Difference between revisions of "Buddhist Monastic Code I: Chapter 9 Pāṭidesanīya by Thanissaro Bhikkhu"
(Created page with "=== Pāṭidesanīya === This term means "to be acknowledged." As a name for training rules, it means "entailing acknowledgement." The four training rules here are unique in ...") |
m (Text replacement - "lodgings" to "lodgings") |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | + | <nomobile>{{DisplayImages|2931|3981|3101|2744|3514|924|972|679|2155|2774|2476|2019|2224|3779|2826|1322}}</nomobile> | |
− | This term means "to be acknowledged." As a name for training rules, it means "entailing acknowledgement." The four training rules here are unique in that they mention, as part of the rule, the words to be used in acknowledging the violation; the second rule is especially unique in that it depicts the violators as acknowledging their offense as a group. | + | |
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | === [[Pāṭidesanīya]] === | ||
+ | |||
+ | This term means "to be [[acknowledged]]." As a [[name]] for [[training rules]], it means "entailing acknowledgement." The four [[training rules]] here are unique in that they mention, as part of the {{Wiki|rule}}, the words to be used in [[acknowledging]] the {{Wiki|violation}}; the second {{Wiki|rule}} is especially unique in that it depicts the violators as [[acknowledging]] their offense as a group. | ||
=== 1. === | === 1. === | ||
<poem> | <poem> | ||
− | Should any bhikkhu chew or consume staple or non-staple food, having received it with his own hand from the hand of an unrelated bhikkhunī in an inhabited area, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it." | + | Should any [[bhikkhu]] chew or consume staple or non-staple [[food]], having received it with his [[own]] hand from the hand of an unrelated [[bhikkhunī]] in an inhabited area, he is to [[acknowledge]] it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be [[acknowledged]]. I [[acknowledge]] it." |
− | A long series of events led up to the formulation of this rule. | + | A long series of events led up to the formulation of this {{Wiki|rule}}. |
− | "At that time a certain woman whose husband was away from home was made pregnant by her lover. She, having caused an abortion, said to a bhikkhunī who was dependent on her family for alms, 'Come, lady, take this fetus away in your bowl.' So the bhikkhunī, having placed the fetus in her bowl and covering it up with her outer robe, went away. Now at that time a certain alms-going bhikkhu had made this vow: 'I won't eat from the first almsfood I receive without having given some of it to a bhikkhu or bhikkhunī.' Seeing the bhikkhunī, he said to her, 'Come, sister, accept alms.' | + | "At that time a certain woman whose husband was away from home was made {{Wiki|pregnant}} by her lover. She, having [[caused]] an [[abortion]], said to a [[bhikkhunī]] who was dependent on her [[family]] for [[alms]], 'Come, lady, take this {{Wiki|fetus}} away in your [[bowl]].' So the [[bhikkhunī]], having placed the {{Wiki|fetus}} in her [[bowl]] and covering it up with her [[outer robe]], went away. Now at that time a certain alms-going [[bhikkhu]] had made this [[vow]]: 'I won't eat from the first [[almsfood]] I receive without having given some of it to a [[bhikkhu]] or [[bhikkhunī]].' [[Seeing]] the [[bhikkhunī]], he said to her, 'Come, sister, accept [[alms]].' |
− | "'No thank you, master.' — "A second time... A third time... — "'No thank you, master.' | + | "'No thank you, [[master]].' — "A second time... A third time... — "'No thank you, [[master]].' |
− | "'Look, sister, I have made this vow: "I won't eat from the first almsfood I receive without having given some of it to a bhikkhu or bhikkhunī." So come on, accept alms.' | + | "'Look, sister, I have made this [[vow]]: "I won't eat from the first [[almsfood]] I receive without having given some of it to a [[bhikkhu]] or [[bhikkhunī]]." So come on, accept [[alms]].' |
− | "Then the bhikkhunī, being pressured by the bhikkhu, took out her bowl and showed it to him. 'You see, master: a fetus in the bowl. But don't tell anyone'... | + | "Then the [[bhikkhunī]], being pressured by the [[bhikkhu]], took out her [[bowl]] and showed it to him. 'You see, [[master]]: a {{Wiki|fetus}} in the [[bowl]]. But don't tell anyone'... |
− | "(Of course the bhikkhu couldn't help but tell his fellow bhikkhus, and word reached the Buddha, who formulated a double rule:) 'A bhikkhunī should not take a fetus in a bowl... I allow a bhikkhunī, when seeing a bhikkhu, to take out her bowl and show it to him.' | + | "(Of course the [[bhikkhu]] couldn't help but tell his fellow [[bhikkhus]], and [[word]] reached the [[Buddha]], who formulated a double {{Wiki|rule}}:) 'A [[bhikkhunī]] should not take a {{Wiki|fetus}} in a [[bowl]]... I allow a [[bhikkhunī]], when [[seeing]] a [[bhikkhu]], to take out her [[bowl]] and show it to him.' |
− | "Now at that time some group-of-six bhikkhunīs, on seeing a bhikkhu, would turn their bowls upside down and show him the bottom side... 'I allow a bhikkhunī, when seeing a bhikkhu, to show him her bowl right side up. And she is to offer him whatever food there is in the bowl.'" — Cv.X.13 | + | "Now at that time some [[group-of-six]] [[bhikkhunīs]], on [[seeing]] a [[bhikkhu]], would turn their [[bowls]] upside down and show him the bottom side... 'I allow a [[bhikkhunī]], when [[seeing]] a [[bhikkhu]], to show him her [[bowl]] right side up. And she is to offer him whatever [[food]] there is in the [[bowl]].'" — Cv.X.13 |
− | Here is where the origin story for this rule begins: | + | Here is where the origin story for this {{Wiki|rule}} begins: |
− | "Now at that time a certain bhikkhunī, on the way back from going for alms in Sāvatthī, seeing a certain bhikkhu, said to him, 'Come, master, accept alms.' | + | "Now at that time a certain [[bhikkhunī]], on the way back from going for [[alms]] in [[Sāvatthī]], [[seeing]] a certain [[bhikkhu]], said to him, 'Come, [[master]], accept [[alms]].' |
− | "'Very well, sister.' And he took everything. As the time (for alms-going) was almost up, she was unable to go for alms and so was deprived of her meal. | + | "'Very well, sister.' And he took everything. As the time (for alms-going) was almost up, she was unable to go for [[alms]] and so was deprived of her meal. |
"On the second day... the third day... he took everything... she was deprived of her meal. | "On the second day... the third day... he took everything... she was deprived of her meal. | ||
− | "On the fourth day, she went staggering along the road. A financier, coming the opposite direction in a chariot, said to her, 'Get out of the way, lady.' | + | "On the fourth day, she went staggering along the road. A financier, coming the opposite [[direction]] in a [[chariot]], said to her, 'Get out of the way, lady.' |
"Stepping down (from the road), she fell down right there. | "Stepping down (from the road), she fell down right there. | ||
− | "The financier asked her forgiveness, 'Forgive me, lady, for making you fall.' | + | "The financier asked her [[forgiveness]], 'Forgive me, lady, for making you fall.' |
− | "'It wasn't that you made me fall, householder. It's just that I myself am weak.' | + | "'It wasn't that you made me fall, [[householder]]. It's just that I myself am weak.' |
"'But why are you weak?' | "'But why are you weak?' | ||
− | "And she told him what had happened. The financier, having taken her to his house and having fed her (§), criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences take food from the hand of a bhikkhunī? It's difficult for women to come by things.'" | + | "And she told him what had happened. The financier, having taken her to his house and having fed her (§), criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences take [[food]] from the hand of a [[bhikkhunī]]? It's difficult for women to come by things.'" |
There are two factors for the full offense here. | There are two factors for the full offense here. | ||
− | 1) Object: staple or non-staple food that a bhikkhu has accepted from the hand of a bhikkhunī — unrelated to him — while she is in a village area. | + | 1) [[Object]]: staple or non-staple [[food]] that a [[bhikkhu]] has accepted from the hand of a [[bhikkhunī]] — unrelated to him — while she is in a village area. |
− | 2) Effort: He eats the food. | + | 2) [[Effort]]: He eats the [[food]]. |
− | Object. There are two elements to this factor: the food sub-factor and the bhikkhunī sub-factor. Under the food sub-factor: Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines. Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa. | + | [[Object]]. There are two [[elements]] to this factor: the [[food]] sub-factor and the [[bhikkhunī]] sub-factor. Under the [[food]] sub-factor: Staple [[food]] follows the standard [[definition]] given in the [[Food]] [[Chapter]] under the [[pācittiya]] {{Wiki|rules}}. Non-staple [[food]] includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}}. Staple and non-staple [[food]] are grounds for a [[pāṭidesanīya]]; juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}} taken as [[food]], grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]]. |
− | As for the bhikkhunī sub-factor: Bhikkhunī refers to one who has received the double ordination. A bhikkhunī who has received only her first ordination — in the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha — is grounds for a dukkaṭa. Unrelated means sharing no common ancestor back through seven generations. Perception as to whether the bhikkhunī is related is not a mitigating factor here. The permutations around the issue of perception here are similar to those under Pc 4, with the only difference that the three pācittiyas under that pattern are changed to three pāṭidesanīyas here. In other words, if she is unrelated, she is grounds for a pāṭidesanīya whether one perceives her as unrelated, related, or doubtful. If she is related, she is grounds for a dukkaṭa if one perceives her as unrelated or doubtful. If she is related and one perceives her as related, she is not grounds for an offense. This pattern with regard to perception is followed in all four pāṭidesanīya rules. | + | As for the [[bhikkhunī]] sub-factor: [[Bhikkhunī]] refers to one who has received the double [[ordination]]. A [[bhikkhunī]] who has received only her first [[ordination]] — in the [[Bhikkhunī]] [[Saṅgha]] — is grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]]. Unrelated means sharing no common [[ancestor]] back through seven generations. [[Perception]] as to whether the [[bhikkhunī]] is related is not a mitigating factor here. The permutations around the issue of [[perception]] here are similar to those under Pc 4, with the only difference that the three pācittiyas under that pattern are changed to three pāṭidesanīyas here. In other words, if she is unrelated, she is grounds for a [[pāṭidesanīya]] whether one [[perceives]] her as unrelated, related, or [[doubtful]]. If she is related, she is grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]] if one [[perceives]] her as unrelated or [[doubtful]]. If she is related and one [[perceives]] her as related, she is not grounds for an offense. This pattern with regard to [[perception]] is followed in all four [[pāṭidesanīya]] {{Wiki|rules}}. |
A village area is defined as a house or roadway in a village, town, or city. | A village area is defined as a house or roadway in a village, town, or city. | ||
− | Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, and in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; while there is a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple food one eats, and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food. | + | [[Effort]]. There is a [[dukkaṭa]] in accepting staple or non-staple [[food]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of eating it, and in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of taking them as [[food]]; while there is a [[pāṭidesanīya]] for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple [[food]] one eats, and a [[dukkaṭa]] for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] for the [[sake]] of [[food]]. |
− | Non-offenses. There is no offense if a bhikkhu accepts and eats food from a related bhikkhunī or from a female trainee or female novice, related or not. There is also no offense in the following situations even if the bhikkhunī is unrelated: | + | Non-offenses. There is no offense if a [[bhikkhu]] accepts and eats [[food]] from a related [[bhikkhunī]] or from a {{Wiki|female}} trainee or [[female novice]], related or not. There is also no offense in the following situations even if the [[bhikkhunī]] is unrelated: |
− | She gets someone else to give him the food. | + | She gets someone else to give him the [[food]]. |
She gives it by placing it near him (as in NP 18 and Pc 41). | She gives it by placing it near him (as in NP 18 and Pc 41). | ||
− | She gives it to him in a monastery, nuns' quarters, a dwelling of members of other sects, or on the way back from such places. | + | She gives it to him in a [[monastery]], [[nuns]]' quarters, a dwelling of members of other sects, or on the way back from such places. |
She gives it to him after she has left the village. | She gives it to him after she has left the village. | ||
− | She gives him juice drinks, tonics, or medicine, and he uses them as such, rather than as food. | + | She gives him juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]], and he uses them as such, rather than as [[food]]. |
− | The Commentary contains a fairly extensive explanation of the second exemption here. To begin with, the bhikkhunī cannot give the food simply by placing it down. She also has to state that she is giving the food, and the bhikkhu has to state his acceptance. In its discussion of Cv.X.15.1-2, the Commentary argues that food formally accepted by a bhikkhunī does not count as formally accepted for a bhikkhu, and vice versa. Thus, in the case of this exemption, even though the food has been given, the bhikkhu cannot take it until it has been formally offered. The Commentary states that the bhikkhunī can then formally offer it herself, but this would turn the exemption into a mere formality. What is more likely is that the food should be formally offered by someone else. | + | The Commentary contains a fairly extensive explanation of the second exemption here. To begin with, the [[bhikkhunī]] cannot give the [[food]] simply by placing it down. She also has to [[state]] that she is giving the [[food]], and the [[bhikkhu]] has to [[state]] his [[acceptance]]. In its [[discussion]] of Cv.X.15.1-2, the Commentary argues that [[food]] formally accepted by a [[bhikkhunī]] does not count as formally accepted for a [[bhikkhu]], and [[vice versa]]. Thus, in the case of this exemption, even though the [[food]] has been given, the [[bhikkhu]] cannot take it until it has been formally [[offered]]. The Commentary states that the [[bhikkhunī]] can then formally offer it herself, but this would turn the exemption into a mere formality. What is more likely is that the [[food]] should be formally [[offered]] by someone else. |
− | In all of these exemptions, the wise policy would be not to take so much of the bhikkhunī's food that she is deprived of a full meal. | + | In all of these exemptions, the [[wise]] policy would be not to take so much of the bhikkhunī's [[food]] that she is deprived of a full meal. |
− | Summary: Eating staple or non-staple food after having accepted it from the hand of an unrelated bhikkhunī in a village area is a pāṭidesanīya offense. | + | Summary: Eating staple or non-staple [[food]] after having accepted it from the hand of an unrelated [[bhikkhunī]] in a village area is a [[pāṭidesanīya]] offense. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
=== 2. === | === 2. === | ||
<poem> | <poem> | ||
− | In case bhikkhus, being invited, are eating in family residences, and if a bhikkhunī is standing there as though giving directions, (saying,) "Give curry here, give rice here," then the bhikkhus are to dismiss her: "Go away, sister, while the bhikkhus are eating." If not one of the bhikkhus should speak to dismiss her, "Go away, sister, while the bhikkhus are eating," the bhikkhus are to acknowledge it: "Friends, we have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. We acknowledge it." | + | In case [[bhikkhus]], being invited, are eating in [[family]] residences, and if a [[bhikkhunī]] is [[standing]] there as though giving [[directions]], (saying,) "Give curry here, give {{Wiki|rice}} here," then the [[bhikkhus]] are to dismiss her: "Go away, sister, while the [[bhikkhus]] are eating." If not one of the [[bhikkhus]] should speak to dismiss her, "Go away, sister, while the [[bhikkhus]] are eating," the [[bhikkhus]] are to [[acknowledge]] it: "Friends, we have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be [[acknowledged]]. We [[acknowledge]] it." |
− | This rule refers to situations where lay donors invite bhikkhus to a meal, and a bhikkhunī stands giving orders, based on favoritism, as to which bhikkhus should get which food. The duty of the bhikkhus in such cases is to tell her to go away. If even just one of them does, they all are exempt from the offense here. If none of them does, and the following factors are fulfilled, they all incur the penalty and must acknowledge their offense as a group. | + | This {{Wiki|rule}} refers to situations where lay donors invite [[bhikkhus]] to a meal, and a [[bhikkhunī]] stands giving orders, based on {{Wiki|favoritism}}, as to which [[bhikkhus]] should get which [[food]]. The [[duty]] of the [[bhikkhus]] in such cases is to tell her to go away. If even just one of them does, they all are exempt from the offense here. If none of them does, and the following factors are fulfilled, they all incur the penalty and must [[acknowledge]] their offense as a group. |
− | Object. As with the preceding rule, there are two objects here: the food and the bhikkhunī. Any one of the five staple foods received in the above situation would fulfill the food sub-factor. A bhikkhunī who has received double ordination would fulfill the bhikkhunī sub-factor. A bhikkhunī ordained only in the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha would be grounds for a dukkaṭa. If she has not been ordained, she is not grounds for an offense. | + | [[Object]]. As with the preceding {{Wiki|rule}}, there are two [[objects]] here: the [[food]] and the [[bhikkhunī]]. Any one of the five staple [[foods]] received in the above situation would fulfill the [[food]] sub-factor. A [[bhikkhunī]] who has received double [[ordination]] would fulfill the [[bhikkhunī]] sub-factor. A [[bhikkhunī]] [[ordained]] only in the [[Bhikkhunī]] [[Saṅgha]] would be grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]]. If she has not been [[ordained]], she is not grounds for an offense. |
− | Perception as to whether she has been ordained is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). | + | [[Perception]] as to whether she has been [[ordained]] is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). |
− | Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting the staple food received under such circumstances, and a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful one eats. | + | [[Effort]]. There is a [[dukkaṭa]] in accepting the staple [[food]] received under such circumstances, and a [[pāṭidesanīya]] for every mouthful one eats. |
Non-offenses. There is no offense if — | Non-offenses. There is no offense if — | ||
− | the bhikkhunī gets others to give her food to the bhikkhus; | + | the [[bhikkhunī]] gets others to give her [[food]] to the [[bhikkhus]]; |
− | she herself gives the food of other people to the bhikkhus; | + | she herself gives the [[food]] of other [[people]] to the [[bhikkhus]]; |
− | she gets the donors to give food they have forgotten to give; | + | she gets the donors to give [[food]] they have forgotten to give; |
− | she gets them to give to a bhikkhu they have passed over; | + | she gets them to give to a [[bhikkhu]] they have passed over; |
− | she gets them to give the food equally to all; | + | she gets them to give the [[food]] equally to all; |
− | she gets them to give anything but the five staple foods; or | + | she gets them to give anything but the five staple [[foods]]; or |
− | she is a female trainee or novice. | + | she is a {{Wiki|female}} trainee or {{Wiki|novice}}. |
− | Summary: Eating staple food accepted at a meal to which one has been invited and where a bhikkhunī has given directions, based on favoritism, as to which bhikkhu should get which food, and none of the bhikkhus have dismissed her, is a pāṭidesanīya offense. | + | Summary: Eating staple [[food]] accepted at a meal to which one has been invited and where a [[bhikkhunī]] has given [[directions]], based on {{Wiki|favoritism}}, as to which [[bhikkhu]] should get which [[food]], and none of the [[bhikkhus]] have dismissed her, is a [[pāṭidesanīya]] offense. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
=== 3. === | === 3. === | ||
<poem> | <poem> | ||
− | There are families designated as in training. Should any bhikkhu, not being ill, uninvited beforehand, chew or consume staple or non-staple food, having received it himself at the homes of families designated as in training, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it." | + | There are families designated as in {{Wiki|training}}. Should any [[bhikkhu]], not being ill, uninvited beforehand, chew or consume staple or non-staple [[food]], having received it himself at the homes of families designated as in {{Wiki|training}}, he is to [[acknowledge]] it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be [[acknowledged]]. I [[acknowledge]] it." |
− | The term in training (sekha) is usually used to refer to anyone who has attained at least the first noble path but has yet to become an arahant. Here, though, the Vibhaṅga uses it to refer to any family whose faith is increasing but whose wealth is decreasing — i.e., a family whose faith is so strong that they become generous to the point of suffering financially. In cases such as these, the Community may, as a formal transaction, declare them as families in training so as to protect them with this rule from bhikkhus who might abuse their generosity. | + | The term in {{Wiki|training}} ([[sekha]]) is usually used to refer to anyone who has [[attained]] at least the first [[noble path]] but has yet to become an [[arahant]]. Here, though, the [[Vibhaṅga]] uses it to refer to any [[family]] whose [[faith]] is increasing but whose [[wealth]] is {{Wiki|decreasing}} — i.e., a [[family]] whose [[faith]] is so strong that they become generous to the point of [[suffering]] financially. In cases such as these, the {{Wiki|Community}} may, as a formal transaction, declare them as families in {{Wiki|training}} so as to {{Wiki|protect}} them with this {{Wiki|rule}} from [[bhikkhus]] who might abuse their [[generosity]]. |
The factors for the offense here are two. | The factors for the offense here are two. | ||
− | 1) Object: staple or non-staple food accepted at the residence of a family designated as in training when one is not ill and has not been invited by them beforehand. | + | 1) [[Object]]: staple or non-staple [[food]] accepted at the residence of a [[family]] designated as in {{Wiki|training}} when one is not ill and has not been invited by them beforehand. |
− | 2) Effort: One eats the food. | + | 2) [[Effort]]: One eats the [[food]]. |
− | Object. Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines. Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa. | + | [[Object]]. Staple [[food]] follows the standard [[definition]] given in the [[Food]] [[Chapter]] under the [[pācittiya]] {{Wiki|rules}}. Non-staple [[food]] includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}}. Staple and non-staple [[food]] are grounds for a [[pāṭidesanīya]]; juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}} taken as [[food]], grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]]. |
− | Ill is defined as being unable to go for alms. | + | Ill is defined as being unable to go for [[alms]]. |
− | Invited means that one has been invited on that day or a previous day by a member of the family — or a messenger — standing outside of the residence or its yard/compound. If they invite one while they are inside the residence or its yard/compound, one is not exempt from the offense in accepting and eating their food. | + | Invited means that one has been invited on that day or a previous day by a member of the [[family]] — or a messenger — [[standing]] outside of the residence or its yard/compound. If they invite one while they are inside the residence or its yard/compound, one is not exempt from the offense in accepting and eating their [[food]]. |
− | Perception as to whether the family has been designated as "in training" is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). | + | [[Perception]] as to whether the [[family]] has been designated as "in {{Wiki|training}}" is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). |
− | Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, or in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple food one eats; and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food. | + | [[Effort]]. There is a [[dukkaṭa]] in accepting staple or non-staple [[food]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of eating it, or in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of taking them as [[food]]; a [[pāṭidesanīya]] for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple [[food]] one eats; and a [[dukkaṭa]] for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] for the [[sake]] of [[food]]. |
− | Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating food that one has accepted from the house of a family in training if — | + | Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating [[food]] that one has accepted from the house of a [[family]] in {{Wiki|training}} if — |
one is ill; | one is ill; | ||
one was invited; | one was invited; | ||
− | almsfood supplied by people other than the members of the family in training is set out in the residence or its yard (§); | + | [[almsfood]] supplied by [[people]] other than the members of the [[family]] in {{Wiki|training}} is set out in the residence or its yard (§); |
− | the family has made an arrangement to provide meals by drawing lots, on a daily basis, or on a regular or rotating basis — such as on a particular day of the waxing or waning moon, the uposatha days, or day after the uposatha days (see Appendix III) — and one accepts food as part of that arrangement; | + | the [[family]] has made an arrangement to provide meals by drawing lots, on a daily basis, or on a regular or rotating basis — such as on a particular day of the waxing or waning [[moon]], the [[uposatha days]], or day after the [[uposatha days]] (see Appendix III) — and one accepts [[food]] as part of that arrangement; |
− | one eats the leftovers of one who received the food at their residence when he was invited or ill; | + | one eats the leftovers of one who received the [[food]] at their residence when he was invited or ill; |
− | one accepts juice drinks, tonics, or medicine and uses them as such; or | + | one accepts juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] and uses them as such; or |
− | the members of the family give the food outside of their residence or yard/compound. The Commentary quotes the Mahā Paccarī, one of the ancient commentaries, as saying that this last exemption holds regardless of whether they take the food out of the residence before or after seeing one approach. | + | the members of the [[family]] give the [[food]] outside of their residence or yard/compound. The Commentary quotes the [[Mahā]] Paccarī, one of the [[ancient]] commentaries, as saying that this last exemption holds regardless of whether they take the [[food]] out of the residence before or after [[seeing]] one approach. |
− | Summary: Eating staple or non-staple food after accepting it — when one is neither ill nor invited — at the residence of a family formally designated as "in training" is a pāṭidesanīya offense. | + | Summary: Eating staple or non-staple [[food]] after accepting it — when one is neither ill nor invited — at the residence of a [[family]] formally designated as "in {{Wiki|training}}" is a [[pāṭidesanīya]] offense. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
=== 4. === | === 4. === | ||
<poem> | <poem> | ||
− | There are wilderness lodgings that are considered dubious and risky. Should any bhikkhu, not being ill, living in such lodgings, chew or consume (a gift of) staple or non-staple food that was unannounced beforehand, having received it with his own hand in the lodging, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it." | + | There are wilderness lodgings that are considered dubious and risky. Should any [[bhikkhu]], not being ill, living in such lodgings, chew or consume (a [[gift]] of) staple or non-staple [[food]] that was unannounced beforehand, having received it with his [[own]] hand in the lodging, he is to [[acknowledge]] it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be [[acknowledged]]. I [[acknowledge]] it." |
− | "Now at that time the Sakyan slaves were rebelling. The Sakyan ladies wanted to present a meal (for the bhikkhus) in wilderness lodgings. The Sakyan slaves heard, 'The Sakyan ladies, they say, want to present a meal in the wilderness lodgings,' so they infested the way. The Sakyan ladies, carrying exquisite staple and non-staple foods, went to the wilderness lodgings. The Sakyan slaves, coming out, robbed them and raped them. The Sakyans, having come out and captured the thieves with the goods, criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences not inform us that there are thieves living in the monastery?'" | + | "Now at that time the [[Sakyan]] slaves were rebelling. The [[Sakyan]] ladies wanted to {{Wiki|present}} a meal (for the [[bhikkhus]]) in wilderness lodgings. The [[Sakyan]] slaves heard, 'The [[Sakyan]] ladies, they say, want to {{Wiki|present}} a meal in the wilderness lodgings,' so they infested the way. The [[Sakyan]] ladies, carrying exquisite staple and non-staple [[foods]], went to the wilderness lodgings. The [[Sakyan]] slaves, coming out, robbed them and raped them. The [[Sakyans]], having come out and captured the thieves with the goods, criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences not inform us that there are thieves living in the [[monastery]]?'" |
Here again there are two factors for the full offense. | Here again there are two factors for the full offense. | ||
− | 1) Object: an unannounced gift of staple or non-staple food that one has received, when not ill, in a dubious and risky wilderness lodging. | + | 1) [[Object]]: an unannounced [[gift]] of staple or non-staple [[food]] that one has received, when not ill, in a dubious and risky wilderness lodging. |
− | 2) Effort: One eats the food. | + | 2) [[Effort]]: One eats the [[food]]. |
− | Object. The Vibhaṅga defines a wilderness lodging as one at least 500 bow-lengths, or one kilometer, from the nearest village, measuring by the shortest walkable path between the two, and not as the crow flies. Such a lodging is considered dubious if signs of thieves — such as their eating, resting, sitting, or standing places — have been seen within it or its vicinity; it is considered risky if people are known to have been hurt or plundered by thieves there. As under the other rule dealing with dubious and risky wilderness lodgings — NP 29 — none of the texts here give a precise definition of how far the vicinity of the lodging extends for the purpose of this situation. As noted in the explanation to NP 29, given the risks inherent in such lodgings it was perhaps felt unwise to delimit the area too precisely. Thus, in the context of this rule, the "vicinity" of the lodging can be stretched to include any area where the presence of thieves leads to a common perception that the lodging is dangerous. | + | [[Object]]. The [[Vibhaṅga]] defines a wilderness lodging as one at least 500 bow-lengths, or one kilometer, from the nearest village, [[measuring]] by the shortest walkable [[path]] between the two, and not as the [[crow]] flies. Such a lodging is considered dubious if [[signs]] of thieves — such as their eating, resting, sitting, or [[standing]] places — have been seen within it or its vicinity; it is considered risky if [[people]] are known to have been {{Wiki|hurt}} or plundered by thieves there. As under the other {{Wiki|rule}} dealing with dubious and risky wilderness lodgings — NP 29 — none of the texts here give a precise [[definition]] of how far the vicinity of the lodging extends for the {{Wiki|purpose}} of this situation. As noted in the explanation to NP 29, given the risks [[inherent]] in such lodgings it was perhaps felt unwise to delimit the area too precisely. Thus, in the context of this {{Wiki|rule}}, the "vicinity" of the lodging can be stretched to include any area where the presence of thieves leads to a common [[perception]] that the lodging is [[dangerous]]. |
− | Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines. | + | Staple [[food]] follows the standard [[definition]] given in the [[Food]] [[Chapter]] under the [[pācittiya]] {{Wiki|rules}}. Non-staple [[food]] includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}}. |
− | Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa. | + | Staple and non-staple [[food]] are grounds for a [[pāṭidesanīya]]; juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}} taken as [[food]], grounds for a [[dukkaṭa]]. |
− | The Vibhaṅga gives specific instructions for how the gift of food should be announced. The donor(s) or a messenger must come into the lodging compound if it is walled, or into its vicinity if it is not, and tell one of the inhabitants that a gift of food will be brought. The inhabitant must then tell the informant that the area is dubious and risky. If the informant says, "Never mind, the donor(s) will come anyway," then someone in the lodging must tell the thieves, "Go away. People are coming to serve food." This is unlikely to make the thieves go away but, as the Commentary explains, it absolves the bhikkhus from any responsibility if the thieves attack the donors. | + | The [[Vibhaṅga]] gives specific instructions for how the [[gift]] of [[food]] should be announced. The donor(s) or a messenger must come into the lodging compound if it is walled, or into its vicinity if it is not, and tell one of the inhabitants that a [[gift]] of [[food]] will be brought. The inhabitant must then tell the informant that the area is dubious and risky. If the informant says, "Never [[mind]], the donor(s) will come anyway," then someone in the lodging must tell the thieves, "Go away. [[People]] are coming to serve [[food]]." This is unlikely to make the thieves go away but, as the Commentary explains, it absolves the [[bhikkhus]] from any {{Wiki|responsibility}} if the thieves attack the donors. |
− | Even if the informant specifies that only certain types of food will be brought, anything that comes along with those foods counts as announced (§). Here the Commentary adds that if other people learn of the intended donation and bring food to add to it, their food counts as announced as well. The Vibhaṅga also states that if the informant says a group of people is coming to bring food, the announcement covers anything brought by any member of the group. | + | Even if the informant specifies that only certain types of [[food]] will be brought, anything that comes along with those [[foods]] counts as announced (§). Here the Commentary adds that if other [[people]] learn of the intended donation and bring [[food]] to add to it, their [[food]] counts as announced as well. The [[Vibhaṅga]] also states that if the informant says a group of [[people]] is coming to bring [[food]], the announcement covers anything brought by any member of the group. |
− | The Vibhaṅga makes clear that the announcement is valid only if the informant makes it in the lodging or its vicinity/compound. Thus, for example, if the donors announce their intended donation to the bhikkhu while he is in the village for alms, the donation is still considered unannounced. And, for the same reason, such things as telephone calls, letters, and faxes would also not count. | + | The [[Vibhaṅga]] makes clear that the announcement is valid only if the informant makes it in the lodging or its vicinity/compound. Thus, for example, if the donors announce their intended donation to the [[bhikkhu]] while he is in the village for [[alms]], the donation is still considered unannounced. And, for the same [[reason]], such things as telephone calls, letters, and faxes would also not count. |
− | The Commentary adds that if the donors send a bhikkhu or novice to the lodging to announce the donation, it does not count as announced. In other words, the messenger must be a lay person. | + | The Commentary adds that if the donors send a [[bhikkhu]] or {{Wiki|novice}} to the lodging to announce the donation, it does not count as announced. In other words, the messenger must be a lay [[person]]. |
− | Perception as to whether the food has been properly announced is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). | + | [[Perception]] as to whether the [[food]] has been properly announced is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1). |
− | A bhikkhu counts as ill if he is unable to go for alms. | + | A [[bhikkhu]] counts as ill if he is unable to go for [[alms]]. |
− | Effort. Under these circumstances, there is a dukkaṭa in accepting unannounced staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, or in accepting unannounced juice drinks, tonics or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the unannounced staple or non-staple food one eats; and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the unannounced juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food. | + | [[Effort]]. Under these circumstances, there is a [[dukkaṭa]] in accepting unannounced staple or non-staple [[food]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of eating it, or in accepting unannounced juice drinks, tonics or [[medicine]] with the {{Wiki|purpose}} of taking them as [[food]]; a [[pāṭidesanīya]] for every mouthful of the unannounced staple or non-staple [[food]] one eats; and a [[dukkaṭa]] for every mouthful one takes of the unannounced juice drinks, tonics, or [[medicine]] for the [[sake]] of [[food]]. |
− | Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating food accepted in the lodging if one is ill or if the gift was announced. There is also no offense — | + | Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating [[food]] accepted in the lodging if one is ill or if the [[gift]] was announced. There is also no offense — |
− | in using roots, bark, leaves, or flowers growing in the lodging (or, apparently, in its vicinity or compound); | + | in using [[roots]], bark, leaves, or [[flowers]] growing in the lodging (or, apparently, in its vicinity or compound); |
− | in eating left-over announced food or food given to one who is ill; | + | in eating left-over announced [[food]] or [[food]] given to one who is ill; |
− | in accepting food outside the lodging and eating it inside; or | + | in accepting [[food]] outside the lodging and eating it inside; or |
− | in accepting and consuming juice drinks, tonics, and medicines as such and not as food. | + | in accepting and consuming juice drinks, tonics, and {{Wiki|medicines}} as such and not as [[food]]. |
− | The Commentary, in discussing these allowances, makes the following points: 1) If lay people take any of the fruits, roots, etc., growing in the lodging and cook them at home, they must announce the gift before bringing them back to the lodging. 2) If the donors, after announcing the gift, bring large amounts of food, some of it may be set aside — without presenting it to the bhikkhus — to be presented on a later day. | + | The Commentary, in discussing these allowances, makes the following points: 1) If [[lay people]] take any of the {{Wiki|fruits}}, [[roots]], etc., growing in the lodging and cook them at home, they must announce the [[gift]] before bringing them back to the lodging. 2) If the donors, after announcing the [[gift]], bring large amounts of [[food]], some of it may be set aside — without presenting it to the [[bhikkhus]] — to be presented on a later day. |
− | All of this causes no hardships in communities where everyone knows that they have to announce a gift of food before bringing it to the dangerous lodging, but there are bound to be cases where donors do not know that the lodging is dangerous or that they should announce their gifts before bringing them, and they are likely to show up at the lodging with unannounced gifts of food. In such cases, the Commentary recommends: 1) Either have the donor take the food outside the area of the lodging, come back in to announce it, and then go out to bring the food back in to present it; or 2) have the donor take the food outside and have a bhikkhu follow him/her out to accept it there. | + | All of this [[causes]] no {{Wiki|hardships}} in communities where everyone [[knows]] that they have to announce a [[gift]] of [[food]] before bringing it to the [[dangerous]] lodging, but there are [[bound]] to be cases where donors do not know that the lodging is [[dangerous]] or that they should announce their gifts before bringing them, and they are likely to show up at the lodging with unannounced gifts of [[food]]. In such cases, the Commentary recommends: 1) Either have the {{Wiki|donor}} take the [[food]] outside the area of the lodging, come back in to announce it, and then go out to bring the [[food]] back in to {{Wiki|present}} it; or 2) have the {{Wiki|donor}} take the [[food]] outside and have a [[bhikkhu]] follow him/her out to accept it there. |
− | In order to minimize the need for doing this, though, it would be a wise policy for a bhikkhu who finds himself living in such a lodging to announce to all his supporters beforehand — and ask them to spread the word — that if they want to bring him gifts of food, they have to come and announce the gifts in advance. | + | In order to minimize the need for doing this, though, it would be a [[wise]] policy for a [[bhikkhu]] who finds himself living in such a lodging to announce to all his supporters beforehand — and ask them to spread the [[word]] — that if they want to bring him gifts of [[food]], they have to come and announce the gifts in advance. |
− | Summary: Eating an unannounced gift of staple or non-staple food after accepting it in a dangerous wilderness lodging when one is not ill is a pāṭidesanīya offense. | + | Summary: Eating an unannounced [[gift]] of staple or non-staple [[food]] after accepting it in a [[dangerous]] wilderness lodging when one is not ill is a [[pāṭidesanīya]] offense. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
{{R}} | {{R}} | ||
− | "Buddhist Monastic Code I: Chapter 9", by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, 23 April 2012, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.ch09.html . Retrieved on 14 November 2012. | + | "[[Buddhist Monastic Code]] I: [[Chapter]] 9", by [[Thanissaro Bhikkhu]]. [[Access to Insight]], 23 April 2012, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.ch09.html . Retrieved on 14 November 2012. |
[[Category:The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu]] | [[Category:The Buddhist Monastic Code I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu]] | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ |
Latest revision as of 09:37, 8 February 2016
Pāṭidesanīya
This term means "to be acknowledged." As a name for training rules, it means "entailing acknowledgement." The four training rules here are unique in that they mention, as part of the rule, the words to be used in acknowledging the violation; the second rule is especially unique in that it depicts the violators as acknowledging their offense as a group.
1.
Should any bhikkhu chew or consume staple or non-staple food, having received it with his own hand from the hand of an unrelated bhikkhunī in an inhabited area, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it."
A long series of events led up to the formulation of this rule.
"At that time a certain woman whose husband was away from home was made pregnant by her lover. She, having caused an abortion, said to a bhikkhunī who was dependent on her family for alms, 'Come, lady, take this fetus away in your bowl.' So the bhikkhunī, having placed the fetus in her bowl and covering it up with her outer robe, went away. Now at that time a certain alms-going bhikkhu had made this vow: 'I won't eat from the first almsfood I receive without having given some of it to a bhikkhu or bhikkhunī.' Seeing the bhikkhunī, he said to her, 'Come, sister, accept alms.'
"'No thank you, master.' — "A second time... A third time... — "'No thank you, master.'
"'Look, sister, I have made this vow: "I won't eat from the first almsfood I receive without having given some of it to a bhikkhu or bhikkhunī." So come on, accept alms.'
"Then the bhikkhunī, being pressured by the bhikkhu, took out her bowl and showed it to him. 'You see, master: a fetus in the bowl. But don't tell anyone'...
"(Of course the bhikkhu couldn't help but tell his fellow bhikkhus, and word reached the Buddha, who formulated a double rule:) 'A bhikkhunī should not take a fetus in a bowl... I allow a bhikkhunī, when seeing a bhikkhu, to take out her bowl and show it to him.'
"Now at that time some group-of-six bhikkhunīs, on seeing a bhikkhu, would turn their bowls upside down and show him the bottom side... 'I allow a bhikkhunī, when seeing a bhikkhu, to show him her bowl right side up. And she is to offer him whatever food there is in the bowl.'" — Cv.X.13
Here is where the origin story for this rule begins:
"Now at that time a certain bhikkhunī, on the way back from going for alms in Sāvatthī, seeing a certain bhikkhu, said to him, 'Come, master, accept alms.'
"'Very well, sister.' And he took everything. As the time (for alms-going) was almost up, she was unable to go for alms and so was deprived of her meal.
"On the second day... the third day... he took everything... she was deprived of her meal.
"On the fourth day, she went staggering along the road. A financier, coming the opposite direction in a chariot, said to her, 'Get out of the way, lady.'
"Stepping down (from the road), she fell down right there.
"The financier asked her forgiveness, 'Forgive me, lady, for making you fall.'
"'It wasn't that you made me fall, householder. It's just that I myself am weak.'
"'But why are you weak?'
"And she told him what had happened. The financier, having taken her to his house and having fed her (§), criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences take food from the hand of a bhikkhunī? It's difficult for women to come by things.'"
There are two factors for the full offense here.
1) Object: staple or non-staple food that a bhikkhu has accepted from the hand of a bhikkhunī — unrelated to him — while she is in a village area.
2) Effort: He eats the food.
Object. There are two elements to this factor: the food sub-factor and the bhikkhunī sub-factor. Under the food sub-factor: Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines. Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa.
As for the bhikkhunī sub-factor: Bhikkhunī refers to one who has received the double ordination. A bhikkhunī who has received only her first ordination — in the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha — is grounds for a dukkaṭa. Unrelated means sharing no common ancestor back through seven generations. Perception as to whether the bhikkhunī is related is not a mitigating factor here. The permutations around the issue of perception here are similar to those under Pc 4, with the only difference that the three pācittiyas under that pattern are changed to three pāṭidesanīyas here. In other words, if she is unrelated, she is grounds for a pāṭidesanīya whether one perceives her as unrelated, related, or doubtful. If she is related, she is grounds for a dukkaṭa if one perceives her as unrelated or doubtful. If she is related and one perceives her as related, she is not grounds for an offense. This pattern with regard to perception is followed in all four pāṭidesanīya rules.
A village area is defined as a house or roadway in a village, town, or city.
Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, and in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; while there is a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple food one eats, and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food.
Non-offenses. There is no offense if a bhikkhu accepts and eats food from a related bhikkhunī or from a female trainee or female novice, related or not. There is also no offense in the following situations even if the bhikkhunī is unrelated:
She gets someone else to give him the food.
She gives it by placing it near him (as in NP 18 and Pc 41).
She gives it to him in a monastery, nuns' quarters, a dwelling of members of other sects, or on the way back from such places.
She gives it to him after she has left the village.
She gives him juice drinks, tonics, or medicine, and he uses them as such, rather than as food.
The Commentary contains a fairly extensive explanation of the second exemption here. To begin with, the bhikkhunī cannot give the food simply by placing it down. She also has to state that she is giving the food, and the bhikkhu has to state his acceptance. In its discussion of Cv.X.15.1-2, the Commentary argues that food formally accepted by a bhikkhunī does not count as formally accepted for a bhikkhu, and vice versa. Thus, in the case of this exemption, even though the food has been given, the bhikkhu cannot take it until it has been formally offered. The Commentary states that the bhikkhunī can then formally offer it herself, but this would turn the exemption into a mere formality. What is more likely is that the food should be formally offered by someone else.
In all of these exemptions, the wise policy would be not to take so much of the bhikkhunī's food that she is deprived of a full meal.
Summary: Eating staple or non-staple food after having accepted it from the hand of an unrelated bhikkhunī in a village area is a pāṭidesanīya offense.
2.
In case bhikkhus, being invited, are eating in family residences, and if a bhikkhunī is standing there as though giving directions, (saying,) "Give curry here, give rice here," then the bhikkhus are to dismiss her: "Go away, sister, while the bhikkhus are eating." If not one of the bhikkhus should speak to dismiss her, "Go away, sister, while the bhikkhus are eating," the bhikkhus are to acknowledge it: "Friends, we have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. We acknowledge it."
This rule refers to situations where lay donors invite bhikkhus to a meal, and a bhikkhunī stands giving orders, based on favoritism, as to which bhikkhus should get which food. The duty of the bhikkhus in such cases is to tell her to go away. If even just one of them does, they all are exempt from the offense here. If none of them does, and the following factors are fulfilled, they all incur the penalty and must acknowledge their offense as a group.
Object. As with the preceding rule, there are two objects here: the food and the bhikkhunī. Any one of the five staple foods received in the above situation would fulfill the food sub-factor. A bhikkhunī who has received double ordination would fulfill the bhikkhunī sub-factor. A bhikkhunī ordained only in the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha would be grounds for a dukkaṭa. If she has not been ordained, she is not grounds for an offense.
Perception as to whether she has been ordained is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1).
Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting the staple food received under such circumstances, and a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful one eats.
Non-offenses. There is no offense if —
the bhikkhunī gets others to give her food to the bhikkhus;
she herself gives the food of other people to the bhikkhus;
she gets the donors to give food they have forgotten to give;
she gets them to give to a bhikkhu they have passed over;
she gets them to give the food equally to all;
she gets them to give anything but the five staple foods; or
she is a female trainee or novice.
Summary: Eating staple food accepted at a meal to which one has been invited and where a bhikkhunī has given directions, based on favoritism, as to which bhikkhu should get which food, and none of the bhikkhus have dismissed her, is a pāṭidesanīya offense.
3.
There are families designated as in training. Should any bhikkhu, not being ill, uninvited beforehand, chew or consume staple or non-staple food, having received it himself at the homes of families designated as in training, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it."
The term in training (sekha) is usually used to refer to anyone who has attained at least the first noble path but has yet to become an arahant. Here, though, the Vibhaṅga uses it to refer to any family whose faith is increasing but whose wealth is decreasing — i.e., a family whose faith is so strong that they become generous to the point of suffering financially. In cases such as these, the Community may, as a formal transaction, declare them as families in training so as to protect them with this rule from bhikkhus who might abuse their generosity.
The factors for the offense here are two.
1) Object: staple or non-staple food accepted at the residence of a family designated as in training when one is not ill and has not been invited by them beforehand.
2) Effort: One eats the food.
Object. Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines. Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa.
Ill is defined as being unable to go for alms.
Invited means that one has been invited on that day or a previous day by a member of the family — or a messenger — standing outside of the residence or its yard/compound. If they invite one while they are inside the residence or its yard/compound, one is not exempt from the offense in accepting and eating their food.
Perception as to whether the family has been designated as "in training" is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1).
Effort. There is a dukkaṭa in accepting staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, or in accepting juice drinks, tonics, or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the staple or non-staple food one eats; and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food.
Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating food that one has accepted from the house of a family in training if —
one is ill;
one was invited;
almsfood supplied by people other than the members of the family in training is set out in the residence or its yard (§);
the family has made an arrangement to provide meals by drawing lots, on a daily basis, or on a regular or rotating basis — such as on a particular day of the waxing or waning moon, the uposatha days, or day after the uposatha days (see Appendix III) — and one accepts food as part of that arrangement;
one eats the leftovers of one who received the food at their residence when he was invited or ill;
one accepts juice drinks, tonics, or medicine and uses them as such; or
the members of the family give the food outside of their residence or yard/compound. The Commentary quotes the Mahā Paccarī, one of the ancient commentaries, as saying that this last exemption holds regardless of whether they take the food out of the residence before or after seeing one approach.
Summary: Eating staple or non-staple food after accepting it — when one is neither ill nor invited — at the residence of a family formally designated as "in training" is a pāṭidesanīya offense.
4.
There are wilderness lodgings that are considered dubious and risky. Should any bhikkhu, not being ill, living in such lodgings, chew or consume (a gift of) staple or non-staple food that was unannounced beforehand, having received it with his own hand in the lodging, he is to acknowledge it: "Friends, I have committed a blameworthy, unsuitable act that ought to be acknowledged. I acknowledge it."
"Now at that time the Sakyan slaves were rebelling. The Sakyan ladies wanted to present a meal (for the bhikkhus) in wilderness lodgings. The Sakyan slaves heard, 'The Sakyan ladies, they say, want to present a meal in the wilderness lodgings,' so they infested the way. The Sakyan ladies, carrying exquisite staple and non-staple foods, went to the wilderness lodgings. The Sakyan slaves, coming out, robbed them and raped them. The Sakyans, having come out and captured the thieves with the goods, criticized and complained and spread it about, 'How can their reverences not inform us that there are thieves living in the monastery?'"
Here again there are two factors for the full offense.
1) Object: an unannounced gift of staple or non-staple food that one has received, when not ill, in a dubious and risky wilderness lodging.
2) Effort: One eats the food.
Object. The Vibhaṅga defines a wilderness lodging as one at least 500 bow-lengths, or one kilometer, from the nearest village, measuring by the shortest walkable path between the two, and not as the crow flies. Such a lodging is considered dubious if signs of thieves — such as their eating, resting, sitting, or standing places — have been seen within it or its vicinity; it is considered risky if people are known to have been hurt or plundered by thieves there. As under the other rule dealing with dubious and risky wilderness lodgings — NP 29 — none of the texts here give a precise definition of how far the vicinity of the lodging extends for the purpose of this situation. As noted in the explanation to NP 29, given the risks inherent in such lodgings it was perhaps felt unwise to delimit the area too precisely. Thus, in the context of this rule, the "vicinity" of the lodging can be stretched to include any area where the presence of thieves leads to a common perception that the lodging is dangerous.
Staple food follows the standard definition given in the Food Chapter under the pācittiya rules. Non-staple food includes all edibles except juice drinks, tonics, and medicines.
Staple and non-staple food are grounds for a pāṭidesanīya; juice drinks, tonics, and medicines taken as food, grounds for a dukkaṭa.
The Vibhaṅga gives specific instructions for how the gift of food should be announced. The donor(s) or a messenger must come into the lodging compound if it is walled, or into its vicinity if it is not, and tell one of the inhabitants that a gift of food will be brought. The inhabitant must then tell the informant that the area is dubious and risky. If the informant says, "Never mind, the donor(s) will come anyway," then someone in the lodging must tell the thieves, "Go away. People are coming to serve food." This is unlikely to make the thieves go away but, as the Commentary explains, it absolves the bhikkhus from any responsibility if the thieves attack the donors.
Even if the informant specifies that only certain types of food will be brought, anything that comes along with those foods counts as announced (§). Here the Commentary adds that if other people learn of the intended donation and bring food to add to it, their food counts as announced as well. The Vibhaṅga also states that if the informant says a group of people is coming to bring food, the announcement covers anything brought by any member of the group.
The Vibhaṅga makes clear that the announcement is valid only if the informant makes it in the lodging or its vicinity/compound. Thus, for example, if the donors announce their intended donation to the bhikkhu while he is in the village for alms, the donation is still considered unannounced. And, for the same reason, such things as telephone calls, letters, and faxes would also not count.
The Commentary adds that if the donors send a bhikkhu or novice to the lodging to announce the donation, it does not count as announced. In other words, the messenger must be a lay person.
Perception as to whether the food has been properly announced is not a mitigating factor here (see Pd 1).
A bhikkhu counts as ill if he is unable to go for alms.
Effort. Under these circumstances, there is a dukkaṭa in accepting unannounced staple or non-staple food with the purpose of eating it, or in accepting unannounced juice drinks, tonics or medicine with the purpose of taking them as food; a pāṭidesanīya for every mouthful of the unannounced staple or non-staple food one eats; and a dukkaṭa for every mouthful one takes of the unannounced juice drinks, tonics, or medicine for the sake of food.
Non-offenses. There is no offense in eating food accepted in the lodging if one is ill or if the gift was announced. There is also no offense —
in using roots, bark, leaves, or flowers growing in the lodging (or, apparently, in its vicinity or compound);
in eating left-over announced food or food given to one who is ill;
in accepting food outside the lodging and eating it inside; or
in accepting and consuming juice drinks, tonics, and medicines as such and not as food.
The Commentary, in discussing these allowances, makes the following points: 1) If lay people take any of the fruits, roots, etc., growing in the lodging and cook them at home, they must announce the gift before bringing them back to the lodging. 2) If the donors, after announcing the gift, bring large amounts of food, some of it may be set aside — without presenting it to the bhikkhus — to be presented on a later day.
All of this causes no hardships in communities where everyone knows that they have to announce a gift of food before bringing it to the dangerous lodging, but there are bound to be cases where donors do not know that the lodging is dangerous or that they should announce their gifts before bringing them, and they are likely to show up at the lodging with unannounced gifts of food. In such cases, the Commentary recommends: 1) Either have the donor take the food outside the area of the lodging, come back in to announce it, and then go out to bring the food back in to present it; or 2) have the donor take the food outside and have a bhikkhu follow him/her out to accept it there.
In order to minimize the need for doing this, though, it would be a wise policy for a bhikkhu who finds himself living in such a lodging to announce to all his supporters beforehand — and ask them to spread the word — that if they want to bring him gifts of food, they have to come and announce the gifts in advance.
Summary: Eating an unannounced gift of staple or non-staple food after accepting it in a dangerous wilderness lodging when one is not ill is a pāṭidesanīya offense.
Source
"Buddhist Monastic Code I: Chapter 9", by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, 23 April 2012, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.ch09.html . Retrieved on 14 November 2012.