Lzh Dg Bu Vb Pc 76Obstructing a Legal Procedure

– DHARMAGUPTAKA VINAYA

– PĀCITTIYA

76. CONSENTING AND THEN RETRACTING

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was dwelling in the Anāthapiṇḍika Garden, Jeta's Grove, in the city of Sāvatthī. At that time, the group of six monks had committed an offense and, fearing that the Saṅgha would bring a formal charge against them, the six of them always kept together. At the time of the main meal, the light meal, when the Saṅgha assembled to hear the Dharma, or when the precepts were being recited, the six never separated from one another, so that the other monks had no opportunity to carry out a legal procedure.

After some time, the group of six monks were sewing robes. The other monks said to one another, "The group of six monks is currently here sewing robes. If we need to carry out a legal procedure, now is the moment."

The monks then sent one monk to summon them:

"The Saṅgha has business to attend to. Please come."

The group of six monks asked:

"What business does the Saṅgha have? We cannot stop sewing robes to come."

The Saṅgha replied:

"If you cannot come, then send one or two monks to convey your consent."

The group of six monks then sent one monk to convey their consent. The Saṅgha carried out a legal procedure concerning that one monk. When the legal procedure was concluded, that monk returned to where the group of six monks was staying. The group of six asked:

"What did the Saṅgha do?"

The monk replied:

"Something harmful to me."

The group of six asked:

"What was it that was harmful to you?"

He said:

"The Saṅgha carried out a legal procedure directed at me."

The group of six monks, having previously given their consent and now feeling regret, said:

"The Saṅgha carried out a legal procedure in this manner—that is not a valid legal procedure; the legal procedure is not properly formed. We gave consent for that matter, not for this matter."

The monks who heard this, among whom were those of few desires and contentment, who practiced the austere practices, who were fond of training in the precepts and who had a sense of shame and remorse, criticized the group of six monks:

"Why did you give consent and then afterward retract it, saying: 'We gave consent for that matter, not for this matter'?"

The monks went to the Blessed One, paid homage at his feet, and sat to one side. They then reported this entire matter to the Blessed One. The Blessed One, on account of this matter, assembled the community of monks and rebuked the group of six monks:

"What you have done is wrong, not in accordance with proper conduct, not in accordance with the way of a samaṇa, not in accordance with pure practice, not in accordance with proper behavior—it is something that should not have been done. Why did you, having already given your consent, afterward retract it, saying: 'I gave consent for this matter, not for that matter'?"

Having rebuked the group of six monks with numerous skillful means, the Blessed One said to the monks:

"These foolish men are a field in which many defiled seeds are planted; they are the first to commit this offense. From this day forward, I shall lay down a rule for the monks, comprising ten principles, up to and including the principle of the long endurance of the true Dharma."

The rule should be stated as follows:

Whatever monk gives consent and then retracts it, it is a pācittiya.

B. THE ANALYSIS OF THE RULE

Monk: as defined above.

If a monk gives consent and then retracts it, saying: "The legal procedure you carried out is not a valid legal procedure; the legal procedure is not properly formed. I gave consent for that matter, not for this matter"—if stated clearly, it is a pācittiya; if stated unclearly, it is a dukkaṭa.

For a bhikkhunī, it is a pācittiya. For a sikkhāmānā, a sāmaṇera, or a sāmaṇerī, it is a dukkaṭa. This is called an offense.

Non-offense: If it is truly the case that the legal procedure is invalid and not properly formed, and one speaks accordingly—if the legal procedure is truly invalid and not properly formed, there is no offense. Or if one speaks in jest, speaks hastily, speaks to oneself, speaks in a dream, intends to speak of one thing but mistakenly speaks of another—in all such cases there is no offense.

Those who do not commit an offense: one who is the first offender before the rule was promulgated, one who is insane, one whose mind is deranged, one who is afflicted with severe pain, one who is compelled by force.

Vietnamese translation: Bhikkhu Thích Đỗng Minh and Thích Đức Thắng. DHARMAGUPTAKA VINAYA, PART ONE.

Chinese translation: Tripiṭaka masters Buddhayaśas and Zhu Fonian.

Edited and annotated by: Bhikkhu Thích Nguyên Chứng.

(Chinese translation, volumes 1–21; Vietnamese translation, volumes 1–2)

Buddhist Studies Editorial Board, 2002.