English
Explanation of the Training Rule Concerning Exceeding the Robe Season In the ninth, "with a weak expectation of robes" means with a weak expectation of robes, "If we can, we will give," having heard just this much, the expectation that arises, this is the meaning. "Should exceed the robe season" means when robes for the season are being distributed by nuns who have completed the rains retreat, saying, "Wait, ladies, the Sangha has an expectation of robes," and thereby exceeding that robe distribution, that robe season. If the Kathina is not spread, by exceeding the last month of the rainy season, if the Kathina is spread, by exceeding the day of the Kathina's removal, there is an offense of Pacittiya. In Savatthi, concerning Thullananda, this was laid down in the story of exceeding the robe season due to a weak expectation of robes. For a weak expectation of robes, if there is doubt, for a strong expectation of robes, if there is a perception of a weak expectation of robes and doubt, there is an offense of Dukkata. In both cases, if there is a perception of a strong expectation of robes, even if they say, "We cannot," but saying, "Now cotton will arise for them, or a faithful person will come, when he comes, they will surely give," thus showing the advantage and preventing them, for the insane and so on, there is no offense. Being a weak expectation of robes, the perception of weakness, preventing without advantage— these are the three factors here. The origin and so on are similar to those for taking what is not given. The explanation of the training rule concerning exceeding the season is finished. 10. Explanation of the Training Rule Concerning the Removal of the Kathina In the tenth, "a lawful removal of the Kathina" means by an Upasaka who wishes to give unseasonal robes to all the nuns, the advantage that is based on the spreading of the Kathina, or having given more or an equal amount, when requested by the unanimous assembly of nuns, the Kathina that is removed in between by a motion with a second, that removal is called "lawful," this is the meaning of such a removal of the Kathina. "Should obstruct" means should prevent. By preventing such a removal of the Kathina, there is an offense of Pacittiya. In Savatthi, Thu concerning Ānanda, enacted in the matter of preventing the withdrawal of the Kathina robe. The rest should be understood in the same way as stated in the seventh. The explanation of the training rule on the withdrawal of the Kathina robe is finished. The Naked Chapter, the third. 4. The Turning-Over Chapter 1. Explanation of the training rule on turning over on one couch In the first of the Turning-Over Chapter, "should turn over" means "should lie down". When one of them has lain down, if another lies down, or if two lie down together, for both, it is an offense of expiation. Enacted in Sāvatthī, concerning many bhikkhunīs, in the matter of two turning over on one couch. But if, when one has lain down, one sits down, or if both sit down, for them, and for those who are insane, etc., there is no offense. One couch, and two turning over— these are the two factors here. The origin, etc., are like the sheep's wool. The explanation of the training rule on turning over on one couch is finished. 2. Explanation of the training rule on turning over on one covering In the second, "one covering and one wrap" means "for them, there is one covering and one wrap." This is a designation for those who, having spread one end of a portable wrap, covering, mat, etc., and having wrapped themselves in one, turn over. "Offense of expiation" means for those who lie down having spread that very one and wrapped themselves in that very one, it is an offense of expiation. Enacted in Sāvatthī, concerning many bhikkhunīs, in the matter of thus turning over. An offense of expiation of three kinds. In the case of one covering or one wrap, an offense of wrong-doing. In the case of different coverings and wraps, an offense of wrong-doing of two kinds. But if, with the perception of different coverings and wraps, having shown the distinction, she lies down, and for those who are insane, etc., there is no offense. The rest is similar to the first. The explanation of the training rule on turning over on one covering is finished. 3. Explanation of the training rule on causing discomfort In the third, "discomfort" means "this will cause discomfort to her," without asking permission, by walking, sitting, etc., in front, or by reciting, questioning, or studying, with the intention of causing discomfort. In walking, by the number of turns. In standing, etc., by the number of efforts. In reciting, etc., by the word. A pācittiya by counting. It was laid down in Sāvatthī, concerning Thullanandā, regarding the matter of intentionally causing discomfort. A triple pācittiya; for an unordained one, a triple dukkaṭa. For one not desiring discomfort, for one who has asked, for one doing things like walking in front, and for mad persons, etc., there is no offense. Being ordained, desire for discomfort, causing discomfort, not asking — these are the four factors here. Its origins, etc., are similar to taking what is not given. But this is an action-inaction, with painful feeling. The explanation of the training rule on causing discomfort is finished. 4. Explanation of the training rule on not attending In the fourth, 'distressed' means 'sick'. 'Fellow resident' means 'co-resident'. 'Should not attend' means: by not attending to her oneself, or by not having others attend to her, as soon as the duty is abandoned, there is a pācittiya. It was laid down in Sāvatthī, concerning Thullanandā, regarding the matter of not attending to a distressed co-resident. For a pupil or an unordained one, a dukkaṭa. If there is one of the ten obstacles, if, having searched, she does not find help, for a sick person, in emergencies, and for mad persons, etc., there is no offense. Sickness, being a co-resident, absence of a permitted reason, abandoning the duty of attendance — these are the four factors here. Its origins, etc., are similar to admonition. The explanation of the training rule on not attending is finished. 5. Explanation of the training rule on expulsion In the fifth, 'having given a dwelling' means having given one's own personal dwelling, which is enclosed by a door. 'Should expel' means: if one expels many doors with a single act, there is one offense. With various acts, offenses are counted by the number of acts. The same method applies to ordering. But if she orders, "Go beyond this door and that door," with one order, offenses are counted by the number of doors. It was laid down in Sāvatthī, concerning Thullanandā, regarding such a matter. A triple pācittiya; from an unenclosed place, a dukkaṭa; for an unordained one, a triple dukkaṭa. Whether from an enclosed place or an unenclosed place, for both, the expulsion of requisites... This is only a dukkaṭa offense. The rest is just as stated in the rule concerning the expulsion from a Sangha-owned monastery. The explanation of the rule concerning expulsion is finished. 6. Explanation of the Rule concerning Association The sixth is just a clear meaning of the words. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning Caṇḍakāḷī, regarding the matter of an associated monastery. The rest here is similar to the decision stated in the first Ariṭṭha rule. The explanation of the rule concerning association is finished. 7. Explanation of the Rule concerning Within the Country In the seventh, 'within the country' means in the country of him whose dominion one dwells in. 'Traveling without a companion' means going without a companion. By counting the distance between villages, or in a village-less forest, by counting half a yojana, it is a pācittiya offense. It was laid down in Sāvatthī concerning many bhikkhunīs, in the same way as stated, regarding the matter of going on a journey to another region. If going with a companion, in a safe and fearless place, in emergencies, or for the insane and so on, there is no offense. Being within the country, being unsafe, absence of a permitted reason, and going on a journey—these are the four factors here. The origins and so on are like sheep's wool. The explanation of the rule concerning within the country is finished. 8. Explanation of the Rule concerning Beyond the Country In the eighth, 'beyond the country' means in another country, excluding that in whose dominion one dwells. The rest should be understood in the same way as stated in the seventh. And the city here is Rājagaha. The explanation of the rule concerning beyond the country is finished. 9. Explanation of the Rule concerning Within the Rains Retreat In the ninth, 'within the rains retreat' means having not finished the first three months or the last three months, but still within that rains retreat. Here, if going for a seven-day duty, or being pressed by something, or in emergencies, or for the insane and so on, there is no offense. The rest is similar to the eighth. The explanation of the rule concerning within the rains retreat is finished. 10. Explanation of the Rule concerning Not Going on a Journey In the tenth, 'having completed the rains retreat' means having completed the first three months or the last three months. 'Six or five yojanas' here means it is permissible to go five yojanas after the pavāraṇā ceremony. Six should be said. it is not. But if she goes three leagues and returns by the same path, it is not allowed. It is allowed to come by another path. As soon as she sets forth with the thought, “I will not go the stated distance,” it is a pācittiya. This was laid down concerning many bhikkhunīs in Rājagaha who, having spent the Rains, departed on a journey. There is no offense for one who has an impediment, who, having sought, does not find a second bhikkhunī, who is sick, in times of danger, or who is insane, and so on.