Rules governing the life of the bhikkhunis are scattered throughout the Vinaya. Here we will focus on the rules in Cv.X that govern the interaction of the bhikkhus with the bhikkhunis. The rules in this Khandhaka that affect only the bhikkhunis, and not the bhikkhus, are best understood in the context of the training rules in the Bhikkhuni Patimokkha, and so are not discussed here.

The rules governing relations between bhikkhus and bhikkhunis fall into two categories: those governing the formal relations between the two Communities, and those governing the relations between individual bhikkhus and bhikkhunis. Although some of these relations — those dealing with the sharing of material gains — are reciprocal, most of them favor the bhikkhus. To understand why, we should first consider the story of the founding of the Bhikkhuni Sangha.

Now at that time, the Awakened One, the Blessed One, was staying near Kapilavatthu in the Banyan Grove. Then Mahapajapati Gotami went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, stood to one side. As she was standing there, she said to him: "It would be good, lord, if a woman might obtain the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"Enough, Gotami. Don't advocate a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline (§)."

A second time ... A third time she said to him: "It would be good, lord, if a woman might obtain the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"Enough, Gotami. Don't advocate a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

So Mahapajapati Gotami, (thinking,) "The Blessed One does not allow a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline" — sad and unhappy, crying, her face in tears — bowed down to the Blessed One, circumambulated him, keeping him to her right, and then went away.

The Blessed One, having stayed as long as he liked in Kapilavatthu, set out for Vesali. After wandering in stages, he arrived at Vesali. There he stayed near Vesali at the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood.

Then Mahapajapati Gotami, having had her hair cut off, having donned ochre robes, set out for Vesali together with a large number of Sakyan women. After wandering in stages, she arrived at Vesali and went to the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood. Then she stood there outside the porch, her feet swollen, her limbs covered with dust, sad and unhappy, crying, her face in tears. Ven. Ananda saw her standing there ... and so asked her, "Why, Gotami, why are you standing here ... your face in tears?"

"Because, sir, the Blessed One does not allow a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"In that case, Gotami, stay right here for a moment (§) while I ask the Blessed One to allow a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

Then Ven. Ananda went to where the Blessed One was staying and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Mahapajapati Gotami, lord, is standing outside the porch ... her face in tears, because the Blessed One does not allow a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline. It would be good if a woman might obtain the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"Enough, Ananda. Don't advocate a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

A second time... A third time, Ven. Ananda said, "It would be good, lord, if a woman might obtain the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"Enough, Ananda. Don't advocate a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

Then the thought occurred to Ven. Ananda, "The Blessed One does not allow a woman's Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline. What if I were to find some other way to ask the Blessed One to allow a woman's Going-forth ..." So he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, if a woman were to go forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline, would she be able to realize the fruit of stream-entry, once-returning, non-returning, or arahantship?"

"Yes, Ananda, she would..."

"In that case, lord, Mahapajapati Gotami has been of great service to the Blessed One. She was the Blessed One's aunt, foster mother, nurse, giver of milk. When the Blessed One's mother passed away, she gave him milk. It would be good if a woman might obtain the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline."

"Ananda, if Mahapajapati Gotami accepts eight vows of respect, that will be her full ordination (upasampada).

"(1) A bhikkhuni who has been fully ordained even for more than a century must bow down, rise up from her seat, salute with hands palm-to-palm over her heart, and perform the duties of respect to a bhikkhu even if he has been fully ordained only a day. This rule is to be honored, respected, revered, venerated, never to be transgressed as long as she lives."

"(2) A bhikkhuni must not spend the rains in a residence where there is no bhikkhu...

"(3) Every half-month a bhikkhuni should request two things from the Bhikkhu Sangha: she should ask for the date of the uposatha day and come for an exhortation...

"(4) At the end of the Rains-residence, a bhikkhuni should invite (criticism both from) the Bhikkhu Sangha and the Bhikkhuni Sangha on any of three grounds: what they have seen, what they have heard, what they have suspected...

"(5) A bhikkhuni who has broken any of the vows of respect must undergo penance for half a month under both Sanghas...

"(6) Only after a probationer has trained in the six precepts for two years should she request ordination from both Sanghas...

"(7) A bhikkhu must not in any way be insulted or reviled by a bhikkhuni...

"(8) From this day forward, the admonition of a bhikkhu by a bhikkhuni is forbidden, but the admonition of a bhikkhuni by a bhikkhu is not forbidden. This rule, too, is to be honored, respected, revered, venerated, never to be transgressed as long as she lives.

"If Mahapajapati Gotami accepts these eight vows of respect, that will be her full ordination."

Then Ven. Ananda, having learned the eight vows of respect in the Blessed One's presence, went to Mahapajapati Gotami and, on arrival, said to her, "Gotami, if you accept these eight vows of respect, that will be your full ordination..."

"Ven. Ananda, just as if a young woman — or man — fond of ornamentation, having been given a garland of lotuses or jasmine or roses, having taken it in both hands, were to place it on her head, in the same way I accept the eight vows of respect, never to transgress them as long as I live."

Then Ven. Ananda returned to the Blessed One and, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said, "Mahapajapati Gotami, lord, has accepted the eight vows of respect. The Blessed One's foster mother is fully ordained."

"But, Ananda, if women had not obtained the Going-forth from the home life into homelessness in the Tathagata's doctrine and discipline, the holy life would have lasted long, the true Dhamma would have lasted 1,000 years. But now that they have gotten to go forth...this holy life will not last long, the true Dhamma will last 500 years. Just as a clan in which there are many women and few men is easily plundered by robbers and bandits, in the same way, in whatever doctrine and discipline women get to go forth, the holy life does not last long... Just as a man might make an embankment in advance around a great reservoir to keep the waters from overflowing, in the same way I have set forth the eight vows of respect for bhikkhunis that they are not to transgress as long as they live." — Cv X.1

As the story makes clear, gender is not an issue in determining a person's ability to practice the Dhamma and attain release. But from the Buddha's point of view it was an issue in his design of the Sangha as an institution. His concerns were pragmatic and strategic, aimed at the long-term survival of two things: the true Dhamma and the holy life. As S.XVI.13 explains, the survival of the true Dhamma meant not simply the brute survival of the teachings, but the survival of the teaching unadulterated with "synthetic Dhamma" (saddhamma-patirupa), later improvements that would call the authenticity of the true Dhamma into question. Why the existence of a women's Community would speed up the appearance of synthetic Dhamma, the Buddha didn't say, but he was willing to make the sacrifice so that women would have a chance to gain the noble attainments. The survival of the holy life, however, is a matter of the simple survival of the practice, even after the True Dhamma no longer has total monopoly in the Community. The analogy of the clan predominantly female shows that, in the Buddha's eyes, the survival of the holy life required a Community predominantly male. That was why he delayed granting ordination to his foster aunt, so that she would be willing to accept the eight vows of respect; that was why the requirements for ordination in the Bhikkhuni Sangha were more difficult and complicated than the requirements for ordination in the Bhikkhu Sangha; and that was why many of the rules governing relationships between the two Communities favored the bhikkhus over the bhikkhunis.

The bhikkhunis did not accept this situation docilely. Soon after vowing to adhere to the eight vows of respect for the rest of her life, Mahapajapati Gotami requested that the bhikkhunis be relieved of the most onerous one — the first. The fact that she was asking to renege on her word to the Buddha doomed the request to failure.

Despite the imbalance in the relations between the two Communities, it is important to remember that, for more than a thousand years, the Bhikkhuni Sangha afforded the opportunity for countless women to reach the noble attainments. No other institution can come near to matching that claim.

Communal relations. When the Bhikkhuni Sangha was first founded, the bhikkhus were instructed to teach them the Vinaya and to conduct their Community transactions. With time, however, problems arose, as people suspected the bhikkhus and bhikkhunis of meeting for clandestine purposes. A typical story is this:

Now at that time bhikkhunis, on seeing a bhikkhu along a main road, in a side road, or at a crossroads, having placed their bowls on the ground, having arranged their upper robes over one shoulder, kneeling down with hands raised palm-to-palm over the heart, confessed their offenses. People were offended and annoyed and spread it about, 'Those are the mistresses of these; these are the lovers of those. Having scorned them last night, they are now asking their forgiveness.'

As a result, the Buddha forbade the bhikkhus from conducting the bhikkhunis' transactions, and placed the bhikkhunis in charge of many of their own Community transactions. For instance, they chanted their own Patimokkha and confessed their own offenses to one another. The bhikkhus' sole role in these transactions was to teach the bhikkhunis how to do them.

In other areas, however, the bhikkhus continued to play a role in the bhikkhuni's Community transactions. If the bhikkhunis were planning to impose a disciplinary transaction on another bhikkhuni, they were to consult with the bhikkhus as to what the precise punishment should be, and were bound by the bhikkhus' decision. The Commentary notes that if they imposed a different transaction from that determined by the bhikkhus, they incurred a dukkata under Mv.IX.6.3. If the bhikkhunis wanted to ordain a female probationer, they first conducted an ordination ceremony of their own and then sent a messenger to the bhikkhus, who conducted a second ceremony. In other words, the candidate's ordination had to be accepted by both Communities in order to be valid.

Bhikkhunis were not allowed to cancel the uposatha or Invitation of a bhikkhu, or to set in motion or to participate in any investigation of a bhikkhu's offense. Bhikkhus, however, were allowed to cancel the uposatha or Invitation of a bhikkhuni, and could set in motion and participate in an investigation of a bhikkhuni's offense.

Exhortation. The third vow of respect was that the bhikkhunis go to the bhikkhus for exhortation every half-month. A bhikkhuni who did not go — unless her exhortation had been canceled (see below) — incurred an offense under Bhikkhunis' Pc 58. The procedure was as follows: two or three bhikkhunis would approach a bhikkhu and, in the name of their Community, ask permission to approach one of the bhikkhus for the exhortation. He, in turn, would join the bhikkhus who had met for the Patimokkha and inform the bhikkhu who was reciting the Patimokkha that the bhikkhunis had requested the exhortation. The bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha would first ask if there were any bhikkhus present who had already been authorized to exhort the bhikkhunis. If there were, one of them was to exhort the bhikkhunis. If there weren't, the bhikkhus were to find if any one among them was able and willing to exhort the bhikkhunis (for the qualifications, see Pc 21). If there was such a bhikkhu, he was to be authorized. If not, the bhikkhunis were to be told to continue to "strive on with friendliness."

Once a bhikkhu had been authorized to exhort the bhikkhunis, he incurred a dukkata if he did not undertake the exhortation. The only bhikkhus exempt from this duty were those who were unqualified, those who were ill, and those setting out on a journey. If a bhikkhu, having undertaken the exhortation, did not have it announced to the bhikkhunis or did not go to the exhortation as announced, he incurred a dukkata. (BD states that these last two rules apply only in the case of a bhikkhu living alone in the wilderness, mentioned below, but the Commentary insists that they apply regardless of whether the exhortation has been arranged by a Community of bhikkhus or by a single bhikkhu.)

If a bhikkhu living alone in the wilderness was approached by bhikkhunis requesting permission to come to him for an exhortation, he was to make an appointment to meet them in a more appropriate location for giving the exhortation. Any bhikkhunis who did not keep the appointment incurred a dukkata as well. This last ruling does not seem to fit with Bhikkhunis' Pc 58, which imposes a pacittiya on any bhikkhuni who does not attend an exhortation, but perhaps the pacittiya applies only when the exhortation has been arranged by a Community of bhikkhus. None of the texts discuss this point.

Invitation. The fourth vow of respect was that bhikkhunis, at the end of the Rains-residence, would invite criticism both from their own Community and from the Community of bhikkhus. Not to invite among themselves was to incur a dukkata offense; not to invite the bhikkhus was to incur an offense under Bhikkhunis' Pc 57. After experimenting with various ways of inviting together — including one instance when all the bhikkhus and all the bhikkhunis held their Invitation as one, resulting in an uproar — the following procedure was worked out: after the bhikkhunis had invited among themselves, they chose one of their members, who was experienced and competent, to go later in the day or on the next day to invite criticism from the Community of bhikkhus on behalf of the entire Community of bhikkhunis.

Individual relations. Cv.X.3 repeats Cv.VI.6.5 to reinforce the first vow of respect: that a bhikkhu may not bow down, rise up to greet, perform añjali, or perform other forms of respect due to superiors to a woman, even if she is a bhikkhuni.

The etiquette if a bhikkhu and a bhikkhuni met on the road was that she was to step aside while still at a distance and make way for him. She was not to give him a blow. This rule was formulated when "a woman formerly from the Mallan clan (according to the Commentary, formerly the wife of a boxer) went forth among the bhikkhunis. Seeing a weak bhikkhu along the main road, she gave him a blow with the point of her shoulder and knocked him flat."

If both of them were out for alms, the bhikkhuni was to show her bowl to the bhikkhu (this rule followed on the origin story reported in Volume One with regard to Pd 1). If, in order to insult him, she showed him her bowl upside down, she incurred a dukkata. She was to offer him food from her bowl, but only under certain circumstances was he allowed to accept it (see Pd 1). The origin story to these rules indicates that this protocol was something of a policing action, to make sure that the bhikkhunis were not carrying contraband.

One of the few rules of reciprocity was that a bhikkhu or bhikkhuni could not take gifts given for his/her own consumption and give them to a member of the other Community. ("People were offended and annoyed and spread it about, 'How can the masters take what is given for the purpose of their own consumption and give it to others? Don't we know how to give a gift?'") However, an over-abundance of food — belonging either to the Community itself or to individuals within the Community — could be given to the other Community. This allowance applied to stored-up food (food formally given on a previous day — see Pc 38) as well. The Commentary notes that if there were no unordained people around, the bhikkhus themselves could formally offer the food to the bhikkhunis, and vice versa.

If the bhikkhus had an abundance of lodgings (i.e., furniture) while the bhikkhunis had none, the lodgings could be given to the bhikkhunis on a temporary basis.

The bhikkhunis were not totally without recourse in case a bhikkhu mistreated them. The Bhikkhu Patimokkha contains several rules — such as NP 4 and NP 17 — to prevent bhikkhus from getting the bhikkhunis to perform personal services for them. Bhikkhunis were also protected from sexual harassment by the bhikkhus. A bhikkhu who, with lustful thoughts, touched a bhikkhuni, spoke lewd words to her, or spoke in praise of her having sexual intercourse with him, would incur a sanghadisesa offense under the relevant rules (Sg 2-4). In addition, bhikkhunis were allowed to inflict a formal punishment on a bhikkhu who had behaved toward a bhikkhuni in an unseemly manner. In the origin story to the relevant rules, some group-of-six bhikkhus had sprinkled muddy water on bhikkhunis in hopes of attracting the bhikkhunis to them; they had exposed their bodies, their thighs, and their penises to the bhikkhunis; had flirted with them or propositioned them. (According to the Commentary, this means that they suggested that the bhikkhunis perform an indiscretion with them or with other men — although if they spoke lewd words or suggested sexual intercourse with themselves, they would be breaking the sanghadisesa rules mentioned above). In all of these cases, the bhikkhunis were allowed to impose a punishment on the offending bhikkhu, even if he had performed any of these indiscretions with only one bhikkhuni: the Community of bhikkhunis could formally agree that they would not pay homage to him.

Pv.XV.8 gives additional reasons why the Community of bhikkhunis could impose this punishment on a bhikkhu:

a) he exposes both of his shoulders to bhikkhunis,
b) he strives for the loss of a bhikkhunis,
c) he strives for the harm of a bhikkhunis,
d) he strives for the non-residence of a bhikkhunis,
e) he insults and reviles bhikkhunis,
f) he gets bhikkhus to break with (§) bhikkhunis.

The Commentary explains that the bhikkhunis were to meet in their nunnery and give notice, by means of an announcement stated three times, that they are not going to pay homage to the offender. The offender was then required to ask forgiveness of the bhikkhunis, but he was not to do so directly. Instead, he was to go to the Community of bhikkhus or to an individual bhikkhu in his own monastery, bow down, and inform them/him that he asked the bhikkhunis' forgiveness. The messenger then went to the bhikkhunis and informed them, which lifted the punishment. In other words, the bhikkhunis had no voice in whether or not to accept the request for forgiveness — although if the bhikkhu again misbehaved, the bhikkhunis could reimpose the punishment, and the bhikkhus could meet to impose a censure transaction on the offender.

However, if a bhikkhuni behaved in a similar manner to a bhikkhu — such as exposing her breasts, her vagina, or her thighs to a bhikkhu; striving for a bhikkhu's non-gain, etc. — the punishment was heavier. The Community of bhikkhus would meet to impose a restriction on her — forbidding her, for instance, from entering their monastery. If she didn't abide by it, they could cancel her exhortation. According to the Commentary, the bhikkhus were not to go to the nunnery to announce this. Instead, when the bhikkhunis came for the exhortation, they were to be told, "I cancel the exhortation of that bhikkhuni. Do not perform the Patimokkha with her." As the Canon says, the bhikkhunis were then not allowed to include her in their Patimokkha until the case was settled (which could involve a disciplinary transaction). There is a rule against a foolish, incompetent bhikkhu's canceling a bhikkhuni's exhortation, which implies that an individual bhikkhu, if knowledgeable and competent, was allowed to do so. There is also a rule against canceling a bhikkhuni's exhortation without grounds. As long as the issue had not been settled, the bhikkhu in question could not go off on tour. He was duty bound to reach a final verdict on the matter. If a disciplinary transaction was imposed on the bhikkhuni, this would require going before the rest of the bhikkhus to get their approval.

Finally, the Buddha provided one further protection against the bhikkhunis' being abused by bhikkhus or samaneras: Any man who had ever molested a bhikkhuni was, for the rest of his life, denied the opportunity of taking the Going-forth.

Rules

Communal Transactions

"I allow that the discipline (vinaya) be taught to bhikkhunis by bhikkhus." — Cv.X.8

"Bhikkhunis' offenses are not to be acknowledged by bhikkhus. I allow that bhikkhunis' offenses be acknowledged by bhikkhunis" ... "I allow bhikkhus to inform bhikkhunis: 'This is how an offense is to be acknowledged.'" — Cv.X.6.2

"The Patimokkha is not to be recited to bhikkhunis by bhikkhus. Whoever should recite it: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that the Patimokkha be recited to bhikkhunis by bhikkhunis" ... "I allow bhikkhus to inform bhikkhunis: 'This is how the Patimokkha is to be recited.'" — Cv.X.6.1

"Bhikkhunis' transactions [C: the seven disciplinary transactions beginning with censure] are not to be done by bhikkhus. I allow that bhikkhunis' transactions be done by bhikkhunis" ... "I allow bhikkhus to inform bhikkhunis: 'This is how the transaction is to be done.'" — Cv.X.6.3

"I allow the bhikkhus, having determined the transaction, to give it over to the bhikkhunis, and that the bhikkhunis perform the transactions of the bhikkhunis. I allow the bhikkhus, having determined the offense, to give it over to the bhikkhunis, and that the bhikkhunis settle bhikkhunis' offenses." (§) — Cv.X.7

Procedure and transaction statement for the acceptance of women into the Bhikkhuni Sangha — Cv.X.17

Procedure and transaction statement for accepting a bhikkhuni through a messenger — Cv.X.22

"A bhikkhuni should not cancel a bhikkhu's uposatha. Even though she has canceled it, it is not (really) canceled. And for she who cancels it: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not cancel (a bhikkhu's) Invitation. Even though she has canceled it, it is not (really) canceled. And for she who cancels it: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not do an investigation (against a bhikkhu). Even though she has done it, it is not (really) done. And for she who does it: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not have an accusation set in motion (against a bhikkhu). Even though she has set it in motion, it is not (really) set in motion. And for she who sets it in motion: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not get (a bhikkhu) to give her leave. Even though she gets it, she has not (really) gotten it. And for she who gets it: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not make a formal charge (against a bhikkhu). Even though she has made it, it is not (really) made. And for she who makes it: an offense of wrong doing. A bhikkhuni should not make (a bhikkhu) testify. Even though she has made him testify, he is not (really) made to testify. And for she who makes him testify: an offense of wrong doing.

"I allow that a bhikkhu cancel a bhikkhuni's uposatha. When he has canceled it, it is properly canceled. And for he who cancels it: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu cancel (a bhikkhuni's) Invitation. When he has canceled it, it is properly canceled. And for he who cancels it: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu do an investigation (against a bhikkhuni). When he has done it, it is properly done. And for he who does it: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu have an accusation set in motion (against a bhikkhuni). When he has set it in motion, it is properly set in motion. And for he who sets it in motion: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu get (a bhikkhuni) to give him leave. When he gets it, he has properly gotten it. And for he who gets it: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu make a formal charge (against a bhikkhuni). When he has made it, it is properly made. And for he who makes it: no offense. I allow that a bhikkhu make (a bhikkhuni) testify. When he has made her testify, she is properly made to testify. And for he who makes her testify: no offense." — Cv.X.20

Exhortation

"The entire Community of bhikkhunis should not go for the exhortation. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing" ... "I allow two or three bhikkhunis to go for the exhortation. Approaching a single bhikkhu (!), arranging their robes over one shoulder, paying homage to his feet, kneeling with hands raised palm-to-palm in front of the heart, they are to say this: 'Master, the Community of bhikkhunis pays homage to the feet of the Community of bhikkhus and asks for permission to approach for the exhortation (§). May the Community of bhikkhus grant permission to approach for the exhortation.'

"That bhikkhu should approach the bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha and say, 'Venerable sir, the Community of bhikkhunis pays homage to the feet of the Community of bhikkhus and asks for (one of the bhikkhus) to approach them and give the exhortation. May the Community of bhikkhus grant the coming-to-give-the-exhortation.' [This last sentence is missing in BD.] The bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha should say, 'Is there a bhikkhu who has been authorized as the one who exhorts the Community of bhikkhunis?' If there is, the bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha should say, 'The bhikkhu named such-and-such is authorized as the one who exhorts the Community of bhikkhunis. The Community of bhikkhunis may approach him.'

"If there is no bhikkhu who has been authorized as the one who exhorts the Community of bhikkhunis, the bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha should say, 'Which venerable one is able/willing to exhort the bhikkhunis?' If one is able/willing to exhort the bhikkhunis and is endowed with the eight qualifications (see Pc 21), then having gathered (the bhikkhus) together, he should say, 'The bhikkhu named such-and-such is authorized as the one who exhorts the Community of bhikkhunis. The Community of bhikkhunis may approach him.' (See Pc 21 for the transaction procedure and statement.)

"If there is no one able/willing to exhort the bhikkhunis, the bhikkhu reciting the Patimokkha should say, 'There is no bhikkhu who has been authorized to exhort the bhikkhunis. May the Community of bhikkhunis strive on in friendliness.'" — Cv.X.9.4

"The exhortation is not not to be given. Whoever (i.e., the bhikkhu authorized to give it) should not give it: an offense of wrong doing." ... "I allow that the exhortation be given except by one who is incompetent, one who is ill, one who is setting out on a journey (§" ... "I allow that a bhikkhu living in the wilderness give the exhortation, and that he make an appointment: 'I will bring it (§) to that place'" ... "The exhortation is not not to be announced. Whoever does not announce it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "One is not not to bring the exhortation. Whoever does not bring it: an offense of wrong doing" ... "Bhikkhunis should not not go to the appointment. Whoever should not go: an offense of wrong doing." — Cv.X.9.5

Invitation

"The bhikkhunis should not not invite. Whoever does not invite: an offense of wrong doing" ... "The bhikkhunis, having invited among themselves, should not not invite the Community of bhikkhus. Whoever does not invite should be dealt with according to the rule (Bhikkhunis' Pc 57)" ... Now at that time, bhikkhunis inviting together as one with the bhikkhus created an uproar ... "Bhikkhunis should not invite together as one with the bhikkhus. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing" ... "I allow the bhikkhunis to invite after mealtime" ... "I allow them, having invited the Community of bhikkhunis on one day, to invite the Community of bhikkhus the next day." — Cv.X.19.1

"I allow that one bhikkhuni — experienced and capable — be authorized to invite the Community of bhikkhus on behalf of the Community of bhikkhunis." Procedure and transaction statement — Cv.X.19.2

Inheritance

"If a bhikkhuni, as she is dying, should say, 'After I am gone, may my requisites belong to the Community,' the Community of bhikkhus is not the owner there. They belong to the Community of bhikkhunis. If a female probationer ... If a female novice, as she is dying, should say, 'After I am gone, may my requisites belong to the Community,' the Community of bhikkhus is not the owner there. They belong to the Community of bhikkhunis.

"If a bhikkhu, as he is dying, should say, 'After I am gone, may my requisites belong to the Community,' the Community of bhikkhunis is not the owner there. They belong to the Community of bhikkhus. If a male novice ... If a male lay follower ... If a female lay follower ... If anyone else, as he is dying, should say, 'After I am gone, may my requisites belong to the Community,' the Community of bhikkhunis is not the owner there. They belong to the Community of bhikkhus." — Cv.X.11

Personal Relations

"Bowing down, rising up to greet, greeting with hands raised palm-to-palm in front of the heart, or performing other forms of respect due to superiors are not to be done to a woman. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing." — Cv.X.3 (See Cv.VI.6.5)

"A bhikkhuni should not give a blow to a bhikkhu. Whoever should give one: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that a bhikkhuni, on seeing a bhikkhu, should step aside while still at a distance and make way for him." — Cv.X.12

"A bhikkhuni should not take a fetus in a bowl. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. I allow a bhikkhuni, when seeing a bhikkhu, to take out her bowl and show it to him." — Cv.X.13.1

"I allow a bhikkhuni, when seeing a bhikkhu, to show him her bowl right side up. And she is to offer him whatever food there is in the bowl." — Cv.X.13.2

Now at that time people gave food to the bhikkhus, and the bhikkhus gave it to the bhikkhunis. The people were offended and annoyed and spread it about, "How can the masters take what is given for the purpose of their own consumption and give it to others? Don't we know how to give a gift?" ... "One should not take what is given for the purpose of one's own consumption and give it to others. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing."

Now at that time the bhikkhus had an abundance of food ... "I allow that what belongs to the Community be given (§)." There was an even greater abundance. "I allow that what belongs to an individual be given." Now at that time the bhikkhus had an abundance of stored up food. "I allow that it be consumed by the bhikkhunis when the bhikkhus have arranged for them to formally accept it." — Cv.X.15.1

Now at that time people gave food to the bhikkhunis, and the bhikkhunis gave it to the bhikkhus. The people were offended and annoyed and spread it about, "How can the masters take what is given for the purpose of their own consumption and give it to others? Don't we know how to give a gift?" ... "One should not take what is given for the purpose of one's own consumption and give it to others. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing."

Now at that time the bhikkhunis had an abundance of food ... "I allow that what belongs to the Community be given." There was an even greater abundance. "I allow that what belongs to an individual be given." Now at that time the bhikkhunis had an abundance of stored up food. "I allow that it be consumed by the bhikkhus when the bhikkhunis have arranged for them to formally accept it." — Cv.X.15.2

Now at that time the bhikkhus had an abundance of lodgings while the bhikkhunis had none ... "I allow that lodgings be given to the bhikkhunis on a temporary basis." — Cv.X.16.1

Punishments

"A bhikkhu should not sprinkle muddy water on a bhikkhuni. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that a punishment be inflicted on that bhikkhu ... He should not be paid homage by the Community of bhikkhunis" ... "A bhikkhu, having exposed his body, should not show it to a bhikkhuni; having exposed his thigh ... his penis, he should not show it to a bhikkhuni. He should not flirt (§) with a bhikkhuni. He should not proposition (§) a bhikkhuni. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that a punishment be inflicted on that bhikkhu ... He should not be paid homage by the Community of bhikkhunis." — Cv.X.9.1

"A bhikkhuni should not sprinkle muddy water on a bhikkhu. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that a punishment be inflicted on that bhikkhuni ... I allow that a restriction be placed on her." (She didn't abide by it) "I allow that the exhortation be canceled for her" ... "A bhikkhuni, having exposed her body, should not show it to a bhikkhu; having exposed her breast ... her thigh ... her vagina, she should not show it to a bhikkhu. She should not flirt (§) with a bhikkhu. She should not proposition (§) a bhikkhu. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing. I allow that a punishment be inflicted on that bhikkhuni ... I allow that a restriction be placed on her." (She didn't abide by it) "I allow that the exhortation be canceled for her." — Cv.X.9.2

"The bhikkhunis should not carry out the Uposatha together with a bhikkhuni whose exhortation has been canceled as long as the issue has not been settled" ... (BD has Ven. Upali in the origin story for the following rule, whereas the Burmese and Thai editions have Ven. Udayin) "Having canceled (a bhikkhuni's) exhortation, one should not set out on a tour. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing" ... "(A bhikkhuni's) exhortation is not to be canceled by a foolish, inexperienced bhikkhu. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing" ... "(A bhikkhuni's) exhortation is not to be canceled without grounds, without reason. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing" ... "Having canceled (a bhikkhuni's) exhortation, one should not not give a final verdict. Whoever does not give one: an offense of wrong doing." — Cv.X.9.3