4.

The Chapter on the Invitation

Discussion on Uncomfortable Dwelling

209. In the Pavāraṇā Section - "Neither to address nor converse with one another" - here "address" (ālāpo) means the first utterance; "converse" (sallāpo) means the subsequent utterance. "By joining hands" means by raising the hands together. "Like cattle living together" means living together like cattle. For even cattle do not inform one another of pleasure and pain that has arisen in themselves, nor do they show friendliness; likewise these monks also did not do so; therefore their living together is called "living together like cattle." This same method applies everywhere. "Monks, the mute observance, an undertaking of sectarians, should not be undertaken" means such an undertaking of an observance as "during these three months one should not speak" should not be made; for this is an agreement contrary to the Dhamma. "Mutual conformity" means the state of being amenable to speaking to one another. For when one says "Let the venerable ones speak to me," it is possible to say something to one who speaks thus; not to the other. "Emergence from offences, putting the discipline first" means the state of emerging from offences and the state of conducting oneself having placed the discipline foremost. For it is said that one who speaks thus "Let the venerable ones speak to me" will emerge from offences and will dwell having placed the discipline foremost.

210. "Let the Community hear me, venerable sir. Today is the invitation ceremony to admonish. If it is the proper time for the Community, the Community should invite admonishment" - this is the motion called all-inclusive; for when stated thus, it is fitting to invite admonishment with three statements, with two statements, and with one statement. With equal rains is not fitting. But when it is stated "should invite admonishment with three statements," only with three statements is fitting, anything else is not fitting. When it is stated "should invite admonishment with two statements," with two statements and with three statements is fitting, but with one statement and with equal rains is not fitting. But when it is stated "should invite admonishment with one statement," with one statement, with two statements, and with three statements are fitting, only with equal rains is not fitting. When "with equal rains" is stated, all are fitting.

211. "Remain" means they just sit there and do not get up. "In the meantime" means during that interval; the meaning is "for that much time."

Discussion on the Varieties of Invitation

212. Regarding "the fourteenth day and the fifteenth day": here, for the fourteenth day, the preliminary duty should be performed thus: "Today the invitation to admonish is on the fourteenth day." For the fifteenth day: "Today the invitation to admonish is on the fifteenth day."

Regarding the legal acts of invitation to admonish: if in one monastery where five monks are residing, having conveyed the invitation to admonish of one, the four perform the invitation to admonish having set up a group motion, or where four or three are residing, having conveyed the invitation to admonish of one, the three or two perform the invitation to admonish having set up a Saṅgha motion - all this is a legal act of invitation to admonish not by rule and with an incomplete assembly.

But if all five persons, having assembled together, perform the invitation to admonish having set up a group motion, or four, three, or two residing, having assembled together, perform the invitation to admonish having set up a Saṅgha motion - all this is a legal act of invitation to admonish not by rule and with a complete assembly.

If, among five persons, having conveyed the invitation to admonish of one, the four perform the invitation to admonish having set up a Saṅgha motion, or among four or three, having conveyed the invitation to admonish of one, the three or two perform the invitation to admonish having set up a group motion - all this is a legal act of invitation to admonish by rule and with an incomplete assembly.

But if all five persons, having assembled together, perform the invitation to admonish having set up a Saṅgha motion, or four or three, having assembled together, perform the invitation to admonish having set up a group motion, or two invite each other to admonish, or one residing alone performs the invitation to admonish by determination - all this is called a legal act of invitation to admonish by rule and with a complete assembly.

Discussion on the Authorisation of Giving the Invitation

213. Regarding "the invitation to admonish is given," here, when the invitation to admonish has been thus given, the conveyer of the invitation to admonish, having approached the Community, should invite admonishment thus: "Venerable sirs, the monk Tissa invites admonishment from the Community by what has been seen, or heard, or suspected. Let the Community, venerable sirs, admonish him out of compassion; seeing, he will make amends. For the second time, etc. For the third time, venerable sirs, the monk Tissa invites admonishment from the Community, etc. will make amends." But if he is senior, one should say "the venerable Tissa, venerable sirs"; for thus the invitation to admonish has been performed by him on that one's behalf.

Regarding "for one giving the invitation to admonish to also give the consent," here the giving of consent should be understood in the same manner as stated in the Uposatha chapter. And here too, the giving of consent is for the purpose of remaining proceedings. Therefore, if one giving the invitation to admonish also gives consent, by the method stated, when the invitation to admonish has been brought, the invitation to admonish has been performed by both that monk and the Community. But if he gives only the invitation to admonish and not the consent, and when his invitation to admonish has been announced and the Community has invited admonishment, the invitation to admonish is well performed for all, but any other proceeding is invalidated. If he gives only the consent and not the invitation to admonish, the Community's invitation to admonish and the remaining proceedings are not invalidated, but the invitation to admonish has not been performed by that monk. But even if one comes on the day of the invitation to admonish having determined the invitation to admonish outside the boundary, consent should be given, so that the Community's invitation to admonish proceeding is not invalidated.

218. "Today is my invitation ceremony to admonish" - herein, if it is the fourteenth day, "today is my invitation ceremony to admonish on the fourteenth"; if it is the fifteenth day, "today is my invitation ceremony to admonish on the fifteenth" - thus it should be determined.

219. "An offence on that very day of the invitation ceremony to admonish" and so forth is according to the method already stated.

Discussion on the Fifteen Cases of Non-offence, etc.

222. "The invitation to admonish should be performed again" means that, having again performed the preliminary duties and having set forth the motion, the invitation to admonish should be performed beginning from the most senior in the Saṅgha. The remainder should be understood in the same manner as stated in the commentary on the Uposatha chapter.

228. "The visiting monks should conform to the resident monks" means that the preliminary duty of announcing "Today the invitation to admonishment is on the fourteenth" should be carried out. In the case of the fifteenth as well, the same method applies. "The resident monks, having gone outside the boundary, should invite admonishment" - at the end of the rains, this is the determination beyond the canonical text: If five monks entered the rains in the first period and five in the later period as well, when the former have invited admonishment after setting forth the motion, the latter should perform the purity observance in their presence; two motions should not be set forth in a single observance hall. Even if those who entered in the later period are four, three, two, or one, the same method applies. Then if there are four in the first period and four, three, two, or one in the later period as well, the same method applies. And also if there are three in the first period and three or two in the later period as well, the same method applies. Here this is the criterion: If those who entered in the later period are fewer than or equal in number to those who entered in the first period, and they complete the quorum for a Saṅgha invitation to admonishment, the motion should be set forth by way of a Saṅgha invitation to admonishment.

But if there are three in the first period and one in the later period, together with him they are four; it is not proper to invite admonishment after setting forth a Saṅgha motion for four. However, by a group motion he completes the group quorum; therefore, the former should invite admonishment after setting forth the motion by way of a group. The other should perform the purity observance in their presence. If there are two in the first period and two or one in the later period, the same method applies. If there is one in the first period and one in the later period as well, one should invite admonishment in the presence of the other, and one should perform the purity observance. But if those who entered the later rains are greater in number by even one than those who entered the first rains, the Pātimokkha should first be recited, and afterwards the fewer should invite admonishment in their presence.

However, regarding the invitation to admonishment at the Kattika four-month period, if those who entered later are greater in number or equal to those who entered the first rains and who have already invited admonishment at the great invitation to admonishment, the motion for invitation to admonishment should be set forth and they should invite admonishment. When they have invited admonishment, afterwards the others should perform the purity observance. Then if the monks who invited admonishment at the great invitation to admonishment are many, and those who entered the later rains are fewer or just one, after the Pātimokkha has been recited, he should afterwards invite admonishment in their presence.

233. And, monks, one should not invite admonishment on a non-invitation day, except for unanimity in the Community - here the unanimity should be understood as similar to the Kosambaka unanimity. The preliminary duty here should be performed thus: "Today is the invitation to admonish for unanimity." But those who, having set aside the invitation to admonish over some trivial matter, are in agreement, they should perform the invitation to admonish on the invitation day itself. And those performing the unanimity invitation to admonish should do so, setting aside the first invitation to admonish, starting from the first day of the waxing moon up to the Kattika full moon of the fourth month; it should be done within this interval, and it is not permissible after that or before.

Discussion on the Invitation with Two Phrases, etc.

234. "To invite to admonish with the double announcement" - here, even when proposing the motion, one should say "If it is the proper time for the Community, the Community should invite to admonish with the double announcement." In the case of the single announcement, one should say "should invite to admonish with the single announcement." In the case of those of the same number of rains too, one should say "should invite to admonish by those of the same number of rains." And here, even many of the same number of rains are permitted to invite to admonish together.

Discussion on the Postponement of the Invitation

236. Regarding "spoken, uttered, but not concluded," here the setting aside of the invitation ceremony to admonish is twofold: collective and individual. Therein, in the collective one, "Let the Saṅgha hear me, venerable sirs, etc. the Saṅgha invites with the triple announcement" - from the letter 'su' up to the letter 're,' the invitation ceremony to admonish is spoken, uttered, but not yet concluded. In the interval here, if one sets aside even at a single word, the invitation ceremony to admonish is set aside. But when the letter 'yya' is reached, it is concluded; therefore, from that point onwards, even if one sets it aside, it is not set aside. But in the individual setting aside - "Venerable sirs, I invite the Saṅgha, etc. For the third time too, venerable sirs, I invite the Saṅgha, by what has been seen or, etc. seeing, I shall act" - from the letter 'saṅ' up to this very last letter 'ṭi,' the invitation ceremony to admonish is spoken, uttered, but not yet concluded; in the interval here, if one sets aside even at a single word, the invitation ceremony to admonish is set aside; but when "I shall act" has been said, it is concluded; therefore, when the word "I shall act" has been reached, even if set aside, it is not set aside. The same method applies also to the double announcement, single announcement, and same-age invitation ceremonies to admonish. For in these too, only the ending with the letter 'ṭi' is the field for setting aside.

237. "When being questioned" means being asked in the manner stated further on as "on what ground do you set it aside." "Having crushed" means having spoken these words beginning with "Enough, monk, no quarrel"; for here "crushing" is intended as crushing by words. "Acknowledges having accused" means he acknowledges thus: "This one was accused by me with an unfounded charge of an offence involving expulsion." "According to the rule" means for accusing with an offence entailing initial and subsequent meetings of the Community, there is an expiation; for the others, a wrong-doing. "Having removed" means having removed by removal of the status.

238. "That has been redressed by him according to the rule" - having said just this much, one should be told "invite admonishment." But this should not be said: "it is such-and-such an offence," for that becomes the cause of quarrel.

Discussion on the Postponement on Grounds, etc.

239. "This case is evident, not the person" - here, it seems that thieves, having caught fish from a pond at a forest monastery, having cooked and eaten them, departed. He, having seen that disturbance, or having seen some disturbance in the monastery caused by a rogue, and having considered "this must be the deed of a monk," spoke thus. "Having set aside the case, the Community should invite admonishment" means "when we know that person, then we shall accuse him. But for now, let the Community invite admonishment" - this is the meaning here. "Tell it right now" means if you suspect any person on account of this case, point him out right now - this is the meaning. If he points someone out, the invitation to admonish should be carried out after investigating that person; if he does not point someone out, the invitation to admonish should be carried out with the understanding "we shall know after examining."

"This person is evident, not the case" - here, a certain monk either worshipped a shrine with garlands, scents and ointments, or drank fermented liquor, and his body had a corresponding smell; he, referring to that smell, spoke thus, making the case known: "this monk has such a bodily smell." "Having set aside the person, the Community should invite admonishment" means having set aside that person, let the Community invite admonishment. "Tell it right now" means speak right now of the fault of that person whom you have set aside. If he says "this is his fault," the invitation to admonish should be carried out after clearing that person. But if he says "I do not know," the invitation to admonish should be carried out with the understanding "we shall know after examining."

"This case and person are evident" - in the same manner as before, having seen the place where fish were caught by thieves, cooked and consumed, and the bathing place with scents and so forth, thinking "this is the deed of one gone forth," he spoke thus. "Tell it right now" means tell right now the person suspected on account of that case; but having seen both of these, the invitation to admonish should be carried out only after adjudicating from the time of seeing. "It is proper to speak" means it is proper to accuse; the meaning is that it is fitting to accuse. Why? Because it was not adjudicated before the invitation to admonish, and because it was seen and accused afterwards. "There is an offence requiring expiation for reopening" - for here, having seen both before the invitation to admonish and having adjudicated, the monks invite admonishment; therefore there is an offence for one who reopens that again.

Discussion on the Case of Those Who Cause Quarrels

240. "To make two or three Observances on the fourteenth": here the fourth and fifth are the two, but the third is already on the fourteenth by its natural course. Therefore, the third and fourth, or the third, fourth, and fifth - two or three should be made on the fourteenth. Then, if they hear when the fourth has been made, the fifth should be made on the fourteenth. Thus too there are two on the fourteenth. By doing thus, the quarrel-makers will perform the invitation to admonish on the fifteenth on either the thirteenth or the fourteenth. And when inviting admonishment in this way, having stationed novices outside the boundary, upon hearing "they are coming," they should quickly assemble together and perform the invitation to admonish. To show this meaning, "If, monks, those" etc. "let them do as they think fit" was said.

"Unexpectedly" means without prior arrangement, without having made arrangements for the purpose of knowing of their coming; the meaning is: having become unaware. "Having distracted them" means having confused them by such methods as saying "you are tired, rest for a moment" and so on; this is the meaning. "If it cannot be obtained" means if they cannot manage to go outside the boundary; the quarrel-makers are constantly followed by novices and junior monks without interruption. "In the coming bright fortnight": with reference to which they set up the motion "we should invite admonishment in the coming bright fortnight," in that coming bright fortnight, on the Komudī of the fourth month, the invitation to admonish must be performed unwillingly, it must necessarily be performed, for it is not allowable to invite admonishment beyond that. "If, monks, while those monks are inviting admonishment" means while thus inviting admonishment at the fourth month.

Discussion on the Collection of Invitation

241. "A certain comfortable abiding" means either newly attained tranquillity or newly attained insight. "We would become outsiders" means we would become outsiders, being unable to accomplish the practice of mental cultivation due to not having fixed night-quarters and day-quarters and so forth. "All should assemble together" - by this, the giving of consent is rejected. For in the case of reconciling a divided Community, in the settlement by covering over with grass, and in this postponement of the invitation to admonish - in these three instances it is not proper to give consent. This postponement of the invitation to admonish should not be given for those who have abandoned their meditation subject, for those who have attained firm tranquillity and insight, and for stream-enterers and others. However, for those who have attained newly developed tranquillity and insight, whether they be all, or half, or a single person, it should be given even on account of one person. When the postponement of the invitation to admonish has been given, it is as if there is a protection within the rains retreat; visiting monks are not permitted to take their lodgings. They too should not break the rains retreat, but to show that after inviting admonishment they are permitted to depart on a journey even in between, he said "If, monks, by those" and so forth. The remainder is clear everywhere.

The commentary on the Invitation Chapter is concluded.