English
Since in the two words "gruel-mixed," there is no naming of what is worthy of invitation, therefore, if the gruel is more or equal there, he does not invite. Why? Because those who bring and reject perceive it as gruel. If the gruel is little, and the rice is much, he invites. Why? Because for both of them there is a different perception there, this is the teacher's reasoning. In the case of rice-mixed, because of the existence of the name of what is worthy of invitation, he always invites. In the case of mixed, however, the reason should be stated in the manner mentioned. He gives it separately, that is, so that no rice remains, he firmly squeezes it with his hand and strains it before giving it. Regarding "made improper," here it is said, "Even if one has made proper the surplus with things made improper, such as plantains, it is permissible to eat the rest, leaving aside those plantains. Since the juice is unmixed, it is permissible to make them proper again, place them in another vessel, and eat them after making them surplus. Why? Because the disciplinary act had not previously been applied to them," they say. From the saying, "Done by one who has eaten, invited, and risen from his seat," it is established that it should be done by one who has eaten, not invited, and risen from his seat. Therefore, "When two people are going on a journey in the morning, one has been invited, He sits there, not having risen; he, having gone for alms with another, even without having eaten the alms received himself, it is said that he may indeed make it 'enough for all'. This is established in the bright fortnight by "it is done by one who has eaten." In that fortnight, his own seven limbs are not fulfilled. It should be understood that in the dark fortnight, seven are stated as the counterpart. By one who has eaten, not having been invited, having risen from his seat, or by one not having risen, it is done; it is permissible. However, to explain this alternative meaning, "by one who has been invited, not having risen from his seat," it is also permissible to say, "seven limbs are stated." He may not do it again, due to the implication that what was done first should be done again by him. For it is said, "What is not done, that should be done." If he, the first one, wishes to do it again, he may do what was not done before in another bowl. The second one may do it even in the first bowl. For it is said, "By whom it was not done, by him it should be done." Referring to this very meaning, it is written, "What was first made allowable by him, that he may not do again; it should be done by another." There, "that" means "that which was done first." Regarding "having sent, one should have it done," if an unordained person has gone, having received it by one bhikkhu there, and having it done by another, it means that one person alone cannot do it in that way. From the saying "whatever is designated for a sick person," etc., even the portion due to a sick person in monasteries, etc., is called "excess for the sick," therefore they say it is permissible. Some say "for the purpose of food" means only at the wrong time. 241. Bodily action is from consuming. Verbal action is to be understood as not having it done by saying, "Venerable sirs, make it surplus." The explanation of the first invitation training rule is finished. 6. Explanation of the Second Invitation Training Rule 243. "It is common" means this, "as much as you wish," is common to all invitations. The explanation of the second invitation training rule is finished. 7. Explanation of the Wrong-Time Eating Training Rule 247-9. N Plays are performances, acting plays, like the abduction of Sītā and others. And that root is edible, thus 'root-edible'. This method applies everywhere. Piṭṭha means powder. Khārakamūla means sacrificial post root. Caccumūla is neḷiyamūla. Tambaka is vaca. Taṇḍuleyyaka is cūḷakuhu. Vatthuleyyaka is mahākuhu. Vajakali is nikoṭṭha. Jajjharī is hirato. Koṭṭha is called jaraṭṭha. Gaṇṭhi is muhukulamudu vicayattha vajamuju vaduḷavi. These are avoided: kiṃsuka, turmeric. Kaseruka, kaṭibalava is its name. Ambāṭaka is amūlaka piḍhala kakkula. Masālu is kinaḷa. Āluva is kaḷi taḍḍhiaḷi alasa kaṭissala namedati mera. Siggu is sīri koḷa kālaka nekaḷavi. The root of the milk creeper is tumūroriya. Saṅkhata is just washing. This is written as "parisaṅkhāra". Khīrakākolī is kirikaveḷi. Jīvika is jīvihi. Usabhaka is ummasuviyi. Hintāla is kitili. Kuntāla is toho tilisatā padikaḷiro paṭasevalakaḷi. Karamandaka is karamba daṇḍokira udakajoti kaṇḍako. It is written: "It is also called siṅghataka." Phaggava is hakiḷi. Nattamāla means karañji. Sellu is loholiya. Kāsamaddaka is kuduvavali anasikina. Ummādiya is melelidiya. Cīnamugga is venamutti huramugga. Rājamāsa is māhaviliti. Aggimanta is muñci. Sunipaṇṇaka is tipilavanināḷikā tilaka. Here, regarding "loṇī born on the ground," because the name loṇī is common, it is specified as "on the ground." Brahmīpatta is demeteye paṇasā. If it is asked, "Why is it said loosely, 'The island dwellers say'?" It is said, "Because it is not consistent with the characteristic of 'spreading for eating'." Padeliviniteki. Sulasipaṇṇa means tasāpalika. Agandhikapuppha is karissaya, cekavādidapuppha, celepatimala. Jīvantīpuppha is jīvitandigamala. Bakula is muthuvala. Kuyyaka is punapunnāmapunnarā, jātisumana. Navamālikā is cehemala. Tintiṇika is kacinī vileyi. Mātuluṅga is lavano. Pussaphala is supu Timbarūsaka is *tigibbera*, well-washed. Tipusavātiṅgaṇa is *dhutatika*, prepared. Coca is *variyiyeli*. Moca is *atireli*. Some say *goṭṭhaphala* is *pūvaphala*. It seems to be in the storehouse. Some say *asamussi* is *bimba*. *Kāsmarī* is *sepaṇṇi*. *Atitemeti* is its work. *Jātiphala* is made. *Kaṭukaphala* is *tiriraka*. *Taruṇaphala* is *kiriupulu*. *Pokkharaṭṭhi* is *kiñcakkhaṭṭhi*. *Siddhatthaka* is white mustard. *Rājika* is red. *Hiṅgu* is *hiṅgujatu*, all asafoetida preparations. Here, *hiṅgujatu* means it should be made by boiling leaves and branches. *Sipāṭikā* is made by boiling branches. Some say it is made by mixing with others. *Taka* is wood-born in the fireplace. *Nikitissākālesayo*. *Timera*, *takapatti*, *pasākhāpatte* should be made by boiling leaves and branch-leaves. It is written: "Takapaṇṇi should be made in this way." The commentary on the training rule concerning eating at the wrong time is finished. 8. Commentary on the training rule concerning making a store 253. The meaning is that "making a store" means for the next day. "Received today" does not mean only what is received, but also what is taken up. Therefore, in the commentary, it is said: "One receives, an offense of wrong-doing arises. Thus, for one who takes anything stored, whether for a limited time or for a day and night, with the intention of consuming it, an offense of wrong-doing arises at the time of receiving." If it was received for the first time, "at the time of receiving" should not be said. Therefore, this should be understood: "What was taken at its proper time is said to be 'received today'." Here it is asked: Just as the five medicines, once taken up, are not intended (for storage). After seven days, there is no offense because they are not to be consumed (after that time). Similarly, here too, is what is taken up not intended (for storage)? Here it is said: In the training rule concerning medicines (Pārā. 618 onwards), it is appropriate that what is taken up is not intended (for storage), because an offense would arise there merely by the lapse of its proper time. Here, it is not appropriate (to say that what is taken up is not intended for storage), because an offense does not arise merely by the lapse of its proper time. Indeed, here an offense arises only by consumption. This is the intention, therefore, according to the opinion of Anugaṇṭhipada, having taken it today and eating it on the next day, one incurs two offenses. Here is the consideration: one who desires to eat oneself, having taken it today and eats it on the next day, incurs two offenses. That which was taken for the sake of novices etc., having taken it again on the next day and eating it, should not be made to incur an offense. "He accepts, an offense of wrong-doing" - this is the meaning here: if, like Belaṭṭhasīsa, having accepted it today for the sake of the second, third, etc. days, he gives it for the preservation of novices etc., for him, upon accepting it on the next day for consumption, an offense of wrong-doing is possible. If he himself preserves and keeps it, seeing fallen refuse on the next day, or accepting it with doubt, an offense of wrong-doing is possible from the very act of acceptance. If he does not accept, that wrong-doing does not exist. It is said, "This is like 'He transgresses one foot, an offense of grave fault,' etc." But he who transgresses both feet at once, for him, that grave fault does not exist; this should be understood as similar. Here, Dhammasiri Thera says that it creates a store without abandoning the state of being accepted; that contradicts the Pāli text "He accepts, an offense of wrong-doing." But grease absorbed by a skull is not to be used. Even if it oozes out when exposed to heat, nevertheless, it is said, "like in the training rule concerning medicine." Otherwise, ghee etc. absorbed by a skull would also generate an offense after seven days. "Having accepted oneself" - here too, it is the method mentioned before. The account of the unwashed bowl also seems to agree with this. "For the purpose of food" is also taken in the sense of 'in time'. "Ordinary meat" means permissible meat. "Eating with a mouth containing meat, two (offenses)" - it is written, "For one who eats yesterday's accepted Yāmakālika (food) before noon today with a mouth containing meat, there are two Pācittiya offenses."