English
Therefore, if it is said, "Where my regular duties are performed, there I give," or "Give there," where his cooking duties are performed, or from where he always feeds bhikkhus, or where he has made some lodging, it is considered given everywhere. But if in one place of regular duties there are fewer bhikkhus, or there is only one robe, having established a rule, as he says, so it should be taken. Here, "He gives to the Saṅgha": that which is given upon entering a monastery, saying, "I give to the Saṅgha," reaches those within the boundary, and also those outside who are connected with them. Therefore, if there is a recipient for them, a share should be given even to those not present. But that which is given outside the boundary, upon seeing bhikkhus, saying, "To the Saṅgha," that reaches the connected assembly. But those who are not present in the assembly by twelve cubits, it does not reach them. Here, "To both Saṅghas": that which is given to both Saṅghas, half of it should be given to the bhikkhus, and half to the bhikkhunīs. Even if there is only one bhikkhu, or one bhikkhunī, even to an unordained person, half should be given. "To both Saṅghas and to you..." But if, when it is said, there are ten monks and ten nuns, making twenty-one shares, one is to be given to an individual, ten to the community of monks, and ten to the community of nuns. The individual who has received a share, that one may also take from the community according to their seniority in the rains. Why? Because it was taken by the taking of both communities. Even when it is said, "for both communities and for the shrine," the method is the same. Here, however, there is no share for the shrine from the community. One share is equal to the share received by an individual. But when it is said, "for the community of monks and for the nuns," it is not to be divided in the middle. It is to be given by counting the monks and the nuns. When it is said, "for the community of monks and for the nuns and for you," the individual does not receive separately. They receive only one from the received shares. But when it is said, "and for the shrine," one individual's share is obtained for the shrine. Even when it is said, "for the monks and for the nuns," it is not to be divided in the middle. It is to be divided only by counting the individuals. The consideration of individuals and shrines with them is just like the preceding method. And just as the method was explained starting with the community of monks, so too it should be explained starting with the community of nuns. Even when it is said, "for the community of monks and for you," the individual does not receive separately, but for the shrine, it is received. Even when it is said, "for the monks and for you," it is not received separately, but for the shrine, it is indeed received. Here, regarding "for the community that has completed the rains," if one enters a monastery and says, "I give to the community that has completed the rains," those who completed the previous rains there without interruption, for them it extends even to those outside the boundary, not to others. But if, standing outside the precinct boundary, one says, "for the community that has completed the rains," it extends to all who have completed the rains anywhere and are present. Then, if one says, "for those who completed the rains in such-and-such a monastery," it is only for those who completed the rains there, up to the point of kathina. It reaches to this one's share. From the first day of summer, he speaks thus. There, it reaches all who are present, not others. "He gives by specifying" means having specified, having delimited, he gives. How? Having invited monks for today or for tomorrow with gruel, having made them drink gruel at home, he says, "These robes I give to those by whom my gruel was drunk." It reaches only those invited ones by whom the gruel was drunk. Even when invited with rice, snacks, and so on, the method is the same. "He gives to an individual" means, "This robe I give to so-and-so," thus, either indirectly, or having placed it at the foot, "This is yours," thus, directly, he gives. This is a brief explanation here, but the detailed account is stated in the Samantapāsādikā. Thus, in accordance with these eight main topics, that which is obtained by the characteristic of an untimely robe, referring to that, it is said, "an untimely robe may arise." "By one who desires" means by one who wishes. "It should be made quickly" means it should be made quickly, within ten days. "If it is not complete" means if it is not complete, the robe being made for determination, if that robe is not sufficient, it would be deficient—that is the meaning. "With existing expectation" means, "On such and such a day, the Sangha will receive robes, then a robe will arise for me"— in this manner, from the Sangha, a group, relatives, friends, or some other place, "or I will obtain a rag from a dust-heap," or "I will take a robe with this suitable material"— thus, with an existing expectation of a robe. "If beyond that" means if he puts it aside beyond the maximum of a month, it is subject to forfeiture—that is the meaning. If, however, his main robe is fine, and the expected robe is coarse, it cannot be joined. And if there are remaining nights, and the month is not yet complete, the robe should not be made unwillingly. He should obtain another expected robe and make it within the time limit. If he does not obtain it, even the expected robe should be determined as a piece of requisites. to be kept. If the original robe is coarse, and the expectation robe is fine, one should designate the original robe as a rag for use, and keep the expectation robe as the original robe. This then receives a month's allowance. By this method, as long as one does not receive it, it is permissible to keep another robe as the original robe. The procedure for relinquishing this, with the statement, "Venerable Sir, this untimely robe of mine has exceeded the month and is to be relinquished," should be understood. Regarding the story of many bhikkhus in Sāvatthī who received an untimely robe and allowed a month to pass, It was laid down, a common injunction, not by command. Everything from here on is the same as what was stated in the first kathina. The only difference is that there it was an excess of ten days, here it is an excess of a month. The rest is the same. The explanation of the training rule concerning the untimely robe is finished. 4. The explanation of the training rule concerning an old robe In the fourth, "by a non-relative" means not by a relative, meaning not connected in any way, from the mother's or father's side, up to the seventh generation. "By a bhikkhunī" means one who has received ordination in a pure bhikkhu Saṅgha or in both Saṅghas, like the Sākiyanīs. "An old robe" means one that has been dyed, made suitable, and worn or put on at least once, or one which, at the very least, has been carried on the shoulder or head for use while walking on a road, or used as a pillow while lying down—even this is an old robe. "Should have it washed" means if one says "wash it," or makes a bodily gesture, or places it in another's hand, or places it at their feet, or stands within twelve cubits and throws it up, or sends it by another's hand, and it is washed by them, it is considered to have been caused to be washed. The same method applies to causing it to be dyed or beaten. If one gives it to a female trainee, or a female novice, or a female lay follower for washing, and she washes it after becoming ordained, even then it is an offense of relinquishment and expiation. If it is given into the hand of a male lay follower or a male novice, and he, changing his gender, becomes ordained If one causes (a nun) to wash (a robe) after acquiring it, or if it is given to a young monk, and he (the young monk) washes it, even if the gender (of the washer) is changed, it is still an offense entailing forfeiture. The same method applies to dyeing and beating. The procedure for forfeiture here should be understood by the method of, "This old robe of mine, venerable sir, was caused to be washed by an unrelated nun, it is to be forfeited." This rule was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the Elder Udāyi regarding the matter of causing an old robe to be washed. It is a special rule, with a command, such as "Wash it!". And for the nun thus commanded, in all actions such as preparing the pot, there is an offense of wrong-doing for the monk. However, merely having it washed and taken up, or merely having it dyed, or merely having it beaten, entails forfeiture. If one causes all three, washing, etc., or two of them, for one item, it is an offense entailing forfeiture; for the others, it is an offense of wrong-doing. If, however, having said "Wash it!", she does all of them, the offense arises only from the washing. But for one who says, "Whatever needs to be done to this robe, do it," there is one offense entailing forfeiture along with two offenses of wrong-doing. For one who causes a nun to wash (a robe) who is ordained in the same way as the nun's community, and uses it without forfeiting it, or causes another's sitting-mat or covering to be washed, or for one who mistakes a relative for an unrelated person, and for one who is in doubt, there is an offense of wrong-doing. For one who mistakes an unrelated person for a relative, or for one who is in doubt, it is an offense entailing forfeiture and expiation. From now on, in such cases, we will say "triple pācittiya." If a non-relative, who is a friend of a relative, washes it without being told "Wash it!", or if one washes an unused or other requisite, or if female trainees or novices wash it, there is no offense. There is no offense for the insane, etc. Here, there are three factors: the robe being old, commanding an unrelated nun while standing within her range, and her washing, etc.