English
that nun should undertake the observance, saying: "I undertake the penance, I undertake the observance." Then she should announce to the assembly of nuns thus: "Venerable sirs, I committed an offense in another village. I asked the Saṅgha for a half-month penance for one offense in another village. The Saṅgha gave me a half-month penance for one offense in another village. I am undergoing the half-month penance. 'I declare, venerable sirs, she declares,' may the Saṅgha hold me thus." Then, having gone to the presence of the assembly of monks, she should announce thus: "Venerable sirs, I committed an offense... ...may the Saṅgha hold me thus, 'I declare, venerable sirs, she declares.'" Here also, it is permissible to announce in any language. Having announced, she should sit in the presence of the assembly of nuns. From the time of announcement, the monk It is proper to go to the village. If there is doubt, the bhikkhunis should expect a place there, and should stay. If another bhikkhu or bhikkhuni comes to that place, she who sees should inform them. If she does not inform, there is a break of the night and an offense of breaking the rule. If, unknowingly, she enters the precinct and goes, there is only a break of the night, not an offense of breaking the rule. If the bhikkhunis wish to go early to perform duties for their preceptors and so on, to protect against the offense of staying out overnight, of falling behind the group, and of entering a village alone, one bhikkhuni should be left behind, and they should go. By her, when dawn arises, the duty should be deposited with her. By this method, the fifteen nights of mānatta should be observed unbroken. But for one who has not deposited her duty, she should conduct herself properly in the manner stated in the Pārivāsika Khandhaka. This, however, is the distinction: Regarding "the newcomer should be informed," whoever, before or after the meal, comes to that village, whether bhikkhus or bhikkhunis, all of them should be informed. If she does not inform, there is a break of the night and an offense of breaking the rule. Even if at night some bhikkhu enters that village precinct and goes, there is indeed a break of the night, but due to not knowing, she is freed from the offense of breaking the rule. In the Kurundi and other texts, it is said that it should be spoken of in the manner stated for bhikkhus who have not deposited their duty. That appears more appropriate because it is delimited by the precinct boundary of the pārivāsika duties and so on. On Uposatha, it should be informed. On Pavāraṇā, it should be informed. To four bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, it should be informed daily. If for the bhikkhus the alms-round is successful in that village, they should go there. If it is not successful, even having wandered elsewhere, they should come there, show themselves, and go. Or, a meeting place should be made outside the village – "You will see us at such and such a place." By her, having gone to the meeting place, it should be informed. Not seeing them at the meeting place, having gone to the monastery, it should be informed. At the monastery... It should be announced to all bhikkhus. If it is not possible to announce to all, standing outside the precinct boundary, nuns should be sent. It should be announced to the four bhikkhus brought by them. If the monastery is far and dangerous, laymen and laywomen should be taken along. If, however, she dwells alone, and incurs a night's separation, therefore, one competent nun should be appointed and given to her to dwell in one shelter. Having thus observed the unbroken mānatta, the rehabilitation should be performed in a community of twenty nuns, in the manner stated. If, while observing the mānatta, she incurs an intermediate offense, it is stated in the Kurundi that she should be sent back to the beginning, and mānatta should be given for that offense. This is called "pakkhamānatta." "Samodhāna-mānatta," however, is of three kinds – odhāna-samodhāna, aggha-samodhāna, and missaka-samodhāna. Therein, that which was later granted as mānatta to the Elder Udāyi, who was observing parivāsa for an offense concealed for five days, and who, having incurred an intermediate offense during his parivāsa and at the mānatta-eligible stage, was sent back to the beginning, (when it was said) "Therefore, O bhikkhus, let the Saṅgha give the bhikkhu Udāyi mānatta for six nights for the three offenses," this is called "odhāna-samodhāna." For this, having been repeatedly sent back to the beginning, and having shaken off the days of parivāsa, it was given combined with the former offenses, therefore it is called odhāna-samodhāna. In the Kurundi, however, it is said, "The mānatta to be given to one who has completed samodhāna-parivāsa is samodhāna-mānatta." That too is appropriate in that context. Aggha-samodhāna, however, and missaka-samodhāna, are simply called the mānatta to be given at the end of aggha-samodhāna and missaka-samodhāna parivāsa, that should be given by combining it according to the parivāsa kammavācā. Thus far, what was said: "Therefore, O bhikkhus, let the Saṅgha give the bhikkhu Udāyi, for one intentional offense of seminal emission, concealed for one day, one day of parivāsa..." In the manner of "let him give" and so on, in the Pāli, in many ways, probation and Mānatta are spoken of. Because, when the decision concerning them is spoken of in each place where they occur, it becomes very extensive, like the Pāli itself, and it is not possible to grasp it easily, therefore, having combined it, we will show it right here. This has been accomplished in meaning. Account of Concealed Probation 102. Now, that which, indeed, the Pāli is spoken in the case of one concealed offense, that is indeed clear in meaning. 108. Then, having spoken the Pāli concerning two, three, four, five days of concealment, an intervening offense is shown starting from the probation for a five-day concealed offense. But because one who has committed that offense is called worthy of being pulled back to the root, therefore, a pulling back to the root is permitted for him there. But if one who has laid down his practice commits an offense, he is not worthy of being pulled back to the root. Why? Because he did not commit it while on probation, he committed it while standing in the state of an ordinary monk. Therefore, a separate Mānatta must be practiced for that offense. If it is concealed, probation must also be undergone. And when this pulling back to the root is spoken of, when it is done, the days of probation undergone are nullified. Thus, having shown an intervening offense during probation, and again, having shown an intervening offense for one worthy of Mānatta, a pulling back to the root is spoken of. When that is done, the days of probation undergone are indeed nullified. Then, for one who has completed probation, a combined Mānatta for all three of those offenses is shown. Then, having shown an intervening offense for one practicing Mānatta, a pulling back to the root is spoken of. But when that pulling back is done, the days of Mānatta practiced and the days of probation undergone are indeed nullified. Then, having shown an intervening offense for one worthy of rehabilitation, a pulling back to the root is spoken of. When that is done, all of them are indeed nullified. Thereafter, having combined all intervening offenses, the act of rehabilitation is shown. Thus, in the section on concealed offenses, five in terms of one-day concealment and so on, and four in terms of intervening offenses, making nine. The formal declarations are shown. The Account of Concealed Probation is concluded. The Account of Combined Probation 125. After that, for an offense concealed for a fortnight, starting from the inner probation, and for an intervening offense concealed for five days, combined probation and combined penance are shown. And in this case, even when an offense is committed during the period of penance-practice or eligibility for penance, if a retraction to the root is made for the offense committed, the days of penance practiced and the days of probation completed all become nullified. Why? Because it is a concealed intervening offense. Therefore it is said: "Having retracted to the root, having given combined probation for the former offense, let him give six nights of penance." After that, having combined all intervening offenses and shown the act of rehabilitation, the matter of seminal emission is concluded. The Account of Combined Probation is concluded. And the Account of Seminal Emission is concluded. The Account of Combined Probation by Valuation 134. Then, having shown two methods, one based on a single offense and one based on increasing offenses, combined probation by valuation is shown. Then, having shown the matter of an offense not reported intentionally, to show what should be done for an offense not reported due to intentional ignorance, forgetfulness, or doubt, when later shame, or knowledge, recollection, and certainty arise, the Pāli text is set forth with the method beginning "Here, monks..." Then, to show the unconcealed state of those who concealed due to ignorance, forgetfulness, or doubt, the Pāli text is set forth in the same way. The Account of Combined Probation by Valuation is concluded. The Account of Two-Month Probation 138. Then, having shown the matter of requesting one month's probation for two offenses concealed for two months, to show what should be done for the other month, not reported due to unintentional ignorance, forgetfulness, or doubt, when later shame, etc., arise, and to show the state of having committed an offense for one who concealed due to ignorance, forgetfulness, or doubt, the Pāli text is set forth in the same way as before. The Account of Two-Month Probation is concluded. Pure End P Story of the Preliminary Probation, etc. Then, in the manner of