善見律毘婆沙

Rule 7 (N.P. 7)

At that time, the Buddha was dwelling at Anathapindika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Savatthi.

Many laypeople said among themselves: “We have heard that a bhikkhu has lost his robes.” The donors then jointly offered robes.

An invitation to take whatever is needed: when a donor tells a bhikkhu, “Whatever you need, please take and use as you wish,” this is called an invitation to take whatever is needed.

Upper and lower robes: if he receives the two robes—the antaravasaka (inner robe) and the uttarasanga (robe worn over the left shoulder)—he may not also receive a sanghati. Therefore, the Vinaya states that a bhikkhu who has lost all three robes is permitted to receive the two upper and lower robes from one place. He should request the remaining robe elsewhere. If he has lost two robes, he is permitted to receive one robe. If he has lost one robe, he may not receive an additional one.

A bhikkhuni who has lost all five robes is permitted to receive two robes from one place. If she has lost four robes, she is permitted to receive one robe. If she has lost three robes, she may not receive any more. If the giver is a close friend or a donor who has extended an invitation and may therefore be asked, or if the property is her own, she is permitted to receive whatever she wishes.

This rule includes all six factors...(as in Rule 4). One is not exempt from the offense merely because of one’s perception. This rule was laid down concerning both bodily and verbal action and includes all three kinds of feeling.

Here ends the explanation concerning requesting the two upper and lower robes.

(Tatuttarisikkhàpada-vannanà Nitthita).

Rule 8 (N.P. 8)

At that time, the Buddha was dwelling at Anathapindika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Savatthi.

The value of a robe means the expense of having a robe made, reckoned in gold, silver, or money.

If a donor or the donor’s wife intends to use that value to have a robe made for a bhikkhu, and the bhikkhu, knowing this, goes to them and says, “If you are having a robe made for me, please make it long, broad, and truly fine.”

He asks them to increase the expense of making the robe: even if the increase is only one-sixteenth of the intended expense.

He asks them to weave it finely: if they weave even one additional thread, then when he receives the robe, he commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

If the donor intends to make a large robe and the bhikkhu advises making it smaller, or the donor intends to make an expensive robe and the bhikkhu advises reducing its value, and the donor does so, the bhikkhu commits no offense upon receiving that robe.

If the bhikkhu advises a relative, or a donor who has invited him and may therefore be asked, he commits no offense.

If he advises that the value of a robe intended for someone else be increased, he himself commits no offense.

The Dhamma teacher said: “The successive passages are easy to understand and require no extensive explanation.”

(Pathamaupakkhatasi kkhàpadavannanànitthità)

Rule 9 (P.N. 9)

The next rule concerns unrelated laypeople having a robe made for a bhikkhu. Since there are several laypeople, the sources from which the robe arises are different. The remaining passages are explained as in the preceding rule.

(Dutiyaupakkhatasikkhàpadavan-nanà nitthità).

Rule 10 (P.N. 9–10?)

At that time, the Buddha was dwelling at Anathapindika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Savatthi.

(A certain gahapati—a male householder) told another layman, “Take this sum, buy a robe, and offer it to the bhikkhu...” It is explained in this manner.

Fifty phat: one phat is equal in value to fifty kahapanas (Indian coins of that period).

“Venerable sir, please wait”: as when one says, “Venerable sir, I have business today. Please wait until today has passed, and tomorrow I shall give it to you.”

A royal servant: one who receives a stipend from the king is called a servant of the king.

To dispatch a messenger: to send someone to deliver it.

To deliver: to bring the value intended for making the robe to the bhikkhu.

To accept a permissible requisite: if it is a permissible requisite, we may accept it.

A permissible requisite (kappiya—allowable according to the Vinaya): robes and medicines for treating illness are called permissible requisites.

If there is a steward for the Sangha (veyyavaccakara—a servant): this is a person appointed by the Sangha to perform duties.

“He has been informed”: “I have informed the steward. If the venerable sir needs a robe, go to him, and he will give the venerable sir a robe.”

“Householder, I need a robe”: he makes the need known, speaking as appropriate to make the person understand. The same applies when he makes a request two or three times. If he obtains it, that is well. If he does not obtain it, he may make one, two, or three requests, up to the sixth request. Then, on the next occasion, the bhikkhu stands silently before him. How does he remain silent? He says nothing and may only stand; he may not sit down. If invited to eat or drink, he must not accept. If asked to teach the Dharma or bestow a blessing, he must not do so for them.

If the donor asks, “Why have you come here, venerable sir?”

He replies, “Householder, you yourself know.”

If he obtains the robe, that is well. If he does not make a verbal request, he may request it by standing silently up to twelve times. For every verbal request, two silent requests are deducted. For two verbal requests, four silent requests are deducted. For three verbal requests, six silent requests are deducted...up to six verbal requests, for which all twelve silent requests are deducted. If, after the prescribed number of requests, he continues requesting and obtains the robe, he commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

If he goes to make a request once each day, he may go for six days. If he goes once a day and makes six verbal requests, he may not go to request it again, nor may he make any further request by standing silently.

If he does not obtain the robe, he should go to the person who provided the funds for the robe and say, “I have derived no benefit whatsoever from your property. You should know this clearly and not allow it to be lost.”

If he does not obtain the robe, the bhikkhu should personally go and inform the owner of the robe-funds; he should not send someone else to report it. If he sends someone else to report it, he commits an offense of dukkata.

The Dhamma teacher said: “There are two kinds of stewards: first, an appointed steward; second, an unappointed steward.

“There are two kinds of appointed steward: one appointed by the bhikkhu and one appointed by the messenger.

“There are two kinds of unappointed steward: one who acts when the bhikkhu himself is absent, and one who acts when another person is absent.

“These are the four kinds of steward (kappiyakaraka).”

The Dhamma teacher said: “How is a steward appointed by the messenger?”

Answer: A certain layman purchases a robe for a bhikkhu and sends a messenger to see the bhikkhu. Upon arriving, the messenger says to the bhikkhu, “Venerable sir, the layman...has sent me to bring the funds for making a robe. Please accept them.”

The bhikkhu replies, “This is an impermissible object, so a bhikkhu may not accept it.”

The messenger then says, “Venerable sir, do you have a steward?”

The bhikkhu replies, “I do not.”

The messenger himself then finds a steward. After finding one, he brings that person to the bhikkhu and says, “This person can serve as the venerable sir’s steward.”

The messenger entrusts the funds for making the robe to the steward. Then, in the bhikkhu’s presence, the messenger tells the steward, “Use these funds to buy a robe and give it to the bhikkhu.”

If there is already a steward, the bhikkhu tells the messenger, “The steward lives in such-and-such a village, at such-and-such a place, and his name is....”

The messenger goes to that steward and says, “Take this sum, buy a robe, and give it to the bhikkhu....”

After entrusting the funds, the messenger returns to the bhikkhu and says, “I have entrusted the funds for making the robe to the steward whom the venerable sir identified. When the venerable sir needs the robe, go and obtain it.”

After entrusting the funds for making the robe to the steward, if the messenger does not personally return to inform the bhikkhu, he must send someone to tell the bhikkhu, “I have entrusted the funds for making the robe to the steward designated by the venerable sir. If you need the robe, please go and obtain it. He will give the robe to the venerable sir.”

The above are the four kinds of stewards. Therefore, it is said in the Vinaya: “Bhikkhus, if there is a steward who has faith and reverence for the Dharma, entrust the value of the robe to him. When you need a robe, go to him and obtain it. You may receive a permissible article, but you may not receive gold or silver.” In this matter, gold or silver may expediently be accepted and handed over to a steward; except in this case, it is not permissible to accept gold or silver.

If the messenger tells the steward, “Use this value to purchase a robe and give it to the bhikkhu...”

After entrusting the expense for making the robe to the steward, if the messenger does not inform the bhikkhu, the bhikkhu may not go to the steward and demand the robe. If he demands and obtains the robe, the bhikkhu commits a dukkata offense.

If a layperson brings gold or silver to a bhikkhu and says, “I bring this gold and silver as an offering to the Sangha. Venerable sir, please accept it to build a dwelling for the Sangha, a refectory, or gardens and fields,” the bhikkhu may not accept it. If he accepts it, he commits a dukkata offense. In this case, the bhikkhu should tell the person to entrust it to a kappiya attendant; only afterward may that gold or silver be administered and expended. If the messenger does not understand, the bhikkhu is permitted to have a kappiya attendant receive it, after which it may be allocated and used as appropriate.

If a layperson brings gold or silver as an offering to the Sangha for food, robes, beverages, or bedding, the Sangha may not accept it directly.

If the Sangha accepts gold or silver and subsequently obtains food or robes for use, a dukkata offense is incurred.

If the Sangha does not accept it and the layperson, failing to understand, takes it back, but on the way encounters a bhikkhu who knows the Vinaya, that bhikkhu may ask, “You brought this as an offering to the Sangha; why are you taking it back?”

Hearing this question and understanding, the layperson entrusts that gold and silver to a kappiya attendant.

Whatever a layperson gives is what must be used. A bhikkhu may not tell him to exchange that article for something for himself. If it is exchanged for another requisite, a dukkata offense is incurred.

If a donor makes an offering for constructing dwellings or a residence, but food and drink have run out, so that the Sangha is about to depart and no one will remain to guard the monastery, the expenditure for repairing the monastery may be reduced and used for food and drink to support the person who guards and maintains the lodgings. The person who reallocates it is blameless.

Regarding requisites intended for lodgings belonging to the Sangha of the Four Directions, if that residence has no food and the Sangha wishes to leave, the expenditure intended for lodgings may be reduced and applied to food and drink for the Sangha. Why? It is for the preservation of the residence. However, the entire amount may not be used up.

If a layperson offers fields or ponds, a bhikkhu may not accept them. How may they be accepted? The bhikkhu should tell the layperson, “The rule for bhikkhus does not permit the acceptance of fields or ponds.”

If the layperson tells the bhikkhu, “From these fields and ponds, the four permissible requisites will continually be produced and offered to the Sangha,” they may be accepted.

If the layperson says, “I offer this pond to the Sangha so that the Sangha may bathe and wash in it and all other beings may drink from it as they please,” the Sangha is permitted to accept that pond.

If the layperson does not know how to speak in the manner described above and merely says that he offers the pond, the bhikkhu should reply, “The rule for renunciants does not permit the acceptance of a pond. If you offer permissible water, it may be accepted.”

The layperson replies, “Excellent, venerable sir. My intention is to offer the water.”

If he speaks in this way, it may be accepted. If the layperson still does not understand those words and merely says that he makes the offering, and afterward dies, the bhikkhu still may not accept or use it.

If the layperson has children or grandchildren, the bhikkhu should instruct them to make the offering. If he has no descendants, the bhikkhu should say to the village elders, “That layperson did not know the proper formula for making the offering and has now died, so the bhikkhu may not accept or use it. You should decide what is to be done.”

Those elders then say to the bhikkhu, “We, your disciples, offer that water to the Sangha.” If they make the offering in this way, the bhikkhu may accept and use it without offense. With the exception of gold, silver, and money, which may not be accepted, if a layperson offers rice together with sweet fruits, robes, food, beverages, and so forth, all may be accepted.

If a layperson himself offers permissible food, a bhikkhu may accept it. A bhikkhu may not, for his own sake, tell a layperson or a kappiya attendant to prepare food and drink for him. Even if he obtains such food and drink, he may not consume it.

The Dharma teacher said: “Formerly, a bhikkhu dwelling on Mount Cittalapabbata wished to eat cakes. Going out before the veranda and seeing some laypeople, he sprinkled water upon the ground to draw the shape of a cake and said, ‘How might cakes like this be obtained as an offering to the Sangha tomorrow?’ Understanding the bhikkhu’s intention, the laypeople returned home, made cakes of that kind, and brought them the following morning as an offering to the Sangha. Knowing what had happened, the senior elder did not accept them. Seeing that the senior elder did not accept them, the junior bhikkhus likewise did not accept them.

“In former times, bhikkhus who knew contentment refused to eat merely because of such an indication. How much more improper is it today to solicit food for oneself merely for the sake of the body!”

If gardens or fields are given to oneself, they may not be accepted, just as stated above.

If a wilderness dwelling or a forest is offered, it may be accepted. If someone later clears the forest and turns it into fields, cultivating rice and sweet fruits for food and drink, those products may be accepted. If they are not given, one may not persist in soliciting them.

If someone formerly cleared a forest and made it into fields and then departed, and later people belonging to the Sangha come and cultivate them, compensation should be paid according to their value. Why? Because the former person made them into fields.

If someone wishes to lease the fields, payment may not be accepted in gold or silver, but permissible articles may be accepted.

If the person leasing the fields does not clearly know their location, he may ask the bhikkhu, “Who knows the boundaries of those fields? Please point them out clearly.” If the bhikkhu does not know them clearly, he may not point them out arbitrarily.

If someone offers a servant, the servant may not be accepted. If he says that he offers a kappiya attendant or a steward, the person may be accepted.

If a kappiya attendant of the Sangha prepares food for the Sangha in the morning and earns his own livelihood at noon and in the afternoon, food may be given to him before the midday meal, but none may be given after midday. Robes and all other articles may not be given to him.

If he performs work assigned by the Sangha for half of each month, the Sangha may provide him with food and robes during that half-month. During the half-month in which he performs his own work, the Sangha does not provide him with robes or provisions.

If he performs no work for the Sangha and has not been assigned any task by the Sangha, but works for himself and later earns an income which he then offers to the Sangha, the Sangha may accept it. If he does not offer it, they may not go and demand it.

If cattle or goats are offered, a bhikkhu may not accept them. If the donors say that they offer milk, ghee, and the other items among the five dairy products, these may be accepted. The same applies to all other kinds of animals.

The Dharma teacher said: “The sequence of the text is easy to understand. This rule arose because of a king and those who served the king. It encompasses all three kinds of karma—bodily, verbal, and mental—and all three kinds of feeling. This is an offense established by regulation, yet ignorance does not exempt one from it.”

(Rājasikkhāpada-vaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā).

Rule 11 (P.N. 11)

At that time, the Buddha was dwelling in the city of Āḷavī.

A felt rug mixed with silk (Kasiyamissaka santhata) is a flat covering spread upon the ground.

Sprinkled and intermingled with sour water (an acidic substance?): Even if it is mixed with a single strand of silk, it entails forfeiture and expiation.

Silk fiber (Kasiyamsu) is a kind of fine, delicate fiber. This type of rug is made by felting wool together, not by weaving it.

The Dharma teacher said: “The sequence of the text is easy to understand.”

(The Commentary on the Kosiyasikkhāpada is concluded.)

Rule 12 (P.N. 12)

At that time, the Buddha was staying in the Gabled Hall (Kūṭāgārasālā) at Vesālī.

Entirely of black goat’s wool (Suddhakālaka eḷakaloma): this means that it is not mixed with any other kind of wool.

The Dharma teacher said: “The sequence of the passages is easy to understand and requires no explanation.”

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning the use of entirely black goat’s wool.

(Suddhakālakasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 13 (P.N. 13)

At that time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Sāvatthī.

(Sewing it) onto the border (of the sitting cloth) (ādiyitvā): using a small amount of white woolen felt to cover the border.

The Dharma teacher said: “This has been clearly explained in the Vinaya and requires no extensive explanation.”

(Dvebhāgasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 14 (P.N. 14)

At that time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Sāvatthī.

Except in the case of an ill bhikkhu. If an ill bhikkhu wishes to go to another dwelling place but, because the sitting cloth is heavy, is unable to carry it, he may make a new sitting cloth after receiving authorization through a formal act of the Sangha. If his illness has not ended, he may make one as he wishes. If his illness has ended but later recurs, there is no need for another formal act; he may make one under the authorization of the previous formal act.

The Dharma teacher said: “The sequence of the passages is easy to understand and requires no extensive explanation.”

(Chabbassasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 15 (P.N. 15)

At that time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Sāvatthī.

This concerns the rule on making a sitting cloth: “Bhikkhus, I, the Buddha, wish to enter a secluded place and dwell there for three months.”

The Dharma teacher said: “Why did the Blessed One enter a secluded place and dwell there for three months? The Blessed One surveyed all sentient beings and saw that during those three months no one would attain the path. Therefore, he went to a secluded place to dwell for three months. (The Blessed One said:) After I have gone, such a matter will occur.

When the bhikkhus hear my words, they will establish an unlawful regulation. Upasena Vaṅgantaputta will break that unlawful regulation and enter the chamber where I am dwelling. Upon seeing him, I shall praise him highly.

Because of Upasena Vaṅgantaputta, many bhikkhus who observe the dhutaṅga practices will also come to see me. After dwelling in seclusion for three months, I shall lead the bhikkhus to inspect the chambers and shall see sitting cloths carelessly discarded. On that account, I shall establish a rule concerning sitting cloths for the bhikkhus.”

Having reflected in this way, the Blessed One dwelt in seclusion for three months.

At that time, Upasena Vaṅgantaputta went to where the Buddha was staying. The elder Upasena had conferred full ordination upon a disciple who was not yet twenty years old and thus committed a dukkaṭa offense. In the Khandhaka he was reproved: “You foolish man, you have not yet completed ten rains; why did you confer full ordination upon someone not yet twenty years old? Moreover, you do not know how to instruct him; you must appoint someone else to instruct him.”

After receiving this reproof, Upasena paid homage to the Buddha and took his leave. He reflected: “I am a man who went forth with a wholesome intention, not an unwholesome one. Why should I be reproved because of a disciple? I shall go and dwell at a place ten yojanas away, instruct my disciples, and cause their deportment to become orderly like my own. Then I shall bring them back to pay respects to the Blessed One. Because my disciples possess deportment in accordance with the Dharma, I shall receive the Buddha’s praise.”

Question: “For this reason, it is said in the Vinaya that the Buddha asked a bhikkhu, ‘Do you enjoy wearing coarse robes?’”

Answer: “I truly do not enjoy wearing them; I wear them only because I comply with my teacher.”

The Buddha then praised him: “Excellent, excellent! Upasena has skillfully instructed his disciples so that their deportment is complete.”

The Buddha addressed the bhikkhus: Seeing sitting cloths discarded everywhere, the Buddha told the bhikkhus, “Things offered out of faith must be used properly; do not allow them to become damaged or lost.”

The Buddha taught in innumerable ways: the Buddha expounded the teaching to the bhikkhus in many ways.

An old sitting cloth is one that has been sat upon at least once.

Taking a small portion: cut a square or round piece from one of the four borders of the old sitting cloth and sew it onto the new sitting cloth. If it cannot be sewn on as a patch, it may instead be joined to the new one as an extension.

The Dharma teacher said: “The other passages have been clearly explained in the Vinaya and require no exposition. The circumstances giving rise to this rule are as stated above.”

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning sitting cloths.

(Nisīdanasanthanasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 16 (N.P. 16)

At that time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery in Jeta’s Grove, in the country of Sāvatthī.

This is the rule concerning carrying goat’s wool.

Mockery and ridicule: On the road, when householders saw a bhikkhu carrying goat’s wool, they asked, “Venerable sir, where are you taking this goat’s wool, where will you sell it, and what is its highest price?”

Hearing the householders mock and jest in this way, the bhikkhu returned to the monastery and, greatly angered, threw the goat’s wool onto the ground. Other bhikkhus asked, “Venerable sir, from where did you bring this goat’s wool, and why have you angrily thrown it onto the ground?”

The bhikkhu replied: “Because of this goat’s wool, I was ridiculed by the householders; therefore, in anger I threw it onto the ground.”

Carrying it oneself: wrapping the goat’s wool in the robe worn over the left shoulder and carrying it oneself.

Beyond three yojanas: if one personally carries it for more than three yojanas without anyone taking over the burden, then regardless of whether the amount of goat’s wool is large or small, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

If, upon reaching exactly three yojanas, one throws it onto the ground and thereafter pushes it with a stick or kicks it with one’s foot beyond three yojanas, one also commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

If, upon reaching three yojanas, one encounters dangers such as tigers, wolves, bandits, and so forth and therefore proceeds beyond three yojanas, one nevertheless commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

If, within three yojanas, it is seized by bandits and they later return it to the bhikkhu, the bhikkhu may carry it for another three yojanas without committing an offense.

Cases in which there is no offense: carrying a sitting cloth woven of goat’s wool; carrying a goat’s-wool rug; carrying goat’s wool within three yojanas; or, immediately upon reaching three yojanas, having another person take over and carry it beyond three yojanas.

Even if the amount of goat’s wool carried is so small that it would fit beneath the rim of the ear, carrying it beyond three yojanas constitutes an offense.

The Dharma teacher said: “The other passages are easy to understand and require no extensive explanation. This rule originates from body and mind; one cannot escape the offense by claiming not to have known.”

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning carrying goat’s wool.

(Eḷakalomadhovāpanasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 17 (P.N. 17)

At that time, the Buddha was staying in Nigrodha Park at Kapilavatthu among the Sakyan clan (Sakkesu Kapilavatthusmiṃ Nigrodhārāme). This is the rule concerning dyeing goat’s wool.

For fear that they would neglect meditation and scripture recitation: because the bhikkhunīs were occupied with washing and dyeing goat’s wool for the group of six bhikkhus, they neglected their duties of meditation and recitation.

The Dharma teacher said: “The other passages are easy to understand.”

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning washing and dyeing goat’s wool.

(Eḷakalomadhovāpanasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā niṭṭhitā.)

Rule 18 (P.N. 18)

At that time, the Buddha was staying on Vulture Peak Mountain near the city of Rājagaha. This is the rule concerning gold and silver.

Gold: mother-of-pearl, beryl, coral, and so forth—all precious objects and all things used in commercial exchange fall within the category of gold and silver. Therefore, it is stated in the Vinaya that even money made from tree resin and used in a country must not be accepted or handled, nor may one cause another person to accept or handle it; all such acts constitute offenses. If one accepts or handles gold and the like, as described above, for oneself, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. If one accepts or handles it for the Sangha, for a group of people, even for a single person, or for an image, one commits a dukkaṭa offense.

Cases in which there is no offense: one does not accept it oneself and does not tell another person to accept it. If a lay devotee brings gold or silver to offer to a bhikkhu, and the bhikkhu replies that he cannot accept it, the lay devotee may say, “Venerable sir, I have resolved to bring this article as an offering, so I cannot take it back.” Having said this, he leaves the article on the ground and departs.

After seeing the lay devotee depart, the bhikkhu remains there to watch over the article. Another lay devotee, seeing the bhikkhu staying there, approaches and asks, “Venerable sir, why are you here?”

The bhikkhu replies, “A lay devotee offered this gold and silver, but according to the rule for bhikkhus, I am not permitted to accept it.”

The lay devotee says to the bhikkhu, “Venerable sir, you are not permitted to accept it, but it may be given to a disciple.” The bhikkhu remains silent.

The lay devotee then takes the article away and afterward exchanges it for allowable articles such as food, robes, and so forth, which he brings and offers to the bhikkhu. The bhikkhu may accept them.

If no one present understands the rule, the bhikkhu places the gold or silver in a room and locks the door so that it will not be lost. If someone selling robes and bowls comes, the bhikkhu summons him, points out the gold or silver, and says to the seller of robes and bowls, “This poor monk needs this robe and bowl. Here is the gold and silver; lay devotee, you may take it as you see fit.”

If there is no seller of robes and bowls, but there is a seller of beverages allowable outside the proper time, seven-day medicine, or lifetime medicine, the bhikkhu leads the seller to the place where the gold or silver is kept and says, “There is this amount of gold and silver. The Sangha needs this medicine; lay devotee, you may take it as you see fit.”

After the medicine has been obtained, the Sangha may consume and use it, but the bhikkhu who was the owner of that gold or silver may not consume or use it separately. Laypeople, monastery attendants, and even animals may not consume it. Why? Because it belongs to the Sangha.

If no medicine is available, the owner of the gold or silver has left it behind and gone away, and there is no means by which it can properly be received or used, then upon seeing a male Buddhist devotee, the bhikkhu should summon him and tell him to throw it away.

The male Buddhist devotee says, “Why throw away this gold and silver? I shall accept it.”

The bhikkhu replies, “As you wish.”

If the male Buddhist devotee understands the rule and exchanges the gold or silver for robes and bowls, then brings them to the Sangha, they may be accepted.

If there is no male Buddhist devotee who can be told to throw it away, the Sangha should perform a motion followed by one proclamation to appoint a bhikkhu who clearly understands the five qualities. He should take the gold and silver, close his eyes, and throw it away without knowing where it falls. If he knows the precise place where it falls, he commits an offense of wrongdoing.

There are four ways of using a donor’s offerings:

1. Using them like a thief.

2. Using them as one in debt.

3. Using them as the property of an intimate friend.

4. Using them as an owner.

Question: What is using them like a thief?

Answer: If a bhikkhu has no virtue, yet in accordance with his place in the order of the Sangha enjoys the donor’s offerings of food and drink, this is called using them like a thief.

Question: What is using them as one in debt?

Answer: When a bhikkhu receives food, drink, or robes offered by others, he must first mindfully reflect upon them. If he enjoys food or robes without first reflecting upon them, this is called using them as one in debt. A bhikkhu who is intelligent and wise and who has gone forth through faith should reflect upon every morsel when taking his meal.

One of lesser wisdom should reflect once before eating. If a bhikkhu is of lesser wisdom, he should reflect once in the early morning when using robes. An intelligent bhikkhu should reflect each time he puts them on.

With regard to dwellings, beds, seats, bedding, and all other requisites given by the faithful, one must reflect before using them. If one does not first reflect, it is called using them as one in debt. If one uses robes for reasons other than protection from heat and cold and the covering of shame, or uses food, drink, and medicine for reasons other than hunger, thirst, and illness, this is also called being in debt.

Whoever uses food, drink, or robes without first reflecting commits an offense of wrongdoing.

Question: What is using them as the property of an intimate friend?

Answer: The seven kinds of noble trainees use a donor’s requisites as a child enjoys the property of his father; therefore, this is called using the property of an intimate friend.

Question: What is using them as an owner?

Answer: A true person who is an arhat receives and uses the donor’s requisites.

The Dharma teacher said: Of the four ways of receiving and using offerings described above, using them like a thief is the most evil. There are also four further ways of receiving and using them:

1. Using them with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing.

2. Using them without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing.

3. Using them in accordance with the Dharma.

4. Using them contrary to the Dharma.

What is using them with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing?

A person without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing associates closely with one who possesses moral shame and fear of wrongdoing; when he receives and uses offerings, there is no offense.

What is using them without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing?

A person with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing associates closely with one who lacks moral shame and fear of wrongdoing; when he receives and uses offerings, there is an offense.

A person with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing who associates closely with one who lacks them will afterward surely follow that person and commit evil; therefore, he is called a person without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing.

A person without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing who associates closely with one who possesses them will afterward surely abandon evil and practice goodness; therefore, he is called a person with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing.

What is using them in accordance with the Dharma?

A person with moral shame and fear of wrongdoing obtains and uses an article properly, in accordance with the Dharma; therefore, this is called using it in accordance with the Dharma.

What is using them contrary to the Dharma?

A person without moral shame and fear of wrongdoing does not obtain an article by a proper method. If he obtains such an article, it is as though he had obtained poison. This is called using it contrary to the Dharma.

The Dharma teacher said: The other passages have already been clearly explained in the Vinaya and need not be extensively elucidated. This is an offense established by prescription; it comprises all three kinds of karma—bodily, verbal, and mental—and all three kinds of feeling.

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning the acceptance of valuables.

(Rùpiyasikkhàpadavannanà nitthità)

Precept 19 (P.N. 19)

The precept concerning buying, selling, and exchanging valuables.

Not of one kind: either a finished article or an unfinished article.

Articles worn on the head: such as floral hairpins and all other ornaments worn on the head.

All ornaments worn on the body, such as bracelets, bangles, golden chains, and so forth, are called finished articles.

Exchanging a finished article for an unfinished article, or an unfinished article for a finished article, is exchanging an offense of wrongdoing for an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation, or exchanging an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation for an offense of wrongdoing.

Question: What is exchanging an offense of wrongdoing for an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation?

Answer: Exchanging copper money for gold money also entails an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation; therefore, it is called exchanging an offense of wrongdoing for an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. Exchanging gold money for copper money is called exchanging an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation for an offense of wrongdoing. If one exchanges a valuable for iron and uses that iron to make a bowl, an axe, or any other object whatsoever, none of those objects may be used. If one uses them, one commits an offense of wrongdoing.

The Dharma teacher said: The other passages are easy to understand. The circumstances giving rise to this precept are the same as above.

(Rùpiyasamvaharasi-kkhàpadavannanà nitthità).

Precepts 20–23 (N.P. 20–23)

The precepts concerning the buying and selling of articles have already been clearly explained in the Vinaya. Since there is no further meaning to add, they need not be set forth again. (Kayavikkhà-padavannanà nitthità).

If one keeps an extra bowl for more than ten days, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. If one uses a bowl involved in this offense without forfeiting it and confessing the offense, one commits an offense of wrongdoing. Cases in which there is no offense: ten days have not yet elapsed, the bowl has been formally assigned, or it has been formally determined for use.

The Dharma teacher said: How many times must a new bowl be fired and smoked before it may be formally determined for use?

Answer: An iron bowl must be fired and smoked five times, and an earthenware bowl twice, before it may be used. If one purchases a bowl from another person but has not yet paid him its price, it may not be formally determined for use. If the owner of the bowl says, “Use it now and pay the price later,” even though he has said this, it still may not be formally determined for use. Only after its price has been paid may it be formally determined for use.

If, after the price has been agreed upon and the bowl purchased, the bowl-maker finishes firing and smoking the bowl and informs the bhikkhu, but the bhikkhu does not come to collect it, then after ten days he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. If the bowl has already been fired and smoked, and someone who knows this sends word to the bhikkhu, then even though the bhikkhu hears that message, he does not commit an offense after ten days; the bowl-maker himself must inform him. After ten days, he should declare its determination in the presence of another person. If no one is present, he may declare its determination by himself.

Loss of determination: Abandoning the monastic life, dying, undergoing a change of sex, relinquishing the bowl, or having the bowl perforated so that it leaks is called loss of determination. If the bowl is cracked or has a hole as large as a grain of rice, its determination is lost. If it is patched with a piece of iron, it may be determined again. The circumstances giving rise to this rule are the same as above.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning bowls.

(Pattasikkhàpadavanna-nà nitthità &

Unapanacabandhanasikkhàpadavannanà nit-thità).

The five kinds of medicine in the country of Sāvatthī: ghee, fresh butter, oil, honey, and molasses. (Sappi, Navanita, Tela, Madhu, Phànita).

Ghee: that made from every kind of milk derived from allowable meat may be consumed. Ghee also belongs to the class of medicines.

Question: If flies or ants fall into a seven-day medicine, is it permissible to consume it?

Answer: Strain them out, and it may be used.

If milk was accepted today, is the ghee contained in that milk considered a seven-day medicine?

Ghee may be collected from the milk over seven days, and the amount of ghee thus collected may be used through the seventh day; if it is used after the eighth day has arrived, an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation is committed. The same applies to oil and molasses. If milk is accepted at an improper time, or milk scum at an improper time, or ghee at an improper time (and kept beyond seven days), it may not be used; the same applies to oil and molasses.

If one suffers from an unusual illness that can be cured only by using raw flesh and raw blood, their use is permitted, but human blood may not be used.

After ghee has been made allowable, it is placed in a jar. When the jar has been filled with ghee, if ghee already in the jar flows out and mingles with newly added ghee, it must be made allowable again. If the ghee has been kept until the seventh day and its acceptance is then lost, it should be given to a layperson, novice, and so forth. If they give the ghee back, or if a novice offers it, it may be used without offense. Before seven days have elapsed, the ghee may be given to a novice; if it is needed on the eighth day, one may ask the novice for it and use it without offense.

The Dharma teacher said: The other passages in the Vinaya have already been explained clearly and need no further explanation. This rule concerns a prescribed offense, not an offense evil by nature, and arises from body and mind.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning seven-day medicines.

(Bhesajjasikkhàpadavanna-nà nitthità).

Rule 24 (P.N. 24)

In the country of Sāvatthī, the Buddha permitted the use of a rains-bathing cloth. According to the Khandhaka, because of Mother Visākhā, the Buddha permitted the use of a rains-bathing cloth. (Vassikasàtikà).

When one month remains before the rains retreat, the rains-bathing cloth should be made, washed, dyed, and sewn to completion. From the sixteenth day of the fourth month, the rains-bathing cloth may be washed, dyed, cut, and sewn, but it need not be made allowable and may not yet be used. On the first day of the fifth month, it must be determined and used. It may be used during the four months of the rainy season and the final fifteen days of spring, totaling 135 days. (In this case, the rains retreat begins on the sixteenth day of the fifth month and continues until the sixteenth day of the eighth month, followed by one month of Kathina, with the additional fifteen days before the rains retreat, from the first through the fifteenth day of the fifth month.—Translator).

If a rains-bathing cloth cannot be obtained during the last month of spring but becomes available only during the rainy season, it should immediately be determined and used.

Seeking a rains-bathing cloth at the wrong time: The period from the latter half of the ninth month until the latter half of the fourth month is not the proper time to seek a rains-bathing cloth. If one seeks one during that period, one commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation.

If one has a rains-bathing cloth but does not use it and bathes naked, one commits an offense of wrongdoing.

If one seeks material for a rains-bathing cloth on the sixteenth day of the fourth month but does not obtain enough, it may be kept until the required amount is obtained, provided there is an expectation of receiving more. If enough has been obtained, it should be determined; if there is not enough, it may be kept while awaiting more, and until the latter half of the ninth month it need not be made allowable. If one has accepted the Kathina robe, it may be kept until the latter half of the first month without being made allowable.

If the three robes are incomplete, the rains-bathing cloth material may be used to make a kasaya robe. If the material is still insufficient but there is an expectation that more may be obtained from somewhere, it may be kept for one month. If enough is obtained, a robe should be made; if not, it should be made allowable or determined.

If it is neither made allowable nor determined, then on the thirty-first day an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation is committed.

Cases in which there is no offense: Because of a shortage, one asks relatives, or one asks a donor who has invited requests for offerings.

The Dharma teacher said: The other passages have already been explained clearly in the Vinaya and need not be presented again.

(Vassikasàtikasikkhàpadavanna-nà nitthità).

(Four rules are missing: Rules 25 through 28.)

Rule 29 (P.N. 29)

The rule concerning a place where there is danger. There are two cases regarding residence in the wilderness:

1. Residing in the wilderness for a long period.

2. Residing in the wilderness for three months.

If a bhikkhu living in the wilderness has damaged or torn robes, he may return to reside in a Sangha dwelling in a village in order to repair them. After completing the work, he may return to live in the wilderness.

The robbers of the month of Kattika (Kattika coraka): robbers who arise during the rainless autumn month of Kattika.

Upon seeing robbers killing people and seizing their possessions, a bhikkhu becomes afraid that he will lose his three robes. He is permitted to deposit one of the three robes in a village.

Danger: Personally seeing robbers or hearing others speak of them is called a threat.

If the wilderness residence has a large Sangha community and the dwellings are secure, there is no need to deposit a robe in a village.

After depositing a robe, he must go to inspect it by the sixth night. Only after seeing the robe may he return to the wilderness, unless he has received a formal act of the Sangha.

The Dharma teacher said: The sequence of the other passages has already been explained clearly in the Vinaya and needs no further explanation.

(Sàsankasikkhàpadava-nnanà nitthità).

Rule 30 (P.N. 30)

Diverting an offering to oneself. Knowing that a donor is offering food to the Buddha and the Sangha and intends also to offer robes, a bhikkhu diverts that offering to himself.

When he begins persuading them to divert the offering to himself, he commits an offense of dukkata.

When the object comes into his possession, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation.

If he diverts the object to another person or to an animal, or if an object intended for one animal is diverted to another animal, in every case he commits an offense of wrongdoing.

If they intend to make an offering to one image but the bhikkhu diverts it to another image, in every case he commits an offense of dukkata.

Cases in which there is no offense: he does not know that they intend to offer it to the Sangha.

-ooOoo-

The Dharma teacher said: The thirty rules have been explained clearly (Nitthità timsa-kavannanà), with nothing omitted. Next come the ninety rules; listen attentively.

1. Hatthaka (Hatthaka), mentioned in the rule concerning false speech, was the name of a venerable elder.

Eighty thousand members of the Sakyan clan entered the monastic life, and Hatthaka was among them. Being naturally fond of debate, whenever he debated with non-Buddhist ascetics and realized that his reasoning was inferior, he would immediately contradict what he had previously said. If he encountered a good statement made by a non-Buddhist ascetic, he would claim it as his own.

If he knew that a proposition was incorrect, he would say that it was the statement of the non-Buddhist ascetic. When he had arranged a time to debate with non-Buddhist ascetics, he would tell them that the debate would take place in the afternoon, but then he would arrive before noon and tell the donors that the debate must take place at once. He would ascend a high seat and announce to everyone, “Why have the non-Buddhist ascetics not come?

Surely they are afraid of me and therefore dare not appear.” After saying this, he would descend from the seat and leave.

In the afternoon, when the non-Buddhist ascetics arrived and could not find the bhikkhu, they reproached him, saying, “The Sakyan ascetics claim to know the true Dharma; why, then, do they deliberately speak falsehood?”

False speech: when one’s words and thoughts contradict each other; it is also called empty speech.

Cases involving no offense: intending to say one thing but mistakenly saying another.

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning false speech. (Musàvàdasikkhàpadampathamam).

2. The precept concerning disparagement and abuse: intending to make another person feel ashamed.

Cases involving no offense: except when giving instruction in the Teaching. This is an offense by its very nature.

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning abusive speech. (Omasavàdasikkhàpadam dutiyamì).

3. Divisive speech: Any bhikkhu who speaks divisively, causing bhikkhus or bhikkhunis to quarrel with one another, commits an offense of expiation; with regard to the other three ordained assemblies, he commits an offense of wrongdoing; with regard to laypeople, it is likewise an offense of wrongdoing. This is an offense by its very nature.

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning divisive speech. (Pesunnasikkhàpadam tatiyam).

4. Reciting together phrase by phrase is of four kinds: 1. A phrase; 2. Following a phrase; 3. Following the syllables; 4. Following the meaning.

– A phrase means each line in a verse.

– Following a phrase means two successive lines.

– Following the syllables means speaking in accordance with the words of the text.

– Following the meaning means having the same words but a different meaning.

When both words and meaning are present, it is called a phrase.

If one teaches those who have not received full ordination the phrase, “Do no evil deeds,” and those who have not received full ordination recite it aloud together with him, the teacher commits an offense of expiation.

If the teacher says, “Do no evil deeds,” and those who have not received full ordination continue by reciting, “Perform wholesome deeds,” and then recite aloud together, the teacher commits an offense.

If the teacher says, “All conditioned phenomena are impermanent,” and the disciple repeats, “Impermanent,” this too constitutes an offense of expiation.

If prose passages are recited together, an offense is incurred according to each syllable.

Words spoken by the Buddha: The entire Vinaya Piṭaka, Abhidhamma Piṭaka, and Sutta Piṭaka are words spoken by the Buddha.

Words spoken by disciples (Sàvakabhàsita): A-năng-già-na, the Discourse on Right View, the A-nậu-ma-na Discourse, Châu-la-tỳ-đà-la, and Ma-ha-tỳ-đà-la (Anangana, Samàditthi, Anumànasutta, Culla-vedalla, Mahàvedalla) are discourses classified as words spoken by disciples.

Words spoken by brahmins: one section of discourses concerning all non-Buddhist brahmins.

Words spoken by celestial beings: All words spoken by Māra, Brahmā, Sakka, and all deities. There is no offense in reciting them together.

The Dhamma teacher said: “After the Buddha’s nirvana, Kassapa served as the presiding elder at the compilation of the Three Piṭakas by the five hundred arhats. If one recites this Dharma—the Three Piṭakas—together with a person who has not received full ordination, one commits an offense of expiation.

“If one recites together texts composed by a Dhamma teacher, there is no offense.”

The Dhamma teacher said:

“Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning reciting together.” (Padas dhammasikkhàpadam catutthamì).

5. Failing to establish mindfulness before oneself: When preparing to sleep, one should first recollect the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, morality, deities, and impermanence. Of these six recollections, one should recollect each as appropriate to the occasion. If one does not recollect them in this way, it is called failing to establish mindfulness before oneself.

Exposing the body: When preparing to sleep without recollecting the foregoing subjects, the mind becomes distracted. One therefore exposes the body and makes sounds like those of birds, cattle, and horses. Hearing this, male lay devotees criticize him, saying, “Why does one who has gone forth sleep like this?”

On account of this matter, the Buddha laid down a precept for the bhikkhus: From this time onward, bhikkhus may not sleep in the same room as a person who has not received full ordination.

When Rāhula (Ràhula) heard that the Buddha had laid down this precept, wishing to uphold it and avoid transgression, he entered the Buddha’s privy (Vaccakuti), spread his kāṣāya robe on the ground, and slept there. Rāhula entered the Buddha’s privy because it was clean and many people made offerings of flowers and incense there. Therefore, he went in and slept there.

Before the light of dawn appeared, the Tathagata went to the privy and first cleared his throat. From inside, Rāhula also cleared his throat in reply. Although he knew who it was, the Buddha deliberately asked, “Who is there?”

He replied, “It is I, Rāhula.”

Because of Rāhula’s case, the Buddha considered the sāmaṇeras and permitted them to stay together for two nights.

The Dhamma teacher said: What kind of room is one forbidden to share for sleeping?

Any room that is roofed and partitioned—even a room partitioned by a cloth robe—entails an offense.

A wall: even one approximately one and a half cubits high is called a wall; if they sleep there together overnight, an offense is committed.

If many rooms share a single entrance, this also entails an offense, except when they have separate entrances, in which case there is no offense.

On the third night, one must go elsewhere before the light of dawn appears. If one does not go elsewhere, there is still no offense during those three nights, but one may not sleep there together on the fourth night; if one’s side touches the bed, one commits an offense of expiation. If the room has little roofing but many partitions, there is no offense; if it has much roofing but few partitions, there is also no offense. If four rooms each have their own door but all pass in and out through one common main entrance, this too entails an offense. If each has a separate door leading outside, there is no offense.

If, after more than three nights have passed, a bhikkhu sleeps and a person who has not received full ordination sleeps together with him, the bhikkhu commits an offense of expiation.

If the person who has not received full ordination falls asleep, awakens, and then goes back to sleep, whether the renewed sleep is long or short, the bhikkhu sleeping together with him commits an offense of expiation.

If one sleeps in the same room with a person who has not received full ordination for more than three nights, and the person who has not received full ordination sleeps and the bhikkhu also sleeps, an offense of Pācittiya is committed.

If the bhikkhu awakens and then goes back to sleep, he commits as many Pācittiya offenses as the number of times he goes back to sleep.

If a large building consists of connected sections and is sometimes as long as a yojana, sharing a single entrance and exit still entails an offense.

If a room has tortoise-shaped or eel-shaped windows whose bars extend through from outside to inside so that one cannot pass through them, there is no offense.

If a building is fully roofed but its dividing wall is only half-height, one commits an offense of wrongdoing. If it is mostly partitioned but only half-roofed, one also commits an offense of wrongdoing.

The Dhamma teacher said: “The other passages are easy to understand and need no explanation.”

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning sleeping in the same room. (Sahaseyyasikkhàpadam pancamam).

6. Sleeping overnight in the same room with a woman.

A house of merit is built so that travelers may have a place to rest overnight. The precept concerning sleeping overnight in the same room with a woman has been clearly explained in the Vinaya and requires no further explanation.

(Dutiyasahaseyyasikkhàpadam chattham).

7. Teaching the Dharma to a woman: whether teaching the Three Refuges and the Five Precepts or speaking about heaven and hell.

Except in the presence of an intelligent man: this man must not be a ghost or an animal.

If an intelligent man is present, there is no offense even if one teaches the Dharma in more than five or six phrases.

Five or six phrases: A bhikkhu who teaches a woman five or six phrases of Dharma commits no offense.

Five or six phrases: If the words in each line of a verse follow one another without interruption, one Pācittiya offense is committed.

If there is a pause after each line, one Pācittiya offense is committed for each line.

One sentence from the canonical text together with five sentences of commentary makes six sentences and entails no offense; if there are more than six sentences, one commits a Pācittiya offense.

If many women are present and a bhikkhu teaches the Dharma to one woman, then continues teaching the second, the third, and so forth, and the first woman returns to listen again, there is no offense even though the teaching exceeds five or six phrases.

Replying to questions: If a woman asks about matters in the Dīrgha Āgama and the bhikkhu answers according to her questions, there is no offense even if the questions and answers continue through the entire Āgama.

The Dhamma teacher said: “The other passages are easy to understand and need no explanation. The circumstance that gave rise to this precept was the same as that of the preceding precept.”

Here ends the explanation of the precept concerning teaching the Dharma to women. (Dhammadesanasikkhàpadamì sattmamì).

8. This is a rule laid down for noble ones, like the fourth Parajika rule explained above. Here it differs from the preceding rule in that one has truly attained a superior human state (Uttarimanussadhamma): if one tells a person who has not received full ordination, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

End of the explanation of the rule concerning telling a person who has not received full ordination about one’s attainment of a superior human state. (Bhùtarocanasikkhàpadam atthamam).

9. Speaking of a grave offense: offenses arising from violating the four grave rules and the thirteen Sanghadisesa rules are all called grave offenses. If, except to a bhikkhu or bhikkhuni, one speaks of them to a person who has not received full ordination, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

Except when authorized by a formal act of the Sangha: a formal act may permit one to speak in such-and-such a place. If one speaks somewhere other than the place authorized by the formal act, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If one speaks of other disciplinary offenses apart from the four grave offenses and the thirteen Sanghadisesa offenses, one commits a Dukkata offense.

The Dharma teacher says: the other passages are clearly stated in the Vinaya and need no explanation.

End of the explanation of the rule concerning speaking of a grave offense. (Dutthullàrocanasikkhàpadam navamam).

10. Digging the earth: a distinction must be made between natural earth and composite earth (Jàtapathàvi, Ajàtapathàvi).

Natural earth is earth unmixed with sand, stone, fragments of brick, or broken tiles, consisting solely of earth.

Composite earth is earth mixed with many kinds of sand, stone, fragments of brick, broken tiles, and so forth. Earth that has been burned is also called composite earth.

If earth is mixed with sand and stones, how can one know whether it may be dug? One should take a little of that earth and wash it with water to examine it. If there are four parts gravel and stones to one part earth, it may be dug. If there is a layer of earth four inches thick upon a rock, it may be taken while it is still dry; if it has passed through four months of the rainy season, it may not be taken.

Any bhikkhu who digs living earth commits one Pacittiya offense for each act of digging.

If a bhikkhu tells a lay attendant, “For the sake of the Sangha, dig the earth and cut down the tree,” there is no offense. If he gives explicit instructions, saying, “Dig in this way; cut in this way,” he commits a Pacittiya offense. If he gives instructions by drawing on the ground or writing words, he likewise commits a Pacittiya offense.

If his hand is burned while holding fire and he therefore throws it onto the ground, there is no offense.

The other passages are fully stated in the Vinaya and need no explanation.

End of the explanation of the rule concerning digging the earth. (Pathavikhanana-sikkhàsadam dasamamì).

This is an offense established by regulation, arising from body and mind.

11. Not heeding an admonition: the bhikkhus of Alavi (Àlavikà bhikkhù) did not heed the words of a spirit and, by cutting down a tree, injured the arm of the spirit’s child. Thinking, “I should not arbitrarily harm one who has gone forth; I shall go and report this to the Buddha. When the Buddha hears of this matter, he will lay down a rule for the bhikkhus,” the spirit went to the Buddha and gave a full account of what had happened. Having heard it, the Buddha spoke this verse:

Whoever, when anger has arisen,

As a speeding chariot runs,

Can bring it to a halt—

That is no difficult feat.

But whoever can restrain anger—

That is exceedingly difficult. — (Dhammapàda, verse 222).

After hearing the Buddha speak this verse, the tree spirit attained the path of stream-entry. Knowing that the tree spirit had nowhere to dwell, the Buddha used his divine eye to find a tree without an owner and told the spirit, “You may dwell in this tree.”

Question: Where was that tree?

Answer: That tree was in Anathapindika’s Grove.

Having obtained a dwelling place, the tree spirit thought, “The Blessed One, in his great compassion, has bestowed a palace upon me. From now on, I should make offerings to the Blessed One.”

When the Buddha taught the Dharma to the devas, if a great deva arrived later, the lesser devas seated in front would yield their seats in succession, until the assembly extended as far as the seashore.

At that time, the tree spirit who had attained the path returned to the tree in which he dwelt and listened to the Buddha teach the Dharma.

Throughout the day and night, the Buddha taught the Dharma to the four assemblies. During the first watch of the night, he taught the Dharma to the bhikkhus; during the middle watch, he taught the Dharma to the devas; and during the last watch, he taught the Dharma to the naga kings. How is this known? During the middle watch, the devas came and knocked on the upper part of the door; during the last watch, the naga kings came and knocked on the lower part of the door. This is the distinction between devas and nagas.

Vegetation (Bhùtagàma) means a community of living plants.

Community (Gàma): because this group of plants is composed of eight smaller parts surrounding it, it is called a community. Vegetation is of five kinds:

1. A Lê Ðà (Haladdi): turmeric.

2. Ưu Thi La (Usira): fragrant vetiver.

3. Chất tha thí thát (Bhaddamuttaka): tước đầu hương.

4. Lư Kiền: coptis.

5. Ðà Cư: the name of a kind of grass in a foreign land.

Xá Ma (Asasttha): the Bodhi tree.

Bà La Hê: the palmyra tree.

These two kinds of trees spread out broad branches and leaves, preventing one from seeing other places.

The Tô Ma Na flower: this flower is fragrant, with a scent like that of the Mạt Lị flower (Mallikà—jasmine).

The Mạt Lị flower: this flower is found in Guangzhou and is a spreading vine.

Tô La Bà: this is the name of a kind of grass.

Bồ Hê Na: the name of a kind of grass in a foreign land.

Plants are of two kinds: those growing in water and those growing upon the earth.

(In water) Uppala flowers (water lilies), lotuses, and water hyacinths live in water. Any bhikkhu who turns these kinds of plants upside down in the water commits a Dukkata offense; if he uproots them from the water, he commits a Pacittiya offense.

(On land) If flowers or fruit are needed, one is permitted to pull down a tree branch and tell a lay attendant to pick them; there is no offense. One must not break the branch. If the tree is too tall and the lay attendant cannot reach it, a bhikkhu may lift the attendant up to pick them; there is no offense. If a tree falls upon a bhikkhu, one is permitted to cut the tree and dig the earth to rescue him; there is no offense.

End of the explanation of the rule concerning cutting down and destroying vegetation. (Bhùtagàsikkhàpadam pathamam).

This is an offense established by regulation, arising from body and mind.

12. Speaking evasively.

Having acted wrongly: having done through body or speech what ought not to be done, one thereby incurs an offense.

Concealing: not wishing others to know.

“Who has committed an offense?” The Dharma teacher says: let the meaning of this be explained. If another bhikkhu says, “The elder has committed an offense,” and brings him before the Sangha so that the matter may be adjudicated together:

There, in the midst of the Sangha, the bhikkhu who has committed the offense asks, “Who has committed an offense?”

The other bhikkhus say, “The elder has committed an offense.”

He replies, “What offense have I committed?”

Among the bhikkhus, some say it is a Pacittiya offense, while others say it is a Dukkata offense.

He asks, “When did I commit the offense?”

They answer, “Venerable sir, you committed the offense at such-and-such a time.”

He asks again, “For what deed did I commit the offense?”

They answer, “Venerable sir, because you did such-and-such a deed, you committed the offense.”

He replies, “Venerable sirs, what are you saying?”

Answering in a way that does not correspond to the question is called speaking evasively.

Seeing Channa holding gold and silver, a bhikkhu asked, “Why are you holding gold and silver?”

He replied, “What I am holding is not gold and silver.”

Or, seeing him drinking liquor, one might say, “Why, venerable sir, are you drinking liquor?”

He replies, “I am drinking something containing water.”

One asks, “Why, venerable sir, are you sitting in bodily contact with a woman in a secluded place?”

He replies, “There is a discerning man present.”

Such is speaking evasively. At other times, one may remain silent and refuse to answer.

Whoever knows an act to be contrary to the Dharma but answers the Sangha evasively commits a Pacittiya offense.

If one is uncertain whether an act accords with the Dharma or is contrary to the Dharma, yet answers the Sangha evasively, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If one knows the truth but tells the Sangha, “I do not know,” one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If one remains silent out of fear that speaking would cause contention within the Sangha, there is no offense.

The other passages are easy to understand and need no explanation. This is an intrinsically blameworthy offense, arising from body, mind, and speech.

End of the explanation of the rule concerning answering evasively without responding to the question. (Annavàdakasikkhà-padam dutiyam).

13. Speaking ill of another.

If, out of resentment, one speaks ill of a person appointed by the Sangha, one commits a Pacittiya offense. If, out of resentment, one speaks ill of another person, one commits a Dukkata offense. This is an offense by nature, arising from bodily and verbal action.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning resentment (Ujjhàpanasikkà-padam tatiyam).

14. Taking the Sangha’s bedding outside and using it in the open air.

Winter is the season of frost and snow.

To warm the body in the sun: during the cold months, one takes the Sangha’s beds and mats outdoors and warms the body in the sun throughout the day.

Knowing the proper time: if someone invites one to go somewhere, and one neither puts away the Sangha’s bedding oneself nor tells someone else to put it away, one commits this offense.

The Dharma teacher said: winter lasts four months, and the hot season lasts four months. When there is no rain, one is permitted to spread out the Sangha’s bedding outdoors; when it is raining, one must not spread it out.

Under a tree: if the tree has dense, broad foliage and no birds congregate above, one may spread the Sangha’s bedding beneath it without committing an offense.

Any bhikkhu who undertakes the highest grade of dhutanga practice and dwells beneath a tree or in the open air may not even make a shelter out of his kasaya, nor may he take the Sangha’s bedding outdoors for use. If he can safeguard it, even by using his kasaya to cover it and prevent it from becoming damp, then he may use it. Under the dhutanga practice, when it is not raining one stays in the open air; when it rains one may stay inside a dwelling. If one enters a dwelling, one may use the Sangha’s bedding.

Seeing a bhikkhu dwelling in the open air, a donor may make bedding and offer it to the Sangha. After receiving it, that bhikkhu should offer it to another bhikkhu if one is present. If there is no bhikkhu to whom it may be offered, he should offer it to a nearby residence.

If there is no residence, he should put it in an empty house. If there is no empty house but there is a tree with a dense canopy of leaves, he may tie it up and suspend it beneath the tree before departing. If he does not suspend it, then when leaving he must think, “I shall enter the village and return at once.” If he acts in this way, there is no offense.

After entering the village, if he is prevented from returning by any of the eight dangers, he should send word back; there is no offense. If it is in fact raining but he says that it is not raining and then leaves, he commits a Dukkata offense.

There are four kinds of beds:

1. The Masàraka-legged kind.

2. The kind with gracefully tapered legs (Bundikàbadha).

3. The Kulirapàdaka-legged kind.

4. The Àhaccapàdaka-legged kind.

A Masàraka bed is one whose frame is joined to its legs.

A bed with gracefully tapered legs has its legs and frame made in one piece.

A Kulirapàdaka bed is also called a bed with horse, goat, tiger, wolf, or lion legs; all such beds are called Kulirapàdaka-legged beds.

An Àhaccapàdaka-legged bed has legs inserted into the bedframe.

When any such bed has been set out in the open air, if one abandons it and goes beyond the distance that a person of average strength can throw a stone from the place where the object was left, one commits a Pacittiya offense.

If a senior bhikkhu tells a junior bhikkhu to have a seat prepared, and after it has been prepared the senior places his robe upon it, the junior may leave. If the senior has not placed anything upon it, the junior should put it away. If he does not put it away, he should inform the senior before leaving; there is no offense.

If a bed has been set out but one has not yet sat upon it, and another bhikkhu comes and sits upon it, one may inform that bhikkhu and then leave; there is no offense.

If a high seat has been arranged for a Dharma teacher and the Dharma teacher has not yet arrived, the person who arranged it must look after it. If the Dharma teacher has already sat down, that person may leave without offense.

If a block of wood is placed as a step for ascending the seat, and on departing one neither removes it nor tells someone else to put it away, one commits a Dukkata offense.

When using the Sangha’s dyeing pot, water jar, or robe-drying cord, one should return it to its original place before leaving. If one does not return it, one commits a Dukkata offense.

When using another person’s private property, failing to put it away also constitutes a Dukkata offense. If one fails to arrange and put away one’s own property before leaving, one likewise commits a Dukkata offense.

If one encounters any of the eight dangers, there is no offense for leaving without putting the articles away.

The Dharma teacher said: the other passages are easy to understand and require no explanation. This is a prescribed offense, arising from body, mind, and speech.

(Pathama senàsananasikkhàpadam catuttham).

15. Setting out the Sangha’s bedding inside a room.

Or a bhisi cushion: a cushion made of leather. A bhisi is something used to support the head or as a seat cushion. Regarding mats for lying or sitting, or mats made of grass, if when leaving one neither puts them away nor tells someone else to put them away, then, where there is no enclosure (Parikkhepa), going one stone’s throw away from the object constitutes a Dukkata offense; going two stone’s throws away constitutes a Pacittiya offense. If there is an enclosure, one commits the offense upon passing beyond it.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning the use of the Sangha’s bedding inside a room. (Dutiyase-nàsanasasikkhàpadam pancamam).

16. Knowing that another bhikkhu has already spread out his bedding, if one comes afterward and deliberately causes trouble for that bhikkhu, one commits a Pacittiya offense. If one does not know but is in doubt, one also commits a Pacittiya offense. If one encounters any of the eight dangers, there is no offense.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning causing trouble for another bhikkhu. (Anupakkhajjasikkhàpadam chattham).

17. (Dragging a bhikkhu out of a cell.) This is an offense by nature (Nikkad-dhanasikkhàpadam sattamam).

18. An upper story: even when one stands upright, one’s head does not touch the story above. No offense: if the place is not an upper story, there is no offense.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning the use of a bed with detachable legs on an upper story (Vehàsakutisikkhàpadam attha-mam).

19. Applying many layers of mud plaster: on both sides of and above the doorway, mud plaster may be applied to a thickness of two and a half cubits. If the doorway is high and there is a wall beneath it, many layers of mud plaster may also be applied there. Many layers of mud plaster may also be applied around all four sides of a window. Why? Because the window must be opened and closed.

There are two kinds of roofing: first, a rounded roof; second, a horizontal roof.

If one stops after laying one course and does no more, there is no offense. If one tiles the roof with more than three layers, one commits a Pacittiya offense. After exceeding three layers, regardless of whether many or few additional tiles are used, each tile constitutes one Pacittiya offense.

If stone slabs are used to roof more than three layers, one commits a Pacittiya offense for every place where another slab is added.

If thatch is used to roof more than three layers, each additional handful constitutes one Pacittiya offense.

If the roofing was poorly done and has become damaged, it may be roofed again without offense.

A case of no offense: if one stops immediately upon being told, there is no offense.

If one constructs a house in an open place and roofs it with more than three layers, one commits a Dukkata offense.

This is a prescribed offense (Mahallakavihàrasikkhàpadam navamam).

20. Knowing that water contains living creatures: according to the circumstances, knowing that the water contains living creatures, one either uses it oneself for sprinkling or tells another person to use that water for sprinkling.

If one sprinkles it oneself, each time one pauses constitutes one Pacittiya offense.

If one tells another person to sprinkle it, each instruction constitutes one Pacittiya offense. This is an offense by nature, arising from body, mind, and speech.

Here ends the explanation of the rule concerning the use of water containing living creatures (Sappànakasikkhàpadam dasamam).

21 & 22. Going to instruct bhikkhunis in order to receive abundant offerings: these venerable ones received many offerings because they instructed the bhikkhunis, but the offerings were not presented by the bhikkhunis themselves, nor did the bhikkhunis tell others to present them. These bhikkhunis were daughters of kings, daughters of ministers, or daughters of wealthy householders. When they returned to their homes, their parents asked, “Who instructs the bhikkhunis?”

They replied, “The venerable ones ... instruct us.”

On hearing this, their parents were filled with joyful faith and brought the four requisites—food and drink, robes, medicine, and bedding—to offer to those venerable ones.

A bhikkhuni returned home and related that the venerable ones were virtuous, diligent, learned, patient, and of noble lineage.

Hearing this, their parents increased their offerings even further. Because of these two circumstances, the venerable ones received abundant offerings.

Seeing that the venerable ones received many material gains, the group of six bhikkhus told the bhikkhunis, “We too are able to instruct the bhikkhunis.”

On hearing this, the bhikkhunis went to the group of six bhikkhus to request instruction.

After expounding the Dharma perfunctorily to the bhikkhunis, the group of six bhikkhus spoke at length about worldly matters such as countries, politics, crop failures, abundant harvests, cities, and villages.

These are precisely forms of speech concerning the three lower realms. Therefore, the Vinaya states that a bhikkhu endowed with eight qualities may instruct the bhikkhunis. Those eight qualities are:

1. He observes the precepts.

2. He guards the Pātimokkha precepts.

3. He is fully endowed with proper deportment.

4. He sees danger in the slightest fault.

5. He is steadfast.

6. He is widely learned.

7. His wide learning is firmly established.

8. He expounds the Dharma clearly, good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, entirely pure and complete in the holy life; his right view is free from error; he is thoroughly versed in reciting the Pātimokkha of both Sanghas; he thoroughly understands the letter and meaning; his speech is fluent; he is revered and respected by the bhikkhunis; and he skillfully expounds the Dharma in accordance with circumstances.

Observing the precepts means that his bodily conduct is always governed by morality; it may also be said that he keeps the precepts without transgressing them.

Guarding body, speech, and mind so that they do not transgress the precepts; practicing the unsurpassed Dharma; or fully maintaining the Pātimokkha precepts—this is called guarding and protecting.

Being fully endowed with proper deportment means that he does not maintain himself through wrong livelihood and does not visit the five kinds of places: the homes of prostitutes, widows, bhikkhuni monasteries, households with young maidens, or eunuchs. Nor does he visit the homes of faithful female Buddhist devotees. This is called being fully endowed with proper deportment.

Seeing danger in the slightest fault means seeing a minor fault as one would see a great venomous snake. This is called being fearful of faults.

Being steadfast and not transgressing means that his resolve to observe the precepts does not regress.

Being widely learned means thoroughly understanding one Āgama collection, or even two collections.

Firmly established means possessing a secure and thorough understanding of the Āgamas and not forgetting them. This is called having wide learning firmly established.

Good in the beginning, middle, and end. The Dharma teacher says: The meaning of this has already been clearly explained in the chapter on the brahmin Verañja.

The letter and meaning are clear, and he does not give people explanations that are mistaken or confused.

Fluent speech means that his words flow freely, without faltering or awkwardness.

Thorough and careful recitation means that at the Uposatha every half-month he is thoroughly versed in reciting the Pātimokkha of both Sanghas, knows well the six observance days, and is therefore able to expound the Dharma to others. If he has recited one or two Āgama collections, he also knows them well and without obstruction. He clearly understands the contemplative practices of ascetics, and even the fruit of arhatship, without obstruction. Having completed twenty rains, he may confer full ordination upon others.

The Dharma teacher said:

“Why is knowledge of the Abhidharma not mentioned?”

The answer was:

“If he understands the Abhidharma, that is excellent. If an ordinary person understands only the Vinaya and the sutras, he may also instruct the bhikkhuni community.”

His voice is fluent and pleasing for women to hear.

Question:

“Why must one use a fluent voice when instructing bhikkhunis?”

Answer:

“For the most part, women are fond of pleasing voices; only afterward will they consent to hear the Dharma.”

Being respected by the bhikkhunis means that this bhikkhu possesses virtue and is esteemed by the bhikkhunis, and that he has not defiled any of the three assemblies.

Why is it said that one who has defiled any of the three assemblies may not instruct the bhikkhunis? If he were to instruct them, the bhikkhunis who saw him would not respect him.

Having completed twenty rains: When one has completed twenty rains, one’s maintenance of the Dharma is firm, and one is less prone to regression, for the impetuosity of youth easily leads to regression. Therefore, the Vinaya prescribes that only one who has completed twenty rains may instruct the bhikkhunis.

Sweeping the dwelling and sprinkling water: The reason for sweeping, sprinkling water, and providing water is that bhikkhus may arrive from afar and must be supplied with beds, mats, and drinking water. If there are no mats, grass should be spread out.

When a bhikkhu expounds the Dharma to bhikkhunis, he must have a companion and may not expound the Dharma inside a room.

If a bhikkhuni encounters a bhikkhu on the road, she should join her palms in greeting if he is far away and bow at his feet if he is nearby. Even if there is danger from the king or the road is wet, she must still greet him.

During the rains retreat, bhikkhunis may reside no farther than half a yojana from a bhikkhu monastery.

If a donor invites bhikkhunis to spend the rains retreat but there is no bhikkhu upon whom they may depend during the retreat, the bhikkhunis should prepare to depart. If the donor says, “Venerable sisters, please remain; I shall invite bhikkhus to come,” they may wait.

If no bhikkhu has yet been invited but one arrives by the beginning of the later rains retreat, they may remain for the retreat. If no bhikkhu can be invited, they must depart.

If, along the road, there is danger to their lives or to the holy life, they may spend the rains retreat even without bhikkhus present and commit no offense.

If bhikkhus are present at the beginning of the rains retreat, but after the boundary for the retreat has been established a bhikkhu departs on business, disrobes, or becomes gravely ill, and the bhikkhunis do not know this but learn of it only later, they should continue the rains retreat as before without changing their residence; there is no offense.

After the rains retreat has ended, if there are no bhikkhus present, the bhikkhunis may not perform the Invitation by themselves; they must seek out bhikkhus.

Every half-month, they must go before the great Sangha and request two things:

1. To ask the date of the Uposatha.

2. To request instruction.

The Dharma teacher said:

“Why did the Tathagata so earnestly admonish the bhikkhunis? Because bhikkhunis are women, their faculties are slow.”

At that time, the entire bhikkhuni community went to the bhikkhu Sangha to receive instruction. Because of this, people criticized the bhikkhunis and reported the matter to the bhikkhus. The bhikkhus informed the Buddha. On that occasion, the Buddha laid down this rule: “From now on, large numbers of bhikkhunis may not come to request instruction; five may be permitted to come.”

When even five were criticized, the Buddha said that two or three might be permitted to come.

The bhikkhuni community must carry out a formal Sangha act appointing two or three bhikkhunis to go before the great Sangha and request instruction. Even bhikkhus dwelling in the wilderness must instruct the bhikkhunis.

How should the instruction be given? An appointment should be made beforehand, either beneath a tree or in a guesthouse. If the bhikkhunis do not come at the appointed time, they commit an offense of dukkaṭa. If the bhikkhu does not come to the appointed place at the appointed time, he likewise commits an offense of dukkaṭa.

The bhikkhunis perform the Invitation on the fourteenth day. The bhikkhu Sangha performs the Invitation on the fifteenth day.

If bhikkhunis request a discourse and the bhikkhu does not first expound the eight principles of respect but instead expounds another teaching, that bhikkhu commits an offense of dukkaṭa. After expounding the eight principles of respect, he may proceed to expound another teaching without committing an offense.

There is no offense in answering questions about other matters.

If he speaks to others and bhikkhunis listen together with them, there is no offense.

If he speaks to a śikṣamāṇā or sāmaṇerī, there is no offense.

The Dharma teacher said:

“The other passages are easy to understand and need no explanation.”

(Ovādasikkhāpadaṃ paṭhamaṃ). This is a prescribed offense, arising from mind and speech, and associated with all three kinds of feeling.

23. (Not appointed by the Sangha, he goes to a bhikkhuni monastery on his own initiative.)

Any bhikkhu who, without being appointed by the Sangha, goes on his own initiative to a bhikkhuni monastery to give instruction commits an offense of pācittiya.

Commentary on the Vinaya: The Dispeller of Doubts

— Volume 15 —