English
these too are like teachers. But the close and intimate companion monks of a preceptor, or any who are older than ten years, all of them are called "like preceptors." When such monks are walking without sandals, for one walking with sandals, there is an offense. "Not, monks, should great skins be worn: lion skin, tiger skin, leopard skin. Whoever wears them incurs an offense of wrong-doing." "Not, monks, should cow skin be worn. Whoever wears it incurs an offense of wrong-doing." "Not, monks, should any skin be worn. Whoever wears it incurs an offense of wrong-doing." (Mahavagga 255) By this rule, in the Middle Country, lion skin and the like, any skin, it is not permissible to take and carry around. And the prohibition of lion skins and the like is made only for carrying them around. But as a ground covering, without carrying it elsewhere, it is permissible to use any skin. "I allow, monks, in all border regions, skins as coverings: sheep skin, goat skin, deer skin." (Mahavagga 259) But this saying means that in border regions, any (Mahavagga Commentary 259) sheep... A hide of a goat or a sheep, it is permissible to spread and lie down or sit. Among deer hides, the hide of an antelope, a wind-deer, a spotted deer, a barking deer, a deer-mother, a rohita deer— only these hides are permissible. But for others— A monkey, a black lion, a sarabha, a kadali deer; And any wild animals, their hides are not permissible. Here, "wild animals" means lions, tigers, bears, and hyenas. Not only these, but apart from those whose hides are said to be permissible, all the rest, down to cows, buffaloes, hares, and cats, are to be understood as "wild animals" in this context. Indeed, the hides of all these are not permissible. "Monks, one should not travel by vehicle. Whoever travels, there is an offense of wrong-doing. Monks, I allow a vehicle for the sick," according to this saying, a monk who is not sick should not go by vehicle. But which vehicle is permissible, and which is not? "Monks, I allow a man-drawn carriage, a hand-cart. Monks, I allow a palanquin, a litter," according to this saying, a man-drawn carriage, a hand-cart, a palanquin, and a litter are permissible. Here, a man-drawn carriage, whether the driver is a woman or a man, is permissible. But a cow-drawn carriage is not permissible. A hand-cart, whether women pull it or men pull it, is permissible. "Monks, I allow for unwashed cloths, for unwashed garments, a double-layered outer robe, a single-layered upper robe, a single-layered inner robe. For cloths removed from storage, a four-layered outer robe, a double-layered upper robe, a double-layered inner robe. For rag-robes, as much as needed. For those from a shop, effort should be made," according to this saying, for unwashed cloths and for cloths washed once, the outer robe should be made double-layered, and the upper robe and inner robe should be made single-layered. But for worn-out cloths, for rags removed from storage, the outer robe should be made four-layered, the upper robe and inner robe The inner robe should be made with two layers, but for a rag-robe, it can be as one wishes. Effort should be made for discarded rags from the market, they should be sought. There is no limit, even a hundred pieces are allowed. All this is said for a monk who accepts it. Of the three robes, two or one should be cut and made. If it is not enough, a spare piece should be given. For a spare piece is allowed when there is not enough. This is said: “I allow, monks, two cut pieces and one uncut.” Two cut pieces and one uncut are not enough. They reported this matter to the Blessed One. “I allow, monks, two uncut pieces and one cut.” Two uncut pieces and one cut are not enough. They reported this matter to the Blessed One. “I allow, monks, to add more.” “But, monks, not all uncut cloth should be worn. Whoever wears it, there is an offense of wrong-doing.” Therefore, if a spare piece is enough, it is not allowed (to be uncut), it must be cut. “Monks, a blanket should not be worn. Whoever wears it, there is an offense of wrong-doing. Monks, robes that are all blue should not be worn… nor all yellow… nor all red… nor all crimson… nor all black… nor dyed with great dyes… nor dyed with great names… nor with uncut fringes… nor with long fringes… nor with flower fringes… nor with fruit fringes should be worn… nor a jacket… nor a loincloth… nor a head-covering should be worn. Whoever wears it, there is an offense of wrong-doing.” From this, blankets and so on should not be worn. Here, “blanket” means a blanket made of goat hair. Cloth made of akkadussa, kadalidussa, and erakadussa are also considered blankets. All blue and so on should be washed of their dye, then re-dyed and worn. If they cannot be washed, they should be used as coverings or placed in the middle of a three-layered robe. to be worn. The variety of their colors is as stated for shoes. Those with unbroken long fringes should have their fringes cut and then be worn. It is permissible to obtain a jacket, tear it, dye it, and then use it. The same method applies to turbans. But a bark-cloth turban is suitable to be made into a foot-wiper. 58. "Monks, an unrighteous act should not be done. Whoever does it, there is an offense of wrong-doing. I allow, monks, when an unrighteous act is being done, to object to it." According to this, an unrighteous act should not be done, and if it is being done, it should be prevented. And those who prevent it, "I allow, monks, to object with four or five, to declare one's view with two or three, to resolve with one, 'This is not acceptable to me.'" According to this, where they cause trouble to the monk who prevents, there it should not be prevented by one person. If there are four or five, it should be prevented. But if there are two or three, one's view should be declared to another, saying, "This is an unrighteous act, this is not acceptable to me." If there is only one, one should resolve, "This is not acceptable to me." All this is said for their not being troubled. 59. "Monks, a monk who has not given permission should not be accused of an offense. Whoever accuses, there is an offense of wrong-doing." According to this, the accuser should make the other give permission, saying, "Venerable sir, please give me permission, I wish to speak to you," and then accuse. Here, a distinction of intention should be understood. This intention is of many kinds: intention to remove, intention to abuse, intention for a formal act, intention to rise up, intention to suspend Uposatha or Pavāraṇā, intention to investigate, intention for a Dhamma talk. Among these, for the first four intentions, if one does not make the other give permission, there is a wrong-doing. Even if one makes the other give permission, if one accuses face-to-face with a baseless Pārājika, there is a Saṅghādisesa. If one accuses with a baseless Saṅghādisesa, there is a Pācittiya. If one accuses with a groundless transgression of conduct, it is a dukkaṭa. If one speaks with the intention of reviling, it is a pācittiya. But if one speaks in absence, with all seven groups of offences, it is a dukkaṭa. If one performs all seven kinds of acts in absence, it is indeed a dukkaṭa. But in the Kurundi it is said: For one who says, with the intention of rising up (from the offence), 'You have incurred this offence, remedy it!' there is no need for asking permission. Even when setting aside the Uposatha and Pavāraṇā, there is no asking permission. But the field of setting aside should be known: 'May the Sangha hear me, venerable sirs. Today is the fifteenth day of Uposatha. If it is suitable for the Sangha, may the Sangha perform the Uposatha.' Indeed, while this 're' syllable is not yet passed, it is permitted to set aside. But after that, when the 'yya' syllable is reached, it is not permitted. This is the method for Pavāraṇā. Even for an investigator, in a matter that has been set aside, for one who says, with the intention of investigating, 'This is yours (your fault),' there is no asking permission. Even for a Dhamma speaker, having sat on the Dhamma seat, for one who teaches Dhamma without specifying, by the method of 'whoever does this and that, this bhikkhu is no recluse' and so on, there is no asking permission. But if, having specified and determined, he says, 'So-and-so and so-and-so are no recluses, no lay followers,' he should descend from the Dhamma seat, confess the offence, and go. By the saying: 'Monks, permission should not be made to pure bhikkhus, those without offence, without a basis, without a cause. Whoever makes it, incurs an offence of dukkaṭa.' (Mahāvagga 153) Thus, to pure bhikkhus, without a cause or basis, permission should not be made. By the saying: 'Monks, I allow to make permission after weighing the person.' (Mahāvagga 153) Thus, having examined: 'Does he speak of an actual offence, or an unactual one?' permission should be made. 60. By the saying: 'Monks, what is given in faith should not be wasted. Whoever wastes it, incurs an offence of dukkaṭa.' (Mahāvagga 361) Thus, what is given in faith should not be wasted. Except for parents (Mahāvagga commentary 361), the rest... Even giving to strangers brings about ruin. But parents, even if established in a kingdom, desire it. It should be given. 61. "Monks, a village should not be entered with the inner and outer robes. Whoever should enter, there is an offense of wrong-doing." (Mahāva. 362) According to this saying, a village should not be entered with the inner and outer robes. 62. "Monks, there are these five reasons for putting aside the outer robe: Either one is sick, or it is the rainy season appointment, or one has crossed a river, or it is a monastery with a bolted gate, or the Kathina ceremony has been performed. Indeed, Monks, these are the five reasons for putting aside the outer robe." (Mahāva. 362) But according to this saying,