English
means, "Friends, evil has been done by us." 455. "By what dwelling, O Bhūmi, do you dwell?" Here, "Bhūmi" is a term of endearment. It seems that Venerable Sabbakāmī, wishing to speak kindly, addressed the new monks in this way. "By a shallow dwelling" means by a superficial dwelling. 457. In the Suttavibhaṅga at Sāvatthī – How is it forbidden in the Suttavibhaṅga? For there, having said, "Storage means what is received today for the next day," it is again forbidden by stating the offense: "If, thinking it is not stored, one eats or consumes stored food or edibles, there is an offense of pācittiya." Some there think, "Indeed, it is said, 'Whatever monk stores food or edibles,' but this salt, being for life, does not fall into the category of storage. And even if one receives unseasoned meat... And eats with it. That is received on that very day. Therefore, "Monks, that which is received for life, when mixed with that which is for a limited time, is permissible at the proper time, not permissible at the improper time." By this rule, there should be a dukkaṭa here. They should be told: "According to your opinion, there should not even be a dukkaṭa, for here, that which is received for life is not received on that very day. Only that which is for a limited time is received on that very day, and that was not consumed at an improper time. Or if you think it's a dukkaṭa by the statement 'not permissible at an improper time,' then for one eating that which is for life mixed with that which is for a limited time at an improper time, there would be no pācittiya for eating at an improper time. Therefore, not merely the letter should be taken, the meaning should be investigated." This is the meaning here: If that which is received for life, received on that very day, is mixed in taste with that which is for a limited time, it becomes of the nature of that which is for a limited time. Therefore, by this training rule: "Whatever monk eats or consumes food or edibles at an improper time," it is permissible at the proper time, not permissible at the improper time. It is not that merely by the statement "not permissible" there is a dukkaṭa here. Just as that which is received for life, received on that very day, when mixed in taste with that which is for a limited time, is not permissible at an improper time, it leads to a pācittiya for eating at an improper time. Similarly, that which is received today, when mixed in taste with that which is for a limited time on the next day, is not permissible, it leads to a pācittiya for eating stored food. Even not knowing "this is stored," one is not exempt. For it has been said: "If, in the case of stored food, one perceives it as not stored, and eats or consumes food or edibles, there is an offence of pācittiya." Therefore, to the question "Where is it forbidden?" [the answer is] "This explanation is clear in the Suttavibhaṅga at Sāvatthī." "Connected with the Uposatha in Rājagaha" - this refers to the statement: "Monks, two Uposatha halls should not be appointed in one dwelling; whoever appoints them, there is an offence of dukkaṭa." "Dukkaṭa in transgression of Vinaya" - [this refers to] "Monks, two..." "Uposatha halls are to be designated." For transgressing this rule of discipline, a dukkaṭa. "In the Campeyya Vinaya-story," this refers to the Vinaya-story that came in the Campeyya Khandhaka, beginning with "If, monks, a factional act is unrighteous, it is no act and should not be done." "Some are permissible" this is said with reference to a righteous custom. "An offence of cutting (pācittiya)" For in the Suttavibhaṅga it is stated: "A sitting cloth is called a 'sadasa'." Therefore, only ten finger-breadths are allowed in addition to two Sugata-spans. For one who makes that measure without the ten (finger-breadths), this indeed is stated: "For one who exceeds it, there is an offence of cutting (pācittiya)." Therefore, when asked "What offence does he incur?", he said, "An offence of cutting (pācittiya)." The meaning is that he incurs the pācittiya mentioned in the cutting training rule. The rest is clear everywhere. The story of the ten matters is finished. In the Samantapāsādikā, the commentary on the Vinaya, The commentary on the Khandhaka of the Seven Hundred is finished. Two sections are spoken of, twenty-two classifications; The Khandhakas in the Dispensation are destroyers of the suffering of the five aggregates. This commentary of theirs, just as it was without hindrance; May the good things be accomplished, and thus may the hopes of beings be fulfilled. The Commentary on the Cūḷavagga is finished.