English
"An obstacle to Uposatha" means an obstacle to one's own Uposatha. 183. In the Pāli text, in phrases like "in the assembly where a bhikkhunī is seated," etc., "bhikkhuniyā," etc., is a genitive case in the sense of an agent. The commentary on the stories beginning with the explanation of gender, etc., is concluded. The method of commentary on the Uposatha chapter is concluded. 3. The Chapter on the Rains-residence Commentary on the stories beginning with the permission for the Rains-residence 184. In the chapter on the Rains-residence, "on the next day" means on the second day of the half-month. 185. "Or by causing the dawn to rise elsewhere" means by going with an unperformed dependent act, or by causing the dawn to rise elsewhere. "Loss" means loss of good qualities. 187. In the Pāli text, "one should stay for seven days" means not spending the entire seven days outside, but the time of dawn at the end of the seven days again in the monastery itself, in connection. Not for seven days should a return be made to the monastery. For the end of the seven-day period is here called by the word "seven days," and with reference to that, "sannivatto" (return) is stated in the masculine gender. "Three things are lost" means because latrines and the like for bhikkhunis are prohibited, they are lost. 189. "It does not decay" means because others are of little virtue, and it does not perish with my death. The description of the discourse on the permission for the Rains-residence and so on is finished. Description of the discourse on permission for those sent 199. "A person dwelling with bhikkhus" shows that he has no other recourse. "One should go" means even if not sent, one should go for a Sangha duty. And here, it should be understood that even if sent by non-lay followers who wish to know the nature of the teaching, seeing the increase of their faith, it is permissible to go for a seven-day duty. "Decision on the cutting of the night" is the decision regarding the cutting of the night, which is the rising of dawn outside, having gone for a seven-day duty. "It is permissible to go" means that having observed the sign for a seven-day duty while standing within the boundary of the precinct, and having gone with this sign, it is permissible to go having made the intention, "I will return within seven days." Even if one made the intention at the previous moment and forgot it at the moment of going, there is no fault, as it is said, "He departs with a duty" (Mahāva. 207). However, they say that for one who went without making any intention, there is a break in the Rains-residence. But for one who, even in the absence of a sign for a seven-day duty, made the intention, "I will return within seven days," and went and returned within seven days, there is an offense, but no break in the Rains-residence, they say, because of the return within seven days. This should be understood after investigation. "Goods" means robe-goods. "He cannot reach, it is permissible" means that because of his eagerness to return on that very day, there is no break in the Rains-residence or offense; this is the meaning. "Teacher" means even a non-sick dependence-teacher and Dhamma-teacher, let alone ordination-teachers and preceptors. "He says, it is permissible" is said with reference to the absence of an offense upon exceeding seven days, the Rains-residence... However, there is a break. The description of the permission for those sent is finished. Description of the break in the rains-residence due to an obstacle without offense 200. They seized in the Pāli means they took and ate. They chased away means they drove away, the meaning is they pursued. 201. Regarding "the dawn should be made to rise by the seventh day," the intention is that one should spend six days outside, and on the seventh day, before dawn, enter the inner boundary, make the dawn rise, and then on the next day, having undertaken the seven-day period, one may go. Some, however, say, "It is permissible to come on the seventh day, and without making the dawn rise, to go even on that very day," but this should not be accepted because it is stated, "the dawn should be made to rise." Indeed, in the Pāli, it is said, "a seven-day stay should be made," referring to the making of the dawn rise there on the seventh day. One who goes without making the dawn rise, and spends the seven days outside without entering, will have his rains-residence cut off, because the dawn was made to rise outside. Otherwise, the statement "the dawn should be made to rise" would be meaningless, as it would have to be said, "it is permissible to enter the monastery by the seventh day and go even without making the dawn rise." And in other places, only the making of the dawn rise is mentioned. For it will be said in the Robe Section, "One residing in one monastery makes the dawn rise in the other by the seventh day" (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 364). Even if they should say, "The Aṭṭhakathā states this meaning, that by one who has entered on the seventh day at any time, the past dawn associated with that day is considered to have been made to rise," this does not accord with the meaning of the word. For one who enters after the dawn has risen cannot be the cause or the one who makes it rise. If it were so, then in the case of one who has undertaken the rains-residence but has gone away on that very day with a seven-day allowance without making the dawn rise, the phrase "without making the dawn rise" would be contradicted, because by him too the dawn associated with that day would have been made to rise. Even for a royal monk, having gone to a suitable forest place in the evening, and returning at that very time, the dawn might be raised, and his dhutaṅga purified. But this is not proper, because it is said that the dawn should be raised only at the time of dawn's rising. For it is said: "Having departed early, in a suitable place, the dawn should be raised. If at the time of raising the dawn their illness increases, their own business should be done, they should not be concerned with the purification of dhutaṅga." Likewise, for those undergoing probation and others, who lay down their duties without raising the dawn, a break in the night is declared. For it is said: "It should be laid down when the dawn has risen." Even in the rule of "sleeping together," to be freed from the state of having dwelt with unordained persons, it is said: "having departed before dawn," and so on. Thus, in cases like being separated from one's robe, and in all other instances, the raising of the dawn at the end of the night is shown to be by means of the coming dawn, not by means of the past dawn. Therefore, the raising of the dawn here should be understood according to the method stated, otherwise, it would be a break in the Rains-residence. But the statement about one who has entered the Rains-residence departing for a necessary task without raising the dawn on that very day, that is proper, because departure is permitted whenever there is an occasion, starting from the time of entering the Rains-residence. But it is not proper for one who has gone for a week to depart on that very day without raising the dawn, because it is said: "the dawn must be raised." Just as, "For a necessary task, one may depart for a week before the Pavāraṇā ceremony, whether that monk, O bhikkhus, returns to that dwelling, or does not return," and so on. Even though non-return is permitted in the last week, it is not permissible in other weeks. Similarly, even though departure without raising the dawn is permitted in the first week, it is not permissible for one who has arrived in subsequent weeks to depart without raising the dawn; this conclusion should be reached here. Here, "brought" means brought to a place outside the monastery. Description of the story of breaking the Rains-residence without offense due to an obstacle. Concluded. Commentary on the story of entering the Rains in Vajā and other places 203. It is not proper to enter. Because of the absence of huts and so forth, it is not proper to enter by making such a verbal declaration as “I will enter the Rains here.” 204. In the Pāli, "pisācillikā" means young demons. "Having fitted an entrance door" means having made a door with panels. "Having cut down a tree" means having cut off the upper part of a hollow place. "On the top of a stump" means on the top of a hollow stump. A "ṭaṅkitamañca" is made by piercing long bed legs and inserting cross-bars. Even though it is designated as lower and upper, it is similar to the former. They place it in cemeteries and shrines of deities. A house made by spreading stone slabs over four stones is also called a "ṭaṅkitamañca." The commentary on the story of entering the Rains in Vajā and other places is concluded. Commentary on the story of unrighteous agreements and so forth 205. In the Mahāvibhaṅga, in the commentary on the fourth Pārājika. Further on, in the chapter on dwellings, unrighteous agreements will also become evident. 207. Since, for one entering the Rains in two dwellings within different boundaries, as soon as he leaves the first with the intention "I will reside in the second," the first acceptance of a dwelling ceases. Therefore, in the Pāli, "for that bhikkhu, O bhikkhus, the former (Rains) is not reckoned" is said with reference to the first acceptance of a dwelling. However, in the second acceptance of a dwelling, the former (Rains) is indeed reckoned. Residing there for three months, he is indeed considered to have completed the former Rains. Or, if on the second day or thereafter, he transgresses the intention "I will reside in the first dwelling," then the former (Rains) is also not reckoned. This should be understood. 208. Since it is said in the Pāli, "he departs with a task for the seven days before the Pavāraṇā," it should be understood that it is not proper to go even on the day of Pavāraṇā