[reload all]
[simple read]

Mv IV 22
PTS: Mv IV 16 | CS: vin.mv.04.22
Pavāraṇāṭhapanaṁ
'Line by Line'
The Cancellation of the Invitation
by
Ven. Khematto Bhikkhu
Alternate translations/layout: 'read-friendly' layout

141. pavāraṇāṭhapanaṁ (Mv.IV.16.1)
The Cancellation of the Invitation [BMC]

[245] tena kho pana samayena chabbaggiyā bhikkhū sāpattikā pavārenti.

Now on that occasion some Group-of-six monks, having offenses, invited.

bhagavato etamatthaṁ ārocesuṁ.

They reported the matter to the Blessed One.

na bhikkhave sāpattikena pavāretabbaṁ yo pavāreyya āpatti dukkaṭassa.

“Monks, one who has an offense should not invite. Whoever should invite: an offense of wrong doing.

anujānāmi bhikkhave yo sāpattiko pavāreti tassa okāsaṁ kārāpetvā āpattiyā codetunti.

“I allow when one with an offense is inviting that, having gotten him to give leave, one charge him with the offense.”

(Mv.IV.16.2) tena kho pana samayena chabbaggiyā bhikkhū okāsaṁ kārāpiyamānā na icchanti okāsaṁ kātuṁ.

Now on that occasion some Group-of-six monks, being asked to give leave, didn’t want to give leave.

bhagavato etamatthaṁ ārocesuṁ.

They reported the matter to the Blessed One.

anujānāmi bhikkhave okāsaṁ akarontassa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapetuṁ

“I allow, when one does not give leave, that the Invitation be canceled. [BMC]

evañca pana bhikkhave ṭhapetabbā

“And, monks, it should be canceled like this:

tadahupavāraṇāya cātuddase vā paṇṇarase vā tasmiṁ puggale sammukhībhūte saṅghamajjhe udāharitabbaṁ

“On the day of the Invitation — the fourteenth or the fifteenth — face-to-face with the individual, in the midst of the Saṅgha, it should be announced,

suṇātu me bhante saṅgho itthannāmo puggalo sāpattiko pavāreti tassa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemi na tasmiṁ sammukhībhūte pavāretabbanti.

“‘Venerable sirs, may the Saṅgha listen to me. An individual named such-and-such is inviting with an offense. I cancel his Invitation. One should not invite when face-to-face with him.’

ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇāti.

“His Invitation is canceled.”

(Mv.IV.16.3) tena kho pana samayena chabbaggiyā bhikkhū puramhākaṁ pesalā bhikkhū pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapentīti paṭikacceva suddhānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ anāpattikānaṁ avatthusmiṁ akāraṇe pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapenti pavāritānampi pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapenti.

Now on that occasion some Group-of-six monks, (thinking,) “Before, the well-behaved monks canceled our Invitations” — without grounds, without reason — canceled the Invitation of pure monks without offenses as a precaution. [Mv.II.16.3]

bhagavato etamatthaṁ ārocesuṁ.

They reported the matter to the Blessed One.

na bhikkhave suddhānaṁ bhikkhūnaṁ anāpattikānaṁ avatthusmiṁ akāraṇe pavāraṇā ṭhapetabbā yo ṭhapeyya āpatti dukkaṭassa.

“Monks, one should not — without grounds, without reason — cancel the Invitation of pure monks without offenses. Whoever should cancel it: an offense of wrong doing.

na ca bhikkhave pavāritānampi pavāraṇā ṭhapetabbā yo ṭhapeyya āpatti dukkaṭassa.

“And one should not cancel the Invitation of those who have already made an Invitation. Whoever should cancel it: an offense of wrong doing.

(Mv.IV.16.4) [246] evaṁ kho bhikkhave ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā evaṁ aṭṭhapitā.

“Monks, the Invitation is (properly) canceled like this; and not (properly) canceled like this:

kathañca bhikkhave aṭṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“And how, monks, is the Invitation not (properly) canceled?

tevācikāya ce bhikkhave pavāraṇāya bhāsitāya lapitāya pariyositāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti aṭṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā

“Monks, if one cancels (another’s) Invitation when the Invitation by three statements has been spoken, uttered, and concluded, then the Invitation is not canceled.

dvevācikāya ce bhikkhave ekavācikāya ce bhikkhave samānavassikāya ce bhikkhave pavāraṇāya bhāsitāya lapitāya pariyositāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti aṭṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“Monks, if one cancels (another’s) Invitation when the Invitation by two statements … by one statement … by equal Rains has been spoken, uttered, and concluded, then the Invitation is not canceled.

evaṁ kho bhikkhave aṭṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“In this way, monks, the Invitation is not (properly) canceled.

(Mv.IV.16.5) kathañca bhikkhave ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“And how, monks, is the Invitation (properly) canceled?

tevācikāya ce bhikkhave pavāraṇāya bhāsitāya lapitāya apariyositāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“Monks, if one cancels (another’s) Invitation when the Invitation by three statements is being spoken, uttered, but has not been concluded, then the Invitation is canceled.

dvevācikāya ce bhikkhave ekavācikāya ce bhikkhave samānavassikāya ce bhikkhave pavāraṇāya bhāsitāya lapitāya apariyositāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“Monks, if one cancels (another’s) Invitation when the Invitation by two statements … by one statement … by equal Rains is being spoken, uttered, but has not been concluded, then the Invitation is canceled.

evaṁ kho bhikkhave ṭhapitā hoti pavāraṇā.

“In this way, monks, the Invitation is (properly) canceled.

(Mv.IV.16.6) [247] idha pana bhikkhave tadahupavāraṇāya bhikkhu bhikkhussa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti.

“Monks, there is the case where, on the day of the Invitation, a monk cancels (another) monk’s Invitation. [BMC]

tañce bhikkhuṁ aññe bhikkhū jānanti ayaṁ kho āyasmā aparisuddhakāyasamācāro aparisuddhavacīsamācāro aparisuddhāajīvo bālo abyatto na paṭibalo anuyuñjiyamāno anuyogaṁ dātunti.

“If the other monks know of that monk, ‘This venerable one is impure in his bodily conduct, impure in his verbal conduct, impure in his livelihood, inexperienced and incompetent. He is unable, when being brought to account, to give an account (of what happened),’

alaṁ bhikkhu mā bhaṇḍanaṁ mā kalahaṁ mā viggahaṁ mā vivādanti omadditvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“then, having blocked him, (saying,) ‘Enough, monk. Don’t (cause) strife; don’t (cause) an uproar; don’t (cause) a clash; don’t dispute,’ the Saṅgha should invite.

(Mv.IV.16.7) idha pana bhikkhave tadahupavāraṇāya bhikkhu bhikkhussa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti.

“Monks, there is the case where, on the day of the Invitation, a monk cancels (another) monk’s Invitation.

tañce bhikkhuṁ aññe bhikkhū jānanti ayaṁ kho āyasmā parisuddhakāyasamācāro aparisuddhavacīsamācāro aparisuddhāajīvo bālo abyatto na paṭibalo anuyuñjiyamāno anuyogaṁ dātunti.

“If the other monks know of that monk, ‘This venerable one is pure in his bodily conduct, impure in his verbal conduct, impure in his livelihood, inexperienced and incompetent. He is unable, when being brought to account, to give an account,’

alaṁ bhikkhu mā bhaṇḍanaṁ mā kalahaṁ mā viggahaṁ mā vivādanti omadditvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“then, having blocked him, (saying,) ‘Enough, monk. Don’t (cause) strife; don’t (cause) an uproar; don’t (cause) a clash; don’t dispute,’ the Saṅgha should invite.

(Mv.IV.16.8) idha pana bhikkhave tadahupavāraṇāya bhikkhu bhikkhussa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti.

“Monks, there is the case where, on the day of the Invitation, a monk cancels (another) monk’s Invitation.

tañce bhikkhuṁ aññe bhikkhū jānanti ayaṁ kho āyasmā parisuddhakāyasamācāro parisuddhavacīsamācāro aparisuddhāajīvo bālo abyatto na paṭibalo anuyuñjiyamāno anuyogaṁ dātunti.

“If the other monks know of that monk, ‘This venerable one is pure in his bodily conduct, pure in his verbal conduct, impure in his livelihood, inexperienced and incompetent. He is unable, when being brought to account, to give an account,’

alaṁ bhikkhu mā bhaṇḍanaṁ mā kalahaṁ mā viggahaṁ mā vivādanti omadditvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“then, having blocked him, (saying,) ‘Enough, monk. Don’t (cause) strife; don’t (cause) an uproar; don’t (cause) a clash; don’t dispute,’ the Saṅgha should invite.

(Mv.IV.16.9) idha pana bhikkhave tadahupavāraṇāya [ME inserts: bhikkhu] bhikkhussa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti.

“Monks, there is the case where, on the day of the Invitation, a monk cancels (another) monk’s Invitation.

tañce bhikkhuṁ aññe bhikkhū jānanti ayaṁ kho āyasmā parisuddhakāyasamācāro parisuddhavacīsamācāro parisuddhāajīvo bālo abyatto na paṭibalo anuyuñjiyamāno anuyogaṁ dātunti.

“If the other monks know of that monk, ‘This venerable one is pure in his bodily conduct, pure in his verbal conduct, pure in his livelihood, inexperienced and incompetent. He is unable, when being brought to account, to give an account,’

alaṁ bhikkhu mā bhaṇḍanaṁ mā kalahaṁ mā viggahaṁ mā vivādanti omadditvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“then, having blocked him, (saying,) ‘Enough, monk. Don’t (cause) strife; don’t (cause) an uproar; don’t (cause) a clash; don’t dispute,’ the Saṅgha should invite.

(Mv.IV.16.10) idha pana bhikkhave tadahupavāraṇāya bhikkhu bhikkhussa pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapeti.

“Monks, there is the case where, on the day of the Invitation, a monk cancels (another) monk’s Invitation.

tañce bhikkhuṁ aññe bhikkhū jānanti ayaṁ kho āyasmā parisuddhakāyasamācāro parisuddhavacīsamācāro parisuddhāajīvo paṇḍito byatto medhāvī paṭibalo anuyuñjiyamāno anuyogaṁ dātunti.

“If the other monks know of that monk, ‘This venerable one is pure in his bodily conduct, pure in his verbal conduct, pure in his livelihood, wise, experienced and competent. He is able, when being brought to account, to give an account,’

so evamassa vacanīyo yaṁ kho tvaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapesi kimhi naṁ ṭhapesi sīlavipattiyā ṭhapesi ācāravipattiyā ṭhapesi diṭṭhivipattiyā ṭhapesīti.

“then he should be asked, ‘Friend, the invitation of this monk that you are canceling: Why are you canceling it? Are you canceling it because of a defect in virtue, are you canceling it because of a defect in conduct, (or) are you canceling it because of a defect in view?’

(Mv.IV.16.11) so ce evaṁ vadeyya sīlavipattiyā ṭhapemi ācāravipattiyā ṭhapemi diṭṭhivipattiyā ṭhapemīti.

“If he should say, ‘I am canceling it because of a defect in virtue … because of a defect in conduct … (or) because of a defect in view,’

so evamassa vacanīyo jānāti panāyasmā sīlavipattiṁ jānāti ācāravipattiṁ jānāti diṭṭhivipattinti.

“then he should be asked, ‘But does the venerable one know what a defect in virtue is, what a defect in conduct is, what a defect in view is?’

so ce evaṁ vadeyya jānāmi kho ahaṁ āvuso sīlavipattiṁ jānāmi ācāravipattiṁ jānāmi diṭṭhivipattinti.

“If he should say, ‘Friends, I know what a defect in virtue is, what a defect in conduct is, what a defect in view is,’

so evamassa vacanīyo katamā panāvuso sīlavipatti katamā ācāravipatti katamā diṭṭhivipattīti.

“then he should be asked, “Then, friend, which is a defect in virtue, which is a defect in conduct, which is a defect in view?’

(Mv.IV.16.12) so ce evaṁ vadeyya cattāri pārājikāni terasa saṅghādisesā ayaṁ sīlavipatti thullaccayaṁ pācittiyaṁ pāṭidesanīyaṁ dukkaṭaṁ dubbhāsitaṁ ayaṁ ācāravipatti micchādiṭṭhi antaggāhikā diṭṭhi ayaṁ diṭṭhivipattīti.

“If he should say, ‘The four pārājikas and the thirteen saṅghādisesas: This is a defect in virtue. A thullaccaya, a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a dukkaṭa, a dubbhāsita: This is a defect in conduct. Wrong view and a view holding to an extreme: This is a defect in view,’ [BMC]

so evamassa vacanīyo yaṁ kho tvaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapesi diṭṭhena ṭhapesi sutena ṭhapesi parisaṅkāya ṭhapesīti.

“then he should be asked, ‘Friend, the invitation of this bhikkhu that you are canceling, are you canceling it on the basis of what was seen, are you canceling it on the basis of what was heard, (or) are you canceling it on the basis of what is suspected?’

(Mv.IV.16.13) so ce evaṁ vadeyya diṭṭhena vā ṭhapemi sutena vā ṭhapemi parisaṅkāya vā ṭhapemīti.

“If he should say, ‘I am canceling it on the grounds of what was seen’ or ‘I am canceling it on the grounds of what was heard’ or ‘I am canceling it on the grounds of what is suspected,’

so evamassa vacanīyo yaṁ kho tvaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno diṭṭhena pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapesi kinte diṭṭhaṁ kinti te diṭṭhaṁ kadā te diṭṭhaṁ kattha te diṭṭhaṁ pārājikaṁ ajjhāpajjanto diṭṭho saṅghādisesaṁ ajjhāpajjanto diṭṭho thullaccayaṁ pācittiyaṁ pāṭidesanīyaṁ dukkaṭaṁ dubbhāsitaṁ ajjhāpajjanto diṭṭho kattha ca tvaṁ ahosi kattha cāyaṁ bhikkhu ahosi kiñci tvaṁ karosi kiñcāyaṁ bhikkhu karotīti.

“then he should be asked, ‘Friend, the invitation of this bhikkhu that you are canceling on the grounds of what was seen: What did you see? What exactly did you see? When did you see it? Where did you see it? Was he seen committing a pārājika? Was he seen committing a saṅghādisesa? Was he seen committing a thullaccaya, a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a dukkaṭa, (or) a dubbhāsita? And where were you? And where was this monk? And what were you doing? And what was this monk doing?’

(Mv.IV.16.14) so ce evaṁ vadeyya na kho ahaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno diṭṭhena pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemi apica sutena pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemīti.

“If he should say, ‘It’s not that I’m canceling the invitation of this bhikkhu on the grounds of what was seen. It’s actually on the grounds of what was heard that I’m canceling (his) invitation,’

so evamassa vacanīyo yaṁ kho tvaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno sutena pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapesi kinte sutaṁ kinti te sutaṁ kadā te sutaṁ kattha te sutaṁ pārājikaṁ ajjhāpannoti sutaṁ saṅghādisesaṁ ajjhāpannoti sutaṁ thullaccayaṁ pācittiyaṁ pāṭidesanīyaṁ dukkaṭaṁ dubbhāsitaṁ ajjhāpannoti sutaṁ

“then he should be asked, ‘Friend, the invitation of this monk that you are canceling on the grounds of what was heard: What did you hear? What exactly did you hear? When did you hear it? Where did you hear it? Was he heard to have committed a pārājika? Was he heard to have committed a saṅghādisesa? Was he heard to have committed a thullaccaya, a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a dukkaṭa, (or) a dubbhāsita?

bhikkhussa sutaṁ bhikkhuniyā sutaṁ sikkhamānāya sutaṁ sāmaṇerassa sutaṁ sāmaṇeriyā sutaṁ upāsakassa sutaṁ upāsikāya sutaṁ rājūnaṁ sutaṁ rājamahāmattānaṁ sutaṁ titthiyānaṁ sutaṁ titthiyasāvakānaṁ sutanti.

“‘Was this heard from a monk? Was this heard from a bhikkhunī? … from one in training? … from a male novice? … from a female novice? … from a male lay follower? … from a female lay follower? … from kings? … from king’s ministers? … from the leaders of other sects? … from the disciples of other sects?’

(Mv.IV.16.15) so ce evaṁ vadeyya na kho ahaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno sutena pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemi apica parisaṅkāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemīti.

“If he should say, ‘It’s not that I’m canceling the invitation of this monk on the grounds of what was heard. It’s actually on the grounds of what is suspected that I’m canceling (his) invitation,’

so evamassa vacanīyo yaṁ kho tvaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno parisaṅkāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapesi kiṁ parisaṅkasi kinti parisaṅkasi kadā parisaṅkasi kattha parisaṅkasi pārājikaṁ ajjhāpannoti parisaṅkasi saṅghādisesaṁ ajjhāpannoti parisaṅkasi thullaccayaṁ pācittiyaṁ pāṭidesanīyaṁ dukkaṭaṁ dubbhāsitaṁ ajjhāpannoti parisaṅkasi

“then he should be asked, ‘Friend, the invitation of this monk that you are canceling on the grounds of what is suspected: What do you suspect? What exactly do you suspect? When do you suspect (it happened)? Where do you suspect (it happened)? Do you suspect him to have committed a pārājika? Do you suspect him to have committed a saṅghādisesa? Do you suspect him to have committed a thullaccaya, a pācittiya, a pāṭidesanīya, a dukkaṭa, (or) a dubbhāsita?

(Mv.IV.16.16) bhikkhussa sutvā parisaṅkasi bhikkhuniyā sutvā parisaṅkasi sikkhamānāya sutvā parisaṅkasi sāmaṇerassa sutvā parisaṅkasi sāmaṇeriyā sutvā parisaṅkasi upāsakassa sutvā parisaṅkasi upāsikāya sutvā parisaṅkasi rājūnaṁ sutvā parisaṅkasi rājamahāmattānaṁ sutvā parisaṅkasi titthiyānaṁ sutvā parisaṅkasi titthiyasāvakānaṁ sutvā parisaṅkasīti.

“‘Do you suspect from having heard a monk? Do you suspect from having heard a bhikkhunī? … one in training? … a male novice? … a female novice? … a male lay follower? … a female lay follower? … kings? … king’s ministers? … the leaders of other sects? … the disciples of other sects?’

so ce evaṁ vadeyya na kho ahaṁ āvuso imassa bhikkhuno parisaṅkāya pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemi apica ahampi na jānāmi kenapāhaṁ imassa bhikkhuno pavāraṇaṁ ṭhapemīti.

“If he should say, ‘It’s not that I’m canceling the invitation of this bhikkhu on the grounds of what is suspected. In fact, even I don’t know on what grounds I’m canceling the invitation of this monk,”

so ce bhikkhave codako bhikkhu anuyogena viññūnaṁ sabrahmacārīnaṁ cittaṁ na ārādheti ananuvādo cudito bhikkhūti alaṁ vacanāya.

“then if the monk making the charge does not satisfy the minds of his observant fellows in the holy life with his account, it is enough to say that the monk who has been charged does not stand accused.

so ce bhikkhave codako bhikkhu anuyogena viññūnaṁ sabrahmacārīnaṁ cittaṁ ārādheti sānuvādo cudito bhikkhūti alaṁ vacanāya.

“But if the monk making the charge does satisfy the minds of his observant fellows in the holy life with his account, then it is enough to say that the monk who has been charged stands accused.

(Mv.IV.16.17) so ce bhikkhave codako bhikkhu amūlakena pārājikena anuddhaṁsitaṁ paṭijānāti saṅghādisesaṁ āropetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk making the charge charges him with an unfounded pārājika offense, then having initiated the procedure for a saṅghadisesa, the Saṅgha should invite.

so ce bhikkhave codako bhikkhu amūlakena saṅghādisesena anuddhaṁsitaṁ paṭijānāti yathādhammaṁ kārāpetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk making the charge charges him with an unfounded saṅghadisesa offense, then, having dealt with him in accordance with the rule (Pc 76), the Saṅgha should invite.

so ce bhikkhave codako bhikkhu amūlakena thullaccayena pācittiyena pāṭidesanīyena dukkaṭena dubbhāsitena anuddhaṁsitaṁ paṭijānāti yathādhammaṁ kārāpetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk making the charge charges him with an unfounded thullaccaya, pācittiya, pāṭidesanīya, dukkaṭa, (or) dubbhāsita offense, then, having dealt with him in accordance with the rule (Pc 76), the Saṅgha should invite.

(Mv.IV.16.18) so ce bhikkhave cudito bhikkhu pārājikaṁ ajjhāpannoti paṭijānāti nāsetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk who has been charged, having fallen into a pārājika offense, admits it, then having expelled him, the Saṅgha should invite.

so ce bhikkhave cudito bhikkhu saṅghādisesaṁ ajjhāpannoti paṭijānāti saṅghādisesaṁ āropetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk who has been charged, having fallen into a saṅghadisesa offense, admits it, then having initiated the procedure for a saṅghadisesa, the Saṅgha should invite.

so ce bhikkhave cudito bhikkhu thullaccayaṁ pācittiyaṁ pāṭidesanīyaṁ dukkaṭaṁ dubbhāsitaṁ ajjhāpannoti paṭijānāti yathādhammaṁ kārāpetvā saṅghena pavāretabbaṁ.

“If the monk who has been charged, having fallen into a thullaccaya, pācittiya, pāṭidesanīya, dukkaṭa, (or) dubbhāsita offense, admits it, then, having dealt with him in accordance with the rule, the Saṅgha should invite.”

[previous page][next page]