home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Shareware Overload Trio 2
/
Shareware Overload Trio Volume 2 (Chestnut CD-ROM).ISO
/
dir32
/
tbmc_3.zip
/
CHAPT_8C.TXT
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-07-05
|
36KB
|
752 lines
CHAPTER EIGHT
Part Three: The Exhortation Chapter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
21. Should any bhikkhu, unauthorized, exhort the bhikkhunis,
it is to be confessed.
"Now at that time, elder bhikkhus, having exhorted the
bhikkhunis, became recipients of robes, alms, lodgings, and
medicines for the sick. (According to the Commentary, if a
bhikkhu gave a good exhortation to the bhikkhunis, they
would tell their supporters, who in turn would provide the
exhorter with requisites.) The thought occurred to some
group-of-six bhikkhus: 'At present, elder bhikkhus, having
exhorted the bhikkhunis, have become recipients of robes,
alms, lodgings, and medicines for the sick. Let's exhort
the bhikkhunis, too.' So, having approached the bhikkhunis,
they said, 'Approach us, sisters, and we too will exhort
you.'
"So the bhikkhunis went to where the group-of-six bhikkhus
were staying and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one
side. Then the group-of-six bhikkhus, after giving just a
trifling Dhamma talk and spending the day with 'animal
talk,' dismissed the bhikkhunis: 'You may go, now,
sisters.'
"Then the bhikkhunis went to where the Blessed One was
staying and, on arrival, having bowed down, stood to one
side. As they were standing there, the Blessed One
addressed them: 'Was the exhortation effective,
bhikkhunis?'
"'Venerable sir, since when was the exhortation effective?
The group-of-six bhikkhus, giving just a trifling Dhamma
talk, dismissed us after spending the day with animal
talk.'"
When Mahapajapati Gotami, the Buddha's aunt and stepmother, asked
him to establish an order of bhikkhunis, he did so on the condition
that she and all future bhikkhunis accept eight vows of respect
(//garu-dhamma//). In short:
1) Even a bhikkhuni who has been ordained over a century must pay
homage to a bhikkhu ordained that very day.
2) A bhikkhuni must not spend the rains in a residence where there
is no bhikkhu (within half a league, says the Commentary).
3) Every half month a bhikkhuni should expect two things from the
Community of bhikkhus: the date of Patimokkha recitation and an
exhortation.
4) At the end of the Rains Retreat, every bhikkhuni should invite
criticism both from the Community of bhikkhunis and from the
Community of bhikkhus.
5) A bhikkhuni who has broken any of the vows of respect must
undergo penance (//manatta//) for half a month under both
Communities.
6) A woman may become ordained as a bhikkhuni only after becoming
female novice, and then, as a probationer, observing the first
six precepts without lapse for two full years.
7) A bhikkhuni is not to insult or abuse a bhikkhu in any way.
8) A bhikkhuni may not instruct a bhikkhu, although a bhikkhu may
instruct a bhikkhuni.
This rule deals with the bi-weekly exhortation mentioned in vow
#3. The pattern for the exhortation was that once a bhikkhu had
been chosen by the bhikkhus to exhort the bhikkhunis, he was to
clean and prepare the place for the exhortation within the monastery
where he was dwelling, then find a companion and wait for the
bhikkhunis to arrive. When they had come, he was to ask if all the
bhikkhunis were present and if they were observing the eight vows of
respect. If they were, he was then to exhort them on any topic
dealing with the Dhamma. If they weren't, he was to exhort them on
the eight vows.
Since the eight vows form the heart of the exhortation, the two
factors for the full offense under this rule are defined as follows:
1) //Object//: a bhikkhuni or group of bhikkhunis.
2) //Effort//: A bhikkhu exhorts her/them concerning the eight
vows of respect when he has not been properly authorized to do
so, or when he has not been invited by the bhikkhuni(s) to give
them instruction.
Object. A bhikkhuni had to undergo a double ordination, first in
the Bhikkhuni Sangha and then in the Bhikkhu Sangha, before she was
considered fully ordained. Thus only a bhikkhuni with the full
double ordination is grounds for a pacittiya here. A bhikkhuni who
has received only her first ordination, from the Bhikkhuni Sangha,
is grounds for a dukkata, while female probationers and female
novices are not grounds for an offense.
Effort. A bhikkhu, not properly authorized, who exhorts the
bhikkhunis on any topic other than the eight vows incurs a dukkata.
The authorization. When this rule was still newly-formulated,
some group-of-six bhikkhus simply authorized one another to continue
exhorting the bhikkhunis. This forced the Buddha to establish
stringent standards for the type of bhikkhu who could properly be
authorized. They were, in short:
He is scrupulously virtuous.
He is very learned.
He thoroughly understands the qualities of the celibate life.
He has mastered both the bhikkhus' Patimokkha and the bhikkhunis'
Patimokkha.
He has a pleasing voice and delivery.
He is well-liked by the bhikkhunis.
He never, before his ordination, violated a bhikkhuni, female
probationer, or female novice.
He has been a bhikkhu for at least 20 years.
As the Commentary notes, these are qualities that the group of six
never possessed even in their dreams.
If a bhikkhu has been improperly authorized -- e.g., he does not
meet with these qualifications -- then even if he perceives himself
as properly authorized, his perception is not a mitigating factor:
He does not count as authorized under this rule.
Non-offenses. Although this rule grew from a time when bhikkhus
were eager to exhort the bhikkhunis, times changed. The Cullavagga
(X.9.5) deals with a period when the bhikkhus tried to avoid
exhorting the bhikkhunis, and Cv.X.9.4 tells what should be done
when there is no bhikkhu qualified to exhort them. (The bhikkhus
were to tell them, "Continue striving in good faith.")
In cases such as these, though, the bhikkhunis were not left
adrift. They could approach any bhikkhu they admired and ask him
for instruction. Thus the no-offense clauses here say, "There is no
offense in giving an exposition (the Commentary interprets this as
chanting the eight vows in Pali), giving an interrogation (this,
according to the Commentary, means reciting the ancient commentary,
which is hardly likely; more probably, it means questioning the
bhikkhunis as to whether or not they are observing the eight vows),
and then, after being requested by the bhikkhunis, giving
instruction. There is also no offense if, on being asked a question
by a bhikkhuni, one answers her question, or if a bhikkhuni happens
to overhear any instruction one is giving for the sake of another
person.
Summary: Exhorting a bhikkhuni about the eight vows of
respect -- except when one has been authorized to do so by
the Community -- is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
22. Should any bhikkhu, even if authorized, exhort the
bhikkhunis after sunset, it is to be confessed.
"Now at that time it was Ven. Culapanthaka's turn to exhort
the bhikkhunis. The bhikkhunis said, 'Today the exhortation
won't be effective, for Ven. Culapanthaka will simply repeat
the same old stanza over and over again.'
"Then the bhikkhunis approached Ven. Culapanthaka and, on
arrival, having paid homage to him, sat down to one side.
As they were sitting there, Ven. Culapanthaka said to them,
'Are you all present, sisters?'
"'Yes, sir, we are all present.'
"'Are the eight vows of respect being observed?'
"'Yes, sir, they are being observed.'
"'This, sisters, is the exhortation.' And having given it
to them, he repeated it over and over again:
Exalted in mind, uncomplacent,
The sage, trained in sagacity's ways:
He has no sorrows, one such as this,
Calmed and ever mindful.
"The bhikkhunis said, 'Didn't we say so? Today the
exhortation won't be effective, for now Ven. Culapanthaka
will simply repeat the same old stanza over and over again.'
"Ven. Culapanthaka heard the bhikkhunis' conversation.
Rising up into the air, he walked back and forth in space,
in the sky, stood, sat, lay down, emitted smoke, emitted
flames, and disappeared, repeating the same old stanza and
many other sayings of the Buddha. The bhikkhunis said,
'Isn't it amazing? Isn't it astounding? Never before has
there been an exhortation as effective as this!'
"Then Ven. Culapanthaka, having exhorted the bhikkhunis
until nightfall, dismissed them: 'You may go, sisters.' So
the bhikkhunis -- the gates of the city being closed --
spent the night outside the city walls and entered the city
only at morning. People were offended and annoyed and
spread it about, 'These bhikkhunis are unchaste. Having
spent the night with the bhikkhus in the monastery, only now
are they entering the city.'"
The factors for the full offense here are two:
Object. As with the preceding rule, a bhikkhuni or group of
bhikkhunis who have received the double ordination are grounds for a
pacittiya here. A bhikkhuni who has received only her first
ordination, from the Bhikkhuni Sangha, is grounds for a dukkata,
while female probationers and female novices are not grounds for an
offense.
Effort. One teaches the bhikkhuni(s) any topic related to the
Dhamma after the sun has set.
Non-offenses. Although the origin story suggests that it is not
wise in any case to teach bhikkhunis after sunset -- because of the
suspicions such an action may provoke -- the no-offense clauses give
more respect to the bhikkhunis' desire for instruction than to the
fear of gossiping lay people. As under the preceding rule, a
bhikkhu may instruct bhikkhunis after sunset if they request it or
if a bhikkhuni asks him a question. And as before, if a bhikkhuni
happens to overhear any instruction he is giving for the sake of
another person after sunset, no offense is entailed.
Summary: Exhorting bhikkhunis on any topic at all after
sunset -- except when they request it -- is a pacittiya
offense.
* * *
23. Should any bhikkhu, having gone to the bhikkhunis'
quarters, exhort the bhikkhunis -- except at the proper
occasion -- it is to be confessed. Here the proper occasion
is this: A bhikkhuni is ill. This is the proper occasion
here.
Here again there are two factors for the full offense:
Object. A bhikkhuni who is not ill. //Ill// means that she is
unable to go to an exhortation or to a "samvasa," which none of the
texts define but which probably means any official communal meeting
of the bhikkhunis.
As with the preceding rule, a bhikkhuni or group of bhikkhunis who
have received the double ordination are grounds for a pacittiya
here. A bhikkhuni who has received only her first ordination, from
the Bhikkhuni Sangha, is grounds for a dukkata, while female
probationers and female novices are not grounds for an offense.
Effort. One goes to her residence -- any place where a bhikkhuni
has spent at least one night -- and exhorts her concerning the eight
vows of respect. Exhorting about any other topic is grounds for a
dukkata.
Non-offenses. As the rule states, there is no offense for the
bhikkhu who goes to the bhikkhunis' quarters to exhort an ill
bhikkhuni. Otherwise, the no-offense clauses are identical with
those for the preceding rule. Here again, a bhikkhuni's desire for
instruction is considered more important than the wagging tongues of
the laity.
Summary: Going to the bhikkhunis' quarters and exhorting a
bhikkhuni about the eight vows of respect -- except when she
is ill or has requested the instruction -- is a pacittiya
offense.
* * *
24. Should any bhikkhu say that the bhikkhus exhort the
bhikkhunis for the sake of personal gain, it is to be
confessed.
Here the factors for the full offense are three:
Object: a bhikkhu who has been properly authorized to teach the
bhikkhunis and who is not teaching for the sake of personal gain.
If the bhikkhu has not been properly authorized, he is not grounds
for an offense.
Perception is not a mitigating factor here: The bhikkhu's actual
status -- properly or improperly authorized -- is what determines
whether or not this factor is fulfilled. And although the texts do
not touch on this point, it would seem that if the bhikkhu actually
does not aim at personal gain, one would incur a pacittiya in saying
that he does, regardless of how one perceives the case.
Intention. One wants to criticize, discredit, or shame him.
Effort. One accuses him of teaching for the sake of personal
gain: either material gain -- gifts of robes, almsfood, etc. -- or
immaterial gain, such as respect, homage, or veneration.
Non-offenses. If the bhikkhu does actually teach for the sake of
personal gain, there is no offense in stating the facts of the case.
Summary: Saying that a properly authorized bhikkhu exhorts
the bhikkhunis for the sake of personal gain -- when in fact
that is not the case -- is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
25. Should any bhikkhu give robe-cloth to a bhikkhuni
unrelated to him, except in exchange, it is to be confessed.
This rule is the counterpart to NP 5. The full offense is composed
of two factors: object and effort.
Object: any piece of robe-cloth of the six suitable kinds,
measuring at least four by eight fingerbreadths. Other requisites
are not grounds for an offense.
Effort. The bhikkhu gives the cloth to an unrelated bhikkhuni and
does not receive anything from her in exchange.
//Unrelated bhikkhuni// here is defined in the same terms as under
NP 5: a bhikkhuni who has received the double ordination and is not
related to the bhikkhu back through their great x 7 grandfathers. A
bhikkhuni who has received only her first ordination, from the
bhikkhunis, is grounds for a dukkata. Female probationers and
female novices are not grounds for an offense.
Perception is not a mitigating factor here: According to the
Vibhanga, even if a bhikkhu perceives an unrelated bhikkhuni as
related, he is still subject to the penalty.
The Commentary states that the giving need not be hand-to-hand.
If a bhikkhu simply places the cloth near a bhikkhuni as his way of
giving it to her, and she accepts it as given, this factor is
fulfilled.
As for the item given in exchange for the cloth, the Vibhanga
states that it can be worth much more then the cloth or much less.
Buddhaghosa quotes the Mahapaccari, one of the ancient commentaries,
as saying that even if, in return for the cloth, the bhikkhuni gives
the bhikkhu a piece of yellow myrobalan -- a medicinal fruit, one of
the cheapest things imaginable in India -- he escapes the penalty
under this rule.
Non-offenses. There is no offense if:
the bhikkhuni is a relation;
the bhikkhuni is not related, but she gives one something in
exchange;
the bhikkhuni takes the cloth on trust;
she borrows the cloth;
one gives her a non-cloth requisite;
one gives robe-cloth to a female probationer or female novice.
Summary: Giving robe-cloth to an unrelated bhikkhuni
without receiving anything in exchange is a pacittiya
offense.
* * *
26. Should any bhikkhu sew a robe or have it sewn for a
bhikkhuni unrelated to him, it is to be confessed.
"Now at that time Ven. Udayin had become skilled at making
robes. A certain bhikkhuni went to where he was staying and
on arrival said, 'Be so good, Ven. sir, as to sew me a
robe.' So Ven. Udayin, having sewed a robe for the
bhikkhuni, having made it well-dyed and well-finished,
having embroidered an obscene design in the middle (a man
and woman in mid-intercourse, done in full color, says the
Commentary), and having folded it up, placed it to one side.
Then the bhikkhuni went to him and on arrival said, 'Where
is the robe, Ven. sir?'
"'Here you are, sister. Take this robe as it is folded and
place it aside. When the Community of bhikkhunis comes for
exhortation, put it on and come at the back of the line.'
"So the bhikkhuni took the robe as it was folded and placed
it aside. When the Community of bhikkhunis came for
exhortation, she put it on and came at the back of the line.
People were offended and annoyed and spread it about, 'How
brazen these bhikkhunis are, how shameless and sly, in that
they embroider obscene designs on a robe!'
"The bhikkhunis said, 'Whose work is this?'
"'Master Udayin's,' the bhikkhuni answered.
"'A thing like this should not adorn even those who are
brazen, shameless, and sly. It is Master Udayin's, isn't
it?'"
The full offense here has three factors:
1) //Effort//: One sews -- or gets someone else to sew --
2) //Object//: a robe
3) //Intention//: for the sake of a bhikkhuni unrelated to
oneself.
Effort. The Vibhanga says that there is a pacittiya for every
stitch one makes in the robe. If one gets someone else to sew the
robe, there is a pacittiya in giving the command or making the
request, and another pacittiya when the other person does as
commanded/requested, no matter how many stitches he/she makes.
Object. //Robe// here means any of the six kinds of robe-cloth
made into a robe that can be worn. Other cloth requisites are not
grounds for an offense.
Intention. //Unrelated bhikkhuni// here is defined in the same
terms as under the preceding rule: a bhikkhuni who has received the
double ordination and is not related to the bhikkhu back through
their great x 7 grandfathers. A bhikkhuni who has received only her
first ordination, from the bhikkhunis, is grounds for a dukkata.
Female probationers and female novices are not grounds for an
offense.
Perception is not a mitigating factor here: According to the
Vibhanga, even if a bhikkhu perceives an unrelated bhikkhuni as
related, he is still subject to the penalty.
The Commentary states that if Bhikkhu X is sewing a robe for a
bhikkhuni related to him, and Bhikkhu Y -- who is not related to her
-- helps him sew it, Bhikkhu Y incurs a pacittiya for every stitch
he sews in the robe. The Sub-commentary adds, though, that if
Bhikkhu Y does not know that the robe is for the bhikkhuni, he is
exempt from the offense.
Non-offenses. There is no offense in sewing a cloth requisite
other than a robe for an unrelated bhikkhuni, in sewing anything for
a bhikkhuni who is a relation, or in sewing anything for a female
probationer or female novice, related or not.
Summary: Sewing a robe -- or having one sewn -- for an
unrelated bhikkhuni is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
27. Should any bhikkhu, by arrangement, travel together with
a bhikkhuni even for the interval between one village and
the next, except at the proper occasion, it is to be
confessed. Here the proper occasion is this: The road is
to be traveled by caravan (%), and is considered dubious and
risky. This is the proper occasion here.
Here the full offense has two factors.
1) //Object//: a bhikkhuni
2) //Effort//: (a) One makes an arrangement together with her to
travel together; (b) one actually travels together with her as
arranged (c) from one village to another (d) except at the
allowable time.
Object. A bhikkhuni who has received the double ordination is
grounds for a pacittiya here. Any other woman would come under
Pacittiya 67.
Making an arrangement. According to the Vibhanga, the bhikkhu
must give his verbal consent to the arrangement for this part of the
factor to be fulfilled. In other words, if the bhikkhuni proposes
the arrangement, and he agrees; or he proposes it, regardless of
whether or not she agrees, this part of the factor is fulfilled.
The penalty for fulfilling it is a dukkata.
If the bhikkhuni proposes the arrangement but the bhikkhu does not
give his verbal assent, then even if he does travel together as she
proposed, he incurs no penalty in doing so.
Going as arranged. If a specific time frame was part of the
arrangement, then the two parties must begin traveling together
within that time frame for this factor to be fulfilled. If they
happen to start out earlier or later than arranged, again the
bhikkhu incurs no penalty.
From one village to another. There is some controversy as to
whether this phrase -- //gamantara// -- means "from one village to
another" or "from one house to another." According to Buddhaghosa,
the ancient commentaries opted for "village," while he opts for
"house." The ancient commentaries have the support of the Canon
here, in that the Bhikkhunis' Sanghadisesa 3 & Pacittiya 37 also use
the term in question, and there it definitely means the area outside
a village, and not the interval from one house to another within a
village.
There is a pacittiya for every village-to-village interval one
passes. In an area where there are no villages -- i.e., says the
Sub-commentary, where villages are further than half a league (8 km.
or 5 miles) apart -- there is a pacittiya for every half-league one
travels together as arranged.
The allowable occasions. A road to be traveled by caravan (%) is
one too dubious or risky to travel alone. (Some have translated
this as a "road to be traveled with a weapon," but since bhikkhus
and bhikkhunis are not allowed even to touch weapons, it's a
doubtful translation at best.)
//Dubious// means that thieves are known to be about; //risky//,
that people are known to have been beaten, plundered, or robbed by
them.
Non-offenses. There is no offense:
if the bhikkhu and bhikkhuni happen to travel together without
having made an arrangement;
if the bhikkhuni proposes an arrangement, while the bhikkhu does
not give his verbal assent;
if they travel on a dubious and risky road; or
if there are other dangers. The Commentary illustrates this last
contingency with a stock phrase whose meaning admits two
interpretations. It starts, "Savage tribes are attacking the
countryside," and then comes the ambiguous part, either, "People
mount their wheels (their carriages, says the Sub-commentary),"
or, what is more likely, "The tribes seize power (another meaning
for 'wheel')."
Summary: Traveling by arrangement with a bhikkhuni from one
village to another -- except when the road is risky or there
are other dangers -- is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
28. Should any bhikkhu, by arrangement, get in the same boat
with a bhikkhuni going upstream or downstream -- except to
cross over to the other bank -- it is to be confessed.
"Now at that time, some group-of-six bhikkhus, having made
an arrangement with some bhikkhunis, got in the same boat
with them. People were offended and annoyed and spread it
about: 'Just as we amuse ourselves with our wives in a
boat, so too these Sakyan contemplatives, having made an
arrangement with bhikkhunis, amuse themselves in a
boat....'"
(The Buddha then formulated the first version of this rule,
without the exception for crossing over to the other bank.)
"Then at that time a number of bhikkhus and bhikkhunis were
traveling on the road from Saketa to Savatthi. Along the
way, they had to cross over a river. The bhikkhunis said to
the bhikkhus, 'We'll cross over with the masters.'
"'Sisters, it isn't proper for bhikkhus, having made an
arrangement, to get in the same boat with bhikkhunis.
Either you go first or we'll go first.'
"'The masters are outstanding men. Let the masters go
first.'
"Then as the bhikkhunis were crossing over afterward,
thieves robbed them and raped them."
The factors for the full offense here are similar to those for the
previous rule.
1) //Object//: a bhikkhuni.
2) //Effort//: (a) One makes an arrangement together with her to
get in a boat together; (b) one actually travels together with her
as arranged, going upstream or downstream along a river (c) from one
village to another.
Object. A bhikkhuni who has received the double ordination is
grounds for a pacittiya here. One who has received only her first
ordination -- from the Bhikkhuni Sangha -- would seem to be grounds
for a dukkata, and female probationers and female novices grounds
for no offense, but none of the texts mention these points.
Effort. The conditions for making an arrangement here are
identical with those under the preceding rule: If the bhikkhuni
proposes the arrangement, and the bhikkhu agrees; or he bhikkhu
proposes it, regardless of whether or not she agrees, this part of
the factor is fulfilled and he incurs a dukkata.
The next part of the factor -- going as arranged -- is fulfilled
only if they get in the boat together within the time frame they had
agreed on. If they get in earlier or later, there is no offense.
Once they get in the boat as arranged, he incurs a pacittiya for
every village-to-village interval they pass along the riverbank
while going upstream or downstream. If the villages are further
than 8 km. apart, he incurs a pacittiya for every 8 km. they travel
together.
The commentaries try to add "intention" as an additional factor
here -- the bhikkhu's purpose in traveling with the bhikkhuni(s) is
to amuse himself -- but there is no basis for this in the Vibhanga.
Non-offenses. As the rule says, there is no offense in making an
arrangement and crossing over a river with a bhikkhuni. The
Commentary adds that this applies not only to rivers but also to
oceans: If one travels from one seaport to another by arrangement
with a bhikkhuni, no penalty is entailed.
The K/Commentary goes even further and says that this rule applies
only to rivers, and that a bhikkhu seeking to amuse himself with a
bhikkhuni may make a date with her and travel around the ocean as
much as he likes with no offense. The Sub-commentary disagrees
here, saying that a bhikkhu traveling by arrangement with a
bhikkhuni in a boat on the ocean incurs a dukkata for every 8 km.
they travel. The Sub-commentary's position here is more in keeping
with the Great Standards and so carries more weight.
Finally, there is no offense if:
the bhikkhu and bhikkhuni happen to travel together in the same
boat without having made an arrangement;
the bhikkhuni proposes an arrangement, while the bhikkhu does not
give his verbal assent; or
there are dangers.
Summary: Traveling by arrangement with a bhikkhuni upriver
or downriver in the same boat -- except when crossing a
river -- is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
29. Should any bhikkhu knowingly eat almsfood donated
through the prompting of a bhikkhuni, except for food that
householders had already intended for him prior (to her
prompting), it is to be confessed.
"Now at that time Bhikkhuni Thullananda regularly took her
meals with a certain family. Then one day the head of the
household invited some senior monks to a meal. Bhikkhuni
Thullananda, dressing in the early morning, carrying her
robe and bowl, went to the family's place and on arrival
said to the head of the household, 'Why has so much food
been prepared?'
"'I have invited some senior bhikkhus for a meal.'
"'But who, to you, are senior bhikkhus?'
"'Ven. Sariputta, Ven. Maha Moggallana, Ven. Maha Kaccana,
Ven. Maha Kotthita, Ven. Maha Kappina, Ven. Maha Cunda, Ven.
Anuruddha, Ven. Revata, Ven. Upali, Ven. Ananda, Ven.
Rahula.'
"'But why have you invited these scoundrels masquerading as
great heroes?'
"'And who, to //you//, are great heroes?'
"'Ven. Devadatta, Ven. Kokakalika, Ven. Katamoraka Tissaka,
Ven. Khanda Deviyaputta, Ven. Samuddadatta....' At that
point, Bhikkhuni Thullananda was interrupted in mid-sentence
when the senior monks entered. 'Is it true, householder,
that you have invited these great heroes?'
"'Just now you made them out to be scoundrels, and now great
heroes.' So he threw her out of the house and put an end to
her regular meals."
The factors for the full offense here are three:
1) //Object//: any of the five staple foods (see the preface to
the Food Chapter, below) offered by a lay person at the
instigation of a bhikkhuni.
2) //Perception//: One knows that it was offered at her
instigation.
3) //Effort//: One eats the food.
Object. Any of the five staple foods is grounds for a pacittiya.
Any edible aside from them is not grounds for an offense.
//Bhikkhuni// here refers to one who has received the double
ordination. The K/Commentary says that one who has received only
her first ordination -- from the Bhikkhuni Sangha -- is grounds for
a dukkata, while the Vibhanga notes that female novices and female
probationers are not grounds for an offense.
//Instigating// means that the bhikkhuni praises Bhikkhu X to a
lay person who is not already planning to give him food and
concludes with the suggestion that food be presented to him. If the
lay person was already planning to give food to X, this factor is
not fulfilled. The Vibhanga defines "already planning to give food"
in the following terms: Either X and the lay person are related,
the lay person has previously invited X to ask for food, or the lay
person already normally prepares food for X. The Commentary adds
that if the lay person had already prepared food for X before the
bhikkhuni's instigation, X incurs no penalty in eating the food even
if none of the Vibhanga's three conditions apply.
Perception. If one is in doubt as to whether or not the food was
offered at a bhikkhuni's instigation, the penalty for eating it is a
dukkata regardless of whether or not it was. If one does not know,
then even if it was, there is no offense.
Effort. There is a dukkata for accepting food with the purpose of
eating it, and a pacittiya for every mouthful one eats.
Non-offenses. There is no offense if:
one does not know,
one eats any edible aside from the five staples offered at a
bhikkhuni's instigation,
the lay person was instigated by a female probationer or female
novice, or
the lay person was already planning to present one with the food
before the bhikkhuni's instigation. As we noted above, one's
relatives, people who have invited one to ask for food, and
people who ordinarily provide one with food also fit under this
allowance.
Summary: Eating any of the five staple foods that a lay
person has offered as the result of a bhikkhuni's prompting
-- unless the lay person was already planning to offer the
food before her prompting -- is a pacittiya offense.
* * *
30. Should any bhikkhu sit in private, alone with a
bhikkhuni, it is to be confessed.
This rule is completely subsumed under another one -- Pacittiya 45
-- the only instance where this happens in the Patimokkha. For
explanations, see the discussion under that rule.
Summary: Sitting or lying down with a bhikkhuni in a place
out of sight and out of hearing with no one else present is
a pacittiya offense.
* * * * * * * *
