Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c31.s4: The ten un-Vinayic acts

Early Monastic Buddhism v2.c31.s4

Language
English

The ten un-Vinayic acts

v2.c31.s4.1

All the earlier sources agree in stating that the main business of the Council was to examine the validity of the ten un- Vinayic acts performed by a section of the Vesālian monks,¹ but there exists a wide divergence of opinion in their interpretations. It is difficult to decide which of the interpretations, accessible to us, should be accepted and so we should prefer that which appears more plausible.

v2.c31.s4.2

The ten un-Vinayic acts with their interpretations, as given in the Pāli texts, are as follows:—

v2.c31.s4.3

(i) *Singiloṇa kappa*—or the practice of carrying salt in a horn for use when needed, which contravened according to one view the rule against the storing of articles of food (cf. *Pācittiya* 38).

v2.c31.s4.4

(ii) *Dvaṅgula kappa*—or the practice of taking food after midday, lit. when the shadow (on the dial) is two digits wide (vide *Pāc.* 37).

v2.c31.s4.5

(iii) *Gāmantara kappa*—or the practice of going to a neighbouring village and taking a second meal there the same day, committing thereby the offence of over-eating (cf. *Pāc.* 35).

v2.c31.s4.6

(iv) *Āvāsa kappa*—or the observance of *uposathas* in different places within the same parish (*sīmā*) (prohibited in the *Mahāvagga*, II, 8, 3).

v2.c31.s4.7

(v) *Anumati kappa*—or doing an act and obtaining its sanction afterwards (contrast *Mahāvagga*, IX, 3. 5).

v2.c31.s4.8

(vi) *Āciṇṇa kappa*—or the use of precedents as authority.

v2.c31.s4.9

(vii) *Amathita kappa*—or the drinking of milk-whey after meal (against *Pāc.* 35).

v2.c31.s4.10

(viii) *Jalogimpātum*—or the drinking of fermenting palm-juice which is not yet toddy (against *Pāc.* 51).¹ (ix) *Adasakaṃ nisīdanaṃ*—or the use of a borderless sheet to sit on (contrary to *Pāc.* 89).

v2.c31.s4.11

¹ Cf. *Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya* (Gilgit ms.), *Civaravastu*, p. 142: मद्यं मद्यपानं प्रक्षिप्य भूमौ निखातव्यम् । युक्तत्वे परिभ्रतं परिभोक्तव्यम् । युक्तत्वानुर- योन्यं तु कोरयितव्यम् । मां भिक्षवः शास्तारमुद्दिश्यैतदमेयमपेयमनन्तः कुशाये वापि ।

v2.c31.s4.12

(x) *Jātarūparajataṃ*—or the acceptance of gold and silver (prohibited in *Nissagg.* 18).¹

v2.c31.s4.13

¹ For a discussion on the interpretations of the terms, see Minayeff, *Recherches*, I, pp. 44-50. The first three rules are relaxations of the more stringent rules, made by Buddha regarding the storage of food and eating to suit the conditions created by famine in Vesālī. The people of Vesālī continued to observe the relaxed rules though they were abrogated later on by the Theravādins in their *Vinaya*.

v2.c31.s4.14

Buston, on the basis of the tradition preserved in the Mūla-Sarvāstivāda Vinaya, enumerates the undermentioned ten acts.² Prof. La Vallée Poussin translated the same Tibetan passage from the *Dulva*. We reproduce below both the translations of Obermiller and de La Vallée Poussin.

v2.c31.s4.15

² The order of enumeration has been changed for the convenience of comparison with the Pāli list.

v2.c31.s4.16

(i) *Using the sacred salt:* (Obermiller) Mixing the salt that is to be kept for life-time with that which is used in general, to eat it and make it thus an object of use.³

v2.c31.s4.17

³ Cf. Gilgit Ms. leaf 93b: अस्ति आयुष्मां शृङ्गपुटं लवणं यावज्जीवमधि-ष्ठितम् । *cf. Mv.* vi. 3. 1.

v2.c31.s4.18

(Poussin) Mixing salt consecrated for life-time with food appropriate at the moment.⁴

v2.c31.s4.19

⁴ *Indian Antiquary*, 1908, pp. 91, 104.

v2.c31.s4.20

The Dharmaguptas and the Mahīśāsakas offer quite a different interpretation. According to them, the word *singi* is *śṛṅga (vera)* = ginger and *loṇa* = salt. Their interpretation is to "mix the food with salt and ginger."⁵ (ii) *Taking food with two fingers*: (Obermiller) The food that has not been left (from a previous meal) they eat, taking it with two fingers.

v2.c31.s4.21

⁵ *Ibid.*, p. 91.

v2.c31.s4.22

(L. V. P.) Eating food of both kinds, not being remainder, while using two fingers.¹

v2.c31.s4.23

¹ Dharmaguptas: "derogation from sobriety, as if, for example, a monk after an ample repast, forgetting the rule of good conduct, began to take with two fingers and to eat the food remaining."

v2.c31.s4.24

(iii) *Eating on the way*: (Obermiller) The monks, having gone a yojana or a half, assemble and eat on the pretext that they are travelling.

v2.c31.s4.25

(L. V. P.) Having gone a yojana or a half-yojana, and having eaten food in troop, rendered the meal in troop legal by reason of the journey.²

v2.c31.s4.26

² The Mahīśāsakas say "to eat a second time after having risen before taking a sufficient meal."

v2.c31.s4.27

(iv) *Admission of a mixture*: (Obermiller) The monks mix a *droṇa* measure of milk with as much sour milk and drink it at undue time.

v2.c31.s4.28

(L. V. P.) After agitating a full measure (*droṇa*) of milk with a full measure of curd, and then eating the preparation out of time.³

v2.c31.s4.29

³ The Dharmaguptas and Mahīśāsakas say: "to drink, beyond the time allowed, a mixture of cream, butter, honey and sugar."

v2.c31.s4.30

(v) *Taking intoxicating drink*: (Obermiller) The monks take wine in the manner of a leech that sucks blood and having drunk, excuse it with illness.

v2.c31.s4.31

(L. V. P.) Drinking fermented liquor with a sucking action like leeches, rendering it legal by reason of illness.⁴ (vi) *Making a new rug:* (Obermiller) Taking a new rug without stitching it by a patch of the so-called Sugata span taken from the old one.

v2.c31.s4.32

⁴ According to the Mahīśāsakas, it is a question of an intoxicating liquor which had become fermented.

v2.c31.s4.33

(L. V. P.) Not having patched their new mats with a border, a Sugata’s cubit broad, from the old mat.¹

v2.c31.s4.34

¹ According to the Mahīśāsakas, to make for oneself a mat of undetermined dimensions; there is no question of fringe.

v2.c31.s4.35

(vii) *Begging gold and silver:* (Obermiller) The monks anoint an alms-bowl with fragrant spices, put it on the head of a Śramaṇa, on a table or a seat, or in a narrow passage at the four cross-roads and proclaim: This is a sublime vessel, if you deposit your gifts in it and fill it, you are to reap great merit.

v2.c31.s4.36

(L. V. P.) Taking alms-bowls such as were round, pure and suitable for ritual, anointing them with perfumes, fumigating them with incense, adorning them with various fragrant flowers, placed on the head of a monk over a cushion went about the highways, streets and cross-roads, crying as follows. “Here, ye people, who have come from various towns and countries, and ye wise people of Vaiśālī! This *pātra* is a lucky one, to give in it is to give much, or whoever shall fill it will obtain a great fruit, a great advantage, a great activity, a great development.”

v2.c31.s4.37

[As far as the seven un-Vinayic acts, mentioned above, are concerned, all the Vinaya texts, including those of the Mahīśāsakas and the Dharmaguptas agree, though they have differed in interpretations, which have all been pointed out.]

v2.c31.s4.38

(viii) *Digging ground:* (Obermiller) It is considered admissible for monks to live by agriculture. (L. V. P.) Turning up the soil with their own hands.²

v2.c31.s4.39

² According to the Dharmaguptas, the Vajjiputtakas think their conduct may be justified by alleging that “this has been done from time immemorial.”

v2.c31.s4.40

On this un-Vinayic act, the comment of the Sarvāstivādins stands alone, and this seems to be due to careless Sanskritization of āciṇṇa by āciṇna, unconsciously changing the root (car to chid). Hence the interpretation offered by the Sarvāstivādins should be left out of account.

v2.c31.s4.41

(ix) Approving: (Obermiller) They perform religious observances, and at the same time incite the monks in attendance to approve.¹ (L.V.P.) The Venerable Ones (absent brothers) having approved, do ye count it as approved, caused the resolutions of the incomplete Saṅgha to be approved by the monks of the parish.²

v2.c31.s4.42

¹ "Rejoicing" of Obermiller is changed by me to "Approving."

v2.c31.s4.43

² The Dharmaguptas support the Pāli interpretation while the Mahīśāsakas say "in the accomplishment of an ecclesiastical act to call others one by one afterwards to hear."

v2.c31.s4.44

Buston or Obermiller has no doubt been misled by the Tibetan rendering of the Sanskrit word anumodanā, which, though derived from the root mud, does not carry the meaning of "rejoice". Anumodanā in Pāli means "acquiescence of an act done by the Saṅgha in one's absence". This is also an instance of anomaly of converting a Prakrit word into Sanskrit. We are not aware what was the original Prakrit word, but evidently the Pālists made it anumati. In any case, the interpretations offered by the different Vinaya texts are similar, i.e., getting an ecclesiastical act performed in an incomplete assembly approved by the absentee members.

v2.c31.s4.45

The Mahīśāsakas and the Sarvāstivādins have both omitted āvāsakappa of the Pāli list. It seems that these schools included

v2.c31.s4.46

According to the Mahīśāsakas: "To continue to occupy themselves with what they had been in the habit of doing before becoming ascetics; certain occupations were declared lawful, others were forbidden."

v2.c31.s4.47

all the irregularities committed by the Vajjian monks relating to the performance of ecclesiastical acts in a regular or irregular assembly within *anumodanā-kappa*, while the Theravādins (Pāli) and the Dharmaguptas have split it up into two: *anumati* and *āvāsa*. The Dharmaguptas, it will be noted, put a slightly different interpretation on *āvāsakappa*. They say that “in the *āvāsa*, besides the regular acts, the innovators accomplished others.

v2.c31.s4.48

Perhaps in order to keep up the number of deviations as ten the Mahīśāsakas and the Sarvāstivādins borrowed one point from Mahādeva’s five and made it the first of their list, viz., “Exclamation of *aho*”.

v2.c31.s4.49

(x) *Exclamation of astonishment*: (Obermiller) The monks of Vaiśālī perform religious observances and at the same time they admit such exclamations as *aho*.

v2.c31.s4.50

(L. V. P.) The monks of Vaiśālī having rendered legal the exclamation *aho* performed an ecclesiastical act illegally in an incomplete or complete Saṅgha or legally in an incomplete Saṅgha.

v2.c31.s4.51

The interpretation given in the Vinaya of the Sarvāstivādins is a laboured one and appears more or less a repetition of the previous un-Vinayic act of the Vajjiputtakas.

v2.c31.s4.52

The exclamation of *aho* reminds us of the fifth point of Mahādeva, viz., the path is attained by an exclamation. This has been discussed in the *Kathāvatthu* (xi. 4) under the heading: ‘*Idam dukkhan ti* vācam bhāsato ‘*idam dukkhan ti* ñāṇam pavattatī ti.’¹

v2.c31.s4.53

¹ See Infra. p. 41.

v2.c31.s4.54

A comparison of the two lists (Pāli and Sanskrit) shows that both the traditions have worked on a common original list, which was probably in a Prakrit, and definitely neither in Sanskrit nor in Pāli. This we state on the basis of the change noticed in the words: *singiloṇa*, *āciṇṇa* and *anumati*. The anomaly of *āvāsa* can hardly be explained. As regards the remaining six items, the interpretations of both the schools are allowable and either exposition may be accepted.

v2.c31.s4.55

*Five propositions of Mahādeva*

v2.c31.s4.56

Vasumitra, followed by Bhavya and Vinītadeva, writes that on account of the five propositions propounded by Mahādeva, the Saṅgha became divided into two schools: the Mahāsaṅghika and the Sthaviravāda. The five points are:—

v2.c31.s4.57

The Arhats
1. are subject to temptation (cf. *Kvu.* II. 1. *Atthi arahato rāgo ti?*)
2. may have residue of ignorance (cf. *Kvu.* II. 2: *Atthi arahato aññāṇan ti?*)
3. may have doubts regarding certain matters (cf. *Kvu.* II. 3: *Atthi arahato kaṅkhā ti?*)
4. gain knowledge through others' help (cf. *Kvu.* II. 4: *Atthi arahato paravitāraṇā ti?*).
5. The Path is attained by an exclamation (as "aho") (cf. *Kvu.* II. 3 & 4 & XI. 4).

v2.c31.s4.58

Watters has collected some information regarding the life of Mahādeva from the *Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā-lun* (ch. 99).¹ According to this work, Mahādeva was the son of a brāhmin merchant of Mathurā. He had his ordination at Kukkuṭārāma in Pāṭaliputra. By his zeal and abilities, he soon became the head of the Buddhist establishment there. The ruling king was a friend and patron of Mahādeva. With his help, he was able to oust the senior orthodox monks and establish his five dogmas, as enumerated above. Yuan Chwang writes that at the instance of the reigning king, an assembly of monks was summoned, in which the senior brethren, who were arhats, voted against the five dogmas, which however, were supported by a large majority of ordinary ordained members, i.e., non-arhats.

v2.c31.s4.59

¹ Watters, *op. cit.*, I, pp. 267-8.

v2.c31.s4.60

The Chinese pilgrim, it will be observed, mentioned both the five dogmas of Mahādeva (Watters, I, p. 267) and the few un-Vinayic acts of the Vesālian monks (Watters, II, p. 73) as the cause of the session of the Council and the cleavage in the Sangha. The writer of the Kathāvatthu was aware of the five dogmas. Buddhaghosa attributed them to the Mahāsanghikas, so there can be no doubt that the statement of Vasumitra and others is authentic. The Dīpavaṃsa also states that the seceders introduced alterations in the doctrines as well.

Cites (11)