The Compendium

Ven. Upāli questions the Buddha

1. The subchapter on “without formal support”

At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery.

Venerable Upāli went to the Buddha, bowed, sat down,

and said,

“Venerable sir, what sort of monk should live with formal support for life?”

“One who has five qualities, Upāli:

(1) he doesn’t know about the observance-day ceremony; (2) he doesn’t know the observance-day procedure; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Code; (4) he doesn’t know the recitation of the Monastic Code; (5) he has less than five years of seniority.

But a monk who has five qualities may live without formal support for life:

(1) he knows about the observance-day ceremony; (2) he knows the observance-day procedure; (3) he knows the Monastic Code; (4) he knows the recitation of the Monastic Code; (5) he has five or more years of seniority.

A monk who has five other qualities should also live with formal support for life:

(1) he doesn’t know about the invitation ceremony; (2) he doesn’t know the invitation procedure; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Code; (4) he doesn’t know the recitation of the Monastic Code; (5) he has less than five years of seniority.

But a monk who has five qualities may live without formal support for life:

(1) he knows about the invitation ceremony; (2) he knows the invitation procedure; (3) he knows the Monastic Code; (4) he knows the recitation of the Monastic Code; (5) he has five or more years of seniority.

A monk who has five other qualities should also live with formal support for life:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the light and heavy offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the grave and minor offenses; (5) he has less than five years of seniority.

But a monk who has five qualities may live without formal support for life:

(1) he knows the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he knows the light and heavy offenses; (3) he knows the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he knows the grave and minor offenses; (5) he has five or more years of seniority.

“Sir, what sort of monk shouldn’t give the full ordination or formal support, nor have a novice monk attend on him?”

“One who has five qualities:

He’s incapable of three things in regard to a student: (1) of nursing him or having him nursed when he’s sick; (2) of sending him away or having him sent away when he’s discontent with the spiritual life; and (3) of using the Teaching to dispel anxiety. And (4) he is incapable of training him in the Teaching; and (5) he is incapable of training him in the Monastic Law.

But a monk who has five qualities may give the full ordination and formal support, and he may have a novice monk attend on him:

He’s capable of three things in regard to a student: (1) of nursing him or having him nursed when he’s sick; (2) of sending him away or having him sent away when he’s discontent with the spiritual life; and (3) of using the Teaching to dispel anxiety. And (4) he is capable of training him in the Teaching; and (5) he is capable of training him in the Monastic Law.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t give the full ordination or formal support, nor have a novice monk attend on him:

He’s incapable of five things in regard to a student: (1) of training him in good conduct; (2) of training him in the basics of the spiritual life; (3) of training him in the higher morality; (4) of training him in the higher mind; (5) of training him in the higher wisdom.

But a monk who has five qualities may give the full ordination and formal support, and he may have a novice monk attend on him:

He’s capable of five things in regard to a student: (1) of training him in good conduct; (2) of training him in the basics of the spiritual life; (3) of training him in the higher morality; (4) of training him in the higher mind; (5) of training him in the higher wisdom.”

“Sir, against what sort of monk should a legal procedure be done?”

“Against one who has five qualities:

he is shameless, ignorant, and not a regular monk, and he has wrong view, and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in conduct; he has failed in view; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

his bodily conduct is frivolous; his verbal conduct is frivolous; his bodily and verbal conduct are frivolous; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

he is improperly behaved by body; he is improperly behaved by speech; he is improperly behaved by body and speech; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

his bodily conduct is harmful; his verbal conduct is harmful; his bodily and verbal conduct are harmful; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

he has wrong livelihood by body; he has wrong livelihood by speech; he has wrong livelihood by body and speech; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

if, after committing an offense and having had a legal procedure done against him, he: (1) gives the full ordination, (2) gives formal support, (3) has a novice monk attend on him, (4) accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns, (5) instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

(1) he commits the same offense for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (2) he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (3) he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (4) he criticizes the procedure; (5) he criticizes those who did the procedure.

A legal procedure should also be done against a monk who has five other qualities:

he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.”

The first subchapter on “without formal support” is finished.

This is the summary:

“Observance day, invitation ceremony,

And offense, one who is sick;

Good conduct, and shameless,

Higher morality, and with frivolity.

Improperly behaved, harmful,

Wrong, and offense;

Offense for which, of the Buddha—

The compilation of the first subchapter is finished.”

2. The subchapter on not lifting

“Sir, for what sort of monk should a legal procedure not be lifted?”

“For one who has five qualities, Upāli:

if, after committing an offense and having had a legal procedure done against him, he: (1) gives the full ordination, (2) gives formal support, (3) has a novice monk attend on him, (4) accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns, (5) instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not.

A legal procedure should also not be lifted for a monk who has five other qualities:

(1) he commits the same offense for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (2) he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (3) he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the legal procedure against him; (4) he criticizes the procedure; (5) he criticizes those who did the procedure.

A legal procedure should also not be lifted for a monk who has five other qualities:

he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha; he has wrong view; and he has failed in livelihood.

A legal procedure should also not be lifted for a monk who has five other qualities:

he is shameless, ignorant, and not a regular monk, and he is a bully, and he doesn’t fulfill the training in proper conduct.”

“Sir, when a monk is involved in a conflict and is about to approach the Sangha, how many qualities should he first set up in himself?”

“He should set up five qualities in himself:

(1) he should be humble; (2) he should be intent on removing defilements; (3) he should be skilled in appropriate seating and where to sit down, taking a seat without encroaching on the senior monks and without blocking the junior monks; (4) he shouldn’t ramble or engage in worldly talk, but should speak according to the Teaching or invite others to speak or value noble silence; (5) if the Sangha is doing legal procedures requiring unity, but the monk doesn’t approve, then he should reveal his view but think, ‘I shouldn’t be at variance with the Sangha,’ and unity can then be announced.”

“What sort of monk does the majority dislike and disapprove of when he speaks in the Sangha?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he’s arrogant; (2) he repeats what others say; (3) he doesn’t keep to the topic; (4) he doesn’t accuse others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or their offense; (5) he doesn’t act according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or his offenses.

But when a monk has five qualities, the majority likes and approves of him when he speaks in the Sangha:

(1) he’s not arrogant; (2) he doesn’t repeat what others say; (3) he keeps to the topic; (4) he accuses others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and their offense; (5) he acts according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and his offenses.

When a monk has five other qualities, the majority dislikes and disapproves of him when he speaks in the Sangha:

(1) he praises; and (2) he blames; (3) he maintains what is contrary to the Teaching; (4) he obstructs what is in accordance with the Teaching; and (5) he often speaks frivolously.

But when a monk has five qualities, the majority likes and approves of him when he speaks in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t praise; and (2) he doesn’t blame; (3) he maintains what is in accordance with the Teaching; (4) he obstructs what is contrary to the Teaching; and (5) he rarely speaks frivolously.

When a monk has five other qualities, the majority dislikes and disapproves of him when he speaks in the Sangha:

(1) he speaks forcefully; (2) he speaks without having gotten permission; (3) he doesn’t accuse others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or their offense; (4) he doesn’t act according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or his offenses; (5) he doesn’t explain things according to his own view.

But when a monk has five qualities, the majority likes and approves of him when he speaks in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t speak forcefully; (2) he doesn’t speak without having gotten permission; (3) he accuses others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and their offense; (4) he acts according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and his offenses; (5) he explains things according to his own view.”

“Sir, how many benefits are there of studying the Monastic Law?”

“There are these five benefits:

(1) your own morality is well guarded; (2) you’re a refuge for those who are habitually anxious; (3) you speak with confidence in the midst of the Sangha; (4) you can legitimately and properly refute an opponent; (5) you’re practicing for the longevity of the true Teaching.”

The second subchapter on not lifting is finished.

This is the summary:

“Committing, for which, and praise,

Shameless, and with conflict;

Arrogant, and praises,

Forcefully, studying.”

The first pairs have been laid down.

3. The subchapter on speech

“Sir, what sort of monk shouldn’t speak in the Sangha?”

“One who has five qualities, Upāli:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of offenses; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding on offenses.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the offenses; (2) he knows the origination of the offenses; (3) he knows the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he knows the settling of offenses; (5) he’s skilled in deciding on offenses.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the legal issues; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the legal issues; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort that is the source of the legal issues; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding legal issues.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the legal issues; (2) he knows the origination of the legal issues; (3) he knows the kind of effort that is the source of the legal issues; (4) he knows the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s skilled in deciding legal issues.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he speaks forcefully; (2) he speaks without having gotten permission; (3) he doesn’t accuse others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or their offense; (4) he doesn’t act according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or his offenses; (5) he doesn’t explain things according to his own view.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t speak forcefully; (2) he doesn’t speak without having gotten permission; (3) he accuses others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and their offense; (4) he acts according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and his offenses; (5) he explains things according to his own view.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the light and heavy offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the grave and minor offenses; (5) he doesn’t know the offenses that are clearable by making amends and the offenses that are not clearable by making amends.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he knows the light and heavy offenses; (3) he knows the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he knows the grave and minor offenses; (5) he knows the offenses that are clearable by making amends and the offenses that are not clearable by making amends.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the legal procedures; (2) he doesn’t know how the legal procedures are done; (3) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for the legal procedures; (4) he doesn’t know the proper conduct in relation to the legal procedures; (5) he doesn’t know the settling of the legal procedures.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the legal procedures; (2) he knows how the legal procedures are done; (3) he knows the actions that are the bases for the legal procedures; (4) he knows the proper conduct in relation to the legal procedures; (5) he knows the settling of the legal procedures.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origin stories; (3) he doesn’t know the rules; (4) he doesn’t know the right order of words; (5) he doesn’t know the sequence of statements.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he knows the origin stories; (3) he knows the rules; (4) he knows the right order of words; (5) he knows the sequence of statements.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s shameless.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he has a sense of conscience.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s unskilled in the Monastic Law.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s skilled in the Monastic Law.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the motion; (2) he doesn’t know how the motion is done; (3) he doesn’t know the proclamation of the motion; (4) he doesn’t know settling through a motion; (5) he doesn’t know resolution through a motion.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the motion; (2) he knows how the motion is done; (3) he knows the proclamation of the motion; (4) he knows settling by way of a motion; (5) he knows resolution by way of a motion.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the Monastic Code; (2) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in what is and is not possible.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the Monastic Code; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in what is and is not possible.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t speak in the Sangha:

(1) he doesn’t know the Teaching; (2) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in the right order.

But a monk who has five qualities may speak in the Sangha:

(1) he knows the Teaching; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in the right order.”

The third subchapter on speech is finished.

This is the summary:

“Offenses, legal issues,

Forcefully, knowing offenses;

Legal procedures, the actions that are the bases, and shameless,

And unskilled, of the motion;

He does not know the Monastic Code, or the Teaching—

The compilation of the third subchapter is finished.”

4. The subchapter on revealing one’s view

“Sir, how many illegitimate kinds of revealing one’s view are there?”

“There are five, Upāli:

(1) one reveals a view about a non-offense; (2) one reveals a view about an offense that isn’t clearable by confession; (3) one reveals a view about an offense that has been confessed; (4) one reveals a view to four or five people; (5) one reveals a view by mind.

But there are five legitimate kinds of revealing one’s view:

(1) one reveals a view about an offense; (2) one reveals a view about an offense that’s clearable by confession; (3) one reveals a view about an offense that hasn’t been confessed; (4) one doesn’t reveal a view to four or five people; (5) one doesn’t reveal a view by mind.

There are five other illegitimate kinds of revealing one’s view:

(1) one reveals a view to someone who belongs to a different Buddhist sect; (2) one reveals a view to someone in a different monastery zone; (3) one reveals a view to someone who’s not a regular monk; (4) one reveals a view to four or five people; (5) one reveals a view by mind.

But there are five legitimate kinds of revealing one’s view:

(1) one reveals a view to someone who belongs to the same Buddhist sect; (2) one reveals a view to someone in the same monastery zone; (3) one reveals a view to a regular monk; (4) one doesn’t reveal a view to four or five people; (5) one doesn’t reveal a view by mind.”

“How many illegitimate kinds of receiving are there?”

“There are five:

(1) when someone gives by body and one doesn’t receive by body; (2) when someone gives by body and one doesn’t receive with something connected to the body; (3) when someone gives with something connected to the body and one doesn’t receive by body; (4) when someone gives with something connected to the body and one doesn’t receive with something connected to the body; (5) when someone gives by releasing and one doesn’t receive by body or with something connected to the body.

But there are five legitimate kinds of receiving:

(1) when someone gives by body and one receives by body; (2) when someone gives by body and one receives with something connected to the body; (3) when someone gives with something connected to the body and one receives by body; (4) when someone gives with something connected to the body and one receives with something connected to the body; (5) when someone gives by releasing and one receives by body or with something connected to the body.”

“In how many ways is something considered ‘not left over’?”

“In five ways:

(1) the making it left over is done with food that’s unallowable; (2) it’s done with food that hasn’t been received; (3) it’s done with food that’s not held in hand; (4) it’s done by one who’s not within arm’s reach; (5) ‘I’ve had enough,’ hasn’t been said.

And there are five aspects for something to be considered ‘left over’:

(1) the making it left over is done with food that’s allowable; (2) it’s done with food that has been received; (3) it’s done with food that’s held in hand; (4) it’s done by one who’s within arm’s reach; (5) ‘I’ve had enough,’ has been said.”

“How many aspects are there of refusing an invitation to eat more?”

“There are five aspects:

there is eating; there is cooked food; they stand within arm’s reach; there is an offering; there is a refusal.”

“How many illegitimate ways are there of acting according to what has been admitted?”

“There are five ways:

(1) A monk has committed an offense entailing expulsion. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits to committing an offense entailing suspension. The Sangha deals with him for an offense entailing suspension. That acting according to what has been admitted is illegitimate.

Again, a monk has committed an offense entailing expulsion. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits to committing an offense entailing confession …

an offense entailing acknowledgment …

an offense of wrong conduct. The Sangha deals with him for an offense of wrong conduct. That acting according to what has been admitted is illegitimate.

(2) A monk has committed an offense entailing suspension …

(3) A monk has committed an offense entailing confession …

(4) A monk has committed an offense entailing acknowledgment …

(5) A monk has committed an offense of wrong conduct. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits to committing an offense entailing expulsion. The Sangha deals with him for an offense entailing expulsion. That acting according to what has been admitted is illegitimate.

Again, a monk has committed an offense of wrong conduct. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits to committing an offense entailing suspension …

an offense entailing confession …

an offense entailing acknowledgment. The Sangha deals with him for an offense entailing acknowledgment. That acting according to what has been admitted is illegitimate.

There are five ways of legitimately acting according to what has been admitted:

(1) A monk has committed an offense entailing expulsion. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits it. The Sangha deals with him for an offense entailing expulsion. That acting according to what has been admitted is legitimate.

(2) A monk has committed an offense entailing suspension …

(3) A monk has committed an offense entailing confession …

(4) A monk has committed an offense entailing acknowledgment …

(5) A monk has committed an offense of wrong conduct. When he’s accused of having committed such an offense, he admits it. The Sangha deals with him for an offense of wrong conduct. That acting according to what has been admitted is legitimate.”

“Sir, what sort of monk is unqualified to get permission to correct someone?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he’s shameless; (2) he’s ignorant; (3) he’s not a regular monk; (4) he speaks to make someone disrobe, (5) not with the aim of clearing their offenses.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to get permission to correct someone:

(1) he has a sense of conscience; (2) he’s knowledgeable; (3) he’s a regular monk; (4) he speaks with the aim of clearing someone’s offense, (5) not to make them disrobe.”

“What sort of monk should one not discuss the Monastic Law with?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origin stories; (3) he doesn’t know the rules; (4) he doesn’t know the right order of words; (5) he doesn’t know the sequence of statements.

But the Monastic Law may be discussed with a monk who has five qualities:

(1) he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he knows the origin stories; (3) he knows the rules; (4) he knows the right order of words; (5) he knows the sequence of statements.”

“How many kinds of questions and enquiries are there?”

“There are five:

one asks (1) because of stupidity and folly; (2) because one is overcome by bad desires; (3) because of contempt; (4) because one desires to know; (5) because of the thought, ‘If he explains correctly when I ask him, all is well, but if he doesn’t, I’ll explain it correctly to him.’”

“How many kinds of declaration of perfect insight are there?”

“There are five:

one declares perfect insight (1) because of stupidity and folly; (2) because one is overcome by bad desires; (3) because of insanity and derangement; (4) because of overestimation; (5) because it’s true.”

“How many kinds of purification are there?”

“There are five:

(1) After reciting the introduction, the rest is announced as if heard. (2) After reciting the introduction and the four rules entailing expulsion, the rest is announced as if heard. (3) After reciting the introduction, the four rules entailing expulsion, and the thirteen rules entailing suspension, the rest is announced as if heard. (4) After reciting the introduction, the four rules entailing expulsion, the thirteen rules entailing suspension, and the two undetermined rules, the rest is announced as if heard. (5) In full is the fifth.”

“How many kinds of cooked food are there?”

“There are five:

cooked grain, porridge, flour products, fish, and meat.”

The fourth subchapter on revealing one’s view is finished.

This is the summary:

“Revealing one’s view, other,

Receiving, not left over;

Refusing an invitation to eat more, according to what has been admitted,

Permission, and with discussion;

Question, declarations of perfect insight,

And also purification, cooked food.”

5. The subchapter on raising an issue

“Sir, how many qualities should a monk see in himself before accusing another?”

“He should see five qualities in himself:

(1) He should reflect:

‘Is my bodily conduct pure and flawless? Is this quality found in me or not?’

If it’s not, there will be those who say,

‘Please train your own bodily conduct first.’

(2) He should reflect:

‘Is my verbal conduct pure and flawless? Is this quality found in me or not?’

If it’s not, there will be those who say,

‘Please train your own verbal conduct first.’

(3) He should reflect:

‘Do I have a mind of good will toward my fellow monastics, a mind free from anger? Is this quality found in me or not?’

If it’s not, there will be those who say,

‘Please set up a mind of good will toward your fellow monastics first.’

(4) He should reflect:

‘Have I learned much and do I retain and accumulate what I’ve learned? Those teachings that are good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, that have a true goal and are well articulated, and that set out the perfectly complete and pure spiritual life—have I learned many such teachings, retained them in mind, recited them verbally, mentally investigated them, and penetrated them well by view? Is this quality found in me or not?’

If it’s not, there will be those who say,

‘Please learn the tradition first.’

(5) He should reflect:

‘Have I properly learned both Monastic Codes in detail; have I analyzed them well, thoroughly mastered them, and investigated them well, both in terms of the rules and their detailed exposition? Is this quality found in me or not?’

If it’s not, then when he’s asked, ‘Where was this said by the Buddha?’ he won’t be able to reply. And there will be those who say,

‘Please learn the Monastic Law first.’”

“Sir, how many qualities should a monk set up in himself before accusing another?”

“He should set up five qualities in himself:

(1) ‘I’ll speak at an appropriate time, not at an inappropriate one; (2) I’ll speak the truth, not falsehood; (3) I’ll speak gently, not harshly; (4) I’ll speak what’s beneficial, not what’s unbeneficial; (5) I’ll speak with a mind of good will, not with ill will.’”

“How many qualities should a monk attend to in himself before accusing another?”

“He should attend to five qualities in himself:

compassion, being of benefit, sympathy, the idea of clearing offenses, and the idea of prioritizing the training.”

“What sort of monk is unqualified to get permission to correct someone?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he’s impure in bodily conduct; (2) he’s impure in verbal conduct; (3) he’s impure in livelihood; (4) he’s ignorant and incompetent; (5) he’s incapable of answering properly when questioned.”

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to get permission to correct someone:

(1) he’s pure in bodily conduct; (2) he’s pure in verbal conduct; (3) he’s pure in livelihood; (4) he’s knowledgeable and competent; (5) he’s capable of answering properly when questioned.”

“Sir, if a monk wishes to raise an issue, what factors should be fulfilled?”

“Five factors should be fulfilled:

He should reflect

whether it’s the right time to raise it.

If he knows

it’s the wrong time, he shouldn’t raise it.

(1) But if he knows

it’s the right time, he should reflect further

whether it’s a real issue.

If he knows

it’s not, he shouldn’t raise it.

(2) But if he knows

it is, he should reflect further

whether raising the issue will be beneficial.

If he knows

it won’t, he shouldn’t raise it.

(3) But if he knows

it will, he should reflect further

whether the monks who are on the side of the Teaching and the Monastic Law will support him.

If he knows

that they won’t, he shouldn’t raise it.

(4) But if he knows

that they will, he should reflect further

whether raising the issue will lead to arguments and disputes, to fracture and schism in the Sangha.

If he knows

it will, he shouldn’t raise it.

(5) But if he knows

it won’t, he may raise it.

In this way, when five factors are fulfilled, he won’t regret raising that issue.”

“What sort of monk is of great help to monks involved in a legal issue?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) He’s virtuous and restrained by the Monastic Code. His conduct is good, he associates with the right people, and he sees danger in minor faults. He undertakes and trains in the training rules.

(2) He has learned much, and he retains and accumulates what he has learned.

(3) Those teachings that are good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, that have a true goal and are well articulated, and that set out the perfectly complete and pure spiritual life—he has learned many such teachings, retained them in mind, recited them verbally, mentally investigated them, and penetrated them well by view.

(4) He’s firmly committed to the Monastic Law.

(5) He’s capable of making both sides relax, of persuading them, of convincing them, of making them see, of reconciling them.

A monk who has five other qualities is also of great help to monks involved in a legal issue:

he’s pure in bodily conduct; he’s pure in verbal conduct; he’s pure in livelihood; he’s knowledgeable and competent; he’s capable of answering properly when questioned.

A monk who has five other qualities is also of great help to monks involved in a legal issue:

he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; he knows the origin stories; he knows the rules; he knows the right order of words; he knows the sequence of statements.”

“Sir, what sort of monk shouldn’t be examined?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he doesn’t know the Monastic Code; (2) he doesn’t know what is in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in what is and is not possible.

But a monk who has five qualities may be examined:

(1) he knows the Monastic Code; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in what is and is not possible.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be examined:

(1) he doesn’t know the Teaching; (2) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in the right order.

But a monk who has five qualities may be examined:

(1) he knows the Teaching; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in the right order.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be examined:

(1) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origin stories; (3) he doesn’t know the rules; (4) he doesn’t know the right order of words; (5) he doesn’t know the sequence of statements.

But a monk who has five qualities may be examined:

(1) he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he knows the origin stories; (3) he knows the rules; (4) he knows the right order of words; (5) he knows the sequence of statements.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be examined:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of offenses; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding on offenses.

But a monk who has five qualities may be examined:

(1) he knows the offenses; (2) he knows the origination of the offenses; (3) he knows the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he knows the settling of offenses; (5) he’s skilled in deciding on offenses.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be examined:

(1) he doesn’t know the legal issues; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the legal issues; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort that’s the source of the legal issues; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding legal issues.

But a monk who has five qualities may be examined:

(1) he knows the legal issues; (2) he knows the origination of the legal issues; (3) he knows the kind of effort that’s the source of the legal issues; (4) he knows the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s skilled in deciding legal issues.”

The fifth subchapter on raising an issue is finished.

This is the summary:

“And pure, at an appropriate time,

Compassion, and with permission;

Raising an issue, legal issue,

And also other, and the actions that are the bases;

The Monastic Code, the Teaching, and the actions that are the bases,

Offense, and with legal issue.”

6. The subchapter on ascetic practices

“Sir, how many kinds of wilderness dwellers are there?”

“There are five kinds:

those who are wilderness dwellers: (1) because of stupidity and folly; (2) because they are overcome by bad desires; (3) because of insanity and derangement; (4) because it is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples; (5) because of fewness of wishes, contentment, self-effacement, seclusion, and not needing anything else.”

“How many kinds of people are there who only eat almsfood?” …

“How many kinds of rag-robe wearers are there?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who live at the foot of a tree?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who live in charnel grounds?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who live out in the open?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who only have three robes?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who go on continuous almsround?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who never lie down?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who accept any kind of resting place?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who eat in one sitting per day?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who refuse to accept food offered after the meal has begun?” …

“How many kinds of people are there who eat only from the almsbowl?”

“There are five kinds:

those who eat only from the almsbowl: (1) because of stupidity and folly; (2) because they are overcome by bad desires; (3) because of insanity and derangement; (4) because it is praised by the Buddhas and their disciples; (5) because of fewness of wishes, contentment, self-effacement, seclusion, and not needing anything else.”

The sixth subchapter on ascetic practices is finished.

This is the summary:

“Wilderness dweller, almsfood, rag-robe,

Tree, charnel ground is the fifth;

Out in the open, and the three robes,

Continuous, those who never lie down;

Resting place, and one sitting,

After, those who eat only from the bowl.”

7. The subchapter on lying

“Sir, how many kinds of lying are there?”

“There are five kinds:

(1) there’s lying that leads to an offense entailing expulsion; (2) there’s lying that leads to an offense entailing suspension; (3) there’s lying that leads to a serious offense; (4) there’s lying that leads to an offense entailing confession; (5) there’s lying that leads to an offense of wrong conduct.”

“A monk may be canceling someone’s observance day or invitation in the midst of the Sangha. Among such monks, what sort should be pressed: ‘Enough. No more arguing and disputing,’ with the Sangha then doing the observance-day ceremony or the invitation ceremony?”

“A monk who has five qualities:

he’s shameless; he’s ignorant; he’s not a regular monk; he speaks to make someone disrobe, not with the aim of clearing their offenses.

The same procedure should be followed also for a monk who has five other qualities:

he’s impure in bodily conduct; he’s impure in verbal conduct; he’s impure in livelihood; he’s ignorant and incompetent; he’s quarrelsome and argumentative.”

“What sort of monk shouldn’t be allowed to question?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the light and heavy offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the grave and minor offenses; (5) he doesn’t know the offenses that are clearable by making amends and the offenses that are not clearable by making amends.

But a monk who has five other qualities may question:

(1) he knows the offenses and non-offenses; (2) he knows the light and heavy offenses; (3) he knows the curable and incurable offenses; (4) he knows the grave and minor offenses; (5) he knows the offenses that are clearable by making amends and the offenses that are not clearable by making amends.”

“For how many reasons does a monk commit an offense?”

“For five reasons:

because of shamelessness; because of ignorance; because of being overcome by anxiety; because of perceiving what’s unallowable as allowable; because of perceiving what’s allowable as unallowable.

A monk also commits an offense for five other reasons:

because of not seeing; because of not hearing; because of sleeping; because of perceiving it as allowable; because of absentmindedness.”

“How many kinds of hostility are there?”

“There are five:

killing living beings; stealing; sexual misconduct; lying; alcohol, which causes heedlessness.”

“How many kinds of abstention are there?”

“There are five:

abstention from killing living beings; from stealing; from sexual misconduct; from lying; from alcohol, which causes heedlessness.”

“How many kinds of loss are there?”

“There are five:

loss of relatives, property, health, morality, and view.”

“How many kinds of success are there?”

“There are five:

success in relatives, property, health, morality, and view.”

The seventh subchapter on lying is finished.

This is the summary:

“And lying, pressed,

Other, question;

And offense, other,

Hostility, and abstention;

Loss, and success—

The compilation of the seventh subchapter is finished.”

8. The subchapter on instructing the nuns

“Sir, against what sort of monk should the Sangha of nuns do a legal procedure?”

“They should do a legal procedure, prohibiting the Sangha of nuns from paying respect to him, against a monk who has five qualities:

(1) he exposes his body to the nuns; (2) he exposes his thighs to the nuns; (3) he exposes his genitals to the nuns; (4) he exposes both shoulders to the nuns; (5) he speaks indecently to the nuns; he associates inappropriately with householders.

They should do the same legal procedure also against a monk who has five other qualities:

(1) he’s trying to stop nuns from getting material support; (2) he’s trying to harm nuns; (3) he’s trying to get nuns to lose their place of residence; (4) he abuses and reviles nuns; (5) he causes division between the monks and the nuns.

They should do the same legal procedure also against a monk who has five other qualities:

(1) he’s trying to stop nuns from getting material support; (2) he’s trying to harm nuns; (3) he’s trying to get nuns to lose their place of residence; (4) he abuses and reviles nuns; (5) he causes the monks to associate inappropriately with the nuns.”

“Against what sort of nun should a legal procedure be done?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) she exposes her body to the monks; (2) she exposes her thighs to the monks; (3) she exposes her genitals to the monks; (4) she exposes both shoulders to the monks; (5) she speaks indecently to the monks; she associates inappropriately with householders.

A legal procedure should be done also against a nun who has five other qualities:

(1) she’s trying to stop monks from getting material support; (2) she’s trying to harm monks; (3) she’s trying to get monks to lose their place of residence; (4) she abuses and reviles monks; (5) she causes division between the nuns and the monks.

A legal procedure should be done also against a nun who has five other qualities:

(1) she’s trying to stop monks from getting material support; (2) she’s trying to harm monks; (3) she’s trying to get monks to lose their place of residence; (4) she abuses and reviles monks; (5) she causes the nuns to associate inappropriately with the monks.”

“What sort of monk shouldn’t cancel the nuns’ instruction?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s shameless; he’s ignorant; he’s not a regular monk; he speaks to make someone disrobe, not with the aim of clearing their offenses.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t cancel the nuns’ instruction:

he’s impure in bodily conduct; he’s impure in verbal conduct; he’s impure in livelihood; he’s ignorant and incompetent; he’s incapable of answering properly when questioned.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t cancel the nuns’ instruction:

he’s improperly behaved by body; he’s improperly behaved by speech; he’s improperly behaved by body and speech; he abuses and reviles nuns; he socializes improperly with the nuns.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t cancel the nuns’ instruction:

he’s shameless, ignorant, and not a regular monk, and he’s quarrelsome and argumentative, and he doesn’t fulfill the training.”

“What sort of monk shouldn’t agree to instruct the nuns?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s improperly behaved by body; he’s improperly behaved by speech; he’s improperly behaved by body and speech; he abuses and reviles nuns; he socializes improperly with the nuns.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t agree to instruct the nuns:

he’s shameless, ignorant, and not a regular monk, or he’s about to depart, or he’s sick.”

“What sort of monk should one not have a discussion with?”

“One who has five qualities:

he doesn’t have the virtue, stillness, wisdom, freedom, or knowledge and vision of freedom of one who’s fully trained.

But one may have a discussion with a monk who has five qualities:

he has the virtue, stillness, wisdom, freedom, and knowledge and vision of freedom of one who’s fully trained.

One also shouldn’t have a discussion with a monk who has five other qualities:

he hasn’t achieved the analysis of meaning, the analysis of text, the analysis of terminology, and the analysis of articulation, and he hasn’t reviewed the extent of his mind’s freedom.

But one may have a discussion with a monk who has five qualities:

he has achieved the analysis of meaning, the analysis of text, the analysis of terminology, and the analysis of articulation, and he reviews the extent of his mind’s freedom.”

The eighth subchapter on instructing the nuns is finished.

This is the summary:

“The nuns should do,

And another two of the same;

Three on legal procedures against nuns,

Twice two on shouldn’t cancel;

Two were spoken on shouldn’t agree,

And twice two on discussions.”

9. The subchapter on committees

“What sort of monk shouldn’t be appointed to a committee?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s not skilled in the meaning, the Teaching, the terminology, the wording, or the right order.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

he’s skilled in the meaning, the Teaching, the terminology, the wording, and the right order.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be appointed to a committee:

(1) he’s angry, overcome by anger; (2) he’s denigrating, overcome by denigration; (3) he’s domineering, overcome by being domineering; (4) he’s envious, overcome by envy; (5) he obstinately grasps his own views and only gives them up with difficulty.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

(1) he’s not angry or overcome by anger; (2) he’s not denigrating or overcome by denigration; (3) he’s not domineering or overcome by being domineering; (4) he’s not envious or overcome by envy; (5) he doesn’t obstinately grasp his own views and gives them up with ease.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be appointed to a committee:

he (1) gets agitated, (2) has ill will, (3) becomes hardhearted, (4) gives rise to anger, and (5) is resistant and doesn’t receive instructions respectfully.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

he (1) doesn’t get agitated, (2) doesn’t have ill will, (3) doesn’t become hardhearted, (4) doesn’t give rise to anger, and (5) isn’t resistant but receives instructions respectfully.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be appointed to a committee:

(1) he causes confusion, not recollection; (2) he speaks without having gotten permission; (3) he doesn’t accuse others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or their offense; (4) he doesn’t act according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, or his offenses; (5) he doesn’t explain things according to his own view.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

(1) he causes recollection, not confusion; (2) he speaks after getting permission; (3) he accuses others according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and their offense; (4) he acts according to the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and his offenses; (5) he explains things according to his own view.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be appointed to a committee:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s shameless.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he has a sense of conscience.

A monk who has five other qualities also shouldn’t be appointed to a committee:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s unskilled in the Monastic Law.

But a monk who has five qualities may be appointed to a committee:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s skilled in the Monastic Law.”

“What sort of monk is considered ignorant?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he doesn’t know the Monastic Code; (2) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in what is and is not possible.

But a monk who has five qualities is considered learned:

(1) he knows the Monastic Code; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Code; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in what is and isn’t possible.

A monk who has five other qualities is also considered ignorant:

(1) he doesn’t know the Teaching; (2) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he doesn’t know the Monastic Law; (4) he doesn’t know what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s not skilled in the right order.

But a monk who has five qualities is considered learned:

(1) he knows the Teaching; (2) he knows what’s in accordance with the Teaching; (3) he knows the Monastic Law; (4) he knows what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law; (5) he’s skilled in the right order.

A monk who has five other qualities is also considered ignorant:

(1) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origin stories; (3) he doesn’t know the rules; (4) he doesn’t know the right order of words; (5) he doesn’t know the sequence of statements.

But a monk who has five qualities is considered learned:

(1) he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he knows the origin stories; (3) he knows the rules; (4) he knows the right order of words; (5) he knows the sequence of statements.

A monk who has five other qualities is also considered ignorant:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of offenses; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding on offenses.

But a monk who has five qualities is considered learned:

(1) he knows the offenses; (2) he knows the origination of the offenses; (3) he knows the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he knows the settling of offenses; (5) he’s skilled in deciding on offenses.

A monk who has five other qualities is also considered ignorant:

(1) he doesn’t know the legal issues; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the legal issues; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort that’s the source of the legal issues; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding legal issues.

But a monk who has five qualities is considered learned:

(1) he knows the legal issues; (2) he knows the origination of the legal issues; (3) he knows the kind of effort that is the source of the legal issues; (4) he knows the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s skilled in deciding legal issues.”

The ninth subchapter on committees is finished.

This is the summary:

“And not skilled in the meaning,

Angry, and one who is agitated;

One who confuses, biased by desire,

And so unskilled.

The Monastic Code, and the Teaching, and the actions that are the bases,

Offense, legal issue—

All proclaimed in groups of two:

You should understand the dark and the bright.”

10. The subchapter on the resolving of legal issues

“What sort of monk is unqualified to resolve a legal issue?”

“One who has five qualities:

(1) he doesn’t know the offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the offenses; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of offenses; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding on offenses.

But monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

(1) he knows the offenses; (2) he knows the origination of the offenses; (3) he knows the kind of effort required to commit the offenses; (4) he knows the settling of offenses; (5) he’s skilled in deciding on offenses.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

(1) he doesn’t know the legal issues; (2) he doesn’t know the origination of the legal issues; (3) he doesn’t know the kind of effort that’s the source of the legal issues; (4) he doesn’t know the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s not skilled in deciding legal issues.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

(1) he knows the legal issues; (2) he knows the origination of the legal issues; (3) he knows the kind of effort that’s the source of the legal issues; (4) he knows the settling of legal issues; (5) he’s skilled in deciding legal issues.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s shameless.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he has a sense of conscience.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s ignorant.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s learned.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

(1) he doesn’t know the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he doesn’t know the origin stories; (3) he doesn’t know the rules; (4) he doesn’t know the right order of words; (5) he doesn’t know the sequence of statements.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

(1) he knows the actions that are the bases for offenses; (2) he knows the origin stories; (3) he knows the rules; (4) he knows the right order of words; (5) he knows the sequence of statements.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s unskilled in the Monastic Law.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he’s skilled in the Monastic Law.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he respects individuals, not the Sangha.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he respects the Sangha, not individuals.

A monk who has five other qualities is also unqualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear; and he values worldly things, not the true Teaching.

But a monk who has five qualities is qualified to resolve a legal issue:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear; and he values the true Teaching, not worldly things.”

“Sir, in how many ways is there schism in the Sangha?”

“In five ways, Upāli:

through a legal procedure, through recitation, through speaking, through a proclamation, and through voting.”

“Sir, we speak of ‘fracture in the Sangha’.

But how is there fracture in the Sangha, yet not schism?

And how is there both fracture and schism in the Sangha?”

“(1) Upāli, I’ve laid down the proper conduct for newly-arrived monks.

Even though I’ve carefully laid down the training rules, the newly-arrived monks don’t practice that proper conduct.

In this way, there’s fracture in the Sangha, but not schism.

(2) I’ve laid down the proper conduct for resident monks.

Even though I’ve carefully laid down the training rules, the resident monks don’t practice that proper conduct.

In this way, there’s fracture in the Sangha, but not schism.

(3) I’ve laid down the proper conduct for monks in the dining hall:

the best seat, the best water, and the best almsfood is to be given out according to seniority and according to what’s proper.

Even though I’ve carefully laid down the training rules, the junior monks block the senior monks from seats.

In this way, there’s fracture in the Sangha, but not schism.

(4) I’ve laid down the proper conduct for the monks in regard to dwellings:

they’re to be given out according to seniority and according to what’s proper.

Even though I’ve carefully laid down the training rules, the junior monks block the senior monks from dwellings.

In this way, there’s fracture in the Sangha, but not schism.

(5) For monks within the same monastery zone, I’ve laid down this: a joint observance-day ceremony; a joint invitation ceremony; joint legal procedures of the Sangha; joint legal procedures of whatever kind.

Even though I’ve carefully laid down the training rules, they form a faction, a subgroup, right there within the monastery zone. They then do a separate observance-day ceremony, a separate invitation ceremony, separate legal procedures of the Sangha, or separate legal procedures of whatever kind.

In this way, there’s both fracture and schism in the Sangha.”

The tenth subchapter on the resolving of legal issues is finished.

This is the summary:

“Offenses, legal issues,

Desire, and with ignorant;

And the actions that are the bases, and unskilled,

Individual, and with worldly things;

Schism, and fracture in the Sangha,

And so too schism in the Sangha.”

11. The subchapter on schism in the Sangha

“Sir, what sort of monk who has caused a schism in the Sangha is irredeemably destined to an eon in hell?”

“One who has five qualities, Upāli:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his view of what’s true during the legal procedure.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his view of what’s true during the recitation.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his view of what’s true while he speaks.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his view of what’s true during the proclamation.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his view of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his belief of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he misrepresents his belief of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he misrepresents his belief of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he misrepresents his belief of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he misrepresents his belief of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his acceptance of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he misrepresents his acceptance of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he misrepresents his acceptance of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he misrepresents his acceptance of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he misrepresents his acceptance of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also irredeemably destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he misrepresents his perception of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he misrepresents his perception of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he misrepresents his perception of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he misrepresents his perception of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he misrepresents his perception of what’s true during the voting.”

The eleventh subchapter on schism in the Sangha is finished.

This is the summary:

“He misrepresents his view during the legal procedure,

During the recitation, and while he speaks;

During the proclamation, during the voting—

These five are dependent on view;

Belief, and acceptance, and perception—

These three by the fivefold method.”

12. The second subchapter on schism in the Sangha

“Sir, what sort of monk who has caused a schism in the Sangha is redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell?”

“One who has five qualities, Upāli:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true during the legal procedure.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true during the recitation.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true while he speaks.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true during the proclamation.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his view of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his belief of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his belief of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his belief of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his belief of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his belief of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his acceptance of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his acceptance of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his acceptance of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his acceptance of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his acceptance of what’s true during the voting.

When one who has caused a schism in the Sangha has five other qualities, he’s also redeemable, not destined to an eon in hell:

(1) a monk proclaims what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, but (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his perception of what’s true during the legal procedure.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his perception of what’s true during the recitation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his perception of what’s true while he speaks.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his perception of what’s true during the proclamation.

… (5) he doesn’t misrepresent his perception of what’s true during the voting.”

The twelfth subchapter, the second on schism in the Sangha, is finished.

This is the summary:

“He does not misrepresent his view during the legal procedure,

During the recitation, and while he speaks;

During the proclamation, during the voting—

These five are dependent on view;

Belief, and acceptance, and perception—

These three by the fivefold method, as above.

As these on the dark side,

Have twenty ways;

So are there twenty on the bright side,

You should understand.”

13. The subchapter on resident monks

“Sir, what sort of resident monk is dumped in hell?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he uses what belongs to the Sangha as if belonging to an individual.

But a resident monk who has five qualities is deposited in heaven:

he’s not biased by desire, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he doesn’t use what belongs to the Sangha as if belonging to an individual.”

“How many illegitimate explanations of the Monastic Law are there?”

“There are five:

(1) a monk develops what’s contrary to the Teaching as being in accordance with it, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching as contrary to it, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law as being in accordance with it, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law as contrary to it, and (5) he lays down new rules and gets rid of the existing ones.

And there are five legitimate explanations of the Monastic Law:

(1) a monk develops what’s contrary to the Teaching to what’s contrary to the Teaching, (2) what’s in accordance with the Teaching to what’s in accordance with the Teaching, (3) what’s contrary to the Monastic Law to what’s contrary to the Monastic Law, (4) what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law to what’s in accordance with the Monastic Law, and (5) he doesn’t lay down new rules or get rid of the existing ones.”

“What sort of designator of meals is dumped in hell?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s biased by favoritism, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he doesn’t know what has and hasn’t been designated.

But a designator of meals who has five qualities is deposited in heaven:

he’s not biased by favoritism, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he knows what has and hasn’t been designated.”

“What sort of assigner of dwellings …

storeman …

receiver of robe-cloth …

distributor of robe-cloth …

distributor of congee …

distributor of fruit …

distributor of fresh foods …

distributor of minor requisites …

distributor of rainy-season bathing cloths …

distributor of almsbowls …

supervisor of monastery workers …

supervisor of novice monks is dumped in hell?”

“One who has five qualities:

he’s biased by favoritism, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he doesn’t know who is and is not supervised.

But a supervisor of novice monks who has five qualities is deposited in heaven:

he’s not biased by favoritism, ill will, confusion, or fear, and he knows who is and is not supervised.”

The thirteenth subchapter on resident monks is finished.

This is the summary:

“Resident, explanations,

Designator of meals, and dwellings;

Storeman, and receiver of robe-cloth,

And distributor of robe-cloth.

Congee, fruit, and fresh foods,

Minor requisites, distributor of rainy-season bathing cloths;

Bowl, and monastery worker,

Supervisor of novice monks.”

14. The subchapter on the robe-making ceremony

“Sir, how many benefits are there in participating in the robe-making ceremony?”

“There are five benefits, Upāli:

(1) going without informing; (2) going without taking; (3) eating in a group; (4) as much extra robe-cloth as you need; and (5) whatever robe-cloth is given there is for you.”

“How many drawbacks are there in falling asleep absentminded and heedless?”

“There are these five drawbacks:

you don’t sleep well; you wake up feeling miserable; you have nightmares; the gods don’t guard you; you emit semen.

But there are five benefits in falling asleep mindfully, with clear awareness:

you sleep well; you wake up feeling good; you don’t have nightmares; the gods guard you; you don’t emit semen.”

“How many kinds of people should one not pay respect to?”

“These five:

one who has entered an inhabited area; one who’s walking along a street; one who’s in the dark; one who’s not paying attention; one who’s asleep.

There are five other kinds of people you also shouldn’t pay respect to:

one who’s drinking congee; one who’s in the dining hall; one who has turned away; one who’s preoccupied with something else; one who’s naked.

There are five other kinds of people you also shouldn’t pay respect to:

one who’s eating fresh food; one who’s eating cooked food; one who’s defecating; one who’s urinating; one who has been ejected.

There are five other kinds of people you also shouldn’t pay respect to:

(1) one who has been given the full ordination after you; (2) one who isn’t fully ordained; (3) one who belongs to a different Buddhist sect who’s senior to you, but who speaks contrary to the Teaching; (4) a woman; (5) a paṇḍaka.

There are five other kinds of people you also shouldn’t pay respect to:

(1) one who’s on probation; (2) one who deserves to be sent back to the beginning; (3) one who deserves the trial period; (4) one who’s undertaking the trial period; (5) one who deserves rehabilitation.”

“But how many kinds of people should one pay respect to?”

“These five:

(1) one who has been given the full ordination before you; (2) one who belongs to a different Buddhist sect who’s senior to you and who speaks in accordance with the Teaching; (3) your teacher; (4) your preceptor; and (5) in this world with its gods, lords of death, and supreme beings, in this society with its monastics and brahmins, its gods and humans, you should pay respect to the Buddha, perfected and fully awakened.”

“Sir, when a monk is paying respect to a more senior monk, how many qualities should he first set up in himself?”

“He should set up five qualities in himself:

(1) he should arrange his upper robe over one shoulder; (2) he should raise his joined palms; (3) he should stroke the feet with the palms of both hands; (4) he should set up a sense of affection; (5) he should set up a sense of respect.”

The fourteenth subchapter on the robe-making ceremony is finished.

This is the summary:

“The robe-making ceremony, and asleep,

Inhabited, congee, when eating fresh food;

And before, and one on probation,

Should pay respect to, to be paid respect.”

Ven. Upāli questions the Buddha is finished.

This is the summary of these subchapters:

“Without formal support, and legal procedure,

Speech, and with revealing;

And accusing, and ascetic practices,

Lying, and nun.

Committee, legal issue,

Schism, the fifth before;

Resident monks, and robe-making ceremony—

The fourteen have been well proclaimed.”