Suspension 7

Origin Story

The Buddha was in Sāvatthī. At that time, the bhikkhus built a monastery close to the city of Sāketa, and over time it became crowded. It was surrounded by lay houses, and because there were the noises of elephants and horses, and the sounds of old and young men and women, it prevented the bhikkhus from reciting suttas, sitting in meditation, and practicing the path. Among the householders was one called Añjana, who had authority, virtue, and an abundance of wealth, people, fields and land, Tridacna stones, agate, and he had achieved all kinds of riches and a beautiful appearance. The bhikkhus instructed him to have a monastery built in another place, and the householder then built a monastery in the Añjana grove. The bhikkhus gave up the monastery close to the city, and lived in the monastery in the Añjana grove. Bhikkhunīs were wandering in the country of Kosala towards Sāvatthī, eventually reached Sāketa, and spent the night in the old monastery. They saw that there were beds and couches, bedding, basins and utensils, pots and pans, all kinds of equipment, and it was clean and livable. The bhikkhunīs went to the bhikkhus and said: “The venerables have given up this monastery, we’ll stay there.” The bhikkhus said: “As you please.” Then the owner of the monastery died, and when his children later divided the assets, this monastery was also among them.

One child received this monastery and they went to the bhikkhunīs and said: “Go away.” The bhikkhunīs said: “Why do you make us leave?” They answered: “I received this monastery as my share.” The bhikkhunīs said: “We haven’t received it from you, we received it from the bhikkhus. If the bhikkhus make us leave, we’ll leave, but we don’t follow your words.” Among the bhikkhunīs was one called Sumuttā who had gone forth from a brahmin clan, and was nimble, sturdy, and strong. She spoke forcefully and quarreled with them. Because the householder’s child was impatient and angry, they beat the bhikkhunī. That bhikkhunī then went to the judges and said: “Such-and-such’s child beat me.” The judges asked: “Why did they beat you?” The bhikkhunī then explained the matter in detail. The judges said: “The renunciates that are Sakyan children shouldn’t lose this monastery. Why? That a father gives something and a child snatches it back, or that a child gives something and a father snatches it back, that shouldn’t happen.” The judges sent someone to summon the child to come, and asked them: “Did you beat the bhikkhunī?” They answered: “I really beat her.” The judges investigated according to the law: “Which offense should be incurred by someone who beats a renunciate?”

The law said: “The body part they used should be cut off.” The judges asked: “With which item did you beat her?” They answered: “I beat her with my hand.” They asked again: “Which hand?” They answered: “The right hand.” Then they cut off their right hand. At that time, a bad reputation spread around: “These renunciates that are Sakyan daughters tell people to cut off someone’s hand.” One person told two people, two people told three, and in this way, the whole city of Sāketa gradually heard about it.

Among the bhikkhunīs were those of few wishes, who knew moderation and practised the austerities. When they heard of this matter, their minds weren’t pleased, and they criticized her with all kinds of reasons: “How can you be called a bhikkhunī when you talk to people to make them cut off someone’s hand?” Having criticized her with all kinds of reasons, they explained it to the Buddha in detail. The Buddha gathered both sanghas because of this matter. He knew, and intentionally asked Sumuttā bhikkhunī: “Did you really do this?” She answered: “I really did this, World-honored One.” The Buddha criticized her with all kinds of reasons: “How can you be called a bhikkhunī when you talk to people to make them cut off someone’s hand?” Having criticized her with all kinds of reasons, he said to the bhikkhus: “For 10 benefits, I’ll lay down a precept for the bhikkhunīs. From now on, this precept should be recited thus:

Final Ruling

‘If a bhikkhunī goes to a king, judges, brahmins, or householders, and relying on their authority speaks about someone, that act is an immediate saṅghādisesa, from which one can repent.’”

Explanations

“A king” means someone from a khattiya clan who has received the position of a king by sprinkling water on their head. This is called a khattiya king by sprinkling water on their head. If a brahmin, a householder, or a woman has received the position of a king, it’s also called “a king by sprinkling water on their head.”

“A judge” means someone who lives off a judge’s salary, fields, and land.

“A brahmin” means someone born into a brahmin clan.

“A householder” means except for a king, a judge, or a brahmin, everyone else who hasn’t gone forth is called “a householder”.

“Relying on their authority she speaks about someone” means that relying on someone else’s authority, she likes to quarrel and talk about others.

“A saṅghādisesa” means this offense is dependent upon the sangha, and in the sangha there’s a remainder. Because she confesses and clears it in front of the sangha, therefore it’s called a saṅghādisesa.

Herein, this is an offense: If a bhikkhunī goes to a king, judges, brahmins, or householders, and relying on their authority speaks about someone, it’s a saṅghādisesa. If, when matters are being settled, she angrily criticizes someone who previously beat her to the person who is settling matters, it’s a saṅghādisesa. If she criticizes someone who previously beat her to someone else, it’s a thullaccaya.

If she angrily criticizes them in a secluded place, or doesn’t speak, the offense isn’t committed. (End of rule 7.)

Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, fascicle 42.