Bad habits. The origin story to Cv.V.36 lists bad habits from which a bhikkhu should abstain. The list is long and varied, and can be divided into the following sub-topics:
Corrupting families. The bhikkhus in question planted flowering trees and had them planted; they watered them and had them watered; they plucked them and had them plucked; they tied the flowers into garlands and had them tied; they made garlands with stalks on one side and had them made; they made garlands with stalks on two sides and had them made; they made branching stalk arrangements (stringing flowers on thorns or palm-frond stems) and had them made; they made floral arrangements in bunches (BD: wreaths) and had them made; they made forehead garlands and had them made; they made floral ear ornaments and had them made; they made floral breast-plates and had them made. They took these garlands or had them sent to wives of reputable families, daughters of reputable families, girls of reputable families, daughters-in-law of reputable families, female slaves of reputable families. They ate from the same dish with wives of reputable families, daughters of reputable families, girls of reputable families, daughters-in-law of reputable families, female slaves of reputable families; drank from the same beaker, sat down on the same seat, shared the same bench, shared the same mat, shared the same blanket, shared the same mat and blanket.
The Commentary has a great deal to say on these topics. It begins by listing five methods by which a bhikkhu may get someone else to do something for him: (1) improper wording, (2) proper wording, (3) description (saying that doing such-and-such is good), (4) physical gesture (e.g., standing with a shovel in one's hand as a gesture that a plant should be planted), and (5) a sign (e.g., leaving a shovel on the ground next to an unplanted plant for the same purpose). A bhikkhu who wants flowering trees planted for the sake of corrupting families incurs a dukkata if he uses any of these methods to get someone else to do the planting. If he wants fruiting trees planted so that he can eat the fruit, only (1) and (2) are improper. If he wants trees planted for the sake of having a forest, a garden, or shade, or for having flowers to give in offering to the Triple Gem, only (1) is improper (i.e., one cannot say, "Dig this soil" in violation of Pc 10). There is no offense in taking or getting someone to take flower-garlands or other flower arrangements as an offering to the Triple Gem.
However, the Commentary insists that under no circumstances should a bhikkhu arrange flowers in any of the ways mentioned above, even as an offering to the Triple Gem. It fields the questions as to why there is the discrepancy here -- i.e., why it is all right to take flower arrangements for the Triple Gem, but not to make them -- but its answer is simply that the ancient commentaries say so, and what they say must be right. This is not supported by the Canon, in which flower arranging is criticized only in the context of corrupting families. Bhikkhus obviously have better things to do with their time than arranging flowers on altars, etc., but that is no reason for imposing an offense for doing so. Nevertheless, to summarize the Commentary's long discussion of the matter: to arrange flowers in any of the ways described in the above passage incurs a dukkata; to arrange them in other ways, no matter how elaborately, is an offense only if one is planning to corrupt families with the arrangement; to get others to make flower arrangements as an offering to the Triple Gem is no offense if one uses any of the methods from (2) to (5) listed in the preceding paragraph.
Violations of the eight precepts. The bhikkhus in the origin story to Cv.V.36 ate at the wrong time, drank strong drink, wore garlands, perfumes, and cosmetics; they danced, they sang, they played instruments, they performed. They danced while a woman danced, sang while she danced, played instruments while she danced, performed while she danced. They danced ... sang ... played instruments ... performed while she sang. They danced ... sang ... played instruments ... performed while she played instruments. They danced ... sang ... played instruments ... performed while she performed... Having spread out their outer cloaks as a stage, they said to a dancing girl, "Dance here, sister." They applauded her (according to the Commentary, they placed their fingers first on their own foreheads, then on her forehead, saying "Good, good!" This, however, would seem to be a violation of Sg 2).
Games and other playful behavior. The bhikkhus played eight-row chess, ten-row chess, chess in the air, hopscotch, spillikins, dice, stick games, hand-pictures, ball-games; blew through toy pipes, played with toy plows, turned somersaults, played with toy windmills, toy measures, toy chariots, toy bows; guessed letters drawn in the air, guessed thoughts, mimicked deformities. Reasoning from the Great Standards, other toys and games, such as computer games, would be forbidden as well.
Athletics, military skills, and acrobatics. The bhikkhus studied elephant-riding skills, horse-riding skills, chariot-riding skills, archery skills, swordsmanship. They ran in front of elephants ... horses ... chariots. They ran forwards and backwards. They whistled (cheered? -- this term, usselhenti, is uncertain), they clapped their hands, wrestled, boxed.
This list, though long, is not intended to be exhaustive. The origin story adds that the bhikkhus in question indulged in other bad habits as well. Cv.V.36 states simply that a bhikkhu who engages in bad habits should be dealt with in accordance with the rule. This, the Commentary says, means that if no higher penalty is assigned elsewhere, the bhikkhu incurs a dukkata.
Other rules related to the list of bad habits include the following:
A bhikkhu should not eat from the same dish, drink from the same beaker, share the same bed, share the same mat, share the same blanket, or share the same mat and blanket with anyone at all, lay or ordained. According to the Commentary, this means that one should not eat from a dish or drink from a beaker in the presence of another person who is also eating from that dish or drinking from that beaker (see Chapter 4). As for sharing bedding, a similar principle would apply: one may use bedding that someone else has used or is planning to use, but not at the same time that the other person is actually using it.
There is a dukkata for going to see dancing, singing, or music. According to the Commentary, "dancing" includes going to see even peacocks dancing. It also includes dancing oneself and getting others to dance. (The Rona Sutta -- A.III.103 -- notes that, in the discipline of the noble ones, dancing counts as insanity.) "Singing" includes drama music as well as "sadhu music," which according to the Sub-commentary means music dealing with Dhamma themes such as impermanence. Other religious music would come under this prohibition as well. The Commentary adds that "singing" also includes singing oneself and getting others to sing. The same holds true for "playing music." (The Rona Sutta also notes that, in the discipline of the noble ones, singing counts as wailing.) However, there is no offense in snapping one's fingers or clapping one's hands in irritation or exasperation. There is also no offense if, within the monastery, one happens to see/hear dancing, singing, or music, but if one goes from one dwelling to another with the intention to see/hear, one incurs a dukkata. The same holds true for getting up from one's seat with the intention to see/hear; or if, while standing in a road, one turns one's neck to see.
D.2's list of forbidden shows includes the following: dancing, singing, instrumental music, plays, ballad recitations, hand-clapping, cymbals and drums, magic-lantern scenes, acrobatic and conjuring tricks, elephant fights, horse fights, buffalo fights, bull fights, goat fights, ram fights, cock fights, quail fights; fighting with staves, boxing, wrestling, war-games, roll calls, battle arrays, and regimental reviews. Reasoning from this list, it would seem that a bhikkhu would be forbidden from watching athletic contests of any type. Movies and shadow-puppet plays would fit under the category of "magic lantern scenes," and -- given the Commentary's prohibition against "sadhu music," above -- it would seem that fictional movies, plays, etc., dealing with Dhamma themes would be forbidden as well. Non-fictional documentary films would not seem come under the rule, and the question of their appropriateness is thus an issue more of Dhamma than of Vinaya. Because many of even the most serious documentaries treat topics that come under "animal talk" (see Pc 85), a bhikkhu should be scrupulously honest with himself when judging whether watching such a documentary would be beneficial for his practice.
Arguing from the Great Standards, a bhikkhu at present would commit an offense if he were to turn on an electronic device such as a television, radio, VCR, computer, or CD player for the sake of entertainment, or if he were to insert a CD or a tape into such a device for the sake of entertainment. He would also commit an offense if he went out of his way to watch or listen to entertainment on such a device that was already turned on.
In connection with the rules against playful behavior, there is a rule that a bhikkhu should not climb a tree. ("People were offended and annoyed ... saying, 'Like monkeys!'") However, if there is good reason to do so, one may climb a tree up to the height of a man; and if there are dangers, one may climb as high as is necessary in order to escape the danger. An example of a good reason, according to the Commentary, is to collect dry kindling. Examples of dangers include dangerous animals, being lost, or an approaching flood or fire: in the latter cases, one may climb a tree to escape the rising water or to get a sense of direction.
Also, as mentioned in Volume One, the Vibhanga to Pr 3 imposes a dukkata on the act of throwing a stone over a precipice in fun.
Wrong livelihood. A bhikkhu lives in an economy of gifts, entrusting his livelihood to the gifts of the faithful. To maintain the purity of this arrangement, he must not try to influence their faith for his own material benefit through inappropriate means or for the sake of items inappropriate for his use. We have already discussed this topic briefly under Sg 13. Here we will treat it more fully.
Cv.I.14.1 states that a bhikkhu who engages in wrong livelihood may be subject to banishment. Only a few of the rules dealing with wrong livelihood are given in the Khandhakas. More information is given in the Patimokkha and in the suttas.
Inappropriate items. NP 18 & 19 forbid a bhikkhu from accepting gold and silver (money) or from engaging in an exchange that would result in his receiving such things. Even when he has forfeited these items after confessing his offense under those rules, he is not allowed to receive them in return. (However, there is an allowance for a steward to accept money to be used for a bhikkhu's needs. This is called the Mendaka allowance, after the lay man who inspired it, and is discussed under NP 10.)
In addition, D.2 states that the ideal bhikkhu "abstains from accepting uncooked grain ... raw meat ... women and girls ... male and female slaves ... goats and sheep ... fowl and pigs ... elephants, cattle, steeds, and mares ... fields and property." The Commentary to NP 19 terms these items dukkata-vatthu, items entailing a dukkata when accepted.
Inappropriate means. The section on wrong livelihood in the Rule Index to Volume One lists the rules in the Patimokkha related to the issue of wrong livelihood, the most serious being the parajika for making false claims to superior human attainments. Most discussions of the type of wrong livelihood that would be grounds for banishment, however, focus on the issue of acting as a go-between (Sg 5) and that of asking for items in inappropriate situations or from inappropriate people.
In general, a bhikkhu may ask for food and tonics only when ill (Pc 39, Sk 37), and for robe cloth only when two or more of his own robes have been lost or stolen (NP 6). He may ask for enough construction materials for his own purposes only when the hut he is building is no larger than the prescribed measure (Sg 6). For further details, see the discussions under these rules. In all circumstances a bhikkhu may ask for items from his relatives and from those who have given him an invitation to ask -- although, in this latter case, he must stay within the bounds of the invitation.
In addition to asking outright, there are other inappropriate ways of influencing donors to make donations. M.117 defines wrong livelihood as dissembling, talking, hinting, belittling, and pursuing gain with gain. The Visuddhi Magga's long discussion of these terms (I.60-82) may be summarized as follows:
dissembling means making a show of not wanting fine food, etc., in hopes that donors will be impressed with one's fewness of wants and offer fine food as a result;talking means speaking with donors in any way that will make them want to give donations -- examples include persuading, suggesting, ingratiating oneself with them, and showing affection for their children;
hinting means speaking or gesturing in an indirect way that will get donors to give donations;
belittling means speaking of or to a person in a reproachful or sarcastic way, in hopes that he/she will be shamed into giving;
pursuing gain with gain means making a small gift in hopes of getting a large gift in return (this would include making investments in hopes of profit, and offering material incentives to those who make donations).
Under the category of hinting fall three rules given in the Vibhanga to Pr 2 (Pr.II.7.25). Dealing with three variables, they cover the case where Bhikkhu X is going to a place where supporters of Bhikkhu Y live. In the first variable, X volunteers to take Y's greetings to the supporters (apparently in hopes that they will send gifts to Y, which is what happens). In the second, Y asks X to take his greetings. In the third, they put their heads together and agree for X to take Y's greetings. In all three cases, the bhikkhu who says, "I will take your greetings," or "Take my greetings" incurs a dukkata. Although the rules seem aimed at preventing a form of wrong livelihood, they make no exception for a bhikkhu taking another bhikkhu's greetings with other, more innocent purposes in mind.
D.2 contains an even more detailed description of inappropriate means for gaining a livelihood. The ideal bhikkhu, it says,
"abstains from running messages ... from buying and selling ... from dealing with false scales, false metals, and false measures ... from bribery, deception, and fraud. He abstains from mutilating, executing, imprisoning, highway robbery, plunder, and violence..."Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to running messages and errands for people such as these -- kings, ministers of state, noble warriors, priests, householders, or youths (who say), 'Go here,' 'Go there,' 'Take this there,' 'Fetch that here' -- he abstains from running messages and errands for people such as these...
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as:
reading marks on the limbs (e.g., palmistry);
reading omens and signs;
interpreting celestial events (falling stars, comets);
interpreting dreams;
reading marks on the body (e.g., phrenology);
reading marks on cloth gnawed by mice;
offering fire oblations, oblations from a ladle, oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains, ghee, and oil;
offering oblations from the mouth;
offering blood-sacrifices;
making predictions based on the fingertips;
geomancy;
laying demons in a cemetery;
placing spells on spirits;
reciting house-protection charms;
snake charming, poison-lore, scorpion-lore, rat-lore, bird-lore, crow-lore;
fortune-telling based on visions;
giving protective charms;
interpreting the calls of birds and animals --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these."Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as: determining lucky and unlucky gems, garments, staffs, swords, spears, arrows, bows, and other weapons; women, boys, girls, male slaves, female slaves; elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, cows, goats, rams, fowl, quails, lizards, long-eared rodents, tortoises, and other animals -- he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these.
"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as forecasting:
the rulers will march forth;"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as forecasting:
the rulers will march forth and return;
our rulers will attack, and their rulers will retreat;
their rulers will attack, and our rulers will retreat;
there will be triumph for our rulers and defeat for their rulers;
there will be triumph for their rulers and defeat for our rulers;
thus there will be triumph, thus there will be defeat --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these.there will be a lunar eclipse;"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as forecasting:
there will be a solar eclipse;
there will be an occultation of an asterism;
the sun and moon will go their normal courses;
the sun and moon will go astray;
the asterisms will go their normal courses;
the asterisms will go astray;
there will be a meteor shower;
there will be a darkening of the sky;
there will be an earthquake;
there will be thunder coming from a clear sky;
there will be a rising, a setting, a darkening, a brightening of the sun, moon, and asterisms;
such will be the result of the lunar eclipse ... the rising, setting, darkening, brightening of the sun, moon, and asterisms --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these.there will be abundant rain; there will be a drought;"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as:
there will be plenty; there will be famine;
there will be rest and security; there will be danger;
there will be disease; there will be freedom from disease;
or they earn their living by counting, accounting, calculation, composing poetry, or teaching hedonistic arts and doctrines (lokayata) --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these.calculating auspicious dates for marriages, betrothals, divorces; for collecting debts or making investments and loans; for being attractive or unattractive; curing women who have undergone miscarriages or abortions;"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly arts as:
reciting spells to bind a man's tongue, to paralyze his jaws, to make him lose control over his hands, or to bring on deafness;
getting oracular answers to questions addressed to a mirror, to a young girl, or to a spirit medium;
worshipping the sun, worshipping the Great Brahma, bringing forth flames from the mouth, invoking the goddess of luck --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these.promising gifts to deities in return for favors; fulfilling such promises;
demonology;
teaching house-protection spells;
inducing virility and impotence;
consecrating sites for construction;
giving ceremonial mouthwashes and ceremonial baths;
offering sacrificial fires;
preparing emetics, purgatives, expectorants, diuretics, headache cures; preparing ear-oil, eye-drops, oil for treatment through the nose, collyrium, and counter-medicines; curing cataracts, practicing surgery, practicing as a children's doctor, administering medicines and treatments to cure their after-effects --
he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue."
The Khandhakas contain only a few rules related to wrong livelihood. A bhikkhu who learns or teaches any of the "lowly arts" mentioned above incurs a dukkata. The same holds true for a bhikkhu who learns or teaches lokayata, a term whose meaning is controversial. S.XII.48 indicates that lokayata is a form of metaphysics, cosmology, or systematic ontology. The four main tenets of lokayata, it says, are: everything exists, nothing exists, everything is a oneness, everything is a plurality. The Commentary defines lokayata as sophistry ("For this and this reason, crows are white, herons are black") and the teachings of other sectarians. Because the lokayatans of the Buddha's time tended to use their first principles to argue for a life of hedonism, some modern scholars translate lokayata as hedonism. Whatever the term's precise definition, it can be extended through the Great Standards to cover all philosophical systems at variance with Buddhist practice. The Vinaya Mukha objects to this particular prohibition, saying that it would make bhikkhus narrow and ill-informed, unable to argue effectively against non-Buddhist teachings. We must remember, however, that when the Canon was first composed, "learning" a philosophical system meant apprenticing oneself to one of its teachers and memorizing its texts. Thus it is possible to argue that this prohibition does not extend to the simple act of reading about systems whose teachings would undermine Buddhist practice. Still, one must be sensitive to one's motivation for reading about such things, and to the question of whether such reading is taking up valuable time better spent in the practice.
A bhikkhu is allowed to take another person's belongings on trust and make them his own only if the original owner is endowed with five characteristics: he/she is a friend, an intimate, has given permission, is still alive, and one knows "he/she will be pleased with my taking this." This topic is discussed in detail under Pr 2. One topic omitted from that discussion is that of a bhikkhu conveying an item from Bhikkhu X to Bhikkhu Y. If he wants, he may take it on trust in X only if X has said, "Give this item to Y." (In this case, the robe does not yet belong to Y.) He may take in on trust in Y only if X has said, "I give this item to Y." (In this case, the item has become Y's as soon as X says this.)
Mv.VI.37.5 tells the story of a former barber who had ordained late in life and still kept his barber's equipment at hand. Handing his equipment over to his sons, who were also skilled barbers, he had them go from house to house, taking the equipment along, to ask for offerings of food. The boys were very successful. Donors, feeling intimidated by the razors, etc., gave donations even though they didn't want to. As a result, the Buddha laid down a double rule: that a bhikkhu should not get others to do what is improper, and that one who was formerly a barber should not keep barber's equipment. The first rule seems to mean that one should not get others to dissemble, talk, hint, etc., for the sake of material gain. The second rule seems related to the fear that people in those days had of barbers, who were so skilled with their razors that they could kill without leaving a visible wound. Thus, to make sure that a bhikkhu who was formerly a barber cannot intimidate anyone, he should not have barber equipment at hand. The Commentary states that a former barber is allowed to use barber's equipment (e.g., to shave the heads of his fellow bhikkhus) but is not allowed to keep it or to accept payment for using it. Other bhikkhus may keep barber's equipment without offense.
To prevent a bhikkhu from pursuing gain with gain -- and from displeasing his donors -- there is a rule that a bhikkhu living off the gifts of the faithful should not take those gifts and give them to lay people. To do so is called a theft of faith. The one exception is that one may always give those gifts to one's mother or father. The Commentary notes that this allowance holds even if one's parents are royalty. However, it does not extend to other relatives.
This raises the question: what is to be done with leftovers? Mv.III.7.8 mentions a person called a bhikkhu-bhatika, which the Commentary defines as a man living in dependence on the bhikkhus. There may have been a custom for bhikkhus to give their leftovers to such people, but the Canon does not explicitly address the issue. The Vinaya Mukha does, saying that a bhikkhu may take any gains beyond his own needs and give them as compensation to lay people who do work in the monastery. (The Commentary to Cv.X.15.1 says that a bhikkhu may take the best part of what is given to him and then give the remainder to others. Also, if the gift is not congenial to him, he may relinquish it to others. He may also use a robe or alms bowl for a day or two and then give it away.) If a bhikkhu gains an excess of items of a more permanent nature, he may give them to his fellow bhikkhus or to the Community. If the Community has an excess, it may have the items exchanged for something more needed (see Chapter 7).
Cruelty. A bhikkhu should not grab cattle by the horns, ears, dewlaps, or by their tails, nor should he mount on their backs. (In some Communities, this rule is extended so that a bhikkhu is forbidden from riding on the back of any animal.) Furthermore, there is a thullaccaya for touching, with lustful thoughts, the sexual organs of cattle. The Commentary explains that this applies only to touching their sexual organs with one's own sexual organ, but there is nothing in the Canon to indicate that this is the case. The Sub-commentary adds that it is all right to grab cattle by their horns, etc., if one's intent is to free them from difficulty or danger.
Destructive behavior. A bhikkhu is not allowed to burn underbrush. However, if an overgrown area is burning, a counter-fire may be lit and protection provided. The Commentary has a fair amount to say about this latter allowance: "Providing protection" includes cutting grass and digging a moat, activities otherwise forbidden (see Pc 10-11); if an unordained person (this includes novices) is present, have him/her light the counter-fire; one may light it oneself only when no unordained person is present (although if that person needs help, there should be no offense in providing that help). The same holds true, the Commentary adds, for cutting underbrush, digging a moat, and cutting fresh branches used to stamp out fire: These things are all right to do regardless of whether the fire has reached one's dwelling or not. If, however, the fire can be put out using nothing but water, these other special allowances don't hold.
Self-mutilation. A bhikkhu who cuts off his own genitalia incurs a thullaccaya.
"Now at that time a certain bhikkhu, tormented by dissatisfaction, cut off his own penis. They reported this matter to the Blessed One (who said), 'When one thing should have been cut off, that foolish man cut off something else.'"
The "thing that should have been cut off," the Sub-commentary notes, was the latent tendency to lust.
The Commentary adds that cutting off any other part of one's body -- such as an ear, nose, or finger -- out of spite entails a dukkata. However, one is allowed to cut off any part of one's body for a medical purpose; or to let blood, for example, when bitten by a snake or an insect, or to treat a disease that calls for blood-letting (see Chapter 5; Mv.VI.14.4).
Charms & omens. A prince once invited the Community of bhikkhus headed by the Buddha to a meal at his residence. Having spread out a white cloth in the entrance to his home, he planned to take it as a sign: if the Buddha stepped on the cloth, that meant that he, the prince, would have a child. The Buddha did not step on the cloth, and furthermore forbade the bhikkhus from ever stepping on a white cloth in a similar situation. The Commentary explains that this rule was formulated to keep lay people from looking down on bhikkhus who couldn't accurately predict the future. The Canon contains two exceptions, however: if lay people spread out a white cloth and ask a bhikkhu to step on it for their good luck, he is allowed to do so; and, of course, one may step on a foot-wiping cloth.
A similar pattern of prohibitions and allowances surrounds wishes for health and long life after a sneeze. The Buddha once sneezed while giving a Dhamma talk, and the talk was interrupted as the bhikkhus all wished him a long life. He asked them, "Bhikkhus, when (the phrase) 'Long life!' is said to one who has sneezed, can he for that reason live or die?" The answer, of course, was no, and the Buddha went on to forbid bhikkhus from saying "Long life!" (modern equivalents would be "Gesundheit!" or "Bless you!") when someone sneezed. However, an exception was made for the case where a bhikkhu sneezes and lay people wish him a long life. The custom in those days was for the person who had sneezed to respond, "And a long life to you!" and the Buddha allowed the bhikkhu to respond in the customary fashion.
As noted in the section on wrong livelihood, above, a bhikkhu is forbidden from giving protective charms. However, he is allowed to protect himself from being bitten by snakes through suffusing the four royal families of snakes with an attitude of good will "for the sake of self-guarding, for the sake of self-protection, for the sake of self-warding." The charm for this purpose appears both in Cv.V.6 and in A.IV.67. D.32 contains a similar charm for protecting oneself against the depredations of unruly spirits.
Displaying psychic powers. In A.III.60, the Buddha tells a brahman that many hundreds of his bhikkhu disciples are endowed with psychic powers. Nevertheless, he forbade them from displaying those powers to householders. The origin story to this prohibition -- which we cited briefly in connection with Pc 8 -- shows why:
"Now at that time a costly block of sandalwood, from sandalwood heartwood, accrued to a moneylender of Rajagaha. The thought occurred to him, 'What if I were to have an alms bowl carved from this block of sandalwood? The chips would be for my own enjoyment, and I will give the alms bowl as a gift.' Then the moneylender, having had a bowl carved from the block of sandalwood, having looped a string around it, having hung it from the top of a bamboo pole, having had the bamboo pole fastened on top of a series of bamboo poles, one on top of another, announced: 'Any priest or contemplative who is a worthy one (arahant) with psychic powers who fetches down this bowl: it is given to him.'"Then Purana Kassapa went to the Rajagaha moneylender and, on arrival, said to him, 'Because I am a worthy one with psychic powers, give me the bowl.' 'If, venerable sir, you are a worthy one with psychic powers, fetch down the bowl and it is given to you.'
"Then Makkali Gosala ... Ajita Kesakambalin ... Pakudha Kaccayana ... Sañjaya Belatthaputta ... Niggantha Nataputta went to the Rajagaha moneylender and, on arrival, said to him, 'Because I am a worthy one with psychic powers, give me the bowl.' 'If, venerable sir, you are a worthy one with psychic powers, fetch down the bowl and it is given to you.'
"Now at that time Ven. MahaMoggallana and Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja, early in the morning, each having put on his robes and carrying his bowl and outer cloak, had gone into Rajagaha for alms. Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja was a worthy one with psychic powers, and Ven. Maha-Moggallana was a worthy one with psychic powers (§). Then Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja said to Ven. Maha-Moggallana: 'Go, friend Moggallana, and fetch down the bowl. That bowl is yours.' Then Ven. MahaMoggallana said to Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja: 'Go, friend Bharadvaja, and fetch down the bowl. That bowl is yours.'
"So Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja, rising up into the sky, took the bowl and circled three times around Rajagaha. Now at that time the moneylender was standing in his house compound with his wife and children, paying homage with his hands palm-to-palm over his heart, (saying,) 'May Ven. Bharadvaja, land right here in our house compound.' So Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja landed in the moneylender's house compound. Then the moneylender, having taken the bowl from Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja's hand, having filled it with costly non-staple foods, presented it to Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja. Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja, taking the bowl, returned to the monastery.
"People, hearing that 'Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja fetched down the bowl of the moneylender,' followed right after him, making a shrill noise, a great noise. The Blessed One, hearing the shrill noise, the great noise, asked Ven. Ananda, 'Ananda, what is that shrill noise, that great noise?'
"'Lord, Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja has fetched down the bowl of the moneylender. People, hearing that "Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja fetched down the bowl of the moneylender," are following right after him, making a shrill noise, a great noise. That is the shrill noise, the great noise, that the Blessed One (hears).'
"Then the Blessed One, with regard to this cause, with regard to this incident, had the Community of bhikkhus convened and questioned Ven. Pindola Bharadvaja: 'Is it true, Bharadvaja, that you fetched down the moneylender's bowl?'
"'Yes, lord.'
"The Awakened One, the Blessed One, rebuked him, (saying,) 'It's not appropriate, Bharadvaja, not fitting for a contemplative, improper, and not to be done. How can you display a superior human state, a wonder of psychic power, to lay people for the sake of a miserable wooden bowl? Just as a woman might expose her sexual organ for the sake of a miserable wooden coin, so too have you displayed a superior human state, a wonder of psychic power, to lay people for the sake of a miserable wooden bowl.'" -- Cv.V.8.2
Strangely, the Commentary insists that the prohibition against displaying psychic powers applies only to vikubbana (harmful/violent)-iddhi, not to adhitthana (mental determination) -iddhi. It doesn't elucidate the difference between the two, but the Sub-commentary notes that vikubbana-iddhi means, for example, changing one's appearance to that of another being, such as a child or a naga (as Devadatta did with Prince Ajatasattu) or to a manifold army in battle formation; whereas adhitthana-iddhi means simply multiplying one's ordinary appearance 100, 1,000, or 100,000 times through the power of a determination "May I be many." The distinction is fascinating, but bears no relation to the origin story -- Ven. Pindola did not engage in vikubbana-iddhi -- and has no basis in the Canon.
Off-limits. The second book to the Abhidhamma -- the Vibhanga -- lists individuals and places that are "out-of-range" (agocara) to a bhikkhu, i.e., off-limits for him to associate with. The commentaries list items that are "untouchable" (anamasa), i.e., off-limits for him to touch. As neither of these lists comes from the canonical Vinaya, they are discussed in Appendix V.
"Various kinds of bad habits are not to be indulged in. Whoever should indulge in them is to be dealt with in accordance with the rule (see Sg 13)." -- Cv.V.36
"One should not eat from the same dish (with another person), drink from the same beaker, share the same bed, share the same mat, share the same blanket, share the same mat and blanket. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing." -- Cv.V.19.2
"One should not go to see dancing, singing, or music. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing." -- Cv.V.2.6
"A tree should not be climbed. Whoever should climb one: an offense of wrong doing" ... "I allow that, when there is a reason, a tree be climbed to the height of a man, and as high as is necessary in case of dangers." -- Cv.V.32.2
"There are people of conviction and confidence who place gold and silver in the hand of stewards, saying, 'Give the master whatever is allowable.' I allow that whatever is allowable coming from that be accepted. But in no way at all do I say that money is to be accepted or sought for." -- Mv.VI.34.21
"Cosmology (hedonism -- lokayata) should not be learned. Whoever should learn it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "Cosmology (hedonism) should not be taught. Whoever should teach it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "Lowly arts (literally, bestial knowledge) should not be learned. Whoever should learn them: an offense of wrong doing" ... "Lowly arts should not be taught. Whoever should teach them: an offense of wrong doing." -- Cv.V.33.2
"I allow that an object be taken on trust when (the owner) is endowed with five qualities: he is a friend, an intimate, has given permission, is still alive, and one knows, ' He will be pleased with my taking (it).' I allow that an object be taken on trust when (the owner) is endowed with these five qualities." -- Mv.VIII.19
When a bhikkhu conveying robe-cloth may rightly take it on trust in (or place under dual ownership with) the original owner: (The original owner says: "Give this robe cloth to so and so"). -- Mv.VIII.31.2
When he may rightly take it on trust in (or place under dual ownership with) the intended receiver: (The original owner says: "I give this robe cloth to so and so"). -- Mv.VIII.31.3
"One who has gone forth should not get others to undertake what is not proper. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. And one who was formerly a barber should not keep barber equipment. Whoever should keep it: an offense of wrong doing." -- Mv.VI.37.5
"I allow giving to one's mother and father. But a gift of faith should not be brought to ruin. Whoever does so: an offense of wrong doing." -- Mv.VIII.22
Are gold and silver permissible?
They are not permissible.
Where is it objected to?
In Rajagaha, in the Sutta Vibhanga (NP 18)
What offense is committed?
A pacittiya for accepting gold and silver. -- Cv. XII.2.8
"One should not grab cattle by their horns ... by their ears ... by their dewlaps, by their tails. One should not mount on their backs. Whoever should mount (one): an offense of wrong doing. One should not touch their sexual organs with lustful thoughts. Whoever touches (one): a grave offense. One should not kill a young calf. Whoever kills (one) is to be dealt with in accordance with the rule (Pc 61)." -- Mv.V.9.3
"One should not incite another to kill an animal. Whoever should incite is to be dealt with in accordance with the rule (Pc 61)." -- Mv.V.10.10
"Underbrush (Thai: a pile of grass; BD: a forest) should not be burned. Whoever should burn it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "I allow that when an overgrown area is burning that a counter-fire be lit (and) protection provided (§)." -- Cv.V.32.1
"One's own penis/genitals are not to be cut off. Whoever should cut them off: a grave offense." -- Cv.V.7
"A spread-out cloth (celapatika) should not be stepped on. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing." -- Cv.V.21.3
"I allow that, when requested by householders for the sake of good luck, one step on a spread-out cloth" ... "I allow that a foot-wiping cloth be stepped on." -- Cv.V.21.4
"'Live!' should not be said to one who has sneezed. Whoever should say it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "I allow that, when householders say to you, 'Live!' you respond, 'Long life (to you).'" -- Cv.V.33.3
"I allow that these four royal families of snakes be suffused with an attitude of good will for the sake of self-guarding, for the sake of self-protection, for the sake of self-warding." (§) -- Cv.V.6
"A miracle of psychic power, a superior human state, should not be displayed to householders. Whoever should display it: an offense of wrong doing." -- Cv.V.8.2