English
by the first word, with the fulfillment of three factors, it is a Saṅghādisesa. By the middle two, with the fulfillment of two factors, it is a grave offense. By the last one, with the fulfillment of one factor, it is a minor offense. In the second set of four, by the first word, with the fulfillment of two factors, it is a grave offense. By the middle two, with the fulfillment of one factor, it is a minor offense. By the last one, due to the absence of factors, there is no offense. There, "He receives" means he receives the message of the sender. "He investigates" means he goes to the sent place and reports it. "He brings back" means he comes back again and reports to the original sender. "He does not bring back" means having reported, he departs from there. "He receives, he does not investigate" means being told by a man, "Go to so-and-so and tell her," he receives his message, saying "Good," and having forgotten it or not forgotten it, he goes to her for some other business, and sits down, saying something or other. By this much, it is called "He receives, he does not investigate." Then that woman herself says to him, "Indeed, your supporter wishes to make me his wife," and having said this, she says, "I will be his wife," or "I will not be." He, not approving of her words, not rejecting them, silently rises from his seat, comes to that man and reports that matter. By this much, it is called "He does not investigate, he brings back." "He does not investigate, he does not bring back" means he only receives at the time of reporting the message, but the other two... which he does not do. "He does not accept, investigate, or bring back." If some man speaks such a talk to a bhikkhu in a standing place or a sitting place, the bhikkhu, though not sent by him, acts as if sent, goes to the woman, and investigates her by saying, "Be, it is said, the wife of so-and-so," and so on. Then, having investigated her liking or disliking, he comes back and reports it to this man. In the same way, if he investigates but does not bring back, he is said to "not accept, investigate, or bring back." In the same way, if he goes, does not investigate, hears the talk initiated by her, and comes back and reports it to this man in the manner stated in the third clause of the first set of four, he is said to "not accept, not investigate, but bring back." The fourth clause is obvious. "He orders many bhikkhus," and so on, are obvious. Just as many (bhikkhus) incur (an offense) in one matter, so also for one (bhikkhu), many offenses are to be understood in many matters. How? A man orders a bhikkhu, "Go, venerable sir, in such and such a palace, there are sixty or seventy women standing; tell them, 'Be, it is said, the wives of so-and-so.'" He assents, goes there, reports it, and then brings back that message. As many women as there are, so many offenses he incurs. This is also stated in the Parivāra: "By the mere passing of words, and by speech uttered; All are serious and reparable; Sixty-four offenses he would incur at once; This problem has been considered by the skilled." (Pari. 480) It is said that this problem was stated with reference to this advantage. Here, "sixty-four offenses" is said due to the conciseness of the wording. However, by doing so, he incurs even a hundred or a thousand. Just as for one sent by one (man), there are many offenses concerning many women, so also one man sends many bhikkhus to one (woman), and for all of them, it is a Saṅghādisesa. One (man sends) many bhikkhus to many women. sends to women, Sanghādisesa by counting women. Many men send one bhikkhu to one woman, Sanghādisesa by counting men. Many send one to many women, Sanghādisesa by counting objects. Many send many to one woman, Sanghādisesa by counting objects. Many men send many bhikkhus to many women, Sanghādisesa by counting objects. This method applies to "one woman (sends) one bhikkhu" and so on. And here, the distinction of similar and dissimilar is immeasurable, even for parents or five co-religionists, one who performs the act of acting as a go-between incurs an offense. The man commands the bhikkhu, "Go, venerable sir," this fourfold statement is made to show the distinction of offenses based on the factors. In its last clause, the pupil, having investigated, brings it back externally, meaning, having come, without informing the teacher, he goes directly and informs that man. The offense for both is a grave offense. For the teacher, because he accepted and caused to investigate, there is a grave offense on two counts. For the pupil, because he investigated and brought it back, there is a grave offense on two counts. The rest is clear. 339. "Going, he fulfills" means he both accepts and investigates. "Coming, he fails" means he does not bring it back. "Going, he fails" means he does not accept. "Coming, he fulfills" means he both investigates and brings it back. Thus, in both cases, there is a grave offense on two counts. In the third clause, there is an offense; in the fourth, no offense. 340. "No offense for one who goes for the business of the Sangha, or a cetiya, or a sick person, or for a mad person, or for the first offender" - here, if the Uposatha hall of the bhikkhu Sangha or something else is unfinished. There, for the food and wages of the workers, a male lay follower might send a bhikkhu to a female lay follower, or a female lay follower to a male lay follower, for one going on such business of the Sangha, there is no offense. In cetiya work, k Even if not requested, this is the rule. For the sake of medicine for a sick person, if sent by a male lay follower to a female lay follower, or by a female lay follower to a male lay follower, there is no offense for going. The insane and initial offenders are as previously stated. The explanation of the analysis of words is finished. Regarding the origins, this training rule has six origins. It originates from the body when one takes a message with a bodily gesture, such as nodding the head, goes, investigates with a hand gesture, and then returns and reports with a hand gesture. It originates from speech when, while sitting in the assembly hall, someone says, "So-and-so will come; you should know her mind," and one assents with "Sādhu," then speaks to her when she arrives, and after she has left, reports to that man when he returns. It also originates from speech when, having taken a message with "Sādhu" by speech, one goes to her house for another purpose, or sees her while going elsewhere, investigates by breaking the speech, then leaves from there for another purpose, and later, when one sees that man, reports to him. But for one who does not know the rule, even an Arahant, it originates from body and speech. How? If his parents are angry and are to be spoken to, and his father, a Thera, says to that monk who has come to the house, "Son, your mother has left me, an old man, and gone to her relatives' house; go send her to attend to me." If he goes, tells her that, and then reports to his father her coming or not coming, it is a Saṅghādisesa. These are three origins without intention. But for one who knows the rule and engages in communication in these three ways, it originates from body and mind, speech and mind, and body, speech, and mind. These are three origins with intention, with the mind knowing the rule. It is a deed, not a release by perception, an offense by rule, a bodily action, a verbal action. In this, there are three types of consciousness, and three types of feeling. 341. In the cases of discipline, in the first five matters, it is merely accepted. a dukkaṭa. Having admonished her for making a reconciliation in a matter of dispute, he made her return home. "Not fit to be spoken to" means not abandoned. For a woman who is abandoned in various countries, in various ways, and thus goes beyond the state of a wife, is called "fit to be spoken to." But this one was not fit to be spoken to, having left after a quarrel for some reason. Therefore, the Bhagavā said "no offense" here. Since a thullaccaya was stated for a yakkhi in the case of bodily contact, it should be understood that yakkhi-petis are also matters of thullaccaya in cases of gross misconduct, etc. However, this has not been discussed in the commentaries. The rest is clear everywhere. The description of the Sañcaritta training rule is finished. 6. Description of the Kuṭikāra training rule 342. At that time, regarding the Kuṭikāra training rule. There, "Āḷavakas" means children born in the Āḷavi country are called Āḷavakas. Even when they were ordained, they were known as "Āḷavakas." It is said, referring to them, "Āḷavaka bhikkhus." "Saññācikāyo" means those who have acquired requisites by asking for them themselves. "Kārāpentīti" means both doing and causing to be done. It is said that they, having abandoned both the burden of insight and the burden of study in the Dispensation, took up the burden of new construction. "Assāmikāyo" means without an owner, meaning without a donor who would cause it to be built. "Attuddesikāyo" means undertaken for oneself, for one's own benefit. "Appamāṇikāyo" means not limited in extent, thinking "it will be finished with this much," or meaning of great extent or large size. "Yācanā eva bahulā etesaṃ mandaṃ aññaṃ kammaṃ" means "their asking is abundant, other work is slight," thus "yācanabahulā" (abundant in asking). Thus, it should be understood as abundant in requesting. There is no difference in meaning here; it is a designation for those who repeatedly ask, "Give a man, give a man for work." In that regard, it is not proper to ask for a man for the purpose of uprooting (a tree), but it is proper to ask for a man for companionship or for doing work, saying "Give a man." A man for work. What is done by a person is called manual labor. It is allowable to ask for it. Manual labor is not a material thing. Therefore, except for their own work