English
Then that elder – just as the dispute was settled by the Sangha in Sāvatthī, just as the dispute was settled by many elders, just as the dispute was settled by three elders, just as the dispute was settled by two elders, so it was well-settled – thus he settled that dispute. Then those bhikkhus, dissatisfied with the settlement of the dispute by the Sangha in Sāvatthī, dissatis satisfied with the settlement of a dispute by many elders, dissatisfied with the settlement of a dispute by three elders, dissatisfied with the settlement of a dispute by two elders, dissatisfied with the settlement of a dispute by one elder, they approached the Blessed One, and having approached, they reported this matter to the Blessed One… …“This dispute, monks, is settled, calmed, well-calmed. I allow, monks, for those monks, three ways of taking votes by ticket: the secret, the whispered, and the open. “And how, monks, is the secret vote taken? The monk who takes the votes should make the tickets of different colors, and approaching each monk, he should say this: ‘This ticket is for this speaker, this ticket is for that speaker. Take whichever you wish.’ When it is taken, he should say: ‘Do not show it to anyone.’ If he knows that the unrighteous speakers are more numerous, it is a bad taking, it should be withdrawn. If he knows that the righteous speakers are more numerous, it is a good taking, it should be announced. Thus, monks, is the secret vote taken. “And how, monks, is the whispered vote taken? The monk who takes the votes should whisper to each monk: ‘This ticket is for this speaker, this ticket is for that speaker. Take whichever you wish.’ When it is taken, he should say: ‘Do not tell anyone.’ If he knows that the unrighteous speakers are more numerous, it is a bad taking, it should be withdrawn. If he knows that the righteous speakers are more numerous, it is a good taking, it should be announced. Thus, monks, is the whispered vote taken. “And how, monks, is the open vote taken? If he knows that the righteous speakers are more numerous, it should be taken openly and clearly. Thus, monks, is the open vote taken. These, monks, are the three ways of taking votes.” Mindfulness-Discipline How many ways are disputes concerning accusations settled? Disputes concerning accusations are settled in four ways – by settlement in the presence, by settlement by appeal to memory, by settlement for an insane person, and by settlement for persistent wrong-doing. Could a dispute concerning accusations, without relying on two settlements – the settlement for an insane person, and the settlement for persistent wrong-doing; be settled by two settlements – by settlement in the presence, and by settlement by appeal to memory? It could be so said. How so? Here, monks, monks accuse a monk of a groundless transgression of morality. To that monk, monks, who has attained fullness of memory, the settlement by appeal to memory should be given. And thus, monks, it should be given – Then, monks, that monk, having approached the Saṅgha, having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder…etc… should be addressed thus – ‘Venerable sirs, monks accuse me of a groundless transgression of morality. I, venerable sirs, having attained fullness of memory, request the Saṅgha for the settlement by appeal to memory.’ A second time he should be requested. A third time he should be requested. A competent and able monk should inform the Saṅgha – May the Saṅgha, venerable sirs, hear me. Monks accuse the monk named so-and-so of a groundless transgression of morality. He, having attained fullness of memory, requests the Saṅgha for the settlement by appeal to memory. If it is appropriate for the Saṅgha, the Saṅgha should give the settlement by appeal to memory to the monk named so-and-so, who has attained fullness of memory. This is the motion. May the Saṅgha, venerable sirs, hear me. Monks accuse the monk named so-and-so of a groundless transgression of morality. He, having attained fullness of memory, requests the Saṅgha for the settlement by appeal to memory. The Saṅgha gives the settlement by appeal to memory to the monk named so-and-so, who has attained fullness of memory. To whichever venerable one it is agreeable to give the settlement by appeal to memory to the monk named so-and-so, who has attained fullness of memory, let him be silent; to whom it is not agreeable, let him speak. A second time I state this matter…etc… A third time I state this matter…etc… …. “The Sangha has given the declaration of innocence to the bhikkhu named so-and-so, who has attained full mindfulness. The Sangha agrees, therefore it is silent, thus I hold this to be so.” “This, bhikkhus, is called a dispute settled. By what is it settled? By settlement in the presence and by the declaration of innocence. And what is there in settlement in the presence? Presence of the Sangha, presence of the Dhamma, presence of the Vinaya, presence of the person… …and what is there in presence of the person? The one who accuses, and the one who is accused, both are present face-to-face – this is presence of the person. And what is there in the declaration of innocence? The act, the doing, the undertaking, the acceptance, the acquiescence, the non-rejection of the declaration of innocence – this is in the declaration of innocence. If, bhikkhus, a dispute thus settled is reopened by a doer, it is an offense of reopening; if a giver of consent is vexed, it is an offense of vexation. Declaration of Sanity 237. “Could there be a dispute concerning accusation that does not rely on two settlements – the declaration of innocence, and the declaration of greater depravity; but could be settled by two settlements – by settlement in the presence, and by the declaration of sanity?” “Yes, that could be said.” “How so?” “Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is insane, afflicted with mental derangement. By that insane, mentally deranged bhikkhu, much unmonastic conduct has been committed, much unmonastic speech has been uttered. The bhikkhus accuse him of an offense committed by that insane, mentally deranged bhikkhu – ‘Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?’ He says this – ‘Friends, I was insane, afflicted with mental derangement. By that insane, mentally deranged me, much unmonastic conduct was committed, much unmonastic speech was uttered. I do not remember that. It was done by me in a state of delusion.’ Even when he says this, they still accuse him – ‘Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?’ “To that bhikkhu, bhikkhus, who is not deluded, a declaration of sanity should be given. And how, monks, should it be given? That monk, monks, having approached the Sangha, having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder, ... should be spoken to thus: 'I, venerable sirs, was insane, my mind deranged. By me, being insane, my mind deranged, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much was spoken. The monks accuse me of an offense committed while insane, my mind deranged, saying: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" And I say thus: "Indeed, friends, I was insane, my mind deranged. By me, being insane, my mind deranged, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much was spoken. I do not remember that. It was done by me in delusion." Even when I am spoken to thus, they still accuse me, saying: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" 'Therefore, venerable sirs, I, being undeluded, request from the Sangha an undeluded discipline.' A second time he should be requested. A third time he should be requested. By a competent and capable monk, the Sangha should be informed: May the Sangha, venerable sirs, listen to me. This monk, named so-and-so, was insane, his mind deranged. By him, being insane, his mind deranged, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much was spoken. The monks accuse him of an offense committed while insane, his mind deranged, saying: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" And he says thus: "Indeed, friends, I was insane, my mind deranged. By me, being insane, my mind deranged, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much was spoken. I do not remember that. It was done by me in delusion." Even when he is spoken to thus, they still accuse him, saying: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" He, being undeluded, requests from the Sangha an undeluded discipline. If it is suitable for the Sangha, the Sangha should grant an undeluded discipline to this monk, named so-and-so, who is undeluded. This is the announcement. May the Sangha, venerable sirs, listen to me. This monk, named so-and-so, was insane, his mind deranged. By that insane, deranged mind, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much unmonkly speech was uttered. The monks accuse him of an offense, committed by that insane, deranged mind: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" He says thus: "Friends, I was insane, my mind deranged. By that insane, deranged mind, much unmonkly conduct was committed, much unmonkly speech was uttered. I do not remember that. It was done by me in delusion." Even when he is spoken to thus, they still accuse him: "Venerable sir, do you remember having committed such an offense?" He, being undeluded, requests the Sangha for the Undeluded Discipline. The Sangha grants the Undeluded Discipline to this monk, named so-and-so, who is undeluded. Whosoever of the Venerables approves of the granting of the Undeluded Discipline to this monk, named so-and-so, who is undeluded, let him be silent. Whosoever does not approve, let him speak. A second time I state this matter... ... a third time I state this matter... The Sangha has granted the Undeluded Discipline to this monk, named so-and-so, who is undeluded. The Sangha approves, therefore it is silent. Thus do I hold it. "This, monks, is called a settled dispute. By what is it settled?