English
"If there are many monasteries in one boundary, all the monks should be gathered and the kathina should be spread in one place," states: "The meaning of 'in one boundary' is 'in one upacāra boundary' is appropriate." The state of the kammavācā-reciting boundary being a bound boundary is understood from the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī (Kaṅkhā. Aṭṭha. Nidāṇavaṇṇanā), which states: "And they stood within one boundary, not abandoning the hand-reach. And this boundary is of two kinds: bound boundary and unbound boundary." And it is also understood from the Vinayatthamañjūsā (Kaṅkhā. Abhi. Ṭī. Nidāṇavaṇṇanā), which states: "Referring to the question 'And what is this boundary, where those who stand not abandoning the hand-reach are called those who have attained the act?' when showing the boundary, the clarification of the nature of those with divisions occurs through the method of showing divisions, thus it said 'And this boundary' and so on." Among these, how many kinds of bound boundaries are there? How many kinds of unbound boundaries are there? Bound boundaries are of three kinds: fragmented boundary, same-residence boundary, and non-separation boundary. Unbound boundaries are of three kinds: village boundary, water-casting boundary, and seven-cubit boundary. How is it understood? What then? It is understood from what is stated in the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī (Kaṅkhā. Aṭṭha. Nidāṇavaṇṇanā): “A boundary that has overcome the eleven kinds of misfortunes, endowed with three kinds of good fortune, connected sign by sign, and approved, is to be known as a bound boundary. A broken boundary, a boundary of common residence, and a boundary of non-separation are its divisions. An unbound boundary, however, is of three kinds: a village boundary, a boundary of seven cubits, and a boundary of water-throwing.” Thus, since it is stated that the acts of the Saṅgha, such as the four-group act, are to be performed only in these six boundaries— in the three bound boundaries and in the three unbound boundaries— it is understood that a pure upacāra boundary is not to be recited with a kammavācā. When there is a bound boundary within an upacāra boundary, even if that bound boundary is covered, the upacāra boundary extends, and that bound boundary is suitable for the recitation of a kammavācā and suitable for the spreading of the kathina, so it should be understood. But are not fifteen kinds of boundaries mentioned in the commentaries (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 379; Kaṅkhā. Aṭṭha. Akālacīvarasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā)? Why then are only six mentioned? It is true. Among those fifteen boundaries, the upacāra boundary is only a place for the distribution of Saṅgha gains, etc. The gain boundary is only a place for the collection of produce there. These two boundaries are not places for performing Saṅgha acts. The market-town boundary, the city boundary, the district boundary, the country boundary, the kingdom boundary, the island boundary, and the world-system boundary— these boundaries are of the same nature as the village boundary and are included within the village boundary, so they are not mentioned separately. And here, how is it to be known that the upacāra boundary extends over the bound boundary? Because it is stated in the commentary (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 379): “An upacāra boundary is delimited by the enclosure of an enclosed monastery, and by the place suitable for enclosure of an unenclosed monastery.” Since the bound boundary exists within the enclosure or the place suitable for enclosure, the upacāra boundary extends over it. Thus, what is given with the thought, “I give to the Saṅgha” within this upacāra boundary, but it reaches even those standing in the interstices of the broken boundaries," (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 379) it is said. By this it is known: "a fixed boundary situated within a precinct boundary is also called a precinct boundary." So be it. If there is a fixed boundary within the inner precinct boundary, then the formal act of giving the Kathina should be recited right there, and the Kathina should be spread right there. If there is no fixed boundary within the inner precinct boundary, what should they do? If there is no fixed boundary within the inner precinct boundary, they should go to an existing fixed boundary in an outer precinct boundary, or to a place where water is thrown up, recite the formal act, and then return to the monastery, stand in the precinct boundary which is the field for the rains-residence, and spread the Kathina. This should be understood. But sir, in that case, the formal announcement would be in one boundary, and the spreading in another. If so, would it not contradict the statement in the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā (Vajira. Ṭī. Mahāvagga 308) which says: "If the donor gives to the Saṅgha after completing the preliminary duties, it should be received and given by a formal act. And by that, after determining and spreading it in that very boundary area, the Saṅgha should be made to rejoice"? Did we not say: "The boundary for reciting the formal act is a fixed boundary, and the boundary for spreading the Kathina is a precinct boundary"? Therefore, it does not contradict the statement in the Vajirabuddhiṭīkā. There, previously, since most monasteries had fixed boundaries, it was said with reference to gathering the entire Saṅgha, reciting the formal act, and spreading it in that very monastery which was both a precinct boundary and a fixed boundary. Even if there is no fixed-boundary monastery, if there is a fixed boundary within the inner precinct boundary, we too have stated that the formal act should be recited in that very boundary area, and the Kathina should be spread right there. But if there is no fixed-boundary monastery, and no fixed boundary within the inner precinct boundary, in such a monastery, it is not permissible to recite the formal act. One must go to another fixed boundary or to a place where water is thrown up, and recite the formal act... Having had it brought, having come to one's own monastery, standing in the precinct boundary, which is the field for the rains-residence, the Kathina should be spread. It should be understood that many excellent teachers, following tradition, do likewise. But other teachers say: "When there is a pure precinct boundary, without a consecrated boundary, in that very precinct boundary, the motion and formal declaration should be recited, the Kathina should be spread. The motion should not be in one boundary, and the spreading in another." But this is their intention: "By 'the boundary where the Kathina is spread' is meant the precinct boundary." In the Vajirabuddhi Commentary (Vajira. Ṭī. Mahāvagga 306), the nature of the boundary as a precinct boundary, being the place for spreading the Kathina, is stated. And in that same commentary (Vajira. Ṭī. Mahāvagga 308), in the previously indicated passage: "Having resolved and spread it in that very boundary area, the Sangha should be made to approve." The fact that it should be spread in the very boundary where the formal declaration is recited, is also stated. Therefore, the motion should not be in one boundary, and the spreading in another. In that very precinct boundary, having recited the formal declaration, the spreading should be done in that very place. There is no need to go to a consecrated boundary situated outside the precinct boundary for the act of spreading. There, such a consideration should be made: This act of giving Kathina, called "motion" in other languages, is a motion-second act among the four Sangha acts. The Kathina offering is among the nine instances of a motion-second act. Among heavy and light acts, it is heavy. If it had come in the treatises that "four Sangha acts should be done in the precinct boundary," then, in accordance with the words of those teachers, the motion-formal declaration for the Kathina offering would have to be recited in the precinct boundary. But it has not come in the treatises that "four Sangha acts should be done in the precinct boundary." Rather, "the division of Sangha gains, entering the monastery after observing the duties of a guest, asking for a lodging by a monk who is departing, the relaxation of dependence, the period of probation..." the monks on tour raising the sun, the nuns asking permission to enter the monastery, and so on, these should be done within the precinct boundary." Thus, it is established that the *ñatti-dutiya-kammavācā* for the Kathina offering should not be recited solely within the precinct boundary. How is this understood? If it is said, "The non-residence boundary can be three yojanas. If so, those standing three yojanas away will receive offerings. Standing three yojanas away, one will have to fulfill the duties of a guest and enter the monastery. A traveler will go three yojanas and ask for a lodging. For a monk who has undertaken dependence, his dependence will cease if he crosses three yojanas. A monk on probation will have to raise the sun after crossing three yojanas. A nun will have to ask permission to enter the monastery while standing three yojanas away. All this is permissible to do only by defining it within the precinct boundary. Therefore, it should be divided only within the precinct boundary." It is understood from such a passage in the commentaries (Mahāva. Aṭṭha. 379). Then they might say, "You said that the precinct boundary is not a place for *ñatti-dutiya-kammavācā*, but it has been done before. Thus, for the appointment of a robe-receiver, a robe-distributor, and a robe-divider, it is stated in the commentaries (Vi. Saṅga. Aṭṭha. 194) that it is permissible to appoint them within the precinct boundary by means of a *kammavācā* like 'May the Sangha hear me... (pe)... I hold it,' or by announcement, even in the midst of the entire Sangha within the monastery, or even in a partial boundary. But regarding the storehouse, it is stated in the commentaries (Vi. Saṅga. Aṭṭha. 197) that "this storehouse