重治毗尼事義集要

3. THE PRECEPT AGAINST KEEPING ROBE-CLOTH FOR MORE THAN ONE MONTH

According to the Mahayana, if it is for the sake of the assembly, there is no offense; if one does it for oneself, it constitutes an offense.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu, after the robe-making period has ended and the Kathina robe privileges have been relinquished, receives out-of-season robe-cloth, he may accept it if he needs it. Having accepted it, he should quickly have it made into a robe. If there is enough cloth, that is good; if there is not enough, he is permitted to keep it for one month while waiting for sufficient cloth. If he keeps it beyond that period, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[1]:

A bhikkhu’s sanghati robe was torn and damaged, and he could not finish sewing it within ten days. He feared that he would violate the preceding precept. His companions reported this to the Buddha, whereupon the Buddha permitted the cloth to be kept until there was enough to finish sewing the robe. The group of six bhikkhus had rag-robes and other kinds of robes, but did not have enough matching cloth. They therefore took a piece from a rag-robe, washed and dyed it, and sewed it over the four corners to make the robe allowable. They then entrusted the robe to bhikkhus who were their friends and departed to travel among the people.

After a long time, they had not returned, so those entrusted with the robe took it out to air. Other bhikkhus saw it and asked about it. Having learned what had happened, they reported it to the Buddha, who then established this precept.

EXPLANATION:

The robe season: when there is no Kathina robe ceremony, it is the one month following the day of the Pavarana; when there is a Kathina robe ceremony, it is the five months following the day of the Pavarana. The period beyond these limits is called the out-of-season period for robes.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If, within ten days, enough matching robe-cloth has been obtained, one should immediately cut and sew it into a robe, make it a gift under formal relinquishment, or give it to someone. If one does none of these, then at sunrise on the eleventh day, one incurs an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation for each piece of cloth, according to their number. If there was not enough matching cloth, but sufficient matching cloth is obtained on the eleventh day, one should cut and sew it as described above.

If one does not do so, then at sunrise on the twelfth day, one incurs an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation for each robe, according to their number. The same applies through the twenty-ninth day. On the thirtieth day, whether or not there is enough cloth and whether or not it matches, the robe must be completely cut and sewn that very day.

Otherwise, at sunrise on the thirty-first day, every piece entails an offense of forfeiture and expiation. A bhikkhuni commits an offense of forfeiture and expiation.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

If, on the twenty-ninth day, one expects to receive fine, soft cloth while the cloth already possessed is coarse, one should formally assign the former cloth to another. Once the new cloth is obtained, one may keep it for one month while waiting for enough fine cloth of the same kind. If one expects to receive coarse cloth, one is permitted to retain it for one month. In this way, successively^[2], according to one’s preference, one may wait for matching cloth, but it must not be kept for more than one month.

4. THE PRECEPT AGAINST ACCEPTING A ROBE FROM AN UNRELATED BHIKKHUNI

This is a prohibitive offense. According to the Mahayana, no distinction is made between relatives and non-relatives; one should simply consider whether or not it is appropriate to accept the robe. Nevertheless, in the age of the decline of the Dharma, one must guard against arousing suspicion.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu accepts a robe from a bhikkhuni who is not his relative, except in exchange, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[3]:

A bhikkhu was wearing an old and tattered sanghati robe. When the bhikkhuni Uppalavanna saw him, compassion arose in her, and she immediately took off the precious robe she was wearing and exchanged it for his old, tattered robe. She later wore this tattered robe when she went to see the Buddha.

The Buddha said, “This should not be done. I permit you to keep a full set of five robes^[4] that are sound and durable; only what remains may be freely given to others. Why is this?

Even when women wear sound garments, they are still not presentable, much less when they wear tattered robes.” The Buddha then assembled the Sangha and established this precept. Thereafter, the bhikkhus were all so cautious and apprehensive that they did not dare accept robes even from bhikkhunis who were their relatives. The Buddha said, “When she is a relative, one must still know whether or not she can afford to give it and whether or not it is appropriate to accept it; if so, I permit it.”

Furthermore, at Jetavana, robes offered to the twofold Sangha were being distributed among them. A bhikkhu mistakenly received a bhikkhuni’s robe, while a bhikkhuni mistakenly received a bhikkhu’s robe. The bhikkhuni brought it to the monastery to exchange it. The bhikkhu again reported this to the Blessed One, who then permitted exchanges.

EXPLANATION:

Relatives means one’s parents and relatives extending back through seven generations, who are called kin. Exchange means exchanging a robe for a robe, a robe for something other than a robe, or something other than a robe for a robe, such as a knife, thread, needle case, or even a single medicinal pill, and so forth.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The four assemblies incur a Dukkata offense.

(A novice monk who accepts a robe from an unrelated bhikkhuni, siksamana, or novice nun incurs a Dukkata offense in every case. A bhikkhuni, siksamana, or novice nun who accepts a robe from an unrelated bhikkhu or novice monk likewise incurs a Dukkata offense in every case.)

There is no offense when one accepts it for the Sangha or for the Buddha.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

One incurs a Dukkata offense when accepting a robe from an unrelated siksamana or novice nun. If a relative violates the precepts or holds wrong views and one goes to that person to obtain a robe, one incurs a Dukkata offense.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

If she is not a relative and one perceives her as not a relative, or if one is doubtful, one commits an offense of forfeiture and expiation. If she is a relative but one perceives her as not a relative, or if one is doubtful, one commits an offense of wrongdoing.

There is no offense if a bhikkhuni brings a robe as an offering to the Sangha; offers it because Dharma has been taught to her; offers it on the occasion of receiving full ordination; offers it because she sees that the bhikkhu has been robbed by thieves; or, being a bhikkhuni with abundant gains and offerings, brings robe material to a bhikkhu, places it on the ground, asks him to accept it, leaves it there, and departs. There is no offense in accepting it.

The Sarvastivada Treatise says:

Accepting a robe of the prescribed size entails forfeiture and expiation; accepting a robe that is not of the prescribed size or other articles incurs a Dukkata offense.

5. THE PRECEPT AGAINST HAVING AN UNRELATED BHIKKHUNI WASH A ROBE

This is also studied in the Mahayana. In the age of the decline of the Dharma, particular attention should be paid to this precept.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu has a bhikkhuni who is not his relative wash, dye, or beat a robe, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[5]:

Kaludayi and the bhikkhuni Thullananda sat with their bodies exposed, gazing at each other with lustful minds. As a result, he emitted impure fluid, soiling his antaravasa robe. The bhikkhuni offered to wash it, and then put the impure fluid into her mouth and genital passage. She subsequently became pregnant. The bhikkhunis questioned her and learned what had happened. They told the bhikkhus and asked them to report it to the Blessed One. The Buddha rebuked them and established this precept.

At that time, the bhikkhus were all so apprehensive and cautious that they did not dare ask even related bhikkhunis to wash, dye, or beat old robes. The Buddha therefore added the phrase “who is not a relative.”

EXPLANATION:

An old robe means even a robe that has been worn only once.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

One is permitted to ask a daughter who has gone forth, or even a granddaughter, to wash it. One may not ask a married woman who subsequently went forth, or a young woman who is not a relative, to wash it.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

Washing, dyeing, and beating each constitute a separate Pacittiya offense. (The robe needs to be forfeited only once, after which it becomes allowable, but there are three Pacittiya offenses, which must be confessed.) If one tells her to wash, dye, or beat it but she does not do so, each act of asking constitutes a Dukkata offense. Asking an unrelated siksamana or novice nun constitutes a Dukkata offense. Asking an unrelated bhikkhuni to wash, dye, or beat a new robe constitutes a Dukkata offense. Members of the four lower assemblies incur a Dukkata offense.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

If one takes a robe belonging to either of one’s two teachers—the preceptor or the acarya—and asks a bhikkhuni to wash it, one commits a Vinayatikrama offense. There is no offense in asking a bhikkhuni to wash, dye, or beat robes for a stupa or for the Sangha.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

If one first washes it roughly oneself and then asks her to wash it thoroughly, one nevertheless incurs a Dukkata offense.

The Sarvastivada Treatise says:

Under this precept, whether the robe is of the prescribed size or not, every case constitutes an offense.

The Matrka Vinaya says:

Asking an unrelated bhikkhuni to wash a nisidana entails forfeiture and expiation; asking her to wash pillows, blankets, and the like incurs a Dukkata offense.

APPENDIX:

The Vinaya Sangraha says:

A robe that is washed clean has five benefits:

– Foul odors are removed.

– Lice and bedbugs do not arise.

– The body does not itch.

– The dye is easily absorbed.

– The robe can be used for a long time.

Conversely, robes that are not washed clean have five disadvantages. Wearing robes dyed in the prescribed color also has five benefits:

– It accords with the dignified appearance of the Noble Ones.

– It causes one to abandon pride.

– Dust and dirt do not easily adhere to it.

– Lice and bedbugs do not arise.

– It feels soft and is easy to care for.

Leaving it unwashed for too long has five disadvantages:

– It quickly tears.

– It causes discomfort.

– It causes irritation.

– It causes weariness.

– It obstructs wholesome states of mind.

Wearing robes of beautiful colors also has five disadvantages:

– It fosters pride, conceit, and heedlessness, causing others to dislike one.

– It causes others to notice one's handsome appearance.

– It can only be obtained with difficulty.

– It may obstruct wholesome deeds.

– Robes that are frequently dyed quickly tear.

Beating the cloth excessively also has the same five disadvantages stated above.

6. THE PRECEPT AGAINST ASKING FOR ROBES FROM NON-RELATIVES

In the Mahayana, for the sake of sentient beings, this is not observed in the same way; nevertheless, one must consider whether the donor is capable or incapable of giving.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu asks for a robe from a male or female householder who is not a relative, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense, except on a special occasion. A special occasion is when the bhikkhu's robe has been stolen, lost, burned, or swept away by water. This is called a special occasion.

ORIGIN^[6]:

In the city of Sravasti, an elder householder went to view the ornamental trees in a garden. On turning his carriage back toward Jetavana Monastery, he encountered Bhaddananda the Sakyan. He paid homage and requested to hear the Dharma.

Bhaddananda taught the Dharma and instructed him, whereupon the elder householder became joyful and asked, “What do you require?” The Venerable One said, “I require nothing.” The elder householder persisted in asking. He was told, “Enough! Enough!

You cannot give me what I desire.” The elder householder earnestly continued to ask. Bhaddananda replied, “Can you give me the garment you are wearing?” At that time, the elder householder was wearing only a single white silk garment, long, broad, and costly, so he said, “Come to my house tomorrow morning, and I shall give it to you.” Bhaddananda continued insisting upon it. Although displeased at heart, the elder householder nevertheless removed the garment and gave it to him.

He then mounted his carriage and entered the city wearing only an undergarment. The city gatekeeper suspected that he had been robbed by bandits. The elder householder explained what had happened.

Because the householders criticized this conduct, the Buddha established this prohibitory precept. Thereafter, the bhikkhus became so cautious and fearful that they did not dare ask even their relatives for robes, so the Buddha added the words “who is not a relative.”

Later, in the country of Kosala, a group of bhikkhus completed the rains retreat, took up their robes and bowls, and set out to visit the Blessed One. Because the daytime heat made travel impossible, they traveled at night, lost their way, and were stripped of all their robes by bandits. When they arrived, they stood naked outside the gate of Jetavana. The bhikkhus suspected that they were Nirgranthas and reported the matter to the Venerable Upali. He questioned them and, after learning what had happened, temporarily lent them robes to wear so that they could go and see the Buddha. The Buddha comforted and questioned them, and they fully related the cause. The Buddha then established the prohibition: To travel naked is a Dukkata offense.

At such a time, one should use leaves or soft grass to cover the body. One should go to the nearest monastery and, if spare robes are available there, borrow them to wear. If none are available, one should ask a fellow bhikkhu known to possess spare robes and borrow them. If no fellow bhikkhu has any, one should ask whether the Sangha has robes that may be distributed. If so, they should be distributed to him. If not, one should ask whether there is any bedding. If there is, it should be given to him. If it is not given, he should open the storeroom himself and inspect it. If there are blankets, ground coverings, thin garments, or undergarments, these should be taken and sewn into robes to cover the body, after which he may go out to ask for robes.

At that time, the bhikkhus did not dare carry property from one residence to another. The Buddha said, “This is permitted.” After those bhikkhus obtained other robes, they did not return the Sangha's robes to their original place. The Buddha said, “You should not act in this way. After obtaining other robes, you should wash, dye, and mend the robes

properly, then return them to their original place. If you do not do so, you shall be dealt with according to the Dharma.”

At that time, some bhikkhus whose robes had been taken, burned, or swept away were so cautious and fearful that they did not dare ask non-relatives for robes. The Buddha said, “This is permitted.” The Buddha then established this precept anew.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

A bhikkhuni commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense; the three lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

There is no offense when one asks on behalf of another, when another asks on one's behalf, when one receives a robe without asking, and so forth.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

If one personally asks for oneself, instructs another to ask, asks while raising the notion of protection from heat or cold, or teaches the Dharma in order to obtain something, then if one receives it, each case constitutes a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense. There is no offense if one asks for a water-straining bag, a rag for mending robes, a head covering, a cloth to cover sores, an undergarment, or one component of a robe. If one asks on behalf of either of one's two teachers, one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If one asks for a stupa or the Sangha, there is no offense.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

When making the request, one commits an offense of wrongdoing. Upon receiving the robe material, if its value, color, or quantity corresponds to the allowable measure of what was needed and requested, one commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense; if it does not correspond, there is no offense.

The Vibhāṣā says:

If two people together ask for one robe, they commit a Dukkata offense. If one asks on behalf of another, one commits a Dukkata offense. If one obtains a robe of the prescribed measure, one commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense; if it is not of the prescribed measure for a robe, one commits a Dukkata offense. If one asks poor and needy relatives, one commits a Dukkata offense. If one gives a little and then demands much in return, one commits a Dukkata offense. If a non-relative previously promised to offer a robe but later became poor and unable to do so, and one pursues that person demanding it, one commits a Dukkata offense. Asking on behalf of another also constitutes a Dukkata offense.

The Matrika says:

There is no offense in asking nonhuman beings, animals, or devas for robes.

CLARIFICATION:

Question: The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says that there is no offense in asking on behalf of another. The Mahasanghika Vinaya and the Sarvastivada both establish it as a Dukkata offense. Which should be followed?

Answer: When one sees another person suffering from poverty and gives rise to compassionate concern, the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya permits the act and holds that there is no offense. When one exploits another person's desire and employs a means for one's own benefit, the Vibhāṣā therefore establishes an offense. The determination of this matter is based on the state of mind. (The term Sarvastivada here may refer to the Vibhāṣā.)

7. THE PRECEPT CONCERNING ACCEPTING TOO MANY ROBES

This belongs to the category of offenses prohibited by regulation. In the Mahayana, for the sake of sentient beings, this is not observed in the same way; one should accept according to what is offered.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu's robes have been lost, stolen, burned, or swept away by water, and a male or female householder who is not a relative offers him many robes and invites him to take as many as he wishes, that bhikkhu should know contentment when accepting robes. If he accepts in excess, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[7]:

A group of bhikkhus encountered bandits and lost their robes. When they arrived at Jetavana, laymen brought many fine robes and invited the bhikkhus to take as many as they wished. The bhikkhus who possessed three robes said, “We shall not accept them.” The group of six bhikkhus said, “Why not accept them and then give them to us or to others?” The bhikkhus therefore accepted the robes and gave them to those bhikkhus. Those of few desires criticized this and reported it to the Buddha, who then established the prohibition.

EXPLANATION:

If one robe has been lost, one should not accept another. If two robes have been lost and one robe remains, and that robe has two, three, or four layers, it should be separated to make the various robes. If all three robes have been lost, one should accept only what is sufficient.

Contentment is of two kinds:

First, one accepts according to what the householder offers and should not demand more.

Second, one is content with the three robes and must not accept many robes beyond those three.

If a householder invites one to take as much as one wishes and offers a large amount of robe cloth, whether fine cloth, thin cloth, or cloth that is not durable, it should be made into two, three, or four layers. A border seam should be left when sewing. A piece of cloth should be placed over the shoulder to protect against perspiration. A fastener should be sewn on for tying the cord, making a stitched loop. If any cloth remains, one should say to the householder, “What should be done with this cloth left over from cutting?” If the donor says, “I am not offering this because you lost your robes; I myself wish to offer it to the Venerable One,” then he may accept it if he wishes.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

A bhikkhuni commits a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense; the three lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

8. THE PRECEPT AGAINST SEEKING FINER ROBES

The Mahayana likewise prohibits this, for it constitutes wrongful seeking and excessive seeking.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a householder or a householder’s wife has set aside money to procure a robe for a bhikkhu, thinking, “I shall purchase such-and-such a robe for the bhikkhu named so-and-so,” and that bhikkhu, without first having been invited to ask as he wishes, goes to the householder’s home and says, “It would be good, householder, if you purchased such-and-such a robe for me,” desiring something fine, then if he obtains the robe, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[8]:

A bhikkhu entered the city to seek alms. Upon arriving at a householder’s home, he heard the husband and wife discussing together, “We shall procure a valuable robe for Bạt-nan-đà.” He returned and reported this to Bạt-nan-đà. Bạt-nan-đà questioned him, learned the address, and went there the following morning, saying, “If you wish to give me a robe, you should have it made broad, fine, and durable in this manner. That is precisely the kind of robe I maintain.” Because the householder criticized him, the Buddha established this prohibition.

Later, a householder voluntarily asked, “Venerable sir, what kind of robe do you need?” The bhikkhu was doubtful and did not dare to answer.

Again, a householder wished to procure a valuable robe, but a contented bhikkhu did not wish to accept such a robe. Yet he too was doubtful and did not dare to decline it. The Buddha taught: If one has previously been invited to ask as one wishes, there is no offense.

EXPLANATION:

Seeking has two kinds:

– The first is seeking an increase in value, even if only by one small coin.

– The second is seeking an addition to the robe, even if only by one strand of thread.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If one seeks and obtains it, one commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation; if one does not obtain it, one commits a Dukkata offense. A bhikkhuni commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. The three lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

There is no offense when seeking on behalf of another, and so forth.

The Five-Part Vinaya says:

If one goes to relatives and requests something superior, one commits a Dukkata offense.

The Vinaya Compendium says:

There is no offense in going to devas and the like to request something, or in requesting leftover silk thread or a small piece of silk.

9. PRECEPT AGAINST REQUESTING THAT FUNDS BE COMBINED TO PROCURE A ROBE

The origin, offenses, cases of no offense, and so forth are the same as in the preceding precept.

TEXT OF THE PRECEPT:

If two households, whether householders or householders’ wives, have each set aside money to procure a robe for a bhikkhu, each thinking, “With this money for procuring a robe, I shall purchase such-and-such a robe for the bhikkhu named so-and-so,” and that bhikkhu, without first having received an invitation from the two households to ask as he wishes, goes to the homes of the two householders and says, “It would be good if you combined the money you have each set aside for making a robe for me and made it into a single robe,” desiring something fine, then if he obtains the robe, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

10. PRECEPT AGAINST REQUESTING A ROBE MORE THAN SIX TIMES

This belongs to offenses prohibited by regulation; followers of the Mahayana also undertake it.

TEXT OF THE PRECEPT:

If a king, a great minister, a brahmin, a householder, or a householder’s wife sends a messenger with money to a bhikkhu, saying, “Take this sum of money for procuring a robe for the bhikkhu named so-and-so,” and the messenger goes to that bhikkhu and says, “Venerable sir, this money for procuring a robe has now been sent to you. Please accept it,” that bhikkhu should say to the messenger, “I am not permitted to accept this money for making a robe.

When I need a robe that is timely and pure, I shall accept one.” The messenger may ask the bhikkhu, “Venerable sir, do you have a steward?” The bhikkhu who needs a robe should say, “Yes,” and indicate either a monastery attendant or an upasaka, saying, “That person is the bhikkhu’s steward and regularly serves bhikkhus.” The messenger then goes to the steward, hands over the money for procuring the robe, and returns to the bhikkhu, saying, “Venerable sir, I have handed the money for procuring the robe to the steward whom you indicated.

Venerable sir, when you need it, go to that person and you will receive a robe.” When the bhikkhu needs a robe, he may go to the steward and remind him two or three times by saying, “I need a robe.” He may remind him in this way two or three times. If he obtains the robe, that is good. If not, he may stand silently before that person four, five, or six times.

If, after standing silently before that person four, five, or six times, he obtains the robe, that is good. If he does not obtain the robe but persists in seeking it beyond this limit, then if he obtains the robe, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense. If he does not obtain the robe, he should himself go, or send someone, to the person who provided the money for procuring the robe and say, “Previously, you sent someone with money to procure a robe for the bhikkhu named so-and-so.

That bhikkhu ultimately did not receive a robe. Please take it back so that it is not lost.” This is the proper procedure.

ORIGIN^[9]:

In the city of Rājagṛha, a great minister sent a messenger carrying money for making a robe as an offering to Bạt-nan-đà. Bạt-nan-đà led the messenger into the city and had the money for making the robe entrusted for safekeeping to a familiar elder householder. After some time, the great minister asked the messenger, “Is Venerable Bạt-nan-đà wearing that robe?” The messenger replied, “He is not.” The great minister immediately sent the messenger to reclaim the money for making the robe.

Bạt-nan-đà hurried to the elder householder’s home to demand the robe. At that time, a meeting of the elder householders was being held in the city. A rule had previously been established that anyone who failed to attend the meeting would be fined five hundred coins.

The elder householder said, “Venerable sir, please wait a little while until I return from attending the great assembly.” Bạt-nan-đà refused. Consequently, the elder householder had to remain and finish making the robe. By the time the robe was completed, the great assembly had adjourned, and he was fined five hundred coins.

When the householders learned of this, they criticized him; therefore, the Buddha established this prohibitory precept.

EXPLANATION:

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

One may go to request three times and stand silently six times, whether after a long or a short interval. What is meant by a long or short interval? If, when one goes to request it, that person says, “Venerable sir, return after one month,” the bhikkhu may return to request it after the month is complete.

If the person again says, “Return after another month,” he should again wait until the full month has passed before requesting it. If the person again says, “After one more month,” he should again return to request it when the full month has passed. After three months have elapsed, he may not go to request it again.

This is called a long interval. If the person says half a month, ten days, or even a mere moment, then after three such moments one may not request it again. This is called a short interval.

The same applies to going and standing silently six times. After six months or six moments have elapsed, one may not go and stand there again. If, when one goes and speaks to the owner of the goods, the owner says, “I previously made the offering to the bhikkhu; use whatever means are appropriate to obtain it,” then one is permitted, as before, to go and request it three times and to go and stand silently six times.

The Samantapasadika says:

If one does not verbally request it, one is permitted to make twelve requests by going and standing silently. If one makes one verbal request, two occasions of standing silently are deducted. If one makes two verbal requests, four occasions of standing silently are deducted. Thus, up to six verbal requests deduct all twelve occasions of standing silently.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

A bhikkhuni commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. The following three assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

The Ten-Recitation Vinaya says:

After this bhikkhu has spoken to the person who offered the money for procuring the robe, whenever some occasion brings him to the steward and the steward asks, “Why have you come?” he should reply, “I have come on another matter.” If the steward says, “Take this robe back with you,” he should reply, “I have already spoken to the owner of the robe. You should go there yourself and settle the matter.” If the steward says, “Venerable sir, simply take it back; I shall explain the matter to the owner of the robe,” then there is no offense in accepting the robe and taking it back.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

If, after the bhikkhu has told the messenger to report the matter, the steward comes and says, “Noble One, you may accept this robe,” he should reply, “I have already relinquished this robe. You should return it to the donor of the robe.” It is proper to answer in this way. If he takes the robe, he commits an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. If the steward says, “Noble One, you may accept this robe. The donor and I have settled the matter clearly, causing him to be pleased,” then there is no offense in taking the robe back.

11. PRECEPT AGAINST MAKING BEDDING FROM SILKWORM SILK

In the Mahayana, one is permitted to keep it for the sake of sentient beings, but one should not personally use it.

The Admonitions at the Gate of Knowledge says:

The Angulimala Sutra teaches: Articles made of silk, fabric, or leather that have passed successively from the hands of those who take life and are then offered to one who keeps the precepts should not be accepted; this is the Dharma of a bhiksu. If one accepts them, one is not compassionate. Master Nanyue and Master Daoxiu did not wear fine silk garments, but wore only coarse and shabby cloth. Therefore, Vinaya Master Nanshan said: Six hundred years after the Buddhadharma first reached the East, only the compassionate practice of Master Hengyue (Hengshan Nanyue) remained worthy of being taken as a refuge and model.

Question: Since wearing silk is prohibited, why is the use of

sheep’s wool and the like permitted? Both kinds come from the bodies of sentient beings; why is one permitted and the other prohibited?

Answer: Although silk and wool both come from the bodies of sentient beings, cocoons are boiled precisely to obtain silk, whereas sheep and goats are not killed for the purpose of obtaining their wool. Moreover, using silk to make a bedding article costs many lives, whereas using wool costs fewer lives. In establishing these training rules and precepts, primary consideration was given to their gradual application in accordance with human circumstances; such matters could not be abruptly and entirely cut off.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If any bhiksu mixes silkworm silk into a new bedding article, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[10]:

The group of six bhiksus made new bedding articles from various kinds of silkworm silk. They went to silkworm-rearing households to ask for silk, and the householders told them, “Wait until the silkworms mature.” The group of six stood to one side and waited, watching them reel the silk and hearing the pupae cry out. The householders criticized them; therefore, the prohibition was established.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

The non-Buddhist ascetics criticized and disparaged them, saying, “This requires the killing of many kinds of sentient beings; how can this be called proper clothing? For the sake of these shaven-headed men, many lives must be destroyed.” When the Buddha heard this, he established the prohibition.

EXPLANATION:

“Mixed kinds” includes fine varieties of wool, kapok, kauśeya, milky-leaf grass, soma^[11], hemp, and so forth.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

Kauśeya is of two kinds: the first is natural, and the second is processed. Natural refers to fine silk filaments; processed refers to silk that has been reeled into thread.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If one makes it oneself or instructs another to make it, and it is completed, in either case one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation; if it is not completed, one commits a Dukkata offense. If one makes it for another, whether or not it is completed, one commits a Dukkata offense. To forfeit such an article, it must be chopped into small pieces with an axe or hatchet, mixed with mud, and plastered onto a wall or the ground. The four lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

There is no offense if one receives an article that has already been completed and then chops it into small pieces, mixes them with earth and mud, and plasters them onto an earthen wall.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

If it is used in any of the three robes—whether in a vertical or horizontal strip, in the center or on one side, as an inner cord or edging, sewn into narrow chive-leaf folds, or used for stitching and patching—and the article is completed, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation; if one uses it, one commits an offense of violating the Vinaya. It should be forfeited before the Sangha. The Sangha should neither return it nor use it for any other purpose. It may be spread on the ground or made into a hanging curtain. (Both precepts are the same in this respect.)

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

It should be forfeited to the Sangha and should not be forfeited to another individual. The Sangha may use it as a covering on the ground or on a platform. Apart from this, all members of the Sangha may sit or lie upon it in due order. Even if one neither makes it oneself nor instructs another to make it, if another person offers it and one accepts it, one still commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

CLARIFICATION:

The matter of forfeiture here is based on the Mahisasaka Vinaya. Its general purport is that the Sangha is permitted to keep such articles collectively, but individuals are not permitted to keep them privately. This accords with the teachings of the Mahayana.

12. PRECEPT ON MAKING AN ALL-BLACK BEDDING ARTICLE

Mahayana practitioners train in the same rule. Its meaning is also as explained above.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If any bhiksu makes a new bedding article entirely from black goat’s wool, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[12]:

The Licchavi princes in Vaisali, most of whom engaged in sexual misconduct, made garments entirely from black goat’s wool so that they would not be seen when going out at night. The group of six imitated them. The Licchavis said, “We dress this way because of lust; for what purpose do you dress this way?” The bhiksus reported this to the Buddha, and therefore the prohibition was established.

EXPLANATION:

“Entirely black” means either naturally black goat’s wool or wool dyed black.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The lighter and graver offenses are the same as in the preceding precept. The four lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

There is no offense when making a pillow or miscellaneous small articles.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

It should be forfeited to the Sangha. The Sangha may spread it on a bed, but may not spread it on the ground. The remainder is as explained above.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

There is no offense when it is made for a stupa or for the Sangha.

13. PRECEPT ON MAKING A BEDDING ARTICLE WITHOUT A MIXTURE OF COLORS

Mahayana practitioners train in the same rule.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhiksu makes a new bedding article, he must use two parts entirely black goat’s wool, a third part white wool, and a fourth part gray wool. If a bhiksu does not use two parts black, a third part white, and a fourth part gray when making a new bedding article, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[13]:

The group of six made sitting mats that were entirely white. The householders criticized them, saying that they resembled kings or great ministers; therefore, the Buddha established the prohibition.

EXPLANATION:

Gray means the color of the wool on the head, ears, and legs, or gray wool from other places. If making a bedding article weighing forty pala^[14], one should use twenty pala of black wool, ten pala of white wool, and ten pala of gray wool. If making a bedding article weighing thirty or twenty pala, the proportions should be calculated accordingly. (The Sarvastivada Vinaya says: One pala is four liang.)

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The lighter and graver offenses are the same as in the preceding precept. The four lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

There is no offense if one receives an article already completed and cuts it apart and destroys it, or uses it to make a pillow or miscellaneous small articles.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

If one uses even one liang more of black wool, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation. If one uses even one liang more of white wool, one commits a Dukkata offense. If one uses even one liang less of gray wool, one commits an offense requiring forfeiture and expiation.

The Vinaya-samgraha says:

If black wool is readily available but wool of the other colors is difficult to obtain, there is no offense whether the quantities are increased or decreased.

14. PRECEPT ON USING A BEDDING ARTICLE FOR LESS THAN SIX YEARS

Mahayana practitioners train in the same rule.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhiksu makes a new bedding article, he must keep it for six years. If, before six years have passed, without relinquishing the old one, he makes another new one, except with an act of the Sangha, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[15]:

The group of six complained that their bedding articles were too heavy or too light, too thick or too thin. Without relinquishing the old ones, they acquired new ones and accumulated a great many; therefore, the Buddha established the prohibition. Later, a bhiksu suffering from a dry, scabrous skin disease needed to travel among the people, but his bedding articles made from discarded rags were too heavy for him to carry. The bhiksus reported this to the Buddha, and the Buddha permitted the Sangha to perform a formal act with one motion and one proclamation for that bhiksu.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The graver and lighter offenses are the same as in the preceding precept. The four lower assemblies commit a Dukkata offense.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

After it has been forfeited before the Sangha, the Sangha should not return it. The Sangha may use it, but it may not be made into an undergarment. (The following precept is the same.)

15. PRECEPT ON FAILING TO SEW A PIECE OF AN OLD MAT ONTO A NEW SITTING MAT

Mahayana practitioners train in the same rule.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhiksu makes a new sitting mat, he must take a square piece from an old one, measuring one of the Buddha’s spans, and attach it to the new sitting mat in order to disfigure its color. If a bhiksu makes a new sitting mat without taking a square piece from an old one, measuring one of the Buddha’s spans, and attaching it to the new sitting mat in order to disfigure its color, it is a Nissaggiya Pacittiya offense.

(The other four Vinaya collections all likewise specify one of the Buddha’s spans.)

ORIGIN^[16]:

The Buddha was staying in Anāthapiṇḍika’s Grove and sent someone to receive food. It is the customary practice of all Buddhas that, after the bhikkhus have gone to accept invitations, the Buddha goes through all the rooms. Seeing old sitting cloths discarded carelessly everywhere, the Buddha then instructed the bhikkhus that when making a new sitting cloth, they must take a piece of cloth from an old sitting cloth, one span in length and width, and sew it onto the new one to impair its color. The Group of Six did not follow the Buddha’s instruction, so the Buddha established this precept.

The Mahāsāṅghika Vinaya says:

For the sake of five benefits, the Blessed One inspected the rooms of the Sangha once every five days:

1) Have the śrāvaka disciples become attached to conditioned activities?

2) Have they become attached to worldly discussions?

3) Have they become attached to sleep and rest, thereby obstructing their practice

of the Way?

4) Are any bhikkhus ill? (Is there anyone caring for the sick bhikkhus?)

5) So that young bhikkhus newly gone forth, upon seeing the solemn and serene deportment of the Tathagata, may give rise to a joyful mind.

EXPLANATION:

The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya says:

One span of the Buddha measures two feet square. “To impair its beautiful color” means to place it anywhere upon the new cloth.

The Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya says:

“To impair its color” means to make it durable.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The four lower assemblies commit a Duṣkṛta offense.

There is no offense if one has no old cloth oneself; if one receives an already completed article; if another person makes it for one; or if it is made entirely from old material.

The Daśādhyāya Vinaya says:

If it is made smaller, even by half an inch, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense.

APPENDIX:

The Vinaya Saṃgraha says:

The niṣīdana^[17] should be made with two layers, overlapped by one-third, cut and sewn into panels corresponding to the panels of the robe.

The Daśādhyāya Vinaya says:

One should not accept a single-layer niṣīdana. One should not sleep without one’s niṣīdana.

16. PRECEPT ON CARRYING GOAT WOOL A LONG DISTANCE

Mahayana practitioners train likewise.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu obtains goat wool while traveling and has need of it but no one to carry it, he may carry it himself for as far as three yojanas^[18]. If there is no one to carry it and he himself carries it beyond three yojanas, it is a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[19]:

While traveling, Upananda obtained a large quantity of goat wool, strung it upon the end of a staff, and carried it over his shoulder along the road. The householders criticized him, taking him for a goat-wool merchant; therefore, this prohibition was established.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If one personally carries it beyond three yojanas, one commits a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense; if one tells another person to carry it, there is no offense. If one takes a turn carrying it along the way, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense. If one has a member of any of the four lower assemblies carry it beyond three yojanas, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense. Apart from goat wool, if one carries other articles, such as kauśeya cloth (robes, fabric, and so forth), beyond three yojanas, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense. If one carries other articles over one’s shoulder on the end of a staff while traveling, one also commits a Duṣkṛta offense. Members of the four lower assemblies commit a Duṣkṛta offense.

The Mahīśāsaka Vinaya says:

One should have a kappiya attendant carry the load. If there is no kappiya attendant, one is permitted to carry it oneself, but one must not carry it on the shoulder, on the head, or on the back. If one acts contrary to this, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense.

The Sarvāstivāda Mātṛkā says:

If one carries goat wool through the air or gives it to a magically created being to carry, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense in either case.

APPENDIX:

The Vinaya Saṃgraha says:

Bhikkhus should not bear burdens of any kind.

17. PRECEPT ON INSTRUCTING A BHIKKHUNĪ TO PROCESS GOAT WOOL

Mahayana practitioners train likewise.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu has an unrelated bhikkhunī wash, dye, or comb goat wool, it is a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[20]:

The Group of Six had the bhikkhunī Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī wash, dye, and beat goat wool. When she had finished dyeing it, her hands were stained, and she went to pay respects to the Blessed One. The Blessed One questioned her and learned what had happened. He rebuked the Group of Six and established the precept. Afterward, the bhikkhus were so cautious and fearful that they did not dare ask even related bhikkhunīs to wash, dye, or beat goat wool. The Buddha then made an allowance for this.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

Washing, dyeing, and beating each constitute one Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense. (That is, one forfeiture and three Pācittiya offenses, as explained previously.) If one instructs her to wash it but she does not wash it, and so forth, each instruction constitutes a Duṣkṛta offense. If one instructs an unrelated woman belonging to either of the other two female assemblies, it is a Duṣkṛta offense.

The Sarvāstivāda Treatise says:

If one has property belonging to the Sangha washed or dyed, one commits a Duṣkṛta offense.

18. PRECEPT ON ACCEPTING GOLD AND SILVER

This is an offense prohibited by regulation. In the Mahayana, one is permitted to accept such things for the sake of sentient beings, but they must be entrusted to a kappiya attendant for safekeeping. If there is no kappiya attendant, one may also hold them oneself, provided one’s mind is free from attachment. If one stores them out of personal greed, this is excessive desire and a lack of contentment. It is called defilement and constitutes an offense. Therefore, the Admonitory Collection says:

– Fields, houses, gardens, and trees.

– Planting and cultivating trees.

– Storing grain and rice.

– Keeping servants.

– Raising livestock.

– Money and precious objects.

– Blankets, felt, jars, and cauldrons.

– Elephants, gold, fine beds, and other valuable objects.

These eight categories are uniformly classified in the sutras, treatises, and Vinaya as manifestly blameworthy things that should not be stored or kept.

The sutras and Vinaya further say:

If one stores and keeps them, one is not My disciple. These eight things cause greed to increase, destroy one’s cultivation of the Way, defile the pure conduct, and lead to foul and evil results. Therefore, they are called impure.

The Nirvana Sutra says:

If My disciples have no one to assist them in a time of famine and hardship, when food is difficult to obtain, then, for the sake of preserving and establishing the True Dharma, I permit My disciples to accept gold and silver, carts and horses, fields and houses, grain and rice, and to exchange them for necessary articles. Although I permit them to keep such things, it is essential that they formally relinquish them in trust to faithful and wealthy donors.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu personally takes money, gold, or silver in his hand, has another person take it, or accepts it after it has been placed upon the ground, it is a Nissaggiya Pācittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[21]:

In the city of Rājagṛha, there was a minister who was friendly with Upananda. One day, the minister obtained a large quantity of pork and told his wife to set aside a portion for Upananda. At that time, the city was celebrating a festival, with musicians providing entertainment, and the people remained awake throughout the night.

The minister’s son became hungry and asked his mother whether any meat remained. His mother told him, “Only Upananda’s portion remains.” The child then took five coins, gave them to his mother, and said, “Mother, use this money to buy meat to replace Upananda’s portion.” Early the next morning, Upananda went to the minister’s house, and the minister’s wife explained what had happened. Upananda took the money and deposited it at a shop in the marketplace before leaving.

The householders and the king’s ministers all criticized him. Only a minister named Zhōu Jì skillfully explained the Dharma. After giving his explanation, he went to report the matter to the Blessed One.

The Blessed One praised the minister for speaking skillfully and bringing about much benefit.

The Buddha said: “Minister, you should know that the sun and moon have four afflictions that prevent them from being bright and pure, from shining forth, and from possessing majestic power. These four are asuras, clouds of smoke, dust, and fog. These are the great afflictions of the sun and moon. Śramaṇas and brahmins likewise have four afflictions that prevent them from being bright and pure, from shining forth, and from possessing majestic power. These four afflictions are: not abandoning the drinking of alcohol, not abandoning sexual activity, not abandoning the personal handling of gold and silver, and not abandoning livelihood by improper means. These are the four great afflictions.”

At that time, the bhikkhus of few desires also criticized Upananda and reported the matter to the Buddha, who then established the precept.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The matter of relinquishment here is as follows: If that monk has confidence in the gardener or an upasaka, he should say to him: “This is something I ought not to receive; you should take cognizance of this matter.” If that person receives it and then returns it to the bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should, on account of what that person has received, have the attendant of a kappiya keep it. If a pure robe, bowl, needle case, or nisidana is obtained in exchange, he should receive and retain it.

If the upasaka receives it and then gives the bhikkhu a pure robe, bowl, nisidana, or needle case, the bhikkhu should receive and retain it. If that person receives it but does not return it, another bhikkhu should be asked to say to him: “The Buddha taught that it was given to you for the sake of purity; you should return that article to that bhikkhu.” If the other bhikkhus do not say this, he should go himself and say: “The Buddha taught that it was given to you for the sake of purity.

You may now offer it to the Sangha, to a stupa, to the two teachers, or to fellow practitioners and companions in learning, or return it to its owner. Why? Because we do not wish the faithful donor’s property to be lost.” If he does not say to that person, “Know it thus; regard it thus,” he commits a dushkrita.

A bhikkhuni commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya. The latter three assemblies commit a dushkrita.

The third part of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says:

A bhikkhu found money in a charnel ground and carried it away in his own hands. The Buddha said: “It should not be taken in that manner.” That bhikkhu needed copper. The Buddha taught: “Break and deface its form; afterward, it may be carried away in one’s own hands.”

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

A sick person may have a kappiya keep it, but he must not become attached to it. If an article entailing nissaggiya-pacittiya has been relinquished before the Sangha, that article must not be returned to the bhikkhu, nor should the Sangha divide it. If there is a large amount, it should be placed in the perpetual fund. When interest accrues, it may be used to construct dwellings or obtain inner robes (antaravāsaka), but it must not be used for food.

When a bhikkhu receives money and, after the rains retreat, receives robe material, he should not take it with his own hands but should have a kappiya take cognizance of it. If there is no kappiya, he should indicate a place on the ground near his feet and say: “Take cognizance of what is there.” After they place it on the ground, he may take leaves, tiles, or bricks in his own hands and cast them from afar to cover it, then wait until a kappiya arrives and inform him.

Whatever serves as currency according to the usage of that country—whether made of copper, iron, gum, leather, or bamboo or wooden tallies—must not be handled. In some countries, objects not formed into the recognized shape are used as currency; in others, objects formed into the recognized shape are not used. Handling either kind constitutes a vinaya-transgression.

In a country where objects neither used as currency nor formed into the recognized shape are made of copper or tin, handling them is not an offense.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

The Sangha should perform a motion followed by one proclamation to appoint a bhikkhu to dispose of gold, silver, and money. That bhikkhu should cast these articles into a pit, into fire, into flowing water, or into open wilderness, and he should not remember the place. If, after taking them in his hands, he casts them elsewhere, he must not take them up again. That bhikkhu should not ask: “What should be done with these articles?” Nor should the Sangha instruct him to do this or that. If, without casting them away or asking what to do, he has a kappiya exchange them for robes and food for the Sangha and bring them as an offering to the Sangha, the Sangha is permitted to accept them. If they are distributed, only the person who committed the offense may not receive a share.

There is no offense if, although something is given to a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu does not know of it, and a kappiya receives it and then purchases pure requisites for the bhikkhu.

There was an occasion when some bhikkhus wished to travel far away and went to a householder to request provisions for the journey. The householder sent someone to accompany them, carrying gold, silver, money, and other articles. Upon reaching their destination, a great surplus of provisions remained, and the messenger returned and reported this to his master. The master said: “I have already offered them; they should not be returned. You may take them to a place where there is a Sangha and offer them to the Sangha.” The Buddha taught: “A kappiya is permitted to receive them on behalf of the Sangha and exchange them for requisites needed by the Sangha. The bhikkhus should not concern themselves with them.”

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

If one handles valuables with one’s own hands and the amount is small, they should be discarded. If the amount is large and one encounters a trustworthy kappiya, one should say: “Because these are impure, I do not accept them; you should take them.” After the kappiya takes them, he says to the bhikkhu: “These articles are given to the bhikkhu.” The bhikkhu says: “These are impure articles; if they become pure, I shall accept them.” If no trustworthy kappiya is encountered, they should be used to make bedding for the Sangha of the four quarters.

One should then enter the Sangha and say: “Venerable Ones, I handled valuables with my own hands and incurred a pacittiya offense. I now disclose it, not daring to conceal it, and repent of the offense.” The Sangha should ask: “Have you relinquished those valuables?” If he replies, “I have relinquished them,” the Sangha should ask: “Do you see the offense?” If he says, “I see the offense,” the Sangha should say: “Do not do this again.” If he says, “I have not yet relinquished them,” the Sangha should instruct him how to relinquish them.

If it does not instruct him, the entire Sangha commits a dushkrita. If it instructs him but he does not relinquish them, that bhikkhu commits a dushkrita.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

If materials are needed for repairing dwellings and other work, one should request grass, timber, vehicles, and laborers; one should not request gold, silver, money, and so forth. If one handles a type of money used in that country, one commits a nissaggiya-pacittiya. If one handles a type of money not used in that country, one commits an offense of wrongdoing.

There is no offense in handling red copper, brass, stone, bronze, lead, or zinc. If someone offers robe material and it is needed, one may accept it. Having accepted it, one should immediately regard it as belonging to that person and set it aside; it should be entrusted to a kappiya for safekeeping and not handled personally.

If there is no kappiya, one should bring the article before another bhikkhu and say: “Venerable Sir,^[22] remember this: I, named ..., have received this impure article. I shall exchange this impure article for pure requisites.” After saying this three times, one may use what is received according to need, without giving rise to doubt.

If there is a threat of bandits at a Sangha monastery, the gold, silver, money, and valuables belonging to the stupa and the Sangha should first be securely stored and then moved elsewhere. If there is no faithful lay kappiya, a probationer (novice) should be assigned. If there is no probationer either, a bhikkhu may dig a pit with his own hands and conceal them. The Tathagata allowed this expedient in a time of danger; after the danger has passed, the practice must not be continued.

The Vinaya Compendium says:

If, during the rains retreat, a donor brings a precious robe and offers it to a bhikkhu, the bhikkhu should immediately give rise to the thought that it is entrusted to that donor and then accept it. He should seek a faithful and reverent lay kappiya in order to make it a pure gift. If he handles it while maintaining the perception that it belongs to the donor, there is no offense.

If there is no donor, he may bring the gold, silver, and other articles before another bhikkhu and say: “Venerable Sir, remember this: I, the bhikkhu ..., have obtained this impure property. I now exchange this impure property for pure requisites.” After saying this three times, he may keep it himself or have another person keep it. (The Karman Collection of Master Huaisu also adopts this method. In this age of the Final Dharma, this is an expedient that is easy to practice and should therefore be followed.)

If a bhikkhu on a journey receives gold or silver as provisions for the road, he may keep it himself or have a kappiya or probationer carry it. It should be understood that, with regard to gold, silver, and so forth, probationers are forbidden only to accumulate them for themselves; they are not prohibited from handling them.

SCRIPTURAL PROOF:

The Mahaparinirvana Sutra says:

If it is said that the Buddha permitted bhikkhus to keep servants; to store impure articles, gold, silver, precious treasures, grain, rice, warehouses, cattle, sheep, elephants, and horses; and to buy and sell for profit in times of famine—this was solely out of compassion for his children. It is also said that he permitted bhikkhus to store food overnight, prepare food with their own hands, and eat without formally receiving it. One should not rely upon such teachings.

APPENDIX:

The Samantapasadika says:

There are four kinds of use:

1) Use with a sense of shame and moral dread, meaning that a person without shame and moral dread associates closely with a person who possesses shame and moral dread.

2) Use by one without a sense of shame and moral dread: this means that when a person with a sense of shame and moral dread associates with one who has a sense of shame and moral dread, it is called use by one without a sense of shame and moral dread, and an offense is incurred. When a person with a sense of shame and moral dread associates with one who lacks a sense of shame and moral dread, he will thereafter certainly follow him in doing evil; therefore, he is called a person without a sense of shame and moral dread. When one without a sense of shame and moral dread associates with one who has a sense of shame and moral dread, he will certainly reform his evil conduct and cultivate the good; he is then called a person with a sense of shame and moral dread.

3) Lawful use: this means that a person with a sense of shame and moral dread receives it in accordance with the True Dharma.

4) Unlawful use: this means that a person without a sense of shame and moral dread receives it without following the True Dharma. If one obtains an article in this manner, it is no different from obtaining poison.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

A bhikkhu once took a novice to visit his relatives. As they passed through an uninhabited wilderness, a nonhuman being transformed itself into the form of a dragon, circumambulated the novice on his right, scattered flowers, and praised him, saying: “Excellent! You have gained a great benefit by leaving the household life and going forth.” After the bhikkhu had finished visiting his relatives and was about to return, the wife of the household said: “You are now returning, and there will be many needs along the road.

You may take this money and exchange it for whatever necessities you require.” The novice accepted it and tied it into a corner of his robe. Along the road, the nonhuman being again transformed itself into a dragon, circumambulated the novice on his left, scattered mud upon him, and said: “You have lost your wholesome benefit. You went forth to cultivate the Way, yet you carry money with you.” The novice cried out.

The bhikkhu turned back and asked what had happened. The novice replied: “I do not recall committing any fault, yet I am being harassed for no reason.” The bhikkhu asked: “Are you carrying anything?” The novice replied: “I am carrying money.” The bhikkhu instructed the novice to discard it and continue on. After he had discarded it, the nonhuman being returned and made offerings as before.

Because of this incident, the bhikkhu reported the matter to the Buddha. The Buddha taught: “From now on, novices are not permitted to carry gold, silver, or money. If a bhikkhu instructs a novice who had already been carrying it beforehand to carry it afterward, there is no offense.”

19. THE PRECEPT CONCERNING TRADE IN VALUABLES

The Mahayana establishes the same prohibition.

PRECEPT TEXT:

Any bhikkhu who engages in any form of commerce involving valuables commits a nissaggiya pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[23]:

Upananda went to a shop, exchanged money for money, and took it away. Because the householders criticized him, the Buddha established this prohibition.

There are eight kinds of money: money made of gold, silver, copper, tin, pewter, lead, wood, and resin.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

The procedure for relinquishment is the same as in the preceding precept.

A bhikkhuni commits an offense entailing relinquishment and expiation. The three lower assemblies commit a dukkata offense.

No offense is committed: when money is exchanged for ornamental articles, such as strings of jewels, for the sake of the Buddha, Dharma, or Sangha; or when ornaments are exchanged for money for the sake of the Buddha, Dharma, or Sangha.

The Vinaya Sangraha says:

If transactions are made on behalf of the Three Jewels, or if a donor establishes an inexhaustible treasury, seeking resources for such purposes does not constitute an offense. However, when these goods are lent out to generate profit, they must be entered into account books as evidence, reliable guarantors must be sought, and written documents must be drawn up. On the last day of the year, a report must be made to the elder and to the persons responsible for receiving and transferring the goods, so that all are fully informed. Alternatively, the matter may be reported to a faithful upasaka^[24].

20. THE PRECEPT CONCERNING BUYING AND SELLING

The Mahayana establishes the same prohibition.

PRECEPT TEXT:

Any bhikkhu who engages in any form of commercial trading commits a nissaggiya pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[25]:

In a village where there was no Sangha dwelling, Upananda exchanged fresh ginger for food and carried it away. When the Venerable Sariputra went on alms round and arrived at a cooked-rice shop, the shopkeeper bargained over the price. Furthermore, in the city of Sravasti, a non-Buddhist ascetic obtained a valuable robe and brought it to the monastery, asking to exchange it.

Upananda told him to return the next morning. That night, Upananda had one of his old robes washed and dyed so that it looked like a new robe. The next morning, he exchanged it with the non-Buddhist ascetic.

After receiving the robe in exchange, the non-Buddhist ascetic took it back to the garden where he lived and displayed it to the other non-Buddhist ascetics. Among them was a knowledgeable person who said: “You have been deceived.” The non-Buddhist ascetic immediately brought the robe back and wished to reverse the exchange. Upananda refused to exchange it back.

Because the non-Buddhist ascetic criticized him, the Buddha established this prohibition.

EXPLANATION:

“Any form of commercial trading” means exchanging timely medicine for timely medicine; timely medicine for untimely medicine, seven-day medicine, lifetime medicine, or pariskara^[26]; exchanging untimely medicine for untimely medicine, seven-day medicine, lifetime medicine, timely medicine, and so forth; up to exchanging pariskara for timely medicine, untimely medicine, and so forth.

Selling means that the price begins at one coin and is repeatedly raised and lowered, increasing to three coins or five coins. Buying is likewise.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

When one engages in any form of commercial trading, if the transaction is completed, one commits an offense entailing relinquishment and expiation; if it is not completed, one commits a dukkata offense. A bhikkhuni commits an offense entailing relinquishment and expiation. The three lower assemblies commit a dukkata offense.

No offense is committed: when exchanging goods with members of the five assemblies of renunciants, provided one personally assesses the exchange so that neither party suffers a loss. One should not exchange goods with others. Alternatively, one may instruct a kappiya to conduct the exchange; if there is regret afterward, the goods should be returned. One may also exchange ghee for oil or oil for ghee.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

If an article in a shop already has a fixed price, and a bhikkhu brings money to purchase it, when taking the article away he should say to the owner: “This is the price of that article.” If he says nothing and silently takes it away, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. If an article is worth fifty coins but the asking price is one hundred coins, the bhikkhu may say: “You should know that I have only fifty.” This is not called bargaining down the price. If a bhikkhu knows that someone intends to buy an article, he should not purchase it before that person does. If he does, he commits a Vinaya-transgression offense.

When purchasing grain, if one thinks: “Later, grain will become expensive,” one commits a Vinaya-transgression offense. When one later sells the grain, one commits an offense entailing relinquishment and expiation. However, one may think: “I fear that grain may become expensive at some time, so I shall purchase grain now. In this way, I shall be able to recite sutras, practice meditation, and cultivate the Way.” When grain becomes expensive, one may preserve it to make offerings to one’s two teachers or to perform meritorious deeds. Apart from this, if it is sold at a profit, there is no offense. The purchase of bowls, medicines, and so forth is likewise.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

If one wishes to exchange goods, one should instruct a kappiya to do so, saying: “For me, take this article and exchange it for that article.” One should think: “I would rather let the other person gain from me than gain from that person.” If one wishes to conduct an exchange personally, one should exchange with a member of the five assemblies. If one exchanges with a layperson, one commits a dukkata offense.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

If one buys for profit but does not sell for profit, one commits a wrongdoing when buying but no offense when selling. If one does not buy for profit but sells for profit, there is no offense when buying, but when selling one commits an offense entailing relinquishment and expiation. If one purchases goods to take to another region without thinking of profit, and upon arriving there sells them, then even if a profit is obtained, there is no offense.

The Vinaya Sangraha says:

When buying or selling, if one does not rely upon truthful speech, or falsifies weights and measures, then when deceiving another one commits the offense of false speech. When one obtains the goods, one commits theft. When taking goods with the intention of buying or selling, one must first establish the intention not to seek profit. Whatever profit may then be obtained according to the circumstances does not constitute an offense.

The Nidana says:

A bhikkhu should not appraise prices for others, nor should he bargain by raising or lowering prices. If no layperson is available to bargain on his behalf, he may personally make two or three offers. If he exceeds this, he commits a wrongdoing.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya in Ten Recitations says:

If one uses an improper article to purchase food, one commits a dukkata offense with each mouthful eaten. If one purchases a robe, one commits a pacittiya offense each time it is worn. If goods are exchanged and the other person regrets the exchange, they should be returned; after seven days, they may no longer be returned. If one offers a low price and demands another person’s valuable robe, one commits a dukkata offense. If one needs an article but, after requesting it three times, does not obtain it, one should find a kappiya and ask that person to purchase it on one’s behalf.

The Sarvastivada Treatise says:

It would be better to be a butcher than a trader, for all such dealings involve harmful deception. If goods obtained through such trade are made into food for the Sangha, the Sangha should not eat it; if they are used to build lodgings for the Sangha of the four quarters, the Sangha may not dwell there. If they are used to build stupas or make images, one should not face them and pay homage. It is also said: “One should merely direct one’s mind toward the Buddha and pay homage.” (Paying homage by directing the mind means not using body or speech to pay homage. The reason for this strict rejection is precisely the fear that shameless persons may deceitfully claim that making offerings to the Three Jewels is a meritorious deed and thereby seek to excuse their own offenses.)

Any bhikkhu who observes the precepts should not make use of such property. If that bhikkhu dies, the property should be divided by a Sangha act. (After death there is no longer a mind of greedy hoarding; therefore, it is treated like the property of a deceased bhikkhu and divided by a Sangha act.)

21. PRECEPT ON KEEPING AN EXTRA BOWL

In the Mahayana, for the sake of sentient beings, this is not studied in common.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu keeps an extra bowl without assigning it through a formal act of purification, he is permitted to keep it for a period of ten days. If he exceeds that period, it is a nissaggiya pacittiya offense.

ORIGIN^[27]:

The group of six bhikkhus kept bowls, using those that were good and setting the inferior ones aside. When laypeople came to the lodgings and saw this, they criticized them, saying: “They are like potters selling pottery.” The Buddha therefore established this prohibition.

Venerable Ananda received a precious bowl in the country of Suma and wished to offer it to Venerable Kasyapa, but Venerable Kasyapa was away, and Ananda feared violating this precept. The Buddha asked: “How long will Venerable Kasyapa be away before returning?” He replied: “Ten days.” The Buddha therefore permitted a bowl to be kept for ten days.

EXPLANATION:

There are two kinds of bowls: metal bowls and earthenware bowls.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

The largest bowl holds cooked rice made from two sheng of uncooked rice. A medium bowl holds one and a half sheng. A small bowl holds one sheng.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If a bowl is received within the ten days—whether there are days on which a bowl is received or days on which none is received—when the sun appears on the eleventh day, in every case a forfeiture offense is committed. The rest is as stated in the precept on keeping robes. A bhikkhuni commits a forfeiture offense.

The Vinaya-samgraha says:

If a bowl is smaller or larger than the prescribed capacity, or if one intends it for another fully ordained renunciant according to that person’s needs, then although it has not been formally assigned, no offense is committed. If bowls are kept for holding vegetable soup or drinking water, or if two small bowls are kept for holding salt or drawing water, no offense is committed. If a small bowl can be placed inside a large bowl and is kept to meet a need when it arises, no offense is committed even though several bowls are kept. One should keep one large bowl for use in case of need.

The Sarvastivada Treatise says:

If one keeps an extra bowl made of white metal or earthenware that has not yet been smoke-fired, or any bowl that does not conform to the prescribed capacity, a duskrta offense is committed in every case.

The third section of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya says:

A shallow bowl, a small bowl, and a medium bowl may be kept without formally assigning them through an act of purification.

The Mahisasaka Vinaya says:

If one obtains two bowls, one should ask one’s teacher which is better. If the teacher cannot distinguish them skillfully, one should use each bowl for five days to determine for oneself which is better. One should then formally undertake to keep that bowl and give the other to someone else.

CLARIFICATION:

Question: The Vinaya-samgraha permits bowls smaller or larger than the prescribed capacity to be kept to meet a need and says that no offense is committed even if several are kept. Yet the Sarvastivada Treatise says that keeping bowls of white metal and the like constitutes a duskrta offense. Which should be followed?

Answer: Even when several bowls are kept to meet a need, there must still be a limit. If bowls of white metal and the like are not necessary articles, then keeping them amounts to greedy hoarding; how could it not be an offense?

22. PRECEPT ON SEEKING A FINER BOWL

This is studied in common with the Mahayana.

PRECEPT TEXT:

If a bhikkhu has a bowl with fewer than five repairs that does not leak, yet seeks and asks for a new bowl because he desires a finer one, it is a nissaggiya pacittiya offense. That bhikkhu must forfeit the bowl in the midst of the Sangha. The Sangha shall pass down the bowls in succession until the most inferior bowl^[28] is taken and given to him, and shall require him to undertake to keep it until it breaks. This is the proper procedure.

ORIGIN^[29]:

Bhaddananda’s bowl broke, so he entered the city of Sravasti and asked the laypeople for bowls. Although only one bowl had broken, he obtained many bowls through his requests. Some time later, the laypeople had occasion to meet one another. Each said, “I have gained much merit by purchasing a bowl and offering it to Bhaddananda.” They consequently criticized him among themselves, and the Buddha therefore established this prohibition.

EXPLANATION:

Five repairs means five repaired cracks, with a distance of two finger-widths between each two.

The Sarvastivada Vinaya says:

It is permitted to repair a broken bowl with metal or copper.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

If it is difficult to obtain a bowl, one may repair, patch, or seal the bowl as appropriate and continue using it. If one is in a place where bowls are easy to obtain, one may discard the old bowl and ask for a new one.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE OFFENSE

If a bowl has five complete cracks but does not leak, and one asks for a new bowl, one commits a duskrta offense. A bhikkhuni commits a forfeiture offense. Members of the three lower assemblies commit a duskrta offense.

There is no offense if a bowl with fewer than five cracks leaks and one therefore seeks and asks for a new one; if one asks on behalf of another; if another asks on one’s behalf; if one receives a bowl without asking; if one receives a share distributed by the Sangha; or if one purchases one oneself to keep in reserve.

The Mulasarvastivada Vinaya says:

This bowl should not be stored away or kept separately, nor should it be given to another. Two bowl bags should be sewn: the better one should hold the extra bowl, and the inferior one should hold the old bowl. When going for alms, one should carry both bowls.

Dry food should be placed in the extra bowl, and wet food in the old bowl. One should eat from the old bowl. The extra bowl should be washed first, dried, and put away; in all matters, priority should be given to the extra bowl.

When placing the bowls in a cabinet or smoke-firing them, the extra bowl should likewise receive priority. When traveling, one should ask another person to carry the old bowl, while carrying the extra bowl oneself. If no one is available to carry it, one should travel with the extra bowl on the left shoulder and the old bowl on the right shoulder.

This is a form of disciplinary punishment to be observed for the rest of one’s life, or else one must skillfully safeguard the bowl until it breaks. If one acts contrary to this, one incurs an offense of transgressing the rule.

The Mahasanghika Vinaya says:

If the bhikkhu carrying this bowl deliberately breaks it, he commits a pacittiya offense. If either of his two teachers, a close friend, or another person, out of compassion and fearing that washing the bowls will hinder his cultivation, hides it away^[30], and he cannot find it and asks for another, there is no offense. If he obtains one bowl through asking, he should undertake to keep it. If he obtains two, he should place one in the Sangha’s storeroom. If he obtains as many as ten, he should place nine in the Sangha’s storeroom. The same applies if he asks for the money required to purchase a bowl.

The Sarvastivada Matrka says:

If one obtains many bowls through asking, one should undertake to keep the one that suits one’s wishes and give the others to those who need them.

ESSENTIAL COMPENDIUM OF THE MEANINGS OF VINAYA MATTERS, REVISED AND EDITED

END OF VOLUME FIVE

Notes:

1 Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 6, p. 604b29, Taisho 22, no. 1428.

2 Successive assignment: “successive purification” 展轉淨. Samantapasadika 14, p. 772c19, Taisho 24, no. 1462: What is called successive purification? One chooses a member of the five renunciant assemblies as the designated recipient of the robe, then brings the extra robe to a bhikkhu and says: “I, the bhikkhu named ..., have this extra robe that has not yet been formally assigned through an act of purification.

As I wish to make a successive assignment of purification, I hand it to the elder.” The bhikkhu receiving the robe says: “Venerable, you have this extra robe that has not yet been formally assigned through an act of purification. Because you wish to make a successive assignment of purification, you have handed it to me. I have received it.

Who is the designated recipient of the robe?” He replies: “The bhikkhu named ....” The recipient then says: “Venerable, because you wish to formally assign this extra robe through an act of purification, you have handed it to me. I have received it. This is the property of the bhikkhu named ....

Venerable, you should safeguard it for the bhikkhu named .... You may use it whenever you wish and need not ask the owner.” This is successive assignment by purification.

3 Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 6, p. 605c06, Taisho 22, no. 1428.

4 The five robes: in addition to the three robes of a bhikkhu, there are the sanghati-chi (a breast-covering undergarment) and a bathing robe.

5 Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 6, p. 607a26, Taisho 22, no. 1428.

6 Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 7, p. 608a, Taisho 22, no. 1428.

7 Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 7, p. 609c, Taisho 22, no. 1428.

8 Four-Part Vinaya 7, p. 610b29, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

9 Four-Part Vinaya 7, p. 612b28, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

10 Four-Part Vinaya 7, p. 613c25, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

11 Kiếp-bối 劫貝 (Pāli: kappāsa, cotton), Câu-giá-la 拘遮羅 (Pāli: koseyya, silk, silk cloth), nhũ diệp grass, sô-ma 乳葉, 芻c摩 (Pāli: khoma, hemp cloth, linen). (See Four-Part Vinaya, translated by the Most Venerable Thích Đỗng Minh.)

12 Four-Part Vinaya, fasc. 7, p. 614a27, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

13 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 615a, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

14 Bát-la 钵羅: Pāli: pala, a unit of weight.

15 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 615c, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

16 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 616c, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

17 Ni-sư-đãn-na: Ni-sư-đàn (Pāli: nisỵdana), translated as a sitting mat or spread, namely a cloth spread out for sitting.

18 Do-tuần 由旬É: Skt. = Pāli: yojana. The Great Tang Records on the Western Regions, fasc. 2, states: “Du-thiện-na was the distance traversed in one day’s march by the sacred kings of old, approximately forty li. According to Indian custom, it is thirty li.”

19 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 617b23, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

20 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 618a22, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

21 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 618c22, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

22 Venerable 具壽: Skt. āyuṣmata, Pāli: āyasmant, a respectful form of address for the Buddha’s disciples (bhikshus). A teacher may also use it when addressing a disciple, and an elder when addressing a younger monk.

23 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 619c26, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

24 Ô-Ba-sách-ca: Skt. Upāsaka, another transliteration of Ưu-bà-tắc, meaning a male lay attendant, namely a householder who serves the Three Jewels and observes the five precepts.

25 Four-Part Vinaya 8, p. 620b24, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

26 Ba-lợi-ca-la 波利迦羅: Skt. parikara, also called Ba-già-la 波伽羅, refers to garments supporting and covering the body other than the three robes, such as the body-covering robe, saṃkakṣikā, nivāsana, and so forth.

27 Four-Part Vinaya 9, p. 621c, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

28 The bowl of the most junior: the bowl received in the final exchange, that is, the bowl of the most junior bhikshu.

29 Four-Part Vinaya 9, p. 623a, Taishō 22, no. 1428.

30 Venerable Zhixu’s citation of this passage is incomplete (Essential Compilation of the Matters and Meanings of the Revised Vinaya, fasc. 6, p. 38904, Manji 40, no. 719). The Mahāsāṃghika Vinaya, fasc. 10, p. 316a23, Taishō 22, no. 1425, states: “..... The preceptor, ācārya, and familiar companions thought: ‘Because of washing his bowl, this worthy and virtuous bhikshu is being hindered in seated meditation, upholding the sutras, and reciting the sutras.’ Therefore, they broke it or hid it away...”