Act of reconciliation

^Kd.11.18.1 Now at that time the venerable Sudhamma^[1] was a resident in the householder Citta’s^[2] Macchikāsaṇḍa,^[3] an overseer of new buildings, a constant adviser.^[4] Whenever the householder Citta wished to invite an Order or a group or an individual^[5] he did not invite the Order or the group or the individual without having asked the venerable Sudhamma for permission. Now at that time several monks who were elders—the venerable Sāriputta and the venerable Moggallāna the Great and the venerable Kaccāna the Great and the venerable ^Vin.2.16 Koṭṭhita the Great and the venerable Kappina the Great and the venerable Cunda the Great, and the venerable Anuruddha and the ^BD.5.23 venerable Revata and the venerable Upāli and the venerable Ānanda and the venerable Rāhula^[6]—walking on tour in Kāsī arrived in Macchikāsaṇḍa. The householder Citta heard that these monks who were elders had reached Macchikāsaṇḍa. Then the householder Citta approached these monks who were elders; having approached, having greeted these monks who were elders, he sat down at a respectful distance. As the householder Citta was sitting down at a respectful distance, the Venerable Sāriputta delighted, rejoiced, roused, gladdened him with talk on dhamma. Then the householder Citta, delighted … gladdened with the venerable Sāriputta’s talk on dhamma, spoke thus to the monks who were elders: “Honoured sirs, let the elders consent to come to a meal with me on the morrow.” The monks who were elders consented by becoming silent.

^Kd.11.18.2 Then the householder Citta, having understood the consent of the monks who were elders, rising from his seat, having I greeted the monks who were elders, keeping his right side towards them, approached the venerable Sudhamma; having approached, having greeted the venerable Sudhamma, he stood at a respectful distance. As he was standing at a respectful distance, the householder Citta spoke thus to the venerable Sudhamma:

“Honoured sir, may master Sudhamma consent to a meal with me on the morrow together with the elders.”

Then the venerable Sudhamma thought: “Formerly, when I the householder Citta wished to invite an Order or a group or an individual, he did not invite the Order or the group or the individual without having asked me for permission; but now he invites monks who are elders without having asked me for permission. This householder Citta is now corrupted, he is indifferent to me, detached from me”, and he spoke thus to the householder Citta: “No, householder, I do not consent.” And a second time … And a third time did the householder Citta speak thus to the venerable Sudhamma: “Honoured sir, may master Sudhamma consent to a meal with me on the morrow together with the elders.”

“No, householder, I do not consent.”

^BD.5.24 Then the householder Citta thinking: “What can master Sudhamma, either consenting or not consenting, do to me?” having greeted the venerable Sudhamma, departed keeping his right side towards him.

^Kd.11.18.3 Then, towards the end of that night, the householder Citta had sumptuous foods, solid and soft, prepared for the monks who were elders. Then the venerable Sudhamma, thinking: “Suppose I were to see what has been prepared on behalf of the householder Citta for the elders?” ^Vin.2.17 having dressed in the morning, taking his bowl and robe, approached the dwelling of the householder Citta; having approached, he sat down on an appointed seat. Then the householder Citta approached the venerable Sudhamma; having approached, having greeted the venerable Sudhamma, he sat down at a respectful distance. The venerable Sudhamma spoke thus to the householder Citta as he was sitting down at a respectful distance:

“Truly abundant, householder, is this solid and soft food prepared by you, but one thing is not here, that is to say sesamum cake.”

“Although, honoured sir, much treasure is to be found in the Awakened One’s words, just this is mentioned by master Sudhamma, that is to say sesamum cake. Formerly, honoured sir, some merchants of the Deccan^[7] went to an eastern district^[8] for trading and from there they brought back a hen. Then, honoured sir, that hen mated with a crow and produced a chick. And whenever, honoured sir, that chick wanted to utter the cry of a crow it uttered a “cockadoodle-doo” whenever it wanted to utter the cry of a cock it uttered a “caw”. In the same way, honoured sir, although much treasure is to be found in the Awakened One’s words, just this is mentioned by master Sudhamma, that is to say sesamum cake.”^[9]

^Kd.11.18.4 “You, householder, are reviling^[10] me, you, householder, are abusing me; this is your residence, householder, I will go away.”

“Honoured sir, I am not reviling and abusing master Sudhamma; honoured sir, let master Sudhamma remain in ^BD.5.25 Macchikāsaṇḍa delightful is the Wild Mango Grove^[11]; I will make an effort for master Sudhamma in respect of the requisites of robes, almsfood, lodgings and medicines for the sick.” And a second time … And a third time did the venerable Sudhamma speak thus to the householder Citta: “You, householder, are reviling me … I will go away.”

“Where, honoured sir, will master Sudhamma go?”

“I, householder, will go to Sāvatthī to see the Lord.”

“Well then, honoured sir, tell the Lord everything that was said by you and that was said by me. But this, honoured sir, will not be surprising: that master Sudhamma should come back again to Macchikāsaṇḍa.”

^Kd.11.18.5 Then the venerable Sudhamma, having packed away his lodgings, taking his bowl and robe, set out for Sāvatthī. In due course he approached Sāvatthī, the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery, the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, the venerable Sudhamma ^Vin.2.18 told the Lord everything that had been said by himself and that had been said by the householder Citta. The Awakened One, the Lord rebuked him, saying:

“It is not suiting, foolish man, it is not becoming, it is not fitting, it is not worthy of a recluse, it is not allowable, it is not to be done. How can you, foolish man, jeer at^[12] the householder Citta, who has faith and is believing, who is a benefactor, a worker, a supporter of the Order, with a low thing, and scoff at him with a low thing? It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …” and having rebuked him, having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks, saying: “Well then, monks, let the Order carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation^[13] for the monk Sudhamma, saying: ‘The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you.’

^Kd.11.18.6 “And thus, monks, should it be carried out: First, the monk Sudhamma should be reproved, having reproved him, he should ^BD.5.26 be made to remember, having made him remember, he should be accused of the offence, having accused him of the offence, the Order should be informed by an experienced, competent monk, saying: ‘Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This monk Sudhamma jeered at the householder Citta who has faith and is believing, a benefactor, a worker, a supporter of the Order, with a low thing, he scoffed at him with a low thing. If it seems right to the Order, the Order may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma, saying: “The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you”. This is the motion. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This monk Sudhamma jeered at the householder Citta … scoffed at him with a low thing. The Order is carrying out a (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma, saying: “The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you”. If the carrying out of the (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma, saying: “The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you” is pleasing to the venerable ones, they should be silent; he to whom it is not pleasing should speak. And a second time I speak forth this matter … And a third time I speak forth this matter … you should speak. A (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma, saying: “The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you” is carried out by the Order. It is pleasing to the Order, therefore it is silent. Thus do I understand this.’

Twelve on an act not by rule

^Kd.11.19.1 “Monks, if it is possessed of three qualities, a (formal) act of reconciliation … = Kd.11.2, Kd.11.3 …

Twelve on an act by rule

… and is easily settled.

Four on desiring

^Kd.11.20.1 “Monks, if a monk is possessed of five qualities, the Order, if it so desires, may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for him^[14]: if he tries for non-receiving (of gains) by householders^[15]; if he tries for non-profiting by householders; if he tries for non-residence for householders; if he reviles and abuses householders; ^Vin.2.19 if he causes householder to break with householder. Monks, if a monk is possessed of these five ^BD.5.27 qualities … act of reconciliation for him. And, monks, if a monk is possessed of five further qualities, the Order, if it so desires, may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for him: if he speaks dispraise of the Awakened One to householders, if he speaks dispraise of dhamma to householders, if he speaks dispraise of the Order to householders, if he jeers at a householder with a low thing, if he scoffs at him with a low thing, if he does not fulfil, according to rule, his assent (given) to householders.^[16] Monks, if a monk … act of reconciliation for him. And, monks, an Order, if it so desires, may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for five (kinds of) monks: for the one who tries for non-receiving (of gains) by householders; for the one who tries for non-profiting by householders; for the one who tries for non-residence for householders; for the one who reviles and abuses householders; for the one who causes householder to break with householder. Monks, an Order … for these five (kinds of) monks. And monks, an Order, if it so desires, may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for five further (kinds of) monks: for the one who speaks dispraise of the Awakened One to householders … of dhamma to householders … of an Order to householders, for the one who jeers at a householder with a low thing, scoffs at him with a low thing, for the one who does not fulfil, according to rule, his assent (given) to householders. Monks, an Order, if it so desires, may carry out a (formal) act of reconciliation for these five (kinds of) monks.

^Kd.11.20.2 Told are the Four times Five Cases on Being Desirous.

Eighteen duties

^Kd.11.21.1 “Monks, a monk for whom a (formal) act of reconciliation has been carried out should conduct himself properly … = Kd.11.5, reading act of reconciliation for act of censure … he should not quarrel with monks.”

^Kd.11.21.2 Told are the Eighteen Observances connected with a (Formal) Act of Reconciliation

^{Kd.11.22.1 BD.5.28} Then the Order earned out a (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma, saying: “The householder Citta should be asked to forgive you.” He, having gone to Macchikāsaṇḍa when the (formal) act of reconciliation had been carried out by the Order, becoming ashamed, was unable to ask the householder Citta to forgive him, and he went back again to Sāvatthī. Monks spoke thus: “Did you ask the householder Citta to forgive you?”

“Now, I, your reverences, having gone to Macchikāsaṇḍa, becoming ashamed, was unable to ask the householder Citta to forgive (me).” They told this matter to the Lord.

^Kd.11.22.2 He said: “Well then, monks, let the Order give a companion messenger^[17] to the monk Sudhamma to ask the householder Citta to forgive him. And thus, monks should he be given: First, a monk should be asked; having asked him, the Order should be informed by an experienced, competent monk, saying: ‘Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. If it seems right to the Order, the Order may give the monk So-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask the householder Citta to forgive him. This is the motion. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. The Order ^Vin.2.20 is giving the monk So-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask the householder Citta to forgive him. If the giving of the monk So-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask the householder Citta to forgive him is pleasing to the venerable ones, let them be silent; he to whom it is not pleasing should speak. The monk So-and-so is given by the Order to the monk Sudhamma as a companion messenger to ask the householder Citta to forgive him. It is pleasing to the Order; therefore it is silent. Thus do I understand this.’

^Kd.11.22.3 “Monks, when the monk Sudhamma, together with the companion messenger monk, has reached Macchikasanda, the householder Citta should be asked to forgive him (Sudhamma using the words), ‘Forgive me, householder, I am at peace towards you’. If, while he is being spoken to thus, he forgives ^BD.5.29 him, that is good; if he does not forgive, he should be spoken to by the companion messenger monk, saying: ‘Forgive this monk, householder, he is at peace towards you.’ If, while he is being spoken to thus, he forgives him, that is good; if he does not forgive, he should be spoken to by the companion messenger monk, saying, ‘Forgive this monk, householder, for I am at peace towards you.’ If … that is good; if he does not forgive, he should be spoken to by the companion messenger monk, saying: ‘Forgive this monk, householder, (I ask it) in the name of the Order’. If … that is good; if he does not forgive, the companion messenger monk, not having caused the monk Sudhamma to be dismissed from reach of the sight^[18] of the householder Citta, not having caused him to be dismissed from reach of the hearing, having made him arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, having made him sit down on his haunches, having made him salute with joined palms,^[19] should cause that offence to be confessed.”

^Kd.11.23.1 Then the monk Sudhamma, together with the companion messenger monk, having reached Macchikāsaṇḍa, asked the householder Citta to forgive him. He conducted himself properly, he was subdued, he mended his ways, and having approached monks, he spoke thus: “I, your reverences, for whom a (formal) act of reconciliation was carried out by an Order, am conducting myself properly, I am subdued, I am mending my ways. Now what line of conduct should be followed by me?” They told this matter to the Lord. He said:

“Well then, monks, let the Order revoke the (formal) act of reconciliation for the monk Sudhamma.

Eighteen cases that should not be revoked

^Kd.11.23.2 “Monks, if a monk is possessed of five qualities, the (formal) act of reconciliation should not be revoked … = Kd.11.6.2–Kd.11.7 …

Eighteen cases that should be revoked

… does not quarrel with monks. Monks, if a monk is possessed of these eight qualities the (formal) act of reconciliation may be revoked.

^Kd.11.23.3 Told are the Eighteen Cases where a (Formal) Act of Reconciliation may be revoked. ^Vin.2.21

^{Kd.11.24.1 BD.5.30} “And thus, monks, should it be revoked. Monks, that monk Sudhamma, having approached the Order … see Kd.11.12 … ‘… Thus do I understand this.’”

Told is the Fourth (Formal) Act: that of Reconciliation.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Cf. Dhp-a.ii.74ff., AN-a.i.386ff. Dhp.73 is said to have been spoken on Sudhamma’s account.

[2]:

At AN.i.26 called chief of lay followers who are speakers on dhamma. He is fully described in the Citta-saṃyutta, SN.iv.281ff. At AN.i.88 = SN.ii.235 he is named as a standard by which to measure disciples who are lay followers.

[3]:

A woodland grove, vanasaṇḍa, according to SN-a.iii.91; a town according to Dhp-a.ii.74 and AN-a.i.386, the latter adding “in the realm of Magadha”.

[4]:

dhuvabhattika usually means a “regular or constant diner”. But bhattika is given this other meaning at Thig-a.267 (cf. Pali-English Dictionary), and seems justified above.

[5]:

puggala, here meaning “monk”.

[6]:

This same list of great theras also occurs at Vin.4.66. For notes and further references, see BD.2.295.

[7]:

Dakkhiṇāpathakā. On the Southern region, Dakkhiṇāpatha, see B.C. Law, India as described in Early Texts of Buddhism and Jainism, p.77ff.

[8]:

puratthima janapada.

[9]:

Vin-a.1158 says he speaks neither as a monk nor as a householder.

[10]:

akkosati and paribhāsati are defined at Vin.4.309 (BD.3.344).

[11]:

Ambāṭakavana. Pali-English Dictionary gives “hog-plum, Spondias Mangifera (a kind of mango)” for ambāṭaka, Critical Pali Dictionary adding “wild mango.” Cf. SN.iv.281ff.

[12]:

khuṃseti, vambheti; occurring also at Vin.4.7 (BD.2.178).

[13]:

paṭisāraṇiyakamma. Cf. Kd.1.25.22, and Kd.9.7.8. At this latter passage the monk is said, not to jeer and scoff at the householder, but to revile and abuse him, while at Kd.11.18.5 above, it is the householder who is accused, by the monk, of reviling and abusing him.

[14]:

Cf. AN.iv.345.

[15]:

Cf. Vin.1.84 (BD.4.106), BD.2.125 and AN.iv.345: Chapters 87 (monks), 88, 89 (householders).

[16]:

On this last clause, see GS.iv.228, n.3. See especially Vin.1.153f., where the monk Upananda breaks his word and also tells a conscious lie to a householder. The particular type of offence incurred by this monk for breaking his word in regard to residence is formulated as one of wrong-doing. Vin-a.vi.1158 instances having accepted a rains-residence, and then not going to it.

[17]:

anudūta, travelling companion, and one with a definite function to fulfil in case of need, as appears below. Cf. Vin.2.295 where a monk Yasa for whom an act of reconciliation had been carried out, refers to this ruling and asks for an anudūta bhikkhu.

[18]:

Cf. BD.2.352, n.3.

[19]:

Cf. Kd.4.5.6.