English
then, Upāli, that self-appropriation should not be taken up. But if, Upāli, the bhikkhu reflecting thus knows: 'It is the time to take up this self-appropriation, it is not the wrong time,' then, Upāli, by that bhikkhu it should be further reflected upon: 'This self-appropriation that I wish to take up, is it indeed factual, or not?' If, Upāli, the bhikkhu reflecting thus knows: 'This self-appropriation is not factual, it is not true,' then, Upāli, that self-appropriation should not be taken up. But if, Upāli, the bhikkhu reflecting thus knows: 'This self-appropriation is factual, it is not untrue,' then, Upāli, by that bhikkhu it should be further reflected upon: 'This self-appropriation that I wish to take up, is it indeed connected with benefit, or not?' If, Upāli, the bhikkhu reflecting thus knows: 'This self-appropriation is not connected with benefit, it is not beneficial,' then, Upāli, that self-appropriation should not be taken up. But if, Upāli, the bhikkhu reflecting thus knows: 'This self-appropriation is connected with benefit, it is not unbeneficial,' then, Upāli, by that bhikkhu it should be further reflected upon: 'This indeed I... 'Taking such a stand, will I obtain monks who are agreeable and esteemed, on the side of Dhamma and Vinaya, or not?' If, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: 'Indeed, taking this stand, I will not obtain monks who are agreeable and esteemed, on the side of Dhamma and Vinaya,' then, Upāli, that stand should not be taken. But if, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: 'Indeed, taking this stand, I will obtain monks who are agreeable and esteemed, on the side of Dhamma and Vinaya,' then, Upāli, that monk should reflect further: 'Indeed, from my taking this stand, will there arise for the Saṅgha, on that account, quarreling, strife, dispute, contention, schism, division, separation, or disunity, or not?' If, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: 'Indeed, from my taking this stand, there will arise for the Saṅgha, on that account, quarreling, strife, dispute, contention, schism, division, separation, or disunity,' then, Upāli, that stand should not be taken. But if, Upāli, a monk reflecting thus knows: 'Indeed, from my taking this stand, there will not arise for the Saṅgha, on that account, quarreling, strife, dispute, contention, schism, division, separation, or disunity,' then, Upāli, that stand should be taken. Indeed, Upāli, a stand thus endowed with five factors, when taken, will later lead to no regret. "By how many factors, venerable sir, is a monk endowed, who is of great help to monks involved in disputes?" "Upāli, a monk endowed with five factors is of great help to monks involved in disputes." "Which five?" He is virtuous; he dwells restrained by the Pātimokkha restraint, perfect in conduct and resort, seeing danger in the slightest faults, he undertakes and trains in the training rules; He is learned, a holder of what he has heard, a collector of what he has heard; those teachings which are good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end, with meaning and with letter, proclaiming the utterly complete and purified holy life— such teachings he has heard much of, he holds them, he is familiar with them by speech, he has examined them with his mind, and he has thoroughly penetrated them by view; moreover, both Pātimokkhas are well-received by him in detail, well-analyzed, well-practiced, well-determined, according to the suttas and according to the detailed explanations; furthermore, he stands firm in the Vinaya, unwavering; he is capable of reassuring, convincing, persuading, observing, and gladdening both the plaintiff and the defendant – Possessed of these five qualities, Upāli, a bhikkhu is of great help to bhikkhus involved in disputes. Again, Upāli, a bhikkhu possessed of five other qualities is of great help to bhikkhus involved in disputes. Which five? He has purified bodily conduct, he has purified verbal conduct, he has purified livelihood, he is wise and discerning, he is capable of giving an answer when questioned – Possessed of these five qualities, Upāli, a bhikkhu is of great help to bhikkhus involved in disputes. Again, Upāli, a bhikkhu possessed of five other qualities is of great help to bhikkhus involved in disputes. Which five? He knows the basis (of the dispute), he knows the origin (of the rule), he knows the promulgation (of the rule), he knows the re-application of words (to the case), he knows the sequence of speech (in the Vinaya) – Possessed of these five qualities, Upāli, a bhikkhu is of great help to bhikkhus involved in disputes. "By how many qualities, Venerable Sir, should a bhikkhu not be questioned?" "Upāli, a bhikkhu possessed of five qualities should not be questioned. Which five? He does not know the Sutta, he does not know what is in conformity with the Sutta, he does not know the Vinaya, he does not know what is in conformity with the Vinaya, and he is not skilled in what is proper and improper – Possessed of these, Upāli, a bhikkhu should not be questioned." A monk endowed with five qualities should not interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with five qualities should interrogate. Which five? He knows the Sutta, he knows what accords with the Sutta, he knows the Vinaya, he knows what accords with the Vinaya, and he is skilled in what is possible and impossible – Upāli, a monk endowed with these five qualities should interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with another five qualities should not interrogate. Which five? He does not know the Dhamma, he does not know what accords with the Dhamma, he does not know the Vinaya, he does not know what accords with the Vinaya, and he is not skilled in what precedes and follows – Upāli, a monk endowed with these five qualities should not interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with five qualities should interrogate. Which five? He knows the Dhamma, he knows what accords with the Dhamma, he knows the Vinaya, he knows what accords with the Vinaya, and he is skilled in what precedes and follows – Upāli, a monk endowed with these five qualities should interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with another five qualities should not interrogate. Which five? He does not know the case, he does not know the origin, he does not know the rule, he does not know the word-by-word analysis, he does not know the connected discourse – Upāli, a monk endowed with these five qualities should not interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with five qualities should interrogate. Which five? He knows the case, he knows the origin, he knows the rule, he knows the word-by-word analysis, he knows the connected discourse – Upāli, a monk endowed with these five qualities should interrogate. Upāli, a monk endowed with another five qualities should not interrogate. Which five? He does not know the offense, he does not know the origin of the offense, he does not know the application of the offense, he does not know the appeasement of the offense, he does not know the offense... is not skilled in judgment – With these five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should not be questioned. "With five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should be questioned. Which five? He knows the offense, he knows the origin of the offense, he knows the application of the offense, he knows the appeasement of the offense, he is skilled in the judgment of the offense – With these five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should be questioned." "Also, Upāli, with five factors a bhikkhu endowed should not be questioned. Which five? He does not know the legal question, he does not know its origin, he does not know its application, he does not know its appeasement, he is not skilled in its judgment – With these five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should not be questioned." "With five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should be questioned. Which five? He knows the legal question, he knows its origin, he knows its application, he knows its appeasement, he is skilled in its judgment – With these five factors, Upāli, a bhikkhu endowed should be questioned." The chapter on Self-Taking, the fifth, is finished. Its summary – Purity and time, compassion and opportunity; Self-taking, legal question, and also other matters; Sutta, Dhamma, and again matters, offense and legal question. 6. The Chapter on Ascetic Practices 443. "How many, indeed, venerable sir, are forest dwellers?" "These five, Upāli, are forest dwellers. Which five? One is a forest dweller out of dullness and delusion, one is a forest dweller out of evil wishes, overcome by desire, one is a forest dweller out of madness, mental derangement, one is a forest dweller thinking, 'It is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples,' and one is a forest dweller relying on little desire, relying on contentment, relying on effacement, relying on seclusion, for this purpose... relying on that, he is a forest-dweller— These, Upāli, are the five forest-dwellers. “How many, venerable sir, are alms-food eaters? ... How many, venerable sir, are rag-robe wearers? ... How many, venerable sir, are tree-root dwellers? ... How many, venerable sir, are charnel-ground dwellers? ... How many, venerable sir, are open-air dwellers? ... How many, venerable sir, are three-robe wearers? ... How many, venerable sir, are uninterrupted-round walkers? ... How many, venerable sir, are sitters? ... How many, venerable sir, are as-it-is-spread dwellers? ... How many, venerable sir, are one-session eaters? ... How many, venerable sir, are late-meal abstainers? ... How many, venerable sir, are bowl-food eaters?” “There are five, Upāli, bowl-food eaters. Which five? One is a bowl-food eater due to dullness and delusion. One is a bowl-food eater due to evil wishes and being overcome by desire. One is a bowl-food eater due to madness and mental distraction. One is a bowl-food eater thinking, ‘It is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples.’ And one is a bowl-food eater relying on fewness of wishes,