English
But if made from boiled juice received after noon, it is permissible only without meat for seven days. That which is taken up is the same as the method stated. "Burnt sugarcane phāṇita or crushed sugarcane phāṇita is permissible only before noon," is stated in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā. But in the Mahāpaccariya, after asking the question, "Is this ripe with ingredients permissible or not permissible?" it is said, "There is no such thing as sugarcane phāṇita not permissible after noon." That which is said is suitable. Molasses made from madhuka flowers with cold water is allowable before noon even with meat. From after noon onwards, for seven days, it is allowable only without meat. After seven days, it is a dukkaṭa by counting the items. Molasses made by adding milk is allowable for a limited time. But rock sugar is purified by removing milk residue, therefore it is allowable. 99. But fresh madhuka flowers are allowable even before noon. Roasted ones are also allowable. Roasted and pounded, mixed or unmixed with sesame and so on, is allowable. But if they are taken and used for making liquor, once used, from the seed onwards, it is not allowable. Molasses of all fruits allowable for a limited time, such as banana, date, mango, breadfruit, jackfruit, tamarind, and so on, is also allowable for a limited time. They make molasses from ripe peppers; that is for life. Thus, the five things mentioned as allowable for seven days, such as ghee and so on, are allowed by the name of medicine, as in "Monks, I allow five medicines." Whether they perform a medicinal function or not, even if they are capable of spreading for food, having received them, they are to be consumed as desired on that day before noon. From after noon onwards, if there is a cause, they are to be consumed for seven days in the manner stated. But after seven days, by the precept on medicine, it is nissaggiya pācittiya. Even if it is as much as a mustard seed, or just a single taste on the tongue taken with a finger, it must be relinquished, and the pācittiya must be confessed. Having received what was relinquished, it should not be swallowed. It should not be consumed by bodily use. The body or a wound on the body should not be smeared. Robes, knives, staffs, sandals, foot-rests, couches, chairs, and so on, smeared with them, are also not to be used. "Even on door and window panels, the place where hands grasp should not be smeared," it is said in the Mahāpaccariya. "But door and window panels should be smeared by putting it on a robe," it is said in the Mahāaṭṭhakathā. On a lamp or on a dark object it is allowable to take. But by another monk it should be used for bodily application, not for internal consumption. But by the saying "There is no offense if one determines it within seven days" (Pārā. 625), within seven days, ghee, oil, and fat, or oil for the head, or an ointment, honey, a wound-dressing, sugar-cane juice, or a house-fumigant, if one determines it, there is no offense, nor does it become subject to relinquishment. If determined oil one wishes to pour into an undetermined oil container, and if there is a fine hole in the container, as the oil enters, it is covered by the old oil, it must be determined again. But if it has a wide opening, much oil quickly enters and covers the old oil, there is no need for redetermination. For it is considered as determined. In this manner, the pouring of undetermined oil into a determined oil container should also be understood. But if, after seven days have passed, one gives it up to an unordained person, and then it is given back by that person as their own property, it is allowable to consume it. For if that person, whether having processed it or not processed it, should give it to that monk for nasal treatment, it should be taken and used for nasal treatment. If he is foolish, and does not know how to give, by another monk, "Do you have oil, novice?" (should be said) "Yes, venerable sir, I have." "Bring it, I will make medicine for the elder." Even so, it is allowable. If the property of two is received by one and undivided, after seven days, there is no offense for either, but it is not allowable to consume it. If the one who received it says to the other, "Friend, this oil is allowable to consume for seven days," and that one does not consume it, whose offense is it? No one's. Why? Because it was relinquished by the one who received it, and not received by the other. 100. But among these four kinds of allowable things (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 305), namely, 'until-time' and 'until-watch', these two alone are to be stored within and are to be... and it is a permanent medicine, it is permissible to put it in an unsuitable hut, and it does not create a store. But a temporary medicine, when mixed in taste with itself, brings the three, even the one-day and seven-day medicines, to its own nature. A one-day medicine, brings the two, even the seven-day and others, to its own nature. A seven-day medicine, when mixed with a permanent medicine, brings it to its own nature. Therefore, the remaining three kinds of medicines, when mixed in taste with a temporary medicine received on that day, are permissible only on that day, before noon. But the other two, when mixed with a one-day medicine received on that day, are permissible until sunrise. But a permanent medicine, when mixed with a seven-day medicine received on that day, whether received on that day or received previously, is permissible for seven days. If received for two days, for six days. If received for three days, for five days... If received for seven days, it is permissible only on that day. It should be understood that in cases of exceeding the time, the day, or the seven-day period, offences arise in terms of the training rules regarding eating at the wrong time, storing, and medicines. However, if the four kinds of medicines, even if received together, are not mixed in taste, it is permissible to consume them according to the nature of each specific time. For example, if a drink like mango juice is received with a whole coconut fruit, without removing the husk, it is permissible to remove the coconut and consume the drink even at the wrong time. They give cold rice porridge with a lump of ghee placed on top. The ghee that is not mixed with the porridge, it is permissible to remove it and consume it for seven days. The same method applies to solid honey and treacle, and so on. They give alms food decorated with takkola, nutmeg, and so on. These should be removed, washed, and consumed for as long as one lives. The same method applies to ginger and so on, placed in gruel, and to liquorice and so on, placed in oil and so on. Thus, whatever is not mixed in taste, that, even if received together... That too, as it is pure, so having washed or peeled it, it is allowable to consume according to its respective time. If it is mixed in taste or mingled, it is not allowable. Thus, in the Compendium of Vinaya Decisions Outside the Pāli Canon, the Discourse on Decisions Regarding Time is concluded. 19. Discourse on Decisions Regarding Allowable Ground 101. Here, regarding "four allowable grounds," by the saying (Mahāvagga 295) "Monks, I allow four allowable grounds: near the eaves, where cattle sit, and by the householder's consent," these four allowable grounds— near the eaves, where cattle sit, and by the householder's consent— are to be understood. There (Mahāvagga Commentary 295), the "near the eaves" ground is to be made thus: when a monastery is made by digging in pillars or wall-bases, the stones covering the pillars beneath it are indeed part of the ground. But when establishing the first pillar or the first wall-base, surrounded by many, uttering the words, "We make an allowable hut, we make an allowable hut," by touching it as people lift and establish it, or by lifting it oneself, the pillar or wall-base should be established. But in the Kurundi and Mahāpaccarī, it is said, "It should be established saying 'allowable hut, allowable hut'." In the Andhaka Commentary, it is said, "I determine this allowable hut for the Saṅgha," but even without saying that, if it is said in the manner stated in the commentaries, there is no fault. Herein, this is a common characteristic: "The establishment of the pillar and the conclusion of the utterance must be simultaneous." For if the pillar is established before the utterance is finished, or if the utterance is finished before it is established, the allowable hut is not made. Therefore, in the Mahāpaccarī, it is said: "It should be said surrounded by many, for surely in this case, for at least one person, the completion of the utterance and the establishment of the pillar will be simultaneous." But in huts made of bricks, stones, or mud-plaster, whether by building a foundation below or not building one, when making From which point they wish to raise a wall, that first brick or stone or lump of clay should be taken and a permissible hut made in the manner stated. Bricks and so on are not permissible below the first bricks and so on of the wall. Pillars, however, rise upwards, therefore they are permissible. In the Andha Commentary it is said: "When made with pillars, there are four pillars at the four corners. In a hut of bricks and so on, two or three bricks should be designated at the four corners." But even if not done thus, there is no fault, for what is stated in the commentaries is the standard. Cattle-sheds are of two kinds: monastery cattle-sheds and dwelling cattle-sheds. Among these, where there is neither a monastery nor are the dwellings enclosed, this is called a monastery cattle-shed. Where all or some of the dwellings are enclosed, but the monastery is not enclosed, this is called a dwelling cattle-shed. Thus, in both cases, the unenclosed state of the monastery is the standard. "A monastery, even if half-enclosed or mostly enclosed, is still called enclosed,"