2.

The Saṅghādisesa Section (Commentary on the Bhikkhunī Analysis)

1.

Commentary on the First Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

678. "Storehouse" means a goods-hall. "Do not, sir, speak thus" means "sir, do not speak thus." "But, sirs" means "but, sir." "Insult" means having transgressed, speak; it is said to mean "revile."

679. "One who speaks in support of litigation" means one who disputes on account of the underlying tendency to conceit and on account of the underlying tendency to anger. But since she is in meaning one who engages in litigation, therefore in the word-analysis it is stated: "One who speaks in support of litigation is called one who engages in litigation." And here, "litigation" refers to a judicial decision, which those gone forth also call "a legal case." "Or seeks a second party" means she seeks a witness or a companion - an offence of wrong-doing. "Or goes" means whether it be a nuns' residence or an alms-round route, wherever while standing the thought arises "I shall engage in litigation," from there, at each step as she goes to the presence of the judges - an offence of wrong-doing at each step. "Reports to one" means among the two parties, anyone reports the case of any one of them to any of the judges. "Reports to the second" - here too the same method applies.

Now here is the detailed explanation for the purpose of avoiding confusion - wherever, even when judges have come to the nuns' residence, if a nun, having seen them, reports her own case, it is an offence of wrong-doing for the nun. If the lay follower reports his own case, it is a grave offence for the nun. If first the lay follower reports his own case, it is an offence of wrong-doing for the nun. Then if she reports her own case, it is a grave offence. If the nun says to the lay follower - "You yourself report both my case and your case," whether he first reports his own case or the nun's, at the first reporting it is an offence of wrong-doing, at the second reporting it is a grave offence. If the lay follower says to the nun - "You yourself report both my case and your case," here too the same method applies.

If the nun has an allowable agent speak on her behalf, therein whether the allowable agent first reports the nun's case, or the other party reports his own case, or the allowable agent reports the case of both, or the other party reports the case of both, in whatever way the reporting is made, at the first reporting it is an offence of wrong-doing for the nun, at the second it is a grave offence. But when, in whatever way it has been reported, having heard the case of both parties, the judges have made a decision, that is called the conclusion of the litigation, and at that conclusion of the litigation, whether the nun wins or loses, it is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. But if the legal case is one that has been ongoing, previously heard by the judges, and then they, having merely seen the nun and the litigant, say "There is no need for you to state your case, we know the proceedings here," and give a decision on their own, even at such a conclusion of the litigation there is no offence for the nun.

"The offence is at the first instance for this" - thus it is "one that becomes an offence at once." The meaning is that the offence is to be committed at the very moment of transgression - that is "one that becomes an offence at once." But in the word-analysis, in order to show merely the intention, it is stated: "She commits an offence together with the transgression of the basis, without formal admonition." For the meaning here is this: that which the nun commits together with the transgression of the basis, not at the third formal admonition - this is called "one that becomes an offence at once" because the offence is to be committed at the very first instance together with the transgression of the basis. "It causes sending away from the Community of nuns" - thus it is "involving being sent away." That is "involving being sent away." But in the word-analysis, in order to show merely the intention, it is stated: "She is sent away from the Community." Therein, the meaning should be understood thus: that on account of which an offending nun is sent away from the Community, that is "involving being sent away." For it is not the rule itself that is sent away from the Community by anyone. But by that rule the nun is sent away, therefore it "causes sending away" - thus it is "involving being sent away."

"Goes when being dragged" means when the litigating persons, having come themselves or having sent a messenger, say "come," she goes to the presence of the judges. Then whether the litigant first reports his own case or that of the nun, there is neither an offence of wrong-doing at the first reporting, nor a grave offence at the second reporting. Even when the conclusion of the case has been made after adjudication by the officials, there is no offence. Even if the litigant says to the nun: "You yourself speak the case of both mine and yours." Even when the conclusion of the case has been made after hearing her speaking, there is no offence.

"Asks for protection" means she asks for lawful protection; there is no offence. Now, in order to show what kind of requested protection is lawful, it says "reports without specifying." Therein, with regard to the past there is reporting with specifying and reporting without specifying; with regard to the future too there is reporting with specifying and reporting without specifying.

How is there reporting with specifying regarding the past? Village boys, rogues, or whoever else commit misconduct at the nuns' residence, or cut trees, or take fruits and produce, or seize requisites. The nun, having approached the judges, says: "Such and such was done at our residence." When asked "by whom?" she specifies "by so-and-so and so-and-so." Thus there is reporting with specifying regarding the past; that is not allowable. If, having heard that, those judges impose a punishment on them, all of it falls upon the neck of the nun. Even when there is merely the intention "they will impose a punishment," it still falls upon her neck. But if she says "impose a punishment on him," when even five māsakas are taken, it is an offence of defeat.

But when asked "by whom?" this should be said: "It is not allowable for us to say 'by so-and-so'; you yourselves will find out. We simply ask for protection; give us that, and have the stolen goods returned." Thus there is reporting without specifying; that is allowable. When spoken thus, even if those judges search for the perpetrators and impose a punishment on them, even if all their property is taken, for the nun there is neither liability nor offence.

Even having seen them carrying away requisites, it is not allowable to say "a thief, a thief" out of ill-will towards them. For even when spoken thus, whatever punishment they impose on them, all of it falls upon the neck of the nun. But it is allowable to say to one who acts on her word: "My requisite was taken by this person; have it returned, but do not impose a punishment on him." They conduct litigation for the sake of slaves, slave-women, reservoirs, and so forth; this is called improper litigation and is not allowable.

How is there reporting with specifying regarding the future? In the same manner as stated, when others have committed misconduct and so forth, the nun says to the judges: "They do such and such at our residence; give us protection so that they will not do so in the future." And when asked "by whom was this done?" she specifies "by so-and-so and so-and-so." Thus there is reporting with specifying regarding the future; that too is not allowable. For when a punishment is imposed on them, in the same manner as before, all of it falls upon the neck of the nun. The remainder is just as before.

But if the judges, having had a drum beaten proclaiming "we shall impose such and such a punishment on those who commit such misconduct at the nuns' residence," and when the decree is standing, search out and impose a punishment, for the nun there is neither liability nor offence.

That which has been stated regarding nuns applies in the same way to monks as well. For monks too, pointing out specifically is not permissible. Whatever punishment they impose when it has been pointed out in that way, all of it falls upon the monk's neck. For one who causes punishment to be imposed in the manner stated, it is an offence of defeat. But one who, even knowing that "they will impose punishment," speaks without pointing out specifically, and they, having investigated, do impose punishment, there is no fault. They seize axes and hatchets and the like from those who are cutting down trees and so forth within the monastery boundary and strike them with stones - this is not permissible. If the blade is broken, it should be repaired and returned. They run up and seize their belongings - that too should not be done, for the mind turns quickly, and if a thieving intention arises, one could even incur the cutting off at the root. The remainder is clear in itself.

The origin of the kaṭhina offence - it is an act, not release by cessation of perception, without consciousness, an offence by convention, bodily action, verbal action, three types of consciousness, three types of feeling.

The first training rule in the group of seventeen.

2.

Commentary on the Second Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

682. In the second - "Valuable goods" means expensive goods such as pearls, gems, beryl, and so forth.

683. "Without taking leave" means without asking permission. "Or a group" means such as a Malla group, a Bhaṭiputta group, and so forth. "A guild" means a religious guild. "A trade guild" means such as a perfumers' trade guild, a cloth-makers' trade guild, and so forth. For wherever kings hand over villages and towns to groups and so forth, saying "You yourselves govern here," there they themselves are the rulers. Therefore, referring to them, this was stated. And here, even after asking permission of the king or of groups and so forth, the Community of nuns must still be asked permission. "Except for one who is suitable" means except for one who has previously gone forth among sectarians or among other nuns and who has attained suitability. The remainder is clear in itself.

The origination of ordaining a female thief - When nuns have departed for some duty, for one who, without going to a detached boundary, ordains at the very place where she is seated together with her own group of dependants, it originates from speech and mind. For one who goes to a detached boundary or a river and ordains, it originates from body, speech, and mind. By way of ordaining without asking permission, it is an act of commission and omission, is released by perception, involves intention, is an offence by rule, is bodily action, is verbal action, involves three types of consciousness, and involves three types of feeling.

The second training rule.

3.

Commentary on the Third Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

692. In the third - "For one moving past the enclosure" - here, for one moving past with one foot, there is a grave offence; as soon as she has moved past with the second, there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. "The precincts of an unfenced village" - here, when she moves past the place deserving of an enclosure with one foot, there is a grave offence; as soon as she has moved past with the second, there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. Furthermore here, for one leaving from her own village, there is no offence on account of going between villages; but for one who, having left, goes between villages, at each step there is an offence of wrong-doing; as soon as she has moved past with one foot the enclosure or precincts of the other village, there is a grave offence; as soon as she has moved past with the second, there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. The same method applies also for one who, having left from there, enters her own village again. But if through a broken wall or a gap in the fence it is possible to enter the grounds of the nuns' monastery itself, for one entering in this way, she has entered what is called allowable ground; therefore it is permissible. Even if she enters on an elephant's back and so forth, or by psychic power, it is indeed permissible. For going on foot is what is intended here. For that very reason it was said "for one moving the first foot past" and so forth.

Two villages are connected by a fence with the nuns' monastery; in whichever village the nuns' monastery is, having walked for alms there and having entered the monastery again, if there is a path through the middle of the monastery to the other village, it is permissible to go. But from that village one should return by that very same path. If she leaves through the village gate and comes back, the classification of offences should be understood in the same way as before. When one who has left her own village together with nuns for some business is entering again, and an elephant is released or there is a driving away, and the other nuns hastily enter the village, she should stand outside the village gate until another nun comes. If she does not come, the companion nun is considered to have departed; it is permissible to enter.

Previously there is a large village, with the nuns' monastery in the middle. Later, four people having obtained that village, having made separate fence enclosures and having divided it, they enjoy it; it is permissible to go from the monastery to one village. From there, it is not permissible to enter another village through a gate or a gap in the fence. It is permissible only to return to the monastery. Why? Because the monastery is common to the four villages.

"The inner robe becomes wet" means wherever and however the three circles are covered; thus, for a nun who has dressed, in the rainy season, having descended at a ford or a non-ford, wherever she crosses, even by just one or two finger-breadths the inner robe becomes wet. The remaining characteristics of a river will become clear in the discussion on the definition of a river. Having descended into such a river at a ford or a non-ford, at the time of crossing, for one who lifts the first foot and places it on the bank, there is a grave offence; at the lifting of the second foot, there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. If she goes by a bridge, there is no offence. Even for one who, having descended on foot, at the time of crossing climbs onto a bridge and crosses, there is no offence. But for one who, having gone by a bridge, at the time of crossing goes on foot, there is indeed an offence. The same method applies also to travelling by vehicle, boat, through the air, and so forth. But for one who, from the near bank, steps directly onto the far bank, there is no offence. Having gone for the purpose of dyeing work, two or three move about on both banks for the task of dragging wood and so forth; it is permissible. But if here any one, having quarrelled, goes to the other bank, there is an offence. Two cross together; one, having quarrelled in the middle of the river, turns back and comes to the near bank itself - there is an offence. But for the other one, this one stands in the place of one who has departed; therefore even for one going to the far bank, there is no offence. For one who has descended to bathe or to drink and crosses back to that same bank, there is no offence.

"Together with the break of dawn" means here, if while doing recitation or striving or any other task, she forms the intention "I shall go to the companion's presence before dawn itself," and dawn rises while she is unaware, there is no offence. But if she stays in one part of the monastery thinking "I shall remain right here until the break of dawn," or without attention, and does not come within a stretched arm's reach of the companion, at the break of dawn there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community. For here a stretched arm's reach alone is the measure; when a stretched arm's reach is exceeded, even being in the same room does not protect.

"In a forest without villages" means here, the forest is precisely that which has the characteristic stated thus: "Having gone out beyond the boundary post, all of that is forest." But that is called "without villages" merely because of the absence of a village, not because of resemblance to the Vindhya forest. When one has entered such a forest, if the region of sight has been left, even if the region of hearing exists, there is an offence. Therefore it is said in the Commentary: "If when nuns are entering the Great Bodhi courtyard, one stands outside, for her too there is an offence. When entering the Brazen Palace too, or when entering the residence too, the same method applies. When they are paying homage at the Great Shrine, one goes out through the north gate, for her too there is an offence. When entering the Thūpārāma, one stands outside, for her too there is an offence." And here, the region of sight means where a companion sees one standing. But if there is even a screen or wall in between, she is said to have left the region of sight. The region of hearing means where, while standing, she hears the sound of one calling out "Noble lady," like the sound of one lost on the path, or like the sound of an announcement for hearing the Dhamma. In the open, even at a distance, there is said to be the region of sight. That does not protect when the region of hearing of such a kind has been left; merely upon leaving, there is an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.

One going along the path falls behind. If being energetic she follows thinking "I shall catch up now," there is no offence. If the former ones go by another path, they are said to have departed, and there is no offence at all. Of two going along, one being unable to follow falls behind thinking "Let this one go," and the other too goes thinking "Let this one fall behind" - for both there is an offence. But if while going, the former one takes another path and the latter one also takes another, each one stands in the place where the other departed from, for both there is no offence.

693. "Has gone over to another faction" means has gone over to another sect. The rest is clear. It has the origin of the first pārājika - It is action, liberation through perception, with consciousness, an offence by rule, bodily action, with three types of consciousness, with three types of feeling.

The third training rule.

4.

Commentary on the Fourth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

694-698. In the fourth - A footstool means a stand for placing washed feet. A footstand means a stand for placing unwashed feet. "Without knowing the consent of the group" means without knowing the consent of that very group performing the act. "Fulfilling the duties" means fulfilling the duties for rehabilitation of forty-three kinds. The remainder is clear in itself.

It has its origin in the abandonment of responsibility - It originates from body, speech and mind; it is action and non-action; it is released by perception; it is with consciousness; it is a worldly offence; it is bodily action; it is verbal action; it is unwholesome consciousness; it is painful feeling.

The fourth training rule.

5.

Commentary on the Fifth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

701. In the fifth - Regarding "one filled with desire," here in the Mahāpaccarī it is stated: "The state of being filled with desire of the nun should be considered." However, this is not stated in the Mahā-Aṭṭhakathā, and that accords with the canonical text. The remainder is clear in itself.

It has the origin of the first pārājika - it is action, release from perception, with consciousness, a worldly fault, bodily action, unwholesome consciousness, and with two feelings.

The fifth training rule.

6.

Commentary on the Sixth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

705-706. In the sixth - "Since you" means "because you." "She encourages" - the offences beginning with an offence of wrong-doing and ending with a saṅghādisesa, to whom do they belong? To the one who encourages. And this has been stated in the Parivāra as well -

For this verse was spoken with reference to this one who encourages. But the classification of offences for the other one has been analysed in the first training rule. The remainder is clear in itself.

It has three origins - it is action, exempt by perception, with consciousness, a worldly fault, bodily action, verbal action, unwholesome consciousness, and of three feelings.

The sixth training rule.

7.

Commentary on the Seventh Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

709. In the seventh - the meaning of the phrase "up to the third time" should be understood in the manner stated in the Mahāvibhaṅga. The remainder is clear in itself.

The origin of the formal admonition - it is an act of commission, freed by right perception, with consciousness, a worldly offence, bodily action, verbal action, unwholesome consciousness, and painful feeling.

The seventh training rule.

8.

Commentary on the Eighth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

715. In the eighth - "In some legal case" means in any one of the four. However, in the word-analysis, in order to show merely the classification of legal cases, it is stated beginning with "legal case means four legal cases." The remainder is clear in meaning, together with the origins and so forth.

The eighth training rule.

9.

Commentary on the Ninth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

723. In the ninth - "In company" means mixed together. "Through not becoming" means through bodily and verbal conduct not becoming for those gone forth. "In company" means in company with householders through bodily conduct such as pounding, cooking, grinding perfumes, stringing garlands, and so forth, and through verbal conduct such as sending messages, sending replies, carrying messages, acting as go-betweens, and so forth. "Evil fame belongs to them" - thus they are "of evil reputation." "Evil repute reckoned as livelihood belongs to them" - thus they are "of evil fame." The remainder is clear in meaning, together with the origins and so forth.

The ninth training rule.

10.

Commentary on the Tenth Saṅghādisesa Training Rule

727. In the tenth - "Evācārā" means "of such conduct." The meaning is: "of such conduct as your conduct." This same method applies everywhere. "Uññāya" means with contempt, knowing by making low. "Paribhavena" means knowing by despising thus: "What will these do?" "Akkhantiyā" means with intolerance; the meaning is: with anger. "Vebhassiyā" means with the state of forceful speech; the meaning is: with intimidation by displaying one's own strength. "Dubbalyā" means because of your weakness. Everywhere "uññāya ca paribhavena ca" - thus the meaning of conjunction should be understood. "Viviccatha" means be separate. The remainder is clear in meaning, together with the origins and so forth.

The tenth training rule.

"Recited, ladies, are the seventeen saṅghādisesa rules" - herein, after the six first-offence rules comes the acting as a go-between, and the two concerning false accusation - having incorporated these three training rules from the Mahāvibhaṅga, there are nine first-offence rules; after the four up-to-the-third-time rules, having incorporated also four up-to-the-third-time rules from the Mahāvibhaṅga, eight up-to-the-third-time rules should be understood. Thus the meaning here should be understood as: "Recited, ladies, are the seventeen saṅghādisesa rules" - all by the method of the Pātimokkha recitation. The remainder is clear, except for the half-month probation. That, however, we shall explain in detail in the Khandhaka.

In the Samantapāsādikā, the Vinaya Commentary, in the Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga,

The Commentary on the Group of Seventeen is finished.

The chapter on offences entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community is concluded.