Bu Pc 3636. Encouraging a monastic to eat after refusing an invitation

Theravāda Collection on Monastic Law The Great Analysis

The chapter on offenses entailing confession The subchapter on eating 36. Encouraging a monastic to eat after refusing an invitation

Origin story

At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery. At that time two monks were traveling through the Kosalan country on their way to Sāvatthī. One monk misbehaved and the other said to him, “Don’t do that! It’s not allowable.” Because of that the first monk became resentful. They then carried on to Sāvatthī.

Soon afterwards an association in Sāvatthī was offering a meal to the Sangha. When the second monk had finished his meal and refused an invitation to eat more, the resentful monk brought back some almsfood from his own family. He then said to the other, “Please eat!”

“There’s no need. I’m full.”

“The almsfood is nice, please eat.”

And because he was pressured, he ate the almsfood. The resentful monk then said to him, “Who are you to correct me when you eat food that’s not left over even though you have finished your meal and refused an invitation to eat more?”

“Shouldn’t you have told me?”

“Shouldn’t you have asked?”

The second monk told the monks what had happened, and the monks of few desires complained and criticized the other, “How could a monk invite another monk to eat food that’s not left over, when the other has finished his meal and refused an invitation to eat more?” … “Is it true, monk, that you did this?”

“It’s true, sir.”

The Buddha rebuked him … “Foolish man, how could you do this? This will affect people’s confidence …” … “And, monks, this training rule should be recited like this:

Final ruling

‘If a monk invites a monk, whom he knows has finished his meal and refused an invitation to eat more, to eat fresh or cooked food that is not left over, saying, “Here, monk, eat,” aiming to criticize him, then when the other has eaten, he commits an offense entailing confession.’”

Definitions

A: whoever … Monk: … The monk who has been given the full ordination by a unanimous Sangha through a legal procedure consisting of one motion and three announcements that is irreversible and fit to stand—this sort of monk is meant in this case.

A monk: another monk. Whom has finished his meal: whom has eaten any of the five cooked foods, even what fits on the tip of a blade of grass. Refused an invitation to eat more: there is eating; there is cooked food; they stand within arm’s reach; there is an offering; there is a refusal.

Not left over: the making it left over is done with food that is unallowable; it is done with food that has not been received; it is done with food that is not held in hand; it is done by one who is not within arm’s reach; it is done by one who has not finished his meal; it is done by one who has finished his meal, who has refused an invitation to eat more, but who has risen from his seat; “I’ve had enough,” has not been said; it is not left over from one who is sick— this is called “not left over”.

Fresh food: apart from the five cooked foods, the post-midday tonics, the seven-day tonics, and the lifetime tonics, the rest is called “fresh food”. Cooked food: there are five kinds of cooked food: cooked grain, porridge, flour products, fish, and meat. Invites to eat: saying, “Take as much as you like.” He knows: he knows by himself or others have told him or the monk has told him.

Aiming to criticize him: if he offers it to him, thinking, “With this I’ll accuse him,” “I’ll remind him,” “I’ll counter accuse him,” “I’ll counter remind him,” “I’ll humiliate him,” he commits an offense of wrong conduct.

If, because of what he says, the other monk receives it with the intention of eating it, then the donor commits an offense of wrong conduct. For every mouthful swallowed, the donor commits an offense of wrong conduct. When the other monk has finished eating, the donor commits an offense entailing confession.

Permutations

If the other monk has refused an invitation to eat more, and the donor perceives that he has, and he invites him to eat fresh or cooked food that is not left over, he commits an offense entailing confession. If the other monk has refused an invitation to eat more, but the donor is unsure of it, and he invites him to eat fresh or cooked food that is not left over, he commits an offense of wrong conduct. If the other monk has refused an invitation to eat more, but the donor does not perceive that he has, and he invites him to eat fresh or cooked food that is not left over, there is no offense.

If he invites him to eat post-midday tonics, seven-day tonics, or lifetime tonics for the purpose of food, he commits an offense of wrong conduct. If, because of what he says, the other monk receives it with the intention of eating it, then the donor commits an offense of wrong conduct. For every mouthful swallowed, the donor commits an offense of wrong conduct.

If the other monk has not refused an invitation to eat more, but the donor perceives that he has, he commits an offense of wrong conduct. If the other monk has not refused an invitation to eat more, but the donor is unsure of it, he commits an offense of wrong conduct. If the other monk has not refused an invitation to eat more, and the donor does not perceive that he has, there is no offense.

Non-offenses

There is no offense: if he gives it after having it made left over; if he gives it, saying, “Have it made left over and then eat it;” if he gives it, saying, “Take this food for the benefit of someone else;” if he gives the leftovers from a sick person; if he gives, saying, “When there’s a reason, use these post-midday tonics,” “… use these seven-day tonics,” “… use these lifetime tonics;” if he is insane; if he is the first offender.

The second training rule on encouraging a monastic to eat after refusing an invitation, the sixth, is finished.