BUDDHIST MONASTIC CODE I

The Animal Chapter Chapter 8.768. Should any bhikkhu say the following: "As I understand theDhamma taught by the Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One saysare obstructive, when engaged in are not genuine obstructions," thebhikkhus are to admonish him thus: "Do not say that, venerable sir.Do not misrepresent the Blessed One, for it is not good tomisrepresent the Blessed One. The Blessed One would not sayanything like that. In many ways, friend, the Blessed One hasdescribed obstructive acts, and when engaged in they are genuineobstructions. [The Sri Lankan and Burmese recensions read: In manyways, friend, the Blessed One has described obstructive acts asobstructive, and when engaged in they are genuine obstructions.] "And should that bhikkhu, thus admonished by the bhikkhus, persist as before, thebhikkhus are to rebuke him up to three times so as to desist. If while being rebukedup to three times he desists, that is good. If he does not desist, it is to beconfessed.Obstructions. The Vibhaṅga does not define obstruction in the context of this rule,although the origin story makes clear that it refers at the very least to the sexual act.The Commentary defines obstruction as anything that acts as an obstacle to theattainment of heaven or emancipation. It lists five major categories:1) Actions, i.e., the five ānantariya/ānantarika-kamma: patricide, matricide,the murder of an arahant, the wounding of a Buddha, the creation of aschism in a Saṅgha;2) Defilements, i.e., firmly held wrong views (the Sub-commentary listsdeterminism, fatalism, annihilationism, etc.);3) Fruits of past actions, e.g., birth as a common animal (see the story ofthe nāga at Mv.I.63 — BMC2, Chapter 14);4) Verbal abuse, i.e., reviling a Noble One — although this is an obstructiononly so long as one has not asked forgiveness; and finally, for a bhikkhu,5) Intentional transgressions of the Buddha's ordinances, although these areobstacles only as long as one has not undergone the penalty called for inthe relevant rule.The Commentary does not say where it derives this list. The first three categories —without explanations — are found in AN VI.86. AN VI.87 provides the examples forthe first category. The statement in the Nidāna to the Pāṭimokkha that an intentionallie is an obstruction may have provided the Commentary with an example of the fifthcategory. (AN III.88 states that arahants may intentionally commit offenses, but thatthey willingly undergo rehabilitation for them.) As for the fourth category, the primaryreference in the Canon is to the case of the bhikkhu Kokālika, who spreads liesabout Sāriputta and Moggallāna, comes down with a horrible disease, and then dies,reappearing in hell because he continued to harbor animosity toward them (SNVI.10). Thus reviling here would seem to mean spreading lies impelled by animosity.385