Overview
To maintain absolute moral purity and internal harmony within a monastery district, monks are legally required to hold each other accountable. However, a monk cannot randomly accuse a peer of a rule violation. The Vinaya mandates that any formal accusation or correction must rest strictly upon one of three valid evidentiary grounds (codanāvatthu).
The List
- Diṭṭhena - By Seeing: The accusing monk directly witnessed the peer committing a specific rule violation with his own eyes.
- Sutena - By Hearing: The accusing monk directly heard the peer committing the offense, or heard a reliable, trustworthy person describe the incident.
- Parisaṅkitena - By Suspecting / Ground for Suspicion: The accusing monk did not see or hear the act directly, but has observed strong circumstantial evidence or anomalous behavior that logically links the peer to a violation (e.g., finding forbidden items in their cell).