers to those that have been blessed: the samghati, the uttarasanga, and the antarvasaka. Mentioning "any one" is to negate the general nature. "If it is separated outside the boundary" means that from the place where the Dharma garment is kept, the Dharma garment is abandoned, and dawn breaks elsewhere. Except for the permission of the Sangha, if it is not a rule established by the Sangha, the offense will occur elsewhere, which is a summary statement. For example, for the sake of the venerable Mahakasyapa and Sariputra who were old and infirm, it is like the Sangha granting the convenience of not being separated from the heavy samghati. Such a cause, if there is a cause such as being robbed by thieves, then the fault of dawn breaking while separated from the blessed Dharma garment is the cause of completely abandoning the nature of self. The meaning of "a monk, for a while, by a Bhikshu Sangha," and so on, is this: the Sangha has two natures: a nature of distinct individuals and a nature of non-distinct individuals. Among them, for a while, for the property of the Sangha with a nature of distinct individuals, the Sanghika offenses of abandonment due to causes such as possession, separation, and placement will arise, and only the offenses of downfall will arise. In this way, all those who belong to the Sangha with a nature of non-distinct individuals are in a state where each individual possesses the ownership of that property. For the Sangha with a nature of non-distinct individuals, no one has autonomy, therefore, the Sanghika offenses of abandonment due to reasons such as possession and placement, and the reason for separation are also impossible. If asked, how is the reason for separation impossible? Because for the Sangha with a nature of non-distinct individuals, it is impossible to bless, and the fault of separation from the unblessed is also not appropriate, because the property of the Sangha with a nature of non-distinct individuals
Chinese
如果衣服被某一个人加持过，那么就仅仅是分离，而不是舍弃。如果问为什么在这里不会变成舍弃呢？分离是指放弃自己所拥有的东西，这也是为了摆脱对“这是我自己的”这种牢固执着的想法。然而，对于那些没有“这是我自己的”这种牢固执着的人来说，他们并不需要舍弃的本质上的分离，因此对他们来说没有舍弃。其他的持律者并不赞同这种观点。比如，对于已经分裂的僧团或尚未分裂的僧团来说，一部分是为了权力，一部分则会产生“这是我自己的”的想法，但不是所有部分都这样。对于一部分产生“这是我自己的”想法的情况，剩余的部分也不允许要求堕罪，因为他们没有“这是我自己的”的想法。不仅如此，因为尚未分裂的僧团会毫无差别地产生“这是我自己的”的想法，所以僧团从这两种情况来看都不会变成舍弃。僧团借用或以其他方式暂时占有，比如持有、放置或加持，在所有这些情况下，因为是暂时性的占有，所以会因此而产生堕罪。因此，无论是已经分裂的僧团还是尚未分裂的僧团，如果有人将某物据为己有并持有，那就会构成舍弃。这里，如果僧团的法衣在加持后要拿到结界之外，那么圣者近护就普遍依赖于僧团的法衣，世尊也普遍回答说“这叫做与法衣分离”。提到“僧团的”，是为了说明“如何与法衣分离”，就像提到与法衣分离是持有等的例子一样，这也是其他衣服的例子。因为那是别人的东西，因为暂时性的占有并不牢固，而且舍弃也是为了断除牢固的占有。因为这在所有情况下都是一样的，所以是僧团的。
English
If a robe is blessed by a single person, then it is merely separation, not abandonment. If asked why it does not become abandonment here, separation means abandoning what one possesses, and this is to act to move away from the attachment of considering it as one's own. However, for those who do not have the attachment of considering it as strongly their own, they do not need the separation of the essence of abandonment, so there is no abandonment for them. Other Vinaya holders do not agree with this view. For example, whether it is a divided Sangha or an undivided Sangha, some parts are for power, and some parts have the idea of 'this is my own,' but not all parts do. For those parts that have the idea of 'this is my own,' the remaining parts are not allowed to demand confession of offenses, because they do not have the idea of 'this is my own.' Not only that, because the undivided Sangha has the idea of 'this is my own' without distinction, the Sangha does not become abandonment from either of these two situations. When the Sangha borrows or otherwise temporarily possesses something, such as holding, placing, or blessing, in all these cases, because it is a temporary possession, offenses will arise from it. Therefore, whether it is a divided Sangha or an undivided Sangha, if someone takes something as their own and holds it, then it constitutes abandonment. Here, if the Sangha's robe is blessed and then taken outside the boundary, the venerable Ananda generally relies on the Sangha's robe, and the Blessed One also generally answers, 'This is called separation from the robe.' Mentioning 'of the Sangha' is to explain 'how to separate from the robe,' just as mentioning separation from the robe is an example of holding, etc., and it is also an example of other robes. Because it belongs to others, because temporary possession is not firm, and abandonment is also to cut off firm possession. Because this is the same in all cases, it is of the Sangha.
Chinese
所谓的“等”字，应理解为包括其他一切。压是指双脚。抓是指树木等。站立是指站起来。行是指行走等。界限之间是指各个界限的中间。在界限之内有“存在”等说法。所谓“划定界限”，是指以达到三又二分之一踰缮那的界限，通过祈请和二种行为，将其变为自己的。所谓“不与法衣相违背的誓言未给予”，是为了避免居住在别处，以及舍弃与法衣分离。对此，僧团未给予认可。对于已经划定界限的，则会成为具备达到三又二分之一踰缮那尽头的界限之内。对于具备界限之内的，则给予不与法衣分离的誓言。因为这里说，如果给予誓言，则不会与法衣分离。这个不分离的誓言，不是为了年老和有病的人而给予的，而是普遍的。例如，从“那位比丘因被携带而感到厌烦”开始，到世尊开示“因此，对比丘们给予不与法衣分离的誓言，是允许的”为止。因此，划定界限后，在那达到三又二分之一踰缮那尽头的界限内，那位比丘也住在界限内，法衣也住在界限内。即使已经划定了界限，但没有给予不与法衣分离的誓言，那么他就会与此分离。就像划定界限是不分离誓言的所依，不分离的誓言是所依靠的。因此，如果没有划定界限，如果给予不分离的誓言，那时不会成立。因为有“在未划定地基界限的情况下，给予不分离的誓言，不会成立”的说法。近处是指周围。在划定界限的寺庙里，只有放置法衣的边缘，连同近处一起的界限才是界限。划定界限是指放置。因为有“边缘是界限”的说法。门廊是指门的台阶。小屋是
English
The so-called "etc." should be understood as including everything else. Pressing refers to the two feet. Grasping refers to trees and the like. Standing refers to standing up. Walking refers to walking and the like. Between the boundaries refers to the middle of each boundary. Within the boundary, there are statements such as "existing." The so-called "delimiting the boundary" refers to making it one's own by reaching the boundary of three and a half yojanas, through supplication and two actions. The so-called "the vow not to conflict with the Dharma robe has not been given" is to avoid residing elsewhere and abandoning separation from the Dharma robes. To this, the Sangha has not given approval. For those who have delimited the boundary, they will become possessed of being within the boundary reaching the end of three and a half yojanas. For those who possess within the boundary, the vow not to be separated from the Dharma robes is given. Because it is said here that if the vow is given, it will not be separated from the Dharma robes. This vow of non-separation is not given for the elderly and the sick, but is universal. For example, from "that bhikkhu became weary of being carried" to the Blessed One's instruction, "Therefore, giving the vow of non-separation from the Dharma robes to the bhikkhus is permitted." Therefore, after delimiting the boundary, within that boundary reaching the end of three and a half yojanas, that bhikkhu also resides within the boundary, and the Dharma robes also reside within the boundary. Even if the boundary has been delimited, but the vow of non-separation from the Dharma robes has not been given, then he will be separated from this. Just as delimiting the boundary is the basis of the non-separation vow, and the non-separation vow is what is relied upon. Therefore, if the boundary has not been delimited, if the non-separation vow is given, it will not be established at that time. Because there is the saying, "Giving the non-separation vow without delimiting the foundation boundary will not be established." Near refers to the surroundings. In the monastery where the boundary has been delimited, only the edge where the Dharma robes are placed, together with the nearby boundary, is the boundary. Delimiting the boundary refers to placing. Because there is the saying, "The edge is the boundary." The porch refers to the steps of the door. The small room is
Chinese
是小房子啊。比丘所普遍使用的，是比丘所需要的。墙壁是最好的。倾斜的遮蔽是用树枝等做成的形状。坑是挖掘出来的。上面的覆盖物是用木板等覆盖的，用木板等盖住屋顶的叫做词语。外道只是各种各样，等等，因为观点不同，所以它们的处所也是不同的。兄弟分了财产的，是指门打开的那些，因为财产不同，所以它们的处所也是不同的。对于比丘尼来说，五件法衣是指僧裙、上衣、下裙、木制肩架和尘拂。在请问的经文中，有些这样说：比丘将法衣放在外道的地基上，僧团的地基住在同一个附近，如果这样做不会犯堕罪， 有什么吗？是这样的，就像和外道一起拥有一样。同样，对于树木也应该这样说。其中的意思是这样的：外道的地基是外道的处所。僧团的地基是僧团的寺庙。同一个附近是指附近的联系，是附近不分离的意思。如果变成拥有，这里所说的拥有，应该理解为比丘们和外道们共同的想法，而不是行为的本质，因为他们拥有在一起是不能允许的。同样，对于树木也应该这样说，就像地基和外道一起拥有一样，拥有树木和那个是相似的意思。像这样，虽然其他外道占据了所说的没有堕罪的地基，但是，比丘们自己所拥有的那部分是不会消失的，这个意思就是这样使用的。如果只有一个人拥有，而不是两个人，那么那时就会变成不同的，应该这样理解。在请问的经文中，有些还说，如果尊者暂时和寺庙附近的地方有联系，那么他应该如何对待法衣和
English
It is a small house. What is commonly used by monks is what monks need. The wall is the best. The leaning shade is a shape made from branches and the like. The pit is dug out. The top covering is a covering made of wooden boards and the like, and the word for covering the roof with wooden boards and the like is called. Non-Buddhists are just various, etc., because of different views, their places are also different. Those who have divided the property of their brothers refer to those whose doors are open, and because the property is different, their places are also different. For nuns, the five Dharma robes refer to the samghati, the upper robe, the lower robe, the wooden shoulder frame, and the dust cloth. In some of the requested texts, it says this: If a monk places his Dharma robe on the foundation of a non-Buddhist, and the foundation of the Sangha dwells in the same vicinity, if he does so, he will not commit a transgression, Is there anything? It is so, just like owning it together with non-Buddhists. Likewise, it should be said of trees as well. The meaning of this is this: The foundation of a non-Buddhist is the place of a non-Buddhist. The foundation of the Sangha is the monastery of the Sangha. The same vicinity refers to the nearby connection, which means that the vicinity is not separated. If it becomes ownership, the ownership mentioned here should be understood as the common thought of the monks and non-Buddhists, not the essence of the action, because it is not permissible for them to own it together. Likewise, it should be said of trees as well, just as the foundation is owned together with non-Buddhists, owning trees is similar to that. In this way, although other non-Buddhists occupy the foundation that is said to be free from transgression, nevertheless, the part that the monks themselves own will not disappear, and this is the meaning of this usage. If only one person owns it, and not two, then it will become different at that time, and it should be understood in this way. In some of the requested texts, it is also said that if a venerable one is temporarily connected to a place near a monastery, then how should he treat the Dharma robe and