English
It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the group of six bhikkhus, regarding the case of appropriation. It is a general enactment, without an order. For one who is in doubt about what is designated, and for one who perceives what is not designated as designated, and for one who is in doubt, and for one who appropriates what is designated for any Sangha, cetiya, or individual for other Sanghas, etc., there is a dukkata. There is no offense for one who perceives it as not designated, or for one who, when asked "where should we give it?", says "give it where your mind is pleased, your offering may be used or obtained," and for the insane, etc. The three factors here are: the state of being designated for the Sangha, knowing that and appropriating it for oneself, and obtaining it. The origin, etc., are similar to those of taking what is not given. The commentary on the training rule concerning what has been designated is finished. The Bowl Chapter, the third. Thus, in the Commentary on the Pātimokkha in the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī, The commentary on the Nissaggiya Pācittiya is finished. The Pācittiya Section 1. False speech 1. Explanation of the Training Rule on False Speech In the first of the Pacittiya section on false speech, "intentional false speech" means speaking falsely, knowing it beforehand and knowing it at the moment of speaking. And speaking here means making what is not real to be real, or what is real to be not real, by means of the body or speech, an act of making known. And this is a locative case in the sense of a cause. Therefore, whoever speaks intentional false speech, for that reason, for that cause, for that condition, there is a Pacittiya offense. This is how the meaning should be understood here and in other similar cases. It was laid down in Savatthi concerning Hatthaka the Sakyan son, in a matter of acknowledging without knowing, etc. It is a general rule, not an injunction. For one who speaks falsely to declare a superhuman state, it is a Parajika. To prevent a groundless Parajika, it is a Sanghadisesa. To prevent a Sanghadisesa, it is a Pacittiya. To prevent a transgression of conduct, it is a Dukkata. For one who, by way of "whoever lived in your monastery" (Parajika 220) and so on, speaks falsely to declare a superhuman state, knowing it, it is a Thullaccaya. For one not knowing it, it is a Dukkata. For one who merely speaks falsely, here it is a Pacittiya. There is no offense for one who speaks hastily without reflection, for one who says "I will say something else" and says something else, and for the insane, etc. The intention to deceive, the desire to speak a certain thing with a deceptive mind, and the act of making it known to that person—these are the two factors here. The origins, etc., are similar to those of taking what is not given. The explanation of the training rule on false speech is concluded. 2. Explanation of the Training Rule on Abusive Speech In the second, "abusive speech" means speech that insults. It means a Pacittiya offense for insulting any bhikkhu, whether he has incurred a Parajika or not, by means of the body or speech or a hand gesture, without any other pretext, using true or false accusations concerning birth, name, clan, action, craft, illness, gender, defilement, or offense. In Savatthi, concerning the group of six bhikkhus, for insulting... It was laid down concerning this matter, a general rule, not by injunction. By those ten grounds of abuse, such as "There are some outcasts here" (Pāci. 26), for one who abuses by making an indirect reference, for one who abuses with words outside the Pāli, like "You are a thief, a pickpocket," or for one who abuses an unordained person in any way, there is a dukkaṭa. Here, a bhikkhunī also counts as an unordained person. For one who does not intend to abuse, but speaks merely out of a desire for sport, there is a dubbhāsita everywhere. For those who prioritize benefit, Dhamma, or instruction, and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. The person one abuses must be ordained, the abuse must be by birth, etc., without indirect reference, the knowledge that "he is abusing me," and the absence of prioritizing benefit, etc. These are the four factors here. The origin, etc., are similar to taking what is not given. But the feeling here is suffering. The explanation of the rule on contemptuous speech is finished. 3. Explanation of the rule on slander In the third (rule), "slander of a bhikkhu" means slander of a bhikkhu. Having heard the words of a bhikkhu who abuses another bhikkhu with grounds of abuse like birth, etc., out of affection for the bhikkhu or with the intention to cause a schism, if one who is not angry conveys those slanderous words to that bhikkhu, there is an offense of pācittiya. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the matter of conveying slander, with reference to the group of six bhikkhus. A general rule, not by injunction. For conveying the words of one who abuses by indirect reference in the manner stated, or for conveying abuse outside the Pāli, or for conveying (slander) about an unordained person, there is a dukkaṭa. Here too, a bhikkhunī stands in the position of an unordained person. For one who speaks not out of affection, nor with the intention to cause a schism, but merely to censure evil, and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. Having heard the words of a bhikkhu who abuses without indirect reference by birth, etc., conveying them to a bhikkhu, one of the intentions of affection or schism, and knowing it, these are the three factors here. The origin, etc., are similar to taking what is not given... There is nothing equal to not taking. The explanation of the rule on slander is finished. 4. The explanation of the rule on teaching the Dhamma word by word In the fourth, "He should teach the Dhamma word by word," means that he should teach word by word the Dhamma that was not included in the three recitations, such as the royal advice, the stories of the sharp-sensed four, the transformation of Nanda and Upananda, the Kulumpa Sutta, and the path, and also the Dhamma of the Tipiṭaka that was included in the three recitations. "Word by word" means each part of the words, phrases, syllables, and letters. "Pācittiya" means that for one who recites together with any other person, except for a bhikkhu and a bhikkhunī, in these words and so on, there is a pācittiya according to the count of the words and so on. This rule was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the group of six bhikkhus regarding the incident of teaching the Dhamma word by word. It is a general enactment. It is not by command. It is a pācittiya of three kinds. For one who has received ordination, if he perceives the other as not having received ordination, or is in doubt, it is a dukkaṭa. There is no offense for one who recites together with an unordained person when taking a lesson together, when reciting together, when taking a lesson from him, when reciting a text that is mostly memorized, or when, in a place where one has stumbled, saying, "Recite thus." There is also no offense for the insane and so on. Here, there are three factors: being unordained, teaching the Dhamma of the described characteristic word by word, and reciting together. The origin of the rule on teaching the Dhamma word by word is from action, it is not released by perception, it is without thought, it is an offense by enactment, it is a verbal action, it is of three thoughts, it is of three feelings. The explanation of the rule on teaching the Dhamma word by word is finished. 5. The explanation of the first rule on sleeping together In the fifth, "With an unordained person" means with anyone except a bhikkhu, even with an animal that is the basis for a pārājika offense. "More than two or three nights" means more than two or three nights. "Sleeping together" means lying down together in a completely covered and enclosed dwelling, or in a dwelling that is mostly covered and enclosed, either one after the other or at the same time. "He should allow" means he should do, he should accomplish. Here, without considering the covering, the enclosure by a wall or similar structure of one and a half cubits high it should be understood as completely covered. Therefore, if a seven-storied palace with one courtyard, or a four-sided hall with a hundred rooms, is endowed with this characteristic, and in that place or elsewhere, a person, whether ordained or unordained, sleeps for three nights with an unordained person, and on the fourth day, when the sun has set, the unordained person lies down, and the other person lies down, whether the door of the room is closed or not, or if the first one to lie down does not get up when the other lies down, for both of them, by the count of the acts of getting up and lying down, and by the count of the unordained person, there is a pācittiya offense. This is the summary here; the detailed explanation is given in all respects in the Samantapāsādikā (Pāci. Aṭṭha. 51). This rule was laid down in Āḷavī, concerning several bhikkhus, regarding the matter of sleeping with an unordained person. "More than two or three nights" is the supplementary rule here. It is a general rule, not an injunction. It is a triple pācittiya offense. For one who is ordained, who perceives the other as unordained, or is in doubt, or in cases of partially covered or uncovered places, there is a dukkata offense. There is no offense for one who stays for less than two or three nights, or who leaves before dawn on the third night and then stays again, or who stays in completely covered or completely uncovered places, or who lies down when the other is sitting, or who sits down when the other is lying down, or for those who are insane, etc. The lodging place is the basis for the pācittiya offense. Sleeping there with an unordained person. The setting of the sun on the fourth day. These are the three factors here.