English
the words 'pārājika' and so on, which have already been stated. Bhaṭṭha means fallen from the Dispensation. Niraṅkata means rejected. This (etaṃ) is the offense-form of pārājika. Chinna means cut off in between. By 'by competent bhikkhus' (pakatattehi bhikkhūhi), here, 'competent' means those who have not incurred a pārājika and have not been suspended. Some, however, because it is said in the Commentary: ‘because it must be done together by competent bhikkhus’, competent... They say there is no fault in performing Sangha acts like Uposatha with the shameless ones. That is not proper, because that meaning is not established by this statement. If indeed a Sangha act is performed, it is performed by those in good standing, not by those not in good standing. Thus this statement is for rejecting co-residence with those not in good standing. But not that a Sangha act must be performed together by all those in good standing, including the shameless and so on. Thus, regarding the rule of co-residence, even among those in good standing who have incurred a shared offense, and with each other, and with the shameless, the performance of an act together is prohibited. For it has been said: "If the entire Sangha, having a shared offense, performs Uposatha without following the prescribed method, then in the same way, the entire Sangha incurs an offense," and so on (Kaṅkhā. aṭṭha. nidānavaṇṇanā). "Where material enjoyment is permissible, there also Dhamma enjoyment is permissible." And co-enjoyment with the shameless is prohibited in the commentary, because performing an act together is also a form of Dhamma enjoyment. Therefore, just as in the Pāli canon, for the purpose of defining individuals who incur a pārājika offense, in the statement: "whoever is ordained by a ñatti-cattuttha kamma... (etc.)... this bhikkhu is intended in this context," the rule that all who are ordained by a ñatti-cattuttha kamma are *only* individuals who incur a pārājika offense is not established, because there are also those who do not incur pārājika offenses, such as trainees and so on. But rather, it is among those ordained by a ñatti-cattuttha kamma that shameless, foolish, ordinary people who incur pārājika offenses are found, and not among those ordained by "ehi bhikkhu" and so on; thus this rule is established. Similarly here, it is among those in good standing that blameless, conscientious, desirous of training individuals suitable for performing acts together are found, not among those not in good standing. Thus this rule is established, because those not in good standing, due to their inability to complete a quorum, are by definition non-co-residents. But the shameless ones, by being quorum-completers, and by enabling the act, are not included among the non-co-residents. (Of those) performing the act together with them, having not done the prescribed method, having crushed (it)... This offense, shamelessness, should be understood as not disappearing. For it is said, "One shameless person makes a hundred shameless." Therefore, it will be said, "All the conscientious ones dwell together in these acts, etc." And this meaning will become clear in detail later. "Thus" refers to "by those who have defined the boundary," etc. "Sama-sikkhatā" (equal training) means training in the precepts laid down by the Blessed One, by performing acts of unity such as worshipping together, eating together, entering villages, observing duties and counter-duties, learning, questioning, reciting, etc. And to show that this should be trained equally with the conscientious, not with the shameless, it is said, "But what is laid down... (etc.) ...is called equal training." There, the precepts that are to be trained together equally by conscientious individuals, by way of not transgressing and by way of learning and questioning, etc., are called "samasikkhā" (equal training). The meaning is that the state of being trained equally in these, in the manner described, by the conscientious, is called "samasikkhatā." When the shameless do not enter into the conscientious practices in the aforementioned common acts, etc., there is no co-residence with the conscientious. Therefore, they appear outside, thus it is said, "All the conscientious," etc. 56. "What was said" is the connection. "It is not a 'thing' itself" is said to remove the doubt of a pārājika offense in cases where the signs (genitalia) of female figures made of gold, etc., are perceived, even in their body parts. Therefore, for one who feels remorse regarding objects that have been disciplined, such as painted or plastered objects, it is said there is no pārājika offense. Explanation of the First Tetrad. 57. "Assa" is a verb, and showing its meaning, it says "hoti" (is). The meaning is "should be," it is said as "hoti." In the second alternative meaning, "hoti" is the remainder of the sentence. 58. "For one who assents" - here, assent means the arising of the mind of desire to indulge, thus it says "for one endowed with the mind of indulgence." "Opponent" means undesirable, harmful. When it is said, "Opponents of bhikkhus are bhikkhu-opponents," the royal opponents, etc., mentioned above, also fall under this. For turning back, monks are indeed enemies. The meaning is shown like royal enemies. "That moment" means "the moment of insertion." From tip to root, the act of insertion is the ongoing time, called the moment of insertion. "At the time of being inserted" means: as much of the organ as is fit for insertion, when that much is fully inserted. It means the moment the act of insertion is completed. Thus inserted, from withdrawal's start, the organ remaining in the interval, its remaining, is called "remaining." But in the commentary, it refers to the time when a woman, having reached emission, has ceased all effort, and remains still. It is said "at the time of semen emission." Both should be taken as "remaining." "Withdrawal" means the ongoing time for pulling out up to the tip. Thus it is said: "At the time of pulling out, one establishes the thought of indulgence." And here, because there is movement of the organ and body acted upon by others, as soon as the thought of indulgence arises, at that moment, the movement of the organ and body, arising as mind-born form, is indeed produced by this thought of indulgence. Moreover, when the thought of indulgence arises, even if the organ is not acted upon by others, movement certainly occurs. And that is called "done by him." Therefore, he incurs a pārājika offense, arising from body and mind, just like "above the knee" (Pāci. 657-658). For there too, an offense is stated merely by consenting "to touch below the armpit, above the knee... or to press" (Pāci. 657). But for a monk's bodily contact, it is said: "should engage in bodily contact" (Pārā. 270). His own effort is stated as the cause of the offense. Therefore, even if lust for bodily contact is present when touched by a woman, and even if bodily movement is generated by the woman, it should be understood that there is no offense due to the absence of his own effort. But some say: "Even in the case of the first Saṅghādisesa, if one is forcibly acted upon by others with hands and so on, release..." The pleasure of destruction arises, and because of that, if he ejaculates in the impure, it is a Saṅghādisesa; if he does not ejaculate, it is a Thullaccaya, so they say. Aṅgārakāsu means a heap of charcoal, or a pit full of charcoal. That not assenting when a woman is making an approach is not the case for everyone, he says, "This is it," and so on. By the eleven fires means by the eleven fires, namely, lust, hatred, delusion, birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair. His means of one who does not assent. "Having taken out and placed four" - here, because it pertains to a single individual, even one non-offence case is called "four" by way of the four terms: entering, remaining, taking out, and placing. In "the discourse on the first four," however, although it should be called "five fours" in the manner stated for the five cases including the non-offence case, by attributing their oneness as pertaining to a single path, it is called the first four. For that reason, it will say, "There are three purification fours by way of the three paths," and so on. Description of the Discourse on the Two Hundred Sixty-Nine Fours 59-60. Mattam means intoxicated by liquor and so on. Akkhāyitanimittā is stated here by the word akkhāyita with the elision of the latter part, so he says, "Akkhāyitanimitta." "Jāgarantaṃ" and so on, because it is without specific qualifiers, is called "purification fours." Samānācariyaka-therā means disciples of the same teacher. Aparabhāgo Gaṅgāya means the other side of the Gaṅgā. Vatare is a particle in the sense of "indeed." Thus, "of those who are respectful of the Vinaya" states the reason for the importance of the decision to be declared by Upatissa Thera later. "Having completely exhausted everything" means having taken the entire Pārājika field without remainder. If he were to lay down a rule leaving some remainder, the stream of transgression would flow there for the shameless by some pretext, so he says, "Having cut off the stream." It is possible to lay down a rule even with a remainder only in the training rules concerning minor offences like co-sleeping (Pāci. 49-51), not in those concerning worldly offences, so he says, "This is it," and so on. For in the co-sleeping training rule (Pāci. 49 ff.), although mostly covered, mostly surrounded... When covered, from the lower boundary, a pācittiya is shown. When half-covered, half-bounded, a dukkaṭa. Nevertheless, due to the remaining part of the rule, even in mostly covered, half-covered, and so on, the commentary shows a pācittiya. Here, however, due to the completeness of the rule shown by the Blessed One, below the mostly visible mark, there is no pārājika area;