English
"They train even on elephants" means the skill to be learned, the elephant-sign, that they learn. The same method applies to horses, etc. "They run" means they run, going away. "They run back" means as much as they run, just that much they run back, coming again face to face. "They wrestle" means they engage in wrestling. "They even give a forehead-tap" means saying "Good, good, sister!" placing a finger on their own forehead, they place it on her forehead. "They practice various improprieties" means they practice other various improprieties not mentioned in the Pāli, such as making faces. 432. "With pleasing demeanor" means causing serenity, suitable, befitting a recluse. "With going forward" means with walking. "With turning back" means with returning. "With looking forward" means with seeing ahead. "With looking around" means with seeing here and there. "With bending" means with contracting the limbs. "With stretching" means with stretching them out. Everywhere, the instrumental case is for expressing such a state, meaning that being pleasing, with going forward, with turning back, with looking forward, with looking around, with bending, with stretching, is said to be accomplished by mindfulness and clear comprehension. "With downcast eyes" means with eyes cast downwards. "Endowed with proper deportment" means deportment endowed with that pleasing going forward, etc. "Who is this?" means who is this? "Like a very weak person" means "abala" is said to be "bondo" (a simpleton), and this reduplication is for emphasis, therefore it is said to be "like a very simpleton." "Very slow" means very slow due to the non-agitation of going forward, etc. "Very subtle" means thus they show a virtue as a fault. "Like one with a very frowning face" means they say, thinking that due to downcast eyes, making a frown, with a contracted face, he walks about like an angry person. "Gentle" means skillful, "Mother, Father, Sister!" thus they are clever at bringing the lay people to the right place, not like this one; this is the meaning of "like a very weak person." "Friendly" means endowed with friendliness. "Pleasant to converse with" means this is the reason for the former statement. Indeed. For those whose pleasant conversation, whose agreeable talk is clear and pleasing to the ear, they are called "friendly." Therefore they said – "friendly, pleasant in conversation." This is the meaning here – our venerable ones, seeing lay followers, speak sweet, agreeable words, therefore they are friendly, pleasant in conversation, not like this one; as if slow and sluggish. "With a smile as a forerunner" means a smile is the forerunner of their words, thus "with a smile as a forerunner." First making a smile, afterwards they speak, this is the meaning. "Speaking words of welcome" means seeing a lay follower, "Come, welcome to you!" thus speaking. Not like this one; with a contracted face, as if frowning repeatedly. Thus, by having a smile as a forerunner, etc., having shown the state of not frowning in meaning, again showing it in its own form, they said – "not frowning, with open faces, speaking first." Or in reverse order, the absence of all three manners should be understood thus. How? For here, by "not frowning," the absence of the repeatedly frowning manner is shown. By "with open faces," the absence of the slow and sluggish manner is shown; for those who, opening their eyes, by looking, have open faces, they are not slow and sluggish. By "speaking first," the absence of the weak and faltering manner is shown; for those who, skilled in addressing, "Mother, Father!" thus address first, they are not weak and faltering. "Come, venerable sir, we will go home!" That lay follower, it is said, when it was said, "Indeed, friend, no almsfood is obtained," having said, "This has been done by your monks themselves, even wandering through the whole village, you will not obtain it," desiring to give almsfood, said, "Come, venerable sir, we will go home!" But is this a proper statement, or is it not? It is not. This is called a question, it is proper to speak (in response to it). Therefore, even now, whether in the morning or in the evening, if someone should ask a monk who has entered a house – "Why, venerable sir, do you wander?" Having explained the purpose for which he wanders, when it is said, "obtained or not obtained?" if... If he has not received it, saying, "I have not received it," it is permissible to accept what he gives. "Corrupt" means not corrupt through the destruction of faith, etc., but corrupt in terms of the individual. "Paths of giving" means simply gifts. Or, "paths of giving" means the practices of giving connected with gifts. "Cut off" means cut off by the givers, they do not give them now. "Are abandoned" means they become separate, they become diverse, they depart. "Should be established" means it should stand firm, it should be a support for virtuous monks. "So be it, friend," that monk accepted the message of the faithful, confident lay follower. It is permissible to carry such a message as this, therefore, one should not feel remorse about messages like: "Worship the feet of the Blessed One in my name," or "Worship the shrine, the image, the Bodhi tree, the elder of the Sangha," or "Offer perfumes and flowers at the shrine," or "Assemble the monks, we will give a gift, we will listen to the Dhamma." These are permissible messages, not related to the household duties of lay people. "From where do you come, monk?" The monk, being seated, does not come in reality, but he has come. Even so, a present tense word is used near the present tense, therefore there is no fault. At the end, in the statement, "From there, Blessed One, I come," the same rule applies. 433. The monks Assaji and Punabbasu should be admonished first. They should be admonished by making an opportunity, saying, "We wish to speak to you," and by the matter and the offense. After admonishing, what they do not remember should be reminded. If they admit both the matter and the offense, or admit only the offense, not the matter, the offense should be imposed. If they admit only the matter, not the offense, even so, it should be imposed, saying, "In this matter, this is the offense." If they admit neither the matter nor the offense, the offense should not be imposed. This is the decision here. However, the offense should be imposed according to the admission. having expelled. Thus, showing that the act of expulsion should be done, he said, "by a competent bhikkhu," and so on. That is clear in meaning. A bhikkhu who has been expelled in this way should not reside in the monastery or in the village where he committed the offense of corrupting families. Residing in that monastery, he should not go for alms in the neighboring village. Residing in a neighboring monastery, he should not go for alms in that village. However, when the Venerable Upatissa was told by his disciples, "Venerable sir, a city can be very large, even twelve yojanas," he said, "He is restricted only in the street where the offense of corrupting families was committed." Then, when told, "A street can also be large, the size of a city," he said, "In the row of houses." When told, "A row of houses can also be the size of a street," he said, "Seven houses here and there are restricted." But all that is merely the Venerable's wish. Even if the monastery is three yojanas away and the city is twelve yojanas away, he is not permitted to reside in the monastery, nor to go for alms in the city. 435. "Expelled by that Sangha"— how did the Sangha perform that act for them? They did not go and simply overwhelm them and do it. Rather, when invited by families and Sangha-meals were being prepared in various places, the elders, having taught the conduct of ascetics, and having made people understand, "This is an ascetic, this is not an ascetic," had one or two bhikkhus enter the boundary, and by this very means, they performed the act of expulsion for all. And for one who has been expelled in this way, having fulfilled eighteen observances and having requested, the act should be revoked. Even after the act has been revoked, he should not accept requisites from those families where he previously committed the offense of corrupting families. He should not accept them even if he has attained the destruction of defilements; they are still improper. If asked, "Why do you not accept them?" and he says, "Because it was done in this way before," if they say, "We do not give for that reason, but now..." It should be taken as, "We give because of their virtue." Naturally, the act of corrupting families is done right at the place of giving. Therefore, it is proper to accept only the usual gift. What they give by increasing it, that is not proper. "They do not behave properly" means those Assaji and Punabbasu do not behave properly in the eighteen observances. "They do not shed hair" means by not practicing the conforming path, they do not become those whose hair has fallen. "They do not practice liberation" means they do not practice their own path to liberation. "They do not ask forgiveness from the bhikkhus" means they do not ask forgiveness from the bhikkhus, saying, "We have done wrong, venerable sirs, we will not do so again, please forgive us." "They abuse" means they abuse the Sangha of doers with ten grounds of abuse. "They revile" means they show them fear. "They lead to partiality through desire... and partiality through fear" means these are partial through desire... and partial through fear. Thus, they lead to partiality through desire... and partiality through fear, which means they involve them. "They depart" means some of the five hundred monks in their retinue depart in various directions. "They become confused" means some become laypeople. How is it that "Assaji and Punabbasu bhikkhus"? Here, all are called "Assaji and Punabbasu" by way of the two leaders. 436-7.