摩訶僧祇律

PART TWO: EXPLANATION OF THE FOUR PARAJIKA DHARMAS

(The concluding section of the precept concerning sexual intercourse)

(235a) Furthermore, when the Buddha was staying in the city of Sravasti, as related above, there was at that time in the country of Ujjayini the wife of a young man who was licentious by nature and engaged in sexual intercourse with another man. Her husband became angry and rebuked her to her face, but she continued as before. He then sought to punish her severely, yet she still would not desist. The husband kept watch until he caught them engaging in sexual intercourse, whereupon he seized them both, brought them before the king, and reported:

– Your Majesty, this immoral woman has engaged in sexual intercourse with this man. I beg Your Majesty to punish her severely as a warning against future offenses.

The king became exceedingly angry and ordered the responsible officials to cut off her hands and feet and cast her outside in the charnel ground. The officials immediately led her to the charnel ground, cut off her hands and feet, and left her lying there on her back.

At that time, a bhikkhu passed through the charnel ground and saw the woman lying naked upon the earth. Because he reflected improperly, lustful thoughts arose in him, and he told the woman that he wished to do that act with her, namely, to engage in sexual intercourse. She replied, "With my body in this condition, how could that act be performed?"

The bhikkhu said, "It can be done." She then consented, and the two engaged in sexual intercourse. When the act was finished, the bhikkhu departed.

At that time, the woman’s friends and relatives said to one another that they should go to the charnel ground to see whether she was dead or still alive.

(235b) They all went together to the charnel ground and saw her lying on her back upon the earth with both hands and feet cut off, while upon her body were traces of recent sexual intercourse. They all became angry and said to her:

– You are undergoing such suffering, yet you still do such a thing. How can a person be so shameless?

The woman replied, "Someone came and forced himself upon me; it was not my fault."

They asked, "Who was the one who forced himself upon you?" She replied, "It was a Sakyan ascetic."

Everyone was shocked and regarded it as an extraordinary outrage, saying to one another, "These Sakyan ascetics do not refrain even from a woman maimed in this way; how much less would they refrain from those whose bodies are whole! We must guard ourselves carefully and never allow them near our homes. They are depraved men; what moral virtue could they possess?"

Afterward, that bhikkhu felt remorseful and doubtful, and he reported the entire matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha said, "Bhikkhu, have you not heard that I established a precept forbidding sexual intercourse?"

The bhikkhu replied, "I knew that the Blessed One had established the precept, but I thought it applied to those whose bodies were whole, whereas this woman had no hands or feet."

The Buddha said, "Whether a woman has had her left hand and right foot cut off, or her right hand and left foot cut off, if a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with her, he commits a parajika offense."

Furthermore, when the Buddha was staying in the city of Rajagriha, as related above, there was a bhikkhu at the Jetavana Monastery who, after finishing his meal, entered the Forest of Opened Eyes to practice meditation. At that time, in the Forest of Opened Eyes, there was a woman seized by madness who lay sleeping upon the ground. The wind blew aside the hem of her garment, exposing her body. The bhikkhu then reflected improperly, lust arose in his mind, and he engaged in sexual intercourse with her. After engaging in sexual intercourse, he felt remorseful and doubtful, and he reported the entire matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then said to the bhikkhu, "Did you not know that I established a precept forbidding sexual intercourse?"

The bhikkhu replied, "I knew that the Buddha had established the precept, but this woman was insane and lay sleeping."

The Buddha said, "Engaging in sexual intercourse with an insane woman who lies sleeping also constitutes a parajika offense."

Furthermore, when the Buddha was staying in the city of Vaisali, as extensively related above, and so forth, there was at that time the wife of a householder who had remained for a long while at her parents’ home. Her husband’s family sent someone to inform her that she must return without delay. She therefore prepared various foods to carry with her, but while traveling on the road she was struck by a poisonous wind and died.

The climate in the city of Vaisali was damp, and the dead could not be left for long. Her relatives then gathered together and said to one another that they must quickly take the corpse to the charnel ground, lest it decay and cause people revulsion. However, while carrying the corpse, they encountered heavy wind and rain.

They therefore placed the corpse in a certain spot, covered it with grass, and intended to cremate it the following morning. During that night, however, the rain ceased, the sky cleared, and the moon shone brightly. At that time, a bhikkhu wandering at leisure came to the charnel ground.

When he reached the place where the corpse had been laid, he smelled a fragrance emanating from the body of the recently deceased woman and mistook her for someone still alive. This bhikkhu did not reflect properly; lust (235c) arose in his mind, and he engaged in sexual intercourse with the corpse. After engaging in sexual intercourse, he remained unsatisfied, so he carried the corpse back to his dwelling and continued engaging in sexual intercourse with it throughout the night.

At daybreak, he closed the door and entered the village to seek alms. Early that morning, the woman’s relatives brought fragrant oil, firewood, and fire, intending to cremate her body. But when they arrived at the former place, they did not see the corpse, nor did they find any sign that birds or beasts had eaten it.

They searched everywhere without finding it. Then they opened the door of the bhikkhu’s thatched hut and saw the corpse inside, with traces of recent sexual intercourse still upon it. Seeing this, they said to one another, "How extraordinary!

These Sakyan ascetics do not spare even the dead, how much less the living! From now on, we must guard ourselves and never allow an ascetic to set foot in our homes. These creatures are depraved beasts; what spiritual conduct could they possess?"

Afterward, the bhikkhu felt remorseful and doubtful, and he reported the entire matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha said, "Bhikkhu! Did you not know that I established a precept forbidding sexual intercourse?"

The bhikkhu replied, "I knew that the Buddha had established the precept, but that was a dead woman."

The Buddha said, "Engaging in sexual intercourse with a dead woman also constitutes a parajika offense."

There are three cases in which a bhikkhu who engages in sexual intercourse commits a parajika offense: engaging in sexual intercourse with one who is awake, one who is asleep, or one who is dead.

The Blessed One then ordered all the bhikkhus residing in Vaisali to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established this precept for the bhikkhus; whoever has heard it must hear it again:

-- "If a bhikkhu has received full ordination before a harmonious Sangha, and, being weak in the precepts, neither returns the precepts nor withdraws from the Sangha, but engages in sexual intercourse—even with an animal—then that bhikkhu commits a parajika offense and may not live in communion."

(The account of the originating circumstances of the parajika ends here.)

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: One who has received full ordination and has properly received full ordination; whose ordination was in accordance with the Dharma, not contrary to the Dharma; conducted by a harmonious assembly, not a discordant assembly; commendable, not blameworthy; and who was fully twenty years of age, not underage. Such a person is a bhikkhu.

Receiving full ordination before a harmonious Sangha: If, at the time of full ordination, a bhikkhu properly received full ordination—that is, through one motion and three proclamations, without any obstructing condition or disqualification—and the Sangha was harmonious and not divided, consisting of ten Sangha members acting as preceptors, or more than ten, then that bhikkhu received full ordination in the midst of a harmonious Sangha.

Not returning the precepts: (To clarify this matter, first let us explain "returning the precepts.")

Relinquishing the precepts: When a bhikshu is sorrowful and unhappy, wishes to abandon the śramana Dharma, does not wish to be a bhikshu, and does not wish to be a son of the Buddha, he says: “I wish to become a śrāmaṇera; I wish to become a follower of another path; I wish to become a layperson and enjoy the five kinds of sensual pleasure as before.” Then, addressing a bhikshu, bhikshuni, shikshamana, śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī, follower of another path, renunciant, or lay householder, he says: “I abandon the Buddha, abandon the Dharma, abandon the Sangha, abandon the trainings, abandon the recitation of the precepts, abandon communal residence, abandon shared benefits, abandon the sutras and treatises, abandon being a bhikshu, abandon being a (236a) śramana, and abandon the Śākya lineage.

I am not a bhikshu, not a śramana, and not of the Śākya lineage. I am a śrāmaṇera, a follower of another path, a layperson; from now on I shall enjoy the five sensual pleasures as before.” This is called relinquishing the precepts.

What is meant by abandoning the Buddha?

Abandoning the Buddha means abandoning the Perfectly Awakened One, abandoning the Most Excellent One, abandoning the Omniscient One, abandoning the Teacher of All, abandoning the One Who Sees All Things without Omission, abandoning the father of Rāhula, abandoning the One whose body is like pure gold, abandoning the One whose radiance is perfect and complete, abandoning the thirty-two marks, and abandoning the eighty excellent minor characteristics.

If one renounces any one of the Buddha’s appellations, it is in every case called abandoning the Buddha. To abandon the Buddha in this way is called relinquishing the precepts. However, if one says that one abandons a Buddha of the past or future, this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but one commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If one does not say that one abandons a Buddha of the past or future but directly says that one abandons the Buddha, this is called relinquishing the precepts. Or if one says, “I abandon the pratyekabuddha,” this is called relinquishing the precepts. Regarding the past and future, it is the same as in the case of abandoning the Buddha described above.

Moreover, all renunciant disciples of the six non-Buddhist teachers also claim to have a buddha. If a bhikshu truly intends to abandon such a buddha and then says, “I abandon the buddha,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If, however, he says in jest, “I abandon the Buddha,” he commits a vinaya-transgression offense.

Yet if he is insane and speaks incoherently, there is no offense.

What is meant by abandoning the Dharma?

The Dharma does not belong to any of the three times; the characteristic of the Dharma abides perpetually. It is the unconditioned nirvana, separation from all afflictions, and the permanent and complete cessation of all suffering. If one says, “I abandon those dharmas,” this is relinquishing the precepts.

However, if one says that one abandons a dharma of the past or future, this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but one commits a sthūlātyaya offense. Yet if one does not say that one abandons a dharma of the past or future but directly says that one abandons the Dharma, this is relinquishing the precepts. All followers of other paths also have their own dharmas.

If a bhikshu truly intends to abandon such a dharma and says, “I abandon that dharma,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he says in jest that he abandons the Dharma, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. But if he is insane and speaks incoherently, there is no offense.

What is meant by abandoning the Sangha?

The Sangha consists of disciples of the Blessed One: those proceeding toward righteousness, proceeding toward wisdom, proceeding toward the Dharma, and proceeding in accordance with the practice of the Dharma; namely, the four pairs and eight classes of noble beings. They are accomplished in faith, accomplished in moral discipline, accomplished in learning, accomplished in samadhi, accomplished in prajna, accomplished in liberation, and accomplished in the knowledge and vision of liberation.

They are worthy of veneration and are the unsurpassed field of merit. If a bhikshu says, “I abandon such a Sangha,” this is called relinquishing the precepts. However, if he says, “I abandon the Sangha of the past or future,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If he does not speak of the Sangha of the past or future but directly says, “I abandon the Sangha,” this is called relinquishing the precepts. What applies to the Bhikshu Sangha also applies to the Bhikshuni Sangha. If he says, “I abandon many bhikshus,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If he says, “I abandon many bhikshus of the past or future,” this is not called (236b) relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he does not say that he abandons many bhikshus of the past or future but directly says, “I abandon many bhikshus,” this likewise is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. What applies to many bhikshus also applies to many bhikshunis.

If he says, “I abandon one bhikshu,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he says, “I abandon one bhikshu of the past or future,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a vinaya-transgression offense that is to be confessed mentally. If he does not say, “I abandon one bhikshu of the past or future,” but directly says, “I abandon one bhikshu,” this likewise is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a vinaya-transgression offense.

What applies to one bhikshu also applies to one bhikshuni. If he says, “I abandon my preceptor,” this is called relinquishing the precepts. The distinctions are the same as in the case of abandoning the Sangha described above.

If he says, “I abandon my teacher (ācārya),” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he says, “I abandon a teacher of the past or future,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he does not say that he abandons a teacher of the past or future but directly says that he abandons his teacher, this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If he says in jest that he abandons his teacher, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he is insane and speaks incoherently, there is no offense.

Followers of other paths also call themselves a Sangha. If a bhikshu truly intends to abandon such a Sangha and says, “I abandon the Sangha of the followers of other paths,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he says in jest, “I abandon the Sangha,” he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he is insane and speaks incoherently, there is no offense.

What is meant by abandoning the trainings?

There are three trainings: the training in higher moral discipline, the training in higher mind, and the training in higher wisdom.

The training in higher moral discipline: The pratimoksha precepts, expounded either extensively or in brief.

The training in higher mind: The nine successive levels of meditative attainment.

The training in higher wisdom: The Four Noble Truths.

The training in higher moral discipline, the training in higher mind, and the training in higher wisdom are all called the trainings. If a bhikshu says, “I abandon those trainings,” this is relinquishing the precepts, as in the case of abandoning the Buddha described above. In the world, each field has its own course of study, such as crafts, mathematics, technical arts, and so forth; all are called trainings.

If a bhikshu intends to abandon such studies and says, “I abandon that course of study,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. Likewise, each school of the followers of other paths has its own training. If a bhikshu intends to abandon such trainings and says disingenuously, “I abandon the trainings of the followers of other paths,” this is not called relinquishing the precepts, but he commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If he says in jest, “I abandon the training,” he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he is insane and speaks incoherently, there is no offense.

What is meant by abandoning the recitation of the precepts?

There are three occasions for the recitation of the precepts: the recitation of the precepts on the fourteenth day, the recitation on the fifteenth day, and an intermediate recitation of the precepts (poṣadha).

The fourteenth-day observances are as follows: in winter, the third and seventh poṣadhas; in spring, the third and seventh poṣadhas; and in summer, the (236c) third and seventh poṣadhas. Thus, in one year there are six poṣadhas held on the fourteenth day. The remaining eighteen poṣadhas are held on the fifteenth day. Altogether there are twenty-four poṣadhas, known as the fourteenth-day poṣadha, the fifteenth-day poṣadha, and the intermediate poṣadha.

When bhikkhus perform the uposatha ceremony, if the Sangha is not in harmony (and therefore cannot perform the uposatha), but one bhikkhu proclaims: “When the Sangha becomes harmonious, we shall perform the uposatha,” then the Sangha commits no offense. If no bhikkhu makes such a proclamation, the Sangha commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If, on the fifteenth day, the Sangha is still not in harmony, the uposatha must be performed on the following day.

If there is still no harmony on the following day, the uposatha must be performed on the second day thereafter, or on any day up to the twelfth. If there is still no harmony on the twelfth day, the uposatha must be performed on the thirteenth day. If that uposatha period has only fourteen days, an intermediate uposatha must not be held on the thirteenth day; instead, it must be combined with the uposatha on the fourteenth day and performed once.

That uposatha day is called both an intermediate uposatha and the regular uposatha day. In a full month (of thirty days), an intermediate uposatha may be held on the thirteenth day when the Sangha is harmonious. If the Sangha is not in harmony, the uposatha must not be held on the fourteenth day but deferred until the fifteenth day, when it is performed once.

This uposatha is called both an intermediate uposatha and a regular uposatha. Why is this? Because the uposatha must not be held on two consecutive days; there must be a day between uposatha ceremonies.

This is called an intermediate uposatha. (In the case where) the uposatha ought to be held on the fourteenth day, it should not be postponed until the fifteenth day; conversely, when it ought to be held on the fifteenth day, it must not be held on the fourteenth day. However, if there is a legitimate reason, it may be performed. Whether on the fourteenth day, the fifteenth day, or at an intermediate uposatha, all are called recitations (of the precepts).

If one says, “I renounce that recitation of the precepts,” this is called abandoning the precepts, just as in the case of abandoning the Buddha explained above.

Other non-Buddhist sectarians also have recitations of precepts. If one truly intends to renounce their recitation of precepts but makes a pretense of saying, “I renounce the non-Buddhist recitation of precepts,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Thullaccaya offense. If one says in jest, “I renounce the recitation of the precepts,” one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one speaks incoherently while mentally deranged, there is no offense.

What is abandoning communal residence?

Communal residence is of two kinds: first, pure communal residence; second, semblant communal residence.

1.—Pure communal residence means that all members of the Sangha are pure and perform the uposatha together. This is called pure communal residence.

2.—Semblant communal residence means that one who is impure assumes the appearance of purity and performs the uposatha together with those who are pure. This is called semblant communal residence. Both pure communal residence and semblant communal residence are called communal residence. If one says, “I abandon communal residence,” this is called abandoning the precepts, just as in the case of abandoning the Buddha explained above.

Non-Buddhist sectarians also have communal residence. If one truly intends to abandon their communal residence but makes a pretense of saying, “I abandon that communal residence,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Thullaccaya offense. (237a) If one says in jest, “I abandon communal residence,” one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one speaks incoherently while mentally deranged, saying, “I abandon communal residence,” there is no offense.

What is abandoning shared benefits?

Shared benefits are of two kinds: first, the benefit of the Dharma; second, the benefit of robes and food.

1.—The benefit of the Dharma: receiving and reciting the teachings, and asking questions.

2.—The benefit of robes and food: jointly receiving a donation.

The benefit of the Dharma and the benefit of robes and food are collectively called shared benefits. If a bhikkhu says, “I abandon these benefits,” this is called abandoning the precepts. The remaining details are as clearly explained above in the case of abandoning the Buddha. If one says, “I abandon the benefit of the Dharma,” this constitutes abandoning the precepts; but if one merely says, “I abandon the benefit of robes and food,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, although one commits a Thullaccaya offense. If one says, “I abandon the benefit of robes and food of the past and the future,” one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

Non-Buddhist sectarians also have shared benefits. If one truly intends to abandon this form of sharing but makes a pretense of saying, “I abandon that shared benefit,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Thullaccaya offense. If one says in jest, “I abandon shared benefits,” one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one speaks incoherently while mentally deranged, saying, “I abandon shared benefits,” there is no offense.

What is abandoning the scriptures and treatises?

The scriptures and treatises comprise nine divisions. If a bhikkhu says, “I abandon these scriptures and treatises,” this is called abandoning the precepts. If one says, “I abandon the scriptures and treatises of the past and the future,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Thullaccaya offense. If one renders the Buddha’s teachings into literary verse for chanting and recitation, and then says, “I abandon the Buddha’s teachings contained in those chants and recitations,” this is called abandoning the precepts.

Non-Buddhist sectarians also have scriptures and treatises. If one truly intends to abandon these scriptures and treatises and says, “I abandon their scriptures and treatises,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Thullaccaya offense. If one says in jest, “I abandon the scriptures and treatises,” this is not called abandoning the precepts, but one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one speaks incoherently while mentally deranged, saying, “I abandon the scriptures and treatises,” one commits no offense.

Furthermore, if a bhikkhu says, “I abandon the Buddha; the Buddha abandons me. I leave the Buddha; the Buddha leaves me. I distance myself from the Buddha; the Buddha distances himself from me.

I am weary of the Buddha; the Buddha is weary of me. I give up the Buddha; the Buddha gives me up...” all such statements are called abandoning the precepts. The same applies to abandoning the scriptures and treatises: depending on the circumstances, it may or may not be called abandoning the precepts.

If one speaks out of anger or impulsiveness, speaks to oneself, speaks indistinctly, speaks in the course of an argument, speaks while imagining oneself alone, speaks to someone who does not understand, speaks to someone asleep, speaks to an insane person, or speaks to someone in anguish; (237b) or if one speaks to a child, a nonhuman being, an animal, and so forth—declaring the return of the precepts under such circumstances is not called abandoning the precepts.

Weakening of the precepts: A person thinks, “It would be better for me to abandon the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, and also abandon the scriptures and treatises.” He further thinks, “I should become a novice, become a layperson, or become a non-Buddhist sectarian.” When this person forms such thoughts and utters them aloud but has not yet resolved to address them to another person, this is called weakening of the precepts.

If this person speaks aloud of his weakening of the precepts, he commits a Thullaccaya offense with each and every utterance. Or that person thinks and says aloud, “It would be better for me to abandon the Buddha...” continuing until he says, “It would be better for me to become a layperson, as before.” He further says, “It would be best for me to abandon the Buddha...” continuing until he says, “It would be best for me to return to the lay life.” This is called weakening of the precepts.

If one speaks aloud of one’s weakening of the precepts, one commits a Thullaccaya offense with each and every utterance. This is called weakening of the precepts.

Sexual intercourse: To engage in sexual intercourse with a living woman in any of the three places—the vagina, anus, or mouth—and to experience pleasure at the beginning, in the middle, or at the end: this is called sexual intercourse. If a bhikkhu, being weak in the precepts, engages in sexual intercourse, he commits a pārājika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with a living or dead woman in any of the three places mentioned above and experiences pleasure at the beginning, in the middle, or at the end, he commits a pārājika offense.

If he engages in sexual intercourse under the same circumstances with a female nonhuman being or a female animal, he likewise commits that offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with a living or dead man, a living or dead male nonhuman being, or a living or dead male animal, in either of the two places—the anus or mouth—and experiences pleasure during any of the three stages, the beginning, middle, or end, he commits a pārājika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha.

If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with a living or dead paṇḍaka, a living or dead nonhuman paṇḍaka, or a living or dead animal paṇḍaka, in either of the two places, and experiences pleasure during any of the three stages, he commits a pārājika offense. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with the body of an elephant, a horse, or even a small chicken, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he engages in sexual intercourse with the body of a young elephant, or even a large chicken, he commits a pārājika offense.

Therefore it is said, “Even if he commits the act with an animal, he commits a pārājika offense.”

Pārājika: When the mind and wisdom regress from the true Dharma, fall away, and fail to attain the fruit of the path, this is called pārājika. Thus, one regresses and falls away from such knowledges as knowledge of position, conventional knowledge, knowledge of others’ minds, knowledge of suffering, its arising, its cessation, and the path, knowledge of exhaustion, and knowledge of non-arising, and fails to attain the fruit of the path. This is called pārājika.

Pārājika also means: To regress and fall away from nirvana and fail to realize it is called pārājika.

Pārājika also means: To regress and fall away from the holy life and fail to attain the fruit of the path is called pārājika.

Pārājika also means: Because one refuses to disclose and repent of offenses one has committed, it is called pārājika.

If a bhikkhu looks at a woman with a defiled mind, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense and must repent of it mentally. If his eyes see her or his ears hear her voice, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If their two naked bodies touch, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense.

If the male organ enters the female organ, even by no more than the width of a sesame seed, he commits a pārājika offense. If the male organ is large and is inserted but remains only at the outer edge of the female organ, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. Some beings have only one passage, used both for eating and drinking and for discharging urine and feces.

Whether such a being is alive or dead, if a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with it and experiences pleasure during any of the three stages—the beginning, middle, or end—he commits a pārājika offense. If a woman’s body has been cut lengthwise into two parts and a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with either part, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If the two parts are tied together so that they adhere as one and he then engages in sexual intercourse with it, he commits a pārājika offense.

If a woman’s body has been cut into three parts—upper, middle, and lower—and a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with the upper or lower part, he commits a pārājika offense. If he engages in sexual intercourse with the middle part, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he engages in sexual intercourse with the bruised, bluish, and swollen body of a woman, he commits a pārājika offense.

If that body has decomposed, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If the body remains intact but has dried out, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. But if oil or water is applied to moisten it, making it supple and intact, and he then engages in sexual intercourse with it, he commits a pārājika offense.

If it is moistened but falls apart and he then engages in sexual intercourse with it, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he engages in sexual intercourse with articulated bones still covered with blood and flesh, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense. If he engages in sexual intercourse with dry bones, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense.

If he engages in sexual intercourse with an image of a woman made of wood or stone, or with a painted image, he commits a vinaya-transgression offense.

If a bhikkhu neither declares that he relinquishes the precepts nor declares that he does not relinquish them, or, because he is weak in the precepts, neither declares that he relinquishes them nor declares that he does not relinquish them, and then becomes a layman, he is to be dealt with according to the Dharma in keeping with whatever violation he commits. The same applies if he becomes a follower of another path.

When engaging in sexual intercourse, whether one person is naked and the other clothed, or both are naked, if the male organ enters the female organ to the depth of a sesame seed, he commits a pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu does not relinquish the precepts, or, because he is weak in the precepts, does not inform anyone, then dresses as a layman and commits an offense, he is judged according to the violation committed.

If a bhikkhu rapes a bhikkhunī, the bhikkhu commits a pārājika offense. If the bhikkhunī experiences pleasure, she also commits a pārājika offense. If a bhikkhunī rapes a bhikkhu, the bhikkhunī commits a pārājika offense. If the bhikkhu experiences pleasure, he also commits a pārājika offense. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual pleasure with another bhikkhu, both commit a pārājika offense. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual pleasure with a novice, the bhikkhu commits a pārājika offense and the novice must be expelled. If a bhikkhu engages in sexual pleasure with a layperson, the bhikkhu commits a pārājika offense, but the layperson (238a) does not commit an offense. The same applies to a follower of another path.

If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse with any of the three classes of beings—human, nonhuman, or animal—of any of the three sexes—female, male, or paṇḍaka—in any of the three places—the mouth, the urinary passage, or the passage for defecation—and in any of the three conditions—awake, asleep, or dead—he commits a pārājika offense. If a bhikkhu is asleep, insane, or absorbed in meditation and a woman comes and rapes him, and the bhikkhu becomes aware and experiences pleasure during any of the three stages—the beginning, middle, or end—he commits a pārājika offense.

If a bhikkhu is asleep or absorbed in meditation and a woman comes and rapes him, and the bhikkhu immediately becomes aware but experiences no pleasure at the beginning, yet experiences pleasure in the middle or at the end, he commits a pārājika offense. If the bhikkhu experiences no pleasure at the beginning or in the middle but experiences pleasure at the end, he commits a pārājika offense. Conversely, if he experiences no pleasure during any of the three stages—the beginning, middle, or end—there is no offense.

What is meant by experiencing pleasure?

What is meant by not experiencing pleasure?—Experiencing pleasure is like a hungry person obtaining delicious food, for that person regards food as the greatest pleasure. Or it is like a thirsty person obtaining nourishing drink, for that person regards drink as the greatest pleasure. Sensual pleasure is likewise.

Not experiencing pleasure means: It is like a clean person having various corpses tied around his neck, or like having an abscess lanced, or having one’s body burned with a red-hot iron bar. Not experiencing pleasure is likewise.

If a bhikkhu engages in sexual intercourse under any of the following circumstances—whether by purchasing sexual services, by retaining someone for hire, by obtaining it through a favor, through acquaintance, through jesting, through a challenge, and so forth—he commits a pārājika offense. If, because his mind is deranged, he is unaware, there is no offense.

Therefore it is said: If a bhikkhu has received full ordination before a harmonious Sangha, has not relinquished the precepts, is weak in the precepts, has not left the Sangha, and engages in sexual intercourse—even with an animal—that bhikkhu commits a pārājika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha.

(The explanation of the First Precept ends here.)

At that time, the Blessed One was staying in the city of Vaishali. After the meal, he sat facing east, when the declining shadow measured half the height of a person, on the twelfth day of the fifth month of winter, six years after his attainment of enlightenment. On account of the elder Yasha, the son of Kalanda, he established this precept. Whatever the Buddha has prescribed must be observed and practiced accordingly. This is called the principle of conformity.

2. PRECEPT: STEALING.

FIRST PART OF THE PRECEPT AGAINST STEALING

When the Buddha was staying in the city of Rajagriha, as related fully above... At that time, the elder Dhanika (Sudinna), the son of a potter, went out soliciting donations and built a lofty Sangha dwelling, magnificent and beautiful. He then adorned it with carvings and decorative designs, sprinkled fragrant oil upon its floor, which was the color of lapis lazuli, and laid out (238b) various kinds of food and drink.

Now an elder bhikkhu arrived and asked Dhanika, “Elder, how many years have you been ordained?” Dhanika replied, “So many years.” The visiting bhikkhu said, “You are junior to me; I should dwell in this room.” Dhanika therefore yielded the room to the senior monk and went out soliciting donations to build a second room. Another elder bhikkhu arrived, and he yielded the room as before, then went out soliciting donations and built a third room. This time yet another elder bhikkhu arrived, and he again yielded the room just as he had on the previous two occasions.

Dhanika then thought, “I have endured every hardship to build these rooms, yet I have not been able to dwell in them. Where am I to find timber and laborers to build another room? I have been tormented by rain, wind, heat, cold, mosquitoes, and flies.

Whenever I contrive to build a room and have only just completed it, someone else is already waiting like a cat stalking a mouse and seizes it as soon as it is finished. What, then, should I do?” He further thought, “I was formerly a skilled craftsman, and I am also strong. I should build a room of bricks upon the black rock beside the cave of the seers and fire it thoroughly so that I may dwell there.” Having thought thus, Dhanika built a brick room upon the black rock beside the cave of the seers and fired it into a solid structure.

He also carved it and installed doors. Apart from the door leaves, door bolts, and clothes rack, everything else was fired, and its color was brilliant red like an udumbara blossom.

At that time, the sky had cleared after the rain. The Blessed One was walking in meditation along the slope of Mount Gridhrakuta. With the Buddha-eye, there was nothing the Tathagata did not see, nothing he did not hear, and nothing he did not know. On account of this matter, he wished to teach a sutra so that the Vinaya might long endure. Therefore, although he already knew, he asked the bhikkhus, “What is that object upon the black rock beside the cave of the seers that resembles an udumbara blossom?”

The bhikkhus said to the Buddha, “Blessed One, the bhikkhu Dhanika previously solicited donations and built a Sangha dwelling, adorning it with carvings and making it exceedingly magnificent. When it was completed, a senior monk came and took possession of it. He then built a second and a third, but these too were taken from him as before. Therefore, he has now built for himself that room of fired bricks, beautiful in color like an udumbara blossom, upon the black rock beside the cave of the seers.”

The Blessed One then told Ananda to bring him his robe, and Ananda immediately brought the robe and offered it to the Tathagata. The Blessed One put on the robe and went to the black rock beside the cave of the seers. Because the Blessed One had perfected the supreme deportment of walking, standing, lying down, and sitting, it manifested naturally without any need for deliberate effort.

Why was this? Because the merit of his conduct and karma was naturally preeminent, so that even the devas and Brahma kings could not equal him, as described fully in the Sutra on Deportment. At that time, with supreme deportment, the Blessed One walked (238c) to Dhanika’s brick room.

A heavenly spirit caused the door to open by itself. Although the room was small and narrow, the Tathagata entered naturally, without finding it confined in the least. After entering Dhanika’s room, the Tathagata touched the wall with his golden hand and said to the bhikkhus, “Look at how skillfully the bhikkhu Dhanika has adorned this room.

Although this bhikkhu Dhanika has gone forth, he has not yet grown weary of his former trade, nor has he relinquished his skillful crafts. Moreover, by firing this room he has harmed living beings. Furthermore, this brick room is extremely cold when the weather is cold and extremely hot when the weather is hot.

It can damage people’s eyes and cause them many illnesses. Because it has such disadvantages, you must demolish it. Do not allow bhikkhus in the future to imitate this kind of room.

For future bhikkhus might say, ‘While the Blessed One was still in the world, the bhikkhus each built their own rooms in which to dwell.’ Therefore, it must be demolished.” The bhikkhus then tore down that room.

After the Blessed One had ordered the room demolished, he returned to Mount Gridhrakuta.

When the elder bhikkhu Dhanika returned from the village after his alms round and saw that his room had been demolished, he asked the bhikkhus, “Who demolished this room?”

A bhikkhu then said to Dhanika, “Today you have gained a very great benefit. Why is that? Because the Tathagata graciously came to this room, and through this room you have shared in the resulting merit. The Blessed One knew the proper time and therefore ordered that this room be demolished.”

When Dhanika heard this, he was so exceedingly joyful that for seven full days he forgot all hunger and thirst. After seven days, however, he thought, “Where can I find timber to build another room? Yashoda, King Bimbisara’s forest superintendent, is an old friend of mine; he surely has timber.” Having thought this, he put on his customary robe, took his bowl, and went to Yashoda’s house. He greeted him, saying, “Are you free from illness and enjoying long life? I wish to build a room but have no timber. Could you provide me with some timber?”

The minister replied, “There is no timber at my house, and the king’s timber has also been exhausted. When more timber is brought in, I will provide some for you.”

Dhanika said, “Do not say that. How could the king’s timber ever be exhausted?”

The minister replied, “Venerable sir, if you do not believe me, go and see for yourself.”

Dhanika then went to the timber yard and saw five large timbers. He selected two and took them back to his dwelling. According to the ancient custom established by former kings, every five days the king had to make an inspection of the granaries, the treasuries containing gold and silver, the quarters of the palace attendants, the elephant and horse stables, the carriage houses, and finally the place where the timbers were stored. When the king saw that two timbers were missing, he asked Yashoda, “Why are (239a) two of the timbers missing?”

Yashoda replied, “Your Majesty, they are all still there; none are missing.”

Thus, on the king’s second and third inspections, he again asked Yashoda why two timbers were missing, but Yashoda repeatedly told the king that all were present and none were missing. The king then became angry and said, “Have you burned my timbers? Or have you given my timber to an enemy kingdom?”

He immediately ordered the responsible officials to arrest and bind Yashoda. Upon being arrested and bound, Yashoda thought, “Not long ago, the venerable Dhanika came asking for timber, but there was none to give him. Could he have taken it?” He immediately sent a trusted man to ask Dhanika, “Venerable sir, you previously came asking for timber. Did you take those two timbers?”

The Venerable replied, “I did take them away.”

Yaśoda again sent a messenger to say to the Venerable, “Because I lost the timber, I have been arrested and imprisoned. Venerable sir, please devise some means of arguing that no offense was committed, so that I may soon be released from prison.”

Dhaniya then sent back word, “You need only report to the king: ‘Previously, the bhikshu Dhaniya came to me asking for timber. Perhaps he took it away. Please order an investigation.’”

The king immediately sent a messenger to summon Dhaniya, and Dhaniya went to the royal court. The Elder Dhaniya was upright in character, refined and dignified in bearing, and revered by devas and humans alike. Therefore, as soon as the king saw him, he was delighted and asked him, “Venerable Dhaniya, surely you did not take my two pieces of timber?”

The Venerable replied, “I did take them.”

The king asked, “Venerable sir, as one who has gone forth, why did you take what was not given by another?”

Dhaniya said, “Great King, you previously promised to give them; it is not that they were not given.”

The king asked, “Who gave them?”

He replied, “Who but the Great King?”

The king said, “Venerable sir, I am the king of a nation and have many affairs to attend to, so I do not remember. Please remind me: how did I promise to give them?”

Dhaniya said, “Great King, do you not remember that when you first ascended the throne, the great ministers of the court assembled, drew water from ponds, lakes, rivers, and streams, and sprinkled it upon sprouts and medicinal herbs? They also poured that water into a white elephant tusk and then poured it over the Great King’s head, enthroning you upon the royal seat. At that time, the Great King himself proclaimed: ‘Now that I am king, I give all the trees, grasses, waters, and mountains throughout the realm to śramaṇas and brahmins.’ Thus the king gave them; it is not that they were not given.”

The king said, “Venerable sir, I gave those things within the realm that had no custodian; I did not give things that were under someone’s care. How dare you distort my former words, argue deceptively, and falsely accuse me?”

The king then ordered Yaśoda’s release. The brahmins and devout men and women of the realm were all delighted, saying, “Excellent, Venerable Dhaniya! Through skillful means and wisdom, he answered the Great King so well that he escaped punishment today. The king also ordered Yaśoda to be safely released from prison.”

At that time, in the city of Rājagṛha, those who had no faith in the Buddha’s Dharma resentfully said, “Why did this śramaṇa Dhaniya resort to trickery and specious arguments, deceiving the king so as to (239b) escape punishment? We fear that from now on he may also take away the trees from our homes and then claim that the king had previously promised to give them. What are we to do? He is a corrupt man—what spiritual conduct does he possess?”

The bhikshus then reported all these criticisms to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered them to summon the bhikshu Dhaniya. When he arrived, the Buddha asked, “Is it true that you took the king’s timber?”

He replied, “It is true that I took it.”

The Buddha said, “You are one who has gone forth. Why did you take what was not given by another?”

Dhaniya replied, “Blessed One, the king had previously promised to give it; it is not that he had not promised to give it.”

The Buddha asked, “In what manner did the king give it?”

Dhaniya replied, “When the king first ascended the throne, he himself proclaimed: ‘I give the waters, mountains, trees, and grasses throughout the realm to śramaṇas and brahmins.’ Thus he promised to give them; it is not that he did not promise to give them.”

The Buddha said, “You foolish man! The king gave things that had no custodian; he did not give things that were under someone’s care. The king’s timber was under someone’s care, so why did you say it had been given? Dhaniya, have you not heard me use many causes and conditions to censure taking what has not been given and to praise taking only after something has been given? Why, then, did you now take what was not given? Dhaniya, this is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and not in accordance with my teaching. This deed cannot cause wholesome qualities to increase.”

The bhikshus then asked the Buddha, “Blessed One, why was the bhikshu Dhaniya the first to commit the offense of taking what was not given?”

The Buddha told the bhikshus, “This Dhaniya was not only the first to commit the offense of taking what was not given today; in a past life, he was also the first to commit the offense of taking what was not given.”

The bhikshus asked the Buddha, “Did such a thing truly happen before?”

The Buddha said, “It was indeed so. In the past, when this world reached the end of a kalpa, sentient beings were reborn in the Ābhāsvara Heaven. When the world was formed again, the devas of the Ābhāsvara Heaven descended once more into the human world.

At that time, those devas traveled through the sky, sustained by the bliss of meditative concentration, wandering here and there and living in delight and perfect goodness. The radiance of their bodies illuminated one another, and they had no need of the light of the sun or moon. At that time, sentient beings knew neither day nor night, nor the sun and moon, nor years, months, seasons, and times.

When the waters had just receded, the savor of the earth arose, like the taste of heavenly amṛta. Then a coarse being, greedy and attached to flavors, tasted the savor of the earth. Finding it fragrant and delicious, his mind immediately became attached to it.

Other beings imitated him and tasted it. They too found it delicious, and so they all took and ate it. After eating it, their bodies became heavy, all their supernormal powers were lost, and their radiance was extinguished.

Consequently, the sun and moon, darkness and light, years, months, seasons, and times came to exist in the world.

At that time, the beings were neither male nor female, but after eating the savor of the earth for a long time, their physical appearances became different. Those who ate much had coarse and ugly bodies, while those who ate little had handsome and well-formed bodies. Then those who were handsome considered themselves superior to others and, upon seeing those who were coarse and ugly, despised them as inferior.

Relying on their own handsome appearance, they became arrogant. Because the offense of arrogance arose, the savor of the earth disappeared. Then a cream-like substance arose from the earth, tasting like pure honey.

The beings were all alarmed and lamented, “Why has the savor of the earth suddenly disappeared?” They then ate the cream of the earth together. Those who ate much became coarse and ugly in appearance, while those who ate little had handsome and well-formed bodies. The handsome ones then became even more arrogant.

Consequently, the cream of the earth also disappeared. After the cream of the earth disappeared, a kind of mushroom arose from the earth, tasting like rock sugar. Those who ate much became ugly, while those who ate little became beautiful.

As before, the handsome ones grew increasingly arrogant. Because of this, the earth mushrooms also suddenly disappeared, and the earth naturally produced fragrant rice. Whenever this fragrant rice was harvested, it grew again, neither increasing nor diminishing.

What was harvested in the morning grew back by evening, and what was harvested in the evening grew back by morning.

Bhikshus, you should know that when the beings saw the cream of the earth disappear, sorrow arose within them, like a strong man oppressed by grief. Although they were oppressed by grief, they did not understand that it was caused by their own wrongdoing. The beings then ate the naturally produced fragrant rice.

After eating this rice for a long time, they gradually developed male and female bodies. They became attached to one another, sexual desire arose, and they became husbands and wives. When the other beings saw this, they angrily beat them, threw stones at them, and cursed them, saying, “Why has such an unlawful thing suddenly arisen in the world?

This is not the Dharma that leads to rebirth in heaven. From now on, we must cultivate wholesome Dharma so that we may be reborn in heaven.”

The Buddha told the bhikshus: “At that time, those beings who committed unlawful acts felt ashamed and defiled, concealed themselves, and did not show their faces for one day, two days, or even as long as a month. Therefore, they built rooms in which they could secretly commit unlawful acts. Then those beings thought: ‘Why should we toil every day?

It would be better if, early in the morning, we gathered enough rice to use through tomorrow.’ The next day, another being came and invited one of them to go gather rice together, but that person replied: ‘Yesterday I gathered enough for today as well.’ The other said: ‘That is indeed a good idea.’ Then, following that example, he gathered at one time enough for ten days, twenty days, one month, or two months. Because of their greed in storing it up, the glutinous rice developed husks and bran, and wherever it was harvested in the morning, it no longer grew back in the evening.

“Then the beings assembled and said to one another: ‘In former times, we could all fly freely through the air, taking the bliss of meditative concentration as our food, living in pleasure and peace. Later, we ate the savor of the earth, but at that time no evil dharmas had yet arisen among beings. When evil dharmas arose, the savor of the earth disappeared, and a film upon the earth came into being.

That film had a fragrant and delicious taste. Next, mushrooms grew from the earth, and afterward fragrant and delicious glutinous rice appeared. Today we must establish regulations, divide the rice fields with boundary embankments (240a), and assign them to one another: This portion belongs to me, and that portion belongs to you.’ But then one being thought: ‘If I take only from my own portion, it will soon be exhausted.

I should take a little from another person’s portion so that mine will last longer.’ When the other beings saw this being taking what had not been given, they said to him: ‘Why do you take what others have not given you? Do not do so again.’ Yet that being continued taking and would not stop. When the others caught him stealing for the third time, they said: ‘Why should there be among beings one who steals as many as three times?

From now on, if you steal again, you must be punished.’ Nevertheless, he still did not desist. When the other person caught him, he struck him painfully with a staff. Having been beaten, the thief cried aloud: ‘Why has this evil dharma appeared in the world, causing one being to strike another with a staff?’ The one who had struck him then threw the staff to the ground and also cried aloud: ‘Why has such an evil dharma appeared in the world?

How can someone take what others have not given him and, the more he is admonished, remain utterly shameless?’ From that time onward, three evil dharmas appeared in the world:

1. Taking what has not been given.

2. Speaking falsely.

3. Striking others with a staff.

“These were the first three evil dharmas to appear.”

The Buddha then said to the bhikshus: “That first being who took what had not been given was none other than this Bhikshu Dhanika, the potter’s son. In the past, Dhanika was the first to take what had not been given; today, within my true Dharma, he is again the first to take what has not been given.”

The bhikshus then asked the Buddha: “Why was Bhikshu Dhanika indebted to the Blessed One for being able to wear the kasaya, so that when King Bimbisara saw him, he immediately released him?”

The Buddha said: “So it is, bhikshus. Bhikshu Dhanika has not only escaped punishment today because he wears my kasaya; in the past as well, he was delivered through his indebtedness to me. At that time, on the shore of the great ocean stood a Yuan-po-li tree.

In that tree lived a huge golden-winged bird, whose two wings spanned one hundred and fifty yojanas. Golden-winged birds live by feeding upon dragons. When one wished to eat a dragon, it first beat its wings powerfully over the sea, causing the waters to part on both sides.

When a dragon’s body appeared, it seized and ate it. Dragons traditionally fear golden-winged birds, and so they often hung a kasaya before the gate of their palaces. Upon seeing the kasaya, the birds gave rise to reverence and would not enter to seize and eat those dragons.

“At that time, the bird beat its wings over the sea, saw a dragon, and wished to eat it. Terrified, the dragon placed a kasaya over its head, came ashore, and fled. It then (240b) transformed itself into human form, while the golden-winged bird transformed itself into a brahmin and pursued the dragon, reviling it: ‘Why will you not cast away that kasaya?’ Fearing death, the dragon clung tightly to the kasaya and refused to relinquish it even at the cost of its life.

“At that time, a rishi dwelt upon an island in the sea, where flowers and fruits grew in abundance. Utterly terrified and with nowhere to seek refuge, the dragon ran to the rishi’s dwelling. The rishi possessed great spiritual authority and virtue, so the golden-winged bird did not dare fly inside. From afar, it faced the rishi and recited this verse:

‘That cruel and wicked dragon

Has now assumed a human form.

Fearing death and seeking escape,

It has fled into your dwelling.

Because of the rishi’s virtue,

I must endure hunger and thirst.

I would rather forfeit my own life

Than dare to eat this dragon.’

“The rishi then thought: ‘Who is reciting that verse?’ He arose and went outside to look. Seeing the dragon being pursued by the golden-winged bird, he recited this verse in reply:

‘May you enjoy long life

And always partake of heavenly amrita.

You endure hunger and do not eat the dragon

Out of reverence for me.’

“Through the spiritual authority and virtue of the rishi, the golden-winged bird’s hunger and thirst immediately ceased. The rishi then said to it: ‘Because you transgressed the precepts, you received this avian body. Now you again wish to kill a living being, and thus you will certainly fall into hell.’ He explained in detail the ten unwholesome deeds, up to and including wrong views. ‘Each of these leads to rebirth in hell, among animals, hungry ghosts, or asuras. You should now repent together with this dragon, so that henceforth you will no longer bear enmity toward one another.’ They then repented. After repenting, each returned to its former abode.”

The Buddha then told the bhikshus: “The rishi at that time was none other than I myself. The golden-winged bird was King Bimbisara, and the dragon was Bhikshu Dhanika. In the past, this Bhikshu Dhanika escaped the peril of the golden-winged bird through my kasaya; today, he has again escaped punishment by the king through my kasaya.”

The bhikshus then asked the Buddha: “Why did King Bimbisara release Bhikshu Dhanika as soon as he saw him?”

The Buddha told the bhikshus: “This did not happen only today; it also happened in the past.”

The bhikshus asked the Buddha: “Did such a thing truly happen before?”

The Buddha said: “Indeed it did. In the past, there was a king who skillfully taught and transformed both people and animals, causing them to abandon hostility. The five grains flourished, the people lived in peace and happiness, and they conducted themselves with integrity, gratitude, benevolence, filial devotion, generosity, and observance of the precepts. At that time, an elephant hunter lived in that kingdom. His household was destitute, and he had many (240c) children, who crowded around him clamoring for food and drink. The hunter’s wife then said to her husband: ‘Our family is so poor and destitute. Why do you not work diligently to earn a living?’

“The hunter replied: ‘What work would you have me do?’

“His wife answered: ‘Why do you not diligently practice the occupation of your father and forefathers?’”

At that time, the hunter prepared provisions, took his hunting equipment, and went to the Snow Mountains. At the foot of the mountains there was then a white elephant with six tusks, an elephant endowed with wisdom. It thought: "Why do people wish to kill me?

Is it because they want my tusks that they seek to kill me?" When this elephant's ancestors had died, it had gathered their tusks and stored them in one place. When its father died, it likewise took his tusks and stored them in the same place. It then separated from the herd and leisurely went in search of food.

Meanwhile, the hunter traveled from place to place hunting, passing through mountains and forests until he came to where the elephant was. When the elephant saw the hunter, it thought: "Who is that man who has come here? Could he be a hunter who has come to kill me?" It then raised its trunk and beckoned the hunter to approach.

The hunter was well versed in the characteristics of elephants, so he thought: "If I do not approach, it will surely harm me." He therefore went up to the elephant, and the elephant asked: "What have you come here seeking?" The hunter told it his purpose. The elephant then said: "If you will not come here again, I shall provide you with what you need." The hunter replied: "If I obtain what I need, I would not even wish to step outside my door, much less come here." The elephant then brought out the tusks of its ancestors and gave them to the hunter.

Having received them, the hunter joyfully returned to his native country. He then thought: "If I take these elephant tusks home and use them to provide food and clothing for my wife and children, they will surely not last long. I should find a secluded place to live and enjoy them by myself.

If I remain healthy, I can have another wife and children." Then, one morning, needing five coins, he took those elephant tusks to a tavern.

When the tavernkeeper saw him approaching, he thought: "Where has this man come from? Today I shall surely make a little profit." He arranged a couch and cushions while awaiting the man carrying the elephant tusks, and then invited him to sit down. Taking advantage of the man's hunger and thirst, the tavernkeeper plied him with wine until he was drunk. Once he was intoxicated, the tavernkeeper made him enter the debt in his account: the amount of wine was very small, but the debt was very great.

The following day, after he had sobered up, he asked for more wine. The tavernkeeper said: "Why do you ask for more? It seems you do not understand. Let us settle the account together, and if any money remains, I shall give you wine." But when the account had been settled, not a single coin remained. The man then thought: "Where can I find money? Perhaps I should return to the mountains and kill that elephant."

He therefore returned to the mountains and went to where the elephant lived. Seeing the hunter, the elephant asked: "Why have you come here again?"

The hunter explained his purpose to the elephant. The elephant then asked: "Where are the things I gave you before?"

He replied: "Because I lacked wisdom and became heedless, I used them all up."

The elephant (241a) said: "If you will no longer be heedless, I shall give you more." The hunter replied: "I have repented of what I did before; how could I possibly do it again? If you give me something once more, I shall not even step outside my door."

The elephant again brought out its father's tusks and gave them to him. The hunter took the elephant tusks back to his country and squandered them all just as before. He then thought: "I must kill that elephant. When I go there this time, I must not let it see me."

During the last month of spring, when the weather was hot, that elephant went down into a pond to bathe. After bathing, it came ashore and lay resting in the cool shade beneath a tree before the elephant herd. The hunter then shot it with an arrow smeared with poison. The arrow struck its shoulder, and blood flowed into its eyes. The elephant raised its head to see where the arrow had come from and saw the hunter. From afar it reproached him: "You are an evil wretch, treacherous and ungrateful. Even now I have the strength to kill you, but out of reverence for the kasaya, I shall not kill you." It then called to the hunter: "Come quickly and cut off my tusks." The elephant shielded that hunter with its own body, preventing the other elephants from harming him.

At that time, a deity dwelling in the forest spoke this verse:

"Within, he has not abandoned delusion and darkness;

Outwardly, he falsely wears the kasaya.

His heart harbors poisonous malice;

He is unworthy to wear the kasaya.

Meditating upon the signless,

Forever extinguishing the afflictions,

With the inner mind ever tranquil—

Such a one is worthy to wear the kasaya."

The Buddha told the bhikkhus: "The elephant king of that time was none other than King Bimbisara of today. The hunter of that time is this bhikkhu Dhanika today. Because King Bimbisara revered the kasaya, he spared that hunter. Today, again, because Dhanika wears the kasaya robe, the king does not hold him guilty."

The bhikkhus again addressed the Buddha:

"Blessed One! Why did King Bimbisara, upon seeing Dhanika's dignified and orderly bearing, not give rise to an evil thought?"

The Buddha told the bhikkhus: "It is not only today that King Bimbisara has esteemed dignified conduct and refrained from giving rise to evil thoughts; he did so in the past as well."

The bhikkhus addressed the Buddha: "Blessed One, did such a thing occur in the past?"

The Buddha said:

"Indeed it did. In the past, there was a king who skillfully guided and transformed his people, so that people and all living creatures remained free from enmity. The five grains flourished throughout the kingdom, and the people lived in peace and happiness.

They possessed integrity and gratitude, practiced benevolence and filial kindness, gave alms, observed the precepts, and extended loving-kindness to all people and creatures. The king had an elephant named Great Body. It was fierce and difficult to tame, and its formidable reputation was known far and wide.

At that time, none of the enemy kingdoms could withstand it. Wherever a military expedition was required, the enemy forces were utterly routed. Whenever anyone violated the royal law, this elephant was made to trample that person to death.

Relying upon this elephant, the king feared nothing. But one day, the elephant stable fell into disrepair (241b), and the elephant escaped and ran to the vicinity of a monastery. There it saw the bhikkhus whose bearing was dignified and orderly, and it also heard them reciting a scripture: 'Those who kill living beings suffer; those who refrain from killing gain merit.' Upon hearing these words of scripture, the elephant's mind became gentle and compliant.

At that time, there was a criminal whose offense merited death. The king ordered the responsible official to have the elephant trample him to death. But the elephant merely smelled the criminal three times with its trunk and had no intention of killing him.

The supervising official reported this matter to the king, saying: 'When the elephant saw the criminal, it only smelled him with its trunk and had absolutely no intention of killing him.'

"When the king heard this, he became deeply distressed and asked the official: 'Did the elephant truly behave in this way?'

"The official replied: 'It truly did!'

"The king then summoned his chief ministers to deliberate upon the matter. When the ministers had assembled, the king said to them: 'Now that I am king, no one can defeat me, and it is entirely because of this elephant. But now it has suddenly become like this. What are we to do?'

"The chief ministers then summoned the elephant keeper and asked: 'Recently, when the elephant stable fell into disrepair, where did the elephant go?' The elephant keeper replied: 'It went to a monastery.' Being intelligent, the chief ministers surmised: 'This elephant saw the bhikkhus and must have heard the Dharma of the scriptures. Its mind became gentle, and it no longer wishes to kill living beings.' They therefore instructed the elephant keeper to establish gambling houses, slaughterhouses, and prisons beside the elephant stable, so that the elephant would remain near those places.

Thereafter, the elephant saw gamblers glaring, gesticulating with their hands, and shouting loudly; it saw butchers slaughtering animals; and it saw jailers interrogating and torturing prisoners. Having witnessed these things, its evil mind arose once more. Thus, when the king placed a criminal in the stable, the elephant immediately trampled him to death.

At that time, the devas spoke this verse:

"The elephant beheld the virtuous precepts and Vinaya,

And heard teachings concerning transgression and merit;

Its wholesome mind increased by day and night,

While its evil conduct gradually disappeared.

Drawing near to those who performed evil deeds,

Its former state of mind arose once again.

Only one endowed with penetrating wisdom

Advances straight ahead and never turns back."

The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

– The great elephant of that time was none other than King Bimbisara. In a previous life, King Bimbisara had once seen a bhikkhu whose deportment was dignified and well-composed, and affection and joy arose in his heart. Now, seeing Dhanika’s dignified and well-composed deportment, he was greatly delighted and therefore did not hold him guilty. At that time, Dhanika thought: “When I made the first room, an elder came and took possession of it, driving me out. When I went to the second and third rooms, I was driven out of those as well. Later, I built a room of fired bricks, but the Blessed One sent men to demolish it. Then I took the king’s timber and brought it back to build a dwelling, only to be reproached in every way by the Blessed One. All this hardship and labor has truly been in vain, accomplishing nothing! From now on, I shall put an end to this toil and, relying upon the (241c) Sangha, pass my days through joy and hardship alike.”

Thereafter, Dhanika cultivated the practice of freedom from affairs. Day and night, with sincerity and diligence, he devoted himself to the path. He attained the meditative absorptions, realized the fruit of the path, acquired the six superknowledges, and knew for himself that he had attained realization, his heart filled with elation. Dhanika then spoke this verse to encourage himself:

“To enjoy the bliss of meditation,

One must cultivate the Dharma of a sramana.

Keep body and life peacefully purified,

Like a snake entering a mouse’s hole.

To enjoy the bliss of meditation,

One must cultivate the Dharma of a sramana.

As for the robes and food one needs,

Whether coarse or fine, follow the community.

To enjoy the bliss of meditation,

One must cultivate the Dharma of a sramana.

In all things, one must know contentment,

And devote oneself to the path of nirvana.”

The Buddha then told the bhikkhus:

– Instruct all the bhikkhus around the city of Rajagriha to assemble here. Even those who have already heard this must hear it again:

– “If a bhikkhu takes what has not been given, he commits a Parajika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha.”

Furthermore, while the Buddha was staying in the city of Rajagriha (as related extensively above), there was a bhikkhu who, when the time came, donned his robe, took his bowl, and entered the city in search of discarded cloth. He searched throughout Rajagriha but found none. He then searched along the riverbank but still found none, and finally went to the place where robes were washed to look there. At that time, after washing the garments, a washerman went to a secluded place to speak with another person.

The bhikkhu then approached the place where the garments were drying. Another man saw him and said to the washerman, “That renunciant intends to take your garments.” The washerman asked, “Which path does that renunciant follow?”

The man replied, “He has gone forth among the Sakyan clan.”

The washerman said, “There is no need to worry. Sramanas of the Sakyan clan do not take what others have not given them.” Shortly afterward, the bhikkhu took the garments. The other man again said to the washerman, “The sramana has taken your garments.”

The washerman gave the same reply as before: “There is no need to worry. Sramanas of the Sakyan clan do not take what others have not given them.”

The bhikkhu then tucked the garments under his arm and carried them away. The man again said to the washerman, “The sramana of the Sakyan clan has carried your garments away.”

The washerman went to look and, alas, found that the bhikkhu had indeed taken and carried them away. He ran after him, calling, “Venerable sir! Venerable sir! Those garments belong to the king, to this minister, and to that householder. Every one of them has an owner. Venerable sir, please do not carry them away.”

The bhikkhu deliberately continued carrying them away and refused to leave them behind.

The washerman then reviled him, saying, “You sramana of corrupt conduct! If you do not return my garments, I shall deal with you in such-and-such a manner!”

The bhikkhu carried the garments back to his dwelling place, opened the door, placed them on the bed, (242a) closed the door, and sat in meditation.

The washerman then took five kinds of ash with him and entered Jetavana. Some bhikkhus were walking in meditation before the gate of the Jetavana monastery, while others were sitting quietly in contemplation. They asked the washerman, “Why are you shouting so noisily?” The washerman replied, “Today my garments were stolen. Why do you ask why I am shouting for no reason?”

The bhikkhus asked, “Who took your garments away?”

He replied, “A renunciant.”

They then asked, “Which path does he follow?”

He replied, “The Sakyan clan.”

The bhikkhus asked, “Where did he take them?”

The washerman replied, “Into this room.”

The bhikkhus went to that room, knocked on the door with their hands, and called, “Elder, open the door.”

But that bhikkhu remained silent and gave no reply. A young and strong bhikkhu then broke open the door and entered. The bhikkhu who had stolen the garments felt ashamed, bowed his head, and said nothing. The young bhikkhu went to the bed, took the garments outside, counted them, and asked the washerman whether their number matched the number he had lost. He replied that it did, and the garments were returned to him. The bhikkhus then said to the washerman, “Among renunciants there are many kinds of people, just as the five fingers of a hand are not equal. How could those of many clans who have gone forth all be the same? You are a virtuous and kindhearted man; please do not spread word of this to others. We shall report this matter to the Blessed One.”

The washerman then said, “The sramanas of the Sakyan clan have the support of kings, brahmins, and householders. Before, I was only afraid that I would lose all these garments. Now that I have recovered them, why would I tell anyone else?”

The bhikkhus then reported the entire matter in detail to the Blessed One. The Buddha instructed them to summon that bhikkhu, and they summoned him. The Buddha then asked him, “Is it true that you acted in this way?”

He replied, “It is true, Blessed One.”

The Buddha said to him, “Have you not heard that I established a precept forbidding theft?”

He replied, “Blessed One, I knew that the Buddha had established such a precept, but I thought it prohibited taking things only in cities, towns, and villages. I did not know that it also applied in uninhabited places.”

The Buddha said, “Foolish man, what difference is there between taking what has not been given in a village and taking what has not been given in an uninhabited place? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching. Such conduct cannot serve to increase wholesome qualities.”

The bhikkhus then asked the Buddha, “Blessed One, why did that washerman refuse to believe the other man and thus allow himself to be deceived by that bhikkhu?”

The Buddha told the bhikkhus, “Not only in this life did that washerman refuse to believe others; in a past life, too, he refused to believe them.”

The bhikkhus asked the Buddha, “Blessed One, did such a thing occur in the past?” The Buddha said, “Indeed it did. In a past life, two brahmins went to southern India to study the scriptures and treatises of non-Buddhist traditions. After completing their studies, they returned to their country.

On their journey home, they passed through a wilderness where goats grazed and saw two rams butting each other in the middle of the road. The manner in which goats fight is to advance and then draw back. (242b) At that time, the man walking in front, being foolish and credulous, said to his companion behind him, ‘Look at those two rams. Although they are four-legged beasts, they still understand courtesy and deference.

Seeing that I am a precept-observing and learned brahmin, they are slowly stepping aside and opening the way.’ The companion behind him said, ‘Brahmin, do not take them lightly or blindly believe that goats possess feelings of friendship. They are not respectfully opening the way and avoiding you. It is simply the manner of goats in combat to advance and then retreat.’

The man in front did not believe these words, and so a goat charged into him, injuring both his knees. He fell sprawling upon the ground, unconscious, with his garments and headgear torn to shreds. At that moment, a deva recited this verse:

“His garments torn to shreds,

He lies wounded and unmoving.

This calamity the fool incurred

Arose from blind belief.”

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: “At that time, the brahmin walking in front was none other than the man who lost his robe today. The brahmin walking behind at that time was the man who brought him the news. The billy goat at that time is now this bhikkhu who stole the robe. Because the man who lost the robe did not believe before, he was butted by the goat; now, because he again did not believe, he lost his robe. In the past, he did not believe the words of the man walking behind; now, although that man sincerely informed him, he still did not believe.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus living around the city of Sravasti to assemble. Those who had already heard this were to hear it once again:

— “If a bhikkhu, whether in a village or in a secluded place, takes by theft what another has not given, and the value is sufficient to meet the prescribed amount, he commits a parajika offense and may no longer dwell together with the Sangha.”

THE MAHASAMGHIKA VINAYA

End of Volume Two.