What Is Virtue?

Thus, although this Path of Purification has been taught by way of virtue, concentration, and understanding — a division that gathers in many good qualities — it has still been taught only in the barest outline. Therefore, thinking, "this will not suffice to help everyone," in order to show its elaboration, this question-and-answer treatment now begins, taking up virtue first.

What is virtue? In what sense is it virtue? What are its characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause? What are the benefits of virtue? How many kinds does this virtue have? What is its defilement? And what is its cleansing?

Here now is the answer. As to "what is virtue" — it is the states beginning with volition, in one who abstains from killing living beings and so on, or who fulfills the observance of duties. For this was said in the Paṭisambhidā: "What is virtue? Volition is virtue, the mental factor is virtue, restraint is virtue, non-transgression is virtue" (Paṭis I.39).

Herein, "volition is virtue" means the volition in one who abstains from killing living beings and so on, or who fulfills the observance of duties. "The mental factor is virtue" means the abstinence in one who abstains from killing living beings and so on. And further, "volition is virtue" also means the seven volitions of the courses of action, in one who abandons killing living beings and the rest. "The mental factor is virtue" also means the states of non-covetousness, non-ill-will, and right view, spoken of by the method beginning, "having abandoned covetousness, he dwells with a mind free from covetousness" (DN I.217).

As to "restraint is virtue" — here, restraint should be understood as fivefold: restraint by the Pātimokkha, restraint by mindfulness, restraint by knowledge, restraint by patience, and restraint by energy. Herein, "he is possessed, fully possessed, of this restraint by the Pātimokkha" (Vibh. 511) — this is restraint by the Pātimokkha. "He guards the eye faculty; he enters upon restraint of the eye faculty" (DN I.213) — this is restraint by mindfulness.

"Whatever streams there are in the world" — Ajita, said the Blessed One — "mindfulness is their restraining; the restraint of the streams I declare; by understanding these are obstructed." (Sn 1041)

This is restraint by knowledge. The proper use of the requisites is included here as well. And this — one who is patient, who has come by the method beginning, "enduring cold, enduring heat..." (MN I.24; AN 6.58) — this is called restraint by patience. And this — one who does not tolerate an arisen sensual thought, who has come by the same method (MN I.26; AN 6.58) — this is called restraint by energy. Purity of livelihood is included here as well.

Thus this fivefold restraint, together with whatever abstinence there is — on the part of clansmen who fear wrongdoing — from an occasion for transgression that has presented itself: all this should be understood as restraint-virtue. As to "non-transgression is virtue" — it is the bodily and verbal non-transgression on the part of one who has undertaken the precepts of virtue. This, for now, is the answer to the question "what is virtue."

As to "in what sense is it virtue" — among the remaining questions — it is virtue in the sense of "composing" (sīlana). What, then, is this "composing"? Either it is a coordinating, meaning the non-scatteredness of bodily action and the rest, by way of their being well-disciplined; or it is a supporting, meaning the state of being a foundation, by way of grounding wholesome states. This twofold meaning alone is what those skilled in grammar accept here. Others, however, explain the meaning by yet other methods — such as, the meaning of sīla is "head" (foremost), or the meaning of sīla is "coolness."

Now, as to "what are its characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause" —

Composing is its characteristic, even though divided in many ways — just as visibility is the characteristic of visible form, though that too is divided in many ways.

For just as visibility is the characteristic of the visible-form base, even though that base is divided in many ways by the distinction of blue, yellow, and the rest — because, however divided, it never goes beyond the state of being visible — so too with virtue: even though divided in many ways by the distinction of volition and the rest, that very "composing," spoken of as the coordinating of bodily action and the rest and as the grounding of wholesome states, is its characteristic — because, however divided, it never goes beyond the state of coordinating and grounding. Its characteristic having been explained thus —

The destruction of bad conduct, and likewise its flawless quality, in the sense of function and of achievement — this is called its function.

Therefore this virtue should be understood: in the sense of function, its function is the destruction of bad conduct; in the sense of achievement, its function is flawlessness. For among characteristic and the rest, it is precisely the function, or the achievement, that is called the "function."

Purity is declared by the wise to be its manifestation; and shame and moral dread are said to be its proximate cause.

This virtue has as its manifestation the purity spoken of thus: "bodily purity, verbal purity, mental purity" (AN 3.121) — it comes to be apprehended in the state of purity, as its manifestation. And shame and moral dread are declared by the wise to be its proximate cause, meaning its immediate cause. For when shame and moral dread are present, virtue arises and endures; when they are absent, it neither arises nor endures. Thus should the characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause of virtue be understood.

As to "what are the benefits of virtue" — its benefit is the attainment of many good qualities, beginning with freedom from remorse. For this was said: "Wholesome virtues, Ānanda, have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their benefit" (AN 11.1).

It was also further said: "Householders, there are these five benefits for one who is virtuous, through the accomplishment of virtue. What five? Here, householders, one who is virtuous, accomplished in virtue, gains a great mass of wealth through diligence — this is the first benefit for one who is virtuous, through the accomplishment of virtue. Further, a good reputation spreads about one who is virtuous, accomplished in virtue — this is the second benefit. Further, one who is virtuous, accomplished in virtue, approaches any assembly whatsoever — whether of nobles, of brahmins, of householders, or of ascetics — confidently and without embarrassment — this is the third benefit. Further, one who is virtuous, accomplished in virtue, dies unconfused — this is the fourth benefit. Further, one who is virtuous, accomplished in virtue, on the breakup of the body, after death, is reborn in a good destination, in a heavenly world — this is the fifth benefit for one who is virtuous, through the accomplishment of virtue" (DN II.150; AN 5.213; Mahāvagga 285).

By the method beginning, "If, monks, a monk should wish: 'May I be dear and pleasing to my companions in the holy life, respected and esteemed by them' — let him then be one who fulfills the precepts of virtue" (MN I.65), many more benefits of virtue are stated — being dear and pleasing, and so on, culminating in the destruction of the taints. Thus virtue has as its benefit the attainment of many good qualities, beginning with freedom from remorse. Moreover —

Without it there is no foundation at all for clansmen in this Dispensation — who, then, could declare the full extent of that virtue's benefits?

Not the Ganges, nor the Yamunā, not the Sarabhū, nor the Sarasvatī, not the river Aciravatī, nor the Mahī, nor any great river, can cleanse that stain here in living beings — it is the water of virtue alone that truly cleanses beings of that stain.

Not those moisture-laden breezes, nor sandalwood, nor garlands, nor gems, nor the young rays of the moon, can allay here the deep-seated fever of beings — it is this noble virtue, utterly cool, that allays it.

Where indeed could there be a fragrance to equal the fragrance of virtue — which blows equally with the wind, and against it?

Where else is there another staircase for the ascent to heaven equal to virtue — or a gateway for entering the city of nibbāna?

Kings adorned with pearls and gems do not shine as the self-controlled shine, adorned with the ornament of virtue.

Virtue always destroys entirely the fear that begins with self-reproach, for the virtuous, and always gives rise to renown and joy.

Thus should be known this introductory account of the benefits of virtue — the root of all good qualities, and the destroyer of the very strength of faults.

Now, as to what was said — "and how many kinds does this virtue have" — here is the answer. First of all, this virtue in its entirety is onefold by way of its own characteristic of "composing."

It is twofold by way of performance and avoidance; likewise by way of good-conduct virtue and fundamentals-of-the-holy-life virtue, by way of abstinence and non-abstinence, by way of dependent and independent, by way of time-limited and life-long, by way of limited and unlimited, and by way of mundane and supramundane.

It is threefold by way of inferior, medium, and superior; likewise by way of self-dominated, world-dominated, and Dhamma-dominated; by way of misapprehended, unmisapprehended, and tranquilized; by way of purified, unpurified, and doubtful; and by way of the trainee's, the adept's, and neither-trainee's-nor-adept's.

It is fourfold by way of that which partakes of decline, that which partakes of stability, that which partakes of distinction, and that which partakes of penetration; likewise by way of the virtue of monks, of nuns, of the not-fully-ordained, and of householders; by way of virtue that is natural, customary, a matter of one's nature, or caused by a prior condition; and by way of restraint by the Pātimokkha, restraint of the faculties, purification of livelihood, and virtue connected with the requisites.

It is fivefold by way of limited-purification virtue and the rest. For this was said in the Paṭisambhidā: "There are five virtues: limited-purification virtue, unlimited-purification virtue, fulfilled-purification virtue, unmisapprehended-purification virtue, tranquilized-purification virtue" (Paṭis I.37). Likewise by way of abandoning, abstinence, volition, restraint, and non-transgression.

Herein, in the case of the onefold division, the meaning should be understood by the method already stated. In the case of the twofold division: whatever fulfillment of a training precept laid down by the Blessed One as "this should be done" — that is performance. Whatever non-doing of what has been prohibited as "this should not be done" — that is avoidance. Here is the verbal meaning of these terms: "performance" is so called because through it people conduct themselves, proceeding by way of fulfilling the training precepts; "avoidance" is so called because by means of it people protect and guard what has been forbidden. Performance is accomplished by both faith and energy; avoidance is accomplished by faith alone. Thus it is twofold by way of performance and avoidance.

In the second pair: "good conduct" means the highest proper conduct. Good conduct itself, as an adjective, is "pertaining to good conduct"; or, what is laid down with reference to good conduct is "pertaining to good conduct" — a designation for the remaining virtue apart from the eightfold livelihood-precept set. "Being the starting point of the path that constitutes the holy life" is "fundamentals of the holy life" — a designation for the eightfold livelihood-precept virtue itself, since that virtue is the starting point of the path and must be purified at the very outset. Hence it is said: "for his bodily action, verbal action, and livelihood are already, beforehand, thoroughly purified" (MN III.431). Or again: whatever training precepts are called "minor and lesser-minor" is good-conduct virtue; the remainder is fundamentals-of-the-holy-life virtue. Or: what is included in the twofold monastic-code analysis is fundamentals-of-the-holy-life virtue, while what is included in the Khandhaka observances is good-conduct virtue — and through the accomplishment of the latter, the former succeeds. Hence it is said: "monks, that a monk should fulfill the fundamentals-of-the-holy-life state without having fulfilled the good-conduct state — this is not possible" (AN 5.21). Thus it is twofold by way of good-conduct virtue and fundamentals-of-the-holy-life virtue.

In the third pair: mere abstinence from killing living beings and the rest is abstinence-virtue. The remainder — volition and so on — is non-abstinence-virtue. Thus it is twofold by way of abstinence and non-abstinence.

In the fourth pair: "dependence" means there are two dependences — dependence on craving and dependence on views. Whatever is engaged in by one wishing for a favorable rebirth, thinking, "by this virtue may I become a god, or one among the gods" (DN III.320; MN I.186; AN 5.206, 7.50) — this is dependent on craving. Whatever is engaged in through the view that "purity comes by virtue alone" — this is dependent on views. But whatever is supramundane, together with the mundane virtue that serves as its requisite, is independent. Thus it is twofold by way of dependent and independent.

In the fifth pair: virtue undertaken after fixing a determination of time is time-limited. That undertaken and thereafter maintained for life is life-long. Thus it is twofold by way of time-limited and life-long.

In the sixth pair: virtue whose limit is determined by gain, fame, relatives, limb, or life is called "limited"; the opposite is "unlimited." And this was said in the Paṭisambhidā: "What is that virtue which is limited? There is virtue limited by gain, virtue limited by fame, virtue limited by relatives, virtue limited by limb, virtue limited by life. What is that virtue limited by gain? Here someone, for the sake of gain, because of gain, for the reason of gain, transgresses a training precept as undertaken — this is that virtue limited by gain" (Paṭis I.38). By this same method the others should be elaborated. And in the answer concerning the unlimited, too, it was said: "What is that virtue not limited by gain? Here someone, for the sake of gain, because of gain, for the reason of gain, does not even give rise to a thought of transgressing a training precept as undertaken — how much less would he transgress it! This is that virtue not limited by gain" (Paṭis I.38). By this same method the others should be elaborated. Thus it is twofold by way of limited and unlimited.

In the seventh pair: all virtue that is subject to the taints is mundane; that free of the taints is supramundane. Herein, the mundane brings about distinction of existence, and also serves as a requisite for escape from existence. As it is said: "The discipline is for the purpose of restraint; restraint is for the purpose of freedom from remorse; freedom from remorse is for the purpose of gladness; gladness is for the purpose of joy; joy is for the purpose of tranquility; tranquility is for the purpose of pleasure; pleasure is for the purpose of concentration; concentration is for the purpose of the knowledge and vision of things as they really are; the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is for the purpose of disenchantment; disenchantment is for the purpose of dispassion; dispassion is for the purpose of liberation; liberation is for the purpose of the knowledge and vision of liberation; the knowledge and vision of liberation is for the purpose of final nibbāna through non-clinging. For this purpose is the talk, for this purpose is the counsel, for this purpose is the support, for this purpose is the lending of ear — namely, the liberation of the mind through non-clinging" (Paṭis II.366). The supramundane brings about escape from existence, and is also the ground for reviewing knowledge. Thus it is twofold by way of mundane and supramundane.

Among the triads: in the first triad, virtue brought about by inferior desire, mind, energy, or investigation is inferior; that brought about by medium desire and the rest is medium; by superior, superior. Or: virtue undertaken out of desire for fame is inferior; out of desire for the fruit of merit, medium; undertaken thinking simply "this is to be done," in dependence on the noble state, is superior. Or: virtue tainted by such self-exaltation and disparagement of others, thinking, "I am accomplished in virtue, but these other monks are of bad conduct, of evil nature," is inferior; untainted, mundane virtue is medium; supramundane virtue is superior. Or: virtue engaged in, by the power of craving, for the sake of future existence and enjoyment, is inferior; that engaged in for the sake of one's own liberation is medium; that engaged in for the sake of the liberation of all beings — the virtue of the perfections — is superior. Thus it is threefold by way of inferior, medium, and superior.

In the second triad: virtue engaged in by one who wishes to abandon what is unbecoming to himself, treating himself as authority, out of regard for himself, is self-dominated. That engaged in by one who wishes to avoid the world's censure, treating the world as authority, out of regard for the world, is world-dominated. That engaged in by one who wishes to honor the greatness of the Dhamma, treating the Dhamma as authority, out of regard for the Dhamma, is Dhamma-dominated. Thus it is threefold by way of self-dominated, world-dominated, and Dhamma-dominated.

In the third triad: that which was called "dependent" among the pairs above — being misapprehended through craving and views — is misapprehended. That which is a requisite of the path for the virtuous ordinary person, and that associated with the path for trainees, is unmisapprehended. That associated with the fruit, for both trainees and adepts, is tranquilized. Thus it is threefold by way of misapprehended, unmisapprehended, and tranquilized.

In the fourth triad: that fulfilled by one who commits no offense, or, having committed one, has since made amends — that is purified. That of one who has committed an offense and made no amends is unpurified. The virtue of one who is in doubt about the grounds, the offense, or the transgression is called doubtful virtue. Herein, the meditator should purify unpurified virtue; and, without indulging the ground of doubt, should dispel the doubt in what is doubtful, thinking, "thus it will be comfortable for me." Thus it is threefold by way of purified, unpurified, and doubtful.

In the fifth triad: virtue associated with the four noble paths and the first three fruits of the ascetic life is the trainee's virtue. That associated with the fruit of Arahantship is the adept's virtue. The rest is neither the trainee's nor the adept's. Thus it is threefold by way of the trainee's, the adept's, and neither.

But in the Paṭisambhidā, since even the ordinary nature of various beings in the world is loosely called "sīla" — as when people say, "this one is of a happy nature, this one of a suffering nature, this one of a quarrelsome nature, this one of a vain nature" — it is therefore said, in that sense: "There are three virtues: wholesome virtue, unwholesome virtue, and indeterminate virtue" (Paṭis I.39). Thus it is also said to be threefold by way of wholesome and the rest. But here, the unwholesome does not accord with even one of the characteristics and so on of the virtue meant in this technical sense, so it is not brought in here — its threefold nature, therefore, should be understood only by the method already given.

Among the tetrads, in the first tetrad —

Whoever here associates with those of bad virtue, and does not associate with the virtuous — such an unwise person does not see the fault in transgressing a ground of training.

One who is full of wrong intention and does not guard the faculties — the virtue of one such as this arises as partaking of decline.

But whoever is content, here, with mere accomplishment in virtue, and does not arouse further resolve toward devotion to a meditation subject —

for that monk, satisfied with virtue alone and not striving further, his virtue becomes one that partakes of stability.

But whoever, accomplished in virtue, strives for the sake of concentration — for this monk, his virtue is one that partakes of distinction.

Not content with virtue alone, but devoting himself to disenchantment — for this monk, his virtue becomes one that partakes of penetration.

Thus it is fourfold by way of that which partakes of decline and the rest.

In the second tetrad: the training precepts laid down with reference to monks, together with those precepts of monks that nuns too must observe by their own promulgation — this is monks' virtue. The training precepts laid down with reference to nuns, together with those precepts of nuns that monks too must observe by their own promulgation — this is nuns' virtue. The ten precepts of novice monks and novice nuns are the virtue of the not-fully-ordained. For male and female lay disciples: the five training precepts as their constant virtue, or, when zeal permits, ten, or, by way of the Uposatha factors, eight — this is householders' virtue. Thus it is fourfold by way of monks' virtue and the rest.

In the third tetrad: the non-transgression natural to the people of Uttarakuru is natural virtue. The customary conduct proper to each family, region, or sect is customary virtue. The virtue of the Bodhisatta's mother, spoken of thus — "It is a natural law, Ānanda, that when the Bodhisatta has descended into his mother's womb, no thought accompanied by sensual desire arises in the Bodhisatta's mother toward men" — is virtue-by-natural-law. But the virtue of Mahākassapa and other beings of pure nature, and the Bodhisatta's own virtue in his various births, is virtue caused by a prior condition. Thus it is fourfold by way of natural virtue, customary virtue, virtue-by-natural-law, and virtue caused by a prior condition.

In the fourth tetrad: the virtue spoken of by the Blessed One thus — "here a monk dwells restrained by the restraint of the Pātimokkha, possessed of good conduct and resort, seeing danger in the slightest faults, he trains, having undertaken the training precepts" (Vibh. 508; DN I.193) — this is called virtue as restraint by the Pātimokkha. And the virtue spoken of thus — "having seen a form with the eye, he does not grasp at its sign nor at its details, since, if he were to dwell with the eye faculty unrestrained, evil unwholesome states of covetousness and grief might overwhelm him, he practices for its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, he enters upon restraint of the eye faculty. Having heard a sound with the ear... having smelled an odor with the nose... having tasted a flavor with the tongue... having felt a tangible with the body... having cognized a mental object with the mind, he does not grasp at its sign... he enters upon restraint of the mind faculty" (MN I.22, 411; DN I.213; AN 4.198) — this is virtue as restraint of the faculties. And whatever abstinence there is from transgressing the six training precepts laid down for the sake of livelihood, together with the abstinence from wrong livelihood that proceeds through such evil states as trickery, talking for gain, hinting, belittling others for gain, and pursuing gain with gain — this is virtue as purification of livelihood. The use of the four requisites, purified by reflection, spoken of by the method beginning, "reflecting wisely, he makes use of the robe only for the sake of warding off cold" (MN I.23; AN 6.58) — this is called virtue connected with the requisites.

Herein, starting from the beginning, is a discussion determining the meaning, together with a word-by-word commentary. "Here" means: in this dispensation. "Monk" means: a clansman gone forth out of faith, who has acquired this designation either because he sees danger in saṃsāra, or because he wears cast-off cloth and the like. As to "restrained by the restraint of the Pātimokkha" — here, "Pātimokkha" means the virtue of the training precepts. For it releases and frees whoever guards and protects it from the sufferings of the states of loss and the rest — therefore it is called the "Pātimokkha." "Restraining" is restraint — a name for bodily and verbal non-transgression. The Pātimokkha itself, as a restraint, is "restraint by the Pātimokkha." Restrained by that restraint is "restrained by the restraint of the Pātimokkha" — meaning: arrived at, endowed with it. "Dwells" means: conducts himself. The meaning of "possessed of good conduct and resort" and the rest should be understood by the very method that has come down in the canonical text itself. For this was said —

"Possessed of good conduct and resort": there is good conduct, and there is bad conduct.

Herein, what is bad conduct? Bodily transgression, verbal transgression, bodily-and-verbal transgression — this is called bad conduct. All bad moral conduct, too, is bad conduct. Here, someone makes his living by giving away bamboo, or leaves, or flowers, fruit, bath-powder, or tooth-wood, or by flattery, or by ingratiating talk, or by fawning service, or by running errands, or by any other kind of wrong livelihood condemned by the Buddha — this is called bad conduct.

Herein, what is good conduct? Bodily non-transgression, verbal non-transgression, bodily-and-verbal non-transgression — this is called good conduct. All restraint by virtue, too, is good conduct. Here, someone does not make his living by any of those means, nor by any other kind of wrong livelihood condemned by the Buddha — this is called good conduct.

"Resort": there is proper resort, and there is improper resort.

Herein, what is improper resort? Here, someone frequents prostitutes, or widows, mature unmarried women, eunuchs, or nuns improperly, or frequents taverns, or lives in improper association with kings, royal ministers, sectarian teachers, or their disciples; or he associates with, frequents, and attends upon families that lack faith and confidence, that are no source of support, that are abusive and reviling, and that wish no good, no benefit, no comfort, and no security to monks, nuns, laymen, or laywomen — this is called improper resort.

Herein, what is proper resort? Here, someone does not frequent prostitutes ... nor taverns, nor lives in improper association with kings ... or sectarians' disciples; but he associates with, frequents, and attends upon families that have faith and confidence, that are a source of support, that shine with the ochre robe, that are swept by the breeze of sages coming and going, and that wish good ... and security to monks ... and laywomen — this is called proper resort. Thus, possessed, fully possessed, arrived at, fully arrived at, endowed, accomplished, and equipped with this good conduct and this resort — hence he is called "possessed of good conduct and resort" (Vibh. 511).

And here, good conduct and resort should also be understood by this further method. For bad conduct is twofold: bodily and verbal. Herein, what is bodily bad conduct? Here, someone, even when he has gone to the assembly hall, without any regard for the elder monks, jostles them while standing, jostles them while sitting, stands in front of them, sits in front of them, sits on a high seat, sits with his head covered, speaks while standing, speaks while waving his arms about; when the elder monks are walking for exercise without sandals, he walks wearing sandals; when they walk on a low walkway, he walks on a high one; when they walk on the bare ground, he walks on the walkway; he stands or sits crowding the elder monks; he keeps newly-ordained monks from a seat; in the steam-room, without asking the elder monks' permission, he feeds the fire and shuts the door; at the bathing-place, he jostles the elder monks or goes down ahead of them, jostles them or bathes ahead of them, jostles them or comes up ahead of them; entering an inner house, he jostles the elder monks or goes ahead of them, or, cutting out of line, walks again and again right in front of them; he even barges suddenly into a household's inner chambers, hidden and curtained off, where the women and daughters of the family sit; he even pats a little boy's head. This is called bodily bad conduct.

Herein, what is verbal bad conduct? Here, someone, even when gone to the assembly, without regard for the elder monks, teaches the Dhamma without being asked, answers a question without being asked, recites the Pātimokkha without authorization, speaks while standing, speaks while waving his arms about; or, entering an inner house, babbles to a woman or a girl: "So-and-so, of such-and-such family — what is there? Is there rice gruel? Is there boiled rice? Is there something to eat? What shall we drink, what shall we eat, what shall we partake of? Or what will you give me?" This is called verbal bad conduct (Mahāniddesa 87). Its opposite should be understood as good conduct.

Moreover, a monk who is respectful, deferential, possessed of shame and moral dread, well dressed and well robed, pleasing in his manner of going forward and returning, of looking ahead and aside, of bending and stretching his limbs, with downcast eyes, possessed of proper deportment, with the doors of his sense faculties guarded, moderate in eating, devoted to wakefulness, endowed with mindfulness and clear comprehension, wanting little, content, with energy aroused, careful in matters of good conduct, and mostly reverential in attitude — this too is called good conduct. Thus, first of all, good conduct should be understood.

Resort, however, is threefold: resort as supporting condition, resort as safeguard, and resort as anchor. Herein, what is resort as supporting condition? A good friend endowed with the qualities of the ten grounds for proper talk, in dependence on whom one hears what one has not yet heard, clarifies what one has heard, gets beyond doubt, straightens one's view, and gains confidence of mind; or in emulation of whom one grows in faith, in virtue, in learning, in generosity, and in wisdom — this is called resort as supporting condition.

What is resort as safeguard? Here, a monk, having entered an inner dwelling, walking along a street, goes with downcast eyes, seeing only a yoke's length ahead, well restrained — not looking at an elephant, a horse, a chariot, or a foot-soldier, not looking at a woman or a man, not looking up, not looking down, not gazing about in all directions — this is called resort as safeguard.

What is resort as anchor? The four foundations of mindfulness, wherein the mind is anchored. For this was said by the Blessed One: "And what, monks, is a monk's own resort, his own ancestral domain? It is just the four foundations of mindfulness" (SN 5.372). This is called resort as anchor. Thus, possessed ... endowed with this good conduct and this resort — by this method too he is called "possessed of good conduct and resort."

"Seeing danger in the slightest faults": one whose habit is to see danger in faults of minute extent — such as a training rule unintentionally transgressed, or merely the arising of an unwholesome thought, and so on. "He trains, having undertaken the training precepts": whatever there is to be trained in among the training precepts, all of that he rightly undertakes and trains in. And here, by this much — "restrained by the restraint of the Pātimokkha" — virtue as restraint by the Pātimokkha has been shown by way of a teaching centered on the person. But everything beginning with "possessed of good conduct and resort" should be understood as spoken in order to show the practice by practicing which that virtue is accomplished.

And that restraint-of-the-faculties virtue which, immediately following, is shown by the method beginning "having seen a form with the eye" — herein, "he" means a monk established in the virtue of restraint by the Pātimokkha. "Having seen a form with the eye" means: having seen a form by means of eye-consciousness, which is capable of seeing form and which has acquired the designation "eye" by way of being its instrumental cause. But the ancient teachers said: "The eye does not see form, since it is without mind; and the mind does not see, since it is without eyes. But when door and object come together, one sees by means of the mind that has the eye-sensitivity as its physical basis." This way of speaking is like saying "he shoots with a bow" — it is called speech in terms of the accompanying apparatus. Therefore "having seen a form by eye-consciousness" is the only meaning intended here. "Not a grasper of signs" means: he does not grasp a sign that is the ground for defilement — whether the sign "woman" or "man," or the sign of beauty and so on — he stops at the mere fact of having seen. "Not a grasper of details" means: he does not grasp the various aspects — movements of hand or foot, a smile, laughter, speech, a glance, and so on — that have acquired the name "detail" because they make the defilements manifest, again and again, in a distinct way; he grasps only what is bare fact present there — like the Elder Mahātissa, who dwelt at Cetiya Mountain.

It is said that, as the Elder was coming from Cetiya Mountain to Anurādhapura for alms, a certain daughter-in-law of good family, having quarreled with her husband, beautifully adorned and dressed like a celestial nymph, having set out early from Anurādhapura to go to her relatives' house, saw him on the road and, her mind distorted, burst into loud laughter. The Elder, looking to see what this was, gained the perception of foulness in the bones of her teeth, and attained Arahantship. Hence it was said —

"Having seen the bones of her teeth, he recalled his earlier perception; standing right there, that Elder attained Arahantship."

Now her husband too, coming along the same road, saw the Elder and asked: "Venerable sir, did you happen to see a woman?" The Elder said to him —

"I do not know whether it was a woman or a man that went by here; but a collection of bones is going along this highway."

As to the phrase beginning "since, if...": for whatever reason it might be that, were this person to dwell with the eye faculty unrestrained by the bolt of mindfulness, with the eye-door left unclosed, these states beginning with covetousness would flow in upon him and pursue him — "he practices for its restraint" means: he practices for the purpose of closing that eye faculty with the bolt of mindfulness. And it is precisely by practicing in this way that he is also said to "guard the eye faculty" and to "enter upon restraint of the eye faculty."

Herein, although there is, strictly speaking, neither restraint nor non-restraint in the eye faculty itself — for neither mindfulness nor forgetfulness arises in dependence on the eye-sensitivity — yet when a visible object comes into the eye's range, then, after the life-continuum has arisen twice and ceased, the functional mind-element, performing the function of adverting, arises and ceases. After that, eye-consciousness performs the function of seeing. After that, the resultant mind-element performs the function of receiving. After that, the rootless resultant mind-consciousness-element performs the function of investigating. After that, the rootless functional mind-consciousness-element, performing the function of determining, arises and ceases; immediately after that, impulsion runs its course.

And even there, neither at the moment of the life-continuum, nor at any moment of adverting and the rest, is there restraint or non-restraint. But at the moment of impulsion, if bad conduct, or forgetfulness, or unknowing, or impatience, or laziness arises, there is non-restraint. When this is so, it is called non-restraint in the eye faculty. Why? Because, when that is present, the door too becomes unguarded — and so too the life-continuum, and the adverting and other process-consciousnesses.

Like what? Just as, when a city's four gates are left unguarded, even though the doors, storerooms, and inner chambers of the houses within are well guarded, still all the goods within the city remain, in effect, unprotected and unguarded — for thieves, once they had entered through the city gate, could do as they pleased — just so, when bad conduct and the rest have arisen at the moment of impulsion, that non-restraint being present, the door too becomes unguarded, and so too the life-continuum and the adverting and other process-consciousnesses.

But when virtue and the rest have arisen at that same moment, the door becomes guarded — and so too the life-continuum and the adverting and other process-consciousnesses. Like what? Just as, when a city's gates are shut, even though the houses within are unguarded, still all the goods within the city remain, in effect, well protected and well guarded — for when a city's gates are closed, there is no entry for thieves — just so, when virtue and the rest have arisen at the moment of impulsion, the door becomes guarded, and so too the life-continuum and the adverting and other process-consciousnesses. Therefore, even though arising only at the moment of impulsion, it is called restraint in the eye faculty.

The same method applies to "having heard a sound with the ear" and the rest. Thus, in brief, this should be understood as restraint-of-the-faculties virtue, having as its characteristic the avoidance of grasping at signs and the rest — the ground for defilements to pursue one — with respect to visible forms and the other sense objects.

Now, as to "the six training precepts laid down for the sake of livelihood," spoken of immediately after restraint-of-the-faculties virtue in purification-of-livelihood virtue — these are the ones: "For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, one of evil wishes, overcome by desire, claims a superhuman state that is unreal and untrue — this is an offense entailing defeat. For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, one acts as a go-between in marriage arrangements — this is an offense entailing an initial and subsequent meeting of the Saṅgha. For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, one says, 'the monk who lives in your monastery is an arahant' — if the other party accepts this, it is a grave offense. For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, a monk who is not ill, having asked for choice foods for his own sake, eats them — this is an offense requiring expiation. For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, a nun who is not ill, having asked for choice foods for her own sake, eats them — this is an offense to be confessed. For the sake of livelihood, because of livelihood, one who is not ill, having asked for soup or boiled rice for his own sake, eats it — this is an offense of wrongdoing" (Pari. 287). Thus are the six training precepts laid down — of these six training precepts —

As to "deceit" and the rest, here is the canonical text: "Herein, what is deceit? In one who is intent on gain, honor, and praise, who is of evil wishes and overcome by desire — whatever fixing, setting up, and arranging of behavior by way of the use of requisites, or by insinuating talk, or by affected deportment, together with scowling and the state of scowling, deceiving and the state of having deceived — this is called deceit.

"Herein, what is talking for gain? In one who is intent on gain, honor, and praise, who is of evil wishes and overcome by desire — addressing others, talking, chatting, exalted talk, mutual exalted talk, flattering, mutual flattering, extolling, mutual extolling, speaking pleasantly, ingratiating conduct, mung-bean-soup speech, and fawning service toward others — this is called talking for gain.

"Herein, what is hinting? In one who is intent on gain, honor, and praise, who is of evil wishes and overcome by desire — giving others a hint, the act of hinting, an intimation, the act of intimating, insinuating talk, roundabout talk — this is called hinting.

"Herein, what is belittling? In one who is intent on gain, honor, and praise, who is of evil wishes and overcome by desire — abusing others, disparaging, finding fault, casting reproach, thorough casting of reproach, mocking, thorough mocking, defaming, thorough defaming, spreading ill repute, and speaking ill of others behind their backs — this is called belittling.

"Herein, what is pursuing gain with gain? One who is intent on gain, honor, and praise, of evil wishes, overcome by desire, carries material goods received from here to there, or brings material goods received from there to here. Whatever such wanting, seeking, and searching for material goods by means of material goods, such questing, hunting, and pursuing — this is called pursuing gain with gain" (Vibh. 862-865).

The meaning of this canonical passage should be understood as follows. First, in the exposition of "deceit": "intent on gain, honor, and praise" means intent on gain, honor, and repute — that is, longing for them. "Of evil wishes" means wishing to display qualities one does not actually possess. "Overcome by desire" means overcome — that is, afflicted — by desire.

Beyond this point: since a threefold "ground for deceit" has come down in the Mahāniddesa — connected with the use of requisites, with insinuating talk, and with deportment — therefore, in order to show this threefold scheme, the phrase beginning "or by way of the use of requisites" was introduced. Herein: a monk, though he actually wants the robes and the like with which he is invited, refuses them out of his evil wishes; and, knowing that those householders already have well-established faith in him, he foresees that they will think, "oh, our master wants so little that he won't accept anything at all — how fortunate we would truly be if he would accept even some small thing." When they then bring him fine robes and the like by various means, he accepts them, showing only that he does so out of a wish to favor them — and from that point on, the very astonishment this produces becomes the cause for donors to bring him gifts even by the cartload. This should be understood as the ground for deceit reckoned by the use of requisites. For this was said in the Mahāniddesa —

"What is the ground for deceit reckoned by the use of requisites? Here, householders invite a monk with robes, almsfood, lodging, and medicinal requisites for the sick. He, though of evil wishes, overcome by desire, and actually wanting the robe ... and the other requisites, out of a wish for more, refuses the robe. He likewise refuses the almsfood ... the lodging. He refuses the medicinal requisites for the sick. He speaks thus: "What use has an ascetic for an expensive robe? This alone is fitting: that an ascetic should gather rags from a charnel ground, a rubbish-heap, or a shop-front, make them into a patched robe, and wear that. What use has an ascetic for expensive almsfood? This alone is fitting: that an ascetic should make his living by gleaning scraps, by mouthfuls gathered on the almsround. What use has an ascetic for an expensive lodging? This alone is fitting: that an ascetic should dwell at the root of a tree, or in the open air. What use has an ascetic for expensive medicinal requisites? This alone is fitting: that an ascetic should make his medicine from fermented urine or a piece of myrobalan." In accordance with this, he wears a coarse robe, eats coarse almsfood, uses a coarse lodging, and uses coarse medicinal requisites. Then the householders come to know him thus: "This ascetic wants little, is content, secluded, unattached, energetic — an advocate of the ascetic practices." They invite him again and again, more and more, with robes ... and the other requisites. He speaks thus: "From the presence of three things, a faithful clansman generates much merit. From the presence of faith, a faithful clansman generates much merit. From the presence of a gift ... and from the presence of those worthy to receive it, a faithful clansman generates much merit. And you have this faith, and a gift is at hand, and I am the recipient — if I do not accept it, you will be excluded from the merit. I myself have no need of this; but I accept it purely out of compassion for you." On this account he accepts many robes. He accepts much almsfood ... and medicinal requisites. Whatever such scowling, the state of scowling, deceiving, the act of deceiving, and the state of having deceived there is — this is the ground for deceit reckoned by the use of requisites" (Mahāniddesa 87).

But of one who is simply of evil wishes, astonishing others in various ways by speech that indicates the attainment of a superhuman state — this should be understood as the ground for deceit reckoned by insinuating talk. As it is said —

"What is the ground for deceit reckoned by insinuating talk? Here, someone of evil wishes, overcome by desire, intending to be esteemed — thinking, 'thus will people esteem me' — speaks words connected with a noble attainment. He says: 'Whoever wears such a robe is a greatly powerful ascetic.' 'Whoever carries such a bowl, a copper vessel, a water-strainer with its filter-cloth, a key, a waist-band, or sandals of such a kind, is a greatly powerful ascetic,' he says. 'He is one who has such a preceptor, such a teacher, such fellow-pupils under the same preceptor or teacher, such a friend, acquaintance, intimate, or companion. Whoever dwells in such a monastery, a vaulted building, a mansion, a long house, a cave, a grotto, a hut, a gabled house, a watch-tower, a round hut, a look-out room, an assembly hall, a pavilion, or at the root of a tree, is a greatly powerful ascetic,' he says. Or else he says: 'Grimacer upon grimacer, frowner upon frowner, deceiver upon deceiver, talker upon talker, one impressive of face — this ascetic is a gainer of such peaceful dwellings and attainments' — speaking words that are deep, hidden, subtle, concealed, supramundane, and connected with emptiness. Whatever such scowling, the state of scowling, deceiving, the act of deceiving, and the state of having deceived there is — this is the ground for deceit reckoned by insinuating talk" (Mahāniddesa 87).

But of one who is simply of evil wishes, astonishing others by a deportment adopted with the intention of being esteemed — this should be understood as the ground for deceit connected with deportment. As it is said: "What is the ground for deceit reckoned by deportment? Here, someone of evil wishes, overcome by desire, intending to be esteemed — thinking, 'thus will people esteem me' — arranges his gait, arranges his standing, arranges his sitting, arranges his lying down; he walks with studied intention, stands with intention, sits with intention, lies down with intention; he walks as if concentrated, stands, sits, and lies down as if concentrated; and he meditates ostentatiously, in full view of others. Whatever such fixing, setting up, and arranging of deportment, together with scowling, the state of scowling, deceiving, the act of deceiving, and the state of having deceived there is — this is called the ground for deceit reckoned by deportment" (Mahāniddesa 87).

Herein, "reckoned by the use of requisites" means: by the use of requisites so reckoned, or by what is so reckoned. "By insinuating talk" means: by talk spoken close to the point, indirectly. "Or of deportment" means: of the fourfold deportment. "Fixing" and the rest mean: a setting up, or a setting up with studied care. "Setting up" means: the manner of setting up. "Arranging" means: a thorough contriving — that is, making oneself appear pleasing. "Scowling" means: producing a frown by displaying a state of being established in exertion beforehand — that is, a contraction of the face. One whose habit is to produce such a frown is "a scowler." The state of being a scowler is "the state of scowling." "Deceit" means: causing astonishment. The proceeding of a deceiver is "the act of deceiving." The state of one who has deceived is "the state of having deceived."

In the exposition of "talking for gain": "addressing" means, having seen people who have come to the monastery, saying, "For what purpose, good sirs, have you come? Is it to invite the monks? If so, go on ahead — I will follow after with my bowl" — such talk, opening the conversation from the very start, is "addressing." Or else, bringing oneself forward, saying, "I am Tissa; the king is devoted to me; such-and-such minister is devoted to me" — such self-promoting talk is also "addressing." "Talking" is simply talk of the kind already described, but when one has been asked a question first. "Chatting" means: fearing that the householders might grow bored, one gives them opening after opening to respond, talking skilfully to keep them engaged. "Exalted talk" means talk that raises someone up: "a great householder, a great sea-captain, a great benefactor." "Mutual exalted talk" is talk that raises both parties up, in every respect.

"Flattering" means: saying, "Lay disciples, at a time like this you used to give the offering of new robe-cloth — why do you not give it now?" — speaking on in this way until they say things such as, "We will give it, venerable sir, we just haven't found the opportunity" — this repeated pressing, up to that point, is called a kind of binding, or entangling. Or else, having seen a handful of sugarcane, he asks, "Where was this brought from, lay disciple?" "From the sugarcane field, venerable sir." "Is the sugarcane there sweet?" "One would have to taste it to know, venerable sir." It is then proper for him to say: "Well then, lay disciple — give some sugarcane to the monk!" Whatever such entangling talk there is — pressed even upon someone trying to wriggle free of giving — this is "flattering." Flattering done repeatedly, in every respect, is "mutual flattering."

"Extolling" means: saying, "This family knows only me — if any gift is to be given here, it is given only to me." Such self-promoting proclamation is called "extolling," that is, an inflating of oneself. The story of Telakandarika should be told here. Extolling done repeatedly, in every respect, is "mutual extolling."

"Speaking pleasantly" is simply speaking agreeably again and again, without regard for whether it accords with truth or with the Dhamma. "Ingratiating conduct" is a lowly manner of behaving — conducting oneself by placing oneself lower and lower than others. "Mung-bean-soup-ness" means being like mung-bean soup: just as, when mung beans are cooked, some grains fail to soften while the rest do, so too a person in whose speech only a little is true and the rest false is called "mung-bean-soup-like"; the state of being such a person is "mung-bean-soup-ness." "Fawning service" means the state of one who fawningly serves — like a nurse who carries the children of a household about on her hip or shoulder, that is, who bears them to win favor. The work of one who so fawningly serves is "fawning-bearing"; the state of such fawning-bearing is "fawning service."

In the exposition of "hinting": "a hint" is any bodily or verbal act that produces in others the perception that they should give a requisite. "The act of hinting" is the making of a hint by such means as, having seen people going along carrying food, asking, "Did you get some food?" and the like. "An intimation" is talk connected with obtaining a requisite. "The act of intimating" is: having seen cowherds, asking, "Are these calves milk-calves or buttermilk-calves?"; when told, "They are milk-calves, venerable sir," saying, "They can't be milk-calves — if they really were, the monks would be getting some milk too" — making an intimation by such means, reported to the children's parents, so as to bring about the giving of milk and the like. "Insinuating talk" is talk brought close to the point, without stating it directly. The story of the family-visiting monk should be told here.

It is said that a monk who regularly visited a certain family, wishing to eat, entered the house and sat down. Seeing him, the housewife, unwilling to give anything, said, "There is no rice," and went off to a neighbor's house as if to borrow some. The monk, too, entering the inner room and looking around, saw sugarcane in the corner behind the door, jaggery in a bowl, pieces of salted fish in a basket, rice in a pot, and ghee in a jar; having seen these, he came out and sat down again. The housewife came back, saying, "I couldn't get any rice." The monk said, "Lay sister, I already saw the sign beforehand that today the alms would not turn out well." "What was that, venerable sir?" "I saw, in the corner behind the door, what looked like a piece of sugarcane — a snake. Looking for something to strike it with, I saw a stone like the lump of jaggery in the bowl. When I struck it with the stone, the snake raised a hood like the pieces of salted fish in the basket. Wanting to bite the stone, it showed teeth like the rice in the pot. And then, enraged, it spat venom-mixed spittle from its mouth like the ghee poured into the jar." She thought, "There's no fooling this shaveling," and gave him the sugarcane, cooked the rice, and gave him everything — the ghee, the jaggery, and the fish as well. Talk brought close to the point in this way should be understood as "insinuating talk." "Roundabout talk" is talk turned this way and that, with the aim of getting whatever one is after.

In the exposition of "belittling": "abusing" is abuse by means of the ten grounds for abuse. "Disparaging" is speaking having held someone in contempt. "Finding fault" is imputing blame by such means as saying, "faithless, without confidence," and the like. "Casting reproach" is a verbal casting-off — saying, "Don't speak of this here." Casting reproach done thoroughly, giving it grounds and reasons in every respect, is "thorough casting of reproach." Or else, having seen someone who is not giving, saying sarcastically, "Oh, what a benefactor!" — such a casting-up is "casting reproach." Saying, "What a great benefactor!" in this way is a thorough casting-up — "thorough casting of reproach." "Mocking" is ridicule such as, "What kind of life does this seed-eater have?" "Thorough mocking" is a more thorough ridicule — saying, "Why do you call this person a non-giver? He constantly gives everyone the very same answer, 'there isn't any.'" "Defaming" is causing someone to arrive at a reputation for being a non-giver, or at disrepute generally. Defaming done thoroughly, in every respect, is "thorough defaming." "Spreading ill repute" is carrying a bad reputation from house to house, village to village, country to country, thinking, "Out of fear of this bad reputation, he will give to me too." "Speaking ill of others behind their backs" is speaking sweetly to someone's face, and speaking ill of them once their back is turned — for, being something one cannot do while facing a person directly, it is like eating the flesh of another's back once they have turned away, hence it is called "back-flesh-eating." This is called "belittling" because, like a bamboo scraper, it scrapes and wipes off another's oiled-on virtue; or because, just as one seeking perfume grinds down fragrant substances to extract their scent, this seeking of gain grinds down and pulverizes another's good qualities — hence it is called "belittling."

In the exposition of "pursuing gain with gain": "pursuing" is seeking. "Received from here" means received from this house; "there" means at such-and-such other house. "Wanting" is wishing; "seeking" is searching; "searching" in its intensified form is searching again and again. The story of the monk who, from the very start, gave away whatever almsfood he received, here and there, to the children of various families, and in the end obtained milk-rice-gruel in return and went on his way, should be told here. "Questing," "hunting," and "pursuing" are simply further synonyms for "wanting," "seeking," and "searching" respectively. Thus should the construction of these terms be understood. This is the meaning of "deceit" and the rest.

Now, as to "and such evil states as these" — here, by the word "and the rest," should be understood the inclusion of the many evil states spoken of in the Brahmajāla Sutta, by the method beginning: "Or, just as some ascetics and brahmins, having eaten food given out of faith, make their living by wrong livelihood through such base arts as these: namely, reading limbs, reading omens, portents, dreams, bodily marks, mouse-gnawings, fire-oblations, and ladle-oblations" (DN I.21).

Thus, whatever wrong livelihood occurs by way of transgressing these six training precepts laid down for the sake of livelihood, and whatever occurs by way of these evil states — deceit, talking for gain, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain, and the rest — the abstinence from wrong livelihood of every such kind: this is purification-of-livelihood virtue. Here is the verbal meaning: one lives by resorting to this — hence "livelihood." What is that? The effort of seeking requisites. "Purification" is the state of being purified. The purification of livelihood is "purification of livelihood."

And as to that virtue connected with the requisites, spoken of immediately following: herein, "reflecting wisely" means having reflected and understood by the right method, the right way — that is, having reviewed. And here, precisely the reviewing spoken of by the method beginning "for warding off cold" should be understood as "reflecting wisely." Herein, "robe" is any one of the inner garment and the rest. "He makes use of" means: he uses it — either wearing it as an inner garment, or draping it as an outer robe. "Only for the purpose of" is a phrase that fixes and limits the extent of the purpose: for the meditator's purpose in using the robe is exactly this much — warding off cold and the rest — and nothing more. "Of cold" means any cold whatsoever, arisen either by way of internal disturbance of the elements, or by way of external change of season. "For warding off" means: for the purpose of repelling it, in such a way that it does not produce affliction in the body. For when the body is assailed by cold, one whose mind is thereby distracted is unable to strive properly; therefore the Blessed One permitted that the robe be used for warding off cold. This is the method everywhere.

Only here: "of heat" means the heat of fire, whose occurrence should be understood as arising in such circumstances as forest fires. As to "the touch of gadflies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and creeping things" — "gadflies" are biting flies, also called "blind flies." "Mosquitoes" are simply mosquitoes. "Wind" is of the kind distinguished as dusty or dustless, and so on. "Sun" is the heat of the sun. "Creeping things" are whatever long-bodied creatures move by crawling, such as snakes; contact with them is of two kinds — being bitten, and being merely touched — and even the latter does not trouble one who sits with the robe properly worn, so in such places he uses the robe for warding them off. "Only for the purpose of" is repeated here to show the boundary of a purpose that is constant: for covering the private parts is a constant purpose of the robe, whereas the other purposes arise only on occasion. Herein, "the private parts" is that particular concealed area of the body — for whatever limb, being exposed, disturbs one's sense of shame, is, on that account, called "the shame-disturber." "For the purpose of covering that shame-disturber" gives "for the purpose of covering the private parts." There is also a reading, "for the purpose of covering the private parts," directly.

"Almsfood" is any food whatsoever. Any food is called piṇḍapāta ("fall of lumps") because it falls into a monk's bowl by way of his almsround; or, piṇḍapāta is the gathering together of the scraps of food received from here and there. "Not for play" means: not for the sake of play, as village children eat — that is, not for the sake of amusement. "Not for intoxication" means: not for the sake of intoxication, as boxers and the like eat — that is, not for the conceit of physical strength or manly vigor. "Not for adornment" means: not for the sake of adornment, as palace women and courtesans eat — that is, not for a plump and rounded physique. "Not for beautification" means: not for beautification, as actors and dancers eat — that is, not for a clear and radiant complexion. And here: "not for play" is stated for abandoning a support for delusion; "not for intoxication," for abandoning a support for hatred; "not for adornment, not for beautification," for abandoning a support for lust. "Not for play, not for intoxication" is for preventing the arising of fetters in oneself; "not for adornment, not for beautification" is for preventing the arising of fetters in others as well. By these four together, the abandoning of both improper practice and devotion to sensual pleasure should be understood as expressed.

"Only for the purpose of" has the meaning already stated. "Of this body" means of this material body composed of the four great elements. "For its continuance" means for the purpose of its uninterrupted persistence. "For its sustenance" means for the unbroken continuation of its functioning, or for its lasting a long time. Just as the owner of a decaying house props it up with a support-post, and just as a cart-driver greases an axle, so too he uses almsfood for the body's continuance and sustenance, not for play, intoxication, adornment, or beautification. Moreover, "continuance" is a designation for the life faculty; therefore this phrase should also be understood as expressing the purpose of keeping the body's life faculty functioning. "For stopping discomfort": "discomfort" here means hunger, in the sense of an affliction; he uses almsfood to stop it, just as one applies ointment to a wound, or a remedy against heat and cold. "For assisting the holy life" means for the purpose of assisting both the holy life of the entire dispensation and the holy life of the path — for this practitioner, relying on the bodily strength gained from almsfood and practicing the threefold training in order to cross the wilderness of existence, uses almsfood to assist the holy life, just as travelers wishing to cross a wilderness might eat their own child's flesh out of sheer necessity, just as one wishing to cross a river uses a raft, and just as one wishing to cross the ocean uses a ship.

"Thus I shall dispel the old feeling, and not give rise to a new feeling": thinking in this way, he uses almsfood — "by this use of almsfood I shall dispel the old feeling, the feeling of hunger, and I shall not give rise to a new feeling caused by immoderate eating, like one of those brahmins — Āharahatthaka, Alaṃsāṭaka, Tatravaṭṭaka, or Kākamāsaka — who ate and then vomited." He uses it thus, just as a sick person uses medicine. Or else: whatever feeling arises now, in dependence on unsuitable or immoderate eating, by way of a condition rooted in past kamma, is called "old feeling." By suitable, moderate eating, destroying its condition, he thinks, "I shall dispel that old feeling." And whatever feeling will arise in the future, in dependence on the accumulation of kamma produced now through improper use of food, is called "new feeling." By way of proper use, not generating its root, he thinks, "I shall not give rise to that new feeling." The meaning here should be seen in this way too. By this much, it should be understood that proper use is comprised, the abandoning of devotion to self-mortification is shown, and the non-relinquishing of legitimate happiness is shown.

"And it will be sustenance for me": by moderate use, since there is then no danger of cutting off the life faculty or breaking down bodily function, sustenance — reckoned as a long continuance of life — will be mine, for this body whose functioning depends on requisites. With this thought too he uses it, just as one with a chronic illness uses its remedy. "And blamelessness, and living in comfort": blamelessness comes through avoiding improper seeking, receiving, and use of food; living in comfort comes through moderate use. Otherwise, from unsuitable or immoderate use come discontent, listlessness, and drowsiness. Or: blamelessness comes through the absence of faults such as the censure of the wise; living in comfort comes through the bodily strength arising from suitable, moderate eating. Or: blamelessness comes from avoiding eating that fills the belly to capacity — that is, from abandoning the pleasures of lying down, of the side, and of torpor; living in comfort comes from eating four or five mouthfuls less than one's fill, thereby producing a state of fitness for all four bodily postures. With this thought too, "blamelessness and living in comfort will be mine," he uses almsfood. For this was said —

"Leaving four or five mouthfuls unfinished, one should drink water — this is enough for the comfortable living of a monk who has applied himself." (Theragāthā 983)

By this much, it should be understood that the grasping of the purpose of eating, and the middle way itself, are both illustrated.

"Lodging" is both a resting place and a seat. Wherever one lies down — whether in a monastery, a vaulted building, or the like — that is a "resting place." Wherever one sits down, that is a "seat." Taking these together, it is called "lodging." As to "for the purpose of dispelling the danger of climate, and for the enjoyment of solitude": in the sense of oppressing the body, the climate itself is called "the danger of climate" — this covers both the purpose of dispelling that danger and the purpose of enjoying solitude. Whatever unsuitable climate causes bodily affliction or mental distraction is to be dispelled by the use of lodging; this is said for the purpose of dispelling it, and for the purpose of the happiness of solitude. Admittedly, the dispelling of the danger of climate was already mentioned, by way of warding off cold and the rest, in the case of the robe. But just as it was said there that covering the private parts is the constant purpose of the robe while the others arise only occasionally, so too here it should be understood that this is said with reference to the dispelling of climate-danger as a constant purpose of lodging. Or else: this climate, described in this way, is simply climate. But danger is twofold: manifest danger and hidden danger (Mahāniddesa 5). Herein, manifest danger is such things as lions and tigers; hidden danger is such things as lust and hatred. A monk who, having known and reviewed that a given lodging is one where these dangers do not arise — whether through lack of protection, or through exposure to unsuitable sights and the like — and who then makes use of it, should be understood as one who, reflecting wisely, uses lodging for the purpose of dispelling the danger of climate and enjoying solitude.

As to "requisite of medicine for the sick" — herein, in the sense of counteracting disease, that is, of acting as its opponent, it is called a "requisite." This is a designation for whatever is suitable as a remedy. It is "medicine" because it is the physician's prescribed treatment. The requisite for the sick that is medicine is "requisite-medicine for the sick" — that is, whatever is suitable for a sick person as the physician's prescribed treatment, such as oil, honey, or molasses. "Requisite" (parikkhāra), however, in such contexts as "it is well equipped with the seven requisites of a city" (AN 7.67), means an accompaniment. In such contexts as "the chariot has virtue as its requisite, jhāna as its axle, energy as its wheels" (SN 5.4), it means an ornament. In such contexts as "and these are the requisites of life that must be acquired by one who has gone forth" (MN I.191–192), it means a necessary provision. But here, both "necessary provision" and "accompaniment" are applicable — for that requisite-medicine for the sick is both an accompaniment of life and a necessary provision, in that it protects life by not giving an opening to the arising of a life-destroying affliction. Since it is thus a cause for life continuing for a long time, it is called a "requisite." Thus, being both the requisite-medicine for the sick and a requisite in the fuller sense, it is "the requisite of medicine for the sick" — meaning whatever is suitable for a sick person, prescribed by a physician, such as oil, honey, or molasses, serving as a requisite of life. "Arisen" means: born, come to be, produced. As to "connected with affliction": "affliction" here is a disturbance of the bodily elements, and such things as leprosy, boils, and pustules that arise from it; being arisen from affliction, these feelings are "connected with affliction." "Feelings" means painful feeling, the resultant feeling of unwholesome kamma, connected with such affliction. "For the maximum freedom from affliction" means for the state of being utterly without pain — the meaning being, until all that pain has been entirely abandoned.

Thus, in brief, this should be understood as virtue connected with the requisites, having as its characteristic the use of requisites after wise reflection. Here is the verbal meaning: since living beings, by making use of the robe and the other requisites in dependence on them, are able to proceed and carry on with life, they are therefore called "requisites" (paccaya). Virtue "connected with those requisites" is "virtue connected with the requisites."

Thus, among this fourfold virtue, restraint by the Pātimokkha should be accomplished through faith. For it is accomplished through faith, since the laying down of the training precepts lies beyond the domain of disciples' own understanding. The rejection of a request to lay down training precepts in advance is the illustration here. Therefore, having undertaken through faith the training precepts exactly as laid down, without exception, one should accomplish this well, without regard even for one's own life. For this was said —

"As a kikī-bird guards its egg, as a yak guards its tail, as one guards a beloved child, or one's only eye — guarding virtue in just the same way, be always of good conduct, always reverential."

It was also further said: "Just so, Pahārāda, whatever training precept has been laid down by me for my disciples, my disciples do not transgress it even for the sake of life" (AN 8.19). And in this connection, the stories of the elders bound by robbers in the forest should be known.

It is said that, in the Mahāvattani forest, robbers bound an elder with black creepers and made him lie down. The elder, lying just as he was, developed insight for seven days, attained the fruit of non-returning, and, dying right there, was reborn in the Brahmā world.

Another elder, on the island of Tambapaṇṇi, was bound with a rotting creeper and made to lie down. When a forest fire came, rather than snapping the creeper to free himself, he took up insight meditation instead — and, his attainment and his death coinciding exactly, he attained final nibbāna. The Elder Dīghabhāṇaka Abhaya, coming along with five hundred monks, saw him, cremated the elder's body, and had a shrine built. Therefore any other faithful clansman too, in purifying the Pātimokkha, should be prepared to give up his very life rather than break the restraint of virtue laid down by the Lord of the World.

And just as restraint by the Pātimokkha is accomplished through faith, so restraint of the faculties should be accomplished through mindfulness. For it is accomplished through mindfulness, since faculties governed by mindfulness cannot be overwhelmed by covetousness and the rest. Therefore: "Better, monks, that the eye faculty be destroyed by a red-hot iron pin, burning, blazing, and glowing, than that one grasp at the sign, in its particulars, of forms cognizable by the eye" (SN 4.235) — recalling the discourse on burning by this and similar means, and restraining, with unforgetting mindfulness, the grasping of signs and the rest that would let consciousness arising at the eye-door and the other doors be overwhelmed by covetousness and the rest — this should be well accomplished. For when this is not accomplished, even Pātimokkha-restraint virtue becomes short-lived and does not endure, like a crop with no fence of branches around it. And it is destroyed by the thieves of defilement, like a village with its gates left open, by those who plunder others' property. And lust penetrates the mind, like rain through a badly thatched house. For this was said —

"Guard the faculty with regard to forms, to sounds, and also to tastes, to odors and to touches — for these doors, if left open and unguarded, destroy one, as plunderers destroy an undefended village."

"Just as rain penetrates a badly thatched house, so lust penetrates an undeveloped mind." (Dhp 13)

But when this is accomplished, even Pātimokkha-restraint virtue becomes long-lasting and enduring, like a crop well-fenced with branches. And it is not destroyed by the thieves of defilement, like a village with its gates well shut, against those who would plunder others' property. And lust does not penetrate the mind, like rain failing to penetrate a well-thatched house. For this too was said —

"Guard the faculty with regard to forms, to sounds, and also to tastes, to odors and to touches — for these doors, when closed and well guarded, do not destroy one, as plunderers destroy an undefended village."

"Just as rain does not penetrate a well-thatched house, so lust does not penetrate a well-developed mind." (Dhp 14)

This, however, is a teaching pitched at a very high standard. For the mind changes quickly; therefore, one should accomplish restraint of the faculties by dispelling arisen lust through attention to foulness — as the Elder Vaṅgīsa did, shortly after his ordination.

It is said that, while the elder, recently ordained, was walking for alms, lust arose in him upon seeing a certain woman. Then he said to the Elder Ānanda —

"I am burning with sensual lust, my mind is thoroughly ablaze; please, Gotama, tell me how to quench it, out of compassion." (SN 1.212; Theragāthā 1232)

The Elder said —

"Because of a distorted perception, your mind is ablaze; avoid the sign that is beautiful, connected with lust. Develop your mind on foulness, made one-pointed, well concentrated. (SN 1.212; Theragāthā 1233–1234)

"See formations as other, as suffering, and not as self; quench the great lust — do not keep burning again and again." (SN 1.212)

The elder, having dispelled the lust, continued on his almsround.

Moreover, a monk fulfilling restraint of the faculties should be like the Elder Cittagutta, who dwelt in the Kuraṇḍaka great cave, and like the Elder Mahāmitta, who dwelt at the Cora Mahāvihāra.

In the Kuraṇḍaka great cave, it is said, there was a delightful painting of the great renunciation of the seven Buddhas. A number of monks, wandering on a tour of lodgings, saw the painting and said, "Venerable sir, what a delightful painting!" The elder said: "Friends, I have lived in this cave for over sixty years, and I did not even know there was a painting here — only today, thanks to you sighted people, have I learned of it." It is said that, in all the time the elder had lived there, he had never once opened his eyes to look up at the cave. And there was also a great nāga tree at the door of the cave — he had never once looked up at that either. Each year, he knew that it had flowered only by seeing its stamens fallen on the ground.

The king, hearing of the elder's accomplished virtues and wishing to pay homage, sent for him three times; when the elder did not come, he had the breasts of the nursing mothers in that village bound shut, saying, "Let the children get no milk until the elder comes." The elder, out of compassion for the children, went to Mahāgāma. The king, hearing of this, said, "Go, bring the elder in — I will take the precepts." Having had him brought into the palace, he paid homage and fed him, but said, "Venerable sir, there is no opportunity today; tomorrow I will take the precepts." Taking the elder's bowl, he followed him a little way, paid homage together with the queen, and turned back. Whether it was the king who paid homage, or the queen, the elder would simply say, "May you be happy, great king." Seven days passed in this way. The monks asked, "Venerable sir, why is it that whether the king pays homage or the queen pays homage, you always just say, 'May you be happy, great king'?" The elder said, "Friends, I do not distinguish between 'king' and 'queen.'" After seven days, the king, realizing that staying there was uncomfortable for the elder, released him. He went back to the Kuraṇḍaka great cave, and during the night took up walking meditation. The deity dwelling in the nāga tree stood by, holding a torch. Then his meditation subject became exceedingly pure and clear. The elder, delighted and wondering, "Why does my meditation subject appear so exceptionally clear today?", attained arahantship immediately after the middle watch of the night, making the whole mountain resound. Therefore any other clansman, too, who desires his own welfare —

"Like a monkey in the forest, like a bewildered deer in the woods, and like a startled fool, let him not be one of restless eyes.

"Let him cast his eyes downward, seeing only a yoke's length ahead; let him not fall under the sway of a mind as restless as a forest monkey."

The mother of the Elder Mahāmitta, too, developed a poisonous tumor; his sister had gone forth among the nuns. She said to her: "Go, noble lady, go to your brother, tell him of my discomfort, and bring back medicine." She went and told him. The elder said: "I do not know how to gather root-medicines and the like and brew a remedy; but I will tell you a medicine — from the time I went forth, I have never once broken restraint of the faculties by looking, with a mind accompanied by greed, at a form of the opposite sex. By this act of truth, may my mother find relief. Go, say this, and stroke the laywoman's body as you say it." She went, related this, and did as instructed. That very instant, the laywoman's tumor dissolved like a lump of foam and disappeared. Getting up, she uttered this joyful exclamation: "If the Fully Enlightened One were still living, why would he not stroke the head of a monk like my own son with his own web-marked hand?" Therefore —

"Any other one who thinks himself a true clansman, having gone forth in this dispensation, should stand firm in excellent restraint of the faculties, just as the Elder Mitta did."

And just as restraint of the faculties is accomplished through mindfulness, so purification of livelihood should be accomplished through energy. For it is accomplished through energy, since the abandoning of wrong livelihood is possible only for one whose energy is rightly applied. Therefore, abandoning improper and unbecoming ways of seeking, one should accomplish this through energy, by proper means of seeking such as going on almsround, using only requisites of pure origin and avoiding those of impure origin as one would avoid a venomous snake. Herein, for one who has not undertaken the ascetic practices, requisites arising from the Saṅgha, from a group of monks, or from householders who have faith in his qualities — such as his Dhamma-teaching — are called "of pure origin." But those arising from going on almsround and the like are of an even purer origin. For one who has undertaken the ascetic practices, requisites arising, in accordance with the rule of that practice, from those who have faith in his ascetic virtues through seeing his practice of the almsround and the like, are called "of pure origin." And when, to allay a certain illness of his, both a piece of rotten myrobalan and the four sweets have become available, if he, thinking, "other fellow monks in the holy life can make use of the four sweets," uses only the piece of myrobalan himself — for such a one the undertaking of the ascetic practice is truly fitting. For such a one is called "a monk of the supreme noble lineage."

Now, as to these requisites — the robe and the rest — for any monk who is purifying his livelihood, hinting, intimating, indirect talk, and direct requesting are not allowable with regard to robe and almsfood. But in the case of lodging, hinting, intimating, and indirect talk are allowable for one who has not undertaken the ascetic practice. Herein, "a hint" means: when a monk doing groundwork or the like for a lodging is asked by householders, "Venerable sir, what is being done, who is having it done?", his reply, "No one in particular" — or any other such act of hinting. "An intimation" means: asking, "Lay disciple, where do you live?", and, being told, "In a mansion, venerable sir," remarking, "But a mansion is not proper for monks, lay disciple" — or any other such act of intimating. "Indirect talk" means the remark, "Lodging is cramped for the community of monks" — or any other such roundabout speech. In the case of medicine, all such means are allowable. But as to whether medicine so obtained may be used once the illness has subsided — some say it is allowable, others say it is not.

Herein, the Vinaya specialists say, "The Blessed One has granted an opening for this, therefore it is allowable." But the Sutta specialists say, "Even though it is not an offense, it disturbs one's livelihood, therefore it is not allowable."

But whoever, even though hinting, intimating, indirect talk, and requesting are permitted by the Blessed One in this case, refrains from them, and, relying only on such qualities as wanting little — even when confronted with the loss of his very life — uses only requisites that have arisen apart from intimation and the like, such a one is called "one of supreme austere conduct," just like the Elder Sāriputta.

That venerable one, it is said, was at one time cultivating solitude, dwelling together with the Elder Mahāmoggallāna in a certain forest, when one day a disorder of wind in the belly arose in him, causing extreme pain. The Elder Mahāmoggallāna, going in the evening to attend on that venerable one, saw the elder lying down, asked after his condition, and asked, "Friend, what used to give you relief before?" The elder said, "Friend, when I was a layman, my mother used to give me undiluted milk-rice-porridge mixed with ghee, honey, and sugar — that gave me relief." That venerable one too said, "Very well, friend — if either you or I have merit enough, perhaps we shall obtain some tomorrow."

Now, this conversation of theirs was overheard by a deity dwelling in a tree at the end of the walking-path, who thought, "Tomorrow I shall bring about porridge for the master," and went at once to the elder's supporting family's house, entered the body of the eldest son, and caused him affliction. Then, to the relatives who had gathered because of his illness, the deity, speaking through the boy, said, "If tomorrow you prepare such-and-such porridge for the elder, I will release him." They said, "Even without your telling us, we regularly give alms to the elders," and on the following day prepared that kind of porridge.

The Elder Mahāmoggallāna, coming early in the morning, said, "Friend, stay right here until I go on almsround and return," and entered the village. Those people, coming out to meet him, took his bowl, filled it with the porridge of the kind mentioned, and gave it to him. The elder made as if to leave. They said, "Please eat too, venerable sir — we will give more besides," fed him, and gave him another bowlful. The elder, going back, offered it, saying, "Here, friend Sāriputta, partake of this." That elder, too, seeing it and thinking, "This porridge is exceedingly delightful — how did it come about, I wonder?", perceived the root of its origin and said, "Friend Moggallāna, this almsfood is not fit to be eaten." That venerable one, without even entertaining the thought, "He refuses to eat almsfood brought by someone like me," took the bowl by its rim, at that single word, and tipped it out to one side. The very moment the porridge touched the ground, the elder's affliction vanished — and from then on, for forty-five years, it never arose again. Then he said to Mahāmoggallāna, "Friend, porridge that has arisen in dependence on a verbal intimation would not be fit to eat, even if my own intestines were to come out and crawl about on the ground." And he uttered this exclamation of joy —

"This sweet porridge, arisen from the spreading effect of a verbal intimation — if I had eaten it, my livelihood would deserve blame.

"Even if my own intestines were to come out and crawl about outside, I would not break my livelihood, even at the cost of my life.

"I satisfy my own mind, and avoid improper seeking; I will not engage in the improper seeking condemned by the Buddha."

The story of the Elder Mahātissa, the mango-eater who dwelt at Ciragumba, should also be told here. Thus, in every way —

"The wise one, without even generating a thought of improper seeking, the self-controlled one who has gone forth in faith, should purify his livelihood."

And just as purification of livelihood is accomplished through energy, so virtue connected with the requisites should be accomplished through understanding. For it is accomplished through understanding, since only one endowed with understanding is capable of seeing the danger and the benefit in the requisites. Therefore, one should accomplish this by abandoning greed for requisites, and by using requisites arisen justly and properly, reviewing them with understanding by the method already stated.

Herein, the reviewing of requisites is twofold: at the time of receiving, and at the time of using. For robes and the like that have already been reviewed at the time of receiving — whether by way of the elements or by way of repulsiveness — and then set aside, the subsequent use is blameless even without reviewing again at the time of use. Here is the determination that settles this matter —

There are four kinds of use: use as a thief, use as a debtor, use as an heir, and use as an owner. Herein, the use of one lacking in virtue, even though he sits in the midst of the Saṅgha and partakes, is called "use as a thief." The use, by one who is virtuous, without reviewing the requisite, is called "use as a debtor." Therefore the robe should be reviewed at each and every use, and almsfood at each and every mouthful; or, for one unable to do so, before the meal, after the meal, and in the first, middle, and last watches of the night. If dawn breaks on him without his having reviewed it at all, he stands in the position of "use as a debtor." Lodging, too, should be reviewed at each and every use. For medicine, mindfulness merely as a condition, whether at the time of receiving or of use, suffices. Even so, there is an offense only for one who is mindful when receiving it but not when using it — whereas for one who was not mindful when receiving it, but is mindful when using it, there is no offense.

For purity is fourfold: purity by exposition, purity by restraint, purity by search, and purity by reviewing. Herein, "purity by exposition" is Pātimokkha-restraint virtue, so called because it is purified through confession. "Purity by restraint" is restraint-of-the-faculties virtue, so called because it is purified simply through the restraint of resolving in the mind, "I will not do so again." "Purity by search" is purification-of-livelihood virtue, so called because, in one who abandons improper seeking and brings about requisites justly and properly, the search itself is pure. "Purity by reviewing" is virtue connected with the requisites, so called because it is purified through the kind of reviewing already described. Hence it was said, "but for one who was not mindful at the time of receiving, yet is mindful at the time of use, there is no offense."

The use of requisites by the seven kinds of trainees is called "use as an heir." For they are the Buddha's sons; therefore, being heirs to the requisites belonging to their father, they make use of those requisites. But do they, then, make use of the Buddha's own requisites, or of lay people's requisites? Even though given by lay people, since they have been permitted for use by the Buddha, they belong to the Buddha — therefore it should be understood that they make use of the Buddha's own requisites. The Dhammadāyāda Sutta ["Heirs in Dhamma"] is confirmatory here.

The use by those whose taints are destroyed is called "use as an owner." For they, having transcended servitude to craving, make use of things as owners. Among these kinds of use, both use as an owner and use as an heir are proper for everyone; use as a debtor is not proper; of use as a thief there is no question at all. As for the reviewed use of one who is virtuous, being the opposite of use as a debtor, it is "debt-free use" — or else it may be included under use as an heir, since even one who is merely virtuous, being endowed with this training, comes to be reckoned simply as a "trainee." Now, among these kinds of use, since use as an owner is the foremost, a monk who aspires to it should accomplish virtue connected with the requisites by reviewing requisites, in the manner already described, before making use of them. For one who acts in this way fulfills his task. For this was said —

"Almsfood, dwelling, and lodging, and water for washing the dust from his robe — having heard the Dhamma taught by the Fortunate One, the disciple of excellent wisdom makes use of these only after reflection.

"Therefore, with regard to almsfood, lodging, and water for washing the dust from his robe, the monk remains unsullied by these things, like a drop of water on a lotus leaf." (Sn 393–394)

"Favors received in due time from others, in what is to be chewed, eaten, and tasted — let the ever-attentive one know moderation in these, just as one applies ointment for a wound to heal.

"Just as one might eat a child's flesh while crossing a wilderness, or as one greases an axle — so let him take food as mere food, for the sake of sustenance, without attachment."

And, as an example of one who fulfilled this virtue connected with the requisites, the story of the novice Saṅgharakkhita, the nephew of the elder of that name, should be told — for he made use of requisites having properly reviewed them. As he said —

"My preceptor, seeing me eating well-cooked rice-porridge, said, 'Novice, do not burn your tongue through inattention.'

"Hearing my preceptor's words, I then felt a sense of urgency; sitting in that very session, I attained arahantship.

"I, my purpose now fulfilled, like the moon on its fifteenth day, with all taints exhausted — there is now no renewed existence for me."

"Therefore any other one, too, who wishes for the exhaustion of suffering, should make use of the requisites only after reflecting wisely."

Thus it is fourfold by way of Pātimokkha-restraint virtue and the rest.

In the first pentad of the fivefold division, the meaning should be understood by way of the virtue of the not-fully-ordained and the rest. For this was said in the Paṭisambhidā —

"What is limited-purification virtue? The virtue of the not-fully-ordained, whose training precepts are limited in number — this is limited-purification virtue. What is unlimited-purification virtue? The virtue of the fully ordained, whose training precepts are unlimited in number — this is unlimited-purification virtue. What is fulfilled-purification virtue? The virtue of virtuous ordinary persons devoted to wholesome states, who fulfill their virtue up to the limit reached by trainees, who have no concern for body or life, who have given up attachment to life — this is fulfilled-purification virtue. What is unmisapprehended-purification virtue? The virtue of the seven kinds of trainees — this is unmisapprehended-purification virtue. What is tranquilized-purification virtue? The virtue of the Tathāgata's disciples whose taints are destroyed, of the Paccekabuddhas, and of the Tathāgatas who are Arahants, Fully Enlightened Ones — this is tranquilized-purification virtue" (Paṭis I.37).

Herein, the virtue of the not-fully-ordained should be understood as "limited-purification virtue" because it is limited by way of number of precepts. As to the fully ordained —

"Nine thousand crores, eighty hundred-crores, fifty hundred-thousands, and thirty-six more besides —

"these are the restraints of discipline proclaimed by the Fully Enlightened One, taught by way of summary headings, the training in the restraint of the discipline." —

Thus, even though limited by way of number in this technical sense, it is called "unlimited-purification virtue" with reference to its being undertaken without exception, and with reference to its limit never being determined by way of gain, fame, relatives, limb, or life — like the virtue of the Elder Mahātissa, the mango-eater who dwelt at Ciragumba. For that venerable one held to this —

"Let one give up wealth for the sake of a precious limb; let one give up a limb, guarding one's life; but let a person give up limb, wealth, and life itself — all of it — when remembering the Dhamma." —

Not abandoning this recollection of what a true man does, and not transgressing a training precept even when his life was in danger, in dependence on that very unlimited-purification virtue, he attained arahantship while being carried on a lay disciple's back. As it is said —

"Neither father, nor mother, neither relative nor kinsman, does such a deed for the sake of one who is virtuous alone —

"having generated a sense of urgency, and having reflected wisely, resting there on his back, he attained arahantship."

The virtue of virtuous ordinary persons, from the time of full ordination onward, being exceedingly pure — like a well-washed natural gem, or well-refined gold — free from even the mere stain of a defiled thought's arising, becomes a proximate cause for arahantship itself; therefore it is called "fulfilled-purification," like the virtue of the Elder Mahāsaṅgharakkhita and his nephew, the Elder Saṅgharakkhita.

It is said that, when the Elder Mahāsaṅgharakkhita, past sixty years as a monk, lay on his deathbed, the community of monks asked him about his supramundane attainment. The elder said, "I have no supramundane attainment." Then his attendant, a young monk, said, "Venerable sir, people have gathered from twelve leagues around, believing you have attained final nibbāna — if you die as an ordinary worldling, the multitude will be filled with regret." "Friend, thinking, 'I shall see the Blessed One Metteyya,' I did not take up insight meditation. Well then, sit me up and make room." He sat the elder up and went outside. The elder, at the very moment of the attendant's departure, attained arahantship and gave the sign of this with a snap of the fingers. The community of monks, gathering, said, "Venerable sir, to bring forth the supramundane state at such a time of death — you have done a difficult thing." "Friends, this is not difficult — but let me tell you what is difficult: friends, from the time I went forth, I have never once done a deed born of unmindfulness or ignorance." His nephew, too, in the same way, attained arahantship at fifty years as a monk.

"If one has little learning, and is not well established in virtue, they censure him on both counts — for his virtue and for his learning.

"If one has little learning, but is well established in virtue, they praise him for his virtue; his learning, too, succeeds.

"If one is greatly learned, but is not well established in virtue, they censure him for his virtue; his learning does not succeed.

"If one is greatly learned, and is well established in virtue, they praise him on both counts — for his virtue and for his learning.

"Who is fit to find fault with one greatly learned, a bearer of the Dhamma, wise, a disciple of the Buddha — like a bar of refined gold from the river Jambū? Even the gods praise him; even Brahmā praises him." (AN 4.6)

But the virtue of trainees, unmisapprehended by way of wrong views, or the virtue of ordinary persons unmisapprehended by way of lust, should be understood as "unmisapprehended-purification" — like the virtue of the Elder Tissa, son of a householder. For that venerable one, in dependence on such virtue, wishing to establish himself in arahantship, said to bandits —

"Having broken both my feet, I shall satisfy you — for I am troubled, I am ashamed, at the thought of dying with a mind touched by lust."

"Thus, having reflected, and having contemplated wisely, when dawn came, I attained arahantship." (DN Commentary 2.373)

A certain elder, too, gravely ill and unable even to feed himself with his own hand, lay rolling about, soiled in his own urine and excrement. Seeing this, a certain young monk said, "Oh, how painful are the formations of life!" The great elder said to him: "Friend, dying now, I shall obtain a heavenly rebirth — of this I have no doubt. But any attainment gained by breaking this virtue would be exactly like the case of one who has renounced the training and returned to lay life." Having said this, resolving, "I shall die together with my virtue intact," he lay right there, and, contemplating that very illness, attained arahantship, and declared it to the community of monks with these verses —

"For me, touched by a certain disease, grievously afflicted, being broken down by illness — this body withers quickly, like a flower laid in the dust under the sun.

"For one who does not see it as it really is — this base thing reckoned noble, this impure thing considered pure, filled through and through with every kind of corpse-matter —

"shame on this afflicted, rotting body of mine — foul-smelling, impure, subject to disease — wherein negligent, infatuated people lose the path to a good rebirth."

But the virtue of arahants and the rest should be understood as "tranquilized-purification," since it is pure through the tranquilizing of all distress. Thus it is fivefold by way of limited-purification and the rest.

In the second pentad, the meaning should be understood by way of the abandoning and so on of killing living beings and the rest. For this was said in the Paṭisambhidā —

"There are five virtues: the abandoning of killing living beings is virtue, abstinence from it is virtue, volition to abstain is virtue, restraint from it is virtue, non-transgression of it is virtue. Likewise of taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, malicious speech, harsh speech, idle chatter, covetousness, ill will, and wrong view. Of sensual desire by renunciation, of ill will by non-ill-will, of sloth and torpor by the perception of light, of restlessness by non-distraction, of doubt by the discernment of states, of ignorance by knowledge, of discontent by gladness; of the hindrances by the first jhāna, of applied and sustained thought by the second jhāna, of joy by the third jhāna, of pleasure and pain by the fourth jhāna; of the perception of form, of resistance, and of diversity, by the attainment of the base of infinite space; of the perception of the base of infinite space, by the attainment of the base of infinite consciousness; of the perception of the base of infinite consciousness, by the attainment of the base of nothingness; of the perception of the base of nothingness, by the attainment of the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; of the perception of permanence, by the contemplation of impermanence; of the perception of pleasure, by the contemplation of suffering; of the perception of self, by the contemplation of non-self; of delight, by the contemplation of disenchantment; of lust, by the contemplation of dispassion; of origination, by the contemplation of cessation; of grasping, by the contemplation of relinquishment; of the perception of compactness, by the contemplation of destruction; of accumulation, by the contemplation of dissolution; of the perception of stability, by the contemplation of change; of the sign, by the contemplation of the signless; of longing, by the contemplation of the desireless; of adherence, by the contemplation of emptiness; of adherence through grasping at essence, by insight into phenomena with higher wisdom; of adherence through confusion, by the knowledge and vision of things as they really are; of adherence through attachment, by the contemplation of danger; of non-reflection, by the contemplation of reflection; of adherence through bondage, by the contemplation of turning away; of the defilements coexistent with wrong views, by the path of stream-entry; of the coarse defilements, by the path of once-returning; of the subtle-remaining defilements, by the path of non-returning; of all defilements, by the path of arahantship — in each case the abandoning is virtue, abstinence, volition, restraint, and non-transgression are virtue. Virtues of this kind lead to freedom from remorse of mind; they lead to gladness, to joy, to tranquility, to happiness, to repeated practice, to development, to cultivation, to embellishment, to requisite-hood, to completeness, to fulfillment; they lead to utter disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, and to nibbāna" (Paṭis I.41).

And here, "abandoning" is not some separate entity in itself, apart from the mere non-arising of killing living beings and the rest, of the kind already described. But since each such abandoning, in the sense of being a foundation for its corresponding wholesome state, is a "supporting"; and, by bringing about a state of non-wavering, is an "undertaking" — therefore, by the very same sense of "composing" already stated, reckoned as supporting and coordinating, it is called "virtue." The other four states — abstinence from each of these, restraint with regard to each, the volition associated with both, and the non-transgression of one who does not transgress each — are stated with reference to an actual occurrence in the mind. But the sense of "virtue" for these has already been explained before. Thus it is fivefold by way of abandoning-virtue and the rest.

And with this much, the answer to these questions — what is virtue? in what sense is it virtue? what are its characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause? what are the benefits of virtue? and how many kinds does this virtue have? — is finished.

Now, as to what was said — "and what is its defilement, what is its cleansing" — here we say: the state of being broken and the rest is virtue's defilement; the state of being unbroken and the rest is its cleansing. That state of being broken and the rest is comprised by breakage caused by gain, fame, and the like, and by the sevenfold bondage of sexuality.

For one whose training precept is broken either at the beginning or at the end of the seven classes of offense, that one's virtue is called "broken" — like a cloth cut off at the border. But for one whose precept is broken in the middle, that one's virtue is called "torn" — like a cloth torn in the middle. For one whose precepts are broken two or three in a row, that one's virtue is called "brindled" — like a cow of one color with a patch of black, red, or some other contrasting color on its back or belly. For one whose precepts are broken here and there, that one's virtue is called "speckled" — like a cow dappled here and there with spots of contrasting color. Thus, first of all, the state of being broken and the rest comes about through breakage caused by gain and the like.

Likewise by way of the sevenfold bondage of sexuality. For this was said by the Blessed One —

"Here, brahmin, a certain ascetic or brahmin, professing to live in proper celibacy, does not actually engage in sexual union with a woman, but he consents to a woman's anointing, massaging, bathing, and rubbing him; he relishes this, desires it, and finds satisfaction in it. This too, brahmin, is a break, a tear, a brindling, a speckling of the celibate life. This one, brahmin, is said to live an impure celibate life, bound by the bondage of sexuality; he is not freed from birth. From aging, from death... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic or brahmin, professing celibacy, does not engage in sexual union with a woman, nor does he consent to a woman's anointing and so on; but he laughs, plays, and jests together with a woman — he relishes this... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic does none of the foregoing; but he gazes into a woman's eyes, eye to eye, and looks at her — he relishes this... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic does none of the foregoing; but he hears a woman's voice through a wall or a fence — laughing, talking, singing, or weeping — he relishes this... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic does none of the foregoing; but he recollects whatever laughing, talking, and playing he once shared with a woman in the past — he relishes this... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic does none of the foregoing; but he sees a householder or a householder's son endowed and provided with the five cords of sensual pleasure, amusing himself with them — he relishes this... I say he is not freed from suffering.

"Further, brahmin, here a certain ascetic does none of the foregoing; but he lives the celibate life aspiring to some order of gods, thinking, 'By this virtue, or observance, or austerity, or celibate life, I shall become a god, or one among the gods.' He relishes this, desires it, and finds satisfaction in it. This too, brahmin, is a break, a tear, a brindling, a speckling of the celibate life." (AN 7.50)

Thus it should be understood that the state of being broken and the rest is comprised both by breakage caused by gain and the like, and by the sevenfold bondage of sexuality.

But the state of being unbroken and the rest is comprised by the complete non-breaking of the training precepts; by making amends for those breaches that admit of amends; by the absence of the sevenfold bondage of sexuality; by the non-arising of a further set of evil states — anger, hostility, denigration, domineering, envy, stinginess, deceit, fraud, obstinacy, presumption, conceit, arrogance, vanity, negligence, and the like; and by the arising of such qualities as wanting little, contentment, and austerity.

For whatever precepts are not broken even for the sake of gain and the like — or, even if broken through the fault of negligence, have had amends made — and are unassailed by the bonds of sexuality or by evil states such as anger and hostility, these are said to be, in every way, unbroken, untorn, unbrindled, and unspeckled. These same precepts, because they produce a state of freedom, are called "liberating"; because they are praised by the wise, they are called "praised by the wise"; because they are unmisapprehended by craving and views, they are called "unmisapprehended"; and, since they lead to access concentration or to absorption concentration, they are also called "conducive to concentration." Therefore this state of being unbroken and the rest should be understood as their "cleansing."

This cleansing is accomplished in two ways: by seeing the danger of failure in virtue, and by seeing the benefit of success in virtue. Herein, the danger of failure in virtue should be seen by the method of such suttas as: "Monks, there are these five dangers for one lacking virtue, from failure in virtue" (DN II.149; AN 5.213).

Moreover, an immoral person, on account of his immorality, is displeasing to gods and humans, is not one his fellows in the holy life care to instruct, is distressed when his immorality is censured, and is filled with regret when the virtuous are praised; and, by that very immorality, he is of poor quality, like a coarse hemp-cloth garment. For those who follow his example, since it brings them long-lasting suffering in states of loss, he is a painful contact to have had. Since he does not make of great fruit the gift of those whose offerings he accepts, he is of little worth. He is hard to purify, like a cesspit accumulated over many years. He is excluded on both sides, like a firebrand from a cremation ground. Even while professing to be a monk, he is no monk at all — like a donkey following behind a herd of cattle. He is constantly anxious, like a man who is everyone's enemy. He is unfit for communal life, like a corpse. Even if endowed with learning and other qualities, he is unworthy of honor from his fellows in the holy life, like a cremation-ground fire is unworthy of honor to brahmins. He is incapable of attaining any distinction, like a blind man is incapable of seeing forms. He is without hope in the true Dhamma, like an outcaste's child is without hope for kingship. Even thinking, "I am happy," he is truly miserable, since he shares in the suffering described in the discourse on the mass of fire.

For immoral persons, whose minds are attached to the pleasurable relish of enjoying the five cords of sensual pleasure, of receiving veneration and honor, and the like — showing them the extremely bitter suffering, capable of producing a rush of hot blood, that arises merely from recollecting the cause of such enjoyment — the Blessed One, to whom the result of action is directly evident in every way, said —

"Monks, do you see that great mass of fire, burning, blazing, and glowing?" "Yes, venerable sir." "What do you think, monks — which would be better: to embrace that great mass of fire, burning, blazing, and glowing, and sit or lie down close to it; or to embrace a maiden of the warrior caste, or a brahmin caste, or a householder's family, with soft and tender hands and feet, and sit or lie down close to her?" "This indeed would be better, venerable sir — to embrace the maiden and sit or lie down close to her. For it would be painful, venerable sir, to embrace that great mass of fire and sit or lie down close to it." "I declare to you, monks, I make known to you, monks: it would indeed be better for such a one — immoral, of evil character, of suspect and impure conduct, of concealed deeds, no true ascetic though professing to be an ascetic, no true celibate though professing celibacy, rotten within, corrupt, of depraved nature — to embrace that great mass of fire, burning, blazing, and glowing, and sit or lie down close to it. Why is that? For on that account, monks, he might incur death, or suffering close to death — but he would not, because of that, be reborn, upon the breakup of the body after death, in a state of loss, an unhappy destination, a state of ruin, in hell." (AN 7.72)

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man should wind a tough rope of horsehair around both one's legs and saw back and forth, cutting through the outer skin, then the hide, then the flesh, then the sinew, then the bone, coming finally to rest severing the very marrow; or that one should accept the reverential salutation of wealthy nobles, wealthy brahmins, or wealthy householders?"

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man should strike one in the chest with a sharp, oil-polished spear; or that one should accept the reverential añjali-gesture of wealthy nobles, brahmins, or householders?"

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man should wrap one's body in a red-hot sheet of iron, burning, blazing, and glowing; or that one should make use of a robe given in faith by wealthy nobles, brahmins, or householders?"

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man, having pried open one's mouth with a red-hot iron spike, burning, blazing, and glowing, should thrust a red-hot ball of metal into the mouth — burning the lips, the mouth, the tongue, the throat, and the belly, and passing out below carrying the intestines and mesentery with it; or that one should make use of almsfood given in faith by wealthy nobles, brahmins, or householders?"

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man, seizing one by the head or by the shoulders, should force one to sit or lie down upon a red-hot iron bed or iron bench, burning, blazing, and glowing; or that one should make use of a bed or bench given in faith by wealthy nobles, brahmins, or householders?"

"What do you think, monks — which would be better: that a strong man, seizing one by the feet with head hanging down, should throw one into a red-hot iron cauldron, burning, blazing, and glowing, where, being cooked, boiling up in froth, one would tumble sometimes to the top, sometimes to the bottom, sometimes sideways; or that one should make use of a dwelling given in faith by wealthy nobles, brahmins, or householders?" (AN 7.72)

By these similes of the horsehair rope, the sharp spear, the iron sheet, the iron ball, the iron bed, the iron bench, and the iron cauldron, he showed the suffering that comes from improperly receiving reverential salutation and the añjali-gesture, and from using robes, almsfood, beds and benches, and dwellings given in faith. Therefore —

For one of broken virtue, who does not give up sensual pleasure, whose bitter fruit exceeds even the suffering of embracing a mass of fire — whence could there be happiness?

What happiness indeed is there, in accepting reverential salutation, for one of failed virtue — who shares in a suffering exceeding even the suffering of the tough horsehair-rope's sawing?

What happiness is there, in accepting the añjali-gesture of the faithful, for one without virtue, for whom this is the cause of a suffering greater even than the suffering of a spear's thrust?

What indeed is the happiness of using a robe, for the unrestrained, by which he must for long endure, in hell, the touch of a blazing sheet of iron?

Even sweet almsfood is, for one without virtue, comparable to deadly poison — by which he must, for a long time, swallow blazing balls of iron.

Even what is reckoned as pleasant — the use of bed and bench by one without virtue — is truly suffering, by which blazing beds and benches of iron will torment him for long.

What delight is there, for one without virtue, in dwelling in a monastery given in faith — by which he must instead dwell amid blazing iron cauldrons?

"Of suspect and impure conduct, of depraved nature, corrupt, evil, and rotten within" — this is what the Teacher of the world said, in censure.

Shame on the life of the unrestrained one, who wears the outward guise of an ascetic — no true ascetic, corrupted, carrying about a ruined self.

Like excrement, like a corpse — such is what even those who love mere adornment avoid here, and what the good and virtuous avoid likewise. What, then, is the life of such a one worth?

Unreleased from every fear, yet cut off from every happiness of attainment, the door to heaven tightly shut against him, he has mounted the road to states of loss.

Who else is a greater object of compassion for the compassionate person than one such as this, equal to the immoral in vileness? Thus manifold are the faults of failed virtue.

By this and similar reflection, the seeing of danger in the failure of virtue should be understood; and, by the reverse of what has been described, the seeing of benefit in the success of virtue should be understood as well. Moreover —

Pleasing indeed is the bearing of bowl and robe for him whose virtue is thoroughly stainless; for him, the going-forth bears fruit.

The fear that begins with self-reproach does not enter the heart of a monk of pure virtue — just as darkness does not enter the sun.

A monk, shining with the accomplishment of virtue in the grove of austerity, shines like the moon in the sky with the accomplishment of its radiance.

Even the bodily fragrance of a virtuous monk gives gladness to the gods themselves — what, then, need be said of the fragrance of his virtue?

It surpasses the excellence of every kind of fragrance — the fragrance of virtue blows, unimpeded, in every direction.

Even small acts of service done for the virtuous become of great fruit; thus the virtuous one becomes a fitting vessel for honor and veneration.

The taints, with their result visible here and now, do not afflict the virtuous one; the virtuous one digs out the very root of suffering yet to come.

Whatever excellence there is among human beings, and whatever excellence there is among the gods, is not hard to obtain for one accomplished in virtue, who wishes for it.

But that excellence which is utterly peaceful — the excellence of nibbāna — is what the mind of one accomplished in virtue runs after.

Thus the wise one, seeing virtue as the root of all excellence, should clearly discern its benefit in all its many aspects.

For one who discerns in this way, the mind, recoiling from failure of virtue, becomes inclined toward the accomplishment of virtue. Therefore, having seen this danger of the failure of virtue, and this benefit of the accomplishment of virtue, just as described, one should cleanse one's virtue with the utmost care.

And with this much, virtue — of the verse "established in virtue, a person of wisdom..." in the Path of Purification taught by way of virtue, concentration, and understanding — has, for now, been fully illuminated.

Thus, in the Visuddhimagga, composed for the gladdening of good people, this is the first chapter, called the Description of Virtue.