English
The teacher's intention was stated before, therefore it should be examined. 67-8. "Having known" means having known by himself, without asking. "Pokkhara" means the body, like the drum-skin of a kettle-drum. Worldly people say "beautiful" without reservation. Therefore, "by beauty of complexion" in the first sense means "by distinguished skin-color of the body." In the second sense, it means "by beauty of color." In a commentary, it is said: "Because her color was like the heart of a water-lily, she was golden-colored, therefore she received the name 'uppalavaṇṇā' (water-lily colored)." The statement "her body-skin was blue-water-lily colored" reveals her natural complexion. In the world, however, by the saying "like a water-lily, praised as dark-skinned," and by the saying "that dark-skinned woman, dark-skinned, with a slender dark waist, she is my attendant, my dwelling in heaven," a dark-skinned woman is praised among women. "As long as darkness for her" is also a reading. One who is not defiled by defilement-sensual pleasures in object-sensual pleasures. 69. "The female gender appeared" means the female form appeared, and that was by the disappearance of the male faculty and the appearance of the female faculty. Similarly, in the appearance of the male faculty. By this, just as For them, the male faculty does not arise, only the male form arises. Just as for some eunuch, the male form arises even without the male faculty, it is not so for them, this is shown. But that female faculty, or male faculty, when disappearing, disappears in reverse order, like those dying, starting from the seventeenth mind-moment. When the present faculty ceases, the other dissimilar faculty appears. Because for one who has fallen into deep sleep, the dissimilar faculty appears, therefore it is said, "for one who has fallen asleep at night." "I allow, bhikkhus, that same preceptor, that same ordination," by this saying, the female preceptor is the preceptor, the female ordination teacher is the teacher. And so, should the duties of preceptor and teacher for them be performed by this bhikkhu going to the bhikkhuni monastery in the morning? And should they, coming to his monastery, perform the duties of a co-resident and so on? "I allow, bhikkhus, to associate with bhikkhunis," by this saying, separation is shown. And it should be understood that "I allow, bhikkhus, that same preceptor," and so on, was said only to show that a preceptor should not be taken again, and ordination should not be performed. There, "to associate with bhikkhunis" means, "I allow to be together with bhikkhunis, being without bhikkhus." Therefore, by this Pāli text, the commentary's saying, "for her, there is no offense in going to another village and so on," is established. It is possible to come and associate. And since going is allowed by the Blessed One, how can there be an offense due to going to another village and so on? Indeed, it is proper that the Blessed One does not enjoin an offense. Otherwise, from the Pāli saying, "those offenses which are not common to bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, there is no offense in those offenses," it would follow that there is no offense in going to another village and so on. Commonality is indeed an offense, "those offenses which are common to bhikkhus and bhikk If it is not said: "There is no offense by those offenses not common to nuns, and those offenses of associating with nuns, of going to another village, crossing a river, staying overnight, being left behind by the group, there is no offense by these offenses"? It is not said, because of an undesirable consequence. Even if she has associated with nuns, having abandoned them, associating with others, there is no offense of going to another village, etc., always. Because of this undesirable consequence, it is not said in that way, is the meaning. In that case, even though she intentionally commits the act of going to another village, etc., at that time, because she does not incur the offense due to the manifestation of her gender, there is no offense. By the very fact of not incurring an offense, she is called "risen," it should be understood. Similarly, a yogi suppresses defilements that have not yet arisen. Even a bowl without a binding is called "lacking five bindings," or if one does not make it known at all, the training is not renounced. Similarly here, an offense not incurred is called "risen," it should be understood. But since she, even though not incurring the offense of sleeping together with a man, is able to associate with nuns, therefore, considering it as "no offense," it is said in the commentary: "There is an offense of sleeping together for both." This is said in the Parivāra: "One incurs an offense by these four ways: in the midst of the Sangha, in the midst of a group, in the presence of an individual, by the manifestation of gender." (Parivāra 324) But what is said in the Parivāra: "One who incurs an offense rises, one who rises incurs an offense." (Parivāra 324) Its meaning is that one incurs the offense of sleeping together, etc., and rises from the offenses not common (to nuns). It should be understood that both of these are referred to. The monastery is far away, five hundred bows to the west. The meaning is that for one entering the village from the monastery, it is another village. "Having released the arrangement" means "having not made arrangements for the journey." "Having made them angry" means "having abandoned them." By the saying "even by a novice of full age," it seems that there is no taking of an upajjhāya (preceptor) for one not of full age. "Having performed a Vinaya act and placed it" means "having made an alternative arrangement and placed it." For those not arranged otherwise, upon the lapse of ten days, nis... It should be known as allowable. Again, having received it, it is allowable for seven days. It is said by the saying: "I allow, monks, for monks to have it received by nuns for storage, and to consume it." By abandoning without concern, or by receiving without concern for the object, "I will receive it again and consume it." At the time of the six-night penance, if the gender changes again, the six-night penance must be given. If, in the state of a monk, for an unconcealed offense, not for a concealed one, this is not the doctrine, says the teacher. But the giving of probation does not exist, it should be known that it is said due to the impossibility of a nun concealing it. If a nun commits an unshared pārājika offense and obtains a male gender, she does not receive ordination among monks, she receives renunciation. Having not renounced, if he remains in the state of a monk, he does not commit the offense of cohabitation. When a male gender appears in a confused nun, she does not receive ordination among monks, it is a pārājika. If a male gender appears in a confused person who is a layman, a defiler of nuns, he does not receive ordination among nuns, nor again among monks when the gender change occurs. If a nun's gender changes, he becomes a monk. If he then renounces the training, becomes confused, and obtains a female gender, she receives ordination among nuns, because in both cases she had not previously reached the state of pārājika. But a nun who has completed twelve years and obtains a male gender is indeed an ordained monk. If he again renounces the training and returns, he should not be ordained, because he has not completed twenty years. If the gender changes again, she receives ordination among nuns. If, in this way, a boy who has completed twelve years has a gender change, he becomes a woman who has gone to a householder. If she has completed twelve years, she should be ordained, it is said. By the disappearance of a nun's female gender, or by the disappearance of a monk's male gender, There should be no state of a seasonal eunuch, that bhikkhunī should not be expelled by bhikkhunīs, nor a bhikkhu by bhikkhus, due to the possibility of returning to a normal state. But referring to a natural eunuch, it is said, "A eunuch should be expelled." For a seasonal eunuch should be expelled from co-residence, the other from both – this is the meaning. If they were to return to a normal state, this rule would be possible: "I allow, monks, that they may associate with bhikkhunīs with the same preceptor, the same ordination, and for the same number of years." If a change of gender were to appear in them, that rule, and the offenses common to bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs, those offenses could be settled in the presence of bhikkhunīs, and there would be no offense for uncommon ones – this rule is also possible. What is said in the Parivāra: "With the acquisition, one abandons the former, stands in the latter; the declarations cease, the designations cease; with the acquisition, one abandons the latter, stands in the former; the declarations..." and so on, that is said with reference to the aforementioned rule, according to our teacher's acceptance. When a female or male gender disappears, does it disappear taking the whole body with it, or by itself? And in this regard – if it disappears taking the whole body with it, this person would have died. Therefore, he would have fallen from recluseship, and if re-ordained, he would be an apparitional being. But if it disappears by itself, that state is also contradictory for him. For the female faculty and so on pervade the entire body, so their disappearance should be understood like momentary cessation; therefore, the absence of the aforementioned fault should be understood. It should be understood that just as when the light of one lamp ceases among lamps whose lights are intermingled, the place of the other remains, so too the place of the rest of the body remains there. 71-2. Whether it is released or not, it is merely a dukkaṭa (minor offense), due to the absence of desire for release. "Beyond the range" means that