English
even if it is merely shut, touching the door frame. It is permissible even if it slightly does not touch. By the very last method, it is permissible even if it does not touch, as long as a head cannot enter. If it is a place frequented by many, it is permissible to lie down even after saying to a monk or novice, "Friend, guard the door." If monks are sitting, doing robe work or something else, it is permissible to lie down even with the thought, "These will guard the door." In the Kurundi Commentary, it says: "It is permissible to lie down even after asking a lay follower, or with the thought, 'He will guard it.' However, it is not permissible to ask a bhikkhuni or a woman." It is said: Now, if the door's mortar or lintel is broken or removed, and it cannot be closed; or if for new construction a pile of bricks or a heap of clay, etc., is made inside the door, or a scaffold is erected, so that it cannot be closed; in such an obstruction, it is permissible to lie down even without closing it. If there is no door panel, it is considered as obtained. One lying above should place a ladder and lie down. If there is a cover at the top of the ladder, it is permissible to lie down even after covering it. One lying in a chamber should close the chamber door or the main door, whatever it may be, and lie down. If in a single-room house doors are made on two sides and used, both doors must be guarded. Even in a three-storied palace, the door must be guarded. If, returning from alms-round, many bhikkhus enter a palace like the Lohapāsāda for a day-rest, the Sangha elder should tell the doorkeeper, "Guard the door," or, having thought, "Guarding the door is his responsibility," should enter and lie down. Even the youngest bhikkhu should do likewise. For those entering first, it is permissible to think, "Guarding the door is the responsibility of those who come last." If one lies down without asking permission or without thinking, either inside a chamber or outside with an open door, there is an offense. Even when lying down inside a chamber or outside, it is permissible to think, "Guarding the door is the responsibility of the doorkeeper at the main door," and lie down. Even one lying on a rooftop in the Lohapāsāda, etc., must close the door. Here is the summary: This day-rest is spoken of in any enclosed place with a closable door. Therefore, whether in the open air, or at the root of a tree, or in a pavilion, wherever one lies down in an enclosed place with a door, one must close the door and then lie down. If it is a large precinct, like the great Bodhi courtyard or the Lohapāsāda courtyard, many a place of refuge, where a door, even if closed, does not remain closed, and those who cannot find a door climb over the wall and wander about, there is no need for a closing act. One who lies down at night with the door open and rises when dawn breaks, there is no offense. If, having woken up, one sleeps again, there is an offense. But if one, having decided, "I will rise when dawn breaks," lies down at night without closing the door, and does not rise as decided, there is an offense. In the Mahāpaccariya, however, it is said, "One who lies down thus is not even free from an offense of disrespect (dukkaṭa)." But if one, having stayed awake much of the night or having traveled a long distance, is tired during the day, and, sitting on a couch, lies down due to sleep without lifting one's feet from the ground, there is no offense. If, having fallen deeply asleep, one unknowingly lifts one's feet onto the couch, there is an offense. For one who sits and sleeps leaning against something, there is no offense. And if one, walking to dispel sleep, falls and immediately gets up, there is also no offense for him. But if one falls and sleeps right there, and does not get up, there is an offense for him. Who is free, who is not free? In the Mahāpaccariya, it is said, "Only one who lies down in a single posture is free. But one who lies down after lifting his feet from the ground, even if possessed by a yakkha or unconscious, is not free." In the Kurunda Commentary, however, it is said, "Only one who is tied and made to lie down is free." In the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, however, it is said, "For one who, walking, is freed and falls and sleeps right there, an offense is not seen because it is outside the scope. But the teachers do not speak thus. Therefore, it is an offense, as stated by the Elder Mahāpaduma. But two persons are indeed free from offense: one who is possessed by a yakkha, and one who is tied and made to lie down." 78. In the story of Bhārukaccha, there is no offense due to a dream. Because it is outside the scope in a dream, Elder Upāli decided this matter by way of inference, even though the Buddha had not decided it before. And the Buddha also "Well said, monks, by Upāli; as if making a footprint in a trackless place, as if showing a footprint in the sky, Upāli has explained this problem." Having said this, he placed the elder at the foremost position – "Foremost, monks, among my disciples, the monks who are masters of discipline, is Upāli." (A.N. 1.219, 228). From here onwards, the stories of Supabba and others are clear in meaning. 80. In the matters of associating with bhikkhunīs and so on, those Licchavi princes, devoted to sport, acted thus with their misconduct. And from that time onwards, the destruction of the Licchavis arose. 82. In the story of the aged renunciant, he went to see her out of compassion, saying "I will see her," he went to the house. Then she described to him her own and her children's helpless state in various ways. And knowing him to be indifferent, she became angry, and saying "Come, let's play!" she seized him by force. As he struggled to free himself, due to the weakness of old age, he fell flat on his back. Then she had her way with him. But that monk was an Anāgāmī, with sensual desire eradicated, therefore he did not consent. 83. The story of the fawn is also clear in meaning. The story of Vinīta is finished. In the commentary on the Vinaya, called Samantapāsādikā, The commentary on the First Pārājika is finished. Herein, regarding the Samantapāsādikā's being "all-pleasing" – From the lineage of teachers, from the exposition of the divisions of the origin stories; From avoiding other doctrines, and from the purity of one's own doctrine. From the purification of the letters, from the meaning of words, from the method of connecting the Pāli; From the determination of the training rules, from the discernment of the divisions of the Vibhaṅga method. To those who observe, nothing appears displeasing in it; Therefore, for the discerning, it is indeed "all-pleasing." This commentary proceeds, on the Vinaya, by one skilled in taming the trainable; Spoken by the Lord of the World, out of compassion for the world. The commentary on the First Pārājika is finished. 2. The Second Pārājika The second (Pārājika), by the peerless one, which was proclaimed by the Conqueror; Now for that Pārājika, the turn for commentary has arrived. Therefore, well understood... Whatever was previously explained, Leaving all that aside, this is the commentary. Commentary on the Story of Dhaniya 84. At that time, the Buddha, the Blessed One, was dwelling in Rājagaha, on Gijjhakūṭa mountain. There, in the city named Rājagaha—it is called Rājagaha because it was taken possession of by Mandhātu, Mahāgovinda, and others. Others explain it in different ways. What are they? This is the name of that city. And this city existed during the time of the Buddha and during the time of the Wheel-turning Monarchs. In other times, it was empty, occupied by yakkhas; it remained as a forest for them to dwell in. Having thus shown the alms-resort, he states the dwelling place: on Gijjhakūṭa mountain. And vultures dwelt on its peaks, or its peaks were like vultures; therefore, it is to be understood that it is called Gijjhakūṭa. Sambahulā: In the Vinaya context, three people are called sambahulā (many); beyond that, it is a Saṅgha. In the Suttanta context, it is three by three, and from that point onwards, sambahulā. Here, however, they are to be understood as sambahulā in the Suttanta context. Sandiṭṭhā: not overly intimate, not firm friends; they are called sandiṭṭhā because they were seen meeting here and there. Sambhattā: overly intimate, firm friends; they are called sambhattā because they were well-devoted, associating, and sharing in enjoyment and consumption. Isigilipasse: Isigili is a mountain, at its side. Formerly, it is said, about five hundred Paccekabuddhas, having wandered for alms in countries like Kāsī and Kosala, would gather on that mountain after their meal and spend their time in attainment. People would see them entering but not leaving. Therefore, they said, "This mountain swallows these sages." From that, the name "Isigili" arose for it, at its side, at the foot of the mountain. Tiṇakuṭiyo karitvā: having made huts with grass roofs and doorframes. For one who is entering the rains retreat, even one who has adopted the practice of a reed-hut dweller, by one of the five coverings One should go to a dwelling with a door-bolt. For it has been said: "Monks, one without a dwelling should not enter the rains. Whoever enters, there is an offense of wrong-doing." Therefore, during the rainy season, if one obtains a dwelling, that is good; if one does not obtain one, it should be made even by seeking help. If one cannot get help, it should be made by oneself. But one should not enter the rains without a dwelling. This is the proper practice. Therefore, those monks, having made grass huts, and having marked off night-quarters and day-quarters, and having undertaken the vows of agreement and the vows of the sections, practicing in the three trainings, entered the rains. And venerable Dhaniya: Not only those elders were the first to commit this training rule, but also venerable Dhaniya. Son of a potter: