English
making a mental intention saying, "I determine this outer robe," it should be determined by making a bodily gesture, or by uttering words, it should be determined by speech. There are two kinds of determination – if it is within reach, the words "I determine this outer robe" should be uttered. But if it is in an inner chamber or nearby monastery, having noted its location, the words "I determine that outer robe" should be uttered. This method applies to the upper robe and the inner robe. Indeed, only the name is different. Therefore, all of them, the outer robe, the upper robe, the inner robe, should be determined by their own respective names. If one makes outer robes, etc., from cloths that have been determined and put aside, when the dyeing and marking are finished, having revoked them saying, "I revoke this," they should be determined again. And this triple robe, for the purpose of easy use, should be determined as a requisite cloth. is also permissible. A rain-cloth, not exceeding the proper measure, having taken its name, should be determined for the four rainy months in the manner stated. After that, it should be revoked and offered for use. Even if it is merely of a different color, it is permissible, but two are not permissible. A sitting cloth should be determined in the manner stated, and that too, only one of the proper measure; two are not permissible. A covering cloth should also be determined. That, however, even if large, one or many, is permissible. Blue, yellow, plain, or flowered – all kinds are permissible. A scab-covering cloth, as long as there is an ailment, should be determined to the proper measure. When the ailment subsides, it should be revoked and offered for use. Only one of these is permissible. A face-wiping cloth should be determined. That, however, one or many, even if large, is permissible. For accessory cloths, there is no count; as many as one desires, so many should be determined. A bag and a water-strainer, not subject to offering for use, of the ultimate measure, should be determined as "accessory cloths." Even many, put together, may be determined with the phrase "I determine these robes as accessory cloths," and this is permissible. However, for a bed-mat, a chair-mat, a pillow, a cloak, a rug, and a covering cloth given for the purpose of a dwelling accessory, there is no need for determination. All these robes, determined in the manner stated, lose their determination by these eight reasons: by giving to another, by taking away, by taking by familiarity, by reverting to a lower state, by renouncing the training, by dying, by changing gender, and by revoking. The three robes, however, lose their determination even by a hole the size of the back of the smallest fingernail, and that too, only if it is completely pierced through. For if even one thread within the hole is not cut, it still protects. There, a portion of the outer robe and the upper robe, measuring a span in length and eight finger-breadths in width, Worn out, a hole breaks the determination, for the inner robe too, lengthwise, this is the measure, but crosswise, four finger-breadths is to be understood. For all three, beyond the specified area, it does not break, therefore, when a hole appears, the triple robe becomes a surplus robe, after sewing, it must be determined again. The rain-robe, even after the rainy season months pass, the itch-covering, even when the ailment ceases, abandons the determination. Therefore, it must be put to joint use thereafter. But the characteristic of putting to joint use, for all robes, we will describe in the rule of putting to joint use itself. Indeed, in this context, whatever is thus undetermined and unassigned, that should be known as a 'surplus robe'. For one who keeps it too long, there is an offense of forfeiture and expiation, for one who keeps a robe of the described kind and measure beyond ten days, without making it not a surplus robe within that period, there is an offense of forfeiture and expiation, and that robe is to be forfeited, and an offense of expiation occurs for him, that is the meaning. Or, 'nissaggiya' means forfeiture, this is the name of the disciplinary act to be done first, it is 'nissaggiya' because it involves forfeiture. What is that? Expiation. For one who exceeds that, the disciplinary act of forfeiture, together with the forfeiture, becomes expiation, this is the meaning here. And that robe, on the day it arose, its dawn is reckoned with the day it arose, therefore, including the day the robe arose, at the eleventh dawn, ten days are exceeded, taking that, it must be forfeited to the Saṅgha, or to a group, or to a person, and here is the procedure – first, to the Saṅgha, it must be forfeited thus: ‘Venerable sirs, this robe of mine has exceeded ten days, it is to be forfeited, I forfeit this to the Saṅgha’, having forfeited, ‘Venerable sirs, I have incurred one offense of forfeiture and expiation, I confess it’, thus the offense must be confessed. If there are two, ‘two’ should be said, if more than that, ‘many’ it should be said, "hulā." When relinquishing, if there are two or many, it should be said, "Venerable sirs, these robes of mine, having passed ten days, are subject to relinquishment. These I relinquish to the Sangha." One unable to recite the Pāli should say it otherwise. A competent and capable bhikkhu should inform the Sangha: "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, listen to me. This bhikkhu of such-and-such a name recalls, reveals, makes manifest, and confesses an offense. If it is suitable for the Sangha, I would receive the offense of this bhikkhu of such-and-such a name." (Cūḷavagga 239) Having received the offense in this manner, it should be said, "Do you see it?" "Yes, I see it." "May you restrain yourself in the future." "Good, I will restrain myself well." In the case of two or many, the wording should be varied in the same way as before. When an offense has been confessed, the relinquished robe should be given, saying: "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, listen to me. This robe, subject to relinquishment for this bhikkhu of such-and-such a name, has been relinquished to the Sangha. If it is suitable for the Sangha, may the Sangha give this robe to this bhikkhu of such-and-such a name." (Pārājika 464) In the case of two or many, the wording should be varied. When relinquishing to a group, having said "this I" or "these I," it should be said, "I relinquish to the venerable ones." And the receiver of the offense should say: "May the venerable ones listen to me. This bhikkhu of such-and-such a name recalls... ...confesses an offense. If it is suitable for the venerable ones..." And when giving the robe, it should be said: "May the venerable ones listen to me. This robe, subject to relinquishment for this bhikkhu of such-and-such a name, has been relinquished to the venerable ones. If it is suitable for the venerable ones, may the venerable ones give this robe to this bhikkhu of such-and-such a name." (Pārājika 466) The rest is the same as before. When relinquishing to an individual, having said "this I" or "these I," it should be said, "I relinquish to the venerable one." Having relinquished, it should be said, "Venerable sir, I have one subject to relinquishment..." he has incurred a pācittiya, “I confess it.” Thus should the offense be confessed. If he is a junior monk, he should say, “Friend.” And when the other says, “Do you see?” or “Do you all see?” he should say, “Yes, venerable sir,” or “Yes, friend,” and then say, “I see.” Then, when the other says, “May you restrain yourself in the future,” or “May you all restrain yourselves,” he should say, “Good, I will restrain myself well.” When the offense has been confessed thus, the robe should be given, saying, “I give this robe to the venerable one.” For two or three, the method is to be understood according to what was said before. For two, however, it should be relinquished as for a group. Then the acceptance of the offense and the giving of the relinquished robe should be done by one of them, as by a single person. This is the rule for all relinquishments. Robe, bowl, sitting-cloth— only the object itself is different. But the object, when turned away, should be relinquished as “this.” If there are many, it should be said, “these.” The same method applies to the giving of the relinquished item. It is a dukkaṭa for one who does not accept the relinquished object with the perception, “This has been given to me by him.” Knowing that it belongs to him, one who takes it away by a trick, causing the owner to abandon his burden, should be made to value the item. This was laid down in Vesālī, concerning the group of six bhikkhus, regarding the matter of keeping an extra robe. “For a maximum of ten days”— this is a supplementary rule here, a general rule, not an order. It is a dukkaṭa for one who uses it without relinquishing it. And as here, so everywhere; therefore, we will not explain it later. It is a dukkaṭa for one who perceives it as exceeded or is in doubt, even if it has not exceeded ten days. If it has exceeded, it is a nissaggiya pācittiya even for one who perceives it as not exceeded or is in doubt. Similarly, for those who perceive it as determined, etc., in the case of undetermined, unconditioned, un-relinquished, lost, destroyed, burnt, or stolen. Within ten days, for one who has determined, conditioned, relinquished, lost, destroyed, burnt, stolen, or taken by trust, and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. offence. Misconduct, and just as this is, so are those others, for in both Pātimokkhas, pārājika and saṅghādisesa offences are moral misconduct, the remaining offences are misconduct. There is no offence called misconduct in livelihood or misconduct in views. However, due to misconduct in livelihood, apart from ill-spoken words, six groups of offences are laid down. Due to misconduct in views, two groups of offences are laid down