Theravāda Collection on Monastic Law

The Great Analysis

The chapter on offenses entailing suspension

8. The training rule on anger

Origin story

At one time when the Buddha was staying at Rājagaha in the Bamboo Grove,

Venerable Dabba the Mallian realized perfection at the age of seven.

He had achieved all there is to achieve by a disciple

and had nothing further to do.

Then, while reflecting in private,

he thought, “How can I be of service to the Sangha?

Why don’t I assign the dwellings and designate the meals?”

In the evening Dabba came out of seclusion and went to the Buddha. He bowed, sat down,

and said,

“Sir, while I was reflecting in private, it occurred to me that I’ve achieved all there is to achieve by a disciple, and I was wondering how I could be of service to the Sangha.

I thought,

‘Why don’t I assign the dwellings and designate the meals?’”

“Good, good, Dabba,

please do so.”

“Yes.”

Soon afterwards the Buddha gave a teaching and addressed the monks:

“Monks, the Sangha should appoint Dabba the Mallian as the assigner of dwellings and the designator of meals.

And he should be appointed like this.

First Dabba should be asked.

A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha:

‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen.

If the Sangha is ready, it should appoint Venerable Dabba the Mallian as assigner of dwellings and designator of meals.

This is the motion.

Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen.

The Sangha appoints Venerable Dabba the Mallian as assigner of dwellings and designator of meals.

Any monk who approves of appointing Venerable Dabba as assigner of dwellings and designator of meals should remain silent.

Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up.

The Sangha has appointed Venerable Dabba the Mallian as assigner of dwellings and designator of meals.

The Sangha approves and is therefore silent.

I’ll remember it thus.’”

Dabba assigned dwellings to the monks according to their character.

He assigned dwellings in the same place to those monks who were experts on the discourses, thinking,

“They’ll recite the discourses to one another.”

And he did likewise for the experts on the Monastic Law, thinking,

“They’ll discuss the Monastic Law;”

for the expounders of the Teaching, thinking,

“They’ll discuss the Teaching;”

for the meditators, thinking,

“They won’t disturb each other;”

and for the gossips and the body-builders, thinking,

“In this way even these venerables will be happy.”

When monks arrived at night, he entered the fire element and assigned dwellings with the help of that light.

Monks even arrived late on purpose,

hoping to see the marvel of Dabba’s supernormal powers.

They would approach Dabba and say,

“Venerable Dabba, please assign us a dwelling.”

“Where would you like to stay?”

They would intentionally suggest somewhere far away:

“On the Vulture Peak,”

“At Robbers’ Cliff,”

“On Black Rock on the slope of Mount Isigili,”

“In the Sattapaṇṇi Cave on the slope of Mount Vebhāra,”

“In Cool Grove on the hill at the Snake’s Pool,”

“At Gotamaka Gorge,”

“At Tinduka Gorge,”

“At Tapoda Gorge,”

“In Tapoda Park,”

“In Jīvaka’s Mango Grove,”

“In the deer park at Maddakucchi.”

Dabba then entered the fire element, and with his finger glowing, he walked in front of those monks.

They followed behind him with the help of that light.

And he would assign them dwellings:

“This is the bed, this the bench, this the mattress, this the pillow, this the place for defecating, this the place for urinating, this the water for drinking, this the water for washing, this the walking stick;

these are the Sangha’s agreements concerning the right time to enter and the right time to leave.”

Dabba then returned to the Bamboo Grove.

At that time the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka were only newly ordained. They had little merit,

getting inferior dwellings and meals.

The people of Rājagaha were keen to give specially prepared almsfood to the senior monks—ghee, oil, and special curries—

but to the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka they gave ordinary food of porridge and broken rice.

When they had eaten their meal and returned from almsround, they asked the senior monks,

“What did you get at the dining hall?”

Some said,

“We got ghee, oil, and special curries.”

But the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka said,

“We didn’t get anything except ordinary food of porridge and broken rice.”

At that time there was a householder who gave a regular meal of fine food to four monks.

He made his offering in the dining hall together with his wives and children.

Some of them offered rice, some bean curry, some oil, and some special curries.

On one occasion the meal to be given by this householder on the following day had been designated to the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka.

Just then that householder went to the monastery on some business.

He approached Dabba, bowed, and sat down.

And Dabba instructed, inspired, and gladdened him with a teaching.

After the talk, he asked Dabba,

“Sir, who has been designated to receive tomorrow’s meal in our house?”

“Mettiya and Bhūmajaka.”

He was disappointed, and thought,

“Why should bad monks eat in our house?”

After returning to his house, he told a female slave,

“For those who are coming for tomorrow’s meal, prepare seats in the gatehouse and serve them broken rice and porridge.”

“Yes, sir.”

The monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka said to each other,

“Yesterday we were designated a meal from that householder who offers fine food.

Tomorrow he’ll serve us together with his wives and children.

Some of them will offer us rice, some bean curry, some oil, and some special curries.”

And because they were excited, they did not sleep properly that night.

The following morning they robed up, took their bowls and robes, and went to the house of that householder.

When the female slave saw them coming, she prepared seats in the gatehouse and said to them,

“Please sit, venerables.”

They thought,

“The meal can’t be ready, since we’re given seats in the gatehouse.”

She then brought them broken rice and porridge, and said,

“Eat, sirs.”

“But, Sister, we’ve come for the regular meal.”

“I know.

But yesterday I was told by the head of the household to serve you like this.

Please eat.”

They said to each other,

“Yesterday this householder came to the monastery and spoke with Dabba.

Dabba must be responsible for this split between the householder and us.”

And because they were dejected, they did not eat as much as they had intended.

When they had eaten their meal and returned from almsround, they put their bowls and robes away and squatted on their heels outside the monastery gatehouse, using their upper robes as back-and-knee straps. They were silent and humiliated, their shoulders drooping and their heads down, glum and speechless.

Just then the nun Mettiyā came to them and said,

“My respectful greetings to you, venerables.”

But they did not respond.

A second time

and a third time she said

the same thing,

but they still did not respond.

“Have I done something wrong?

Why don’t you respond?”

“It’s because we’ve been badly treated by Dabba the Mallian, and you’re not taking an interest.”

“But what can I do?”

“If you like, you could make the Buddha expel Dabba.”

“And how can I do that?”

“Go to the Buddha and say,

‘Sir, this isn’t proper or appropriate.

There’s fear, distress, and oppression in this district, where none of these should exist.

From where one would expect security, there’s insecurity.

It’s as if water is burning.

Venerable Dabba the Mallian has raped me.’”

Saying, “Alright, venerables,” she went to the Buddha, bowed,

and then repeated what she had been told to say.

Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned Dabba:

“Dabba, do you remember doing as the nun Mettiyā says?”

“Sir, you know what I’m like.”

A second and

a third time the Buddha asked

the same question

and got the same response.

He then said, “Dabba, the Dabbas don’t give such evasive answers.

If it was done by you, say so;

if it wasn’t, then say that.”

“Since I was born, sir, I don’t recall having sexual intercourse even in a dream, let alone when awake.”

The Buddha addressed the monks:

“Well then, monks, expel the nun Mettiyā,

and call these monks to account.”

The Buddha then got up from his seat and entered his dwelling.

When the monks had expelled the nun Mettiyā,

the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka said to them,

“Don’t expel the nun Mettiyā;

she’s done nothing wrong.

She was urged on by us. We were angry and displeased, and trying to get Dabba to leave the monastic life.”

“But did you groundlessly charge Venerable Dabba with an offense entailing expulsion?”

“Yes.”

The monks of few desires complained and criticized them,

“How could the monks Mettiya and Bhūmajaka groundlessly charge Venerable Dabba with an offense entailing expulsion?”

They rebuked those monks in many ways and then told the Buddha. Soon afterwards he had the Sangha gathered and questioned those monks:

“Is it true, monks, that you did this?”

“It’s true, sir.”

The Buddha rebuked them …

“Foolish men, how could you do this?

This will affect people’s confidence …” …

“And, monks, this training rule should be recited like this:

Final ruling

‘If a monk who is angry and displeased groundlessly charges a monk with an offense entailing expulsion, aiming to make him leave the monastic life,

and then after some time, whether he is questioned or not, it is clear that the legal issue is groundless, and he admits to his ill will, he commits an offense entailing suspension.’”

Definitions

A:

whoever …

Monk:

… The monk who has been given the full ordination by a unanimous Sangha through a legal procedure consisting of one motion and three announcements that is irreversible and fit to stand—this sort of monk is meant in this case.

A monk:

another monk.

Angry:

upset, dissatisfied, discontent, having hatred, hostile.

Displeased:

because of that upset, that ill will, that dissatisfaction, and that discontent, he is displeased.

Groundlessly:

not seen, not heard, not suspected.

With an offense entailing expulsion:

with one of the four.

Charges:

accuses him or has him accused.

To make him leave the monastic life:

to make him leave the monkhood, leave the state of a monastic, leave his morality, leave the virtue of monasticism.

And then after some time:

the moment, the instant, the second after he has laid the charge.

He is questioned:

he is questioned about the grounds of his charge.

Not:

he is not spoken to by anyone.

The legal issue:

there are four kinds of legal issues: legal issues arising from disputes, legal issues arising from accusations, legal issues arising from offenses, legal issues arising from business.

And he admits to his ill will:

“What I said was empty,” “What I said was false,” “What I said was unreal,” “I said it without knowing.”

He commits an offense entailing suspension:

… Therefore, too, it is called “an offense entailing suspension”.

Permutations

Permutations part 1

Doing the accusing oneself

Although he has not seen it, he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve seen that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not heard it,

he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he does not suspect it,

he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not seen it, he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve seen and I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not seen it, he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve seen and I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not seen it, he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve seen and I’ve heard and I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not heard it,

he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I’ve heard and I suspect …” …

“I’ve heard and I’ve seen …” …

“I’ve heard and I suspect and I’ve seen that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he does not suspect it,

he accuses someone of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“I suspect and I’ve seen …” …

“I suspect and I’ve heard …” …

“I suspect and I’ve seen and I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has seen that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he accuses him like this:

“I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has seen that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he accuses him like this:

“I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

“I’ve heard and I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has heard

that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he accuses him like this:

“I suspect that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

“I’ve seen that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

“I suspect and I’ve seen that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He suspects

that someone has committing an offense entailing expulsion,

but he accuses him like this:

“I’ve seen that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

“I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

“I’ve seen and I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic. …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has seen someone committing an offense entailing expulsion,

but he is unsure of what he has seen, he does not believe what he has seen, he does not remember what he has seen, he is confused about what he has seen …

he is unsure of what he has heard, he does not believe what he has heard, he does not remember what he has heard, he is confused about what he has heard …

he is unsure of what he suspects, he does not believe what he suspects, he does not remember what he suspects, he is confused about what he suspects.

If he then accuses him like this:

“I suspect and I’ve seen …” …

“I suspect and I’ve heard …” …

“I suspect and I’ve seen and I’ve heard that you’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Getting someone else to do the accusing

Although he has not seen it, he has someone accused of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“You’ve been seen.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not heard it …

Although he does not suspect it,

he has someone accused of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“You’re suspected.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion. …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Although he has not seen it, he has someone accused of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“You’ve been seen and you’ve been heard …” …

“You’ve been seen and you’re suspected …” …

“You’ve been seen and you’ve been heard and you’re suspected.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion …” …

Although he has not heard it …

Although he does not suspect it,

he has someone accused of having committed an offense entailing expulsion:

“You’re suspected and you’ve been seen …” …

“You’re suspected and you’ve been heard …” …

“You’re suspected and you’ve been seen and you’ve been heard.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has seen that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he has him accused like this:

“You’ve been heard …” …

but he has him accused like this:

“You’re suspected …” …

but he has him accused like this:

“You’ve been heard and you’re suspected.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has heard

that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion …

He suspects

that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he has him accused like this:

“You’ve been seen …” …

but he has him accused like this:

“You’ve been heard …” …

but he has him accused like this:

“You’ve been seen and you’ve been heard.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic …”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

He has seen that someone has committed an offense entailing expulsion,

but he is unsure of what he has seen, he does not believe what he has seen, he does not remember what he has seen, he is confused about what he has seen …

he is unsure of what he has heard, he does not believe what he has heard, he does not remember what he has heard, he is confused about what he has heard …

he is unsure of what he suspects, he does not believe what he suspects, he does not remember what he suspects, he is confused about what he suspects.

If he then has him accused like this:

“You’re suspected and you’ve been seen …”

… he is confused about what he suspects.

If he then has him accused like this:

“You’re suspected and you’ve been heard …”

… he is confused about what he suspects.

If he then has him accused like this:

“You’re suspected and you’ve been seen and you’ve been heard.

You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.

You’re not an ascetic, not a Sakyan monastic.

You’re excluded from the observance-day ceremony, from the invitation ceremony, and from the legal procedures of the Sangha.”

For each statement, he commits an offense entailing suspension.

Permutations part 2

Summary

Someone is impure, but viewed as pure;

someone is pure, but viewed as impure;

someone is impure and viewed as impure;

someone is pure and viewed as pure.

Exposition

Impure but viewed as pure

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits one offense entailing suspension and one offense of wrong conduct.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits an offense entailing suspension.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits one offense for abusive speech and one offense of wrong conduct.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits an offense for abusive speech.

Pure but viewed as impure

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits an offense of wrong conduct.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, there is no offense.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits one offense for abusive speech and one offense of wrong conduct.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits an offense for abusive speech.

Impure and viewed as impure

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits an offense of wrong conduct.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, there is no offense.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits one offense for abusive speech and one offense of wrong conduct.

An impure person has committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as impure, and then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits an offense for abusive speech.

Pure and viewed as pure

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits one offense entailing suspension and one offense of wrong conduct.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of making him leave the monastic life, one commits an offense entailing suspension.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion.

If one views him as pure, but then, without having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits one offense for abusive speech and one offense of wrong conduct.

A pure person has not committed an offense entailing expulsion. If one views him as pure, but then, having gotten his permission, speaks with the aim of abusing him, one commits an offense for abusive speech.

Non-offenses

There is no offense:

if he views a pure person as impure;

if he views an impure person as impure;

if he is insane;

if he is the first offender.

The training rule on groundless, the eighth, is finished.