English
and exclude the rose-apple, and establish it. A boundary has become mixed with a boundary. Therefore, if the boundary of the first-made monastery is not validly established, the boundary's vicinity should be set aside. If it is validly established, a boundary interval of one cubit should be set aside at the western end. In the Kurundi, "even a span" (is said). In the Mahāpaccari, "even four finger-breadths is permissible" is said. Even one tree can be a boundary mark for two boundaries. But as it grows, it causes boundary confusion. Therefore, it should not be done. A boundary established by overlapping another boundary means one established by one's own boundary overlapping another's boundary. For if they establish their own boundary by including the whole of another's established boundary, or a part of it, it is called a boundary overlapping a boundary. However, it is permissible for bhikkhus to establish their boundary even within a bhikkhunī's boundary, having overlapped it. The same rule applies to bhikkhunīs regarding bhikkhus' boundaries. For they are not quorum-completers for each other's acts, nor do they make the formal act invalid. Thus, having avoided these eleven faulty boundaries, a boundary should be established. 157. Those endowed with three perfections are endowed with perfection of marks, perfection of assembly, and perfection of formal acts. Among these, those endowed with perfection of marks are those where, among the eight marks thus stated – a mountain mark, a rock mark, a forest mark, a tree mark, a road mark, an anthill mark, a river mark, a water mark – in each respective direction, the marks that are found and are suitable as marks (are used). "What is the mark to the eastern direction? A mountain, venerable sir. That mountain..." by the method of "O sign!" and so on, having correctly proclaimed, they are agreed upon. Herein, this is the determination (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 138) – the Vinaya-holder should ask, "What is the sign in the eastern direction?" "A mountain, venerable sir." This, however, whether an ordained person or an unordained person points it out, it is valid. Again, the Vinaya-holder should proclaim the sign thus: "This mountain is the sign." But it is not valid to proclaim thus: "We make this mountain a sign, we shall make it, it has been made a sign, let it be a sign, it is, it will be." The same method applies to rocks and so on. In the eastern direction, in the south-eastern direction, in the southern direction, in the south-western direction, in the western direction, in the north-western direction, in the northern direction, in the north-eastern direction, what is the sign? "Water, venerable sir." "This water is the sign" should be proclaimed. Here, however, having established it, again, "What is the sign in the eastern direction? A mountain, venerable sir. This mountain is the sign" – having proclaimed the sign that was first proclaimed, it should be established. For thus, sign is joined with sign, and the signs, even if proclaimed once, are indeed proclaimed. In the Andhakaṭṭhakathā, however, it is said, "The sign should be proclaimed three times by one who is binding the boundary circle." 158. Now, the objects that serve as signs, such as mountains, should be known – a mountain is of three kinds: a pure earth mountain, a pure rock mountain, and a mixed one of both. All three kinds are valid, but a sand heap is not valid. The other, if it is smaller than the size of an elephant, is not valid; from the size of an elephant up to the size of Mount Sineru, it is valid. If there are four mountains in the four directions, or three in three, it is valid to agree upon four or three mountain signs, but it is not valid to agree upon two signs or one. The same method applies to rock signs and so on that follow. Therefore, one who is making a mountain sign should ask, "Is it connected, or not connected?" ti. If it is one continuous mass, it should not be done. For by marking it in four or eight directions, only one mark is marked. Therefore, a mountain that thus stands encircling the monastery in a wheel-like shape, having marked it in one direction, in other directions, making it outside, other marks should be marked inside. If they wish to make a third or a half part of the mountain within the boundary, without marking the mountain, as much area as they wish to make inside, beyond that, on that very mountain, one of the born trees or anthills, etc., should be marked as a sign. If they wish to make the entire mountain, one or two yojanas in size, inside, beyond the mountain, on the ground, born trees, anthills, etc., should be marked as signs. For a stone mark, even an iron ball counts as a stone. Therefore, any stone is suitable. But in size, one the size of an elephant is considered a mountain, therefore it is not suitable. But one the size of a large ox or a large buffalo is suitable. With a lower limit, one the size of a thirty-two pala lump of clay is suitable. Smaller than that, even a large brick is not suitable. A heap of stones not suitable as marks is also not suitable, much less a heap of dust and sand. A flat stone level with the ground, like a threshing floor, or a stone risen from the ground like a stump, if it meets the size requirement, is suitable. Even a very large flat stone counts as a stone. Therefore, if they wish to make one part of a large flat stone within the boundary, without marking that, another stone on top of it should be marked. If they build a monastery on top of a flat stone, or if the flat stone passes through the middle of the monastery, such a flat stone is not suitable. For if they mark it, the monastery would be on top of the mark, and a mark, by definition, is outside the boundary, so the monastery would also fall outside the boundary. A flat stone standing encircling the monastery, having marked it in one place, in other should not be designated. Regarding a forest as a sign: a forest of grass or a forest of trees like palm, coconut, etc., which have pith in their bark, is not suitable. But a forest of trees with pith inside, such as teak or sal, or trees with mixed pith, is suitable. And this, by the lower limit, is even just four or five trees. Less than that is not suitable. More than that, even a hundred yojanas, is suitable. If, however, they build a monastery in the middle of a forest, the forest should not be designated. Even those who wish to make a part within the boundary should designate trees, rocks, etc., there, without designating the forest. A forest surrounding a monastery, designated in one place, should not be designated elsewhere. Regarding a tree as a sign: a tree with pith in its bark, like a palm or coconut tree, is not suitable. A living tree with pith inside, even if it is eight finger-breadths in height and the size of a needle-stick in circumference, is suitable. Less than that is not suitable. More than that, even a well-established banyan tree twelve yojanas away, is suitable. A tree grown by planting a seed in a bamboo, reed, or earthenware pot, even if it reaches the required size, is not suitable. But if it is removed from there and planted in the ground for even a moment, a fence is made, water is poured, it is suitable to designate it. The emergence of new roots and branches is not a reason; but if it is planted after cutting the trunk, this is applicable. And one designating it may say "tree," or "teak tree," or "sal tree." But a single connected tree, like a well-established banyan, designated in one place, should not be designated elsewhere. Regarding a path as a sign: paths through wilderness, fields, rivers, or ponds, etc., are not suitable. A foot-path or a cart-path is suitable. One that goes through two or three village-intervals, piercing through. But paths from which one deviates from a foot-path or cart-path and then returns to the cart-path itself, or foot-paths and cart-paths that are not frequented, are not suitable. Only those frequented by foot-travelers and cart-travelers are suitable. If two paths emerge and later join like a cart-pole, it should be designated once at the point where they diverge or where they connect, and then It should not be marked. For this is a single, connected mark. If, encircling the monastery, four paths go in four directions, it is not proper to mark one in the middle and then another. For this is a single, connected mark. But if it goes piercing a corner, it is proper to mark it on the other side. But a path that goes piercing through the middle of the monastery should not be marked. For if marked, the monastery would be upon the mark. If they make the last wheel-track of a cart-path the mark, the path is outside the boundary. If they make the outer wheel-track the mark, the outer wheel-track is outside the boundary, and the rest belongs within the boundary. When marking a path, it is proper to mark it with any of the ten names such as "magga, pantha, patha, pajja" and so on. But a path that goes encircling the monastery like a moat, it is not proper to mark it in one place and then in another. Regarding an anthill as a mark: by the lower limit, an anthill born on that day, eight finger-breadths high, even the size of a cow's horn, is proper. Less than that is not proper. Beyond that, even one like the Himavanta mountain is proper. But if it stands encircling the monastery as a single, connected entity, it is not proper to mark it in one place and then in another. Regarding a river as a mark: if, in the time of righteous kings, when it rains every half-month, every ten days, every five days, and the clouds have completely dispersed, its current ceases, this does not count as a river. But if, in such a time of good rain, its current does not cease during the four months of the rainy season, where a bhikkhunī, having covered her three circles with the prescribed robe, and having lifted her inner robe, crosses,