English
here, for one who repeatedly takes it, what is put into his own bowl is determined as "his own property," so the acceptance in hand does not cease. But for one who takes what is given by delimiting, since the determination of "his own property" is made at the time of taking, the acceptance in hand ceases. "He puts rice for the sake of some" here, even if he puts it for the sake of an unordained person, since he himself puts it down, thinking "he will come and take it," the acceptance does not cease. But what is put into the hand of an unordained person is considered to have been put down by the unordained person, so the acceptance ceases due to its abandonment. Therefore it was said: "novice... ...due to abandonment." A burden suitable for acceptance is one that a man of medium strength is able to lift. Although there is no fault for one who covers it with another hand without having abandoned it, nevertheless, it should not be covered; this should be understood by the authority of the commentaries. "To ward off flies" here, "even if dust from a branch falls into the bowl, it can be consumed easily, so because it was received by the branch, "The acceptance here is for internal use, so the original acceptance is valid," it is said. Others, however, say, "Taking only the word 'for warding off fish' here, it was taken for external use." "Even if that is not present" means if there is no pot or bowl. "Having an unordained person take it" means having an unordained person take that very consumable item. "The elder's bowl to the junior elder" means taking the elder's bowl oneself and giving it to the junior elder. "Give your gruel to me" - here, saying this, he takes the novice's bowl and gives his own bowl to him. "Here, however" refers to the story of the bowl exchange, such as "the clever novice." "The reason should be investigated" means that just as one carrying oil, etc., for one's mother, etc., in such a situation, may consume it without having an unordained person exchange it, so here, one may not consume it without performing a bowl exchange. The reason for this should be examined. Here, however, "when the rice taken by the novices is exhausted, the thought 'our novices will certainly provide support' may arise, therefore it should be consumed only after exchanging it." "But when taken for the sake of parents or for shade, there is no desire for consumption, therefore it is permissible," they state as the reason. Therefore, it was also said by the elder Acariya Buddhadatta: "Even for one carrying oil, etc., for the sake of parents; a branch for shade, etc., these are not different. "Therefore, the reason for its distinction should be considered; we surmise that distinction is its attachment." This is more appropriate here, as such a thought is bound to arise. For it is not possible to purify the thought here. But when carrying for the sake of one's mother, etc., such a thought does not necessarily arise, so the thought can be purified. For where the thought can be purified, there is no fault. Therefore, it will be said, "But if one is able to purify the thought, then... "Oh, it is obtained, it is permissible to eat." "Cannot be moved" means cannot be moved and the sugar removed. "The bowl is placed on the stand" means it refers to the bowl to be received. "Moves" means moves without reason. Even with reason, it is not permissible to move what is suitable for monks' use. Although it is permitted, "I allow, monks, raw meat and raw blood in the case of non-human illness" (Mahavagga 264), and "he refrains from receiving raw meat" is generally prohibited, yet because it was not received for one's own or another monk's use, it is said, "lion's leftovers, etc., ...it is permissible." "Can purify the thought" means one can discern the absence of the thought, "he will give some to me too," or one can discern, "I took this with a pure mind to give to the novice." If it was received at the root, here they say, "if it was received with the thought, 'when he takes it, he will give some to me too'." "Makes into portions" means he makes equal portions for everyone, so that monks and novices may take their preferred portion. "Remaining after taking" means what remains from the portion taken by the novices. "Having taken" means having taken with the thought, "I will take this for myself." Here, "remaining after taking" means what he took and then put back. "Having received" means having received on that very day. Therefore it is said, "there is no fault in mixing what is for a limited time with what is for life." However, if it was received and kept on the previous day, it is not permissible to smoke the wick with a mouth that has a taste. "With sea water" means with unreceived sea water. Because the Kataka nut water clarifies and settles separately, it is called "unusable." "Sticks" means it sticks to the mouth and hands, showing a white color when the water is dry. "Having taken drinking water" means having taken it for one's own use. If it is so "I will scatter the remaining drink right there," he takes it. There is no need for a second acceptance. "Having spread out" means having arranged, having removed. "In the great elements" means in the great elements dependent on the body. "Falls" means it falls having been cut off. Indeed, only that which has fallen having been cut off should be accepted, not the other. Where it says "it is permissible to make even by cutting wet wood from a tree," it should be understood that it is permissible to dig earth for clay. Where it says "it is permissible only at the moment of a snakebite," it means that if there is no suitable person (to prepare it), it is permissible to take it oneself and consume it. At other times, it should be consumed after having it accepted (by another). The rest here is clear. Non-acceptance, non-permission, non-usability (as in smoke, etc.), and consumption— these are the four factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning tooth-cleaning is finished. The fourth chapter on food is finished. 5. The Chapter on Naked Ascetics 1. Explanation of the training rule concerning naked ascetics 273. In the first training rule of the Acelaka chapter, "their" refers to the sectarians. "There" means in the vessel. "From this" means from the bowl. If the sectarian says, "It was placed, having been brought with me in mind from the very beginning, it belongs to me; scatter it into this vessel," it is permissible. The rest here is clear. Being another sectarian, being consumable, and giving for consumption into a vessel not placed by one's own hand— these are the three factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning naked ascetics is finished. 2. Explanation of the training rule concerning dismissal 274. The second (rule) is for clarity. The desire to practice improper conduct, the dismissal of an ordained monk for that very purpose, and the transgression of proper conduct by one who dismisses in this way— these are the three factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning dismissal is finished. 3. Explanation of the training rule concerning eating together 280. In the third (rule), "back-door-post" is a designation for the door-arm. A small sleeping-chamber is five cubits in width. And its middle point is only two and a half cubits from the back-door-post. Therefore, such a... If he, in a sleeping chamber, having abandoned a hand's reach from the back-rest, sits down, he is called one who sits having gone beyond the back-bone. And thus sitting, he is called one who sits having gone beyond the middle, it is said, "By this, it shows the going beyond the middle." "Of one done in whatever way" means of one done having placed on the back-rest or not having placed on it. "With one's own thought" means with the thought of entering and sitting, with one's own thought. The rest here is obvious. The presence of a husband and wife overcome by passion, the state of being a sleeping chamber, the absence of a second bhikkhu, and sitting very close – these are the four factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning eating together is finished. 284-289. In the fourth and fifth (rules) there is nothing to be said. 6. Explanation of the training rule concerning going on rounds 298. In the sixth (rule), here, "by ordinary speech" means that which could be heard by one standing within twelve cubits, that is called ordinary speech. "He should be asked" means "I am going to so-and-so's house," or "I am going on rounds," he should be asked with such a statement. The rest here is obvious. Accepting an invitation for one of the five kinds of food, not asking a bhikkhu who is present, entering another house from the invited house, not exceeding midday, and the absence of a proper time or an emergency – these are the five factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning going on rounds is finished. 7. Explanation of the training rule concerning Mahānāma 303. In the seventh (rule), "Mahānāma" means the brother of Elder Anuruddha, the son of the Buddha's paternal uncle. Suddhodana, Sakkodana, Sukkodana, Dhotodana, Amitodana – these five people were brothers. The queen named Amitā was their sister. Elder Tissa was her son. The Tathāgata and Elder Nanda were Suddhodana's sons. Mahānāma and Elder Anuruddha were Sukkodana's (sons). Elder Ānanda was Amitodana's (son). He was the Buddha's younger brother. Mahānāma was older, a once-returner, a noble disciple. Therefore it is said: "Mahānāma by name... and so on... a noble disciple." In the Pāli, "ajjaṇhoti" means "today, one day". Or the meaning "ajjano" should be taken, not our own. "You will bring the time" means "you will bring it tomorrow". "If he accepts more than that" means if a limit has been set there by nights or by medicines, "only so many nights or so many medicines are to be requested,"