English
much was spoken. If we were to make each other liable for these offenses, that case might lead to harshness, to ferocity, to schism. I, whatever offense of these venerable ones, and whatever offense of my own, for the sake of these venerable ones, and for my own sake, declare in the midst of the Saṅgha with a covering of grass, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople. To whichever venerable one it is agreeable that our declaration of these offenses in the midst of the Saṅgha with a covering of grass, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople, let him be silent; whoever is not agreeable, let him speak. These offenses of ours have been declared in the midst of the Saṅgha with a covering of grass, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople. It is agreeable. to the Saṅgha, therefore, be silent. Thus do I hold this.’’ 214. Then, by a competent and able bhikkhu, the Saṅgha should be informed on behalf of the bhikkhus of one party: ‘‘May the Saṅgha, venerable sirs, listen to me. While we were living quarreling, disputing, and in contention, much that was unbecoming for ascetics was committed and spoken. If we were to make each other liable for these offenses, that case might lead to harshness, to violence, to schism. If it is agreeable to the Saṅgha, I would confess both the offenses of these venerable ones and my own offenses, for the benefit of these venerable ones and for my own benefit, in the midst of the Saṅgha, by means of the covering-with-grass procedure, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople. This is the motion. ‘‘May the Saṅgha, venerable sirs, listen to me. While we were living quarreling, disputing, and in contention, much that was unbecoming for ascetics was committed and spoken. If we were to make each other liable for these offenses, that case might lead to harshness, to violence, to schism. I confess both the offenses of these venerable ones and my own offenses, for the benefit of these venerable ones and for my own benefit, in the midst of the Saṅgha, by means of the covering-with-grass procedure, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople. Any venerable one who approves of the confession of these offenses of ours in the midst of the Saṅgha by means of the covering-with-grass procedure, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople, should be silent; whoever does not approve, should speak. ‘‘These offenses of ours have been confessed in the midst of the Saṅgha by means of the covering-with-grass procedure, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople. The Saṅgha approves, therefore, it is silent. Thus do I hold this.’’ ‘‘And thus, bhikkhus, those bhikkhus are absolved from those offenses, excluding grave offenses, excluding those connected with laypeople, excluding those seen. action, except for those who are not there.” 8. Cases 215. Now at that time bhikkhus were disputing with bhikkhus, bhikkhus were disputing with bhikkhunis, bhikkhunis were disputing with bhikkhus, and the bhikkhu Channa, siding with the bhikkhunis, disputed with the bhikkhus, taking the side of the bhikkhunis. Those bhikkhus who were of few desires… they complained, grumbled, and criticized: “How can the bhikkhu Channa, siding with the bhikkhunis, dispute with the bhikkhus, taking the side of the bhikkhunis?” Then those bhikkhus reported this matter to the Blessed One… “Is it true, bhikkhus… “It is true, Blessed One.”… Having rebuked him… having given a Dhamma talk, he addressed the bhikkhus: “Bhikkhus, there are these four cases: cases of dispute, cases of accusation, cases of offense, and cases of duty. “Among these, what is a case of dispute? Here, bhikkhus, bhikkhus dispute: ‘This is Dhamma’ or ‘This is not Dhamma,’ ‘This is Vinaya’ or ‘This is not Vinaya,’ ‘This was spoken and uttered by the Tathāgata’ or ‘This was not spoken and uttered by the Tathāgata,’ ‘This was practiced by the Tathāgata’ or ‘This was not practiced by the Tathāgata,’ ‘This was laid down by the Tathāgata’ or ‘This was not laid down by the Tathāgata,’ ‘This is an offense’ or ‘This is not an offense,’ ‘This is a light offense’ or ‘This is a grave offense,’ ‘This is an offense with a remainder’ or ‘This is an offense without a remainder,’ ‘This is a serious offense’ or ‘This is not a serious offense’? Whatever quarrel, contention, strife, dispute, difference of opinion, disagreement, argument leading to opposition, or conflict there is— this is called a case of dispute. “Among these, what is a case of accusation? Here, bhikkhus, bhikkhus accuse a bhikkhu of a transgression of morality, or a transgression of conduct, or a transgression of view, or a transgression of livelihood. or for failure. Whatever there is accusation, speaking against, reviling, reproaching, persistent fault-finding, instigation, giving support – this is called a dispute-case. "Among these, what is an offense-case? The five groups of offenses are an offense-case, the seven groups of offenses are an offense-case – this is called an offense-case." "Among these, what is a duty-case? Whatever is a duty of the Sangha, a thing to be done, a declaration act, a motion act, a motion with one announcement act, a motion with three announcements act – this is called a duty-case." 216. "What is the root of a dispute-case? Six roots of dispute are the root of a dispute-case. The three unwholesome roots are the root of a dispute-case, the three wholesome roots are the root of a dispute-case. Which are the six roots of dispute that are the root of a dispute-case? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is angry and resentful. That bhikkhu, bhikkhus, who is angry and resentful, he dwells disrespectful and insubordinate towards the Teacher, disrespectful and insubordinate towards the Dhamma, disrespectful and insubordinate towards the Sangha, and is not a fulfiller of the training. That bhikkhu, bhikkhus, who dwells disrespectful and insubordinate towards the Teacher, towards the Dhamma... towards the Sangha... and is not a fulfiller of the training, he generates dispute in the Sangha. That dispute is for the harm of many, for the unhappiness of many, for the disadvantage, for the detriment, for the suffering of many people, of devas and humans. If you, bhikkhus, should perceive such a root of dispute, whether internally or externally, then you, bhikkhus, should strive for the abandonment of that evil root of dispute. If you, bhikkhus, should not perceive such a root of dispute, whether internally or externally, then you, bhikkhus, should practice for the non-arising of that evil root of dispute in the future. Thus it is. That is the abandoning of the evil root of contention. Thus there is no future influx of that evil root of contention. [pari.272] “Again, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu is envious and jealous… …he is deceitful and fraudulent, he is wishful of evil and holds wrong views, he is attached to his own views, stubbornly clinging and hard to let go. That bhikkhu, bhikkhus, who is attached to his own views, stubbornly clinging and hard to let go, he dwells without respect for the Teacher, without deference, without respect for the Dhamma, without deference, without respect for the Saṅgha, without deference, and he does not fulfill the training. That bhikkhu, bhikkhus, who dwells without respect for the Teacher, without deference, without respect for the Dhamma… …without respect for the Saṅgha… …and does not fulfill the training, he generates contention in the Saṅgha. That contention is for the harm of many people, for the unhappiness of many people, for the disadvantage, harm, and suffering of many people, of devas and humans. If you, bhikkhus, should perceive such a root of contention within yourselves or externally, then, bhikkhus, you should strive for the abandoning of that evil root of contention. If you, bhikkhus, should not perceive such a root of contention within yourselves or externally, then, bhikkhus, you should practice for the non-influx of that evil root of contention in the future. Thus there is the abandoning of that evil root of contention. Thus there is no future influx of that evil root of contention. These six roots of contention are the root of disputes and legal cases. “Which three unwholesome roots are the root of disputes and legal cases? Here, bhikkhus, bhikkhus contend with greedy minds, they contend with hateful minds, they contend with deluded minds— saying ‘this is Dhamma’ or ‘this is not Dhamma’, ‘this is Vinaya’ or ‘this is not Vinaya’, ‘this was spoken and uttered by the Tathāgata’ or ‘this was not spoken and not uttered by the Tathāgata’, ‘this was practiced by the Tathāgata’ or ‘this was not practiced by the Tathāgata’— , whether it is laid down by the Tathāgata or not laid down by the Tathāgata, whether it is an offense or not an offense, whether it is a light offense or a heavy offense, whether it is an offense with a remainder or an offense without a remainder, whether it is a gross offense or not a gross offense. These three unwholesome roots are the root of a dispute case. “Which three wholesome roots are the root of a dispute case? Here, monks, monks dispute with ungreedy minds, they dispute with unhateful minds, they dispute with undeluded minds – whether it is Dhamma or not Dhamma… …whether it is a gross offense or not a gross offense. These three wholesome roots are the root of a dispute case. 217. “What is the root of an accusation case? Six roots of accusation are the root of an accusation case. The three unwholesome roots are also the root of an accusation case, the three wholesome roots are also the root of an accusation case, the body is also the root of an accusation case, speech is also the root of an accusation case. “Which six roots of accusation are the root of an accusation case? Here, monks, a monk is angry and resentful.