English
It is said thus only in the Mūlasikkhāpakaraṇa, therefore it would be the teachers' own opinion. There, by "having properly completed the preliminary actions and preliminary duties," only the meaning of the first two verses is stated, but the meaning of the third verse is not stated. And by "for one who has confessed an offense," only the fact of the offense being confessed is stated, not all the proper conditions. And in the fact of an offense being confessed, only the confession of a similar offense is included in the proper conditions, not the other. For it is said in the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī: "Indeed, even if similar offenses are not present, but dissimilar offenses are present, it is still the proper time." When only this much is said: "Having properly completed the preliminary actions and preliminary duties, with the permission of the harmonious community of bhikkhus who have confessed their offenses, we make the request to recite the Pātimokkha," the remaining three conditions for the proper time are not mentioned. Namely – the Uposatha day, that as many bhikkhus as are eligible for the act are present, and that objectionable persons are not present therein. If these are not present, it would follow that the Uposatha should be performed, but it should not be performed. Therefore it is said: "Monks, the Uposatha should not be performed on a non-Uposatha day; whoever does so commits an offense of wrong-doing," and "Monks, I allow four to recite the Pātimokkha," and "Monks, the Pātimokkha should not be recited to an assembly with laypeople," etc. Therefore, when the Saṅgha has assembled on Uposatha days, if there is already an appointed Dhamma reciter, that is good. If not, having appointed one capable and competent bhikkhu by the Saṅgha, that Dhamma reciter should approach the Pātimokkha reciter with one shoulder uncovered. Having gathered, having sat squatting, having raised the joined hands, he should be addressed thus: "Venerable Sir, the Saṅgha requests the Elder to recite the Pātimokkha. May the Elder recite the Pātimokkha." A second time, Venerable Sir, the Saṅgha requests the Elder to recite the Pātimokkha. May the Elder recite the Pātimokkha. A third time, Venerable Sir, the Saṅgha requests the Elder to recite the Pātimokkha. May the Elder recite the Pātimokkha. Having caused him to be requested three times thus, then by the reciter of the Pātimokkha— "Sweeping and a lamp, Water and a seat; These are called The preliminaries for the Uposatha." When asked, "The four preliminaries stated by the Commentarial Masters, have they been done?" and the Dhamma-inquirer said, "Yes, Venerable Sir," then again by the reciter of the Pātimokkha— "Purity of desire and declaration of season, Counting of monks and admonition; These are called The pre-duties for the Uposatha." When asked, "The five pre-duties stated by the Commentarial Masters, have they been done?" and the Dhamma-inquirer said, "Yes, Venerable Sir," then again by the reciter of the Pātimokkha— "The Uposatha, and as many monks as are fit for the act; And no similar offenses are found; And no objectionable persons are present therein; It is called 'fit for the act'." When asked, "The four requisites for fitness for the act stated by the Commentarial Masters, have they been brought together?" and the Dhamma-inquirer said, "Yes, Venerable Sir," then again the reciter of the Pātimokkha, having said, "Having properly completed the preliminaries and pre-duties, and having brought together the requisites for fitness for the act, I shall recite the Pātimokkha with the permission of the Saṅgha," and when the assembly of monks assented with "Good, good," then the reciter of the Pātimokkha recites the Pātimokkha with "May the Saṅgha, Venerable Sir, listen to me," and so on. This is our tradition. And here, where it is said, "by the Dhamma-inquirer... he should be addressed thus," how is that addressing by the Dhamma-inquirer to be understood? is it? "No, monks, the Pātimokkha should not be recited in the midst of the Saṅgha without being invited. Whoever recites it, there is an offense of dukkaṭa," because of this statement (Mahāva. 154). It is said, "Having been appointed by the Saṅgha," how is that? "Because the invitation here is dependent on the Dhamma-reciter appointed by the Saṅgha, or dependent on the Saṅgha-thera," as stated in the commentary. "Venerable sir, the Saṅgha invites the Thera to recite the Pātimokkha. Venerable sir, may the Thera recite the Pātimokkha" — from where is this form of invitation obtained? From the Pāḷi. For in the Pāḷi (Mahāva. 155) it is stated, "They invite the Thera, 'Venerable sir, may the Thera recite the Pātimokkha.'" If, however, the Dhamma-reciter is older, and the Pātimokkha-reciter is younger, it should be said, "Friend, the Saṅgha invites the Venerable One to recite the Pātimokkha. May the Venerable One recite the Pātimokkha." From where is this obtained? From the Pāḷi itself. For in the Pāḷi (Mahāva. 155) it is stated, "By this same method, they invite even the youngest in the Saṅgha, 'May the Venerable One recite the Pātimokkha.'" Then, "By the Pātimokkha-reciter, the sweeping... and when asked by the Dhamma-reciter, 'Yes, Venerable sir,' when it is said" — from where is this obtained? From the Pāḷi and the commentary. For in the Nidāna Pāḷi it is stated, "What is the preliminary duty of the Saṅgha?" And in the commentary (Kaṅkhā. Aṭṭha. Nidāṇavaṇṇanā) it is stated, "'What is the preliminary duty of the Saṅgha?' The Saṅgha should perform the Uposatha... Thus, by two names, the nine kinds of preliminary duties are shown. He asks, 'Are they done?'" But is this not stated in the introduction itself? Then why should it be said by the Pātimokkha-reciter in the preliminary part? It is true, nevertheless, it should be said because it is to be known in accordance with that. For in the commentary, these verses are stated only as indicators of the preliminary actions such as sweeping, not as something to be recited at the time of beginning the Pātimokkha. But now they do recite them. If this is the case, for what purpose do they recite them? Considering this, in the introduction, "What is the preliminary duty of the Saṅgha..." It should be understood that they speak "done" for the purpose of asking about the completion of the preliminary duties, etc., in accordance with the question asked. For it has been said: "Having performed the four kinds of preliminary duties thus spoken of, the Uposatha should be observed" (Vi. Saṅga. Aṭṭha. 177). Therefore, when this sequence is followed in accordance with the Pāli and commentaries, the one who requests the Dhamma becomes known, the manner of his request becomes known, the reciter of the Pātimokkha becomes known, his asking about the completion of the preliminary duties, etc., becomes known, the dismissal of the Dhamma requester becomes known, his declaration to recite the Pātimokkha, having completed those (duties), becomes known. Thus, understanding that the purpose in uttering these verse-statements becomes known, this path of discourse, long concealed by the wise and those skilled in Vinaya, should be followed. The same method applies to Pavāraṇā. Indeed, this method, suitable for the Pāli and commentaries, etc., Let the wise ones, skilled in Vinaya, reflect again and again. Having reflected again and again, if it is suitable, let them retain it. If it is not suitable, let them discard it, as disciples of the Perfectly Enlightened One. Thus, in the Vinayālaṅkāra, which is a commentary on the Vinayasaṅgaha, the chapter named "Adornment of the Discourse on the Determination of Uposatha and Pavāraṇā" is the twenty-fifth chapter. 26. Discourse on the Determination of the Rains-residence 179. Having thus explained the determination of Uposatha and Pavāraṇā, now, in order to explain the determination of the Rains-residence, he begins with "Here, 'vassūpanāyikā'..." There, "residing" is "vassa" (rains/year). What is that? The act of residing, in the sense of a state, by means of the ṇya-suffix. "Bringing near" is "upanaya." What is that? The act of approaching. The bringing near of the rains is "vassūpanaya." That (vassūpanaya) exists in this designation, or is found therein, therefore "vassūpanāyikā." What is that? The designation of the Rains-residence. Or, "that by which one brings near" is "upanāyikā," with the middle vowel lengthened. The bringing near of the rains is "vassūpanāyikā." That same, being formerly, is "purimā" in the sense of "being" by means of the ima-suffix. That same is "purimikā" in its own sense by means of the ka-suffix. When that (suffix) is followed by a feminine ending... The 'i' vowel is substituted for 'āra'. That which comes after is 'pacchimā', and that is 'pacchimikā'. But as for 'assātiyā', one does not enter the rains retreat, by making a verbal declaration like "In this monastery, I enter the rains retreat for these three months." They say that the prohibition, "Monks, one who has no dwelling should not enter the rains retreat; whoever enters, there is an offense of wrong-doing" (Mahāvagga 204), refers to entering the rains retreat by verbal declaration, not to entering by merely taking up residence. However, since it is stated without distinction in the Pāli, and in the commentary to the second Pārājika (Pārājika Aṭṭhakathā 1.84) it is strongly stated: "Indeed, one entering the rains retreat, even if not practicing the 'dwelling-less' practice, must enter a dwelling with a door and a lock, covered by one of the five coverings. Therefore, during the rains season, if one obtains a dwelling, that is good. If one does not obtain it, one should have it made by seeking manual labor. If one cannot obtain manual labor, one should make it oneself. But one who has no dwelling should not enter the rains retreat" (Mahāvagga 204). Therefore, it is our conviction that one who has no dwelling is not permitted to enter the rains retreat