摩訶僧祇律

CLARIFICATION OF THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE NINETEEN SANGHADISESA RULES

12—RULE: ENCOURAGING ANOTHER TO DO WHAT IS CONTRARY TO THE DHARMA.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Rajagriha, the Blessed One had established a rule forbidding bhiksunis from accepting robes, bowls, food and drink, or medicine for treating illness from a man whose mind was defiled by lust. Therefore, the bhiksuni Tho-De did not accept the robe offered by a householder. The bhiksuni Thau-lan-nan-da then asked Tho-De: “Why do you not take what this man is offering? Whether or not the man’s mind is defiled has nothing to do with you. So long as your own mind is undefiled, you may take it and use it as appropriate.”

The bhiksunis admonished that bhiksuni, saying: “Do not say: ‘Whether or not the man’s mind is defiled has nothing to do with you. So long as your own mind is undefiled, you may take it and use it as appropriate.’” They admonished her in this way a second and a third time, but she still would not desist.

The bhiksunis then reported the matter to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati in turn went and reported it to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that bhiksuni to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Did you truly do this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is contrary to the Dharma. Why did you tell another to accept an offering from a person whose mind was defiled by lust? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati to command all the bhiksunis residing in the city of Rajagriha to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni says to another bhiksuni: “(521c) You should accept this man’s offering. Whether or not his mind is defiled has nothing to do with you. So long as your own mind is undefiled, you should take it and use it as appropriate,” the bhiksunis should admonish that bhiksuni, saying: “Do not say: ‘You should accept that offering. Whether or not that man’s mind is defiled has nothing to do with you. So long as your own mind is undefiled, you should take it and use it as appropriate.’” After she has been admonished in this way a second and a third time, if she desists, that is good; if she does not desist, she commits an initial Sanghadisesa offense.

Explanation:

The bhiksuni who spoke those words: This refers to the bhiksuni Thau-lan-nan-da.

Accepting an offering: This refers to the bhiksuni Tho-De.

When the bhiksunis admonish that bhiksuni to desist from such conduct, but she does not desist and is admonished through all three stages, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense. Therefore, the Blessed One spoke as above.

13—RULE: BASELESSLY SLANDERING THE SANGHA.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Rajagriha, there were those who supported a person seeking to divide the Sangha, as has been fully explained in the rules for bhiksus. Therefore, the Blessed One said: “If a bhiksuni wishes to disrupt the harmony of the Sangha, devising means and persistently pursuing actions that divide the Sangha and give rise to disputes, the bhiksunis should say to that bhiksuni: ‘Venerable one!

Do not disrupt the harmony of the Sangha by devising means and persistently pursuing actions that divide the Sangha and give rise to disputes. Instead, you should remain in harmony with the Sangha. Why is this?

When the Sangha is harmonious, joyful, free from disputes, training together in one body of precepts, mingled like water and milk, and speaking in accordance with the Dharma, it dwells in happiness.’

“If that bhiksuni is admonished by the other bhiksunis but persists and refuses to desist, they should admonish her a second and a third time. After she has been admonished three times, if she desists, that is good; if she does not desist and has been admonished through all three stages, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

“If, when the bhiksunis admonish the bhiksuni who is dividing the Sangha, there are other bhiksunis who agree with and support her—whether one, two, or many—and who speak together and voice their opposition with one accord, saying: ‘Venerable one, please do not speak of that bhiksuni as being good or bad. Why is this? That bhiksuni speaks in accordance with the Dharma and in accordance with the Vinaya.

Whatever that bhiksuni says pleases us. Her views are acceptable, and we all accept them. That bhiksuni speaks because she knows; she does not speak without knowing,’ then the bhiksunis should admonish those consenting bhiksunis, saying: ‘Venerable ones, do not claim that the other bhiksuni speaks in accordance with the Dharma and in accordance with the Vinaya.

Why is this? That bhiksuni speaks contrary to the Dharma and contrary to the Vinaya. Venerable ones, do not support the division of the Sangha; instead, you should gladly support the harmony of the Sangha.

Why is this? When the Sangha is harmonious, joyful, free from disputes, training together in one body of precepts, mingled like water and milk, and speaking in accordance with the Dharma, it dwells in happiness.’

“When the bhiksunis admonish those bhiksunis (522a), but they persist and refuse to desist, they should admonish them a second and a third time. If they desist, that is good; if they do not desist and continue to be admonished through all three stages, they commit a Sanghadisesa offense.”

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhiksuni Thau-lan-nan-da became involved in a dispute. The Sangha performed a formal act against her, finding her at fault in accordance with the Dharma and the Vinaya. But after the formal act had been performed, she became angry and baselessly slandered the Sangha, saying: “The venerable Sangha acts out of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion; the Sangha passes judgment because of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion. This is a judgment contrary to the Dharma.”

The bhiksunis admonished that bhiksuni, saying: “Venerable one! Do not baselessly slander the Sangha. The Sangha does not act out of partiality, anger, fear, or delusion; nor does the Sangha pass judgments contrary to the Dharma because of partiality, anger, fear, or delusion.” They admonished her in this way a second and a third time, but she still would not desist.

The bhiksunis then reported the matter to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati in turn went and reported it to the Blessed One. The Buddha taught: “Go and admonish her three times in private, three times before a group, and three times in the midst of the Sangha, so that she may desist from such conduct.

When admonishing her in private, ask: ‘Is it true that, becoming angry, you baselessly slandered the Sangha by saying: “The Sangha acts out of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion; the Sangha passes judgment because of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion”?’ If she answers, ‘It is true,’ then admonish her in private as follows: ‘Do not become angry and baselessly slander the Sangha, for the Sangha does not act out of partiality, anger, fear, or delusion; nor does the Sangha pass unreasonable judgments because of partiality, anger, fear, or delusion.

I now admonish you out of loving-kindness, wishing to benefit you. The first admonition is complete, and two admonitions remain. Will you desist from such conduct?’ If she answers, ‘I will not desist,’ continue to admonish her a second and a third time in the same way.

Likewise, admonish her before a group in the same manner.

“Then, in the midst of the Sangha, perform the formal act by making a motion seeking the Sangha’s consent:

– May the venerable Sangha listen. The bhiksuni Thau-lan-nan-da became angry and baselessly slandered the Sangha, saying: ‘The Sangha acts out of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion; the Sangha passes judgment because of partiality, anger, fear, and delusion.’ The Sangha has admonished her three times in private and three times before a group so that she might desist from such conduct, but she has not desisted. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha will now also admonish her three times.”

Then she should be questioned in the midst of the Sangha: “Is it true that, having become angry without cause, you disparaged the Sangha, saying: ‘The Sangha acts according to affection, anger, fear, and delusion,’ even going so far as to say, ‘This judgment is contrary to the Dharma’; and although the Sangha admonished you three times in private and three times before many people, you still did not desist?” If she answers, “That is true,” she should be admonished in the midst of the Sangha as follows: “Do not become angry without cause and disparage the Sangha, for the Sangha does not act according to affection, anger, fear, or delusion, nor does it render judgments unreasonably.

The Sangha now wishes, out of loving-kindness, to bring you benefit; you should heed the Sangha’s words. The first admonition has been completed, and two admonitions remain. Will you relinquish this conduct?” But she answers, “I will not relinquish it.” The Sangha then admonishes her a second and a third time, yet (522b) she still does not desist.

The bhikkhunis then reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that bhikkhuni to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha questioned her fully about the events described above:

– Is it true that you did this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– Thullanandā, this is contrary to the Dharma. Have you not heard Me use countless skillful means to censure obstinacy and praise gentleness? Why are you so obstinate? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to My teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.

Then the Buddha instructed Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī to order all the bhikkhunis residing in the city of Śrāvastī to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If a bhikkhuni, becoming angry without cause, disparages the Sangha as follows: “The Sangha acts according to affection, anger, fear, and delusion; the Sangha reproves others because of affection, anger, fear, and delusion,” the bhikkhunis should admonish that bhikkhuni, saying: “Venerable one, do not say that the Sangha acts according to affection, anger, fear, and delusion, or that the Sangha acts because of affection, anger, fear, and delusion.

Why is this? Because the Sangha does not act according to affection, anger, fear, or delusion. Do not become angry without cause and disparage the Sangha.” If, when the bhikkhunis admonish that bhikkhuni, she persists and does not desist, they should admonish her a second and a third time.

If she desists, that is good. If she does not desist after being admonished through all three stages, she commits a Saṅghādisesa offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhuni: This refers to a bhikkhuni such as Thullanandā, who became angry without cause and disparaged the Sangha.

Admonished three times in private without desisting: With each admonition, she commits one Vinaya-transgression offense; the same applies when she is admonished before many people.

When admonished in the midst of the Sangha, at the beginning of the first admonition she commits a Vinaya-transgression offense, and when that admonition is completed she commits a Thullaccaya offense. At the beginning of the second admonition, she likewise commits a Vinaya-transgression offense, and when that admonition is completed she commits a Thullaccaya offense. At the beginning of the third admonition she commits a Thullaccaya offense, and when that admonition is completed she commits a Saṅghādisesa offense.

The Saṅghādisesa offense is constituted through the three stages of admonition in private, before many people, and in the midst of the Sangha, comprising all the Vinaya-transgression and Thullaccaya offenses—except for the eight Thullaccaya offenses incurred through disparaging the Sangha—which are combined into a single Saṅghādisesa offense for disciplinary action. If the procedure is halted midway, she is disciplined according to the stage at which it was halted.

Therefore, the Blessed One said the foregoing.

14- RULE: CONCEALING EACH OTHER’S TRANSGRESSIONS.

When the Buddha was staying at Kauśāmbī, the bhikkhuni who was Chanda’s mother was instructed by the bhikkhunis, in accordance with the Dharma and the Vinaya, that she must train and not commit offenses. She then made herself into someone to whom no one could speak, as explained in detail in the account of the obstinate Chanda. And further: If a bhikkhuni speaks obstinately and, when other bhikkhunis instruct her in accordance with the Dharma and the Vinaya, stubbornly says, “Do not tell me what is good or bad.

I also will not tell you what is good or bad,” the bhikkhunis should admonish that bhikkhuni as follows: “(522c) Venerable one! When bhikkhunis who dwell together in the true Dharma instruct you in accordance with the Dharma and the Vinaya, do not be obstinate, but heed their words. You, in turn, should also instruct the other bhikkhunis in accordance with the Dharma and the Vinaya.

Why is this? Because when the disciples of the Tathagata instruct one another, admonish one another, and help one another emerge from offenses, wholesome qualities increase.”

If, when the bhikkhunis admonish that bhikkhuni, she persists and does not desist, they should admonish her a second and a third time. If she relinquishes that conduct, that is good. If she does not relinquish it after being admonished through all three stages, she commits a Saṅghādisesa offense, as explained in detail in the corresponding rule for bhikkhus. Therefore, the foregoing is stated.

When the Buddha was staying in the city of Śrāvastī, there were two bhikkhunis. The first was named Candana and was a daughter of the Śākya clan; the second was named Uttarā. The two were habitually intimate in body, habitually intimate in speech, habitually intimate in both body and speech, and habitually concealed each other’s transgressions.

Habitually intimate in body: They slept in the same bed, sat on the same seat, ate from the same bowl, shared the same clothing, and always went about together.

Habitually intimate in speech: They spoke with defiled minds and concealed each other’s offenses. When one committed an offense, the other concealed it; when the other committed an offense, the first concealed it.

Habitually intimate in both body and speech: This comprises both physical and verbal intimacy.

The bhikkhunis admonished them, saying: “Venerable ones, do not be habitually intimate in body, habitually intimate in speech, or habitually intimate in both body and speech, and do not conceal each other’s transgressions. Why is this? Because when you behave in this way, wholesome qualities do not arise.” They admonished them once, twice, and three times, but the two bhikkhunis still did not desist. The bhikkhunis then told Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī. Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, in turn, presented the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered the bhikkhunis to be summoned. When they arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is it true that you did this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is improper conduct. Why do you maintain physical and verbal intimacy and conceal each other’s offenses? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to My teaching. Such conduct cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.

Then the Buddha instructed Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī to order all the bhikkhunis residing in the city of Śrāvastī to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If two bhikkhunis live in intimacy and conceal each other’s offenses, the bhikkhunis should admonish them, saying: “Venerable ones, do not live in intimacy or conceal each other’s offenses. When you live in intimacy, wholesome qualities do not arise.”

If the bhikkhunis admonish those two bhikkhunis in this way but they persist and do not desist, they should admonish them a second and a third time. If they relinquish that conduct, that is good. If they do not relinquish it after being admonished through all three stages, they commit a Saṅghādisesa offense.

15- RULE: ENCOURAGING THOSE WHO LIVE IN AN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, after the Blessed One had established the precept prohibiting close association, the two bhiksunis Candana, daughter of the Sakyan clan, and Uttara each lived in a separate place. (523a) At that time, Bhiksuni Sthulananda urged them: “Venerable ones, you may continue living in close association and concealing one another’s offenses; do not live apart. Living in this way does not hinder the arising of wholesome qualities. Others also live in close association in this way, yet the Sangha cannot prevent them. It is only because the Sangha looks down upon you that it has imposed this prohibition.”

The bhiksunis admonished Bhiksuni Sthulananda: “Venerable one, do not say: ‘You may continue living in close association and concealing one another’s offenses; do not live apart. Doing so does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities. It is only because the Sangha looks down upon you that it has imposed this prohibition.’”

The bhiksunis admonished Sthulananda in this way once, twice, and three times, but she still would not desist. Therefore, they reported the matter to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati, in turn, went and reported it to the Blessed One. The Buddha then taught: “Although the two bhiksunis Candana, daughter of the Sakyan clan, and Uttara live apart, Bhiksuni Sthulananda urges them to live close together, saying that living in this way does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities. She should therefore be admonished three times in private, three times before several persons, and three times in the midst of the Sangha so that she will abandon this conduct. When admonishing her in private, one should say:

“‘Sthulananda, is it true that you urged the bhiksunis Candana and Uttara, saying: “You may continue living in close association and concealing one another’s offenses; do not live apart. Doing so does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities. Others also live in close association in this way, yet the Sangha cannot prevent them. It is only because the Sangha looks down upon you that it has imposed this prohibition”?’

“If she answers, ‘It is indeed so,’ she should be admonished: ‘Do not say: “Live in close association and conceal one another’s offenses; do not live apart. Doing so does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities. Others also live in close association in this way, yet the Sangha cannot prevent them.

It is only because the Sangha looks down upon you that it has imposed this prohibition.” I now admonish you out of loving-kindness and for your benefit. The first admonition is complete, and two admonitions remain. Will you abandon this conduct?’ If she answers, ‘I will not abandon it,’ she should be admonished a second and a third time, and she should then be admonished in the same way before several persons.

If she still does not desist, a motion requesting the Sangha’s consent should be made in the midst of the Sangha as follows:

– May the venerable Sangha listen. Bhiksuni Sthulananda urged Bhiksuni Candana, daughter of the Sakyan clan, and Bhiksuni Uttara, saying: ‘You may continue living in close association and concealing one another’s offenses, for doing so does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities.’ She was admonished three times in private and three times before several persons, but did not desist. If the time is appropriate for the Sangha, the Sangha will now admonish her three times so that she will abandon this conduct.

“Then, in the midst of the Sangha, Sthulananda should be asked: ‘Is it true that you urged those two to live in close association, and that the Sangha admonished you, saying: “The Sangha now admonishes you out of loving-kindness and for your benefit. The first admonition is complete, and two admonitions remain. Will you abandon this conduct?” Yet you answered, “I will not abandon it”; and although you were admonished a second and a third time, you still did not desist?’”

The bhiksunis then went and reported this matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered Sthulananda to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– (523b) Is this true?

– It is indeed true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper act.

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati to command all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

— If a bhiksuni sees other bhiksunis living apart and urges them, saying: “Live close together and conceal one another’s offenses; do not live apart. Doing so does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities. Others also live close together in this way, yet the Sangha cannot prevent them.

It is only because the Sangha looks down upon you that it has imposed this prohibition,” the bhiksunis should admonish that bhiksuni, saying: “Venerable one, such-and-such bhiksunis live apart. Do not urge them to live close together and conceal one another’s offenses, saying that living close together does not hinder the growth of wholesome qualities, that others also live close together yet the Sangha cannot prevent them, and that it is only because the Sangha looks down upon them that it has imposed this prohibition upon them.”

When the bhiksunis admonish that bhiksuni and she persists and refuses to desist, they should admonish her a second and a third time. If she desists, that is good. If she does not desist and has been admonished through all three stages, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

Explanation:

Living apart: As in the case of Candana, daughter of the Sakyan clan, and Bhiksuni Uttara.

Urging: As in the case of Bhiksuni Sthulananda urging those two.

Living in close association: Bodily close association, verbal close association, or bodily and verbal close association.

Concealing: When the body or speech of one person is at fault, the other conceals it; and when the body or speech of the other person is at fault, the first conceals it.

That bhiksuni: As in the case of Bhiksuni Sthulananda.

The bhiksunis: The Sangha, several persons, or one person.

Three admonitions: Three admonitions in private, three admonitions before several persons, and three admonitions in the midst of the Sangha. When admonishing her in private, one should ask: “Is it true that you urged such-and-such bhiksunis not to live apart?” If she answers, “It is indeed so,” she should be admonished: “Venerable one, do not act in this way. Such-and-such bhiksunis live apart; do not tell them to live close together.” If she does not desist after being admonished once, and still does not desist after being admonished a second and a third time, she must then be admonished in the same way before several persons. Finally, she is to be admonished three times in the midst of the Sangha. If she does not desist after the three admonitions, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

Sanghadisesa: As explained above.

If a bhiksuni is admonished three times in private, she commits one Vinaya transgression with each admonition. When she is admonished before several persons, she likewise commits one Vinaya transgression with each admonition. When she is admonished in the midst of the Sangha, at the beginning of the first admonition she commits a Vinaya transgression; upon completion of that admonition, she commits a Thullaccaya offense.

At the beginning of the second admonition, she commits a Vinaya transgression; upon completion of that admonition, she commits a Thullaccaya offense. At the beginning of the third admonition, she commits a Thullaccaya offense; upon completion of that admonition, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense. The Sanghadisesa offense is constituted after the admonitions in private, before several persons, and in the midst of the Sangha; all the Vinaya transgressions and Thullaccaya offenses are combined into a single (523c) Sanghadisesa offense.

If the proceedings are discontinued midway, she is dealt with for the offense reached at the point where they were discontinued. Therefore, it is stated as above.

16—PRECEPT: ANGRILY RENOUNCING THE PRECEPTS.

When the Buddha was dwelling at the monastery of the Sakyan clan, beneath the Nigrodha tree in Kapilavastu, at that time a mother and daughter of the Sakyan clan had both gone forth. The mother had gone forth among the non-Buddhist ascetics and said to her daughter:

– Why should we, mother and daughter, live apart from one another now? You should come and live here with me.

– I cannot come there without a reason. I must wait until some circumstance arises before I can come.

Then she returned and, feigning anger, quarreled with another bhikkhuni, saying: "Now I abandon the Buddha, abandon the Dharma, abandon the Sangha, abandon the recitation of the precepts, abandon communal living and communal eating, and abandon the scriptures and treatises. I am not a bhikkhuni, nor am I of the Sakyan clan. Among the non-Buddhist ascetics there is also a supreme Dharma and a place where the holy life may be practiced. Why should I be a female renunciant of the Sakyan clan? I shall go to the non-Buddhist ascetics and practice the holy life there."

The bhikkhunis then admonished that bhikkhuni, saying: "Venerable sister, do not abandon the Buddha, abandon the Dharma, or abandon the Sangha; do not abandon the Sakyan clan. To abandon the Buddha is not good, and even to abandon the Sakyan clan is not good." They admonished her a first time, but she did not desist; they admonished her a second time and then a third time, but she still did not desist.

The bhikkhunis then reported the matter to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati brought the matter before the Blessed One and reported it in full. The Buddha instructed: "First go to a secluded place and admonish her three times; then admonish her three times in the presence of many people; and then admonish her three times in the midst of the Sangha so that she will desist from that conduct.

When admonishing her in a secluded place, you should ask: 'Is it true that, in anger, you said: I abandon the precepts, abandon the Buddha, and so forth, up to saying: Why should I be a female renunciant of the Sakyan clan? I shall go to another, most excellent place to practice the holy life? Is this true?' If she answers: 'It is indeed true,' you should admonish her: 'Do not abandon the precepts, abandon the Buddha, abandon the Dharma, abandon the Sangha, or even abandon the female renunciants of the Sakyan clan.

For abandoning the Buddha is not good, and abandoning the female renunciants of the Sakyan clan is also not good. Out of loving-kindness and wishing you benefit, I now admonish you. The first admonition is complete, and two admonitions remain.

Will you desist from that conduct?' If she answers: 'I will not desist,' she should be admonished a second and a third time in the same way. She should likewise be admonished in the presence of many people. If she still does not desist, go into the midst of the Sangha, perform the jnapti-karman, and question her as in the secluded place." Yet she remained resolute and would not desist.

The bhikkhunis then brought the matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that bhikkhuni to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha questioned her fully concerning the foregoing matter:

– Did you actually do this?

– It is indeed true, Blessed One!

– This is an evil deed, contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. Such conduct cannot cause wholesome qualities to increase.

The Buddha then told Mahaprajapati to issue an order that all the bhikkhunis dwelling in Kapilavastu should assemble, and that even those who had heard it before should hear it again:

-- If a bhikkhuni, becoming angry, wishes to abandon the (524a) precepts and says: "I abandon the Buddha, abandon the Dharma, abandon the Sangha, abandon the recitation of the precepts, abandon communal living and communal eating, abandon the scriptures and treatises, and abandon the female renunciants of the Sakyan clan. Why should I be a female renunciant of the Sakyan clan? Elsewhere there is also a most excellent Dharma.

I shall go there to practice the holy life," the bhikkhunis should admonish that bhikkhuni, saying: "Venerable sister, do not become angry and abandon the precepts, saying that you abandon the Buddha, up to abandoning the female renunciants of the Sakyan clan; for abandoning the Buddha is not good." If, when admonished in this way by the bhikkhunis, she persists and does not desist, she should be admonished a second and a third time.

If she desists, that is good; if she does not desist after being fully admonished on all three occasions, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhuni: A woman of the Sakyan clan who wishes to abandon the precepts, abandon the Buddha, and so forth, up to abandoning the female renunciants.

The bhikkhunis: One person, many people, or the Sangha.

Three admonitions: The occasion in a secluded place, the occasion in the presence of many people, and the occasion before the Sangha. If she desists, that is good; if she does not desist after the three admonitions, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

(Some terms above have already been explained.)

If she desists when admonished in a secluded place, that is good. If she does not desist, she commits one Vinaya transgression with each admonition. The same applies when she is admonished in the presence of many people.

When she is admonished in the midst of the Sangha, at the commencement of the first admonition she commits a Vinaya transgression; when that admonition is completed, she commits a Sthulatyaya offense. At the commencement of the second admonition, she likewise commits a Vinaya transgression; when that admonition is completed, she commits a Sthulatyaya offense. At the commencement of the third admonition, she commits a Sthulatyaya offense; when that admonition is completed, she commits a Sanghadisesa offense.

The Sanghadisesa offense begins with the admonition in a secluded place and continues through the admonition in the presence of many people and the admonition in the midst of the Sangha, together constituting one grave offense that must be dealt with as a Sanghadisesa offense. If she desists midway, she is dealt with according to the offense incurred at the point where she desisted. Therefore, the Blessed One spoke as above.

END OF THE SANGHADISESA RULES.

– May the venerable Sangha listen. I have finished reciting the nineteen Sanghadisesa rules. For the first twelve rules, the offense is complete as soon as the transgression begins; for the latter seven rules, the offense is complete only after three admonitions if the offender still does not desist. If a bhikkhuni commits any one of these offenses, she must undergo the manatta discipline for half a month in the midst of both Sanghas. Thereafter, she is to be rehabilitated before both Sanghas, each consisting of twenty persons, so that all are satisfied. If a Sangha of twenty persons is short by even one person... then the rehabilitation of this bhikkhuni is invalid, and the bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are themselves deserving of reproach. Therefore, when rehabilitating her, it is necessary to ask: "Are the venerable ones here pure?" A second and a third time, it should likewise be asked: "Are the venerable ones here pure? The venerable ones here are pure and therefore remain silent. Thus do I understand this matter."

Summary verse:

"Acting as a go-between, making false accusations,

Engaging in disputes, traveling alone.

Not permitting, one who has offended,

Crossing a river, rehabilitating oneself.

Accepting things from a lustful person,

Urging the acceptance of donated things.

(524b) These twelve belong to offenses complete at their inception.

Schism in the Sangha and supporting it.

Angrily disparaging the Sangha,

Being obstinate, dwelling in close association.

Urging close association, abandoning the precepts—

Thus ends the second division."

FIRST SECTION OF THE NISSAGGIYA RULES (the same as for bhikkhus)

The first ten rules are the same as the rules for bhikkhus.

First section of the thirty matters.

"Ten days, sleeping apart from the robe,

At an improper time, accepting gold and silver.

Buying and selling, and requesting a robe,

Giving a request, one may receive two,

Requesting robes from two householders,

King and minister—the tenth matter—

Have been explained in the Bhikkhu rules.

Thus ends the first section."

SECOND SECTION OF THE NISSAGGIYA RULES

11- RULE: REQUESTING MONEY FOR A BED AND THEN BUYING SOMETHING ELSE.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhiksuni Sthulananda was living in a village. She went about soliciting donations to procure beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets for the Sangha, saying to the women: “Upasikas, you should make offerings of beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets to the Sangha.” At that time, the women, being faithful and joyful, donated money for the purchase of beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets.

After receiving the money, she used it to buy robes, bowls, food and drink, and medicines. When another bhiksuni came to those households in the course of her alms round, the women asked: “Venerable, we donated money to the bhiksuni Sthulananda to purchase beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets. Do you know whether she has procured them yet?” The bhiksuni replied: “She has procured nothing of the sort!

We have only seen her buy robes, bowls, food and drink, and medicines.”

When the bhiksunis heard this, they reported it to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha instructed that the bhiksuni Sthulananda be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is it true that you solicited money to purchase beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets, but then used it to procure other things?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper deed. Have you not heard Me employ innumerable skillful means to censure having many desires and praise having few desires? Why did you commit such an improper and unwholesome deed? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and not in accordance with My teaching. It cannot nurture wholesome qualities. From now on, I do not permit anyone to solicit money for beds and mattresses and then use it to procure other things.

The Buddha then told Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni solicits money to purchase beds and mattresses but uses it to procure robes, bowls, food and drink, or medicine, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense.

Explanation:

Beds, mattresses, pillows, and coverlets: These have been explained in detail above in the rules for bhiksus.

Solicits: To exhort others and request donations. If she solicits money to purchase beds and mattresses but subsequently uses it to purchase robes, bowls, food and drink, or medicines, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense.

Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề: The article must be relinquished before the Sangha, after which the Ba-dạ-đề offense must be confessed. (524c) If she confesses without relinquishing it, she commits a Việt tì-ni offense.

Ba-dạ-đề: This has been explained in detail in the rules for bhiksus.

If a bhiksuni solicits money to procure beds and mattresses but uses it to purchase robes, bowls, food and drink, or medicines, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense. If she solicits money to purchase one thing, she may not use it to purchase another. If she solicits money for a bed but uses it to purchase a mattress, solicits money for a mattress but uses it to purchase a pillow, or solicits money for a pillow but uses it to purchase a coverlet, she commits a Việt tì-ni offense.

If she goes about soliciting donations and obtains a large sum of money to purchase beds and mattresses, she must clearly designate each portion to the donors: this portion is money for purchasing beds; this portion is money for purchasing mattresses; this portion is money for purchasing pillows; and this portion is money for purchasing coverlets. If she does not do so, she commits a separate Việt tì-ni offense for each portion. However, it is still in accordance with the Dharma to use the aforementioned money to repair dwellings and to purchase pots and pans.

If a bhiksuni solicits money for beds and mattresses but purchases other things with it, she commits a Việt tì-ni offense. However, she may exchange the funds and use them in accordance with the Dharma. Therefore, it is said (as above).

12- RULE: USING MONEY OFFERED FOR ONE THING TO PURCHASE ANOTHER.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhiksuni Sthulananda went on her alms round wearing soiled and tattered robes. A woman saw her and said: “Venerable, I wish to offer you money for making a robe so that you may procure one.” Another woman said: “I wish to offer money for a bowl so that you may purchase one.” After receiving the money, she spent all of it on food and drink and did not procure either a robe or a bowl. Later, when another bhiksuni went on her alms round, one of those women asked: “Previously, I donated money for a robe and bowl. Do you know whether Sthulananda has purchased them yet?” The bhiksuni replied: “We have only seen her purchase food. We have not seen her procure any robe or bowl!”

When the bhiksunis heard of this matter, they reported it to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha instructed that the bhiksuni be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is it true that you did this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper deed. Have you not heard Me employ innumerable skillful means to praise having few desires and censure having many desires? Why did you receive money to procure a robe and bowl but use it for other purposes? From now on, I do not permit anyone to act in this way.

The Buddha then told Mahaprajapati to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni receives an offering intended for the purchase of one thing but uses it to purchase another, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense.

Explanation:

An offering intended for the purchase of one thing: An offering of money to purchase robes or bowls.

Uses it to purchase another: She purchases food and drink or medicines. If she does so, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense. The article must be relinquished before the Sangha, after which the Ba-dạ-đề offense must be confessed.

If a bhiksuni receives from others money for purchasing robes, money for purchasing bowls, money for purchasing milk, or money for purchasing oil, the money for robes must be used to purchase robes, the money for bowls must be used to purchase bowls, the money for milk must be used to purchase milk, and the money for oil must be used to purchase oil. If she uses it to procure something else, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense. If the donor says that it may be used as she wishes, then she may use it as she wishes without offense. If no purpose was designated beforehand, she may purchase whatever she wishes without offense. (525a)

If a bhiksuni receives from others money for purchasing robes, money for purchasing bowls, money for purchasing milk, or money for purchasing oil, the money for robes must be used to purchase robes, and so forth, up to the money for milk, which must be used to purchase milk. If she uses it to purchase something else, she commits a Việt tì-ni offense. If the donor makes the offering for her to use as she wishes, she may purchase whatever she wishes without offense. Or, if no purpose was designated beforehand, she may purchase whatever she wishes without offense. Therefore, the Blessed One said (as above).

13- RULE: USING MONEY FOR FOOD TO PROCURE ROBES AND BOWLS.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhiksuni Sthulananda went about soliciting donations to purchase food, saying to the women: “Upasikas, I wish to procure food for the Sangha.” The faithful and joyful upasikas then donated money for purchasing food and said: “Venerable, when the day comes to prepare the food, please inform us so that we may come and cook it.”

After receiving the money, this bhiksuni used some of it to purchase food and to procure robes and bowls for herself. With the remainder, she purchased coarse food. On the appointed day, an upasika came to cook the food. When she saw it, she asked: “Venerable, I previously donated a large amount of money for purchasing food. Why is there only such coarse food as this?” The bhiksunis replied: “How could there be money to purchase fine food? She already used it to buy robes and bowls and consumed the food she purchased for herself!”

When the bhiksunis heard this, they reported it to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha instructed that the bhiksuni be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is it true that you did this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper deed.

The Buddha then told Mahaprajapati to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni solicits money to purchase food for the Sangha but uses it to procure robes, bowls, food, or medicines for her personal use, she commits a Ni-tát-kì-ba-dạ-đề offense.

Explanation:

Purchasing food: Purchasing food for the Sangha.

Solicit: To go and exhort donors and make requests.

Use for another purpose: To use it to procure robes, bowls, and food for oneself. If one does so, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Nissaggiya-pacittiya: As explained above. If a bhiksuni solicits money to buy food for the Sangha but uses it to buy robes, bowls, or food for herself, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense. Whatever purpose was originally intended must be carried out accordingly.

If money intended to procure food for the earlier meal is used to buy food for the later meal, or money intended to procure food for the later meal is used to buy food for the earlier meal, one commits a vinaya offense.

If money intended to procure food is used to buy beds or mattresses, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

If money intended to procure robes for spring, summer, or winter, or money intended to buy food, is used to make purchases inconsistent with the donor’s original intention, one commits a vinaya offense.

If a bhiksuni solicits donations to buy food for the Sangha, she must use all of it for that purpose. If food, oil, or milk remains, she must point it out to the donor. If the donor takes it away, she should allow the donor to do so. If the donor says, “I wish to offer this to the venerable one,” she should say, “It should be offered to the Sangha.” If the donor says, “I have already made an offering to the Sangha; I wish to offer this portion to the venerable one,” then she may accept it without offense. Therefore it is said as above.

14- PRECEPT: KEEPING EXTRA BOWLS.

(525b) When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, a visiting bhiksuni arrived and was assigned a room according to seniority. The bhiksuni who had previously occupied it, being junior in seniority, said, “Venerable one, please wait while I move my bowls.” The next morning, the visitor asked again:

– Have you finished moving the bowls?

– I have not yet finished moving them.

– Do you intend to take your bowls and consign them to a pottery shop? What use have you for so many bowls?

When the bhiksunis heard this, they told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the bhiksuni be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is this true?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– Why do you keep extra bowls? From now on, I do not permit the keeping of extra bowls.

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni keeps extra bowls, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Keeping extra bowls: Bowls include such kinds as Tung-ba bowls, U-ba-tung-ba bowls, Uu-cuu-tra-da bowls, and Ba-ki-da bowls. In general, iron bowls and earthenware bowls of such kinds are called bowls. There are superior, medium, and inferior bowls, oversized bowls, undersized bowls, and regulation bowls. If one keeps them, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense. A bhiksuni is permitted to keep sixteen bowls (?): one for use, three formally assigned through vikappana, four oversized bowls, four undersized bowls, and four regulation bowls. If she keeps more than this number, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Nissaggiya-pacittiya: As explained above.

There must be a definite limit to the extra bowls a bhiksuni may keep. If a bhiksu has many bowls and formally assigns them to her through vikappana, she may use them without offense. Therefore the Blessed One spoke as above.

15- PRECEPT: KEEPING EXTRA ROBES.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the account was given in full as above, up to the words: “Do you intend to open a clothing shop?”

When the bhiksunis heard this, they told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the bhiksuni be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is this true?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– Why do you keep extra robes? From now on, I do not permit the keeping of extra robes.

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni keeps extra robes, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Robes: These include kambala robes, chien robes, kauseya robes, soma robes, sana robes, hemp robes, and khumudi robes.

Keeping: If one keeps robes beyond the permitted limit, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Nissaggiya-pacittiya: As explained above.

A bhiksuni is permitted to keep twenty robes: five for use, while the remaining fifteen are formally assigned through vikappana and then used. (525c) If she keeps more than this number, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense. If a bhiksu formally assigns an extra robe through vikappana, a bhiksuni may use it without offense. Therefore the Blessed One spoke as above.

16- PRECEPT: TAKING BACK A ROBE ONE HAS DISCARDED.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, the bhiksuni Sthulananda had a torn sanghati robe. Without washing, dyeing, or mending it, she threw it at the foot of a wall and announced, “Whoever wants it may take it.” At that time, the bhiksuni Tho-de was wearing a torn robe. Seeing this, the bhiksunis said, “Venerable one, you may take this robe, wash and dye it, patch it, and then use it.” She therefore took it, patched it, washed and dyed it, and wore it.

When the bhiksuni Sthulananda saw this, she said, “Give my robe back to me.” Tho-de then protested to the bhiksunis, “Look at this—how extraordinary! Surely robes and other requisites should not be thrown on the ground for a moment and then abandoned. Was there no room left in her quarters?” Sthulananda then seized the sanghati robe back.

When the bhiksunis saw this, they told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that Sthulananda be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is this true?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper act.

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhiksunis dwelling in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni discards her old sanghati robe at her dwelling place and announces, “Whoever wants it may take it,” and afterward, once someone has taken and used it, she seizes it back, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Dwelling place: That is, within the monastery.

Discard: To cast it upon the ground. If someone takes and uses it and one then seizes it back, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Nissaggiya-pacittiya: As explained above. If a bhiksuni discards an article and someone takes and uses it, she may not seize it back. If no one has taken it and she later needs it, she may retrieve it without offense.

If, within the monastery, a bhiksuni discards robes, bowls, footwear, or other miscellaneous articles, and someone takes them, but she subsequently seizes them back, she commits a vinaya offense. If no one has taken them and she later retrieves them, there is no offense. Therefore the Blessed One spoke as above.

17- PRECEPT: FAILING TO MEND A DAMAGED ROBE.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, a bhiksuni took out her soiled sanghati robe and wiped it clean. She then spread it in the sun, whereupon the wind blew it away.

The bhiksunis told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the bhiksuni be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked:

– Is this true?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– Why did you take out your old sanghati robe and wipe it clean without mending it yourself or asking someone else to mend it? From now on, I do not permit a robe to be wiped clean (?) instead of being washed.

Furthermore, at that time (526a), a Sakyan woman and a Malla woman who had formerly been musicians washed their sanghati robes. Because the sanghati robes were thick and heavy, they were difficult to wash, so they spoke to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then went and presented the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha said, “From now on, I permit an interval of five or six days.”

Then the Buddha instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhiksunis residing in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were required to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni has an old sanghati robe and temporarily stitches it herself, or has someone else temporarily stitch it, but then allows more than five or six days to pass without mending it herself or having someone else mend it—except when she is ill—she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Explanation:

An old sanghati robe: A robe that needs to be washed.

Either stitching it herself or having someone else stitch it within five or six days: If, within six days, she neither mends it herself nor has someone else mend it, she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Naihsargika-pacattika: As explained above.

If a bhiksuni washes an old sanghati robe that is light and thin, it must not be stitched. If it is thick and heavy, it may be stitched. After it has been stitched, it must be washed. When it has been washed, it should be stretched out upon a couch or mat, with stones placed at its four corners. When it is dry, she should call upon a companion disciple, a dependent disciple, or a bhiksuni acquainted with the same preceptor or the same acarya to mend it promptly. If, because she is old or ill, she has no one to assist her, there is no offense. Therefore, the Blessed One spoke as above.

18- RULE: PROMISING TO CONFER ORDINATION BUT NOT CONFERRING IT.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Sravasti, a probationer nun said to Thullananda: “Venerable one, please confer full ordination upon me.”

Thullananda said: “Offer me a robe, and I will confer full ordination upon you.” The woman immediately offered her a robe. Afterward, however, Thullananda did not confer full ordination upon her. The probationer nun reminded her, “Please confer full ordination upon me,” repeating the reminder many times.

The bhiksunis then reported the matter to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati brought the matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that Thullananda be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked her:

– Did you truly do this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– This is an improper act.

Then the Buddha instructed Mahaprajapati to order all the bhiksunis residing in the city of Sravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were required to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni says to a siksamana, “Offer me a robe, and then I will confer full ordination upon you,” but, after taking the robe, does not confer full ordination upon her, she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Explanation:

Siksamana: A woman undergoing training in the precepts.

Robe: This comprises the seven kinds explained above. There are also the robe called the sanghati, through to the rain-bathing robe.

Promising full ordination: If afterward she neither confers ordination herself nor asks someone else to confer it, she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Naihsargika-pacattika: As explained above.

(526b) If a bhiksuni takes a robe from a siksamana and promises to confer full ordination upon her, she must afterward confer it. If, because she is old or ill, she lacks the strength and is unable to confer ordination, she should say to another: “Take this robe and confer full ordination upon that woman.” If the candidate no longer wishes to receive ordination and asks for the robe back, it must be returned.

If a bhiksu promises a sramanera that he will confer full ordination but does not do so, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. Therefore, the Blessed One spoke as above.

19- RULE: PURCHASING A HEAVY ROBE.

When the Buddha was dwelling in Vaisali, a merchant from the north brought an exceptionally fine and precious kambala cloth to sell. People asked him:

– How much are you asking for this?

– One hundred thousand.

At that time, the king, princes, ministers, and great merchants all considered it too expensive and would not buy it. The merchant sat dejectedly at his shop. People asked him:

– Why do you look so sorrowful?

– I purchased this very valuable kambala cloth and also paid a great deal in taxes, but now I cannot sell it; therefore, I am unhappy.

– Do you wish to sell it?

– I wish to sell it.

– You should take it to the bhiksuni Bhadra. She will buy it.

He then took it there and asked people, “Where is the bhiksunis’ monastery?” They showed him the place. When he arrived, he again asked, “Where is the room of the bhiksuni Bhadra?” They again showed him the place. Upon reaching it, he asked, “Who is the bhiksuni Bhadra?” Bhadra asked in return:

– Why are you asking for me?

– Would you like to buy this kambala robe?

– How much are you asking?

– One hundred thousand, neither more nor less.

Bhadra immediately told her disciple: “Go to Balue’s shop, obtain one hundred thousand, and give it to him.” Afterward, someone asked the merchant:

– Have you sold the kambala cloth?

– I have sold it.

– Who took it?

– The bhiksuni Bhadra.

That person then criticized her, saying: “Although she has gone forth, she still delights in beautiful things.”

When the bhiksunis heard this, they reported it to Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati brought the matter before the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that the bhiksuni Bhadra be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked her:

– Did you truly do this?

– It is true, Blessed One!

– Are you not to serve as a model for people of later generations? From this day forward, I do not permit the expenditure of four karsapanas to purchase a heavy robe.

Then the Buddha instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhiksunis residing in the city of Vaisali to assemble. Even those who had already heard it were required to hear it again:

-- If a bhiksuni spends more than four karsapanas to purchase a heavy robe, she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Explanation:

Four karsapanas: Sixteen ancient coins.

A heavy robe: (526c) A kambala robe.

Purchase: To exchange money for an article. If she exchanges more than sixteen ancient coins for an article, she commits a Naihsargika-pacattika offense.

Naihsargika-pacattika: As explained above.

A bhiksuni must not use more than sixteen ancient coins to purchase a heavy robe. However, if she has not requested it and a donor brings it and gives it to her, then even if the article is valuable, there is no offense in accepting it.

There is a limit for bhiksunis, but no limit for bhiksus; even if a bhiksu acquires and uses a valuable article, there is no offense. Therefore, the Blessed One spoke as above.

20- RULE: PURCHASING FINE SILK.

When the Buddha was dwelling in Vaisali, a merchant from the south brought there a piece of fine silk bearing a pattern of swans. Someone asked him:

– How much does this cloth cost?

– One hundred thousand.

Because it was expensive, the king would not buy it, nor would the ministers or other merchant chiefs. Unable to sell the silk, the merchant sat sorrowfully at his shop. Someone saw him and asked:

– Why do you have such a sorrowful expression?

– I purchased this precious silk and also paid a great deal in taxes, but now I cannot sell it.

– Do you wish to sell it?

– I wish to sell it.

– You may take it to the bhiksuni Bhadra. She will buy it from you.

So he went there and asked people, “Where is the bhiksunis’ residence?” After learning where it was, he entered and asked, “Where is the room of the bhiksuni Bhadra?” They showed him the place. He then went in and greeted her:

– Greetings, venerable one! Are you Bhadra?

– Why do you ask?

– I have this silk bearing a pattern of swans. Would you buy it?

– How much are you asking?

– I am asking one hundred thousand.

The bhiksuni did not bargain for a lower price but told her disciple: “Go to the shop, tell Balue, obtain one hundred thousand, and give it to him.” Afterward, someone asked the merchant:

– Have you sold the silk yet?

– I have sold it.

– Who took it?

– The bhiksuni Bhadra took it.

Then someone criticized her, saying, “Why should one who has gone forth still be so fond of beautiful things?”

When the bhikkhunis heard this, they told Mahaprajapati. Finally, the Buddha said to the bhikkhuni Bhaddala, “Will you not serve as a model for those of future generations? From now on, I do not permit more than two and a half karshapanas to be used to purchase a piece of fine silk.” The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhikkhunis dwelling in the city of Shravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

— If a bhikkhuni uses more than two and a half karshapanas to purchase a piece of fine silk, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Two and a half karshapanas: Equal to sixteen ancient coins. (This calculation is inconsistent with the one above.)

Purchase: To exchange money for another object; if the prescribed amount is exceeded, a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense is committed.

Nissaggiya-pacittiya: As explained above.

If a bhikkhuni purchases a piece of fine silk (527a), she should use two and a half karshapanas to purchase it and must not exceed that amount. If she did not ask for it and a donor gives it to her, then even if she receives and uses a precious piece of silk, there is no offense.

A bhikkhu may purchase and use a precious piece of silk without committing an offense.

Summary verse:

“Requesting a bed and bedding for personal use,

Using robe-and-bowl funds for another purpose.

Reducing the Sangha’s property for personal use,

Keeping an extra bowl and an extra robe.

Taking back a robe after discarding it,

Sewing a robe, and granting full ordination.

A heavy robe together with a light robe—

Here ends the second section.”

21—PRECEPT: COMPETING WITH ANOTHER PERSON TO PURCHASE GOODS.

When the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Shravasti, a man carrying a load of firewood passed before a merchant’s shop. The merchant asked him:

“How much do you ask for this firewood?”

“One karshapana.”

“Take this load of firewood and unload it at my house. Then come back here, and I will pay you.”

The firewood seller drove his cart past the bhikkhunis’ monastery. When the bhikkhuni Sthulananda saw him, she asked:

“Good sir, has anyone already purchased your firewood?”

“Yes.”

“For how much?”

“One karshapana.”

“I will give you two karshapanas.”

Greedy for profit, the owner sold it to her. After unloading the firewood, he returned past the shop, and the shopkeeper said to him:

“Take this money.”

“I have already sold it to someone else.”

“For how much did you sell it?”

“For two karshapanas.”

“Who took it?”

“The bhikkhuni Sthulananda.”

When the merchant heard this, he criticized her, saying, “Why does this female renunciant have so much money?”

When the bhikkhunis heard this, they told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered Sthulananda to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked her:

“Is it true that you knew another person had already purchased the firewood, yet you raised the price and competed to buy it?”

“It is true, Blessed One!”

“This is an unwholesome act. Why did you knowingly compete to purchase something that another person had already bought? This is contrary to the Dharma, contrary to the Vinaya, and contrary to my teaching. It cannot foster the growth of wholesome qualities.”

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati Gautami to order all the bhikkhunis dwelling in the city of Shravasti to assemble. Even those who had already heard this were to hear it again:

— If a bhikkhuni knowingly competes to purchase something that another person has already bought, she commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya offense.

Explanation:

Knowing: Either knowing it herself or learning it by hearing it from another person.

Already purchased: As in the case of the merchant at the shop described above. If a bhikkhuni wishes to purchase something and knows that another person has already bought it, she must not compete to buy it. She should wait until that person no longer intends to take it before taking it herself. She should also ask that person, “(527b) Are you determined to purchase it?” If the person replies, “I am determined to purchase it,” this means that the person has firmly resolved to buy the object, and therefore she should not take it. If the person says, “I will not take it after all,” then she may take it without committing an offense.

If bhikkhus compete with one another to purchase robes or bowls, they commit a vinaya-transgression offense. If, in the midst of the Sangha, one offers a higher price to obtain something—except in relation to one’s preceptor or acharya—there is no offense.

If a bhikkhuni competes with another person to purchase goods, she commits a vinaya-transgression offense. Therefore it is stated as above.

Summary verse:

“An extra bowl, five patches,

Seven days, angrily taking back a robe.

Purchasing gold, requesting thread,

Hiring a weaver, urging a gift.

Competing to purchase, taking Sangha property—

Here ends the third section.”

Beginning with taking a bhikkhuni’s robe to wash and dye, a robe entirely black, one with three parts white, kausheya, using a sitting cloth for six years, three yojanas, carding goat’s wool, a rain-bathing robe, and dwelling in the aranya—these eleven matters should be set aside and not discussed here. There are also another eleven matters that should be sought in the final section. In the first section, the matter concerning taking a bhikkhuni’s robe is supplemented under the rule concerning handling gold and silver.

Washing an old robe is supplemented by the matter concerning buying and selling. In the final section, the rain-bathing robe is supplemented by the matter concerning selling gold, and dwelling in the aranya is supplemented by the matter concerning competing to purchase. The first and second sections of the nissaggiya rules have been recounted without omission.

At this point, the Blessed One had finished teaching the thirty rules for bhikkhunis.

DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE FIRST SECTION OF THE 141 PACITTIYA RULES

“False speech and its varieties,

Divisive speech, reviving former disputes.

Taking life, teaching phrases of Dharma,

Claiming oneself to have attained the path.

Speaking of a grave offense to one not fully ordained,

Obstructing and disparaging the precepts.

Here ends the first section.

Cutting trees, disparaging others,

Reproaching, spreading bedding in the open.

Dragging someone out of a room,

Using a bed with pointed legs.

Using water containing living creatures to irrigate plants,

Causing another person doubt and unhappiness.

Here ends the second section.

Eating in many places in a single day,

Giving away a robe and then taking and using it.

Urging another person to eat more,

Eating what was not received, eating at an improper time.

Storing two or three bowls of food,

Concealing goods, eating apart from the Sangha.

Here ends the third section.

Kindling a fire, exceeding three nights,

Entrusting one’s consent, then becoming angry afterward.

(527c) Entering a village and then telling another to return,

Refusing to relinquish wrong views.

A novice, three discolored robes,

Taking valuables, and intimidating others.

Here ends the fourth section.

Drinking water containing living creatures, non-Buddhist ascetics,

Sitting in a place of sexual activity or a concealed place.

Watching an army for more than three nights,

Ivory and fighting.

Threatening to strike, playing in water—

Here ends the fifth section.

Pointing at one another, accompanying thieves,

Digging earth, an invitation for four months.

Refusing instruction, drinking alcohol,

Belittling others, listening in silence.

Adjudicating matters, failing to listen attentively—

Here ends the sixth section.

Leaving the eating place, the royal palace,

A needle case, exceeding eight fingerbreadths.

Cotton and a sitting cloth,

A sore-covering cloth, imitating the Buddha.

Disparaging a sanghadisesa offense, embezzlement—

Here ends the seventh section.

All the matters stated above

Are found among the bhikkhus’ precepts.”

71—PRECEPT: WEARING ANOTHER PERSON’S ROBE WITHOUT PERMISSION.

When the Buddha was dwelling at Vaishali, the bhikkhuni Bhaddalaka put on the robe of her dependent disciple without telling her and then went into the village. A bhikkhuni called out, “Those who are going for alms, let us go.” The dependent disciple replied, “Venerable one, please wait while I fetch my sanghati robe.” But she searched and could not find her robe; she saw only her teacher’s robe. She thought, “My teacher must certainly have worn my robe and gone out. My teacher may wear my robe, but I am not permitted to wear my teacher’s robe.” Thinking this, she said to the other bhikkhuni:

“You may go. I cannot go.”

“Why not?”

“I have no robe.”

“Wear your teacher’s robe and go.”

“My teacher is one whom I revere, so I dare not wear her robe. You may go.”

Thus, on that day, she missed her meal. The bhikkhunis told Mahaprajapati. Mahaprajapati then reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Buddha ordered that bhikkhuni to be summoned. When she arrived, the Buddha asked her:

“Did you actually do this?”

“It is true, Blessed One!”

“This is an improper act. Why did you wear another person’s robe without informing her? From now on, I do not permit such conduct.”

The Buddha then instructed Mahaprajapati to issue an order that all the bhikkhunis residing at Vaisali assemble together, and even those who had already heard it were to hear it again:

— If a bhikkhuni wears another person’s robe without informing its owner, she commits a Payattika offense.

Explanation:

Bhikkhuni: As explained above.

The Buddha did not permit one to wear a disciple’s sanghati robe without informing the disciple. When wishing to wear it, one should say: “I shall wear your robe; if you need to go anywhere, wear my sanghati robe.” (528a) The same applies to all other robes.

When wishing to wash, dye, or mend a robe, or when some occasion requires wearing a disciple’s robe, one must say: “Remain at home; I shall bring food back.”

If a bhikkhu wears another person’s robe without informing that person, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. Therefore, the Blessed One said the above.

THE MAHASANGHIKA VINAYA

End of the thirty-seventh fascicle.