佛說目連問戒律中五百輕重事

1. SECTION ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE KARMIC RETRIBUTION FOR VIOLATING THE FIVE CATEGORIES OF PRECEPTS

Thus indeed have I heard: At one time, the Buddha was dwelling in the Kalandaka Bamboo Grove in the city of Rajagriha. At that time, Maudgalyayana rose and addressed the Buddha:

“Blessed One! I now have a matter that I wish to ask about. I beseech the Blessed One to instruct me!”

The Buddha said:

“Excellent! If this matter can bring benefit to immeasurable sentient beings, you may ask as you wish.”

Maudgalyayana addressed the Buddha:

“Blessed One! In the age of the decline of the Dharma, if a bhikshu treats the Buddha’s teachings with contempt, violates the śaikṣa precepts, and indiscriminately uses articles belonging to the Three Jewels, into what realm will he fall?”

The Buddha told Maudgalyayana:

“Listen attentively, and I shall explain it clearly to you!

“If a bhikshu is without shame, treats the Buddha’s teachings with contempt, and violates a śaikṣa precept, he will suffer in hell for nine hundred thousand years, equal to the five-hundred-year lifespan of the devas in the Heaven of the Four Great Kings. If a bhikshu commits a pratideśanīya offense, he will suffer in hell for three hundred million and sixty thousand years, equal to the one-thousand-year lifespan of the devas in the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.

If a bhikshu commits a pāyattika offense, he will suffer in hell for twenty billion thousand years, equal to the two-thousand-year lifespan of the devas in the Yama Heaven. If a bhikshu commits a sthūlātyaya offense, he will suffer in hell for five billion and sixty thousand years, equal to the four-thousand-year lifespan of the devas in the Tushita Heaven. If a bhikshu commits a sanghavasesa offense, he will suffer in hell for twenty-three billion and forty thousand years, equal to the eight-thousand-year lifespan of the devas in the Heaven of Delight in Creation.

If a bhikshu commits a pārājika offense, he will suffer in hell for ninety-two billion one hundred million and sixty thousand years, equal to the sixteen-thousand-year lifespan of the devas in the Heaven of Mastery over the Creations of Others.”

2. SECTION ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING ARTICLES BELONGING TO THE BUDDHA

Question: If an article belonging to the Buddha has been placed in one location and a bhikshu moves it elsewhere to perform Buddha-work, what offense does he commit?

Answer: He commits an offense of Expulsion[1]. No article belonging to the Buddha may be moved elsewhere. If a calamity occurs and the entire Sangha departs for another place, the bhikshu should report the matter to the assembly. If the assembly consents, the bhikshu may carry it elsewhere without committing an offense.

Question: May a bhikshu sell articles belonging to the Buddha and use the money to purchase other articles as offerings to the Buddha?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: This refers to such things as flowers, fruit, incense, lamps, banners, canopies, and so forth, which donors offer to the Buddha. If there is an excess of these articles, a bhikshu may sell them and use the money to purchase other articles to present for the Buddha’s use. In every such case, the donors gain merit. This may not be done, however, with articles offered to ghosts, spirits, and so forth.

Question: May articles belonging to the Buddha be used to build a house that is then rented out at an assessed price?

Answer: Any article belonging to the Buddha may be purchased outright, but it may not be rented.

Question: When performing Buddha-work, may a bhikshu borrow and use the Buddha’s servants, oxen, donkeys, or horses?

Answer: If he already knows that they belong to the Buddha, he may not. If he does not know, he may, because he is entirely unaware of the rule.

Question: If a Buddha stupa is built on land belonging to the Sangha and articles belonging to the Buddha are used to construct an enclosure, may a bhikshu reside within it?

Answer: If he knows and deliberately enters, he commits an offense entailing downfall; if he enters without knowing, he commits no offense. If he knows, and despite being admonished three times still deliberately remains there, the bhikshu commits a sthūlātyaya offense; after a fourth admonition, he commits a pārājika offense.

Question: If a Buddha shrine has become dilapidated and collapsed, and someone uses personal funds to repair it and then offers the old materials to the Sangha, may the Sangha accept them?

Answer: No.

Commentary: This is because they are articles belonging to the Buddha. If the Sangha accepts them, their monetary value is calculated to determine the gravity of the offense. Nor may they be used for any other purpose; they may be used only for the Buddha.

Question: If articles belonging to the Buddha are used to fence off land belonging to the Sangha, may a bhikshu use such things as wells, vegetables, and fruit that were already within it?

Answer: No! If they are articles given by a donor for Buddha-work, they must first be offered to the Sangha before they may be used. If this is not done, the bhikshu may not use them. Alternatively, he may pay five times their value and then use them. If he knows this but does not purchase them and instead takes and uses them without permission, their monetary value is calculated, and whether it is great or small, the bhikshu commits an offense.

Question: Is there an offense in sweeping dust and soil from a Buddha stupa?

Answer: No! But this soil may not be used for any other purpose.

Commentary: Since it has already been said that a Buddha stupa constitutes an article belonging to the Buddha, one should understand that if even the dust swept from a Buddha stupa is treated in this way, what applies to matters of greater importance may readily be known. The Buddha-Dharma is profound and wondrous in this way so as to guard against minor faults, prevent them from developing, and enable everyone to understand clearly cause and effect, offenses and merit. Therefore, it is said: Do not disdain a small good deed, thinking that it brings no merit; although water falls only drop by drop, it gradually fills a great vessel.

Question: If one has owed articles belonging to the Buddha for a long time, how should compensation be made?

Answer: One should compensate an amount equal to the value of those articles. Because the Buddha neither disburses nor receives, no additional compensation is required. Even so, one will still fall into hell.

Long ago, after the Buddha had entered nirvana, there was an intelligent bhikshu who cultivated diligently. At that time, a brahmin saw that the bhikshu was such a person and therefore allowed his daughter to follow this bhikshu and leave the household life to become a bhikshuni. The bhikshu accepted her.

Because the woman was beautiful, after some time the bhikshu developed affection for her, and they then lived together. Between them, they used articles belonging to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha, totaling approximately one hundred thousand coins, to obtain clothing and food. Yet this bhikshu was very intelligent and was able to teach the Dharma so that people attained the four fruits of the path[2].

He reflected that his own offense was extremely grave and wished to repay this money. He therefore traveled to the country of Shakhu, where through alms-rounds he obtained a great amount of money and other articles, and then set out to return and make compensation. But while this bhikshu was traversing a mountain road, he was bitten by a Seven-Step Snake[3].

The bhikshu knew that when one was bitten by this kind of snake, one would die after taking seven steps. Therefore, when he reached the sixth step, he conveyed to his disciple his instructions for allocating the articles as compensation. He then told him to carry them back to the country, saying: “After you have made compensation for the articles, return here.

I shall wait for you here!” The disciple carried the articles away, made compensation, returned, and reported that it had been completed. The bhikshu rose and took the seventh step, whereupon he died and fell into the Avici Hell. When he first entered the hell, the bhikshu felt only warmth and had not yet come to experience its excessively scorching torment.

Thinking that it was a warm dwelling, he raised his voice and recited sutras and made invocations, thereby enabling innumerable offenders and demonic wardens in hell to be delivered. Seeing this, a hell guard became extremely enraged and struck him with an iron trident. He then died there and was reborn in the Heaven of the Thirty-Three[4].

From this account, it may be understood that whenever one uses articles belonging to the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Sangha, one must make compensation. Although that bhikshu subsequently underwent punishment, there nevertheless came a time when he escaped from it.

Question: If a bhikshu lends articles belonging to the Buddha to another person and then uses the interest earned from them, does he commit an offense?

Answer: If he takes articles belonging to the Buddha and lends them to another person, he commits a grave offense. Because the interest is likewise equivalent to articles belonging to the Buddha, its use also constitutes a grave offense. Even if the Sangha uses that interest to make offerings to the Buddha, there is still no merit, for this destroys the Dharma body in order to make offerings to the physical body.

Question: The monastery steward assigns children and servants belonging to the Buddha to a bhikshu. May the bhikshu give them orders?

Answer: He may not give them orders, because they are persons belonging to the Buddha.

Question: When a bhikshu performs work for the Buddha, may he consume the Buddha’s food?

Answer: No! A bhikshu has no grounds for working as a hired laborer, much less for using the Buddha’s articles, robes, food, or drink!

Question: Laypeople perform work for the Buddha and receive articles belonging to the Buddha. They then exchange these articles for food and drink and invite the Sangha to partake. May the Sangha partake of them?

Answer: They may not partake of them!

Commentary: Although the articles have passed through the hands of laypeople, they originally belonged to the Buddha. For the laypeople, using such articles to support their families is proper. But if a bhikshu who is present and knows the Dharma violates the Dharma, the value must also be calculated in monetary terms to determine the offense.

Question: When carrying out services for the Buddha or the Dharma, is it permissible to retain money, gold, or silver?

Answer: No! Possessing them constitutes an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation.

Commentary: If, in matters concerning the Buddha or the Dharma, one follows ordinary worldly customs and offers remuneration in the form of money or other wealth, this is akin to commerce or hired labor and contravenes the Buddha’s regulations; therefore, it is impermissible. In the sutras and Vinaya, the Buddha taught that bhikshus should live solely by alms and must not retain money or wealth. If someone, for the sake of the Dharma, insists on making an offering and the bhikshu cannot decline it, it should be made pure and may then be used to create some other merit.

Question: If someone offers oxen, donkeys, horses, male servants, or female servants to the Buddha for carrying out services for the Buddha or the Dharma, may a bhikshu accept them?

Answer: He may accept and employ them, but must not squander them. Nor may he accept military weapons such as bows and arrows, sabers, or swords.

Question: If someone offers a dwelling to the Buddha, but it has not yet been put to the Buddha’s use, may a bhikshu reside there temporarily?

Answer: No! It is an article belonging to the Buddha.

Question: May a lamp lit as an offering to the Buddha be extinguished during the day?

Answer: No! Whoever extinguishes it commits an offense of expiation, even though for the Buddha there is neither light nor darkness. The donor gains merit, while the person who extinguishes the lamp commits an offense.

Question: If a building does not belong to the Buddha but contains an image of the Buddha, may one eat, drink, lie down, or sleep before the Buddha?

Answer: Yes! When the Buddha was still in the world, people could eat, drink, lie down, and sleep in his presence; how much more so before an image of the Buddha! When lying down, however, one must use a curtain as a screen. If a lamp is burning, one must not tread upon or stand within the area illuminated by its light. If one is personally holding the lamp, it is permissible.

Question: What offense is committed by climbing upon a Buddha stupa or a wall bearing an image of the Buddha in order to look into the distance?

Answer: If one does not know, no offense is committed; nor is an offense committed in an emergency. If one knows and arrogantly stands upon it, one commits an offense of expiation. If, after being admonished three times, one does not heed the admonition, one commits a sthulatyaya offense. If, after being admonished four times, one still remains standing there, one commits a parajika offense.

Question: Materials have already been designated for printing sutras or carving an image of the Buddha, but afterward other materials are obtained, so the original materials are no longer used. Is this permissible?

Answer: No! Whatever materials have been designated for a particular purpose must be used for precisely that purpose.

Commentary: If one does otherwise, one’s craving and seeking will never be satisfied, cause and effect will be distorted, and one’s words will be untruthful. Because of these three faults, it is impermissible. Whether they are articles belonging to the Buddha or the Dharma, and whether offered earlier or later, if all are used, the resulting merit will be immeasurable.

Question: What offense is committed by examining, comparing, or imagining what the excellent marks of the Buddha resemble, saying they are like this or that?

Answer: No image of the Buddha, whether beautiful or unattractive, may be compared to anything. This offense is extremely grave and must never be committed.

Question: Is it permissible to purchase silk that has been offered to the Buddha and use it to make one’s own Dharma robe?

Answer: No!

Commentary: These fabrics and silks were offered to the Buddha by faithful donors seeking merit. If a bhikshu, with a greedy and shameless mind, purchases them to make a Dharma robe for himself, he causes the donors to lose merit and to lose faith. In principle, he commits a grave offense.

Question: If an earlier person made an image of the Buddha whose nose lacks nostrils, may a later person joyfully assist by altering it so that the image has nostrils?

Answer: No!

Commentary: This is equivalent to the grave offense, discussed above, of making comparisons concerning an image of the Buddha. Why? Because the image has already been completed.

Question: May objects be leaned against a wall on which an image of the Buddha has been painted or carved?

Answer: No! Doing so constitutes an offense of expiation. Long ago, a bhikshu entered a monastery to pay homage to the Buddha. A brahmin skilled in physiognomy saw that this bhikshu bore the marks of one destined to become an emperor and said to him, “I have a daughter whom I wish to give to you in marriage.” The bhikshu replied, “Wait until I have gone inside to pay homage to the Buddha and returned; then we shall speak!” The bhikshu then leaned his khakkhara against the wall, entered the monastery to pay homage to the stupa, and afterward came back out. The brahmin said nothing.

The bhikshu asked:

– Will you give your daughter to me in marriage?

The brahmin replied: No!

– Why did you say just now that you would give your daughter to me, but now you will not?

– Just now, I saw that you possessed marks of great nobility, so I wished to give my daughter to you. But now those marks are gone, so I will not give her to you. Why? Because your merit has been completely exhausted.

Therefore, one must not lean objects against a Buddha stupa or against walls bearing painted images of the Buddha. By doing so, one not only violates a precept but also exhausts immeasurable merit.

Question: May articles belonging to the Buddha be used to make images of animals, devas, or humans?

Answer: They may be used to make images of devas and humans, as well as attendants and other figures accompanying the Buddha.

Question: If a bhikshu ordains someone without clearly inquiring into that person’s origins, and afterward learns that the person belongs to the Buddha but still does not tell him to leave, what offense does the bhikshu commit?

Answer: If the bhikshu knowingly ordains him, he commits a grave offense. If he did not know beforehand and learns only after ordaining him, he should tell him to leave. If he does not tell him to leave, he commits a grave offense.

Question: Is the person thus ordained a great practitioner of the Way?

Answer: No!

Commentary: Because the bhikshu who ordained him deliberately acted contrary to the Vinaya established by the Buddha, did not fear cause and effect, lacked any sense of shame, and was devoid of wisdom, the person is not a great practitioner of the Way.

Question: If someone uses his own wealth to hire a bhikshu to make an image of the Buddha, may the bhikshu accept wages?

Answer: No!

Commentary: This would entail two faults. First, because these wages are obtained from work performed for the Buddha, they too are articles belonging to the Buddha. Second, if one possesses this ability, everyone should work together, thereby increasing their merit. If the bhikshu accepts money, he becomes like a hired laborer and loses the essence of the bhikshu precepts.

Question: May a bhikshu take banners and streamers hung as offerings before the Buddha and use them for services dedicated to the Buddha?

Answer: They may be used for services dedicated to the Buddha, but if the donor does not consent, they may not be used.

Question: May one bow in homage collectively to the seven Buddhas of the past?

Answer: Yes, because their Dharma bodies are of one and the same essence.

Commentary: The sutras speak of the seven Buddhas of the past and the seven Buddhas of the present. They further distinguish Buddhas of the past, such as Vipashyin Buddha, and Buddhas of the present, such as Krakucchanda Buddha. It is said to be permissible because, although the names of the Buddhas of the three times differ, their Dharma body is nondual. If one merely pays homage with utmost sincerity, the merit will be immeasurable. Moreover, one should make no distinction between past and future. The meanings of the names of the seven Buddhas are briefly and clearly explained in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya.

Question: If someone previously vowed to hold three assemblies commemorating the Buddha—the Birth, Enlightenment, and Nirvana—but afterward holds only one assembly; or vowed to offer incense three times or give alms three times, may this be done?

Answer: No. To act contrary to one’s vow constitutes an offense.

Commentary: Because one harbors a mind of greed and stinginess and speaks falsely, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. Alas! In the Dharma-ending age, the faith of bhikshus is shallow. They regard Buddhist observances as a game; how could they not incur offenses? Should they not be cautious?

Question: May a bhikshu who has committed an offense of Decisive Severance[5] repent within the Buddha-ground?

Answer: No!

Commentary: The Buddha-ground is the area before an image of the Buddha. It is not a place where the Sangha performs the formal act of repentance. It is said that this may not be done because, according to the Vinaya, one who has committed a Sanghavasesa offense must be required to undergo separate residence, repentance, and so forth. Afterward, the bhikshu must declare his transgression before twenty members of the Sangha. If even one person is lacking, the offense has not yet been removed; how much less could one repent on the Buddha-ground without an assembly present? How could one violate the Tathagata’s prescribed procedure?

Question: If a monastery is extremely old and dilapidated, with no walls marking its boundaries, so that the extent of the Buddha-ground is unknown, how should its boundaries be determined when one wishes to rebuild or repair it?

Answer: If they are unknown, one must form an intention and establish boundaries. Because the original boundaries are unknown, no offense is committed whether the area is enlarged or reduced.

Question: Is it an offense to use the Buddha’s property to make a dwelling place for the Mother-of-Demons and her children and to create images of them?

Answer: One commits an offense equivalent to that of giving the Buddha’s property to others.

Commentary: That offense is extremely grave, as may be understood from the preceding passage, because one uses venerable objects for an inferior purpose, just as though one had caused the loss of items donated by the faithful. Furthermore, bhikshus must not worship ghosts or spirits. This is to covet fame and gain while forfeiting dignified conduct; it is absolutely impermissible.

Question: If a bhikshu personally fells trees and digs the earth to build a monastery or Buddha-stupa, or to carve an image, does he gain merit?

Answer: He cannot even escape the suffering of punishment in hell; how could he gain merit? This is because he has violated the precepts.

Question: May a bhikshu bow to another bhikshu before a Buddha-stupa?

Answer: No! If he bows, he commits an offense of expiation.

Commentary: Even before the Son of Heaven’s hall or in a court of justice, officials and commoners do not exchange courtesies with one another; how then could they do so before an image of the Great Sage? Therefore, one who bows commits this offense. Many bhikshus today commit this offense, so they must be cautious.

Question: Does a bhikshu commit an offense by selling an image of the Buddha?

Answer: He commits an offense equivalent to selling his own parents.

Commentary: If one does not believe the Buddha’s teaching, whose words will one believe? Bhikshus in this age also do such things, and thus their offense is equivalent to one of the five heinous offenses. How could they act this way? The ancients said, “If this can be endured, what cannot be endured?” The Brahma Net Sutra states: “One must instruct that material goods be used to redeem it.” Today, people not only fail to show reverence but even sell such images. They will certainly be unable to escape the painful retribution of a heinous offense. Some may say, “The Buddha possesses great loving-kindness and compassion, so there is no harm in selling it.” These are the words of an icchantika holding wrong views. Upon carefully considering this teaching, how could one act contrary to it?

3. SECTION ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE TEACHING OF THE DHARMA

Question: If a bhikshu sits upon a high seat to teach the Dharma while the bhikshus in the audience wear secular clothing, may he teach the Dharma?

Answer: Both the speaker and the listeners commit numerous offenses. If, after being admonished three times, they do not correct themselves, they commit a duskrta offense. If, after being admonished three more times, they still do not heed the admonition, they commit a sthulatyaya offense. If, after being admonished yet another three times, they still do not heed it, they commit a parajika offense. If no admonition is given and three recitations of the precepts pass, their offenses gradually become more severe.

Question: If a bhikshu teaches the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma, but the listeners hear the Dharma in a manner not in accordance with the Dharma, may he continue teaching?

Answer: If he teaches, he commits the same offenses as stated above.

Question: On a Dharma seat belonging to the Sangha, if the Buddha is first invited to sit upon it, may a member of the Sangha afterward sit there to teach the Dharma?

Answer: If the Buddha has first been invited to sit upon it, he may. If a member of the Sangha sits upon it first, he may not.

Commentary: This means that when a Dharma master ascends the seat to teach the Dharma, he must first invite the Buddha to ascend the seat. In accordance with principle, he proclaims the teaching on the Buddha’s behalf. If this is not done, the proper distinction between superior and subordinate is lost, as is the meaning of proclaiming the teaching on the Buddha’s behalf. Therefore, a member of the Sangha may not sit there first.

Question: If someone invites a bhikshu to ascend a high seat and teach the Dharma, but that high seat has already been adorned with curtains and jeweled canopies offered to the Buddha, may the bhikshu sit beneath them?

Answer: If he does not know, he commits no offense; if he knows, he must not sit there!

Question: If someone invites a bhikshu to recite sutras or teach the Dharma and then makes offerings to him, may he accept them?

Answer: If he accepts them with an expectant mind, he commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. If he accepts them without greed, he commits no offense. If he lacks robes or an alms bowl, he may accept them and commits no offense.

Question: When a bhikshu ascends a high seat to teach the Dharma to the Sangha, may he use a footstool and hold a fly whisk?

Answer: If his feet are not afflicted, but he sits with them placed upon a small stool and holds a fly whisk, he commits an offense of expiation. He may use the fly whisk if it is not made from an animal’s tail hair or feathers.

Question: Does one commit an offense by concealing the sutras and Vinaya and refusing to transmit them?

Answer: One commits an offense of expiation.

Commentary: The sutras and Vinaya constitute the wondrous path to Buddhahood and the compass guiding one beyond the world. They should therefore be widely transmitted so that immeasurable merit may be gained. Conversely, if one conceals them and, out of laziness, refuses to disseminate them, one commits this offense. Those who sacrificed their bodies for half a verse or cut off their arms in quest of the Dharma did so solely for this matter. Therefore, a bhikshu must not begrudge or hoard the teachings.

Question: If a teacher is ill and wears secular clothing, may he teach the Dharma to listeners, and should his disciples bow to him?

Answer: If he is ill, he may teach the Dharma to them, and they may bow to him. If the teacher is not ill but wears secular clothing, he may only receive their bows and must not teach the Dharma to them.

Question: May one teach the Dharma to someone wearing a hat?

Answer: Except for an ill person who needs to wear a hat, one may not teach anyone who does so.

Commentary: This rule existed not only in the Western Regions but also in China. It is proper for people today to wear formal robes and hats when attending the most solemn ceremonies. Ordinary observances, however, are not like this, and the present matter may be understood by comparison. This rule existed in the Western Regions. The Vinaya teaches that a bhikshu must not teach the Dharma to people whose heads are covered, except when they are ill. As for those who teach the Dharma today, it is also proper to wear a hat when following the protocol of solemn ceremonies; there is no need to be overly rigid.

Question: If dust or debris lies upon a sutra volume, may one blow it away with one’s mouth?

Answer: No.

Commentary: Because the impure breath from one’s mouth would strike the sutra volume, showing contempt and irreverence toward the scripture, doing so constitutes an offense. One should wipe it with a clean cloth. Likewise, one must not blow with one’s mouth upon images of the Buddha or other sacred objects.

Question: May a bhikshu copy sutras in exchange for material goods?

Answer: No! If he receives them, he commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

Commentary: If one copies sutras oneself or asks others to copy them in order to disseminate them, the merit is boundless, and one thereby repays the Buddha’s kindness. If one copies them in exchange for goods, one harbors greed and contempt and therefore commits this offense.

Question: What offense is committed by placing food upon a sutra and eating it?

Answer: If one deliberately does so with a mind of pride, one commits a Sthulatyaya offense; if one has no mind of pride, one commits an offense of Downfall.

Question: May worn and damaged copies of the Vinaya that are no longer usable be burned?

Answer: No! If one does not know that burning them entails an offense, then by burning them one commits an offense of Downfall. If one knows that burning them entails an offense yet deliberately burns them, one commits a Sthulatyaya offense, equivalent to the preliminary offense of causing a schism in the Sangha and also akin to the offense of burning one’s parents.

4. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS ON THE PROCEDURE FOR ESTABLISHING BOUNDARIES

Question: What is the procedure for establishing a boundary?

Answer: Regarding the method of establishing a boundary, if one is deep in the mountains or in a deserted marshland where no people are present, one may establish the boundary as far or as near as desired. If one is in a town or village, one must not establish a distant boundary, nor may one establish a boundary at night. Before performing the formal act of establishing the boundary precinct, the Sangha, laypeople, and those serving within the boundary precinct should be assembled, and the boundary markers in the four directions should be agreed upon.

When the formal act of establishing the boundary is performed, the novices and laypeople should be sent outside the boundary precinct. Bhiksus must also stand at the four corners and not allow outsiders to enter. If an outsider enters, the establishment of the boundary is invalid.

When establishing the boundary, four places must be excluded:

1. Villages.

2. Outside the villages, areas where laypeople commonly go to work, such as fields and gardens.

3. If an aranya dwelling is situated separately amid mountains, forests, ravines, or streams, and there is concern that many difficulties may arise during the karman or recitation of the precepts so that the Sangha cannot reach it, one should formally petition the assembly for permission to establish a separate minor boundary. If the assembly consents, it may be done. If there are fewer than five persons at that place, members of the Sangha should be invited until there are enough to establish a separate minor boundary. This is the establishment of a boundary for an aranya residence.

4. When establishing a boundary precinct for ordination, all previously established boundary lines must first be relinquished before the precinct boundary is established; these established boundaries must be annulled first. If the great boundary is established first and the precinct boundary only afterward, and ordination is then conferred within it, this is like a government office situated within a province, commandery, city, or town.

One who receives ordination there will not obtain the precepts. This is because there is concern that some people may be unable to ascertain the marks of the boundary precinct and may claim that, not knowing them, it is as though the boundary had never been established. If someone thereby recognizes the boundary precinct and enters it, that is merely fortunate happenstance.

If a sick bhiksu cannot come before the Sangha and requests that a separate boundary be established within a room, the Sangha should also permit it. However, the great boundary must first be dissolved, after which the separate minor boundary may be established; once the minor boundary has been established, the great boundary should then be reestablished. At night, no bhiksu may enter without carrying his robe.

At a residence where a great boundary has been established, even a single bhiksu may strike the gandi and recite the precepts, but he must first confess before the Sangha of the four directions and only then recite them; he may also recite the precepts three times.

Question: When establishing a boundary precinct for ordination, if the land is confined, may it be established so as to include land belonging to the Buddha within the great boundary?

Answer: Ordination may not be conferred within it. If a novice previously received ordination there without knowing the proper procedure, he obtains the precepts. If the three preceptors and seven witnesses knew but deliberately acted contrary to the rule, they commit an offense.

Question: May a boundary be established while traveling on a boat?

Answer: Yes! If novices or laypeople are aboard, they should be sent ashore before the boundary is established. If they are not sent ashore, a section should be partitioned off and the boundary then established. After the boundary has been established, another bhiksu may not enter it at night unless he carries his robe.

Question: If all the senior Sangha members depart and only novices remain within the great boundary, is this permissible?

Answer: So long as even one virtuous layman or faithful laywoman remains, the marks of the boundary are not lost, much less when novices remain. If everyone is absent for one night, the marks of the boundary are lost. If the Sangha has entirely departed and does not return, there is likewise no need to dissolve the boundary marks.

Question: If bandits enter the established boundary and kill bhiksus, are the marks of the boundary lost?

Answer: No!

Commentary: The killing of bhiksus by bandits has no bearing on the boundary marks; how much less could they be lost when bhiksus still remain within the boundary.

Question: May one, two, three, or four persons traveling on the road or staying in a layperson’s house establish a boundary?

Answer: No! A boundary may be established only by five or more persons.

Question: When establishing a boundary, may it be established so as to include rivers, streams, ponds, or lakes?

Answer: Any body of water that does not flow may be included; one with branching currents that flow onward may not, because it is impossible to know where the boundary lies.

Question: If the gandi is not struck after the boundary has been established, is the great boundary lost?

Answer: No!

Commentary: The practice of the Dharma does not depend upon striking the gandi. The gandi is struck merely to assemble the pure community and even to benefit sentient beings in the realms of suffering. Therefore, whether the gandi is struck or not has no effect on the establishment of the boundary.

Question: May a boundary be established so as to include a main road?

Answer: Yes! However, when establishing the boundary, persons should be assigned to block both ends and prevent people from entering; only then may the boundary be established.

Question: May a boundary be established on ownerless land?

Answer: Yes! It is like the procedure in Uttarakuru.[6]

Commentary: The people of the northern continent of Uttarakuru have no attachment to self, and therefore all things there are ownerless. Since they have no owner, a boundary may immediately be established wherever appropriate.

Question: If, after a boundary has been established, the waters rise, or a trench fifteen paces long is dug, or sexual activity takes place within it, are the marks of the boundary lost?

Answer: They are not lost in any of these cases. Even if a pit one yojana deep and wide were dug, the boundary would still not be lost, much less because of a small pit.

Question: May a bhiksu enter the great boundary of the bhiksunis and remain there overnight?

Answer: Yes, but he may not enter a bhiksuni’s room; he also does not thereby become separated from his robe.

Question: After the Sangha has established a boundary, if another Sangha member comes to stay with them but does not carry his robe, does he forfeit the robe?

Answer: No! This is because, when the boundary was established, it was established inclusively for the Sangha of the three times.

Question: May a boundary be established if the entire Sangha has not assembled?

Answer: If someone must be absent on account of some matter and has conveyed his authorization, it may be done; but if someone is absent without cause, it may not be done.

Question: For how long does a single establishment of a boundary remain valid?

Answer: There is no time limit. If a donor offers additional land, the boundary should be reestablished.

Question: If the Sangha establishes a boundary and then departs without dissolving it, may a later Sangha reestablish a boundary at that place?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: Although the former Sangha did not dissolve the boundary, the great boundary is lost after one night because no one remains to maintain the Dharma. Therefore, the later Sangha may reestablish a boundary there.

Question: When establishing a boundary precinct, must the entire Sangha be assembled, or may any number of members do so?

Answer: Five or more persons may do so. If there is no great boundary, the Sangha does not commit an offense by failing to assemble.

Question: When establishing a boundary precinct, must the Sangha be within the precinct, or may it be established from afar?

Answer: They must enter the boundary precinct before they may establish the boundary.

Commentary: It cannot be done without going there. Why? Because this would show a lack of reverence in body and mind, contradict the Buddha’s prescribed rule, and thus could not be accomplished.

Question: May the two great boundaries of two communities—either the twofold communities of bhiksus and bhiksunis, or the communities of two residences—be established so as to overlap?

Answer: They may not be established so as to overlap; they may only be established so as to connect with one another.

Commentary: The boundaries here and there would overlap, becoming confused and difficult to distinguish, and disputes would arise between them; therefore, this is not permitted. They may only establish boundaries that communicate with one another. Although they are spoken of as two assemblies, in practice they constitute a single entity.

Question: Within one great boundary, may two gaṇḍīs be struck?

Answer: Yes, but the recitation of the precepts and the performance of Sangha karmans may not take place in two separate locations. Only the burning of incense and the taking of food and drink are permitted.

Question: May the great Sangha establish a great boundary communicating with the great boundary of the bhikshunis?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: When establishing communicating boundaries, the entire Sangha of monks and nuns must assemble together to establish them. This is called the Great Boundary of the Four Directions; therefore, establishing boundaries that communicate with one another does not constitute an offense.

5. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE RAINS RETREAT

Question: During the three months of the summer retreat, on how many days may the boundary for the rains retreat be established so that one may receive rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: From the sixteenth day of the fourth month through the fifteenth day of the fifth month, the rains retreat may be established on any day. This refers to one who, at the beginning of the retreat, encountered an adverse circumstance and was therefore unable to establish the summer retreat. Whether the retreat is established after three, four, or five days, or at any time through the end of the month, that person is regarded in the same way as one who arrived earlier.

This is called thirty days for establishing the summer retreat, although there is only one day for receiving rains-retreat seniority. However, one who arrives later has only one day on which to establish the boundary for the rains retreat. If an adverse circumstance occurs after the fifteenth day of the seventh month, rains-retreat seniority may be received on any day through the fifteenth day of the eighth month.

This is called one day for establishing the boundary of the rains retreat and thirty days for receiving rains-retreat seniority.

Question: Regarding the seven-day authorization to leave the boundary during the summer retreat, should it be received upon first entering the retreat, or only when one is about to depart?

Answer: It is best to receive it upon first entering the retreat, but it may also be received at the time of departure. Once the seven-day authorization has been received, if one returns before the full seven days have elapsed and later departs again, there is no need to receive it anew; only after the seven days have been completed must it be received again. If one fears forgetting, one may also receive it every day.

Question: During the rains retreat, if one does not perform the prescribed act of formally accepting the twelve kinds of requisites, such as beds, seats, and dwellings, may one still observe the retreat?

Answer: There is no need to accept them!

Commentary: The twelve articles are clearly explained in the Fundamental Vinaya. The passage below states that dwellings may be repaired during the three months; thus it would seem that one should also be permitted to accept the three robes and six requisites, which are indispensable. Other articles, such as bedding, need not be accepted during the hot summer season.

Question: During the summer retreat, if there is some matter concerning the Three Jewels, or if one encounters such hardships as illness, may one move elsewhere to continue the retreat?

Answer: Yes! At the beginning of the retreat, one must announce the matter to the great assembly and then receive from the assembly the thirty-nine-day authorization. After receiving the thirty-nine-day authorization, if some matter requires one to leave the boundary for thirty-nine days, it is best to return when the full thirty-nine days have elapsed.

If one is unable to return, one may receive rains-retreat seniority at that place without committing an offense. If one did not receive this authorization upon first entering the retreat, it may also be received when one is about to depart. If one has already completed thirty-nine days of the retreat at that place, there is no need to receive the authorization again when some matter requires one to leave the boundary.

If one is unable to return because of one’s duties, one may also receive rains-retreat seniority at the residence where one is staying.

Question: If one establishes the summer retreat but does not enter the retreat, may one receive rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: If one previously did not know the procedure for the rains retreat, one may receive rains-retreat seniority; but if one knew it and deliberately acted contrary to it, one may not.

Question: If one neither establishes nor observes the summer retreat, may one receive rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: If one previously did not know that the summer retreat had to be established and did not know the procedure for observing it, one may receive rains-retreat seniority. Once one learns of it, one should confess before the Sangha. If one previously knew the procedure for establishing and observing the summer retreat but deliberately violated it, one may not receive rains-retreat seniority.

Question: If one observes the retreat without establishing the summer retreat, may one receive rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: It is the same as the matter just explained above!

Question: During the rains retreat, may one bathe in rivers, streams, ponds, or lakes?

Answer: If they are within the boundary, one may. If one has received the seven-day authorization and encounters a river or stream while traveling, one may also bathe there.

Question: During the rains retreat, if one commits a sthūlātyaya offense and does not confess it, may one receive rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: Although one has committed an offense, one may still receive rains-retreat seniority, because one remains a bhikshu.

Question: If, when an offender is to receive rains-retreat seniority, the Sangha is not in harmony, may that person receive it?

Answer: That person must first confess and only then receive rains-retreat seniority. If the person refuses to confess, the person must be expelled; afterward, the Sangha may receive rains-retreat seniority. If that person refuses to leave, the Sangha should admonish the person three times.

If, after more than three admonitions, the person still refuses to leave, the person commits a sthūlātyaya offense; after more than four admonitions, the person commits a pārājika offense. It is best to make every effort to expel the person beyond the boundary. If the person still refuses to leave, the Sangha should confine that person separately in a room and then receive rains-retreat seniority without further regard for that person, because the person is no longer a bhikshu.

If many wicked persons are within the great boundary and cannot be expelled, the Sangha should move beyond the boundary to perform the prescribed act of receiving rains-retreat seniority. If they receive rains-retreat seniority within the same boundary as those persons, the act is invalid.

Question: During the rains retreat, may fans be used?

Answer: Fans made from the feathers of birds may not be used, but fans made from reeds or bamboo are permitted.

Question: During the rains retreat, may merit be made on behalf of a deceased preceptor or ācārya?

Answer: Yes, but one may not personally perform those tasks with one’s own hands.

Question: May one who entered the rains retreat late receive rains-retreat seniority on the fifteenth day of the seventh month and leave the great boundary?

Answer: No! If one previously did not know the rule and has already received rains-retreat seniority, it is allowed; but if one knew the rule and deliberately acted contrary to it, it is not allowed. If the Sangha is harmonious, one who entered the retreat late may only be included in the number of Sangha members receiving rains-retreat seniority; that person may leave the boundary only after completing the requisite number of retreat days. If this applies to one who entered the retreat late when receiving rains-retreat seniority, it likewise applies to one who entered the retreat early.

Question: Two persons have the same number of rains-retreat years. The younger entered the retreat early, while the elder entered it late. The person who entered early has already received rains-retreat seniority, while the person who entered late has not. During that one month, which of them has greater seniority?

Answer: The one who received full ordination earlier is senior, because seniority is calculated from the first day of full ordination, not from the day on which rains-retreat seniority is received.

Question: During the rains retreat, if one temporarily leaves the great boundary for a short time without receiving the seven-day authorization, may one return and continue the retreat?

Answer: Yes, if one confesses!

Commentary: If one leaves the great boundary without receiving the authorization, one commits an offense of transgressing the rule; therefore, one must confess before being permitted to receive rains-retreat seniority. It should be known that the Vinaya prescribes that, when leaving the great boundary, one must inform the great assembly. If an urgent matter arises and there is no time to inform the assembly, one must confess upon returning. If one does not confess, the offense becomes still graver.

Question: During the rains retreat, for a single matter, may one receive the seven-day authorization three times?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: If a bhikshu has a valid reason, such as attending to matters concerning the Three Jewels, caring for the sick, making offerings to the great assembly, or encountering hardship on a long journey, and the authorized days expire before the task is completed, repeatedly going out and returning would be burdensome. Therefore, out of compassion, the Buddha provisionally permitted this. Yet one must not use this as an occasion to wander about seeking personal ease and thereby become indolent and lose all great merit.

Question: During the summer retreat, if ten or five persons who have not observed the retreat wish to come and take refuge with the community so that they may receive rains-retreat seniority together, may they dwell together and receive rains-retreat seniority together?

Answer: If there is still time for the later rains retreat, one may perform the procedure for entering the retreat; if there is no longer time for the later retreat, one may not. If this person was entirely unaware that there is a procedure for establishing the summer rains retreat, it is permitted. If the person knew but deliberately acted contrary to it, it is not permitted.

Question: If one did not enter the rains retreat, or did not formally request seven days’ leave, yet counted a rains, does one receive the merits of the summer rains retreat?

Answer: If one did not know the procedure and has already counted it, one receives the rains-retreat seniority but not the merits of the summer rains retreat. It is well if, after the Sangha admonishes the person once, the person performs the procedure for establishing the retreat and formally requests leave. If, after being admonished three times, the person still refuses to perform the procedure for entering the retreat and requesting seven days’ leave, the person commits a Thâu-lan-giá offense. If the person now agrees to perform these procedures, it is still permissible. When performing them, the matter must be announced to the assembly; only after the assembly has consented is it permissible.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit if he does not count the rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: If a bhikkhu does not count the rains-retreat seniority, it is well if he does so after the assembly admonishes him once, twice, or three times. If, after more than three admonitions, he still does not do so, he commits a Thâu-lan-giá offense. If, after more than four admonitions, he still does not do so, he is not a śramaṇa, because he refuses to undertake the prescribed procedure.

Question: During the rains retreat, if a newly ordained bhikkhu performs the procedure for entering the retreat precisely at noon or only after noon, may he count the rains-retreat seniority?

Answer: Yes, but he may not do so at the end of the night.

Commentary: According to these words, it appears that it is still permissible in the early evening. “The end of the night” has two meanings: First, it already belongs to the following day; second, there is a lack of sincere resolve.

Question: During the summer rains retreat, if through forgetfulness one leaves the boundary once without formally requesting seven days’ leave, can one still complete the retreat?

Answer: If one remembers and immediately repents, one may. However, during a single summer retreat, one may not repent in this way more than three times. If one does so more than three times, one may not count the rains-retreat seniority.

Question: When counting the rains-retreat seniority, if it is raining, is one permitted to remain in one’s room while doing so?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: According to the Vinaya, when counting the rains-retreat seniority, one should do so in the open-ground area within the ceremonial boundary, signifying that the merit of completing the rains retreat is perfect and transcends the three realms. Yet if rain requires one to move indoors, there is no impediment.

Question: If one has resolved to go to a certain place to establish the summer rains retreat but is prevented from reaching it, is one permitted to perform the procedure for entering the retreat from afar?

Answer: No! One must go to that place and perform the procedure for the later retreat. Alternatively, if there is a Sangha residence along the way, one should go there and perform the procedure for entering the retreat, clean and arrange the rooms for two or three days, and then remain there for thirty-nine days before departing. If there is no Sangha residence, five or more persons should together establish a boundary and enter the retreat. Afterward, one or two persons must remain to maintain the boundary and may depart only after completing thirty-nine days. If those who remain depart before completing thirty-nine days, those who left earlier do not lose their retreat if they were unaware of this, but those who departed later will lose theirs.

Question: Are one to four bhikkhus permitted to establish a boundary and enter the retreat in a layperson’s house?

Answer: No! There must be five or more persons.

Commentary: Only five or more persons can perform the karma procedure to establish a minor boundary and reside there for the summer retreat. If there are too few persons, the procedure is not in accordance with the Dharma, and the establishment of the boundary is invalid.

Question: Is a person dwelling in a secluded place permitted to perform the procedure for entering the retreat?

Answer: If a boundary has previously been established and there are two or more persons, it is permitted; for one person, it is not. Because there is no one with whom to undertake the retreat and no established boundary, it is not permitted. If one wishes to enter the retreat separately, one must first invite the Sangha to establish the boundary.

Question: During the summer rains retreat, may a bhikkhu accept pure articles offered as donations and objects entrusted to him by others for periods ranging from ten days to three months?

Answer: If he accepts them without giving rise to greed, there is no time limit.

Question: During the summer rains retreat, if one performs conditioned activities within the boundary, does one receive the merits of the retreat?

Answer: If the work is meritorious, one does; however, one should merely instruct others to do it and must not do it personally, for fear of losing dignified conduct and neglecting seated meditation. All other activities are impermissible.

Question: A person undertaking the retreat says, “This room is damaged and leaking, so it should be repaired.” Does this mean it should be repaired when the retreat has just begun, or only after the retreat has ended?

Answer: If the rooms become damaged during the three-month retreat, they should be repaired.

Question: When the rains-retreat seniority is being counted, if the community of bhikkhunīs enters the inner boundary and requests permission to count its rains-retreat seniority, should permission be granted?

Answer: If there are two or more bhikkhunīs, it is permitted; if there is only one, it is not. Why? Because if a lone bhikkhunī leaves the established boundary, she commits a grave offense.

6. CHAPTER ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING ORDAINING PEOPLE

Question: Is one bhikkhu permitted to ordain a śrāmaṇera?

Answer: No! Two or more persons are required to ordain a śrāmaṇera.

Commentary: This is because one person is needed to serve as preceptor and another as the instructing ācārya. The preceptor personally transmits the precepts, while the ācārya teaches the rules and procedures. This is unlike worldly affairs, in which one person may suffice. Thus, the more persons there are, the better; a single person cannot serve as the teacher.

Question: When a bhikkhu ordains a śrāmaṇera, is he permitted to invite a preceptor from afar?

Answer: No!

Commentary: Once one ordains a person, one becomes that person’s original teacher. Yet if one is personally incapable of doing so, and the procedure must moreover be performed at the proper time, one is not permitted to invite a preceptor from afar. “Not permitted to invite from afar” means that one may not, while in a distant place, invite another teacher to ordain someone in one’s stead, because if another person performs the ordination, the ordinand becomes that person’s disciple. Nor is it permissible to bow toward empty space in invitation and invoke the name of one’s original teacher as witness, because when transmitting the precepts, teacher and disciple must face and see one another.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu with fewer than five rains commit if he ordains someone? Does that disciple receive the precepts?

Answer: If he knows that it is contrary to the Dharma yet still performs the ordination, he commits an offense entailing downfall. If, after being admonished more than three times, he does not desist, he commits a Thâu-lan-giá offense. If the disciple does not know that this is contrary to the Dharma, he receives the precepts; if he knows, he does not receive them.

Question: If a bhikkhu neither recites the precepts nor understands the affairs of the Sangha, yet ordains many people or serves as one of the three teachers,[7] does he commit an offense?

Answer: Such a person is not even worthy of consuming the food offered by the faithful, much less of ordaining others.

Commentary: If a bhikkhu does not recite the precepts, then every day when he eats food and drinks water, he commits the offense of theft; hence it is said that he is not permitted to do so.... Being deluded himself, he cannot enable others to attain clarity; therefore, the Buddha established this precept. Having received full ordination, one must apply oneself diligently and earnestly, as though extinguishing a fire on one’s head. One must first follow a wise bhikkhu and study the precepts; one must not be indolent and allow an entire lifetime to pass in vain.

Question: If a person’s parents or the king’s law does not permit that person to be ordained, yet a bhikkhu secretly leads the person away and ordains them into the monastic life, what offense does the bhikkhu commit?

Answer: He commits a grave offense! If a member of an official household or a servant comes to a bhikkhu’s dwelling to study the Way, and the bhikkhu knowingly allows that person to remain, he commits a grave offense, even if the person has not yet been ordained into the monastic life.

Question: If a child has entered the monastic life first, and the parents later come to that child and request ordination, is the child permitted to ordain them?

Answer: Yes!

Commentary: In leaving the household life to study the Way, realization of the truth is foremost. Only the Buddhadharma is considered, without being constrained by worldly etiquette. If one already possesses the ability to ordain others, one may ordain anyone. Thus King Śuddhodana bowed in homage to the Tathagata, and the holy mother Māyā listened to the Buddha teach the Dharma. Therefore, it is said that one may ordain them.

Question: Is a bhikkhu who has violated the precepts permitted to ordain others?

Answer: If a bhikshu has violated a grave precept, he may not ordain others. If he has committed a Sthulatyaya offense and ordains someone, it is the same as in the case mentioned above of a bhikshu who has not yet completed five rains retreats ordaining someone. If he has violated any other minor precept, he must first repent in accordance with the Dharma before he may ordain others.

Question: A layman wishes to approach a bhikshu and request ordination. The bhikshu accepts him but then invites an upadhyaya to confer the precepts upon him. Is that bhikshu considered the man's teacher?

Answer: He is not the man's original teacher. If the man later receives the Dharma from that bhikshu, the bhikshu may serve as his Dharma teacher; if he relies upon him, the bhikshu may serve as his teacher of dependence.

Question: If a bhikshu ordains many disciples, or serves as one of the three teachers, but does not know how to instruct them, what offense does he commit?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing downfall. Long ago, during the time of Kasyapa Buddha, there was a bhikshu who ordained disciples but did not know how to instruct them. His disciples committed many acts contrary to the Dharma, and when they died, one of them was reborn as a dragon. According to the karma of dragons, on one day out of every seven, it was burned by fire until all its flesh and skin were consumed and only its skeleton remained. Afterward, its body was restored to its former state, only to be burned again, causing unbearable suffering. It then thought, “What offense did I commit in a former life that I must now endure such suffering?”

It then contemplated its life in the previous existence and saw that it had been a sramana who did not observe the precepts, and that its teacher had likewise failed to instruct it. It immediately gave rise to an evil thought, became angry with its original teacher, and wished to harm him. Later, when its original teacher and five hundred people were traveling across the sea by boat, the dragon rose from beneath the sea and held the vessel fast.

The people asked, “Who are you?”

It answered: I am a dragon.

They asked: Why are you holding our boat?

It answered: If you cast this bhikshu into the sea, I shall allow the rest of you to go!

They asked: What does this bhikshu have to do with your affair that you would seize only him while releasing everyone else?

It answered: This bhikshu was formerly my teacher, but he failed to instruct me, causing me to endure this suffering today. Therefore, I have come to seize him. All of you may continue on your way; I seek only to take this bhikshu down into the sea.

The bhikshu said, “I shall jump into the water myself; you need not seize me.”

Having said this, the bhikshu immediately jumped into the water and died. His consciousness was reborn in realms of suffering, where he endured immeasurable punishment. From examining this account, one knows that ordaining others is a matter of great importance and that one must not fail to instruct them.

7. CHAPTER ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING RECEIVING THE PRECEPTS

Question: If a novice violates one, two, three, or all ten precepts without repenting, may he receive the higher ordination?

Answer: If he remembers having committed an offense but does not repent, he may not receive the higher ordination. If he remembers none of them and also does not know the Dharma he has received, he may receive it. Whenever the precepts are conferred, the Dharma teacher should ask the novice, “Have you violated any precepts?” If the novice answers that he has, the teacher must immediately instruct him to repent. If his original teacher does not ask, the precept-conferring teacher must ask him upon the ordination platform. If they do not ask, all of them commit an offense entailing downfall.

Question: After receiving the higher ordination, may one repent of offenses committed while still a novice?

Answer: Yes! One should perform the rite of repentance in the same manner as when one was a novice.

Commentary: One may repent either before one’s original teacher or before another bhikshu; it need not necessarily conform to the rite of repentance for a fully ordained bhikshu. If one does not repent, it is feared that the higher precepts will not remain firm. Furthermore, this matter cannot be treated merely in the general manner described above. One may previously have committed an offense without remembering it, and only after receiving the higher ordination remember and repent of it. This matter is raised out of concern that, after receiving the higher ordination, one might remember the offense yet fail to repent.

Question: When a novice is about to ascend the platform to receive the higher ordination, if he is wearing lay clothing or footwear, or if he lacks a complete robe and bowl and must borrow them, does he obtain the precepts?

Answer: If he is wearing lay clothing and the precept master does not question him, that novice does not obtain the precepts. In all the other cases, he obtains the precepts, but the precept master commits an offense entailing downfall.

Question: If a bhikshu becomes a novice without relinquishing his precepts—that is, while still a fully ordained practitioner—and then receives the precepts again, does he obtain them?

Answer: No!

Question: If he does not obtain the precepts, do the precepts he previously received still remain?

Answer: They still remain.

Commentary: Because the precepts he previously received still remain, he cannot receive them again now. The Vinaya teaches that if a bhikshu violates a grave precept, he must relinquish his precepts and become a novice, yet he is still not permitted to receive the higher ordination again. How much less could one who has not relinquished the precepts receive the higher ordination anew!

Question: If his former precepts still remain, may the later precept-conferring teacher be called his teacher?

Answer: No!

Commentary: Because he does not obtain the precepts, that person cannot be called his teacher.

Question: When many people receive the precepts and together invite one person to serve as their precept-conferring teacher, may five or ten people receive the precepts simultaneously?

Answer: This is not permissible!

Commentary: The Vinaya teaches that the complete ordination requires ten teachers: one upadhyaya, two acaryas, and seven teachers who serve as witnesses in accordance with the Dharma. All must be invited from among members of the pure Sangha. If the ten are not complete, the precepts are not successfully established. Why is this? As recorded in the “Rites for Propagating the Dharma and Conferring the Precepts”: “The complete fulfillment of the Three Collections necessarily depends upon the three teachers; the examination of the seven faults relies entirely upon the seven witnesses.” Therefore, all ten must be present before the precepts may be conferred upon someone.

Question: When a novice receives the higher ordination, he invites a bhikshu to serve as the master of the higher precepts. However, this bhikshu does not know the karman procedure or the rite for conferring the precepts, so another person is invited to confer them. Which of these may serve as the teacher?

Answer: The person who confers the precepts is the teacher; the person who has no precept Dharma to transmit is not the teacher.

Commentary: The karman procedure consists of one announcement and three karman proclamations, exhortations, and clear and thorough questioning about all relevant matters. However, one who wishes to serve as a model and teacher must clearly understand the three contemplations, be thoroughly versed in restraint through refraining and restraint through action, and be complete in the five virtues, the ten enumerations, speech, and conduct. Only then is he qualified. If he does not meet these requirements, he does not even understand his own responsibilities; it is impossible for him to become a teacher of others.

Question: If the precept master ascends the platform to confer the precepts while wearing lay clothing or while having violated the precepts, does the recipient obtain the precepts?

Answer: If the recipient knows that such conduct is not in accordance with the Dharma, he does not obtain the precepts; if he does not know, he obtains them.

Question: If, when the precepts are being received, the assembled Sangha is not harmonious, or its members strike and revile one another, does the precept candidate obtain the precepts?

Answer: If the assembled Sangha is harmonious when the platform is ascended and the precepts are conferred, the candidate obtains the precepts. If the Sangha is not harmonious, the candidate does not obtain them.

Commentary: This is because doubt arises. Thus, a sutra teaches: If even one Dharma is impure, your discipline of moral precepts is impure and certainly cannot be accomplished. If the candidate does not know, however, he obtains the precepts. This means that although the teacher may have faults, if the disciple possesses right understanding, is earnest and utterly sincere, and is entirely free of doubt, he obtains the precepts. Faith is the source of the Way and the mother of all virtues; this principle applies precisely here. In this way, the teacher’s transmission to the disciple remains uninterrupted.

Question: Is there a time restriction for receiving the precepts?

Answer: They may not be received at the end of the night. Nor may they be received at the beginning or middle of the night without lamps, because those present must be able to see one another.

Question: If it begins to rain while the precepts are being received and the ordination boundary must be moved indoors so that the ceremony may continue, does the candidate obtain the precepts?

Answer: It is not permitted! If one wishes to relocate the ordination boundary, one must first dissolve the great boundary and then establish the ordination boundary anew; only then may ordination be conferred. If this is not done, it is not permitted.

Question: During ordination, if some calamity prevents the rite from being completed in full, does that person become a fully ordained bhikshu?

Answer: It is sufficient that the three proclamations of the karma procedure have been completed.

Commentary: If the three proclamations of the karma procedure have not been completed, that person has not yet received the precepts. A calamity refers to such dangers as flood, fire, and so forth, as mentioned above. “Completed” means that, after the three proclamations of the karma procedure, the four observances[8], the four reliances[9], and the other Dharma teachings are explained. These are discussed extensively below.

Question: When the complete precepts are conferred, if the precept master reads only as far as the group of Thirteen Matters[10] and then stops, and afterward the preceptor and precept masters do not continue instructing the ordinand, does the ordinand receive the precepts?

Answer: If the preceptor and precept masters do not give instruction, but after fifteen days, during the recitation of the precepts, the ordinand listens single-mindedly and accepts and upholds them, that person also receives the precepts.

Question: If, at the time of ordination, one does not possess all three robes but has only cloth that has or has not been dyed, or has or has not been cut and sewn, does that person receive the precepts?

Answer: In none of these cases does one receive them!

Commentary: One does not receive the precepts because the robes exist in name only, not in actuality, and the proper deportment is also lost. A person receiving ordination must possess all three robes; lacking even one is impermissible. Although the cloth may be valuable, the set of robes is incomplete, and therefore in every such case the precepts are not received. As stated above concerning borrowed robes and so forth, not only does one fail to receive the precepts, but one will later fall into the three painful realms.

Question: At the time of ordination, if it is difficult to assemble the prescribed number of Sangha members, how many monks are permitted to confer full ordination?

Answer: Apart from the three masters, five or more are sufficient.

Commentary: If there are ten in all, the rite accords with the rule, corresponding to the three masters and seven witnesses mentioned above. Six monks are also sufficient. This is merely a provisional expedient, not the constant rule. One explanation states that the seven witnesses symbolize the destruction of the seven heinous offenses.

Question: If a novice once falsely claimed to be a great practitioner of the Way and accepted the prostrations of a fully ordained bhikshu, may he later receive full ordination?

Answer: He may not!

Commentary: This is because he committed the grave offense of making a great false claim.

Question: A novice took leave of his master to travel far away, but encountered a calamity and could not return. He then requested a dependence master in that place and received full ordination. Does he receive the precepts in this way?

Answer: He receives the precepts!

Commentary: There is no fault when a calamity has occurred. If he encounters a master who accords with the Dharma and under whom he ought to receive ordination, he may receive it immediately; neither party is at fault.

Question: If a bhikshu entices a novice away from another master and takes him to a different Sangha to receive full ordination, what offense does he commit? If that Sangha knows what happened, should it confer ordination upon the novice?

Answer: If the novice’s master acts contrary to the Dharma, neither the novice nor the person who takes him away commits an offense. If that master does not act contrary to the Dharma, the person who takes the novice away commits a grave offense. The master on the ordination platform who confers the precepts commits an offense of Downfall.

In former times, an elderly bhikshu had only one novice to care for him. At that time, another bhikshu enticed the novice to leave. The elderly bhikshu was left without anyone to care for him and died not long afterward. Because of this incident, the Buddha established the precept: One must not entice away another master’s novice. If one entices him away, one commits a grave offense. If a bhikshu sees another novice caring for an elderly or sick person and tells him to leave, that bhikshu commits a grave offense.

8. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERINGS

Question: When a bhikshu accepts the four requisites offered by a donor, may he give the articles he has received to others?

Answer: He may!

Commentary: If one accepts a loss so that others may benefit, or gives the articles to those who are hungry, thirsty, and so forth, the merit is immeasurable. This accords with one’s proper duty and clearly manifests a mind free from greed.

Question: Having accepted a donor’s invitation to provide the four requisites over a long period, if one goes elsewhere for some minor matter, may one accept food, robes, and medicine from others?

Answer: One may do so if that donor permits it!

Commentary: This is to enable everyone to cultivate merit. If one does not accept the offerings, it is impermissible, because one would go against the aspirations of others and cause them to criticize. The ancients said: “The Teacher of the Way has instructed bhikshus to advance upon the path and discipline themselves strictly. Food, clothing, and sleep should always be insufficient; if one seeks them to excess, one should examine and reflect upon oneself.”

Question: Someone wishing to offer an article to a bhikshu must first ask whether the bhikshu already possesses such an article. If the bhikshu already has one but, out of greed, falsely says that he does not, and the person then offers him the article, what offense does the bhikshu commit by accepting it?

Answer: If he accepts it out of greed, he commits an offense requiring Forfeiture and Downfall; by lying, he commits an offense of Downfall.

Question: If food belonging to the Sangha is offered only to the senior monk, may the senior monk eat it?

Answer: If the senior monk accepts it with a greedy mind, he commits an offense of Downfall.

Commentary: In the great matter of transcending the world, the most important thing is to abandon greed, anger, and delusion. Since one is called a senior monk, one should understand this oneself. Although one may labor on behalf of the assembly and, according to principle, ought to receive offerings of other items, if one is free from greed, there is no offense; but if one is greedy, one incurs an offense. As recorded in the “Sangharakshita Sutra”: “A senior monk with a greedy mind falls into hell or assumes the body of a camel, suffering the torments of burning fire and crying out in anguish.” How could one not be cautious?

Question: If a bhikshu who is not ill claims to be suffering from illness in order to request fine food, what offense does he commit if he obtains the food?

Answer: He commits a grave offense!

Commentary: Through deceit and greed, he is no different from a thief; he deceives people who are poor and distressed.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit if he takes a meal without wearing the three robes?

Answer: He commits an offense of Downfall.

Commentary: This is because he goes against the Buddha’s teaching. Furthermore, when a bhikshu goes on almsround, he may wear the nine-strip robe; when attending a communal meal, he wears the seven-strip robe; and when taking an ordinary meal, he wears the five-strip robe. Moreover, the robes are not to be worn only when taking meals; rather, the third robe must not be separated from the body. Only then is one called a true upholder of the Vinaya conduct. If one does not follow the Buddha’s teaching and merely seeks convenience, one commits this offense.

Question: If a donor invites only two or three members of the Sangha, is it necessary to announce this to the assembly?

Answer: It must be announced.

Commentary: “Announced” means that the monk charged with Sangha duties invites monks by turns in their proper sequence and must not pass over anyone’s place in the order. Because every visiting monk has a share in the material offerings, they would not know about them if no announcement were made; therefore, an announcement must be made.

Question: When fully ordained bhikshus perform a karma procedure to distribute offerings, if a bhikshuni enters the great boundary, is she entitled to a share?

Answer: She is!

Commentary: She is entitled to a share because these are offerings belonging to the presently assembled Sangha of the ten directions. A bhikshuni is also included among the Sangha and therefore receives a share. Otherwise, there would be discrimination between self and others, resulting in the karmic retribution of miserliness. The resident master should therefore understand this.

Question: Someone sends offerings to the Sangha of a particular monastery. After the offerings arrive, another bhikshu comes and is present when they are distributed. Is that bhikshu entitled to a share?

Answer: If the ghanta has been struck, he is entitled to a share; if it has not been struck, he is not.

Commentary: Striking the ghanta announces the matter to the Sangha throughout the ten directions. Therefore, if a monk arrives, he must be given a share; failure to give him one constitutes a fault. If the ghanta has not been struck, he is not entitled to a share, because these articles were offered only to one monastery, not to the Sangha of the ten directions; hence no announcement was made to the Sangha of the ten directions. Therefore, even if a monk arrives, it is proper not to give him a share.

Question: If a bhikshu traveling on the road encounters a woman who offers him an article, may he accept it?

Answer: If that person is a relative, a neighbor from the same village, or an acquaintance, it is permissible to accept it.

Commentary: The Vinaya stipulates that one must not request articles from women with whom one is unacquainted. If one obtains them by asking, people will become suspicious and criticize one.

Question: If a bhikkhu traveling on the road encounters a bhikkhuni who offers him requisites, may he accept them?

Answer: If they are offered to the Sangha, he may accept them; but if they are not offered to the Sangha and he accepts them, he commits an offense entailing expiation.

Commentary: There is no fault if he accepts them on behalf of the Sangha. If he accepts articles that a bhikkhuni offers to him personally, it is feared that worldly people will become suspicious and criticize him.

Question: A donor offers rice to the Sangha, but the Sangha must leave on some business. The donor then uses that rice to make an offering to members of the Sangha who arrive later. May those who arrive later use it?

Answer: If the gandī is struck, they may use it. If the gandī is not struck and they consume even one meal from it, they commit a pārājika offense.

Commentary: Striking the gandī shows that the intention is to offer it to the Sangha and that no one is taking it privately for himself; therefore, consuming the food does not constitute an offense. This food originally belongs to the Sangha of the ten directions. If someone who arrives later takes and uses it privately, this is stealing property belonging to the Sangha of the ten directions.

Question: On the eighth day of the fourth month, a donor offers articles. By the fifteenth day of the seventh month, the former Sangha has departed. The monastery’s administrator distributes those articles among members of the Sangha who arrive later. If the latter divide and accept them, what offense do they commit?

Answer: If the gandī is struck to assemble the Sangha presently in residence and they distribute the articles together, there is no offense. If they distribute them without striking the gandī, they commit the offense of theft.

Question: A lay devotee presents articles as an offering to the Sangha, but one bhikkhu departs on a distant journey before he has time to receive his share. The lay devotee then offers that share to a bhikkhu who arrives later. May the latter accept it?

Answer: He should ask everyone whether the former bhikkhu will return. If they say that he will not return, he may pronounce the dedication and accept it. If they say that he will return, he must not accept it; if he does, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. If he knows that the former bhikkhu has died and nevertheless accepts it, he commits a pārājika offense. When that bhikkhu dies, these articles belong to the Sangha of the four directions.

Question: If a bhikkhu engages in commerce to earn a livelihood and make a profit, and then offers food and robes to another bhikkhu, may the latter accept them?

Answer: If he accepts a robe, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. If they are in a dangerous place where there is no food, and the bhikkhu engaged in commerce instructs a layperson to prepare and offer food, the other bhikkhu may partake of it. At that time, the bhikkhu engaged in commerce should declare to the Sangha: “This article is not mine; it belongs to that person.” If this is done, the food may be eaten.

If that bhikkhu does not declare this to the Sangha and the other bhikkhu eats it, the latter commits an offense entailing expiation. Even if only two or three bhikkhus are present, the declaration should still be made. If the bhikkhu has already given the articles to the person whom he instructed, that person should say: “These articles are mine; venerable ones, you may use them!”

Question: May a bhikkhu invest property to obtain interest or profit?

Answer: No. If he does so, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation.

Question: A bhikkhu accepts a donor’s invitation to receive meals for one hundred days. During that period, may he accept one or two meals from someone else?

Answer: He may do so if the original donor permits it; if the donor does not permit it, he may not.

Question: If a bhikkhu has surplus food from almsround, may he give it to others?

Answer: If he accepted the food without greed and some remains, he should give it to sentient beings. If no sentient beings are present, he should hang it from a tree branch; it is well if sentient beings come and eat it. If no sentient being comes to eat it, he should return the next day, sprinkle it with water, and take it to eat; he must not discard it, for offerings made by faithful donors carry great weight. He is permitted to return and take it for himself because that food has no owner, just as food is gathered in Uttarakuru.

Question: If a bhikkhu is eating rice and either holds rice in his mouth and then spits it out or throws away a ball of rice, does he commit an offense?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing expiation.

Commentary: This results from failing to contemplate the five reflections while eating. If food remains, one may recite a mantra to bless it and sincerely place it in a clean place so that spirits may partake of it, or so that small birds and other creatures may consume it; thereby one gains immeasurable merit. To put such food in one’s mouth and then spit it out is to treat lightly the offerings of benefactors and faithful donors; therefore, one incurs this offense.

Question: A donor earnestly invites a bhikkhu to receive offerings of material goods over an extended period. May the bhikkhu accept the invitation?

Answer: If, at that donor’s place, the bhikkhu is able to practice the Way, no perilous conditions are present, and the people are not poor or destitute, he may go and receive the offerings.

Question: A donor invites a bhikkhu to his home for a meal. May the bhikkhu send someone else in his place?

Answer: If the donor did not have a particular bhikkhu in mind, he may do so. But if the donor specified that bhikkhu and moreover does not approve of a substitute, the bhikkhu commits an offense entailing expiation.

Question: May a bhikkhu consume food offered to Hārītī, the Mother of Demon Children?

Answer: Yes, but he must first pronounce a dedication before eating it.

Commentary: If only incense, lamps, and food offered to spirits are present, members of the Sangha must all pronounce a dedication before they may eat it. As for the mantra, they may uphold whichever one they deem appropriate. The dedication consists of wishing that Hārītī, the Mother of Demon Children, the spirits, and others may quickly attain deliverance and be reborn in a pure realm; one should also wish that the donor of the food may increase in merit and wisdom. However, members of the Sangha may eat this food only if they happen upon it and have nothing else to eat; otherwise, they must not consume it.

Question: If a donor offers cattle, horses, and servants to a bhikkhu in an amount equivalent to the value of food offered, may the bhikkhu accept them?

Answer: He may accept and make use of them, but he must not sell them. If the donor gives weapons such as bows, knives, or clubs, he must not accept them.

Question: A donor provides material goods to offer a vegetarian meal to the Sangha at a certain residence. After the meal, the Sangha departs and food remains. May members of the Sangha of the ten directions who arrive later consume it?

Answer: If the gandī is struck to make an announcement, they may consume it. If they consume it without striking the gandī, they commit the offense of theft.

Question: Many bhikkhus sit together at the same table. If one consumes another’s portion, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he asks the other bhikkhu and receives his consent, he commits no offense. If consent is not given and he takes and eats it, he commits an offense entailing expiation. If he takes and eats it without asking, he likewise commits an offense entailing expiation. It does not constitute the offense of theft because the offered articles have already been given by the donor.

Question: When a bhikkhu requests articles, the donor asks whether he has attained the fruit of sanctity. The bhikkhu replies that he has attained it. If he obtains the requested articles, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he has truly attained realization but declares his own attainment, he commits an offense entailing expiation. If he has not attained it but says that he has, he commits a pārājika offense.

Question: May a bhikkhu give all his surplus possessions to others one after another and then say: “If I need them later, I shall come and take them back myself”?

Answer: This is permissible if the recipient is trustworthy. Nevertheless, afterward he must also tell another person: “I have offered these articles to the bhikkhu named….” When he wishes to retrieve them, he must first approach and inform that person before taking them; he must not simply take them on his own authority.

9. SECTION OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING ILLNESS

Question: When a bhikkhu is ill, may he take food while separated from his bowl?

Answer: If he is seriously ill, he may; if his illness is mild, he may not.

Question: What offense does an ill bhikkhu commit if he does not keep his three robes with him?

Answer: If his illness is so grave that he is no longer conscious, he may be separated from his three robes. If he remains conscious, he must not be separated from them.

Commentary: Alas! Even when ill but still conscious, one may not be separated from the three robes, much less when one is not ill. Monks in the present age, though strong and healthy, are unwilling to strive onward. They rely only on the strength of solitary practice and neglect their robes and alms bowl, thereby contravening the Buddha’s teaching. How could they not incur an offense? Monks who uphold the precepts must certainly remember these words and engrave them upon their hearts.

Question: If a monk caring for a sick person takes money belonging to that patient on his own initiative and uses it to assist another patient, make robes, prepare food, or purchase medicine, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he uses five coins or more, he commits a Parajika offense. However, if the monk later tells the patient what he has done and the patient is pleased, he commits no offense. If the patient becomes angry and the monk does not make restitution, he also commits a Parajika offense.

Question: For the sake of a sick monk, a donor offers one hundred coins each day. However, only fifty coins are needed. May the surplus be given to another sick person to purchase food and medicine?

Answer: It is permissible if the sick monk himself gives it.

Question: If a monk is ill and has no one to care for him, may another monk prepare food and provide it to him?

Answer: In a remote mountain or forest place where no one is present and no one comes each day, he may prepare food for up to seven days. However, the monk must first formally receive pure rice and firewood before preparing it.

Commentary: Rice and firewood that have not been purified are not to be accepted, out of concern that insects and ants might be harmed. It is also said that they may be purified by a Sangha procedure within the assembly and then received and used to prepare food. The chapter “The Procedure for Receiving Permission to Leave for a Specified Number of Days” in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: “When there is work concerning the Buddha, the Sangha, or a stupa; or when circumstances involving one’s parents arise;

or when a donor invites a monk to confer the precepts, hear a confession, examine an illness and prescribe medicine, answer questions about doubtful matters, or explain the Dharma—what is to be done?” The Buddha taught: “If the monk cannot return within one day, he is permitted to leave for seven days.

If the work cannot be completed and he cannot return within seven days, he is permitted to leave for fifteen days. If he cannot return within fifteen days, he may leave for one month. On the final day of the month, the monk should return.

Before departing, however, he must request the harmonious Sangha to perform a motion followed by one proclamation before he may leave the boundary. When the work is finished, he must return to the rains retreat and remain until its completion, thereby fulfilling his retreat seniority.”

Question: If a sick person needs one or two liters of alcohol to mix with medicine for treatment, is this permissible?

Answer: If a physician says that drinking it can cure the illness, it may be mixed into medicine and taken, but unmixed alcohol may not be drunk.

Commentary: Drinking unmixed alcohol violates the precepts and incurs a Pacittiya offense; therefore, it must not be drunk. Drinking alcohol entails thirty-six faults and even immeasurable faults. If a householder drinks alcohol, his family may be ruined and his country lost. For members of the Sangha, alcohol causes delusion and the loss of one’s true nature. This is clearly explained in the Vinaya and will not be quoted here.

Question: May an ill monk practice breath ingestion[11]?

Answer: No, because it is the same as the practice of non-Buddhist ascetics.

Question: If a monk suffers from abdominal distension, may he ask someone to recite a mantra to cure it?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: Distension is an illness caused by the accumulation of cold and hot vital energies; that is, it arises from disharmony of the wind element. If a monk suffers from this illness, medicine is ordinarily administered to make the vital energies circulate. Is there, within the Buddhist teaching, a practice of mantra-blessed water that may be used to treat this illness?

The Buddha permitted it. This is because the deep underlying cause of the illness is the mind’s deluded and inverted thinking, and mantras can help eliminate such delusions. The Consecration Sutra states: “Recite the mantra one hundred and eight times over water free of microorganisms, empowering the water, and then give it to the sick person to drink; all the suffering of illness will thereby be eliminated.” This is precisely the meaning intended here.

Question: If a monk is gravely ill and relinquishes part of his three robes and his alms bowl as an offering to the Sangha, or sells his robes and bowl to obtain money for meritorious deeds, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he has old robes with which to replace them, it is permissible. If he sells them and has no old robes to use in their place, he commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

Commentary: This is because, in seeking recovery from illness, he acts contrary to the Buddha’s teaching. The Buddha taught that robes and bowl are indispensable articles for sustaining and protecting the body and are also essential conditions for entering the Path, like the two wheels of a cart or the two wings of a bird. Therefore, one should relinquish one’s very life rather than be separated from one’s robes and bowl for even a single night.

10. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE PASSING OF A MONK

Question: Regarding the possessions of a monk who has passed away, if the Sangha neither sounds the gandī to announce the matter nor performs a formal Sangha act before distributing them, what offense is committed?

Answer: Within a formally established boundary, if there are ten or more persons, the gandī must be sounded to make an announcement, and a formal Sangha act must be performed to distribute the possessions. If they perform the formal act without sounding the gandī, or sound the gandī without performing the formal act, they commit a Parajika offense. This is because all the possessions of a deceased monk belong to the Sangha of the four directions and therefore may not be distributed at will.

Outside a formally established boundary, if there are five or more persons, they may perform a formal Sangha act to distribute the articles without sounding the gandī, because no formal boundary exists there. If there are four persons or fewer, they may not perform a formal Sangha act to distribute the articles but must carry them to a Sangha residence. If they distribute them on their own initiative, they commit a Parajika offense.

If one takes the articles on one’s own initiative to another Sangha residence and enters its great boundary, no offense is committed; but if one subsequently carries the articles out of that great boundary on one’s own initiative, one commits a Parajika offense. Thus, after the articles have been brought to another Sangha residence, each time they are taken outside its great boundary, a Parajika offense is committed. The same applies when a disciple carries away the possessions of his teacher.

Question: When a monk passes away, if his disciple does not hand his teacher’s possessions over to the great assembly but instead distributes them on his own initiative as offerings to the Sangha at that residence, may the Sangha use them?

Answer: If that disciple knows of the rule requiring the gandī to be sounded first to make an announcement but does not sound it, he commits an offense. If the Sangha uses the possessions without sounding the gandī or performing a formal Sangha act, they commit a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

Commentary: When disciples nowadays see that their teacher has passed away, they immediately assume that all the property and possessions left by their teacher naturally belong to them, just as the estate of parents is necessarily left to their children and no one would dare contend for it. Yet they do not understand that the Buddha-Dharma differs from worldly conventions. Thus, regardless of whether it constitutes an offense, and even though hell may await them, they still act in this way!

Just look at what is before your eyes! Such people are merely worldly monks. Although they study the Path, they do not understand the Buddha-Dharma.

How deeply lamentable! Those who study the Path should thoroughly understand the forms of the teaching and have clear faith in cause and effect. Otherwise, although they study the Path, they will fall into hell, with nowhere at all to appeal for aid!

Question: If a teacher passes away and the Sangha performs a formal Sangha act to distribute his possessions, does his disciple receive a share?

Answer: Yes, because the disciple is also a member of the Sangha.

Commentary: Alas! The disciple is also a member of the assembly and therefore may receive only one share. From this, one may understand how perfectly impartial the Buddha-Dharma is. In the Dharma-ending age, if there is a disciple capable of acting in this way, he may be regarded as a true practitioner. He will certainly increase in morality, concentration, and wisdom, with the hope of attaining the fruit of unsurpassed bodhi. If he cannot act in this way, he remains dim and confused, with no clear understanding of cause and effect. If he wishes to seek the noble Path, it is to be feared that he can expect to attain nothing in the present life.

Question: If a teacher passes away and no other members of the Sangha are present, but there are only five or ten disciples, may they perform a formal Sangha act to distribute his possessions?

Answer: Yes. Since these are indeed Sangha members, they may receive a share, but the gaṇḍī must be struck and a karma procedure performed. If this is not done, they may not receive a share.

Question: When a sick bhikshu dies, may his disciples or caregivers take any remaining requisites offered for the sick and give them to another sick person?

Answer: These are requisites belonging to the Sangha and may not be given to others at one's own discretion. If one gives away property worth five coins, one commits a Parajika offense.

Question: When one's master, disciple, parents, or siblings die, is one permitted to weep?

Answer: No. To weep aloud constitutes a Pacittiya offense; one may only weep silently.

Commentary: Silent weeping shows that, although the path of transcendence does not lie outside the conventional truth, those born together in the same assembly cannot bear to be suddenly separated. This may be understood from the Ullambana Sutra, which says that Venerable Maudgalyayana shed tears of compassion.... Furthermore, the “Instructions for Disciples” by Chan Master Mingjiao Song states that when one's parents, masters, patriarchs, or members of the Sangha die, one must not wear mourning garments while reciting sutras during the funeral rites; one may, however, wear monastic robes, including the great robe.

One should certainly observe inward mourning for three years and sincerely cultivate pure Dharma practices to create merit for the deceased. At the spring and autumn memorial observances, one should arrange a vegetarian offering and recite sutras. In every matter and every practice, this should differ from worldly customs.

This is called great filial piety.

Question: When a monk passes away, some bhikshus are present, but they are absent when the karma procedure for distributing his requisites is performed; or they are absent when he passes away but present for the karma procedure. May they receive a share of the requisites?

Answer: All those who arrive in time to be present for the karma procedure may receive a share of the requisites. Those who were present when he passed away but are absent from the karma procedure may not receive a share.

Commentary: Although bhikshus were present when the Sangha member passed away, that moment belongs to the past. If they are absent at the karma procedure, that pertains to the future. Neither is the present, so they may not receive a share.

However, according to the Mahasanghika Vinaya, those who were present when the Sangha member passed away but not at the karma procedure may sometimes still receive a share. This also applies to a bhikshu who is absent because he has gone to seek a physician or obtain medicine for the sick, or because he is attending to matters concerning a stupa or the Sangha. This is called the Dharma of impermanent possessions.

Yet there are also times when articles should not be distributed. Among them, some should be allotted to those who recite and study the sutras and Vinaya.... They should not be distributed for sale; if they are divided up and sold, an offense is committed.

You should be careful regarding this matter.

Question: When a bhikshu passes away, what offense is committed if his disciples purchase a coffin and clothing for his burial?

Answer: When a bhikshu dies, the Sangha should be informed. The Sangha will provide a nivāsana[12] and saṅghakakṣikā[13] with which to clothe him. All the bhikshu's other possessions must be assigned to the Sangha and must not be buried with him. If an article worth five coins is buried with him, a Parajika offense is committed. If the articles belong personally to the disciple, they may be used. If the deceased understood the Dharma and made arrangements beforehand while still alive, and those who come afterward dispose of the property accordingly, there is no offense.

Question: When one's parents or relatives die, may a bhikshu provide clothing and a coffin for their burial?

Answer: No. If his parents are ill and have no one to support them, a bhikshu may go on almsround and share half of what he receives with them. If his parents are able to perform minor tasks themselves, such as spinning thread or weaving cloth, he may not provide them with food. If a bhikshu provides them with food, he commits a Pacittiya offense; if he provides clothing, he commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense. How much less may he provide a coffin for their burial after they have died!

Question: Before a sick bhikshu died, he gave his robe and bowl to his caregiver without a karma procedure. The caregiver later sold the robe and bowl and used the money to purchase food as an offering to the Sangha. May the Sangha consume it?

Answer: If the Sangha consumes it before performing a karma procedure, the Sangha commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense. If the caregiver did not know that, in the Buddha-Dharma, a karma procedure must be performed before the food may be eaten, and no karma procedure had yet been performed, the Sangha should instruct him to have the procedure performed before consuming it.

Question: A bhikshu lends an article to another bhikshu, but that bhikshu passes away. May the lender take it back on his own authority?

Answer: He may not take back anything on his own authority. If he does so, he commits a Dushkrita offense. He should inform the Sangha; if the Sangha returns it, he may take it. If the Sangha does not give it to him and he takes it on his own authority, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

Commentary: This is property of the Sangha and should not be taken. It is best to relinquish it; if one does not relinquish it, one falls into hell. Because greed causes one to violate what the Buddha established, one incurs this offense.

Question: When his master passes away, may a bhikshu build a stupa in his honor?

Answer: He may build it with his own resources, but he may not use his master's resources.

Question: May a bhikshu bow in reverence before his master's tomb or stupa?

Answer: Yes. Someone may object: “While alive, he was my master, but now that he is dead, he is no longer a bhikshu and is merely a set of dry bones. Why, then, should I bow before him?” The reply is: “Thus, while the Buddha was in the world, one should revere him and make offerings to him. After the Buddha entered nirvana, he too was merely a set of dry bones; why, then, should offerings be made? Therefore, know that while the master was alive, he benefited everyone through the true Dharma. What fault could there be in bowing before him after he has passed away?”

Question: After the karma procedure for distributing the articles has been completed, if a Sangha member arrives, may he receive a share of the articles?

Answer: If he arrives only after the karma procedure has been proclaimed three times and completed, there is no offense in not giving him a share. If he arrives after the first proclamation, he may still receive a share.

11. SECTION OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE THREE ROBES

Question: When a bhikshu washes the three robes, must he relinquish them?

Answer: He must relinquish them. If he does not, he commits a Pacittiya offense. That is, he should give them to another person and may receive them back only after that person returns them.

Commentary: Washing and relinquishing a robe is equivalent to making a new robe; therefore, it must be relinquished and then received back. Whenever robes are washed, this should be done with meticulous care. They should not be beaten with the hands or trodden upon with the feet, nor should water be held in the mouth and sprayed upon them. One should venerate the robes as one venerates the Buddha; be careful never to treat them lightly. The texts for the karma procedures of relinquishment and reception are all as prescribed in the Vinaya. If there is no time to perform the karma procedure, one may give instructions as circumstances permit, ask the person entrusted with the robes, and simply say “relinquish” or “receive.”

Question: May all three robes have an equal number of strips?

Answer: This is permitted for the great robe, but not for the middle and lower robes.

Commentary: In each strip of the great robe, the number of long sections exceeds that of the short sections, symbolizing that within the subtle mind-ground there are many habitual tendencies and afflictions. It also symbolizes that whenever one receives the precepts and dons the robe, the mind of the noble Sangha grows within one's mental karma while ordinary thoughts diminish. This is the initial cause for transcending the twenty-five states of existence within the three realms.

In each strip of the middle robe, the long sections outnumber the short, symbolizing the four faults of verbal karma. Next, with respect to mental karma, it symbolizes that once one receives the precepts and maintains the robe, noble intentions increase while ordinary thoughts diminish. This is the initial cause for escaping the seven destinies.

In each strip of the lower robe, the long sections outnumber the short, symbolizing the three faults of bodily karma. Next, with respect to the four faults of verbal karma, once one receives the precepts and maintains the robe, noble thoughts increase while ordinary thoughts diminish. This is the initial cause for escaping the five destinies.

Thus, the numbers of strips and the arrangement of long and short sections in the middle and lower robes differ from the supremely exalted function of the great robe; therefore, it is said that they may not be the same.

Question: May a bhikshu wear the five-strip robe when burning incense as an offering to the Buddha and when entering the Dharma hall to hear the teachings?

Answer: He may do so if he has no seven-strip robe. He may also do so if the five-strip robe has not yet been worn and remains clean.

Commentary: The five-panel robe is ordinarily worn while working, drinking water, rinsing the mouth, and so forth. For such activities as burning incense, however, a bhikshu should wear the seven-panel robe. If he does not have one, he may temporarily substitute another robe. If he has one but does not use it properly, he disrupts the established rules; therefore, this is not permitted. It should be understood that because the five-panel robe is worn next to the body, it is often soiled. If it is clean, the Buddha does not prohibit its use.

Question: When a bhikshu washes his robe and some threads come loose, may he use rice water to starch and bind them back together?

Answer: No. If he does so, he commits a Patayantika offense.

Question: May an additional inner lining be sewn into the three robes?

Answer: They may be sewn with or without a lining.

Commentary: The Vinaya teaches that the great robe may have six layers, while the seven-panel and five-panel robes may have one or two layers, according to whether the weather is hot or cold.

Question: May the great robe be worn while listening to Dharma teachings and bowing to the Buddha?

Answer: If one does not have the middle robe, it may be worn.

Commentary: When listening to Dharma teachings and bowing to the Buddha, one must wear the seven-panel robe; the great robe is worn when ascending the Dharma seat, going on almsround, and so forth. The present allowance in cases of deficiency is merely a provisional expedient. Otherwise, a bhikshu must not disrupt these regulations. Therefore, one who acts contrary to them may also be liable to an offense.

Question: May a bhikshu use thin silk to make the three robes?

Answer: Any robe made of thin silk may be worn, provided the body cannot be seen through it.

Commentary: The Pratimoksha states: “The three robes should be made of coarse cloth woven from hemp fibers. If animal hair or silk is used, living beings are harmed and compassion is impaired. Even if the robes have already been made, they must all be torn apart and rubbed upon the ground.” The present passage says that raw silk may be used because the Tathagata, as an expedient, taught according to the capacities and circumstances of beings.

This sutra is certainly a provisional teaching within the Hinayana teachings, temporarily granting permission; it is certainly not an enduring rule. The Pratimoksha, however, sets forth the enduring precepts, encompassing the Mahayana as well. Therefore, it does not formulate regulations in this provisional manner, varying according to time and circumstance.

Careful reflection will make this clear.

Question: If, in anger, a bhikshu deliberately destroys his robe, bowl, or khakkhara, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If, in anger, he deliberately destroys any of the three robes or his alms bowl, he commits a Nissaggiya Patayantika offense. If he destroys his khakkhara, he commits a Patayantika offense. If he damages another person’s property, its monetary value must be assessed to determine the offense.

Question: May the three robes be lent to another person?

Answer: Yes, but they must not be taken outside the great boundary overnight. If they remain within the great boundary, there is no limit on the number of days.

Commentary: The Vinaya teaches that one must not be separated from one’s robes overnight—how much less may they be taken outside the great boundary! Being separated by two zhang and five chi already constitutes separation from the robes. Within the great boundary, however, if necessity requires temporarily lending one robe to another person, there is no limit on the number of days. But lending all of them is absolutely impermissible.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit if he enters a village without wearing the great robe?

Answer: If he carries it over his shoulder when entering, he commits no offense. If he has been sent by the Sangha, or if he goes on behalf of a sick person and does not take it with him, he commits no offense.

Question: When one of the three robes is torn, may it be used immediately after being patched, or must it first be given to another person?

Answer: If a tear is as large as a cat’s pawprint, the robe must be given to another person. Only after that person returns it may the bhikshu patch and wear it. Alternatively, he may patch it first and then give it to another person.

12. SECTION OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE BOWL

Question: In the case of a bhikshu, what constitutes the loss of a bowl?

Answer: If the bowl is chipped, perforated, cracked, broken, or stained with oil that cannot be washed away, it is considered lost. A chipped, perforated, or broken bowl cannot be repaired. A cracked bowl, however, should be repaired by the bhikshu himself and then given to another person. Only after that person returns it may the bhikshu accept and use it. The same applies to a bowl stained with oil that cannot be washed away.

Question: May a bhikshu place his bowl upside down on a wall?

Answer: If the bowl is covered with a cloth, it may be placed in a clean location. It is best to put it in a bag and hang it up. The bowl must not be placed upside down on a wall. In ancient times, the group of six bhikshus placed their bowls upside down on a wall, and the bowls fell to the ground and broke. Because of this incident, the Buddha established the precept: Bowls must not be placed upside down on a wall. Anyone who does so commits a Patayantika offense; if the bowl falls to the ground and breaks, he commits a Nissaggiya Patayantika offense.

Question: In the morning, a bhikshu may use his bowl to eat rice. If he does not use it, does he commit an offense?

Answer: The bowl should be used for every meal. If he does not use his bowl at all during an entire day, he commits a Patayantika offense.

Commentary: This means that using the bowl for even one meal during the day is sufficient. The Buddha himself never went a day without his robe and bowl. Even patriarchs of later generations, such as Yunmen, Deshan, and Yongming, never left them even briefly. Bhikshus in the present age should not be lazy or negligent in this matter and thereby incur offenses themselves.

Question: When a bhikshu has nearly finished his rice, may he tilt the bowl to scrape up the remainder?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: A bhikshu must hold the bowl properly. When he has nearly finished eating, he may fear that tilting the bowl to scrape it clean would compromise his dignified conduct, and therefore asks the Buddha. The Buddha says: “There is no fault.” The Vinaya merely teaches that one must not make noises by scraping the bowl while eating, for this causes fire to arise in the throats of hungry ghosts. Therefore, a bhikshu should be careful about this.

Question: After a bhikshu has finished his rice and then eats fruit, may his hands leave the bowl?

Answer: Yes. Even before he has finished his rice, he may temporarily let go of the bowl.

Question: While eating, a bhikshu should hold the bowl, but may he also set it on the ground?

Answer: He should hold it up. If there is a legitimate reason, however, setting the bowl on the ground is not an offense.

Question: May a bhikshu fill a smaller bowl with rice, place it inside his alms bowl, and eat from it in that manner?

Answer: No. If he does so, he commits a Patayantika offense.

Commentary: Bhikshus do this out of laziness, fear of the cold, or reluctance to wash their bowls. If this is repeatedly cultivated until it becomes habitual, all proper observance will be lost; therefore, it constitutes a Nissaggiya Patayantika offense. This fault is not minor, so one must be careful. Furthermore, acting in this manner is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching.

Question: May the bowl be lent to another person?

Answer: Yes, except while one is eating.

Question: May the bowl be used to cook food?

Answer: No. If it is used for cooking, one commits a Nissaggiya Patayantika offense.

Commentary: Even when washing the bowl, warm water must be used. If it is washed with boiling water, the glaze may be damaged, making grime adhere easily. How much more improper, then, would it be to use the bowl for cooking! Such indiscriminate use would violate the regulations.

13. SECTION OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS

Question: Suppose a thief steals a bhikshu’s belongings, but they have not yet been carried outside the great boundary. The bhikshu sees that they are his possessions but does not know who stole them. May he take them back?

Answer: He may take them back, but when doing so, he must form the same intention prescribed for reclaiming valuables among the ninety matters previously discussed. That is, he must first reflect: “If someone claims these things, I must not take them. If no one claims them, I shall announce the matter to the assembly before taking them.” If there is no Sangha present, he must perform the prescribed procedure for taking an object belonging within the boundary. He must not regard it as his own property and take it on his own authority.

Question: When the Sangha strikes the gandhi to announce a meal and a monastic from outside the great boundary arrives, what offense is committed if that monastic is not given food?

Answer: They lose great benefit and also commit a Dushkrita offense.

Commentary: Striking the gandī means notifying the Sangha of the ten directions to come and partake. Yet if one begrudges the offering and does not distribute shares, this is called “speaking of communal use with the mouth while intending private use in the mind.” This causes everyone to reproach one, while both oneself and others lose the benefit; therefore, one commits this offense. If one encounters shameless people who constantly come to cause trouble, it is permissible merely to give them a small portion. It is not permissible, however, to give them nothing at all.

Question: A bhikkhu previously instructed a donor to prepare a meal offering for one hundred persons. If from one to ten additional persons arrive, may they be allowed to partake? Does the bhikkhu who gave the instruction commit an offense?

Answer: If additional members of the Sangha arrive when the gandī is struck for the meal, they should be allowed to partake. The person who gave the instruction commits no offense. Why? Because when the gandī is struck to invite the Sangha, what fault could there be if many members of the Sangha come? Whenever the gandī is struck, one must form the thought of inviting the Sangha of the four directions. Whether many or few members of the Sangha arrive, all goods, food, and drink must be distributed among them. There is no fault in this.

Question: A bhikkhu instructs a layperson to make offerings to the Sangha. If members of the Sangha from outside the boundary come to ask for something, may the bhikkhu give them one sheng or five sheng of provisions?

Answer: No. If he knows that this is not in accordance with the Dharma yet arbitrarily gives even a portion worth five coins, he commits a pārājika offense. If he informs the assembly and the Sangha consents, then it is permissible.

Question: If a donor makes a long-term offering to the Sangha of one hundred coins each day, but the assembly uses only fifty coins, may the remainder be used for other purposes?

Answer: It may be used after the gandī has been struck to notify the assembly. If members of the Sangha lack robes or bowls, then even without striking the gandī, it may be spent for that purpose provided the Sangha is harmonious. Better still is to reduce one’s own share and offer it to visiting members of the Sangha.

Question: A donor offers food to a bhikkhu for ten days. After those ten days, food remains, and the donor additionally prepares fine food as an offering for another three or five days. What offense does the bhikkhu commit by partaking of it?

Answer: He commits no offense. However, he must not ask for more; if he does, he commits a pācittiya offense. If he leaves before the ten days are complete, he also commits a nissaggiya pācittiya offense.

Question: A donor offers food to a bhikkhu for ten days, but the bhikkhu himself divides it into smaller portions to make it last for one month. Is this permissible?

Answer: It is permissible after the gandī has been struck to notify the assembly. If the gandī is not struck and, during this period, members of the Sangha must leave on some business, yet no offering is provided to members of the Sangha who arrive later, and those who arrive later finish their own portions and then consume the portions of others, they commit a pārājika offense if they eat their fill, or a pācittiya offense if they do not eat their fill.

Question: If one’s parents or siblings are in debt, are seized by their creditor, and are sold to someone else, may a bhikkhu solicit goods to redeem them?

Answer: Yes. However, he must not say that he is soliciting them for himself; he must say that he is soliciting them for his parents or siblings. If anything remains after the obtained goods have been used to make compensation, the bhikkhu must not use it himself, because those goods already belong to the person who was redeemed. If he uses them himself and his relative bears no resentment, he commits a nissaggiya pācittiya offense. If the relative bears resentment and the bhikkhu does not return them, he commits a pārājika offense.

Question: May a bhikkhu go to a wine seller’s house to ask for food and goods? If he has no particular reason to be there, may he sit and engage in idle conversation?

Answer: He must not enter any doorway where wine is present; if he does, he commits a pācittiya offense. If the house has other entrances where wine is not displayed for sale, he may enter through them. If a donor who sells wine invites a bhikkhu to a prepared meal offering, the bhikkhu should ask:

– Can the donor undertake the one-day precepts[14]?

If the donor answers that he can, the bhikkhu should administer the precepts for him to uphold, and the Sangha may go to his house. If he does not undertake the precepts but can suspend the sale of wine for one day, the bhikkhu may go to his house. The same applies to the house of a butcher.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit if he pressures someone to drink wine?

Answer: If he deliberately pressures the person but that person does not drink, he commits a dukkaṭa offense. If the person drinks, the bhikkhu commits a pācittiya offense.

Commentary: A person who craves food falls into the Hells of Hot Excrement and Boiling Copper. The sutra states: “If one hands another person a cup of wine to drink, one will be born without hands for five hundred lifetimes; how much more so if one drinks it oneself or tells another to drink!” If one can persuade a single person to abstain from meat, observe the precept against drinking alcohol, or even undertake and uphold the Three Refuges and Five Precepts, both will gain immeasurable merit and benefit.

Question: A bhikkhu entrusts an object to a layperson, but after the appointed time the bhikkhu has not come to retrieve it, so the layperson gives it to another bhikkhu. May that other bhikkhu take it?

Answer: He may not take it. If the bhikkhu who owns the object is still alive, it is property with an owner. If that bhikkhu has passed away, the object belongs to the Sangha of the four directions.

Question: May a bhikkhu carry a torch while traveling at night?

Answer: In winter he may do so, but in summer he should carry a lantern. If he carries a torch, he commits a pācittiya offense.

Commentary: He may carry a torch in winter because no insects fly into it. He commits a pācittiya offense in summer because he harms insects and ants.

Question: If an article belonging to a bhikkhu is worth one coin but can be sold elsewhere for three or five coins, may he accept the surplus?

Answer: No. If he accepts it, he commits a nissaggiya pācittiya offense.

Commentary: The value of an article rises or falls according to whether a locality is wealthy or poor. In principle, there is no fault in this. It is permissible for worldly people, but a renunciant who has gone beyond the world should always practice relinquishment and generosity. How could he covet offerings and seek profit, thereby increasing his faults? Therefore, he commits this offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit if, in jest, he borrows another person’s property and does not return it?

Answer: Whether he takes or gives something in jest, he commits a nissaggiya pācittiya offense. If the person does not give it and the bhikkhu forcibly seizes it, he commits a pārājika offense.

Question: May a bhikkhu consume food remaining after another bhikkhu has tasted it?

Answer: No. If he knowingly consumes it, he commits a pācittiya offense, and the bhikkhu who tasted the food also commits a pācittiya offense. If they do not confess, their offenses increase day by day. Long ago, there was a bhikkhu serving as a steward who was assigned to prepare food. He would regularly touch the bowls and dishes of food with his fingers and say, “Take this dish; eat this dish.” This bhikkhu did so every day and refused to confess. Consequently, after his life ended, he fell into the realm of hungry ghosts. One night, the bhikkhu Asaṅga entered the latrine and suddenly heard a moaning sound. He asked, “Who are you?”

Answer: I am a hungry ghost.

Question: What did you do in the past that caused you to fall into the realm of hungry ghosts?

Answer: I served as the Sangha steward in this monastery.

Question: You were originally a very diligent person. Why did you fall into the realm of hungry ghosts?

Answer: I gave impure food to the Sangha to consume.

Question: What do you mean by saying it was impure?

Answer: I touched the assembly’s bowls of food with my fingers and said, “Take this dish; eat this dish!” At that moment, I had already committed a pācittiya offense. Yet three recitations of the precepts passed without my confessing it, so the offense gradually increased and became exceedingly grave. For this reason, I fell into the realm of hungry ghosts. My hands keep striking my chest until the skin is torn and the flesh mangled, and then I clutch my own throat until water gushes out.

Question: Why must you strike your chest?

Answer: The insects feeding within my body cause me pain.

Question: Why do you clutch your throat until water gushes out?

Answer: There are insects in my mouth.

Question: Why do you moan?

Answer: He was so extremely hungry and thirsty that he was about to die.

Question: Is there anything you wish to eat?

Answer: I wish to eat excrement, but I cannot do so.

Question: Why can you not eat it?

Answer: Because many kinds of ghosts push and struggle against one another for it, so I cannot approach and obtain any.

Question: Then what can I do to help you?

Answer: Please ask the Sangha to bestow a blessing upon me!

Asanga said, “Very well!”

He then returned and reported the matter to the Sangha. The Sangha asked:

“In the past, that person practiced diligently, so why did he fall into the realm of hungry ghosts?”

Answer: It was because in the past he gave impure food to the Sangha and did not repent. Please have the Sangha bestow a blessing upon him!

The Sangha then bestowed a blessing, and that ghost was able to eat excrement and no longer wailed. From this incident as evidence, one should know that a senior bhiksu must not prepare food with his own hands or touch the Sangha’s bowls. If a bowl does not belong to the Sangha, however, he commits no offense by personally receiving it and then handing it to the Sangha.

Question: If a teacher orders his disciple to engage in commerce or perform unlawful deeds, may the disciple leave the teacher?

Answer: He may leave. There are four circumstances in which a disciple should remain with his teacher:

1. If the teacher teaches the Dharma and provides food but does not provide robes and a bowl, the disciple should remain.

2. If the teacher teaches the Dharma and provides robes and a bowl but does not provide food, the disciple should remain.

3. If the teacher teaches the Dharma and provides robes, a bowl, and food, the disciple should remain.

4. If the teacher teaches the Dharma but provides neither robes and a bowl nor food, the disciple should remain.

If the teacher does not teach the Dharma but provides robes, a bowl, and food, the disciple should leave.

Question: What things must be purified, and how many kinds of things require purification?

Answer: Vegetables and fruits should be purified by cutting them with a knife, peeling them by hand, or scorching them with fire; only rice needs to be cooked with fire. Fruit from which the seeds have been completely removed may be eaten without fault.

Question: May a bhiksu wear footwear when bowing to the Three Jewels?

Answer: He may, provided the footwear is clean.

Commentary: In accordance with the Dharma, when bowing to the Three Jewels or a Buddha stupa, one should remove one’s footwear and head covering and arrange the robe to bare the right shoulder. Those who are ill, however, may wear bearskin footwear. Footwear made from the following five kinds of hides may not be worn: elephant, horse, lion, tiger, and wolf, as well as the hides of animals belonging to the same kinds. Here, however, the Buddha permitted footwear to be worn, provided it was thoroughly clean. If the footwear is unclean, one commits a duskrta offense.

Question: What offense does a bhiksu commit if he paints flowers and leaves upon banners and streamers and then sells them for money?

Answer: He commits a naihsargika-payattika offense.

Commentary: This is because he harbors greed. It is permissible to paint banners and streamers as offerings to the Three Jewels. If he sells them for money, however, the offense is the same as that involved in the commerce and hired labor discussed above.

Question: What offense does a bhiksu commit if he teaches others to engage in commerce?

Answer: He commits a naihsargika-payattika offense.

Commentary: A bhiksu should practice the pure livelihood of renunciation and should likewise teach others to practice it. If, instead, a bhiksu instructs others to engage in commerce, he gives rise to greed. Moreover, because he disregards the precepts established by the Buddha and teaches others causes and conditions that bind them, he commits a naihsargika-payattika offense.

Question: What offense does a bhiksu commit if he keeps servants, oxen, donkeys, or horses?

Answer: He commits a naihsargika-payattika offense. If he does not repent, the offense grows more serious, as explained above.

Commentary: All sentient beings possess Buddha-nature and are no different from ourselves. If a bhiksu keeps people and domestic animals to command and employ them, his mind gives rise to distinctions between people and animals, masters and servants, and self and other. He loses his compassion, pursues excessive desires, and is not a disciple of the Buddha; therefore, he commits this offense.

If he recognizes it and repents, the offense is extinguished; if he does not repent, it becomes grave. The “Sun Treasury Section” of the sutra states: “In my Dharma, a community of one to four bhiksus may not accept and keep servants.” The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states: “Bhiksus may not keep cats, dogs, or birds, but a community of five or more bhiksus may do so.” This means that when required for the work of the Buddha, bhiksus may accept servants, donkeys, and horses for use.

If there is no work of the Buddha to be performed and a bhiksu privately keeps and uses them, he commits an offense.

Question: If a layperson comes to a bhiksu seeking ordination, may he consume the Sangha’s food before his head has been shaved?

Answer: He may if the Sangha has been informed. If the Sangha has not been informed, the bhiksu who gives him food commits a payattika offense.

Commentary: All things belonging to a bhiksu also belong to the assembly. If he does not inform the assembly but privately gives them to one person, he commits this offense. He should address the assembly: “May the venerable Sangha listen! I, named… of the family…, today address the Sangha to request permission to ordain a person who will receive the precepts. I ask the Sangha to permit me to ordain this person to receive the precepts. Please show compassionate mercy.” This should be said three times. The details may be consulted in the Vinaya and are not quoted here.

Question: If a bhiksu goes to collect almsfood on behalf of the Sangha, may he consume the Sangha’s food while traveling?

Answer: If, before departing, he informed the Sangha and the Sangha granted permission, he may consume it. If he did not inform the Sangha when he departed but reports it after returning and the Sangha grants permission, he may also consume it. If the Sangha does not grant permission, he must calculate its monetary value and provide compensation. If he does not compensate the Sangha, he commits a grave offense.

Question: If another person leaves bowls and utensils overnight in a bhiksu’s room for safekeeping, is an offense committed?

Answer: No offense is committed.

Commentary: No offense is committed because the objects entrusted by another person have no connection with the bhiksu himself. Since he has not personally committed the fault of keeping food overnight, there is no offense.

Question: May a bhiksu keep one or two containers of oil intended for lamps offered to the Buddha in his room?

Answer: He may!

Commentary: If the oil is not misused, there is no fault in storing it in his room. If he keeps it for personal use, the offense should be determined according to its monetary value.

Question: May a bhiksu keep medicinal wine in his room?

Answer: If it is for treating an illness, he may keep it for seven days.

Commentary: If he keeps it for more than seven days, he violates a precept, because it is feared that greed may arise. If a physician says that the illness cannot be cured without wine, medicine may be mixed into wine and consumed, provided that the smell of wine cannot be detected. If he is ill, he may keep it for seven days. If he is not ill, he must not intentionally consume even a single drop. According to the Vinaya’s teaching, an ill person who drinks such wine may not enter the assembly. After seven days, he should go before the Buddha hall and, standing downwind at a distance, sincerely bow in reverence for seven days; only then may he don his robe and rejoin the assembly. The same applies to eating meat, fish, and so forth.

Question: What offense does a bhiksu commit if he does not use a tooth-cleaning stick to clean his teeth?

Answer: He commits a payattika offense.

Commentary: The Vinaya states that using a tooth-cleaning stick has five benefits: first, the mouth is not bitter; second, the breath does not smell foul; third, it dispels harmful wind; fourth, it dispels heat; and fifth, it removes phlegm and brightens the eyes, and so forth. If one does not use a tooth-cleaning stick, one forfeits these five benefits. Not only does one lose these benefits, but one also commits an offense. Such a person is further called defiled and is not permitted to bow to the Buddha or the preceptor, and so forth. Therefore, one should diligently clean one’s teeth and not be indolent.

Question: May a tooth-cleaning stick be used before daybreak?

Answer: It may be used only after the morning star appears. If it is used at an improper time, one commits a payattika offense.

Question: May a tooth-cleaning stick be used to clean the teeth after the midday meal?

Answer: Yes. If one does not use ash-water, soap-pod, and a tooth-cleaning stick, one commits a payattika offense in each case. If one uses them after noon, one also commits a payattika offense. After noon, apart from taking medicine, no grass, plant, or other substance possessing flavor may be placed in the mouth; otherwise, one commits a payattika offense.

Question: If no tooth-cleaning stick is available, may one pick or clean one’s teeth with wood from other kinds of trees?

Answer: Any of them may be used.

Commentary: All substances used to remove impurities from the teeth and mouth may be used. The verse and mantra for the “willow twig” are recorded in the Vinaya Daily Practices.

Question: If a bhikkhu is in need, is he permitted to enter the marketplace and beg?

Answer: Before noon he may do so, but after noon he may not; nor may he ask for money. If he wishes to ask for money, he must bring along a lay devotee or a novice monk.

Question: If someone seizes a bhikkhu in order to sell him, is the bhikkhu permitted to escape?

Answer: At first he may escape, but once he has been sold to an owner, he may not escape.

Question: If a bhikkhu obtains goods through jesting and exchanges them for food and drink to offer to another bhikkhu, may that other bhikkhu consume them?

Answer: No. If he consumes them, he commits an offense of Expiation.

Commentary: Those of wrong views and foolish adherents of non-Buddhist paths should, according to principle, be reproved and expelled, and their evil views should be eradicated so that the pure regulations may be upheld. If a person accepts this food, he thereby shares in a livelihood contrary to the true Dharma and thus commits an offense of Expiation.

Question: If a bhikkhuni is not diligent, may a bhikkhu advise her to renounce the path?

Answer: There is no justification for doing so!

Commentary: A bhikkhu should instruct a bhikkhuni: “Be diligent in practicing the path; do not be heedless.” He may sincerely counsel her in this way. How could he do the opposite, causing her to abandon pure karma and pursue defiled karma, thereby committing an even graver offense? Therefore, there is no justification for this.

Question: If a bhikkhu prepares medicine to give to someone but does not know how to compound it, and the person dies immediately after taking it, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he gave it with a wholesome intention, he commits no offense; if he gave it with an evil intention, he commits a grave offense.

Question: If a bhikkhu of five or ten rains never recites the precepts, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he does not recite the precepts, then every day when he eats the food offered by the faithful, he commits the offense of stealing. If previously he did not know this, he may still repent and confess.

Question: Is a bhikkhu permitted to stay overnight in any dwelling of ghosts or spirits?

Answer: If his journey has been delayed, he is permitted to do so; but if he goes there intending to cause a disturbance, he commits an offense of Expiation.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit by eating the flesh of living beings?

Answer: He commits an offense of Expiation.

Commentary: At first, the Blessed One permitted the eating of the pure kinds of meat when: one did not see the animal being killed, did not hear it being killed, did not suspect it had been killed for oneself, the animal had died by itself, or the meat was left over from what birds or beasts had eaten. However, a bhikkhu must not eat raw meat, for it harms the stomach and obstructs the noble path. If he eats it, he commits an offense of Expiation. A bhikkhu who practices the Mahayana Dharma must never consume it. This should be clearly understood.

Question: If a bhikkhu arranges for two men to engage in sexual conduct, but the act is not consummated, what offense does he commit?

Answer: A Sthulatyaya offense.

Commentary: A bhikkhu ought to teach everyone to cultivate pure conduct, but instead he tells them to perform this defiled act; therefore, he commits such an offense.

Question: A bhikkhu wishes to make two men kiss each other on the lips for his amusement. The two men intend to do so but immediately desist. What offense does this bhikkhu commit?

Answer: He commits an offense of Expiation. If the act is carried out, the bhikkhu commits a Sthulatyaya offense.

Commentary: This is because he has a lustful mind. Both of the preceding questions speak of two men, which is indeed difficult to explain coherently. If they are said to be young laymen, since they are not bhikkhus, how could their conduct be classified among the five categories of offenses?

If they are members of the Sangha, why are they called two men? If it means one monastic and one layman, that would not accord with the wording of the scripture. What, then, is the ultimate meaning?

In my humble opinion, the “two men” mentioned here are two young bhikkhus who have not yet completely eliminated their defiled habits and who enjoy playing in this manner; hence, this precept was established. The translator discreetly abbreviated the wording and therefore merely said “two men.” The wise should understand this clearly.

Question: If other people have engaged in sexual conduct on a bhikkhu’s bed, is the bhikkhu permitted to remain at that dwelling place?

Answer: If he sees that it is clean, he may stay there.

Question: Once the sang-bạt has been proclaimed, if the senior monks have not yet eaten but the junior monks eat first, what offense do they commit?

Answer: If they eat after hearing the proclamation, they commit no offense.

Commentary: Once the sang-bạt has been proclaimed, everyone may partake of the meal. If it is omitted and they eat without the proclamation, they commit an offense. Sang-bạt refers to reciting at mealtime: “The Buddha established that bhikkhus, when eating, should maintain the five contemplations…”

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit if he does not possess all six requisites[15]?

Answer: If he does not seek them in order to complete the set, he commits an offense entailing Forfeiture and Expiation; if he seeks them but cannot obtain them, he commits no offense.

Question: When the weather is bitterly cold, are bhikkhus permitted to sleep beneath the same blanket?

Answer: They may do so if each person is clothed in his robe.

Commentary: Two people may share the same covering if they do not give rise to any improper thought. In hot weather, however, this is not permitted; if they share a covering, they commit an offense of transgressing the Dharma. The word “together” has two meanings.

First, when considered in relation to two people, it is as explained above. Second, when considered in relation to one person, it means that one may also lie down with the entire body covered by the robe. Why is this so?

Monastics in the Western Regions had only the three robes and no other blankets. If they did not cover themselves in cold weather, there was concern that they might be afflicted by harmful winds. Hence it is said that, provided they remain clothed in their robes, they may lie beneath the same blanket.

Both explanations are preserved here so that later generations will have no doubts.

Question: If a bhikkhu declares himself to be of noble lineage and diligent in observing the precepts in order to solicit goods, what offense does he commit if he obtains them?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing Forfeiture and Expiation.

Commentary: This is a pitiable person filled with arrogance and self-conceit, who falsely claims noble status and greedily solicits goods; therefore, he commits this offense.

Question: If an elder or younger sister suffers from a perforating ailment or has a painful place, and a bhikkhu personally presses or rubs the painful area to treat the illness, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If lust arises in his mind, he commits a Sthulatyaya offense; if lust does not arise, he commits an offense of Expiation.

Question: If an elder or younger sister has no son to continue the family line and asks a bhikkhu to teach her methods and techniques for bearing a son, and the bhikkhu teaches her, what offense does he commit?

Answer: He commits a Sthulatyaya offense.

Commentary: Teaching someone such a method is contrary to right wisdom. Whether one has a descendant is determined by karmic conditions from previous lives and cannot be obtained merely by seeking. Instead of teaching her to cultivate the pure Dharma gate of right wisdom, he teaches her such matters. Because his defilements and worldly habits have not yet been eliminated, the bhikkhu commits this offense.

Question: Someone entrusts an object to a bhikkhu and asks him to deliver it to another person, but the bhikkhu does not deliver it. What offense does he commit?

Answer: If he appropriates it on his own initiative and does not deliver it, he commits a grave offense. If the bhikkhu deliberately damages it and then delivers it, whether the offense is minor or grave is determined according to the value of the object.

Question: If a bhikkhu enters a village without wearing his robe, what offense does he commit?

Answer: He commits an offense of Expiation.

Commentary: The Vinaya teaches that whenever a bhikkhu enters a village or goes on almsround, he must wear his robe. If he does not wear his robe, he is regarded as an adherent of a non-Buddhist path and will not be respected by laypeople. Because he acts contrary to the Buddha’s regulation, he commits an offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit by lamenting and weeping?

Answer: If he is in a crowded village, each time he weeps he commits an offense of Expiation. If the Sangha admonishes him three times and he does not desist, he commits a Sthulatyaya offense.

Question: If, while in a village, a bhikkhu picks up bows and arrows, swords, or blades to examine them, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If he did not previously know the rule, he commits no offense; if he knows it but deliberately does so, he commits a Dushkrita offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit by riding animals?

Answer: If it is a male animal, riding it once constitutes a Pācittiya offense; if, after being admonished three times, he still does not stop, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. If he rides a female animal, riding it once constitutes a Thullaccaya offense.

Question: In a village, what offense does a bhikshu commit by watching laypeople fight?

Answer: He commits a Pācittiya offense.

Commentary: Fighting among laypeople may involve life and death. Even worldly people should not engage in it, much less members of the Sangha! The Vinaya teaches that when a bhikshu walks along a road, even turning to look from side to side compromises his deportment; how much more so if he watches people fight and allows his mind to race after external objects. Therefore, he commits this offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit by playing Chinese chess, Go, and so forth?

Answer: He commits a Pācittiya offense.

Commentary: These are worldly amusements, not activities befitting the sons of the Śākyan. Because such activities disturb the mind and obstruct the noble path, a bhikshu who engages in them commits this offense.

Question: In a village, what offense does a bhikshu commit if he picks up a three-year-old child and utters affectionate, doting words?

Answer: He commits a Pācittiya offense.

Commentary: If lust arises in him, he commits a Thullaccaya offense. Such behavior reveals that the bhikshu has not yet severed emotional attachment and desire; it compromises his deportment and harms the true Dharma. Therefore, the Buddha established this precept.

Question: In a village, what offense does a bhikshu commit by fighting with a layperson?

Answer: He commits a Duṣkṛta offense.

Commentary: When a bhikshu raises his hands and fights with a layperson, this shows that he has not eliminated the habitual tendency toward restlessness. It leads to conflict, brings calamity upon him, and obstructs the cultivation of right conduct. Therefore, he commits the aforementioned offense.

Question: In a village, what offense does a bhikshu commit by watching a layperson engage in sexual intercourse with an animal?

Answer: If he knows that it is an unlawful act and deliberately watches, he commits a Pācittiya offense; if he does not know, he does not commit an offense. If, while watching, lustful thoughts arise in his mind and he speaks defiled words, he commits a Thullaccaya offense.

Question: If a bhikshu has not eaten his fill, may he ask someone who has not received full ordination to bring him more food?

Answer: He may, except in the case of a brahmin.

Commentary: When bhikshus receive a meal, their capacities for food may differ, or the speed at which they eat may vary, so some may have enough while others do not. Śrāmaṇeras and those who observe the Five Precepts are all called persons who have not received full ordination, and they may be asked to bring more food. Brahmins, non-Buddhist practitioners, and others, however, are arrogant and haughty and do not revere the Three Jewels. When they see members of the Sangha, they may give rise to slanderous thoughts; therefore, they must be excluded.

Question: If a bhikshu sees an ownerless object in the mountains or in a deserted wilderness, may he take and use it?

Answer: He may. He need only report it to the local authorities or tell someone else, and then he may use it, but he must not carry it away. If he carries it away, he commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

Question: If a bhikshu practices medicine and treats illness, may he accept material goods?

Answer: If he treats illness out of compassion, he may; if he does so with an unwholesome intention, he may not. If he lacks robes and an alms bowl and the person he treated makes an offering to him, the bhikshu may accept it. If he already has robes and an alms bowl but that person insists that he accept the offering, the bhikshu may accept it if the person wishes to create merit. If the person does not offer anything, however, the bhikshu may not ask for something on the pretext of enabling that person to create merit. If he asks, he commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

Question: If vegetables or other food, whether much or little, spill onto and cling to the cloth used during meals, must it be washed?

Answer: Even if it is not dirty, it must still be washed every day. If there is a śrāmaṇera or layperson, the bhikshu may entrust it to that person to wash and receive it back for use each day, without committing an offense. Once it has been entrusted and placed in the room of a śrāmaṇera or layperson, he need not concern himself with it. If he neither entrusts it to someone nor washes it, he commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

Question: If a bhikshu living in a private room briefly leaves it to attend to some minor matter without closing the door, does he commit an offense?

Answer: He commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

Commentary: There is a danger that possessions may be lost and that no one will know whom to hold responsible. Therefore, carefully guarding against what has not yet happened is also part of cultivating the path. If someone is negligent, claiming that the true path consists in being free of concerns, yet does not understand that adverse circumstances are difficult to escape, he will instead lose his right mindfulness entirely. Therefore, he commits this offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit by clapping his hands, laughing, and jesting in his private room?

Answer: He commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

Commentary: The Śūraṅgama Sūtra states: “At dawn, rub the crown of your head with your hand.” For what purpose have you shaved off your beard and hair and donned robes of subdued color? Even skillfully gathering in body and mind may not yet bring one into accord with the path; how much less clapping the hands and laughing loudly. Even in a private room, a bhikshu thereby loses his dignified deportment and allows his mind to become heedless. Therefore, he commits this offense.

Question: May a bhikshu jump over a puddle or a small ditch?

Answer: He may not. If he jumps over it, he commits a Pācittiya offense. Long ago, an upāsaka wished to invite a bhikshu to his home and offer him a fine robe, and the bhikshu followed him. Along the way, seeing a small puddle, the bhikshu immediately jumped over it. The upāsaka criticized him and thought, “I believed this bhikshu to be virtuous and therefore wished to offer him a fine robe, but he jumped over a puddle. When we reach my home, I shall offer him only half a robe.” This bhikshu was none other than Venerable Asaṅga. Knowing the man’s thought, when they encountered another puddle along the road, he again deliberately jumped over it.

The upāsaka then thought, “When we reach home, I shall offer him only a piece of coarse cloth.” Farther along the road, they encountered yet another puddle, and the bhikshu again jumped over it. The upāsaka then thought, “When we reach home, I shall offer him only a single meal.” Venerable Asaṅga again knew the man’s thought. Therefore, when they encountered another puddle, he lifted his robe and stepped across it. The upāsaka asked the bhikshu:

– Why did you not jump over it?

He answered: Previously, you promised to give me a fine robe. The first time I jumped over a puddle, it was reduced to half a robe. The second time I jumped over a puddle, it was reduced to a piece of coarse cloth. The third time I jumped over a puddle, it was reduced to a meal. Now I do not jump because I fear losing even the meal.

Realizing that this bhikshu was indeed an accomplished practitioner of the path, the upāsaka immediately repented. When they reached his home, the upāsaka made an exceedingly generous offering. From this account, it may be understood that a bhikshu must not jump over a small puddle.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit by running?

Answer: He commits a Pācittiya offense. If there is an urgent matter, he does not commit an offense.

Question: What offense does a person commit if, after leaving the household life, he returns and steals property from his former family home?

Answer: He commits a Pārājika offense. Why? Because once he has left the household life, he has relinquished everything, and those things are no longer his property.

Question: While still living at home with his parents and siblings, a bhikshu had hidden away a small amount of property. After he leaves the household life, all the members of his family die. What offense does he commit if he returns and takes this property on his own authority?

Answer: If he takes it on his own authority, he commits a Pārājika offense. If he has lay relatives, he should ask them to come, take it away, and use it to perform meritorious deeds; however, half should also be given to the local authorities. Why? Because this property has no owner and should therefore belong to the authorities. Thus, he must not take all of it. If he takes all of it, he commits a grave offense.

Question: Suppose a preceptor receives ordination again and consequently has less ordination seniority than his disciple. May the disciple regard himself as junior in rains-retreat seniority and inferior in precepts, and therefore walk behind him? If not, may the disciple bow at his preceptor’s feet?

Answer: There is no such principle! Seniority and juniority are determined solely according to the grade of ordination and the number of rains retreats.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit by entering another person’s field, whether or not crops are growing there?

Answer: If crops are growing there, he commits a Pācittiya offense, but if there is an urgent matter, he does not commit an offense. If no crops are growing there, he commits no offense in any case.

Question: A bhikkhu committed a Sanghadisesa offense and openly confessed and repented, but after only three or five days a calamity occurred in that place and the Sangha dispersed. Is that offense thereby extinguished?

Answer: He must seek the Sangha and repent again. Only after the full seven days have elapsed is the offense extinguished.

Question: A ruler asks a bhikkhu about auspicious and inauspicious matters, and the bhikkhu explains them. If the ruler afterward makes an offering to him, what offense does the bhikkhu commit?

Answer: If he accepts food, he commits a Payattika offense; if he accepts robes, he commits a Nissaggiya Payattika offense. If he speaks about launching a military campaign against another country and receives an offering for doing so, he commits a grave offense.

Question: When a bhikkhu encounters urgent danger, may he cross a layperson’s field?

Answer: He may.

Commentary: He may cross a field planted with rice seedlings because he is temporarily avoiding grave danger, thereby preserving his body in safety so that he may cultivate the Way. But if there is no emergency, he may not cross the field.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu of fewer than five rains commit if he does not seek a teacher upon whom to depend?

Answer: If he does not seek a teacher upon whom to depend, then every day that he eats the rice and drinks the water offered by the faithful, he commits the offense of stealing. If he did not previously know this, the bhikkhu is permitted to repent.

Commentary: Concerning the five rains, the “One Hundred and One Karmavacanas” records:

The Buddha taught:

– Bhikkhus who have completed five rains and possess the following five qualities may leave their teacher and travel among the people: knowing what constitutes an offense, knowing what does not constitute an offense, knowing minor offenses, knowing grave offenses, clearly understanding what is permitted and prohibited, and fluently reciting the Pratimoksha Sutra.

– Venerable Sir! Bhikkhus who have completed five rains and possess the five qualities may leave the teacher upon whom they depend and travel among the people to teach and transform them. If, then, a bhikkhu has completed only four rains but is thoroughly versed in the five qualities, may he leave the teacher upon whom he depends?

The Buddha answered: - He may not! Five rains is the prescribed period!

– Venerable Sir! If a bhikkhu has completed five rains but is not yet proficient in the five qualities, may he leave the teacher upon whom he depends?

The Buddha taught: - He may not, because possession of the five qualities is an established rule.

– Venerable Sir! If a bhikkhu has attained the three knowledges and completely eliminated the three defilements, but has completed only three rains, must this person still depend upon a teacher?

The Buddha answered: - It is not because one has or has not attained realization, nor because one has realized and awakened, that one may leave the teacher upon whom one depends. It is solely by observing the established rule: a bhikkhu must have completed five rains and know the five qualities before he may leave the teacher upon whom he depends. Even if one was ordained as a bhikkhu at the age of eighty and has completed sixty rains, if one does not know the five qualities, one must still depend upon a teacher.

Question: - Venerable Sir! Upon whom should one depend?

The Buddha answered: - One should depend upon an elder teacher. If there is no elder teacher, one may depend upon a younger teacher.

Question: - Venerable Sir! How should one pay homage to a younger teacher?

The Buddha answered: - Apart from making prostrations to him, all other duties may be performed. Whether elder or younger, those who have gone forth within the bhikkhu Sangha, have only recently received full ordination, and are not yet proficient in the deportment and regulations of a renunciant must depend upon a virtuous elder.

Question: - The Vinaya prescribes that a bhikkhu may leave the teacher upon whom he depends only after completing five rains. If a bhikkhu who has not yet completed five rains does not depend upon a teacher, which precept does he violate?

The Buddha answered: - If he does not depend upon a teacher, then each day that he eats rice and drinks water, he commits the offense of stealing. Because he does not depend upon a teacher, the bhikkhu does not know the Vinaya or the Dharma and lacks the virtue needed to digest the offerings of the faithful. If he did not previously know of the rule requiring dependence upon a teacher, he is permitted to repent and thereafter depend upon a teacher in accordance with the Dharma. If he clearly knows the rule requiring dependence upon a teacher but does not follow it, he is not permitted to repent. If bhikkhunis do not depend upon an upadhyaya, they commit a Payattika offense.”

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu of ten rains commit if he does not recite the precepts?

Answer: The same offense as that described above for not depending upon a teacher.

Question: If a bhikkhu engages in buying and selling, praises his own goods as excellent, and asks a high price, and another person believes him and buys them at that high price, what offense does the bhikkhu commit?

Answer: He commits the offense of stealing.

Commentary: A bhikkhu fundamentally has no justification for engaging in trade. If he lies in pursuit of profit, this is called stealing with the mouth. If he obtains five coins, he commits a Parajika offense. Such a person is a robber who carries neither bow and arrow nor sword, a dangerous robber within the Buddha-Dharma. This truly must not be done.

Question: While traveling along a deserted road, a bhikkhu comes upon food, but no one is present to witness and give it to him. How may he consume it?

Answer: He may reach out with one hand and take the food only once. If he exceeds this, he commits a Payattika offense.

Question: If a bhikkhu is traveling by boat on a great river and cannot go ashore, may he urinate or defecate into the water?

Answer: He may.

Commentary: Boarding and leaving the boat might consume time or inconvenience everyone, so he may act according to circumstances without violating a precept, but he must still do so skillfully. This may be understood clearly by consulting the Vinaya collection.

Question: If a bhikkhu copies a sutra onto bamboo or wood and erases it after reciting it, does he commit an offense?

Answer: He commits a Payattika offense.

Commentary: Once a sutra has been transcribed, it must be respected and studied. To write it upon bamboo or wood for study and then erase it is to treat the Buddha-Dharma with contempt; therefore, this offense is committed. If one copies passages from sutras or mantras upon city walls, partitions, and so forth, enabling others to study them, one gains immeasurable merit.

Question: May a bhikkhu who has not yet completed five rains recite the precepts together with the assembly?

Answer: He may not. He may only give brief instruction. If he recites them, he commits a Payattika offense.

Question: If someone receives full ordination before the ordination platform has been completed and has not yet relinquished the precepts of a novice, does that person remain a novice?

Answer: He is no longer a novice, because after the four karman proceedings he has entered the bhikkhu Sangha.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit by sleeping during the day?

Answer: If he sleeps with the door of his room open, he commits a Payattika offense.

Commentary: The meaning here is that he may sleep during the day if he closes the door. Why? If he becomes weary from sitting in meditation, closes the door of his room, and sleeps briefly to harmonize the four great elements, there is no offense. He may not sleep with the door open because this involves two faults: first, his careless posture compromises his dignified deportment; second, beginners might imitate him. Because this is improper, sleeping during the day with the door open constitutes this offense.

Question: May a bhikkhu lean against a wall or lie upon the ground?

Answer: He may do so in his private room, but not in the midst of the assembly. If he does, he commits a Payattika offense.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit if he remains within his dwelling without wearing the three robes?

Answer: If he meditates or recites sutras without wearing his robes, he commits a Payattika offense.

Commentary: According to the Four Deportments of Nanshan, the three robes must never be separated from the body; how could this apply only inside one’s room? Nowadays, practitioners of meditation readily say that meditation is seated within the mind, so what need is there to wear robes? But they do not understand that inwardly one cultivates meditative contemplation while outwardly one regulates one’s dignified deportment. Only when inner and outer are of one suchness is it called right wisdom. If one clings to principle while abandoning practice, this is called the one-sided view of non-Buddhist paths; therefore, one commits a Payattika offense.

Question: While traveling, may a bhikkhu bind his nivāsana so that it completely covers his legs?

Answer: He may do so if the weather is extremely cold.

Commentary: If it is not cold, he may not, lest it fail to accord with the customs of that country. In the Eastern Land, however, this is not the case: whether the weather is cold or hot, it must be bound closed, and wearing the robe with dignity is more seemly. Because customs differ between one region and another, this precept was established.

Question: What offense does a bhikkhu commit by keeping a lacquered wooden bowl?

Answer: A lacquered wooden bowl may not be used. If he uses one, he commits a Payattika offense.

Commentary: A lacquered wooden bowl is made by cutting down a tree with a knife to obtain the wood. This too is an act of destruction, lacking loving-kindness and patience. A bhikshu may not even tread upon green grass, much less cut down a tree! Sentient and insentient beings are all of one essence; therefore, this constitutes an offense. In present-day monasteries, it seems entirely impossible to avoid this, so a bhikshu should repent in order to lessen the offense. If this is not done, it is contrary to the Buddha’s teaching and is wholly impermissible.

Question: If a bhikshu uses clean hands to prepare food, or mixes food and drink so that food adheres to his hands, may he partake of the meal with his hands in that condition?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: The Vinaya teaches: “One must not take food with soiled hands. This is to be learned.” These hands were originally clean and became soiled only through preparing the food; it is not that they were unclean, and therefore it is said to be permissible. In all other cases, it is not permissible.

Question: If a bhikshu enters the senior’s chamber and, where he ought not to sit, sits down on his own initiative, what offense does he commit?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing forfeiture.

Commentary: The senior’s chamber means the chamber of a venerable elder, or a chamber containing an image of a holy one. Some also say it means an upper-story room: if there is an image of the Buddha below, this is a place where one must not sit casually; if one does so, one commits an offense entailing forfeiture. An elder possesses the ten virtues and is therefore said to be weighty in virtue. One who has newly come to seek instruction must be humble and respectful. If he sits down on his own initiative without being invited to sit, he thereby commits an offense. The ten virtues are: having an established dwelling place, being fearless, being free from affliction, possessing understanding, possessing eloquence, and so forth. They are clearly taught in the Ten Recitations Vinaya.

Question: When a bhikshu circumambulates a stupa, if bhikshunis and upasikas follow behind him, does he commit an offense?

Answer: If upasakas are also present, he does not commit an offense.

Commentary: If upasakas follow behind as well, so that other members of the assembly are also present, there is no offense. Otherwise, worldly people may criticize them, so one must be cautious.

Question: If raw vegetables have been washed clean but their roots remain, may a bhikshu eat them?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: Raw vegetables, radishes, and the like may all be eaten together with their roots. In the case of mustard greens, the roots should be removed; however, if they have been washed thoroughly, they may be eaten without removing the roots, and thus it is said to be permissible. They may also be eaten in this way when traveling and it is inconvenient to prepare them otherwise.

Question: If a disciple travels far away and entrusts his belongings to his teacher, or a teacher entrusts belongings to his disciple, but does not return by the appointed time, or many years pass without reclaiming them, may the person to whom they were entrusted take and use them?

Answer: If the person said nothing when leaving, they may not be used. If that person is still alive, they are possessions with an owner; if that person has died, they are possessions of the Sangha. Therefore, in either case, one may not take and use them on one’s own initiative.

Question: Is it reasonable for a bhikshu to instruct laypeople not to make offerings to any deceased person?

Answer: No! Although their deceased parents do not partake of the food, laypeople nevertheless gain merit by respectfully making offerings.

Question: Within the assembly, may a bhikshu sit at the same table as his teacher when taking the meal?

Answer: If they share a round table, they must not sit next to one another. (If they sit in two rows, they must not sit facing one another.)

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit if he pays homage to the Buddha without lifting his robe?

Answer: He commits a Shaiksha rule offense, a dushkrita.

Commentary: When paying homage to the Buddha, a bhikshu must use his right hand to lift his robe so that his right knee does not press upon it. If he does not do so correctly, then although he is said to be paying homage to the Buddha, his disregard for the robe causes him to lose his reverence, and therefore he also commits an offense. A Shaiksha offense means transgressing a rule of training, which is a dushkrita offense. This should be understood.

Question: May a bhikshu personally compound medicines?

Answer: He may use pure medicinal herbs.

Commentary: Medicine should be made only from pure medicinal herbs. Creatures such as snakes, centipedes, and scorpions must not be used, thereby harming them, for this belongs to evil discipline. If one follows the medicinal substances prescribed in the Divine Farmer’s Materia Medica, such as coptis and cinnamon, there is no formula that will not be effective, and the merit thereof is immeasurable. Thus it is said that pure herbs may be used. When a bhikshu practices medicine and examines an illness, he must investigate it meticulously. If he acts carelessly, he will instead incur offenses, and therefore he must be cautious.

Question: Suppose a bhikshu intends to abandon the path, wears secular clothing for a period, and bows in homage to honored worldly relatives. Afterward, he comes before the Sangha and asks to be restored to his former status as a bhikshu. Should this be permitted?

Answer: If that person has not relinquished the precepts, it may be permitted.

Commentary: If that person has already relinquished the precepts, it may not be permitted. Whether or not he has relinquished them, the Sangha must question him thoroughly. They may also question his trusted associates or those close to him. Only after ascertaining that he has certainly not broken any of the fundamental precepts of a bhikshu may they restore him to his former status. If this is not done, the Sangha must not grant permission. If he has committed only minor offenses against the precepts, the Sangha may instruct him to feel shame, repent, and correct his faults.

Question: If a bhikshu knows that his parents or siblings have been displaced and forced to sell themselves to another person, does he commit an offense if he does not redeem them?

Answer: If he does not redeem them because he is practicing the path, he does not commit an offense.

Commentary: By cultivating the supramundane path, he may be able to free his parents from the suffering of transmigration through birth and death. Therefore, although his parents may encounter great calamity and suffer displacement, their redemption may still be deferred; hence, he is not at fault for failing to redeem them. If this is not the case, how could one, whose body was given by his parents and who is bound by intimate ties even to his siblings, sit by and do nothing, willingly behaving like an insentient creature? Nevertheless, he must act according to his own abilities.

Question: If a layperson addresses the Sangha and reverentially calls the monks a holy assembly, may the Sangha assent to this?

Answer: They may not assent.

Commentary: Why? A holy one is not an ordinary being. Only those who have realized the four fruits or the four approaches are called holy ones. If ordinary people falsely claim to have attained the state of a holy one, they are claiming an attainment they have not achieved, thereby committing the grave offense of false speech, and the resulting offense is by no means minor. Since the person has already honored us with such a title, we should give rise to apprehension and humbly decline it; then there is no fault.

Question: If a layperson brings articles as offerings to the monks and says that they are offerings to the holy assembly, should they accept them?

Answer: If the donor does not designate them for the holy assembly, they may accept whatever is distributed, because the assembly includes ordinary monks as well.

Question: If a bhikshu encounters a water-filled ditch while traveling and immediately orders someone to carry him across, what offense does he commit?

Answer: If that bhikshu is neither elderly nor ill, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture.

Commentary: Earlier, it was taught that one must not leap across a water-filled ditch. Here, it is taught that one must not order someone to carry one across. Both prohibitions were established because young bhikshus were arrogant and conceited, unwilling to endure even the slightest hardship, and thereby lost their dignified deportment. Thus the Buddha laid down this precept. In such a situation, one should go barefoot, lift one’s robe, and slowly step across. Elderly or ill bhikshus who lack the strength to cross may ask someone to carry them without committing an offense.

Question: May a bhikshu ask those performing meritorious labor for the Sangha to do miscellaneous tasks?

Answer: He may ask them to do minor miscellaneous tasks, but not major work.

Question: What offense does a bhikshu commit by allowing his fingernails to grow long?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing forfeiture.

Commentary: Fingernails are very unclean. According to the disciplinary rule, they may be kept only as long as a grain of rice; if they grow longer, they must be cut. Keeping long fingernails entails two faults: First, it makes one resemble worldly people, hoping that others will enjoy looking at them and develop affection, thereby obstructing the Way. Second, in tending one’s fingernails, one becomes fond of idleness and ease and is not diligent in performing duties for the Sangha. Moreover, this disfigures the appearance of a bhiksu and was censured by the Buddha. Therefore, a bhiksu who keeps long fingernails commits an offense entailing forfeiture.

Question: If a senior bhiksu has not yet bathed and a junior bhiksu bathes before him, does the junior bhiksu commit an offense?

Answer: He commits an offense entailing forfeiture.

Commentary: Once an order of precedence according to ordination seniority has been established, it must be observed in every matter. Otherwise, bhiksus lose their reverence and are no different from brahmins gathering together and speaking noisily. Therefore, this constitutes an offense entailing forfeiture.

Question: If an unfamiliar object suddenly appears in a bhiksu’s bowl, chest, or other belongings, or if there is an old, damaged object whose owner is unknown, may the bhiksu take and use it? May he discard it?

Answer: It must be handed over to the Sangha for disposition; he may not use it on his own authority.

Commentary: An object for which no owner can be found is treated in the same way as property of the Sangha. If a bhiksu uses it, he will certainly commit an offense. Furthermore, someone may later come to claim it, in which case the bhiksu who used it privately would be unable to justify himself. Therefore, it is said that he may not use it.

Question: At a monastery where many members of the Sangha come and go, someone may forget an article, whether a new robe or an old robe, and never return to claim or use it. May a bhiksu take and use it?

Answer: It must be handed over to the Sangha. The Sangha should keep it for one month or one year, after which it may be taken and used. If the owner later comes, property of the Sangha should be used to reimburse him. If it is a valuable object that the Sangha would later be unable to replace, it should not be used.

Question: Suppose a lay devotee acquainted with a bhiksu comes to the monastery to visit him. May that bhiksu ask the senior monk or the karmadana to give the lay devotee a portion of the Sangha’s food?

Answer: If the Sangha has previously established a rule permitting laypeople to partake of it, this is allowed; if no such rule has been established, it is not allowed.

Question: A bhiksu abandons the monastic path and returns to lay life, and later renounces the household life again. Is his former teacher still his teacher?

Answer: No.

Commentary: Because he has relinquished his former precepts, the person who later transmits the precepts to him becomes his teacher. Nevertheless, the bhiksu must not fail to honor his former teacher, for the kindness of that teacher in guiding and instructing him still remains.

Question: May the members of the Sangha who ascend the ordination platform to confer full ordination be called teachers?

Answer: There is no justification for this. Because the bhiksu did not receive the Dharma from these persons, they cannot be called his teachers at all.

Question: May all the Sangha masters present at the ordination platform be called preceptors, with oneself referring to oneself as their disciple?

Answer: No. However, one should respect them as one respects honored elders in worldly life.

14. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING RECEIVING THE THREE REFUGES

Question: Who may and may not receive the Three Refuges?

Answer: Apart from those who have committed the five heinous offenses[16], everyone may receive them.

Question: What should one do after receiving the Three Refuges?

Answer: One should commit no wrongdoing with body, speech, or mind, and should not study under teachers who hold erroneous views.

Commentary: With the body, one should not kill, steal, or engage in sexual misconduct; with speech, one should not lie, speak floridly, speak divisively, or speak harshly; in the mind, one should be free from greed, anger, and delusion. When the three kinds of karma are thus pure, this is right view. Therefore, it is said that one should commit no wrongdoing and should not follow teachers whose three kinds of karma are impure and improper. Anyone who has received the Three Refuges should cultivate these practices. Why? Because taking refuge in the Three Jewels is itself to acquire the essence of the five precepts.

Question: What constitutes a violation of the Three Refuges?

Answer: Delighting in wrong views and following non-Buddhist teachers.

Commentary: The ten unwholesome actions have already been explained above: three of the body, four of speech, and three of mind. There are also the view of a self, extreme views, and so forth, up to the sixty-two views. All erroneous attachments that do not accord with the Buddhadharma are called the wrong views of non-Buddhist paths. If anyone delights in practicing them or goes along with them, that person violates the Three Refuges; downfall lies right there. Only when that person can abandon the wrong and return to the right can it be said that there is no violation. One should be cautious in this matter.

Question: If one violates the Three Refuges, how should one repent?

Answer: One should go to one’s original teacher and repent. If one’s original teacher is unavailable, one may go to another bhiksu.

Question: If one is unable to observe them, may one relinquish them?

Answer: Yes.

Question: How does one relinquish them?

Answer: One should approach one’s original teacher or another bhiksu and say: “From this day forward, I am unable to rely upon the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Bhiksu Sangha.” Saying this three times constitutes relinquishing the Three Refuges. If it is not said three complete times, the Three Refuges remain in effect.

Question: It is said that one who receives the Three Refuges has thereby repented of the ten unwholesome actions[17] and the five heinous offenses committed in the past. Is this reasonable?

Answer: It is not reasonable!

Commentary: Why? The passage above states that a person who has committed the five heinous offenses may not even receive the Three Refuges. How, then, could someone who receives the Three Refuges thereby repent of five heinous offenses committed in a former lifetime?

Even if those deeds were committed hundreds of thousands of kalpas ago, their karma has still not disappeared. Therefore, it is said that this is unreasonable. One theory states: “A person who takes refuge in the Three Jewels firmly believes that, through their awe-inspiring power, all karma is extinguished, just as snow melts when the sun rises, without any need to await repentance.

It is like a person who has committed an offense against an official and later goes before the king; through the king’s authority, even a grave offense may be pardoned.” In truth, there is no such principle. How could all karma be extinguished in this way? However, this sutra speaks in this manner because those who have newly received the Three Refuges merely rely upon the Three Jewels of the ten directions in order to receive the five precepts, and this still pertains to minor phenomenal forms.

If one realizes the Three Jewels as a single essence, profoundly understands the true mark, awakens to the fact that the nature of offenses is originally empty, and repents without perceiving any locus of repentance, then there is no evil that one cannot eliminate and no offense that one cannot extinguish. Therefore, it is said that offenses are like morning dew, which the sun of wisdom can dispel. If one wishes to repent, one should sit upright and contemplate the true mark of all dharmas—then when would there be occasion to speak of this matter?

If one cannot accomplish this, then claiming attainment without having attained it remains non-attainment. This matter must be carefully considered.

Question: The Three Refuges should be received from only one teacher. But may one receive them from three teachers, receiving one refuge from each?

Answer: No!

Commentary: This is because the essence of the Three Jewels is one. That is, in name they are called the Three Jewels, but in essence they are originally of one suchness. Even the Three Jewels of the ten directions are identical in essence. Therefore, they may be received only from a single teacher. If they were received from three teachers, it would resemble the formation of something fragmented and ruined. Therefore, it is said that this is not allowed. This differs from the five precepts, each of which may be received from a different teacher.

Question: The Dharma of the Three Refuges is to be upheld for one’s entire life. But if one cannot uphold it for long, may one be permitted to uphold it for one year, half a year, ten days, or five days and then relinquish it?

Answer: One may uphold it for a longer or shorter period as one wishes.

Commentary: The Three Refuges should properly be received for one’s entire lifetime, extending into the future... as stated above. Yet the words “as one wishes” are used here because the Tathagata, in His compassionate concern for sentient beings, certainly wishes them to observe the refuges for a long time, but fears that their capacities may be shallow and limited and that, dreading the burden, they may refuse to receive them. Therefore, the Buddha skillfully taught according to their capacities, gradually enabling them to enter the excellent state and plant its causes; hence He spoke in this way. The wise should not use this as a reason to become negligent.

Question: If one receives the Three Refuges from a teacher for one year or half a year, after that period has ended, does that person remain one’s teacher?

Answer: Once one has received the Dharma from a teacher, that person remains one’s teacher for life.

Question: Regarding the Three Refuges, may one receive only one or two of them?

Answer: No.

Commentary: The Three Jewels are a single essence and, in principle, cannot be divided. If they are received, they are received together; if relinquished, they are relinquished together. To receive only one or two of the Refuges would likewise amount to dividing the Dharma-body and is therefore impermissible. This differs from the Five Precepts, of which one may receive one or two as one wishes.

Question: One wishes to receive the Three Refuges, but presently there is no teacher to transmit them. May one receive them before the Buddha by following the text of the precepts?

Answer: No.

Commentary: If one wishes to receive the bodhisattva precepts and cannot find a precept-transmitting teacher within a thousand li, one may make a vow before an image of the Buddha and receive the precepts oneself. This is not permitted, however, for the Three Refuges, the Five Precepts, or even the bhikshu precepts. Why? Before the time of Buddha King of Awe-Inspiring Voice, when there was no teacher to transmit the precepts, this was permitted. But after the time of Buddha King of Awe-Inspiring Voice, anyone who receives them independently without a teacher transmitting them is an adherent of a non-Buddhist path.

Question: If one previously received the Three Refuges, committed an offense, and did not repent, may one receive them again?

Answer: No! One must repent. If one wishes to receive them again, one must first relinquish the precepts already received. One may not receive them again without relinquishing them.

15. CHAPTER OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING RECEIVING THE FIVE PRECEPTS

Question: May one receive the Five Precepts without receiving the Three Refuges?

Answer: No.

Commentary: The Precept Text states: “First proclaim the Three Refuges; next explain the Five Precepts, the Ten Precepts, and the full precepts; then once again proclaim the One Vehicle.” The Sarvastivada Treatise states: “First one receives the Three Refuges. Even without expounding the Five Precepts, the Five Precepts are thereby obtained; hence it is said, ‘Without receiving them, one does not obtain them.’ Next, the names of the Five Precepts are explained so that recipients may understand the characteristics of the precepts, observe them, and not lose them.” Thus, the Three Refuges are the foundation of the Five Precepts; the same applies to the Eight Precepts and the Ten Precepts.

Regarding the bhikshu precepts, one must first perform the motion and three proclamations of the karma procedure to obtain the precepts. Only afterward are the characteristics of the precepts explained so that recipients may understand and uphold them. This must be understood.

Question: If one has received the Three Refuges but committed an offense and did not repent, may that person receive the Five Precepts?

Answer: No.

Commentary: It has been said that the Three Refuges are the foundation of the Five Precepts. Since that person has now violated the Three Refuges, the essence of the Five Precepts has thereby been destroyed; thus it is said that the person may not receive them. That person must feel shame and repent. Just as a vessel must be washed clean before it can hold ambrosia, so one who has not repented cannot receive them because one is not yet pure. Therefore, one must strive earnestly to repent.

Question: Under the method of receiving the Five Precepts, may one receive them for only five days, ten days, one year, or two years?

Answer: One may receive them for a longer or shorter period as one wishes.

Commentary: There is likewise no fixed limit on the number of days for which they may be received. This accords with what was said above regarding the Three Refuges, but it is a provisional teaching permitted in the Agamas; the Vaipulya teaching is not like this. In the Vaipulya assembly, Upali asked:

– May the Five Precepts be received for five days or ten days?

The Buddha replied:

– No.

Therefore, one should understand that every precept established by the Tathagata has its proper time and circumstances.

Question: If one violates the Five Precepts and does not repent, may one receive them again?

Answer: If one has not relinquished them, one may not receive them again. If one has not repented, one also cannot relinquish them.

Commentary: If one commits an offense, one must repent; after repenting, one may relinquish the precepts, and after relinquishing them, one may receive them again. Only then can one avoid abandoning the precepts, while one’s sincere resolve remains unchanged. If one does not repent, the offense is not extinguished. As the person is like an unclean vessel, neither course is permissible. One can only devote oneself wholeheartedly to steadfast observance, without committing even the slightest transgression; then one will make progress. All the precepts discussed below take this as their foundation.

Question: If one violates the Five Precepts, may all such offenses be repented of?

Answer: If one kills a human being, engages in sexual relations with a revered relative or a bhikshuni, or steals property belonging to the Three Jewels, one cannot repent of that offense. All other offenses may be repented of.

Question: Having received the Five Precepts, if one cannot keep them, may one relinquish them after one or two years?

Answer: One may relinquish them. If one wishes to relinquish all Five Precepts and the Three Refuges, one should say: “From this day onward, the Buddha is not my World-Honored One, and I am not a disciple of the Buddha.” Saying this three times constitutes relinquishment. The same formula should be spoken three times concerning the Dharma and the Sangha. If one wishes to relinquish one, two, three, or four precepts, one should merely say: “From this day onward, I shall no longer observe the first precept...” and repeat this three times. If one does not say it a full three times, the precept remains in effect.

Question: When receiving the Five Precepts, may one receive them from five teachers, receiving one precept from each teacher?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: Why? The essential characteristics of the Five Precepts are not identical, and their functions also differ; therefore, one teacher or five teachers are both permissible. This differs from the Three Refuges, for the three are one, an indivisible, harmonious essence. However, each individual precept may be received from only one teacher; one may not receive the same precept from several teachers. Because some might vaguely apply the principle stated above too broadly, the Buddha established this matter separately.

Question: Having received the Five Precepts, may one relinquish one or two of the weightier precepts because they are difficult to keep?

Answer: Yes.

Commentary: When relinquishing them, one should speak as described above. One may wish to relinquish the weightier precepts because, when faith first arose, one was able to undertake and uphold not only the Five Precepts but even the bhikshu precepts all at once. Who would have expected that, as days and months passed, habits from previous lives would remain uneradicated and the mind intent upon the Way would gradually regress? This is called wishing for clarity yet inclining toward turbidity, delighting in uprightness yet persisting in crookedness. Thus matters come to this. This permission also arises from the Tathagata’s skillful accommodation of sentient beings; hence it is said to be allowed.

Question: Of the Five Precepts, may one receive only one, two, or three?

Answer: One may receive more or fewer as one wishes.

Question: May a bhikshu violate a grave precept or the precept against drinking alcohol?[18]

Answer: No.

Commentary: Those who violate the grave precepts remain forever outside the Buddha’s ocean and may not dwell together with the pure assembly; hence it is said that this is not permitted. According to the Vinaya, one who commits a grave offense must repent and relinquish the precepts, and for the remainder of one’s life may receive and train only in the novice precepts. Such a person may not even serve as a teacher guiding others. Alas! Be cautious in this matter and do not regard it as a jest. Alcohol, moreover, is the beginning of violations of the restraining precepts, from which many offenses arise. Even worldly law prohibits it; how much more so for a bhikshu! Therefore, this precept likewise must not be violated.

Question: Are there Eight Precepts for lay Buddhists?

Answer: No. There are only the Eight Fasting Precepts.

Commentary: Laypeople may receive only the Five Precepts, and therefore the answer says no. Nowadays, some may allow laypeople to receive the Eight Precepts, but this is contrary to the Dharma and the Vinaya and is absolutely impermissible. “Restraint” means closing off.

It closes off the eight transgressions and prevents them from arising. These are also precisely the Eight Precepts: First, not to kill living beings; Second, not to steal; and so forth through the eighth precept, not to sit or lie upon high and broad beds. Not eating at improper times constitutes the fast.

The essence of the fast is not eating after noon. Because the eight precepts above assist in perfecting the essence of the fast, the two sustain one another. Moreover, because they are called the Eight-Limbed Fasting Precepts, they are said to be eight rather than nine.

These fasting precepts are intended only for laypeople. Laypeople receive and observe them for the duration of one day and one night; they receive them for one day and are released from them after that day. This was also established by the Tathagata as an expedient means for lay Buddhist disciples who are unable to observe precepts throughout their lives.

Because they do not possess lifelong precepts, they are not called upasakas; yet because they possess precepts observed for one day and one night, they are also upasakas. Therefore, they are called only persons of an intermediate status. However, when receiving the fasting precepts for one day, the recipient must necessarily be pure and utterly sincere.

Without purity and sincerity, there is only an empty name and no benefit whatsoever. One must therefore be careful.

16. CHAPTER ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING RECEIVING THE TEN PRECEPTS

Question: Without receiving the Five Precepts, may one receive the Ten Precepts?

Answer: One may do so if one has previously received the Three Refuges. Because the Five Precepts are already included within the Ten Precepts, it is not invariably necessary to receive them again.

Question: If one has violated the Five Precepts without repenting, may one receive the Ten Precepts?

Answer: No. If one previously received them without knowing that there was a method of repentance, the reception is valid; but if one knew and did not repent, it is not valid.

Question: If the preceptor has committed a grave transgression and a disciple receives the Ten Precepts from that teacher, does the disciple obtain the precepts?

Answer: The disciple does not obtain the precepts.

Commentary: The teacher here means the preceptor. Only one who possesses the virtue of the precepts and sufficient seniority in the rains may serve as a teacher. If he himself has committed a grave offense and is no longer a bhikshu, how could he ordain another person? It is like carrying people across a river in a leaking boat: they will sink. Therefore, the answer says no. Consequently, one who seeks the supramundane Dharma… cannot fail to choose a teacher carefully. One must be cautious in this matter.

Question: If teachers such as the acarya have committed grave transgressions, does an ordinand who receives the Ten Precepts from them obtain the precepts?

Answer: The ordinand does not obtain the precepts.

Question: If a novice violates the Ten Precepts, may all the transgressions be repented?

Answer: It is the same as the violation of the Five Precepts discussed above.

Commentary: It is the same as the section above concerning violations of the Five Precepts. One who violates any of the four precepts, such as killing living beings, is not permitted to repent. Apart from these four precepts, the violation of any other precept among the Ten Precepts may be repented.

17. CHAPTER ON QUESTIONS CONCERNING NOVICES

Question: When a novice who has committed an offense wishes to repent, must he do so before the Sangha?

Answer: No. He need only go before his original teacher. If his original teacher is not presently available, he may repent before another bhikshu.

Question: Must a novice recite the precepts every half-month?

Answer: There is no such principle. Why? Because one who receives the novice precepts is no longer a layperson and will ultimately become a bhikshu. At that time, he will be permitted to participate in the recitation of the precepts. For the present, however, novices may assemble once every half-month together with the great Sangha to attend the karman and listen to the precepts.

Question: May a novice who has violated a precept go to another novice to repent?

Answer: No.

Commentary: Because a novice’s wisdom is shallow, he does not understand the expedient distinctions between observance and violation or between light and grave offenses, and he cannot preside over a karman for the assembly to absolve offenses. Therefore, this is not permitted. As stated in the preceding passage, he may repent before his original teacher.

Question: May a novice wear lay clothing?

Answer: No.

Commentary: As stated above, a novice who wishes to receive the full ordination may not wear lay clothing. Having become a novice, he must not lack the three robes and must always carry an alms bowl with him. Otherwise, his physical appearance and the clothing he wears would not correspond: he would be neither layperson nor monastic. Therefore, it is not permitted.

Question: If his original teacher acts contrary to the true Dharma, may a novice leave and seek reliance upon another teacher?

Answer: Yes.