English
Because it must be known by hearing, it is said, “it stands only in the place of hearing.” “Suspicion” is suspected. “Suspected based on what is seen” is suspected as seen. Thus in the remaining cases too. “Of these” is the genitive case in the sense of agent, meaning “by these.” In “they will do,” by changing the case ending, “these” should be connected. “There is seen, with a basis; there is, without a basis” this is said with reference to the existence or non-existence of the transgression. “There is with a perception-basis; there is without a perception-basis” this, however, is with reference to the existence or non-existence of the perception of seeing. “Standing nearby” means standing nearby within twelve cubits, so they say in all three commentaries. Further on, however, since it is stated that there is no offense for accusing from a distance, “when one sends a messenger, or a letter, or a message, the head of the accuser does not come,” our view is that “standing nearby” is said only to show the state of being face-to-face. Therefore, in the Mātika-aṭṭhakathā (Kaṅkhā. aṭṭha. Duṭṭhadosasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā), when showing the factor, it is said, “accusing face-to-face with the intention of causing expulsion,” and it is not possible to establish a rule that being face-to-face is only within twelve cubits. And having reached a Vinaya decision, it is said one should stand firm in what is weighty. Therefore, having examined, what is more suitable should be taken. By the accuser's own word, "It is a Saṅghādisesa," and by the commanded one's own word, it is a Saṅghādisesa for the accuser. "I too have seen, have heard" - this is said to show that the commanded one also becomes an accuser. However, even without saying this, if one says, "You have fallen into a Pārājika offense," not making this statement as if it were another's, but speaking with the intention of not disparaging, it is still a Saṅghādisesa. But even with the intention of not disparaging, if one says, showing, "So-and-so said this," they say there is no Saṅghādisesa. Where it says, "Many accuse many with many matters," the reason for specifying "many" (sambahule) is not seen. For this fourfold division comes about only by the one or many of the matters and accusers, not by the one or many of the accused. Thus, with respect to a single accused, this fourfold division arises: one matter, one accuser; one matter, many accusers; many matters, one accuser; many matters, many accusers. Therefore, even when showing the fourth accusation, it is said, "For this accusation, there are many matters and many accusers," but not "many accused." Therefore, the reason for specifying "many" (sambahule) is not seen. Or, having first specified the accused as one in all three accusations, the specification of "many" here is made to show this meaning: "Accusation is not possible only against a single accused, but also against many." "Who may accuse, who may not accuse," and so on, is said to show the characteristics of accusation, even without the intention of disparaging. "Endowed with virtue" - this is said with the intention that the word of an unvirtuous person is not authoritative. However, because bhikkhunīs are not empowered to accuse a bhikkhu, it is said, "only a bhikkhunī." Even though bhikkhunīs are not empowered over bhikkhus, an accusation made by them, being of the nature of an accusation, is still an accusation, with this intention, "p..." "Others who are in the Dhamma also receive it," it was said. The Elder, to show that the accusation of those who hear and accuse is also valid, because it is accepted that their word is also a measure, cited the Sutta. By sending a messenger, or a letter, or a message, meaning, "You yourself go and accuse him," or by sending a messenger who can accuse him, or by sending a verbal message or a letter. "It does not reach the head" means there is no Sanghādisesa. Although in the Pāḷi it is generally stated "accuses or causes to be accused," so it is understood that there is an offense even for one who causes to be accused by messenger or message, this "it does not reach the head" should be taken as the authority of the Aṭṭhakathā teachers. "By the time" means by the time of understanding the meaning after hearing the sound naturally. "Of the two serious ones" refers to Pārājika and Sanghādisesa. "By way of the remaining ones" refers to the five minor offenses. "There is no giving," etc., is the ten-item wrong view. The view that arises in the manner of "The world is finite, the world is infinite," etc., grasps an extreme, called eternalism and annihilationism, thus it is an extreme-grasping view. "By way of the six training rules laid down for livelihood" means: for the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, a wicked person, overcome by desire, boasts of a non-existent, unreal superhuman state, the offense is Pārājika. For the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, one engages in acting as a go-between, the offense is Sanghādisesa. For the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, a bhikkhu says, "The bhikkhu who lives in that monastery is an Arahant," for one who understands it, the offense is Thullaccaya. For the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, a bhikkhu, not sick, requests and eats fine food for himself, the offense is Pācittiya. For the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, a bhikkhunī, not sick, requests and eats fine food for herself, the offense is Pāṭidesanīya. For the sake of livelihood, for the reason of livelihood, a bhikkhu, not sick, requests and eats soup or rice for himself, the offense is Dukkaṭa. Because of the failure of livelihood, lest he incurs six offenses, thus, according to the six training rules shown in the Parivāra Pāli (Pari. 287). Even if one admonishes with wrong view and wrong livelihood, one admonishes only with an offense rooted in that. When asked, "Why do you not pay homage to me?" because the reason for not paying homage was stated as "You are not a recluse, you are not a son of the Sakyas," they say that one who has fallen into the final offense should not be paid homage to. In the Cūḷagaṇṭhipada and Majjhimagaṇṭhipada, it is stated that, setting aside what one wishes to say oneself, not paying homage out of a desire to admonish is not a reason for not paying homage. Since one who has fallen into the final offense is not mentioned among those not to be paid homage to, and there is no offense of sleeping together for one who sleeps with him, and his acceptance is valid, it is understood that that is more appropriate. Although, as long as he acknowledges his monkhood, he should be paid homage to. But when he acknowledges, "I am not a recluse," then he should not be paid homage to; this distinction should be understood here. For one who has fallen into the final offense, monkhood exists only as long as he acknowledges his monkhood, not beyond that. For one who does not acknowledge monkhood belongs to the side of the unordained. Since one who gives material things gives them only where he wishes, therefore, by one giving gruel, rice, etc., to those seated in a row, even if not given to one out of a desire to admonish, it is not called an admonition, thus it is said, "It is not an admonition by that." "Tiṃsāni" means "having thirty of these," that is, "having thirty," meaning "more than thirty." Because it is an adjective, by eliding the taddhita suffix, it is called "tiṃsāni." Or, "tiṃsāni" means "thirty admonitions are in excess of these." When the suffix "ḍa" is applied in the sense of "more than that," this form should be seen. The same method applies to "navutāni" (ninety). "That dispute should be settled by a committee" means that dispute should be settled by those approved by the committee. For in an assembly overwhelmed by shamelessness, a bhikkhu endowed with ten qualities should be appointed to the committee. "He is virtuous..." He dwells restrained by the restraint of the Pātimokkha, endowed with good conduct and resort, and so on, two or three bhikkhus endowed with the ten qualities mentioned in the Samathakkhandhaka (Cūḷava. 231) should be chosen, and they should be appointed by a motion-seconded formal act as stated therein. These bhikkhus, thus appointed, should sit separately, or, having informed that assembly, "Nothing should be said by others," they should decide that case. "To you" is said referring to the accuser and the accused. "In what?" means in what matter. "You don't even know in what?" means you don't even know the phrase "in what?". "No inquiry should be given to him" means no question or counter-question should be given to him. From the phrase "for the suppression of unruly individuals," and so on, it is said, "for the suppression of the shameless...pe...enacted." "He will come" means he will arrive. "By a visible connection" means by a visible relationship, it is said, by a visible rule. The opponents in the matter called the point of dispute are the "matter-opponents." "Having given a sign" means having interrupted their speech and made a sign to establish one's own statement. Since it arose from an impure intention, he says "improper." "Of one enjoyment and use" is said for the purpose of releasing them from one's own side, not for the purpose of joining them in mutual enjoyment. "No decision should be made" means a decision should not be made by one who knows, "These shameless ones are not of a nature to stand by our word." "It is spoiled" means having told some lie to cover up a fault committed by oneself, it is spoiled. "He does not give a confession" means if I confess the fault I committed, my followers will split, so he does not give a confession, "It was done by me." "Let him be pure" means let him be called pure by their word, the intention is that a decision should be given to him once or twice by their word.