English
The rest is easily understood. The commentary on the discourse about taking dwellings is finished. Commentary on the discourse about common requisites 225. In the discourse on common requisites, "by one authorized to give away a small amount" means by one who has obtained permission to give away a small amount, authorized either by a motion-seconded formal act or by an announcement act. "Undivided Sangha property" means "there is no need to ask"; here, "undivided Sangha property" means showing the manner of doubt arising, that having thus doubted, there is no need to ask; the meaning is that it should be given without asking. "Why so?" For the purpose of giving away such a small amount of Sangha property, of the united (Sangha). because it is a formal act done with the Sangha's permission. Regarding the lump of jaggery... should be given: here, the lump of jaggery should be understood as being the size of a palmyra fruit. "Even for one who has entered for alms" - this is merely an indication. The same rule applies even to one who has gone outside the boundary for another reason. "The portion of rice" means the portion of rice belonging to the Sangha, such as the Sangha's meal. "For one standing within the precinct boundary" is a genitive of condition; it is proper to take only for one standing within the precinct boundary, not for one who has reached outside the precinct boundary, is the meaning. This is stated in the Commentary (Cūḷava. Aṭṭha. 325): "They say to take for those standing outside the precinct boundary, but it should not be taken." "Even in a village area": here the word "pi" (even) has the meaning of including what is unstated, meaning it is proper to take both in a village area and outside a village area. Or it has the meaning of possibility, by which it is proper to take even in a village area, how much more so outside a village area. The explanation of the general discourse on the four requisites is concluded. Thus, in the Vinayālaṅkāra, which is an elucidation of the Vinayasaṅgaha, The Ornament of the Discourse on the Determination of the Distribution of the Four Requisites, The twenty-eighth chapter. Explanation of the Discourse on the Determination of Monasteries Now, since a monastery is included within the four requisites, after the discourse on the distribution of the four requisites, the discourse on the determination of monasteries is begun. Therein this is said – What is a monastery, by what meaning? How many kinds is that monastery? By whom should it be given to whom? How, who is its owner? By whom is it taken, for whom? How many are not to be established? With how many factors endowed, Is it given for permanent residence? Therein, what is a monastery? Among the four requisites, it is a dwelling place, a specific type of lodging, known as a dwelling-requisite among the four dwelling-requisites, serving as a residence for bhikkhus. By what meaning is it a monastery? It is a monastery because "they dwell therein." That is, the noble ones dwell therein with the four modes of dwelling: the postures, the divine, the Brahma, and the noble. How many kinds is it? It is of three kinds: a Sangha-owned monastery, a group-owned monastery, and an individual-owned monastery. This is stated in the Samantapāsādikā: A monastery, or a precinct, or a dwelling, given to the Sangha for the bhikkhus from the four directions, whether large or small, if someone disputes it, the dispute does not stand, nor can it be seized. Why? Because there is no burden of responsibility for all. Not all bhikkhus from the four directions bear the burden of responsibility here. But if one seizes what belongs to a group, such as the Dīghabhāṇakas, or to an individual, one can make them bear the burden of responsibility. Therefore, the decision there should be understood in the same way as for a park. This indicates that there is no monastery belonging to a donor. By whom should it be given? By a khattiya, or a brahmin, or by anyone, that monastery should be given. To whom should it be given? To the Sangha, or to a group, or to an individual, it should be given. How should it be given? If given to the Sangha, (one says) "I give this monastery to the Sangha from the four directions, those who have come and those who will come." If to a group, "I give this monastery to the venerable ones." If to an individual, "I give this monastery to the venerable one." Who is its owner? If given to the Sangha, the Sangha is the owner of that monastery. If given to a group, the group is its owner. If given to an individual, the individual is its owner. Thus it is said in the commentary: "what belongs to a group, such as the Dīghabhāṇakas, or to an individual." By whom is it received? That monastery is received by the assigner of lodgings. For it was said by the Blessed One: "I allow, bhikkhus, to appoint an assigner of lodgings endowed with five qualities: who does not go by way of desire, who does not go by way of hatred, who does not go by way of delusion. And thus, bhikkhus, he should be appointed. First, a bhikkhu should be asked. Having asked, a competent and able bhikkhu should inform the Sangha: "May the Sangha, venerable sirs, hear me. If it is suitable for the Sangha, the Sangha should appoint the bhikkhu named so-and-so as the assigner of lodgings. This is the motion. "May the Sangha hear me, Venerable sirs, the Saṅgha, the Saṅgha appoints the monk named so-and-so as the assigner of lodgings. To whichever venerable one it is agreeable, the appointment of the monk named so-and-so as the assigner of lodgings, he should remain silent. To whom it is not agreeable, he should speak. "Appointed by the Saṅgha is the monk named so-and-so as the assigner of lodgings. It is agreeable to the Saṅgha, therefore it is silent. Thus I hold this." (Cūḷava. 317) For whom is it assigned? That monastery is assigned for the monks. This was said by the Blessed One: "I allow, monks, first to count the monks, having counted the monks, to count the sleeping places, having counted the sleeping places, to assign by the best sleeping place." (Cūḷava. 318) How many are not to be dislodged? Four are not to be dislodged: an elder, a sick person, a treasurer, and one who has received a lodging from the Saṅgha. This was said in the Kaṅkhāvitaraṇī: "Indeed, an elder is not to be dislodged due to his elder status, a sick person due to his sickness. But the Saṅgha, for a treasurer, or for a Dhamma speaker, a Vinaya holder, a group reciter, or a teacher, having considered their great helpfulness and special qualities, having considered and appointed a monastery for permanent residence, gives it. Therefore, one to whom it is given by the Saṅgha is also not to be dislodged." With how many qualities endowed is it given for permanent residence? By the highest measure, to one endowed with two qualities a monastery is given for permanent residence. Which two? By great helpfulness and by special qualities. If it is asked, how is it understood? "'Great helpfulness' means being greatly helpful, such as being a treasurer, etc. It is not only this, therefore it says 'and special qualities'. By this, even if there is great helpfulness but no special qualities, or if there are special qualities but no great helpfulness, it shows that it is proper to give." according to the Vinayatthamañjūsā. By the lowest measure, even to one endowed with one quality. Which one quality? Either by great helpfulness or by special qualities. How is it understood? If it is "atīti"? "Considering their great helpfulness and their distinguished qualities," thus, considering the great helpfulness of the treasurer, and the distinguished qualities of the Dhamma-speaker and others, as stated in the Sāratthadīpanī (Sārattha. Ṭī. Pācittiya 3.119-121). The acceptance of a dwelling, however, is of two kinds: according to time, in the fair season and in the rainy season. Or there are three acceptances of dwellings: the former, the latter, and the intermediate-released. Their distinction has been stated below. "The acceptance of a dwelling in the fair season and the intermediate-released and the immediate-secluded are of two kinds. The acceptance of a dwelling in the rainy season, the former and the latter, are of two kinds. Thus there are four acceptances of dwellings," so say the teachers. That statement is not found in the Pāli canon nor in the commentaries. In the Pāli canon (Cūḷava. 318), however, "There are these three acceptances of dwellings, monks: the former, the latter, and the intermediate-released," thus it is stated. In the commentary (Cūḷava. Aṭṭha. 318) also, "Among the three acceptances of dwellings, the former and the latter, these two acceptances are fixed. Regarding the intermediate-released, this is the decision," thus it is stated. Now, however, some teachers say: "At this time, all monasteries are communal (Sanghika), there is no such thing as a personal monastery. Why? Because at the time of donating a monastery, the donors of the monastery, the family-helpers, make them declare: 'We give this monastery to the Sangha of the four directions, those who have come and those who have not come.' Therefore, even new monasteries are communal. Even in cases where they give without saying this in some monasteries, it is said that 'while he is alive it is personal, when he dies it is communal.' Therefore, even old monasteries are communal." In that regard, it should be considered thus: Even in monasteries given after making them declare, those donors who make it for the Sangha are few. They think: "We will make this monk, this elder, reside here," and after consulting with their children, wives, friends, ministers, etc., they establish it. Even if they do not say it at the time of establishment, they usually say it at the time of donation. Then, if the family-helpers instruct them and make them say it at the time of donation, thus saying Even among donors,