The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c9.s3.9

c9.s3.9

An important feature of these monastic institutions was that no business was held valid without quorum. “If an official act, O *bhikkhus*,” as we read Śâkya saying in the *Mahâvagga*,² “is performed unlawfully by an incomplete congregation, it is no real act and ought not be performed.” Along with this caution against incomplete congregations went the injunction against “unlawful acts.” In the following extract the *Mahâvagga*³ mentions some of those acts that have to be ruled out as unconstitutional: “They performed unlawful acts before an incomplete congregation; they performed unlawful acts before a complete congregation; they performed seemingly lawful acts before an incomplete congregation; they performed seemingly lawful acts before a complete congregation; a single *bhikkhu* pronounced expulsion against a single one; a single *bhikkhu* pronounced expulsion against two; a single *bhikkhu* pronounced expulsion against a number of *bhikkhus*; a single *bhikkhu* pronounced expulsion against a *Samgha*”. As no unlawful acts were to be permitted within the church or among the church members, Śâkya definitely laid down the rule: “Therefore, O *bhikkhus*, you ought to train yourself thus: Lawful acts which are performed by complete congregations—such acts we will perform.”⁴