重治毗尼事義集要

EXPLANATION OF THE METHODS FOR DEALING WITH OFFENSES

Offenses arise from causes and conditions. Because they arise from causes and conditions, they have no intrinsic nature. Therefore, when the path of counteraction arises, the seeds of the offenses immediately perish.

This is what is meant by saying that the nature of offenses is originally empty. Here, one does not reject their phenomenal characteristics in order to seek their intrinsic nature. Yet there are people who, knowing neither shame nor remorse, constantly proclaim that they contemplate the true characteristic of the mind, while never considering the performance of the prescribed rite to eliminate their offenses.

How lamentable! They do not even understand the characteristics of offenses themselves, much less the true characteristic of the mind. Although offenses arise from the mind, they must depend upon deeds to become karma.

Although offenses are extinguished through the mind, how could one abandon phenomenal characteristics and cling to emptiness? Moreover, practice has the function of relying upon principle, whereas principle has no separate function by which it can be established. Thus, repentance without contemplation of the mind may still assuredly transform the branches of an offense; but if one merely speaks of principle without openly disclosing the offense, its root will certainly be difficult to eradicate.

May everyone believe this wholeheartedly and without hesitation. Everyone must look directly into their own heart and not be heedless. Practice is established from principle, and then, by means of practice, it is brought back into accord with principle.

Only thus can the “jewel of precepts” and the “sun of wisdom” both shine brilliantly. The three wheels and the seven branches will alike become pure. One will perpetuate the lineage of the Shakyans, bring splendor to the Sangha, forever close the gates to the evil destinies, and swiftly open the path to awakening.

Question: The ancients said that, among the three methods of repentance,[1] “it is better to lack an earlier one than to lack a later one” (ning ke que yu qian qian, bu ke que yu hou hou). This is because offenses are like frost and mildew, which the sun of wisdom can dispel. Therefore, contemplation of principle must serve as the principal factor. If we now employ only repentance through the prescribed rite, is this not an attachment to the Lesser Vehicle that fails to attain the essential mystery of the true characteristic taught by the Great Vehicle?

Answer: The statement, “It is better to lack the two earlier methods than to lack the two later methods,” refers to a situation in which the requirements are incomplete and something must necessarily be omitted. It is like saying that one may grant release from a Sanghavasesa offense even when twenty pure members of the Sangha are unavailable. Furthermore, its purpose is to show that an earlier method cannot encompass a later one, whereas a later method can fully encompass the earlier one.

If someone regards repentance through the prescribed rite as shameful and refuses to practice it, concealing offenses merely to preserve appearances, that person has entirely failed to understand that the nature of offenses is originally empty. How could this be called the sun of wisdom? Therefore, our present reliance upon repentance through the prescribed rite is precisely the foundation for contemplating principle.

The wise can thereby realize that all practice is itself principle. Even the foolish can enter principle by means of practice.

Master Jingxi said: “One who has committed a grave offense cannot be restored merely by contemplating the mind. To speak of contemplating the mind means that, while undertaking repentance through practice, one must rely upon contemplation of the mind. Without contemplation of the mind, a grave offense cannot be extinguished. Only by applying practice and principle together can the matter be resolved.”

It is said elsewhere: The practical precepts are the foundation of the Three Contemplations.[2]

Therefore, it is said: When shila (morality) is pure, samadhi (concentration) manifests before one. Without the precepts, even worldly powers of concentration cannot exist, much less the Three Truths.[3] To say that the Great Vehicle has no need of the precepts is an error. “Nonattachment” means observing the precepts without attachment. If one claims that failing to observe them is called nonattachment, that is attachment to destruction. How could it be called nonattachment? Even attachment to observance has no real existence; upon forgetting observance, where could attachment be established?

The original text says: To reject the method of repentance through the prescribed rite is not to uphold the precepts. Yet if the phenomenal practice of the precepts is already deficient, upon what can contemplation of principle rely? One exploits the true characteristic taught by the Great Vehicle and thereby clings to the pernicious view of emptiness. Not only does one go astray oneself, but one also causes others to go astray. This is no minor loss. It must be carefully considered! It must indeed be carefully considered!

In the original text, the treatment of offenses is divided into six sections:

1) Determining the method for dealing with the four Parajika offenses.

2) Determining the method for dealing with Sanghavasesa offenses.

3) Determining the method for dealing with Sthulatyaya offenses.

4) Determining the method for dealing with minor offenses.

5) Determining the various karma procedures.

6) Determining the procedure of overturning the bowl.

I. DETERMINING THE METHOD FOR DEALING WITH THE FOUR PARAJIKA OFFENSES

The second section[4] records:

The bhikshu Nandi, tempted by Mara, approached the carcass of a dead mare and committed an impure act, but he had absolutely no intention of concealing it. The bhikshu Nandi told the other bhikshus, and the bhikshus reported the matter to the Blessed One. The Blessed One permitted the Sangha to confer upon him the discipline for a person who has committed a Parajika offense.

(This means that this person had committed a grave offense and thereby destroyed the Parajika precept. Nevertheless, he had absolutely no intention of concealing his offense; he wept and did not wish to be separated from the kasaya. The Buddha therefore permitted the harmonious Sangha, through a karma procedure consisting of one motion and three proclamations, to confer upon him the discipline for a person who has committed a Parajika offense. He was allowed to dwell together with the Sangha, but the thirty-five privileges of a teacher were revoked for life.)

The person concerned must make an earnest request three times. For his sake, the Sangha performs the karma procedure consisting of one motion and three proclamations and confers upon him the discipline for a person who has committed a Parajika offense. After receiving this discipline, he must comply with the following requirements:

1) He may not confer full ordination upon anyone.

2) He may not accept anyone as a dependent pupil.

3) He may not maintain a novice.

4) He may not instruct bhikshunis.

5) Even if assigned to do so, he may not go to instruct them.

6) He may not recite the precepts for the Sangha.

7) He may not answer questions concerning the Vinaya within the Sangha.

8) He may not accept an administrative office assigned by the Sangha.

9) He may not serve as an adjudicator of the Sangha’s affairs.

10) He may not serve as a representative of the Sangha.

11) He may not enter a village early in the morning and return only in the evening.

12) He must remain near the bhikshus.

13) He may not associate intimately with non-Buddhist practitioners or householders.

14) He must conform to the Dharma of the bhikshus.

15) He may not engage in worldly conversation.

16) He may not recite the Vinaya before the assembly, unless no other capable person is present, in which case it is permitted.

17) He may not commit this offense again.

18) He may not commit an offense resembling it or arising from it.

19) He may not obstruct the Sangha from performing a karma procedure.

20) He may not obstruct the person who performs the karma procedure.

21) He may not accept a seat spread by a pure bhikshu.

22) He may not accept washing water drawn by a pure bhikshu.

23) He may not accept drinking water offered by a pure bhikshu.

24) He may not allow another bhikshu to wipe his shoes or clogs.

25) He may not allow another bhikshu to massage his body.

26) He may not accept homage from a pure bhikshu.

27) He may not allow a pure bhikshu to escort or receive him.

28) He may not accept greetings from a pure bhikshu.

29) He may not accept an alms bowl offered by a pure bhikshu.

30) He may not accept robes presented by a pure bhikshu.

31) He may not charge a pure bhikshu with an offense, whether by a verdict based on recollection or by a verdict based on the bhikshu’s own admission.

32) He may not serve as a witness in another person’s case.

33) He may not prevent a pure bhikshu from reciting the precepts.

34) He may not prevent a pure bhikshu from participating in the Invitation Ceremony.

35) He may not dispute with a pure bhikshu.

When the precepts are recited or a karma procedure is performed, the Sangha commits no offense whether or not this person attends. If he commits a Parajika offense again, he must be permanently expelled. (He is not permitted to receive the discipline for a person who has committed a Parajika offense a second time.)

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya Miscellany records:

Until all afflictions have been completely eradicated, one must still comply with and uphold these rules. Failure to do so constitutes an offense. After attaining the fruition of arhatship, one is no longer required to observe them.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya records:

A person who has been granted this discipline for a parajika offense must sit behind all bhiksus and before all sramaneras. This person may not share a room with a bhiksu for more than three nights, and the same applies between this person and a sramanera. Food rendered impure for a bhiksu is likewise impure for this person. Food rendered impure for this person is likewise impure for a bhiksu.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

A person granted this discipline must undertake and observe all the precepts established by the Buddha. This person may participate in the two Sangha-karmans of the Uposatha and the Pavarana, but may not be counted toward the Sangha quorum. (That is, when performing the Uposatha-karman, four pure bhiksus are required. If there are only three bhiksus and one person under this discipline, they may not perform the Uposatha-karman; they may only conduct the Uposatha face-to-face. The same applies to the Pavarana-karman, for which five persons are required.)

Apart from these, this person is not permitted to participate in any other Sangha-karman.

The Vinaya-matrka explains:

After this bhiksu has been authorized by karman, he is called a pure observer of the precepts. Yet in this body he cannot bring birth and death to an end, nor can he attain uncontaminated merit. Nevertheless, he is prevented from falling into hell. It is like a leaf that, once separated from the tree, can never be joined to it again.

Question: According to the Mulasarvastivada Ksudrakavastu, a person under this discipline can attain fruition; after attaining arhatship, he no longer has to observe the discipline. The Vinaya-matrka, however, says that he cannot attain fruition. Which position is correct?

Answer: The Mulasarvastivada Ksudrakavastu says that fruition can be attained on the basis of the manifestation made by the bhiksu Nandi. The Vinaya-matrka, however, speaks according to the Buddha-Dharma and says that such a person has absolutely no share in attaining fruition. It is unreasonable for a fallen leaf to become attached again. How could one who commits an offense not tremble at this? Repentance according to formal practice must accord with repentance through the unborn. One who repents must exert himself to the utmost.

The Samantapasadika says:

The characteristics of sexual misconduct and false speech are evident and readily discerned, whereas the characteristics of the two precepts concerning killing and stealing are difficult to discern. Subtle matters must be handled with subtle discernment. One should not rely upon the suspicions of worldly people and conclude that a person has committed a parajika offense.

He should be told to consult a teacher, fellow practitioner, disciple, or another such person. If it is suspected that he has committed an offense, he should be instructed to sit quietly in his room and contemplate for himself. If the substance of his precepts is unharmed and undefiled, his mind will readily enter samadhi.

If the substance of his precepts has been destroyed, he will be unable to attain a concentrated mind. Only afterward should a judgment be made on that basis.

Question: A person who commits an act of impure conduct and completely fails to

conceal it is specially permitted to receive the “discipline for a parajika offense.” If someone violates one of the other three grave precepts without concealing it, may that person receive the same treatment?

Answer: This is difficult to say. Nevertheless, let us consider the matter as follows. Regarding the precept against stealing, the Vinaya stipulates that an offense is complete when five conditions are present:

1) The object belongs to another.

2) It is perceived as belonging to another.

3) It is taken with the intention to steal.

4) It is worth at least five coins.

5) It is moved from its original place.

Suppose a bhiksu happens to see another person’s possession, gives rise to craving, and wishes to steal it. As soon as he moves it from its original place, the grave offense is complete. Then, with a subsequent thought of remorse and regret, he returns it to its original place and does not take it. If he has never entertained any intention to conceal the offense and urgently seeks the “discipline for a parajika offense,” why should it not be granted to him? But if he has already taken the object and only afterward discloses the offense, and one hastily and improperly grants him the “discipline for a parajika offense,” how could this fail to incur wrongdoing?!

Regarding the precept against killing, suppose one intends to kill a certain person but mistakenly kills someone else. In such a case, although the precept has not been lost, even secular law will not pardon him. How much less, if he has fulfilled his murderous intent, could he be granted the “discipline for a parajika offense,” even though he did not conceal the act? Nevertheless, on the basis of the Vimalakirti Sutra and the Sutra on Purifying Karmic Obstructions, has there not still been a means of opening a way through?

Next is the precept against making great false claims. If one makes a great false claim for the sake of material gain, how could it be said that one had no intention to conceal it? In principle, this should not be permitted. But suppose one makes a great false claim in order to escape a threat to one’s life or a threat to one’s pure conduct, and immediately afterward discloses the offense and seeks someone before whom to repent. How could one force such a person onto a path with no way forward?

One should understand that this matter must be handled with the utmost skill. Only one who is free from attachment, anger, fear, and delusion is capable of undertaking it.

The Mahaparinirvana Sutra explains:

There may be a bhiksu who observes the precepts, possesses complete dignified conduct, and safeguards the True Dharma. Upon seeing someone harm the True Dharma, he expels, rebukes, and disciplines that person. One should know that this bhiksu gains immeasurable and incalculable merit. If there is a bhiksu who is regarded as good, yet upon seeing someone harm the True Dharma does not expel, rebuke, or formally accuse that person of an offense, one should know that he is an enemy within the Buddha-Dharma.

If one violates the four grave precepts or commits the five heinous offenses, knows personally that these are grave offenses yet feels neither fear nor shame and refuses to disclose them; if one never gives rise to the resolve to safeguard or establish the Buddha’s True Dharma, but disparages and scorns it, and one’s speech is mostly blameworthy—persons of this kind are also said to be proceeding toward the path of the icchantika. Those who say that the seed of the Buddha-Dharma does not exist are likewise called by this name.

(The Sanskrit sound is icchantika, translated into Chinese as one who is greatly greedy for and delights in birth and death. In some places it is transliterated as acchantika, translated into Chinese as one without desire, meaning one who does not delight in the state of nirvana. Elsewhere it is transliterated as atyantika, translated into Chinese as one of utmost evil, meaning one who has completely severed all roots of goodness.)

Question: According to the Vinaya, a bhiksu who commits an offense entailing expulsion is like a tala tree whose roots have been cut off and which can never live again. One who commits an offense in the second category must also undergo confinement, manatta, and then, before a Sangha of twenty members, be released from the offense. Even one who commits a wrongdoing must confess it face-to-face before becoming pure.

Why, then, does the Great Buddha Crown Sutra say that if one has committed the five heinous offenses of immediate retribution, violated the four parajikas or the eight parajikas, and recites this mantra, all offenses will be completely eradicated without the slightest remainder? The Buddhas and bodhisattvas will not only refrain from regarding that person as an offender but will also bestow merit upon that person, who will attain patience with the unborn.

Judged according to this, regardless of whether an offense is grave or minor, one need only recite the mantra, and there is no question of disclosing the offense before another person. Since the sutras and the Vinaya appear to contradict each other in this way, how can they be reconciled?

Answer: The radiance gathered at the Buddha’s ushnisha, from which wondrous sounds were proclaimed. This is called the mind-mantra, and is also called the mantra of the mind. It is the esoteric proclamation of the King Shurangama Samadhi.

Judging according to the Exoteric Teaching, the Buddha’s initial instructions directly answered the questions posed; they were forthright words from the depths of his heart, without the least appearance of accommodation or circumlocution. At times it is said that offenses, whether grave or minor, need not be disclosed before another person. If that were so, it would already run counter to the Tathagata’s way; how then could it accord with the unsurpassed mind-mantra?

Because the sutra seeks to reveal the spiritual power and efficacy of the esoteric seal, it says: “There is no offense that cannot be eradicated.”[5] Not only does this sutra speak in this way; the Ushnisha Vijaya Sutra, the Great Compassion Sutra, the Vaipulya Sutras, the various dharanis, and even the sutras of the Thirty-Five Buddhas, the Fifty-Three Buddhas, and the Names of the Five Thousand Five Hundred Buddhas all express this meaning.

The principal reason is that sentient beings may have deep and heavy obstructions of karma and fail to understand that offenses already committed are difficult to discipline, subdue, extinguish, and eliminate. Thus, the Vinaya reaches an impasse in its strict treatment of them. Here, the sutras and mantras open a new path of deliverance.

One excludes, while the other receives, and each performs its own function. Those who have not yet committed offenses are deterred from doing so, while those who have committed offenses can have them eradicated. We may call this the working of a mind of ultimate compassion and a wondrous skillful means.

If there were no Vinaya regulations, the Sangha Jewel, which abides in and upholds the Dharma, would not be revered. If there were no sutras and mantras, sentient beings would fall forever because of the obstructions of their offenses. The Four Siddhantas, skillfully encompassing all, were proclaimed from the Buddha’s golden mouth; how could we be permitted to give rise recklessly to biased judgments?

II. CLARIFYING THE PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH SANGHADISESA OFFENSES

The third section[6] explains:

If one commits a Sanghadisesa offense and conceals it, one must undergo the penalty for concealment for the length of time during which it was concealed. The person concerned must approach the Sangha, arrange the robe to bare the right shoulder, remove sandals, bow at the feet of the Sangha, join the palms, kneel, and make this formal declaration:

“May the Venerable Sangha listen! I, Bhikkhu..., committed a Sanghadisesa offense and concealed it. I, Bhikkhu..., committed a Sanghadisesa offense, and according to the length of time I concealed it, I now come before the Sangha to request a formal act imposing the penalty for concealment for the period during which it was concealed. I respectfully beseech the Sangha to grant me a formal act imposing the penalty for concealment for the length of time I concealed it. May the Sangha have compassion upon me, have compassion upon me!” (This request is to be made three times. The Sangha should grant it by a formal act consisting of one motion and three proclamations.)

(If the offense was concealed for one day, one must observe one day of parivasa, “separate residence.” If it was concealed for two days, one must observe two days of separate residence. The same applies to five days, ten days, half a month, one month, half a year, one year, and so forth.)

If, while undergoing the penalty of concealment, or separate residence, one again commits a grave offense, one must request, through a formal act consisting of one motion and three proclamations, the procedure of recommencing the penalty for concealment from the day of the offense.

(This means that if one commits another Sanghadisesa offense while formally observing separate residence, however many days of separate residence one has already completed are annulled. One must ask the Sangha to annul them and then ask the Sangha to impose separate residence anew for the same number of days as originally required.)

After observing separate residence, one must request six nights of manatta, “the pleasing discipline,” through a formal act consisting of one motion and three proclamations. After completing the six nights of the pleasing discipline, one next requests rehabilitation through a formal act consisting of one motion and three proclamations.

If one commits a Sanghadisesa offense but does not conceal it, one requests only six nights of manatta, the pleasing discipline. After completing the six nights of the pleasing discipline, one requests rehabilitation. If, while undergoing manatta, one again commits a grave offense, one must request the procedure of recommencing manatta from the original day (the meaning is the same as the procedure for recommencing the penalty of concealment from the original day explained above). After completing the procedure, one requests rehabilitation.

If one commits several Sanghadisesa offenses, concealing some for one night and others for ten nights, one is permitted to combine them and request, through a formal act consisting of one motion and three proclamations, the penalty for several Sanghadisesa offenses concealed for ten nights. One is then made to undergo six nights of manatta, followed by rehabilitation.

If one commits two Sanghadisesa offenses and conceals both, or remembers one offense but does not remember the other, or doubts one offense but does not doubt the other, or knows one offense but does not know the other, or states one offense but does not state the other, then according to what one remembers, knows (to know means to have no doubt), or states, a formal act imposing the penalty for concealment should be performed. If one later remembers, comes to know, or states the other offense, a formal act imposing the penalty for concealment should likewise be performed according to the offense committed. The same applies when one has concealed offenses for two months but remembers one month and does not remember the other month, and so forth.

If one commits two Sanghadisesa offenses, then relinquishes the monastic life, later returns to it and again receives full ordination (this case does not apply to bhikkhunis), whether one concealed the offenses both before and afterward, concealed them before but not afterward, or disclosed them before but later concealed them, a formal act imposing concealment should be performed according to the length of the concealment. If one did not conceal them either before or afterward, but disclosed them, only manatta is imposed. After completing that procedure, one is granted rehabilitation.

Cases in which one offense was concealed and one was not concealed, and so forth, likewise comprise the four alternatives above. Cases in which one offense was remembered and one was not remembered, and so forth, also comprise the same four alternatives. When requesting the procedure for concealment—stating one offense and not stating the other—the same four alternatives likewise apply.

During the performance of the concealment procedure and through the performance of manatta, all twenty such alternatives apply.

If one becomes a samanera and later again receives full ordination, the same applies to the one hundred alternatives.

The same one hundred alternatives also apply to insanity, mental derangement, and distressing illness. The one hundred alternatives likewise apply when the Sangha formally imposes the penalties for refusing to acknowledge an offense, refusing to repent, or refusing to relinquish an evil view.

*

Diagrams of each set of four alternatives, the twenty alternatives, and up to the one hundred alternatives follow:

1) Diagram of four alternatives: Concealing one offense and not concealing the other.

One previously committed two offenses, concealing one offense and not concealing the other.

One relinquishes the monastic life and later receives full ordination again.

– Previously, one was concealed and one was not concealed.

– Neither was concealed.

– Both were concealed.

– Previously concealed, afterward not concealed.

– Previously not concealed, afterward concealed.

2) Diagram of four alternatives: Remembering one offense and not remembering the other.

One previously committed two offenses, remembering one offense and not remembering the other.

One relinquishes the monastic life and later receives full ordination again.

– Previously, one was remembered and one was not remembered.

– Neither was remembered.

– Both were remembered.

– Previously remembered, afterward not remembered.

– Previously not remembered, afterward remembered.

3) Diagram of four alternatives: Doubting one offense and not doubting the other.

One previously committed two offenses, doubting one offense and not doubting the other.

One relinquishes the monastic life and later receives full ordination again.

– Previously, one was doubted and one was not doubted.

– Neither was doubted.

– Both were doubted.

– Previously doubted, afterward not doubted.

– Previously not doubted, afterward doubted.

4) Diagram of four alternatives: Knowing one offense and not knowing the other.

One previously committed two offenses, knowing one offense

and not knowing the other.

One relinquishes the monastic life and later receives full ordination again.

– Previously, one was known and one was not known.

– Both were known.

– Neither was known.

– Previously not known, afterward known.

– Previously known, afterward not known.

5) Diagram of four alternatives: When requesting concealment, stating one offense and not stating the other.

Having committed two offenses, one approaches the Sangha

to request the procedure for concealment, stating one offense and not stating the other.

One relinquishes the monastic life and later receives full ordination again.

– Previously, one was stated and one was not stated.

– Both were stated.

– Neither was stated.

– Previously not stated, afterward stated.

– Previously stated, afterward not stated.

In the preceding five diagrams, each diagram has four propositions, making twenty propositions in all. This is formulated according to the period from the commission of the offense until the request for the concealment discipline, or until one relinquishes the monastic life, in order to set forth the matter. There are also cases of relinquishing the monastic life while carrying out the concealment discipline; relinquishing the monastic life after completing the concealment discipline; relinquishing the monastic life while carrying out Ma-na-đỏa; and relinquishing the monastic life after completing Ma-na-đỏa.

Each likewise comprises twenty propositions; together with the preceding, they make one hundred propositions concerning relinquishing the monastic life. When the seven matters concerning a novice are enumerated, each likewise has one hundred propositions. They are presented in the following diagram:

When requesting the concealment discipline: Concealing one, not concealing one—four propositions.

While carrying out the concealment discipline: Relinquishing the precepts; remembering one, not remembering one—four propositions.

After carrying out the concealment discipline, returning to lay life: Doubting one, not doubting one—four propositions.

While carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony and receiving ordination: Knowing one, not knowing one—four propositions.

After carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony and then returning: Stating one, not stating one—four propositions.

Diagram of 700 propositions:

– From committing the offense until requesting: Concealing one, not concealing one—four propositions

the concealment discipline. Relinquishing full ordination and becoming a novice

– While carrying out the concealment discipline: Insanity; remembering one, not remembering one—four propositions

Mental derangement

– After carrying out the concealment discipline: Afflicted and oppressed by pain; doubting one, not doubting one—four propositions

Refusing to acknowledge the offense

– While carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony: Refusing to repent; knowing one, not knowing one—four propositions

Refusing to abandon wrong views

– After carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony: Stating one, not stating one—four propositions

In the preceding proposition, “Relinquishing full ordination and becoming a novice” encompasses five periods. In each period, what follows—concealing one, not concealing one, and so forth—each has four propositions. One period comprises five sets of four propositions, making twenty propositions.

The five periods, each having twenty propositions, make one hundred propositions. That is, one relinquishes the full precepts and becomes a novice, and afterward receives full ordination again. The circumstances in these one hundred propositions differ from one another.

Each case must be resolved according to its circumstances by performing the appropriate Yết-ma. In the cases of the three illnesses—insanity, mental derangement, and painful affliction—there are likewise one hundred propositions after recovery. In the three cases beginning with refusing to acknowledge the offense, after the exclusion has been lifted upon request, there are likewise one hundred propositions, making seven hundred propositions in all.

There is the case of relinquishing the monastic life while carrying out the concealment discipline; or relinquishing the monastic life while performing the discipline of restoration to the original day; or relinquishing the monastic life after completing the concealment discipline; or relinquishing the monastic life while carrying out Ma-na-đỏa; or relinquishing the monastic life after completing that discipline and later receiving full ordination again. In every case, the appropriate procedure is to be performed according to its particular circumstances. The cases of becoming a novice and so forth likewise each have five propositions.

Diagram of five propositions:

After relinquishing the monastic life, one receives full ordination again.

While carrying out concealment: Relinquishes the monastic life and becomes a layperson—Permit the concealment discipline to be continued.

Undergoing the discipline of restoration to the original day—Perform the discipline of restoration to the original day.

After carrying out concealment, receives ordination—Perform Ma-na-đỏa.

While carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony, receives full ordination again—Continue carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony.

After carrying out the discipline of restoring harmony—Grant release from the offense.

The case of becoming a novice and later receiving full ordination again is also the same as these five propositions. The cases of insanity, mental derangement, painful affliction, and oppression, after mental stability has been restored, are likewise the same as these five propositions. The cases of refusing to acknowledge the offense, refusing to repent, and refusing to abandon wrong views, after the Yết-ma has been lifted, are likewise the same as these five propositions. Altogether there are forty propositions.

If one commits a Sanghadisesa offense but believes it to be an offense entailing defeat and conceals it, or calls it a Pacittiya offense or even an offense of wrong speech and then conceals it, that person should perform the act of repentance for a Dukkata offense and then request the Sangha to confer Ma-na-đỏa. If one commits a Pacittiya offense but calls it an offense entailing defeat, and so forth, and conceals it, one should first perform the act of repentance for a Dukkata offense and afterward repent of the offense according to the Dharma. If one commits a Sanghadisesa offense, recognizes it as a Sanghadisesa offense, and then conceals it, one should perform the act of repentance for a Dukkata offense and then be given the Yết-ma discipline for concealment.

If one has committed Sanghadisesa offenses but does not remember how many times or for how many days one committed them, or remembers how many times one committed them but does not remember the number of days over which they were committed, in either case one is to be given the concealment discipline for a Sanghadisesa offense beginning from the time one ceased to be pure. If one remembers the number of days but not how many times one committed the offense, the concealment discipline should be conferred according to the remembered number of days. Cases of doubt or absence of doubt, and so forth, are treated in the same way.

If, while carrying out Ma-na-đỏa, one commits another offense and conceals it, one should be given Ma-na-đỏa, followed by the discipline of restoration to the original day, and only afterward be released from the offense.

During the period from carrying out the concealment discipline through release from the offense, and so forth, one should not interpose a Yết-ma for concealment, restoration to the original day, or Ma-na-đỏa, nor should one count such a person among the full complement of twenty persons required for release from the offense.

For a bhikkhu carrying out the discipline for concealment, there are eight circumstances in which the day is not counted and in which he also incurs a Dukkata offense.

(The circumstances will be explained clearly in the text below. In these eight circumstances, a formal declaration must be made. If no declaration is made, that day cannot be called a day of separate residence. One must repent of the Dukkata offense and then carry out the discipline of separate residence, making up that day.)

The eight circumstances in which the day is not counted are as follows:

1) Going to another monastery without making a declaration.

2) A visiting bhikkhu arrives and one does not make a declaration.

3) Having business requiring one to go beyond the boundary and not making a declaration.

4) Someone in the monastery goes out walking and one does not make a declaration.

5) Falling ill and not asking someone to make a declaration on one’s behalf so that one may suspend the discipline.

6) Two or three persons sleeping together in one room.

7) Staying at a residence where there is no bhikkhu.

8) Not making a declaration on the day of the recitation of the precepts.

The person concerned, having fully assumed the proper deportment, should make the following declaration:

“May the venerable Sangha listen! I, the bhikkhu ..., committed a Sanghadisesa offense and concealed it. According to the period of concealment, I, the bhikkhu named ..., came before the Sangha and requested the Yết-ma discipline for the number of days of concealment. The Sangha conferred upon me the Yết-ma according to the number of days of concealment. I, the bhikkhu named ..., have carried out the discipline for so many days, and so many days remain to be carried out. May the venerable ones know: I am a person carrying out the discipline for an offense that was concealed.”

One carrying out Ma-na-đỏa must sleep together with the Sangha and make this declaration every day.

On the Uposatha day, if the person undergoing repentance is weak and greatly ashamed, he should approach a pure bhikkhu and say:

“May the venerable elder know: Today I ask temporarily to suspend the discipline of repentance, in accordance with the instruction of the Sangha.” If he later wishes to resume the discipline, he should approach a pure bhikkhu and say:

“Today, in obedience to the instruction of the Sangha, I ask to resume and carry out the discipline of repentance.”

The Căn bản bách nhất yết-ma states:

While carrying out the discipline of universal residence (that is, separate residence), or while carrying out Ma-na-đỏa, if one hears that a bhikkhu who is by nature quarrelsome and fond of criticism, or a shameless and indolent person, intends to come to that residence, one should request before a bhikkhu to relinquish the discipline one is carrying out. After that person has departed, one should again approach a virtuous and pure bhikkhu and request to resume that discipline.

The Five-Part Vinaya states:

A bhikkhu carrying out the discipline of separate residence who wishes to travel far away should relinquish it before departing. He should approach a bhikkhu who is in accordance with the Dharma and say:

“Venerable sir, please listen! I now relinquish the discipline of separate residence and will carry it out again later...” (He should say this three times.)

If he departs without relinquishing it and sees a bhikkhu along the way, he should declare:

“Venerable sir, I, the bhikkhu ..., have carried out the discipline of separate residence for so many days, and so many days remain. May the venerable sir acknowledge this.”

If he has relinquished the separate residence and goes elsewhere, he should request the Sangha there to allow him to resume the separate residence. That Sangha should grant permission.

If a bhikkhu dies while carrying out the discipline of separate residence, Ma-na-đỏa, or A-phù-a-na (release from the offense), the bhikkhus asked the Buddha: “When those bhikkhus die, do they possess the complete precepts, or have their precepts been broken?” The Buddha taught: “Those bhikkhus are all bhikkhus who possess the complete precepts.”

The Luật nhiếp explains:

There are six classes of persons who, upon violating the precepts, may confess before a bhikkhu and ask that the offense be absolved, and are then said to be purified:

1) One who upholds the Sutra Pitaka.

2) One who upholds the entire Vinaya Pitaka.

3) One who upholds the entire Matrka Pitaka (Treatises).

4) One whose sense of shame is exceedingly profound: if the offense committed by such a person were disclosed, that person might die from overwhelming shame.

5) The most senior Elder in the assembly.

6) One of great merit and virtue.

When these six classes of persons are subjected to disciplinary measures, adverse consequences may arise. If they have committed an offense, they resolve to put an end to it and vow never to repeat it. Their shame is profound, and they never treat the matter lightly; therefore, the offense may be absolved. If they violate precepts concerning an offense that is “not shared in common,” then when the sexual faculty changes, that offense is also extinguished.

(“Not shared in common” refers to the following among the thirteen rules for bhikkhus: 1. Emission of semen, 2. Physical contact with a woman, 3. Lewd speech, 4. Praising oneself, 5. Building a dwelling without a sponsor, and 6. Building a dwelling with a sponsor. In all these matters, the rules for bhikkhunis differ from those for bhikkhus; hence they are called “not shared in common.”)

The Preface to the Ten Recitations Vinaya explains:

If a senior Elder commits a Sanghavasesa offense and, after performing the manatta observance, causes others to give rise to a mind of disbelief, he should form this thought: “From this day onward, I shall never allow myself to commit it again.” He thereby immediately attains purification. The same applies to a greatly virtuous and widely renowned person. The same applies to one who thinks, “I would rather cease practicing than perform the manatta observance.” The same applies to a sick and feeble bhikkhu who is unable to perform the manatta observance.

There was also a bhikkhu who committed a Sanghavasesa offense, but an assembly of twenty persons was unavailable. He intended to go to another dwelling place to confess, but robbers took his life along the way. Again, there was a bhikkhu who committed a Sanghavasesa offense, but the assembly was impure.

He intended to go to another dwelling place to confess, but robbers took his life along the way. If persons such as these give rise to the intention to “confess in accordance with the Dharma,” they immediately attain purification and do not fall into the evil destinies.

(There are six classes of persons or circumstances to which this manner of confession applies: 1. A senior Elder, 2. A greatly virtuous person, 3. A person possessed of shame, 4. A sick and feeble person, 5. The absence of a sufficient assembly, and 6. An impure assembly.)

This must not be applied improperly or with arrogance. If one makes a false claim and deceives oneself, the offense cannot be absolved. It is essential to consult extensively with those who clearly understand the Vinaya before a determination can be made.

Question: The Vinaya Samgraha calls these six classes of persons the eyes of humans and devas and the leaders of the assembly; therefore, they regard a Duskrta offense as equal to an offense entailing expulsion—the four parajikas. If a grave offense is now excused in this manner, would this not create an impediment concerning the other training rules?

Answer: They are leaders within the Sangha, so naturally they cannot be deficient in discerning what is light and what is grave. It is only because the habitual force of their afflictions is exceedingly strong, or because they have inadvertently violated a rule of purity, that once they themselves express remorse, all doubts can be overturned. They personally vow never again to deceive. These methods of confession inherently do not permit arrogance or self-deception; how, then, could one hastily claim that there is no impediment?

III. DETERMINING THE METHOD FOR DEALING WITH STHULATYAYA OFFENSES

The Ten Recitations Vinaya explains:

An offense arising from a parajika, when grave in degree, is called a grave Sthulatyaya. This offense must be confessed before the entire Sangha in order to be extinguished.

(For example, regarding the precept against sexual intercourse: the two bodies have touched, but the male organ has not entered the female organ. Regarding the precept against stealing: one has resolved to take five coins, but the object has not yet been moved from its original place. Regarding the precept against killing: one has attacked the intended person, but that person has not yet died. Regarding the precept against false claims: one falsely claims to have attained a fruition, but the statement is not clearly expressed.)

An offense arising from a parajika, when not grave in degree, is called a light Sthulatyaya.

(For example, regarding the precept against sexual intercourse: the two approach each other but have not yet touched. Regarding the precept against stealing: one has touched a valuable object but has not yet resolved to take it, or one has resolved to take an ordinary object but has not yet moved it from its original place. Regarding the precept against killing: one has merely made preparations and has not yet injured another. Regarding the precept against false speech: one has not yet uttered the words and then abandons the thought.)

An offense arising from a Sanghavasesa, when grave in degree, is called a grave Sthulatyaya.

(Regarding the precept concerning emission of semen: one stops before semen is emitted. Regarding the precept against touching a woman’s body: one party is clothed and the other is unclothed. Regarding the precept against lewd speech and the precept against soliciting sexual service: the speech is not clearly expressed.

Regarding the precept against acting as a go-between: one does not accept the proposal, but goes to convey it and then returns with a reply. Regarding the precepts on building a large or small dwelling: construction has begun but is not yet completed. Regarding the precept against making slanderous accusations out of anger: the statement is not clearly expressed.

Regarding being the instigator of a schism in the Sangha, an accomplice in a schism, reviling the Sangha, and refusing admonition—that is, “not accepting corrective admonition”—if one abandons the conduct only when the Sangha performs a karman, these are all called grave preliminary offenses.)

These offenses must be confessed outside the boundary before four bhikkhus in order to be extinguished.

An offense arising from a Sanghavasesa, when not grave in degree, is called a light Sthulatyaya. This offense must be confessed before one bhikkhu in order to be extinguished.

(One takes the male organ in the hand but does not stimulate it. Two persons touch while both are clothed. One begins to utter lewd speech or solicit sexual service but stops before the words are fully spoken. One acts as a go-between and goes to convey the message but does not return with a reply. A large or small dwelling has been planned, but construction has not yet begun. One intends to make a slanderous accusation out of anger but stops before speaking. Regarding schism in the Sangha through to obstinate misconduct, if one abandons the conduct immediately upon the first formal announcement to the Sangha, these are all called light preliminary offenses.)

An offense arising from these is also called a preliminary Sthulatyaya, or a causal Sthulatyaya.

The Dharmaguptaka Karman explains:

There are three distinct kinds of independent Sthulatyaya:

– Acting as the instigator in splitting the Dharma-wheel Sangha, stealing four coins, killing a deva, and so forth are called offenses of the highest grade.

– Acting as the instigator in splitting a karman Sangha, acting as an accomplice in splitting the Dharma-wheel Sangha, stealing two or three coins, and so forth are called offenses of the middle grade.

– Acting as an accomplice in splitting a karman Sangha, shaving body hair, going naked, keeping human skin or a stone alms bowl, consuming raw blood or flesh, wearing the garments of non-Buddhist ascetics, stealing one coin, and so forth are called offenses of the lowest grade. By analogy with the Sthulatyaya offenses arising from these, the three methods of confession should be understood.

This independent offense is also called an intrinsic Sthulatyaya or a resultant Sthulatyaya and belongs to the category of outflow offenses.[7]

Question: Splitting the Sangha is a grave heinous offense and a disqualification. How can it be confessed according to the procedure for a Sthulatyaya offense?

Answer: Acting as the instigator in splitting the Dharma-wheel Sangha is a heinous offense, whereas acting as an accomplice is not a heinous offense. Neither the instigator nor an accomplice in splitting a karman Sangha is said to have committed a heinous offense. Moreover, although acting as the instigator in splitting the Dharma-wheel Sangha is a heinous offense, one does not lose the bhikkhu precepts. Therefore, it is still called only a Sthulatyaya offense and is not called a parajika. If the wheel of the Sangha has not yet been split, the offense may still be confessed. If the Sangha has already been split, it becomes a heinous offense. In this case, confession by means of a “formal procedure” alone is insufficient; it must be confessed through “non-arising.”

As for an accomplice in splitting the Dharma-wheel Sangha and an instigator in splitting a karman Sangha, their offenses may still be confessed. However, if they relinquish the precepts and subsequently receive full ordination again, this constitutes a grave disqualification. (This is addressed when questioning the candidate about impediments and disqualifications.)

IV. DETERMINING THE METHOD FOR DEALING WITH LIGHT OFFENSES

The method for confessing a Naiḥsargika offense has already been explained in the section on the thirty rules entailing forfeiture and expiation. Here, only a general explanation is given of the method for confessing Payantika, Duskrta, and other offenses.

The third section[8] explains:

When a bhikkhu has committed an offense and wishes to approach one bhikkhu to confess it (this applies to an ordinary Pacittiya offense, a minor Dukkata offense, and so forth), he must approach a pure bhikkhu, arrange his robe to bare his right shoulder, and, if that bhikkhu is senior, bow to him (if he is junior, no bow is required). He should kneel, join his palms, state the name and category of the offense, and say:

“Venerable Sir, please be single-mindedly compassionate! I, the bhikkhu named ..., have committed the offense of ..., belonging to the category of .... I now approach the Elder to seek confession and repentance. I dare not conceal it. Having confessed, I shall be at ease; without confessing, I shall not be at ease. I acknowledge and disclose the offense I have committed according to my understanding and dare not conceal it. May the Elder recognize that I am purified, that my body of full precepts is purified, and that I may participate in the Uposatha.” (This should be said three times.)

The bhikkhu receiving the confession should say: “You should reproach your own mind and give rise to weariness toward the offense.” The confessing bhikkhu should reply: “Yes.”

If he wishes to approach two bhikkhus to confess (this applies to a Pacittiya offense of intermediate gravity, which is relatively serious, so he should express his remorse before two persons before his mind can be at ease; or there may be only three bhikkhus at that residence), he should approach two pure bhikkhus, arrange his robe to bare his right shoulder, and clearly state the offense and so forth as above. The bhikkhu receiving the confession should ask the second bhikkhu: “If the Elder permits me to receive the confession of the bhikkhu named ..., I shall receive it.” The other should say: “It is permitted; I agree.”

If he wishes to confess before three bhikkhus, the procedure is likewise the same. (This applies to a Pacittiya offense of intermediate gravity that is serious by nature; the offender must confess before three bhikkhus before his mind can be at ease. Or, if there are only four bhikkhus at that residence, the bhikkhu receiving the confession should ask the other two before accepting the confession.)

If he wishes to confess before the Sangha (that is, from four bhikkhus up to any number is called the Sangha; this applies to the upper and intermediate classes of Thullaccaya offenses, as well as relinquishment before the Sangha and confession before the Sangha), the offender should approach the Sangha, arrange his robe to bare his right shoulder, remove his footwear, bow at the feet of the Sangha, kneel, join his palms, and say:

“May the Venerable Sangha listen! I, the bhikkhu named ..., have committed the offense of .... I now come before the Sangha to seek confession and repentance....” (This should be said three times.)

The bhikkhu receiving the confession must make a formal motion. Only afterward may he receive the offender’s confession. The wording of the motion is as follows:

“May the Venerable Sangha listen! The bhikkhu named ... has committed the offense of ... and now comes before the Sangha seeking confession and repentance. If it is the proper time for the Sangha, and the Sangha approves, I shall receive the confession of that bhikkhu. This is the motion.”

After making this motion, he may receive the confession. The bhikkhu should repeat the foregoing statement three times in confession. The bhikkhu receiving the confession should say: “You should reproach your own mind and give rise to weariness and detachment.” The offender should reply: “Yes, Venerable Sir.”

The Vinaya-matrika Sutra explains:

When a senior bhikkhu has an offense to confess to a junior bhikkhu, he must perform four acts when disclosing it:

1) Arrange his robe to bare his right shoulder.

2) Remove his shoes, clogs, and sandals.

3) Join his palms.

4) State the offense he has committed.

When a junior bhikkhu approaches a senior bhikkhu to confess offenses he has committed, he must perform five acts (the four acts above, with the fifth added: kneeling).

(The distinction between senior and junior here is not determined by the number of rains retreats—nine rains, and so forth—but solely by the time of receiving full ordination. One who received bhikkhu ordination even a single instant earlier is the senior. Furthermore, according to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, when a senior confesses to a junior, only prostration is omitted; he must still kneel.)

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya Ksudrakavastu states:

One must possess five qualities before performing the rite of confession and repentance:

1) Possessing faith.

2) Arousing diligence.

3) Giving rise to reverence.

4) Uttering good and gracious words.

5) Associating with spiritual friends.

The Introduction to the Sarvastivada Vinaya states:

If one has been captured by bandits or is ill, although the person before him has a “corresponding” offense, he is permitted to confess mentally and verbally. Afterward, he must approach a pure bhikkhu and confess. Only after those persons have confessed may their confessions be received.

(A “corresponding” offense means that both persons have jointly committed the same offense. Under ordinary circumstances, one may not confess to a person who has committed the same offense, and a person who has committed the same offense may not receive another’s confession. But in the event of calamity, illness, or capture by bandits, that person should first think: “As for this offense of mine today, I must later approach a pure bhikkhu and confess it.” After forming this intention, he may immediately receive the confession of the gravely ill person or the person captured by bandits, so that the latter will not fall into an evil destiny after death.)

V. DETERMINING THE VARIOUS KARMAVACANA PROCEDURES

The third section of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya states:

There were two bhikkhus whose dispositions inclined them toward contentious litigation. They reviled one another, spoke malicious words, competed for superiority, and also encouraged others to engage in disputes. The Buddha permitted the Sangha to perform an act of censure against them by means of a motion followed by three proclamations. After the Sangha had assembled, their offenses were to be stated. Once the offenses had been stated, an act of recollection was to be performed for them. After the act of recollection had been performed, the charges were to be determined. The wording of the motion for the karmavacana procedure is as follows:

“May the Venerable Sangha listen! These bhikkhus named ... delight in contention, revile one another, speak harsh words, and compete with one another for superiority. After those bhikkhus have contended with one another, if other bhikkhus engage in contention, they approach and encourage them, saying: ‘You friends are capable and are not like them.

You are far more learned and wise, your undertakings are far superior to theirs, and so are your friends and acquaintances. We shall be your allies.’ Because they advocate in this manner, disputes arise in the Sangha where none had previously existed, and disputes already arisen cannot be brought to an end. If it is the proper time for the Sangha, and the Sangha approves, the Sangha shall perform an act of censure against these bhikkhus.

If in the future they again engage in contention and again revile one another, the Sangha shall impose an additional penalty and discipline them. This is the motion.”

The wording of the karmavacana is formulated accordingly. If they comply with the Sangha and transgress none of its requirements, and they request that the karmavacana act be rescinded, it should be rescinded. They must approach the Sangha and request three times that the penalty be lifted. The Sangha shall rescind it by a motion followed by three proclamations.

If an expelled bhikkhu has not been summoned, he should not enter within the boundary. He is permitted to ask a trustworthy person to enter the assembly and request confession and repentance on his behalf. (This refers to one who has engaged in corrupt conduct and defiled a household.)

If a bhikkhu living in dependence studies the Vinaya, attains wisdom, complies with the Sangha, dares not oppose it, and requests the rescission of the karmavacana act, it should be rescinded.

When a bhikkhu possesses any of ten qualities, a formal karmavacana should be performed to prohibit him from visiting lay households:

1) Speaking ill of and reviling a lay household.

2, 3, 4) Causing a lay household to suffer harm, lose its benefits, or lose its place of support.

5) Contending with and troubling laypeople.

6, 7, 8) Slandering the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha before laypeople.

9) Speaking base and abusive words before laypeople.

10) Promising to act in accordance with the Dharma but failing to do so.

There are five kinds of bhikshus for whom this karma procedure should not be performed: those who do not respect their father, mother, shramanas, or brahmins, and who do not steadfastly uphold what ought to be upheld (for them, only a formal act of rebuke and discipline should be performed...). If they respect their father, mother, shramanas, and brahmins, and steadfastly uphold without abandoning what ought to be upheld, then any bhikshu who commits the ten acts mentioned above should undergo the karma procedure barring him from visiting lay households. After performing the procedure, a bhikshu should be sent to the lay household to apologize on his behalf. One possessing eight qualities should be sent:

1) He has heard about and understands the matter.

2) He speaks skillfully.

3) He himself clearly understands it.

4) He is capable of understanding another person’s intention.

5) He skillfully receives another person’s words.

6) He remembers well.

7) He is without fault.

8) He skillfully explains which statements are right and which are wrong.

One who possesses these eight qualities should be appointed through a motion and one proclamation to go to the lay household and say to the householder in apology: “The Sangha has already performed a disciplinary act against this bhikshu.” If the householder accepts the apology, that is well. If not, the bhikshu should be told to stand where the householder can see but not hear him, and that bhikshu should be instructed to make a proper confession.

The appointed bhikshu should then return and tell the householder: “That bhikshu previously committed an offense, but he has now confessed it, and the offense has been removed.” If the householder accepts the apology, that is well. If not, the offending bhikshu must personally approach the householder and apologize. After apologizing, he must remain dependent upon the Sangha and must not offend again.

When he requests that the karma procedure be rescinded, it should be rescinded for him.

If one has committed an offense but says that one does not see it as an offense, has an offense but does not confess it, or refuses to relinquish a wrong view, in every case the formal act of suspension should be performed.

If a formal act of rebuke, banishment, dependence, or barring from lay households has already been performed; if one has been suspended for refusing to acknowledge an offense, for refusing to confess an offense committed, or for refusing to relinquish a wrong view; or if one is undergoing probation according to the number of days the offense was concealed, recommencement from the beginning, six nights of mānatta, or reinstatement—after these karma procedures have been performed, there are five things one must not do:

1) One must not confer full ordination upon another.

2) One must not accept another as a dependent.

3) One must not maintain a shramanera.

4) One must not accept an appointment from the Sangha to instruct bhikshunis.

5) If already appointed by the Sangha, one must not go to instruct them.

There are also five things one must not do:

1) One must not recite the precepts.

2) When the Sangha asks about the meaning of the Vinaya, one must not answer.

3) One must not officiate at a karma procedure.

4) One must not participate in selecting wise persons to judge and deliberate upon the affairs of the Sangha.

5) One must not act as a representative of the Sangha.

Furthermore, one must not enter a village early and return only at night. One must not associate closely with followers of other paths. One must not speak jāguṇa (foreign expressions), nor commit another offense.

One must not disparage the karma procedure or those who perform it. One must not accept offerings or reverence from virtuous bhikshus. One must not accuse a virtuous bhikshu of an offense.

One must not obstruct the Uposatha or the Invitation. One must not dispute with virtuous bhikshus. One should sit and walk behind the other bhikshus.

For pure bhikshus, one should sweep, prepare seats, carry robes and bowls, massage their bodies, and so forth, serving them in accordance with the Dharma as one serves a teacher. Three times each day, one should present oneself before a pure bhikshu. On the Uposatha day, one must sweep and prepare everything, including the tally sticks.

After the Uposatha, one should put everything away.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya explains:

There are five matters for which a formal act of discipline must be performed (that is, the karma procedure of rebuke):

1) Habitual intimacy in eight ways, namely: bodily intimacy in living together, verbal intimacy in living together, and bodily and verbal intimacy in living together. Bodily intimacy means sitting together on one bed, sleeping together on one bed, eating from the same tray, sharing clothing, going out together, and coming in together. Verbal intimacy means responding back and forth to one another and speaking defiled words. Bodily and verbal intimacy means sitting together on one bed and so forth, up to responding back and forth to one another and successively speaking defiled words. (There are six bodily acts and two verbal acts, together making these eight matters.)

2) Frequently committing offenses and failing to desist after being admonished three times.

3) Entering a village too early and leaving it too late, associating with evil companions, and going to places one ought not to go.

4) Engaging in mutual disputes and failing to desist after being admonished three times.

(Five qualities lead to renewed disputes: 1. Arrogance; 2. A coarse and vicious nature; 3. Meaningless speech; 4. Speaking at an improper time; 5. Failing to associate with good friends.)

5) Delighting in close association with young people and failing to desist after being admonished three times.

When a karma procedure of discipline has been performed, yet the offender does not compliantly carry it out, or when he frequently commits minor offenses and, though verbally accepting admonition, continues to offend, in every case the karma procedure of refusing to speak with him should be performed (that is, the karma procedure of dependence).

For bad conduct that corrupts lay households, the karma procedure of banishment should be performed. For disturbing worldly people and causing unpleasant incidents, the karma procedure of conciliation should be performed (that is, the karma procedure barring one from visiting lay households).

If one does not acknowledge an offense, does not act in accordance with the Dharma (that is, does not confess), or refuses to relinquish a wrong view, the karma procedure of suspension should be performed.

A bhikshu undergoing parivāsa must obediently observe seven categories of regulations:

1) Matters concerning bhikshus.

2) Matters concerning bhikshunis.

3) Matters concerning dependents.

4) Matters concerning entry into a village.

5) Undertaking arduous duties.

6) Accepting duties assigned by the Sangha.

7) Matters concerning the king.

What are the matters concerning bhikshus?

He must not accept homage from a bhikshu. He must not speak of a bhikshu’s faults. He must not deliberate together with bhikshus. He must not speak of a shramanera’s offenses. He must not reward or punish a shramanera. He must not deliberate together with shramaneras. He must not act as a messenger for a bhikshu. When the assembly gathers, he must not serve as a Dharma speaker for the assembly, except under special circumstances. These are the matters concerning bhikshus.

What are called the matters concerning bhikshunis?

He must not accept the prostrations of bhikshunis. He must not speak of a bhikshuni’s offenses, deliberate together with bhikshunis, or speak of the offenses of a shikshamana or shramaneri. He must not reward or punish them, nor deliberate together with them. He must not obstruct the bhikshunis’ Uposatha or Invitation. He must not prevent bhikshunis from standing across the gateway of the Sangha’s residence.

(Because some bhikshunis struck the Venerable Kapila, the Buddha instructed the bhikshus that when they saw bhikshunis entering the monastery, they should tell them to stand across the gateway. That was proper. Only after they had reported their arrival were they permitted to enter. Bhikshus presently undergoing separate residence, however, must not prevent them from doing so.)

He must not go to instruct the bhikshunis; even if he has already accepted the appointment, he must not go. (This means that although he had previously accepted an appointment from the Sangha before being disciplined, while he is presently under an unresolved penalty he must not go to teach them.) These are the matters concerning bhikshunis.

What are the matters concerning dependents?

He must not authorize anyone to receive full ordination. He must not accept anyone as a dependent. He must not maintain a shramanera. He must not accept support from a bhikshu. He must not transmit scriptures to another. He must not receive scriptures from another. If he regularly recites scriptures, he should recite them softly. If he previously accepted disciples as dependents, he should tell them to take dependence upon another and should terminate his circle of dependents. These are the matters concerning dependents.

What are called the matters concerning villages?

He must not enter a village too early or leave it too late. He must not enter a village alone. He must not walk ahead of or behind a shramana.

(A bhikkhu dwelling separately in confinement must walk behind all bhikkhus who are pure, and likewise must sit behind them. If he enters a village alone, or walks ahead of or behind other ascetics, this means that he is not complying with the prescribed practice.) He may not go to the homes of knowledgeable donors. He may not stay at a residence where there is no Sangha of bhikkhus. When sitting or eating, he must remain behind the bhikkhus. He may not send someone to receive food or have someone deliver food, except when it is his turn. (When his turn comes in the rotation of daily duties, he commits no offense by having someone receive or deliver food.) These are called the duties concerning the village.

What is meant by undertaking strenuous duties?

Upon rising in the morning, he must sweep the monastery, the stupa, and the Sangha’s dwellings. He must wash and clean the Sangha’s receptacles for urine and excrement. He must perform, according to his ability and without evasion, every task that can be done in this manner. He may not receive another person’s consent, except when it is his turn. (When his turn comes in the rotation to convey another person’s consent, he commits no offense.) This is called undertaking strenuous duties.

What is meant by accepting an appointment from the Sangha?

He may not accept any act of homage or any procedure carried out by a motion and one proclamation or by a motion and three proclamations. This concerns accepting an appointment from the Sangha.

What are the duties concerning the king?

He may not rely upon the power of the king, ministers, householders, or violent persons. He may not disparage the Buddha, disparage the Dharma, disparage the Sangha, or disparage those who performed the karman. He must blame only himself and may not blame others. These are called the duties concerning the king.

When a bhikkhu is undergoing Parivasa and Manatta, there are these seven duties to be observed. If he follows them, it is called compliant conduct; if he does not follow them, it is called noncompliant conduct.

A person subjected to a karman of censure must comply with five duties:

1) Duties concerning bhikkhus.

2) Duties concerning bhikkhunis.

3) Duties concerning his retinue.

4) Duties concerning Sangha procedures, such as accepting appointment as a teacher.

5) Duties concerning the king.

(Only the duties of entering villages and undertaking strenuous work for the Sangha are excluded.) After performing the karman, the Sangha should say:

“Venerable sir, you must not commit the offense again. If you repeat it, the Sangha will impose a heavier penalty upon you. You must fully comply with these five duties.”

After he has fulfilled them, subdued himself, and humbled his mind, the Sangha should confer upon him the karman of release, thereby rescinding the former karman. A person upon whom this karman has been imposed may not engage in conversation, nor may he fail to comply with the five duties described above. After the karman has been performed, he must further comply with five duties:

1) Even if he is one hundred years old, he must live in dependence upon a bhikkhu of only ten years’ standing who observes the precepts, even if that bhikkhu knows only the two divisions of the Vinaya.

2) Upon rising in the morning, he must offer greetings, carry away and empty the receptacles for urine and excrement and the rinsing tube, and return them to their former places. He must provide tooth-cleaning sticks, sweep, carry food, wash robes, dye bowls, and provide all other services, except for bowing in homage and rubbing the body. If the person is ill, however, he may rub and apply ointment to him.

3) He must study the two divisions of the Vinaya. If he is unable to do so, he must at least study the five classes of precepts.

4) He must thoroughly understand the skandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, and the twelve links of dependent origination.

5) He must thoroughly understand what constitutes an offense and what does not constitute an offense, which forms of deportment should be taught, and which improper forms of deportment should be avoided.

When he has completed this study, the karman of release is performed.

A person subjected to a karman of banishment must likewise comply with the five duties above. After the karman has been performed, he should be settled beside the Sangha’s monastery. When he has complied with the five duties and everything has been done in accordance with the Dharma, the karman of release should be conferred upon him.

A person subjected to a karman of reconciliation must likewise comply with the five duties above. After the karman has been performed, he should be told to go to the layperson’s home and apologize, thereby causing that householder to be pleased. If the person is pleased, this is called release.

A person subjected to a karman of suspension must likewise comply with the five duties above. After the karman has been performed, he should be placed outside the Sangha’s monastery, with his doorway facing the aranya. If he comes to sweep the grounds of the monastery, stupa, or Sangha compound, the bhikkhus should sweep away and conceal his footprints.

If he comes to the place for washing the feet or relieving himself, it should be rinsed clean afterward. If he travels together with his disciples or dependent pupils, they may not call him their preceptor or acarya, nor may they speak with him; other people, however, should speak to him. In order to induce him to comply and abandon evil and wrong views, as well as bhikkhus who hold evil and wrong views, one should not converse or stand together with them, share Dharma food with them, bow together before the same Buddha, recite sutras together, belong to the same Sangha assembly, perform the Uposatha or Pavarana together, or participate in any Sangha karman with them.

One may speak with followers of other paths and invite them to sit. If the suspended person becomes ill, one should not tend to him, but one may tell his donors or relatives, “That suspended person is ill; you should go and care for him.” If he dies, one should not offer incense and flowers to his corpse, nor should food and drink be prepared on his behalf and offered to the Sangha. His robes and bowl may not be distributed, and his corpse may not be cremated.

The corpse should be placed upon the bed on which he lay, his robes and bowl tied around his neck, and the entire bed carried outside. It should then be said: “The affairs of the Sangha are now purified! The affairs of the Sangha are now purified!” Toward a bhikkhu who holds evil and wrong views, we should not give rise to an evil mind.

Even when his body is burned, no evil thought should arise; rather, one should think: “May those who come afterward not become accustomed to following this wrong view.” If a cowherd or woodcutter brings back his robes and bowl, they may be accepted, regarding that person as the donor. If the suspended person complies with the five duties, his mind gains right view, and he becomes gentle and amenable, the karman is rescinded; this is release.

There are three matters for which a person must be suspended:

1) His observance of the precepts is impure.

2) His views are impure, such as saying that sexual misconduct does not obstruct the Path, saying that killing living beings brings no karmic result, holding views of annihilationism or eternalism, or maintaining that the world is finite or infinite, and so forth.

3) His livelihood is impure.

There are three grounds for suspending a person: what has been seen, what has been heard, and what is suspected.

Furthermore, a bhikkhu endowed with the following five qualities may accuse another of an offense:

1) What he states is true, not false.

2) He speaks at the proper time, not at an improper time.

3) He speaks for the person’s benefit, not without benefit.

4) He speaks gently, not harshly.

5) He speaks with loving-kindness, not out of anger.

One who is endowed with the following five qualities may also accuse another of an offense:

1) His bodily conduct is pure.

2) His verbal conduct is pure.

3) His livelihood is pure.

4) He is learned in the sutras.

5) He is learned in the Vinaya.

Furthermore, there are five ways of accusing another of an offense:

1) First insulting him and afterward accusing him of an offense.

2) First accusing him of an offense and afterward insulting him.

3) Accusing him of an offense while insulting him.

4) Insulting him without accusing him of an offense.

5) Accusing him of an offense without insulting him.

Of these five, if one first insults a person and then accuses him of an offense, accuses him and then insults him, or accuses him while insulting him, the Sangha should not accept the accusation. If one accuses him of an offense without insulting him, the Sangha should investigate the matter.

One who possesses any of the following five qualities should not accuse another of an offense: partiality arising from affection, hatred, fear, delusion, or personal gain. Whoever accuses another because of these five qualities will, upon the breakup of the body and the end of life, fall into an evil destination, into hell.

Only one who possesses the following five qualities should accuse another of an offense: freedom from hatred, freedom from attachment, freedom from fear, freedom from delusion, and freedom from concern for personal gain. Whoever, endowed with these five qualities, accuses another of an offense will, upon the breakup of the body and the end of life, be reborn in a good destination and receive the praise of those who practice the holy life.

When a bhikkhu who has been suspended goes to another residence of the Sangha, he should say: “Venerables, I have been suspended. I have practiced the concordant procedure, my mind has become gentle and compliant; please revoke the suspension for me.” The Sangha should ask: “For what reason were you suspended?” If he replies: “There was no matter for which I was suspended,” they should say: “You and I may share the Dharma food and material food together.” If he says: “I was suspended because of a matter,” they should say: “Return to your former place;

the Sangha there will revoke it for you.” If the person says that no Sangha resides at that place, or that they have died, ceased practicing, or gone to other residences where no Sangha is present, he should be asked: “For what matter were you suspended?” He replies: “I was suspended because of such-and-such a matter; my mind has become gentle and compliant, I have recognized my fault, and I have already practiced the concordant procedure.” If so, the suspension should be revoked.

The Mūlasarvāstivāda Nidāna explains:

When bhikshus dispute with one another, if their two teachers—the preceptor and the acharya—are still present, they should be instructed to make confession or should be admonished by them. If they have completed ten rains and are independent of reliance, the bhikshus should admonish them—that is, perform the censure karma. If they refuse to listen, the Sangha should perform the karma of placing them under dependence—that is, the karma of dependence, requiring them to take dependence upon one who upholds the Vinaya. All others must refrain from associating or conversing with them.

The Ten Recitations Vinaya says:

After performing the karma of humbling oneself—that is, the karma of reconciliation—a bhikkhu should be instructed to go to the householder and apologize. If, after three visits, the householder still refuses to accept the apology and intends to cause trouble, that bhikkhu should be told to go away. If the bhikkhu refuses to leave, the Sangha is not at fault. If a bhikkhu jokes and laughs while conversing with bhikkhunis and thereby disturbs other bhikkhus, the karma of impurity should be performed against him. (This belongs to the category of the censure karma.)

The Preface to the Vinaya says:

A bhikkhu expelled from one residence may not go to another residence to make confession, except when there is no Sangha at that monastery; in that case, he is permitted to go to another residence to confess.

VI. EXPLANATION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR OVERTURNING THE BOWL

The fourth section[9] explains:

When a lay household commits any of ten acts, the Sangha should perform the karma of overturning the bowl:

1) Reviling or slandering a bhikkhu.

2) Causing harm to a bhikkhu.

3) Acting to a bhikkhu’s detriment.

4) Depriving a bhikkhu of support.

5) Creating disputes and disorder among bhikkhus.

6. 7. 8) Speaking ill of the Buddha, Dharma, or Sangha in the presence of a bhikkhu.

9) Falsely accusing a bhikkhu of impure conduct.

10) Violating a bhikkhuni.

If any one of these ten acts is committed, the karma of overturning the bowl must be performed. After performing the karma, a bhikkhu possessing the eight qualifications—as stated in the section concerning prohibition from visiting a lay household—should be appointed to go to that household and say: “Because of such-and-such a matter, the karma of overturning the bowl has now been performed against.... We shall no longer visit the house of....” If that person confesses in accordance with the Dharma, complies with the Sangha without daring to oppose it, and requests that the karma of overturning the bowl be revoked so that visits may resume, the Sangha should revoke it for that person.

Concerning this matter, the Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya records:

In the city of Śrāvastī, the upasaka Dharma-giver regularly invited the Sangha to receive meals. Whenever members of the Sangha arrived, he would question them closely about the meaning of the teachings. If a bhikkhu could answer, he rejoiced and personally served him various foods. If a bhikkhu could not answer, he immediately disparaged and ridiculed him and ordered his servants to bring him unpalatable food. For this reason, the bhikkhus all refused to go to the home of that lay Buddhist family to receive meals. The Buddha instructed the Sangha to perform the karma of overturning the bowl.

There are eight acts by an upasaka for which the Sangha must perform the karma of overturning the bowl:

1) Openly slandering a bhikkhu.

2) Openly reproaching a bhikkhu.

3) Openly reviling a bhikkhu in anger.

4) Cutting off a bhikkhu’s material support.

5) Refusing to cooperate with a bhikkhu.

6. 7. 8) Reviling the Buddha, Dharma, or Sangha.

Dharma-giver ordinarily made offerings to the bhikkhus before taking his own meal. On that day, he waited until after noon, but no bhikkhu arrived. He went and reported the matter to the Buddha....

The Buddha taught: “You have treated the Bhikkhu Sangha with contempt. Wishing to benefit you, the Sangha has therefore performed the karma of overturning the bowl.” At that time, not far from the Buddha, there was an arhat. The Buddha told Dharma-giver: “Go and ask him what salt is and how many kinds of salt there are.” Dharma-giver immediately went and asked him.

The arhat replied: “I know that you are the upasaka Dharma-giver. You treated the bhikkhus with contempt, and the Sangha has performed the karma of overturning the bowl against you. Was that not enough?

I require quiet here, yet you have come to disturb me again! Salt is simply salt.” Dharma-giver was displeased upon hearing this and returned to the Buddha. The Buddha asked: “How did your inquiry into the meaning of salt go?

Were you satisfied?” Dharma-giver replied: “That bhikkhu is inferior and poorly learned. When asked about salt, he merely said that salt is salt.” At that time, not far from the Buddha, there was another bhikkhu, a Dharma teacher named Phất-hy-lô. The Buddha told Dharma-giver to go and ask that bhikkhu.

Dharma-giver went and asked him, and the Dharma teacher replied: “According to its meaning, salt is of two kinds: the taste of salt and the nature of salt. Its taste is the single salty taste of seawater. As for its nature, there are black salt, red salt, Tân-đầu salt, Vị-bạt-già salt, Tỳ-lãm salt, Ca-già salt, Tư-đa salt, and Tỷ-ca salt.

In summary, there are two kinds: raw salt and cooked salt. This is what is called salt.” Upon hearing this, Dharma-giver was greatly delighted and went to report to the Blessed One: “That bhikkhu explained most skillfully. He distinguished, expounded, and comprehensively summarized the meaning of salt.

Whether questioned directly or in reverse order, he could answer everything.” The Buddha taught: “That is an ordinary bhikkhu who has not yet tasted the flavor of the Dharma within my teaching. The former bhikkhu, however, was an arhat. Yet, in your arrogance, you were unable to discern what was true and what was false; throughout your life, you have done nothing but useless deeds.” Faced with this, Dharma-giver became afraid and begged to confess.

The Buddha said: “With a sincere mind, put your robes in proper order and go together with your relatives before the Sangha. Three times request the karma for revoking the overturning of the bowl.” The Sangha had them enter within the boundary and stand where they could be seen but not heard, and then revoked it by a motion followed by three proclamations.

When the Sangha has performed the karma of overturning the bowl, no one—from bhikkhus to upasakas and upasikas—may visit or associate with that person. A piece of kasaya cloth should be tied and hung at the entrance to that person’s house, and an announcement should be made throughout the lanes: “The house of... is a house against which the karma of overturning the bowl has been performed.” If visiting bhikkhus arrive, they must be informed.

The karma of overturning the bowl must not be performed hastily; caution is necessary. If they say: “It is fortunate for my household that the śramanas do not come,” the karma of overturning the bowl should not be performed against such a person. It should be performed when the family possesses a sense of shame and moral dread. If they recognize their fault and, with a compliant and accommodating mind, practice the concordant procedure, that karma should be revoked.

The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya says:

A bhikkhu should not perform the karma of overturning the bowl against a layperson over one or two trivial matters. Likewise, an upasaka should not cease to respect and trust a bhikkhu over a trivial matter. Only when a bhikkhu commits any of the following eight acts may an upasaka cease to trust and respect him:

1, 2, 3, 4) Slandering the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, or precepts.

5) Seeking to cause harm to an upasaka.

6) Causing evil rumors about an upasaka to circulate.

7) Seeking to seize an upasaka’s dwelling place.

8) Treating what is contrary to the Dharma as correct and showing contempt for an upasaka.

If an upasaka is angry with a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should not go to that person’s house. If an entire village is angry with a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should not go to that village.

ESSENTIAL COLLECTION OF THE MEANINGS OF VINAYA MATTERS, REVISED AND CORRECTED

END OF VOLUME THIRTEEN

Notes:

1 The three methods of repentance comprise repentance based on non-arising, repentance through apprehending signs, and repentance through a formal procedure.

2 The Three Contemplations: The Tiantai school teaches these as comprising the contemplation of emptiness, the contemplation of provisional existence, and the contemplation of the Middle.

3 The Three Truths: Established by the Tiantai school, these comprise the truth of emptiness, the truth of provisional existence, and the truth of the Middle, which are the objects of the Three Contemplations.

4 It is not the second section; Master Zhixu cited it incorrectly (Essential Compilation of the Meaning of Vinaya Matters, Revised and Reexamined 13, p. 447c18, Manji 40n719). Four-Part Vinaya 55, fourth section, Regulating the Order, p. 972b11, Taishō 22n1428.

5 See the Guide to Karman Procedures, Chapter 14, under the heading “Repentance for the Six Classes of Offenses,” for clarification of this matter concerning the Exoteric and Esoteric teachings.

6 Four-Part Vinaya 45, third section, Khandhaka on Persons, p. 898c07, Taishō 22n1428.

7 Corresponding-result offense: an offense in which an offending cause gives rise to an offending result; that is, the result resembles the cause.

8 The third section, as cited by Master Zhixu in Essential Compilation of the Meaning of Vinaya Matters, Revised and Reexamined 30, p. 451b13, Manji 40n719. According to Taishō 22n1428, Four-Part Vinaya 36, second section, Khandhaka on the Recitation of the Precepts, p. 825c23.

9 Four-Part Vinaya 53, fourth section, Miscellaneous Khandhaka, p. 959b03, Taishō 22n1428.