English
that which is thus specified as "this is the motion," and that which is not specified. Among these, that which is not specified is called a "motion for action." That which is specified is called a "motion with a preamble." He does not know that motion at all. He does not know the performance of a motion, meaning he does not know the performance of a motion for action in nine places, nor of a motion with a preamble in two places. The announcement of a motion, meaning: "For this motion, there is one announcement, this... He does not know "the three kinds of envy." He does not know the settlement by motion. The four kinds of settlement— settlement by mindfulness, settlement for the unbewildered, settlement by majority, and settlement by covering with grass— do not occur without a motion. He does not know that settlement by motion. He does not know the appeasement by motion. The case that is appeased by these four kinds of settlement by motion, he does not know that appeasement as "this appeasement by motion has been made." He does not know the Sutta, meaning he does not know the two Vibhaṅgas. He does not know what is in conformity with the Sutta, meaning he does not know the four Great Standards. He does not know the Vinaya, meaning he does not know the Khandhakas and the Parivāra. He does not know what is in conformity with the Vinaya, meaning he does not know the four Great Standards. And he is not skilled in what is proper and improper, meaning he is not skilled in reasons and non-reasons. He does not know the Dhamma, meaning, excluding the Vinaya Piṭaka, he does not know the remaining two Piṭakas. He does not know what is in conformity with the Dhamma, meaning he does not know the four Great Standards in the Suttantas. He does not know the Vinaya, meaning he does not know the Khandhakas and the Parivāra. He does not know what is in conformity with the Vinaya, meaning he does not know the four Great Standards. Here, the two Vibhaṅgas are not included. Therefore, what is said in the Kurundī, "he does not know the entire Vinaya Piṭaka," should not be taken. And he is not skilled in what comes before and after, meaning he is unskilled in earlier talk and later talk. The rest is clear, being understandable everywhere by way of the opposite of what has been said, and having been explained before. The commentary on the Anissita Vagga, the Appaṭippassambhana Vagga, and the Vohāra Vagga is concluded. Commentary on the Diṭṭhāvikamma Vagga 425. In the Diṭṭhāvikamma Vagga – "Diṭṭhāvikamma" means the making manifest of views; the declaration of doctrines. This is a designation for disciplinary actions called the confession of offenses. "He makes a view manifest concerning a non-offense" means he teaches a non-offense as an offense. "Concerning what is not to be confessed" means he makes a view manifest concerning a grave offense; meaning he teaches a Saṅghādisesa and a Pārājika. "Concerning what has been confessed" means even concerning a light offense that has been confessed. He reveals his view; the meaning is that he teaches again what has been taught. By four or five views: just as a view is revealed by four or five, so he reveals it; the meaning is that four or five people together confess an offense. By mental intention: he reveals his view by intention reckoned as mind; the meaning is that without breaking speech, he confesses an offense by mind alone. To one of different communion: he reveals his view in the presence of one of different communion in doctrine or of different communion in action; the meaning is that he confesses an offense. In a different boundary: he reveals it in the presence of one who, though of the same communion, stands in a different boundary. For it is not proper for one standing in a chapter-house boundary to confess an offense to one standing in an intermediate boundary, or for one standing in an intermediate boundary to one standing in a non-separation boundary. To one who is not in good standing: the meaning is that he confesses it in the presence of one who is suspended, or one whose Uposatha and Pavāraṇā have been suspended. 430. Not fit to perform the 'asking for permission' act: not sufficient to perform; the meaning is that it should not be done. Here too, 'one not in good standing' refers to one who is suspended and one whose Uposatha and Pavāraṇā have been suspended. With the intention of expulsion: desiring to expel from the Dispensation. 432. Due to dullness and delusion: unable to understand even what has been explained, he merely asks, revealing his own delusion, like a madman. With evil desire: he asks with an evil desire, thinking, "Thus will people respect me." With contempt: he asks, intending to show contempt. The same method applies to other explanations. The rest is clear everywhere. Whatever should be said in the chapter on self-grasping and the chapter on ascetic practices has already been said below. The commentary on the chapter on revealing views is finished. Commentary on the chapter on false speech 444. In the chapter on false speech – goes to a pārājika: meaning, he incurs a pārājika offense. The same method applies to others. Therein, false speech declaring a non-existent superhuman state leads to a pārājika; false speech slandering with a baseless pārājika leads to a saṅghādisesa. for the villager, the intentional lie spoken to one who knows, for example, "who lives in your monastery," is a grave offense; for one who does not know, it is a minor offense; it is to be understood as a pācittiya offense, as stated, "for an intentional lie, there is a pācittiya." By not seeing: by not seeing a Vinaya expert. For when doubt arises concerning what is allowable and what is not, one should see a Vinaya expert, inquire about what is allowable and not, abandon what is not allowable, and do what is allowable. But not seeing one, if one does what is not allowable thinking it is allowable, one incurs an offense. Thus, an offense that would be incurred is not incurred by seeing a Vinaya expert, but is incurred by not seeing one. Therefore, it is said, "by not seeing." By not hearing: even living in the same monastery, if one does not go to attend on the Vinaya expert and inquire about what is allowable and not, or does not listen to what is being said to others, one still incurs an offense. Therefore, it is said, "by not hearing." By being asleep: by being asleep. For one incurs an offense of sleeping together even by being asleep. But one who incurs an offense by thinking what is not allowable is allowable, incurs it with such a perception. By loss of mindfulness: one incurs an offense that should be incurred, for example, by the passing of one night. The rest is clear everywhere. The commentary on the Chapter on Lying is finished. The commentary on the Chapter on Admonishing Nuns 450. In the Chapter on Nuns – for loss of gain: for the purpose of loss of the four requisites; meaning, one strives and endeavors so that they do not obtain requisites. For harm: one strives bringing harm, a quarrelsome teaching. For expulsion: for the purpose of expulsion; for the purpose of expelling them from the village area where they live. Incites: incites them to engage in unwholesome practices. 451. "By how many factors, venerable sir, should a nun be endowed for an act to be performed?" This question refers to one of the seven acts. 454. Should not be conversed with: the path of discourse, such as the analysis of what is allowable and not, of name and form, of tranquility and insight, should not be spoken. However, since an Arahant monk does not deceive, the path of discourse of such a one he who is the owner speaks, not the other; therefore, in the first group of five, it is rejected with "not by one who is not an Arahant," and in the second group of five, "by an Arahant," and so on, is stated. "Not attained to analytical knowledge of meaning" means in the commentary, he is not one who has attained to analytical knowledge, not one who has attained to knowledge of distinctions. "Not attained to analytical knowledge of Dhamma" means he is not one who has attained to analytical knowledge of the Dhamma of the Pāli. "Not attained to analytical knowledge of language" means he is not one who has attained to analytical knowledge of the language of common usage. "Not attained to analytical knowledge of perspicuity" means he is not one who has attained to analytical knowledge in those knowledges called perspicuity, such as analytical knowledge of meaning. "He has not reviewed the mind as it was liberated" means he has not reviewed the mind as it was liberated in terms of the four fruit-liberations, by the nineteenfold review. The rest is clear everywhere. The commentary on the Bhikkhunovāda Vagga is finished. Commentary on the Ubbāhika Vagga 455. In the Ubbāhika Vagga – "Not skilled in meaning" means not skilled in commentary; he is not clever in extracting meaning. "Not skilled in Dhamma" means not skilled in Pāli, not a master of Pāli, because he has not learned it from a teacher. "Not skilled in language" means not skilled in the language of other lands. "Not skilled in expression" means not skilled in applying perfect expressions in terms of soft and hard sounds, and so on; the meaning is, he is not skillful in discerning letters. "Not skilled in sequence" means not skilled in the sequence of meaning, the sequence of Dhamma, the sequence of language, the sequence of expression, and in prior and subsequent discourses. "Angry," and so on, are stated because one overcome by anger, and so on, does not know what is cause and what is not, and cannot decide. "He causes confusion" means he causes delusion, not the arising of mindfulness; the meaning is, he confuses and obscures the speech of the accuser and the accused, he does not make it clear. The rest in this Ubbāhika Vagga is clear. The commentary on the Ubbāhika Vagga is finished.