SUTTA 104

[^976]: The opening of this sutta is the same as that of DN 29, which is also concerned with preserving harmony in the Sangha after the Buddha's demise.

[^977]: MA: The "shrine" and "refuge" are the Niganṭha Nātaputta, who is now dead.

[^978]: The novice Cunda was the younger brother of Ven. Sāriputta.

[^979]: Even while the Buddha was still alive such a dispute had already broken out among the bhikkhus at Kosambī, referred to at MN 48.2.

[^980]: This would be a dispute about the Noble Eightfold Path or the other requisites of enlightenment.

[^981]: The first four pairs are included among the "imperfections that defile the mind" at MN 7.3.

[^982]: Adhikarana. Horner translates "legal questions." They are dealt with at length at Vin Cv Kh 4/Vin ii.88-93; see Horner, Book of the Discipline, 5:117-25. Briefly, litigation because of a dispute (vivādādhikarana) arises when bhikkhus dispute about the Dhamma and the Discipline; litigation because of an accusation (anuvädadhikarana) when bhikkhus accuse a bhikkhu of committing a transgression of the monastic rules; litigation because of an offence (apattādhikarana) when a bhikkhu who has committed a transgression seeks to exonerate himself from it; and litigation concerning procedures (kiccadhikarana) deals with the enactment of the formal functions of the Sangha.

[^983]: Adhikaranasamatha. They are dealt with in detail in Vin Cv Kh 4. How the seven means of settlement are to be applied for the resolution of the four kinds of litigation is discussed at Vin ii.93-104; see Horner, Book of the Discipline, 5:125-40.

[^984]: Sammukhävinaya. Horner translates "verdict in the presence of." At Vin ii.93, this is explained as confrontation with (or presence of) the Sangha, the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the individuals who are parties to the dispute. This kind of settlement applies to all four kinds of litigation, with minor differences in formulation.

[^985]: Dhammanetti samanumajjitabbā. MA gives as an example of dhammanetti the ten courses of wholesome and unwholesome conduct, but says that here the Dhamma and Discipline themselves are meant.

[^986]: Sativinaya. Horner renders "verdict of innocence". At Vin ii.80, it is said that this is given when a bhikkhu is pure and without offences and he is reproached with an offence; he must ask the Sangha to give him such a verdict by appeal to his full and accurate recollection of his behaviour.

[^987]: An offence involving defeat, a pärājika offence, requires expulsion from the Sangha. An offence bordering on defeat is either a sanghädisesa offence, which requires a formal meeting of the Sangha and a period of temporary penalisation, or the preliminary steps leading to a pārā̄ika offence.

[^988]: Amülhavinaya. A verdict of past insanity is given when a bhikkhu commits offences during a period of madness. The criterion for determining insanity is that he must have no recollection of his behaviour during the period for which the verdict is requested.

[^989]: The procedure described is the established method by which a bhikkhu obtains exoneration for his transgression when he has fallen into any offence that can be cleared by confession.

[^990]: Pāpiyyāsikā. Horner renders "decision for specific depravity." This verdict is pronounced against a bhikkhu who is a maker of strife and quarrels in the Sangha, who is igno- rant and full of offences, or who lives in unbecoming association with householders.

[^991]: Tinavatthāraka. This means of settlement is resorted to when the Sangha has been involved in a dispute in the course of which the bhikkhus committed many minor offences. Since to pursue charges for these offences might prolong the conflict, the offences are cleared by the means described in the sutta. MA explains that this method is like throwing grass over excrement to remove the bad smell, hence the name "covering over with grass."

[^992]: Offences calling for serious censure are those of the $p \bar{a} r a \bar{j} j i k a$ and sanghādisesa classes. Those connected with the laity are cases where a bhikkhu reviles and disparages householders.

[^993]: As at MN 48.6.

[^994]: At MN 21.21, this is said with reference to the simile of the saw.