Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
15’ Uposatho pazmaraso. See below, Mahavagga, Book II, and especially chap. 14. ‘ 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. 5 On sabbe ’va santa compare ubho ’va santé in the ninth Nissaggiya, and the Old Commentary loc. cit. “ (13) B 2 PATIMOKKHA, 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 put? as 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)*. Therefore a fault, if there be one, should be declared by that Bhikkhu who remembers it, and desires to be cleansed therefrom. For a fault, when declared, shall be light to him. 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. 1 The spelling of the P&li word in the text should be anussavitam, and so below, anussaviyamane. 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. 2 See Mahavagga II, 3, 7. PARAGIKA DHAMMA., 3 PARAGIKA DHAMMA. Tue PArAeiIKA RULEs!. Here these four Rules, concerning those acts which bring about Defeat *, come into recitation. 1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has taken upon 1 The whole of the following portion of the Patimokkha, together with the ancient commentary upon it, is contained in the first book of the Vibhanga, also called the Paragikam. Dickson translates throughout Dhammé 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. Dhamméa must here be ‘Rules,’ in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx.
2‘ Offences’ is however not the right direction in which to limit the general sense. Dhamméa must here be ‘Rules,’ in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx. * Childers (sub voce) follows Burnouf (Introduction, &c., p- 301) in deriving the word Pérfgika from AG with par4 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 para prefixed, in the sense of ‘to suffer defeat.’ So the Samanta-Pasadiké : Paragiko hotiti parégito paragayam Apanno. 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 para 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 pfragika stands in close connection: par4gi, ‘to suffer defeat ;’ pardgita, ‘defeated;’ paragaya, ‘defeat.’ We cannot therefore but think that the native commentators are right in associating pfragika also with this group, and that the word really means ‘involving defeat.’ This may mean specifically defeat in the struggle with Mara the Evil One; but more probably defeat in the struggle against 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. B 2 4 PATIMOKKHA. 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 communion ?, 2. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take, from village or from wood, anything not given—what men call ‘theft ?’—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. 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 communion °. VJ
3my 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 communion °. VJ 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, Mahévagga II, 22, 3. On sikkhasagivam, which is by no means only ‘Rules of the Order,’ see the Vibhanga (Par. I, 8, 1). ® The Vibhanga (Par. II, 3) takes theyya-samkhatam as meaning ‘with dishonest intent.’ 8 The deviations here from Mr. Dickson’s version will, we hope, justify themselves. There is no commentary on h4araka, though PARAGIKA DHAMMA. 5 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 communion}. 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 communion®. the Vibhanga (P4r. III, 3, 1) explains the different kinds of Sattha, Papaka must be ‘sinful,’ not merely ‘poor;’ the suggestion is ‘by destroying your life you will escape from the possibility of sinning.’ ‘1 The extraordinary qualities (literally, ‘superhuman qualities’) are defined to be the Vimokkhas, Sam4dhis, the Sam4pattis, the /Vanadassana, 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 Samyoganas, or ‘Fetters,’ which the Arahat has to break. 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 Patimokkha have already been heard, do not occur in the Vibhanga, They are not part of the Patimokkha; but only the 6 PATIMOKKHA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
15’ Uposatho pazmaraso. See below, Mahavagga, Book II, and especially chap. 14. ‘ 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. 5 On sabbe ’va santa compare ubho ’va santé in the ninth Nissaggiya, and the Old Commentary loc. cit. “ (13) B 2 PATIMOKKHA, 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 put? as 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)*. Therefore a fault, if there be one, should be declared by that Bhikkhu who remembers it, and desires to be cleansed therefrom. For a fault, when declared, shall be light to him. 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. 1 The spelling of the P&li word in the text should be anussavitam, and so below, anussaviyamane. 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. 2 See Mahavagga II, 3, 7. PARAGIKA DHAMMA., 3 PARAGIKA DHAMMA. Tue PArAeiIKA RULEs!. Here these four Rules, concerning those acts which bring about Defeat *, come into recitation. 1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has taken upon 1 The whole of the following portion of the Patimokkha, together with the ancient commentary upon it, is contained in the first book of the Vibhanga, also called the Paragikam. Dickson translates throughout Dhammé 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. Dhamméa must here be ‘Rules,’ in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx.
2‘ Offences’ is however not the right direction in which to limit the general sense. Dhamméa must here be ‘Rules,’ in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx. * Childers (sub voce) follows Burnouf (Introduction, &c., p- 301) in deriving the word Pérfgika from AG with par4 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 para prefixed, in the sense of ‘to suffer defeat.’ So the Samanta-Pasadiké : Paragiko hotiti parégito paragayam Apanno. 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 para 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 pfragika stands in close connection: par4gi, ‘to suffer defeat ;’ pardgita, ‘defeated;’ paragaya, ‘defeat.’ We cannot therefore but think that the native commentators are right in associating pfragika also with this group, and that the word really means ‘involving defeat.’ This may mean specifically defeat in the struggle with Mara the Evil One; but more probably defeat in the struggle against 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. B 2 4 PATIMOKKHA. 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 communion ?, 2. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take, from village or from wood, anything not given—what men call ‘theft ?’—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. 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 communion °. VJ
3my 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 communion °. VJ 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, Mahévagga II, 22, 3. On sikkhasagivam, which is by no means only ‘Rules of the Order,’ see the Vibhanga (Par. I, 8, 1). ® The Vibhanga (Par. II, 3) takes theyya-samkhatam as meaning ‘with dishonest intent.’ 8 The deviations here from Mr. Dickson’s version will, we hope, justify themselves. There is no commentary on h4araka, though PARAGIKA DHAMMA. 5 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 communion}. 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 communion®. the Vibhanga (P4r. III, 3, 1) explains the different kinds of Sattha, Papaka must be ‘sinful,’ not merely ‘poor;’ the suggestion is ‘by destroying your life you will escape from the possibility of sinning.’ ‘1 The extraordinary qualities (literally, ‘superhuman qualities’) are defined to be the Vimokkhas, Sam4dhis, the Sam4pattis, the /Vanadassana, 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 Samyoganas, or ‘Fetters,’ which the Arahat has to break. 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 Patimokkha have already been heard, do not occur in the Vibhanga, They are not part of the Patimokkha; but only the 6 PATIMOKKHA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.