THE SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST

HENRY FROWDE

OXFORD UNIVEKSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE 7 PATERNOSTER ROW

THE SACRED BOOKS OF THE EAST

TRANSLATED BY VARIOUS ORIENTAL SCHOLARS

AND EDITED BY F. MAX MULLER

VOL. XIII

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1881

VINAYA TEXTS

TRANSLATED FROM THE PÂLI

T. W. RHYS DAVIDS

AND

HERMANN OLDENBERG

PART I

THE PÂTIMOKKA THE MAHÂVAGGA, I-IV

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1881

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION TO THE VINAYA TEXTS FROM

THE PÂLI. ix

The Pâtimokkha i

Nidâna i

The Pârâgika Rules 3

The Samghâdisesa Rules 7

The Aniyata Rules 16

The Nissaggiya Pâkittiya Rules 18

The Pâkttiya Rules 32

The Pâkidesaniya Rules 56

The Sekhiya Rules 59

The Adhikarana-samatha Rules 68

THE MAHÂVAGGA 71

First Khandhaka (The Admission to the Order of Bhikkhus) 73

Second Khandhaka (The Uposatha Ceremony, and the Pâtimokkha) 23.9

Third Khandhaka (Residence during the Rainy Season) 298

Fourth Khandhaka (The Pavâranâ Ceremony). . 325

Transliteration of Oriental Alphabets adopted for the Translations of the Sacred Books of the East. . 357

INTRODUCTION

TO THE

VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PÂLI.

IN the present MSS. the Vinaya Piùaka is divided into the following books:

Called collectively the Sutta-vibhaôga,

1. Pârâgika

2. Pâkittiya,

Called collectively the Khandhakas,

3. Mahâvagga,

4. Kullavagga,

5. Parivâra-pâtha.

These books constitute that part of the sacred literature of the Buddhists which contains the regulations for the out ward life of the members of the Buddhist Saêgha - nearly the oldest, and probably the most influential, of all Fraternities of monks.

It is impossible to frame any narrower definition of the Vinaya than this, since the gradual change of circumstances in the Fraternity resulted in a gradual change also in the Vinaya itself. To give any more detailed account of what the Vinaya is, it will be necessary to trace what can be at present ascertained of its history; to show that is, so far as it is yet possible to do so the causes which led to the establishment of the oldest Rules and Ceremonies of the Order, and to follow step by step the accretions of new literary work around this older nucleus.

For this purpose we propose to consider first the Rules of the work called the Pâtimokkha; for the later texts presuppose its existence. It is one of the oldest, if not the oldest, of all Buddhist text-books; and it has been inserted in its entirety into the first part of the Vinaya, the Vibhaôga¹.

Nota: 1. The opening sentence only is found in the Mahâvagga. See below, p. xv.

The Pâtimokkha - the meaning of the name will be discussed later on seems to have owed its existence to the ancient Indian custom of holding sacred two periods in each month, the times of the Full Moon and of the New Moon.

The Vedic ceremonies of the Darsapûrnamâsa sacrifice, and of the feast or sacred day (Upavasatha) connected with it, are known to have been very old, and the custom of celebrating these days would naturally be handed on from the Brâhmans to the different Samanas, and be modified and simplified (though, as it seems, sometimes increased in number) by them, in accordance with their creeds and their views of religious duty. According to Buddhist tradition²-and we see no sufficient reason for doubting the correctness of the account the monks of other, that is, of non-Buddhistic sects, used to meet together at the middle and at the close of every half-month, and were accustomed then to proclaim their new teaching in public. At such times the people would crowd together; and the different sects found an opportunity of increasing their numbers and their influence.

The Buddhists also adopted the custom of these period ical meetings, but confined themselves to meeting twice in each month³. And the peculiarity which gave to these meetings among the Buddhists their distinguishing cha racter seems to have been borrowed by them neither from the Brahmans nor from other dissenters, but to have been an original invention of the Buddhists themselves. The Brethren and Sisters made use of these half-monthly gather ings to confess to the assembled Order the sins and faults which each of them had committed; and to take upon him self, or herself, the penance which the transgressor had thereby incurred. It would be unnecessary to dwell here upon the details of these penitential meetings, as we can refer the reader to the second book of the Mahâvagga, where he will find them fully set out.

Nota: 2. Mahâvagga II, i, i.

Nota: 3. Ibid. II, 4, 2

It was for use at such penitential gatherings that the text, now known as the Pâtimokkha, was composed. 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; this list was read out in the half-monthly meetings of the Order; and the Brethren and Sisters who were present were asked if they were innocent of each one of the offences therein mentioned.

The use of such a list must have already begun in very early times. 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 Pâtimokkha, 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.

It is no doubt natural, through the influence of the his tory of early Christianity, or perhaps of the school of Socrates, to imagine that early Buddhism was far removed from all fixed and absolute forms, either of creed or of liturgy; and to represent the intercourse of Gotama and his disciples as purely and simply an interchange of spiritual edification, where the spirit was all in all, and the letter was nothing. But it should be remembered that Gotama continued to live for many years, almost for two generations, after he had formulated the essential points of his system, and after he had founded the brotherhood of his Order. And at that time the stream of scholastic and legal ideas which emanated from the earlier Brahmanism was flowing in full force through the religious circles of India. A rich phraseology of sacred and ecclesiastical expressions, an armoury of technical terms in philosophy and in theology (still preserved in the Brahmaòas and Upanishads), had been developed and made ready for the use of the Buddhists, and (Jainas, and other reforming schools. And earlier speculation had raised a whole series of problems, and long-continued custom had elaborated a multi farious system of ecclesiastical observances, which the newly risen sects, orthodox or heretical, could grapple with, or could adopt. 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 their common reverence for their Master, and through a common spiritual aim. They formed rather, and from the first, an organised Brotherhood.

But if we look upon the Sakyaputtiya Samaòas — for that is the name which the people in the earliest times gave to the community as from the first an organised body, it is highly probable that the earliest formularies, both of their creeds and of their liturgies, arose in a time, if not during the life of Gotama, yet at most not long after his decease. Now among the oldest expressions of belief we may with certainty rank the four sentences known as the Four Noble Truths and the summary of the so-called Noble Eightfold Path: and the oldest liturgical formularies preserved to us are, without any doubt, the Pâtimokkha and the various Kammavâkas. It is true that these litur gical formularies, being so much more extensive, may possibly have been modified or added to before they reached the form in which we now possess them; but there is not the slightest trace of any other liturgies haying ever been in use in the Buddhist fraternity.

It is of course impossible to attempt to draw a line between the part which Gotama himself may have had in the settlement of the list of offences contained in the Pâtimokkha, and the part that may have been taken by his disciples. Nor indeed, considering the limited character of our knowledge, is that a point of much importance. But it should perhaps be noticed in this connection that Buddhist tradition does ascribe to one among Gotamas disciples to Upâli an especial connection with the Vinaya. This tradition reaches back at least as far as the time when the existing recension of the Pâli Piùakas was made, for we find it both in the Sutta - and in the Vinaya- Piùakas.

Thus in the Kullavagga (VI, 13, i) we find the passage -

'At that time the Blessed One proclaimed the Vinaya in many a way to the Bhikkhus, exalted the Vinaya, exalted the learning of the Vinaya, exalted again and again the venerable Upâli. Then thought the Bhikkhus, "The Blessed One hath proclaimed the Vinaya in many a way, hath exalted the Vinaya, hath exalted the learning of the Vinaya, hath exalted again and again the venerable Upâli. Come now let us learn the Vinaya from the venerable Upâli." And so many Bhikkhus, old and middle-aged and young, learnt the Vinaya from the venerable Upâli'.

And again in a Sutta of the Aôguttara Nikâya¹, where those Bhikkhus are enumerated who, in any particular respect, are the first and foremost in the Brother hood, Upâli is mentioned as the first among the custodians of the Vinaya (the Vinaya-dharâ). And further, as is well known, it is Upâli who, according to the tradition, plays, at the First Council, the same part of propounder with regard to the Vinaya Texts which Ananda does with regard to the Dhamma Texts². There may well be some truth in this very ancient tradition that Upâli was specially conversant with the Rules of the Order; but it would be hazardous on that account to ascribe to Upâli a share, not only in the handing down of existing Rules, but in the composition of the Pâtimokkha itself³.

Nota: 1. Phayre MS., vol. i. fol. kau.

Nota: 2. Kullavagga XII.

Nota: 3. In the Ceylon Chroniclers (Dîpavaêsa, Bhâòavâras 4 and 5) Upâli even becomes the first in a series of Vinayapâmokkhâ, or Chiefs of the Vinaya; but no such office is known to the older tradition; and had it existed it would certainly have been mentioned in connection with the dispute about the so-called Ten Points of the Vinaya at the Council of Vesâlî.

As regards the order in which the various offences are arranged in the Pâtimokkha, the principal division corresponds to the division of the Order into Brethren and Sisters: there is a Bhikkhu- pâtimokkha and a Bhikkhuni-pâtimokkha. In each of these two chief divisions the offences are divided into various classes, beginning with the heaviest with those, that is, that result in the exclusion of the offender from the Order. Inside each class the sequence of the clauses follows no invariable rule. Sometimes offences of a related character are placed together in groups¹, but sometimes those which would naturally come together are found scattered in quite different parts of the same class² . It is perhaps worthy of notice that there sometimes seems, as in the two cases first mentioned in the last note, to be an effort to arrange the offences in groups (vagga) of ten: and in three cases we find regulations for mulated with the utmost brevity (the offences being merely expressed by a locative case dependent upon pâkittiyaê) at the commencement of such a vagga. It seems to us, at least in the present state of our knowledge, quite impossible to draw any conclusions from such peculiarities as to the comparative age of any different parts of the Pâtimokkha. The irregularities in arrangement may very well be due to want of literary clearness in the compilers of the present Form of Confession, and it would be hazardous to attempt to trace in it any historical argument.

The various points in regard to the Pâtimokkha dealt with in the foregoing paragraphs do not of themselves show that it was at all older than the rest of the Vinaya Piùaka; and indeed the work, as a separate work, is not considered among Buddhists to belong to the Piùakas at all, and is therefore not included in the list of works of which the Piùakas consist. But every single Rule or Clause in the Pâtimokkha is in fact found word for word in the Sutta-vibhaôga, the quotations being so complete that the Pâtimokkha might be entirely put together again by piecing together extracts from the Vinaya Piùaka. And it is not possible that the Pâtimokkha originated merely by such a process of dovetailing; for the quotations in the Vinaya Piùaka, though not actually called quotations, bear the un mistakable stamp of being taken from some pre-existing work. The cause which led to the Pâtimokkha, and the Upasampadâ-kammavâka, being separately preserved at all, is the same as the cause which led to their exclusion from the lists of the Piùaka texts the fact, that is, of their being liturgical compositions.

Nota: 1. For instance, regulations as to the conduct of Brethren towards Sisters come together in Pâkittiya 21-30; those about meal-times in Pâkittiya 31-40; about conduct in relation to armies in Pâkittiya 48-50.

Nota: 2. For instance, Pâkittiya 5, 6, and 43-45; and again, Pâkittiya 20 and 62, &c.

We turn now to the consideration of the question how a series of further literary productions were gradually de veloped out of, or added to the Pâtimokkha¹.

Nota: 1. With the following paragraphs should be compared H. Oldenberg in the Introduction to his edition of the Pâli text of the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xvi and following.

Whoever reads through the Mahâvagga will at once be struck by one section of it which differs completely both in contents and in form from the rest of the work. This is the section in the Second Book, Chapter III, paragraphs 4-8.

This passage is preceded by the opening words of the Pâtimokkha; and in the passage itself those words are separately paraphrased or explained. But the explanation does not appear to be put into the mouth of the Buddha; it bears rather, without any historical or conversational form, the impersonal shape of a simple commentary: and it only differs from the later commentaries by peculiar solemn diffuseness and rhetorical tautology.

If we were to consider the Mahâvagga only, the sudden and unexplained appearance in this connection, and in this connection only, of an isolated passage of this kind, would have to remain an insoluble puzzle. But when we look further into the other parts of the Vinaya Piùaka, an answer immediately suggests itself. In the portion of that Piùaka which is better called the Sutta-vibhaôga, but is divided in the MSS. into two divisions, under the somewhat misleading titles of Pârâgika and Pâkittiya, we find, at regularly recur ring intervals, passages of an exactly similar character, and without any doubt of the same origin, as the isolated passage in the Mahâvagga.

The Sutta-vibhaôga is occupied with laying down and explaining all the Rules which are contained in the Pâtimokkha. Now, immediately after the text of each of these Rules, there is found a word for word commentary upon them precisely as a word for word commentary follows, in the passage above cited in the Mahâvagga, upon the quoted words of the Introductory Formular of the Pâtimokkha service. Here then lies the explanation. This Introductory Formular is the only passage contained in the Pâtimokkha which is not found also in the Sutta-vibhaôga. And with the explanation of the curiously isolated passage in the Mahâvagga we have also a new fact of very great im portance. Not only does the Vinaya Piùaka contain, word for word, the whole of the Pâtimokkha, but it contains also, and again word for word, the whole of an ancient Commentary on the Pâtimokkha.

This commentary no longer exists as a separate work, and it would indeed be strange if it did. It was not re quired in the simple liturgical services of Ordination and Confession in use in the Order: and if any one wished to refer to it, in order to refresh his memory as to the explanation of any passage in the Pâtimokkha, he had only to repeat, or to get repeated over to him, the corresponding passage from the Sutta-vibhaôga. There he would find the Old Commentary (as we shall hereafter call it) word for word, together with the additional commentary by which it had been supplemented in later times.

A question may then possibly occur to the reader whether we can be really sure that the Old Commentary has been preserved complete, or whether what we have is a fragment only. We think there can be but little doubt as to the right answer. The Pâtimokkha, which the Old Commentary deals with word by word, has been separately preserved to us, and we know that no one phrase of it remains uncommented upon. And further it is clear from several passages that the words of the old commentator were considered so sacred or authoritative that they have been kept intact even in cases where they are in contra diction to the later parts of the Vinaya Piùaka¹. It should however be noted that this Old Commentary is philological and exegetical throughout, containing nothing of a legendary or quasi- historical nature. It is just possible to suggest that it may have originally contained not only such an explanation of the meaning of each Rule, but an account also of the occasion on which the Rule was laid down. But it is difficult to see why greater sacredness should have been attached to one part of the work than to another; or to explain how it was that, if any part was changed, the contradictory passages above referred to were not also altered. Every probability therefore points to the conclusion that we have the complete work still before us, and not fragments of it only.

Nota: 1. See, for instance, the comparison made by Oldenberg in the Introduction to his edition of the text, vol. i. p. xviii. The Old Commentary follows of course the passage there referred to in the Pâtimokkha.

It seems to us to have been precisely the absence of any such historical account in the older Commentary which probably led to the formation of what was practically the new edition of the Pâtimokkha which now lies before us in the first part of the Vinaya Piùaka.

In the earliest books of the Sutta Piùaka, which contains the statement of Buddhist belief, we find—just as in the Gospels and in the Socratic dialogues—that that belief is not stated directly. The books profess to give, not simply the belief itself, but the belief as the Buddha uttered it, with an account of the time when, and the place at which, he uttered it. The Buddha's new method of salvation, his new doctrine of what salvation was, did not present itself to the consciousness of the early Buddhist community as an idea, a doctrine, standing alone, and merely on its own merits. In their minds it was indissolubly bound up with the memory of the revered and striking personality of him who had proclaimed it. So in the Sutta Piùaka the actor and speaker is almost throughout the Buddha himself: (occasionally, but very seldom, one of his disciples.) Introductions—often indeed short and tending in later times to disappear—give a full account of where, and when, he spoke; what was the occasion which led to his uttering that particular speech; and to whom he uttered it. But, throughout, the principal thing is what the Buddha said.

It is only natural that this distinguishing mark of the (13) literature of the Buddhist Dhamma—much of which was no doubt in existence at a very early date should have reacted upon the literature of the Buddhist Vinaya. The members of the Order were no longer contented to learn, and to understand the meaning of, the various Rules of the Pâtimokkha. A desire sprang up to have, for each one of them also, a kind of historical basis; to know the story of how the Buddha himself came to lay down the Rule to his disciples. And it was only the Brother who was properly acquainted with all this who was accounted a real 'Doctor of the Law'.

So it is said in the Kullavagga (IX, 5, i):—'If a Brother, Upâli, has not received gladly both the Pâtimokkhas in their full extent, has not well divided them, well established them, well investigated them, both sutta by sutta, and in every detail; if when asked, "Where was this spoken by the Blessed One?" he fail to solve the question: then there will be some who will say to him, " But then, let the venerable one still devote himself to learning the Vinaya!" thus will they say¹.

Nota: 1. No ke Upâli bhikkhuno ubhayâni Pâtimokkhâni vitthârena svâgatâni honti suvibhattâni suppavattîni suvinikkhitâni suttato anuvyañganaso, idam pan'âvuso kattha vuttaê Bhagavatâ 'ti iti puttho na sampâyati, tassa bhavanti vattâro: Iôgha tâva âyasma Vinayaê pariyâpuòassû 'ti: iti 'ssa bhavanti vattâro.

It is evident from this passage that, at the time when it was written, such a tradition regarding each Rule was in existence; and that the knowledge of these traditions was held in high esteem. It is therefore a reasonable con jecture that steps were taken to amalgamate these tradi tions with the Text and the Old Commentary in a complete work, which should also contain what we may call Notes on the Rules that is, decisions on points of Law involved, though not expressed in so many words, in the Rules; discussions on what cases were really included and what were not, in particular regulations; enumeration of excep tions to the Rules; and so on.

Whether this conjecture be right or not, it is precisely such a work that we have now before us in that part of the Vinaya Piùaka called the Sutta-vibhaôga, and divided in the present MSS., as above pointed out, into two books called respectively after the class of Rules with which they begin Pârâgika and Pâkittiya. And it is possible throughout, without the possibility of mistake, to distinguish between the three portions of which the present work is built up. The historical basis comes first, leading up to the extract from the Pâtimokkha, which is always placed in the Buddha's own mouth; then comes the Old Commentary, with its verbal explanations; and then, finally, the Notes giving the exceptions to, and the extensions of, the Rule in the Pâtimokkha.

The foregoing paragraphs show the way in which the Sutta-vibhaôga grew up on the basis of the Pâtimokkha. The following books the Khandhakas give a detailed and connected account of the admission into the Saêgha; of the ceremony of the Uposatha; of the annually recurring observances connected with the beginning and the end of the rainy season; of the principal disciplinary proceedings; and of miscellaneous details regarding the medicine, food, dwelling-places, and daily life of the members of the Order (Bhikkhus). As in the Sutta-vibhaôga, so here also, the outward form is arranged in such a way that in the case of every regulation a history was given of the occasion upon which the Buddha was supposed to have made it. These histories again lead up, in most cases, to a liturgical formulary by which the regulation was to be carried out.

While, however, in the case of the Sutta-vibhaôga the liturgy on which it has been founded has been preserved Iri a separate shape, the formularies in the Khandhakas have not as yet, except in some instances/been found in existence apart from the Khandhakas. The principal exception is the Upasampadâ- kammavâka (The Words of the Act of Ordination), which recurs in its entirety in the First Khandhaka of the Mahâvagga (I, 76, 3 to I, 78, 5). It is impossible therefore as yet to trace the history of the gra dual formation of the Khandhakas as we think it already possible to do in the case of the Sutta-vibhaôga.

In the Khandhakas too, no doubt, the introductory histories are the latest part. But while some of the formularies and regulations to which they lead up may well be very old, others are probably additions to, or modifications of, those older ones; and it is difficult to attempt to show, even with regard to the exceptions above mentioned, which are the older and which are the later. The misfortune that these forms are not all now separately extant¹ is probably simply due to the fact that the formularies separately pre served (including the Pâtimokkha) are the only ones which continued to be used in actual services among the mem bers of the Order.

Nota: 1. Mr. Dickson has given us an excellent text of the Upasampadâ-kammavâkâ; and it were much to be wished that the rest of them should also be published. Mr. Clough has given a translation of six others in 'Miscellaneous Translations from Oriental Languages,' London, 1834; and the Liverpool Free Library has MSS. of others.

Such being the nature and contents, and such so far as it can be traced being the origin of the Sutta-vibhaôga and of the Khandhakas respectively, 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.

The kind of narrative setting with which, in both cases, the older material has been surrounded is alike in both. Here and there in both works are included real fragments of ancient legend or tradition—as, for instance, the account of the events from the attainment of Buddhahood down to the conversion of Sâriputta and Moggallâna (Mahâvagga I, 1-24), the story of Devadatta (Kullavagga VII), the story of the conversion and the sin of Sudinna (Vibhaôga, First Pârâgika). But the greater number of these narratives are of the most meagre description, and have altogether the appearance of being mere inventions.

There is little doubt that this is what they, in fact, were. Actual remembrance of the Buddha, and of his time, could have sufficed only in the rarest instances to give a correct historical basis for the Rules or Ceremonies, which had to be explained. We find a precisely similar state of things leading, in the Introductions to the Gâtaka Stories, to what were unquestionably inventions: and it must be acknowledged that the compilers have not taken the slightest trouble to conceal the evidently unsubstantial character of most of these summary introductions. But it does not follow that they were invented at the time when the Sutta-vibhaôga and the Khandhakas were compiled. They may possibly have formed part of the traditional explanatory teaching of the schools.

As to the time when the Sutta-vibhaôga and the Khandhakas were compiled, we have important evidence in their silence regarding the well-known Ten Points.

The long-continued struggle on that question—as important for the history of Buddhism as the Arian controversy for that of Christianity—agitated the whole Buddhist world to its very centre; and the attempted settlement of it, at the Council of Vesâlî, led to a most serious schism in the Buddhist Church. Now the ten expressions in which the question was summarised or catalogued¹ are (as was pointed out in the Introduction to the Pâli Text of the Mahâvagga) conspicuous by their absence from the Vibhaôga, and from all, except the last, of the Khandhakas². The first mention of most of them, and the first use of any one of them as a distinctive war -cry, is found in those last books, which are evidently an appendix to the rest of the Khandhakas, and of an entirely different nature from the earlier ones; for they contain a regular historical account of the two Councils, that of Râgagaha, and that of Vesâlî³.

Nota: 1. Siôgiloòa, dvaôgula, &c. (Kullavagga. XII, I, 10).

Nota: 2. That is, as war-cries; gâtarûparagata occurs in the sense of the precious metals.

Nota: 3. In the present division of the Khandhakas into two parts, called the Larger and Smaller Divisions (Mahâ- and Kulla-vagga), there are ten Khandhakas in the first Division, and ten, apart from this appendix, in the second Division. Without the appended two last Khandhakas the so-called smaller Division is really considerably smaller than the larger Division; and there is therefore a good reason for the name which was given to it. With the two last Khan dhakas the difference in length of the two Divisions as a whole is not sufficiently striking to account satisfactorily for the choice of their names; and the smaller Division actually contains two more Khandhakas than the larger. We lay no stress upon these facts, but it confirms the general argument to find little points of this kind tending in the same direction.

But the Ten Points in dispute were all matters of ecclesiastical law, they all related to observances of the brotherhood, they were in fact questions as to whether or not the ancient Rules should be relaxed or not in these ten respects. Is it possible that in a collection of works like the Vibhaôga and the Khandhakas, which seek to set forth, down to the minutest detail, and even with hair-splitting diffuseness, all that has any relation to the daily life of the Brethren, and the regulations of the Buddhist Order—is it possible that in such a collection, if, when it was compiled, the struggle on the Ten Points had already burst into flame, there should be no reference at all, even in interpolations, to any one of these ten disputes? That the difference of opinion on the Ten Points remains altogether unnoticed in those parts of the collection where, in the natural order of things, it would be obviously referred to, and that it is only mentioned in an appendix where the Council held on its account is described, shows clearly, in our opinion, that the Vibhaôga and the Khandhakas (save the two last) are older than the Council of Vesâlî and, of course, a for tiori that the Pâtimokkha and the Kammavâkas are so too.

The Council of Vesâlî is said in the XIIth Khandhaka of the Kullavagga to have taken place a hundred years after the Buddha's death. This is no doubt a round number; and the exact year of the date of the Buddha's death is open to question. If it be placed, according to the Ceylon chronicles, at exactly 218 years before Asoka's coronation, it will fall in or about 483 B.C.

But the expression '218 years' can in no case be regarded as an absolutely reliable statement of actual fact, and the date of 483 B.C. must therefore be taken subject to a marginal allowance of some decades. And it appears to one of us, for various reasons which he has elsewhere stated at length, that the balance of probability leads to the conclusion that the date of the Buddha's Parinibbâna must be brought down to the period from 420-400 B. C.¹ We do not enter upon that question here, as the details are intricate, and the result uncertain; and it is sufficient for our present purpose to be able to fix the Council of Vesâlî, even after making allowance for all possibilities, at within thirty years of 350 B.C.

Nota: 1. See the dissertation on this subject in Rhys Davids's Ancient Coins and Measures of Ceylon; and, more shortly, the close of the Introduction to his Buddhist Suttas from the Pâli."

We would only point out that there is really no ground for discontent with a result which can be fixed, after all, within a few decades. For what difference does that make in this case? If we had to deal with Grecian history, such a result might well be deemed unsatisfactory. There are differences, both personal and political, between Greece in 480, in 440, and in 400—differences well known to us. But whether we fix the date of an event in India in 480, or in 440, what does it, at present, matter? Who would be bold enough to say that the mention of India in 480 B.C. calls up to his mind a condition of things different from that suggested by the mention of India in 440 B. c., or even in 400 B.C.? We need not therefore take too much to heart the uncertainty of this chronological result; though we may regret that our comfort is drawn from no better source than our want of knowledge.

The Vibhaôga and the Twenty Khandhakas were at that time (circa 350 B.C.) already held in such high repute that no one ventured to alter them; a sanctity of this kind is not acquired without the lapse of a considerable time: and we think it is not going too far to say, Firstly, that these books must have been in existence, as we now have them, within thirty years, earlier or later, of, at least, 360 or 370 B.C.; Secondly, that the Old Commentary they have preserved must be considerably, perhaps fifty years, older; and Thirdly, that the Kammavâkas and the Pâtimokkha must be older still.

The reader will notice that in the foregoing discussion no mention has been made of the Fifth Book in the present division of the Vinaya Piùaka—the Parivâra-pâtha. The reason is that this work, an abstract of the other parts of the Vinaya, is in fact a very much later compilation, and probably the work of a Ceylonese Thera. In some stanzas, which are found at the end of the Parivâra-pâtha, it is stated to have been composed by the highly wise, learned, and skilful Dipa, after he had inquired here and there into the methods (literally, the way) followed by former teachers¹'.

Nota: 1: Pubbâkariyamaggañ ka pukkhitvâ ka tahim tahim

Dipo nâma mahâpañño sutadharo vikakkhano

Imam vitthârasam khepam saggâmaggena magghime

Kintayitvâ likhâpesi sissakânam sukhâvaham.

We have every hope that the foregoing argument will commend itself to our fellow workers as being, in the main, well founded. We now propose to test it by applying it in explanation of several difficult terms and phrases found in the Vinaya Piùaka, which seem to have been hitherto incorrectly interpreted.

It has been pointed out that, in the Pâtimokkha, the offences are arranged in certain classes, called, with reference to the heinousness of the act committed, Pârâgika, Saêghâdisesa, Pâkittiya, Pâùidesaniya, and Sekhiya. In other parts of the Vinaya, other offences are called Thullakkaya and Dukkaùa. On this nomenclature the Rev. S. Coles has founded a trenchant attack upon Buddhist morality. He says:

'Beside the Pârâjikas there are lesser faults, the nature of which is determined by various causes, as will subsequently appear. These are Saôghâdisesa, Thullaccaya, and Dukkaùa faults, and can all be easily remedied, the two latter especially; as, after a fault of this kind has been committed, the culprit has only to confess to his Upajjhâya (ordaining priest) without much delay, and is then exempted from all evil consequences; but the Saôghâ disesa being more serious (about half a Pârâjikâ), a course of penance has to be submitted to, and confession without delay made to twenty-five superior Bhikkhus. The nature and extent of these penances are not defined in the first book of the Vinaya Piùaka, but in others, to which reference will be made when these books are brought under consideration. Suffice it to say, that they can possibly have no deterring effect on crime, but rather form loop-holes through which most enormous and disgusting misdeeds may be committed, and yet the perpetrator may remain not only as a Buddhist, but as a Bhikkhu¹'

Nota: 1. Journal of the Ceylon Asiatic Society, 1867-1870, p. 155.

Mr. Coles then applies this argument to show that many offences against morality, being only called Dukkaùa and not Pârâgika, must have been looked upon very leniently, not only by the Buddhists, but by Gotama himself; and that therefore his system of morality was not of the lofty kind it has usually been supposed to be, but was, in fact, a mere cloak and encouragement to wickedness and crime!

If Mr. Coles had looked at the Piùaka he was discussing from a historical, instead of from a controversial, point of view, he would scarcely have advanced this argument. The use of the term Dukkaùa does not arise from, nor is it evidence of, a weakness in moral feeling; but merely of a difference in point of time. It occurs only in what we have ventured above to call the Notes: that is to say, in the latest portion of the Piùaka. When the author or authors of the final recension of the Vinaya had to speak of an offence not actually mentioned, though implied, in the text before them, they did not presume to call it by any of the names applied in the Pâtimokkha itself to the classification of offences. They no more dared to add to the number of Pârâgikas, for instance, than a clergyman would now venture seriously to propose an addition to the Ten Commandments. They made use of two technical terms (both entirely new ones), namely, Thullakkaya and Dukkaùa (literally, Serious Transgression and Bad-deed), using the former more sparingly, and for graver misdemeanours. No argument based on passages where the word Dukkaùa occurs can therefore have any force as to the teaching of Gotama himself; and the Bhikkhus, who did use the word, were restrained from using the older term Pârâgika by a feeling of reverence towards their sacred books—a feeling surely deserving, not of censure, but of sympathy.

Again, there are certain terms applied to various parts of the Vinaya itself on which the above historical analysis may throw some light. When Asoka, in the Edict of Bhabra, addressed to the Buddhist Order, exhorted them to take as their authority, among other works, the Vinaya-Samukase, or Abstract of the Vinaya, he may fairly be supposed to have referred to the Pâtimokkha, which that epithet would very appropriately describe. If it be asked why he did not then call it the Pâtimokkha, the explanation may be either that that word is more especially a term for the act to be performed, than for the liturgy which shows the way to perform it (though it was also undoubtedly used as a name of the liturgy), or else that the work was known under both designations.

We would just add, in passing, that, in the passage in question, the reading samukase (samutkarsha), instead of the formerly accepted samâkase, is quite clear in General Cunningham's lithograph¹; and the generally accepted view that the Edict was addressed to a council, and is therefore an authoritative confirmation of the Ceylon traditions regarding the Council of Patna, ought to be re considered. The Edict merely says: King Devânampiya of Magâdha salutes the Saêgha (that is, the Order, or the Community, of Bhikkhus)². Without desiring to throw any doubt upon the reality of the Council of Patna, we are driven to the conclusion that such an expression as the Saêgha' could not have been meant to describe a formal council. Surely, if the Edict had been addressed to such a council, the fact would have been plainly intimated.

Nota: 1. 'Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum,' pl. xv.

Nota: 2. Burnouf translated a l'assemblée du Magâdha, and Wilson, to the venerable assembly of Magâdha (see 'Corpus, &c., p. 131); but the reading is clearly Magâdhe in the 'Corpus,' while the older facsimile in the Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society (ix. 618) had the impossible form Magâdheê. Even if we could read Magâdhaê samghaê (an expression for which we know no parallel), the above remarks would still hold good. Compare further Professor Kern in the Jaartelling der Zuidelijke Buddhisten, pp. 30- 35.

It is just possible that Vinaya-Samukase may refer to the Old Commentary as well as to the Pâtimokkha; but this is not probable,, for there is no reason to believe that in Asoka's time the Old Commentary any longer existed apart from its setting in the Vibhaôga. And Vinaya-Samukase cannot for the reasons above stated mean, as has been supposed, the Parivâra-pâùha.

As regards the meaning of the word Pâtimokkha we have the explanation of the Old Commentator in that single passage of his work found, as above pointed out, in the Khandhakas¹. He there describes it as 'the origin, the front (mukha), the chief of the good Dhammâs;' where the word Dhammâ means qualities, and where the evident inference is that the commentator²derived Pâtimokkha from mukha. But, on the other hand, the tradition of the Northern Buddhists, in whose Sanskrit works the word is replaced by Pratimoksha, points to a derivation from the root muk.

Nota: 1. Pâtimokkhan ti âdiê etaê mukhaê etaê pamukhaê etaê kusalânaê dhammânaê, tena vukkati pâtimokkhan ti. Mahâvagga II, 3, 4.

Nota: 2. We use the phrase 'Old Commentator' for convenience only. The commentary was, no doubt, handed down by tradition in the Buddhist schools; and there is no reason to believe that it was the work of any one mind.

It seems scarcely open to doubt that we must, in accordance with this last interpretation, connect the word with mu, and not with mukha. 'Pratimukha' means in Sanskrit over against, standing close in front. How is it possible to derive from that any meaning appropriate as a title for the liturgy of confession called Pâtimokkha? On the other hand, the derivation from muk is straightforward and simple. Prati-muk (âtmanep.) means 'to free oneself, to get rid of;' and it is precisely through the recitation of this formular, and the answering of the questions contained in it, that the conscience of the member of the Brotherhood was set free from the sense of the offence he had incurred¹. Pâtimokkha or Pratimoksha means therefore Disburdening, Getting free. The lengthening of the first vowel in the Pâli word is not without analogies which have been already adduced by Childers. It is certain that the word is older than the present shape of the Formulary now so called; for it is used several times in the Formulary itself, as well as in many of the oldest Suttas.

Nota: 1. Compare Mahâvagga II, 3, 3.

The Old Commentator makes the Pâtimokkha 'the head of the good Dhammâs'. There is a curious passage in the Pâtimokkha where the Dhammâs are said to be included in the Suttas:

'If a Bhikkhu at the half-monthly recitation of the Pâtimokkha should say, "Now for the first time do I notice that this Dhammâ, as one handed down in the Suttas, embraced in the Suttas, gets recited every half-month!" then' &c.²

Nota: 2. Yo pana bhikkhu anvaddhamâsaê Pâtimokkhe uddissamâne evaê vadeyya; idân eva kho ahaê gânâmi, ayam pi kira dhammo suttâgato suttapariyâpanno anvaddhamâsaê uddesaê âgakkatîti, tañ ke. .. (the 73rd Pâkittiya, quoted in Kullavagga III, 34, 2).

It is plain here that neither Dhammâ nor Sutta is used in the sense to which we are accustomed from the later books. The Dhammâs recited half-monthly are those con tained in the scheme of offences given in the Pâtimokkha, and the Suttas must therefore mean the separate clauses of that Formulary.

The fact is that the use of the word Sutta is by no means confined in the oldest Pâli to the texts of what was afterwards the Sutta Piùaka, nor is it exclusively used either in earlier or later times³ in opposition to Vinaya.

Nota: 3. Though more especially concerned here with the earlier use of the word Sutta, it may be well to remind our readers of the name Suttadharâ applied in the Sumaôgala Vilâsinî to secular lawyers (see Alwis, 'Introd.' &c., p. 100).

Thus we find it used again, as we think, of the Rules of the Pâtimokkha; and in contrast, as in the rule above quoted, to Dhammâ, in Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23:

'This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhamma; but the Suttas have not been handed down to him, nor the Sutta-Vibhaôga'.

'This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhammâ, and the Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Sutta-Vibhaôga¹' .

Nota: 1. Suttaê tassa âgataê na Suttavibhaôgaê. On the latter term see below.

So again in the constantly repeated phrase above referred to—

If the two Pâtimokkhas are (or are not, as the connection requires) thoroughly known to a Bhikkhu in their entirety with all their divisions and explanations, if he have (or have not) thoroughly mastered them Sutta by Sutta, and Detail by Detail; then &c.²

Nota: 2. Ubhayâni nu kho Pâtimokkhâni vitthârena svâgatâni suvibhattâni suppavattîni suvinikkhitâni suttato anuvyañganaso (Mahâvagga I, 36, 14; I, 37, 14; Kullavagga IV, 14, 19; IX, 5, i). Anuvyañgana. may perhaps refer here to the Old Commentary.

—the word Sutta evidently refers to the clauses of the two Pâtimokkhas; and we find also in the immediate context the mention of Dhammâ or of Vinaya, or of both.

It is no doubt true that in one passage of the Mahâparinibbâna Sutta (IV, 8-ii=pp. 39, 40), Sutta is opposed to Vinaya in much the same way as Sutta Piùaka was afterwards opposed to Vinaya Piùaka; yet the contrast between these two ideas is usually expressed by the appo sition of Dhammâ to Vinaya³, and the passage in the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta stands, so far as we yet know, quite alone. Indeed in the oldest tradition the discourses or conversations now called Suttas seem not to have been called by that name, but are referred to as Suttantas.

Nota: 3. Compare H. Oldenberg's Introduction to his edition of the Mahâvagga, pp. 7 and following.

So in the Mahâvagga III, 5, 9, 12 mention is made of devout men, or of devout women, who may have been accustomed to recite some well-known Suttanta⁴; and in the next Khandhaka (IV, 15, 4) we find Suttanta, Dhammâ, and Vinaya all occurring in one context:

Nota: 4. Abhiññâtaê vâ Suttantaê bhaòati.

'It may happen, Brethren, that in some district on the day of Pavâraòâ, the night may have become far spent while the Brethren are in confusion—some reciting the Dhammâ, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Suttanta together, the custodians of the Vinaya discussing the Vinaya, and the preachers of the Dhammâ discoursing about the Dhammâ'.

The whole of these expressions recur in Kullavagga IV, 4, 4; and are found again, with others of a similar character, in Kullavagga VI, 6, 2. This last passage is in the Intro duction to a fable which of course recurs, as a Gâtaka, in the Gâtaka collection, and with an introduction in almost the same words. We should therefore expect to find there also the epithet suttantika ('versed in the Suttantas'), if that expression had remained in use as late as the fifth century A.D.; but it is omitted, the Suttantikas having been then long since replaced by those entrusted, not with the whole, but with special portions only, of the Dhammâ literature. The word Suttanta was however still in common use at the time when the presumably later books now contained in the Piùakas were composed; for it occurs in the Aôguttara Nikâya¹ and in a constantly recurring verse in the Buddha-vaêsa in which it is opposed to Vinaya², and the word is still used in the MSS. as the title of the more important Suttas.

Nota: 1. The Aôguttara Nikâya, Pañkaka Nipâta (Phayre MS. vol. ii. fol. gâì): Ye te Suttantâ Tathâgatassa bhâvitâ gambhîrâ gambhîratthâ lokuttarâ suññatapaùisaêyuttâ tesu bhaññamânesu na sussissanti no sotaê odahissanti na aññâkittaê upaùùhâpessanti na ka te dhamme uggahetabbaê pariyâpunitabbaê maññissanti; ye pana te suttantâ kathitâ kâveyyâ kittakkharâ kittabyañganâ bahirakâ sâvakabhâsitâ tesu bhaññamanesu sussissanti sotaê odahissanti; &c.

Nota: Ibid. fol. ôaì: Ye te bhikkhû bahussutâ âgatâgamâ dhammadharâ vinayadharâ mâtikâdharâ te na sakkakkaê suttantaê paraê vâkenti, tesam akkayena khinnamûlako suttanto hoti apaùisarano.

Nota: On the form compare the Sanskrit dèishùânta, vèittânta, and siddhânta.

Nota: 2. Suttantaê Vinayañ kâpi navaôgaê Satthusâsanaê

Sabbaê pariyâpuòitvâna sobhayi Ginasâsanaê.

The phrase is used of various Buddhas in verses 317, 348, 594, 627, and 786 of the Buddhavaêsa. This reference we owe to Dr. Morris.

In the passage quoted above from the Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23 there is a term Sutta-vibhaôga used as the name of some part of the Vinaya literature apparently distinct from the Suttas of the Pâtimokkha. The Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Suttavibhaôga.

The word recurs only in one other passage¹ and that is in the appended Khandhakas of the Kullavagga, in the account of the Council of Vesâlî². Seven passages are there quoted from the Pâtimokkha in condemnation of seven out of the Ten Points raised by the heretics; and in answer to the question, 'Where was it condemned?' and before the passages are quoted, the place where the passage was uttered is mentioned, and condemnation is stated to be 'in the Sutta-vibhaôga'. Thus

Nota: 1. That is, of the Vinaya Piùaka. We are not certain that it may not be found in the Sutta Piùaka.

Nota: 2. Kullavagga XII, 2, 8.

Revata says, 'Is it right, Lord, to drink galogi?'

Sabbakâmî replies, 'What, Friend, is this galogi?

Revata: 'Is it right, Lord, to drink strong drink which not being fermented, is not yet intoxicating?'

Sabbakâmî: 'No, my friend, it is not right'.

Revata: 'Where has it been condemned?'

Sabbakâmî: 'At Kosambî in the Suttavibhaôga'.

Revata: 'What does he (who drinks galogi) commit?'

Sabbakâmî: 'He commits the Pâkittiya offence of drinking strong drink and of drinking intoxicating liquors.'

This is a quotation of the Pâkittiya Rule, No. 51; but the words quoted do not in fact condemn the drinking of toddy, and neither the Pâtimokkha nor the Old Commentary contains any reference to the place, Kosambî, where the words are here said to have been uttered.

It is only in the introduction afterwards appended (in what is now called the Vibhaôga) to the two older works, that Kosambî is mentioned; and in the appendix following the Rule 51 in the Vibhaôga there are no exceptions which would include galogi. But Kosambî is mentioned in the Introductory History. It is therefore most probable that the term Sutta-vibhaôga refers to what is now called the Vibhaôga; or, if not, at least to that body of traditional teaching (including the Pâtimokkha and the Old Com mentary) out of which the present Vibhaôga was composed.

It may be convenient to make some reference here to the question whether the literature above discussed was handed down by memory only, or by writing. We are justified in expecting to find, in texts dealing in such minute detail with the daily life of the members of the Buddhist Order, some distinct evidence—and it will be equally distinct whether it consists in actual statement, or in silence—as to writing, and the use of written books. And this expectation is not disappointed.

In the first place, there are several passages which confirm in an indisputable manner the existence of the art of writing at the time when the Vinaya Texts were put into their present shape.

'A certain man, who had committed a theft, ran away, and got ordained among the Bhikkhus. Now he was written up in the king's palace with an injunction that he should be slain wheresoever he should be found¹.'—

Nota: 1. Aññataro puriso korikaê katvâ palâyitvâ bhikkhûsu pabbagito hoti. So ka rañño antepure likhito hoti yattha passitabbo tattha hantabbo ti (Mahâvagga I, 43).

'But there occurred to the parents of Upâli this consideration: "If Upâli should learn writing², Upâli might thus after our decease live at ease, and not be troubled."

Nota: 2. Sake kho Upâli lekhaê sikkheyya (Mahâvagga I, 49, i).

And in the Vibhaôga we find an interesting explanation of the Third Pârâgika Rule, which lays down that whosoever wilfully kills a man, or brings about his death, must be expelled from the Order.

In the Notes on this Rule the Sutta-vibhaôga discusses the case of some one causing the death of another by persuading him that suicide is glorious, or that it results in salvation. And in this connection the possibility is considered of these representations being made to the proposed victim, not by word of mouth, and not by a messenger, but by writing.

'He engraves a writing to this effect: "Who so dies, he acquires wealth, or acquires fame, or goes to heaven." By that writing he is guilty of a Dukkaùa offence. The other sees the writing, and, determining to die, is filled with painful feelings. (The writer is) guilty of a Thullakkaya offence. He does die. (The writer is) guilty of a Pârâgika offence¹.

Nota: 1. Lekhaê khindati yo evaê marati so dhanaê vâ labhati yasaê vâ labhati saggaê vâ gakkhatîti. Akkharakkharâya âpatti Dukkaùassa. Lekhaê passitvâ marissâmîti dukkhaê vedanaê uppâdeti. Âpatti thullaayassa. Marati. Âpatti pârâgikassa.

And again, with respect to the injunction addressed to the Sisters of the Order not to devote themselves to worldly wisdom (tirakkhâna-viggâ), the Vibhaôga makes an exception in favour of learning to write².

Nota: 2. Anâpatti lekhara pariyâpuòâti (Bhikkhuni-Pâtimokkha, Pâkittiya 49).

It is evident therefore that writing was in vogue in the time when the Notes on the Rules were put into their present form, that it was made use of for the publication of official announcements, and for the drawing up of written communications in private life; and that while the knowledge of the art was a possible source of livelihood, it was not confined to 'clerks', but was acquired by ordinary persons, and even by women.

But it is a long step from the use of writing for such public or private notifications to the adoption of it for the purpose of recording an extensive and sacred literature: and our texts show—and show, as it seems to us, in an equally indisputable manner—that for this latter purpose writing, however well known, had not yet come into use.

Had the sacred texts been written down and read, books, manuscripts, and the whole activity therewith connected, must have necessarily played a very important part in the daily life of the members of the Buddhist Order. Now the texts of the Vinaya place clearly enough before our eyes the whole of the 'personal property', so to speak, of the Buddhist Ârâmas and Viharas. Every movable thing, down to the smallest and least important domestic utensils, is in some way or other referred to, and its use pointed out; while the use of other articles, not usually found in the Viharas, is mentioned, and condemned. But nowhere do we find the least trace of any reference to manuscripts; much less of inks, or pens, or styles, or leaves, or other writing materials.

And we do find, on the contrary, passages which show the difficulties which arose every time that the memorial tradition by word of mouth of any of the sacred texts was interrupted, or threatened to be interrupted.

So, for instance, we find the case discussed of no one Bhikkhu, among all the Brethren dwelling in some particular place, knowing the Pâtimokkha. There was no other way out of the difficulty, save that of one of the Bhikkhus being sent out to some neighbouring fraternity, with the commission there to learn the Pâtimokkha by heart, either in its full extent (that is, as we take it, all the rules being learnt in full) or at least in abstract¹.

Nota: 1. Mahâvagga II, 17, 5. 6. On this meaning of vitthârena and saêkhittena see also Mahâvagga II, 15, i. 2.

And again, in a passage already quoted, we hear of the case of an Upasaka, who knows some important Suttanta, and is afraid that the knowledge of it will fade away. So he sends to a fraternity of Bhikkhus, and invites the Brethren to come over to him; and in that case an exception is made to the Rule forbidding the Brethren to travel in the rainy season, provided only that they do not stay away from home longer than seven days².

Nota: 2. Mahâvagga III, 5, 9.

We may quote in this connection a passage of the same tendency from the Aôguttara Nikâya, in which, among the circumstances hurtful to the security and the propagation of the Buddhist faith, the possibility is mentioned of the well-instructed Bhikkhus neglecting to take pains to hand on to others the Suttantas which they know. Then, when they have passed away, the root of that Suttanta is cut off, and it finds no place of refuge³.

Nota: 3. Katukka-Nipâta (Phayre MS. vol. i. fol. a); and repeated in the Pañkaka-Nipâta (ibid. vol. ii. fol. nâì): Ye te bhikkhû bahussutâ âgatâgamâ dhammadharâ vinayadharâ mâtikâdharâ te na sakkakkaê suttantaê paraê vâkenti tesaê akkayena khinnamûlako suttanto hoti apaùisarawo.

It is very plain from these last passages that the Buddhist community in its earliest days did not think of the possibility of using writing as a means of guarding against such painful accidents. Can this have arisen from any belief that writing the books would have been an irreverent treatment of them? We cannot think that among such a community as that of the Buddhists—who were so advanced in their views that they deliberately adopted the language of the people, and even took no thought, within the ranks of their community, of caste—any such con sideration would have prevailed. It seems much more probable that, at the date referred to, the art of writing had not been taken advantage of for the purposes of any kind of literature; but that its use was wholly confined to recording short messages or notes, or private letters, or advertisements of a public character—a result which may well have been due to the want of any practical material on which to engrave the letters that were nevertheless evidently known¹.

Nota: 1. Compare Burnell, Elements of South Indian Palaeography, p. 10.

On the texts above quoted, and the inferences which may fairly be drawn from them, we would base two remarks. Firstly, that there can be no reasonable ground for doubting the correctness of the ancient tradition preserved in the well-known verse of the Ceylon Chroniclers, when, speaking of the time of Vaùùa Gâmaòi, who began to reign 88 B. c., they say,

'The text of the Three Piùakas, and the Commentary too thereon,

The wise Bhikkhus of former time had handed down hy word of mouth:

The then Bhikkhus, perceiving how all beings do decay,

Meeting together, wrote them in books, that the Dhammâ might last long²
'

Nota: 2. Dîpavaêsa XX, 20, 21; Mahâvaêsa, p. 207. As the stanza is common to both works it is taken in all probability, word for word, from the Old Commentary in Siêhalese, the Sîhalaùùhakathâ, preserved in the Mahâvihâra in Anurâdhapura. See H. Oldenberg's Introduction to his edition of the Dîpavaêsa.

But, secondly, though we must therefore believe that the Vinaya, before it was reduced to writing, was handed down for about three hundred years solely by memory, and that it lived only in the minds of the Vinayadharâ, theBhikkhus who were versed in the Vinaya, we do not think it is at all necessary, or even possible, to impugn the substantial accu racy of the texts handed down in a manner that seems, to moderns, so unsafe. The Text, as it lies before us, stands so well against all proofs, whether we compare its different parts one with another, or with the little that is yet known of its northern counterparts¹, that we are justified in regarding these Pâli books as in fact the authentic mirror of the old Magadhi text as fixed in the central schools of the most ancient Buddhist Church. That text, in the dialect of Magâdha, may have been lost to us, once for all; and we can scarcely hope, unless some isolated sentences may hereafter be found preserved here and there in Inscriptions, that this loss will ever be, even partially, made good. But we may well be thankful that the faithful zeal and industry of these old monks has preserved for us a translation, in a dialect so nearly allied to the original, and in so perfect and trustworthy a state as the Pâli version of the Vinaya still undoubtedly presents.

Nota: 1. How little this is, is apparent from the fact that Burnouf, who had studied all those that were then accessible, did not even find the words pârâgika and saêghâdisesa (Introduction, &c., p. 301). To the Tibetan texts Csoma Körösi has devoted a few pages ('Analysis of the Dulva' in Asiatic Researches, vol. xx. pp. 45 and foll.) Of the Chinese we have only the brief notices of M. Remusat (Foe Koue Ki, pp. 104 and foll.) and of Mr. Beal (in H. Oldenberg's Introduction to the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xliv, xlv). The last scholar also mentions several Vinaya works, of the contents of which however nothing further is known, in his Catalogue of Chinese Buddhist Works now in the India Office Library (pp. 67-71).

We trust that the choice we have made from the literature of the Vinaya Piùaka for insertion in this Collection of Translations from the Sacred Books of the East will be considered to need little justification. As the oldest and in many respects most important material of the Vinaya literature we have included a version of the Pâtimokkha; though confining ourselves to the Bhikkhu-Pâtimokkha, as our predecessors, Mr. Dickson and Professor Minayeff, have done before us. We could not consider, even after their labours, that a new translation of this difficult text would be superfluous. And of the younger literature we have confined ourselves to the Khandhakas, both because these books, in their variety, and in the fulness of their contents, are better calculated to afford a correct view of the conditions, and the life, of that oldest and most influential of the many monkish orders, the Buddhist Saêgha; and also because the Sutta-vibhaôga is little more than an expansion of the Pâtimokkha, which we have already, for the reasons just stated, determined to include¹.

T. W. RHYS DAVIDS.

H. OLDENBERG.

November, 1880.

Nota: 1. For the Upasampadâ-kammavâkara see the passages recurring in the Khandhakas as pointed out above, p. xix.

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON MAHÂVAGGA III, 2, 2 (vassupanâyikâ).

As entering upon Vassa is called vassaê upagakkhati or vassaê upeti, we believe that upanâyikâ, the final member of the compound vassupanâyikâ (entrance upon Vassa), must not be derived from upa-ni, but from upa-i (upan-i). Comp. -Satapatha-Brâhmaòa II, 3, 2, 2: ahar-ahar vai Nadb Naishidho Yamaê râgânaê dakshiòata upanayati (Sâyaòa: upagakkhati). The preposition upan contained in upan-ayati will be treated of by Professor JOH. SCHMIDT in the 26th volume of Kuhn's Zeitschrift,

PÂTIMOKKHA.

THE PÂTIMOKKHA.

THE WORDS OF DISBURDENMENT.

REVERENCE TO THE BLESSED ONE, THE HOLY ONE, THE FULLY ENLIGHTENED ONE.

NIDANA¹ .

INTRODUCTION.

May the Chapter², reverend Sirs, hear me !

To-day is the sacred day (of the full, or new, moon), the fifteenth day of the half- month³. If it be convenient to the Chapter, let the Chapter hold Uposatha, let it repeat the Pâtimokkha. How is it with respect to the necessary preliminaries to a meeting of the Order? Let the reverend brethren announce their purity⁴, and I will rehearse the Pâtimokkha!

We all gladly give ear and do attend⁵!

Nota: 1. The whole of this Introduction, with the ancient commentary upon it (referred to above, in the Introduction), recurs in the Mahâvagga II, 3, where further notes will be found. The previous chapter in Dickson entitled the Pukkhâvissaggana is not part of the ancient text of the Pâtimokkha.

Nota: 2. Saêgho: of course not the whole Order, but those members then present, spoken of collectively.

Nota: 3. Uposatho paòòaraso. See below, Mahâvagga, Book II, and especially chap. 14.

Nota: 4. That is, their freedom from any of those disabilities which are declared below, Book II, to incapacitate a member of the Order from assembling at a formal meeting on the Uposatha day.

Nota: 5. On sabbe'va santâ compare ubho'va santâ in the ninth Nissaggiya, and the Old Commentary loc. cit.

Whosoever have incurred a fault, let him declare it! If no fault have been incurred it is meet to keep silence!

Now, venerable Sirs, it is by your silence, that I shall know whether you are pure. As to each one question put there must be an answer, so, in such a meeting as this, each question is put¹as many as three times. Then if any Bhikkhu, when it has been three times put, knowingly omit to declare a fault incurred, he is guilty of uttering a conscious lie. Venerable Sirs, the uttering of a deliberate lie has been declared by the Blessed One to be a condition hurtful (to spiritual progress)². Therefore a fault, if there be one, should be declared by that Bhikkhu who remembers it, and desires to be cleansed there from. For a fault, when declared, shall be light to him.

Nota: 1. The spelling of the Pâli word in the text should be anussavitaw, and so below, anussâviyamâne. By the text we refer throughout to Mr. Dickson's very careful edition, all the necessary corrections in which they are mostly only misprints will be noticed in the following notes.

Nota: 2. See Mahâvagga II, 3, 7.

Venerable Sirs, the Introduction is now recited.

Thus do I question you, venerable Sirs, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time do I question you, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time do I question you, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Introduction.

PÂRÂGIKÂ DHAMMÂ.

THE PÂRÂGIKÂ RULES¹.

Nota: 1. The whole of the following portion of the Pâtimokkha, together with the ancient commentary upon it, is contained in the first book of the Vibhaôga, also called the Pârâgikaê.

Dickson translates throughout Dhammâ by 'offences'. He is no doubt right in taking the word, not in its ordinary sense of condition or quality, but in a more strictly technical, legal, sense. 'Offences' is however not the right direction in which to limit the general sense. Dhammâ must here be 'Rules', in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx.

Here these four Rules, concerning those acts which bring about Defeat², come into recitation,

Nota: 2. Childers (sub voce) follows Burnouf (Introduction, &c., p. 301) in deriving the word Pârâgika from AG with pârâ prefixed, taking that compound in the sense of 'to expel'. Dickson's translation deadly sin rests upon the same basis. The Buddhist commentators refer the word to the passive of GI with parâ prefixed, in the sense of 'to suffer defeat'. So the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ: Pârâgiko hotîti parâgito parâgayaê âpanno. Now the root AG belongs to the Vedic dialect only, and is not met with in any Buddhist expressions, and even in the Vedas it does not occur with parâ prefixed. The Buddhist forms of speech have quite different and settled terms with which to convey the idea of expulsion. On the other hand, there was a considerable group of words in use in the Buddhist community with which pârâgika stands in close connection: parâgi, 'to suffer defeat'; parâgita, 'defeated'; parâgaya, 'defeat'. We cannot therefore but think that the native commentators are right in associating pârâgika also with this group, and that the word really means 'involving defeat'. This may mean specifically defeat in the struggle with Mâra the Evil One; but more probably defeat in the struggle again st evil generally, defeat in the effort to accomplish the object for which the Bhikkhu entered the Order, in the effort to reach the 'supreme goal' of Arahatship.

1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has taken upon himself the Bhikkhus system of self-training and rule of life, and has not thereafter withdrawn from the training, or declared his weakness, shall have carnal knowledge of any one, down even to an animal, he has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion¹.

Nota: 1. 'Declared his weakness' refers to the permission (on the ground that it was better to leave the Order than to burn) for a Bhikkhu to acknowledge himself unfit for the discipline, and throw off the robe. 'Withdrawn from the training' is the formal expression for thus throwing off the Robes. See below, Mahâvagga II, 22, 3.

On sikkhâsâgîvaê, which is by no means only 'Rules of the Order', see the Vibhaôga (Pâr. I, 8, i).

2. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take, from village or from wood, anything not given what men call 'theft²' in such manner of taking as kings would seize the thief for, and slay, or bind, or banish him, saying, 'Thou art a thief, thou art stupid, thou art a fool, thou art dishonest,'—the Bhikkhu who in that manner takes the thing not given, he, too, has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion.

Nota: 2. The Vibhaôga (Pâr. II, 3) takes theyya-saêkhâtaê as meaning with dishonest intent.'

3. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall knowingly deprive of life a human being, or shall seek out an assassin against a human being, or shall utter the praises of death, or incite another to self-destruction, saying, 'Ho! my friend! what good do you get from this sinful, wretched life? death is better to thee than life!'—if, so thinking, and with such an aim, he, by various argument, utter the praises of death or incite another to self-destruction—he, too, is fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion³.

Nota: 3. The deviations here from Mr. Dickson's version will, we hope, justify themselves. There is no commentary on hâraka, though the Vibhaôga (Pâr. Ill, 3, i) explains the different kinds of Sattha. Pâpaka must be sinful,' not merely 'poor;' the suggestion is 'by destroying your life you will escape from the possibility of sinning.'

4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, without being clearly conscious of extraordinary qualities, shall give out regarding himself that insight into the knowledge of the noble ones has been accomplished, saying, 'Thus do I know,' 'Thus do I perceive:' and at some subsequent time whether on being pressed, or without being pressed, he, feeling guilty, shall be desirous of being cleansed from his fault, and shall say, 'Brethren! when I knew not, I said that I knew; when I saw not, I said that I saw—telling a fruitless falsehood; then, unless he so spake through undue confidence he, too, has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion¹.

Nota: 1. The extraordinary qualities (literally, superhuman qualities ) are denned to be the Vimokkhas, Samâdhis, the Samâpattis, the Ñânadassana, the having experienced the Noble Path, and having realised the Fruit thereof; that is to say, Arahatship and the highest forms of spiritual emotion and intelligence which can accompany Arahatship. They are in fact, therefore, superhuman only in the sense of extraordinary; as it is precisely human beings, and only human beings, who were supposed to be able to acquire these qualities.

Uddhakka, 'Self-righteousness,' is also the last but one of the ten Saêyoganas, or 'Fetters,' which the Arahat has to break.

Venerable Sirs, the four Conditions of Defeat have been recited, of which when a Bhikkhu has fallen into one or other, he is no longer allowed to be in co-residence with the Bhikkhus. As before, so afterwards, he is defeated, he is not in communion².

Nota: 2. The sentences which follow in the text, but are not here translated, and in which it is declared that all the following portions of the Pâtimokkha have already been heard, do not occur in the Vibhaôga. They are not part of the Pâtimokkha; but only the form to be used, when the Pâtimokkha cannot be recited in full, and all the remaining Rules are to be omitted. According to Mahâvagga II, 15, i, 4 this abridged recital may be used in certain cases of danger.

On Yathâ pure tatha pakkhâ there is no explanation in the Old Commentary. The phrase probably means that the Bhikkhu is irrevocably defeated. He must remain for ever in the condition (of permanent exclusion from the Order) into which he has brought himself.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Pârâgikas.

SAMGHÂDISESÂ DHAMMÂ.

RULES WHICH REQUIRE, AS WELL IN THEIR EARLIER AS IN THEIR LATER STAGES, FORMAL MEETINGS OF THE ORDER¹.

Nota: 1. The expression is curious, but the authorities given by Childers (sub voce) are decisive as to its meaning. Whereas the Pârâgika offences were dealt with in one meeting of the Order, these thirteen offences gave rise to the various Saêghakammas (formal resolutions or proceedings at meetings of the Order), which are explained in detail in the third Khandhaka of the Kullavagga.

The text of, and the ancient commentary on this portion of the Pâtimokkha will be found in the Vibhaôga in the Book on the Saêghadisesas.

Here, venerable Sirs, the thirteen matters, which, as well in their earlier as in their later stages, require formal meetings of the Order, come into recitation.

1. The emission of semen by design, except by a person sleeping, is a Saêghadisesa.

2. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being degraded², shall, with perverted ³ mind, come into bodily contact with a woman, by taking hold of her hand, or by taking hold of her hair, or by touching any part of her body—that is a Saêghadisesa.

Nota: 2. Otiòòo, literally, 'having gone down,' which the old commentator in the Vibhaôga explains as 'lustfully, or with a mind bound by desire.' Our word 'degraded' has often a very similar connotation.

Nota: 3. Vipariòatena, literally, 'changed;' here 'changed for the worse.' Compare Mahâ-sudassana Sutta II, 39, and the Old Comment at Minayeff, p. 64.

3. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being degraded, shall, with perverted mind, address a woman with wicked words, exciting to passion as those of a young man to a maid that is a Saòghadisesa ⁴ .

Nota: 4. Compare the second Aniyata.

4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being degraded, shall, with perverted mind, magnify, in the hearing of a woman, ministration to himself ₁ (by saying), 'This, Sister, would be the noblest of ministrations, that to so righteous and exalted a religious person as myself you should ministrate by that act,' (meaning) sexual intercourse—that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 1. Attakâmapârikariyâ, perhaps to his lusts; but we follow the old commentator.

5. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall act as a go-between for a woman to a man, or for a man to a woman, or for a wife, or for a paramour, or even for a harlot—that is a Saêghâdisesa.

6. A Bhikkhu who, begging (the materials) to gether, is having a hut put up for his own use, to belong to no one (else), must have it made of due measurement. And herein this is the measurement in length twelve spans according to the accepted span ² , in breadth seven spans (measured) inside.

Nota: 2. Sugata-vidatthiyâ. Dickson translates of the span of Buddha,' Sugata being one of the many epithets applied to the Buddha in poetry, or poetical prose. Mr. James D'Alwis in the Ceylon Asiatic Society's Journal for 1874 has a long article to show that this cannot be the correct meaning of the word 'Sugata' in this connection; and we think he is right, though his discussion as to what it does mean (evidently more than a simple span) seems to lead to no certain conclusion. The older Ceylon commentators take the expression as being equal to one and a half carpenter's cubits, a 'carpenter's cubit' (Siêhalese Waòu-riyana) being two ordinary cubits, so that 'the Buddha's span' (as they translate it) would be four feet and a half! But the Bhikkhus of the present day in Ceylon take it to be equal to the length of the supposed foot-print of the Buddha on Adam's Peak; that is, four ordinary cubits, or six feet. See Dickson's note; and compare Nissaggiya 15, and Pâkittiya 87-92.

There is no comment on the phrase in the Old Commentary, which is especially curious if the word Sugata meant 'the Buddha's,' that is to say, the Buddha's span, when that work was composed.

The Bhikkhus must be brought to the place to approve the site; and those Bhikkhus shall approve a site free from danger ¹ , and with an open space around it ². If a Bhikkhu shall, at his own request, have a hut put up on a dangerous site, without the open space around it, or shall not bring the Bhikkhus to approve the site, or shall exceed the (due) measure that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 1. That is, either to living creatures (birds, ants, and so on) by clearing the site; or to the future resident after it is built. See the old commentator's note on Sârambha at Minayeff, p. 71.

Nota: 2. 'Sufficient for a cart drawn by a yoke of oxen to pass round it,' according to the old commentator.

7. A Bhikkhu who is having a large ³ residence made for his own use, and to belong (also) to others, shall bring the Bhikkhus to the place to approve the site; and those Bhikkhus shall approve a site free from danger, and with an open space around it. If a Bhikkhu shall have a large residence made on a dangerous site, without the open space around it, or shall not bring the Bhikkhus to the place to approve the site—that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 3. Mahallaka. Compare Kullavagga VI, ii, i.

8. Whatsoever Bhikkhu ⁴ , in harshness, malice, or anger, shall harass (another) Bhikkhu by a ground less (charge of having committed) a Pârâgika offence, thinking to himself, Perchance I may (thus) get him to fall from this religious life ⁵ and then at some later time, either when he is pressed, or without his being pressed, the case turns out to be groundless, and the Bhikkhu confesses his malice¹ that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 4. In the text read, of course, Bhikkhu, not Bhikkhû.

Nota: 5. I. e. to throw off the robes, to leave the Order.

Nota: 1. Do saê was probably meant here to refer to the do so at the beginning of the rule.

9. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, in harshness, malice, or anger, shall harass another Bhikkhu by a groundless charge of having committed a Pârâgika offence, sup porting himself by some point or other of no im portance in a case that really rests on something of a different kind; thinking to himself, 'Perchance I may thus get him to fall from this religious life'—and then at some later time, either when he is pressed, or without his being pressed, the case turns out to rest on something of a different kind, and that Bhikkhu confesses his malice—that is a Saêghâdisesa².

Nota: 2. For instance, the Bhikkhu has seen that A, who is a Khattiya, has committed some offence. He says either that he has seen a Khattiya commit that offence, and thus harasses an innocent person; or he says that A has committed a Pârâgika offence, whereas the offence is of a lesser nature.

For kaveyyan in the text read kâveyyan.

10. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall go about to cause division in a community ³ that is at union, or shall persist in calling attention to some matter calculated to cause division, that Bhikkhu should thus be ad dressed by the Bhikkhus: 'Sir, go not about to cause division in a community that is at union;' or, 'Persist not in calling attention to a matter calculated to cause division;' 'Be, Sir, at one with the community, for the community, being at unity, in harmony, without dispute, dwells pleasantly under one authority¹.' If that Bhikkhu, when he has thus been spoken to by the Bhikkhus, should persist as before, then let that Bhikkhu be (formally) admo nished about it by the Bhikkhus as a body ², even to the third time, to the intent that he abandon that course. If, while being so admonished up to the third time, he abandon that course, it is well: if he abandon it not—that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 3. Saêgha; that is, the company of the Brethren dwelling in one place, or in one district.

Nota: 1. Ekuddeso; that is, the authority of the rules recited in the Pâtimokkha.

Nota: 2. Samanubhâsitabbo. We think 'admonish' is not too strong a rendering of this term; and not inconsistent with the equality of the fraternity, as the admonition comes from the united body. The preposition sam need not imply a Saêghakamma, which appears to have been necessary only after the Saêghâdisesa offence had been completed. We occasionally render the word by 'adjure.'

11. Now if other Bhikkhus, one, or two, or three, become adherents of that Bhikkhu, and raise their voices on his side; if they should say thus: 'Say not, Sirs, anything against that Bhikkhu! That Bhikkhu both speaks according to the Dhammâ, and he speaks according to the Vinaya; it is our wish, too, and desire, that he adopts, and gives expression to; and he speaks, knowing that what he says appears to us also to be right:'—then let those Bhikkhus be addressed by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Say not so, Sirs! That Bhikkhu speaks not according to the Dhammâ, neither does he speak according to the Vinaya. Let not, Sirs, the causing of division in the community be pleasing to you! Be, Sirs, at one with the community! for the community, being at unity, in harmony, without dispute, dwells pleasantly under one discipline.' If those Bhikkhus, wrien they have thus been spoken to by the Bhikkhus, should persist as before, those Bhikkhus should be (formally) adjured by the Bhikkhus, as a body, even to the third time, to the end that they abandon that course. If, while being so adjured, up to the third time, they abandon that course, it is well: if they abandon it not—that is a saêghâdisesa.

12. Should a Bhikkhu refuse to listen to what is said to him ¹; and when spoken to by the Bhikkhus, in accordance with the Dhammâ ² , touching the pre cepts handed down in the body of recited law ³ , will allow nothing to be said to him (objecting), 'Say nothing to me, Sirs, either good or bad: and I will say nothing, either good or bad, to you. Be good enough, Sirs, to refrain from speaking to me!'—then let that Bhikkhu be addressed by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Do not, Sir, make yourself a person who cannot be spoken to: make yourself rather, Sir, a person to whom we can speak. Speak to the Bhikkhus, Sir, in accordance with the Dhammâ; and the Bhikkhus, Sir, will speak in accordance with the Dhammâ to you. For thus has the church ⁴ of the Blessed One grown large; that is to say, by mutual converse, and by mutual help ⁵.' If that Bhikkhu, when he has thus been spoken to by the Bhikkhus, should persist as before, then let that Bhikkhu be (formally) adjured by the Bhikkhus as a body, even to the third time, to the end that he abandon that course. If, while being so adjured, up to the third time, he abandon that course, it is well: if he abandon it not—that is a saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 1. Dubbako is not 'unruly,' as Dickson has, following Childers, who gives 'abusive, unruly, violent.' It means rather 'difficult to reason with, averse to instruction.' Compare Gâtaka I, 151, 152.

Nota: 2. Sahadhammikaê, which is here adverbial; and where the Dhammâ refers to the Rules, as is pointed out in the Introduction.

Nota: 3. Uddesa-pariyâpannesu; uddesa being here practically the same as Pâtimokkha.

Nota: 4. Parisâ, the retinue, the followers, the adherents/ referring here to the Saêgha only.

Nota: 5. In the text read vutthâpanena.

13. Should a Bhikkhu dwell near a certain village or town, leading a life hurtful to the laity, and devoted to evil, (so that) his evil deeds are seen and heard, and the families led astray by him are seen and heard, let that Bhikkhu be spoken to by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Your life, Sir, is hurtful to the laity, and evil; your evil deeds, Sir, are seen and heard; and families are seen and heard to be led astray by you. Be so good, Sir, as to depart from this residence; you have dwelt here, Sir, long enough.' If, when that Bhikkhu is thus addressed by the Bhikkhus he should answer the Bhikkhus thus: 'The Bhikkhus are walking in longing, the Bhikkhus are walking in malice, the Bhikkhus are walking in delusion, the Bhikkhus are walking in fear; and, for a fault of a like nature, they send some away, and some they send not away¹:'—then that Bhikkhu should be spoken to by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Say not so, Sir! The Bhikkhus walk not in longing, the Bhikkhus walk not in malice, the Bhikkhus walk not in delusion, the Bhikkhus walk not in fear; and they send not some away, for a fault of a like nature, while they send others not away. Your life, Sir, is hurtful to the laity, and evil; your evil deeds, Sir, are seen and heard, and families are seen and heard, Sir, to be led astray by you. Be so good, Sir, as to depart from this residence; you have dwelt here, Sir, long enough.' If that Bhikkhu, when thus spoken to by the Bhikkhus should persist as before, that Bhikkhu should be (formally) adjured by the Bhikkhus as a body, even to the third time, to the end that he abandon that course. If, while being so adjured, up to the third time, he abandon that course, it is well: if he abandon it not that is a Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 1. On the use of Pabbâgeti in this sense comp, the 2nd Pâr.

Venerable Sirs, the thirteen matters which require, as well in their earlier as in their later stages, formal meetings of the Order, have been recited; nine which become offences at once, and four which are not completed until the third admonition.

If a Bhikkhu have committed either one or other of these¹, for as many days as he knowingly conceals his sin, for so many days must that Bhikkhu, even against his will, remain in probation². When the probation is over, that Bhikkhu must, for six further days, undergo the Manatta discipline ³ (Penance). When the Penance has been removed, that Bhikkhu must be reinstated in some place where the community of the Bhikkhus forms a body of twenty. If a community of Bhikkhus forming a body of less than twenty, even by one, should reinstate that Bhikkhu, he is not reinstated, and that community is blameworthy. This is the proper course in that case.

Nota: 1. Literally, 'of which.' In the text there should be no full stop after yâvatatiyakâ.

Nota: 2. On the regulations respecting Parivâsa (Probation), see Kullavagga II, 1-3.

Nota: 3. On the regulations respecting Mânatta (Penance), see Kullavagga II, 6-8.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Saêghâdisesa.

ANIYATÂ DHAMMÂ¹ .

RULES REGARDING UNDETERMINED MATTERS.

Here, venerable Sirs, the two Rules regarding undetermined matters come into recitation.

1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take a seat with a woman, one man with one woman, in secret, on a secluded seat, suitable² (for sexual intercourse); and if a believing woman, trustworthy of speech, who has seen (them so), shall lay it to his charge under one or other of three Rules, either under the Pârâgika³, or under the Saêghâdisesa⁴, or under the Pâkittiya⁵ Rules:—let then that Bhikkhu, if he acknowledge that he has so sat, be dealt with (according to the circumstances reported) for a Pârâgika, or for a Saêghâdisesa, or for a Pâkittiya; or let that Bhikkhu be dealt with under that one of those three Rules under which the believing woman, trustworthy in speech, shall lay it to his charge.

This rule relates to a matter undetermined.

2. And furthermore, even if the seat be not se cluded, and not convenient (for sexual intercourse), but be convenient for addressing a woman with wicked words⁶ , then whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take a seat with a woman, one man with one woman, in secret, on such a seat, and a believing woman, trust worthy in speech, who has seen (them so), shall lay it to his charge under one or other of two Rules, either under the Saêghâdisesa, or under the Pakittiya Rule let then that Bhikkhu, if he acknowledge that he has so sat, be dealt with (according to the circumstances reported) for a Saêghâdisesa, or for a Pâkittiya; or let that Bhikkhu be dealt with under that one of those two Rules under which the believing woman, trustworthy in speech, shall lay it to his charge.

Nota: 1. The whole of the following portion of the Pâtimokkha, to gether with the Old Commentary on it, recurs in the Vibhaôga, Book III.

Nota: 2. Alaêkammaniye, an expression found only in this passage.

The Vibhaôga interprets it as above (Aniyata I, 2, i).

Nota: 3. The ist Pârâgika.

Nota: 4. The 2nd Saêghâdisesa.

Nota: 5. Pakittiya 44, 45; and compare also 7, 27.

Nota: 6. Compare the 3rd Saêghâdisesa, and probably the 4th is also referred to.

This rule relates to a matter undetermined.

Venerable Sirs, the two Rules regarding uncertain matters have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, Are you pure in this matter?

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Aniyatas.

NISSAGGIYÂ PÂKITTIYÂ DHAMMÂ.

PÂKITTIYA RULES INVOLVING FORFEITURE.

Here, venerable Sirs, the thirty Pâkittiya Rules involving forfeiture come into recitation.

1. When the robes have been settled, when the Kathina has been taken up by the Bhikkhu, an extra robe may be kept up to the end of a period of ten days. To him who goes beyond that there is a Pakittiya offence involving forfeiture¹ .

Nota: 1. The following Rules, most of which have long ago fallen into abeyance, depend in great measure upon communistic customs of the ancient Fraternity, which are now somewhat difficult to understand. The following explanation of this rule, and more especially of the first few words of it, is therefore submitted with diffidence. At the end of the Vassa period (see below, Mahâvagga, Books III and VII) the Saêgha, or community of brethren in any place, was accus tomed to give over to some one of the Bhikkhus such store of robes (Kathina-dussa) as it possessed; and it should here be observed that no Bhikkhus had a separate personal ownership over his robes, though nominally given to him for his own use, and really his own subject to the rules, they were, technically speaking, the property of the whole Saêgha (that is, here, of the Order as a whole, not of the community residing together at that place). The Bhikkhu above referred to then spread the store of robes out to dry (suriye attharati); and afterwards satisfied out of it the wants of any brother whose robes, through the dampness of the season or other causes, had become spoiled. Meanwhile, each of the Bhikkhus had, of course, to wear something—it being one of the points most frequently insisted upon that a Bhikkhu should be decently clad, in direct contradiction to certain then popular views as to the sanctity of nakedness—but, during the interval, some of the rules about the robes were temporarily relaxed.

Now the Mahâvagga (VII, i, 7) gives eight reasons by which the Kathina license would be extinguished for any one particular Bhikkhu alone—as it would be for the community at that place by the formal 'taking up of the store of robes' (Kathinuddhâra or Kathinassa ubbâdra); and with it that Bhikkhu's claim to a share in the common store. These eight reasons are merely eight ways in which that particular Bhikkhu's wants are already amply supplied; and the necessity, in his case, for a relaxation of the rules no longer exists.

One of these reasons is that his set of robes is settled or done for (kîvaraê nitthitaê); which, according to the old commentator on our rule here, means that his set has been made, or spoiled, or destroyed, or burnt, or that his hope of receiving one from the laity has been disappointed (nitthitakivarasmin ti kîvaraê kataê vâ hoti natthaê vâ vinatthaê vâ daddhaê vâ kîvarâsâ vâ upakkhinnâ, ac cording to which the Scholion in Dickson's note must be corrected).

In each of these cases his wants are already supplied by the set of robes he has retained for wear during the process of drying: only the case of those Bhikkhus remains to be settled who have not had new robes made, and whose old ones were still good enough to wear during that process.

After the Kathinuddhâra, either particular or general, no Bhikkhu can retain for his own use an atireka-kîvara, a spare robe. He must give it up to any brother who has need of it.

As to the 'ten days,' the Sutta Vibhaôga has the following story.

Ânanda, after the Katthinuddhâra, has a spare robe. He wants to give it to Sâriputta; but the latter is in Sâketa, and is not expected back till the ninth or tenth day. So the Buddha, to meet such cases, establishes the rule that the spare robe may be kept up to the tenth day.

The words 'a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture,' repeated at the end of each of the Nissaggiyas, are intended to mean that that offence involves, firstly, all that a Pâkittiya involves; and secondly, forfeiture.

2. When the robes have been settled, after the taking up of the Kathina by the Bhikkhu, if a Bhikkhu be without his three robes, even for a single night, unless with the permission of the Bhikkhus—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture¹ .

Nota: 1. To this Rule there is the following story in the Sutta Vibhaôga.

Certain Bhikkhus left their robes in charge of the other Bhikkhus, and went on a journey. The robes, being laid by for a long time, became spoilt. The Buddha thereupon forbad a Bhikkhu, under the circumstances stated in this Rule, to separate himself from his robes (ti-kîvara).

As regards the permission we have the story that a sick Bhikkhu was invited home that his friends might nurse him. He answers, 'The Blessed One has forbidden us to separate ourselves from our robes. I am sick, and unable to travel in my robes.' Then the Blessed One allows a sick brother to obtain leave to dispense with the Rule.

3. When the robes have been settled, when the Kathina has been taken up by the Bhikkhu, if a set of robes should be offered to a Bhikkhu out of season, it may be accepted by that Bhikkhu, should he so wish. But when he has accepted it, it must be made up at once; and if it be not sufficient for him, it may be kept up to the end of a month by that Bhikkhu should he have any hope that the deficiency may be supplied. If he keep it beyond that time, even if there be hope of (the deficiency) being supplied—that is a Pâkittiya offence requiring forfeiture.

4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have his soiled robe¹ washed, or dyed, or beaten by a Bhikkhunî (sister)² who is not related to him—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture³.

Nota: 1. Literally, 'an old robe,' which the Vibhaôga (Nissaggiya IV, 2, i) explains as one that has been once worn.

Nota: 2. And so, frequently, below.

Nota: 3. Compare the 17th Nissaggiya.

5. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall receive a robe from the hands of a Bhikkhunî not related to him, except in exchange that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

6. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall ask a householder, or a householder's wife⁴ , not being related to him, for a robe, except at the right season—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

4 Householder is here gahapati; that is, pater familias. See Rh. D.'s note on Mahâ-sudassana Sutta I, 41.

Here the right season means when the Bhikkhu has been robbed of his robe, or when his robe has been destroyed. This is the right season in this connection.

7. If the householder, or the householder's wife, should offer him a choice¹ from (the materials for) many robes, that Bhikkhu may have robes made out of it up to the (due portion of) inner and outer robes. If he has robes made beyond this limit—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. One MS. of the Vibhaôga reads abhihaùuê; but another reads abhihaùùhuê, as does Minayeff; while the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ makes it equal to abhiharituê. The right reading is probably abhihaùùhuê. In any case, the unusual form and grammatical construction throw some doubt on the exact meaning of the phrase.

The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ, which explains it philologically as just mentioned, goes on in the next words to explain it syntactically as abhiharitvâ, which it refers to the subject of pavâreyya, and states could be done either actually, or by words. Dickson's rendering, 'arrange to supply him,' does not accurately convey the force of pavâreyya; but the right rendering may be 'should offer to bring forth for him (whatever he chose) from (amongst the material for) many robes.' The only possible alternative is 'should make him an offer to take whatever he chose from amongst the material for many robes.' Compare the 34th Pâkittiya.

Santar-uttara-paramaê is meant, according to the Vibhaôga, 'to imply to the extent of one inner, and one outer robe;' but we preserve the ambiguity of the text.

8. In case the value in barter of a set of robes has been laid by, for a particular Bhikkhu, by a householder who is not a relative of his, or a house holder's lady, with the intention 'I will get a set of robes in exchange for this robe-fund, and so provide a dress for such and such a Bhikkhu:' in that case, if that Bhikkhu, before the offer has been made to him, go and give directions as to the make of the robe, saying, 'It would be well, Sir, to get in ex change such and such a sort of robe with that robefund to clothe me with;' desiring something fine that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture¹.

Nota: 1. Both Dickson and Childers have gone too far in rendering ketâpetvâ by 'purchase.' The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ (Minayeff, 78) explains it by parivattetvâ. So Rh. D., 'Ancient Coins and Measures of Ceylon,' p. 6.

In the text read Ketâpanaê (compare Kakkâyana, p. 322 of Senart's edition); and it should not be rendered 'money;' see Rh. D., loc. cit. The Robe-fund consisted of things for barter.

In the text the vâ after aññâtakassa should be omitted.

9. In case two persons, householders or house holders ladies, have each laid by for a particular Bhikkhu the value in barter of a set of robes, with the intention, 'We will each get a set of robes in exchange for this robe-fund, and so provide a dress for such and such a Bhikkhu:'—in that case, if that Bhikkhu, before the offer has been made to him, go and give directions as to the make of the robe, saying, 'It would be well, Sirs, to get in exchange, with the value in barter you have each laid by, such and such a sort of robe to clothe me with, the two becoming one:' desiring something fine—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

10. In case a Râga, or a Khattiya, or a Brâhman, or a Gahapati should send by messenger, for a particular Bhikkhu, the value in barter of a set of robes, saying, 'Get a set of robes in exchange for this robe-fund, and provide a dress for such and such a Bhikkhu!' if then that messenger should go to that Bhikkhu and say, 'I have brought, Sir, this robe-fund for your reverence. May your reverence accept the robe-fund!' let then that monk answer that messenger thus: 'We do not, my friend, accept the value in barter for a set of robes; but we may accept a set of robes, at the right time, and of the suitable kind.' If then that messenger shall answer that Bhikkhu thus: 'Has then your reverence a person who attends (to such matters for you)?' then, Bhikkhus¹, let the Bhikkhu, to whom the robes are to belong, point out, as his agent, the man who keeps the ar a ma in order² , or some believer, saying, 'This man, my friend, is the Bhikkhus' agent.' If then that messenger, when he has made an appointment with that agent, shall come to that Bhikkhu, and say, 'I have made an appointment, Sir, with that agent whom your reverence pointed out. Let your reverence come, and he will clothe you with the set of robes betimes! then, Bhikkhus¹, let that Bhikkhu, to whom the set of robes is to belong, go to the agent and warn him and remind him two or three times, saying, 'Sir, I have need of a set of robes!' If, while so warning and reminding³ two or three times, he should succeed in obtaining the robes, it is well. Should he not succeed in obtaining them, let him up to the fourth, fifth, or sixth time go and stand silently on that matter¹. If, while so standing silently on that matter up to the fourth, fifth, or sixth time, he should succeed in obtaining the set of robes, it is well. Should he not succeed in obtaining them (so), and then, exerting himself beyond that point succeed in obtaining them—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving for feiture. (But) if he should not succeed in obtaining them, let him either go himself, or send a messenger (to the place) whence the robe-fund was brought to him, and say, 'The robe-fund which your reverences sent for a Bhikkhu, that has in no wise advantaged that Bhikkhu. Take heed, your reve rences, of your own, that your own go not to ruin!' This is the proper course in that case².

Nota: 1. This word of address is most noteworthy as standing quite isolated in the Pâtimokkha. It must be meant as an address by the Buddha himself to the Brethren; for, if it were the address* of the Bhikkhu reciting the Pâtimokkha, the expression used would necessarily be ayasmanto, as in the closing words of each chapter, or other words to that effect. That it should have been left in is a striking proof of the faithfulness with which the Pâtimokkha has been preserved. Is it a survival of some form of words older even than the Pâtimokkha? or is it merely an ancient blunder?

Nota: 2. The ârâma is, literally, the grove or pleasure-ground in which the monks residence stood; but it had probably before this already come to include the residence, or vihâra, itself.

Nota: 3. In the text read kodayamâno, sârayamâno; the medial participle with active sense, as often.

Nota: 1. In the text read khakkhattuparamaê. This silent standing is the only mode of asking for food permitted to a Bhikkhu.

Nota: 2. Both here, and in the Conclusion of the Saêghâdisesa, and further below in the 22nd Nissaggiya, where the same phrase occurs, Mr. Dickson takes it to mean, 'This is the way to Nirvâna.'

We are unable to see any foundation for such a rendering.

Here ends the first section,

the 'Robe-section.'

11. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have a rug or mat made with silk in it—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture³ .

Nota: 3. The following rules were for use in a tropical climate, and refer not to bed coverings, but to materials spread over a hard seat or couch. The word translated 'rug or mat' is a more general term, meaning 'a thing spread;' but there is no corresponding word in English, as 'coverlet' or 'counterpane' would imply a different state of things.

12. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have a rug or mat made of pure black wool of goats hair¹—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. The Sutta Vibhaôga says that kâÂaka is of two kinds, either gâtiyâ kâÂaka or ragana-kâlaka; that is, that the wool is either naturally black, or dyed of that colour. Elaka is a goat, not a sheep.

13. In case a Bhikkhu is having a new rug made, two parts should be taken of pure black wool of goats hair, the third part of white wool, and the fourth of the colour of oxen (reddish brown). If a Bhikkhu should have a new rug made without taking two parts of pure black wool, the third of white, and the fourth of tawny—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture².

Nota: 2. This is deliberately chosen as an ugly mixture, which would lessen the commercial value of the rug, by making it unfashionable.

14. When a Bhikkhu has had a new rug made, he should use it for six years. If he should have another new rug made within the six years, whether he has got rid, or has not got rid of the former one, unless with the permission of the Bhikkhus³—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 3. Regarding this permission the Vibhaôga gives the following story. A sick monk was asked by his relatives to come home, that they might nurse him. He answered that he was too ill to carry his rug, could not get on without one, and could not have a new one made within six years. Then the Blessed One established this exception to the general Rule.

15. When a Bhikkhu is having a new rug made to sit upon, a piece of the breadth of the accepted span⁴ must be taken from all round the old one in order to disfigure it. If a Bhikkhu should have a new seat-rug made without taking a span's width from all round the old one—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 4. See the note on the 6th Saêghâdisesa.

16. In case a Bhikkhu should get some goats' wool whilst he is on a journey¹, let him accept it, if he likes; and when he has accepted it, he may carry it in his own hand, if there are no porters, for the distance of three leagues². Should he carry it further than that, even if there are no porters—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. Addhâna-magga-paùipanno; which the Kaôkhâ Vitaraòî (Minayeff, p. 80) explains as being on a long road, called addhâna (high-road). But one may be on a high-road without going a long journey.

Nota: 2. Yoganas; a yogana being a trifle under eight miles. See Rh. D., 'Ancient Coins and Measures' &c., pp. 16, 17.

17. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall get goats' wool washed, or dyed, or combed out by a Bhikkhunî who is not related to him—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture³.

Nota: 3. Compare the 4th Nissaggiya.

18. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall receive gold or silver, or get some one to receive it for him, or allow it to be kept in deposit for him⁴—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 4. Upanikkhittaê vâ sâdiyeyya; which cannot possibly mean 'if he thinks to appropriate money entrusted to him,' as Mr. Dickson translates. See Rh. D., 'Ancient Coins' &c., p. 7.

The method of procedure on a breach of this rule, or of the next, is thus described in the Vibhaôga. The guilty Bhikkhu has to give up the gold or silver to the community (Saêgha, not here, as elsewhere in sentences concerning forfeiture, or to a gaòa 'or to a puggala'). Then when an ârâmika or an upâsaka comes, it is to be given to him, to buy ghee or oil with it for the Saêgha; and whatever is bought is the common property of all the Saêgha, save the guilty Bhikkhu. Should the layman object to undertake the spending of the gold or silver, he is to be asked to throw it away. Or, if this cannot be managed, then, as a last resource, some Bhikkhu is to be formally appointed 'Bullion-remover' (Rûpiyakkhaddaka, and he is to go and throw it away somewhere, 'animittaê katvâ, (without making any mark at the place!)

19. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall engage in any one of the various transactions in which silver is used—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

20. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall engage in any one of the various kinds of buying and selling—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

End of the second section,

the 'Silk-section.'

21. A spare bowl maybe kept up to the limit of ten days. To him who exceeds that there is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

22. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall get another new bowl in exchange for an (old) one broken in less than five places that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

That bowl must be forfeited by that Bhikkhu to the company of Bhikkhus; and whichever in that company of Bhikkhus shall be the worst bowl, that shall be given to that Bhikkhu with the words, 'This, Bhikkhu, is thy bowl; it must be kept until it breaks.' This is the right course in that case.

23. Now those medicines which may be used by the sick Bhikkhus to wit, ghee, butter, oil, honey, molasses—when they have received them, they may enjoy them, storing them up to the seventh day. To him who exceeds that there is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

24. When he sees that a month of the hot days has yet to run, let a Bhikkhu provide himself with the materials for robes for the rainy season: when he sees that half a month of the hot days has yet to run, let him make them, and wear them. Should he provide himself with the materials for robes for the rainy season when more than a month of the hot days has yet to run; or should he make them, and wear them, when more than half a month of the hot days has yet to run that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

25. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when he has himself given a set of robes to another Bhikkhu, shall thereafter, being angry or displeased with him, take them away, or get them taken away—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

26. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall himself ask for yarn, and have it woven up by weavers into cloth for a set of robes—that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

27. In case a householder, who is not related to him, or a householder's lady, shall have the cloth for a set of robes woven for a particular Bhikkhu by weavers; in that case, if that Bhikkhu, before the offer has been made to him, shall go to the weavers, and give directions as to the make of the robe, saying, 'This robe-cloth, my friends, is being woven for me. Make it long and broad, and make it thick, and well woven, and evenly woven¹, and with even lines, and well carded. If you do so, ourselves will make it up to you, friends, in some way or other ! If that Bhikkhu², having thus spoken, should make it up³ to them in any way, even by the contents of a begging bowl that is a Pâkittiya offence in volving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. Suppavâyitaê, literally, 'well woven forth.' We follow the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ in its explanation of this word, but with considerable hesitation. Compare the relation between Sanskrit ota and prota; and between English 'web' and 'woof.'

Nota: 2. In the text read Evañ ka so bhikkhu.

Nota: 3. Anupadaggeyya is a double potential. Daggâma would be equal to Sanskrit dadyâma; and to that a second potential ter mination has been added.

28. In case a robe should fall to the lot of a Bhikkhu, as a special gift¹, ten days before the Kattika-temâsa¹ full moon, that Bhikkhu may take it, considering it as a special gift: and when he has it, he may keep it up till the robe time¹. Should he keep it beyond that that is a Pâkkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. The expression in the Pâli is literally 'should a special robe come to a Bhikkhu,' &c.; where 'special robe' is akkeka-kîvaraê, explained in the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ (Minayeff, 83) as equal to akkâyika-kîvaraê. The Vibhaôga says, 'If a man wants to join the army or to emigrate, or if a man has fallen sick, or a woman is with child, or an unbeliever has come to believe, or a believer is edified (pasâdo uppanno hoti); then, if such a one send a messenger to the Bhikkhus, saying, "Let their reverences come hither, I will give a gift for the rainy season" (vassâvâsikaê; perhaps, " such a gift as the laity are wont to give to the Bhikkhus who have spent the vassa among them")—that is an akkeka-kîvaraê' (Minayeff, 82, 83). Akkaya is an immediate, threatening, danger: compare the expression 'donatio mortis causâ.' 'Special robe' is, no doubt, an inadequate rendering; but we have chosen it in reference to the special circumstances under which the donation is made, and in default of a better translation. Compare the 85th Pâkittiya.

The Kattika-temâsi-puòòamâ is, according to the Vibhaôga (Minayeff, p. 82), the close of the Pavâraòâ, the ceremony at the end of Vassa (see below, Book IV).

The robe time is the time when the robes were settled. The Vibhaôga says, 'Robe time is, if the robes have not been laid out to dry (see the note to the first rule in this division of the Pâtimokkha), the last month of the rains; if they have, it is five months.'

29. When vassa is completed up to the full moon in Kattika¹ in case a Bhikkhu, who is dwelling in a place belonging to the class of those forest dwellings which are held to be insecure and dangerous, should desire to do so, he may leave one or other of his three robes in a hut inside a village, and if there is any ground for that Bhikkhu being separated from that robe, he may be separated from it up to the sixth night. Should he separate himself from it more than that, except by permission from the Bhikkhus—that is a Pâkittiya offence in volving forfeiture.

Nota: 1. This is a different date from that mentioned in the last rule, and one month later. The Vibhaôga explains the date here as Kattika-kâtumâsinî, whereas the date in Rule 28 is temasint, and is called by the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ (Minayeff, p. 82) paùhama-kattika-puòòamâ.

The same distinction is evident, from Mahâvagga IV, 14, 7-11, between Pavâraòâ and the Kâtumâsinî. But how both these full moons came to be called Kattika is not clear.

30. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall cause to be diverted to himself any benefit already dedicated to the Saêgha that is a Pâkittiya offence involving forfeiture.

Here ends the third section,

the 'Bowl-section.'

Venerable Sirs, the thirty Pâkittiya Rules involving forfeiture have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here ends the recitation of the Nissaggiyas.

PÂKITTIYÂ DHAMMÂ

THE PÂKITTIYÂ¹ RULES

Now here, venerable Sirs, the ninety-two Pâkittiya Rules (Rules regarding matters requiring expiation) come into recitation.

1. There is Pâkittiya in a deliberate lie.

2. There is Pâkittiya in abusive language.

3. There is Pâkittiya in slander of a Bhikkhu.

4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall cause one not re ceived into the higher grade (of the Order²) to recite the Dhammâ clause by clause³—that is a Pâkittiya.

5. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, for more than two or three nights, lie down (to sleep) in the same place with one not received into the higher grade (of the Order)—that is a Pâkittiya.

6. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall lie down (to sleep) in the same place with a woman—that is a Pâkittiya⁴ .

7. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall preach the Dhamma, in more than five or six words, to a woman, without a man arrived at years of discretion⁵ (being present)—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. That is, 'requiring repentance.' Compare the Sanskrit terms Prâyaëkittika and Prâyaëkittîya.

Nota: 2. Literally, one who has not received the upasampadâ.

Nota: 3. Anupasampannaê padaso dhammaê vâkeyya. This rule is directed against a wrong method of teaching the Dhammâ to a Sâmanera. See the extracts from the Old Commentary, and from the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ, given by Minayeff on p. 84. Read however in the second line osâpenti for âsâpenti; and then go on anvakkharaê nâma, rûpam anikkan ti vukkamano ruppan ti opâteti: anuvyañganaê nâma, rûpam anikkan ti vukkamâno vedanâ anikkâ ti saddaê nikkhâreti,, &c.

Nota: 4. For the text read mâtugâmena.

Nota: 5. Viññu. The Vibhaôga says, 'a man able to understand what is well said, and what is wrongly said; what is wicked, and what is not wicked.' Compare the use of viññutâ at Gâtaka I, 231.

8. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall tell one not received into the higher grade (of the Order) that the (speaker or any other Bhikkhu) has extraordinary spiritual gifts, even when such is the case²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. To do so when it was not the case, would be a Pârâgika. See the 4th Pârâgika, and our note there on the meaning of uttarimanussa-dhammaê. The 'even' here means that the truth of the averment makes no excuse for it.

9. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall tell one not received into the higher grade (of the Order) of a Bhikkhu having fallen into any grave offence—that is a Pâkittiya.

10. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall dig the ground or have it dug³ that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. Because doing so might bring some living thing into danger.

Here ends the first section,

the 'Falsehood-section.'

11. There is Pâkittiya in destroying any vegetable.

12. There is Pâkittiya in prevarication, or in worrying (the assembled Bhikkhus; for instance, by refusing to answer⁴).

Nota: 4. Vihesake; which must be understood as being done in a formal meeting of the Saêgha during an official enquiry.

13. There is Pâkittiya in stirring up ill-will against, in speaking disrespectfully of (any Bhikkhu deputed to any official duty⁵).

Nota: 5. The words in parentheses are supplied from the explanations in the Vibhaôga.

14. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has put out, or got another to put out to air, a bedstead, or a chair, or a mat, or a stool¹, the common property of the Saêgha; and when going away shall not put it back, or have it put back, but shall depart without saying anything to anybody—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1 Kokkhaê, the meaning of which is not quite clear. The Vibhaôga says there are four kinds, made of bark, of usîra roots, of muñga grass, and of bulrushes. It is apparently therefore of wickerwork.

15. Whatsoever Bhikkhu has put out, or got another to put out, a bedstead in a dwelling-place common to a Saêgha; and when going away shall not put it back, or have it put back, but shall depart without saying anything to anybody that is a Pâkittiya.

16. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, in a dwelling-place com mon to a Saêgha, shall lie down where he knows that he is encroaching on (the space occupied by) a Bhikkhu who arrived before him, thinking, 'If he become inconvenienced he may go away'—if he does it for that object, and for no other²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. That is, according to the Vibhaôga, the rule does not apply to an invalid, or to one suffering from the heat, or the cold; and so on.

17. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being angry or displeased with another Bhikkhu, shall drive him out, or get him driven out of a dwelling-place common to a Saêgha that is a Pâkittiya.

18. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall hurriedly sit down, or lie down, in the upper story of a dwelling-place common to a Saêgha³, on a bedstead or chair with removable legs—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. Because if he does so, he might unwittingly upset the furniture, or fall himself, to the injury of some one who was rightfully on the ground floor.

19. In case a Bhikkhu is having a large dwelling-place put up, he may have the work rectified, in a place where straw is scarce, round the, doors, and where the bolts are put in, and the openings for light are set, and till the roof has been twice or thrice covered in¹. Should he go beyond that, even in such a place that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. In the text read dvittikkhadanassa: ùhite pi. This rule, directed against too great luxury in the matter of a perfectly finished dwelling, is somewhat obscure, owing to our want of information as to the mode in which such dwellings should be put up. It refers probably to a hut, albeit a large one, of wattel and daub (kudda.: comp. Rh. D.'s note on the Mahâparinibbâna Sutta V, 41). The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ divides dvâra-kosa into dvâra-okâsa, and quotes various estimates from the old Sinhalese commentaries as to the proper extent of this space (see Minayeff, p. 87).

20. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall sprinkle water with living creatures in it, or shall cause such to be sprinkled on grass or on clay that is a Pâkittiya.

Here ends the second section,

the 'Bhûtagâma-section.'

21. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, not thereto deputed, shall exhort the Bhikkhunî's² that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Ovadeyya; that is, shall preach to them the eight Garudhammâ. On these see the passages mentioned in the Index appended to the text of the Kullavagga; and on the ovâda see Kullavagga X, 9, 2, and following. The mode of procedure is laid down in the Vibhaôga as follows: 'The Bhikkhu asks the Bhikkhuni's, "Are you all present, sisters, and do none raise objections (that is, are you samaggâ)?" If they say, "That is so, Sir!" he asks, "Are the eight Garu-dhammâ being kept up?" If they say, "They are, Sir" he is to say, "That, sisters, is the exhortation!" and so deliver it to them. If they say, "They are not, Sir!" he should go all through them, saying, "A sister who has been received into the higher grade even one hundred years, &c. (and so on to the end of the Garu-dhammâ)."

'If he preach any other Dhammâ to those who say, "We, Sir, are all present, and none raise objections!" he is guilty of a Dukkaùa. If he preach the eight Garu-dhammâ to those who say, "No, Sir, that is not so!" (vagg' amh' ayyâ ti, where vagga is vyagra, the opposite of samagga), he is guilty of a Dukkaùa. If he preach another Dhammâ, when the eight Garu-dhammâ have not committed to their charge, he is guilty of a Dukkaùa.

22. If a Bhikkhu, even when thereto deputed, exhort the Bhikkhunî's after the sun has set—that is a Pâkittiya.

23. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall go to the dwelling-place of Bhikkhunî's, and there exhort the Bhikkhunî's¹, except on the (right) occasion—that is a Pâkittiya.

Herein this is the right occasion: (to wit), when a Bhikkhunî is ill. This is the right occasion in this passage.

Nota: 1. Compare Kullavagga X, 6, i.

24. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall speak thus: 'The Bhikkhus exhort the Bhikkhunî's for the sake of gain2!'—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Âmisa-hetu; that is, in order that the sisters may be induced to supply the preachers with food, medicine, &c.

25. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall give a robe to a Bhikkhunî who is not related to him, except in exchange—that is a Pâkittiya.

26. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall make up a robe, or have it made up, for a Bhikkhunî who is not related to him—that is a Pâkittiya.

27. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, by appointment, shall travel along a high road in company with a Bhikkhunî, even to go as far as the village, except on the right occasion—that is a Pâkittiya.

Herein this is the right occasion: (to wit), when the road is so insecure and dangerous that travellers on it have to carry arms. This is the right occasion in this passage.

28. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, by appointment, shall go on board the same boat, whether going up stream or down stream, in company with a Bhikkhunî, except for the purpose of crossing over to the other side—that is a Pâkittiya.

29. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, knowing it to be so, shall eat food procured by the intervention of a Bhikkhunî, unless the laity (who give the food) had already undertaken (to give it to him)¹ that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. The introductory story in the Vibhaôga is of a Bhikkhu born in Râgagaha, who went to a relative's house, and a meal was there being prepared for him by his relatives. A kulupikâ bhikkhunî then arrives, and says, 'My friends, give the gentle man a meal!' Then the Bhikkhu was in doubt whether he ought not to refuse it as being Bhikkhunî-paripâkitaê.

30. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take a seat, one man with one woman, in company with a Bhikkhunî, in a secret place²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Compare the Aniyatâ Dhammâ.

Here ends the third section,

the 'Bhikkhunovâda - section.'

31. A Bhikkhu who is not sick may take one meal at a public rest-house³. Should he take more than that—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. Eko âvasatha-piòdo bhuñgitabbo. An âvasatha is one of those 'chaultries,' or public resting-places, which good Buddhists were wont to put up in the villages or at cross roads. At some of these a constant supply of rice was provided for travellers. See the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta I, 10; II, 5 (pp. 10, 16); Gâtaka, No. 31 (Buddhist Birth Stories,' pp. 280-285) Mahâ-sudassana Sutta I, 63; Dhammapada Commentary apud Fausböll, 185. The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ on this rule (Minayeff, p. 88) says that âvasatha-piòdo is a meal in such an âvasatha.

32. There is Pâkittiya in going in a body to receive a meal¹ , except on the right occasion.

Herein the right occasion is this: (to wit), when there is sickness, when robes are being given, when robes are being made, when on a journey (on foot), when on board a boat, when (the influx of Bhikkhus) is great² , when a general invitation is given to Samaras³. This is right occasion in this passage.

Nota: 1. On this rule compare Kullavagga VII, 3, 13. 'In a body' means four or more Bhikkhus going together to the same house.

Nota: 2. Mahâ-samayo. The Vibhaôga relates how, when vassa was over, the Bhikkhus repaired in great numbers to visit the Buddha. On such occasions it was difficult or impossible for them all, if they adhered to the strict rule, to obtain their meals.

Nota: 3. Samaòa-bhatta-samayo. See the Vibhaôga, and the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ, quoted by Minayeff, pp. 88, 89. Samaòas, of course, includes others besides Buddhists.

33. There is Pâkittiya in taking food in turn⁴ , except on the right occasion.

Herein the right occasion is this: (to wit), when there is sickness, when robes are being given, when robes are being made. This is right occasion in this passage.

Nota: 4. Parampara-bhogane; that is, in picking and choosing with regard to food, or in regard to different invitations. The Bhikkhus were to eat straight on whatever was given, and to accept invitations in the order in which they were received. But a sick Bhikkhu might choose one morsel rather than another; and Bhikkhus in health might accept an invitation to a house where robes are going to be given, or made, rather than to a house where only a meal was offered. The last exception was simply to guard against the stock of robes falling short (Bhikkhû... nâdhivâsenti: kîvaraê parittaê uppaòati, says the Vibhaôga).

34. In case people should offer a Bhikkhu, who has gone to some house, to take as much as he chose of their sweetmeats and cakes, that Bhikkhu, should he so wish, may accept two or three bowls full¹. If he should accept more than that—that is a Pâkittiya.

When he has accepted two or three bowls full¹ , he must take them away, and divide them up among the Bhikkhus. That is the proper course in this case.

Nota: 1. In the text read dvittipattapurâ.

The word for sweetmeats, pûva, includes all those sweetmeats which it was then (as it is now) the custom to send as presents from one house to another at weddings, funerals, and such occasions.

'Cakes' (mantha) refers to those rice-cakes, &c., which were usually prepared as provision for a journey. Compare Gâtaka I, 80.

Should offer to take as much as he chose is the phrase referred to above in our note on the 7th Nissaggiya. The Vibhaôga says here, Abhihaùuê pavâreyyâ ti yâvatakaê ikkhasi tâvatakaê gaòhâhîti.

35. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when he has once finished his meal, though still invited (to continue eating²), shall eat or partake of³ food that has not been left over⁴, whether hard or soft⁵—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Pavârito. The Vibhaôga says, Pavârito nâma âsanaê paññâyati bhoganaê paññâyati hatthapâse ùhito abhiharati paùikkhepo paññâyati, which means, we think, 'A seat for him is there, food is there, (the host) standing near him still makes invitation, but there takes place a refusal (of the preferred food)'.

Nota: 3. Khâdeyya vâ bhuñgeyya vâ.

Nota: 4. The 'not left over' refers only to the case of a sick Bhikkhu. A Bhikkhu in health, when he has once finished his meal, ought not to eat what he has left.

Nota: 5. Khâdaniyaê vâ bhoòaniyaê vâ. The former term is used of hard food, such as biscuits, cakes, meats, fruits, &c.; the latter term of soft foods, such as boiled rice, curries, &c. The two words for eating correspond to these two ideas.

36. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall offer a Bhikkhu who has finished his meal, though still invited to continue eating, his choice of food, whether hard or soft, that has not been left over, saying, 'Come, now, Bhikkhu; take and eat!' deliberately desiring to stir up longing (in that Bhikkhu); then if that Bhikkhu eats¹—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Bhuttasmiê pâkittiya; that is, the offence is completed when the eating has taken place; but the offer alone is not a Pâkittiya. So the Vibhaôga.

37. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take or eat any food, whether hard or soft, at the wrong time²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. After sun-turn.

38. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall eat food, whether hard or soft, that has been put by—that is a Pâkittiya.

39. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when he is not sick, shall request, for his own use, and shall partake of delicacies—to wit, ghee, butter, oil, honey, molasses, fish, flesh, milk, curds³—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. In the text read tâni; madhu phâòitaê.

40. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall place, as food, within the door of his mouth, anything not given to him, save only water and a tooth-cleaner⁴—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 4 Dantapoòa; doubtless the same, perhaps an older expression for, the dantakaùùha referred to in Kullavagga V, 31. It is a piece of fragrant root (cinnamon, betel, &c.) about eight inches long.

Here ends the fourth section,

the 'Bhogana-section.'

41. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, with his own hand, give food, whether hard or soft, to an Akelaka or to a Paribbâgaka or to a Paribbâgika¹—
that is a Pâkittiya.

42. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall address a Bhikkhu thus: 'Come, brother; let us go, for a meal, to the village, or the town!' and then, whether after he has got an alms for him, or without having got an alms for him, shall send him away, saying, 'Go away, brother! Talking with you, or sitting with you, is not pleasant to me. Talking, or sitting each one by himself, is more pleasant to me!' if he does this for this cause, and for no other²—that is a Pâkittiya.

43. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall force his way into a house where a meal is going on³, and take a seat there—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. These are the various non-Buddhist religious teachers or devotees, most of whom rejected the Vedas. The Paribbâgakas were mostly, though not always, wandering logicians, willing to maintain theses against all the world. Paribbâgikâ is merely the feminine of the last. Akelaka, which naturally has no feminine, were the naked ascetics.

The sect now called Gains are divided into two classes, Svetambaras and Digambaras, the latter of which eat naked. They are known to be the successors of the school called Nigaòùhas in the Pâli Piùakas; and it is not certain whether the Nigaòùhas are included in the Akelakas. It is probable that the Brâhman ascetics, the Vânaprasthas, were not included under the term Paribbâgakas; but our information on the exact meaning of these terms is, as yet, very imperfect.

Nota: 2. That is merely to get rid of him, in order to gain any purpose of his own. The Vibhaôga gives as examples that the Bhikkhu sees some valuable things, and wants to get them; or sees some woman, and wants to speak to her.

Nota: 3. Sabhogane kule; the meaning of which is not quite clear. The Old Commentary says, 'A sabhogana kula is one where there is a husband and a wife; and they both, husband and wife, are not gone forth from, are not devoid of lust' (Minayeff, p. 89, under P.; but for anatikkantâ read anikkhantâ). Then the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ, doubtless to justify this suggested implication, makes sabhoganaê equal to saha ubhohi ganehi (!); or, in the alternative, to sabhogaê, since the wife is the bhoga of a man still given to passion, and the husband the bhoga of a wife. The use of Bhogana in any such sense is extremely forced, and was perhaps only suggested by the following rules; but it is just possible we should translate, 'a household still given to pleasure' (compare Kullavagga VIII, 5, i), or 'fond of good food' (compare Milinda Pañha 76).

On anupakhagga compare the i6th Pâkittiya.

44. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take a seat, in secret, with a woman, in a concealed place¹—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Compare the 30th Pâkittiya, and the two Aniyatâ Dhammâ.

45. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take a seat, in secret, with a woman, one man with one woman—that is a Pâkittiya.

46. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, who has been invited (to a house), and has been (thus already) provided with a meal, shall, without having previously spoken about it to a Bhikkhu, if there is one there, go on his (begging) rounds among the families, either before meal-time or after meal-time² , except on the right occasion—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. The Vibhaôga has the following stories in regard to these two particulars. A family devoted to Upananda invited him and another Bhikkhu. Before meal-time he went to attend on other families (purebhattaê kulâni payirupâsati). The people delayed giving his meal to the other Bhikkhu till Upananda should arrive. He came late; and the other Bhikkhu was thereby dis comforted.

The family devoted to Upananda sent him food for his use; saying it was to be given to the Saêgha, with special reference to him. He had gone for an alms to the village. The messengers delivered the food and the message, and asked where Upananda was. The Bhikkhu told the matter to the Blessed One. He directed the present to be accepted, and laid by till Upananda should return. After Upananda returned, he nevertheless went out again to attend on other families, and the food so sent went bad.

The Bhikkhu is to tell a resident Bhikkhu before, on account of this rule, giving up his usual rounds, in order that he may still go if a sick Bhikkhu wants medicine.

The exceptions are, as above, to prevent the stock of robes falling short.

Herein the right occasion is this: (to wit), a time of giving of robes, a time of making of robes. That is right occasion in this passage.

47. A Bhikkhu who is not sick may accept a (standing) invitation with regard to the requisites¹ for four months. If he accept it for a period longer than that unless there be a second invitation, or a perpetual invitation that is a Pâkittiya.

48. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall go to see an army drawn up in battle-array, except for a cause thereto sufficient—that is a Pâkittiya.

49. And if there be any reason for that Bhikkhu's going to the army, that Bhikkhu may remain there for two or three nights. If he remain longer than that—that is a Pâkittiya.

50. And if while remaining there for two or three nights he should go to the battle-array, or to the numbering of the forces, or to the drawing up of the forces, or to a review²—that is a Pâkittiya.

End of the fifth section,

the 'Akelaka-section.'

Nota: 1. These are usually four—clothing, food, residence, and medicine. This rule refers more especially to medicine, as appears from the explanation in the Vibhaôga.

Nota: 2. On this rule compare the third section of the Magghima-Sîla, and the third section of the Mahâ-Sila (translated in Rh. D.'s Buddhist Suttas from the Pâli,' pp. 192, 1 98). We follow the Vibhaôga in the interpretation of the various terms.

51. There is Pâkittiya in the drinking of fermented liquors, or strong drinks¹.

Nota: 1. The Old Commentary (quoted by Minayeff, p. 90) distinguishes between surâ and meraya by the former being derived from flour, water, &c., and the latter from flowers, fruits, &c.

52. There is Pâkittiya in poking (another person) with the finger.

53. There is Pâkittiya in sporting in the water².

Nota: 2 Throwing water over one another, and chasing one another, were common amusements at the public and private bathing-places. Our MSS. read throughout hâsa-dhamme.

54. There is Pâkittiya in disrespect³.

Nota: 3. Anâdariye. That is, according to the Vibhaôga, paying no heed, when one's attention is drawn by an upasampanna to the fact that this or that action is against the rule laid down (paññattaê). But compare also Kullavagga VIII, 8, i.

55. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall frighten a Bhikkhu⁴—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 4. In the text read bhiêsapeyya.

56. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, who is not sick, shall, desiring to warm himself⁵, kindle a fire, or have a fire kindled, without cause sufficient thereto—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 5. H. O.'s MS. reads visibbanâpekho. At MahâvaggaI, 20, 15, visibbesuê occurs in the sense of they warmed themselves.' Trenckner at p. 47 of the Milinda Pañha reads aggiê galetvâ visîvetvâ; and at p. 102, saêsibbitavisibbitattâ sâkhânaê.

57. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall bathe at intervals of less than half a month, except on the proper occasion—that is a Pâkittiya.

Herein this is proper occasion: (to wit), the two and a half months during which there is hot weather, and during which there is fever; namely, the last month and a half of the heats, and the first month of the rains¹: when sick; when there is work; when on a journey; when there has been wind and rain. This is right occasion in this connection.

58. A Bhikkhu who receives a new robe must choose one or other mode of disfigurement out of the three modes of disfigurement; either (making part of it) dark blue, or (marking part of it with) mud, or (making part of it) black. If a Bhikkhu should make use of a new robe without choosing one or other mode of disfigurement out of the three modes of disfigurement²—that is a Pâkittiya.

59. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has made over 3 his robe to a Bhikkhu, or to a Bhikkhunî, or to a probationer, or to a Sâmaòera, or to a Sâmaòerî, shall continue to make use of it as a thing not (formally) given—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. The Vibhaôga refers the first of these periods to the hot weather, and the second to the fever weather.

Nota: 2. In the text insert a full stop after kâlasâmaê vâ. The object of this rule, according to the Vibhaôga, is to enable a Bhikkhu to trace his robe should it get lost by being mixed up with others. Compare the i5th Nissaggiya.

Nota: 3. The Vibhaôga says, 'There are two ways of appointment (in making over, vikappanâ), promising in the presence, and promising in the absence (of the person to whom the appointment is made). Promise in the presence is by the words, "I make oòer this robe to you, or to such and such a one (then present)!" Promising in the absence is by the words, "I give this robe to you for you to appoint (to some one else)." Then the person spoken to should say, "Who is your friend, or intimate acquaintance?" "Such a one, or such a one." Then the other should say, "I give this to them. This is their property. Wear it, or part with it, or do with it as you like¡"

These last are the formal words used on presenting a robe; and by their use the property in the robe is transferred. After that the original owner, in spite of the formal words, may not, according to our rule, continue to use the robe.

On apakkuddhârakaê see Childers, sub voce pakkuddhâro.

60. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall hide, or cause another to hide, a Bhikkhu's bowl, or his robe, or the mat on which he sits, or his needle-case¹, or his girdle, even though in fun—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. In the text read sukigharaê.

End of the sixth section,

the 'Surâpâna-section.'

61. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall deliberately deprive any living thing of life—that is a Pâkittiya.

62. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, knowingly, drink water with living things in it—that is a Pâkittiya.

63. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall stir up for decision again a matter which he knows to have been settled according to the Dhammâ²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Compare the 79th Pâkittiya, and Kullavagga IV, 14 passim.

64. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, who knows of it, shall conceal a serious offence3 committed by a Bhikkhu—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. That is, a Pârâgika, or a Saêghâdisesa.

65. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall admit a person under twenty years of age to the higher grade in the Order, knowing him (or her) to be so—(while) the person is not admitted to the higher grade, and the other Bhikkhus (who assist) are blameworthy—this is in him⁴ a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 4. The upagghâya is guilty of a Pâkittiya; the âkariya, and the gaòa, of a Dukkaùa, says the Vibhaôga.

66. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, by appointment, journey along the same route with a caravan of robbers, knowing it to be such, even as far as the next village¹—that is a Pâkittiya.

67. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, by appointment, journey along the same route with a woman², even as far as the next village—that is a Pâkittiya.

68. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall speak thus: 'In this wise do I understand that the Dhammâ has been proclaimed by the Blessed One: that to him who cultivates those Qualities which have been called "dangerous" by the Blessed One, there is not sufficient danger (to prevent his acquiring spiritual gifts)³;' then that Bhikkhu should be addressed by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Say not so, brother! bear not false witness against the Blessed One! For neither is it seemly to bring a false accusation against the Blessed One, nor could the Blessed One speak so.

By many a figure⁴ , brother, have the Dangerous Qualities been declared by the Blessed One to be full of danger⁵ , and also to be sufficient to prevent him who cultivates them (from attaining spiritual gifts)³.' If that Bhikkhu, when he has thus been spoken to by the Bhikkhus, should persist as before, then let that Bhikkhu be (formally) admonished about it by the Bhikkhus as a body, even to the third time, to the intent that he abandon that course.

Nota: 1. Compare the 27th Pâkittiya. A caravan that sets out with intent to steal or rob on the way is meant.

Nota: 2. Compare the 2yth and z8th Pâkittiyas.

Nota: 3. These are specified in detail in Mahâvagga II, 3, 7.

Nota: 4. Pariyâya; fulness, extent, of illustration and explanation. Not merely manner, or method, of statement. Much of this pariyâya will be found in the various similes used in the Kullavagga loc. cit.

Nota: 5. In the text here, and in the corresponding clause of No. 70, read anekapariyâyena âvuso antarâyika dhammâ antarâyikâ vuttâ bhagavatâ, as in Kullavagga I, 32.

If, while being so admonished, up to the third time, he abandon that course, it is well. If he abandon it not that is a Pâkittiya¹.

Nota: 1. This rule is directed against the delusion that sin, to a very holy man, loses its danger and its sinfulness. Compare the 4th Saêghâdisesa; and, on the method of procedure here laid down, the 10th to the 13th Saêghâdisesas. At Kullavagga I, 32 lust is declared to be an antarâyiko dhammo; and falsehood another at Mahâvagga II, 3, 3. The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ (quoted by Minayeff, p. 92) gives five divisions of these dangerous qualities.

69. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, knowing him to be so, shall eat in company with, or dwell together with², or sleep in one place with a Bhikkhu who talks thus (as in 68), and has not been dealt with according to the law³, and has not laid aside his delusion—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. This the Vibhaôga explains as holding Uposatha, or Pavâraòâ, or a Saêghakamma with him.

Nota: 3. Ukkhitto anosârito, says the Vibhaôga. Compare Mahâvagga IX, 4, 10, ii.

70. If a Sâmaòera⁴ even should say thus: 'In this wise do I understand that the Dhamma has been proclaimed by the Blessed One: that to him who cultivates those Qualities which have been called "dangerous" by the Blessed One there is not sufficient danger (to prevent his attaining to spiritual gifts); then that Sâmaòera should be addressed by the Bhikkhus thus: 'Say not so, good Sâmaòera! Bear not false witness against the Blessed One. For neither is it seemly to bring a false accusation against the Blessed One, nor could the Blessed One speak so. By many a figure, good Sâmaòera, have the

Nota: 4. Samaòuddeso; which is explained by the Old Commentary as equal to Sâmaòera. Why, in the Pâtimokkha, now one and now the other expression should be used, is not clear. In the later texts Sâmaòera is the usual form, but samaòuddeso is found also in a few passages.

Dangerous Qualities been declared by the Blessed One to be full of danger, and also to be sufficient to prevent him who cultivates them (from attaining to spiritual gifts).' And if that Sâmaòera, when so addressed by the Bhikkhus, shall persist in that course, that Sâmaòera should be addressed by the Bhikkhus thus: 'From this day forth, good Sâmaòera, neither can that Blessed One be referred to¹ by you as your Teacher, nor can the privilege, which the other Sâmaòeras enjoy, of sleeping in the same place with the Bhikkhus for two or three nights² , any longer be yours! Depart! away with you³!

Nota: 1. Apadisitabbo. Compare the four Mahâpadesâ in the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta IV, 7-11.

Nota: 2. Compare the 5th Pâkittiya.

Nota: 3. In the text read kara pi re; that is, kara api re, instead of kara pare. On vinassa compare Mahâvagga I, 61, i.

Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall encourage⁴, or sup port⁵, or eat with, or sleep in the same place with, a Sâmaòera thus expelled that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 4 Upalâpeyya. Compare Mahâvagga I, 59, and Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta I, 5, and the passages quoted in Rh. D. s version of the latter passage. The Old Commentary says, 'Flatters him (talks him over, tassa upalâpeti) by saying, "I will give you a bowl, or a robe, or hear you repeat, or answer your questions."'

Nota: 5 Upaùùhâpeyya. The Old Commentary says, by providing him with chunam, or clay, or a tooth-cleanser, or water to wash his face with.' No doubt upaùùhâpeti is used in the sense of showing such personal attentions to another, as the upaùùhâkâ did to the Buddha; and such services would very rightly come under this rule. Yet here, as often, the comment is rather a scholastic exegesis of the sentence, than a philologically exact explanation of the word.

End of the seventh section,

the 'Sappâòaka⁶-section.

Nota: 6. This title is taken from the second, not, as in all the other cases, from the first rule in the section.

71. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when admonished by the Bhikkhus in respect of some precept in accordance with the Dhammâ, shall speak thus: 'I cannot submit myself to that precept, brother, until I shall have enquired touching it of another Bhikkhu, an ex perienced master of the Vinaya'—that is a Pâkittiya.

A Bhikkhu desirous of training, Bhikkhus¹, should learn, and enquire, and settle in his own mind. This is the right rule in this connection.

Nota: 1. On this strange allocution see the note to the loth Nissaggiya.

72. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when the Pâtimokkha is being recited, shall speak thus: 'What comes of these minor² precepts being here recited, save only that they tend to misgiving, and worry, and perplexity!'—there is Pâkittiya in thus throwing contempt on the precepts³.

Nota: 2. Khuddânukhuddakehi. Compare the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta VI, 3, and the passages quoted there in Rh. D. s note.

Nota: 3. In the text read vivaòòake.

73. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when at the half month the Pâtimokkha is being recited, should say thus: 'Now for the first time do I notice that this rule, they say, is handed down in the Suttas, is embraced in the Suttas!'—then, if the other Bhikkhus shall know concerning that Bhikkhu thus: 'This Bhikkhu has taken his place at the recitation of the Pâtimokkha once, or twice, not to say oftener⁴—that Bhikkhu is not only not made free on account of his ignorance⁵, but he is to be dealt with according to the Dhamma for the offence into which he has fallen, and furthermore he is to be charged with foolishness (in the words), 'This is loss to thee, brother, this is an evil to thee, in that when the Pâtimokkha is being recited you fail to take it to your heart, and attend to it with care.' There is Pâkittiya in such foolish conduct.

Nota: 4. In the text read ko pana vâdo bhiyyo.

Nota: 5. In the text read aññâòakena.

74. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being angry or displeased with another Bhikkhu, shall give a blow—that is a Pâkittiya.

75. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, being angry or displeased with another Bhikkhu, shall make use of any threatening gesture¹—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Talasattikaê uggireyya. The Old Commentary says, Kâyaê vâ kâyapaùibaddhaê vâ antamaso uppalapattaê pi ukkâreti. Compare âvudhâni uggiritvâ at Gâtaka I, 150.

76. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall harass a Bhikkhu with a (charge of) Saêghâdisesa without ground—that is a Pâkittiya.

77. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall intentionally suggest difficulties of conscience to a Bhikkhu, with the idea of causing him uneasiness, even for a moment; if he does it to that end alone—that is a Pâkittiya.

78. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall stand by over hearing when Bhikkhus are quarrelling, or making a disturbance, or engaged in a dispute, hoping to hear what they shall utter; if he does it to that end alone—that is a Pâkittiya.

79. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when he has declared his consent to formal proceedings conducted accord ing to the Dhamma, shall thereafter grumble (about those proceedings)²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. If he should raise any formal objections so as to re-open the question, that would fall under the 63rd Pâkittiya. On declaring one's consent in this and the following rule, see below, Mahâvagga II, 23. The whole rule, as well as on No. 63, is repeatedly referred to in Kullavagga IV, 14.

80. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when the Saêgha is engaged in conducting a (formal) enquiry, shall rise from his seat, and go away, without having declared his consent—that is a Pâkittiya.

81. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when, in a regularly constituted Saêgha¹ , he has given away a robe, shall thereafter grumble about it, saying, 'The Bhikkhus appropriate the property of the Saêgha according to friendship'—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Samaggena saêghena. See the note to the 21st Pâkittiya.

82. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall divert to the use of any individual property dedicated to the Saêgha, knowing it to be so—that is a Pâkittiya.

Here ends the eighth section,

the 'Sahadhammika-section.'

83. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall cross the threshold of an anointed Khattiya king, when the king has not gone forth, and the queen has not withdrawn, without first having had himself announced²—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Indakhîla, the word translated 'threshold,' is explained in the Old Commentary by sayani-ghara, 'sleeping chamber;' but this is rather a didactic gloss on the rule. Compare the note above on the 43rd Pâkittiya. The phrase 'when the queen has not gone in' is somewhat doubtful. H. O.'s MS. of the Vibhaôga reads (as Minayeff does) aniggata-ratanake, instead of Dickson's anîhata-ratanake. The former is the better reading; nîhata is impossible, it must be either nihata or nîhaùa. But ratanaka, though the queen is one of the seven Ratanas of a king, is not found elsewhere used absolutely for a queen: the use of ragake, too, immediately after rañño, instead of raññe or râgini, is curious. A possible alternative rendering would be when the court has not departed, and the regalia not laid aside: but we prefer on the whole the Old Commentator's explanation of râgaka and ratanaka.

84. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall pick up, or cause another to pick up, except in a grove or in a dwelling-place, a jewel, or anything deemed a jewel¹—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Ratanasammataê; that is, a thing made of one of those substances ranked with gems, such as jade, coral, &c.

Should a Bhikkhu have picked up, either in a grove or in a dwelling-place, a jewel, or anything deemed a jewel, it is to be laid aside, that he to whom it may belong may take it away. This is the right course in such a case.

85. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall, out of hours², enter a village, without having informed a Bhikkhu if one is present³, except on account of business of a special nature⁴ thereto sufficient—that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 2. Vikâle; that is, says the Old Commentary, from sun-turn in one day till sun-rise in the next.

Nota: 3. Santaê bhikkhuê. If one is not present, he may go without. The Old Commentary gives no such definition of being present, as Mr. Dickson has supplied.

Nota: 4. Akkâyika. Compare the note on the 28th Nissaggiya.

86. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have a needlecase made of bone, or ivory, or horn, it shall be broken up—and that is a Pâkittiya.

87. When a Bhikkhu is having a new bedstead or chair made, it should be made with legs eight inches in height, according to the accepted inch⁵ , exclusive of the lowermost piece of the bed frame⁶. To him who exceeds that limit there is a Pâkittiya, and (the legs of the piece of furniture) shall be cut down (to the proper size).

Nota: 5. Sugataôgulena. See the note on the 6th Saòghadisesa.

Nota: 6. Aùani. There is no explanation of this term, either in the Old Commentary, or in the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ.

88. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have a bedstead or a chair made, stuffed with cotton¹, the stuffing shall be torn out and that is a Pâkittiya.

Nota: 1. Tûlaê; which the Old Commentary expands into three kinds tûlaê from a tree, tûlaê from a creeper, and tûlaê from a young fowl.

89. When a Bhikkhu is having a rug or mat to sit upon made, it must be made of the right measure. Herein this is the measure: in length two spans, according to the accepted span; in breadth one span; the border one span. To him who exceeds that limit there is a Pâkittiya, and (the article) shall be cut down (to the proper size).

90. When a Bhikkhu is having an itch-cloth² made, it must be made of the right measure. Herein this is the measure: in length four spans, according to the accepted span; in width two spans. To him who exceeds that limit there is a Pâkittiya, and (the cloth) shall be cut (down to the proper size).

Nota: 2. When a Bhikkhu had a boil, or running sore, or any such disease, the use of an itch-cloth (so called from the first in the list of skin complaints there mentioned) is laid down in Mahâvagga VIII, 17.

91. When a Bhikkhu is having a garment made for the rainy season, it must be made of the right measure. Herein this is the right measure: in length six spans, according to the accepted span; in breadth two spans and a half. To him who exceeds that limit there is a Pâkittiya, and (the garment) shall be cut (down to the proper size).

92. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall have a robe made of the dimensions of a Sugata's robe³, or larger—that is a Pâkittiya, and (the robe) shall be cut down to the proper size.

Nota: 3. On the doubtful meaning of Sugata, see the note above on the 28th Nissaggiya. There is no reason whatever to believe that Gotama's robe was larger, in proportion, than those worn by the other members of his order. He exchanged robes with Mahâ Kassapa. Of the two sets of robes brought by Pukkusa, one was given to Ânanda, and one was reserved for the Buddha himself; and no one can read the account in the Mahâ-parinibbâna Sutta without feeling that both are supposed to be of the same size.

Herein this is the measure of the Sugata robe of a Sugata: in length nine spans, according to the accepted span; in breadth six spans. This is the measure of the Sugata robe of a Sugata.

End of the ninth section,

the 'Ratana-section.'

Venerable Sirs, the ninety-two rules regarding matters requiring expiation have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Pâkittiyas.

PAÙIDESANIYA DHAMMA

RULES REGARDING MATTERS WHICH OUGHT TO BE CONFESSED.

Here, venerable Sirs, the four rules regarding matters which ought to be confessed come into recitation.

1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, when a Bhikkhunî not related to him has entered within the houses¹, shall, with his own hand, accept at her hands food, either hard or soft, and eat or enjoy it—that is a matter which ought to be confessed by that Bhikkhu, saying, 'I have fallen, Brethren, into a blameworthy offence, unbecoming, which ought to be confessed; and I confess it!'

Nota: 1. Antaragharaê paviùùhâ; that is, during her alms- visit to the village. Compare the 3rd Sekhiya; Mahâvagga I, 23, 3; and Kullavagga VIII, 5, 2.

2. Now Bhikkhus, when they have been invited to laymen's houses, eat. If the Bhikkhunî stay there giving directions, saying, 'Here give curry, give rice here!' the Bhikkhunî ought to be rebuked by those Bhikkhus, saying, 'Stand aside, Sister, as long as the Bhikkhus are eating!' If it should not occur to a single Bhikkhu to rebuke the Bhikkhunî, saying, 'Stand aside, Sister, as long as the Bhikkhus are eating!'—that is a matter that ought to be confessed by those Bhikkhus, saying, 'We have fallen, Brethren, into a blameworthy offence, unbecoming, which ought to be confessed; and we confess it!'

3. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall accept, with his own hand, food, either hard or soft, in such households as have been (by a formal sammuti) declared to be households, under discipline¹, without having been previously invited, and without being sick, and eat it or enjoy it—that is a matter that ought to be confessed by that Bhikkhu, saying, 'I have fallen, Brethren, into a blameworthy offence, unbecoming, which ought to be confessed; and I confess it!'

Nota: 1. Sekha-sammatâni kulâni; which the Vibhaôga explains as a household grown rich in faith, but poor in goods; where whatever they get is given away to the Order, though the family may be some days in want of it. Compare what is said of Anâthapiòàika in the Introduction to the 40th Gâtaka (Gâtaka I, 228); though his lot had not reached the very lowest limit.

4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, while he is dwelling in a place belonging to the class of those forest dwellings which are held to be insecure and dangerous², shall accept, with his own hand, at his home, food, either hard or soft, without having previously given notice (of the danger incurred by people that enter that forest), unless he is sick, and shall eat it or enjoy it—that is a matter that ought to be confessed by that Bhikkhu, saying, 'I have fallen, Brethren, into a blameworthy offence, unbecoming, which ought to be confessed; and I confess it!'

Nota: 2. Compare the 29th Nissaggiya.

Here end the Pâùidesaniyas.

Venerable Sirs, the four rules regarding matters which require confession have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Pâùidesaniyas.

SEKHIYÂ DHAMMÂ

RULES REGARDING MATTERS CONNECTED WITH DISCIPLINE.

Here, venerable Sirs, the rules regarding matters connected with discipline come into recitation.

1. 'I will put on my under garment all around me¹.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Parimaòàalaê: 'so as to cover the navel-maòàala, and the knee-maòàala,' says the Old Commentary. Compare Childers sub voce Timaòàalaê; and Kullavagga VIII, 5, 2.

2. 'I will put on my robe all around me.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

3. 'Properly clad will I go amidst the houses².' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 2. Antaraghare. The antaragharaê is the space in a village between the huts; not exactly the same, and yet in the following rules practically the same, as the village (gâma).

4. 'Properly clad will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

5. '(With my body) under proper control³ will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 3. Not, for instance, with dirty hands or feet, according to the Vibhaôga.

6. '(With my body) under proper control will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

7. 'With downcast eye⁴ will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 4. The practical rule is for a Bhikkhu to look at a spot in the ground about a plough's length in front of him.

8. 'With downcast eye will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

9. 'With robes not pulled up¹ will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Or perhaps 'thrown off.' He is to be fully dressed as laid down in the ist and 2nd Sekhiyas.

10. 'With robes not pulled up will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

End of the first section.

11. 'Not with loud laughter will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

12. 'Not with loud laughter will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

13. 'Making but a little sound will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

14. 'Making but a little sound will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

15. 'Without swaying my body about will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

16. 'Without swaying my body about will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

17. 'Without swaying my arms about will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

18. 'Without swaying my arms about will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

19. 'Without swaying my head about will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

20. 'Without swaying my head about will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

End of the second section.

21. 'With my arms not akimbo¹ will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

22. 'With my arms not akimbo will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

23. 'With my head uncovered² will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 2. Na oguòùhito: which the Old Commentary applies to the head.

24. 'With my head uncovered will I take my seat amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Nakkhambhakato: 'putting the hands on the hips,' says the Old Commentary.

25. 'Without walking on my heels or my toes¹ will I go amidst the houses.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Na ukkuùikâya; an unusual sense of the word; but it is so explained here by the Old Commentary.

26. 'Without lolling² will I take my seat amidst the houses/ This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 2. Na pallatthikâya. 'Without making a rest with his hands, or with a cloth,' according to the Old Commentary. Compare the Tipallattha-miga Gâtaka, and No. 65 below.

27. 'With mind alert³ will I receive an alms.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 3. Sakkakkaê. Satiê upaùùhâpetvâ, says the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ. See also No. 31.

28. 'Paying attention to my bowl will I receive an alms.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

29. 'With equal curry⁴ will I receive an alms.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 4. Samasupakaê. When the curry is in quantity one-fourth of the rice explains the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ. See No. 34.

30. '(Equally full⁵ will I receive an alms.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 5. Samatittikaê. Equally full, equally heaped up (samabhâritaê) explains the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ. Compare the several passages quoted in Rh. D.'s note on Tevigga Sutta I, 24.

End of the third section.

31. 'With mind alert will I eat the alms placed in my bowl.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

32. 'Paying attention to my bowl will I eat the alms placed in my bowl.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

33. 'Begging straight on from house to house¹ will I eat the alms placed in my bowl.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

34. 'With equal curry will I eat the alms placed in my bowl.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

35. 'Without pressing down from the top² will I eat the alms placed in my bowl.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

36. 'Neither the curry nor the condiment will I cover up with the rice, desiring to make it nicer³.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

37. 'Neither curry nor rice will I ask for, for my own particular use, unless I am sick.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

38. 'Not with envious thoughts will I look at others bowls.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

39. 'Not into too large balls will I make (up my food).' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

40. 'Into round mouthfuls will I make up my food.' This is a discipline which ought to Be observed.

End of the fourth section.

Nota: 1. Sapadânaê. See Childers sub voce. The Vibhaôga says, Khabbaggiyâ bhikkhû tahaê tahaê omadditvâ piòàapâtaê bhuñganti. The Samanta-Pâsâdikâ says, Sapadânan ti tattha tattha odhiê akatvâ anupaùipâùiya.

Nota: 2. Na thûpato omadditvâ; on which the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ has matthakato vemagghato ti.' He is not to pick and choose what morsel he takes.

Nota: 3. Compare the 8th Nissaggiya. In the text read upâdâya.

41. 'Not till the ball is brought close will I open the door of my mouth.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

42. 'Not the whole hand, when eating, will I put into my mouth.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

43. 'When the food is in my mouth will I not talk.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

44. Without tossing the food into my mouth will I eat¹.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Piòàukkhepakan ti piòàaê ukkhipitvâ ukkhipitvâ, says the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ.

45. 'Without nibbling at the balls of food will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

46. 'Without stuffing my cheeks out will I eat².' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 2. Avagaòàakârakan ti makkaùo viya gaòàe katvâ, says the Samanta-Pâsâdikâ (Minayeff, p. 93).

47. Without shaking my hands about³ will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 3 That is, to disengage particles of the rice, to shake them off on to the ground.

48. 'Without scattering the lumps of boiled rice will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

49. 'Without putting out my tongue will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

50. 'Without smacking my lips⁴ will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 4 Literally, without making the sound 'Kapu-kapu.'

End of the fifth section.

51. 'Without making a hissing sound will I eat¹.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 1. Literally, without making the sound 'Suru-suru.'

52. 'Without licking my fingers will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

53. 'Without licking my bowl will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

54. 'Without licking my lips will I eat.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

55. 'Not with a hand soiled with food will I take hold of the water-jar.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

56. 'The rinsings of the bowl mixed with lumps of boiled rice will I not throw into the inner court².' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Nota: 2. Antaraghare, which here means the space, or small open square in the middle of the house.

57. 'Not to a person with a sunshade in his hand, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma. This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

58. 'Not to a person with a staff in his hand, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

59. 'Not to a person with a sword in his hand, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

60. 'Not to a person with a weapon in his hand, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

End of the sixth section.

61. 'Not to a person wearing slippers, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

62. 'Not to a person wearing sandals, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

63. 'Not to a person seated in a cart, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

64. 'Not to a person lying on a couch, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

65. 'Not to a person lolling, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

66. 'Not to a person with a turban on his head, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

67. 'Not to a person with his head covered, unless he is sick, will I preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

68. 'Not to a person seated on a seat, unless he is sick, will I, seated on the earth, preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

69. 'Not to a person seated on a high seat, unless he is sick, will I, seated on a low seat, preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

70. 'Not to a person sitting, unless he is sick, will I, standing, preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

End of the seventh section.

71. 'Not to a person walking in front of me, unless he is sick, will I, walking behind, preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

72. 'Not to a person walking on a path, unless he is sick, will I, walking by the side of the path, preach the Dhamma.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

73. 'Not standing will I ease myself, unless I am sick.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

74. 'Not on growing grass will I ease myself, or spit.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

75. 'Not into water will I ease myself, or spit.' This is a discipline which ought to be observed.

Venerable Sirs, the rules regarding matters of discipline have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the Sekhiyas.

THE ADHIKARAÒA-SAMATHÂ DHAMMÂ.

THE RULES REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT OF CASES.

Here, venerable Sirs, the seven rules regarding the settlement of cases come into recitation.

For the decision and settlement of cases as they from time to time arise, the Proceeding in presence¹ must be performed, or the Proceeding for the consciously innocent², or the Proceeding in the case of those who are no longer out of their mind³, or the Proceeding on confession of guilt⁴, or the Proceeding by majority of the chapter⁵, or the Proceeding for the obstinate⁶, or the Proceeding by covering over as with grass⁷.

Nota: 1. Sammukhâ-vinaya. See Kullavagga IV, 14, 16, and fol lowing.

Nota: 2. Sati-vinaya. See Kullavagga IV, 14, 27.

Nota: 3. Amûlha-vinaya. See Kullavagga IV, 5, and following, and IV, 14, 28.

Nota: 4. Paùiññâya. See Kullavagga IV, 7, 8.

Nota: 5. Yebhuyyasikâ. See Kullavagga IV, 9, and IV, 14, 24.

Nota: 6. Tassapâpiyyasikâ. See Kullavagga IV, n.

Nota: 7. Tiòavatthâraka. See Kullavagga IV, 13.

Venerable Sirs, the seven rules regarding the settlement of cases have been recited.

In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A second time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

A third time I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'

The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.

Here endeth the recitation of the

Adhikaraòa-samathas.

Venerable Sirs! Recited is the Introduction.

Recited are the four Pârâjikâ Rules.

Recited are the thirteen Saêghâdisesa Rules.

Recited are the two Aniyata Rules.

Recited are the thirty Nissaggiya-Pâkittiya Rules.

Recited are the ninety-two Pâkittiya Rules.

Recited are the four Pâùidesaniya Rules.

Recited are the Sekhiya Rules.

Recited are the seven Adhikaraòa-samatha Rules.

So much (of the words) of the Blessed One, handed down in the Suttas, embraced in the Suttas, comes into recitation every half month. It behoveth all to train themselves according thereto in concord, in pleasantness, without dispute!

Here endeth the recitation of the Pâtimokkha

for the use of the Bhikkhus.

MAHAVAGGA

THE MAHAVAGGA

REVERENCE TO THE BLESSED ONE, THE HOLY ONE, THE FULLY ENLIGHTENED ONE

FIRST KHANDHAKA

(THE ADMISSION TO THE ORDER OF BHIKKHUS.)

1¹.

Nota: 1. To this book is prefixed, as introduction, an account of the first events after Gotama's attaining Buddhahood, down to the conversion of his two chief disciples, Sâriputta and Moggallâna (chaps. 1-24). Among the elements of historical or legendary character with which, in the Vinaya Piùaka, the discussion of the monastic discipline is interwoven, this account occupies by far the first place, both in extent and in importance. For it contains the oldest version accessible to us now and, most probably, for ever, of what the Buddhist fraternity deemed to be the history of their Master's life in its most important period.

The connection in which this legendary narration stands with the main subject of the first Khandhaka is not difficult to account for. The regulations regarding the admission to the fraternity, which are discussed in this Khandhaka, could not but present themselves to the redactors of the Piùaka as being the very basis of their religious discipline and monastic life. It was possible to fancy the existence of the Saêgha without the Pâtimokkha rules, or without the regulations about the Pavâraòâ festival, but it was impossible to realise the idea of a Saêgha without rules showing who was to be regarded as a duly admitted member of the fraternity, and who was not. It is quite natural, therefore, that the stories or legends concerning the ordination of Bhikkhus were put in connection with the record of the very first events of the history of the Saêgha.

Nor is it difficult to account for the theory formulated by the historians of the Buddhist ecclesiastical law, of different successive forms in which the ordination of Bhikkhus had been performed. In the beginning, of course, there was nobody but the Buddha himself who could ordain Bhikkhus; to him those who desired to be received, expressed their wish, and he conferred on them the pabbaggâ and upasampadâ ordinations by the formula: 'Ehi bhikkhu,' &c. (see I, 6, 32, 34, &c.) It was a very natural conception that afterwards, as the Saêgha grew larger, the Buddha should have transferred the power of admitting new members to the Bhikkhus themselves, and should have instituted that form of ordination which the redactors of the Piùaka found valid at their own time.

The transition, however, from the supposed oldest form of ordination (the so-called ehi-bhikkhu-upasampadâ) to that latter form is in the Vinaya legends not represented as immediate. There is described an intermediate stage between the two, the ordination by the three saraòagamanas, or by the candidate's three times repeated declaration of his taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Saêgha (see Mahâvagga I, 12). The reason which has led the redactors of the Vinaya Piùaka to this construction, was most probably the important part which in the upasampadâ service of the later time devolved upon the preceptor (upagghâya) of the candidate. As only learned Bhikkhus, who had completed the tenth year after their own upasampadâ, could per form the function of upagghâya at the upasampadâ ordination of other Bhikkhus (Mahâvagga I, 31, 8), it was natural that the redactors of the Vinaya found it impossible to ascribe this form of upasampadâ service to the first times of Buddha's teaching. For these times, therefore, they recorded another form, the upasampadâ by the three sarawagamanas, the introduction of which they assigned, very naturally, to the time soon after the conversion of Yasa's friends, by which event the number of Bhikkhus had been augmented at once from seven to sixty-one.

1. At that time the blessed Buddha dwelt at Uruvelâ, on the bank of the river Nerañarâ¹, at the foot of the Bodhi tree (tree of wisdom), just after he had become Sambuddha. And the blessed Buddha sat cross-legged at the foot of the Bodhi tree uninterruptedly during seven days, enjoying the bliss of emancipation².

Nota: 1. The Lilayan or Phalgu river in Behar; see General Cunningham's map, Archaeological Reports, vol. i. plate iii.

Nota: 2. After having reached the sambodhi and before preaching to the world the truth he has acquired, the Buddha remains, according to the tradition, during some weeks at Uruvelâ, enjoying the bliss of emancipation. The Mahâvagga, which contains these legends in their oldest forms, assigns to this stay a period of four times seven days; the later tradition is unanimous in extending it to seven times seven days (Buddhaghosa in the commentary on the Mahâvagga; Gâtaka Atthav. vol. i. p. 77 seq.; Dîpavaêsa I, 29, 30; Lalita Vistara, p. 488 seq.; Beal, Romantic Legend, p. 236 seq., &c.)

2. Then the Blessed One (at the end of these seven days) during the first watch of the night fixed his mind upon the Chain of Causation¹, in direct and in reverse order: 'From Ignorance² spring the saêkharas³, from the saêkharas springs Consciousness, from Consciousness spring Name-and-Form, from Name-and-Form spring the six Provinces (of the six senses⁴), from the six Provinces springs Contact, from Contact springs Sensation, from Sensation springs Thirst (or Desire), from Thirst springs Attachment, from Attachment springs Existence, from Existence springs Birth, from Birth spring Old Age and Death, grief, lamentation, suffering, dejection, and despair. Such is the origination of this whole mass of suffering. Again, by the destruction of Ignorance, which consists in the complete absence of lust, the saêkharas are destroyed, by the destruction of the saêkharas Consciousness is destroyed, by the destruction of Consciousness Name-and-Form are destroyed, by the destruction of Name-and-Form the six Provinces are destroyed, by the destruction of the six Provinces Contact is destroyed, by the destruction of Contact Sensation is destroyed, by the destruction of Sensation Thirst is destroyed, by the destruction of Thirst Attachment is destroyed, by the destruction of Attachment Existence is destroyed, by the destruction of Existence Birth is destroyed, by the destruction of Birth Old Age and Death, grief, lamentation, suffering, dejection, and despair are destroyed. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.'

Nota: 1. The Chain of Causation, or the doctrine of the twelve nidânas (causes of existence), contains, as has often been observed, in a more developed form an answer to the same problem to which the second and third of the four Noble Truths (ariyasakka) also try to give a solution, viz. the problem of the origin and destruction of suffering. The Noble Truths simply reduce the origin of suffering to Thirst, or Desire (Taòhâ), in its threefold form, thirst for pleasure, thirst for existence, thirst for prosperity (see I, 6, 20). In the system of the twelve nidânas Thirst also has found its place among the causes of suffering, but it is not considered as the immediate cause. A concatenation of other categories is inserted between taòhâ and its ultimate effect; and on the other hand, the investigation of causes is carried on further beyond taòhâ. The question is here asked, What does taòhâ come from? and thus the series of causes and effects is led back to aviggâ (Ignorance), as its deepest root. We may add that the redactors of the Piùakas, who of course could not but observe this parallelity between the second and third ariyasakkas and the system of the twelve nidânas, go so far, in one instance (Aôguttara-Nikâya, Tika-Nipâta, fol. ke of the Phayre MS.), as to directly replace, in giving the text of the four ariyasakkas, the second and third of them by the twelve nidânas, in direct and reverse order respectively. Professor Childers has furnished a valuable note on the nidânas; see Colebrooke, Miscellaneous Essays (second edition), II, 453 seq.

Nota: 2. In the Sammâdiùùhisuttanta (Magghima-Nikâya, fol. khu of Tumour's MS.) we find the following explanation of what Ignorance is: 'Not to know Suffering, not to know the Cause of suffering, not to know the Cessation of suffering, not to know the Path which leads to the cessation of suffering, this is called Ignorance.' The same is repeated in the explanation of the nidâna formula, which is given in the Vibhaôga (Abhidhamma-Piùaka, Paùikkasamuppâdavibhaôga, fol. ki of the Phayre MS.), and we must accept it, therefore, as the authentic expression of Buddhistical belief. It is obvious, however, that this explanation leaves room for another question. Ignorance, we are told, is the source of all evil and of all suffering, and the subject ignored is stated to be the four Truths. But who is the subject that ignores them? All attributes (as the viññâòa, &c.), that constitute sentient beings and enable them to know or to ignore, are said to be first produced by Ignorance, and we should conclude, therefore, that they cannot exist before Ignorance has begun to act. Or are we to understand that it is the Ignorance incurred by a sentient being in a preceding existence, that causes the sawkharas and Consciousness, the connecting links between the different existences, to act and to bring about the birth of a new being?

As is well known, this Ignorance (Avidyâ) plays a great part also in the Brahmanical philosophy of the Upanishads; and the Buddhist belief is, no doubt, founded to a considerable extent on older theories. But we cannot venture in a note to touch upon one of the most difficult and interesting questions which await the research of Indianists.

Nota: 3. It is very frequently stated that there are three saêkhâras or productions: kâyasaêkhâra, vakîsaêkhâra, and kittasaêkhâra, or, productions of body, of speech, and of thought (see, for instance, the Sammâdiùùhisuttanta, Magghima-Nikâya, fol. khû of Tumour's MS.) The kâyasaêkhâra consists, according to the Saêkhâra-Yamaka (Abhidhamma-Piùaka), in inhalation and expiration (assâsapassâsâ); the vakîsaêkhâra in attention and in vestigation (vitakkavikârâ); the kittasaêkhâra in ideas, sensations, and all attributes of mind except attention and investigation (saññâ ka vedanâ ka ùhapetvâ vitakkavikâre sabbe pi kittasampayuttakâ dhammâ). The Vibhaôga (Abhidhamma-Piùaka, Paùikkasamuppâdavibhaôga, 1. 1.) gives, when discussing the saêkhâras, six categories instead of the three: 'Now which are the saêkharas that are produced by Ignorance? Saêkharas (or, productions) that lead to righteousness, saêkharas that lead to sinfulness, saêkharas that lead to immovability, productions of body, of speech, and of thought.' The Pâli words are: 'Tattha katame aviggâpakkayâ saêkhâra? puññâbhisaêkhâro apuññâbhisaêkhâro âòañgâbhisaêkhâro kâyasaêkhâro vakisaêkhâro kittasaêkhâro.' The list of fifty-five categories belonging to the saêkhâra-khandha, which Sp. Hardy gives in his Manual (p. 404 seq.; comp. also Rh. D., Buddhism, p. 91 seq., and Buddhist Suttas from the Pâli,' p. 242), is not founded, as far as we know, on the authority of the Piùakas themselves, but on later compendia and commentaries.

Nota: 4. I. e. eye, ear, nose, tongue, body (or the faculty of touch), and mind.

3. Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmaòa, then all his doubts fade away, since he realises what is that nature and what its cause.'

4. Then the Blessed One during the middle watch of the night fixed his mind upon the Chain of Causation, in direct and reverse order: From Ignorance spring the saòkharas, &c Such is the origination of this whole mass of suffering, &c .... Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

5. Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmaòa, then all his doubts fade away, since he has understood the cessation of causation.'

6. Then the Blessed One during the third watch of the night fixed his mind, &c.

7. Knowing this the Blessed One then on that occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'When the real nature of things becomes clear to the ardent, meditating Brâhmaòa, he stands, dispelling the hosts of Mara, like the sun that illuminates the sky.'

Here ends the account of what passed

under the Bodhi tree.

1. Then the Blessed One, at the end of those seven days, arose from that state of meditation, and went from the foot of the Bodhi tree to the Agapâla banyan tree (banyan tree of the goat-herds¹). And when he had reached it, he sat cross-legged at the foot of the Agapâla banyan tree uninterruptedly during seven days, enjoying the bliss of emancipation.

Nota: 1. Buddhaghosa: 'The goat-herds used to go to the shadow of that banyan tree and to sit there; therefore it was called the banyan tree of the goat-herds.' The northern Buddhists say that this tree had been planted by a shepherd boy, during the Bodhisatta's six years penance, in order to shelter him; see Beal, Rom. Legend, pp. 192, 238, and the Mahâvastu.

2. Now a certain Brâhmaòa, who was of a haughty disposition², went to the place where the Blessed One was; having approached him, he exchanged greeting with the Blessed One; having exchanged with him greeting and complaisant words, he stationed himself near him; then standing near him that Brâhmaòa thus spoke to the Blessed One: 'By what, Gotama, does one become a Brâhmaòa, and what are the characteristics that make a man a Brâhmaòa?'

Nota: 2. 'Huhuôkagâtiko.' Buddhaghosa: 'Because he was diùùhamaôgalika, he became filled with haughtiness and wrath, and went about uttering the sound "huhum." Diùùhamaôgalika (having seen something auspicious?) is obscure to us.

3. And the Blessed One, having heard that, on this occasion pronounced this solemn utterance: 'That Brâhmaòa who has removed (from himself) all sinfulness, who is free from haughtiness, free from impurity, self-restrained, who is an accomplished master of knowledge (or, of the Veda), who has fulfilled the duties of holiness, such a Brâhmaòa may justly call himself a Brâhmaòa, whose behaviour is uneven to nothing in the world.'

Here ends the account of what passed

under the Aòapala tree.

1. Then the Blessed One, at the end of those seven days, arose from that state of meditation, and went from the foot of the Agapâla banyan tree to the Mukalinda tree. And when he had reached it, he sat cross-legged at the foot of the Mukalinda tree uninterruptedly during seven days, enjoying the bliss of emancipation.

2. At that time a great cloud appeared out of season, rainy weather which lasted seven days, cold weather, storms, and darkness. And the Nâga (or Serpent) king Mukalinda came out from his abode, and seven times encircled the body of the Blessed One with his windings, and kept extending his large hood over the Blessed One's head, thinking to himself: 'May no coldness (touch) the Blessed One! May no heat (touch) the Blessed One! May no vexation by gadflies and gnats, by storms and sunheat and reptiles (touch) the Blessed One!'

3. And at the end of those seven days, when the Nâga king Mukalinda saw the open, cloudless sky, he loosened his windings from the body of the Blessed One, made his own appearance disappear, created the appearance of a youth, and stationed himself in front of the Blessed One, raising his clasped hands, and paying reverence to the Blessed One.

4. And the Blessed One, perceiving that, on this occasion, pronounced this solemn utterance: 'Happy is the solitude of him who is full of joy, who has learnt the Truth, who sees (the Truth). Happy is freedom from malice in this world, (self-) restraint towards all beings that have life. Happy is freedom from lust in this world, getting beyond all desires; the putting away of that pride which comes from the thought "I am!" This truly is the highest happiness!'

Here ends the account of what passed under the Mukalinda tree.

VINAYA TEXTS en GOOGLE

Thomas William Rhys Davids; Hermann Oldenberg (tr) - Vinaya Texts. Part III

Glossarios de Palabras - VER/OCULTAR

A

abhihaùùhuê
Abhihaùuê pavâreyyâ ti yâvatakaê ikkhasi tâvatakaê ganhâhiti
abhiharitvâ
abhihaùuê
abhihaùùhuê
abhihaùuê
addhâna
Adhikaraòa-samathas
Agapâla, banyan tree
akimbo
Akkâyika
akkâyika-kîvaraê
akkeka-kîvaraê
Amûlha-vinaya
Ânanda
Anâthapiòàika
anatikkantâ
aniggata-ratanake
anîhata-ratanake
anikkhantâ
Aniyatâ Dhammâ
Aôguttara Nikâya
aññâtakassa
Antaragharaê paviùùhâ
Antaraghare
Anupadaggeyya
anupakhagga
Anupasampannaê padaso dhammaê vâkeyya
Anurâdhapura
Apadisitabbo
apakkuddhârakaê
ârâma
ârâmika
ariyasakka
âsâpenti
assâsapassâsâ
Aùani
atireka-kîvara
âtmanep
Attakâmapârikariyâ
âvasatha
âvasatha-piòdo
Avidyâ (Ignorance)
aviggâ (Ignorance)

B

Bhâòavâras
Bhikkhu's
Bhikkhuni
Bhikkhuni's
Bhikkhunî's
Bhikkhu-pâtimokkha
Bhikkhuni-pâtimokkha
Bhikkhunovâda
bhiêsapeyya
Bhûtagâma
Bhuttasmiê pâkittiya
Brâhmaòa
Buddha-vaêsa
Buddhaghosa
Buddhist Suttas

D

dadyâma
Daggâma
dantakaùùha
Dantapoòa
Devadatta
Devanampiya King of Magâdha
Dhamma Texts
Dhammas
Digambaras
Dîpavaêsa
Dîpavaêsa
diùùhamaôgalika
Dukkaùa
dvangula
dvâra-kosa
dvâra-okâsa
dvittikkhadanassa

E

Ehi bhikkhu
ehi-bhikkhu-upasampadâ
Ekuddeso

G

Gahapati
gâma
Garu-dhammâ
Gâtaka
Gâtaka Atthav.
Gotama

H

hâsa-dhamme
Huhuôkagâtiko

I

Indakhîla

K

kâlasâmaê vâ
Kammavâkas
Kaôkhâ Vitaraòî
Kapu-kapu
kara pi re
kara api re
kara pare
Kâtumâsinî
Kathina
Khattiya
Kathinassa ubbâdra
Kattika-temâsa
Kattika-temâsi-puòòamâ
Khattiya
Katukka-Nipâta
Kathinuddhâra
kâyasaêkhâra
ketâpetvâ
kittasaêkhâra
kîvaraê nitthitaê
khakkhattuparamaê
Khandhakas
kodayamâno
Kosambî
Khuddânukhuddakehi
kulupikâ bhikkhunî
Kullavagga

L

Lalita Vistara

M

Magâdha
Magghima-Nikâya
Magghima-Sîla
Mahâ Kassapa
Mahâ-sudassana Sutta
Mahaparinibbana Sutta
Mahâparinibbâna Sutta
Mahâ-parinibbâna
Maha-parinibbana Sutta
Mahâparinibbâna Sutta
Mahâ-Sila
Maha-sudassana Sutta
Mahâvagga / Mahavagga
Mahâvaêsa
Mahâvihâra
maòàala
matthakato vemagghato ti
meraya
Moggallâna
Mukalinda, tree
mukha

N

Na pallatthikâya
Na oguòùhito
Na thûpato omadditvâ
Na ukkuùikâya
Nâga (or Serpent)
Nakkhambhakato
Nerañarâ, río
nidânas, el sistema de las doce
Nigaòùhas
nihata
nîhata
nîhaùa
Nirvâna
Nissaggiyas
Nissaggiya

Ñ

Ñânadassana

O

osâpenti
Otiòòo
ovâda
Ovadeyya

P

pabbaggâ
Pâkittiya
pakkuddhâro
Pâli Piùakas
paññattaê
Pârâgika
Pârâjikâ
Parampara-bhogane
Paribbâgaka
Paribbâgakas
Paribbâgika
Parimaòàalaê
Parinibbâna
Parivâra-pâtha
Parivâra-pâùha
Parivâsa
parivattetvâ
Pariyâya
pasâdo uppanno hoti
paùhama-kattika-puòòamâ
Pâùidesaniya
Paùikkasamuppâdavibhaôga
Pâtimokkha
Pavâraòâ
Pavârito
Pitakas
Pratimoksha
Prati-muk
Pratimukha
Prâyaëkittika
Prâyaëkittîya
puggala
Pukkhâvissaggana
Pukkusa

R

Râga
Râgagaha
Râgagaha
râgaka
ragake
râgini
raññe
rañño
ratanaka
Ratanas
Ratanasammataê
Rûpiyakkhaddaka

S

Sabbakâmî
sabhogaê
Sabhogane kule
sabhogana kula
sabhoganaê
Sagathavagga Samyutta
Sahadhammika
Sâketa
Sakkakkaê
samabhâritaê
Samâdhis
samaggâ
Samaggena saêghena
samâkase
Samaòa-bhatta-samayo
Samanta-Pâsâdikâ
Sâmaòera
Sâmaòerî
Samanubhâsitabbo
Samaòuddeso
Samâpattis
sambodhi
Sambuddha
Saêgha
Saêghâdisesa
Saêghâdisesa
Saêkhâra-Yamaka
samutkarsha
Saôghâ
Saôghâdisesa
saêghâdisesa
Saêghakamma
saêkhâra-khandha
Sammâdiùùhisuttanta
Sammukhâ-vinaya
sammuti
Santaê bhikkhuê
Sappâòaka
saraòagamanas
sârayamâno
Sâriputta
Sâriputta
Sati-vinaya
Satiê upaùùhâpetvâ
sayani-ghara
Sekha-sammatâni kulâni
Sekhiya
Sîhalaùùhakathâ
Siêhalese
Siôgiloòa
Sudinna, sin of
Sugata
Sugataôgulena
sukigharaê
Sumaôgala
Suppavâyitaê
surâ
Suru-suru
Suttadharâ
Suttanta
Suttas
Suttantikas
Sutta Pitaka
Sutta-vibhaôga
Suttavibhangara
Suttadharâ
Svetambaras

T

Taòhâ, Desire
tâni; madhu phâòitaê
tassa upalâpeti
Tassapâpiyyasikâ
Tevigga Sutta
Teviggu Sutta
theyya-saêkhâtaê
Thullaccaya
Thullakkaya
ti-kîvara
Tika-Nipâta
Timaòàalaê
Tiòavatthâraka
Tipallattha-miga Gâtaka
tirakkhâna-viggâ
Tûlaê

U

Uddhakka
Ukkhitto anosârito
upagghâya
Upajjhâya
Upalâpeyya
Upâli
Upananda
Upanikkhittaê vâ sâdiyeyya
upâsaka
Upasampadâ
Upasampadâ-kammavâka
upasampanna
Uposatha
Uposatho paòòaraso
uttarimanussa-dhammaê

V

vagga
vakîsaêkhâra
Vânaprasthas
vassâvâsikaê
Vesâlî, Council of
Vibhaôga
Vibhaôga
Vikâle
Vilâsinî
Vimokkhas
Vinaya
Vinaya-dharâ
Vinayadharâ
Vinayapâmokkhâ
Vinaya Pitaka
Vinaya-Samukase
Vinaya Texts
viññâòa
vitakkavikârâ
vyagra

Y

yâvatatiyakâ
Yebhuyyasikâ
Yoganas

Vinaya Texts - en Google

SBE 20 Index
- [ Traducir esta página ]
Chapter 24 · Chapter 25 · Chapter 26 · Chapter 27. Eleventh Khandhaka ...
www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe20/index.htm - En caché - Similares
SBE 20: Contents
- [ Traducir esta página ]
Note on the Bhânavâras. 415. Index of Subjects. 422. Index of Proper Names ...
www.sacred-texts.com/bud/.../sbe20001.htm - En caché
Mostrar más resultados de sacred-texts.com
Vinaya Texts: Volumes 1, 2, 3 - Resultado de la Búsqueda de libros de Google
Hermann Oldenberg
32) Bhânavâras, occupying about 350 pages of Pâli text, and about 610 pages in ... 52) Bhânavâras, occupying about 550 pages of Pâli, and about 960 pages of ...
books.google.es/books?isbn=1605061123...
Khandhaka Definition. Crossword Dictionary.
- [ Traducir esta página ]
The last Bhânavâra in each Khandhaka is not referred to either by name or by ... “SBE 20: Note on the Bhânavâras”, sacred-texts.com; La Liga Round Up: ...
wordsdomination.com/khandhaka.html - En caché
Pathama Definition. Crossword Dictionary.
- [ Traducir esta página ]
“SBE 20: Note on the Bhânavâras”, sacred-texts.com; Sagathavagga Samyutta ...
wordsdomination.com/pathama.html - En caché
Mostrar más resultados de wordsdomination.com
Free Ebooks - VINAYA TEXTS
- [ Traducir esta página ]
3 In the Ceylon Chroniclers (Dîpavamsa, Bhânavâras 4 and 5) Upâli even becomes the first in a series of Vinayapâmokkhâ, or 'Chiefs of the Vinaya;' but no ...
www.bored.com/ebooks/Religion/.../vinaya%20texts.html - En caché
Scribd
- [ Traducir esta página ]
... Bhikkhunîs) 320 Eleventh Khandhaka (On the Council of Râgagaha) 370 Twelfth Khandhaka (On the Council of Vesâlî) 386 Note on the Bhânavâras 415 Index of ...
www.scribd.com/EvamMeSutam/documents?page=19 - En caché
Thomas William Rhys Davids; Hermann Oldenberg (tr) - Vinaya Texts ...
- [ Traducir esta página ]
Note on the Bhânavâras 415. Index of Subjects 422. Index of Proper Names 428 ...
www.scribd.com/.../Thomas-William-Rhys-Davids-Hermann-Oldenberg-tr-Vinaya-Texts-Part-III - En caché
Mostrar más resultados de scribd.com
Vinaya Texts, Part I (SBE 13) - Mahâvagga - First Khandaka
- [ Traducir esta página ]
We may add that the succession of Vinaya teachers from Upâli down to Mahinda, which is given in the Dîpavamsa (Bhânavâras IV and V), is a succession of ...
integrativespirituality.org/postnuke/html/modules/Static.../sbe1312.htm

Fuentes - Fonts

SOUV2

SOUV2P.TTF - 57 KB
SOUV2I.TTF - 59 KB
SOUV2B.TTF - 56 KB
SOUV2T.TTF - 56 KB

Balaram

bai_____.ttf - 46 KB
babi____.ttf - 47 KB
bab_____.ttf - 45 KB
balaram_.ttf - 45 KB

ScaGoudy

SCAGRG__.TTF - 73 KB
SCAGI__.TTF - 71 KB
SCAGB__.TTF - 68 KB

FOLIO 4.2

inbenr11.ttf - 64 KB
inbeno11.ttf - 12 KB
inbeni11.ttf - 12 KB
inbenb11.ttf - 66 KB
indevr20.ttf - 53 KB

Biblica Font

Greek font: BibliaLS Normal
Greek font: BibliaLS Bold
Greek font: BibliaLS Bold Italic
Greek font: BibliaLS Italic
Hebrew font: Ezra SIL
Hebrew font: Ezra SIL SR

Disculpen las Molestias

Conceptos Hinduistas (1428)SC |

Category:Hindu (mythology) (3256)SC | Category:Hindu mythology (3270)SC | Categoría:Mitología hindú (3288)SC (indice) | Categoría:Mitología hindú (videos) (3289)SC | C onceptos Hinduista (A - G) SK y SC (videos) (3294)SC

Aa-Anc · Aga - Ahy · Ai - Akshay · Akshe - Amshum · Ana - Ancie · Ang - Asvayu · Ata - Az · Baa-Baz · Be-Bhak · Bhal- Bu · C · Daa-Daz · De · Dha- Dry · Du-Dy · E · F · Gaa- Gayu · Ge-Gy · Ha-He · Hi-Hy · I · J · K · Ka - Kam · Kan - Khatu · Ki - Ko · Kr - Ku · L · M · N · O · P · R · S · Saa-San · Sap- Shy · Si-Sy · Ta - Te · U · V · Ve-Vy · Y · Z

Conceptos Hinduistas (2919)SK · (2592)SK

A_a-A_g · A_h-A_m · A_na-A_nc · A_nd-A_nu · A_p-A_r · A_s-A_x · A_y-A_z · B_aa-B_aq · B_ar-B_az · B_e-B_hak · B_hal-B_hy · B_o-B_u · B_ra · B_rh-B_ry · B_u-B_z · C_aa-C_aq · C_ar-C_ay · C_e-C_ha · C_he-C_hi · C_ho-C_hu · C_i-C_n · C_o-C_y · D_aa-D_an · D_ar-D_ay · D_e< span style="font-weight: bold;"> · D_ha-D_ny · D_o-D_y · E_a-E_o · E_p-E_z · F_aa-F_y · G_aa-G_aq · G_ar-G_az · G_e-G_n · G_o · G_ra-G_y · H_aa-H_aq · H_ar-H_az · H_e-H_indk · H_indu-H_isto · H_o-H_y · I_a-I_q · I_r-I_s · I_t-I_y · J_aa-J_aq · J_ar-J_ay · J_e-J_n · J_o-J_y · K_aa-K_aq · K_ar-K_az · K_e-K_h · K_o · K_r · K_u - K_z · L_aa-L_aq · L_ar-L_ay · L_e-L_n · L_o-L_y · M_aa-M_ag · M_ah · M_ai-M_aj · M_ak-M_aq · M_ar-M_az · M_b-M_n · M_o-M_z · N_aa-N_aq · N_ar-N_az · N_b-N_n · N_o-N_z · O_a-O_z · P_aa-P_aq · P_ar-P_az · P_e-P_h · P_o-P_y · R_aa-R_aq · R_ar-R_az · R_e-R_n · R_o-R_y · S_aa-S_am · S_an-S_ar · S_as-S_g · S_ha-S_hy · S_ia-S_il · S_im-S_n · S_o - S_q · S_r - S_t · S_u-S_z · T_aa-T_aq · T_ar-T_ay · T_e-T_n · T_o-T_y · U_a-U_q · U_r-U_s · V_aa-V_aq · V_ar-V_az · V_e · V_i-V_n · V_o-V_y · W_aa-W_i · W_o-W_y · Y_aa-Y_av · Y_e-Y_iy · Y_o-Y_u · Z_aa-Z_y

GENERAL
JUDAISMO \| Ärî Garga-Samhita \| Oraciones Selectas al Señor Supremo \| Devotees Vaishnavas \| Dandavat pranams - All glories to Srila Prabhupada \| Hari Katha \| Santos Católicos \| El Antiguo Egipto I \| Archivo Cervantes \| Sivananda Yoga \| Neale Donald Walsch \| SWAMIS \| ENCICLOPEDIA - INDICE \| DEVOTOS FACEBOOK \| EGIPTO - USUARIOS de FLICKR y PICASAWEB

Devotees Vaishnavas

Correo Vaishnava

18/11/10

Vinaya Texts - 1º Parte

A

B

D

E

G

H

I

K

L

M

N

Ñ

O

P

R

S

T

U

V

Y

SBE 20 Index

SBE 20: Contents

Vinaya Texts: Volumes 1, 2, 3 - Resultado de la Búsqueda de libros de Google

Khandhaka Definition. Crossword Dictionary.

Pathama Definition. Crossword Dictionary.

Free Ebooks - VINAYA TEXTS

Scribd

Thomas William Rhys Davids; Hermann Oldenberg (tr) - Vinaya Texts ...

Vinaya Texts, Part I (SBE 13) - Mahâvagga - First Khandaka

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario

Seguidores

Archivo del blog

Devotos Vaishnavas