English
and suppressed his anger towards him. Thinking, "My fear of the enemy has subsided," without having entered the assembly of monks, having taken up the lay state, he came back. All is just as before. Another went to his family, renounced the training, and became a layman. Thinking, "These robes will be ruined here. Even if I take them and go to the monastery, on the way they will seize me as a thief. What if I were to make them body-covering and go?" So, to carry the robes, he put them on and wrapped himself in them, and went to the monastery. Seeing him coming from afar, the novices and young monks came out to meet him, and showed him respect. He did not accept it, but revealed himself as he truly was. If the monks wish to ordain him by force, saying, "Now we will not let you go," they should remove the saffron robes and re-ordain him. But if he thinks, "These do not know my fallen state," and acknowledges that very state of being a monk, all that was said before... He practices a ritual involving counting years, and so on; he should not be ordained. Another senior novice, having gone to his relatives' home, having disrobed, and being oppressed by the performance of work, again [thinks]: "Now I will be a monk again, and the elder does not know that I have disrobed." Taking those same robes and bowl, he comes to the monastery. Nor does he inform the monks of that matter. He pretends to be a novice. This one is merely a thief-dweller; he does not obtain ordination. Even if at the time of taking the robes it occurs to him: "I will not tell anyone," and having gone to the monastery, he does tell, by the very act of taking [the robes], he is a thief-dweller. Or if the thought arises in him: "I will tell at the time of taking [the robes]," and having gone to the monastery, when asked: "Where did you go, friend?" he deceives [them, thinking]: "Now these do not know me," and does not tell, [and thinks]: "I will not tell," along with laying down the burden, this one too is merely a thief-dweller. But if at the time of taking [the robes] the thought arises in him: "I will tell," and having gone to the monastery, he does tell, this one obtains ordination again. Another young novice, or a grown-up but ignorant one, having disrobed in the same manner as before, does not wish to do work like guarding calves at home. His relatives, having dressed him in those same yellow robes, and having given him a bowl or a plate in his hand, drive him out of the house, [saying]: "Go, be a monk!" He goes to the monastery. The monks do not know him, [thinking]: "This one disrobed and then ordained himself again." Nor does he himself know that "whoever ordains in this way is called a thief-dweller." If they ordain him when he is of full age, he is well-ordained. But if, while still unordained, he hears during a Vinaya discussion: "Whoever ordains in this way is called a thief-dweller." Then he should tell the monks: "I did this." In this way, he obtains ordination again. If he does not inform, [thinking]: "Now no one knows me," the burden is abandoned. He is a thief-dweller. A monk, having renounced the training, without removing his insignia, having committed an immoral act or not committed one, again practices all the procedures previously mentioned, such as counting years, he is a thief-dweller. Not having renounced the training, remaining in his own insignia, having engaged in sexual intercourse, practicing procedures such as counting years, he is not a thief-dweller. He obtains only the ordination. But in the Andhakaṭṭhakathā, it is said that he is a thief-dweller. That should not be taken. A certain monk, while still eager for the saffron robes, having put on white clothes, having engaged in sexual intercourse, then having put on saffron robes again, practices all the procedures such as counting years, he is not a thief-dweller. He obtains only the ordination. But if, having abandoned the burden of the saffron robes, having put on white clothes, having engaged in sexual intercourse, then having put on saffron robes again, practices all the procedures such as counting years, he is a thief-dweller. A novice, remaining in his own insignia, even having committed acts that make him not a recluse, such as sexual intercourse, is not a thief-dweller. Even if, while still eager for the saffron robes, having removed the saffron robes, having engaged in sexual intercourse, then puts on the saffron robes again, he is certainly not a thief-dweller. But if, having abandoned the burden of the saffron robes, naked or dressed in white, having become not a recluse through acts like sexual intercourse, he puts on the saffron robe, he is a thief-dweller. Even if, desiring the state of a householder, having folded the saffron robe or in some other way, puts on householder's clothes, for the purpose of testing "Does the householder's insignia suit me, or not?", he still maintains (his status). But having accepted "It suits me," and then again taking up the insignia, he is a thief-dweller. The same method applies to putting on white clothes for testing and acceptance. But if, over the worn saffron robe, he puts on white clothes, and tests or accepts, he still maintains (his status). The same method applies to a bhikkhunī. For she too, desiring the state of a householder, if she puts on householder's clothes over the saffron robe... he wears it, "Does this lay attire suit me, or does it not?" to investigate, he keeps it for a while. If he accepts, "It suits me," he does not keep it. Wearing white and investigating or accepting, the same rule applies. But if he wears white over a dyed robe, and investigates or accepts, he keeps it. If some elder monk, without counting his years, and without standing in the Pāli line, comes from one side, and holds out his bowl for the rice-balls scooped out with a ladle from large baskets, and takes it like a hawk taking a piece of meat, he is not a thief-dweller. But if he counts his monk-years and takes it, he is a thief-dweller. If a novice himself, in the novice order, counts false years and takes it, he is not a thief-dweller. If a monk, in the monk order, counts false years and takes it, he should be made to pay the price of the goods. The story of the thief-dweller is finished. The story of one gone over to sectarians Here, in "monks gone over to sectarians," one who has gone over, entered among sectarians, is a sectarian-gone-over. He should not only not be given higher ordination, but he should not even be given renunciation. Here is the decision: A monk who has received higher ordination, thinking, "I will become a sectarian," goes to their dwelling in his own robes; for each step, a dukkata. As soon as he adopts their robes, he becomes a sectarian-gone-over. Even if he himself, thinking, "I will become a sectarian," wears grass-cloth, etc., he is a sectarian-gone-over. But if, naked while bathing, he looks at himself and thinks, "My state as an Ajivaka suits me, I will become an Ajivaka," and without taking saffron robes, goes naked to the Ajivakas' dwelling, for each step, a dukkata. If, however, shame and fear of wrongdoing arise in him on the way, he is freed by confessing the dukkatas. Even if he goes to their dwelling and is advised by them, or if he himself thinks, "Their renunciation is too painful," and turns back, he is freed. But if, "What is the use of your renunciation?" having asked, "What is the best?", and having been told, "Plucking out hair and beard, etc.", he causes even a single hair to be plucked out, or he undertakes the practices of squatting, etc., or he wears peacock feathers, etc., he adopts their insignia, or he comes to the belief that "this renunciation is superior," he is not released, he becomes one who has gone over to the sectarians. But if, for the purpose of investigating, "Does my sectarian renunciation look good? Does it not look good?", he wears grass-cloth, etc., or he ties his hair in a knot, or he takes up a carrying-pole, as long as he does not accept it, the doctrine protects him; as soon as he accepts it, he becomes one who has gone over to the sectarians. But one whose robes have been taken away, wearing grass-cloth, etc., or adopting sectarian insignia due to fear of kings, etc., since he lacks the doctrine, he does not become one who has gone over to the sectarians. This one called "one who has gone over to the sectarians" is spoken of by an ordained bhikkhu; therefore, it is said in the Kurundi, a novice, even if he goes to a sectarian abode with his own insignia, receives renunciation and ordination again. The former, the thief-dweller, is spoken of by an unordained person; therefore, an ordained bhikkhu, even if he counts a false rainy season, does not become a non-ascetic. One who is zealous in insignia, having committed a pārājika, even if he counts bhikkhu-years, etc., does not become a thief-dweller. The discourse on one who has gone over to the sectarians is finished. The discourse on the animal story 111. "He is disgusted with the nāga birth" Here, although he experiences lordly prosperity similar to divine prosperity as a result of wholesome karma in his existence, for him, who has a rebirth resulting from unwholesome karma, when he engages in sexual intercourse with his own kind, and when he releases his semen, the body of a nāga appears, moving in water, preyed upon by frogs; therefore, he is disgusted with that nāga birth. "He is ashamed" means he is embarrassed. "He is disgusted" means he is disgusted with his own existence. "When that bhikkhu departed" means when that bhikkhu left. Or it means "the departure of that bhikkhu." "He released and entered sleep" means, when he had not departed, due to fear of a loud noise, without mindfulness Having let go of mindfulness when he went out, sleeping just like a monkey's drowsiness, released and fearless, he fell into a deep sleep.