The
traditional value of the vinaya may be best
perceived from the viewpoint of how the Buddha’s teaching was disseminated. Any
Buddha will have attained the awakened state through an arduous and constant
training which enables one to realize “dependent co-arising” (prat´tya-samutpŒda). In the case of êŒkyamuni Buddha,[1] he endeavored to elucidate what he had experienced. His doctrine
appealed to those who were keen to break through the shackles of saµsŒra, and he quickly attracted many followers. Some of them went so far
as to emulate the Buddha and they accompanied him in a life of celibacy (brahmacarya).
Theoretically,
the accomplishment of nirvΚa is available equally to laypeople and monks. However, in actuality,
the householder’s life is characterized by a greater ebb and flow of the
struggle between the physical body and mental forces. Consequently, householder
life is replete with experiences of backsliding on the path to nirvΚa.[2] On the other hand, the life style of the monks, at the time of the
Buddha, particularly facilitated the achievement of nirvŒöa and therefore was conducive to eliminating all kinds of duúkha.[3] But how was this so? In the early phase of his teaching, êŒkyamuni usually encouraged the monks to tackle the human experience
of duúkha by taking to heart the doctrines expressed in passages such as the
following:
It is good to safeguard one’s bodily action;
Being able to restrain the speech is also good;
It is good to safeguard one’s mind.
[Thus,] the restraint of every way of action is good.
A monk, if restrained in every [way of action],
Will be able to depart from all kinds of duúkha.[4]
[If] a monk is alert to his speech as well as thought,
Commits no unwholesome deeds with the body,
And is pure in these three ways of action,
He will [eventually] attain the Path achieved by the Sages.[5]
According
to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, five years after achieving the awakened state, the Buddha
began to lay down the monastic discipline that ensued from an actual
infringement of conduct.[6] The reason that the Buddha did not prescribe any disciplinary
precept prior to an offense is mentioned in the Vinaya, in which Venerable êŒriputra asked the Buddha how the teachings of the Blessed One could
be perpetuated. The Buddha replied that the teachings would last long after his
death under two situations Ñ 1) if a
Buddha could reiterate the Dharma for his pupils, and 2) if a Buddha could
stipulate the discipline for the monk pupils and then could establish the
recitation of the “collection of the disciplinary precepts” (prŒtimok·a).[7] In response to the second situation, êŒriputra requested the Buddha to prescribe the vinaya and to institute the recitation of the prŒtimok·a. However, the Blessed One maintained that a TathŒgata[8] does not embark on such a measure until a transgression had arisen.
When various incidents occurred on the basis of a warped mind owing to a
preponderance of the three unwholesome roots (lust or passion [rŒga], hatred [do·a] and delusion [moha]), a TathŒgata would specify vinaya and establish
a way to recite the prŒtimok·a.[9]
Besides
the above passages, the Buddha also encouraged his pupils to “abide grounded in
the Dharma, take refuge in the Dharma and have no other refuge.”[10] On other occasions, however, the Buddha recommended thus: “What I
have taught and explained to you as Dhamma and [monastic] discipline (vinaya) will, at my passing, be your teacher.”[11] These passages show that there was a discrepancy between the
exclusive weight given to the Dharma and an equal emphasis placed on both the
Dharma and vinaya. On what ground is monastic discipline so important that it can
equalize the Dharma? In other words, how crucial is the vinaya in the
monastic tradition allowing it to be on balance with the Dharma?
In
order to respond to these inquiries, the rationale for such a strong impact of
the monastic discipline needs to be examined. In this regard, the “Ten
Benefits” (da§Œrthava§as) found in the Vinaya
can shed light on the question of the value of the monastic discipline. The
“Ten Benefits”, in turn, are foundational to understand how the Buddha set
forth disciplinary precepts or monastic guidelines, including the way for the
recitation of the prŒtimok·a.
The
Ten Benefits given in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya are the following:
1.
Being involved in the Saµgha’s [activities];
2.
Increasing involvement in the Saµgha’s [activities];
3.
Enabling the Saµgha to remain in
calmness;
4.
Restraining those without the sense of
shame;
5.
Enabling those with shame to come to a
state of calmness;
6.
Convincing those, whose confidence has
not arisen, to trust [the Buddha’s teaching];
7.
Increasing and reinforcing [the
confidence of] those who already trust [the Buddha’s teaching];
8.
Extinguishing present Τravas;[12]
9.
Preventing Τravas which have not
yet arisen from arising;
10. Enabling the Proper Dharma (saddharma)
to continue perpetually.[13]
According
to Ven. Yin-shun, these Ten Benefits can be distributed among six divisions
which are: 1) harmony, 2) calmness, 3) purity, 4) promulgation for others, 5)
spiritual cultivation for oneself, and 6) the utmost. As systematized by Ven.
Yin-shun, the correlation between Ten Benefits and six divisions in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya is as follows:[14]
Ten
Benefits Six
Divisions
1. Being involved in the Saµgha’s [activities] ¾¾¾¾¾¾¾¾¾ 1. Harmony
2. Increasing involvement in the Saµgha’s [activities] ö
ñ¾¾¾ 2. Calmness
3. Enabling the Saµgha to remain in calmness ø
4. Restraining those without the sense of shame
ö
ñ¾¾¾ 3. Purity
5. Enabling those with shame to come to a state of calmness ø
6. Convincing those, whose confidence has not arisen, to ö
trust
[the Buddha’s teaching] ñ¾¾¾ 4. Promulgation
7. Increasing and reinforcing [the confidence of] those who ½ for
others
already
trust [the Buddha’s teaching]
ø
8. Extinguishing present Œ§ravas ö¾¾¾ 5. Spiritual ñ
cultivation
9. Preventing Τravas which have not
yet arisen from arising ø for oneself
10. Enabling the Proper Dharma to continue perpetually ÑÑÑÑÑ 6. The Utmost
The
Ten Benefits actually are not unique to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya when the
traditional value of the vinaya is considered
in terms of the Ten Benefits, there is no difference of the contents between
the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya and the other Vinayas.[15] Even if the Ten Benefits are distributed among six divisions, the
concordance between the Ten Benefits and six divisions from the other Vinayas can also be made according to
Ven. Yin-shun.[16] To clarify the
traditional context and significance of monastic discipline, the following
discussion will explain how the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya embodies the traditional value of the vinaya in the above six divisions.
Harmony
plays a vital role in characterizing and sustaining the communal life style
that contributed to the increase in the followers of the Buddha after several
years. It appears that clashes or moral lapses occasionally arose within the Saµgha. The Buddha coped with those incidents by discoursing on and
instituting disciplinary precepts or monastic guidelines. The quarreling that
took place at Kau§Œmb´ was a case in point.[17] In response to such a dispute, the Buddha came up with the six
qualities that brought about affection and respect, and that were conducive to
amity, non-dispute, harmony and unity. Of these six qualities, the first three
refer to maintaining: 1) bodily, 2) verbal, and 3) mental acts of
loving-kindness toward one’s companions, and the last three refer to: 4)
sharing all things with one’s companions, 5) living an unblemished and
scrupulous life, and 6) living in accord with the awareness that guides one
toward the removal of duúkha.[18]
Of
these, the first three qualities are at the basis of a harmonious relationship,
and the last three are related to three types of clashes that occur in the Saµgha regarding livelihood, conduct and view.[19] If each monk practices bodily, verbal and mental acts of
loving-kindness, the clashes involving livelihood, conduct or view in the Saµgha find no impetus to develop. Therefore, harmony in livelihood,
conduct or view entails the concord within a Saµgha in terms of
physical, verbal and mental actions. For example, the po·adha ceremony is typical
of reinforcing harmony in the areas of the conduct and view.
The
po·adha service is held usually every fortnight on the fourteenth or
fifteenth day.[20] Each monk who has received “the higher ordination” (upasaµpad) excepting those who are ill or seeking robes or bowls must attend
that service. If a monk really cannot attend the service, he should declare to
a companion that his actions during the last fortnight have been pure as
specified in the prŒtimok·a; he should entrust the companion to explain his absence and to
state his purity to the Saµgha. When a monk is absent from the po·adha observance without
justification, legitimately that service should be suspended. Even if others
assemble and continue to recite the prŒtimok·a, the service is considered invalid. The reason for such demanding
regulations can be found in the commentary to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, in which the
notion of “harmony” is defined as follows:
[The statement,] “the Saµgha in harmony”
indicates that an event in the community is not to be administered in a
sectarian way. Although there may be conflicts or accusations among one
another, these monks still live within the same “monastic boundary” (s´mŒ) as a whole. They regularly hold either the po·adha service or “the ceremony at the end of the rainy season retreat” (pravŒraöŒ). Therefore this is named “the Saµgha in harmony”.[21]
To progress with the po·adha service means to
maintain a harmonious alliance within the Saµgha, and thus a valid po·adha ceremony characterizes the amicable relationship within a monastic
community. Furthermore, the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya relates nine circumstances which can prevent the po·adha ceremony from being observed:
1.
The presence of a person, whose
banishment has been authenticated;
2.
The presence of a person, whose rights
in the Saµgha have been suspended;
3.
The presence of those who have not yet
received upasaµpad;
4.
The lack of a claim by an absentee
that he has been “pure” (pari§uddhi) since the last po·adha service;
5.
The occasion of not taking up the
“counting chips” (§ŒlŒkŒ);[22]
6.
[The state of] harmony for which is
intended;[23]
7.
[The state of] an incomplete
congregation;[24]
8.
The fear that holding a po·adha service would entail clashes within the Saµgha;
9.
The occurrence of a disintegration of
the Saµgha.[25]
Among these circumstances, nos.
1-5 and 7 (except no. 6), relate to aggravating the harmony of “conduct” within
a Saµgha when the po·adha service is conducted; nos. 8 and 9 are factors that lead to the
destruction of harmony within a Saµgha in the area of “view”.
A
state of harmony is the raison-d’tre for
the symbolic significance of treasuring and honoring the po·adha service by any monk. The incident involving Venerable Aniruddha’s
absence is a case in point. On one occasion the monks in residence were ready
to hold the po·adha service, but Aniruddha was absent. The Saµgha dispatched a monk to
call on him. He replied that he was one who was already pure in the world and
thus he would not go. The monk related this to the Blessed One. The Buddha
spoke to Aniruddha saying that if he disregarded the po·adha, others would not
honor it either. The Buddha thenceforth declared that everyone should attend
the po·adha service.[26] Despite being one of the eminent pupils of the Buddha,[27] the excellence of Aniruddha did not qualify him to be exempt from po·adha service. Conversely, this incident stresses the dignity of the po·adha service for harmony’s sake.
Calmness
is an outcome from maintaining a harmonious relationship within a Saµgha. Harmony arises immediately in the wake of the disappearance of
clashes and thus calmness in the Saµgha comes into view. This means that a community of monks can remain in
calmness only if conflicts come to an end. The SŒmagŒma Sutta of the MajjhimanikŒya traces disputes or contentions to six
sources. They state that a monk dwells impudent and inconsiderate towards his
teacher (the Buddha), Dharma or Saµgha when he (1) is angry and revengeful; (2) is contemptuous and
domineering; (3) is envious and avaricious; (4) is deceitful and fraudulent;
(5) has unwholesome wishes and improper view; or (6) adheres to his own views,
and is obstinate and tenacious. When a monk is impudent, this tends to generate
a dispute in the Saµgha.[28] These six sources of disputes or contentions figure in the
occurrence of the three types of clashes as follows: the 3rd and 4th sources
figure in the clash of livelihood, the 1st and 2nd sources are grouped under
the clash of conduct, and the 5th and 6th are classified under the clash of
view. Without these sources of disputes or contentions, there can be no clash
in the areas of livelihood, conduct or view.
Regarding
calmness in the light of the clash of livelihood, the fact that the concord of
livelihood results in harmony of the Saµgha can be found in the Vinaya.
At the time of the Buddha, the “state of celibacy in terms of spiritual
cultivation” (pravrŒjita) was not unique to the Buddha and his pupils. This is connected
with keeping the necessities of life to a minimum that epitomizes the monastic
life style of Buddhist monks. If a monk pursues more material wants than the
basic necessities such as robes, almsfood, resting place and medicine, he will
need to spend more time and energy in acquiring and maintaining these
additional materials. Therefore, he will have less time to train himself. To
curb personal needs sensibly to their lowest level will be conducive to
spiritual cultivation. The breakthrough in attaining calmness is related to how
reasonably restrained one is in regard to the necessities. The monastic
discipline thus reminds every practitioner of such restraints. For example,
with respect to food, the nidŒna (historical basis) of a precept in the §aik·a-dharmas (the precepts that are to be learnt) category gives the following
description. On one occasion the lay followers prepared the meals in the
monastery and offered them to monks. Then “a group of six monks” (·a¶vargika-bhik·us) viewed the food in the bowls of their neighbors with a sense of
grievance. On seeing less food in their own bowl, or seeing another with a
larger bowl, they murmured among themselves. Having heard the murmuring, other
monks felt ashamed. Therefore, they approached the Buddha and reported this
matter to him.[29] Subsequently, the Buddha laid down the precept: “Do not look into
one’s neighbor’s bowl grudgingly Ñ This is
what is to be learned (§aik·Œ karaö´yŒ).”[30] Further, the commentary on this precept states: “If one indulges
the faculties by looking into one’s neighbor’s bowl grudgingly, one will
infringe on ‘the precepts that are to be learnt’ (§aik·a-dharmas).”[31] On the one hand, this precept is to caution that one should stop
such resentful thought and action so that one may progress in spiritual
refinement. Thus, calmness will be attained. On the other hand, because such
grievances can lead to conflict, once the complaint is stopped by means of the
aforementioned precept, there will be no dispute between two monks. A lack of
disputation secures harmony within the Saµgha in terms of
livelihood. From harmony calmness is achieved.
Purity
is acquired in the proper, harmonious and valid performance of the whole set of
the monastic discipline. Purity is understood in this case as a state in which
one feels free from any offense or in which one’s infringement has been
confessed, expiated and then treated properly. Since purity is directed toward
“restraining those without the sense of shame”,[32] it necessitates a process for dealing with any transgression except
the four gravest cases in the pŒrŒjika category.[33] Further, owing to the fact that purity is also directed towards
“enabling those with shame to come to a state of calmness”,[34] one will feel carefree and pure if one commits no offense or if
one’s transgression has been treated properly. These two facets of purity will
be exemplified below.
In
the first place, when purity is directed toward “restraining those without the
sense of shame”, it is crucial to have a well functioning institution which can
caution a possible offender that his purity may be in danger. The episode
involving Chandaka contains an example of such a functioning institution. When
a monk honestly specified what Chandaka committed in the prŒtimok·a, he claimed that he was not the person who could be advised.
However, others urged him to respond to the counsel by acknowledging that he
accepted their instructions in accordance with the Dharma and vinaya, and they
promised also to speak to him in accordance with the Dharma and vinaya. This
practice was emphasized for the growth of the Saµgha. One may
rehabilitate the other from falling into infringement by mutual exchange of
views, advice and remonstration.[35] When such an operation is instituted, it tends to ensure that a
transgressor can quickly restore purity.
Nonetheless,
to expose the wrongdoing of another cannot be performed at one’s whim. In the Vinaya there are several essential
prerequisites for exposing offense or oversights of another. Once the Buddha
informed UpŒli that a monk is entitled to expose
the wrongdoing of another with respect to one of three issues Ñ i. e., the impurity regarding livelihood, conduct or view. A monk
is also qualified to expose the wrongdoing of another with respect to one of
three circumstances Ñ i. e.,
what has been seen, what has been heard, or what is suspected.[36] Further, the text also mentions that a monk can bring to light the
offenses of another so long as he fulfills one of the three subsequent sets of
acts:
Set I Ñ to know the offending case is fact not fiction; to know exactly
when one can expose the
wrongdoing rather than when it is inappropriate to bring to light the wrongdoing; to
know that the exposure of the wrongdoing will be beneficial [to a transgressor] and is not malicious; [to be certain
that the speech used in the
exposure is] gentle rather than harsh; [to know that the motive behind the
exposure] is grounded in the mind of compassion rather than outrage.[37]
Set II Ñ to purify one’s bodily action, to purify one’s verbal action, to
maintain
proper living, to be well versed in Abhidharma,[38] and to be well
versed
in the Vinaya.[39]
Set III Ñ not to follow craving, not to follow hatred, not to follow fear,
not to follow delusion and not to take
advantage [of others].[40]
Moreover, there has been an
insistent demand that, at any time, the person who exposes the wrongdoing of
another should remain in equanimity and loving-kindness in order to help a
transgressor to realize his offence. Therefore, the spirit of a well
functioning institution in approving a qualified person to expose the offenses
or oversights of another is to protect a fellow offender from further
indulgence or unawareness so that the latter will swiftly recover from the
moral frailty or lapse, and reestablish purity.
The
other facet of purity, “enabling those with shame to come to a state of
calmness”, will now be discussed. This can be illustrated by a precept: a bhik·u, having known that the Saµgha has already settled a bone of contention according to the Dharma
and vinaya, is not allowed to stir it up again and to demand that the
“monastic proceeding” (karma) be done once
more.[41] There are four types of bones of contentions as described in the sètras or Vinaya collection: a
bone of contention arising from a dispute, a slander, an offense and a
proceeding.[42] According to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, each is to be tackled by
some specific types of settlement.[43] When a bone of contention confronts the members of a Saµgha, they are required to treat it attentively in order to reach a
settlement. Once the dispute has been brought to an end, the Saµgha will have no more trouble, whereupon purity will appear in the
community of monks. If one impugns a settled issue, such a question will be
nothing less than a source for new trouble. The reopening of a settled case
leaves open the possibility of denying the previous effort of treating that
issue. If it were the case that the proposal of reconsidering the previously
settled issue could be accepted, then not only would the state of purity in the
Saµgha be challenged, but the members of the Saµgha would again have to
take time out from their spiritual cultivation. Who could justify the rationale
for a reappraisal? Since to arrive at a settlement has involved enormous effort
and time, the purity that resulted immediately after the resolution appears far
more precious. Any person with a sense of shame will be keen to stay pure so
that one can endeavor to practice the Dharma. Consequently, the maintenance of
purity is greatly appreciated within the Saµgha and among
individuals as well.
The
establishment of the monastic discipline can benefit the promulgation of the
Buddha’s teaching. For those who previously lack confidence, the institution
and observation of the vinaya will enable them to establish primary confidence. When a monastic
practitioner adheres to even so trivial a practice of the disciplinary
precepts, it will become evident that the Buddha Dharma is not merely a
doctrine but is also a practice. Once the Buddha Dharma is fulfilled through a
constant practice, it can no longer be taken at face value. Those who previous
lack confidence will then tend to acknowledge the practicality of the Buddha
Dharma, and confidence arises out of that acknowledgement. Thus, the value of
the Buddha Dharma will surface after primary confidence has been established.[44] Further, for those who already trust in the Buddha Dharma, the
institution and observation of the vinaya will enable
them to reinforce their confidence. Accordingly, the following two
illustrations will be discussed in view of the non-Buddhist and Buddhist.
Many
events which induced the Buddha to institute the monastic discipline arose from
the fact that the incidents evoked a negative response from the non-Buddhists.
The establishment of the retreat during the rainy season is a case in point. On
one occasion the monks traveled during the “rainy season” (var·a), and many things such as green herbs and small living beings were
thus crushed, damaged, or killed. The people ridiculed this behavior. They
wondered whether the Buddhist monks were really benevolent if they did not go
into retreat during the rainy season. Several monks told the Blessed One this
matter. The Buddha recognizing that such an issue had been condemned by the
people announced that the Buddhist monks should enter a retreat during the
rainy season.[45]
The
incident relates that the Buddhist monks were censured on account of the fact
that their traveling during the rainy season failed to express
“loving-kindness” (maitr´) for living beings. If Buddhist monks had continued their habit of
traveling during the rainy season, such a habit would give rise to the question
of how the doctrine of loving-kindness was put into practice. As things stood,
the Saµgha properly responded to people’s censure by observing a rainy season
retreat. This response shows that the Saµgha had resolved to minimize the gap between the discourse on maitr´ and its practice.[46]
The
second illustration refers to the functioning of the monastic discipline as
reinforcing confidence of those who already trust the Dharma. The incident
involving Gho·iÊa can fully represent this. On one occasion the monks were assembled
and were ready to conduct the po·adha service. In administering the monastic proceedings, the monks spoke
loudly. As soon as Gho·iÊa entered the site of the congregation, the monks became silent. He
thereupon went out. They proceeded to tackle the issues in the Saµgha; their voices continued to be as loud as before. This incident
recurred three times. Gho·iÊa was perplexed and the monks were also baffled. They reported the
occurrence in full to the Blessed One. The Buddha suggested that if an eminent
lay devotee with immense merits wished to listen to the treatment of the issues
regarding the Saµgha, this person was entitled to hear the treatment and the judgment.
Nonetheless, it is preferable that the Saµgha entrust a monk whose
eloquence could make the facts clear to explain the details of the issues.[47] It is recorded that Gho·iÊa attained the stage of a “Stream-Winner” (srotŒpanna) before the Buddha
was invited to Kau§Œmb´. The attainment of srotŒpanna stage indicates that Gho·iÊa had obtained an indestructible confidence in the Buddha, Dharma, Saµgha and “moral virtues” (ê´la).[48] Besides his spiritual accomplishment, he is the epitome of one
possessing “supreme power of merits” (pu––iddhi).[49] His spiritual achievement and considerable merits equipped Gho·iÊa to understand the mechanism of the
monastic proceedings so as to reinforce his confidence. This reference thus
demonstrates that the monastic discipline is of particular value when
edification is given to those who already possess confidence in the Dharma.
As
shown in the distribution of the Ten Benefits among six divisions, the division
“Spiritual Cultivation for Oneself” includes two benefits, “extinguishing
present Œ§ravas” and “preventing Œ§ravas which have not
yet arisen from arising”. Central to these two benefits is Œ§rava. Because the term “Œ§rava” is difficult
to explain fully by a single English word or phrase,[50] an illustration of these two benefits should be undertaken first on
the basis of a text other than the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya. In other words, the embodiment of the division, “Spiritual
Cultivation for Oneself,” in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya needs to be understood with the aid of other sources.
According
to the SabbŒsava Sutta of the MajjhimanikŒya,[51] the Buddha suggests seven ways to prevent Œ§ravas not yet arisen
from arising and to abandon Τravas that have
already arisen by: (1) seeing (dar§ana), (2) restraining (saµvara), (3) using (pratisevana), (4)
enduring (adhivŒsana), (5) avoiding (parivarjana), (6)
removing (vinodana) and (7) developing (bhŒvanŒ).
Firstly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by seeing means to advise a practitioner not to attend
to those matters not suited for attention and to attend to those matters suited
for attention. In view of disciplinary practices, Τravas are of two
kinds Ñ those that have not yet arisen and
those that have already arisen. î§ravas that have not
yet arisen include: 1. sensual desire (kŒmŒ§rava), 2. the desire for future life or becoming (bhavŒ§rava), and 3. unawareness (avidyŒ§rava), and a practitioner should keep them from arising, because they
are not suited for attention. î§ravas that have
already arisen include the same three, but now the practitioner should abandon
them, because the ones that have arisen are suited for attention.
Secondly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by restraining means to restrain the faculties of
the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind in order to dissipate an Τrava and the like.
Thirdly,
an Œ§rava to be abandoned by using means to use one’s robes, almsfood,
resting place and medicinal requisites in sensible ways in order to dissipate
an Τrava and the like.
Fourthly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by enduring means to encourage one to put up with
the unsatisfactory circumstances such as unpleasant natural conditions,
personal words or physical sensations in order to endure these unsatisfactory
circumstances and to dissipate an Τrava.
Fifthly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by avoiding means to inspire one to avoid harmful
animals and hazardous resorts, and to discourage one from sitting on improper
seats, loitering in improper places and associating with bad company.
Sixthly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by removing means to encourage a practitioner not
to maintain sensual desire, ill-will or cruelty, or any unwholesome states that
have arisen in order to abandon, remove or annihilate any of these unwholesome
states and to dissipate an Τrava.
Seventhly,
an Τrava to be abandoned by developing means to encourage a practitioner to
cultivate each of the Seven Adjuncts of Awakening (sapta-bodhyaºga), because each “is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and
cessation, and ripens in relinquishment.”[52]
Among
these seven ways, those of relinquishing Τravas by restraining
(no. 2), using (no. 3), enduring (no. 4) and avoiding (no. 5) seem to be
related more to the institution of the vinaya
than to the others (nos. 1, 6 and 7). That is to say, the monastic discipline
aids a practitioner to abandon Τravas through
restraint, use, endurance or avoidance.
An
example of relinquishing an Τrava by restraining
(no. 2) is the first precept in the Vinayas
of the MahŒsŒµghikas and other traditions of not becoming involved in sexual
intercourse, and this means to relinquish Τravas by restraining
the faculties of the body.
An
example of relinquishing an Τrava by using (no.
3) or enduring (no. 4) is to follow relevant guidelines regarding the four
requisites (ni§rayas) of a monastic life. According to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, a practitioner
is reminded of the four requisites of robes, almsfood, resting place and
medicine before receiving the higher ordination.[53]
An
example of relinquishing an Τrava by avoiding
(no. 5) is the first precept in the aniyata-dharma
(undetermined article) category. In the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, this precept is stated as follows:
If whatever monk takes a seat with a woman in a solitary concealed place suitable for carrying out coitus, and when a woman devotee, who is trustworthy of speech, charges him with one or another of the three transgressions under either the pŒrŒjika, or the saµghŒti§e·a or the pŒcattika precepts, and admits, “I sat in such and such a place,” then let him be treated in accordance with the circumstances reported for a pŒrŒjika, or for a saµghŒti§e·a or for a pŒcattika. [In brief,] this monk should be under indictment for what the trustworthy woman devotee reports.[54]
It appears that this precept suggests a form of training
in which a monk avoids sitting on an improper seat and eventually is prompted
to abandon Τravas.
The
above three examples of relinquishing Τravas by
restraining, using, enduring and avoiding are apparent readily not only in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya but also in the
other Vinayas.[55]
Since
the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya is a source
endowed with ample examples of abandoning Τravas, the benefit
of “extinguishing present Œ§ravas” and that of
“preventing Œ§ravas which have not yet arisen from arising” are fully illustrated
there. The subsuming of these two benefits under the division of “Spiritual
Cultivation for Oneself” is an expression of the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya embodied in the
traditional value of the vinaya.
Thus
far, attention has been on the divisions of “harmony”, “calmness”, “purity”,
“promulgation for others” and “spiritual cultivation for oneself”. These five
divisions converge for the continuance of the Dharma, which is the tenth of the
Ten Benefits. Such perpetuation of the Dharma is classified under the “the
utmost” of why the Buddha instituted the monastic discipline. To prolong the
Dharma entails the practice in accord with the vinaya. To behave in
conformity with the monastic discipline involves the recognition of the value
of vinaya. In this respect, the beginning passage in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya explicitly
encourages one to cherish, practice and uphold the monastic discipline. The
virtues of upholding the vinaya are
formulated into five facets in the text:
1.
If a gentleman wishes to establish the
Buddha’s Dharma, he should strive to uphold the vinaya.
2.
If he intends to enable the
continuance of the Proper Dharma, he should strive to uphold the vinaya.
3.
If he does not want to inquire about
the doubts or regrets [regarding the vinaya] from others, he should strive to
uphold the vinaya.
4.
If another monk or nun who has
committed an offense and [accordingly] is afraid [of the accompanying dire
consequence of the infringement] expects to rely on this person, the latter
should strive to uphold the vinaya.
5.
If he plans to travel elsewhere and to
edify [others] without any [problems or] obstacles, he should strive to uphold
the vinaya.[56]
These five facets refer to the
incentives for upholding the vinaya. Only when
the genuine value of the vinaya has been authentically observed can an initiative to behave in
keeping with the ethos of monastic discipline be feasible. As stated in both
the Ten Benefits and Five Facets of Virtues, the prescription of the vinaya is
primarily for the perpetuation of Dharma. Once the infrastructure of the
monastic life has been stabilized, the prevalence of the vinaya is
accompanied by the continuation of Dharma. How do the Five Facets of Virtues
and the Ten Benefits figure within the prescription of the vinaya? The Five Facets of Virtues have more emphasis on the individual,
while the Ten Benefits reflect the Saµgha as a whole. As mentioned above, both descriptions simply are two
distinct outlooks in the presentation of the traditional value of the monastic
discipline.
Since
the continuance of the Dharma involves cherishing and practicing the monastic
discipline, the dignity of vinaya during its transmission is accentuated in some contexts. For
example, the tenth rule of the pŒcattika, causing to fall if not repented, states:
Whatever monk, when the prŒtimok·a is being recited at each fortnight by the Saµgha, says thus: “You
Venerable! What is the use of reciting these trivial precepts in the prŒtimok·a fortnightly? [The recitation of these precepts] causes the mind of
the monks in attendance to grow dubious and regretful [about what they have
done].” If he simply acts to be disdainful of the precepts on this account, not
otherwise, that will constitute a pŒcattika.[57]
On clear investigation of this
precept, it becomes evident that this precept should have been incorporated
into the precepts after the practice of reciting prŒtimok·a. This quoted precept strongly suggests that the dignity of the vinaya should be
recognized and treasured. According to the account of the so-called First
Council,[58] although every rule, irrespective of its seriousness, should be
observed, this precept does not necessitate that every monastic rule,
regardless of being grievous, slight, temporal or regional, be kept intact.
Instead, this precept should be understood in the situation where there is a
person devaluing the nobility of the monastic discipline in its entirety.
The
foregoing discussion demonstrated an analysis of the traditional value of the
monastic discipline as is embodied in the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya. The divisions of “harmony”, “calmness”, “purity”,
“promulgation for others” and “spiritual cultivation for oneself” in the text
were in turn examined. The last division, “the utmost”, was a discussion on how
the continuation of the Dharma was made possible and on the reason for the
Buddha to institute the vinaya. It also
functioned to conclude the five subject matters.
Although this chapter mainly considers the traditional basis for the Buddha’s prescription of the monastic discipline in view of six divisions from the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, these six divisions (i.e., “harmony”, “calmness”, etc.) can be found also in the other extant Vinayas.[59] While in Chapter One, the MahŒsŒµghikas were connected with those who claimed the legitimacy of the ten disciplinary practices (the theory of disciplinary leniency [1.A]), in this chapter it was pointed out that the MahŒsŒµghikas treasured the vinaya in the same manner as the other traditions. Hence, it is doubtful that only the MahŒsŒµghikas were advocates of disciplinary leniency.
CONTENTS PROLEGOMENON CHAPTER ONE CHAPTER THREE CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] As mentioned by the early Buddhist texts, the word “Buddha” was often connected with Gautama (Gotama in PŒli). He was a historical figure, whose personal name was SiddhŒrtha, and whose family name was Gautama, cf., Ven. Rahula, p. xv. He was also known to his contemporaries as êŒkyamuni, cf., “Buddha,” Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, vol. 3 (Colombo: Government of Ceylon, 1971). He was born in Northern India, in what is now Nepal, around the fifth century BCE. According to the SarvŒstivŒda Buddhist Scholasticism, eds. Charles Willemen, Bart Dessein and Collett Cox (Leiden & New York: Brill, 1998), p. 1, the Buddha had lived for eighty years and passed away around 368 BCE. This would place the time of his birth to be around 448 BCE. There have been a wide variety of the dates for the Buddha, and there is no consensus among scholars or traditions. For example, in his A History of Indian Buddhism, Lamotte gave variegated dates. According to him, 368 BCE is given in reference to the “short chronology”, which was based mostly on all the Sanskrit and Chinese sources. By contrast, the “long chronology” places the ParinirvŒöa in 486 BCE. This date, adopted by the Sinhalese tradition, is found in the texts such as the D´pavaµsa, or MahŒvaµsa. Further, the Buddhists of Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma and Kampuchea place the ParinirvŒöa in 543 BCE. However, this date is disregarded by the great majority of Western and Indian historians. See Lamotte, pp. 13-14.
[2] Cf. Rhys Davids, trans., The Questions of King Milinda, part 2, pp. 56-59. Here one finds the dialogue between NŒgasena and King Milinda regarding the distinction between the laypeople and monks.
[3] According to the Buddhist tradition, duúkha may be observed from three aspects: (1) duúkha as ordinary suffering (duúkha-duúkha), (2) duúkha as generated by change (vipariöŒma-duúkha), and (3) duúkha as a conditioned state (saµskŒra-duúkha). These three aspects show that the word duúkha bears such a range of meanings that it cannot be translated simply as “suffering”, “pain” or “misery”. As mentioned by Ven. Rahula, it is difficult to find one single word to embrace the whole conception of the term duúkha, and so it is better to leave it untranslated than to give an inadequate or wrong idea of it by conveniently translating it as “suffering” or “pain”. See Ven. Rahula, pp. 17 and 19.
[4] For the PŒli equivalent of this verse, see Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda, The Dhammapada (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Sasana Abhiwurdhi Wardhana Society, 1992), p. 587, verse 361.
[5] For this and the previous verses, see T22. 447a10-14, fasc. 27; for the PŒli equivalent of this verse, see Ven. Dhammananda, p. 505, verse 281. According to the EkottarŒgama (T2. 787b7-8, fasc. 44), this gŒthŒ was established as monastic discipline (vinaya) during the first twelve years after his awakening when no one had committed the offense against either communal harmony or individual spiritual refinement. In the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, this and the previous verses (gŒthŒs) indicate the prototype of the prŒtimok·a.
[6] T22. 412b21-22, fasc. 23.
[7] T22. 227b20-22, fasc. 1.
[8] The literal meaning is “thus gone” or “thus come”. This term is always used for the epithet of a Buddha, for he had gone/come thus along the Path of Buddhahood.
[9] Cf., T22. 227b3-c11, fasc. 1.
[10] Cf., Frank Lee Woodward, trans., The Book of the Kindred Sayings, vol. 5 (London: PTS, 1965), p. 143. This citation is translated from Dhammad´pŒ dhammasaraöŒ ana––asaraöŒ, which can be found in SaµyuttanikŒya, ed. M. LŽon Peer, vol. 5 (London: PTS, 1976 reprint), SaµyuttanikŒya no. 47, SatipaÊÊhŒnasaµyuttam, ¤13 Cundo Sutta, p. 163.
[11] Maurice Walshe, Thus Have I Heard (London: Wisdom, 1987), D´ghanikŒya no. 16, MahŒparinibbŒna Sutta, p. 270. The equilibrium between Dharma and vinaya is not exclusively emphasized by the TheravŒda tradition. For example, the D´rghŒgama is of the Dharmaguptaka branch according to Ven. Yin-shun, see YŸan-shih, p. 96, and Hirakawa, Ritsuz‾, p. 48. This text reads: “înanda! Do you think that there, again, will be no refuge, and thus you will lose what to be upheld after the ParinirvŒöa of the TathŒgata? Do not generate such a thought! All sètras and monastic disciplines are your refuge and what are to be upheld by you;” see T1. 26a26-28, fasc. 4. With reference to such a equilibrium, see Ven. Yin-shun, “The Last Discourse of the Buddha,” Hua-yŸ-chi (The Anthology as A Rain of Flowers), vol. 3 (Taipei: Chng Wn, 1993), pp. 132-34.
[12] The Chinese translation of Œ§rava is lou (漏), which means “to flow out”. The figurative sense of Œ§rava indicates the defiling traits or polluting aspects. As noted by Ven. Rahula, this word not only points out the usual psychological and ethical meanings such as “influx”, “outflow”, or “impurity”, but it also encompasses “both psychological cares and physical troubles”. Thus, Œ§rava is one of the words which is difficult to express in the English context, see Ven. Rahula, p. 99. Cf., “Œsava,” Pali-English Dictionary, ed. T. W. Rhys Davids & William Stede (Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1989 reprint), pp. 114-15. In order not to mislead the English reader into a narrow interpretation of Œ§rava, this word will remain untranslated throughout the thesis.
[13] T22. 228c24-28, fasc. 1.
[14] Ven. Yin-shun, YŸan-shih, pp. 197-200. Besides, the author also gives the distributions of the other versions of these six divisions, see note 16.
[15] For the Ten Benefits in the Pa–cavargika-vinaya, see T22. 3b29-c4, fasc. 1; for the Caturvargika-vinaya, see T22. 570c3-7, fasc. 1; for the Da§abhŒöavŒra-vinaya, see T23. 1c16-19, fasc. 1; for the MèlasarvŒstivŒda Bhik·u-vinaya, see T23.629b21-25, fasc. 1; for the TheravŒda Vinaya, see Horner, trans., The Book of Discipline, vol. 1, pp. 37-38.
[16] In his YŸan-shih, pp. 197-99, Ven. Yin-shun also gives the distributions between the Ten Benefits and six divisions from the Da§abhŒöavŒra-vinaya, MèlasarvŒstivŒda Bhik·u-vinaya, TheravŒda Vinaya, Caturvargika-vinaya and Pa–cavargika-vinaya.
[17] Lamotte, p. 519, indicates that the quarreling at Kau§Œmb´ is regarded as one of two schisms during the time of the Buddha. Therefore, some Vinayas take many pages to deal with the issue. For example, the TheravŒda Vinaya treats this issue in the Kosambakakkhadhaka of the MahŒvagga. In contrast, the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya treats it briefly in T22. 438b29-439a5, fasc. 26, cf., Ven. Yin-shun, YŸan-shih, p. 339.
[18] Bhikkhu „Œöamoli & Bhikkhu Bodhi. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha (Boston: Wisdom, 1995), MajjhimanikŒya no. 48, Kosambiya Sutta, pp. 420-21; Walshe, D´ghanikŒya no. 16, MahŒparinibbŒna Sutta, p. 234.
[19] Ven. Yin-shun, Fu-tsai-jn-chien (The Buddha in Human World), rev. 1st ed. (Taipei: Chng Wn, 1992), p. 151, the author says that each conflict may arise from view, conduct or discipline, and economy.
[20] T22. 447a14-23, fasc. 27. According to the MahŒsŒµghika-vinaya, there are twenty-four po·adha services in a year. Further, this version of the Vinaya specifies in particular two types of po·adha ceremony that comprise the ceremony held on the fourteenth or fifteenth day. The service on the fourteenth day is recommended for the third and seventh fortnight of the winter, spring and summer (rainy) seasons. Besides these six services, there remain eighteen services that took place on the fifteenth day of a fortnight.
[21] T22. 282c23-25, fasc. 7.
[22] For §ŒlŒkŒ (舍 羅), see William Edward Soothill & Lewis Hodous, A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms, 5th ed. (Kaoshung: Fo Guang, 1988), p. 278r. The phrase “not taking up” implies that the number of the attendees is unknown.
[23] This is the literal translation from the text. However, it is puzzling why “[the state of] harmony for which is intended” could prevent a po·adha service.
[24] The items 1 to 7 can be found in T22. 450 b26-29, fasc. 27.
[25] The items 8 and 9 are discussed in T22. 450 b29-c1, fasc. 27.
[26] T22. 447c22-29, fasc. 27; by contrast, the Vinayas of the other four traditions, namely the TheravŒda, Mah´§Œsaka, Dharmaguptaka, and SarvŒstivŒda, invariably state the protagonist to be Venerable MahŒkapphiöa. Cf. Rhys Davids & Oldenberg, trans., Vinaya Texts, part 1, p. 248; T22. 121c27-122a6 for the Pa–cavargika-vinaya; T22. 818a28-b18 for the Caturvargika-vinaya; T23. 158a16-b2 for the Da§abhŒöavŒra-vinaya. The Chinese translation of Po·adha-vastu in the MèlasarvŒstivŒda is lacking.
[27] Cf. Richard Morris, ed., AºguttaranikŒya, vol. 1, 2nd ed., as revised by A. K. Warder (London: PTS, 1961), p. 23; further, under “Agon (Œgama),” Mochizuki Bukky‾ Daijiten (The Mochizuki Buddhist Dictionary), ed. Shink‾ Mochizuki (Tokyo, 1973 reprint), states that after the first council, D´ghanikŒya was handed over to the pupils of Ven. înanda, MajjhimanikŒya was handed over to the pupils of Ven. êŒriputra, SaµyuttanikŒya was handed over to the pupils of Ven. KŒ§yapa, and AºguttaranikŒya was handed over to the pupils of Ven. Aniruddha. This depiction of the lineage in transmitting the Buddhist texts shows how the tradition thought highly of Ven. Aniruddha.
[28] Vens. „Œöamoli & Bodhi, MajjhimanikŒya no. 104, SŒmagŒma Sutta, pp. 854-5; Walshe, D´ghanikŒya no. 33, Sang´ti Sutta, pp. 499-500, 2.2. (15); T1. 753c12-754a20, MadhyamŒgama no. 196, fasc. 52.
[29] T22. 406c8-13, fasc. 22.
[30] T22. 406c17-18, fasc. 22; cf., Pachow, Comparative Study, p. 202. This is the 42nd of “the precepts that are to be learnt” (§aik·a-dharma) in the Mo-ho-sng-ch’i-lŸ-ta-pi-ch’iu-chieh-pn (the bhik·u PrŒtimok·asètra of the MahŒsŒµghikas, Taish‾ no. 1426), see T22. 554c24.
[31] T22. 406c21-22, fasc. 22.
[32] This is the first facet under “purity”, which is the fourth of the Ten Benefits.
[33] Any offense in this category will lead a transgressor to be
expelled from the Saµgha.
[34] This refers to the second facet under “purity”, which is the fifth of the Ten Benefits.
[35] T22. 284c28-285a5, fasc. 7; cf., Pachow, Comparative Study, pp. 91-92.
[36] T22. 442a21-23, fasc. 26.
[37] T22. 442a24-27, fasc. 26. Although exposing the wrongdoing of another pertains to the disciplinary matter, the SaµyuktŒgama also has a similar passage to this Set I, see T2. 129b25-130c6, SaµyuktŒgama no. 497, fasc. 18.
[38] According to the MahŒsŒµghika tradition, the Abhidharma is especially characteristic of the “nine literary forms of the Buddha’s doctrines” (navŒºga-buddha§Œsana), see T22. 501c24-25, fasc. 34 and note 13 of chapter 3.
[39] T22. 442a27-28, fasc. 26.
[40] T22. 442c13-15, fasc. 26.
[41] T22. 327b9-11; cf. Pachow, Comparative Study, p. 123.
[42] T22. 327b13-14, fasc. 12, however, the names of these kinds of a bone of contention diverge among the Vinayas. Cf., Vens. „Œöamoli & Bodhi, MajjhimanikŒya no. 104, SŒmagŒma Sutta, p. 855; Rhys Davids & Oldenberg, trans., Vinaya Texts, part 3, p. 35, Cullavagga ch. 4, ¤14.2; for Pa–cavargika-vinaya, see T22. 154a8-9, fasc. 23 Ñ Adhikaraöa-§amatha-dharmaka; for Caturvargika-vinaya, see T22. 916a5, fasc. 47 Ñ Adhikaraöa-§amatha-skandhaka.
[43] For example, the bone of contention arising from an offence is to be tackled by pratij–ŒkŒraka (the procedure that effects confession of the erring one) and tasya pŒpeya§ika (the investigation of the offence). For the explanation of pratij–ŒkŒraka, see T22. 332c18-333b6, fasc. 13; for the explanation of tasya pŒpeya§ika, see T22. 333b6-c24, fasc. 13. In contrast, the TheravŒda Vinaya proposes three ways to tackle the bone of contention arising from an offence. The three ways include: attendance (saµmukha-vinaya), pratij–ŒkŒraka and the repentance of both parties (t¨öaprastŒraka), see Rhys Davids & Oldenberg, trans., Vinaya Texts, part 3, pp. 61-64, Cullavagga, ch. 4, ¤¤30-33.
[44] This facet is illustrated in the sixth of the Ten Benefits.
[45] T22. 450c3-8, fasc. 27.
[46] Ven. Hammalawa Saddhatissa, trans., SuttanipŒta (London: Curzon, 1985), pp. 15-16. According to the MettŒ Sutta in the SuttanipŒta, the practice of maitr´/mettŒ is to pervade the whole world with a mind full of loving-kindness and thereby free from hatred and ill-will. This cultivation of loving-kindness is the concern for all living beings. As shown by the incident of the Vinaya, the practice of maitr´ would be embodied only if the monks do not continue to travel in the rainy season.
[47] T22. 449b11-20, fasc. 27.
[48] These four qualities of a srotŒpanna can be found in Walshe, D´ghanikŒya no. 33, Sang´ti Sutta, pp. 490-91, 1.11 (14).
[49] “Ghosaka-seÊÊhi,” Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, vol. 1.
[50] See note 12.
[51] The following up to p. 60 is a summary of Vens. „Œöamoli & Bodhi, MajjhimanikŒya no. 2, SabbŒsava Sutta, pp. 91-96.
[52] Vens. „Œöamoli & Bodhi, MajjhimanikŒya no. 2, SabbŒsava Sutta, p. 96.
[53] T22. 413c12-415a2, fasc. 23. In contrast, the Caturvargika-vinaya contends that the reminder of four requisites should be conducted after receiving the higher ordination; see T22. 811b29-c1, fasc. 34.
[54] T22. 550c24-28, translation mine; cf. also Pachow, Comparative Study, p. 95.
[55] For the illustration of restraining (no. 2), the precept of “not becoming involved in sexual intercourse” is common to all extant versions of the PrŒtimok·asètra, see Pachow, Comparative Study, pp. 73-74. The reminder of how one is to use the four requisites illustrates using (no. 3) or enduring (no. 4) as found in the TheravŒda Vinaya, see Rhys Davids & Oldenberg, trans., Vinaya Texts, part 1, pp. 172-74, MahŒvagga, ch. 1, ¤¤30-31.1. For the reminder in the Caturvargika-vinaya, see T22. 811b12-c1, fasc. 34; for the reminder in the Pa–cavargika-vinaya, see T22. 112b19-c16, fasc. 16. With respect to providing the above information, see Frauwallner, The Earliest Vinaya, p. 74. As an illustration of avoiding (no. 5), the precept related to refraining from sitting on improper seats is common to all extant versions of the PrŒtimok·asètra, see Pachow, Comparative Study, pp. 95-96.
[56] T22. 227a7-12, fasc. 1, translation mine; cf., Hirakawa, Monastic Discipline for the Buddhist Nuns, pp. 102-03. Cf., T22. 41a28-b2, Pa–cavargika-vinaya fasc. 6, these five facets were expressed in terms of “five merits of the monk upholding the vinaya”, cf. T24. 694b22-24, fasc. 4, in the Chinese version of the SamantapŒsŒdikŒ, “five issues of benefit on upholding the vinaya” were mentioned; cf. T22. 1004b28-c2, Caturvargika-vinaya fasc. 59. In this text, the corresponding expression of these issues is quite close to that of the Pa–cavargika-vinaya. By and large, the contents of the Five Facets of Virtues vary from version to version.
[57] T22. 552b3-5, translation mine; cf. Pachow, Comparative Study, p. 126.
[58] Cf. Rhys Davids & Oldenberg, trans., Vinaya Texts, part 3, pp. 377-78, Cullavagga, ch. 11, ¤1.9.
[59] See note 16.