English
different preceptors... it is permissible." And what is said here about the preceptors making announcements for each other's co-residents, such as: "Elder Tissa's co-resident for Elder Sumana, Elder Sumana's co-resident for Elder Tissa," that... merely an indication. Therefore, if Thera Tissa announces the disciple of Thera Sumana, and Thera Sumana announces the disciple of Thera Nanda, and they are mutually quorum-completers, it is indeed valid. But if the preceptor himself announces his own disciple, there is nothing to be said here; the act is well done. Even for one without a preceptor, if announced by anyone, there is ordination. How much more so for one with a preceptor, if announced by the preceptor himself? This should be understood. Therefore, to show the non-validity side, he said, "But if..." and so on. "Upajjhā" shows that "upajjhā" is a word ending in 'ā' synonymous with "upajjhāya". Or "upajjhā" is just the word "upajjhāya", spoken thus by dropping the 'ya' sound in the vocative and accusative cases, as the word "upajjhā" is not used in the instrumental case and so on. This should be understood. In Pāli, "one should appoint oneself" means that the act of appointing should be done by oneself as agent, by oneself as instrument, towards oneself as object. Or "oneself" is a vocative in the accusative case, meaning "one should appoint oneself". Not only here, but also elsewhere, in the thirteen appointments and so on, by this same characteristic, one should appoint oneself. Moreover, since one is the object of the act, excluding oneself, a group of four or more is desired everywhere. "Time of truth" means abandoning the deception "I will conceal," it is the time when truth alone is desired by you. "Time of reality" means even in the absence of deception, it is the time when the reality of being human and so on is necessarily desired, otherwise, there would be an obstacle like the invalidation of the act. This is the meaning. "Maṅkū" means downcast face. "Let him raise up" means to establish him in ordination from the state of not being ordained. This is the meaning. For skill in meaning in all formal declarations, here, the meaning of the ordination declaration should be understood thus: "Suṇātu" (Let him hear) is a third-person singular imperative for the command to hear. And although that Sangha is enjoined in the act of hearing, because of its presence, "suṇāh It should be said with a middle person verb, yet because in the presence of the word 'Sangha' the first person usage is customary among grammarians, just as in the presence of words like 'venerable', 'Blessed One', 'reverend', as in "May Venerable Gotama accept me" (Parā. 22), "This is the time, O Sugata, for the Blessed One to lay down a training rule for the disciples" (Parā. 21), "Go forth, reverend" (Parā. 436), "May the reverends listen to me" (Mahāva. 168). Therefore, here the first person usage is made. Or it is said out of respect. For in the case of those worthy of respect, even when a middle person usage arises out of respect, they use a first person usage, as in "May the Sugata teach the Dhamma" (Dī. Ni. 2.66; Ma. Ni. 2.338; Mahāva. 8). Some, however, say "The first person usage here is in expectation of the words 'bhante' and 'āvuso'", but that is not good, because even in such usages as "Be my teacher, venerable sir" (Mahāva. 77) and "Come, friend Upāli, question this recluse" (Parā. 517), the middle person usage is seen. 'Me' is the genitive case for the self-designation of the one who announces. 'Bhante' is a respectful address to elders in the vocative sense; the word 'āvuso' is for juniors. Both are particles, being of the same form even for many, as in "you, venerable sirs, you, friends." 'Sangha' refers to the group of ordinary individuals, such as a group of four, without distinction. Here, however, in border regions, 'Sangha' should be understood as from a group of five upwards, and in central regions, from a group of ten upwards. The gist of it is: "Venerable sirs, may the Sangha listen to my words." And this is a statement to be made by a junior. If, however, the announcer is older than all the bhikkhus, it should be said, "May the Sangha, friends, listen to me." If he were to say "bhante", or a junior were to say "āvuso", there is no fault in the act. Some, however, say "Even if 'āvuso' is said in one place and 'bhante' in another, there is no..." They say that this fault is avoided because the address is successful in both ways. Now, wishing to make known the matter for which he enjoins the Sangha to listen with "Listen!", he makes it known by saying "This person of such-and-such a name," and so on. There, "this" indicates the proximity of the ordination candidate within arm's reach. And by that, the ordination is successful only for one standing within arm's reach, because "this" is not said of one standing outside arm's reach. Therefore, in the designation of the instructor, he was not called "this" because he was standing outside arm's reach. Therefore, the unordained ordination candidate should be placed within arm's reach. The word "this" in "this person of such-and-such a name" must necessarily be used. And it should be understood that it is only in this first use of the name. "Such-and-such a name" is the showing of his name without specification. In both ways, it shows the name, such as "this Buddharakkhita". "Upasampadāpekkho" (ordination candidate) is a Bahubbīhi compound in a different case relation. The meaning is: "The Sangha expects ordination from me." And to show his connection with the preceptor, it is said "of the venerable one of such-and-such a name". By this, the meaning is shown together with the application of names in this manner: "This Buddharakkhita, the co-resident of the venerable Dhammarakkhita, is an ordination candidate." And here, even without saying the word "venerable", it is permissible to say: "This Buddharakkhita is Dhammarakkhita's ordination candidate." Therefore, in the Pāli text, in "by the preceptor of such-and-such a name", the word "venerable" is not said. Whatever should be said here, that has already been said below. Now, should not the preceptor here also be desired to be standing within arm's reach, just like the ordination candidate? Then why, in referring to the preceptor's name as "This person of such-and-such a name is the ordination candidate of this person of such-and-such a name", is the word "this" not used? There is no contradiction here, because even in the absence of the preceptor, there is no invalidation of the act. For indeed, for the completion of the act, even of a preceptor who is not present, by way of a 'present' term... The naming and praising of the preceptor is done even in ordinations and so forth for one who is not a preceptor. Therefore, even when the preceptor is not present, merely by referring to him, the act is successful. Thus, it is not proper to point to him as "this one." "Pure from obstructive things" means free from things that make ordination impossible, such as being unable to become a monk, and from things that cause offenses, such as the five diseases or severed hands. If it is said thus, then even if one is not free from the five diseases and so forth, which merely cause offenses, ordination is valid, but not otherwise. "With bowl and robe complete" means that the one seeking ordination has his bowl and robe complete. If it is said thus, then even if one does not have a bowl and robe, ordination is valid, but not otherwise. "Asks for ordination" refers to the act of asking, as in "Venerable sirs, I ask the Sangha for ordination" (Mahavagga 126). Even if he does not ask the Sangha thus, if it is said, "So-and-so asks the Sangha for ordination," then the act is not unsuccessful, but not otherwise. "By the preceptor" means the preceptor as the instrument. The meaning is that he asks the Sangha, which is the agent, to give or accomplish the ordination, which is the object, having made so-and-so the preceptor. Since the root "to ask" takes two objects, "the Sangha" and "ordination" are stated as two object phrases. "If it is timely for the Sangha" – here, "timely" means that the time for this act has arrived. The four kinds of Sangha acts, such as declaration, are called "timely" by the suffix "ya" in its own sense. Here, the ordination act, which is the fourth kind of declaration, is intended. It has become timely for the Sangha to perform it. "If" indicates the timeliness of the act by way of obtaining consent. For whoever there thinks it is not timely, he will speak. It is with this very meaning in mind that it is said in the announcements, "If it is agreeable to any venerable one... let him speak" (Mahavagga 127). This timeliness is the completeness of the object, his purity from obstructive things, the completeness of the boundary, and the assembly. Completeness, and completion of preliminary duties— it is comprised of these five factors. Therein, completeness of the person means: a human male, not yet ordained, fully twenty years old, other than the eleven unfit persons mentioned, and those who have committed the ultimate offense. Only when such a person exists, is this ordination act of the Sangha called appropriate. If not, and if done, it is invalid. And his purity from obstructive factors means: freedom from those corrupting factors forbidden by the Blessed One for that person to be ordained, as mentioned. Such as being afflicted by the five diseases, not permitted by parents, and corrupting factors like a severed hand. These are called 'obstructive' because they cause obstacles like offenses for the performing Sangha. Only when this freedom exists, is this act called appropriate. If not, the act, if done, is well-done, except for a person under twenty years old. But completeness of the boundary is to be understood as being of two kinds: bound and unbound, free from all faults,