English
an offense should be understood by causing the dawn to rise elsewhere. Commentary on the discourse allowing the seven-day task. 187-189. "Three are abandoned" means they are abandoned because latrines etc. for nuns are prohibited. 'Vāreyya' means a marriage ceremony. 'Suttanta' means one's own well-mastered Suttanta. 'Na palujjati' means it does not perish, it does not disappear. P Description of the Story of Permitting What is Not Permitted 199. A bhikkhu-goer is one who depends on bhikkhus. Since he lives with bhikkhus, it is said, “a man living with bhikkhus.” Going for a seven-day task and the sun rising outside is a break of the night. It should be understood that if one goes uninvited, it is not proper; and in this case, even if one goes having resolved on a seven-day task, there is a break of the rains and an offense of wrong-doing. For they say that even if one goes saying, “I will stay in a nearby monastery and come back,” without the aforementioned reason for breaking the night, there is a break of the rains. “It is proper to go” means it is proper to go for a seven-day task. And when going thus, one should make a resolve while standing within the boundary of the precinct, “I will return within seven days,” and then go. If one crosses the precinct boundary without making a resolve, they say the rains retreat is broken. “Goods” is said referring to robes. “They send” means they send for robe washing and so on. “Cannot reach, it is proper” – in this case, they say that if one goes to a nearby monastery intending, “I will come back today,” and the sun rises on the way, there is no break of the rains, and no offense of wrong-doing for breaking the night. “One may go to see a teacher” – means one may go for a seven-day task “even if not sick, to see a teacher or preceptor.” If the teacher says to him, “Do not go today,” “it is proper” – the meaning is that if one who has gone for a seven-day task is returning within seven days, and the teacher or preceptor says, “Do not go today,” it is proper, and there is no offense even if the seven days are exceeded. However, it should be understood that the rains retreat is broken, because the seven days have been spent outside. Description of the Story of No Offense and Break of Rains in Case of Obstacle 201. If one has gone far, and the sun must be raised after seven days – this indicates that it is proper to go for a seven-day task when there is this reason for breaking the rains. . Description of the account of entering the rains retreat in a boat, etc. 203. “Here I enter the rains retreat” —it should be said three times. Because it is not a monastery of the caravan, it should not be said “in this monastery,” but only “here I enter the rains retreat.” However, it is not proper to enter the rains retreat in a caravan. Thus, in the absence of huts, etc., it is not proper to enter by making a verbal declaration “here I enter the rains retreat.” The intention is that it is proper merely by making an intention. “Vippakirati” means they go separately. In three places, there is no offense for breaking the rains retreat. There is no offense for one who goes with them. But if one separates from them and goes, there is an offense. And one cannot invite. Description of the account of places where the rains retreat should not be entered. 204. “Seyyathāpi pisācillikā” —here, pisācillikā are pisācas (demons); some also say “pisāca children.” “Having joined the entrance door” —having joined it, secured with a door. “Of five coverings” —of the five coverings, namely, grass, leaves, bricks, stones, and plaster. And this should be understood as generally stated, because entering the rains retreat in a hut with a plank covering in trees, etc., is also mentioned. “Bhikkhus, one should not enter the rains retreat without a dwelling” —this prohibition refers to entering the rains retreat by making a verbal declaration, not to entering by way of making an intention, so they say. However, since it is stated without distinction in the Pāḷi, and in the commentary to the second Pārājika (Pārā. Aṭṭha. 1.84), it is strongly stated: “Indeed, one who enters the rains retreat, even if not practicing the practice of the alms-bowl, must enter it in a dwelling that is covered with one of the five coverings and has a door. Therefore, during the rains season, if one obtains a dwelling, that is good. If one does not obtain it, one should seek manual labor and do it. If one does not obtain manual labor, one should do it oneself. But one should not enter the rains retreat without a dwelling.” Therefore, our opinion is that for one without a dwelling, an intention is not proper anywhere else except in a boat, caravan, or forest. Indeed, "I allow, monks, to observe the Rains in a boat," and so on. Because observing the Rains, whether there is a dwelling or not, is separately permitted, this prohibition: "Monks, one without a dwelling should not observe the Rains" is not found there. Therefore, even without a dwelling, observing the Rains in boats, etc., by way of attachment, is stated. A 'ṭaṅkita-mañca' is a bed made by piercing the long bed-legs in the middle and inserting cross-bars. It has no "this is up, this is down"; even when turned over and used, it is the same. They place it in cemeteries and shrines. A house made by laying a stone on top of four stones is also called a 'ṭaṅkita-mañca'. The commentary on the discourse about places where the Rains should not be observed is finished. Commentary on the discourse about unrighteous agreements. 205. Its characteristic is stated in the Mahāvibhaṅga. It refers to the characteristic of an unrighteous agreement, shown in the commentary on the fourth Pārājika, where it says: "Whoever departs first from this dwelling, him we shall know as an Arahant" (Pārā. 228). Further on, in the commentary on the Chapter on Dwellings, the unrighteous agreement will also become clear. Commentary on the discourse about the offense of wrong declaration. 207. Because for one observing the Rains in two dwellings in different precincts, when the thought "I am observing" arises in the second, the first dwelling-acceptance ceases. Again, when the thought "I am observing" arises in the first, the second ceases. Therefore it is said: "For that monk, monks, the former is not discerned." Although the wrong declaration is due to the cause of contradiction, the dukkaṭa offense occurs only when there is a declaration, so it says: "For each such declaration, a dukkaṭa." Therefore it is said: "And indeed... (etc.)... due to the cause of later contradiction." "Not to be done" means not to be done for seven days. "To be done" means to be done for seven days. If so, why is it not said: "Not to be done for seven days, to be done for seven days"? Even when "not to be done" is said... By the duty itself, the presence or absence of a duty is understood. Therefore, it was not stated. If so, later on, in both instances of "He departs for a seven-day duty," why was it not simply said, "He departs with a duty"? It is said: There, without saying "for a seven-day duty," if it were said "he departs with a duty," it would not be possible to say that he spends that seven days outside. Therefore, "he departs for a seven-day duty" was stated. For when it is thus stated, because the seven days are specified, it is possible to say that he spends that seven days outside. And here, the first four cases are stated with reference to independent departure. Among these, the first two cases are stated for one who has not entered the Rains Retreat, while the latter two cases are for one who has entered the Rains Retreat. Thereafter, two cases are stated with reference to dependent departure. Among these, the first case is stated to show the breaking of the Rains Retreat for one who, even with a dependency, departs for a seven-day duty and spends that seven days outside. The other (case) is to show the non-breaking of the Rains Retreat for one who, departing in the manner stated, returns within seven days. However, the case "He departs with a duty for seven days before the coming Pavāraṇā" is stated to show the non-breaking of the Rains Retreat even for one who departs from the ninth (day) onwards and spends seven days outside. And here, since the second case "He departs without a duty" is not present, it should be understood that even one departing from the ninth (day) onwards must depart only when there is a duty, not when there is none. And these seven cases are given for one who has performed the Uposatha outside. The other seven (cases) are for one who has gone inside the monastery and performed the Uposatha. Thus, fourteen cases are stated according to the former (method). Thereafter, those same fourteen cases are stated according to the latter (method). Thus, the distinction among these should be understood. However, to summarize and show the meaning stated in all these cases, the phrase "He, on that very day, without a duty, etc." was begun. What then to say of one who, having stayed for two or three days, returns within seven days... For one who, having entered the Rains retreat, stayed for two or three days, went for a seven-day task, and returned within seven days, what then is the talk? The meaning is that there is no such talk. But if there is no presence, he does not enter the Rains retreat, meaning he does not enter by making the verbal declaration, "In this monastery, I shall enter the Rains retreat for these three months." "By Komudī, the four-monthly" is the last Katthika full moon. For it is Komudī because of the presence of water lilies, and it is called "cātumāsinī" (four-monthly) because it is the end of the four months of the Rains. At that time, water lilies are in full bloom. Therefore, a collection of water lilies, or just water lilies, are komudā. Because they are present there, it is called "Komudī." It is said to be "possessing water lilies."