Vinaya Pitaka (2): The Analysis of Nun’ Rules (Bhikkhuni-vibhanga)

by I. B. Horner | 2014 | 66,469 words | ISBN-13: 9781921842160

The English translation of the Bhikkhuni-vibhanga: the second 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 acollection of rules for Buddhist nuns. The English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka (second part, bhikkhuni-vibhanga) contain...

Nuns’ Expiation (Pācittiya) 54

Bi-Pc.54.1.1 BD.3.348 … at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. Now at that time a certain brahmin, having invited nuns, Vin.4.311 offered them food[1] …” …

Whatever nun, being invited or being satisfied,[2] should eat or partake of solid food or soft food, there is an offence of expiation.”


Bi-Pc.54.2.1 Whatever means: … nun is to be understood in this case.

Being invited means: being invited to any one meal of the five (kinds of) meals.

Being satisfied means: eating is to be seen, a meal is to be seen, standing within a reach of the hand, she asks (her), a refusal is to be seen.[3]

Solid food means: setting aside the five (kinds of) meals, conjey,[4] food (that may be eaten) during a watch of the night, during seven days, during life, the rest means solid food.[5]

Soft food means: the five (kinds of) meals: … meat.[6]

If she accepts, thinking: “I will eat, I will partake of,” there is an offence of wrong-doing. For every mouthful, there is an offence of expiation.[7] If she BD.3.349 accepts for the sake of nutriment (food to be eaten) during a watch of the night, during seven days, during life, there is an offence of wrong-doing. For every mouthful, there is an offence of wrong-doing.[8]


Bi-Pc.54.2.2 There is no offence if, being invited (but) not being satisfied, she drinks conjey; if she eats having asked the owner (for permission); if when there is a reason she makes use of (food to be eaten) during a watch of the night, during seven days, during life[9]; if she is mad, if she is the first wrong-doer. Vin.4.312

Footnotes and references:

1.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35, first story; see BD.2.326f. The rule was amended for the monks but not for the nuns.

2.

The words are here changed to nimantitā vā pavāritā vā from bhuttavi pavarita of the story. This latter pair (in the masculine) appears in the monks’ sikkhāpada (Bu-Pc.35); therefore the Old Commentary there defines bhuttāvī, having eaten, while above it defines nimantitā, being invited; but the terms used in these two definitions are the same.

3.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.1. See BD.2.328ff. for notes.

4.

This is omitted from corresponding paragraph in Monks’ Bu-Pc.35. For conjey, yāgu, as being neither a solid food nor a soft food, see BD.2, Introduction, p.xxxi and BD.3.352f. It was counted rather as a drink, see “no offence” clause below.

5.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.1. See BD.2.328ff. for notes.

6.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.1. See BD.2.328ff. for notes.

7.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.1. See BD.2.328ff. for notes.

8.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.2.

9.

= Monks’ Bu-Pc.35.3.3.