Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammāsambuddhassa

Vinayapiṭake

Pācittiya-aṭṭhakathā

5. Pācittiyakaṇḍaṃ

1. Musāvādavaggo

1. Musāvādasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā

Of those, the collection is well-established with nine sections;
Now, this is the commentary on those Khuddakas.

1. In that, regarding the first sikkhāpada of the Musāvāda section, Hatthaka is the name of that thera. Sakyaputto means "son of the Sakyans." It is said that in the Buddha's time, eighty thousand men from the Sakyan clan went forth; he was one of them. Vādakkhitto means "thrown by the vāda," that is, sent, dispatched, directed to the opponent in debate by a vāda contemplated with the thought, "I will engage in debate." Or, thrown by one's own mind in debate. Or, "he is evident wherever there is debate"; hence, vādakkhitto. Avajānitvā avajānātī means "not knowing, he knows"; perceiving some fault in his own vāda, thinking, "this is not my vāda," not knowing, he then speaks, and repeatedly speaking, perceiving its faultlessness, he acknowledges, "this is indeed my vāda." Paṭijānitvā avajānātī means "acknowledging, he does not know"; perceiving some benefit in a certain statement, thinking, "this is my vāda," acknowledging, he then speaks, and repeatedly speaking, perceiving a fault in it, he does not know, thinking, "this is not my vāda." Aññenaññaṃ paṭicaratī means "with one thing, he covers another"; he covers, conceals, overspreads one cause with another, saying, "form is impermanent because it is to be known," and then saying "because it is subject to arising," and so on. But in the Kurundi, it is said, "because of the covering of that, he speaks much else." Here, the meaning is this: to cover up that acknowledging and not-knowing, he speaks much, such as "who said it, what did he say, in what context did he say it?" Furthermore, in the Mahā-aṭṭhakathā, it is said, "not knowing, he acknowledges; acknowledging, he does not know; thus, he covers one thing with another." Sampajānamusā bhāsatī means "knowing, he speaks falsehood." Saṅketaṃ katvā visaṃvādetī means "having made an agreement, he breaks it"; having made an agreement, such as "let there be a debate at such and such a time, in such and such a place" regarding before the meal, etc., going before or after the agreed time, he departs, saying, "behold, the Titthiyas have not come; they are defeated."

2. Sampajānamusāvāde means "in speaking falsehood knowingly, and to one who knows."

3. Visaṃvādanapurekkhārassā means "to one who speaks having placed the intention of deception in front." Vācā means "the volition that gives rise to speech comprised of false speech." Girā indicates the sound produced by that volition. Byappatho means "the path of speech"; for indeed, speech is called byappatho because it is the path for others who attain conformity to what is seen. Vacībhedo means "division of speech" consisting of verbal designation; speech that has gone to the state of division is called thus. Vacīviññatti means "verbal intimation." Thus, it should be understood that with the first word, pure volition; in the middle, with three, volition together with the sound produced by it; at the end, with one, volition together with intimation, are "spoken." Anariyavohārā means "the expressions of the ignoble," of childish worldlings.

He says, "‘adiṭṭhaṃ diṭṭhaṃ me’" and so on. Therein, the statement of one saying "adiṭṭhaṃ diṭṭhaṃ me" and the volition that gives rise to it is one ignoble expression; the meaning should be understood in this way. Moreover, here, adiṭṭhaṃ is an object not grasped by way of the eye; asutaṃ is not grasped by way of the ear; amutaṃ is not perceived by way of the nose, etc.; not grasped, having made it as if bound together by three senses, having attained it; aviññātaṃ is not known, not grasped elsewhere by the pure consciousness alone with the five senses. But in the Pāli, the teaching is given in a rather gross way, "‘adiṭṭhaṃ nāma na cakkhunā diṭṭha’" means "‘unseen’ means not seen by the eye." And among the seen, etc., what is seen by oneself or by another is indeed seen. Thus, sutamutaññātāni; this is one way. Another way: what is seen by oneself is indeed seen. This way applies to the heard, etc. But what is seen by another stands in the place of what is heard by oneself. Thus, with the smelled, etc.

4. Now, showing the offense by imposing it according to those ignoble expressions, he says, "‘tīhākārehi’" and so on. Its meaning should be understood in the same way as said in the explanation of the fourth pārājika Pāli, such as "‘for one who knowingly speaks falsehood, thinking ‘I have attained the first jhāna,’ the offense is a pārājika.’" Only, there, "‘I have attained the first jhāna,’" here "‘adiṭṭhaṃ diṭṭhaṃ me,’" and there "‘the offense is a pārājika,’" here "‘the offense is a pācittiya,’" thus, there is a difference only in the object and in the offense; the rest is of the same characteristic.

9. The meaning of Tīhākārehi diṭṭhe vematiko and so on, should also be understood in the same way as said in the explanation of the Duṭṭhadosa Pāli, such as "‘for one who is doubtful about what is seen, while engaging in a pārājika thing, there is a pārājika.’" Only the Pāli is different here; but in meaning, there is no difference at all in the Satheravāda.

11. Sahasā bhaṇatī means "without considering, without examining, he speaks hastily, saying even what is seen, ‘I have not seen it.’" Aññaṃ bhaṇissāmīti aññaṃ bhaṇatī means "intending to say one thing, he says another," slipping up due to dullness, foolishness, he says "cīra" instead of "cīvara," and so on. But if, when a sāmaṇera, having been asked, "Venerable sir, did you see my preceptor?" and making a joke, says, "your preceptor must have gone harnessing a wooden cart," or hearing the sound of a jackal, having been asked, "Venerable sir, what is that sound?" says, "that is the sound of your mother going in a vehicle, pulling out a wheel stuck in the mud," thus he speaks something else, neither to harm nor to sound off, he incurs an offense. The rest is called a pūraṇakathā. For example, one gains a little oil in a village and comes to the monastery and says to a sāmaṇera— "Today where did you go, the village was all oil" or having obtained a piece of cake placed in a basket— "Today cakes were moving around the village from baskets", this is falsehood. The rest is straightforward.

It arises from three sources: from body and mind, from speech and mind, and from body, speech, and mind; it is kiriya, saññāvimokkha, sacittaka, lokavajja, kāyakamma, vacīkamma, akusalacitta, and has three kinds of feeling.

The Musāvāda Sikkhāpada, the first.

2. Omasavādasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā

12. In the second sikkhāpada, omasantī means "they despise." Khuṃsentī means "they revile." Vambhentī means "they disparage."

13. Bhūtapubba means "formerly"; the Blessed One brought forth this object for the purpose of censuring abusive speech. Nandivisālo nāmā means "named Nandivisāla"; Nandī is the name of that bull, but his horns were large, therefore he is called "Nandivisālo." The Bodhisatta at that time was named Nandivisāla. The Brahmin nourished him excessively with rice gruel and so on. Then, he, feeling compassion for the Brahmin, said, "‘gaccha tva’" and so on. Tattheva aṭṭhāsī means "he stood right there"; even at the time of causeless rebirth, he rejected being reviled by another as unpleasant, therefore, wishing to show the fault of the Brahmin, he stood there. Sakaṭasataṃ atibaddhaṃ pavaṭṭesī means "he caused a hundred carts bound together to proceed"; having placed them in a row, giving them to the lower trees, having made them bound together, causing a hundred carts full of muggamāsa, sand, and so on to proceed, although he formerly caused the area of established support to proceed again when the spokes reached, the Bodhisatta, however, caused an area the size of a hundred carts to proceed, in order to establish the later cart in the place established by the former cart. For there is no loosening for Bodhisattas. Tena cattamano ahū means "he was delighted by that"; by that gain of wealth for the Brahmin and by his own action, that Nandivisāla was delighted in his mind.

15. Akkosenapī means "even by reviling"; here, however, since he wishes to distinguish later "there are two kinds of reviling—base reviling and severe reviling," therefore, as it was said earlier "they revile even with base reviling," he says thus, without saying "akkosena." Venajātī means "a bamboo worker's caste"; they also say veṇukārajātī. Nesādajātī means "a hunter's caste," such as trappers of deer, etc.

Rathakārajātī means "a chariot maker's caste," a leather worker's caste. Pukkusajātī means "a refuse sweeper's caste." Avakaṇṇakādi is the name of slaves; therefore, it is base. Oññāta means "despised"; some read "uññāta." Avaññāta means "known by disparaging." Hīḷita means "disgusted." Paribhūta means "treated with contempt, thinking, 'what is this good for?'" Acittīkata means "not respected."

Koṭṭhakakamma means "carpentry work." Muddā means "counting with hand gestures." Gaṇanā means "counting what remains after flaws," etc. Lekhā means "written letters." Madhumehābādho is called "severe" because of the absence of feeling. Pāṭikaṅkhā means "to be desired." Yakārena vā bhakārena vā means "reviling with the letters ya or bha joined together." Kāṭakoṭacikāya vā—"kāṭa" means "male genitals," "koṭacikā" means "female genitals"; or reviling with these, this is called base reviling.

16. Now, showing the offense by imposing it according to the divisions of caste, etc., he says, "‘upasampanno upasampanna’" and so on. Therein, khuṃsetukāmo vambhetukāmo maṅkukattukāmo means "wishing to revile, wishing to disparage, wishing to despise, wishing to make spiritless." Hīnena hīna means "a person of low caste with a word of low caste." In this way, the meaning should be understood in all instances.

And here, although one speaks the truth while speaking of a low person with a low thing, for him, due to the intention to despise, for each utterance, there is a pācittiya. And for one who speaks a low person with a severe thing, although he speaks falsely, he incurs a pācittiya with this very sikkhāpada, not with the former, due to the intention to despise. And he who says, "you are extremely caṇḍāla, you are extremely brahmin, you are a wicked caṇḍāla, you are a wicked brahmin," and so on, he too should be dealt with according to the offense.

26. Santiidhekacce means "there are some here"; in the case of warding off, there is a dukkata due to having been said. The same method applies in the cases of ye nūna…pe… na maya. But in the case of one not fully ordained, in all four cases, it is only a dukkata. But by statements such as "you are a thief, a purse-cutter," even for one fully ordained and not fully ordained, in all cases, it is only a dukkata. But due to the intention to joke, even for one fully ordained and not fully ordained, in all cases, there is a dubbhāsita. Davakamyatā is the intention of jesting or joking. And in this sikkhāpada, having excluded a bhikkhu, all beings beginning with a bhikkhunī should be understood as standing in the place of one not fully ordained.

35. Explaining the meaning of the Pāli in Atthapurekkhārassā and so on, atthapurekkhāro means "having the aim of the meaning"; dhammapurekkhāro means "having the aim of the Dhamma" while reciting the Pāli; anusāsanīpurekkhāro should be understood as "having the aim of instruction" while standing in instruction and speaking in a way such as "even now you are a caṇḍāla, do not do evil, do not be one whose darkness is devoted to darkness," and so on. The rest is straightforward.

Here, the Dubbhāsita offense arises from verbal consciousness; it is kiriya, saññāvimokkha, sacittaka, akusalacitta, and has two kinds of feeling: pleasure and equanimity.

The Omasavāda Sikkhāpada, the second.

3. Pesuññasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā

36. In the third sikkhāpada—bhaṇḍanajātāna means "of those in whom quarreling has arisen." Bhaṇḍana means "the preliminary part of a quarrel," the agreement in one's own party, such as "this and this was done by this and this; when thus spoken, we will say thus." Kalaho means "the transgression of body and speech that leads to an offense." Vivādo means "contentious talk." Vivādāpannānaṃ means "of those who have entered into that dispute." Pesuñña means "divisive speech," it is said to be "speech that makes the state of affection empty."

37. Bhikkhupesuññe means "in divisiveness among bhikkhus"; having heard from a bhikkhu, divisiveness brought together by a bhikkhunī to a bhikkhu is the meaning.

38. Dvīhākārehīti means by two reasons. Piyakamyassa vā means, desiring one's own state of being liked, thinking, "Thus, I will be liked by him." Bhedādhippāyassa vā means, desiring the split of another with another, thinking, "Thus, this one will split with him." Jātitopītiādi, and all the rest, is in the same manner as stated in the previous training rule. Here also, beginning with a bhikkhuni, all are called unordained.

Na piyakamyassa na bhedādhippāyassāti if, seeing one person scolding and another tolerating, one speaks merely out of disgust for evil, saying, "Alas, shameless one, would he consider speaking to you again like this?", there is no offense. The rest is easy to understand. It arises from three sources (tisamuṭṭhānaṃ): from body and mind, from speech and mind, and from body, speech, and mind; it is an action (kiriyaṃ), it involves no release of perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), it is intentional (sacittakaṃ), it is a fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), it is a bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), it is a verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), it is an unwholesome state of mind (akusalacittaṃ), and it is felt in three ways (tivedananti).

Pesuññasikkhāpadaṃ tatiyaṃ.

4. Padasodhammasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā

44. In the fourth training rule – appatissāti means not listening. It means unwilling to even hear a word when an upāsaka speaks; it means disrespectful. Or, appatissayā means behaving without reverence. Asabhāgavuttikāti means having a dissimilar livelihood, meaning behaving in a way that one should not behave among bhikkhus.

45. Padaso dhammaṃ vāceyyāti means he should recite the Dhamma word by word; it means he should recite section by section. However, since that word called "section" is of four kinds, therefore, to show that, the division of words is stated as "padaṃ anupadaṃ anvakkharaṃ anubyañjanaṃ". There, padaṃ intends one line of a verse. Anupadaṃ is the second line. Anvakkharaṃ is letter by letter. Anubyañjanaṃ is a subsequent letter similar to the previous letter. Or, whatever single letter is anvakkharaṃ, a group of letters is anubyañjanaṃ, and a group of letters and anubyañjanaṃ is padaṃ. The first padaṃ is just padaṃ, the second is anupadaṃ; thus, the distinction should be understood here.

padaṃ nāma ekato paṭṭhapetvā ekato osāpentīti while reciting the Dhamma in verse form, he begins and ends each word together with the novice, such as "manopubbaṅgamā dhammā". A Pācittiya offense should be understood for reciting in this way, counting by pada. Anupadaṃ nāma pāṭekkaṃ paṭṭhapetvā ekato osāpentīti when the elder says "manopubbaṅgamā dhammā", the novice, not reaching that pada, recites the second pada "manoseṭṭhā manomayā" together; these are called beginning separately and ending together. A Pācittiya offense also occurs for reciting in this way, counting by anupada. Anvakkharaṃ nāma rūpaṃ aniccanti vuccamāno ‘‘rū’’ti opātetīti when being told, "Say 'rūpaṃ aniccanti', novice," he utters only the syllable "rū" together and stops. A Pācittiya offense also occurs for reciting in this way, counting by anvakkhara. This method can certainly be found even in verse compositions. Anubyañjanaṃ nāma rūpaṃ aniccanti vuccamāno vedanā aniccāti saddaṃ nicchāretīti while reciting this sutta, "rūpaṃ, bhikkhave, aniccaṃ, vedanā aniccā", when the elder says "rūpaṃ aniccaṃ", the novice, due to quick wisdom, utters the word "vedanā anicca" together with the elder's word "rūpaṃ anicca", thus emitting speech. A Pācittiya offense also occurs for reciting in this way, counting by anubyañjana. Here is a summary of it: in these pada, etc., he incurs an offense by whatever he recites together.

Buddhabhāsitoti the entire Vinaya Piṭaka, Abhidhamma Piṭaka, Dhammapada, Cariyāpiṭaka, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Jātaka, Suttanipāta, Vimānavatthu, Petavatthu, and suttas such as Brahmajāla. Sāvakabhāsitoti that spoken by disciples who have attained the four assemblies, such as Anaṅgaṇasutta, Sammādiṭṭhīsutta, Anumānasutta, Cūḷavedallasutta, Mahāvedallasutta. Isibhāsitoti that spoken by outside wanderers, the entire Paribbājaka Vagga, the questions of the sixteen Brahmins who were disciples of Bāvari, and so on. Devatābhāsitoti that spoken by deities; it should be understood as Devatāsaṃyutta, Devaputtasaṃyutta, Mārasaṃyutta, Brahmasaṃyutta, Sakkasaṃyutta, and so on.

Atthūpasañhitoti associated with the commentary (aṭṭhakathā). Dhammūpasañhitoti associated with the Pali; he speaks relying on both the explicit and the implicit meanings. Although he speaks relying on the explicit and implicit meanings, an offense occurs for reciting aloud the Dhamma established by the three councils word by word. Even in what relies on explicit meaning, there is no offense in what is composed in various languages, such as verses and poetic compositions. Even in what is not established by the three councils, an offense occurs in such texts as Kulumbasutta, Rājovādasutta, Tikkhindriya, Catuparivaṭṭa, and Nandopananda. Apalāladamana is also mentioned, but Mahāpaccariya is prohibited. In the questions of Meṇḍaka and Milinda, there is no offense for the elder's own wit, but there is an offense for what is brought up and said to convince the king. It is said that the Vaṇṇapiṭaka, Aṅgulimālapiṭaka, Raṭṭhapālagaajataāḷavakagajjita, Guḷhamagga, Guḷhavessantara, and Guḷhavinayavedallapiṭakas are definitely not the words of the Buddha. They say that the Sīlūpadesa was spoken by Dhammasenāpati; there is definitely an offense in that. There are also other things such as Maggakathā, Ārammaṇakathā, Buddhikadaṇḍaka, Ñāṇavatthu, Asubhakathā, etc., in which the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment are distinguished, and the practice is distinguished in the Dhutaṅga question; therefore, it is said that there is an offense in those. However, in Mahāpaccariya and others that are not established by the council, it is said that an offense occurs only in Rājovāda, Tikkhindriya, Catuparivaṭṭa, Nandopananda, and Kulumbasutta, and in the remaining ones, only what is brought and said from the Buddha's words is the basis for an offense, not the rest; this is the meaning that is accepted.

48. Ekato uddisāpentoti means even if he recites the lesson together with an unordained person, he speaks together, meaning there is no offense.

Here is the judgment in this matter: an ordained person and an unordained person sit and recite the lesson. The teacher thinks, "I will recite to those who are sitting," and speaks together with them; an offense occurs for the teacher. There is no offense for taking it together with an unordained person. Both stand and take it together; this is the same method. A young bhikkhu is sitting, and a novice is standing; there is no offense for reciting thinking, "I will recite to the one who is sitting." If the young one stands and the other sits, there is also no offense for reciting thinking, "I will recite to the one who is standing." If a novice is sitting among many bhikkhus, a non-intentional offense occurs for the teacher who recites the Dhamma word by word to the one who is sitting. If the novice, abandoning respectful behavior, is standing or sitting, because he is not included among those to whom he recites, it is counted as if he is taking a "running-away lesson" in one direction, therefore there is no offense. Even when doing recitation together, an ordained person doing recitation together with an unordained person speaks together with him; there is no offense. There is also no offense for taking a lesson in the presence of an unordained person, speaking together with him. This is also counted as doing recitation together.

Yebhuyyena paguṇaṃ ganthaṃ bhaṇantaṃ opātetīti if one line of a verse is not coming, but the rest is coming, this is called a mostly-familiar text. This method should be understood in the suttas as well. There is no offense for telling him to recite in that way, even if he recites together. Osārentaṃ opātetīti there is no offense for saying to one who is reciting a sutta, going around in the assembly, "Say it this way," even if he speaks together with him. However, if one who is told "Do not speak with me" in Mahāpaccariya and others speaks, it is said "there is no offense," but that is not in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, and it is fitting that it does not exist. Why? Because it arises from action. Otherwise, it would be an action that is not an action. The rest is easy to understand.

Padasodhammasamuṭṭhānaṃ – it arises from speech and from speech and mind, it is an action (kiriyaṃ), it involves no release of perception (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), it is unintentional (acittakaṃ), it is a fault by designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), it is a verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), it is a tri-root mind (ticittaṃ), and it is felt in three ways (tivedananti).

Padasodhammasikkhāpadaṃ catutthaṃ.

5. Sahaseyyasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā

49. In the fifth training rule – muṭṭhassatī asampajānāti this is said in terms of not doing mindfulness and clear comprehension in the preliminary part, but from where is mindfulness and clear comprehension at the time of falling into bhavanga! Vikūjamānāti means babbling. Kākacchamānāti means emitting a meaningless sound like the sound of a crow from the nose. Upāsakāti means the upāsakas who woke up earlier.

50. Etadavocunti "Friend Rāhula, the training rule has been established by the Blessed One," the bhikkhus said this out of respect for the training rule. But naturally, with respect for the Blessed One and a desire for training for venerable Rāhula, they would prepare a small cot or lean-to or whatever else there was for that venerable one who had come to his dwelling place, and give him a robe or upper robe to use as a pillow. Here is a story about that venerable one's desire for training: it seems that when the bhikkhus saw him coming from afar, they would throw the fistful of sweepings and the garbage outside. Then, when others asked, "Friend, who dropped this?", others would say, "Venerable, Rāhula wandered in this area, so perhaps he dropped it." But that venerable one, without saying even for one day, "Venerable, this is not my doing," would put it back in its place, ask forgiveness from the bhikkhus, and leave. Vaccakuṭiyā seyyaṃ kappesīti following up on that very desire for training, he prepared his bed in the Blessed One's toilet cell, without going to the presence of Dhammasenāpati, Mahāmoggallāna, Ānanda Thera, and others. It seems that the cell stood like a shrine, with its door closed, scented with fragrant substances, and adorned with gathered flower garlands, not used by others.

51. Uttaridirattatirattanti the Blessed One gave a dispensation of three nights in order to favor the novices. For it is not proper to ordain the sons of good families and not to favor them. Sahaseyyanti means sleeping together. Seyyāti is also said of the act of lying down, which is the stretching out of the body, and also of the lodging in which one lies down. There, to show the lodging first, ‘‘seyyā nāma sabbacchannā’’tiādi is said. To show the stretching out of the body, anupasampanne nipanne bhikkhu nipajjatī’’tiādi is said. Therefore, this is the meaning here: "having entered the lodging called seyyā, he should make, do, or accomplish the seyyā called the stretching out of the body." However, by Sabbacchannātiādi, the characteristic of that lodging called seyyā is stated. Therefore, whatever lodging is entirely covered from above by five coverings or by anything else, this is called sabbacchannā seyyā. However, in the commentaries, taking the well-known usage, it is said in the manner of recitation, "sabbacchannā nāma means covered by five coverings." Although it is said, is it not possible to avoid an offense even for one living in a cloth tent? Therefore, whatever is capable of covering, both the covering and the enclosed space should be understood here. For if only the five kinds of coverings are taken, there would be no sleeping together even in a padaracchanna. However, whatever lodging is enclosed from the ground up to the covering by a wall or by anything else, even by a cloth at the very least, this is called sabbaparicchannā seyyā. It is said in the Kurunda Commentary that even if it is enclosed by a wall, etc., at a height of two and a half cubits from the very edge, not touching the covering, it is definitely sabbaparicchannā. However, whatever has more space covered above and less uncovered, or is mostly enclosed on all sides and less unenclosed, this is called yebhuyyena channā yebhuyyena paricchannā. Indeed, a building that possesses this characteristic, even if it is a seven-storied mansion with only one attendant, or a hundred-chambered or four-sided building, is counted as one seyyā. With that in mind, it is said ‘‘catutthe divase atthaṅgate sūriye anupasampanne nipanne bhikkhu nipajjati, āpatti pācittiyassā’’tiādi.

There, merely lying down constitutes a pācittiya. But if there are many sāmaṇeras and one bhikkhu, it is a pācittiya by counting the sāmaṇeras. If they lie down each time they get up, the bhikkhu incurs an offense with each attempt. But when the bhikkhu lies down each time he gets up, the bhikkhu incurs an offense by his own action. If there are many bhikkhus and one sāmaṇera, he causes an offense to all; even his lying down each time he gets up causes an offense to the bhikkhus. The same principle applies when both are numerous.

Moreover, here the quartet beginning with "one dwelling" should be understood. Whoever cohabits for three nights with a non-ordained person in one dwelling incurs a daily offense starting from the fourth day. And whoever cohabits for three nights with various non-ordained persons in the same dwelling also incurs an offense. And whoever cohabits for three nights with one non-ordained person in various dwellings also incurs an offense. And whoever goes even a hundred yojanas and cohabits with various non-ordained persons in various dwellings also incurs a daily offense starting from the fourth day.

This offense of sahaseyyā (cohabitation) occurs even with animals, because it is said that "except for a bhikkhu, the remainder are called non-ordained." There, the distinction regarding animals should be understood in the same way as stated for the offense of methunadhamma (sexual intercourse). Therefore, even if a monitor lizard, cat, mongoose, or something similar enters and lies down in a bhikkhu's dwelling or lodging within the same enclosure, it is sahaseyyā.

If, however, the upper story of a building constructed on pillars has no connecting wall, and someone enters through a hole in a hollow beam placed on the wall and lies down inside the beam, and then exits through the same hole, the bhikkhu lying down in the lower building incurs no offense. If there is a hole in the roof, and someone enters through it, stays inside the roof, and then leaves through it, the person lying inside the roof on the upper floor incurs an offense, but the person lying on the lower floor incurs no offense. If they ascend inside the building itself and use all the levels, they are within the same enclosure; an offense is incurred by whoever lies down anywhere in them.

If pigeons or similar creatures enter and lie down in a lodging with a half-wall made in a shed, or in a pile of reeds, etc., an offense is incurred. If they lie down outside the enclosure, in an uncovered space, no offense is incurred. Even if a lodging is a hundred-roomed pavilion, either round or square, with a single roof, and they enter through a single common door and enter all the rooms within the enclosure not separated by walls, if a non-ordained person lies down in one room, those lying down in all the rooms incur an offense. If the rooms have individual porches, even if there is an elevated area uncovered above the porch, someone lying in the porch does not cause an offense to those lying in the rooms. But if the roof of the porch is connected to the roof of the rooms, someone lying there causes an offense to all. Why? Because it is all covered and all enclosed, and its enclosure is the same as the enclosure of the rooms. Indeed, in this way, the offense is stated in the commentaries in the four gatehouses of the Lohapāsāda enclosure.

However, what is stated in the Andhaka Commentary—"no offense in an unenclosed porch," referring to a porch without a platform on the ground—refers to the single-roofed rows of rooms with individual courtyards in the Andhaka country. And what is stated there—"without a platform on the ground"—is not found in the commentaries, nor does it agree with the Pali. Even a platform ten hatthas high does not count as an enclosure. Therefore, what is stated in the Second Training Rule, giving the measurement of a platform and saying, "This is called the same enclosure," should not be accepted. Also, in large buildings with single, double, triple, or quadruple halls, it is possible to go everywhere without leaving the enclosure once one has washed one's feet and entered in one place; one is not freed from the sahaseyyā offense in these either. If, in each of those places, the enclosure is defined and made separate, an offense is incurred only in the same enclosure.

If they build a wall in the middle of a pavilion with a stucco roof and two doors, and a non-ordained person lies down in one enclosure after entering through one door, and a bhikkhu in one, there is no offense. If there is a hole in the wall just large enough for monitor lizards to enter, and monitor lizards lie down in one enclosure, again there is no offense. A house does not become the same enclosure just because of a hole. If they cut through the wall in the middle and join a door, there is an offense because of the same enclosure. If they lie down after closing that door with a gate, there is an offense. A house does not become a different enclosure just by closing the door, whether there is a door or not. A gate is made for convenient opening and closing, not to cut off the enclosure. But if they brick up that door again, it becomes not a door and remains as it was in the previous state of being a different enclosure. A cetiyaghara (shrine room) has a long porch. One gate is inside and one is outside; between the two gates, a non-ordained person lying in the inner cetiyaghara causes an offense to one inside because it is the same enclosure.

Here, someone might say, "This idea of the same enclosure and different enclosure is stated in the Udosita Training Rule, but here only 'a seyyā (sleeping place) is one that is entirely covered, entirely enclosed, mostly covered, or mostly enclosed' is stated. A room with a closed door is entirely enclosed. Therefore, an offense is incurred with someone lying inside, but no offense is incurred by someone lying outside." He should be told, "But why is an offense incurred by someone lying outside when the door is open?" Because the porch is entirely covered together with the room. "But when the room is closed, is the roof destroyed?" It is not destroyed, but the porch is not entirely enclosed together with the room. "Is the enclosure destroyed?" Indeed, he will say, "It is not destroyed, the enclosure is enclosed by the gate." Even going that far, he will still come back to the idea of the same enclosure and different enclosure.

Moreover, if the meaning were easily understood from the mere wording, a seyyā would be one covered by one of the five types of roofing because of the wording "entirely covered," and not by anything else. In that case, there would be no offense in a padara roof, etc. Then the very purpose for which the Training Rule was laid down would be lost. Whether it is lost or not, how can one grasp what is unsaid? And who says, "What is unsaid should be grasped"? This is said in the case of indefinite things: "A covered seat is one covered by a wall, a gate, a screen, a cloth covering, a tree, a pillar, a recess, or anything else." Therefore, just as there anything covered is covered, so too it should be grasped here. Therefore, whether a senāsana (lodging) is small or large, connected to something else or not, long or round or square, single-storied or multi-storied, whatever is the same enclosure, in all cases, if it is entirely covered or entirely enclosed or mostly covered or mostly enclosed by any covering, the sahaseyyā offense is incurred.

53."If it is half-covered and half-enclosed, the offense is a dukkata." Here, it is stated in the Mahāpaccariya that even in cases like "entirely covered and half-enclosed," the offense is only a dukkata. But in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā it is stated: "If it is entirely covered and mostly enclosed, a pācittiya; entirely covered and half-enclosed, a pācittiya; mostly covered and half-enclosed, a pācittiya; entirely enclosed and mostly covered, a pācittiya; entirely enclosed and half-covered, a pācittiya; mostly enclosed and half-covered, a pācittiya; there are seven pācittiyas including the pācittiya stated in the Pāḷi." "If it is entirely covered and slightly enclosed, a dukkata; mostly covered and slightly enclosed, a dukkata; entirely enclosed and slightly covered, a dukkata; mostly enclosed and slightly covered, a dukkata; there are five dukkatas including the dukkata in the Pāḷi," it is stated.

"If it is half-covered and slightly enclosed, there is no offense; if it is half-enclosed and slightly covered, there is no offense; if it is slightly covered and slightly enclosed, there is no offense; and 'entirely covered and entirely enclosed' means it is like a senamba-maṇḍapa (traveler's rest pavilion)," it is stated. By this, it should be understood that "a jagati (platform) does not count as an enclosure." The rest is clear in meaning.

The arising of the eḷakaloma: it arises from the body and from thought associated with the body; it is an action, without perception of release, non-intentional, an offense by designation, a bodily action, tri-citta (three- citta), tri-vedana (three- vedana).

The Fifth Sahaseyya Training Rule.

6. Explanation of the Second Sahaseyya Training Rule

55.In the Second Sahaseyya Training Rule: āvasathāgāra means a dwelling place for visitors. Paññattaṃ hoti means it has been established by being made out of a desire for merit. Yena sā itthī tenupasaṅkamī means having heard that there is an āvasathāgāra established in such-and-such a place, people approached it. Gandhagandhinī means having a fragrance of fragrant substances like agaru and saffron; she is gandhagandhinī. Sāṭakaṃ nikkhipitvā means thinking, "Perhaps lust will arise in him even by seeing this kind of change," she did this. Okkhipitvā means having cast down. Accayo means offense. Maṃ accagamā means having overcome and overpowered me, it arose. The rest should be understood in the same way as stated in the First Training Rule. This alone is the difference: in the First Training Rule, the offense is incurred on the fourth day, but here it is incurred even on the first day. A dukkata is incurred in the case of a female animal, whether a yakkhi, a peta, or one whose form is visible, who is the object of methunadhamma (sexual intercourse). No offense is incurred in other cases. The arising and so on are the same as in the first.

The Sixth Dutiyasahaseyya Training Rule.

7. Explanation of the Dhammadesanā Training Rule

60.In the Seventh Training Rule: gharaṇī means the mistress of the house. Nivesanadvāre means at the main door of the residence. Gharasuṇhā means the daughter-in-law in that house. Āvasathadvāre means at the door of the dwelling. Vissaṭṭhenā means with a clearly projected sound. Vivaṭenā means very openly, without concealment. Dhammo desetabbo means this dhamma, which is differentiated as the refuges, the precepts, etc., should be spoken. Aññātu means to understand. Viññunā purisaviggahenā means by a discerning man, also one standing having assumed the form of a man, not a yakkha, not a peta, not an animal.

66.Anāpatti viññunā purisaviggahenā means there is no offense for one who teaches much dhamma while standing with the form of a discerning man. Chappañcavācāhī means there is no offense for one who teaches with five or six utterances. There, one line of a verse is one utterance; in this way, the measure of an utterance should be understood everywhere. If he wants to speak the commentary, the Dhammapada, a Jataka story, or something similar, it is permissible to speak only about five or six words. If speaking along with the Pali, one word is Pali and five are commentary; in this way, he should speak without exceeding six words. Indeed, all the categories stated in the Padasodhamma are also dhamma here. Tasmiṃ desetī means he teaches at that moment. Or this is a locative case in the sense of giving. The meaning is, "he teaches her." Aññissā mātugāmassā means having taught one, he teaches another who comes again and again; in this way, sitting in one seat, he teaches even hundreds of thousands of women. It is stated in the Mahāpaccariya Commentary: "To women sitting together, he says, 'I will teach each of you a single verse; listen to it,' there is no offense. It is proper to make an announcement and inform them that 'I will first recite a single verse to each of you,' but not afterwards." Pañhaṃ pucchati pañhaṃ puṭṭho kathetī means a woman asks, "Bhante, what does the Dīghanikāya illuminate?" Being asked such a question, there is no offense even if the bhikkhu speaks the entire Dīghanikāya. The rest here is clear in meaning.

The arising of the Padasodhamma: it arises from speech and from thought associated with speech; it is both action and non-action, without perception of release, non-intentional, an offense by designation, a verbal action, tri-citta (three- citta), tri-vedana (three- vedana).

The Seventh Dhammadesanā Training Rule.

8. Explanation of the Bhūtārocana Training Rule

67. Regarding the eighth training rule: Whatever should be said by way of the story is the same as has been stated in the explanation of the fourth pārājika. The only difference here is that in that case, they reported what was untrue; in this case, what is true. And even the truth was reported by ordinary people, not by noble ones. For noble ones, there is no such thing as intentional speech. However, when their own virtues were being proclaimed, they did not object to others, and they approved of such a situation when it arose, not being aware of the situation that arose.

But in the passage beginning with "Then those monks reported this matter to the Blessed One," it should be understood that those who spoke in praise of superhuman qualities were the ones who reported. However, when asked "Is it true, monks?", all acknowledged, "It is true, Blessed One." For even in the minds of the noble ones, there are superhuman qualities that are true. Then the Blessed One, not saying "foolish men" because there was a mixture of noble ones, but saying "How indeed, monks," and so on, said "for the sake of your bellies." Here, because the noble ones, hearing from others, acknowledged the attainment of distinction for themselves and others with pure minds when asked by people pleased in ways such as "Venerable, they say he is a stream-enterer," in the absence of a declared training rule, and seeing no fault in it. And by those acknowledging in this way, whatever alms-food others produced by speaking in praise of superhuman qualities for the sake of their bellies, even those approving with pure minds, it is as if praise of superhuman qualities was spoken for the sake of the belly. Therefore, with a manner encompassing all, he said, "How indeed, monks, would you speak in praise of superhuman qualities to laypeople for the sake of your bellies?" The rest is similar to the case of the fourth pārājika. In the analysis of the training rule, the only difference is that there was pārājika and thullaccaya there, but here, because it is true, there is pācittiya and dukkaṭa. The rest is as stated.

77. "Reports a truth about an ordained monk" refers specifically to superhuman qualities. However, it is permissible to report the truth about an ordained monk who is either dying or being dragged away against their will. But it is permissible to report on the qualities of learning the scriptures and virtue even to one who is not ordained. There is no offense for the first offender. However, "to one who is insane" is not mentioned here. Why? Because those who are accomplished in view do not have insanity or derangement of mind. Even in the Mahāpaccariya, it was considered: "If one who has attained jhāna becomes insane upon losing jhāna, it should not be said that there is no offense for the reason of reporting the truth, because the truth is absent." The rest is straightforward.

Reporting a truth arises from three sources not previously mentioned: from the body, from speech, and from both body and speech. It is an action, without perception-release, unintentional, an offense by designation, a bodily action, a verbal action, two minds with wholesome and indeterminate consciousness, and two feelings with pleasant and neutral sensation.

The eighth training rule on reporting a truth.

9. Explanation of the Training Rule on Reporting a Serious Offense

78. Regarding the ninth training rule: "A serious offense (duṭṭhulla) means an offense consisting of the four pārājikas and the thirteen saṅghādisesas." In this passage, the commentaries say that "the pārājikas are mentioned to illustrate the meaning of the word duṭṭhulla, but here the saṅghādisesa is intended." Herein lies a consideration: if there were no pācittiya for reporting a pārājika, just as in the similar case of the word "ordained" in relation to monks and nuns, where a nun is not intended, and thus all except the monk are called unordained; similarly, if pārājika is not intended in the similar case of pārājika and saṅghādisesa in the word duṭṭhulla, then it should be said "a serious offense means an offense consisting of the thirteen saṅghādisesas." There, it might be argued that "one who has committed a pārājika has fallen from monkhood, therefore, one who reports his offense incurs a dukkaṭa." In that case, even one who insults would incur a dukkaṭa, and would incur only a pācittiya. For it was said: "The person is impure, having committed one of the pārājika offenses, and if, being of impure view, having made an opportunity, he speaks with the intention of insult, there is an offense of abusive language" (pārā. 389). Thus, when examined by the Pāli, only a pācittiya is seen for reporting a pārājika. Although it is seen, nevertheless, because it is stated in all the commentaries, the commentary masters are the authority here, and no other consideration is needed. And we have previously said: "The Dhamma and the Vinaya were spoken by the Buddha, which was known in the same way by his sons" (pārā. aṭṭha. 1.ganthārambhakathā). For the commentary masters know the Buddha's intention.

And this should be understood by this method. For it is said, "Except by the agreement of the monks." And the reporting by the agreement of the monks is permitted by the Blessed One for the sake of restraint in the future, to prevent falling into such an offense again, not merely to reveal the faults of that monk, nor to prevent his establishment in the dispensation. And for one who has committed a pārājika, there is no such thing as monkhood by preventing falling into such an offense again. Therefore, what is said in the commentaries, "the pārājikas are mentioned to illustrate the meaning of the word duṭṭhulla, but here the saṅghādisesa is intended," is well said.

80. Among the passages beginning with "There is agreement by the monks until the end of the offense," this agreement by the monks that is mentioned is not found anywhere else. But because it is mentioned here, having seen a monk who frequently commits offenses, thinking that "even this one will achieve restraint in the future through shame and fear in others," it should be understood that it should be done by the Saṅgha after announcing it three times for the benefit of that monk.

82. "Reports a non-serious offense, there is an offense of dukkaṭa": there is a dukkaṭa for reporting any of the five aggregates of offenses. However, in the Mahāpaccariya, even for reporting a pārājika, only a dukkaṭa is stated. "To one who is not ordained, a serious or non-serious transgression": here, the first five training rules are called serious transgressions, the rest are non-serious. It is said that emission of semen, physical contact, and self-gratification are serious transgressions for him.

83. "Reports the basis": there is no offense for one who says, "he has committed emission of semen, he has committed a serious offense, he has committed self-gratification," or "he has committed physical contact." "Reports the offense": here, there is no offense for one who says, "he has committed a pārājika, a saṅghādisesa, a thullaccaya, a pācittiya, a paṭidesanīya, a dukkaṭa, or a dubbhasita." But there is an offense only for one who, in the manner of "he has discharged semen and committed a saṅghādisesa," reports the offense in conjunction with the basis. The rest here is straightforward.

It arises from three sources: from body-mind, from speech-mind, and from body-speech-mind; it is an action, with perception-release, intentional, a mundane offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, and painful feeling.

The ninth training rule on reporting a serious offense.

10. Explanation of the Training Rule on Digging the Earth

86. Regarding the tenth training rule: "Earth that is already there and earth that is not yet there" shows both earth that is already there and earth that is not yet there. In "with few stones" and so on, the meaning should be understood as "few are the stones in it," thus "with few stones." Here, stones are to be understood as those above the size of a fist, and gravel is the size of a fist. Kathala means fragments of pots. Marumba means coarse gravel. Vālikā is just sand. "Mostly dust" means that in three parts, two parts are dust, and one is any of the stones, etc. "Not firm" means not firm in various ways, such as by reason of being used for pot-baking kilns or potter's kilns. However, that is not separate; it should be understood as one of the pure dust, etc. "Mostly gravel" means mostly gravel. It is said that in the elephant's belly, after bringing a full load of gravel, washing it in a trough, knowing the state of mostly gravel in the earth, the monks themselves dug a pond. However, the two terms "with little dust, with little clay" in the middle enter into the five categories of mostly stones, etc., for this is a showing of the distinction of those two. "Digs oneself, there is an offense of pācittiya": here, a pācittiya should be understood for each strike. "Once ordered, digs much": even if he digs the entire day, there is only one pācittiya for the one who ordered. But if he is lazy, he should be ordered again and again. For one causing him to dig by ordering him, there is a pācittiya for each utterance. This is the explanation of the Pāli.

However, this is a judgment outside the Pāli: it is permissible to say, "Dig a pond." For a pond is indeed something that is dug, therefore, this is permissible usage. This method applies to "dig a reservoir, a lake, a pit," and so on. However, it is not permissible to say, "Dig this space, dig a pond in this space." It is permissible to say, without specifying, "Dig a tuber, dig a root." It is not permissible to say, "Dig this creeper, dig a tuber or a root in this space." For those cleaning a pond, it is permissible to remove thin mud that can be bailed out with pots, but not thick mud. Dry mud cracks in the sun; there, it is permissible to remove only that which is not connected to the earth below. In a place wetted by water, there is something called a water crust, which moves with the force of the wind; it is permissible to remove that.

If the bank of ponds, etc., breaks and falls along the edge of the water, it is permissible to cut or break it if the rains are within the four months of the rainy season, but not beyond the four months. But if it falls only into water, it is permissible even if the rains are beyond the excess four months, since it is only water falling into water. If one digs a hole in a stone slab, and if fine dust falls there first, and if it has been rained on by the deity, it becomes counted as impermissible earth after the passing of four months. It is not permissible to disturb the hole when cleaning it after it has been filled with water. But if it is filled with water first, and dust falls later, it is permissible to disturb it. For even when the deity rains, it is only water falling into water. Fine dust on a flat stone becomes sticky when touched by the deity; it is also not permissible to disturb it after the passing of four months. If a termite mound has risen in an unbuilt area, it is permissible to disturb it as desired. If it rises in the open air, it is permissible only if the rains are within the four months of the rainy season. This same method applies to the clay clinging to trees, etc. This same method applies to earthworms, excrement, mice, dogs, thorny bushes, etc.

Gokaṇṭaka is the mud churned up by the hooves of cows. If there is a connection to the ground with the lower surface, it is not permissible even for one day. This same method applies to taking a lump of mud clod that has been plowed in a cultivated area. An old dwelling that has no roof or whose roof has been destroyed, having been rained on for more than four months, becomes counted as earth that has already come into being. Then, it is permissible to take the remaining roofing tiles or equipment such as gutters with the intention, "I am taking a brick, a gutter, a wall base, a floor covering, or a stone pillar." There is no offense if mud falls along with it. But there is an offense for taking wall mud. If one takes whatever falls away easily, there is no offense.

In the inner chamber, there is a pile of clay; one day, they are roofing the house with it. If it is all wet, it is considered newly-grown earth after four months. But if only the top part is wet and the inside is dry, then as much of the wet part as possible should be removed by those who make things allowable, using an allowable manner, and the rest can be shaped as desired. Because when moistened with water, it becomes newly-grown earth immediately, not otherwise.

If there is a mud wall in the open air, it is counted as newly-grown earth if it remains wet for more than four months. However, it is permissible to pick off the attached dust by patting it with a damp hand. If it is a brick wall, it stands mostly in a hard place; it is permissible to dismantle it as desired. When dismantling the earth by moving a pavilion pillar standing in the open air from here to there, it is not permissible to take it; it must be lifted straight up. The same method applies to taking any dry tree or dry stump. When going along lifting and rolling stones or trees with levers for construction, the earth is broken; if they roll it with pure intention, there is no offense. But if they intend to break the earth under that pretext, there is an offense. The same method applies to pulling branches and splitting wood on the ground.

It is not permissible to hammer or insert anything into the earth, even if it is bone needles or thorns. It is not permissible to urinate in such a way that the stream breaks the earth with force; if one does so and it breaks, there is an offense. It is not permissible to scrub with a broom to level uneven ground; it should be swept only with the round head. Some strike the ground with a staff, scratch it with their big toe, or walk back and forth, repeatedly breaking the ground, saying, "We will show the place for walking meditation"; all of this is not permissible. However, one who is practicing the ascetic's duty with effort and a pure mind may walk meditation. It is not permissible to scrub one’s hands on the ground, saying, "We will wash our hands." But it is permissible to place a damp hand on the ground and take dust without scrubbing. Some who are afflicted with itching, scabies, etc., rub their limbs on broken banks, etc.; this is not permissible.

87. Khaṇati vā khaṇāpeti vā means that one digs oneself or has another dig, even if with the big toe or with a broom bristle. Bhindati vā bhedāpeti vā means that one breaks oneself or has another break, even when merely throwing water. Dahati vā dahāpeti vā means that one burns oneself or has another burn, even when merely cooking a leaf. There are as many pācittiyas as there are places where one sets fire or has fire set. Even when cooking a leaf, it should be cooked in a place that has been previously burned. It is not permissible to place fire on unburned ground. However, it is permissible to place fire on top of a pot for cooking leaves. One places it on top of wood, and that fire, burning those, goes and burns the earth; this is not permissible. The same method applies to brick pots, etc.

Even there, it is permissible to place it only on top of bricks, etc. Why? Because they are not fuel. They are not counted as fuel for the fire. It is not permissible to set fire to dry stumps or dry trees. But if one sets it intending to extinguish it before it reaches the earth, it is permissible. If one is unable to extinguish it later, there is no offense because it is beyond one's control. While walking along holding a burning torch, if it burns in one's hand, one drops it on the ground, there is no offense. In the Mahāpaccari, it is said that it is permissible to make a fire by adding fuel only to the place where it fell. It is also stated there that all the place affected by the heat of the burned earth is permissible to dismantle. But if a bhikkhu who does not know creates fire with fire sticks and, lifting it up with his hand, says, "What should I do?" he should be told, "Burn it." If he says, "My hand is burning," he should be told, "Do it in such a way that it does not burn." But he should not be told, "Drop it on the ground." If he drops it while it is burning in his hand, there is no offense because he did not drop it intending to burn the earth. In the Kurundi, it is said that it is permissible to make a fire in the place where it fell.

88.Anāpatti imaṃ jānātiādīsu means that the meaning should be understood as: "Know the hole of this pillar, know the coarse clay, know the fine clay, give the coarse clay, give the fine clay, bring the clay, bring the dust, there is a need for clay, there is a need for dust, make the hole of this pillar allowable, make this clay allowable, make this dust allowable."

Asañciccāti means that the earth is broken while rolling stones or trees, or while going along striking with a staff; because it is broken unintentionally without intending to break it in that way, it is called unintentionally broken. Thus, there is no offense for breaking unintentionally. Asatiyāti means that while talking about something with someone else, with a distracted mind, one stands scratching the ground with a big toe or a staff; thus, there is no offense for scratching or breaking with a distracted mind. Ajānantassāti means that one does not know that the earth covered with thatch inside the inner chamber is "unallowable earth," and dismantles it with the perception that it is "allowable earth," or one does not know "I am digging, breaking, burning," but merely places digging tools, etc., for the sake of storage, or one drops fire because one’s hand is burning; thus, there is no offense for one who does not know. The rest is clear in meaning.

Threefold in origin – it arises from body and mind, from speech and mind, and from body, speech, and mind. It is an inactive offense, an offense involving intention, an offense concerning a living thing, a rule by designation, a bodily action, a verbal action, a threefold mental state, and a threefold feeling.

The Tenth Pathavīkhaṇana Sikkhāpada (Rule on Digging the Earth) is Finished.

The First Musāvāda Vagga (Section on False Speech) is Completed with the Order of Explanation.

2. Bhūtagāma Vagga (Section on Living Things)

1. Bhūtagāma Sikkhāpada Vaṇṇanā (Explanation of the Rule on Living Things)

89.In the first Sikkhāpada of the Senāsanavagga (Section on Lodgings), anādiyantoti means not accepting that statement. Dārakassa bāhuṃ ākoṭesīti means being unable to stop the raised ax, he cut off the arm of a boy who was lying in a divine palace in a tree trunk, obtained from the great king beyond the sight of humans, right at the base of the breast. In Na kho metaṃ patirūpanti etc., this is the concise explanation: It is said that in the Himalayas, there is a gathering of deities on the fortnightly days, where they ask about the law concerning trees – "Do you abide in the law concerning trees or not?" The law concerning trees means that the tree deity does not have mental displeasure when the tree is being cut. There, the deity who does not abide in the law concerning trees is not allowed to enter the gathering of deities. Thus, that deity saw both this danger of not abiding in the law concerning trees and, according to the Dhamma teaching previously heard in the presence of the Blessed One, recollected the past conduct of the Tathāgata at the time of Chaddanta and so on. Therefore, she had this thought: "This is not proper for me…to remove it." Yaṃnūnāhaṃ bhagavato etamatthaṃ āroceyyanti this occurred to her as she reflected, "This bhikkhu is someone's son; surely the Blessed One, having heard about this transgression of his, will set a limit, will prescribe a rule." Sacajja tvaṃ devateti means, "If you, deity, today." Pasaveyyāsīti means, "May you generate, may you produce." Having said this, the Blessed One, making that deity understand –

"Who controls the rising anger,
Like a charioteer controls a rolling chariot;
Him I call a charioteer, the rest are merely holders of the reins." (dha. pa. 222);

He spoke this verse. At the end of the verse, that deity was established in the fruition of stream-entry. Again, the Blessed One, teaching the Dhamma to the assembled company –

"He who subdues rising anger, as one neutralizes spreading poison with medicine;
That bhikkhu abandons this shore and the further shore, as a snake sheds its old worn-out skin." (su. ni. 1);

He spoke this verse. There, the first verse is included in the Dhammapada, the second in the Suttanipāta, but the story is in the Vinaya. Then, while teaching the Dhamma, the Blessed One, considering the dwelling place of that deity, saw a suitable place and said, "Go, deity, there is a secluded tree in such and such a place; approach it." It is said that this tree was not in the Āḷavi country but within the outer enclosure of Jetavana. The deity of that place, whose retinue belonged to a son of the gods, had passed away; therefore, it was called "secluded." From then on, that deity, having received support from the Fully Enlightened One, became an attendant of the Buddha. When there is a gathering of deities, other deities of lesser power retreat as far as the great ocean, the world-circle mountain, when deities of great power arrive. But this one sits in her own dwelling place and listens to the Dhamma. Also, whatever questions the bhikkhus ask in the first watch of the night, and the deities in the middle watch, she listens to all of that while sitting there. And the four great kings, when coming and going to attend upon the Blessed One, go only after seeing that deity.

90.Bhūtagāmapātabyatāyāti in this context, bhūtā means those that are, or have come into being; that is, they are born and grow, or have been born and grown. Gāmoti means a group; bhūtagāmo means a group of beings; or bhūtagāmo means beings that are a group. This is a designation for established green grass, trees, etc. Pātabyatā means the state of being liable to destruction; that is, it can be used at will through cutting, splitting, etc. Tassā bhūtagāmapātabyatāyati is a locative case used in the sense of a cause; the meaning is that because of the destruction of living things, there is a pācittiya.

91.Now, showing that living thing by dividing it, he said, beginning with bhūtagāmo nāma pañca bījajātānīti. There, bhūtagāmo nāmāti in order to show that when there is a living thing, it becomes a living thing, he said "pañca bījajātānī" (five kinds of seeds), so it is said in the commentaries. Even so, the phrases "yāni vā panaññānipi atthi mūle jāyantī" etc., do not fit. For root-seeds etc., do not grow in roots etc.; but those that grow in roots etc., are made into seeds; therefore, the explanation should be understood in this way – bhūtagāmo nāmāti is a term to be divided. Pañcāti is the limit of that division. Bījajātānīti is an indication of the limited Dhamma. Its meaning is – bījajātāni means born from seeds; this is a designation for trees etc. Another method – bījajātāni means seeds that are of various kinds, produced, originating with shoots and roots. With this, the gathering of ginger etc., which have shoots and roots originating after being placed in wet soil, is done.

He said beginning with ‘‘mūlabīja’’nti. Their enumeration is indeed obvious. In the definition, yāni vā panaññānipi atthi mūle jāyanti mūle sañjāyantīti, by the seed originating, the seed is shown, therefore, the meaning should be seen in this way: Yāni vā panaññānipi atthi means whatever else there is in the various kinds of roots such as āluvaka, kaseru, kamala, uppala, puṇḍarīka, kuvalaya, kanda, pāṭalimūla, in the roots, plants, creepers, and trees grow and originate; that in which they grow and originate is called root-seed, as well as turmeric etc., which is mentioned in the Pāḷi. The same method applies to stem-seeds etc. Among those that are capable of being planted as stem-seeds are ambāṭaka, indasāla, nuhīpāḷi, bhaddakaṇikāra etc., as fruit-seeds are amūlavalli, caturassavalli, kaṇavīra etc., as shoot-seeds are makaci, sumana, najayasumana etc., and as seed-seeds are amba, jambū, panasa, saṭṭhi etc., should be seen.

92. Now, regarding what was said, "pācittiya for harming plant life (bhūtagāma)," here, showing the distinction between offense and non-offense and the distinctions in what can be harmed, based on perception, he says, "perceiving seed in seed," etc. Therein, just as in "even if he eats rice made from sāli rice," etc. (ma. ni. 1.76), cooked rice made from sāli rice grains is called "sāli rice," so too, plant life that arises from a seed should be understood as being called "seed." However, the seed that has been set aside after performing the act of freeing plant life, as stated in "abstaining from harming seed-life and plant-life" (dī. ni. 1.10), etc., is a dukkaṭa object. Or, alternatively, connecting it with the initial word of the training rule's explanation, which is "what is called plant-life," that seed which is called plant-life, perceiving seed in that seed, taking knives, etc., either cutting it oneself or having another cut it, taking stones, etc., either breaking it oneself or having another break it, bringing fire near, either cooking it oneself or having another cook it, the offense is pācittiya—thus the meaning should be understood here. However, taking it literally, a pācittiya offense should not be stated for the act of harming seed that has been freed from plant life, by means of cutting, etc.

Herein is the deciding statement: pācittiya for one who injures plant life; dukkaṭa for one who injures any of the five kinds of seed-life that has been freed from plant life. Seed-life and plant life: there is some that exists in water, and some that exists on land. Therein, that which exists in water—all kinds of algae, with and without leaves, beginning with mustard seeds, mattikā, sesame seeds, etc., up to and including water-fern—should be understood as "plant life." Water-fern is rigid and rough-colored on top, soft and blue-colored underneath. Of that algae, for that which has its root descending and established in the earth, the earth is its place. That which moves in the water, the water is its place. Pācittiya for one who injures that which is established in the earth, by moving it, or transferring it to another place. Pācittiya for one who injures that which moves in the water. However, it is permissible to scatter it here and there with the hands and bathe, for all the water is its place. Therefore, it is not, by that much, transferred to another place. However, it is not permissible to deliberately lift it from the water without water; it is permissible to lift it with water and put it back in the water. If it comes out through a filter, the water should be used only after having it made allowable. For one who lifts water-lilies, lotuses, etc., water-born creepers and grasses from the water, or injures them there, pācittiya. Dukkaṭa for one who injures those that have been uprooted by others. For those go into the category of seed-life. Sesame seed, mustard seed, mattaka algae, even when lifted from the water, if not wilted, go into the category of first seed. In the Mahāpaccariya, it is said, "endless sesame seed, water-fern, etc., are objects of dukkaṭa," the reason is not seen there. In the Andhaka-aṭṭhakathā, it is said, "it is not complete plant life, therefore dukkaṭa," that too does not fit, for pācittiya is stated for plant life, dukkaṭa for seed-life. An incomplete plant life is a third category that has not come up either in the Pāḷi or in the commentaries. If it goes into the category of seed-life, that too is not fitting, because such a seed-life has an origin in non-plant life. Moreover, "in serious and light offenses, the serious should be established" is a characteristic of the Vinaya.

That which exists on land: what remains of cut trees is called a green stump. Therein, the stump of kakudha, karañja, piyaṅgu, jackfruit, sāla, etc., grows upwards; that is included in plant life. The stump of palmyra palms, coconut palms, etc., does not grow upwards; that is included in seed-life. However, the stump of a banana tree that has not borne fruit is included in plant life; that of one that has borne fruit, in seed-life. However, a banana tree that has borne fruit is included in plant life as long as the leaves are blue, so too a bamboo that has borne fruit. But when it withers, starting from the top, then it goes into the category of seed-life. Which seed-life? Fruit seed-life. What arises from that? Nothing. For if something were to arise, it would go into the category of plant life. After cutting down indasāla, etc., trees, they make a pile; even if branches the size of jewels emerge from the sticks in the pile, they go into the category of seed-life. There, they bury it in the ground for the purpose of a pavilion, or for a hedge, or for planting creepers; when roots and leaves have emerged, they again go into the category of plant life. However, if only roots or only leaves have emerged, they are included in seed-life.

Whatever seeds that have been placed in the earth after being sprinkled with water, or that have been placed in pots, etc., after putting in moist soil, all those are seeds even if only a root or only a leaf has emerged. Even if roots and a sprout above emerge, they are still seeds as long as the sprout is not green. However, when the leaves of mung beans, etc., have sprouted, or when the sprout of rice, etc., is green and of blue-leaf color, they go into the category of plant life. For palmyra palms, first a root emerges like a boar's tusk. Even after emerging, it is still seed-life as long as the leaf-stem does not emerge above. After breaking the husk of a coconut, a sprout emerges like an ivory needle; it is still seed-life as long as there is no blue leaf-stem like a deer's horn. Even if a leaf-stem of that kind has arisen without a root emerging, it goes into the category of rootless plant life.

Ambaṭṭhi, etc., should be decided in accordance with rice, etc. Any vine or other thing that grows on a tree and covers the tree, the tree is its place; for one who injures that or lifts it from there, pācittiya. There is a rootless creeper that wraps around branches of forest bushes like a finger ring; for that too, this is the decision. On house facades, walls, railings, shrines, etc., there is blue-colored algae; as long as two or three leaves have not arisen, it goes into the category of first seed. When leaves have arisen, it is an object of pācittiya. Therefore, it is not permissible to apply even whitewash in such places. It is permissible for one who is not fully ordained to apply a coating of oil on top of what has been coated. If dry algae remains during the hot season, it is permissible to sweep it away with a broom, etc. Algae on the outside of water pots, etc., is an object of dukkaṭa; inside, it is not for use. Even the kaṇṇaka on tooth sticks, cakes, etc., is not for use. For it was said, "if a wall that has been prepared with red ochre is covered with kaṇṇaka, a cloth should be soaked, squeezed, and rubbed on it" (mahāva. 66).

Stony types: stone daddu, algae, seleyyaka, etc., that are not green-colored and without leaves, are objects of dukkaṭa. A mushroom is an object of dukkaṭa as long as it is a bud. From the time it blooms, it is not for use. However, when taking a mushroom from a living tree, he injures the bark of the tree; therefore, there is pācittiya there. The same method applies to tree fungus. However, if fungus of indasāla, kakudha, etc., falls off the tree and remains, there is no offense for taking it. It is permissible to take sap that has fallen off the tree and remains, or that is attached to a dry tree. It is not permissible from a living tree. The same method applies to lac. It is pācittiya for one who shakes a tree and causes yellowed leaves or ripened kaṇikāra flowers, etc., to fall. The same method applies to one who cuts letters out of soft indasāla, nuhī trunks, etc., or palmyra leaves, etc., that grow there, due to scrupulousness of the hand.

It is permissible for novices to bend a branch down and give it to them when picking flowers. However, they should not scent water with those flowers. A novice should be lifted up by one who wishes to scent water and made to pick them. A branch with fruit should not be bent down by one who wishes to eat it himself. A novice should be lifted up and made to take the fruit. When uprooting any bush or vine, they should not take it together with the novices and pull it. However, for the purpose of arousing their enthusiasm, it is permissible to take hold of the end as if showing them the manner of pulling without pulling. If the branches of trees grow, for those branches, if taken for the sake of bees' honey, etc., without having it made allowable, there is dukkaṭa for one who scratches the bark or leaves, even with a nail. The same method applies to fresh ginger, etc. However, if roots arise in that which has been made allowable and placed in a cool place, it is permissible to cut it in the upper part. If a sprout arises, it is permissible to cut it in the lower part. It is not permissible if both a root and a blue sprout have arisen.

Cuts or has cut: even if intending to cut grass with a broom-bristle, while sweeping the ground, he either cuts it himself or has another cut it. Breaks or has broken: even while walking, intending that what should be cut be cut, what should be broken be broken, and that he will show the place for walking, deliberately stepping on it with his feet, he either breaks the grass, vines, etc., himself or has another break them. Even if it breaks while making a knot in grass or a vine, a knot should not be made. However, on palmyra palm trees, etc., they fasten wooden monkeys, tie thorns, in order to prevent thieves from climbing; it is not permissible for a bhikkhu to do so. If the wooden monkey is only attached to the tree, it does not harm the tree, it is permissible. It is permissible to say, "cut the tree, cut the vine, uproot the tuber or root," because it is unrestricted. However, it is not permissible to say, specifying, "cut this tree." Even saying, taking a name, "cut, break, uproot this mango tree, square vine, colocasia tuber, muñja grass, asukarukkha bark," etc., is unrestricted. For saying, "this mango tree," etc., is specified; that is not permissible.

Cooks or has cooked: even if intending to cook a leaf, deliberately making a fire on top of grass, etc., he either cooks it himself or has another cook it—all of that should be understood in the manner stated in the training rule on digging the earth. However, it is permissible to say, without specifying, "cook mung beans, cook lentils," etc. It is not permissible to say, "cook these mung beans, cook these lentils."

There is no offense, knowing this, etc.: the meaning should be seen as, "know this root medicine, give this root or leaf, bring this tree or vine, this flower or fruit or leaf is needed, make this tree or vine or fruit allowable." To this extent, freeing from plant life is done. However, when using it, it should again be made allowable for the purpose of freeing from seed-life.

The permissibility of items should be understood here according to this Sutta: "I allow, monks, the use of fruit made permissible in five ways for a monastic: scorched by fire, cut by a knife, pared by a nail, seedless, or with the seed removed." (pāci. 239) Here, "scorched by fire (aggiparijita)" means scorched, burnt, or touched by fire. "Cut by a knife (satthaparijita)" means cut or pierced by a knife. The same method applies to paring by a nail. Seedless fruits and those with seeds removed are permissible by themselves. When making something permissible with fire, it should be made permissible with any kind of fire, whether from wood or cow dung, or even with a heated piece of metal. And that should be done by touching a part of it and saying "kappiya" (permissible). When making something permissible with a knife, it should be done with any kind of metal knife, even with the tip or blade of a needle or nail-cutter, by showing a cut or piercing and saying "kappiya". When making something permissible with a nail, it should not be done with a decaying nail. However, the nails of humans, or animals like lions, tigers, leopards, monkeys, and birds are sharp, and it can be done with those. The hooves of animals like horses, buffaloes, pigs, deer, or cattle are too sharp and should not be used; if used, it is as if not done. But elephant nails are not hooves, so it is acceptable to use them. Those which are acceptable to use, it must be done by showing a cut or piercing, saying "kappiya", either with those that grew there or with those taken after uprooting.

Here, even if there is a mountain-sized heap or a thousand trees of seeds, and they are cut and tied together, or a large bundle of sugarcane is tied up, once one seed or tree branch or sugarcane is made permissible, all is made permissible. If sugarcane and wood are tied together, and one pierces the wood thinking to make the sugarcane permissible, it is acceptable. But if one pierces the rope or vine with which they are tied, it is not acceptable. If they bring a basket filled with pieces of sugarcane, once one piece is made permissible, all is made permissible. If they bring rice mixed with spices like pepper, it is acceptable to pierce even the rice soup when told to "make it permissible". The same method applies to sesame seeds, rice, etc. But things mixed in porridge do not remain together as one; there, each one must be pierced and made permissible. If the pulp inside fruits like wood apples moves around after the shell is removed, it should be broken up and made permissible. If it is one mass, it is acceptable to do it on the shell.

Without intention (asañcicca): If one is rolling stones or trees, or pulling a branch, or striking the ground with a staff while walking, and grasses are cut, those are considered unintentionally cut (asañcicca chinnāni nāma honti) because one did not intentionally cut them. Thus, there is no offense for cutting without intention.

Unmindfully (asatiyā): If one is standing, cutting grass or vines with a toe or hand while talking to someone about something else, there is no offense for cutting unmindfully.

Without knowing (ajānantassa): Here, one does not know that there is seed-life or plant-life within, nor does one know that one is cutting. One simply places a stick, a heap of straw, a digging tool, or a hoe for storage, or drops a burning hand onto it; if grasses are cut or burned there, there is no offense. However, in the commentaries on the Pārājika regarding human form, it is said in all the commentaries: "If a monk is oppressed by a tree or has fallen into a pit and is able to get out by cutting the tree or digging the ground, it should not be done by oneself even for the sake of one's life. But another monk may dig the ground or cut the tree, or cut a small stick from a fresh tree, or roll away that tree and help him out; there is no offense." The reason is not seen there. "I allow, monks, to make a counter-fire when being burnt by a wildfire, to make a protective barrier" (cūḷava. 283), only this sutta is seen. If one were to follow this, this distinction "it is not acceptable for oneself, but it is acceptable for another" (attano na vaṭṭati, aññassa vaṭṭatīti) cannot be obtained. If one does it for oneself, one does it with selfish attachment and an unwholesome mind; but another does it with compassion, therefore there is no offense? This is also without reason. For one incurs this offense even with a wholesome mind. But since it is said in all the commentaries, it cannot be rejected. The justification here should be sought. Or one should go with faith in the commentary masters (Aṭṭhakathācariyānaṃ vā saddhāya gantabbanti). The rest is self-explanatory.

Triple arising: Arises from body and mind, speech and mind, and body, speech, and mind. It is an inactive offense (kiriyaṃ), not subject to removal by confession (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentional, an offense by rule (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), a bodily action, a verbal action, a three-fold consciousness (ticittaṃ), a three-fold feeling (tivedananti).

The First Training Rule on Plant Life

2. Explanation of the Training Rule on Equivocation

94. In the second training rule: Having engaged in improper conduct (anācāraṃ ācaritvā) means having done what should not be done; it means having incurred an offense through the doors of body and speech. Deals with one thing in terms of another (aññenaññaṃ paṭicarati) means dealing with one statement by means of another, covering up or concealing it; now, showing the method of dealing with it, he said, "Who has offended? (ko āpanno)" etc. Here is the connection of statements: It seems that seeing some transgression, when being questioned about the offense in the midst of the Sangha, "Friend, you have incurred an offense (āvuso, āpattiṃ āpannosī)," he says, "Who has offended? (ko āpanno)". When told "You (tato tva)," he says, "What have I offended? (ahaṃ kiṃ āpanno)". Then when told "A pācittiya or a dukkaṭa (pācittiyaṃ vā dukkaṭaṃ vā)," asking about the case, he says, "In what have I offended? (ahaṃ kismiṃ āpanno)". Then when told "In such and such a case (asukasmiṃ nāma vatthusmi)," he asks, "How have I offended, doing what have I offended? (ahaṃ kathaṃ āpanno, kiṃ karonto āpannomhī)". Then when told "Having done such and such, you have offended (idaṃ nāma karonto āpanno)," he says, "What are you saying? (kaṃ bhaṇathā)". Then when told "We are saying that (taṃ bhaṇāmā)," he says, "What are you saying? (kiṃ bhaṇathā)".

To impose (ropetū) an equivocator means to impose an equivocator; it means to establish. To impose (ropetū) a harasser; the same method applies in this case.

98. Pācittiya for equivocating (aññavādake) and harassing (vihesake): Here, one who speaks one thing in terms of another is an equivocator (aññavādakaṃ); this is the name for dealing with one thing in terms of another. One who harasses is a harasser (vihesakaṃ); this is the name for being silent; in that equivocating harasser (aññavādake vihesake). Pācittiya (pācittiya) means a double pācittiya is stated for the two offenses.

100. When the equivocator is imposed (āropite aññavādake) means when the equivocator is not imposed by a formal act. When the harasser is imposed (āropite vihesake); the same method applies in this case.

101. In a lawful act (dhammakamme), aware (saññī) it is a lawful act: In these cases, if that act of imposing an equivocator or a harasser has been done, and if it is a lawful act, and if that monk is aware that it is a lawful act, and he makes (karoti) an equivocator and a harasser, then he incurs a pācittiya offense for that equivocating and harassing; the meaning should be understood in this way.

102. Not knowing, he asks (Ajānanto pucchatī) means not knowing about the offense or the state of having offended, he asks, "What are you saying? I do not know (kiṃ tumhe bhaṇatha, ahaṃ na jānāmī)". Or a sick person does not speak (Gilāno vā na kathetī) means there is such a disease in his mouth that he cannot speak. Or a quarrel (bhaṇḍanaṃ vā) of the Sangha: In these cases, understanding that a quarrel, dispute, or disagreement of the Sangha will arise in the midst of the Sangha due to that cause, and thinking, "May that not happen," he does not speak; the meaning should be understood in this way. The rest is self-explanatory.

Triple arising: Arises from body and mind, speech and mind, and body, speech, and mind. It may be an inactive offense (kiriyaṃ), it may be an non-active offense (akiriyaṃ); for one who deals with one thing in terms of another, it is an inactive offense, for one who harasses by being silent, it is a non-active offense, subject to removal by confession (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentional, an offense against the world (lokavajjaṃ), a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, a painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Second Training Rule on Equivocation

3. Explanation of the Training Rule on Disparagement

103. In the third training rule: Monks disparage (ujjhāpentī) Dabba Mallaputta (dabbaṃ mallaputtaṃ bhikkhū ujjhāpentī) means those monks cause the venerable one to be disrespected, look down upon with contempt, or cause them to think poorly of him, by saying things like "Dabba Mallaputta does things out of favoritism (chandāya dabbo mallaputto)". The characteristics here should be understood according to the rules of grammar (saddasatthānusārena). Ojjhāpentī is also a reading. This is the meaning. Out of favoritism (chandāyā) means out of favoritism, partiality; the intention is that they arrange fine things for their own friends and acquaintances (attano attano sandiṭṭhasambhattānaṃ paṇītāni paññāpetīti adhippāyo). They publicize (khiyyantī) means they proclaim, saying "Dabba Mallaputta does things out of favoritism (chandāya dabbo mallaputto)" etc.

105. Pācittiya for disparaging (ujjhāpanake) and publicizing (khiyyanake): Here, the speech by which they disparage is disparaging (ujjhāpanakaṃ). And that by which they publicize is publicizing (khiyyanakaṃ). In that disparaging and publicizing (ujjhāpanake khiyyanake). Pācittiya (pācittiya) means a double pācittiya is stated for the two offenses.

106. Disparaging (Ujjhāpanakaṃ) means an ordained monk, agreed upon by the Sangha, one who arranges lodgings (senāsanapaññāpakaṃ) ...pe... one who distributes sparingly (appamattakavissajjanakaṃ): The connection of these terms is with "intending to cause trouble (maṅkukattukāmo)". However, on the basis of "intending to make him unworthy (avaṇṇaṃ kattukāmo), intending to make him lose his reputation (ayasaṃ kattukāmo)," the case endings should be changed to "of an ordained monk (upasampannassā)" etc. among "ordained monk (upasampanna)" etc. Here, in "he disparages (ujjhāpeti) or publicizes (khiyyati), there is a pācittiya offense," since having extracted the matrix term "publicizing is (khiyyanakaṃ nāmā)", the exposition already given of the term "disparaging is (ujjhāpanakaṃ nāmā)" should be repeated, and since there is no other distinction like in the training rule on equivocation, it should be understood that the conclusion alone is made together without separately extracting and distinguishing. In "In a lawful act (dhammakamme), aware it is a lawful act," if that act of making an ordained monk with agreement is a lawful act, and if that monk is aware that it is a lawful act, and he makes (karoti) disparaging and publicizing, then he incurs a pācittiya offense for that disparaging and publicizing; the meaning should be understood in this way.

He disparages (ujjhāpeti) or publicizes (khiyyati) an unordained monk (anupasampannaṃ): Here, it means he disparages (ujjhāpeti avajānāpeti) another unordained monk, one who is ordained and agreed upon by the Sangha, or he publicizes (khiyyatīti) that offense in his presence. An ordained monk (Upasampannaṃ) not agreed upon by the Sangha (saṅghena asammataṃ) means one not agreed upon by a formal act, but merely one upon whom the Sangha has placed a burden with the words "this is your responsibility," or one who voluntarily bears that burden for the comfortable dwelling of the monks, or one who does such a task where two or three monks reside. Here, in "An unordained monk (Anupasampannaṃ), whether agreed upon or not agreed upon by the Sangha (saṅghena sammataṃ vā asammataṃ vā)," although it is not appropriate to give thirteen agreements to an unordained monk, still, referring to one who had an agreement given at the time of ordination but later remained in the state of being unordained, it is said, "agreed upon by the Sangha (saṅghena sammataṃ vā)". However, referring to a knowledgeable novice (byattassa sāmaṇerassa) upon whom a burden has been placed by the Sangha or by a monk agreed upon, saying, "You should do this task (tvaṃ idaṃ kammaṃ karohī)," it is said, "not agreed upon (asammataṃ vā)". The rest here is self-explanatory.

Triple arising: Arises from body and mind, speech and mind, and body, speech, and mind. It is an active offense (kiriyaṃ), subject to removal by confession (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentional, an offense against the world (lokavajjaṃ), a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, a painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Third Training Rule on Disparagement

4. Explanation of the First Training Rule on Lodgings

108. In the fourth training rule: In the winter season (hemantike kāle) means in the winter time, the time of snowfall. Warming their bodies (Kāyaṃ otāpentā) means sitting on benches and chairs, warming their bodies in the sunlight. When the time is announced (Kāle ārocite) means when any time for rice-gruel or meals is announced. It is covered (Ovaṭṭhaṃ hotī) means it is covered and wet with snowfall.

110.Avassikasaṅketeti: "vassika" means the months of the rains, thus, if it is not designated in this way, then four months in the cold season and four in the hot season, meaning eight months.Maṇḍape vāti: either in a pavilion made of branches or a pavilion made of leaves.Rukkhamūle vāti: under any tree.Yattha kākā vā kulalā vā na ūhadantīti: These crows and kulala birds, or other birds, that live making nests as a permanent dwelling, do not abandon that lodging, I allow (leaving it) at the foot of such a tree. Therefore, it is suitable to leave (it) at the foot of a tree where birds go to rest after foraging. But it should not be left at the foot of a tree in which they live making nests as a permanent dwelling. From the statement "eight months," even in those regions where it does not rain during the rainy season, it is not suitable to leave (it) for four months. From the statement "Avassikasaṅkete," in places where it rains in the cold season, it is not suitable to leave (it) in the open even in the cold season. But in the hot season, everywhere the sky is clear with no clouds, in such a time it is suitable to leave a bed or chair in the open for some reason.

Even an abbhokāsika (one who dwells in the open) should know the practice. If he has a personal cot, he should sleep on that. When taking a Saṅghika (community property) one, a cot without cane or wicker should be taken. If that is not available, an old cot should be taken. If even that is not available, a newly woven one or one with supports should be taken. But having taken one, he should not, thinking "I am one who dwells at the foot of a grand tree, one who dwells in a grand open space," set it up in the open air or at the foot of a tree at an unseemly time without even making a robe-hut. But if even a robe-hut made with a four-folded robe cannot protect (him) completely, and there are sattāhavaddalika etc., it is suitable because it conforms to the bhikkhu's body.</line

People, with minds pleased by the virtuous conduct of those who dwell in leaf huts in the forest, give new beds and chairs, (saying) "Use (this) with communal use." When departing after dwelling there, (they) should send (them) to a neighboring monastery to bhikkhus who share (their) possessions; if there are no sharers, (they) should leave (them) in a rainless place; if there is no rainless place, (they) should hang (them) on a tree and depart. In the courtyard of a Cetiya, having taken a broom, either the courtyard of the dining hall or the uposatha hall, or having swept and washed one of the enclosure, day-quarters, fire hall, etc., again the broom should be put back in its place. The same method (applies) even to one sweeping the rest after taking (the broom) from one of the uposatha hall etc.

If a bhikkhu intends to go sweeping the alms-round path, having swept, if there is a hall on the path, it should be left there. If there is not, having considered that clouds have not formed, if he knows that "as long as I leave the village, it will not rain," he should leave (it) anywhere and, returning again, should put (it) in its usual place. If, knowing that it will rain, he leaves (it) in the open, it is a duukkaṭa, as stated in the Mahāpaccariya. But if brooms are placed in various places for sweeping, it is suitable to sweep each place and leave (them) there. One sweeping the assembly hall should know the practice. Here is the practice: sand should be removed starting from the middle towards the footrests. Rubbish should be taken in the hands and thrown outside.

111.Masārakoti: made by drilling into the legs of the bed and inserting pegs.Bundikābaddhoti: made in the manner of a couch by clamping the bed legs with pegs.Kuḷīrapādakoti: made with legs similar to those of a crab or scorpion. Or any bed with crooked legs is called kuḷīrapādako.Āhaccapādakoti: But this, "the bed called āhaccapādako is made by drilling into the limbs," thus it is stated in the Pali itself later, therefore the bed made by drilling pegs, inserting the tip of the leg into them, and putting a pin on top should be understood as "āhaccapādako." The same method (applies) to a chair. Anto saṃveṭhetvā baddhaṃ hotīti: it is bound having made a shape wide at the bottom and top, narrow in the middle, like a drum; it seems that they even cover it with lion or tiger skin in the middle. There is no unallowable skin here. For a lodging is suitable even if it is made of gold, therefore that is very valuable. Anupasampannaṃ santharāpeti tassa palibodhoti: he who has it spread out, has an encumbrance.Leḍḍupātaṃ atikkamantassa āpatti pācittiyassāti: for one exceeding a stone's throw of a man of medium strength, there is a pācittiya.

Here is a determination in this case: an elder, having finished his meal in the dining hall, orders a young one, "Go, spread out the bed or chair in the day-quarters." He does so and sits down. The elder, wandering as he pleases, goes there and places his bag or upper robe, from then on there is an encumbrance for the elder. If, sitting down and going himself, he neither removes (it) nor has (it) removed, there is a pācittiya for exceeding a stone's throw. But if the elder, without placing his bag or upper robe there, while pacing, says to the young one, "Go away," he should be told, "This is the bed, venerable sir." If the elder knows the practice, he should say, "You go, I will put it in its usual place." If he is foolish, one who does not follow the proper conduct, he threatens the young one, "Go away, do not stand here, I will not allow (you) either to sit or lie down." The young one, having received permission (to leave) with the words "May you lie down comfortably, venerable sir," should pay respects and leave. When he has gone, the encumbrance is with the elder himself. The offense for him should be understood in the same way as before.

Now, if at the moment of the order, the young one says, "Venerable sir, I have some business to do, such as washing my bowl etc.," and the elder, having said to him, "You spread (it) out and go," goes out of the dining hall and goes elsewhere, it should be made (removed) by moving the feet. If he goes there and sits down, the offense is incurred in the same way as before for exceeding a stone's throw. But if the elder orders a novice, even if the novice, having spread out the bed or chair there and sat down, while going elsewhere from the dining hall, it should be made (removed) by moving the feet. If, having gone and sat down, at the time of going again, it should be made (removed) with an offense for exceeding a stone's throw. But if, while ordering, he orders (him) having spread out the bed or chair there and sat down, he may go and come as he wishes. But for one going without putting (it) in its usual place himself, there is a pācittiya for exceeding a stone's throw. Having spread out beds and chairs in an assembly in between, when leaving, it should be said to the ārāmikas "Return this." For those leaving without saying (so), there is an offense for exceeding a stone's throw.

There is (an event) called the Great Dhamma Sermon; there they spread out beds and chairs having brought (them) from the uposatha hall and from the dining hall. The residents alone have the encumbrance. If the visitors take (them, saying) "This is for our preceptor, this is for (our) teacher," from then on the encumbrance is with them alone. At the time of leaving, for those exceeding a stone's throw without putting (them) in their usual place, there is an offense. Again, it is stated in the Mahāpaccariya – "As long as others do not sit down, the burden is on those by whom (it) was spread out. When others have come and sat down, the burden is on those who have sat down. If they leave without removing (it) or having (it) removed, it is a duukkaṭa. Why? Because it was spread out without being ordered." When (a seat) is spread out on the Dhamma seat, as long as the inviter or the Dhamma speaker does not come, the encumbrance is on those who spread (it) out, when he has come and sat down, the encumbrance is on him. The Dhamma sermon lasts a whole day and night, one inviter or Dhamma speaker gets up, another sits down, whoever comes and sits down, the burden is on him. But the one getting up should leave after saying "This seat is your burden." Even if, while the other has not yet come, the one who sat down first gets up and goes, and while he is still within reach, the other comes and sits down, the one who got up and went should not be made (liable) for an offense. But if, while the other has not yet come, the one who sat down first gets up and exceeds a stone's throw from the seat, he should be made (liable) for an offense. And everywhere, "for exceeding a stone's throw, a duukkaṭa on the first step, a pācittiya on the second" – this is the method stated in the Mahāpaccariya.

112.Cimilikaṃ vātiādīsu:cimilikā means (a layer) made to protect the color of the ground prepared with plaster etc., spreading that underneath, they spread a rush mat on top.Uttarattharaṇaṃnāma: means a top-spread, a covering to be spread on top of beds and chairs.Bhūmattharaṇaṃnāma: means a product made of rush mat etc. to be spread on the ground.Taṭṭikaṃnāma: a mat made of palm leaves or wicker.Cammakhaṇḍonāma: any skin, even of lions, tigers, leopards, bears etc. For in the commentaries, no skin prohibited for use as a lodging is seen, therefore the prohibition should be understood as avoiding lion skin etc. Pādapuñchanīnāma: made of ropes or rags for wiping the feet.Phalakapīṭhaṃnāma: a chair made of planks. Or even planks and chairs made of wood; by this all wooden goods etc. are included. But it is stated in detail in the Mahāpaccariya – "for one leaving in the open a stand, a bowl cover, a foot stool, a palm fan, a leaf fan, any wooden goods, even a water scoop and a water conch, there is a duukkaṭa." But this method is shown in the second training rule in the Great Commentary. Having cooked dye in the open, all the dye vessel, dye scoop, dye trough should be returned to the fire hall. If there is no fire hall, it should be left in a rainless cave. If even that is not available, it is suitable to go having placed (it) in such a place where bhikkhus can see while looking around.

Aññassa puggaliketi: in the property of one in whom trust does not arise, there is a duukkaṭa. But in the property of one in whom trust arises, it is like one's own personal property, as stated in the Mahāpaccariya etc.

113.Āpucchaṃ gacchatīti: whichever bhikkhu or novice or ārāmika is modest, he regards (it) as his own encumbrance; for him who goes having asked such a one, there is no offense.Otāpento gacchatīti: he goes warming (it) in the sun, (thinking) "I will come and remove (it)"; for one going like that, there is no offense.Kenaci palibuddhaṃ hotīti: the lodging is disturbed by someone, this is the meaning. Even if an elder bhikkhu makes (it) get up and takes (it), even if a yaksha or a ghost comes and sits down, or some lord comes and takes (it), the lodging is disturbed. Even if lions, tigers etc. come and stand in that place, the lodging is indeed disturbed. Thus, for one going without removing (it) when it is disturbed by someone, there is no offense.Āpadāsūti: in dangers to life and the holy life. The rest is clear indeed.

Kathina-origination: it originates from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; it is active and inactive, neither perception nor cessation, unintentional, an offense by designation, a bodily action, a verbal action, tri-citta, tri-vedana.

The fourth, First Lodging Training Rule.

5. Explanation of the Second Lodging Training Rule

116.In the Second Lodging Training Rule – bhisīti: either a bed cushion or a chair cushion. The cimilika etc. are the same as the kinds stated in the previous training rule.Nisīdananti: should be understood as having a border.Paccattharaṇanti: only so much is stated as pāvāro kojavo.Tiṇasanthāroti: a spread of any kind of grass. The same method (applies) to a spread of leaves.Parikkhepaṃ atikkamantassāti: here, for one exceeding the first step, there is a duukkaṭa, on exceeding the second, a pācittiya. For that which is not delimited, the surrounding area is two stone's throws from the lodging.

129.In the eighth training rule – uparivehāsakuṭiyā means a two-storied dwelling with a covered upper level, or a three-storied or more dwelling. Mañcaṃ sahasā abhinisīdī means he sat on the couch, suddenly overwhelming and covering it. Or, this is a locative usage in the sense of location; it means he sat on the couch. Abhī is merely a prefix for the sake of embellishing the word. Nippatitvā means having fallen or gone out. Because no pegs were put on it, it came out. Vissaramakāsī means he made a discordant sound, the sound of a sick person.

131.Vehāsakuṭi means not hitting the head of a man of medium height means a dwelling where the head of a man of average height does not hit the lowest rafters; this shows what kind of vehāsakuṭi is intended here, not the definition of vehāsakuṭi. For any two-storied dwelling with a covered upper level or a three-storied dwelling is called a "vehāsakuṭi." But here, one that does not hit the head is intended. Regarding sitting down suddenly, etc., the difference in offenses should be understood according to the mode of application in the manner already stated.

133.Avehāsakuṭiyā means no offense in a leaf hut or similar structure built on the ground. It is not possible to cause harm to another there. Sīsaghaṭṭāyā means even in a dwelling where the head hits, there is no offense. It is not possible to walk there below the upper story without stooping; therefore, since it is a place where one cannot move freely, harm to another will not occur. Heṭṭhā aparibhogaṃ hotī means even where the space below is not used because materials, goods, etc., are stored there, there is no offense. Padarasañcitaṃ hotī means even if the upper level is densely covered with wooden planks or has been plastered with stucco etc., there is no offense. Paṭāṇi dinnā hotī means even if pegs have been put at the bottom of the legs of the couch or chair, so that they do not fall down even when one sits on them, there is no offense in sitting on such a couch or chair. Tasmiṃ ṭhito means even if he stands on a couch or chair with firmly fixed legs and takes down or hangs up a robe or anything else that is hanging on a nāgadantaka or similar projection above, there is no offense for him. The rest is straightforward. Eḷakalomasamuṭṭhānaṃ – it arises from body and from mind connected with the body, it is an act, it is without perception of release, it is unintentional, it is an offense by designation, it is a bodily action, it is tri-citta, it is tri-vedana.

The Vehāsakuṭi training rule, the eighth.

9. Description of the Mahallakavihāra Training Rule

135.In the ninth training rule – yāva dvārakosā means here dvārakoso is the space around the piṭṭhasaṅghāṭa, as far as the kavāṭavitthāra. But in the Mahāpaccari, it is said "from the dvārabāha onward, one and a half hatthas." But in the Kurundi, it says "the size of the door leaves on both sides of the door." In the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, it is said "a door leaf can be one and a half hatthas, or two hatthas, or one and a half hatthas," which is well said. Indeed, with that in mind, the Blessed One also made this excellent specification, "a hand's reach around the piṭṭhasaṅghāṭa." Aggaḷaṭṭhapanāyā means for the placing of the door bolt, along with its leaves; it means for the stable condition of the door frame along with its leaves. Dvāraṭṭhapanāyā this word division is also spoken with this meaning in mind. Here the meaning is this: the door leaf, being light and easily turned, strikes the wall when opening, and the door frame when closing. By that striking, the wall shakes, and from that the plaster moves, and having moved, it either becomes loose or falls off. Therefore, the Blessed One said, "up to the door space, for the placement of the bolt." Although it is not stated in the mātikā or the word division "this should be done," in the aṭṭhuppatti, it is seen from the context of "he repeatedly had it covered, he repeatedly had it plastered," that it should be plastered or have plaster applied repeatedly up to the door space for the placement of the bolt.

Ālokasandhiparikammāyā means here ālokasandhī means windows are called vātapānakavāṭakā; these too, when opened, strike the wall area even as much as a vidatthi or more. Here the treatment is obtained in all directions; therefore, the meaning here is that in all directions, a space the size of the kavāṭavitthāra should be plastered or have plaster applied for the sake of repairing the āloksandhi.

Setavaṇṇanti etc. is not in the mātikā or the word division. By this, it is permitted in the word division itself that there is no heaviness of the dwelling, therefore all this should be done as one pleases.

‘‘dvatticchadanassā’’tiādi is said. There, dvatticchadanassa pariyāya means two or three courses of roofing; pariyāya means boundary, the meaning is that two boundaries or three boundaries should be determined. Appaharite ṭhitenā means by one standing in a non-green area. Harita here means both pubbaṇṇa, kinds of seven grains, and aparaṇṇa, kinds of mugga beans, māsa beans, sesame, kulattha beans, bottle gourds, ash gourds, etc. Therefore, he said – "harita means pubbaṇṇa and aparaṇṇa."

Sace harite ṭhito adhiṭṭhāti, āpatti dukkaṭassā here, even if a seed sown in a field has not yet matured, but will mature when rain falls, that too goes under the designation "green." Therefore, one standing in such a field should not determine; one should determine only when standing in a non-green area. Even there, this is the limit: sitting on the side of the roof ridge, the gable end, or the finial, looking down at the edge of the roofing, one sees the part of the ground where one is standing, and the part of the ground where one is standing, sees the one sitting above; determination should be done in that place. One is not allowed to stand inside that and determine, even if it is non-green. Why? Because this is the falling space for the dwelling if it were to fall.

136.Maggena chādentassā means here, maggena chādanaṃ means roofing straight without surrounding; this is obtained with bricks, stones, and plaster. Dve magge adhiṭṭhahitvā means if two pathways are poorly roofed, it is allowable to remove them and roof them again and again; therefore, as one wishes; one should determine two pathways and depart after ordering about the third pathway, "now roof it like this." Pariyāyenā means with a surrounding. Such roofing, however, is obtained with grass and leaves. Therefore here too, as one wishes, one should determine two surroundings and depart after ordering about the third surrounding, "now roof it like this." If one does not depart, one should stand silently. All this roofing should be understood as being on top of roofing. Indeed, thinking that a dwelling covered with layers upon layers will not leak for a long time, they roof it in this way. Tato ce uttari means above the three pathways or surroundings, in the fourth pathway or surrounding.

137.Karaḷe karaḷe means in a handful of grass, in a handful of grass. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origin: it arises from action, without perception of release, it is unintentional, it is an offense by designation, it is bodily action, it is verbal action, it is tri-citta, it is tri-vedana.

The Mahallakavihāra Training Rule, the ninth.

10. The Sappāṇaka Training Rule

140.In the tenth training rule – jānaṃ sappāṇaka means knowing that it is sappāṇaka in whatever way it is. Siñceyya vā siñcāpeyya vā means either he himself waters with that water, or he orders another and has them water. In the Pāḷi, however, the meaning of such statements as "siñceyya means he himself waters" should be understood in the manner previously stated.

There, for one who waters without interrupting the stream, there is one offense for one water pot. This method applies to all divisions. But for one who interrupts the stream, there is an offense for each effort. He directly faces the mātikā, even if it flows for a day, there is only one offense. If he ties it there and leads it from one place to another, there is an offense for each effort. Even if he throws a cartload of grass into the water with one effort, there is only one offense. But for one who throws in each blade of grass or leaf, there is an offense for each effort. The same method applies to plaster and other materials such as wood or cow dung. This, however, is not said with reference to great water, but it should be understood as said with reference to such water as, when thrown on grass or plaster, is used up or becomes turbid, or where living beings die.

Threefold origin: it arises from mind connected with the body, from mind connected with speech, and from mind connected with body and speech, it is an act, with perception of release, it is intentional, it is an offense by designation, it is bodily action, it is verbal action, it is tri-citta, it is tri-vedana.

The Sappāṇaka Training Rule, the tenth.

The second Senāsana Section is complete according to the order of description.

3. The Ovāda Section

1. Description of the Ovāda Training Rule

141-144.In the first training rule of the Bhikkhunī Section – lābhino hontī means here, the bhikkhunīs do not give to them, nor do they have given, but the daughters of good families, who have gone forth from great families, say to relatives who have come to them asking, "From whom do the venerable ones receive advice, instruction, and questioning?", naming the eighty great disciples, and according to the conversation, they describe their virtues, such as their qualities of sīla, learning, conduct, birth, and lineage. Such existing virtues are indeed fit to be spoken about. Then, with pleased minds, the people offered great gains and honor to the elders in the form of robes, etc. Therefore, it is said – "they gain robes…pe… requisites."

Bhikkhuniyo upasaṅkamitvā means it seems that not even one bhikkhunī comes to them, but with their hearts drawn by craving for gain, they went to their residence. With that in mind, it is said – "the bhikkhunīs, having approached." Those bhikkhunīs, too, due to their unsteady minds, did as they said. Therefore, it is said – "then those bhikkhunīs…pe… sat down." Tiracchānakatha means pointless talk of various kinds, such as talk about kings, which is mundane even for those going to the path of heaven. Iddho means prosperous, rich in meaning, profound, full of flavor, and connected with the penetration of characteristics.

145-147.Anujānāmi bhikkhave here, because those bhikkhus, being told "do not advise the bhikkhunīs, bhikkhus," might develop resentment towards the Tathāgata, not having seen the truth, and go to a woeful destination, therefore, the Blessed One, avoiding their going to that woeful destination, should be understood as approving this appointment of a bhikkhu-advisor by another means, wishing to exclude those bhikkhus from giving advice. Having thus approved it, wishing to exclude them, he says later, while doing so, ‘‘anujānāmi bhikkhave aṭṭhahaṅgehi samannāgata’’ etc. These eight qualities have never existed even in the dreams of the Group of Six.

sīlavā. Now, showing what that sīla is, and how he truly has it, he says ‘‘pātimokkhasaṃvarasaṃvuto’’ etc. There, pātimokkha itself is the restraint, pātimokkhasaṃvaro. Pātimokkhasaṃvarasaṃvuto means endowed with and possessed of pātimokkhasaṃvara.

Viharatī means conducts himself. This was said in the Vibhaṅga –

‘‘Pātimokkhaṃ means morality, foundation, beginning, conduct, restraint, protection, release, foremost, for the attainment of wholesome things; saṃvaro means bodily non-transgression, verbal non-transgression, bodily and verbal non-transgression. Saṃvuto means he is equipped with, fully equipped with, reached, fully reached, possessed of, fully possessed of, endowed with, fully endowed with this pātimokkhasaṃvara, therefore it is called ‘pātimokkhasaṃvarasaṃvuto.’ Viharatī means moves, conducts himself, protects, cherishes, maintains, walks, lives, therefore it is called ‘viharatī’’’ (vibha. 511-512).

Ācāragocarasampanno means possessing conduct (ācāra) that refrains from wrong livelihood such as bamboo donations, and possessing a suitable alms resort (gocara) by abandoning resorts frequented by courtesans and visiting families endowed with faith. Aṇumattesu vajjesu bhayadassāvī means seeing danger in the slightest faults, meaning one is in the habit of seeing those faults as dangerous. Samādāya sikkhati sikkhāpadesūti means, taking up each and every precept (sikkhāpada) among the precepts that are established in three ways in the form of higher morality etc., properly taking it up, well grasping it, not abandoning it, one trains; this is the meaning. This is a summary here; however, one who desires the detailed explanation should take it from the Visuddhimagga.

Bahussuto. Sutaṃ dhāretīti sutadharo; that which is much heard by him is called much learning (bahu suta), and it is not merely heard; but he retains it. Sutasannicayo means one in whom learning is accumulated like jewels in a casket. By this, he shows that the learning he retains does not perish even after a long time, just like jewels carefully stored in a casket. Now, showing that learning in its true form, he said, ‘‘ye te dhammā’’ etc.; that is in the same manner as stated in the Verañjakaṇḍa. Here is the conclusion in this regard: such teachings are much heard by him, therefore he is much learned. He retains it, therefore he is a Sutadhara. They are familiar by speech and unneglected by mind, thoroughly penetrated by understanding; therefore, he is a Sutasannicaya. Among these, vacasā paricitā means made fluent by speech. Manasānupekkhitā means unneglected by mind, they are like being illuminated by a thousand lamps when one turns one's attention to them. Diṭṭhiyā suppaṭividdhā means thoroughly penetrated by wisdom (paññā) in terms of meaning and cause, they are very well realized.

nissayamuccanakena means that with the final limit of five years from the full ordination, two mātikās must be made fluent and recited, four bhāṇavāras from the Suttanta for the purpose of hearing the Dhamma on the pakkhadivasas, one kathāmagga like the Andhakavinda, Mahārāhulovāda, or Ambaṭṭha for the purpose of discussing what has been attained, three anumodanās for rejoicing at saṅghabhattas and auspicious occasions, the distinction between permissible and impermissible actions (kammākammavinicchaya) for the purpose of knowing the uposatha and pavāraṇā etc., and one meditation subject (kammaṭṭhāna) ending in Arahantship by way of samādhi or vipassanā for performing the duties of a samaṇa, so much must be learned. By this much, he is much learned and is all-directional, and he is able to dwell at his own pleasure wherever he wishes.

Parisupaṭṭhāpakena means that with the final limit of ten years from the full ordination, two Vibhaṅgas must be made fluent and recited in order to discipline the assembly in the Abhivinaya; if he is unable, he must be capable of reciting with three people, and the permissible and impermissible actions (kammākamma) and the Khandhaka-vatta must be learned. If he is a Majjhima-reciter for the purpose of guiding the assembly in the Abhidhamma, the Mūlapaṇṇāsaka should be learned, the Dīgha-reciter should learn the Mahāvagga, the Saṃyutta-reciter should learn the lower three vaggas or the Mahāvagga, and the Aṅguttara-reciter should learn the lower or upper half of the Nikāya; if he is unable, it is proper to learn from the Tikanipāta downwards. However, in the Mahāpaccari, it is said that "it is proper for one learning one to take the Catukkanipāta or Pañcakanipāta." The Jātaka-reciter should learn the Jātaka with its commentary; less than that is not proper. It is also stated in the Mahāpaccari that it is proper to learn the Dhammapada together with its stories. Is it proper to make a collection from here and there up to the Mūlapaṇṇāsaka or not? It is rejected in the Kurunda commentary that "it is not proper," and there is no consideration in the other commentaries. It is not stated that anything should be learned in the Abhidhamma. But one who has mastered the Vinayapiṭaka and the Abhidhammapiṭaka along with their commentaries, and there is no text of the type stated in the Suttanta, he is not able to guide the assembly. But one by whom the text of the stated extent has been learned from the Suttanta and the Vinaya, this assembly-attendant is much learned, is a chief in all directions, goes as he pleases, and is able to guide the assembly.

Bhikkhunovādakena however, the three Piṭakas together with their commentaries should be learned; if he is unable, the commentary of one of the four Nikāyas should be mastered, for with one Nikāya he will be able to answer questions even in the remaining Nikāyas. The commentary of a four-treatise in the seven treatises should be mastered, for with the method obtained there, he will be able to answer questions in the remaining treatises. But the Vinayapiṭaka is of various meanings and various causes, therefore it must be mastered together with its commentary. By this much, he is called a Bhikkhunovādaka who is much learned.

Ubhayāni kho panassātiādi, however, since it is absolutely not proper without the Vinayapiṭaka along with its commentary even if there is much learning in the other entire ninefold teachings, therefore it is stated separately. Among these, vitthārena means together with both Vibhaṅgas. Svāgatānī means well-received. To show how they are well-received as they have come, ‘‘suvibhattānī’’ etc. is stated. Among these, suvibhattānī means well-divided, free from the faults of confusion of words and syllables. Suppavattīnī means fluent, recited. Suvinicchitāni suttaso means well-decided in terms of the suttas to be brought from the Khandhaka and Parivāra. Anubyañjanaso means well-decided even in terms of the completeness of letters and words, unbroken, with undistorted letters. By this, the commentary is indicated, for this decision comes from the commentary.

Kalyāṇavāco means endowed with a beautiful voice, which is distinct and without throatiness, capable of making the meaning known, with complete words and phrases, by means of the proper method of speaking, without looseness or harshness. Kalyāṇavākkaraṇo means having a sweet voice, for the woman is delighted in the abundance of sound; therefore, she despises even speech with complete words and phrases that is devoid of the abundance of sound. Yebhuyyena bhikkhunīnaṃ piyo hoti manāpo means it is rare to be loved by all, but he is loved by most of the wise nuns with the accomplishment of virtue and conduct, and he is pleasing to the mind. Paṭibalo hoti bhikkhuniyo ovadituṃ means being able to admonish the nuns by showing the sutta and the reason, and by threatening them with fear of offenses, he is capable of teaching such Dhamma. Kāsāyavatthavasanāyā means wearing robes of brown color. Garudhammaṃ means that in his householder life, he has not previously engaged in bodily contact with a nun or in sexual activity with a female novice who is training. For the woman, remembering what was done before, does not respect the teaching of the Dhamma even if he is established in restraint. Or else, she produces her mind in that same immoral thing. Vīsativasso vā means twenty years old or more in ordination. For one of such a kind, even when repeatedly coming together with dissimilar things, does not suddenly attain the destruction of virtue like a young person, being able to dispel desire and lust in an improper place after considering his own age, therefore it is said - "twenty years old or more than twenty years old."

Here, "sīlavā" etc. should be understood as one factor, "bahussuto hotī" etc. as the second, "ubhayāni kho panassā" etc. as the third, "kalyāṇavāco hoti kalyāṇavākkaraṇo" as the fourth, "yebhuyyena bhikkhunīnaṃ piyo hoti manāpo" as the fifth, "paṭibalo hoti bhikkhuniyo ovadituṃ" as the sixth, "na kho paneta" etc. as the seventh, and "vīsativasso" etc. as the eighth.

148.Ñatticatutthenāti, as said previously in the vatthu.Garudhammehīti by the heavy rules (garudhamma), for these are called heavy rules because they should be respectfully accepted by the nuns. Ekatoupasampannāyāti here, there is a dukkaṭa to the one who admonishes by the garudhamma to one who is fully ordained in the presence of the nuns. But to one who is fully ordained in the presence of the monks, it is according to the vatthu.

149.Pariveṇaṃ sammajjitvāti if the enclosure has not been swept in the morning, or even if it has been swept, it has become littered again with grass and leaves, and the sand is scattered by the impact of feet, it should be swept. For seeing that unswept, those nuns might become unwilling to listen, thinking, "The venerable one does not even instruct the young monks who are dependent on him in the practice of duties, he only talks about the Dhamma." Therefore, it is said - "after sweeping the enclosure." But the nuns coming from inside the village are thirsty and tired, they expect drinking water and water for washing their hands, feet, and faces, and if that is not available, they will generate disrespect in the same way as before and become unwilling to listen. Therefore, it is said - ‘‘pānīyaṃ paribhojanīyaṃ upaṭṭhapetvā’’ti.

Āsanaṃ means preparing a seat such as a low stool, a plank, a mat, a rug, or a Sāraka mat, or even a broken branch, thinking, "this will be their seat." For the sake of releasing the offense of teaching the Dhamma, a second person should be desired. Therefore, it is said - ‘‘dutiyaṃ gahetvā nisīditabba’’nti.Nisīditabbaṃ means one should sit not at the edge of the monastery, but in the middle of the monastery, at the door of the uposatha hall or the refectory, in a place of access for all. Samaggātthāti means all have come.Vattantīti means they are coming; fluent, recited is the meaning.Niyyādetabboti means to be given out.Osāretabboti means the pāḷi should be spoken.Vassasatūpasampannāyātiādi is a showing of the pāḷi that should be spoken.

sāmīcikammaṃ means appropriate duties such as giving the seed of the path, drinking water, and asking questions. Here, the nun's salutation to the monk must be done without fail, whether inside or outside the village, inside or outside the monastery, inside the house or on the road, even at the king's gate, even when it is raining and the ground is muddy, even with an umbrella or parasol in hand, even when followed by elephants and horses. Seeing the one entering for alms in a single row, it is proper to salute, saying "vandāmi ayyā" in one place. If they go leaving a distance of twelve cubits in between, they should be saluted separately. In a great assembly, it is proper to salute in one place where they are seated. This is the same method for the añjalikamma. But standing up should be done wherever she is sitting, and that particular duty should be done in a place and time appropriate to that particular duty.

Sakkatvāti having done it in such a way that it is well done.Garuṃkatvāti having generated respect there.Mānetvāti having made it dear with the mind.Pūjetvāti having worshiped by doing these three duties.Anatikkamanīyoti should not be transgressed.

Abhikkhuke āvāseti here, if monks who give advice do not dwell within half a yojana of the nun's residence, this is called a monkless residence. One should not dwell there during the rains. It has been said that "a monkless dwelling is one to which it is not possible to go for advice or association" (pāci. 1048). And it is not possible to go there after the meal, listen to the Dhamma, and come back. If the nuns who do not want to dwell there during the rains, or relatives or supporters say this - "dwell here, venerable ones, we will bring monks," it is proper. If monks who wish to enter the rains in the stated area come and stay even for one night in a branch pavilion; even though they are not invited and do not wish to go, by just this much it is a monastery with monks, it is proper to enter the rains here. And those who are entering should request the monks on the thirteenth of the pakkhassa - "venerable sirs, we will dwell with your advice." But where there is a dwelling place of monks at half a yojana by the straight path, but there is danger to life or danger to celibacy for those going by that path, and it is more than half a yojana for those going by another path, this remains in the state of a monkless dwelling. If, however, there is another nun's residence about a gāvuta away in a safe place, those nuns should request those nuns and then go and request the monks, saying, "venerable sirs, there is danger for us on the straight path, and it is more than half a yojana by another path. But in between the paths, there is another nun's residence about a gāvuta away from our residence, we will dwell with the advice coming from the venerable ones." Those monks should accept it. Then those nuns should come to that nun's residence and perform the uposatha, or those nuns, seeing them, may even go to their own residence and perform it.

If, however, bhikkhus intending to enter the rains-residence (vassa) come to the monastery on the fourteenth, and the bhikkhunīs, having asked, "Venerables, will you dwell here for the rains?", and having said "Yes," then after they say, "Then, Venerables, we also, living in dependence on your instruction (ovāda), will dwell here," but on the second day, not seeing the accomplishment of alms-gathering in the village, depart saying, "It is not possible to dwell here." Then those bhikkhunīs, going to the monastery on the Uposatha day, do not see the bhikkhus, what should be done in this case? One should go to where the bhikkhus dwell and undertake the rains-residence on the later date (pacchimikāya vassaṃ upagantabbaṃ). Or, having made an arrangement (ābhogaṃ katvā) that "they will come to undertake the rains-residence on the later date," one should dwell with the instruction when they have come. But if no one comes even on the later date, and there is fear of robbers or fear of famine on the way, there is an offense for her dwelling in a non-bhikkhu residence; there is also an offense for her going away having broken the rains-residence; she should be protected. For it is stated that there is no offense for her dwelling in a non-bhikkhu residence in times of danger. If bhikkhus, having come and undertaken the rains-residence, then depart for some reason, one must dwell there. For it was said: "There is no offense if bhikkhus who have undertaken the rains-residence depart, or become deranged, or die, or move to another place, or in times of danger, or due to insanity, or for the initial training (ādikammikāya)." However, when inviting (pavārentiyā), one should go to where the bhikkhus are and invite them.

Anvaddhamāsaṃ: every half-month. Dve dhammā paccāsīsitabbā: two things should be desired. Uposathapucchakaṃ: asking about the Uposatha; there, on the fifteenth Uposatha, having gone on the fourteenth of the fortnight, on the fourteenth, on the thirteenth, the Uposatha should be asked about. However, in the Mahāpaccariya, it is stated, "Having gone on the thirteenth of the fortnight, one should ask, 'Is this Uposatha the fourteenth or the fifteenth?'" On the Uposatha day, one should approach for the sake of instruction (ovādatthāya). However, from the day after the new moon (pāṭipadadivasato), one should go for the purpose of hearing the Dhamma. Thus, the Blessed One, not giving an opportunity for any other activity, continuously prescribed going to the bhikkhus for the bhikkhunīs. Why? Because of the weak wisdom (mandapaññattā) of women. For women are of weak wisdom, therefore constant hearing of the Dhamma is very helpful. And when this is so, without making the conceit that "what we know, the Venerables also know," constantly attending upon the Bhikkhu Sangha, they will make the going forth worthwhile, therefore the Blessed One did so. The bhikkhunīs also, thinking, "We will practice as instructed," all continuously approached the monastery. For it was said:

"Then, at that time, the entire Bhikkhunī Sangha went for instruction. People criticized, grumbled, and complained, 'These are their wives, these are their mistresses, now they will enjoy themselves with these women.' They reported this matter to the Blessed One. 'No, bhikkhus, the entire Bhikkhunī Sangha should not go for instruction; if they should go, there is an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭassa). I allow, bhikkhus, four or five bhikkhunīs to go for instruction.' Again they criticized in the same way. Again the Blessed One said, 'I allow, bhikkhus, two or three bhikkhunīs to go for instruction.'"

Therefore, two or three bhikkhunīs should be requested by the Bhikkhunī Sangha to be sent: "Come, Venerables, ask the Bhikkhu Sangha for the approach for instruction, the Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerables…pe… the approach for instruction" (cūḷava. 413). Those bhikkhunīs should go to the monastery. Then, having approached the bhikkhu who receives the instruction, having paid homage, that bhikkhu should say this to one bhikkhunī: "The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, pays homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, and asks for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhu Sangha grant the approach for instruction to the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha." That bhikkhu should approach the bhikkhu who recites the Pātimokkha and say this to him: "The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, pays homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, and asks for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhu Sangha grant the approach for instruction to the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha." The Pātimokkha reciter should say, "Is there any bhikkhu who is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs?" If there is any bhikkhu who is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs, the Pātimokkha reciter should say, "The bhikkhu named so-and-so is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs, let the Bhikkhunī Sangha approach him."

If there is no bhikkhu who is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs, the Pātimokkha reciter should say: "Who here is capable of instructing the bhikkhunīs?" If any bhikkhu is capable of instructing the bhikkhunīs, and he is endowed with eight qualities, having appointed (sammannitvā), it should be said: "The bhikkhu named so-and-so is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs, let the Bhikkhunī Sangha approach him."

If no one is capable of instructing the bhikkhunīs, the Pātimokkha reciter should say: "There is no bhikkhu who is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs; let the Bhikkhu Sangha inspire confidence (pāsādikena bhikkhunisaṅgho sampādetū)." For by this, the entire teaching that includes the three trainings (sikkhattayasaṅgahaṃ sāsanaṃ) is announced. That bhikkhu, having accepted with "Good," should announce to the bhikkhunīs on the day after the new moon (pāṭipade). The Bhikkhunī Sangha also should send those bhikkhunīs, saying, "Go, Venerables, ask, 'Does the Bhikkhu Sangha grant the approach for instruction to the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha?'" They, having accepted with "Good, Venerables," having gone to the monastery, having approached that bhikkhu, should say thus: "Does the Bhikkhu Sangha grant the approach for instruction to the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha?" He should say: "There is no bhikkhu who is considered an instructor of bhikkhunīs; let the Bhikkhu Sangha inspire confidence." They should accept with "Good, Venerables." This was said in terms of those who have come together, but for one bhikkhunī among them, both the saying and the acceptance should be done, the others are her companions.

If the Bhikkhunī Sangha or the Bhikkhu Sangha is not complete, or if there are only enough individuals to constitute a group (gaṇamattameva) or just individuals (puggalamattaṃ), or if one bhikkhunī is sent from many bhikkhunī residences (bhikkhunupassayehi) for the sake of instruction, here is the manner of speaking: "The Bhikkhunīs, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, and ask for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunīs obtain the approach for instruction." "I, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha; and I ask for the approach for instruction, may I obtain, Venerable, the approach for instruction."

"The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, pays homage at the feet of the Venerables, and asks for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhunī Sangha obtain, Venerable, the approach for instruction." "The Bhikkhunīs, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Venerables, and ask for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunīs obtain the approach for instruction." "I, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Venerables, and I ask for the approach for instruction, may I obtain, Venerable, the approach for instruction."

"The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, pays homage at the feet of the Venerable, and asks for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhunī Sangha obtain, Venerable, the approach for instruction." "The Bhikkhunīs, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Venerable; and ask for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunīs obtain the approach for instruction." "I, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Venerable, and I ask for the approach for instruction, may I obtain, Venerable, the approach for instruction."

"The Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī, Venerable, pay homage, pay homage, pay homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, the Venerables, the Venerable, and ask, ask, ask for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī obtain, may the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī obtain the approach for instruction."

That bhikkhu also should say thus at the time of the Uposatha: "The Bhikkhunīs, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, and ask for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunīs obtain the approach for instruction." "The Bhikkhunī, Venerable, pays homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, and asks for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunī obtain the approach for instruction."

"The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, the Bhikkhunīs, Venerable, the Bhikkhunī, Venerable, pay homage at the feet of the Venerables, and ask for the approach for instruction, may the Venerable Bhikkhunī obtain the approach for instruction."

"The Bhikkhunī Sangha, Venerable, and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī, Venerable, pay homage, pay homage, pay homage at the feet of the Bhikkhu Sangha, the Venerables, and ask, ask, ask for the approach for instruction, may the Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī obtain, may the Venerable Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī obtain the approach for instruction."

The Pātimokkha reciter also, if there is an appointed bhikkhu, in the same way as before, should say that the Bhikkhunīs, that the Bhikkhunī, that the Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī should approach, should approach, should approach him. If there is not, he should say that a bhikkhu, inspiring confidence, should inspire confidence, should inspire confidence in the Bhikkhu Sangha and the Bhikkhunīs and the Bhikkhunī.

The one who receives the instruction, having brought it back on the day after the new moon, should say it in the same way. However, having set aside the immature, the sick, and the travelers, even if another is a forest-dweller (āraññako), he is not allowed to not accept it. For this was said by the Blessed One:

"I allow, bhikkhus, having set aside the immature, having set aside the sick, having set aside the traveler, for the rest to take the instruction" (cūḷava. 414).

There, he who intends to go on the fourteenth or fifteenth Uposatha days or on the day after the new moon, that traveler, even going on the second day of the fortnight, is not allowed to not accept it, since it was said, "No, bhikkhus, the instruction should not be rejected; whoever should not accept it, incurs an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭassā)" (cūḷava. 414), he indeed incurs the offense. Having taken the instruction, it is not proper to not announce it at the Uposatha gathering or to not bring it back to the bhikkhunīs on the day after the new moon. For it was said –

"No, bhikkhus, the instruction should not be announced. Whoever should not announce it, incurs an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭassā)" (cūḷava. 415).

Again it was said –

"No, bhikkhus, the instruction should not be brought back. Whoever should not bring it back, incurs an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭassā)" (cūḷava. 415).

There, an arrangement (saṅketo) should be made by the forest-dweller for the purpose of bringing it back. For it was said: "I allow, bhikkhus, for a forest-dwelling bhikkhu to take the instruction and to make an arrangement, 'I will bring it back here.'" Therefore, if a forest-dwelling bhikkhu obtains alms in the village where the bhikkhunīs reside, having walked there, having seen the bhikkhunīs, having announced it, he should go. But if alms are not easily available there, having walked in a bordering village, having come to the village of the bhikkhunīs, he should do likewise. If one has to go far, an arrangement should be made: "I, named so-and-so, will approach the meeting hall or pavilion or the foot of a tree at your village gate, you should come there." The bhikkhunīs should go there, they are not allowed not to go. For it was said: "No, bhikkhus, a bhikkhunī should not not go to the appointed place. Whoever should not go, incurs an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭassā)" (cūḷava. 415).

Ubhatosaṅghe tīhi ṭhānehi pavāretabbaṃ: here, the bhikkhunīs, having invited (pavāretvā) by themselves on the fourteenth, should invite the Bhikkhu Sangha on the Uposatha. For it was said –

"I allow, bhikkhus, having invited today, to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha tomorrow" (cūḷava. 427).

Here, the decision should be understood in the same way as stated in the Bhikkhunī Khandhaka. For it was said –

"Then, at that time, the entire Bhikkhunī Sangha, while inviting (pavārento), made a commotion. They reported this matter to the Blessed One. I allow, bhikkhus, for one bhikkhunī, competent and capable, to be appointed to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha for the sake of the Bhikkhunī Sangha. And thus, bhikkhus, should she be appointed. First, the bhikkhunī should be requested, having requested, the Sangha should be informed to the competent and capable bhikkhunī –

Let the Sangha hear me, Venerables, if it is convenient for the Sangha, the Sangha should appoint the bhikkhunī named so-and-so to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha for the sake of the Bhikkhunī Sangha. This is the motion.

Let the Sangha hear me, Venerables, the Sangha should appoint the bhikkhunī named so-and-so to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha for the sake of the Bhikkhunī Sangha. To whichever Venerable it is agreeable that the appointment of the bhikkhunī named so-and-so should be for the sake of the Bhikkhunī Sangha to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha, let her be silent; to whichever it is not agreeable, let her speak.

The bhikkhunī named so-and-so is appointed by the Sangha to invite the Bhikkhu Sangha for the sake of the Bhikkhunī Sangha. It is agreeable to the Sangha, therefore it is silent; thus I hold it" (cūḷava. 427).

That recognized bhikkhuni, taking the bhikkhuni Sangha, having approached the bhikkhu Sangha, having arranged the upper robe over one shoulder, having extended the joined palms, should say thus: "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhuni Sangha invites the bhikkhu Sangha, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable bhikkhu Sangha, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhuni Sangha, correcting what is seen. For the second time, venerable sirs, for the third time, venerable sirs, the bhikkhuni Sangha...pe...will correct."

If the bhikkhuni Sangha is not complete, (she should say,) "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhunis invite the bhikkhu Sangha, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable bhikkhu Sangha, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhunis, correcting what is seen," and, "Venerable sir, I invite the bhikkhu Sangha, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable bhikkhu Sangha, out of compassion, instruct me, correcting what is seen." Thus, it should be said three times.

If the bhikkhu Sangha is not complete, (she should say,) "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhuni Sangha invites the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable ones, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhuni Sangha, correcting what is seen," and, "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhuni Sangha invites the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable ones, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhuni Sangha, correcting what is seen." Thus, it should be said three times.

If neither is complete, (she should say,) "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhunis invite the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable ones, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhunis, correcting what is seen," and, "Venerable sirs, the bhikkhunis invite the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable ones, out of compassion, instruct the bhikkhunis, correcting what is seen," and, "Venerable sirs, I invite the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable ones, out of compassion, instruct me, correcting what is seen," and, "Venerable sir, I invite the venerable ones, by what is seen, or by what is heard, or by what is suspected. May the venerable one, out of compassion, instruct me, correcting what is seen." Thus, it should be said three times.

The performance of mānatta and the seeking of ordination will become apparent in their respective places.

A bhikkhuni should not by any means, that is, with the ten grounds for accusation or by any other means, a bhikkhu should never be abused, nor insulted, nor threatened with fear. Ovaṭo means covered, prevented, warded off. Vacanameva means the path of speech. Anovaṭo means not covered, not prevented, not warded off. Therefore, a bhikkhuni, standing in a position of authority, in a senior position, should not in any way advise or instruct a bhikkhu, saying, "Approach in this way, retreat in this way, wear it in this way, put it on in this way." But having seen a fault, it is proper to show the existing fault in such a way as, "In the past, the elder monks did not approach in this way, did not retreat in this way, did not wear it in this way, did not put it on in this way, did not even wear such a robe, did not anoint their eyes in this way," etc. But bhikkhus may advise and instruct a bhikkhuni as they please, saying, "This old sāmaṇeri wears it in this way, puts it on in this way, do not wear it in this way, do not put it on in this way, do not do tilakamma or paṇṇakamma," etc.

Saying 'We are in concord, venerable sir': the bhikkhuni Sangha saying, "We are in concord, venerable sir." Speaks on another subject: another suttanta or abhidhamma. For with the words "We are in concord, venerable sir," they expect instruction; therefore, having set aside the instruction, there is a dukkaṭa for speaking on another subject. Without assigning the instruction: without saying, "This is the instruction for the sisters."

150.In an unlawful act, etc.: the act of giving consent for a bhikkhu to instruct should be understood as an act (kamma). Therein, in an unlawful act, there are eighteen pācittiyas by way of two nines. In a lawful act, there is no offense in the final clause of the second nine, in the remaining seventeen there are dukkaṭas.

152.Giving the recitation: reciting the Pali of the eight Garudhamma. Giving the inquiry: explaining the commentary of that same well-learned Garudhamma Pali, is the meaning. When being told, 'Recite, venerable sir,' he recites: when being told thus, he recites the eight Garudhamma Pali, is the meaning. Thus, for one giving the recitation, one giving the inquiry, and one who, being told to recite, speaks on the eight Garudhamma, there is no offense by pācittiya. For speaking on another subject, there is no offense by dukkaṭa. Asks a question, having been asked a question, he speaks: a bhikkhuni asks a question related to the Garudhamma or related to the khandhas and so on, and that bhikkhu speaks, there is also no offense for him. Speaking for the sake of another: bhikkhunis approach a bhikkhu teaching the Dhamma to the four assemblies and listen, there is also no offense for the bhikkhu in that. To a sikkhamānā or a sāmaṇeri: there is also no offense for one teaching to these. The rest is of obvious meaning.

The origination of the word-by-word Dhamma arises from speech, and from mind-accompanied speech; it is an action (kiriya), without perception of release (nosaññāvimokkha), unintentional, an offense by designation (paṇṇattivajja), a verbal act (vacīkamma), of three minds (ticittaṃ), of three feelings (tivedanaṃ).

The Ovāda Training Rule, the first.

2. Description of the Training Rule on Setting (of the Sun)

153.In the second training rule—pariyāyenā: by turn, in order, is the meaning. Adhicetaso: of superior mind, meaning possessing a mind superior to all minds, endowed with the fruition consciousness of Arahatship. Appamajjato: of one not negligent, it has been said to mean endowed with constant action in regard to skillful qualities by means of non-negligence. Munino: "He who understands both worlds is therefore called a muni," (Dhp. 269) thus, by one who understands both worlds, or mona means knowledge (ñāṇa), because of being endowed with that knowledge, a khīṇāsava is called muni, of that muni. Monapathesu sikkhato: training in the paths of mona, which is synonymous with the knowledge of Arahatship, in the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment or in the three trainings. And this is said taking up the preliminary practice; therefore, the meaning here should be understood thus: of the muni who, having trained in this way in the preliminary stage, has attained muni-hood by this training, is a muni. Sokā na bhavanti tādino: sorrows relating to the loss of loved objects, etc., do not exist within that tādi khīṇāsava muni. Or, alternatively, tādino: sorrows do not occur to such a muni endowed with such characteristics, this is the meaning here. Upasantassā: of one calmed by the calming of the rāga etc. Sadā satīmato: of one who is constantly not separated from mindfulness due to having attained abundance of mindfulness. Ākāse antalikkhe: in the sky referred to as the intermediate space (antalikkha), not in the kasiṇa-ugghāṭima, nor in the delimitation of form. Caṅkamatipi tiṭṭhatipī: having heard their talk, "These bhikkhunis despise me, thinking, 'This one knows only this much,' come now, I will show these my power," having generated great respect for the Dhamma, having attained the fourth jhāna, which is the basis for supernormal powers, having arisen, he showed such a supernormal feat—"He walks in the sky, in the intermediate space...pe...he disappears." Therein, antaradhāyatipī: he also disappears, goes to invisibility, is the meaning. Tañceva udānaṃ bhaṇati aññañca bahuṃ buddhavacanaṃ: it seems that the Elder, in the presence of his brother Elder—

“Just as a red lotus, sweet-scented,
Would bloom in the morning, its scent not yet faded,
Behold Aṅgīrasa, shining forth,
Like the sun blazing in the sky.” (SN 1.123);

Having made (him) learn this verse, he recited (it) for four months. But he was unable to make (it) fluent. Then the Elder drove him out of the monastery, (saying,) "You are incapable in this Dispensation." He stood weeping at the gatehouse. Then the Blessed One, looking at beings amenable to guidance with the Buddha-eye, having seen him, as if wandering on monastery rounds, went to his presence and said, "Cūḷapanthaka, why do you weep?" He explained the matter to him. Then the Blessed One gave him a clean piece of cloth and said, "Wipe this, saying, 'Removal of dust, removal of dust.'" He agreed, saying, "Good," and sitting down in his dwelling, he wiped one edge of it, the wiped area became black. He regained saṃvega, (thinking,) "Even such a pure cloth becomes black because of relying on this existence," and began insight (meditation). Then the Blessed One, knowing his state of aroused energy, spoke this verse of illumination, "adhicetaso." At the end of the verse, the Elder attained Arahatship. Therefore, the Elder naturally considers this verse as his own, and to make known his feeling of ownership of this verse to her, he speaks that very one. And from time to time, having brought forward much Buddha-word. Therefore, it was said—"He speaks that very exclamation, and much other Buddha-word."

156.Ekato upasampannāyā: ordained in the bhikkhuni Sangha; however, there is a pācittiya for one ordained in the bhikkhu Sangha for instructing. The rest here is obvious. And this too is the same origination of word-by-word Dhamma.

The Training Rule on Setting (of the Sun), the second.

3. Description of the Training Rule on the Bhikkhuni Residence

162.In the third training rule—aññatra samayā ovadati āpatti pācittiyassā, etc.: there is a pācittiya only for one instructing with the eight Garudhamma, it should be understood that there is a dukkaṭa with another Dhamma. Ekatoupasampannāyā: ordained in the bhikkhuni Sangha; however, there is only a pācittiya for one ordained in the bhikkhu Sangha for instructing. From here on, wherever "ekatoupasampannā" is said, this same meaning should be understood everywhere. The rest is obvious.

The origination is by means of kathina—it arises from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; it is an action (kiriya), without perception of release (nosaññāvimokkha), unintentional, an offense by designation (paṇṇattivajja), a bodily act (kāyakamma), a verbal act (vacīkamma), of three minds (ticittaṃ), of three feelings (tivedanaṃ).

The Training Rule on the Bhikkhuni Residence, the third.

Here, in this regard, the following miscellaneous (points) were stated in the Mahāpaccariya: If an unappointed bhikkhu, after sunset, approaches a bhikkhuni residence and instructs with the eight Garudhamma, there are three pācittiyas. For one instructing with another Dhamma, there are two dukkaṭas, one pācittiya. How? A dukkaṭa rooted in being unappointed, a dukkaṭa rooted in going to the residence and instructing with another Dhamma, a pācittiya rooted in instructing after sunset. For an appointed (bhikkhu) who, after sunset, having gone there, instructs with the eight Garudhamma, there is one no offense, two pācittiyas. How? No offense because of being appointed, one rooted in instructing after sunset, one rooted in going and instructing with the Garudhamma, thus two pācittiyas. For that same one who instructs with another Dhamma, there is one no offense, one dukkaṭa, one pācittiya. How? No offense because of being appointed, a dukkaṭa rooted in going and instructing with another Dhamma, a pācittiya rooted in instructing after sunset. But having gone during the day and instructing, having removed one pācittiya rooted in instructing at night for both the appointed and the unappointed, the remaining offenses and non-offenses should be understood.

The miscellaneous talk is finished.

4. Description of the Training Rule on Gifts

164.In the fourth training rule—na bahukatā: not making much of, the meaning is not instructing having made much of the Dhamma. ‘‘Bhikkhunovādakaṃ avaṇṇaṃ kattukāmo’’: The meaning of these, as stated in the incitement, should be understood in the same way.

Upasampannaṃ saṅghena asammataṃ: Here, an unappointed (bhikkhu) should be understood as one laid aside having placed the burden on (him) by an appointed (bhikkhu) or by the Sangha. Anupasampannaṃ sammataṃ vā asammataṃ vā: Here, however, one who, having obtained consent during the time of being a bhikkhu, stands in the ground of a sāmaṇera is appointed, a sāmaṇera who is learned and laid aside by an appointed (bhikkhu) or by the Sangha is understood to be unappointed. The rest is obvious because of the mode having been stated.

Tisamuṭṭhānaṃ – arises from body and mind, or from speech and mind, or from body, speech, and mind; it is an action (kiriya), without intention of release (saññāvimokkha), unintentional (acittaka), a fault against the rule (lokavajja), a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome state of mind, and a painful feeling.

The Fourth Āmisa Training Rule.

5. Explanation of the Training Rule on Giving Robes

169.In the Fifth Training Rule: visikhāya means on the road (rathikāya). Piṇḍāya caratī means she frequently wanders for alms by means of a continuous round. Sandiṭṭhā means they were well-acquainted friends. The rest is straightforward in meaning from the words, and in terms of judgement, it should be understood in the same way as stated in the Training Rule on receiving robes, along with the arising (samuṭṭhāna) etc. In that case, the bhikkhu is the receiver, here the bhikkhunī, this is the difference. The rest is just the same.

The Fifth Cīvaradāna Training Rule.

6. Explanation of the Training Rule on Sewing Robes

175.In the Sixth Training Rule: udāyī means Lāḷudāyī. Paṭṭho means capable, clever and competent, it is said. Aññatarā bhikkhunī means his former second wife. Paṭibhānacittanti means a design made by her ingenuity; it seems she dyed the robe and then made a drawing of a couple engaging in sexual intercourse in the middle using various colors. Therefore, it is said: "having depicted an ingenious design in the middle." Yathāsaṃhaṭanti means just as it was collected.

176.Cīvara means that which can be worn or used as an outer robe, as it is stated in the Mahāpaccari and others. Sayaṃ sibbatī means that even while considering 'I will sew' or while cutting, there is a dukkaṭa, but when sewing, there is a pācittiya. Ārāpathe ārāpathe means inserting and removing the needle. But if, without removing the entire needle, she pierces it even a hundred times to insert a long thread, there is only one pācittiya. Sakiṃ āṇatto means having been told once, "sew the robe." Bahukampi sibbatī means even if he completes all the needlework and finishes the robe, there is only one pācittiya. But if he is told, "the work to be done on this robe is your responsibility," each insertion of the needle by the one instructed incurs a pācittiya, and many for the one who instructs, in one utterance. There is certainly nothing to be said about repeated instructions.

Even if, when teachers or preceptors are sewing robes for their own relatives, their pupils think, "let us do the duties for teachers or preceptors, or the Kathina duties," and sew, they also incur offenses according to the count of needle insertions. Teachers and preceptors have their pupils sew robes for their own relatives, for the teachers and preceptors it is a dukkaṭa, for the pupils a pācittiya. Pupils have their teachers and preceptors sew robes for their own relatives; the same rule applies there as well. If the robe belongs to relatives of both the pupils and the teachers and preceptors, but the teachers and preceptors deceive the pupils and have them sew it, both incur a dukkaṭa. Why? Because the pupils sew thinking it is for a non-relative, and the others instruct them in what is improper. Therefore, it should be pointed out, "this is your mother's robe, this is your sister's," and then have them sew it.

179.Aññaṃ parikkhāranti means any equipment whatsoever, such as shoes or a bag. The rest is straightforward. Sixfold arising – arises from action, without intention of release, unintentional, a fault against the rule, bodily action, verbal action, three types of mind, three types of feeling.

The Sixth Cīvarasibbana Training Rule.

7. Explanation of the Saṃvidhāna Training Rule

181.In the Seventh Training Rule: pacchā gacchantīnaṃ corā acchindiṃsū means thieves stole the bowls and robes of those who were going behind. Dūsesunti means those nuns were violated by thieves; that is, they were made to lose their virtue.

182-3.Saṃvidhāyāti means having arranged, that is, having made an agreement at the time of departure. Kukkuṭasampādeti, here, since a chicken, having come out of one village, goes to another village within the distance of its steps, this is called a 'chicken's passage' (kukkuṭasampāda). Here is the meaning of the word: sampādo means that in which they come together. Who comes together? Chickens. Kukkuṭasampādo means the coming together of chickens. Or alternatively, sampāda means going; kukkuṭasampādo also means where there is the going of chickens. Kukkuṭasampāte is also a reading; there, that which is called kukkuṭasampāta is where a chicken flies from the roof of one house in a village and lands on the roof of another house. The meaning of the word should be understood in the manner stated here. Even if a village is very close in the way described in two ways, an upacāra is not obtained. In whatever village the sound of a rooster crowing early in the morning is heard in the immediately adjacent village, in a state full of such villages there is a pācittiya between villages, it is said in the commentary. Although it is said, "there is an offense of pācittiya between each village," however, even if a village is only a ratana's measure away, if one enters the upacāra established by the people of that village, there is indeed an offense.

Here is the determination of the offense: if at the time of arranging, both are standing in a nun's residence or an intermediate monastery or in a rest house or a heretical dwelling and arrange, there is no offense, it is an allowable place for this activity. Therefore, here they do not say there is an offense of dukkaṭa due to the condition of arranging, but only what is appropriate for the one going. But if they arrange inside a village at the entrance to a nun's residence, on a road, or at other crossroads, market halls, etc., the bhikkhu incurs an offense of dukkaṭa. Having arranged thus, they leave the village; there is no offense in leaving, but when the bhikkhu enters the upacāra of the next village, there is a pācittiya. There too, "duukkaṭa in the first step, pācittiya in the second step," it is said in the Mahāpaccari. But having left the village, as long as they do not enter the upacāra of the next village, even if they arrange in between, the bhikkhu incurs a dukkaṭa; upon entering the upacāra of the next village, the offense is as before. If they intend to go far, there is an offense for each entry when calculating the village upacāra, but there is no offense in passing beyond each of those villages. If a bhikkhunī leaves the residence thinking "I will go to such and such village," and a bhikkhu, thinking of the same village, leaves the monastery thinking, "I will go to such and such village." Then, if both meet at the village gate and say, "Where are you going? To such and such village. Where are you going?" "We too are going there," and then say, "Come now, let's go," and go having arranged, there is no offense. Why? Because they had already left intending to go, it is said in the Mahāpaccari. That does not agree with either the Pali or the rest of the commentary.

Addhayojane addhayojaneti means for each half-yojana that is passed, there is a dukkaṭa for the first step in anticipation of crossing, and a pācittiya for the second step. In this method, there is an offense upon crossing, but no offense upon entering.

184.Bhikkhu saṃvidahatīti means seeing a bhikkhunī at the city gate or on the road, he says, "Have you ever gone to such and such village?" "No, venerable, I have never gone." Then he says, "Come, let's go," or "I will go tomorrow, you should come too." Bhikkhunī saṃvidahatīti means seeing a bhikkhu leaving a village to venerate a cetiya in another village, she says, "Where are you going, venerable?" "To such and such village to venerate a cetiya." "I too am coming, venerable." Thus, the bhikkhunī alone arranges, not the bhikkhu.

185.Visaṅketenāti here, there is no offense only with regard to a discrepancy in time, for example, saying "we will go before the meal" and going after the meal, or saying "we will go today" and going tomorrow. There is certainly an offense even with a discrepancy in the gate or a discrepancy in the path. Āpadāsūti means in such dangers as when countries are ravaged by plagues, and districts are in turmoil, there is no offense. The rest is straightforward.

Fourfold arising – arises from body, from body and speech, from body and mind, and from body, speech, and mind; it is an action, without intention of release, unintentional, a fault against the rule, bodily action, verbal action, three types of mind, three types of feeling.

The Seventh Saṃvidhāna Training Rule.

8. Explanation of the Training Rule on Embarking on a Boat

188.In the Eighth Training Rule: saṃvidhāyāti means having arranged through delighting in the world, friendship, and intimacy, with playfulness as the preliminary. Uddhaṃgāmininti means going upstream against the current of the river. Since one who plays upstream in a fast-flowing boat is called "one who embarks on an upstream-going boat," therefore "ujjavanikāya" is said in the analysis of the words to show just the meaning. Adhogāmininti means going downstream with the current. Since one who plays downstream in a fast-flowing boat is called "one who embarks on a downstream-going boat," therefore "ojavanikāya" is said in the analysis of the words to show just the meaning for that as well. There is no offense where they carry (something) upstream or downstream for the purpose of completing a landing place. Tiriyaṃ taraṇāyāti is a non-attributive word in the sense of use.

189.Gāmantare gāmantareti here, if one bank of a river is continuously lined with chicken-passage villages and the other is an uninhabited forest, there are pācittiyas for each village passed when traveling along the village-lined bank, and offenses according to the calculation of half-yojanas when traveling along the uninhabited bank. It should be understood that even when traveling in the middle of a river that is a yojana wide, there are pācittiyas according to the calculation of half-yojanas. Anāpatti tiriyaṃ taraṇāyāti here, not only for a river, but also for one who goes from a great port to Tāmalitti or Suvaṇṇabhūmi, there is no offense. In all the commentaries, the offense has been considered only in a river, not in the ocean.

191.Visaṅketenāti here too, there is no offense only with a discrepancy in time, but there is indeed an offense for one who goes with a discrepancy in the landing place or a discrepancy in the boat. The rest is similar to the first training rule, along with the arising etc.

The Eighth Nāvābhiruhana Training Rule.

9. Paripācita Training Rule Explanation

192.In the Ninth Training Rule: mahānāge tiṭṭhamāneti is a locative word in the sense of "on the ground," meaning when great elephants are standing. Or alternatively, the reading mahānāge tiṭṭhamāne ‘‘adisvā’’ti "without seeing," should be understood here as the remainder of the passage. Otherwise, the meaning does not fit. Antarākathāti means a talk that has reached a position intermediate between the beginning and the end without reaching the conclusion or the beginning. Vippakatāti means is being done. Saccaṃ mahānāgā kho tayā gahapatīti, seeing the Theras entering, looking with genuine wonder, and knowing that they had heard, she spoke thus.

194.Bhikkhuniparipācitanti means prepared by a bhikkhunī, completed by proclaiming its qualities; that is, having made it obtainable. In the analysis of the words, "bhikkhunī means one ordained in both orders, paripāceti means for those who were previously unwilling to give," etc. is said to show the bhikkhunī and the manner of her preparation. Pubbe gihisamārambhāti, here pubbe means first. Samārambhoti means that which has been started, it is a designation for that which has been prepared. Gihisamārambho means the preparation by lay people. It is said that apart from the food prepared by lay people before the bhikkhunī's preparation, there is an offense for one who eats other alms food setting that aside, but there is no offense for one who eats that. In the analysis of the words, since alms food that has not been prepared for the sake of the bhikkhu by relatives or those who have invited is in fact already prepared, since it should be brought as desired, therefore, without paying attention to the literal meaning, "gihisamārambho means relatives or those who have invited" is said to show just the meaning.

195.Pakatipaṭiyattanti means it is prepared by nature for that very bhikkhu, thinking "we will give to the Thera." In the Mahāpaccari, however, it is said without distinguishing, "it is prepared thinking 'we will give to the bhikkhus'," without saying "for that other one."

197.Except for the five kinds of food, there is no offense anywhere means that there is no offense in all cases of yāgu (gruel), khajjaka (hard food), fruits, and non-fruits, even if they are prepared entirely by bhikkhunīs. The rest is self-explanatory. The origin of the first pārājika is from body and mind; it is an action (kiriya), involves release of perception (saññāvimokkha), is intentional (sacittaka), is an offense by rule (paṇṇattivajja), is a bodily action (kāyakamma), involves three mental states (ticitta), and three kinds of feeling (tivedana).

The ninth, on fully prepared food.

10. Explanation of the Training Rule on Seclusion

198.In the tenth training rule, all the Pali meaning and the judgment should be understood in the same way as stated in the second aniyata. Indeed, this training rule, together with the second aniyata and the fourth training rule of Upananda above, forms one chapter (pariccheda), but it is established separately in terms of the eight occurrences (aṭṭhuppatti).

The tenth, on seclusion.

The third Bhikkhunī Vagga is complete with the order of explanation.

4. The Food Vagga

1. Explanation of the Training Rule on Alms from a Rest House

203.In the first training rule of the Food Vagga, āvasathapiṇḍo means alms in a rest house. Having made a rest house (āvasatha) completely enclosed, with appropriately arranged seats and couches for travelers, the sick, pregnant women, and renunciants, with various partitioned rooms, alms are provided there out of a desire for merit. This means that everything, such as yāgu, rice, and medicine, is kept there for the purpose of giving to those people. Even tomorrow means also for the next day. They go away means they depart. People complain means that those not seeing the sectarians, and hearing "Where have the sectarians gone?" "They saw these ones and left," they complain. Being scrupulous means acting scrupulously, giving rise to the perception of it being unlawful.

206.Is able to leave that rest house means is able to go half a yojana or a yojana. Is not able means is not able to go that far. Not specified means it is established for everyone without specifying a particular group or a certain number. As much as needed means it is established as much as is needed, without limiting the amount of food. Should be eaten once means it should be eaten one time per day; from the second day onwards, there is a dukkaṭa for receiving and a pācittiya for each swallow.

Here is the judgment on this: Whether established by one family or by many families, gathered together in one place or in various places, saying, "today in one place; tomorrow in another," in such an unspecified place, having eaten in one place one day, it is not allowable to eat in that same place or another place on the second day. However, having eaten in one place one day where it is established by various families in various places, it is allowable to eat elsewhere on the second day. But it is said in the Mahāpaccariya that it is not allowable to exhaust the sequence and start eating again from the beginning. The same method applies to one group of families or various groups, one village or various villages. Moreover, even that which is established together by one family or various families, if it is interrupted in between due to a lack of rice, etc., that should not be eaten. But if, having stopped saying, "We are not able to give," they begin to give again when a good intention arises, it is allowable to eat this again for one day, as stated in the Mahāpaccariya.

208.There is no offense for the sick person means there is no offense for the sick person who eats after residing there. Or one who is going means there is no offense for one who is traveling and eats one day on the way and one day at the place he has reached. The same method applies to one who is coming. For one who goes and returns, it is permissible to eat one day on the way and one day at the place he has reached. All of this is stated in the Mahāpaccariya, etc. It is specified means it is specified for the sake of the bhikkhus alone. Not as much as needed means it is not specified as much as is needed; if only a little is obtained, it is allowable to eat such regularly. Except for the five kinds of food, everywhere means there is no offense everywhere in the distinction of yāgu, khajjaka, fruits, and non-fruits, etc. Indeed, it is allowable to eat yāgu, etc., regularly. The rest is self-explanatory. The origin is from Eḷakaloma—it arises from the body and from body-mind, is an action (kiriya), involves no release of perception (nosaññāvimokkha), is unintentional (acittaka), is an offense by rule (paṇṇattivajja), is a bodily action (kāyakamma), involves three mental states (ticitta), and three kinds of feeling (tivedana).

The first, on alms from a rest house.

2. Explanation of the Training Rule on Group Meals

209.In the second training rule, lacking in gain and respect—it is said that Devadatta remained hidden even after having King Ajātasattu killed, and after having an attack arranged, and after causing a blood-letting. But when he employed Dhanapālaka in broad daylight, he became manifest. When the talk arose, "How did Devadatta employ the elephant?" he became obvious: "Not only did he employ the elephant, but he also had the king killed, he sent assassins, he split the rock; the wicked Devadatta!" And when it was said, "With whom did he do this deed?" they said, "With King Ajātasattu." Then the citizens rose up, "How can the king associate with such a thief, a thorn in the Sāsana?" Knowing the disturbance in the city, the king expelled Devadatta. From then on, hundreds of portions of food prepared for him were cut off, attendance on him did not occur, and other people did not think anything should be given or done for him. Therefore, it is said, "lacking in gain and respect." Having informed each family, he eats—maintaining his following lest his group be broken up, he eats with his retinue in the families, having informed them, "You give food to one bhikkhu; you to two."

211.Robes arise sparingly—they do not give robes to those who do not accept food, therefore robes arise sparingly.

212.Bhikkhus making robes invite [others] with food—having seen them finishing the robes slowly after going for alms in the village, they invite them out of a desire for merit, thinking, "They will finish quickly and use the robes."

215.Of various countries—having come from various other countries. There is also the reading "Nānāvirajjake," which has the same meaning.

217-8.Group meal—a meal of a group. Here, a group (gaṇa) means bhikkhus beginning with four bhikkhus and more; therefore, showing the final determination, he said, "Where there are four bhikkhus...pe...this is called a group meal." But that group meal occurs in two ways: from invitation or from request. How does it occur from invitation? Four bhikkhus approach and say, "I invite you, venerable sirs, with rice; accept the rice from me, desire it, look at it, consent to it, honor it," thus inviting them with some synonym or other language, taking the names of the five foods. Invited together in this way, they go together to the place for either today or tomorrow, accept together, and eat together; it is a group meal, and there is an offense for all. Invited together, they go together or separately, accept together, and eat separately; there is still an offense. For here the acceptance is the criterion. Invited together, they go together or separately, accept separately, and eat together or separately, there is no offense. Having gone to four enclosures or a monastery, invited separately, even when staying in one place, or invited separately even as one is a son and one is a father, whether they go together or separately, whether they eat together or separately, if they accept together, it is a group meal, and there is an offense for all. Thus, it occurs from invitation.

How from request? Four bhikkhus, standing or sitting together, having seen a lay follower, might request, "Give food to the four of us," or having seen each individually, "Give to me, give to me," thus, whether they request together or separately, whether they go together or separately, even having taken the food, whether they eat together or separately, if they accept together, it is a group meal, and there is an offense for all. Thus, it occurs from request.

Feet are cracked—just as flesh is seen on the outside of a large hide; thus, they are cracked and cause pain as soon as they are struck by sand or gravel, and it is not possible to go for alms in the village. In such sickness, it should be eaten during the time of illness, and a minor adaptation should not be done.

When a robe is being made—when, having obtained cloth and thread, they make a robe; for there is no separate time called "robe-making time." Therefore, whatever work should be done on the robe there, whatever kind of work is done, for in the Mahāpaccariya it is said, "even at least threading a needle," therefore, it should be eaten at the time of robe-making. But in the Kurundī it is stated extensively. One who examines the robe, cuts it, keeps the old thread, keeps the new patch, sews the returned one, binds the new patch, cuts and rubs the seam, fastens it; there, one who sews the returned one, makes and twists the thread, sets the needle case, makes the turning, all these are said to be making the robe. But one who sits nearby and tells a Jātaka story or a Dhammapada, this is not a robe-maker. Except for this, there is no offense in group meals.

Half a yojana—for one intending to go even this much distance. But for one intending to go far, there is certainly no need to say anything. By one who is going—by one who is going on a journey, it is allowable to eat even within a gāvuta within half a yojana. Should be eaten by one who has gone—should be eaten one day by one who has gone. The same method applies to one embarking on a boat. But here is the distinction—having embarked, it is said in the Mahāpaccariya that it is allowable to eat until one disembarks, even after going to the desired place. When the fourth arrives—this is the final determination; even when the fourth arrives, where they do not delay; that is a great assembly. But where a hundred or a thousand gather, there is certainly no need to say anything. Therefore, in such a time, it should be eaten after resolving, "It is a great assembly." Any wanderer—one or another among those of the same Dhamma or sectarians; for when food is given by any of these, it should be eaten, thinking, "It is the time for a meal for ascetics (samaṇabhattasamayo)."

220.There is no offense at the time—there is no offense at any of the seven times. Two or three together—there is no offense even for those who, having approved an improper invitation, accept and eat together, two or three.

Here, the judgment should be understood in terms of five groups of four: the fourth uninvited, the fourth alms-seeker, the fourth not fully ordained, the fourth with a bowl, and the fourth sick person. How? Here, some four bhikkhus are invited, saying, "Accept food." Of those, three went, one did not go. The lay follower asks, "Where is the venerable elder?" He has not come, lay follower. So, having brought in another who arrived at that moment, saying, "Come, venerable sir," he gives food to all four; there is no offense for all. Why? Because the one who completes the group is uninvited. For there only three invited accepted there, the group is not completed by them, and the one who completes the group is uninvited, therefore the group is broken up. This is the fourth uninvited.

In the fourth alms-seeker—at the time of the invitation, one is an alms-seeker, he does not consent. But at the time of going, when it is said, "Come, venerable sir," without having consented, even though he is not coming, they take him along, having taken [him along] saying, "Come, you will get alms," so he breaks up the group. Therefore, there is no offense for all.

In the fourth not fully ordained—they are invited together with a novice; he also breaks up the group.

In the fourth with a bowl—one, not going himself, sends a bowl; in this way also, the group is broken up. Therefore, there is no offense for all.

In the fourth sick person—they are invited together with a sick person; there is no offense for the sick person alone, but the others complete the group. Indeed, the group is not broken up by the sick person. Therefore, there is an offense for them. However, in the Mahāpaccariya it is stated without distinction.

Samayaladdhaka by himself is freed (from offense), but the others incur offense because they fulfill the quorum. Therefore, the groups of four should be understood also in terms of those who obtain the opportunity at the time of the robe-offering, etc. But if, even after the four people who had accepted had departed, one learned bhikkhu said, "I will break up your group; accept the invitation," and, at the end of the rice-gruel and cakes, when they were taking their bowls for the meal, he, without giving to them, sat down, saying, "First feed and dismiss these bhikkhus; I will make the anumodana later and then leave." When they had eaten and left, if the lay follower took the bowl, saying, "Give me the bowl, Bhante," and gave rice, and he ate and made the anumodana and left, there is no offense for anyone. For in group meals, there is no doubt only with respect to the five foods. Those invited with rice incur an offense even if they take kummāsa. And those were not taken by them together. But in the case of rice-gruel, etc., there is doubt, as those were taken by them together. Thus, one learned person causes no offense for others as well.

Therefore, if someone, wishing to arrange a saṅgha meal, comes to the monastery, sent for the purpose of inviting, and says, "Bhante, take alms at our house tomorrow," or says, "Take a meal," or "Take a saṅgha meal," or "Let the saṅgha take a meal," the one who designates the meal should be learned, so that those invited may be freed from group meals, from being a piṇḍapātika, and from the breach of the dhutaṅga. How? Thus, first, he should say: "It is not possible tomorrow, Upāsaka." "The day after tomorrow, Bhante?" "It is not possible the day after tomorrow either." Thus, after delaying even half a month, he should ask again: "What did you say?" If he again says, "Take a saṅgha meal," then, after causing a distraction by saying, "Upāsaka, make this flower kappiya, this grass," he should again be asked, "What did you say?" If he again says the same, he should be told, "Āvuso, you will not get a piṇḍapātika or a Mahāthera; you will get sāmaṇeras." If he says, "But Bhante, in such and such a village, they fed the Bhaddantes, why do I not get (them)?" (he should be told), "They know how to invite; you do not know." "How did they invite, Bhante?" They said thus: "Bhante, take alms at our place." If he too speaks thus, it is allowable. But if he again says, "Take a meal," then he should be told, "Āvuso, you will not get many bhikkhus now; you will get only three." "But Bhante, in such and such a village, they fed the entire Saṅgha; why do I not get (them)?" "You do not know how to invite." "How did they invite?" They said, "Take alms." If he too says, "Take alms," it is allowable. But if he again says only "a meal," then he should be told, "Go away, we have no need for your meal; this is our fixed range; we will wander for alms here." If he says, "Wander, Bhante," and goes away, they ask: "Have the bhikkhus been obtained, sir?" "Why should much be said about this? The Theras said, 'Tomorrow we will wander for alms.' Now, do not be negligent." On the second day, the bhikkhus, having performed the cetiyavatta and being ready, should be told by the Saṅghathera: "Āvuso, an unwise man went to invite for a saṅgha meal in Dhuragāma; let us go to Dhuragāma and wander for alms." The bhikkhus should heed the Thera's word; they should not be insubordinate; they should wander for alms without standing at the village gate. While those people are taking the bowls, making (the bhikkhus) sit, and feeding them, they should eat. If, after placing the meal in the refectory, they announce while wandering about in the streets, "Bhante, take the meal in the refectory," it is not allowable.

But if, taking the meal, they go here and there, saying, "Take the meal," or immediately carry it to the monastery and, placing it in a suitable place, give it to those who come, this, called abhihaṭabhikkhā, is allowable. But if, preparing the offering in the refectory, they send (it) to this and that pariveṇa, (saying) "Take the meal in the refectory," it is not allowable. However, those people who, seeing bhikkhus wandering for alms, sweep the refectory, seat (them) there, and feed (them), should not be rejected. Those bhikkhus who, not obtaining alms in the village, are seen by people as they leave the village, and are told, "Bhante, take a meal," should be rejected, nor should (the bhikkhus) turn back. If they say, "Turn back, Bhante, take a meal," it is allowable to turn back at the word "Turn back." If they say, "Turn back, Bhante, a meal has been prepared at the house; a meal has been prepared in the village," it is allowable to turn back, as a meal exists at someone's house or in the village. If they say, "Turn back, take a meal," connecting the words, it is not allowable to turn back. The same method applies when, seeing (bhikkhus) leaving the refectory to wander for alms, they say, "Sit down, Bhante, take a meal." Niccabhatta is called dhuvabhatta. If they say, "Take niccabhatta," it is allowable to take (it) together with many. The same method applies also for salākabhatta, etc. The rest here is self-explanatory.

Eḷakalomasamuṭṭhānaṃ: action, without perception-release, non-volitional, offense by way of designation, bodily action, three- cittas, three feelings.

The Second Sikkhāpada on Group Meals.

3. Explanation of the Sikkhāpada on Successive Meals

221.In the third Sikkhāpada: na kho idaṃ orakaṃ bhavissati, yathayime manussā sakkaccaṃ bhattaṃ karontīti, it is understood by the manner in which these people respectfully prepare a meal that "this gift will not be inferior, meager, or base, either to the Teaching or to the Saṅgha with the Buddha at its head." Kirapatiko: here, "Kira" is the name of that clansman; however, he is called "Kirapatiko" in the sense of being a master. That Kira, indeed, as the lord and master, has work done by laborers, giving wages according to a fixed monthly, seasonal, or annual arrangement. Badarā paṭiyattā: he speaks in terms of courtesy. Badaramissenā: with badara relish.

222.Ussūre āhariyitthā: he brought (it) at an improper time of day.

226.Mayhaṃ bhattapaccāsaṃ itthannāmassa dammī: this, called the food-renunciation, is allowable both in his presence and in his absence. In his presence, having said, "I renounce (this) to you," it should be eaten; in his absence, having said to the five co-residents in the Dhamma, "I renounce (this) to so-and-so," it should be eaten. However, in the Mahāpaccariya, only renunciation in his absence is stated. And because that is included in the Vinaya act, it is not allowable to renounce to the Blessed One. For when the Blessed One is seated in the Gandhakuti or seated in the midst of the Saṅgha, if the Saṅgha, having taken bhikkhus fit to be appointed by the Chapter, performs that act, it is indeed well done; the Blessed One neither invalidates the act nor accomplishes (it). He does not invalidate (it) because of being the Lord of the Dhamma; he does not accomplish (it) because of not fulfilling the quorum.

229.Dve tayo nimantane ekato bhuñjatī: (this means) he throws two or three invitations into one bowl, mixes (them), makes (them) one, and eats (them). Having invited two or three families, they seat (them) in one place, and, bringing (food) from here and there, they pour rice and pour curry, and it becomes one mixture; here, there is no offense, it is stated in the Mahāpaccariya. But if the original invitation is at the bottom, and the subsequent one(s) are on top, there is an offense for one who eats starting from the top. However, for one who inserts (his) hand and lifts out even one mouthful from the first invitation and eats (it) as he likes, starting from the time he has eaten, there is no offense. If they pour milk or juice there, so that the rice soaked (in it) becomes of one taste, there is no offense for one who eats starting from the edge, it is stated in the Mahāpaccariya. However, in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā it is stated: "When someone sitting (there) after obtaining milk-rice or juice-rice, if they pour other milk-rice or juice-rice there, there is no offense for one who drinks the milk or juice. But for one who is eating, it is allowable to put the first obtained piece of meat or lump of rice into (his) mouth and to eat starting from the edge. The same method applies also for ghee-pāyāsa."

A Mahāupāsaka invites a bhikkhu; when (the bhikkhu) has approached his family, the upāsaka as well as his sons, wives, brothers, sisters, etc., bring their own portions and put (them) into (the bhikkhu's) bowl; for one who eats the later obtained (food) without eating what was given first by the upāsaka, there is "no offense," it is stated in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā. However, in the Kurundaṭṭhakathā, it is stated that it is allowable. In the Mahāpaccariya: "If they cook separately, and they bring (food) from their own cooked rice and give (it), for one who eats the later brought (food) first, there is a pācittiya. But if there is only one cooking for all, there is no successive meal." A Mahāupāsaka invites (a bhikkhu) and seats (him); another man takes the bowl; it should not be given. (The bhikkhu asks:) "Why do you not give (it), Bhante?" (The Mahāupāsaka replies:) "But Upāsaka, I have invited (you)!" (The other man says:) "Let it be, Bhante, eat whatever you obtain!" It is allowable to eat. It is stated in the Kurundī that it is allowable to eat (food) given with rice brought by another, after asking permission.

When (bhikkhus) are leaving after making the anumodana, if people, wishing to hear the Dhamma, all invite (them), (saying) "Bhante, may you come again tomorrow," it is allowable to come again the next day and eat whatever is obtained. Why? Because all have invited (them). A certain bhikkhu, while wandering for alms, obtains rice; another upāsaka invites that (bhikkhu) and seats (him) in (his) house, but the rice is not yet ready. If that bhikkhu eats the rice he obtained while wandering for alms, there is an offense. When he does not eat after sitting down, if he is asked, "Why do you not eat, Bhante?" and he says, "Because I have been invited by you," and is told, "Eat whatever you obtain, Bhante," and he eats, it is allowable.

Sakalena gāmenā: it is only for one who has been invited by the entire village together that there is no offense when he eats anywhere. The same method applies for a guild as well. Nimantiyamāno bhikkhaṃ gahessāmīti bhaṇatī: when he is being invited (saying), "Take a meal," he says, "I have no need for your meal; I will take alms." Here, Mahāpadumatthero says: "While saying thus, he can cancel the invitation in this sikkhāpada, but since an opportunity for eating has been made, he is freed neither from group meals nor from (the rule on) successive meals." Mahāsumatthero says: "By that very (act) by which he can cancel the invitation, there is neither a group meal nor (a rule on) successive meals." The rest is self-explanatory.

Kathinasamuṭṭhānaṃ: arises from bodily and verbal (action) and from bodily, verbal, and mental (action); kiriyākiriyaṃ; here, eating is kiriya; not renouncing is akiriya; without perception-release, non-volitional, offense by way of designation, bodily action, verbal action, three-cittas, three feelings.

The Third Sikkhāpada on Successive Meals.

4. Explanation of the Kāṇamātā Sikkhāpada

230.In the fourth Sikkhāpada: kāṇamātā: the mother of Kāṇā. It seems that her daughter was beautiful; whoever saw her, became blind with lust; (that is,) they became blinded by lust. Therefore, because she caused others to become blind, she became famous as "Kāṇā." Because of her, her mother also became known as "Kāṇamātā." Āgataṃ: the arrival. Kismiṃ viyā: like what? The idea (is that it) is like something shameful. Rittahatthaṃ gantuṃ: empty-handed in this going; that empty-handed (going), to go empty-handed seems like something shameful, it is said. Parikkhayaṃ agamāsī: the female lay follower, a noble disciple, could not not give to the bhikkhus when she saw (them), therefore she gave until everything came to an end. Dhammiyā kathāya: here, Kāṇā too, while listening to the Dhamma being taught for the sake of (her) mother, became a sotāpanna at the conclusion of the discourse. Uṭṭhāyāsanā pakkāmī: having risen from (his) seat, he left. That man too, having heard that "the Teacher went to Kāṇamātā's dwelling," brought Kāṇā and placed (her) in her original place.

231. In this case, as soon as the matter arose, before the training rule was even formulated, the provision regarding travelling provisions (pātheyyavatthu) came into existence. Therefore, immediately after that, to show this, the passage beginning with "tena kho pana samayena" etc., was stated. And that lay follower, being a noble disciple (ariyasāvaka), gave everything. Therefore, it was said, "it came to an end."

233. Yaṃkiñci paheṇakatthāyā means anything prepared for the purpose of a gift (paṇṇākāra), anything extra such as sweet cakes (modaka), sugar candy (sakkhalikā), etc., all of this here is counted as cake (pūva) only. Yaṃkiñci pātheyyatthāyā means anything prepared for those going on a journey for the sake of provisions along the way, anything such as hard roasted grains (baddhasattu), unroasted grains (abaddhasattu), sesame seeds (tilataṇḍula), etc., all of this here is counted as gruel (mantha) only. Tato ce uttari means even if one takes a third bowl piled up, it is a pācittiya offense in the category of cake.

:Dvattipattapūre paṭiggahetvā means having taken bowls filled to the level of the lower line of the mouth rim. Amutra mayā dvattipattapūrā means here, if two were taken, it should be said, "Here, two bowlfuls have been received by me; you should take one." Even by him, seeing another, it should be said, "Two bowlfuls have been taken by the one who came first, one by me; you should not take (any)." For the one by whom one was taken first, this same method (naya) applies in announcing it to the next. But by the one by whom three were taken by himself, seeing another, it should be said, "Do not receive (any) here." Paṭikkamanaṃ nīharitvā means having taken (the bowls) to the refectory (āsanasāla); and one going to the refectory should not go via the abandoned hall (chaḍḍitasālā). One should go to where the great Saṅgha of monks is sitting. But in the Mahāpaccari, it was said, "One should go to the refectory that is nearest to the place obtained. It is not allowed to go elsewhere, thinking, 'I will give (it) to my acquaintances, or to those who are companions, or to those of the same school.' But if there is a place for regularly sitting, it is allowable to go even far away."

:Saṃvibhajitabbaṃ means if three bowlfuls have been taken, having kept one for oneself, two should be given to the Saṅgha of monks. If two have been taken, having kept one for oneself, one should be given to the Saṅgha; but it is not allowed to give (it) as a personal favor. By the one by whom one has been taken, nothing unwillingly should be given; it should be done as one pleases.

235. Gamane paṭippassaddhe means, seeing a danger in the middle of the road, or due to lack of purpose, (thinking,) "Now, we will not send (it), we will not go," thus, when the going is given up, discontinued. Ñātakānaṃ pavāritānaṃ means there is no offense for one accepting much given to these relatives who have invited him. But in the commentaries, it was said, "Even for them, only the proper amount is allowable, as it is prepared for the purpose of travelling provisions (pātheyya) and gifts (paheṇaka)." The rest is self-explanatory.

:Sixfold origination: it is an action (kiriya), accompanied by neither perception nor non-perception (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), unintentional (acittakaṃ), an offense by designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), a bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), a verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), of three minds (ticittaṃ), of three feelings (tivedananti).

:The Kāṇamātā training rule is the fourth.

:##### 5. Explanation of the First Invitation Training Rule

236. In the fifth training rule: bhikkhū bhuttāvī pavāritā means monks who have eaten, having been invited (pavāritā) by a Brahmin, (saying,) "Take, venerable sirs, as much as you wish," thus, by an invitation to the extent of satisfaction, and by oneself, (saying,) "Enough, friend, give (it) little by little," thus, by an invitation involving refusal.Paṭivissake means those living in neighboring houses.

237. Kākoravasaddaṃ means the croaking sound of crows (kākānaṃ oravasaddaṃ); the sound of those gathered together, crying out. Alametaṃ sabbaṃ means here, it is allowable to say just "alametaṃ sabbaṃ" without uttering the three times (tikāraṃ).

238-9. Bhuttāvī means one who has eaten (bhuttavā). And there, since by whomever even one grain has been eaten, whether chewed or unchewed, that one is counted as "bhuttāvī," therefore, in its analysis of terms, "bhuttāvī means of the five foods," etc., was said. Pavārito means one who has made an invitation (katapavāraṇo), one who has made a refusal (katapaṭikkhepo). And that too (is valid) since it is not by mere refusal, but rather by way of the five factors, therefore, in its analysis of terms, "pavārito means food is apparent," etc., was said. There, since by "food is apparent" (asanaṃ paññāyatī), food is broken up (vippakatabhojano), "pavārito" is said. And by the one whose food is broken up, some has been eaten, some not eaten, and what has been eaten; with reference to that, it is also counted as "bhuttāvī," therefore, we do not see any separate attainment of meaning by the word "bhuttāvī". But just as in "two or three days, five or six utterances," etc. (pāci. 61-62), the word "diratta" etc., similarly, it should be understood that this (word "pavārita") was said because of the enveloping nature and the elegance of expression.

:Asanaṃ paññāyatītiādīsu means broken-up food is seen, and this person is one who is eating, this is the meaning. Bhojanaṃ paññāyatī means food suitable for invitation (pavāraṇappahonaka) is seen. Meaning that one of the rice etc., should be refused (paṭikkhipitabbaṃ). Hatthapāse ṭhito means the giver, having taken food suitable for invitation, is in a space measuring two and a half hands (aḍḍhateyyahatthappamāṇe). Abhiharatī means that giver presents that food to him with his body. Paṭikkhepo paññāyatī means refusal is apparent; meaning that the monk refuses that which has been presented, with his body or with his speech. Thus, by way of these five factors, he is called "pavārito". And this was said:

:"In five ways, Upāli, an invitation is apparent: food is apparent, a meal is apparent, standing within arm's reach, presenting, refusal is apparent" (pari. 428).

:"Sālī" means all kinds of rice, including at least wild rice (nīvāra). "Vīhī" means all kinds of rice. There is no distinction in "yavagodhumesu" (barley and wheat). "Kaṅgū" means all kinds of millet, with white, red, and black varieties. "Varako" means all white varieties of varaka grains, including at least varakacorakaṃ. "Kudrūsako" means all kinds of wild grains, with black grains, liquid, and varieties such as sāmāka.

:Here, they say that nīvāra, varakacorakā are "similar to grains" (dhaññānulomā). Whether they are grains or similar to grains, having taken the grains of these seven kinds mentioned above, if they cook (it), intending "we will cook rice," or "we will cook gruel," or "we will cook one of the sour rice porridge etc.," whatever they cook, if, when eating hot or cold, gruel is apparent (odhi paññāyati) in the place where it is taken during the mealtime, it goes into the category of rice (odanasaṅgahameva), it causes invitation (pavāraṇa). If gruel is not apparent, it goes into the category of gruel, it does not cause invitation.

:Also, rice porridge (pāyāsa) or sour gruel mixed with leaves, fruits and shoots (kaḷīra), as soon as it is taken down from the hearth, is slightly warm, can be poured and drunk, does not show gruel even in the place grasped by the hand, it does not cause invitation. But if, when the heat has gone away, it becomes cold and thick, it shows gruel, then it causes invitation again. The thinness does not protect it earlier. Even if curds (dadhi) or buttermilk (takka) etc., are placed and many leaves, fruits, and shoots are put in, even a handful of rice grains are thrown in, if gruel is apparent at mealtime, it causes invitation. In a non-gruel invitation, they pour water gruel (udakakañjika), milk etc., into the rice and give (it), (saying,) "Take the gruel." Even though they are thin, they cause invitation. But if, having cooked (them) after throwing (them) into boiling water etc., they give (it), it goes into the category of gruel only. Even when it has gone into the category of gruel, in that or another (dish) where they put fish or meat, if even a mustard-seed sized piece of fish or meat or tendon is apparent, it causes invitation.

:But pure broth (suddharasako) or broth gruel does not cause (invitation). Except for rice grains mentioned (above), rice with other bamboo rice etc., or root vegetables or fruits, whatever rice is made, does not cause invitation, much less thick gruel. But if they put fish or meat in this, it causes (invitation). In the Mahāpaccari, it was said, "Rice for flowers also causes invitation." Rice for flowers (pupphiatthāya bhattaṃ) means rice grains cooked in boiling water for the purpose of flower-snacks (pupphikhajjaka). But if they dry those rice grains and eat (them), it is allowable; they go neither into the category of roasted grain flour (sattu) nor into the category of rice. Again, rice made with those causes invitation. Those rice grains, they cook in sesame oil etc., or make cakes, they do not cause invitation. Or flattened rice or roasted grain flour rice etc., made with those do not cause invitation.

:Kummāsa means kummāsa made with barley. But kummāsa made with other mung beans etc., does not cause invitation. Sattu (roasted grain flour) means sattu made with rice, paddy, or barley. They also fry millet, varaka, kudrūsaka, and sīsāni, lightly pound (them), remove the husks, and then pound (them) firmly, and make flour. Even if that is sticky and cohesive, it goes into the category of sattu only. Having pounded rice grains of hard-roasted paddy and give (it), that flour also goes into the category of sattu only. But rice grains of evenly-roasted paddy or paddy husks or fried rice grains do not cause invitation. Flour of those rice grains etc., causes invitation. The husk (kuṇḍaka) of hard-roasted paddy also causes invitation. But the husk of evenly-roasted or sun-dried (rice) does not cause invitation. Puffed rice or rice sattu etc., made with those do not cause invitation. Fried flour or whatever pure snack does not cause invitation. But snacks filled with fish or meat or sattu cakes cause invitation. Fish and meat are obvious. But this is the distinction: even if, while drinking gruel, just two pieces of fish or pieces of meat, sized like gruel grains, are given in one bowl or in different bowls, if he refuses (paṭikkhipati) some other pavāraṇappahonaka without eating those, he does not cause invitation. After that, one is eaten, one is in the hand or bowl, if he refuses another, he causes invitation. If both have been eaten, there is not even a mustard-seed sized (piece) left in the mouth, even if he refuses another, he does not cause invitation.

:Eating allowable meat, one refuses allowable meat, he causes invitation. Eating allowable meat, one refuses unallowable meat, he does not cause invitation. Why? Because of the absence of basis (avatthutāya). Indeed, invitation occurs when one refuses only what a monk is allowed to eat. But knowing this, he refuses because it is unallowable; even without knowing, he refuses, standing in a place where (something) should be refused, therefore, he does not cause invitation. But if, eating unallowable meat, one refuses allowable meat, he causes invitation. Why? Because of the presence of basis. Indeed, what has been refused by him is the basis for invitation. But what he is eating, even though it is in a place where (something) should be refused, that being eaten does not give up the state of meat, therefore, he causes invitation. Eating unallowable meat, one refuses unallowable meat, he does not cause invitation, according to the previous method. Eating allowable meat or unallowable meat, one refuses whatever allowable food of the five foods, he causes invitation. Food arising from a corrupt family (kuladūsaka), medical practice (vejjakamma), revealing superior human states (uttarimanussadhamma), or trading in forms for gain (sāditarūpiya), censured by the Buddha, arising from an improper search (anesanāya), he refuses unallowable food, he does not cause invitation. Even while eating allowable food or unallowable food, one refuses allowable food, he causes invitation. He refuses unallowable food, he does not cause invitation; the reason should be understood everywhere according to the method stated.

:Here, in Hatthapāse ṭhito, if the monk is sitting, starting from the back edge of the seat, if standing, starting from the heel, if lying down, starting from the far edge of the side on which he is lying, for the giver, whether sitting, standing, or lying down, keeping the hand outstretched, whichever limb is nearest, having determined the inner limit of that, two and a half hands is to be understood as "arm's reach" (hatthapāso). Invitation occurs only for one refusing something presented while standing in that (space), not beyond that.

Abhiharati means he brings it near to take, while standing within arm's reach. But if a bhikkhu, even sitting nearby, says "Take the food" without bringing near the bowl that is resting in his hands, or on his lap, or on a stand, there is no pavāraṇā for refusing it. The same principle applies even if he brings the food container and places it on the ground in front and says, "Take it." But if, after lifting or moving it slightly, he says, "Take it," there is pavāraṇā for refusing. If a senior monk, sitting in the senior's seat, sends a bowl to a junior monk sitting far away and says, "Take rice from here," and the junior monk takes it but remains silent, and the junior says, "Enough for me," and refuses, there is no pavāraṇā. Why? Because of the distance of the senior monk and because the messenger did not bring it near. But if a monk who has taken it and come says, "Take this food," there is pavāraṇā for refusing it.

For serving, one person takes a rice container in one hand and a ladle in the other and serves the bhikkhus; if another person comes and says, "I will hold the container, you give the rice," and only makes the gesture of taking it, but the server still holds it, then it is considered to have been brought near ( abhihaṭāva). Therefore, there is pavāraṇā for the one who refuses when he is about to take it with the intention of giving. If, however, it is only touched by the server, and the other person holds it, then there is no pavāraṇā for the one who refuses when he is about to take it with the intention of giving. But it applies to rice scooped with a ladle. The act of bringing it near is indeed the act of bringing near with the ladle. The Mahāpaccari says that even if the burden is equal for both, the one who refuses incurs pavāraṇā. If, when food is being given to a nearby bhikkhu, another covers his bowl with his hands, there is no pavāraṇā. Why? Because he refused what was brought near to another.

Paṭikkhepo paññāyatīti: Here, there is no pavāraṇā for refusing verbally what has been brought near. But it should be understood that there is pavāraṇā for refusing physically what has been brought near, whether physically or verbally.

Here, physical refusal means moving a finger, hand, fly whisk, or the edge of the robe, or making a face with the eyebrows, or looking angrily; verbal refusal means saying "Enough," or "I will not take it," or "Don't pour," or "Go away"; thus, pavāraṇā occurs when it is refused by body or speech in any way.

One, fearing pavāraṇā when food is brought near, withdraws his hand, and when they repeatedly pour rice into his bowl, he says, "Pour, pour, fill it to the brim!" What is the ruling here? Venerable Mahāsumata says, "Since it was said to prevent pouring, there is pavāraṇā." But Venerable Mahāpaduma says, "When someone says 'Pour and fill,' who would say 'there is pavāraṇā for someone'? He does not cause pavāraṇā." Another, noticing a bhikkhu bringing food near, asks, "Venerable, will you take some more from here? Shall I give you some?" There too, Venerable Mahāsumata says, "Since it was said, 'so that it will not come again,' there is pavāraṇā." But Venerable Mahāpaduma says, "When someone says 'Will you take some,' who would say 'there is pavāraṇā for someone'? He does not cause pavāraṇā."

One brings near a curry with meat and says, "Take the curry," there is no pavāraṇā for refusing it upon hearing that. There is pavāraṇā for refusing if it is said, "Fish curry, meat curry," and there is pavāraṇā if it is said, "Take this." If the meat is separated and he says, "Take the meat curry," if there is even a mustard seed-sized piece of meat in it, there is pavāraṇā for refusing it. If, however, it has been strained, Venerable Abhaya says, "It is allowable."

When asked about meat curry, a senior monk says, "Wait a moment," and says, "Bring a plate, friend." What is the ruling here? Venerable Mahāsumata says, "The act of bringing near is interrupted first, therefore, it causes pavāraṇā." But Venerable Mahāpaduma says, "Where is this person going? What is the nature of his going? Would there be pavāraṇā even for the one who is taking it?" and says, "It does not cause pavāraṇā." They cook meat mixed with kaḷīra and breadfruit etc., and taking it, they say, "Take the kaḷīra soup, take the breadfruit curry." Even in this case, it does not cause pavāraṇā. Why? Because it is mentioned by the name of what is not subject to pavāraṇā. If they say, "Fish soup, meat soup," or "Take this," it causes pavāraṇā. There is something called maṃsakarambaka (meat mixed dish), even if he wants to give it, if he says, "Take the karambaka," it is allowable; it does not cause pavāraṇā. But if it is said "Meat karambaka," or "This," it causes pavāraṇā. The same principle applies to all mixtures of fish and meat.

But the Mahāpaccari says that if one, eating at an invitation, refuses meat that is brought near, thinking "it was done intentionally," he has incurred pavāraṇā. The discussion of mixtures, however, is well stated in the Kurundī. For example, it is stated there: A bhikkhu on alms round brings mixed rice gruel and says, "Take the gruel," it does not cause pavāraṇā. If he says, "Take the rice," it causes pavāraṇā. Why? Because of the existence of what he was asked about. The intention here is: If he says, "Take the gruel mixture," and if the gruel is more abundant or equal, it does not cause pavāraṇā. If the gruel is less and the rice is more abundant, it causes pavāraṇā. And since this is stated in all the commentaries, it cannot be rejected, although the reason here is difficult to see. If he says, "Take the rice mixture," whether the rice is abundant, equal, or less, it always causes pavāraṇā. If he says, "Take the mixture" without mentioning rice or gruel, if the rice is more abundant or equal, it causes pavāraṇā. If it is less, it does not cause pavāraṇā. And this should not be compared with karambaka. Karambaka can be a mixture with or without meat, therefore, there is no pavāraṇā when "karambaka" is said. This, however, is only a rice mixture. Pavāraṇā occurs according to the method stated here. In rice with abundant flavor, one separates the flavor, and in milk-rice with abundant milk, the milk, and in pāyāsa with abundant ghee, gives the ghee separately, there is no pavāraṇā for refusing it.

But one who incurs pavāraṇā while walking is allowed to eat while walking. If one encounters mud or water, the remainder should be done while standing. If there is a full river in between, it should be eaten while going around the bushes on the riverbank. If there is a boat or a bridge, it should be eaten while climbing on it and walking, the walking should not be interrupted. One who has incurred pavāraṇā while sitting on a vehicle or on the back of an elephant or on the lunar disc or solar disc, should eat while sitting as long as they are moving until noon. One who incurs pavāraṇā while standing should eat while standing, one who incurs pavāraṇā while sitting should eat while sitting. The remainder should be done by maintaining that posture. One who incurs pavāraṇā while squatting should eat while squatting. A mat of straw or some kind of seat should be given under him. One who has incurred pavāraṇā while sitting on a stool is allowed to eat by turning in four directions without moving the seat. One who has incurred pavāraṇā while sitting on a bed is not allowed to move from here to there. If, however, they lift him up with the bed and take him elsewhere, it is allowable. One who incurs pavāraṇā while lying down should eat while lying down. While turning around, the place of the side he is lying on should not be exceeded.

Anatiritta means not remainder; it means not extra. Since that is either not done with the seven forms of vinayakamma such as making it allowable etc., or is not more for the sick person, therefore "not made allowable" etc., is said in the padabhājana. Here, akappiyakata means a fruit, root, tuber, etc., that has not been made allowable with the five samaṇakappas; and what is unallowable meat or unallowable food, this is called unallowable. Even if that unallowable is made remainder by saying "Enough, all this," it should be understood as "made unallowable." Appaṭiggahitakata means that which has not been accepted by the bhikkhu, made remainder in the same way as before. Anuccāritakata means that which has been brought by a bhikkhu who has come to have it made allowable, without even slightly lifting or moving it away. Ahatthapāse kata means that which has been done by someone standing outside the arm's reach of one who has come to have it made allowable. Abhuttāvinā kata means that the food sufficient for pavāraṇā has been made remainder without being eaten by the one who says, "Enough, all this." Bhuttāvinā pavāritena āsanā vuṭṭhitena kata this is self-explanatory. Alametaṃ sabbanti avutta means it is not said by making a verbal distinction. Thus, both that allowable remainder which is not made allowable with these seven forms of vinayakamma, and that which is not an excess for the sick person, should be understood as "not remainder."

bhuttāvinā kataṃ hotīti: It should be understood that even if a single grain of rice or meat essence is eaten from the bowl of a like-minded bhikkhu sitting nearby, it is considered to have been done by one who has eaten. Āsanā avuṭṭhitenāti: Here, for the purpose of non-confusion, this is the ruling – two bhikkhus are eating in the morning and have incurred pavāraṇā – one should remain sitting there, the other should bring regular food or ticket food, pour half into that bhikkhu's bowl, wash his hands, and have the remainder made allowable by that bhikkhu and eat it. Why? Because what is stuck to his hand is unallowable. If, however, the bhikkhu who is sitting first takes from that bowl himself with his hand, there is no need to wash hands. If, while eating in this way after having it made allowable, some more curry or edibles are poured into the bowl, the one who made it allowable first cannot do it again. It must be done by the one who did not do it. What has not been done, that must be done. ‘‘Yena akata’’nti: It must be done by another bhikkhu who did not do it first. ‘‘Yañca akata’’nti: Even what was not done by the one who first made it allowable, that must be done. It is not allowed to do it in the first bowl. For there, what is being done is done together with what was done first, therefore, the intention is that it is allowable to do it in another bowl. It is allowable for that bhikkhu to eat what has been done in this way together with what was done first.

When making allowable, it should be done not only in the bowl, but also in a pot or container, wherever it is, in a lowered container placed in front. Even if a hundred bhikkhus have incurred pavāraṇā, it is allowable for all to eat, and it is allowable for those who have not incurred pavāraṇā as well. It is not allowable for the one who made it allowable. Even if they lead a bhikkhu who has incurred pavāraṇā and entered for alms to sit at an auspicious invitation where eating is a must, it must be eaten only after having it made remainder. If there is no other bhikkhu there, it must be sent to the refectory or monastery to have it done. However, when making allowable, it should not be done while it is in the hands of one who is not fully ordained. If there is an incapable bhikkhu in the refectory, one should go himself, have it made allowable, bring it, and eat it.

Gilānātirittanti: Here, not only what is left over after a sick person has eaten is "remainder for the sick"; but whatever is brought for the sake of the sick person, saying "today or tomorrow or whenever he wants, he will eat it," all that should be understood as "remainder for the sick." The dukkata that occurs with each consumption in yāmakālika etc., is said in terms of non-contact. If, however, they are in contact with āmisa, there is only a pācittiya for accepting and consuming it for the sake of food or not for the sake of food.

241. Sati paccayeti: If there is thirst for yāmakālika, for the purpose of cutting off thirst, and for sattāhakālika and yāvajīvika, if there is an illness that needs to be alleviated with that, there is no offense for using them for the purpose of alleviating it. The rest here is self-explanatory.

Kathina-arising: It arises from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; it is active and inactive, without perception and release, unintentional, an offense by enactment, a bodily action, a verbal action, tri-citta, tri-vedana.

The Fifth Chapter on First Pavāraṇā is Concluded.

6. Explanation of the Second Pavāraṇā Training Rule

242. In the sixth training rule, "ācāraṃ ācarati" (behaves unacceptably) means he commits an offense against the enactment. "Upanandhī" means generating ill-will, binding his anger to that person; that is, repeatedly arousing hatred. "Upanaddho bhikkhū" means the bhikkhu who has generated ill-will.

243. "Abhihaṭṭhuṃ pavāreyyā" means inviting after bringing [food], saying, "Here, bhikkhu, eat or consume." However, in the word-by-word analysis, without extracting "handa bhikkhū" (here, bhikkhus), etc., only the general meaning is given to show the purpose of inviting by bringing [food], it is said, "Take as much as you like." "Jāna" means knowing that he has been invited. Since that knowing of his occurs in three ways, therefore, in the word-by-word analysis, the method is stated beginning with "jānāti nāma sāmaṃ vā jānātī" (he knows, either he knows himself), etc. "Āsādanāpekkho" means expecting offense, accusation, or disrespectful behavior.

"Paṭiggaṇhāti āpatti dukkaṭassā" (if he accepts, there is an offense of wrong-doing) means that when someone accepts what has been brought, the bhikkhu who brought it incurs a duukkaṭa offense. However, for the other bhikkhu, all the types of offenses have been stated in the first training rule; but in this training rule, all the offenses should be understood as applying only to the bhikkhu who brings the food. The rest is clear because the method has been stated in the first training rule.

It arises from three sources: from body-mind, from speech-mind, and from body-speech-mind; it is an action (kiriya), accompanied by intention, with consciousness, a worldy offense (lokavajja), a bodily action (kāyakamma), a verbal action (vacīkamma), an unwholesome state of mind (akusalacitta), and painful feeling (dukkhavedanā).

The Second Pavāraṇā Training Rule, the Sixth.

7. Explanation of the Training Rule on Eating at the Wrong Time

247. In the seventh training rule, "giraggasamajjo" means a gathering at the top of a mountain, or a gathering at the summit of a mountain. It is said that an announcement was made in the city that it would happen on the seventh day, and a large crowd gathered outside the city on a level ground in the shadow of the mountain, and various kinds of dances and plays took place, and stages were built upon stages for the purpose of seeing them. The group-of-seventeen, ordained as young men before the training rule was laid down, went there thinking, "Friends, we will watch the plays." Then their relatives, delighted, thinking, "Our venerable ones have come," bathed them, anointed them, fed them, and gave them other cakes and edibles in their hands. Referring to that, it is said – "manussā sattarasavaggiye bhikkhū passitvā" (people, seeing the group-of-seventeen bhikkhus), etc.

248-9. "Vikāle" means at the wrong time, after the time has passed. Here, 'time' is intended to mean the time for bhikkhus to eat, and that is, by the final limit, midday; the intention is that it has passed that. Therefore, in the word-by-word analysis, it is said, "vikālo nāma majjhanhike vītivatte yāva aruṇuggamanā" (wrong time is after midday has passed until the rising of the dawn), even the established midday is included in the term 'time.' But after that, it is not possible to eat or consume, it might be possible to drink quickly, but it should not be done with doubt (kukkucca). And to know the limit of time, a time marker (kālatthambho) should be set up, and the meal duty should be done at the correct time.

"Avasesaṃ khādanīyaṃ nāmā" (the remainder is called "edible") – here, there is no need to speak about what is made of flour, such as sakkhalimodaka, etc. Even that which is of the nature of meat (āmisagatikaṃ) from forest roots, etc., that is, root edibles, stem edibles, sprout edibles, bud edibles, trunk edibles, bark edibles, leaf edibles, flower edibles, fruit edibles, kernel edibles, flour edibles, and sap edibles, this too goes into the category of "edible".

Here, for understanding the characteristic of what is of the nature of meat, this brief example is given: among root edibles, mūlaka roots, khāraka roots, caccu roots, tambaka roots, taṇḍuleyyaka roots, vatthuleyyaka roots, vajakali roots, jajjharī roots, and so forth, roots that are suitable for soup and leaves, are of the nature of meat. And here, in the vajakali root, they cut off and discard the old part, that is permissible for life. Other things of this kind should be understood in the same way. It is said that even the old parts of mūlaka, khāraka, and jajjharī roots are of the nature of meat. But those that are in the Pāḷi –

"I allow, monks, roots as medicines: turmeric, ginger, vaca, vacatta, ativisa, kaṭukarohiṇī, usīra, bhaddamuttaka, or whatever other roots there are as medicines, which neither serve as edibles for the purpose of eating, nor serve as foods for the purpose of consuming" (Mahāva. 263) –

are permissible for life. There is no end to the counting of those which are counted in the manner of the small five roots, the great five roots, etc. But the characteristic of these is precisely the lack of serving as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming. Therefore, whatever root in those various regions serves as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, that is permissible until the next day; the other is permissible for life, it should be understood. For even after saying much about them, one must remain within this characteristic itself. But in spoken common names, there is confusion for those who do not know those names, therefore, not giving importance to common names, only the characteristic has been shown.

Just as with roots, so too with stems, etc., the decision should be made based on the characteristic that has been shown. And that which is stated in the Pāḷi as eight kinds beginning with turmeric, all of its trunk, bark, flower, and fruit are permissible for life, it is said.

In stem edibles, there are two kinds of stems: long and short. Stems such as bhisakiṃsuka, etc., are round; stems such as uppalakaseruka, etc., are what they also call "knots." Of these, the old and aged parts of all stems, and the bark and fine roots are permissible for life. But the young, easily edible stems, such as the sālakalyāṇīpotaka stem, the kiṃsukapotaka stem, the ambāṭaka stem, the ketaka stem, the māluvaka stem, the stem known as bhisa (lotus), the padumapuṇḍarīka stem, and also piṇḍālumasāluādi stems, khīravallikando, āluvakando, siggukando, tālakando, the stems of blue lotus, red lotus, kumuda, and sogandhika, the banana stem, the bamboo stem, the kaseruka stem, and so forth, stems that serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food in those various regions, are permissible until the next day.

Khīravallikando that is unwashed is permissible for life, that which is washed is permissible until the next day. Khīrakākolījīvikausabhakalasuṇādi stems, however, are permissible for life. These, in the Pāḷi, are included by way of inclusion with roots as medicine, as in, "yāni vā panaññānipi atthi mūlāni bhesajjāni" (whatever other roots there are as medicines).

In sprout edibles, the lotus sprout is just like the white lotus sprout. Sprouts such as erakamūla and kandulamūla, which in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as food for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, are permissible until the next day. But the sprouts of turmeric, ginger, amakaci, four-cornered creeper, ketaka, palmyra palm, hintāla, kuntāla, coconut, and areca palm are permissible for life, all of that is included in the Pāḷi by way of inclusion with roots as medicine, as in, "yāni vā panaññānipi atthi mūlāni bhesajjāni" (Mahāva. 263).

In bud edibles, the buds of palmyra palm, hintāla, kuntāla, ketaka, coconut, areca palm, date palm, rattan, eraka, banana, the buds known as kaḷīra, bamboo shoots, reed shoots, sugarcane shoots, radish shoots, mustard shoots, satāvari shoots, and the shoots of the seven grains, which in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, the buds of trees and creepers are permissible until the next day. The buds of turmeric, ginger, vaca, makaci, suna, and the old stump cut off from palmyra palm, hintāla, kuntāla, and coconut are permissible for life.

In trunk edibles, the inner pith of the sālakalyāṇī trunk that is free from disease, sugarcane trunks, trunks of blue lotus, red lotus, kumuda, and sogandhika, which in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, the trunk is permissible until the next day. The leaf stalks of lotus species, all stalks of the lotus family, and kāravindakadaṇḍādi and all remaining trunks are permissible for life.

In bark edibles, only sugarcane bark is permissible until the next day, and that too if it is juicy. All the rest is permissible for life. Of these, the three – buds, trunks, and bark – should be understood as included with astringent medicine in the Pāḷi. For it was said:

"I allow, monks, astringent medicines: nimba astringent, kuṭaja astringent, paṭola astringent, phaggava astringent, nattamālaka astringent, or whatever other astringent medicines there are which neither serve as edibles for the purpose of eating, nor serve as foods for the purpose of consuming" (Mahāva. 263).

Here, the inclusion of these too is accomplished. And all the astringents that have been stated should be understood as allowable.

In leaf edibles, mūlaka, khāraka, caccu, tambaka, taṇḍuleyyaka, papunṇāga, vatthuleyyaka, vajakali, jajjharī, sellu, siggu, kāsamaddaka, ummā, Chinese gram, māsa, kidney bean, leaving out the great broad bean, the remaining broad beans, aggimantha, sunisannaka, white varaṇa, nāḷikā, bhūmiyaṃ jātaloṇī, the leaves of these, and other such leaves that in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, those leaves are certainly permissible until the next day. But that other paṇṇaloṇi, which is the size of a large fingernail or the back of the hand, climbs on trees and shrubs, its leaf is permissible for life. The islanders say that brahmī leaves are permissible until the next day. Mango leaves are permissible until the next day, but asoka leaves are permissible for life.

Whatever other [leaves] are in the Pāḷi –

"I allow, monks, leaves as medicines: nimba leaves, kuṭaja leaves, paṭola leaves, sulasī leaves, cotton leaves, or whatever other leaves there are as medicines which neither serve as edibles for the purpose of eating, nor serve as foods for the purpose of consuming" (Mahāva. 263) –

that have been stated, those are permissible for life. Not only the leaves, but also their flowers, fruits, etc., are permissible for life. There is no end to the counting of leaves in terms of phaggava leaves, ajjuka leaves, phaṇijjaka leaves, paṭola leaves, tambūla leaves, paduminī leaves, and so forth.

In flower edibles, mūlaka flowers, khāraka flowers, caccu flowers, tambaka flowers, vajakali flowers, jajjharī flowers, small broad bean flowers, large broad bean flowers, kaseruka flowers, the young flowers of coconut and palmyra palm, ketaka flowers, white varaṇa flowers, siggu flowers, the flowers of lotus species, fragrant flowers of the size of an earring, kaḷīra flowers, jīvantī flowers, which in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, those flowers are permissible until the next day. But the flowers of asoka, bakula, kuyyaka, punnāga, campaka, jasmine, oleander, kaṇikāra, kundana, newly opened jasmine, mallikā, etc., are permissible for life; there is no end to their counting. But in the Pāḷi, they should be understood as included with astringent medicine.

In fruit edibles, the fruits of jackfruit, breadfruit, palmyra palm, coconut, mango, jambū, ambāṭaka, tintiṇika, citron, wood apple, ash gourd, pussaphala, timbūsa, katipusa, eggplant, coca, moca, madhuka, etc., whatever fruits in the world in various regions serve as edibles for the purpose of eating and as foods for the purpose of consuming for people by nature as food, all those are permissible until the next day. It is not possible to show the end to them in terms of counting names. But those which are in the Pāḷi –

"I allow, monks, fruits as medicines: bilaṅga, long pepper, black pepper, myrobalan, vibhītaka, emblic myrobalan, goṭṭhaphala, or whatever other fruits there are as medicines which neither serve as edibles for the purpose of eating, nor serve as foods for the purpose of consuming" (Mahāva. 263) –

Those mentioned are life-long. Even among these, the unripe fruits such as acchiva, bimba, varaṇa, ketaka, kāśmarī, etc., and fruits like jātiphala, kaṭukaphala, eḷā, takkola, and so on, cannot be fully enumerated by name.

Among edible seeds, seeds of labuja, mango (panasa), ambāṭaka, sāla, dates (khajjūrī), ketaka, timbarūsa young seeds, tamarind seeds (tintiṇikaṭṭhi), bimba fruit seeds, lotus seed head (uppala, paduma types), and so on, which are naturally consumed by people in various regions for eating and nourishment, these seeds are for a limited time only (yāvakālika). Seeds of madhuka, punnāga, harītakī, mustard seeds (siddhatthakaṭṭhi), rājikaṭṭhi, and so on, are life-long (yāvajīvika). In the Pali texts, their inclusion should be understood with medicinal fruits.

Among flour-based edibles, flour from the seven grains, similar grains, and other grains, as well as panasa flour, labuja flour, ambāṭaka flour, sāla flour, flour from unwashed palm (dhotakatāla), and khīravallī flour, etc., which are naturally consumed by people in various regions for eating and nourishment, these flours are for a limited time only (yāvakālika). Unwashed palm flour (adhotakaṃ tālapiṭṭhaṃ), khīravallī flour and assagandhādi flour are life-long (yāvajīvika). In the Pali texts, their inclusion should be understood with astringents, roots, and fruits.

Among resin-based edibles, only sugarcane molasses (ucchuniyyāsa) is allowable for seven days. The remaining resins mentioned in the Pali passage, "I allow, monks, medicinal resins – hiṅgu, hiṅgujatu, hiṅgusipāṭika, taka, takapatti, takapaṇṇi, sajjulasa, or any other medicinal resins that exist," (mahāva. 263) are life-long (yāvajīvika). The various types included based on the yevāpana method, such as mango resin and kaṇikāra resin, cannot be fully enumerated by name. Thus, anything among these root-based edibles and so on that is for a limited time is included in this meaning as "the remaining edibles."

"Bhojanīyaṃ nāma pañca bhojanānī" (Bhojanīya means the five foods) – what needs to be said in that regard has already been said. "Khādissāmi bhuñjissāmīti, paṭiggaṇhāti" (Thinking "I will eat" or "I will consume", he accepts it) – if a bhikkhu accepts such edibles and foods at the wrong time (vikāla), upon accepting, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. The rest is as explained above.

Eḷakalomasamuṭṭhānaṃ (arising of elakaloma) – It arises from the body and from the mind-and-body, it is an inactive action (kiriyaṃ), not associated with perception or release (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), non-volitional (acittakaṃ), an offense by designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), a bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), tri-citta (ticittaṃ), and tri-vedana (tivedanaṃ).

Vikālabhojanasikkhāpadaṃ sattamaṃ. (The seventh precept on taking food at the wrong time.)

8. Sannidhikārakasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā (Explanation of the Precept Against Storing Up)

252. In the eighth precept – Belaṭṭhasīso was a great elder among thousands of ascetics. Araññe viharatī (he was dwelling in a forest) means he was residing in a meditation chamber (padhānaghara) in a monastery not far from Jetavana. Sukkhakura (dry rice) means rice with curry. It is said that after eating in the village, he would go for alms and bring back such rice, and this was due to his lack of desire, not out of greed for provisions. It is said that the Elder would spend seven days in cessation (nirodhasamāpatti), and after arising from that attainment, he would moisten that alms food with water and eat it, and then sit again for seven days in attainment. In this way, he would spend two, three, or four weeks and then enter the village for alms. Therefore, it is said – ‘‘cirena gāmaṃ piṇḍāya pavisatī’’ (he enters the village for alms after a long time).

253. Kāro (storing), karaṇaṃ (the act of storing), kiriyā (the action) are the same in meaning; sannidhikāro assāti sannidhikāraṃ (he has the act of storing, therefore he is one who stores); sannidhikāramevasannidhikārakaṃ** (the very act of storing is what constitutes a storer). This is a designation for one who has let a night pass after receiving something. Therefore, its explanation of terms states – "Sannidhikārakaṃ nāma ajja paṭiggahitaṃ aparajjū" (Storing means something received today is kept for tomorrow).

Paṭiggaṇhāti āpatti dukkaṭassā (In accepting, there is an offense of dukkaṭa) means that in accepting whatever has been stored, whether for a limited time or for a measured time, with the intention of consuming it, there is an offense of dukkaṭa upon accepting. But in consuming, there is a pācittiya for each mouthful. Even if the bowl is poorly washed (duddhoto hoti), such that a line is visible when rubbed with a finger, or if grease has entered between the segments of a segmented bowl, and it drips out when heated, or it is apparent when hot rice gruel is taken, there is a pācittiya for eating from such a bowl on the following day. Therefore, the bowl should be washed, and then clear water should be poured into it or rubbed with a finger to ensure that there is no oiliness. If oiliness is apparent in the water or a line is visible in the bowl when rubbed with a finger, it is poorly washed. But if a line is visible in a bowl stained with oil, it is not relevant. If bhikkhus give away something to sāmaṇeras without attachment, and the sāmaṇeras store it and give it back, it is all allowable. What is not allowable is receiving something oneself and not giving it away, and then consuming it on the second day. For from even one grain being consumed, it is a pācittiya.

Among disallowed meats, eating human meat involves a pācittiya along with a gross offense (thullaccaya), and the remaining disallowed meats involve a dukkaṭa. Eating something allowable for a measured time (yāmakālikaṃ) when there is a valid reason involves a pācittiya. Eating for the purpose of nourishment involves a pācittiya along with a dukkaṭa. If, after being invited, one eats something not made allowable, for natural meat, there are two pācittiyas; for human meat, there are two along with a gross offense; for the remaining disallowed meats, there is a dukkaṭa; for something allowable for a measured time, if one eats it with a mouth tainted with meat, there are two, but if untainted, only one. Eating for the purpose of nourishment increases the dukkaṭa in both cases. If one eats at the wrong time (vikāla), for natural food, there are two pācittiyas due to the storing and due to eating at the wrong time; for disallowed meats, a gross offense and a dukkaṭa are increased. For things allowable for a measured time, there is no offense due to the wrong time, but due to not making allowable, there is no offense in all cases at the wrong time.

255. Sattāhakālikaṃ yāvajīvikaṃ āhāratthāyā (Accepting something allowable for a week or for life for the purpose of nourishment) means that upon accepting for the purpose of nourishment, there is a dukkaṭa due to the act of accepting, and upon consuming, if it is untainted by meat, there is a dukkaṭa for each mouthful. But if what is accepted and kept is mixed with meat, there is a pācittiya as appropriate.

256. Anāpatti yāvakālika (There is no offense for that which is allowable until the permitted time) means that the edibles and foods specified in the precept against eating at the wrong time are yāvakālikaṃ (allowable until the permitted time), as they are to be consumed until the time known as midday. The eight kinds of drinks, along with similar drinks, are yāmakālikaṃ (allowable for a measured time), as yāma (a period) is the time until the last watch of the night when they can be consumed. The five kinds of medicine, such as ghee, are sattāhakālikaṃ (allowable for a week), as seven days is the time they can be stored. Except for water, everything else that is kept and consumed when there is a valid reason is called yāvajīvaka (allowable for life).

In this regard, there is no offense in consuming something allowable until the permitted time that is received at dawn, even if stored a hundred times, as long as the permitted time is not exceeded, something allowable for a measured time within one day and night, something allowable for a week within seven nights, and the other, even for life, when there is a valid reason. The rest is as explained above. However, in the commentaries, in this section, the discussion on drinks, the discussion on allowable similar items, the question of "is something allowable until the permitted time allowable with something allowable for a measured time?" and the discussion on allowable ground are elaborated. We will discuss that in the appropriate place when it comes up.

Eḷakalomasamuṭṭhānaṃ (arising of elakaloma) – It arises from the body and from the mind-and-body, it is an inactive action (kiriyaṃ), not associated with perception or release (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), non-volitional (acittakaṃ), an offense by designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), a bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), tri-citta (ticittaṃ), and tri-vedana (tivedanaṃ).

Sannidhikārakasikkhāpadaṃ aṭṭhamaṃ. (The eighth precept on storing up.)

9. Paṇītabhojanasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā (Explanation of the Precept Against Soliciting and Eating Choice Food)

257. In the ninth precept – paṇītabhojanānī (choice foods) means excellent foods. Kassa sampannaṃ na manāpa (Whose abundance is not pleasing?) means whose is not beloved when endowed with prosperity. Sādu (delicious) means flavorful.

259. Yo pana bhikkhu evarūpāni paṇītabhojanāni agilāno attano atthāya viññāpetvā bhuñjeyyā (Whatever bhikkhu, being not ill, should solicit such choice foods for his own sake and eat them) – here, it should be understood that in soliciting pure items such as ghee and eating them, one does not incur a pācittiya, but incurs a dukkaṭa for soliciting soup and rice according to the Sekhiya rules; however, in soliciting items mixed with rice and eating them, one incurs a pācittiya. This is the intended meaning here. Therefore, the Sutta uses the term "paṇītabhojanānī" (choice foods) instead of "paṇītānī" (choice items). For if "paṇītānī" were used, it would only include items such as ghee, but by using "paṇītabhojanānī," it is understood that foods made from the seven grains mixed with choice items are choice foods.

viññāpeti payoge dukkaṭa (in the act of soliciting, there is an offense of dukkaṭa) – in these and other similar cases, this is the judgment: if one solicits by saying, "Give rice with ghee," "Give it sprinkling ghee," "Make it mixed with ghee," "Give it together with ghee," or "Give ghee and rice," there is a dukkaṭa for the solicitation, a dukkaṭa for the acceptance, and a pācittiya for the consumption. However, if one says, "Give ghee-rice," since there is no such thing as ghee-rice like sāli rice, only a dukkaṭa for soliciting soup and rice should be understood.

If, however, when asked, "Give rice with ghee," rice is given and then butter, milk, or yogurt is given, or the raw material is given, saying, "Take ghee with this and eat," it is all as appropriate. But if, when asked, "Give rice with cow's ghee," cow's ghee is given, or if cow's ghee is not available, cow's butter, etc., is given in the same way, or even a cow is given, saying, "Eat with ghee from this," it is all as appropriate. If, however, when asked for cow's ghee, ghee etc. from a goat is given, it is deceptive. In this case, something other than what was asked for has been given, so there is no offense. This principle applies to cases of asking for ghee from a goat, etc., as well.

If, when asked, "Give allowable ghee," unallowable ghee is given, it is deceptive. If, when asked, "Give unallowable ghee," unallowable ghee is given, there is a dukkaṭa for both acceptance and consumption. If unallowable ghee is not available, unallowable butter, etc., is given in the same way, saying, "Make ghee with this and eat," it is considered as having given unallowable ghee. If, when asked, "Give unallowable ghee," allowable ghee is given, it is deceptive. If, when asked, "Give ghee," one of the others, such as butter, is given, it is also deceptive. This principle applies to cases of asking for butter, etc., as well. For whatever is asked for, whether that or its raw material is obtained, that itself is considered obtained.

If, however, something else, whether mentioned or not mentioned in the Pali texts, is given, it is deceptive. Soliciting with butter etc. other than those mentioned in the Pali texts involves a dukkaṭa. Just as it was said that when asked "give ghee-rice," because there is no such thing as ghee-rice like sāli rice, it is only a dukkaṭa for soliciting soup and rice, so too with asking for butter-rice etc. Even if each item were expanded and explained in order, the meaning would have to be stated in the same way, and that can be understood even in brief, so what is the point of elaborating? Therefore, it was said, "This principle applies to cases of asking for butter, etc., as well."

If, however, after soliciting with all the ghee etc., in one place or in different places, and receiving them, one pours them into one container, makes them into a single flavor, and then puts a drop on the tip of the tongue with a blade of grass and consumes it, one incurs nine pācittiyas. This was also said in the Parivara –

‘‘Kāyikāni na vācasikāni,
Sabbāni nānāvatthukāni;
Apubbaṃ acarimaṃ āpajjeyya ekato,
Pañhāmesā kusalehi cintitā’’ti. (pari. 481);

261. Agilānogilānasaññī (Not ill, thinking he is ill) – here, if even thinking he is ill, one solicits the five medicines for medicinal purposes, he should be dealt with according to the Mahānāma precept. But if soliciting the nine choice foods, he should be dealt with according to this precept. For bhikkhunis, however, these are matters for confession (pāṭidesanīya), and for soliciting soup and rice, there is only a Sekhiya-stipulated dukkaṭa for both. The rest is as explained above.

Catusamuṭṭhānaṃ – arises from body, from body and speech, from body and mind, and from body, speech, and mind,

Is Kiriya, is not a perception of release (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), is acittaka, is an offense by way of designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), is a bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), is a verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), is a three-arisen mind (ticittaṃ), has three feelings (tivedananti).

The ninth, concerning refined food.

10. Description of the Training Rule on Tooth-Cleaning Sticks

263.In the tenth training rule – sabbapaṃsukūliko, because, at the very least, even a tooth-cleaning stick is considered entirely refuse-rag-like among the four requisites. It is said that he would use as his bowl only a discarded vessel in a cemetery, make his robes only from discarded rags there, and use only discarded couches and chairs found there. Ayyavosāṭitakānīti – here, ayyā refers to deceased paternal ancestors. Vosāṭitakāni refers to edible and consumable items discarded in cemeteries and other places for their sake; it seems people, remembering a deceased relative, would make lumps of whatever was dear to them when alive, placing them in cemeteries and other places, thinking, "May our relatives partake of this." That bhikkhu would take and eat that, not wanting other, even excellent, offerings. Therefore, it was said, "He himself takes and consumes ayyavosāṭitaka items in cemeteries, at the foot of trees, and at crossroads." Thero means stable and firmly established. Vaṭharo means stout; it is said this bhikkhu is stout and has a solid body. Manussamaṃsaṃ maññe khādatīti – we would consider him to be eating human flesh; for those who eat human flesh are like this, that was their intention.

264.Udakadantapone kukkuccāyantīti – Here, those bhikkhus, not properly considering the meaning of the rule "he should not bring food into the mouth-door that has not been given," felt remorse. The Blessed One, however, like a father to his children, made those bhikkhus understand based on the object as it arose, and established a further rule.

265.Adinnaṃ means not given in one of the ways that results in nissaggiya for body or what is connected to the body. With this in mind, in the word analysis, it is said, "Adinnaṃ means what has not been received." In the second pārājika, however, it is said, "Adinnaṃ means what is possessed by another." Dinnaṃ – this, however, is cited to show the characteristic by way of the opposite of that very adinnaṃ. And in the Niddesa, ‘‘kāyena vā kāyapaṭibaddhena vā nissaggiyena vā dente’’ti thus, while another is giving, ‘‘hatthapāse ṭhito kāyena vā kāyapaṭibaddhena vā paṭiggaṇhātīti thus, even if a particle of dust from a chariot wheel is being given in that way, if one standing within arm's reach, as described earlier, receives it with the body or what is connected to the body, this, received in this way, is called given. It is not given merely by uttering words such as "Take this, may this be yours."

kāyenāti – with any part of the body whatsoever, such as the hand; even if given with a toe, it is called given with the body; the same method applies to receiving. For whatever is taken with any part of the body whatsoever is indeed taken with the body. Even if, when something is being given to clean the nostrils, an unworthy one receives it with the nostril or the mouth, the mere act of inclining is the measure here, this method is stated in the Mahāpaccariya. Kāyapaṭibaddhenāti – whatever is given with any instrument whatsoever, such as a ladle, is called given with what is connected to the body. The same method applies to receiving. For whatever is taken with anything connected to the body, such as a bowl or plate, is indeed taken with what is connected to the body. Nissaggiyenāti – even if one releases it from the body and what is connected to the body, and one standing within arm’s reach receives it with the body or what is connected to the body, it is called given by way of nissaggiya means. This, for now, is the Pāḷi commentary.

pāḷimuttakavinicchayo – Receiving is valid with five factors: it is only the height of a man of moderate stature; the arm's reach is evident; the presentation is evident; a deva or a human or a being gone to the animal realm gives with the body or with what is connected to the body or by way of nissaggiya; and that bhikkhu receives it with the body or with what is connected to the body. Thus, receiving is valid with these five factors.

Here, the arm's reach for one standing, sitting, or lying down should be understood in the same way as stated in the Invitation Training Rule. But if one among the giver and receiver is in the sky and one is on the ground, and the one on the ground, having placed his head [against the one in the sky's] or the one in the sky, having stretched out a hand to give or receive, the measure of the arm's reach should be determined by defining the limit with the nearer limb. Even if one is in a well and one is on the edge of the well, or one is in a tree and one is on the earth, the measure of the arm's reach should be determined in the same way as stated. Standing within such an arm's reach, even if a bird gives a flower or fruit having taken it with its beak, or an elephant gives it with its trunk, the receiving is valid. Even if one is seated on the shoulder of an elephant that is half a league tall, it is indeed acceptable to receive something being given by its trunk.

One, having placed many bowls of rice and curry on his head, comes to a bhikkhu and, standing there, says, "Please take." Presentation is not evident in this case; therefore, it should not be taken. But if he bows down even a little, the bhikkhu should stretch out his hand and receive the bottom bowl with at least a part of it. To that extent, all the bowls are considered received; from then on, it is acceptable to take and eat whatever he wants, either having lowered them or uncovered them. But in the case of a whole basket of rice and so on, there is no need to speak of individual bowls; even if rice is carried in the hand, it is acceptable if one tilts the hand when giving. If there is a thirty-cubit-long bamboo pole, and a pot of molasses is tied to one end and a pot of ghee to the other, if one receives it, all of it is considered received. If one says, "Please take the juice that is flowing from the sugarcane press," it should not be taken, because the presentation is not evident. But if one discards the residue and gives it scooping it out with the hand, it is acceptable.

Many bowls are placed on a couch or a chair or a mat frame or a trough or a plank; standing there, where the giver is within arm’s reach, having touched the couch and so on with a finger with the intention of receiving, whatever is given in those bowls while standing or sitting or lying down, is all considered received. Even if one climbs onto the couch and so on and sits down with the intention of receiving, it is indeed acceptable. But if one takes the couch and so on with one's hand and sits on the couch, there is no need to speak of it.

If, however, [the bowls] are placed on the ground, touching belly to belly, then whatever is given there, where one is sitting having touched something with a finger or a needle, is considered received. It was said, "Receiving is not valid for bowls placed on a large mat frame or a hand-span mat and so on, wherever they are placed." That should be understood as having been said with reference to exceeding the arm's reach. But within arm's reach, it is acceptable wherever it is, except for what grows there.

But for what grows there, it is not acceptable on a lotus leaf or a butea frondosa leaf and so on. For that does not go to the reckoning of being connected to the body. And as with what grows there, so too it is never valid on a couch and so on tied to a stump, or on an unmovable plank or stone, for those too fall into the category of what grows there. Receiving is not valid even on very fine leaves such as tamarind leaves scattered on the ground, for they are not capable of supporting it. But it is valid on large lotus leaves and so on. If one standing beyond arm's reach gives with a long-handled ladle, he should be told, "Come and give it." If, without hearing the words or without paying attention, he simply pours it into the bowl, it should be received again. The same method applies even when throwing a lump of rice from a distance.

If, when a bowl is being taken out from a bowl-bag, there is dye-powder in the bowl, it should be washed if there is water; if there is no water, having wiped off the dye-powder, one should go for alms. If dust falls while one is going for alms, having received it, alms should be collected. There is a vinaya dukkata for collecting it without receiving it. However, there is no offense for eating it after having received it again. If, however, when one says "Give it after receiving it," one gives alms without hearing the words or without paying attention, there is no vinaya dukkata; other alms should be collected after receiving it again.

If a great wind blows dust from here and there, and it is not possible to collect alms, it is acceptable to collect it with a pure intention, having made an inclination, thinking, "I will give it to one who is not fully ordained." Having thus gone for alms and gone to a monastery or an assembly hall, it is acceptable to give that to one who is not fully ordained and eat it having received it again from him or with his trust.

If one gives a dusty bowl to a bhikkhu on an alms round, he should be told – "Either receive this and collect alms, or consume it." He should do it in that way. If the dust floats on top, the rest should be consumed after pouring away the rice-gruel. If it has entered inside, it should be received. If there is no one who is not fully ordained, it should be taken to where there is one who is not fully ordained without releasing it from the hand, and it should be received there. It is acceptable to remove dust that has fallen on dry rice and consume it. If it is very fine, it should be removed together with the rice on top, or it should be eaten after receiving it. If one places rice-gruel or soup in front, and particles falling from the pots while they are being stirred fall into the bowl, the bowl should be received.

When people bring [food] scooping with a ladle, if the first bit of gravy falling from the ladle falls into the bowl, it has fallen well, and there is no offense because it has been brought near. Even if soot or ash falls from the pot while rice is being poured into it from a pot, there is no offense whatsoever because it has been brought near. If [rice] being given to an immediately next bhikkhu flies up from the bowl and falls into another’s bowl, it has fallen well. For that is indeed considered received.

If, when people are splitting open a palmyra branch or the like and giving it to one bhikkhu, particles falling from the branch fall into another’s bowl, the bowl should be received. There is no offense whatsoever for the one into whose bowl [the pieces] fall while they are splitting it above his bowl, because it has been brought near with the intention of giving. They give a bowl filled with pāyāsa, being unable to hold it from underneath due to the heat, it is acceptable to hold it with the mouth-rim. If he is still unable to do so, it should be taken with a stand.

A bhikkhu who has taken his bowl and is sitting in the assembly hall falls asleep, he does not know what is being brought or what is being given; it is not considered received. But if he is sitting having made an inclination, it is acceptable. Even if he lets go of the stand with his hand and pushes it with his foot and falls asleep, it is indeed acceptable. But it is an irreverent receiving for one who steps on the stand with his foot and receives it even while awake; therefore, it should not be done. Some say that receiving with a stand in this way is called receiving with something connected to what is connected to the body; therefore, it is not acceptable. That is merely their opinion. In reality, however, all of this is indeed connected to the body. This method has indeed been shown even in the context of bodily contact. Even if something falls while being given to a bhikkhu, it is acceptable for him to take and consume it himself. There is this sutta concerning that –

"Bhikkhus, I allow that which falls while being given to be taken and consumed by oneself; that, bhikkhus, is relinquished by the donors" (cūḷava. 273).

This sutta, however, is of interpretable meaning (neyyattha). Therefore, the intention here should be understood thus: whatever is being given falls from the giver’s hand onto clean ground, or onto a lotus leaf, a woven mat, a core of heartwood, etc., it is allowable to take and use that oneself. But whatever falls on dusty ground, that dust should be wiped off or washed off, or it should be received and then used. If it rolls away and goes to another bhikkhu, it is allowable to have it brought back as well. If that bhikkhu says, "You yourself eat it," it is allowable for him to eat it. But it should not be taken without being instructed. In the Kurundi it is said that it is allowable to take it even without being instructed, thinking, "I will give it to the other." Why is it not allowable for that other bhikkhu to take it? Because it is not permitted by the Blessed One. For by saying, "Take and use it yourself," the Blessed One has permitted the use of that which falls to whomever it falls to, even if it is unreceived. By the statement, "It is relinquished by the donors, bhikkhus," the absence of ownership by another is indicated here. Therefore, it is not allowable for another to take and use it himself, but it is allowable with his instruction. This, it is said, is the intention here.

And because it is allowed due to being unreceived, therefore it is allowable to use it even on the second day, just as it is, without touching it, having covered it with something, without offense due to storing up. But having received it, it should be used. For the use of it oneself is allowed only for that day, not beyond that. This, it is said, is also the intention here.

Now, the way of common usage (abbohārika) is stated: For those who are eating, teeth wear out, nails wear out, the color of the bowl wears out, all is common usage. Also, when filth is visible in sugarcane, etc., that has been cut with a knife, this is called newly arisen and should be received and used. If filth is not visible in that cut with a knife that has been washed, but only a metallic smell remains, that is common usage. And the same method applies even to that which is cut with a knife that is carried around. For it is not carried around for the purpose of consumption. When grinding or pounding root medicine, etc., the seat, sitting cloth, mortar, pestle, etc., wear out. Having heated a knife carried for cutting, they put it into whey or milk for medicinal purposes, and a blue color appears there. The decision is similar to that stated regarding the knife. But in raw whey, etc., it should not be put in oneself. If one puts it in, one is not freed from being self-cooked (sāmapākato).

When rain is falling from the sky on one who is wandering for alms, if soiled water from the body or robe falls into the bowl, that should be received. The same method applies even when it falls while eating at the foot of a tree, etc. But if pure water comes down when the gods are raining for a week, or it falls from the open air, it is allowable. When giving rice to a novice, it should be given only by pouring it into his bowl without interruption. Or his bowl should be received. If one pours rice into an unreceived bowl and then takes rice into one's own bowl, there is an offense of taking what has not been given (uggahitaka).

If, however, desiring to give, one says, "Bring the bowl, novice, take the rice," and the other refuses, saying, "Enough for me," and even when it is said again, "This is relinquished by me to you," he says, "I have no need of it," even if one relinquishes it a hundred times, it is only received when it has come into one's own hand.

If, however, one says "Take" being indifferent while it is placed on a stand (ādhāraka), it should be received again. If, being attached, one places the bowl on a stand and says to the novice, "Take cake or rice from here," even if the novice, having washed his hands, takes it a hundred times and puts it into his own bowl without touching what is in his own bowl, there is no need for further receiving. If, however, having touched what is in his own bowl, he takes from there, it is mixed with what belongs to the novice, and it should be received again. Some, however, say, "Even if it is broken off while being taken and falls there, it should be received again." That should be understood when it is said after specifying, "Take one ball of rice, take one cake, take so much of this lump of molasses." Here, however, there is no specification. Therefore, that which falls into the novice's bowl itself ceases to be received. However, as long as the novice does not desist saying "Enough," or the bhikkhu does not prevent it, that which is in the hand belongs to the bhikkhu himself, therefore the receiving does not cease.

If one puts rice into a cooking pot for gruel for someone's sake, either for oneself or for the bhikkhus, one should say, "Novice, put your hand over the pot," and put it into his hand. For that which falls from his hand into the pot does not cause the pot to be unallowable on the second day, because it has been relinquished. If one puts it in without doing so, the pot should be made free from meat (nirāmisaṃ) like a bowl and used. Donors have placed a gruel pot and gone away, and a young novice is not able to have it received, the bhikkhu holds out the bowl, and the novice places the neck of the pot on the rim of the bowl and pours it out, the gruel in the bowl is already received. Or the bhikkhu places his hand on the ground, and the novice pours it out and places it there, it is allowable. The same method applies to baskets of cakes, baskets of rice, loads of sugarcane, etc.

If two or three novices give a load that is subject to being received, or if it is lifted up by one strong one and two or three bhikkhus take it, it is allowable. If they attach a pot of oil, or a pot of molasses, or a pot of butter to the foot of a couch or a chair, it is allowable for the bhikkhu to sit on the couch or chair. It is not called taking what has not been given (uggahitaka).

If two oil pots are hung on a coat-hook or a peg, the upper one is received and the lower one is unreceived, it is allowable to take the upper one. If the lower one is received and the upper one is unreceived, if one takes the upper one and then takes the other, the upper one is taken what has not been given. If there is an unreceived oil plate on the lower couch, if one touches it with a broom while sweeping, it is not taking what has not been given. Thinking, "I will take what has been received," if one takes what has not been received, knowing it, and puts it back, it is not taking what has not been given. If one knows it after taking it outside, one should take it outside without placing it and put it back in the same place, there is no fault. If, however, it has been opened and placed before, it should not be closed; it should be placed as it was before. If one puts it outside, it should not be touched again.

While descending from the upper story of a building, one knows it in the middle of the ladder, because there is no space, it should be taken up or down and placed. In received oil, etc., one lifts up the spout; in ginger, etc., the solid powder, this is only the arising thereof, there is no need for further receiving.

If one who has climbed up a palmyra palm or coconut palm lowers a bunch of fruit with a rope and says, "Take it, staying up here," it should not be taken. If another, standing on the ground, takes hold of the rope loop, lifts it up and gives it, it is allowable. Having made a large branch with fruit allowable and received it, the fruits are already received, it is allowable to use them as one pleases.

Standing inside a fence, if they cut the fence and give sugarcane or ebony fruit, it is allowable if there is hand's reach. It is allowable for one who is taking that which has come out without striking the fence sticks. No fault is shown in the commentaries for that which comes out having been struck. However, we suppose that that place is spontaneously fallen from where it was struck. Therefore, it is proper to go away without stopping there, like goods that have fallen outside after being pushed past the customs barrier. If they give it after having crossed a fence or a wall, if the wall is not thick, and the hand's reach is sufficient for one standing inside the wall and outside the wall, it is allowable to take what has come up as much as a hundred hands above.

A bhikkhu carries a sick novice on his shoulder, and he, seeing fruits and non-fruits, takes them and gives them while sitting on the shoulder, it is allowable. Another carries a bhikkhu and gives it to the bhikkhu sitting on the shoulder, it is indeed allowable.

A bhikkhu takes a fruitful branch for the sake of shade, if the thought of eating the fruits arises, it is allowable to have them received and eat them. Having made it allowable for the sake of warding off flies and received it, if he desires to eat, the original receiving itself is sufficient, there is no fault in eating.

A bhikkhu places an article worthy of being received on a man's vehicle and goes along the road, the vehicle gets stuck in the mud, a young one takes the wheel and lifts it up, it is allowable, it is not called taking what has not been given (uggahitaka). Having placed it on a boat, one moves the boat with an oar, or pulls it with a hand, it is allowable. The same method applies to a raft. Having placed it in a pot or a water jar, it is allowable to have it taken by one who is not fully ordained and to cross the river taking the one who is not fully ordained in the arm. Even in the absence of that, it is allowable to have the one who is not fully ordained take it and to cross the river taking him in the arm.

Lay followers give journey rice (patheyyataṇḍule) to travelling bhikkhus. Novices are not able to take the rice of the bhikkhus and take their own rice, the bhikkhus take their rice. When the rice taken by the novices is exhausted, they cook gruel with the other rice, and having placed all the bowls in order, they pour in the gruel. A wise novice takes his bowl and gives it to the elder, the elder's bowl to the sub-elder, thus he exchanges all the bowls, what belongs to the novice is eaten by all, it is allowable.

Even if the novice is unwise, he begins to drink the gruel in his own bowl himself, it is allowable for the elders to ask and drink in order, saying, "Friend, give your gruel to me," what belongs to the novice is eaten by all, they do not touch fault due to taking what has not been given or due to storing up. Here, however, no difference is seen between those who bring oil, etc., for the sake of parents and branches, etc., for the sake of shade and these. Therefore, the reason should be examined.

A novice, desiring to cook rice, washes the rice and is not able to drain it. The bhikkhu should receive the rice and the vessel, and having washed the rice and drained it, the vessel should be placed on the hearth, fire should not be made, and when it is cooking, having opened it, the state of being cooked should be known. If it is undercooked, it is not allowable to cover it for the sake of cooking. It is allowable to prevent dust or ashes from falling, it is allowable to place it on the hearth and eat it when it is cooked, there is no need for further receiving.

The novice is capable of cooking, but he has no time, he wants to go somewhere. The bhikkhu should be told to receive the vessel with rice and water, place it on the hearth, light the fire and go. After that, it is allowable to do everything in the same way as before.

A bhikkhu puts a clean vessel on the fire for the sake of gruel and heats water, it is allowable. The novice puts rice in the hot water, from then on, the bhikkhu should not make a fire. Having received the cooked gruel, it is allowable to drink it.

A novice is cooking gruel, a bhikkhu who is scrupulous about his hands, playing around, touches the vessel, touches the lid, cuts off and removes the rising foam, it is not allowable for him to drink it, it is called durupaciṇṇaṃ. If, however, he stirs it while not lifting it up with a ladle or a skimmer, it is not allowable for all, it is both self-cooked and durupaciṇṇaṃ. If he lifts it up, it is also taken what has not been given.

If a bhikkhu, after going for alms, has placed his bowl in a stand, and another greedy bhikkhu, playing around, touches the bowl or the bowl's lid, the food received from that bowl is not allowable for him. But if he lifts the bowl and sets it down, it is not allowable for anyone. If he takes fruits growing on a tree by their branch or vine and shakes them, the fruit received from that is not allowable for him, and he incurs a durupaciṇṇa-dukkaṭa. But it is allowable to lean against a fruit tree or tie a string to it; there is no durupaciṇṇa, so it is said in the Mahāpaccariya.

However, having seen mangoes and other fruits fallen in the forest, it is allowable to pick them up, intending to give them to a sāmaṇera. Having seen sīhavighāsa and such, it is allowable to receive it or not receive it, and bring it intending to give it to a sāmaṇera. But if he is able to purify his thought, it is allowable to eat what he has received from there; no fault touches him, either because of accepting raw meat or because of the condition of having been taken without permission.

While going along the road carrying oil and such for his parents, if illness arises, it is allowable to receive and use whatever he wishes. But if it was received at the source itself, there is no need for a further acceptance. He brings rice for his parents, and they prepare gruel and such from it right there and give it to him; it is allowable, there is no fault because of the condition of sannidhi or the condition of having been taken without permission.

A bhikkhu heats water with a lid on, it is allowable to use it until it is used up. But if ashes fall into it, it must be accepted. If ashes fall while one is cooking oil, holding the pan with long tongs, it must be accepted after cooking and taking it off the heat without letting go with the hand. But if embers or firewood have been accepted and kept, the original acceptance is sufficient.

A bhikkhu is eating sugarcane, and a sāmaṇera says, "Give me some too." If told, "Cut it off from here and take it," he takes it, there is no need for further acceptance of what remains. The same method applies to eating a lump of molasses. For what remains after cutting off and taking from the stated place is truly unabandoned acceptance.

A bhikkhu, when dividing molasses, accepts it and makes portions; bhikkhus and sāmaṇeras come and take one portion each with a single taking; what remains after taking is accepted. If a greedy sāmaṇera takes and takes, then puts it back, what remains after taking is unaccepted for him.

A bhikkhu accepts a smoke-stick and smokes, and his mouth and throat are as if smeared with realgar, it is allowable to consume it for the yāvakālika; there is no fault in connection with yāvajīvika through the yāvakālika.

While cooking a bowl or dye, smoke enters through the holes of the ears, nose, and mouth; if one sniffs a flower or fruit because of illness, it is allowable because it is abbohārika. If food rises and enters inside, striking the palate, it is allowable because it is not an object of sense. But if what has entered the mouth is consumed at the wrong time, there is an offense. If the taste of meat stuck between the teeth enters, it is an offense indeed. If the meat is fine and the taste is not apparent, it follows the side of being abbohārika.

Having eaten food in a waterless place near the time (for the meal), after scraping the mouth, two or three balls of saliva should be spat out, and one should go to a place with water and rinse the mouth. If sprouts come out of ginger and such that have been accepted and kept, there is no need for further acceptance. If there is no salt, it is allowable to use seawater to do the work of salt. Salt water that has been accepted and kept, whether it becomes salt, or the water becomes salt, or the syrup becomes taste, or the taste becomes syrup, the original acceptance is sufficient. Hailstones are of the nature of water. They purify water with katakaṭṭhina by the attendant, that is abbohārika, it is allowable with meat. What is purified with kapitthaphalādi that is of the nature of meat, is allowable before the meal only.

In ponds and such, water is thick, it is allowable. But if it sticks to the mouth and hand, it is not allowable, it should be received and used. In fields, in tilled places, water is thick, it should be received. If, flowing, it enters caves and such and fills a river, it is allowable. There are kakudhasobbha and such, water covered with flowers fallen from trees, if the taste of the flowers is not apparent, there is no need for acceptance. There is little water, the taste is apparent, it should be accepted. The same method applies to water covered with black leaves in mountain caves and such.

In a water pot, dust or sap or flowers have been put, it should be accepted. Or flowers should be accepted and put in. Pāṭali, campaka, mallikā flowers have been put in, the scent remains, that is abbohārika, it is allowable with meat even on the second day. From water perfumed with flowers kept by a bhikkhu, a sāmaṇera takes water and spills the remainder there, it should be accepted. In lotus ponds and such, it is allowable to take water by dispersing the pollen spread on the water's surface with a pot. A toothpick is made permissible and kept after accepting it, if he wants to drink its taste, the original acceptance is sufficient. If it is kept without accepting it, it should be accepted. Even if the taste enters without knowing, there is an offense. For this training rule is acittaka.

Among the great elements, what is allowable and what is not? Milk, of course, is allowable, whether it is milk from permissible meat or milk from impermissible meat, there is no offense for one who drinks it. Tears, saliva, mucus, urine, excrement, phlegm, tooth dirt, eye discharge, ear discharge, salt that rises on the body, all this is allowable. What falls from its place and falls into a bowl or hand, that should be accepted. What is stuck on a finger is already accepted. If, while eating hot pāyāsa, sweat, following the line of the fingers, becomes united and stays on the pāyāsa, or while going for alms, it drips from the hand to the bowl's rim or the bowl's surface, there is no need for acceptance here. Among the inanimate great elements, there is nothing that is not allowable, but what is not burnt well is not allowable. Even human bone that is well burnt can be made into powder and taken as a lick.

The four great corruptions can be used even raw in the absence of a permissible agent. And here, one who is difficult to speak to and one who is incapable remain in the category of being absent. In the absence of ashes, ashes should be taken by burning dry wood. In the absence of dry wood, it is allowable to cut fresh wood from a tree and make it. But this fourfold great corruption is named for a specific time; it is allowable only at the moment of a snake bite. The remainder is clear here.

Eḷakaloma arises from the body and from the mind of the body, is an action, is without perception and release, is acittaka, is a regulation offense, is a bodily action, is three-fold consciousness, is three-fold feeling.

The tenth training rule on tooth cleaning (dantapona) is complete.

The fourth section, the Bhojanavagga, is complete in the order of exposition.

5. The Acelakavagga

1. Explanation of the Acelaka Training Rule

269. In the first training rule of the Acelakavagga: Parivesana means the place of serving. Paribbājakasamāpanno means one who has undertaken the renunciate life. Deti āpatti pācittiyassa means if he gives a bowl of gruel enough to satisfy, in one act of giving, there is one pācittiya. If he gives cutting off and cutting off, there is a pācittiya for each act of giving. The same method applies to cakes, rice, etc. Titthiye atitthiyasaññī means even if a mother or father goes forth among the titthiyas, giving to them with the perception of mother or father, there is a pācittiya. Dāpeti means he causes to be given by one who is not fully ordained.

273.Upanikkhipitvā detī means having placed it in such a container, he places that container on the ground near them, or having caused their container to be placed (there), he gives into it; it is allowable to place the bowl in a stand or on the ground and say, "Take it from here." If the titthiya says, "This belongs to me, don't throw it here," it should be thrown (elsewhere). Because it belongs to him, it is not called giving with one's own hand. The remainder is clear here.

Eḷakaloma arises as an action, is without perception and release, is acittaka, is a regulation offense, is a bodily action, is three-fold consciousness, is three-fold feeling.

The first training rule on the Acelakas is complete.

2. Explanation of the Uyyojana Training Rule

274. In the second training rule: Paṭikkamanepi means even in the assembly hall. Bhattavissagga means the meal duty. Na sambhāvesi means he does not bring about.

276.Anācāra means the transgression of bodily and verbal doors that has been stated. Dassanūpacāraṃ vā savanūpacāraṃ vā vijahantassā here, if he urges while standing or sitting; whoever is urged, he abandons (the upacāra), and there is no offense for him. But even while he is abandoning, in reality, the other one has abandoned it. Therefore, this offense is for the one who urges. There, if one foot is within the upacāra, there is a dukkaṭa. At the boundary's transgression, there is a pācittiya. And here, the measure of the visible upacāra in the open air is twelve cubits, likewise for the audible upacāra. But if there are walls, doors, ramparts, etc., in between, being obstructed by them is a transgression of the visible upacāra, and the offense should be known according to that. Na añño koci paccayo hoti means there is no other reason except for the stated kind of improper conduct.

277. Kalisāsanaṃ āropetīti "kalī" means anger; he imposes its command; he imposes the command of anger; showing faults in standing, sitting, etc., due to anger, he says, "See, good sirs, his standing, sitting, looking around, he stands like a stump, sits like a dog, looks here and there like a monkey," thus he speaks unpleasant words, "Perhaps, even by this, overwhelmed, he might leave." The remainder is clear.

Three-fold arising: it arises from mind of the body, from mind of speech, and from mind of body and speech, is an action, is with perception and release, is sacittaka, is a worldly offense, is a bodily action, is a verbal action, is unwholesome consciousness, is three-fold feeling.

The second training rule on urging is complete.

3. The Sabhojana Training Rule

279. In the third training rule: Sayanighare means in the dwelling for sleeping. Yato ayyassa bhikkhā dinnā means since alms have been given, what should be obtained by the one who has come, that has been obtained by you; the intention is, "Go." Pariyuṭṭhito means overwhelmed by lust; the meaning is, with the intention of sexual intercourse.

With both people, together, is sabhojana; in that sabhojana. Or, sabhojana means together in enjoyment. For a man overwhelmed by lust, a woman is enjoyment, and for a woman, a man. Therefore, in its explanation of terms, "There is a woman and there is a man," etc., has been said. Mahallake ghare means in a large dwelling for sleeping. Piṭṭhasaṅghāṭassa hatthapāsaṃ vijahitvā means having abandoned the hand's reach of the bedstead of that dwelling's room; it means he sits in a place near the inner sleeping area. And such a dwelling for sleeping is in large catussālās and such. Piṭṭhivaṃsaṃ atikkamitvā means by this, he shows the transgression of the middle. Therefore, the offense should be known for the transgression of the middle of a small dwelling for sleeping, made in whatever way. The remainder is clear here.

Arising from the first pārājika: is an action, is with perception and release, is sacittaka, is a worldly offense, is a bodily action, is unwholesome consciousness, is two-fold feeling.

The third training rule on Sabhojana is complete.

284.Whatever needs to be said regarding the fourth and fifth sikkhāpadas has already been explained in the same manner as the two aniyata cases. Just as the sabhojana-sikkhāpada, these also arise from the first pārājika.

The secluded covering sikkhāpada is the fourth, the secluded sitting sikkhāpada is the fifth.

6. Description of the Cāritta-sikkhāpada

294.In the sixth sikkhāpada, regarding "dethāvuso bhatta" (give alms, friend), it seems that the food had been brought, therefore they spoke thus. But when it is not brought, it is not proper to speak thus; it becomes an uttered falsehood.

295.Tena hi bhikkhave paṭiggahetvā nikkhipathāti (Then, monks, having received it, put it down)—this, however, the Blessed One spoke to protect the faith of the family. If he were to say, "Divide and eat," there would be a change in people's faith. Ussāriyitthāti (they put it aside)—they took it and went to their dwelling, is what is said.

298.Santaṃ bhikkhunti (An available monk)—how much is "available," and how much is "unavailable"? When a family develops a desire to attend upon a monk staying inside the dwelling, from that point onward, whatever he sees in front of him, whomever he can inform with ordinary speech, this one is called "available." There is no need to search here and there to inform him. Indeed, he who must be searched for is "unavailable." Moreover, if someone goes to the boundary of the inner compound thinking, "I will ask the monk," whomever he sees there, that one should be asked. If he does not see anyone, he is considered to have entered without asking an unavailable monk.

302.Antarārāmanti (Inside the monastery)—there is a monastery inside the village; he goes there. Bhattiyagharanti (A meal house)—either an invited house or a house that gives salākabhatta (ticket food) etc. Āpadāsūti (In times of distress)—in situations involving danger to life or the holy life, it is permissible to go. The rest here is straightforward.

Originating from kathina—it originates from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; it is an inaction, without perception of release, non-deliberate, a rule-offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, tri-citta, tri-vedana.

The Cāritta-sikkhāpada is the sixth.

7. Description of the Mahānāma-sikkhāpada

303.In the seventh sikkhāpada, mahānāmo (Mahānāma) is the son of the Blessed One's paternal uncle, about a month older, an ariya-sāvaka (noble disciple) established in two fruits (stages of enlightenment). Bhesajjaṃ ussannaṃ hotīti (Medicine is abundant)—the ghee that has been brought and stored from the time of making it is plentiful.

306.Sāditabbāti (Should be accepted)—at that time, if there is no illness, it should not be refused; it should be accepted with the intention of informing him when an illness arises. Ettakehi bhesajjehi pavāremīti (I invite with so much medicine)—by name, two or three of ghee, oil, etc., or by measure, a pattha, nāḷi, or āḷhaka. Aññaṃ bhesajjaṃ viññāpetīti (He asks for another medicine)—having been invited with ghee, he asks for oil; having been invited with an āḷhaka, he asks for a doṇa. Na bhesajjena karaṇīyenāti (Not needing medicine)—even if he can subsist on mixed food, it is not considered needing medicine.

310.Pavāritānanti (Those who have been invited)—those who have been invited by their personal invitation; for them, there is no offense for a request in accordance with the invitation. However, in the case of those invited by the Saṅgha, the measure should be considered. The rest is straightforward.

Sixfold origin—inaction, without perception of release, non-deliberate, a rule-offense, bodily action, verbal action, tri-citta, tri-vedana.

The Mahānāma-sikkhāpada is the seventh.

8. Description of the Uyyuttasena-sikkhāpada

311.In the eighth, abbhuyyātoti (gone forth) means abhiuyyāto; the meaning is that he has gone out of the city intending to go against the enemy army. Uyyuttanti (equipped) means having made an effort; the meaning is that he has gone out of the village.

314.Dvādasapuriso hatthīti (An elephant with twelve men)—there are four riders, two guards for each foot, thus it is an elephant with twelve men. Tipuriso assoti (A horse with three men)—one rider and two foot guards, thus it is a horse with three men. Catupuriso rathoti (A chariot with four men)—one charioteer, one warrior, and two wheel guards, thus it is a chariot with four men. Cattāro purisā sarahatthāti (Four men with weapons in hand)—four men with weapons in hand; this is called an army complete with four divisions at the ultimate extent. For one who goes to see such an army, there is a dukkaṭa for each step. Dassanūpacāraṃ vijahitvāti (Having given up the occasion to see)—it is not visible because it is obstructed by something or has descended into a hollow; if he goes to another place thinking, "It cannot be seen from here," there is a pācittiya for each effort.

315.Ekamekanti (Each one)—one of each of the four divisions, elephants, etc.; even an elephant with one man riding it, even one man with a weapon in hand. Anuyyuttānāma (Following along) means the king goes to a park or a river; thus, he is following along.

316.Āpadāsūti (In times of distress)—in situations involving danger to life or the holy life, there is no offense for one who goes thinking, "Having gone here, I will be freed." The rest here is straightforward. Originating from eḷakala—inaction, without perception of release, non-deliberate, a worldly offense, bodily action, unwholesome mind, tri-vedana.

The Uyyuttasena-sikkhāpada is the eighth.

9. Description of the Senāvāsa-sikkhāpada

319.In the ninth, atthaṅgate sūriye senāya vasatīti (dwelling with the army after the sun has set)—whether he stands, sits, or lies down, even if he assumes some posture in the sky by psychic power, it is only a pācittiya. Senā vā paṭisenāya ruddhā hotīti (The army is obstructed by another army)—it is obstructed in such a way that movement is cut off. Palibuddhoti (Obstructed) means obstructed by a barricade or an embankment. The rest is straightforward. Originating from eḷakala—inaction, without perception of release, non-deliberate, a rule-offense, bodily action, tri-citta, tri-vedana.

The Senāvāsa-sikkhāpada is the ninth.

10. Description of the Uyyodhika-sikkhāpada

322.In the tenth—uyyodhikaṃ (battle ground) is a term for the place of fighting, where they fight rising up and rising up. Balaggaṃ (battle array) is where they know the strength of the army; the meaning is the place for counting the strength. Senābyūhaṃ (military formation) is a term for the arrangement of the army. Tayo hatthī pacchimaṃ hatthānīkanti (Three elephants are the rear division of elephants)—three elephants in relation to that elephant with twelve men mentioned earlier. The same method applies to the rest as well. The rest should be understood in the same manner as explained in the Uyyuttasena-sikkhāpada, along with the origination, etc.

The Uyyodhika-sikkhāpada is the tenth.

The fifth Acelaka Vagga is completed according to the order of description.

6. Surāpāna Vagga

1. Description of the Surāpāna-sikkhāpada

326.In the first sikkhāpada of the Surāpāna Vagga—bhaddavatikāti (Bhaddavatika) is the name of a village, so called because it is endowed with the bhaddika vati. Pathāvinoti (Travelers) means wayfarers. Tejasā tejanti (Power with power) means the power of the Nāga with his own influential power. Kāpotikāti (Kapota-colored) means having a red glow similar to the color of a pigeon's foot. Pasannāti (Clear) is a term for the essence of liquor. Ananucchaviyaṃ bhikkhave sāgatassāti (Unsuitable, monks, for one who has come well)—it is said that drinking intoxicants is unsuitable for one who possesses the five abhiññās (supernormal knowledges).

328.Pupphāsavonāma (Flower liquor) is made from the juice of madhuka flowers, etc. Phalāsavonāma (Fruit liquor) is made by crushing muddika fruits, etc., and using their juice. Madhvāsavonāma (Honey liquor) is made from the natural juice of muddika fruits; some say it is also made with bee honey. Guḷāsavonāma (Molasses liquor) is made from sugarcane juice, etc. Surānāma (Liquor) is made by adding flour and yeast; liquor made from the juice of coconuts, etc., is also counted as liquor. It is said that when the sediment of that same yeast-added liquor is taken, it is counted as meraya. Antamaso kusaggenapi pivatīti (Even if he drinks with a blade of grass)—the meaning is that even if he drinks this liquor or meraya from the beginning using a blade of grass, there is a pācittiya. However, there is only one offense for drinking a lot with one effort. For one who drinks intermittently, there are offenses according to the number of efforts.

329.Amajjañca hoti majjavaṇṇaṃ majjagandhaṃ majjarasanti (And it is non-intoxicating but has the color, smell, and taste of intoxicants)—it is either loṇasovīraka (sour gruel with salt) or sutta (vinegar). Sūpasampāketi (In the preparation of soup)—they cook soup by adding a little intoxicant for the purpose of enhancing the flavor; there is no offense in that. The same method applies to the maṃsasampāke (preparation of meat) as well. However, oil is cooked with intoxicants for the purpose of treating wind disorders; in that case too, there is no offense as long as the intoxicant is not excessive. But when the intoxicant is excessive, where the color, smell, and taste of the intoxicant are evident, there is an offense. Amajjaṃ ariṭṭhanti (Non-intoxicating herbal drink)—there is no offense in an ariṭṭha that is not intoxicating. It seems that they make ariṭṭha with the juice of āmalaka etc., it has the color, smell, and taste of intoxicants, but it is not an intoxicant; this is said in reference to that. However, if it is mixed with ingredients that cause intoxication, it is an intoxicant, and it is not permissible from the beginning. The rest here is straightforward. Originating from eḷakala—inaction, without perception of release, non-deliberate, a worldly offense, bodily action, unwholesome mind, tri-vedana. Here, being non-deliberate is to be understood due to not knowing the basis (of the offense), and being a worldly offense is due to the act of drinking being unwholesome.

The Surāpāna-sikkhāpada is the first.

2. Description of the Aṅgulipatodaka-sikkhāpada

330.In the second—aṅgulipatodakenāti (With finger-snapping) refers to rubbing the armpits, etc., with the fingers. Uttasantoti (Panting) means becoming exhausted with excessive laughter. Anassāsakoti (Breathless) means having interrupted breathing. Anupasampannaṃ kāyena kāyanti (Touching a non-ordained person body to body)—here, even a bhikkhunī standing in a place for the non-ordained, there is a dukkaṭa for touching her with the intention of playing. The rest here is straightforward.

Originating from the first pārājika—inaction, perception of release, deliberate, a worldly offense, bodily action, unwholesome mind, dual-vedana.

The Aṅgulipatodaka-sikkhāpada is the second.

3. Description of the Hasadhamma-sikkhāpada

335.In the third—appakataññunoti (Not knowing what has been done) means not knowing what has been done and prescribed by the Blessed One.

336.Udake hasadhammeti (In water for play) refers to water games. Uparigopphaketi (Above the ankles) means to the extent above the ankles. Hasādhippāyoti (Intention to play) means intention to sport. Nimujjati vātiādīsu (Either diving) etc.—there is a dukkaṭa for each foot movement when descending for the purpose of diving. There is a pācittiya for each effort in diving and surfacing. For one who is diving and going only under water, there is a pācittiya everywhere for hand movements and foot movements. Palavatīti (Swimming) means floats. For one who swims with his hands, there is a pācittiya for each hand movement. The same method applies to the feet as well. With whichever part of the body he swims, there is a pācittiya for each effort. There is only a pācittiya for falling into the water from the shore or a tree. Nāvāya kīḷatīti (Playing with a boat) means playing with a boat by propelling the boat with oars, etc., or pulling it up on the shore; there is a dukkaṭa.

561.Hatthena vātiādīsupi (Or with the hand) etc., there is a dukkaṭa for each effort. Some say that there is a dukkaṭa for each instance of throwing a potsherd into the water with the hand, for each descent and ascent, but that should not be taken (as correct). There, because it is one effort, there is only one dukkaṭa. Moreover, having set aside the immersions etc. mentioned in the part about "above the ankles", for anyone who enters the water by any other manner, whether or not one has entered the water, for water that is in any place whatsoever, there is a dukkaṭa even for playing the game of throwing even a drop of water; however, it is permissible to write a meaningful letter; this is the determination here. The rest here is straightforward.

Originating from the first pārājika—inaction, perception of release, deliberate, a worldly offense, bodily action, unwholesome mind, tri-vedana.

The Hasadhamma-sikkhāpada is the third.

4. Description of the Anādariya-sikkhāpada

342.In the fourth—kathāyaṃ nasseyyāti (Lest the talk should be lost) means how this Dhamma, this lineage, should not be lost. Taṃ vā na sikkhitukāmoti (Or not wishing to learn that) means not wishing to learn that which is called "prescribed." Apaññattenāti (By what is not prescribed) means by what comes in the Suttas or Abhidhamma.

344.Evaṃ amhākaṃ ācariyānaṃ uggahoti, here, the ācariyuggaha which is blameworthy should not be taken; only the ācariyuggaha that has come by tradition should be taken. However, in the Kurundi, it is said, "The ācariyuggaha is not valid in the case of lokavajja, but it is valid in the case of paṇṇattivajja." In the Mahāpaccari, it is said, "The uggaha of the teachers who have grasped the Sutta and what accords with the Sutta is the standard; the talk of those who do not know is not the standard." All that goes to the combination that has come by tradition. The rest is clear.

Tri-arising: it arises from body and mind, from speech and mind, and from body, speech and mind; it is an action, without intention of release, with consciousness, a world offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, and painful feeling.

The fourth, the Disrespectful Training Rule.

5. Description of the Frightening Training Rule

345.In the fifth, the offering of forms (rūpūpahārā) and so on should be understood in the same way as stated in the section on human beings. The rest is clear. The arising and so on are similar to the Disrespectful one.

The fifth, the Frightening Training Rule.

6. Description of the Fire Training Rule

350.In the sixth, Bhaggā is the name of a country. Saṃsumāragira is the name of a city. Bhesakaḷāvana is the name of the forest dependent on it. However, because it was given for the comfortable dwelling of animals, it is called Migadāya. Samādahitvā means having kindled. Paripātesī means chased after.

352.Padīpepī means even with the lighting of a lamp. Jotikepī means in making light in cooking pots, etc. Tathārūpapaccayā means because of a condition of such a kind, such as a lamp.

354-5.Sayaṃ samādahatīti, here, from the setting up of the fire-stick, wanting to kindle a flame, until the flame does not rise, there is a dukkaṭa for all efforts. Paṭilātaṃ ukkhipatīti, he lifts up a burning firebrand (alāta) that has fallen, that is, he puts it back in its original place. Thus, there is a dukkaṭa for lifting up and throwing away one that has not caught fire, but for one who kindles the flame again on one that has caught fire, it is a pācittiya.

356.Tathārūpapaccayāti, having set up lamps etc., there is no offense for one who kindles with another condition of such a kind. Āpadāsūti, if there is oppression by wicked wild animals or humans, there is no offense even for one who kindles there. The rest is clear. Six-fold arising: it is an action, without intention of release, without consciousness, a regulation offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, tri-arising mind, tri-arising feeling.

The sixth, the Fire Training Rule.

7. Description of the Bathing Training Rule

364.In the seventh, cuṇṇena vā mattikāya vāti, here, from the time of preparing the powder or clay, there is a dukkaṭa for all efforts.

366.Pāraṃ gacchanto nhāyatīti, here, it is valid to bathe even in small ponds made by scooping out sand in a dry river. Āpadāsūti, it is valid to dive into the water for one who is being pursued by bees and so on. The rest here is clear. Arising like a sheep's hair: it is an action, without intention of release, without consciousness, a regulation offense, a bodily action, tri-arising mind, tri-arising feeling.

The seventh, the Bathing Training Rule.

8. Description of the Discoloration Training Rule

368-9.In the eighth, navaṃ pana bhikkhunā cīvaralābhenāti, here, alabhīti labho; gain is indeed gain. What was gained? A robe. What kind? New. Thus, instead of saying "navacīvaralābhena," it is said "navacīvaralābhena" without dropping the nasal consonant; the meaning is "with a newly acquired robe." In the two words in the middle, panāti is a particle. Bhikkhunāti is an indication of the one by whom it was obtained. However, in the word analysis, in order to show what was obtained without regard to the literal meaning, it is said, "cīvaraṃ nāma channaṃ cīvarāna," etc. Cīvaranti, here, whatever is able to be worn or wrapped should be understood. Therefore, "vikappanupagapacchima" is not said. Kaṃsanīlanti is tanner's blue. However, in the Mahāpaccari, it is said, "Iron rust, iron impurity, this is called kaṃsanīla." Palāsanīlanti is any blue-colored leaf juice. Dubbaṇṇakaraṇaṃ ādātabbanti, this is said with reference to the marking spot (kappa-bindu); not the discoloration of the entire robe with blue etc. And that mark should be taken by one who takes up the mark after dyeing the robe, in four, three, two, or one corner, the size of a peacock's eye or the back of a maṅkula. In the Mahāpaccari, it is said, "It is not valid on a bowl or knot." However, in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, it is said, "It is valid." However, Pāḷikappakaṇṇikakappādayo are prohibited everywhere, therefore, having set aside one round spot, a mark should not be made with any other alteration.

371.In Aggaḷeti and so on, there is no need to perform the act of making a mark after applying these bars etc. to a robe that has already had a mark made. The rest is clear. Arising like a sheep's hair: it is action-inaction, without intention of release, without consciousness, a regulation offense; a bodily action, tri-arising mind, tri-arising feeling.

The eighth, the Discoloration Training Rule.

9. Description of the Assigning Training Rule

374.In the ninth, tassa vā adinnanti, not given by the owner of the robe after saying, "Use it, dispose of it, or do as you please." Tassa vā avissasantoti, or by not trusting him by whom the vinaya act has been done. However, there is no offense for one who uses it by him having given it or by trusting him. The rest here is clear, as it was stated in the description of the thirtieth.

Kathina-arising: it arises from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; it is action-inaction, without intention of release, without consciousness, a regulation offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, tri-arising mind, tri-arising feeling.

The ninth, the Assigning Training Rule.

10. Description of the Hiding a Robe Training Rule

377-81.In the tenth, apanidhentīti, they hide it, having removed it. Hasāpekkhoti, intending to mock. Aññaṃ parikkhāranti, bowl, needle case etc. not mentioned in the Pāḷi. Dhammiṃ kathaṃ katvāti, there is no offense for one who puts it down, thinking, "It is not proper for a renunciate to be without hidden requisites," after making a Dhamma talk in this way. The rest here is clear. Tri-arising: it is an action, with intention of release, with consciousness, a world offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, tri-arising feeling.

The sixth, the Alcohol Chapter, is complete according to the order of description.

7. The Living-Being Chapter

1. Description of the Intentional Killing of a Living Being Training Rule

382.In the first training rule of the Living-Being Chapter, issāso hotīti, he was an archery teacher in his lay life. Jīvitā voropitāti, separated from life.

Voropeyyāti, should separate. However, since this is merely a matter of expression; there is nothing here like the head remaining separate when an ornament is removed from the head, or life remaining separate when a being is removed from life, but rather it simply disappears, therefore, in order to show that meaning, it is said in the word analysis, "he destroys the life faculty," etc. And in this training rule, only a being in the animal realm should be understood as "living being." There is no non-offense for killing even a small or large one. However, in the case of a large one, there is great unwholesomeness because of the greatness of the undertaking. Pāṇe pāṇasaññīti, even when cleaning a bed or chair, if he is conscious of life in a maṅgula seed and destroys it out of pitilessness, he commits a pācittiya. Therefore, in such places, compassion should be established and the duty should be done with care. The rest should be understood in the same way as stated in the section on human beings, together with the arising and so on.

The first, the Intentional Killing of a Living Being Training Rule.

2. The Living-Beings Training Rule

387.In the second, sappāṇakanti, that which is with living beings (pāṇaka) that die from being used, sappāṇaka is with such living beings, indeed, there is a pācittiya for each effort of one who knowingly uses such. There is one offense for drinking a bowlful without interruption in one effort. There is a pācittiya for each effort for one who washes a bowl contaminated with meat with such water, or for one who cools a hot rice-gruel bowl in such water, or for one who bathes taking that water with his hand or a scoop. Also, for one who enters a pond or lake and raises a wave to come out. Those who are cleaning a pond or lake should pour the water taken from there back into the water itself. If there is no water nearby, eight or ten pots of permissible water should be poured into a place that looks like water and then poured there. "Having rained, it will fall back into the water," water should not be poured on a hot stone. However, it is valid to cool a stone with permissible water and then pour it. The rest here is clear.

Tri-arising: it is an action, with intention of release, with consciousness, a regulation offense, a bodily action,

a verbal action, tri-arising mind, tri-arising feeling. And here, even knowing the falling of insect-beings, because it should be used with pure intention like lighting a lamp, even knowing the state of being with living beings, because it should be used with the perception of water, its nature of being a regulation offense should be understood.

The second, the Living-Beings Training Rule.

3. The Accusation Training Rule

392.In the third training rule, ukkoṭentīti, going to the presence of this or that bhikkhu and saying "the deed has not been done" etc., they stir them up; they do not allow them to be established in their proper state.

393.Yathādhammanti, by that same Dhamma by which the Dhamma was spoken for the calming of whose ever offense it was. Nihatādhikaraṇanti, the offense is destroyed; the meaning is that the offense is calmed by the Dhamma spoken by the Teacher.

395.Dhammakamme dhammakammasaññīti, if that offense was calmed by whatever action, if that is a Dhamma action, and even he, being conscious of a Dhamma action in that Dhamma action, accuses, he incurs a pācittiya. The meaning of the remaining words should be understood in this way. Here is the summary; the expansion, however, is stated in the Parivāra in the manner beginning "How many accusations are there of these four offenses?" In the commentaries, all that is brought forth and the meaning of that itself is described. However, we will describe that there itself. For if it were brought here and described, there might be even greater confusion, therefore we did not describe it. The rest here is clear. Tri-arising: it is an action, with intention of release, with consciousness, a world offense, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome mind, painful feeling.

The third, the Accusation Training Rule.

4. The Harsh Speech Training Rule

399.In the fourth, "duṭṭhullā nāma āpattī" (an offense that is serious) here shows the four pārājikā offenses in terms of abstracting the meaning, but it refers to a saṅghādisesa offense. A pācittiya results for concealing that. Dhuraṃ nikkhittamatte (as soon as the responsibility is relinquished) means as soon as the responsibility is relinquished. Even if he relinquishes the responsibility and then informs later, it does not protect him; it means a pācittiya occurs as soon as the responsibility is relinquished. But if, having relinquished the responsibility in this way, he informs another person only for the purpose of concealment, even that person incurs the offense, and in this way, even a hundred or a thousand monks incur the offense until the chain is broken. When is the chain broken? Mahāsumatthera says, "The monk who has committed an offense informs one person, and that person, having turned back, informs the same person; in this way, the chain is broken." But Mahāpadumatthera says, "This is a matter of the individual involved. However, the monk who has committed an offense informs one bhikkhu, and this one informs another, and that one, having turned back, informs the one by whom he was informed; in this way, the chain is broken when the third person informs the second."

400.Aduṭṭhullaṃ āpatti (an offense that is not serious) means the remaining five groups of offenses. Anupasampannassa duṭṭhullaṃ vā aduṭṭhullaṃ vā ajjhācāra (transgression with a non-ordained person that is either serious or not serious) here means the discharge of semen and bodily contact with a non-ordained person, this is called a serious transgression (duṭṭhullaajjhācāra). The rest here is self-explanatory. The origin of relinquishing responsibility arises from body, speech, and mind; is non-action, release from perception, intentional, a worldy fault, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome thought, and painful feeling.

The fourth Duṭṭhulla training rule.

5. Explanation of the Training Rule on Under Twenty Years of Age

402.In the fifth training rule, "aṅguliyo dukkhā bhavissantī" (the fingers will be painful), they thought, when writing letters, "the fingers will be painful." "Urassa dukkho" (pain in the chest), by learning counting, one has to think a lot, so they thought "his chest will be painful." "Akkhīni dukkhā bhavissantī" (the eyes will be painful), by learning the rūpasutta, kahāpaṇas have to be turned over and over to look at, so they thought "his eyes will be painful." Among mosquitoes etc., "ḍaṃsā" means brown flies. "Dukkhānaṃ" means painful. "Tibbānaṃ" means intense. "Kharānaṃ" means sharp. "Kaṭukānaṃ" means harsh; or like a bitter taste due to unpleasantness. "Asātānaṃ" means unpleasant. "Pāṇaharānaṃ" means life-threatening.

404.Sīmaṃ sammannati (establishes a sīma) means establishes a new sīma. But in the Kurundī, a dukkaṭa is stated even for determining the boundary by throwing water. Paripuṇṇavīsativasso (fully twenty years old) means fully twenty years old starting from the moment of conception; even a "gabbhavīsa" is counted as fully twenty years old. As it was said:

"At that time, the Venerable Kumārakassapa was ordained at the age of twenty since conception. Then this occurred to the Venerable Kumārakassapa: 'The Blessed One has prescribed that a person under twenty years of age should not be ordained. But I am ordained at the age of twenty since conception. Am I ordained, or am I not ordained?' They reported this matter to the Blessed One. 'Bhikkhus, counting from the first thought that arises in the mother's womb, the first consciousness that appears, from that is his birth. I allow, bhikkhus, the ordination of one who is twenty years old since conception'" (mahāva. 124).

There, one who lived in the mother's womb for twelve months and was born on the great pavāraṇā day, from then until the great pavāraṇā in the nineteenth year, having passed that, should be ordained on the first day of the waxing moon. In this way, the increase and decrease of years should be understood.

The ancient elders, however, ordain a sāmaṇera who is one day past the nikkhamanīya full moon day of his nineteenth year. Why is that? It is said: in one year there are six cātuddasika uposatha days. Thus, in twenty years, four months are lost. Kings add a month every third year. Thus, in eighteen years, six months are added; then, having removed the four months lost due to the uposatha days, two months remain, taking those two months, twenty years are completed. Therefore, being without doubt, they ordain on the first day of the waxing moon, having passed the nikkhamanīya full moon day. Here, "ekūnavīsativassa" (under twenty years of age) is said in reference to one who will be twenty years old after pavāraṇā. Therefore, one who lived in the mother's womb for twelve months is twenty-one years old. One who lived for seven months is twenty years and seven months old. But one born at six months does not live.

406.Anāpatti ūnavīsativassaṃ paripuṇṇavīsativassasaññī (no offense if one thinks a person under twenty is fully twenty), here, although there is no offense for the one who ordains, the person is still not ordained. But if he ordains another after ten years, and if the gaṇa is filled after releasing him, he is well-ordained. And as long as he does not know, there is neither an obstacle to heaven nor an obstacle to liberation for him, but having known, he should be ordained again. The rest is self-explanatory.

Triple origin: action, release from perception, intentional, an offense against a rule, bodily action,

verbal action, triple consciousness, triple feeling.

The fifth training rule on under twenty years of age.

6. Explanation of the Training Rule on Traveling with Stolen Goods

407.In the sixth, "paṭiyāloka" means facing the sunlight; it means the western direction. "Kammiyā" means officials at the customs station.

409.Rājānaṃ vā theyyaṃ gacchantī (going while stealing from the king) means either deceiving the king by stealing, taking something belonging to the king, and now going without giving it to him.

411.Visaṅketenā (without arrangement), there is no offense for one who goes without a prior arrangement of the time or the day. But there is an offense for going without an arrangement of the road or the forest. The rest here is self-explanatory, since the method has been stated in the Bhikkhunī section. The origin of traveling with stolen goods arises from body and mind, and from body, speech, and mind; is action, release from perception, intentional, an offense against a rule, bodily action, verbal action, triple consciousness, triple feeling.

The sixth training rule on traveling with stolen goods.

7. Explanation of the Training Rule on Conspiracy

412.In the seventh, "padhūpento nisīdī" (sat meditating) means sat contemplating, scolding himself. "Nāyyo so bhikkhu maṃ nippātesī" (that venerable bhikkhu did not bring me out) means that venerable bhikkhu did not take me out; it means he did not take me and go. The rest here should be understood in the same way as stated in the training rule on conspiracy with a bhikkhunī, along with the origins etc.

The seventh training rule on conspiracy.

8. Explanation of the Ariṭṭha Training Rule

417.In the eighth, "gaddhe bādhayiṃsū" means those who harm vultures; "gaddhabādhipubbo" means his ancestors were those who harmed vultures, it means descended from a family that killed vultures.

antarāyikā (obstacles). These are fivefold: obstacles due to kamma, defilements, results, censure, and transgression of the rule. Among them, the five ānantarika kammas are obstacles due to kamma. Likewise, the kamma of violating a bhikkhunī, but that only creates an obstacle to liberation, not to heaven. Fixed wrong views are obstacles due to defilements. The rebirth conditions of hermaphrodites, animals, and those with both sets of organs are obstacles due to results. Censure of the noble ones are obstacles due to censure, but those exist only until they apologize to the noble ones, not after that. Offenses committed intentionally are obstacles due to transgression of the rule, and those too exist only as long as he acknowledges being a bhikkhu, or does not renounce, or does not confess, not after that.

Here, this bhikkhu is very learned, a speaker of the Dhamma, he knows the other obstacles, but being unskilled in the Vinaya, he does not know the obstacles due to transgression of the rule, therefore, being alone, he thought thus: "These householders, enjoying the five strands of sense pleasure, are stream-enterers, once-returners, and non-returners, and bhikkhus also see desirable forms cognizable by the eye...pe... touch tangible objects cognizable by the body, enjoy soft bedding, coverings, etc., all this is allowable. Why are female forms...pe... female tangibles not allowable, these too are allowable." Thus, mixing flavor with flavor, combining indulgence in desire with non-indulgence in desire, like fitting a very thin thread with thick reeds, like bringing Mount Sineru together with a mustard seed, producing a bad view, "why did the Blessed One prescribe the first pārājika offense with great effort, like building the great ocean, there is no fault in this," contradicting the knowledge of the All-Knowing One, severing the hope of worthy individuals, he struck a blow at the wheel of the command of the Conqueror. Therefore, he said, "tathāhaṃ bhagavatā dhammaṃ desitaṃ ājānāmī (Thus I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One.)" etc.

In aṭṭhikaṅkalūpamā (simile of a skeleton) etc., aṭṭhikaṅkalūpamā in the sense of little satisfaction. Maṃsapesūpamā (simile of a lump of flesh) in the sense of being commonly shared. Tiṇukkūpamā (simile of a grass torch) in the sense of not burning away desire. Aṅgārakāsūpamā (simile of a pit of embers) in the sense of great burning. Supinakūpamā (simile of a dream) in the sense of fleeting presence. Yācitakūpamā (simile of a loan) in the sense of being temporary. Rukkhaphalūpamā (simile of tree fruit) in the sense of shaking down all parts and limbs. Asisūnūpamā (simile of a butcher) in the sense of excessive cutting. Sattisūlūpamā (simile of a spear) in the sense of piercing through. Sappasirūpamā (simile of a snake's head) in the sense of fearing a snake. This is the summary here. But the detailed explanation should be taken from the Papañcasūdanī commentary on the Majjhima Nikāya (ma. ni. 1.234 ff.; 2.42 ff.). Evaṃ byākho (thus explain) means just like that. The rest here is self-explanatory, since the method has been stated before.

The origin of giving consent arises from body, speech, and mind; is non-action, release from perception, intentional, a worldly fault, a bodily action, a verbal action, an unwholesome thought, and painful feeling.

The eighth Ariṭṭha training rule.

9. Explanation of the Training Rule on Association with a Suspended Monk

424-5.In the ninth, "akaṭānudhammenā" (without having carried out the due process), anudhammo means seeing conduct in accordance with the rule of one who has been suspended by the Dhamma, the Vinaya, the Teacher’s instruction, due to not seeing the offense, or not making amends, or not relinquishing the evil view; the reinstatement that is called osāraṇā; one who has not had that done is called akaṭānudhammo, meaning with such a one. Therefore, in its word analysis, it is said, "akaṭānudhammo nāma ukkhitto anosārito (akaṭānudhammo means suspended and not reinstated)."

Deti vā paṭiggaṇhāti vā (gives or receives), with one effort, whether giving or taking even a lot, there is one pācittiya. For one who gives or takes discontinuously, there are pācittiyas according to the number of efforts. The rest here is self-explanatory. Triple origin: action, release from perception, intentional, an offense against a rule, bodily action, verbal action, triple consciousness, triple feeling.

The ninth training rule on association with a suspended monk.

10. Explanation of the Kaṇṭaka Training Rule

428.In the tenth, "diṭṭhigataṃ uppannaṃ" (a wrong view arose) means, arising improperly for this one too, like for Ariṭṭha. "Nāsetū" (he should expel), here there are three kinds of expulsion: expulsion of association (saṃvāsanāsanā), expulsion of status (liṅganāsanā), expulsion by disciplinary action (daṇḍakammanāsanā). There, the suspension due to not seeing the offense etc., is called expulsion of association. "Dūsako nāsetabbo (a corrupter should be expelled)" (pārā. 66), "expel the bhikkhunī Mettiya" (pārā. 384), this is called expulsion of status. "From today, Āvuso, you should not call that Blessed One your teacher" this is called expulsion by disciplinary action. This is what is meant here. Therefore, he said, "evañca pana bhikkhave nāsetabbo…pe… vinassā (in this way, bhikkhus, he should be expelled…pe… disappear)". There, "carā" means go. "Pire" means other, not mine. "Vinassā" means perish; go where we do not see you.

429.Upalāpeyyā (should converse with) means should associate with. Upaṭṭhāpeyyā (should have him attend to) means should have him perform attendance for himself. The rest should be understood in the same way as stated in the Ariṭṭha training rule, along with the origins etc.

The Tenth Training Rule on Thorns.

The seventh chapter, Sappāṇaka Vagga, is completed according to the order of exposition.

8. Sahadhammika Vagga

1. Explanation of the Sahadhammika Training Rule

434. In the first training rule of the Sahadhammika Vagga: etasmiṃ sikkhāpade means, "In this training rule," what has been said, "I will not train in that." Āpatti pācittiyassā means here, an offense for each utterance should be understood. Sikkhamānena bhikkhave bhikkhunā means, monks, it should be known, asked, and examined by a monk who, having respectfully received the advice, wishes to train. The rest here should be understood in terms of the meaning of the words in the same way as stated in the Dubbacasikkhāpada. In terms of judgment, it is straightforward.

It arises from three sources: it is an action, involves intention to give up, is self-caused, is a worldy offense, is a bodily action, is a verbal action, arises from unwholesome consciousness, and is felt as painful.

The First Training Rule on Those in Accordance with the Dhamma.

2. Explanation of the Vilekhana Training Rule

438. In the second: vinayakathaṃ kathetī means he tells a Vinaya story, which is a story connected with what is allowable and not allowable, offenses and non-offenses, restraint and abandonment. Vinayassa vaṇṇaṃ bhāsatī means he speaks of the praise of the Vinaya, which is the description by way of placing the matrix (mātikaṃ) according to the five or seven groups of offenses and dividing it into words (padabhājana). Vinayapariyattiyā vaṇṇaṃ bhāsatī means he speaks of the praise, the virtue, the benefit rooted in the Vinaya learning of those who learn the Vinaya. For a Vinaya-holder obtains five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, or eleven benefits rooted in Vinaya learning, and he speaks of all of them. What are the five benefits he obtains? Beginning with the good protection of one's own aggregate of virtue (sīlakkhandha). Thus it was said:

"Monks, there are these five benefits in a person who is a Vinaya-holder: one’s own aggregate of virtue is well-guarded and well-protected, he is a refuge for those beset by scruples, he speaks confidently in the midst of the Sangha, he soundly refutes opponents with the Dhamma, and he is committed to the stability of the true Dhamma" (pari. 325).

attano sīlakkhandho sugutto hoti surakkhito? How is one's own aggregate of virtue well-guarded and well-protected? Here, a certain monk incurs an offense in six ways: through shamelessness, through ignorance, through being beset by scruples, through perceiving what is impermissible as permissible, through perceiving what is permissible as impermissible, and through loss of mindfulness.

alajjitāya āpattiṃ āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through shamelessness? Knowing its impermissible nature, he disregards it and commits the transgression. Thus it was said:

‘‘He intentionally incurs an offense, he conceals an offense;
And he goes to wrong destinations, such a person is called shameless’’ (pari. 359);

aññāṇatāya āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through ignorance? An ignorant person, being dull and confused, not knowing what should and should not be done, does what should not be done and neglects what should be done; thus, he incurs an offense through ignorance.

kukkuccapakatatāya āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through being beset by scruples? When scruples arise concerning what is permissible and impermissible, having asked a Vinaya-holder, if it is permissible, it should be done; if it is impermissible, it should not be done. But this one, thinking "it is allowable," disregards it and commits the transgression; thus, he incurs an offense through being beset by scruples.

akappiye kappiyasaññitāya āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through perceiving what is impermissible as permissible? He eats raw meat thinking it is pork, he eats leopard meat thinking it is deer meat, he consumes impermissible food thinking it is permissible food, he eats at the wrong time with the perception of the right time, he drinks impermissible drinks thinking they are permissible drinks; thus, he incurs an offense through perceiving what is impermissible as permissible.

kappiye akappiyasaññitāya āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through perceiving what is permissible as impermissible? He eats pork thinking it is raw meat, he eats deer meat thinking it is leopard meat, he consumes permissible food thinking it is impermissible food, he eats at the right time with the perception of the wrong time, he drinks permissible drinks thinking they are impermissible drinks; thus, he incurs an offense through perceiving what is permissible as impermissible.

satisammosāya āpajjati? How does one incur an offense through loss of mindfulness? He incurs an offense through loss of mindfulness due to reasons such as sleeping together, separation from the robe, medicine, and the passing of the robe-time; thus, a certain monk here incurs an offense in these six ways.

chahākārehi āpattiṃ nāpajjati. How does one not incur an offense in six ways? How does one not incur it lajjitāya through shame? He does not incur it protecting himself from the reproach, "Look, this one knowingly transgresses the rule regarding what is permissible and impermissible"; thus, he does not incur an offense through shame. Even if he incurs an offense suddenly, having confessed it, which leads to desanā, and having arisen from it, which leads to vuṭṭhāna, he becomes established in purity. Therefore –

‘‘He does not intentionally incur an offense, he does not conceal an offense;
And he does not go to wrong destinations, such a person is called shameful’’ (pari. 359)

He is established in this state of being ashamed.

ñāṇatāya nāpajjati? How does one not incur it through knowledge? He knows what is permissible and impermissible; therefore, he does only what is permissible and does not do what is impermissible; thus, he does not incur an offense through knowledge.

akukkuccapakatatāya nāpajjati? How does one not incur it through not being beset by scruples? When scruples arise concerning what is permissible and impermissible, he examines the matter, considering the matrix, the word division, the included offense, the offense, and the non-offense, and if it is permissible, he does it; if it is impermissible, he does not do it; thus, he does not incur an offense through not being beset by scruples.

akappiyādisaññitāya nāpajjati? How does one not incur it through perception of the impermissible? He knows what is permissible and impermissible; therefore, he does not perceive what is impermissible as permissible, nor does he perceive what is permissible as impermissible; and his mindfulness is well-established, he determines what should be determined, and he analyzes what should be analyzed. Thus, he does not incur an offense in these six ways. Not incurring an offense, he is one of unbroken virtue and pure virtue; thus, his own aggregate of virtue is well-guarded and well-protected.

kukkuccapakatānaṃ paṭisaraṇaṃ hoti? How is he a refuge for those beset by scruples? Monks in outlying districts and border regions, thinking, "A Vinaya-holder lives in such and such a monastery," come from afar to his presence and ask about their scruples. He examines the matter of the action they have done, discerns the difference between offense and non-offense, serious and minor, and having made them confess what leads to desanā and having made them arise from what leads to vuṭṭhāna, he establishes them in purity; thus, he is a refuge for those beset by scruples.

Visārado saṅghamajjhe voharatīti How does he speak confidently in the midst of the Sangha? Fear and hesitation overcome one who is not a Vinaya-holder when speaking in the midst of the Sangha, but this does not happen to a Vinaya-holder. Why? Because he knows, "There is fault in speaking thus; there is no fault in speaking thus."

Paccatthike sahadhammena suniggahitaṃ niggaṇhātīti How does he soundly refute opponents with the Dhamma? Here, opponents are of two kinds: opponents of oneself (attapaccatthikā) and opponents of the Teaching (sāsanapaccatthikā). Among them, the monks Mettiya and Bhummajaka and Vaḍḍha the Licchavi accused [others] with a baseless charge concerning the last matter (antimavatthu); these are called opponents of oneself. Or any other immoral and wicked monks, all of them are opponents of oneself. But those of distorted views, such as Ariṭṭha the monk, Kaṇṭaka the novice, the Vesāli Vajjiputtakas, and those with doctrines such as wrong livelihood, ignorance, doubt, and dependence on others, and the Mahāsaṅghikas, who insist that what is not the Buddha's teaching is the "Buddha's teaching," are called opponents of the Teaching. He soundly refutes all of them, having refuted them with the Dhamma, with reasoned words, in such a way that they are not able to establish that false Dhamma.

Saddhammaṭṭhitiyā paṭipanno hotīti How is he committed to the stability of the true Dhamma? Here, the true Dhamma is of three kinds: the Dhamma of learning (pariyatti), the Dhamma of practice (paṭipatti), and the Dhamma of realization (adhigama). Among them, the word of the Buddha, the Tipiṭaka, is called the Dhamma of learning. The thirteen qualities of the dhutaṅgas, the fourteen duties of the khandhakas, and the eighty-two great duties (mahāvattāni) are called the Dhamma of practice. The four paths and fruits are called the Dhamma of realization.

"Learning is the root of the Teaching," some say. Some elders, quoting the sutta, "If these monks, Subhadda, were to live rightly, the world would not be empty of arahants" (dī. ni. 2.214), said, "Practice is the root of the Teaching," and said, "As long as five monks live rightly, the Teaching will last." Other elders said, "Without learning, there is no realization of the Dhamma even for those who practice well." If five monks are guardians of the four pārājikas, they will ordain faithful sons of good families, get them ordained in a border region, complete a group of ten, and perform the upasampadā ordination even in the central region; in this way, by completing a Sangha of twenty, having performed the act of restoration for themselves, they will bring the Teaching to growth, increase, and abundance. Thus, this Vinaya-holder is committed to the long-lasting stability of all three kinds of true Dhamma; thus, this Vinaya-holder should be understood to obtain these five benefits.

What six benefits does he obtain? He is the authority for the uposatha, the pavāraṇā, the Saṅghakamma, the pabbajjā, the upasampadā, he gives dependence (nissaya), and he maintains the novice (sāmaṇeraṃ upaṭṭhāpeti).

All these nine uposathas, namely, the fourteenth, the fifteenth, the uposatha of agreement, the uposatha of the Sangha, the uposatha in a group, the uposatha in an individual, the recitation of the suttas, the purity, the adhiṭṭhāna uposatha, all are dependent on the Vinaya-holder.

And these nine pavāraṇās, namely, the fourteenth, the fifteenth, the pavāraṇā of agreement, the pavāraṇā of the Sangha, the pavāraṇā in a group, the pavāraṇā in an individual, the three-word pavāraṇā, the two-word pavāraṇā, and the pavāraṇā of those of equal seniority, are also dependent on the Vinaya-holder, they belong to him, he is their master.

And these four Saṅghakamma, namely, the apalokanakamma, the ñattikamma, the ñattidutiyakamma, and the ñatticatutthakamma, are dependent on the Vinaya-holder.

And this pabbajjā and upasampadā for sons of good families, which are to be done by being an preceptor, are also dependent on the Vinaya-holder. For another, even if he is a two-piṭaka-holder, is not able to do this. He alone gives dependence and maintains the novice. Another is neither able to give dependence nor to maintain the novice. But one who anticipates the maintenance of a novice can have a preceptor near the Vinaya-holder and accomplish the practice of duties. And here, giving dependence and maintaining the novice are one thing.

Thus, in these six benefits, the former five together with one make six, together with two make seven, together with three make eight, together with four make nine, together with five make ten, and together with all those make eleven; thus, the Vinaya-holder should be understood to obtain five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, and eleven benefits. Thus, the Blessed One, showing these benefits, should be understood to speak of the praise of Vinaya learning.

Ādissa ādissa means repeatedly determining, making distinct, separately. Āyasmato upālissa vaṇṇaṃ bhāsatī means, relying on Vinaya learning, he speaks of the virtues of the Elder Upāli, praises, and extols him. Why? So that monks, even having heard my praise, might think, "Vinaya should be learned and mastered near Upāli," thus this Teaching will be long-lasting and will continue for five thousand years.

Tedha bahū bhikkhū means, having heard this praise of the Blessed One, thinking, "Suttanta-holders and Abhidhamma-holders do not obtain these benefits," many monks, elders, new ones, and middle ones, becoming enthusiastic about attaining the benefits as described, master the Vinaya near the venerable Upāli; this is the meaning here. Idhā is merely an expletive.

439-40. Uddissamāne means when the preceptor is reciting (the Pāṭimokkha) to the pupil. However, because the pupil either has the preceptor recite it according to his own preference or, having requested the preceptor, has the preceptor recite it, he is called "reciting" when he keeps it in mind or when he is reciting the sajjhāya. Therefore, the word division states, "when reciting, or having it recited, or when reciting the sajjhāya." Khuddānukhuddakehī means by the minor and the insignificant. Yāvadevā is a term that indicates the limit of their tendency. This means that, indeed, for those who recite, have it recited, or recite the sajjhāya, these things tend toward the arising of remorse counted as kukkucca, "Is it allowable? Is it not allowable?", vexation, and mental agitation counted as doubt or vicikicchā. Alternatively, yāvadevā means a determination of excess; it is connected with "tend to," which means it tends exceedingly to kukkucca, vexation, and agitation. Upasampannassa vinayaṃ vivaṇṇetī means he disparages, reviles, and criticizes the Vinaya in the presence of a fully ordained monk, desiring to create doubt in him about it. The rest is straightforward here.

Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Second Training Rule on Agitation.

3. Explanation of the Training Rule on Deception

444. In the third (training rule): anvaddhamāsa means every half-month in sequence; but because he recites it on the Uposatha day, it is stated in the word division as "non-Uposatha." Uddissamāne means when being recited. But because he is called "being recited" when the one reciting the Pātimokkha is reciting, therefore, it is stated in the word division as "when reciting." Yañca tattha āpattiṃ āpanno means whatever offense he incurs in that misconduct. Yathādhammo kāretabbo means because he incurred the offense through ignorance, there is no release from that offense; but it should be done as the Dhamma and Vinaya prescribe. If he has incurred an offense that leads to confession, he should be made to confess; and if it leads to rehabilitation, he should be rehabilitated. Sādhuka means well. Aṭṭhiṃkatvā means having made an attitude of need; it means having become one who needs it.

447. Among dhammakamme and the rest, an act of deception is intended. The rest is straightforward here. Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Third Training Rule on Deception.

4. Explanation of the Training Rule on Striking

449. In the fourth (training rule): pahāraṃ dentī means having said, "Venerable, set out a seat, bring foot-washing water," and striking those who do not do so.

451. Pahāraṃ deti āpatti pācittiyassā means here, if a blow is given with the intention to strike, even if he dies, it is only a pācittiya. If a hand or foot is broken by the blow, or if the head is fractured, it is only a pācittiya. If he cuts off an ear or nose with the intention of disfiguring him, thinking, "I will make him so that he does not shine in the midst of the Saṅgha," it is a dukkaṭa.

452. Anupasampannassā means giving a blow to a householder or a renunciant, to a woman or a man, even to a non-human being, it is a dukkaṭa. But if, with lustful thoughts, he strikes a woman, it is a saṅghādisesa.

453. Kenaci viheṭhiyamāno means being harassed by a human or a non-human being. Mokkhādhippāyo means desiring his own release from that. Pahāraṃ detī means he gives a blow with one of the forms of physical action relating to body, non-offense. Even if, on the road, having seen a thief or an enemy wanting to harass him, he says, "Lay follower, stay right there, do not come," and as he comes without heeding his words, striking him with a club or a weapon, he goes away, and if he dies from that blow, it is not an offense. The same method applies to wild animals. The rest is straightforward here. But its origin, etc., are similar to the first pārājika, but this one is painful feeling.

The Fourth Training Rule on Striking.

5. Explanation of the Training Rule on Raising a Fist

454. In the fifth (training rule): talasattikaṃ uggirantī means having shown the manner of giving a blow, they utter threats against the body or against what pertains to the body. Te pahārasamuccitā rodantī means they, accustomed to blows, weeping because they have received blows in the past and now thinking that they will be shown a blow. "Pahārassa muccitā" is also recited; there, the meaning is "fearing a blow."

457. Uggirati āpatti pācittiyassā means here, if, having raised a fist in anger, he gives a blow, because the blow falls suddenly when he is unable to restrain himself, and is not given with the intention of striking, it is a dukkaṭa. If anything is broken in the hand, etc., by that blow, it is only a dukkaṭa.

458. Mokkhādhippāyo talasattikaṃ uggiratī means here, in the cases stated earlier, there is no offense for one who raises a fist in accordance with the earlier method. Even if, having lost control, he gives a blow, there is no offense. The rest is the same as before, along with its origin, etc.

The Fifth Training Rule on Raising a Fist.

6. Explanation of the Training Rule on Baseless Accusation

459. In the sixth (training rule): anuddhaṃsentī means because they themselves are full of defilements, making self-protection, thinking, "Monks will not accuse or remind us in this way," they accuse monks beforehand with a baseless Saṅghādisesa. The rest is straightforward here because the method is stated in the thirteenth Training Rule on Baseless Accusation.

Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Sixth Training Rule on Baseless Accusation.

7. Explanation of the Training Rule on Intentionally Arousing Remorse

464. In the seventh (training rule): upadahantī means they cause to arise. Kukkuccaṃ upadahati āpatti pācittiyassā means offense by offense, a pācittiya. Anupasampannassā means to a novice. "I think you sat, lay down, ate, and drank in a secluded place with a woman, you did this and that in the midst of the Saṅgha," in this way, he causes remorse to arise, offense by offense, a dukkaṭa. The rest is straightforward here. Its origin, etc., are similar to the one on baseless accusation.

The Seventh Training Rule on Intentionally Arousing Remorse.

8. Explanation of the Training Rule on Eavesdropping

471. In the eighth (training rule): adhikaraṇajātāna means of disputes that have arisen from these quarrels and the like. Upassuti means near to hearing; it means in a place where it is possible to hear their words. Gacchati āpatti dukkaṭassā means here, for each word occurrence, a dukkaṭa. Mantenta means when conferring with another about someone else; alternatively, there is the reading "mantente," the meaning is the same.

473. Vūpasamissāmī means I will go to quiescence, I will not quarrel. Attānaṃ parimocessāmī means I will free myself by speaking of my innocence. The rest is straightforward here.

Its origin with respect to the object (theyyasattha) is from body-mind and from body-speech-mind. It may arise as action because of going with the desire to hear, it may arise as non-action because of not informing those who are conferring when coming to a place where they are standing. Indeed, these three training rules—regarding rūpiyaṃ, speaking otherwise, and eavesdropping—are of one category. Release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Eighth Training Rule on Eavesdropping.

9. Explanation of the Training Rule on Obstructing a Saṅgha Act

474. In the ninth (training rule): sace ca mayaṃ jāneyyāmā means if we should know; but the "ca" is merely an expletive. Dhammikāna means because they are done according to the Dhamma, the Vinaya, and the Teacher's teaching, they have Dhamma in them; of those lawful four Saṅgha acts. Khiyyati āpatti pācittiyassā means here, offense by offense, a pācittiya. The rest is straightforward. Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Ninth Training Rule on Obstructing a Saṅgha Act.

10. Explanation of the Training Rule on Leaving Without Giving Consent

481. In the tenth (training rule): vatthu vā ārocita means the accuser and the accused have spoken their stories, the investigator is appointed, even by this much, the case is announced. The rest is straightforward here.

Its origin with respect to abandoning responsibility (dhuranikkhepa) is from body-speech-mind. Action and non-action (kiriyākiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Tenth Training Rule on Leaving Without Giving Consent.

11. Explanation of the Training Rule on Favoritism

484. In the eleventh (training rule): yathāmittatā means according to friendship; it means he gives to each one who is a friend. This method applies in all phrases. The rest is straightforward in meaning because the method is stated in the one on disparagement and the like.

Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ) unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and painful feeling (dukkhavedananti).

The Eleventh Training Rule on Favoritism.

12. Explanation of the Training Rule on Appropriation

489. In the twelfth (training rule): whatever should be said, all that is in accordance with the method stated in the thirtieth training rule on appropriation. This itself is the distinction: there, because he himself appropriated it, it is a nissaggiya pācittiya, here, because it is appropriated by an individual, it is a suddhika pācittiya.

Its origin is threefold: action (kiriyaṃ), release by perception (saññāvimokkhaṃ), intentionality (sacittakaṃ), fault of the world (lokavajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), unwholesome thought (akusalacittaṃ), and threefold feeling (tivedananti).

The Twelfth Training Rule on Appropriation.

The eighth Sahadhammika Vagga is complete with the order of explanation.

9. The Jewel Vagga

1. Explanation of the Training Rule on the Inner Quarters

494. In the first training rule of the Royal Vagga: orako means small. Uparipāsādavaragato means gone to the upper part of an excellent palace. Ayyānaṃ vāhasā means because of the noble ones; it means he knows because it was made known by them.

497. Pitaraṃ patthetī means he desires to kill him, seeing an opportunity. Among rājantepuraṃ hatthisammadda and the rest, hatthisammaddaṃ means a crush by elephants is there; it means a crowd of elephants. The same method applies in assarathasammaddapade. Some read "Sammatta," that should not be taken. There is also the reading "Rañño antepure hatthisammadda," there, hatthisammaddaṃ means a crush of elephants, it means there is a crush of elephants in the king's inner quarters. The same method applies in the remaining phrases. Rajanīyānī means such forms, etc., are desirable in that inner quarters.

498. Muddhāvasittassā means of one who has been consecrated on the head. Anikkhanto rājā itoti anikkhantarājakaṃ, in that anikkhantarājake means in the king's bedchamber. A jewel (ratanaṃ) is said to be the chief queen, niggataṃ means gone out, aniggataṃ ratanaṃ itoti aniggataratanakaṃ, in that aniggataratanake means in the bedchamber of the jewel who has not gone out. The rest is straightforward here.

Its origin with respect to the base (kathina) is from body-speech, and from body-speech-mind. Action and non-action (kiriyākiriyaṃ), no release by perception (nosaññāvimokkhaṃ), unintentional (acittakaṃ), fault of designation (paṇṇattivajjaṃ), bodily action (kāyakammaṃ), verbal action (vacīkammaṃ), triple consciousness (ticittaṃ), and threefold feeling (tivedananti).

The First Training Rule on the Inner Quarters.

2. Explanation of the Training Rule on Jewels

502-3. In the second (training rule): vissaritvā means having forgotten. Puṇṇapattaṃ means constantly five kahāpaṇas. Kyāhaṃ karissāmī means what shall I do. Ābharaṇaṃ omuñcitvā means having removed an ornament called Mahālatā worth nine kotis.

504. Antevāsī means attendant.

506. Aparikkhittassa upacāro here, upacāro means two leḍḍupātā from the boundary of the monastery. It is said in the Mahāpaccari that "for the dwelling, it is the distance of a draining point or a pestle drop." Uggaṇhāti āpatti pācittiyassā here, for receiving or having received gold and silver for one's own use, there is a nissaggiya pācittiya. For the sake of the Saṅgha, a group, an individual, a shrine, or new construction, there is a dukkaṭa. For receiving or having received remaining gems such as pearls, for oneself or for the sake of the Saṅgha, etc., there is a dukkaṭa. Whether it is allowable or unallowable material, even if it is a tāḷapaṇṇa used as ear ornament for a mother, if one returns property belonging to a householder with the attitude of being a treasurer, it is only a pācittiya.

But if it is allowable property belonging to one’s parents that must be returned, it should be taken for one’s own use and returned. But when told, "Return this and give it," it should be refused saying, "It is not proper." If they leave it after throwing it down and depart, it is called an encumbrance (palibodha), and it is proper to return it. When builders and others doing work in the monastery, or royal favorites, say, "Return and give" their equipment or bedding, it should not be done even out of desire or fear, but it is proper to show a safe place. And it is proper to return it if they have thrown it down forcibly and left.

Ajjhārāme vā ajjhāvasathe vā, here, if there is a large monastery like the Mahāvihāra, in a cloister surrounded by walls where there is a suspicion that it will be taken by monks or novices, it should be received or had received and placed in such a place. It should not be taken in places frequented by the public such as the Mahābodhi gate enclosure or mango grove, there is no encumbrance. But it is said in the Kurundi, "If a person going along the road sees some goods in a deserted place, even when people are swarming, people suspect that monk, therefore one should sit down off the road. When the owners come, it should be told to them. If one does not see the owners, one will do what is appropriate."

Rūpena vā nimittena vā saññāṇaṃ katvā, here, rūpaṃ means the goods inside the bundle; therefore, having opened the bundle and counted, one should note whether there are so many kahāpaṇas or gold and silver. Nimitta means a mark, etc.; therefore, one should note everything about the marked bundle, whether it is marked with clay or lac, or whether the bundle is tied with blue or white cloth.

Bhikkhū patirūpā are those who are conscientious and scrupulous. For it is not permissible to place it in the hands of the fickle. But if one neither leaves that dwelling nor sees the owner, one should also not use it for the price of one’s robes, etc.; but a permanent dwelling or cetiya or pond should be built. If the owner comes after a long time, he should be told, "Layman, this was done with your property, please approve." If he approves, that is good; if he does not approve, he should be urged, "Give me my money," and it should be given after persuading another.

507.Ratanasammataṃvissāsaṃ gaṇhātītiādīsu it is said referring only to what can be touched (āmāsa). What cannot be touched (anāmāsa) is certainly not proper. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination – kiriyaṃ, nosaññāvimokkhaṃ, acittakaṃ, paṇṇattivajjaṃ, kāyakammaṃ, vacīkammaṃ, ticittaṃ, tivedananti.

The Second Rule on Gems.

3. Explanation of the Training Rule on Entering Villages at the Wrong Time

508.In the third, tiracchānakathaṃ means talk that is base to the Noble Path. Rājakathaṃ means talk connected with kings. The same method applies to Corakathā, and so on.

512.Santaṃ bhikkhuṃ, what should be said here has already been said in the rule on proper conduct (cārittasikkhāpada). If many enter a village for some work, all should ask each other, "I ask permission for entering the village at the wrong time." If that work is not accomplished in that village and they go to another village, even if it is a hundred villages, there is no need to ask permission again. But if, having abandoned their effort, they go to the monastery and want to enter another village in between, they must ask permission again.

If one wants to go to a family's house or assembly hall, after having done the meal duty, to go for oil alms or ghee alms, if one sees there is a monk, one should go after asking permission. If there is not, one should go without asking. If one sees a monk after descending into the street, there is no need to ask permission, one should go even without asking. If there is a road through the middle of the village, if the thought arises in one's mind that one will go for alms of oil, etc., while going along it, if one sees there is a monk, one should go after asking permission. But for one who goes for alms without leaving the road, there is no need to ask permission, and the boundary (upacāro) of the unconfined village should be understood in the same way as stated in the case of not giving.

515.Antarārāmaṃ and so on, not only is there no offense for going without asking permission, without tying the waistband, and without opening the outer robe. Āpadāsu means if a lion or tiger comes, or a cloud rises, or some other misfortune arises, there is no offense. In such misfortunes, it is proper to enter a village from outside the village. The rest here is straightforward.

Kathina origination – it originates from body and speech, and from body, speech, and mind; kiriyākiriyaṃ, nosaññāvimokkhaṃ, acittakaṃ, paṇṇattivajjaṃ, kāyakammaṃ, vacīkammaṃ, ticittaṃ, tivedananti.

The Third Training Rule on Entering Villages at the Wrong Time.

4. Explanation of the Training Rule on Needle Cases

517-20.In the fourth, bhedanameva bhedanakaṃ; having that is bhedanakameva.Araṇike means fire-stick bow. Vidhe means a piercer. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination – kiriyaṃ, nosaññāvimokkhaṃ, acittakaṃ, paṇṇattivajjaṃ, kāyakammaṃ, vacīkammaṃ, ticittaṃ, tivedananti.

The Fourth Training Rule on Needle Cases.

5. Explanation of the Training Rule on Couches

522.In the fifth, chedanakaṃ is as previously stated.

525.Chinditvā paribhuñjatī here, if one does not want to cut it, but shows the measure above after burying it in the ground, or uses it after turning it face up, or picks it up and uses it after placing it on a balance beam and making a platform, it is all proper. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Fifth Training Rule on Couches.

6. Explanation of the Training Rule on Cotton-Filled (Bed)

526.In the sixth, tūlonaddhaṃ means cotton is stuffed in it; it is said to mean that cotton is put in and covered with cloth on top. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Sixth Training Rule on Cotton-Filled (Bed).

7. Explanation of the Training Rule on Sitting Cloths

531-4.In the seventh, nisīdanaṃ anuññātaṃ hotī where is the sitting cloth allowed? In the robe section, in the matter of excellent food. For it was said there – "I allow, monks, a sitting cloth for the protection of the body, the protection of the robe, and the protection of the lodging" (mahāva. 353).Seyyathāpi purāṇāsikoṭṭho means just as an old leather worker. Just as a leather worker stretches the leather from here and there, pulling it, thinking "I will expand the leather"; so too, is that sitting cloth. Therefore, the Buddha said this to him – ‘‘nisīdanaṃ nāma sadasaṃ vuccatī’’, a sitting cloth (nisīdana) is called with fringes (sadasaṃ): having spread it out like a mat, having split off two places in one end to the extent of a Sugata span (vidatthi), three fringes are made, with those fringes it is called with fringes (sadasaṃ). The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Seventh Training Rule on Sitting Cloths.

8. Explanation of the Training Rule on Bandages for Itch

537.In the eighth, kaṇḍupaṭicchādi anuññātā hotī where is the bandage for itch allowed? In the robe section, in the matter of belaṭṭhasīsā. For it was said there – "I allow, monks, a bandage for itch for one who has itch or boils or discharge or thick scabies or disease" (mahāva. 354).

539.Yassa adhonābhi ubbhajāṇumaṇḍala means for that monk, below the navel and above the kneecaps. Kaṇḍū means scabies. Piḷakā means blood boils, small boils. Assāvo means an impure discharge by way of hemorrhoids, gonorrhea, diabetes, etc. Thullakacchu vā ābādho means a disease of large boils. The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Eighth Training Rule on Bandages for Itch.

9. Explanation of the Training Rule on Rain Cloths

542.In the ninth, vassikasāṭikā anuññātā hotī where is the rain cloth allowed? In the robe section, in the matter of Visākhā. For it was said there – "I allow, monks, a rain cloth" (mahāva. 352). The rest here is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Ninth Training Rule on Rain Cloths.

10. Explanation of the Training Rule on Nanda Thera

547.In the tenth, caturaṅgulomako means less than four fingers in length. The rest is straightforward. Sixfold origination.

The Tenth Training Rule on Nanda Thera.

The Ninth Chapter on Gems is Complete According to the Order of Explanation.

Uddiṭṭhā kho and so on, is as previously stated.

The Minor Explanation in the Samantapāsādikā, the Vinaya Commentary, is Complete.

The Pācittiya Section is Finished.

6. The Pāṭidesanīya Section

1. Explanation of the First Pāṭidesanīya Training Rule

The Pāṭidesanīya rules, immediately after the minor ones;
Those that are established, now, there is an explanation of them.

552.In the first Pāṭidesanīya, first paṭikkamanakāle means at the time of returning after wandering for alms. Sabbeva aggahesī means he took all of it. Pavedhentī means trembling. Apehī means go away.

553-5.Gārayhaṃ āvuso and so on, is showing the manner of confessing. Rathikā means a street. Byūha means a street where those who have gone and returned stand without obstruction. Siṅghāṭaka means a place where roads meet in a square or triangle. Ghara means a family's house. For one standing in any of these places and receiving, there is a dukkaṭa for receiving, and a pāṭidesanīya for each mouthful. The same method applies to one receiving in elephant stables, etc. If a nun stands in the street and gives, even if the monk stands in between monasteries, etc., there is an offense. For it should be understood that the offense here is due to the nun standing and giving in the interior of the house, according to the statement "having entered the interior of the house," but the place where the monk stands is immeasurable. Therefore, even if a monk standing in the street, etc., receives from a nun standing and giving in between monasteries, etc., there is no offense.

Yāmakālikaṃ sattāhakālikaṃ yāvajīvikaṃ āhāratthāya paṭiggaṇhāti, āpatti dukkaṭassa. Ajjhohāre ajjhohāre āpatti dukkaṭassa this is said referring to what is not mixed with food, but when mixed, in one taste, it is only pāṭidesanīya. Ekato upasampannāyā means one ordained in the presence of nuns. But for one ordained in the presence of monks, it is just as it is in reality.