⇄
Original (.txt) Plain text (.txt) Markdown (.md) Rich text (RTF) (.rtf) Word (DOCX) (.docx) PDF (.pdf) EPUB (.epub)
⋮ KWIC Create account to save clippings server-side.

PLI-TV-KD11 (tr. Bhikkhu Brahmali)

Theravāda Collection on Monastic Law The Small Division The chapter on penalty procedures

1. The legal procedure of condemnation Homage to the Buddha, the Perfected One, the fully Awakened One At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery. At that time the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka were quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha. They went to other monks who were also quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha, and said to them, “Don’t let him beat you. Argue back forcefully. You’re wiser, more competent, more learned, and more capable than he. Don’t be afraid of him. We’ll take your side.” Because of that, new quarrels started and existing quarrels became worse. The monks of few desires complained and criticized them, “How can the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka act like this?” They told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka are acting like this?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked them, “It’s not suitable for those foolish men, it’s not proper, it’s not worthy of a monastic, it’s not allowable, it’s not to be done. How can they act like this, causing new quarrels to start and existing quarrels to become worse? This will affect people’s confidence, and cause some to lose it.” The Buddha then spoke in many ways in dispraise of being difficult to support and maintain, in dispraise of great desires, discontent, socializing, and laziness; but he spoke in many ways in praise of being easy to support and maintain, of fewness of wishes, contentment, self-effacement, ascetic practices, serenity, reduction in things, and being energetic. After giving a teaching on what is right and proper, he addressed the monks: “Well then, monks, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. They should then be reminded of what they’ve done, before they’re charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha. They go to other monks who are also quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha, and they say to them, “Don’t let him beat you. Argue back forcefully. You’re wiser, more competent, more learned, and more capable than he. Don’t be afraid of him. We’ll take your side.” Because of this, new quarrels start and existing quarrels become worse. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha. They go to other monks who are also quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha, and they say to them, “Don’t let him beat you. Argue back forcefully. You’re wiser, more competent, more learned, and more capable than he. Don’t be afraid of him. We’ll take your side.” Because of this, new quarrels start and existing quarrels become worse. The Sangha does a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha. They go to other monks who are also quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha, and they say to them, “Don’t let him beat you. Argue back forcefully. You’re wiser, more competent, more learned, and more capable than he. Don’t be afraid of him. We’ll take your side.” Because of this, new quarrels start and existing quarrels become worse. The Sangha does a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha. They go to other monks who are also quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha, and they say to them, “Don’t let him beat you. Argue back forcefully. You’re wiser, more competent, more learned, and more capable than he. Don’t be afraid of him. We’ll take your side.” Because of this, new quarrels start and existing quarrels become worse. The Sangha does a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of condemnation has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures is finished.

The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of condemnation has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of condemnation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures is finished.

The group of six on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of condemnation against him: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of condemnation against him: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of condemnation against him: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of condemnation against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of condemnation against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of condemnation against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha.” The group of six on wishing is finished.

The eighteen kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of condemnation done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The eighteen kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of condemnation are finished.

The group of eighteen on not to be lifted When the Sangha had done a legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka, they conducted themselves properly and suitably, and deserved to be released. They then went to the monks and told them about this, adding, “What should we do now?” The monks told the Buddha … “Well then, lift that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of condemnation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of condemnation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of condemnation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted is finished.

The group of eighteen on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of condemnation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of condemnation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of condemnation against him; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of condemnation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on to be lifted is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. After approaching the Sangha, the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should arrange their upper robes over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on their heels, raise their joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of condemnation against us. We’re now conducting ourselves properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. We ask for that legal procedure of condemnation to be lifted.’ And they should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of condemnation against these monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. They’re now conducting themselves properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. They’re asking for that legal procedure of condemnation to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of condemnation against these monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. They’re now conducting themselves properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. They’re asking for that legal procedure of condemnation to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of condemnation against these monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. They’re now conducting themselves properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. They’re asking for that legal procedure of condemnation to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of condemnation against these monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. They’re now conducting themselves properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. They’re asking for that legal procedure of condemnation to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of condemnation against the monks Paṇḍuka and Lohitaka. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The first section on the legal procedure of condemnation is finished.

2. The legal procedure of demotion At that time Venerable Seyyasaka was ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries. And he was constantly and improperly socializing with householders. In addition, the monks regularly gave him probation, sent him back to the beginning, gave him trial periods, and rehabilitated him. The monks of few desires complained and criticized him, “How can Venerable Seyyasaka go on like this?” They told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that the monk Seyyasaka goes on like this?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked him, “It’s not suitable for that foolish man, it’s not proper, it’s not worthy of a monastic, it’s not allowable, it’s not to be done. How can he be ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries? How can he constantly and improperly socialize with householders? And how can it be that the monks regularly give him probation, send him back to the beginning, give him trial periods, and rehabilitate him? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … the Buddha gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monk Seyyasaka. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Seyyasaka is ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries. He’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. In addition, the monks regularly give him probation, send him back to the beginning, give him the trial period, and rehabilitate him. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Seyyasaka is ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries. He’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. In addition, the monks regularly give him probation, send him back to the beginning, give him the trial period, and rehabilitate him. The Sangha does a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Seyyasaka is ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries. He’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. In addition, the monks regularly give him probation, send him back to the beginning, give him the trial period, and rehabilitate him. The Sangha does a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of demotion has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of demotion has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of demotion has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures is finished. The group of six on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of demotion against him: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of demotion against him: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of demotion against him: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of demotion against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of demotion against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of demotion against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha.” The group of six on wishing is finished. The eighteen kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of demotion done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask permission from a regular monk to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The eighteen kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of demotion are finished.

Soon the Sangha did a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka, instructing him to live with formal support. Then, by associating with good friends, by having them recite, and by questioning them, he became learned and a master of the tradition; he became an expert on the Teaching, the Monastic Law, and the Key Terms; he became knowledgeable and competent, had a sense of conscience, and was afraid of wrongdoing and fond of the training. And he conducted himself properly and suitably, and deserved to be released. He then went to the monks and told them about this, adding, “What should I do now?” The monks told the Buddha. He had the monks gathered and said, “Well then, lift that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of demotion against him shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of demotion against him shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of demotion against him shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted is finished. The group of eighteen on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of demotion against him should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of demotion against him should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of demotion against him; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of demotion against him should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on to be lifted is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. After approaching the Sangha, the monk Seyyasaka should arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of demotion against me. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of demotion to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of demotion to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of demotion to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of demotion to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of demotion to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of demotion against the monk Seyyasaka. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The second section on the legal procedure of demotion is finished.

3. The legal procedure of banishment At one time the bad and shameless monks Assaji and Punabbasuka were staying at Kīṭāgiri. They were misbehaving in many ways. They planted flowering trees, watered and plucked them, and then tied the flowers together. They made the flowers into garlands, garlands with stalks on one side and garlands with stalks on both sides. They made flower arrangements, wreaths, ornaments for the head, ornaments for the ears, and ornaments for the chest. And they had others do the same. They then took these things, or sent them, to the women, the daughters, the girls, the daughters-in-law, and the female slaves of respectable families. They ate from the same plates as these women and drank from the same vessels. They sat on the same seats as them, and they lay down on the same beds, on the same sheets, under the same covers, and both on the same sheets and under the same covers. They ate at the wrong time, drank alcohol, and wore garlands, perfumes, and cosmetics. They danced, sang, played instruments, and performed. While the women were dancing, singing, playing instruments, and performing, so would they. They played various games: eight-row checkers, ten-row checkers, imaginary checkers, hopscotch, pick-up-sticks, board games, tip-cat, painting with the hand, dice, leaf flutes, toy plows, somersaults, pinwheels, toy measures, toy carriages, toy bows, guessing from syllables, thought guessing, mimicking deformities. They trained in elephant riding, in horsemanship, in carriage riding, in archery, in swordsmanship. And they ran in front of elephants, horses, and carriages, and they ran backward and forward. They whistled, clapped their hands, wrestled, and boxed. They spread their outer robe on a stage and said to the dancing girls, “Dance here, sister,” and they made gestures of approval. And they misbehaved in a variety of ways. Just then a monk who had completed the rains residence in Kāsi was on his way to visit the Buddha at Sāvatthī when he arrived at Kīṭāgiri. In the morning he robed up, took his bowl and robe, and entered Kīṭāgiri to collect almsfood. He was pleasing in his conduct: in going out and coming back, in looking ahead and looking aside, in bending and stretching his arms. His eyes were lowered, and he was perfect in deportment. When people saw him, they said, “Who’s this, acting like a moron and always frowning? Who’s gonna give almsfood to him? Almsfood should be given to our Venerables Assaji and Punabbasuka, for they’re gentle, congenial, pleasant to speak with, greeting one with a smile, welcoming, friendly, open, the first to speak.” A certain lay follower saw that monk walking for alms in Kīṭāgiri. He approached him, bowed, and said, “Venerable, have you received any almsfood?” “No, I haven’t.” “Come, let’s go to my house.” He took that monk to his house and gave him a meal. He then said, “Where are you going, venerable?” “I’m going to Sāvatthī to see the Buddha.” “Well then, would you please pay respect at the feet of the Buddha in my name and say, ‘Sir, the monastery at Kīṭāgiri has been corrupted. The bad and shameless monks Assaji and Punabbasuka are staying there. And they’re misbehaving in many ways. They plant flowering trees, water them … And they misbehave in a variety of ways. Those who previously had faith and confidence have now lost it, and there’s no longer any support for the Sangha. The good monks have left and the bad monks are staying on. Sir, please send monks to stay at the monastery in Kīṭāgiri.’” The monk agreed, got up, and set out for Sāvatthī. When he eventually arrived, he went to the Buddha in Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery. He bowed to the Buddha and sat down. Since it is the custom for Buddhas to greet newly-arrived monks, the Buddha said to him, “I hope you are keeping well, monk, I hope you’re getting by? I hope you’re not tired from traveling? And where have you come from?” “I’m keeping well, sir, I’m getting by. I’m not tired from traveling.” He then told the Buddha all that had happened at Kīṭāgiri, adding, “That’s where I’ve come from, sir.” Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that the bad and shameless monks Assaji and Punabbasuka are staying at Kīṭāgiri and misbehaving in this way? And is it true that those people who previously had faith and confidence have now lost it, that there’s no longer any support for the Sangha, and that the good monks have left and the bad monks are staying on?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked them, “It’s not suitable … How can those foolish men misbehave in this way? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking them … he gave a teaching and addressed Sāriputta and Moggallāna: “Go to Kīṭāgiri and do a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka. They’re your students.” “Sir, how can we do a procedure of banishment against these monks? They’re temperamental and harsh.” “Well then, take many monks.” “Alright.” “And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka. They should then be reminded of what they’ve done, before they’re charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks, Assaji and Punabbasuka, are corrupters of families and badly behaved. Their bad behavior is seen and heard about, and the families corrupted by them are seen and heard about. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks, Assaji and Punabbasuka, are corrupters of families and badly behaved. Their bad behavior is seen and heard about, and the families corrupted by them are seen and heard about. The Sangha does a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. These monks, Assaji and Punabbasuka, are corrupters of families and badly behaved. Their bad behavior is seen and heard about, and the families corrupted by them are seen and heard about. The Sangha does a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of banishment has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of banishment has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of banishment has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures is finished. The group of fourteen on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of banishment against him: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: his bodily conduct is frivolous; his verbal conduct is frivolous; his bodily and verbal conduct are frivolous. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: he’s improperly behaved by body; he’s improperly behaved by speech; he’s improperly behaved by body and speech. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: his bodily conduct is harmful; his verbal conduct is harmful; his bodily and verbal conduct are harmful. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against him: he has wrong livelihood by body; he has wrong livelihood by speech; he has wrong livelihood by body and speech. “The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those who are frivolous in bodily conduct; those who are frivolous in verbal conduct; those who are frivolous in bodily and verbal conduct. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those who are improperly behaved by body; those who are improperly behaved by speech; those who are improperly behaved by body and speech. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those whose bodily conduct is harmful; those whose verbal conduct is harmful; those whose bodily and verbal conduct are harmful. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of banishment against three other kinds of monks: those who have wrong livelihood by body; those who have wrong livelihood by speech; those who have wrong livelihood by body and speech.” The group of fourteen on wishing is finished.

The eighteen kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of banishment done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The eighteen kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of banishment are finished.

Soon afterwards a sangha of monks, headed by Sāriputta and Moggallāna, went to Kīṭāgiri and did the legal procedure of banishment from Kīṭāgiri against the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka, prohibiting them from staying at Kīṭāgiri. Even so, they did not conduct themselves properly or suitably so as to deserve to be released, nor did they ask the monks for forgiveness. Instead they abused and reviled them, and they slandered them as acting from favoritism, ill will, confusion, and fear. And they left and they disrobed. The monks of few desires complained and criticized them, “How can these monks act like this when the Sangha has done a legal procedure of banishment against them?” They told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that the monks Assaji and Punabbasuka are acting like this?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked them … “It’s not suitable … How can those foolish men act like this? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking them … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, don’t lift that legal procedure of banishment.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of banishment against him shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of banishment against him shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of banishment against him shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted is finished. The group of eighteen on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of banishment against him should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of banishment against him should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of banishment against him; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of banishment against him should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on to be lifted is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. After approaching the Sangha, the monk who’s had a legal procedure of banishment done against him should arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of banishment against me. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of banishment to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of banishment to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of banishment to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of banishment to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of banishment against monk so-and-so. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The second section on the legal procedure of banishment is finished.

4. The legal procedure of reconciliation At one time Venerable Sudhamma was the staying at the householder Citta’s monastery at Macchikāsaṇḍa. He was in charge of the building work and received a regular supply of food. Whenever Citta wanted to invite the Sangha, a group of monks, or an individual monk, he would not do so without getting permission from Sudhamma. On one occasion a number of senior monks—Venerable Sāriputta, Venerable Mahāmoggallāna, Venerable Mahākaccāna, Venerable Mahākoṭṭhika, Venerable Mahākappina, Venerable Mahācunda, Venerable Anuruddha, Venerable Revata, Venerable Upāli, Venerable Ānanda, Venerable Rāhula—were wandering in Kāsi, when they arrived at Macchikāsaṇḍa. When Citta heard that they had arrived, he went to them, bowed, and sat down. After Sāriputta had instructed, inspired, and gladdened Citta with a teaching, Citta said, “Venerables, please accept a meal for newly-arrived monks from me tomorrow.” They accepted by remaining silent. When he knew that they had accepted, Citta got up from his seat, bowed down, circumambulated them with his right side toward them, and went to Sudhamma. He bowed to him and said, “Venerable, please accept tomorrow’s meal from me together with the senior monks.” Sudhamma thought, “Previously when Citta wanted to invite the Sangha, a group of monks, or an individual monk, he wouldn’t do so without getting my permission. But now he has. He’s been corrupted, this Citta. He’s uninterested and has no affection for me.” He said to Citta, “There’s no need. I won’t accept.” Citta asked him a second and a third time, but got the same reply. He thought, “What difference does it make to me whether Sudhamma accepts or not?” He then bowed, circumambulated Sudhamma with his right side toward him, and left. The following morning Citta prepared various kinds of fine foods for the senior monks. Sudhamma thought, “Why don’t I go and see what Citta has prepared for the senior monks?” He then robed up, took his bowl and robe, and went to Citta’s house where he sat down on the prepared seat. Citta approached Sudhamma, bowed, and sat down. And Sudhamma said to him, “You have prepared many kinds of food. But there’s one that’s missing: sesame cookies.” “When there are so many jewels in the word of the Buddha, sir, you speak of sesame cookies. In the past there were some traders from the south who went to an eastern country to trade. From there they brought back a hen. That hen mated with a crow and because of that she had a chick. When that chick wanted to caw like a crow, it cried, ‘caw-ca-doodle-doo.’ And when that chick wanted to crow like a rooster, it cried, ‘cock-a-doodle-caw.’ In the same way, when there are so many jewels in the word of the Buddha, you speak of sesame cookies.” “Householder, you’re abusing and insulting me. I will leave your monastery.” “I’m not abusing and insulting you. Please stay at Macchikāsaṇḍa. The mango grove is delightful. I’ll do my best to provide you with robe-cloth, almsfood, a dwelling, and medicinal supplies.” Sudhamma repeated what he had said a second time and Citta responded as before. When Sudhamma repeated it a third time, Citta said, “Where will you go?” “I’ll go to Sāvatthī to visit the Buddha.” “Well then, please tell the Buddha of our entire conversation. And I would not be surprised if you returned to Macchikāsaṇḍa.” Sudhamma put his dwelling in order, took his bowl and robe, and left for Sāvatthī. When he eventually arrived, he went to the Buddha in Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery. He bowed to the Buddha, sat down, and told him about the conversation he had had with Citta. The Buddha rebuked him, “It’s not suitable, foolish man, it’s not proper, it’s not worthy of a monastic, it’s not allowable, it’s not to be done. How can you demean and insult Citta, who has faith and confidence, who’s a donor, benefactor, and supporter of the Sangha? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, do a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. And it should be done like this. First you should accuse the monk Sudhamma. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Sudhamma has demeaned and insulted the householder Citta, who has faith and confidence, who’s a donor, benefactor, and supporter of the Sangha. If the Sangha is ready, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Sudhamma has demeaned and insulted the householder Citta, who has faith and confidence, who’s a donor, benefactor, and supporter of the Sangha. The Sangha does a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Sudhamma has demeaned and insulted the householder Citta, who has faith and confidence, who’s a donor, benefactor, and supporter of the Sangha. The Sangha does a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of reconciliation has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures of reconciliation is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of reconciliation has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of reconciliation has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures of reconciliation is finished.

The group of four on wishing “When a monk has five qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of reconciliation against him: he’s trying to stop householders from getting things; he’s trying to harm householders; he’s trying to get householders to lose their place of residence; he abuses and reviles householders; he causes division between householders. When a monk has another five qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of reconciliation against him: he disparages the Buddha to householders; he disparages the Teaching to householders; he disparages the Sangha to householders; he demeans and insults householders; he doesn’t fulfill legitimate promises to householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of reconciliation against five kinds of monks: those who are trying to stop householders from getting things; those who are trying to harm householders; those who are trying to get householders to lose their place of residence; those who abuse and revile householders; those who cause division between householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of reconciliation against another five kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha to householders; those who disparage the Teaching to householders; those who disparage the Sangha to householders; those who demean and insult householders; those who don’t fulfill legitimate promises to householders.” The group of four on wishing is finished.

The eighteen kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of reconciliation done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The eighteen kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of reconciliation are finished.

Soon afterwards the Sangha did a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma, instructing him to ask Citta for forgiveness. He went to Macchikāsaṇḍa, but feeling humiliated, he was unable to ask Citta for forgiveness. He returned to Sāvatthī. The monks asked him if he had asked Citta for forgiveness, and he told them what had happened. The monks told the Buddha. He had the monks gathered and said: “Well then, the Sangha should give a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask Citta for forgiveness. And this is how the messenger should be given. First you should ask a monk, and then a competent and capable monk should inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. If the Sangha is ready, it should give monk so-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask Citta for forgiveness. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha gives monk so-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask Citta for forgiveness. Any monk who approves of giving monk so-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask Citta for forgiveness should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has given monk so-and-so as a companion messenger to the monk Sudhamma to ask Citta for forgiveness. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’ Sudhamma should now go to Macchikāsaṇḍa with that monk as a companion messenger to ask Citta for forgiveness, saying, ‘Please forgive me, householder; I wish to reconcile with you.’ If he forgives, all is well. If not, the companion messenger should say, ‘Please forgive this monk, householder; he wishes to reconcile with you.’ If he forgives, all is well. If not, the companion messenger should say, ‘Please forgive this monk, householder; I wish to reconcile with you.’ If he forgives, all is well. If not, the companion messenger should say, ‘Please forgive this monk, householder; I ask in the name of the Sangha.’ If he forgives, all is well. If not, then within sight and hearing of Citta, the monk Sudhamma should arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and confess that offense.”

Soon afterwards Sudhamma went to Macchikāsaṇḍa with a monk as a companion messenger, and he asked Citta for forgiveness. And he conducted himself properly and suitably, and deserved to be released. He then went to the monks and told them about this, adding, “What should I do now?” The monks told the Buddha. He had the monks gathered and said, “Well then, lift that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of reconciliation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of reconciliation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of reconciliation against him shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on not to be lifted is finished. The group of eighteen on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of reconciliation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of reconciliation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of reconciliation against him; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of reconciliation against him should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of eighteen on to be lifted is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. The monk Sudhamma should approach the Sangha, arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of reconciliation against me. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of reconciliation to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of reconciliation to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of reconciliation to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of reconciliation to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of reconciliation against the monk Sudhamma. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The fourth section on the legal procedure of reconciliation is finished.

5. The legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense At one time the Buddha was staying at Kosambī in Ghosita’s Monastery. At that time Venerable Channa had committed an offense, but refused to recognize it. The monks of few desires complained and criticized him, “How can Venerable Channa commit an offense, but then refuse to recognize it?” They told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that Channa is acting like this?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked him, “It’s not suitable … How can Channa commit an offense, but then refuse to recognize it? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monk Channa. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to recognize it. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to recognize it. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to recognize it. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’ Monks, you should proclaim from monastery to monastery that the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha.”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished. The group of six on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha.” The group of six on wishing in regard to a procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished.

The forty-three kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood. He shouldn’t cause division between monks. He shouldn’t wear lay clothes. He shouldn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions. He shouldn’t associate with the monastics of other religions. He should associate with monks. He should train in the monks’ training. He shouldn’t, in a monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He shouldn’t, in a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He shouldn’t, in a monastery or a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He should get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk. He shouldn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The forty-three kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense are finished.

Soon afterwards the Sangha did a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. He then left that monastery and went to another one. The monks there did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and went to yet another one. There too the monks did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and went to yet another one. There too the monks did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and returned to Kosambī. He then conducted himself properly and suitably, and deserved to be released. He went to the monks and told them about this, adding, “What should I do now?” The monks told the Buddha. He had the monks gathered and said, “Well then, lift that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he consents to a regular monk bowing down to him; he consents to a regular monk standing up for him; he consents to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he consents to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him; he consents to a regular monk offering him a seat. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he consents to a regular monk offering him a bed; he consents to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he consents to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he consents to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he consents to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he charges a regular monk with failure in morality; he charges a regular monk with failure in conduct; he charges a regular monk with failure in view; he charges a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he causes division between monks. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he wears lay clothes; he wears the robes of the monastics of other religions; he associates with the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with monks; he doesn’t train in the monks’ training. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he stays in a monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he stays in a non-monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he stays in a monastery or a non-monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he dismisses a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished.

The group of forty-three on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he doesn’t cause division between monks. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t wear lay clothes; he doesn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with the monastics of other religions; he associates with monks; he trains in the monks’ training. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t, in a monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t, in a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t, in a monastery or a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he gets up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he doesn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not recognizing an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. The monk Channa should approach the Sangha, arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against me for not recognizing an offense. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not recognizing an offense. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The fifth section on the legal procedure of ejection for not recognizing an offense is finished.

6. The legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense At one time the Buddha was staying at Kosambī in Ghosita’s Monastery. At this time Venerable Channa had committed an offense, but refused to make amends for it. The monks of few desires complained and criticized him, “How can Venerable Channa commit an offense, but refuse to make amends for it?” They told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that Channa is acting like this?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked him, “It’s not suitable … How can Channa commit an offense, but refuse to make amends for it? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monk Channa. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to make amends for it. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to make amends for it. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. This monk Channa has committed an offense, but refuses to make amends for it. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’ Monks, you should proclaim from monastery to monastery that the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished. The group of six on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha.” The group of six on wishing in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished. The forty-three kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood. He shouldn’t cause division between monks. He shouldn’t wear lay clothes. He shouldn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions. He shouldn’t associate with the monastics of other religions. He should associate with monks. He should train in the monks’ training. He shouldn’t, in a monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He shouldn’t, in a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He shouldn’t, in a monastery or a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk. He should get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk. He shouldn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The forty-three kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense are finished. Soon afterwards the Sangha did a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. He then left that monastery and went to another one. The monks there did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and went to yet another one. There too the monks did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and went to yet another one. There too the monks did not bow down to him, stand up for him, raise their joined palms to him, or do acts of respect toward him. They did not honor, respect, or esteem him. Because of this, he left that monastery too and returned to Kosambī. He then conducted himself properly and suitably, and deserved to be released. He went to the monks and told them about this, adding, “What should I do now?” The monks told the Buddha. … “Well then, lift that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. … he consents to a regular monk bowing down to him; he consents to a regular monk standing up for him; he consents to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he consents to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him; he consents to a regular monk offering him a seat. … he consents to a regular monk offering him a bed; he consents to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he consents to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he consents to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he consents to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. … he charges a regular monk with failure in morality; he charges a regular monk with failure in conduct; he charges a regular monk with failure in view; he charges a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he causes division between monks. … he wears lay clothes; he wears the robes of the monastics of other religions; he associates with the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with monks; he doesn’t train in the monks’ training. … he stays in a monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he stays in a non-monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he stays in a monastery or a non-monastery in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he dismisses a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished. The group of forty-three on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. … he doesn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk doing acts of respect toward him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. … he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. … he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he doesn’t cause division between monks. … he doesn’t wear lay clothes; he doesn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with the monastics of other religions; he associates with monks; he trains in the monks’ training. … he doesn’t, in a monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t, in a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he doesn’t, in a monastery or a non-monastery, stay in the same room as a regular monk; he gets up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he doesn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not making amends for an offense should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished. “And this is how it should be lifted. The monk Channa should approach the Sangha, arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against me for not making amends for an offense. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of ejection against the monk Channa for not making amends for an offense. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The sixth section on the legal procedure of ejection for not making amends for an offense is finished.

7. The legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Monastery. At that time the monk Ariṭṭha, the ex-vulture-hunter, had the following bad and erroneous view: “As I understand the Teaching of the Buddha, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” A number of monks heard that Ariṭṭha had that view. They went to him and asked, “Is it true, Ariṭṭha, that you have such a view?” “Yes, indeed. As I understand the Buddha’s Teaching, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” “No, Ariṭṭha, don’t misrepresent the Buddha, for it’s not good to misrepresent him. The Buddha would never say such a thing. The Buddha has given many discourses about the obstacles being obstructive and how they obstruct one who indulges in them. The Buddha has said that the enjoyment provided by worldly pleasures is small, whereas the suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater. The Buddha has said that worldly pleasures are similar to a skeleton, similar to a piece of meat, similar to a grass torch, similar to a pit of coals, similar to a dream, similar to borrowed goods, similar to fruits on a tree, similar to a knife and chopping block, similar to swords and stakes, and similar to a snake’s head. The suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater.” But even though the monks corrected Ariṭṭha in this way, he stubbornly held on to that bad and erroneous view, and continued to insist on it. And since they were unable to make him give up that view, they went to the Buddha and told him what had happened. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned Ariṭṭha: “Is it true, Ariṭṭha, that you have a bad and erroneous view such as this: ‘As I understand the Buddha’s Teaching, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them’?” “Yes indeed, sir.” “Foolish man, who do you think I’ve taught like this? Haven’t I given many discourses about the obstacles being obstructive and how they obstruct one who indulges in them? I’ve said that the enjoyment provided by worldly pleasures is small, whereas the suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater. I’ve said that worldly pleasures are similar to a skeleton, similar to a piece of meat, similar to a grass torch, similar to a pit of coals, similar to a dream, similar to borrowed goods, similar to fruits on a tree, similar to a knife and chopping block, similar to swords and stakes, and similar to a snake’s head. The suffering and trouble with them are huge, and so their drawbacks are greater. And yet by misunderstanding, you have misrepresented me, hurt yourself, and made much demerit. This will be for your long-lasting harm and suffering. And this will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should do a legal procedure of ejection against Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. And this is how it should be done. First you should accuse the monk Ariṭṭha. He should then be reminded of what he has done, before he’s charged with an offense. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The monk Ariṭṭha, the ex-vulture-hunter, has the following bad and erroneous view: “As I understand the Teaching of the Buddha, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” He’s not giving up that view. If the Sangha is ready, it should do a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The monk Ariṭṭha, the ex-vulture-hunter, has the following bad and erroneous view: “As I understand the Teaching of the Buddha, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” He’s not giving up that view. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The monk Ariṭṭha, the ex-vulture-hunter, has the following bad and erroneous view: “As I understand the Teaching of the Buddha, the things he calls obstacles are not able to obstruct one who indulges in them.” He’s not giving up that view. The Sangha does a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. Any monk who approves of doing a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha, should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has done the legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’ Monks, you should proclaim from monastery to monastery that the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha.”

The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has three qualities, it’s illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done without the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done without having charged the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done in the absence of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without questioning the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without the admission of the accused, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t committed any offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that isn’t clearable by confession, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s confessed their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having accused the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having reminded the person of their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also illegitimate, contrary to the Monastic Law, and improperly disposed of: it’s done without having charged the person with their offense, it’s done illegitimately, it’s done by an incomplete assembly.” The group of twelve on illegitimate legal procedures of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished. The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures “When a legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has three qualities, it’s legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done with the admission of the accused. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done after charging the person with their offense. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done in the presence of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the questioning of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done with the admission of the accused, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who’s committed an offense that’s clearable by confession, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done against one who hasn’t confessed their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. “When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after accusing the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after reminding the person of their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly. When a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view has another three qualities, it’s also legitimate, in accordance with the Monastic Law, and properly disposed of: it’s done after charging the person with their offense, it’s done legitimately, it’s done by a unanimous assembly.” The group of twelve on legitimate legal procedures of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished. The group of six on wishing “When a monk has three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a legal procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view: he’s quarrelsome, argumentative, and a creator of legal issues in the Sangha; he’s ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; he’s constantly and improperly socializing with householders. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view: he has failed in the higher morality; he has failed in the higher conduct; he has failed in the higher view. When a monk has another three qualities, the Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view: he disparages the Buddha; he disparages the Teaching; he disparages the Sangha. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view against three kinds of monks: those who are quarrelsome, argumentative, and creators of legal issues in the Sangha; those who are ignorant and incompetent, often committing offenses, and lacking in boundaries; those who are constantly and improperly socializing with householders. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view against three other kinds of monks: those who’ve failed in the higher morality; those who’ve failed in the higher conduct; those who’ve failed in the higher view. The Sangha may, if it wishes, do a procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view against three other kinds of monks: those who disparage the Buddha; those who disparage the Teaching; those who disparage the Sangha.” The group of six on wishing in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished. The forty-three kinds of conduct “A monk who’s had a legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view done against him should conduct himself properly. This is the proper conduct: He shouldn’t give the full ordination. He shouldn’t give formal support. He shouldn’t have a novice monk attend on him. He shouldn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns. Even if appointed, he shouldn’t instruct the nuns. He shouldn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view. He shouldn’t commit an offense similar to the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view. He shouldn’t commit an offense worse than the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view. He shouldn’t criticize the procedure. He shouldn’t criticize those who did the procedure. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk doing appropriate duties for him. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot-stool. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot-scraper. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe. He shouldn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view. He shouldn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood. He shouldn’t cause division between monks. He shouldn’t wear lay clothes. He shouldn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions. He shouldn’t associate with the monastics of other religions. He should associate with monks. He should train in the monks’ training. He shouldn’t stay in the same room in a monastery as a regular monk. He shouldn’t stay in the same room in a non-monastery as a regular monk. He shouldn’t stay in the same room in a monastery or a non-monastery as a regular monk. He should get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk. He shouldn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. He shouldn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk. He shouldn’t direct a regular monk. He shouldn’t give instructions to a regular monk. He shouldn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him. He shouldn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t remind a regular monk of an offense. He shouldn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The forty-three kinds of conduct in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view are finished.

Soon afterwards the Sangha did a legal procedure of ejection against the monk Ariṭṭha for not giving up that bad view, prohibiting him from living with the Sangha. He then disrobed. The monks of few desires complained and criticized him, “How could the monk Ariṭṭha disrobe after the Sangha had done a legal procedure of ejection against him for not giving up that bad view?” The monks told the Buddha. Soon afterwards the Buddha had the Sangha gathered and questioned the monks: “Is it true, monks, that the monk Ariṭṭha disrobed after the Sangha had done a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up that bad view?” “It’s true, sir.” The Buddha rebuked him … “It’s not suitable … How could that foolish man disrobe after the Sangha had done a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up that bad view? This will affect people’s confidence …” After rebuking him … he gave a teaching and addressed the monks: “Well then, the Sangha should lift that legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view shouldn’t be lifted: he gives the full ordination; he gives formal support; he has a novice monk attend on him; he accepts being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he instructs the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view shouldn’t be lifted: he commits the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he commits an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he commits an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he criticizes the procedure; he criticizes those who did the procedure. … he consents to a regular monk bowing down to him; he consents to a regular monk standing up for him; he consents to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he consents to a regular monk doing appropriate duties for him; he consents to a regular monk offering him a seat. … he consents to a regular monk offering him a bed; he consents to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he consents to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he consents to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he consents to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. … he charges a regular monk with failure in morality; he charges a regular monk with failure in conduct; he charges a regular monk with failure in view; he charges a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he causes division between monks. … he wears lay clothes; he wears the robes of the monastics of other religions; he associates with the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with monks; he doesn’t train in the monks’ training. … he stays in the same room in a monastery as a regular monk; he stays in the same room in a non-monastery as a regular monk; he stays in the same room in a monastery or a non-monastery as a regular monk; he doesn’t get up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he dismisses a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view shouldn’t be lifted: he cancels the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he cancels the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he directs a regular monk; he gives instructions to a regular monk; he asks a regular monk for permission to correct him; he accuses a regular monk of an offense; he reminds a regular monk of an offense; he associates inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on not to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished. The group of forty-three on to be lifted “When a monk has five qualities, a legal procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view should be lifted: he doesn’t give the full ordination; he doesn’t give formal support; he doesn’t have a novice monk attend on him; he doesn’t accept being appointed as an instructor of the nuns; he doesn’t instruct the nuns, whether appointed or not. When a monk has another five qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view should be lifted: he doesn’t commit the same offense as the offense for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he doesn’t commit an offense similar to the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he doesn’t commit an offense worse than the one for which the Sangha did the procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view; he doesn’t criticize the procedure; he doesn’t criticize those who did the procedure. … he doesn’t consent to a regular monk bowing down to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk standing up for him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk raising his joined palms to him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk doing appropriate duties for him; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a seat. … he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a bed; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him water for washing his feet and a foot stool; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk offering him a foot scraper; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk receiving his bowl and robe; he doesn’t consent to a regular monk massaging his back when bathing. … he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in morality; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in conduct; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in view; he doesn’t charge a regular monk with failure in livelihood; he doesn’t cause division between monks. … he doesn’t wear lay clothes; he doesn’t wear the robes of the monastics of other religions; he doesn’t associate with the monastics of other religions; he associates with monks; he trains in the monks’ training. … he doesn’t stay in the same room in a monastery as a regular monk; he doesn’t stay in the same room in a non-monastery as a regular monk; he doesn’t stay in the same room in a monastery or a non-monastery as a regular monk; he gets up from his seat when he sees a regular monk; he doesn’t dismiss a regular monk, whether indoors or outdoors. When a monk has eight qualities, a procedure of ejection against him for not giving up a bad view should be lifted: he doesn’t cancel the observance-day ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t cancel the invitation ceremony of a regular monk; he doesn’t direct a regular monk; he doesn’t give instructions to a regular monk; he doesn’t ask a regular monk for permission to correct him; he doesn’t accuse a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t remind a regular monk of an offense; he doesn’t associate inappropriately with other monks.” The group of forty-three on to be lifted in regard to the legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished.

“And this is how it should be lifted. The monk who’s been ejected by the Sangha for not giving up a bad view should approach the Sangha, arrange his upper robe over one shoulder, pay respect at the feet of the senior monks, squat on his heels, raise his joined palms, and say, ‘Venerables, the Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against me for not giving up a bad view. I’m now conducting myself properly and suitably, and deserve to be released. I ask for that legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view to be lifted.’ And he should ask a second and a third time. A competent and capable monk should then inform the Sangha: ‘Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view to be lifted. If the Sangha is ready, it should lift that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. This is the motion. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. For the second time, I speak on this matter. … For the third time, I speak on this matter. Please, venerables, I ask the Sangha to listen. The Sangha has done a legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. He’s now conducting himself properly and suitably, and deserves to be released. He’s asking for that legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view to be lifted. The Sangha lifts that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. Any monk who approves of lifting that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view should remain silent. Any monk who doesn’t approve should speak up. The Sangha has lifted that legal procedure of ejection against monk so-and-so for not giving up a bad view. The Sangha approves and is therefore silent. I will remember it thus.’” The seventh section on the legal procedure of ejection for not giving up a bad view is finished. The first chapter on penalty procedures is finished. In this chapter there are seven topics. This is the summary: “The monks Paṇḍu and Lohitaka, Themselves quarrelsome; They went to those of the same kind, And encouraged quarrels. They gave rise to new ones, And worsened the existing ones; The good monks of few desires, Criticized. The One who Shows, The Buddha, standing in the True Dhamma, Independent, the Supreme Person; The Victor: at Sāvatthī he ordered The procedure of condemnation. In the absence, without questioning, Without admission, and done against One without offense, not clearable by confession, Done against one who has confessed. Not having accused, not having reminded, And done without having charged; In the absence, with illegitimate, And also done with an incomplete assembly. Without questioning, with illegitimate, Again done with an incomplete assembly. Without admission, with illegitimate, And also done with an incomplete assembly. One without offense, with illegitimate, And also done with an incomplete assembly. Not clearable by confession, And illegitimately, with an incomplete assembly. Against one who has confessed, with illegitimate, And so also with incomplete assembly; Not having accused, with illegitimate, And so also with incomplete assembly; Not having reminded, with illegitimate, And so also with incomplete assembly; Not having charged, with illegitimate, And so also with incomplete assembly. Just as the method of the dark section, One should understand the bright section; And the Sangha wishing, Might do condemnation against one: Quarrelsome, ignorant, socializing, In the higher morality, in the higher conduct; For those failed in the higher view, The Sangha might do condemnation. And the Buddha, the Teaching, the Sangha, Whoever dispraises them; And against three kinds of monks, The Sangha might carry out condemnation: The quarrelsome, The ignorant, the one attached to socializing; In the higher morality, in the higher conduct; Just so about the higher view. And the Buddha, the Teaching, the Sangha, Whoever dispraises them; Who has had a legal procedure of condemnation done against him, Should conduct himself properly thus: Full ordination, formal support, A novice monk attending on; Instruction, even if appointed, He should not do. Against the one condemnation was done, He should not commit that offense, Or one similar, or one beyond; And the procedure, and also the doers, He should not criticize those. The observance, the invitation, He should not cancel for a regular monk; Directing, instructing, Permission, and with accusing. Reminding, and associating, He should not do such things; Full ordination, formal support, A novice monk attending on. Instruction, even if appointed, With five factors, it should not lift; And should not commit that offense, Or one similar, or one beyond. And the procedure, and also the doers, Criticizing, it should not lift; The observance, the invitation, And directing, instructing. Permission, and accusing, Reminding, associating; Whoever is engaged in these eight factors, The condemnation should not be lifted. Just as with the method of the dark section, One should understand the bright section; Ignorant, with many offenses, And socializing, Seyyaso. The procedure of demotion was ordered, By the Fully Awakened One, the Great Sage; Two monks at Kīṭāgiri, Assaji and Punabbasuka. And many kinds of misconduct, They did without restraint; To be banished, the Fully Awakened One, Procedure, at Sāvatthī, the Victor; Sudhamma at Macchikāsaṇḍa, Was staying with Citta. He abused as low status, Sudhamma, the lay follower Citta; The procedure of reconciliation, The Buddha ordered. The monk Channa at Kosambī, Did not wish to see his offense; To eject for not recognizing, The Supreme Victor ordered. Channa that same offense, Did not wish to make amends; Ejection for not making amends, The Leader ordered. The bad view of Ariṭṭha, Was attached to because of ignorance; For not giving up a bad view, Ejection was spoken of by the Victor. The procedure of demotion, banishment, Just so reconciliation; Not recognizing, not making amends, And not giving up a view. Frivolous, misconduct, he hurts, And just wrong livelihood; For the procedure of banishment, There are these extra lines. Stopping gain, disparaging, two, five, They are called two sets of five; For the procedure of reconciliation, There are these extra lines. Condemnation, and demotion, Are two procedures of the same kind; Banishment, and reconciled, There are extra lines. Three procedures of ejection, Are analyzed in the same way; As with the method of condemnation, One should understand the rest of the procedures.” The chapter on penalty procedures is finished.