English
while she is going by vehicle, and they are pulling it out.” Thus, he speaks something else, neither by gift nor by sound. He certainly incurs an offense. There is also a type of filling-in speech. One having obtained a little oil in the village comes to the monastery and says to the novice, “Where did you go today? The village was one-oil.” Or having obtained a piece of cake placed in a basket, he says, “Today they served cakes in baskets in the village.” This is certainly false speech. Regarding “with the intention to deceive”: That by which they deceive is deception, a mind arisen from the intention to cheat. Its being put forward is “with the intention to deceive.” The meaning is, making the deceptive thought foremost. The description of the precept on false speech is finished. 2. Description of the Precept on Abusive Speech “Abusive speech” means words of disparagement and blame. Since it is neither pleasant to the ear nor pleasant to the heart, therefore it pierces both the ear and the heart. Thus it is said, “piercing words,” meaning words spoken by connecting them with birth, etc. Therefore it is said, “birth, name,” and so on. Therein, birth means the high birth of Brahmins, etc., and the low birth of Caṇḍālas, etc. Name means the low name of Avakaṇṇaka (earless), etc., and the high name of Buddharakkhita (protected by the Buddha), etc. Clan means the low clan of Kosiyas, etc., and the high clan of Gotamas, etc. Work means the low work of a flower-sweeper, etc., and the high work of farming and trade, etc. Skill means the low skill of a reed-worker, etc., and the high skill of counting and calculating, etc. Affliction means all diseases are low. Or, diabetes is high, the rest are to be understood as low. Mark means the low mark of being too tall, etc., and the high mark of not being too tall, etc. Defilement means all defilements like lust, etc. Offense means the high offense of stream-entry, etc., and the not-high offense of pārājika, etc. Abuse means the low abuse like “You are a camel,” etc. "You are wise," and so on (Pāci. 15), is extreme abuse. "Yathātathā" means of words, whether in the Pāli canon or not, in any way whatsoever. In this training rule, excluding a bhikkhu, all beings, bhikkhunīs and so on, stand in the position of not fully ordained, therefore it says "and here," and so on. "Davakamyatā" means the intention of playful laughter. "Sabbattha" means everywhere, both among the fully ordained and not fully ordained, and among words in the Pāli canon and not. Regarding "Atthadhammaanusāsanipurekkhārānaṃ" here, one who explains the meaning of the Pāli canon, "You are an outcast," and so on, is called "atthapurekkhāra." One who recites the Pāli canon is called "dhammapurekkhāra." Standing in instruction, one who speaks in the manner of "Even now you are an outcast, do not commit evil. Do not become one whose destination is darkness upon darkness," and so on (Pāci. Aṭṭha. 35), is to be understood as "anusāsanipurekkhāra." The explanation of the training rule on abusive speech is finished. 3. Explanation of the training rule on slander "Bhikkhupesuñña" means: It crushes, thus it is slanderous. The speech by which it makes united beings, as if members of a group, divided, that speech is slanderous. Slanderous speech itself is slander. One endowed with that speech is a slanderer. His action is slander. The slander of a bhikkhu is "bhikkhupesuñña." In that "bhikkhupesuñña," having heard from a bhikkhu, by a bhikkhu, or slander brought to a bhikkhu, this is the meaning. Therefore it says "by birth and so on," and so on. And indeed that brings about by two reasons, therefore it says "or by the desire for the bhikkhu's affection," and so on. There, "by the desire for the bhikkhu's affection" means: To whom one speaks that, for that bhikkhu, by desiring one's own dearness, thinking, "Thus I will be dear to him." "By the intention of causing division" means: By desiring the division of one from another, thinking, "Thus this one will be divided from that one." Or alternatively, "pesuñña" (slander) is from making (someone) devoid of affection, by way of etymology (Sārattha. Ṭī. Pācittiya 3.36). The speech by which, to whom one speaks that, in his heart, one makes one's own dearness, and makes the other's state of being empty (of affection), that speech, "the slander of a bhikkhu is bhikkhupesuñña." ...and so on, in this way, the meaning here should be understood. "In the way stated" means "in the way stated with 'by means of reviling objects such as birth,' and so on." "Bringing in a reviling outside the Pāḷi" means bringing in a reviling with "You are a thief," and so on. "However, if one brings in an act or a word of his that causes slander, which is not an object of reviling, out of affection, even though an offense is not seen by this training rule, still, a dukkaṭa offense should occur," they say (Sāratthadīpanī, Pācittiya 3.36). "Speaking out of condemnation of evil" means seeing one reviling and another enduring, and saying, "Oh, how shameless! He will think that such a person can be spoken to again!" — thus speaking purely out of condemnation of evil. The explanation of the training rule on slander is finished. 4. Explanation of the training rule on teaching Dhamma word by word. "Should teach Dhamma word by word" means should teach Dhamma word by word, section by section. Since the offense is not only for teaching Dhamma that has been included in the three recitations word by word, therefore it is said, "even that which is not included in the three recitations," and so on. By the word "and so on" (Pācittiya Aṭṭhakathā 45), are included instructions on morality, questions on dhutaṅga, discourses on objects, stories of intellectual feats, knowledge-objects, discourses on impurity, and so on. In the questions of Meṇḍaka and Milinda, there is no offense for the Elder's own spontaneous replies. Where something is brought forth and spoken to convince the king, there is an offense. However, the Vaṇṇapiṭaka, the Aṅgulimāla Piṭaka, the Raṭṭhapāla's Roar, the Āḷavaka's Roar, the Hidden Path, the Hidden Vessantara, the Hidden Vinaya, the Vedalla Piṭaka, and so on, are not words of the Buddha. Since that "word" is fourfold, therefore, to show that, it is said "in words, subsequent words, syllables, and subsequent syllables." Therein, "word" means one line of a verse. "Subsequent word" means the second line. "Syllable" means each single letter. "Subsequent syllable" means a subsequent consonant similar to a preceding consonant. Or, any single letter is a syllable. A group of letters is a subsequent syllable. A group of letters and subsequent syllables is a word. First... One word is just a word. The second is a follow-word. Thus, here, the distinction should be understood. Among these words and so on, any portion, excluding monks and nuns, for one who recites together with other remaining individuals, there is an offense of expiation by counting words and so on. Here, in verses (Pacittiya Commentary 45), for each word like "Mind precedes all mental states" (Dhp 1, 2), for one who begins together with a novice and finishes together, there is an offense of expiation by counting words. When the elder says "Mind precedes all mental states," and the novice, not reaching that word, at the time of saying "Mind is chief, mind-made," recites together with the elder, it is by counting follow-words. At the time of saying "Form is impermanent" and so on (MN 1.353, 356), for one who recites only the syllable "rū" with him, it is by counting syllables. This method applies to verses as well. While reciting this Sutta: "Form, monks, is impermanent; feeling is impermanent" (MN 1.353, 356), when the elder says "Form is impermanent," the novice, being quick-witted, takes this word "impermanent" from "feeling is impermanent" and utters it together with the elder's word "impermanent" from "Form is impermanent." For one reciting thus, it should be understood as an offense of expiation by counting sub-syllables. As for the triple expiation, there are three expiations based on (1) an unordained person, (2) one who perceives an unordained person as such, and (3) one who is in doubt or perceives an ordained person as such. The connection is that for one who recites together with an unordained person while taking a lesson together, there is no offense. This method applies also to "doing recitation, taking a lesson in his presence." Here is the decision: Both an ordained person and an unordained person sit and have a lesson recited. The teacher says, "I will recite for those who are seated," and recites together with them. The teacher alone incurs an offense. For one who takes (the lesson) with an unordained person, there is no offense. If both stand and take (the lesson), the same method applies. A young monk is seated, a novice is standing. "I will recite for the seated one..." he is not guilty. If the novice stands, and the other sits, even if he says, "I will speak to the one standing," he is not guilty. If a single novice is seated among many bhikkhus, and one recites the Dhamma word by word while he is seated, it is an unintentional offense. If the novice stands or sits outside the precincts, since he is not included among those to whom one recites, it is considered as if he is taking a text that runs away in one direction, therefore there is no offense. "Reciting" means reciting together with an unordained person. "Receiving a lesson from him" means receiving a lesson from an unordained person. "One who recites mostly memorized texts" means if one line of a stanza is not recalled, but the rest are, this is called a mostly memorized text. In this way, it should be understood for suttas as well, for one who recites such. "And one who recites aloud" means one who recites a sutta in the midst of an assembly.