Vinaya Pitaka (1): Bhikkhu-vibhanga (the analysis of Monks’ rules)
by I. B. Horner | 2014 | 345,334 words | ISBN-13: 9781921842160
The English translation of the Bhikkhu-vibhanga: the first part of the Suttavibhanga, which itself is the first book of the Pali Vinaya Pitaka, one of the three major ‘baskets’ of Therevada canonical literature. It is a collection of rules for Buddhist monks. The English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka (first part, bhikkhu-vibhanga) contains many...
Monks’ Expiation (Pācittiya) 61
Bu-Pc.61.1.1 Vin.4.124 BD.3.1 … at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. Now at one time the venerable Udāyin[1] was an archer,[2] and crows were unpleasant to him. He, having shot crows, having cut off their heads, put them in a row on a stake. Monks spoke thus:
“By whom, your reverence, were these crows deprived of life?’”
“By me, your reverences; crows are unpleasant to me.” Those who were modest monks … spread it about, saying:
“How can the venerable Udāyin intentionally deprive a living thing of life?” …
“Is it true, as is said, that you, Udāyin, intentionally deprived a living thing of life?”
“It is true, lord.”
The enlightened one, the lord, rebuked him, saying:
“How can you, foolish man, intentionally deprive a living thing of life? It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased … And thus, monks, this rule of training should be set forth:
“Whatever monk should intentionally deprive a living thing of life, there is an offence of expiation.”
Bu-Pc.61.2.1 Whatever means: … monk is to be understood in this case.
BD.3.2 Intentionally means: a transgression committed knowingly, consciously, deliberately.[3]
Living thing means: it is called a living thing that is an animal.[4]
Should deprive of life means: if he cuts off the faculty of life, destroys it, harms its duration,[5] there is an offence of expiation. Vin.4.125
Bu-Pc.61.2.2 If he thinks that it is a living thing when it is a living thing, (and) deprives it of life, there is an offence of expiation. If he is in doubt as to whether it is a living thing, (and) deprives it of life, there is an offence of wrong-doing.[6] If he thinks that it is not a living thing when it is a living thing, there is no offence. If he thinks that it is a living thing when it is not a living thing, there is an offence of wrong-doing. If he is in doubt as to whether it is not a living thing, there is an offence of wrong-doing. If he thinks that it is not a living thing when it is not a living thing, there is no offence.
Bu-Pc.61.2.3 There is no offence if it is unintentional; if (he is) not thinking; if he does not know; if he is not meaning death[7]; if he is mad, if he is the first wrong-doer.
The First
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
[2]:
issāsa. Cf. MN.iii.1 (issattha); AN.iv.423. Vin-a.864 says when he was a householder he taught archers.
[6]:
Variant reading āpatti pācittiyassa. See Vin.4.361.