English
"By that" means by the reason for which perceptions of objects arise. In the description of the training rule, "should make it serious for the bhikkhu, should reveal it" is the connection. "I am free from perception" means with the perception gone astray. "This very object" refers to what is mentioned in this training rule, and also to the absence of offense for one who touches anything, animate or inanimate, not mentioned. "With lust" means with lust for physical contact. "Without lust" refers to a mother or the like, without lust for physical contact. "Dukkaṭa" is said for one who touches out of motherly affection or the like; but for one who touches even a woman without lust, if it is with lust for physical contact, it is a Sanghādisesa. "It accords with this Pāli" is the connection. How does it accord? If, when the thought "I will grasp a part of a woman's body" arises, the perception of woman were absent, even in grasping a part of the body, there should be no grave offense, because the grave offense is stated in the Pāli (Pārā. 276) only for the perception of woman. Therefore, the view stated by Mahāsumatthera: "When one grasps a body with the thought 'I will grasp a part of a woman's body,' the perception of woman is not absent. Thus, when grasping a body with the thought 'I will grasp a part of a woman's body,' since the perception of woman, the lust for physical contact, and the act of grasping the body are all present, one incurs a Sanghādisesa as appropriate to the situation," accords with this Pāli. In the Commentary, a grave offense is stated for one who embraces with the perception "I will embrace many women with my arms," regarding those in the middle. For him, there is no perception "I will grasp the body-part of the women in the middle." Therefore, it should be understood that it also accords with the Commentary. "Black woman" is mentioned due to the difficulty of discerning her features by blue (color). 279. "Intention to serve" means intention to serve the pleasure of touch. In the case of "bound to the body," it should be understood as recognizing touch as bound to the body. "No offense" because there is no offense at the mere arising of a thought— this is said with reference to the absence of an act, even if one approves of the bodily movement made by a woman, because no bodily movement arises from the mere passion of bodily contact. However, in the first pārājika, since there is no action initiated by others, when the intention to serve arises, the agitation of the sexual organ necessarily arises by itself due to that intention, and that is considered as done by him, thus it is called pārājika. In the same way, in the first saṅghādisesa too, even if one approves of the action initiated by another, an offense occurs due to the possibility of agitation of the sexual organ. In the fourth, it is in the phrase: "nor does he exert himself with the body, nor does he recognize the touch." "Nor does he recognize the touch" —the word "api" (nor) indicates that there is no exertion either, as in the third case. "As in the case of a nissaggiya offense" —this should be understood as merely an illustration of the absence of recognizing touch, not of the absence of action. In "intention to release," even if passion for bodily contact arises intermittently due to the mind's rapid change, there is no offense as long as the intention to release is uninterrupted; but if it is interrupted, there is an offense. The method of the Commentary on the Word Analysis. 281. Here, "do not take" is said with reference to an offense of wrong-doing (dukkaṭa) for touching with householder-like affection bound to the body. But out of compassion, if one says "take" to someone who cannot take an object like cloth, or if one, out of compassion, without thinking, suddenly grasps the hair or other parts of someone drowning, who has reached an unavoidable state, and pulls them up with the intention to release, there is no offense. For it is not forbidden to lift one's dying mother. The same applies to a woman who is not a relative. "Mother" is mentioned to show that even an excellent mother should not be touched. But what should be done for her, when doing it for other women too, It is still no offense, there being no difference in what is not to be touched. "Bundle of grass" means a coil made from the roots of hirivera and the like, for decorating the hair. "Having removed" means having taken it away from being one's own clothing and so forth. But for the purpose of offerings and the like, it is permissible to touch it even temporarily. "Hair ornament and tooth-pick and so forth": This is to be understood in two ways: "hair ornament" made from cloth, cotton, and so forth for hair decoration, and "tooth-pick and so forth." Thus, it shows the meaning that a hair ornament is to be taken for the purpose of a hair ornament, and a tooth-pick for the purpose of a tooth-pick. Or, it should be construed thus: "A tooth-pick made for inserting crosswise into a tied bundle of hair is itself a hair ornament and tooth-pick," making it one thing, and "a needle to be carried in a needle-case, which is an implement for that particular task, is a needle-case needle-implement." "Figure of a book" means one made of plaster and so forth; even one made in the shape of the female animals that were the object of the pārājika offense is not to be touched. It is permissible to use female figures and the like, and female figures on walls and the like, without touching them. When there is no lustful physical contact with such untouchable things, there is no fault in touching them with something connected to the body. "Having broken": Here, because it is stated in the commentary that even untouchable things can be broken with sticks, stones, and so forth, and because it is stated in the Pāli that there is no offense even in touching with the intention of release in times of danger, this meaning should be taken: It is permissible to encircle and take a snake or other wild animal with a cloth, stick, and so forth, to release creatures caught by them; to take a mother or the like drowning in water with a cloth and so forth; and to lift up one who is unable to do so, by the hair and so forth, out of compassion. However, the commentary's statement, "But it should not be touched," is said with reference to something not in danger of dying; this is our patience. "Having established the path" means having generated the perception, "This is the path." "Having designated, they give": This is said in a proper sense, but by them, those monks When it is said, "Sit down without spreading anything," it is permissible to spread something oneself and sit down. "Born there" means they remain as living plants without being uprooted. Since it is said "while playing," there is no offense for one who touches them if there is a reason. But it is not permissible at all to touch anything belonging to monks that is fit for use, due to its being improperly handled. "I will give this to the unordained" - this is said with reference to taking without receiving. There is no fault in taking it for one's own use after receiving it, as it is not something to be untouched. "Jewel" means any gem, such as beryl and others, of various kinds like luminous essence. "Beryl" is a gem the color of fresh bamboo; some also say "dark-centered, circular-colored." "Stone" means very smooth black stone the color of mung beans; they also say that smooth stones of red, white, and other colors, which are called gems, are not to be touched. "Silver" includes all remaining silver, such as coins and their fractions, and lac-like substances. "Red gem" is a ruby. "Masāragalla" is a variegated gem; some also say "emerald." Since pearls crushed and used for medicine lose their gem status, and are not regarded as gems at the time of taking, it is said, "it is permissible for medicine." But as long as those pearls remain in the form of gems, it is certainly not permissible to touch them. Similarly, it is certainly permissible to take other gem-stones, crush them, and use them for medicine. But it is not permissible to accept gold and silver, even for the purpose of crushing and using them for medicine. Even if given by householders, if it remains in the medicine in the form of gold, etc., and can be separated, such medicine is also not permissible. If it has become unusable, it is permissible. Since it is said "including crystal," it should be understood that natural stones like sunstone and moonstone are included in "gem." "A blown conch, a washed and pierced one, and one mixed with gems" should be combined. "Pierced" means having a hole made in the manner of a gem, etc. "Mixed with gems" means with gold creepers, etc. It is studded with gems, such as pearls. By this, it shows that another conch, made of metal, mixed with gems, is not to be touched. The same applies to stone. By "water conch," it is established that conch-shell vessels, made in the form of bowls, are suitable for monks to receive. "Other" means those remaining, excluding those associated with gems. "Starting from the seed" means starting from the ore. "He forbids" is said because a gold ore casket or a Buddha image, etc., becomes subject to forfeiture if one makes it one's own. Since it is said, "in the place for discarding silver," it is established that it is permissible to touch and discard gold and silver that is to be discarded. "To make it move" means to touch it and move it here and there. "It is said" refers to what is said in the Great Commentary. They say that it is permissible to remove only dirt, meaning that whether they are cowherds or others, it is permissible to wipe with the hand and remove dirt, and it is permissible to clean away impurities. But this does not agree with the Commentary, as it is similar to making it move. "Brass metal" is a type of copper-colored bell-metal. There are three kinds of bell-metal: