2 Burnouf translated ' a l'assemblee du Magadha,' and Wilson, ' to the vener- able assembly of Magadha' (see 'Corpus,' &c, p. 131); but the reading is clearly Magadhe in the ' Corpus,' while the older facsimile in the Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society (ix. 618) had the impossible form Magdhem. Even if we could read Magadhara sa/rcghara (an expression for which we know no parallel), the above remarks would still hold good. Compare further Professor Kern in the ' Jaartelling der Zuidelijke Buddhisten,' pp. 30-35.
Introduction. Xxv11
council. Surely, if the Edict had been addressed to such a council, the fact would have been plainly intimated.
It is just possible that Vinaya-Samukase may refer to the Old Commentary as well as to the Patimokkha ; but this is not probable, for there is no reason to believe that in Asoka's time the Old Commentary any longer existed apart from its setting in the Vibhanga. And Vinaya- Samukase cannot for the reasons above stated mean, as has been supposed, the Parivara-pa//za.
As regards the meaning of the word Patimokkha we have the explanation of the Old Commentator in that single passage of his work found, as above pointed out, in the Khandhakas1. He there describes it as 'the origin, the front (mukha), the chief of the good Dhammas ;' where the word Dhamma means 'qualities,' and where the evident inference is that the commentator2 derived Patimokkha from mukha. But, on the other hand, the tradition of the Northern Buddhists, in whose Sanskrit works the word is replaced by Pratimoksha, points to a derivation from the root mu£.
It seems scarcely open to doubt that we must, in ac- cordance with this last interpretation, connect the word with mu£, and not with mukha. 'Pratimukha' means in Sanskrit ' over against, standing close in front.' How is it possible to derive from that any meaning appropriate as a title for the liturgy of confession called Patimokkha? On the other hand, the derivation from mu£ is straightforward and simple. Prati-mu^ (atmanep.) means cto free one- self, 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
1 Patimokkhan ti adim etara mukhara etara pamukhara etara kusalanam dhammanara, tena vu££ati patimokkhan ti. Mahavagga II, 3, 4.
2 We use the phrase ' Old Commentator ' for convenience only. The com- mentary 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.
XXV111 VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI.
was set free from the sense of the offence he had incurred1. Patimokkha or Pratimoksha means therefore 'Dis- burdening, 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 c 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 :
' If a Bhikkhu at the half-monthly recitation of the Pati-
mokkha 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. 2
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 con- tained 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 Pi/aka, nor is it exclusively used either in earlier or later times 3 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 iTullavagga IV, 14, 23, 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 g-anami, ayam pi kira dhammo suttagato suttapariya- panno anvaddhamasam uddesam aga&Matiti, ta» ke . . . (the 73rd Pa&ttiya, quoted in .STullavagga III, 34, 2).
3 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 D ham ma; 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-VibhahgaV
So again in the constantly repeated phrase above re- ferred 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.2
— 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 Maha- parinibbana Sutta (IV, 8-n=pp. 39, 40), Sutta is opposed to Vinaya in much the same way as Sutta Pi/aka was afterwards opposed to Vinaya Pi/aka ; yet the contrast between these two ideas is usually expressed by the appo- sition of Dhamma to Vinaya3, and the passage in the Maha-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 Mahavagga 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 4 ; 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 Pavara^a the night may have become far spent
1 Suttaw tassa agatara na Suttavibhangara. On the latter term see below.
2 Ubhayani nu kho Patimokkhani vittharena svagatani suvibhattani suppa- vattini suviniteitani suttato anuvya^anaso (Mahavagga I, 36, 14; I, 37, 14; -STullavagga IV, 14, 19; IX, 5, 1). Anuvya^ana may perhaps refer here to the Old Commentary.
3 Compare H. Oldenberg's Introduction to his edition of the Mahavagga, pp. 7 and following.
* Abhmwatam va Suttantara bha^ati.
XXX VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI.
while the Brethren are in confusion — some reciting the
Dhamma, those versed in the Suttantas intoning some Sut-
tanta 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 iTullavagga IV, 4, 4; and are found again, with others of a similar character, in .ATullavagga VI, 6, 2. This last passage is in the Intro- duction 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 Suttantas5), 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 Pi/akas were composed ; for it occurs in the Anguttara Nikaya \ and in a constantly recurring verse in the Buddha- va^sa in which it is opposed to Vinaya2, and the word is still used in the MSS. as the title of the more important Suttas.
In the passage quoted above from the ATullavagga 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, Pa^aka Nipata (Phayre MS. vol. ii. fol. g&k) : Ye te Suttanta Tathagatassa bhavita gambhira gambhirattha lokuttara suii- wataparisamyutta tesu bha^wamanesu na sussissanti no sotam odahissanti na aMaiittawz upa^Mpessanti na £a te dhamme uggahetabbam pariyapuraitabbam ma»fiissanti; ye pana te suttanta kathita kaveyya £ittakkhara £ittabya%-ana bahiraka savakabhasita tesu bhailwamanesu sussissanti sotam odahissanti ; &c.
Ibid. fol. naA : Ye tebhikkhu bahussuta agatagama dhammadhara vinayadhara matikadhara te na sakka££ara suttantam parara va£enti, tesam a^ayena kfiin- namulako suttanto hoti apa/isararco.
On the form compare the Sanskrit dWsh^anta, vnttanta, and siddhanta.
2 Suttantam Vinaya^ £api navangam Satthusasanam Sabbam pariyapumtvana sobhayi Ginasasanam.
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 1, and that is in the appended Khandhakas of the iTullavagga, in the account of the Council of Vesali2. 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 4 in the Suttavibhanga.5 Thus
Revata says, ' Is it right, Lord, to drink ^alogi?' Sabbakami replies, 'What, Friend, is this^alogi?' Revata: 'Is it right, Lord, to drink strong drink which not being fermented, is not yet intoxicating ? ' Sabbakami : ' No, my friend, it is not right.' Revata : ' Where has it been condemned ? ' Sabbakami : ' At Kosambt in the Suttavibhanga.' Revata: 'What does he (who drinks ^alogi) commit?' Sabbakami : ' He commits the Pa^ittiya offence of drink- ing strong drink and of drinking intoxicating liquors.'
This is a quotation of the Pa£ittiya Rule, No. 51 ; but
the words quoted do not in fact condemn the drinking of
toddy, and neither the Patimokkha nor the Old Com-
mentary contains any reference to the place, Kosambi,
where the words are here said to have been uttered.
It is only in the introduction afterwards appended (in what is now called the Vibhanga) to the two older works, that Kosambi is mentioned ; and in the appendix following the Rule 51 in the Vibhanga there are no exceptions which would include ^alogi. But Kosambi is mentioned in the Introductory History. It is therefore most probable that the term Sutta-vibhahga refers to what is now called the Vibhanga ; or, if not, at least to that body of traditional teaching (including the Patimokkha and the Old Com- mentary) out of which the present Vibhanga was composed.
1 That is, of the Vinaya Pitaka. We are not certain that it may not be found in the Sutta Pi/aka.
2 isTullavagga XII, 2, 8.
XXX11 VINAYA TEXTS FROM THE PALI.
It may be convenient to make some reference here to the question whether the literature above discussed was handed down by memory only, or by writing. We are justified in expecting to find, in texts dealing in such minute detail with the daily life of the members of the Buddhist Order, some distinct evidence — and it will be equally dis- tinct whether it consists in actual statement, or in silence — as to writing, and the use of written books. And this expectation is not disappointed.
In the first place, there are several passages which con- firm in an indisputable manner the existence of the art of writing at the time when the Vinaya texts were put into their present shape.
1 A certain man, who had committed a theft, ran away,
and got ordained among the Bhikkhus. Now he was
written up in the king's palace with an injunction that he
should be slain wheresoever he should be found1.' —
' But there occurred to the parents of Upali this con- sideration : "If Upali should learn writing2, Upali might thus after our decease live at ease, and not be troubled." '
And in the Vibhanga we find an interesting explanation
of the Third Para^ika Rule, which lays down that whoso-
ever wilfully kills a man, or brings about his death, must
be expelled from the Order.