English
Here, however, in taking planned goods, and in exceeding the planned limit, a pārājika is to be understood. Now, to show the determination here, "by goods, time, value, and place," and so on, was said. Here, in taking what is not given, the determination is to be made by goods, and time, and value, and place, and by use. There, having examined whether the stolen goods have an owner or no owner, and even if they have an owner, whether the owners are attentive or inattentive, if it was stolen at an attentive time, the determination is to be made by valuing the goods; this is determination by goods. If it was stolen at an inattentive time, there is no pārājika; it should be returned when the owners ask for it again. Indeed, the same goods are sometimes expensive, sometimes inexpensive; therefore, at what time the goods were stolen, by the value they had at that very time, the determination is to be made; this is determination by time. The value of new goods later depreciates; therefore, not always making it by the original value, the determination is to be made; this is determination by value. In the place where goods originate, they are inexpensive; elsewhere, expensive; therefore, in what place the goods were stolen, by the value in that very place, the determination is to be made; this is determination by place. By use, the value of goods like garments depreciates; therefore, having examined their depreciated or undepreciated state according to their use, the determination is to be made; this is determination by use. Second. 5-7. Now, to show the third, "human form," and so on, was begun. There, "human form" is the body of living human beings, from the embryo onwards. "Having killed," with the perception "it is a living being," and with the intention of killing, "I will kill it," having willed and planned. Or deprives of life. Whatever monk, at the time of the embryo-form, like a drop of oil extracted by a heated needle, or even upwards from that stage, by heating or similar means, or by a corresponding method, when there is an attempt on the life-faculty of form, because there is a possibility of destroying the formless life which depends on it, he would destroy both lives. The word 'vā' (or) is for option. 'Intention to kill' means he whose intention is for death, he has the aim of death. 'A weapon that takes life' means that which takes life is a taker; that which is a weapon and a taker is a weapon-taker; that (is the meaning). Of this human body. 'Places near' means he would place it nearby. By this, he shows the fixed method. 'Would cause to take a means of death' means by such a method as 'bring a weapon, or eat poison,' he would cause to take a means for death. By this, the method of command is shown. 'Would speak of the advantage in death' means by body, speech, messengers, or writings, by such a method as 'whoever dies thus, obtains wealth,' he would declare an advantage in death. In both cases, by way of context, the word 'vā' (or) should be supplied. 'That monk is cut off' is the connection; it is understood as 'from the Dispensation'. Now, however, to show his six kinds of methods, he says 'methods,' etc. Therein, 'by one's own hand...etc.... methods by psychic power and knowledge' — these six methods is the connection. By the elision of the 'ka' syllable, here it is said 'sāhatthī'. Or else, by the possibility of many taddhita suffixes in various meanings, the formation of the word 'this application of one's own hand is sāhatthī' should be understood. 'By one's own hand, and by casting, and by command, and by fixed means' — this is a dvanda (compound). 'Psychic power and knowledge' — these are 'iddhivijjāmayā' (made of psychic power and knowledge); it is said to be 'made of psychic power' and 'made of knowledge'. 'Methods' — these are called the six methods; this is the meaning. Therein, for one who kills by himself, striking with one's body or with something connected to one's body is the method by one's own hand. For one desiring to kill someone far away, the casting of arrows, spears, etc., by body, etc., is 'casting'. The command of one who commands, saying 'kill so-and-so,' etc., is 'command'. Digging a pitfall, arranging a trap, placing swords, etc., nearby is 'fixed/stationary'. For the purpose of killing, the action... The power of result, the power of psychic might. The power of karmic result, this is called the power of kings, and so on. There, the royal power is to be seen in the killing of the chief Sumanakuṭumbiya by the breaking of the tusk of the father-king, the lord of Sri Lanka. For that very purpose, the application of knowledge, such as Atharvaṇa, is the power of knowledge. Thus, having shown the six applications, to show the regulators of the command application among them, it is said, "time," and so on. There, they regulate the command as stated, they define it by way of agreement and disagreement, thus they are regulators of command. These are four: time, object, weapon, and posture. And also, a specific action and opportunity, thus they are six by way of enumeration and definition. There, time is morning, and so on, and youth, and so on. The object is the being to be killed. The weapon is a sword, and so on. Posture is the movement, and so on, of the one to be killed. A specific action is piercing, and so on. Opportunity is a village, and so on. Indeed, if one is told, "kill in the morning," without specifying "today, tomorrow," and kills at any time in the morning, there is no disagreement. But if one is told "in the morning," and kills at midday, and so on, there is disagreement, and no offense for the one who commanded. Thus, the regulatory nature of time by way of agreement and disagreement is to be understood. In this same manner, the decision regarding object, and so on, is also to be understood. Third. 8-9. Now, to show the fourth, it is said, "distinction of jhānas," and so on. There, not existing in oneself, and brought to oneself, and based on the present existence, and free from other designations, having made a division of the distinction of jhānas, or having made each one separately, displaying it by body or by speech in the path of communication, he is not conceited, he falls from the known existence, this is the connection. There, "not existing in oneself" means not existing because it has not arisen in one's own continuum; here, "not existing" is a tatpurisa compound. "Distinction of jhānas," means jhāna and so on, as stated, "release, concentration, attainment, knowledge and vision, development of the path, realization of the fruit, abandonment of defilements, freedom from hindrances, delight of the mind in an empty house" (Pārā. 198), that is jhāna and so on, and that very bh This is a compound word meaning 'distinction'. That, the supramundane dhamma, differentiated by jhānas and so on. 'Bringing oneself forward' means in the manner of declaring "this is in me," one brings it to oneself. Or, the dhamma by which one brings oneself forward, saying "I am seen here," is 'self-referential'. Differentiated by jhānas and so on, that. 'Dependent on the present existence' means 'present existence' is the self-existence that is now occurring. 'Dependent on that' is a compound. And that is also differentiated by jhānas and so on, that. 'Devoid of referring to another' means referring to another, in the manner of "the bhikkhu who dwelt in your monastery attained the first jhāna," and so on (Pārā. 220). 'Devoid of that' is a tatpurisa compound. Or, 'he is devoid of that' is a bahubbīhi compound. It is differentiated by jhānas and so on, that. Or by making it a part, in the manner of "I attained the first jhāna, the second jhāna; I attained the first jhāna, the third jhāna," and so on. Or by making it one by one, in the manner of "I attained the first jhāna; I attained the second jhāna," and so on. And here, when 'ekaṃ' stands, there is a doubling in the pause. But here, 'katvā' (having done) should be understood as a pause indicating the desire to connect the meaning of the jhānas and so on, which are distinct, one by one, through the action of doing. But in the commentary, it is said: "Here, 'by making it a part' means 'I am one who has attained jhāna, one who has attained liberation, one who has attained concentration, one who has attained attainments,' and so on, by way of parts." And it is said: "'One by one' means 'I am one who has attained the first jhāna, one who has attained the second jhāna,' and so on, by way of each one." This should be understood as not stated in the Pāli canon or the commentaries. Or by body, in the manner of hand gestures and so on. Here, in 'vācā', the 'ya' sound is omitted, as in 'alajjitā' and so on. 'In the way of communication' means it should be supplied (understood) as "standing in a place suitable for the reception of bodily and verbal communication." 'Revealing' means making clear, saying, "For this reason and for that reason, this dhamma is in me." 'Not conceited' means the over-estimation, reckoned as the perception of having attained what has not been attained... Conceit, that is not in him, thus he is not conceited, the monk. It is known by a wise human being, that when understood by the method stated in the renunciation of training, he would fall from the Dispensation, thus it is understood. But for one who indicates by another designation, it is a grave offense. And here – A minor offense for the first one only, is described as 'bordering'; But for the remaining three, a grave offense is declared. The Fourth. 10. Now, to show the non-communion and inability of these four, the section beginning with 'these pārājika' is commenced. These four pārājika individuals are in non-communion, just as they were formerly, in the past, in the lay state, and in the unordained state, this is the connection. Because all conscientious ones dwell together, in these acts and so forth;