Lzh Dg Bu Vb Ss 9Making an Accusation Out of Anger on an Irrelevant Pretext

– FOUR-PART VINAYA

– SANGHADISESA

9. FALSE ACCUSATION ON AN IRRELEVANT PRETEXT

A. ORIGIN OF THE RULE

At one time, the Buddha was dwelling on Gijjhakūṭa Mountain, at Rājagaha. At that time, the bhikkhu Mettiya, descending from Gijjhakūṭa Mountain, saw a large male goat copulating with a female goat. Upon seeing this, they spoke among themselves, saying:

"This male goat is Dabba Mallaputta. This female goat is the bhikkhunī Mettiyā. Now we shall say to the bhikkhus: 'Previously, I falsely accused Dabba Mallaputta on the basis of an unsubstantiated report. Now we have seen with our own eyes Dabba Mallaputta engaging in sexual intercourse with the bhikkhunī Mettiyā.'"

Thereupon they went to where the bhikkhus were and said:

"Previously, I falsely accused Dabba Mallaputta on the basis of an unsubstantiated report. Now we have seen with our own eyes Dabba Mallaputta engaging in sexual intercourse with the bhikkhunī Mettiyā."

The bhikkhus asked:

"What is the meaning of this? You should not falsely accuse Dabba Mallaputta, who is a practitioner of the holy life, by means of an unsubstantiated charge. To falsely accuse a practitioner of the holy life on unsubstantiated grounds incurs an extremely grave offense."

At that time, the bhikkhu Mettiya, having been questioned by the bhikkhus, then said:

"Dabba Mallaputta has done no such thing. He is a pure person. Just now, as we were descending from Gijjhakūṭa Mountain, we saw a male goat copulating with a female goat, and so we said among ourselves: 'This male goat is Dabba Mallaputta. This female goat is the bhikkhunī Mettiyā. Today we have seen this with our own eyes. We will go to the bhikkhus and report: Previously, I falsely accused Dabba Mallaputta by means of an unsubstantiated report. Now I have seen with my own eyes Dabba Mallaputta engaging in sexual intercourse with the bhikkhunī.' However, Dabba Mallaputta is a pure person. In truth, no such thing occurred."

Among the bhikkhus who heard this, those of few desires, contentment, who practiced the austere dhutaṅga practices, were fond of training in the precepts, and were endowed with a sense of shame and remorse, reproached the bhikkhu Mettiya:

"Why did you falsely accuse Dabba Mallaputta, who is a pure person, with an unsubstantiated pārājika charge, based on an irrelevant matter from another case?"

The bhikkhus then went to where the Blessed One was, paid homage at his feet, sat to one side, and reported this entire matter to the Blessed One in full.

The Blessed One, on account of this matter, convened an assembly of the Sangha of bhikkhus, and by means of countless skillful methods rebuked the bhikkhu Mettiya:

"What you have done is wrong, is not proper conduct, is not in keeping with the way of a samaṇa, is not pure conduct, is not fitting behavior, and is something that should not have been done. Dabba Mallaputta is a practitioner of the holy life. Why did you falsely accuse Dabba Mallaputta with an unsubstantiated pārājika charge based on an irrelevant matter from another case?"

Having rebuked the bhikkhu Mettiya, the Blessed One then said to the bhikkhus:

"This bhikkhu Mettiya is a foolish person, a field in which many seeds of the āsavas are planted, and he is the first to commit this offense. From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, I shall lay down this rule, gathering together the ten bases of meaning, up to and including the purpose of causing the true Dharma to endure long."

Wishing to recite the rule, it should be recited thus:

B. THE RULE

Should any bhikkhu, out of anger, relying on a minor detail from an irrelevant matter, falsely accuse a bhikkhu—who has not committed a pārājika—with an unsubstantiated pārājika charge, wishing thereby to destroy that bhikkhu's life of holy conduct; and if afterward, whether questioned or not questioned, that matter becomes known to have been based on a minor detail from an irrelevant matter, and that bhikkhu himself says: "I said so out of hatred"—any bhikkhu who speaks in such a way: saṅghādisesa.

C. EXPLANATION OF TERMS

Bhikkhu: the meaning is as above.

Anger: as previously explained.

Irrelevant matter: a bhikkhu has committed a pārājika, and one says one saw him commit a pārājika—falsely accusing him on unsubstantiated grounds pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

D. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If a bhikkhu has not committed a pārājika but is said to have committed one: saṅghādisesa.

To falsely accuse by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a bhikkhu has not committed a pārājika, but one has seen him commit a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a thullaccaya, a dukkaṭa, or an offense of wrong speech, and falsely accuses him with an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a bhikkhu has committed a saṅghādisesa, but one says he has committed a pārājika, and falsely accuses him by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a bhikkhu has committed a saṅghādisesa, but one says he has committed a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a thullaccaya, a dukkaṭa, or an offense of wrong speech, and falsely accuses him by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If an impure person resembles another impure person—sharing the same name, same family name, same characteristics—and one takes the matter of one person and falsely accuses the other by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If an impure person resembles a pure person—sharing the same name, same family name, same characteristics—and one takes the matter of one person and falsely accuses the other by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a pure person resembles an impure person—sharing the same name, same family name, same characteristics—and one takes the matter of one person and falsely accuses the other by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a pure person resembles another pure person—sharing the same name, same family name, same characteristics—and one takes the matter of one person and falsely accuses the other by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

Or if one has seen that person, while still a layperson, commit sexual misconduct, steal five coins or more than five coins, or kill a person, and then says to others: "I saw that bhikkhu commit sexual misconduct, steal five coins, steal more than five coins, and I heard that he killed a person"—falsely accusing him by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

Or if one has heard that a person, while still a layperson, committed sexual misconduct, heard that he stole five coins or more than five coins, heard that he killed a person, heard that he falsely claimed to have attained a superhuman state, and then says: "I have heard that that person committed sexual misconduct, I have heard that he stole five coins or more than five coins, I have heard that he killed a person, I have heard that he falsely claimed to have attained a superhuman state"—falsely accusing him by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a bhikkhu himself says he has heard a rumor saying: "I committed sexual misconduct; it is heard that I stole five coins or more than five coins; it is heard that I killed a person; it is heard that I falsely claimed to have attained a superhuman state"—falsely accusing by means of an unsubstantiated pārājika charge pertaining to an irrelevant matter: saṅghādisesa.

If a bhikkhu, by means of four kinds of unsubstantiated charges pertaining to irrelevant matters, falsely accuses a bhikkhu—if said clearly: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if said unclearly: thullaccaya is incurred. If he uses hand signs, or writes a letter, or sends a messenger, or makes a sign that is recognized and clearly understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not clearly understood: thullaccaya is incurred.

Apart from the four pārājikas, if by means of other non-bhikkhu grounds, unsubstantiated and pertaining to an irrelevant matter, one makes a defamatory accusation, saying: "You have committed an offense causing exclusion from the borders," and so forth through the case of a hermaphrodite, in the manner detailed above—if the statement is understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred. If by means of hand signs, letters, a messenger, or signals, if understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred.

Apart from the above matters, if other unsubstantiated grounds pertaining to irrelevant matters are used to falsely accuse a bhikkhu, the offense incurred corresponds to what is stated above.

If a bhikkhu, by means of the eight unsubstantiated pārājika charges pertaining to irrelevant matters, falsely accuses a bhikkhunī—if said and understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred. If by means of hand signs, letters, a messenger, or signals, if understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred.

Apart from the eight pārājikas, if by means of other non-bhikkhunī grounds pertaining to irrelevant matters one makes a false accusation, and the statement is understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred. If by means of hand signs, letters, a messenger, or signals, if understood: saṅghādisesa is incurred; if not understood: thullaccaya is incurred. Apart from non-bhikkhunī offenses, if other unsubstantiated grounds pertaining to irrelevant matters are used to falsely accuse a bhikkhunī, the offense incurred corresponds to the circumstances.

Apart from falsely accusing a bhikkhu or a bhikkhunī, if unsubstantiated grounds pertaining to irrelevant matters are used to falsely accuse another person: dukkaṭa is incurred.

For a bhikkhunī: saṅghādisesa. For a sikkhāmānā, a sāmaṇera, or a sāmaṇerī: dukkaṭa. These are called offenses.

Non-offenses: speaking truthfully on the basis of what one has seen, heard, or suspected; speaking in jest; speaking hastily; speaking to oneself; speaking in a dream; intending to say one thing but saying another by mistake — in such cases there is no offense.

Those who do not commit an offense: the first offender before the rule was established; one who is insane, mentally deranged, or in extreme pain and distress.

---

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: Bhikkhu Thích Nguyên Chứng

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

Buddhist Studies Editorial Board, 2002