BUDDHIST MONASTIC CODE I

Buddhist Monastic Code 12. A verdict of mindfulness may be given. This is the verdict of innocence given inresponse to an accusation, based on the fact that the accused remembers fully thathe did not commit the offense in question.This verdict is valid only if —1) The bhikkhu is pure and without offense.2) He is accused of an offense.3) He asks for the verdict.4) The Community gives him the verdict.5) It is in accordance with the Dhamma, the assembly of bhikkhus beingunited and competent to give it (Cv.IV.4.11).According to the Commentary, factor (1) here — the bhikkhu is pure and withoutoffense — applies only to arahants, but the Canon makes no mention of this point.There are other places in the Khandhakas where the phrase "pure and withoutoffense" is used to refer to any bhikkhu who has not committed the offense ofwhich he is accused (e.g., Mv.IX.1.7; Mv.IX.4.9), with nothing to indicate that hewould have to be an arahant as well. If the Commentary's interpretation were correcthere, there would be no way that a bhikkhu in his right mind who is not an arahantcould be declared innocent of an offense at all, for the only three verdicts that maysettle an accusation-issue are this one, the verdict of past insanity (for a bhikkhuwho was insane when he committed the offense in question), and the transactionfor further punishment (literally, "making it worse for him,") for a bhikkhu whocommitted the offense in question when he was in his right mind. The fourth rulebelow — acting in accordance with what is admitted — which is sometimesassumed to cover cases of innocence, actually applies only to cases where thebhikkhu admits to having committed an offense, and not to cases where he isinnocent and asserts his innocence.Thus we will follow the general usage in the Khandhakas and say that the factor"pure and without offense" is fulfilled by any bhikkhu — arahant or not — who hasnot committed the offense in question.3. A verdict of past insanity may be given. This is another verdict of innocencegiven in an accusation, based on the fact that the accused was out of his mindwhen he committed the offense in question and so is absolved of any responsibilityfor it.This verdict is valid only if given to a bhikkhu who:1) does not remember what he did while insane;458