English
shows what is unseemly to the bhikkhunīs. Does the act of making this venerable one unvenerable please you?’ A second time. A third time I ask the bhikkhunī Saṅgha.” Having thus announced three times, the act of making unvenerable should be performed by means of an announcement. From then on, that monk by the bhikkhunīs should not be venerated. If, not being venerated, he feels shame and moral dread and conducts himself properly, then he should ask the bhikkhunīs for forgiveness. When asking for forgiveness, he should not go to the bhikkhunīs' residence, but in the monastery itself, approaching the Saṅgha, or a group, or a single bhikkhu, he should sit on his haunches, raise his hands in anjali, and say: "Venerable sirs, I, having reflected, will stand in restraint in the future, I will not again show anything displeasing. May the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs forgive me." He should ask for forgiveness in this way. Then, the Saṅgha, or the group, or a single bhikkhu, having sent one bhikkhu, or one bhikkhu himself going, should say to the bhikkhunīs: "This bhikkhu, having reflected, stands in restraint in the future. Having confessed his offense, he has asked the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs for forgiveness. May the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs make this bhikkhu one to be venerated." He should be made one to be venerated, and it should be done in this way. With the permission of the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs assembled in the bhikkhunīs' residence, a competent bhikkhunī should announce: "Venerable ladies, the venerable one named so-and-so showed something displeasing to the bhikkhunīs, and was made one not to be venerated by the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs. He, having entered into the state of shame, having reflected, stands in restraint in the future. Having confessed his offense, he asked the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs for forgiveness. I ask the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs if it is agreeable to make that venerable one one to be venerated." This should be said three times. In this way, he should be made one to be venerated by an act of announcement. 255. This is the determination of the characteristics of an act even outside the Pāḷi (Pari. Aṭṭha. 495-496). Indeed, this characteristic of an act is laid down as originating from the Saṅgha of bhikkhunīs, but it is also obtainable for the Saṅgha of bhikkhus. For the Saṅgha of bhikkhus also performs acts of announcement at the head of distribution of meal tickets and Uposatha, and this is also a characteristic of an act. For it is proper to give robes that are torn, worn out, or lost, by assembling the Saṅgha, and having a competent bhikkhu announce it three times, and performing an act of announcement. However, for one making a robe with a small amount of expenditure, in the discourse on the division of requisites, And the aforementioned kinds of needles, etc., may be given even without asking permission. In giving these, he himself is the master; what is given in excess of that must be given after asking permission. For in giving in excess of that, the Saṅgha is the owner. Medicine for the sick, of the kind mentioned there, may be given by oneself; for one desiring more, it must be given after asking permission. And whoever is weak, or has a broken posture, or has his alms-round cut off, or is greatly ill, for him, from the produce in the great monasteries, daily a nāḷi or half a nāḷi, or in one day, five or ten nāḷis of rice, must be given only after performing the act of asking permission. Also, from the produce, the debt-bondage of a virtuous bhikkhu, and the unremovable lodging of a learned bhikkhu who relieves the burden of the Saṅgha, and the food and wages of those performing Saṅgha duties, such as stewards, may be given by the act of asking permission. From the produce given for the four requisites, it is permissible to maintain a Saṅgha dwelling, but to prevent the talk, "This bhikkhu acts as if he is the master," it must be maintained only after asking the Saṅgha at the distribution of tickets or at an interim assembly. Even from the produce specifically given for robes and alms-food, a dwelling may be maintained after asking permission; it is also permissible without asking permission, but to prevent such talk as, "This bhikkhu is indeed bold, maintaining a dwelling from what was specifically given for robes and alms-food," it must be maintained only after performing the act of asking permission. In a cetiya, making an unmade umbrella, or railing, or Bodhi-tree house, or seat-house, or repairing what is old, or doing plaster work, it is permissible to have it done by engaging people. If there is no doer, it must be done from the cetiya's deposit. Even if there is no deposit, it must be done from the produce after performing the act of asking permission; it is permissible to do cetiya work even with Saṅgha property after asking permission. But with the cetiya's property, even after asking permission, Saṅgha work is not permissible, but temporarily, taking It is proper to make it in return. However, for those who are doing plastering and other work on the stupa, if they do not receive enough for their sustenance from alms-round or from the Sangha, it is proper for them to take enough for their sustenance from the stupa's property and consume it, and to perform the duty. It is not proper to make a Sangha meal with fish, meat, etc., saying, "We are performing the duty." The fruit trees planted in the monastery that are taken possession of by the Sangha receive care. For those whose fruits are consumed after striking the bell and distributing them, no act of permission needs to be done. But for those not taken possession of, an act of permission must be done. This can be done even at the distribution of tickets, at the distribution of gruel, at the distribution of meals, or at the time of an accidental meeting. But it is certainly proper to do it at the end of the Uposatha. For there, even for those who have not arrived, their purity of intention is brought, therefore it is very purified. And it should be done thus: A competent bhikkhu, with the permission of the Sangha of bhikkhus, should announce: "Venerable sirs, whatever property of the Sangha, such as roots, bark, leaves, sprouts, flowers, fruits, and edibles, is within the boundary of this monastery, I ask the Sangha if it is agreeable for all the bhikkhus, those who have come and those who will come, to consume it as they please." It should be asked three times. What is done by four or five bhikkhus is well done. Even in a monastery where two or three people reside, what is done by them sitting together is like what is done by the Sangha. But if there is only one bhikkhu, what is done by that bhikkhu, having performed the preliminary duties and preliminary actions on the Uposatha day and being seated, that agreement is also like what is done by the Sangha. However, when making it, it is proper to make it for a period of fruits, or by defining it as four months, six months, or one year, or without defining it. If defined, after consuming according to the definition, it should be done again. If undefined, it is valid as long as the trees exist. Even other trees planted from the seeds of those trees have the same agreement. But if in another monastery If they are planted, where they are planted, in that very monastery, the Saṅgha is the owner. Even if seeds are brought from elsewhere, and later planted in the former monastery, a different agreement should be made concerning them. When the agreement is made, they stand as personal property. It is permissible to enjoy the fruits as one pleases. If, however, they enclose those specific places, make enclosures, and tend them, they stand as personal property for those bhikkhus. Others are not allowed to enjoy them. But they must be enjoyed after giving a tenth share to the Saṅgha. Even if someone surrounds a tree in the middle of the monastery with branches and protects it, the same rule applies to him. To a respected bhikkhu who has gone to an old monastery, saying "The elder has arrived," fruits are brought. If at that place, at the root, a bhikkhu learned in all the scriptures resided, then "Surely a long-standing agreement must have been made here," it should be enjoyed without scruple. Fruits in the monastery are also permissible for alms-gatherers. It does not violate the ascetic practice. Novices give many fruits to their teachers and preceptors. Other bhikkhus, not receiving, are annoyed. That is merely annoyance. If there is a famine, sixty people live relying on one jackfruit tree. At such a time, for the sake of supporting everyone, it should be divided and eaten. This is proper conduct. As long as the agreement-rule is not relaxed, what they have eaten is well-eaten. But when does the agreement-rule become relaxed? When the united Saṅgha assembles and announces, "From now on, let them divide and eat." However, in a monastery with only one bhikkhu, even if he announces this, the former agreement is indeed relaxed. If, when the agreement is relaxed, novices neither drop fruits from the tree, nor pick them up from the ground and give them to bhikkhus, but walk around kicking fallen fruits with their feet, for them, a penalty should be imposed, from a tenth share up to half the fruit share. Surely, out of greed for the penalty, they will bring or they give. Again, when there is plenty, when the stewards come, having made fences and so on, while protecting the trees, no portion should be made for the novices; it should be divided and consumed. "There are fruits in the monastery," people from nearby villages, for the sake of the sick or pregnant, come and ask, "Give one coconut, give a mango, give a breadfruit." Should it be given, or not given? It should be given. For if not given, they become displeased. But when giving, having assembled the Saṅgha, having announced it up to three times, it should be given only after making an announcement.