English
as long as Buddhas exist, it comes to be recited. For the Buddhas themselves recite the Ovādapātimokkha, not the disciples. The connection is that it comes to be recited only in the first period of enlightenment. Here, the first period of enlightenment is defined as twenty years, as stated in the Mahāgaṇṭhipada. And this is said by taking "the first period of enlightenment means twenty years," because it was stated below in the commentary itself: "For during the twenty-year interval of the Blessed One's first period of enlightenment, there was no regular attendant." However, by the Elder Ācariya Dhammapāla, it was said that "in the forty-five years, the first fifteen years are the first period of enlightenment." And if this is so, the middle fifteen years are the middle period of enlightenment, and the last fifteen years are the last period of enlightenment, thus there would be an equal duration for the three periods of enlightenment, so that too is reasonable. For by three fifteens, forty-five years are completed. However, in the commentary, since the fifteen-year duration of the first period of enlightenment is included within the twenty years, it is said "during the twenty-year interval of the first period of enlightenment," and thus it can also be understood. But surely, even after some training rules were laid down, the Pātimokkha of injunctions was not yet authorized, because it was authorized later at the request of the Elder. Therefore, how is it said: "From the time of the laying down of the training rules, only the Pātimokkha of injunctions is recited"? Even if some training rules were laid down, the Pātimokkha of injunctions... The Pātimokkha was not allowed, and thus, when the training rule was not laid down, there was no command-Pātimokkha. But only when it was laid down. To show this meaning, it was said: “from the time the training rule was laid down.” In Pubbārāma, a great monastery so called because it was built in the eastern part of Sāvatthī. In Migāramātupāsāda, a palace built by Visākhā, the great laywoman, who was called Migāramātā because she was like a mother to Migāra, the chief. Aṭṭhāna means the rejection of a cause. Anavakāsa means the rejection of a condition. By both, the cause itself is rejected. Yanti means by which cause. Tesanti means of those monks. Pabbajitāti sammukhasāvakānaṃ santike refers to those who went forth in the presence of the direct disciples, like Subhadda, the very last ones. Khattiyakulādivaseneva vividhā kulāti sambandho is connected as: “various families, due to being of royal families and so on.” Uccanīcauḷāruḷārabhogādikulavasena vāti should be construed as: “due to being of high or low families, or families of great and abundant wealth, and so on.” There, high family status should be understood as due to being of royal or brahmin families, or royal, brahmin, or householder families; low family status as due to being of other families. Uḷāruḷārabhogādikulavasena vāti means due to being of families with very great and abundant enjoyments, and so on. The repetition of uḷāra is to emphasize the greatness, as in “dukkhaṃ dukkhaṃ” (suffering, suffering) and so on. By the word ādi (and so on), the inclusion of both great and not-so-great should be understood. Brahmacariyaṃ rakkhantīti To clarify and show the meaning already stated, it is said: “long preserving the Dhamma of study.” Even if the training rule were not laid down, if they were of the same class and so on, they would not destroy it, like their own family tradition. But since the training rule was not laid down, and these monks are not of the same class and so on, they would destroy it. To show this meaning, it was said: “yasmā ekanāmā…pe… tasmā aññamaññaṃ viheṭhentā” (since they are of one name… therefore, harming one another). If so, why was it said “nānānāmā” (of various names) and so on in the section on the long duration? Even though they were of various castes and so on, the long duration of the Dispensation was due to the laying down of the training rules. It was said to show non-cessation. Only by the laying down of training rules does the Dispensation long endure. Because Buddhas, even after their final passing, lay down training rules if there are beings to be trained; if not, they do not lay them down. Therefore, it should be understood. Just as the mind, even when arising and proceeding by giving rise to communication through the doors of body and speech, is said to "proceed through the doors of body and speech" because it proceeds by means of that very communication; similarly, this should be seen. Here, "yathā tanti" is merely a particle. By collections of sections, collections of fifties, and so on: by way of collection into sections like the section on morality, the great section, and so on; by way of collection into fifties like the first fifty, the middle fifty, and so on. By the word "and so on," the collection of the Saṃyutta, etc., should be understood. "Think thus, do not think thus" — here, "thus" refers to the manner of proceeding by way of injunction and by way of prohibition in the instructed teaching. And it proceeds by showing the manner of arising of right thoughts and wrong thoughts, for the purpose of clarifying the benefit and the danger. Therefore, it is said: "Think the three thoughts beginning with the thought of renunciation," and so on. Here, by the word "beginning with," the thoughts of non-ill-will and non-violence should be understood as included. Therein, renunciation (nekkhamma) is called: non-greed, because it has gone forth from greed; the first jhāna, because it has gone forth from hindrances; all wholesome states, because they have gone forth from all unwholesome states; Nibbāna, because it has gone forth from all conditioned things. The thought connected with renunciation by way of strong support, by way of association, and by way of making it an object, is the thought of renunciation, which is right intention. In the preliminary stage of the meditation on the repulsive, it is of the sense-sphere. In the meditation on the repulsive, it is of the form-sphere. Having made that jhāna its basis, at the time of the arisen path and fruit, it is supramundane. The opposite of ill-will is non-ill-will, or non-ill-will because one does not harm anyone by it; it is loving-kindness. The thought connected with non-ill-will as described is the thought of non-ill-will. It is the preliminary stage of the loving-kindness jhāna... In part, it is of the sense-sphere; when the first jhana is attained through the development of loving-kindness, it is of the form-sphere; making that jhana its basis, at the time of the arising of path and fruit, it is supramundane. It is the opposite of harm, or beings are not harmed by it, thus non-harming, compassion. The thought connected with that is the thought of non-harming. In the initial stage of the compassion jhana, it is of the sense-sphere; when the first jhana is attained through the development of compassion, it is of the form-sphere; making that jhana its basis, at the time of the arising of path and fruit, it is supramundane. Is it not the case that because non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion are inseparable from each other, there is no distinct classification of these thoughts of renunciation, etc., which arise by means of them, due to their non-confusion with each other? No, there is. Indeed, when non-greed is predominant, by way of regulated, matured conduct, etc., then the other two become its followers. Thus, when a mind-state is predominant in non-greed and heavy with renunciation, then the thought of renunciation, having gained opportunity, becomes established. But by means of non-aversion, which is connected with it and characterized by non-hatred, the state of being a thought of non-ill-will for that very thing might arise; and when there is the state of being a thought of non-ill-will, due to the nature of not harming anyone, the state of being a thought of non-harming might also arise. Those other two are followers of that very thought of renunciation. Since they are not seen in their own form, they are inferred to exist when that is present, and not to exist when that is absent. In the same way, when a mind-state is predominant in loving-kindness, then the other two become its followers. When a mind-state is predominant in compassion, then the other two become its followers. Here, by the word 'etc.' in 'thoughts of sensual desire, etc.', the inclusion of thoughts of ill-will and thoughts of harm should be understood. Therein, a thought connected with sensual desire is a thought of sensual desire. Here, indeed, there are two kinds of sensual desire: desire for objects and defiling desire. Therein, in the case of desire for objects, a thought connected with sensual objects by way of object is a thought of sensual desire. But in the case of defiling desire, it should be understood as connected with sensual desire by way of association. Connected with ill-will connected with ill will is the thought of ill will. connected with harming is the thought of harming. Among these, two arise in beings and in formations. The thought of sensual desire arises in one who thinks of dear, pleasing beings or formations. The thought of ill will arises from the time of looking with anger at unpleasing, disagreeable beings or formations until their destruction. The thought of harming does not arise in formations. For there is no formation to be made to suffer. But it arises in beings when one thinks, "May these beings be slain, or cut off, or destroyed, or may they not exist!" Now, why is it said, "There is no formation to be made to suffer"? Are not those who are wished to be made to suffer, who are designated as beings, also formations in reality? This is true, but they, being bound by faculties and endowed with consciousness, experience suffering. Therefore, they, being designated as beings,