English
He was the son of a potter; his name was Dhaniya, his father was a potter, therefore it is said: "Dhaniya, the potter's son." Entered the rains: He entered the rains together with those elders, having made a grass hut in the same place. Having completed the rains: Those who entered the rains in the former period, having made the great invitation, are called "having completed the rains" from the first day of the month. Thus, having completed the rains. Having broken down the grass huts: Not by crushing them into tiny pieces with sticks and hammers, but by removing the grass and wood and creepers, that is the meaning. For if a hut was made on the outskirts of a monastery, and if there are resident monks, they should be asked. One should depart, saying: "If anyone wishes to maintain this hut and dwell in it, give it to him." If it was made in the forest, or if no one is found to maintain it, one should put it away and go, thinking: "It will be for the use of others." But those monks, having made huts in the forest, and not finding anyone to maintain them, put away the grass and wood and stored them, that is the meaning. And so that what was stored would not be eaten by termites, and would be free from rain. having done so, having established it, thinking, "This place will be helpful to fellow celibates who wish to come and dwell here," having fulfilled the wanderer's duty. "They set out on a journey through the country" means they went to the country that pleased their own minds. "But the venerable Dhaniya, the potter's son, dwelt there for the rainy season," and so on, is clear in meaning. "Up to three times" means up to the third time. "Anavayo" is anu-avayo, with the elision of the 'u' vowel due to sandhi. Anu anu avayo, meaning, whatever the potters had to do, he was complete in all crafts, without deficiency, perfected, is the meaning. "Sake" means in his own possession. "Ācariyake" means in the teacher's craft. "Kumbhakārakamme" means in the work of potters; in the work to be done by potters, is the meaning. By this, his own teacher's craft is shown in its true nature. "Pariyodātasippo" means of pure craft. Even with being without deficiency, it is said that his craft was unequaled by others. "Sabbamattikāmayaṃ" means having made all the house materials —except for the back-door, door, bolt, latch, and window-door— all of clay, such as walls, roofs, bricks, and pillars, is the meaning. "Having gathered grass, wood, and cow dung, he baked that hut" means having made all of it of clay, having smoothed it with his hand, having dried it, having polished it with oil-and-clay, and having filled it inside and out with grass and so on, he baked it so that it was well-baked, thoroughly baked. And that hut, thus baked, was beautiful. "Abhirūpā" means of good form. "Pāsādikā" means inspiring confidence. "Lohitikā" means reddish. "Kiṅkaṇikasaddo" means the sound of a bell-net. Just as there is the sound of a bell-net made of various jewels, so there was a sound when the wind entered through the windows and so on and struck that hut. By this, its well-baked state, inside and out, is shown. In the Mahāaṭṭhakathā, however, it is said, "'Kiṅkaṇikā' means a bronze vessel; therefore, just as the sound of a struck bronze vessel, so was the sound of it when struck by the wind." 8 5. "What is this, monks?" Here, the Blessed One, though knowing, asked to initiate the discourse. "They reported this matter to the Blessed One," meaning, they reported to the Blessed One from the beginning that the hut was made entirely of clay. "How indeed, monks, could that one... ...make a hut?" This is a future tense word in the sense of the past; it means "he made." Its characteristic should be sought from grammar. "Indeed, monks, there will be no pity, no compassion, no non-harming for living beings in that foolish man." Here, "pity" is protection; by this, the preliminary stage of loving-kindness is shown. "Compassion" is the trembling of the mind at the suffering of others. "Non-harming" is not harming; by these, the preliminary stage of compassion is shown. This is what is said: "Monks, for that foolish man, who, in digging the earth, treading in the mud, and setting fire, harms and destroys many small and tiny beings, there will indeed be not even a trace, not even a little, of the preliminary stage of loving-kindness and compassion, no pity, no compassion, no non-harming for those beings." "Lest later generations fall into the state of harming beings," meaning, lest later generations fall into the state of harming beings. This is what is said: "Lest later generations, thinking, 'Even in the Buddha's time, monks did this; there is no fault for those who commit the destruction of life in such places,' and following this example, think that beings are to be harmed, to be crushed." Having thus rebuked Dhaniya, "And, monks, a hut made entirely of clay should not be made," he prohibited the making of such a hut in the future; and having prohibited it, he established an offense for making a hut entirely of clay: "Whoever makes one, there is an offense of wrong-doing." Therefore, even if one makes such a hut without falling into the state of harming beings by digging the earth and so on, that one also incurs an offense of wrong-doing. But if one falls into the state of harming beings by digging the earth and so on, whatever object one transgresses, the stated offense applies there. incurs an offense. For Thera Dhaniya, being the first to act, there is no offense. For the others, even if they acted transgressing the training rule, having received what was done, and dwelling there, it is merely a minor offense. But if mixed with other materials, however they may be mixed, it is allowable. One made purely of clay is not allowable. But even that, if made with bricks, like a small brick dwelling, is allowable. "So be it, venerable sir," they said... and accepting the Buddha's word, "they broke down that hut," they broke down that small hut, scattering it with wood and stones. Now, in the passage beginning "Then indeed, Venerable Dhaniya," this is the brief meaning: Dhaniya, sitting in day-dwelling in one place, came upon hearing that sound and asked those bhikkhus, "Why, friends, are you breaking down my hut?" And having heard, "The Blessed One had it broken down," he accepted it with good-will. But why did the Blessed One, with such great effort, have the small hut made for his own dwelling broken down? Was there not also a construction cost involved? Although there was, the Blessed One had it broken down because it was not allowable, and had it broken down because it was a sectarian banner. This is the decision here. In the commentary, however, other reasons are stated – for the compassion of beings, for the protection of bowls and robes, for preventing an excess of dwellings, and so on. Therefore, even now, any bhikkhu who is learned and skilled in Vinaya, seeing another bhikkhu wandering with an unallowable requisite, and has it cut or broken, is not to be blamed. He should neither be reproached nor reminded; nor is it allowable to say to him, "My requisite was destroyed by you; give it back to me." Decision outside the Pāli (text) Herein is the decision regarding allowable and unallowable requisites, which is outside the Pāli (text): Some, sewing a palm-leaf umbrella inside or outside with five-colored threads, make it colorful; that is not allowable. But to sew it inside or outside with a single color, whether blue or yellow, or any thread, for the umbrella handle-holder or the frame of spokes... It is proper to hold. And indeed, for making it firm, not for the sake of decoration. On umbrella leaves, to cut out a makara-tooth or a half-moon is not proper. On the umbrella handle, like house pillars, a pot-shape or an animal-figure is not proper. Even if lines are drawn everywhere with an awl, that too is not proper. The pot-shape and the animal-figure must be broken and kept. The lines must be rubbed off or removed, or the handle must be wrapped with thread. But at the base of the handle, a mushroom-shape is proper. To prevent the umbrella canopy from moving by wind, they hold it with ropes and tie it to the handle; at that tying place, they carve a line like a ring, that is proper. For decorating the robe, sewing with various threads like a centipede, they place an ornamental band, or do any other kind of needlework alteration, at the edge or end of the band, a braid or a chain, all such things are not proper; only ordinary needlework is proper. They make the knot-band and the loop-band eight-cornered or sixteen-cornered, and depict precious gems, elephants, pestles, etc., or carve crab's eyes; all such things are not proper; only four-cornered is proper. And corner-thread-knots, when the robe is dyed, if they are hard to discern, are proper. To put the robe into gruel, flour-paste, etc., is not proper. But during robe-making, for washing off hand-dirt, needle-dirt, etc., and when it is dirty, for washing, it is proper. To put perfume, or lacquer, or oil into the dye is not proper. After dyeing the robe, it should not be rubbed with a conch, or a gem, or anything else. Kneeling on the ground, holding it with hands, it should not be rubbed in a trough. But placing it in a trough or on a board, having someone hold the ends, and striking it with the hands is proper; that too should not be done with a fist. But the ancient elders did not even place it in a trough. One stands holding it; the other, taking it in hand, with the hand... It carries. The ear-string of a robe is not permissible. It should be cut off when dyed. But that which is allowed, as in "Monks, I allow the ear-string" (Mahāva. 344), that should be tied with a loop at the end to prevent it from getting stuck during dyeing. Even on a knot, for adornment, a line or a knob is not permissible. It should be removed and then used. On a bowl or a plate,