Jotiya
Dhirasekera
[Now Bhikkhu
Dhammavihari]
BIONA
Editor Note:
Footnotes are marked as roman numerals, eg XI, XII, XIII,
etc. To view this page correctly,
you need to download this font
A study of its origin and
development in relation to the Sutta and Vinaya Pitakas
Jotiya
Dhirasekera
Editor - in - Chief, Encyclopaedia
of Buddhism, Sri Lanka
Formerly of the Department of Pali and Buddhist Civilization,
University of Ceylon, Peradeniya
and the Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, University of Toronto, Canada
Ministry of Higher Education
Research Publication Series, Sri
Lanka.
Vinayo nma Buddhassanassa yu
vinaye Źhite ssanam Źhitaµ
hoti
As long as the respect for law and
order is maintained
so long shall the word of the
Buddha prevail.
Indebtedness of the author to the
Ministry of Higher Education for the publication of this work is gratefully
acknowledged.
Buddhist Monastic Discipline
Thesis submitted to the University
of
Ceylon for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
First Edition
Printed in Sri Lanka in 1982 by
M.D.Gunasena & Co. (Printers) Ltd., Colombo 12.
878-2 / 79
The Vinaya which is a part of the
system of training for the Buddhist disciple is a subject of absorbing interest
not only for the study of Buddhist monasticism but also for the study of
Buddhism as a whole. This is particularly true of Theravada Buddhism where the practice of
monastic life as a means of attaining the religious goal is held in great
esteem. Dr. Robert H.Thouless has
made a thoroughly accurate assessment of this position as early as 1940. He says
: ' Perhaps the feature of Buddhism with which the modern Western mind finds it
hardest to sympathize is its monastic character. The achievement of emancipation
was regarded as a full-time occupation incompatible with the preoccupation
of a man living in the world. It is
true that householders might become disciples of the Buddha. These were required
to abstain from taking life, drinking intoxicating liquors, lying, stealing, and
unchastity, and also aim at pleasant speech, kindness, temperance, consideration
for others, and love. By obeying these injunctions laymen might hope to advance
so far that their future state would be a happier one. It is even suggested in
one discourse that a householder might obtain full release, but it is clear that
this was regarded as exceptional; the fruits of the Buddhist discipline could
normally be achieved only by the monk who gave all his time to the
task.'[i]
Nevertheless, it is our belief that
the subject has not received the attention it deserves. The present work
attempts to assess the role of the monk in the religion which is the outcome of
the teachings of the Buddha. There were monks in India, no doubt, even before
the time of the Buddha. But the first sermon which the Buddha delivered to the '
Group of Five ' monks made the Buddhist monks appear somewhat different from the
rest of their kind. His views about life in Saµsra and the escape therefrom,
his aesthetic sensibility, and his regard for sound public opinion contributed
to emphasise these differences. Thus in Buddhist monasticism the life of the
cloister is not an end in itself. It marks only the beginning of the pursuit of
the goal. It is a long way before the monk could claim to have reached that
worthy ideal : anuppattasadattho. It has been our endeavour to show that
Buddhist monastic discipline covers this vast and extensive
field.
I wish to express my gratitude to
my colleagues and friends who have been of
assistance to me at various stages in the course of this work.
Jotiya Dhirasekera
University Park, Peradeniya,
Ceylon
1 October 1964
At this stage of publication the
need for further comments on the subject matter of this thesis is not felt. It
is to be reiterated, however, that any meaningful living of the monastic life in
Buddhism has to accord with the spirit of
both the Dhamma and the Vinaya.
Jotiya
Dhirasekera
Encyclopaedia of
Buddhism
135, Dharmapala Mawatha
Colombo 7
5 November 1981
I now write this preface to the
second edition of my BUDDHIST MONASTIC DISCIPLINE as a Buddhist monk of six years'
standing, having renounced the life in the household on retirement at the age of
sixty-seven. More than thirty-two years have passed since the production of this thesis and I still continue pursuing my studies on the Vinaya. I have seen and read several
subsequent publications on the subject. This is neither the time nor the place
to make any observations on them.
I wish to place my own findings and
my observations on the subject before students of Buddhist monastic life in particular,
and students of Buddhism in
general, specially those who have missed seeing my work in the earlier edition
and those who I believe are not
adequately familiar with the original Vinaya texts in their Pali
version.
I owe a special word of thanks to
Bhikkhu Tiradhammo who in an early review of my work had kindly drawn
attention two 'minor errors' of
oversight. They now stand corrected on pp. 59 and 95.
Mention must also be made of
Bhikkhu Pamburana Sanghasobhana who assisted me in the production of the
manuscript for the printer. Finally my thanks go to Messrs. P.W. Dayananda and
B.D.Jayasena who did the typing of the text.
I wish to express my deep gratitude
and appreciation to Messrs. Motilal Banarsi Das & Co. for kindly agreeing to bring out this second edition of BUDDHIST MONASTIC DISCIPLINE.
Bhikkhu Dhammavihari
Buddhist Society of Victoria
Inc.
71-73 Darling
Road
East Malvern, Victoria
3145
Australia
A.
Aŗguttara Nikya
AA.
Aŗguttara Nikya AŹŹhakath, i.e. Manorathapčraö“
AAS.
Ananda Asrama Series
Ap.
Apadna
Brh.
Brhadraöyaka Upanisad
Chnd.
Chndogya Upanisad
Comy.
Commentary
D.
D“gha Nikya
DA.
D“gha Nikya AŹŹhakath, i.e. Sumaŗgalavilsin“
Dhp.
Dhammapada
DhA.
DhammapadaŹŹhakath
DhsA.
Dhammasaŗgaö“ AŹŹhakath, i.e. Atthaslin“
Gilgit MSS Gilgit
Manuscripts
IHQ.
Indian Historical Quarterly
Ind. Ant.
Indian Antiquary
J.
Jtaka
KaŹha.
KaŹha Upanisad
Kkvt.
Kaŗkhvitaraö“, i.e. Ptimokkha AŹŹhakath
M.
Majjhima Nikya
MA.
Majjhima Nikya AŹŹhakath, i.e. Papacasčdan“
Mö¶.
Mö¶čkya Upanisad
Manu.
Manusmriti
Miln.
Milinapaha
Muö¶.
Muö¶aka Upanisad
Prasna.
Prasna Upanisad
PTS.
Pali Text Society
Pts.
PaŹisambhidmagga
S.
Samyutta Nikya
SA.
Samyutta Nikya AŹŹhakath i.e. Sratthappaksin“
SBB.
Sacred Books of the Buddhists
SBE.
Sacred Books of the East
Sn.
Suttanipta
SnA.
Suttanipta AŹŹhakath
Taisho
Taisho Issaikyo
Tait.
Taittir“ya Upanisad
Thag.
Theragth
Thig.
Ther“gth
Ud.
Udna
UdA.
Udna AŹŹhakath, i.e. Paramatthad“pan“
Vibh.
Vibhaŗga
Vimt.
Vimativinodan“Vinaya T“k
Vin.
Vinaya PiŹaka
VinA.
Vinaya AŹŹhakath, i.e. Samantapsdik
Vinvi.
Vinayavinicchaya
Vism.
Visuddhimagga
Chapter
I
It is well to begin a study of
Buddhist monasticism with a brief reference to religious mendicancy in India in
general. Both these are by no means
unexplored fields of study and have engaged the attention of scholars for nearly
a century. Among the more
successful and recognised of these we would not fail to mention Max Muller, Monier Williams, Oldenberg,
Rhys Davids, Mrs. Rhys Davids, E.J. Thomas, Nalinaksa Dutt, Miss Horner and
Sukumar Dutt. The pioneers among
them started their work during the
last few decades of the
19th century and worked on
relatively scanty material.
However, we are glad to note that in our evaluation of their results, we
have found some of these scholars of distant antiquity to be extremely reliable
and trustworthy. Admittedly, they tried to work with perfect detachment but it
cannot always be said, perhaps due to forces beyond their control, that they
were free from bias of some sort or another.
We have attempted in the present
study to analyse and examine such lapses wherever possible. It is our conviction
that, barring the paucity of source material at a particular time, the following
considerations contributed in some way or other to the origin and perpetuation
of several erroneous theories:
(i) An unnecessary attempt to force into one
single geneological tree many institutions of diverse origin. This is
particularly true in the case of some scholars who begin their study of Indian religions from the Vedic
schools and trace it down
chronologically through the centuries. Here is Monier Williams attempting to see
Buddhism in relation to Brahmanism : 'We perceive again the close connexion
between Brahmanism and Buddhism ;
for clearly the Brahmacr“ and Sannys“ of the one became the Srmaöera or
junior monk, and Sramaöa or senior monk of the other.'[ii] But this is an unfortunate
identification which is far from the truth. The Pali works keep the
brahmacarya of the Brahmins
distinctly apart from their own
[brahmacariya ]. In the
Suttanipta it is said that the orthodox Brahmins of old practised the life of
brahmacariya for forty-eight years.
AŹŹhacattl“saµ vassni komrabrahmacariyaµ cariµsu te
vijjcaraöapariyeŹŹhiµ acaruµ brhmaö pure. Sn. v. 289
The Aŗguttara Nikya too, expresses
a similar idea.[iii] This distinction between the
brahmacariya life of the Buddhist disciple and that of the Brahmins is clearly
maintained by an independent observer in the person of King Pasenadi Kosala in the Dhammacetiya
Sutta.[iv] [ Idh ' haµ bhante passmi eke
samaöabrhmaöe pariyantakataµ brahmacariyaµ carante dasa ' pi vassni v“satim '
pi vassni tiµsam ' pi vassni cattr“sam ' pi vassni. Te aparena samayena
sunht.... pacahi kmaguöehi samaŗg“bhčt paricrenti. M.II.120. ]
(ii) An inadequate knowledge of Pali, the
language in which one of the most
reliable recensions of Buddhist
texts is preserved. Some of the pioneers very naturally stumbled over in many
places in their translations, mainly through their ignorance of the
peculiarities of idiom. Greater disaster befell Pali studies when later scholars
who followed in their wake placed implicit faith on the earlier translations and
built far-reaching theories on
them. Avery glaring instance of this is found in S.Dutt's reliance on Chalmers'
translation of the Gopakamoggallna sutta.[v] It is also possible to trace other
instances of incorrect translations which result more from biassed thinking than
from ignorance. Here are two such
cases picked up at random :
(a) Bhavissanti dhammassa atro
(Vin. I. 21; M. I. 163.) - translated as :
'Some when they learn will become
(i. e. will grow). '[vi]
It simply means: ' There would be
some who would understand the doctrine.'
(b) Ariyassa vinaye yo accayam accayato
disv yathdhammaµ paŹikaroti....
yatiµ saµvaraµ pajjat“ 'ti .[vii] - translated as :
' In these Rules
laid down by the Venerable One, he
who realizes his lapse to be such and remedies it according to law, obtains
absolution at once.'[viii]
Here, not only is this translation
incorrect but the quotation itself is badly mutilated. The words vuddhi hi
es should be prefixed to
the quotation. The translation
should then read as follows :
'It is a sign of progress in this noble discipline if one realizes his lapse to be such and remedies it according to law
and safeguards against its repetition in the future.'
(iii) An unwarranted disregard for
the subsequent commentarial traditions which merit more serious
consideration.
It should be made quite clear that
we do not make a plea here on behalf of the Pali Commentaries that they should be used as
the sole criteria in the interpretation of Canonical texts. Far from it. But our
contention is that more often than not, when Commentaries have been subject to
criticism and ridicule, they have been misjudged and misinterpreted. We come
across instances when modern scholars accuse commentators of being ignorant of
etymology.[ix] But it is obviously unreasonable to imagine that
every commentarial explanation of a word either had to be or was thought by the
commentators to be an etymological one. It would certainly amount to fighting wind-mills to mock a
commentator at a definition like
saµsre bhayaµ ikkhat“ ' ti bhikkhu.[x] This is by no means born of ignorance of
etymology. Commentarial tradition
is equally conversant with the
definition bhikkhat“ ' ti
bhikkhu.[xi] And there are numerous
other definitions of bhikkhu.[xii]
This commentarial trend is much
more evident in the numerous definitions that have been successively added on to
the word Ptimokkha. All these go
to prove the fact that the
commentarial tradition which legitimately goes back to the early days of
the Ssana, as far back as the time
of the Buddha, did acquire in its long history a wealth of information which
is invaluable in the study and
interpretation of Buddhist ideas and institutions. Such information reveals something
dynamic in their evolution. The
connotations of words and the values
attached to them are seen changing in course of
time.
(Page 3)
It would be interesting to study
the various definitions of Ptimokkha in the light of these observations. In the Mahvagga, in what is called the
Old Commentary by Rhys Davids and Oldenberg, we have perhaps what may be regarded as the oldest definition of Ptimokkha:
Ptimokkhan ' ti diµ etaµ mukhaµ
etaµ pamukhaµ etaµ kusalnaµ dhammnaµ .[xiii] One would search in vain here for an etymological
definition. But one cannot ignore the light it throws on the scope and function
of the Ptimokkha in the early history of the Ssana. It is said to be the beginning, the
source of all good activities. We
have shown elsewhere how the Ptimokkha which began as
a complement to s“la in early Buddhist monasticism soon came to be
regarded as s“la par excellence. Thus we discover their
identification in the Commentaries
[ Ptimokkhasaµvaro eva hi s“laµ - MA.I.155; SA.III. 230.]. The cultivation and acquisition of virtue (kusal dhamm) was the main concern of the monastic
life[xiv] and soon the Ptimokkha came to be the sole guide in Buddhist monasticism for
the attainment of this ideal. Hence, even in the Canonical texts, sampannaptimokkha or the perfection in terms of the Ptimokkha becomes a necessary adjunct
of a s“lasaµpanna or one who is
perfected in s“la.
We are well aware of the fact that
the spiritual earnestness of early Buddhist monasticism soon receded into the
background. In its place, the
slower process of perfection through saµsric evolution, subject to birth in
good and evil states (sugati and duggati), came to the fore and
gained greater prominence. This
tended, to a certain degree, even to secularise the monastic ideal. The reward for the religious life
of the monk differed from that of
the layman only in the matter of degree.
They both shared a life of bliss in heaven, the monk excelling the layman
with regard to his complexion,
glory and life-span.
Nave deve passant vaööavanto
yasassino
sugatasmiµ brahmacariyaµ caritvna idhgate.
Te ae atirocanti
vaööena yasasyun
svak bhčripaassa visesč ' pagat idha.
D.11. 208.
However, there is no doubt that
this was viewed as a departure
towards something inferior. In the Aŗguttara Nikya, the Buddha gives these same
items of divine excellence as a cause for revulsion for those who seek the true
fruits of recluseship [Sace vo bhikkhave aatitthiy paribbjak evaµ
puccheyyuµ devalokč ' papattiy vuso samaöe gotame brahmacariyaµ vussat“ ' ti
nanu tumhe bhikkhave evam puŹŹh aŹŹiyeyytha haryeyytha jiguccheyyth ' ti. Evam bhante -
A.I.115. ].
Some did, in fact, rebel against
it. Evidence of this, though with a
different emphasis, is found in the Commentary to the story of the Samaöa
Devaputta of the Saµyutta Nikya who, due to no choice of his, found himself
born in the heavenly world [So chyaµ disv cutibhvaµ atv na may imaµ Źhnaµ patthetv
samaöadhammo kato. Uttamatthaµ
arahattaµ patthetv kato ' ti sampattiy vippaŹisr“ ahosi. SA.I. 86. ]. At this stage we are not surprised at
the following definition of
Ptimokkha given by Buddhaghosa :
Yaµ taµ atimokkhaµ atipamokkhaµ uttamas“laµ pti v sugatibhayehi mokkheti duggatibhayehi yo v naµ pti taµ mokkhet“ ' ti ptimokkhan ' ti vuccati.[xv]
Apart from the new emphasis which
is laid on the scope of the Ptimokkha, one thing stands out clearly in this
definition of Buddhaghosa.
Buddhaghosa is conscious of the paramount importance of the Ptimokkha as
a body of s“la : it is the
atimokkhaµ atipamokkhaµ uttamas“laµ. Nevertheless,
(Page 4)
it is now valued more for its efficacy in warding off the possible dangers of sugati and duggati. It is the security of the life after that is now
sought. Yet another thing strikes us here. Whatever may be the purpose for
which the Ptimokkha is used, the
Commentator seems to be aware of the fact that the primary idea associated with
the Ptimokkha is that of freeing, liberating and saving. It is as though he knows that the verbal
notion in the word Ptimokkha is derived from the root /muc, giving such verb forms like muccati,
mucati, moceti which have the idea
of free, release or liberate.
In the present study of monastic
discipline we use the word ' monastic' primarily in the sense of
'pertaining to or characteristic of monks, nuns, friars and the like.'
Any reference to monasteries is made only secondarily in association with the
former. As a prelude to such a
study three things should be viewed clearly in order that the problems of Buddhist monastic discipline may be
analysed in their proper context.
They are:
(a) Pre- Buddhist religious
mendicancy in India.
(b) Origins of Buddhist
monasticism.
(c)
Origins of Vinaya literature.
Extensive work has admittedly been
done in all these fields of study.
Very difinite ideas have been expressed on many problems connected with
them. Nevertheless, we feel that there are numerous instances where modification
and reconsideration of views already expressed is not only desirable but
absolutely essential.
A great deal has been said about
religious mendicancy in India before the advent of Buddhism. As early as 1889
Monier Williams said the following on the subject :
'Monasticism had always been a
favourite adjunct of the Brahmanical system, and respect for monastic life had
taken deep root among the people....Hindu monks, therefore, were numerous before Buddhism. They belonged to various sects, and took
various vows of self- torture, of silence, of fasting, of poverty, of
mendicancy, of celibacy, of abandoning caste, rank, wife and family. Accordingly they had various names.....
Such names prove that asceticism was an ancient institution.'[xvi]
These remarks of Monier Williams
about pre-Buddhist mendicancy are also borne out by the evidence of the Pali
texts.[xvii] Oldenberg gives a very vivid account of
the pre-Buddhist origin of Indian monasticism.[xviii] Sukumar Dutt makes a
very comprehensive study of the origin of §ramaöa in India in a chapter entitled
' The Primitive Parivrjaka - A Theory Of Their Origin'.[xix] He has refreshingly new and interesting
views to express regarding their
origin. It would be out of place in
the present study to quote these authorities at length on the history of
pre-Buddhist religious mendicants.
Suffice it to say that all evidence
points to the wide prevalence and respectful acceptance of religious
mendicancy in ancient India prior to the birth of Buddhism, and that what was
most noteworthy about it was the
diversity rather than the homogeneity of its character.
On the origins of Buddhist
monasticism much more markedly divergent theories have been put forward since the
beginning of this century. One of
the distinguished pioneers in the field of Buddhist studies, Professor Rhys Davids, expressed the following view
about Buddhist monasticism at a date as early as 1886.[xx]
(Page 5)
'It was a logical conclusion from
the views of life held by Gotama, that any rapid progress in spiritual life was
only compatible with a retired life, in which all such contact with the world as
would tend to create earthly excitement and desires should be reduced as much as
possible; and accordingly, from the first he not only adopted such a mode of
life for himself, but urged it on his more earnest disciples.'[xxi]
In 1912 he was joined by his wife,
Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys, in expressing the same view. In the unrevised editions of her
Buddhism in the Home University
Library series (pre-1934) she says the following about Buddhist monasticism
:
'The monastic habit or practice of
seclusion in the wild, common to Indian recluseship from time immemorial, and
probably imported from India to Egypt and so to the newly Christianized Europe,
was largely and systematically practised by Buddhists. It was both practised by the founder
himself, and recommended to the followers, as the best opportunity for
cultivating detachment, spiritual calm, and thoroughgoing meditation on any
given subject prescribed by the recluse's superior.'[xxii]
After a thorough analysis of the
evidence of the Sutta and Vinaya PiŹakas we feel that this explanation of
Buddhist monasticism is indisputably correct. The motive in renuciation as given here
could not be any more near the truth.
But we lament the fact that,
supported by her new discovery of '
the growing vogue of the cenobitic monk and his peculiar ideals ', Mrs. Rhys
Davids abandoned her early ideas about Buddhist monasticism expressed
earlier.[xxiii] In her Outlines of Buddhism published in 1934 she shows her new
attitude to monasticism in Buddhism :
'I believe, that for the founder of
Buddhism and their co-workers the business of the missioner was the main
pre-occupation, and that, effectively to carry on this, it was necessary to give
up the life 'of the world' as a tie which would nullify the worth in their work
in religion. People would not have listened to the gospel taught by one who was
sharing their life. He had to show
that that gospel was the one thing in the world which mattered.'[xxiv]
This is a very strange motive which
is ascribed here to the pabbajita.
This is as it were to show that pabbajj and the life of brahmacariya have nothing in common. Mrs. Rhys Davids goes a step
further. She undertakes the
formidable task of simplifying, or oversimplifying we should say, the concept of
brahmacariya in Buddhism. Of
brahmacariya in Buddhism she
says:
'It paraphrases Dharma as perfect
conduct, in a word hitherto used for the life of a student under his teacher,
resembling to some extent the life of a medieval youth in a collegiate cloister,
but now applied to life as the '
many-folk ' might live if they chose to.'[xxv]
But this popularised rendering of
the meaning of brahmacariya when it
comes to Buddhism, unlike in the Catursrama Dharma, seems to be hardly justifiable
except on the assumption that Buddhism, in its origin, was a religion for the '
many- folk '. In a chapter devoted
entirely to this subject of brahmacariya, we show why we prefer to hold a
different point of view on the evidence of the Pali texts (See Ch. III.). For the present we would place before the reader a very different
evaluation of the life of pabbajj and its relation to the practice of
brahmacariya as given by Miss Horner:
(Page 6)
'For one of the points of entering
Gotama's Order was to learn control of body, mind and speech. This, it was thought, was essential to
spiritual progress, and was extremely hard to attain unless the shackles of the
household life had been laid aside. Then man, as monk, could more readily attain
perfection and its fruit (arahattaphala), the goal of brahmacariya, the good,
divine, holy or Brahma-life.'[xxvi]
These remarks, whatever may be the
interpretation of Brahma-life, savour truly of the contents of the early
Nikyas.
Monier Williams who completed his
treatise on Buddhism in 1880 has made the following remarks on the origins of the Buddhist
Saŗgha :
'What ought rather to be claimed
for him (Buddha) is that he was the
first to establish a universal brotherhood (Saŗgha) of coenobite monks, open to
all persons of all ranks. In other words, he was the founder of what may be
called a kind of universal monastic communism (for Buddhist monks never as a
rule, lived alone), and the first to affirm that true enlightenment - the
knowledge of the highest path leading to saintship - was not confined to the
Brahmans, but open to all the members of all castes.'[xxvii]
He adds further
:
'The peculiarity about Gotama's
teaching in regard to monachism was that he discouraged solitary asceticism,
severe austerities, and irrevocable vows, though he enjoined moral restraint in
celibate fraternities, conformity to rules of discipline, upright conduct, and
confession to each other.'[xxviii]
These obssevations of Monier
Williams both with regard to the origins of Buddhist monasticism and the pattern
of the consequent organization, we would regard as being commendably thorough and accurate.
However, there is one single point on which we wolud like to seek futher
clarification. He says that Buddhist monks never, as a rule, lived alone. It is difficult for us to determine the
evidence on which he arrived at this conclusion. Judging by his evident familiarity with the
Vinaya texts, we wonder whether it is the apparent compulsory residence under a
teacher for a prescribed period of time which is in the tradition of the Vinaya
which led him to this remark. But we should observe here that the Vinaya itself
gives many exceptions to this general practice.[xxix] At the same time,
forest-dwelling, solitary monks were as much a feature of early Buddhism as the
resident, urban monks who lived in communities. This is the burden of the
Khaggavisöa Sutta of the Suttanipta. This aspect of Buddhist monastic life is
discussed at greater length elsewhere (See Chs. VII &
XII.).
On the other hand, Dr. Sukumar
Dutt, obsessed as it were with the idea of itinerant mendicancy which he derives
from the life of Parivrjakas, seems to be unable to conceive of any settled
life in the early Buddhist community of Bhikkhus. Of their life he says : 'in its original
condition of homeless wandering'.[xxx]
Was not the Buddha himself, even
prior to his enlightenment, sufficiently acquainted with settled community life
among his contemporaries who had renounced the household life? The institutions
of īlra Klma, Uddaka Rmaputta, Sajaya and the three Kassapa brothers, all
point to the existence of well settled communities of ' homeless men'. Such settled life did not come to be
tabooed in Buddhism, either early or late. Itinerancy was not a compulsory
injunction and was never implied in the Buddhist ideal of agrasm anagriyam pabbajati.. As we
have pointed out elsewhere, it came to be adopted by some through personal
preference, but this does not in
any case imply any general change of attitude in Buddhist
monasticism.
(Page 7)
Life in the community and life in
seclusion were undoubtedly in existence side by side even during the earliest
phase of the Ssana. But to affirm
this is not to lose sight of the fact that both monasteries and community life
in them grew in stature in the centuries that followed the establishment of the
Ssana.
In support of his theory of the
exclusive eremetical ideal of early Buddhism, Dutt quotes the Mahvagga statement m ekena dve agamittha which he translates very correctly as
'let not two of you go one and the same way '.[xxxi] But we are surprised to find him use
this statement thereafter to conclude that
' the Buddha insists on unsocial life in its extreme form.' Dutt seems to lose sight completely of
the historical setting in which the remark was made by the Buddha. It was the Buddha's philanthrophy and
magnanimity which made him dispatch his first band of sixty disciples who were
of reliably good character to wander about in the country and the town for the
weal and welfare of many. He wanted
his meassage to reach as wide a circle as possible and he was confident of the
calibre of his disciples. That is
what made him say the above, that no two disciples should go in the same
direction. In those pioneering days
of the Ssana it would have been a tragic waste of man power to do so when every
one of the disciples so dispatched was equal to the task. We would refer the
reader here to the thoroughly accurate explanation which Miss Horner has given
to the above injunction of the Buddha :
" These are the grandiloquent words
which have come down to us. It is
more likely that Gotama said
something like ' Go out now to the
villages near by, and as there are so few of you, no
two of you should go by the same
way. Speak of the new ideas that I have just been
telling you about to any one who will listen'." [xxxii]
Having postulated that the Buddhist
Bhikkhus formed a sect of the Indian Parivrjaka community,[xxxiii] Dutt associates, ipso
facto, an exclusive eremetical ideal with the early Buddhist Bhikkhus. But he seems to run into a number of
references in the Canonical Pali texts which differentiate the Bhikkhus from
Parivrjakas. As these obviously
are contrary to his supposition he chooses to regard them as being of later
orgin.[xxxiv] It is difficult to detect the criteria which Dutt uses in
underrating the evidence of some
portions of the Pali texts as being unhistorical. The Gopakamoggallna Sutta of the Majjhima Nikya clearly does not
support his theory of the early Buddhist eremetical ideal. He thinks this Sutta is unhistorical in
its narrative contents.[xxxv]
The solitary, retiring type of
Bhikkhu who loved a life of peace and quiet and who for that purpose even
penetrated into the forest depths was by no means the exclusive pattern of early
Buddhist monasticism. While the
great elders like Mah Kassapa were respected as champions of this way of life,
monks who lived in an urban setting (gmantavihr“ ) have won as much praise for
their spiritual earnestness. (Evam
eva kho vuso yassa kassaci bhikkhuno ime ppak icchvacar pah“n dissanti c '
eva suyyanti ca kic ' pi so hoti gmantavihr“ nemantaniko gahapatic“varadharo
atha kho naµ sabrahmacr“ sakkaronti garukaronti mnenti pčjenti. Taµ kissa
hetu. Te hi tassa yasmato ppak
akusal icchvacar pah“n dissanti c ' eva sčyanti c ' ti - M.I. 31) In the
Gulissni Sutta, the venerable Sriputta shows us that the forest-dwelling monk
needs as much to develop his virture as the monk who lives in the
village.[xxxvi]
(Page 8)
Both groups seem to have been known
at a very early date and it also appears that their venue of residence was no
major concern. In marked contrast
to Mah Kassapa, Sriputta and Moggallna mingled with their fellow brethren in
large communities and worked for their upliftment.[xxxvii]
Dutt also tells us that " the counterpart in practice of the
'rhinoceros' ideal is represented by the formula of the Four Resources (nissaya)
of a Bhikkhu." [xxxviii] Elsewhere he says the same in the
following words : ' The eremetical ideal indicated here - a life of solitude and
austerity - is that recommended in the so -called Four Nissayas.' [xxxix] Neither the nature of these Nissayas nor
the incident which is said to have prompted the announcement of these make us
believe that they have anything in common whit the solitary ideal of the
Khaggavisöa Sutta. They only
constitute a sound attitude of mind towards the life of pabbajj. They refer to the four requisites
(catupaccaya) which a Bhikkhu expects to receive from the laymen. It is of paramount importance that a
Bhikkhu who chooses on his own a life of renunciation should be able to live
that life, without discontent, on the simplest of requisites which he would
receive from others. The virtue
which is aimed at in this idea of the Nissayas is contentment. In a desire for more and better
requisites the pabbajita shall not
let a spirit of discontent overpower him and embitter him about his religious
life. That is the warning struck in
the admonition on the Nissayas : Tattha te yvaj“vaµ ussho karaö“yo.[xl] It means 'In that holy way of living you
should continue to strive all your life.'
Dutt's remarks on the Nissayas show
signs of unnecessary distortion. He
says : 'When a person has already been ordained as a Bhikkhu, an almsman
professing to live for the rest of his life on alms, he is thus reminded in a
formal exhortation of the other three
nissayas, supposed to be the
other resources of his mendicant life.' [xli] He appears to derive the idea that a
Bhikkhu is ' an almsman professing to live
for the rest of his life on alms '
perhaps from the expression of the first Nissaya in the form
'Piö¶iylopabhojanaµ nissya pabbajj '.
But we do not see any justification for it. Nor do we feel warranted to
make such a statement on the purely etymological definition of the word bhikkhu
(bhikkhat“ 'ti bhikkhu).
This concept of the Bhikkhu as
indicated by Dutt is obviously in the tradition of Devadatta who requested the
Buddha to lay it down that a Bhikkhu should live on begged food all his life
(sdhu bhante bhikkhč.... yvaj“vaµ piö¶aptik assu - Vin.III.171). Dutt goes even so far as to think that
Devadatta's request to make rigid, lifelong habits of certain recommendations
which also include the Nissayas was an unsuccessful attempt at reviving the old
eremetical ideal.[xlii] But what Devadatta attempted was more to toe the line with the
champions of severe austerity, for Devadatta himself states that people
generally have a greater regard for austerity in religious life - lčkhappasann
hi manuss. But whether Devadatta did this out of genuine respect for austerity,
or as the Vinaya texts put it, out of the sinister motive of discrediting the
Buddha and his Order in the eyes of the people because the Buddha denounced
severe austerities, is a different problem. As Dutt himself points out, Devadatta's
proposals accord more with Jaina practices.[xliii] In Buddhism, they
strike a discordant note and consequently Devadatta appears more a dissentient
than a revivalist. Dutt is
apparently sorry that 'Devadatta got no credit for enjoining strictness with
regard to some of them.' [xliv] But for very obvious reasons we are
certainly not.
(Page 9)
Dutt's historical sense has also
led him to develop an evolutionary theory with regard to the concept of
Ctuddisa Saŗgha. He begins by saying that " the word Saŗgha signified later on
not the whole body of Buddhist ' Bhikkhus of the Four Quarters ', but only a
particular cenobitical society resident at an vsa." [xlv] Elsewhere he is even more categorical
about the use of the word Ctuddisa Bhikkhu-saŗgha. He says: ' The primitive Buddhist Saŗgha
in Pali literature is designated by its founder the Ctuddisa Bhikkhu-saŗgha.'
[xlvi]'This identification
of 'the primitive Buddhist Saŗgha '
with the Ctuddisa Bhikkhu-saŗgha, in our opinion, is hardly justifiable. The
Ctuddisa Bhikkhu-saŗgha, in the
context in which it occurs, did not
represent a distinct group as such.
It implied, on the other hand, the bestowal of gifts to the ' Order as a
collective organization '. The
phrase was used in such context, from the earliest times, connoting the totality of the Saŗgha. This undoubtedly was more a theoretical
reckoning than a physical reality and was used for purposes of monastic
administration, particularly in the acceptance and ownership of property. We reproduce below in full the instances
cited by Dutt where the word Ctuddisa Saŗgha is used:
D.I.145.
Yo kho brhmaöa ctuddisaµ saŗghaµ uddissa vihraµ karoti....
Vin.I.
305. Yaµ
tattha garubhaö¶aµ garuparikkhraµ tam gatngatassa
ctuddisassa saŗghassa avissajjikam vebhaŗgikan '
ti.
Vin.II.147. Rjagahako seŹŹhi
bhagavato paŹissutv te saŹŹhiµ vihre
gatngatassa ctuddisassa saŗghassa patiŹŹhpesi.
Vin.
II.164. Tena hi
tvaµ gahapati jetavanaµ gatngata-
ctuddisassa saŗghassa patiŹŹhpeh“ ' ti.
It should be clear from a study of
the above statements that where the Buddha uses the word ctuddisa (of the four quarters) with reference to the
Saŗgha, he does so for the specific
purpose of enjoining the collective acceptance of gifts in the name of the
Saŗgha in its totality. This is
further clarified by the additional word gatngata (those present and not present) which is
sometimes used with the former implying that the physical presence of every
member is not necessary at such a bestwal although the right of use of property
so bestowed is shared by every member of the Saŗgha. In the light of these observations we
are unable to agree with the following statements of Dutt
:
1. The persistency with which the
expression is used in reference to the primitive Buddhist Saŗgha seems to indicate that
it was used originally not as
descriptive phrase merely, but as a name.[xlvii]
2. In the Vinaya PiŹaka and in Ceylonese inscriptions
dating back to the time of Asoka, it is used in contexts where no special
signification of universality is intended.[xlviii]
3. The Saŗgha of the Four Quarters meant
latterly an ideal confederation, which at one time had an historical
reality.[xlix]
If we examine the Rdha Brhmaöa
episode of the Mahvagga[l] we see a very early stage in the
evolution of monastic administration.
The right of admitting new converts to the monastic order through a
formal resolution before the Saŗgha
is introduced here for the first time. This was done by the Buddha himself to
avoid the possible abuse of power by individuals to whom
he
had already relegated the authority
which he once held. In this transference of power from individuals to a
corporation we see the recognition of the existence of such separate bodies
which carried the designation of Saŗgha.
They were real and active
institutions which had a local relevance.
One would not deny that this
instance of empowering Saŗghas for the conferment of Upasampad is
relatively early in the history of the Ssana. Nevertheless one cannot confuse the
Saŗgha who thus acts collectively at these monastic functions with the Ctuddisa
Saŗgha, a concept which connotes something very different. These independent groups of Saŗgha, to
begin with, were not necessarily residents of one single vsa or monastic
residence.[li] Sometimes the residents within a
single village unit formed one Saŗgha as is evident from details of the
Ptimokkha recital which is
referred to in the Gopakamoggallna Sutta.[lii]
We shall now turn our attention to
what has been said so far about the organization and discipline of this early
monastic community. As early as
1880 Rhys Davids and Oldenberg jointly expressed the following view : 'It seems
to us that Gotama's disciples, from the very beginning, were much more than a
free and unformal union of men held
together merely through this common reverence for their Master, and through a
common spiritual aim. They formed
rather, and from the first, an organised Brotherhood.' [liii]
Speaking of the Buddhist monastic
fraternity Oldenberg says : 'It
appears from the very beginning to have been a society governed by
law. The completion of a procedure prescribed by law was
necessary to the reception of a postulant into the society. The law of the Order pointed out to him
his course of action and of omission.
The society itself as a court of discipline secured conformity to the
ecclesiastical rules by keeping up a regular judicial procedure.' [liv]
Based on independent observations
we are in a position to say that what has been stated in both cases is
thoroughly accurate. Let us now
turn to Sukumar Dutt.
'It is unhistorical to presume that
the entire corpus of the laws the Vinaya PiŹaka was drawn up at one time. From the beginning we hear of persons in
the Buddhist Saŗgha, called Vinayadharas, who concerned themselves with the
study and exposition of the rules of the Vinaya. The existence of such professors was the
surest guarantee for conservation and consolidation of the laws from generation
to generation among the Buddhist Bhikkhus.' [lv]
We are glad to say that these words
too, constitute very sound observation.
Note here Dutt's admission of the early existence of Vinayadharas in the Saŗgha and ' the study and
exposition of the rules of the Vinaya'.
He proceeds thereafter to strike a note of warning against possible
lapses in this field of study.
' Through an inadequate
appreciation of the complexities of the study, even learned writers on Buddhism
have been betrayed into attributing to the historical Buddha rules and
regulation of his Order, most of which did not emanate from him, but were
adopted by his monk-followers from time to time under the aegis of the Founder's
name. ' [lvi]
When and where these criticisms
apply, we will leave the reader to judge.
But where Dutt expresses his own ideas about the origins of Vinaya rules
he seems to be obviously on slippery ground. Speaking of the role of the Buddha in
the Vinaya PiŹaka he says :
' He is therefore set up rather as
a judge than as a law-maker. He
pronounces on the validity of acts done by the Bhikkhus and does not profess to prescribe general courses of
conduct for them.' [lvii]
We feel that his remarks here are
mixed up with a bit of legal jargon and they obviously miss the mark. As has
been explained in detail elsewhere under the origin of s“la and sikkhpada,[lviii] he Buddha does not
proceed as a law-maker, without any provocation. This is clearly stated to be so by the
Buddha himself both in the Bhaddli Sutta[lix] and the
Suttavibhaŗga.[lx] Judgement on a single wrong act done by
a Bhikkhu marks the birth of a new rule.
Nothing is further from the truth than his remark that the Buddha does
not profess to prescribe general courses of conduct for the Bhikkhus. Here Dutt seems to fail to assess
correctly the role of the Vinaya sikkhpada. They are unmistakably
generalisations based on specific instances. Collectively they determine the general
course of conduct for the monks.
Whatever be the evidence of the
Sutta and Vinaya PiŹakas, Dutt seems to have reached the conclusion that the Vinaya is a very late product in the
Ssana. But some of his remarks at
times seem to contradict his own theory.
We examine below some of his major postulates. He begins his argument regarding the
origin of Buddhist Vinaya as follows :
'Each of these sects had a Dhamma,
a body of doctrines, of its own, but whether it had an equally defined Vinaya, a
special body of external rules, is another question which we shall deal with in
Chapter III.' [lxi]
In Chapter III which is referred to
here, he makes the following analysis :
' Considering this episode.....the
conclusion is irresistible that the idea of the primitive Buddhist community was
that the Buddha himself had laid down no regula for the Saŗgha. The seeming inconsistency in the
Buddha's saying later on in the same Suttanta " Yo vo Ananda may dhammo ca vinayo ca desito,"
etc.... vanishes if we regard Vinaya in this context as not signifying the rules
of an Order,but those of right conduct.' [lxii]
But we are sorry to say, with all
due deference to Dutt's critical attitude, we are not in a position to
concede this manner of historical
reconstruction which is based on misconceptions and is exeedingly misleading.
Let us examine these statements more closely. The episode he speaks of refers to a
statement said to have been made by the Buddha to Ananda. It reads as Tathgatassa kho nanda na evaµ hoti
ahaµ bhikkhusaŗghaµ pariharissm“ ' ti.
Kiµ nanda tathgato bhikkhusaŗghaµ rabbha kicid ' eva udharissati.
[lxiii]
Based on this, Dutt says that 'the Buddha refused to lay down any rule
for the Saŗgha.' [lxiv] But to say this is no more than an act
of wishful thinking, for by no stretch of imagination can we find any such idea
in the above statement which is ascribed to the Buddha. Therefore we would call this the first
false move of Dutt in consequence
of which he ventures to ascribe to the primitive Buddhist community an idea
which would historically be most unsound, viz. that the Buddha himself had laid
down no regula for the Saŗgha. It
has been pointed out elsewhere that the cry came from more than one quarter of
the Buddhist Saŗgha that the Buddha
was laying down too many rules.[lxv] The first assumption of Dutt has led him to his second error of
judgement where he suggests
a new meaning to the word Vinaya in the
quotation Yo vo nanda may dhammo ca vinayo ca desito paatto...Note his
remarks here : '... if we regard
the Vinaya in this context as not signifying the rules of an Order, but those of
right conduct.'
Now we should point out that it is
hardly fair that Dutt leaves out of his quotation the word paatto which appears just after desito in the
above statement. This, in effect,
would be a distortion, for the word paatto has a specific ring of codified law, and
the word paatti is used
throughout the Vinaya PiŹaka with reference to the promulgation of rules of
discipline. Further, Dutt himself
does not fail to menŹion the fact that these remarks were made by the Buddha
during his last missionary tour.[lxvi] In numerous sections of Canonical texts
which can legitimately claim great antiquity the words dhamma and vinaya are used ascribing to both,
as it were, equal prestige and importance.
One only needs to analyse such statements as the following to be
acquainted with such usage.
(a)
gat ' gam dhammadhar vinayadhar mtikdhar - D.II.125;M.I.
223.
(b)
ayaµ dhammo ayaµ vinayo idaµ satthussanaµ - D.II.124; A.
IV.143,280.
(c)
abhidhamme vinetum abhivinaye vinetum -Vin.I. 64.
(d)
abhidhamme abhivinaye yogo karaö“yo - M.I. 472.
What justification is there then
for regarding 'Vinaya in this
context' as something very different from what it usually is in the references
to Dhamma and Vinaya? Are we here
called upon to imagine that the Vinaya in the last days of the Master was
something much more diminutive than during his life time? Or are we expected to
be so critical as to reject every
other reference which does not support our hypothesis as being unhistorical and
unacceptable?
Thus having set the stage according
to his own inclinations, Dutt proceeds to build up his own theory as follows
:
'There is no reason to suppose that
the Buddhist Parivrjakas, who called themselves Bhikkhus did not abide by
them. It seems, on the other hand,
as the legend of Subhadda would seem to suggest, that the Buddha had enjoined
strictness with regard to them. The
followers of the great Teacher obeyed these rules of Parivrjaka life, as
presumably did the other Parivrjakas.' [lxvii]
We do not deny that the background
of Buddhism did influence to some extent the evolution of the Buddhist Vinaya.
But this interpretation of Subhadda's words is certainly far-fetched and appears
to be calculated to support a pre- conceived notion. Dutt makes several bold attempts
to establish this idea and makes several new interpretations of passages too well known. Note the obvious contradiction in what
Dutt says about the proceedings of the First Council : ' In other words, its
main object was to collect the rules of right conduct for the Bhikkhus which had
been laid down by the Buddha at various times and, by giving them an
authoritative Buddhist stamp, to convert them into special rules of the Buddhist
Order.' [lxviii] If on his own admission the Buddha had
laid down at various times rules of right conduct for the Bhikkhus, the question
arises what then is the need to give them an authoritative Buddhist stamp? What of the redundant conversion into
special rules of the Buddhist Order? How do we dismiss the references which
point to the early existence of
Vinayadharas? Many such problems would be reviewed in the course of this
study.
We would now consider the evolution
of the Vinaya literature which is preserved to us in the Pali TipiŹaka. There too, on many problems, one
discovers a diversity of opinion.
Before we enter into any controversy we would like to name the works
which are recognised as the contents of the Canonical Vinaya PiŹaka. They are :
Ptimokkha (Bhikkhu and
Bhikkhun“)
Vibhaŗga or Suttavibhaŗga
(Mahvibhaŗga and
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga)
Khandhaka (Mahvagga and
Cullavagga)
Parivra.
In our present study we do not
undertake any serious study of the Parivra as it does not make a really
worthwhile contribution to the
problems of monastic discipline.
Considering the vital role of the Ptimokkha in Buddhist monasticism we
would choose to begin our discussion with what has been said about the
Ptimokkha. Rhys Davids and
Oldenberg say :
'It (Ptimokkha) is one of the
oldest, if not the oldest, of the Buddhist text- books ; and it has been
inserted in its entirety into the first part of the Vinaya, the Vibhaŗga.'
[lxix]
As a result of extensive
investigations made into early monastic history we are unable to concede the use
of the description ' oldest text-book ' with reference to the Ptimokkha. By Ptimokkha we mean the code of bare
rules, without any details regarding the rules. Jugding by the nature and function of
the early ritual of Ptimokkha in Buddhist monasticism we are convinced that if
anything served as a text-book in the early days of the Ssana, it should
certainly be the Suttavibhaŗga, though not necessarily in the present form, yet
as something more than the Ptimokkha itself. Evidence in support of this view is examined in detail in a succeeding
chapter (See Ch. VIII.).
Oldenberg who takes the Ptimokkha
alone to be the older portion poses the following question. ' The question is,
therefore, whether the ordinances originally appeared with the explanatory notes
as in the Vibhaŗga, the Ptimokkha being subsequently extracted from it, or
whether the Ptimokkha alone was the older portion, the additional matter of the
Vibhaŗga being the work of subsequent revision.' [lxx] He refers to Rhys Davids as holding a
different view : ' Mr. Rhys Davids
considers the Ptimokkha of more recent origin than the works which form the
great complexus of the TipiŹaka,
and assumes that at the time when
the latter works were collected, the Ptimokkha either did not exist or was of
too recent a date to be admitted into the holy writings.' [lxxi] It would be seen in the course of the
present study that we are in
perfect agreement with Mr. Rhys Davids on
this point.
But we are surprised to find Rhys
Davids and Oldenberg push their argument too far and say the following regarding
the place of the Ptimokkha in the Canon.
'... and indeed the work, as a
separate work, is not considered among Buddhists to belong to the PiŹakas at
all, and is therefore not included in the list of works of which the PiŹakas
consist.' [lxxii] Winternitz too seems to hold the
same idea. [lxxiii]
While we subscribe to the view that
the Ptimokkha as an independent Vinaya treatise has been subsequently extracted
from the Suttavibhaŗga, very probably before it reached its present form, we
should point out here the inaccuracy of the statement that Buddhists do not consider the Ptimokkha as
belonging to the PiŹakas.
Buddhaghosa himself, perhaps backed by a contemporary tradition, includes
the two Ptimokkhas under the contents of the Vinaya PiŹaka (Tattha
paŹhamasaŗg“tiyaµ saŗg“ta ca asaŗg“ta ca sabbam ' pi samodhnetv ubhayni
ptimokkhni dve vibhaŗgni dvv“sati khandhak soĀasaparivr ' ti idaµ
vinayapiŹakaµ nma - DA.I.17 & VinA.I.18).
On the other hand we should also
here take note of the Cullavagga account of the First Council (Vin.II. 287.). No attempt is made there to name any
specific texts under the Vinaya recital, its entire contents being brought under
the designation of ubhato vinaya [
PTS and Cambodian text reading.See p.79 n.3 ]. We presume ubhato implies 'of
both Bhikkhu and Bhikkhun“ '. Vinaya here has to be taken to include both the
Vibhaŗga (Mah-vibhaŗga and Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga) as well as the Khandhakas,
possibly in their initial, rudimentary form. [ We reject the Sri Lankan Buddha
Jayanti Text reading vibhaŗge for vinaye which would totally exclude the
Khandhaka Vinaya.] In the samples
given here of the work recited under Vinaya we discover portions of the detailed
work, the Suttavibhaŗga and not of the bare code, the
Ptimokkha.
This core of the Suttavibhaŗga, on
account of its association with the fortnightly recital called the Uddesa which
had a specific religious disciplinary function, came to be known by the name
of Ptimokkha. From the point of
view of the recital it was also
called the Uddesa. As the bare
code, without any details, it was also designated as sutta. The Cullavagga distinguishes the two as
follows : ....tassa n ' eva suttam gataµ hoti no suttavibhaŗgo.[lxxiv] The Commentary on this statement brings out
their relative values in the following remarks : N ' eva suttaµ gatan ' ti na mtik
gat. No suttavibhaŗgo ' ti vinayo
na paguöo.[lxxv] The knowledge of the suttas, without
their details is only fragmentary learning. It is not Vinaya. The inadequacy of
these bare regulations for the successful maintenance of monastic discipline is
clear from this reference in the Vinaya PiŹaka.[lxxvi] (Tehi ce bhikkhave bhikkhčhi tasmiµ
adhikaraöe vinicchiyamne tatra 'ssa bhikkhu dhammakathiko tassa suttaµ hi kho
gataµ hoti no suttavibhŗgo. So
atthaµ asallakkhento
vyajanacchyya atthaµ patibhati - Vin.II. 97.)
Speaking of the Uddesa Rhys Davids
says : ' The completion of the
recitation is therefore evidence that all who have taken part in it are pure in
respect of the specified offences.
And this is the origin of that second name, the Ptimokkha, which means
the Acquittal, or Deliverance or Discharge.' [lxxvii]
Careful examination of available evidence has led us to
conclusions not very different from the above. We have attempted a detailed study of
the many problems connected with the Ptimokkha in a chapter specially devoted
to it. [lxxviii]
Speaking of the origin of what now
constitutes the Ptimokkha Rhys Davids and Oldenberg express the following
view.
' Tradition even ascribes the first
laying down of each clause to the Buddha himself. This tradition is of course very far
from being conclusive. But neither should we hold it impossible that the
Ptimokkha, either in its present
shape, or at least in its most essential parts, can reach back to the Buddha's
own time, or to that of his personal disciples.' [lxxix]
Of these remarks, we shall say for
the present that they are
characterised by their sobriety and moderation. Evidence in support of the ideas
expressed here, we shall furnish in due course.
Regarding the origin of the
Ptimokkha as a ritual among the Buddhist Saŗgha, Dutt seems to base his
investigations on two assumptions.
First, he assumes that the disciples of the Buddha, at first, formed a
loosely-strung group without any disciplinary rules of their own. Hence he concludes that they needed a
bond of union and that Ptimokkha was therefore originally used in that sense
and for that purpose. Secondly, in
spite of his perfect disregard for legend, Dutt is willing to treat the
Mahpadna Sutta as a reliable bit of historical evidence.[lxxx]
We have shown elsewhere that we
take a very different attitude with regard to both these assumptions. It will be made clear that all available
evidence prove more the contrary and we are compelled to reject the following
statement of Dutt as lacking in historical support.
" But the Ptimokkha, the ' bond '
or the external token of union of the Bhikkhu-saŗgha, changed its character,
shortly after the founder's decease, from a mere declaration of faith in the
Dhamma to a discipline and rule of life." [lxxxi]
Speaking further of the Ptimokkha
Dutt says : ' The existence of the Ptimokkha at first as a mere code and not a
ritual is beyond all legitimate doubt.' According to Dutt's idea stated earlier
the Ptimokkha, upto the founder's decease, was apparently only ' a mere
declaration of faith in the Dhamma'.
From when does he then date 'the existence of the Ptimokkha at first as
a mere code '? Besides, where does one get this original form as ' a mere code
'? Does one find such a code divorced from the confessional meeting of the
Uposatha and referred to by the name of Ptimokkha? How does one ignore the
references to the Uddesa, which mean the recital at the confessional meetings,
which occur in the Suttas and in the Vinaya, including the Ptimokkha
itself?[lxxxii] If what Dutt means by '
the present ritual form of the Ptimokkha ' is the presence of ' the Introductory formular at the beginning and the Interrogatory
Portions appended to each section '
[lxxxiii] in the text of the Ptimokkha, then one
is compelled to point out that
these ' later additions ' should be
as old as the days when Uddesa or the recital of the list of sikkhpada, the
confession of guilt by transgressing monks and the consequent punishment of
offenders were the functions of the Uposatha. Both those portions of the text
referred to above are essential to give the recital of the Ptimokkha a truly
live function. We have shown that this was in fact so in the early days of the
Ssana. At any rate, one cannot speak of an original form of the Ptimokkha
earlier than this. What did exist was the body of
sikkhpada.
It is lamentable that Dutt tries to
discover a form ' Ptimokkh ' in the plural and says that it ' cannot but mean
the rules of law contained in the code'.[lxxxiv] But we have to point out that this
assumed plural form is only the second member, mutilated from the compound
sampanna-ptimokkh. Hence we
should understand the plural form here as belonging to the compound as a whole
and not to the word Ptimokkha. Compare the similar use of the form ' sampanna-s“l ' in the same context.[lxxxv]
It is also Dutt's idea that ' the Suttavibhaŗga in fact, regards the
Ptimokkha as a mere code, while the Mahvagga regards it as a liturgy. '
[lxxxvi] Whatever he means here
by a 'mere code' and a 'liturgy ',
let us repeat again what we have said earlier that the Suttavibhaŗga knows of
the recital of the Ptimokkha at the confessional meetings of the Uposatha.
[lxxxvii]
As Dutt pursues his own line of
argument he is led to the following observations regarding the exercise of
disciplinary authority of the Ptimokkha :
' But there were graver offences
for which confession would be no atonement. It is difficult to ascertain how these
offences were dealt with before the Buddhist Order had attained to that stage
when each Bhikkhu was regarded as member of a single corporate body, of a
particular Saŗgha, subject to its disciplinary jurisdiction.' [lxxxviii]
It would be clear at this stage
that the above remarks result from Dutt's confusion of the connotation of Saŗgha and Ctuddisa Saŗgha in the early
history of the Ssana, The Buddhist
Order had attained to that stage that he speaks of at a very early
date.
Let us now turn our attention to
the rest of the Vinaya PiŹaka with which we are interested, viz. the
Suttavibhaŗga and the Khandhakas.
Let us introduce the Suttavibhaŗga with the following remarks of Miss
Horner whose unsurpassed familiarity with the Vinaya literature lends such
maturity to her judgement on problems of Buddhist monastic
discipline:
' The Vinaya, the Discipline,
especially that portion of it called Suttavibhaŗga, appoints and decrees a
definite standard of outward morality, comprised in courses of training laid
down for the proper behaviour of monks and nuns. On the surface the Suttavibhaŗga is not
much more than an attempt to restrain unsuitable behaviour; but in reality it
also arrives, though in many cases by a long process of exclusion, at the kind
of positive conduct to be pursued by the monk who wishes his life to be
externally blameless, so far as his relations with his fellow monks, with the
Order as a whole, and with the laity are concerned.' [lxxxix]
Here are the views of Rhys Davids
regarding the Suttavibhaŗga : ' The
book deals with each of the 227 rules in order and following throughout one set
scheme or method. That is to say it
tells us firstly how and when and why the particular rule in question came to be
laid down. This historical
introduction always closes with the words of the rule in full. Then follows a very ancient
word-for-word commentary on the rule - a commentary so old that it was already
about B.C.400 (the probable approximate date of the Suttavibhaŗga) considered so
sacred that it was included in the canon.
And the Old Commentary is succeeded,where necessary, by further
explanations and discussions of doubtful points. These are sometimes of very great
historical value. The discussions,
for instance (in the rules as to murder and theft), of what constitutes murder,
and what constitutes theft, anticipate in a very remarkable degree the kind of fine-drawn
distinctions found in modern law books.' [xc]
In relation to the Suttavibhaŗga
Rhys Davids comments on the Khandhakas as follows :
'It deals one after another with
all those matters relating to Order which are not stated in so many words in the
Rules of the Ptimokkha.' [xci].
Winternitz puts it more directly
when he says that ' the
Khandhakas... (form a kind of continuation and supplement of the Suttavibhaŗga.'
[xcii] Speaking of the relation of Suttavibhaŗga to the Khandhakas in
point of time Rhys Davids says : '....
it follows that in all probability they were composed, or put into their
present shape, at about the same period in the development of early Buddhism -
it is even possible that both works arose in immediate connection.' [xciii] E.J. Thomas expresses the same idea in
the following : ' Besides these
rules intended for the daily life of the individual monk, others were found
necessary for the organization of the Order. These also in their essentials must have
existed from the beginning. They
are contained in the second part of the Vinaya known as the Khandhakas and in
the Pali are divided into two series (Mahvagga, Cullavagga).' [xciv]
We are in perfect agreement with
the views expressed above. The
nature and scope of the contents of the Ptimokkha being so limited the
Khandhakas had, of necessity, to take up the rest of monastic discipline from
the very outset. Further, the
contents of the Suttavibhaŗga being
necessarily based on the text of the Ptimokkha admitted of no additions beyond
that. On the other hand, the
Khandhakas had to envisage and accomodate evolutionary changes. Thus the period of development of the
whole of the Khandhakas must inevitably spread over a much longer period of time
than that of the Suttavibhaŗga.
Oldenberg himself makes similar
observations on the above subject :
' While the Vibhaŗga stands in the
closest relation to the Ptimokkha, there was a new and wider circle of
additions added to that same centre of the Vinaya- discipline -the Ptimokkha- most probably about the same time
in which the Vibhaŗga originated, an endeavour was made to go beyond the more
confined domain of that series of ecclesiastical offences as established of old,
to give a coherent picture of the whole legal life of the Saŗgha.' [xcv]
It would be clear from what has
been said so far that we are on the whole in agreement with the views expressed by Rhys Davids and
Oldenberg, both jointly and severally, with regard to monastic discipline and
Vinaya literature. One notable
exception to this occurs in the ideas we hold regarding the text of the
Ptimokkha and its place in the Canon.
We hope we have succeeded in stating our position clearly in the light of
evidence we have examined. On the other hand, the greatest
disagreement is with the views expressed by Sukumar Dutt. We were compelled to make a detailed and
exhaustive analysis of very many of his statements. After careful consideration we have
expressed our opinion about them.
The present study is therefore undertaken in the belief that we could
make our contribution to the elimination of such failings as the following which
vitiate a fair and unbiassed examination and evaluation of the
subject:
(i) Inadequate examination of all original source
material.
(ii)
Misinterpretations resulting from ignorance of the language, i.e. Pali,
and lack of familiarity with the subject.
(iii) Misinterpretations resulting from a desire to
force available evidence to fit into a preconceived
pattern.
It is also our considered opinion
that once these defects, which we have specifically pointed out in several works
on the subject, are remedied it is also necessary to view the problems of
monastic discipline from the wider angle of religion as a whole. For Buddhist monks are not a class of
officiating priests. They are not
members of a purely administrative heirarchy who tend the flock. They are symbolic of the religious
earnestness of those who choose to follow the teaching of the Buddha. Their life has to be fashioned to accord
with the professed faith. It must
be such as would necessarily lead them to the aspired goal. Thus we feel the necessity to study
Buddhist monastic discipline based on the joint evidence of the Sutta and the
Vinaya PiŹakas. Historically, there
is no doubt that the Buddha had a message
for the world, even before '
the group of five ' (pacavaggiy bhikkhč) thought of joning him. One might call the contents of that
message a philosophy or a way of life.
One might therefore say with commendable accuracy that both the theory
and practice of good living were contained in these early teachings which are in
the domain of the Dhamma (or Sutta according to subsequent classification). Thus the seeds of monastic discipline
are seen to be rooted in the teaching of the Dhamma. With the spread and expansion of
monastic life from the personal and the individual to an institutional group
level we discover the problems of monastic discipline increasing in
complexity. The efficacy of
the ' early philosophy of life ' seems to lose its grip on the
increasing membership and this marks the appearance of the new medium of
monastic control and administration.
This is the birth of the Vinaya literature. [xcvi]
It is from this basic position that
we propose to proceed on our investigations. Therefore our primary source of information consists of the
Sutta and the Vinaya PiŹakas. These
Canonical texts are read and studied with as much care as we could command with
our present knowledge of the Pali language. Even where the meaning of texts is clear
it has been our desire to probe further into the notes in the Commentaries
(AŹŹhakath) and the Sub-commentaries (T“k) for purposes of comparison and
contrast. This has proved to be of
immense value as would be shown in relevant places. Owing to the vastness of the field of
study we lave had to confine ourselves mainly to Pali literature. But in a number of places where we
thought it extremely important we have ventured out into two further fields,
namely Sanskrit and Chinese. In
both cases our suspicions and speculation
which prompted us to go to them have been amply rewarded. Considering the complexity of the
problems of monasticism within Buddhism itself we have thought it wise to leave any references to
Jainism completely out of the present study.
As a basic source of investigation
our choice invariably falls on the Theravda school which upheld the monastic
ideals of the faithful disciple in Buddhism : saddh agrasm anagriyaµ
pabbajito. Monastic discipline is
essentially their concern. At the
same time it is clear from the evidence relating to the early history of the
Buddhist Saŗgha that the first hundred years of the Ssana knew of only a single
body of disciples, more or less homogenous. One does not discover at this stage any
traces of groups with distinct names which indicate their partisan loyalties or
sectarian teachings. Thus one is
inclined to consider terms like Theriya (Theravda) and Mahsaŗghika as being obviously
necessitated by the first schism in the Ssana, the distinction between them
being essentially relative.
However, disagreements and
differences of opinion did exist within this apparently homogenous body of early
sisciples. While a common Dhamma
and Vinaya guided their destinies during this period, it becomes clear in our
studies that the Dhamma begins to lend itself to diverse interpretations and the
Vinaya comes to be challenged and criticised as being too stringent. Although it is not always possible to
identify the men behind these moves, the portents are visible threatening a
schism in the Ssana, be it either on account of the Dhamma or the
Vinaya.
Thus we are not surprised to find,
on a comparison of the Prtimok©a sčtras of the different schools, that the
Theravdins and the Mahsaŗghikas share the greatest measure of agreement,
having coexisted so long close to each other during their formative years. It is with this common heritage that
they part their ways and as they develop their own distinctive doctrines and
traditions, the new schools which emerge align themselves with the one or the
other.
However, it should be pointed out
here that in the seven categories of ecclesiastical offences listed in the
Prtimok©a sčtra there is almost complete conformity among all the early schools
with regard to the first six categories.
These account for 145 out of the total of 220 rules. In the last category
of minor rules dealing with etiquette, popriety and decorum called the Sekhiya
Dhamma, however the new schools show an evident increase. While the Theravda school lists 75 and
the Mahsaŗghika 66 under this category, the Sarvstivdins go as far as 113.
[xcvii]
The reason for this agreement in
their Vinaya literature between the Theravda and the Mahsaŗghika on the one
hand and between these and the later schools on the other is more to be sought
in the fact that these legal enactments of the Vinaya being stratified in a
fixed form at a very early date and being shared unaltered by the earliest
groups which appeared after the first schism, namely the Theriya and the
Mahsaŗghika, left little room for any changes or modifications. But the weight
of ideological changes and changes of tradition in the different schools is
certainly felt in the less stratified historical records and in the instructions
on procedure in the rest of the Vinaya literature, particularly the portions
which correspond to the Khandhakas of the Theravda Vinaya and portions of the
Suttavibhaŗga.
These observations do not
necessarily lead us to the conclusion that the Theravda literature preserves
completely the Buddha's teaching on monastic discipline, i.e. the Vinaya, in it
s original form. However, comparing
it as a whole with that of the
Mahsaŗghikas one cannot fail to be
impressed by the fact that the
canonical texts of the Theravda Vinaya show more coherence and continuity as
well as a conciseness in the statement of
ideas which entitle them to be considered closer to the time of the
origin of the Buddhist monastic institutions.
We do indicate, at the same time,
more than one instance in the Theravda Vinaya literature where we suspect a
violation of the spirit of the early traditions and injunctions. On the other hand, we do find the
Mahsaŗghikas to be more alert at times and more sensitive to such
discrepancies. In such instances the traditions preserved or the modifications
effected by the ' dissentients ' appear to us to be more orthodox than the
Theravda version.
Nevertheless, assessing the overall
position we are led to use the Vinaya literature of the Theravdins together
with their suttas dealing with the Dhamma, as the basis of this study. Evidence from other schools of Buddhism
has been brought in from time to time both to investigate a doubtful proposition
and to stabilise a tottering tradition.
Before we bring these prefatory
remarks to a close we should make a few observations on Buddhist monastic
discipline in general. As the
teacher (satth) who had a new
message (dhamma) for the world, the Buddha was soon surrounded by a group of
disciples who chose to follow him
(uddissa pabbajit). This placed
him, as the Pali texts describe it, in the distinguished position of being the
propounder of a completely new way (anakkhtassa maggassa akkht- M.III.
8.). The disciples were the
followers of that way (maggnug ca pana etarahi svak viharanti pacch
samanngat - ibid.). At this stage in life, the Buddha was making no
experiments. As early as the First
Sermon, he had known as to what should constitute the foundations of Buddhist monastic life. He himself had been through a life of
mendicancy which led him to his enlightenment. He denounced both the life of sensual
pleasures and that of extreme austerity as being unsuited for a Buddhist
disciple (Dve ' me bhikkhave ant pabbajitena na sevitabb...Vin.I.10.) The life he enjoined on them steered
clear of these two extremes.
Early Buddhist monastic life, which
was thus one definite way for one definite purpose, admitted of no
compromises. It would be shown in
the relevant places that the Buddha was firmly opposed to those who rebelled
against discipline and dealt with them with such strictness as worthy of a
teacher who does not swerve from his ideals for the sake of popularity with his
pupils. Additions and modifications
to rules which did not violate their spirit were accepted and even initiated by
the Buddha himself. Constructive
evolution of this nature did, in fact, bring the Vinaya PiŹaka into its present
shape. Against destructive
revolutionary trends, legislation was enacted and the very machinery of the
Vinaya was geared against them. [xcviii]
Thus Buddhist monastic life being
what we have shown it to be, the content of its discipline had to embrace every
aspect of life as viewed in Buddhism.
According to Buddhism, life activity goes on through the three media of
thought, word and deed. Progress or
depravity are reckoned in terms of refinement or deterioration of these. Therefore the total content of Buddhist
monastic discipline had to be in terms of thought, word and deed. Even in what appears to be a modified
statement of old material Buddhaghosa clearly upholds this view.[xcix]
Of this threefold discipline, it is
said that the Vinaya PiŹaka claims to concern itself only with two, viz. word and deed. They are the aspects of outward conduct
(Tasm vividhanayatt visesanayatt kyavcna ca vinayanato vinayo ' ti akkhto.).[c] Here we would also refer the
reader to Oldenberg's very precise definition which describes the Vinaya
PiŹaka ' as a collection of rules regulating the
outward conduct of the Saŗgha and the Bhikkhu'.[ci] But true monastic discipline covers a
little more. It embraces the
discipline of the mind too. It has
been our endeavour to relate this to the former and to show that any violation
of the former would possibly produce serious repercussions on the
latter.
Monasticism in Buddhism comes in
the wake of the brahmacariya ideal
which the Buddha preached from the beginning of his mission. Hence our present study primarily
springs from the study of the life of brahmacariya in Buddhism. But even prior to the birth
of the Buddha the notion of brahmacariya has had an appeal to the religious men
of India. Each creed had its own
form of Brahmacarya life leading to its desired goal, which was often termed
emancipation, immortality or divine absorption. In Chapter II we deal with the different
forms of brahmacariya both in the
Brahmanic and non- Brahmanic religious creeds. Chapter III portrays the Buddhist concept of
brahmacariya in marked contrast to
the rest. Chapters IV, V, VI and
VII deal in succession with the foundations on which the life of pabbajj is built. In Chapter VIII we have attempted to show
how the early basis of monastic life gradually changed its character from a
simple system of advice and
admonition to a complete code of monastic law. In Chapter IX one
witnesses the disciplinary machinery of the Saŗgha at work. Numerous factors are seen retarding its
efficiency in course of time.
Onece the machinery of the Vinaya
PiŹaka was set up it also became necessary to see that its operation was smooth
and effective. Every attempt
to put it out of gear was also
guarded against. Thus, in the wake of
the rules there also came provision for prosecution and punishment of
those who violated them. We have
made special studies of these aspects of the Vinaya in Chapters X and
XI.
Besides all legislation and legal
machinery, yet another factor played a very dominant part in the history of the
Ssana. It is the spiritual
leadership which the members of the Order, individually and collectively,
offered to the others and the integrated life in the community which contributed
to its stability and well-being.
See Chapter XII.
Whatever may be the verdict of the
later generations on the role of Bhikkhunis in the Ssana, there is no doubt that they
distinguished themselves and fulfilled the mission of their monastic life with
as much success as the Bhikkhus.
Thus we have thought it fit to devote a part of this study to the
establishment of this new division of Buddhist monasticism and the formation of
the code of discipline for the Bhikkhunis.
In Chapters XIII and XIV we have examined this development in relation to
the Order of the Bhikkhus and lay society of the day.
We have also thought it necessary
at his stage to probe further into two problems which we think are very much
more controversial than they seem to be on the surface. It
appears as though history has stratified them in such a way as to be
unquestionably settled. But
curiosity has spurred us into this venture of re-investigating
them.
The two problems are
:
1. Legislation regarding the exclusion of a
guilty monk (spattika) from the recital of the Ptimokkha. See Appendix I.
2. The attitude of the Saŗgha of the
Theriya Group towards the ' lesser and minor ' precepts (khuddnukhuddakni
sikkhpadni). See Appendix II.
We have attempted to compare and
contrast the evidence found in Pali literature with those we have been able to
gather from Sanskrit and Chinese sources.
If we have succeeded in indicating even to some extent the complexity of
these problems we would feel more than amply rewarded.
The S“m also has been a subject of
great interest in the history of Buddhist monasticism, both during the life time
of the Buddha and in the centuries that followed. We have occasion to refer to it briefly
in the study of the Ptimokkha ritual.
But we feel that the subject needs more careful analysis and examination.
Hence we have pursued the matter further and we present our observations to the
reader separately in an appendix.
See Appendix III.
It is our belief that this brief
outline of the contents of the present study will enable the reader to view the
problems of Buddhist monasticism
from a fresh angle as he reads through this thesis. It is also hoped that he
would be able to purge his mind of various misconceptions about the subject
which have been created through mistakes of omission and commission of some of
the pioneer work.
Chapter
II
Thoroughout the pages of Indian
religious thought, in Buddhist as well as non-Buddhist terminology, brahmacarya (Pali brahmacariya) is the term of choice used to designate
the life of discipline ordained for the aspirant to spiritual awakening. The life of brahmacarya had a meaning
and purpose to many in India even before the appearance of
Buddhism. Here we shall be
concerned with a survey of the badcground of Buddhism in which the life of
brahmacarya under diverse religious
traditions was widely known. A
passage in the Chndogya Upani©ad in which one seems to get a glimpse of the
first beginnings of the Catur
īsrama doctrine of the Brahmins[cii] refers to the life of brahmacarya as one of 'the three dharmaskandhas ' 'each of
which is regarded as capable of leading the adherent to a state of spiritual
edification or a 'world of bliss (puöyaloka). According to the text the result
of the pursuit of these dharmaskandha is that thereby one
becomes an heir to a punyaloka (Trayo dharmaskandh yajo 'dhyayanaµ dnam
iti prathamas. Tapa eva dvit“yas.
Brahmacarycryakulavs“ trt“yo' tyantamtmnamcryakule' vasdayan.Sarva ete
puöyalok bhavanti brahmasamstho' mrtatvameti - Chnd. 2.23.1.).
źaŗkara, commenting on this passage
in the Chndogya, identifies these dharmaskandha with the stages of the īsrama doctrine and goes on to say that
each īsramin reaches a puöyaloka by
virtue of his own dharma (Sarva ete trayo'pysramino yathoktair dharmaih
puöyalok bhavanti - ibid.). But we
are not certain how far one could look for the pattern of the fully developed
Catur īsrama Dharma in this passage.
Belvalkar and Ranade, in their chronological grouping of the Upani©adic
texts, place this section of the Chndogya in the early portion of group one
which they call Brahmanic.[ciii] Hence we would consider this as one of
the earliest references to the institution of brahmacarya, perhaps as a unit in
itself or as a part of religious life in the Brahmanic tradition. It is not convincingly clear whether
these three dharmaskandha are parts of an integrated whole. Each one of them seems to have a
justification in itself and appears capable of producing the desired effect of a
puöyaloka, although such a state may not be identified with the highest goal
which is amØtatva. For, over and above these dharmaskandha,
the highest premium is set on what is referred to as brahmasaµstha, because it
is the brahmasaµstha who
attains amrtatva or immortality (Brahmasaµstho
amØtatvameti - ibid.)
Therefire we would consider
brahmacarya here as still being ranked as one of several ways of religious
living. It is worth noting the
ritualistic bias of some of the other dharmaskandhas which are mentioned along with
brahmacarya. They do not reflect a moral or ethical basis of religious life or
an intellectual attitude towards it.
The inclusion of adhyayana and brahmacarya along with yaja and
tapas aproximates to a fusion of
old and new ideas about religious life.
Brahmacarya here is still
neither the religious initiation nor the stepping stone to social
upliftment among the Brahmins as it was at a later date.[civ] Those who took to this life of
brahmacarya, it may be argued, did so out of their own choice with a view to
spiritual edification. It was
undoubtedly a life of devotion and dedication as is clear from the passage in
the Chndogya Upani©ad which describes the brahmacrin as wearing himself away at the house of
his teacher (Brahmacrycryakulavs“ tØt“yo' tyantamtmnamcryakule' -
ibid.). This old Brahmanic institution of brahmacarya which evidently was the
choice of a select few underwent a process of popularisation in the formulation
of the Catur īsrama Dharma whereby it was brought into the life of every
Brahmin, or in fact of every member of the three principal castes. The religious and secular duties of life
were magnificently blended together in this fourfold institution. However, it is
clear that the older concept of brahmacarya constituted a way of religious life
which was, more or less, complete in itself.
The Manusmrti describes two
different types of brahmacrins who are referred to in the Commentary of Medhtithi as
naisŹhika and upakurvöa.[cv] The former is lifelong studentship. It is described as an effective means of
making an end of saµsra.[cvi] This naisŹhika evidently refers to the
older concept of brahmacarya which was a lifelong institution and which had to be lived
under a teacher. This completely
religious life which was divorced from social obligations did promise as its
goal the attainment of Brahman.[cvii] Thus as a way of life it could not be
displaced completely with the inauguration of the Catur ī§rama Dharma. Brahmanic tradition often shows acquaintance with both. The latter, upakurvöa, which shows more
conformity to the Catur īsØrama Dharma, was a limited period of studentship
whereby initiation into true Brahminhood was effected through the mastery of the
sacred learning. Manu gives
thirty-six years as the maximum period of time for this preparation which he
calls the 'traivedikaµ vrataµ
' or dedication to the study of the
three Vedas.[cviii] He apparently shows no concern for the
fourth Veda, the Atharvan, as a part of the sacred learning. Thus each Veda
would have a maximum period of twelve years for its study. But the possibility
is indicated of completing the study of the Vedas in much less time. It is in fact brought down to a total of
nine years thus giving only three years for each Veda. This is considered possible only in the
case of exceptionally good students.[cix]
This tradition of twelve years for
the study of each Veda during the period of Brahmacarya appears to have been
well known to the Buddhists. But
the Buddhist texts which speak of the Brahmin institution of brahmacarya
apparently go a step further than Manu in this connection. What they describe as
komrabrahmacariya of the Brahmins
extends over forty- eight years.[cx] This komrabrahmacariya unmistakably refers to the period
of studentship during which the
study of the sacred literature was undertaken. Here the Buddhist texts seem to be in
accord with Baudhyana who ' alone
states that the term of studentship extends over forty-eight years. This rule
includes the Atharva-veda.' [cxi] However, we are not in a position here
to examine the reasons for this preference shown by the
Buddhists.
In the vast complex of Upani©adic thought it is difficult to
see a singleness either with regard to what constituted the life of brahmacarya
or the nature of the goal that was to be attained by means of it. However, there is no doubt that
brahmacarya meant a period, limited or otherwise, of training in religious life
under the guidance of a teacher.
Some of the early Upani©ads, deviating perhaps from the ' older ' naisŹhika brahmacarya way which was a complete means by
itself, use brahmacarya as a vital part of religious life on to which are
grafted moral and ethical considerations.
The Muö¶aka Upani©ad which has a
claim to a relative antiquity[cxii] gives brahmacarya long
with truth, austerity and correct knowledge (satyam, tapas and samyagna) as a means of reaching
the ītman.[cxiii] The Prasna Upani©ad which
chronologically belongs to the succeeding group[cxiv] attaches similar importance to
brahmacarya when it says the following:
They indeed possess that
Brahma-world,
Who possess austerity (tapas) and
chastity (brahmacarya)
In Whom truth is
established.
To them belongs yon stainless
Brahma-world,
In whom there is no crookedness and
falsehood, nor trickery (my).[cxv]
This is a further indication of the
insistence on moral values. One
cannot fail to notice at this stage
the fact that the goal of religious life presented in the Upani©ads is, in
itself, not a fixed concept. Brahma, whatever it may connote in different
contexts, comes to be repeatedly given as the goal which is to be reached
through brahmacarya. At any rate,
the motive underlying this Brahma-reaching was the escape from this whirl of
human existence. ' He leads them on
to Brahma. This is the way to the
gods, the way to Brahma. They who
proceed by it return not to the human condition here - yea, they return
not.'[cxvi] The importance of the observance of
brahmacarya in the sphere of religious life has been very keenly recognised in
the Upani©ads. Chndogya 8.4.3 says that only those who find the
Brahma-world through brahmacarya possess the Brahma-world.[cxvii] The next khaö¶a of the
same text goes so far as to identify brahmacarya with a host of sacrificial
duties of varying degrees of importance thus giving brahmacarya the pride of
place as the sole means to the attainment of the highest goal.[cxviii] Brahmacarya is equated to what people
call 'sacrifice' (yaja), what people call 'what has been sacrificed ' (isŹaµ),
what people call ' the protracted
sacrifice ' (sattryaöa), what people call 'silent asceticism ' (mauna), what
people call ' a course of fasting '
(ansakyana) and what people call ' betaking oneself to hermit life in the
forest ' (araöyyana).[cxix] But it should be
pointed out that these portions of the Chndogya belong to the late period of
the Upani©adic group.[cxx] We are not in a position to determine
with any certainty wherher brahmacarya here is completely identified with the
first stage of the Catur ī§rama Dharma.
Apparently, ti is as a part of this systematised way of life that
brahmacarya here eclipses, more or less, the cult of yaja and
tapas.
This complexity of the idea of
brahmacarya which we find in the Upani©ads is simplified by the commentators who
readily identify this brahmacarya with the first stage of the Catur ī§rama
Dharma. At Chnd. 2.23.1 źsŗkara
identifies the three dharmaskandha which include brahmacarya with three of the
four §ramas. The commentators associate the following
ideas with this institution of brahmacarya :
(a) That one lives the life of brahmacarya under a teacher for the
purpose of religious education.[cxxi] The importance of brahmacarya for the
acquisition of sacred knowledge is reaffirmed by źaŗkara in his comment on Brh.
5.2.1 wher he points out that brahmacarya is the basis of studentship.[cxxii]
(b) That the practice of celibacy and
renunciation of all desire for women constitute the hallmark of this institution
of brahmacarya. Commenting on Chnd 8. 4. 3. źaŗkara says that brahmacarya is the
renunciation of desire for
women.[cxxiii] At Muö¶. 3. 1. 5 he defines brahmacarya as the negation
of the enjoyment of the company of
women.[cxxiv] In the wake of this negative virtue comes the acquisition of
instruction from one's teacher to which we
have already referred above.
Rmnuja puts this effectively as
' instruction and guidance
from the teacher is preceded by the life of brahmacarya, which in turn is
characterised by the renunciation of desire for women.' [cxxv]
(c) That brahmacarya is the initiation into
true Brahminhood through which every Brahmin must pass. It is clearly brought out in źaökara's
comment on Chnd. 6.1.1.[cxxvi]
The pattern of brahmacarya in the
Upani©ads which we have discussed so far does not seem to be identifiable with
that formulated in Buddhism. In the
Upani©ads the life of brahmacarya has a different end in view. It is the attainment of Brahma or the
Brahma-world and the way to it is distinctly prescribed. In summing up the Upani©adic position
the commentators recommend brahmacarya as a particular stage in life which is to
be gone through for the purpose of religious and social accomplishment. However, the life of brahmacarya in the
Upani©ads and that in Buddhism seem to be drawn very close to each other in the
remarks of źaŗkara on Chnd. 8.7.3. Describing the practice of brahmacarya
by Indra and Vairocana under Prajpati,
źaŗkara goes on to say that although these two were jealous of each other
before they came to Prajpati, they gave up their failings such as greed,
hatred, delusion and jealousy before commencing the life of brahmacarya under
Prajpati.[cxxvii] It should be noted that these
commentarial observations are peculiar to
źaŗkara alone. He seems
thereby to make this ethical purge a pre-requisite of brahmacarya. Although this same ethical purge,
viz. the elimination of rga,
dosa and moha is the fundamental concern of Buddhism,
the Buddhist life of brahmacarya does not begin with it. On the other hand, the life of
brahmacarya is undertaken in Buddhism, as will be shown below, for the purpose
of eliminating rga, dosa and
moha by a gradual process of
development. Their elimination is given as the goal of
brahmacarya.[cxxviii] The disciples of the Buddha are thus
guided through brahmacarya towards this end.[cxxix]
The Atharva- veda which lies
outside the Brahmaöic tradition of the three Vedas presents to us at 11. 5 a very different character in the person
of the brahmacrin. Bloomfield
makes the following observations on this hymn : ' Here a Brahma disciple -
brahmacrin - in the full glory
of his holy functions and monastic
habits is treated as an incarnation of the brahma ; from him the brahma springs, and in his holy life -
brhmaöaµ - the brahma is glorified.' [cxxx] Griffith too refers to this hymn as a
glorification of the brahmacrin or religious student.[cxxxi] According to this Atharvan hymn the
brahmacrin is infinitely powerful
and controls the universe and the gods therein. 'He hath established firmly earth and
heaven.' [cxxxii] He has command over both worlds. 'Stirring both worlds the Brahmacri
moveth.' [cxxxiii] He takes precedence over Brahma too, and
all this power he derives through tapas. 'The Brahmacri, earlier born than
Brahma, sprang up through Fervour, robed in hot libation.' [cxxxiv] His power of tapas is repeatedly
mentioned. He is the most potent
factor in the universe. He is the
source from which the highest Brahma sprang and all the gods owe their origin to
him. ' From him sprang the heavenly
lore, the highest Brahma, and all the Gods, with life that lasts for ever.'
[cxxxv] All life, both animate and inanimate,
sprang from him. ' The plants, what
is and what shall be, day, night, the tall tree of the wood, the year with
seasons of the year, all from the Brahmacri sprang. All creatures of the earth and heaven,
tame animals and sylvan beasts,
winged and wingless creatures, from the Brahmacri sprang to life.' [cxxxvi] In him lay the ultimate guardianship of
all. 'The Brahma that is stored within the Brahmacri guards them all.'
[cxxxvii] The contents of this hymn seems to give
an indication that the brahmacrin of the Atharva-veda belongs to a different
tradition. Religiously he may be
regarded as being more primitive in character, deriving his power mainly through
tapas and yaja. Nevertheless, it shows the wide
acceptance and unchallenged importance which the institution of brahmacarya had
acquired.
We are also aware that the term
brahmacarya was something familiar to the other contemporary religious circles
as well. The term was used by them
to mean the ideal life prescribed by each. The Bodhisatta[cxxxviii] himself refers to the religious
life he opted to live under īlra Klma and Uddaka Rmaputta as
brahmacariya.[cxxxix] The Mahvagga of the Vinaya PiŹaka refers to the religious life of
the JaŹilas who were contemporaries
of the Buddha as brahmacariya. It
is said that after the Buddha converted the JaŹila chief, Uruvela Kassapa,
people were still in doubt as to who really was converted, the Buddha or Uruvela
Kassapa. So they questioned, 'Has
Samaöa Gotama taken up the life of brahmacariya under Kassapa or vice versa?'
[cxl] It is also said that Sriputta and
Moggallna, prior to their conversion to
Buddhism, lived the life of brahmacariya of the Paribbjakas under the
Paribbjaka chief Sajaya.[cxli] In the Assalyana Sutta it is associated
with the Seven Brahmin Sages of yore.[cxlii] The Sandaka Sutta mentions eight such
courses, which when judged by the criteria of the Buddhists, fall below
standard. Hence they are termed
abrahmacariyavsa (no real abodes of brahmacariya) or anasssika-brahmacariya
(rewardless life of brahmacariya).
They seem to include the Materialists (under the doctrine associated with
Ajita Kesakambal“) and the īj“vakas (under the doctrines of Pčraöa Kassapa,
Makkhali Gosla and
Pakudha Kaccyana.) None of these teachers, however, are
referred to by name in the Sutta.[cxliii] In the Sutta, the venerable īnanda
explains to Sandaka Paribbjaka why the Buddha declared the religious life lived
under most of the contemporary teachers as being void and worthless. In all cases it is pointed out that no
wise man would choose to practise the brahmacariya under them and that if one
ever did he would thereby never gain enlightenment. Under the four abrahmacariyavsa the doctrines of Ajita Kesakambal“,
Pčraöa Kassapa, Makkhal“ Gosla and Pakudha Kaccyana are critically examined
and the verdict is given that no true brahmacariya life could be lived under
them. The four anasssikni
brahmacariyni refer to the
following four types of teachers whose doctrines are similarly scrutinised and
dismissed: 1. The teacher who
claims omniscience. 2. The
traditionalist. 3. The rationalist.
4. The
sceptic.
In the Mahs“handa Sutta the
Buddha tells the venerable Sriputta of another form of brahmacariya which he
himself is said to have practised.
It also, no doubt, stands outside the pale of Buddhism. It was a form of severe asceticism
characterised by fourfold austerities such as abstemious partaking of food,
seeking the solitude of forest retreats, etc.[cxliv]
Buddhaghosa places before us a list
in which he tries to indicate the connotation of the term brahmacariya in
different circles at different times.
He says: ' This term brahmacariya here is used in the following senses.'
[cxlv] But one is not quite sure whether
Buddhaghosa refers to the use of the term only in Buddhism. What is clear from the evidence of Buddhaghosa is that brahmacariya in all
these cases, not necessarily Buddhist, meant virtuous living. But the concept and magnitude of virtue
apparently varied. Here are the
different applications of the term according to Buddhaghosa
:
1.
dna - charity.
2.
veyyvacca - rendering a
service.
3.
pacasikkhpadas“la - observance of the
five precepts.
4.
appama - practice of
brahmavihra.
5.
methunavirati -
celibacy.
6.
sadrasantosa _
chastity.
7.
viriya - striving.
8.
uposathaŗga - observance of the full-day
of the fast
9.
ariyamagga - the noble
path.
10. ssana - the complete Buddhist way of
life
While some of these practices may
fall in line with the Buddhist concept of morality still there is evidence to
show that at least a few of these forms of brahmacariya were not at all Buddhist
in outlook. Illustrating the use of
the term brahmacariya in the sense of viriya or striving Buddhaghosa refers to
the Lomahaµsana Sutta[cxlvi] which is the same as the Mahs“handa
Sutta which was quoted earlier.
There the Buddha describes the fourfold austerities which he had
practised. Those debased practices with regard to food, lodgings etc. as they
are described in the Sutta are evidently among those which the Buddha rejects in
more places than one. We discover
clear proof of this as we examine the story in the Jtaka collection which goes
by the same name, namely the Lomahaµsana Jtaka.[cxlvii] The Jtaka story which summarises the
contents of the Lomahaµsana Sutta[cxlviii] goes into
great detail in the narration of
the story. Perhaps, in an attempt
to avoid any mistaken association of these practices with what were genuinely
Buddhist, the Jtaka story makes the Buddha state that he practised these
austerities to see whether there was any value in them.[cxlix] It is further added that these
constituted a form of īj“vaka life.[cl] Thereafter the Jtaka story goes on to
stigmatise these practices
completely by stating that these practices invariably lead to birth in
hell.[cli]
Buddhism seems to have found in the
setting in which it grew up a number of terms of very great popularity and wide
acceptance. Their connotations had
been established through continued usage and as religious concepts they had
reached an unchallenged position.
The term Brahma and its derivatives seem to occupy the foremost place
among them and they are our main interest here. In the Upani©adic schools of thought the
Highest Being, Brahman, is sometimes conceived personally and at other times as
an Impersonal Absolute.[clii] To reach it and be merged in it or be
identified with it was the aim of all their religious endeavours. It is as the fountain-head of all
existence that Brahman was accorded this
position. Brahman is
believed to be the source whence everything originated.[cliii] In the more developed later Upani©adic
thought we get a pantheistic conception where Brahman is identified with the
universe.[cliv] Buddhism too, seems to use the term
Brahma to mean the Highest and the Perfect, but apparently with none of the
theological and metaphysical associations.
The term is always defined by Buddhaghosa in this sense, giving the word
brahma the meaning of seŹŹha. The Buddha, however, was aware of the
earlier connotations of the term.
This becomes quite evident in the new definitions and explanations which
the Buddha offers to the exponents of these ideas.
In the Saµyutta, the Buddha is seen
giving a new interpretation which accords with his teaching to the Brahmanic
concept of Brahma-reaching. He
tells the Brahmins that it is essentially based on moral achievements like
honesty, self-restraint and holy life:
Saccaµ dhammo saµyamo brahmacariyaµ majjhe sit brhmaöa
brahmapatti.[clv] In Buddhism these
concepts of ' Becoming Brahma' (brahmabhčta) and 'Attaining Brahma ' (brahmapatti)
had no associations of a higher power, an absolute with which an alliance was
sought. As far as the Buddha was
concerned, these terms implied only the attainment of the goal, the perfection
of the religious life which he propounded.
It is the enlightenment which leads to perfect liberation from the cycle
of saµsra. It is also the purge of
all the defiling traits of human life which hence comes to be called savnaµ
khaya. The Buddha, while he was once resting in a forest glade, was asked by
Bhradvjagotta Brhmaöa whether he was there practising austerities (tapas) in
order to reach Brahma (brahmapattiy) and to gain companionship with him
(lokdhipatisahavyataµ kaŗkhamno).[clvi] The Commentary on the above passage
gives the concept of Brahma here the more personal character by explaining
lokdhipatisahavyataµ as
lokdhipatimahbrahmun sahabhvaµ.[clvii] We have already observed that such a
concept of Brahman was not unknown among the Brahmins. The Buddha, in his reply to the Brahmin,
not only points out that as Buddha he is supremely enlightened and possesses a
clarified vision into the nature of all things, but also indicates the way
whereby he attained to that state.
This shows that the talk of Brahma-reaching in the way in which the
Brahmins understood it had no relevance to the Buddha or to the religious life
he advocated. What the Buddha
valued most was his victory in the battle against craving and desire which are
rooted in ignorance. Freed from craving and desire, and seeing things in their
true perspective, the Buddha is wise and enlightened. He is happy and for him there are no
further attainments beyond this.[clviii]
But on the other hand, we notice
that the concept of 'Becoming
Brahma' (brahmabhčta and brahmabhčya) as found in the Bhagavadg“t is always
coupled with the idea of identification of the individual self with
Brahman. The consequence of this
seems to be the final mergence of the tman in
Brahman which the G“t
refers to as Brahmanirvöa.[clix] A commentarial note explains this
clearly. With remarkable consistency the term brahmabhčta is defined in a number of places in more
or less identical terms which amounts to an identifcation of oneself with
Brahman.[clx] Similar observations are made in the
comment on brahmabhčya.[clxi] Brahmabhčta is also defined as the
reciprocal identification of Brahman and tman.[clxii] It should also be noted that the G“t
too, like Buddhism, reckons with moral values.[clxiii] But these are subordinated to the
absolutism of its Brahma ideal.
In Buddhism, the term brahmabhčta
is used in two different contexts.
It is used with reference to the Buddha along with a host of other
attributes which describe him as a wise and reliable teacher.[clxiv] In all instances, the term
brahmabhčta as an epithet of the
Buddha is closely associated with the term dhammabhčta. In The Aggaa Sutta,
these two terms are declared to be epithets of the Buddha and are associated
with two other terms derived from the same concepts of Dhamma and Brahma.[clxv] The Buddha is also described as
dhammakyo and brahmakyo. He is the symbol of the Dhamma (dhammakyo) and he is
identified with it. Hence th is
also dhammabhčto. The Commentary on the above passage adds
that the Dhamma, on account of its supreme nature, is called Brahma which is the
recognised and accepted term to signify the highest and the perfect in
contemporary religious thought.
Here comes the identification of
Dhamma with Brahma and perhaps this gave further support for the adoption
of the term Brahma by the Buddhists to describe their own state of religious
perfection.[clxvi] Now it becomes clear that the term
brahmabhčta is used to stress the Buddha's perfection and pre-eminence. The Commentaries regularly explain it as
seŹŹhabhčta : SeŹŹhaŹŹhena brahmabhčto - MA. II. 76. It is also used as an attribute of the
Arahant, i.e. the disciple who, in
this very life, has reached peace and perfection, is tranquil and
blissful.[clxvii] Here too, the idea does not seem to be
far from what was stated above, for it seems to emphasise the transcendent
character of the Arahant as compared with the rest of the worldlings.[clxviii] But neither in the descriptions of the
spiritual progress of one who
aspires to Arahantship nor in the accounts of the achievements and
attainments of the Arahant do we ever get any associations with Brahma, personal
or impersonal, as the highest and the absolute.
The term Brahma, however, does
appear in Buddhism in such contexts as brahmacariya, brahmabhčta snd brahmapatti. Here the term connotes only the idea of
noble, worthy and supreme. It is
this same phenomenon of adapting terms with already established connotations
that we find in the use of the word brhmaöa with reference to the worthy Buddhist
disciple.[clxix] During the days of the Buddha, the
Brahmins as a group had attained an unassailable position in society, and the
Buddha too, seems to have conceded this up to a point. He always had a word of praise for those
whom he called the virtuous Brahmins of old. His lament was that the Brahmins of his
day did not live up to the worthy Brahmin ideals set up by the ancestors of the
clan.[clxx] The following are some of the virtues he
ascribed to them: ' The sages of yore were full of restraint and given to
austerity. Rejecting the pleasures of the senses they sought their own
salvation.' [clxxi] 'They considered the life of
brahmacariya, morality, honesty, austerity, benevolence, compassion and
tolerance as great virtues.' [clxxii] It would have been both futile and
almost impossible to dislodge the Brahmin from the social position which he had
acquired for himself. The Buddha
accepted the concept of the ideal Brahmin and redefined the qualifications for
the title of Brhmaöa with the stress on ethics and morality. He challenged the accepted value
attached to birth as the exclusive qualification for Brahminship.[clxxiii] It is the mode of a man's life,
according to the Buddha's new criterion, that determines a man's social and
religious pre-eminence.[clxxiv]
It is not the purpose of the
present study to go into details of the development of Buddhist cosmological
ideas. However, it must be
mentioned that Buddhist texts know of references to Brahm as a personal
being. He is referred to as
Mahbrahm and is recognised as the head of the thousand world systems.[clxxv] But the interest of the Buddhist texts
here is not so much to stress the greatness of Brahm as to show that he himself
is subject to the law of change and therefore is not an ideal or absolute
position to aspire to, although it is, no doubt, regarded as a very high
one.[clxxvi] According to the Buddhist texts, it is
to this great Brahm that the Brahmins of the day addressed their prayers and
sacrifices.[clxxvii] It is a very ritualistic Brahmanism that
is portrayed here. It is centered
on the cult of a personal Brahma.
The world of Brahm was the religious goal of the Brahmins and
companionship with him was the consummation of their religious life. The Brahmins themselves are seen
professing it to be so.[clxxviii] A passage from the Dhnajni Sutta
makes it further clear that this was the manner in which the Buddhists explained
the position of the Brahmins of the day who aspired to reach the world of Brahma
(brahmalokdhimutt).[clxxix] Here the Buddha questions the venerable
Sriputta why he aided Dhnajni to be born in the Brahma-world which according
to the religious considerations of the Buddhists was an inferior goal. But in the Tevijj Sutta, the Buddha
himself, being questioned by the Brahmin pupils of Pokkharasti and Trukkha, is seen
redefining the path to the world of Brahm and the way to Brahma-union.[clxxx] What strikes us in both
these instances is that birth in
the world of Brahm as a reward for the practice of the religious life is
conceded. However, nowhere is it
recognised as the final end. On the
other hand, the Buddha asks Sriputta why he set Dhnajni in the world of
Brahm when something further could have been achieved (sati uttariµ
karaö“ye).[clxxxi] Brahm himself is declared to be subject to change (mahbrahmuno ' pi atth ' eva
aattattaµ atthi vipariömo).[clxxxii] Consequently a high premium is never set
on life in the Brahma-world for the Buddhists who always regard it as a
relatively inferior position in relation to nibbna (h“ne brahmaloke).[clxxxiii]
At the same time we notice that the
idea of birth in the Brahma-world is closely bound up with the practice and
development of the four virtues of mett, karuö, mudit and upekkh which in Buddhism have come to be known
as the four Brahma-vihra or divine abodes . However, in the early texts the term
Brahma-vihra is not always used for the practice of these virtues. The Saŗg“ti Sutta refers to them as
catasso appamayo or the fourfold boundlessness.[clxxxiv] In the Dhnajni Sutta, it is the
practice of these four virtues which the venerable Sriputta recommends to the
Brahmin Dhnajni as the way to reach the Brahma-world. Each one of these is spoken of as leading
to that much coveted goal.[clxxxv] Here, the practice of the
Brahma-vihra seems to stand on its own without any leanings on Buddhism, except
for the fact that the Sutta simply says that a Bhikkhu does practise these.
Dhnajni was thus able,
apparently without any radical change of his ways, to practise it in his Brahmin
setting and be born in the Brahma-world.
In the Tevijj Sutta, the position is different. It is admitted that the development of
these practices leads to Brahma-companionship, but it is to come only after the
fulfilment of the preliminary duties which are to be carried out by a Buddhist
disciple. The grounding in morality
(s“lakkhandha), restraint of the sense faculties (indriyasamvara), mental
alertness (satisampajaa) and contentment (santuŹŹhi) are all basic
requirements, possessed of which the Buddhist disciple is to purge his mind of
the five evil traits (pacan“varaöa).
Then alone has he reached the necessary mental poise for the effective
practice of the above virtues referred to as Brahma-vihra. We see in this Sutta the practice of the
Brahma-vihra adequately garbed in Buddhist fashion, even though it is
recognised that this practice leads to
Brahma-companionship.[clxxxvi] This being so, no difficulty of
incompatibility seems to be encountered here.[clxxxvii]
But in the Makhdeva Sutta, the
Brahma-vihra are valued differently.
King Makhdeva who is recognised as the Buddha in one of his earlier
existences, is said to have renounced the household life at the first appearance
of the signs of old age. Living the
life of brahmacariya, he practised not one, but all the four Brahma-vihra and
after death was born in the Brahma-world.[clxxxviii] But after he became the Buddha, he was
in a position to point out the limitations of the practice of the Brahma-vihra
as a way of religious life. It
leads not to detachment, tranquility and cessation. It leads not to
enlightenment but only confers birth in the Brahma-world. The Buddha is happy to be able to offer
a new way of religious life which leads to detachment, cessation and
tranquility. It is the way to
enlightenment which is none other than the noble eightfold path.[clxxxix] We notice that there is a definite
attempt in this Sutta to reject this alien way of the practice of
Brahma-vihra,
with its limitations, perhaps
because of its strong ties with the Brahma-world, the relative inferiority of
which the Buddha repeatedly stressed.
The scope of the religious life of a Buddhist disciple would not only
thereby be limited but also misdirected.
The same criticism is made when a Buddhist disciple practises the life of
brahmacariya, aspiring to be born in a particular heavenly world. The Cetokhila Sutta considers it a
definite hindrance to spiritual progress.[cxc]
However, the virtues developed
under the Brahma-vihra are in no way incompatible with the spiritual progress
of a Buddhist disciple. They are,
in fact, associated with the Buddha too.
In the J“vaka Sutta, J“vaka tells the Buddha about these four virtues
which are believed to be characteristics of Brahm and adds that he feels that
the Buddha also possesses them. The
Buddha admits that he possesses them but not as the result of a direct process
of practice. On the other hand, it
is by virtue of the fact that rga, dosa
and moha are completely
eliminated in the Buddha. For it is these which give rise to vypda, vihes,
arati and paŹigha which are the
opposites of these four virtues.[cxci] Thus, in him they are only derivative
virtues resulting from a higher achievement. But the Buddha speaks of his disciples as
developing these virtues in their daily life.[cxcii] In the Mahrhulovda Sutta, the
disciples are asked to develop these with the primary idea of eliminating their
opposites, viz. vypda, vihes, arati
and paŹigha.[cxciii] The Commentary adds that these virtues
are essential as the means to the attainment of Arahantship.[cxciv] We notice here an attempt to offer a
different motive which is more in keeping with Buddhist values for the practice
of these much recognised virtues. It is particularly interesting to note
how the elimination of arati is held out as an incentive for the practice of
mudit. The explanation of arati as
given in the Commentaries gives the virtue of mudit an essentially monastic
character which it need not necessarily have. Arati is accordingly the apathy and
indifference to the cloistered life and the lack of initiative in the striving
for higher spiritual attainments.[cxcv] Also note the comment on arati which is
given in the Suttanipta AŹŹhakath.
There it is indicated that the pabbajita, even after the conquest of kma
on entering the monastic life, may yet fall a victim to arati if he fails to
engage himself actively in the
pursuit of the monastic aspirations.[cxcvi] As we examine the interpretation given
here to mudit and arati with this
distinctly monastic bias we begin to see that the Brahma-vihra which originally
were meant to bring about a mental purge and secure an equipoise of mind are
also being used to serve partly as a stimulant in Buddhist monasticism. There is a statement in the Saµyutta
Nikya which tries to make out that the difficult task for a pabbajita is the
devotion and dedication to his mission of good monastic living.[cxcvii] The Saµyutta has repeated laments over
the falling standards of the
Buddhist Saŗgha and we may safely infer that this statement reflects a similar
attitude.[cxcviii] At such a stage in the history of the
order it is understandable that mudit
is called upon to play this additional role of battling against spiritual
lethargy and indifference.
The practice of these four virtues
is also called appamö cetovimutti
and this cetovimutti is
esteemed high in so far as it is stable and has led in that state of mental
perfection to the elimination of rga, dosa and moha.[cxcix] Of these four, mett alone as a virtue by itself, is
advocated by the Buddha in the Kakacčpama Sutta. This sermon which refers to the
elimination of feelings of anger under all circumstances became, more or less, a
standard injunction to his disciples.
They are called upon to
bear in mind the simile of the saw (kakacčpama) at all
times.[cc] Consequently it became a guiding
principle in their life as is borne out by the Theragth.[cci] The Mgha Sutta too, seems to single out
mett as a virtue to be developed
by the Buddhist disciple.[ccii] The Metta Sutta goes further to
recommend the development of mett
and calls it, in its isolation, the Brahma-vihra.[cciii]
The AŹŹhakangara Sutta points out
that a disciple, realising the limitations of the mental purge resulting from
the practice of these virtues under the Brahma-vihra, would be propelled thereby to strive for
further attainments.[cciv] Thus it becomes abundantly clear that in
spite of the allusions to their transcendent character the Brahma-vihra have
only a limited significance in Buddhism in relation to the Buddhist life of
brahmacariya.
Chapter
III
The Buddha, who discovered the path
to enlightenment after a successful process of trial and elimination, proclaims a new way of
religious life which he recommends to his followers under the name of
brahmacariya.[ccv] We find that as the
goal of this life of brahmacariya the accent falls on the release from
dukkha[ccvi] and the attainment of
nibbna. This is clear from the
recurring statement in the texts which is ascribed to the Buddha : ' Come. O
monk, live the life of brahmacariya in order that you may make an end of
suffering ' (Ehi bhikkhč ' ti bhagav avoca svkkhto dhammo cara brahmacariyaµ
samm dukkhassa antakiriyy ' ti - Vin.I.12.).[ccvii] This orientation is due to the fact that
the Bodhisatta's search for enlightenment derived its urge from his consuming
anxiety to discover the root-cause of the phenomenon of dukkha and the way to
its extinction.[ccviii]
The Bodhisatta seems to have
analysed the problem of dukkha in
terms of its origin (samudaya) and its cessation (nirodha).[ccix] Through this, it is not difficult to see
the emergence of the Noble Truths or Ariya-saccni as a part of the basic doctrines of
Buddhism. This quest of the Bodhisatta resulted in the discovery of the ultimate
cause of dukkha and hence of its
cessation too, a discovery which he made following the principle of causal
genesis (idappaccayat
paŹicca-samuppdo). From this, the evolution of the Chain of Causation
would have naturally resulted. In
the SammdiŹŹhi Sutta,[ccx] the venerable Sriputta
defines dukkha and analyses it in terms of its origin, cessation and the path
leading to its cessation.
Thereafter, he defines likewise the twelve links of the PaŹiccasamuppda
chain and analyses each one of them in turn in the same manner. In this analysis of Sriputta we see an
extended use of the Buddha's idea of causal genesis. Here too the successive links of the
chain follow, as it were, from an analysis of dukkha.
Thus it is clear that the fact of
dukkha was the starting-point of the Bodhisatta's journey of discovery of the
causative links. As Buddha, he makes this point crystal clear in more than one
place. Thus he tells the venerable
Anurdha : ' One thing do I teach,
suffering and the cessation of suffering ' (Sdhu sdhu anurdha pubbe c ' ham
anurdha etarahi ca dukkha c' eva papemi dukkhassa ca nirodhan ' ti - S.IV.
384. See also M.I.140.). Nothing could have been a more realistic
approach to mok©a or deliverance
than an awareness of the presence of suffering and a desire to terminate
it. Even in his first sermon to the
Pacavaggiya monks,[ccxi] the Buddha discoursed
on dukkha and the escape
therefrom. This is so fundamentally
the dominant theme of Buddhism that even the philosophical expositions of
nibbna savour of this. They describe nibbna as being the termination of dukkha :
es'ev' anto dukkhassa. (Atthi bhikkhave tadyatanaµ yattha n ' eva pathav“ na
po... es ' ev ' anto dukkhass ' ti ... etc. - Ud. 80f.)
This current life, associated
together with the idea of many more repeated existences, appeared to the
Bodhisatta as but a single link in the continuous chain of births and deaths,
holding between them decay and disease as inescapable consequences. These ills of life, which the Bodhisatta
observed around him, stand out as the first promptings which stirred him to the
quest of a way of release from them.[ccxii] The inquiry which he initiated and the
results he achieved have become so significant in the history of Buddhism that
these researches have been referred retrospectively to times anterior to Buddha
Gotama.[ccxiii] They are ascribed to all the six Buddhas
of the past who are listed together in the Mahpadna Sutta.[ccxiv] All these Buddhas seem to make the same
observation regarding life in the world, namely, that the world is subject to
the ills of birth, decay and death with the threatening reality of birth again
in another existence. ' And to me,
brethren, before I was enlightened, while I was yet unenlightened and
Bodhisatta, there came this thought : Alas! this world has fallen upon
trouble. There is getting born and
decaying and dying and passing away and being reborn. And yet from this suffering, from decay
and death, an escape is not known.
O when shall escape from this suffering, from decay and death, be
revealed? Then to me, brethren,
came this thought, What now being
present, does decay and death come to be?
What conditions decay and death? ' [ccxv]
The theory of causal genesis in
Buddhism was therefore a direct outcome of this probe and it is little wonder
that the venerable Assaji. who was one of the first five disciples of the
Buddha, gave this theory as the essence of his master's teaching
:
Ye dhamm
hetuppabhav tesaµ hetu tathgato ha
tesa ca yo nirodho evaµvd“ mahsamaöo
' ti.[ccxvi]
In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta, the
Buddha himself identifies the theory of causal genesis - idappacayat
paŹiccasamuppdo, a theory in terms
of which phenomenal existence and all its concomitants are explained, as the
central feature of his Dhamma. As
the only complement to this the Sutta introduces the cessation of samsaric
existence which is the goal in Buddhism - nirodho nibbnaµ.[ccxvii] The words of Assaji are undoutedly
resonant of these two fundamental and correlated ideas of the Buddha's
teaching. Thus, as already pointed
out earlier, the four Truths of
Buddhism including the way or magga (dukkhanirodhagmin“paŹipad) and the
Chain of Causation are products of
the Buddha's application of the principle of causal genesis to the
problem of dukkha.[ccxviii] Therefore they are essentially of the
very core of Buddhism. In the
Mahhatthipadopama Sutta, the
venerable Sriputta quotes the Buddha as having identified the PaŹiccasamuppda
with the whole of his teaching.[ccxix] This same prestige for the
PaŹiccasamuppda is claimed with greater eloquence in the Mahnidna
Sutta.[ccxx]
The problem of dukkha as envisaged
by the Bodhisatta and analysed by him later in great detail is shown to be both
varied and extensive. In addition
to the physical changes of decay, disease and death which are inherent in the
fact of birth and are aspects of the basic suffering in life,[ccxxi] there are also other
painful situations which are consequent on it. The Buddha, in his first sermon at
Isipatana, explained that all our relationships with the world outside which are
based on strong likes and dislikes and perverted values also lead to
dukkha. Dukkha is there defined as
' the company of those whom one does not like, separation from those whom one
likes and the inability to gain the objects of desire.' [ccxxii] Cares and considerations of household
life lead to numerous such instances.
The Kma Sutta of the Suttanipta portrays some of these as
follows:
Whoso for
pleasure longs
And therein hath his will,
How happy is that man
With
all he wished for won.
But when those
pleasures fade,
The wanton wight, thus steeped
In pleasure,
craving-born,
Suffers as pierced by dart.
Who craves for
pleasure's brood:
Fields and demesnes and gold,
Horses and cows and
slaves,
Retainers, women, kin:
Him weaknesses
o'erpower,
Him troubles dominate,
And on him closes ill
As sea on
vessel split.[ccxxiii]
However, it is pointed out that
these are situations which a wise man may discreetly avoid. The Mahdukkhakkhandha Sutta also
discusses how the manifold implications of life bring dukkha in their wake, to a
greater or lesser degree. These
aspects of dukkha, man creates for himself to whatever degree he gives vent to
his desires.[ccxxiv] The burden of earning a livelihood, loss
and failure, insecurity, interstate warfare, communal and family disputes, and
acts of political violence are all listed in the Sutta as contributing their
quota to the additional load of dukkha which man piles upon
himself.
Brahmacariya or the higher
religious life which is often identified with the life of pabbajj is held out in early Buddhism as the one
certain way for the effective
elimination of these ills of existence. The disciples of the Buddha, once being
asked by the followers of other religious schools as to the purpose of Buddhist
monastic life, answer that it aims at the termination of
dukkha.
This reply of the disciples is
heartily endorsed by the Master who maintains that it is the correct interpretation of his teaching.He is himself seen stating
the same.[ccxxv] The following items are also added as
motives for the practice of brahmacariya :
Elimination of
lust - rgavirgatthaµ
Removal of
fetters of existence - saµyojanapahnatthaµ
Destruction of
predispositions -
anusayasamugghtatthaµ
Extinction of
defilements - savnaµ
khayatthaµ
Realisation of
the fruits of release through wisdom - vijjvimuttiphalasacchikiriyatthaµ
Realisation of
knowledge and insight - öadassanatthaµ
Complete
liberation from the whirl of esistence - anupd parinibbnatthaµ[ccxxvi]
Brahmacariya is the Buddhist way to
perfection which is referred to as the attainment of nibbna. The Mahassapura
Sutta states that the one concern of brahmacariya is the attainment of that
poise and freedom of the mind which is nibbna.[ccxxvii] The Cullavedalla Sutta explains the
purpose of brahmacariya as the attainment of nibbna.[ccxxviii] The Saµyutta explains further how the
life of brahmacariya leads to the cessation of dukkha. Through the practice of
brahmacariya, it says, rebirth is ended, and thereby one is freed of all
consequent ills.[ccxxix] The above passage in the Samyutta
strives hard to establish, in no uncertain terms, the essential connection
between the practice of brahmacariya and the attainment of the Buddhist goal of
terminating saµsric existence. The
early Canonical texts repeatedly record that every Arahant, while declaring the
fact of his enlightenment, claims that he would not be reborn again and that he
has perfected the life of brahmacariya : kh“ö jti vusitaµ
brahmacariyaµ.[ccxxx] He is also aware of the termination of
his existence in saµsra which he has accomplished : nparaµ itthatty ' ti
pajnti.[ccxxxi] This life of brahmacariya admits of no
compromises and is described as a mode of life which is perfect and wholly pure
: ekantaparipuööaµ ekantaparisuddhaµ saŗkhalikhitaµ.[ccxxxii] There should be no erring even for a
single day, says the Commentary.[ccxxxiii] The Commentaries go on to add that the
life of brahmacariya is so called because it is the noblest way of life or the
way of life of those who have reached the highest state of perfection.[ccxxxiv] The Arahant is
described as brahmacariyassa keval“
or one who has perfected the life of brahmacariya.[ccxxxv] The Commentary on the above adds that he
is also called sakalabrahmacr“. i.e. a complete brahmacr“.[ccxxxvi] As the complete way to salvation it is
also said to embrace all three phases of sikkh or self- culture in Buddhism,
namely s“la, samdhi and pa.
i.e. morality, tranquility of mind and wisdom respectively.[ccxxxvii]
It is in this sense, namely that
brahmacariya is the way to Arahantship, that brahmacariya comes to be identified
with the Noble Eightfold Path.[ccxxxviii] The Commentaries repeatedly speak of
brahmacariya as the path leading to
Arahantship.[ccxxxix] Thus it is undoubtedly the ideal
religious life in Buddhism, recommended and practised for the attainment of the
final goal.
The efficacy of this way of life is
readily admitted by its adherents.
The elder Puööa Mantniputta tells the venerable Sriputta that the life
of brahmacariya under the Buddha is
lived for the sake of attaining complete emancipation : Anupd parinibbnatthaµ
kho vuso bhagavati brahmacariyaµ vussati - M.I.148. The Buddhist disciple who has attained
the goal of his quest, the Arahant, speaks of having perfected this higher life
of brahmacariya : vusitaµ brahmacariyaµ.
The pragmatism of the Buddha's teaching is clearly revealed in the
statement that he preaches only what contributes to his life of brahmacariya and
leaves unexplained that which has no relevance to it.[ccxl] The life of brahmacariya amounts almost
to complete renunciation in that all the followers of the Buddha are invariably
found saying that this perfect and
pure religious life cannot easily be lived while leading the life of a
householder.[ccxli] Thus the ardent convert is seen going
from home to homelessness, with faith in the way of life laid down by the Buddha, for the purpose of perfecting this life of brahmacariya.[ccxlii] The Pabbajj Sutta of the Suttanipta
describes on very similar lines the motive which prompted the Bodhisatta to
renounce the household life.[ccxliii] It is at this point of emphasis of
complete renunciation that brahmacariya and the life of pabbajj seem almost to
converge.
In describing the s“la observed by a pabbajita Suttas go on to say that he is a brahmacr“ in that he observes the vow of celibacy,
having given up the life of abrahmacariya
(non-brahmacariya) which is, more or less, identified with the sex life
of a householder.[ccxliv] The Tissametteyya Sutta of the
Suttanipta[ccxlv] sheds further light on the Buddhist
monastic attitude to celibacy.
Called upon by the elder Tissametteyya to explain the dangers of sex life to a
monastic career, the Buddha says that the monk who indulges in the pleasures of
sex (methuna) would, first and foremost, fail to fulfil his avowed
mission.[ccxlvi] The Commentary explains this further as
the failure to gain mastery over the Buddha's teaching (pariyattissana) and the
inability to attain to any higher spiritual states (paŹipattissana).[ccxlvii] He would also consequently slip into
wrong patterns of conduct which are unworthy of the noble traditions of true
monasticism.[ccxlviii] It is also said to be despicable in the
eyes of the public that one who had renounced everything and chosen a monastic
career to lead a solitary life should be lured by thoughts of methuna or sex gratification. He would be looked upon as a
carriage which has gone out of control, which ere long would go to wreck and
ruin.[ccxlix] Such a decline would be degrading and
the
Sutta goes onto say that these
considerations should suffice as inducements for a monk to eschew such vulgar
pleasures.[ccl] On account of this monastic attitude to
celibacy we discover in the Saµyutta Nikya what appears to be a fossilized idea
which regarded women as a danger to the life of brahmacariya.[ccli] This latter attitude to
women in Buddhism may also be partly derived from Jainism and from the
Brahmacarya ī§rama of the Brahmins which we discussed earlier under the
Upani©ads.[cclii] But the really vital consideration, over
and above all these, is the Buddhist attitude to the enjoyment of kma or pleasures of the senses. The desire for their enjoyment, the
Buddha has repeatedly stated, is contradictory to the spiritual aspirations of
the monk.[ccliii]
It is the celibacy and the good
life of the monk that we have discussed so far, and thus brahmacariya remains as
though it were the prerogative of the monk. However, in the Mahvacchagotta Sutta we
see the term brahmacr“ being used
with reference to laymen.[ccliv] The Psdika Sutta too, uses it in the
same sense.[cclv] The essence of the term here, which is
also applied to the white-clad laymen, is that a brahmacr“ is one who has eschewed sensual
pleasures. Hence he is not a
kmabhog“. The white-clad laymen who are brahmacr“ are presented in marked
contrast to the white-clad laymen who enjoy sensual pleasures.[cclvi] This stresses the idea that the essence
of brahmacariya is the spirit of
complete renunciation. It is not
the mere departure from home to homelessness but the surrendering of all the
pleasures which are the lot of a householder. This detachment which is to be acquired
through diligent cultivation is the fundamental characteristic of true
pabbajj. It is evident from
the statement in the Saµyutta which says that once the mind has achieved this
detachment, the pabbajita would not
exchange his mode of life for the lower order of the laymen.[cclvii]
It is also clear from the testimony
of the Suttas that the early disciples who took to the monastic life under the
Buddha did so with a characteristic awareness and earnestness.[cclviii] They admit that it is difficult for one
who lives the life of a householder to practise this code of higher
living.[cclix] The household, with its many-faceted
activities could never provide the necessary leisure or freedom for its
development. It is far from being
the ideal setting for it. It is
also said that the unstable and disquietening character of household life is
enough in itself to drive a man to complete renunciation.[cclx] The contrast between the two is
emphatically stated in the following statement. ' Life in the household is full
of impediments and leads to corruption.
Life of mendicancy affords complete freedom ' : Bahusambdho gharvso rajopatho
abbhokso pabbajj.[cclxi] The Commentaries, which
give
further details of this, quote the
MahaŹŹhakath as saying that the household life does invariably give rise to
defilement of the mind through greed etc.[cclxii] This point of view, that the higher life of brahmacariya is
closely bound up with renunciation, is so significant and is accepted in
principle in Buddhism that in the biographies of the Buddha he is made to
express it even at the stage of being a Bodhisatta, prior to his
enlightenment.[cclxiii] Those who choose that life leave their
household behind with perfect ease.
Inspired by this end which they have in view they find that nothing in
their worldly possessions is too great to be sacrificed. Kla, who fled from his wife and son,
reassures us of this as he says : ' Like the elephant that breaks its chains
asunder the wise leave behind their sons, wealth and kinsmen and enter the life
of pabbajj '.[cclxiv] The goal for which they strive becomes
the constant and unfailing guiding force in their lives.
It is abundantly clear that early
Buddhism with its spiritual earnestness considered pabbajj or the life of renunciation as the ideal
religious life.[cclxv] The life of the monk is a stage beyond
that of the laymen, and the passage from lay life to recluseship is always
looked upon as an advance, a step
forward in spiritual progress.
Discarding all paraphernalia and associations of lay life a man should
leave his home and take to the solitary life of a mendicant. In doing so he is compared to the
Pricchatta tree which sheds its leaves.[cclxvi] The Cčladukkhakkhandha Sutta expresses
the idea that the spiritual development enjoined in Buddhism would ultimately
lead to pabbajj or renunciation of
household life. It is argued in the Sutta that if the basis from which thoughts
of lobha, dosa and moha spring has
been eliminated in any man, he would then no longer remain in the household or
enjoy sensual pleasures.[cclxvii] Those who chose this way of life,
inspite of the strict discipline and the endless striving it involved, decided
that they would ceaselessly work
all their life for the attainment of their goal. An independent observation by King
Pasenadi Kosala in the Dhammacetiya Sutta testifies to this.[cclxviii] Those disciples would prefer death
rather than give up their chosen career.
A ther“, despairing at the slow progress she made in her spiritual
endeavours, declares that she would rather make an end of her life than return
to lay life.[cclxix] The elder Sappadsa who was placed in a
similar situation voiced the same sentiment.[cclxx] This, in fact, became the accepted
attitude to fickleness of faith among
those leading the higher life.
It is suicide, declares the Saµyutta, to give up the higher religious
life and revert to the lower order.[cclxxi]
Thus early Buddhism, very
naturally, seems to have exalted the life of the monk over that of the
layman. In the spiritual quest, the
monk is ahead of the layman on account of his very natural advantages with which
the layman could not compete. The
Suttanipta illustrates this position beautifully where it says that the crested
peacock adorned with its blue neck
never equals the swan in its speed.[cclxxii] A monk does transcend a layman in that
he gives up not only the belongings. but also
the desires and emotions which are characteristic of
those living in the household.[cclxxiii] He leads such a light livelihood, with
just enough food for his sustenance and a garment to cover himself, that it is
said that the monk goes about like a bird which, wherever it goes, carries only
the weight of its feathers.[cclxxiv]
These world-renouncing and
abstemious disciples of the Buddha seem to have had a mixed reception in the
contemporary Indian society. Although celibacy and renunciation were nothing
strange to Indian religions, yet the popularity of the new creed of the Buddha
and the success of his early conversions appear to have roused some animated
comments from his contemporaries.
The ideal of renunciation in the new religion, they argued, led to social
disintegration and breach of family life.
It was added that women were widowed on account of this new movement and parents were
robbed of their dhildren.[cclxxv] This presumably would have been the most
natural and at the same time the most superficial charge that could have been
made against the Buddhist Order of monks.
The Indians of the Buddha's day seem to have been accustomed to look upon
renunciation and religious mendicancy as a stage in man's life which is to be
initiated at the appearance of grey hairs.
Renunciation marks the quest
for celestial pleasures on which one embarks only after the enjoyment of
the pleasures of the world. This is
well attested in the words of King Makhdeva in the Makhdeva Sutta where he
says that since grey hairs have appeared on his head it is time for him to
search for heavenly pleasures.[cclxxvi] In the RaŹŹhapla Sutta we get another
expression of this idea where King Koravya tells the elder RaŹŹhapla that
people leave the household life and take to religious mendicancy only when they
fail to make a success of this life on account of old age or disease, loss of
wealth or kith and kin.[cclxxvii]
It would also not be out of place
here to observe that the hallmark of Indian religious mendicancy at the time was
asceticism which more often than not turned out to be of a severe order. Both popular taste and contemporary
practices mutually contributed towards this position. Putting forward his new charter for more
rigorous monastic living, Devadatta pointed out that people adore severe
self-abnegation.[cclxxviii] The naked ascetics of the day argued with the Buddha that
no happpiness could be attained except through the path of pain.[cclxxix] It was also observed earlier that the
caturaŗgasamanngata-brahmacariya which is of non- Buddhist origin consisted of
austerities of the highest severity.[cclxxx] The Buddha denounced this as a form of
religious life and said, in his first sermon, that it was a mean and vulgar way
of life which was painful.
Therefore it was to be ruled out as a disastrous extreme which should be
avoided.[cclxxxi] It was not the way whereby the mind
would triumph over the body and attain to higher states of
enlightenment.[cclxxxii] Nor did this mode of conduct help to pay
off the sins of the past as was maintained by the Jains.[cclxxxiii] Thus the Buddha never
set
the mind and the body against each
other. One should take special note
here of the statement in the Padhna Sutta which appears, as it were, to
contradict this position.[cclxxxiv] In reply to Mra, the Bodhisatta is
reported to have said the following.
' While my flesh wastes away my mind will reach greater tranquility ' :
Maµsesu kh“yamnesu bhiyyo cittaµ pas“dati - Sn. v. 434. This does not, however, seem
to mean that the way to the tranquility of mind is through this physical
decline. As the Commentary appears
to indicate these words are in reply to Mra who exaggerated the Bodhisatta's
physical deterioration with a view
to luring him into the enjoyment of sensual pleasures.[cclxxxv] The Bodhisatta was fully aware that the
way to the attainment of the desired goal was undeniably a hard one which would
make very heavy demands.[cclxxxvi] But with a sincerity of purpose and an unrivalled earnestness
which are coupled with a perfect judgement, he was not to be dissuaded from his
venture.[cclxxxvii] It is in spite of the threatened danger
to his physical self that he is certain of attaining the desired mental
equipoise. Thus what the Bodhisatta
wished to establish was that his indomitable spirit would not give way under the
decline of the flesh : Na tv '
eva tappaccay saµs“dati - SnA. II. 389.
It is in fact a healthy and
peaceful interdependence of the mind and the body that is aimed at in the
religious life which the Buddha prescribed. While the body is distressed no control
or concentration of the mind could ever be achieved. Keeping this in mind the Buddha decried
not only the baser forms of austerities which weary the body but also excessive
striving, even though such striving may be channelled in the right
direction.[cclxxxviii] The composure of the dody and the
consequent sense of ease was vital for the acquisition of any tranquility of the
mind. (Pamuditassa p“ti jyati
p“timanassa kyo passambhati passaddhakyo sukhaµ vedeti sukhino cittaµ
samdhiyati - M.I.37.).
Coloured by this new attitude to
mind culture, the code of conduct governing the life of the Buddhist disciple
became considerably different from those of the contemporary groups. The life of
the Buddhist disciple was never degraded to sub-human levels as are described at
length in the Buddhist Suttas which deal with the austerities of the
day.[cclxxxix] Clean and healthy
living, both in mind and body, was their rule. The Buddha saw no reason to retreat from
physical and mental well-being, as long as it was not mingled with and
contaminated by sensual pleasures.
In fact, he recognised the physical well-being as a basis for the
other.[ccxc] A high value was set on physical fitness
and freedom from disease, not so much for its own sake but as forming a solid
basis for mental development. It is
partly with this end in view that the Buddha regulated the lives of the monks
with regard to their habits of food and drink.[ccxci] Regularity and moderation in eating, the
Buddha maintained, contributes to a healthy life, but lack of food would impair
the successful progress of brahmacariya.
Food is therefore to be taken with a view to eliminating physical
distress so that the endeavour for spiritual development may be made
unhindered.[ccxcii] Thus the Buddhist monks did eat and
dress much less than the laymen and on a much simpler pattern. The Buddha constantly reminded them that
once they renounced the household life they should never again lean towards the
ways of the laymen. Seyyath ' pi
gih“ kmabhogino was a grim
reminder to every erring individual.
Every monk who was sufficiently alert in mind always reminded himself
that it was
unworthy of his ideal to incline
towards the enjoyment of pleasures which he had renounced on leaving the
household.[ccxciii] The monk who is satisfied with his four
basic sustenances (cattro nissay) which consist of begged food and patch-work
robes, way-side shelters and the simplest of medicaments, is described as a triumphant free man
who finds himself at home everywhere.[ccxciv] Even these minimum requirements, a monk
should use with extreme frugality and diligent consideration.[ccxcv]
The marked contrast of the Buddhist
monks when viewed in relation to contemporary religious mendicants, and the
liberal patronage they enjoyed brought upon them a series of accusations that
they were leading a life of ease and luxury.[ccxcvi] But these statements were often
groundless and based on misconceptions.
It is proved by the fact that those who sought admission to the Buddhist
Order, lured by these assumed attractions, were soon disillusioned and
discovered to their utter dismay the demands of Buddhist monastic discipline. There is also no doubt that some would
have found themselves in the same position as the Brahmin who joined the Order
to make an easy living on the gifts of food offered by the laymen and
subsequently threatened to revert to lay life on being called upon to go begging
for alms.[ccxcvii] There was also the other section of the
community who truly recognised the sincerity of the Buddhist diseiples and their
devotion to the holy life.[ccxcviii] They were looked upon as a perfect model
of good living and were of such exemplary
character that men who wished to join their ranks were not wanting in the
society of the day.[ccxcix]
Chapter
IV
The complete spiritual development
of the early Buddhist disciple who has voluntarily embarked on the life of
brahmacariya seems to have been covered under the term sikkh which means culture, training, discipline and also study. All the rewards of monastic life
including the final goal of Arahantship are therefore the result of sikkh (Tassa evaµ jnato evaµ passato kmsav ' pi cittaµ
vimuccati....nparaµ itthatty ' ti
pajnti. Taµ kissa
hetu. Evaµ hi etaµ bhaddli hoti
yath taµ satthussane sikkhya paripčrakriss ' ti - M.I. 442.) Similarly the respect in which sikkh is
held by the disciples (sikkh-gravat) is considered a cardinal virtue of Buddhist monasticism (ye pana te
kulaputt saddh agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajit.... sikkhya tibbagrav - M.I.
32). It is also one of six virtues
which contribute to a disciple's spiritual stability.[ccc] It is listed together with the respect
for the Buddha, Dhamma and Saŗgha (satthugravat, dhammagravat and saŗghagravat) and two other
virtues which vary in different contexts.[ccci] Consequently the abandonment of the
monastic discipline and the return to lay life was regarded as the negation of
sikkh (ye pi samaöassa gotamassa
svak sabrahmacr“hi sampayojetv sikkhaµ paccakkhya h“nya vattanti - M.II.
5.).
This concept of sikkh which brings
within its fold the entire system of spiritual development in Buddhism is
considered as being threefold in character. According to this classification the
training of the disciple is divided into three successive stages of 1. s“la, 2.
samdhi and 3. pa and goes under the name of tisso sikkh
(Tisso im bhikkhave sikkh. Katam
tisso. Adhis“lasikkh adhittasikkh
adhipasikkh - A.I. 235.). It is
reported in the Aŗguttara Nikya that once a Vajjiputtaka monk who confessed his
inability to abide by such a large number of rules which exceeded one hundred
and fifty in number (sdhikaµ
diya¶¶hasikkhpadasataµ) and which were recited fortnightly at the Ptimokkha
ceremony was told by the Buddha that it would serve the purpose of his monastic
life if he could discipline himself in terms of the threefold sikkh.[cccii] All those rules, it is said, are
contained within the threefold sikkh (Im kho bhikkhave tisso sikkh yatth '
etaµ sabbaµ samodhnaµ gacchati - A.I. 231.). These three items of discipline are also
referred to as constituting the duties of monastic life (T“öi ' mni bhikkhave samaöassa
samaöakaraö“yni. Katamni t“öi. Adhis“lasikkhsamdnaµ
adhicittasikkhsamdnaµ adhipasikkh-samdnaµ - A.I. 229.) They bring about the accomplishments of
a recluse which make him a true samaöa.
Buddhaghosa too, quoting the Aŗguttara Nikya verbatim in his commentary
on the Mahassapura Sutta, reaffirms this view.[ccciii] These three stages of s“la, samdhi and pa, together mark the complete development
of Buddhist monastic life which leads to the acquisition of true knowledge or
a (Seyyath pi sriputta bhikkhu
s“lasampanno samdhi-sampanno pasampanno diŹŹheva dhamme aaµ rdheyya -
M.I. 71.). Viewed negatively, it is
said that self-training in terms of these three results in the elimination of
lust, hatred and delusion (tasm tuyhaµ bhikkhu adhis“lam ' pi sikkhato
adhicittam ' pi sikkhato adhipaam ' pi sikkhato rgo pah“yissati doso
pah“yissati moho pah“yissati - A.I. 230). Thus the true endeavour to develop all
these aspects is made the basis of all monastic aspirations. The īkaŗkheyya
Sutta gives it as a prescription for the perfection of monastic life. It is held out as the best code for the
attainment of the highest good in religious life, including
Arahantship.
(Akaŗkheyya ce bhikkhave bhikkhu
savnaµ khay ansavaµ cetovimuttiµ pavimuttiµ diŹŹhe ' va dhamme sayaµ
abhiya sacchikatv upasampajja vihareyyan ' ti s“lesv ' eva ' ssa
paripčrakr“ ajjhattaµ cetosamathaµ anuyutto anirkatajjhno vipassanya
samanngato brčhet sugrnaµ - M.I. 35f.). Buddhaghosa establishes that the
procedure described here is identical with the discipline of the tisso
sikkh.[ccciv]
Nevertheless, it is clear from the
evidence of the Suttas that out of the threefold sikkh special emphasis was laid on s“la as the foundation of all spiritual
attainments. The Buddha himself is
seen assuring his disciples of the efficacy of s“la as the basis of spiritual
progess (yato kho tvaµ bhikkhu s“laµ nissya s“le patiŹŹhya ime cattro
satipaŹŹhne bhvessasi tato tuyhaµ bhikkhu y ratti v divaso v gamissati
vuddhi yeva pŹikaŗkh kusalesu dhammesu no parihn“ ' ti - S.V. 187.). Once the monastic life is well
established on the s“la basis all
else seem to follow in natural succession.
The īkaŗkheyya Sutta,in fact, begins with the Buddha's admonition to the
monks to be mindful of their s“la
and to acquire thereby the necessary discipline (sampannas“l bhikkhave
viharatha sampannaptimokkh ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvut viharatha
cragocara-sampann anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhatha
sikkhpadesu - M.I. 33.). The Smaaphala Sutta gives a complete account of
what ought to be and what probably was the proper conduct of the good monk (Evaµ pabbajito samno
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu
bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu kyakammavac“kammena samanngato
kusalena parisuddhj“vo s“lasampanno indriyesu guttadvro satisampajaena
samanngato santuŹŹho - D.I. 63.) An analysis and evaluation of the aspects of
monastic conduct which are described here will be found in a succeeding
chapter.[cccv] For the present we shall only quote
Professor Rhys Davids who in his study of the Smaaphala Sutta makes the
following observations regarding its distinctly Buddhist flavour in its
reference to monastic conduct :
'Now it is perfectly true that of these thirteen consecutive propositions
or groups of propositions, it is only the last, No. 13 which is exclusively
Buddhist. But the things omitted,
the union of the whole of those included into one system, the order in which the
ideas are arranged, the way in which they are treated as so many steps of a
ladder whose chief value depends on the fact that it leads up to the culminating
point of Nirvna in Arahatship - all this is also distinctly Buddhist.'
[cccvi]
Getting down to the details of the
above passage, however, the Sutta proceeds with an exhaustive analysis of
s“lasampanno which is followed in
succession by indriyesu guttadvro, satisampajaena samanngato and santuŹŹho. When we compare the comments of Buddhaghosa on the above
passage[cccvii] and the definition of
s“lasampanno given in the Sekha Sutta[cccviii] it becomes clear to us
that here too the first consideration has been the perfection in s“la. This prestige which s“la enjoys in early Buddhism as the basic
training in religious life has never been challenged in the centuries that
followed in the history of Pali Buddhism.
In the Milindapaha
(circa first century B.C.),
the venerable Ngasena reiterates its impotrance with equal vigour
(PatiŹŹhnalakkhaöaµ mahrja s“laµ sabbesaµ kusalnaµ dhammnaµ
indriya-bala-bojjhaŗga-magga-satipaŹŹhna-sammappadhna-iddhipda-jjhna-vimokkha-samdhi-sampatt“naµ
s“laµ patiŹtham. S“le patiŹŹhassa
kho mahrja sabbe kusal dhamm na parihyant“ 'ti - Milin. 34.). In the fifth century
A.C. Buddhaghosa is equally eloquent on it in the Visuddhimagga.[cccix] Both Ngasena and Buddhaghosa quote
Canonical texts regarding the basic value of s“la. The Saµyutta Nikya records in two
places the following statement which is ascribed to the Buddha
:
S“le patiŹŹhya
naro sapao cittaµ paa ca bhvayaµ
tp“ nipako bhikkhu so imaµ vijaŹaye
jaŹaµ.[cccx]
This stanza which emphasises the
importance of s“la is quoted by
Ngasena as an utterance of the Buddha (Bhsitam ' pi etaµ mahrja bhagavat
s“le patiŹŹhya ....Miln. 34.). Buddhaghosa does the same in the Visuddhimagga.
(Ten ' ha bhagav s“le patiŹŹhya... Vism.I. 4) In the Gaöakamoggllna[cccxi] and the
Dantabhčmi[cccxii] Suttas of the Majjhima Nikya, which
deal with the development of the monastic life under the guidance of the Master
himself, the main emphasis is on the idea that the spiritual development of the
monk is a gradual process and is undertaken in successive stages (anupubbasikkh
anupubbakiriy anupubba-paŹipad).
The first words which the Buddha addresses to his disciples on taking
them under his direction are with regard to their perfection in s“la and the consequent restraint which is
associated with it (Ehi tvaµ bhikkhu s“lav hohi ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharhi
cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhhi
sikkhpadesč ' ti - M.III.
2,134.).
The perfection in s“la, no doubt,
marks the first stage in the spiritual development of the Buddhist disciple and
this advice of the Buddha to his disciples is found scattered in many places in
the Sutta PiŹaka, sometimes addressed to single individuals and sometimes to the
Saŗgha as a whole. It is thus clear
that s“la was the corner-stone of early Buddhist monasticism. First and
foremost, the Buddhist disciple had to be s“lav. It meant that the disciple had
to regulate his life in terms of what is recorded under s“la as conditions of
good monastic living, abstaining from what is indicated as unworthy and
contradictory to his spiritual aspirations. In the Smaaphala Sutta, the term
s“lasampanno is used as equivalent
in meaning to s“lav and under it
are included forty-three items of s“la which are subdivided into three groups as
Minor, Middle and Major (cčlas“la, majjhimas“la and mahs“la).[cccxiii] A number of Suttas of the Majjhima
Nikya,[cccxiv] in describing the s“la
of the Buddhist disciple, include under the category of s“la (s“lakkhandha) only the first twenty-six
items which in the Smaaphala Sutta are all grouped under cčlas“la. They include the three bodily and the
four verbal misdeeds or akusalakamma
and have in addition certain practices, like the acceptance of gold and
silver, cattle and land, which are unworthy of a monk but are allowable in the
case of laymen. There are also some
others like the last three items of the cčlas“la which include fraudulent
practices, violence and atrocities which are neither good for the monk nor for
the layman.[cccxv] Almost all the ten items under the
majjhimas“la are only further
elaborations of some of the items of the cčlas“la. The seven items of the mahs“la
are only detailed descriptions of the different forms of ignoble livelihood or
micch j“va which are improper for
a monk.
These items of s“la, in the Suttas
where they occur, do not bear the impress of an order or injunction. The disciples of the Buddha are
described as giving up akusalakamma
through word and deed.
Abstaining from these evils, the disciples develop their corresponding
virtues (Idha mahrja bhikkhu pötiptaµ pahya pötipt paŹivirato hoti
nihitadaö¶o nihitasattho lajj“ daypanno sabba-pöa-bhčta-hitnukamp“ viharati -
D.I. 63 ff.). They also abstain
from patterns of conduct which are deemed unworthy of a monk. This freedom and the absence of pressure
in the regulation of the spiritual life which underlies the letter and the
spirit of s“la is very characteristic of
Buddhist monasticism in its earliest phase. With those sincere and earnest disciples
of the Buddha who gathered themselves
around him at the inception of the Ssana, no injunctions or restrictive
regulations seem to have been necessary.
In the Kakacčpama Sutta, the Buddha records his memory of the early days
of the Ssana when he needed no strict orders to determine the behaviour of his
disciples. At a mere suggestion by
the Master the disciples took to the good ways of life recommended as they did
when they adopted the habit of one meal a day (īrdhayiµsu vata me bhikkhave
bhikkhč
ekaµ samayaµ cittaµ. Idh ' haµ bhikkhave bhikkhč
mantesiµ. Ahaµ kho bhikkhave
eksanabhojanam bhujmi.... Etha tumhe ' pi bhikkhave eksanabhojanaµ
bhujatha... Na me bhikkhave tesu bhikkhusu anussan“ karaö“y ahosi sat '
uppdakaraö“yaµ eva me bhikkhave tesu bhikkhusu ahosi -
M.I.124.).
The incident referred to in the
Kakacčpama Sutta clearly indicates the manner in which the Buddha's early
disciples received and accepted his recommendations regarding the way of life
appropriate for the monk. The
Buddha seems at first to have counted on the sincerity and spiritual earnestness
of his early disciples for the success of his religious order. It was his wish, no doubt, to manage
with the minimum of restrictive regulations. But in the growing monastic community
whose numbers were rapidly increasing, laxity in discipline was bound to appear
before long. The Bhaddli Sutta indicates a recognition of the relative strength
of the Saŗgha at two different periods within one's memory (Appak kho tumhe bhaddli tena samayena
ahuvattha yad vo ahaµ
jn“yasusčpamaµ dhammapariyyaµ desesiµ.
Sarasi tvaµ bhaddl“ ' ti - M.1.445.). The strength in numbers, the popularity
of individuals or groups and the maturity of the members of the Saŗgha as it was
becoming a long established institution, were among the causes of
corruption.[cccxvi] The Bhaddli Sutta[cccxvii] shows us how the once accepted monastic
tradition of one meal a day which is recorded in the Kakacčpama Sutta and which
had also found for itself a place among the items of s“la as a condition of good monastic
living[cccxviii] had to be reinforced with a restrictive
regulation making it an offence to eat out of regular hours.[cccxix] These rgulations which are called sikkhpada now provide, beside s“la, an effective
instrument for the furtherance of good discipline in the monastic
community.
It is also probable that the Buddha
has such rebellious disciples like Bhaddli in mind when he speaks in the
Kakacčpama Sutta of the willing acceptance of the one meal a day recommendation
by his disciples as a thing of the past.
Inspite of the general agreement that abstinence from irregularity of
meals was wholesome for the monastic life, yet certain laxities regarding this
practice are noticeable in the early Buddhist monastic community. The incident which brought about the
promulgation of Pcittiya 37 is
such an instance.[cccxx] It was certainly an offence against
s“la, but since sila had no legal
status the offender could not be prosecuted and punished under its
authority. It is such situations as
these which mark the introduction of sikkhpada into the sphere of Buddhist
monastic discipline. Thus, in the Buddhist Vinaya, the first offender who
provokes the promulgation of a sikkhpada
is declared free, in a legal sense, from guilt (anpatti.... dikammikassa - Vin.III. 33. etc.). His offence, at the time, is against an
item of s“la and he could not
therefore be legally prosecuted for a pre-sikkhpada offence. This role of the Vinaya, that it serves
as an instrument of prosecution, is clearly indicated in the text of the Vinaya
itself.[cccxxi] In the introduction to Pcittiya 72, we
diccover the fear expressed by the Chabbaggiya monks that if many monks are
conversant with the text of the Vinaya that they are liable to be accused and
questioned by those Masters of the Vinaya with regard to laxities in discipline
(Sace ime vinaye pakatauno bhavissanti amhe yen ' icchakaµ yad ' icchakaµ yvad ' icchakaµ ka¶¶hissanti
parika¶¶hissanti. Handa mayaµ vuso
vinayaµ vivaööem ' ti - Vin. IV. 143.). Buddhaghosa too, explains the role of
sikkhpada on the same lines when he says that in the presence of sikkhpada the Saŗgha could make specific
references to the body of rules and make just and legally valid
accusations.[cccxxii]
A careful analysis of the history
of Prjika I reveals the nanner in
which the authoritative disciplinary machinery of the Vinaya came to be set up
in gradual stages. The
Suttavibhaŗga records that Sudinna committed the offence of methunadhamma (sexual intercourse) at a time when the sikkhpada on this point had not been
promulgated. It is said that he did
not know the consequences it involved (.... apaatte sikkhpade and“navadasso
- Vin.III.18.). It is difficult
to
maintain here that
and“navadassao means that Sudinna
did not know that his act was an offence against the spirit of Buddhist
monasticism. Two things preclude us
from accepting this position. Some
time after the commission of the act Sudinna is stricken with remorse that he
had not been able to live to perfection his monastic life (atha kho yasmato
sudinnassa ahu ' d eva kukkuccam ahu vippaŹisro albh vata me na vata me lbh dulladdhaµ vata me na vata me
suladdhaµ yv ' haµ evaµ svkkhte
dhammavinaye pabbajitv nsakkhiµ yvaj“vaµ paripuööaµ parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ
caritun ' ti - Vin. III. 19.) He knows and feels that he has erred and
brought ruin upon himself. For he
says that he has committed a sinful deed (Atthi me ppaµ kammaµ kataµ - Vin. III. 19.). Perhaps it would also have occurred to him that his act was in
violation of the item of s“la which refers to the practice of celibacy
(Abrahmacariyaµ pahya brahmacr“ hoti rcr“ virato methun gmadhamm - D.I.
63.).
Therefore we cannot take and“navadasso to mean that Sudinna did not know that
methunadhamma was an offence
against monastic life. Nor does he
claim such ignorance anywhere during the inquiries held by his fellow celibates
or the Buddha. Secondly, even in
the absence of any restrictive regulations it seems to have been very clear to
all members of the Buddhist Saŗgha that according to what the Buddha had
declared in his Dhamma, the offence of methunadhamma contradicts the spirit of true
renunciation (Nanu vuso bhagavat aneka-pariyyena virgya dhammo desito no
sargya visaµyogya dhammo desito no samyogya anupdnya dhammo desito no
saupdnya - Vin. III. 19.).
Similarly, the Buddha had repeatedly stated to the monks that
gratification of sense desires was in no way permissible. Both the disciples and the Buddha remind
Sudinna of this position (Nanu vuso bhagavat anekapariyyena kmnaµ pahnaµ
akkhtaµ kmasanaµ pari akkht kmapipsnaµ paŹivinayo akkhto
kmavitakknaµ samugghto akkhto kmapariĀhnaµ včpasamo akkhto - Vin. III.
2.). On the other hand, the
sikkhpada on methunadhamma, i.e. Prjika I, which
came to be laid down subsequently does no more than determine the gravity of the offence and
the consequent punishment it involves.
Therefore what the statement and“navadasso here means probably is that abstinence
from methunadhamma being one among the many items of s“la, Sudinna did not fully
apprehend the relative seriousness of his offence.
However, this passage receives a
very different interpretation in the hands of Buddhaghosa. The commentator says that Sudinna
committed the act of methunadhamma
thinking that it was not wrong because he did not realise the
consequences which the Buddha was going to indicate while laying down this sikkhpada.[cccxxiii] It is abundantly clear that Sudinna did
not know that he would have been expelled from the Order for his offence had he
not been the first to be guilty of it, because this penalty came to be
categorically stated only in the
sikkhpada which was laid
down after the commission of the offence by Sudinna. But we are unable to agree with
Buddhaghosa when he says that Sudinna did not know that he was doing something
wrong and thought he was completely blameless (anavajjasa“ and niddosasa“). This interpretation does not seem to be
possible unless we say that Sudinna was completely ignorant of the Dhamma or we
take the words vajja and dosa here in an unnecessarily restricted
legal sense. This is obviously what
Buddhaghosa does in his explanation of anavajjasa“ and niddosasa“ (And“navadasso ' ti yaµ bhagav idni
sikkhpadaµ papento d“navaµ dasseti tam apassanto anavajjasa“ hutv
...... ettha pana d“navam
apassanto niddosasa“ ahosi. Tena
vuttam and“navadasso ' ti - VinA.I. 213.). But it is the criteria of the Dhamma
which both Sudinna's
fellow-celibates and the Buddha adopt in chastising him. Does not Sudinna himself admit that he
has incurred a guilt (Atthi me
ppaµ kammaµ kataµ puröadutiyikya
methuno dhammo paŹisevito - Vin. III. 19.), and that therefore his monastic life
has been a failure (.... yv ' haµ evaµ svkkhte dhammavinaye pabbajitv
nsakkhiµ yvaj“vaµ paripuööaµ parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ caritun ' ti - Ibid.)? Thus, this ignorance of the possible
penalty cannot be taken as rendering the offender
blameless.
It is possible to state at this
stage that the sikkhpada of the
Vinaya PiŹaka have been evolved as instruments of prosecution with a monastic
legal validity, against offences which in the general text of the Dhamma are put
down as improper and unworthy of a monk, which sometimes are also applicable to
laymen, or as being detrimental to the spiritual progress of the monk. It is this particular character of the
sikkhpada of which the greater
part of the Vinaya consists, which made the Vinaya
so obnoxious to quite a umber of
rebellious monks even during the lifetime of the Master (Sace ime vinaye
pakatauno bhavissanti amhe yen ' icchakaµ yad ' icchakaµ yvad ' icchakaµ ka¶¶hissanti parika¶¶hissanti. Handa
mayaµ vuso vinayaµ vivaööem ' ti
- Vin.IV.134.). The need for such
legalised administration of the Saŗgha arose only with the lapse of time. It
was already referred to above how the Buddha recollects with pleasure the
golden age of the Buddhist Saŗgha when the good life according to the Master's
bidding was practised at a mere suggestion.[cccxxiv] According to a tradition preserved in
the Samantapsdik[cccxxv], this sense fo
responsibility and earnestness among the members of the Saŗgha lasted only
twenty years. For twenty years from
the enlightenment of the Buddha, says the tradition, no serious offence like a
Prjika or Saŗghdisesa was ever witnessed, and hence there was no provocation
for the promulgation of Prjika or
Saŗghdisesa rules. Then there
began to appear the need for legislation.
In course of time laxities in discipline and lawlessness among the
members of the monastic community signalled to the Buddha that the time had come
to lay down restrictive regulations for the guidance of its members (Yato ca kho
bhaddli idh ' ekacce savaŹŹhniy dhamm saŗghe ptubhavanti atha satth
svaknaµ sikkhpadaµ papeti tesaµ y ' eva savaŹŹhniynaµ dhammnaµ
paŹightya - M.I. 445.).
In the Bhaddli Sutta, the above
quoted words of the Buddha to Bhaddli that he lays down rules and regulations
only as the need arises[cccxxvi] seem to come at a time when already a
fair number of regulations had been laid down. This fact appears to be recognised in
the words of Bhaddli as he
questions the Buddha with regard to the increase in the number of sikkhpada (Ko
pana bhante hetu ko paccayo yen ' etarahi bahutarni c ' eva sikkhpadni honti
appatar ca bhikkhč aya saöŹhahanti - M.I. 445.). The Buddha's reply to this is, in fact,
in defence of the increase of regulations which is said to have been
necessitated by the steady decline in morality (Evaµ hi etaµ bhaddli hoti
sattesu hyamnesu saddhamme antaradhyamne bahutarni c ' eva sikkhpadni
honti appatar ca bhikkhč aya saöŹhahanti - M.I. 445.). In the Saµyutta Nikya, the venerable
Mah Kassapa is seen making the same observation about the increase in the
number of sikkhpada.[cccxxvii] On the other hand, the semi-historical
introduction to the Suttavibhaŗga places these words of the Buddha regarding the
promulgation of the rules in a different context.[cccxxviii] Here the Buddha Gotama, at the request
of the venerable Sriputta, discusses the success and failure of the monastic
organizations of the six previous Buddhas from Vipassi to Kassapa and analyses
in detail the causes which contributed to these vicissitudes. In addition to the
exhaustive preaching of the Dhamma, the adequate provision of restrictive
regulations and the institution of the monastic ritual of the Ptimokkha are
considered vital for the successful establishment of the monastic
order.[cccxxix] It is further recorded that the
venerable Sriputta, getting wiser by the experience of the Buddhas of the past,
requests the Buddha Gotama to lay down s“kkhpada and institute the ritual of the
Ptimokkha for the guidance of his disciples. The Buddha then silences Sriputta
saying that he himself knows the proper time for it, and repeats the rest of the
argument as is recorded in the Bhaddli Sutta that rules and regulations would
be laid down only as the occasion demands.
However, there are two noticeable differences in these two accounts. In the Bhaddli Sutta, the Buddha tells
Bhaddli that he does not lay down sikkhpada until they are really necessitated
by circumstances and that with the appearance of signs of corruption in the
Order he would lay down sikkhpada for their arrest. In the Suttavibhaŗga, the institution of
the ritual of the Ptimokkha is added to this as a further safeguard. The absence of this reference to the
Ptimokkha in the Bhaddli Sutta does not entitle us to argue that the account
in the Bhaddli Sutta is therefore anterior to the institution of the Ptimokkha
ritual. It may be that since
sikkhpada and their gradual increase was the main concern of Bhaddli, the
Sutta speaks about the promulgation of sikkhpada alone and leaves from it any reference
to the Ptimokkha ritual.
The second point is far more
interesting. The Bhaddli Sutta has
five items as causes of corruption in the monastic order. The list begins with mahatta (greatness)
and adds lbhagga (highest gain), yasagga (highest fame), bhusacca (great learning) and rattaut
(seniority). The Suttavibhaŗga
has only four items which run as
follows: rattaumahatta (greatness of seniority), vepullamahatta (greatness of
number), lbhaggamahatta (greatness of gain) and bhusaccamahatta (greatness of
learning). The first thing we notic
here is that while mahatta was used in the Bhaddli Sutta as a
specific condition it is used in the Suttavibhaŗga as a general attribute. The
yasagga of the former is also left
out in the latter. In the Suttavibhaŗga list, rattaumahatta which is the last item in the Bhaddli
Sutta takes precedence over all other considerations. Consequently, mahatta which headed the
list in the Bhaddli Sutta takes the second palce in the Suttavibhaŗga under the
new name of vepullamahatta. This
change of position, and probably also of emphasis of rattaut is a significant one. For this attribute of rattaut,
both in relation to the monastic community as well as to individual monks seems
to imply their existence over a long period of time. Probably at the time of the Bhaddli
Sutta, rattaut as cause of
corruption of the monastic community was only beginning to gather momentum. It was to become a potent factor only in
the years to come. Hence it would
not have been in proper sequence if
rattaut as a cause of
corruption headed the list in the Bhaddli Sutta. It is therefore rightly relegated to the
last place. On the other hand, the
increase in the number of monks was then a reality and was no doubt a constant
cause of trouble. The Buddha's
remarks to Bhaddli imply that the numbers in the monastic community at that
time were not as few as they used to be (appak kho tumhe bhaddli tena samayena
ahuvattha yad vo aham jn“yasusčpamaµ dhammapariyyaµ desesiµ. Sarasi tvaµ bhaddl“ti - M.I.
445.).
On the whole, the Sriputta episode
in the Suttavibhaŗga regarding the origin of sikkhpada, which undoubtedly is a
part of the compiler's preface, lacks the historicity of the account in the
Bhaddli Sutta. Sriputta's
inquiries are based on the semi-legendary story of the Buddhas of the past. According to the Suttavibhaŗga,
Sriputta's request to the Buddha to lay down sikkhpada and institute the ritual of the
Ptimokkha was prompted by an observation of the catastrophe that befell the
monastic communities of the Buddhas of the past which were not adequately bound
by restrictive regulations. This,
we have no doubt, is historically based on what was actually taking palce in the
monastic community of Buddha Gotama himself and is projected back into legendary
antiquity. This same tendency to
seek traditional authority is seen in the Mahpadna Sutta where the biographies
of the six previous Buddhas are modelled, more or less, on the main outlines of
the life of the historical Buddha Gotama.[cccxxx] In the Buddhavagga of
the Saµyutta Nikya, Buddha Gotama's
quest of enlightenment is similarly reproduced in relation to the Buddhas
of the past.[cccxxxi] Furthermore, in the Suttavibhaŗga, the discussion on the promulgation of
sikkhpada in relation to the
savaŹŹhniy dhamm or conditions
leading to corruption which is placed at a time when there is no evidence either
of the presence of savaŹŹhniy
dhamm or the promulgation
of sikkhpada, appears to be far more theoretical than the account in the
Bhaddli Sutta which seems to analyse the situation in terms of what was
actually taking place. Thus the
Suttavibhaŗga account appears to be, more or less, a romanticised version of
what is recorded in the Bhaddli Sutta.
A few points of interest seem to
emerge from our earlier reference to the period of twenty years of good monastic
discipline.[cccxxxii] While stating that
during this period there was no provocation for the promulgation of Prjika or
Saŗghdisesa rules, the Samantapsdik goes on to say that during this period
the Buddha did however lay down rules pertaining to the remaining five groups of
lesser offences (paca khuddakpattikkhandha) as the occasion demanded (Atha bhagav
ajjhcraµ apassanto prjikaµ v saŗghdisesaµ v na papesi. Tasmiµ tasmiµ
pana vatthusmiµ avasese paca-khuddakpattikkhandhe ' va papesi - VinA.I.
213.). This note of the Commentator on the history of the monastic regulations
seems to create some problems of anachronism. Of the five groups of khuddakpatti referred to here we note that
Thullaccaya,[cccxxxiii] DukkaŹa[cccxxxiv] and Dubbhsita[cccxxxv] are generally
derivative offences. The DukkaŹa
has also an independent existence under the Sekhiy dhamm.[cccxxxvi] The Thullaccaya on the
other hand is derived from a Prjika or Saŗghdisesa offence. As such, it is
difficult to push the Thullaccaya
back to a period when the major offences themselves were not known to
exist. In fact, there is evidence
to show that this statement of the Samantapsdik was later challenged and not
accepted in its entirety. The
Sratthad“pan“ Vinaya T“k records the tradition of a line of scholars who
contend that the five khuddakpattikkhandha referred to here could only be what the
Buddha laid down as regulations during the eight years which followed his
rains-retreat at Veraj in the twelth year of his enlightenment. Apparently
they do not concede the promulgation of any sikkhpada anterior to this.
But the author of the T“k himself
supporting the orthodoxy of the
Samantapsdik and wishing to push the first promulgation of the
sikkhpada of the lesser type to an
earlier period, seems to reject this amendent (Ke ci pana tasmiµ tasmiµ pana
vatthusmiµ avasesapacakhuddakpattikkhandhe eva papes“ ' ti idaµ dvdasame
vasse verajya vutthavassena bhagavat tato paŹŹhya aŹŹhavassabbhantare
paattasikkhpadaµ sandhya vuttan ' ti vadanti. Taµ na sundaraµ. Tato pubbe ' pi
sikkhpadapaattiy sabbhvato -
Sratthad“pan“ I.
401.). But neither of these
traditions seem to question the antiquity of the Thullaccaya over the two major
offences of Prjika and Saŗghdisesa.
But there is no doubt that the Thullaccaya had already come to be
regarded as one of the group of five offences. If we concede the existence of the
fivefold group of lesser offences from the early days of the Ssana, prior to
the rains-retreat at Veraj, then
the request of Sriputta to the Buddha during his stay at Veraj, asking him to
lay down sikkhpada for the guidance of the monks becomes
considerably incongruous. The
Sratthad“pan“, confronted with this anomaly, explains it by saying that the
request of Sriputta was mainly concerned with regulations against grosser
offences (PaŹhamabodhiyaµ pacannaµ lahukpatt“naµ sabbhvavacanen ' eva
dhammasenpaissa sikkhpadapaattiycan visesato garukpattipaattiy
ptimokkhuddesassa ca hetubhčt '
ti daŹŹhabb - Sratthad“pan“ I.
401.). But this turns out to be a
very inadequate answer which only tends to disintegrate the ingeniously knitted
episode of Sriputta in the Suttavibhaŗga regarding the promulgation of
sikkhpada by the Buddha for the guidance of the life of his
disciples.
Another instance of unwarranted
distortion resulting from commentarial over-anxiety is found in Buddhaghosa's
explanation of the conditions that lead to the corruption of the Saŗgha
(savaŹŹhniy dhamm) in the Papacasčdan“.[cccxxxvii] Since it is said both
in the Bhaddli Sutta and the Suttavibhaŗga that the Buddha lays down sikkhpada only at the appearance of signs of
corruption in the Ssana, Buddhaghosa tries to indicate some sikkhpada from the
extant Vinaya PiŹaka as resulting from those said conditions. The result, however, is intriguing. Although the appearance of savaŹŹhniy
dhamm has repeatedly been
mentioned as prompting the promulgation of sikkhpada, Buddhaghosa is able to
bring before us as consequent sikkhpada
only about six Pcittiya rules and two regulations regarding DukkaŹa
offences. He has obviously missed
the mark. There is no doubt that
through some tradition which he inherited he has too narrowly viewed these
savaŹŹhniy dhamm and the conditions that lead to their appearance. Further, if as he has stated in the
Samantapsdik,[cccxxxviii] the five groups of minor rules had
already been laid down previously, prior to the provocation for the promulgation
of the major rules at the appearance of the savaŹŹhniy dhamm then it does not appear convincing to
regard these minor offences which Buddhaghosa quotes without any reference to
major ones as resulting from those conditions. This unwarranted identification of
Buddhaghosa has in no way contributed to explain or emphasise the point that the
conditions mentioned both in the Bhaddli Sutta and the Suttavibhaŗga tended to
corrupt
the monastic organization, thus
compelling the Buddha to set up a body of regulations and thereby arrest this
decay. At this stage the
instructions of the Dhamma proved ineffective and nothing without monastic legal
validity would have compelled the offenders to submit themselves to correction
and punishment.
We have now seen the introduction
into Buddhist monasticism of restrictive legislation for the purpose of
maintaining good discipline and furthering the spiritual progress of the
disciple. Ten considerations are
listed under Prjika I as well as
several other sikkhpada as having
motivated the Buddha to lay down
sikkhpada.[cccxxxix] The Buddha deelared that he lays down
sikkhpada to serve the following
needs :
SaŗghasuŹŹhutya : well-being of the
Saŗgha.
Saŗghaphsutya : convenience of the
Saŗgha.
Dummaŗkčnaµ puggalnaµ niggahya :
restraint of evil-minded persons.
Pesalnaµ bhikkhčnaµ phsuvihrya
: ease of well-behaved
monks.
DiŹŹhadhammiknaµ savnaµ
saµvarya : restraint against the defilements of this
life.
Samparyiknaµ savnaµ
paŹightya: eradication of the
defilements of the life after.
Appasannnaµ pasdya : for the
conversion of new adherents.
Pasannnaµ bhiyyobhvya :
enhancement of the faith of those already converted.
SaddhammaŹŹhitiy : stability and continuance of the
Dhamma.
Vinaynuggahya : furtherance of
the good discipline.
These seem to cover mainly the
individual and collective welfare of the disciples, the relation of the
disciples to the laymen on whom they are dependent, and the spiritual
attainments for the sake of which the disciples take to the monastic life. However, it is clear to us from
statements in Canonical Pali literature that these sikkhpada did not, on their introduction,
completely displace s“la from its position as the basis of a disciple's monastic
development.[cccxl] True to the spirit in which they were
institued, they helped to augment s“la. In a statement in the Sekha Sutta
which enumerates the virtues which make a disciple to be one who is endowed with
good living, i.e. s“lasampanno,
s“la still seems to hold its basic position while the discipline through
sikkhpada and other means are
added on to it (katha ca mahnma ariyasvako s“lasampanno hoti. Idha mahnma ariyasvako s“lav hoti
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu
bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu - M.I. 355.). The Buddha appears to lay special
emphasis on s“la while speaking of the items which form the foundation for the
spiritual development of the monk (Tasm ' t ' iha tvaµ bhikkhu dim eva
visaodhehi kusalesu dhammesu. Ko c
' di kusalnaµ dhammnaµ. Idha
tvaµ bhikkhu ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharhi cragocarasampanno anumatesu
vjjesu bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhhi sikkhpadesu. Yato kho tvaµ bhikkhu s“laµ nissya s“le
patiŹŹhya ime cattro satipaŹŹhne evaµ bhvessasi tato tuyhaµ bhikkhu y ratti
v divaso v gamissati vuddhi y '
eva pŹkaŗkh kusalesu dhammesu no parihn“ ' ti - S.V.
187.).
According to the definition of
s“lasampanno quoted above, further
to s“la, the sikkhpada are drawn
into the life of the disciple as providing the necessary guidance for his
spiriual development. He is called
upon to train and discipline himself in terms of the sikkhpada (samdya sikkhhi sikkhpadesu). The Vajjiputtaka monk who confesses to
the Buddha his inability to conform to the complete monastic discipline admits
his weakness that he cannot discipline himself in terms of the vast dody of
sikkhpada which are recited
regularly every fortnight (Sdhikam idaµ bhante diya¶¶hasikkhpadasataµ
anvaddhamsam uddesaµ gacchati. N
' haµ bhante ettha sakkomi sikkhitun ' ti - A.I. 230.). It is implied here that these
sikkhpada now form the main stay
of the Ssana for the maintenance of discipline in the Saŗgha. At this stage, with the largely
increased number of sikkhpada
governing the life of the monk, there arose the need to draw a
distinction between the young noviciate monks
called the smaöera and the monks
of senior status who on being twenty years of age have been elevated to the rank
of upasampanna. The
noviciates are given a code of ten regulations as items of compulsary training
and the use of the word sikkhpada
is extended to cover these as well.[cccxli] Nine out of these sikkhpada are traceable back to s“la : nos.1-4 and 9-13 in the lists of s“la
recommended for the monk.[cccxlii] The regulation regarding the use of
intoxicants is introduced as the fifth item. It is also the fifth item in the
lists of fivefold and eightfold s“la laid down for the laymen. But this one relating to intoxicants had
no place in the earlier lists of s“la of the monk. Reference to the use of intoxicants is
also conspicuous by its absence in the lists of satta and dasa kammapatha.[cccxliii] Nor does it appear under dasa
kusala or akusala kamma.[cccxliv] On the other hand, it is in one of
the regulations of the Vinaya PiŹaka that we discover the circumstances leading
to the prohibition of intoxicants for the monks.[cccxlv] It is based on the very sound common
sense consideration whether one
should drink or take in [the
root / p to drink being also used in the sense
of - to smoke] anything which would make him lose his
sense of judgement (Api nu kho bhikkhave taµ ptabbaµ yaµ pivitv visa“ ass '
ti - Vin. IV. 110.). A more
developed and elaborated account of this incident, coupled with a ' story of the
past ' has found a place in the
Jtaka collection.[cccxlvi]
Of the ten sikkhpada laid down for the smaöera, the first
five seem, more or less, inviolable.
The smaöera is liable to be expelled for the violation of any one of
them Tasm yo pötiptdisu ekam '
pi kammaµ karoti so liŗgansanya nsetabbo - VinA.V.1014.). Buddhaghosa further stresses this
distinction between the first five and the latter five of these dasasikkhpadni
when he says that the violation of the former leads to the expulsion of a
smaöera while the violation of the latter lead to the imposition of specific
punishments (Dasasu sikkhpadesu
purimnaµ pacannaµ atikkamo nsanavatthu pacchimnaµ atikkamo daö¶akammavatthu
- VinA.V.1012.). It is these first
five sikkhpada which are also
spoken of as the code of the laymen's discipline (Te rmikabhčt v upsakabhčt v pacasu
sikkhpadesu samdya vattanti - M.II. 5.). It has come to be the standardised
pattern, for all times, of basic good living for the layman. It is said in the Dhammapada that a man,
by the neglect of these considerations, brings about his own ruin in this very
life:
Yo pöam
atipteti musvda ca bhsati
loke adinnaµ diyati paradra ca
gacchati
surmerayapna ca yo naro anuyujati
idh ' eva eso lokasmiµ
mčlaµ khaöati attano.
Dhp. 246-47.
A Cakkavatti king is also presented
as upholding this fivefold code of lay ethics [Rj mahsudassano evaµ ha pöo
na hantabbo adinnaµ na dtabbaµ kmesu micch na caritabb mus na bhaöitabb
majjaµ na ptabbaµ yathbhutta ca bhujath ' ti - D.II.173.). Perhaps the fact that these five
sikkhpada, with the adjustment of
abrahmacariyveraman“ or
complete celibacy to read as kmesu micchcrveramaö“ or chaste moral behaviour
in the case of laymen's s“la, were shared in common both by the laymen and the
noviciate monks made them inviolable in the case of the
latter.
The Suttas also record countless
occasions on which the Buddha advises his disciples without any reference to s“la or
sikkhpada, to conduct and discipline
themselves in a specific manner (evaµ hi vo bhikkhave
sikkhitabbaµ).[cccxlvii] It is often said to be under the
guidance of the Dhamma (Tasm ' t iha bhikkhave dhammaµ yeva sakkaronto dhammaµ
garukaronto dhammaµ apacyamn suvac bhavissma sovacassataµ pajjism ' ti evaµ hi vo
bhikkhave sikkhitabbaµ - M.I. 126.).
Not only did this form another source of discipline from the earliest
times but also supplemented s“la
which regulated
discipline in terms of word and deed, by bringing
within its fold mental discipline as well.
This is clearly evident in the Buddha's advice to the Bhikkhus in the
Kakacčpama Sutta where they are asked to rid themselves of anger, hatred and
ill-will and develop love and magnanimity (Tatr ' pi kho bhikkhave evaµ
sikkhitabbaµ na c ' eva no cittaµ vipariöataµ bhavissati na ca ppikaµ vcaµ
nicchressma hitmukamp“ ca viharissma mettacitt na dosantar ta ca puggalaµ
mettsahagatena cetas pharitv viharissma tadrammaöa ca sabbvantaµ lokaµ
mettsahagatena cetas vipulena mahaggatena appamöena averena abypajjhena
pharitv viharissm ' ti -
M.I.129.). In the passage
cited above, although certain patterns of conduct are idicated to the monks, yet
there are evidently no sikkhpada.
What is referred to here is self-acquired discipline : evaµ vo hi
bhikkhave sikkhitabbaµ.
We also notice that sikkh
in its most liberal sense, without the aid of sikkhpada, not only thus regulated conduct but also
urged the disciple to his highest culture, the attainment of wisdom [Jarmaraöaµ bhikkhave ajnat apassat
yathbhčtaµ jarmaraöe yathbhčta- öya sikkh karaö“y. Evaµ ....... catusaccikaµ ktabbaµ - S.II.131.).
We may now safely conclude that
s“la, sikkh and sikkhpada form
the foundations of the life of brahmacariya in Buddhism. Not only do we find these perfectly
co-ordinated but at times almost identified with one another. With reference to the dichotomous
division of Abhisamcrika and īdibrahma-cariyika, s“la and sikkh are used as though they were identical
with sikkhpada as their subject
matter. The Aŗguttara Nikya
divides sikkh into these two
categories and includes under Abhisamcrik sikkh the regulations which
determine the outward conduct of the monk in relation to the laymen on whose
good will he is dependent (Idha bhikkhave may svaknaµ abhisamcrik sikkh
paatt appasannnaµ pasdya pasannnaµ bhiyyobhvya. Yath bhikkhave may svaknaµ
abhisamcrik sikkh paatt appasannnaµ pasdya pasannnaµ bhiyyobhvya
tath so tass sikkhya akkhaödakr“ hoti acchiddakr“ asabalakr“ samdya
sikkhati sikkhpadesu - A.II. 243.). The Commentary to the
Aŗguttara Nikya, in more than one place, defines Abhisamcrik as vattavasena
paattas“la or rules of propriety.[cccxlviii] The īdibrahmacariyik sikkh, on the
other hand, contributes towards the attainment of complete freedom from
suffering which is the goal of the life of brahmacariya (Puna ca paraµ bhikkhave
may svaknaµ
dibrahmacariyik sikkh
paatt sabbaso samm dukkhakkhayya ..... sikkhpadesu - A.II.
243.).
Thus it is clear from both the text
and the commentarial notes of the above two passages that Abhisamcrik and
īdibrahmacariyik sikkh in Buddhism stood complementary to each other and that
they did cover from the earliest times the social as well as religious aspects
of Buddhist monasticism.
Considering the importance which the Buddha attached from the very
inception of the Ssana to the good will of the lay public there is litle doubt
that Abhisamcrk sikkh too, must
have played an important part. The
Vinaya PiŹaka regards both these as two important aspects of training through
which a teacher should put his pupil
[PaŹibalo hoti antevsiµ v saddhivihriµ v abhisamcrikya sikkhya
sikkhpetuµ dibrahmacariyikya sikkhya vinetuµ Vin. I. 64.).
In the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa
divides s“la into Abhisamcrika
and īdibrahmacariyika, thus
exhausting between them the complete monastic discipline and culture which leads
up to the termination of dukkha.
According to Buddhaghosa, the Abhisamcrika s“la as the lesser of the
two consists of all sikkhpada
which are designated as minor in character (yni v sikkhpadni
khuddnukhuddakn“ ' ti vuttni idaµ abhisamcrikas“laµ sesaµ
dibrahmacariyikaµ - Vism.I. III f.).
The rest of the sikkhpada
form the īdibrahmacariyika.
Buddhaghosa makes the groups more specific when he divides the contents
of the Vinaya into two categories as follows. The īdibrahmacaryika consists of the
contents of the twofold Vibhaŗga.
The instructions of the Khandhakas form the Abhisamcrika, perfection in
which assures the attainment of the other (Ubhatovibhaŗgapariypannaµ v
dibrahmacariyikaµ khandhakavattapariypannaµ abhisamcrikaµ. Tassa sampattiy dibrahmacariyikaµ
sampajjati - Vism. I.12.). In the
Samantapsdik Buddhaghosa presents the latter classification as Khandhakavatta
and Sekhapaööatti (Abhisamcrikya
sikkhy ' ti khandhakavatte vinetuµ na paŹibalo hot“ ' ti attho. īdibrahmacariyiky ' ti
sekhapaööattiyaµ vinetuµ na paŹibalo ' ti attho - Vin A.V. 989f.).
It is clear from what has been
stated above that Buddhaghosa not only admits the higher role of the discipline
brought about by the Ubhato Vibhaŗga, but also emphasises at the same time the
important basic character, in his opinion, of the discipline brought about by
the regulations of the Khandhakas.
Thus we notice that both these items of Abhisamcrika and
īdibrahmacariyika are, according to Budhaghosa, products of the Vinaya
PiŹaka. The Vinaya PiŹaka in its
codified and legalised form, was designed to safeguard the monsastic discipline
and contribute thereby to the furtherance of the spiritual development envisaged
in the Suttas. With the decline of
morality and the waning spiritual earnestness among the members of the monastic
community such rigorous and binding discipline as is evident in the Vinaya
PiŹaka would have become indispensable.
The liberalism of the instructions of the Suttas had to become, ere long,
a thing of the past. We come to a
stage when not only the Ptimokkha but the entire discipline of the Vinaya
PiŹaka is looked upon as the fundamental basis on which the Buddhist spiritual
perfection of tisso sikkh had to
be founded. According to this view
Abhisamcrik sikkh which is perfected through the discipline of the
Khandhakas had to be accomplished first before the perfection of sekha
dhamma. On a comparison of
commentarial notes we discover that this sekha dhamma is equated by Buddhaghosa to sekha
paööattis“la. (Sekhaµ dhamman ' ti
sekkapaööattiyaµ - AA. III.228.) In
the Samantapsdik, Buddhaghosa defines īdibrahmacariyik sikkh as
sekhapaööatti.
(īdibrahmacariyiky ' ti sekhapaööattiyaµ - VinA.V. 990.) Thus the sekha dhamma which can be perfected only after the
Abhsamcrik sikkh is none other
than the īdibrahmacariyik sikkh.
According to a statement in the Aŗguttara Nikya, it is only after these
two stages of Abhisamcrik and īdibrahmacariyik sikkh that the successive
development through s“la, samdhi
and pa are considered
possible. (So vata bhikkhave
bhikkhu... abhisamcrikaµ dhammam aparipčretv sekhaµ dhammaµ
paripčressat“ ' ti... sekhaµ
dhammam aparipčretv s“lakkhandhaµ paripčresst“ ti...... s“lakkhandham aparipčretv
samdhikkhandhaµ paripčressati samdhikkahndham aparipčretv pakkhandhaµ
paripčressat“ ' ti n ' etaµ Źhnaµ vijjati
- A.III.15.).
Here we are led to take note of two
different views with regard to the perfection of monastic life. On the one hand, the Abhisamcrik and
īdibrahmacariyik sikkh are looked
upon as exhausting between them the complete monastic discipline and culture
leading up to the termination of dukkha.
( Note : Puna ca paraµ
bhikkhave may svaknaµ dibrahmacariyik sikkh paatt sabbaso samm
dukkhkkhayya - A. II. 243.). On
the other hand, the īdibrahmacariyik sikkh came to be narrowly defined, thus
allowing for the integration of these two sikkh, i.e. Abhisamcrika and
īdibrahmacariyika to provide a basis for the perfection of s“la, samdhi and pa which once existed independently as a
system of monastic culture under the name of tisso sikkh. (Note : Sakkhasi pana tvaµ bhikkhu t“su
sikkhsu sikkhituµ ...... tasm tuyhaµ bhikkhu adhis“lam ' pi sikkhato adhicittam ' pi sikkhato
adhipaam ' pi sikkhato rgo pah“yissati doso pah“yissati moho pah“yissati -
A.I.230.).
We have thus witnessed in the above
discussion the origin and development of Buddhist monastic discipline in terms
of s“la, sikkh and sikkhpada and the relation in which they stand to
the threefold sikkh and to the
more codified texts of the Vinaya PiŹaka.
They all contribute their share to the perfection of the spiritual
development of the disciple and to the attainment of the goal of Arahantship
which Buddhism, as a way of life, offers its followers.
Chapter
V
In the preceding chapter we pointed
out the basic position which s“la
occupies in the spiritual development of the Buddhist disciple and the
manner in which s“la came to be related to sikkh and sikkhpada. Besides these, the Suttas
also know of a number of other items, which together with the above, contribute to the perfection
of a disciple. In the Smaaphala
Sutta, for instance, we find an account of what constituted the perfect
character of the good monk. ' Having thus become a recluse he dwells, 1.
disciplined by the restraints of
the Ptimokkha, 2. endowed with the propriety of behaviour and conduct, 3. heedful even of the
slightest misdeeds, 4. disciplining himself in terms of the moral injunctions, 5. possessed of
blameless word and deed, 6.
virtuous in his livelihood, 7. full
of moral virtue, 8.
with well restrained sense organs, 9. endowed with mindfulness and awareness, and 10. full of
contentment.' (Evaµ pabbajito samno 1. ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto
viharati, 2.
cragocara-sampanno, 3.
anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“, 4. samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu, 5. kyakammavac“kammena samanngato kusalena, 6.
pari-suddhj“vo, 7. s“lasampanno,
8. indriyesu guttadvro, 9.
satisampajaena samanngato, 10.
santuŹŹho - D.I. 63.).
Explaining further the items which
are mentioned here, the Sutta deals first with the concept of s“lasampanno (7),
making an exhaustive analysis of its many aspects. The Sutta proceeds thereafter to
indriyesu guttadvro (8), satisampajaena samanngato (9) and santuŹŹho (10). In its summing up too, the Sutta is
concerned only with these four items (So imin ca ariyena s“lakkhandhena
samanngato imin ca ariyena indriyasaµvarena samanngato imin ca ariyena
satisampajaena samanngato imya ca ariyya santuŹŹhiy samanngato vivittaµ
sensanaµ bhajati - D.I. 71.). Thus we are naturally led to associate
the first six items of the above list from ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto (1) to parisuddhj“vo (6) with s“lasampanno and consider them as subdivisions of the latter. Of these six
items, the first four have already appeared together with s“lav, in the
difinitions of s“lasampanno (Katha ca mahnma ariyasvako s“lasampanno
hoti. Idha mahnma ariyasvako
s“lav hoti ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu
bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu - M.I. 355.).[cccxlix] Buddhaghosa helps us to include the
remaining two items also under the category of s“la. In the Sumaŗgalavilsin“ he takes these
two (kyakammavac“kammena samanngato kusalena and parisuddhj“vo) as complementary to each other and
points them out to be really amounting to one thing, namely s“la (Yasm idaµ
j“vaprisuddhis“laµ nma na kse v rukkhaggdisu v uppajjati kyavac“dvresu
eva pana uppajjati tasm tassa uppattidvradassanatthaµ hyakammavac“kammena
samanngato kusalen ' ti vuttaµ.
Yasm pana tena samanngato tasm parisuddhj“vo. Mandiyaputtasuttantavasena v etaµ.
Tattha hi katama ca thapati kusalaµ s“laµ. Kusalaµ kyakammaµ vac“kammaµ. Parisuddhaµ j“vaµ ' pi kho ahaµ thapati s“lasmiµ vadm“ '
ti vuttaµ - DA.I. 181 f.). Buddhaghosa is, no doubt, backed here by
the Canonical texts. The
Mandiyaputta Sutta which he quotes is none other than the Samaöamaö¶ik Sutta of
the Majjhima Nikya[cccl] where j“vaprisuddhi
is recognised as a part of good s“la.
After s“la and its accessory virtues we are
introduced to three further items in the spiritual development of the Buddhist
disciple, viz. indriyesu guttadvrat, satisampajaa and santuŹŹh“. These together with s“la, are to be
achieved and accomplished before the disciple embarks on his inner purification,
commencing with the elimination of the five n“varaöa.[cccli] Indriyasaµvara or indriyesu guttadvrat, restraint of
senses referred to above, appears to take the disciple to a stage beyond
s“la in that it aims at the
discipline of the body as well as of the mind for the sake of further inner
development. The disciple begins to regulate, in the light of the
instructions of the Master, his responses
to the external world through the
sense organs so as not to allow
evil thoughts which result from excessive desires and dislikes to get the better
of him. He needs a cultivated
outlook for this purpose. He has to
guard his senses with cautions neutrality (So cakkhun rčpaµ disv na
nimittaggh“ hoti n ' nubyajanaggh“ yatv ' dhikaraöaµ enaµ cakkhundriyaµ
asaµvutaµ viharantaµ abhijjh domanass ppak akusal dhamm anvssaveyyuµ
tassa saµvarya paŹipajjati rakkhati cakkhundriyaµ - D.I. 70 f.)[ccclii]
The significant part
indriyasaµvara thus plays in the
religious life of a Buddhist
disciple is amply illustrated in the Mahtaöhsaŗkhaya Sutta. It points out how unguarded senses upset
the poise of mind and enslave one to his sense experiences (So cakkhun rčpaµ
disv piyaØčpe rčpe srajjati
appiyarčpe rčpe vypajjati anupaŹŹhitakyasati ca viharati parittacetaso ta
ca cetovimuttiµ pavimuttiµ
yathbhčtaµ nappajnti yattha ' ssa te ppak akusal dhamm aparises
nirujjhanti. So evaµ
anurodhavirodhaµ sampanno yaµ ka ci vedanaµ vedeti sukhaµ v dukkhaµ v
adukkhamasukhaµ v so taµ vedanaµ abhinandati abhivadati ajjhosya tiŹŹhati -
M.I. 266.). This in turn, it is
pointed out, leads to the perpetuation of the saµsric process which the
Buddhist disciple strives to transcend (Tassa tam vedanaµ abhinandato abhivadato
ajjhosya tiŹŹhato uppajjati nand“ y vedansu nand“ tadupdnaµ
tassupdnapaccay bhavo bhapvaccay jti jtipaccay jarmaraöaµ sokaparideva-dukkha-domanassupys sambhavanti. Evam etassa kevalassa
dukkhakkandhassa samudayo hoti - Ibid.). Indriyasaµvara or restraint over sense-faculties is
also valued elsewhere as paving the way to s“la. It is said that in the absence of
indriyasaµvara, s“la would be without support (Indriyasaµvare bhikkhave asati
indriyasaµvaravipannassa hatčpanisaµ hoti s“laµ - A.III. 360.). Hirotappa, the
sense of shame and fear in doing
what is wrong, is sometimes added as a virtue which necessarily precedes
indriyasaµvara.[cccliii] Satisampajaa or mental alertness and awareness is
considered to be the first and foremost in this whole process of acquiring
personal discipline.[cccliv] Regardless of the order
in which they are listed, they all aim jointly at vimutti or the final liberation from
saµsra.
Besides this, indriyasaµvara has a secondary importance in that it
contributes to the successful practice of the monastic life. It is said that indriyasaµvara sustains
the life of brahmacariya:
Indriyasaµvaro brahmacariyassa hro - A.V.136. Expressed negatively, it is implied that
the lack of indriyasaµvara is an
impediment to it : Indriy ' saµvaro brahmacariyassa paripantho - Ibid. The lure of sensual pleasures which a
pabbajita has to renounce on
leaving the household life was a great force against which he had to be
constantly armed. On taking to the
monastic career, if the pabbajita did not acquire proper control over his
senses, temptations of kma would
not only defile his mind but also wreck his whole monastic life, swallowing him
up in the whirl of worldly pleasures (So evaµ pabbajito samno pubbaöhasamayaµ
nivsetv pattac“varaµ dya gmaµ v nigamaµ v piö¶ya pavisati arakkhiten '
eva kyena arakkhitya v vcya
anupaŹŹhitya satiy asaµvutehi indriyehi.
So tattha passati gahapatiµ v gahapatiputtaµ v pacahi kmaguöehi
samappitaµ samaŗg“bhčtaµ paricrayamnaµ.
Tassa evaµ hoti mayaµ kho pubbe agriyabhčt samn pacahi kmaguöehi
samappit samaŗg“bhčt paricrimha.
Saµvijjante kho kule bhog.
Sakk bhoge ca bhujituµ puni ca ktun ' ti. So sikkhaµ paccakkhya h“ny '
vattati. Ayaµ vuccati bhikkhave
vaŹŹabhayassa bh“to sikkhaµ paccakkhya h“ny ' vatto - M.I. 461.). Indriyasaµvara is also sometimes spoken of as an
essential monastic virtue necessary for the safeguarding of a disciple's
chastity and therefore also of his whole monastic life. In the adsene of such restraint he would
succumb to the temptations of the world and would be torn off the moorings of
monastic life.[ccclv]
On the other hand, the
insistence on indriyasaµvara in
Buddhist monasticism is given as a reason why Buddhist disciples, most of whom
are described as not being mature in years, have successfully completed their
monastic careers. They achieved
this end through the restraint of their senses (Vuttaµ kho etaµ mahrja tena bhagavat
jnat passat arahat samm-sambuddhena etha
tumhe bhikkhave indriyesu
guttadvr viharatha cakkhun rčpaµ disv .... manindriye saµvaraµ pajjath '
ti. Ayaµ kho mahrja hetu ayaµ paccayo yen' ime dahar bhikkhč susuklakes
bhadrena yobbanena samanngat paŹhamena vayas anik“Āitvino kmesu yvaj“vaµ
paripuööaµ parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ caranti addhna ca pdenti -
S.IV.112.).
Satisampajaa or mental alertness, which comes next,
is very generally described as awareness and deliberation over all bodily
activities which range from movement of limbs, bodily ablutions and acts of
eating and drinking to speech and silence, sleep and wakefulness (So abhikkante
paŹikkante sampajnakr“ hoti lokite vilokite sampajnakr“ hoti samijite
pasrite sampajnakr“ hoti saŗghŹipattac“varadhraöe sampajnakr“ hoti asite
p“te khyite syite sampajnaka“ hoti uccrapassavakamme sampajnakr“ hoti gate
Źhite nisinne sutte jgarite bhsite tuöh“bhve sampajnakri hoti - M.I. 181.).
SantuŹŹhi which appears as the last virtue in this
list, emphasises a disciple's contentment with regard to his food and clothing,
which incidentally had to be of the simplest order (Seyyath ' pi mahrja
pakkh“ sakuöo yena yen ' eva ¶eti sapattabhro ' va ¶eti evam eva mahrja
bhikkhu santuŹŹho hoti kyaparihrikena
c“varena kucchiparihrikena piö¶aptena. So yena yen ' eva pakkamati samdy '
eva pakkamati - D.I. 71.). This
virtue of santuŹŹhi or contentment is also used in relation to the wider field
of requirements of a Buddhist disciple, viz. the fourfold requisites or
catupaccaya (SantuŹŹho hoti
itar“tarac“vara-piö¶apta-sensana-gilnapaccaya-bhesajjaparikkhrena - A.III.
135.). The venerable Mah Kassapa
is held out as a perfect embodiment of this virtue and the other disciples are
advised to emulate him (SantuŹŹh ' yaµ bhikkhave kassapo itar“tarena....Tasmt
' iha bhikkhave evaµ sikkhitabbaµ santuŹŹh bhavissma itar“tarena c“varena
itar“tarac“varasantuŹŹhiy ca vaööavdino na ca c“varahetu anesanaµ appaŹirčpaµ
pajjissma. Aladdh ca c“varaµ na
paritassissma laddh ca c“varaµ agadhit amucchit anajjhpann
d“navadassvino nissaraöapa paribhujissma. Evaµ ktabbaµ ..... itar“tarena
piö¶aptena.... itar“tarena sensanena ...... itar“tarena
gilnapaccaya-bhesajjaparikkhrena....
Kassapena v hi vo bhikkhave ovadissmi yo v kassapasadiso. Ovaditehi ca pana vo tathattya
paŹipajjitabban ' ti - S.II.194f.).
The Khaggavisöa Sutta echoes a similar refrain:
Ctuddiso
appaŹigho ca hoti
santussamno itar“tarena
parissaynaµ sahit
achambh“
eko care khaggavisöakappo.
Sn. v. 42.
' Moving freely in all the four
quarters of the world, without any sense of cnflict or hostility, content with
meagre provisions, braving all dangers without trepidation, let him wander alone
like the rhinoceros. '
SantuŹŹhi also focusses light on the
abstemiousness of the disciple which has been praised elsewhere as santussako ca
subharo ca appakicco ca sallahukavutti.[ccclvi] ' Contented is he and easily
supportable. He is abstemious and
has few things that he needs to do.' Commenting on the word santuŹŹho, Buddhaghosa does, in fact,
emphasise this aspect of monastic life (Iti imassa bhikkhuno sallahukavuttiµ
dassento bhagav santuŹŹho hoti kyaparihrikena c“varen ' ti dim ha -
DA.I.207.). We also witness in the
Canonical texts the elaboration of this concept of santuŹŹhi under the name of ariyavaµs. The Saŗg“ti Sutta[ccclvii] speaks of cattro ariyavaµs or four noble traditions which according
to the Commentary are characteristic of the Buddhas and their disciples.[ccclviii] The Sutta itself calls them ancient
traditions : porö agga
ariyavaµs. The Aŗguttara Nikya
also knows of the ariyavaµs.
Describing them in greater detail it claims universal approval and
acceptance for them. It is also
claimed that they come down from hoary antiquity and have ever since held an
unchallenged position. The practice
of these it is said, will enable a monk to resist the temptations of the
pleasures
of the world and derive sufficient
inspiration to fight the spiritual lethargy that would impede his progress
(Cattro' me bhikkhave ariyavaµs agga vaµsa porö asaµkiöö asaµkiööapubb na
saµk“yanti na saµk“yissanti appaŹikuŹŹh samaöehi brhmaöehi vičhi .....Imehi
ca pana bhikkhave catčhi ariyavaµsehi samanngato bhikkhu puratthimya ce 'pi
disya viharati sv ' eva aratiµ sahati na taµ arati sahati....Taµ kissa
hetu. Aratiratisaho hi bhikkhave
dh“ro ' ti - A.II. 27 f.). The first three of these ariyavaµs
pertain to a disciple's contentment with regard to his clothing, food and
residence respectively. The
commentary on the Saŗg“ti Sutta points out that being so they fall within the
territory of the Vinaya PiŹaka.[ccclix] It also tells us that in compressing the
four requisites of the catupaccaya
within the first three items of
ariyavaµs, gilna- paccayabhesajjaparikkhra is to be taken as being implicitly
included under piö¶apta.[ccclx] The fourth place in the list of
ariyavaµs is reserved for the disciple's interest and enthusiasm in his
spiritual development, both by the elimination of evil traits of his mind and by
his inner culture (pahnrmo and
bhvanrmo). Hence the commentator
suggests that the other two
PiŹakas, Sutta and Abhidhamma, play their role here. Thus it should be noted that this
concept of ariyavaµs is more
developed and more comprehensive than the fourfold contentment in relation to
the catupaccaya which was ascribed to the venerable Mah Kassapa.[ccclxi]
As is evident from the text of the
Smaaphala Sutta, these virtues of s“la, indriyasaµvara, satisampajaa and
santuŹŹhi undoubtedly constituted
the standard pattern of early Buddhist monasticism (Evaµ pabbajito samno
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu
bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu kyakammavac“kammena samanngato
kusalena parisuddhj“vo s“lasampanno indriyesu guttadvro satisampajaena
samanngato santuŹŹho - D.I. 63.).
We also discover in the Canonical texts another list of virtues, somewhat
different from the above, which are linked with the disciple's spiritual
development under s“la. They are as
follows: 1. s“lav hoti
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati
cragocarasampanno anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhati
sikkhpadesu. 2. indriyesu guttadvro. 3.
bhojane mattač. 4.
jgariyaµ anuyutto. 5. satisampajaena samanngato.[ccclxii] As in the former list the cultivation of
these virtues here prepares the disciple for the elimination of the five
n“varaöa. Thus both these lists which start with s“la appear to be similar in
their scope. They are in fact
identical as far as s“la and
indriyasaµvara are concerned. The
latter list adds thereafter two new items in bhojane mattaut and jgariynuyoga. It leaves out santuŹŹhi of the former, but agrees with it in
retaining satisampajaa.
As we examine the concept of
bhojane mattaut, it appears as
though considerations regarding the acceptance and use of food assumed, in
course of time, increasing importance in Buddhist monasticism, and that it led
to this special mention of
moderation in eating. The broader
concept of santuŹŹhi which covers
all the needs of a disciple besides food is thus replaced by this narrower one
of bhojane mattaut, perhaps with the intention of being more specific. In its wider interpretation,
however, bhojane mattaut was taken to be equivalent to santuŹŹhi as is evident from the comment of
Buddhaghosa which says that bhojane mattaut brings to light such virtues like
contentment : bhojane mattač ' ti idam assa santosdiguöaparid“pam - VibhA. 323. Heedlessness in eating was considered a
danger not only to the physical well- being but also to the mental poise and
spiritual development of the disciple.
In several suttas like the Kakacčpama, Bhaddli and LaŹukikopama,[ccclxiii] the Buddha speaks of the physical benefits which result
from moderation and regularity in meals.
A verse in the Theragth almost specifies the quantity of food to be consumed by a
monk.
Cattro paca
lope abhutv udakaµ pive
alaµ phsuvihrya pahitattassa bhikkhuno.
Thag. 983.
' Let him drink water after his
meal while he leaves four or five mouthfuls of food yet uneaten. This is conducive to the ease and
comfort of the disciple who is striving
for this emancipation.'
It is suggested in the Commentaries
that these bounds of propriety apply not only to the quantity of food consumed
but also to the amount sought and accepted (Bhojane mattaut ' ti bhojane y
matt jnitabb pariyesana-paŹiggahana-paribhogesu yuttat - MA.I.152.). The Vatthčpama Sutta negatively implies
the dangers to spiritual life of the proneness to pleasures in eating.[ccclxiv] A disciple of such
virtue and wisdom, even if he were to partake of a delicious and delightful
meal, would not thereby bring ruin upon his spiritual life (Sa kho so bhikkhave
bhikkhu evaµs“lo evaµdhammo evampao sl“na ce ' pi piö¶aptaµ bhujati
vicitaklakaµ anekasčpaµ anekabyajanaµ nev ' assa taµ hoti antaryya - M.I.
38.).
Thus bhojane mattaut became an important item of monastic
discipline. True to the injunction
under santuŹŹhi (santuŹŹho hoti
kucchiparihrikena piö¶aptena) it
not only sets the limit on the quantity of food, but also corrects the
disciple's attitude to the use of food in general. 2 The disciple is advised to eat his food
with the awareness that he does so in order to maintain his physical fitness,
free from pain, that he may further his religious pursuit of brahmacariya. He
should eschew all desires of physical perfection and adornment (Ehi tvaµ bhikkhu
bhojane mattač hohi paŹisaŗkh yoniso hreyysi neva davya na madya na
maö¶anya na vibhčsanya yvad ' ev ' imassa kyassa Źhitiy ypanya
vihiµsčparatiy brahmacariynuggahya -
M.III.[ccclxv]). The Dhammapada views it from many other
angles. Moderation in eating is
said to be a great asset in the battle against the forces of evil. The disciple who along with other
virtues possesses a sense of moderation in eating shall not easily be swayed by
Mra. It is said that the disciple
should take his food with the awareness that it should contribute so much to his
physical well being as would be needed for the successful completion of his life
of brahmacariya.
Asubhnupassiµ viharantaµ indriyesu
susaµvutaµ
bhojanamhi ca mattauµ saddhaµ raddhav“riyaµ
taµ ve
nappasahati mro vto selaµ ' va pabbataµ.
Dhp. 8.
It is also listed there among the
basic injunctions of the Buddhas.
Ančpavdo
ančpaghto ptimokkhe ca saµvaro
mattaut ca bhattasmiµ pantha ca
sayansanaµ
adhicitte ca yogo etaµ buddhna ssanaµ.
Dhp. 185.
This added emphasis which seems to
be centered on the question of food does not appear to have resulted from mere
theoretical considerations.
Evidence of both the Sutta and the Vinaya PiŹakas show that restrictions
on food were constantly being challenged and violated by rebellious disciples
even during the time of the Buddha.
Bhaddli tells the Buddha of his inability to practise the habit of one
meal a day (Evaµ vutte yasm bhaddli bhagavantaµ etad ' avoca. Ahaµ kho bhante na ussahmi eksanabhojanaµ bhujituµ - M.I.
437.). The LaŹukikopama Sutta
expresses through the words of Udyi what might have been the general protest at
the prohibition to the monks of the night meal and meals out of hours.[ccclxvi] Similarly, we witness
in the K“Źgiri Sutta the followers of Assaji and Punabbasu, who being told about the
Buddha's abstemious ways relating to food, argue on the merits of plentiful
meals.[ccclxvii] We also come across a
number of supplementary rules on the acceptance and use of food which were laid
down by the Buddha as a result of certain irregularities indulged in by erring
disciples. Once a number of monks, fearing that they would get only
a frugal meal at the house of a poor man who had invited them. collected an
early meal and enjoyed it beforehand.
This led to the promulgation of Pcittiya 33.[ccclxviii] In the history of
Pcittiya 35 we discover
monks
taking a second meal elsewhere after they had concluded their
meal at one place.[ccclxix] Pcittiya 37 had to be laid down as a special
safeguard against eating after hours.[ccclxx] It should here be
observed that all these situations are implicitly guarded against under s“la in
the sikkhpada which pertains to
food, that the disciple takes only one meal a day, abstaining from the night
meal and meals after hours (Ekabhattiko hoti rattčparato virato viklabhojan -
D.I. 64.).
Considerig all these dangers which
could possibly befall Buddhist monasticism in general and the spiritual life of
the disciple in particular through an untutored attitude to food, it is little
wonder that bhojane mattaut
became a special monastic virtue.
We notice further a new attitude to food being cultivated by the Buddhist
disciples which came to be regarded as one among seven conditions which lead to
enlightenment.[ccclxxi] It is an acquired
feeling of disgust and detachment towards food which a disciple is called upon
to develop gradually, stage by stage (Tasmiµ hre paŹikkčlkraggahaöavasena
uppann sa hre paŹikkčlasa - Vism. 341.). What is intended thereby is that a disciple's mind may never be
enslaved through his greed for food (īhre paŹikkčlasa bhikkhave bhvit
bahul“kat mahapphal hoti mahnisaµs amatogadh amatapariyosn ' ti iti kho
pan 'etaµ vuttaµ kic ' etaµ paŹicca vuttaµ. īhre paŹikkčlasaparicitena bhikkhave
bhikkhuno cetas bahulaµ viharato rasataöhya cittaµ paŹil“yati paŹikuŹŹati
paŹivattati na sampasr“yati upekkh v paŹikkčlyat v saöŹhti -
A.IV.49.). The Visuddhimagga
considers that the acquisition of this attitude would serve as a prelude to the complete eradication of
lust centering on the fivefold
pleasures of the senses (Atha 'ssa appakasiren ' eva kabaliŗkrhraparimukhena
pacakmaguöiko rgo pariaµ gacchati - Vism. 347.). The origin of this idea
of Buddhaghosa is in fact traceable
back to Canonical texts. The Samyutta Nikya (S.II. 98) records a statement by
the Buddha himself where he says
that once a complete mastery over
one's attitude to solid food of daily consumption has been gained (kabaliŗkra-hre parite), one gains
restraint over one's attitude to the entire range of fivefold sense pleasures or
pacakmaguöika-rga. It is the
vision of such possibilities, no
doubt, which set a high premium on hre paŹikkčlasa and led to its being considered as a
factor leading to nibbna (amatogadh amataariyosn.[ccclxxii]
Jgariynuyoga too, like bhojane
mattaut, is a very specific virtue. It refers to both physical wakefulness
and mental alertness through control of sleep. Satisampajaa which was referred to
earlier, concerns itself with the vigilance of a disciple. But jgariynuyoga
demands that a disciple should harness that vigilance to bring about the purge
of his mind of the defiling traits. We notice that instead of replacing satisampajaa, jgariynuyoga augments it by adding this active
mind-culture as another important monastic virtue. Thus the second list of monastic virtues
is completed with satisampajaa as the last of its items.
Out of the virtues enumerated in this second list three have come to
deserve special consideration in that they are often listed together as basic
virtues necessary for the successful continuance of monastic life as well as for
the attainment of the final goal of Arahantship (So vata vauso bhikkhu indriyesu
aguttadvro bhojane amattač jgariyaµ ananuyutto yvaj“vaµ paripuööam
parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ santnessat“ ' ti n ' etaµ Źhnam vijjati - S.IV.103 f.). It is in terms of these monastic virtues
that the venerable Mah Kassapa
judged the followers of īnanda and declared them to be immature and
unworthy.[ccclxxiii] However, we notice that
no mention is made here of s“la.
Perhaps it is implicitly taken to be contained within the framework of
these three items of indriyasaµvara,
bhojane mattaut and
jgariya. They lead to the
physical and mental well-being of a disciple in this very life and pave the way
for the attainment of Arahantship (T“hi bhikkhave dhammehi samanngato bhikkhu
diŹŹhe ' va dhamme sukhasomanassabahulo viharati yoni ca ' ssa raddh hoti
savnaµ khayya. Katamehi
t“hi. Indriyesu guttadvro hoti
bhojane mattač jgariyam anuyutto - S.IV.175 f.). The Aŗguttara reiterates this idea,
declaring the infallibility of these virtues.[ccclxxiv] There is no doubt that
they formed a powerful triad in the development of monastic life. However, we find at times
satisampajaa appended to these as
a fourth (Kimaatra bhikkhave nando indriyesu guttadvro bhojane mattač jgariyam anuyutto
satisampajaena samanngato yena nando sakkoti paripuööam parisuddham
brahmacariyaµ carituµ - A.IV. 166.).
Chapter
VI
The final and what is claimed to be
the most comprehensive code of monastic
discipline is brought under the fourfold division of s“la known as the Catuprisuddhis“la.
Buddhaghosa begins his Visuddhimagga,
more or less, with a detailed analysis of this classification.[ccclxxv] Like the earlier lists
of s“la which had indriyasaµvara
closely appended to it,[ccclxxvi] this classification
seems to recognise the basic importance of the two items of s“la and
indriyasaµvara. Buddhaghosa goes so
far as to say that no perfection in s“la could be achieved without stability in
indriyasaµvara (Evam asampdite hi
etasmim ptimokkhasaµvaras“lam ' pi anaddhaniyaµ hoti aciraŹŹhitikaµ....... Vism.I.37.). However, the earlier concept of
s“la as expressed in the Suttas in
the reference imin ariyena s“lakkhandhena samanngato now forms only one single fragment in
this larger fourfold classification.
The earlier concept is
narrowed down and is specifically referred to as Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la. In this division of s“la the emphasis is more on the codified
legalised precepts. The sole basis
of monastic discipline now seems to be the code of the Ptimokkha which is aptly described by Buddhaghosa as the sikkhpada-s“la.[ccclxxvii] Here one immediately
feels that there is a complete disregard of the role of the Dhamma as a
disciplinary force among the disciples.
This new attitude is perhaps resonant of an age in which the Vinaya
dominated. Buddhaghosa does bring
before us in clearer relief the tendency of his day when he says that the Vinaya
constitutes the life-blood of the Ssana.[ccclxxviii] However, it is
interesting to note that the Vimuttimagga which is claimed to be a
pre-Buddhaghosa work[ccclxxix] adds the following
remarks after its definition of ptimokkhasaµvara : 'This is the entrance into the
doctrines. By this the Good Law
(saddhamma) is accepted.' [ccclxxx] One is tempted by this
to ask whether the reference to the Good Law (saddhamma) under the definition of
ptimokkhasaµvara implies in this
context a recognition of the wide range of monastic discipline and a desire to
infuse the spirit of the Dhamma into the legal machinery of the Vinaya which
tended to be exclusive in character in the regulation of monastic
life.
Indriyasaµvaras“la forms the second
item in this fourfold classification.
It has retained its character, more or less unmodified in the new
classification.[ccclxxxi] īj“vaprisuddhis“la and
Paccayasannissitas“la form the last two items. These are concerned with the daily life
of the disciple, specially in relation to his food and clothing. The Suttas too are adequately concerned
with this aspect of monastic discipline although it had not come to be laid down
in the form of a division of
s“la. The j“vaprisuddhi, as a
separate item of s“la in the new
fourfold category, claims to safeguard the way in which a disciple ' earns his
living ' without fraud and deceit, and greed for gain, and thus renders him
blameless with regard to his livelihood.
It is possible to infer from Buddhaghosa's definition of
īj“vaprisuddhis“la[ccclxxxii] that the origin of this
special branch of s“la lay
primarily in the last item of Majjhimas“la
given in the Brahmajla and the Smaaphala Suttas.[ccclxxxiii] Buddhaghosa quotes it
as
(Pqge 62)
follows : ..... kuhan lapan
nemittakat neppesikat lbhena lbhaµ nijigiµsanat ' ti evam d“na ca
ppadhammnaµ vasena pavatt micchj“v virati - Vism. I. 16. It is also of interest to note that the
Mahcattr“saka Sutta defines micchj“va
solely in terms of this item of s“la.[ccclxxxiv] Buddhaghosa further suggests that along
with this are also to be taken the different forms of unworthy professional
practices or micchj“va which are
elaborated under the mahs“la.[ccclxxxv] To supplement this concept of
īj“vaprisuddhi Buddhaghosa also draws reinforcements from the Vinaya. These consist of six sikkhpada from the Suttavibhaŗga and Buddhaghosa
describes them as being ' laid down
for the guidance of the livelihood of the monk ' : j“vahetu paattnaµ channaµ
sikkhpadnan ' ti yni tni .... evaµ paattni cha sikkhpadni - Vism. I.
22. They occur already
together in a group in the Parivra
as constituting in their violation j“vavipatti or damage to the purity of
livelihood.[ccclxxxvi]
Of these, five sikkhpada are primary regulations directly
traceable to the Ptimokkha. The
other is a Thullaccaya offence derived from the fourth Prjika. The DukkhaŹa offence is in terms of
Sekhiyadhamma 37. In their gravity,
these sikkhpada range from a
Prjika to a DukkaŹa offence. Three minor rules, a Pcittiya (Vin. IV. 88),
PŹidesan“ya (Vin. IV. 347f.) and a
DukkaŹa (Vin. IV. 193) are
concerned with irregular appropriation of food. Two rules, a Prjika (Vin.III.
91) and a Thullaccaya (Vin. III. 102 Sec.7) deal with claims to spiritual powers
which are made with a view to increase the support from laymen. One rule, a Saŗghdisesa
(Vin.III.139) proscribes the
transaction of the affairs of laymen with a similar motive of personal
gain. It is also interesting to
note that Buddhaghosa bundles up under the one PŹidesan“ya sikkhpada all the
eight PŹidesan“ya rules of the Bhikkhunis.[ccclxxxvii] He is perhaps here
influenced by the single Pcittiya rule (no. 39) of the Bhikkhus which covers the same
ground. Thus the
j“vaprisuddhi is judged in terms
of both s“la and the codified rules of the Vinaya.[ccclxxxviii] On the other hand, we
notice that in the earlier texts, the concept of j“vaprisuddhi was brought within the scope of s“la
itself.[ccclxxxix] Its aim was to make the
disciples purge themselves of such mean traits of character (ppadhamm) as
fraud and deceit,[cccxc] as well as to make them abstain from
blameable forms of livelihood (micchj“va) which are unworthy of a monk. But
Buddhaghosa makesa further distinct group of micchjiva in terms of the transgression of the
rules of the Ptimokkha : j“vahetupaattnaµ channaµ sikkhpadnaµ
v“tikkamavasena - (Vism. I 30.).
As far as the disciples of the
Buddha were concerned, the items of micchj“va which are more or less professional
practices were firstly considered stupid
(tiracchna-vijj), perhaps because they exploited the credulity and the
superstitious character of the public on whom they were dependent. Secondly, they were irregular practices
for the monk (micchj“va), for they were not conducive to his spiritual
progress. It would be a misuse of
his life if he engaged himself in such activities. There can be little doubt that
kyakamma-vac“kammena samanngato kusalena
served as a warning against such irregular ways of members of the
monastic community.[cccxci] Thus we notice parisuddhj“vo being rightly equated by Buddhaghosa to
kyakamma-vac“kammena samanngato kusalena.[cccxcii] It must be observed
that the īj“vaprisuddhis“la as described by Buddhaghosa overlaps to some extent
the Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la in that Buddhaghosa while recognising the various
irregular ways of a monk enumerated under s“la (kuhan lapan etc.) draws also on the contents of the
Ptimokkha.[cccxciii]
The last item in this fourfold
classification is the Paccayasannissitas“la. While the īj“vaprisuddhis“la is
concerned with the correctness of the method whereby the monk obtains his
requisites, the
Paccayasannissitas“la determines the correct attitude of mind in the use of
these.[cccxciv] The Sabbsava Sutta
deals comprehensively with this consideration in relation to the use of the four
paccaya.[cccxcv] Buddhaghosa quotes
freely from this Sutta in his description of the Paccayasannissitas“la.[cccxcvi] Bhojane mattaut which was discussed earlier,[cccxcvii] tended to single out food from among
these four requisites and lays special emphasis on moderation in eating as a
monastic virtue. The
Paccayasannissitas“la seems to reintroduce to monastic life the above
considerations of the Sabbsava Sutta in their widest application.[cccxcviii]
Canonical Pali literature does not
make any reference to this fourfold classification of Catuprisuddhis“la. The PaŹisambhidmagga knows the term
Prisuddhis“la but it is used in
the very general sense of a ' code of good living leading to purity '.[cccxcix] It is presented there
in five categories which are graded according to the degree of perfection of
each. Speaking of a fivefold
classification of s“la in the Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa reproduces this
division of Prisuddhis“la of the PaŹisambhidmaga.[cd] The classification is
as follows:
1. Pariyantaprisuddhis“la
-
anupasampannnaµ pariyantasikkhnaµ
2. Apariyantaprisuddhis“la - upasampannnaµ
apariyantasikkhnaµ
3. Paripuööaprisuddhis“la
-
puthujjanakalyöaknaµ kusaladhamme yuttnam sekhapariyante
paripčrakrinam kye ca jivite ca anapekkhnam
pariccattaj“vitnaµ
4. AparmaŹŹhaprisuddhis“la - sattanöaµ
sekhnaµ
5. PaŹippassaddhiprisuddhis“la - tathgatasvaknaµ
kh“ösavnaµ paccekabuddhnaµ tathgatnaµ arahantnaµ
sammsambuddhanaµ[cdi]
These refer to the various stages
in the development of s“la or moral virtue in Buddhism, from the uninitiated
disciple to the Tathgatas. It is
difficult to determine with any certainty whether the concept of
prisuddhis“la as the ' code of good living leading to purity
' heralded the later classification
of the Catuprisuddhis“la. However,
it has already been pointed out that the aspects of monastic discipline
contained under the Catuprisuddhis“la are of Canonical origin.[cdii] Like s“la, they were considered among the necessary accomplishments of
monastic life, and as such some of them stood beside s“la under their own name. Thus they were never reckoned as divisions of s“la. Nevertheless, with
the lapse of time, we witness the expansion of the scope and function of s“la as
it brings within its fold the entire range of monastic development which
culminates in the attainment of Arahantship.[cdiii] Thus s“la, from its position of being
the first and basic stage in the threefold training of a disciple (tisso
sikkh) came, more or less, to be
identified with the complete concept of s“kkh itself. The first clear indication of an
adequate elaboration of s“la
capable of accomodating the new element is seen in the Milindapaha where
the venerable Ngasena tells King Milinda that
the s“laratana of the Buddha consists of Ptimokkhasaµvara, Indriyasaµvara
īj“vaprisuddhi and Paccayasannissita s“las as well as of the Cčlla, Majjhima, Mah and Magga and Phala s“las
(Katamaµ mahrja bhagavato s“laratanaµ.
Ptimokkhasaµvara-s“lam indriyasaµvaras“lam j“vaprisuddhis“lam
paccayasannissitas“lam cullas“lam majjhimas“lam mahs“lam maggas“lam phalas“lam - Miln. 336.). It also occurs in a statement by King
Milinda where he refers to the development of a disciple in terms of the four
categories of s“la : catusu s“lakkhandhesu samm paripčrakri - Miln. 243. Although the term Catuprisuddhis“la is
not used here, there is no doubt that the fourfold classification had already
gained considerable recognition, for the threefold division of Cčla, Majjhima
and Mah s“las which is the
Canonical classification is accorded here the second place after the enumeration
of the four items of s“la which
constitute the Catuprisuddhis“la.
This fourfold classification of
s“la which evidently is one of
post-Canonical origin seems to have been a subject of great controversy in later
monastic history. Even during the
time of Buddhaghosa the Catuprisuddhis“la does not seem to have enjoyed an
unchallenged position. Buddhaghosa
who describes it in great detail in the Visuddhimagga also records elsewhere the
disputes which seem to have arisen on this subject. According to him, a learned Buddhist
monk of Sri Lanka by the name of Culbhaya Thera who was a Master of the
TipiŹaka [ TipiŹka Culbhaya Thera ] refused to accept, in the absence of
Canonical authority, the importance attached to Indriyasaµvara, īj“vaprisuddhi
and Paccayasannissita as separate items of s“la. He challenged the view of his teacher,
Sumana Thera of D“pavihra, who
held that the term s“la was used in the Canonical texts to mean implicitly the
wider concept covered under the fourfold classification. To Sumana Thera s“la meant something more than the discipline
brought about by the Ptimokkha, although he was quick and ready to recognise
the very significant part it played in the life of a monk. Commenting on the term sampannas“la in the īkankheyya Sutta,[cdiv] Buddhaghosa brings to
light these differences of opinion (Tattha sampannas“l ' ti ettvat kira
bhagav catuprisuddhi-s“laµ uddisitv ptimokkhasaµvarasampann ' ti imin
tattha jeŹŹhakas“laµ vitthretv dasses“ ' ti d“pavihravs“ sumanatthero
ha. Antevsiko pana 'ssa
tipiŹakacčlbhayatthero ha.
Ubhayatth ' pi ptimokkhasaµvaro bhagavat vutto. Ptimokkhasaµvaro y 'eva hi s“laµ. Itarni pana t“ni s“lan ' ti
vuttaŹŹhnaµ nma atth“ ' ti ananujnanto vatv ha - MA.I.155.)[cdv]
Even if we would agree with the
learned Cčlbhaya Thera and argue that the recognition of such items as
Paccayasannissita and ījivaprisudhi as separate items of s“la is a matter of post-Canonical origin,
Cčlbhaya Thera is himself liable to be accused of viewing s“la too narrowly by identifying it totally
with the Ptimokkha. S“la would
thereby be robbed of its spirit to some extent and be made effective only by the
mechanism of the Ptimokkha.
However, the Ptimokkha was only an aid to the perfection of s“la and
therefore the old stereotyped description of a s“lasampanno invariably mentions s“la
first and then follows it with Ptimokkhasaµvara etc. (Katha ca mahnma ariyasvako
s“lasampanno hoti. Idha mahnma
ariyasvako s“lav hoti ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati ...M.I.
355.).
But with the increasing
importance which the text and the
ritual of the Ptimokkha gradually assumed in the early days of Buddhist
monasticism we are not surprised to find in the Canonical texts themselves a
virtual identification of the very comprehensive concept of s“la with the Ptimokkha. In doing so, at least theoretically, the
scope of the Ptimokkha was considerably widened. A passage in the Aŗguttara
Nikya refers to the complete grounding in s“la simply as ptimokkhasaµvara (Etha tumhe vuso s“lav hotha
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvut viharatha
cragocarasampann anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassvino samdaya sikkhatha
sikkhpadesč ' ti. Iti
ptimokkhasaµvare samdapetabb nivesetabb patiŹŹhpetabb - A.III.138.). On
the other hand, we find in the Saµyutta Nikya a passage which describes the
discipline of a monk with the rest of the above phraseology, leaving out the
reference to s“la. However, the
discipline so described is recognised in the end as the grounding in s“la (Yato
kho tvam bhikkhu ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharissasi
cragocarasampanno
anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“
samdya sikkhasi sikkhpadesu tato tvam bhikkhu s“laµ nissya s“le patiŹŹhya
cattro satipaŹŹhne bhveyysi -
S.V.187.) Thus there seems to be a
mutual identification of s“la and
the Ptimokkha. Evidently, Cčlbhaya Thera found here a point in his favour and
Buddhaghosa himself remarks that this establishes the superiority of the
Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la over the other s“las in the fourfold
classification.[cdvi] Cčlbhaya Thera argues
that the other three items of this classification are never referred to as s“la
and dismisses them as elementary considerations relating to the control of sense
faculties and to the acceptance and use of a disciple's food and
raiment.[cdvii] Nevertheless,
Buddhaghosa is anxious to maintain that the Ptimokkha by itself does not
complete the discipline of a monk.[cdviii] The Ptimokkha
being essentially an organ of Buddhist Vinaya aimed at the correction
only of word and deed. This is clearly stated to be the avowed purpose of
theVinaya PiŹaka as is borne out by the definitions of Vinaya given by
Buddhaghosa.[cdix] But the complete
development of a Buddhist disciple included the discipline of his mind as
well. As the Catuprisuddhi-s“la
was meant to be the complete and comprehensive code of Buddhist monastic
discipline, it was argued that the development of the mind of the disciple which
the Ptimokkha did not take within its fold was brought about by the rest of
these divisions of s“la.[cdx] Thus Buddhaghosa would
speak of the good disciples as being established in this fourfold s“la for the perfection of their religious
life.[cdxi]
This deficiency of the Ptimokkha,
and therefore also of the earlier s“lakkhandha referred to in the Suttas, which is
pointed out here had been remedied to some extent by the discipline of
indriyasaµvara which was closely
coupled with s“la from the earliest
times. Hence we would readily
concede the elaboration of the indriyasaµvara into a separate item of s“la which
contributes to the mental discipline of a monk. But the formulation of īj“vaprisuddhi
and Paccayasannissita in their present form in the Catuprisuddhis“la seems more
to hint at the concern over the behaviour of the growing monastic
community.
It is of interest to note that
while Buddhaghosa records the divergent evaluations of the Catuprisuddhis“la.
he also makes a genuine attempt to place before us this fourfold classification
with a definite note of recommendation.
In the Visuddhimagga he shows us how these four items of s“la bring into play essential monastic
virtues like saddh, sati, viriya
and pa.[cdxii] It is also shown that they contribute
towards a fourfold purification in the life of the monk : catubbidh hi
suddhi.[cdxiii] In terms of the s“la which bring about these aspects of
purification they are :
(a) Desansuddhi :
Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la.
(b) Saµvarasuddhi : Indriyasaµvaras“la
.
(c) PariyeŹŹhisuddhi :
īj“vaprisuddhis“la.
(d) Paccavekkhaöasuddhi : Paccayasannissitas“la[cdxiv]
There is a passage in the
DhammapadaŹŹhakath which in its comment on a verse in the
Bhikkhuvagga,[cdxv] attempts to equate the
Catuprisuddhis“la to the three items of ptimokkhasaµvara, indriyagutti and santuŹŹhi of Canonical antiquity. In doing so it is constrained to accommodate both
īj“vaprisuddhi and Paccayasannissita s“las under santuŹŹhi which is explained
as contentment with regard to the four requisites.[cdxvi] The Vimuttimagga[cdxvii] seems to go a step
further in that it tries to establish with finality the significance of the
Catuprisuddhis“la in Buddhist monasticism by equating the four items of s“la to
the three sikkh of s“la,
samdhi and pa. In the light of all these observations
it becomes clear that the Catuprisuddhis“la has acquired in Buddhist
monasticism a validity and significance which cannot easily be
underrated.
Chapter
VII
Inspite of the diversity of opinion
regarding the importance of the Catuprisuddhis“la one would readily admit that
Buddhism attaches great importance to the inner development of the disciple as a
part of his religious life. In its
basic form this development would amount to the elimination of
manoduccarita or evil traits of the
mind and the cultivation of manosucarita
as its opposite. This
obviously lay outside the pale of s“la, for greed, hatred and wrong views
(abhijjh vypda micchdiŹŹhi), the three items of dasakammapatha[cdxviii] which belong to the mind-group
(manokamma) are not reckoned with under the s“la. The Suttas, on the other hand,
repeatedly bring before us hosts of such vices or diseased states of the mind
against which the disciples are constantly cautioned (Evam eva kho bhikhave
citte saµkiliŹŹhe duggati pŹikaŗkh - M.I. 36.). The Vatthčpama Sutta gives a list of
sixteen such evil traits of the mind which are referred to as cittassa
upakkiles.[cdxix] None of these have been
brought up for correction under the category of s“la. Commenting on these, Buddhaghosa hastens
to add that these sixteen are not the only defiling traits of the mind (kilesa,
upakkilesa) and suggests that in this manner all kilesa are taken into consideration. (Na ca ete soĀas '
eva cittassa upakkiles. Etena pana
nayena sabbe ' pi kiles gahit y ' eva hont“ ' ti veditabb - MA.I. 170.).
The monks are advised to purge
their minds of these as a step forward in their spiritual progress. (Yath ' odhi
kho pana ' ssa cattaµ hoti vantaµ muttaµ pah“naµ paŹinissaŹŹhaµ so buddhe
aveccappasdena samanngato'mh“ ' ti labhati atthavedaµ labhati dhammavedaµ
labhati dhammčpasaµhitaµ pmujjaµ. Pamuditassa p“ti jyati p“timanassa kyo
passambhati passaddhakyo sukhaµ vedeti sukhino cittaµ samdhiyati - M.I.
37.) The Sallekha Sutta which is
addressed to the monks as a plea for self-correction introduces us to a much
larger list of forty-four evil ways or akusala dhamma. The Buddha reminds his
disciples that every attempt to eradicate these by a sincere desire to cultivate
their opposites is a commendable virtue (Cittuppdam ' pi kho ahaµ cunda
kusalesu dhammesu bahukraµ vadmi.
Ko pana vdo kyena vcya
anuvidh“yansu. Tasmt ' iha cunda
pare vihiµsak bhavissanti mayam ' ettha avihiµsak bhavissam ' ti cittaµ
uppdetabbaµ - M.I. 43.) He calls this the way to peace and
progress: uparibhvapariyya and
nibbnapariyya. (Seyyath ' pi cunda ye keci akusal dhamm sabbe te
adhobhvaŗgaman“y ye keci kusal dhamm sabbe te uparibhvaŗgaman“y. Evam eva
kho cunda vihiµsakassa purisapuggalassa avihiµs hoti uparibhvya...... Evaµ eva kho cunda vihiµsakassa
purisapuggalassa avihiµs hoti parinibbnya - M.I.44.).
The mental purge referred to above
was always considered an essental feature in the religious life of a Buddhist
disciple. The Suttas which deal
with s“la as the basis of the spiritual development of a disciple refer to this
as the subsequent cleansing of the mind of the n“varaöa. N“varaöa defile and disease the mind and thereby
weaken the functioning of the intellect.
(So ime paca n“varaöe pahya cetaso upakkilese paya
dubbal“karaöe...M.I.412.)[cdxx] Thus the proper culture of the mind is a
stage which must necessarily precede the perfection of wisdom or adhipa
sikkh. Without it, the mind can
never be chanelled for the attainment of Arahantship (Evaµ eva kho bhikkhave
pac ' ime cittassa upakkiles yehi upakkilesehi upakkiliŹŹhaµ cittaµ na c ' eva
mudu hoti no ca kammaniyaµ na ca pabhassaraµ pabhaŗgu ca na ca samm samdhiyati savnaµ khayya. Katame paca. Kmacchando bhikkhave.... khayya - S.V. 92.). Every good disciple, therefore, was
expected to strive for the elimination of these
defilements.
Tatr '
bhiratiµ iccheyya hitv kme akicano
pariyodapeyya attnaµ cittaklesehi
paö¶ito.
S.V. 24.
The Khaggavisöa Sutta specifies
the defiling mental traits as cetaso varaöa, upakkilesa and sinehadosa :
Pahya pacvaraöni cetaso
upakkilese
vyapanujja sabbe
anissito chetv sinehadosaµ
eko care
khaggavisöakappo.
Sn. v. 66
On a careful analysis of these defilements which are referred to
as 1. n“varaöa,[cdxxi] 2. cetaso varaöa,[cdxxii] 3. cittaklesa,[cdxxiii] 4. upakkilesa[cdxxiv] or 5. saµyojana,[cdxxv] we discover that there are two
constant and recurring items,
viz. abhijjh and vypda. As a n“varaöa, abhijjh is also referred to as
kmacchanda[cdxxvi]. As a saµyojana, it goes under both names of kmacchanda and kmarga[cdxxvii]. Thus it appears that in the mind-culture
which is recommended to the Buddhist disciple, these two, out of the numerous
evil states to which the mind was liableto descend, became the central target of
attack. But we have already noted
above that these two, together
with micchdiŹŹhi, form the triad
of manokamma in the list of dasa
akusala kamma.[cdxxviii] Hence we may ask
ourselves why then do abhijjh and vypda come to be specially stressed, almost to
the exclusion of micchdiŹŹhi. But it should also be noted here that
micchdiŹŹhi is not listed under
the paca n“varaöa which are the
primary defiling traits of the
mind.[cdxxix] Nor does the Vatthčpama
Sutta mention it among the upakkilesa
of the mind.[cdxxx]
This special mention of
abhijjh and vypda has also a parallel when we
consider lobha (rga) and dosa which are referred to at times without
any mention of moha which is the third item of the group. The Saµyutta speaks of a disciple's
conquest of these two evils:
Evaµ mano
chassu yad subhvito
phuŹŹhassa cittaµ na vikampate kvaci
te rgadose
abhibhuyya bhikkhavo
bhavattha jtimaraöassa prag ' ti.
S.IV. 71.
The Majjhima Nikya mentions
lobha and dosa as the two evils which are to be
transcended by pursuing the Middle Path (Tatr ' vuso lobho ca ppako doso ca
ppako. Lobhassa ca pahnya
dosassa ca pahnya atthi majjhim paŹipad cakkhukaraö“ öakaraö“ upasamya
abhiya sambodhya nibbnya saµvattati - M.I.15.). However, it must be clearly borne in
mind that in the final attainment of Arahantship there is no room for any trace
of moha or of rga and dosa. For nibbna is the elimination of all
the three evils of rga, dosa
and moha (Yo kho vuso rgakkhayo dosakkhayo
mohakkhayo idaµ vuccati nibbnan '
ti - S.IV.251.).
It is important to note that in this line of spiritual
development sakkyadiŹŹhi is regarded as one of the earlier mental
failings which need to be remedied.
For already at the early stage of Sotpatti the first three
saµyojana (sakkyadiŹhi together with vicikicch and s“labbataparmsa) are completely
eradicated (Tinnaµ saµyojannaµ parikkhay sotpanno aviniptadhammo niyato
sambodhiparyano ' ti - M.I. 141.).
This achievement is further described as follows :
Sah '
vassadassanasampadya
taya ' ssu dhamm jahit bhavanti
sakkyadiŹŹhi
vicikicchita ca
s“labbataµ v ' pi
yad ' atthi kici.
Sn. v. 231.
Beyond this, the further
achievements of a Sakadgmin are only a reduction in
rga, dosa and moha (yesaµ bhikkhčnaµ t“ni saµyojanni
pah“nn“ rgadosamoh tanubhčt sabbe te sakadgmino sakid ' eva imaµ lokaµ
gantv dukkhass ' antaµ karissanti
- M.I.141.). This makes it
clear that inspite of the complete elimination of sakkyadiŹŹhi at the stage of Sotpatti, moha seems to survive beyond this. Even at the stage of Sakadgmin rga,
dosa and moha are only reduced in magnitude. An Angmin is said to get rid of two
more saµyojana, viz. kmacchanda
and vypda, for he is described as having purged himself by then of the
five orambhgiya saµyojana.[cdxxxi] If we regard the two
saµyojana, kmacchanda and vypda as approximating to rga and dosa,[cdxxxii] then we discern this reduced element of
moha as surviving even after the
stage of Angmin. The final
extinction of moha (mohakkhaya) perhaps takes place in Arahantship, after the
elimination of the five uddhambhgiya saµyojana.[cdxxxiii] We find avijj persisting as the last item of this
group, and whatever meaning we may give to the term avijj, it must undobtedly
remain a form of moha. Buddhaghosa's definition of moha that it is the root of
all evil (Moho.... sabb ' kusalnaµ mčlan ' ti daŹŹhabbo - Vism. 468.) perhaps emphasises this most enduring
character of moha. This failing, which seems to find
expression severally as micchdiŹŹhi, sakkyadiŹŹhi, moha and avijj, implies error of judgement and
deficiency of knowledge, presumably of varying degree, which can be rectified
completely only on the attainment of perfect wisdom in
Arahantship.
The other defiling traits of the
mind which the Suttas enumerate are mainly related to fraud, pride, jealousy and
anger, which may exist in varying degrees of severity. Besides their moral and ethical
significance for the religious life referred to in the Vatthčpama[cdxxxiv] and Sallekha[cdxxxv] Suttas, they also have an essentially
social character in that these failings cause friction and disharmony in the
communal life of the monastic society.
The Anumna Sutta calls them the dovacassa-karaöa-dhamma, or evil ways of
monks which make them resent and reject good eounsel from fellow members. The Saŗgha would no longer trust such
monks and would deem it unwise to advise or admonish them (So ca hoti dubbaco
dovacassa-karaöehi dhammehi samanngato akkhamo appadakkhiöaggh“
anussaniµ. Atha kho naµ
sabrahmacr“ na c ' eva vattabbaµ maanti na ca anussitabbaµ maanti na ca
tasmiµ puggale visssaµ pajjitabbaµ maanti - M.I. 95.). Therefore the monks are called upon to
view from all angles the dangers resulting from these to the religious life as
well as to the life in the community, and make therefore every effort for their
elimination. (i. Sa kho so bhikkhave bhikkhu abhijjhvisamalobho cittassa
upakkileso ' ti iti viditv abhijjhvisamalobhaµ cittassa upakkilesaµ
pajahati. ii. Pare abhijjhlč bhavissanti mayam ettha
anabhijjhlč bhavissm ' ti sallekho karaö“yo. iii. Tatrvuso bhikkhun attan ' va attnaµ evam
anuminitabbaµ yo khv ' yaµ puggalo
ppiccho ppiknaµ icchnaµ vasaµgato ayam me puggalo appiyo amanpo. Aha c ' eva kho pan ' assaµ ppiccho
ppiknaµ icchnaµ vasaµgato aham ' p'assam paresaµ appiyo amanpo ' ti. Evaµ jnantena vuso bhikkhun na
ppiccho bhavissmi na ppiknaµ icchnaµ vasaµgato ' ti cittaµ uppdetabbaµ -
M.I. 37.)[cdxxxvi]
It appears to be fairly clear from
the statements in the Suttas that
for the cultivation of the perfect character it was not only a life of
renunciation that was desirable.
The pabbajita, as a disciple
who had given up all household ties, was further advised that solitary retreats
would be conducive to a life of contemplation and spiritual perfection. We discover in the Suttas that it was
nothing unusual for the early Buddhist disciple to resort to a sylvan retreat in
order to develop his inner character (So imin ca ariyena s“lakkhandhena
samanngato ... santuŹŹhiy samanngato vivittaµ
sensanaµ bhajati araaµ rukkhamčlaµ pabbataµ kandaraµ giriguhaµ susnaµ vanapatthaµ abbhoksaµ
pallapujaµ. So pacchbhattam
piö¶aptapaŹikkanto nis“dati pallaŗkam
bhujitv ujuµ kyam panidhya parimukhaµ satim upaŹŹhapetv -
D.I.71.). The Buddha, in fact,
recognises the existence among his disciples of monks
who lead such lives (Santi kho pana
me udyi svak raak pantasensan araavanapatthni pantni sensanni
ajjhogahetv viharanti - M.II.
8). This mode of life of some of
the early Buddhist monks seems also to have been well recognised as a regular
institution as is evident from words ascribed to Vessavaöa in the īŹnŹiya
Sutta (Santi hi bhante bhagavato svak
arae vanapatthni pantni sensanni paŹisevanti appasaddni appanigghosni vijanavtni
manussarhaseyyakni paŹsallnasruppni - D.III. 195.). In the Saµyutta Nikya we hear of the venerable Udyi who reports back
to the Buddha the progress he made under such conditions (So khv ' ham bhante
sugragato imesam pacupdnakkhandhnaµ ukkujjvakujjaµ samparivattento idaµ
dukkhan ' ti yathbhčtam abbhasim - S.V. 89.). At times the Budha is seen making direct reference to this
in his admonitions to his disiples. ' Resort to the solitary retreats and be
engaged in contemplative thought,'
he tells Cunda, and adds further, ' Be quick and zealous, lest you repent
afterwards.' (Yaµ kho cunda
satthr karaö“yaµ svaknaµ hitesin anukampakena anukampaµ updya kataµ vo
tam may. Etni cunda rukkhamčlni
etni sugrni. Jhyatha cunda
m pamd ' attha m pacch vippaŹisrino ahuvattha. Ayaµ vo amhkaµ anussan“ ' ti - M.I. 46.) He is seen advising īnanda with these
same words.[cdxxxvii] The Buddha is even more
direct in his admonitions to Nanda who evinced a love of luxury and pleasure
(Evaµ kho te nanda patirčpaµ kulaputtassa saddh agrasm anagriyam
pabbajitassa yaµ tvaµ raako assasi piödaptiko ca paµsukčliko ca. Kmesu ca
anapekkho vihareyys“ ' ti - S.II. 281.). Here the relevance of his remarks
appears in clearer relief, for the very things that he seems to recommend to
Nanda are some of those of which he refused Devadatta to make a general rule
incumbent on all.[cdxxxviii]
It is evident that this mode of
living, which is called a life of physical detachment or kyavčpakaŹŹha[cdxxxix], soon came to be recognised in Buddhist
monastic circles as a much praised virtue (Etha tumhe raak hotha
araavanapatthni pantni sensanni paŹisevath ' ti. Iti kyavčpakaŹŹhe samdapetabb
nivesetabb patiŹŹhpetabb -
A.III.138.). The Pali texts make repeated attempts to show that both the
Buddha and the venerable Mah Kassapa practised this way of solitary
living. They are said to have done
so for their own comfort and peace of mind as well as for the purpose of setting
a good example for the future generations.
King Pasenadi Kosala praises the Buddha for this special virtue (Yam pi
bhante bhagav d“gharattaµ raako araavanapatthni pantni sensanni
paŹisevati imaµ pi kho ahaµ bhante atthavasaµ sampassamno bhagavati evarčpaµ paramanipacckraµ karomi mittčpahraµ upadaµsemi - A.V. 66 f.). Saµyutta Nikya informs us of Kassapa's
preference for this mode of life (Kim pana tvaµ kassapa atthavasaµ sampassamno
d“gharattaµ raako c ' eva araakattassa vaööavd“ - S.II.203 f.). This is in fact made out to be the
general pattern of conduct of the Buddha and his disciples. (Ye kira te ahesuµ buddhnubuddhasvak
te d“gharattaµ raak c ' eva ahesuµ araööakattassa ca vaööavdino -
Ibid.). Udumbarikas“handa Sutta
goes so far as to make it an ancient and eternal order which governs the life of
the Buddhas of the past, present
and the future (Ye te ahesuµ at“taµ addhnaµ arahanto sammsambuddh .... evaµ
su te bhagavanto arae vanapatthni pantni sensanni paŹisevanti appasaddni
appanigghosni vijanavtni manussarhaseyyakni paŹisallnasruppni seyyath '
pi bhagav etarah“ ' ti - D.III. 54.).
The Aŗguttara Nikya which gives
five different reasons for the
adoption of this way of forest-living says that one would take to it
being impressed by the fact that it had been extolled by the Buddha and his
disciples (vaööitaµ buddhehi buddhasvakeh“ ' ti raako hoti - A. III.
219.). But the real reason, it goes
on to add, should be that it provides an ideal setting to the man who has
renounced the cares of the world and seeks to perfect his inner being
(Appicchataµ y ' eva nissya santuŹŹhiµ y ' eva nissya sallekhataµ y ' eva
nissya pavivekaµ y ' eva nissya idaµ atthitaµ y ' eva nissya raako hoti -
Ibid.).
It appears from the above
consideration that every attempt had been made to popularise this mode of life
as the one that contributes most to the spiritual well-being of the
disciple. It was deemed useful for
the progress of both samatha and vipassan. It is this idea of solitary and secluded
life that is implied in the phrase brčhet sugrnaµ which the Buddha addresses as an
admonition
to his disciples.[cdxl] The Papacasčdan“
brings both samatha and vipassan
within the aspirations of this solitary life in its comment on brčhet
sugrnaµ (Ettha ca samathavipassanvasena kammaŹŹhnaµ gahetv rattindivaµ
sugraµ pavisitv nis“damno bhikkhč brčhet sugrnan ' ti veditabbo -
MA.I.157.). This love of the life
of solitude in the forest is one of the seven conditions wich would arrest the
decay of the monk (satta aparihniy dhamm). It would, on the other hand, be a
stimulus to his spiritual progress (Yvak“va ca bhikkhave bhikkhč raakesu
sensanesu spekkh bhavissanti vuddhi y ' eva bhikkhave bhikkhčnaµ pŹikaŗkh
no parihni - D.II. 77.)[cdxli] It is also given as one of ten items
which a disciple should constantly ponder over with a view to developing a love
for it (Kacci no ahaµ sčgre abhiramm“ ' ti pabbajitena abhiöhaµ
paccavekkhitabbaµ........ Ime kho
bhikkhave dasa dhamm pabbajitena abhiöhaµ paccavekkhitabb - A.V. 88.).
However, it was recognised at the
same time that mere residence in forest retreats or sdopting frugal and
abstemious ways of life was not a
virtue in itself, unless accompanied by a corresponding perfection of
character. The Budha tells the
venerable Sandha that unless the defiling traits of the mind are first
eliminated they would overpower him even as he dwells in his forest residence and lead him
astray in his musings (Evam eva kho
sandha idh ' ekacco purisakhaluŗko araagato ' pi rukkhamčlagato ' pi
sugragato ' pi kmargapariyuŹŹhitena cetas viharati kmargaparetena. Uppannassa ca kmargassa nissaraöaµ
yathbhčtaµ nappajnti. So
kmargaµ.... vicikicchaµ y ' eva antaraµ karitv jhyati pajjhyati nijjhyati
avajjhyati - A.V. 323.).
On the other hand, it has been very
realistically pointed out that unless a disciple makes progress towards the
attainment of the tranquility of mind which he is seeking, it would be difficult
for him to relish forest-residence and delight in its solitude. The wilderness would whirl away his
mind. In the Bhayabherava Sutta,
the Brahmin Jnussoni expresses this
view and the Buddha is found to be in perfect agreement with him
(Durabhisambhavni hi bho gotama arae vanapatthni pantni sensanni.
Dukkaraµ pavivekaµ durabhiramaµ ekatte. Haranti mae mano vanni samdhiµ
alabhamnassa - M.I.16.).[cdxlii] In the early history of the Ssana it
was evidently this dread of forest-residence which prevented it from being
widely accepted. The story of the
Verajbhöavra seems to indicate that the reliance on this mode of life alone,
without an alternative, was regarded as one of the causes that led to the
alleged breakdown of the monastic institutions of some of the Buddhas of the
past.[cdxliii] Thus it is not
difficult to see that while zealous monks like Mah Kassapa and Upasena
Vaŗgantaputta were regular forest-dwellers and always spoke in favour of it,
there were, even in the earliest days of the Ssana, others who probed into the
spiritual qualifications of those who resorted to such a way of life and pointed
out that it could be as much a source of danger to a monk as a life of
pleasure. Continuing to lead such a
life without attaining the desired result of tranquility of the mind, it is
pointed out, would lead a disciple to disastrous consequences (Yo kho upli evaµ
vadeyya ahaµ samdhiµ alabhamno arae vanapatthni pantni sensanni paŹisevissm“ ' ti
tass ' etaµ pŹikankhaµ saµs“dissati v uppilavissati v - AV.202.). The commentary explains that in
such a state of contradiction the mind of the disciple would be torn by thoughts
of lust or hatred (Saµs“dissat“ '
ti kmavitakkehi saµs“dissati uppilavissat“ ' ti vypdavihiµsvitakkehi uddhaµ
pilavissati - AA.V. 67.)
But those who took to this way of
life supported it wholeheartedly.
Mah Kassapa led the way in this direction, both by example and precept
(Dve kho ahaµ bhante atthavasaµ sampassamno d“gharattaµ raako c ' eva
araakattassa ca vaööavd“.... Attano ca diŹŹhadhammasukhavihraµ sampassamno
pacchima ca janataµ anukampamno app ' eva nma pacchim janat diŹŹhnugatiµ
pajjeyyuµ - S.II.202.) Upasena
Vaŗgantaputta was such an ardent supporter of it that he would take none as his
pupil unless he was willing to be a regular forest-dweller (Yo maµ bhante
upasampadaµ ycati t ' haµ evaµ
vadmi ahaµ kho vuso raako piö¶aptiko paµsukčliko. Sace tvaµ ' pi ranako bhavissasi
piö¶aptiko paµsukčliko ev ' haµ taµ upasampdessm“ ' ti - Vin. III.
230.). However, even during the
life-time of the Buddha we note that the araakatta as a regular mode of monastic life was
recommended with
certain reservations. According to
a statement in the Anguttara Nikya, the venerable Upli informs the Buddha of
his desire to live the forest-life (Ekamantaµ nisinno kho yasm upli
bhagavantaµ etad avoca icchm '
ahaµ bhante arae vanapatthni
pantni sensanni paŹisevitun ' ti. - A.V. 202). But he was immediately
dissuaded by the Buddha who, in those same words of Jnussoni quoted earlier, told him of
the hopelessness of forest-life for one who fails to gain tranquility of the
mind.
It is somewhat difficult to
understand here why Upli, who later became such a distinguished disciple, was
warned by the Buddha in this manner. We are thus inclined to ask whether these
remarks implied any inherent weakness of
Upli against which the Buddha was anxious to safeguard him. The next
remark which the Buddha makes, dismissing almost with ridicule the idea that one
could still continue to lead the forest-life without gaining any tranquility of
mind, seems to be very emphatic about Upli's inaptitude for such a life. The
words with which the Buddha concludes his advice to Upli crown the whole
argument. ' Stay back, Upli, in the midst of the Saŗgha and it will contribute
to your own welfare.' (Iŗgha tvaµ upli
saŗghe viharhi saŗghe te viharato phsu bhavissati. - A.V. 209.). The
Commentary very readily solves this problem by pointing out that if Upli was allowed to choose the way of
forest-life, he would have only developed the holy life and missed the chance of
learning the texts of the Vinaya. He would also thereby have lost the honour of
being the chief exponent of the Vinaya. The Commentary says that it was in
anticipation of the situation that the Buddha advised him against retiring to
the forest. However, it is clear that what the text tries to stress is something
different.
We do not propose to probe further
into this matter here. But the Bhayabherava Sutta and the story of Upli in the
Aŗguttara Nikya yield us two interesting observa-tions. In the Bhayabherava
Sutta, the Buddha who was told by Jnusssoni of the difficulties of forest-life
explains that the disciple who on retiring to the forest assails the evil and
corrupt ways of his life, gains with each victory greater and greater confidence
for the pursuit of it. It is in terms of his own life as the Bodhisatta that the
Buddha makes these observations in the Bhayabherava Sutta (Etaµ ahaµ brhmaöa parisuddha-kammantataµ attani
sampassamno bhiyyo pallomaµ pdiµ arae vihrya. - M.I. 17.). On the other
hand, it is pointed out that to retire to the forest one did not need to wait
for the perfection of his spiritual life. In fact, it was to achieve this end
that one took to the forest life. But the forest-dweller had to be contilually
inspired by his religious aspirations, i.e. the higher and higher states of
spiritual development he could attain in succession (Imaµ ' pi kho upli mama svak attan dhammaµ
samanupassamn arae vanapatthni
pantni sensanni paŹisevanti no ca kho tva anuppattasadatth
viharanti. - A.V.207).
Once this spiritual earnestness was
secured the results of forest-residence always proved to be heartening and the
hardships of such a life recede to the background. Thus the thera Vakkali who
was living in the forest, even though he suffered from cramps (vtarogbhin“to),
made his mind triumph over the body and thereby propelled himself to further and
further spiritual attainments, ignoring the hardships of forest life.
P“tisukhena vipulena pharamno samussayaµ
lčkham ' pi abhisambhonto viharissmi knane.
Bhvento satipaŹŹhne indriyni balni ca
bojjhaŗgni ca
bhvento viharissmi knane.
Thag. 351-2
With bliss and
rapture's flooding wave
This mortal frame will I suffuse.
Though hard and
rough what I endure
Yet will I in the jungle dwell.
Herein myself I 'll exercise :
The
Starting-points of Mindfulness,
The Powers five, the Forces too,
The Factors of Enlightenment --
So will I in the jungle dwell. Psalms
of the Brethren, 351-2
A similar story is told of the
thera Nhtakamuni.[cdxliv] The thera Ekavihriya
seems to look upon the wilderness
as the one place of delight to the ardent disciple, the yog“.
Purato pacchato
v ' pi aparo ce na vijjati
at“va phsu bhavati ekassa vasato vane.
Handa eko
gamissmi araaµ buddhavaööitaµ
phsuµ ekavihrissa pahitattassa bhikkhuno.
Yogap“tikaraµ rammaµ
mattakujarasevitaµ
eko atthavas“
khippaµ pavisissmi
knanaµ.
Thag.
537-9
If there be
none in front, nor none behind
Be found, is one alone and in the
woods
Exceeding pleasant doth his life become.
Come then!
alone I 'll get me hence and go
To lead the forest-life the Buddha
praised,
And taste the welfare which the brother knows,
Who dwells alone
with concentrated mind.
Yea, swiftly
and alone, bound to my quest,
I 'll to the jungle that I love, the haunt
Of wanton elephants, the source and means
Of thrilling zest to each
ascetic soul.
Psalms
of the Brethren, 537-9
Therein he looks forward to the
consummation of his religiouslife.
Ekkiyo
adutiyo raman“ye mahvane
kad ' haµ viharissmi katakicco ansavo.
Thag.
541
Lone and
unmated in the lovely woods,
When shall I come to rest, work wrought, heart
cleansed?
Psalms of the Brethren, 541
Armed for that purpose, he plunges
into the forest, never to return until he has attained his heart's desire, the highest goal of
Arahantship.
Esa bandhmi
sannhaµ pavisissmi knaµ
na tato nikkhamissmi appatto savakkhayaµ.
Thag. 543
I 'll bind my
spirit's armour on, and so
The jungle will I enter, that from thence
I '
ll not come forth until Nibbna's won.
Psalms of the Brethren, 543
Perhaps the most glorious example
of a thera who seems to have enjoyed every moment of his life in the forest,
using these sylvan charms as a spring-board to higher spiritual attainments is
the thera TlapuŹa. To him, they have been a constant source of inspiration as
he pursued this spiritual quest.
Kad nu maµ
pvusaklamegho navena toyena
sac“varaµ vane
isippaytamhi vane vajantaµ ovassate taµ nu kad
bhavissati.
Kad mayčrassa sikhaö¶ino vane dijassa sutv girigabbhare rutaµ
paccuŹŹhahitv amatassa pattiy samcintaye taµ nu kad
bhavissati.
Thag. 1102-3
(Page 74)
O when will
(break above my head)
The purple storm- cloud of the rains,
And with fresh
torrents drench my raiment in the
woods,
Wherein I wend my way.
Along the Path the Seers have trod before
-
Yea, when shall this thing come to be?
O when shall I, hearing the call
adown the woods
Of crested, twice- born peacock (as I lie
At rest) within the bosom of the hill,
Arise
and summon thought and will
To win th' Ambrosial -
Yes, when shall this
come to be?
Psalms of the Brethren,1102-3
Similar ecstasies of the thera TlapuŹa
are also evident in the following verses ascribed to him:
VarhaeöeyyavigĀhasevite
pabbhrakčŹe pakaŹe ' va sundare
navambun pvusasittaknane tahiµ
guhgehagato ramissasi.
Sun“lag“v susikh supekhuö sucittapattacchadan
vihaµgam
sumajughosatthanitbhigajjino te taµ ramissanti vanamhi
jhyinaµ.
VuŹŹhamhi deve caturaŗgule tiöe sampupphite meghanibhamhi
knane
nagantare viŹapisamo sayissaµ taµ me mudu hohiti
tčlasannibhaµ.
Thag.
1135-7
O (thou wilt
love the life), be't on the crest
Of caverned cliffs, where herd boar and
gazelle,
Or in fair open glade, or in the depths
Of forest freshened by
new rain - ' tis there
Lies joy for thee to cavern-cottage
gone.
Fair-plumed,
fair-crested passengers of air
With deep blue throats and many-hued of
wing,
Give greeting to the muttering thundercloud
With cries melodius,
manifold; ' tis they
Will give thee joy whiles thou art musing
there.
And when the
god rains on the four-inch grass,
And on the cloud-like crests of budding
woods,
Within the mountain's heart I 'll seated be
Immobile as a
lopped-off bough, and soft
As cotton down my rocky couch shall
seem.
Psalms
of the Brethren, 1135-7
There seems to be very little
reason to doubt that in the early days of the Ssana when the majority of the
Buddha's disciples chose the monastic life out of a deep-rooted conviction,
realising its significance and its implications, the practice of frugality and
contentment, and to some extent even austerity, was a reality in Buddhist
monasticism. Following the
anagriya doctrine of the Buddha,
the disciples could not have conducted themselves in any other way if they were
to be true to their convictions. It
was not a mere non-existent ideal of the past, as is assumed by some, that was
used as the criterion in commenting on the increasing laxity in monastic
discipline.[cdxlv] There was undoubtedly
an established and recognised pattern of conduct which was jointly determined by
both the Dhamma and the Vinaya in terms of which monastic conduct was judged
and
criticised.
It is clear from a passage in the
Aŗguttara that it included perfection of personal character as well as
observance of monastic propriety.
Discussing the dangers that would befall the Ssana in the future
(angatabhayni), it is said that
monks of uncultivated character would confer higher monastic status on others
whom they would not be able to instruct and discipline towards perfection of
character on account of their own imperfections. But these new members, inspite of their
imperfect character, would in turn aspire to be leaders and teachers and thus
subscribe to the continuous degeneration and corruption of monastic life
(Bhavissanti bhikkhave bhikkhč angatamaddhnaµ abhvitaky abhvitas“l abhvitacitt abhvitapa te
abhvitaky samn
abhvitas“l abhvitacitt abhvitapa ae upasampdessanti. Te ' pi na sakkhissanti vinetuµ adhis“le
adhicitte adhipaya. Te ' pi
bhavissanti abhvitaky......
abhvitapa. Iti kho
bhikkhave dhammasandos vinayasandoso vinayasandos dhammasandoso -
A.III.106.).
We have already noticed in our
study of s“la that with the increase of offences and offenders in the monastic
community rules and regulations for the guidance of its members became more
rigorous and more comprehensive, and in the light of contemporary events, were
made foolproof. This battle against
falling standards and increasing laxity in monastic discipline led to a number
of interesting devolopments. The
simple and basic monastic virtues of contentment with regard to food, clothing
and residence, and the love of solitude, which were more or less assumed to be
basic virtues in the early days of the Ssana, begin to acquire more and more
importance. It becomes a compulsory
monastic procedure that every monk, soon after the conferment of Upasampad, be
told of the four Nissayas or the minimum of his requirements with which he is
expected to be satisfied all his life.[cdxlvi] They are: i. Begged_food for a meal (piö¶iylopabhojana), ii. a robe made of bits of cloth collected
from here and there for a garment
(paµsukčlac“vara), iii. residence
at the foot of a tree (rukkhamčlasensana), and iv. putrid urine as medicament
(pčtimuttabhesajja). However, it was not binding on him to be confined within
these narrow limits. If extra gifts were offered to him he was given the option
to receive them. This principle of
the Nissayas was laid down by the Buddha only as a safeguard against any
possible complaints from monks regarding the scanty provision of food, clothing
etc. by the laymen. It is a forewarning against
disappointment and disillusionment concerning the comforts of monastic
life.
However, it was the Buddha himself
who refused the request alleged to heve been made by Devadatta to make these
virtues of simplicity compulsory for the monks.[cdxlvii] But the public at
large, who inherited the ascetic traditions of India, show a partiality for
austerity and asceticism in religious life. Even during the life time of the
Buddha there seem to have been some who thought the monks who were austere and
ascetic in their ways were, on that account, more worthy of honour and nearer to
perfection. A householder of Ndika
once told the Buddha that whenever he made offerings of food he always selected
monks who were abstemious and austere in their ways (D“yati me bhante kule dnaµ
ta ca kho ye te bhikkhč raak piö¶aptik paµsukčlik arahanto v
arahattamaggaµ v sampann tathrčpesu bhante dnaµ d“yyati - A.III.
391.). Here, the Buddha hastens to
correct the fallacy and states that susterity, without the perfection of
character, would not be a virtue in itself. On the other hand, a monk who is less
austere could be more worthy of honour on account of his perfect character
(Araako ce ' pi gahapati bhikkhu hoti uddhato unnalo capalo mukharo
vikiööavco muŹŹhassati asampajno asamhito vibbhantacitto pkatindriyo evaµ so
tena y ' eva grayho... Gahapatic“varadharo ce ' pi gahapati bhikkhu hoti
anuddhato anunnalo acapalo amukharo avikiööavco upaŹŹhitasati sampajno
samhito ekaggacitto saµvutindriyo evaµ so tena y ' eva psasµo - Ibid.). The existence among the popular values
of the day of a preference for
ascetic and austere living as a monastic virtue is indicated in a statement in
the Anaŗgana Sutta. It is stated
that the monk who lives in urban associations appears to suffer by contrast when
placed against his forest-dwelling brethren. The Sutta, however, makes it clear that
according to true Buddhist values what mattered more in the perfection of
monastic life was the elimination of defiling traits of the mind (ppak akusal
icchvacar).[cdxlviii]
We notice, at any rate, that along
with the choice of this solitary way of life in the forest there seems to have
gone hand in hand a number of other practices which reveal frugality,
abstemiousness and contentment. The
Anaŗgana Sutta mentions three such practices, viz. 1. forest residence (raaka), 2. subsistence on begged food
(piö¶a-ptika) and 3.
use of patch-work robe (paµsukčlika).[cdxlix] These seem to cover a
disciple's residence, food and clothing.
In the form they are presented here they constitute special ways of
monastic life which are optional.
They do not bear any longer the general and simple character of the
Nissayas. As monastic observances
they seem to have brought greater honour and respect to those who practised them, presumably on account of the
austerity and sacrifice they
implied. It becomes more evident
when we compare the opposites of these ways which seem to indicate, as it were,
an easier way of life : gmantavihra
or residence in the proximity of a village, nemantanika or acceptance of invitations to meals
and gahapati-c“varadhara or use of
garments offered by laymen.[cdl] To these monastic
practices which were becoming increasingly popular, tec“varikatta or
reliance on a single set
of three robes was sometimes added
as a fourth.[cdli] The Buddha recognises,
however, that there can be a nominal practice of these austere ways without any
corresponding spiritual progress.
He brings to our notice the thirty Pveyyaka monks. who inspite of the
complete adoption of these austere ways, were full of defiling traits of
character (Atha kho bhagavato etadahosi.
Ime kho tiµsamatt pveyyak bhikkhč sabbe raak sabbe piö¶aptik
sabbe paµsukčlik sabbe tec“varik sabbe sasaµyojan. Yannčn ' haµ imesaµ tath dhammaµ
deseyyaµ yath nesaµ imasmiµ y ' eva sane anupdya savehi cittni vimucceyyun
' ti - S.II. 187.)
We also detect an attempt to
idealise these practices and make them a part of the general pattern of Buddhist
monastic life. This seems to herald
the ascendency of asceticism as the hallmark of monastic virtue. The Yodhjivavagga of the Aŗguttara
Nikya[cdlii] which gives warning of
a number of calamities that would befall the Ssana with the lapse of time
(angatabhayni), refers to the practice of these ways of monastic living as
though it was the order of the day.
Here we see clearly an attempt to fix and establish the changing pattern
of monastic living in a form acceptable to contemporary values. We would not imagine that there was
unanimity of opinion with regard to these values. However, it is certain that they were
acceptable to a fair section of the community who were powerful enough to
publicise and popularise their views among others. There will come a time, says the text,
when monks evincing a love of luxury with regard to food, clothing and residence
would neglect the present austere practices of being piö¶aptika,
paµsukčlika and raaka respectively. They would give up the life of
retirement in the forest and ' invading the urban districts ' indulge in all
manner of unworthy pursuits for the sake of their requisites (Bhavissanti
bhikkhave bhikkhč angatamaddhnaµ c“vare kalynakm te c“vare kalynakm samn ricissanti
paµsukčlikattaµ ricissanti araavanapatthni pantni sensanni
gmanigama-rjadhniµ osaritv vsaµ kappessanti c“varahetu ca anekavihitaµ
anesanaµ appaŹirčpaµ pajjissanti.
Idaµ bhikkhave paŹhamaµ angatabhayaµ etarahi asamuppannaµ yatiµ
samuppajjissati. Taµ vo
paŹibujjhitabbaµ paŹibujjhitv ca tassa pahnya vyamitabbaµ - A.III. 108
f.).
In a similar passage in the
Saµyutta,[cdliii] the Buddha, in a
conversation with the venerable Mah Kassapa, is made to lament over this
alleged decline in Buddhist monastic values and the effect it would have on the
younger generation of disciples.
Nevertheless, this tendency
appears to have continued unabated.
Those who fought for laxity in discipline were equally vivacious and
vociferous and are seen thrusting
themselves against the orthodoxy with unyielding persistence.[cdliv]
Chapter
VIII
The first
indications of the evolution of a
system of codified law for the Saŗgha come to us with the promulgation of
sikkhpada which was provoked by
laxities in discipline in the monastic community which contravened the spirit
of s“la. The sikkhpada thus laid down from time to time soon
grew to be a comprehensive code of discipline for the monks and was put into
effective functioning through the fortnightly recital which was called the
Uddesa or Ptimokkhuddesa.[cdlv] The Aŗguttara Nikya specifies the total
number of sikkhpada which were
thus regularly recited to be over a
hundred and fifty (Sdhikam idam
bhante diya¶¶ha-sikkhpada-satam anvaddhamsam uddesam gacchati - A.I. 230.).
This is evidently an early reckoning, for the extant code of the Ptimokkha
has a total of 220 sikkhpada.[cdlvi] Seven different groups of
sikkhpada contribute to this
total of 220. The distribution of
the sikkhpada is as follows :
Prjika 4, Saŗghdisesa 13, Aniyata 2,
Nissaggiya 30, Pcittiya 92,
Ptidesaniya 4, Sekhiya 75. The Adhikaranasamathas which are seven
in number, for obvious reasons, cannot be grouped together along with these
sikkhpada.
It is clear from the evidence of
both the Sutta and the Vinaya PiŹakas that the promulgation of the
sikkhpada preceded the institution
of the fortnightly recital of the Ptimokkha for the monks. This does not,
however, preclude the possibility that additions were made to the corpus of
sikkhpada even after the institution of the
Ptimokkha recital.[cdlvii] But we discover
Oldenberg has expressed a
surprisingly different view. He says: " The origin of the earliest rules or laws
laid down by the Buddhist community for the guidance of its members appears to
have been connected with those assemblies of Bhikkhus which met at full and new
moon." [cdlviii] We fail to see why Olenberg adopted this
sequence in relating the sikkhpada
to the Ptimokkha recital.
According to what we have been able
to gather from the evidence of the Suttas and the Vinaya this appears to
be a reversal of the order. We
ourselves observe that some of the rules of the Ptimokkha have had their origin
after the recital of the Ptimokkha
had acquired definite form and recognition. At the same time it appears to be
resonable to assume that a large number of rules would have had their origin
independent of the idea of a recital.
The promulgation of rules in the form of sikkhpada was necessitated by the growing inadequacy
of the moral injunctions of s“la to curb miscreants. Perhaps the form in which the rules of
the Ptimokkha are introduced in the Suttavibaŗga led Oldenberg to his
conclusion. The Suttavibhaŗga introduces every rule saying ' This rule shall be recited in this
manner ' : Eva ca pana bhikkhave imam sikkhpadam uddiseyytha. The editors of the Suttavibhaŗga, we may venture to guess, could not have thought of the
sikkhpada divorced from the
Uddesa or the recital at the Uposatha.
Thus it is said of all the sikkhpada, from the first to the last, that they should be recited in this
form.[cdlix] But we cannot infer from this that
the entire code of the Ptimokkha was drawn up, like a constitution, prompted solely by
the needs of the recital. We
believe Oldenberg is much nearer the truth when he says the following: "A list of those offences which deserved
punishment or some kind of expiation was,
at a very early period, drawn up for the use of these
confessional meetings." [cdlx] Rhys Davids and Oldenberg jointly
express the same idea elesewhere : "A list was drawn
up which of course it would be
necessary from time to time to complete and rectify -- of those offences which
ought to be confessed and atoned
for....." [cdlxi] This certainly was, in the first
instance, a systematic grouping together of material which was already in
existence.
In the Mahvagga of the Vinaya
PiŹaka, which gives the most comprehensive account of the origin and development
of the ritual of the Ptimokkha, the Buddha says that he would sanction for
recital at the ritual of the Ptimokkha the sikkhpada which he has already laid down for the
monks (Yannčnham yni may bhikkhčnam paattni sikkhpadni tni nesam ptimokkhuddesam anujneyyam. So
nesam bhavissati uposathakamman ' ti - Vin. I. 102.). The Vimativinodan“ T“k, a
Sub-Commentry on the
Samantapsdik, which explains further
the evolution of the
Ptimokkha code adds that the
Buddha himself gave to the sikkhpada
which he had laid down a formal character by codifying them and prefacing
them with an introduction for the purpose of recital at the Uposatha meeting (Pubbe avijjamnam papes“ ' ti na kevala ca etam. Pubbe paattam ' pi pana prjikdi
sikkhpadam sabbam bhagav tatr ' ime cattro prjik dhamm uddesam gacchant“ ' ti din
prjikuddesdivasena
vinayamtikam katv nidn '
uddesena saha sayam eva sangahetv ptimokkhan ' ti papes“ ' ti daŹŹhabbam -
Vimt. 396.).[cdlxii]
We should draw attention here to
the fact that Sukumar Dutt refers to the above account of the Mahvagga as ' the legend, incredible for obvious
reasons... .' [cdlxiii] As far as we can see
the incredibility of the legend is not so obvious. But it is abundantly clear that this
account, together with other allied evidence, contradicts his thesis regarding the
Ptimokkha. Fact or fiction he may call this, it will be seen that there is
adequate evidence both in the Suttas and in the Vinaya which support this
tradition that
(i) the promulgation of the sikkhpada, not necessarily all, started with the
Buddha. (See M.I. 444 f ; A.I. 230
f.)
(ii) the recital of the Ptimokkha was
instituted during the life time of the Buddha and under his personal
direction. (See M.II. 8, III.10;
A.I. 230.)
(iii) the sikkhpada which had been promulgated earlier
formed the text of the Uddesa or the recital. (See Vin.I.102; A.I.
230.)
We notice that a comprehensive code
of sikkhpada was in existence in
the monastic circles at an early date[cdlxiv] and that it was regularly recited before
the Saŗgha once a fortnight[cdlxv], with a view to
reminding and acquainting the disciples with the regulations in terms of which
they were expected to discipline themselves.[cdlxvi] The Mah“ssaka Vinaya in the Chinese
version asserts negatively this
function of the recital when it says that owing to the repeated recitals of
abridged texts of the Ptimokkha the young monks failed to acquaint themselves
with its contents.[cdlxvii]
Each one of these sikkhpada or rules which constitute the text of
the Ptimokkha, according to the text of the Vinaya PiŹaka, was laid down on the
commission of some offence which thereafter on the authority of the rules thus
laid down, was declared illegal.
These rules, as instruments of prosecution and punishment, therefore
carried with them a host of carefully worded clauses which determine the gravity
of the offence and the consequent changes in the nature of the punishment
according to the circumstances of each case. Thus in the early days of the Ptimokkha
recital with which we associate the very dynamic function of ' dealing with offenders ' (tam mayam
yathdhammam yathsattham krema - M.III.10.), the details connected with each
rule were as vital as the rule itself.
Every competent monk had to be a
master of the text of what was to be recited at the Uddesa (i.e. sutta) together
with those details (sutta-vibhaŗga).[cdlxviii] They were undoubtely
parts of one single text and one cannot always speak of the details as being of
later origin. Some of the historical prefaces and the amendments to the rules
are evidently contemporary accounts and would have been essential in the
application of the Ptimokkha as a legal system. Thus the reference to the
Ptimokkha in terms of suttato
and anuvyajanaso undoubtedly covers the contents of the
Suttavibhaŗga which embodies the Ptimokkha together with the details connected
with it.[cdlxix] These details were vitally needed in the
days when the Uddesa was no mere recital of the list of rules but a trial at
which the offenders thus discovered were to be judged and dealt with according
to the law.
Further proof of this literary
position of the Ptimokkha is seen in the solitary Canonical account of the
First Buddhist Council, the Saŗg“ti which was held soon after the demise of the
Buddha. In the record of the
literary activity of this Saŗg“ti it is said that the venerable Mah Kassapa
questioned the venerable Upli on the contents of the Ubhato Vinaya,[cdlxx] commencing with the
first Prjika with all its details
(Atha kho yasm mahkassapo yasmantam uplim paŹhamassa prjikassa
vatthum ' pi pucchi nidnam ' pi pucchi puggalam ' pi pucchi paattim ' pi
pucchi anupaattim ' pi pucchi
pattim ' pi pucchi anpattim ' pi pucchi... Eten ' eva upyena ubhato
vinaye pucchi- Vin.II. 287.). There
is little doubt that Ubhato Vinaya refers to the disciplinary code of the Bhikkhus and the Bhikkhunis
and we are fairly safe in assuming this to be primarily the two Vibhaŗgas, [
i.e. the codfied rules ot the Ptimokkha together with their legally relevant
details of application as was revealed in the above report ], though not necessarily in their present
form. Thus it becomes clear that the text of the Ptimokkha
was something already contained in the Vibhaŗgas, the Mahvibhaŗga and the
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga, for no special mention of it is made under that name any
where in the proceedings of the first Council. We are also compelled to add here
that Ubhato Vinaya of the above report should include, under the connotation of
that phrase, a reasonable amount of the core contents of the other section of
the Vinaya known as the Khandhaka. That was vital for the execution of the
ecclesiastical acts fo the Saŗgha as a corporate body.
Sukumar Dutt attempts in the
following remarks to offer a different explanation for this omission : " In the reported proceedings, the term,
Ptimokkha is nowhere mentioned, but all the heads of misdemeanour on the part
of a Bhikkhu are listed except the Sekhiyas and the procedural rules of
Adhikaranasamatha. The reason for
the studied omission of the word, Ptimokkha, is not far to seek if we assume
that at the time when the proceedings were put into the present narrative shape,
the Bhikkhus understood by Ptimokkha something quite different from a code of
Vinaya rules." [cdlxxi]
Here we are prepared to concede
that the ' time when the
proceedings were put into the present narrative shape ' may even be some time after the Second
Buddhist Council. [cdlxxii] On Dutt's own admission almost all the
sikkhpada of the extant Ptimokkha
code were known by then. For he
says : ' but all the heads of
misdemeanour on the part of a Bhikkhu are listed except the Sekhiyas and the
procedural rules of Adhikaranasamatha.'
On the other hand, he also says : ' at the time ....the Bhikkhus
understood by Ptimokkha something quite different from a code of Vinaya
rules.' What then did this body of
sikkhpada mean to them? Was their Ptimokkha still a ' communal confession of Faith in a set
from of hymn-singing '? [cdlxxiii] However, in the
succeeding paragraph Dutt says the following : ' The code, whatever its original
contents, became after the First Council the bond of association of the Buddhist
Bhikkhus, and was called Ptimokkha (Bond). Thus the old name for a confession
of faith came to be foisted on something new, a code of Prohibitions for a Bhikkhu. ' [cdlxxiv] This attempted explnation of the
omission of the term Ptimokkha in the proceedings of the First Council is far
from being conclusive.
It is the Vibhaŗga and not the
Ptimokkha which had the completeness of a code of discipline. That alone was the effective instrument
of discipline, though one could have opted to learn only the body of rules in
isolation. We find the sutta and
the suttavibhaŗga referred to
severally (Tassa n ' eva suttam
gatam hoti no suttavibhaŗgo - Vin.II. 96.). But out of these two, it is the
suttavibhaŗga which is looked upon
as the Vinaya proper even in the commentarial tradition (No suttavibhaŗgo ti
vinayo na paguöo - VinA.VI. 1197.).
The sutta has only the value of an
extract, an abridged version or mtik.[cdlxxv]
In course of time, the recital of the Ptimokkha lost its
legal validity and function, as
would be shown in the following chapter.
The details regarding the application of rules would have then proved
themselves to be irksome to those whose only interest in the Ptimokkha was for
the sake of its fortnightly recital
mainly as an instrument of monastic get-together and consolidation. The Vinayavinicchaya perhaps attempts to
establish this attitude to the Ptimokkha in the following statement, which contrasts the Pavraö with the
Uposatha and asserts that the latter is
for the purpose of stability and consolidation of the monastic
community: Uposatho
samaggattho visuddhatth pavraö -
Vinvi. p.190.v.2599. There seems to
be very little doubt that the term uposatha here stands for the fortnightly
meeting at which the recital of the Ptimokkha is the main concern. At such a stage one would readily
concede the extraction of the text of the rules, and the rules alone, from the
Suttavibhaŗga to form an independent unit.
Thus we would regard the emergence of an independent text by the name of
Ptimokkha, which contained only the sikkhpada and the instructions regarding their
recital, to be historically later than the very substantial text of the
Suttavibhaŗga.
Oldenberg, however, is very
definite about the theory that the list called the Ptimokkha ' is the earliest specimen of Buddhist
Vinaya literature that we possess '.[cdlxxvi] In support of this he says that if we
read the ordinances of the Ptimokkha,
without the commentary of the Vibhaŗga, we find that they constitute one
uninterrupted whole.[cdlxxvii] It is our opinion that this alleged
continuity is more imaginary than real.
If we begin with the four Prjika rules of the Ptimokkha, even a
cursory glance at them would show that there is no more continuity among them
than their being grouped together under a single category. The position is identically the same
with regard to their continuity even if we examine them in the
Suttavibhaŗga, not better nor
worse.
On the other hand, in the
Suttavibhaŗga version the sikkhpada
come to possess more meaning and significance with regard to their
disciplinary role. The generalised
rule which occurs in isolation in the Ptimokkha looks revitalised when viewed in the specific setting of its
origin. Nor does the fact that
three or four rules in succession deal with different aspects of the same
subject support Oldenberg's theory of continuity. For thereafter, there occurs irreconcilable
deviation into a completely new theme.
(Compare the Saŗghdisesa 6 and 7 in relation to the first five rules of
the same group.) Further he says
: ' and, moreover, it frequently happens that a rule refers
to the one immediately preceding it,
in a manner that would be altogether unintelligible if the two had been
originally separated by the intervening explanations of the Vibhaŗga.' [cdlxxviii] Here too, we find it
difficult to subscribe to this view.
He cites two examples in support of his statement. He points out the phrase tassa
bhikkhuno which occurs in Pcittiya
49 as an indication of its link
with the preceding rule. We would readily concede this, but we are unable to
accept the position that the
'intervening explanation of the Vibhanga ' would make it ' altogether unintelligible ' On the other hand, we would like to
point out that the phrase aatra tathrčpaccay of
Pcittiya 48 would be completely unintelligible without the explanations
of the Vibhaŗga. We would make the same comments regarding the phrase
tathvdin bhikkhun of Pcittiya
69, which Oldenberg gives as the
second example. The introductory story of this Pcittiya
rule clearly spcifies this tathvdin bhikkhun as
being AriŹŹha, who was a
well known character both in the Suttas
and in the Vinaya.
Regarding this intelligibility of
the rules without their explanations which Oldenberg assumes, we would commend the scrutiny of a few
rules from the Ptimokkha which, on account of their very elliptical nature,
would make very little sense in the enforcement of discipline without an
acquaintance with their background.
The following deserve special mention:
Pcittiya 12 : Aavdake pcittiyaµ
52 : Aŗgulipatodake
pcittiyaµ
53 : Udake hsadhamme
pcittiyaµ
54 : Andariye
pcittiyaµ[cdlxxix]
As for the
details regarding the rules which occur in the Suttavibhaŗga, it need hardly be
said that the explanations of the contents of the rules and the provision of
modifications to the rules could not have preceded the rules themselves. But this does not necessarily separate
them from the rules by a very wide margin of time and once they came into being
this element would not have been divorced from the rest of the legal system as
these details were necessary for its proper enforcement.
When we examine the stories which
are given in the Suttavibhaŗga as leading to the promulgation of the rules we
feel that the majority of these can be regarded as historical and that they
serve a useful purpose in the proper understanding of the law. However, we are prepared to accept the
position that some of the stories are possibly the contribution of the editors
who felt that every rule, however simple or spontaneously laid down, should have
a preceding incident leading up to it.
This provision of a ' historical basis ' (nidna) could have happened both in the case of
rules which were not necessarily provoked by a specific incident and those whose
stories of origin were replaced in course of time with more attractive
versions.
Here
are a few such cases which we think lie open to this
criticism:
|
|
The
rule |
It's
meaning |
The incident leading to
it |
|
Pc.11 |
Bhčtagmaptavyatya
pcittiyaµ |
Destruction of plant life
brings about a Pcittiya offence. |
In the act of cutting a tree
a Bhikkhu enraged a deity who was resident in it and escaped death at his
hands by the skin of his
teeth 2.
Note : But the spirit in
which the rule had been laid down
accords more with the popular belief that trees possess life (J“vasaino hi
moghapuris manuss rukkhasmiµ.[cdlxxx] See also Vin.
I.189.). People did protest against
the destruction of plant life by the Buddhist monks (Ekindriyaµ samaö
sakya- puttiy j“vaµ viheŹhent“ ti.
[cdlxxxi] See also Vin.I. 189). |
|
Pc.57 |
Yo pana bhikkhu
orenaddhamsaµ nahyeyya aatra samay pcittiyaµ[cdlxxxii] |
Bathing more often than once
a fortnight, except during specified seasons, leads to a Pcittiya
offence |
Monks who were given to
frequent bathing monopolised the baths where the king himself was used to
go. The king was inconvenienced and the Buddha is said to have rebuked the
monks for not realising the limits of their bathing even after they had
seen the king. Hence this legislation. 3 Note : It is more likely that in a setting
where austerity was the hallmark of virtue frequent bathing would have
been looked upon as a proneness to luxury. |
Pcittiyas 56 and 61 have a similar
appearance.[cdlxxxiii]
Oldenberg also raises the question of a contradiction in the
relationship of the traditions of the Ptimokkha to those of the
Vibhaŗga.[cdlxxxiv] Here too, we are compelled to say that
this contradiction vanishes when we view the problem from a different
angle. Oldenberg has already taken
up the position that the Ptimokkha and the Vibhaŗga are from the very beginning
two distinct units which stand apart.
We have shown why we refuse to accept this position. The contents of what is spoken of here
as the Ptimokkha are the rules governing the conduct of the members of the
monastic community which had acquired,
very early, an unalterably fixed character. Flexibility in the application of this
legal system was the theme of the living tradition which grew on and around it
and was considered so essential from the earliest times (Ubhayni kho pana ' ssa
ptimokkhni vitthrena svgatni honti suvibhattni suppavatt“ni suvinicchitni suttato anuvyajanaso -
Vin.I. 65.).
The changing pattern of monastic
organization would have necessitated a corresponding change in the monastic
administration. There is clear
evidence of such changes, particularly in the acts of Pabbajj and
Upasampad.[cdlxxxv] The responsibility that was once the
right of individual Bhikkhus had to be latterly vested in the collective
organization of the Saŗgha. With
every such change it was not possible to alter the structure of the rules of the
Ptimokkha. On the other hand, the
living traditions which accompanied it closely from the very beginning and
constituted the contents of the Vibhaŗgas stood up to serve as a complement to
the Ptimokkha. These are the
changes which the Suttavibhaŗga shows in relation to the Ptimokkha and we have
no doubt that they would have been smoothly effected through a sensible
acceptance of the traditions of the Suttavibhaŗga.
The sikkhpada which constitute the Ptimokkha have a
new emphasis and are very different in character from advice and counsel given
in the Dhamma under the category of s“la.
They are at times restatements of items of s“la, increasing in number and diversity
according to the needs of the monastic organization of the Saŗgha.[cdlxxxvi] Besides these, a number of regulations
governing residence, food and clothing of the members of the Saŗgha as well as
series of rules covering monastic propriety and procedure, and communal harmony of the society of
the Saŗgha are also found in the Ptimokkha. However, as a code for the guidance of
monks in their pursuit of religious development, these sikkhpada are far more exacting and obligatory
than the s“la.
The s“la concept, for example, of abstaining from
destruction of life includes within it non-injury and the love and protection of
life of every sort, both human and
animal (Pötiptaµ pahya pötipt paŹivirato hoti nihitadaö¶o nihitasattho lajj“ daypanno
sabbapöabhčtahitnukamp“ viharati
- D.I. 63 .). But in
the sikkhpada of the Ptimokkha
where both prosecution and punishment are contemplated, the gravity of the
offence of killing is fixed at different levels, drawing a distinction between
human and animal life. The
destruction of human life is classed among the Prjika offences, the four
greatest crimes under the monastic discipline which involve expulsion and
complete loss of monastic status.
Prjika No.3, which covers
this subject of homicide, also
regards other conditions such as aiding and abetting which would contribute to
the commission of the crime of suicide, as being equally reprehensible.[cdlxxxvii]
There is a further rule pertaining
to destruction of life, other than human, included under the lesser offence of
Pcittiya. (Pc. 61 : Yo pana
bhikkhu sacicca pöaµ j“vit voropeyya pcittiyaµ - Vin.IV.124.) Both the Old Commentary in the
Suttavibhaŗga which defines pöa in
this context as tiracchnagatapöa
and the history of the sikkhpada
narrated there just before the text of the rule establish the fact that
this rule concerns itself with the destruction only of animal life.[cdlxxxviii] Thus we notice that
considerations which under the category of s“la had moral values are now, as
sikkhpada, forced into a legal frame-work, involving at times a sacrifice of
the spirit in which they were originally introduced. Another clear instance of this is
Prjika No.2 which deals with
stealing. Under the category of
s“la theft meant the appropriation of whatever was not given and the scheming to
obtaining the same (Adinndnaµ
pahya adinndn paŹivirato hoti dinndy“ dinnapŹikaŗkh“ athenena sucibhčtena
attan viharati - D.I. 63.). But as
a Prjika rule, the regulation against stealing seeks further, backing from the
law of the land, coupling together
as it were both moral and legal considerations. The Buddha is in fact seen consulting a
former Minister of Justice, who was now ordained as a monk, on this matter (Yo pana bhikkhu gm v ara v
adinnaµ theyyasaŗkhtaµ diyeyya yathrčpe adinndne rjno coram gahetv
haneyyuµ v bandheyyuµ v pabbjeyyuµ v coro ' si blo ' si mčĀho ' si theno '
s“ ' ti tathrčpaµ bhikkhu adinnaµ diyamno ayam ' pi prjiko hoti asaµvso - Vin.III.
45.).
There is no doubt that it was soon
felt that the four items of discipline brought under the category of Prjika and
stated in legal phraseology were necessarily circumscribed in relation to the
moral well being of the true pabbajita.
Thus while the greatest respect was shown to the codified monastic law an
attempt was made to infuse into these four major items of discipline the spirit
of s“la which comes in the earlier Sutta tradition. We find expression given to
this in the declaration of Cattri Akaraöiyni which are mentioned in the
Mahvagga.[cdlxxxix] These are given there
as four major items of discipline which no monk who has gained higher ordination
shall transgress. He shall guard
himself in terms of these all his life. Thus it is required by law that
these should be made known to a Bhikkhu soon after the conferment of
upasampad or higher ordination on
him.
The wider field of control of the
Akaraö“yni in marked contrast to the Prjikas is particularly evident in the
items 2 and 3 which deal with theft and destruction of life respectively. It is these two, as we have shown above,
which underwent serious contraction in the process of legalization. Under the category of Akaraö“yni the
spirit which they lost appears to
be restored. Note the wider
applicability of the Akaraö“yni 2 and 3 which are given below
:
Akaraö“ya 2 : Upasampannena bhikkhun adinnaµ
theyyasankhtaµ na dtabbaµ
antamaso tiöasalkaµ updya.[cdxc] i.e. No Bhikkhu who is an
upasampanna shall take in theft what is not given to him, even as much as a
blade of grass.
3 :
Upasampannena bhikkhun sacicca pöo j“vit na voropetabbo antamaso
kunthakipillikaµ updya.[cdxci] i.e. No Bhikkhu who is an upasampanna shall destroy the life even of an
ant.
Sukumar Dutt makes a suggestion
which gives the impression that the Cattri Akaraö“yni were the precursors of
the four Prjikas.[cdxcii] But a closer
examination of the Vinaya texts would reval the fact that this assumption lacks
historical support. In the text of
the Akaraö“yni we find the precisely worded clauses of the Prjikas embedded
almost in their entirety. They also
show an awareness of the incidents which are related in the Suttavibhaŗga
connected with the promulgation of the rules.[cdxciii] Akaraö“yni are
obviously the result of a fusion of the legal statements pertaining to the
Prjikas from the Suttavibhaŗga with the general spirit of the s“la from the Sutta PiŹaka. This establishes
beyond doudt the vital position which the items of discipline included under the
four Prjika came to occupy in Buddhist monasticism.
Let us examine further the
relationship of the Prjika rules to the lists of s“las. The first thing that strikes us is the
difference in the order of these items in the two groups, i.e. s“las and the sikkhpada of the Ptimokkha. The s“las commence with abstinence from
destruction of life. Considerations regarding theft come second and the vow of celibacy is listed as the third
item. Under the Prjikas, on the
other hand, celibacy takes the first place. Destruction of life, which is now
restricted to destruction of human life alone, stands as the third item. These two items have thus changed places
in the two groups. Regarding these
discrepancies[cdxciv] we would make the
following observations:
S“la, at least in part, remain the
common property of both monks and laymen.
The laymen are capable of keeping some of them. With the addition of abstinence from
intoxicants[cdxcv] a list of five items of
s“la is constituted for the
guidance of the daily life of lay
prsons. On special occasions, they
observe three additional s“la thus
making a total of eight. It is on
those occasions alone that the laity take the vow of celibacy temporarily :
abrahmacariy veramaö“. All the
other times the s“la of the laity specifies this as the vow of chastity, i.e. restraint in the enjoyment of sex
pleasures : kmesu micchcr veramaö“.
Monks alone take the vow of complete celibacy to be observed all their
life. Hence we would regard this
virtue of celibacy as one of the primary distinguishing features which marks out
the monk from the layman. It is
also clear from the history of the Prjikas that nothing else seems to have run so
contrary to the spirit of pabbajj as the violation of this virtue of
celibacy. For Sudinna, who is
presented as the first miscreant who violated this virtue, is accused of having
directly contradicted the fundamental teachings of the Buddha. (Tattha nma tvam vuso bhagavat
virgya dhamme desite sargya cetessasi visaµyogya dhamme desite saµyogya
cetessasi anupdnya dhamme desite saupdnya cetessasi.... Nanu vuso
bhagavat anekapariyyena kmnam pahnaµ akkhtaµ kmasanaµ pari akkht
kmapipsnaµ paŹivinayo akkhto kµavitakknaµ samugghto akkhto kmapariĀhnaµ včpasamo
akkhto - Vin.III.19 f.). Hence we would regard the prominence
given to this rule pertaining to the virtue of celibacy in the codified law of
the Sangha as being quite legitimate. It savours of the very essence of nekkhamma or renunciation which is the basis of
pabbajj.[cdxcvi]
But we are aware of the fact that
the Prjikas have been assessed differently by some scholars. This is what Dr. Nagai has to say regarding the first
Prjika : ' With regard to
the problem of inhibitions for priests, one that will remain perplexing for a
long time to come is the inhibition concerning sexual relations. To me it
appears that the problem of inhibitions for the Buddhist priests of the present
day (except those belonging to the Shinshč Sect) depends upon the manner of
interpretation of this particular inhibition. If it is interpreted as one requiring
all Buddhist priests to observe celibacy,
I fear that very few priests
will be found living in Japan who are really worthy of the name bhikkhu.'
[cdxcvii] There is no doubt that it is the bold
venture of Shinran in the 13th century which led to this state of affairs in
Japan. It is not possible to
undertake a full analysis of this in the present study. However, unless it is admitted that the
concepts of bhikkhu and priest in this context are incomparably different, one
from the other, we are not in a position to concede this magnanimity in the
interpretation of the first Prjika rule.
The early history of the religion and the nature of its fundamental
teachings do not seem to allow it.
We should here refer the reader to
the observations of Miss Horner on the regulations governing the lives of the
Buddhist disciples. ' If monks
behaved in a way that was censurable in monks, this does not necessarily mean
that their conduct was wrong in itself.
Various activities were not only permissible for lay-people, but were
fully accepted to be such as could be unquestionably pursued by them. Marriage, negotiating for parties to a
marriage, trading, the owning of possessions, are cases in point.... I think it very likely that some of the
courses of training for monks that are
included in this volume were
formulated as a result of this bringing over of lay-life into the religious
life; for a difference between the
two had to be made, and then maintained.' [cdxcviii] We feel that these
remarks are obviously the result of a thorough understanding of original
authoritative texts which deal with Buddhist monasticism.
In the evaluation of the
Prjikas, however, the fourth Prjika seems to have
confronted Miss Horner with some serious difficulty. For she says: " The curious fourth Prjika, concerned
with the offence of 'claiming a
state of quality of further-men' (uttarimanussadhamma), seems to have been fashioned in some
different mould, and to belong to some contrasting realm of values." [cdxcix] This attitude towards
the fourth Prjika has made her evaluate the four Prjikas from a new
angle. She remarks : ' For I think it possible that the
Prjikas are arranged in an ascending scale of gravity, in which the offence
held to be the worst morally, though not legally, is placed last.' [d] We find it difficult to
agree with this. In an attempt to
regard the fourth Prjika as supremely important it is hardly possible to
consider the first Prjika as being the least offensive morally. We would regard it to be undoubtedly the
worst, for it runs contrary to the basic teachings of Buddhism, whose main theme
is virga, visaµyoga etc.[di] We have already shown
above what we consider to be the significance of this sikkhpada which gives it the pride of place among
the Prjikas.
Let us now examine the fourth
Prjika, which is said to rival the first in moral value. The text of the sikkhpada is as
follows: "Whatever monk should
boast, with reference to himself of a state of further-men, sufficient ariyan
knowledge and insight, though not knowing it fully, and saying : This I know, this I see, then if later
on, he, being pressed or not being
pressed, fallen, should desire to be purified, and should say : ' Your reverence, I said that I know
what I do not know, see what I do not see, I spoke idly, falsely, vainly, ' apart from the undue estimate of
himself, he also is one who is defeated, he is not in communion." [dii] This sikkhpada provides that no monk shall make false
claims (anabhijnan ' ti asantaµ abhčtaµ asaµvijjamnaµ ajnanto apassanto
attani kusalaµ dhammaµ atthi me kusalo dhammo ' ti - Vin.III. 91.) to spiritual attainments except under
the pain of being expelled from the Order.
The sikkhpada refers to
such attainments under the terms iti jnmi iti passmi. It is clear that the state or quality of
further-men (uttarimanussa-dhamma) referred to here pertains to the realm of
emancipation and hence recons exclusively with knowledge and insight.
Uttarimanussadhamma also marks
different stages in the process of spiritual development like the eight
jhnas and the state of
Savedayitanirodha.[diii] The Suttavibhaŗga appears to take note
of both these in its comment on uttarimanussadhamma. (Note : Uttarimanussadhammo
nma jhnaµ vimokkhaµ samdhi
sampatti öadassanaµ maggabhvan phalasacchikiriy kilesapahnaµ
vin“varaöat cittassa sugre abhirati - Vin.III. 91.) At the same time there is also reference
to uttarimanussadhamma in association with less transcendental achievements like
the ability to exercise miraculous powers.
This is referred to as uttarimanussadhammaµ iddhi-pŹhriyaµ (Note : na bhikkhave gih“naµ
uttarimanussadhammaµ iddhipŹihriyaµ dassetabbaµ -
Vin.II.112.)
The spirit of this sikkhpada seems to be made further clear in the
Buddha's reference to the five great thieves who are identified with different
types of monks which occurs in the introduction to the sikkhpada. The fifth
thief who is referred to here as the greatest of all is described in terms which
coincide, more or less, with the text of the sikkhpada. (Note: Ayaµ aggo mahcoro yo
asantaµ abhčtaµ uttarimanussadhammaµ ullapati - Vin.III. 9). Thereafter,
the Buddha proceeds to give a
reason for the stigmatisation of such attempts. The reason is that the monks who do so
subsist on what is collected by theft (Taµ kissa hetu. Theyyya vo bhikkhave raŹŹhapiö¶o bhutto ' ti - Vin.III. 90.).
This emphasis on the correctness of j“va or the mode of earning a living is
seen to be specifically so in the incident which led to the promulgation of the
fourth Prjika (Varaµ tumhehi moghapuris tiöhena govikattanena kucchi parikanto natv 'eva udarassa kraö gih“nam aamaassa uttarimanussadhammassa
vaööo bhsito - Vin.III. 89.). Further, the text assures us that it was
a false claim which they made before the laymen (Kacci pana vo bhikkhave bhčtan
' ti. Abhčtaµ bhagav ' ti -
Vin.III. 89.).
At rhe same time we should also
take note of the fact that Pcittiya 8
too, records the incidents
of the fourth Prjika almost in identical terms. The one point of difference, and that is
vital here, is that the spiritual attainments of the Bhikkhus of which they give
publicity to lay people are states to which they had genuinely attained. Hence there does not arise a question of
dishonesty here and the offence is only the lesser one of Pcittiya.[div]
Apart from considerations of
honesty and truthfulness of a monk in the mode of obtaining his requisites from the laymen there seems to be yet
another associated idea in this sikkhpada. To our mind it is the unscrupulous
exploitation of the regard and the respect which the lay people of the time had
for these 'super-human
achievements' which were generally
associated with those who had renounced the household life.[dv] The SeŹŹhi of Rjagaha sums up this position
beautifully when he says yo samaöo v brhmaöo v arah c ' eva iddhim ca, i.e. any monk or brahmin who is both an
Arahant and one who is possessed of miraculous powers.[dvi] People viewed such superhuman
achievements with awe and
credulity, with little scrutiny as to whether those claims were genuine or
false. Hence a false claim would be
deemed an act of meanness which is unworthy of a Buddhist
disciple.
On the other hand, it is said that
even where claims to such superhuman powers were real a true Buddhist disciple
would not display them in public for the sake of worldly and personal
benefits. The Vinaya PiŹaka tells
us of the elder Piö¶olabhradvja who was sternly rebuked by the Buddha for
displaying his superhuman powers by performing miraculous feats in public for
the sake of winning a sandal-wood bowl.
Thereafter, the Buddha forbade such acts and decreed that one who did so
was guilty of a DukkaŹa offence (Na bhikkhave gih“naµ uttarimanussadhammaµ iddhipŹihriyaµ
dassetabbaµ Yo dasseyya patti dukkaŹassa -
Vin.II.112.). In the Saµyutta Nikya it is said that the venerable Mahaka once
performed a similar miracle (uttarimanussadhammaµ iddhipŹihriyaµ) before
Citta, the house-holder, but with no desire for personal gain. However, as a result of it when Citta
invited him to stay in Macchiksaö¶a,
promising to provide him with his requisites, he left the place never to
return again.[dvii] Perhaps he did so out
of his conviction that if he remained to enjoy the hospitality which was offered
he would be guilty of having ' earned it '
in the wrong way.
We would now sum up our observations on the fourth Prjika as
follows:
1. Claims to superhuman powers and
attainments and to the title Arahant appear to have been part of the aspirations
of most groups of religious men of India who had left the household
life.
2. Judging by the great esteem in
which such powers were held by the public there is no doubt that any such claim
would have been received with great acclamation.
3. Thus, for the petty purpose of
ensuring for oneself a ' comfortable living ' any false claim to superhuman powers and
attainments would amount to a despicable form of lying. Hence the inclusion of the offence, like
that of theft, in the category of
Prjika.
4. Where such powers and attainments
were genuinely achieved, any public declaration, other than in the presence of monks and
nuns, would amount to a vulgar display and is ranked in the Vinaya as an offence
which is lesser in gravity than the former. It is a Pcittiya
offence.
5 As such, we are unable to see how
the fourth Prjika could be morally more significant than the
first.
It has also been generally assumed
that the fourth Prjika finds no parallel among the s“la.[dviii] But after the analysis we have made
above of this Prjika it becomes clear that the injunction against false claims
to superhuman attainments is laid
down because such claims are made with a view to gaining an easy livelihood in a
manner which is unworthy of a monk.
It is evidently for this same reason that Buddhaghosa introduces
this Prjika rule as one laid down for the guidance
of j“vaprisuddhi or purity of
livelihood in his definition of
īj“vaprisuddhis“la (... j“vaprisuddhis“le j“vahetu paattnaµ channaµ
sikkhpadnan ' ti yni tni
j“vahetu j“vakraö ppiccho icchpakato asantam abhčtam
uttarimanussadhammaµ ullapati patti prjikassa - Vism.I. 22.). It is also of interest to note that
Buddhaghosa couples the six sikkhpada
which he introduces under
īj“vaprisuddhis“la with similar considerations on j“vaprisuddhi which he derives from the category of
s“la (.... kuhan lapan nemittakat nippesikat lbhena lbhaµ nijigiµsanat '
ti evaµ d“na ca ppadhammnaµ vasena pavatt micchj“v virati -
Vism.I.16.) These hint at
both fraud and artful conversation as means of gaining an easy livelihood in an unworthy
manner. These considerations are
traceable to item 36 in the list of s“la
(Yath v pan ' eke bhonto samaöabrhmaö saddhdeyyni bhojanni
bhujitv te kuhak ca honti lapak ca nemittik ca nippesik ca lbhena ca
lbhaµ nijigiµsitro. Iti evarčp
kuhan lapan paŹivirato hoti. Idam
pi ' ssa hoti s“lasmiµ - D.I. 67.
Sec.55.)[dix] The scope of both Prjika 4 and
Pcittiya 8 seems to be within the range of this item of s“la. Thus we feel inclined to assume that the fourth Prjika too, as
much as the other three, is traceable to the broader basis of s“la which in the
early history of Buddhist
monasticism was the primary guide in the life of the
pabbajita.
Further modifications which
s“la underwent while they were
expressed in the form of sikkhpada
are witnessed in Pcittiya 1 and
3 which deal with lying (musvda)
and tale-bearing (pisuövca) respectively. Here, the original concepts which occur
under s“la are narrowed down and are made more specific.
|
S“la
|
Sikkhpada
|
|
Musvdaµ pahya musvd
paŹivirato hoti saccavd“ saccasandho theto paccayiko avisaµvdako lokassa.[dx] |
Sampajnamusvde
pcittiyaµ[dxi] |
|
Pisuövcam pahya pisuöya
vcya paŹivirato hoti ito sutv na amutra akkht imesaµ bhedya amutra
v sutv na imesaµ akkht amčsaµ bhedya. Iti bhinnnaµ sandht sahitnaµ
v anuppadt samaggrmo samaggarato samagganand“ samaggakaraöiµ vcaµ
bhsit.[dxii] |
Bhikkhupesue
pcittiyaµ.[dxiii] |
Besides these sikkhpada which are closely related to s“la or the
personal moral well-being of the disciple, there are also a host of others in
the Ptimokkha which attempt to maintain the concord and communal harmony of the
Buddhist Saŗgha. A number of sikkhpada
of the Saŗghdisesa group aim at achieving this end.[dxiv]
These may be broadly classified as
calculated to suppress:
(a) Attempts to despise and discredit fellow
members of the Order by making false and unfounded accusations of a definitely
serious nature against them with a view to damaging their spiritual life. Saŗghdisesa 8 and 9 appear to safeguard against such
situations.
"Whatever monk, malignant,
malicious and ill-tempered should defame a monk with an unfounded charge
involving defeat, thinking :
''Thus perhaps may I drive him away from this Brahma-life,' then, if
afterwards he, being pressed or not being pressed, the legal question turning
out to be unfounded, if the monk confesses his malice, it is an offence
entailing a formal meeting of the Order." [dxv]
(b) Attempts to disrupt the united
organization of the Saŗgha by canvassing public opinion against the Saŗgha and
by instituting disciplinary action manoeuvered to cause disunity.[dxvi]
"Whatever monk should go forward
with a schism of the Order which is harmonious, or should persist in taking up
some legal question leading to a dissension : .... there is an offence entailing a
formal meeting of the Order." [dxvii]
Such tendencies were clearly
manifest in the activities of Devadatta.
The following remarks of Devadatta betray him completely
:
"It is possible, your reverence,
with these five items, to make a schism in the Order of the recluse Gotama, a breaking of the concord. For, your
reverence, people esteem austerity." [dxviii]
(c) Attempts to resist, under various
pretexts, correction of bad and unworthy behaviour which is justly undertaken by
fellow members.[dxix]
" If a monk is one who is difficult
to speak to, and if himself being spoken to by the monks according to dhamma
concerning the courses of training included in the exposition, he reckons
himself as one not to be spoken to, saying : ' Do not say anything to me, venerable
ones, either good or bad, and I will not say anything to the venerable ones,
either good or bad; refrain venerable ones, from speaking to me'...... there an
offence entailing a formal meeting of the Order." [dxx]
There is
yet another collection of 16 sikkhpada
(including rules from the Nissaggiya, Pcittiya and PŹidesan“ya groups)
whose purpose is to safeguard the mutual relations of the Bhikkhus and the
Bhikkhunis..[dxxi] These must admittedly
bear the stamp of relative lateness in that they pertain to Bhikkhunis, the
members of the latterly established Order of nuns. Irregular performance of monastic duties
and excesses in personal relationships which are detrimental to the progress of
the religious life and also would provoke public censure come within the purview
of these regulations.
Their distribution is as
follows:
|
Nissaggiya 4 and 17
|
Monks engaging the services
of the nuns. |
|
Pcittiya 26
|
Monks rendering services to the
nuns. |
|
Nis. 5 and Pc. 59
|
Monks accepting and using robes
belonging to the nuns. |
|
Pcittiya 25
|
Monks giving robes to the
nuns. |
|
Pcittiya 29 and PŹidesan“ya
1 and 2 |
Nuns expressing their
personal attachment to the monks. |
|
Pcittiya 21 -
24 |
Irregular performance of monastic duties by monks towards
the nuns. |
|
Pcittiya 27, 28, 30 |
: Irregular social relationships of
monks towards the nuns. |
In the group of Pcittiya are found
a number of rules which deal with matters of procedure and propriety to be
observed within the monastic organization so that its collective honour and
authority may in no way be undermined.[dxxii] A monk shall not maliciously challenge
the validity of an expiatory act which has been properly carried out by members
of the Saŗgha and urge for its performance again. (Yo pana bhikkhu jnaµ yathdhammaµ nihatdhikaraöaµ
punakammya ukkoŹeyya pcittiyaµ - Vin.IV.126 : Pc. 63.) He should also not conduct himself in
such a way as to reduce or nullify the effect of an act of punishment inflicted on an
offender.[dxxiii] Nor should he repudiate
the authority or doubt the competence of his fellow members when they advise him
on matters of discipline. (Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhčhi sahadhammikaµ vuccamno
evaµ vadeyya na tv ' haµ vuso etasmiµ
sikkhpade sikkhissmi yva na aaµ bhikkhuµ vyattaµ vinayadharaµ
paripucchm“ ' ti pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.141 : Pc. 71.) He is
also not to underrate the value of the disciplinary measures agreed upon by the
Saŗgha as being effective and essential for the well-being of the
community. (Yo pana bhikkhu
ptimokkhe uddissamne evaµ vadeyya kiµ pan' imehi khuddnukhuddakehi
sikkhpadehi uddiŹŹhehi yvadeva kukkuccya vihesya vilekhya saµvattant“ ' ti
sikkhpadavivaööake pcittiyaµ -
Vin. IV. 143: Pc.72). These
sikkhpada show that the purpose of
the Ptimokkha was not only to safeguard the outward conduct and the moral life
of the disciple but also to protect the machinery which was set up to achieve
this end.
In the code of the Ptimokkha even
the day to day life of the Buddhist
monk is circumscribed within certain considerations relating to the articles of
daily use such as his bowl and the robe, beds, seats, rugs etc.[dxxiv] We notice that on
account of certain abuses by monks they were forbidden the use of needle-cases
made of bone, ivory and horn. In the evolution of monastic discipline such
restrictions become general rules and through the code of the Ptimokkha govern
the life of all members of the community.
Likewise, the monks are forbidden the use of couches and chairs which are
bolstered with cotton on account of the protests that they are like the luxuries
enjoyed by laymen.[dxxv] The use and
distribution of what belongs to the Saŗgha also needed to be done with
sufficient caution.[dxxvi] Neglect and damage of
monastic property and misappropriation of what belongs to the collective
organization of the Saŗgha for private ends are safeguarded against. A monk who places for his own use a
couch or a chair or a mattress or a stool belonging to the Order in the open
air, should either remove it or
have it removed on departing, or
should inform those concerned of his departure. If he does not do so, there is
an offence of expiation - Pcittiya.[dxxvii] It is also stated that
a monk who knowingly appropriates for himself or fransfers to another individual
a benefit which accrues to the Saŗgha is guilty of a breach of discipline. In the former case he is gulity of the
more serious offence of Nissaggiya Pcittiya and in the latter of a
Pcittiya.[dxxviii] It is clear from these
injunctions that the Ptimokkha also takes cognizance of a considerably settled
monastic life.
Of the diverse monastic rituals
witnessed in the Khandhakas the Ptimokkha has a few references to the kaŹhina
ubbhra, which is closely
associated with the ceremony of the vassvsa or rains-retreat, and these too, are mainly in terms of
the acceptance and use of robes.[dxxix] The sikkhpada deal no more with it. On the other hand, Pcittiya 72 and 73
directly refer to the ritual of the Ptimokkha with a view to eliminate any
irregularities and abuses which may occur in connection with the recital of the
Ptimokkha.[dxxx] Saŗghdisesa12 presupposes the existence of the
Ptimokkha under the term uddesa.
These rules which are contained in the text of the Ptimokkha clearly
reveal the scope and function of the Ptimokkha and its recital as an instrument
for detecting miscreants in the monastic circles and assisting them in their
correction. Therefore we are
compelled to observe that these sikkhpada
were latterly added to the collection of the Ptimokkha while the recital as a
regular observance was acquiring a definite character.
Modelling the life of a monk in
terms of the rules of the Ptimokkha marks the shift of accent from s“la to sikkhpada as well as the change of responsibility
for the maintenance of monastic discipline from the individual monk to the
collective organization of the Saŗgha.
Even the venerable Upasena Vaŗgantaputta who is distinguished as a
forest-dwelling monk devoted to austere ways of living (raako piö¶aptiko
paµsukčliko) seems to accept, as a
member of the general corpus of the Saŗgha, the code of rules laid down by the
Buddha, in its entirety, as the
guiding factor in monastic discipline. (Na mayaµ apaattaµ papessma
paattaµ v na samucchindissma yathpaattesu sikkhpadesu samdya
vattissm ' ti - Vin.III. 231.)
The Buddha heartily endorses this view. Sdhu sdhu upasena, says the
Buddha in recognition of this attitude.
We seem to hear the echo of this in the remarks of the venerable Mah
Kassapa at the First Council where arose the dispute about the abrogation of the
minor rules.[dxxxi]
Thus it is clear that the
sikkhpada and the recital of the
Ptimokkha are closely connected not only in their literary content but also in
their aims and aspirations. Besides, in all the standard definitions of the
virtuous monk, the virtue of his s“la is always coupled with the restraint he
acquires through the discipline of the Ptimokkha and the sikkhpada.[dxxxii] This shows us that from early times in
the history of Buddhism all possible criteria have been used for the maintenance
of good discipline. In the īkaŗkheyya Sutta the Buddha requests his disciples to
go through this complete course of training which couples together s“la and the
Ptimokkha. (Sampannas“l bhikkhave
viharatha saµpanna-ptimokkh ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvut viharatha
cragocarasaµpann anumattesu vajjesu bhayadassv“ samdya sikkhatha
sikkhpadesu - M.I. 33.). True to
this tradition, the venerable
īnanda, in his admonitions to the Sakyan Mahnma, describes in identical terms a worthy
disciple who is a s“lasampanna.
(Idha mahnma ariyasvako s“lav hoti ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto viharati
cragocarasaµpanno anumattesu vajjesu
bhayadassv“ samdya
sikkhati sikkhpadesu. Evaµ kho
mahnma ariyasvako s“lasampanno hoti - M.I. 355.)
Chapter
IX
An
examination of the Pali texts reveals the fact that we are not without Canonical
Sutta references which speak of the existence of the Ptimokkha recital even
during the lifetime of the Buddha.[dxxxiii] In the Mahsakuludy“ Sutta of the
Majjhima Nikya, the Buddha himself
tells Sakuludy“ Paribbjaka how the solitude of his forest-dwelling monks is
regularly interrupted by their attendance at the fortnightly recital of the
Ptimokkha in the assembly of the Saŗgha.
(Santi kho pana me udyi
svak raak pantasensan araavanapatthni pantni sensanni
ajjhogahetv viharanti. Te
anvaddhamsaµ saŗghamajjhe osaranti
ptimokkhuddesya - M.II.
8). This is quite an
incidental reference and no more is said in the Sutta thereafter about the
Ptimokkha ritual.
The Aŗguttara Nikya records the
words of the Vajjiputtaka monk who comes before the Buddha and confesses his
inability to discipline himself in terms of the sikkhpada which are being regularly recited in the
assembly of the Saŗgha every fortnight
(Atha kho aataro vajjiputtako bhikkhu yena bhagav tenupasaŗkami....
Ekamantaµ nisinno kho so vajjiputtako
bhikkhu bhagavantaµ etad
'avoca. Sdhikaµ idaµ bhante
diya¶¶hasikkhpadasatam
anvaddhamsaµ uddesaµ gacchati.
N ' haµ bhante ettha sakkomi sikkhitun ' ti - A.I.230.). But the word Ptimokkha is not used in
this context. However, there is no doubt that the uddesa here referred to as a fortnightly event
is nothing other than what is spoken of elsewhere as the recital of the
Ptimokkha (Ptimokkhuddesa and suttuddesa). The Vinaya too, uses the term uddesa in the sense of the Ptimokkha and its
recital. (Uddesapariypannesu
sikkhpadesč ' ti ptimokkhapariypannesu sikkhpadesu -
Vin.III.178.)
On the other hand, the
Gopakamoggallna Sutta which comes down to us as a
post-parinibbna composition of fair antiquity, gives us more details regarding the
ritual of the Ptimokkha.[dxxxiv] According to the
Suttta, this ritual seems to have been vital to the early Buddhist monastic
community to maintain and establish
its purity and exercise control over its miscreants. (Atthi kho brhmaöa tena bhagavat
jnat arahat passat sammsambuddhena bhikkhčnaµ sikkhpadaµ paattaµ
ptimokkhaµ uddiŹŹhaµ. Te mayaµ tad
' ah ' uposathe yvatik ekaµ gmakkhettaµ upanissya viharma te sabbe ekajjhaµ
sannipatma sannipatitv yassa taµ vattati taµ ajjhesma. Tasmin ce bhaamne hoti bhikkhussa
patti hoti v“tikkamo taµ mayaµ yathdhammaµ yathsatthaµ krem ' ti. Na kira no bhavanto krenti dhammo no
kret“ ' ti - M.III.10). Thus Ptimokkha undoubtedly became the
most dynamic institution in the early history of the Ssana. It also soon roused endless opposition
from members of the monastic community on account of its uncompromising spirit
of correction and reform. On the
other hand, the Ptimokkha ritual itself lost its dynamism in course of time and
there is evidence to believe that in its struggle for survival it lent itself to
considerable modification.
It is with regret that we note that
the translation of the above passage in the Further Dialogues of the Buddha is
extremely misleading.[dxxxv] We would translate the
passage as follows : ' O Brahmin,
the Exalted One has laid down sikkhpada and instituted the Ptimokkha for the
use of the Bhikkhus. We are the
Bhikkhus for whom they were laid down and all of us who live by a single village unit assemble ourselves together on the day
of the Uposatha and whosover amongst us knows it, i.e. the Ptimokkha (yassa taµ
vattati ), we request him to recite
it (taµ ajjhesma). While
it is being recited if (it is
discovered that) a Bhikkhu has an offence or a transgression of which he is
guilty, then we deal with him (krema) according to the Dhamma and the
injunctions (yathdhammam yathsatthaµ).
It is not the monks who punish us but the Dhamma which punishes
us.'
Sukumar Dutt, in his The Buddha And
Five After-Centuries, has made use of the translation of this passage in the
Further Dialogues of the Buddha which we have refered to above.[dxxxvi] Dutt has certainly
attempted to improve on the choice of words in the translation. He replaces almsman with Bhikkhu,
Doctrine with Dhamma and '
according to book ' with ' scriptural ordinances '. But these
changes do not add any more sense to the translation. If the statement yassa taµ vattati taµ ajjhesma of the passage quoted
above which we have translated as
'whosoever knows it
(Ptimokkha), we request him (to
recite it) ' still baffles the
reader we would refer him to Vin. I.116 where it occurs in a clearer
context. (Te theraµ ajjhesiµsu
uddisatu bhante thero ptimokkhan ' ti. So evaµ ha na me vuso vattat“ '
ti - Vin. I.
116.)
Placed in such a situation, it is not at all surprising that Dutt
came to the following conclusion :
' The periodical assembly mentioned by īnanda seems to have been the
primitive bond of the Buddhist sect after the extinction of personal leadership
on the Lord's decease.... It is not known when exactly a disciplinary code
ascribed traditionally to the Lord himself, of which the Ptimokkha was the
final development, was first devised in the Buddhist community.'[dxxxvii] His theories which
resulted from this assumption are examined in the relevant places.
In the Gopakamoggallna Sutta, the
declaration of the venerable īnanda to the Brahmin Vassakra is in answer to the
question whether the monastic community was without guidance on the death of the
Master who appointed no successor.
It is interesting that both in the proper care of the monastic community
and the spiritual welfare of its members, it is the Dhamma which embodies the
spirit of the Buddha's teaching, which īnanda claims to be their leader and
guide (Na kho mayaµ brhmaöa appaŹisaraö sappaŹisaraö mayaµ brhmaöa
dhammapaŹisaraö - M.III. 9.)
This regard and respect which the
disciples still seem to have for the Dhamma even after the demise of the Master
is reminiscent of the advice given by the Buddha to his disciples in the
Kakacčpama Sutta. (Tasmt ' iha
bhikkhave dhammaµ y ' eva sakkaronto dhammaµ garukaronto dhammaµ apacyamn
suvac bhavissma sovacassataµ pajjissm ' ti evaµ hi vo bhikkhave
sikkhitabbaµ - M.I.126.). It also
reminds us of his sdvice to īnanda in the Mahparinibbna Sutta. (Tasmt ' iha nanda attad“p viharatha
attasaraö anaasaraö dhammad“p dhammasaraö anaasaraö ..... Ye hi ke ci nanda etarahi v mamaµ v
accayena attad“p viharissanti.....anaasaraö tamatagge me te nanda bhikkhč
bhavissanti ye ke ci sikkhkm ' ti - D.II.100.) In both these cases, which on the
authority of internal evidence mark a relatively early and a very late stage in
the history of the Ssana, the disciples are advised by the Buddha to be guided
by the Dhamma and to respect its leadership. But the increasing need for regulations,
with greater concern for the letter of the law, is already evident in the Sutta
PiŹaka. We have already witnessed
in the Bhaddli Sutta the introduction of sikkhpada into the sphere of Buddhist monastic
discipline.[dxxxviii] In the Gopakamoggallna
Sutta, īnanda makes pointed reference to the existence of the sikkhpada as well as of the ritual
Ptimokkha.[dxxxix]
What appears to be the most
complete account of the recital of the Ptimokkha appears in the
Uposathakkhandhaka of the Mahvagga.[dxl] This account, which is
very composite in character,
including commentarial notes which are of a relatively later date,
attempts to place the inauguration of the ritual in a convincing historical
situation. It introduces the
establishment of the recital of the Ptimokkha through several preliminary
stages not all of which seem to be really necessary. This is perhaps the result of the editor
of the text following too closely the formulation of
sikkhpada.
and their modified versions in
successive stages in the Suttavibaŗga where a historical or imaginary situation
is provided for every addition or change.
It is said that King Seniya Bimbisra of Magadha brought to the notice of
the Buddha the fact that the Paribbjakas met regularly on the 8th, 14th and
15th days of the fortnight and preached their Dhamma (dhammaµ bhsanti) as a
result of which they gained fame and popularity and grew in strength. So he wished that the disciples of the
Buddha, too, did the same.[dxli]
In response to this the Buddha
instructed his disciples to meet accordingly, hoping perhaps that they would
engage themselves in some religious activity at such assemblies. But we are told that in the absence of
specific instructions from the Master they sat in the assembly and remained
silent like ' dumb creatures.'
However, it is stated that the people were wise enough to remind the
disciples that it was their duty to preach the Dhamma when they met (Nanu nma
sannipatitehi dhammo bhsitabbo ' ti - Vin. I.102). Thereupon the Buddha recommended that it
should be so (Anujnmi bhikkhave
ctuddase pannarase aŹŹhamiy ca pakkhassa sannipatitv dhammaµ bhsitun ' ti -
Ibid.) But it must be
mentioned at this stage that the Mahvagga does not refer to these assemblies of
the Buddhist Saŗgha or of the Paribbjakas as Uposatha. They are no more than regular meetings
of those who had renounced the household life at which, even the laymen knew,
the Dhamma would be preached. The laymen attended those meetings for the purpose
of listening to the Dhamma. Nor do we find the term Ptimokkha associated with
these meetings. But as a
modification to these regular meetings of religious men at which their special
doctrines were preached before laymen the Buddha is said to have suggested the
idea that his disciples should perform the Ptimokkha recital as a religious
duty on the day of the Uposatha. He
appears to sanction for this purpose the recital of the body of sikkhpada which he had already laid down for the
guidance of his disciples.[dxlii]
But the recital of the Ptimmokkha
assumes a more positive and definite character where it is presented as closely
following the promulgation of the
sikkhpada in the attempt to arrest the decline in monastic discipline. That this was undoubtedly the primary function of the Ptimokkha
is clear from the request of the venerable Sriputta in the Suttavibhaŗga
pertaining to the institution of sikkhpada and the recital of the Ptimokkha and from the reply given
to him by Buddha.[dxliii] The ritual of the
Ptimokkha empowers the collective organization of the Saŗgha, on the authority
of the ' dhamma and the
instructions ' (yathdhammaµ
yathsatthaµ), to sit in judgement
over the conduct of its members.[dxliv] The sikkhpada of which the text of the
Ptimokkha is constituted form the criteria. One should also take note of the
procedure adopted by the senior monk (thera) who recites the Ptimokkha in the
assembly (ptimokkhuddesaka) in
questioning the members of the assembly with regard to their purity in terms of
each group of sikkhpada recited by
him. In the light of evidence from
the Suttas which we have already examined there does not appear to be any justification to regard this aspect of
the Ptimokkha recital as being of later origin.
But Sukumar Dutt calls this 'the present ritual form of the
Ptimokkha' and says that it 'was not its original form - the
original was a disciplinary code.' [dxlv] Dutt presumes the
existence of the ' original '
Ptimokkha in the bare form of
a code.[dxlvi] He says that the
Suttavibhaŗga contemplates it as such, and goes on to add the following remarks
: ' In the Suttavibhaŗga there is
not the usual word-for-word commentary on the " introductory formular " of the Ptimokkha as we now have it - as
text for a ritual.' A few lines
below he concludes as follows :
'The Suttavibhaŗga, in fact, regards the Ptimokkha as a mere code, while
the Mahvagga regards it as a liturgy.' But how does one arrive at such a
conclusion? When Dutt speaks
of the Ptimokkha as a mere code does he mean that it was not used for the
purpose of a recital? Apparently he
does so, for the only
argument
he adduces in support of his thesis
is that the Suttavibhaŗga does not provide a word-for-word commentary on the "
introductory forlmular " of the
Ptimokkha which is now used as the introduction to the recital. We should point out here that not only
is there no commentary on the " introductory formular " in the Suttavibhaŗga, but the "
introductory formular " itself is
not found in the Suttavibhaŗga. But
this does not prove that the recital of the Ptimokkha was not known to the
Suttavibhaŗga. On the other hand,
the evidence proves the contrary.
At a stage when the true spirit of
the Uddesa or the recital of the Ptimokkha was well known there would hardly
have been a need for the
incorporation of such a formal introduction in the Suttavibhaŗga.[dxlvii] Nevertheless, one
cannot forget the fact that every sikkhpada in the Suttavibhanga is introduced
in a manner as though it were intended to be recited : Eva ca pana bhikkhave imaµ sikkhpadaµ
uddiseyytha. On the other hand,
the text of the Ptimokkha, which
contains only the sikkhpada
without any details about them, and which we believe was extracted from
the Suttavibhaŗga to serve the needs of the recital, carries this " introductory formular ". It is misleading to refer to the
Ptimokkha which is known to the Suttavibhaŗga as a mere code. The Suttavibhaŗga knows fully well
the functions of the Ptimokkha recital as is evident from Pcittiyas 72 and
73.[dxlviii] The Ptimokkha recital which is known to the
Suttavibhaŗga and to some of the Suttas in the Nikyas is a dynamic function
where a close watch is kept over the conduct of the members of the Saŗgha, the miscreants are detected and are
dealt with according to the law. If Dutt attaches so much importance to the
negative evidence of the absence of the commentary to the " introductory
formular " in the
Suttavibhaŗga, then it seems hardly
justifiable to pay no attention to the positive evidence which points to a
different conclusion.
This being so, where does one find
the ' original form ' of the Ptimokkha as a 'bare code'? Does one find such a code referred to by
the name of Ptimokkha divorced from the confessional meeting of the
Uposatha? What did apparently exist
prior to the institution of the recital of the Ptimokkha was the body of
sikkhpada. After his remarks on what appears to him to be the form of the
Ptimokkha, Dutt proceeds to comment on the Ptimokkha as a monastic
function. In his search for
the ' missing link ' Dutt is prepared to see in the story of
Buddha Vipassi in the Mahpadna Sutta
' an earlier rite '.[dxlix] This he calls 'the archaic practice among the
Buddhists' [dl] and says that the
recital of the Ptimokkha replaced it
at a comparatively late stage of
the growth of the Saŗgha.[dli]
It is also difficult to see how
Dutt comes to the conclusion that '
the rudimentary idea in the Buddhist Uposatha service seems to have been a
ritualistic one, - the observance of sacred days '.[dlii] On the other hand, we have already shown
how the Uposatha and the Ptimokkha recital of the Buddhist Saŗgha are closely
identified. Besides, we fail to
detect the sacredness associated
with these ' days ' which the Buddhist Saŗgha was expected
to observe. No matter to whom they
were sacred, they were accepted by the Buddhists too, because it was convenient to use for the
purpose of religious observances these conventionally recognised days. Further, as is clear from the Mahvagga,
additional religious activities on the part of the Buddhist Saŗgha on these
popularly respected days of the moon would have elevated them in the esteem of
the people.[dliii]
Dutt is obviously making a needless
search when he attempts to find a reason for the preaching of the Dhamma by
religious mendicants when they meet on those specified days.[dliv] This is what he says
:
' It is curious to observe the
closeness between the Vrata ceremonies of the Vedic sacrificer and the Posadha
ceremonies of the Jaina, though the reason, as given in the Satapatha-Brhmaöa,
for such observances has no relevance to Jaina faith. The Jainas retire on these sacred days into their
Posadha-sl, as the Vedic
sacrificer would go into the Agnygra,
and they take upon themselves the vow of the four abstinences
(Upavsa), viz. from eating (hra), from luxuries
(sar“rasatkra), from sexual intercourse (abrahma), and daily work (vypra). Similar abstinences are prescribed also for
Buddhist laymen who celebrate the day of Uposatha by the observance of the Eight
S“las.'
' Among religious mendicants,
however, the custom seems to have been different from that which prevailed among
laity. It is another form of sacred
day observance that is related of them in Mahvagga, ii. i. The reason for this
different form is not far to seek. The
'abstinences' were already
implied in the norm of life of the religious mendicant, and some substitute had
to be found among them for the Vrata abstinences observed by lay folk. Such
substitute was found in religious discourse.' [dlv]
It should be clear to every student
of Buddhism that the abstinences referred to by Dutt in relation to the Eight
S“la are only a continuation of the
spirit of abstinence and renunciation which is characteristic of all s“la from the five s“la of the layman to the major s“la of the pabbajita. The similarity noted here is only a
coincidence and shows nothing in common with the Vrata ceremonies of the Vedic
ritualist. Hence one cannot find
any basis for this forced remark which is made about religious mendicants
that ' some substitute had to be
found among them for the Vrata abstinences observed by lay
folk.'
The Gopakamoggallna Sutta which
makes a brief but comprehensive statement about the recital of the Ptimokkha
speaks of the ' single village unit
' (ekaµ gmakkhettaµ) as its proper
sphere of operation.[dlvi] The gmakkhetta seems to have served as a convenient
unit for the collective organization of the disciples for their monastic
activities. The rigid divisions and
technicalities of S“m which abound in the Mahvagga[dlvii] are conspicuous by
their absence in the Suttas. Both
in the Gopakamoggallna and the Mahsakuludy“ Suttas, participation in the
ritual of the Ptimokkha, referred to there under the name of Uddesa, is looked
upon as a regular duty which is voluntarily performed by the members of the
monastic community as a collective body.
It was looked upon as a ritual which was inseparable from Buddhist
monasticism. Participation in it
was a legitimate right of the members of the Saŗgha which was withdrawn only on
the commission of a Prjika offence.
The following explanation of the term asaµvso, which refers to the penalty incurred by
one who is guilty of a Prjika offence or for one suspended, makes it
abundantly clear : asaµvso ' ti
saµvso nma ekakammaµ ekuddeso samasikkht eso saµvso nma - Vin.III.
28. This complete and total
participation in the Uddesa (ekuddeso)
also implies the solidarity of the monastic group in addition to ascertaining and safeguarding its
purity (Samaggo hi saŗgho sammodamno avivadamno ekuddeso phsu viharati -
Vin.III.172.) According to a
statement in the Mahvagga the performance of the Uposatha implies the unity and
solidarity of the body of Bhikkhus
who are participating in it.
(Anujnmi bhikkhave samaggnam uposathakamman ' ti -
Vin.I.105.)
The solidarity which the ritual of
the Ptimokkha thus gives to the monastic group seems secondary to the other,
perhaps earlier, ideal of the purity of the individual monk and hence of the
group as a whole. In the
Gopakamoggallna Sutta the recital itself is referred to very briefly in
non-technical terms.[dlviii] But it has a very definite standpoint
with regard to the miscreants in the
monastic circles and their
prosecution and punishment. It is
clear from the evidence of the Vinaya too,
that the recital of the Ptimokkha had this end in view. During the
recital of the Ptimokkha no monk shall,
on grounds of ignorance, claim forgiveness for an offence committed by
him, if he had been present at least at two earlier recitals of the
Ptimokkha. (....ta ce bhikkhuµ
ae bhikkhč jneyyuµ nisinnapubbaµ imin bhikkhun dvikkhattuµ ptimokkhe uddissamne ko pana vdo bhiyyo na ca
tassa bhikkhuno aöakena mutti atthi ya ca tattha pattiµ panno ta ca
yathdhammo kretabbo...Vin.IV.144.)
He is to be dealt with for the offence according to the law. He is also further guilty of not being
alert and attentive during the recital.
(.....uttari c ' assa moho ropetabbo tassa te vuso albh tassa te
dulladdhaµ yaµ tvaµ ptimokkhe uddissamne na sdhukaµ aŹŹhikatv
manasikaros“ ' ti. Idaµ tasmiµ mohanake pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.144.) Thus he has failed to
comply with the requirements of the ritual which are specifically laid down
elsewhere. (Ptimokkhaµ uddisissmi
taµ sabbe ' va sant sdhukaµ suöoma manasikaroma -
Vin.I.103.)
On the other hand, the Mahvagga
gives us an account of the Ptimokkha recital with a far greater concern for
details. Procedure assumes here a
great deal more of importance.
(Eva ca pana bhikkhave uddisitabbaµ. Vyattena bhikkuhn paŹibalena saŗgho
petabbo. Suötu me bhante saŗgho.
Ajjh ' uposatho paööaraso. Yadi
saŗghassa pattakallaµ saŗgho uposathaµ kareyya ptimokkhaµ uddiseyya. Kiµ saŗghassa pubbakiccaµ. Prisuddhim yasmanto rocetha. Ptimokkhaµ uddisissmi. Taµ sabbe ' va
sant sdhukaµ suöoma manasikaroma.
Yassa siy patti so vikareyya.
Asantiy pattiy tuöh“ bhavitabbaµ. Tuöh“bhvena kho panyasmante parisuddh
' ti vedissmi - Vin.I.102.).
The recital of the Ptimokkha must
first be formally proposed before the assembly of the Saŗgha. In the absence of any objections from
the members of the congregation the approval of the Saŗgha is assumed and the
Ptimokkha-reciter commences the recital.
It is on behalf of the Saŗgha that he does so and his action is made to
be representative of the wish of the Saŗgha. The Ptimokkha-reciter announces that he
is ready to commence the recital.
However, he identifies himself with the whole group in the performance of
the ritual. In the Kaŗkhvitaran“,
Buddhaghosa attempts to safeguard against a possible misinterpretation of the
phrase ptimokkhaµ uddisissmi which occurs in the Mahvagga.[dlix] It could be argued that
the Ptimokkha-reciter would be excluded thereby from active participation in
the ritual on the grounds that he is conducting the ceremony and is therefore
outside it. But as pointed out
earlier the recital of the Ptimokkha is a ritual to be undertaken and performed
by all members of the Saŗgha living within a specified area.[dlx] Therefore participation in it, either by
being personally present or in absentia, was incumbent on every monk (Ettha ca kic ' pi ptimokkhaµ
uddisissm“ ' ti vuttatt suöotha
manasikaroth ' ti vattuµ yuttaµ
viya dissati. Saŗgho uposathaµ
kareyy ' ti imin pana na sameti.
Samaggassa hi saŗghassa etaµ uposathakaraöaµ. Ptimokkuddesako ca saŗghapariypanno '
va. Iccassa saŗghapariypannatt
suöoma manasikarom ' it vattuµ yuttaµ - Kkvt.14.).
The Mahvagga has also a few
remarks concerning the preliminaries to be observed by the Saŗgha before the
Ptimokkha-reciter commences the recital.
(Kiµ sanghassa pubbakiccaµ. Prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha. Ptimokkhaµ uddisissmi -
Vin.I.102.) Strangely enough, the
old commentary which is appended to the text has no comment whatsoever on these
ideas of preliminary duties which the Saŗgha is called upon to perform. The atatement which requires the
declaration of purity - Prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha - does not get a single
word of comment. On the other hand, it picks up such words as yasmanto for
comment. The Samantapsdik
too, makes no comment at all on any
of the details of procedure given in the Mahvagga, although it elaborates on a
few ideas picked out from the Old Commentary.[dlxi] However, the
Kaŗkhvitaran“ explains kim saŗghassa pubbakiccaµ as an inquiry made by the
Ptimokkha-reciter before commencing the recital as to whether the preliminary
duties to be performed by the Saŗgha had been done. (Kim taµ katan ' ti pucchati
- Kkvt.11.) It further explains
these duties with the aid of both Canonical texts
and commentaries (Kiµ saŗghassa
pubbakiccan ' ti saŗgho uposathaµ kareyy ' ti evaµ uposathakaraöasaµbandhena
vuttassa saŗghassa uposathe kattabbe yaµ taµ anujnmi bhikkhave uposathgraµ sammajjitun ' ti din
nayena pliyaµ gataµ aŹŹhakathsu ca
Sammajjan“
pad“po ca udakaµ sanena ca
uposathassa etni pubbakaraöan ' ti
vuccati.
Chandaprisuddhi utukkhnaµ bhikkhugaöan ca ovdo
uposathassa
etni pubbakiccan ' ti vuccati.
Evaµ dv“hi
nmehi navavidhaµ pubbakiccaµ dassitaµ - Kkvt. 10f.).
We notice here that Buddhaghosa,
following the earlier commetarial
tradition, takes the Canonical statement
anujnmi bhikkhave
uposathgraµ sammajjituµ....[dlxii] to mean the preliminary
duties incumbent on the Saŗgha who are participating in the recital of the
Ptimokkha. But as we examine these directions in their context we
notice that this preparation of the venue of the recital constitues the
preliminary duties to be undertaken and supervised by the monks who act the host
for the occasion. What is given
there as most binding is that no junior monk shall, except in case of illness,
fail to execute these duties when ordered to do so by a senior monk. The failure to do so results in a
DukkaŹa offence. It is in the same
spirit that these preliminary duties (pubbakaraöni) are recommended to a monk
who is the sole occupant of a monastery to prepare for the Uposatha with the
hope that other monks will arrive on the scene.[dlxiii] It is here, in
commenting on this that Buddhaghosa incorporates in the Samanatapsdik the commentarial
tradition which he inherits from the AŹŹhakathcariy regarding these
preliminaries.[dlxiv] Thus one cannot fail to take note of
this discrepancy. A later
tradition, however, tries to explain how these preliminary duties, though
performed by an individual, come to be reckoned as the lot of the Saŗgha :
Navavidhaµ pubbakiccaµ therena öattena katatt saŗghena kataµ nma
hoti.[dlxv]
On the other hand, chandaprisuddhi which is mentioned in the second list of
preliminary duties known as pubbakicca
occupies a place of real importance in the early history of the ritual.
As the innocence of every member was tested during the recital in the full
assembly of the Saŗgha and the miscreants were punished, the presence of every
member who belongs to that assembly was absolutely essential. We use the word assembly here to mean
the totality of the disciples who live within the formally accepted region of
samna s“m or common communal
activity. The Suttas depict such a
region as a very natural division of residence like a village (.... yvatik
ekaµ gmakkhettaµ upanissya viharma te sabbe ekajjhaµ
sannipatma...M.III.10.). However,
with the expansion of community life the use of such natural divisions would
have become impracticable. Thus we
find in the Mahvagga the origin of a formally accepted region of such
co-residence or ekvsa.[dlxvi] Through a Saŗghakamma such a unit of
communal activity is demarcated and agreed upon by the Saŗgha. Under the injunctions of the Vinaya no
monk shall fail to co-operate for the perfect execution of this arrangement
except under the pain of a
Dukkata (Na tv ' eva vaggena
saŗghena uposatho ktabbo. Yo
kareyya patti dukkaŹassa - Vin.I.108,120). We notice a very rigid ritualistic
interpretation of this principle at Vin.I.122. There it is deemed possible to
give validity to the Uposathakamma by removing the non-participating monk
temporarily out of the region of common communal activity which has been designated as
the S“m (Iŗgha tumhe yasmanto imaµ bhikkhuµ niss“maµ
netha yva saŗgho uposathaµ karot“
' ti - Vin.I.122.).
Under normal conditions the ritual
could not be carried out or would be considered ineffective in the absence of
even one member. This, in fact,
seems to have been the accepted position in the early days of the Buddhist
Saŗgha.[dlxvii] The Buddha once ordered the monks to
assemble so that the
Saŗgha might collectively perform
the Uposatha. Then it was brought
to his notice that one monk was absent from the assembly on account of illness.
The Buddha decreed on this occasion that any monk who absents himself from the
assembly should convey his innocence to the members of that assembly (Anujnmi
bhikkhave gilnena bhikkhun prisuddhiµ dtuµ - Vin.1.120). He further indicated different
ways in which it could be done. Here he definitely insisted that any performance
of the ritual without the full assembly or without ascertaining the purity of
the absentee members of the Saŗgha
would not only be invalid but would also be a definite offence (Na tv ' eva vaggena saŗghena uposatho
ktabbo. Kareyya ce patti
dukkaŹassa - Vin.I.120.). This act
of legislation is further proof of the fact that ascertaining and establishing
the purity of the members of the Saŗgha, both present as well as absent, was the major function of the Ptimokkha
recital.
Once the assembly of the Saŗgha has
met in full membership for the recital of the Ptimokkha and the preliminary
duty of communicating the purity and the consent of the absentees has been
performed, the Ptimokkha-reciter
proceeds thereafter with the recital.
According to the statement in the Suttas the miscreants in the monastic
circle were discovered and punished during this recital.[dlxviii] The text of the Ptimokkha too, reveals
the fact that the purity of the monks was tested and established during the recital and that disciplinary
action was also taken against the transgressing monks at the same time (Tena kho
pana samayena chabbaggiy bhikkhč ancraµ caritv aöakena pann ' ti
jnantč ' ti ptimokkhe uddissamne
evaµ vadenti idn ' eva kho mayaµ
jnma ayam ' pi kira dhammo
suttgato suttapariypanno anvaddhamsaµ uddesaµ gacchat“ ' ti... na ca
tassa bhikkhuno aöakena mutti
atthi yaŗ ca tattha pattiµ panno ta ca yathdhammo kretabbo ...
Vin.IV.144.).
It is also clear that the testing
was done in terms of each group of sikkhpada after its recital. The monks are called upon to confess if
they have violated any of the said rules under each group (UddiŹŹh kho yasmanto cattro prjik
dhamm yesaµ bhikkhu aataraµ v aataraµ v pajjitv na labhati bhikkhčhi
saddhiµ saµvsaµ yath pure tath pacch prjiko hoti asaµvso. Tatth ' yasmante pucchmi kacci ' ttha
parisuddh dutiyam ....tatiyaµ... parisuddh. Parisuddh etth ' yasmanto. Tasm
tuöh“. Evametaµ dhraym“ 'ti - Vin.III.109.).[dlxix] All these accounts seem
to agree on the point that the confession of guilt and the establishment of the
purity of the members of the congregation as well as the punishment of the
offenders were carried out at the assembly which met fortnightly for the recital
of the Ptimokkha.
The Mahvagga account of the Ptimokkha recital
categorically states that during the recital all members of the congregation
should listen attentively to it and ponder over its contents and whosoever
discovers himself to be guilty of any transgression should confess the same
before the Saŗgha.[dlxx] This regular scrutiny
would have served to ensure the purity of individual monks and also would have
kept the community of monks as a whole above suspicion, as the innocence of
every member in terms of the code of monastic discipline was tested in the
assembly and the purity of the Sangha was thus established (Ptimokkham
uddisissmi. Taµ sabbe ' va sant sdhukam suöoma manasikaroma. Yassa siy patti so vikareyya. Asantiy pattiy tuöh“
bhavitabbaµ. Tuöh“bhvena kho pana
yasmante parisuddh ' ti vedissmi - Vin.I.103 f.).
Yet another, and a very distinctly
different function of this ritual is envisaged in the Mahvagga. It appears that
the confession of guilt, if any, by the monks during the recital of the
Ptimokkha is insisted upon not only because no miscreant should go unpunished
for his offence and thereby help to perpetuate such offences, but also because
this confession is said to bring about the disburdening of the offender of the
sense of guilt without which no spiritual progress could be made. The Mahvagga states that this
absolution through confession is essential as a prelude to all spiritual
attainments (Tasm saramnena
bhikkhun pannena visuddhpekkhena santi patti viktabb. īvikat hi 'ssa phsu hoti - Vin. I.103.). In the ritual of the Ptimokkha, it is
evidently this role of 'the purge
from guilt ' (vikat hi ' ssa
phsu hoti ) which earned for itself the title of Ptimokkha, and
perhaps through this the text too,
which is recited at the ritual of the Uposatha came to be known by the same
name.[dlxxi] The confession removes
the sense of guilt from standing as an impediment on the path to higher
spiritual attainment (īvikat hi ' ssa phsu hot“ ' ti kissa phsu hoti. PaŹhamassa
jhnassa adhigamya....kusalnaµ dhammnaµ adhigamya phsu hot“ ' ti - Ibid.
104.).
However, the virtue of confession
cannot be in the mere act of owning one's guilt. We should really seek it in the
acceptance of penalties and punishments by the offender and in his determination
to abstain from the repetition of such offences in the future (yati
saµvarya). It is also declared by
the Buddha both in the Suttas and in the Vinaya that the ability to admit and
accept one's error and make amends for it as well as safeguard against its recurrence is
the basis of progress (Vuddhi hi es bhikkhave ariyassa vinaye yo accayaµ
accayato disv yathdhammaµ paŹikaroti yatiµ saµvaraµ pajjati - Vin.I.
315.[dlxxii]). That this attitude to crime and its
correction was not restricted to monastic discipline alone is clear from the
Buddha's advice to king Ajtasattu in the Smaaphala Sutta.[dlxxiii] The Vinaya too, records a similar
incident where the Buddha advises the man, who being instigated by Devadatta,
lay in ambush to assassinate him.[dlxxiv] This comprehensive process of
confession, however, seems to have undergone considerable change in the history
of the Ptimokkha recital.
It is interesting to note that we
discover, both in the Suttas and in the Vinaya, a tendency on the part of some
transgressing monks to suppress and conceal any lapses in discipline into which
they have slipped (Źhnaµ kho pan ' etaµ vuso vijjati yaµ idh ' ekaccassa
bhikkhuno evam icch uppajjeyya patti ca vata panno assaµ na ca maµ bhikkhč
jneyyuµ - M.I. 27.). The fear and
dislike of consequent punishment and loss of personal reputation may be
considered as being responsible for this.
There also seem to have been others who, though their guilt was known to
fellow members and they themselves were willing to admit it, wished that they
might not be prosecuted in public (Anuraho maµ bhikkhč codeyyuµ no saŗghamajjhe
- Ibid.).
The Posadhasthpanavastu of the
Mčlasarvstivda Vinaya records an incident which reflects this
tendency.[dlxxv] A monk objects to the declaration of his
guilt before the whole assembly by the Ptimokkha-reciter and adds that it would
have been best done in private. It
is also stated there that the
Buddha sanctioned this request.
(Sthavira prtimok©asčtrodde§amuddi§eti. Sa kathayati. īyu©mannapari§uddh
tvadbhik©upar©at. Sthavira ko'
trpari§uddhah. Tvameva tvat. Sthavira kathaµ nma tvay saŗghamadhye
mama §irasi mu©Źir niptit. Aho
vat ' ham tvay eknte coditah sym ' iti. Sa tu©n“mavasthitah. Etatprakaraöaµ bhik©avo bhagavata
rocayanti. Bhagavnha. Eknte
codayitavyo na saŗghamadhye - Gilgit
MSS. III.3.107 f.).
It is clear from evidence in the Pali Vinaya too, that there was
opposition to prosecution and disciplinary action from certain individuals and
groups in the monastic community (Sace ime vinaye pakatauno bhavissanti amhe
yen ' icchakaµ yad ' icchakaµ yvad ' icchakaµ ka¶¶hissanti parika¶¶hissanti.
Handa mayaµ vuso vinayaµ vivaööem ' ti - Vin.IV.143. Also : Bhikkhu pan ' eva dubbacajtiko hoti
uddesapariypannesu sikkhpadesu bhikkhčhi sahadhammikaµ vuccamno attnaµ
avacan“yaµ karoti m maµ ki ci avacuttha kalyöaµ v ppakaµ v aham ' pi
yasmante na ki ci vakkhmi kalyöaµ v ppakaµ v.Viramath 'yasmanto mama
vacany ' ti -Vin.III.178.[dlxxvi] Therefore, even where the members of the
Saŗgha were physically present at
the Ptimokkha recital, compelled by the regulations which required them to be
present there, yet the miscreants could be non-co-operative in not admitting
their transgressions when called upon to do so (Yo pana bhikkhu yvatatiyaµ
anussviyamne saramno santiµ pattiµ na vikareyya - Vin. I.103.) This would completely nullify the
purpose of the recital where the purity of the Saŗgha is assumed by their
silence (Tuöh“bhvena kho pana
yasmante parisuddh ' ti vedissmi - Vin.I.103.). Consequently the purity of the Saŗgha
which is thus assumed would be far from being real.
In an attempt to steer clear of
such a situation special emphasis has been laid on the honesty and integrity of
the participants. Wilful
suppression of a transgression of which one is guilty is deemed a serious
offence hindering one's spiritual progress
(Sampajnamusvdo kho panyasmanto anataryiko dhammo vutto bhagavat -
Vin.I.103 f.). These words of
warning seem to have been uttered regularly at the Uposatha as a prelude to the
recital of the Ptimokkha.[dlxxvii] It is also laid down in
the laws of the Ptimokkha that it is an offence involving expiation to help a
fellow-member to conceal from the Saŗgha a grave offence, i.e. a Prjika or Saŗghdisesa, which
he has committed (Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhussa jnaµ duŹŹhullaµ pattiµ
paŹicchdeyya pcittiyaµ - Vin.IV.127.).
We also notice in the Khandhakas
what appears to be the development of a new tradition regarding the recital of
the Ptimokkha. It is stated in the
Mahvagga that the Buddha has decreed that no monk who is guilty of any
transgression should perform the Uposatha. (Bhagavat paattaµ na spattikena
uposatho ktabbo ' ti - Vin.I.125.).
In the Cullavagga it is reaffirmed that such a monk should not listen to
the recital of the Ptimokkha (Na ca bhikkhave spattikena ptimokkhaµ sotabbaµ
- Vin.II.240.). Both these
injunctions, in practice, really serve the same purpose as is clear from the
following statement which identifies the Uposatha with the recital of the
Ptimokkha : Sammatya v bhikkhave bhčmiy nisinn asammatya v yato
ptimokkhaµ suöti kato' v ' assa uposatho - Vin.I.108. Both these statements evidently derive
their authority from the story of the Suspension of the Ptimokkha in the
Cullavagga.[dlxxviii]
This brings us to a very
paradoxical position. The Mahvagga
tells us in its details regarding the Ptimokkha recital that any monk in the
assembly who is guilty of an offence and who remembers it during the recital
should make it known. By the
failure to do so he shall incur the further guilt of deliberate lying (Yo pana bhikkhu yvatatiyaµ
anussviyamne saramno santiµ pattiµ n ' vikareyya sampajnamusvd ' assa
hoti - Vin.I.103.). However, at
Vin.I.126 the Bhikkhu who recollects during the recital of the Ptimokkha an
offence which he has committed seems to be at a loss as to what he should
do. He seems to be put into a very
dilemmatic position by the apparently subsequent legislation that no guilty monk
should participate in the Ptimokkha recital (Tena kho pana samayena aataro bhikkhu
ptimokkhe uddissamne pattiµ sarati.
Atha kho tassa bhikkhuno
etadahosi bhagavat
paattaµ na spattikena uposatho ktabbo ' ti. Aha c ' amhi pattiµ panno kathan nu
kho may paŹipajjitabban ' ti - Vin.I.126.).
On the other hand, side by side
with this exclusion of a guilty monk
from the recital of the Ptimokkha it is also insisted on that no monk
should let the performance of his Uposatha lapse. (Na tv ' eva tappaccay
uposathassa antaryo ktabbo - Vin.I.126 f.). Even a monk who on account of illness is
unable to be physically present at the ritual was expected to communicate to the
Saŗgha his purity so that it may be declared in the assembly before the
recital.[dlxxix] For it is the purity of all members
concerned which is to be ascertained and established at this fortnightly
congregation of the Saŗgha.
Therefore it could not be properly performed in the absence of even one
member of the group if the Saŗgha had not been authoritatively informed of his
purity prior to the recital. It is
even suggested
that a sick monk who has been
unable to communicate his purity to the Saŗgha may be conveyed in a bed or a
seat before the assembly for the valid performance of the ritual.[dlxxx] If he is too ill to be moved without
danger to his life the Saŗgha is then called upon to go to him and perform the
Uposatha there lest they be guilty of a ritual of incomplete
membership.[dlxxxi]
Thus we see the very dilemmatic
position in which a guilty monk is placed in the light of the ruling that no
guilty monk has the right to listen to the Ptimokkha or perform the Uposatha
and the injunction that no monk shall fail to perform the Uposatha. This would first eliminate the
possibility of a guilty monk who could suppress his guilt and sit silently
through the recital of the Ptimokkha.
Secondly, such a monk, on that account, could not also keep out of the
Uposatha. The only solution that seems to be offered to this compels
the monk to confess his guilt to
another beforehand. Prior to his attendance at the ritual the guilty monk is
expected to go before a fellow member and submit very respectfully that he is
guilty of a specific offence and that he wishes to admit it.[dlxxxii] On his admission of
guilt and his being advised to safeguard against its recurrence the guilty monk
gains absolution which entitles him to participate in the ritual. Thus we feel that confession of one's
guilt prior to participation in the ritual was necessitated by the exclusion of
guilty monks from the ritual of the Ptimokkha.[dlxxxiii]
From what we have indicated it
should be clear that confession of the type contemplated here does not absolve
an offender from the guilt of a Prjika or Saŗghdisesa. Nevertheless we are told that this form
of confession gives an offender sufficient purity to enable him to participate
in the ritual.[dlxxxiv] Hence we are compelled
to observe that what is conceded here is, more or less, a ritualistic
purge. On the other hand, it seems
to offer to the transgressing monks complete shelter from public scrutiny to
which they would have ben subjected if they had to confess their guilt at the
time of the recital. For now the
confession may be made before a group or even a single individual who may
possibly be selected on partisan loyalties.[dlxxxv] Thus it may be argued
that this form of private confession prior to the recital was intended to remove
the alleged harshness of the jurisdiction of the Ptimokkha
ritual.
Certain incidents which are
referred to in the Cullavagga, in the chapter on the Suspension of the
Ptimokkha, seem to indicate the fact that there were certain members in the
monastic community who were so rebellious in character that they did not choose
to make use of this concession.
That alone would account for the presence of the Chabbaggiya as guilty
monks (spattika) at the recital of the Ptimokkha.[dlxxxvi] The Suspension of the
Ptimokkha would then appear to serve the purpose of dealing effectively with
such miscreants who tend to break the law
flagrantly at every turn.
We discover that through the act of
suspending the Ptimokkha the ritual of the Ptimokkha comes to acquire a new
emphasis. Any member of the
Ptimokkha assembly who knows through seeing, hearing or suspicion (diŹŹhena
sutena parisaŗkhya) about the
commission of an offence by any participant would, on seeing that individual,
declare it in the assembly and call for the suspension of his Ptimokkha, which
in effect means that the Ptimokkha shall not be recited in his
company.[dlxxxvii] Inspite of all the
taboos and restrictions relating to the recital of the Ptimokkha which are
indicated in the Vinaya PiŹaka, the possibility is here contemplated of the
presence of a Prjika offender in the assembly which meets to recite the
Ptimokkha.[dlxxxviii] It is also declared
possible that there may
be offenders in terms of all the
seven groups of īpatti.
Nevertheless, in all these cases, the detection and chastisement of
offenders take place. if ever at all, not through voluntary confession during
the recital of the Ptimokkha but through report and other indirect sources of information with which the
Saŗgha has been acquainted, and that too, prior to the recital with a view to
denying them the right of participation in it.
However, the ritualistic purge from
guilt, resulting from confession at and before the recital, became a reality in
the history of Buddhist monasticism.
The Vimativinodan“ records the view of some section of the monastic
community who actually maintained
that even the greater offences were
remedied by mere confession. But
the author goes on to point out that this view is completely at variance with
the text of the Ptimokkha which prescribes penalties for the greater offences.
(īvikat hi ' ssa phsu hot“ ' ti vuttatt garukpatti ' pi vikaraöamattena
vuŹŹht“ ' ti keci vadanti. Taµ
tesaµ matimattaµ parivsdividhnasuttehi virujjhanato. Ayaµ pan ' ettha adhippyo. Yathbhčtaµ hi attnaµ vikarontaµ
pesalaµ bhikkhuµ akm parivatthabban ' ti divacanaµ nissya anicchamnaµ ' pi
naµ upyena parivsdi dpetv anassaµ suddhante patiŹŹhapessanti. Tato tassa avippaŹisrd“naµ vasena
phsu hoti - Vimt. 396.)
It is elear, however, that the
changing outlook and the concessions made in the sphere of monastic discipline
led to this position. We see here
an attempt to extract a new concession from the old idea of confession of guilt
at the Ptimokkha recital which included payment of penalties besides
cofession. The reduction of the
ritual of the Primokkha to a mere confession for the sake of absolution was
undoubtedly a sectarian move as pointed out in the
Vimativinodan“.
But we discover that some scholars
have mistaken this aspect of confession to be the original concept in early
Buddhist monasticism. There is
clear evidence that Sukumar Dutt did not fully appreciate the scope of
confession of guilt by the Buddhist disciples.[dlxxxix] This has resulted from
the incorrect translations of two
Pali passages which he quotes. His
first quotation (Cullavagga, v. 20.5) suffers on two accounts. Firstly, it is mutilated in that a vital
portion of the quotation - vuddhi
hi es - has been left out. Dutt
also seems to lose sight of another imprtant condition governing this
confession. It is the reminder to
the transgressing monk regarding future restraint which is part and parcel of
this process of confession and self- correction (yatiµ saµvareyysi - Vin. II.
102 : yatiµ saµvaraµ pajjati - Ibid. 126.). Secondly, these omissions made the rest
of the quotation meaningless and drove the translator to force a garbled meaning
out of it. Hence this translation
: ' In these Rules laid down by the
Venerable One, he who realises his lapse to be such and remedies it according to
law, obtains absolution at once.'
But we regret to say that there is no notion of absolution whatsoever
here. How far from the real state of affairs would it be to say ' he.... absolution at once.' In the second quotation he gives the
translation 'Unconfessed offences
are cleared up on confession ' for
the phrase vikat hi ' ssa phsu hoti.
Here too, we fail to detect any indication of the 'clearance of an
offence.'
Based on this mistaken notion of
absolution through confession Dutt assumes that there was in the early days of
the Ssana ' a mere religious confession which led to absolution from the guilt
confessed.' [dxc] This, he would have us
believe, was the earlier aspect of the Ptimokkha ritual. However, he is quick to detect the
dynamic function of what he calls the legal confession. Its importance is equally admitted by
him. For he says: ' The incorporation of the concept of
legal confession with the code was a necessity, as without it most parts of the
code would remain inoperative and disciplinary proceedings could not be
taken. Hence emphasis is laid on
the duty of confession.' [dxci] It is for these same
reasons, as we have already pointed out, that confession and punishment became
the essential core of the earliest Ptimokkha ritual. The text of the Ptimokkha too, which
has
a better claim to be more authentic
than the Mahvagga, records in Pcittiya 73 evidence to the effect that if a
monk is discovered during the fortnightly recital of the Ptimokkha to be
guilty of a transgression, charges
are to be framed and disciplinary action taken against him.[dxcii]
At the same time, it is also clear
that if a guilty monk could not take part in the ritual because of his guilt and he therefore absolves
himself of it through confession prior to his attendance at the ritual, then no
participant would really be guilty
of any īpatti of which he could confess during the recital. But the ritual of the Ptimokkha in its
early phase countenanced the presence of both innocent and guilty monks (Yassa
siy patti so vikareyya asantiy pattiy tuöh“ bhavitabbaµ - Vin. I.
103. Also : Tasmi ce bhaamne hoti bhikkhussa
patti hoti v“tikkamo - M.III. 10.[dxciii]). As far as we could infer, the phrase
asantiy pattiy which occurs in the Mahvagga side by side with yassa siy
patti, should really mean complete absence of guilt. But the Mahvagga itself, which appears
to have recognised and accepted the new turn of the ritual, explains asant“
patti in keeping with the new
tradition of absolution through prior confession (asant“ nma patti
anajjhpann v pajjitv v vuŹŹhit - Vin.I.103). The Kaŗkhvitaran“ subscribes to
the same view and maintains that an patti
which has been declared and
accepted really amounts to no patti (Asantiy pattiy ' ti yassa pana evaµ
anpann v pattiµ pajjitv ca puna vuŹŹhit v desit v rocit v patti
tassa s patti asant“ nma hoti - Kkvt. 15.). What purpose does it serve then to say
as an introduction to the recital that any one who is guilty of an offence shall
confess it during the recital? For
no monk, according to this latter tradition, who is guilty of an īpatti could be present at the
recital. Has not this statement in
the Mahvagga, yassa siy patti so vikareyya, already lost its original
significance and does it not appear as a mere fossil embedded in the old
formula?
A similar significant deviation
from what we would consider to be the older tradition is noticeable under the
pubbakicca or preliminary
duties which needed to be performed before the recital of the Ptimokkha. The Mahvagga which describes the ritual
of the Ptimokkha recital introduces what it considers to be the preliminary
duty to be performed before the commencement of the recital in the following
words: ' What is the preliminary
duty of the Saŗgha? Let the
venerable ones inform the purity.' (Kiµ saŗghassa pubbakiccaµ. Prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha - Vin. I.
102.[dxciv]). Elsewhere in the Mahvagga, the joint
communication of chanda (consent) and prisuddhi (purity) of those who are unable to be
present at the recital is given as a general condition to be fulfilled before
the assembly which meets for the recital of the Ptimokkha.[dxcv] The inclusion of chanda
here is said to be done on the assumption that the Saŗgha might have besides the
recital of the Ptimokkha other monastic duties for the performance of which the
unanimous agreement of the Saŗgha was needed (Anujnmi bhikkhave tad ' ah ' uposathe
prisuddhiµ dentena chandam ' pi dtuµ santi saŗghassa karaö“yan ' ti - Vin. I.
122.).
In the context of this passage it
is manifestly clear that the prisuddhi
which is communicated to the assembly of the Ptimokkha recital is that
of the absentee monks. Therefore we
would have to take the earlier statement prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha to mean the announcement of the purity
of the absentees, i.e. the members
who have assembled for the recital should announce before the Saŗgha any
information they have regarding the purity of the absentees who are expected to
convey it through a competent fellow member (prisuddhi-hraka). For the Ptimokkha recital, this
information more than the chanda,
is of vital consideration. However,
we notice that the Mahvagga gives no explanation whatsoever about this phrase
prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha even
in the portion of the text which is regarded as the Old Commentary. On the other hand, Buddhaghosa hastens
to explain this with the comment attano parisuddha-bhvaµ rocetha.[dxcvi] This makes the purity
which is announced before the commencement of the recital to be that of the
monks present. But what we have
shown so far from internal evidence in the Mahvagga points to the
contrary. It is difficult to say
with any certainty whether during the time of Buddhaghosa
the practice of communicating to
the Ptimokkha assembly the purity of the absentee monks had gone out of
vogue. What is more clearly evident
is the fact that the ritualistic significance of the purity of the participants
at the Ptimokkha recital had assumed overwhelming authority. It is in the light of this new change
that Buddhaghosa offers the above comment.
For he supports it with a statement which he has picked up from the
Cullavagga which bars a guilty monk from participating in the Ptimokkha recital
(Na bhikkhave spattikena ptimokkhaµ sotabbaµ yo suöeyya patti dukkaŹass ' ti
vacanato aparisuddhehi ptimokkhaµ sotuµ na vaŹŹati. Tena vuttaµ prisuddhiµ yasmanto
rocetha ptimokkhaµ uddisissm“ ' ti - Kkvt. 14.[dxcvii]).
But our assumption which is based
on co-ordinated evidence from the Vinaya that what should mean here is 'the communication of the purity of the
absentees' appears to be further supported by the Vinaya traditions of other
schools besides the Theriya. On a
careful scrutiny of the Vinaya texts of several other schools which are
preserved both in Sanskrit and Chinese we discover that they all seem to agree
with us in this interpretation of the declaration of purity at the Ptimokkha
recital. They specifically state
that it is the purity of the absentees which is declared, as a preliminary duty,
for the information of the members of the assembly. The Po©adhavastu of the Mčlasarvstivda
Vinaya, which agrees for the most part with the Uposathakkhandhaka of the
Mahvagga, contains a very clear and definite statement on this point (Yad
saŗghasthavirah kathayati angamanya yu©mantas chandaµ ca pri§uddhiµ ca
rocayata rocitaµ ca pravedayate ' ti.
Tena antarikasya bhik©oh puratah sthitv vaktavyaµ. Samanvhara yu©man amusmin 'n 'vse
bhik©ur bdhiko duhkhito v¶haglnah.
Adya saŗghasya po©adhapaµcada§ik tasy ' pi bhik©oh
po©adhapaµcada§ik. So ' yam evaµnm bhik©uh pari§uddham
ntaryikaih dharmair ' tmnaµ vedayati po©adhe ' sya pri§uddhim rocaymi
rocitµ ca pravedaymi -
Gilgit MSS. III. 4.
p.100.).
According to the above statement
the Ptimokkha-reciter addresses the members of the assembly and makes a clear
request to announce before the Saŗgha the purity and the consent of the
absentees. Whosoever in the
assembly has chosen to play the role of messenger to carry to the Saŗgha the
prisuddhi on behalf of an
absentee, he shall make it known to the Saŗgha that the absentee has intimated
that he is pure and is not guilty of any transgressions which are detrimental to
his religious life : pari§uddhaµ
antaryikaih dharmairtmnaµ vedayati.
In the above passage angamanya
stands for ' the absence
from the assembly of possible participants '. That it is so is further supported by
the statement in the Prtimok©asčtra of the same school which in its comments on
the preliminary duties uses the very specific term angatnµ which means 'of those who are not present.' (Kiµ bhagavatah §rvakasaŗghasya
pčrvakla-karaö“yaµ alpo 'rtho 'lpakØtyaµ.
Angatnm yu©manta§ chandapri§uddhiµ c' rocayata rocitaµ ca
pravedayata - IHQ. vol. XXIX. 2.167.).
The Prtimok©asčtra of the Mahsaŗghikas too, states the same under its
instructions for the Prtimoksa recital. (Angatnm yu©manto
bhik©uncchanda-pri§uddhimrocetha.
īrocita ca prativedetha - Journal of the Ganganath Jha Research
Institute, vol.X. Appendix, p. 3.).
The Mah“ssaka Vinaya which is preserved to us in Chinese expresses the
same idea of communicating to the assembly of the Saŗgha the purity and the
consent of the absentees before the commencement of the Ptimokkha
recital.[dxcviii]
In the light of all this evidence
we feel inclined to infer that this is the true spirit and the older sense in
which the statement prisuddhiµ yasmanto rocetha of the Mahvagga is to be
taken. Nevertheless, we believe
that here too, the Theriya tradition has conceded certain changes in the process
of evolution. The accomodation of
such changes perhaps became more possible
with the Theriya group whose Vinaya traditions did not get petrified
through disuse but continued to be live and dynamic. Yet one cannot fail to observe that
these changes robbed the Ptimokkha ritual of its vigour and vitality. For there seems to be no more need for
confession of guilt in the assembly of the Saŗgha. It is assured that the participants are pure in character. The Saŗgha does not collectively engage
itself to punish and deal with offenders, exercising over its membership the
authority of the Dhamma. The ritual as described in the Mahvagga
does not seem to provide
for this. The instructions given in the Ptimokkha
with regard to penalties and punishments are left with a merely theoretical
value at the recital.[dxcix] The erring individuals
do not need any more to face the judiciary at the Ptimokkha recital. For the confession of guilt can now be
made before a single individual.[dc] Even if one remembers
during the recital of the Ptimokkha an offence he had committed he needs
confess it only to a single Bhikkhu who sits beside him and promise to make
amends for it after the conclusion of the ritual.[dci] On the other hand, the
ritual is prefaced with a number of formalities by way of preliminary duties,
pubbakicca and pubbakaraöa, which assume considerable ritualistic
importance.[dcii] They completely
outweigh the recital and the consequent confession which formed the core of the
ritual. The Ptimokkha recital
thereafter ceases to be a powerful instrument in the proper maintenance of
monastic discipline. While we
witness here, on the one hand, the break down of the centralised administration
of this monastic institution, the ritual of the Ptimokkha, we discover on the
other the emergence of a completely decentralised system of the same. It has been made possible for a minimum
of four Bhikkhus, without any reference to the membership of a S“m, to
undertake collectively the recital of the Ptimokkha: Anujnmi bhikkhave
catunnaµ ptimokkhaµ uddisitun ' ti
- Vin. I. 124. This gives the
Ptimokkha recital a very provincial character and robs it of its stature and
dignity. But it would be clear from
what has been said so far that the crystallized tradition of the Suttas
contemplates a different position.
But it also seems to be clear that the tradition of the Suttas regarding
the Ptimokkha recital, like many other Sutta traditions pertaining to problems
of Vinaya, soon became a thing of the past.
It is probably at such a stage in
the history of the Ptimokkha ritual that
it became possible to say that the Ptimokkha or the Uposatha is intended
for the purpose of bringing about monastic unity while the purity of the Saŗgha
is the burden of the Pavraö (Uposatho samaggattho visuddhatth pavraö - .
Vinvi. p.190.v. 2599.). Hence we
would choose to conclude with a few observations on the
Pavraö.
The Pavraö is the ritual which
comes usually at the end of the third month of the rains-retreat and is a part
of the observance of the Vassvsa.
It is used like the ritual of the Ptimokkha as a means of safeguarding
monastic discipline. The Pavraö,
as the name itself suggests, is the request which a Bhikkhu makes to the Saŗgha
with whom he has spent the rains-retreat to judge his conduct and declare
according to what the Saŗgha has seen, heard or suspected whether he is guilty
of any transgressions. This request
for the public scrutiny of one's conduct is made by every member of the Saŗgha,
irrespective of seniority, on the definite understanding that whosoever stands
accused would make amends for his errors when he recognises them as such
(Sanghaµ vuso pavremi diŹŹhena v sutena v parisaŗkhya v. Vadantu maµ yasmanto anukampaµ
updya. Passanto paŹikarissmi -
Vin.I. 159.). The benefits
resulting from this form of self-correction are gives as
(a) being agreeable to and tolerant of
one another :
aamanulomat
(b) making amends for the wrongs done
by safeguarding against their recurrence:
pattivuŹŹhnat.
(c) developing a regard and respect
for the rules of discipline :
vinayapurekkhrat.[dciii]
It is evident that the disciplinary
function of the Pavraö is very similar to that of the Ptimokkha ritual and
hence the details of procedure in both rituals are for the most part
identical. A monk who is prevented
from patricipating in the Pavraö on account of illness is expected, as in the case of the Ptimokkha ritual, to
communicate to the Saŗgha through another
his request for the judgement of
his conduct (Pavraöaµ dammi pavraöaµ me hara mamatthya pavreh“ ' ti - Vin. I. 161.)[dciv] Although total and
complete participation would have been the ideal aimed at in these two rituals,
yet under circumstances very similar to those connected with the recital of the
Ptimokkha, the quorum for the performance of this ceremony in the assembly of
the Saŗgha (saŗghe pavretuµ) is
fixed at five.[dcv] Any number of monks
below this and down to two persons are expected to perform this ritual among
themselves (aamaaµ
pavretuµ). A solitary monk who is
left to himself must make a personal resolve (adhiŹŹhna) on this matter,
similar to the AdhiŹŹhna Uposatha of the Ptimokkha ritual. The position of monks who are guilty of
offences which exclude them from participation in the ritual of the
Pavraö is identical with similar
situations in the ritual of the Ptimokkha.[dcvi]
However, a very distinct feature of
the ritual of the Pavraö is its dynamic character, specially in contrast to
the Ptimokkha which already in the Mahvagga has lost its vitality and appears
to have only a ceremonial significance.
When, for instance, a monk is charged at the Pavraö with a Prjika
offence, if he were to admit that he is guilty of it, then disciplinary action
is promptly taken against him (So ce bhikkhave cudito bhikkhu prjikaµ
ajjhpanno ' ti paŹijnti nsetv saŗghena pavretabbaµ - Vin. I. 173), unlike at the ritual of the Ptimokkha
where suspension of the Ptimokkha, without any reference to the admission or
denial of guilt by the accused, is the only course of action
recommended.[dcvii] Likewise, in the case
of a Saŗghdisesa offence, the charge is laid on the offender on his admission
of guilt. For all other offences too, necessary disciplinary action is taken
according to the prescriptions of the law and the Saŗgha thereafter proceeds
with the ritual of the Pavraö :
yath-dhammaµ krpetv saŗghena pavretabbaµ - Vin. I. 173. There is evidence to show that the
ritual is, in fact, temporarily suspended in certain cases until necessary
action is taken against the offender and he makes amends for his mistake (Ye te
bhikkhave bhikkhu thullaccayadiŹŹhino tehi so bhikkhave bhikkhu ekamantaµ
apanetv yathdhammaµ krpetv saŗghaµ upasaŗkamitv evaµ assa vacan“yo yaµ kho
so vuso bhikkhu pattiµ panno s
'ssa yathdhammaµ paŹikat. Yadi saŗghassa pattakallaµ saŗgho pavreyy ' ti -
Vin.I. 173.).
Leaving all details aside, when we
compare the two institutions of Ptimokkha and Pavraö, we note one important
distinction. In the early
Ptimokkha recital it was the individual Bhikkhu who judged his guilt or
innocence in terms of the regulations of the Ptimokkha. The assembly of the Saŗgha had to rely
on the bona fide of the
individuals. The accusation, if any at all, was pronounced in consequence of the
confession of the erring member. At
the Pavraö, the request made individually by the members of the assembly
transfers this initiative to the collctive body of the Saŗgha. This arrangement to face the scrutiny by
the Saŗgha which is implied here, although occurring only as an annual event,
shows itself as an additional safeguard in the maintenance of good monastic
discipline.
Nevertheless, the Pavraö too,
shows signs of acquiring a more and
more ritualistic character. As in the case of the Ptimokkha, an idea seems to
be gaining ground that the Pavraö is to be performed only by the monks who are
pure. The Buddha, it is said, meant
it to be so : bhagavat kho vuso
visuddhnaµ pavraö paatt - Vin. I. 174. It is also said that the Buddha
legislated for the exclusion of guilty monks from the Pavraö.[dcviii] This gives the Pavraö
the appearance of a solemn conclave
for it is said that the Pavraö is laid down only for the Saŗgha who are united
: bhagavat kho vuso samaggnaµ pavraö paatt - Vin. I. 174. The same idea of ritualistic purity
which came to be associated with the recital of the Ptimokkha seems also to be
at work in the Pavraö. The
request made to the Saŗgha at the Pavraö to sit in judgement over one's
conduct (saŗghaµ vuso pavremi.... Vin. I. 159) would thus be made a formal and
meaningless one. We would refer the
reader to Vin. I. 175. for various
other details concerning the ritual
of the Pavraö.
What becomes clear from all these
is the fact that both these rituals of Ptimokkha and Pavraö had, at the time
of their origin, a similarity of purpose.
They both strove for the maintenance of good monastic discipline and
communal harmony. As such, they
counted on the loyal co-operation and the sincerity and the integrity of the
members of the Saŗgha. Partisan
rivalries and petty considerations were not provided for. But the history of these two
institutions as recorded in the Vinaya PiŹaka shows that, contrary to
expectations, these disruptive forces contributed considerably to the
modification of the character of these institutions. The Ptimokkha and the Pavraö, we are
compelled to regard as being extremely simple in their origin and they also
appear to have been characteristically direct in operation. We have shown in this essay, as far as
possible, how changes set in ere long, prompted by diverse circumstances, and how the Ptimokkha and the Pavraö
acquired in course of time a very formal and rigidly ritualistic character so
divorced from their original
spirit. The fossilised remains of
the older versions which are embedded in places in the present form of these
rituals reveal, even though unwittingly, these marked
divergences.
Chapter
X
In Buddhist monasticism
disciplinary action against offenders proceeds primarily from the authority of
the Ptimokkha which was promulgated to regulate the life of the monk. However, four different types of
situations which necessitate disciplinary action or legal proceedings (referred
to as adhikaraöa) are recognised both in the Sutta and Vinaya PiŹakas (CaŹtr '
imni nanda adhikaraöni. Katamni cattri. Vivddhikaraöaµ anuvddhikaraöaµ
pattdhikaraöaµ kiccdhikaraöaµ.
Imni kho nanda cattri adhikaraöni - M. II. 247. Also: Adhikaraöaµ nma cattri adhikaraöni
vivdhikaraöaµ anuvddhikaraöaµ pattdhikaraöaµ kiccdhikaraöaµ - Vin. III. 164. See further Vin. II. 88 ; IV.126.) They
are Vivddhikaraöa,
Anuvddhikaraöa,
īpattdhikaraöa and Kiccdhikaraöa. Of these, the īpattdhikaraöa includes offences
which come under the transgressions listed in the Ptimokkha. The Khandhakas speak of this as
consisting of the fivefold and the sevenfold groups of īpatti or offences which
are essentially the burden of the Ptimokkha (Tattha katamaµ pattdhikaraöaµ.
Paca ' pi pattikkhandh pattdhikaraöaµ satta ' pi pattikkhandh
pattdhikaraöaµ. Idaµ vuccati
pattdhikaraöaµ - Vin. II. 88.).
This, more than the others, has relevance to the personal, moral
well-being of the disciple. The
rest are Vivddhikaraöa or disputes arising within the community pertaining to
matters of the Dhamma or the Vinaya, Anuvddhikaraöa or accusation of
fellow-members and Kiccdhikaraöa or disturbances resulting from the failure to
observe proper procedure in all monastic acts. These latter three adhikaraöa appear to show greater concern fot the
solidarity of the monastic community and the concord among its
members.
It has already been observed that
the Vinaya PiŹaka takes cognizance of both these aspects of discipline, of the
individual as well as of the group, and provides for the correction of offences
and omissions which violate its injunctions. Nevertheless, its claim to discipline
the Buddhist disciple is only in terms of word and deed. Thus it emphasises the point that in the
achievement of monastic discipline the Vinaya with its additional power of
prosecution does not replace the contents of the Dhamma but only helps to augment it. For, it is the Dhamma which takes into
its domain the discipline of the mind.
Buddhaghosa records for us a definition of the Vinaya which corroborates
this (Kyikavcasika-ajjhcranisedhanato c ' esa kyaµ vca ca vineti tasm
vividhanayatt visesanayatt kyavcna ca vinayanato vinayo ' ti akkhto -
VinA.I.19.).
Thus all disciplinary action
contemplated in the Vinaya would naturally be expected to proceed against
transgressions through word and deed. The only notable exception to this
assumption seems to be the Ukkhepaniya-kamma or the Act of Suspension, which
besides being intended for the offences of not admitting and not atoning for
one's transgressions, is also recommended for holding fast to a heresy .(...
ppikya diŹŹhiy appaŹinissagge - Vin.II. 26). This latter consideration, however, is
to be placed under the category of verbal offences, for it comes to be declared
an offence under Pcittiya 68 only after the wrong view is stated and affirmed
and the offender refuses to desist from doing so.[dcix] Even at this stage,
when the wrong view is challenged by the rest of the community, if the offender
is willing to give it up, he is absolved of the guilt, It is his unwillingness to give up his
view and desist from saying so which brings upon him the specific accusation
under Pcittiya 68.[dcx] Under the imposition of
Ukkhepaniya-kamma too, the miscreant is first asked to refrain from giving
expression to false views and thereby make groundless charges against the Buddha
(M ' vuso ariŹŹha evaµ avaca m bhagavantaµ abbhcikkhi na hi sdhu bhagavato
abbhakkhnaµ na hi bhagav evaµ vadeyya - Vin.II. 25. Also Vin.IV.134.). If the offender continues to do so
inspite of these requests then he is punished with an Ukkhepaniya-kamma. For when members of the monastic
community hold fast to such views and give public expression to them it would be
damaging to the beliefs of the rest.
It would also discredit the
community in the eyes of the public.
Buddhaghosa appears to see in this Act of Suspension a relevance to the
maintenance of monastic concord.
The term diŹŹhi which occurs in the clause ppikya diŹŹhiy
appaŹinissagge under the
Ukkhepaniya-kamma is defined by Buddhaghosa as views which would lead to
factions and disturbances in the Saŗgha (Bhaö¶ana-krako ' ti disu yaµ diŹŹhiµ
nissya bhaö¶and“ni karoti tass appaŹinissagge y ' eva kammaµ ktabbaµ -
VinA.VI.1159.).
Although this offence of holding
fast to a heresy is included in the Ptimokkha under the lighter category of
Pcittiya offences, yet it is clear from the evidence of the Ptimokkha itself
that it was treated with greater concern than the rest.[dcxi] The Ptimokkha makes no
mention of the Ukkhepaniya-kamma in this connexion. However, it is clear from Pcittiya 69
which follows the incident of holding fast to a heresy that the offender is
subjected to the Ukkhepaniya-kamma and is punished with a total boycott (Yo pana
bhikkhu jnaµ tathvdin bhikkhun akatnudhammena taµ diŹŹhiµ
appaŹinissaŹŹhena saddhiµ sambhujeyya v saha v seyyaµ kappeyya pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.137.). In effect, this is
what comes out of the Ukkhepaniya-kamma.
The Old Commentary in the
Suttavibhaŗga, on the other hand, uses the word ukkhitto with reference to the offender who has
been so punished (Akatnudhammo nma ukkhitto anosrito - Ibid.). This is further corroborated by the
Ukkhittnuvattaka Prjika rule of the Bhikkhunis which refers to the offending
Bhikkhu who is not to be followed by the Bhikkhunis as ukkhitta which means that he has been punished
under the Ukkhepaniya-kamma.[dcxii] All these make it quite
clear that as a form of punishment the Ukkhepaniya seems to have been in vogue
fairly early in the history of the Ssana.[dcxiii] Buddhaghosa readily
indentifies what is alluded to in the Ptimokkha under Pcittiya 69 with the
punishment of Ukkhepaniya kamma
(Akatnudhammen ' ti anudhammo ' ti vuccati pattiy adassane v
appaŹikamme v ppikya diŹŹhiy appaŹinissage v dhammena vinayena ukkhittassa
anulomavattaµ disv katosaraö so osaraöasaŗkhto anudhammo yassa na kato ayaµ
akatnudhammo nma - Kkvt. 127.).
The code of the Ptimokkha itself,
in its details of disciplinary procedure, recommends certain forms of penalties
for the categories of major offences.
The Prjika, being the gravest of the monastic offences, admits of no
remedies or atonements. The penalty
for Prjika offences being complete ex-communication and loss of monastic
status, it is spontaneously brought about by the commission of the crime. Thus, the disciplinary action on the
Prjika offences requires no details of procedure. The Saŗgha has only to take note of the
fact that the offender is no more one of their fold and that they have no
dealings with him : na labhati
bhikkhčhi saddhiµ saµvsaµ yath pure tath pacch prjiko hoti asaµvso -
Vin.III.109. The Vinaya appears to
refer to this briefly as the process of destruction or extermination (So ce
bhikkhave cudito bhikkhu prjikaµ ajjhpanno ' ti paŹijnti nsetv saŗghena
pavretabbaµ - Vin.I.173.).
All offences other than the Prjika
are remediable in that every offender, barring one who is guilty of a Prjika
offence, who submits himself to the
specified penalties and punishments and behaves himself in accordance
with the law is considered as being purged of his guilt. The Saŗghdisesas include a host of
offences for which specified penalties are to be imposed by the
Saŗgha,
taking into consideration the circumstances
attendant on the commission of the crime.[dcxiv] The Cullavagga draws a definite distinction
between Saŗghdisesa offences which are confessed forthwith on the day of
commission and those which have been concealed from the Saŗgha for any length of
time. They are termed
apaŹicchanna and paŹicchanna respectively.[dcxv] Buddhaghosa reckons
this period of concealment as
extending, theoretically, to over sixty years (Tato paraµ atirekasaµvaccharaµ
dvisaµvaccharaµ evaµ yva
saŹŹhisaµvaccharaµ atirekasaŹŹhisaµvaccharapaŹicchannan ' ti - Kkvt.
49.). However, the code of the Ptimokkha makes no special mention of the former
group of apaŹicchanna or offences
which are confessed soon after commission.
The Cullavagga which discusses the
details of disciplinary procedure in relation to Saŗghdisesa offences
recommends different disciplinary
measures for the two categories mentioned above.[dcxvi] The penalty that is
prescribed for a Saŗghdisesa offence which has not been concealed is a very
direct one. The Saŗgha is called
upon to impose on the offender, at his request, the penalty of Mnatta for a
period of six days (Vyattena bhikkhun paŹibalena saŗgho petabbo. Suötu me bhante saŗgho. Ayaµ udyi bhikkhu ekaµ pattiµ pajji
sacetanikaµ sukkavissaŹŹhiµ apaŹicchannaµ. So saŗghaµ ekiss pattiy sacetanikya
sukkavissaŹŹhiy apaŹicchannya chrattaµ mnattaµ ycati. Yadi saŗghassa
pattakallaµ saŗgho udyissa bhikkhuno ekiss pattiy sacetanikya
sukkavissaŹŹhiy apaŹicchannya chrattaµ mnattaµ dadeyya. Es atti - Vin. II. 38.). Commenting on these injunctions
Buddhaghosa states that irrespective of the considerations of confession or
concealment, the miscreant incurs this penalty of Mnatta by the mere commission
of the offence (Tattha apaŹicchanna-mnattaµ nma yaµ apaŹicchannya pattiy
parivsaµ adatv kevalaµ pattiµ pannabhven ' eva mnattrahassa mnattaµ
diyyati - VinA.VI.1171.). This
penalty of Mnatta is also recommended as the concluding phase of the
disciplinary action taken against Saŗghdisesa offences which have been
concealed and for which the penalty known as Parivsa is first imposed on the
offender (Parivutthaparivsena bhikkhun uttariµ chrattaµ bhikkhumnattya
paŹipajjitabbaµ - Vin.III.186. Also : So' haµ parivutthaparivso saŗghaµ ekiss
pattiy sacetanikya sukkavissaŹŹhiy ekhapaŹicchannya chrattaµ mnattaµ
ycmi - Vin.II. 41.).
In the case of a Saŗghdisesa
offence which has been deliberately concealed, disciplinary action commences
with the penalty of Parivsa which is imposed for the same number of days up to
which the offence had been concealed.
The concealment of an offence committed by oneself was a disconcerting
breach of monastic decorum and it was seen in the study of the Ptimokkha how
every precaution was taken to safeguard against such situations (Saramno santiµ
pattiµ n ' vikareyya sampajnamusvd'assa hoti - Vin.I.103.).[dcxvii] Pcittiya 64 declares
it an offeence even to aid and abet in such a situation (Yo pana bhikkhu
bhikkhussa jnaµ duŹŹhullaµ pattiµ paŹicchdeyya pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.127.). No monk shall
knowingly shield an offender who is guilty of a duŹŹhull patti, i.e. a
Prjika or Saŗghdisesa offence.
The concern with which attempts to conceal such offences are treated is
witnessed in this penalty of Parivsa.
According to the Cullavagga, a monk who is guilty of concealing a
Saŗghdisesa offence which he has committed, must go before the Saŗgha and
confess to them his error. He must then request the Saŗgha to impose on him
first the Parivsa penalty for the number of days the offence had been
concealed. It is only after the
offender has behaved himself perfectly well under the penalty of Parivsa for
concealing his offence, that Mnatta, the penalty for the actual Saŗghdisesa
offence, would be imposed.[dcxviii]
The injunctions of the Ptimokkha regarding this penalty
of Parivsa make it clear that as a manual of disciplinary procedure the
Ptimokkha maintained an authoritative enforcement of penalties and punishments,
even though on an impersonal note.
This is clearly recognised in the Gopakamoggallna Sutta where it is
stated that punishment is meted out not on the authority of persons but solely
on the authority of the Dhamma (Tasmi ce bhaamne hoti bhikkhussa
patti
hoti v“tikkamo taµ mayaµ
yathdhammaµ ythsatthaµ krem ' ti.
Na kira no bhavanto krenti dhammo no kret“ ' ti. - M.III.10.). The monk who has concealed the
Saŗghdisesa offence he has committed must, according to the Ptimokkha, submit
himself to the penalty of Parivsa. even if it were not to his liking (UddiŹŹh
kho yasmanto terasa saŗghdises dhamm nava paŹhampattik cattro
yvatatiyak yesaµ bhikkhu aataraµ v aataraµ v pajjitv yvatihaµ jnaµ
paŹicchdeti tvatihaµ tena bhikkhun akm parivatthabbaµ - Vin.III.186.). The injunctions of the Ptimokkha
introduce this penalty with a note of compulsion. This attitude is also held by schools
besides the Theriya. The
Prtimok©asčtra of the Mčlasarvstivdins records the same idea (Uddi©t
mayyu©mantastrayodasa saŗghva§e© dharmh... tena akmatah paryu©itavyaµ -
IHQ.vol. 29. 2. p.174.). The
Prtimok©asčtra of the Mahsaŗghikas puts it in the following form : ....tena
bhiksun akmaparivsaµ parivasitavyaµ.[dcxix]
The Vinaya PiŹaka knows of two
forms of Parivsa, one as a period of punishment and the other as a period of
probation. As a form of punishment
it pertains, as was shown above, to the members of the Buddhist Order and is
recommended as a penalty for a Bhikkhu who is guilty of a Saŗghdisesa offence
and had knowingly concealed it from the Saŗgha. Thus it is known by the name of
PaŹicchannaparivsa, the term ApaŹicchannaparivsa consequently being used for
the period of probation applicable to members of other heretic groups. Hence it is also called
Titthiyaparivsa. The
PaŹicchannaparivsa is to be imposed even against the will of the offender for
the number of days the offence had been concealed. This is followed by the further penalty
of Mnatta for six more days. Both
these penalties being
satisfactorily concluded the monk who has been subjected to them is reinstated
by the Act of Abbhna by the properly constituted body of twenty monks. If the
number were to be less even by one,
then this reinstatement would be rendered invalid (ciööamnatto bhikkhu
yattha siy v“satigaöo bhikkhusaŗgho tattha so bhikkhu abbhetabbo. Ekena' pi ce
čöo v“satigaöo bhikkhusaŗgho taµ bhikkhuµ abbheyya so ca bhikkhu anabbhato te ca
bhikkhč grayh - Vin.III.186.)
The Khandhakas make further
provision for new situations where a monk may lapse into error again during the
period of his sentence. If, at the
time of his second offence which he confesses forthwith, he is still serving his
period of Parivsa for the first offence which he had concealed, or has just
finished the period of Parivsa but not started on his Mnatta, then he is
called upon to serve his period of Parivsa over again. But if the second ofence is committed
during the period of Mnatta or when he is about to be reinstated on the
completion of it, then he shall serve only the full period of Mnatta
again. If on the other hand, the
second offence is concealed for any length of time, irrespective of the time of
its commission, whether during the period of Parivsa or Mnatta, the penalty of
Parivsa is to be gone through over again for which ever is the longer period of
concealment. This is called the
combined penalty or Samodhnaparivsa, as the periods of punishment for the
different offences are to run concurrently and not successively.[dcxx] This renewal of
punishment to serve a sentence again either under Mnatta or under Parivsa is
known as Mčlya-paŹikassana or ' being dragged to the begnning '. The Khandhakas deal with several such
situations of diverse complexity.
But it is not within the scope of the present study to go into a detailed
analysis of these. Hence the reader
is referred to the Cullavagga for fuller details.[dcxxi]
Both these penalties of Parivsa
and Mnatta are characterised by the humiliation to which they subject the
offender. Under the proper
behaviour recommended (samm vattan) for those serving a period of Parivsa or
Mnatta (parivsika and
mnattacrika)[dcxxii], it is repeatedly mentioned that he who
is guilty and is placed under a penalty should make it known to the rest of the
Bhikkhus. The parivsika and the
mnattarika should as both guest
and host inform the other Bhikkhus of their position (Parivsikena bhikkhun
gantukena rocetabbaµ gantukassa rocetabbaµ - Vin.II. 32.). They should also announce it at the
regular assemblies of Uposatha and Pavraö. Even in case of
illness
when personal attendance may not be
possible, they should communicate it through a messenger, who according to the
Commentary should be a full-fledged monk and not an anupasampanna.[dcxxiii] The mnattacrika has the additional burden of announcing
the fact of his being under a penalty each day.[dcxxiv] The Khandhakas also
decree against all attempts of a parivsika or mnattacrika to evade informing the fellow members
that he is under a penalty. It is
said, for instance, that during this period he should not take to the vow of
forest-residence in order to avoid meeting others who come to his
residence,[dcxxv] or take to the vow of
begging for his meals so that he may avoid occupying the last of the seats which
he would have to accept in the alms-hall as a part of the penalty.[dcxxvi] (Na araikaŗgaµ ' ti
gatgatnaµ rocetuµ haryamnena araikadhutaŗgaµ na samdtabbaµ .... tath
bhattaggdisu sanapariyante nisajjya haryamnena piö¶aptikadhutaŗgaµ ' pi na
samdtabbaµ - VinA.VI.164.). In
brief, no person who is under these penalties of Parivsa or Mnatta should make
a secret of it to felow-members (M maµ jniµsč ' ti m maµ ekabhikkhu pi jntč
' ti imin ajjhsayena vihre smaöerehi pacpetv bhujituµ ' pi na labhati
gmaµ piö¶ya pavisitabbaµ eva - VinA.VI.1165.).
All these considerations discussed
above are listed under the ninetyfour observances which are laid down as the
pattern of conduct (catunavuti-parivsikavatta)[dcxxvii] for the Bhikkhu under
the penalty of Parivsa and are more or less identical with those for the
mnattacrika. As in most other
forms of disciplinary action in Buddhist monasticism, here too, under these penalties, a
number of privileges which a monk is normally entitled to enjoy are withdrawn
from him. His authority is reduced
and his freedom of action is curtailed.
We reproduce below the first 18 items of catunavuti-parivsikavatta which
are common to both the penalties of
Parivsa and Mnatta as well as to all acts of punishment or daö¶akamma,
viz. Tajjaniya, Nissaya,
Pabbjaniya, PaŹisraöiya and Ukkhepaniya for not giving up a heresy.[dcxxviii] The Ukkhepaniya kamma
for the refusal to recognise one's transgressions, and the failure to make
amends for them has 25 more conditions added to these, thus bringing up the
total to 43 (tecattr“savatta: Vin.
II. 25.).
1.
Not act as the preceptor of another
for the conferment of upasampad : na upasampdetabbaµ.
2.
Not undertake to offer tutelage to
another: na nissayo
dtabbo.
3.
Not take in a smaöera anew or accept the services of another
who has been with him: na smaero
upaŹŹhpetabbo.
4.
Not allow himself to be elected to
give counsel to the Bhikkhunis: na bhikkhuniovdasammuti
sditabb.
5.
Not avail himself of that
opportunity even if it has been assigned to him: sammatena ' pi bhikkhuniyo na
ovaditabb.
6.
Not be guilty of an offence of the
type for which he has been put under the particular penalty : yya pattiy
saŗghena parivso dinno hoti s patti na pajjitabb.
7.
Not be guilty of another offence
similar to it: a v
tdisik.
8.
Not be guilty of anything worse:
tato v ppiŹŹhatar.
9.
Not despise or challenge the
validity of the disciplinary action taken against him: kammaµ na
garahitabbaµ.
10. Not despise those who did it: kammik na
garahitabb.
11. Not suspend the Uposatha of another monk who is better than
himself: na pakatattassa bhikkhuno uposatho Źhapetabbo.
12. Not suspend the Pavraö of such a
monk: na pavraö Źhapetabb.
13. Not assume authority to issue orders on disciplinary matters to
such a monk : na savacan“yaµ
ktabbaµ. This
explanation of savacan“yaµ
ktabbaµ is derived from the Commentary (VinA.VI.1163) to which the Sub-commentary adds this
further note: evaµ attano öya pavattanakakammaµ na ktabban ' ti
adhippyo.Vimativinodan“ T“k 449.
14. Not assume leadership at monastic
functions : na anuvdo paŹŹhapetabbo. For this explanation too, we lean on the
Commentary : na anuvdo ' ti vihrajeŹŹhakaŹŹhnaµ na ktabbaµ
ptimokkhuddesakena v dhammajjhesakena
v na bhavitabbaµ - VinA.VI.1163.
15. Not ask another monk who is better
than himself for an opportunity to accuse him of an offence : na okso
kretabbo.
16. Not aaccuse another monk who is
better than himself of an offence : na codetabbo.
17. Not remind anoter monk who is
better than himself of his offence : na sretabbo.
18. Not quarrel with members of the
community nor incite them against one another: na bhikkhčhi sampayojetabbaµ. See Commentary :
VinA.VI.1156,1163.
These conditions may broadly be
classified as follows : 1-5 involve a considerable reduction in the power and
prestige enjoyed by the monks in
their normal daily life. A monk
must, during the term of the penalty, renounce his authority over his pupils and
decline the services offered to him by them. He is not only deprived of his power and
position but according to the Commentary is also made to inform his pupils and
the nuns who come to him about the
penalty to which he is subjected (Upajjhaµ datv gahitasmaöer ' pi vattabb
ahaµ vinayakammaµ karomi. Mayhaµ
vattaµ m karotha m maµ gmappavesanaµ pucchath ' ti... gat ca bhikkhuniyo
saŗghassa santikaµ gacchatha saŗgho vo ovdadyakaµ jnissat“ ' ti v ahaµ
vinayakammaµ karomi asukabhikkhussa nma santikaµ gacchatha so ovdaµ dassat“ ti
v vattabb - VinA.VI.1162.). 6-8
reiterate the old ideal in monastic discipline of yati saµvara or the safeguard against the recurrence
of an offence which has once been
committed. 9 and 10 provide that the machinery which regulates the discipline of
monastic life would not be thrown out of gear by the miscreants who have been
brought under punishment. The power of prosecution must thus be maintained
unimpaired.11-17 concern themselves
with the proper and responsible exercise of disciplinary powers by those whose
conduct is beyond reproach, so that it may command from those who are
subordinated to it the highest respect as being fair and just. Thus a monk who is subjected to a
penalty or punishment is barred from exercising such powers. 18 serves as a perfect safeguard against
possible onslaughts on the communal harmony of the Saŗgha by embittered
offenders who are subjected to penalties and punishments.[dcxxix]
We have shown above that the
penalty of PaŹicchannaparivsa which is imposed on a monk who is guilty of
concealing a Saŗghdisesa offence is followed by a further penalty of six days
of Mnatta (Parivutthaparivsena
bhikkhun uttariµ chrattaµ bhikkhumnattya paŹipajjitabbaµ -
Vin.III.186.). This, according to
the commentarial tradition, is intended for the purpose of reconciliation of the
miscreant with the fellow-members (Bhikkhumnatty ' ti bhikkhčnaµ
mnanabhvya rdhanatthya iti vuttaµ hoti - Kaŗkhvitaraö“ 51.). This clearly
shows that the offender loses favour with the members of the community by his
violation of monastic regulations.
It also shows the degree of collective responsibility for the maintenance
of discipline. The community as a
whole would be slighted by such a breach of discipline. This point is further emphasised in the
text of the Mčlasarvstivda Prtimok©asčtra which has saŗghamnatva corresponding to bhikkhumnatta of the Pali text, thus addressing the
amends and atonements which the miscreant is called upon to make to the
collective organisation.[dcxxx] The Mčlasarvstivda
Prtimok©asčtra has also these additional words in this context which are not
found in the Pali text:[dcxxxi] KØtnudharmah
bhik©usaŗghasya rdhitacitto.
These seem to be
supporting the Pali commentarial explanation of Mnatta as bhikkhčnaµ
mnanabhvya rdhanatthya.[dcxxxii] The Mahsaŗghika
Prtimok©asčtra has only kØtnudharmah
and leaves out the words
Bhik©usaŗghasya rdhitacitto of the Mčlasarvstivda version. But it speaks of mnatva as bhik©usaŗghe mnatvaµ
caritavyaµ.[dcxxxiii]
Parivsa as a period of probation
pertains to persons who, having been previously members of any other heretic
group, latterly seek admision to the Buddhist order. Every such person is put
under probation for a specified period of four months during which he must
conduct himself honourably to the satisfaction of the Bhikkhus in authority (Yo
kho seniya aatitthiyapubbo imasmiµ dhammavinaye kaŗhkati pabbajjaµ kaŗkhati
upasampadaµ so cattro mse parivasati catunnaµ msnaµ accayena raddhacitt
bhikkhč pabbjenti upasampdenti bhikkhubhvya - M.I. 391.). In the text of the Khandhakas, the
Aggika JaŹilas or fire-worshipping matted-hair ascetics are exempted from this
on consideration of their religious views (Ye te bhikkhave aggik jaŹilak te
gat upasampdetabb na tesaµ parivso dtabbo. Taµ kissa hetu. Kammavdino ete bhikkhave kiriyavdino -
Vin.I. 71.). It is recorded that
the Skiyas also are exempted. The
Buddha, according to the Commentary, held the view that the Skiyas, out of
respect for the founder as their greatest kinsman, would do nothing to discredit
the religion. (Te hi titthyatane pabbajit ' pi ssanassa avaööakm na
honti. Aµhkaµ tiseŹŹhassa
ssanan ' ti vaööavdino ' va honti.
Tasm evaµ ha - VinA.V. 995.).
The commentary also insists that this Titthiya-parivsa applies only to
the naked ascetics (Ayaµ titthiyaparivso nma apaŹicchannaparivso ' ti ' pi
vuccati. Ayaµ pana
naggaparibbjakass ' eva jivakassa v acelakassa v dtabbo ... Tattha
titthiyaparivso nigaöŹhajtiknaµ y ' eva dtabbo na aesaµ - Ibid. 990
f.).[dcxxxiv]
According to the Khandhakas the
newcomer is made to don the yellow robe after his head and beard have been
shaven and is admitted to the order as a smaöera by the act of professing faith thrice in
the Buddha, Dhamma and the Saŗgha.[dcxxxv] Showing respect to the
accepted monastic tradition, he is made to request the Saŗgha to put him under
four months probation so that he may qualify for upasampad or higher monastic status.[dcxxxvi] During this period the
noviciate must satisfy the Saŗgha (rdhako hoti ) by his conduct, efficiency
and loyalties and convince them that he deserves the higher monastic status in
the Buddhist Saŗgha. For this he
should qualify himself in terms of eight considerations which are referred to as
aŹŹhavatta. He should acquire
habits which are acceptable to the
monastic life such as going out to and returning from the village at proper
times. As a celibate he should maintain his chastity. He should adapt himself to perform with
interest and efficiency the various monastic duties that devolve on him as a
member of the Saŗgha. He should not
be lacking in interest and enthusiasm for the development of his religious
life. The next four out of the
eight duties which he is called upon to perform seem to concern themselves with
the clash of loyalties between the old and the new faiths. If the new comer still feels angered
when his former faith or its propounder is criticised and is happy when the
Buddha, the Dhamma and the Saŗgha are subjected to ridicule, then he is deemed
unworthy of full membership in the Buddhist Order. On the other hand, if he rejoices at the
praise of his old faith and frowns at the eulogy of the Buddha, the Dhamma and
the Saŗgha the same verdict is pronounced on him. When the noviciate has thus satisfied
the Saŗgha (rdhitacitt ' ti aŹŹhavattassa pčraöena tuŹŹhacitt -
MA.III.106) and qualified himself
in terms of these basic requirements for Buddhist monastic life, upasampad is conferred upon him without further
delay (Evaµ rdhako kho bhikkhave aatitthiyapubbo gato upasampdetabbo -
Vin.I. 71.).
The Sutta PiŹaka refers in more
than one place to the prevalence of this practice of imposing Titthiyaparivsa
in Buddha's own time. The
Kukkuravatika Sutta records that the Buddha himself informs Seniya who was a
naked ascetic practising the ' canine way ' of the general Buddhist practice of
Titthiyaparivsa when he sought admission to the Buddhist monastic life (Yo kho
seniya aatitthiyapubbo imasmiµ dhammavinaye kaŗkhati pabajjaµ kaŗkhati
upasampadaµ so cattro mse parivasati.
Catunnaµ msnaµ accayena
raddhacitt bhikkhč pabbjenti upasampdenti bhikkhubhvya. Api ca m ' ettha puggalavemattat vidit
- M.I. 391.). A similar incident occurs in the Mahvacchagotta Sutta[dcxxxvii] with reference to the
Paribbjaka Vacchagotta and in the Mgandiya Sutta[dcxxxviii] with reference to the
Paribbjaka Mgandiya. In the
Mahparinibbna Sutta[dcxxxix] we come across the
story of Subhadda, the last disciple of the Buddha who as an
aatitthiyapubba was treated
similarly by him. The Saµyutta
Nikya gives us the story of Acela Kassapa who receives similar treatment in the
hands of the Buddha.[dcxl] However, the Buddha
admits in all these cases that the persons concerned are not of the general type
contemplated, and that he would hence exempt them from the general
requirement. On the other hand, we
find Seniya and the rest expressing their willingness to stand the trial and go
under probation, not only for four months but even for four years, in order to
be admitted to the Buddhist Order. Buddhaghosa, who presents them as recognising
the purpose of this test, stresses thereby the fact already witnessed in the
Khandhakas that this was a safeguard against the entry into the Order of men of
fickle faith who change their former beliefs and seek new ones without much
conviction (Tato seniyo cintesi aho acchariyaµ buddhassanaµ yattha evaµ
ghaµsitv koŹŹetv yuttaµ eva gaöhanti ayuttaµ cha¶¶ent“ ' ti - MA.III.
106). The Vinaya PiŹaka records
instances of men who on the slightest provocation revert back to their old order
(Tena kho pana samayena yo so aatitthiyapubbo upajjhyena sahadhammikaµ
vuccamno upajjhyassa vdaµ ropetv taµ y ' eva titthyatanaµ saµkami - Vin.I.
69.).
On a careful examination of the
above two versions of the Titthiyaparivsa as they appear in the Sutta and Vinaya PiŹakas, we
notice a considerable difference between them. The statements in the Suttas clearly
state that he who seeks admission
to the Buddhist Order and higher monastic sgatus therein (pabbajj and upasampad) must go under probation
for four months, after which the Bhikkhus in authority who are satisfied with
his conduct admit him into the Order and confer on him the higher monastic
status. Thus he is made a Bhikkhu
only at the end of this period of probation (Catunnaµ msnaµ accayena
raddhacitt bhikkhč pabbjenti upasampdenti bhikkhubhvya - M.I. 391.). This statement of the Sutta version is
clear enough on the point that both pabbajj and upasampad come after the period of
Parivsa. But this passage, which
occurs in identical words both in the Majjhima and in
the Saµyutta Nikyas, seems to cause the commentator no small degree of embarrassment. This is unavoidably so because the
tradition preserved in the Khandhakas on the imposition of Titthiyaparivsa is
at variance with that of the Suttas which is presumably of pre- Khandhaka
origin.
The details of the Khandhakas on
this point place the Parivsa on the newcomer after his admission as a
smaöera.[dcxli] Here Parivsa is a
qualifying test for the conferment of higher monastic status or upasampad and not for admission to recluseship as
it is in the Sutta versions (... pabbjenti upasampdenti bhikkhubhvya.). Hence Buddhaghosa, commenting on the
above statements of the Suttas which place both pabbajj and upasampad after Parivsa, attempts to dismiss the
word pabbajj out of the context as having no meaning
of its own (Tattha pabbajjan ' ti vacanasiliŹŹhatvasena vuttaµ - MA.III. 106;
SA.II. 36f.). At the same time he
explains the statements in the Suttas in the light of the Vinaya tradition. In his comments on the Suttas he quotes
the version of the Khandhakas (Atha bhagav yo so khandhake titthiyaparivso
paatto yaµ aatitthiyapubbo smaöerabhčmiyaµ Źhito ... cattro mse parivsaµ
ycm“ ' ti din nayena samdiyitv parivasati taµ sandhya yo kho seniya
aatitthiyapubbo ' ti diµ ha - Ibid.).
He states categorically that the aatitthiyapubba receives his ordination without serving
the period of probation under Parivsa.
It is only after being ordained as a smaöera that he undertakes to serve the period
of Parivsa in order to qualify for the conferment of upasampad (Aparivasitv y ' eva hi pabbajjaµ
labhati. Upasampadatthikena pana na atiklena gmapavesand“ni aŹŹhavattni
purentena parivasitabbaµ - Ibid.).
In this attempt to read into the Suttas an apparently subsequent
tradition of the
Khandhakas, we see the commentator
striving to accord with the tradition of the Vinaya which, in course of time,
seems to have overstepped some of the traditions of the Suttas on these monastic
matters. However, even in the
Khandhakas, all details which pertain to the imposition of Parivsa on an
aatitthiyapubba who wishes to join the Buddhist Order seem to follow from a
statement which reads more or less the same as in the
Suttas.
|
Sutta |
Vinaya |
|
Yo kho seniya
aatitthiyapubbo imasmiµ dhammavinaye kaŗkhati pabbajjaµ kaŗkhati
upasampadaµ so cattro mse parivasati.[dcxlii] |
Yo bhikkhave ao pi
aatitthiyapubbo imasmiµ dhammavinaye kankhati pabbajjaµ kankhati
upasampadaµ tassa cattro mse
parivso dtabbo.[dcxliii] |
Nevertheless, in the matter of
details, we see a divergence in these two accounts.
|
Sutta |
Vinaya |
|
Catunnaµ msnaµ accayena
raddhacitt bhikkhč pabbjenti upasampdenti bhikkhubhvya.
[dcxliv] |
Eva ca pana bhikkhave
dtabbo. PaŹhamaµ kesamassuµ oharpetv ksyni vatthni acchdpetv
ekaµsaµ uttarsaŗgaµ krpetv... Ahaµ bhante itthannmo aatitthiyapubbo
imasmim dhammavinaye
kaŗkhmi upasampadaµ. So ' haµ bhante saŗgham cattro mse parivsaµ ycmi.
[dcxlv] |
As against the fossilised
traditions of the Suttas which refer to monastic practices, the Vinaya PiŹaka,
specially the Khandhakas, reveal a more active and living spirit. As such, it provides within its
framework for new situations and changing conditions. This tendency becomes abundantly clear
when we study in the Khandhakas the history of the acts of pabbajj and upasampad. In the early history of the Ssana, all
new converts to the faith who wished to enter the monastic life were admitted by
the Buddha himself at their request.
They express their desire in the stereotyped formula which states that
they seek pabbajj and
upasampad under the Buddha
(Labheyy ' haµ bhante bhagavato santike pabbajjaµ labheyyaµ upasampadan ' ti -
Vin.I.12.). The Buddha then merely
invites them to come and live the monastic life, practising the Dhamma which is
open to all, so that they may make a perfect end of all suffering (Ehi bhikkhu
cara brahmacariyaµ samm dukkhassa antakiriyy ' ti - Ibid.). That invitation alone,says the text,
constituted the conferment of full monastic status (S ' va tassa yasmato
upasampad ahosi - Ibid.) But as
Buddhism spread over wider territories and the new converts who sought the
monastic life increased in numbers, the authority for admission could no longer
be centralised in the person of the Buddha. Considering the practical difficulties
of time and distance involved, the Buddha deems it fit to transfer this
authority to his disciples (Etarahi kho bhikkhč nn dis nn janapad
pabbajjpekkhe ca upasampadpekkhe ca nenti bhagav ne pabbjessati
upasampdeasat“ ' ti. Tattha bhikkhč c ' eva kilamanti pabbajjpekkh ca
upasampadpekkh ca. Yannčn ' haµ
bhikkhčnaµ anujneyyaµ tumh ' eva ' dni bhikkhave tsu tsu dissu tesu tesu janapadesu pabbjetha
upasampdeth ' ti - Vin.I. 22.)
Henceforth, by a simple avowal of faith in the Buddha, Dhamma and Saŗgha
the new converts are to gain both pabbajj and upasampad (Anujnmi bhikkhave
imehi t“hi saraöagamanehi pabbajjaµ upasampadan ' ti - Ibid.). But the power vested in the disciples,
as individuals, for the conferment of upasampad in the above manner was soon withdrawn
and the collective organization of the Saŗgha made the sole authority for
that. This change, no doubt, must
have come about with the growing importance of upasampad as the hallmark of full membership in
the monastic Order and the possible indiscreet conferment of it according to
individual whims and fancies.
Upasampad is now to be
conferred by a formal resolution before the Saŗgha, informing the members of the
Saŗgha of the identity of the applicant and his preceptor (Y s bhikkhave may
t“hi saraöagamanehi upasampad anut t ' haµ ajjatagge paŹikkhipmi.
Anujnmi bhikkhave atticatutthena kammena upasampdetuµ
Eva ca pana bhikkhave
upasampdetabbo. Vyattena bhikkun
paŹibalena saŗgho petabbo suötu me bhante saŗgho ayaµ itthannmo
itthannmassa yasmato upasampadpekkho.
Yadi saŗghassa pattakallaµ saŗgho itthannmaµ upasampdeyya itthannmena
upajjhyena. Es atti -
Vin.1.56.). The
Samantapsdik, in explaining the
circumstances which brought about this change, says that the Buddha wished to
attach greater dignity to the conferment of upasampad by bringing it under the authority of
the collective organization of the Saŗgha (Rdhabrhamaöavatthusmiµ kinc ' pi
yasm sriputto bhagavat bröasiyaµ t“hi saraöagamanehi anutaµ pabbajja c
' eva upasampada ca jnti bhagav pana taµ lahukaµ upasampadaµ paŹikkhipitv
atticatutthakammena garukaµ katv upasampadaµ anutukmo. Atha ' ssa thero ajjhsayaµ viditv
kath ' haµ bhante taµ brhmaöaµ pabbjemi upasampdem“ ' ti ha - VinA.V.
983.).
On the other hand, we find the earlier act of
pabbajj by the avowal of faith in
the tisaraöa which was coupled with the act of upasampad reaffirmed in isolation under the new
name of smaöerapabbajj (Anujnmi bhikkhave imehi t“hi
saraöagamanehi smaöerapabbajjan '
ti - Vin. I. 82.) This apparently
reflects the phase of monasticism in which young converts were being admitted
into the Order as noviciates or smaöera with no immediate thoughts of
upasampad. Here, the
Samantapsdik suggests that this reaffirmation was necessary because of the
possible misunderstanding regarding the performance of the act of pabbajj after the act of upasampad was isolated from it. Arguing that in the past pabbajj and upasampad were closely identified, the monks would
be in doubt, it is said, whether the
pabbajj should now be
performed like the upasampad by
the method of kammavc or by the
threefold avowal of faith in the original manner.[dcxlvi] The details of
procedure in the imposition of Titthiyaparivsa as are described in the
Khandhakas thus seem to follow from this distinction between the
smanerapabbajj and upasampad and hence the consequent deflection of
the tradition in the Vinaya PiŹaka which now stands in marked contrast to the
fossilised version of the Sutta PiŹaka.
Chapter
XI
In the Kammakkhandhaka of the
Cullavagga[dcxlvii] we meet with another
collection of disciplinary acts which are of a more general character in that,
unlike the penalties of Parivsa and Mnatta, they are not directly derived from
the code of the Ptimokkha. The
Kammakkhandhaka has five different kammas
or acts of punishment of varying degrees of severity which are
recommended for certain shortcominga and reprehensible features in the behaviour
of members of the monastic community.
They are :
1. Tajjaniya kamma : Act of
Censure
2. Nissaya kamma : Act of
Subordination
3. Pabbjaniya kamma : Act of
Banishment
4. PaŹisraöiya Kamma : Act of
Reconciliation
5. Ukkhepaniya Kamma : Act of
Suspension
The following enumeration of
monastic failings is given in the Cullavagga as applying to the Tajjaniya,
Nissaya, Pabbjaniya and Ukkhepaniya kammas.[dcxlviii]
A. 1. When a Bhikkhu is a maker of strife,
quarrelsome, a maker of disputes, given to idle talk, and raises legal questions
in the Saŗgha.
2.
When he is ignorant,
unaccomplished, full of offences and heedless of
injunctions.
3.
If he lives in company with
householders, in unbecoming association with householders.
B. 1. If in regard to moral habit, he comes to
have fallen away from moral habit.
2.
If in regard to good habits, he
comes to have fallen away from good habits.
3.
If in regard to right views, he
comes to have fallen away from right views.
C. 1. If he speaks dispraise of the
Buddha.
2.
If he speaks dispraise of the
Dhamma.
3.
If he speaks dispraise of the
Saŗgha.
If a Bhikkhu is marked by the
qualities of any one of the above groups, the Sŗgha may subject him to any one of the five
kammas mentioned earlier barring
the PaŹisraöiya. The
Pabbjaniya-kamma has besides these a few additions of its own which may be
summed up as frivolity and misdemeanour through word and deed.[dcxlix]
The PaŹisraöiya-kamma or the Act
of Reconciliation is in a class by itself, in that it concerns itself solely
with the relations of the monk with the laymen so far as he tends to damage the
interests of the laymen and abuses the Buddha, Dhamma and the Saŗgha in their
presence. This punishment may be
carried out on any monk who is guilty of any one of the offences mentioned in
the two following groups:[dcl]
D. 1.
If he tries for non-receiving of gains by
householders.
2. If he tries for non-proflting by
householders.
3. If he tries for non-residence for
householders.
4. If he reviles and abuses
householders.
5. If he causes householder to break with
householder.
E. 1. If he speaks dispraise of the Buddha to
householders.
2.
If he speaks dispraise of the
Dhamma to householders.
3.
If he speaks dispraise of the
Saŗgha to householders.
4.
If he jeers at a householder with a
low thing, if he scoffs at him with a low thing.
5.
If he does not fulfil a promise
made in accordance with the rules to the laymen.
Some of these vicious aspects of
character for which these punishments are laid down are, however, not unknown to
the Ptimokkha where they are recorded with a different emphasis in relation to
its own regulations. These, when
viewed in their entirety, are weaknesses which would possibly arise among the
members of the Saŗgha and are harmful to their religious perfection as well as
the solidarity and well-being of their communal life against which not only the
Vinaya but also some of the Suttas are eloquent.
Of these, the first and the most
outstanding is the group of faults consisting of making strife, quarrels and
disputes, and raising legal questions in the Saŗgha. These are listed among the conditions
which justify prosecution under four out of the five kamma. Monks who are makers of strife seem to
have been a positive danger both to the religion and the monastic organization
not only among the Buddhists but in other religious groups as well. It is recorded in the Smagma Sutta
that soon after the death of NigaöŹhantaputta, his disciples were divided and
they quarrelled and disputed and reviled each other on what they called
differences of opinion with regard to the teachings of their master (Tena kho
pana samayena nigaöŹho ntaputto pvyaµ adhun klakato hoti. Tassa klakiriyya bhinn nigaöŹh
dvedhikajt bhaö¶anajt kalahajt vivdpann aamaaµ mukhasatt“hi
vitudant viharanti na tvaµ imaµ dhammavinayaµ jnsi ahaµ dhammavinayaµ
jnmi......niggah“to ' si cara vdappamokkhya nibbeŹhehi v sace pahos“ ' ti - M.II.243.). Thus they completely lost favour with
their lay-followers. (Ye pi
nigaöŹhassa ntaputtassa svak gih“ odtavasan te ' pi nigaöŹhesu
ntaputtiyesu nibbinnarup virattarčp paŹivöarup yath taµ durakkhte
dhammavinaye..... bhinnathčpe
appaŹisaraöe - Ibid..244)
The arrogance and intolerance with
which the fellow-religionists despised the views of one another seems to have
been the cause of most of these contentions. The Bahuvedaniya Sutta gives a very
realistic analysis of the cause of such disputes.[dcli] There the Buddha says
that as far as his teaching is concerned, one should respect and endorse
another's views if they conform to the proper canons. In the absence of such mutual respect
and tolerance, the inevitable
result would be strife and disunity, and people would go about attacking one
another with pungent words. The Upakkilesa Sutta records one such instance where
disturbances took place in alarming
proportions during the life-time of the Buddha himself (Ekaµ samayaµ
bhagav kosambiyaµ viharati ghositrme.
Tena kho pana samayena kosambiyaµ bhikkhč bhaö¶anajt kalahajt
vivdpann aamaaµ mukhasatt“hi vitudant viharanti - M.III.152.). The Buddha, being unable to settle the
dispute, leaves Kosambi in despair and comes to Pc“navaµsadya where the three
disciples Anuruddha, Nandiya and
Kimbila are living in perfect concord (Taggha mayaµ bhante samagg
sammodamn avivadamn kh“rodak“bhčt aamaaµ piyacakkhčhi sampassant
viharm ' ti - Ibid. 156.). They
tell the Buddha that the secret of their success is mutual respect and
consideration, and their determination to eliminate the spirit of self
assertion. ' We value the company
of our fellow-celibates ', each one of them says, ' and we bear nothing but love
towards them in thought, word and deed at all times. We willingly fall in line with their
likes and dislikes, and thus though we are many in body are only one in mind
'(So kho ahaµ bhante sakaµ cittaµ nikkhipitv imesaµ yeva yasmantnaµ cittassa
vasena vattmi. Nn hi kho no
bhante ky eka ca pana mae cittan ' ti - Ibid.) We also find this story recorded in the
Vinaya PiŹaka.[dclii]
Speaking of the danger of disputes
among the members of the Saŗgha,
the Buddha says in the Smagma Sutta that he considers the disputes over
disciplinary matters (ajjhj“ve v
adhiptimokkhe v) to be trifling when compared with possible disputes about the
teaching or the religious
life (magge v paŹipadya v) which would lead to the detriment and
degeneration of great many beings.[dcliii] There is little doubt
that the Buddha considered complete discipline in thought, word and deed as essential for all progress. But the above comments clearly show the
relatively secondary importance which the Buddha attached to discipline in its
mere outward form in contrast to the more fundamental teachings of the doctrine
and their practice in the religious life.
The Sutta makes a plea, and no legislation, for the elimination of the
causes of these disputes which it analyses as consisting of the
following:[dcliv]
1. Anger and ill will : kodhano hoti
upanh“
2. Hypocrisy and malice : Makkh“ hoti
pals“
3. Jealousy and envy : issuk“ hoti
macchar“
4. Deceit and fraud : saŹho hoti
myv“
5. Evil intentions and false beliefs :
ppiccho hoti micchdiŹŹh“
6. Obstinacy and dogmatism :
sandiŹŹhaparmas“ hoti dhnagh“
duppaŹinissagg“
The perpetuation of such vicious
traits by those leading the monastic life, it is said, leads to their lack of
respect and regard for the Buddha, Dhamma and the Saŗgha and also to the neglect
of their own religious life. It is
in such a state of affairs that disputes
and quarrels would arise among the members of the Saŗgha (Yo so nanda
bhikkhu kodhano hoti upanh“......
so satthari ' pi agravo viharati appatisso dhamme ' pi...... saŗghe ' pi.... sikkhya ' pi na
paripčrakr“ hoti... so saŗghe
vivdaµ janeti - M.II.245 f.). Thus
we see that the Suttas approach the problem from a different angle. Leaving it to the Vinaya to legislate
against such indiscipline the Suttas analyse the causes of these and attempt to remedy them by advocating
personal inner development.
There are some items in the
Ptimokkha which seem to be related in some ways to those monastic failings,
viz. disputes etc., referred to above.[dclv] Their inclusion in the
Ptimokkha reveals the fact that they were not only prevalent in the early days
of the Ssana when the Ptimokkha was being evolved, but that they were also
considered serious enough in their day to be legislated against. Thus a number of minor regulations which
are calculated to arrest such indiscipline expressing itself in different ways
have come to be laid down. Although
the violation of most of these regulations entail no serious punishments, they certainly
reveal a stricter and sterner attitude to monastic indiscipline than the Suttas,
which counted more on appeals and admonitions for ethical re-orientation. In addition to these disputes which are
referred to both in the Vinaya and in the Suttas as bhaö¶ana, kalaha, and
vivda, we find litigiousness
(saŗghe adhikaraöakraka) too, added to this group at times.[dclvi] The need for this
addition evidently arose as a safeguard against the abuse of the machinery which
is set up for the maintenance of monastic discipline. The history of Saŗghdisesa 8 clearly
shows how jealous and embittered persons within the monastic community may, in a
spirit of revenge, misuse the law.[dclvii]
A close scrutiny of the details of
these kamma show that they give to these Acts the widest scope and unrestricted
authority for prosecution and punishment in the interests of the religion and
the monastic organization.
Development of character and cultivation of the religious life, fitting
into the harmonious life of the community, maintaining proper relations with the
laymen, all these come within the jurisdiction of these Kamma. They also watch over the loyalty to the
religion and the Order to which the members belong. The PaŹisraöiyakamma makes special
provision to safeguard the interests of the laymen in the hands of the
monks. The monks are forbidden to
do anything which damages the interests of the laymen or to bring about a
cleavage between the religion and its lay patrons.
We give below the special
situations in which these kamma as
forms of punishment are said to have had their origin.
|
Punishment
|
Offence
|
Persons
concerned |
|
Tajjaniya : Act of Censure |
Being quarrelsome and
litigant |
Followers of Paöduka and
Lohitaka who instigate other
monks to fight and revolt.
Vin.II.1 f. |
|
Nissaya : Act of
Subordination which compels the offender to live under the tutelage of
another |
Ignorance and indiscipline |
Ven. Seyyasaka who was stupid and constantly
committed offences and did not conduct himself properly with the laymen.
Ibid. 7 f. |
|
Pabbjaniya : Act of Puni shment which removes the
offender from the area of his residence |
Bringing the families of the
area into disrepute by their own bad behaviour |
Followers of Assaji and
Punabbasu who by their licentious behaviour corrupted the lay patrons of
K“Źgiri. Ibid. 9 f. |
|
PaŹisraöiya : Act of
Reconciliation which requires the offender to apologise to the aggrived
party |
Strained relations with the
laymen |
Ven. Sudhamma who abused the
householder Citta who was his lay patron. Ibid.15 f. |
|
Ukkhepaniya : Act of
Suspension whereby the offender is temporarily barred from the company of
monks in accepting or giving food, in religious discussions and in
ceremonial acts of the Saŗgha.
This act is further characterised by the proclamation which is to be issued
to all monasteries giving the name of the monk on whom this boycott has
been imposed. |
Refusal to admit or atone for
one's offences or false views regarding the Dhamma. |
Ven. Channa who refused to
admit his offence and atone for it and Ven. AriŹŹha who refused to give up
his heresy. Ibid. 21 f, 25 f. |
The most comprehensive chapter in
Buddhist monastic legislation comes to us in the Khandhakas under the section
known as the Samathakkhandhaka.[dclviii] This deals with seven
different ways (satta adhikaraöasamatha) by means of which, it is claimed, that
all forms of disciplinary action within the monastic community could be carried
out. The seven Adhikaraöasamathas
are as follows.[dclix]
1. Sammukhvinaya
: 'by a verdict in the presence of '
Vin.II. 73 f.
2. Sativinaya
: 'by a verdict of innocence'
Ibid. 74-80.
3. AmčĀhavinaya : 'by a verdict of past
insanity'
Ibid. 80-83.
4. PaŹitakaraöa : 'the carrying out on the
acknowledgement'
Ibid. 83
f.
5. Yebhuyyasik : 'by the
decision of the majority'
Ibid. 84 f.
6. Tassappiyyasik : 'by an act of condemnation for specific
depravity' Ibid.85 f.
7. Tiöavatthraka : 'by the covering up with
grass'
Ibid. 86-88.
These lay down procedure for the
correction of monastic indiscipline, for the settlement of disputes and strifes
among the members of the Saŗgha, and for the valid execution of monastic
Acts. There is very little doubt
about the recognition and prestige which this section of the law enjoyed from
the earliest times. For Adhikaraöas
seem to have been a matter of common occurrence even in the early days of the
Ssana. The word is used in the
sense of going into litigation, of charging a fellow-member of the Saŗgha with
an offence, maliciously or with valid reasons. The text of Saŗghdisesa 8 bears testimony to this. (Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhuµ duŹŹho doso
appat“to amčlakena prjikena dhammena anuddhaµseyya app ' eva nma naµ imamh
brahmacariy cveyyan ' ti. Tato aparena samayena samanugghiyamno v
asamanugghiyamno v amčlak c ' eva taµ adhikaraöaµ hoti bhikkhu ca dosaµ
patiŹŹhti saŗghdiseso - Vin. III. 163.).
In the Kakacčpama Sutta, the monk Moliyaphagguna accuses, in a spirit of
retaliation, his fellow brethren who criticise the conduct of the nuns with whom
he closely associates (Sace ko ci bhikkhu yasmato moliyaphaggunassa sammukh
tsaµ bhikkhun“naµ avaööaµ bhsati ten ' yasm moliyaphagguno kupito anattamano
adhikaraöaµ ' pi karoti - M.I.122)
It is felt that this
litigant character of individual
monks is not a healthy sign and much is said in praise of those who refrain from
such litigations and advocate the effective termination of such conditions
wherever they appear (Yaµ ' pi bhikkhave bhikkhu na adhikaraöiko hoti
adhikaraöasamathassa vaööavd“ ayam ' pi dhammo piyattya garuttya bhvanya
smaya ek“bhvya samvattati -
A.V.167.). The skill in arresting
the rise of such disputes and disturbances is considered a qualification for
election to responsible monastic positions such as membership in a committee of
arbitration which is known as Ubbhik (Dasah' aŗgehi samanngato bhikkhu
ubbčhikya sammannitabbo.....
adhikaraöasamuppda-včpasamanakusalo hoti.....Vin.II. 95; A.V.71). It also leads to the personal well-being
of the members of the monastic community (Dasahi bhikkhave dhammehi samanngato
thero bhikkhu yassaµ yassaµ disyaµ viharati phsu yeva viharati. Katamehi dasahi.... adhikaraöasamuppdavčpasamakusalo hoti -
A.V.201.).
These seven modes of
Adhikaraöasamatha are referred to both in the Suttas and in the Vinaya. (Satta
kho pan' ime nanda
akhikaraöasamath uppannuppannnaµ adhikaraönaµ samathya včpasamya.
Sammukhvinayo dtabbo sativinayo dtabbo amčĀhavinayo dtabbo paŹiya
kretabbaµ yebhuyyasik tassa ppiyyasik tiöavatthrako - M.II.247. See also D.III. 254 ; A.IV.144 ; Vin.II. 73-104 ; IV.207.). We shall first examine them as they are
presented to us in the Vinaya PiŹaka.[dclx] The first of these, the
Sammukhvinaya, recognises the
principle that no penalties or punishments should be imposed on an offender in
his absence (Na bhikkhave asammukh“bhčtnaµ bhikkhčnaµ kammaµ ktabbaµ
tajjaniyaµ v nissayaµ v
pabbjaniyaµ v paŹisraöiyaµ v ukkhepaniyaµ v. Yo kareyya patti dukkaŹassa - Vin.II.
73.). PaŹitakaraöa which appears as the fourth in the Vinaya text provides
that such disciplinary action should also be taken with the acknowledgement of the guilty monk. (Na bhikkhave
apaŹiya bhikkhčnaµ kammaµ ktabbaµ tajjaniyaµ v ..... ukkhepaniyaµ v. Yo kareyya patti dukkaŹassa - Vin. II.
83.). Both these conditions are
regarded as essential to give validity to the daö¶akamma or acts of punishment which are outside
the regulations of the Ptimokkha in their origin and character. Failure to comply with these
requirements would render such an act invalid.[dclxi] In the fourfold
division of the adhikaraöas, this latter form of samatha, namely PaŹitakaraöa
seems also to be made use of in the settlement of īpattdhikaraöa which is
almost entirely based on the Ptimokkha.[dclxii] Sammukhvinaya. on the
other hand, is a pre-requisite in the settlement of all the four forms of
adhikaraöa.
Tassappiyyasik which is listed as
No. 6 under the Adhikaraöasamatha seems to be very different from the rest
in that it has a great deal more in
common with the daö¶akamma as a means of maintaining order in the
community. In fact, both
Samanta-psdik and Vimativinodan“ consider this to be on the same footing as
the other daö¶akamma. Speaking of
the Tassappiyyasik, the Samantapsdik says that the details concerning this
are the same as in the Tajjaniya and other
daö¶akamma (Sesaµ ettha tajjan“ydisu vuttanayaµ
eva - VinA.VI.1193.) The
Vimativindodan“ elaborates further on this comment and says that this is intended to serve as an act
of prosecution whereby it would be possible to punish an offender who refuses to
accept the judgement of the Saŗgha. (Sesaµ ettha tajjan“ydisu vuttanayam ev '
ti etena tajjan“ydisattakammni viya idam pi tassappiyyasikkammam
asucibhvdidosayuttassa saŗghassa ca vinicchaye atiŹŹhamnassa kattabbaµ visuµ
ekaµ niggahakamman ' ti dasseti - Vmativinodani 452 f.). It is virtually an act of condemnation
carried out on a monk for corrupt, shameless and reprehensible behaviour. It is also carried out on one who
deliberately lies and attempts to evade a charge laid upon him.[dclxiii] The details of the
offences for which it is imposed and the proper mode of conducting oneself under
this penalty are identical, more or less, with those of the other
daödakamma.[dclxiv] It lays down no
specific punishment but it was perhaps used more effectively as a general act of
stigmatisation whereby a vociferous offender was prevented from evading
prosecution with a garrulous defence.
This stigmatisation would forthwith arrest such indiscipline, The Vimativinodan“ confirms this view
(Etasmiµ hi niggahakamme kate so puggalo ahaµ suddho ' ti attano suddhiy
sdhanatthaµ saŗghamajjhaµ otarituµ saŗgho c ' assa vinicchayaµ dtuµ na labhati
taµkammakaraöamatten ' eva ca tam adhikaraöaµ včpasantaµ hoti - Vimt.
453.). Accordig to the
Kaŗkhvitara“ it would result in
the complete elimination from the monastic community of a Prjika offender or
the possible correction of a lesser offence committed by one of its members.
(Yad pana prjikena v prjiksmantena v codiyamnassa aen ' aaµ
paŹicarato pp ' ussannatt ppiyassa puggalassa sac ' yaµ acchinnamčlo
bhavissati samm vattitv osaraöaµ labhissati. Sace chinnamčlo ayam 'ev ' assa nsan
bhavissat“ ' ti maamno saŗgho atticatutthena kammena tassappiyyasikaµ
kammaµ karoti - Kkvt.155.).
On the other hand, Sativinaya and
AmčĀhavinaya provide against any possible miscarriage of justice in the monastic
administration. The legal machinery
it to be operated with humane considerations and it is not to be abused through
malice, jealousy or prejudice.
Sativinaya is intended for the exoneration of a guiltless monk who is
falsely accused by malicious parties.[dclxv] This absolution from
guilt is to be conferred, relying on the mental alertness of the person
concerned (Sativepullappattassa sativinayaµ dadeyya - Vin.II. 80.). According to
the Samantapsdik, this is then applicable only to the Arahants and to none
below that level of perfection and reliability (Ayaµ pana sativinayo kh“ösavass ' eva dtabbo na
aassa antamaso angmino ' pi - VinA.VI.11-2.). It is to be carried out by a competent body of monks
at the request of the aggrieved person.[dclxvi] The AmčĀhavinaya seeks
exemption for offences committed in a state of unsound mind. The Bhikkhu who is guilty of such
an offence, on regaining his mental equilibrium, confesses to the Saŗgha the
circumstances under which the offence came to be committed and states that he
does not remember it thereafter.
Inspite of this consideration, it is added, he may be wrongfully
prosecuted for the same. The
AmčĀhavinaya provides the exoneration of such a monk from the guilt of an
offence committed in a state of unsound mind. But it is to be applied only in bona
fide cases and the Vinaya legislates against offenders taking shelter under
this, claiming falsely a lapse of memory or pretending to be of unsound
mind.[dclxvii] Under such
circumstances the exercise of this power is declared to be illegal.[dclxviii]
The Yebhuyyasik and the
Tiöavatthraka as disciplinary measures are different from the rest of the
Adhikaraöasamathas in that they are not only interested in safeguarding the
moral tone of the character of individuals but also are concerned with settling
their disputes and adjudicating over breaches of discipline in such a way that the concord of the
monastic community may not be impaired.
This is the dominant note of the Tiöavatthraka. It does recognise the existence of
contending parties in the Saŗgha
and the possible break up of the monastic unity through their factional
differences. Under such
circumstances, even in the face of offences committed (bahuµ assmaöakaµ
ajjhciööaµ hoti bhsitaparikantaµ - Vin.II. 86), the members of one faction shall
not
proceed to institute disciplinary
action against members belonging to the other group for fear of breaking the
unity of the Saŗgha (Sace mayam imhi patt“hi aamaaµ kreyyma siy ' pi
tam adhikaraöaµ kakkaĀattya vlattya bhedya samvatteyya - Ibid.). But both parties are to meet in the full
assembly of the Saŗgha, and with the consent of the Saŗgha agree to have the
offences committed by their members dealt with by means of this collective
disciplinary measure known as ' covering up with grass' (Yadi saŗghassa pattakallaµ saŗgho imam
adhikaraöaµ tiöavatthrakena sameyya Źhapetv thčlavajjaµ Źhapetv
gihipaŹisaµyuttan ' ti - Ibid. 87.).
The leaders of the two factions would obtain the sanction of their groups
to declare before the Saŗgha, for this purpose, the offences committed by themselves as
well as by the members of their respective groups (Ekato pakkhiknaµ bhikkhčnaµ
vyattena bhikhun paŹibalena sako pakkho petabbo... yad ' yasmantnaµ
pattakallaµ ahaµ y c' eva yasmantnaµ patti y ca attano patti yasmantna
c ' eva atthya attano ca atthya
sŗghamajjhe tiöavatthrakena deseyyaµ - Ibid.). The offences which could be treated in
this manner were invariably minor in character in that they excluded the major
offences (thullavajja) which the
Samantapsdik explains as Prjika and Saŗghdisesa.[dclxix] It was also necessary
that these breaches of discipline did not involve the laymen
(gihipaŹisaµyuttam). It is claimed
that by this process of Tiöavatthraka all participants are absolved of their
guilt of any transgression, barring
those specified above. Absentees and dissentients do not benefit by this (Eva
ca pana bhikkhave te bhikkhč thi patt“hi vuŹŹhit honti Źhapetv thčlavajjaµ
Źhapetv diŹŹhvikammaµ Źhapetv ye na tattha hont“ ' ti - Vin.II.
88.).
The Yebhuyyasik as described in
the Khandhakas is perhaps the most complex of all the Adhikaraöasamathas. It is worked out in a rather protracted
manner and is resorted to only after the failure of other methods. When it has been found that it is not
possible to settle a monastic dispute within the confines of the monastery where
it occurred by the method of Sammukhvinaya, the Khandhakas suggest that those
Bhikkhus who are connected with it should take the matter to the members of
another monastery who are greater in number, and by mutual agreement the monks
who are the hosts would settle the dispute.[dclxx] However, it is added
that such a large group might possibly become unweildy and that no useful
purpose would be served by deliberations in such an assembly. In such a situation the monks are
empowered to refer the matter to a select committee (ubbhik) for a settlement
(Sammato saŗghena itthannmo ca itthannmo ca bhikkhč ubbhikya imam
adhikaraöaµ včpasametuµ - Vin.II. 96.).
Ten qualifications are insisted on for consideration for membership in
such a committee. These cover not
only good and virtuous conduct but also a thorough knowledge of the Dhamma and
the Vinaya. Every member of such a
committee had also to be a good judge and authority on the exercise of
disciplinary powers.[dclxxi] If it is discovered
that the dispute cannot be settled in this manner, it must be referred back to
the whole Saŗgha for settlement by the decision of the majority (yebhuyyasik). In the description of
the Adhikaraöasamatha in the Khandhakas we fine that the Yebhuyyasik assumes a
more restricted connotation in contrast to its description in the Sutta
version.[dclxxii] It is claimed to be an
act whereby the Saŗgha assures itself that, at the time of a division, the
righteous monks would be in the majority.[dclxxiii] Thus it is not a
decision arrived at by merely taking a vote. The Samantapsdik reiterates the same
idea (Yebhuyyasikya včpasametun ' ti ettha yassa kiriyya dhammavdino bahutar
es yebhuyyasik nma - VinA.VI.1192.).
By the method of direct and indirect canvassing the Saŗgha must assure
itself of a majority for the righteous cause.
For this purpose three forms of
voting are recommended. They are
secret ballot (gčĀhaka), whispering in the ear (sakaööajappaka) and open ballot
(vivaŹaka). A reliable monk who is
not inclined to err on account
of his partialities or prejudices (chand dos), confusion
or fear (moh bhay) and who is
capable of reckoning the votes as they are cast (gahitgahita ca jneyya) is appointed to distribute the
ballot-sticks
salkaghpaka).[dclxxiv] In the case of secret
ballot, two distinct groups of ballot-sticks have to be used (.... salkyo
vaöövaööyo katv - Vin.II. 99.).
The Commentary on the above statement takes vaöövaööyo to mean that the sticks of each group
bear a special sign on them and look different (Vaöövaööyo katv ' ti
dhammavd“na ca adhammavd“na ca salkyo nimittasaaµ ropetv visabhg
kretabb - VinA. VI.1198.). The
Vimativinodan“ adds that these differences may be slight or great (Vaöövaööyo katv ' ti
khuddakamahantehi saöehi yuttyo katv ten ' ha nimittasaam ropetv ' ti
- Vimt.456.). Going up to each monk
in turn, the salkaghpaka, i. e.
the one who distributes ballot sticks, should introduce the ballot-
sticks and ask him to take the one of his choice. Once the voter has made a decision he is
asked not to show his voting stick to any other. At this stage, if the
salkaghpaka knows that the
unrighteous monks are in the majority, he should then declare the voting null
and void on grounds of incorrect procedure and set about taking a vote over
again (....duggahito ' ti paccukka¶¶hitabbaµ - Vin.II. 99). But if the righteous monks are in the
majority, even by a single vote, then he should announce that the voting has
been valid (Ekasmim ' pi
dhammavdismiµ atireke jte suggahit salkyo ' ti svetabbaµ - VinA.
VI.1198.). The
Sakaööajappakasalkagha or the method of voting by whispering in the ear is
different from the former only in so far as the announcement to ecach monk is
made in a whisper and he is asked not to inform the others of his decision
(Gahite vattabbo m kassa ci roceh“ ' ti - Vin.II. 99). The VivaŹakasalkagha or the method of
voting by open ballot is adopted only where a majority of righteous monks is
assured.
The Samantapsdik seems to
know a great deal more about the art of
securing a majority for what it calls the just cause. It allows a fresh vote to be taken up to
a third time with the hope of securing a majority, dismissing the former on
grounds of incorrect procedure. But
if no majority is secured as desired even
at the third voting, the assembly should then adjourn with the idea of
meeting again the next day. This
would give time and opportunity to
the righteous monks to canvass support for their cause before the next vote is
taken and be able thereby to shatter the opposition (Atha yvatatiyam ' pi
adhammavdino bahutar ' va honti ajja aklo sve jnissm ' ti vuŹŹhahitv
alajj“naµ pakkhaµ vibhedatthya dhammavdipakkhaµ pariyesitv punadivase
salkagho ktabbo - VinA.VI.1198.). Under the Sakaööajappaka form of voting
too, the Samantapsdik has a very similar comment which reflects the same
spirit of defending by all possible means what is chosen to be the righteous
position. Gahite vattabbo of the text quoted above[dclxxv] which is applicable in
general to all monks of the assembly during the Sakaööajappakasalkagha is
commented on in the Samantapsdik as referring to a specal situation,
viz. the vote of the Saŗghatthera
or the president of the assembly.
It is said that if he chooses to vote on the side of the unrighteous
monks, it should be pointed out to him that it is not in keeping with his age or
seniority. Thereafter, if he
decides to vote with the righteous monks, a voting-stick of the right kind
should be provided. If he does not
change his mind, on the other hand, he should be asked to keep his decision a
secret.
The interest in the
Adhikaraöasamathas as measures for the settlement of disciplinary matters in the
Saŗgha is further enhanced when we compare and contrast the details regarding
these in the Suttas and in the Vinaya.
The lists of Adhikaraöasamathas which are given in Pali literature, both
Sutta and Vinaya, are identical in all cases. However, the descriptions of the
Adhikaraöasamathas given in the Smagma Sutta[dclxxvi] seem to be in marked
contrast to the account in the Khandhakas.[dclxxvii] One is immediately
impressed by the simplicity of these disciplinary measures as they are described
in the Sutta account. The monastic irregularities which come under review and
the manner of dealing with them here are far from the complexity which one
associates with
these in the Khandhakas. Allusions to the imposition of
daö¶akamma are conspicuous by their
absence in the Sutta account. It does not seem to portray such a phase
of the Saŗgha when the imposition of formal acts of punishment on its members
had become a regular feature. On
the other hand, what appears to us from the Sutta account is the desire of the
members to remedy and rectify any errors and irregularities that might appear in
the Saŗgha and the frankness and willingness with which these are confessed and
atoned for in the company of the
fellow members. This difference in
the enforcement of discipline comes out with marked emphasis on a study of the
form of the Adhikaraöasamatha known as PaŹitakaraöa. The primary interest of the Khandhakas
in this form is for the proper imposition of daö¶akammas. The Khandhakas insist that under the
PaŹitakaraöa no punishment or penalty (i.e. the daö¶akamma mentioned earlier) is to be imposed
without the offender admitting his fault.
It is essentially a matter of procedure in monastic disciplinary
action. On the other hand, the
Sutta account takes it as a way in which the repetition of monastic offences may
be averted. It seems to provide
adequately against what is described as īpattdhikaraöa or offences against the
injunctions of the Ptimokkha. A
monk who has committed such an offence, whether urged by others or not,
recognises it and confesses his guilt.
He is then asked to address himself to a senior member of the Order, and
owning and admitting his offence, undertake to guard himself in the future. Thus the occurrence and perpetuation of
monastic offences would be eliminated.
It is also with the same purpose in
mind, as in the case of the PaŹitakaraöa, that the Khandhakas take up the
Sammukhvinaya. Here too, it is the
proper execution of the daö¶akamma
that seems to engage the attention of the Khandhakas. But the Sutta account, once again,
has no reference whatwoever here to
the daö¶amma. It looks upon the
Sammukhvinaya as a disciplinary measure related directly to Vivddhikaraöa or
disturbances in the monastic community arising out of disputes concerning the
doctrine or monastic discipline. Under the Sammukhvinaya, the Sutta recommends
that in such a situation all monks should meet together and settle such disputes
correctly in a way that would accord with the Dhamma, perhaps here in the
broader sense which includes the Vinaya as well. The Sutta suggests that monks should, at
such a meeting, apply the criteria of the Dhamma (dhammanetti) and straighten out the differences in
conformity to it (Tehi nanda bhikkhčhi sabbeh ' eva samaggehi sannipatitabbaµ
sannipatitv dhammanetti samanumajjitabb dhammanettiµ samanumajjitv yath
tattha sameti tath taµ adhikaraöaµ včpasametabbaµ. Evaµ kho nanda sammukhvinayo hoti -
M.II. 247.). The commentary on the
above passage also takes this allusion to mean a careful and sensible
scrutiny to the situation with the
criteria of the dhamma (Dhammanetti samanumajjitabb ' ti dhammarajju
anumajjitabb öena ghaµsitabb upaparikkhitabb .....
MA.IV.48.).
The Suta account recommends that
this same method be adopted for the Yebhuyyasik too. If the monks in a particular monastic
residence are unable to settle a monastic dispute among themselves, then they
are asked to seek the assistance of monks in another monastery where they are
greater in number. However, the
method of deciding such issues by voting as in the Khandhakas is not envisaged
here. The limitations of such a
routine method were perhaps too obvious.
It is not the mere mechanism of procedure that is vital here. The monastic ideals are to be
safeguarded at all costs. Once the
method of voting is adopted, and this is the stage the Yebhuyyasik has reached
in the Khandhakas, one could not hazard any miscarriage of justice by relying
solely on the externals of procedure.
This naturally necessitated the practice of canvassing for the righteous
cause, for the spirit of democracy in the Saŗgha, in ay case, had to be
channelled for the achievement of its worthy ideals.
In the Sutta account both
AmčĀhavinaya and Tassappiyyasik bring before us miscreants who try to defend
themselves by denying the charges
brought against them. The
Tassappiyyasik in particular is calculated to tighten the ring round such
evasive characters (Taµ enaµ nibbeŹhentaµ ativeŹheti - M.II. 248.). Persuation and pressure are continuously
applied until the offender stands condemned on his own admission. Here it gives no indication of a daö¶akamma whatsoever. Under the AmčĀhavinaya a guilty monk
may, under cross examination, adduce a stage of mental
derangement
as a mitigating factor. He may thereby be completely absolved. The Tiöavatthraka and the Sativinaya
remain more or less the same in both the Sutta and the Vinaya
accounts.
The Adhikaraöasamathas, as part of the machinery for the
maintenance of monastic discipline,
concern themselves with all the four forms of adhikaraöa including īpattdhikaraöa. Thus they embrace a wider field of
activity than the Ptimokkha. Hence
it is little wonder that the Ptimokkha, both as text and as ritual, appended to itself in course of
time the Adhikaraöasamathas, although as we have pointed earlier one cannot
reckon these items of Adhikaraöasamathas as sikkhpada. Explaining the recital
of the Adhikaraöasamathas at the ritual of the Ptimokkha (Ime kho pana
yasmanto satta adhikaraöasamathadhamm uddesaµ gacchanti - Vin. IV. 207), Buddhaghosa says that
they have to be recited in order to ascertain the purity of the Saŗgha both with
regard to the transgressions listed under īpattdhikaraöa as well as those
transgressions which bring about the other three adhikaraöas (Uddesaµ gacchant“
' ti pattdikaraöasaŗkhtsu avasesdhikaraöattayapaccaysu ca pattisu
parisuddhabhvapucchanatthaµ uddisitabbaµ gacchanti - Kkvt. 153.). As a result of this very close associaton
of the Adhikaraöasamathas with the ritual of the Ptimokkha they evidently came to be identified,
perhaps in some circles, as a part of the text of the Ptimokkha. Buddhaghosa's analysis of the contents
of the two Vibhaŗgas in the Samantapsdik makes no discrimination against
them.[dclxxviii] However, in the
Sumangalavilasini Buddhaghosa does not add the seven Adhikaraöasamathas in
totalling up the sikkhpada of the
Vibhaŗgas.[dclxxix]
Whatever might have been the
original intention of reading out the list of Adhikaraöasamathas at the
Ptimokkha ritual the point of interest here is the manner in which this new
addition is integrated to form a whole with the body of sikkhpada which formed the contents of the early
recital. At the ritual of the
Ptimokkha, after the recital of the Adhikaraöasamathas too, the question
regarding the purity of the members of the assembly which had been asked with
regard to each category of offences in the Ptimokkha is addressed to the Saŗgha
once again: UddiŹŹh kho yasmanto
satta adhikaraöasamath dhamm.
Tattha yasmante pucchmi kacci ' ttha parisuddh - Vin.IV.
207.
These Adhikaraöasamathas are
clearly not offences but are only
ways by means of which the collective organization of the Saŗgha may arrive at a
settlement of monastic disputes and disturbances including the commission of
offences (pattdhikaraöa). Hence we would normally expect the purpose of the
above question to be to ascertain whether there has been any irregularity of
procedure in the settlement of monastic disputes among the members of the
Saŗgha. If that were so we would
regard this extension of the process of questioning as an attempt to safeguard
the machinery set up for the maintenance of monastic discipline. In this case it would be the Saŗgha as a
whole and not individual monks who would be held responsible. On the other hand, it could also be a
mere mechanical extension of the method of questioning which was applied to the
earlier groups of sikkhpada. The Mahsaŗghikas show a further extension of this
process of questioning. They go beyond the Adhikaraöasamathas to apply the
question of purity in terms of a new group of their own which they call
dharma and anudharma.[dclxxx]
However, in the absence of any
conclusive evidence regarding the inclusion of Adhikaraöasamathas in the recital
of the Ptimokkha we have to fall back on the tradition of the commentators who
preserve for us at least their view of contemporary trends. Buddhaghosa attempts to explain this
final questioning at the end of the Ptimokkha recital as being calculated to
cover all offences coming under the
four adhikaraöa (Tatthyasmante
pucchmi kacci ' ttha parisuddh ' ti tesu sattasu adhikaraöasamathesu kacci '
ttha parisuddh. Natthi vo kici
samathehi vupasametabban ' ti pucchmi etena sabbpatt“hi parisuddhabhvo
pucchito hoti - Kkvt.155f.).
At the end of the process of detailed and specific questioning regarding
the īpattdhikaraöa which takes place through the recital of each category of
sikkhpada in the Ptimokkha,
Buddhaghosa regards this scrutiny under the Adhikaraöasamatha as being the grand
finale of the ritual of the Ptimokkha.
Chapter
XII
From the earliest times the Buddha
was undoubtedly accepted as the leader of all the disciples who took to the
monastic life. The venerable
Assaji, who was one of the first five disciples of the Buddha, revealed this
position to Sriputta Paribbjaka (Atth ' vuso mahsamaöo sakyaputto sakyakul
pabbajito taµ bhagavantam uddissa pabbajito. So ca me bhagav satth tassa c ' haµ bhagavato dhammaµ rocem“
' ti - Vin.II. 40 .). Even after
the community of the Sanŗgha increased in number and spread over wider regions
this basic position remained unaltered. In the Bhayabherava Sutta, the Brahmin
Jöussoöi expresses the same view regarding the leadership of the Buddha and the
Buddha himself is seen confirming it (Ye ' me bho gotama kulaputt bhavantaµ
gotamaµ uddissa saddh agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajit bhavaµ tesaµ gotamo
pubbaŗgamo bhavaµ tesaµ gotamo bahukro bhavaµ gotamo samdapet bhoto ca pana
gotamassa s janat diŹŹhnugatiµ
pajjat“ ' ti. Evam ' etaµ brhmaöa
evam ' etaµ brhmaöa. Ye te
brhmaöa..... pajjat“ ' ti - M.I.16.).
However, as we have pointed out
elsewhere, it was never the Buddha's desire to exercise too much personal
control over the Saŗgha, either by himself or through his nominees.[dclxxxi] The Buddha is, in fact, happy that at an
early stage in the history of the Ssana he was able to discipline his disciples
with the minimum instructions : Na
me tesu bhikkhusu anussan“ karaö“y ahosi - M.I. 124. On the other hand, it is the wish of the
disciples that the Buddha should instruct them : ... aad ' atthu mamaµ yeva svak
anussaniµ paccsiµsanti - M.II. 10.
The disciples derived great benefits from the Teacher who placed them on
the correct path to spiritual perfection.
The disciples in turn emulated their Master and modelled their lives
after him. The Gopakamoggallna
Sutta goes on to say that the disciples, however, never equalled the
Master. As the founder of the way,
he was supremely above them. They
come as followers to pursue the path which was indicated by him.[dclxxxii]
As the leader whose concern was the
spiritual well-being of his disciples the Buddha always thought it was his duty
to keep them reminded of the Norm and to explain to them the way to the
perfection of their religious life. Thus he would explain to them some point of
doctrine as the occasion necessitated and conclude his discourse to them by
requesting them to apply themselves to the realisation of the goal which is set
out in this teaching. At the end of
the Dvedhvitakka Sutta, the Buddha sums up his position as teacher in the
following words : ' Whatever, O
monks, has to be done by a kind and compassionate teacher for the good of his
disciples, that I have done for you.
Here, O monks, are the sylvan retreats and solitary abodes. Be earnestly engaged in the perfection
of your religious life. Brook no
delay lest you have cause for lament
afterwards. This is my
advice to you. ' (Yaµ bhikkhave
satthr karaö“yaµ svaknaµ
hitesin anukampaµ updya kataµ vo taµ may. Etni bhikkhave rukkhamčlni etni
sugrni. Jhyatha bhikkhave m pamda ' ttha m pacch vippaŹisrino
ahuvattha. Ayaµ vo amhkaµ
anussan“ ' ti - (M.I. 118.). In
the Sallekha Sutta the Buddha addresses these same words to Cunda.[dclxxxiii] In the
Indriyabhvan Sutta he does so
after explaining to īnanda what was regarded in Buddhism as the true cultivation
of the senses.[dclxxxiv]
Not only did the Buddha give
counsel himself but he also
expected the lives of his disciples
to be regulated through the guidance and instruction of other senior members of
the Order. The Saµyutta Nikya
gives a number of instances
where the Buddha requests
the venerable Mah Kassapa to admonish the Bhikkhus as much as he does (Ovada kassapa bhikkhč karohi
kassapa bhikkhčnaµ dhammikathaµ.
Ahaµ v kassapa bhikkhč ovadeyyaµ tvaµ v ahaµ v bhikkhčnaµ dhammikathaµ
kareyyaµ tvaµ v ' ti - S.II. 203,
205, 208.). However, it is said
that the venerable Mah Kassapa declined
this invitation saying that the
Bhikkhus of the day were not amenable to instruction and were resentful of such
advice. It is mentioned repeatedly
that he stated that the monks of his day were temperamentally unsuited for such
correction (Dubbac kho bhante etarahi bhikkhč dovacassakaraöehi dhammehi
samanngat akkham appadakkhiöagghino anussaniµ - S.II. 204, 206, 208.). This possible intolerance of advice and
correction from fellow members of the community seems to be evident even in the
early days of the Ssana. The history of the Saŗghdisesa 12 shows how the
venerable Channa resented such advice from fellow monks.[dclxxxv] From an analysis of
this incident and the legislation that followed it becomes clear that in the
corporate organization of the Saŗgha every member was expected to contribute his
share towards mutual correction of their religious life. Every member was also expected to
allow himself to be corrected by
others (M ' yasam attnaµ
avacan“yaµ aksi vacan“yaµ eva yasm attnaµ karotu. īyasm ' pi bhikkhč vadetu
sahadhammena bhikkhč ' pi
yasmantaµ vakkhanti sahadhammena.
Evaµ saµva¶¶h hi tassa bhagavato paris yad ' idaµ aamaavacanena
aamaavuŹŹhpanen ' ti - Vin. III.178.). The Saŗghdisesa rule referred to above
makes legal provision to enforce the acceptance of such correction by fellow
monks. For he who resists such
advice stubbornly up to a third time would be guilty of a Saŗghdisesa offence
which, it should be realised, is
second only to a Prjika in its gravity.
Besides this legalised aspect of
the acceptance of instruction from fellow members of the community which we find
in the Vinaya PiŹaka, we also find in the Sutta PiŹaka numerous references where
the willingness to accept instruction is referred to as a great monastic
virtue. It is spoken of as leading
to unity and concord among the members of the Saŗgha (Yam ' pi bhikkhave bhikkhu
suvaco hoti saovacassakaraöehi dhammehi samanngato khamo padakkhiöaggh“
anussanim ayam ' pi dhammo srn“yo piyakaraöo garukaraöo saµgahya avivdya
smaggiy ek“bhvya saµvattati - A.V. 90.). It is also said to contribute to the
stability and continuity of the Ssana for a long time (Ayam ' pi bhikkhave
dhammo saddhammassa Źhitiy
asammosya anantaradhnya saµvattati - A.II.148 ; III.180 ; V. 338). Thus we see that in the
corporate life of the Saŗgha the offer and acceptance of such advice for mutual
welfare became a reality (.... padakkhiöaggh“ anussanin ' ti ther ' pi naµ
bhikkhu vattabbam anussitabbaµ maanti
- A.V.27.). This practice,
we further discover, had been extended to the Bhikkhun“ Saŗgha as well and the
Buddha himself is seen requesting the venerable Nandaka to give counsel to the
Bhikkhunis. Both the Sutta and the Vinaya PiŹakas bear testimony to the fact
that it became a regular feature for the Bhikkhuni Saŗgha to be advised by
competent and qualified members of the Bhikkhu Saŗgha. It is also evident that
the Bhikkhunis regularly looked forward to it (Ekamantaµ Źhit kho mahpajpat“
gotam“ bhagavantaµ etadavoca ovadatu bhante bhagav bhikkhuniyo anussatu bhante
bhagav bhikkhuniyo karotu bhante bhagav bhikkhun“naµ dhammikathan ' ti. Tena kho pana samayena ther bhikkhu
bhikkhuniyo ovadanti pariyyena - M.III. 270.). In fact. under the third garudhamma it
is incumbent on the Bhikkhunis to go to the Bhikkhu Saŗgha regularly for
ovda.[dclxxxvi]
Notwithstandig the venerable Mah
Kassapa's reticence we find a
great claim made for the usefulness
of such counsel and correction for those who have chosen to lead a life of
religious zest. According to the
circumstances such anussan“ or
counsel would vary in each context.
But it was always calculated to guide and direct the disciple who still
has to accomplish his avowed mission (Ye kho te brhmaöa bhikkhč sekh
appattamnas anuttaraµ yogakkhemaµ patthayamn viharanti tesu me ayaµ evarčp“
anussan“ hoti - M.III. 4.). Such
was the spiritual leadership provided by the Buddha which was respected and
recognised quite independent of the subsequent achievements of the
disciples. The same Sutta as quoted above makes it clear by saying
that even under the guidance of the
Buddha himself some disciples may fail to attain Nibbna. That is how the Tathgata plays the
limited role of a guide (Evaµ eva kho brhmaöa tiŹŹhat ' eva nibbnaµ tiŹŹhati
nibbnagm“ maggo tiŹŹhm ' ahaµ samdapet. Atha ca pana mama svak may evaµ
ovadiyamn evaµ anussiyamn appekacce accantaniŹŹhaµ nibbnaµ rdhenti
ekacce na rdhenti. Ettha kv '
haµ brhmaöa karomi maggakkhy“ brhmaöa tathgato ' ti - M.III.
6.).
It is possible to state that there
must have been besides the Buddha a number of senior members of the Saŗgha who
were concerned with the progress of the religious life of their fellow
members. The two chief disciples of
the Buddha, Sriputta and Moggallna, no doubt, figure prominent among
them. In the Anaŗgana Sutta the
venerable Moggallna himself gives pride of place to the venerable
Sriputta.[dclxxxvii] The venerable Sriputta
gives here his fellow monks a long discourse on the defiling traits of the
mind. At the end of it the
venerable Moggallna remarks that Sriputta's clear analysis served to purge the minds of
those disciples who were lacking in faith but had taken to the monastic life to
eke out an existence and were corrupt, stupid and undisciplined (Tesaµ yasm
sriputto imin dhammapariyyena haday hadayaµ mae aya tacchati - M.I.
32.). The devoted and faithful
disciples, Moggallna further remarks, would relish and rejoice over these words
of instruction (Te yasmato sriputtassa imaµ dhammapariyyaµ sutv pipanti
mae vacas c ' eva manas ca - M.I. 32.). The sole purpose of such instruction is
conceived to be the guidance of fellow monks so as to keep them out of evil and
place them on the path of virtue (Sdhu vata bho sabrahmacr“ akusal
vuŹŹhpetv kusale patiŹŹhpeti - Ibid.).
However, as pointed out by the
venerable Mah Kassapa it has not always been an easy or pleasant task to
criticise and correct the conduct
of a fellow member, for many miscreants were ill-tempered and resentful of
correction. The history of
Saŗghdisesa 12 lends further support to this view (Bhikkhu pan ' eva
dubbacajtiko hoti uddesapariypannesu sikkhpadesu bhikkčhi sahadhammikaµ
vuccamno attnaµ avacan“yaµ karoti
m maµ yasmanto kici avacuttha kalyöaµ v ppakaµ v aham ' p ' yasmante na
kici vakkhmi kalyöaµ v ppakaµ v. Viramathyasmanto mama vacany ' ti - Vin.III. 178.). The recurrence of such situations seems
to have been long recognised as a reality in the Ssana. The Anumna Sutta which the venerable
Moggallna addressed to fellow members of the Order is evidently calculated to
spotlight such situations and indicate ways and means of remedying them. The
Sutta enumerates sixteen evil qualities which make a monk unworthy of advice
from fellow members. Those which
are referred to as dovacassakaraöadhamm
include sinful thoughts, diverse expressions of violent temper, and abuse
and counter attack of the critics.
Besides these, they also embrace such weaknesses as jealousy, treason,
fraud and deceit, and stubbornness in many ways. The presence of such evil traits
would make the members of the Order
distrust a fellow celibate and consider it indiscreet to offer advice and
criticism even at his bidding
(Pavreti ce ' pi vauso bhikkhu vadantu maµ yasmanto vacan“yo' mhi
yasmanteh“ ' ti so ca hoti dubbaco dovacassakaraöehi dhammehi samanngato
akkhamo appadakkhiöaggh“ anussaniµ. Atha kho naµ sabrahmacr“ na c ' eva
vattabbaµ maanti na ca anussitabbaµ maanti na ca tasmiµ puggale visssaµ
pajjitabbaµ maanti - M.I. 95.).
The venerable Moggallna therefore makes a plea for the correction of
these failings (Sace vuso bhikkhu paccavekkhamno sabbe ' p ' ime ppake
akusale dhamme appah“ne attani samanupassati ten ' vuso bhikkhun sabbesaµ y '
eva imesaµ ppaknaµ akusalnaµ dhammnaµ pahnya vyamitabbaµ -
Ibid.).
However, inspite of everything, the
need for constant guidance and correction of the disciples became increasingly
imperative. Thus while the Sutta PiŹaka praised the willingness of monks to accept such conusel from
fellow members as a great monastic virtue and indicated how the monks should
qualify themselves to be worthy of it, the Vinaya on the other hand made it
almost incumbent on them to lead their monastic life under such guidance. In the early days of the Ssana when the
Buddha had only a limited number of Bhikkhus under his wing, it was found
possible to regulate their lives without any enforced injunctions. The messageof the Buddha was more or
less personally conveyed to them. The loyalties of the early disciples to the
Master were so sincere that a gentle reminder was all that was needed to
regulate a disciple's conduct, for he undoubtedly knew what was expected of
him. This is what is implied in the
remarks which the Buddha made regarding his disciples in the Kakacčpama
Sutta. The Master once
addressed his disciples and said the following : ' There was a time when the
Bhikkhus pleased me (by their conduct)...... It was not necessary that I should lay
down instructions for them. It was
only a suggestion that they needed.' [dclxxxviii] But
with
the spread of Buddhism over wider
territories there was a corresponding increase in the number of admissions into
the Order. We know from the
evidence of the Vinaya PiŹaka that latterly the Buddha did not
personally preside over such
admissions.[dclxxxix] Further, with these
increasing numbers, there entered into the Order men of varying degrees of
maturity as well as sincerity. They
were not all prompted by a genuine desire to seek spiritual perfection in the
monastic life. In the Anaŗgana
Sutta the venerable Mahmoggallna makes a complete survey of such
cases.[dcxc] In the interests of the
Ssana and the spiritual betterment of the monks themselves, they needed
constant exhortation and compulsory training in discipline. The words of the venerable Sriputta in
the above Sutta were praised by the venerable Moggallna as serving this
purpose. Besides such counsel given from time to time, we also notice the Khandhakas devoting much time to the
regulation and correction of the conduct of the members of the Order. As pointed out by the Buddha himself
such bad conduct would not only have contradicted the lofty ideals and aspirations of the monastic life but
also would have discredited the members of the Order in the eyes of the public on whose
good-will they were entirely dependent for their sustenance. The Khandhakas refer to instances where
owing to the lack of teachers and regular instruction the members of the
monastic community conducted themselves without decorum and propriety (Tena kho
pana samayena bhikkhč anupajjhyak anovadiyamn ananussiyamn dunnivatth
dupprut ankappasampann piö¶ya caranti - Vin.I. 44, 60.). The Buddha rules out such bad conduct as
being reprehensible. He repeatedly
pointed out that such conduct would lead to loss of faour with the public and
bar the new movement which was initiated by him from winning fresh converts and
stabilising itself among the old (Ananucchaviyaµ ananulomikaµ appaŹtirčpaµ
assmaöakaµ akappiyaµ akaraö“yaµ. N
' etaµ bhikkhave appasannnaµ v pasdya pasannnaµ v bhiyyobhvya...... appasannna c ' eva appasdya
pasannna ca aathatty ' ti -
Vin. I.45.).
The system of discipline which is
set out in the Khandhakas attempts to remedy this situation by the appointment
of two categories of teachers called Upajjhya and īcariya who would preside
over the conduct of the members of the Saŗgha. Barring the central authority of the
Buddha in his day as the founder of the organization, these two constituted the
spiritual leadership of the monastic community. Referring to these, the
commentarial tradition of the Samantapsdik defines an Upajjhya as a teacher
who could judge correctly and point
out to his pupils what is right and wrong (Anupajjhyak ' ti vajjvajjam
upanijjhyakena garun virahit -
VinA.V. 977.). A very
different role is assigned to the īcariya in the same work. He is the teacher from whom the pupils
acquire their refinement and culture (Anujnmi bhikkhave cariyan ' ti crasamcrasikkhpanakaµ cariyaµ
anujnmi - Ibid. 985.). As we
trace the role of the Upajjhya and the īcariya in the Khandhakas we see in
places what approximates to a difference in their respective duties. When a pupil elects his īcariya and
invites him to fill that role, the formal invitation in terms of which he has to
do it gives us some indication that the īcariya appears to be his proximate
teacher under whose immediate supervision he takes up residence. For he is made
to say: ' Be thou my īcariya. I
shall live under thee.' (Acariyo me
bhante hohi yasmato nissya vacchmi - Vin. I. 60.). But under the election of an Upajjhya
we do not discover any such specification of relationship.[dcxci] However, as the pupil
reaches maturity in the Order and seniority of status (upasampad) is conferred
upon him he comes to owe his allegiance to the Upajjhya. At the earliest stage in the history of
the Ssana, when the act of upasampad assumed a formal character, it became
necessary to announce in the assembly of the Saŗgha the name of the Upajjhya
under whose responsibility the Saŗgha confers seniority of status on the
noviciate (Suötu me bhante saŗgho.
Ayaµ itthannmo itthannmassa yasmato upasampadpekkho. Yadi saŗghassa pattakallaµ saŗgho itthannmaµ
upasampdeyya itthannmena upajjhyena.
Es atti - Vin.1. 56.).
However, speaking of the various
duties to be performed by those who
preside over the discipline of the members of the Order, the Khandhakas seem to
look upon both Upajjhya and īcariya as playing similar roles in the maintenance
of monastic discipline. But there
can be
little doubt that each one of them
carried an emphasis of his own.
Both are required to be competent to develop their pupils on the
following lines:
1.
...to guide them in the discipline
for the acquisition of decorum and propriety.
2.
...to guide them in the discipline
leading to the attainment of the monastic ideal.
3.
...to regulate their life in terms
of the Dhamma.
4.
...to regulate their life in terms
of the Vinaya.
5.
...to dispel any incorrect views
they come to entertain by analysing them in terms of the
Dhamma.
(PaŹibalo hoti antevsiµ v
saddhivihriµ v abhisamcrikya sikkhya sikkhpetuµ dibrahmacariyikya
sikkhya vinetuµ abhidhamme vinetuµ
abhivinaye vinetuµ uppannaµ diŹŹhigataµ dhammato vivecetuµ vivecpetuµ -
Vin. I. 64f.). The antevs“ and saddhivihr“ referred to here are the pupils of the
īcariya and the Upajjhya respectively, both of whom seem to exercise authority
over the development of discipline on similar lines. The significance of abhisamcrik sikkh and dibrahmacariyik sikkh in terms of which the īcariya and the
Upajjhya have to train their pupils has already been discussed under s“la and sikkh.[dcxcii] Suffice it here to say
that as has been already pointed out these two forms of sikkh are capable of exhausting between them
the whole range of monastic discipline.
The two terms abhidhamma and
abhivinaya which are further
referred to and in terms of which the pupils are to be trained by their teachers
are equally comprehensive and may well echo an earlier phase of the Ssana when
the whole of the Buddha's teaching was reckoned in terms of Dhamma and Vinaya. Thus abhidhamme vineti and abhivinaye vineti would therefore cover the disciple's
personal spiritual development as well as his monastic discipline. However, Budddhaghosa is seen narrowing
the scope of the term
abhidhamma here when he
defines it as abhidhamme ti
nmarčpaparicchede vinetuµ na paŹibalo ti attho.[dcxciii] This attempt of
Buddhaghosa to define the term
abhidhamma here as meaning a
special branch of knowledge which is really in the field of the Abhidhamma
PiŹaka is both unnecessary and unwarranted. This has already been pointed out by
Oldenberg[dcxciv] and Miss
Horner.[dcxcv] But Buddhaghosa was
evidently very strongly influenced by a tradition which attempted at all costs
to claim for the Abhidhamma equal antiquity with the Sutta and the Vinaya. Finally, the teacher should safeguard
his pupil against entertaining false views regarding the Dhamma and hasten to
correct them whenever their presence is detected.
The importance of spiritual
leadership in the rapidly expanding monastic community is further recognised in
the Khandhakas as is evident from the discussions on nissaya.[dcxcvi] At one stage the Buddha seems to have
thought it fit to lay down that a pupil should live ten years under the guidance
of his teacher, īcariya or
Upajjhya.[dcxcvii] Such a teacher must
himself claim ten years standing in the Ssana to be qualified to offer such
guidance (Anujnmi bhikkhave dasavassni nssya vatthuµ dasavassena nissayaµ
dtuµ - Vin.I. 60.). Subsequently it is added that the
teacher who provides such guidance should not only possess his seniority of ten
or more years but also be a competent and able one (Anujnmi bhikkhave vyattena
bhikkhun paŹibalena dasavassena v atirekadasavassena v nissayaµ dtuµ - Op.cit. 62.). In course of time, under changing
circumstances, it was conceded that an able and efficient pupil need spend only
five years under such tutelage.
However, an incompetent one
may be required to spend all
his life under such conditions (Anujnmi bhikkhave vyattena bhikkhun paŹbalena
pacavassni nissya vatthuµ avyattena yvaj“vaµ - Op.cit. 80.). NissayapaŹippassaddhi or the
withdrawal of the condition of
being under the guidance of the teacher is effected only under special
circumstances. Five such conditions
are mentioned in the Khandhakas in relation to the Upajjjhya.[dcxcviii] The dependence of a pupil on his
Upajjhya may be terminated on the latter's departure, leaving the Order, death
or joining another religious group.
It may also happen at the express wish of the teacher (Pac ' im bhikkhave
nissaya-paŹippassaddhiyo upajjhyamh.
Upajjhyo pakkanto v hoti vibbhamanto v klaµkato v pakkasaµkanto v
öatti yeva pacam“ - Vin.I. 62.).
In the case of the īcariya
these five considerations are
repeated and a sixth condition is added, which reads to the effect that whenever
the Upajjhya as the higher authority comes to supersede the īcariya the pupil's
dependence on the īcariya is
terminated: upajjhyena v
samodhnaµ gato hoti - Ibid. Here
we are inclined to agree with S.
Dutt in his interpretation of this point.
He reads the above phrase to mean ' when the Upajjhya and the īcariya
are together, nissaya towards the latter ceases.' [dcxcix] The Samantapsdik explains it in a manner
which makes it appear unnecessarily formal and mechanical.[dcc] This last consideration
apparently takes note of the possible overlapping of the services of the
Upajjhya and the īcariya in the role of
nissayadyaka. Certain
concessions are also given with regard to life under nissaya to monks who are
proceeding on a journey, are incapacitated on account of illness and to those
who have chosen residence in the forest in their own interest.[dcci]
With such a vital role to play in
the monastic community the īcariya
and the Upajjhya were placed
in loco parentis to their pupils by the Buddha. The teacher, īcariya or Upajjhya,
should look after his pupil with paternal concern (īcariyo bhikkhave
antevsikamhi puttacittaµ upaŹŹhapessati - Vin.I. 45, 60.). Similarly a pupil must look upon his
teacher with filial regard (Antevsiko cariyamhi pitucittaµ upaŹŹhapessati.... Evaµ te aamaaµ sagrav sappatiss
sabhgavuttino viharant imasmiµ dhammavinaye vuddhiµ virčĀhiµ vepullaµ
pajjissanti - Ibid.). The
Theragth states that such mutual
respect in the monastic community is an essential step in the ladder of spiritual progress
(Yassa sabrahmacr“su gravo nčpalabbhati parihyati saddhamm maccho appodake
yath. etc. _ Thag. 387 f.). The teacher, thus placed in this
honoured position, is expected to benefit his pupil in diverse ways of which his
contribution to the pupil's spiritual progress ranks uppermost. The Khandhakas which define his proper
service to the pupil go on to say that he should further the latter's progress
by means of uddesa, paripucch,
ovda and anussan“.[dccii] The
Samanta-psdik explains uddesa as plivcan and paripucch as
pliy atthavaööan, thus
making it clear that it was necessary for the pupil to gain a knowledge of the
teachings of the Master together with their explanation under his
teacher.[dcciii] It was one of the
duties of the teacher to see it perfected. He was also expected to regulate the
pupil's day to day life by means of ovda
and anussan“. Under ovda the Samantapsdik indicates that the
teacher should forewarn his pupil regarding impropriety of behaviour (Ovdo ti
anotiööe vatthusmiµ idaµ karohi idaµ m karitth ' ti vacanaµ - VinA.V. 982.).
If the pupil happens to slip into an error the teacher should then give him
further advice (Anussan“ ' ti
otiööe vatthusmiµ - Ibid.).
The pupil who thus develops his
religious life under the tutelage of his īcariya or Uajjhya has also a part to
play in safeguarding the spiritual well-being of his teachers. In the closely knitted life of the
monastic community every member, both young and old, was expected to contribute
his share towards mutual correction
of the irreligious life and also to let himself be corrected by others. This was observed earlier under the
Saŗghdisesa12 where the following
comments are made : ' May you, O
sir, admonish the Bhikkhus. The Bhikkhus too, will admonish you. Thus the disciples of the Buddha are
nurtured in this manner through mutual advice and correction.' (īyasm ' pi
bhikkhu vadetu sahadhammena.
Bhikkhč ' pi yasmantaµ vakkhanti sahadhammena. Evam-samva¶¶h hi tassa bhagavato paris
yadidaµ aamaavacanena aamaa-vuŹŹhpanen ' ti - Vin. III. 178.). Thus
a pupil was expected to help his
teacher in the perfection of his religious life in the following ways:[dcciv]
If the teacher shows lack of interest in
the perfection of his religious life the pupil must make every effort to dispel it.
If the teacher comes to entertain
any doubt or heresy the pupil must strive to eradicate it by having recourse to
religious discussions.
The pupil is further empowered to
urge the Saŗgha into action against his teacher if the latter is guilty of a
more serious monastic offence (garudhamma). As the imposition of penalties and
punishments is vital in the correction of monastic indiscipline the pupil has to
see that the Saŗgha carries out without fail the necessary disciplinary action
on his teacher. Assisting the Saŗgha in this manner for the proper enforcement
on miscreants of remedial penalties
which are part of the code of the Ptimokkha was considered a great serviceby
the pupil both to his teacher and to the monastic
community.
On the otherhand, if the Saŗgha
wishes to carry out on his teacher a daö¶akamma or formal act, the pupil may then plead
with the Saŗgha for the mitigation of sentence. He may go so far as to request
the Saŗgha to waive it completely.
However, if the punishment is meted
out to the teacher the pupil must request him to conduct himself through it in a
commendable manner.
This reciprocity of relations
between the teacher and the pupil seems to extend to many spheres of monastic
life besides the furtherance of spiritual well-being. The Khandhakas describe in great detail
the services which a pupil should render to his teacher.[dccv] In the day to day life
of the monastic community a pupil is expected
to attend to the physical needs of his teacher. He shall commence his duties at daybreak
by providing water and other requisites for the teacher to wash his face. He
shall then prepare a seat
for him and shall attend on him while he is at his meals. He shall also take good care of the
teacher's possessions such as the bowl and the robe. He shall keep the teacher's place of
residence in perfect order, taking good care of its belongings. In cases of illness, he shall
attend on him all his life looking
forward to his recovery. The teacher, in turn, has many duties
which he shall fulfil towards his pupil.[dccvi] He shall see that his
pupil comes to possess such necessaries like the bowl and the robe. Further to this, if the pupil happens to be
indisposed, there devolves also on the teacher the additional duty of attending
to all his physical needs such as were described in relation to the duties of a
pupil towards his teacher.
The relationship of teacher and
pupil is thus seen to be established on a basis of mutual respect and
consideration. From the very inception of monastic community life such
safeguards were provided in order that the machinery for its administration may
not get out of control or breakdown under the strain of abuse or
corruption. The first signs of the
necessity to restrict the number of
pupils under a single teacher appears with the incident of the two noviciate
pupils of the venerable Upanada who abused each other.[dccvii] In those early days of
the Ssana when the monastic community was evolving itself into shape as a
respected institution we are not surprised that the first prompt action taken
against the possibility of such an incident was the ban that was imposed that no
teacher should keep more than one pupil (Na bhikkhave ekena dve smaöer
upaŹŹhpetabb. Yo upaŹŹhpeyya
patti dukkatassa - Vin.I. 79.).
The disciplinary machinery
of the Vinaya was used to enforce this condition as is clear from the imposition
of a DukkaŹa offence on one who fails to respect it. However, the spirit underlying this was
the consideration that a teacher should have proper control over his pupils and
should be able to direct their lives so as not to allow them to drift away from the path
of
the holy life. Consequently we find the first
restriction modified soon afterwards and a teacher is allowed to have as many pupils as he
could guide and instruct (...yvatake v pana ussahati ovadituµ anussituµ
tvatake upaŹŹhpetuµ - Vin. I.
83).
In executing the proper
responsibility towards the pupils a teacher is empowered to make use of certain
disciplinary measures whenever the
need arises. Having specified as to
what should be the proper mode of conduct of a pupil towards his teacher, the
Vinaya proceeds to ensure that this
order is not violated except under the pain of punishment. A teacher is
given the right to turn away a pupil who does not conform to this pattern of
conduct.[dccviii] But it is also left
possible for the pupil to tender an apology to his teacher and be pardoned by
him for any of his transgressions.
Likewise young noviciate monks who show no respect or courtesy to the
senior members of the community are also liable to be subject to
punishment.[dccix] The freedom of movement
of such miscreants may be curtailed
and certain restrictions may be imposed on them. At the same time it is interesting to
note the extra safeguards the Vinaya provides against possible abuse of power by
those who are placed in positions of trust to regulate the lives of the
juniors. Several interesting
examples may be cited. No teacher
shall refuse to forgive his pupil whom he has turned away if he comes back to
him with a sincere apology. The law
shall also not be abused to turn away a really good pupil. At the same time it is also made
incumbent on the teacher to turn away without discrimination every pupil who
violates the accepted pattern of conduct ( asammvattanto). Any teacher who disregards these
considerations shall be himself guilty of a DukkaŹa offence.[dccx]
Despite all these attempts to
maintain law and order in the monastic community, we discover on the evidence of
the Vinaya PiŹka itself rebellious and disruptive forces at work within the
Ssana. These miscreants are
generally associated with the ' band of six' or Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus. These Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus and their
followers attempt to wreck the machinery which is set up fot the maintenance of
monastic discipline. In the
introduction to Pcittiya 63 we discover them challenging the validity of
ecclesiastical acts which have been correctly performed by the Saŗgha.[dccxi] At Pcittiya 76 they
make false accusations against innocent Bhikkhus.[dccxii] The most reprehensible
example of such behaviour is the
conduct of Mettiyabhummajaka Bhikkhus who falsely accuse the venerable
Dabbamallaputta of a Prjika offence.[dccxiii] These miscreant monks
are seen over and over again attempting to bring chaos and bitterness into the
life in the monastic community.[dccxiv] Prompted by his
personal animosity against the Buddha, Devadatta too, appears to have taken a
leading part in such activity. The
circumstances which led to the promulgation of Saŗghdisesa 10 clearly
illustrate the subtle move by Devadatta to break up the unity of the Buddhist
Saŗgha.[dccxv] This tendency assumed
dangerous proportions when such a move was either led by a body of people which
was large enough to canvass opinion in its favour or was pioneered by one who by
his power or popularity was able to influence a considerable section of the community and the public. When Devadatta stood condemned for his
attempts to disrupt the unity of the Saŗgha, Koklika attempted to convert a
group in support of Devadatta.[dccxvi] This schismatic
tendency is seen to have been widely prevalent even in the earliest days of the
Ssana. Under the history of the
Tajjaniya-kamma it is recorded that the followers of Paödukalohitaka
Bhikkhus went around inciting
groups of monks to fight others.[dccxvii] Similar behaviour on the part of
Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus isseen in Pcittiya 3 where they are seen
indulging
in tale-bearing with a view to
creatig dissensions in the Saŗgha.[dccxviii] On the otherhand, Assajipunabbasuka Bhikkhus of K“Źgiri who became very popular among
the people of the neighbourhood were able to mislead them completely as to what
constituted the proper form of monastic behaviour. The unwarranted friendship and
familiarity of these Bhikkhus had won for them such confidence with the lay
people that they refused to regard as acceptable even the more restrained and
dignified behaviour of any other
monk.[dccxix] Thus these groups of
miscreant monks were fast establishing themselves as the true representatives of
the Buddhist Saŗgha. The danger of this was soon realised and the Buddha hastens
to enlist the support of the leading disciples like Sriputta and Moggallna to
eradicate such vicious elements. It is already evident that they had become
considerably powerful and were even capable of physical violence. Sriputta and
Moggalna make mention of this to the Buddha who then suggests that they should go
reinforced with large numbers to deal with these miscreant monks.[dccxx] In carrying out
disciplinary action against them, the Buddha tells Sriputta and Moggallna that
they are only exercising their authority as leaders in the Ssana (Gacchatha tumhe sriputt k“Źgiriµ
gantv assajipunabbasuknaµ bhikkhčnaµ k“Źgirism pabbjaniyakammaµ
karotha. Tumhkam ete
saddhivihrino ' ti - Vin.II. 14
; III.182.). For ever afterwards these two dynamic characters, Sriputta
and Moggallna, served as the model of good monastic living. The Buddha himself
endorsed this view and held that every good disciple should emulate them (Saddho
bhikkhave bhikkhu evaµ samm ycamno yceyya tdiso homi ydis
sriputtamoggalln ' ti. Es
bhikkhave tul etaµ pamöaµ mama svaknaµ bhikkhčnaµ yadidaµ
sriputta-moggalln ' ti - A.II.
164.)
Chapter
XIII
At the time the Buddha set up his
Order of Bhikkhus, there was in Indian society the widespread but groundless
belief that woman is inferior to man.
The position which the woman lost under the dominance of the Brhmaöas
had not yet been retrieved. The
Brahmins of the day evidently showed little sympathy for her sad lot. Altekar describes the position of woman
in India at the time as follow : '
The prohibition of upanayana
amounted to spiritual disenfranchisement of women and produced a
disastrous effect upon their general position in society. It reduced them to the status of
źčdras... What, however, did infinite harm to women was the theory that they
were ineligible for them (Vedic
sacrifices) because they were of
the status of the źčdras.
Henceforward they began to be bracketed with źčdras and other backward
classes in society. This we find to
be the case even in the Bhagavadg“t (IX.32).' [dccxxi] In the Manusmrti we witness the
cruel infliction of domestic subservience on woman. The road to heaven is barred to her and
there is hard bargaining with her for the offer of an alternative route. Matrimony and obedience to the husband
are the only means whereby a woman can hope to reach
heaven.
Nsti str“nm
pthag yajo na
vrataµ npyupo©athaµ
patiµ §u§rč©ate yena tena svarge mah“yate.
Manu. V. 153.
'Women have no
sacrifices of their own to perform nor religious rites or observances
to
follow. Obedience to the husband
alone would exalt the woman in heaven.'
This hostile attitude to woman both
in religion and in society was repeatedly
criticised and challenged by the Buddha on numerous occasions. In the Kosala Saµyutta the Buddha contradicts the
belief that the birth of a daughter was not as much a cause of joy as that of a
son, a belief which the ritualism of the Brhmaöas had contributed to
strengthen. The Buddha pointed out
clearly that woman had a dignified and an importnt part to play in society, and
he defined it with great insight, fitting her harmoniously into the social
fabric. She is a lovable member of
the household, held in place by numerous relationships, and respected above all,
as the mother of worthy sons. The
sex did not matter, he argued, and added that in character and in her role in
society, she may even rival men.
Itth“ ' pi hi
ekacciy seyy pos jandhipa
medhvin“ s“lavat“ sassudev
patibbat.
Tass yo jyati poso sčro hoti disampati
evaµ subhagiy putto
rajjam ' pi anussati.
S.I. 86.
A woman child,
O lord of men, may prove
Even a better offspring than a male.
For she may
grow up wise and virtuous,
He husband's mother rev'rencing, true wife.
The
boy that she may bear may do great deeds,
And rule great realms, yea, such a
son
Of noble wife becomes his country's guide.
Kindred
Sayings, I. p.111
But it is not unusual to find
scholars who have missed this singular virtue of Buddhism. It would be grossly
unfair to say that the Budha did not devote much attention to the duties and
ideals of laywomen or that he showed indifference to or contempt of women. Speaking of Buddhism and Jainism Altekar unjustly
says : ' Both these were ascetic religions, and they have not devoted much
attention to the duties and ideals of lay women. The founders and leaders of both these
movements showed the indifference to, or contempt of women, which is almost
universal among the advocates of the ascetic ideal.'[dccxxii]
The instances are numerous where
the Buddha defines and describes the duties of woman in society.[dccxxiii] Further, the Buddha
recognises the fact that these do not constitute the whole of her life. It is not with a view to limiting their
life solely to the secular affairs of the household that the Buddha laid down a
code of good living for women, but to serve as a complement to the good life
already enjoined in his religion to all his followers irrespective of their
sex. A host of these considerations
as they are addressed to women are grouped together in the Saµyutta Nikya in a
chapter solely devoted to them.[dccxxiv] A good lay woman
endowed with religious devotion, moral virtue and liberality as well as wisdom
and learning, makes a success of her life in this world. For it is said:
Saddhya s“lena
ca y ' “dha va¶¶hati
paya cgena sutena c ' čbhayaµ
s tdis“ s“lavat“
upsik
diyati sraµ idh ' eva attano ' ti.
S.IV.250
'Such a
virtuous lady who possesses religious devotion, cultivates virtue, is endowed
with wisdom and learning and is given to charity makes a success of her life in this very
existence.'
Her virtuous character gives to her
life in the household poise and dignity (Pacahi bhikkhave dhammehi samanngato
mtugmo visrado agraµ ajjhvasati.
Katamehi pacahi. Pötipt
pa“ivirato ca hoti . ...saurmerayamajjapamdaŹŹhn paŹivirato ca hoti - S.IV.
250.). The following are also given
as virtues by means of which she can make her life fruitful, both here and
hereafter: Saddho (religious devotion), hirim ottp“ (sense of shame and fear), akkodhano
anupanh“ (not given to anger),
anissuk“ (not jealous),
amacchar“ (not niggardly),
anaticr“ (chaste in behaviour),
s“lav (virtuous), bahussuto
(learned), raddhaviriyo (zealous),
upaŹŹhitassat“ (mentally alert),
paav (wise)[dccxxv]. We notice that all these virtues
enumerated so far are within the reach of a woman living in the household. She is not rooted out of her domestic
setting. The good and successful
life of the laywoman, as much as of the layman, seems to have loomed large in
the ethics of Buddhism. In the
Aŗguttara Nikya two sets of virtues are given whereby a woman is said to strive
for success in this world as well as in the other : idhalokavijaya and paralokavijaya (Catčhi kho viskha dhammehi samanngato
mtugmo idhalokavijayya paŹipanno hoti ayaµ sa loko raddho hoti. Katamehi catčhi. Idha viskha mtugmo
susamvihitakammanto hoti saŗgahitaparijano bhattu manpaµ carati sambhataµ
anurakkhati... Catčhi kho viskha dhammehi samanngato mtugmo paralokavijayya
paŹipanno hoti parassa loko raddho hoti.
Katamehi catčhi. Idha
viskha mtugmo saddhsampanno hoti s“lasampanno hoti cgasampanno hot
pasampanno hoti - A.IV. 269 f.).
It is also worth noting here that
the Buddha accepts the reality and significance of the institution of marriage
for woman. But unlike in Hindu
society, it was not the only means for the social elevation of woman. In Hinduism, a woman is supposed to become a dvija, a
truly initiated member of the religion and the society, only after her
marriage.[dccxxvi] The virtues
referred
to in the Aŗguttara Nikya[dccxxvii] are household duties of
a woman as wife which lead to domestic peace and concord. They are also calculated to keep the
family administration in gear and secure for the family economic stability. This significant part which she is
called upon to play is meticulously defined and it reveals neither indifference
to nor contempt of women on the part of the Buddha. The good laywoman has also her duties
for the development of her religious life.
It is a course of graduated training which does not conflict with her
household life. It is, in fact,
smoothly woven into it. Religious
devotion (saddh), moral virtue (s“la), and a generous disposition (cga), for
instance, form part of it. This
healthy combination of social and religious virtues of woman is further
witnessed in the Aŗguttara Nikya where it is said that the following eight
virtues pave the way for her to proceed to heaven:
Sausaµvihitakammant
saŗgahitaparijjan
bhattu manpaµ carati
sambhataµanurakkhati.
Saddhs“lena sampann vadač v“tamacchar
niccaµ
maggaµ visodheti sotthnaµ samparyikaµ.
Iccete aŹŹhadhamm ca yass vijjati
nriy
tam pi s“lavatiµ hu dhammaŹŹhaµ saccavdiniµ.
Solaskrasampann
aŹŹhaŗgasusamgat
tdis“ s“lavat“ upsik upapajjati devalokaµ manpaµ.
A.IV. 271.
They are : 1.organises the work of
the household with efficiency,
2.treats her servants with
concern, 3.strives to please her husband, 4.takes good care of what he earns, 5.possesses religious devotion, 6.is virtuous in conduct, 7.is kind, 8.is liberal. The first four items of this list are identical with the first four
of the five good qualities ascribed to the virtuous wife in the Siŗglovda
Sutta, the fifth being general
efficiency (dakkh) and enterprise
(analas sabbakiccesu) - D. III. p.190.
It was also held in Indian belief
that woman was intellectually inferior to man and therefore had no capacity to
reach higher spiritual attainments.
This idea clearly echoes in the Saµyutta Nikya where Mra, as the
personification of the forces of evil, strives in vain to dissuade a Bhikkhuni [
Ther“ Som ] from her religious endeavours.
Yaµ taµ is“hi
pattabbaµ Źhnaµ durabhisambhavaµ
na taµ dvaŗgulapaya sakk pappotuµ
itthiy.
S.I. 129.
'No woman, with
the two-finger-wisdom which is hers, could ever hope to reach those heights which are attained only by the
sages.'
These words of Mra are undoubtedly
resonant of the beliefs of the day and the Buddha was vehement in contradicting
them. Bhikkhuni Som to whom Mra
addressed these words answered.
Illustrating the Buddhist attitude to the spiritual potentialities of
woman she said :
Itthibhvo kiµ
kayir cittamhi susamhite
öamhi vattamnamhi samm dhammaµ vipassato.
S.I. 129.
'When one's
mind is well concentrated and wisdom never fails does the fact of being a
woman make any
difference?'
However, there is evidence that
this age-old scepticism about the spiritual potentialities of woman died
hard. Even in the face of success
achieved by Bhikkhunis in Buddhism,
a groundless belief seems to have prevailed which distrusted the capacity
of woman for spiritual perfection.
On the eve of her final passing away, when Mahpajpati Gotami visits the
Buddha to bid him farewell, he
calls upon her to give proof of the religious attainments of the Bhikkhunis in
order to convince the disbelieving sceptics.
Th“naµ
dhammbhisamaye ye bl vimatiµ gat
tesaµ diŹŹhipahnatthaµ iddhiµ dassehi
gotami.
Ap. II. 535.
'O Gotami,
perform a miracle in order to dispel the wrong views of those foolish men who
are in doubt with regard to the spiritual potentialities of
woman.'
Buddhism. with its characteristic
note of realism, also recognises the inherent qualities of woman which make her
attractive to the opposite sex.
Nothing else in the world, it is said, can delight and cheer a man so
much as a woman. In her, one would
find all the fivefold pleasures of the senses. The world of pleasure exists in
her.
Pacakmaguö ete itthirčpasmiµ
dissare
rčp sadd ras gandh phoŹŹhabb ca manoram.
A.III. 69.
'All these
five-fold pleasures of the senses which gratify the mind are centered in the
feminine form.'
The power which the woman derives
through this may, at the same time, extend so far as to make man throw all
reason to the winds and be a pawn in her hand, under the influence of her charm.
Thus, it is even possible that a mother may err in relation to her son or vice versa :
Kin nu so bhikkhave moghapuriso maati na mt putte srajjati pčtto v pana
mtar“ ' ti.[dccxxviii] The Aŗguttara is
equally emphatic when it says : Nhaµ bhikkhave aaµ ekarčpam ' pi
samanupassmi evaµ rajan“yaµ evaµ kaman“yaµ evaµ madan“yaµ evaµ bandhan“yaµ evµ
mucchan“yam evaµ antaryakaraµ anuttarassa yogakkhemassa adhigamya yatha y '
idaµ bhikkhave itthirčpaµ.
Itthirčpe bhikkhave satt ratt giddh gadhit mucchit ajjhopann te
d“gharattaµ socanti itthirčpavasnug.... A.III. 68. Therefore a man might say
without exaggeration that woman is a
trap laid out on all sides by Mra
(yaµ hi taµ bhikkhave samm vadamno vadeyya samantaps ' ti mtugmaµ y
' eva samm vadamno vadeyya samantapso mrass ' ti - A.III. 68.). These observations are made, however,
not as a stricture on their character but as a warning to the men, who in
seeking their company, might err on the side of excess. It is true that at times they tend to be
overstressed, but obviously with no malice to women. There is pointed reference to the unguarded nature of the
man who falls a prey to these feminine charms.
MuŹŹhassatiµ t
bandhanti pekkhitena mhitena ca
atho ' pi dunnivatthena majun bhaöitena
ca
n ' eso jano svsaddo api ugghtito mato.
A.III.
69.
' Women ensnare
a man of heedless mind with their glances and smiles or with artful
grooming (dunnivattha) and pleasing words. Women are such that
one cannot approach them in safety
even though they may be stricken and dead.'[dccxxix]
Thus it becomes clear that it is
not in the spirit of Budhism to
brand woman as a source of
corruption for man. Note the
words ' a man of heedless mind
' in the above quotation. It would be interesting to contrast here
the words of Manu who says : ' It
is the nature of woman to seduce men in this world ' (Svabhva eva nr“öµ naröµ iha
dč©anaµ - Manu. II.213.). The Jains too, inspite of their admission of women
into their Monastic Order, do not seem to have differed very much from the
Brahmins in their attitude towards women.
The īcraŗga Sčtra, in the course of a religious admonition known as the
Pillow of Righteousness, makes the following comment which stigmatises woman
completely: ' He to whom women were
known as the causes of all sinful acts,
he saw (the true state of the world).'[dccxxx] The position of woman
in Jainism is summed up as follows :
" Right in the earliest portions of the Canon woman is looked upon as
something evil that enticed innocent males into a snare of misery. They are described as ' the greatest
temptation ', ' the causes of all
sinful acts ', ' the slough ', ' demons ' etc. Their bad qualities are described in
exaggerated terms. Their passions
are said to destroy the celibacy of monks
' like a pot filled with lac near fire '. "[dccxxxi] In
Buddhism, on the other hand, the
caution which men are called upon to exercise in their dealings with the opposite sex springs solely
from the Buddhist attitude to kma
or the pleasures of the senses.
Km are described in Buddhism as leading to grief and
turbulence. Km thwart the path to transcendental
happiness . This attitude is
eloquently manifest in the counsel given to AriŹŹha in the Alagaddčpama
Sutta.[dccxxxii]
Of this vast field of sense
experience, sex is only a segmant but it is admittedly one with irresistible
appeal and thus required a special word of warning, particularly to those who
are keen on the pursuit of mental equipoise. The Buddha says that if it were left
unbridled, it would, in expressing itself, shatter all bounds of propriety (Kin
nu so bhikkhave moghapuriso maati na mt putte srajjati putto v pana matar“
' ti - A.III. 68.). Hence the
desire to lead a chaste and moral life, eschewing, even completely, the
gratification of sex desires, can as much be the aspiration of a woman as of a
man. Besides this philosophic
attitude to the pleasures of the world in which the woman admittedly plays a
dominant part, there seems to be nothing in Buddhism which looks upon sex or
woman as being corrupt in themselves.
Thus it becomes clear that the
philosophy of early Buddhism had no reservations whatsoever regarding the
spiritual emancipation of woman. In
the ocean of saµsra her chances swimming across to the further shore were as
good as those of man. Emancipation of the mind through
perfecton of wisdom which is referred to as cetovimutti pavimutti was the goal of religious life and
for this the way which had proved
most effective was the life of renunciation. The woman was as much encumbered by
household life as man and in her spiritual earnestness she would have equally
well echoed the words of the man who chooses renunciation. She would say with him that the
household life is full of impediments and contrast it with the life of
pabbajj (Sambdho gharvso
rajopatho abbhokso pabbajj - M.I.179.).
But according to the evidence of
the Pali texts[dccxxxiii] the admission of women
into the life of pabbajj in
Buddhism does not seem to have been effected with as much ease as one would
expect. According to these, the
Buddha appears to have shown some reluctance to admit women into the Order. When Mahpajpati Gotami requested the
Buddha to consent to the entry of women into his Order he is said to have put
her off three times, saying: 'Do
not be interested O, Gotami, about the entry of women into my Order.'[dccxxxiv] This does seem to imply
that the presence of women in the monastic institution of brahmacariya was
considered, for some reason or other, to be detrimental to its well- being. In an atmosphere where women were
considered a danger to spiritual life, their presence in the inner circle of
religious life as members of the monastic community would have naturally called
for serious comment. However, there
is evedence that Jainism had
already broken through this barrier against women. But the vicissitudes of the Jaina
monastic community, in the relations between the two orders of monks and nuns,
as well as of nuns and laymen, could not apparently have been very heartening to
the Buddha. Speaking of the reforms
introduced by Mahv“ra with the addition of the fifth vow of chastity to the
earlier cauyma saµvara of Pr§va, Jacobi says, 'The argumentation in the text
presupposes a decay of morals of the monastic order to have occurred between
Pr§va and Mahv“ra...'.[dccxxxv] There is also evidence
from another quarter of the promiscuity in the behaviour of male and female
mendicants in the Buddha's day. The
Buddha takes note of this in the Culladhammasamdna Sutta where he speaks of
Samaöas and Brhmaöas who repudiating the view that sensual pleasures are
detrimental to spiritual progress, mingle freely with female mendicants,
vociferuously enjoying their company.
They are reported as saying
'Whatever can be the basis for
pleading for the renunciation of sensual pleasures? What future calamity can lie in wait for
us? Blissful indeed is the contact
of the soft and tender hands of these young female mendicants.'[dccxxxvi]
However, the Buddha concedes to
īnanda that women, having taken to the life of pabbajj in Buddhism. are capable of attaining
the higher fruits of religious life as far as Arahantship. (Bhabbo nanda mtugmo
tathgatappavedite dhammavinaye agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajitv sotpattiphalam '
pi sakadgmiphalam ' pi angmiphalam ' pi arahattaphalam ' pi sacchiktun ' ti
- A.IV. 276 ; Vin.II. 254.). The considerations which seem to have
weighed heavy in the mind of the Buddha regarding the admission of women into
the Order are concerned more with the wider problem of the monastic organization
as a whole. He would have been
undoubtedly most averse to stand in the way of the personal liberty of
woman. But in the interests of the
collective good of the institution of brahmacariya, which was the core of the
religion, women had to make certain sacrifices, surrendering at times even what
might appear to have been their legitimate rights, This is evident from the
eight conditions (aŹŹha-garudhamm) under which the Buddha granted them
permission to enter the Order.
1.
A nun who has been ordained
(even) for a century must greet
respectfully, rise up from her seat, salute with joined palms, do proper homage
to a monk ordained but that
day.
2.
A nun must not spend the rains in a
residence where there is no monk.
(See Bhikkhun“ Pc. 56 :
Vin. IV. 313.).
3.
Every half- month a nun should
desire two things from the Order of monks : the asking (as to the date) of the
Observance day, and the coming for the exhortation. (See Bhikkhun“ Pc. 59 : Ibid.
315)
4.
After the rains a nun must ' invite ' before both Orders in respect of three
matters : what was seen, what was heard, what was suspected. (See Bhikkhun“ Pc. 57 : Ibid. 314.)
5.
A nun, offending against an
important rule, must undergo Mnatta (discipline) for half a month before both
Orders.
6.
When, as a probationer, she has
trained in the six rules for two years, she should seek ordination from both
Orders.
7.
A monk must not be abused or
reviled in any way by a nun.
8.
From today admonition of monks by
nuns is forbidden, admonition of nuns by monks is not
forbidden.
Book
of the Discipline, V. 354-55.
The insistence on these
aŹŹha-garudhamm is the most vital
issue, much more than the delayed consent of the Buddha, in the founding of the
Bhikkhun“ Ssana. The delay, it may
in fact be argued, would have proved useful to emphasise the conditions which he
was going to lay down. It is these conditions alone which gave the women access
to the monastic life in Buddhism (Sace nanda mahpajpati gotam“
aŹŹhagarudhamme paŹigaöhti s ' va 'ss hotu upasampad - Vin. II. 255.). The Dharmagupta Vinaya in the Chinese
version compares them to a bridge over a great river by means of which one is
enabled to cross over to the further bank.[dccxxxvii] These garudhamm are observances which pertain
to monastic propriety and procedure in the Order of Bhikkhunis in relation to
the Bhikkhus. The women are not to
violate these as long as they remain in the monastic community. In the establishment of the Bhikkhun“
Ssana, these conditions seem to have engaged greater attention than even the
formulation of the code of moral precepts,
which incidentally is not even mentioned at this stage. There is no doubt that in maintaining
the vigour and vitality of the Saŗgha, whether of the
Bhikkhus
or of the Bhikkhunis, the code of
the Ptimokkha played a vital part.
But it seems to be equally true to say that in bringing the newly
inaugurated Bhikkhun“ Saŗgha in to a healthy relationship with the older
institution of the Bhikkhu Saŗgha, the aŹŹha-garudhamm were calculated to play
a greater role. They take no note
of moral considerations. A perfect
functioning of the latter, in the case of the Bhikkhunis too, was apparently
taken for granted at this early stage of their Ssana. That a similar state of affairs did
exist even in the Bhikkhu Saŗgha in its early history is evident in the
Kakacčpama Sutta.[dccxxxviii]
On a closer examination of the
aŹŹhagarudhamm we are led to make
the following observations. According to these the Bhikkhu Saŗgha is looked upon
as the more mature and respnsible body, evidently on account of its seniority,
which is capable of leading the way for the Bhikkhun“ Saŗgha. This is clearly evident from the
garudhamm 2 and 3.[dccxxxix] The Bhikkhunis are
expected to recognise the spiritual leadership of the Order of Bhikkhus. At
least at the outset, the Bhikkhunis had to seek the assistance of the Bhikkhus
in such vital monastic rituals like the ptimokkhuddesa and bhikkhunovda. But it is evident
that, as circumstances recessitated and experience proved opportune, the Buddha
did transfer some of these powers to the Bhikkhunis themselves.[dccxl] However, the
recognition of the leadership of the monks over the community of nuns and this
position of the Bhikkhus in loco
parentis to the Bhikkhunis seem to
have continued much longer. Even
when the authority to recite the Ptimokkha by themselves was finally
transferred to the Bhikkhunis, the Bhikkhus were still left with the right to
instruct them on its proper performance (Anujnmi bhikkhave bhikkhčhi
bhikkhun“naµ cikkhitum evaµ ptimokkham uddiseyyth ' ti - Vin. II.
259.). There is also evidence of a
similar reservation of power in the transference of authority to the Bhikkhunis
to impose penalties and punishments on their fellow members. The Bhikkhus who carried out these acts
at the outset are latterly barred from doing so and are authorised only to
explain to the Bhikkhunis the proper procedure. (Anujnmi bhikkhave bhikkhčhi
bhikkhun“nam cikkhitum evaµ kammaµ kareyyth ' ti - Vin. II. 260.). In the matter of bhikkhunovda too, it was a Bhikkhu who was appointed to
remind the Bhikkhunis regularly of the proper observance of the
aŹŹhagarudhamm.[dccxli] Thus on account of this
complete dependence of a Bhikkhuni on the leadership of a Bhikkhu, the second of
these eight garudhamm forbade the
Bhikkhunis from going into residence for the rains- retreat in a place where
there were no Bhikkhus. The third
garudhamma too, implies the
reliance of the Bhikkhunis on the Order of
Bhikkhus in the performance of the two functions of uposathapucchaka and ovdčpasaŗkamana. Both the Bhikkhus and the Bhikkhunis
seem to have been vigilant about the proper observance of these functions which
they considered, no doubt, to be vital for the healthy progress of the newly
established Order of nuns. (i.
Bhikkhuniyo t bhikkhuniyo etadavocuµ kattha ayyyo vassaµ vutth kacci ovdo
iddho ahos“ ' ti. N ' atthi ayye
tattha bhikkhč. Kuto ovdo iddho
bhavissat“ ' ti. Y t bhikkhuniyo
appicch ...vipcenti kathaµ hi nma bhikkhuniyo abhikkhuke vse vassaµ
vasissant“ ' ti - Vin.IV. 313. ii.
Tena kho pana samayena bhikkhuniyo uposatham ' pi na pucchanti ovdam ' pi na
ycanti. Bhikkhuč ujjhyanti
kh“yanti vipcenti kathaµ hi nma bhikkhuniyo uposathaµ ... na ycissant“ ' ti -
Ibid. 315.). At the first sign of slackness with
regard to these there is a storm of protests and we notice that the authorities
take immediate action to remedy it.
These considerations are brought within the legal framework of the
Bhikkhun“ Ssana and the failure to observe these come to be declared punishable
offences.[dccxlii] In other words they
become part of the Bhikkhuni“ Ptimokkha.
In the study of the sikkhpada
of the Bhikkhu Ptimokkha we have already noted this interesting
phenomenon of the change over into legal statutes of what was once observed as
honoured conventions.
The garudhamma 4, 5 and 6 concern themselves with some
of the other major items of administration in the Buddhist monastic community,
viz. (i) the performance of the pavraö
at the end of the rains- retreat, (ii) the imposition of necessary
penalties on the commission of a grave offence, and (iii) the conferment of
upasampad or higher monastic status. As far as the Bhikkhunis are concerned,
they are barred under these garudhamm
from performing any of these acts within their own Order of the Bhikkhun“
Saŗgha. These acts of the
Bhikkhunis are not considered valid unless they are carried out jointly together
with the monks. However, practical
considerations soon necessitated amendments to these and we see in the revised
version of these conditions the sanction given to the Bhikkhunis to perform
these acts, in the first instance, by themselves. Then they are expected to bring their
decisions before the Bhikkhu Saŗgha for ratification. The following is the
amended procedure for the conferment of upasampad on a Bhikkhuni by the Bhikkhu Saŗgha
: anujnmi bhikkhave ekato
upasampannya bhikkhun“saŗghe visuddhya bhikkhusaŗghe upasampadan ' ti - Vin.II. 271, 274. It shows that the candidate had been
already approved by the Bhikkhun“ Saŗgha.
The Bhikkhunis were also allowed to perform their pavraö in two stages before the two assemblies,
first among themselves and then before the Bhikkhu Saŗgha (Anujnmi bhikkhave
ajjatan pavretv aparajju bhikhusaŗghe pavretun ' ti - Ibid.
275.).
Thus, from the manner in which the Buddha directed the activities of
the Bhikkhunis it becomes clear that he did realise that as the Bhikkhunis
formed a part of the single body of the Saŗgha, their decisions would affect not only
themselves, but also the rest of
that vast organization. Hence the
Bhikkhus were given the right to advise and assist the Bhikkhunis in their
affairs, and thus regulate the destinies of the Ssana. Public opinion must have played a
considerable part in bringing Bhikkhunis under the wing of the Bhikkhu
Saŗgha. At any rate, it appears to
have been considered wise to have all the important monastic activities of the
Bhikkhunis linked up with the more established and senior group of the Bhikkhu
Saŗgha. However, when and wherever
this advisory role had to be transferred from the collective organization of the
Bhikkhu Saŗgha to a single individual, the Buddha took every necessary
precaution to avoid possible abuse of privilege. He has laid down a very comprehensive list of eight
requirements which should be satisfied before a monk could be selected to the
role of a bhikkhunovdaka to give counsel to the
congregation of nuns. There seems
to be little doubt about his anxiety and his foresight regarding the safety and
well-being of the female members of his Order. A monk who is entrusted to preside over
their welfare should conform to perfect standards of moral virtue. He should also possess a thorough
knowledge of the teaching of the Master and know well the complete code of the
Ptimokkha covering both the Bhikkhus and the Bhikkhunis. He should be of pleasant disposition,
mature in years and acceptable to the Bhikkhunis, and above all, should in no
way have been involved in a serious offence with a Bhikkhuni.[dccxliii]
The three remaining garudhamm 1, 7 and 8, appear to have baffled some students
of Buddhism as being contrary to
the Buddha's general attitude to women.
However, if these are examined carefully in their context, this apparent contradiction becomes less
glaring. They all strive to see that the Bhikkhunis do not, under any
circumstance, assert their superiority over the Bhikkhus. We notice that even in the observance
of sikkhpada, the Bhikkhunis are to follow the lead of
the Bhikkhus wherever the sikkhpada
are common to both groups.
The Buddha advises the Bhikkhunis to follow the Bhikkhus in the practice
of such sikkhpada (...yath bhikkhč sikkhanti tath tesu
sikkhpadesu sikkhath ' ti - Vin.II. 258.). But referring to the sikkhpada which are peculiar to the Bhikkhunis, he
suggests that they should be followed, as they are laid down, according to the
letter of the law(...yath-paattesu sikkhpadesu sikkhath ' ti - Ibid.
258.). What seems to follow from
these words of instruction to the Bhikkhunis is that even if there was a
difference between the text of the sikkhpada laid down for the Bhikkhus and their
practice at the time, the Buddha did not think it wise, for purposes of communal harmony, to leave
room for the Bhikkhunis to be critical of this discrepancy. Such a challenge
would have completely undermined the prestige and the authority of the older
institution ot the Saŗgha, quite out of proportion to any degree of moral good
it could bring about by the correction of
Bhikkhus by the Bhikkhunis.
There is evidence to show that the
Buddha was always concerned with the esteem in which the public held his
monastic organization. Such a
consideration was vital for its existence and prosperity. The first remarks which he made to his
erring disciples as he criticised their conduct always pertains to this (N '
etaµ moghapurisa appasannnaµ v pasdya pasannnaµ v bhiyyobhvya - Vin.I.
58 ; II. 2 ; III. 21, 45.). As much
as the Buddha wanted his disciples to correct their mistakes and be of faultless
conduct, he did not want any of them to divulge to any one other than a Bhikkhu
or a Bhikkhuni the more serious offences of their fellow members. Such an intimation was allowed only with
the approval of the Bhikkhus (Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhussa duŹŹhullaµ pattiµ
anupasampannassa roceyya aatra bhikkhusammutiy pcittiyaµ - Vin.IV.
31.). One who violates this
injunction is guilty of a Pcittiya offence (Pc. 9). This provision was undoubtedly made with
the best of intentions and should not be misjudged as contributing in any way to
the perpetuation of monastic offences,
On the other hand, it is in fact repeatedly declared that it is irregular
for a monk to conceal intentionally an offence of one member from the rest of
the community. Pcittiya 64 of the
monks and Prjika 2 and Saŗghdisesa
9 of the nuns are all calculated to avoid such a possibility.[dccxliv] All these precautions,
therefore, seem to be a part of a system of internal security set up by the
Buddha in the interests of the monastic organization. They emphasise the Buddha's concern both
for the public esteem and for the moral soundness of his
Order.
There seems to be a general
agreement about the fact that the
eight garudhamm were laid down by the Buddha as a
condition governing the establishment of the Bhikkhun“ Ssana. However, strange as it may seem, after the Bhikkhun“
Ssana was instituted under the leadership of Gotami, she appears before īnanda to make the request that the
Buddha should remove the first
garudhamma and allow
Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis to pay courtesies to each other according to seniority
alone.[dccxlv] This could hardly be true to the spirit in
which Gotami accepted the
garudhamm.[dccxlvi] We are inclined to think that she was
here undoubtedly subjected to undue pressure of her own group.
This dissentient note which we find
recorded in the Cullavagga, it is imortant to note, does not seem to have found
general acceptance elsewhere. Of
the Chinese Vinaya texts we have examined, it is only the MahҤsakas who record it and that too with a
different emphasis.[dccxlvii] According to their text Gotami, prior to
her being ordained, sends īnanda to the Buddha to request him to make this
change. The Buddha refuses to do so
and says that since he has now allowed women to enter the Order they should
follow what has been laid down and not go against it. In the Cullavagga too, the
Buddha declines to make this concession.
But in trying to give a reason for this attitude of the Buddha, the
Theriya tradition attempts to make out that in the organization of the Ssana
social considerations, as much as moral and ethical values, loomed large in the
mind of the Master. In the
Cullavagga he is reported as saying :
'Not even the Titthiyas who propound imperfect doctrines sanction such
homage of men towards women. How
could the Tathgata do so?'[dccxlviii]
We should also here consider the
fact that any concession for the abrogation of what had already been laid down
after careful deliberation would be grossly contradictory to the ideal which the
Buddha and his early disciples appear to have upheld regarding the observance of the rules
and regulations laid down for the guidance of monastic life.[dccxlix] The reply which the
Buddha seems to have
given to Gotami in the Chinese
version of the MahҤsaka Vinaya is definitely more in keeping with this
spirit. But we should take
note of the fact that this reply would run contrary to the Theriya tradition,
which at some stage, seems to have accommodated the idea that the Buddha
conceded the abrogation of the minor rules.[dccl]
As far as we are aware there is one
other Vinaya tradition which records
a challenge of the garudhamm.
The Chinese version of the Dharmagupta Vinaya has a chapter
entitiled 'Bhikkhun“
Khandhaka' wherein the question is
asked whether the Bhikkhunis cannot accuse the Bhikkhus under any
circumstances.[dccli] The Buddha replies to
say that they could not do so even if the Bhikkhus violated the rules of
discipline or were guilty of offences.
These two protests on the part of the Bhikkhunis seem to show that the
Bhikkhuni“ Saŗgha, or at least a section of it, resisted what it considered to
be harsh legislation.
At the same time one has to view
dispassionately the position of the Buddha, who as the head of the Bhikkhu Saŗgha
which was already a well-groomed institution, had to safeguard against its
disintegration through dispute and discontent. The fifth accusation levelled
against īnanda at the First
Council, that he agitated for the admission of women into the Order,[dcclii] is a clear indication
that even after the recognised success of the Bhikkhun“ Ssana[dccliii] there was a section of
the Bhikkhus who formed as it were a consolidated opposition against it. The motive for such an attitude could
have been generated by the fear of being eclipsed by the newer Order. The Chinese version of the MahҤsaka
Vinaya includes a statement which is ascribed to the Buddha which seems to lend
support to this assumption. The
Buddha says that if there were no Bhikkhunis in the Ssana, then after his death
the male and female lay-devotees
(upsak and upsik ) would have
honoured the Bhikkhus in diverse ways.
But now that the Bhikkhunis had entered the Order it would not happen
so.[dccliv] It is difficult here to decide how and
why the presence of Bhikkhunis in the Ssana should have brought about such a
radical change in the attitude of laymen and lay-women towards the
Bhikkhus. Why were the Bhikkhus
deprived of the honour that would have been theirs had not the Bhikkhunis
appeared on the scene? Are the Bhikkhunis to be held responsible for the loss of
prestige of the Bhikkhus? At any rate, this record of the MahҤsakas was
undoubtedly representative of a
section of the opinion of the day regarding the Bhikkhun“
Ssana.
The Pali records of the Theriya
tradition which belong to an earlier phase of the history of the Ssana[dcclv] give expression to a
similar feeling in the chastisement of īnanda in whom ultimately lay the
responsibility for the admission of women into the Order. An echo of this is felt in the
Mah“§saka Vinaya where īnanda apologises to the Buddha for having requested him
to permit women to enter the Order.
But the Buddha absolves him saying that he did so unwittingly under the
influence of Mra.[dcclvi] The Theriya tradition
is not alone again in expressing the fact that the presence of women in the
Ssana would reduce its life span by half. We find it recorded in the Chinese
version of the Dharmagupta Vinaya that the Buddha told īnanda that if women did
not enter the Order it would have
lasted 500 years longer.[dcclvii]
It becomes clear from what has been
said so far that at the time of crystalization of Theriya traditions two ideas
regarding the establishment of the Bhikkhun“ Ssana stood out clearly. A section
of the Bhikkhu Saŗgha was reproachful of īnanda because he interceded with the
Buddha for the sake of the Bhikkhunis.
The admission of women was also considered a categorical danger to the successful
continuance of the Ssana. In the
light of all this evidence a study of the
garudhamm reveals to us the
fact that the Buddha was keenly conscious of the need to steer clear of the
possible rivalries of the Bhikkhus and the Bhikkhunis and maintain healthy and
harmonious relations between the two groups.
Chapter
XIV
Inspite of the numerous comments
and criticisms which are associated with the founding of the Order of Bhikkhunis it is clearly evident that it
soon became a recognised component of the religious organization of the
Buddha.
Bhikkhu ca
s“lasampanno bhikkhun“ ca bahussut
upsako ca yo saddho y ca saddh
upsik
ete kho saŗghaµ sobhenti ete hi saŗghasobhan.
A.II. 8.
Virtuous monks and learned
nuns,
Laymen and laywomen of great devotion.
These indeed are an ornament
to the Saŗgha.
They do indeed adorn the Saŗgha.
The catuparis or the fourfold assembly, which included
both Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis together with laymen and laywomen, was the dynamic
institution of Buddhism which gave the religion its vitality and its
validity. In the Psdika Sutta the
Buddha tells Cunda how the stability of the religion depends on the achievements
of this fourfold assembly which includes both Bhikkhunis and laywomen, showing
that women were by no means an appendix but an integral part of the corpus of
the religion (Santi kho pana me cunda etarahi ther bhikkhč svak vyatt vin“t
visrad ... ther bhikkhuniyo svik ... upsak svak... upsik svik
.... Etarahi kho pana me cunda
brahmacariyaµ iddha ca ph“ta ca vitthrikaµ bhujaaµ puthubhčtaµ yva ' d '
eva manussehi suppaksitaµ -
D.III.125 f.). This
significance of the Bhikkhun“ Ssana is further attested in the Mahparinibbna
Sutta, where heedless of an anachronism,
it is said that the Buddha, not long after his enlightenment, told Mra
that he would not pass away into parinibbna until his fourfold assembly, including
the Bhikkhunis, i.e. Bhikkhu,
Bhikkhun“, Upsaka and Upsik, is well and firmly established (Na tv ' ham ppima parinibbyissm“ yva me ...bhikkhuniyo na svik
bhavissanti viyatt vin“t visrad ...sappŹihriyaµ dhammaµ desessanti - D.II.113.). The presence of women in the monastic
life is accepted as a reality and most admonitions which were addressed to the
Bhikkhus were equally applicable to the Bhikkhunis as well (Yassa kassaci
bhikkhave bhikkhussa v bhikkhuniy v kyavaŗko appah“no kyadoso kyakasvo
vac“vaŗko...manovaŗko... evampapatit te bhikkhave imasm dhammavinay seyyath
' pi taµ cakkaµ chahi divasehi niŹŹhitam - A.I.112 f.). However, there soon evolved a separate code of
conduct for the use of the Bhikkhunis which took into consideration the
differences not only of sex but also of temperament between the Bhikkhus and the
Bhikkhunis.
In the study of the Bhikkhu
Ptimokkha we have already observed how both the text and the ritual of the
Ptimokkha grew out of the restrictive regulations which the Buddha had to lay
down from time to time to discipline the monks who were leading the life of
brahmacariya under him (Yannčn ' haµ yni may bhikkhčnaµ paattni
sikkhpadni tni nesaµ ptimokkhuddesaµ anujneyyaµ - Vin.I.102.). As this first collection of the Bhikkhu
Ptimokkha grew, associated for the most part with monks alone, some of its
rules no doubt came to possess a peculiarly masculine relevance. Nevertheless, the Ptimokkha as a code
meant to further the life of brahmacariya would have applied in its essence to
the women as well when they sought admission to be ordained as Bhikkhunis under
the Buddha. Recognising the character of woman from diverse angles, both social
and religious, the Buddha had to make relevant changes in the Ptimokkha of the Bhikkhus to make it acceptable to
the Order of the Bhikkhunis. Yet it
remained essentially the same, the guide to the monastic life of those men and
women who renounced the world.
The evolution of the Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha out of the Ptimokkha which was laid down for the Bhikkhus seems to
have confused some scholars considerably with regard to its size and
contents.[dcclviii] We shall therefore
first examine this phenomenon. The regulation of the discipline of the newly
established Bhikkhuni“ Ssana does not seem to have necessitated any structural
alteration of the original Ptimokkha.
The original classification of sikkhpada into different categories is accepted in
the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha, almost in
toto, the group of Aniyatas of the Bhikkhu Ptikokkha being the only one to be
left out in the latter. On a closer
examination, however, it would be discovered that these two Aniyata dhammas are
themselves a further development out of the Bhikkhu Pcittiyas 44 and 45 which
have been made applicable to the Bhikkhunis as well. On the other hand a number
of individual rules which are peculiar to the male members alone had to be left
out while a host of new rules came to be added to cover the special needs of the
women in the monastic community.
The four Prjik of the Bhikkhu
Ptimokkha are increased to eight in the code of the Bhikkhunis. Nos. 1, 2, and 4 of these additional
rules[dcclix] which are peculiar to
the Bhikkhunis (asdhraöa paatti)
pertain to sex life in some way or another and can therefore be looked
upon as secondary rules deriving from Prjika 1 of the Bhikkhu Ptimokkha. However, in the life of the Bhikkhunis,
they are considered serious enough
to be ranked under Prjika.
Thus half the number of
Prjika rules laid down for the Bhikkhunis deal with sex. These sikkhpada not only attempt to safeguard the
chastity of the brahmacrin“ but
also try to keep the whole body of Bhikkhunis above reproach. Unchaste behaviour of female mendicants was a reality in
contemporary society[dcclx] and seeing the
possibility of similar incidents within his own monastic Order, the Buddha was
prompted to provide these extra safeguards. There is evidence of incidents in the
history of the Ssana in which Bhikkhunis were involved which were serious
enough for public censure. The
Mahvagga records the incident of the smaöera Kaö¶aka who violated the chastity of a
Bhikkhuni (Tena kho pana samayena
yasmato upanandassa sakyaputtassa kaö¶ako nma smaöero kaö¶akaµ nma
bhikkhuniµ dčsesi - Vin.I. 58.). Provoked perhaps by the recurrence of such
events the public also did at times make hasty and groundless accusations
implicating Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis.
A widowed father who had taken to the monastic life along with his young
son once became the target of such an accusation. The father was accused, as a Bhikkhu, of
having had the child through a Bhikkhuni (Abrahmacrino ime samaö
sakyaputtiy. Ayaµ drako
bhikkhuniy jto ' ti - Vin. I. 79.).
The Bhikkhunis were forbidden to
indulge in frivolous behaviour with members of the opposite sex. A number of rules of the Bhikkhunis
which supplement the contents of the Saŗghdisesa and Pcittiya groups of the
Bhikkhus regulate the conduct of
the Bhikkhunis with adequate caution so that they may not fall victims to the
lustful desires of unscrupulous men.
The following rules of the Bhikkhunis deserve special mention here : Saŗghdisesas 3, 5 and 6
and Pcittiyas 11-14,
36.
Saŗghdisesa 3 : No
Bhikkhuni shall, alone, leave the village, cross the river and go beyond, shall
stay a night out, or be out of the company of the group. Whoever does so shall
be guilty of a Saŗghdisesa offence.Vin.IV. 229.
Saŗghdesesa 5 : No
Bhikkhuni shall, with lustful intentions, receive and partake of any food
from a lustful man with similar
intentions. Ibid.
233.
Saŗghdisesa 6 : No Bhikkhuni shall tell another ' what ever will this man do unto
you, whether he is lustful or otherwise as long as you entertain no such
thoughts. Therefore accept and partake of whatever he offers you. '
Ibid. 234.
Pcittiya 11 : No Bhikkhuni shall, in the darkness of
the night, at a place where there is no lamp, stay alone in the company of a man
or converse with him. Whoever does so shall be guilty of a Pcittiya
offence. Ibid. 268.
Pcittiya 12 : No
Bhikkhuni shall stay alone in the company of a man or converse with him in
a secluded place. Ibid. 269.
Pcittiya 13 : No
Bhikkhuni shall stay alone in the company of a man or converse with him in an
open place. Ibid.
270.
Pcittiya 14 : No Bhikkhuni shall, in the street, in a
blind alley or at the cross-roads, stay alone in the company of a man, coverse
with him, whisper in his ear or send away the Bhikkhuni who is her only companion. Ibid. 271.
Pcittiya 36 : No Bhikkhuni shall live in close
association with a house-holder
or a house-holder's son........... Ibid.
294.
The other additional rule
(No.3) in the Prjika group of the
Bhikkhunis makes it an offence for a Bhikkhuni to follow a monk who had been
lawfully subjected to a boycott by the Saŗgha (ukkhittnuvattik).[dcclxi] Such indiscreet
partisan loyalties, whether on the part of the Bhikkhus or of the Bhikkhunis,
would have made it difficult to maintain law and order and to ensure harmony
within the monastic community.
Pcittiya 69 of the Bhikkhus warns monks against associating a miscreant
Bhikkhu who had been lawfully subjected to punishment. According to the history
of this sikkhpada an act of
boycott had been carried out by the Saŗgha on a monk named AriŹŹha who held fast
to a heresy, and the rest of the community were barred from seeking his company
under the pain of a Pcittiya offence.[dcclxii] In the
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga, the loyalties of
Bhikkhuni Thullanand towards the same miscreant Bhikkhu AriŹŹha assumes major
proportions and leads to the promulgation of a Prjika sikkhpada.[dcclxiii] In contrast, it is
worth noting that a Bhikkhuni who associates with another Bhikkhuni who had been subjected
to a boycott under similar conditions is declared to be guilty only of a
Pcittiya offence (Y pana bhikkhun“ jnaµ tathvdiniy bhikkhuniy
akatnudhammya taµ diŹŹhiµ appaŹinissaŹŹhya saddhiµ sambhujeyya v saµvaseyya
v saha v seyyaµ kappeyya pcittiyaµ - Bhikkhun“ Pcittiya No. 147).[dcclxiv]
Let us probe further into this apparent discrimination. Both in the Sutta and the Vinaya we come
across a number of instances of Bhikkhunis who show strong emotional attachment
to Bhikkhus of their choice. Such
Bhikkhunis, who often happened to be of frivolous character, seem not only to
dedicate their whole life for the service of their chosen comrades, but also to
engage themselves actively in canvassing for them the patronage of the
laymen. Thi is clearly evident in
the Bhikkhu Pcittiya 29 where Bhikkhuni Thullanand underrates the greatness of
Sriputta, Moggallna and other elders in the presence of a house-holder
who had invited them. Here, she
does so in order to exalt her own favourites like Devadatta, Koklika and others
whom she presents as the stalwarts of the Ssana.[dcclxv] We witness a further
embarrassing situation in PŹidesaniya 2
where the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhunis personally supervised the feeding of
their comrades, the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus, and saw to it that they got the
choicest dishes to the neglect of the rest (Chabbaggiy bhikkhuniyo
chabbaggiynaµ bhikkhčnaµ vossantiyo Źhit honti idha sčpaµ detha idha odanaµ
deth ' ti. Chabbaggiy bhikkhč
yvadatthaµ bhujanti ae bhikkhč na cittarčpaµ bhujanti -
Vin.IV.177.) This emotionalism of
the Bhikkhunis appears to have gone a step further. In an attempt to defend their comrade
monks and maintain their prestige, at times, the Bhikkhunis became pugnacious
and
offensive. Bhikkhuni Thullanand once abused the
elder Mah Kassapa calling him the erstwhile heretic because she took exception
to his criticism of īnanda.[dcclxvi] Thus the Bhikkhunis
ventured to silence the critics and shield themselves and their erring
comrades. The attitude of Moliyaphagguna towards the criticisms
hurled at his favourite nuns with whom he used to mingle freely and similar
reactions on the part of the nuns themselves show that these emotions which the
Buddha referred to as being characteristic of lay householders (gehasit chand
gehasit vitakk) would have been a menace to the healthy and harmonious life of
the community.[dcclxvii] If this tendency of the
Bhikkhunis was allowed to continue without restriction it would have served to
support and encourage the rebellious dissentients in the Saŗgha. Evidently such Bhikkhus considered the
ability to command and count on the support of the Bhikkhunis to be a great
asset. Thus it is clear that the
vissicitudes of the Bhikkhu Ssana would have warranted the inclusion of this
additional Prjika of theBhikkhunis (No. 3.) ' that no Bhikkhuni shall follow a
Bhikkhu who had been lawfully subjected to a boycott by the Saŗgha and who
subsequently had made no amends for it.'
The seventeen Saŗghdisesa rules of
the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha consist of
seven which the Bhkkkhunis hold in common with the Bhikkhus (sdhraöa
paatti), and ten additional rules which apply to the Bhikkhunis alone. The Saŗghdisesa rules 1- 4 of the
Bhikkhus deal with sex abuses or minor sex relations of a Bhikkhu with a woman
and therefore have no relevance to the Bhikkhunis. On the other hand, we have already noted
that cosiderations regarding the sex relations of Bhikkhunis with the male members of the
lay society were relatively enhanced in
gravity and included under the Bhikkhun“ Prjikas 1 and 4. The other two rules of the Bhikkhu
Saŗghdisesas (Nos. 6 and 7) which are left out of the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha
refer to the construction of dwelling places (kuŹi and vihra). Nevertheless, Pcittiya 19 of
the Bhikkhus which also happens to deal with dwelling places of monks
(vihra) finds its parallel in the
following Pcittiya rule of the
Bhikkhunis : Mahallakaµ pana
bhikkhuniy vihraµ krayamnya yva dvrakos aggalaŹŹhapanya lokasandhiparikammya
dvatticchadanassa pariyyam appaharite Źhitya adhiŹŹhtabbaµ. Tato ce uttarim appaharite pi Źhit
adhiŹŹhaheyya pcittiyaµ.' [dcclxviii] With the omission of these six rules of
the Bhikkhu Saŗghdisesa the Bhikkhunis are still left with seven sdhraöa paatti or rules which they hold in common with
the Bhikkhus under the category of Saŗghdisesa. The ten new rules which take their place
under the Bhikkhun“ Saŗghdisesas deal with a variety of
themes.
No.1 forbids nuns from entering
into hostilities with the laymen. (Y pana bhikkhun“ ussayavdik vihareyya gahapatin v
gahapatiputtena v dsena v kammakrena v antamaso samaöaparibbjaken '
pi ayampi bhikkhun“
paŹhampattikkaµ dhammaµ pann nissraŗ“yaµ saŗghdisesaµ - Vin. IV.
224.
Nos. 2 and 4 provide against the indiscreet admission
of doubtful characters into the Bhikkhun“ Order without proper investigation and
the illegal reinstatement of a properly expelled nun.[dcclxix]
Nos. 3. 5 and 6
safeguard the nuns from the dangers of lustful men.[dcclxx]
Nos. 7-10 attempt to curb the rebellious and
disruptive elements of the Bhikkhun“ Order who operate either singly or in
groups.[dcclxxi] These four new rules of
the Bhikkhunis seem, more or less, to reinforce the Bhikkhu Saŗghdisesa 9
-13 which are also applicable to
the Bhikkhunis and which deal with similar situations.Thus we see that with the
establishment of the new Order for Bhikkhunis the code of monastic discipline is
being made more and more comprehensive.
Both the Bhikkhus and the
Bhikkhunis have the same number of thirty Nissaggiya Pcittiya rules. But only the following 18 rules of the
Bhikkhus are held in common by the Bhikkhunis as well. They are 1-3, 6-10, 18-20, 22, 23,
25-28, 30. The 12 rules of the
Bhikkhus which do not apply to the Bhikkhunis are as follows
:
Nos. 4 and 5 deal with engaging the
services of a Bhikkhuni to wash or
dye a robe and receiving a robe from a Bhikkhuni respectively.[dcclxxii]
Nos. 11-17 are a set of very
specific and circumscribed rules which deal with the making of rugs and
coverlets out of silk and wool and their use.[dcclxxiii]
No. 21 forbids the retention of an
extra bowl beyond ten days.[dcclxxiv] This rule, however,
finds a place among the Bhikkhun“ Nissaggiyas in a stricter form.[dcclxxv] The new rule requires
that no Bhikkhuni shall make a collection of bowls. This, in its context, is taken to mean
that she shall not possess an extra bowl even for a single day. Buddhaghosa
points out this difference between the two versions of the rule (Ayam eva hi
viseso. Tattha das ' haµ parihro
ettha ek ' ham pi natthi -
VinA.IV. 916.). Commenting
on the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga Buddhaghosa looks upon this rule of the Bhikkhunis as a
new one which replaces the former.[dcclxxvi]
No. 24 specifies the time when a
Bhikkhu should make a quest for a rain garment and the time when he should start
wearing it.[dcclxxvii] This together with the
rule which deals with life in forest residences (No. 29) were apparently
considered as having no relevance to the life of the
Bhikkhunis.
No. 29 indicates a concession granted to the
forest-dwelling monks regarding
c“varavippavsa.[dcclxxviii]
The Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga, on the other
hand, has the following rules added to the rest of the Bhikkhu Nissaggiya rules
:
No.1. The Nissaggiya Pcittiya group of the
Bhikkhunis begins with this revised rule regarding the possession of
bowls[dcclxxix] to which we have
referred earlier under Bhikkhu Nissaggiya 21.
Nos. 2 and 3 deal with faulty
practices in the acceptance and distribution of robes.[dcclxxx]
Nos. 4-10. This section details the abuse of offers
made by laymen to provide the Bhikkhunis with their needs either individually or
collectively to the congregation as a whole. The indiscreet behaviour of the
Bhikkhunis in this direction had proved both irksome and embarrassing to the
public.[dcclxxxi]
Nos. 11 and 12 which deal with the
choice and acceptance of robes are closely allied to Nos. 2 and 3.[dcclxxxii]
Pcittiya is not only the largest
of all the groups of sikkhpada
laid down for the Bhikkhunis as in the case of Bhikkhus too, but is also the group
which has an overwhelmingly large collection of additional rules, amouting to
ninety-six,[dcclxxxiii] which is four more than
the entire group of
Bhikkhu
Pcittiyas. Of the ninety-two Bhikkhu Pcittiyas,
the Bhikkhunis take seventy which they hold in common with the Bhikkhus. Thus the Bhikkhunis have a total of 166
sikkhpada under the group of
Pcittiya. The additional rules of
the Bhikkhunis may roughly be analysed as pertaining to the following
themes.
(a) Immodest and
perverse sex behaviour.
Nos. 2-5, 21, 31, 32
....
.....
Total
7
(b) Relations with laymen
which would impair the life of brahmacariya.
Nos. 11-14, 36-38, 60
....
....
Total
8
(c) Boisterous and
quarrelsome habits.
Nos. 18-20, 33, 35, 53, 55, 76. ....
....
Total
8
(d) Frivolous behaviour
and lack of moderation in
the
fulfilment of personal needs.
Nos. 1, 7-10, 41- 44, 49, 50, 77, 78, 84
- 93 ....
....
Total
23
(e) Impropriety and
unceremonious conduct.
Nos. 15 -17
....
....
Total
3
(f) Monastic
regulations. The sikkhpada of this
category refer to
essentially monastic considerations which apply to the
institution
of the Bhikkhun“ Saŗgha.
This group of sikkhpada may be futher
subdivided as follows.
i. Robes and garments peculiar to the
Bhikkhunis on accunt
of their difference in sex.
Nos. 22-30, 47, 48, 96.
....
....
Total
12
ii. Food.
Nos. 46, 54.
....
....
Total
2
iii. Observance of vassvsa or rains -
retreat and duties connected with it.
Nos. 39, 40, 56 -59
....
....
Total
6
iv. Obligations towards fellow-bhikkhunis : teachers
and pupils.
Nos. 34, 68 -70
....
....
Total
4
v. Relations with Bhikkhus.
Nos. 6. 51,
52, 94, 95.
....
....
Total
5
vi. Maintenance of law and order in the
community.
No. 45.
....
....
Total
1
vii.
Correct monastic procedure in the conferment of upasampad etc.
Nos.
61- 67, 71-75, 79 - 83
....
....
Total
17
We have already noted above that 70
rules of the Bhikkhu Pcittiya also apply to the Bhikkhunis. Of the twenty-two
rules which are therefore peculiar to the Bhikkhus alone and do not apply to the
Bhikkhunis, ten deal solely with relationships of Bhikkhus with Bhikkhunis (Nos.
21-30). Out of the bhojanavagga of
the Bhikkhus which deal with food, four rules do not apply to the Bhikkhunis
(Nos. 33, 35, 36, 39). The Bhikkhu
Pcittiya 41 which refers to the offer of food by a Bhikkhu to a naked ascetic,
a male or female wandering ascetic, does not occur in the
Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha. The Bhikkhunis have in its place a new
sikkhpada which leaves out the
reference to the naked ascetic and replaces it with a householder : Bhikkhuni“
Pcittiya 46. However, inspite of
this change, these two sikkhpada
look very similar to each other.
Compare the Bhikkhu Pcittiya 41:
Yo pana bhikkhu acelakassa v paribbjakassa v
paribbjikya v sahatth
khdan“yaµ
v bhojan“yaµ v dadeyya pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV. 92.
with the Bhikkhun“ Pcittiya
46:
Y pana
bhikkhun“ agrikassa v paribbjakassa v paribbjikya v sahatth
khdan“yaµ
v bhojan“yaµ v dadeyya pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV. 302
Nevertheless, it should be noted
that the motives which led to the promulgation of these two sikkhpada are different in each case. The
Pcittiya rule of the Bhikkhunis (No.46)
should be studied together with No.28 of the same group where both the
motives and the persons concerned are identical, the only difference being that
in one a robe instead of food is given away by a Bhikkhuni. Under both these sikkhpada the Bhikkhuni concerned is guilty of
bribing laymen, for the sake of personal gain or glory, with something belonging
to the Bhikkhunis (Ten kho pana samayena thullanand bhikkhun“ naŹnam ' pi
naŹaknam ' pi .... samaöac“varam
deti mayham parisati vaööaµ bhsath ' ti - Vin.IV.285). The apparently corresponding sikkhpada of the Bhikkhus (Bhikkhu Pc. 41), on the other hand, has its origin in an
incident which is considerably circumscribed. What appears to be quite a harmless act
did unexpectedy subject some members of the Order to ridicule in the hands of
the heretics. In an attempt to
safeguard against the recurrence of such incidents the following general rule,
Bhikkhu Pcittiya 41 is laid down:
'No monk shall give, with his own hands, any food unto a naked ascetic, a
wandering ascetic, male or female.'
The Bhikkhu Pcittiya 64 is left
out of the Bhikkhun“ Pcittiyas, perhaps because there is a similar ring in the
second additional Prjika of the Bhikkhunis (vajja-paŹicchdika). This rule of the Bhikkhunis, however,
refers only to the concealment of Prjika offences while the Bhikkhu Pcittiya
64 covers both groups of offences, Prjika and Saŗghdisesa, under the
term duŹŹhull patti.[dcclxxxiv]
No. 65 is covered under the new
Bhikkhun“ Pcittiya 71.[dcclxxxv]
Nos. 67 and 83 have relevance to
Bhikkhus alone.[dcclxxxvi]
No. 85 gives permission to monks to
enter the village out of hours under specified conditions.[dcclxxxvii] Perhaps we may infer
that in leaving it out of the Bhikkhun“ Pcittiya, it was intended that the
Bhikkhunis were not to be given even a conditional entry except during proper
hours.
No. 89. It is difficult to understand why this
rule, which specifies the size of a nis“dana (=a mat to sit on) for the
Bhikkhus,[dcclxxxviii] does not apply to the
Bhikkhunis. The fact that
nis“danas were recognised as part
of the belongings of the Bhikkhunis as well is proved by the presence of the
parallel of the Bhikkhu Pcittiya
60[dcclxxxix] under the Pcittiya of
the Bhikkhunis (Pcittiya 141 in the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha). Moreover, the parallel of the Bhikkhu
Pcittiya 87,[dccxc] which gives
specifications about µaca (bed)
and p“Źha (chair), also find a a place in the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha (Pcittiya 173 in the Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha).
No. 91 gives specifications of the
size of the vassikasŹika (=a cloth
for the rains).[dccxci] This, as well as the Bhikkhu Nissaggiya
24 which also refers to the
vassikasŹika, do not apply to the Bhikkhunis.
The eight PŹidesaniya rules of the
Bhikkhunis are extremely simple in character and seem in fact to be a splitting
up of the single rule which bars a Bhikkhuni, unless she is ill, from obtaining
by request and using ghee, oil, honey, molasses, fish, meat, milk and curd. The Bhikkhus, on the other hand, have
four PŹidesaniya rules of their own which also deal with food but are wider in
their scope.[dccxcii] Nos. 1 and 2 determine
the relations of Bhikkhus with
Bhikkhunis at meals, and hence have no relevance to the Bhikkhunis
themselves. Nos. 3 and 4 refer to
certain situations in which a monk
who is not ill should not help himself to food. No. 4 deals with it specifically in
relation to forest residences. Therefore this rule would not apply to the
Bhikkhunis. No. 3 embodies an
undoubtedly singnificant
consideration. It prescribes
against possible exploitation of pious lay patrons by inconsiderate monks, who
while helping themselves to a meal, would fail to consider the economic
stability of the people who provide them with food. Here the Buddha decrees that the
Bhikkhus should formally decide among themselves not to strain those families of
devoted laymen whose resources are depleted. The Bhikkhus shall not call on them and
accept food unless on invitation or in cases of illness.
Both Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis share
the same set of seventy-five Sekhiya dhammas.
The text of the Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha seems to have presented a number of problems to the scholars who
ventured to examine it. Miss Durga
N. Bhagavat who apparently approached it solely through the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga of
the present Vinaya PiŹaka
discovered therein only a fragment of it. She has erred so far as to
mistake this abridged version for the complete text.[dccxciii] The result of this has
been obviously disastrous as has
already been pointed out by Miss Horner.[dccxciv] Miss Horner suggests
that the Nuns' Vibhaŗga in its
present form may be regarded as an abridged version of some more complete
Vibhaŗga for nuns.[dccxcv] In support of this she
adduces as evidence the fragment of the Prtimok©asčtra of the Sarvstivdins
published by Finot.[dccxcvi] The
Bhik©un“-prtimok©a in it, it is
pointed out, contains the end of one sikkhpada and the beginning of another which are
identified as Saŗghdisesas for nuns corresponding to Monks' Saŗghdisesa 8 and
9. This leads us to the legitimate
inference that there existed at
some stage among the Sarvstivdins a complete, unabridged Prtimok©a for the
Bhik©unis. However, the earlier hypothesis of the existence
of ' a more complete Vibhaŗga
for nuns ' is not necessarily established thereby, because there is evidence to
show that the Prtimok©asčtras which came to be recited fortnightly at the
Uposatha meetings existed quite distinctly apart from the Vibhaŗgas, and very
naturally in an unabridged form.
On the other hand, as we examine
the early literary history of the Vinaya PiŹaka we discover evidence which point
to the existence of a complete and unabridged text of the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga.
Buddhaghosa, while describing the Vinaya texts which were rehearsed at the First
Council, speaks of the Ubhato Vibhaŗga consisting of the Mahvibhaŗga and the
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga. These two texts,
it is said, were gone through separately each in its entirety. The Mahvibhaŗga, says Buddhaghosa,
consists of 220 rules (Evaµ v“sdhikni dve sikkhpadasatni mahvibhaŗgo ' ti
kittetv Źhapesuµ - DA.I. 13). We
should note here how precise Buddhaghosa is in not adding, as most scholars do
when they speak of 227 rules of the Ptimokkha, the 7 Adhikaraöasamatha
dhammas
to the list of disciplinary
rules.[dccxcvii] The Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga
consists of 304 rules, and not 311 for the same reason. (Evaµ t“ni sikkhpadasatni cattri ca
sikkhpadni bhikkhun“vibhaŗgo ' ti kittetv... Ibid.) This shows that at least the tradition
which Buddhaghosa inherited knew of
an early reckoning of the contents of the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga independent of the
Mahvibhaŗga, and it leads us to surmise on the independent existence of a
complete Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga.
Further it is worth noting that Buddhaghosa, while speaking of the
literary activity of the First Cuncil, does not speak of an independent
rehearsal of either of the Ptimokkhas apart from the Vibhaŗgas, although he
goes so far as to include both the Khandhakas and the Parivra under the Vinaya
literature rehearsed at the First Council.[dccxcviii] The two Ptimokkhas
were apparently reckoned as being part and parcel of the two respective
Bibhaŗgas at that stage. This is
clear from the manner in which the elder Mah Kassapa questioned the venerable
Upli from the first Prjika onwards inquiring not only about the rule but also
about the details connected with it.
Even as far as the function of the
Ptimokkha was concerned, it is evident that in the early days of Buddhist
monasticism much importance was attached to the meaning and interpretation, and
all the implications of the sikkhpada.
It was also necessary for the proper enforcement of the law that those
who were in authority knew all the circumstances leading to the promulgation of
the various sikkhpada.
Therefore it is not unusual to find a monk being challenged regarding the
authenticity of a particular item of discipline which he wishes to enforce. Thus, the maintenance of acceptable good
monastic conduct being the live function of the Ptimokkha, it was necessary for a monk, specially
for one who was in authority such as a Vinayadhara or a
Bhikkhunovdaka,[dccxcix] to learn both codes of
the Ptimokkha in detail with all the explanations. Note the significance of the following
observations: 'If a monk is not well-versed in both codes of the Ptimokkha with
all their details and explanations, then if he were to be questioned as to where
the Buddha has laid down such and such an injunction, he would not be able to
give an answer. Then there would be
many who would advise him to first learn his Vinaya.' (No ce bhikkhave bhikkhuno ubhayni
ptimokkhni vitthrena svgatni honti suvibhattni suppavatt“ni suvinicchitni
suttaso anuvyajanaso idaµ pana yasm kattha vuttaµ bhagavat ' ti puŹŹho na
sampyati. Tassa bhavanti vattro
ingha tva yasm vinayaµ sikkhassč ' ti - A.V. 80 f.). There is no doubt, that all these
requirements imply a thorough knowledge of the texts of the Vibhaŗga. Buddhaghosa, in fact, explains
suttaso of the above passage as
vibhangato.[dccc] In the Samantapsdik,
he explains the phrase vitthrena svgatni which also occurs in the above passage
as implying a knowledge of the twofold Vibhaŗga (Tattha ubhayni kho pana ' ssa
ptimokkhni vitthrena svgatni hont“ ' ti ubhato vibhaŗgavasena vuttni
- VinA. V.
990.).
However, it is clear that
Buddhaghosa was aware of the
existence in his own day of the two Ptimokkhas as independent literary works,
besides the two Vibhaŗgas, in the Vinaya PiŹaka. In a general description of the Vinaya
PiŹaka, Buddhaghosa adds to its contents the two Ptimokkhas as well, which now
take their stand side by side with the Vibhaŗgas, the Khandhakas and the
Parivra. (Tattha paŹhamasaŗg“tiyaµ
saŗg“ta ca asaŗg“taŗ ca sabbam pi samodhnetv ubhayni ptimokkhni dve
vibhaŗgni dvv“sati khandhak soĀasaparivr ' ti idaµ vinayapiŹakaµ
nma.[dccci]). He also makes it clear in this statement
that not all the contents of the extant Vinaya PiŹaka were rehearsed at the
First Council.
It is not possible to determine
with any certainity the time when the Ptimokkha (of the Bhikkhus and the
Bhikkhunis) were thus extracted from the Vibhaŗgas. All that we can safely infer from the
statements of Buddhaghosa is that
it certainly took place before his time, but at a date which does not go so far
back as the First Council. Hence
the absence in the Cullavagga of any reference to the Ptimokkha as a Vinaya
treatise during the recital of the Vinaya at the First Council.[dcccii] The independent
existence of the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha in their entirety, at least
during the time of Buddhaghosa, is clearly evident in the Kaŗkhvitaraö“ of
Buddhaghosa. We notice there that Buddhaghosa is familiar with an
unabridged text of the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha. In commenting, however, on the
sikkhpada of the Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha, he recognises the items which the Bhikkhunis hold in common with the
Bhikkhus (sdhraöa paattiyo) and
refers back for their explanation to his comments on those identical sikkhpada in the Bhikkhu Ptimokkha. He commences his
Bhikkhun“ptimokkha-vaöön with a comment on the first Prjika, the first of
the eight Prjikas of the Bhikkhunis which incidentally also happens to be a
sdhraöa paatti. (Y pana
bhikkhun“ chandaso methunaµ dhammaµ paŹiseveyy ' ti vuttaµ tattha chandaso ' ti
methunargapaŹisamyuttena chandena c ' eva ruciy ca.... Kkvt. 157.). Therefore he refers to the rest of the
common sikkhpada in the following
terms: 'Here and in the instances which follow, the rest should be understood with the
help of the explanations given under the common injunctions which the Bhikkhus
share with the Bhikkhunis.'
(Sesaµ ettha itoparesu ca sdhraöasikkhpadesu vuttanaynusren ' eva
veditabbaµ - Kkvt. 157.). That in
the Kaŗkhvitaraö“ Buddhaghosa was commenting on a complete text of the
Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha is further evident in the remarks which he adds after his
comments on the first six rules of the Bhikkhun“ Saŗghdisesas which are
peculiar to the nuns alone. Noting
that the next three Saŗghdisesas, i.e. nos. 7, 8 and 9, are held in common with
the Bhikkhus, Buddhaghosa says that their explanations are to be known in terms
of what has been said about the triad which begins with the sikkhpada on sacaritta (sacarittdittaye vuttanayen ' eva
vinicchayo veditabbo - Kkvt. 165),
and refers them back to the Bhikkhu Ptimokkha. They were, nevertheless, reckoned as
forming a part of the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha, for Buddhaghosa proceeds to number
the sikkhpada which follows these
three as the tenth (Dasame kinnu' m ' va samaöiyo ' ti - Kkvt. 165.). When Buddhaghosa, following this order,
regards the suceeding sikkhpada as
No.11, the editor of the Kaŗkhvitaraöi (P.T.S.) hastens to make the following comment
: ' This really refers to the
Saŗghdisesa 8 as given at
Vin.IV.238 and not to No.11. There are only 10 in the
recognised Pali Canon.' [dccciii] It should here be
pointed out that this attempted correction is not only unwarranted but is also
dangerously misleading. After
Saŗghdisesa 13 of the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha, Buddhaghosa is aware of the existence of four more
sikkhpada for the Bhikkhunis under
the Saŗghdisesa which the Bhikkhunis share in common with the Bhikkhus
(Saŗgha-bheddisu catusu vuttanayen ' eva vinicchayo veditabbo - Kkvt.
166.). Thus Buddhaghosa winds up
his comments on the Saŗghdisesas of the Bhikkhunis with commendable accuracy,
thereby establishing the existence of 17 sikkhpada in that group.
Attention has already been drawn to
the change of emphasis in the ritual of Ptimokkha at a time when the mere
recital of the sikkhpada at the
assenbly of the Bhikkhus, without any evident probe into the incidents of
indiscipline, constituted the ritual of the Uposatha. At such a function, it was obviously the
text of the Ptimokkha rules that mattered. The details of interpretation and
application which were closely connected with the rules and thus formed an
essential part of the Vibhaŗga would have been eventually left out. This, perhaps, explains the extraction
of the rules of the Ptimokkha from the body of the Vibhaŗgas and the formation
out of these of the two manuals of Bhikkhu and Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha, intended
undoubtedly to be used for recital at the ritual of the Uposatha. Thus it is the consequent independent
existence of the Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha, in its entirety, which in all probability, could have
justified the abridgement of the text of the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga into the form in
which we have it today. The
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga was an abridged text even at the time of Buddhaghosa and the
Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha as well as the
Bhikkhu Ptimokkha had already acquired an independent position
in the Vinaya PiŹaka.[dccciv] Thus in marked contrast to the
Kaŗkhvitaraöi which is Buddhaghosa's commentary on the two Ptimokkhas,
Buddhaghosa commences his
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗgavaööan in the Samantapsdik with the first additional
Prjika of the Bhikkhunis which he treats as No.1, for he proceeds to the rest
of the four asdhraöa paatti as
dutiya, tatiya and catuttha, i.e.
second, third and fourth respectively.
He follows the same method in the Saŗghdisesa as well as in the other
succeeding groups of sikkhpada. In
the Samantapsdik we discover an implicit admission of Buddhaghosa that the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga
which is before him is an abridged text containing only the asdhraöa
paattiyo. Commenting on the
phrase uddiŹŹh kho ayyyo aŹŹha
prjik dhamm he first refers to
the four Prjikas laid down for the Bhikkhus (...bhikkhč rabba paatt
sdhraö cattro - VinA.IV. 906)
and offers four only as the contents of the Prjika group of the
Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga (...ime ca cattro ' ti - Ibid.). Affirming as it were our earlier
assumption that the recital at the ritual of the Uposatha was now the immediate
and perhaps the single purpose of the Ptimokkha, Buddhaghosa says that the
Ptimokkha recital brings before us the complete list of Bhikkhun“ sikkhpada
(...evaµ ptimokkhuddesamaggena uddiŹŹh kho ayyyo aŹŹha prjik dhamm ' ti
evam ettha attho daŹŹhabbo - Ibid).
This establishes beyond doubt the position that in Buddhaghosa's day
there existed an abridged Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga and an unabridged Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha.
Appendix
I
Let us examine the statements in
the Khandhakas under the authority of which a monk who was guilty of an offence
(spattika) was barred from participating in the ritual of the
Ptimokkha.[dcccv] A careful scrutiny of
these two accounts shows that this authority was derived from the story of the
Suspension of the Ptimokkha in the Cullavagga.[dcccvi] When Vin.I.125 says
that the Buddha has decreed that no guilty monk shall participate in the
performance of the Uposatha it has evidently in mind this incident of the
Cullavagga. This story of the
Suspension of the Ptimokkha appears also in two other Canonical texts, viz. the
Udna[dcccvii] and theAŗguttara
Nikya.[dcccviii]
It is interesting to compare here
this version of the Theriya trdition with that of the
Mčlasarvstivdins.[dcccix] The following
observations emerge from such a comparison:
1. In the Mčlasarvstivda account, it is
not the Buddha but the
Saŗghasthavira who presides over the assembly at which the guilty monk is
discovered. Thus the entire Theriya
version that the Buddha up to this incident held the monopoly of reciting the
Ptimokkha in the assembly of the monks finds no support among the
Mčlasarvstivdins.[dcccx] It is clearly stated in the
Mčlasarvstivda account that the Buddha had ordered that the Saŗghasthavira
should recite the Ptimokkha every fortnight.[dcccxi] (Uktaµ bhagavat
saŗghasthavirena tvardhamsaµ prtimok©asčtroddesa udde©Źavya iti - Gilgit MSS. III. 3.107 f.). This order, at any
rate, is prior to the incident of the discovery of the guilty monk in the
assembly which had met for the recital of the Ptimokkha.
2. The Mčlasarvstivdins do not draw the
elder Mah Moggallna into the
picture. It is the Saŗghasthavira
himself who uses his 'divine
eye' to spot out the guilty monk.
3. In the Mčlasarvstivda account, unlike
in the Theriya tradition where the elder
Moggallna uses his power of clairvoyance (cetopariyaöa), the use of
the 'divine eye' or the 'divine ear '
for this purpose is condemned and forbidden by the Buddha. One who does so is guilty of an
offence.
It appears from the above analysis
that the Mčlasarvstivdins too,
agree with the Theravdins in their tradition that no guilty monk shall
participate in the recital of the
Ptimokkha. This is
evidently true of most Vinaya traditions for they had been firmly stratified
before the break up of the monastic community into distinct schools. Inspite of
their elimination of the Buddha and the elder Moggallna from this incident, the
Mčlasarvstivdins are loosely linked with the Theravdins in this matter in
that the uddna gth which
prefaces their Po©adhasthpanavastu mentions the role of Moggallna in
penalysing the guilty monk :
Asaudhapo©adhdbhik©ur maudgalyöena n§itah - Gilgit MSS.III. 3.107. But there is no doubt that the
Mčlasarvstivdins found the whole setting of this incident to be somewhat
clumsy and in part unacceptable.
This leads uf further to examine
the contents of this chapter in the Cullavagga on the Suspension of the
Ptimokkha and observe the procedure adopted in excluding the guilty monk from
the recital of the
Ptimokkha.[dcccxii] The elder Moggallna
tells the guilty monk that he has no right to sit together with the Bhkkhus : Natthi te bhikkhčhi saddhiµ
saµvso ' ti - Vin.II. 237. It is
difficult to see from where the venerable Moggallna derives the authority for
such an accusation. It appears
possible only under the terms of
Prjika offences about which alone the Vinaya says that no monk who is
guilty of any one of them shall have the right of co-residence with fellow
Bhikkhus. It is further added that
such a monk forfeits his right of being a Bhikkhu.[dcccxiii] (UddiŹŹh kho yasmanto
cattro prjik dhamm yesaµ bhikkhu aataraµ v aataraµ v pajjitv na
labhati bhikkhčhi saddhiµ saµvsaµ yath pure tath pacch prjiko hoti
asaµvso - Vin. III. 109.).[dcccxiv]
Then in terms of what criteria is the prisuddhi or purity of the monk concerned
challenged in this context? There
is not a single specific charge which makes him a spattika in the sense that is familiar to us in
the Vinaya. Is it to be inferred
that no sikkhpada had been laid
down up to this stage? If that is
conceded then this monk should have enjoyed the normal benefit of an dikammika,
i.e. of being exempted from guilt in the absence of sikkhpada : anpatti
dikammikassa. If sikkhpada had already been laid down then this
non-specific and all-inclusive charge seems hardly
justifiable.
If up to the time of this incident
no sikkhpada had been laid down then it is hardly possible to
imagine that the monks would have been in a position to start forthwith a
Ptimokkha recital of their own.
(Note: Na dn ' haµ
bhikkhave itoparaµ uposathaµ karissmi ptimokkhaµ uddisissmi. Tumhe ' va ' dni bhikkhave itoparaµ
uposathaµ kareyytha ptimokkhaµ uddiseyytha - Vin.II. 240.)[dcccxv] At any rate, if this
incident, contrary to the evidence of Vin.I.102, marks the real beginning of the
recital of the Ptimokkha by the Bhikkhus, then it is also to be argued that the
recital of the Ptimokkha by the Bhikkhus begins with the assumption that guilty
monks should be excluded from the recital.
But we have already seen that all available evidence point to the
contrary.[dcccxvi] Thus the assumption
that all participants at the recital should be pure has to be regarded as the
development of a relatively later
concept. The story that the
Buddha suspended his recital of the Ptimokkha to the Bhikkhus because of the
presence of the guilty monk in the assembly contrives to lend support to this
growing idea.
We should also like to examine at
this stage some evidence which comes to us from the Chinese versions of the
Buddhist Vinaya. According to the
Vinaya of the Mah“§asakas[dcccxvii] the Saŗghasthavira who
presides at the Ptimokkha recital asks the assembly as to what the Saŗgha is
going to do. The Bhikkhus in reply
recommend that various forms of disciplinary action such as the Tajjaniya-kamma
be carried out on certain monks.
They also specify that penalties like Mnatta be imposed. It can hardly be denied that these
statements are in perfect accord with what has been laid down in the Suttas of
the Theriya tradition.
Nevertheless, side by side with this older tradition the Mahi§sakas
accomodate a tradition which is akin to that of the Khandhakas regarding the
Suspension of the Ptimokkha.
On the other hand, the
Mahsaŗghikas[dcccxviii] seem to feel that the
non-specific charge which is brought against the guilty monk is inadequate for
purposes of prosecution. So they
have a new story according to which the monk who stands accused had stealthily
picked up a golden lotus petal which was a part of the decoration of the
Uposatha hall and had fallen on the ground. This new situation which is added to the
story enables the venerable Moggallna,
perhaps on account of the offence of stealing, to give the verdict that
from that day the monk who was involved would not be regarded as a samaöa. He is further told that he should not be
any more among the members of the Saŗgha.
The Mahsaŗghikas also go so far as to make the Buddha declare the action
of Moggallna in dragging the
guilty monk out of the assembly to be illegal.
We would consider this divergence
in the Mahsaŗghika tradition to be a very significant one. In the light of other evidence in the
Suttas and in the Vinaya we are led to consider the exclusion of the guilty monk
from the ritual of the Ptimokkha as striking a discordant note. In presenting a new and a legally more
acceptable basis for the exclusion of the guilty monk, the Mahsaŗghikas
undoubtedly reveal their distrust of the soundness of the Theriya tradition and
the validity of the act of exclusion as described in the Cullavagga. The Mahsaŗghikas, while they inherit
along with the Theriya group and other early divisions of the Saŗgha the earlier
story of this incident in toto,
seem to challenge its conformity to orthodox canons.
There is yet another point in this
story which runs contrary to what appears to be historically acceptable. The story of the Cullavagga tries to
make out that up to the detection of the guilty monk in the assembly of the
Saŗgha it was the practice of the Buddha to recite the Ptimokkha for the
Bhikkhus. We have already observed
that the Mčlasarvstivdins differ from the Theriya tradition on this point in
keeping the Buddha out of the Ptimokkha recital. The only other Canonical reference in
the Theriya tradition to the recital of the Ptimokkha by the Buddha[dcccxix] comes to us from the Mahpadna Sutta.[dcccxx] But this
quasi-historical Sutta makes this statement in terms of a Buddha of the
past. Placed in a legendary and
supernatural setting the Buddha Vipassi, the first of the group of six previous
Buddhas, expresses his desire to order his disciples to return to
Bandhumat“ at the end of every six
years, after their missionary travels, to participate in the Ptimokkha
recital.[dcccxxi] Thereupon a great
Brahm appears on the scene and
requests him to make the order and pledges their support to see that the
disciples do so. The Sutta goes on to describe how the divinities thereafter
play their role in reminding the Bhikkhus annually, in anticipation, about their
return to the capital for the Ptimokkha recital. When the appointed time comes they make
a further contribution by transporting the Bhikkhus to the venue of the recital
in a single day by their supernatural power. When the assembly of Bhikkhus meets, the
Buddha Vipassi recites before them three stanzas which are traceable to the
Buddhavagga of the Dhammapada.[dcccxxii] The Sutta describes
this as the recital of the Ptimokkha by the Buddha
Vipassi.
Strangely enough, we discover in
the last of these stanzas[dcccxxiii] a reference to the
restraint in terms of the Ptimokkha (Ptimokkhe ca saµvaro). We are already familiar with this
concept of discipline and are aware of its connotation. The Commentary to the Sutta explains
this as the restraint in the highest
s“la which is identifiable
with the code of the Ptimokkha.[dcccxxiv] Thus when the
Ptimokkha as a code of discipline seems to have been well established and its
functions appear to have been
well known during the life time of
the Buddha how does one explain this unnecessary regressing to present the
Ptimokkha and its recital as being primitively simple. As there is no reliable
evidence
at all, excepting what we
implicitly get in the story of the Suspension of the Ptimokkha, to show that the
Buddha did preside for some time over a form of Ptimokkha recital we are
compelled to regard the other abundant evidence pointing to the early existence
of a Ptimokkha recital which the Buddha instituted for the Bhikkhus and which
the Bhikkhus themselves performed from its inception as being more positive and
reliable.
It is only with a considerable recognition of
such an institution that one could expect the emergence of a standardised
concept like ptimokkhe ca saµvaro.
To take this concept back to antiquity and link it up with a primitive and less
organized institution appears to be a serious distortion. This retrospective use of the term
Ptimokkha to refer to the mere recital of the three stanzas by the Buddha
appears to be unhistorical.
Furthermore, the past to which it is drawn is also enveloped in what
comes more in the realm of myth and legend. Thus it is undoubtedly a projection from
the present and the historical to the past and the legendary. This tendency to delve into the past, in
a search as it were for precedent and traditional sanction, is clearly seen in
many instances in the life story of the Buddha and the history of the Ssana.[dcccxxv] Such sanction seems to
be sought both for what has historically taken place and also for what is
intended to be approved as historical and acceptable. The whole of the Mahpadna Sutta seems
to illustrate this tendency.
We discover in the
DhammapadaŹŹhakath a story which appears to give a cross reference to this
semi-legendary account of the Buddhas of the past of the Mahpadna
Sutta.[dcccxxvi] In a very brief story
entitled īnandattherauposathapahavatthu the venerable īnanda states that
although the Buddha has given details regarding the parentage, disciples
etc. of the seven Buddhas including
the Buddha Gotama himself he has said nothing about the nature of the Uposatha
of the past Buddhas.[dcccxxvii] Therefore he raises the question whether their
Uposatha was the same as the present one or different from it. The Buddha replies to say that there is
no difference in the content of what is recited at the Uposatha. The only diference is in the frequency
of its performance (Yasm pana
tesaµ buddhnaµ klabhedo eva ahosi na gthbhedo - DhpA. III. 236.). Establishing the identity of the
Uposatha of all the seven Buddhas he says that they all recited three admonitory
stanzas before their
assemblies. These stanzas are the
same as those mentioned in the Mahpadna Sutta with reference to the Buddha
Vipassi. This story strives to
establish, above all, that the Buddha Gotama did perform some form of admonitory
Upssatha and that it is distinctly in the tradition of the Buddhas of the
past. In doing so this story of the
DhammapadaŹŹhakath goes a step further than the Mahpadna Sutta which speaks
of the Uposatha only of Buddha Vipassi.
Nevertheless, there is no serious divergence between the two
accounts.
Buddhaghosa, in his comments on the
Verajabhöavra, has attempted to integrate this tradition with the history of
the Ssana. This, he says, is the
general practice of all Buddhas and the Buddha Gotama too, did recite a form of
ovda ptimokkha for twenty years
in the history of the Ssana up to the promulgation of the sikkhpada.[dcccxxviii] But this twofold Ptimokkha as
ovda and ö in two distinct chronological stages is
a product of commentarial tradition.
The only Canonical reference to two stages of the Ptimokkha recital is
the story of the Suspension of the Ptimokkha in the Cullavagga.[dcccxxix] However, we are not
told there that these are two distinct types of Ptimokkha recital. All that we are told is that the Buddha
refused to recite the Ptimokkha any more in the company of the Bhikkhus and
asked them to do it themselves. In
the Mahpadna Sutta the Buddha Vipassi
himself recites the admonitory stanzas and this alone constitutes
the Ptimokkha recital in his
Ssana.[dcccxxx] At no stage is this
replaced by another form of recital in the Mahpadna Sutta. Even the account in
the DhammapadaŹŹhahath preserves this singleness of character of the recital of
the
Buddhas of the past.[dcccxxxi] This form of ovda
ptimokkha which originally was
associated with Buddha Vipassi of distant antiquity is extremely simple and primitive and
seems characteristic of a legendary past.[dcccxxxii]The Canonical texts do not seem to mix this up with the
Ptimokkha recital of the Buddha Gotama's Ssana which is more historical in
character. It is Buddhaghosa who attempts to trace the change over of
the Ptimokkha from ovda to
ö and give it a historical
sequence and the story of the Suspension of the Ptimokkha in the Cullavagga
seems to facilitate this.[dcccxxxiii] In this attempt of
Buddhaghosa we see the romanticised tales of the Buddhas of the past invading
the truly historical accounts of the life and the Ssana of the Buddha
Gotama.
On the other hand, it is
interesting to analyse at this stage the contents of the Verajabhöavra which
has a relevance to this question.[dcccxxxiv] In reply to a question
by the venerable Sriputta the Buddha discusses the history of the monastic
organizations of the six Buddhas of the past. They are classified into two
groups of three each on a purely chronological order. It is said that the three earlier
Buddhas, Vipassi, Sikh“ and Vessabhč, did neither lay down sikkhpada nor institute the Ptimokkha recital for
their disciples. Their discourses on the Dhamma were very
meagre. In consequence of this,
their monastic organizations disintegrated soon after their death. Of the latter
three, Kakusandha, Kongamana and
Kassapa, we discover that their
organizations flourished because they preached the Dhamma extensively to their
disciples and also laid down sikkhpada
and instituted the recital of the Ptimokkha. No more is said here of the nature of
this Ptimokkha recital, either of Gotama or of the Buddhas of the past. Nor is there any indication about one
form of recital being replaced by another.
Even though we may not regard this
portion of the Suttavibhaŗga to be as old as the rest which deal with the text
of the Ptimokkha, we cannot but be impressed by its conformity to the early
traditions of the Sutta and the Vinaya.
What we mean by this is the recognition of the fact that the promulgation
of the sikkhpada and their recital
by the Bhikkhus at the Ptimokkha assembly together formed the basic structure of the Ssana
and its earliest institutions which safeguarded it. Thus we see that what is said about the
Buddhas of the past in the Verajabhöavra is a very accurate projection into
the past of a distinct historical setting.
Hence the idea of a primitive form
of Ptimokkha recital by the Buddha Gotama seems to be in all probability a
product of wishful construction which besides whatever other purpose it serves
helps the legislation against the presence of guilty monks at the Ptimokkha
recital For it is at this point
that the Buddha abolishes the practice of the ovda ptimokkha under protest and
hands over the recital of the Ptimokkha to the Bhikkhus. What is more significant here is the
legislation whic followed this incident.[dcccxxxv] (Na ca bhikkhave
spattikena ptimokkhaµ sotabbaµ.
Yo suöeyya patti dukkaŹassa - Vin.II. 240.). The presence of the guilty monk in the
assembly being the provocation which led to the abolition of the ovda
ptimokkha the Buddha laid down the
rule, applicable to the ö ptimokkha
of the Bhikkhus, that no guilty monk shall participate in the Ptimokkha
recital. The incident of the
abolition of the ovda ptimokkha
undoubtedly provides a very convincing situation for this new
legislation. However, we have
already pointed out that it is clearly a deviation from the original spirit of
the Ptimokkha recital.
Appendix
II
The history of the Ssana, both in
the Sutta and the Vinaya PiŹakas, shows that there were rebellious monks in the
Order. Their protests against the
disciplinary measures adopted by the Buddha are widely scattered in the Pali
texts where such monks are described as being militant and intolerant of any
advice (Dubbac kho bhante etarahi bhikkhč dovacassakaraöehi dhammehi
samanngat akkham appadakkhiöagghino anussaniµ - S.II. 204.).[dcccxxxvi] The words of Subhadda,
who was discovered expressing his joy on the passing away of the Buddha, mark
the climax of this tendency.[dcccxxxvii] There was a formidable
move in this direction even during the life time of the Buddha and he was well
aware of it. In the LaŹukikopama
Sutta, the Buddha states very clearly that there exists a group of misguided disciples who when
being told by him to give up certain ways of life which are unworthy of a monk
refuse to do so. They in turn
accuse the Buddha of being meticulous and pronounce judgement on him that he
worries over worthless trifles.
They show their displeasure not only at him as the law-giver but also at
the other good disciples who abide by these laws (Evaµ eva kho udyi idh '
ekacce moghapuris idaµ pajahath ' ti may vuccamn te evaµ haµsu kiµ pan '
imassa appamattakassa oramattakassa adhisallikhat ' ev ' yaµ samano ' ti. Te ta c ' eva nappajahanti mayi ca
appaccayaµ upaŹŹhpenti ye ca bhikkhč sikkhkm - M.I.
449.).
A specific instance of such
accusation against the Buddha is recorded in the Aŗguttara Nikya where a
Bhikkhu named Kassapagotta of Paŗkadha protests at a discourse of the Buddha in
which he deals with monastic discipline (Atha kho kassapagottassa bhikkhuno bhagavat sikkhpadapaŹisaµyuttya
dhammiy kathya bhikkhč sandassante samdapente samuttejente ahud ' eva
akkhanti ahu appaccayo adhisallikhat ' ev ' yaµ samaöo ' ti - A.I. 236.).
Regardless of the avowed purpose of Buddhist monasticism these rebels appear to
have looked upon sikkhpada as
measures calculated to restrict their freedom and the liberty to do things as
they wish. This is clearly evident
from the history and the text of Pcittiya 72 which is laid down against the disciples
who speak disparagingly of the sikkhpada
of the Vinaya PiŹaka (Sace ime vinaye pakatauno bhavissanti amhe yena
icchakaµ yad ' icchakaµ yvad ' icchakaµ ka¶¶hissanti parika¶¶hissanti. Handa mayaµ vuso vinayaµ vivaööem '
ti. Also : Yo pana bhikkhu ptimokkhe
uddissamne evaµ vadeyya kiµ pan '
imehi khuddnu-khuddakehi sikkhpadehi udduŹŹhehi yvad ' eva kukkuccya
vihesya vilekhya saµvattant“ ' ti sikkhpadavivaööake pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.143.). This is undoubtedly
the reason why a section of the monastic community expressed their sense of
freedom on the death of the Master and stated in no uncertain terms that they
were in a position to act on their own choice and would not be pestered any more
with instructions on propriety and procedure ( Sumutt mayaµ tena mahsamaöena.
Upaddut ca mayaµ homa idaµ vo kappati idaµ vo na kappat“ ' ti. Idni pana mayaµ yaµ icchissma taµ
karissma yaµ na icchissma na taµ karissm ' ti - Vin.II.
284).
The Buddha was not only aware of
the gathering momentum against the organization of discipline but also felt it
necessary to pay sufficient heed to it.
On the one hand, he would keep the good disciples informed of this
calamitous situation as is clear from the words of the Buddha to Udyi in the
LaŹukikopama Sutta.[dcccxxxviii] He would praise the
virtues of the law-abiding Bhikkhus as he did when he discovered the attitude of
the venerable Upasena Vaŗgantaputta to the code of monastic discipline (Sdhu
sdhu upasena na apaattaµ papetabbaµ paattaµ v na samucchinditabbaµ
yathpaattesu sikkhpadesu samdya vattitabbaµ - Vin.III. 231.). Such willing submission to monastic
discipline was a cause of joy to
the founder of the Order. In the
Kakacčpama Sutta the Buddha
is happy to recollect his
associations with such disciples. There was a time, says the Buddha, when the
monks won his heart by their good behaviour. He also often held out such good
monks as an example to the rest.
The venerable Mah Kassapa
was a dominant personality of that category about whose exemplary character the
Buddha repeatedly mentioned (Kassapena v hi vo bhikkhave ovadissmi yo v kassapasadiso. Ovaditehi ca pana vo tathattya
paŹipajjitabban ' ti - S.II. 195.).
On the other hand, the Buddha also
took more active disciplinary measures by incorporating in the code of
discipline itself legislation against such vicious moves to undermine monastic
discipline. The rebels directed their attack against the regulations of the
Vinaya, their main target being the sikkhpada of the Ptimokkha. Out of a sense of
fear of prosecution the miscreants thought it advantageous to keep as many
members of the Order as possible ignorant of the contents of the Vinaya. It is said that they therefore spoke
very disparagingly of the Vinaya to every one.[dcccxxxix] They challenged the
usefulness of the recital of the lesser and minor rules (khuddnukhuddakni
sikkhpadni) at the ritual of the
Ptimokkha. It only wearies and
vexes the listeners, they said (Kiµ pan ' imehi khuddnukhuddakehi sikkhpadehi
uddiŹŹhehi. Yvad ' eva kukkuccya
vihesya vilekhya saµvattat“ ' ti - Vin.IV.143.). They oppose the recital at the
Uposatha of the whole code of Ptimokkha regulations. The lesser and minor rules are slighted
and an attempt is made to eliminate them from the Ptimokkha recital. This means that the conduct of no monk
would be questioned any more in terms of these sikkhpada. This attitude would stand in marked
contrast to the assumption of the Vajjiputtaka monk who thought that he had to
discipline himself in terms of all the sikkhpada which were being recited fortnightly at
the Uposatha ceremony and which he said were over a hundred and fifty in
number.[dcccxl] It is unmistakably
clear that this is one of the first attempts to get rid of some of the monastic
regulations which had found a place in the code of the Ptimokkha. According to the Suttavibhaŗga this move
was headed by the Chabbaggiya monks and their followers who in the history of
the Ssana had gained a fair degree of notoriety by their self-willed
actions.[dcccxli] Even if one would
attempt to dismiss this gang as a fictitious group, they are no doubt symbolic
of the rebels in the Ssana who were unworthy of their monastic garb and were a
constant cause of irritation both to the good monks and the
laymen.
This same tendency of the
miscreants to resist correction by fellow members of the monastic community in
terms of the regulations of the Ptimokkha is also clearly evident in Saŗghdisesa
12.[dcccxlii] These two sikkhpada
(Saŗghdisesa 12 and Pcittiya
72) are clear proof of a
two-pronged attack launched by the champions of lawlessness and anarchy. Rules of propriety and good behaviour
which require conformity to fixed standards are either to be rejected or, on a
policy of 'strict
non-interference', the offenders
who violate these regulations are not to be questioned. But the Buddha was not to be led into
believing in the sincerity or the correctness of such suggestions and we see him
legislate against them with firm determination. Any monk who challenges the right of
other Bhikkhus to offer counsel in terms of the regulations of the Ptimokkha
and who stubbornly offers resistance does so under the pain of a
Saŗghdisesa.[dcccxliii] No monk shall also
speak of the regulations of the Ptimokkha in a disparaging manner, referring to
their recital as being of no consequence.[dcccxliv]
It is important to recognise the
fact that there seems to have existed even during the time of the Buddha a
category of sikkhpada which carried the designation 'lesser and minor ' or
khuddnukhuddaka. It is
reasonable to believe that the inviolable rules of the Prjika group would have
been in a class by themselves in marked contrast to the rest. No remedy or redress was possible with
the offenders of this category.
This is perhaps why the Vinaya makes special mention that every monk, on
being conferred the higher status of Upasampad, should be told of these
four inviolable rules : anujnmi
bhikkhave upasampdetv dutiyaµ dtuµ cattri ca akaraö“yni cikkhituµ - Vin.
I. 96. Hence the four Prjikas
would naturally form the group of major rules. The Aŗguttara makes repeated reference
to a group of 'lesser and minor'
rules. These are regarded as being
a part of the disciplinary code of the monk. These deal with offences of which any
monk could be guilty but for which he could make amends and be absolved
therefrom. For they are not
declared to be inviolable (So yni
tni khuddnukhuddakni sikkhpadni tni pajjati ' pi vuŹŹhti ' pi. Taµ kissa hetu. Na hi m'ettha bhikkhave abhabbat vutt
- A.I. 231 f.). Besides these, the
Aŗguttara mentions another set of sikkhpada which have to be inviolably
perfected. They would therefore
naturally be regarded as the only major ones (Yni kho tni sikkhpadni
dibrahmacariyikni brahmacariyasruppni tattha dhauvas“lo ca hoti Źhitas“lo ca
samdya sikkhati sikkhpadesu
- A.I. 231 f.)[dcccxlv]
The distinction between the major
and the minor rules thus seems to be a valid one. As Prjika or Akaraö“ya these major
items of discipline are the primary requirements without which the monastic life
in Buddhism could not be contemplated.
Hence they are called dibrahmacariyikni. However, this does not amount
to a denial of the validty of the other group of sikkhpada which are called
'lesser and minor' or
khudd-nukhuddaka. On the other
hand, the need to regulate the life of a monk in terms of those regulations is
fully recognised. For along with
the possibility that a monk may violate any one of these rules is also mentioned the possibility of his
absolution from the consequent guilt through correction: pajjati ' pi vuŹŹhti ' pi. Hence a disciple has to face them and
adjust himself accordingly and not attempt stubbornly to resist them. This accords well with the spirit
of Pcittiya 72 which, though
negatively, recognises the usefulness of the recital of even the minor rules at
the Ptimokkha ritual.
However, the rebellious monks too,
appear to have carried on a ceaseless campaign to achieve their end. Their propaganda for the abolition of
the ' lesser and minor ' rules was evidently gaining more and more ground
towards the last days of the Buddha.
The Mahparinibbna Sutta opens, more or less, with the Buddha's advice
to his disciples regarding the conditions which lead to their progress and
well-being. Under these aparihniya
dhamma the Buddha includes what he
appears to consider to be the healthy attitude of the disciples towards the
regulations governing their monastic life (Yvak“va ca bhikkhave bhikkhč
apaattaµ na papessanti paattaµ na samucchindissanti yathpaattesu
sikkhpadesu samdya vattissanti vuddhi y ' eva bhikkhave bhikkhčnaµ pŹikaŗkh
no parihni - D.II. 77.). This
concern of the Buddha for the recognition of the code of monastic discipline as
a whole is clearly evident in his remarks to the venerable Upasena Vaŗgantaputta
who maintained that nothing should be added to or removed from the codified law,
and that one should conduct oneself in accordance with it (Sdhu sdhu upasena
na apaattaµ papetabbaµ paattaµ v na samucchinditabbaµ yathpaattesu
sikkhpadesu samdya vattitabbaµ - Vin.III. 231.).
As the Buddha finally lay in his
deathbed, during the last moments of his life, it is said that the Buddha
indicated to īnanda that as he had not chosen to appoint an heir to succeed him
as the leader of the Ssana, the
Dhamma and the Vinaya would succeed him as their guide (satth).[dcccxlvi] The Mahparinibbna
Sutta which records this statement has also three other last-minute
communications of the Buddha to the Saŗgha. Among them we discover a very abrupt and
unprefaced suggestion which is ascribed to the Buddha. The Buddha is said to
have told īnanda that the Saŗgha, if it so desires, may on his death do away
with ' lesser and minor ' rules (īkaŗkhamno nanda saŗgho mamaccayena
khuddnukhuddakni sikkhpadni samčhanatu - D. II. 154.).
In the light of what we have
discussed so far regarding the history of the khuddnukhuddaka sikkhpada in monastic discipline this appears to
be a very strange suggestion. It is
almost incredible that a person of the Buddha's calibre should have conceded
such a laxity to be effective only after his death. We cannot understand it
either as an expression of the wisdom of his last days or as an attempt to wash
his hands of the guilt of a possible catastrophe in the monsastic order as a
result of the abolition of some of the rules of discipline. Before we proceed to examine the
historical significance of these statements which are recorded in the
Mahparinibbna Sutta it should be pointed out that in the Pacasatikakkhandhaka
of the Cullavagga we find the venerable īnanda reporting to the assembly of the
First Council two out of these four statements.[dcccxlvii] After reciting the
contents of the Dhamma before the assembly he places before them the suggestion
of the Buddha that the Saŗgha may, if it so desires, do away with the ' lesser
and minor ' rules. He is promptly
asked by the members of the Saŗgha whether he ascertained from the Buddha the
identity of these ' lesser and minor ' rules. He had failed to do so and when he is
found fault with for this omission he simply confesses that it did not occur to
him that he should do so (Ahaµ kho bhante asatiy bhagavantaµ na pucchiµ -
Vin.II. 289.). According to the
Cullavagga, diverse opinions are thereupon expressed by the members of the
assembly as to what constitute the ' lesser and minor ' rules. But when we discover that reference
to ' lesser and minor ' rules has
already been made elsewhere with a fair degree of certainty as to their
identity,[dcccxlviii] it becomes somewhat
dificult to explain this assumed ignorance or the diversity of opinion regarding
this matter.
Assuming that at least a section of
the Saŗgha was agreed on the abolition of
the 'lesser and minor '
rules and was anxious about it we could argue that even they would have been
hesitant to support the abolition of these rules in their entirety as they would
have been understood at the time.
Some of those rules were certainly regarded as sufficiently important to
command recognition throughout the history of the Ssana. That being so the real question would
have been as to which of these ' lesser and minor ' rules could, in course of
time, be dispensed with. As the
arguments of the venerable Mah Kassapa at the First Council show this would
have been undoubtedly a question which few would have dared to answer in public
for fear of serious repercussions among the laity (Sant ' amhkaµ sikkhpadni gihigatni
gih“ pi no jnanti idaµ vo samaönaµ sakyaputiynaµ kappati idaµ vo na kappat“ '
ti. Sace mayaµ khuddnukhuddakni
sikkhpadni samčhanissma bhavissanti vattro dhčmaklikaµ samaöena gotamena
svaknaµ sikkhpadaµ paattaµ yv ' imesaµ satth aŹŹhsi tv ' ime
sikkhpadesu sikkhiµsu. Yato imesaµ satth parinibbuto na ' dn ' i me
sikkh-padesu sikkhant“ ' ti - Vin.II. 288.).
Let su now examine the statement
recorded in the Theriya tradition that the Buddha did tell īnanda that the
Saŗgha, after his death, could do away with the ' lesser and minor ' rules if it
so desired.[dcccxlix] In both places where
this statement occurs it is īnanda himself who states that the Buddha told him
so. A comparative study we made of
the Chinese versions which are parallel to the Pali Vinaya account has yielded
us some valuable evidence. In the
Sarvstivda[dcccl], MahҤsaka[dcccli], and Dharmaguptaka[dccclii] accounts, as in the
Pali text, īnanda himself reports that the Buddha made this sugestion. In all the three Chinese texts īnanda
gives the deteriorating physical condition of the Buddha in his deathbed and the
consequent pain which he was suffering as an excuse for not interrogating him
further regarding the identity of these rules. In the Sarvstivda and
MahҤsaka accounts he gives the high regard in which he held the sikkhpada as another reason for not pursuing this
matter any further. This makes it
quite clear that īnanda did not obviously belong to the camp which championed
this move. The texts of the
Sarvstivdins and the Mah“§sakas represent īnanda as being reluctant to
sponsor such a move. Thus we are
more or less compelled to observe that we detect here the results of an attempt
to make a cat's paw of īnanda in this manoeuvre. What we
would consider to be the most
convincing evidence for this assumption comes to us from the Mahsaŗghika
version of this incident in the Chinese texts.[dcccliii] Strangely enough the
Mahsaŗghikas do not present īnanda as conveying this information to the Saŗgha
himself. In fact, he appears to
know nothing about it and plays a perfectly silent role throughout this episode. He suffers it all in silence for it is
the others who seem to know and talk about the task which is said to have been
assigned to
him.
Feeling diffident as it were, even
with the authority which the Buddha is supposed to have given them to abolish
the ' lesser and minor ' rules, the Mahsaŗghikas make an attempt to say in a
convincing manner that the Buddha had planned to do it himself before his
death. But now it is īnanda's
responsibility that it did not happen so, for he had been asked by the Buddha to
remind him about it before his death and he failed to do it. The following is the statement in the
Mahsaŗghika Vinaya in the Chinese versions :
' Upli tells the
assembly : " The Buddha told īnanda thus. ' When I am about to enter into
Nirvöa you should remind me so that I may repeal for the sake of the Bhik©us the minor
and insignificant rules.' But you
did not tell him." '[dcccliv]
The Mahsaŗghika account carries a
further statement which attempts to reinforce this idea.
'There is a Bhik©u who
says : "Venerable Sirs, the
Tathgata earlier told īnanda that he was desirous of repealing the minor and
insignificant rules for the Bhik©us."[dccclv]
Now we come to what may be regarded
as the most significant statement of all in the Mahsaŗghika account. In the discussion that followed the
announcement about the abolition of
'lesser and minor ' rules there was diversity of opinion as to their
identity, and the congregation was drifting further and further away from any
finality of decision. In the
Mahsaŗghika account alone we discover that at this stage the Chabbaggiya
Bhikkhus were most dismayed at the failure to implement this suggestion. It was obviously their cause which was
being defeated. In an attempt to
rescue it from this plight the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus darted forth to announce in
the assembly that if the Buddha were living all the rules would have been given
up.[dccclvi]
In view of the marked divergence in
the traditions of the Mahsaŗghikas and the Theravdins on this matter let us
probe further to discover the loyalties and leanings of each group. In the Mahsaŗghika account, when the
venerable Mah Kassapa asks the assembly as to which collection of scriptures
they should recite first it is the unanimous opinion of the Saŗgha that it
should be the Dharma PiŹaka.[dccclvii] We know that this is
completely at variance with the Theriya tradition which seems to emphasise more
the importance of the Vinaya.
Considering the attempts made by them to safeguard the proper maintenance
of monastic discipline at all stages in the history of the Ssana it could
unhesitatingly be said of them that they had a very high regard for the
Vinaya. What Buddhaghosa records as
having been said at the First Council that the Vinaya is the life-blood of the
Ssana (vinayo nma buddhassanassa yu)
is reminiscent of this attitude.[dccclviii] Thus we see a very
clear line of division between these two groups.
One would hardly be surprised to
find among the Mahsaŗghikas a tendency to bring about a laxity in monastic
discipline. It accords well with
what is alleged to be their attitude to the Vinaya.[dccclix] The account in their
Vinaya texts which we have discussed above shows the ingenuity with which they
introduce the story which discloses the wish of the Buddha to repeal
the
minor rules himself. On the other hand, one does feel that
this alleged suggestion by the Buddha to repeal the minor rules strikes a harsh
and discordant note in the Theriya tradition. It is perhaps this unacceptability to
the orthodox tradition which made it to be brought up as a dilemmatic problem by
King Milinda before the venerable Ngasena. 'Were then these lesser and minor
precepts wrongly laid down, or established in ignorance and without due cause, that
the Blessed One allowed them to be revoked after his death?'[dccclx] (Kin nu kho bhante
ngasena khuddnukhuddakni sikkhpadni duppaattni udhu avatthusmiµ ajnitv paattni
yaµ bhagav attano accayena khuddnukhuddakni sikkhpadni samčhanpeti - Trenckner, Milindapaho, p.
142.).
The problem that is posed here is
if the Buddha wished these rules to be revoked after his death then they cannot
really be important rules which were laid down after careful consideration. On the other hand, if they were really
such important rules he could not possibly allow the Bhikkhus to revoke them
after his death. Ngasena attempts
to solve the problem by admitting both propositions. i.e. that the rules were well laid down and
that the Buddha had ordered the Bhikkhus to revoke them if they so desired. But Ngasena adds that this order of the
Buddha was only to test his disciples.
' But in the second case it was to test the Bhikkhus that he said it, to
try wherher, if leave were granted them, they would, after his death, revoke the
lesser and minor regulations, or still adhere to them.'[dccclxi] (Taµ pana mahrja
tathgato bhikkhč v“maµsamno ha ukkalissanti nu kho mama svak may
vissajjpiyamn mam ' accayena khudd-nukhuddakni sikkhpadni udhu
diyissant“ ' ti - Miln. 143.).
It is clear from the above
statements that the venerable Ngasena is of the view that an abolition of any
rule laid down by the Buddha for the guidance of his disciples does not accord
with the true Theriya tradition. We find that Buddhaghosa reiterates the
same. He says that the Buddha
himself knew that even if he had made a specific order for the abolition of the
lesser and minor rules, without leaving it to the option of the Saŗgha, the
venerable Mah Kassapa would not abolish them at the time of the first Council
(Passati hi bhagav samčhanath ' ti vutte ' pi saŗg“tikle kassapo na
samčhanissat“ 'ti. Tasm vikappena eva Źhapesi -
DA.II. 592.). Therefore the
Buddha left it to the option of the Saŗgha.
Following the statements of the
venerable Ngasena in the Milindapaha if we take this suggestion for the
abolition of the lesser and minor rules to be a test of the attitude of the
disciples who survived the Buddha, then we would discover to our utter dismay
that none, perhaps other than the venerable Mah Kassapa, would show themselves
to be true disciples of the Buddha.
For not only were the members of the First Council quick to chastise
īnanda for not ascertaining from the Buddha the identity of the rules which they
may revoke but also were quick to propose the abolition of various categories of
rules. Not one, out of respect for
the law laid down by the Buddha, proposed its acceptance in toto. It was the venerable Mah Kassapa who,
as the President of the Council, finally proposed that the suggestion for the
abolition of the lesser and minor rules be rejected and that the law as laid
down by the Buddha be accepted in toto.
However, there seems to be a
post-Milindapaha tradition which, more or less, stigmatizes the venerable Mah
Kassapa saying that he did so because he was ignorant as to what the lesser and
minor rules were. It praises, on
the other hand, the venerable Ngasena who very categorically identifies
khuddaka and anukhuddaka with DukkaŹa and Dubhsita respectively.[dccclxii] This interpretation of
Ngasena, it would appear, could absolve to some extent those who championed the abolition of the
khuddnukhuddaka sikkhpada from
the charge of being unorthodox. For
they would not then be directing their assault against any real sikkhpada except the Sekhiyas violation of which
also constitute DukkaŹa offences.
Barring this group of DukkaŹas, both DukkaŹa and Dubbhsita are
derivative
offences and are not the direct
outcome of the violation of any sikkhpada. But Buddhaghosa warns us against taking
the words of Ngasena to serve as a defence. We are told that he was only being
tactful in his conversation with non-believers (Ngasena-tthero hi paravdino
okso m ahos“ ' ti evaµ ha - DA.II. 593.).
Thus we feel that even among the
followers of the Theriya tradition certain sections seem to have supported the
suggestion for the abolition of the lesser and minor rules and at times even
frowned on the stalwarts of the Theriya group who upheld the orthodox views.
However, this suggestion, when placed in the context of the Theriya Vinaya
traditions, sounds unmistakably to be of Chabbaggiya origin, for the
Chabbaggiyas as we have shown, on the evidence of both the Theriya and
Mahsaŗghika records, have always been the symbol of the
dissentients.
This brings us to yet another
problem. How did such a statement
which does not accord with the traditions of the Theriya school come to be
recorded in their literature? In
answer to this we would commend the following points for
consideration.
1. The first observations to be made on
this is the fact that the two works in which this statement is recorded,
viz. the Mahparinibbna Sutta and
the Saŗg“tikkhandhaka of the
Cullavagga, both belong to a
relatively later stratum in the
Canonical Pali literature.
2. The two Khandhakas of the Cullavagga
which deal with the two Saŗg“ti are both in point of time and contents relatively
outside the scope of the Vinaya PiŹaka.
3. The Cullavagga account of the first
Saŗg“ti includes besides this statement on the abolition of the leser and minor
rules another statement which records a dissent and is not wholly favourable to
the Theriya tradition. This is the
refusal of the venerable Puröa to accord fully with the recital of the Dhamma
and the Vinaya which the monks of
the Theriya group had carried out in his absence.[dccclxiii]
4. Even the Khandhakas show traces of the
presence of traditions which at times appear to be far removed from the original
spirit of the Vinaya. These become
very glaring when the older tradition happens to be preserved intact, at times,
in the Vinaya texts of other
schools. This points to the
fact that the stratification of the contents of the Khandhakas did spread over a
period of time which was long enough to allow the adoption of discordant
traditions either out of choice or under pressure from within or without. Unlike the Suttavibhaŗga, the nature of
the contents of the Khandhakas also would have made this process of ssimilation
possible.
Appendix
III
While the purity and the prestige of the early Buddhist Saŗgha
was being safeguarded by the regular performance of the Ptimokkha ritual, the
Mahvagga witnesses certain sections of the community of monks who were holding
factional meetings for the purpose of reciting the Ptimokkha within their own
groups (Tena kho pana samayena chabbaggiy bhikkhč yathparisya ptimokkhaµ
uddisanti sakya sakya parisya - Vin.I.104.). This would certainly have been in
violation of the spirit in which the ritual was instituted in the early days of
the Ssana.[dccclxiv] Legislating against
such a situation which would herald the disintergration of the Saŗgha, the
Buddha declares it to be a DukkaŹa offence and calls for unity of the Saŗgha in
the performance of the Uposatha.
But considering the increasing
membership of the corporation of the Saŗgha and the vastness of the territory
over which it was spreading, there seems to have appeared the need to determine
as to what would be a convenient unit for the collective activities of the
Saŗgha. We notice in the
Gopakamoggallna Sutta that the village in which the monks lived had served as
the unit of such monastic activities.[dccclxv] When the Buddha
insisted on the unity of the Saŗgha in their monastic activities, the monks seem to have been perplexed by
the theoretical position whether the unity of the Saŗgha implied the inclusion
of all members of the community living in the land, literally on earth :
Kittvat nu kho smagg“ hoti yvat ekvso udhu sabb paŹhav“ ' ti.- Vin. I. 105. This, we have no doubt, was hardly meant
to be taken as a real position and would have been recorded here more for the
purpose of pointing out the relevance of practical considerations. An area of residence (ekvso) became
the obvious choice as an operational unit and on the recommendation of the
Buddha the area of residence is delimited by boundaries, accepted and agreed
upon by the Saŗgha as the region of co- residence within which the Saŗgha was
expected to perform its activities collectively : Sammat s“m saŗghena etehi nimittehi
samnasaµvs ekčposath - Ibid.106.
This marks the birth of S“m in Buddhist monastic
history.
It is clear from the evidence of
the Mahvagga that in the early days of the Buddhist community not all
vsa or centres of monastic
residence enjoyed the status of being S“m or independent units of monastic
activity. Ekvsa meant a region of residence within which
all members acted collectively as one single body (saŗgha). The Samantapsdik portrays beautifully
this state of affairs in the early history of the Ssana when it says that the
eighteen great monasteries in the vicinity of Rjagaha formed collectively a
single unit of common communal activity. (Rjagahaµ hi parikkhipitv aŹŹhrasa mahvihr sabbe ekas“m. Dhammasenpatin nesaµ s“m baddh. Tasm veĀuvane saŗghassa
smaggidnatthaµ gacchanto ' ti attho - VinA.V. 1049.). Any one of the vsa within the region may turn out to be, by
the choice of the Saŗgha, the venue of the ritual of the Uposatha (Tena kho pana
samayena rjagahe sambahul vs samnas“m honti. Tattha bhikkhč vivadanti
amhkaµ vse uposatho kar“yatu
amhkaµ vse uposatho kar“yatč ' ti - Vin.I.108.). We hear of members of one vsa going to
another as guests for the purpose of performing the Uposatha there. (īgantuk bhikkhč na jnanti
kattha v ajj ' uposatho kar“yissat“ ' ti - Ibid. 107.). Thus it was possible for the inmates of
many vsa to operate as members of one S“m in their
activities.
In performing the ritual of the
Uposatha the monks had to operate collectively and no sectional meetings were
allowed within that region (Tehi bhikkhave bhikkhčhi sabbeh ' eva ekajjhaµ sannipatitv
uposatho ktabbo. Yattha v pana thero bhikkhu viharati tattha sannipatitv
uposatho ktabbo. Na tv ' eva
vaggena saŗghena uposatho ktabbo - Ibid. 108.). All monks living within it, heedless of
the distance they had to travel and the hardships of the journey, congregated at
an appointed place for the purpose
of the Ptimokkha recital. In the interests of the guest monks it
was considered necessary to decide beforehand upon a site for the performance of
the ritual, viz. an uposathgra.
Thus, on account of the prior
knowledge of the place, the participants would be enabled to arrive there in
time without any confusion. The Saŗgha may choose for this purpose any one of
the five buildings sanctioned for monastic residence.[dccclxvi] Once selected an
uposathgra continued to be
recognised as such until the decision is revoked by the Saŗgha. It is clear from the following statement
about the thoughtless selection of two such buildings at the same site and the
subsequent order made by the Buddha to cancel one and use the other (Tena kho
pana samayena aatarasmiµ vse dve uposathgrni sammatni
honti.....Anujnmi bhikkhave ekaµ samčhanitv ekattha uposathaµ ktuµ -
Vin.I.107.). In case the
uposathgra turns out to be too
small for the congregation which assembles, then the Saŗgha is empowered to
declare as much of the courtyard of the building (uposathapamukha) as necessary to be valid territory in
which the participants may take their seats for the ritual of the
Ptimokkha. This is clearly a
matter of ritualistic detail quite additional to the early spirit of the
Ptimokkha recital. For it is said
with reference to an incident which historically takes precedence over this that
the ritualistic validity of the ground on which a monk sat during the Ptimokkha
recital was a matter of no concern as long as he was able to hear from there the
Ptimokkha as it was being recited (Sammatya v bhikkhave bhčmiy nisinn asammatya v yato ptimokkhaµ suöti
kato 'v ' assa uposatho - Ibid. 108.).
Although the delimitation of a
region of S“m was approved, S“m
in its early stages was not subjected to restrictions of size. Some of them became very large extending
up to four, five and six yojana.
The monks who had to travel long distances to the venue of the recital
were unable to arrive in time.
Hence three yojana soon came to be fixed as the maximum allowable size of
a S“m. No S“m was also to extend
beyond a river unless there was a permanent bridge or a regular ferry providing a
safe crossing.[dccclxvii] The incidents connected
with this proviso make it clear that it is based on practical considerations and
has no ritualistic significance whatsoever.
Based on this institution of S“m
which is thus established by delimitation of a specified region to be a unit of
co-residence and common Uposatha, the members of the Saŗgha are given a
concession to set apart one of their three robes for safe keeping, as a
stand-by to be used in case of damage to the others. This legislation was actually provoked
by the incident in which the venerable Mah Kassapa who on his way from
Andhakavinda to participate in the Uposatha at Rjagaha got his robes wet while
crossing a river and had to attend the ritual in his wet robes for want of a
change of clothing. This concession
of keeping out of one 's possession one out of the unit of three robes (tic“varena
avippavsasammuti) is applicable within the aforesaid Samna-saµvsaka-s“m, but
leaving out its urban areas,[dccclxviii] for it is out side
these that this concession would have been most needed. (Y s bhikkhave saŗghena s“m sammat
samnasaµvs ekuposath saŗgho taµ s“maµ tic“varena avippavsaµ sammanatu
Źhapetv gma ca gmčpacra ca - Vin.I.109.).
The Mahvagga also makes provision
for regions in which monks reside
but wherein no S“m has been officially proclaimed. In the case of such towns and
villages (gmagahaöena c ' ettha
nagaram pi gahitaµ eva hoti - VinA.V.1051)
their own boundaries are accepted to circumscribe the area of
co-residence for the monks (Asammatya bhikkhave s“mya yaµ gmaµ v nigamaµ v
upanissya viharati y tassa v gmassa gmas“m nigamassa v nigamas“m ayaµ
tattha samnasaµvs ek ' uposath -
Vin.I.110 f.). This seems to reflect the conditions
which are referred to in the Gopakamoggallna Sutta and are perhaps
characteristic of a stage of pre-s“m antiquity (Te mayaµ tad ' ah ' uposathe
yvatik ekaµ gmakkhettaµ upanissya viharma te sabbe ekajjhaµ sannipatma -
M.III. 10.).
To this group of unbounded S“m of
gma and nigama is also added the forest regions in
which monks reside. From any such
place of residence an area of a radius of sattabbhantara i.e. seven abbhantara[dccclxix] is marked out as the region of
samnasaµvsa and ekuposatha (Agmake ce bhikkhave arae samant
sattabbhantar ayaµ tattha samnasaµvs ekuposath - Vin.I. 111.). Such a Sattabbhantara S“m enjoys also
the privilege of tic“varavippavsaparihra
(- tic“varena avippavssasammuti).[dccclxx] The Mahsakuludy“
Sutta perhaps portrays an earlier phase of monastic life when it says that even
the forest-dwelling monks come regularly to the midst of the Saŗgha for the
recital of the Ptimokkha.[dccclxxi] In course of time
further independent units of monastic residence seem to appear as the community
expands and spreads over wider territories. As a result of this we also note a
corresponding change in the concept of S“m.
S“m, which originally indicated a
practical and convenient unit of residence of the Saŗgha for their common
communal activities (samnasaµvs ekuposath ) and referred to as Samnasaµvsaka S“m,
seems to have soon changed its character to mean also the venue in which the
Saŗgha may perform its monastic activities like the conferment of Pabbajj and
Upasampad. This gives rise to what is latterly known as the
Khaö¶a S“m. The Samantapsdik
suggests that this smaller unit of Khaö¶a S“m should, in fact, be established
first before the establishment of the Samnasaµvsaka S“m (Imaµ pana
samnasaµvsakas“maµ sammannantehi pabbajjupasampadd“naµ saŗghakammnaµ
sukhakaraöatthaµ paŹhamaµ khaö¶as“myo bandhitabb - Vin.
A.V.1041.).
In a monastic residence which is
complete with all its accessories like the Bodhi tree, Cetiya and the Alms-hall,
the Khaö¶a S“m should be located in a quiet corner [not in the centre of the
monastic residence] at a place which is not frequented by many people (Sace hi
bodhi-cetiya-bhattasld“ni sabbavatthčni patitŹŹhpetv katavihre bandhanti
vihramajjhe bahčnaµ samosaraöaŹŹhne abandhitv vihrapaccante vivittokse
bandhitabb - Ibid.). Considering the quorum for valid monastic acts (which
range from four to twenty monks), it is said that the Khaö¶a S“m should be
large enough to accomodate not less than twenty-one monks (S
heŹŹhiamparicchedena sace ekav“sati bhikkhč gaöhti vaŹŹati tato oraµ na
vaŹŹati... Ibid.). It is also
conceded that a large monastery could have as many as two, three or more Khaö¶a
S“m (Sace pana vihro mah hoti dve ' pi tisso ' pi tad ' uttari ' pi
khaö¶as“myo bandhitabb - Ibid. 1042.).
Any watery abode like a river,
natural lake or the sea is said to be, by its very nature, suitable for the
performance of all monastic acts. 'Its very nature ' here may mean the fact that
such places being ' uninhabited ' it requires no further legislation to exclude
aliens. Here, under normal
circumstances, there would be no danger of trespassers (S pana attano sabhven
' eva baddhas“msadis. Sabbam
ettha saŗghakammaµ ktuµ vaŹŹati.
Samuddajtassaresu ' pi es '
eva nayo - VinA.V. 1052.). Thus we
see the emergence of the Udakukkhepa S“m.
It is a region in a river, a natural lake or the sea which covers ' the distance that a man of average
(height) can throw water all round.'[dccclxxii] (Nadiy v bhikkhave
samudde v jtassare v yaµ majjhimassa purisassa samant udak ' ukkhep ayaµ tattha samnasaµvs
ekuposath -Vin.I. 111.).
The Mahvagga itself gives
indications of a steady elaboration of the concept of S“m. What was originally
introduced for the convenient administration of the monastic community soon turns out
to be a cause of dispute in itself.
With the fragmentation of the central S“m and the consequent
multiplicity of smaller units there arose the danger of some of them overlapping
the others (Tena kho pana samayena chabbaggiy bhikkhč s“mya s“maµ sambhindanti
- Vin.I.111. Also : Tena kho pana
samayena chabbaggiy bhikkhč s“mya
s“maµ ajjhottharanti - Ibid.). To
avoid such overlapping of territory of each monastic group it soon became necessary to provide a ' buffer state ' (s“mantarik) between
two regions which are marked out as S“m
(Anujnmi bhikkhave s“maµ sammannantena s“mantarikaµ Źhapetv s“maµ
sammannituµ.- Ibid.).
This ritualistic concern with which
the validity of each S“m seems to have been guarded appears to have been a
subject of absorbing interest in the history of the Ssana. This would have been necessarily so as
the authority for the enforcement of discipline in Buddhist monastic life had to
be secured at an impersonal level through the validity of monastic procedure.
S“m undoubtedly was the corner-stone of this structure. The Khandhakas have already witnessed
the interest shown in it. The
Samantapsdik shows how it has proceeded so far as to produce divergent views
on many issues according to the inclinations of the diverse groups that
developed within the Theriya fold.[dccclxxiii]
The wealth of Vinaya literature
written in Ceylon in Pali on the theme of S“m shows what a live problem it had
turned out to be even after the authoritative commentarial notes of Buddhaghosa on this subject. A Ceylonese thera by the name of
Vcissasra is said to have compiled the S“mlaŗkra in the 13 th century. The Buddhist monastic
community of Burma seems to have been equally
interested in this problem. The
Burmese thera ChapaŹa compiled a T“k to the S“mlaŗkra of Vcissara.[dccclxxiv] Of this work, Mabel
Bode says : ' The S“mlaŗkrapakaraöa of ChapaŹa was a result of the Talaing
thera's studies in Ceylon.'[dccclxxv] A considerable amount
of literary activity on this subject seems to have gone on in both countries,
perhaps with mutual influence.[dccclxxvi] Another treatise
compiled in Ceylon similar to the S“mlaŗkra of Vcissara is the
S“msaŗkarachedan“ of Sr“ Rhula (15th century).[dccclxxvii]
The importance attached to the
ritualistic validity of S“m does not appear to have been peculiar only to the
Southern schools of Theravda
Buddhism in Burma and Ceylon. It
does seem to have been shared by some of the schools of Buddhism in the Far
East as well. The Kaidan (the equivalent of S“m in the Far East) must have enjoyed
some prestige in China and Japan at a very early date. Kanjin (Chien-chen in Chinese
pronunciation) who introduced the Vinaya or Ritsu sect (= Lč-tsung of China) from China to Japan built a
Kaidan for performing the ceremony of admission to the Order.[dccclxxviii] What is more important
here is the point which stresses the ritualistic significance of this new
establishment. Monks and nuns of
the land who had already been ordained but whose admission to the Order was considered invalid for
any reason were re-ordained by him.
After many entreaties by Dengyo Daishi, the founder of the Tendai sect in
Japan, another Kaidan was established at Hieizan in 827 A.D. This seems to have led to the decline of
the fortunes of the Ritsu sect.
However in the 12 th century, Shosho shonin, in a bid to revive the Ritsu
sect, wrote a treatise called Kaidan Shiki on the ceremonial to be observed at
ordinations.[dccclxxix] Nevertheless, we have
no doubt that with the birth of new and rival sects the Kaidan probably had to
face a competitive process of change and modification.
The history of Buddhist monasticism
in Ceylon has also witnessed a major dispute regarding the validity of a S“m
which was being used for the conferment of Upasampad. It assumed such proportions that Burma
too, was drawn into it. Its histroy
in brief is as follows. [dccclxxx] In 1845 A.D.
an
Udakukkhepa S“m 'consisting of a permanent raft fixed in
the middle of the lake called
Mdugaŗga at Balapitimodara [ in Ceylon ] and having an approach to it by
a bridge from the bank ' was
established. Sometime afterwards, '
a famous learned priest called Laŗkgoda Sirisaddhammavaµsapla Dh“rnanda
' found fault with it ' as being confused and undetached, and
consequently irregular and invalid... In consequence of his representations and
his protest against the vaildity of the rite of ordination performed in the said
S“m many priests who had received that rite there had themselves re-ordained in
properly defined S“ms... There
were, on the other hand, several who from various motives upheld the validity of
that S“m and the ecclesiastical acts performed therein: thus disputes and
dissensions arose in the Society and rent the unity and harmony which had
hitherto prevailed.'
At this time two Ceylonese priests
named Dhammakkhandha and Vanaratana went on a visit to Burma and informed the
High Priest (Saŗgha Rja) of
Mandalay about the controversy that was raging in Ceylon with respect to the
validity of the Balapitimodara S“m in which the ordination of the Amarapura
priests had been hitherto held...
This pontiff (Saŗgha Rja)
having learnt the particulars of the case and after consulting the most
eminent members of the Buddhist clergy in that country, drew up a memorandum
embodying their decision on the matters in dispute, and sent the document in
charge of these priests to the address of the principal priests of the Amarapura
Society in Ceylon. This authoritative decision which was adverse to the views
held by those who maintained the validity of the aforesaid S“m not having been
accepted as conclusive by them, the Saŗgha Rja of Burma sent a second epistle
supporting the statements made in the first with the help of copious quotations from the Pali texts
and commentaries, and exhorting the recalcitrant priests to yield to reason and
authority.
When this epistle was read in a
public assembly of the Buddhist clergy and laity, the then High Priest of the
Amarapura Society and his colleagues who, for some time, upheld the vaildity of
the disputed S“m became convinced of its faultiness and renouncing their
preconceived notions on the subject joined the party of Laŗkgoda. A number of priests at Dodanduwa who
stood aloof from the contending factions also gave in its adherence on this day
to the united factions, and thenceforward the three parties in alliance
performed their ecclesiastical functions together in peace and harmony. But this epistle as well as two others
accompanied with diagrams on the subject, subsequently addressed to the
Amarapura priests of Ceylon by two learned members of the Burmese church, had no
effect on those who persisted in their error...
Things were in this state when the
priest Vimalasra Thera of the Ambagahapitiya Vihra at Velitota, who had
received his ordination at the faulty place of consecration, wrote some epistles
addressed to the late King of Burma
and to the leading ministers and priests of that country, propounding certain
questions having reference to the validity or invalidity of the disputed S“m at
Balapitimodara... The questions submitted by Vimalasra were, at the instance of
the King and his ministers, referred to a Committee of the most learned Buddhist
priests of Mandalay under the presidency of the best Vinaya scholar of that
country named Sirisaddhammavamsapla Jgara Mah Thera. This Committee embodied their opinions
on the different points submitted to them in the form of a report, which was
printed and published in Burma, and copies of it were sent to Ceylon for
distribution among the priests here.
The decision arrived at by this learned Committee was again adverse to
the opinions of Vimalasra and his party, and the S“m at Balapitimodara was
condemned as defective and faulty.
One would have supposed that this would settle the whole question and put
an end to the controversy and strife once and for ever ; but it was not
so...
With the praiseworthy object of
conciliating the factious brethren in Ceylon and uniting the Amarapura Society
in the bonds of peace and brotherhood, the Committee aforementioned, named Sirisaddhammavamsa Jgara Mah Thera,
and who had come on a visit here, convened an asembly of the principal priests
of Ceylon in order to advise and exhort the oppositionists to yield to reason
and discipline.... This priest, in a great public assembly held at Velitara
exhorted Vimalasra and his party to stand to reason and to submit to authority;
but the oppositionists actuated by policy rather than by wisdom, disregarded the
sober admonition...
After the great Thera Jgara left
the island, the leader of the oppositionist band, Vimalasra Thera, printed and
published a work entitled S“mlakkhaöad“pan“ in which he attempted to set at
naught the generally received opinions of the ancient elders of the church who,
in his estimate,were not infallible and were liable to error. This book has been widely circulated
among the Amarapura section of the Buddhist clergy both in and out of the
island, and its tendency is to perpetuate and widen the breach which has
unfortunately occurred among the brethren of the Amarapura
clergy.
In order, therefore, to counteract
the evil effects which this work is calculated to produce among the laity and
clergy, and to correct the errors and misrepresentations which it contains... we
have thought it incumbent upon us to publish a reply to that work by the title of 'S“mnayadappana or A Mirror of the
System of Consecrated Boundaries.'
We lament the fact that we are not
in a position to produce an equally comprehensive version for the defence from
the school of Vimalasra Thera.
However, it is clear that in these two works we come to possess two
Vinaya treatises on the question of S“m submitted from opposite camps. These two masterly studies of the 19th
century, while being undoubtedly a valuable addition to our Vinaya literature,
also indicate the changing trends in the history of the Ssana in the island.
A.
Pali Texts and Translations
Aŗguttara Nikya, Ed. R.
Morris and E. Hardy, 5 Vols., PTS. London, 1885 - 900. Tr. F.L.Woodward and E.M. Hare, The Book
of the Gradual Sayings, 5 Vols.,
PTS. London, 1932 - 36.
Aŗguttara Nikya
Commentary, see Manorathapuraö“.
Apadna, Ed. M.E.Lilley,
2 Vols., PTS. London, 1925 - 27.
Atthaslin“, Comy. to
Dhammasaŗgaö“, Ed.E.Muller, PTS. London, 1897.
BhikkhuptimokkhagaöŹhid“pan“ of
Nnakitti Mah Thera, Ed. K.Gunaratna Thera, Colombo, 1889. Printed in Sinhala
characters.
Dhammapada, Ed.
S.Sumaŗgala Thera, PTS. London, 1914.
DhammapadaŹŹhakath, Ed.
H.C.Norman, 4 Vols., PTS. London, 1906 -14.
D“gha Nikya, Ed.
T.W.Rhys Davids and J.E.Carpenter, 3 Vols., PTS. London, 1890 -1911. Tr. T.W.
and C.A.F.Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, [ SBB. Vols. 2, 3 and 4 ] OUP. London, 1899
-1921.
D“gha Nikya Commentary,
see Sumaŗgalavilsin“.
Jtaka, Ed. V.Fausboll,
6 Vols. and Index, London, 1895 -1907.
Translated in 6 volumes under the editorship of
E.B.Cowell.
Kaŗkhvitaraö“,
Buddhaghosa's Comy. to the Ptimokkha (Mtik AŹŹhakath ), Ed. Dorothy Maskell, PTS.London, 1956.
Mahniddesa, see
Niddesa.
Majjhima Nikya,
Ed.V.Trenkner and R. Chalmers, 3 Vols., PTS. London, 1948 - 51. Tr. R. Chalmers,
Further Dialogues of the Buddha, 2
Vols., PTS. London. 1888. Tr. I.B.Horner, Middle Length Sayings, 3 Vols., PTS. London, 1954 -
59.
Majjhima Nikya
Commentary, see Papacasčdan“.
Manorathapuraö“, Comy.
to Aŗguttara Nikya, Ed. M. Walleser H.Hopp, 5 PTS. London, 1924 -
56.
Milindapaha, Ed.
V.Trenkner, London, 1928. Tr. T.W.
Rhys Davids, The Questions of King Milinda SBE. Vols. 35, 36, Oxford,
1890,1894. Tr. I.B.Horner,
Milinda's Questions, SBB. Vols. 22, 23, PTS. London, 1963 -
64.
Niddesa, I -
Mahniddesa, Ed. L.de la V. Poussin and E.J.Thomas, 2 Vols. ; II -
Cullaniddesa, Ed. W.Stede, PTS.
London, 1916 -18.
Papacasčdan“, Comy. to
Majjhima Nikya, Ed. J.H.Woods, D.Kosambi and I.B.Horner, 5 Vols., PTS., London, 1922 -
38.
Paramatthajotik
II, Comy. to Suttanipta, Ed. H.
Smith, 3 Vols. in II, PTS. London,
1916 -18.
PaŹisambhidmagga, Ed,
A.C.Taylor, PTS. London, 2 Vols., 1905 - 7.
Samantapsdik, Comy.
to Vinaya PiŹaka, Ed. J.Takakusu & M.Nagai, PTS. London, 5 Vols., 1924 - 38. Vol. 6, Colombo,
1947.
Saµyutta Nikya, Ed. L.
Feer, 6 Vols., PTS. London, 1884
-1904. Tr. C.A.F.Rhys Davids
and F.L.Woodward, The Book of the
Kindred Sayings, 5 Vols., PTS. London 1917-30.
Saµyutta Nikya
Commentary, see Sratthappaksin“.
Sratthad“pan“,
Sriputta's Comy. (T“k) to
Samantapsdik, Part I. Ed. Bihalpola Devarakkhita Thera (pp.1- 639), 1914 ; Part II. Ed. Mabopitiye
Medhaŗkara Thera (pp. 640-903), 1933.
Printed in Ceylon in Sinhala characters.
Sratthappaksin“, Comy.
to Saµyutta Nikya, Ed. F.L. Woodward, 3 Vols., PTS.London, 1929 -
37.
Sumaŗgalavilsin“, Comy.
to D“gha Nikya, Ed. T.W.Rhys Davids, J.E.Carpenter and W.Stede. 3 Vols., PTS. London, 1888
-1932.
Suttanipta, Ed.
D.Anderson and H. Smith, PTS. London,1948.
Tr. R.Chalmers, HOS. Vol.37,
1932 Tr. E.M.Hare, Woven Cadences of Early Buddhists, SBB. 15, London,
1945.
Suttanipta Commentary,
see
Paramatthajotik.
Thera - and Ther“gth,
Ed. H. Oldenberg and . R. Pischel, PTS. London, 1883. Tr.C.A.F. Rhys Davids,
Psalms of the Early Buddhists, 2 Vols., PTS. London : Psalms of the Sisters. First Published 1909. Psalms of the
Brethren. First Published 1913.
Udna, Ed. P.Steinthal,
PTS. London, 1948. Tr.
F.L.Woodward, The Minor Anthologies of
the Pali Canon II. Published
1935.
Vibhaŗga, Ed. C.A.F.Rhys
Davids, PTS. London, 1904.
Vimativinodan“, Coliya
Kassapa's Comy. (T“k) to Samantapsdik, Ed. Beratuduwe Dhammdhra Tissa
Thera, Ceylon, 1935. Printed in
Sinhala characters.
Vimuttimagga, Tr. Rev.
N.R.M.Ehara, Soma Thera and Kheminda Thera, The Path of Freedom,
Ceylon,1961.
Vinaya PiŹaka, Ed. H.
Oldenberg, 5 Vols., PTS. London, 1879 - 83. Tr. T.W.Rhys Davids and H.Oldenberg, Vinaya Texts, SBE.Vols.
13,17, 20, Oxford, 1881- 85. Tr.I.B.Horner, The Book of the Discipline,
SBB.Vols.10,11,13,14 and 20, London, 1949-52.
Vinayavinicchaya,
Buddhadatta's Manuals II, Ed. A.P.Buddhadatta Thera, PTS.London,
1928.
Visuddhimagga, by
Buddhaghosa, Ed.C.A.F.Rhys Davids, 2 Vols., PTS. London, 1920 - 21. Reprinted in
one volume 1975. Tr. Bhikkhu
Nnamoli, The Path of Purification,
Colombo, Ceylon 1956.
B.
Prakrit, Sanskrit and Chinese Texts and Translations
Atharvaveda Saµhit, Ed.
R.Roth and W.D.Whitney, Berlin, 1924. Tr.R.T.H.Griffith, Hymns of the
Atharvaveda, Vol2. Benares, 1896.
Bhagavadg“t, Ed. S.
Radhakrishnan, London, 1948.
Brhadraöyaka Upanisad,
with Comy. of źaŗkara, Ed. V.B. īpte, AAS.15, 4th Edition.
1939.
Chndogya Upanisad, with
Comy. of źaŗkara, Ed. V.G.īpte, AAS. 14, 5th Edition,1934.
Chinese TripiŹaka, see
Taisho Issaikyo.
Dharmaguptaka Vinaya :
preserved in Chinese, Taisho Issaikyo.
Gilgit Manuscripts, Ed.
Nalinaksha Dutt, 3 Vols. Vol.I ; Vol.II, Parts 1,2,3 ; Vol. III, Pats 1, 2, 3,
4. Srinagar, Kashmir, 1939-50.
Jaina Sčtras, Tr.
Hermann Jacobi, SBE.Vols. 22,45, Oxford, 1884,1895.
KaŹha Upani©ad,
Ed.V.G.īpte, AAS. 7, 7th Edition, 1935.
Mahsaŗghika Prtimok©a
Sčtra, Ed. W.Pachow and R. Mishra, Gangnath Jh Research Institute, Allahabad, 1956.
MahҤsaka Vinaya : Preserved in
Chinese.
Mö¶ukya Upanisad, Ed.
V.G.īpte, Poona, 1928.
Manusmrti, with Comy. of
Medhtithi, Ed. G.Jh, 3 Vols., Calcutta, 1932 - 39. Tr. G. Buhler, The Laws of Manu, SBE. 25, Oxford,
1886.
Mčlasarvstivda
Prtimok©a Sčtra, Ed. A.C.Banerjee, IHQ. Vol. 29. pp.162 - 74, 266 - 75, 363 - 77.
Mčlasarvstivda Vinaya
: prserved in Sanskrit, Gilgit
MSS.
Taisho Issaikyo, Chinese TripiŹaka, Ed. J.Takakusu and K.
Watanabe.
Taittir“ya Upani©ad,
with Comy. of źaŗkara, Ed. V.G.īpte, ASS. 12, 4th Edition,
1922.
Muö¶aka Upani©ad, with
Comy. of źaŗkara, Ed. V.G. īpte, Poona, 1925.
Pra§na Upani©ad, Ed.
V.G. īpte, Poona,1922.
Sarvstivda Prtimok©a
Sčtra, Ed. M. Finot, Journal Asiatique, 1913.
Sr“madbhagavadg“trthaparaksik,
Ed. Pandits of the Adyar Library, Series No. 25,1941.
Upani©ads : The Thirteen
Principal Upanishads, Tr. R.E.Hume, Second Edition, OUP,
1934.
Altekar, A.S., The
Position of Women in Hindu Civilization, Banaras Hindu University,
1956.
Basham, A.L. History and
Doctrines of the īj“vikas, London, 1951.
Belvalkar, S.K. and
Ranade, R.D., History of Indian Philosophy, Vol.2, Poona,
1927.
Bhabavat, Durga N., Early Buddhist Jurisprudence, Poona,
1940.
Bloomfield, M.,
Atharvaveda, Strassburg, 1899.
Bode, Mabel Haynes, The
Pali Literature of Burma, RAS.
London, 1909.
Deo, S.B., History of
Jaina Monachism, Poona,
1956.
Dutt, Nalinaksha, Early
Monastic Buddhism, New Edition, Calcutta, 1960.
Dutt, Sukumar, Buddha
and Five After-Centuries, London, 1959. Early Buddhist Monachism,
First Published 1924. First Indian Edition (revised) 1960.
Eliot, Sir Charles, Japanese Buddhism, London, 1935.
Horner, I.B., Women Under Primitive Buddhism, London,
1930. 'Abhidhamma Abhivinaya ',
IHQ. Vol. 17, pp. 291 - 310.
Law, B.C., A. History
of Pali Literature, 2 Vols., London, 1933. (Ed.)
Buddhistic Studies, Calcutta,
1931.
Malalasekera. G.P.,The Pali Literature of Ceylon, RAS. London,
1928.
Monier-Williams, Sir
Monier, Buddhism, London, 1889.
Nagai, M., 'Buddhist Vinaya Discipline ' in Buddhistic Studies, Ed. B.C.Law,
Calcutta, 1931, pp. 365 - 82.
Oldenberg, H., Buddha,
Tr. Hoey, London and Edinburgh, 1882 ; Calcutta, 1927.
Prabhu, Pandhari-Nath,
Hindu Social Organization, New Revised Edition,
Bombay,1954.
Rahula, Walpola, History
of Buddhism in Ceylon, Colombo,
1956.
Rhys Davids, C.A.F.,
Buddhism, Home University Library of Modern Knowledge, London,1912. Revised Edition, 1934. Outlines of Buddhism : a historical
sketch, Methuen & Co., London, 1934.
Sakya or Buddhist Origins,
London, 1931.
Rhys Davids, T.W.,
Buddhism, Non- Christian Religious Systems, London, Revised Edition, 1886. New and Revised Edition, 1907. Buddhism,
its History and Literature (American Lectures on the History of Religions), 1896.
Taw Sein Ko, 'Preliminary Study of the Kalyöi
Inscriptions of Dhammaceti. 1476
A.D.'' in Indian Antiquary, Vol. 22. pp. 11- 17.
Thomas, E.J. The History
of Buddhist Thought, London,1933.
Winternitz, M., A
History of Indian Literature, Vol. 2. University of Calcuta,
1933.
(Numbers are referred to the page numbers of the printed book Sadly we cannot replicate the page numbers in E-Format, however, if you print it out the numbers should still be fairly accurate)
Abbhna (Act of) 111 (See also reinstate)
Abhidhamma (PiŹaka) 14 n. i, 58,132
abhidhamme (in terms of the Dhamma)
132
Abhijjh 67f.
Abhisamcrika(-sikkh) 53f., 132
Abhivinaye (in terms of the Vinaya)
132
abrahmacariyavsa 25
abrahmacariy veramaö“ 52
abrogation 145,146
absolution 2, 98, 101,102,103,123,166
īcraŗga Sčtra 140
īcariya 131-3
Acela Kassapa 115
Act of Banishment 118,121 (See also Pabbjaniya
kamma) ; of Censure 118,121 (See also Tajjaniya Kamma) ; of Reconciliation 118,121 (See also
PaŹisraniya kamma) ; of Subordination 118,121 (See also Nissaya kamma) ; of
Suspension, 109,118,121 (See also Ukkhepaniya kamma)
Adhikaraöa
108,121,122,127
Adhikaraöasamatha 77,79,121-127,155
adhipa sikkh 67
AdhiŹŹhna (- uposatha) 106
īdibrahmacariyika (-sikkh) 53f,132 ; (sikkhpada) 166
dikammika 160
administration (monastic) 9,17,48,82,123,134, 144, 173
gatngata 9
Aggika JaŹila 114
agnygra 95
hre paŹikkčlasa 60
Ajtasatthu (King) 99
Ajita Kesakambali 26
īj“vaka 25,27
j“vaprisuddhi 55, 62, 64, 66, 87
j“vavipatti 62
Akaraö“ya 83 ; cattri akaraö“yni 83,166
akusala kamma 45, 52, 67, 68,
īlra Klma 6, 25
Altekar, A.S. 137,138
Amarapura (sect) 175 -176
amends (make
amends) 99, 105, 106, 112, 113,
151, 166
amØtatva 21
AmčĀhavinaya 121, 123, 126
and“navadasso 47
Angmin 69, 86 n. 2
anagriya 74
angatabhayni 74, 76
īnanda 11, 26, 60, 70, 92,128,142,145 - 7,151,
162, 166 - 8,169,
īnandattherauposathapahavatthu 48
n.6, 162
ö ptimokkha 160 n.4, 162 - 3
ansakyana 23
anasssika
brahmacariya 25,
26
Andhakavinda 172
Aŗguttara Nikya 1, 3,
43, 53, 54, 57, 60, 64, 70, 72, 75, 76, 77, 138,139, 159, 164,
166
Aniyata 77, 149
aatitthiyapubba 114,115,116
antevs“ 132.
anupd parinibbnatthaµ 36
Anurdha 33
Anuruddha 119
anusayasamugghtattham 36
Anuvdhikaraöa
108
aparihniya dhamma (seven) 71,166
apaŹicchanna 110
ApaŹicchannaparivsa 111 see Parivsa
īpatti 102 -
103,108.
īpattdhikaraöa 108, 122, 126, 127
appamn cetovimutti 32.
appama (= brahmavihra) 26
catasso appamayo 30
Arahant 28, 36, 37, 86,123
Arahantship 28, 31, 37, 43, 44, 54, 60, 63, 67, 68,
69, 73,142
arahattaphala 6
raaka 76,172 n. 3
araakatta 71
araöyyana 23
arati 31
AriŹŹha
141,150
ariyamagga (= brahmacariya) 26
ariyasaccni 33
ariyavaµs (four) 57 - 58
asdhraöa paatti 149,158
savnaµ khaya 27
savnaµ khayatthaµ 36
savaŹŹhniya dhamma 48, 49, 50
ascetic 114 ascetic ideal 138
fire-worshipping ascetics 114 naked
ascetics 114,153,154
asceticism 4, 6, 26, 40, 76
Asoka 9
§ramin 21
Assaji 34,128
Assaji and Punabbasu 59,121,136.
Atharvan (Atharava-veda) 22, 24, 25
ītman (tman) 23, 28
aŹŹha garudhamma 142 - 6
AŹŹhakathcariy 97
aŹŹha vatta 273
austerities 6, 8, 19, 23, 26, 27, 29, 40, 41, 76,
88
vsa 9, 10, 171
bhusaccamahatta 49 (See also savaŹŹhniya
dhamma)
BalapiŹimodara 174 n 8, 175
ballot 125
Bandhumat“ 161
Basham, A.L. 26 n.1.
Baudhyana 22
Belvalkar, S.K. and
Ranade, R.D. 21 n.1 and 3
Bhaddli 46, 48, 49,
59
Bhagavadg“t 28, 137
Bhagavat, Durga N. 149
n.1, 155
Bhradvjagotta
(Brahmin) 27
Bhikkhu
2,6,7,8,10,11,12,19,20,53,62,77,79,80,81-4,86,88,91,92,95,100,104-6,
109,111,112,114,115,118,123,124,128,130,133,136,137,142-7,148-55,
157-8,160-5,168,169
bhikkhumnatta 113
Bhikkhu Ptimokkha
143,148 - 9,157
Bhikkhu Saŗgha 129, 142 - 4, 146 -
7
Bhikkhu Ssana 151
Bhikkhun“
12,20,62,79,88,112,129,142-7,148-58
Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha,
143,149,151,152 n.4,153f,155-8
Bhikkhun“ptimokkhavaööan 157
Bhikkhun“ Ssana 148, 149
Bhikkhunovda 143,144
Bhikkhunovdaka 156
Bhiksun“prtimoksa 155
bhojane mattaut 58,59,60,63.
Bloomfield, M. 24
Bode, Mabel Haynes 174
Bodhisatta 25, 33-35, 37, 39, 41,
72
boycott 109,121,150-1 (See also Ukkhepaniya
kamma)
Brahma 23,24,25,27,28,29
Brahm 29, 30, 31,161
Brahman 22, 27, 28
Brahma-companionship 30
Brahma-life,6;
Brahma-reaching, 23,27; Brahma-union,29; Brahma-world, 23,24,
29,30,31
brahmabhčta,
27,28,29
brahmabhčya,28
Brahmacr“
1,22,24,25,37,38
Brahmacrin“
149
Brahmacariya,
1,5,6,20.25,26,29,30,31,32,33,35,36,37,38,41,43,53,56,59,141,142,148,153;
caturaŗgasamanngata
brahmacariya, 26,27,40
brahmacariyassa
keval“
36
brahmacarya 21-25
brahmakya 28
brahmanirvöa 28
brahmapatti 27,29
brahmasaµstha 21
Brahmavihra (four) 26, 30, 31,
32
Brhmaöas (literature) 137
brhmaöa (person) 29,141
Brahmanic 4, 20-22,24,27
Brahmanism 1, 29
Brahmin 1, 6, 21, 22, 24, 27, 29, 30, 42,
86,137,140
Brahminhood 22, 24
Brahmin Sages (seven) 25
BØhadraöyaka
Upanisad 24
Buddha 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9,10-12,
14,17,18.19, 20, 24, 25 - 32, 33 - 5, 37 - 41, 43 - 53,57- 59, 62, 64, 67,
69-76, 78, 79, 81, 83-6, 90-3, 97-100,106,108,114-120, 128-
33,135-9,141-9,151,156,159-69,171-2
Buddhas (of the past) 49, 70, 71, 161-
3
Buddhaghosa 3,13,19, 26, 27, 43, 44, 46,
47,50, 52, 53,55,57,58, 61-5, 67, 69, 87, 96 97,103104,108,109,110, 115, 127, 132,152,155-8,162,163,166 n 1, 168,
169, 170,174
Burma 174,175
Cakkavatti 52
Canonical 2, 3,12,18, 36, 44, 55, 57, 58,
63, 64, 91, 97,161,162,163,170
Ctuddisa Saŗgha 9,10,15
catunavutiparivsikavatta 112
catupaccaya 8, 57,58,
63
catuparis 148
Catuprisuddhis“la 61, 63 -7
caturaŗgasamanngata
brahmcariya 26 n.2, 4, 27
n.1, 40
Catur ī§rama Dharma 5, 21-3
causal genesis 33, 34
cauyma saµvara 141
celibacy 4, 24, 37, 38, 40, 47, 52,
84,140
cenobitic (monk) 5. 6, 9
cetaso varaöa 68
Ceylonese 64,174,175
Chabbaggiya (monks) 46,101,135,150,165,168,170. (nuns) 150
Chain of Causation 33, 34
Chalmers, Lord 2
chandaprisuddhi 97,103
Chndogya Upanisad 21, 23, 24
Channa 121,129
ChapaŹa (Burmese Thera) 174
chastity
84,114,141,149
Chien- Chen (= Kanjin) 174
China 174
Chinese 18,
20.104,142,145-6,160,161,168
Citta (Gahapati) 86,121
cittaklesa 68
code 15. 20. 38, 52, 61, 78, 80, 82,
89, 90, 92, 93-4,98,102,109,110,118,134,138,
142,14,148-9,156,164,165,166
codified 61,77, 83,
84,166
Commentaries (Pali) 2, 3,18, 36,
97,175
Commentary (Old) 3,16, 83, 96
Commentator 2, 4,103,109
Community 6, 7, 8,10, 20, 46, 48, 49,5 4,
62, 65, 69, 75, 77, 82, 89, 91-2, 95, 97, 99, 101,102,108 - 9,113,
118,120-3,126,128,129,131,132-5,141,142,143,144,
145,149,150,151,153,159,164,165,171,173,174
conceal 110-22, 113,
145
conduct 5, 6,10,11,12,16,
37,41,44,45,53,55, 82, 84, 89, 94,105,106,112,113,114,115,
121,122,124,130-1,134,135,145,148,149,156,165,166
confess
98,101,103,104,110,111,123,126
confession 6,15, 79,
98-99,101-3,104,105,106,110
confessional meeting 15, 77, 94
court 10
Cčlbhaya 64-5
Cullavagga
13,14,16,100,101,104,110-1,118,145,
57,159,160,161,162,163,167,170,406
Cunda 70,128,148
Dabbamallaputta 135
dna (= brahmacariya) 26
daö¶akamma
112,122,123,126,134
dasa atthavasa 51 (ten considerations which prompted the Buddha to lay down sikkhpada)
dasa sikkhpadni 52.
Dengyo Daishi 174
Devadatta 8, 70, 75, 88,
99,135,150.
Dhamma 5,12,14,15,17,18,19, 28, 34, 47,
48, 51, 52, 61, 74,82,88, 91-3,95,104,108-
110,114,116,118,119,120,121,124,126,132,163,166,167,170
dhammabhčta 28
Dhammaceti (King) 174 n.4
dhammakya 28
Dhammlaŗkra (Thera) 174 n.8
dhammanetti 126
Dhammapada 52, 59, 161
DhammapadaŹŹhakath 48 n.6, 66, 161 n.4,
162
Dhnajni (Brahmin / sutta) 29-30
Dharma 5, 21
Dharma PiŹaka 168
Dharmagupta Vinaya 142, 146, 167
dharmaskandha 21,23
Dh“rnanda, Lankgoda (Thera) 175
D“pavaµsa 168 n.7
D“pavihra (See Sumana Thera) 64
disciple (s) 1,5,7,10,14,18,19, 24, 29, 30, 31,
32, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 54, 55, 60, 61, 62,
63, 64, 67, 68, 69, 70-2, 73, 74, 76, 78, 84, 86, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 95,
97,102,108,115,116,119,128,129,130,133,136,145,161, 162, 163,
164,156,166,169
discipline 2,4,
6,10,12,13,14,16,17,18,19,21,42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 49, 51-4, 56, 59, 61, 63, 64-5,
74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 98, 99,102, 105.106.107,
108,113,120,123,124,126,127,128,131-2,135,146,148,149,156,161,164-5, 165, 166,
167,168,174
dispute
118,119,120,122,123-4,126,127,146,175
dissentient
19,145,151,170
divine 3
Dodanduwa 175
dosa 24, 31, 32, 39, 68-9
dovacassakaraöadhamma 69,130
Dubbhsita 50,169
duggati 3,4
DukkaŹa 50, 62, 86,
97,134,135,169,171
dukkha 33, 35-6, 53,
54
Dutt, Nalinaksha 1
Dutta, Sukumar 1,2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,10,14,15,17,78,79,
83, 92, 93-5, 102,133, 161 n.6
duŹŹhull pati 110,154.
Egypt 5
Eightfold Path 30, 37
ekvsa 97,171
Ekavihriya (Thera) 73
ekuddesa 95
ekčposatha 173
Eliot, Sir Charles 174 n.7
emancipation 20, 21, 37, 85,
141
enlightenment 6, 19, 26, 27, 30, 33, 36, 39, 40,
48, 50, 60,148
eremitical 7, 8
ethical 21, 22, 24, 52, 69
etymology 2, 3, 8
Europe 5
exclusion
20,101,106,159,161
excommunication 109
exoneratiion 123
expel 47, 52,151
faith 33, 39, 79,114,116
-7,130
Finot, M. 155
First Council 12,13, 79, 90,146,155
-7,167,168,169
food 41-2, 59 - 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 75,
76, 82
forest-dwelling 6, 7, 71, 72, 76, 90,
91,152,173
gahapatic“varadhara 76
gmakkhetta 95
gmantavihra 7, 76,172
n.3
garudhamma 129 AŹŹha garudhamma (eight conditions governing the
admission of women into the
Buddhist Order of Nuns) 145,146,147
goal 17, 20, 22-3, 24, 27, 29, 30, 33,
34, 36 -7, 39, 41, 43, 53, 54, 73,128,141
Gotama (Buddha) 1, 5, 6, 7,10, 25, 34, 48, 49,
88,162 - 3
Gotami, Mahpajpat“ 139,141,145,146
Griffith, R.T.H. 25
guidance 22,
45,130,132,146,169
guilt (patti ) 15, 46, 47, 98 -
99,100,101,102-3,104,106,108,109,123,124,126,160,166;
guiltless 123
guilty 20, 47, 96, 98,100
-1,103,104,105,106,109,110,-111,112,113,118,122,123, 126.
134,135,145,146,150,154,159-60,161,163,166
gčĀhaka 125
heaven 3,
25,137,139
hell 27
heresy 108
-9,112,121,134,150
heretic 111,154
Hieizan 174
Horner, I.B. 1, 5, 7,15, 84, 85,113 n.1,
132,155
Hume, R.E. 23 n. 4-6, 27 n.5
husband 137,139
immortality 20, 21
India 1, 4, 5, 20, 21, 86,137
Indian 1, 5, 21,
40,137,139
Indra 24
indriyagutti 65
indriyasaµvara 30, 55 - 6, 58, 60 -1, 54,
65
Indriyasaµvaras“la 61, 64
indriyesu guttadvro 44, 55
institution (s) 1, 2,10, 21-2, 24, 46, 48, 70, 71,
91, 93, 94,105,106,107,134,137, 142,
143,144,146,148,153,162
intoxicants 52
Introductory Formular 15, 93 - 4
inviolable 52
i©Źam 23
Interrogatory Portions 15
Isipatana 35
Jacobi, Hermann 141
Jgara (Burmese Thera) 175
jgariynuyoga 58,
60,
Jaina 8, 40,
95,140,141
Jainism 18, 38,138,140,141
Jnussoni (Brahmin) 71 - 2, 128
Japan 84,174
Jtaka 26, 52
JaŹilas 25 Aggika JaŹilas
114
Jhna 85, 86 n.2
J“vaka 31
kaidan (= s“m) 174
Kaidan Shiki (of Shosho
shonin) 174
Kakacčpama 32
Kakusandha (Buddha) 163
Kla 39
Kalyn“ Inscriptions 174 n.4
kma 31, 38, 56,
141
kmabhog“ 38
kmesu micchcr veraman“ 52
kmacchanda 68 - 9
kmarga 68
Kammakkhandhaka 118
kammapatha (satta and dasa) 52,
67
Kaö¶aka 149
Kanjin 174
Kaŗkhvitaraö“ (Mtik
aŹŹhakath) 96,103,123,157 -
8
Kassap (Buddha) 48,163
Kassapa (JaŹila) 6
Kassapagotta (Bhikkhu) 164
kaŹhina ubbhra 90
kyavčpakaŹŹha 70
Khandhakas 12,15 - 6,18, 53 - 4,
90,100,108,111 - 2, 114 - 7,121,124,125 - 6,131 - 4,
156,159,160,170,174
khandhakavatta 53
khuddakpatti 49 -
50
khuddnukhuddaka 165 - 7,169
Kiccdhikaraöa 108
Kimbila 119
K“Źgiri 121,136
Koklika 135,150
komrabrahmacariya 1, 22
Kongamana (Buddha) 163
Koravya (King) 40
Kosala Saµyutta 137
Kosambi 119
kusala dhamma 3
kusala kamma (dasa) 52
lbhaggamahatta 49
laity 16, 20,
95,167,175,176
Law, B.C. 17, 79 n.3
law 77, 79, 81, 83, 84, 92, 94,
96,100,101,106,109,120,122,135,150,153,156,164,166
lawlessness 48,165
law-maker 10
laxity 46, 48,166,168
layman 3, 8, 38 - 9, 41 - 2, 45, 47, 52 -3, 62,
84 - 5, 89, 93, 95,118-9,124,138,141, 146,148,150 - 5,165
laywoman 352
leadership 20,128,129,131 -
2,143,145
legal 46 - 7, 51, 61. 79, 80, 81,
82, 83, 88,102,118 - 9, 123,129,143
legalize 48, 54, 61, 83
legislation 20, 48, 51, 81, 98,100,120
-1,129,140,163,165,173
litigiousness 120
lobha 39, 68
Lomahaµsana Jtaka 26
lčkhappasanna 8
Lč-tsung (= Ritsu) 174
Macchiksaö¶a 86
Mdugaŗga 175
Magadha 93
Mgandiya (Paribbjaka) 115
Mah aŹŹhakath 39
Mahaka 86
Mah Kassapa (Thera) 7, 8, 48, 57, 58, 60, 70 -1, 76,
79, 90, 90, 128 - 30, 151,
156,165,167- 9, 172
Mahnma (Sakya) 90
Mahpajpati see Gotami
Mahsaŗghika 18,104,111,114,127,161,168
-170
mahatta 49
Mahvagga (Vinaya) 3, 7, 9,15,16,25, 78, 83,
92-100,103 - 4,106,149,171 - 3
Mahvibhaŗga 79,155
Mahv“ra 141
Mah“ssaka Vinaya 78, 104, 145 - 6, 160,
167
Majjhima Nikya 45, 55, 68, 91,
115
Makhdeva (King) 30, 40
Makkhali Gosla 25
Malalasekera, G.P. 174 n 2, 5
Mnatta 110 -113, 118, 142,
160
mnattacrika 111-2
manoduccarita
67
manokamma 67 -
8
manosucarita 67
Manu 22,140
ManusmØti 22,137
Mra 41, 59, 139 - 40,
146,148
mtik 80
mauna 23
Max Muller 1
Medhtithi 22
mendicancy 1, 4, 6, 8,19, 25, 38, 39, 40,
42
mendicants 4, 95,141 - 2,
149
mental 53, 67 - 8
methuna 37, 46 - 7
methunavirati (= brahmacariya) 26
mett 30, 32
Mettiyabhummajaka 135
micchdiŹŹhi 67 - 9
micchj“va 45, 62
Middle Path 68
Milinda (King) 63,169
Milindapaha 44, 45 n.3, 63,
169
mind 67 - 8, 71 - 2,
75
minor rules 18, 146, 164
-170
miraculous (powers) 85 - 6
missioner 5
Mogallna 8, 25,130 -1,136,150,159 -
61
moha 24, 31- 2, 39, 68 - 9
mohakkhaya 69
mok©a 33
Moliyaphagguna 122, 151
monasteries 4,
7,124,126,171,173
monastic 4,10,13,18, 31, 37, 38, 40, 42, 43
- 51, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62 - 3, 65, 70-71, 74 - 6, 77 - 8, 80, 82 - 3, 88
- 90, 91 -2, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99,101,102,103,105,106 108, 109,110,113,114 -
6,118,119,120 - 2,123,124,126,127,128,129,130 - 6,140,141, 142, 143,144-7,148
-50,153,159,163,164 -7,168,171,173 - 4
monasticism 1,
3,4,5,6,7,13,18,20,31,37,43,45,47,53,56,58, 60, 64, 66,74, 83, 85,87,95,
102,106,112,117,156,164,174
Monier- Williams 1, 4, 6
monks 3, 5, 6, 7,11,16,17, 33, 37-
8, 39-40, 41-2,44,45,46,47,50,51,52,53,55,57,58,59, 62, 63, 64, 67, 69, 70, 71,
75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87- 90, 91, 95 -9,100- 1, 102 -
6,108,110 - 3,117,118 - 27,128 - 32,135 - 6,140 - 6,148,150,151,154 - 6,159-
61,163- 6,170 - 3,174
moral 6, 21 - 3, 27 - 8, 52, 55,
69, 83, 85, 87, 89,118,123,141,142,144 - 5
morality 16, 26, 29, 48,
54
mother 137, 140
mudit 30, 31
Muö¶aka Upanisad 23 - 4
Mčlasarvstivda (Vinaya) 99,104,159
Mčlasar- Prtimoksasčtra 113
Mčlasarvstivdins 111,159,161
Mčlya PaŹikassana 111
murder 16
Nagai, M. 84
Ngasena 45, 63,169
-70
nai©Źika 22
öadassanatthaµ 36
Nanda 70
Nandaka 129
Nandiya 119
Nara 174 n.6
nemantanika 76
Nhtakamuni 73
nibbna (Nirvna) 30, 33, 36, 44, 60,
68,129
nibbnapariyya 67
NigaöŹhantaputta 119
nirodha 33
Nissaggiya 77, 88 -
9,152,154
Nissayas (four) 8, 42, 75,
76
nissaya (= dependence of a pupil on his
teacher) 132
nissayadyaka 133
Nissaya kamma 112,118,121
nissayapaŹippassaddhi 132
n“varaöa (paca) 55, 58, 67,
68
nun (s) 4,16, 87,
99,113,122,141,142,143,144,145,148,151,155,157,174
offence (s) 14,15,16, 46 - 8, 49, 50, 75, 77, 78,
83, 85, 87, 88, 95, 97, 98,100,101- 3 105,106,108 -11,112,113,118,121,122,123 -
4,126,127,134,135,143,144,145,
146,150,154,159,160,161,166, 169,170,171
offender (s) 15, 46, 47, 51, 75, 78, 79, 89, 98,
99,101,104,106,108 -1,113,121-3,126,165
Oldenberg, H. 1, 3, 4,10,13 -14,16 -17,19, 77, 80, 81,
82, 99 n.1,109 n.3, 113 n.1, 132
orambhgiya saµyojana 69
ovda 129,133,143
ovda ptimokkha 162 -
3
pabbajj 5, 8, 20, 35, 37, 38 - 9,
82, 84,115,116 - 7,141, 142,173
Pabbjaniya kamma 109 n.3,
112,118,121
pabbajita 5, 31, 37, 38, 56, 69, 83, 87,
95
Paccayasannissitas“la 61, 63, 64, 65,
66
Pc“navaµsadya
119
Pcittiya 46, 50, 60, 62, 77, 80, 81 - 3, 86
- 90, 94,103 108 - 9,110,135,145,149,150, 151 - 4,164,166
padhniyaŗga (five) 3 n.3
Pakudha Kaccyana 26
paµsukčlac“vara 75
paµsukčlika 76
pacan“varaöa 30 See also n“varaöa
pacasikkhpadas“la (= brahmacariya) 26
pacavaggiya (bhikkhu) 17, 33
Panduka and Lohitaka 121,135
Paŗkadha 164
pa 36, 43, 54, 65,
66
paatto 12
pantheistic 27
ppadhamma 62
Papacasčdan“ 50, 71
Prjika 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 62, 77,
79, 80, 82 -7, 95,100,101,106,109,110,123, 124,129,135,145,149,150
-1,154,156,157,158,160,166
paramtman 22 n.3
Paribbjaka 93
parinibbna 148
paripucch 133
parisuddhj“vo 55, 62
prisuddhis“la 63, pariyanta- 63, apariyanta- 63, paripuööa- 63, aparmaŹŹha- 63, paŹippassaddhi- 63
Parivra 28, 62,156
Parivsa 110 -12,114 - 6,118, ApaŹicchanna- 111, PaŹicchanna- 111,113, Samodhna- 111, Titthiya- 111,114 -
5,117
parivsika 111 - 2
Parivrjakas (paribbjaka) 6, 7,12, 25
pariyattissana 37
Prsva 141
Pasenadi Kosala (King) 1, 39, 70
PaŹiccasamuppda 33, 34
paŹicchanna 110
paŹicchannaparivsa 111,113 See
Parivsa
PŹidesan“ya 77, 88,150,155
Ptimokkha 2, 3, 4,10, 21, 28 - 38, 45, 43, 48 - 9,
54, 55, 61, 62, 64, 65, 77- 82, 84, 88
89 - 90, 91- 4, 95 -107, 109 -11, 118,
119,120,122,126,127,134,143,144,148, 149, 155 - 8,159 - 63,165 - 6,171 -
3
Ptimokkhas 88 n.8, 156-7,158, Bhikkhu Ptimokkha 88 n.8, 148 - 9,157 - 8, Bhikkhun“
Ptimokkha 88 n.8,149,151,152
n.4,153 - 4, 155,157 - 8
Ptimokkhuddesa 143
Ptimokkhuddesaka 93
Ptimokkha- reciter 96, 98 -
9,104
ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto 55, 64, 65 n.1.
66
Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la 61, 62, 64 -
5
PaŹitakaraöa 121,122,126
paŹipattissana 37
PaŹisambhidmagga 63
PaŹisraöiya kamma 112,18,120,121,
Pavraö 80,105 -
7,111,112,144
Pveyyaka (monks) 76
penalty 47, 95, 99,102,105,108,109
-13,118,122,123, 126,134,143,144,160
piö¶aptika 76
piö¶iylopabhojana 8, 75
Pindola Bhradvja 86
Pokkharast“ (Brahmin) 29
Posadha (ceremonies) 95
pasadhasl 95
Posadhasthpanavastu 99,104,159
Prabhu, Pandhari Nath 138 n.5
Prajpati 24
Prasna Upanisad 23
Prtimoksasčtra 18,104,111,113,155
preceptor 112,116
probation 111,114 - 5
procedure 10, 44, 75, 82, 89,
93,108,109,110,117,122, 125,126,127,143,160,164,174
property 9
propriety 18,164,165
prosecute 46, 99,133
prosecution 20, 46, 47, 78, 82, 96,
99,108,113,119,120,123,161,165,
pubbakaraöa 97,105
pubbakicca 96
-7,103,105
punish 46, 97,
98,194,123
punishment 15, 20, 47, 51, 52, 77, 78, 82, 89, 96,
98 - 9,102,105,108,109,110 -11,112,
113,118,120,122,123,126,134,135,143,150
Puööa Mantniputta 37
puöyaloka 21
pupil 113,131 - 5, 153
Puröa 170
Pčraöa Kassapa 25 - 6
purity 95, 96, 98,100,101,102 -
5,106,127,160,171
pčtimuttabhesajja 75
quarrel 118,119,120,121
Rdha (Brahmin) 9
rga 24, 31, 32, 68 -
9
rgavirgattham (=brahmacariya) 36
Rains-retreat (vassvsa) 143,144,153
Rjagha 86,171,172
Rmnuja 24
rattaumahatta 49
RaŹŹhapla 40
rebellious 46, 48,
59,151,164,166
recital (of the
Ptimokkha =uddesa) 14,15, 20, 77,
78, 80, 90, 91, 92 - 4, 95,107,127, 157 - 60, 161, 162 - 3,
165,166,172,173
recluseship 3
regulation (s) 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 61, 75,
78, 82, 83, 92,106,113,118,119,120,
122,131,145,148,149,153,165,166,
reinstate 111,151
release 4, 33, 34
renunciation 5, 8, 24, 37, 38 - 9, 40, 47, 69,
84,141 - 2
residence 75, 76,
82,171,172,173
restraint 6
rhinoceros 8, 57
Rhys Davids, C.A.F. 1,
5
Rhys Davids, T.W. 1, 3, 4,10,13 -14,16 -17, 44, 77, 79
n.3, 99 n.1.
Ritsu (sect) 174
ritual 13,14,15, 20, 48 - 9, 78,90, 91,
92 - 3, 95 - 6, 97- 9,100 - 3,104 -7,127,148,157- 9, 161,
165,166,171,172
ritualistic 21, 29, 91, 94,
97,101,102,104,105,106,107,172,174
rukkhamčlasensana 75
sadrasantosa (= brahmacariya) 26
saddh 65
saddhamma 61
saddhivihr“ 132
sdhraöapaatti 150 n.4,
151,157
Sakadgmin 69
sakalabrahmacr“ 36
sakaööajappaka 125
sakkyadiŹŹhi 69
Sakuludy“ (Paribbjaka) 91
salkaghpaka 125
samdhi 36, 43, 54,
66
samaöa 43,141,161
samaöadevaputta 3
samnasaµvsa 173
samnasaµvsakas“m 173
samnas“m 97
smaöera 1,
52,112,114,115,117,149
smaöerapabbajj 117
Samantapsdik 48, 49, 50, 53, 54, 78, 96,
97,116, 117,122,123,124 - 5, 127, 131,
133,156,158,171,172 n.3.173,174
samatha 70, 71
Samathakkhandhaka 121
sammappadhna (four) 3 n.3
sammvattan 111
Sammukhvinaya 121 -
2,124,126
Samodhnaparivsa 111 See Parivsa
sampannaptimokkha 3,15
sampannas“la 15, 64
saµsra 22, 27, 36,
56,141
samsaric 3, 34, 36
samudaya 33
samyagna 23
saµyojana 68 saµyoyana-pahnattham 36
Saµyutta Nikya 3, 27, 31, 36, 38, 39, 44, 48, 49,
64, 68, 70, 76, 86,115,128,138,139
Sandaka (Paribbjaka) 26
Sandha 166
Saŗgha 6, 8, 9,10,11,14,15,16,18,19, 20,
31, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 69, 72, 77, 78, 82 84, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95,
96 - 8,100,101,102,103,104,105-7,109 -11, 113, 114, 116,117,118- 20,121,122,123,124,
125,126,127,128,129,130,131,134,135,136,142, 143,144,148,150,151,160,161,166 -
8,169,171 - 3
Saŗghdisesa 48, 49, 50, 62, 77, 80, 88,
90,100,101,106,109 -11,113,120,122,124,129,
130,133,135,145,149,151,154,155,157,165
saŗghakamma 97
sŗghamnatva 133
Saŗgha Rja (of Mandalay) 175
Saŗghasthavira 159,160 (= saŗgatthera )
125
saŗg“ti
79,170
źaŗkara 21, 23 - 4
Sajaya (Paribbjaka) 6, 25
savedayitanirodha 85
Sannys“ 1
santuŹŹh“ 30, 44, 55, 57 - 9,
66
Sappadsa 39
Sratthad“pan“ (Vinaya T“k) 50
Sriputta 7, 8, 25, 26, 29, 30, 33, 34,
37,48, 49, 50, 93,128,130,131,136,150,163
Sarvstivdin 18,155,167
Ssana 2, 3, 7,10,11,13,15,18, 20,45, 50,
51, 53, 61, 71, 75, 76, 91, 92, 102, 109,
116,120,122, 128, 129,130 -1,132,134,135 -
6,142,143,,144,146,147,149,150, 162 - 3, 164, 165,
166,167,168,171,174,176
pariyattissana 37, paŹipattissana 37, ssana (= brahmacariya) 26
źatapatha Brhmaöa 95
sati
65
satisampajaa 30, 44, 55, 56, 57, 58,
60
Sativinaya 121,123,127
sattabbhantara 173
sattryaöa 23
Second Buddhist Council 79
sekhadhamma 54
sekhapaööatti 53, 54
Sekhiya (Sekhiyadhamma) 18, 50, 62, 77, 74,
79,155,169
Seniya Bimbisra (King) 93
Seniya (JaŹila) 114
sensual 19, 41, 56,142
seŹŹha (= brahma) 27
sex 37,
46,148,149,151,153
Seyyasaka (Thera) 121
Shinran (Shonin) 84
Shinshč (sect) 84
Shosh shonin 174
Siddhattha 25 n.9
Sikh“ (Buddha) 163
sikkh 36, 43, 53, 54, 55, 63,
66,132; tisso
sikkh 43, 44, 54,
63,
sikkhpada 11,15, 46, 47, 48 - 54, 55, 60, 61
- 2, 77 - 8, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85 - 6, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92-4, 98,127,149,150,151
n.3,152- 8,160,162-3,164,165-7,169-70
s“la 3,11, 36, 37, 43-7, 51, 52, 53,54,
55, 56, 58, 60, 61 - 6, 67, 75,77, 82 - 4,87- 8, 90, 95,132,161; cčlas“la 45, 64; majjhimas“la 45, 61, 64; mahs“la 45, 62, 64; five s“las 95; eight s“las 95; magga and phala s“la 64; sikkhpadas“la 61. See also Catuprisuddhis“la,
Ptimokkhasaµvaras“la, Indriyasaµvaras“la,
īj“vaprisuddhis“la,
Paccayasannissitas“la
S“lakkhandha 30, 45, 55
s“laratana 64
s“lasampanna 3, 44, 45, 51, 55, 64,
90
s“lav 45,55
S“m 20, 95, 97,105,171- 6; Khaö¶as“m 173; Samnasaµvsakas“m 172 - 3; Sattabbhantaras“m 173; Udakukkhepas“m 173,175
S“mlakkhaöd“pan“ 174 n.8, 176
S“mlaŗkra 174
S“mlaŗkrapakaraöa 174
S“mnayadappana 174 n.8,176
s“mantarik 174
S“msaŗkarachedan“ 174
sinehadosa 68
society 137- 9,149
solitary 6, 7, 8, 69, 70, 71,
76
solitude 8, 71, 75
Som (Bhikkhuni) 139
Sotpatti 68
spiritual 5, 6, 7,10, 21, 31, 37, 38, 39,
41, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 54, 55, 58, 60, 62, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76,
85, 86, 88, 92, 99,100,128,129,131,132,133 - 4,139, 141,143
§ramaöa 1, 4
srmamaöera 1
Srimadbhagavadg“trthapraksik 28 n.3
strife 118,119,122
student 5, 25
studentship 22, 24
Sri Lanka 64
Subhadda 12,115,164
suddhi (catubbidh suddhi : desansuddhi saµvarasuddhi pariyeŹŹhisuddhi paccavekkhansuddhi ) 65
Sudhamma 121
Sudinna 46 - 7,
84
źčdra 137
sugati 3,4
suicide 82
Sumana 64
Sumaŗgalavilsin“ 55,127
Suspension of the Ptimokkha
100,101,106,159,160,162,163
sutta (= rules of the
Ptimokkha) 14,17 n.1, 79,
80; suttato 79; suttaso 156
Suttanipta 1, 6, 35, 37,
39
Suttanipta AŹŹhakath 31
Sutta PiŹaka 5,11,14 n.1, 17,18, 45, 58, 59,
83, 92,108,114,115,129,130,132,164
sutta (s) of the Sutta PiŹaka 77, 78, 80, 83, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98,
99,105,115 -6, 117, 119,120,122,124,125 - 6,
150,160,161,163
Sutta-
Aggana 28
īkaŗkheyya 43, 44, 64, 90
Alagaddčpama 141
Anaŗgana 76,130,131
Anumna 69,130
Ariyapariyesana 34
Assalyana 25
īŹnŹiya 70
AŹŹhakangara 32
Bahuvedaniya 119
Bhaddli 11, 45, 46, 48 - 9, 50, 58,
92
Bhayabherava 71, 72,128
Brahmajla 61
Cetokhila 31
Cčladukkhakkhandha 39
Culladhammasamdna 141
Cullavedalla 36
Dantabhčmi 45
Dhammacetiya 1, 39
Dhnajni 29, 30
Dvedhvitakka 128
Gaöakamoggallna 45
Gopakamoggallna 2, 7,10, 91, 92, 95,110,128,
171,173
Gulissni 7
Indriyabhvan 128
J“vaka 31
Kakacčpama 32, 45, 46, 53, 58,
92,122,130,143,164
Kma 35
Khaggavisöa 6, 8, 57, 68
K“Źgiri 59
Kukkuravatika 114
LaŹukikopama 58, 59,164
Lomahaµsana 26
Mgandiya 115
Mgha 32
Mahassapura 36, 43
Mahcattr“saka 62
Mahdukkhakkhandha 35
Mahhatthipadopama 34
Mahnidna 34
Mahpadna 14, 34, 48 n.6, 49,
94,161,162
Mahparinibbna
92,115,148,166,167,170
Mahrhulovda 31
Mahsakuludy“ 91, 95,173
Mahs“handa 26
Mahvacchagotta 38,115
Makhdeva 30, 40
Mandiyaputta = Samaöamaö¶ik 55
Metta 32
Pabbajj 37
Padhana 41
Psdika 38,148
RaŹŹhapla 40
Sabbsava 63
Sallekha 67, 69,128
Smagma 119,125
Smaaphala 44, 45, 52 n.2, 55, 58, 61,
99
SammdiŹŹhi 33
Sandaka 26
Saŗg“ti 30,58
Sekha 44, 51
Tevijj 29, 30
Tissametteyya 37
Udumbarikas“handa 70
Upakkilesa 119
Vatthčpama 59, 67, 68,
69
Suttavibhaŗga 11,13,14,15 - 6,17 n.1,18, 46, 48 - 9,
50, 62, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85,
93 - 4,109,150 n.4,163,165,170
Tajjaniya kamma,
112,118,121,122,135,160
TlapuŹa (Thera) 73,74
tapas 21, 23, 25,
27
Trukkha (Brahmin) 29
Tassappiyyasik 121,122,126
Taw Sein Ko 174 n.4
teacher 5, 6,19, 21 - 2, 24, 26, 28, 53,
75,128,131,132 - 5,153
tecattr“savatta 112
tec“varikatta 76
Tendai (sect) 174
theft 16
Theragth 32, 58,133
Theravdins
18,159,168,174
Theriya 18,104,145 -7,159,160
-1,167,168,16970,174
Thomas, E.J. 1,16
Thullaccaya 50, 62
Thullanand 150 -1
thullavajja 124
Tiöavatthraka 121,123,124,127
tiracchnavijj 62
Tissa Metteyya (Thera) 37
tisso sikkh 43, 44, 54, 63. See sikkh
Titthiyaparivsa 111,114,115,117. See Parivsa
traivedikaµ vrataµ 22
tutelage 112,121,132,133
Ubbhik 122,124
Ubhato Vibhaŗga 54, 79,155
Ubhato Vinaya 79
Udy“ 59, 70,164
Uddaka Rmaputta 6, 25
Uddesa 14,15, 77, 78 - 9, 90, 91, 94,
95,133
uddhambhgiya saµyojana 69 n.2
Ukkhepaniya kamma 108 -
9,112,118,121
ukkhitta 109
ukkhittnuvattik 150
Upajjhya 131 - 3
upakurvöa 22
upakkilesa 67, 68
Upli (Thera) 72,
79,156,168
Upananda 134
Upanisad (s) 22 - 4, 38
Upanisadic 23, 24,
27
uparibhvapariyya 67
Upasampad 10, 75, 82, 83,112,114 -
7,131,144,153, 165,173,174
upasampanna 52, 83
Upasena Vaŗgantaputta (Thera) 71,
90,164,166
upavsa 95
upekkh 30
Uposatha 15, 77, 78, 80, 91, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98,
99,100, 101,105,111,112,155,157- 9, 162,165,171,172; adiŹŹhna-uposatha 106
uposathgra 172,
411
Uposathakamma 77
uposathaŗga (= brahmacariya) 26
uposathapucchaka 104
Uruvela Kassapa (JaŹila) 25
uttarimanussadhamma 85
Vacchagotta (Paribbjaka) 115
Vcissara (Thera) 174
Vairocana 24
vajjapaŹicchdik 154
Vajjiputtaka 43, 51,
91,165
Vakkali (Thera) 72
Vassakra (Brahmin) 92
Vassvsa (= Rains retreat) 90,105,153
vassikasŹika 154
Veda (s) 22, 24
Vedic 1, 95,137
Velitota 175
vepullamahatta 49 See also savaŹŹhniya dhamma
Veraj 50
Verajabhnavra 71,162 - 3
Vessabhč (Buddha) 163
Vessavaöa (Mahrj) 70
veyyvacca (= brahmacariya) 26
Vibhaŗga 12,13,16, 53, 79 - 80,
82,127,155,156,157
vijjvimuttiphalasacchikiriyatthaµ
36
Vimalasra (Thera) 174
n.8,175,176
Vimativinodan“ (Vinaya T“k) 78,102,113,122,123,
125
Vimuttimagga 61, 66
Vinaya 11,12 -13,15,16,17,18,19, 46, 48,
53, 61 - 2, 65, 72, 74, 75, 79 - 80, 83, 87, 91, 96, 97,
99.104,105,108,109,115,119,120,122,123,124,125,126,127, 130,132,134,
135,146,150,156 -7,159 -
61,163,165,166,167,168,170,174,176
Vinayadhara (s) 10,12,156
Vinaya PiŹaka 4, 9,10 -11,12,13,14,15,17,18,19 -
20,25,47,50,52,53,54,58,59, 65, 77, 78, 86,101,107 -
8,111,115,116,117,119,122,129,131,135,155,156, 158,164,170
Vinayavinicchaya 80
vipassan 70, 71
Vipass“ (Buddha) 48,
94,161,162,163
virga 85
viriya 65
viriya (=brahmacariya) 26
virtue 3
visaµyoga 85
Visuddhimagga 44, 45, 53, 60, 61, 63, 64,
65
Vivddhikaraöa 108,126
VivaŹakasalkagha (=voting by open
ballot)
125
Vrata (ceremonies) 95
vypda 67, 68,
69
wife 137,139
Winternitz, M. 13,16
woman 137 - 47,148 - 51
yaja 21, 23,
25
yasagga 49
Yebhuyyasik 121,123 -
4,126
[i]Conventionalization and Assimilation in Religious Movements in Social Psychology
with special reference to the development of Buddhism and Christianity, p. 24,
Riddell Memorial Lectures, Twelfth Series, O.U.P. London, 1940.
[ii] Monier Williams, Buddhism., p. 75.
[iii] A.III. 224.
[iv] M.II. 120.
[v] See S. Dutt, Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 66 and Further Dialogues, II. SBB. VI. p. 160.
[vi] Given by Mrs. Rhys Davids as occurring at Vinaya Texts, SBE. XIII (edition not given), p. 112. [ See her Outlines of Buddhism, p.74 where she has made use of this translation.]. But the 1881 edition of the text which we have used has the following translation which we consider to be reliably accurate : 'They will understand the doctrine.'
[vii] For the correct and complete quotation see D.I. 85; M. I. 440; Vin. I. 315.
[viii] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 85.
[ix] Ibid. p. 72.
[x] Vism. I. 3.
[xi] Vibh. 245.
[xii] Ibid. 245-46.
[xiii] Vin.I.103.
[xiv] M.II.11. lists it under the four sammappadhna.
Ibid. pp. 95,128 list it under the five padhniyaŗga.
[xv] DA.II. 479.
[xvi] Monier Williams, Buddhism, pp.74-75.
[xvii] M.I. 80,82,237f ; Ud. 65.
[xviii] Oldenberg, Buddha, pp. 60-70.
[xix] S.Dutt, Ealy Buddhist Monachism, pp. 30-56.
[xx] Rhys Davids, Buddhism (Non-Christian Religious Systems) 1886, p.152.
Note: This is a revised edition and is the earliest edition available to us.
[xxi] Even the reprint which was made 26 years afterwards of this learned treatise has not witnessed a change of his view. See 1912 ed. p.152.
[xxii] Mrs. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, (Home University Library) 1912 ed. p. 204.
[xxiii] See Mrs. Rhys Davids, Buddhism (Revised edition, 1934), p.198f.
[xxiv] Mrs. Rhys Davids, Outlines of Buddhism, p. 63. See her Buddhism, (1934 ed.) p. 201.
[xxv] Ibid. p. 75.
[xxvi] Miss Horner, The Book of the Discipline, I. pp. xviii.
[xxvii] Monier Williams, Buddhism, p. 72.
[xxviii] Ibid.
[xxix] Vin.I. 80f.
[xxx] S. Dutt, Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 61.
[xxxi] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 91. Rhys Davids and Oldenberg too translate it as 'Let not two of you go the same way ' at Vinaya Texts I, SBE. XIII (1881), p.112. But Mrs. Rhys Davids quotes SBE.XIII (edition not given) as translating this statement as ' Go not singly but in pairs.' (See Outlines of Buddhism, p. 74.). Neither the grammar of this sentence nor the spirit in which it was made would allow us to accept this latter translation.
[xxxii] Miss Horner, Women Under Primitive Buddhism, p.115.
[xxxiii] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p.113.
[xxxiv] Ibid. p.110. n.84. and Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p.109. n.1.
[xxxv] S.Dutt, Buddha And Five After- Centuries, p. 66.
[xxxvi] M.I. 469f.
[xxxvii] M.I.24f, 95f.
[xxxviii] S.Dutt, Buddha And Five after-Centuries, p. 69. The word nissaya is used to refer to the minimum requirements of a Bhikkhu on which he subsists. They include food (piö¶apta), clothing (c“vara), shelter (sensana) and medicaments (gilnapaccaya-bhesajja-parikkhra) and are referred to as the Four Nissayas (cattro nissay). See Vin. I.58.
[xxxix] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 92.
[xl] Vin. I.58.
[xli] S.Dutt, Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 96.
[xlii] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 96.
[xliii] Ibid. p. 95. n. 23.
[xliv] S.Dutt, Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 70.
[xlv] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p.13
[xlvi] Ibid. p. 67.
[xlvii] Ibid. pp. 67-68.
[xlviii] Ibid. p. 68.
[xlix] Ibid. p. 69.
[l] Vin.I. 56.
[li] See S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 13.
[lii] M.III.10.
[liii] Vinaya Texts I. SBE. XIII. xii.
[liv] Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 331.
[lv] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p.13.
[lvi] Ibid. p.29.
[lvii] Ibid. p.23.
[lviii] See Ch. IV.
[lix] M.I. 445.
[lx] Vin.III. 9f.
[lxi] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 36.
[lxii] Ibid. p. 65.
[lxiii] D.II.100.
[lxiv] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 65.
[lxv] Evam eva pana udyi idh '
ekacce moghapuris idaµ pajahath ' ti may vuccamn te evam haµsu. Kim pan '
imassa appamattakassa oramattakassa.
adhisallikhatev ' yaµ samaöo ' ti - M.I.449.
Ko nu kho bhante hetu ko paccayo yena pubbe
appatarni c ' eva sikkhpadni ahesum bahutar ca bhikkhč aya
saöŹhahiµsu. Ko pana bhante hetu ko
paccayo yena etarahi bahutarni c ' eva sikkhpadni honti appatar ca bhikkhč
aya saöŹhahant“ ' ti - M.I. 445.
See also S.II.224.
Yo pana bhikkhu ptimokkhe uddissamne evam
vadeyya kiµ pana imehi khuddnukhuddakehi sikkhpadehi uddiŹŹhehi yvad ' eva
kukkuccya vihesya vilekhya samvattant“ ' ti sikkhpadavivaööake pcittiyaµ -
Vin.IV.143.
[lxvi] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 64.
[lxvii] Ibid. p. 66.
[lxviii] Ibid. p. 67.
[lxix] Vinaya Texts I, SBE.XIII, pp. ix-x.
[lxx] Vin. I. p. xvi.
[lxxi] Ibid.
[lxxii] Vinaya Texts I, SBE.XIII, p. xiv.
[lxxiii] Wiŗternitz, History of Indian Literature II, p. 24.
[lxxiv] Vin. II. 96. It is important to maintain the distinction between these suttas (sutta) and the texts of the Sutta PiŹaka which are referred to as Suttas or Suttantas, and are viewed as belonging to a sphere outside the Vinaya and Abhidhamma PiŹakas. Note : Anpatti na vivaööetukmo iŗgha tvaµ suttante v gthyo v abhidhammaµ v pariypuöassu pacch vinayaµ pariypuöissas“ ' ti bhaöati - Vin.IV.144.
[lxxv] VinA.VI.1197.
[lxxvi] Vin.II. 97.
[lxxvii] Rhys Davids, Buddhism (American Lectures), p. 54.
[lxxviii] Ch. IX. See also Ch.VIII.
[lxxix] Vinaya Texts. I. SBE. XIII. p. xi.
[lxxx] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, pp. 81-84.
[lxxxi] Ibid. p. 73.
[lxxxii] M.II. 8; III.10; A.I. 230; Vin.I.102; IV.143,144.
[lxxxiii] S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 81.
[lxxxiv] Ibid. p. 74.
[lxxxv] M.I. 33.
[lxxxvi] S.Dutt, op. cit. p. 75.
[lxxxvii] Vin.IV.143,144.
[lxxxviii] S.Dutt, op.cit. p. 85.
[lxxxix] Miss Horner, The Book of the Discipline, I. p. ix.
[xc] Rhys Davids, Buddhism, (American Lectures) p. 55.
[xci] Ibid. p. 56.
[xcii] Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, II. p. 24
[xciii] Vinaya Texts I. SBE. XIII. P. xx.
[xciv] E.J.Thomas, History of Buddhist Thought, p. 21.
[xcv] Vin.I. p. xxii.
[xcvi] But it is our belief that these observations on the Dhamma and the Vinaya do not justify the following remarks of B.C. Law with regard to the relation of the Vinaya to the Sutta PiŹaka:
'The consideration of all these facts cannot but lead one to surmise that the treatises of the VinayapiŹaka point to a sutta background in the Vinaya materials traceable in the nikyas particularly in the Aŗguttara. The sutta background of the Vinaya texts is clearly hinted at in the concluding words of the Patimokkha. Ettakaµ tassa bhagavato suttgataµ suttapariypannaµ anvaddhamsaµ uddesaµ gacchati. *
This is far from beuing true.The word sutta in this context has been unfortunately misunderstood. What it means is that the contents of the Ptimokkha recital exists as a collection of sutta or rules (note the name Suttavibhaŗga) which the Buddha has laid down. As for the relation of the Aŗguttara to the Vinaya, it is the Aŗguttara which draws freely and extensively from the Vinaya. In places, the Aŗguttara looks like an anthology of Vinaya material. Law's own reference to A.I. 98-100 should prove a sufficient indication of this tendency. The Vinaya contents of the Aŗguttara show more signs of development and editing than in the Vinaya PiŹaka. The reasons for laying down sikkhpada for the disciples as given at A.I. 98 total up to 12 while the standard lists in the Vinaya PiŹaka have only 10. (See Vin. III. 21.) The two additional items are: 1 . Consideration for laymen - gih“naµ anukampya and 2. To break up the power of miscreant groups - ppicchnam pakkhčpacchedaya. These evidently are additions to the original list of the Vinaya PiŹaka.
* See B.C. Law, History of Pali Literature, I. p.19.
[xcvii] W. Pachow, Comparative study of the Prtimok©a, p.11 .
[xcviii] See Vin.IV.126,143,152,153.
[xcix] SA.III. 230.
[c] VinA.I.19; DA.I.17; DhsA. 19
[ci] Vin.I. p. xiii.
[cii] Belvalkar and Ranade, History of Indian Philosophy, vol.2. p. 216.
[ciii] Ibid p. 135.
[civ] See źaŗkara's comment on Chnd. 6.1.1 He źvetaketo' nurčpaµ gurum kulasya no gatv vasa brahmacaryaµ. Na caitadyuktaµ yadasmatkul“no he somyanančcynadh“tya brahmabandhuriva bhavat“ti brhmaön bandhčn vyapadisati na svayaµ brhmaöavØtta iti.
[cv] Dvividho brahmacr“ pčrvatra pratipditah nai§thika upakurvna§ ceti. Medhtithibhsya on Manu. 3.1.
[cvi] ī sampteh §ar“rasya yastu §u§rčsate gurum sa gacchatyajas vipro brahmaöah sadma §svataµ - Manu. 2.244. The point of special interest here is Medhtithi's comment on 'brahmanah sadma §svataµ which reads as na punah samsraµ pratipadyata iti yvat - Ibid.
[cvii] Ibid. The commentary of Medhtithi countenances the possibility of explaining Brahman here either as a personal god or as the Paramtman. Brahma§abdena c ' etihsadar§ane devavi§esa§ caturvaktrah tasya sadma sthnavi§esah divi vidyate. Vedµtavdinµ tu brahma paramtm tasya sadma svarčpam eva tadbhvpattih.
[cviii] Sattriµsadbdikaµ caryaµ gurau traivedikaµ vrataµ tadardhikaµ pdikaµ v grahaöntikameva v - Manu. 3.1.
[cix] Kathaµ punartribhirvarsairvedah §akyo grah“tum. Bhavati ka§cin medhvitamah. Medhtithi's comment on Manu. 3.1.
[cx] AŹŹhacattl“saµ vassni komrabrahmacariyaµ carimsu te vijjcaraöapariyeŹŹhiµ acarum brhmaö pure - Sn. v.289. So aŹŹhacattl“sam vassni komrabrahmacariyaµ carati mante adh“yamno - A.III.224.
[cxi] AŹŹhacattl“saµ vassni komrabrahmacariyaµ carimsu te vijjcaraöapariyeŹŹhiµ acarum brhmaö pure - Sn. v.289. So aŹŹhacattl“sam vassni komrabrahmacariyaµ carati mante adh“yamno - A.III.224.
[cxii] Belvalkar and Ranade, History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 2. p.125.
[cxiii] Satyena labhyastapas hyesa tm samyagjnena brahmacaryena nityaµ- Muöd. 3.1.5.
[cxiv] Belvalkar and Ranade, History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 2. p. 135.
[cxv] Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upani©ads, p. 380.
Tesmevaisa brahmaloko yesµ tapo brahmacaryaµ yesu stayaµ pratisthitaµ. Tesmasau virajo brahmaloko na ye©u jihmamanØtaµ na my ceti - Prasna. 1.15.16.
[cxvi] Hume. op. cit. p. 224.
Sa enn brahma gamayate©a devapatho brahmapatha etena pratipadyamn imaµ mnavamvartaµ nvartante nvartante - Chnd. 4.15.5.
[cxvii] Tadya evaitaµ brahmalokaµ brahmacaryeönuvindanti tesmevai©a brahmalokah - Ibid. 8.4.3
[cxviii] Atha yadyaja itycak©ate brahmacaryameva tad... Ibid. 8.5.1.-3.
[cxix] Hume, op.cit. p. 266.
[cxx] Belvalkar and Ranade, History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 2. p. 135.
[cxxi] Brahmacaryaµ svdhyya grahaöya he bhavati vivat§ycryakule. źaŗkara on Chnd. 4.4.1.
[cxxii] źi©yatvavØtter brahmacaryasya prdhnycchisyh santo brahmacaryamč©uru©itavanta ityarthah. źaŗkara on BØh. 5.2.1.
[cxxiii] Tattatraivaµ satyetaµ brahmalokaµ brahmacaryeöa str“vi©ayatØ©ötygena.... pdayanti.
[cxxiv] Sarvatra samyagjnena yathbhčttmadar§anena brahmacaryeöa maithunsamacreöa....
[cxxv] Str“vi©ayatØ©ötygarčpabrahmacaryapčrvaka§strcryopade§din....
[cxxvi] He svetaketo' nurčpaµ gurum kulasya no gatv vasa brahmacaryaµ. Na caitadyuktaµ yadasmatkul“no he somynančcynadh“tya brahmabandhuriva bhavat“ti brhmaön bandhčn vyapadi§ati na svayaµ brhmaöavØtta iti.
[cxxvii] Vidyprptiprayojanagauravt tyaktargadve©amoher©ydido©aveva bhčtvo©atur brahmacaryaµ prajpatau. źaŗkara on Chnd. 8.7.3.
[cxxviii] Yo kho bhikkhave rgakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo idaµ brahmacariyapariyosnan ti - S.V. 8,16, 26.
[cxxix] yassa kassaci bhikkhave bhikkhussa v bhikkhuniy v cakkhu-vieyyesu rčpesu uppajjeyya chando v rgo v doso v paŹighaµ v ' pi cetaso tato cittaµ nivraye..... Na tvaµ arahas“ ' ti tato cittaµ nivraye cakkhuvieyyehi rčpehi... pe - S.IV.195.
[cxxx] Bloomfield, The Atharva-veda, p. 89.
[cxxxi] Griffith, The Hymns of the Atharva-veda, vol. II. p. 68. n.
[cxxxii] Ibid. XI. V. 1.
[cxxxiii] Ibid.
[cxxxiv] Ibid. XI. V. 5.
[cxxxv] Ibid.
[cxxxvi] Ibid. XI. V. 20, 21.
[cxxxvii] Ibid. XI.V. 22.
[cxxxviii] The term Bodhisatta is used throughout this thesis to refer only to Buddha Gotama during the thirtyfive years of his early life, prior to his enlightenment. This covers both the princely life of twentynine years under the name of Siddhatta and the six years of mendicancy during which he came to be called Samaöo Gotamo. Referring to this earlier period prior to his enlightenment, the Buddha calls himself the Bodhisatta : Pubbe ' va me bhikkhave sambodh anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattassa sato - M.I.24; S.II.10.
[cxxxix] Icchm ' ahaµ vuso klma imasmiµ dhammavinaye brahmacariyaµ caritun ' ti - M.I.163.
[cxl] Atha kho tesaµ dvdasanahutnaµ mgadhiknaµ brhmaöagahapatiknaµ etadahosi. Kinnukho mahsamaöo uruvelakassape brahmacariyaµ carati udhu uruvelakassapo mahsamane brahmcariyaµ carati - Vin. I. 36.
[cxli] Tena kho pana samayena sriputtamoggalln sajaye paribbjake brahmacariyaµ caranti - Vin.I. 39.
[cxlii] Atha kho assalyana sattannaµ brhmanis“naµ etaµ ahosi moghaµ vata no tapo aphalaµ brahmacariyan ' ti - M.II.155.
[cxliii] M.I. 514f. Also see Basham, The īj“vikas, p. 17f.
[cxliv] Abhijnmi kho pan ' haµ sriputta caturaŗgasamanngataµ brahmacariyaµ carit : tapass“ sudaµ homi paramatapass“ lčkhassudaµ homi paramalčkho jegucch“ sudaµ homi paramajegucch“ pavivitta ' ssudaµ homi paramapavivitto - M.I. 77.
[cxlv] Ettha pana ayaµ brahmacariyasaddo... imesu atthesu dissati - DA.I.177.
[cxlvi] Abhijnmi kho pan ' haµ sriputta caturaŗgasamanngataµ brahmacariyaµ carit tapassi sudaµ hom“ ' ti lomahaµsanasutte viriyaµ brahmacariyan ' ti vuttaµ - DA.I.179.
[cxlvii] J. I. 390.
[cxlviii] Lomahaµsana Sutta = Mahs“handa Sutta - M.I. 77.
[cxlix] Atthi nu kho ettha sro ' ti bhirakamicchtapaµ v“maµsanto caturaŗgasamanngataµ brahmacariyavsaµ vasim - J.I. 390
[cl] ...bhirakatapaµ v“maµsissm“ ' ti j“vakapabbajjaµ pabbajitv acelako ahosi. Ibid.
[cli] Evaµ caturaŗgasamanngataµ pana brahmacariyaµ caritv bodhisatto maraöakle upaŹŹhitaµ nirayanimittaµ disv idaµ vata samdnaµ niratthakan 'ti atv taµ khaöa ' eva taµ laddhiµ bhinditv sammdiŹŹhiµ gahetv devaloke nibbatti - Ibid.
[clii] See Supra p. 22. n. 3.
[cliii] BØh. 3.6; Tait. 2.6; Chnd. 6.3. See Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upani©ads. p. 21 f.
[cliv] Chnd. 3.14; KaŹha. 5.2; Muö¶. 2.2.11; Mö¶. 2.
[clv] S. I. 169.
[clvi] Ibid. 180.
[clvii] SA. I. 265.
[clviii] S.I.180.
[clix] Bhagavadg“t 5. 24.
[clx] Sr“madbhagavadg“trthapraksik (Adyar Library ed.), p.168.
[clxi] Ibid. 446. See. G“t 18. 53.
[clxii] Brahmabhčtamiti brahmhameva brahmeti brahmtmatvena siddho brahmabhčtah. Srimadbhagavadg“trthapraksik, 189.
[clxiii] Ahaµkraµ balaµ darpaµ kmaµ krodhaµ parigrahaµ vimucya nirmamah §nto brahmabhčyya kalpate - G“t 18.53.
[clxiv] Addhvauso kaccna bhagav jnaµ jnti passaµ passati cakkhubhčto öabhčto dhammabhčto brahmabhčto vatt pavatt atthassa ninnet amatassa dt dhammassm“ tathgato - M.I.111; III.195, 224; S.IV. 94.
[clxv] Tathgatassa h'etaµ vsettha adhivacanaµ dhammakyo iti ' pi brahmakyo iti ' pi dhammabhčto iti ' pi brahmabhčto iti ' p“ ' ti - D.III. 84.
[clxvi] Iti dhammakyo ass ' ti dhammakyo. Dhammakyatt eva brahmakyo. Dhammo hi seŹŹhaŹŹhena brahm ' ti vuccati. Dhammabhčto hi dhammasabhvo. Brahmabhčtatt eva brahmabhčto - DA.III.865.
[clxvii] Tassa evaµ jnato evaµ passato kmsav ' pi cittaµ vimuccati bhavsav 'pi cittaµ vimuccati avijjsav ' pi cittaµ vimuccati vimuttasmiµ vimuttan ' ti öaµ hoti kh“ö jti vusitaµ brahmacariyaµ kataµ karaö“yaµ nparaµ itthatty ' ti pajnti. Ayaµ vuccati bhikkhave puggalo nev ' attantapo nttaparitpannuyogaµ anuyutto na parantapo na paraparitpannuyogaµ anuyutto. So anattantapo aparantapo diŹŹh ' eva dhamme nicchto nibbuto s“tibhčto sukhapaŹisamved“ brahmabhčtena attan viharati - M.I. 384. 413.
[clxviii] Loke ančpalitt te brahmabhčt ansav - S.III. 83.
[clxix] See Dhammapada, vv. 397 ff. Brhmaöavagga.
Sabbasamyojanaµ chetv yo ve na paritassati
saŗgtigaµ visamyuttaµ tamahaµ brčmi brhmaöaµ, etc.etc.
[clxx] Sn. p. 50f.
[clxxi] Isayo pubbak suµ saatatt tapassino pacakmaguöe hitv attadatthaµ acrisum - Sn. v. 284.
[clxxii] Brahmacariya ca s“la ca ajjavaµ maddavaµ tapaµ soraccaµ avihiµsa ca khanti cpi avaööayuµ - Ibid. 292.
[clxxiii] Na jacc brhmaöo hoti na jacc hoti abrhmaöo kamman brhmaöo hoti kamman hoti abrhmaöo - Ibid. 650.
[clxxiv] Kamman vattat“ loko kamman
vattat“ paj kammanibandhan satt rathassö“ ' va yyato - Ibid. 654.
Tapena brahmacariyena samyamena damena ca
etena brhmaöo hoti etaµ brhmaöaµ
uttamaµ - 655.
[clxxv] Yvat bhikkhave sahass“lokadhtu mahbrahm tattha aggaµ akkhyati - A.V. 59f.
[clxxvi] Mahbrahmuno ' pi kho bhikkhave atth ' eva aatattaµ atthi vipariömo. Evaµ passaµ bhikkhave sutav ariyasvako tasmim ' pi nibbindati tasmiµ nibbindanto agge virajjati pageva h“nasmim - Ibid.
[clxxvii] Dčre ito brhmaö“ brahmaloko yasshutiµ paggaöhsi niccaµ - S.I.141.
[clxxviii] Ayameva ujumaggo ayam ajasyano niyyniko niyyti takkarassa brahmasahavyatya. Sv ' yam akkhto brhmaöena pokkharastin ' ti - D.I. 236.
[clxxix] Mayham kho bhante evam ahosi ime kho brhmaö brahmalokdhimutt. Yannčn ' haµ dhnajniµ brhmaöaµ brahmnaµ sahavyatya maggaµ deseyyan ' ti - M.II.195 f.
[clxxx] Sutaµ me ' taµ bho gotama samaöo gotamo brahmnaµ sahavyatya maggaµ deset“ ' ti. Sdhu no bhavaµ brahmnaµ sahavyatya maggaµ desetu ullumpatu bhavaµ gotamo brhmaöiµ pajan ' ti - D.I. 249.
[clxxxi] M.II.195.
[clxxxii] A.V. 59f.
[clxxxiii] M.II.195.
[clxxxiv] D.III. 223.
[clxxxv] Ayam pi kho dhnajni brahmnaµ sahavyatya maggo - M.II.195.
[clxxxvi] D.I. 250f.
[clxxxvii] So vata vseŹŹha apariggaho averacitto avypajjacitto asaŗkiliŹŹhacitto vasavatti bhikkhu kyassa bhed parammaraö apariggahassa... vasavattissa brahmuno sahavyčpago bhavissat“ ' ti Źhnaµ etaµ vijjati - D.I.252.
[clxxxviii] Rj kho pannanda makhdevo.... agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajito brahmacariyaµ cari. So cattro brahmavihre bhvetv kyassa bhed parammaraö brahmalokčpago ahosi - M.II. 76.
[clxxxix] Katamac ' nanda etarahi may kalyöaµ vaŹŹaµ nihitaµ ekanta-nibbidya virgya nirodhya upasamya abhiya sambodhya nibbnya samvattati. Ayam ' eva ariyo aŹŹhaŗgiko maggo seyyath“daµ sammdiŹŹhi .... sammsamdhi - M.II. 82.
[cxc] Puna ca paraµ bhikkhave bhikkhu aataraµ devanikyaµ panidhya brahmacariyaµ carati imin ' haµ s“lena v vatena v brahmacariyena v devo v bhavissmi devaataro v ' ti ... evaµ assyaµ pacamo cetaso vinibandho asamucchinno hoti - M.I.102.
[cxci] Yena kho j“vaka rgena yena dosena yena mohena vypdav assa so rgo so doso so moho tathgatassa pah“no ucchinnamčlo tlavatthukato anabhvakato yatiµ anuppdadhammo. Sace kho te j“vaka idaµ sandhya bhsitaµ anujnmi te etan ' ti - Ibid. 369f.
[cxcii] ibid. 38,297,369.
[cxciii] ibid. 424.
[cxciv] Mettaµ rhul ' ti kasm rabhi... Mettdibhvanya pana hot“ ' ti tdibhvassa kraöadassanatthaµ imaµ desanaµ rabhi - MA.III.140.
[cxcv] Arat“ ' ti arati pantasensanesu c ' eva adhikusalesu dhammesu ca ukkaöŹhitat - ibid.
[cxcvi] Tattha yasm dito ' va agriyabhčte satte vatthukmesu kilesakm mohayanti te abhibhuyya anagriyabhvaµ upagatnaµ pantesu v sensanesu aataraataresu v adhikusalesu dhammesu arati uppajjati. Vutta c ' etaµ pabbajitena kho vuso abhirati dukkar ' ti - SnA.II. 389.
[cxcvii] Pabbajitena panvuso kim dukkaran ' ti. Pabbajitena kho vuso abhirati dukkar ' ti - S.IV.260.
[cxcviii] S.II. 206, 208,218,267.
[cxcix] Idhvuso bhikkhu mettsahagatena.... upekkhsahagatena cetas ekaµ disaµ pharitv viharati......Ayaµ vuccat ' vuso appamö cetovimutti. Yvat kho vuso appamö cetovimuttiyo akupp tsaµ cetovimutti aggaµ akkhyati. S kho pana akupp cetovimutti su rgena su dosena su mohena - M.I. 297f.
[cc] Ibid. 129.
[cci] Uppajjate sace kodho vajja kakacčpamaµ - Thag. 445. See also M.I.189.
[ccii] So v“targo pavineyya dosaµ mettaµ cittaµ bhvayaµ appamöaµ rattim divaµ satataµ appamatto sabb dis pharate appamaaµ - Sn. v. 507.
[cciii] Mettaca sabbalokasmiµ
mnasaµ bhvaye aparimöaµ - Sn. v.150.
......brahmam etaµ vihraµ idha-m-hu
- Sn. 151.
[cciv] Puna ca paraµ gahapati bhikkhu mett-sahagatena... upekkh-sahagatena cetas ekaµ disaµ pharitv viharati.... So iti paŹisacikkhati ayam ' pi kho upekkh-cetovimutti abhisaŗkhat abhisacetayit. Yaµ kho pana kici abhisaŗkhataµ abhisacetayitaµ tadaniccam nirodhadhamman ' ti pajnti. So tattha Źhito ... anuttaraµ yogakkhemaµ anuppunti - M.I. 351.
[ccv] So dhammaµ deseti dikalyöaµ majjhekalyöµ pariyosnakalyöaµ stthaµ sabyajanaµ kevalaparipuööaµ parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ pakseti - D.I. 62; M.I.179, 267 etc.
[ccvi] Dukkha: This is a word whose meaning in Buddhism is so wide that it cannot easily be given in a single word like pain, suffering, or sorrow. Sometimes the word Ill is used to cover the totality of its connotation. Each one of these words can be regarded as being valid in its own context.
[ccvii] See also S.II. 24.
[ccviii] Op.cit. 10-11
[ccix] Tassa mayham bhikkave yoniso manasikr ahu paya abhisamayo avijjya kho sati saŗkhr honti avijj paccay saŗkhr ' ti. Iti h ' idaµ avijjpaccay saŗkhr saŗkhrapaccay viöaµ...... Evam etassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo hoti... Evam etassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti - S.II.10f.
[ccx] M.I. 46f.
[ccxi] Vin.I.10.
[ccxii] S.II.10.
[ccxiii] Op.cit. 5.
[ccxiv] D.II.1f. They are Vipassi, Sikkh“, Vessabhč, Kakusandha, Kongamaöa and Kassapa and conform, more or less, to the pattern of the historical Buddha Gotama.
[ccxv] Pubbe ' va me bhikkhave sambodh anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattassa sato etadahosi. Kicchaµ vat ' yaµ loko panno jyati ca j“yati ca m“yati ca cavati ca uppajjati ca. Atha ca pan ' imassa dukkhassa nissaraöaµ nappajnti. Kud ' ssu nma imassa dukkhassa nissaraöaµ payissati jarmaraöass ' ti. Tassa mayhaµ bhikkhave etadahosi. Kimhi nu kho sati jarmaraöaµ hoti kiµ paccay jarmaraöan ' ti - S.II.10.
[ccxvi] Vin.I. 40.
[ccxvii] Adhigato kho me ayaµ dhammo gambh“ro duddaso duranubodho... layaramya kho pana pajya layaratya layasammuditya duddasaµ idaµ Źhnaµ yadidaµ idappaccayat paŹiccasamuppdo idam ' pi kho Źhnaµ duddasaµ yadidaµ sabbasaŗkhrasamatho sabbčpadhipaŹinissaggo taöhakkhayo virgo nirodho nibbnaµ. M.I.167.
[ccxviii] See Mrs Rhys Davids, Skya, p.133f.
[ccxix] Vuttaµ kho pan ' etaµ bhagavat yo paticcasamuppdam passati so dhammaµ passati yo dhammaµ passati so paŹiccasamuppdaµ passat“ ' ti - M.I.190.f. See Mrs. Rhys Davids, Ibid.
[ccxx] Gambh“ro c ' yaµ nanda paticcasamuppdo gambh“rvabhso ca. Etassa nanda dhammassa ananubodh appaŹivedh evaµ ayaµ paj tantkulakajt gulguöŹhikajt mujababbajabhčt apyaµ duggatiµ samsraµ n ' tivattati - D.II. 55.
[ccxxi] Idaµ kho pana bhikkhave dukkhaµ ariyasaccaµ jti ' pi dukkh jar ' pi dukkh vydhi ' pi dukkh maraöaµ ' pi dukkhaµ....Vin.I.10; S.V.420f.
[ccxxii] Appiyehi sampayogo dukkho piyehi vippayogo dukkho yaµ ' p ' icchaµ na labhati taµ ' pi dukkhaµ saŗkhittena pacupdnakkhandh ' pi dukkh - Vin.I.10; S.V.420f.
[ccxxiii] Hare, Woven Cadences, SBB.XV. pp.115-6; Sn. vv. 766,767,769,770.
[ccxxiv] Ayaµ ' pi bhikkhave kmnaµ d“navo sandiŹŹhiko dukkhakkhandho kmahetu kmanidnaµ kmdhikaraöaµ kmnaµ eva hetu - M.I.85f.
[ccxxv] Idha no bhante aatitthiy paribbjak amhe evaµ pucchanti kimatthiyam vuso samaöe gotame brahmacariyaµ vussat“ ' ti. Evaµ putŹh mayaµ bhante tesam aatitthiynaµ paribbjaknaµ evaµ vykaroma dukkhassa kho vuso pariatthaµ bhagavati brahmacariyaµ vussat“ ' ti - S.IV.51.
[ccxxvi] S.V.27- 29.
[ccxxvii] Y ca kho ayaµ bhikkhave akupp cetovimutti etadatthaµ bhikkhave brahmacariyaµ etaµ sraµ etaµ pariyosnan ' ti - M.I.197.
[ccxxviii] Nibbnogadhaµ hi vuso viskha brahmacariyaµ nibbnaparyanam nibbnapariyosnaµ - M.I. 304. See also .S.III.189; V.29.
[ccxxix] Acari bhikkhave paö¶ito brahmacariyaµ samm dukkhakkhayya. Tasm paö¶ito kyassa bhed na kyčpago hoti. So akyčpago samno parimuccati jtiy jarmaraöena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upysehi parimuccati dukkhasm ' ti vadmi - S.II. 24-25.
[ccxxx] M.I. 23,38,67; II. 39,61. S.I.140.161; II.21- 22; III.36.
[ccxxxi] Ibid.
[ccxxxii] D.I. 62; M.I.179,267,344.
[ccxxxiii] Yad etaµ sikkhattayaµ brahmacariyaµ ekaµ ' pi divasaµ akhaö¶aµ katv carimakacittaµ ppetabbatya ekantaparipuööaµ ekadivasaµ ' pi ca saŗkilesamalena amalinaµ katv carimacittaµ ppetabbatya ekantaparisuddham saŗkhalikhitaµ likhitasaŗkhasadisaµ dhotasaŗkhasappaŹibhgaµ caritabbaµ .... MA. II. 205.
[ccxxxiv] Brahmacariyan ' ti seŹŹhaŹŹhena brahmabhčtaµ cariyaµ brahmabhčtnaµ v buddhd“naµ cariyan ' ti vuttaµ hoti - DA.I.179; MA.II 204.
[ccxxxv] Pah“najtimaraöo brahmacariyassa keval“ pannabhro visaµyutto katakicco ansavo - A.I.162.
[ccxxxvi] Brahmacariyassa keval“ ' ti brahmacariyassa kevalena samanngato paripuööabhvena yutto 'i attho. Kh“ösavo hi sakalabrahmacr“ nma hoti - AA.II.258.
[ccxxxvii] Evaµ desento ca sikkhattaya-saµgahitam sakalassanabrahmacariyaµ pakseti - DA.I.179.
[ccxxxviii] Katama ca bhikkhave brahmacariyam. Ayaµ eva ariyo aŹŹhaŗgiko maggo seyyath“daµ sammdiŹŹhi......sammsamdhi. Katamni ca bhikkhave brahmacariyaphalni. Sotpattiphalaµ .......arahattaphalaµ. Imni vuccanti bhikkhave brahmacariyaphaln“ ' ti - S.V.26.
[ccxxxix] Arahattamaggasaökhtassa brahmacariyassa anuttaraµ ogadham uttamapatiŹŹhbhčtaµ nibbnaµ - AA. II.267.
[ccxl] M. I.431.
[ccxli] Yath yath ' haµ bhante bhagavat dhammaµ desitaµ jnmi na ' y ' idaµ sukaraµ agraµ ajjhvasat ekantaparipuööaµ ekantaparisuddhaµ saŗkhalikhitaµ brahmacariyaµ carituµ. Icchm ' ahaµ bhante kesamassuµ ohretv ksyni vattśni acchdetv agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajituµ - M.II. 66 f.
[ccxlii] Yassatthya kulaputt sammadeva agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajanti tadanuttaraµ brahmacariyapariyosnam diŹŹhe ' va dhamme sayaµ abhi sacchikatv upasampajja vihsi - M.I.40,172,477.
[ccxliii] Pabbajjaµ kittayissmi yath pabbaji cakkhum yath v“maµsamno so pabbajjaµ samarocayi. Sambdho ' yaµ gharvso rajassyatanaµ iti abbhokso ca pabbajj iti disvna pabbaji - Sn. vv. 405-6.
[ccxliv] Abrahmacariyaµ pahya brahmacr“ hoti virato methun gmadhamm - D.I.63; M.II.181; III. 33.
[ccxlv] Sn. 814f.
[ccxlvi] Methunaµ anuyuttassa metteyy ' ti bhagav mussate 'v ' pi ssanaµ - Sn. v. 815.
[ccxlvii] Mussatev ' pi ssanan ' ti dv“hi kraöehi ssanaµ mussati pariyattissanam ' pi mussati patipattissanam ' pi mussati - Mahniddesa I.143f.
[ccxlviii] Micch ca paŹipajjati etaµ tasmiµ anriyam - Sn. v. 815.
[ccxlix] Eko pubbe caritvna methunaµ yo nisevati ynaµ bhantaµ va taµ loke h“naµ hu puthujjanaµ - Sn. v. 816.
[ccl] Yaso kitti ca y pubbe hyatev ' pi tassa s etam ' pi disv sikkhetha methunaµ vippahtave - Sn. v. 817.
[ccli] Itth“ malaµ brahmacariyassa etth ' yaµ sajjate paj - S. I. 38.
[cclii] Supra p.24.
[ccliii] Sdhu bhikkhave sdhu kho me tumhe bhikkhave evaµ dhammaµ desitaµ jntha. Anekapariyyena hi vo bhikkhave antaryik dhamm vutt may ala ca pana te paŹisevato antaryya. Appassd km vutt may bahudukkh bahčpys d“navo ettha bhiyyo - M. I.133.
[ccliv] .... upsak ca gih“ odtavasan brahmacrino rdhak upsak ca gih“ odtavasan kmabhogino rdhak. Evaµ idam brahmacariyaµ paripčraµ ten ' aŗgena - M.I. 492.
[cclv] Santi kho pana me cunda etarahi upsak svak gih“ odtavasan brahmacrino - D.III.124.
[cclvi] D.III.124. Also M.I. 492.
[cclvii] So vata bhikkhave bhikkhu evaµ caranto evaµ viharanto sikkhaµ paccakkhya h“nyvattissat“ ' ti n ' etaµ Źhnaµ vijjati. Taµ kissa hetu. yaµ hi tam bhikkhave cittaµ d“gharattaµ vivekaninnaµ vivekaponaµ vivekapabbhraµ taµ vata h“nya vattissat“ ' ti n ' etaµ Źhnaµ vijjati - S.IV.191.
[cclviii] Idha pana bhikkhave ekacco kulaputto saddh agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajito hoti otiööo ' mhi jtiy jarmaraöena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upysehi dukkhotiööo dukkhapareto app ' eva nma imassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa antakiriy payeth ' ti. - M. I. 196,460; A.I.147.
[cclix] Nay ' idaµ sukaram agraµ ajjhvasat ekantaparipuööaµ ekanta- parisuddhaµ saŗkhalikhitaµ brahmacariyaµ carituµ - D.I. 63; M.I.179,267,344.
[cclx] Socanti jan mamyite na hi santi nicc pariggah vinbhvasantaµ ev ' idaµ iti disvngraµ nvase - Sn. v. 805.
[cclxi] D.I. 63; M.I.179,267,344.
[cclxii] Sambdho gharvso ' ti sace ' pi saŹŹhihatthe ghare yojanasatantare v dve jayampatik vasanti tath ' pi tesaµ sakicanapalibodhaŹŹhena gharvso sambdho ye ' va. Rajopatho ' ti rgarajd“naµ uŹŹhnaŹŹhnan ' ti MahŹŹhakathyaµ vuttaµ - DA.I.180; SA.II.179; AA.III.187.
[cclxiii] Idha me aggivessana pubbe ' va sambodh anabhisambuddhassa bodhisattass' eva sato etadahosi. Sambdho gharvso ...... agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajeyyan ' ti - M.I. 240.
[cclxiv] Jahanti putte sappa tato t“ tato dhanaµ pabbajanti mahv“r ngo chetv ' va bandhanaµ - Thig. 301.
[cclxv] Yassatthya kulaputt sammad ' eva agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajanti tadanuttaraµ brahmacariyapariyosnaµ diŹŹh ' eva dhamme sayaµ abhi sacchikatv upasampajja viharissath ' ti - M.1.40,172,477.
[cclxvi] Ohrayitv gihivyajanni sachinnapatto yath pricchatto ksyavattho abhinikkhamitv eko care khaggavisöakappo - Sn. v. 64.
[cclxvii] So eva kho te mahnma dhammo ajjhattaµ appah“no yena te ekad lobhadhamm ' pi cittaµ pariydya tiŹŹhanti dosadhamm ' pi. cittaµ pariydya tiŹŹhanti mohadhamm ' pi cittµ pariydya tiŹŹhanti. So ca hi te mahnma dhammo ajjhattaµ pah“no abhavissa na tvaµ agraµ ajjhvaseyysi na kme paribhujeyysi - M.I. 91
[cclxviii] Idha pan ' haµ bhante bhikkhč passmi yvaj“vaµ pöakoŹikaµ parisuddhaµ brahmacariyaµ carante - M.II.120.
[cclxix] araµ me idha ubbandhaµ ya ' ca h“naµ pun ' care - Thig. 80.
[cclxx] Satthaµ v harissmi ko attho j“vitena me kathaµ hi sikkhaµ paccakkhaµ klaµ kubbetha mdiso - Thag. 407.
[cclxxi] Maraöam h ' etaµ bhikkhave ariyassa vinaye yo sikkhaµ paccakkhya h“nyvattati - S.II. 271.
[cclxxii] Sikh“ yath n“lag“vo vihaŗgamo haµsassa nopeti javaµ kudcanaµ evaµ gih“ nnukaroti bhikkhuno munino vivittassa vanamhi jhyato - Sn. v. 221.
[cclxxiii] Tatr ' pi tvaµ phagguna ye gehasit chand ye gehasit vitakk te pajaheyysi - M.I.123.
[cclxxiv] Seyyathpi nma pakkh“ sakuöo yena yen ' eva ¶eti sapattabhro ' va ¶eti evam ' eva bhikkhu santuŹŹho hoti kyaparihrikena c“varena kucchiparihrikena piö¶aptena yena yen ' eva pakkamati samdy ' eva pakkamati - M.I. 180,268
[cclxxv] Manuss ujjhyanti kh“yanti vipcenti aputtakatya paŹipanno samaöo gotamo vedhavyya paŹipanno samaöo gotamo kulčpacchedya paŹipanno samaöo gotamo - Vin.I. 43.
[cclxxvi] Ptubhčt kho me tta kumra devadčt dissanti sirasmiµ phalitni jtni. Bhutt kho pana me mnusak km. Samayo dibbe kme pariyesituµ - M.II. 75.
[cclxxvii] Cattr ' imni bho raŹŹhapla prijuni yehi prijuehi samanngat idh' ekacce kesamassum ohretv ksyni vatthni acchdetv agrasm anagriyaµ pabbajanti. Katamni cattri. Jarprijuaµ vydhiprijuaµ bhogaprijuaµ tiprijuaµ - M.I. 66.
[cclxxviii] Lčkhappasann hi vuso manuss - Vin. III. 171.
[cclxxix] Na kho vuso gotama sukhena sukhaµ adhigantabbaµ dukkhena kho sukhaµ adhigantabbaµ - M.I. 93.
[cclxxx] Supra p. 26.
[cclxxxi] ...yo c ' yaµ attakilamathnuyogo dukkho anatthasamhito - Vin. I.10.
[cclxxxii] Na kho pan ' haµ imya kaŹukya dukkarakrikya adhigacchmi uttariµ manussadhamm alamariyaöadassanavisesaµ. Siy nu kho ao maggo bodhy ' ti - M.I. 246.
[cclxxxiii] So evam ha atthi vo nigaöŹh pubbe ppaµ kammaµ kataµ. Taµ imya kaŹukya dukkarakrikya nijjaretha - Ibid. -93.
[cclxxxiv] Sn. vv. 433,434.
[cclxxxv] SnA.II. 389.
[cclxxxvi] Nad“naµ api sotni ayaµ vto visosaye ki ca me pahitattassa lohitaµ nčpasussaye - Sn. v. 433.
[cclxxxvii] Atthi saddhh tato viriyaµ pa ca mama vijjati evaµ maµ pahitattam ' pi kiµ j“vaµ anupucchasi - Sn. v. 432.
[cclxxxviii] Api ca kho me aticiram anuvitakkayato anuvicrayato kyo kilameyya kye kilante cittaµ čhaeyya čhate citte r cittaµ samdhimh ' ti - M.I.116.
[cclxxxix] M.I. 77f. 92. Also see A. I 240f. under c“varapaviveka, piö¶aptapaviveka and sensanapaviveka.
[ccxc] Na kho ahaµ tassa sukhassa bhymi yaµ taµ sukhaµ aatr ' eva kmehi aatra akusalehi dhammeh“ ' ti. Tassa mayhaµ aggivessana etadahosi. Na kho taµ sukaraµ sukhaµ adhigantuµ evaµ adhimattakasimnaµ pattakyena.Yannčn ' haµ oĀrikaµ hraµ hreyyaµ odanakummsan ' ti - M.I. 247.
[ccxci] Etha tumhe ' pi bhikkhave eksanabhojanaµ bhujatha. Eksanabhojanaµ kho bhikkhave tumhe ' pi bhujamn appbdhata ca sajnissatha apptaŗkata ca lahuŹŹhna ca bala ca phsuvihra c ' ti - M.I.124
[ccxcii] Ehi tvaµ bhikkhu bhojane mattau hohi paŹisaŗkh yoniso hraµ hreyysi n ' eva davya na madya na maö¶anya na vibhčsanya yvad ' eva imassa kyassa Źhitiy ypanya vihimsčparatiy brahmacariynuggahya - M .III. 2. See also M.I.10,273,355; II.138.
[ccxciii] A.I.147f.
[ccxciv] UttiŹŹhapiö¶o hro pčtimutta ca bhesajaµ sensanaµ rukkhamčlaµ paµsukčla ca c“varaµ yass' ete abhisambhutv sa ve ctuddiso naro - Thag. 1059.
[ccxcv] M.I.10.158; Vin. I. 58 Also infra pp.175ff.
[ccxcvi] Ime kho samaö sakyaputtiy sukhas“l sukhasamcr subhojanni bhujitv nivtesu sayanesu sayanti - Vin. I. 77f.
[ccxcvii] N ' haµ vuso etaµkraö pabbajito piö¶ya carissm“ ' ti. Sace me dassatha bhujissmi no ce me dassatha vibbhamissm“ ' ti - Vin. I. 57f.
[ccxcviii] Ime kho samaö sakyaputŹiy dhammacrino samacrino brahmacrino saccavdino s“lavanto kalyöadhamm - Vin. I. 73.
[ccxcix] Sace kho mayaµ samaöesu sakyaputtiyesu pabbajeyyma evaµ mayam pp ca virameyyma kalyöa ca kareyym ' ti - Ibid.
[ccc] A.III. 330.
[ccci] A.III. 330. Appamdagravat and paŹisanthragravat
331. Hirigravat and otappagravat
423. Sovacassat and kalynamittat
[cccii] A.I. 230 f .
[ccciii] MA.II. 313.
[ccciv] MA.I.157.
[cccv] See Chapter V.
[cccvi] Dialogues of the Buddha I [ SBB.II.], p. 59.
[cccvii] DA.I. 182.
[cccviii] M.I. 355.
[cccix] Vism.I.1 ff.
[cccx] S.I.13,165.
[cccxi] M.III. 2.
[cccxii] M.III. 134.
[cccxiii] . D.I. 63-69. Milindapaha too, recognises this threefold division. Miln. 399.
[cccxiv] M.I. 179 f, 345 f.
[cccxv] D.I. 64 a.
tulkčŹa-kaµsakčŹa-mnakčŹa.
b.
ukkoŹaöa-vacana-nikati-sciyoga
c.
chedana-vadhabandhana-viparmosa-lopasahaskra.
[cccxvi] M.I. 445.
[cccxvii] M.I. 437.
[cccxviii] D.I. 64.
[cccxix] Vin.IV. 85 : Pc. 37.
[cccxx] Ibid.
[cccxxi] Vin.IV.143.
[cccxxii] VinA.I. 224.
[cccxxiii] VinA.I. 213.
[cccxxiv] Supra p. 45 f.
[cccxxv] VinA. I. 213.
[cccxxvi] M.I. 445.
[cccxxvii] S.II. 224.
[cccxxviii] Vin.III. 9 ff.
[cccxxix] For a different type of Ptimokkha ritual which is said to have been adopted by the Buddhas of the past see Mahpadna Sutta. (D.II. 48 f) and īnandattherauposathapahavatthu (DhpA.III. 236 f.).
[cccxxx] D.II.1-54.
[cccxxxi] S.II. 5 ff.
[cccxxxii] Supra p. 48.
[cccxxxiii] Vin.III. 30, 33 etc. under Prjika I ; Ibid.116 under Saŗghdisesa I.
[cccxxxiv] Ibid. 36 under Prjika I ; Ibid.118 under Saŗghdisesa. I.
[cccxxxv] Vin. IV. II. under Pcittiya 2.
[cccxxxvi] Ibid. 185 ff.
[cccxxxvii] MA.III. 154 ff.
[cccxxxviii] VinA.I. 213.
[cccxxxix] Vin.III. 21; IV. 9. See A.I. 98. for an enlarged list. Also see supra, p.17.n.1.
[cccxl] M.I. 33, 355; III. 2,134; A.II.14 etc.
[cccxli] Vin. I. 83.
[cccxlii] See Smaaphala Sutta : D.I. 63 f.
[cccxliii] S.II.167 f.
[cccxliv] M.I. 47.
[cccxlv] See Pcittiya 51 : Vin. IV.108-10.
[cccxlvi] J.I. 360 f.
[cccxlvii] M.I.123 ff., 271 ff. ; II. 239.
[cccxlviii] AA. III. 217, 228, 410.
[cccxlix] See also M.I. 33, 36; III. 2,134; S.V.187; A.II.14.
[cccl] M.II. 27.
[cccli] D.I. 70-71; M.I.179-80, 267-68, 345-46.
[ccclii] See also M.I.179 ff, 267 ff, 345 f.
[cccliii] A.IV. 99.
[cccliv] A.IV. 336.
[ccclv] M.I. 462. Also A.III. 95.
[ccclvi] Sn. v. 144.
[ccclvii] D.III. 224 f.
[ccclviii] DA.III.1009 f.
[ccclix] DA.III. 1017.
[ccclx] Ibid. 1016.
[ccclxi] S.II. 194.
[ccclxii] M.III. 2,134.
[ccclxiii] M.I.124, 437, 448.
[ccclxiv] M.I. 38.
[ccclxv] M.III. 2.
[ccclxvi] M.I. 448.
[ccclxvii] Ibid. 473.
[ccclxviii] Vin.IV. 76 f.
[ccclxix] Ibid. 81.
[ccclxx] Ibid. 85.
[ccclxxi] S.V.132; A.IV. 46.
[ccclxxii] A.IV. 49.
[ccclxxiii] S.II. 218.
[ccclxxiv] A.I.113.
[ccclxxv] Vism. I.15 f.
[ccclxxvi] D.I. 71; M.I.181.
[ccclxxvii] Ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto ' ti ettha ptimokkhan ' ti sikkhpadas“laµ - Vism. I. 16.
[ccclxxviii] Vinayo nma buddhassanassa yu vinaye Źhite ssanaµ Źhitaµ hoti - DA.I.11.
[ccclxxix] Vimuttimagga : The Path of Freedom. Introduction p. xliv.
[ccclxxx] Ibid. 17.
[ccclxxxi] Vism. I. 20 f.
[ccclxxxii] Ibid. 16, 30. It must be mentioned here that Buddhaghosa, in his definition of j“vaprisuddhis“la, first refers to the six rules drawn from the Suttavibhaŗga and then to the conditions discussed under s“la. This is apparently due to the overwhelming authority which the Vinaya had acquired in his day.
[ccclxxxiii] D.I. 8. Sec. 20; Ibid. 67 Sec. 55.
[ccclxxxiv] Katamo ca bhikkhave micch j“vo. Kuhan lapan nemittakat nippesikat lbhena lbhaµ nijigiµsanat. Ayaµ bhikkhave micch j“vo - M.III. 75.
[ccclxxxv] Iti din nayena brahmajle vuttnaµ anekesaµ gahaöaµ veditabbaµ - Vism. I. 30. Also see Mahs“la at D.I. 9 f, 67 f.
[ccclxxxvi] īj“vahetu j“vakraö ppiccho ... bhujati. Ayaµ s j“vavipatti sammat - Vin.V.146.
[ccclxxxvii] Vism.I. 22
[ccclxxxviii] Ibid. 16, 30.
[ccclxxxix] īj“vaprisuddhim ' pi kho ahaµ thapati s“lasmiµ vadmi - M.II. 27. See also items 37-43 in the lists of s“la given in the Brahmajla and Smaaphala Suttas.
[cccxc] Vism. I. 16, 30.
[cccxci] D.I. 63.
[cccxcii] DA.I. 181 f.
[cccxciii] The clause which pertains to the Thullaccaya offence occurs outside the Ptimokkha but is still within the Suttavibhaŗga.
[cccxciv] Vism. I.16.
[cccxcv] M.I.10.
[cccxcvi] Vism.I.16
[cccxcvii] Supra p. 58, 60.
[cccxcviii] Vism.I. 30 f.
[cccxcix] Pts. I. 42.
[cd] Vism. I. 46.
[cdi] Pts. I. 42 f.
[cdii] Supra p. 61.
[cdiii] Arahattamaggena sabbakilesnaµ pahnaµ s“laµ - Pts. I. 47.
[cdiv] M.I. 33.
[cdv] Also SA.III. 230.
[cdvi] Ptimokkhasaµvarasaµvuto ' ti catunnaµ s“lnaµ jeŹŹhakas“laµ dassento evam ha - SA.III. 230.
[cdvii] Itarni pana t“ni s“lan ' ti vuttaŹŹhnaµ nma natth“ ' ti vatv ananujnanto ha. Indriyasaµvaro nma chadvrarakkhanamattaµ eva. īj“vaprisuddhi dhammen ' eva samena paccayuppattimattakaµ paŹiladdhapaccaye idamatthan ' ti paccavekkhitv paribhujanamattakaµ. Nippariyyena ptimokkhasaµvaro ' va s“laµ - SA.III 230. Also MA.I.155.
[cdviii] Sattame kyasucaritavac“sucaritni ptimokkhasaµvaras“laµ manosucaritaµ itarni t“ni s“ln“ ' ti catuprisuddhis“laµ kathitaµ hoti - SA.III .230.
[cdix] Kyikavcasikaajjhcranisedhanato c ' esa kyaµ vcaca vineti. Tasm vividhanayatt visesanayatt kyavcnaca vinayanato vinayo ' ti akkhto - VinA. I.19. See also DA.I.17. and DhsA.I.17.
[cdx] SA.III. 230.
[cdxi] MA.II.5-6.
[cdxii] Vism.I. 35, 36, 40, 43.
[cdxiii] Ibid..43 f.
[cdxiv] Ibid.43-44.
[cdxv] Tatryam di bhavati idha paassa bhikkhuno indriyagutti santuŹŹhi ptimokkhe ca saµvaro. DhA.IV.107.v. 375.
[cdxvi] Tatra indriyagutt“ ' ti indriyasaµvaro santuŹŹh“ ' ti catupaccayasantoso. Tena j“vaprisuddhi c ' eva paccayasannissita ca s“laµ kathitaµ - DhA.IV. III.
[cdxvii] Vimuttimagga :The Path of Freedom. p.24.
[cdxviii] Dasakammapatha are the ten modes of acting classified under thought (3), word (4) and deed (3).
[cdxix] M.I. 36.
[cdxx] See also M.I. 521; II. 226.
[cdxxi] M.I. 60,144, 412.
[cdxxii] Sn. v. 66.
[cdxxiii] S.V.24.
[cdxxiv] M.I. 36; S.V. 92, 94,108; Sn. v. 66.
[cdxxv] M.I. 361; III.275.
[cdxxvi] See D.I. 71 and 246.
[cdxxvii] M.I. 433.
[cdxxviii] Ibid. 47.
[cdxxix] D.I. 71. The paca n“varaöa are abhijjh (kmacchanda), vypda, th“namiddha, uddhaccakukkucca and vicikicch.
[cdxxx] M.I. 36.
[cdxxxi] M.I.141,465. The five orambhgiya saµyojana are sakkyadiŹŹhi, vicikicch, s“labbataparmsa, kmacchanda and vypda.
[cdxxxii] Note : As a samyojana, only one aspect of rga, viz. kmarga (kmacchanda) seems to be eliminated at the stage of Angmin. Even under the uddhambhgiya saµyojana an aspect of rga seems to linger on under the names of rčparga and arčparga. It is also sometimes referred to as bhavarga.
[cdxxxiii] The five uddhambhgiya saµyojana consist of rčparga, arčparga, mna, uddhacca and avijj.
[cdxxxiv] M.I. 37.
[cdxxxv] Ibid. 42.
[cdxxxvi] Also M.I. 42, 97.
[cdxxxvii] M.II. 266; III. 302; S.V.157.
[cdxxxviii] Vin. III. 171.
[cdxxxix] A.III. 138.
[cdxl] M.I. 33; A.V.131.
[cdxli] Also. A.IV. 21.
[cdxlii] See also A.V. 202.
[cdxliii] Vin. III. 8.
[cdxliv] Thag. 436-7
[cdxlv] Rahula, History of Buddhism in Ceylon, p.199 f.
[cdxlvi] Vin. I. 95 f. This is the modified procedure. The original suggestion was that the Nissayas be made known before the conferment of Upasampad. See Vin. I. 58. See supra. p. 42.
[cdxlvii] Vin. III .171.
[cdxlviii] M.I. 30-31.
[cdxlix] M.I. 30.
[cdl] Ibid. 31.
[cdli] Ibid. 214; S.II.187, 202.
[cdlii] A.III. 108 f.
[cdliii] S.II. 208 f.
[cdliv] M.I. 438,440 f, 473; A.I. 230.
[cdlv] A .I. 230 . See Chapter IX on the Ritual of the Ptimokkha.
[cdlvi] See infra p. 370.
[cdlvii] Pc. 72 and 73 presuppose the existence of the Ptimokkha recital. See Vin.IV.143 f.
[cdlviii] Vin.I. p. xv.
[cdlix] Vin.III. 21; IV.185.
[cdlx] Vin.I. p. xv.
[cdlxi] Vinaya Texts I [ SBE. XIII ], p. xi.
[cdlxii] Whether one holds the Commentarial tradition in high esteem or not, one cannot fail to be impressed here by the fact that this interpretation seems to be more than adquately supported by the evidence of the Canonical texts.
[cdlxiii] S.Dutt, Buddha and five After-Centuries, p.77.
[cdlxiv] Vin.III.178.
[cdlxv] M.III.10 ; A.1.230 ; Vin.IV.144.
[cdlxvi] Vin.IV.144.
[cdlxvii] Taisho, Vol.22. p.127B.
[cdlxviii] Vin.II. 96 f.
[cdlxix] Vin.1. 65
[cdlxx] Rhys Davids has discovered in a Burmese manuscript the reading ubhato vibhange in place of this. See Vinaya Texts III [ SBE.XX. ], p. 376. n.1. See also B.C. Law, History of Pali Literature I. p.16. We are fully in agreement with the view expressed by Rhys Davids regarding this reading. Strange enough, we also discover the Buddha Jayanti Tripitaka Series [ Sri Lankan Edition ] adopting the ubhato vibhaŗge and reporting that the Burmese has ubhato vinaye. We recently discovered that the newly reprinted edition of the Cambodian Tripitaka at the Buddhist Institute in Phnom Penh preserves the reading ubhato vinaye and reports Burmese as having ubhato vibhaŗge. We are of the opinion that ubhato vinaye is the more meaningful reading in this context.
[cdlxxi] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p.73.
[cdlxxii] Vin.I. p. xxix.
[cdlxxiii] S.Dutt, op.cit. p.73.
[cdlxxiv] Ibid. p.74.
[cdlxxv] VinA. VI.1197.
[cdlxxvi] Vin.I. p. xvi.
[cdlxxvii] Ibid. p. xvii.
[cdlxxviii] Ibid.
[cdlxxix] Vin.IV. 35 f, 110 f, 111 f, 113 respectively.
[cdlxxx] Ibid. 34.
[cdlxxxi] Ibid. 34.
[cdlxxxii] Ibid. 117.
[cdlxxxiii] Vin.IV.115, 124 respectively.
[cdlxxxiv] Vin.I. p. xix.
[cdlxxxv] Ibid. 22, 56, 82.
[cdlxxxvi] M.I. 444; S.II. 224.
[cdlxxxvii] Vin.III. 73.
[cdlxxxviii] Vin.IV.124.
[cdlxxxix] Vin.I. 96 f.
[cdxc] Ibid. 96.
[cdxci] Ibid. 97.
[cdxcii] S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 66.
[cdxciii] Note : antamaso tiracchnagaty ' pi of Akaraö“ya 1 and Prjika 1 - Vin.I.96 and Vin.III. 23. as well as pdaµ v pdrahaµ v atirekapdaµ v of Akaraö“ya 2 and Prjika 2 - Vin.1. 96 and Vin.III. 45, 47.
[cdxciv] See Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, I. p. xxiv.
[cdxcv] This does not occur in the lists of s“la which are given in the Suttas. See D.I. 4 ff., 63 ff. ; M.I.179 f. etc. As an item of discipline for the monks it occurs in the Ptimokkha as Pcittiya 51. See Vin.IV.108-10.
[cdxcvi] See supra p. 84.
[cdxcvii] Buddhistic Studies, ed. B.C.Law, p. 381: Dr. M. Nagai on Buddhist Vinaya Discipline.
[cdxcviii] Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, I. p. xvii f.
[cdxcix] Ibid. p. xxiv.
[d] Ibid. p. xxv.
[di] Vin.III.19.
[dii] Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, I. p.159.
[diii] M.I. 209.
[div] Vin.IV.23 f. See also Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, II. p. xxxix.
[dv] A notable exception to this is Citta, the householder, who as a layman had attained uttarimanussadhamma alamariyandassanavisesa as far as the fourth jhna and was declared to be an Angmin. See S.IV.301.
[dvi] Vin.II.110. See Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 351. n.2.
[dvii] S. IV. 290 f.
[dviii] See Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, I. p. xxiv: ' The fourth Prjika, alone of the Prjikas, does not find any corresponding matter among the s“las.'
[dix] Also D.I. 8. Sec.20.
[dx] D.I. 63.
[dxi] Vin.IV. 2.
[dxii] Ibid. 63 f.
[dxiii] Ibid. 12.
[dxiv] See Saŗghdisesa 8-13 : Vin.III.158-86.
[dxv] Book of the Discipline, I. p.281: Saŗghdisesa 8.
[dxvi] See Saŗghdisesa 10 and11 : Vin.III.171-77.
[dxvii] Book of the Discipline, I. p. 299 : Saŗghdisesa 10
[dxviii] Ibid. p. 297.
[dxix] See Saŗghdisesa 12 and13 : Vin.III.177-86
[dxx] Book of the Discipline, I. p. 310.
[dxxi] See Ch. XIV for a comparative study of Bhikkhu and Bhikkhuni Ptimokkhas
[dxxii] Pc. 6, 63-65, 71-73, 76, 77, 79-82.
[dxxiii] Vin. IV. 137-39 : Pc. 69 and 70.
[dxxiv] Ibid. 167-73: Pc. 85-92.
[dxxv] Ibid. 169.
[dxxvi] Ibid. 39-46, 91,155 f : Pc. 14-18, 41, 82.
[dxxvii] Ibid. 39.
[dxxviii] Vin.III. 265 ; IV.156.
[dxxix] Vin.III.195-203: Nissaggiya 1-3.
[dxxx] Vin.IV.143-44.
[dxxxi] Vin.II. 288. See Appendix II.
[dxxxii] M.I. 33, 355; II. 2,134; S.V.187; A.II.14.
[dxxxiii] Whether we use the word ritual with reference to this event or not, it is said to have been performed with definite regularity and with a seriousness of purpose which had a religious significance. When we describe the recital as being ritualistic in character it is at the later stage when the spirit of the old Uddesa had faded away and the recital had come to be burdened with many technicalities of an external character which have hardly any connection with its earlier aims. In contrast to this we use the word ritual with reference to the Ptimokkha recital from its earliest phase.
[dxxxiv]See supra, pp. 2, 7.
[dxxxv]Further Dialogues II [ SBB.VI ], p.160.
[dxxxvi]S. Dutt, The Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 65 f.
[dxxxvii]Ibid.
[dxxxviii]M.I. 445. See supra p. 48 ff.
[dxxxix]M.III. 7.
[dxl]Vin.I.101 ff.
[dxli]Vin.I.101.
[dxlii]Ibid. 102.
[dxliii]Vin.III. 9.
[dxliv]M.III.10.
[dxlv]S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 81.
[dxlvi]See Ibid. p. 74.
[dxlvii]See M.III.10; Vin.IV.144.
[dxlviii]Vin.IV.142 ff.
[dxlix]S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 81.
[dl]S. Dutt, Buddha And Five After-Centuries, p. 76.
[dli]S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 81.
[dlii]Ibid. p. 82.
[dliii]Vin.I.101. On the adaptation by the Buddhists of this respect for the 8th, 14th and 15th days of every fortnight see Anguttara Nikya I. 142-45.
[dliv]See Vin.I.102.
[dlv]S. Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 83.
[dlvi]M.III.10.
[dlvii]Vin.I.106-11. See Appendix III.
[dlviii]M.III.10.
[dlix]Kkvt. 14.
[dlx]M.III.10.
[dlxi]VinA.V.1034 f.
[dlxii]Vin.I.118.
[dlxiii]Ibid. 125.
[dlxiv]VinA.V.1063.
[dlxv]BhikkhuptimokkhagaöŹhid“pani, p. 6. A Pali work ascribed to a Thera Nnakitti and printed in Ceylon in 1889.
[dlxvi]Vin.I.106. See also Appendix III.
[dlxvii]Ibid. I.120.
[dlxviii]M.III.10.
[dlxix]See also Vin.III.186,194, 266; IV.174,184, 206.
[dlxx]Vin.I.103.
[dlxxi]Rhys Davids and Oldenberg seem to find further support for this idea through an etymological analysis of the words Ptimokkha and Prtimoksa. See Vinaya Texts I. [ SBE..XIII ], p. xxvii f.
[dlxxii]See also D.I. 85 ; M.I. 440 ; III. 247 ; Vin.II.192.
[dlxxiii]D.I. 85.
[dlxxiv]Vin.II.192.
[dlxxv]Gilgit MSS. III. 3. p.107 f.
[dlxxvi]Further, the Mahvagga records the state of affairs of a time when disciplinary action against offenders had to be taken after careful consideration of the temperament and mood of the offenders. For they were not only capable of openly expressing their resentment but were also bold enough even to threaten bodily harm to the prosecuting members. (Tena kho pana samayena pesal bhikkhč chabbaggiye bhikkhč oksaµ krpetv pattiy codenti. Chabbaggiy bhikkhč labhanti ghtaµ labhanti appaccayaµ vadhena tajjenti. Bhagavato etamatthaµ rocesuµ. Anujnmi bhikkhava kate ' pi okse puggalaµ tulayitv pattiy codetun ' ti - Vin.I.114.).
[dlxxvii]Vin.I.103. See also Kkvt.16.
[dlxxviii]Ibid. II. 226 ff. See Appendix I.
[dlxxix]Ibid. I.120.
[dlxxx]Vin. I.120.
[dlxxxi]Ibid.
[dlxxxii]Ibid. I.126.
[dlxxxiii]Ibid. II. 240.
[dlxxxiv]Ibid. I. 125 f.
[dlxxxv]Ibid. See also Ibid. I.103.
[dlxxxvi]Ibid. II. 241. See also Ibid. I. 125 f.
[dlxxxvii]Ibid. II. 244.
[dlxxxviii]Ibid.
[dlxxxix]S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 85.
[dxc]Ibid. p. 86.
[dxci]Ibid. p. 86 f.
[dxcii]Vin.IV.144.
[dxciii]See Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 373. n.1.
[dxciv]See Ibid. p. 372. n.1.
[dxcv]Vin.I. 120 f.
[dxcvi]Kkvt. 14.
[dxcvii]See also Vin.II. 240.
[dxcviii]Taisho, Vol.22. p.128 C.
[dxcix]See Vin.III.109,186.
[dc]Vin.I. 125 f.
[dci]Ibid. 126.
[dcii]Kkvt.11 f.
[dciii]Vin.I.159.
[dciv]Cf. Vin. I.120.
[dcv]Ibid. 163.
[dcvi]Ibid. 164. Cf. Ibid. 125 f. See also Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 375. n.1.
[dcvii]Ibid. II. 244.
[dcviii]Ibid. I. 164.
[dcix]Vin.IV.135.
[dcx]Ibid.
[dcxi]See Pc. 69 :Vin.IV.137.
[dcxii]Vin.IV.218.
[dcxiii]Note Oldenberg's remarks : ' It deserves to be noticed that in the same way as the Pabbjaniyakamma is not mentioned in the Ptimokkha, neither is there any mention of the similar proceedings of the Ukkhepaniyakamma, etc., however much occasion for it might appear.' - Vin. I. p.xix. But this does not mean that these two forms of punishment, banishment (Pabbjaniya) and Suspension (Ukkhepaniya) were not known to the Ptimokkha. Saŗgh.13 uses the term pabbjenti with obvious familiarity. Note : ...... tdisikya pattiy ekaccaµ pabbjenti ekaccaµ na pabbjenti - Vin.III.184. Likewise, Prjika 7 of the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha (Prjika 3 of the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga) knows not only of Bhikkhus who have been suspended (ukkhittaµ bhikkhuµ) but knows also the fact that such disciplinary action has been taken by the collectively responsible body of the Saŗgha (samaggena saŗghena ukkhittaµ bhikkhuµ - Vin.IV.218.). It should also be pointed out here that in the Bhikkhu Ptimokkha where disciplinary action in terms of Banishment and Suspension appears to be evident it is still left informally in the hands of the Bhikkhus. The responsibility does not seem to be vested in the Saŗgha (So bhikkhu bhikkhčhi evamassa vacan“yo .... pakkamat ' yasm imamh vs. Alan te idha vsen ' ti - Vin.III.184. Also Vin.IV.135.).
[dcxiv]Vin.III. 118.
[dcxv]Vin.II. 38 f.
[dcxvi]Ibid. 38 ff.
[dcxvii]Supra p.100.
[dcxviii]Vin.II. 40.
[dcxix]Gangnth Jh Research Institute Journal Vol. X. Appendix.p. 13.
[dcxx]Vin.II. 48 ff.
[dcxxi]Ibid. 43 ff.
[dcxxii]Ibid. 32.
[dcxxiii]VinA.VI.1166 on Vin.II. 32.
[dcxxiv]Vin. II. 35.
[dcxxv]Ibid. 32.
[dcxxvi]Ibid.
[dcxxvii]Ibid. 32-33.
[dcxxviii]Ibid. pp. 5, 8, 14,19 and 27 respectively.
[dcxxix]In interpreting the condition bhikkhčhi na sampayojetabbaµ in the manner given above we choose to agree with Miss Horner who translates it as ' He should not quarrel with monks '. This translation is, in fact, supported by the Commentary. Oldenberg renders it as ' ought not to associate with the bhikkhus '. Vinaya Texts II. [ SBE. XVII.] p. 339.
[dcxxx]IHQ. Vol.29. No. 2. p.174.
[dcxxxi]Vin.III.186.
[dcxxxii]Kkvt. 51.
[dcxxxiii]Journal of the Gangnth Jh Research Institute, Vol. X. Appendix p.13.
[dcxxxiv]For a closer examination of these views the reader is referred to S.Dutt's Early Buddhist Monachism, p.147 f.
[dcxxxv]Vin.I. 82.
[dcxxxvi]Ibid. 69.
[dcxxxvii]M.I. 494.
[dcxxxviii]Ibid. 512.
[dcxxxix]D.II. 152.
[dcxl]S.II. 21.
[dcxli]Vin.I. 69.
[dcxlii]D.II.152 ; M.I. 391, 494, 512 ; S.II. 21.
[dcxliii]Vin.I. 69.
[dcxliv]D.II.152 ; M.I. 391, 494, 512 ; S.II. 21.
[dcxlv]Vin.I. 69.
[dcxlvi]VinA.V. 1009.
[dcxlvii]Vin .II. 1-28.
[dcxlviii]Ibid. 4. See Book of the Discipline, V. p.6.
[dcxlix]Ibid. 13 f.
[dcl]Ibid. 18 f. See Book of the Discipline, V. p.26 f.
[dcli]M.I. 398.
[dclii]Vin.I. 351 f.
[dcliii]M.II. 245.
[dcliv]Ibid. 245-46.
[dclv]See Saŗgh. 8-12 ; Pc. 2, 3,17, 63, 71, 76, 78.
[dclvi]A.III. 252 ; Vin.II. 4.
[dclvii]Vin.III.158.
[dclviii]Vin. II. 73-104.
[dclix]See Book of the Discipline, V. pp. 96-140.
[dclx]Vin. II. 73 ff.
[dclxi]Ibid. 3.
[dclxii]Ibid. 102 and 88.
[dclxiii]Vin.II. 85.
[dclxiv]Ibid. 4-5 ; also 86.
[dclxv]Ibid. 78 ff.
[dclxvi]ibid. 80.
[dclxvii]Ibid. 82.
[dclxviii]Ibid.
[dclxix]VinA.VI.1194.
[dclxx]Vin.II. 94.
[dclxxi]Ibid. 95.
[dclxxii]Infra p.126.
[dclxxiii]Vin.II. 92.
[dclxxiv]Vin.II. 84.
[dclxxv]Ibid. 99.
[dclxxvi]M.II. 247.
[dclxxvii]Vin.II. 73 ff.
[dclxxviii]VinA.I.14 f.
[dclxxix]DA.I.13.
[dclxxx]Journal of the Ganganath Jha Research Institute, vol.X. Appendix.
[dclxxxi]D.II.100,154 ; Vin.II.188.
[dclxxxii]M.III. 8.
[dclxxxiii]M.I. 46.
[dclxxxiv]M.III. 302.
[dclxxxv]Vin. III.177.
[dclxxxvi]Vin. II. 255.
[dclxxxvii]M.I. 32.
[dclxxxviii]Ibid. 124.
[dclxxxix]Vin.I. 22.
[dcxc]M.I. 32.
[dcxci]Vin.1. 45.
[dcxcii]See Chapter IV.
[dcxciii]VinA.V. 990.
[dcxciv]Vin. I. Intr. p.xii. n. 2.
[dcxcv]The Book of the Discipline, IV. 84. n.1. See also Miss Horner's art. Abhidhamma Abhivinaya, IHQ. Vol. XVII. 291 ff.
[dcxcvi]Vin. I. 60, 62, 80. Nissaya: In this context it means the dependence of the pupil on his teacher for guidance and instruction. The Vinaya prescribes a compulsory period of such tutelage for young pupil monks.
[dcxcvii]Vin.1. 60, 62.
[dcxcviii]Vin.1. 62.
[dcxcix]S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, 149 f.
[dcc]VinA.V. 988.
[dcci]Vin.1. 92.
[dccii]Ibid. 50. These terms are translated as recitation, interrogation, exhortation and instruction respectively at BD. IV. 67 f.
[dcciii]Vin.A.V. 982.
[dcciv]Vin.I. 49.
[dccv]Ibid. 1. 44 f.
[dccvi]Ibid. 50 f.
[dccvii]Ibid. 1.79.
[dccviii]Vin. 1.54.
[dccix]Ibid. 84.
[dccx]Ibid. 54 f.
[dccxi]Vin.IV. 126.
[dccxii]Ibid. 147.
[dccxiii]See Saŗgh. 9 : Vin. III. 166 f.
[dccxiv]See Pc. 79, 80 : Vin. IV. 151 f.
[dccxv]Vin. III. 171 f.
[dccxvi]Ibid. 175.
[dccxvii]Vin. II. 1 f.
[dccxviii]Vin. IV.12.
[dccxix]Vin. III. 181.
[dccxx]Vin. II.14 ; III.182.
[dccxxi]Altekar, A.S., The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization, p. 204-5.
[dccxxii]Altekar, A.S., op.cit. p. 208.
[dccxxiii]A.IV. 265 f.
[dccxxiv]S.IV. 328 f.
[dccxxv]Ibid. 243-44.
[dccxxvi]Prabhu, Hindu Social Orgnisation, p. 284.
[dccxxvii]A.IV.269 f.
[dccxxviii]i.e., ' What, O monks, does that foolish man think that a mother would not feel lustfully attached to her son or the son to his mother.' See Gradual Sayings, III. p. 55. for a different translation of this passage which we consider to be incorrect.
[dccxxix]See Gradual Sayings, III. p. 57.
[dccxxx]Jaina Sčtras I [ SBE. XXII ], p. 81.
[dccxxxi]Deo, S.B., History of Jaina Monachism, p. 493. See supra p. 38.
[dccxxxii]M.I.130.
[dccxxxiii]A.IV. 274 ; Vin.II. 253.
[dccxxxiv]Ibid. The other schools of Buddhism, too, besides the Theravdins, do not appear to have challenged the historicity of this incident.
[dccxxxv]Jaina Sčtras II. [ SBE.XLV.],122. n.3.
[dccxxxvi]M.I. 305.
[dccxxxvii]Taisho, Vol.22. p. 923 B.
[dccxxxviii]M.I. 124.
[dccxxxix]Vin.II. 255.
[dccxl]Ibid. 259.
[dccxli]Vin.IV. 51 f.
[dccxlii]Ibid. 313, 315. See Bhikkhun“ Pcittiya 56, 59.
[dccxliii]Vin.IV. 51.
[dccxliv]Vin. IV. 127, 216, 239.
[dccxlv]Ibid. II. 257-58.
[dccxlvi]Op.cit. 255-56.
[dccxlvii]Taisho, Vol.22. p.186.A.
[dccxlviii]Vin.II. 258.
[dccxlix]Ibid. III. 231.
[dccl]D.II. 14 ; Vin.II. 287. See Appendix. II.
[dccli]Taisho, Vol.22. p. 927.A.
[dcclii]Vin.II. 289.
[dccliii]Note the Buddha's remarks to Pajpati Gotami before her passing away at Apadna II.535. v. 79.
[dccliv]Taisho, Vol.22. p.186. B.
[dcclv]Vin.II. p. 289. See also Ibid. 256.
[dcclvi]Taisho, Vol.22. p.186.A.
[dcclvii]Ibid. p. 923. C. See also Vin.II. 256.
[dcclviii]Miss D.N. Bhagavat, Early Buddhist Jurisprudence, p.164 ff.
[dcclix]The numbering of the additional rules of the Bhikkhunis here is in accordance with the abridged text of the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga (Vin.IV. 211-251) where only the asdhraöa paatti are listed. Hence these numbers do not indicate the real position of the sikkhpada in relation to the complete text of the Bhikhun“ Ptimokkha.
[dcclx]M.I. 305.
[dcclxi]Vin. IV. 218.
[dcclxii]Ibid. 137.
[dcclxiii]Ibid. IV. 218.
[dcclxiv]This sikkhpada is not given in the Suttavibhaŗga as it is only the Bhikkhuni version of a sdhraöa paatti held in common with the Bhikkhus. Hence the number 147 is in terms of the complete text.
[dcclxv]Vin. IV. 66.
[dcclxvi]S.II. 219 f.
[dcclxvii]M.I.122.
[dcclxviii]The real position of this sikkhpada in the complete Ptimokkha of the Bhikkhunis would be Pcittiya No.115. As this is a sdhraöa paatti it is not listed in the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga.
[dcclxix]Vin.IV. 226, 231.
[dcclxx]Ibid. 227 f, 233, 234.
[dcclxxi]Ibid. 235-42.
[dcclxxii]Vin.III. 206, 209.
[dcclxxiii]Ibid. 234-35.
[dcclxxiv]Ibid. 243.
[dcclxxv]See Nissaggiya Pcittiya No.1 in the Bhikkhun“ Ptimokkha. Looked upon as a new rule it is placed in the Bhikkhun“vibhaŗga. Vin.IV. 243.
[dcclxxvi]VinA.IV. 919.
[dcclxxvii]Vin.III. 253.
[dcclxxviii]Ibid. 263.
[dcclxxix]Vin.IV. 243.
[dcclxxx]Ibid. 246, 247.
[dcclxxxi]Ibid. 248-54.
[dcclxxxii]Ibid. 255, 256.
[dcclxxxiii]Ibid. 258-345.
[dcclxxxiv]Vin.IV. 127.
[dcclxxxv]Ibid. 130, 327.
[dcclxxxvi]Ibid. 133,160.
[dcclxxxvii]Ibid. 166.
[dcclxxxviii]Ibid. 171.
[dcclxxxix]Ibid. 123.
[dccxc]Ibid. 168.
[dccxci]Ibid. 172.
[dccxcii]Vin. IV. 175-84.
[dccxciii]Miss D.N. Bhagavat, Early Buddhist Jurisprudence, p. 164 f.
[dccxciv]The Book of the Discipline, III. p. xxxii. n.1 and p. lviii.
[dccxcv]Ibid. p. xxxi.
[dccxcvi]Journal Asiatique, 1913, p. 548.
[dccxcvii]B.C.Law, History of Pali Literature, I. 46-47, 49.
Winternitz, History of
Indian Literature, II.
24.
N.Dutt, Early Monastic Buddhism, 1960, p. 152.
S.Dutt, Early Budhist
Monachism, p. 75.
Miss Horner, Book of the Discipline, I. p.x.
Rhys Davids, Buddhism, its History
and Literature, 1896, p. 54.
However, in The
Questions
of King Milinda he says that the regulations in the
Ptimokkha are only
220 in number.
See SBE 35, p. 203.n.1
(1890).
[dccxcviii]DA.I. 13.
[dccxcix]A.IV.140, 279 ; V. 71.
[dccc]AA.IV. 66.
[dccci]DA.I.17 ; VinA.I.18 ; DhsA.18.
[dcccii]See S.Dutt, Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 73 f.
[dccciii]Kkvt. p.165.
[dccciv]DA.I. 17 ; VinA. I.18 ; DhsA.18
[dcccv]Vin.I.125. and Vin.II. 240.
[dcccvi]Vin.II. 236 ff.
[dcccvii]Ud. 51 ff.
[dcccviii]A.IV. 204 ff.
[dcccix]Gilgit MSS. III. 3. 107 f.
[dcccx]Ibid.
[dcccxi]Ibid.
[dcccxii]Vin.II. 236 ff.
[dcccxiii]Ibid. III.109.
[dcccxiv]We should here take note of the explanation which the Commentaries give for the exclusion of the guilty monk from the assembly which had met for the recital of the Ptimokkha by the Buddha. It is said that if the Buddha recited the Ptimokkha with the guilty monk present in the assembly it would have spelt disaster for the guilty monk: sattadh tassa muddh phlessati. Thus, out of compassion for him the Buddha declined to recite the Ptimokkha in that assembly. See UdA. 296 ; AA.IV. 112.
[dcccxv]The Commentarial tradition maintains that the recital of sikkhpada as the Ptimokkha (ö ptimokkha) belongs exclusively to the Bhikkhus and not to the Buddha. See VinA. I. 187; UdA. 298.
[dcccxvi]M.III.10; Vin.I.103 ; IV.144.
[dcccxvii]Taisho, Vol.22. p.128 C.
[dcccxviii]Taisho, Vol. 22. p. 447B.
[dcccxix]i.e. other than in the story of the Suspension of the Ptimokkha which occurs at Vin.II. 236 f, Udna 51 f, A. IV. 204 f.
[dcccxx]D.II. 46 ff.
[dcccxxi]A tradition in the DhammapadaŹŹhakath makes out the recital to be held every seventh year. See DhpA.III. 237.
[dcccxxii]Dhammapada vv. 183,184,185. See DhpA.III. 237.
[dcccxxiii]Ibid.v. 185. It is a pity that Sukumar Dutt has completely missed this very significant stanza. See his Early Buddhist Monachism, p. 71.
[dcccxxiv]DA.II. 479.
[dcccxxv]S.II. 5-9,106 ; A.II. 21 ; Vin.III. 7 ff.
[dcccxxvi]DhpA. III. 236.
[dcccxxvii]However, this is not true of the extant Mahpadna Sutta which gives a detailed account of the Ptimokkha recital of the Buddha Vipassi. See D.II. 47- 49.
[dcccxxviii]VinA.I. 186 f.
[dcccxxix]Vin.II. 236 ff.
[dcccxxx]The Sutta, however, does not use the term ovda ptimokkha with reference to this recital.
[dcccxxxi]DhpA.III. 236.
[dcccxxxii]D.II. 48 -50.
[dcccxxxiii]See VinA.I.186 f. where Buddhaghosa quotes extensively from Vin.II. 240. Sabbabuddhnaµ hi im tisso ovdaptimokkhagth honti. T d“ghyukabuddhnaµ yva ssanapariyant uddesaµ gacchanti. Appyukabuddhnaµ paŹhamabodhiyam eva sikkhpadapaattiklato pabhuti öptimokkham eva uddis“yati. Ta ca kho bhikkhč yeva uddisanti na buddh. Tasm amhkam ' pi bhagav paŹhamabodhiyaµ v“sativassamattaµ eva idaµ ovdaptimokkhaµ uddisi. Tato paŹŹhya bhikkhč öptimokkhaµ uddisanti - VinA.I. 187.
[dcccxxxiv]Vin. III. 7-9.
[dcccxxxv]Ibid. II. 240. See also Vin. I. 125.
[dcccxxxvi]See also M.I. 437 f, 448 f ; A.I. 230, 236 ; Vin.III.177, IV.142 f.
[dcccxxxvii]Vin.II. 284 f.
[dcccxxxviii]M.I. 449.
[dcccxxxix]Vin.IV. 142 f.
[dcccxl]A.I. 230.
[dcccxli]Vin.IV.142 f. Pcittiya 72.
[dcccxlii]Ibid. III.177 f.
[dcccxliii]Ibid.178.
[dcccxliv]Ibid. IV.143.
[dcccxlv]Inspite of the diversity of opinion which existed regarding the identity of the khuddnukhuddaka sikkhpada, the followers of the Aŗguttara tradition seems to have maintained this division up to the time of Buddhaghosa. Note: Imaµ pana aŗguttaramahnikyavalajanakcariy cattri prjikni thapetv sesni sabbni ' pi khuddnukhuddakn“ ' ti vadanti - AA.II. 348. See Vin.II. 288 for the diversity of opinion referred to above.
[dcccxlvi]D.II. 154 : Yo vo nanda may dhammo ca vinayo ca desito paatto so vo mam ' accayena satth.
[dcccxlvii]Vin.II. 287, 290. See also D.II. 154.
[dcccxlviii]A.I. 231 ff.
[dcccxlix]D.II. 154 and Vin.II. 287.
[dcccl]Taisho, Vol.23. p. 449 B.
[dcccli]Ibid. Vol.22. p.191 B.
[dccclii]Ibid. p. 967 B.
[dcccliii]Taisho, Vol. 22. p. 492 B-C.
[dcccliv]Ibid. p. 492 B.
[dccclv]Ibid. p. 492 C.
[dccclvi]Ibid.
[dccclvii]Ibid. p. 491 B-C.
[dccclviii]VinA.I.13.
[dccclix]It is said that the Mahsaŗghikas branched off from the parent Theriya tradition after the ten disputed points of Vinaya which they put forward had been rejected by the orthodox Theriya group. See D“pavaµsa, Ed. Oldenberg. p. 36.
[dccclx]Rhys Davids, The Questions of King Milinda, Part I. [ SBE. 35 ] p. 202.
[dccclxi]Loc.cit.
[dccclxii]DA.II. 592 f. See also Miln.144.
[dccclxiii]Vin.II. 290.
[dccclxiv]M.II. 8 ; III.10.
[dccclxv]Ibid. III. 10
[dccclxvi]Vin. I. 56.
[dccclxvii]Ibid. 106.
[dccclxviii]This interpretation is supported by the Samantapsdik which takes nigama, nagara and gma to be all in the same category : Ettha ca nigamanagarnam ' pi gmen ' eva saŗgaho veditabbo -VinA.V.1050. PTS Dictionary equates gmantavihr“ to raaka. This is obviously a mistaken identification, for the two terms are regularly used in antithesis as is clearly seen from the following example : īraaken ' pi kho vuso moggallna bhikkhun ime dhamm samdya vattitabb pageva gmantavihrin ' ti - M.I. 273. See also M.I. 30 f. See supra p.7.
[dccclxix]The Samantapsdik defines an abbhantara as being twenty-eight cubits in length. See VinA.V.1052.
[dccclxx]VinA.V.1052.
[dccclxxi]M.II. 8.
[dccclxxii]See The Book of the Discipline IV. p.145.
[dccclxxiii]See VinA. V. 1053,1055,1056.
[dccclxxiv]Malalasekera, Pali Literature of Ceylon, p. 202.
[dccclxxv]Bode, Pali Literature of Burma, p. 39. n.1.
[dccclxxvi]See Taw Sein Ko's Preliminary Study of the Kalyni Inscriptions of Dhammaceti. 1476 A.D. (Ind. Ant. xxii, p.11 f.).
[dccclxxvii]Malalasekera, op.cit.. p. 251.
[dccclxxviii]Kanjin arrived at Nara in Japan in 753 A.D.
[dccclxxix]See Sir Charles Eliot, Japanese Buddhism, p.231 f.
[dccclxxx]The statements within inverted commas which are reproduced above are extracts from the English summary of the introduction to the S“mnayadappana of Dhammlaŗkra Thera (published 1885 A.D.). This treatise, as would be clear from the notes above, was in support of the charge that the S“m at Balapitimodara in Ceylon was ritualistically invalid and it attempts to meet the arguments of the S“mlakkhanadipan“ of Vimalasra Thera which was written in defence of the said S“m. (Published 1881 A.D.).