English
is made to fit the lower part, there are six places. But if not supported at the back, but only supported at the pole, by means of the supports, there are three or four places. For that placed on a plank or a piece of wood by its pole, there are three places. Likewise for that placed on the ground. For one who pulls or lifts that pole, moving the places forward or backward, it is a grave offense. If the wheels move even a hair's breadth from their established place, it is a pārājika. With wheels removed, for that placed on top of wood by its two axle-ends, there are two places. If one pulling or lifting it moves it past the touched place, it is a pārājika. For that placed on the ground, established by its pole and four axle-pegs, there are five places. If one pulling it by the pole moves it past the front ends of the pegs from their back ends, it is a pārājika. If one pulling it by the pegs moves it past the back ends of the pegs from their front ends, it is a pārājika. If one pulling it by the side moves it past the established place of the pegs sideways, it is a pārājika. If one lifting it by the middle causes it to be free from the ground even a hair's breadth, it is a pārājika. Now if there are no axle-pegs, but the axle-ends are inserted, having made a crossbeam and pierced it in the middle, that, of the lower surface... Yes, it stands touching the entire earth. There, in the four directions and upwards, by transgressing the touched place, a pārājika should be understood. For a wheel placed on the ground by its hub, there is only one place; its demarcation is in five ways. For that which stands touching by its rim-side and by its hub, there are two places. For one who, having stepped on the raised part of the rim with his foot, makes it touch the ground, and then taking it by the spokes or by the rim, lifts it up, the place made by himself is not *the* place. Therefore, even if it stands there, a pārājika occurs upon the mere transgression of the remaining place. For a wheel placed leaning against a wall, there are also two places. There, for one who first detaches it from the wall, it is a grave offense. Afterwards, upon lifting it from the ground by a hair's breadth, it is a pārājika. But for one who first detaches it from the ground, if the place established on the wall is not disturbed, the method is the same. Then, for one who, taking it by the spokes, pulls it downwards, if the upper end of the space where it stood touching the wall transgresses the lower end, it is a pārājika. When a vehicle is on the road, if the owner of the vehicle has dismounted for some reason and gone off the road, and then another bhikkhu coming in the opposite direction, seeing it unguarded, thinks, "I will steal the vehicle," and mounts it, but without his effort, the oxen take it and depart, there is no theft. The rest is similar to what was said about a boat. The Commentary on Vehicles is finished. Commentary on Burdens 101. Henceforth, "burden" is the commentary on burdens. It is shown in four ways, such as head-burden. There, for the sake of clarity regarding head-burdens and so on, the demarcation of the head and so forth should be understood. There, for the head, first, the Adam's apple in the front of the neck, and at the back of the neck, for some, a whorl at the hairline, and on both sides of the neck, for some, hair grows downwards, which are called ear-locks – the lower part of these – this is the lower demarcation. Above that is the head. A burden placed within this interval is called a head-burden. On both sides, downwards from the ear-locks, upwards from the temples, and From the neck-joint and the throat-hollow downwards, and from the back-middle-joint and the heart-hollow in the middle of the chest-division upwards, is the shoulder. A load placed in this interval is called a shoulder-load. But from the back-middle-joint and the heart-hollow downwards, as far as the tips of the toenails, this is the waist-division. A load placed all around the body in this interval is called a waist-load. But from the elbow downwards, as far as the tips of the fingernails, this is the hanging-down division. A load placed in this interval is called a hanging-down load. Now, regarding "a load on the head" and so on, this is an unprecedented decision: A monk who, not commanded by the owners, "Take this and go there," but himself says, "Give me this thing, I will carry your goods," and taking their goods on his head, goes, if he touches that goods with the intention of theft, it is a dukkaṭa. Without exceeding the aforementioned head-division, if he rubs it here and there, moving it forward or backward, it is a thullaccaya. As soon as it is placed on the shoulder, even if the owners have the thought, "Let him carry it," but because they did not command it, it is a pārājika. But even without placing it on the shoulder, if he moves it even by a hair's breadth from the head, it is a pārājika. For a double-load, one load rests on the head, one on the back; there, the decision should be understood according to the two places. But this teaching is begun only with reference to pure head-loads and so on. And what is stated concerning a head-load, that same decision applies to shoulder-loads and so on. But here, regarding "a load in the hand," the hanging-down load is called "a load in the hand" because it is held by the hand. Whether it was first taken from the ground, or by the head and so on with pure intention, it is reckoned as "a load in the hand." Seeing such a place of taking with the intention of theft, for one who places it on the ground or on trees and so on, as soon as it is released from the hand, it is a pārājika. But here, regarding "takes from the ground," whatever of those loads, for reasons like breakfast, sud... with the intention of theft, having placed it on the ground, and then with the intention of theft, pulling up even a hair's breadth, it is a pārājika. The Commentary on Burdens is finished. Commentary on Parks 102. Also in the commentary on parks, First showing what a park is, He says, "A park is called a flower park or a fruit park." Among these, a flower park Is one that bears flowers like jasmine. A fruit park is one that bears fruits like mangoes. The decision regarding what is placed in a park In four ways Is just as stated in the commentary on ground, etc. However, concerning what grows there, "Root" means any root, Like usīra grass or hirivera. For one who takes it, Having uprooted it or after it's uprooted, When the root by which the object is completed is taken, It is a pārājika. A tuber is also included with roots. Here, for one who uproots, Even if a small part is not severed, It is only a grave offense. The decision there Should be understood in the same way as stated for lotus stalks. "Bark" means any tree bark Suitable for use as medicine or dye. For one who takes it, Having peeled it off or after it's peeled off, It is a pārājika in the way stated for roots. "Flower" means any flower, Like jasmine or mallikā. For one who takes it, Having picked it or after it's picked, It is a pārājika in the way stated for water lilies and lotuses. Indeed, for flowers too, If the stalk or the binding is not severed, It protects it. However, sometimes inside the stalk There is a small needle-like part; That does not protect it. "Fruit" means any fruit, Like mangoes or palmyra fruits. For one who takes it from a tree, The decision is stated in the commentary on what is attached to a tree. What is removed and placed down Is included in the commentary on ground, etc. When he claims a park, He claims what belongs to another, Saying falsely, "This belongs to me." Because it is an attempt at taking what is not given, It is a dukkata offense. When he causes doubt in the owner, He creates uncertainty for the park owner, Either through skill in judgment Or by being supported by a powerful person, etc. How? Seeing him so engaged in judgment, The owner thinks, "Will I be able to make this park my own, Or will I not be able to?" Thus, his doubt arises... being produced by him, therefore he incurs a grave offense. 'He abandons the burden': But when the owner says, "This one is stubborn, harsh, he might even cause an obstacle to my life and holy life, enough now for me with this monastery!" thus abandons the burden, the accuser incurs a pārājika offense. If he himself has also abandoned the burden, but even if the owner has abandoned the burden, the accuser, without abandoning the burden, says, "Having thoroughly oppressed this one, having shown the execution of my command, having placed him in a state of obedience and submission, I will give it!" is zealous in the matter of giving, he still holds on. Or if the accuser says, "Having seized it, I will not give it to this one now!" thus abandons the burden, but the owner does not abandon the burden, he seeks support, he waits for the opportune time, says, "Let me first find an assembly of respectable people, afterwards I will know!" he is zealous in taking it back again, he still holds on. But when he too says, "I will not give it!" and the owner too says, "I will not get it!" thus both abandon the burden, then the accuser incurs a pārājika offense. But if, having accused and while the judgment is being made, before the judgment is concluded, and while the owner has not abandoned the burden, knowing that it is not his property, he takes any flower or fruit from it, he is to be made to pay the value of the goods. 'While acting according to the Dhamma': means making a judgment in the Sangha or in the royal court. 'He defeats the owner': means having given a bribe to the judges, having brought in false witnesses, he defeats the owner of the monastery. 'The offense is pārājika': means not only for him, but for all those who intentionally acted to achieve his purpose, for the false judges and for the false witnesses, it is all a pārājika offense.