English
Therefore, it says, “The Blessed One granted the allowance of three nights for the sake of supporting novices, saying ‘more than two or three nights.’” Or, the mention of two nights is made to signify three consecutive nights. For, if only “three nights” were said, one might count three nights even with an interruption by staying elsewhere. But when “three nights” qualified by “two nights” is said, it indicates three consecutive nights. In the Vimativinodanī also (Vi. Vi. (Sub-commentary on Pācittiya 2.50-51) "The mention of 'two nights' is for rhetorical embellishment. Having slept continuously for three nights, an offense is incurred only by one who sleeps on the fourth day and thereafter, not by one who sleeps intermittently, and this should be understood as for the purpose of showing this." — so it was said. "Sleeping together" means sleeping in one place. Here, "sleeping" is also said to be the act of lying down, extending the body, and also the lodging where one sleeps. Therefore, in "should arrange a sleeping place," the meaning is: having entered a lodging, which is a sleeping place, one should arrange or prepare the act of lying down, which is a sleeping place. Here, "one and a half cubits high" means one and a half cubits measured by a carpenter's cubit. "With five coverings" means with the five coverings consisting of bricks, stones, plaster, grass, and leaves. "By way of having it on the tip of the tongue" means by way of being proficient. "Having one approach" is said with reference to having one entrance door. However, in the Vimativinodanī (sub-commentary on Pācittiya 2.50-51), it is said: "Having one approach" means suitable for going everywhere by entering through one path without stepping into the open air. Even if it has many doors, it is still considered to have one approach. But where they block it with walls and the like and make separate doors, it has many approaches. If, however, they merely block it, and do not make separate doors, this too should be taken as having one approach, like a room with a door closed with clay and the like. Otherwise, if one were to enter a room and sleep with unordained persons on the porch and the like, without being free from the offense of sleeping together, and have the room door closed with clay and the like, and then have it opened at dawn, there would be no offense." — so it was said. "A four-sided hall has one approach" — this is the connection. Regarding "an offense for a bhikkhu in each instance of their use," some say: "An offense is said to arise from inaction, by not getting up, because there is no action for one sleeping at that moment. For this training rule arises sometimes from action, sometimes from inaction. And its arising from action is stated mostly." — so they say. "Just as this is so, so too is daytime sleeping. For by not getting up, by not closing the door... And they say, "This does not arise from non-action," and this seems appropriate; it should be examined and taken. 80. "With a wall not connected to the upper floor" is said to show that there is nothing to be said about a connected wall. There is no doubt for one sleeping on the upper floor, thus "in the lower palace," etc., is said. "Not in the vicinity" refers to a place where they ascend to the upper floor by making an external staircase, thus "even on the upper floor" is said. Since there is no offense for one lying in an open courtyard, "within the roof" is said. "In the manner of a hall" means in the form of a hall. Regarding "a bed in a half-walled dwelling," it is said in all three knot-points: "A half-walled dwelling is where walls are built on three sides, leaving one side open, or where a wall is raised on one side, and half-walls are raised on both other sides, such a dwelling is a bed." But in the knot-point, it is said: "Half-walled dwelling means a dwelling where the roof does not reach the half-wall." This is also not inappropriate. However, in the Vimativinodanī, it is said: "By 'in the manner of a hall' is shown the structure of what is called a half-walled dwelling. Where walls are built on three or two sides, or where the roof does not reach the half-wall, this is called a half-walled dwelling." "Vāḷasaṅghāṭa" means a structure made with lion figures above the pillars, etc., within the enclosure. Regarding "gone outside the enclosure," it should be understood that even where there is no enclosure on that side, there is no offense if one goes outside the area that would be suitable for an enclosure. However, in the Vimativinodanī (Vi. Vi. Ṭī. Pācittiya 2.50-51), it is said: "Regarding 'gone outside the enclosure,' where there is no enclosure on that side, if the object is high from the ground, even within the area below the high object on both sides, there is no offense on the ground, because there is no designation of a bed there. If the object is low, at the same level as the ground, for the bed, It stands on the ground level. There, in the direction without an enclosure, within the entire unroofed area, there is an offense everywhere. Because there is no boundary, it should be understood that outside the enclosure there is no offense. Regarding "in an unpartitioned inner chamber approach," in large four-sided halls with an open courtyard in the middle, it is not possible to enter all the chambers by going directly through the main entrance without entering the open courtyard. Similarly, a "partitioned inner chamber approach" is made by extending walls on two sides of each chamber. But this is not like that, hence it is called "unpartitioned inner chamber approach." They enter all the chambers. Because the inner chamber approach is unpartitioned, they enter those respective chambers by going directly through the main entrance without entering the open courtyard. Then, why is it said that its enclosure alone is entirely partitioned? It is said, "for its enclosure is just the enclosure of the chamber." This is said with reference to the chamber walls all around. Indeed, in a dwelling arranged in the manner of a four-sided hall, even if the chamber entrance is not separately enclosed, it is considered enclosed by virtue of the chamber walls standing all around. 81. A palace arranged by making it long and straight in one direction is a one-hall arrangement. Arrangements of two halls, etc., made in the form of a triangle, etc., in two, three, or four directions, should be understood. The exposition of the types of halls is the distinction here from the former. Regarding "eight pācittiyas," starting with the dukkaṭa offense for a half-roofed, half-enclosed dwelling, as shown in the Pāli text, even more than that, all fully-roofed, half-enclosed, etc., even if not mentioned in the Pāli text, are shown as grounds for a pācittiya, because the training rule is an offense of prescription, and because one must abide by what is serious. Regarding "seven pācittiyas," it is said by taking the two pācittiyas mentioned in the Pāli text as one in a general sense. In the Pāli text (Pāci. 54), "having gone out before dawn on the third night and slept again," this is in the highest sense. It is said: Even for one who, without going out, having risen before dawn, sits within the covering, there is no offense of co-sleeping on the next day. Here, one-fourth is a small part; two-fourths are half; and two parts out of three are the majority. By this characteristic, small, covered, surrounded, and so forth, should be understood. Now, extending the aforementioned method to the second training rule, he says: "With a woman... this is the decision." They say: "Even with a dead female heretic, who was the basis for a pārājika offense, since she is in the unappropriated category, she does not generate the offense of co-sleeping." From the saying: "When the sun has set, if a woman lies down, and he lies down, there is an offense of pācittiya" (Pāci. 57), it should be understood that for one sleeping during the day, there is no offense of co-sleeping. Thus, in the Vinayālaṅkāra, which is a commentary on the Vinayasaṅgaha, named the Ornament of the Discourse on the Decision of Co-sleeping, the Sixteenth Chapter. 17. Discourse on the Decision of What Should Be Done Regarding Saṅgha-owned Beds, Chairs, and Other Lodgings. 82. Having thus explained the decision on co-sleeping, now, in order to explain the decision on what should be done regarding beds in a Saṅgha-owned monastery, he begins with: "In a Saṅgha-owned monastery, a bed..." There, "Saṅgha" means that which performs collective action; and this meaning of the word is common to all Saṅghas. "Saṅgha-owned" means given to the Saṅgha. "Monastery" means where one dwells; in that. "Bed" means where one sleeps; that. "Having spread" means having spread out. "Departure" means going away. The interpretation of this recitation passage, "In a Saṅgha-owned monastery, having spread a bed, departure," should be understood as: "In a Saṅgha-owned monastery... departure." There, in that departure, this decision, as spoken by me, should be understood. What is that decision? He says: "In a Saṅgha-owned... pācittiya." The precinct of an un-enclosed place is two clod-throws from the lodging. "Pācittiya" means a dukkaṭa for transgressing the first step, and a pācittiya for transgressing the second. How is it understood? He says: "Whatever monk... speech" so it is. Therein, the monastery belonging to the Sangha is evident, the bedding is not evident. What kind is it? He says, “Bedding is… and so on… ten kinds.” Therein, what is a bhisī, what is a cimilikā, and so on? He says, “Therein, bhisī means… and so on… this is the method for a leaf-mat.” Therein, to be spread on a bed, that is, a bed-bhisī. Similarly elsewhere. Made for the sake of preserving its color, that is, sewn with pieces of cloth and so on. To be spread on the ground, that is, if there is a cimilikā, on top of it;