<p>I think your first doubt was taken out of context from the following rule (excerpt from <a href="http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/BMC_v140110.pdf" rel="nofollow">The Buddhist Monastic Code</a>, page 370):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>Should any bhikkhu teach more than five or six sentences of Dhamma to
  a woman, unless a knowledgeable man is present, it is to be confessed.</em></p>
  
  <p>“Then Ven. Udāyin, dressing early in the
  morning and taking his bowl and (outer) robe, went to visit a certain
  family. At that time the lady of the house was sitting in the main
  entrance, while the daughter-in-law was sitting in the door to the
  inner chamber. So Ven. Udāyin went to the lady of the house… and
  whispered Dhamma into her ear. The daughter-in-law thought, ‘Is this
  monk my mother-in-law’s lover, or is he being fresh with her?’ Then,
  having whispered Dhamma into the ear of the lady of the house, Ven.
  Udāyin went to the daughter-inlaw… and whispered Dhamma into her ear.
  The lady of the house thought, ‘Is this monk my daughter-in-law’s
  lover, or is he being fresh with her?’ After whispering Dhamma into
  the daughter-in-law’s ear, Ven. Udāyin left. So the lady of the house
  said to the daughter-in-law, ‘Hey. What did that monk say to you?’</p>
  
  <p>“‘He taught me Dhamma, ma’am. And what did he say to you?’</p>
  
  <p>“‘He taught me Dhamma, too.’</p>
  
  <p>“So they criticized and complained and spread it
  about, ‘How can Ven. Udāyin whisper Dhamma into women’s ears?
  Shouldn’t the Dhamma be taught openly and out loud?’”</p>
  
  <p>The two factors for the full offense here are:</p>
  
  <p>1) Object: a female human being who knows what is and is not lewd, what is well-spoken and ill-spoken, and who has not asked one a question about the Dhamma.</p>
  
  <p>2) Effort: One teaches her more than six sentences of Dhamma without a knowledgeable man present—i.e., a male human being who also knows what is and is not lewd, what is well-spoken and ill-spoken.</p>
  
  <p>...</p>
  
  <p><em>Summary: Teaching more than six sentences of Dhamma to a woman,
  except in response to a question, is a pācittiya offense unless a knowledgeable
  man is present.</em></p>
</blockquote>

<p>Your second doubt, seems to be referring to this rule (excerpt from <a href="http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/BMC_v140110.pdf" rel="nofollow">The Buddhist Monastic Code</a>, page 356):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><em>Should any bhikkhu have an unordained person recite Dhamma line by line (with him), it is to be confessed.</em></p>
  
  <p>This is an offense with two factors:</p>
  
  <p>1) Effort: One gets a student to recite Dhamma line-by-line with oneself (which, as we shall see below, means to train the student to be a skilled reciter of a Pali Dhamma
  text).</p>
  
  <p>2) Object: The student is neither a bhikkhu nor a bhikkhunī.</p>
  
  <p>...</p>
  
  <p><em>Summary: To train a novice or lay person to recite passages of Dhamma by
  rote is a pācittiya offense.</em></p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-21T15:35:20.957Z
2015-01-21T15:41:33.883Z
2015-01-21T15:41:33.883Z
fxam
<p>Two of the Pacittiyas (monks precepts according to Vinaya) implies that 1-Bhikkhus should not teach more than 6 words of Dhamma to women and also 2-Should not recite texts of dhamma in pali with laymen.</p>

<p>Is this correct? I may have read that in a non reliable source of per haps I may have misinterpreted it, it could also be an issue with the translation... not sure.</p>

<p>Anyway, I woukd like to understand it better. thanks!</p>

<vinaya><precept>
Monks precepts - Not to teach dhamma to women and not to recite dhamma in pali with laymen?
# Monks precepts - Not to teach dhamma to women and not to recite dhamma in pali with laymen?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-01-20)

Two of the Pacittiyas (monks precepts according to Vinaya) implies that 1-Bhikkhus should not teach more than 6 words of Dhamma to women and also 2-Should not recite texts of dhamma in pali with laymen.

Is this correct? I may have read that in a non reliable source of per haps I may have misinterpreted it, it could also be an issue with the translation... not sure.

Anyway, I woukd like to understand it better. thanks!

**Tags:** vinaya, precept


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2015-01-21. Score: 3

I think your first doubt was taken out of context from the following rule (excerpt from [The Buddhist Monastic Code](http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/BMC_v140110.pdf), page 370):

> *Should any bhikkhu teach more than five or six sentences of Dhamma to
> a woman, unless a knowledgeable man is present, it is to be confessed.*
>
> “Then Ven. Udāyin, dressing early in the
> morning and taking his bowl and (outer) robe, went to visit a certain
> family. At that time the lady of the house was sitting in the main
> entrance, while the daughter-in-law was sitting in the door to the
> inner chamber. So Ven. Udāyin went to the lady of the house… and
> whispered Dhamma into her ear. The daughter-in-law thought, ‘Is this
> monk my mother-in-law’s lover, or is he being fresh with her?’ Then,
> having whispered Dhamma into the ear of the lady of the house, Ven.
> Udāyin went to the daughter-inlaw… and whispered Dhamma into her ear.
> The lady of the house thought, ‘Is this monk my daughter-in-law’s
> lover, or is he being fresh with her?’ After whispering Dhamma into
> the daughter-in-law’s ear, Ven. Udāyin left. So the lady of the house
> said to the daughter-in-law, ‘Hey. What did that monk say to you?’
>
> “‘He taught me Dhamma, ma’am. And what did he say to you?’
>
> “‘He taught me Dhamma, too.’
>
> “So they criticized and complained and spread it
> about, ‘How can Ven. Udāyin whisper Dhamma into women’s ears?
> Shouldn’t the Dhamma be taught openly and out loud?’”
>
> The two factors for the full offense here are:
>
> 1) Object: a female human being who knows what is and is not lewd, what is well-spoken and ill-spoken, and who has not asked one a question about the Dhamma.
>
> 2) Effort: One teaches her more than six sentences of Dhamma without a knowledgeable man present—i.e., a male human being who also knows what is and is not lewd, what is well-spoken and ill-spoken.
>
> ...
>
> *Summary: Teaching more than six sentences of Dhamma to a woman,
> except in response to a question, is a pācittiya offense unless a knowledgeable
> man is present.*

Your second doubt, seems to be referring to this rule (excerpt from [The Buddhist Monastic Code](http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/BMC_v140110.pdf), page 356):

> *Should any bhikkhu have an unordained person recite Dhamma line by line (with him), it is to be confessed.*
>
> This is an offense with two factors:
>
> 1) Effort: One gets a student to recite Dhamma line-by-line with oneself (which, as we shall see below, means to train the student to be a skilled reciter of a Pali Dhamma
> text).
>
> 2) Object: The student is neither a bhikkhu nor a bhikkhunī.
>
> ...
>
> *Summary: To train a novice or lay person to recite passages of Dhamma by
> rote is a pācittiya offense.*


---

