摩訶僧祇律

[359b]

A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE SIXTH SECTION OF THE 92 PACITTIYA RULES.

36. THE PRECEPT: EATING AT AN IMPROPER TIME.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, as described above in detail, the Buddha said to the bhikkhus: “By eating one meal each day, the Tathagata’s body is light and at ease, and he dwells happily. You too should eat one meal each day. For by eating one meal each day, the body is light and at ease, and one dwells happily.” At that time, the Venerable Bhaddali said to the Buddha: “Blessed One, I am unable to eat only one meal each day.

Why is this? It is only when I eat throughout both the morning and the afternoon that I am at ease.” The Buddha then said to Bhaddali: “If you cannot eat only one meal each day, then early in the morning take two bowls into the village to seek alms. Use one bowl in the morning and the other at noon.

In this way, you may eat two meals.” The Blessed One instructed him thus a second and a third time, yet Bhaddali still firmly maintained that he was unable to do so. At that time, all the disciples complied with the Blessed One’s instruction except Bhaddali. Because of this, he felt ashamed and did not go to the Buddha for three months, as explained in detail in the Bhaddali Sutta.

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhikkhus went seeking alms at an improper time and were consequently reproached by people of the world: “Why do the Sakyaputta ascetics seek alms at an improper time, utterly abandoning their religious conduct? What kind of path is this?” When the bhikkhus heard this, they went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus: “You are renunciants, yet you seek alms at an improper time, so it is fitting that people of the world should reproach you. From this day forward, I do not permit seeking alms at an improper time.” This is also as explained in detail in the Udayin Sutta.

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, as described above in detail, there was a bhikkhu who ate at dusk. People of the world reproached him, saying: “Why do the Sakyaputta ascetics eat in the evening? Even we householders do not eat in the evening. These people are destroying the discipline of ascetics. What kind of path is this?”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they went and reported the matter [359c] to the Blessed One. The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus:

“You have been reproached by people of the world because you eat at night. From this day forward, I permit eating before midday—that is, before noon—and you must mark the sun’s shadow to determine the proper time.”

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, as described above in detail, the bhikkhus entered villages before the mealtime to seek alms. After the mealtime, they again went to places where people gathered for recreation, such as parks and ponds, to seek alms. Consequently, people of the world reproached them, saying to their companions: “Look! That Sakyaputta ascetic has just sought alms at my house, and now he has followed me out to the pond to ask me again! This truly undermines the discipline of the religion. What kind of path is this?”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then ordered that bhikkhu to be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha questioned him about the matter:

“Did you actually do this?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“Then for what purpose did you use the almsfood you sought in the morning?”

“To eat at the proper time.”

“Then why did you seek more after the meal?”

“To store it and eat it tomorrow morning.”

“Why do you store food for later consumption? From this day forward, I do not permit eating at an improper time, nor do I permit storing food for later consumption.”

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Rajagriha, as described above in detail, the Venerable Bhaddali felt deeply ashamed. Thus, when he entered a village to seek alms, it was as though he were entering the midst of a battle. He carried two bowls with him when seeking alms, using one bowl that day and keeping the other for the following day. At that time, the bhikkhus who were about to enter the village to seek alms called to Bhaddali:

“Elder, let us enter the village together to seek alms.”

“Go on, venerable ones. I will not go again.”

“Elder, you have obtained a great benefit: by eating only one meal, you remain at ease for two whole days.”

“It is not that I eat only one meal and thereby remain at ease for two days. Rather, when I enter the village, it is like going into battle, so I take two bowls with me and seek enough food for both days.”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then ordered that Bhaddali be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked him:

“Did you actually do this?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“Although you wished to reduce your exertion, this is not permissible.”

“From this day forward, I do not permit you to eat at an improper time, nor do I permit you to store food for later consumption,” as explained in detail in the Bhaddali Sutta.

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, as described above in detail, Anuruddha was spreading spoiled leftover rice out to dry on a square black stone on Rishi Mountain. The Buddha then used his spiritual power [360a] to go to that mountain. Although he already knew, he nevertheless asked Anuruddha:

“What are you doing?”

“Blessed One, faithful and joyful sravaka disciples wish to take refuge with me tomorrow. Therefore, I will be unable to enter the village to seek alms, so I intend to dry this leftover rice and eat it.”

“Although you wished to reduce the inconvenience, from this day forward, I do not permit you to eat at an improper time or to keep food for later consumption.”

The Buddha then used his spiritual power to return to the city of Sravasti and ordered all the bhikkhus residing there to assemble. For the sake of ten benefits, he established this precept for the bhikkhus, which even those who had already heard it were required to hear again:

— If a bhikkhu eats at an improper time, he commits a Pacittiya offense. If a bhikkhu allows the mealtime to pass and then eats, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: As explained above.

Improper time: If the permitted time has passed even by the duration of a flash, or by the measure of the tip of a blade of grass or a leaf, this is called an improper time.

Eating: If one eats brown rice, white rice, fish, meat, or any other miscellaneous food, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

Pacittiya: As explained above.

Allowing the mealtime to pass: This means allowing the period of one “muhurta” to pass.

Muhurta: Twenty thoughts are called the interval of a flash. Twenty flashes are called the interval of a finger-snap. Twenty finger-snaps are called one la-tuong (?). Twenty la-tuong are called one muhurta. The longest day consists of eighteen muhurtas. The shortest night consists of twelve muhurtas. The longest night consists of eighteen muhurtas. The shortest day consists of twelve muhurtas.

Food: This comprises five principal foods and five miscellaneous foods. If one allows the proper time to pass and then eats any one of them, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

– (In addition, there are the following cases:) receiving at the proper time, receiving at an improper time, receiving intentionally, receiving unintentionally, receiving a small amount, receiving a large amount, receiving quickly, receiving gradually, and receiving snow or ice.

Receiving at the proper time: If one receives food at the proper time and eats it at the proper time, there is no offense. If one lets the proper time pass by the duration of a flash, or by the measure of the tip of a blade of grass or a leaf, and then eats, one commits one Pacittiya offense. If one lets one muhurta pass and then eats, one commits two Pacittiya offenses: one offense for eating at an improper time and one offense for eating food after the permitted time has passed.

Receiving at an improper time: If one receives food at an improper time and then eats it at an improper time, one commits one Pacittiya offense. If one allows one muhurta to pass and then eats, one commits two Pacittiya offenses: one offense for eating at an improper time and one offense for eating food after the permitted time has passed.

The cases of receiving intentionally, receiving unintentionally, receiving a small amount, receiving a large amount, receiving quickly, and receiving gradually likewise have these distinctions.

Acceptance of Snow and Ice (Acceptance of Snow): If a bhikkhu wishes to eat snow, he should receive it from a lay attendant. If there is no lay attendant, he should wash his hands clean and then take it himself to eat. The same applies in the case of ice. This is called Acceptance of Snow and Ice.

When a bhikkhu rises early in the morning, he should wash his hands clean. He should not wash them roughly, but should first wash the five fingertips. Nor should he wash from the armpits down; rather, he should thoroughly wash from the wrists forward, without being rough.

While washing, he should not twist and wrench them so as to cause bleeding (?). He should use a large stone, a blade of grass, or ashes to wash his hands clean, and then [360b] clap them so that they make a sound (?). After washing his hands clean, if he rubs his hands together again, they are considered unclean and should be washed again.

If, after washing his bowl, he strokes or rubs it while his hands are still wet, they are likewise considered unclean; he should wait until they are dry. Before a meal, a bhikkhu should take care to keep his hands clean. If he scratches his head, handles his lower garment or leather sandals, or handles a bowl of milk, oil, or a leather bag, he must wash them clean again as before.

If he handles the sanghati robe or the uttarasanga robe, he must wash them again with water.

When a bhikkhu wishes to go for alms, he should wash his hands clean and then put on the robe used for entering the village. After putting on the robe, he should wash his hands again, take his bowl, and enter the village. If, during the cold winter season, he places the bowl inside a bag and intends to go as far as the village boundary, a pond, or a flowing stream, he should wash his hands clean there.

If there is no water, he should enter the village, go to the dwelling place of bhikkhus, and ask for water with which to wash his hands. If there is none there either, he should go to a bhikkhuni monastery and ask for water. If there is still none, he should go to the home of a faithful upasaka and ask for clean water.

If there is still none, he should open the bag, take out the bowl, hold it only in one place, and go for alms. After obtaining food, he should leave the village and go to a pond or flowing stream, place the bowl upon clean grass, and then wash his hands clean, followed by washing a stone slab or a leaf clean. Having washed them, he should discard the portion of rice touched by his fingers and then pour the rice onto the stone slab or leaf.

When pouring out the rice, he must not pour it directly onto the place held by his unclean hand. After pouring it out, he must wash the bowl clean, then put the rice back into the bowl and eat it. When he has finished eating, if any rice remains, he should pour it onto one place on the stone slab and depart.

The following day, the bhikkhu again enters the village for alms. If he receives nothing, he must leave the village with an empty bowl. If he happens to return along the same road and sees that the leftover rice poured onto the stone the previous day is still there, then, if a lay attendant is present, he should ask that person to pick it up and give it to him to eat.

If there is no lay attendant and crows have eaten from the rice, he should remove the portion eaten by the birds and then take the remainder himself to eat. If a lay attendant, with unclean hands, handles noodles or rice and offers them to the Sangha, they are considered unclean for the Elder, but clean for the others. If the lay attendant pours clean noodles on top of unclean noodles, the upper portion may be taken and eaten.

But if the attendant pours unclean noodles on top of clean noodles, all of them become unclean. If the attendant pours clean noodles into an unclean bowl, the portion in the very center may be scooped out and eaten. If the attendant stirs them, all of them become unclean.

While eating noodles, if a bhikkhu wipes his mouth with his hand, the hand is considered unclean and must be washed again. If he rubs his two hands together, they are considered unclean and must be washed again.

If a sick bhikkhu requires gruel, he should ask a lay attendant to cook it. If there is no lay attendant at an aranya dwelling [360c], he may wash his hands clean so that no dirt adheres to them, scoop water into a pot, kindle a fire to boil the water, and then inform a lay attendant so that the attendant may put in the rice. After the attendant has put in the rice, the bhikkhu must not tend the fire again, but should ask the lay attendant to tend it until the gruel boils.

If the lay attendant goes away, the bhikkhu may tend the fire until the gruel is cooked, then ladle it out and give it to the sick person. If a bhikkhu has taken purgative and emetic medicine and the physician says that he must be given thin rice gruel, without which he will die, what should be done? At that time, one should wash rice clean, cook it thoroughly into a liquid, pour it into a bowl, and give it to the sick bhikkhu.

If the sick person cannot tolerate it, one should take a handful of intact unhusked rice, wash it clean seven times, place it in a bag, tie the opening, wash the pot clean, place the bag inside, and boil it. The tips of the grains must not be allowed to break; if they break, it must not be given to the sick bhikkhu. If, in a remote place, a lay attendant falls ill, another lay attendant should be asked to cook gruel for that person.

If there is no lay attendant but legally allowable unhusked rice is available, the bhikkhu may pound it himself, cook gruel, and give it to the lay attendant. If the lay attendant does not finish the gruel, the bhikkhu must not consume it, nor may he give it to other bhikkhus. Therefore, it is said (as above).

37. THE RULE: RECEIVING FOOD IN EXCESS OF WHAT HAS BEEN OFFERED

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, as related in detail above, there was at that time a householder to whom a girl was born, peerless in beauty, and her parents were greatly delighted. When she had completed her first month, her parents intended to hold a celebration and thought: “This girl is extraordinarily beautiful, a rarity in the world. If the king learns of her, he will certainly take her away. We should therefore give her an unattractive name.” They accordingly named her Speckled-Eyed.

The girl gradually grew up. When the king’s physiognomist saw her, he asked the people, “Whose daughter is this girl?” Someone replied, “She is the daughter of such-and-such a householder.” The royal physiognomist thought, “Judging by her marks, this girl is destined to become the king’s chief consort.” He therefore reported to the king: “That household has a daughter who possesses noble marks and is worthy of becoming queen. She should be selected for the palace.” The king then sent someone to that house to ask her name. They replied, “Her name is Speckled-Eyed.” The messenger returned and reported this to the king. The king said, “That name is inauspicious. I do not want her.”

Later, someone sought her hand in marriage, and the bridegroom’s parents instructed that she be brought to their home. The husband then sent a messenger to request that the bride be escorted there. Her family replied, “We shall send her at once,” and began preparing the articles for their daughter’s departure and making various kinds of cakes.

Just then, a bhikkhu going from house to house on almsround came to that home. When the girl’s mother saw him, faith and joy arose in her, and she asked, “Venerable sir, do you need any cakes?”

He replied, “I do.”

She then offered him various cakes, filling his bowl. After receiving the cakes, he took them back to the monastery and invited the bhikkhus he knew to eat with him. The bhikkhus asked, “Elder, these cakes are very delicious. Where did you obtain them?”

He replied, “I obtained them at the home of the girl Speckled-Eyed.”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they went to that house and likewise received cakes as the first bhikkhu had. Thus, one after another, [361a] they continued going there to ask for food, until all the articles prepared for the daughter’s departure were exhausted. The same thing happened on the second and third days.

The husband again sent someone to remind them. The bride’s family replied once more, “Please wait a few days until we have finished preparing the gifts for her departure.” Yet the bhikkhus continued coming every day and asking until everything was gone.

Because the bride did not arrive at her husband’s home at the appointed time, the husband became angry and said, “I have sent people to remind them several times, but each time they said that the gifts were not yet ready and therefore she had not been sent. They must now have some other intention.” He then sent someone to seek another girl in marriage.

When Speckled-Eyed’s mother heard that her daughter had been rejected, she was overcome with grief and wept bitterly. The girl was also distressed and blamed her mother for failing to send her at the appointed time, thereby causing her to be rejected. Seeing this, their neighbors asked, “Why are you grieving and weeping?” They then related the entire affair to the neighbors. The neighbors reproached them, saying, “Why did you not first send your daughter away and only afterward prepare other food and drink to give to the bhikkhus?”

When the bhikkhus heard of this, they went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered those bhikkhus to be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked them, “Did you actually do this?”

– It is true, Blessed One.

– From now on, I do not permit bhikkhus to accept food prepared for a bride’s departure.

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Rajagriha, as related in detail above, there was at that time a merchant in the city named Fearless, who was preparing to travel far away with other merchants. His wife remained at home preparing various provisions for the journey.

Then bhikkhus going from house to house on almsround came to that home. When the wife saw them, faith and joy arose in her, and she asked, “Venerable sir, do you need any noodles?”

The bhikkhu replied, “I do.”

She then took a portion of the provisions, filled his bowl with it, and offered it to him. Having obtained the food, the bhikkhu carried it back to the Kalandaka Bamboo Grove Monastery and invited the bhikkhus he knew to eat with him. The bhikkhus asked, “Where did you obtain such delicious food?”

He replied, “I obtained it at the home of such-and-such a merchant.”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they went one after another to that house to ask for journey provisions, until everything was exhausted. Thus, the provisions had to be prepared again on the second and third days, but the bhikkhus continued taking turns going there to ask for them until all were exhausted.

On the fourth day, when the merchant’s provisions had finally been prepared, he departed but could not catch up with his companions, and robbers took all his property. When the merchant’s wife heard of this, she was distressed and wept bitterly. A neighbor asked, “Why are you weeping like this?” She then related the entire affair to the neighbor. The neighbor said, “Why did you not first finish preparing the traveler’s provisions and only afterward prepare other things to give to the bhikkhus?”

When the bhikkhus heard of this matter, they went and reported the entire affair to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered those bhikkhus to be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked them, “Did you actually do this?”

They replied, “It is true.”

The Buddha rebuked them: “This is an evil deed. Even if the giver does not know how to exercise moderation, the recipient should know how to exercise discretion! This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching [361b]. It cannot serve to foster wholesome qualities. From now on, I do not permit you to ask for journey provisions.”

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

-- If a bhikkhu goes to the home of a layperson where cakes and noodles are being freely offered, he may accept two or three bowlfuls and bring them back to share with bhikkhus who are not ill. If he accepts more than this amount, or brings the food back but does not share it with bhikkhus who are not ill, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: Either one, two, or many persons.

Home of a layperson: A household of kshatriyas, brahmins, vaishyas, or shudras that offers cakes or noodles.

Cakes: Various kinds of cakes made from barley, wheat, rice, beans, and so forth.

Noodles: Various kinds of noodles made from barley, wheat, rice, beans, and so forth.

Three bowls: He may accept no more than three bowlfuls.

Carry them outside: Carry them to whatever place he wishes.

A bhikkhu who is not ill: A bhikkhu who has the strength to go to that house.

Share them with bhikkhus who are not ill: The food brought back should be eaten together with them. If he does not share it with them, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

Pacittiya: As explained above.

– There are also the following cases: articles prepared for someone’s departure, provisions for a journey, provisions not made for bhikkhus but prepared for someone’s departure, and provisions generously offered.

Articles prepared for someone’s departure: Such as the cakes prepared for the departure of the girl Speckled-Eyed.

Provisions for a journey: Such as in the case of Fearless, the leader of the merchants.

Cakes and noodles: As explained above.

Not for bhikkhus: Provisions originally prepared for another person’s departure.

Generously offered: When they are offered as they were by the mother of the girl Speckled-Eyed or by the merchant and his wife, a bhikkhu may accept three bowlfuls, carry them away, and share them with bhikkhus who are not ill.

If a bhikkhu thinks, “Who has the energy to make matters so troublesome?” and then says to a female lay devotee, “Fill one bowl and pour it into one vessel, then fill another bowl and pour it into another vessel,” after which he himself takes one bowl and instructs the female householder, “If a bhikkhu comes, give him this bowl. If another comes, give him the second bowl. After that, if anyone else comes, do not give him anything. If you do, you will gain little merit.” Then, when the bhikkhu carries the food away, if he meets another bhikkhu along the road, he should say, “There is food at such-and-such a house; you should go there and receive your share.” If he meets a second bhikkhu, he should say the same.

– There are also the following cases: it is not a cake given as a farewell provision, not provisions for a journey, it is for a bhikkhu, it is not food intended as a farewell provision, and it is not given generously.

It is not a cake given for seeing off a bride: it is not like the case of the young woman Seed-Eyes mentioned above.

It is not provisions for a journey: it is not like the case of the merchant Fearless.

For a bhikkhu: the food was prepared for a bhikkhu, not for someone else.

It is not food intended as a farewell provision: apart from the two cases described above, if the food was prepared for other people, it may be accepted without offense.

It is not given generously: one carries away only the food one has received [361c]. If the young woman Seed-Eyes has already gone to her husband’s home and her mother gives the food afterward, it may be accepted without offense.

If the bride has already gone to her husband’s home and then gives the food herself, it may be accepted without offense.

If the merchant has already departed and his wife afterward gives alms, it may be accepted without offense.

If the merchant has reached his destination and then gives alms, it may be accepted without offense.

If a household holds a feast on the occasion of giving a daughter in marriage or taking a wife for a son, or during festival days, and a bhikkhu comes to that house, and the host says, “Venerable sir, even if I had wished to send someone to invite you, I could not have been certain that you would come; how much more fortunate I am that you have now honored us with your presence,” then the bhikkhu may freely accept the food without offense.

Therefore, it is stated as above.

38. THE PRECEPT CONCERNING REQUESTING FINE FOOD

When the Buddha was residing in the city of Sravasti, as described in detail above, the group of six bhikkhus went to households that had ghee and asked for ghee; to households that had oil and asked for oil; to households that had fresh milk and asked for fresh milk; to households that had sour milk and asked for sour milk; to households that had honey and asked for honey; to households that had crystallized sugar and asked for crystallized sugar; to households that had fish and asked for fish; and to households that had meat and asked for meat.

The people of the world consequently criticized them, saying, “The ascetic Gautama uses countless skillful means to praise having few desires, knowing contentment, being easy to support, and being easy to satisfy, while censuring those who have many desires, are insatiable, difficult to support, and difficult to satisfy. Yet now these ascetics refuse to ask for coarse food; instead, they go to households with ghee and ask for ghee, and even go to households with meat and ask for meat.

These are corrupt men—what kind of path is this?”

When the bhikkhus heard this, they brought the matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha then ordered the group of six bhikkhus to be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked:

“Is it true that you did this?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“This is an unwholesome deed. Have you not heard that, through countless skillful means, I praise having few desires and censure having many desires? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. Such conduct cannot foster wholesome qualities. From now on, I do not permit you to request fine food for your own consumption.”

On another occasion, the Buddha was residing in a monastery in the Banyan Tree Grove at Kapilavastu, in the land of the Sakya clan. For five beneficial purposes, once every five days the Buddha inspected the bhikkhus’ lodgings. Seeing a bhikkhu who was ill, although he already knew the circumstances, the Buddha nevertheless asked:

“How is your illness? Is the pain severe?”

“The pain is not severe, Blessed One.”

“Are you unable to obtain food appropriate for your illness and medicine appropriate for your illness?”

“I could obtain them, but the Blessed One has established a precept forbidding the request of fine food, so I dare not ask. Moreover, I have no benefactor and no one who will give such things to me.”

“From now on, I permit an ill bhikkhu to request fine food.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus residing at Kapilavastu to assemble and, for the ten benefits, established a precept for the bhikkhus. Those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

— If fine foods such as ghee, oil, honey, crystallized sugar, fresh milk, sour milk, fish, meat, and so forth are available in the homes of benefactors, and a bhikkhu who is not ill requests them for his own bodily pleasure, he commits a Payattika offense.

Explanation:

Household: As explained above.

[362a] Ghee, oil, honey, crystallized sugar, fresh milk, sour milk, meat, and fish: These are as explained previously in the second precept concerning theft. These are called fine foods. If a person is ill, the Blessed One permits him to request and consume them without offense.

Illness: There are such illnesses as spreading sores, tumors, hemorrhoids, loss of control over urination and defecation, jaundice, malaria, consumption, emaciation, swelling caused by wind, edema, and the like. These are called illnesses.

For oneself: If one requests food for oneself, whether asking personally or having someone else request it for one’s consumption, one commits a Payattika offense.

Payattika: As explained above.

If a bhikkhu suffers from a fever and a physician says, “For this illness, you should drink curds,” he may request curds. However, he must not go to a household without faith to request them. Why? Because when he asks, they will disparage him, saying that the bhikkhu is requesting curds out of greed for fine food. Since they would criticize the bhikkhu’s conduct, he must not go there to ask, but should instead go to the home of a faithful male lay devotee and make the request. After obtaining the curds, he should use them with proper moderation.

If a bhikkhu suffers from a disorder of wind and a physician says, “You should drink oil,” he may then request oil. However, he must not go to an oil-presser’s household to request it, nor may he go to a household without faith, as explained in the case of requesting curds.

If a bhikkhu suffers from edema and a physician says, “For this illness, you should drink honey,” he may then request honey. However, he must not go to the household of a honey gatherer to request it, nor may he go to a household without faith, as explained in the case of requesting curds.

If a bhikkhu suffers from emaciation and a physician says, “For this illness, you should consume crystallized sugar,” he may request crystallized sugar. However, he must not go to the household of a sugarcane processor to request it, nor may he go to a household without faith, as explained in the case of requesting curds.

If a bhikkhu has been afflicted by cold and a physician says, “You should mix crystallized sugar and curds together and drink them,” he must not go to a household without faith to request them, as explained in the case of requesting curds.

If a bhikkhu suffers from diarrhea and a physician says, “For this illness, you should drink fresh milk,” he may then go to a cowherd and request fresh milk. After obtaining it, he should take only a measured amount.

If a bhikkhu wishes to induce vomiting and takes an emetic, and a physician says, “First you should drink fish broth,” he may then request fish broth. However, he must not go to the household of a fisherman to request it, nor may he go to the household of a person without faith, as explained above.

If a bhikkhu wishes to have his head lanced to draw blood or to take a purgative, and the physician then says, “For this illness, you should drink meat broth,” he is permitted at that time to ask for meat broth. However, he must not go to the house of a butcher or to the house of one without faith to ask for it, as explained above.

If a bhikkhu goes on alms round to the house of one who measures out curds, and the curd seller asks, “Venerable sir, what are you seeking?” he replies, “I wish to ask for food.” The person says, “There is no food, only these curds. If you need them, I will give them to you.” At that time, if the bhikkhu needs them, he may accept a full bowl without offense. Or, if he has a companion, he may encourage the person to give some to his companion, without offense. The same applies to those who measure out oil, honey, rock sugar, fresh milk, or buttermilk.

If a bhikkhu, while on alms round, obtains noodles and rice filling a medium-sized bowl so that no space remains, he may ask for a drink. If the donor says, “There is no drink, only meat broth. If you need it, [362b] I will give it to you,” the bhikkhu is then permitted to accept it.

Or the donor may say, “There is also meat. If you need it, I will give it to you.” At that time, the bhikkhu may take a full vessel without offense. Likewise, a bhikkhu may go to the house of a sugarcane presser and ask for sugarcane juice.

If the householder says, “There is no sugarcane juice, only rock sugar. If you need it, I will give it to you,” the bhikkhu, if he needs it, may take a full bowl without offense. He may also encourage the person to give some to his companion.

Similarly, he may go to a sesame-oil press and ask for sesame-oil residue. If the owner says, “I have no sesame-oil residue, but if you need oil, I will give it to you,” the bhikkhu, if he needs it, may take a full bowl without offense. He may also encourage the person to give some to his companion.

A bhikkhu may ask for the clear liquid beneath clotted cream. If they say, “I have no clear liquid beneath clotted cream, only clotted cream. If you need it, I will give it to you,” the bhikkhu, if he needs it, may take a full bowl without offense. He may also encourage them to give some to his companion.

A bhikkhu may ask for sugarcane. He may also ask for fine food on behalf of a visiting bhikkhu who has traveled a long distance. Or, while he himself is traveling, he may ask for fine food.

If a bhikkhu asks for the eight kinds of fine food at one place and then eats each kind separately, he commits multiple Payattika offenses.

If a bhikkhu asks for the eight kinds of fine food at several different places and then eats them together in one place, he commits one Payattika offense. If he asks for them at several places and then eats each kind separately, he commits multiple Payattika offenses. If he asks for various kinds of food at one place and then combines them and eats them in a single meal, he commits one Payattika offense.

If he asks for them while not ill and later eats them when ill, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

If he asks for them while ill and later eats them when no longer ill, there is no offense.

If he asks for them while ill and eats them while ill, there is no offense.

If he asks for them while not ill and eats them while not ill, he commits a Payattika offense.

If they are cooked without regard to the illness but eaten in accordance with the illness, there is no offense (?).

If they are cooked in accordance with the illness but eaten without regard to the illness, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

If they are cooked in accordance with the illness and also eaten in accordance with the illness, there is no offense.

If they are cooked without regard to the illness and eaten without regard to the illness, there is no offense. Why is this? Because those who have gone forth live in dependence upon others. Therefore, it is said:

“At each place, one meal is given;

When one is full, one is urged to eat more.

Eating without accepting one’s portion,

Eating at an improper time, and leftover food.

Two or three bowls of delicacies,

Eating them separately, and eating afterward—

Thus ends the fourth Varga.”

39. PRECEPT: KINDLING A FIRE WHEN NOT ILL.

When the Buddha was dwelling in Anathapindika’s Park, in the Jeta Grove near the city of Sravasti, the people of the world, with sincere faith, revered, honored, and made offerings of robes, food, lodgings, and medicines for illness (tonics). At that time, the renunciants of other sects were also staying in the city of Sravasti, but the people did not revere, honor, or make offerings of robes, food, lodgings, and medicines for illness to them.

Therefore, many renunciants of other sects assembled in a debating hall and discussed the matter as follows: “This Sramana Gautama is now dwelling in Anathapindika’s Park, in the Jeta Grove near the city of Sravasti, [362c] and the people, with profound faith, revere, honor, and make offerings of robes, food, lodgings, and medicines for illness to him. But we are not revered, honored, or offered robes, food, lodgings, and medicines for illness.

Who, then, can go forth in the teaching of the Sramana Gautama, practice the holy life, recite and study his teachings, and afterward return and teach them to us in turn, so that we too may receive offerings as he does?”

After the adherents of the other sects had discussed the matter in this way, they said to one another, “Sushuma is foremost in thoughtfulness among our assembly, so we can send him to go forth in the teaching of the Sramana Gautama, receive Gautama’s precepts, and then return...” Thereupon, they said to Sushuma, “The Sramana Gautama is living at the Jetavana Monastery and is revered and supported with offerings by many people, while we receive no such benefits. You should now go forth in the teaching of the Sramana Gautama, practice the holy life, read and recite his scriptures, and then return to our teaching and instruct us in turn, so that we too may receive offerings as he does.”

Having accepted their nomination, Sushuma immediately left the city of Sravasti and went to the Jetavana Monastery. Upon arriving at the monastery gate, he saw bhikkhus engaged in walking meditation and seated meditation. Sushuma approached the bhikkhus, exchanged greetings with them, sat down to one side, and said, “I was formerly an adherent of another sect, but now I wish to go forth and receive full ordination in the teaching of the Tathagata. What must be done here?” The bhikkhus replied, “If one was originally an adherent of another sect and wishes to go forth in the teaching of the Tathagata, one must undergo a probationary period of four months. After the four-month probation, if the bhikkhus find him agreeable, they will permit him to go forth.”

Sushuma then complied and underwent the four-month probation. After four months had passed, the bhikkhus found him agreeable and permitted him to receive full ordination. After receiving full ordination, he went to the Blessed One, bowed his head at the Blessed One’s feet, and stood in attendance to one side. At that time, many bhikkhus came to the Buddha, bowed their heads at his feet, stood to one side, and said, “Blessed One, I have attained realization. My life has reached its culmination, the holy life has been accomplished, and there will be no further rebirth.” Having spoken thus, they bowed their heads at the Buddha’s feet and departed.

As soon as those bhikkhus had departed, Susīma approached, bowed at the Buddha’s feet, and then went to those bhikkhus and exchanged greetings with them. After exchanging greetings, he stood to one side and asked them, “Venerable ones, just now in the presence of the Buddha, did you yourselves declare that you had attained realization, that the holy life had been lived, that what had to be done had been done, and that there would be no further rebirth?” The bhikkhus replied, “It is so.” Susīma then asked, “Venerable ones, knowing and seeing thus, have you obtained the purified divine eye, with which you see beings passing away here and being reborn elsewhere—the beautiful and the ugly, those in fortunate destinations and those in unfortunate destinations [363a]?

Do you see beings who commit evil with the body, speak evil with the mouth, think evil with the mind, revile the noble ones, personally act according to wrong view, and teach others to follow wrong view, and who, upon the breakup of the body at death, fall into the three evil realms? Do you also see beings who do good with the body, speak good with the mouth, think good with the mind, personally act according to right view, and teach others to follow right view, and who, upon the breakup of the body at death, are reborn in a fortunate realm, among the devas or among human beings?

Venerable ones, have you obtained such a purified divine eye, surpassing that of humans?” They replied, “We have not.”

He asked again, “Venerable ones, have you obtained the knowledge of past lives, whereby, knowing and seeing thus, you know one past life, two lives, three lives, four lives, five lives, ten lives, a hundred lives, a thousand lives, up to eons of cosmic formation and dissolution—knowing your names, clans, deaths here and rebirths there, deaths there and rebirths here, and the countless events throughout such eons?” They replied, “We have not.”

He asked again, “Venerable ones, have you attained those liberations beyond form, transcending form, formless, quiescent, and directly realized through the body, dwelling in their complete fulfillment?” They replied, “We have not.”

Susīma said, “Just now, when I asked about these states, you venerable ones said that you had attained none of them. Why, then, did you declare in the presence of the Blessed One that you had attained realization, that the holy life had been lived, that what had to be done had been done, and that there would be no further rebirth? Who could believe this?”

The bhikkhus replied, “Venerable Susīma, we are liberated through wisdom.”

Susīma said, “Your explanation is too brief, and its meaning is unclear. Please explain it more fully.”

A bhikkhu said, “Although the meaning may not yet be clear to you, I know for myself that I am one liberated through wisdom.”

When Susīma heard the bhikkhus speak in this way, he thought, “I should go to the Blessed One and ask him about this matter. Whatever explanation the Blessed One gives, I shall bear it in mind accordingly.” Having thought thus, he rose from his seat, went to the Buddha, bowed his head at the Buddha’s feet, and stood to one side. He then related the foregoing matter fully to the Blessed One and asked how it should be understood.

The Buddha said to Susīma:

– First comes knowledge of the Dharma; afterward comes knowledge by inference.

– Blessed One, what the Blessed One has taught is too abstruse and brief. I do not understand it.

– Even though you do not yet understand, nevertheless, first comes knowledge of the Dharma; afterward comes knowledge by inference.

– Excellent, Blessed One, but I still do not understand. I respectfully beseech the Blessed One to explain it more fully for me.

– Then I shall question you, and you should answer according to your understanding. Susīma, what do you think? Is it because there is birth that aging and death arise?

– It is so, Blessed One.

– Excellent, Susīma. What do you think? Is it because of ignorance that formations arise?

– It is so.

– Excellent, Susīma. What do you think? With the cessation of birth as condition, do aging and death cease? And, continuing in this way, with the cessation of ignorance, do formations cease?

– It is so.

– Excellent [363b], Susīma. If a bhikkhu dwelling in this teaching contemplates rightly and knows rightly, will he attain everything that is to be attained?

– It is so.

– You know that because there is birth, aging and death arise, do you not?

– It is so.

– Because of ignorance, formations arise, do they not?

– It is so.

– With the cessation of birth as condition, aging, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, and distress, together with the five skandhas, all cease, do they not?

– It is so.

– With the cessation of ignorance, formations cease, do they not?

– It is so.

– Having known these dharmas in this way, have you attained the divine eye, the knowledge of past lives, and the various liberations?

– I have not attained them, Blessed One.

– You yourself say that you know these dharmas in this way, yet you also say that you have not attained those virtues. Who could believe this?

– Blessed One, because I was surrounded by evil and perverse ignorance, I gave rise to such wrong views. Now that I have clearly heard the true Dharma from the Blessed One, I have eradicated those evil wrong views and attained the pure Dharma eye.

Then Susīma bowed his head at the Buddha’s feet, knelt, joined his palms, and said to the Buddha:

– Blessed One, I went forth to live in the true Dharma of the Tathagata with a deceitful mind, intending to steal the teaching. In your great compassion, Blessed One, please accept my confession and repentance.

– You were foolish, like a child, and went forth with a deceitful mind because you wished to steal the Buddha’s true Dharma. I now accept your confession and repentance. Susīma, it is as though a man had committed an offense against a king, and the king ordered soldiers to take him away and dismember him, cut off his ears, slice off his nose, saw him with a saw, hack him into pieces with knives, and then have elephants trample him and horses tread upon him, putting him to death through such extremely painful punishments. You went forth with a deceitful mind because you wished to steal the Dharma and thereby committed an offense. I now accept your confession and repentance. You will grow in the Dharma of the noble ones. From this time onward, do not transgress again.

Because the Blessed One had delivered Susīma, and because Maudgalyāyana had exercised his supernormal powers and used a sandalwood bowl to subdue the non-Buddhist ascetics at Vaiśālī, the people’s reverence and faith increased still further, and the Sangha received abundant offerings. Consequently, the non-Buddhist ascetics became enraged and reviled the Blessed One, as explained in detail in the Sundarī Sūtra: before the Buddha appeared in the world, the non-Buddhist ascetics received all kinds of offerings, but after the Buddha appeared, all of them lost their gains and offerings. Why was this? Because everyone knew that the Buddha’s Dharma was profound and wondrous, as explained in detail in the Peacock Jātaka Sūtra.

At that time, the Blessed One had grown weary of worldly offerings and therefore returned to the city of Śrāvastī. When it was time to seek alms, the Buddha put on his customary robe, took his bowl, entered Śrāvastī, and went from house to house on almsround. After finishing his meal, the Buddha calmly practiced walking meditation. Then he put his bedding in order and, without informing the Sangha or his attendant, set out alone [363c] and traveled to the land of Kosala.

The bhikkhus then went to Ānanda and said:

– Venerable Ānanda, after his meal, the Blessed One calmly practiced walking meditation and then put his bedding in order. Without informing the Sangha or his attendant, he set out alone and traveled to the land of Kosala.

Ānanda replied, “Venerable ones, if the Tathagata, the Worthy One, the Perfectly Enlightened One, after his meal calmly practices walking meditation, then puts his bedding in order and, without informing the bhikkhus or his attendant, sets out alone, it is because he wishes to seek seclusion. Therefore, the bhikkhus should not follow him.”

At that time, the Blessed One traveled from the country of Kosala to Pārileyyaka and the Sala Forest, where he dwelt beneath the Auspicious Tree. Now, it is said that a herd of five hundred elephants encountered muddy water and withered grass. Therefore, the king elephant grew weary of the herd and went alone to this tree.

When the king elephant saw the Buddha, he used his trunk to pull up the grass and stamped the ground until it was level. He then drew water with his trunk and sprinkled it upon the ground to settle the dust, and spread soft grass there to make a seat. Then he knelt and invited the Buddha to sit.

When he saw that the Buddha had seated himself, he requested permission to make offerings to the Buddha for three months. The Buddha understood the king elephant’s intention and accepted his invitation. On this occasion, the Buddha recited this verse:

“Dwelling alone in goodness, free from care,

Like an elephant in the wilderness.

Joyfully upholding and training in the precepts,

What need is there for companions?”

The king elephant then took fine lotus roots, washed them clean, and offered them to the Blessed One. The Blessed One accepted the king elephant’s offerings for three months. At that time, because five hundred bhikshus had not seen the Buddha throughout those three months, they went to the Venerable Ānanda and said:

“Elder, we have not seen the Buddha for a long time, nor have we heard the Dharma. We now wish to go and bow before the Blessed One, inquire after him, and hear his instruction.”

“Elders, please remain here for a short while and wait for me to return.”

“Excellent!”

Ānanda then went to the Venerable Mahāmaudgalyāyana and said: “Elder, five hundred bhikshus came to me and said, ‘We have not seen the Buddha for a long time and have not heard the true Dharma. We wish to go and bow before the Buddha, make offerings to him, and hear his instruction.’ Elder, please observe where the Buddha is now dwelling.”

Maudgalyāyana immediately entered samādhi and surveyed the entire world. He saw the Buddha beneath the Auspicious Tree in the Sala Forest at Pārileyyaka, accepting the offerings of the king elephant. Seeing this, he turned toward Ānanda and spoke the following verse:

“Having left the lotus pond,

His body fresh, beautiful, and well nourished,

His form unsoiled and pure,

He dwells joyfully in the secluded forest.

Having attained the ambrosia of the wondrous Dharma,

Adorned with excellent marks, his body is full and radiant.

[364a] His mind is pure and undefiled;

Apart from the assembly, he delights in the secluded forest.”

After Maudgalyāyana had recited this verse, he said to the Venerable Ānanda: “The Blessed One is now at Pārileyyaka, in the Sala Forest beneath the Auspicious Tree, accepting the offerings of the king elephant. If you wish to go to the Blessed One, now is the proper time.”

The Venerable Ānanda returned to the bhikshus and said:

“The Blessed One is presently at Pārileyyaka, in the Sala Forest beneath the Auspicious Tree, accepting the offerings of the king elephant. Let us now go together to the Blessed One, bow before him, and inquire after him.”

When the bhikshus heard Ānanda say this, they went together to Pārileyyaka, to the Sala Forest and the Auspicious Tree. When they were not far from the Blessed One, Ānanda said to the bhikshus:

“Elders, the Tathagata, the Worthy One, the Perfectly Enlightened One, is dwelling in a secluded place. We should not approach him abruptly. Elders, please remain here for a short while and allow me to go ahead.”

“Excellent.”

Ānanda then approached the Buddha. Seeing Ānanda coming from afar, the Buddha said: “Ānanda, you have come at just the right time. I have not seen you for a long while.” The Venerable Ānanda bowed his head at the Buddha’s feet and said: “Blessed One, are you suffering little illness and little distress, and are you dwelling at ease?”

“The Tathagata suffers little illness and little distress and dwells at ease while accepting the offerings of the king elephant. Ānanda, do the bhikshus of the Sangha suffer little illness and little distress, and do they dwell at ease? Do they obtain alms without hardship and practice the path in accordance with the Dharma?”

“Blessed One, the bhikshus of the Sangha suffer little illness and little distress and dwell at ease. They obtain alms without hardship and practice the path in accordance with the Dharma. Blessed One, five hundred bhikshus are presently waiting outside the forest and wish to enter and visit you. May the Blessed One grant them permission.”

“I permit them to enter.”

Ānanda returned to the bhikshus and said:

“Elders, you have gained a great benefit, for the Blessed One has permitted you to enter and visit him.”

The bhikshus followed Ānanda to the Buddha, bowed their heads at the Buddha’s feet, and stood to one side. At that time, one bhikshu among them thought: “How may a bhikshu know things as they truly are, see things as they truly are, and progressively bring all the outflows to an end?” Although he silently thought in this way, he did not dare ask the Buddha.

The Blessed One knew the thought in that bhikshu’s mind and said to Ānanda: “Among these men is a bhikshu who thinks: ‘How may a bhikshu know things as they truly are, see things as they truly are, and progressively bring all the outflows to an end?’ Although he silently thinks in this way, he does not dare ask. Ānanda, I previously taught the bhikshus how to contemplate the skandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, and the twelve links of dependent origination. If a bhikshu knows them as they truly are and sees them as they truly are, he will bring all the outflows to an end.”

When that bhikshu heard the Blessed One say this, he thought: “Material form is the self.”

The Blessed One knew the thought in that bhikshu’s mind and said to Ānanda: “That bhikshu thinks: ‘[364b] Material form is the self.’ Ānanda, you should know that if a bhikshu contemplates in this way: ‘Material form comprises all conditioned formations, and through ignorance, contact, and feeling, craving arises,’ then, Ānanda, from what does craving originate? On what does it depend? From what does it arise? From what does it evolve?

“Ānanda, you should know that craving originates from feeling, depends upon feeling, arises from feeling, and evolves from feeling.

“Ānanda, you should know that feeling originates from contact, depends upon contact, arises from contact, and evolves from contact.

“Ānanda, you should know that contact originates from the six ayatanas, depends upon the six ayatanas, arises from the six ayatanas, and evolves from the six ayatanas.

“Ānanda, you should know that the six ayatanas are conditioned phenomena, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and are impermanent phenomena subject to decay and destruction. Contact is a conditioned phenomenon, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and is an impermanent phenomenon subject to decay and destruction. Feeling is a conditioned phenomenon, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and is an impermanent phenomenon subject to decay and destruction.

Craving is a conditioned phenomenon, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and is an impermanent phenomenon subject to decay and destruction. Formations are conditioned phenomena, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and are impermanent phenomena subject to decay and destruction. Ignorance is a conditioned phenomenon, arising through the convergence of causes and conditions, and is an impermanent phenomenon subject to decay and destruction.

Thus, Ānanda, if a bhikshu knows in this way and sees in this way, he will progressively bring the outflows to an end.”

When that bhikshu heard this, he thought: “Material form is not the self; material form belongs to me.”

The Buddha knew the thought in that bhikshu’s mind and said to Ānanda: “That bhikshu now thinks: ‘Material form is not the self; material form belongs to me.’

“Ānanda, you should know that if a bhikshu contemplates in this way: ‘Material form comprises all conditioned formations, and through ignorance, contact, and feeling, craving arises. From what, then, does craving originate? On what does it depend? From what does it arise? From what does it evolve?’

“Ānanda, you should know that craving originates from feeling, depends upon feeling, arises from feeling, and evolves from feeling, and so on up to ignorance and conditioned formations—the functioning of conditioned phenomena—which arise through the convergence of causes and conditions and are impermanent phenomena subject to decay and destruction.”

When that bhikshu heard this, he thought: “Material form is not the self, nor does it belong to the self; rather, material form exists within the self.”

The Buddha knew the thoughts in that bhikkhu’s mind: (and so forth) Ignorance is a conditioned activity, arising through the conjunction of causes and conditions; it is an impermanent phenomenon subject to change and decay.

Hearing this, that bhikkhu immediately thought: “Material form is not self, does not belong to self, nor is material form within self, nor self within material form.”

The Buddha knew the thoughts in that bhikkhu’s mind: (and so forth) Ignorance is a conditioned activity, arising through the conjunction of causes and conditions; it is an impermanent phenomenon subject to change and decay.

Hearing this, that bhikkhu immediately thought: “If material form is not self, does not belong to self, is not within self, and self is not within material form, then surely feeling is self; and the same applies to perception, formations, and consciousness. If the five skandhas are not self, do not belong to self, are not within self, and self is not within the five skandhas, then how can there be a self?”

The Buddha said to Ananda: “If one thus contemplates the [364c] five skandhas and all formations, and craving arises from ignorance, contact, and feeling, then, Ananda, from where does craving originate? Upon what does it depend? From what does it arise? From what does it evolve? Ananda, craving originates from feeling, depends upon feeling, arises from feeling, and evolves from feeling.

“Ananda, you should know that feeling originates from contact, depends upon contact, arises from contact, and evolves from contact.

“Ananda, you should know that contact originates from the six ayatanas, depends upon the six ayatanas, arises from the six ayatanas, and evolves from the six ayatanas.

“Ananda, you should know that the six ayatanas are conditioned activities, arising through the conjunction of causes and conditions; they are impermanent phenomena subject to change and decay. (And so forth) Ignorance is a conditioned activity, arising through the conjunction of causes and conditions; it is an impermanent phenomenon subject to change and decay. Thus it is, Ananda. If a bhikkhu knows in this way and contemplates in this way, he will successively bring the outflows of existence to an end.”

Hearing this, that bhikkhu immediately attained the pure Dharma-eye. He then thought: “All dharmas are quiescent; there is no self and nothing belonging to self.”

The Buddha said to Ananda: “While that bhikkhu was contemplating in this way, he grasped at no dharma whatsoever, brought all outflows to an end, and his mind was liberated.”

While the Buddha was expounding that Dharma for the bhikkhu, the minds of five hundred bhikkhus were liberated, and they all became arhats.

Thereafter, the Blessed One was dwelling together with the bhikkhus. At that time, during an autumn month, a sudden cold rain fell, and the bhikkhus set fire to a large hollow log. But a large snake had been living inside it. Tormented by the heat of the fire, it crawled out, raised its head, and pursued the bhikkhus. The bhikkhus therefore cried out noisily to one another: “A snake is crawling out! A snake is crawling out!” At that time, although the Buddha knew what had happened, he nevertheless asked the bhikkhus: “Why are you making such a noisy commotion?”

“Blessed One, because a sudden cold rain fell, the young bhikkhus set fire to a hollow log. A snake was inside it, and, tormented by the heat of the fire, it crawled out and pursued the bhikkhus. Seeing this, the bhikkhus cried out noisily to one another.”

“Go and summon those bhikkhus here.”

When they had arrived, the Buddha said to the bhikkhus: “Kindling a fire entails seven harms: 1. It damages the eyes; 2. It damages one’s complexion; 3. It makes the body haggard; 4. It soils and damages one’s robes; 5. It damages beds and cushions; 6. It creates occasions for violating the precepts; 7. It increases conversation about worldly affairs. Because there are these seven harms, from now on I do not permit fires to be kindled.”

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, all was related in detail as above. For the sake of five benefits, the Blessed One inspected the bhikkhus’ quarters once every five days. He saw a bhikkhu suffering from an itching skin disease. Although the Buddha knew this, he nevertheless asked:

“Bhikkhu, are you comfortable? Are you free from suffering?”

“I am suffering from an itching skin disease and am not at ease. If I could warm myself by a fire, I would feel comfortable; but the Blessed One has established a rule prohibiting the kindling of fires, so I cannot obtain relief.”

“From now on, I permit a sick bhikkhu to kindle a fire.”

[365a] Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, all was related in detail as above. At that time, after the venerable Nandi, Kimbila, and Bhaddiya had completed the rains retreat at Mount Stupa, they went to the city of Sravasti to pay homage to and visit the Blessed One. Seeing that the robes they wore had been soaked by rain and that their dyed color had faded, the Buddha, although he knew the reason, nevertheless asked:

“Bhikkhus, why are you wearing robes that have been soaked by rain and whose color has faded?”

“Blessed One, because the Blessed One established a rule prohibiting the kindling of fires, we did not dare boil dye to dye them again.”

“From now on, an exception is allowed when there is a proper reason to kindle a fire.”

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

-- If a bhikkhu who is not ill personally sets fire to grass, wood, or cow dung, or causes another person to do so, he commits a Pacittiya offense, except when there is a proper reason.

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: As explained above.

Illness: Such conditions as sores, itching skin disease, ringworm, leprosy, and so forth. When one has an illness of a kind for which fire is needed to obtain relief, one is permitted to kindle a fire.

Grass: All kinds of grass, reeds, rushes, bamboo, and so forth.

Wood: All kinds of wood, whether already cut down or still intact.

Cow dung: Whether one sets fire to it oneself or causes another person to do so, the Blessed One declared that there is no offense when there is a proper reason.

Reason: If one is the monthly duty officer, must attend to food and drink, or if it is one’s turn to kindle a fire, light a lamp, or light a brazier to warm a room; or if one kindles a fire for one’s preceptor or acarya, heats water, fumigates bowls, or dyes robes, and so forth, there is no offense in kindling a fire. If there is no reason, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

Pacittiya: As explained above.

If one takes a burning piece of firewood and places it upon a pile of wood, grass, cow dung, a wooden bench, or a heap of refuse, one commits a Pacittiya offense. Likewise, even if one takes a burning handful of refuse and places it upon wood, grass, cow dung, or a wooden bench, the same applies.

If a bhikkhu stamps upon a fire made of grass or wood, some of which has burned and some of which has not yet burned, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

If, by stamping upon the fire, he causes sparks to fly out but they do not scorch the ground, he commits a Yue-pi-ni offense (?). In such a case, he may use an iron implement, a brick, or a tile to extinguish the fire, and there is no offense.

If one takes fire and swings it in a circle, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If a bhikkhu plucks blades of grass and throws them toward or into a fire, he commits as many Pacittiya offenses as there are blades he plucks.

If one burns grass or trees, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If one burns the trunk of a sprouting tree, one commits two Pacittiya offenses: one for kindling a fire and one for harming a plant shoot.

If one burns something for the purpose of destroying an object, for purification by fire—using fire on food to render it allowable—or for a proper reason, there is no offense.

If one burns a rice plant bearing grain or an ear of rice bearing grain, one commits two Pacittiya offenses: one for kindling a fire and one for harming living growth. But if fire is required to perform purification, in the sense of purification by fire, or if there is a proper reason for burning it, there is no offense.

If one burns hair, horsehair, camel hair, and so forth, one commits a Yue-pi-ni offense.

If one burns hide, one commits a Yue-pi-ni offense.

If one burns cakes, one commits a Yue-pi-ni offense.

If one burns poison or charcoal, one commits a Yue-pi-ni offense.

[365b] If food cannot be digested and one applies a heated iron plate to the abdomen, there is no offense.

If one wears leather sandals and treads upon fire, one commits an offense of vinaya-transgression.

Therefore, it is stated (as above).

40. PRECEPT: SLEEPING BEYOND THE PERMITTED PERIOD.

When the Buddha was residing at the Wilderness Monastery, the circumstances were related in detail as above. At that time, the bhikkhu serving as steward hired a workman to mix mortar and mold bricks. That workman sometimes slept in the Sangha’s refectory, sometimes rested in the meditation hall, and sometimes rested in the warming room. He spat and discharged filth, or urinated and defecated here and there, making the places unclean and hindering the bhikkhus in their meditation and practice of the Way. The bhikkhus brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha then ordered that the steward bhikkhu be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked:

“Is it true that the workman you hired made various places unclean, thereby hindering the bhikkhus in their meditation and practice of the Way?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“Why did this happen?”

“I wanted that workman to work in the morning and rest in the afternoon, stopping when the work equaled the amount of his wages.”

“Even so, from now on, a bhikkhu must not sleep in the same room as one who has not received full ordination.”

Furthermore, when the Buddha was still a bodhisattva, his royal father cherished him greatly. Fearing the loss of the lineage of a wheel-turning king, his father grieved and wept and would not permit the bodhisattva to renounce the household life. Only when Yasodhara became pregnant with Rahula was the bodhisattva able to leave home and go forth. The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus: “No one could have delighted the Tathagata with tender care more than his royal father, for he built three palaces suited to the three seasons—spring, summer, and winter—as explained in detail in the Sutra on Tenderness, up to the Tathagata’s attainment of unsurpassed perfect enlightenment.”

The bhikkhus said to the Buddha:

“Blessed One, why did the Blessed One have to practice austerities for six years?”

“It was not only today that this occurred, as explained in detail in the Bird Birth Story.”

“Blessed One, why did Mara Papiyan continually seek to trouble and harm the Blessed One?”

“It was not only today that he sought to cause harm, as explained in detail in the Turtle Birth Story concerning the meeting of father and son in Kapilavastu.”

That account also explains in detail the going forth of Mahaprajapati, Yasodhara, and Rahula. It further explains in detail how the Buddha returned to Kapilavastu for the sake of his relatives. At that time, faithful people built a privy for the Buddha. Although the Buddha did not need it, he accepted it in conformity with worldly custom.

Then, one day, Venerable Rahula lay down to sleep outdoors. That night, wind and rain suddenly arose. He went to the door of Venerable Sariputra’s room and knocked. Sariputra asked, “Who are you?”

“Venerable Preceptor, I am Rahula.”

“Remain outside.”

Rahula then went to the door of Venerable Mahamaudgalyayana’s room and knocked. Maudgalyayana asked:

“Who are you?”

“Acharya, I am Rahula.”

“Remain outside.”

In this manner, Rahula went to the other rooms as well, but everyone told him to remain outside. Rahula then entered the Blessed One’s privy, rested his head upon its threshold, and lay down. [365c] Then a black snake, seeking shelter from the wind and rain, also intended to enter the privy. The Buddha constantly observed sentient beings. Seeing that the black snake was about to enter the privy and fearing that it might harm Rahula, he emitted a radiance, went to the privy, and called out, “Who are you?”

“Blessed One, I am Rahula.”

“Rahula, are you truly staying there?”

“Blessed One, I am already most fortunate to have found this place!”

The Buddha lifted Rahula up with his soft, golden-hued hands, brushed the dust from his body, and then led him into his own room. Pointing to the bed before him, he said, “Rest upon this bed.”

Because the Tathagata had already established a precept for his disciples at that time, he had to act in accordance with it. Therefore, the Blessed One sat cross-legged upon the ground. After completing his meditation, the Buddha said to the bhikkhus: “Out of loving-kindness, and on account of Rahula’s case, the Tathagata wishes his disciples to dwell at ease. From now on, I permit one who has not received full ordination to sleep in the same room with a bhikkhu for three nights. On the fourth night, they must sleep separately.”

The bhikkhus then said to the Buddha: “Blessed One, for what reason did Rahula remain in the womb for six years?”

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus: “Long ago, there was a seer named Revata who went to a king and requested an audience. The king sent word to the seer: ‘Stay temporarily in the Asoka Garden; after a short while I shall grant you an audience.’ Although the king gave this order, six days passed without his granting the seer an audience. The king of that time is now Rahula. For that reason, he had to remain in the womb for six years, as explained in detail in the Birth Sutra.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus residing in Kapilavastu 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 sleeps in the same room as one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, he commits a pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: As explained above.

One who has not received full ordination: This excludes bhikkhus and bhikkhunis. However, even though a bhikkhuni has received full ordination, she is not permitted to share a room with a bhikkhu for three nights.

Sleeping for three nights: Sleeping is permitted for a maximum of three nights.

In the same room: If they sleep together in a room sharing the same roof and the same walls, a pacittiya offense is committed.

Pacittiya: As explained above.

If a single room has separate doors and is partitioned, there is no offense.

If there are separate rooms but they share the same door, a pacittiya offense is committed.

If there is a single room with a single door, a pacittiya offense is also committed.

If the rooms and doors are separate, there is no offense.

If a room has walls and a roof, a pacittiya offense is committed.

If it has walls but is only half roofed, one commits an offense of vinaya-transgression.

If it has walls but no roof, there is no offense.

If it has a roof and walls, a pacittiya offense is committed.

If it has a roof but the partitioning wall extends only halfway, one commits an offense of vinaya-transgression.

If it has a roof but no walls, there is no offense.

If a bhikkhu sleeps inside a room and a person who has not received full ordination also sleeps inside that room, a pacittiya offense is committed.

If a bhikkhu sleeps inside a room and a person who has not received full ordination lies with half of his body inside the room, one commits an offense of vinaya-transgression. If that person lies entirely outside, there is no offense.

[366a] If a person who has not received full ordination sleeps inside a room and a bhikkhu also sleeps inside that room, a pacittiya offense is committed.

If a person who has not received full ordination sleeps inside a room while a bhikkhu lies with half of his body inside the room, one commits an offense of vinaya-transgression. If the bhikkhu lies entirely outside the room, there is no offense.

If a bhikkhu lies down first inside a room and a person who has not received full ordination comes and lies down afterward, the bhikkhu commits one pacittiya offense each time he lies down. If either the bhikkhu or the person who has not received full ordination rises in the middle of the night to urinate or defecate and then returns to sleep, the bhikkhu commits one pacittiya offense each time either person rises and returns.

If several persons who have not received full ordination enter and lie down first, and a bhikkhu comes afterward and sleeps there, he commits one pacittiya offense.

If he rises in the middle of the night to urinate or defecate and then returns and lies down again, he commits one pacittiya offense each time he goes out and returns.

If a bhikshu sleeps in the same room with a person who has not received the full ordination for three nights, then on the fourth night he must move to another room. If he goes outside to sleep in the open and then encounters rain, wind, or cold, he should return to the room and remain seated until the ground can be clearly seen. If the bhikshu is ill and unable to sit, he should hang a blanket from above his head downward, or from beneath his armpits down to the ground, and should use something thick and closely fitted as a partition, so that even a cat cannot pass through.

If a bhikshu is traveling, he may sleep in the same house with a person who has not received the full ordination for three nights; on the fourth night, he should sleep separately. If he goes outside to sleep in the open but encounters rain, wind, snow, or cold and must enter the house, he should use a blanket as a partition, as explained above. If he does not hang up a blanket, he must remain seated until the ground can be clearly seen. If, because of old age or illness, he cannot sit, and the person who has not received the full ordination is trustworthy, he should tell him: “When you sleep, I must sit.” When the bhikshu wishes to sleep, he should wake him and say: “While I sleep, you must sit. If you also sleep, you will gain no merit.”

If the offense of sleeping together in the same room has not yet been confessed and they sleep together again, the offense becomes still graver. If it has been confessed and they then sleep in separate rooms, afterward they may sleep together again. Therefore it is said as above.

41. RULE: DENYING CONSENT AFTER GIVING IT

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Shravasti, as related fully above, the Sangha of bhikshus assembled with the intention of performing a Sangha act, but Upananda did not come. A messenger therefore went to summon him, saying: “Venerable sir, the Sangha has assembled and intends to perform a Sangha act. I have been sent to summon you.” Upananda, being versed in the Vinaya, entrusted his consent for the Sangha act to the messenger.

After giving his consent, the bhikshu who received it said: “You have now given your consent; afterward, do not say one thing and then another.” The Sangha then performed a Sangha act of formal censure against a close disciple of Upananda. After the Sangha had performed the act of formal censure against him, that disciple went to his preceptor, Upananda, and said:

“Why did the preceptor give his consent in this matter?”

“What happened?”

“The Sangha performed an act of formal censure against me.”

“I knew nothing of it.”

After hearing his disciple, Upananda went to the person to whom he had entrusted his consent and said: “Venerable sir, I did not give my consent to such an improper matter. That Sangha act [366b] is invalid. I did not give my consent to this Sangha act.”

When the bhikshus heard this, they were ashamed and displeased, and they reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then ordered Upananda to be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha said: “This is an improper deed. Why, after giving your consent, did you say that you had not given it, that the Sangha act was invalid, and that you had not given such consent? Why did you give your consent without first asking about the matter? From now on, I do not permit a bhikshu to give his consent without first clearly inquiring into the matter.”

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

— If a bhikshu, after giving his consent, later becomes angry and displeased and says: “I did not give my consent to an improper matter. That Sangha act is invalid. I did not give my consent in this case,” he commits a Payattika offense.

Explanation:

Bhikshu: As explained above.

Giving consent: There are two cases: giving consent after asking and giving consent without asking.

Giving consent after asking: This means asking the person receiving the consent: “What act is to be performed?” If that person replies: “An act of subjugation,” one then gives consent for the act of subjugation. Likewise, if the reply is “an act of formal censure,” one gives consent for the act of formal censure. For each particular kind of Sangha act, one first asks and then gives consent. This is called giving consent after asking.

Giving consent without asking: This is to say: “I give my consent to the Sangha acts.” One says this three times. This is regarded as giving general consent for all Sangha acts, except the bodhisattva observance and the invitation ceremony. This is called giving consent without asking.

Then, after the Sangha act has been completed, he becomes angry and displeased. Anger and displeasure refer to the nine distressing matters and becoming angry without due cause. The tenth kind of anger is still experienced by ordinary persons under training, and even an arhat may experience displeasure. If he then says: “I did not give my consent to improper matters. That Sangha act is invalid. I did not give that kind of consent,” he commits a Payattika offense.

Payattika: As explained above.

When the Sangha of bhikshus assembles with the intention of performing a Sangha act, everyone must attend. If one has a necessary matter, such as fumigating a bowl, dyeing robes, being ill, or being occupied with duties concerning a stupa or the Sangha, one must then give one’s consent. But after giving it, one must not later say: “According to what I heard that person say, this matter should not be carried out in this way.” If one has already given consent to the Sangha act, one must afterward express one’s approval. If one has given consent in the midst of the Sangha but later acts contrary to it, one commits a Payattika offense.

If one has given consent in the midst of a group, or before an elder bhikshu, one’s preceptor, or one’s acharya, but later acts contrary to it, one commits a Vinaya transgression. Therefore it is said as above.

42. RULE: CAUSING ANOTHER PERSON TO GO HUNGRY

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Shravasti, as related fully above, Upananda, the younger brother of Nanda, said to a disciple traveling with Nanda: “Come with me into the village [366c]. When we reach a certain house, I will give you fine food. If I do anything contrary to proper deportment, do not tell anyone else.

I am your uncle.” This is explained fully in Rule Thirty. The account continues until he said to Nanda: “Why did your disciple speak of my fault before the practitioners of the holy life?” Nanda then rebuked his disciple: “You wretched fellow! Why did you speak of my younger brother’s fault before the practitioners of the holy life?” The bhikshus then reported the matter to the Blessed One.

The Buddha ordered Upananda to be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha asked:

“Did you truly do this?”

“It is true, Blessed One.”

“Upananda, this is an evil deed. Why did you say to that bhikshu: ‘Come with me into the village. When we reach that house, I will give you fine food,’ but upon arriving there, tell him to return? From now on, I do not permit anyone to tell him to return.”

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

— If a bhikshu says to another bhikshu: “Come with me into the village. When we reach that house, I will give you food,” whether intending to give it himself or have someone else give it, and afterward wishes to send him away, saying: “Go away. Staying with you and speaking with you brings me no pleasure. It is more pleasant for me to live alone and speak alone,” and sends him away solely for this reason and no other, he commits a Payattika offense.

Explanation:

Bhikshu: As explained above.

Village: As explained above in the rule concerning theft.

Afterward not giving: If he neither gives the food himself nor has another person give it, but says: “Venerable sir, go away. Staying with you and speaking with you brings me no pleasure. It is more pleasant for me to live alone and speak alone,” and thereby sends him away, he commits a Payattika offense.

Payattika: As explained above.

If, because he wishes to do something contrary to proper deportment along the way, he detains the other person in the monastery, he commits a Vinaya transgression.

If, wishing to engage in conduct contrary to proper deportment while on the road, he then sends the other person back while they are still on the road, he commits a Vinaya transgression.

If, wishing to engage in conduct contrary to proper deportment within a village, he then drives the other person away while they are still in the village, he commits a Payattika offense.

One should not take someone along and then send him back. If one is unable to obtain enough food for two people, one may send the other person back, and there is no offense.

If one can obtain enough food for two people, they should eat together. If one sends the other person to obtain medicine or invite a physician, there is no offense.

If one was unable to obtain food and therefore intended to send the other person away, but then receives an invitation to a meal, one should tell him to go to the place of invitation and eat. If there is no invitation to a meal but there is food in the monastery, one should tell him to return to the monastery to eat. If there is neither an invitation anywhere nor food in the monastery, one should say to the other person, “Venerable, go and seek food for yourself.” If that person behaves contrary to proper deportment or casts improper glances, there is no offense in making him leave.

Or if one sends him to perform such tasks as fumigating bowls or dyeing robes, there is no offense.

In summary, if one drives away a bhikkhu, one commits a Payattika offense; if one drives away a [367a] bhikkhuni, one commits a Sthulatyaya offense; if one drives away a probationer nun, a novice monk, or a novice nun, one commits a Vinaya transgression; finally, if one drives away a layperson, one commits a Vinaya transgression to be confessed mentally. Therefore, it is said (as above).

43. PRECEPT: DISTORTING THE TEACHING AND REFUSING TO HEED ADMONITION.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the account was related in full as above. At that time, the Venerable Aritta slandered the sutras, saying: “As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced.” The bhikkhus then said: “Venerable Aritta, do not slander the sutras. This is a wrong view, an unwholesome view; it will cause you to fall into an evil destiny and descend into hell.” Although they admonished him once, twice, and three times, he would not desist.

The bhikkhus then went and reported the matter to the Blessed One: “Blessed One, Aritta slanders the sutras, saying: ‘As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced.’ We admonished him once, twice, and three times, but he would not desist.”

The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus: “That Aritta slanders the sutras, saying: ‘As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced.’ If, after being admonished once, twice, and three times, he still does not desist, you should admonish him three times in private, three times before a group, and then three times before the Sangha.

When admonishing him in private, you should ask as follows: ‘Venerable Aritta, is it true that you slander the sutras, saying: “As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced,” and that, although admonished three times, you refuse to relinquish this?’ If he answers, ‘It is so,’ then he should be admonished in private as follows: ‘Aritta, you are slandering the sutras.

This is a wrong view, an unwholesome view; it will cause you to fall into an evil destiny and descend into hell. Venerable, I admonish you out of loving-kindness and for your benefit. Therefore, relinquish this matter.

The first admonition is concluded; two admonitions remain. Relinquish this matter.’”

Aritta said: “This is a good view, a wholesome view. Since I began to uphold it, my parents, friends, and acquaintances have also regularly adopted this view. I cannot relinquish this view without first consulting my parents, friends, and acquaintances.”

Then, if after the second and third admonitions he still does not desist, and even after being admonished three times before a group he does not desist, the Sangha must perform the karma of requesting permission to speak, saying: “May the venerable Sangha listen! Aritta slanders the sutras, saying: ‘As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced.’ Although admonished three times in private and three times before a group, he still has not relinquished this matter. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha should now admonish him three times before the Sangha so that he may relinquish this matter.”

Before the Sangha, he should be asked: “Venerable Aritta, is it true that you slander the sutras, saying: ‘As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, [367b] those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced,’ and that, although admonished three times in private and three times before a group, you still have not relinquished this matter?”

If he answers, “It is so,” he should be admonished before the Sangha. The admonition should be given as follows: “Aritta, do not slander the sutras. Slandering the sutras will cause you to fall into an evil destiny and descend into hell. Venerable, the Sangha wishes to benefit you; you must obey the Sangha. The first admonition is concluded; two admonitions remain. You must relinquish this matter.”

Aritta again said: “This is a good view, a wholesome view. My parents and those before them have all inherited and adopted this view. I cannot relinquish it without first consulting my parents.”

Although admonished a second and a third time, he still would not relinquish it. Therefore, the bhikkhus went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus: “If the bhikkhu Aritta slanders the sutras, saying: ‘As I understand the teachings expounded by the Tathagata, those things which he declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced,’ and, although admonished three times in private, three times before a group, and three times before the Sangha, he still does not relinquish this matter, you should perform the karma of formally censuring the bhikkhu Aritta.”

The Buddha then ordered all the bhikkhus dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble, and 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 says: “Venerables, I understand the teaching expounded by the Blessed One in this way: those things which the Blessed One declares to be obstacles to the path do not in fact obstruct the path when practiced,” the bhikkhus should admonish that bhikkhu, saying: “Venerable, do not slander the Blessed One. It is unwholesome to slander the Blessed One. The Blessed One did not say this.

The Blessed One taught that things which obstruct the path truly do obstruct the path. Relinquish this matter.” If, although admonished by the bhikkhus, that bhikkhu persists and refuses to relinquish it, they should admonish him in the same manner a second and a third time. If, after three admonitions, he relinquishes it, that is good.

If he does not relinquish it, the Sangha should perform the karma of formal censure. After that karma has been performed, that bhikkhu commits a Payattika offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhu: As explained above.

Blessed One: The One of all-knowing wisdom and all-seeing vision.

Teaching: That which was spoken by the Blessed One and that which was approved by the Blessed One.

Spoken by the Blessed One: Personally spoken by the Blessed One.

Approved: The disciples spoke it, and the Blessed One confirmed and approved it.

Says: Utters each sentence distinctly and clearly.

Knowledge: This means the knowledge belonging to supreme wisdom.

Dharmas obstructing the Path: With regard to the five sensual pleasures, when the eye sees forms, affection and attachment arise, together with recollection and thought; the mind gives rise to craving and clinging. The same applies to the ear, nose, tongue, body, and sensations.

Practicing (engaging in): Doing that act.

Nothing obstructs the Path: It does not obstruct the Path of the First Dhyana, Second Dhyana, Third Dhyana, or Fourth Dhyana, nor the fruits of stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, or arhat.

The bhikkhus: Either one person, several people, or the Sangha.

That bhikkhu: [367c] Such as Bhikkhu Arittha.

Do not slander the Blessed One: Do not hold to what is untrue or embrace what is unwholesome.

Admonished three times: Either before one person, before several people, or amid the Sangha.

Payattika: As explained above; up to being admonished three times—if he relinquishes it, that is good; if he still does not relinquish it, the Sangha should perform a formal act of censure, requiring him to repent of the Payattika offense.

Therefore, it is stated as above.

THE MAHASANGHIKA VINAYA

End of the seventeenth fascicle