English
sometimes means an offense, and sometimes means only a training rule, it should not be spoken of separately. There, the training rule defeats one who transgresses it, therefore it is called 'pārājika'. The offense, however, defeats one who commits it, therefore it is called 'pārājikā'. The individual, since he is defeated, has fallen into defeat, therefore he is called 'pārājiko'. Indeed, referring to this very meaning, it is said in the Parivāra: "What is called pārājika, listen to it as it truly is; Fallen, lost, cast out, indeed removed from the good Dhamma; There is no communion with him, therefore it is called thus." This is the meaning here: "Transgressing that training rule, and having incurred an offense, that person is fallen" – all this should be connected. Therefore it is said: for what reason he is not a recluse, not a son of the Sakyan, fallen away, cut off, defeated from the Dispensation, for that reason he is called. What? "He is defeated." "They dwell together here" – that is co-residence. To show that, having said "co-residence means," it then says "one act," and so on. Here is the explanation with connection: The fourfold Sangha-act, by bhikkhus who are within the boundary and are in good standing, because it must be done together, is called "one act." Likewise, the fivefold recitation of the Pātimokkha, because it must be recited together, is called "one recitation." And the training rule that has been laid down, by all conscientious persons, because it must be trained in equally, is called "equal training." Here, since all conscientious ones dwell together in these acts, etc., and not one is seen outside of them, therefore, taking all of them, it says, "This is co-residence." And that co-residence, as described, does not exist with that person. For that reason, that defeated person is called "non-co-resident." 56. Having thus analyzed the training rule that was recited, by sequence of words, now, what is said as "should engage in" here, to show in what manner one should engage, having placed this heading "engages in means," it is said: "organ with organ, limb with limb." Here, since not only a woman's organ is the basis for a pārājika, nor only a human woman's, and the organs of women made of gold, silver, etc., are not a basis at all; therefore, to show whatever is a basis, by the method beginning with "three women," having stated those beings whose organs are bases, (it then) by the method beginning with "three paths of a human woman," states those bases. Here, three women, three hermaphrodites, three eunuchs, and three men – (these are) the organs of the bases for a pārājika. Depending on these (ways), twelve types of beings exist. Among them, women and men are obvious. The distinction of eunuchs and hermaphrodites will become clear in the description of the Pabbajjā Khandhaka. "For one engaging in sexual intercourse through the three ways of a human woman" – here, the meaning should be understood as "in the three ways of a human woman." So it is everywhere. All these are: three ways for a human woman, three for a non-human woman, three for an animal woman – that's nine; nine for human hermaphrodites and so on; six for human eunuchs and so on, taking two each; similarly, for human men and so on, there are thirty ways. In any of these, which are called "signs," by inserting one's own sexual organ, even to the extent of a sesame seed, and engaging in sexual intercourse, one incurs a pārājika. Description of the First Four Rules 57. However, since one incurs (the offense) only with the intention of engaging, not without it; therefore, showing that characteristic, the Blessed One said, "When the monk's intention to engage arises," and so on. There, "of the monk" means "of the monk who engages in sexual intercourse." "When the intention to engage arises" is a locative case meaning "when the intention to engage is present." "For one inserting the sexual organ into the excrement passage" means "for one inserting one's own sexual organ, the male organ, even to the extent of a sesame seed, into the passage through which excrement exits." "An offense of pārājika" means "a pārājika offense occurs for him." Or, "offense" means "incurring." "Of pārājika" means "of the pārājika rule." This method applies everywhere. 58. Thus, having shown the offense for one who inserts with the intention of engaging, now, since that insertion occurs not only by one's own effort, but also by another's effort. And even in that case, the offense is only for one who consents, who is endowed with the intention to engage, not for the other. Therefore, for the protection of those noble sons who have gone forth out of faith, who are practicing rightly, and who do not consent even when insertion occurs by another's effort, (the Buddha) said, "A human woman hostile to the monk," and so on. There, desiring the destruction of the opposing party, they are called adversaries. Monks who are adversaries are enemy monks. This is a designation for hostile monks, who are not in harmony. Having brought a human woman to the monk: those overcome by jealousy, desiring to destroy that monk, either enticing her with a bribe, or by way of friendly acquaintance, saying, "Do this task for us," having brought some human woman at night to that monk's dwelling place. Causing the organ to enter the excretory passage: Having firmly seized that monk by his hands, feet, head, and so on, so that he cannot move, they cause that monk's organ to enter the woman's excretory passage. The meaning is, they make them engage in intercourse. In "If he," and so on: If that monk approves or consents to the entry of his organ into the excretory passage, at that moment, he generates a mind of enjoyment. If he approves or consents to its having entered, at the time of entry, he generates a mind of enjoyment. If he approves or consents to its being there, at the time of its being in place, at the time of semen emission, he generates a mind of enjoyment. If he approves or consents to its withdrawal, at the time of withdrawal, he generates a mind of enjoyment. Thus, if he approves in these four instances, he cannot say, "This was done by my enemy ascetics." He incurs a pārājika offense. And just as he incurs it by approving all four, so too, by not approving the first one but approving three, by not approving two but approving two, and by not approving three but approving one, he still incurs it. But if he disapproves completely, regarding the entered organ as if it were the mouth of a poisonous snake or a pit of glowing coals, he does not incur it. Therefore it was said: "If he does not approve the entry... ...if he does not approve the withdrawal, there is no offense." For such a person who has begun insight meditation, who is indifferent to body and life, and sees all sense bases as ablaze with the eleven fires, and sees the five sense pleasures as murderers with drawn swords, the Blessed One, protecting such a person, (said this) for himself. And causing the frustration of the bhikkhus' wishes, he extracted and placed this four-line stanza, beginning with "does not approve of entry." The discourse on the first four-line stanza is finished. The discourse on the 269 four-line stanzas 59-60. Having thus shown the first four-line stanza, now, because the enemies of the bhikkhus, having brought a woman, do not only make her sit down by the anus, but also by the urethra and by the mouth. And having brought a woman, some bring one who is awake, some one who is asleep, some one who is intoxicated, some one who is insane, some one who is heedless, meaning one whose mind is otherwise occupied or distracted. Some bring a dead one that is un-eaten, meaning, one whose signs are un-eaten by dogs, jackals, etc. Some bring a dead one that is mostly un-eaten; "mostly un-eaten" means one whose signs, in the anus, urethra, or mouth, have a larger portion un-eaten. Some bring a dead one that is mostly eaten; "mostly eaten" means one whose signs, in the anus and so forth, have much eaten, and little un-eaten. And they do not only bring human women, but also non-human women and animal women. And not only women of the aforementioned types, but also hermaphrodites, eunuchs, and men do they bring. Therefore, according to these cases, showing other four-line stanzas, he said, beginning with "The enemies of the bhikkhus bring a human woman who is awake." There, for the sake of clarity in the Pāli, the mentioned four-line stanzas should be understood as enumerated thus: For a human woman, according to the three passages, three pure four-line stanzas, three for an awake one, three for a sleeping one, three for an intoxicated one, three for an insane one, three for a heedless one, three for a dead un-eaten one, three for a mostly un-eaten one, and three for a mostly eaten one— that makes twenty-seven four-line stanzas. Likewise for a non-human woman; likewise for an animal woman— in the case of women, that is eighty-one four-line stanzas. And just as in the case of women, so too in the case of hermaphrodites. But in the cases of eunuchs and men, of two by way of the paths, there are fifty-four, fifty-four. Thus, all of them are two hundred, and seventy fours, which are clear in meaning. In all cases here, regarding the statement: “mostly eaten, mostly consumed” in this place, this is the determination: It is said that in Tambapaṇṇidīpa, there were two Vinaya-holders, teachers of the same lineage, the elders Upatissa and Phussadeva. When great danger arose, they preserved and protected the Vinaya Piṭaka. Among them, Elder Upatissa was more skilled. He also had two disciples: Elder Mahāpaduma and Elder Mahāsumana. Among them, Elder Mahāsumana heard the Vinaya Piṭaka nine times. Elder Mahāpaduma heard it nine times with him, and eighteen times by himself, nine times each; he was the more skilled among them. Among them, Elder Mahāsumana,