The chapter on penalty procedures (PLI-TV-KD11)

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 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.¹³

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.”¹⁴

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.”¹⁵

“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.