Lzh Dg Bu Vb Pc 80Groundless Accusation

– FOUR-PART VINAYA

– PĀCITTIYA

80. GROUNDLESS ACCUSATION OF A SAṄGHĀDISESA OFFENSE.

A. ORIGIN STORY

At one time, the Buddha was dwelling in the Anāthapiṇḍika Garden, Jeta's Grove, in the country of Śrāvastī. At that time, the group of six bhikkhus, out of anger, groundlessly accused the group of seventeen bhikkhus of a saṅghādisesa offense.

At that time, the bhikkhus heard of this; among them were those of few desires, who were content, who practiced the ascetic virtues, who were fond of training in the precepts, and who had a sense of shame and remorse. They reproached the group of six bhikkhus: "Why do you, out of anger, groundlessly accuse the group of seventeen bhikkhus of a saṅghādisesa offense?"

The bhikkhus went to the place where the Blessed One was, paid homage at his feet, then sat to one side, and reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. The Blessed One thereupon, on account of this matter, convened the assembly of bhikkhus and rebuked the group of six bhikkhus:

"What you have done is wrong, not in accordance with proper conduct, not in accordance with the way of a śramaṇa, not in accordance with pure conduct, not in accordance with appropriate behavior — this is something that should not be done. Why did you, out of anger, use a groundless saṅghādisesa accusation to slander the group of seventeen bhikkhus?"

After the Blessed One had rebuked the group of six bhikkhus with numerous skillful means, he said to the bhikkhus:

"These foolish men are a field where many seeds of the āsavas are planted; they are the first to commit this offense. From this time forward, I shall lay down a precept for the bhikkhus, comprising ten principles of meaning, up to and including the perpetuation of the true Dharma for a long time."

The precept should be stated as follows:

Whatever bhikkhu, out of anger, groundlessly accuses another bhikkhu of a saṅghādisesa offense — pācittiya.

B. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

Bhikkhu: as explained above.

Basis: there are three: evidence based on seeing, on hearing, and on suspicion.

—Evidence based on seeing: having actually seen him engage in sexual misconduct and emit semen; or having seen him make bodily contact with a woman; or having seen him speak coarse and offensive words to a woman; or having seen him praise his own body before a woman; or having seen him acting as a go-between. Or another person has seen it and one hears it from that person. This is called evidence based on seeing.

—Evidence based on hearing: having heard that he engaged in sexual misconduct and emitted semen; or that he was physically intimate with a woman; or having heard that he spoke coarse and offensive words to a woman; or having heard that he praised his own body before a woman; or having heard that he acted as a go-between. Or another person has heard it and one hears it from that person. This is called evidence based on hearing.

—Evidence based on suspicion from hearing: there are two conditions that give rise to suspicion: suspicion arising from seeing, and suspicion arising from hearing.

What is suspicion arising from seeing? Seeing that person together with a woman coming out of a forest or going into a forest; or seeing him naked without his robes, with impure substance discharged and soiling his body; or seeing him associating with an evil companion, or frolicking together. This is called suspicion arising from seeing.

What is suspicion arising from hearing? Hearing sounds in that place — hearing the sound of a bed, the sound of a grass mattress, the sound of heavy breathing, the sound of speech, the sound of sexual intercourse; or hearing that person say of himself: "I committed an emission of semen. I made bodily contact with a woman. I spoke coarse and offensive words to a woman. I praised my own body before a woman. I acted as a go-between for a man and a woman." When one gives rise to suspicion upon hearing such things.

Apart from these three bases, using any other matter to make an accusation — this is called groundless. Whatever bhikkhu, out of anger, groundlessly accuses another of a saṅghādisesa offense: if the accusation is stated explicitly, it is a pācittiya offense; if stated inexplicitly, it is a duṣkṛta offense.

For a bhikkhunī, it is a pācittiya offense. For a śikṣamāṇā, a śrāmaṇera, or a śrāmaṇerī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. These are called offenses.

Non-offense: if there is seeing, hearing, or suspicion, and one speaks in accordance with the truth, wishing the other person to feel remorse and not making a false accusation; or if one speaks in jest, speaks hastily, speaks to oneself, speaks in a dream, or intends to say one thing but mistakenly says another — there is no offense.

Those who do not commit an offense: one who commits it for the first time before the rule was established; one who is mentally deranged; one whose mind is disturbed; one who is afflicted with pain and suffering.

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

Chinese translation: Tripiṭaka masters Buddhayaśas and Zhu Fonian.

Revised and annotated by: Bhikkhu Thích Nguyên Chứng

(Chinese translation, fascicles 1–21; Vietnamese translation, fascicles 1 and 2)

Dharma Publication Committee, 2002