Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Prati-mué (A4tmanep.) means ‘to free oneself, to get rid of;’ and it is precisely through the recitation of this formular, and the answering of the questions contained in it, that the conscience of the member of the Brotherhood ! Patimokkhan ti Adim etam mukham etam pamukham etam cusalanam dhamméanam, tena vutkati patimokkhan ti. Mahavagga II, 3, 4. 2 We use the phrase ‘Old Commentator’ for convenience only. The commentary was, no doubt, handed down by tradition in the Buddhist schools; and there is no reason to believe that it was the work of any one mind. XXVili VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. was set free from the sense of the offence he had incurred}. Patimokkha or Pratimoksha means therefore ‘ Disburdening, Getting free.’ The lengthening of the first vowel in the Pali word is not without analogies which have been already adduced by Childers. It is certain that the word is older than the present shape of the Formulary now so called; for it is used several times in the Formulary itself, as well as in many of the oldest Suttas. The Old Commentator makes the Patimokkha ‘the head of the good Dhammas.’ There is a curious passage in the Patimokkha where the Dhammas are said to be included in the Suttas: ‘Ifa Bhikkhu at the half-monthly recitation. of the Patimokkha should say, “Now for the first time do I notice that this Dhamma, as one handed down in the Suttas, embraced in the Suttas, gets recited every half-month!” then’ &c.? It is plain here that neither Dhamma nor Sutta is used in the sense to which we are accustomed from the later books. The Dhammas recited half-monthly are those contained in the scheme of offences given in the Patimokkha, and the Suttas must therefore mean the separate clauses of that Formulary. The fact is that the use of the word Sutta is by no means confined in the oldest Pali to the texts of what was afterwards the Sutta Pizaka, nor is it exclusively used either in earlier or later times® in opposition to Vinaya. Thus we find it used again, as we think, of the Rules of the Patimokkha; and in contrast, as in the rule above quoted, to Dhamma, in Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23: ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher 1 Compare Mahavagga II, 3, 3. 2 Yo pana bhikkhu anvaddhamasam Patimokkhe uddissamane evam vadeyya ; idan’ eva kho aham gandmi, ayam pi kira dhammo suttagato suttapariyapanno anvaddhamasam uddesam Agakkaatiti, tat ke...(the 73rd PAtittiya, quoted in Kullavagga ITI, 34, 2). 8 Though more especially concerned here with the earlier use of the word Sutta, it may be well to remind our readers of the name Suttadhara applied in the Sumangala Vilasini to secular lawyers (see Alwis, ‘ Introd.’ &c., p. 100). INTRODUCTION, XXIX of the Dhamma; but the Suttas have not been handed down to him, nor the Sutta-Vibhanga.’ ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhamma, and the Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Sutta-Vibhanga!’
2100). INTRODUCTION, XXIX of the Dhamma; but the Suttas have not been handed down to him, nor the Sutta-Vibhanga.’ ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhamma, and the Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Sutta-Vibhanga!’ So again in the constantly repeated phrase above referred to— ‘If the two Patimokkhas are (or are not, as the connection requires) thoroughly known to a Bhikkhu in their entirety with all their divisions and explanations, if he have (or have not) thoroughly mastered them Sutta by Sutta, and Detail by Detail; then’ &c.? —the word Sutta evidently refers to the clauses of the two Patimokkhas; and we find also in the immediate context the mention of Dhamma or of Vinaya, or of both. It is no doubt true that in one passage of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (IV, 8-11=pp. 39, 40), Sutta is opposed to Vinaya in much the same‘way as Sutta Pifaka was afterwards opposed to Vinaya Pitaka; yet the contrast between these two ideas is usually expressed by the apposition of Dhamma to Vinaya3, and the passage in the Mahé-parinibbana Sutta stands, so far as we yet know, quite alone. Indeed in the oldest tradition the discourses or conversations now called Suttas seem not to have been called by that name, but are referred to as Suttantas. So in the Mahdvagga III, 5,9, 12 mention is made of devout men, or of devout women, who may have been accustomed to recite some well-known Suttanta*; and in the next Khandhaka (IV, 15, 4) we find Suttanta, Dhamma, and Vinaya all occurring in one context: ‘It may happen, Brethren, that in some district on the day of Pavdravd the night may have become far spent 1 Suttam tassa 4gatam na Suttavibhaigam. On the latter term see below. 2 Ubhay4ni nu kho Patimokkhani vittharena svagataéni suvibhattani suppavattini suvinisksitani suttato anuvyafiganaso (Mahavagga I, 36,14; I, 37,14; Kullavagga IV, 14,19; IX, 5,1). Anuvyafigana may perhaps refer here to the Old Commentary. 5 Compare H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Mahavagga, pp. 7 and following. * Abhifi#atam va Suttantam bhazati. XXX VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. while the Brethren are in confusion—some reciting the Dhamma, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Suttanta together, the custodians of the Vinaya discussing the Vinaya, and the preachers of the Dhamma discoursing about the Dhamma.’
3XXX VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. while the Brethren are in confusion—some reciting the Dhamma, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Suttanta together, the custodians of the Vinaya discussing the Vinaya, and the preachers of the Dhamma discoursing about the Dhamma.’ The whole of these expressions recur in Kullavagga IV, 4, 4; and are found again, with others of a similar character, in Kullavagga VI, 6,2. This last passage is in the Introduction to a fable which of course recurs, as a Gataka, in the Gataka collection, and with an introduction in almost the same words. We should therefore expect to find there also the epithet suttantika (‘versed in the Suttantas’), if that expression had remained in use as late as the fifth century A.D.; but it is omitted, the Suttantikas having been then long since replaced by those entrusted, not with the whole, but with special portions only, of the Dhamma literature. The word Suttanta was however still in common use at the time when the presumably later books now contained in the Pifakas were composed ; for it occurs in the Anguttara Nikéya}, and in a constantly recurring verse in the Buddhavamsa in which it is opposed to Vinaya?, and the word is still used in the MSS. as the title of the more important Suttas. In the passage quoted above from the Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23 there is a term Sutta-vibhanga used as the name of some part of the Vinaya literature apparently distinct 1 The Anguttara Nikaya, Pazkaka Nipata (Phayre MS. vol. ii. fol. gk): Ye te Suttanta Tathagatassa bhavité gambhfra gambhirattha lokuttara suifiatapatisamyutta tesu bha#fiamanesu na sussissanti no sotam odahissanti na afinakittam upatthapessanti na ka te dhamme uggahetabbam pariyapuxitabbam mafissanti; ye pana te suttanta kathita kaveyya Aittakkhara hittabyaigana bahiraka sivakabh4sita tesu bhaiiamanesu sussissanti sotam odahissanti ; &c. Ibid. fol. az : Ye te bhikkha bahussuta 4gatagama dhammadhara vinayadhara matikadhara te na sakkakkam suttantam param vakenti, tesam akkayena khinnamilako suttanto hoti apatisarano. On the form compare the Sanskrit drish¢Anta, vrittanta, and siddhanta. a Suitantam Vinayaw kapi navahgam Satthusdsanam Sabbam pariyapusitvana sobhayi Ginasdsanam. The phrase is used of various Buddhas in verses 317, 348, 594, 627, and 786 of the Buddhavamsa. This reference we owe to Dr. Morris. INTRODUCTION, XXxi from the Suttas of the Patimokkha. ‘The Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Suttavibhanga.’ The word recurs only in one other passage}, and that is in the appended Khandhakas of the Kullavagga, in the account of the Council of Ves4lf?, Seven passages are there quoted from the Patimokkha in condemnation of seven out of the Ten Points raised by the heretics; and in answer to the question, ‘Where was it condemned?’ and before the passages are quoted, the place where the passage was uttered is mentioned, and condemnation is stated to be ‘in the Suttavibhanga.” Thus
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.
1Prati-mué (A4tmanep.) means ‘to free oneself, to get rid of;’ and it is precisely through the recitation of this formular, and the answering of the questions contained in it, that the conscience of the member of the Brotherhood ! Patimokkhan ti Adim etam mukham etam pamukham etam cusalanam dhamméanam, tena vutkati patimokkhan ti. Mahavagga II, 3, 4. 2 We use the phrase ‘Old Commentator’ for convenience only. The commentary was, no doubt, handed down by tradition in the Buddhist schools; and there is no reason to believe that it was the work of any one mind. XXVili VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. was set free from the sense of the offence he had incurred}. Patimokkha or Pratimoksha means therefore ‘ Disburdening, Getting free.’ The lengthening of the first vowel in the Pali word is not without analogies which have been already adduced by Childers. It is certain that the word is older than the present shape of the Formulary now so called; for it is used several times in the Formulary itself, as well as in many of the oldest Suttas. The Old Commentator makes the Patimokkha ‘the head of the good Dhammas.’ There is a curious passage in the Patimokkha where the Dhammas are said to be included in the Suttas: ‘Ifa Bhikkhu at the half-monthly recitation. of the Patimokkha should say, “Now for the first time do I notice that this Dhamma, as one handed down in the Suttas, embraced in the Suttas, gets recited every half-month!” then’ &c.? It is plain here that neither Dhamma nor Sutta is used in the sense to which we are accustomed from the later books. The Dhammas recited half-monthly are those contained in the scheme of offences given in the Patimokkha, and the Suttas must therefore mean the separate clauses of that Formulary. The fact is that the use of the word Sutta is by no means confined in the oldest Pali to the texts of what was afterwards the Sutta Pizaka, nor is it exclusively used either in earlier or later times® in opposition to Vinaya. Thus we find it used again, as we think, of the Rules of the Patimokkha; and in contrast, as in the rule above quoted, to Dhamma, in Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23: ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher 1 Compare Mahavagga II, 3, 3. 2 Yo pana bhikkhu anvaddhamasam Patimokkhe uddissamane evam vadeyya ; idan’ eva kho aham gandmi, ayam pi kira dhammo suttagato suttapariyapanno anvaddhamasam uddesam Agakkaatiti, tat ke...(the 73rd PAtittiya, quoted in Kullavagga ITI, 34, 2). 8 Though more especially concerned here with the earlier use of the word Sutta, it may be well to remind our readers of the name Suttadhara applied in the Sumangala Vilasini to secular lawyers (see Alwis, ‘ Introd.’ &c., p. 100). INTRODUCTION, XXIX of the Dhamma; but the Suttas have not been handed down to him, nor the Sutta-Vibhanga.’ ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhamma, and the Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Sutta-Vibhanga!’
2100). INTRODUCTION, XXIX of the Dhamma; but the Suttas have not been handed down to him, nor the Sutta-Vibhanga.’ ‘This Bhikkhu, of such and such a name, is a preacher of the Dhamma, and the Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Sutta-Vibhanga!’ So again in the constantly repeated phrase above referred to— ‘If the two Patimokkhas are (or are not, as the connection requires) thoroughly known to a Bhikkhu in their entirety with all their divisions and explanations, if he have (or have not) thoroughly mastered them Sutta by Sutta, and Detail by Detail; then’ &c.? —the word Sutta evidently refers to the clauses of the two Patimokkhas; and we find also in the immediate context the mention of Dhamma or of Vinaya, or of both. It is no doubt true that in one passage of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (IV, 8-11=pp. 39, 40), Sutta is opposed to Vinaya in much the same‘way as Sutta Pifaka was afterwards opposed to Vinaya Pitaka; yet the contrast between these two ideas is usually expressed by the apposition of Dhamma to Vinaya3, and the passage in the Mahé-parinibbana Sutta stands, so far as we yet know, quite alone. Indeed in the oldest tradition the discourses or conversations now called Suttas seem not to have been called by that name, but are referred to as Suttantas. So in the Mahdvagga III, 5,9, 12 mention is made of devout men, or of devout women, who may have been accustomed to recite some well-known Suttanta*; and in the next Khandhaka (IV, 15, 4) we find Suttanta, Dhamma, and Vinaya all occurring in one context: ‘It may happen, Brethren, that in some district on the day of Pavdravd the night may have become far spent 1 Suttam tassa 4gatam na Suttavibhaigam. On the latter term see below. 2 Ubhay4ni nu kho Patimokkhani vittharena svagataéni suvibhattani suppavattini suvinisksitani suttato anuvyafiganaso (Mahavagga I, 36,14; I, 37,14; Kullavagga IV, 14,19; IX, 5,1). Anuvyafigana may perhaps refer here to the Old Commentary. 5 Compare H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Mahavagga, pp. 7 and following. * Abhifi#atam va Suttantam bhazati. XXX VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. while the Brethren are in confusion—some reciting the Dhamma, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Suttanta together, the custodians of the Vinaya discussing the Vinaya, and the preachers of the Dhamma discoursing about the Dhamma.’
3XXX VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. while the Brethren are in confusion—some reciting the Dhamma, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Suttanta together, the custodians of the Vinaya discussing the Vinaya, and the preachers of the Dhamma discoursing about the Dhamma.’ The whole of these expressions recur in Kullavagga IV, 4, 4; and are found again, with others of a similar character, in Kullavagga VI, 6,2. This last passage is in the Introduction to a fable which of course recurs, as a Gataka, in the Gataka collection, and with an introduction in almost the same words. We should therefore expect to find there also the epithet suttantika (‘versed in the Suttantas’), if that expression had remained in use as late as the fifth century A.D.; but it is omitted, the Suttantikas having been then long since replaced by those entrusted, not with the whole, but with special portions only, of the Dhamma literature. The word Suttanta was however still in common use at the time when the presumably later books now contained in the Pifakas were composed ; for it occurs in the Anguttara Nikéya}, and in a constantly recurring verse in the Buddhavamsa in which it is opposed to Vinaya?, and the word is still used in the MSS. as the title of the more important Suttas. In the passage quoted above from the Kullavagga IV, 14, 22, 23 there is a term Sutta-vibhanga used as the name of some part of the Vinaya literature apparently distinct 1 The Anguttara Nikaya, Pazkaka Nipata (Phayre MS. vol. ii. fol. gk): Ye te Suttanta Tathagatassa bhavité gambhfra gambhirattha lokuttara suifiatapatisamyutta tesu bha#fiamanesu na sussissanti no sotam odahissanti na afinakittam upatthapessanti na ka te dhamme uggahetabbam pariyapuxitabbam mafissanti; ye pana te suttanta kathita kaveyya Aittakkhara hittabyaigana bahiraka sivakabh4sita tesu bhaiiamanesu sussissanti sotam odahissanti ; &c. Ibid. fol. az : Ye te bhikkha bahussuta 4gatagama dhammadhara vinayadhara matikadhara te na sakkakkam suttantam param vakenti, tesam akkayena khinnamilako suttanto hoti apatisarano. On the form compare the Sanskrit drish¢Anta, vrittanta, and siddhanta. a Suitantam Vinayaw kapi navahgam Satthusdsanam Sabbam pariyapusitvana sobhayi Ginasdsanam. The phrase is used of various Buddhas in verses 317, 348, 594, 627, and 786 of the Buddhavamsa. This reference we owe to Dr. Morris. INTRODUCTION, XXxi from the Suttas of the Patimokkha. ‘The Suttas have been handed down to him, but not the Suttavibhanga.’ The word recurs only in one other passage}, and that is in the appended Khandhakas of the Kullavagga, in the account of the Council of Ves4lf?, Seven passages are there quoted from the Patimokkha in condemnation of seven out of the Ten Points raised by the heretics; and in answer to the question, ‘Where was it condemned?’ and before the passages are quoted, the place where the passage was uttered is mentioned, and condemnation is stated to be ‘in the Suttavibhanga.” Thus
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.