English
the appointment for a bowl collector, the appointment for a sender of monastery attendants, the appointment for a sender of novices. Giving is to be understood by means of giving the Kathina robe and the robe of the deceased. Removal is to be understood by means of the removal of the Kathina. Declaration is to be understood by means of the declaration of a hut-site or a monastery-site. And as for the two motion-second action-declarations that are stated in the 'covering with grass' settlement (Cv. 212 onwards), one in one party, and one in the other party, and the action-declaration stated in the 'imposing delusion' and so on (Pāci. 446), by means of these, the characteristic of action is to be understood. Thus, a motion-second action goes to seven places. A motion-fourth action also goes to seven places: restoration, expulsion, appointment, giving, rebuke, admonition, and characteristic of action. Therein, expulsion is to be understood by means of the seven actions such as the 'action of reproof' (Cv. 1 onwards). And restoration is to be understood by means of the cessation of those very actions, by means of the appointment of an admonisher of bhikkhunis (P. Agreement (Pāci. 146-147), giving, probation-giving (Cūḷava. 102), penance-giving (Cūḷava. 105), punishment, pulling back to the root (Cūḷava. 110), following the suspended one, eight up to the third time, Ariṭṭha (Pāci. 417), Caṇḍakāḷī (Pāci. 709) — these are those "up to the third time" ones. Thus, the formal declaration is known by these eleven formal declarations. The characteristic of a formal act is to be known by the ordination act and the rehabilitation act. Thus, a four-motion act goes to seven places. Among these four acts, a declaration act must be done by declaration only, it should not be done by a single-motion act or other means. A single-motion act also must be done by establishing one motion only, it should not be done by a declaration act or other means. However, a two-motion act, there are some that can be done by declaration, and some that cannot. Therein, the designation of a boundary, the removal of a boundary (Mahāva. 139-140, 144 onwards), the giving of the kathina robe, the removal of the kathina, the designation of a site for a hut, the designation of a site for a dwelling — these six acts are weighty. They are not permissible to be done by declaration. They must be done by proclaiming the two-motion formal act. The remaining thirteen designations, such as the designation of an allocator of lodgings and the designation of a giver of robes for the deceased — these are light acts. They are permissible to be done by declaration. But they should not be done by a single-motion act or other means. A four-motion act also must be done according to its own characteristic, not according to the other acts. Thus, these acts, done according to their own characteristics, with the fulfillment of the matter, the motion, the proclamations, the boundary, and the assembly, because they are done according to the Dhamma, the Vinaya, and the Teacher's teaching, Dhamma is in them, therefore they are called "lawful acts." Thus, for one who, having given consent to these lawful acts, later falls into the habit of disparaging them, there is an offense of expiation for each word. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning the group of six, regarding the matter of falling into the habit of disparaging. It is a general injunction, not requiring a specific order. For one who is doubtful about a lawful act, for one who perceives an unlawful act as a lawful act, and for one who is doubtful, there is an offense of wrong-doing. For one who perceives it as a lawful act, for one who, knowing "they are performing an act unlawfully, or by faction, or for one unworthy of the act," is displeased, and for the insane and so forth, there is no offense. Lawfulness of the act, perception of the act as lawful, and being displeased after giving consent— these are the three factors here. The origin and so forth are similar to taking what is not given, but this involves painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule concerning obstructing an act is finished. 10. The explanation of the training rule concerning going without giving consent In the tenth (rule), "while the discussion of the case is going on" means as long as the matter announced is undecided, or the formal motion has been laid but the formal declaration has not been concluded, so long is the discussion of the case considered to be going on. If a bhikkhu, during this interval, wishing to obstruct the act, leaves the assembly's reach, for his leaving there is a dukkaṭa, and when he has left, a pācittiya. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning a certain bhikkhu who left without giving consent. It is a general enactment, without specific authorization. For one who is doubtful about a lawful act, for one who perceives an unlawful act as lawful, and for one who is doubtful, there is a dukkaṭa. But for one who perceives it as an unlawful act, and for one who, knowing "there will be quarrels and so forth in the Saṅgha, or they will perform an act unlawfully, or by faction, or for one unworthy of the act," or being sick, or having a duty for a sick person, or afflicted by defecation and so forth, and not wishing to obstruct the act, goes thinking "I will return again," for him, and for the insane and so forth, there is no offense. The discussion of the case being ongoing, the lawfulness of the act, the perception of the act as lawful, being present within the same boundary, being of the same communion, and leaving the reach of the assembly with the intention to obstruct— these are the six factors here. It arises from admonition, is an act and a non-act, has a perception-release, is intentional, is blameworthy by the world, is a bodily act, a verbal act, an unwholesome thought, and involves painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule concerning going without giving consent is finished. 11. The explanation of the training rule concerning the weak In the eleventh (rule), "by a united Saṅgha" means by those of the same communion, within the same boundary, standing having given a robe to the community of monks with good will. "As one is familiar with" means: whoever is familiar by way of being a friend, acquaintance, or intimate, to him, to him. This is the meaning. "Pācittiya" means: having given a robe to a monk who has been appointed by the community itself for arranging lodgings and so on, and afterwards, if he grumbles, it is a pācittiya offense by his words. In Rājagaha, concerning the group of six monks, it was laid down regarding the matter of giving a robe and later grumbling. It is a general rule, not requiring a command. In a formal act, it is a pācittiya offense of three types. Having given an accessory that is to be given away and is divisible, other than a robe, and later grumbling, it is a dukkaṭa offense. "To be given away and divisible" means all that remains after excluding the five heavy items. Indeed, the five heavy items are mentioned in groups: therein, a monastery and monastery land is one; a dwelling and dwelling land is the second; a couch, a chair, a mattress, a pillow is the third; a metal pot, a metal basin, a metal cup, a metal cauldron, an axe, a hatchet, a pickaxe, a spade, a hoe is the fourth; creepers, bamboo, muñja grass, pabbaja grass, straw, clay, wooden articles, clay articles is the fifth. Indeed, these five, belonging to the community, are not to be given away or divided by the community, or by groups or individuals. Even if given away or divided, they remain communal property. However, it is permissible to exchange a fixed asset for a fixed asset, and other things for other things, whether unsuitable or valuable suitable items, considering it as a benefit to the community, by means of a suitable exchange. It is permissible to give away inferior items for the preservation of superior lodgings and so on, and to use them after giving them away. And here, among the first three groups, there is nothing that is not a heavy item. In the fourth, a metal pot, a metal basin like a water jar, a metal cauldron—these three, even if they hold only a handful of water, are heavy items. A metal cup, however, made of any kind of iron, copper, bronze, or brass, is to be divided as a 'pāda' in Sri Lanka. And 'pāda' means a mag from a five-nāḷi measure, he takes a five-nāḷi measure; anything exceeding that is heavy property. These are the iron vessels mentioned in the Pāḷi. However, even small items not mentioned in the Pāḷi, such as a water-pot, a receiver, a ladle, a spoon, a scoop, a plate, a bowl, a casket, a censer, a lamp-stand, a smoke-scoop, and so on, are all heavy property. An iron bowl, an iron plate, a copper plate— these are divisible. A bell-metal vessel, a copper vessel, a metal vessel of any kind, is permissible for communal use or if it is a gift from a layperson. It is not permissible for personal use. But, apart from such metal vessels, among other permissible metal objects, an eye-ointment box, an eye-ointment stick, a snuff-box, an ear-cleaner, a needle, a small pepper-box, a small awl, a key, a lock, a pair of scissors, a gimlet, a drill, and any kind of solid metal object, or any kind of unworked metal object, all are divisible. However, a smoking pipe, a spear, a lamp, a tree-lamp, a small lamp, a hanging lamp, images of men, women, or animals, or any other objects to be placed on walls, ceilings, or doors, and so on, down to an iron nail, all metal objects are heavy property. Even if one has received and kept them, they should not be used for personal enjoyment. They are permissible for communal use or if they are gifts from laypersons. The same rule applies to lead objects. Plates, bowls, and so on, made of milk-stone, are also heavy property. A small pot, however, or an oil vessel, if it exceeds the measure of a foot-rest, is heavy property.