BUDDHIST MONASTIC CODE I

The Animal Chapter Chapter 8.74) duty-issues (kiccādhikaraṇa) — Community transactions, such as givingordination and holding the Pāṭimokkha recitation — which the Communitymust deal with by performing them properly.An issue rightfully dealt with is one that has been handled properly in accordancewith the procedures given in the Vinaya. Some of these procedures are discussedunder Pc 79 & 80, the Adhikaraṇa-samatha rules, and in BMC2, Chapters 12-22. Ifan issue has been dealt with improperly, it may be reopened for reconsideration, butonce it has been dealt with properly it is considered closed for good.The factors for an offense under this rule are three.1) Object: an issue that has been dealt with properly.2) Perception: One knows that it was dealt with properly, either because onewas directly involved or one has been told of the matter.3) Effort: One says — in the presence of another bhikkhu — that it was dealtwith improperly. The Vibhaṅga gives the following examples of statementsthat would fulfill this factor: "The issue was not carried out." "It was poorlycarried out." "It should be carried out again." "It was not settled." "It waspoorly settled." "It should be settled again."Pv.IX.3 contains a short discussion of this rule, making the point that one is subjectto this rule regardless of whether one was involved in dealing with the issue the firsttime around.Perception. If the transaction dealing with the issue was invalid but one perceives itas valid, it is grounds for a dukkaṭa. If one is in doubt about the validity of thetransaction, then it is grounds for a dukkaṭa regardless of whether it was actuallyvalid or not. What this last point means in practice is that if one is in doubt aboutthe transaction, one may declare one's doubt, but to state baldly that the issueneeds to be reopened is to incur a dukkaṭa.Further action. The Commentary to Cv.IX.3 states that in committing this offenseone is subject to having one's Pāṭimokkha cancelled (see BMC2, Chapter 15). Thiswould provide an opportunity for the Community to look into one's attitude to see ifone is still insistent on having the issue revived. If one continues to make aconcerted effort to reopen an issue, knowing that it was properly dealt with, one isconsidered a maker of strife, and as such is subject to an act of censure,banishment, or suspension, depending on the gravity of the case (see BMC2,Chapter 20).Non-offenses. There is no offense in agitating to have an issue re-opened if oneperceives it to have been improperly dealt with: e.g., dealt with not in accordancewith the rules and procedures of the Vinaya, dealt with by an incomplete group, or— in the case of an accusation or similar acts — performed against someone whodid not deserve it. This allowance holds regardless of whether, in actuality, the issuewas properly dealt with. For example: A Community has performed a censuretransaction against Bhikkhu X. One honestly believes that X did not deserve the act,377