Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early Monastic Buddhism v1.c22.s5: Sub-committee or a body of assessors

Early Monastic Buddhism v1.c22.s5

Language
English

Sub-committee or a body of assessors

v1.c22.s5.1

The resolutions were formally moved generally from the chair. Every resolution had to be announced thrice and no resolution was carried unless it had the unanimous consent of all present. Hence ordinarily there was no question of majority or voting. The question of majority was raised on rare occasions, e.g. in the holding of a *Pātimokkha*-assembly by the existing members of an *āvāsa* without *āgantuka-bhikkhus*. If the *āvāsikas* (existing members) were larger in number than the *āgantukas*, the actions of the assembly were regarded as valid provided the *āgantuka-bhikkhus* who joined the assembly after the fixed time were apprised of the proceedings of the assembly.² If in the determination of the *uposatha* day (i.e. the 14th or 15th of a fortnight) any difference of opinion took place between the inmates of an *āvāsa* (*āvāsikas*) and the incoming monks (*āgantukas*), it was settled as follows: the opinion of the former prevailed if their number was greater than or equal to that of the latter, but the opinion of the latter prevailed only if their number was greater than that of the former.³

v1.c22.s5.2

² *Vinaya*, I, p. 129.

v1.c22.s5.3

³ *Ibid.*, I, p. 132-3.

v1.c22.s5.4

There was a system of *ubbāhika* which is usually translated by the term 'voting' but it bears quite a different sense. It corresponds to something like the formation of a sub-committee or a body of assessors. The method of *ubbāhikā* was restored to when there was a dispute relating to a particular question of discipline (*vivādādhikaraṇa*) and when there was no possibility of settling it in an assembly without unnecessary discussions. In a case like this, two or more monks possessing the requisite qualifications¹ were selected from among the members of the assembly and their names were placed before the assembly for approval, and were adopted if the members be unanimous. The selected monks were then entrusted with the duty of settling the dispute. This method of *ubbāhikā* was adopted in the Second Council to settle the disputes between the Vajjian monks and Yasatthera. It was by *ubbāhikā* that four monks of the eastern countries and four of Pāṭheyya were chosen, and the decision of this subcommittee of eight was placed before the whole *saṅgha* for confirmation.²

v1.c22.s5.5

¹ For details, see *Vinaya*, II, p. 95-6.

v1.c22.s5.6

² *Vinaya*, II, p. 305.

Linked texts (3)