English
Or why did he not speak thus? Because there were no such qualified ones. But those who, stating the reason "because of not being near and not being constantly present," say, "Indeed, only monks are close to the Teacher, always present. Therefore, only they are worthy of being called 'Come, monk,' not nuns," that is merely their opinion, for the Teacher's proximity or distance is determined by fitness or unfitness. For this was said by the Blessed One – "Even if, monks, a monk were to grasp the hem of my outer robe, following me step by step, and he were covetous, strongly attached to sensual pleasures, with ill will in his mind, with corrupted thoughts, forgetful, not comprehending, not concentrated, with a wandering mind, with uncontrolled senses, then he is far from me, and I am far from him. For what reason? Because that monk, monks, does not see the Dhamma. Not seeing the Dhamma, he does not see me. Even if, monks, a monk were to dwell a hundred leagues away, and he were not covetous, not strongly attached to sensual pleasures, without ill will, with uncorrupted thoughts, with mindfulness established, comprehending, concentrated, with a unified mind, with restrained senses, then he is near me, and I am near him. For what reason? Because that monk, monks, sees the Dhamma. Seeing the Dhamma, he sees me." (Itivuttaka 92). Therefore, the Teacher's proximity or distance by location is not the reason. But the unsuitability of nuns for 'Come, nun' ordination should be understood as due to their not having performed the qualification. If so, then what was said in the Therīgāthā concerning Bhaddā Kuṇḍalakesā – "‘‘Kneeling down, having paid homage, I made an añjali before him; He said to me, ‘Come, Bhaddā!’ That was my ordination.’’ (Therīgāthā 109);" Likewise in the Apadāna – "‘‘Requested then, the Leader said, ‘Come, Bhaddā!’ Then I was ordained, I saw little water.’’ (Apadāna, Therī 2.3.44);" How is that explained? This was not said with reference to ordination by 'Come, nun' status, but with reference to ordination... Due to being the cause, it is said, "The Master's command, that was my immediate ordination." Thus it is said in the commentary (Therīgāthā Aṭṭhakathā 111): "Come, good lady, go to the bhikkhunī residence, and in the presence of the bhikkhunīs, go forth and be ordained," he said to me, he commanded. That command of the Master, being the cause of my ordination, was indeed my ordination. In the Apadāna verses too, the meaning should be taken in the same way. Therefore, it must be concluded here that there is no "Come, bhikkhunī" ordination for bhikkhunīs. And just as this "Come, bhikkhunī" was said in the sense of a stream-enterer, so too, "ordained by the three refuges is a bhikkhunī" this also should be understood as said in the sense of a stream-enterer, because ordination by taking refuge is not possible for bhikkhunīs. 659. In the Bhikkhuvibhaṅga, because it says "should engage in" instead of "should consent to" bodily contact, it is said that "a bhikkhu should not be made liable for an offense." This is by way of the majority, due to the prevalence of the action-origin. Indeed, that usage is seen by way of the majority, like "Brahmin village." Even in a Brahmin village, there are at least five families like washermen and so on. That is the action-origin. 662. "Just so" means, indeed, overcome by lust for bodily contact. The rest here is clear. The explanation of the first pārājika training rule is concluded. 2. Explanation of the second pārājika training rule 666. In the second [pārājika], from the statement, "Why, venerable lady, knowing, did you fall into a pārājika offense?" and from the statement beginning with, "Indeed, venerable ladies, eight pārājika rules have been recited," having reached the Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga, the common training rules, in the very matter that arose for the bhikkhus, in the manner beginning with, "Whatever bhikkhunī, willingly, engages in sexual intercourse, even with an animal, is pārājika, no longer in communion," having set forth the specific and non-specific matrix, it then explained in sequence the word-by-word analysis, the types of offenses, the three-fold analysis, and the section on non-offenses, without omission. It should be understood that here it is elaborated only by a special designation made by the reciters of the council. Then, regarding the two un-designated ones above, the statement "one of the eight pārājikas" is not appropriate, so it says, "and this pārājika was designated later," and so on. If so, why was it placed in this section? It says, "because it is paired with the former," and so on, meaning it is mentioned here because of its single connection with the former. And by the phrase "one of the eight pārājikas," it should be understood that she who conceals a fault is also a concealer of a fault. Although the concealment of a fault is out of affection, the mind transgressing the training rule is still sorrowful, and so it is said "painful feeling." The rest here is clear. The explanation of the second pārājika training rule is finished. 668. The third is of clear meaning. 4. Explanation of the Fourth Pārājika Training Rule 675. In the fourth, "by way of worldly pleasure and friendly intimacy" means by way of friendly intimacy, which is called worldly pleasure. To explain the same meaning in another way, it is said, "by the passion of bodily contact." "Three women, that sexual act she does not engage in" (Pari. Aṭṭha. 481) means that among the three women mentioned, she does not engage in that which is called sexual intercourse. "Three men" means she does not approach even three men and engage in sexual intercourse. "And three ignoble eunuchs" means she does not approach these six persons—three ignoble ones, who are hermaphrodites, and three eunuchs—and engage in sexual intercourse. "Nor does she engage in sexual intercourse in the organ" means she does not engage in sexual intercourse in her own organ, even by way of an anuloma pārājika. "There might be a cutting off due to the condition of sexual intercourse" means this question, "there might be a pārājika due to the condition of sexual intercourse," is stated with reference to the eight cases. For her who attempts to engage in the preliminary bodily contact of that sexual act, there is a cutting off due to the condition of sexual intercourse. Cutting off is indeed cutting off. The preliminary part of sexual intercourse By this, it is shown that the preliminary part of sexual intercourse, which is merely bodily contact, is called by the word 'sexual intercourse' there, and not the actual act of intercourse. 'Vaṇṇāvaṇṇa' refers to the emission of semen in two ways. 'Gamanuppādana' is wandering about. 'In all places' refers to phrases like "should accept the holding of the corner of the outer robe." The rest here is clear. Lust for bodily contact, eagerness, and the completion of the eighth condition— these are the three factors here. The explanation of the fourth Pārājika training rule is finished. In the Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga, the explanation of the Pārājika section is finished. The Pārājika section is finished. 2. The Saṅghādisesa Section (Explanation of the Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga) 1. Explanation of the First Saṅghādisesa Training Rule 679. In the first training rule of the Saṅghādisesa section, 'among two people' means among two people who are intermediaries. 'Whoever' means whoever among those two, or another person commanded by them. In 'informs the second,' the meaning here too should be taken as "how whoever informs the second of any of the two people." Thus it is said, "here too, in 'informs the second,' the same method applies." 'Gatigata' means long-standing. 'Offence' means falling into. 'Together with the transgression of the matter' means together with the transgression of the condition. In the sense of 'together with,' where the instrumental case would be expected, this is an ablative case. 'Which' means which dhamma. 'Expels' means expels the offender from the community of bhikkhunīs. And this is the agent's usage in the cause. For the dhamma that is the cause of expulsion is called 'expellable'. It is only a 'gīvā', not a pārājika, because it was taken without permission. Just as it is not proper to accept slaves, female slaves, fields, and so on, so too, acting as an intermediary for their sake is not proper. Thus it is said, "This is an improper intermediary, it is not proper." And here, if one goes to the place of dispute and speaks saying, "This is our slave, female slave, field, land, monastery, monastery land, cows, goats, chickens," and so on, it is improper. "This is our monastery attendant, this field, by such and such a name, for the Sangha's washing of robes..." given for the sake of, the four requisites arising from this field, from this monastery, the cow's milk, buffalo's milk, goat's milk arising from this cow, buffalo, goat, given to the Sangha by such and such a name, they say it is proper to say, whether asked or not asked. The rest here is clear. Making it half for one not drawn in, and the completion of the half - these are the two factors here. The explanation of the first Sanghādisesa training rule is finished. 2. The explanation of the second Sanghādisesa training rule. 683. In the second, regarding "groups of wrestlers, groups of mercenaries' sons, etc.": a group of wrestlers is a group devoted to Nārāyaṇa, performing meritorious deeds such as placing water here and there, digging ponds, etc. a group of mercenaries' sons is a group devoted to Kumāra. A group of Dhamma followers is called a group devoted to the teaching, performing various kinds of meritorious deeds. A guild of perfumers is a group that makes various kinds of fragrant products. A guild of weavers is a group of weavers. "Having gone to what is proper" means having become proper. "By one who causes to rise up" means by one who confers ordination.