English
I gave it with the intention that "it will go with me," not otherwise,' and 'being angry, he snatches it'— thus it should be supplied and construed. 633. 'One dukkaṭa' means: if, being ordered, he certainly snatches it, at the moment of the order, it is a pācittiya. If he does not snatch it, then only is it to be understood as a dukkaṭa. 'Many offences with one utterance' means: if, being ordered, he snatches without interruption, at the moment of the order, there are pācittiya offences according to the number of objects, because the offence is incurred at the moment of the act of application. But the robe becomes nissaggiya only when snatched. If he does not snatch it, at the moment of the order, only one dukkaṭa is to be understood. In this way, the method should be known in other similar cases. 635. 'He will take an upajjha' indicates a gift to a novice. And thereby, even if one gives it during the novice period and snatches it during the full ordination period, it indicates a pācittiya. 'Having given a robe to a bhikkhu oneself'— this is stated in the highest sense. 'But it is permissible to have it brought'— this is said because, if the act is not done, it is like wages. The last robe, not subject to designation, given by oneself, perceived as one's own, (given to) a fully ordained monk, snatching it or causing it to be snatched out of anger— these are the five factors here. The explanation of the training rule concerning the snatching of a robe is finished. 6. The explanation of the training rule concerning the requesting of thread 636. In the sixth (rule), the place where it is woven, the square piece of wood around which they wrap (the thread), its name is 'turi' (shuttle). Weavers, having inserted the thread crosswise, with which they beat (the threads) to make the cloth dense, that is called 'vema' (reed/batten). By 'in the other case, likewise, a dukkaṭa,' from the time weaving is begun, a dukkaṭa also occurs only when the aforementioned limit is finished, n And before that it shows in the acts of weaving. That which is on the loom should be determined. Here, once determined, what is woven afterwards is considered determined. There is no further act of determining. If, however, with intervals, having set aside the fringes, separate portions are woven, each must be determined separately. And here, taking suitable thread, even by an unknown, uninvited weaver, through an unsuitable weaver, by means of a phrase like: "There is thread, but no one to weave," there is no offense for one who causes it to be woven. Therefore, in the Mātikā Commentary (Kankhā. Atth. Suttaviññattisikkhāpadavaṇṇanā), the meaning of the word "vāyāpeyyā" is stated as: "He should cause it to be woven by an unsuitable request, saying, 'Weave a robe for me, friend.'" One who speaks thus causes it to be woven by an unsuitable weaver, not otherwise. 640. In "There is no offense in sewing a robe," and so on, there is no offense by this rule itself. But they say there is a dukkaṭa due to an unmade request. Unsuitable thread, self-dedication, and causing it to be woven by an unsuitable weaver with an unsuitable request— these are the three factors here. The commentary on the rule concerning requesting thread is finished. 7. Commentary on the rule concerning the great weaver. 642. In the seventh, "should give even a little" is a showing of the difference in application. Giving is not a factor here. Therefore, in its analysis, it is said, "even if he recites the Dhamma." The rest here is clear. Approaching unknown, uninvited weavers and making a request, the robe being for oneself, the thread being increased by his word, and the acquisition of the robe— these are the four factors here. The commentary on the rule concerning the great weaver is finished. 8. Commentary on the rule concerning an urgent robe. 646. In the eighth, it says that the eleventh dawn for a robe that arose on the sixth day rises during the robe season, by "from the sixth day onwards," and so on. And because it is said "not having come for ten days," it means from the fifth day onwards, before the full moon, when ten dawns have risen. Even a robe is not to be relinquished. That eleven days together with the full moon day are allowed, only so much is obtained by this rule. It shows that all robes arising from the sixth day onwards are not to be relinquished until the robe season, by means of the first Kathina rule itself. 650. Now, gathering together here and showing the allowance obtained for each respective robe by the rules beginning with the first Kathina, he says, starting with "for an extra robe..." "When the Kathina is not spread, a month plus eleven days; when the Kathina is spread, five months plus eleven days" - this very reading agrees with the Pāli. But some say that the reading should be "a month plus ten days, five months plus ten days." That is not appropriate, otherwise, it would be said "not arrived for nine days." And what is written in the Mātikā-aṭṭhakathā here: "Although it is established by this [rule] 'an extra robe is to be kept for a maximum of ten days,' but by way of the origin story, the rule is laid down as if showing an unprecedented meaning," that is written by mistake, because it is said that "the time for depositing a robe arising from the fifth day of the bright half of the Pavāraṇā month is shown." And having taken this very mistaken writing, it should be understood that the venerable teacher Buddhadata also said, "the allowance is one month, the maximum is ten days," and so on. The meaning is that in another robe similar to an emergency robe, previously determined (as such), by a similar manner of arising time etc., one transgresses the robe season with the perception of it being an emergency robe. Therefore here a dukkaṭa and non-offence are stated, otherwise, in all three cases, only a pācittiya would be stated. Indeed, even for a non-emergency robe, when one transgresses the robe season, it is indeed a pācittiya, as should be understood from the triad of emergency robes. ...for the last measure of an emergency robe that is subject to determination. its being one's own property, its arising on the full moon of the three months of Kattika, ten days after the end (of the vassa), its not having been determined or designated, the passing of the robe season— these are the four factors here. The commentary on the training rule concerning emergency robes is finished. 9. The commentary on the training rule concerning doubt. 652-3. In the ninth (rule), "antaraghara" (between houses) means "antaraghara" (within the village), because "gāma" (village) is mentioned here. Therefore, it says "antogāme" (within the village). In the Vibhaṅga (624) of "He dwells having attained the first jhāna," the word "upasampajja" (having attained) is extracted with its context. Referring to that, it says, "as in 'upasampajja' and so on." Also of that, meaning the Vibhaṅga word "vutthavassānaṃ" (of those who have spent the Rains). "Vutthavassānaṃ" is a genitive case of determination. By this, it is established that in the previous training rule, for those who have not benefited from the kathina, the practice of not taking (robes) is not obtained even in the kathina month; otherwise, the training rule itself would be meaningless. This should be understood. Here, "from the place worthy of enclosure" means one clod's throw, starting from the vicinity of houses situated at the village boundary, is called "the place worthy of enclosure." In the Visuddhimagga (1.31) too, it is said, "starting from the first clod's throw of an unenclosed area." That (refers to) that first dwelling and so on. However, in the Majjhima Nikāya commentary, it is said that the boundary of the monastery and the village should be drawn, and the measurement should be taken between the two clod's throws. Since it is stated, "A certain bhikkhu in Kosambī was ill," it is said, "the Kosambī allowance is permitted." By "And he had gone to the western direction," it is shown that for one who has deposited his robe within the village and is residing in that monastery, it is permissible to stay away for the entire robe month. If there is a need to go elsewhere from there, a six-night absence outside the monastery is permitted. Therefore, it says, "Having come to the dwelling, let him cause the seventh dawn to rise," and so on. "Having stayed" means having caused the dawn to rise. "Right there" means in that very place he went to. The factors here are stated in the commentary itself. The commentary on the training rule concerning doubt is finished. 10. Description of the Training Rule on Dedication 660. In the tenth, "a mango sapling planted" is said with reference to one planted by someone with a specific intention. If it is improper or withering, it is permissible to pluck it and offer it anywhere. "Seeing it standing" means seeing it standing after taking the remainder. Regarding "Give it where you wish," even if it is specified, "Give it to so-and-so," there is no fault, because it was said "according to your liking." The maturity in the Sangha, knowing that and dedicating it oneself, and the receipt— these are the three factors here. The description of the Training Rule on Dedication is finished. The third chapter, Pattavagga, is finished. Thus, in the Vimativinodanī, a sub-commentary to the Vinaya Commentary Samantapāsādikā, The method of describing the Thirty is finished. The first part is finished. Homage to that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Perfectly Self-Enlightened One. In the Vinaya Piṭaka, Vimativinodanī-ṭīkā (Second Part) 5. The Pācittiya Section 1. The False Speech Chapter 1. Description of the False Speech Training Rule 1. In the first training rule of the False Speech chapter, regarding "minor ones," they say that the word "minor" is a synonym for "many." "Therein" refers to those chapters, or to the minor ones. When others say,