English
For these six phonetic variations do not invalidate the act. But what the Suttanta elders say: "The letter 'da' becomes 'ta', 'ta' becomes 'da', 'ca' becomes 'ja', 'ja' becomes 'ca', 'ya' becomes 'ka', 'ka' becomes 'ya'. Therefore, when 'da' and so forth should be spoken, speaking 'ta' and so forth is not wrong." That, when it comes to the kammavācā, is not permissible. Therefore, by one who upholds the Vinaya, 'da' should not be made 'ta', ... nor 'ka' made 'ya'. Having purified the pronunciation according to the Pāli, avoiding the faults mentioned in the ten kinds of phonetic pronunciation, the kammavācā should be performed. Otherwise, it is called a failure of the announcement. Or, "he announces at an improper time" means: without establishing the motion at an improper time or place for the announcement, having first performed the act of announcement, he then establishes the motion. Thus, by these five ways of announcing, acts are invalidated. 253. Regarding the invalidation of boundaries, an "excessively small boundary" is one that does not hold twenty-one bhikkhus. In the Kurundi, it is said: "where twenty-one bhikkhus cannot sit." Therefore, such a boundary, even if approved, is like an unapproved village field, and an act performed there is invalidated. This method applies to other boundaries as well. Here, an "excessively large boundary" is one that, even by a hair's breadth, exceeds three yojanas and is approved. A "broken boundary mark" is called an improperly established mark. Having declared the mark in the eastern direction, then in due order, having declared it in the southern, western, and northern directions, again to the eastern... having marked the previously mentioned sign in that direction, it is proper to establish it there; thus it is a complete sign. But if, having brought it in order, one marks the sign in the northern direction and establishes it there, it is a broken sign. Another kind of broken sign is that which, making a sign out of a tree with heartwood unsuitable as a sign, or a tree stump, or a heap of earth, or a heap of sand, or any other intervening object, is agreed upon. A shadow sign is that which, making any shadow, such as the shadow of a mountain, into a sign, is agreed upon. A no-sign is that which, having marked no signs at all, is agreed upon. One who stands outside the boundary and agrees upon a boundary means one who, having marked the signs, stands outside the signs and agrees upon it. One agrees upon a boundary in a river, in the ocean, in a natural lake: that which is agreed upon in these rivers and so forth, even if thus agreed upon, is, by the saying, “All rivers, bhikkhus, are no-boundaries; all oceans are no-boundaries; all natural lakes are no-boundaries,” still a no-boundary. One boundary merges with another boundary means one's own boundary merges with another's boundary. One boundary overlaps another boundary means one's own boundary overlaps another's boundary. How merging and overlapping occur there, all that has been stated in the discourse on boundaries. Thus, all these eleven kinds of boundaries are no-boundaries, just like village fields; a kamma performed while sitting in them is invalid. Therefore it was said: “By these eleven modes, kammas fail due to the boundary.” As for the failure of kamma due to the assembly, there is nothing obscure. Whatever should be said there regarding the characteristics of those fit for kamma and those who have given their consent, that too has been stated later by the method beginning with “four bhikkhus, normal and fit for kamma.” There, “normal and fit for kamma” means: in a kamma requiring a four-member group, four bhikkhus who are normal, not suspended, not expelled, of pure conduct, are fit for kamma, worthy of the kamma, suitable, and masters of it. Without them, that kamma cannot be performed, nor can their consent A proxy or a declaration of purity comes. But if the remaining ones are even a thousand in number, and if all co-residents are indeed eligible for a proxy, having given a declaration of purity, whether they come or not, the act stands. But for whom the Sangha performs an act like probation, he is neither eligible for the act nor eligible for a proxy. However, since the Sangha performs the act making that person the object, therefore he is called "eligible for the act." The same method applies to other acts. 254. To which five cases does the declaration-act apply? Reinstatement, expulsion, the act of a scoundrel, the Brahma-punishment, and the fifth is the mark of the act itself. Here, "reinstatement and expulsion" is said due to the closeness of the words, but first there is expulsion, afterwards reinstatement. There, that disciplinary act of removing the novice Kaṇṭaka, that should be known as expulsion. Therefore, even now, if a novice speaks ill of the Buddha, or the Dhamma, or the Sangha, declares what is improper to be "proper," is a wrong-doer, endowed with an extreme view, he should be restrained up to three times and made to abandon that view. If he does not abandon it, the Sangha should be assembled and he should be told, "Abandon it!" If he does not abandon it, he should be expelled by a competent bhikkhu performing a declaration-act. And the act should be performed thus – "Venerable Sir, I ask the Sangha: 'This novice, so-and-so, is a slanderer of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, a wrong-doer. For the loss of that co-residence with bhikkhus for two or three nights, which other novices obtain, does the Sangha approve of his expulsion?' A second time. A third time, Venerable Sir, I ask the Sangha: 'This novice, so-and-so... (etc.)... does the Sangha approve?' 'Go forth, scoundrel, be ruined!'" Then, at a later time, saying, "Venerable Sir, I did this out of foolishness, out of ignorance, out of misfortune; I therefore beg the Sangha's forgiveness," begging forgiveness, having been made to request up to three times, the declaration-act... should be reinstated, and thus should be reinstated. In the midst of the Sangha, by a competent bhikkhu, with the Sangha's permission, it should be announced – "Venerable Sirs, I ask the Sangha: 'This novice, so-and-so, was a disparager of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha, holding wrong views. For the shared lodging with bhikkhus for two or three nights, which other novices obtain, he was expelled from that. But now he is gentle, humble in conduct, has entered the path of shame, established in conscience and dread of wrongdoing, has undergone the punishment, and confesses his fault. Does the Sangha approve of giving this novice the same bodily association and companionship as before?'" Thus it should be said three times. Thus the declaration, reinstatement, and expulsion are carried out. The 'Bhaṇḍukamma' (binding action) is as stated in the discourse on the determination of ordination. But the Brahma-punishment was not only prescribed for Channa. If any other bhikkhu is rude, living by provoking, insulting, and disparaging bhikkhus with harsh words, to him also it should be given, and thus it should be given. In the midst of the Sangha, by a competent bhikkhu, with the Sangha's permission, it should be announced – "Venerable Sirs, this bhikkhu, so-and-so, is rude. He lives by provoking, insulting, and disparaging bhikkhus with harsh words. Whatever that bhikkhu wishes, let him say it. By the bhikkhus, this bhikkhu, so-and-so, should neither be spoken to, nor admonished, nor instructed. Venerable Sirs, I ask the Sangha: 'Does the Sangha approve of giving the Brahma-punishment to this bhikkhu, so-and-so?' A second time I ask... (and so on) A third time I ask: 'Does the Sangha approve of giving the Brahma-punishment to this bhikkhu, so-and-so?'" If, at a later time, he behaves properly and asks for forgiveness, the Brahma-punishment should be revoked, and thus it should be revoked. By a competent bhikkhu, in the midst of the Sangha, it should be announced – "Venerable Sirs, the community of bhikkhus gave the Brahma-punishment to that bhikkhu, so-and-so. That bhikkhu is gentle, humble in conduct, has entered the path of shame, established in conscience and dread of wrongdoing..." established, having reflected, he stands in future restraint. I ask the Saṅgha, venerable sirs, ‘Does the appeasement of that monk’s brahmadaṇḍa please the Saṅgha?’” Having thus spoken up to the third time, the brahmadaṇḍa should be appeased by means of an announcement. The fifth is the characteristic of the act itself, that which the Blessed One said in the section on the expulsion of monks: “At that time, the group of six monks splashed the bhikkhunīs with muddy water, thinking, ‘Perhaps they will become attached to us.’ They exposed their bodies to the bhikkhunīs, exposed their thighs to the bhikkhunīs, exposed their private parts to the bhikkhunīs. They spoke to the bhikkhunīs, they associated with the bhikkhunīs, thinking, ‘Perhaps they will become attached to us’” (Cūḷava. 411). In these matters, for those monks for whom a dukkaṭa was prescribed, and it was said, “I allow, monks, that a disciplinary act be performed for that monk,” when a doubt arose, “What disciplinary act should be performed?” it was said, “That monk, monks, should be made unvenerable by the bhikkhunī Saṅgha.” Thus, the act of making unvenerable was allowed. That is the fifth, the characteristic of the act itself, the basis for this act of announcement. For its characteristic is the act itself, not removal or other things; therefore, it is called “characteristic of the act.” Its performance, along with its appeasement, we will explain in detail. To the bhikkhunī Saṅgha assembled in the bhikkhunī residence, it should be announced by a competent bhikkhunī: “Venerable ladies, such and such a venerable one shows what is unseemly to the bhikkhunīs. I ask the bhikkhunī Saṅgha, ‘Does the act of making this venerable one unvenerable please you?’ ‘Venerable ladies, such and such a venerable one