English
does, that they declare to be a dukkaṭa. Thus, this too is evil due to its despicable nature, being condemned by the Buddha. Therefore, it should be understood as a dukkaṭa. Just as when it should be said "duggati" (evil destination) for a painful or repulsive destination, it is said "duggati"; and just as when it should be said "kaṭukaphala" (bitter fruit) for that which has a bitter fruit, it is said "kaṭukapphala"; similarly here, to show that when it should be said "thūlaccaya" (gross transgression) due to its grossness and transgression, it is said "thullaccaya," it is said, "and a bad destination in the future," and so on. However, having made the conjunction, the shortening of the vowel of the conjoined syllable is already established, so having kept that in mind, only "the state of conjunction should be understood" is said. "At one's root" means "with one." "There is no transgression equal to it" means that among the transgressions that lead to a destination, there is no gross transgression equal to it. "Therefore it is called this" means that because of the grossness of the transgression, it is called "thullaccaya." "In all cases, a dukkaṭa arises from touching, and a thullaccaya arises from moving, separately for one who performs the act of touching and moving with the intention of theft. But for one who takes with a single act, it is a pārājika for the taking, not a dukkaṭa or thullaccaya," they say. However, regarding "without performing a combined act," it is stated in all three gaṇṭhipadas: "Because there is no cessation of the offenses incurred in previous acts, even if one performs a combined act and has entered into a state of shame, the offenses incurred in previous acts must be confessed." But the Aṭṭhakathā statement indicates the cessation of offenses incurred in previous acts when a combined act is performed. Otherwise, the qualification "without performing a combined act" would be meaningless. And what was said earlier: "If, however, when he cuts grass, trees, or creepers, etc., that grow there, he enters into a state of shame, and restraint arises, he confesses the dukkaṭa due to cutting and is freed," this also indicates the cessation of offenses incurred in previous acts when a combined act is performed, because it is stated that only the dukkaṭa incurred due to cutting in a combined act is confessed. From a combined act, however, And this "for the sake of standing" for one who has reached simultaneous application, of offenses incurred before that, even of prior application offenses, shows the cessation. Therefore, this meaning is understood: "As long as one does not reach simultaneous application, so long there is no cessation of offenses incurred before. But from the time of reaching simultaneous application, even for those, there is cessation." Therefore, having thoroughly examined, what is more suitable should be taken. Let there be many offenses, by confessing just one, one is freed. Here, this is the intention: if in digging, spreading, and removing, one has incurred ten offenses each, among those, by confessing ten offenses in removing, one is freed, having reached a dissimilar action, because the former offenses have ceased. But by way of kind, by a similar action, the incurred offenses are taken as one, and it is said, "by confessing just one." Therefore, by this statement of the Kurunda commentary, it supports only the cessation of former offenses as stated in the first Great Commentary. There is no difference in meaning between the two commentaries. They also describe another way here: "Even in similar actions, offenses incurred due to former and former digging, cease upon reaching later and later digging." With this intention, 'when offenses of shame arise in digging earth, and so on, let there be many offenses, by confessing just one, one is freed,' it is said in the Kurunda commentary. "And if that were the case, it should not be said, 'let there be many offenses,' but it is said. Therefore, only by reaching a dissimilar action, and only by wishing for the cessation of former offenses, that in many offenses, by confessing just one, one is freed, in this place, a distinct method of confession is shown," they also say. This is their intention: just as here the cessation of former offenses is taken according to the authority of the commentary teachers, so too, in many offenses, that by confessing just one, one is freed, this too here should be understood as according to the authority of the commentary teachers. That And thus in the Pāli, even in a pācittiya place, it is only a dukkaṭa; here, making it unique, a special offense is shown. Thus, the special pacification of previous offenses and the special teaching are shown by the Aṭṭhakathā teachers. "Sinking from below" means "When the owners come and go without seeing, I will take it"— sinking into the lower ground with a thieving mind. "By the bottom" means by the bottom surface of the pot. Thus, the moving of a pot standing in one place should be understood in six ways, is the connection. "He pulls out the ring, it is pārājika" means for one who pulls it out by scraping without making it airborne, it is pārājika as soon as it is pulled out from the cut edge. "He moves it here and there" means he moves it by scraping without making it airborne. "Pārājika as soon as it is cut" means if it will certainly fall, it is pārājika as soon as it is cut. "Limit" means "five māsa or more than five māsa"— the stated numerical limit. "Pushing aside" means "I will take what is below"— making it two parts with the hand. "In a half-pot" means in a half-full pot. "But why should what is stated in the Saṅkhepaṭṭhakathā and other texts, according to the measure of the Aṭṭhakathā teachers, not be taken?" he asks. "For when a decision on Vinaya comes, one should stand by what is weighty." "The nature of Vinaya" means the nature of those who respect Vinaya. For those who respect Vinaya stand by what is weighty when a decision on Vinaya comes. For the purpose of explaining the respect for Vinaya, only one who respects Vinaya is here called by the word 'Vinaya', or this is the nature of Vinaya, because their place of weighty respect is the domain of Vinaya. Now, showing that what is stated in the Saṅkhepaṭṭhakathā and other texts does not even agree with the Pāli, he says "Moreover," and so on. "Container" means a container like a bowl. For one taking a bowl etc. without filling it, even if not lifted, the limit is the rim of the mouth. But for one taking it filled, it is at the time of lifting, he says, "either by the limit of the rim of the mouth or by lifting." But when in oil pots etc., due to the scarcity of oil etc., it is not possible to take by immersing the container, then it is by the boundary of the mouth. "Cikkananti" means stiff. "Ākaḍḍhanavikaḍḍhanayogganti" means suitable for pulling and pushing. Here, pulling towards oneself is "ākaḍḍhanaṃ", and pulling away is "vikaḍḍhanaṃ". "Paṭinīharitunti" means to take out from one's own vessel. "Pārājika upon release from the hand" is because the act of taking another's property with the intention of theft has been performed. In the Mahāaṭṭhakathā itself, it is said: "Even if one weakens the boundary and blocks the water outlet or the water discharge pipe of a dry pond, or builds a dam on another path, or straightens a dry channel, and later when it rains, the water comes and breaks the boundary, in all cases, it is 'bhaṇḍadeyya' (liable for the goods)." Therefore, what is said is: "That, however, contradicts the decision of straightening the dry channel in that very dry pond." "Avahāralakkhaṇaṃ" means any one of the twenty-five characteristics of taking away, or simply the act of moving from its place. "Uddhāreti" means to lift, even if it's just a hair's breadth, from a broken part of a pot. "Yuttaṃ" means appropriate, because there is an act of moving from its place. "Saṅgopanatthāyāti" (for the purpose of protecting) shows purity of intention. "Palibujjhissatīti" means it will obstruct. "Pārājika in the manner stated" means pārājika upon release from the hand. "Suddhacittova uddharatīti" means he places it with a pure mind even before the oil is poured into the pot, and later takes it out with a pure mind. "Neva avahāroti" (it is not taking away) because the act of taking away with the intention of theft has not been performed. But because it is one's own vessel, it is said "not a gīvā" (not a neck), only non-offence is stated, but it is not considered in this way. Or, only non-offence is stated. By this, it establishes the Mahāaṭṭhakathā's view, previously stated as "not a gīvā" due to the absence of the word "gīvā" there. The Kurundi view, shown later, also supports the Mahāaṭṭhakathā's view. "Attano bhaṇḍanti" (one's own property) refers to the yellow oil placed in one's own pot with a pure mind even before the oil is poured, which is one's own property. is caustic. "A place of confusion" means a place of confusion in terms of determining the offense. "It becomes external" means from that point onwards, due to the oil being out of place and facing downwards, it becomes external. If a hole is made starting from the inside, the oil, having flowed out, goes to whatever place it goes, which is counted as part of the vessel, so it says: "If it flows out from the outer edge of the foot-rest, it is a pārājika." "However it is done" means done starting from the outer edge or from the inner edge. "A hole made by placing something in the middle" means a hole made by placing a small piece of pottery in the middle and then breaking it. Since it is said (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.