English
without a command, for one who is doubtful about an expelled monk, and for one who perceives an unexpelled monk as expelled, and for one who is doubtful about an unexpelled monk, there is a dukkaṭa. For one who perceives both as unexpelled, who knows that "he has been reinstated" or "he has renounced that view," and for the insane and so forth, there is no offense. Non-performance of the proper practice, knowing, and engaging in eating together and so forth— these are the three factors here. The origin and so forth are similar to taking what is not given, but this is an offense of precept, of three thoughts, of three feelings. The explanation of the precept on eating with an expelled monk is finished. 10. Explanation of the Kaṇṭaka Precept In the tenth, "samaṇuddesa" means a novice. "Carati" means goes. "Pire" means beyond, not a follower. "Vinassati" means perishes, meaning "go where we do not see you." In "tathānāsita" (thus expelled), there are three kinds of expulsion: expulsion by association, expulsion by designation, and expulsion by disciplinary action. Among these, expulsion for not seeing an offense and so forth is called expulsion by association. "The corrupt one should be expelled" (Pārā. 66), "expel the nun Mettiyā" (Cūḷava. 193; Pārā. 384)— this is called expulsion by designation. "From today onwards, friend novice, that Blessed One should not be referred to as your Teacher" (Pāci. 429)— this is called expulsion by disciplinary action, and this is what is intended here. Therefore it is said "tathānāsita" (thus expelled). "Upalāpeyyāti" means "I will give you a bowl, or a robe, or a lesson, or an inquiry," thus he should gather. "Upaṭṭhāpeyyāti" means by accepting powders, clay, and so forth, he should make him serve him. Eating together and sleeping together are as stated in the immediately preceding precept, therefore the determination of offense here should also be understood in the way stated there. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the matter of the six-group monks enticing the novice Kaṇṭaka, the rest is similar to what was stated in the Ariṭṭha precept. The explanation of the Kaṇṭaka precept is finished. The Chapter on Living Beings is the seventh. 8. The Chapter on Those Who Follow the Dhamma 1. The Precept on Those Who Follow the Dhamma Commentary on the Sahadhammika Training Rule In the first of the Sahadhammika chapter, the meaning of "when a fellow Dhamma-farer is spoken to" is stated in the Dubbacasikkhāpada. Regarding "in this training rule," the meaning is "I will not learn what is said in this training rule yet." Here, concerning "pācittiya," for one who speaks thus indirectly out of fear of disrespect, a pācittiya should be understood for each word. "By one who is learning" means having accepted the instruction with one's head, and having become one who desires to learn. "It should be known" means it should be understood. "It should be questioned" means "What is the meaning of this?" it should be questioned. "It should be pondered" means it should be thought about, it should be weighed. It was laid down concerning Thera Channa in Kosambi, on the occasion of such a statement. It is a general enactment, not requiring an order, a triple pācittiya. For an unordained person, a triple dukkata. Even for both who speak thus, saying "This is not for purification," etc., in that manner (Pāci. 436), even if it is said without being laid down, for one who speaks thus, it is a dukkata. For one who says "I will know, I will learn," and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. For an ordained person, speaking what is laid down, and speaking thus out of a desire not to learn— these are the two factors here. Its origins, etc., are similar to taking what is not given, but this is a painful feeling. The commentary on the Sahadhammika training rule is finished. 2. Commentary on the Vilekhana Training Rule In the second (rule), "when being taught" means when spoken by the teacher to the pupil, or when being recited by way of chanting. "By the minor and lesser rules" means by the minor and by the lesser rules. "Just so long as" is a word defining the limit of their occurrence. This is what is said: For indeed, for those who teach these, or cause them to be taught, or recite them, they occur for them as long as remorse, vexation, doubt, and mental scratching arise, thinking "Is it proper, is it not proper?" Remorse, vexation, doubt, and mental scratching indeed arise. Or else, "just so long as" is an emphasizing definition. It is connected with "they occur." It is said that they occur exceedingly for remorse, for vexation, for mental scratching. "Regarding the disparagement of a training rule," thus, in disparaging the training rules, in censuring, there is an offense of pācittiya, this is the meaning. In Sāvatthī, concerning the group of six, in the matter of disparaging the Vinaya, it was laid down. A general promulgation, not requiring an order, a pācittiya of three kinds. In disparaging to an unordained person, a dukkaṭa of three kinds. In disparaging other Dhamma to both, it is only a dukkaṭa. For one not intending to disparage, for one saying, "Come now, first learn the suttas or the verses or the Abhidhamma, later you will learn the Vinaya," and for the insane and so forth, there is no offense. The intention to censure, and in the presence of an ordained person, the disparagement of a training rule— these are the two factors here. Its origins and so forth are similar to taking what is not given, but this is painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule on disparagement is finished. 3. Explanation of the training rule on bewildering. In the third (rule), "every half month" means in succession, half month by half month. "When being recited" means when being recited in the manner of the Uposatha. "And whatever offense he has committed" means whatever misconduct he has practiced, and wishing to make known that he committed it unknowingly, he says thus, whatever offense he committed in that misconduct. "And that should be dealt with according to the Dhamma" means because it was committed unknowingly, there is no exemption, but as the Dhamma and Vinaya stand, so that offense should be dealt with. If it leads to confession, it should be confessed. If it leads to rehabilitation, it should be rehabilitated, this is the meaning. "And further, bewilderment should be imposed on him" means and further, beyond dealing with it according to the Dhamma, having censured him with words like "To you, friend," and so forth, bewilderment should be imposed on that person by a ñatti-dutiya kamma. "This is a pācittiya in that bewildering" means whoever, when such bewilderment has been imposed, bewilders again, in that bewildering person, this pācittiya should be understood, not when bewilderment has not been imposed, this is the meaning. In Sāvatthī, concerning the group of six, in the matter of bewildering, it was laid down. A general promulgation, not requiring an order, a pācittiya of three kinds. In an unrighteous act, a dukkaṭa of three kinds. In bewildering when bewilderment has not been imposed, it is only a dukkaṭa. By whom it was not heard in detail, less... or heard in detail once or twice, for those who do not intend to deceive, and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. The act of deceiving, the intention to deceive, the state of having heard in the manner stated, the act of deceiving— these are the four factors here. The origins, etc., are similar to taking what is not given, but this is a painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule on deception is finished. 4. Explanation of the training rule on striking. In the fourth, "should give a blow." Here, if a blow is given with the intention to strike, even if one dies, it is still a pācittiya offense. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the group of six monks, regarding the incident of giving a blow. A general enactment. Not requiring an order. A triple pācittiya. For an unordained person, a triple dukkaṭa. But if, with the intention of disfiguring, even an ordained person's ear, etc., is cut off, it is only a dukkaṭa. But for one being harassed by someone, with the intention of liberation (from harassment), and for the insane, etc., there is no offense. Anger, not the intention of liberation, the act of giving a blow to an ordained person— these are the three factors here. The origins, etc., are similar to the first pārājika, but this is a painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule on striking is finished. 5. Explanation of the training rule on raising the hand to strike. In the fifth, "should raise the hand to strike," showing the manner of giving a blow, one raises the body or something connected to the body. And here, due to the act of raising, it is a pācittiya offense. But if, having raised, one misses and gives a blow, because it was not given with the intention to strike, it is only a dukkaṭa. If by that blow anything on the hand, etc., is broken, it is only a dukkaṭa. All the rest here should be understood in the same way as stated in the previous training rule. The explanation of the training rule on raising the hand to strike is finished. 6. Explanation of the training rule on groundless accusation. In the sixth, "groundlessly" means without a basis of what was seen, etc. "Should harass" means should accuse or cause to accuse. "Pācittiya" means if the accused person immediately knows, "He is accusing me," it is a pācittiya offense for the accuser. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the group of six monks, regarding the incident of harassing with a groundless Saṅghādisesa. A general enactment. With a command, a pācittiya of three (categories). For disparaging due to misconduct or wrong view, a dukkaṭa. For an unordained person, a dukkaṭa of three (categories). For one who perceives it as such, and for the insane and so on, there is no offense. Being ordained,