English
"This method" means it is not subject to forfeiture. "In ghee from unsuitable meat" means in ghee from elephants and so on. "Saying a semblance of a reason" means saying a semblance of a reason like "because it is ghee of its own kind." "It should be understood by the rule of ghee" means it is permissible for seven days only if it is free from meat. "Here" means in fresh butter. "Washed is permissible" means if unwashed, it is received with its substance. Therefore, the elders' intention is that it is permissible to receive it washed and keep it for seven days. However, according to Mahāsīva Thera, because the substance is separated, it is not considered "received with its substance" merely by being mixed with curd-balls and so on. Therefore, the intention is that they received only what was extracted from buttermilk, washed it, or cooked it, and ate it only when it was free from meat, not eating it with curd-balls and so on at an improper time. Therefore, he said, "Thus, for one consuming fresh butter... ...it is not considered 'received with its substance'." In that case, even if unwashed fresh butter is received, the meaning is that one consuming that fresh butter should remove the curds and so on before consuming it. But some, not knowing the meaning of the phrase "they ate only what was extracted from buttermilk," say that "it is permissible to consume even unwashed fresh butter, extracted from buttermilk, together with curd-balls and so on, at an improper time." That should not be accepted. For it cannot be said that it is permissible to consume fresh butter whose taste is mixed with the meat-like substance of curd-balls and so on. "By one consuming fresh butter" means by one consuming fresh butter received without washing. Curd itself is curd-like, just as "feces-like, urine-like" (M.N. 2.119; A.N. 9.11). By the saying "it will go to destruction," having put in milk, cooked ghee... It should be known that it is permissible at an improper time. It will perish, thus it is non-flesh; therefore, it means it is permissible even at an improper time. By that much, it means by a small amount of curds and so on, which has not attained the distinct designation of curds and so on, being merely attached to fresh butter. By this, it shows that it goes along with that which is received with a substance, cooked together with curds and so on received separately. Even in that, which is non-flesh. But the scruples have this intention: At the time of receiving, because its flavor is not mixed with curds and so on, it is called received with a substance, like a lump of jaggery mixed with rice. But that, when cooking, must be cooked only after washing. Otherwise, at the time of cooking, because its flavor is mixed with the cooking curds and jaggery pellets and so on, it becomes self-cooked; even when these are consumed, it is still self-cooked. Therefore, it must be cooked only as non-flesh. For that very reason, the reason "because it is cooked with flesh" was stated. And here is this consideration: If there is no receiving with a substance, then either the fault of self-cooking by a bhikkhu with flesh is suspected, or its being for a limited time. There, the fault of self-cooking is not possible here, because it is for seven days. For whatever curds and so on are in the flesh there, they are consumed. Now, if it is suspected that because it is cooked by oneself with the received curds and jaggery pellets and so on, it would be like cooked with a substance, then the reason "because it was received with flesh" should be stated, not "because it was cooked." And thus, only the opinion of the Upaddha Theras would be accepted. And in that case, even that cooked by novices and so on would be for a limited time, like ghee and so on made by unordained persons after cooking received milk and so on. And that is not proper, because of the consequence that fresh butter and so on obtained by alms-round, being possibly mixed with flesh like buttermilk and so on, would be unfit for consumption. For there is no rule that householders wash or clean before putting it into the bowl. And in the Commentary, "Just as the grains of rice and so on that have fallen there are not cooked, so... (etc.)... he cooks it again and gives it, by this very method, it is allowable for seven days" this statement contradicts that. Therefore, here, for those who feel remorse, no sign of remorse arising is seen. Just as here, so too, "a conscientious novice, just as there rice grains etc. are not cooked, so too, having melted it in fire... gives it." No sign of this statement is seen either. If this were said to avoid mixing with yāvakālika. It should also be done by oneself in that way. And in ghee etc. given by householders, the doubt of mixing with food would not disappear. For householders do not, having melted it thus, strained it, removed husk and rice grains etc., cook it again. Moreover, having put milk etc. with medicines, just as milk etc. is consumed, so too, oil etc. medicine cooked by others would be yāvakālika. And that is not appropriate either, because it is said "having cooked it again, he gives it" for the purpose of consuming curds etc. Therefore, in the view of Mahāsīva Thera, without feeling remorse, it is allowable to cook unwashed butter even on that day or on subsequent days, and to melt ghee etc. mixed with rice grains etc. by oneself in fire and cook it again for the purpose of consuming buttermilk etc. Even though yāvakālika is present there, its taste being mixed at the time of cooking makes it unusable. Therefore, it should be concluded here that even those things received with substance and those received previously become unusable. For this reason, it is said, "by this much, it is not considered as received with substance." However, having mixed butter etc. with milk etc. food received separately, or medicine like cooked oil etc. by a bhikkhu or others, it is considered as received with substance, because the yāvakālika that has entered there does not become unusable. But that cooked oil etc. which is cooked by unordained persons, having put unreceived milk etc. with previously received medicines, even if received with substance, it is not stored, because the milk etc. mixed in there, at that moment, has its taste mixed with the previously received. If, however, the taste of meat is perceived in oil cooked by others, or in oil not accepted by oneself, it should be understood that it is only for a temporary period. This method of discussion is found in the Vimativinodanī (Vi. Vi. Ṭī. 1.622). In the Sāratthadīpanī (Sārattha. Ṭī. 2.622), however, it is only stated: “‘They are scrupulous, they are scrupulous’ – by this, it also shows the existence of scrupulousness in oneself. Therefore, in the Mātika-aṭṭhakathā (Kaṅkhā. Aṭṭha. Bhesajjasikkhāpadavaṇṇanā), it is said: ‘It is permissible to cook clarified butter or fresh butter that has been churned out.’” Having taken means having taken by oneself. Having accepted them means having accepted those milk and curds. Accepted means having cooked again to remove rice grains, etc., and then accepted. And by medicines accepted and stored means by medicines for life accepted beyond seven days; by this, it shows that even ghee, etc., mixed with them, is not accepted beyond seven days. In the rainy season means in the time of the rainy season, meaning in the time without sun. The acceptance of a scrupulous novice means that a scrupulous person prepares and gives it in such a way that rice grains, etc., are not cooked, as stated in the method. Moreover, it is not permissible to have anything prepared by an unscrupulous person for consumption, therefore it is said thus. 96. Oil made after accepting sesame means oil made without oneself having roasted, etc. Therefore, it is said: “It is permissible even with meat.” Having been churned out means having been separated from being temporary; by this, it shows the absence of temporariness due to the absence of a mixture, and the acceptance of temporariness by the bhikkhu's acceptance with a substance. Both means made by oneself and by others. If it remains until dawn, it is subject to forfeiture: if oil made on the seventh day remains until dawn, it is subject to forfeiture. The fat of a clean animal means that the fat of animals whose meat is not permissible, similar to the object of a dukkaṭa offense, is allowed because the fat of a dukkaṭa object is allowed, but the fat of humans, which is an object of a thullaccaya offense, is not allowed. It says: “except human fat.” . Mixed means strained. Regarding "three dukkaṭas," it is said with reference to three dukkaṭas for each mouthful. Although in the Pāli and the commentary, no offense is stated for the preliminary actions of receiving, cooking, or straining for consumption at the wrong time, nevertheless, an offense must occur here because of doing what is forbidden, just as in receiving medicinal foods and the like at the wrong time for food. They say, "When something received at the right time is consumed at the wrong time, cooked and mixed, even by one not fully ordained, two dukkaṭas always occur." Since the dregs in cooked medicinal oil, into which milk and other things have been put, are like flesh, it is not proper for a bhikkhu to receive or cook the oil with them. Therefore, it is said, "He is scrupulous as if with cooked oil dregs." When asked, "If it is not proper because it is cooked with fat, why is this proper?" they said, "Venerable sir... it is proper." The elder, being overly scrupulous, said, "This too, friends, is not proper." Later, realizing that fat was allowed only for the suppression of disease, he assented, saying, "Good." 97. "By honey-bees, by honey-flies" —some say this is a specific description for only two kinds of small bees. Others say, "Among the stick-bees, the honey-makers are called honey-flies,