English
But since not only enemies of bhikkhus do this, but also enemies of kings and so forth do it. Therefore, showing that distinction too, it said, beginning with "enemies of kings." There, kings themselves are enemies, (thus) enemies of kings. They, whether they themselves bring them or have others bring them, are to be understood as bringing them. Robbers are enemies, robber-enemies. "Dhuttā" means city rascals addicted to sexual play, or those who are womanizers, drunkards, and so on; dhuttā are enemies, dhutta-enemies. "Gandha" means heart; those who tear it out are "uppalagandhā"; uppalagandhā are enemies, uppalagandha-enemies. These, it is said, do not live by farming or trade, but support their wives and children by committing highway robbery, village raids, and so on. Desiring success in their endeavors, they make requests to deities and tear out human hearts for the purpose of making offerings to them. Humans are always hard to find. But monks dwelling in the forest are easy to find. They seize a virtuous monk and, thinking "the killing of a virtuous person is a serious matter," they bring human women or others to destroy his virtue; or they take him there. This is the distinction here. The rest is to be understood in the manner already stated. And in these four cases, the fourfold divisions are to be understood in the manner stated in the section on monk-enemies. However, in the Pāli, they are stated concisely. The explanation of the fourfold divisions in all respects is concluded. Explanation of the Section on Offenses and Non-Offenses 66. Now, what was said, "for one who engages in sexual intercourse in the three paths of a human woman," and so on— to avoid confusion here, it says "by path, by path," and so on. Therein, "by path, by path" means one inserts one's own organ into one of the three paths of a woman, or, in the case of two conjoined paths, one inserts the urinary path into the fecal path, or the fecal path into the urinary path. "By path, by non-path" means one inserts it by the urinary or other path and withdraws it by a wound nearby. "By non-path, by path" means one inserts it by a wound near the path and withdraws it by the path. "By non-path, by non-path" means in the case of two conjoined wounds, one inserts it by one wound and withdraws it by the second. In accordance with the direct meaning of this Sutta, everywhere a wound In brief, a grave offense should be understood. Now, what will be said later: "No offense for one who does not know, for one who does not consent," for the sake of clarity there, he says, "A monk, I am a sleeping monk," and so on. Here, the meaning is: one who is awake and consents, he is not released by saying, "I was sleeping, he acted wrongly against me, I did not know." Both should be destroyed, here, both should be destroyed by the destruction of their monastic status. There, for the defiler, there is no confession. The defiled one, after being questioned, if he confesses, should be destroyed. If he does not consent, he should not be destroyed. This is the method even in the case of novices. Thus, having shown this and that offense and no offense in various places, now, showing only no offense, he says, "No offense for one who does not know," and so on. Here, one who does not know is one who has fallen into deep sleep and does not even know the attempt made by another, like the monk who was staying for the day in the Great Forest at Vesālī. For such a one, there is no offense. This has also been said: "'I do not know, Blessed One.' 'No offense, monk, for one who does not know.'" One who does not consent is one who, even knowing, does not consent, like the monk who suddenly awoke there. This has also been said: "'I did not consent, Blessed One.' 'No offense, monk, for one who does not consent.'" One who is mad is one mad with bile. For bile is of two kinds: bound bile and unbound bile. There, unbound bile is like blood, pervading all limbs. When it is agitated, beings experience itching, rashes, body tremors, and so on. These subside with medicinal treatment. Bound bile, however, is located in the gallbladder. When it is agitated, beings become mad, their perceptions are distorted, they cast away shame and moral dread, and behave in an unseemly manner. They do not know even when transgressing light or heavy training rules. They are incurable even with medicinal treatment. For such a mad person, there is no offense. One whose mind is deranged is called one whose mind is released, one possessed by a yakkha. Yakkhas, it is said, by showing terrifying objects or by inserting a hand into the mouth, ha or crushing a compassionate form, they make beings distracted in mind, with perverted perception. For such a distracted-minded person, there is no offense. But for these two, this is the distinction – one mad from bile is always mad, and does not regain normal perception. One mad from a yakkha (demon) regains normal perception intermittently. Here, however, whether one is mad from bile or mad from a yakkha, if one is utterly forgetful and knows nothing, and goes about crushing fire, gold, excrement, and sandalwood as if they were all the same, for such a person there is no offense. But for one who regains perception intermittently and acts knowingly, there is indeed an offense. One afflicted by feeling is he who is tormented by excessive painful feeling and knows nothing. For such a person, there is no offense. An original offender is one who is the first in that particular action. Here, however, Thera Sudinna is the original offender, for him there is no offense. But for the rest, such as the monkey-monk and the Vajjiputtaka, there is indeed an offense. The commentary on the word-division is finished. Miscellaneous Talk In this training rule, for the sake of skill, this miscellaneous matter should be known – Origin and action, then perception, with thought; and worldly blame, and action, and wholesome, and by feeling. There, "origin" means the six origins of training rules, by way of comprehensive inclusion. These will become clear in the Parivāra. In brief, a training rule is – there is one with six origins, there is one with four origins, there is one with three origins, there is one with a Kathina origin, there is one with a sheep's wool origin, there is one with an origin like laying down a burden. Therein, some arise from action, some arise from non-action, some arise from action and non-action, some may arise from action, may arise from non-action, some may arise from action, may arise from action and non-action. Therein, there is release by perception, there is not-release by perception. There, that which certainly obtains a mental factor, that is release by perception; the other is not-release by perception. Again a There is with-mind, there is without-mind. That which arises with the mind itself, that is with-mind; that which arises even without the mind, that is without-mind. All of that is twofold: blameworthy by the world, blameworthy by rule. Their characteristics have been stated. Here, also by way of action, wholesome, and feeling, there is a precept of bodily action, there is a precept of verbal action. Therein, that which is through the body-door, that is bodily action; that which is through the speech-door, that is verbal action, so it should be understood. Moreover, there is a precept that is wholesome, there is unwholesome, there is indeterminate. Indeed, there are thirty-two minds that give rise to offenses – eight wholesome sense-sphere minds, twelve unwholesome minds, ten functional sense-sphere minds, and two supernormal knowledge minds from wholesome and functional. Among these, that which arises with a wholesome mind, that is wholesome; the others by the others. And there is a precept with three feelings, there is with two feelings, there is with one feeling. Therein, that which, when one commits it, arises being endowed with any one of the three feelings, that is with three feelings; that which, when one commits it, arises being endowed with pleasure or equanimity, that is with two feelings; that which, when one commits it, arises being endowed only with painful feeling, that is with one feeling, so it should be understood. Thus – "Origin and action, and perception, with-mind; Blameworthy by the world and action, wholesome, and with feeling." Having understood this miscellaneous matter, among these origins and so forth, this precept is of one origin by way of origin. By way of factors, it is of two origins, it arises from body and mind. And it is of action-origin, for one commits it only by acting. It is released by perception, due to the absence of sense-desire perception connected with sexual intercourse. For it is said: "No offense for one who does not know, for one who does not consent." One commits it only with a mind of sexual intercourse, not without a mind, thus it is with-mind. It is blameworthy by the world because it is to be committed only by way of lust. It is bodily action because it arises only through the body-door. Here, the mind is merely a factor; action-status is not obtained by its means. Because it is incurred with an evil mind, it is an unwholesome mind. It should be understood as twofold: whether one incurs it with pleasant feeling or with equanimity. All this is applicable to an offense. But all the good expositions of the commentaries are based on the head of the training rule, therefore it is said thus. Miscellaneous talk finished. Description of the Settled Cases "The monkey and the Vajji sons... etc. ... the old monk and the deer" - what is this? These are the summary verses of those various cases, which were settled by the Blessed One himself. Those cases were established by the Elder compilers of the Dhamma, so that "the Vinaya-holders may easily learn them." But the case-verses were established by Elder Upāli while the Blessed One was still alive,