Lzh Sarv Bu Pm 2 Pc 34Eating More After Refusing an Invitation

Eating More After Refusing an Invitation

Comparative Vinaya: Chinese | Number: Lzh Sarv Bu Pm 2 Pc 34 | Sectarian Tradition · Comparative

---

Source Status

This text belongs to the Chinese Comparative Vinaya corpus in the Sectarian Canonical tradition, recorded under the designation Lzh Sarv Bu Pm 2 Pc 34. It is a training rule (sikkhāpada) in the Pācittiya section, that is, the group of rules requiring confession, of the law code belonging to the Sarvāstivāda tradition, preserved through the Chinese text.

The original full Chinese text of this specific training rule has not yet been directly collated in the database on which this explanation is based. Therefore, what is presented below is built on the supplied descriptive information together with general knowledge of the structure of sectarian Vinaya and related terminology; it is not a translation or quotation of the full source text. Readers should note this when using the material for specialized research.

---

Background

The recorded Pāli/Sanskrit title is Pavāraṇā, an important term in the communal life of the Sangha. In a broad sense, pavāraṇā may refer to the act of “inviting” or “offering according to one’s wish,” but in the context of this training rule it is understood specifically as the act of accepting or refusing an invitation to receive food offerings.

In the way of life of renunciants according to the Vinaya, when a donor invites a monastic to eat and asks about their need for food, the bhikkhu has the responsibility to answer truthfully. If he has said that he has had enough, that is, has declined the invitation to be given more, and then afterward continues to eat more, that act is regarded as a violation of the rule. This is the basis of Pācittiya rule number 34 in the Sarvāstivāda code, according to the numbering in this Chinese comparative system.

It is noteworthy that there is a certain similarity between this training rule and regulations in the law codes of other schools, such as the Pāli Vinaya of the Theravāda or the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, on the same subject of taking food and invitations. However, because this is the Chinese Sarvāstivāda version, details concerning the conditions for an offense, exceptions, and the form of confession may differ from parallel traditions.

---

Content Identifiable from the Descriptive Information

From the Vietnamese title “Eating More After Refusing an Invitation,” the English title “Eating More After Refusing an Invitation,” and the term Pavāraṇā, the following core elements can be identified:

Regulated act: A bhikkhu has been asked by a donor and offered more food; he has refused, whether by words or an equivalent gesture, but afterward continues to eat more. The contradiction between the refusal and the actual action constitutes the offense.

Classification of the rule: This is a Pācittiya rule, a Ba-dật-đề, belonging to a class lighter than Pārājika or Saṅghādisesa, but still requiring the offender to acknowledge and confess before another bhikkhu in order to clear the fault.

Purpose of the rule: This rule is intended to maintain truthfulness and consistency in the speech and actions of renunciants, while also protecting the pure and proper relationship between the Sangha and supporting lay followers.

Tradition: Sarvāstivāda, the School That All Exists, was one of the influential Buddhist schools in Central Asia, India, and China, with its Vinaya preserved through Chinese translation and especially widespread in the history of Northern Buddhism.

---

Meaning for Practice and Study

This rule, though belonging to the category of daily discipline, contains a depth of practice worthy of contemplation.

First, truthfulness in speech and action. A practitioner takes moral conduct as the foundation, and moral conduct cannot be separated from truthfulness. When one has said “no,” one’s action must reflect that statement. Inconsistency between word and deed, even in a small matter such as taking food, is a sign of distraction, heedlessness, or lack of mindfulness.

Second, moderation in eating. The Vinayas of all schools place the matter of food within a framework of careful practice. Immoderate eating is one of the causes of dullness, heedlessness, and weakening of meditation. This rule reminds renunciants to maintain mindfulness even in moments of receiving offerings.

Third, protecting the faith of donors. Donors make offerings with reverence and faith. When a bhikkhu behaves inconsistently, this may create misunderstanding or harm the pure relationship between the two sides.

Fourth, its meaning in the context of comparative sectarian study. Studying this training rule within the comparative Vinaya system helps students see the basic agreement among the schools regarding ethical principles, while also understanding more about the development and differences of discipline according to each tradition and region.

---

Comparative Note

Because the full Chinese text of the training rule Lzh Sarv Bu Pm 2 Pc 34 has not been directly collated in the preparation of this explanation, all specific details regarding the conditions for an offense, exceptions, methods of confession, and explanations in the original code should be consulted in the corresponding Chinese Sarvāstivāda Vinaya text. Researchers should compare related texts in the Chinese sectarian Vinaya corpus in order to gain a more accurate and complete view.