English
it is the intention to steal, arising from the perception of another's property as another's property, which initiates the effort to take it, and occurs through one of the two doors: body or speech. This is of slight offense when the other's property is inferior, of great offense when it is excellent. Why? Because of the excellence of the object. When the object is equal, it is of great offense in the case of property belonging to those of greater virtue, and taking into account that greater virtue, it is of slight offense in the case of property belonging to those of lesser virtue. Wrong conduct is sexual misconduct. It is a base conduct, utterly condemned among sexual behaviors. By definition, however, it is the intention to transgress an improper place, occurring through the door of the body, with the aim of unchastity. This sexual misconduct is of slight offense in an improper place devoid of virtues like morality, of great offense in one endowed with virtues like morality. Its four components are: an improper object, the intention to engage with it, the act of engaging, and the acquiescence to the penetration by way of the path. One application is by one's own hand. Misconduct that arises from speech, mostly through the door of speech, is verbal misconduct. Showing its nature, it is said: "False speech, backbiting..." New, harsh speech, frivolous talk, intention should be known. Therein, "musā" means a thing that is not, that is untrue. "Musāvādo" means that by which a lie is spoken, is said; the intention that arises from the desire to make another understand an untrue thing as true. This, if the matter he speaks of is small, is of small fault; if it is great, is of great fault. Moreover, for householders, the refusal to give what is their own, expressed by saying "it is not," and so on, is of small fault; to act as a witness and speak falsely to distort a matter is of great fault. For renunciants, to obtain even a little oil or ghee and, with a joking intent, to say, "Today, I think, the river of oil flows in the village," in an exaggerating manner, is of small fault; but for those who say "I saw" what they have not seen, and so on, is of great fault. It has four constituents: an untrue thing, the intention to deceive, the corresponding effort, and the other's understanding of that matter. One mode of application is direct (sāhatthika). This is to be seen in the act of deceiving another by body, or by something connected to the body, or by speech. If by that act the other person understands that matter, then at the moment of the intention that gives rise to this act, one is bound by the karma of false speech. Since, just as one deceives another by body, by something connected to the body, or by speech, so also by commanding, "Tell him this," or by writing a letter and placing it before someone, or by writing "This meaning is to be understood thus" on walls, etc., and leaving it there, therefore, here, the modes of application by command (āṇattika), by sending (nissaggiya), and by permanent inscription (thāvara) are also appropriate. However, since they are not mentioned in the commentaries, they should be understood after careful consideration. "Pisati" means to crush, to make whole beings into separate factions, is the meaning. Or, by etymological rule, "pisuṇā" means making dear ones empty. For by that speech which one speaks to someone, one makes one's own dearness in that person's heart, and makes the other's dearness empty; that is divisive speech. By characteristic, however, it is the bodily or verbal effort of a defiled mind, for the purpose of causing division among others, or for the sake of one's own dearness. The volition that gives rise to slanderous speech is called slanderous speech, because one speaks slanderously with it. If it causes division among those with few good qualities, it is a minor offense; among those with many good qualities, it is a major offense. It has four components: the other person to be divided; the intention to divide, thinking, "These will be separate, they will be apart," or the desire for affection, thinking, "I will be dear, trustworthy"; the effort for that purpose; and the other person's understanding of that purpose. However, for those not yet divided, there is no path of action for division; it only occurs when they are divided. It is harsh because it is harsh, speech. The speech by which one makes oneself and others harsh, rough due to lack of affection, that is harsh speech. Or, it is harsh itself, arising from displeasure, and by nature it is coarse, neither pleasant to the ear nor pleasant to the heart, thus it is harsh speech. Here, however, the word "harsh" for speech should be understood as occurring through the piercing of others' vital points, due to its extreme cruelty by nature, and by way of cause and effect. It is harsh speech because one speaks harshly with it; it is the volition that gives rise to an extremely harsh verbal or physical act that pierces another's vital points. To illustrate this, there is this story: Once, a boy, disregarding his mother's words, went to the forest. His mother, unable to make him return, cursed him, "May a fierce buffalo pursue you!" Then, in the forest, a buffalo indeed appeared before him. The boy made an act of truth, "May what my mother spoke with her mouth not happen. May what she thought in her heart happen." The buffalo stood there as if bound. Thus, even a piercing act is not harsh speech if it is accompanied by a kind heart. Parents sometimes say to their children, "May thieves cut you into pieces!" yet they do not wish even an lotus leaf to fall upon them. Teachers and preceptors sometimes say to their students, "Why do these shameless, fearless ones wander about? Expel them!" Yet they wish for them to achieve success in learning and realization, just as By gentleness of mind, harsh speech does not arise. Similarly, by gentleness of speech, unharsh speech does not arise. Indeed, for one wishing to kill, the words "May you sleep soundly" are not unharsh speech. But by harshness of mind, this is harsh speech itself. Depending on whom it is directed, it is of little blame for one of little virtue, and of great blame for one of great virtue. Its three constituents are: the other to be abused, an angry mind, and the act of abusing. That which bears, spreads, or destroys happiness and welfare is 'samphaṃ'. Whatever is unhelpful to oneself and others. By which one prattles 'samphaṃ' is 'samphappalāpo' (frivolous talk). Unwholesome volition that gives rise to bodily and verbal actions that convey meaninglessness. It is of little blame by slight indulgence, and of great blame by great indulgence. Its two constituents are: preoccupation with useless talk like the Mahabharata war, the abduction of Sita, etc., and the telling of such stories. But if others do not heed that talk, there is no breach of the path of action. But it occurs only when the frivolous talk is taken up by others. Here, 'abhijjhā' (covetousness) is the intense longing for another's possessions, greed for others' possessions. It is characterized by coveting another's goods, thinking "Oh, if only this were mine!" Like taking what is not given, it is of little blame and of great blame. Its two constituents are: another's goods, and the turning of them to oneself. Indeed, even when greed arises concerning another's goods, there is no breach of the path of action until one turns it to oneself, thinking "Oh, if only this were mine!" That which harms and destroys welfare and happiness is 'byāpādo' (ill-will), resentment. It is characterized by mental defilement for the destruction of others. Like harsh speech, it is of little blame and of great blame. Its two constituents are: another being, and the thought of their destruction. Indeed, even when anger arises concerning another being, there is no breach of the path of action until one thinks of their destruction, "Oh, if only this one were cut off, were destroyed!" By the absence of grasping reality as it is, one sees wrongly; this is 'micchādiṭṭhi' (wrong view). i. It is characterized by seeing things wrongly, in the manner of "there is no giving," etc. Like frivolous talk, it is both of slight fault and great fault. Moreover, indeterminate (views) are of slight fault, determinate (views) are of great fault. It has two components: the object's apprehended form being contrary (to reality), and its appearing in the way it is apprehended. Therein, the breaking of the path of action occurs only through nihilistic, non-causal, and non-action views. Even though it is a general statement, "of various kinds of evil, unwholesome states," by the rule of remainder, the remaining unwholesome states should be taken. Thus it says "excluding those states," etc. The meaning is: excluding those unwholesome states like the aforementioned bodily misconduct, etc. "Anekavihita" means of many kinds. 6. "This is the world's custom" means this is the world's tradition, characterized by actions like greeting elders. For non-returner Brahmas in ornaments etc., and for non-returner monks in robes etc., craving arises due to attachment. Therefore, it should be understood that only the craving connected with the five sense-pleasures is abandoned by the non-returner path. Thus it says "of the craving connected with the five sense-pleasures." The craving arising in the five sense-pleasures like forms etc., which are the divisions of object-desire, should be understood as "craving connected with the five sense-pleasures." Here, the word "guṇa" (quality) means "division," as in "the qualities of age gradually abandon" etc. (SN 1.4). "In the two unwholesome consciousnesses" means in the two unwholesome consciousnesses accompanied by displeasure. Because delusion is common to all unwholesome states, it says "of the origin of all unwholesome states." "Of the remaining" means of wrong views