English
the act of offering is evident, a deva or a human or an animal gives it with the body or with something connected to the body or by relinquishing, and the bhikkhu receives it with the body or with something connected to the body. Thus, receiving is valid with these five factors. Here, the arm's reach for those standing, sitting, or lying down should be understood in the manner stated in the Pavāraṇā training rule. If, however, among the giver and receiver, one is in the air and one is on the ground, excluding the head of the one on the ground and the one in the air, and the outstretched hand for giving or receiving, the measure of arm's reach should be determined by the nearest part of the body. Even if one is in a well, one on the well's edge, or one in a tree, one on the ground, the arm's reach measure should be determined in the manner stated. Standing within such an arm's reach, even if a bird with its beak, or an elephant with its trunk, takes and gives a flower or a fruit, acceptance is allowed. But if one is seated on the shoulder of an elephant, even one eight and a half cubits tall, and accepts what is given by its trunk, it is certainly permissible. One, having placed many bowls of rice and curry on their head, comes to the bhikkhu and, standing, says, "Please take it!" the act of offering is not yet manifest, therefore, it should not be taken. But if they bend down even slightly, the bhikkhu, extending his hand, should accept the lowest bowl, even a part of it. By this much, all the bowls are considered accepted. From then on, having put them down or opened them, whatever one wishes, taking it, it is permissible to eat. But regarding a single bowl, like a rice-basket, there is nothing to say. Even one carrying rice on a shoulder-pole, if they lower the pole and give it, it is permissible. There is a thirty-cubit bamboo pole, at one end a pot of molasses is tied, at the other a pot of ghee. If one accepts that, everything is considered accepted. If one says, "Please take the juice flowing from the sugar-cane press trough!" the act of offering is not manifest, so it should not be taken. But if, having discarded the dregs, they ladle it out repeatedly with their hand and give it, it is permissible. Many bowls are placed on a couch, or a stool, or a mat, or in a trough, or on a plank. Where the giver is within arm's reach of the one standing, standing there, with the intention of acceptance, touching the couch, etc., even with a finger, whether standing, or sitting, or lying down, whatever is given in those bowls, all of it is considered accepted. Even if, thinking "I will accept it," one climbs onto the couch, etc., and sits down, it is certainly permissible. But if one takes hold of the couch, etc., with the hand, and sits on the couch, there is nothing to say. But on the ground, even if a bundle standing with their hips pressed against it, wherever one sits, touching with a finger or a needle, there, what is given is received. It is said, "Receiving food in bowls placed on large mats or similar coverings is not proper," that should be understood as referring to what is beyond arm's reach. But if it is within arm's reach, it is permissible anywhere, except for those that are "born there." However, on a lotus leaf or a Butea leaf, or similar "born there" items, it is not permissible. For that is not considered as attached to the body. And just as with "born there" items, so too, it is not proper on a bed or similar item tied to a tree stump, or on an immovable plank or stone, for these too are included in the category of "born there." Even on delicate tamarind leaves spread on the ground, receiving is not proper, for they are not capable of holding it. But on large lotus leaves and the like, it is proper. If one stands beyond arm's reach and gives with a long-handled ladle, one should be told, "Come and give." If, without hearing or heeding the words, one just throws the food into the bowl, it should be received again. The same rule applies if one stands far away and throws a lump of food. If, when the bowl is taken out of its bag, there is dust of dye, if there is water, it should be washed; if not, one should ask about the dye dust, and having received it, go on alms round. If, while on alms round, dust falls, one should receive it and take the alms. If one takes it without receiving, it is a minor offense against the Vinaya. But if one receives it again and eats, there is no offense. However, if, when told, "Receive and give," they give alms without hearing or heeding the words, there is no minor offense against the Vinaya, and other alms should be taken after receiving again. If a strong wind blows dust from here and there, and it is not possible to take alms, it is permissible to take it with a pure intention, thinking, "I will give it to an unordained person." Thus, when on alms round... Having gone to the monastery or the assembly hall, having given it to an unordained person, then having received it back from him, or having received it through his trust, it is allowable to eat. If, during alms-round, someone gives a dusty bowl to a bhikkhu, he should be told: "Having received this, you may take alms or you may consume it." He should do so. If dust floats on top, having poured off the gruel, the rest should be eaten. If it has entered inside, it should be received. If there is no unordained person, without releasing it from the hand, it should be taken to where an unordained person is, and then received. In dry food, having removed the fallen dust, it is allowable to eat. If it is very fine, it should be removed along with the top food, or it should be received and eaten. When gruel or curry is placed in front, and people stir it, splashes fly up from the vessel and fall into the bowl; the bowl should be received. When people bring and give with a ladle, first, drops from the ladle fall into the bowl; they are well-fallen, there is no fault because it is offered. Even if, when food is being served with a pot, soot or ash falls from the pot, there is no fault because it is offered. When food is being given to the next bhikkhu, it flies up from his bowl and falls into the other's bowl; it is well-fallen. Indeed, it is considered received. If, when people break up dry branches or the like and give them to one bhikkhu, splashes from the branch fall into another's bowl, the bowl should be received. For the bowl over which they break them, when they fall into that bowl, there is no fault because of the intention to give, and because it is offered. When they fill a bowl with milk-rice and give it, because it is hot, one cannot hold it from below; it is allowable to hold it by the rim. If even so one cannot, it should be held with a support. A bhikkhu seated in the assembly hall, having taken his bowl, falls asleep; he knows neither what is brought nor what is given; it is not received. But if he is seated with attention, it is allowable. Even if he, having released the support with his hand, having pushed it with his foot, sleeps, it is permissible. But for one who receives by stepping on the support with his foot, even while awake, it is a disrespectful reception, therefore, it should not be done. Some say that receiving with such a support is a reception bound to the body, therefore, it is not permissible. That is merely their statement. But in reality, all of this is bound to the body. And this method has been shown even in bodily contact. Whatever falls while being given to a bhikkhu, it is permissible to take it oneself and consume it. Concerning this, there is this Sutta – "I allow, O bhikkhus, whatever falls while being given, to take it oneself and consume it. That is relinquished, O bhikkhus, by the donors." (Cūḷavagga 273). But this Sutta has an implied meaning. Therefore, the intention here should be understood thus – whatever, while being given, slips from the donor's hand and falls onto clean ground, or onto lotus leaves, cloth, mats, etc., it is permissible to take it oneself and consume it. But whatever falls onto dusty ground, that should be wiped of dust, or washed, or received, and then consumed. But if, while rolling, it goes near another bhikkhu, it is permissible to have him bring it. If he says to that bhikkhu, "You yourself eat it," it is permissible for him also to eat it. But it should not be taken by him without being told. It is said in the Kurundi that even without being told, it is permissible to take it, thinking, "I will give it to the other." But why is it not permissible for another bhikkhu to take it? Because it was not allowed by the Blessed One. For the Blessed One, by saying "take it oneself and consume it," allowed consumption by taking it, even if not yet received, for the one to whom it was being given and fell. By the statement, "That is relinquished, O bhikkhus, by the donors," the absence of ownership by others is indicated here. Therefore, it is not permissible for another to take it oneself and consume it. , but it is permissible by his command—this is the intention here. And because it is permitted due to not having been received, therefore, it is permissible to consume it on the second day, having kept it as it is, without touching it, covered by something; there is no offense due to storage. But it must be consumed after being received. For only on that day was its consumption by taking it oneself permitted, not beyond that—this is also the intention here. Now the rule of non-transactional items is stated—for those eating, teeth wear out, nails wear out, the color of the bowl wears out, all are non-transactional. And when something appears as dirt on sugarcane, etc., split with a knife, this is called newly arisen; it must be consumed after being received. When something appears as dirt on items split after washing the knife, it is only the smell of metal; that is non-transactional.