English
and do not obtain ordination. 115. "Desiring" means desiring white clothes. Therefore it is said, "only when accepted in the state of a layperson." The detailed story of the schism-maker will become clear later. "Of the four actions" means of the four actions such as revocation. "With a malicious mind" clarifies the meaning already stated: "with a killer mind." Indeed, a mind corrupted by the intention to kill is here called a malicious mind. Regarding "causes blood to flow," there is no such thing as causing blood to flow by cutting the skin through external attack on the Tathāgata, due to his indestructible body; but of the body In one place, blood gathered within, agitated by the blow, it was accumulated. The splintered rock thrown by Devadatta struck the Tathāgata's foot, and like a foot struck by an axe, it was full of blood within. But Jīvaka, with the Tathāgata's consent, cut the skin with a knife and removed the bad blood from that place, making it well. Thus, it was a meritorious deed for him. Therefore it is said, "like Jīvaka," and so on. Now, what happens to those who, after the Tathāgata's Parinibbāna, destroy a cetiya, cut down a Bodhi tree, or attack a relic? It is a grave deed, similar to an immediate karma. However, it is permissible to cut a Bodhi branch that obstructs a stūpa or an image containing relics. Even if birds nesting there drop droppings on the cetiya, it is still permissible to cut it. For a bodily cetiya is more important than a cetiya of use. It is permissible to break up the cetiya ground and even cut and remove what is at the root of the Bodhi tree. But a Bodhi branch that obstructs the Bodhi house should not be cut for the protection of the house. For the house is for the Bodhi, not the Bodhi for the house. The same applies to the seat house. However, if relics are enshrined in a seat house, it is permissible to cut a Bodhi branch for its protection. For the care of the Bodhi tree, it is permissible to cut a branch that draws away nutrients or a decaying part. It is also meritorious, like caring for the Teacher's physical body. The commentary on the story of matricide and so on is finished. Commentary on the story of the hermaphrodite 116. "Ubhatobyañjanako" (hermaphrodite) means "one who has both marks." This is an external compound with a non-co-referential sense, and it shows the non-elision of the case ending in the first word. Here, "byañjana" refers to both the female mark and the male mark. Now, does a hermaphrodite have only one faculty, or two? Only one. "Does the male faculty arise for one for whom the female faculty arises?" No. Or for whom... Does the male faculty arise, and for that person, does the female faculty arise? No. Because two faculties are denied in one continuum, indeed, for the female hermaphrodite, it is the female faculty; for the male hermaphrodite, it is the male faculty. If so, the second characteristic would be absent. For the faculty is said to be the cause of the characteristic, and that is not present for them? It is said – their faculty is not the cause of the second characteristic. Why? Because it is always absent. Indeed, for the female hermaphrodite, when a lustful thought for a woman arises, then the male characteristic becomes manifest, the female characteristic is hidden, concealed. And similarly for the other, the other. And if their faculty were the cause of the second characteristic, then both characteristics would always exist, but they do not exist. Therefore, this should be understood: "That is not the cause of their characteristic; rather, the lustful thought, aided by kamma, is the cause here." And because they have only one faculty, therefore, the female hermaphrodite conceives a fetus herself, and also causes another to conceive. The male hermaphrodite causes another to conceive, but does not conceive himself. "If at rebirth, a male characteristic, if at rebirth, a female characteristic" – the existence of characteristics at rebirth, as stated in the Kurundi, is incorrect. For female characteristics and so forth arise only in the course of life, not at rebirth. At rebirth, however, only the faculty arises, not characteristics and so forth. Nor can it be said that the faculty itself is the characteristic, because faculties and characteristics have different natures. This is stated in the Atthasālinī: "Femaleness and female state – both mean the same, the meaning is female nature. This is kamma-born, arisen at rebirth. But female characteristics and so forth arise in the course of life, dependent on the female faculty. Just as when there is a seed, dependent on the seed, and due to the condition of the seed, a tree grows, becomes endowed with branches and twigs, and stands filling the sky, even so..." In the state of womanhood, when the female faculty is present, female characteristics and so on arise. For just as a seed, having grown from a seed, fills the sky and stands as a tree, so too, dependent on the female faculty, female characteristics and so on arise and come into being. Therein, the female faculty is not knowable by the eye-consciousness, it is knowable only by the mind-consciousness. Female characteristics and so on are knowable by the eye-consciousness and also knowable by the mind-consciousness. Therefore it is said: "The method of investigation there is to be known in detail from the Aṭṭhasālinī, the commentary on the Dhammasaṅgaṇī." The description of the story of those with both sets of characteristics is finished. The description of the story of those without a preceptor, etc. The training rule is not yet laid down, it is said with reference to the training rule laid down here. Having made a preceptor accept, means "Venerable sir, be my preceptor," thus having made a preceptor accept. It should be understood that the mention of the preceptor in the formal act (kammavācā) is already done. Otherwise, if "he does not refer to the person" were said, due to the possibility of a defect in the act, the act would be invalid. Therefore, it is not said "without mentioning the preceptor," but rather "having made a preceptor accept." And just as an ordination performed with a formal act, even if it mentions a non-existent thing like "with complete bowl and robes" at the time of ordaining one whose bowl and robes are incomplete, is valid; so too, an ordination performed with a formal act, even if it mentions a non-existent person like "this Buddharakkhita is an aspirant for ordination from the venerable Dhammarakkhita," merely by the extraction of existing words, is to be understood as valid. Therefore it is said: "But the act is not invalid." "Monks, one without a preceptor should not be ordained. Whoever ordains him, there is an offense of wrong-doing." Having said only this much, and not having said "and that person is not ordained," and since the characteristic of a defect in the act is absent, it is said: "that should not be taken." From the saying "Monks, if the act is to be performed by five, and a paṇḍaka is the fifth to perform the act, it is not an act and should not be done," (Mahāva. 39) 0) Even for eunuchs and those with both male and female organs, the act is invalid only when they are the quorum-completing member, not otherwise. Thus it is said, "The same rule applies to the completion of the ordination by those with both male and female organs." The explanation of the stories concerning those without preceptors, etc., is finished. The explanation of the stories concerning those who are not renunciants, etc. 118. Or other bhikkhus wish to give, is the connection. "Unaffected alms-food" means alms-food whose best part has not been taken. "The portion of food equal to that of a novice" – although there is no separate novice's portion since it is given equally to novices, the meaning here is that the food going down might sometimes be less, therefore, without taking the best part from the top, it should be taken from the novice's portion and given. And this portion is given only to one who has a fixed ordination. Therefore, it is said, "unripe fruit," etc. The explanation of the stories concerning those who are not renunciants, etc., is finished. The explanation of the stories concerning those with severed hands, etc. 119. "In a goat's foot-like place" means in a place shaped like a goat's foot. "With a body straight like Brahma" means with a body as straight as Brahma's. "The remaining being" means a being without this characteristic. By this, it shows that, except for the Great Man and the Universal Monarch, other beings are hunchbacked. For most beings bend at three places: the shoulders, the waist, and the knees. Those who bend at the waist bend backward; those who bend at the other two places bend forward. Long-bodied ones, however, are crooked on one side; some walk as if counting stars, with their faces uplifted; some are thin, with little flesh and blood, like stakes; some are bent forward and walk trembling. "Completely round" means circular all around. "A body of bone, sinew, and skin" means a body consisting only of bone, sinew, and skin. "Split-headed" means one whose head is divided into two. "Squint-eyed" means looking sideways. "Water-stars are water-bubbles," it is said in the glossaries. "Pupils of the eye" means the eyeballs. "Eyeless without lashes" means one whose eyes are devoid of eyelid hairs. For the word "pakhuma" is commonly used for eyelid hairs. o. The frog that jumps is a large-mouthed frog. "Eḷamukha" means one whose mouth constantly drips saliva. "Sabbañcetaṃ" refers to phrases like "he has a scabby body." "Vātaṇḍiko" means afflicted with a disease causing swelling in the testicles. "Vikaṭo" means one with splayed legs, whose knees turn outwards when walking. "Paṇho" means one with backward-curving legs, whose knees turn inwards when walking. The reason for "kudaṇḍapādatā" (crooked-leggedness) is explained as "having legs bent in the middle."