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.