English
in the way stated in the second [chapter]. Commentary on the Word-Division 285. "In the way stated" means it is written as "by the female characteristic in bodily contact." "By the female characteristic" is said to be the reading of the Great Commentary. "The head does not come" means there is no reviling, but when there is contact, there is. Here is the distinction: Only when there is contact with these three [types of women] is there a Saṅghādisesa offense, because of the specific terms for the excretory and urinary passages, or because of their extreme coarseness, not with the other eight, such as "you are without a mark." Among these, "you are not bloody," "you are always bloody," "you are always clean," "you are flowing," "you are a female eunuch," "you are a man-woman" — these six are non-specific terms for the passages. "You are without a mark," "you are merely a mark" — these two words are not extremely coarse. Since the eight words are said to "not generate a Saṅghādisesa," therefore they are grounds for a Thullaccaya offense. Some say they are grounds for a Dukkata offense, being merely reviling, like in the case of the wanderer. The words "you are a female eunuch," "you are a man-woman" — these words alone, which indicate a difference in the entire body's structure, do not generate a pure Saṅghādisesa, because they are common to the whole body. The others do generate it, because they are not common. For they indicate only the urinary passage, like the word "sikharaṇī" (crested). The statement "you are ambisexual" is a mixed statement with a non-Saṅghādisesa ground due to the male characteristic. For a male ambisexual, the female characteristic is hidden, the male characteristic is manifest. If that also generates [an offense], how is it that words like "you are without a mark" do not generate a Saṅghādisesa? Some say this, but it is not appropriate. Because the male also has the characteristic as a designation, and because the characteristic is stated in the matrix as "Saṅghādisesa with sexual intercourse," therefore, if she understands when he speaks with sexual intercourse, it is a Saṅghādisesa; if she does not understand, it is a Thullaccaya. If he speaks with other [words], if she understands, it is a Thullaccaya; if she does not understand, it is a Dukkata. Some say this. Everything should be thoroughly considered and understood. 287. "Laughing" means if the one he addresses understands, it is a Saṅghādisesa. Vinī The Description of That 289. The reading is “It was replied.” The word “no” is extra. Some say, “It can also be by writing letters,” and if that agrees with the method of immediate attention, it should be accepted. The description of the training rule concerning coarse speech is finished. 4. The Description of the Training Rule Concerning Serving One’s Own Desires 290. In the fourth, three cases of Saṅghādisesa have occurred; the remaining fifty-seven cases are to be understood as summarized under offenses of Thullaccaya and Dukkaṭa, as no other is possible, so it is not extracted here. The method of connecting the remaining parts should be understood in the manner stated. “By city defenses” means by city surroundings such as walls and moats. “White adornment” means white ornament, the meaning is adornment of virtue (Saṃ. Ni. Aṭṭha. 3.5.4). “Wheel of energy” means the energy wheel. He says “a stinking outcaste” referring to a sign, and with that same reference it was said, “What is evil to me, what is foul-smelling to me?” 291. “Near” means where one stands to inform. “If one connects it in the first analysis according to the Pāli, the meaning is service for the sake of desire. The rest, the word ‘intention,’ is a mere expression due to the absence of meaning. In the second, the words ‘for the sake of desire’ are mere expressions according to the Pāli, due to the absence of their meaning there. Thus, four words are connected according to the two analyses, as others say,” it was stated. 295. In these training rules, if there is a transgression due to sexual passion, there is no offense of Saṅghādisesa. Therefore, “What, venerable sir, is the highest gift? Sexual intercourse”—this was said merely to praise and describe sexual intercourse, and it should be understood that it was not said with the intention of sexual intercourse for that purpose. For praising the service of desire for another bhikkhu, there is a Dukkaṭa. Even by an indirect statement like, “Give the highest gift to him who dwells in your monastery,” there is a Dukkaṭa. And because it was said, “He should praise the service of his own desires. Such a virtuous person as I am,” say some. Some say that because it exists in five factors, it is a Saṅghādisesa. It should be accepted after consideration. However, in the Gaṇṭhipada, it is said, “In these two training rules, by body They say it is a grave offense for lewd, lustful speech, as if in intercourse with yakkhis and petis. But in the Commentaries, it is written that it does not occur. But they say a hermaphrodite is like a eunuch. The explanation of the training rule concerning serving one's own lust is finished. 5. Explanation of the Sañcaritta training rule "I am unfortunate" means "I am unfortunate." In "I, sirs," the word "ayya" is plural. "They entreat" means humbling themselves, they beg the gods. "They implore" means exalting themselves, they beg with respect. Adorned with ornaments and so forth, decorated with hairstyles and so forth. They say there is a wrong-doing in the act of adorning. Explanation of the Word-Division "Existing with punishment" is the meaning. "Chandavāsinī" means, the Pāli text says "the beloved causes the beloved to dwell," the intention is "causes a man to dwell." The Commentary says "the beloved causes the beloved to dwell." The meaning is, if she reports it as certainly reporting that the action will be accomplished. If he reports to both parents, it is a Saṅghādisesa. In the Vinaya-vinicchaya, it is said, "the case should be examined." And in the case, it is said that "Elder Udāyi reported to a courtesan." That is useless, from the Commentary's statement "there is no doubt even when speaking to mothers, etc." "But this" is the teacher's statement. For one sent with "Speak to the mother-protected one," if he goes and speaks to a mother-and-father-protected one, even though she is mother-protected, it is still doubtful. Why? Because it is said, "there is doubt for one speaking to any of the father-protected, etc." Otherwise, the word "etc." would be meaningless. Combining one group of ten with another group of ten, and due to the method stated previously regarding the emission of semen, it should be understood that the mother sends her own daughter to the mother-protected one. "Without rejoicing" is merely a statement. Even if one rejoices, as long as one does not report the message, one is not called "investigated." "At the time of reporting the message" means at the moment of speaking the message of the one who commanded. "In the manner stated in the third clause" means a wrong-doing by the fulfillment of one factor. By counting the matters, it is a Saṅghādisesa; indeed, by counting both matters. 339. But here, regarding "no offence in the fourth (case)", they say it is said to show that there should also be a Pāli text for "no offence" like 'going, he does not accomplish; coming, he deceives', just as in "he accepts, does not investigate, does not return, no offence". And in some books, "it exists". Explanation of the Vinīta Matters 341. "Alaṃvacanīyā" means "not to be spoken of"; the word "alaṃ" is for prohibition. "Therapitā speaks" means "the old father speaks". Although here it is not stated "a woman means a human woman, not a female yakkha, not a female peta, not an animal; a man means a human man, not a yakkha," etc., nevertheless, since in cases like physical contact, "human woman" is specified as a woman, it is understood that here too it is a human woman. Because of being a preliminary part of sexual intercourse, a human hermaphrodite is indeed a matter for a grave offence (thullaccaya); the rest, such as human eunuchs, hermaphrodites, animals, and men, are matters for a minor offence (dukkaṭa) as they are associated with wrong conduct in the Dispensation. This should be understood. However, cases should be cited as appropriate. Just as in not knowing the rule, so too in not knowing the state of being "not to be spoken of," it should be understood as unintentional. Even in cases of gross misconduct, etc., it is said to be "in this (case) too." They say that "even for one who has sent a letter and received a reply, there is no 'go-between' (sañcaritta) if he does not know the nature of 'go-between'." This should be taken after investigation. The explanation of the Sañcaritta training rule is finished. 6. Explanation of the Kuṭikāra (hut-builder) training rule 342. "Asking" means urging "give, give." "Request" means informing "we have this need." "He asks for 'handiwork' (labour) or equipment, or 'he will give the price (mūlaṃ)'." It is not permissible. Some say it is permissible for lodging, having obtained light, conversation, etc. "Unoccupied" means ownerless. "One should not consume what is brought" means it is said that "a minor offence (dukkaṭa) arises from requesting soup and rice." Although it is said "in matters sufficient for heavy requisites," nevertheless, whatever is small in terms of the object... ...or by reason of great value, such as orpiment, cinnabar, and so forth, they say, "It is not proper to request that." 344. He was a Kirāti sage. Then he attained, then he attained. 348-9. It is not possible to make by requesting, therefore the meaning is that one should do it oneself with requested materials. The wording fits, but not the meaning. Why? Because here both are intended, showing that, he said, "Since indeed..." and so forth.