English
But tirīṭaka is made of tree bark; it is permissible to make it into a foot-wiper. 374. "If there is a suitable recipient" means if some bhikkhu takes it, saying "I will take it for him," then it should be given. Thus, among these twenty-three individuals, sixteen people do not receive, and seven people receive. Saṅg The Story of the Origin of the Torn Robe 376. "The Sangha is divided" means that, having divided, there are two factions, like the monks of Kosambi. In one faction, they give water for the dedication of merit and perfumes, etc.; in the other, robes. "These belong to the Sangha" means that these belong to the entire Sangha, to both factions. The bell should be struck, and it should be divided equally by both factions. "These belong to the faction" means that when given in this way, the water belongs to the faction to which the water was given; the robe belongs to the faction to which the robe was given. But where the water for the dedication of merit is the standard, there one faction receives robes because it received the water for the dedication of merit, and the other because it received the robes themselves. Thus, both should unite and divide according to seniority. This, it is said, is a characteristic in other lands, as stated in the Great Commentary. "To that very faction" means that in this case, the other faction has no authority. The stories of sending robes are well known. The Story of the Eight Robe Categories 379. Now, to show the field of acquisition for the robes mentioned from the beginning, it is said, "Monks, these are the eight categories..." "He gives to the boundary," etc., is stated in terms of individual designation. Here, giving to the boundary is one category; giving by agreement is the second... and giving to an individual is the eighth. Therein, "I give to the boundary" means that one who gives by referring to the boundary in this way is said to give to the boundary. This method applies everywhere. In the explanation of the categories, "He gives to the boundary, and as many monks as are within the boundary, by them it should be divided," etc., here, "he gives to the boundary" means that fifteen boundaries should be understood: a partial boundary, a proximity boundary, a common residence boundary, a non-separation boundary, a gain boundary, a village boundary, a market town boundary, a city boundary, an inner boundary, a water-throwing boundary, a district boundary, a country boundary, a kingdom boundary, an island boundary, and a world-system boundary. Therein, the partial boundary is already mentioned in the story of boundaries. The proximity boundary is defined by the enclosure of an enclosed monastery, or by the place suitable for enclosure for an unenclosed one. It is. And also, from the monks' regular meeting place, or from the refectory standing at the edge, or from the fixed dwelling place, the precinct boundary is to be known as within two stone-throws of a strong, average man. But that (boundary) grows when the dwellings grow, and shrinks when they shrink. In the Mahāpaccariya, it is said, "It grows even when the monks grow (in number)." Therefore, if, being connected with the monks assembled in the monastery, they sit filling even a hundred yojanas, even a hundred yojanas becomes the precinct boundary, and the gain reaches all. The two boundaries of common residence and non-separation have also been stated. The boundary of gain is neither permitted by the Perfectly Enlightened One, nor established by the elders who compiled the Dhamma. But kings, chief ministers, having built a monastery, having delimited a quarter-yojana, or half-yojana, or a yojana all around, having erected pillars inscribed with "This is the boundary of gain for our monastery," and having declared "Whatever arises within this, all that we give to our monastery," they establish this boundary. This is called the boundary of gain. The boundary of a village, market town, or city, and the boundary of a water-throw within them, have also been stated. The boundary of a district means – within countries like Kāsī and Kosala, there are many districts. There, each district's demarcation is a district boundary. The boundary of a country means the demarcation of countries like Kāsī and Kosala. The boundary of a kingdom means the sphere of authority of each king, for example, "the Chola dominion, the Kerala dominion." The boundary of an island means the great islands and intermediate islands delimited by the sea. The boundary of a world-system means that which is delimited by the Cakkavāḷa mountain itself. Thus, regarding these boundaries, if, seeing a Sangha assembled for some act within a partial boundary, it is said, "I give to the Sangha right here within this boundary," then as many monks as are within that partial boundary should divide it. For it belongs to them alone. It does not belong to others who are standing within the boundary interval or within the precinct boundary. But if, on a tree or a rock standing within the partial boundary... whether standing on a tree, or below, or in the middle of the earth, it reaches them. But if given saying, "I give this to the Saṅgha within this precinct boundary," it reaches even those standing in fragmented boundaries and between boundaries. If given saying, "I give this for the common residence boundary," it does not reach those standing in fragmented boundaries and between boundaries. If given in non-separation boundaries or acquisition boundaries, it reaches those included within those boundaries. If given in village boundaries and so forth, it reaches even those standing in a fixed boundary within those boundaries. If given in inner boundaries or water-throwing boundaries, it reaches only those included therein. Regarding district, country, kingdom, island, and world-system boundaries, the decision is the same as stated for village boundaries and so forth. If, however, one standing in Jambudīpa gives saying, "I give this to the Saṅgha in Tambapaṇṇidīpa," even one person from Tambapaṇṇidīpa can go and receive for all. Even if one compatible bhikkhu there receives the share for compatible ones, he should not be prevented. Thus far, this is the decision to be known regarding the gift of one who specifies a boundary. But if one does not know how to say "in such and such a boundary," knowing only the mere word "boundary," goes to a monastery and says, "I give to the boundary," or "I give to the Saṅgha within the boundary," he should be asked: "Boundaries are of many kinds, which boundary do you mean?" If he says, "I do not know 'such and such a boundary,' let the Saṅgha within the boundary divide and receive," by which boundary should it be divided? Mahāsīva Thera, it is said, said: "By the non-separation boundary." Then they said to him: "A non-separation boundary can be three yojanas. If so, those standing at three yojanas will receive the acquisition. Standing at three yojanas, one will have to fulfill the duties of a guest and enter the monastery. A traveler will go three yojanas and ask for lodging. For one who has undertaken reliance, the reliance will be released upon exceeding three yojanas. A bhikkhu under probation will have to let the dawn rise after exceeding three yojanas. A bhikkhunī, standing at three yojanas, Entering the monastery will have to be asked for. All this is proper to do only by defining the precinct boundary. Therefore, it should be divided by the precinct boundary itself. By agreement, meaning by agreement for equal gains. Therefore it is said: "Many monasteries are of equal gain." There such an agreement should be made. By bhikkhus assembled in one monastery, wishing to include a monastery and make it of equal gain, taking its name, saying "such and such a monastery is ancient" or "dwelt in by the Buddha" or "has little gain" or whatever reason, it should be announced three times that "it pleases the Saṅgha to make that monastery of one gain with this monastery." By this, even one seated in that monastery is as if seated here. In that monastery too, the Saṅgha should do likewise. By this, even one seated here is as if seated there. When one gain is being divided, it is proper for one residing in the other to take a share. Thus, many monasteries can be made of one gain with one monastery. By the declaration of alms, meaning in the place of declaring one's donation. Therefore it is said: "Where permanent provisions are made for the Saṅgha." Its meaning is: in which monastery the Saṅgha's cooking expenses are borne by this robe-giver, or in which monastery bhikkhus, taking it upon themselves, always feed at home, or where a dwelling has been built by him, or where ticket-meals, etc., are regularly provided, and by whom the entire monastery has been established, there is nothing to be said (it is obvious), these are called permanent provisions. Therefore, if he says, "Where my permanent provisions are made, there I give" or "Give there," even if permanent provisions are in many places, it is considered given everywhere. But if in one monastery there are many bhikkhus, they should say: "In your permanent provisions, in one place there are many bhikkhus, in another few." If he says, "Take according to the number of bhikkhus," then divide and take accordingly. is proper. And here, even a little of dwelling requisites, medicine, etc., is easily distributed. However, if there is only one couch or one stool, it should be given after asking, to whomever the monastery or, in a single monastery, to whomever's lodging he considers, there it should be given. If he says, "Let such-and-such a bhikkhu take it," it is proper. If he says, "Give it to my permanent dwelling," and goes without considering, it is proper for the Saṅgha to consider it. But it should be considered thus: it should be said, "Give it to the dwelling place of the Saṅgha's elder." If his lodging is complete,