四分戒本疏卷第一．第二．第三 3.65

3.65

Precept thirty-two: Alternate meals. The intent of the prohibition: a faithful layperson prepares fine food and invites the assembly of monks, wishing for them to partake of it. Yet now one first accepts and then reneges, causing the other's food and drink to be prepared in vain without the benefit of offering to the Saṅgha, thus grieving and burdening the donor; this fault is not light. Therefore the Sage instituted the prohibition. Explanation of the name: having accepted a prior invitation, one then accepts a subsequent invitation, turning one's back on one or the other; this is called “alternating,” hence it is called the precept against alternate meals. The general conditions are as above. There are five specific conditions: first, previously accepting an invitation from a former family for the five staple foods; second, the substance of the food is pure and capable of providing satiety; third, accepting an invitation elsewhere for the five staple foods; fourth, the absence of extenuating circumstances—meaning that except during illness or the time of robe-giving, one is exempt from an offense if there is a circumstance for relinquishing an invitation; fifth, an offense is committed as soon as one eats. Taking the first two conditions of the prior invitation against the third, subsequent invitation, there are three pairs of four propositions. First: both the prior and subsequent are staple foods—prāyaścittika; the middle two are mismatched; the next one has neither as staple foods—the lower three are all duṣkṛtas. Regarding sufficiency and insufficiency: fourth, first, both prior and subsequent are sufficient—both commit the offense of prāyaścittika; the third has mismatching, etc.—all incur duṣkṛta. Regarding purity, as four: both prior and subsequent are pure—both commit the offense of prāyaścittika; the third is pure, the prior is pure—these two are both prāyaścittika; the remaining two are both duṣkṛta. Below, the text of the precept is properly explained. This precept was instituted because after eating gruel, [a monk] accepted staple food; the donor criticized and reproached him, the bhikṣus reported the fault, and the Buddha then instituted the precept.