四分律

Thích Nguyên Chứng - Thích Đức Thắng

Revised and Annotated

XXXIII. EATING IN A SEPARATE GROUP^[184]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was dwelling on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa at Rājagṛha. At that time, Devadatta had sent someone to harm the Buddha and had also incited Ajātaśatru to kill his father. His evil reputation spread, and consequently his material support was cut off.^[185]

Devadatta then went from house to house seeking alms together with five bhikkhus. These five bhikkhus were named Tam-văn-đà-la-đạt, Khiên-đà-la-đạt-bà, Cù-bà-ly, Ca-lưu-la-đề-xá…^[186]

The bhikkhus heard that Devadatta had sent someone to harm the Buddha and had incited Ajātaśatru to kill his father; his evil reputation had spread, and consequently his material support had been cut off, so he had gone from house to house seeking alms together with five bhikkhus.^[187]

On account of this matter, the Blessed One assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus. Although he knew what had happened, he still asked Devadatta:

“Is it true that you went from house to house seeking alms together with five bhikkhus?”

Devadatta replied:

“It is true.”

The Blessed One reproved Devadatta in countless ways:

“What you have done is wrong. It is not proper conduct, not the practice of a śramaṇa, not pure conduct, not conduct in accordance with the Dharma. You have done what ought not to be done. Devadatta, why did you go from house to house seeking alms together with five bhikkhus?”

After the Blessed One had reproved Devadatta in countless ways, he told the bhikkhus:

“This foolish Devadatta is a place in which many seeds of the taints are planted. He is the first offender against this precept. From now on, I shall establish a precept for the bhikkhus, comprising the ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the true Dharma.”

When the precept is recited, it should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group commits a pācittiya offense.

Thus the Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, sick bhikkhus found that in some places where they were invited to take a meal, there was neither suitable food nor medicine appropriate to their illnesses, while in other places there was fine food and medicine appropriate to their illnesses. Nevertheless, fearing that they would violate the rule against eating in a separate group, they did not dare accept it. The Blessed One learned of this and told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, sick bhikkhus are permitted to eat in a separate group.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group, except under special circumstances, commits a pācittiya offense. The special circumstance is a time of illness.

Thus the Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, the bhikkhus had completed the pavāraṇā and were making robes during the month of Kārttika.^[189] The upāsakas thought, “These bhikkhus have completed the pavāraṇā and are now making robes during the month of Kārttika. We should prepare food as an offering to the Sangha. Why? Because we fear that these bhikkhus may become so weary from making robes that they are unable to eat.” Those upāsakas went to the monastery and said to the bhikkhus:

“Tomorrow morning, we will offer a meal. Venerable ones, please accept our invitation.”

The bhikkhus replied:

“You may invite only three bhikkhus^[190] to eat, for we are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The upāsakas said to the bhikkhus:

“We all thought, ‘The venerable ones have completed the pavāraṇā and are making robes during the month of Kārttika. Fearing that the bhikkhus may become so weary that they are unable to eat, we should invite the venerable ones to take a meal.’ Yet the bhikkhus say that we may invite only three, because eating in a separate group is not permitted.”

The bhikkhus went and reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Blessed One said:

“From now on, eating in a separate group is permitted during the time of robe-making.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group, except under other circumstances, commits a pācittiya offense. The other circumstances are a time of illness and the time of robe-making. These are the other circumstances.

Thus the Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, some householders wished to offer food and robes. They went to the monastery and said to the bhikkhus:

“Tomorrow morning, I wish to offer food. May the Sangha please accept my invitation.”

The bhikkhus replied:

“You may invite only three bhikkhus to eat, for we are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The householder said:

“Venerable ones, I wish to offer food and robes. Please accept [658a1] my invitation.”

But those bhikkhus said, “You may invite only three bhikkhus to eat, because eating in a separate group is not permitted.”

The bhikkhus then went and reported the matter to the Buddha. The Buddha taught:

“From now on, bhikkhus are permitted to eat in a separate group when receiving an offering of robes.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group, except under other circumstances, commits a pācittiya offense. The other circumstances are a time of illness, the time of robe-making, and the time of a robe offering. These are the other circumstances.

Thus the Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, a large number of bhikkhus and householders were traveling together to the country of Kosala. When the time for seeking alms arrived, the bhikkhus said to the householders:

“We wish to enter the village to seek alms. Please wait a short while. We will return, and then we can continue traveling together.”

The householders replied:

“Come along with us. We will provide you with food and drink.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may give food to only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The householders said:

“Venerable ones, this road is dangerous and gives cause for fear and alarm. Come! We will provide you with food and drink. You are too few in number, so you should not travel behind us.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may give food to only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The bhikkhus then entered the village to seek alms. The householders went on ahead, and the bhikkhus, traveling behind them and unable to keep up, were robbed of their robes by bandits. The bhikkhus reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. The Blessed One told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, when a road is dangerous, bhikkhus are permitted to eat in a separate group.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group, except under other circumstances, commits a pācittiya offense. The other circumstances are a time of illness, the time of robe-making, the time of a robe offering, and while traveling on a road. These are the other circumstances.

Thus the Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, a large number of bhikkhus and householders were traveling together in a boat downstream. When the time for seeking alms arrived, the bhikkhus said to the householders:

“Stop the boat for a short while. We need to enter the village to seek alms, and when we return, we will continue traveling together.”

The householders said:

“Do not go! We will provide you with food and drink.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may provide food for only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The householders said:

“There are many bandits along this stretch of the riverbank, giving cause for fear and alarm. You are few in number and should not travel behind us, lest the bandits rob you. Do not go! We will provide you with food and drink.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may provide food for only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

Nevertheless, the bhikkhus went ashore to seek alms. Their fellow travelers in the boat went on ahead, and the bhikkhus, traveling behind them, were robbed of their robes by bandits. The bhikkhus reported this matter in full to the Buddha. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, bhikkhus are permitted to eat in a separate group while traveling by boat.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

Any bhikkhu who eats in a separate group, except under other circumstances, commits a pācittiya offense. The other circumstances are a time of illness, the time of robe-making, the time of a robe offering, while traveling on a road, and while traveling by boat. These are the other circumstances.

The Blessed One thus established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, a large number of bhikkhus were traveling from the country of Kosala to a small village. The householders thought, “The Sangha is large, while the village is small. Let us prepare food for the Sangha so that the Sangha will not have to undergo hardship and distress.”^[191] They then went to the monastery and said to the bhikkhus:

“Venerable Sirs, please accept a meal from us tomorrow.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may invite only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.” The householders said:

“We thought that the Sangha was large while the village was small. We merely feared that there would not be enough food and that the Sangha would consequently have to undergo hardship.”

The bhikkhus again said:

“You may invite only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

The bhikkhus then went and reported this to the Blessed One. The Blessed One said:

“From now on, I permit bhikkhus to eat in a separate group when a large assembly has gathered.”

From now on, the precept should be recited as follows:

If any bhikkhu eats in a separate group, except on other allowable occasions, it is a pacittiya offense. The other allowable occasions are: when one is ill, during the robe-making period, during the robe-giving period, when traveling by road, when traveling by boat, and when a large assembly has gathered. These are the other allowable occasions.

The Blessed One thus established the precept for the bhikkhus. At that time, a son of King Bimbisara’s elder sister,^[192] named Kala,^[193] offered food to ascetics before going forth among the non-Buddhist sectarians. He then went to King Bimbisara and said:

“I have prepared an offering for the ascetics. I now wish to go forth.”

King Bimbisara asked:

“Among whom do you wish to go forth?”

He replied:

“I wish to go forth among the Niganthas.”

The King further asked:

“Have you prepared food as an offering for my ascetics?”

Kala asked:

“Your Majesty, who are those ascetics?”

The King said:

“They are the Sakyan ascetics.”

Kala said:

“I have not yet prepared food as an offering for them.”

The King said:

“You should now prepare food as an offering for the ascetic sons of the Sakyans.”

Kala then went to the monastery and said to the bhikkhus:

“I now wish to prepare food as an offering for the Sangha of bhikkhus. Please accept my invitation.”

The bhikkhus said:

“You may make an offering to only three bhikkhus. We are not permitted to eat in a separate group.”

Kala then said to the bhikkhus:

“I prepared offerings for the ascetics before going forth among the non-Buddhist sectarians. Then I went to King Bimbisara and said, ‘I have prepared offerings for the ascetics. I now wish to go forth.’ The King asked me, ‘Among whom do you wish to go forth?’ I replied, ‘I wish to go forth among the Niganthas.’ The King further asked me, ‘Have you prepared food as an offering for my ascetics?’ I then asked, ‘Who are those ascetics?’ The King told me, ‘They are the ascetic sons of the Sakyans.’ The King instructed me, ‘Go there and prepare food as an offering for the ascetic sons of the Sakyans, and only afterward may you go forth.’ For this reason, I have come to the monastery to invite the Venerable Sirs. I earnestly ask you to accept my invitation.”

When the bhikkhus heard this account, they went and reported it to the Blessed One. The Buddha told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, I permit bhikkhus to eat in a separate group when a meal is offered by ascetics.^[194]”

From now on, the precept should be recited as follows:

If any bhikkhu eats in a separate group, except on other allowable occasions, it is a pacittiya offense. The other allowable occasions are: when one is ill, during the robe-making period, during the robe-giving period, when traveling by road, when traveling by boat, when a large assembly has gathered, and when a meal is offered by ascetics. These are the other allowable occasions.

B. DEFINITION OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: as explained above.

Eating in a separate group: a group of four or more persons.

Food: this refers only to cooked rice, provisions, dried rice, fish, and meat.^[195]

Illness: even if merely the heel is sprained.

The robe-making period: following the invitation ceremony, if the Kathina robe has not been accepted, it lasts for one month; if the Kathina robe has been accepted, it lasts for five months, even until only a single horse-tooth-shaped seam remains to be sewn on the robe.

The robe-giving period: following the invitation ceremony, if the Kathina robe has not been accepted, it lasts for one month; if the Kathina robe has been accepted, it lasts for five months; it also includes other occasions on which food and robes are given.

When traveling by road: even when traveling only half a yojana in total, including both the outward and return journeys.

When traveling by boat: even when riding in a boat upstream or downstream for half a yojana.

When a large assembly has gathered:^[196] if there is enough food for four persons but the addition of one more person would cause hardship; likewise, if there are five persons, ten persons, or even one hundred persons, and the addition of one more person would cause hardship.

A meal offered by ascetics:^[197] this refers to those who have gone forth among non-Buddhist sectarians outside the ascetic sons of the Sakyans.

If a bhikkhu has no allowable reason for eating in a separate group, he should rise and say, “I have no allowable reason to partake in this separate group meal. I wish to leave the group.”

The Buddha said:

“He is permitted to leave.”

Anyone else who has no allowable reason is also permitted to leave the group. If there are two or three persons, they may take the meal as they wish. If there are four or more persons, they should divide into two groups and enter in turn to eat.

If a bhikkhu has an allowable reason to eat in a separate group and wishes to enter, he should rise and say, “I have an allowable reason to eat in a separate group. I wish to enter.”

The Buddha taught:

“He should be admitted. He should take his seat according to the order of seniority.”

If any bhikkhu eats in a separate group, he commits one pacittiya offense with each mouthful. If he has an allowable reason but does not declare it, he commits a dukkata offense.

For a bhikkhuni, it is a pacittiya offense. For a siksamana, samanera, or samaneri, it is a dukkata offense. This is called an offense.

There is no offense: when one is ill; during the robe-making period; during the robe-giving period; when traveling by road; when traveling by boat; when a large assembly has gathered; when a meal is offered by ascetics; when there are three persons; when four persons eat in alternating groups; or when one leaves for an allowable reason. In all such cases, there is no offense.

Those who do not offend are: one who committed the act for the first time before the precept was established; one who is insane, mentally deranged, racked by pain, or under duress.

XXXIV. ACCEPTING MORE THAN THREE BOWLFULS^[198]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was staying in Anathapindika’s Park in the Jeta Grove at Sravasti. At that time, there was a woman named Kanyana,^[199] who had formerly lived in a large village and later married a man from the country of Ujjayini. After several months, she became pregnant and returned to stay at her parents’ home. At that time, some bhikkhus came to that house on almsround, and she personally offered them food and fruit.

After some time, her husband sent a messenger to summon her home. She said to the messenger:

“Please remain here and wait a little while! Let me fully prepare food and drink and adorn myself and put on my garments; then I will go with you.”

At that time, some bhikkhus came to this house on almsround. When the woman saw them, she offered them all the food and drink she had just prepared and said:

“Venerable Sirs, you may accept this food.”

The bhikkhus accepted all the food, leaving nothing behind. Afterward, she had to prepare everything and adorn herself once again before she could depart.^[200]

Before she was able to return there, her husband had already taken another wife and sent a messenger to tell her, “I have now taken another wife. Whether you return or not is up to you.”

When Kanyana’s father heard this, he went to the monastery. Upon seeing him, the bhikkhus said:

“Your daughter Kanyana has steadfast faith and delights in generosity.”

Her father said:

“As the Venerable Sirs say, my daughter truly does have steadfast faith. Yet it is also because of this that she has now met with something no woman would welcome.”

The bhikkhus asked:

“What happened?”

Kāñcana’s father said:

“Her husband has taken another wife.”

At that time, outside the gate of the city of Vārāṇasī, many caravans of merchants were spending the night with their carts. That day, when it was time, an almsgoing bhikkhu donned his robe, took up his bowl, and entered the encampment of that merchant caravan to seek alms.

That bhikkhu went from place to place in due order and then stood silently before a caravan leader who possessed deep faith. Seeing him, the caravan leader asked:

“Venerable sir, for what purpose are you standing here?”

The bhikkhu replied:

“I am seeking alms.”

The caravan leader then said:

“Please give me your bowl.”

The bhikkhu handed him the bowl. The caravan leader filled the entire bowl with fine food. The almsgoing bhikkhu carried the food out of the encampment. Not far away, another almsgoing bhikkhu who also wished to enter the encampment for alms asked the bhikkhu who had just received the food:

“Were you able to obtain food?”

He replied:

“Yes.”

The other asked:

“From whom did you receive it?”

He replied:

“I received it from that caravan leader.”

The almsgoing bhikkhu then went and stood silently before that caravan leader. The merchant asked:

“Venerable sir, why are you standing here?”

The bhikkhu replied:

“I am seeking alms.”

The merchant said:

“Please give me your bowl.”

The bhikkhu handed him the bowl. The caravan leader filled the entire bowl with fine food and returned it to the bhikkhu. After receiving the food, the bhikkhu carried it out of the encampment. Not far beyond the encampment, he met another bhikkhu who also wished to enter it for alms. That bhikkhu asked:

“Were you able to obtain food?”

He replied:

“Yes.”

The other asked:

“From whom did you receive it?”

He replied:

“I received it from that caravan leader.”

In this way, the almsgoing bhikkhus informed one another, causing the caravan leader to exhaust all his provisions for the journey.

The caravan leader then had to enter the city of Vārāṇasī to purchase provisions again. Meanwhile, his companions had already departed. Because the caravan leader had to travel behind them, he could not catch up and was robbed by bandits along the road.

When the bhikkhus heard of this, those among them who had few desires, were content, practiced the dhutaṅga austerities, delighted in training in the precepts, and possessed a sense of shame and moral dread reproached the bhikkhus, saying: “How could bhikkhus consume all the food a woman was taking to her husband’s household and all the traveling provisions of merchants?”

The bhikkhus went to the Blessed One, paid homage at the Buddha’s feet, and sat to one side. They then reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. On account of this matter, the Blessed One assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus and rebuked those bhikkhus:

“What you have done is wrong. It is not proper conduct, not the conduct of a śramaṇa, not pure conduct, not conduct in accordance with the Dharma. You have done what ought not to be done. How could bhikkhus consume all the food a woman was taking to her husband’s household and all the traveling provisions of merchants?”

After rebuking those bhikkhus in innumerable ways, the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus:

“These foolish men are a field in which many seeds of the defilements are planted. They are the first offenders against this precept. From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, I shall establish a precept comprising the ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the true Dharma.”

The precept should be recited as follows:

If a bhikkhu goes to a householder’s home and is offered food such as cakes or provisions for a journey,^[201] he may, if he needs it, accept two or three bowlfuls. Having accepted two or three bowlfuls and returned to the Sangha monastery, he should distribute them among the other bhikkhus to eat. If he accepts more than two or three bowlfuls and, upon returning to the Sangha monastery, does not share them with the other bhikkhus, he commits a pācittiya offense.

The Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus in this way. At that time, some sick bhikkhus, being fearful, did not dare accept food beyond the prescribed amount. They went and reported this to the Buddha. The Buddha said:

“From now on, sick bhikkhus are permitted to accept food beyond the prescribed amount.”

From now on, the precept should be recited as follows:

If a bhikkhu goes to a householder’s home and is offered food such as cakes or provisions for a journey, he may, if he needs it, accept two or three bowlfuls. Having accepted two or three bowlfuls and returned to the Sangha monastery, he should distribute them among the other bhikkhus to eat. If a bhikkhu who is not sick accepts more than two or three bowlfuls and, upon returning to the Sangha monastery, does not share them with the other bhikkhus, he commits a pācittiya offense.

B. ANALYSIS OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: as defined above.

Householder’s home: a house in which there are men and women.

Sick: unable to become satisfied by eating one meal.

If a bhikkhu goes to a householder’s home and is offered food such as cakes or provisions for a journey, he should ask the host: “Is this food that a woman is taking to her husband’s household, or is it a merchant’s provision for a journey?” If they say that it is food a woman is taking to her husband’s household or a merchant’s provision for a journey, he should eat his fill there and then depart. Upon returning to the Sangha monastery, he should inform the bhikkhus: “At that house there is food that a woman is taking to her husband’s household or provisions for a merchant’s journey. If you wish to eat, go there, eat your fill, and then depart. If you wish to bring food back, bring two or three bowlfuls.^[202] As for me, I have not brought any food back at this time.”

If he wishes to bring back one bowlful of food, then upon returning to the Sangha monastery, he must distribute it among the bhikkhus to eat together. He should tell the other bhikkhus: “At that house there is food that a woman is taking to her husband’s household or provisions for a merchant’s journey. If anyone wishes to go there, eat there. If you wish to bring food back, bring two bowlfuls.^[203] As for me, I have now brought back one bowlful.”

If he brings two bowlfuls of food back to the Sangha monastery, he must distribute them among the bhikkhus to eat together. He should then tell the other bhikkhus: “At that house there is food that a woman is taking to her husband’s household or provisions for a merchant’s journey. If anyone wishes to go there, eat there. If you wish to bring food back, bring one bowlful.^[204] As for me, I have now brought back two bowlfuls.”

If he brings back all three bowlfuls and distributes them among the other bhikkhus to eat, he should tell the other bhikkhus: “At that house there is food that a woman is taking to her husband’s household or provisions for a merchant’s journey. If anyone wishes to go there, eat there. If you wish to bring food back, take care not to do so,^[205] for I have now brought back the full three bowlfuls.”

If a bhikkhu who is not sick accepts more than two or three bowlfuls of food at that house and carries it away, he commits a pācittiya offense upon passing through the gate. [660a1] If he has one foot inside the gate and one foot outside, or intends to leave but then stops, in every case he commits a duṣkṛta offense. If he brings the food back to the Sangha monastery and eats it alone without sharing it with the other bhikkhus, he commits a duṣkṛta offense. If he does not inform the other bhikkhus, he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

For a bhikkhunī, it is a pācittiya offense. For a śikṣamāṇā, śrāmaṇera, or śrāmaṇerī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. This is called an offense.

There is no offense if he accepts two or three bowlfuls; if, because of sickness, he accepts more; if he asks and determines that it is food a woman is taking to her husband’s household or provisions for a merchant’s journey; if he brings it back to the Sangha monastery and distributes it among the other bhikkhus to eat; or if he informs the other bhikkhus of the location. If they themselves bring it to the Sangha monastery, he is permitted to accept it. If they bring it to a bhikkhunī monastery, there is no offense in accepting it.

Those who do not commit an offense are: one who committed the act for the first time before the precept was established; one who is insane, mentally deranged, tormented by pain, or under duress.

XXXV. THE RULE CONCERNING LEFTOVER FOOD^[206]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was staying in Anathapindika’s Park in the Jeta Grove at Sravasti. At that time, the Blessed One taught the bhikkhus the practice of eating once,^[207] and praised the practice of eating once.

When the bhikkhus heard the Blessed One teach the practice of eating once and praise the practice of eating once, they ate khadaniya foods,^[208] or the five kinds of staple food,^[209] or drank fruit juice, or took medicine, consuming them all together on a single occasion and not daring to eat again. Consequently, their bodies became emaciated and their complexions haggard.

At that time, although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Ananda:

“Why are these bhikkhus emaciated in body and haggard in complexion?”

Venerable Ananda said to the Buddha:

“The Blessed One has used innumerable skillful means to teach the bhikkhus the practice of eating one meal and to praise the practice of eating one meal. Having heard this, the bhikkhus, in a single sitting, eat khadaniya foods, or the five kinds of food, or drink fruit juice, or take medicine, consuming them all together on one occasion and then not daring to eat again. For this reason, their bodies have become emaciated and their complexions haggard.”

The Buddha told Venerable Ananda:

“From now on, I permit the bhikkhus to eat their fill in a single sitting.”

The bhikkhus heard that the Buddha had permitted them to eat in a single sitting until completely full. Thereupon, the bhikkhus ate khadaniya foods, or the five kinds of food, or drank fruit juice, or took medicine, consuming them all together on a single occasion and then not daring to eat again. Consequently, their bodies became emaciated and their complexions haggard. At that time, although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Venerable Ananda:

“Why are these bhikkhus withered in body and haggard in complexion?”

Venerable Ananda said to the Buddha:

“The bhikkhus heard that the Blessed One had permitted them to eat in a single sitting until they were satisfied. They therefore eat khadaniya foods, or the five kinds of food, or drink fruit juice, or take medicine, consuming them all together on a single occasion and then not daring to eat again. For this reason, their bodies have become emaciated and their complexions haggard.”

The Blessed One told Venerable Ananda:

“From now on, I permit the bhikkhus to eat their fill of the five kinds of food: rice, cakes, parched rice, fish, and meat. Of these five foods, whatever they have received, they may eat their fill of it.”

At that time, although the sick bhikkhus had received fine foods such as rice, flour cakes, parched rice, fish, and meat, they did not have sufficient strength to sit and eat their fill on a single occasion. Consequently, their bodies became emaciated and their complexions haggard. Although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Venerable Ananda:

“Why are the sick bhikkhus emaciated in body and haggard in complexion?”

Venerable Ananda said to the Buddha:

“Although these sick bhikkhus have received the five fine foods, they do not have sufficient strength to sit and eat their fill on a single occasion. Consequently, their bodies have become emaciated and their complexions haggard.”

The Buddha told Ananda:

“From now on, I permit sick bhikkhus to eat on multiple occasions.^[210] A sick person need not obtain permission regarding a full meal.^[211]”

At that time, the sick bhikkhus received fine, nourishing food but could not finish it, so they gave it to their attendants. After the attendants had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Birds flocked to contend for it, clamoring noisily. Although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Venerable Ananda:

“Why are the birds clamoring so noisily?”

Venerable Ananda said to the Buddha:

“These sick bhikkhus received fine, nourishing food but could not finish it, so they gave what remained to their attendants. After the attendants had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Therefore, the birds contend for the food and clamor so noisily.”

The Buddha told Venerable Ananda:

“From now on, I permit attendants of the sick to eat food left over by the sick without having to perform the procedure for leftover food.”

At that time, the bhikkhus received food early in the morning and put it aside; they then entered the village to seek alms. After eating, they returned and gave the food they had put aside to the other bhikkhus. After those bhikkhus had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Birds contended for it and clamored. Although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Venerable Ananda:

“Why are the birds clamoring like this?”

Venerable Ananda said to the Buddha:

“The bhikkhus received food early in the morning and put it aside; they then entered the village to seek alms. After eating, they returned and gave the food they had put aside to the other bhikkhus. After those bhikkhus had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Therefore, the birds contend for it and clamor like this.”

The Buddha told Ananda:

“From now on, I permit the bhikkhus to perform the procedure for leftover food with food they have received and then eat it. The procedure for leftover food is performed by taking that food before a senior bhikkhu who has not yet finished eating and saying, ‘Venerable sir, I have eaten my fill. Please acknowledge it and inspect it.’ This constitutes performing the procedure for leftover food. That bhikkhu should take and eat a little, and then say to the bhikkhu performing the procedure, ‘You may take and eat as you please.’ One should perform the procedure for leftover food in this way before eating.”

Later, there was an elder, a bhikkhu who was known by many people. He entered the village to seek alms and obtained much food. He gathered together with others in one place and ate. After eating, he brought the remaining food back to the Sangharama and gave it to the bhikkhus. After the bhikkhus had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Birds contended for it and clamored noisily. Although the Blessed One knew, he still asked Ananda:

“Why are the birds clamoring like this?”

Venerable Ananda replied:

“There was an elder, a bhikkhu who was known by many people. He entered the village to seek alms and obtained much food. He gathered together with others in one place and ate. After eating, he brought the remaining food back to the Sangharama and gave it to the bhikkhus. After the bhikkhus had eaten their fill, they did not dare eat any more and threw it away. Therefore, the birds contend for it and clamor like this.”

The Buddha told Ananda:

“From now on, I permit the bhikkhus to perform the procedure for leftover food with food brought back from another place and then eat it. The procedure for leftover food is performed by taking that food before a senior bhikkhu who has not yet finished eating and saying, ‘Venerable sir, I have eaten my fill. Please acknowledge it and inspect it.’ This constitutes performing the procedure for leftover food. That bhikkhu should take and eat a little, and then say to the bhikkhu performing the procedure, ‘You may take and eat as you please.’ That bhikkhu should perform the procedure for leftover food in this way before eating.”

At that time, in the country of Sravasti, there was a gluttonous bhikkhu who did not know what constituted having eaten one’s fill and what constituted not having eaten one’s fill; he did not know what was food made allowable as leftover food and what was not; whenever he received food, he ate it.

The bhikkhus heard about this. Among them, those who had few desires and were content, who practiced the dhutanga austerities, delighted in training in the precepts, and possessed a sense of shame and moral dread, criticized that bhikkhu, saying, “Why are you so gluttonous, not knowing what constitutes having eaten one’s fill and what constitutes not having eaten one’s fill, and not knowing what is food made allowable as leftover food and what is not, but eating whenever you receive food?”

The bhikkhus went to the Blessed One, bowed at the Buddha’s feet, and sat to one side. They reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. The Blessed One then, on account of this matter, assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus. Although he knew, he still asked that bhikkhu:

“Is it true that you are gluttonous, that you do not know what constitutes having eaten one’s fill and what constitutes not having eaten one’s fill, that you do not know what is food made allowable as leftover food and what is not, and that whenever you receive food, you eat it?”

That bhikkhu replied:

“Blessed One, it is true.”

“What you have done is wrong. It is not in accordance with proper conduct, not the Dharma of a renunciant, not pure conduct, not conduct conducive to the path, and is something that should not be done. Bhikkhu, why are you so gluttonous?”

After rebuking him, the Blessed One told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, [661a1] I shall establish a precept comprising the ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the true Dharma.”

When wishing to state the precept, it should be stated thus:

If a bhikkhu, having eaten his fill or having accepted an invitation,^[212] eats again without performing the procedure for leftover food,^[213] he commits a pācittiya offense.

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: the meaning is as explained above.

Food: this comprises five kinds: rice, flour cakes, parched rice, fish, and meat. With regard to these five kinds of food, if one eats any one of them—whether rice, flour cakes, parched rice, fish, or meat—until one is satisfied, there are five factors of having eaten one’s fill:^[214] knowing that it is rice, knowing that it has been brought, knowing that one has refused it, knowing one’s posture, and knowing that one has relinquished that posture. Having eaten one’s fill and relinquished that posture, if one receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, one commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

At that time, the Venerable Upāli rose from his seat, bared his right shoulder, knelt with one knee on the ground, joined his palms, and addressed the Buddha:

“For a bhikkhu who is walking, under how many circumstances is he considered to have eaten his fill?”

The Buddha told Upāli:

“There are five circumstances under which he is considered to have eaten his fill. What are the five? Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking, knows that the food is rice, knows that it has been brought, knows that he has refused it, knows his posture, and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Knowing that he has eaten his fill and having relinquished that posture,^[215] if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case,^[216] Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking; knows flour cakes, parched rice, fish, and meat; knows that they have been brought; knows that he has refused them; knows his posture; and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, at that time a bhikkhu knows that he is walking, knows that the food is flour cakes, knows the person who brings it, knows that he has refused it, knows his posture, and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, at that time a bhikkhu knows that he is walking; knows parched rice, fish and meat, rice, and flour cakes; knows the person who brings them; knows that he has refused them; knows his posture; and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking, knows that the food is parched rice, knows the person who brings it, knows that he has refused it, knows his posture, and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking; knows fish and meat, rice, and flour cakes; knows the person who brings them; knows that he has refused them; knows his posture; and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking, knows that the food is fish, knows the person who brings it, knows that he has refused it, knows his posture, and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking; knows meat, rice, flour cakes, and parched rice; knows the person who brings them; knows that he has refused them; knows his posture; and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking, knows that the food is meat, knows the person who brings it, knows that he has refused it, knows his posture, and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“In this case, Upāli, a bhikkhu knows that he is walking; knows rice, flour cakes, parched rice, fish, and meat; knows the person who brings them; knows that he has refused them; knows his posture; and knows that he has relinquished that posture. Having eaten his fill and relinquished that posture, if he receives and eats food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

“Upāli, these are called the five circumstances under which a bhikkhu who is walking has eaten his fill. The same applies when standing, sitting, or lying down.”

Khādanīya food^[217] comprises khādanīya roots, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits, as well as oil, sesame, sugarcane sugar, and ground food.^[218] If a bhikkhu, having eaten his fill, receives and eats such food without performing the procedure for leftover food, he commits a pācittiya offense with each mouthful.

If, after having eaten one’s fill, one performs the procedure for leftover food for another person, but the procedure is invalid, one commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If one knows that another person has eaten his fill and performs the procedure for leftover food for him, but the procedure is invalid, one commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If a bhikkhu holds food in his own hand and performs the procedure for leftover food, but the procedure is invalid, he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If he places the food on the ground and performs the procedure for leftover food, but the procedure is invalid, he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If a bhikkhu has a lay attendant hold the food and performs the procedure for leftover food, but the procedure is invalid, he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If a bhikkhu performs the procedure for leftover food before a lay attendant, he commits a duṣkṛta offense. If he covers fine food with inferior food and performs the procedure for leftover food, the procedure is invalid, and he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If a bhikkhu takes away all the food on which another person has performed the procedure for leftover food, the procedure is invalid, and he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

If he has eaten his fill and perceives that he has eaten his fill, he commits a pācittiya offense. If he has eaten his fill but is doubtful, he commits a duṣkṛta offense. If a bhikkhu has not eaten his fill but perceives that he has eaten his fill, he commits a duṣkṛta offense. If he has not eaten his fill but is doubtful, he commits a duṣkṛta offense.

For a bhikkhunī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. For a śikṣamāṇā, śrāmaṇera, or śrāmaṇerī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. This is called a transgression.

There is no offense if one perceives food as not being food and does not accept the performance of the procedure for leftover food; if it is not food and one does not perform the procedure for leftover food; if one holds it in one’s own hand and performs the procedure for leftover food; if one performs the procedure for leftover food without placing it on the ground; even if one’s hand touches the food vessel; if one performs the procedure for another, or another performs it for oneself; if, being ill, one does not perform the procedure for leftover food; if one consumes food left over by an ill person without performing the procedure for leftover food; or if the procedure for leftover food has already been performed. In all such cases, there is no offense.

Those who do not commit an offense are: one who transgresses for the first time before the precept has been established, one who is insane, mentally deranged, racked by pain, or under duress.

XXXVI. URGING ONE WHO HAS EATEN HIS FILL TO EAT^[219]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was staying in Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park in the Jeta Grove at Śrāvastī. At that time, in Śrāvastī there were two brothers, both of whom were bhikkhus. One of them was fond of eating and drinking and did not know whether he had eaten his fill or had not eaten his fill, whether food was leftover food or not leftover food; whenever he received food, he ate it. Another bhikkhu said to him: “Never has there been anyone like you, so fond of eating and drinking, not knowing whether you have eaten your fill or have not eaten your fill, whether food is leftover food or not leftover food; whenever you receive food, you eat it at once.”

When that bhikkhu heard these words, he harbored resentment. Later, after some time, he saw that this bhikkhu had eaten but had not performed the procedure for leftover food, so he earnestly urged him to eat. This bhikkhu ate. The gluttonous bhikkhu then said:

“Never have I seen anyone as fond of food as you. You do not know whether you have eaten your fill or have not eaten your fill; you do not know whether food is leftover food or not leftover food. Whenever you receive food, you eat it, knowing neither satiety nor sufficiency.”

This bhikkhu said:

“Although I had eaten, I had not yet eaten my fill.”

The other bhikkhu said:

“You had already eaten your fill before that.”

This bhikkhu said:

“You knew that I had already eaten my fill, did you not?”

He replied:

“Yes, I knew.”

This bhikkhu asked:

“Knowing that about me, did you deliberately urge me to eat?”

He replied:

“Yes, I did.”

Then this bhikkhu reproached the other bhikkhu, saying:

“Why, knowing that another bhikkhu had already eaten his fill, did you earnestly urge him to eat, wishing to cause another to violate a precept?”

When the bhikkhus heard of this matter, those among them who had few desires, were content, practiced the dhuta austerities, delighted in training in the precepts, and possessed a sense of shame and moral dread criticized that bhikkhu: “Why, knowing that another had already eaten his fill, did you earnestly urge him to eat, wishing to cause him to commit an offense?”

The bhikkhus then went to the Blessed One, paid homage at the Buddha’s feet, and sat to one side. They reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. Thereupon, on account of this matter, the Blessed One assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus. Although he knew what had happened, the Buddha still asked that bhikkhu:

“Is it true that, knowing that the other bhikkhu had already eaten his fill, you earnestly urged him to eat, wishing to cause him to violate a precept?”

That bhikkhu replied:

“Venerable Blessed One, it is indeed true.”

The Blessed One rebuked that bhikkhu in countless ways:

“What you did was wrong. It was not in accordance with proper conduct, not the practice of a śramaṇa, not pure conduct, not conduct in harmony with the Dharma. You did what ought not to be done. Why, knowing that another had already eaten his fill, did you earnestly urge him to eat, wishing to cause him to violate a precept?”

After rebuking that bhikkhu in countless ways, the Blessed One told the bhikkhus:

“This foolish man is the first offender against this precept, a ground in which many seeds of the taints are planted. From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, I shall establish a precept comprising ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the true Dharma.”

The precept should be stated as follows:

If a bhikkhu, knowing that another bhikkhu has already eaten his fill, earnestly urges him to eat, saying, ‘Venerable sir, partake of this food!’ solely for the purpose of causing the other to violate a precept and for no other reason, he commits a pācittiya offense.

The Blessed One established the precept for the bhikkhus in this way. At that time, some bhikkhus did not know whether another had eaten or not, nor whether he had eaten his fill or not. Only afterward did they learn that he had already eaten his fill. Some performed the act of confession for a pācittiya offense, while others became fearful. The Buddha said:

“If one did not know, there is no offense.”

From now on, the precept should be stated as follows:

If a bhikkhu, knowing that another bhikkhu has already eaten his fill or has accepted an invitation,^[220] earnestly urges him to eat, saying, ‘Venerable sir, partake of this food!’ solely for the purpose of causing the other to violate a precept and for no other reason, he commits a pācittiya offense.

B. ANALYSIS OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: as explained above.

Food: the five kinds explained previously.

Urging: this too may be done in the five ways explained above.^[221]

A bhikkhu knows that another bhikkhu has eaten his fill and has not performed the formal act concerning leftover food, yet earnestly urges him to eat, saying, “Venerable sir, partake of this food.” If the other accepts and eats it, with each mouthful both commit a pācittiya offense. If he urges him to eat but the invited bhikkhu does not eat and throws the food away, the one who urged him commits a dukkaṭa offense. If a bhikkhu urges another to eat and the other accepts the food but does not eat it and instead stores it away, the one who urged him commits a dukkaṭa offense.

If a bhikkhu urges another to eat and the other accepts the food but passes it to someone else, the one who urged him commits a dukkaṭa offense. If a bhikkhu gives food to another without having performed the formal act concerning leftover food, and that person performs the formal act and then eats it, the giver commits a dukkaṭa offense. If he gives food intended for a sick person, wishing to cause another to commit an offense, the giver commits a dukkaṭa offense.

If he gives another person food left over by a sick person, wishing to cause that person to commit an offense, the giver commits a dukkaṭa offense. If, after performing the formal act concerning leftover food, he gives it to another, wishing to cause that person to commit an offense, the giver commits a dukkaṭa offense.

If the other has eaten his fill and one perceives that he has eaten his fill, it is a pācittiya offense. If he has eaten his fill but one is uncertain, it is a dukkaṭa offense. If he has not eaten his fill but one perceives that he has eaten his fill, it is a dukkaṭa offense. If he has not eaten his fill but one is uncertain, it is a dukkaṭa offense.

In the case of a bhikkhunī, it is a dukkaṭa offense. In the case of a śikṣamāṇā, śrāmaṇera, or śrāmaṇerī, it is a dukkaṭa offense. This is called an offense.

There is no offense if one did not know beforehand; if the other has eaten his fill but one perceives that he has not; if one gives the food to be discarded and the other eats it; if one gives the food to be stored and the other eats it; if one tells the other to give it to someone else but he takes and eats it himself; if one gives food for which the formal act concerning leftover food has not yet been performed and tells the other to perform the formal act and then eat it, but the other eats without performing the formal act; or if one gives food left over by a sick person without wishing to cause another to commit an offense. In all such cases, there is no offense.

Those who do not commit an offense are one who committed the act for the first time before the precept was established, one who is insane, mentally deranged, afflicted by pain, or under duress.

XXXVII. EATING AT AN IMPROPER TIME^[222]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was dwelling on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa in the city of Rājagṛha. At that time, the people of Rājagṛha were holding a festival and staging musical performances.

Then the two Śākyan sons Nanda and Upananda went to watch the musical performances. Because Nanda and Upananda were handsome in appearance, everyone wished to gaze upon them. Someone in the crowd then said:

“You merely gaze at these Śākyan śramaṇas. Why do you not provide them with food? You should make offerings to them, and only then gaze at them!”

Thereupon, everyone gave them food. After the two Śākyan sons Nanda and Upananda had eaten, they continued watching the singing and music until evening, and only then returned to Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa. Seeing them, the bhikkhus asked:

“Why have you returned so late, when it is already dark?”

Nanda and Upananda related the circumstances to the bhikkhus.

That same evening, Kālodāyin^[223] put on his robe, took up his alms bowl, and entered the city of Rājagṛha to seek alms. In the dim twilight, Kālodāyin came to the house of a pregnant woman to seek alms. The woman brought food out to the gateway. Just then, lightning flashed, and she suddenly saw Kālodāyin’s countenance.^[224] Terrified, she cried out, “A ghost! A ghost!” As a result, she miscarried. Kālodāyin said:

“Younger sister, I am not a ghost. I am a Śākyan śramaṇa.”

The woman angrily said:

“Śākyan śramaṇa, may your entrails burst forth! Do not go seeking alms at night!”

Upon hearing these words, Kālodāyin returned to the monastery and related the matter to the bhikkhus.

Those among them who had few desires, were content, practiced the dhuta austerities, delighted in training in the precepts, and possessed a sense of shame and moral dread criticized the conduct of the Śākyan sons Nanda and Upananda, as well as Kālodāyin: “Nanda, Upananda, and Kālodāyin, why did you seek alms at an improper time and watch musical performances?”

The bhikkhus went to the Blessed One, paid homage at the Buddha’s feet, and sat to one side. They reported this matter in full to the Blessed One. Thereupon, on account of this matter, the Blessed One assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus and rebuked the Śākyan sons Nanda and Upananda, as well as Kālodāyin, in countless ways:

“What you did was wrong. It was not in accordance with proper conduct, not the practice of a śramaṇa, not pure conduct, not conduct in harmony with the Dharma. You did what ought not to be done. Nanda, Upananda, and Kālodāyin, why did you seek alms at an improper time and watch musical performances?”

After rebuking the Śākyan sons Nanda and Upananda, as well as Kālodāyin, in countless ways, the Blessed One told the bhikkhus:

“From now on, you must not watch musical performances. Whoever watches a musical performance commits a dukkaṭa offense.

“From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, I shall establish a precept comprising ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the true Dharma.”

The precept should be stated as follows:

If a bhikkhu accepts and eats food^[225] at an improper time, he commits a pācittiya offense.

B. ANALYSIS OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: as explained above.

Proper time: from the appearance of dawn until midday. This is the time prescribed by the Dharma for eating. The inhabitants of the four continents also eat at this time.

Improper time: from midday until dawn has not yet appeared.

Food: there are two kinds, khādanīya and bhojanīya,^[226] each comprising the five kinds explained above.

If any bhikkhu receives food at an improper time and eats it, he commits one pācittiya offense with each mouthful. If it is food for an improper time and is consumed after the improper time, it is a pācittiya offense. If seven-day medicine^[227] is kept beyond seven days, it is a pācittiya offense. If lifetime medicine^[228] is used without cause, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is an improper time and he perceives it as an improper time, it is a pācittiya offense. If it is an improper time and he is uncertain, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is an improper time but he perceives it as the proper time, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is the proper time but he perceives it as an improper time, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is the proper time and he is uncertain, it is a duṣkṛta offense.

For a bhikkhuni, it is a pācittiya offense. For a śikṣamāṇā, śrāmaṇera, or śrāmaṇerī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. This is called an offense.

There is no offense: At that time, a bhikkhu on almsround saw people making dark sugar,^[229] in which there was jini substance.^[230] Being apprehensive, he was cautious and did not dare consume it at an improper time. The Buddha said, “It is permitted to consume it; there is no offense. It must be prepared in this manner.”

At that time, a sick bhikkhu took purgative medicine. A bhikkhu cooked gruel, but while waiting for it to cook, the proper time passed. He should therefore boil barley without allowing the husks to split, strain off the liquid, and consume it; there is no offense. If food rises back into the throat and is swallowed again, there is no offense.

Those who do not offend are one who committed the act for the first time before the precept was established, one who is insane, mentally deranged, tormented by pain, or under duress.

XXXVIII. OVERNIGHT FOOD^[231]

A. ORIGIN

At one time, the Buddha was staying on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa near the city of Rājagṛha. At that time, the Venerable Kāla^[232] was also dwelling there in meditative contemplation. Each day, at the proper time, the Venerable put on his robe, took up his bowl, and entered Rājagṛha to seek alms.

At that time, almsfood was easily obtained in Rājagṛha, so Kāla thought, “Why must I trouble myself by entering the city each day to seek alms? I shall eat the food previously obtained and bring back the food I obtain today.” He subsequently acted according to this thought.^[233] The Venerable then carried out what he had conceived.

At that time, the bhikkhus did not see Kāla at either the morning meal or the midday meal, and so they discussed among themselves, “We have not seen Kāla at the morning meal or the midday meal. Could he have died, traveled far away, abandoned the training, been killed by bandits, been harmed by a wild beast, or perhaps even been swept away by water?”

After some time, they saw Kāla appear again. The bhikkhus asked:

“Where have you been these past few days, that we did not see you at either the morning meal or the midday meal? We thought you might have died, traveled far away, been harmed by a wild beast, abandoned the training, or been harmed by a wild beast.”

Kāla then related the foregoing matter to the bhikkhus. Among them were those of few desires and contentment, who practiced the dhūta disciplines, delighted in studying the precepts, and possessed shame and moral dread. They reproached Kāla, saying, “Why did you store food overnight and then eat it?”

The bhikkhus then went to the Blessed One, bowed at the Buddha’s feet, and sat to one side. They reported this entire matter to the Blessed One. On account of this matter, the Blessed One assembled the Sangha of bhikkhus. Though he knew, he nevertheless asked Kāla:

“Is it true that you stored food overnight and then ate it?”

Kāla replied:

“It is true.”

The Blessed One reproached Kāla in innumerable ways:

“What you have done is wrong. It is not proper deportment, not the Dharma of a śramaṇa, not pure conduct, not conduct in accordance with the training; you have done what ought not to be done. Kāla, why did you store food overnight and then eat it? Although your intention arose from having few desires and being content, living beings in later generations will imitate this conduct.”

After reproaching Kāla, the Blessed One told the bhikkhus:

“This foolish man is one in whom many seeds of the outflows are planted, and he is the first offender against this precept. From now on, for the sake of the bhikkhus, I shall establish this precept, comprising the ten benefits, up to and including the enduring preservation of the True Dharma.”

When stating the precept, it should be stated thus:

If any bhikkhu eats food kept overnight,^[234] it is a pācittiya offense.

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRECEPT

Bhikkhu: the meaning is as explained above.

Overnight food:^[235] food received today and kept until the following day. For all Śākyan śramaṇas who have received the higher ordination, eating such food is impure.

There are two kinds of food: principal food and non-principal food.^[236] Non-principal food means food made from roots, up to and including food ground into crumbs.^[237] Principal food means meat, fish, dried rice, provisions, and cooked rice.

If a bhikkhu eats food kept overnight, he commits one pācittiya offense with each mouthful. If he eats food intended for an improper time after that improper time, it is a pācittiya offense. If he receives seven-day medicine and uses it after seven days, it is a pācittiya offense. If he uses lifetime medicine without illness as a reason, it is a duṣkṛta offense.

If it is overnight food and he perceives it as overnight food, it is a pācittiya offense. If it is overnight food and he is uncertain, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is not overnight food but he perceives it as overnight food, it is a duṣkṛta offense. If it is not overnight food and he is uncertain, it is a duṣkṛta offense.

For a bhikkhuni, it is a pācittiya offense. For a śikṣamāṇā, śrāmaṇera, or śrāmaṇerī, it is a duṣkṛta offense. This is called an offense.

There is no offense: If food received and left overnight remains, the remainder may be given to one’s parents. Or it may be given to those constructing a stupa or monastic lodgings, reckoning the food as payment for their labor; afterward, if the bhikkhu seeks alms from those workers and receives the food back, there is no offense. If food becomes lodged in a crack in a bowl and, when washing it, one fears that prying it out would break the bowl, one should carefully wash it in accordance with the Dharma; if it does not come out, there is no offense. If milk, oil, ghee, or fat is received at night for instillation into the nostrils, then if the milk or oil flows back out after being instilled, it should be discarded. In all such cases, there is no offense.

Those who do not offend are one who committed the act for the first time before the precept was established, one who is insane, mentally deranged, tormented by pain, or under duress. ^[238]

Notes:

^[184] Mahīśāsaka Vinaya 7, pācittiya 32; Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 40—the note (T22n1425, p. 362b24) says that insects ate away rule 40 concerning separate-group meals in the Sanskrit manuscript preserved at Jetavana Monastery; Sarvāstivāda Daśabhāṇavāra Vinaya, pācittiya 36; Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 36. Pali, Pāc. 32, Gaṇabhojana.

^[185] See Chapter ii, saṅghāvaśeṣa 10.

^[186] Devadatta 提婆達, Sanvandāradata 三聞陀羅達, Khandaradatta 騫駄羅達婆, Kokālika 瞿婆離, and Kaluratiṣya 迦留羅提舍. See Chapter ii, saṅghāvaśeṣa 10 and note 123, Devadatta and his companions.

^[187] Four or more bhikkhus who do not yet possess all the factors necessary to constitute a Sangha (Pali: Saṅgha) are called a separate group (gaṇa).

^[188] Separate-group meal 別眾食. See the explanation below. Mahīśāsaka Vinaya 7 (T22n1421, p. 50c24): a meal by a separately invited group 別請眾食.

^[189] The month of Kārttika 迦提月; see note 177, Chapter iv, naiḥsargika-pācittiya 29.

^[190] See note 187 above.

^[191] The Sangha is divided into several separate groups, each of which takes its meal in a different place.

^[192] King Bimbisāra 瓶沙王. See note 113, Chapter i, pārājika 2; note 98, Chapter ii, saṅghāvaśeṣa 10.

^[193] Kāla 迦羅. Mahīśāsaka Vinaya 7 (T22n1421, p. 50c27): the king’s younger brother, named Kālu 迦留. Sarvāstivāda Daśabhāṇavāra Vinaya 13 (T23n1435, p. 94c25) and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya 36 (T23n1442, p. 824a01): the king’s maternal uncle. Pali, Vin. iv. 747: a relative of King Seniya Bimbisāra who went forth among the naked Ājīvaka ascetics; his name is not stated.

^[194] That is, the community of bhikkhus was invited to a meal by an ascetic of another path.

^[195] For the five kinds of food, see note 182 under pācittiya 32 above.

^[196] Pali: mahāsamayo. The English translation understands this as an extreme scarcity, because the Pali word samaya means “season” or “occasion.” In Sanskrit, samaya also means “assembly.”

^[197] Pali: samaṇabhattasamayo, explained as: “an ascetic’s meal—that is, a meal prepared by an ascetic.” (Vin. iv. 475).

^[198] Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 38; Sarvāstivāda Daśabhāṇavāra Vinaya and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 33. Pali, Pāc. 34.

^[199] Kāṇamātā 伽若那. Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya: Blind-Eye 瞎眼. Sarvāstivāda Daśabhāṇavāra Vinaya: Sideways-Eye 睞眼, because she was cross-eyed. Pali: Kāṇamātā.

^[200] Pali: three times she prepared provisions for the journey, and each time she gave them all in alms to three bhikkhus; consequently, she was delayed in going to her husband’s home. The other Vinaya traditions relate the same.

^[201] Chinese: bǐng, qiǔ 餅糗. Pali: pūvehi vā manthehi; explained as: pūva, cakes intended as gifts; mantha, dry provisions for a journey.

^[202] This bhikkhu has not brought back any bowls; he informs the other bhikkhu that he may bring back two or three bowls.

^[203] This bhikkhu has brought back one bowl; he informs the next bhikkhu that he may bring back no more than two bowls.

^[204] This bhikkhu has brought back two bowls; he informs the next bhikkhu that he may bring back only one more bowl.

^[205] See the notes above.

^[206] Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, pācittiya 35; Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 33; Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 34. Pali, Pāc. 35.

^[207] The rule of one meal 一食法, or eating at one sitting: eating one meal a day. Pali: ekāsana/ekabhatta. The Chinese version reads eka-asana: eating once, “one meal.” Other versions read eka-āsana, one seat, “one sitting (for a meal).” Cf. M.i. 437.

^[208] Khư-xà-ni 佉闍尼. Pali: khādanīya, hard food (which must be bitten). See the explanation in the section on the characteristics of the precept and note 182.

^[209] Proper food 正食. Pali: bhojanīya, soft food. See note 182, pācittiya 32.

^[210] Eating repeatedly 數數食.

^[211] The rule concerning sufficient food 足食法. See the latter part of note 184.

^[212] Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya: “…having eaten sufficiently and having left the seat…” Pali: bhuttāvī pavārito, having finished eating and being satisfied. The Chinese version understands pavārito as “having been invited.”

^[213] The rule concerning leftover food 餘食法. The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya and the other Vinaya traditions have: the rule concerning remaining food 殘食法.

^[214] Cf. Mahīśāsaka Vinaya 7 (T22n1421, p. 52c13): for each kind of food, five conditions are said to constitute sufficient food: food is present; it has been offered; it has been received, chewed, and swallowed; the meal has been completed; and one has left the seat—this is called sufficient food (having eaten enough). Pali, Vin. iv. 82, gives five factors constituting sufficient food: 1. it is known that one is eating (asanaṃ paññāyati); 2. it is known that food is present (bhojanaṃ paññāyati); 3. one stands nearby within arm’s reach (hatthapāse ṭhito); 4. it is brought and offered (abhiharati); 5. it is known that one has refused it because one has eaten one’s fill (paṭikkhepo paññāyati).

^[215] That is, one is no longer “going.”

^[216] The content of the repeated passages differs only in the kind of food.

^[217] Pali: khādanīya, hard food (which must be bitten), explained at Vin. iv. 83 as follows: apart from the five staple foods (bhojanīya, soft food), and apart from foods permitted to be kept overnight, for seven days, or for life, all the rest is hard food. Sarvāstivāda Vinaya (T23n1435, p. 91b11): five kinds of khư-đà-ni 佉陀尼: roots, stalks, leaves, ground food, and fruit 根莖葉磨果. Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya (T23n1442, p. 821b22): roots, stalks, leaves, flowers, and fruit 根莖葉花果. Mahīśāsaka Vinaya 7 (T22n1421, p. 52c12): cooked rice, dried rice, flour cakes, fish, and meat 飯乾飯餅糗魚肉.

^[218] Ground into a fine powder 磨細末. In the passage below, it is called fine-powder food 細末食.

^[219] Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, pācittiya 36; Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 34; Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 35. Pali, Pāc. 36.

^[220] See note 212, pācittiya 35.

^[221] Invitation 請. Other versions have: declared invitation. This explains the expression “accepting an invitation” in the text of the precept, although no explanation appears in the preceding passage. More precisely, it explains the meaning of “sufficient food” (Pali: pavārita), which the Chinese version understands as “accepting an invitation (being invited).” See note 212, pācittiya 35 above.

^[222] Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, pācittiya 38; Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 36; Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 37. Pali, Pāc. 37.

^[223] Ca-lưu-đà-di 迦留陀夷. Cf. M.i. 437 (Bhaddālisutta): the account of the Venerable Bhaddāli. See Madhyama Āgama 51, Sutra 194, Bạt-đà-hòa-lợi, T1, p. 746.

^[224] Pali: Kāḷudāyi (Skt. Kālodāyin): Kāḷa + Udāyī, meaning “Dark Udāyi,” because his complexion was dark.

^[225] Pali: hard food (khādanīya) and soft food (bhojanīya).

^[226] See the passages above and the related notes.

^[227] A kind of food (regarded as medicine) permitted to be kept and used for a period of seven days.

^[228] Medicine (food) that may be stored and used without any time limit.

^[229] Black rock sugar 黑石蜜, a kind of unrefined granulated sugar.

^[230] Pali: kiṇṇa, a fermenting agent.

^[231] Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, pācittiya 39; Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, pācittiya 37; Sarvāstivāda Vinaya and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, pācittiya 38.

^[232] Ca-la 迦羅. Sarvāstivāda Vinaya 13: the bhikkhu Thượng Thắng 上勝. Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya 36: the Venerable Ca-la 具壽哥羅. Pali: Belaṭṭhasīsa, Ānanda’s preceptor (ānandassa upajjhāyo).

^[233] The Chinese text of this passage is somewhat obscure. Cf. Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya 36 (T23n1442, p. 824c24): if wet food is obtained on the alms round, receive it in the bowl and eat it at once. If it is dry food, wrap it in a cloth, bring it back, and store it. On a day when rain prevents one from going on the alms round, take it out and eat it. Cf. Pali, Vin. iv. 86: Belaṭṭha stored rice and dried it in the sun. When he needed to eat it, he took it out, sprinkled it with water, and ate it.

^[234] Leftover food kept overnight 殘宿食. Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya 36: previously touched food 曾觸食. Pali: sannidhikāraṃ khādānīyaṃ vā bhojanīyaṃ vā khādeyya vā bhuñjeyya vā, eating hard or soft foods that have been stored.

^[235] Chinese: food kept overnight 宿食; in the text of the precept: leftover food kept overnight 殘宿食. Pali: sannidhikarānaṃ khādanīyaṃ vā bhojanīyaṃ vā, storing hard and soft foods.

^[236] Proper food and food that is not proper food 正食非正食; that is, bhojanīya (soft food) and khādanīya (hard food). See the explanations in the passages above.

^[237] See note 218 above.

^[238] End of Fascicle 14.