English
He should not give dependence to newcomers. Those who have already taken dependence should be told: "I am performing a disciplinary act; under the name of such-and-such elder, s do not take a close attendant, do not do my duties, do not ask me about entering the village.’ If, even after being told this, she still does it, there is no offense for her doing it from the time of prohibition. Another novice should not be taken. A novice taken after being given to an preceptor should be told: ‘I am doing a disciplinary procedure, do not do my duties, do not ask me about entering the village.’ If, even after being told this, he still does it, there is no offense for him doing it from the time of prohibition. The appointment of a bhikkhunī advisor should not be accepted. Even if appointed, bhikkhunīs should not be advised. Therefore, the Sangha of bhikkhus should be told: ‘Sirs, I am doing a disciplinary procedure, please know the bhikkhunī advisor.’ Or the burden should be placed on a capable bhikkhu. Bhikkhunīs who have arrived should be told: ‘Go to the Sangha, the Sangha will know your advisor,’ or ‘I am doing a disciplinary procedure, go to such-and-such a bhikkhu, he will give you advice.’ The offense for which the Sangha has given a probation should not be committed. Nor should another similar offense, or one worse than that. The procedure should not be disparaged. Those performing the procedure should not be disparaged. The Uposatha of a normal bhikkhu should not be suspended. The Pavāraṇā should not be suspended. A formal admonition should not be made for the purpose of obstruction or for the purpose of summoning. For when one does it for the purpose of obstruction, one does it thus: ‘I make a formal admonition to the venerable one in this matter. Do not depart from this dwelling or beyond, until that dispute is settled.’ When one does it for the purpose of summoning, one does it thus: ‘I make a formal admonition to you. Come, go with me into the presence of the Vinaya-holders.’ Neither of these two should be done. The position of elder in the monastery should not be taken. One should not be a reciter of the Pātimokkha or a teacher of the Dhamma. Nor should an act of authority be done by way of any one of the thirteen appointments. "Venerable sir, grant me an opportunity, I wish to speak to you." An opportunity should not be granted to one who has thus made himself. He should not be reproached concerning a matter or an offense. He should not be reminded, "This is your fault." Quarrels should not be caused by setting monks against each other. As a senior monk of the Sangha, one should not go or sit in front of a pakatatta monk. Leaving a twelve-cubit distance, one should go and sit alone. Whatever is the Sangha's last seat, last bed, last dwelling, that should be given to him. Therein, "last seat" means the last place for the Sangha in the refectory and so on. That should be given to him. He should sit there. "Last bed" means the last of the beds, the worst bed or stool. For he, by seniority, does not obtain a bed in his due place. The worst bed, filled with dung and filth, bound with creepers and so on, remaining after all monks have chosen, should be given to him. And just as with the bed, so too the dwelling place for him, by seniority, is not suitable in his due place. But a leaf-hut, with a dusty floor, filled with bats and mice, remaining after all monks have chosen, should be given to him. If all the pakatattas are tree-dwellers and open-air dwellers, they do not go into a roofed dwelling. All these are called "abandoned dwellings" by them. Among these, whatever he wishes, that he obtains. On the day of the Rains-retreat invitation, he may receive requisites by seniority, standing to one side. He does not receive a lodging. If he wishes to receive a regular Rains-retreat lodging, he must set aside the discipline and take it. When invited by relatives, "Take so many monks and come," he should not, having arranged thus, "Venerable sirs, such and such a family has invited monks, come, let us go there," approach families as a leading or following monk. "Venerable sirs, in such and such a village, people wish for monks to come, it would be good..." a, if you would provide them with support.” Thus, it is proper for him to speak to them in terms of discipline. One who is ashamed to inform those who come and go should not undertake the forest-dweller’s ascetic practice. Even if one has naturally undertaken it, one should take a second monk and make the dawn rise in the forest; one should not dwell alone. Similarly, one who is ashamed to sit at the edge of the seats in the refectory and so on should not undertake the alms-food-eater’s ascetic practice. But for one who is naturally an alms-food-eater, there is no prohibition, nor should alms-food be prevented on that account, thinking, “Lest they know me.” Having had food brought in, sitting and eating in the monastery, one should not prevent alms-food from being brought in for this reason: “I will count the nights; if I see a monk going and do not inform him, there might be a break in my nights.” And with this intention, “Lest even one monk knows me,” one is not allowed to have food cooked by novices in the monastery and eat it; one must go to the village for alms. However, for one who is sick, or engaged in duties such as new construction, or for one’s preceptor or teacher, it is proper to stay in the monastery. Even if many hundreds of monks are wandering in the village, and it is not possible to inform them, one should go to a village dwelling and stay in a suitable place. Since it is said, “Monks, a monk on probation should inform an arriving monk, should inform a departing monk, should inform on the Uposatha day, should inform on the Pavāraṇā day; if he is sick, he should inform even by messenger,” (Cūḷava. 76) Therefore, an arriving monk who has gone to any monastery should inform the monks there. If he sees all of them standing in one place, he should inform them while standing in one place. If they are standing separately at the foot of trees and so on, he should go there and inform them. If he intentionally does not inform them, there is a break in his nights, and an offense of wrong-doing for breaking the rule. If, searching, he does not see some of them, there is only a break in his nights, not an offense of wrong-doing for breaking the rule. An arriving monk, having come to his own dwelling monastery, To him, whether one or many, It should be announced as stated. The breaking of the night-period, And the breaking of the observance here, Should be understood as stated. If the newcomers, Having rested for a moment, Or without resting at all, Go through the middle of the monastery, To them also it should be announced. If they go without him knowing, And he knows when they have gone, He should go and announce it. If he cannot reach them, Or make them hear, There is only the breaking of the night-period, No wrong-doing for breaking the observance. Even those who do not enter the monastery, But pass by crossing the vicinity boundary, And he hears their umbrella sound, Or their coughing sound, Or their spitting sound, And knows them to be newcomers, He should go and announce it. Even if he knows when they have gone, He must pursue and announce it. If he cannot reach them, There is only the breaking of the night-period, No wrong-doing for breaking the observance. Even if one comes at night, And goes away at night, He also causes a breaking of the night-period. But because he was unknown, There is no wrong-doing for breaking the observance. If he performs rehabilitation without knowing, It is as if not done, So it is said in the Kurundi. Therefore, it should be done By taking additional nights. This is the infallible practice. Even seeing a bhikkhu Going by boat in rivers, Or standing on the other bank, Or going in the sky, Or standing far away In mountain valleys, forests, If there is a determination: "This is a bhikkhu," Having gone by boat, Or having made a loud sound, Or having pursued quickly, It should be announced. For one not announcing, There is both a breaking of the night-period, And a wrong-doing for breaking the observance. Even if trying, If he cannot reach them, Or make them hear, There is only the breaking of the night-period, No wrong-doing for breaking the observance. But Thera Saṅghasenābhaya Speaks regarding the sphere and non-sphere: "Indeed, for one not announcing Within the sphere, There is both a breaking of the night-period, And a wrong-doing for breaking the observance. But outside the sphere, There is neither." Thera Karavīkatissa says: "The determination 'This is a recluse' Is the criterion. Even if it is outside the sphere, There is indeed no wrong-doing For breaking the observance, But the breaking of the night-period Certainly occurs." So it is said. On Uposatha day, "We will observe Uposatha," visiting monks come. Even those going by psychic power, knowing it is Uposatha, descend and observe Uposatha. Therefore, for the purification of visitors, it should be announced even on Uposatha day. The same rule applies to Pavāraṇā. By a sick person unable to go, sending a monk, it should be announced. It is not proper to send an unordained person. A monk on probation should not go to a dwelling with monks, or an uninhabited place, or a place without monks, or a dwelling or uninhabited place with those of different communion, except with a normal monk, except for danger. Where indeed not even one monk is, there one should not dwell. For nights spent there are not counted. But in the ten kinds of danger, even if nights are not counted, one should indeed go to be freed from danger. Therefore it is said, "except for danger." It is not proper to perform Vinaya acts with those of different communion. Even if they are not announced, there is no cutting of nights. It is just like a dwelling without monks.