3.

The Section on Undetermined Rules

1.

Commentary on the First Undetermined Training Rule

443. "At that time the Buddha, the Blessed One" - this is the first indefinite training rule. Therein, "conversing at the appropriate time" means having observed the time, when no other person is going or coming nearby, then speaking accordingly household talk such as "Are you not discontented, are you not weary, are you not hungry?" and so forth. "Speaking the Teaching at the appropriate time" means having observed the time, when some other person is going or coming nearby, then speaking accordingly a Dhamma talk such as "You should observe the Uposatha, you should give ticket-food" and so forth.

"Had many sons" means she had many daughters and sons. It is said that she had ten sons and ten daughters. "Had many grandsons" means she had many grandsons. For just as she had, so too each of her sons and daughters had twenty children each; thus she was surrounded by an entourage of four hundred and twenty sons and grandsons. "Considered supremely auspicious" means considered as having the highest auspiciousness. "At sacrifices" means at the giving of gifts. "At festivals" means at minor celebrations such as wedding ceremonies and marriage festivities and the like. "At celebrations" means at major celebrations such as the Āsāḷhī, Pavāraṇā, and Nakkhatta festivals and the like. "Fed first" means wishing "May these children too be of equal lifespan and free from illness like you," they fed her first of all; even those who were faithful and devoted, after feeding the monks, immediately thereafter fed her first of all. "Did not heed" means he did not heed her words, did not accept them, or did not show regard - this is the meaning.

444-445. "Convenient" means: "suitable for action, fit for action" is "workable"; "sufficiently prepared for the state of being workable" is "convenient"; in that which is convenient, where those committing transgression are able to do so - such is the meaning, that it is of such a nature that the act can be performed. Therefore in its word-analysis it is stated: "It is possible to engage in sexual intercourse" - meaning it is stated that where it is possible to engage in sexual intercourse. "Should sit" means should arrange a sitting, meaning should sit down. But since after sitting down one also lies down, therefore in its word-analysis both are stated. Therein, "seated near" means having approached and sat down. Similarly, "lying down near" should also be understood. "The monk sitting" means "when the monk is sitting" - this is the meaning. "Or both sitting" means both sitting neither after nor before each other. And here, although in the text it has come as "secret from hearing," the determination should be understood as being only by secrecy from sight. For even if a wise man is sitting at the door of a room with closed shutters, he does not create a state of non-offence. But one sitting at the door of a room with open shutters creates a state of non-offence. And not only at the door, but even one sitting in a space within twelve cubits, if he has eyes and is distracted or even dozing, creates a state of non-offence. Even one standing nearby who is blind does not create it, and even one with eyes who has lain down and is sleeping does not create it. But even a hundred women do not create a state of non-offence.

"Trustworthy" means one whose word is to be believed. But since she is indeed a noble disciple, therefore in its word-analysis "one who has attained the fruit" and so forth is stated. Therein, "one who has attained the fruit" means one for whom the fruit has come, meaning one who has obtained the fruit of stream-entry. "One who has comprehended" means one who has penetrated the four truths. "One who has understood the teaching" means one by whom the teaching of the threefold training has been understood. "The monk acknowledging the sitting" means although such a female lay follower having seen speaks, yet the monk should be dealt with according to one of the three rules only when acknowledging the sitting, not when not acknowledging - this is the meaning.

"By whichever that trustworthy female lay follower should speak, by that that monk should be dealt with" means in the modes of sitting and so forth, by whichever mode that female lay follower should speak, attributing sexual intercourse and so forth, only when acknowledging should that monk be dealt with by that. The meaning is that he should not be dealt with merely by the word of even such a female lay follower. Why? Because what is seen can be so and can also be otherwise.

And to illustrate that meaning, they cite this account: At the Mallārāma monastery, it is said, a certain elder who was an arahant one day went to a supporter's family and sat inside the house, and a female lay follower was standing leaning against a couch. Then a certain almsman standing at the door, having seen and gained the perception that "the elder is sitting on one seat with the female lay follower," looked again and again. The elder too, having observed "this one has formed an impure suspicion about me," having finished his meal duty, went to the monastery, entered his own dwelling place, and sat inside. That monk too, thinking "I shall accuse the elder," came, cleared his throat, and opened the door. The elder, knowing his mind, rose up into the air and sat cross-legged resting against the pinnacle of the gabled hall. That monk too, having entered inside and having looked at the bed and under the bed, not seeing the elder, looked upwards; then seeing the elder sitting in the air, he said: "Venerable sir, being of such great psychic power, you allow it to be said that you were sitting on one seat with a woman!" The elder said: "Friend, this is the fault of being inside a house. But being unable to convince you, I acted thus. Please keep this to yourself" - and descended.

446. Hereafter, all that is stated beginning with "If she should say thus" is said for the purpose of showing the manner of dealing according to the acknowledgement. Therein, "engaging in sexual intercourse with a woman" means engaging in sexual intercourse in the passage of a woman - this is the meaning. "He should be dealt with for the sitting" means that having acknowledged the sitting but not acknowledging the engaging in sexual intercourse, without being dealt with for the offence of defeat for sexual intercourse, he should be dealt with for the offence he incurs merely by the sitting - the meaning is that he should be dealt with for the offence of pācittiya. By this method, the judgement in all the sets of four should be understood.

451. Now, at the conclusion of the training rule, in the statements beginning with "he acknowledges the going" etc., which are stated for the purpose of showing the determination of what is an offence and what is not an offence, "he acknowledges the going" means he acknowledges the going thus: "I went for the purpose of the enjoyment of sitting in private." "The sitting" means he acknowledges the sitting by the very enjoyment of the sitting. "The offence" means any one of the three offences. "He should be dealt with for an offence" means whichever of the three he acknowledges, he should be dealt with for that. The remainder here in the set of four is of obvious meaning. But in the second set of four, "he does not acknowledge the going" means he does not acknowledge it on the basis of the enjoyment of sitting in private, but says: "I went on my own business such as a meal by ticket, and she came to the place where I was sitting." The remainder here too is of obvious meaning.

Now, this is the determination in all cases - "The enjoyment of sitting in private" is called a defilement connected with sexual intercourse. Whatever monk, desiring to go to the presence of a woman with that enjoyment, applies collyrium to his eyes, it is an offence of wrong-doing. He puts on his lower garment, ties his waistband, wraps his robe - at each and every effort, it is an offence of wrong-doing. He goes - at each and every step, it is an offence of wrong-doing. Having gone, he sits down - it is just an offence of wrong-doing. When the woman has come and merely sat down, it is an offence entailing expiation. If that woman, on account of some task, gets up again and again and sits down repeatedly, for each and every sitting, it is an offence entailing expiation. The one with reference to whom he went is not seen, but another comes and sits down - when enjoyment arises, it is an offence entailing expiation. But in the Mahāpaccarī it is said: "Because of the impure mind from the time of going, it is indeed an offence." If several women come, there are offences entailing expiation according to the number of women. If they get up again and again and sit down repeatedly, there are offences entailing expiation according to the number of sittings. Even for one who has gone and sat down without specifying, thinking "I shall enjoy the pleasure of privacy with whichever one I see," the offences should be understood in the same manner as stated, according to each one who comes and according to each repeated sitting. If, having gone with a pure mind and sat down, a woman comes into his presence and sits down, and the enjoyment of privacy arises, there is no offence.

The origin and so forth are similar to those of the first pārājika.

The Commentary on the First Undetermined Training Rule is finished.

2.

Commentary on the Second Undetermined Training Rule

452. "At that time the Buddha, the Blessed One" - this is the second indefinite training rule. Therein, in the passage beginning with "rejected by the Blessed One," the connection should be understood thus: "That which one alone with one alone in a secret place, on a concealed seat, convenient, should arrange a sitting - to arrange that sitting has been rejected." Otherwise, it would have to be said "of one alone with one alone" - why? Because it is said "rejected." Or this nominative case should be understood in the sense of the possessive.

453. Regarding "but if not concealed" - here, whatever is enclosed on the outside but open within, such as a courtyard of a residence, etc., should be understood as included herein. For such a place is taken as uncovered indeed - this is stated in the Mahāpaccarī. The remainder should be understood according to the method of the first training rule. For here, exclusively, whether a woman or a man, any wise person who is not blind and not deaf, standing or sitting in a space within twelve hands' reach, even if distracted or sleeping, renders it a non-offence. But one who is deaf, even if possessing sight, or one who is blind, even if not deaf, does not render it so. This is the distinction: excluding the offence of defeat, the offence of lewd speech is stated. The remainder is just as before. In both cases, there is no offence for those who are insane and those who are the original doers.

Regarding the origins and so forth, this training rule has three origins - it originates from body and mind, from speech and mind, and from body, speech, and mind. It is action, exempt from perception, with consciousness, worldly wrong, bodily action, verbal action, unwholesome consciousness, and of two feelings - pleasant and neutral. The remainder is of manifest meaning only.

The Commentary on the Second Undetermined Training Rule is finished.

In the Samantapāsādikā, the commentary on the Vinaya,

The Explanation of the Undetermined is completed.