English
…they complained, grumbled, and criticized: “How can the group-of-six bhikkhus hide away the bowls and robes of bhikkhus?”… …“Is it true, bhikkhus, that you hide away the bowls and robes of bhikkhus?” “It is true, Blessed One.” The Buddha, the Blessed One, rebuked them… …“How can you, foolish men, hide away the bowls and robes of bhikkhus? This, foolish men, is not for the appeasement of the unappeased… …And so, bhikkhus, you should recite this training rule thus: 378. “Should any bhikkhu hide away or cause to be hidden away a bowl or a robe or a sitting cloth or a needle-case or a body-band belonging to a bhikkhu, even if intending it as a joke, it is an offense of pācittiya.” 379. “Any” means whoever, of whatever kind… “Bhikkhu” means… …in this context, the bhikkhu here intended. “Belonging to a bhikkhu” means belonging to another bhikkhu. “Bowl” means two kinds of bowls: an iron bowl, a clay bowl. “Robe” means any one of the six kinds of robes, the last one being that which is subject to determination. “Sitting cloth” is called a rug. “Needle-case” means with a needle or without a needle. “Body-band” means two kinds of body-bands: a strip, a boar’s tusk. “Hide away” means he himself hides it away, an offense of pācittiya. “Cause to be hidden away” means he ordered another, an offense of pācittiya. “Cause to be hidden away” means he ordered another, an offense of pācittiya. Having been ordered once, he hides away many things, an offense of pācittiya. “Even if intending it as a joke” means with the intention of play. 380. If one hides away or causes to be hidden away a bowl or a robe or a sitting cloth or a needle-case or a body-band, perceiving an ordained bhikkhu as an ordained bhikkhu, even if intending it as a joke, it is an offense of pācittiya. If one is in doubt about an ordained bhikkhu… …if one perceives an ordained bhikkhu as unordained, a bowl or a robe or a sitting cloth or… A needle-case or a body-band if he hides or causes to be hidden, even for fun, there is an offense of pācittiya. Another requisite if he hides or causes to be hidden, even for fun, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. For an unordained person a bowl or a robe or any other requisite if he hides or causes to be hidden, even for fun, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. Regarding an unordained person with the perception of an ordained person, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. Regarding an unordained person being in doubt, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. Regarding an unordained person with the perception of an unordained person, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. 381. No offense if not with the intention of fun, if he puts away something misplaced, if he puts it away thinking "I will give it back after speaking Dhamma," for a mad person, for the first wrongdoer. The training rule on hiding robes, the tenth, is finished. The chapter on drinking alcohol, the sixth. Its summary – Alcohol, finger, and laughter [water (thus it is said)], and disrespect, and frightening; Light, bathing, discolored, by oneself, and by hiding. 7. The chapter on living beings 1. The training rule on intentional killing 382. At that time the Buddha, the Blessed One, was dwelling in Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time Venerable Udāyī was a good archer, and crows were displeasing to him. He, the crows having shot again and again, having cut off their heads, placed them in a row on a stake. The bhikkhus said thus – "By whom, friends, have these crows been deprived of life?" "By me, friends. Crows are displeasing to me." Those bhikkhus who were of few wishes... (etc.)... they complained, murmured, criticized – "How can Venerable Udāyī intentionally deprive a living being of life!"... (etc.)... "Is it true, Udāyī, that you intentionally deprived a living being of life?" "It is true, Blessed One." The Buddha, the Blessed One, rebuked him... (etc.)... "How can you, foolish man, intentionally deprive a living being of life! This, foolish man, is not for the confidence of those without confidence... (etc.)... And thus, bhikkhus, you should recite this training rule: Whatever monk intentionally deprives a living being of life, it is an offense entailing expiation. "Whatever monk" means "whatever kind of monk"... (etc.)... "monk" means... (etc.)... "monk" is intended in this sense here. "Intentionally" means knowing, fully knowing, having considered and transgressed. "Living being" means a sentient being of the animal realm. "Deprives of life" means he cuts off the faculty of life, obstructs it, disrupts its continuity; it is an offense entailing expiation. When it is a living being, and he perceives it as a living being, and deprives it of life, it is an offense entailing expiation. When it is a living being, and he is doubtful, and deprives it of life, it is an offense of wrong-doing. When it is a living being, and he perceives it as not a living being, and deprives it of life, there is no offense. When it is not a living being, and he perceives it as a living being, it is an offense of wrong-doing. When it is not a living being, and he is doubtful, it is an offense of wrong-doing. When it is not a living being, and he perceives it as not a living being, there is no offense. There is no offense for one who does not intend, for one who is unmindful, for one who does not know, for one who has no intention to kill, for one who is insane, for the first wrong-doer. The training rule concerning intentional killing, the first, is finished. 2. The training rule concerning water with living beings. At that time the Buddha, the Blessed One, was staying at Savatthi, in Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now at that time the group of six monks, knowing it to be water with living beings, drank it. Those monks who were of few desires... (etc.)... they complained, murmured, and criticized: "How can the group of six monks, knowing it to be water with living beings, drink it?"... (etc.)... "Is it true, monks, that you, knowing it to be water with living beings, drank it?" "It is true, Blessed One." The Buddha, the Blessed One, rebuked them... (etc.)... "How can you, foolish men, knowing it to be water with living beings, drink it!" "This, foolish men, is not for the faith of the unfaithful... (etc.)... And thus, monks, you should recite this training rule:" "Whatever monk, knowing it to be water with living beings, should drink it, it is an offense entailing expiation." "Whatever monk" means "whatever kind of monk"... (etc.)... "monk" means... (etc.)... "monk" is intended in this sense here. "Knowing" means one knows oneself, or others... They inform him. Knowing it has living beings, Knowing they will die by consumption, he consumes it, there is an offense of pācittiya. 390. In what has living beings, with perception of living beings, he consumes, there is an offense of pācittiya. In what has living beings, being in doubt, he consumes, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. In what has living beings, with perception of no living beings, he consumes, there is no offense. In what has no living beings, with perception of living beings, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. In what has no living beings, being in doubt, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. In what has no living beings, with perception of no living beings, there is no offense. 391. No offense if not knowing it has living beings, if knowing it has no living beings, if knowing they will not die by consumption, he consumes, for one who is insane, for the first offender. The training rule concerning living beings, the second, is finished. 3. The training rule concerning overturning 392. At that time, the Buddha, the Blessed One, was dwelling at Sāvatthī, in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. Now at that time, the group of six monks, knowing a legal question had been settled according to Dhamma, overturned it for re-execution – saying: "The act is not done, the act is badly done, the act should be done again, it is not settled, it is badly settled, it should be settled again." Those monks who were of few wishes...pe... they complained, grumbled, and criticized – "How can the group of six monks, knowing a legal question had been settled according to Dhamma, overturn it for re-execution?" ...pe... "Is it true, monks, that you, knowing a legal question had been settled according to Dhamma, overturned it for re-execution?" "It is true, Blessed One." The Buddha, the Blessed One, rebuked them...pe... "How can you, foolish men, knowing a legal question had been settled according to Dhamma, overturn it for re-execution! This, foolish men, is not for the conviction of the unconvicted...pe... And thus, monks, you should recite this training rule: 393. "Whatever monk knowing a legal question settled according to Dhamma should overturn it for re-execution, there is an offense of pācittiya." 394. "Whatever" means whoever, whatever kind...pe... "Monk" means...pe... the monk intended in this context. "Knows" means one knows oneself, or others inform him, or he informs. "According to Dhamma" means done by Dhamma, by Vinaya, by the Teacher's instruction. This is called "according to Dhamma." "Legal question" means four legal questions: a dispute legal question, an accusation legal question, an offense legal question, a duty legal question. "Should revoke for re-doing": he revokes, saying: "The act is not done, the act is badly done, the act should be done again, it is not settled, badly settled, it should be settled again." There is an offense of pācittiya. 395. If one revokes a Dhamma-act, perceiving it as a Dhamma-act, there is an offense of pācittiya. If one revokes a Dhamma-act, being in doubt, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. If one revokes a Dhamma-act, perceiving it as a non-Dhamma-act, there is no offense. If one revokes a non-Dhamma-act, perceiving it as a Dhamma-act, there is an offense of dukkaṭa. If one revokes a non-Dhamma-act, being in doubt,