As mentioned in Chapter 11, one of the rewards for having completed the first Rains-residence is being eligible to participate in the spreading of a kaṭhina. Donors present a Community numbering at least five bhikkhus with a gift of cloth that the bhikkhus then bestow on one of their members. With the help of the Community, the bhikkhu receiving the cloth must make it into a robe before the dawn of the following day. When the robe is finished, he announces to the other bhikkhus the "spreading of the kaṭhina," after which they express their approval. As a reward of having spread the kaṭhina, the bhikkhu who spreads the kaṭhina and those who approve it receive a series of privileges that — depending on certain conditions — may last until the end of the cold season, five months after the end of the Rains (see NP 28.2).

The name of this procedure comes from the frame (kaṭhina) used in the time of the Buddha for sewing a robe, much like the frame used in an American quilting bee. However, there is no requirement that the bhikkhus making the robe in one day must use such a frame. Rather, the term kaṭhina is used figuratively for the time period during which the privileges that come from making the robe are in force. Similarly, the terminology used in connection with this time period is taken from that used in connection with the physical frame. As noted in Chapter 2, the frame could be rolled or folded up. Thus, when put into use, it was unrolled and spread out. When no longer needed, it was dismantled and rolled or folded back up. Similarly, the establishment of the privileges is called the spreading of the kaṭhina; the ending of the privileges, the kaṭhina's dismantling.

The Canon does not explicitly state why the Buddha formulated this transaction. In the relevant origin story, he gives his allowance for the transaction when a group of bhikkhus coming to pay their respects to him — after the Rains-residence is over but while actual rains are still pouring — arrive with their robes soaking wet. The Commentary maintains that the Buddha's purpose in allowing the kaṭhina was (1) so that bhikkhus traveling during this time period could be given the privilege of not having to carry their complete set of robes with them, and (2) so as to follow the custom of previous Buddhas. However, the first purpose could have been served simply by making this privilege contingent on completing the Rains-residence. So the question arises as to what further purpose the transaction might fulfill so that Buddhas would want to maintain it as a custom. The Commentary offers no explanation, but a few moments' reflection will show that the transaction promotes cooperation and a sense of community among the bhikkhus: It encourages them to maintain the Rains without break and to work together on the project of making a robe. At the very least, it affords an opportunity for senior bhikkhus to pass on their sewing skills to their juniors. At the same time, because the privileges attendant on the spreading of the kaṭhina are in force as long as one has a sense of commitment to one's monastery, they reward a bhikkhu who wants to maintain a relationship with a particular residence. This, in turn, encourages on-going relationships between bhikkhus and their lay supporters.

The discussion of the kaṭhina in Mv.VII is remarkably terse in some areas and obsessively detailed in others. Thus in this chapter we will draw heavily on the Parivāra and commentaries to fill in the gaps in the Canon's discussion, while at the same time reducing the more elaborate parts of that discussion to their essential points. Because this chapter draws so heavily on the Parivāra, this is the one instance in which the Rules section at the end of the chapter includes passages from that book.

Unfortunately, the Commentary's explanation of the kaṭhina differs from that of the Mahāvagga and Parivāra on several key issues, so we will have to deal with conflicting interpretations. The primary issues center on the relationship between the transaction by which the kaṭhina cloth is bestowed on an individual bhikkhu and the transaction whereby the kaṭhina is spread. The Commentary to Mv.VII.1.3 conflates the two, saying that the minimum quorum for the first — a complete Community — also applies to the second; and implying that the qualifications for participating fully in the second also apply to anyone completing the quorum for the first. However, the Mahāvagga (VII.1.6) states that the spreading of the kaṭhina is effective if "one standing in the territory" approves of it. The Parivāra follows the implications of this statement in maintaining that the spreading of the kaṭhina does not require a full Community. It may be accomplished when one bhikkhu spreads the kaṭhina and then gets the approval of either a full Community, a group of two or three, or a single bhikkhu. Thus the Parivāra treats the two transactions as separate: The bestowal of the cloth is a Community transaction; the spreading of the kaṭhina is not. Furthermore, nowhere does it say that a bhikkhu completing the quorum for the first must meet the qualifications for participating fully in the second.

The Vinaya-mukha notes the discrepancy here between the Commentary and the Parivāra, and — siding with the Commentary — advances the thesis that the authors of the Parivāra were simply careless when they mentioned that a kaṭhina could be spread not only by a Community but also by a group. However, the Parivāra's explanations, when taken as a whole are — with the exception of one errant passage, discussed in Appendix V — thoroughly consistent, whereas the Commentary's are not. Although the Commentary treats the spreading of the kaṭhina as if it were a Community transaction, the actual procedure it describes differs from the normal pattern for such a transaction. The spreading, it says, may be held in any part of the residence, and the bhikkhu spreading the kaṭhina may contact his fellows to get their approval individually, instead of having to assemble them all in the same place. Because of these inconsistencies in the Commentary, the Parivāra's interpretation seems more solid.

The Commentary also assumes — following the Mahā Paccarī ancient commentary — that the bhikkhus expressing their approval for the kaṭhina must all have spent the Rains in that monastery or territory if their approval is to qualify them for the kaṭhina privileges. Bhikkhus who have spent the Rains elsewhere — alone, in a group, or in a Community — may not earn privileges from this Community's kaṭhina. The Commentary does not say where in the Canon it finds evidence for this explanation, but it may come from Mv.VIII.25.3, which prohibits a bhikkhu who has entered the Rains in one place from consenting to a portion of robe-cloth from another place. However, that prohibition would seem to apply only to cases where bhikkhus are dividing up shares of Community robe-cloth for general distribution, for there is a passage in the Mahāvagga (VIII.24.2) allowing a bhikkhu who is spending the Rains alone to keep robe-cloth until the dismantling of the kaṭhina. This implies that even he would be allowed to participate in the spreading of a kaṭhina and to enjoy the resulting privileges, which would be possible only if he could join in the kaṭhina at another monastery or residence where enough bhikkhus had gathered to conduct the transaction of bestowing the cloth. For this reason, the Commentary's position on this question seems at odds with the Canon. An interpretation closer to the Canon would be that a bhikkhu does not have to spend the Rains at a particular monastery in order to participate in that monastery's kaṭhina or to receive the resulting privileges.

Thus wherever the Canon and Commentary disagree, the interpretation given here will follow the Canon. However, because the Commentary's explanation is widely followed in many Communities, we will discuss it in some detail.

Time period. Mv.VII.1.3 says simply that the kaṭhina may be spread when the bhikkhus have completed the Rains. Pv.XIV.4 adds that it must be spread within the fourth month of the rainy season, i.e., the first month after the end of the first Rains-residence. There is a widespread oral tradition that the bhikkhus in a given residence may receive only one kaṭhina donation during this time period. The Commentary contains a statement that, in an oblique way, may have been the source of this tradition, and another that suggests that this tradition may already have been an unspoken assumption in its time (see below), but none of the texts state this principle explicitly. In the time of the Canon, there would have been little need to make this limitation, as the kaṭhina donation consisted simply of cloth with, perhaps, only a few accessory gifts; once the bhikkhus had spread the kaṭhina with that cloth, they would have earned their kaṭhina privileges, so there would be little or no reason for them to desire another kaṭhina donation. At present, however, the kaṭhina cloth is usually only a small part of the kaṭhina donation, which can often amount to the largest single donation a monastery will receive in the course of the year. The oral tradition thus serves the purpose of ensuring that these large kaṭhina donations will fan out to the largest number of monasteries and not get concentrated in only a few of the more popular ones.

The donor. The Commentary states that anyone, human or deva, ordained or not, may give the kaṭhina cloth to the Community. However, as Mv.VII.1.5 forbids the bhikkhus who are receiving the cloth from doing anything to obtain it, the Commentary's statement must be amended to read that the donor of the cloth may be anyone — lay or ordained, human or not — who is not a part of the Community receiving it.

The cloth. Pv.XIV.3.5 states that the cloth must be any one of the six allowable types of robe material. Mv.VII.1.6 stipulates that it must be either unsoiled or "made unsoiled," which the Commentary interprets as meaning washed once or twice. It may be a rag, cast-off, or obtained at a store. The Commentary interprets this last phrase as referring to cloths (cut-offs?) dropped at the door of a store. However, if this were the case, there would be no passage in the Canon to allow cloth bought at a store, so the phrase "obtained at a store" probably also covers cloth that the donor has purchased.

According to Mv.VII.1.6, the cloth may not be borrowed, kept overnight, or be cloth that is to be forfeited. Pv.XIV.1 distinguishes two ways in which cloth may be kept overnight: kept overnight in the doing and kept overnight in the accumulation. The Commentary explains the former as meaning cloth that has been put aside (apparently, after it has been received by the Community and bestowed on an individual bhikkhu) without having been finished that day. It explains the latter as meaning cloth given to a Community one day, while the Community gives it to an individual on a later day for him to spread kaṭhina. The same passage in the Parivāra interprets "to be forfeited" as meaning cloth that is still in the process of being made when dawn arises, but this is redundant with the category of "kept overnight." The Vinaya-mukha prefers to interpret "to be forfeited" as referring to cloth that a bhikkhu must forfeit under any of the NP rules. This interpretation seems more reasonable. The cloth, in short, must be a gift free and clear.

Mv.VII.1.5 places stipulations on what the bhikkhus may and may not do to obtain a gift of kaṭhina cloth. Any cloth that the bhikkhus have received through insinuation or roundabout talking, it says, is unallowable. The Pv.XIV.1 defines insinuation and roundabout talk as anything a member of the Community might say with the purpose of getting cloth to spread for a kaṭhina. The Commentary's example of insinuation is, "This is good cloth. One could spread a kaṭhina with this cloth." Its example of roundabout talking is, "It's proper to donate kaṭhina cloth. The donor of a kaṭhina acquires lots of merit." It adds that one cannot ask for a kaṭhina cloth even from one's own mother. The cloth should be "as if it floated down from the sky."

However, the Commentary states that if a person who has decided to donate a kaṭhina cloth — but doesn't know the proper procedure for doing so — comes and asks, "How should the kaṭhina be donated?" one may say, "One should donate, while the sun is in the sky, enough cloth to make one of the three robes, saying 'We are donating the cloth for the kaṭhina.' For the purpose of making the kaṭhina robe, one should donate so many needles, so much thread, so much dye, conjey and food for so many bhikkhus who will be doing the robe-making." Speaking in this way does not invalidate the cloth.

Transaction. The transaction bestowing the kaṭhina cloth is accomplished by means of a motion and a proclamation, which are included in Appendix I.

Quorum. Mv.IX.4.1 states that this transaction requires a quorum of four bhikkhus, meaning at least five participants: four to bestow the cloth and one to receive it.

The Commentary's treatment of the issue of quorum does not distinguish between the quorum for the transaction of bestowing the cloth and the quorum for the spreading of the kaṭhina. This creates some confusion. It maintains that at least five bhikkhus are needed to spread the kaṭhina and they must have stayed the Rains without break. The implication in the Commentary's discussion is that this principle applies both to the act of spreading the kaṭhina and to the Community transaction of bestowing the cloth. The Canon supports neither idea. On the one hand, although the Canon would require a minimum total of five bhikkhus for the transaction bestowing the cloth, it does not require that they all must have spent the Rains without break. And although Mv.VII.1.3 mentions that the bhikkhu spreading the kaṭhina must have spent the Rains without break, the Canon nowhere says that the spreading requires a full Community. This may seem like splitting hairs, but the difference would be especially important in a case like the following: Five bhikkhus have spent the Rains together in an isolated place far from any other bhikkhus, but three of them have broken the Rains for various reasons. If we followed the Commentary's interpretation, the remaining two would be deprived of their rightful privilege to spread the kaṭhina through no fault of their own. The Canon, however, would seem to allow for the five, as a Community, to receive a kaṭhina cloth and to bestow it on one of the two who had completed the Rains. After making a robe from the cloth, he and the other bhikkhu who had completed the Rains could participate in the formal procedure for spreading the kaṭhina (see below) and enjoy the resulting privileges.

The Commentary also maintains that the bhikkhus participating in the spreading of the kaṭhina must have already participated in the Invitation. Taken literally, this would mean that bhikkhus who delay their Invitation for a month would be ineligible for a kaṭhina. Again, nothing in the Canon supports the Commentary on this point. However, the Sub-commentary — perhaps sensing this problem — states that the Commentary's assertion here simply means that the bhikkhus have completed the first Rains-residence and the first Invitation day has passed.

The Commentary adds that no bhikkhus from other monasteries (in different territories, says the Sub-commentary) may count toward the quorum, although they may join in the meeting. Again, there is nothing in the Canon to support the Commentary in excluding outside bhikkhus from counting toward the quorum. As we noted above, Mv.VIII.24.2 implies that a bhikkhu spending the Rains alone would be allowed to enjoy the privileges resulting from spreading a kaṭhina, which would be possible only if he could join in the kaṭhina at another residence. If he would be allowed to enjoy the privileges, there seems no reason not to count him toward the quorum when bestowing the cloth. However, the Commentary's position on this point is widely accepted, and so it is worth knowing in full:

The Commentary further states — and here there is nothing in the Canon to contradict it — that if within one territory there are many monasteries, the bhikkhus in those monasteries should all meet to spread a kaṭhina in one place and not spread separate kaṭhinas. This statement may be the source of the tradition that there may be one kaṭhina per territory in a given year, but the Commentary does not explicitly make this point.

The recipient. Because the recipient is the person primarily responsible for spreading the kaṭhina, the Mahāvagga requires that he has spent the Rains without break. Pv.XIV.3.7 adds that he must be knowledgeable about eight things:

All of these matters will be discussed below.

The Commentary, however, states simply that the recipient should be a bhikkhu with an old robe. Among bhikkhus with old robes, the Community should choose one with seniority; and, among the senior bhikkhus, the one who is a "great person" capable of spreading the kaṭhina within that day. If the senior bhikkhus are unable to do this, while a more junior bhikkhu is able, the Community may give it to him. However, as the Community should all assist in making the robe, the preferable course is to tell a senior bhikkhu, "Please accept the cloth. We'll see that it gets done."

Accessory gifts. The Commentary states that if kaṭhina-accessories — i.e., other gifts — come along with the cloth, their status depends on what the donors say. If they say, "These accessories are for that bhikkhu," the Community has no right over them. They belong to the bhikkhu receiving the cloth. If the donors don't say that, the accessories belong to the Community. If the bhikkhu spreading the kaṭhina has other robes that are wearing out, then — following a simple announcement to the Community — enough accessory cloths should be given to him for the purpose of replacing those robes. Remaining cloths should be distributed to the Community, beginning where the distribution of rains-bathing cloths left off (see Chapter 18). If there were no rains-bathing cloths, distribute the accessory cloths beginning with the senior bhikkhu. The same procedure holds for other goods that are light or inexpensive (lahubhaṇḍa). Any heavy or expensive goods (garubhaṇḍa — see Chapter 7) should not be distributed.

Making the robe. Mv.VII.1.6 states that the robe to be made from the cloth must be either an under robe, an upper robe, or an outer robe. In all cases it must be comprised of at least five sections (khaṇḍa — see Chapter 2). The Commentary advises making a robe to replace whichever robe in the recipient's basic set of three is most worn out. Given the time constraints, however, the common practice is to use the cloth to make an under robe, as this takes the least time.

The Mahāvagga's instructions on how to sew the robe are somewhat unclear. Mv.VII.1.5 contains a series of sentences of the form, "Not simply by x is the kaṭhina spread (§)," in which x is replaced by marking [C: measuring], washing, calculating the cloth [C: planning the number of sections to be made], cutting, tacking, basting, making a seam, reinforcing [Kurundī: doubling the thickness], making the border {SC: adding the border on the long side of the robe}, making a binding (for the edge of the border) {SC: adding the border on the short side of the robe}, patching [C: patching another robe with cloth from the kaṭhina cloth], insufficient dyeing [C: dyeing it just once so that it has the color of ivory or withered leaves]. This obviously means that the kaṭhina has to be spread with a completed, fully dyed robe made entirely of cloth donated for the purpose, but nowhere does the Canon say whether all of these activities have to be done by the bhikkhus, or if any of them may be skipped. The Parivāra, in its section on the preliminaries to the spreading of the kaṭhina, says simply that these preliminaries include washing, calculating the cloth, cutting, tacking, sewing, dyeing, and making it allowable (with the mark stipulated by Pc 58, says the Commentary). Again, it doesn't state that all these activities have to be done by the bhikkhus themselves.

The Commentary maintains that if the cloth for the kaṭhina is presented to the bhikkhus as a finished robe, well and good, but this point is controversial. As the Vinaya-mukha points out, if one of the purposes of the kaṭhina procedure is to teach the bhikkhus to work together, the Commentary's position would defeat that purpose.

If the cloth hasn't been made into a finished robe, the Commentary describes the procedure is as follows: Wash the cloth so that it's thoroughly clean. Prepare the robe-making accessories, such as needles. Gather all the bhikkhus to sew the robe, dye the sewn robe, make it allowable, and spread it that very day. No one may get out of this obligation on the grounds that he is senior, learned, or whatever. To qualify as properly dyed, the robe must be dyed enough times to give it the proper color. If, while the first cloth is being prepared, another person comes along with another cloth together with many accessory gifts, the bhikkhus may make the robe from the cloth donated with the more accessory gifts, having instructed the donors of the other cloth so that he/she/they are agreeable.

This last judgment is a little dubious, for it is hard to imagine that the donor of the first cloth wouldn't despise the bhikkhus for passing over his/her cloth in favor of a cloth coming later with more material rewards. However, there are cases where many donors join the initial donor in giving accessory gifts of their own, which may include pieces of cloth of a higher quality than those given by the initial donor. In cases like this, after checking with the initial donor to see if he/she is amenable, it is permissible to pile the accessory cloths together with his/her gift of cloth and to include the whole pile in the transaction statement. In this way, the bhikkhus are free to choose which of the cloths they want to use when making the robe.

Regardless of the validity of the Commentary's judgment on this point, it suggests that the principle of only one kaṭhina per monastery in a given year was an unspoken assumption when the Commentary was composed. If the Commentary had assumed that more than one kaṭhina were allowed, it could have easily advised the bhikkhus in this situation to hold two separate kaṭhina transactions, one using the cloth provided by the first donor, and the other using the cloth provided by the second. Nevertheless, as noted above, the principle of no more than one kaṭhina per year per residence is nowhere explicitly stated in the texts.

Spreading. Once the robe is finished and has been made allowable, the kaṭhina may be spread. Mv.VII.1.5 states that the kaṭhina must be spread by an individual, not by a group or a Community. According to the Commentary, that individual should be the bhikkhu to whom the Community gave the cloth in the first place.

Pv.XIV.3.4 states that after removing the determination of one's old robe (for example, if the new robe is an under robe, one removes the determination of one's current under robe), one determines the new robe for use. Once determined, the new robe may be used to spread the kaṭhina as long as it is the proper type of cloth, made into a robe on the day it was donated to the Community, and completed before the following dawn. Although the Parivāra states that the robe must be completed before dawnrise, only the Commentary insists that the kaṭhina must also be spread before dawn in order to be valid. Neither the Mahāvagga nor the Parivāra contains this requirement.

The Mahāvagga gives no details for the procedure of spreading the kaṭhina, other than that anyone who expresses his approval of the spreading of the kaṭhina must be standing within the territory. If anyone expresses approval while standing outside the territory, the spreading is not effective. This statement raises two questions:

The Mahāvagga does not explicitly state that the person giving his approval must be a bhikkhu, or that he must have spent the Rains without break. However, the Parivāra states explicitly that he must be a bhikkhu. It also states that the kaṭhina is spread by two people — the bhikkhu who spreads it, and the person who gives his approval — and because the Mahāvagga allows the spreading of the kaṭhina only for those who have spent the Rains, this would imply that the bhikkhu giving his approval must have spent the Rains without break for his approval to count.

According to the Parivāra, the general requirements for spreading and giving approval are that:

The precise pattern it recommends is as follows:

If a bhikkhu wants to spread the kaṭhina with an under robe, he removes the determination of his old under robe, determines the new under robe, and then says out loud:

This means, "With this under robe I spread the kaṭhina (§)." If spreading the kaṭhina with an upper robe, he follows a similar procedure, replacing Iminā antaravāsakena with Iminā uttarāsaṅgena; if with an outer robe, he replaces Iminā antaravāsakena with Imāya saṅghāṭiyā.

Having approached the Community, with his robe arranged over one shoulder and his hands in añjali, he says,

This means, "Venerable sirs [friends], the Community's kaṭhina has been spread. The spreading of the kaṭhina is in accordance with the Dhamma. Approve of it." The bhikkhus — each of whom has his robes also arranged over one shoulder and his hands raised in añjali — respond by saying,

"Venerable sir [friend], the Community's kaṭhina has been spread. The spreading of the kaṭhina is in accordance with the Dhamma. We approve of it."

Pv.XIV.4 adds the alternative that instead of approaching the Community, the bhikkhu spreading the kaṭhina may go to bhikkhus individually or in smaller groups and follow the same procedure, with only one difference: If he is approaching an individual, he replaces the plural, Anumodatha, with the singular, Anumodasi; while the individual replaces anumodāma ("We approve") with anumodāmi ("I approve").

The allowance for getting the bhikkhus' approval individually or in small groups reflects the fact that the spreading of the kaṭhina is not a Community transaction; the validity of the spreading does not require the entire Community's presence or approval. This is an important point. If one cannot convene the entire Community after having finished the robe, then simply contacting at least one other member of the Community and gaining his approval of the spreading is enough for the kaṭhina to be properly spread.

In light of this fact, the phrase saṅghassa kaṭhinaṃ — "the Community's kaṭhina" — would denote the Community as the owner of the kaṭhina only in the sense of its unity in authorizing the kaṭhina through having originally bestowed the cloth; the phrase would not necessarily mean that the entire Community is participating in the kaṭhina's spreading or gaining the resulting privileges. For example, there is the case where, following the transaction by which the kaṭhina cloth is bestowed on one of the bhikkhus, so many of the other bhikkhus leave the monastery that less than a full Community remains. (The bhikkhus who leave may have joined in the transaction statement simply to please the donors but with no interest in making the robe or in taking advantage of the kaṭhina privileges.) In this case, the remaining group may still make the new robe and spread the kaṭhina with it. (Pv.XIV.5 offers another explanation for the phrase saṅghassa kaṭhinaṃ, but because its explanation is so problematic, and the problems so technical, I have relegated its discussion to Appendix V.)

There is also the case, mentioned above, where not all of the bhikkhus in the Community successfully completed the Rains. In this case, all the bhikkhus could participate in the transaction bestowing the cloth, but only those who had actually completed the Rains would be allowed to earn the privileges that come from spreading the kaṭhina.

If we follow the Commentary in maintaining that the kaṭhina must be spread before dawn of the following day, there is yet another case where this point would prove relevant: when the robe is finished near dawn, the bhikkhus for the most part have gone off to sleep, and the bhikkhu spreading the kaṭhina cannot track them all down before dawnrise. In this case, he would be duty-bound to inform only those he can track down in time.

Privileges. The Canon contains a discrepancy in its lists of the privileges earned by those who participate in the spreading of a kaṭhina. Mv.VII.1.3 maintains that the kaṭhina privileges are five:

Note that privileges (1), (3), (4,) and (5) are simply extensions of the automatic privileges for the cīvara-kāla, or robe-season (see Chapter 11). Privilege (2), however, is exclusively a kaṭhina privilege that does not come automatically with the robe-season.

For some reason, the list at Mv.VII.1.3 does not include an extension of the one remaining automatic robe-season privilege: the rescinding of the rule against out-of-turn meals (Pc 33). This is where the discrepancy lies, for the Vibhaṅga to Pc 33 states that the rule is rescinded not only during the fourth month of the rainy season but also throughout the period when the kaṭhina privileges are in effect. None of the texts mention this discrepancy, so there is no precedent for deciding whether the list at Mv.VII.1.3 is incomplete or the Vibhaṅga to Pc 33 is wrong. Because the allowance for rescinding Pc 33 during the occasion for giving cloth (cīvara-dāna-samaya) is written into the training rule, and because this period, in all other contexts, is said to be extended throughout the kaṭhina privileges, we can assume that the list at Mv.VII.1.3 is incomplete, and that there is actually a sixth privilege for those who have participated in the spreading of a kaṭhina:

According to Pv.XIV.1, these privileges apply both for the bhikkhu who has spread the kaṭhina and for any bhikkhu who has approved the spreading of the kaṭhina. As long as certain conditions are in place, these privileges extend until the end of the cold season, five months after the end of the first Rains-residence.

Dismantling the kaṭhina. There are two ways in which a bhikkhu's kaṭhina privileges may be ended — this is called the dismantling of the kaṭhina — before the end of the cold season:

The Vinaya-mukha questions the purpose of the transaction mentioned in point (1), but there are a number of possible reasons for withdrawing the privileges. Some Communities do so on the grounds that there is value in not relaxing one's observance of the rules, even when allowed. This attitude acts as a deterrent to any lazy bhikkhu who might want to join a Community simply to take advantage of its kaṭhina privileges. Another reason to withdraw the privileges would be as a favor to new bhikkhus joining the Community after the kaṭhina has been spread. Once the privileges are withdrawn, the new bhikkhus would have a share in all gifts of cloth given to the Community in that monastery.

As for point (2), one's monastery constraint ends when one leaves the monastery without intending to return. The Mahāvagga does not mention this specifically, but the Parivāra's analysis of the Mahāvagga's scenarios for ways in which the kaṭhina is dismantled indicate that one's monastery constraint is also ended when one hears that the bhikkhus in one's monastery have held the Community transaction to withdraw the kaṭhina privileges.

One's robe constraint ends when one's new robe is finished, lost, destroyed, or burned, or when one's expectation for cloth has been disappointed (i.e., the cloth has not been provided as expected).

Mv.VII.1.7 lists eight headings that cover the various ways these conditions for the dismantling of the kaṭhina can combine in practice. One's kaṭhina may be dismantled:

Headings (1) and (5) cover cases where the robe constraint has already ended, so the kaṭhina is dismantled when the monastery constraint is ended in one of two ways: One leaves the monastery with the thought of not returning, or one leaves with the thought of returning but then hears that the Community there has agreed to withdraw the privileges. Headings (2), (4), and (6) cover cases where the monastery constraint has already ended, so the kaṭhina is dismantled when the robe constraint is ended in one of three ways: One finishes one's robe, one loses the cloth needed to make a robe, or one's expectation of cloth is disappointed. Heading (3) covers the case where the constraints are ended simultaneously, when — after leaving the monastery — one resolves simultaneously not to return and not to make a robe. Heading (8) covers the case where one's privileges end simultaneously with those of the other bhikkhus in the Community — the Canon does not say so specifically, but this seems to refer to the situation in which one participates in the meeting at which the kaṭhina privileges are formally withdrawn.

Heading (7) is problematic. The Commentary and Parivāra interpret going beyond the territory as referring to a physical territory, but this does not fit the examples given in the Mahāvagga. The Sub-commentary prefers to interpret territory as meaning the time-territory for the privileges. Thus, going beyond the territory would mean passing the end of the cold season, an interpretation that fits with the Mahāvagga and makes much more sense. Otherwise, none of the eight headings would cover this possibility.

Mv.VII.2-12 works out a total of ninety possible scenarios covered by these headings, a few examples of which are given in the Rules section at the end of this chapter. And, with a little imagination, one could work out many more possible scenarios as well. Fortunately, there is no need to know all the scenarios. Simply keeping in mind the two ways in which one's kaṭhina can be dismantled before the end of the cold season, as mentioned above — participating in the Community transaction to withdraw the privileges, or ending both one's robe- and one's monastery-constraints — is enough to ensure that one will recognize when one's privileges are still in effect and when they no longer are.

Rules

Cloth

Recipient

Making the Robe

Spreading & Approval

Kaṭhina Privileges

Dismantling the Kaṭhina