English
"What's with that? Much is to be said here. The theras said, 'Tomorrow we will go on alms-round,' so do not be negligent now." On the second day, the monks who had performed the stupa duties should be told by the Sangha-thera: "Friends, there is a Sangha-meal in the main village, but an ignorant person came. Let us go, we will go on alms-round in the main village." The monks should do the thera's bidding, they should not be disobedient, they should go on alms-round standing at the village gate, among those who have arrived... i. Having taken, having seated, when they feed, it should be eaten. If, having placed food in the assembly hall, they announce, wandering in the streets, "Venerable sirs, take food in the assembly hall," it is not allowable. But if they say, "Having taken food, go here and there and take food," or if they have brought it to the monastery beforehand, placed it in a suitable place, and give it to those who come, this is called "food brought to them," and it is allowable. If, however, having prepared alms in the refectory, they send word to each precinct, "Take food in the refectory," it is allowable. But those people who, seeing alms-gathering monks, sweep the assembly hall, seat them there, and feed them, they should not be refused. But those who, having failed to get alms in the village, seeing monks leaving the village, say, "Venerable sirs, take food," they should be refused; one should not turn back. If they say, "Turn back, venerable sirs, take food," it is allowable to turn back when "turn back" is said. If they say, "Turn back, venerable sirs, food is prepared at home, food is prepared in the village," and food at home and in the village belongs to anyone, it is allowable to turn back. If they say, "Turn back, take food," making it a single phrase, it is not allowable to turn back. The same rule applies when, seeing them leaving the assembly hall to go for alms, they say, "Sit down, venerable sirs, take food." By the phrase "except at the proper time," there is no offense in any of these seven occasions: the time of sickness, the time of giving robes, the time of making robes, the time of journeying, the time of boarding a boat, the great occasion, and the time of monks' meals. Therefore, just as meat is seen beyond the great hide, so even the feet are split, or they cause pain when merely struck by sand or gravel, and it is not possible to go for alms within the village—in such a sickness, it is the time of sickness, and it should be eaten, not a little. It should be made allowable. The time for offering robes is, when the kathina is not spread, the last month of the rainy season; when the kathina is spread, five months. During this interval, one should eat, thinking, "This is the time for offering robes." When a robe is being made, one should eat, thinking, "This is the time for making robes." Indeed, when they obtain cloth and thread and make a robe, this is called the time for making robes. There is no separate time called "the time for making robes." Therefore, whoever performs any work on the robe there, in the Mahāpaccariya, it is said, "even down to a needle-piercer." Thus, one should eat, thinking, "This is the time for making robes." In the Kurundi, however, it is stated in detail: "Whoever arranges the robe, cuts it, sets aside the waste thread, sets aside the incoming patch, sews the returning patch, ties the incoming patch, cuts the crosswise strip, joins it, attaches it, sews the returning patch there, makes thread, twists it, smoothes the nap, turns it over, all of them are said to be making the robe. But whoever sits nearby and recites a Jātaka or a Dhammapada, this one is not a robe-maker. Excluding this one, for the rest, there is no offense in a group meal." At the time of a journey, even one intending to go half a yojana should eat, thinking, "I will go half a yojana." While going, one should eat. Having gone, one should eat for one day. At the time of boarding a boat, one should eat, thinking, "I will board a boat." Having boarded, even having gone to the desired place, as long as one has not disembarked, one should eat. Having disembarked, one should eat for one day. A great gathering is where two or three bhikkhus subsist by going on alms round, but when even a fourth one comes, they do not subsist. This is a great gathering. But where a hundred or a thousand gather, there is no need to say. Therefore, at such a time, one should eat, having resolved, "This is a great gathering." The time for a recluse's meal is when any wanderer who has entered the ascetic life prepares a meal, this is a recluse's meal. It is a time for monks' meal. Therefore, whether among fellow monks or among sectarians, when a meal is made by anyone, it should be eaten, thinking: "It is a time for monks' meal." "There is no offense at the proper time; when two or three eat together; when they have gone for alms and gathered together to eat; for a perpetual meal; for a ticket meal; for a fortnightly meal; for an Uposatha meal; for a first-day-of-the-fortnight meal; excluding these five meals, there is no offense in all other cases." According to this saying, even for those who accept an improper invitation and two or three eat together, there is no offense for them. Herein, the determination should be understood by means of five kinds of fourth persons: the uninvited fourth, the alms-round fourth, the unordained fourth, the bowl-sending fourth, and the sick fourth. How? Here, someone invites four bhikkhus, saying: "Please take a meal." Three of them go, one does not go. The lay follower asks: "Venerable sir, where is the one elder?" "He has not come, lay follower." So he invites some other person who has arrived at that moment, saying: "Come, venerable sir," brings him into the house, and gives a meal to all four. There is no offense for anyone. Why? Because the one completing the group was uninvited. Only three were invited there and took the meal; the group is not completed by them; and the one completing the group was uninvited; thus the group is broken. This is the uninvited fourth. In the case of the alms-round fourth, at the time of invitation, one is on an alms-round; he does not accept. But at the time of going, when he is told "Come, venerable sir," even though he has not accepted, they go, taking him, saying: "Come, you will receive alms." He breaks that group. Therefore, there is no offense for anyone. In the case of the unordained fourth, they are invited together with a novice. He also breaks the group. In the case of the bowl-sending fourth, one comes by himself and sends his bowl. Even so, the group is broken. Therefore, there is no offense for anyone. In the case of the sick fourth, they are invited together with a sick person. There, there is no offense only for the sick person. But for the others, he completes the group. For the group is not broken by a sick person. therefore, they incur an offense. But in the Mahāpaccariya, it is said without distinction: "One who is authorized by the occasion is released by himself; for the others, as they complete the quorum, he causes an offense." Therefore, the fourfold categories should be understood in terms of those authorized by the occasion of robe-giving and so on. If, however, among the four people who have accepted and gone, one wise bhikkhu says: "I will break your group; accept the invitation," and after the gruel and snacks, when they are taking their bowls for the meal, he does not give it to them, saying: "First, feed and dismiss these bhikkhus; I will make the anumodanā and go later," and he sits down, and after they have eaten and gone, when the lay follower takes the bowl and gives the meal, saying: "Give the bowl, venerable sir," he eats and makes the anumodanā and goes, there is no offense for anyone. For there is no restriction on group meals only in terms of the five kinds of food; even those invited for rice who take gruel incur an offense, and those were not taken together by them. But there is a restriction with gruel and so on, and those were taken together by them. Thus, one wise person causes no offense for others as well. "Constant meal" is called "fixed meal." They say, "Take the constant meal," and it is permissible for many to take it together. The same method applies to ticket-meals and so on. 2. "In successive meals, except at the proper time, there is a pācittiya" (Pāci. 222-223, 225). The successive meal mentioned arises only from the invitation. For one who is invited, for example, "Take a meal with one of the five kinds of food," and setting that aside, eats another of the five kinds of food, that meal is called a "successive meal." For one eating thus, except at the time of sickness, the time of robe-giving, and the time of robe-making, at another time, a pācittiya is stated. Therefore, one should eat in the order of invitation, not in reverse order. "I allow, bhikkhus, to eat successive meals by making a choice" (Pāci. The first invitation, even having transferred it to another, is permissible to consume. This transfer (Pāci. Aṭṭha. 226 onwards) is permissible both in person and not in person. In person, having seen, one should say: "I transfer my meal portion to you," or "I give it," and then consume. Not in person, among five fellow Dhamma-farers, taking the name of any one, one should say: "I transfer my meal portion to so-and-so," or "I give it," and then consume. However, two or three invitations, having put them into one bowl, mixed them, and made them one, are permissible to consume. For it is said: "No offense if one eats two or three invitations together." (Pāci. 229) If two or three families, having invited, make one sit in one place, and bring food from here and there, and pour in rice, and pour in curries and sauces, and it becomes one mixture, even here there is no offense. If, however, the original invitation is at the bottom,