Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
18 Katukka-Nipata (Phayre MS. vol. i. fol. x4); and repeated in the Pawikaka- Nipata (ibid. vol. ii. fol. naz): Ye te bhikkhi bahussuta dgatégama dhammadhara vinayadhara matikadhara te na sakkakkam suttantam param vakenti tesam akkayena kkinnam@lako suttanto hoti apatisarano. © INTRODUCTION. XXXV possibility of using writing as a means of guarding against such painful accidents. Can this have arisen from any belief that writing the books would have been an irreverent treatment of them? We cannot think that among such a community as that of the Buddhists—who were so advanced in their views that they deliberately adopted the language of the people, and even took no thought, within the ranks of their community, of caste—any such consideration would have prevailed. It seems much more probable that, at the date referred to, the art of writing had not been taken advantage of for the purposes of any kind of literature; but that its use was wholly confined to recording short messages or notes, or private letters, or advertisements of a public character —a result which may well have been due to the want of any practical material on which to engrave the letters that were nevertheless evidently known}. , On the texts above quoted, and the inferences which may fairly be drawn from them, we would base two remarks. Firstly, that there can be no reasonable ground for doubting the correctness of the ancient tradition preserved in the well-known verse of ‘the Ceylon Chroniclers, when, speaking of the time of Va¢ta Gamazi, who began to reign 88 B.C., they say, ‘The text of the Three Pizakas, and the Commentary too thereon, The wise Bhikkhus of former time had handed down by word of mouth’: The then Bhikkhus, perceiving how all beings do decay, Meeting together, wrote them in books, that the Dhamma might last long 2) But, secondly, though we must therefore believe that the 1 Compare Burnell, ‘Elements of South Indian Palaeography,’ p. 10. 3 Dipavamsa XX, 20, 21; Mahavamsa, p.207. As the stanza is common to both works it is taken in all probability, word for word, from the Old Commentary in Simhalese, the Sthalat¢hakath4, preserved in the Mahavihara in Anurddhapura, See H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Dipavamsa., Cc 2 XXXVI VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI.
2As the stanza is common to both works it is taken in all probability, word for word, from the Old Commentary in Simhalese, the Sthalat¢hakath4, preserved in the Mahavihara in Anurddhapura, See H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Dipavamsa., Cc 2 XXXVI VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. Vinaya, before it was reduced to writing, was handed down for about three hundred years solely by memory, and that it lived only in the minds of the VinayadharA, the Bhikkhus ‘who were versed in the Vinaya,’ we do not think it is at all necessary, or even possible, to impugn the substantial accuracy of the texts handed down in a manner that seems, to moderns, so unsafe. The Text, as it lies before us, stands so well against all proofs, whether we compare its different parts one with another, or with the little that is yet known of its northern counterparts’, that we are justified in regarding these Pali books as in fact the authentic mirror of the old Magadhi text as fixed in the central schools of the most ancient Buddhist Church. That text, in the dialect of Magadha, may have been lost to us, once for all; and we can scarcely hope, unless some isolated sentences may hereafter be found preserved here and there in Inscriptions, that this loss will ever be, even partially, made good. But we may well be thankful that the faithful zeal and industry of these old monks has preserved for us a translation, in a dialect so nearly allied to the original, and in so perfect and trustworthy a state as the Pali version of the Vinaya still undoubtedly presents. We trust that the choice we have made from the literature of the Vinaya Pizaka for insertion in this Collection of Translations from the Sacred Books of the East will be considered to need little justification. As the oldest and in many respects most important material of the Vinaya literature we have included a version of the Patimokkha ; though confining ourselves to the Bhikkhu-PAtimokkha, 1 How little this is, is apparent from the fact that Burnouf, who had studied all those that were then accessible, did not even find the words paragika and samghadisesa (Introduction, &c., p. 301). To the Tibetan texts Csoma KGrdsi has devoted a few pages (‘ Analysis of the Dulva’ in Asiatic Researches, vol, xx. pp. 45 and foll.) | Of the Chinese we have only the brief notices of M. Rémusat (Foe Koue Ki, pp. 104 and foll.) and of Mr. Beal (in H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xliv, xlv), The last scholar also mentions several Vinaya works, of the contents of which however nothing further is known, in his Catalogue of Chinese Buddhist Works now in the India Office Library (pp. 67-71). INTRODUCTION. XXXVII
3Beal (in H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xliv, xlv), The last scholar also mentions several Vinaya works, of the contents of which however nothing further is known, in his Catalogue of Chinese Buddhist Works now in the India Office Library (pp. 67-71). INTRODUCTION. XXXVII as our predecessors, Mr. Dickson and Professor Minayeff, have done before us. We could not consider, even after their labours, that a new translation of this difficult text would be superfluous. And of the younger literature we have confined ourselves to the Khandhakas, both because these books, in their variety, and in the fulness of their contents, are better calculated to afford a correct view of the conditions, and the life, of that oldest and most influential of the many monkish orders, the Buddhist Samgha; and also because the Sutta-vibhanga is little more than an expansion of the Patimokkha, which we have already, for the reasons just stated, determined to include!. T. W. RHYS DAVIDS. H. OLDENBERG. November, 1880. 1 For the Upasampada-kammavaka see the passages recurring in the Khandhakas as pointed out above, p. xix. AppitionaL Note on ManAvacaa III, 2, 2 (vassupandyik4). As entering upon Vassa is called vassam upagakkfati or vassam upeti, we believe that upandyik4, the final member of the compound vassupan4yik4 (entrance upon Vassa), must not be derived from upa-ni, but from upa-i (upan-i). Comp. Satapatha-Brahmaza II, 3, 2, 2: ahar-ahar vai Nado Naishidho Yamam raganam dakshimata upanayati (Sayaza: upagaskhati) The preposition upan contained in upan-ayati will be treated of by Professor Jou. Scumipt in the 26th volume of Kuhn’s Zeitschrift. ~ PATIMOKKHA. THE PATIMOKKHA. THE WORDS OF DISBURDENMENT. REVERENCE TO THE BLESSED ONE, THE Hoty Ong, THE FuLty ENLIGHTENED ONE. __ \\ TY! Ob THE NIDANAL{UNIVERSI INTRODUCTION. May the Chapter *, reverend Sirs, hear me! To-day is the sacred day (of the full, or ‘new, * moon), the fifteenth day of the half-month*. If it be convenient to the Chapter, let the Chapter hold Uposatha, let it repeat the Patimokkha. How is it with respect to the necessary preliminaries to a meeting of the Order? Let the reverend brethren announce their purity 4, and I will rehearse the Patimokkha! We all gladly give ear and do attend 5! * The whole of this Introduction, with the ancient commentary upon it (referred to above, in the Introduction), recurs in the Mah4vagga II,-3, where further notes will be found. The previous chapter in Dickson entitled the PuséhAvissaggana is not part of the ancient text of the Patimokkha. * Samgho: of course not the whole Order, but those members then present, spoken of collectively. 5’ 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.
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.
18 Katukka-Nipata (Phayre MS. vol. i. fol. x4); and repeated in the Pawikaka- Nipata (ibid. vol. ii. fol. naz): Ye te bhikkhi bahussuta dgatégama dhammadhara vinayadhara matikadhara te na sakkakkam suttantam param vakenti tesam akkayena kkinnam@lako suttanto hoti apatisarano. © INTRODUCTION. XXXV possibility of using writing as a means of guarding against such painful accidents. Can this have arisen from any belief that writing the books would have been an irreverent treatment of them? We cannot think that among such a community as that of the Buddhists—who were so advanced in their views that they deliberately adopted the language of the people, and even took no thought, within the ranks of their community, of caste—any such consideration would have prevailed. It seems much more probable that, at the date referred to, the art of writing had not been taken advantage of for the purposes of any kind of literature; but that its use was wholly confined to recording short messages or notes, or private letters, or advertisements of a public character —a result which may well have been due to the want of any practical material on which to engrave the letters that were nevertheless evidently known}. , On the texts above quoted, and the inferences which may fairly be drawn from them, we would base two remarks. Firstly, that there can be no reasonable ground for doubting the correctness of the ancient tradition preserved in the well-known verse of ‘the Ceylon Chroniclers, when, speaking of the time of Va¢ta Gamazi, who began to reign 88 B.C., they say, ‘The text of the Three Pizakas, and the Commentary too thereon, The wise Bhikkhus of former time had handed down by word of mouth’: The then Bhikkhus, perceiving how all beings do decay, Meeting together, wrote them in books, that the Dhamma might last long 2) But, secondly, though we must therefore believe that the 1 Compare Burnell, ‘Elements of South Indian Palaeography,’ p. 10. 3 Dipavamsa XX, 20, 21; Mahavamsa, p.207. As the stanza is common to both works it is taken in all probability, word for word, from the Old Commentary in Simhalese, the Sthalat¢hakath4, preserved in the Mahavihara in Anurddhapura, See H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Dipavamsa., Cc 2 XXXVI VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI.
2As the stanza is common to both works it is taken in all probability, word for word, from the Old Commentary in Simhalese, the Sthalat¢hakath4, preserved in the Mahavihara in Anurddhapura, See H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to his edition of the Dipavamsa., Cc 2 XXXVI VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI. Vinaya, before it was reduced to writing, was handed down for about three hundred years solely by memory, and that it lived only in the minds of the VinayadharA, the Bhikkhus ‘who were versed in the Vinaya,’ we do not think it is at all necessary, or even possible, to impugn the substantial accuracy of the texts handed down in a manner that seems, to moderns, so unsafe. The Text, as it lies before us, stands so well against all proofs, whether we compare its different parts one with another, or with the little that is yet known of its northern counterparts’, that we are justified in regarding these Pali books as in fact the authentic mirror of the old Magadhi text as fixed in the central schools of the most ancient Buddhist Church. That text, in the dialect of Magadha, may have been lost to us, once for all; and we can scarcely hope, unless some isolated sentences may hereafter be found preserved here and there in Inscriptions, that this loss will ever be, even partially, made good. But we may well be thankful that the faithful zeal and industry of these old monks has preserved for us a translation, in a dialect so nearly allied to the original, and in so perfect and trustworthy a state as the Pali version of the Vinaya still undoubtedly presents. We trust that the choice we have made from the literature of the Vinaya Pizaka for insertion in this Collection of Translations from the Sacred Books of the East will be considered to need little justification. As the oldest and in many respects most important material of the Vinaya literature we have included a version of the Patimokkha ; though confining ourselves to the Bhikkhu-PAtimokkha, 1 How little this is, is apparent from the fact that Burnouf, who had studied all those that were then accessible, did not even find the words paragika and samghadisesa (Introduction, &c., p. 301). To the Tibetan texts Csoma KGrdsi has devoted a few pages (‘ Analysis of the Dulva’ in Asiatic Researches, vol, xx. pp. 45 and foll.) | Of the Chinese we have only the brief notices of M. Rémusat (Foe Koue Ki, pp. 104 and foll.) and of Mr. Beal (in H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xliv, xlv), The last scholar also mentions several Vinaya works, of the contents of which however nothing further is known, in his Catalogue of Chinese Buddhist Works now in the India Office Library (pp. 67-71). INTRODUCTION. XXXVII
3Beal (in H. Oldenberg’s Introduction to the Vinaya, vol. i. pp. xliv, xlv), The last scholar also mentions several Vinaya works, of the contents of which however nothing further is known, in his Catalogue of Chinese Buddhist Works now in the India Office Library (pp. 67-71). INTRODUCTION. XXXVII as our predecessors, Mr. Dickson and Professor Minayeff, have done before us. We could not consider, even after their labours, that a new translation of this difficult text would be superfluous. And of the younger literature we have confined ourselves to the Khandhakas, both because these books, in their variety, and in the fulness of their contents, are better calculated to afford a correct view of the conditions, and the life, of that oldest and most influential of the many monkish orders, the Buddhist Samgha; and also because the Sutta-vibhanga is little more than an expansion of the Patimokkha, which we have already, for the reasons just stated, determined to include!. T. W. RHYS DAVIDS. H. OLDENBERG. November, 1880. 1 For the Upasampada-kammavaka see the passages recurring in the Khandhakas as pointed out above, p. xix. AppitionaL Note on ManAvacaa III, 2, 2 (vassupandyik4). As entering upon Vassa is called vassam upagakkfati or vassam upeti, we believe that upandyik4, the final member of the compound vassupan4yik4 (entrance upon Vassa), must not be derived from upa-ni, but from upa-i (upan-i). Comp. Satapatha-Brahmaza II, 3, 2, 2: ahar-ahar vai Nado Naishidho Yamam raganam dakshimata upanayati (Sayaza: upagaskhati) The preposition upan contained in upan-ayati will be treated of by Professor Jou. Scumipt in the 26th volume of Kuhn’s Zeitschrift. ~ PATIMOKKHA. THE PATIMOKKHA. THE WORDS OF DISBURDENMENT. REVERENCE TO THE BLESSED ONE, THE Hoty Ong, THE FuLty ENLIGHTENED ONE. __ \\ TY! Ob THE NIDANAL{UNIVERSI INTRODUCTION. May the Chapter *, reverend Sirs, hear me! To-day is the sacred day (of the full, or ‘new, * moon), the fifteenth day of the half-month*. If it be convenient to the Chapter, let the Chapter hold Uposatha, let it repeat the Patimokkha. How is it with respect to the necessary preliminaries to a meeting of the Order? Let the reverend brethren announce their purity 4, and I will rehearse the Patimokkha! We all gladly give ear and do attend 5! * The whole of this Introduction, with the ancient commentary upon it (referred to above, in the Introduction), recurs in the Mah4vagga II,-3, where further notes will be found. The previous chapter in Dickson entitled the PuséhAvissaggana is not part of the ancient text of the Patimokkha. * Samgho: of course not the whole Order, but those members then present, spoken of collectively. 5’ 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.
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.