摩訶僧祇律

DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE THIRD SECTION OF THE PĀCITTIYA DHARMAS

8. PRECEPT: DISCLOSING ANOTHER BHIKKHU’S GRAVE OFFENSE.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, as described above in detail, a lay devotee invited the bhikkhus with whom he was acquainted to his home. Among them was an elder bhikkhu who was undergoing mānatta and therefore sat in the lowest row. Seeing this, the female lay donor asked: “Venerable sir, formerly you sat above; why are you now sitting here?”

The elder replied: “I simply sit wherever there is a place. Why is there any need to ask?”

The upāsikā said: “I know that the venerable sir’s proper seat is here, and I also know the proper seats of the other venerable ones.”

Then Nanda said to the upāsikā: “Why do you tell your teacher to sit in the upper place? [337c] Your teacher still has not abandoned the frivolous behavior of his youth.”

Hearing this, the upāsikā became displeased and thought: “Because my teacher has committed minor offenses, he must sit in this lower place.” She threw the basket of rice onto the ground and departed, saying: “Venerable sir, take the food from there and eat it yourself.” Having said this, she entered a room, shut the door, and recited this verse:

“Though long since gone forth,

Practicing the holy life,

He has not abandoned childish ways—

How can he accept offerings?”

The bhikkhus reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered Nanda to be summoned.

When he arrived, the Buddha asked: “Is this true?”

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

The Buddha then rebuked Nanda: “This is improper. One who practices the holy life may at times be heedless and afterward live in accordance with the Dharma. Why did you tell one who has not received full ordination about that person’s offense?

“From now on, I do not permit bhikkhus to tell one who has not received full ordination about another person’s grave offense.”

On another occasion, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, as described above in detail, a bhikkhu who lived on alms put on his robe, took his bowl, and entered the city at the proper time to beg for alms from house to house. When he reached a certain house, he heard a man say to a woman: “Give food to the renunciant.”

The woman asked: “From which path has he gone forth?”

The man replied: “He has gone forth among the Śākyans.”

“I will not give him food.”

“Why will you not give him any?”

“They are violators of the holy life, so I will not give him any.”

The bhikkhu then said to the woman: “Sister, I am one who practices the holy life.”

The woman said: “The venerable Kālu is a man of great renown and virtue, yet even he cannot practice the holy life. How, then, can you now claim that you practice the holy life?”

Hearing these harsh words, the bhikkhu became distressed. Without begging for alms, he returned to the monastery and went without food for a day. Because he had fasted, his body grew weak. He then went to the Blessed One, bowed his head at the Buddha’s feet, and stood to one side. Although the Buddha knew what had happened, he asked: “Why is your body so weak today?”

The bhikkhu then reported the entire matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha said: “Bhikkhu, why did you not tell them: ‘Even if the bhikkhu Kālu does not practice the holy life, how does that impair my practice of the holy life?’”

He replied: “Blessed One, I could have said that to her, but because the Blessed One established a precept forbidding us to tell those who have not received full ordination about another person’s grave offense, I did not speak.”

The Buddha said: “Excellent! Excellent, good man! You did not violate the Buddha’s instruction even for the sake of your life.”

The Buddha then addressed the bhikkhus: “Both householders and renunciants know that the bhikkhu Kālu does not practice the holy life. The Sangha should therefore perform a karman authorizing the disclosure of his failure to practice the holy life. The one performing the karman should speak as follows:

“‘Venerable Sangha, listen! Both householders and renunciants know that the bhikkhu Kālu does not practice the holy life. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, may the Sangha authorize the disclosure of the bhikkhu Kālu’s failure to practice the holy life.’ This is the motion. The karman should then be proclaimed three times.”

Afterward, the Buddha asked the bhikkhus: “Has the karman authorizing the disclosure of the bhikkhu Kālu’s failure to practice the holy life been performed?”

The bhikkhus replied: “It has been performed.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus residing in the city of Śrāvastī to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established this precept for the bhikkhus, which those who had already heard it were to hear again:

— “If a bhikkhu, knowing that another bhikkhu has committed a grave offense, tells a person who has not received full ordination—except when authorized by a karman of the Sangha—he commits a pācittiya offense.”

Explanation

Grave offense: Such as the four pārājika offenses and the thirteen saṅghāvaśeṣa offenses.

One who has not received full ordination: This excludes bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs. However, even though bhikkhunīs have received full ordination, such matters must not be disclosed to them.

Tells: Makes it known to a person who is present before him, except when authorized by a karman of the Sangha.

Karman: If the motion is invalid, the Sangha is invalid, or the procedure of the karman is invalid, it cannot be called a karman. Conversely, if the motion is valid, the Sangha is valid, and the procedure of the karman is valid, it is called a karman. The Blessed One declared that acting under such a karman entails no offense.

If a bhikkhu knows that another person has committed a grave offense, but the Sangha has not yet performed a karman granting permission, he must not disclose that person’s grave offense. If someone asks: “Did such-and-such a bhikkhu violate the precept against sexual intercourse or the precept against drinking intoxicants?” he should reply: “That elder knows for himself.”

Even after the Sangha has performed the karman, one must not publicize the matter throughout the villages. If someone asks: “Did that bhikkhu violate the precept against sexual intercourse or the precept against drinking intoxicants?” the bhikkhu who is asked should ask in return: “Where did you hear this?”

If the person replies: “I heard it at such-and-such a place,” the bhikkhu should answer: “I also heard it at that place.”

If a bhikkhu tells one who has not received full ordination that another bhikkhu has committed one of the four pārājika offenses or thirteen saṅghāvaśeṣa offenses, he commits a pācittiya offense. If he tells of one of the thirty nissaggiya-pācittiya dharmas or ninety-two pācittiya dharmas, he commits a vinayātikrama offense. If he tells of one of the four pratideśanīya dharmas, the training rules, or rules of deportment, he commits a vinayātikrama offense to be confessed mentally.

If he tells of one of the eight pārājika offenses or nineteen saṅghāvaśeṣa offenses of a bhikkhunī, he commits a sthūlātyaya offense. If he tells of one of the thirty nissaggiya dharmas, one hundred and forty-one pācittiya dharmas, eight pratideśanīya dharmas, the training rules, or rules of deportment of a bhikkhunī, he commits a vinayātikrama offense to be confessed mentally.

If he tells of one of the ten precepts of a śrāmaṇera or śrāmaṇerī, he commits a vinayātikrama offense. Finally, even if he tells of one of the five precepts of a layperson, he commits a vinayātikrama offense to be confessed mentally. Therefore, the rule is stated as above.

9. PRECEPT: CONSENTING TO A KARMAN AND LATER REPUDIATING IT.

[338b] When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, as described above in detail, the venerable Dabbamallaputta had been appointed by a karman of the Sangha to oversee nine duties, as explained in the account of the thirteen saṅghāvaśeṣa matters. At that time there was a rag robe made of śāṇa cloth that could not be divided, so he addressed the Sangha: “This rag robe made of śāṇa cloth cannot be divided. May it be given to the elder Mahākāśyapa?”

All the bhikkhus agreed, saying: “Yes.” Nevertheless, fearing that a dispute might arise later, Dabba announced before the Sangha three times: “This rag robe made of śāṇa cloth is given to the elder Mahākāśyapa.”

As soon as the proclamation was completed, the group of six bhikkhus rose from their seats and said: “Who said it could be given? Has the group of six bhikkhus agreed to give it? By making such a proclamation, you have shown that your mind is not impartial. Out of personal favoritism, you have taken property belonging to the Sangha and given it to them.”

The bhikshus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the group of six bhikshus be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked, “Is it true that you did this?”

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

The Buddha then rebuked them: “This is an evil deed. If such a practitioner of the holy life were to need your skin, flesh, blood, or marrow, you should give it to him, how much more so this rag robe, which could not be divided and has now been publicly given to him by the Sangha, yet you obstruct it. When you remained silent and consented to the gift, you bore the demeanor of noble persons. Now that you obstruct it, you bear the demeanor of mean and ignoble persons. This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikshus residing in the city of Shravasti to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established a precept for the bhikshus, which, though already heard, must be heard again:

—“If a bhikshu, when the Sangha is distributing goods, has harmoniously consented to their being given to another but afterward obstructs the gift, he commits a Payattika offense.”

Explanation:

Previously consented: Previously, when the Sangha distributed goods, he harmoniously consented to their being given.

Afterward obstructs: If he says, “The Venerable gives the Sangha’s property privately according to personal affection,” he commits a Payattika offense.

When the Sangha distributes articles that ought to be divided, such as a sanghati robe, an uttarasanga robe, an antaravasa robe, a sitting cloth, a cloth for covering sores, a rain-bathing cloth, a belt, butter, a small bowl, a copper basin, a fan, a parasol, an oil vessel, a leather pouch, a small knife, leather shoes, a water vessel, and so forth—all such divisible articles, when allotted to oneself, should be accepted.

If one does not wish to accept an article, one should tell the distributor to pass on. If asked, “Why do you not accept it?” one should reply, “I do not need this; I wish to receive another article.” If one later accepts something when needed, there is no offense. If the distributor announces, “Venerables, take whatever you wish,” a bhikshu may then freely take whatever he needs, [338c] and there is no offense.

Obstructing has three cases: obstructing after the gift has been made; obstructing while it is being made; and obstructing before it is made.

If one obstructs after the gift has been made, one commits a Payattika offense. If one obstructs while the gift is being made, one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one obstructs before the gift is made, one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense requiring mental repentance. Therefore it is stated as above.

10. PRECEPT: DISPARAGING THE PRECEPTS.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Shravasti, as related fully above, the Sangha was reciting the Pratimoksha every half-month. When the recitation reached the four offenses of Parajika, the group of six bhikshus remained silent. When it reached the thirteen offenses of Sanghavasesha, they became angry. When it reached the thirty offenses of Naihsargika, they made a disturbance. When it reached the ninety-two offenses of Payattika, they stood up and said, “Venerables, who can observe all these precepts? Why recite them? Could it be that only devas are able to observe such precepts? They merely cause the bhikshus to give rise to doubt and remorse.” At that time, the reciter of the Pratimoksha became ashamed.

The bhikshus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the group of six bhikshus be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked, “Is it true that you did this?”

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

The Buddha then rebuked them: “This is an evil deed. Wishing to benefit my disciples, the Tathagata prescribed that the Pratimoksha be recited every half-month. Why do you belittle, disparage, and obstruct the recitation of the precepts? Such conduct is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikshus residing in the city of Shravasti to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established a precept for the bhikshus, which, though already heard, must be heard again:

—“If, on the occasion of the half-monthly recitation of the Pratimoksha, a bhikshu shows contempt for and disparages the precepts, saying, ‘Venerable, why recite these miscellaneous minor precepts every half-month, causing the bhikshus to give rise to doubt and remorse?’ he commits a Payattika offense.”

Explanation:

Half-month: Either fourteen days or fifteen days.

Pratimoksha: The ten precepts pertaining to intrinsic offenses.

Recitation: The Sangha, being harmonious, recites it every half-month.

Miscellaneous minor precepts: This refers to the other sections of the precepts, apart from the four offenses of Parajika and the thirteen offenses of Sanghavasesha.

Causing the bhikshus to give rise to doubt and remorse: Whoever speaks in this way commits a Payattika offense.

Showing contempt and disparaging has three cases: disparaging before the recitation; disparaging during the recitation; and disparaging after the recitation.

Disparaging before the recitation: Before the recitation, one says, “Venerable, do not recite those minor precepts. I want the recitation to be finished quickly.” This is disparaging before the recitation.

Disparaging during the recitation: During the exposition of the precepts, one says, “Venerable, why expound those minor precepts, causing the bhikshus to give rise to doubt and remorse?” This is called disparaging during the recitation.

Disparaging after the recitation: Immediately after the recitation, one says, “Why did you just recite those minor precepts? Why did you recite all the precepts in full, making me sit for so long that I am exhausted to death?” [339a] This is called disparaging after the recitation.

One who disparages before the recitation commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. One who disparages during the recitation commits a Payattika offense. One who disparages after the recitation commits a Vinaya-transgression offense requiring mental repentance. Therefore it is said:

“False speech and its kinds,

Divisive speech and reopening a settled matter,

Impurity of the agent and phrasing,

Claims of superhuman attainment and speaking coarsely of offenses,

Partiality and disparaging the precepts—

Thus ends the first Varga.”

11. PRECEPT: CUTTING DOWN LIVING PLANTS.

When the Buddha was residing at the wilderness monastery, as related fully above, the bhikshu serving as steward personally cut down trees, broke off branches and leaves, and picked flowers and fruit. He was therefore criticized by people in the world, who said, “Look at them! The shramana Gautama employs countless means to condemn killing and praise abstention from killing, yet now his followers personally cut down trees, pick flowers, and destroy plant life. They have utterly lost the discipline of shramanas. What kind of path is this?”

The bhikshus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the steward bhikshu be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked, “Bhikshu, is it true that you did this?”

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

The Buddha then rebuked him: “This is an evil deed. Although there is no sentient life therein, you should not cause people to develop aversion. You are capable of accomplishing some modest task; abandon these trifling activities. From now on, I do not permit bhikshus personally to cut down trees or destroy the villages of spirits.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikshus residing in the wilderness to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established a precept for the bhikshus, which, though already heard, must be heard again:

—“If a bhikshu destroys the living growth of plants or destroys a village of spirits, he commits a Payattika offense.”

Explanation:

Living growth of plants: There are five kinds: 1. bulbs and roots; 2. stems; 3. joints; 4. pith; 5. shoots. These are called the five kinds of living plant growth.

Village of spirits: Large trees, small trees, and grasses.

Destroys: To cut down, sever, or damage. If one cuts down, severs, or damages them, one commits a Payattika offense.

Payattika: As explained above.

1/ Roots and tubers: Ginger root, lotus root, water-yam tubers, radishes, and onions. Roots and tubers such as these must be made allowable by fire (cooked), or peeled clean with a knife. These are called roots and tubers.

2/ Stems: Such kinds as Ni-câu-luật, Bí-sát-la, Ưu-đàm-bát-la, and willow. Stems such as these should be made allowable by fire or pared clean with a knife. These are called stems.

3/ Jointed stalks: Such as bamboo, reeds, and dwarf bamboo. Jointed stalks such as these should be made allowable by fire, pared clean with a knife, or have their nodes removed. These are called jointed stalks.

4/ Piths: Such as radish, bitter greens, and indigo plants. Things that grow from pith should be made allowable by fire or rubbed clean by hand. These are called piths.

5/ Shoots: These comprise the seventeen kinds of seeds discussed under the second rule. Shoots such as these should be made allowable by fire or cleaned by removing their skins. These are called shoots.

The classes of plants are: 1) Khỏa hạch chủng; 2) Phu khỏa chủng; 3) [339b] Xác khỏa chủng; 4) Cối khỏa chủng; 5) Giác khỏa chủng; 6) Anh vũ trác; 7) Hoàn xuất; 8) Hỏa thiêu; 9) Thời chủng; 10) Phi thời chủng; 11) Thủy chủng; 12) Lục chủng; 13) Tiên tác cánh sanh chủng;

1) Khỏa hạch chủng: Such as la-lợi-lặc, tỷ-ê-lặc, a-ma-lặc, khước-thù-la, and sour jujubes. With fruits such as these, one should use a fingernail to pry out and discard the seed before eating them. If one wishes to eat the seed as well, it should be cooked. This is called khỏa hạch chủng.

2) Phu khỏa chủng: Such as Bí-bát-la, phá cầu, Ưu-đàm-bát-la, and lợi nại. Things enclosed in skins such as these should be made allowable by fire. When ripe, they fall naturally from the tree to the ground; if they strike a tree or stone and their skin is broken in a mark the size of a mosquito’s footprint, they are regarded as allowable. One must not eat the seed together with the fruit. If one wishes to eat the seed as well, it must be cooked. This is called phu khỏa chủng (seeds enclosed in skins).

3) Xác khỏa chủng: Such as coconuts, walnuts, and pomegranates. Fruits with hard shells such as these should be made allowable by fire or broken open. This is called xác khỏa chủng.

4) Cối khỏa chủng: Such as aromatic herbs, perilla, and beans. If vegetables such as these have not yet borne fruit, they should be made allowable by rubbing them with the hand; if they have borne fruit, they should be made allowable by fire. This is called cối khỏa chủng.

5) Giác khỏa chủng: Such as various large and small beans or māṣa beans. If beans such as these have not yet formed seeds, they should be made allowable by hand; if they have formed seeds, they should be made allowable by fire. This is called giác khỏa chủng.

6) Anh vũ trác: Fruits pecked open by parrots and fallen to the ground, bearing a mark like a mosquito’s footprint, are regarded as allowable; after discarding the seed, they may be eaten. If one wishes to eat the seed as well, it must be made allowable by fire. This is called anh vũ tịnh.

7) Hoàn xuất: Seeds eaten by praying mantises or monkeys and then excreted in their feces are regarded as allowable (valid seeds). This is called hoàn xuất.

8) Hỏa thiêu: If fruit is burned by a naturally occurring fire and falls to the ground, it is regarded as allowable. This is called hỏa thiêu tịnh.

9) Thời chủng: In the season for ordinary rice, ordinary rice is planted; in the season for wheat, wheat is planted. These grains should be made allowable by fire or by removing their husks. In the country of Câu-lân-đề, when farmers harvest grain and heap it in piles, they fear that nonhuman beings may steal it, so they scatter ashes over it as a marker; in this way it is regarded as allowable. Suppose that a steward has a granary of grain that has not yet been made allowable. Fearing that young bhikkhus do not know the proper procedure, he instructs a lay attendant to make it allowable by fire, but the fire spreads and burns the entire granary. At that time, if the bhikkhu is told, “All the grain had already been taken away to be milled,” he commits no offense. This is called thời chủng.

10) Phi thời chủng: If wheat is harvested during the season for glutinous rice, or glutinous rice is harvested during the season for wheat, it should be made allowable by fire. This is called phi thời chủng.

11) Thủy chủng: Such as Ưu-bát-la flowers, câu-vật-đầu flowers, and hương đình flowers. The roots of these flowers should be made allowable by fire or pared with a knife. This is called thủy chủng (plants that live in water).

12) Lục chủng (*): This comprises seventeen kinds of grain, which must be made allowable by removing their husks [339c] or by fire. This is called Lục Chủng (plants that live on plains).

13) Tiên tác hậu sinh (): Certain kinds of ordinary rice or radish roots should be made allowable by fire or pared with a knife. This is called tiên tác. [Arranged according to the order above.]

In summary, there are the following cases: one cuts them oneself; instructs another to cut them; breaks them oneself; or instructs another to break them. One crushes them oneself; instructs another to crush them; burns them oneself; instructs another to burn them; peels them oneself; or instructs another to peel them.

Cutting oneself: If one personally employs a means to cut the five kinds of plants continuously throughout the day, one commits one Pācittiya offense. If one stops midway and then resumes cutting, one commits one Pācittiya offense for each interruption.

Instructing another to cut: If, on a single occasion, one employs a means to instruct another to cut throughout the day, one commits one Pācittiya offense. If one says midway, “Cut faster,” one commits one Pācittiya offense each time one says it. In all the other four cases—breaking, crushing, burning, and peeling—whether one does the act oneself or instructs another to do it, the offense is the same.

If one serves as a steward for the Sangha, one must under no circumstances tell a lay attendant, “Cut down this tree, break this tree, crush this tree, or peel this tree.” If one speaks in this way, one commits an offense. Therefore, one should say only, “Take care of that tree; make that tree allowable.” Speaking in this way entails no offense.

If one throws any of the five kinds of plants into a pond, down a well, into a latrine, or onto a rubbish heap, one commits an offense of Việt-tì-ni. If the plants are consequently damaged and die, one commits a Pācittiya offense.

If a bhikkhu, wishing to prevent grass from growing, walks back and forth over it, he commits an offense of Việt-tì-ni while walking. If he damages grass or plants to the extent of a mosquito’s footprint, he commits a Pācittiya offense. If he stands, sits, or lies upon them as above, the offenses are likewise the same.

If one draws upon a tree with a brush and damages it to the extent of a mosquito’s footprint, one commits a Pācittiya offense.

If moss grows on a rock and a bhikkhu wishes to wash his robe there, he must not pull the moss away. He should merely inform a lay attendant—implicitly asking the attendant to clear it away—and only afterward wash the robe. If sunlight has dried the moss, he may remove it with his own hand without offense.

If trees fall to the ground after rain, a bhikkhu must not raise them with his hand; if he does so, he commits an offense of Việt-tì-ni. If he damages a tree, even only to the extent of a mosquito’s footprint, he commits a Pācittiya offense. If a lay attendant first comes and raises it, and the bhikkhu then helps the attendant, there is no offense.

If mold grows on a bhikkhu’s saṅghāṭi, uttarāsaṅga, antaravāsaka, sitting cloth, blankets, pillows, footwear, or sandals, he should inform a lay attendant and have the attendant set them in the sun to dry; the bhikkhu may then brush off the mold with his hand.

If mold grows on a cake, one should inform a lay attendant—implicitly asking the attendant to clean off the mold—and only afterward may one eat it.

When a meal is served containing such things as beans, sesame, melons, sugarcane, and so forth, the senior monk should ask, “Have these been made allowable?” If they reply, “They have not yet been made allowable,” he should tell them to make the food allowable. If they say, “It has already been made allowable,” it may be eaten.

If many fruits are on a single plate and one fruit is made allowable, all the other fruits are also regarded as having been made allowable. If the fruits are placed on separate plates, each plate must be made allowable separately.

If sugarcane still has leaves, each stalk must be made allowable separately. If the sugarcane has no leaves and is tied into bundles, it may be made allowable in the same manner as fruit.

If a bhikkhu is spending the rains retreat in an aranya and grass has grown there until it covers the path, and for fear of losing the path [340a] he gathers two clumps of grass and ties them together, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If he uses some other object to tie them together as a marker, and unties them upon returning, there is no offense.

If a bhikkhu is in the mountains and, when it rains, the road becomes muddy and slippery, and while walking he slips and nearly falls, then grasps some grass and it breaks, and then grasps another clump, there is no offense.

If he is swept away by water and therefore grabs hold of grass, causing it to break, there is likewise no offense.

If, while plastering an earthen wall, he becomes thirsty and wishes to drink water, but his hands are muddy, he may use a leaf to scoop up water and drink. If there is no lay attendant to obtain a leaf, he may climb a tree and use a fresh leaf to hold water for drinking, provided that he does not tear the leaf from the tree. If the tree is too tall to be used in this way, he may bend it down and use a dry leaf to scoop up water and drink. If a bhikkhu tears off a fresh green leaf, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

If he severs a leaf having many firm, sturdy stems, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If he tears off a leaf that has already turned yellow and withered, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If the wind blows down the three kinds of leaves—fresh, withered, and dry—and he then takes and uses them, there is no offense.

If a bhikkhu picks unripe fruit, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If he picks fruit that is about to ripen, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If he picks ripe fruit, there is no offense.

If a bhikkhu is traveling and at night lies down to sleep on fresh grass, thinking it to be dry grass, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If it is dry grass but he thinks it is fresh grass, he also commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If it is fresh grass and he perceives it as fresh grass, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If it is dry grass and he perceives it as dry grass, there is no offense.

If there is an ancestral shrine in a city or village, and trees with branches and leaves grow there, even if they are dry, one must not break them off and take them. If one does so, one commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. The four cases concerning trees are the same as those stated above regarding fresh grass.

If a bhikkhu, after relieving himself, needs water and must go to a pond to obtain it, but the surface of the pond is entirely covered with water hyacinths, he must not use his hands to sweep them aside in order to obtain water. Instead, he should look for a passage made by cattle, horses, snakes, or frogs. If there is no passage, he should take a clod of earth, toss it into the air, and say, “Ascend as far as the Brahma realm.” After waiting for the clod to fall, he may then sweep aside the floating plants and take water for use, and there is no offense. However, if he causes the aquatic plants to be overturned in the water, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. If he scoops them out and throws them onto the bank, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

When entering a pond to bathe, if fresh grass becomes entangled around his body, he should pour water over it so that it floats back into the water. If he uproots morning mushrooms, he commits a Yue-bi-ni offense. When gathering dry cow dung, if fresh grass is pulled up together with it, he commits a Pacittiya offense. Therefore, it is said as above.

12. PRECEPT: SPEAKING TO DISRUPT OTHERS

When the Buddha was residing at Kausambi, the circumstances were related in detail as above. At that time, the Sangha assembled intending to perform a karma, but Venerable Chanda did not come. The Sangha therefore sent a messenger to summon Chanda, saying, “The Sangha has assembled intending to perform a karma.

Elder, please come.” Chanda then thought, “The Sangha has now summoned me precisely because they wish to discipline me, and for no other reason. Whom should I [340b] now disrupt so that the entire Sangha will be thrown into confusion and unable to perform the karma? Perhaps if I disrupt Venerable Maudgalyayana, I may escape this matter.

But Maudgalyayana possesses great supernormal powers and will certainly know what I am doing. He may seize me and cast me into another world, so this cannot be done.”

He then thought again, “If I disrupt Mahakasyapa, I may escape this matter. But Mahakasyapa possesses great authority and virtue. He may subdue and humiliate me in the midst of the Sangha, so this also cannot be done.”

He then thought again, “Venerable Sariputra is gentle-minded, straightforward, and easy to speak with. If I disrupt him, I may cause the entire Sangha to fall into confusion and be unable to perform a karma against me.”

Having thought thus, Chanda went into the midst of the Sangha and said, “Venerable Sariputra, I wish to ask about the meaning of a sutra.”

Sariputra said, “The Sangha has now assembled for another matter. This is not the time to ask about the meaning of a sutra.”

Chanda again said to Venerable Sariputra, “With regard to the Buddha’s true Dharma, there is no time that is an improper time. If one can attain wholesome fruit in this very life, eliminate the afflictions, and bring joy to the noble ones, there is no need whatsoever to choose a particular time.”

Venerable Sariputra said, “I am ready to hear your question.”

Chanda then asked, “The Blessed One taught the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. What are the Four Foundations of Mindfulness?”

Venerable Sariputra then expounded the Four Foundations of Mindfulness to Chanda. Chanda said again, “I did not ask about the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. I asked about the Four Right Efforts. Elder, you should explain only the Four Right Efforts to me.”

Sariputra said, “If you wish to hear the Four Right Efforts, then listen attentively,” and he then explained the Four Right Efforts.

Chanda again said, “I asked about the Four Bases of Supernormal Power.” In this manner, he proceeded in sequence to ask about the Five Faculties, the Five Powers, the Seven Factors of Awakening, and the Noble Eightfold Path, just as he had asked about the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, questioning him back and forth three times.

At that time, the bhikkhus, wearied from sitting for so long, departed one after another, causing the Sangha to become disharmonious, and in the end the karma could not be completed. The bhikkhus therefore reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that Chanda be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked him, “Chanda, did you truly do this?”

He replied, “It is true.”

The Buddha said, “Chanda, this is an unwholesome act. Have I not, for your sake, employed countless skillful means to censure disruptive speech and praise harmonious speech? Why have you now caused such a disruption? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus residing at Kausambi to assemble and, for the sake of ten benefits, established this precept for the bhikkhus. Even those who had heard it before were to hear it again:

—“If a bhikkhu speaks of other matters in order to trouble and disrupt others, he commits a Pacittiya offense.”

Explanation

Speaking of other matters in order to trouble and disrupt others: There are eight cases: 1. At the time of performing a karma; 2. At the time of discussing matters in accordance with the Dharma; 3. At the time of discussing the Abhidharma; [340c] 4. At the time of discussing the Vinaya; 5. Not discussing another matter; 6. Not discussing it with another person; 7. Ceasing the discussion; 8. Speaking of other matters in order to trouble and disrupt others.

1) Performing a karma: The bhikkhus assemble in harmony to perform a karma of censure, up to and including a karma of separate residence. This is called performing a karma.

2) Discussing matters in accordance with the Dharma: Speaking of non-permanence—that is, impermanence—and non-annihilation—that is, not being annihilated. This is called discussing matters in accordance with the Dharma.

3) Abhidharma: This refers to the nine divisions of scripture. This is called Abhidharma.

4) Vinaya: Reciting the Pratimoksha—the precepts—either in full or in summary. This is called Vinaya.

5) Not discussing another matter: One must not abandon the subject under discussion and discuss another subject. This is called not discussing another matter.

6) Not discussing the matter with others: One must not abandon the person who has just asked a question and instead question someone else. This is called not discussing the matter with others.

7) Suspending the discussion: While expounding the Dharma, one suddenly says, “Stop; we shall continue the discussion later.” This is called suspending the discussion.

8) Speaking of other matters to vex others: As Venerable Chanda spoke of other matters, apart from the purpose of the karman, in order to vex others.

These are called the eight cases.

Here, if one speaks of other matters to vex others, one commits a Pacittiya offense. Apart from the eight matters above, one does not commit a Pacittiya offense.

If someone asks:

“Bhiksu, where have you come from?”

“I have come from the past.”

“Where will you go?”

“I shall go toward the future.”

“Where do you sleep?”

“I sleep upon eight kinds of trees.”

“Where did you eat today?”

“I ate with five fingers.”

If one is asked one thing but answers another in this manner, one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

If bandits enter the monastery and ask a bhiksu, “Show me the possessions of the Sangha,” the bhiksu must neither show them the precious articles nor tell a lie, but should point out the rooms, beds, seats, and similar things. If the bandits say, “Show me the implements belonging to the stupa,” he likewise must neither show them the stupa’s treasures nor tell a lie, but should point out the offering vessels beside the stupa.

If the bandits say, “Show me the kitchen,” the bhiksu must not show them where money is stored, but should point out where the various pots, pans, and utensils are kept.

If an animal belonging to a butcher escapes and the butcher comes to ask a bhiksu whether he has seen it, the bhiksu must neither tell a lie nor reveal its location, but should say, “Look at the fingernails here, look at the fingernails here” (in Sanskrit, this means “I did not see it”).

If a bhiksu is staying in an aranya and an escaped prisoner passes by, and then soldiers come to question him, the bhiksu should answer as in the case of the animal above.

If a bhiksu, while among the Sangha, is asked one thing but answers another, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If, while among many people, before his upadhyaya or acarya, or before elder bhiksus, he is asked one thing but answers another, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. Therefore it is said as above.

13. PRECEPT: CENSURING AN OFFICIAL OF THE SANGHA

When the Buddha was staying in the city of Sravasti, the account was as related above. At that time, the people of the world possessed very deep faith and reverence, so they brought many kinds of food and drink as offerings to the Blessed One, and then made offerings to the Sangha and to Venerable Sariputra and Maudgalyayana. The attendants cleared away the offerings made to the Buddha, but as for the offerings made to the Sangha, Sariputra, and Maudgalyayana (341a), whether they were entirely consumed or not, no one cleared them away, and they became putrid.

At that time, Venerable Dravya was still a trainee. He thought, “If I attain the state beyond training, I shall oversee the affairs of the Sangha so that the members of the Sangha may dwell at ease.” Having thought thus, he practiced diligently during the first and last watches of the night and attained arhatship, the three knowledges, and the six superknowledges. He then thought, “Why should I perform conditioned activities?

I should cultivate the joyful life of few desires and freedom from affairs.”

The Buddha said to Dravya, “While you were still in the state of training, you said, ‘If I attain the state beyond training, I shall oversee the affairs of the Sangha.’ Did you say this?”

He replied, “I did say so, Blessed One.”

“Dravya, in accordance with your former aspiration, you should now do so.”

“I shall do as the Blessed One instructs.”

The Sangha then appointed him to perform the nine duties described previously. At that time, he assigned members of the Sangha, as appropriate, to receive meals. If one was a senior elder, he was given superior food. If one was of intermediate seniority, he was given food of middling quality. If one was junior, he was given coarse food.

Because the group of six bhiksus already harbored resentment and hostility, they reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then said to Dravya, “As a rule, one who has gone forth must distribute food equally. You should understand that when little is received, it is insufficient; yet when much is received, one should not become discontented. Whether the food received is good or poor, the arrangement will never satisfy everyone.”

Therefore, Elder Dravya divided the food into three grades, fine and coarse, distributing them in sequence through a complete rotation and then beginning again from the first.

At that time, Nanda and Upananda rose early in the morning, put on their robes, took their bowls, and went to a household that offered food and drink. They said to the upasika, “Give me food.”

The upasika said, “Venerable sir, it is not yet mealtime. I have not had time to wash my face or clean the bowls and dishes, nor have I prepared food for those who have gone forth.”

At that time, the young women in the donor’s household had just risen and were going to bathe, exposing their bodies. Because the bhiksu Nanda did not restrain his faculties and stared fixedly at the young women, the upasika thought, “This bhiksu is not an observer of the Vinaya. If he remains here long, many offenses may arise. I shall give him the servant’s food so that he will leave at once.”

Having thought thus, she brought the servant’s food and gave it to him.

After receiving the food, that bhiksu returned to the monastery. When it was time to go for alms, an elder bhiksu put on his robe, took his bowl, and went to the household that offered food. The donor filled his bowl with delicious food as an offering, and he returned. When Nanda and Upananda saw this, they said, “Elder Dravya, the Blessed One taught that food must be distributed equally. Look at these two kinds of food and tell us whether they are the same.”

Dravya said, “You went too early, before mealtime; that is why this happened.”

The next day, Nanda put on his robe, took his bowl, and entered the city, but along the road he watched elephant fights and horse fights and listened to the comments of laypeople. Meanwhile, the upasika thought, “[341b] Yesterday the venerable came and did not receive food, so today I must prepare it early.” She finished preparing the food long beforehand, but after waiting a long time she still did not see him arrive. She then thought, “Yesterday the venerable came early; why has he not come today? Perhaps an offering is being made to the Sangha at the Jetavana Monastery, and that is why he has not come.” Therefore, she and her husband and children ate all the food.

Only when it was mealtime did Nanda hurry over and say to the upasika, “Give me food.”

The upasika said, “I prepared food early and waited for the venerable, but you did not come. I thought that today someone was making an offering to the Sangha at Jetavana. Surely they invited you? Therefore, we have eaten all the food that was offered for you.”

Nanda immediately said, “Do you intend to starve me?”

The upasika then brought out the servant’s leftover food and gave it to him. After receiving the food, he returned to the monastery and spoke as before.

Dravya said, “Today you arrived too late.” After saying this, Venerable Dravya reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that Nanda be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked, “Is it true that you acted in this way?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“This is an unwholesome act. Have you not heard me, by innumerable means, censure having many desires and praise having few desires? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhiksus living in the city of Sravasti to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established this precept for the bhiksus; even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

—“If a bhikkhu resents and reproaches the steward, he commits a Pācittiya offense.”

Explanation:

Resentment and reproach: This may concern an appointed person, a person entrusted by an appointee, or a person entrusted by one who was himself entrusted.

Appointed person (a person assigned a duty): Such as Venerable Dabba. This is called an appointed person.

Person entrusted by an appointee (a person assigned a duty who then asks someone else to perform it): As in the case of Dabba Mallaputta entrusting another person with the affairs of the Sangha. This is called a person entrusted by an appointee.

Person entrusted by one who was himself entrusted (a person assigned a duty asks another person to perform it, and that person in turn asks yet another): The person entrusted with the duty again asks someone else to handle the affairs of the Sangha. This is called a person entrusted by one who was himself entrusted.

Resentment and reproach: One who resents and reproaches commits a Pācittiya offense.

When the Sangha distributes various kinds of cakes and one’s turn comes in due order, one should accept them. If one does not wish to take them, one should tell the distributor to continue onward. If the lay attendant asks, “Why do you not take any?”

And one replies, “I abstain from this kind and do not eat it; I wish to take another kind,” there is no offense.

When various kinds of porridge are distributed to the Sangha—such as milk porridge, ghee-and-curd porridge, sesame porridge, fish porridge, and so forth—if they fill the ladle and offer it to the senior monk, the senior monk should not accept it immediately but should say, “It should be distributed equally.” If the monk on duty is distributing meat and, out of deference to the senior monk, gives him more, the senior monk should ask, “Is everyone receiving this same amount?”

The monk on duty replies, “Only the senior monk is being given more.”

The senior monk should say, “It should be divided equally.” Then, if he does not need so much [341c], he should take only a little. After taking it, he should tell the distributor to give equal portions to everyone.

When there are fine foods such as these, they should be distributed equally.

When a novice distributes food, if he shows partiality by giving more to his own teacher, the steward should say, “Distribute it equally.”

If the novice says, “Why do you not do it yourself?” the steward should dismiss the novice and assign someone else to do it.

If the person distributing food sees a greatly virtuous monk in the Sangha and gives him more, thereby leaving too little for the others, the steward should say to that person, “Within the Sangha there is neither high nor low; distribute it equally.”

In general, there are the following cases: one may feel resentment without uttering reproach; utter reproach without feeling resentment; both feel resentment and utter reproach; or neither feel resentment nor utter reproach.

Feeling resentment without uttering reproach: One holds up one’s own bowl of food, compares it with the bowl of the person beside one, and says, “Is this equal?” This is called feeling resentment without uttering reproach. The other four cases are to be explained fully in the same way.

Feeling resentment without uttering reproach constitutes a Vinaya-transgression offense. Uttering reproach without feeling resentment also constitutes a Vinaya-transgression offense. Both feeling resentment and uttering reproach constitutes a Pācittiya offense. Neither feeling resentment nor uttering reproach is no offense. Therefore, it is stated as above.

14. PRECEPT: LEAVING THE SANGHA’S FURNISHINGS IN THE OPEN.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the country of Vṛji, he journeyed through the countryside and came to the bank of a river, where he saw fishermen casting nets to catch fish. Seeing this, the bhikkhus said to the Buddha, “Blessed One! These fishermen are doing what ought not to be done.” Because the bhikkhus had spoken thus, the Blessed One recited this verse:

“Having obtained this body, so hard to obtain,

Why then perform evil deeds?

This body harbors defiling attachments;

After death, one enters an evil realm.”

At that time, the fishermen cast a vast section of net, fastening stones along its lower edge and floating gourds along its upper edge. Following the current, they hauled it in, with two hundred and fifty people pulling at each end, shouting noisily as they dragged it ashore. Seeing this, the bhikkhus said to the Buddha, “Blessed One! If these people were to exert themselves like this within the Buddha’s Dharma, they would gain immense benefit.” On account of this incident, the Blessed One recited this verse:

“What is called diligent effort

Is not exertion in sensual desires,

But abandoning evil deeds

And sustaining one’s life in accord with the Dharma.”

This is explained in detail in the Kapila Jātaka Sūtra.

At that time, among the fish caught in the net was a great fish with hundreds of heads, each different from the others. Seeing it, the Blessed One called it by name. It answered the Blessed One. The Blessed One then asked, “Where is your mother?”

It replied, “She has taken the body of a maggot in a certain latrine.”

The Buddha then told the bhikkhus, “In the time of Kāśyapa Buddha, this great fish was [342a] a bhikkhu well versed in the Tripiṭaka. Because of his abusive speech, he has received the karmic retribution of possessing all these different kinds of heads. His mother, because she accepted offerings on his behalf, has become a maggot in a latrine.”

When the Buddha related these causes and conditions, five hundred fishermen abandoned the task of hauling in the net, requested ordination and cultivated the path. They all attained arhatship and then dwelt beside the Vṛji River.

The Buddha then told Ānanda, “Prepare seats for those visiting bhikkhus.” Ānanda said to the Buddha, “May the Buddha offer words of comfort to the visiting bhikkhus.”

The Buddha again said to Ānanda, “You do not know that I have already entered the Fourth Dhyāna and comforted the visiting bhikkhus.”

While the beds and pillows were left spread out on the open ground, with no one putting them away, the time for almsround arrived. The visiting bhikkhus used their spiritual powers: some went to northern Uttarakuru, some to the Heaven of the Thirty-Three, and others descended to the palace of the nāga king to seek alms. Consequently, the beds and pillows left in the open were scorched by the sun and blown upon by the wind, becoming covered with dust and extremely dirty. Although the Buddha knew what had happened, he nevertheless asked about it. The bhikkhus then reported all these circumstances fully to the Blessed One. The Buddha said, “Wait until those bhikkhus return.”

When they returned, the Buddha asked, “Is it true that you acted in this way?”

They replied, “It is indeed true.”

The Buddha said, “From today onward, on account of your conduct, I shall establish a precept for the bhikkhus.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus dwelling beside the Vṛji River to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established a precept for the bhikkhus, which even those who had already heard it were required to hear again:

—“If a bhikkhu, at a dwelling place of the Sangha, personally takes or has someone else take a bed, seat, mattress, or pillow out onto open ground, and then, when leaving, neither puts it away himself nor has someone else put it away, he commits a Pācittiya offense.”

Explanation:

Dwelling place of the Sangha: Either a dwelling place in the wilderness or a dwelling place in a village.

Beds and seats: There are fourteen kinds:

1. A bed with round legs; 2. A seat with round legs; 3. A cushioned bed; 4. A cushioned seat; 5. A corded bed; 6. A corded seat; 7. An uṇāda bed; 8. An uṇāda seat; 9. A tāmi bed; 10. A tāmi seat. (Only ten kinds are listed here.)

Mattresses: A cotton mattress, a fine-hair mattress, a woolen mattress, a kāśi mattress, or a grass mattress.

Pillows: A cotton pillow, a fine-hair pillow, a woolen pillow, or a kāśi pillow.

To spread out: Either one spreads them out oneself or tells another person to spread them out.

To leave: To go elsewhere.

Not to put away: If one neither puts them away oneself nor has someone else put them away, one commits a Pācittiya offense.

If one wishes to expound the Dharma on open ground, and the custodian of the beds and mattresses brings them out and arranges them there, but afterward goes more than twenty-five cubits away without entrusting someone else to put them away, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If two people both know that a bed is outdoors, then when one of them leaves, he must entrust it to the second person. If the second person wishes to leave, he must wait until the first person returns and, after giving him the necessary instructions, may then depart. If one takes out and arranges the beds and pillows, and someone comes and sits upon them whom the person who brought them out knows, then he may leave without offense.

If, during the spring months, a bhikshu brings a bed and bedding outdoors, and then a young bhikshu comes and sits or sleeps upon them, the one who brought them out must instruct that bhikshu to put them away.

[342b] If, at night, a bhikshu goes to urinate or defecate, happens to touch a bed belonging to the Sangha on which no bhikshu is present, and then leaves it there, he commits a Pācittiya offense for each thing he touches. If a bhikshu is on that bed and he instructs him to put it away, there is no offense.

If the Sangha’s steward wishes to assign a bed and bedding to someone, brings them outdoors, and then goes more than twenty-five cubits away, he commits a Pācittiya offense. If the recipient of the Sangha’s bed and bedding leaves them drying in the sun and goes more than twenty-five cubits away, he likewise commits a Pācittiya offense.

If a sick bhikshu sleeps in an open place and his disciple comes to pay homage, then, upon seeing his teacher rise and leave, the disciple must bring the bed inside and put it away. If two persons are sitting together on one bed, then when the senior bhikshu wishes to leave, he must instruct the junior bhikshu. When the junior bhikshu wishes to leave, he must say to the senior bhikshu, “I wish to leave. Where should this bed be put away?” If the senior bhikshu says, “You may go; I shall put this bed away,” then the junior bhikshu may leave without offense.

If a bhikshu brings out a bed and bedding for his preceptor or ācārya to lie upon and then leaves, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya. If the preceptor or ācārya knows that his disciple brought them out for him to lie upon, then when leaving he should instruct the disciple to put them away. If he leaves without giving such instructions, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If a bhikshu places an image upon a bed belonging to the Sangha, and other bhikshus come to pay homage, then anyone who touches the image with his hand but does not put it away commits a Pācittiya offense. If bhikshus come in succession to pay homage and touch the image with their hands, they should instruct the last person to put it away.

There are the following cases: one may be instructed but not responsible; one may be responsible without being instructed; one may both require instruction and be responsible; or one may neither require instruction nor be responsible.

Instructed but not responsible: this is the case of a śrāmaṇera.

Responsible without needing to be instructed: this is the case of a senior bhikshu.

Both requiring instruction and being responsible: this is the case of a junior bhikshu.

Neither requiring instruction nor being responsible: this is the case of a layperson.

If a bhikshu of great virtue has many disciples who spread out a bed and bedding, and the teacher knows that they have spread them out for him, then when leaving he should instruct them to put them away. If he does not instruct them, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If beds and bedding are left outdoors at the Sangha’s dwelling place, and a bhikshu leaves without putting them away, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If he sees the Sangha’s bed and bedding left outdoors at his own dwelling place and leaves without putting them away, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If he sees his own bed and bedding left outdoors at the Sangha’s dwelling place and leaves without putting them away, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If he sees his own bed and bedding left outdoors at his own dwelling place and leaves without putting them away, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If he sees the Sangha’s bed and bedding left outdoors at a layperson’s house and leaves without putting them away, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya.

If he sees a layperson’s bed and bedding left outdoors, then when leaving he should inform the owner. Therefore, it is said as above.

15. PRECEPT: SPREADING OUT THE SANGHA’S ARTICLES IN A SHELTERED PLACE

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, as related fully above, a brahmin [342c] invited the Sangha to remain and offered them food, drink, and robes. The bhikshus arranged the various sitting articles in the Sangha’s quarters and departed without putting them away. For the sake of five benefits, the Blessed One inspected the bhikshus’ quarters once every five days.

He saw mouse and cockroach droppings, dust, and filth upon those sitting articles. Although the Buddha already knew what had happened, he nevertheless asked about it. The bhikshus then reported the circumstances to the Blessed One.

The Buddha said to the bhikshus, “You are renunciants, and there is no one to attend to your affairs before and after you. Why did you leave without putting the articles away? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to the Buddha’s teaching.

Such conduct cannot be used to foster wholesome qualities.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikshus dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī to assemble and, for the sake of ten benefits, established this precept for the bhikshus. Even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

—“If a bhikshu himself spreads out a bed and bedding, or causes another person to spread out a bed and bedding, within a sheltered place, and when leaving neither puts them away himself nor causes another person to put them away, he commits a Pācittiya offense.”

Explanation:

Within: That is, in a sheltered place.

Beds and seats: These comprise the fourteen kinds described above.

Pillows and bedding: As described above.

Spreads out: Either he spreads them out himself or causes another person to spread them out.

Leaves: He goes to another place.

Does not put them away himself: He does not personally put them away.

Does not cause another person to put them away: If he does not cause another person to put them away, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If a bhikshu wishes to go elsewhere, before leaving he must sprinkle water and sweep the room, wipe the floor clean with a cloth, and air the blankets and pillows until they are dry. He must then say to the person responsible for them, “Venerable, here are the bed, blankets, and pillows.” He must necessarily entrust them in this way. If the person responsible for the bed and bedding is junior, he should reply, “I shall put away that bed and bedding.” If the person responsible for the bed and bedding is senior, then when the other person returns the bed and bedding, he should reply, “Very well.” If a bhikshu leaves without informing anyone, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If he leaves without informing anyone, but another bhikshu moves into the room so that it is no longer vacant, he commits an offense of transgressing the Vinaya. If, after leaving, he realizes that he has forgotten his robe and bowl, returns to retrieve them, and then informs someone, there is no offense.

If a bhikshu is traveling when the sky grows overcast and rain is imminent, and a young bhikshu goes ahead to the monastery and puts away the bed and bedding of his preceptor or ācārya, then when the sky clears and he wishes to depart, he must inform his preceptor. If he leaves without informing him, he commits a Pācittiya offense.

If many bhikshus stop to rest at a monastery in a village, jointly receive beds and bedding belonging to the Sangha, and when leaving each thinks, “So-and-so will instruct them to put these things away,” but halfway along the road they question one another and discover that no one gave such instructions, then they should send two persons back to instruct those there to put them away.

If bhikshus traveling on the road stop to rest at a monastery and, upon leaving, fail to instruct the steward to put away the beds and bedding, then, after traveling a considerable distance, question one another and discover that no one gave such instructions, they may suddenly encounter [343a] another bhikshu traveling in the opposite direction and ask, “Venerable, where are you going?” If he replies, “I intend to go to that place,” those bhikshus should say, “Last night we rested there, but when leaving we forgot to instruct them to put away the beds and bedding.

When you arrive there, venerable, please instruct them on our behalf.” That bhikshu may also say, “When I left, I too forgot to give such instructions. When you venerable ones arrive at that monastery, please give the instructions on my behalf.” Thus, the two parties entrust the matter to each other. Once both parties have entered the boundaries of their respective monasteries, they are considered to have given the required instructions.

If a bhikshu stays in the home of a layperson and is provided with a bed, mattress, or sitting mat, then when departing he should remind the householder to put them away. If it is a grass sitting mat, then when leaving he should ask: “Where should this grass mat be stored?” He should then put it wherever the owner directs. If the donor says, “Venerable, please go; I shall put it away,” the bhikshu should fold up a small corner and then depart.

If, while traveling, a bhikshu arrives at a place and spreads out grass to make a seat, then when departing he must smooth the grass back into place before leaving. Therefore, it is stated as above.

16. PRECEPT: DRAGGING ANOTHER BHIKSHU OUT OF A ROOM

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Shravasti, the circumstances were as related above. At that time, a visiting bhikshu came to the room occupied by the group of six bhikshus. The group of six said, “Welcome, Elder!” Having said this, they offered him water for washing his feet, oil for anointing his feet, and drinking water, so that he might rest. After he had rested, they asked the visiting bhikshu, “Venerable Elder, where do you intend to stay?”

“I shall stay in this room.”

“Do you know to whom this room belongs?”

“I know that this is a room belonging to the Sangha.”

“Although this room belongs to the Sangha, we, the group of six bhikshus, were staying here first.”

“This is a room belonging to the Sangha of the four quarters. Even if a group of sixteen bhikshus had been staying here first, I would still stay here according to the proper order, much less when there are only six bhikshus.”

“If the Elder wishes to stay, then stay.”

After the visiting bhikshu had settled there, the group of six bhikshus rushed upon him. Some seized his hands and feet, while another grabbed his head. They lifted him high, intending to throw him out of the room. At that moment, the Blessed One, using his supernatural powers, came through the air and remained suspended in space. When the group of six bhikshus saw the Blessed One, they immediately dropped the bhikshu to the ground and departed. The Buddha then said to the visiting bhikshu, “You may remain in this room.”

Furthermore, Venerable Nanda was the elder brother of Upananda. Nanda had an attendant disciple who, after being driven out of the room, cried out loudly. Hearing the cry, the bhikshus were alarmed and came out to see what had happened. They said, “Today this bhikshu has lost two benefits: he has obtained no food, and he has also lost his room.” The bhikshus then went and reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the group of six bhikshus be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked Nanda and Upananda, “Did you truly do this?” They replied, “[343b] It is true.”

The Buddha then rebuked them: “Why did you, while staying in a room belonging to the Sangha of the four quarters, drag a visiting bhikshu outside? This is an evil deed. Have you not heard me employ innumerable means to praise those who practice the holy life for cultivating a mind of loving-kindness, cultivating loving-kindness in speech and thought, and constantly making offerings and providing necessities for visiting members of the Sangha?

This conduct is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. It cannot serve to foster wholesome qualities.” The Buddha then ordered all the bhikshus dwelling in the city of Shravasti to assemble. For the sake of the ten benefits, he established this precept for the bhikshus, which those who had already heard it should hear again:

— “If a bhikshu personally drags, or causes another person to drag, another bhikshu out of a room belonging to the Sangha, or even says, ‘Bhikshu, leave,’ he commits a Pacittiya offense.”

Explanation

Bhikshu: As explained above.

If a bhikshu drags another bhikshu out of a room, and that bhikshu embraces a pillar, grasps a door, or leans against a wall, then for dragging him away from each such place, the bhikshu commits a separate Pacittiya offense. If he uses reproachful words to berate and drive away that bhikshu, and the latter, in response to each reproach, moves away from one place after another, then for each instance the offender commits a separate Pacittiya offense. If he uses some means to drive him directly out through the door, he commits one Pacittiya offense.

If a bhikshu becomes angry with mice or snakes and drives them away, he commits a Vinaya transgression. But if he says, “These creatures are harmful,” and then drives them away, there is no offense.

If camels, cattle, or horses are standing within the grounds of a monastery or stupa, and a bhikshu drives them away for fear that they will defile the monastery or stupa, there is no offense.

If one bhikshu drives away another bhikshu, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If he drives away a bhikshuni, he commits a Sthulatyaya offense.

If he drives away a shikshamana, shramanera, or shramaneri, he commits a Vinaya transgression. Finally, even if he drives away a layperson, he commits a Vinaya transgression that is to be confessed mentally. Therefore, it is stated as above.

THE MAHASANGHIKA VINAYA

End of the fourteenth fascicle.