摩訶僧祇律

EXPLANATION OF THE THIRD MISCELLANEOUS RECITATION CHAPTER.

A SANGHADISESA OFFENSE.

Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhikkhu A Le Tra disparaged the sutras, saying to the bhikkhus:

“Venerable ones, as I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, those things called obstructions to the path are not in fact obstructions to the path when practiced.” The bhikkhus admonished him:

“Venerable one! Do not disparage the sutras. Disparaging the sutras is an evil wrong view that leads one into an evil destiny and causes one to fall into hell.”

He replied:

“This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have handed it down from ancient times to the present, and they all held this view.”

The bhikkhus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“If the bhikkhu A Le Tra says, ‘As I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, those things called obstructions to the path are not in fact obstructions to the path when practiced,’ [427b] he should be admonished three times in private, three times before a group of people, and three times in the midst of the Sangha.

“When admonishing him in private, first ask: ‘Venerable A Le Tra, is it true that you disparage the sutras, saying, “As I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, practicing those dharmas called obstructions to the path does not in fact obstruct the path”?’

“If he answers, ‘It is indeed so,’ then he should be admonished in private as follows: ‘Venerable one, do not disparage the sutras. Disparaging the sutras is an evil wrong view that will lead you into an evil destiny and cause you to fall into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, I admonish you. Abandon this matter. The first admonition is complete; two admonitions remain. Will you abandon this matter?’

“If he replies, ‘This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have handed it down from former times to the present, and they all held this view. I cannot abandon it,’ he should be admonished a second and a third time.

“If he does not abandon it, he should be admonished three times before a group of people.

“If he still does not abandon it, he should be brought into the midst of the Sangha, and a formal act should be performed. The officiant should speak as follows:

“‘May the venerable Sangha listen. The bhikkhu A Le Tra disparages the sutras, saying: “As I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, those dharmas called obstructions to the path are not in fact obstructions to the path when practiced.” He has been admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, yet he has not abandoned this view. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha should now admonish him three times.’

“Then he should be asked in the midst of the Sangha: ‘Venerable one, is it true that you disparage the sutras, saying, “As I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, those dharmas called obstructions to the path are not in fact obstructions to the path when practiced,” and that, although you were admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, you did not abandon this matter?’

“If he answers, ‘It is indeed so,’ he should be admonished in the midst of the Sangha as follows: ‘Venerable one, do not disparage the sutras. Disparaging the sutras is an evil wrong view that leads one into an evil destiny and causes one to fall into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, the Sangha now admonishes you. The first admonition is complete; two admonitions remain. Will you abandon this matter?’ He replies: ‘This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have handed it down from former times to the present, and they all held this view. I cannot abandon it.’ He is then admonished in the same manner a second and a third time, yet still does not abandon it.

“The bhikkhus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“If the bhikkhu A Le Tra has disparaged the sutras and, although admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, has not abandoned this view, the Sangha should perform a formal act of censure against him for disparaging the sutras and refusing to abandon that view.

“The officiant should speak as follows:

“‘May the venerable Sangha listen. The bhikkhu A Le Tra disparages the sutras, saying: “As I understand the Dharma taught by the Blessed One, those things called obstructions to the path are not in fact obstructions to the path when practiced.” He has been admonished three times in private, three times before a group of people, and three times in the midst of the Sangha, yet he has not abandoned this view. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha will now perform a formal act of censure against the bhikkhu A Le Tra for disparaging the sutras and refusing to abandon that view. This is the motion.’ (After making this motion, the formal act is to be proclaimed three times.)

[427c] Furthermore, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, Thi Loi Da Ba gave rise to an evil wrong view, saying: ‘If one kills living beings oneself or instructs others to kill living beings, and so forth, committing evil brings no calamity; performing good deeds brings no meritorious reward; and there is no karmic result of good or evil in this life or in a future life.’

The bhikkhus admonished him: ‘Venerable Thi Loi Da Ba, do not give rise to an evil view. Giving rise to an evil view is unwholesome; it will lead you into an evil destiny and cause you to fall into hell.’

He replied: ‘This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have handed it down from former times to the present, and they all held this view.’

The bhikkhus then brought this matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha said:

“If Thi Loi Da Ba gives rise to an evil view and goes so far as to say, ‘There is no karmic result of good or evil...,’ he should be admonished three times in private, three times before a group of people, and three times in the midst of the Sangha.

“When admonishing him three times in private, first ask: ‘Venerable Thi Loi Da Ba, is it true that you have given rise to an evil view and said: “If one kills living beings oneself or instructs others to kill living beings, and so forth, committing evil brings no calamity; performing good deeds brings no meritorious reward; and there is no karmic result of good or evil in this life or in a future life”?’

“If he answers, ‘It is indeed so,’ he should be admonished: ‘Venerable one, do not give rise to an evil view. Giving rise to an evil view is not good; it will lead you into an evil destiny and cause you to fall into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, I now admonish you.

The first admonition is complete; two admonitions remain. Will you abandon this evil view?’ If he replies, ‘This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have handed it down from former times to the present, and they all held this view.

I cannot abandon it,’ he should be admonished a second and a third time. If he still does not abandon it, he should likewise be admonished three times before a group of people. If he still does not abandon it, he should be brought into the midst of the Sangha, and a formal act of censure should be performed.

The officiant should speak as follows:

“‘May the venerable Sangha listen. Thi Loi Da Ba has given rise to an evil wrong view, saying: “If one kills living beings oneself or instructs others to kill living beings, and so forth... committing evil brings no calamity; performing good deeds brings no meritorious reward; and there is no karmic result of good or evil in this life or in a future life.” He has been admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, yet he has not abandoned this view. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha should now admonish him three times in the midst of the Sangha.’

“The Sangha should then ask:

“‘Venerable Thi Loi Da Ba, is it true that you said: “If one kills living beings oneself or instructs others to kill living beings, and so forth, committing evil brings no calamity; performing good deeds brings no meritorious reward; and there is no karmic result of good or evil in this life or in a future life,” and that, although you were admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, you still did not abandon this matter?’”

If he replies, “It is indeed so,” he should be admonished in the midst of the Sangha:

“Venerable sir, do not give rise to an evil wrong view. To give rise to such an evil wrong view is not good; it will cause you to fall into an evil realm and descend into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, the Sangha admonishes you. The first admonition is concluded; two admonitions remain. Will you relinquish this evil wrong view?”

But he still replies, “[428a] This is a good view, a wholly wholesome view. My parents and teachers have inherited it from former times, and they all hold this view. I cannot relinquish it.”

He is admonished in this way once but does not relinquish it, and even after being admonished three times, he still does not relinquish it.

The bhikkhus then reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“If Śiriyavasa gives rise to an evil wrong view and, after being admonished three times, does not relinquish it, the Sangha should perform a formal act of suspension against him for failing to relinquish the evil wrong view. The bhikkhu performing the formal act should speak as follows:

“‘Venerable Sangha, please listen. The bhikkhu Śiriyavasa has given rise to an evil wrong view. He has been admonished three times in private, three times before a group of people, and three times in the midst of the Sangha, yet he still does not relinquish it. If the Sangha’s time has come, the Sangha shall now perform a formal act of suspension against Śiriyavasa for failing to relinquish the evil wrong view. This is the motion.’

“After the motion has been made, the formal act is proclaimed three times, and so forth, concluding: ‘The Sangha has consented; therefore it is silent. Thus do I record this matter.’”

On another occasion, when the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, the bhikkhu Māluṅkyaputta gave rise to an extreme view, saying:

“The world is finite; the world is infinite.”

The bhikkhus admonished him:

“Venerable sir! Do not give rise to an extreme view. This extreme view is an evil view; it will cause you to fall into an evil realm and descend into hell.”

He replied:

“This is a good view, a wholesome view. My parents and teachers have inherited it and have all held this view from ancient times until now. I cannot relinquish it.”

The bhikkhus then reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“If the bhikkhu Māluṅkyaputta gives rise to the extreme view and says, ‘The world is finite; the world is infinite,’ he should be admonished three times in private, three times before a group of people, and three times in the midst of the Sangha.

“When admonishing him in private, one should ask:

“‘Venerable sir, is it true that you have given rise to the extreme view and said, “The world is finite; the world is infinite”?’

“If he replies, ‘It is indeed so,’ he should then be admonished: ‘Venerable sir, that is an evil view; it will cause you to fall into an evil realm and descend into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, I now admonish you. The first admonition is concluded; two admonitions remain. Will you relinquish this extreme view?’

“If he replies, ‘This is a good view, a wholesome view. My parents and teachers have inherited it and have all held this view from ancient times until now; therefore I cannot relinquish it,’ he should be admonished in this way a second and a third time.

“If he still does not relinquish it, he should likewise be admonished three times before a group of people. If he still does not relinquish it, a formal act of suspension should be performed in the midst of the Sangha. The bhikkhu performing the formal act should speak as follows:

“‘Venerable Sangha, please listen. This bhikkhu Māluṅkyaputta has given rise to the extreme view and said, “The world is finite; the world is infinite.” He has been admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, yet he does not relinquish it. If the Sangha’s time has come, the Sangha should also admonish him three times.’

“Then, in the midst of the Sangha, he should first be asked:

“‘Venerable sir! Is it true that you gave rise to the extreme view and said, “The world is finite; the world is infinite,” [428b] and that, although you were admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, you did not relinquish this extreme view?’

“If he still replies, ‘It is indeed so,’ he should then be admonished in the midst of the Sangha: ‘Venerable sir! Do not give rise to an extreme view. This extreme view is an evil view; it will cause you to fall into an evil realm and descend into hell. Out of loving-kindness and wishing to benefit you, the Sangha now admonishes you. The first admonition has not succeeded; two admonitions remain. Will you relinquish this extreme view?’

“But he still replies, ‘This is a good view, a wholesome view. My parents and teachers have inherited it and have all held this view from ancient times until now; therefore I cannot relinquish it.’

“He is then admonished in the same way a second and a third time, yet he still does not relinquish it.”

The bhikkhus therefore reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“If this bhikkhu Māluṅkyaputta gives rise to an extreme view and, after being admonished three times in private and three times before a group of people, does not relinquish it, the Sangha should perform a formal act of suspension against him for failing to relinquish the extreme view, as explained above. This is called a formal act of suspension.”

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Śrāvastī, the bhikkhu Śiriyavasa repeatedly committed Saṅghādisesa offenses. He said to the bhikkhus:

“Venerable sirs, please grant me the mānatta observance.”

The bhikkhus asked:

“Venerable sir, why do you request the mānatta observance?”

He replied, “Because I have committed a Saṅghādisesa offense.”

The bhikkhus already knew that he repeatedly committed Saṅghādisesa offenses, so they said:

“Venerable Śiriyavasa, the Sangha has assembled in harmony to perform a formal act of inquiry. Whatever offenses you have committed, you should disclose them all within a single formal act.”

They spoke in the same way a second and a third time.

He then replied:

“I myself committed that offense.”

But after the formal act had been completed, he thought, “Why should I wait for another formal act to be performed? I should disclose everything within a single formal act.” He then said to the bhikkhus:

“Venerable sirs, please grant me the mānatta observance.”

“Why do you again request the mānatta observance?”

“Because I have committed a Saṅghādisesa offense.”

“Venerable sir, when did you commit it?”

“I committed it at that time.”

“Previously, we told you that the Sangha had assembled in harmony to perform a formal act and that, whatever offenses you had committed, you should disclose them all within a single formal act. Why did you not disclose this one?”

“Because I was ashamed, I did not disclose everything.”

The bhikkhus then reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered Śiriyavasa to be summoned. When he arrived, the Buddha questioned him fully concerning the events above:

“Is it true that you did this?”

“It is indeed true, Blessed One.”

“Foolish man! When committing the offense, you felt no shame; why, when seeking purification, did you feel ashamed? This is evil, contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. It cannot serve to foster wholesome qualities.”

THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A BHIKKHU ADJUDICATING A CASE

[428c] The Buddha then said to the bhikkhus:

– When a Vinaya-holding bhikkhu performs the procedure for another’s release from an offense, he knows when there is an offense and also when there is no offense; he knows when there has been concealment and also when there has been no concealment; he knows when disclosure has been made and also when disclosure has not been made; he knows when probation should be imposed and also when probation should not be imposed; he knows when probation is imposed in accordance with the Dharma and also when it is imposed contrary to the Dharma; he knows when Parivāsa is practiced in accordance with the Dharma and also when it is practiced contrary to the Dharma; he knows when an offense is committed during the course of it and also when no offense is committed during the course of it; he knows when a night is interrupted and also when a night is not interrupted; he knows when one acts in conformity and also when one does not act in conformity; he knows when the Mānatta procedure should be imposed and also when the Mānatta procedure should not be imposed; he knows when Mānatta is imposed in accordance with the Dharma and also when Mānatta is imposed contrary to the Dharma; he knows when the practice of Mānatta is completed and also when the practice of Mānatta is not completed; he knows when the procedure for release from an offense should be performed and also when the procedure for release from an offense should not be performed; he knows when the procedure for release from an offense is performed in accordance with the Dharma and also when it is performed contrary to the Dharma; he knows when concealments are concurrent and also when concealments are not concurrent; he knows concealment for an immeasurable period and also Tiṣya-gaccha; he knows cases in which offenses are concurrent but nights are not concurrent; nights are concurrent but offenses are not concurrent; both offenses and nights are concurrent; neither offenses nor nights are concurrent; and whether there are former offenses or intervening offenses. (Such a one is called a Vinaya-holding bhikkhu.)

(Furthermore,) a bhikkhu endowed with the following four qualities is called a keeper of the Vinaya. They are: knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, knowing a grave offense, and knowing a light offense. These are called the four qualities.

Furthermore, one endowed with the following four qualities is called a keeper of the Vinaya: knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, not regarding a grave offense as a light offense, and not regarding a light offense as a grave offense. These are called the four qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with four qualities: knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, not declaring one who has committed no offense to have committed an offense, and not declaring one who has committed an offense to be free of offense. These are called the four qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with four qualities: not regarding a grave offense as a light offense, not regarding a light offense as a grave offense, not regarding one who has committed no offense as having committed an offense, and not regarding one who has committed an offense as having committed no offense. These are called the four qualities.

Furthermore, one endowed with the following five qualities is called a keeper of the Vinaya: clearly knowing a dispute, clearly knowing the cause of the dispute, clearly knowing how to settle the dispute, clearly knowing how to distinguish the means of bringing the dispute to an end, and clearly knowing how to settle the dispute so that it ceases entirely. These are called the five qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with six qualities: namely, the five matters above, together with skill in settling accumulated disputes. These are called the six qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with seven qualities: knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, knowing a grave offense, knowing a light offense, not treating a grave offense as a light offense, not treating a light offense as a grave offense, and skillfully knowing how to perform a karma procedure. [429a] These are called the seven qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with eight qualities: namely, the seven matters above, together with clearly knowing the circumstances in which the precepts should be recited in full or in brief. These are called the eight qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with nine qualities: namely, the eight matters above, together with skill in reciting the precepts, skill in knowing their meaning, not forgetting them, clearly understanding them, and skillfully knowing the Dharma of karma procedures. These are called the nine qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with ten qualities: namely, in addition to the nine matters above, skillfully disciplining the faculties, perfecting the holy life, and deeply understanding the Dharma of karma procedures. These are called the ten qualities.

Furthermore, one endowed with five qualities is called a keeper of the Vinaya. They are: observing the precepts, knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, clearly knowing the circumstances in which the precepts should be recited in full or in brief, and skillfully knowing the Dharma of karma procedures. These are called the five qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with four qualities. They are: observing the precepts, clearly knowing when there is an offense, clearly knowing when there is no offense, and clearly knowing the Dharma of karma procedures. These are called the four qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with three qualities: knowing when there is an offense, knowing when there is no offense, and knowing the Dharma of karma procedures. These are called the three qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with two qualities. They are: knowing when there is an offense and knowing when there is no offense. These are called the two qualities.

Furthermore, one is endowed with one quality. It is skillfully knowing the Dharma of karma procedures. Such a one is called a keeper of the Vinaya.

One who is endowed with as many as fourteen qualities is called the foremost keeper of the Vinaya; apart from the Tathagata, Worthy One, Perfectly Enlightened One, no one else can attain this. These fourteen qualities are as follows: 1/ Knowing when there is an offense; 2/ Knowing when there is no offense; 3/ Knowing a grave offense; 4/ Knowing a light offense; 5/ Knowing when there has been concealment; 6/ Knowing when there has been no concealment; 7/ Knowing an offense that can be remedied; 8/ Knowing an offense that cannot be remedied; 9/ Knowing when purity has been attained; 10/ Knowing when purity has not yet been attained; 11/ Attaining the merit of the four dhyānas and experiencing present happiness; 12/ Attaining the divine eye, divine ear, and knowledge of former lives;

13/ Completely eliminating the taints; 14/ Attaining the untainted state, free from all defilement.

These are called the fourteen qualities. One endowed with these fourteen qualities is foremost among all keepers of the Vinaya, apart from the Tathagata, Worthy One, Perfectly Enlightened One.

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus:

– The bhikkhu Upāli is endowed with the fourteen qualities stated above and is the foremost keeper of the Vinaya. He knows when there is an offense and when there is no offense, up to and including completely eliminating the taints and attaining the untainted wisdom of liberation.

Knowing when there is an offense means knowing the five classes of offenses: Pārājika, Saṅghāvaśeṣa, Pāyattika, Pratideśanīya, and Vinayātikrama.

Pārājika: sexual intercourse, theft, killing a human being, and falsely claiming to have attained a superhuman state.

Saṅghāvaśeṣa: intentionally emitting semen, touching a woman, speaking lewd words, up to and including corrupting families in a village.

Pāyattika: comprising the thirty Naiḥsargika offenses and the ninety-two pure Pāyattika offenses.

Pratideśanīya: while dwelling in an araṇya, accepting food from a bhikkhunī when not ill, eating food at the direction of a bhikkhunī, and begging for food at the home of a family in training.

Vinayātikrama: comprising the following thirteen matters:

1) Āgādhya; 2) Sthūlātyaya; 3) Impure Sthūlātyaya; 4) Failure to act; 5) Failure [429b] to answer; 6) Duṣkṛta; 7) Improper speech; 8) Proper deportment; 9) Improper deportment; 10) Bad deportment; 11) Wrong livelihood; 12) Wrong view; 13) Vinaya concerning a mind that gives rise to remorse.

1) Āgādhya: As in the case of the non-Buddhist Śanma, the Venerable Bhaddāli, and the bhikkhunīs in the city of Rājagṛha, all such cases require going before the Buddha to confess and repent. This is called Āgādhya.

2) Sthūlātyaya: Stealing something worth less than five coins, or touching an object worth five coins without yet moving it from its place. This is called Sthūlātyaya.

3) Impure Sthūlātyaya: Playfully handling the male organ with a defiled mind. This is called Impure Sthūlātyaya.

4) Failure to act: If the preceptor or ācārya instructs one to do something that accords with the Dharma, one must do it; if one does not, one commits a Vinayātikrama offense. If instructed to summon a woman or bring liquor, one should say to the preceptor or ācārya: "I have heard that this is not to be done according to the Vinaya." This is called failure to act.

5) Failure to answer: If the preceptor or ācārya calls one and one hears but does not answer, one commits a Vinayātikrama offense. If one has rice in one’s mouth but one’s voice would not be altered, one should answer. If one is unable to answer, one should swallow the rice and then answer. If the preceptor or ācārya asks: "Why did you hear me call but not answer?" one should say to the preceptor or ācārya: "I had rice in my mouth and therefore could not answer." This is called failure to answer.

6) Duṣkṛta: As when the Blessed One said to the group of six bhikkhus, Udāyin, and the other bhikkhus: "It is not good to do that." This is called Duṣkṛta.

7) Harsh sounds: Imitating the cries of elephants, horses, cattle, donkeys, camels, and so forth—all such sounds of animals; or drawing out the breath and then crying in broken intervals, or crying rapidly and then prolonging the sound. This is called a harsh sound (a grating cry).

8) Proper deportment: Upon rising early in the morning, one should wash and clean the places for urination and defecation, then fill those places with water. One must also sweep the stupa, the monastery compound, and the Sangha’s rooms. If one takes, gives, or performs any task—even tying a single thread—without informing one’s supporting preceptor or acarya, one commits a Viet-ti-ni offense. This is called proper deportment.

9) Improper deportment: Such acts as arranging one’s hair, adorning one’s eyes, beautifying one’s face, shaking out one’s robe, making silk garments glossy and bright, fastening a belt, heating one’s bowl to make it shine, or using a mirror to look at one’s face. This is called improper deportment (conduct contrary to proper deportment).

10) Bad deportment: Bad bodily deportment, bad verbal deportment, or bad bodily and verbal deportment; harmful bodily conduct, harmful verbal conduct, or harmful bodily and verbal conduct; wrong livelihood through the body, wrong livelihood through speech, or wrong livelihood through both body and speech. This is called bad deportment (unseemly deportment).

11) Evil wrong livelihood: Crookedness of body, crookedness of speech, and crookedness of mind, while displaying affectionate behavior in the hope that others will make offerings. This is called evil wrong livelihood.

12) Wrong views: All kinds of views, such as eternalism, annihilationism, and so forth, are called wrong views.

13) Vinaya concerning the arising of remorse: Regarding the rules of training and proper deportment, harboring an unwholesome thought, or unintentionally touching a woman—all such cases are called causes for remorse. This is called [429c] the Vinaya concerning the arising of remorse.

ONE ALSO KNOWS WHAT CONSTITUTES AN OFFENSE.

Furthermore, an offense may arise from sensual desire; an offense may arise from anger; an offense may arise from delusion; or an offense may arise from neither sensual desire, anger, nor delusion. An offense may be due to bodily action and not verbal action; due to verbal action and not bodily action; due to both bodily and verbal action; or due to neither bodily nor verbal action. An offense may arise from oneself and not from another person; from another person and not from oneself; from both oneself and another person; or from neither oneself nor another person.

An offense may arise from one’s own speech and not from another’s speech; from another’s speech and not from one’s own speech; from both one’s own speech and another’s speech; or from neither one’s own speech nor another’s speech. An offense may be determined by the mind and not by the act; determined by the act and not by the mind; grave in act but not grave in intention; grave in intention but not grave in act; grave in both act and intention; or grave in neither act nor intention.

An offense may be due to one’s own property and not another’s property; due to another’s property and not one’s own property; due to both one’s own property and another’s property; or due to neither one’s own property nor another’s property. One may commit several kinds of offenses in one place, one offense in several places, several offenses in several places, or one offense in one place. One may proceed from a situation involving no offense to one involving an offense; from a situation involving an offense to one involving no offense; from a situation involving an offense to one involving an offense; or from a situation involving no offense to one involving no offense.

One may proceed from the cause of a grave offense to a light offense; from a light offense to a grave offense; from a grave offense to a grave offense; or from a light offense to a light offense. Sometimes one commits an offense by accepting something, and sometimes by eating it. In a completed act there is an offense; by not receiving, there is an offense, whereas by receiving, there is no offense; by failing to perform an act, there is an offense, whereas by performing it, there is no offense.

An offense may pertain to a village and not to the wilderness; pertain to the wilderness and not to a village; pertain to both a village and the wilderness; or pertain to neither a village nor the wilderness. An offense may pertain to the proper time and not to an improper time; pertain to an improper time and not to the proper time; pertain to both the proper and improper times; or pertain to neither the proper nor the improper time.

An offense may pertain to night and not to day; pertain to day and not to night; pertain to both night and day; or pertain to neither night nor day. An offense may occur in a concealed place and not in an open place; in an open place and not in a concealed place; in both a concealed and an open place; or in neither a concealed nor an open place. An offense may occur while walking and not while standing; while standing and not while walking; [430a] both while walking and while standing; or neither while walking nor while standing.

An offense may occur while standing and not while sitting; while sitting and not while standing; both while sitting and while standing; or neither while sitting nor while standing. An offense may occur while sitting and not while sleeping; while sleeping and not while sitting; both while sitting and while sleeping; or neither while sitting nor while sleeping. An offense may occur while sleeping and not while walking; while walking and not while sleeping; both while walking and while sleeping; or neither while sleeping nor while walking.

An offense may occur in a solitary place and not in a crowded place; in a crowded place and not in a solitary place; in both a solitary and a crowded place; or in neither a solitary nor a crowded place. An offense may occur in a crowded place but not in the midst of the Sangha; in the midst of the Sangha but not in a crowded place; both in a crowded place and in the midst of the Sangha; or neither in a crowded place nor in the midst of the Sangha.

An offense may occur in the midst of the Sangha but not in a secluded place; in a secluded place but not in the midst of the Sangha; both in the midst of the Sangha and in a secluded place; or neither in the midst of the Sangha nor in a secluded place. An offense may pertain to winter and not to spring; pertain to spring and not to winter; pertain to both winter and spring; or pertain to neither winter nor spring. An offense may pertain to spring and not to summer; pertain to summer and not to spring; pertain to both spring and summer; or pertain to neither spring nor summer.

An offense may pertain to summer and not to winter; pertain to winter and not to summer; pertain to both summer and winter; or pertain to neither summer nor winter.

An offense arising from desire: Such as deliberately playing with the male organ, rubbing against it, speaking lewdly, praising oneself, acting as an intermediary, or speaking with a thoroughly defiled mind. This is called an offense arising from desire.

There are offenses arising from anger: such as groundlessly making false accusations, slandering, speaking divisively, striking someone, driving someone away, deliberately causing distress to someone known to have already eaten his fill, expelling someone from a village, striking with the fist, raising a hand in threat of striking, and standing in a concealed place to eavesdrop. These are called offenses arising from anger.

There are offenses arising from delusion: Due to a deluded mind, one holds that the world is truly eternal, or that the world is impermanent, entertaining views of this kind. These are called offenses arising from delusion.

There are offenses not arising from desire, anger, or delusion: such as when an arhat commits an offense. These are called offenses not arising from desire, anger, or delusion.

There are offenses committed by the body but not by speech: such as staying in the same room with a woman, sleeping in the same room with one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, sleeping on the same bed, sitting on the same seat, eating in many places, eating apart from the Sangha, and eating from the same bowl. These are called offenses committed by the body but not by speech.

There are offenses committed by speech but not by the body: generally speaking, all offenses that fall within the sphere of speech. These are called offenses committed by speech but not by the body.

There are offenses involving both body and speech: such as groundlessly making false accusations, slandering, speaking divisively, engaging in contentious disturbances, driving someone away, deliberately causing distress to someone known to have already eaten his fill, expelling someone while in a village, striking someone with the hand, raising a hand in threat of striking, and standing in a concealed place to eavesdrop. These are called offenses involving both body and speech.

There are offenses committed neither by body nor by speech: such as [430b] offenses arising from the mind. These are called offenses committed neither by body nor by speech.

There are offenses arising from one’s own body, not from the body of another: such as becoming angry and striking oneself. These are called offenses arising from one’s own body, not from the body of another.

There are offenses arising from the body of another, not from one’s own body: such as seeing another person commit sexual misconduct, theft, or killing and concealing it. These are called offenses arising from the body of another, not from one’s own body.

There are offenses arising from both one’s own body and the body of another: such as sleeping in the same house with a woman, sleeping with one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, sleeping on the same bed, sitting on the same seat with another, eating in many places, eating apart from the Sangha, and eating from the same bowl. These are called offenses arising from both one’s own body and the body of another.

There are offenses arising neither from one’s own body nor from the body of another: such as all offenses within the sphere of speech, except teaching one who has not received full ordination to recite a text. These are called offenses arising neither from one’s own body nor from the body of another.

There are offenses arising from one’s own speech, not from the speech of another: all offenses pertaining to speech, except teaching one who has not received full ordination to recite a text. These are called offenses arising from one’s own speech, not from the speech of another.

There are offenses arising from the speech of another, not from one’s own speech: If the Sangha adjudicates a matter contrary to the Dharma and a bhikshu neither sends his consent nor informs others that he does not agree, but remains silent and listens, this is called an offense arising from the speech of another, not from one’s own speech.

There are offenses arising from both one’s own speech and the speech of another: such as reciting together, sentence by sentence, with one who has not received full ordination. These are called offenses arising from both one’s own speech and the speech of another.

There are offenses arising neither from one’s own speech nor from the speech of another: such as offenses arising from body and mind. These are called offenses arising neither from one’s own speech nor from the speech of another.

There are offenses determined by the mind, not by the act: such as cases in which one should ask: With what intention was the theft committed? With what intention was the killing committed? With what intention was a woman touched? With what intention was fresh grass damaged? With what intention was the earth dug? These are called offenses determined by the mind, not by the act.

There are offenses determined by the act, not by the mind: For example, one should not ask: With what intention was sexual intercourse committed? With what intention was food eaten at an improper time? With what intention was alcohol consumed? With what intention did one sleep in the same house with a woman? With what intention did one sleep in the same room with one who had not received full ordination for more than three nights? If the offense was committed, it should be dealt with in accordance with the Dharma. These are called offenses determined by the act, not by the mind.

There are offenses in which the act is grave but the mind is not grave: such as when a bhikshu eats at an improper time while believing it to be the proper time, thereby committing a Ba-dạ-đề offense. This is called an offense in which the act is grave but the mind is not grave.

There are offenses in which the mind is grave but the act is not grave: If a bhikshu eats at the proper time while believing it to be an improper time, he commits a Việt-tì-ni offense. This is called an offense in which the mind is grave but the act is not grave.

There are offenses in which both the act and the mind are grave: such as eating at an improper time while believing it to be the proper time, thereby committing a Ba-dạ-đề offense. This is called an offense in which both the act and the mind are grave.

There are offenses in which both the act and the mind are light: such as the rules of training and proper deportment. These are called offenses in which both the act and the mind are light.

There are offenses arising from one’s own property, not from the property of another: such as when a bhikshu deliberately attempts to steal what is actually his own property, thereby committing a Thâu-lan-giá offense. This is called an offense arising from one’s own property, not from the property of another.

There are offenses arising from the property of another, not from one’s own property: such as when a bhikshu, with the intention to steal, takes another person’s property worth less than five coins, [430c] thereby committing a Thâu-lan-giá offense; if it is worth five coins, he commits a Ba-la-di offense. This is called an offense arising from the property of another, not from one’s own property.

There are offenses arising from property jointly belonging to oneself and another: such as when a bhikshu, with the intention to steal, takes jointly owned property belonging to himself and another that is worth less than five coins, thereby committing a Thâu-lan-giá offense; if it is worth five coins, he commits a Ba-la-di offense. This is called an offense arising from the property of oneself and another.

There are offenses arising neither from one’s own property nor from the property of another: such as when a bhikshu, with the intention to steal, takes ownerless property, thereby committing a Việt-tì-ni offense. This is called an offense arising neither from one’s own property nor from the property of another.

There are cases in which many offenses are committed at one place: such as when a bhikshu obtains eight delicacies by requesting them at one place and then eats each kind at a separate place, thereby committing eight Ba-dạ-đề offenses. This is called committing many offenses at one place.

There are cases in which one offense is committed at many places: such as when a bhikshu obtains eight delicacies by requesting them at many places and then sits down and eats them at one place, thereby committing one Ba-dạ-đề offense. This is called committing one offense at many places.

There are cases in which many offenses are committed at many places: such as when a bhikshu obtains eight delicacies by requesting them at eight places and then eats on eight occasions, thereby committing eight Ba-dạ-đề offenses. This is called committing many offenses at many places.

One offense is committed at one place: such as obtaining eight delicacies by requesting them at one place and then sitting down and eating them at one place. This is called committing one offense at one place.

An offense may arise from a cause that is not an offense: such as when a bhikshu who is without offense requests absolution for an offense, thereby committing a Việt-tì-ni offense. This is called an offense arising from a cause that is not an offense.

A state of no offense may arise from a cause that is an offense: such as in the construction of a large dwelling or a small dwelling, or in matters concerning all kinds of cloth, when one has received admonition three times. This is called a state of no offense arising from a cause that is an offense.

An offense may arise from a cause that is an offense: When the Sangha recites the precepts and asks three times that whoever has committed an offense should confess it in accordance with the Dharma, while whoever is without offense should remain silent, if one who has committed an offense does not act in accordance with the Dharma, does not inform another, and does not even think, “Later I shall confess in accordance with the Dharma before one who is pure and understanding,” but continues to remain silent, he commits a Việt-tì-ni offense. This is called an offense arising from a cause that is an offense.

From a cause involving no offense leading to no offense: For example, when one does not act, one does not commit an offense. This is called from a cause involving no offense leading to no offense.

From a cause involving a grave offense leading to a minor offense: For example, a bhikkhu who has committed a Payattika offense goes to confess it before an evil person who holds wrong views or extreme views, or before one who is required to undergo training (one who is undergoing penance for a Parajika offense). This is called from a cause involving a grave offense leading to a minor offense.

From a minor offense leading to a grave offense: For example, a bhikkhu who has committed a Vinaya-transgression offense goes to confess it before one who disparages the sutras or one who is required to undergo training; he thereby commits a Payattika offense. This is called from a minor offense leading to a grave offense.

From a grave offense leading to a grave offense: For example, a bhikkhu who has committed a Payattika offense goes to confess it before one who disparages the sutras or one who is required to undergo training; he thereby commits a Payattika offense. This is called from a grave offense leading to a grave offense.

From a minor offense leading to a minor offense: A bhikkhu who has committed a Vinaya-transgression offense goes to confess it before one who has not received full ordination; this is not considered a confession, and he further commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. This is called from a minor offense leading to a minor offense.

[431a] There are cases in which an offense is committed upon accepting something: For example, accepting raw meat, grain, gold or silver, elephants, horses, camels, donkeys, cattle, goats, male or female slaves, women, fields, land, or houses. This is called committing an offense upon accepting something.

There are cases in which an offense is committed while eating: For example, eating apart from the Sangha, eating in multiple places, eating from the same bowl, or eating fruit that is not allowable. This is called committing an offense while eating.

There are acts whose completion constitutes an offense: For example, constructing a small dwelling or a large dwelling, or persisting after being admonished three times. These are called acts whose completion constitutes an offense.

There are cases in which not undertaking something constitutes an offense, whereas undertaking it does not constitute an offense: For example, when one undertakes the Kathina robe observance, the five restrictions are lifted, namely: eating apart from the Sangha, eating in multiple places, going somewhere without informing the person with whom one is eating, keeping an extra robe for an extended period, and sleeping apart from one’s robe. This is called a case in which not undertaking something constitutes an offense, whereas undertaking it does not constitute an offense.

There are cases in which failing to perform an act constitutes an offense, whereas performing it does not constitute an offense: When a bhikkhu obtains a new robe and does not use three colors to dye it so as to spoil its color, or does not dye it with one color, make it allowable, and then use it, he commits a Payattika offense. This is called a case in which failing to perform an act constitutes an offense, whereas performing it does not constitute an offense.

There are offenses committed in a village but not in the wilderness: Entering a village without wearing the sanghati robe, without fastening one’s belt or tying one’s waistband, without carrying one’s bowl, without informing the person with whom one is eating, or entering a village at an improper time. These are called offenses committed in a village but not in the wilderness.

There are offenses committed in the wilderness but not in a village: A bhikkhu traveling in company with thieves, or arranging to travel along the same road with a woman or a bhikkhuni. These are called offenses committed in the wilderness but not in a village.

There are offenses committed both in the wilderness and in a village: Striking someone with one’s fist or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike someone. These are called offenses committed both in the wilderness and in a village.

There are offenses committed neither in the wilderness nor in a village: An offense occurring at the king’s gate. This is called an offense committed neither in the wilderness nor in a village.

There are offenses committed at the proper time but not at an improper time: For example, eating apart from the Sangha, eating in multiple places, eating from the same bowl, digging beneath the food in one’s bowl to eat, eating the eight delicacies, or eating fruit that has not been made allowable. These are called offenses committed at the proper time but not at an improper time.

There are offenses committed at an improper time but not at the proper time: Entering a village at an improper time without informing anyone, eating at an improper time, or instructing bhikkhunis until evening. These are called offenses committed at an improper time but not at the proper time.

There are offenses committed both at the proper time and at an improper time: For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike. These are called offenses committed both at the proper time and at an improper time.

There are offenses committed both at an improper time and not at an improper time: For example, committing an offense precisely at midday. This is called an offense committed both at an improper time and not at an improper time.

There are offenses belonging to the night but not to the day: For example, sleeping in the same house as a woman, sleeping with one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, or instructing bhikkhunis until evening. These are called offenses belonging to the night but not to the day.

There are offenses belonging to the day but not to the night: For example, eating apart from the Sangha, and so forth, up to eating fruit that is not allowable. These are called offenses belonging to the day but not to the night.

There are offenses belonging both to the day and to the night: For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike. These are called offenses belonging both to the day and to the night.

There are offenses belonging neither to the day nor to the night: For example, an offense occurring at dawn. This is called an offense belonging neither to the day nor to the night.

There are offenses [431b] committed in a concealed place but not in an open place: For example, sleeping in the same house as a woman, sleeping with one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, spreading bedding in the middle of a room, sitting in a place where people engage in sensual pleasure, or sitting in a secluded and concealed place. These are called offenses committed in a concealed place but not in an open place.

There are offenses committed in an open place but not in a concealed place: If one personally takes, or has someone else take, a bed or mattress belonging to the Sangha and spreads it in an open place, and then leaves without informing the Sangha and goes about twenty-five cubits away, one commits a Payattika offense. This is called an offense committed in an open place but not in a concealed place.

There are offenses committed both in a concealed place and in an open place: For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike.

What is an offense committed neither in a concealed place nor in an open place?

– It is an offense occurring beneath the veranda of a house.

What is an offense committed while walking but not while standing?

– A bhikkhu travels in company with bandits or arranges to travel along the same road with a woman or a bhikkhuni; or, when the Sangha, his preceptor, or his acarya tells him not to go, he nevertheless goes and thereby commits an offense. This is called an offense resulting from walking, not from standing.

What is an offense committed while standing but not while walking?

– For example, standing beside a prostitute, at a tavern, at a gambling place, beside a prison, or in a doorway; then, when the Sangha, his preceptor, or his acarya tells him not to stand there, he nevertheless continues standing and thereby commits an offense. This is called an offense resulting from standing, not from walking.

What is an offense resulting both from walking and from standing?

– For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike.

What is an offense committed neither while walking nor while standing?

– For example, one committed while sitting or sleeping.

What is an offense resulting from standing but not from sitting?

– For example, standing beside a prostitute and, when one’s preceptor or acarya tells one not to stand there, nevertheless continuing to stand and thereby committing an offense.

What is an offense resulting from sitting but not from standing?

– For example, sitting on an excessively large bed, using a mattress stuffed with cotton, using a hide as a sitting mat, or sitting beside a prostitute, a tavern, a gambling place, or a prison; then, when the Sangha, one’s preceptor, or one’s acarya tells one not to sit there, nevertheless continuing to sit and thereby committing an offense.

What is an offense resulting both from standing and from sitting?

– For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike.

What is an offense resulting neither from standing nor from sitting?

– It is an offense occurring while walking or sleeping.

What is an offense committed while sitting but not while sleeping?

– For example, sitting on an oversized bed and, when the Sangha, one’s preceptor, or one’s acarya tells one not to sit there, nevertheless continuing to sit and thereby committing an offense.

What is an offense committed while sleeping but not while sitting?

– Sleeping in the same house as a woman, sleeping with one who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, sitting on an excessively large bed, using a mattress stuffed with cotton as a seat, or using a hide as a sitting mat.

What is an offense committed both while sitting and while sleeping?

– For example, striking someone with one’s hand or raising one’s hand to threaten to strike.

What is an offense committed neither while sitting nor while sleeping?

– As in committing an offense while walking or while standing.

What constitutes committing an offense while sleeping, but not while walking?

– As when one sleeps in the same house with a woman, or even sleeps on a leather mattress.

What constitutes committing an offense while walking, but not while sleeping?

– As when a bhikkhu travels in company with robbers or with a woman, and, although his preceptor or acarya tells him not to go, he nevertheless goes; he thereby commits an offense.

What constitutes committing an offense both while sleeping and while walking?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes committing an offense neither while sleeping nor while walking?

– As in committing an offense while sitting or while standing.

What constitutes committing an offense neither in a secluded place nor in the presence of many people?

– As when one is admonished three times in a secluded place but does not desist.

What constitutes committing an offense in the presence of many people, but not in a secluded place?

– [431c] As when one is admonished three times in the presence of many people but does not desist.

What constitutes committing an offense both in a secluded place and in the presence of many people?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes committing an offense neither in a secluded place nor in the presence of many people?

– As when it occurs in the midst of the Sangha.

What constitutes committing an offense in the presence of many people, but not in the midst of the Sangha?

– As when one is admonished three times in the presence of many people but does not desist.

What constitutes committing an offense in the midst of the Sangha, but not in the presence of many people?

– As when one is admonished three times in the midst of the Sangha but does not desist.

What constitutes committing an offense both in the presence of many people and in the midst of the Sangha?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes an offense committed neither in the presence of many people nor in the midst of the Sangha?

– As when one is admonished three times in a secluded place but does not desist.

What constitutes an offense committed in the midst of the Sangha, but not in a secluded place?

– As when one is admonished three times in the midst of the Sangha but does not desist.

What constitutes an offense committed in a secluded place, but not in the midst of the Sangha?

– As when one is admonished three times in a secluded place but does not desist.

What constitutes an offense committed both in the midst of the Sangha and in a secluded place?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes an offense committed neither in the midst of the Sangha nor in a secluded place?

– As when one is admonished three times in the presence of many people but does not desist.

What constitutes an offense belonging to winter, but not to spring?

– If, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, a bhikkhu does not relinquish his rain-bathing robe but relinquishes it only on the sixteenth day, he commits a Viet-ti-ni offense.

What constitutes an offense belonging to spring, but not to winter?

– A bhikkhu who has received the kathina robe should relinquish it on the fifteenth day of the twelfth month. If he does not relinquish it and keeps it until the sixteenth day, he commits a Viet-ti-ni offense.

What constitutes an offense belonging both to winter and to spring?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes an offense belonging neither to winter nor to spring?

– As during the rains retreat, that is, in summer.

What constitutes an offense belonging to spring, but not to summer?

– If a bhikkhu who has received the kathina robe does not relinquish it and keeps it until the sixteenth day of the twelfth month, he commits a Viet-ti-ni offense.

What constitutes an offense belonging to summer, but not to spring?

– If a bhikkhu is required to enter the rains retreat on the sixteenth day of the fourth month but does not do so, he commits a Viet-ti-ni offense. If he also fails to enter the later rains retreat, he commits two Viet-ti-ni offenses.

What constitutes an offense belonging both to spring and to summer?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes an offense belonging neither to spring nor to summer?

– As an offense committed in winter.

What constitutes an offense belonging to summer, but not to winter?

If one does not enter either of the two rains retreats, one commits two Viet-ti-ni offenses.

What constitutes an offense belonging to winter, but not to summer?

– If, on the fifteenth day of the eighth month, one should relinquish the rain-bathing robe but does not relinquish it and keeps it until the sixteenth day, one commits an offense.

What constitutes an offense belonging both to summer and to winter?

– As when one strikes someone with one's hand or raises one's hand threatening to strike.

What constitutes an offense belonging neither to summer nor to winter?

– It is an offense committed in spring; that is, an offense belonging neither to summer nor to winter.

There are also offenses arising from failing to restrain the body, failing to restrain speech, or failing to restrain both body and speech; offenses committed by the body, by speech, or by both body and speech; evil done by the body, by speech, or by both body and speech. These are called offenses.

Conversely, being free of offense means restraining the body, restraining speech, and restraining both body and speech; the body does not transgress, speech does not transgress, and neither body nor speech transgresses; the body does no evil, speech does no evil, and neither body nor speech does evil. This is called being free of offense.

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus:

-- When a bhikkhu who upholds the Vinaya releases someone from an offense, he knows when there is an offense, [432a] knows when there is no offense, knows when there has been concealment, and knows when there has been no concealment.

KNOWING WHEN THERE HAS BEEN CONCEALMENT.

If a bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn, knows that it is an offense, and does not deliberately conceal it, but after sunrise deliberately conceals it until dawn the following morning, this is called concealment for one night.

There is also this case of concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn, knows that he has committed an offense, and does not deliberately conceal it, but at mealtime deliberately conceals it until dawn the following day. This is called concealment for one night. The same applies if this occurs at midday, in the afternoon, at sunset, in the early part of the night, or at midnight.

If a bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn, knows that it is an offense, and does not deliberately conceal it, but at the end of the night, still knowing it to be an offense, deliberately conceals it until dawn the following day, this is called concealment for two periods during one night.

There is also this case of concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn but does not know that he has committed an offense. At sunrise he realizes that he has committed an offense but does not deliberately conceal it; then, at mealtime, he deliberately conceals it until dawn the following day. This is called concealment for one night. The same applies if this occurs at midday, in the afternoon, at sunset, or in the early part of the night.

If a bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn but does not know that he has committed an offense, and only at midnight realizes that he has committed an offense but does not deliberately conceal it, yet at the end of the night deliberately conceals it until dawn the following day, this is called concealment for three periods during one night.

There is also this case of concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn but does not know that he has committed an offense. At mealtime he realizes that he has committed an offense but does not deliberately conceal it; then, at midday, he deliberately conceals it until dawn the following day. This is called concealment for one night. The same applies if this occurs in the afternoon, at sunset, or in the early part of the night.

If a bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn but does not know that he has committed an offense, and only at midnight realizes that he has committed an offense but has no intention of concealing it, yet at the end of the night deliberately conceals it until dawn, this is called concealment for four periods during one night.

There is also this case of concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Sanghadisesa offense at dawn and knows that he has committed an offense, but hesitates, not knowing whether he should conceal it. At sunrise he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealment for one night. Likewise, if at mealtime, midday, in the afternoon, at sunset, in the early part of the night, at midnight, or even at the end of the night he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day, this is called concealment for two periods during one night.

There is also a case of concealment: At dawn, a bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense without knowing that he has committed an offense. Only at sunrise does he realize that he has committed an offense, but he remains uncertain whether or not to conceal it. At mealtime, he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealing for one night. [432b] Likewise at midday, in the afternoon, at sunset, and at the beginning of the night.

At dawn, a bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense without knowing that he has committed an offense. Not until midnight does he realize that he has committed an offense, but he remains uncertain whether or not to conceal it. At the end of the night, he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealing for one night over three periods.

There is also a case of concealment: At dawn, a bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense without knowing that he has committed an offense. Not until mealtime does he realize that he has committed an offense, but he remains uncertain whether or not to conceal it. At midday, he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealing for one night. The same applies in the afternoon, at sunset, and at the beginning of the night.

At dawn, a bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense without knowing that he has committed an offense. Not until midnight does he realize that he has committed an offense, but he remains uncertain whether or not to conceal it. At the end of the night, he resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealing for one night over four periods.

There is also a case of concealment: At dawn, a bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense and knows that he has committed an offense. He deliberately conceals it, but at sunrise resolves not to conceal it. At the end of the night, he again resolves to conceal it until dawn the following day. This is called concealing for one night.

There is also a case of concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense and then, from behind a wall or across a ditch, in a dark place and speaking softly, states that another bhikkhu, giving that bhikkhu’s name, has committed a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense. This is not called disclosure, because he knowingly speaks falsely and commits a Pāyattika offense. This is called concealment.

A case of non-concealment: If, from a separated place or across a ditch, in a dark place and speaking softly, he gives another person’s name while disclosing that he himself has committed a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense, this is called disclosure; however, because it is deceitful, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

There is also a case of non-concealment: A bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense and, without being behind a wall, across a ditch, or in a dark place, without speaking softly, and without giving another person’s name, states his own name and declares that he has committed the offense. This is called non-concealment.

There is also a case of non-concealment: What is not an offense is perceived as an offense, and doubt arises; one is uncertain whether or not it should be concealed and uncertain about the night (?). If it is disclosed, this is called non-concealment.

There is also a case of non-concealment: One does not deliberately conceal the offense but has not yet been able to disclose it, and then either forgets, renounces the path, enters meditative concentration, or dies. This is called non-concealment.

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus:

– When a bhikkhu versed in the Vinaya releases someone from an offense, he should know when there is an offense and when there is no offense; he should know concealment and non-concealment; he should know disclosure and non-disclosure. He should know whether there is concealment without disclosure, disclosure without concealment, both concealment and disclosure, or neither concealment nor disclosure.

What is concealment without disclosure?

– A bhikkhu commits a Vinaya-transgression offense, knows that he has committed an offense, and deliberately conceals it, [432c] not telling another person. This is called concealment without disclosure.

What is disclosure without concealment?

– A bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, does not deliberately conceal it, and tells another person. This is called disclosure without concealment.

What is both concealment and disclosure?

– A bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, and intends to conceal it, but afterward tells another person. This is called both concealment and disclosure.

What is neither concealment nor disclosure?

– A bhikkhu commits a Saṃghāvaśeṣa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, and does not deliberately conceal it, but thinks: “I shall wait for the proper time, place, and person, and then confess in accordance with the Dharma.” This is called neither concealment nor disclosure.

THE PROCEDURE FOR SEPARATE RESIDENCE.

The Buddha said to the bhikkhus:

– When a bhikkhu versed in the Vinaya releases someone from an offense, he must know when there is an offense and when there is no offense; he must know concealment and non-concealment; he must know disclosure and non-disclosure; he must know when separate residence should be granted and when it should not be granted.

When should separate residence not be granted?

– When there is no offense, it should not be granted; when there has been no concealment, it should not be granted. When the offense is not determined, the concealment is not determined, the number of nights is not determined, and the person concerned neither requests nor asks for it, separate residence should not be granted.

When should separate residence be granted?

– When there is an offense, it should be granted; when there has been concealment, it should be granted. When it is certain that there was an offense, certain that it was concealed, certain that a night has elapsed, and the person concerned requests it, separate residence should be granted.

There is a granting of separate residence that is not in accordance with the Dharma, and a granting of separate residence that is in accordance with the Dharma.

What is a granting of separate residence that is not in accordance with the Dharma?

– The offense is not certain, the concealment is not certain, the number of nights is not certain, the person concerned neither requests nor asks for it, the Sangha is incomplete, the formal motion is incomplete, and the karma procedure is incomplete. This is called granting separate residence not in accordance with the Dharma.

What is a granting of separate residence that is in accordance with the Dharma?

– There is an offense, the offense is certain, the concealment is certain, the passing of the night is certain, the person concerned requests it, the Sangha is complete, the formal motion is complete, and the karma procedure is complete. If each of these is complete, this is called granting separate residence in accordance with the Dharma.

There is the practice of Parivāsa that is not in accordance with the Dharma, and the practice of Parivāsa that is in accordance with the Dharma.

What is the practice of Parivāsa that is not in accordance with the Dharma?

– There are no bhikkhus in residence at the monastery; during the course of the practice, he commits an offense and is found out; he shares the same room and the same partitioned space with another bhikkhu; when a visiting bhikkhu arrives, he does not make a declaration; when the Sangha assembles at the proper time, he makes a declaration, but when it assembles at an improper time, he does not. This is called practicing Parivāsa not in accordance with the Dharma.

What is the practice of Parivāsa that is in accordance with the Dharma?

– There are bhikkhus residing at the monastery; during the period of practicing Parivāsa, he does not offend again and is not formally charged with an offense; he stays in a separate room and in a separately partitioned space from other bhikkhus; when a visiting bhikkhu arrives, he makes a declaration; whenever the Sangha assembles, whether at the proper time or at an improper time, he makes a declaration. This is called practicing Parivāsa in accordance with the Dharma.

There are uninterrupted nights and interrupted nights.

What are uninterrupted nights?

– There are bhikkhus residing in the monastery, and whenever the Sangha assembles, whether at the proper time or at an improper time, he makes a declaration. These are called uninterrupted nights.

What are interrupted nights?

– There are no bhikkhus residing in the monastery, and whenever the Sangha assembles, whether at the proper time or at an improper time, he does not make a declaration. These are called [433a] interrupted nights.

Furthermore, there is committing an offense during the course of the practice and not committing an offense during the course of the practice.

What is called committing an offense during the course of the practice?

– After making disclosure, but before the Sangha has granted him permission to practice Parivāsa, he commits the offense again; or, while partway through practicing Parivāsa, he commits it again. This is called committing an offense during the course of the practice.

What is called not committing an offense during the course of the practice? - During that period, he does not commit the offense again. This is called not committing an offense during the course of the practice.

A bhikkhu undergoing Parivāsa should conduct himself in accordance with the following seven matters: 1) Matters concerning bhikkhus; 2) Matters concerning bhikkhunīs; 3) Matters concerning a retinue; 4) Matters concerning entering villages; 5) Performing burdensome duties for the Sangha; 6) Matters concerning receiving homage; 7) Matters concerning the royal household.

1/ What are matters concerning bhikkhus?

– He must not receive the homage of bhikkhus; must not speak of a bhikkhu’s offense; must not engage in discussions with bhikkhus; must not speak of a novice’s offense; must not reward or punish novices; must not engage in discussions with novices; must not act as a messenger for bhikkhus; must not enter a village walking ahead of, behind, or in the same line as bhikkhus; and when the Sangha assembles, he must not teach the Dharma on behalf of the community, except when he is living alone. These are called matters concerning bhikkhus.

2/ What are matters concerning bhikkhunīs?

– He must not receive the homage of bhikkhunīs; must not speak of a bhikkhunī’s offense; must not engage in discussions with bhikkhunīs; must not speak of the offenses of śikṣamāṇās or female novices; must not reward or punish śikṣamāṇās or female novices; must not engage in discussions with śikṣamāṇās or female novices; must not obstruct the bhikkhunīs’ Uposatha or invitation ceremony; must not stop bhikkhunīs outside the gate; and must not go to instruct bhikkhunīs—even if the Sangha had previously appointed him, he must not go. These are called matters concerning bhikkhunīs.

3/ What are matters concerning a retinue?

– He must not ordain anyone; must not confer full ordination upon anyone; must not accept another’s dependence or maintain a novice; must not accept the services of a bhikkhu; must not give scriptures to others; must not receive copies of scriptures from others; and when reciting scriptures, he must recite in a low voice. If he already has disciples, he should tell them to take dependence upon someone else and must sever familiar relations with them. These are called matters concerning a retinue.

4/ What are matters concerning entering villages?

– He must not enter a village too early or return too late; must not enter a village walking ahead of or behind the ranks of śramaṇas; must not visit the homes of familiar donors; must not stay in monasteries where there is no Sangha; when sitting or eating, he must remain in a place below that of the bhikkhus; must not send anyone to fetch food; and must not accompany those going to fetch food, except when it is his turn. These are called matters concerning entering villages.

5/ What does it mean to perform burdensome duties for the Sangha?

– Rising early in the morning, he should sweep the stupa, monastery grounds, and Sangha dwellings, bring water for the Sangha, and clean the Sangha’s places for urination and defecation. He should perform, according to his ability, all such tasks that can be done. He must not send his consent by proxy or receive another person’s consent by proxy, except when it is his turn. This is called performing burdensome duties for the Sangha.

6/ What are matters concerning receiving homage?

– [433b] He must not receive any form of homage; he must not receive either a motion followed by one proclamation or a motion followed by three proclamations. These are called matters concerning receiving homage.

7/ What are matters concerning the royal household?

– He must not rely upon the power of the king, ministers, householders, or violent men; must not disparage the Buddha, the Dharma, the Sangha, or the person performing the karman; he should reproach only himself and must not disparage others. These are called matters concerning the royal household.

A bhikkhu undergoing Parivāsa must observe these seven matters. This is called conducting oneself in accordance with the discipline. If he does not do so, it is called failing to conduct himself in accordance with the discipline.

THE PROCEDURE FOR MĀNATTA.

Furthermore, there are cases in which Mānatta should not be granted and cases in which Mānatta should be granted.

When should Mānatta not be granted?

– If there is no offense, it should not be granted; if the offense was concealed but the procedure of separate residence has not yet been granted, it should not be granted; if part was concealed and part was not concealed, it should not be granted; if the offense has not been determined, the concealment has not been determined, or the number of nights has not been determined, it should not be granted; if the Parivāsa has not been determined, it should not be granted. If the person concerned does not seek or request it, Mānatta should not be granted.

When should Mānatta be granted?

– When there is an offense, it was concealed, and the Parivāsa has been completed; when the offense has been determined, the concealment has been determined, the number of nights has been determined, the Parivāsa has been determined, and the person concerned requests it, Mānatta should be granted. There are, however, two cases: granting it contrary to the Dharma and granting it in accordance with the Dharma.

What is granting it contrary to the Dharma?

– If there is no offense, and so forth, up to the person concerned neither seeking nor requesting it; if the assembly is incomplete, the motion is incomplete, or the karman is incomplete—if any single requisite is incomplete, it is called granting it contrary to the Dharma.

What is granting it in accordance with the Dharma?

– When there is an offense, and so forth, up to the person concerned seeking and requesting it; when the assembly is complete, the motion is complete, and the karman is complete—when every requisite is complete, it is called granting it in accordance with the Dharma.

Incomplete observance of Mānatta and complete observance of Mānatta.

What is incomplete observance of Mānatta?

– If the Sangha does not have the required number of members, it is not called observing Mānatta; if midway through it he commits another offense and is formally charged with it; if he stays together with a bhikkhu in the same room or in the same screened enclosure; if he does not make a declaration to visiting bhikkhus; if he does not make a declaration when the Sangha assembles at the proper time or at an improper time; or if each day he does not make a declaration to the Sangha within the boundary—this is called incomplete observance of Mānatta.

What is complete observance of Mānatta?

– The Sangha has the required number of members; midway through it he does not commit another offense and is not formally charged with one; he does not stay together with another bhikkhu in the same room or in the same screened enclosure; when visiting bhikkhus arrive, he makes a declaration to them; when the Sangha assembles at the proper time or at an improper time, he makes a declaration; and each day he makes a declaration to the Sangha within the boundary. This is called complete observance of Mānatta.

Interrupted nights—the six nights of Mānatta—and uninterrupted nights.

What are interrupted nights?

– If, during the six nights of Mānatta, the Sangha does not have the required number of members, and so forth, up to his failing each day to make a declaration to the Sangha within the boundary, this is called an interruption of the six nights of Mānatta.

What are six uninterrupted nights of Mānatta?

– If, during the six nights of Mānatta, the Sangha has the required number of members, and so forth, up to his making a declaration each day to the Sangha within the boundary, these are called uninterrupted nights of Mānatta.

Committing an offense midway through and not committing an offense midway through.

What is committing an offense midway through?

– Committing an offense during the period before the Mānatta procedure is granted; committing an offense while Mānatta is being granted; or committing an offense during the period when it is nearly completed—this is called committing an offense midway through.

What is not committing an offense midway through?

– When none of the matters listed above occurs, this is called not committing an offense midway through.

A bhikkhu observing Mānatta [433c] must conduct himself in accordance with the seven matters explained above. This is called Mānatta. The bhikkhu must conduct himself in accordance with them; if he does not observe them, it is called failing to conduct himself in accordance with the discipline.

THE PROCEDURE FOR RELEASE FROM AN OFFENSE.

There are cases in which release from an offense should not be granted and cases in which release from an offense should be granted.

Cases in which it should not be granted:

– If there is no offense, it should not be granted; if the offense was concealed and the procedure of separate residence has not yet been granted, it should not be granted; if the observance of Mānatta has not been completed, it should not be granted; if Mānatta has not yet been observed, it should not be granted; if part of the offense was concealed and part was not concealed, it should not be granted; if the offense has not been determined, the concealment has not been determined, the number of nights has not been determined, the separate residence has not been determined, the Mānatta has not been determined, or the person concerned neither seeks nor requests it, release from the offense should not be granted.

Cases in which it should be granted:

– If there is an offense, it should be granted; if the offense was concealed, probation should be granted, and after the mānatta practice has been completed, it should be granted; if it was not concealed, after the mānatta practice has been completed, it should be granted; when the offense is established, the concealment is established, the number of nights is established, the probation is established, the mānatta is established, and the person concerned makes the request, rehabilitation from the offense should be granted.

Rehabilitation granted in accordance with the Dharma and rehabilitation granted not in accordance with the Dharma.

Rehabilitation granted not in accordance with the Dharma:

– When there is no offense, it should not be granted, and so forth through the assembly being incomplete, the motion being incomplete, and the karma procedure being incomplete. If any one of these is incomplete, this is called rehabilitation granted not in accordance with the Dharma.

Rehabilitation granted in accordance with the Dharma:

– When there is an offense and it is a case in which rehabilitation should be granted, and so forth through the assembly being complete, the motion being complete, and the karma procedure being complete. If every matter is complete, this is called rehabilitation granted in accordance with the Dharma.

The case of concealment in common:

– On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense. He knows that he has committed an offense but does not deliberately conceal it. Likewise, on the second, third, and so forth through the tenth day, he knows in every case that there is an offense, and then deliberately conceals them until dawn the following day. These are ten offenses. Since all these offenses share a single night of concealment, ten separate probation karma procedures, ten separate rehabilitations from the offenses, should be performed; yet it is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called concealment in common.

There is another case of concealment in common:

On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, but does not deliberately conceal it. Likewise, on the second day he commits two offenses, on the third day three offenses, and so forth until, on the tenth day, he commits ten Sanghadisesa offenses. He knows in every case that he has committed an offense and deliberately conceals them all until dawn the following day.

These are called fifty-five Sanghadisesa offenses. Since they all share a single night of concealment, fifty-five probation karma procedures, fifty-five mānattas, and fifty-five rehabilitations from the offenses should be performed; yet it is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called concealment in common.

There is another case of concealment in common:

– On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense but does not know [434a] that he has committed an offense. Likewise, on the second, third, and so forth through the tenth day, he comes to know in every case that he has committed an offense and deliberately conceals them all until dawn the following day. These are ten offenses sharing a single night of concealment, and so forth... It is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called concealment in common.

There is another case of concealment in common:

On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense, but does not know that he has committed an offense and has no intention of concealing it. This continues until, on the tenth day, he commits ten Sanghadisesa offenses. He then knows in every case that he has committed an offense and deliberately conceals them until dawn the following day. These fifty-five offenses all share a single night of concealment, and so forth... It is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called concealment in common.

The case of differing concealments:

– On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, and deliberately conceals it. On the second day, he tells another person and then commits another Sanghadisesa offense. This continues until, on the tenth day, he tells another person and then commits another offense; he knows that he has committed an offense but deliberately conceals it until the eleventh day, when he tells another person. Thus, each of these ten Sanghadisesa offenses has a distinct single night of concealment. Therefore, ten probation karma procedures, ten mānattas, and ten rehabilitations from the offenses should be performed; yet it is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called differing concealments.

There is another case of differing concealments: On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, and deliberately conceals it. On the second day, he tells another person and then again commits offenses in this manner, until on the tenth day he commits ten Sanghadisesa offenses, knows that he has committed offenses, and deliberately conceals them; on the eleventh day, he tells another person.

Each of these fifty-five Sanghadisesa offenses has a distinct single night of concealment. Therefore, fifty-five probation karma procedures, fifty-five mānattas, and fifty-five rehabilitations from the offenses should be performed; yet it is also permissible to perform one probation karma procedure, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses. This is called the case of differing concealments.

The case of immeasurable concealment:

One may remember the offenses but not remember the number of nights; remember the number of nights but not remember the offenses; remember both the offenses and the number of nights; or remember neither the offenses nor the number of nights.

1/ Remembering the offenses but not the number of nights: One remembers whether the offenses committed were many or few, but does not remember how many nights there were.

2/ Remembering the number of nights but not the offenses: One remembers how many nights there were, but does not remember whether the offenses were many or few.

3/ Remembering both the offenses and the number of nights: One remembers whether the number of offenses was many or few and also remembers how many nights there were.

4/ Remembering neither the offenses nor the number of nights: One does not remember whether the offenses committed were many or few, nor does one remember how many nights there were.

In the case of remembering the offenses but not remembering the number of nights, one should ask:

– When did you commit the offenses? [433b] Was it before you had completed one rains-retreat year?

If the person concerned remains silent, the probation procedure should be granted according to the number of years since his ordination.

– If he answers, “It was not so,” then one should continue asking: “Was it when you had completed one year? Two years? Five years?” The probation procedure should be granted according to the point at which he remains silent. This is the case of remembering the offenses but not remembering the number of nights.

In the case of remembering the number of nights but not remembering the offenses, the probation procedure for immeasurable offenses should be granted according to whether the number of nights was many or few. This is called remembering the nights but not remembering the offenses.

In the case of remembering both the offenses and the nights, once one remembers whether the offenses were many or few, the probation procedure should be granted according to the number of nights remembered. This is called remembering both the offenses and the nights.

In the case of remembering neither the offenses nor the nights, one should ask: “Did you commit the offenses before you had completed one rains-retreat year?”

If he remains silent, the probation procedure for immeasurable offenses should be granted according to the number of years.

If he answers, “It was not so,” then one should continue asking: “Was it before you had completed one rains-retreat year, or after one year, two, three, four, or five years?”

At whatever point he remains silent, the probation procedure for immeasurable offenses should be granted for that period. This is called immeasurable concealment.

Concealment in common, differing concealments, and immeasurable concealment—these three kinds are all called concealment.

Separate concealments:

On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghadisesa offense, knows that he has committed an offense, deliberately conceals it, and does not tell another person. On the second day, he commits another offense, knows that he has committed an offense, deliberately conceals it, and does not tell another person. This continues until, on the tenth day, he commits another offense, knows that he has committed an offense, deliberately conceals it, and does not tell another person.

Each of these ten offenses is concealed separately. The final offense has only one night of concealment; proceeding backward in this way, there are two nights, three nights, and so forth, until the first offense has ten nights of concealment. Therefore, ten probation karma procedures, ten mānattas, and ten rehabilitations from the offenses should be performed; yet it is also permissible to perform one probation, one mānatta, and one rehabilitation from the offenses.

There is also the case of separate concealment: On the first day of the month, a bhikkhu commits one Sanghavasesa offense. Knowing that he has committed an offense, he deliberately conceals it and does not tell another person. Each day thereafter, through the tenth day, he commits one Sanghavasesa offense.

Knowing that he has committed the offenses, he deliberately conceals them and does not tell another person. Among these fifty-five instances of concealment, each offense is concealed separately; however, the final offense is concealed for only one night, the preceding one for two nights, the one before that for three nights, and so forth, counting backward until the first offense, making a total of fifty-five nights of concealment.

Therefore, he should be given the karman procedure for fifty-five nights of separate residence, fifty-five Manattas, and fifty-five restorations from the offenses. Yet he may also be given a single period of separate residence, a single Manatta, and a single restoration from the offenses. This is called separate concealment.

Both joint concealment and separate concealment are called concealment.

Tỉ-xá-già-cước:

There may be many offenses but not many nights; or many nights but not many offenses; or both many offenses and many nights; or neither many offenses nor many nights.

1/ A case of many offenses but not many nights: A bhikkhu commits Sanghavasesa offenses throughout the day. Knowing that he has committed offenses, he goes and tells another person. This is called many offenses but not many nights.

2/ A case of many nights, [434c] but not many offenses: A bhikkhu commits one Sanghavasesa offense. Knowing that he has committed an offense, he deliberately conceals it and does not go and tell another person. This is called many nights but not many offenses.

3/ A case of both many offenses and many nights: A bhikkhu commits Sanghavasesa offenses every day. Knowing that he has offenses, he conceals half and discloses half. This is called both many offenses and many nights.

4/ A case of neither many offenses nor many nights: A bhikkhu commits a Sanghavasesa offense. Knowing that he has an offense, he does not deliberately conceal it but goes and tells another person, and thereafter commits no further offense. This is called neither many offenses nor many nights.

Here, in the two cases of many offenses but not many nights, and both many offenses and many nights, while the bhikkhu is undergoing Parivasa, he should be given little food and made to do much work. If he deliberately refuses to desist, the attendant should be told to bind his hands and feet, place him upon a bed, and then say: “If you offend again, the Sangha will discipline you even more severely.” This is called Tỉ-xá-già-cước.

There may be offenses combined but not nights combined; or nights combined but not offenses combined; or both offenses and nights combined; or neither offenses nor nights combined:

1/ Offenses combined but not nights combined: A bhikkhu commits ten Sanghavasesa offenses, concealing each of them for ten nights. The Sangha combines them and performs the karman procedure granting one hundred nights of separate residence.

The bhikkhu then says: “Venerable ones, I am ill and weak and cannot endure this. May I undertake an abbreviated form of Parivasa?” The Sangha should say: “You may,” and then perform the karman procedure combining the one hundred nights of separate residence into ten nights of separate residence. This is called offenses combined but not nights combined.

2/ Nights combined but not offenses combined: A bhikkhu commits ten Sanghavasesa offenses, concealing each of them for ten nights. The Sangha combines them and grants ten nights of separate residence. The bhikkhu then says: “Venerable ones, I feel ashamed and wish to undertake the full Parivasa.” The Sangha should say: “You may.” This is called nights combined but not offenses combined.

3/ Both offenses and nights combined: A bhikkhu commits ten Sanghavasesa offenses, concealing each of them for ten nights. The Sangha combines them and grants ten nights of separate residence. This is called both offenses and nights combined.

4/ Neither offenses nor nights combined: As in the preceding case, but a separate karman procedure for Parivasa is performed for every offense. This is called neither offenses nor nights combined.

THE MAHASANGHIKA VINAYA

End of the Twenty-Fifth Fascicle