彌沙塞部和醯五分律

THE FIVE-PART VINAYA OF THE MAHĪŚĀSAKA SCHOOL — VOLUME 13

FASCICLE 13
Part 2: PRECEPTS FOR BHIKSHUNIS
Section 4: THE TWO HUNDRED AND SEVEN PĀCITTIYA RULES (Continued)
At that time, the bhikshunis did not enter the rains retreat but traveled among the people. They either encountered bands of robbers in the eighth month or met with calamities of flood and fire. When the elder bhikshunis saw this, they reproached them in every way: “How can you be called bhikshunis when you do not observe the rains retreat?” This continued up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above).

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who does not observe the rains retreat commits a Pācittiya offense.” There are two kinds of rains retreat: the earlier rains retreat and the later rains retreat. If, without any compelling circumstance, she waits until the later rains retreat, she commits a Dukkaṭa offense. A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If any of the eight calamities arises, there is no offense.

The ninety rules have now been stated.

At that time, the bhikshunis observed the rains retreat in a place where there was no community of bhikshus. They had various doubts: whether or not they should confer ordination, whether or not they should permit someone to receive the precepts, and whether robes were sewn in accordance with the Dharma or not. Having such doubts regarding the Vinaya, they did not know whom to ask, and they were also despised, oppressed, and intimidated by wicked people and non-Buddhist ascetics.

When the elder bhikshunis saw this, they severely reproached them and then reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both communities of the Sangha and asked the bhikshunis: “Did you actually do this?” They replied: “Blessed One, it is true.” The Buddha reproached them in every way, saying: “Did I not previously teach among the eight principles of respect that bhikshunis must depend upon a community of bhikshus when observing the rains retreat?” After reproaching them, the Buddha told the bhikshus: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis.

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘Any bhikshuni who observes the rains retreat without depending upon a community of bhikshus commits a Pācittiya offense.’” Even if she depends upon a community of bhikshus, if there is no one to instruct her, she commits a Dukkaṭa offense. A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense. If, during the rains retreat, the community of bhikshus moves away, dies, abandons the practice, is compelled by force, or becomes ill, there is no offense.

At that time, although the bhikshunis had entered the rains retreat, they still traveled about and consequently encountered calamities such as fire and robbers. When the elder bhikshunis saw this, they reproached them in every way, continuing up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who travels during the rains retreat commits a Pācittiya offense.” Regarding travel: if she goes from one village to another, or, where there are no villages, travels half a yojana, she commits a Pācittiya offense. A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense. If any of the eight calamities arises, there is no offense.

At that time, after completing the rains retreat, the bhikshunis did not go before the Bhikshu Sangha to invite admonition concerning offenses seen, heard, or suspected. Since there was no one to instruct them, they were unable to study the Vinaya and remained ignorant and without understanding. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they severely reproached them and then reported the matter to the Buddha.

On account of this, the Buddha assembled both communities of the Sangha and asked the bhikshunis: “Did you actually do this?” They replied: “Blessed One, it is true.” The Buddha reproached them in every way, saying: “Did I not previously teach among the eight principles of respect that, after completing the rains retreat, bhikshunis should go before the community of bhikshus and invite admonition concerning offenses seen, heard, or suspected?” After reproaching them, the Buddha told the bhikshus: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis.

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘Any bhikshuni who, after completing the rains retreat, does not go before the Bhikshu Sangha to invite admonition concerning offenses seen, heard, or suspected commits a Pācittiya offense.’” If the Sangha is not harmonious and cannot assemble, or if any of the eight calamities occurs, there is no offense.

At that time, certain householders invited the bhikshuni Saima to observe the rains retreat in the city of Śrāvastī, saying: “If you accept our invitation, we shall provide for you as appropriate.” After accepting their invitation, Saima went there and remained continually without leaving. The householders complained: “We have many duties to perform, yet this bhikshuni neither knows how to exercise moderation nor knows when to depart.

These people constantly speak of having few desires and knowing contentment, yet she now knows no satisfaction.” When the elder bhikshunis heard this, they severely reproached her, continuing up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who, having accepted an invitation to observe the rains retreat, remains for one night after it has ended without departing commits a Pācittiya offense.” A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense.

If she is ill, is threatened, the term of the invitation has not yet expired, or the place was not where she had accepted the invitation to observe the rains retreat, then there is no offense in not departing.

At that time, bhikshunis traveled within the country through places where there was danger and no protector, and they were robbed by wicked people. When the elder bhikshunis heard this, they severely reproached them, continuing up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who, while within the country, travels alone through a dangerous place without anyone upon whom she may rely commits a Pācittiya offense.” Even if many bhikshunis travel together, if they are not accompanied by a strong layperson, this is called traveling alone.

If she goes from one village to another, or, where there are no villages, travels half a yojana, she commits a Pācittiya offense. A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense. If an urgent danger arises and she must flee, there is no offense.

At that time, bhikshunis traveled beyond the borders of the country through places where there was danger and likewise no protector, and they were robbed by wicked people. This continued up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who, while outside the country, travels alone through a dangerous place without anyone upon whom she may rely commits a Pācittiya offense.” (The remainder is as stated above.)

At that time, the bhikshunis observed the rains retreat at the monastery built by the mother of Viśākhā. After completing the rains retreat, they entrusted the monastery to no one and departed, leaving it unattended. Later, the monastery caught fire.

Someone saw it and went to inform the mother of Viśākhā: “The monastery that you built for the bhikshunis is on fire.” The mother of Viśākhā sent her servants to extinguish the fire, and thus it was not completely burned down. Afterward, when the bhikshunis returned, the mother of Viśākhā asked: “Were any of your belongings burned?” The bhikshunis replied: “Such-and-such things of ours were burned.” A great many of their surplus requisites had been burned.

The mother of Viśākhā censured them, saying: “Why did you observe the rains retreat at my monastery and then depart without entrusting it to anyone, causing it to catch fire and so many surplus requisites to be burned?” When the elder bhikshunis heard this, they severely reproached them, continuing up to the statement: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “Any bhikshuni who, after completing the rains retreat, departs without entrusting the monastery to anyone commits a Pācittiya offense.” If, without entrusting it to anyone, she steps one foot beyond the gate, she commits a Dukkaṭa offense; if she steps both feet beyond the gate, she commits a Pācittiya offense.

A śikṣamāṇā or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense. If no bhikshu or bhikshuni comes to reside there, or if there is no one to whom the monastery can be entrusted, there is no offense.

At that time, after observing the rains retreat at the monastery of the mother of Viśākhā, the bhikshunis departed without formally returning the monastery to her. Later, the monastery caught fire. Someone saw it and said to the mother of Viśākhā: “The monastery that you built for the bhikshunis has caught fire.” The mother of Viśākhā said: “Let it burn completely. Previously, the bhikshunis departed without entrusting it to anyone. After it burned, they returned and said that far too many of their surplus requisites had been destroyed, thereby giving me a bad reputation.” When those bhikshunis later returned, the mother of Viśākhā asked: “When you departed, did you leave any belongings in the monastery?” The bhikshunis replied: “No.”

The donor reproached them, saying, “Why did you leave without returning the monastery to me, allowing it to be completely destroyed by fire like this? Had you informed me, I would have protected it, and it would not have burned down in this way!” When the elder bhikkhunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I shall establish a precept” (as above).

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikkhuni, after completing the rains retreat, departs without returning the monastery to its donor, she commits a Pacittiya offense” (the remainder is as stated above).

At that time, some bhikkhunis went sightseeing in the royal palace and its exhibition halls, and then visited various places of amusement, including flower gardens and the banks of ponds. Large crowds had gathered at these places to view the sights. The bhikkhunis said to the young men, “Could you move aside a little and not come near us?” The young men replied, “You inauspicious, shaven-headed women, dressed in cut-up robes, ought not to have come here.

Since you have come here, you must be seeking young men; why then do you tell us to keep away?” The young men then seized their hands and dragged them about, speaking coarse and lustful words. When the elder bhikkhunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I shall establish a precept” (as above). Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikkhuni goes sightseeing at various attractions, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” If she forms the intention to go and makes preparations, she commits a Dukkata offense.

Once she sets out, she commits one Pacittiya offense with every step. A sikkhamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If she goes to see something for a purpose other than amusement, there is no offense.

At that time, when the bhikkhunis held the Uposatha every half-month, they did not go before the Bhikkhu Sangha to request a teacher to instruct them. Because no one instructed them in the precepts, they remained ignorant and knew nothing, and they were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikkhunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them and then reported the matter to the Buddha.

On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and asked the bhikkhunis, “Did you actually do this?” They replied, “Blessed One, it is true that we did.” After rebuking them in every way, the Buddha told the bhikkhunis, “Did I not previously teach the eight principles of respect and instruct you to request a teacher every half-month?” After rebuking them, the Buddha told the bhikkhus, “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I shall establish a precept.

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni does not go before the Sangha every half-month to request a teacher to instruct her, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A sikkhamana or samaneri who does not request instruction must confess a Dukkata offense. If she requests instruction but cannot obtain it, or if she is ill, there is no offense.

The one hundred rules have now been expounded.

At that time, the bhikkhuni Saima passed away, and the bhikkhunis erected a stupa containing her remains within the bhikkhus’ monastic compound. Three times each day, Saima’s dependents came and circumambulated it, weeping and lamenting: “She who gave us the Dharma, who provided us with robes and food, beds and seats, sitting cloths, and medicines—how could she so suddenly depart from us forever!” The bhikkhus were distressed because this clamor interfered with their meditation and cultivation of the Way.

At that time, Venerable Upali came to the monastic compound and asked a resident bhikkhu, “What is that clamor?” The bhikkhu told him what had happened. Venerable Upali immediately ordered someone to demolish the stupa. When the bhikkhunis heard of this, they discussed among themselves: “Each of us shall take a staff and go beat that bhikkhu.

Any bhikkhuni who does not come will be expelled.” Having decided this, they took up their staffs and went to the monastic compound. When they saw a bhikkhu, they surrounded him and were about to strike him, but, realizing that he was not the one they sought, they desisted. They proceeded to a narrow lane, where they encountered Venerable Upali.

Standing before and behind him, they blocked his way and raised their staffs to strike him. Venerable Upali immediately used his spiritual power to fly to the Buddha and fully reported the matter. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and asked the bhikkhunis, “Did you actually do this?” They replied, “Blessed One, it is true that we did.” The Buddha rebuked the bhikkhunis in every way, saying, “Your conduct is contrary to the Dharma.

Why would bhikkhunis strike a bhikkhu?” After rebuking them, the Buddha told the bhikkhus, “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I shall establish a precept. Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni enters a bhikkhu residence, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’”

Some bhikkhunis traveling along a road saw a deserted monastic compound and wished to enter and pay homage, but they did not dare to do so. They reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and told the bhikkhus, “I now permit bhikkhunis to enter a deserted monastic compound. Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni enters a residence in which bhikkhus are present, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’”

Some bhikkhunis had a reason to enter a monastic compound but did not dare to do so. They reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and told the bhikkhus, “I now permit a bhikkhuni who has a reason to enter a monastic compound to inform a bhikkhu. Only after the bhikkhu has given permission may she enter. Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni enters a residence in which bhikkhus are present without informing a bhikkhu, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’”

Some bhikkhunis had a reason to enter a monastic compound, but the bhikkhus were either meditating or sleeping, so the bhikkhunis could not inform them. They reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and told the bhikkhus, “I now permit bhikkhunis to enter a monastic compound and inform a bhikkhu as soon as they see one. Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni enters a residence in which bhikkhus are present and, upon seeing a bhikkhu, fails to inform him, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’”

Some bhikkhunis, when confronted by an urgent danger, wished to flee into a monastic compound for refuge but did not dare to do so; consequently, they were either robbed by bandits or harmed by wild beasts. They reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and told the bhikkhus, “I now permit bhikkhunis, when confronted by an urgent danger, to enter a monastic compound as circumstances require.

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni enters a residence in which bhikkhus are present and, upon seeing a bhikkhu, fails to inform him, except when confronted by an urgent danger, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’ If she enters because she sees no bhikkhu and thus cannot inform one, she must approach and inform a bhikkhu as soon as she sees him. That bhikkhu should consider the circumstances: if she may appropriately be allowed to enter, he should permit her; if he considers that she should not be allowed to enter, he should not permit her.

If she sees a bhikkhu but does not inform him and enters without permission, she commits a Pacittiya offense. A sikkhamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis who had not yet completed twelve years in the Order accepted disciples. They were unable to instruct or supervise them, and their disciples remained ignorant, knew nothing, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikkhunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them, up to the words: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I shall establish a precept” (as above).

Henceforth, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikkhuni who has not completed twelve rains accepts a disciple, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” “Has not completed twelve years” means that twelve years have not passed since she received ordination. “Accepts a disciple” means that she serves as that person’s preceptor. If she forms the intention to accept a disciple, she commits a Dukkata offense from that point until the formal act with one motion and three proclamations has been completed.

Once the formal act with one motion and three proclamations is completed, the preceptor commits a Pacittiya offense, and the other members of the Bhikkhuni Sangha commit a Dukkata offense.

At that time, although some bhikkhunis had completed twelve years, they were mute or had speech impediments, were deaf or blind, suffered from many illnesses, and lacked understanding, yet they accepted disciples. They were unable to instruct or supervise them. Their disciples remained ignorant and without knowledge and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikkhunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them and then reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and asked the bhikkhunis, “Did you actually do this?” They replied, “Blessed One, it is true that we did.” After the Buddha had rebuked them in every way,

said: Why do bhikshunis who are mute, speech-impaired, deaf, blind, and afflicted with various illnesses take disciples when they are incapable of instructing or supervising them, causing their disciples to remain ignorant, knowing nothing and unable to train in the precepts? After rebuking them, the Buddha told the bhikshus: “I now permit the bhikshunis, through a motion and one proclamation, to authorize the taking of disciples.

That bhikshuni should enter the Bhikshuni Sangha, remove her footwear, arrange her robe to bare her right shoulder, kneel, join her palms, and declare:

‘May the A-di Sangha listen! I, the bhikshuni named... have completed twelve years and wish to take disciples. I have come to request from the Sangha the karma procedure authorizing me to take disciples. May the Bhikshuni Sangha kindly grant me the karma procedure authorizing me to take disciples.’

She should make this request three times. The bhikshunis should investigate and examine whether this bhikshuni is capable of taking disciples. If she is incapable, they should not grant her the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. If she is capable, they should grant it. The Bhikshuni Sangha should appoint a senior bhikshuni, or one equal in standing to a senior bhikshuni, who knows the Dharma and the Vinaya, to proclaim as follows:

‘May the A-di Sangha listen! This bhikshuni named... has completed twelve years and wishes to take the woman named... as her disciple. She has therefore come before the Sangha to request the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. The Sangha now grants her the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. If the Sangha is ready, let the Sangha give its consent. This is the motion.

‘May the A-di Sangha listen! This bhikshuni named... has completed twelve years and wishes to take the woman named... as her disciple. She has therefore come before the Sangha to request the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. The Sangha now grants her the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. Those A-di who consent shall remain silent. Whoever does not consent should speak.

‘The Sangha has now granted the bhikshuni named... the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples. The Sangha consents and therefore remains silent. Thus is this matter understood and thus is it upheld.’

“I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis. From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikshuni who has completed twelve years takes disciples without having been granted by the Sangha the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples, she commits a payattika offense.’” (The remainder is as explained above.)

At that time, the bhikshunis conferred full ordination upon married women who had not yet reached twelve years of age. Being ignorant and knowing nothing, they were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they severely rebuked them, up to the passage: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni confers full ordination upon a married woman who has not yet reached twelve years of age, she commits a payattika offense.” “Not yet reached twelve years of age” means that although she has been married, she has not yet reached twelve years of age. “Married” means that she has had relations with a man. (The remainder is as explained in the precept concerning taking disciples.)

At that time, the bhikshunis conferred full ordination upon married women who, although twelve years of age, were mute, speech-impaired, and afflicted with many illnesses. Being ignorant and unintelligent, they were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they severely rebuked them, up to the passage: “I now permit the bhikshunis, through a motion and three proclamations, to authorize a married woman who has reached twelve years of age to receive full ordination.”

The woman who wishes to receive full ordination should enter the Bhikshuni Sangha and declare: “May the A-di Sangha listen! I, named..., am married and have reached twelve years of age. I seek the preceptor named... and wish to receive full ordination. I have now come before the Sangha to request full ordination. May the Sangha kindly permit me to receive full ordination. I beseech the Sangha to have compassion for me.”

After she has made this request three times, the bhikshunis should investigate whether or not she should be permitted to receive ordination. If she should be permitted, the Bhikshuni Sangha should appoint a bhikshuni to perform the karma procedure, just as explained in the preceding precept. The Buddha told the bhikshus: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis. From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikshuni confers full ordination upon a married woman who has reached twelve years of age without the Sangha having performed the karma procedure granting permission, she commits a payattika offense.’” (The remainder is as explained in the precept concerning taking disciples.)

At that time, the bhikshunis permitted unmarried girls under eighteen years of age to undertake the training precepts. Being ignorant and knowing nothing, they were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the passage: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni permits an unmarried girl under eighteen years of age to undertake the training precepts, she commits a payattika offense.” An “unmarried girl” is one who has never had relations with a man. If one forms the intention and makes preparations, up until the karma procedure of a motion and one proclamation has not been completed, she commits a duskrita offense.

Once the karma procedure of a motion and one proclamation has been completed, the preceptor commits a payattika offense. All the other bhikshunis commit duskrita offenses.

At that time, the bhikshunis permitted unmarried girls who, although eighteen years of age, were deaf, speech-impaired, and afflicted with many illnesses to undertake the training precepts, up to the passage: “I now permit the bhikshunis, through a motion and one proclamation, to authorize an unmarried girl who has reached eighteen years of age to undertake the training precepts for two years.” The woman who wishes to undertake the training precepts should enter the Bhikshuni Sangha and declare:

“May the venerable Sangha listen! I am named..., and my preceptor is named... I have now come before the Sangha to request the training precepts for two years. May the A-di Sangha kindly permit me to undertake the training precepts for two years and have compassion for me.”

She should make this request three times. The bhikshunis should carefully investigate whether or not she should be permitted to undertake them. If she is to be permitted, they should appoint a bhikshuni to perform the karma procedure according to the preceding precept. The Buddha told the bhikshus: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis. From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikshuni permits an unmarried girl who has reached eighteen years of age to undertake the training precepts without the Sangha having performed the karma procedure, she commits a payattika offense.’” (The remainder is as explained in the preceding precept.)

At that time, the wife of a donor who supported the bhikshuni Sthulananda wished to seek ordination. Sthulananda said: “First give me a robe, and only then will I ordain you.” The donor’s wife reproached her, saying: “I am your donor. Why do you demand that I first give you a robe before you ordain me?

You do not wish to deliver me from birth, aging, illness, and death, but instead seek to obtain from me the benefit of robes! These women do not practice the conduct of renunciants; they destroy the Dharma of renunciants.” When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they severely rebuked her, up to the passage: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni says to a laywoman dressed in white, ‘First give me a robe, and only then will I ordain you,’ she commits a payattika offense.” If a bhikshuni says this to a shikshamana or a shramanerika, she commits a duskrita offense.

If that person owes her a debt and she asks that the debt be repaid before ordaining her, there is no offense.

At that time, the bhikshuni Sthulananda said to the other bhikshunis: “Grant me the karma procedure authorizing me to take disciples.” The bhikshunis replied: “According to the Buddha’s teaching, only one who possesses the requisite qualifications may be granted the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples.” Sthulananda then said: “The bhikshunis act out of partiality, hatred, delusion, and fear. They grant it to those they fear and refuse it to those they do not fear.” When the elder bhikshunis heard this, they rebuked her in every way, up to the passage: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If, when the bhikshunis say to a bhikshuni, ‘According to the Buddha’s teaching, you do not possess the qualifications required for one to be granted the karma procedure authorizing her to take disciples,’ she reproaches the bhikshunis, she commits a payattika offense.”

At that time, the bhikshunis did not come to listen when instruction was given, nor did they come to listen when Sangha karma procedures were performed. Consequently, they remained ignorant and knew nothing, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the passage: “I now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni does not come to listen when instruction is given or when Sangha karma procedures are performed, she commits a payattika offense.” “Instruction” means the exposition of the eight rules of reverence and so forth. “Sangha karma procedure” means the motion

karman, a motion followed by one proclamation, and a motion followed by three proclamations.
The one hundred and ten rules have now been expounded.
At that time, the bhikshunis did not grant full ordination to probationary nuns who had completed two years of training in the precepts. Subsequently, those probationary nuns contracted grave illnesses, becoming mute, deaf, blind, or afflicted by various other diseases, and were thereby obstructed from receiving the ordination Dharma. A disciple of the bhikshuni Saima had likewise completed two years of training in the precepts, yet Saima did not grant her full ordination.

Saima further said, “You should train in these precepts for another period.” Later, the disciple fell ill and reported the matter, but no one knew how to resolve it. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni, when a sikshamana has completed two years of training in the precepts and is free of impediments, does not grant her full ordination but instead says, ‘First train further in these precepts,’ she commits a Pacittiya offense.”
At that time, the bhikshunis ordained prostitutes, who would not accept instruction. They were like an ox with an injured shoulder that could not pull a cart and, when yoked to the cart, sought only to escape the shafts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni ordains a prostitute, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” From the moment she forms the intention until the completion of the motion followed by three proclamations, she commits a Dukkaṭa offense. When the motion followed by three proclamations has been completed, the preceptor commits a Pacittiya offense, while the other nun-teachers commit Dukkaṭa offenses.

If she ordains a woman because that woman has become disenchanted with the defiled and unwholesome nature of the female body, there is no offense.
At that time, the bhikshunis granted full ordination to nuns who had not yet completed two years of training in the precepts. Those nuns were foolish, benighted, and ignorant, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they sternly rebuked them, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a nun who has not yet completed two years of training in the precepts, she commits a Pacittiya offense” (the remainder is as stated in the precept concerning taking disciples).
At that time, the bhikshunis granted full ordination to nuns who, although they had completed two years of training in the precepts, were mute, deaf, blind, or afflicted with other illnesses. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as stated in the precept concerning a married woman who has reached twelve years of age). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a nun who has completed two years of training in the precepts without the Sangha having performed the karman, she commits a Pacittiya offense” (the remainder is as stated in the precept concerning taking disciples).
At that time, the bhikshunis granted full ordination to probationary nuns who, although two years had elapsed, had not trained in the precepts. They were foolish, benighted, and ignorant, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a probationary nun who, although two years have elapsed, has not trained in the precepts, she commits a Pacittiya offense” (the remainder is as stated in the precept concerning taking disciples).
At that time, the bhikshunis granted full ordination to pregnant women. When they entered a village to beg for food, laypeople who saw them mocked them, saying, “This bhikshuni bears a heavy burden; give her food quickly.” Some said, “You should look at her belly.” Others said, “These women do not practice the holy life.” Still others said, “This happened before she went forth to practice the holy life.” They criticized the bhikshunis, saying, “Why did you not wait until she had given birth before ordaining her?

This brings disgrace upon the holy life.” The bhikshunis did not know whom they should or should not ordain; they lacked the conduct of śramaṇas and undermined the Dharma of śramaṇas. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a pregnant woman, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” From the moment she forms the intention until the completion of the motion followed by three proclamations, all is as previously explained.

If one wishes to grant a woman full ordination, one should first examine her breasts for milk. If there is no sign that she has an infant, there is no offense. If it is learned only after her ordination that she is pregnant, there is likewise no offense.
At that time, the bhikshunis granted full ordination to women who had recently given birth. Holding an alms bowl in one hand and carrying an infant in the other, they went begging for food. Laypeople who saw them mocked them, saying, “Quickly, give food to both of them.” The laypeople objected and criticized them. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a woman who has recently given birth, she commits a Pacittiya offense” (the remainder is as stated in the precept concerning taking disciples).
At that time, the bhikshunis ordained disciples to full ordination every year. Their disciples became so numerous that they could not instruct them properly, and many were foolish, benighted, and ignorant, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni grants full ordination to a disciple every year, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” A bhikshuni may grant full ordination to a disciple only in alternate years. (The remainder is as stated in the precept concerning taking disciples.)
At that time, the bhikshunis conferred full ordination upon disciples within the Bhikshuni Sangha, but allowed a night to pass before bringing them to receive ordination within the Bhikshu Sangha. During that one night, an impediment arose for an ordinand, and because the ordination had been delayed overnight, the Bhikshu Sangha did not grant her ordination. When the elder bhikshunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni allows a night to pass before having her disciple receive full ordination, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” From the moment she forms the intention until the first sign of sunrise has not yet appeared, she commits a Dukkaṭa offense. When the first sign of sunrise appears, the preceptor commits a Pacittiya offense, while the other nun-teachers commit Dukkaṭa offenses.

If the Sangha is not harmonious, cannot assemble, or any of the eight difficulties arises, there is no offense.
At that time, bhikshunis who had newly received full ordination did not attend upon their preceptors. Having no one to instruct them, they were foolish and knew nothing, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni who has newly received full ordination does not attend upon her preceptor for six years, or does not have another attend upon her, she commits a Pacittiya offense. A sikshamana or śrāmaṇerikā commits a Dukkaṭa offense.” If the preceptor does not require an attendant, there is no offense.
The one hundred and twenty rules have now been expounded.
At that time, after granting full ordination to their disciples, the bhikshunis did not supervise or instruct them, nor did they teach them to recite and study. The disciples were foolish, benighted, and ignorant, and were unable to train in the precepts. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikshuni takes a disciple and, during the six years, neither supervises her herself nor appoints another to supervise her, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” If the disciple refuses to accept instruction, there is no offense.
At that time, after granting full ordination to their disciples, the bhikshunis did not take them to a place far from their native locality. Men who had known them previously saw them, gave rise to defiled thoughts, teased them, and spoke coarse and lustful words. When the elder bhikshunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way, up to the words: “I shall now establish a precept for the bhikshunis—”

establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhikkhuni takes a disciple and neither personally escorts her nor has another escort her five or six yojanas from her native place, she commits a Pacittiya offense.” Native place means the place where she was born or the place where she married. If the disciple refuses to comply, there is no offense.

At that time, when fellow bhikkhunis fell ill, the bhikkhunis did not tend them or arrange in time for others to tend them, resulting in the sick bhikkhunis’ deaths. When the elder bhikkhunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni does not personally tend a sick fellow practitioner or arrange for someone else to tend her, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A fellow practitioner is one who has the same preceptor or acarya and who is regularly her companion. A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If they do not reside in the same place, there is no offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis gave ordination to women who were under the authority of another household. The laypeople criticized them, saying, “These bhikkhunis do not know whom they may ordain and whom they may not ordain.” Some householders said, “We should seize their robes and bowls and take them before the authorities.” Others said, “King Prasenajit has decreed that anyone who treats a bhikkhuni disrespectfully will incur a grave punishment.

Quickly release them, and do not let anyone learn of this.” Everyone said, “These women do not possess the conduct of renunciants; they destroy the Dharma of renunciants.” When the elder bhikkhunis heard this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni gives ordination to a woman who belongs to another, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” Belonging to another means belonging to the authorities or to another person.

From the moment she forms the intention until the conclusion of the formal act with one motion and three proclamations (as in the preceding precept). If the woman’s master gives permission, there is no offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis gave ordination to women suffering from chronic illnesses who were unable to exert themselves in training in the precepts and were ignorant and without understanding. When the elder bhikkhunis learned of this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni gives ordination to a woman suffering from a chronic illness, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A chronic illness means an illness present in both the hot season and the cold season.

From the moment she forms the intention to ordain her until the conclusion of the formal act with one motion and three proclamations... (as stated in the preceding precept). If she contracts that illness after receiving ordination, there is no offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis gave ordination to women who were bound to their husbands. The laypeople criticized them, and some wished to seize their robes while others wished to release them... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (all as stated in the precept concerning the ordination of a woman under another’s authority). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni gives ordination to a woman who is under her husband’s authority, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” From the moment she forms the intention to ordain her until the conclusion of the formal act with one motion and three proclamations (as stated in the preceding precept).

At that time, bhikkhunis gave ordination to women who were in debt... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (all as stated in the precept concerning the ordination of a woman under another’s authority). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni gives ordination to a woman who is in debt, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” From the moment she forms the intention to ordain her until the conclusion of the formal act with one motion and three proclamations (as in the preceding precept). If that woman says, “After going forth, I shall repay the debt,” then there is no offense in ordaining her.

At that time, bhikkhunis stood conversing with men in dark places. Their hearts became infatuated, sensual desire increased, and they no longer delighted in the holy life, resulting in some returning to lay life and others becoming followers of non-Buddhist paths. When the elder bhikkhunis heard of this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni stands and converses with a man in a dark place, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” If she converses in a dark place, she commits one Pacittiya offense for each utterance. A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If she believes the place to be dangerous, or if the lamp is suddenly extinguished, there is no offense.

At that time, whenever bhikkhunis visited households with which they were acquainted, they hastily sat down upon the householders’ beds. The laypeople criticized them, saying, “We do not like seeing these inauspicious people, who do not know where they should sit and where they should not sit and who have no proper deportment.” When the elder bhikkhunis heard this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni hastily sits upon a householder’s bed without speaking to the owner, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If the owner invites her to sit, there is no offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis personally gave food into the hands of male laypeople and men who followed non-Buddhist paths. Those men thought, “Surely this bhikkhuni gives me food because she is infatuated with me,” and consequently teased them with coarse and lustful words. When the elder bhikkhunis heard this, they rebuked them in every way... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni personally gives food into the hands of a man who follows a non-Buddhist path, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If she does not personally place it into his hands, or if she personally gives food to a relative, there is no offense in either case.

The one hundred and thirty rules have now been stated.

At that time, bhikkhunis went to laypeople and spoke of the faults of bhikkhus, saying, “That bhikkhu violates the precepts, holds wrong views, and transgresses proper deportment.” When the bhikkhus heard of this, they became angry and refused to instruct the bhikkhunis. When the elder bhikkhunis heard of it, they sternly rebuked those bhikkhunis and then reported the matter to the Buddha. On account of this matter, the Buddha assembled both Sanghas and asked the bhikkhunis, “Did you actually do this?” They replied, “Blessed One, we indeed did.” The Buddha rebuked them in every way, saying, “Have I not previously taught you the eight principles of respect?” Having rebuked them in every way, the Buddha told the bhikkhus, “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept.

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni goes to the home of a layperson and speaks of a bhikkhu’s faults, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense. If a layperson has already heard about the matter and asks her, she should ask in return, “What have you heard?” If the person says, “I heard this and this,” and what the bhikkhuni heard is likewise, then there is no offense if she subsequently answers truthfully.

At that time, the bhikkhuni Candrasumana quarreled with someone and then beat her own breast, struck her own body, cried aloud, and lamented. When the elder bhikkhunis heard of this, they sternly rebuked her... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: ‘If a bhikkhuni, after quarreling with someone, strikes her own body and cries out in lamentation, she commits a Pacittiya offense.’” For every blow with which she beats her own breast or strikes her own body, she commits one Pacittiya offense. A siksamana or samaneri commits a Dukkata offense.

At that time, bhikkhunis at a distance pointed toward Candrasumana while speaking among themselves about her quarrel. Candrasumana thought they were reviling her and cried aloud, “The bhikkhunis are reviling me!” The bhikkhunis immediately came and asked, “How did we revile you?” Confused, she was unable to answer. When the elder bhikkhunis heard of this, they sternly rebuked her, saying, “Why did you, without listening carefully and clearly to what others said, falsely claim that they were reviling you?”... up to the passage: “Now, for the sake of the bhikkhunis, I establish this precept (as above).”

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni, without clearly hearing what a person has said, becomes angry and falsely reports it to another person, she commits a Payattika offense. A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense.”

At that time, the bhiksunis quarreled among themselves, and each uttered an oath: “If I have acted in this way, may I fall into hell and undergo punishment like Devadatta and Kokalika; I swear this. But if I have not acted in this way, may you undergo such punishment.” When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above).

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni herself utters an oath that is in fact intended as a curse upon another person, she commits a Payattika offense.” For each oath or curse she utters, she commits one Payattika offense. A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense.

At that time, the bhiksunis poured urine and feces outside the enclosing wall, defiling human beings and nonhuman beings. Now there was a brahmin minister who had just been dismissed from office. He was diligently observing a fast and purifying his body and mind. Early that morning, he bathed thoroughly, applied perfume, and put on garments likewise scented with fragrant perfume. He intended to go to a heavenly shrine to pray that he might be restored to office.

He covered his head as he went, fearing that he might see inauspicious people—those with shaven heads wearing patched robes. When he reached the outside of the monastery wall, the nuns happened at that very moment to pour out feces and urine. All of it landed on his head and streamed down, soaking his entire body.

Filled with grief and anger, he said: “I feared encountering inauspicious people, yet now feces and urine have been poured all over me. My destiny must surely have met with misfortune. Nevertheless, I must go to King Prasenajit and lodge a complaint so that these shaven-headed women may be punished.” Suppressing his anger, he had no choice but to turn back. On the way, he met a brahmin physiognomist.

The brahmin physiognomist asked: “How did you come to such a state?” The dismissed minister truthfully related what had happened. The physiognomist said: “This is a most auspicious sign. Today you will receive one thousand coins and be restored to your former office.” Still unable to calm his anger, the dismissed brahmin minister went directly to the King, his entire body still covered in filth.

The King asked: “How did this happen?” The minister related the incident. The King clapped his hands and laughed heartily, then immediately ordered that the man be given one thousand coins and restored to his former office. The officials attending the King criticized the matter, saying: “They threw feces and defiled someone; they certainly did not intend to pursue the path or help anyone.”

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni throws feces or urine outside an enclosing wall, or causes someone else to throw it, she commits a Payattika offense.” A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense.

At that time, the bhiksunis threw rubbish, dust, and leftover food outside the enclosing wall, thereby defiling both human beings and nonhuman beings. When laypeople saw this, they criticized them, saying: “Why do the bhiksunis throw rubbish over the wall and cause defilement? These people do not understand the rules of proper conduct.”

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni throws rubbish, dust, or leftover food outside a wall or partition, or orders someone else to throw it, she commits a Payattika offense.” A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense.

At that time, the ground before the monastery in the King’s garden was very level and covered with exceedingly soft grass. People often came there for recreation, disturbing the bhiksunis’ seated meditation and practice of the path. The bhiksunis became vexed and weary, so they agreed to urinate and defecate there, making the place filthy so that people would no longer come.

Later, people came as usual for recreation, and their hands, feet, clothing, and belongings were all soiled. They became angry and said: “Who has urinated and defecated here like this?!” Someone said that it was the bhiksunis. Everyone criticized them, saying: “These people have gone forth to cultivate the pure path. Why do they defile a clean place and prevent people from coming here for recreation?!”

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni urinates or defecates on growing grass, she commits a Payattika offense.” A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense. If she is suffering from an urgent illness, there is no offense.

At that time, the bhiksunis again threw rubbish, dust, and leftover food upon the ground before the monastery in the King’s garden in order to drive people away by indirect means. The laypeople criticized them.

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni throws rubbish, dust, or leftover food upon growing grass, she commits a Payattika offense.” A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense. If she throws it into a pit or into a place that is not clean, there is no offense.

At that time, bhiksunis spent the night in a house “where there was food.” Hearing the sounds of a husband and wife engaging in sexual intercourse, they gave rise to lustful thoughts and no longer delighted in living according to the path. Some returned to lay life, while others became followers of non-Buddhist paths.

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni spends the night in a house where there is ‘food,’ she commits a Payattika offense.” “Where there is food” means a place where men and women affectionately engage in sexual intercourse. A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense. If she must remain because of illness or because a danger has arisen, there is no offense.

At that time, bhiksus asked the bhiksunis: “Where is the house of such-and-such a woman?” or “Where does this road lead?” The bhiksunis treated them disdainfully and did not answer. The bhiksus became angry and reproached them, saying that because they had not received instruction, they were ignorant and foolish and were unable to train in the precepts.

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni does not answer when questioned by a bhiksu, she commits a Payattika offense.”

At that time, the group of six bhiksus questioned bhiksunis with coarse and abusive words. Although the bhiksunis answered them, they felt ashamed at heart and therefore reported the matter to the Buddha. Because of this incident, the Buddha assembled both divisions of the Sangha and told the bhiksus: “I now permit the bhiksunis to answer when a bhiksu questions them in accordance with the Dharma.”

From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni does not answer when a bhiksu questions her in accordance with the Dharma, she commits a Payattika offense.” A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense. If they have previously had a dispute and are not speaking to one another, there is no offense if she does not answer.

The one hundred and forty rules have now been explained.

At that time, the bhiksunis rode in vehicles when going to the homes of laypeople. The laypeople criticized them, saying: “These bhiksunis ride in vehicles like the King’s consorts or the women of wealthy and noble households. They have no proper decorum.”

When the elder bhiksunis heard of this, they reproved them in every way... up to the words: “I now establish this precept for the bhiksunis” (as above). From now on, this precept shall be stated as follows: “If a bhiksuni travels by riding in a vehicle, she commits a Payattika offense.” “Riding in a vehicle” means riding any kind of conveyance, including elephants and horses; even wearing wooden clogs is called traveling by vehicle. A siksamana or a sramaneri commits a Duskrta offense.

If one is old or ill, is compelled by force, or suffers pain in the feet while traveling, there is no offense.
Thus ends the exposition of the one hundred and forty-one rules.
THE FIVE-PART VINAYA OF THE MAHĪŚĀSAKA SCHOOL