The Sangha and the Buddhist Path MBI 104
Lesson 5
There have been various Buddhist Councils since Buddha died, but none had such a profound effect upon the course of Buddha Dharma as the first two councils. It was the first council that established the Dharma as the sacred base and set in place the Patimokkha rules.
What actually happened at that first council? Perhaps we shall never completely know what transpired. Though there was discussion about the Vinyana rules,-- which was the reason, after all, for the conference,-- at that first council there was no difference of opinion among the members about the Dharma.
There are many lessons we can learn from the examination of that first meeting and its major participants, for we can see the base being established for dissent and the split which occurred later over the rules, for it was in the following council that the schism in the Buddhist community became evident and real. Perhaps if there had been more flexibility, the split may never have occurred. The open question then is whether Buddhism would then have been richer or poorer.
About one hundred years after the First Council, a Second Council was held to discuss some Vinaya rules that had been questioned, but then there was controversy about the Dharma as well. The orthodox Sthavarivada said that nothing should be changed, while other groups insisted on modifying some rules. Finally, a group of monks left the Council and formed the Mahasanghika,-- the Great Community. It is claimed by these that they were not the ones who changed the rules but the Sthaviravadin.
It is possible that what is called the Second Council may actually been the third council. The second was held in Vaisali, 60 years after Buddha’s death, and the third 40 years after that. The third council held a meeting in Pataliputra, where Mahadeva maintained five theses on the Arhat.
The actual split may have occurred at Pataliputra, not Vaisali over the details of the Vinaya. The truth is obscured by dogma and tradition, but what is clear is that the split between the Elders and Mahasanghika took place within 100 years of Buddha’s death.
The third, or fourth council, was presumably held during the reign of Emperor Asoka in the 3rd Century BCE, possibly 1500 years after Buddha’s death. It was held to discuss the differences of opinion among the bhikkhus of different sects. At this Council differences of opinion were not confined to the Vinaya, but also concerned the Dharma.
The President of the this Council, Moggaliputta Tissa, compiled a book called the Kathavatthu which refuted what he termed the heretical false views and theories held by some sects. The teaching, approved and accepted by this Council, became known as Sthaviras or Theravada, "Teaching of the Elders". The Abhidhamma Pitaka was included at this Council.
After the Third Council, King Asoka sent missionaries to Sri Lanka, Kanara, Karnataka, Kashmir, the Himalayan region, Burma, and even to the area now known as Afghanistan. It was Asoka's son, Ven. Mahinda, who took the Tripitaka to Sri Lanka, along with the commentaries that were recited at the Third Council. It was these teachings that later became known as the "Pali-canon".
The Fourth Buddhist Council was held under the auspices of King Kaniska at Jalandhar or in Kashmir about four hundred years later, around 100 CE, where 499 monks of the Sarvastivadin school compiled a new canon. This council, important though it was, never became recognized by the Theravada school.
Lesson Five The First Council
Subhadda
Except for his most deeply realized disciples, Buddha’s death was understandably a great loss to most of his followers, and many were plunged into deep grief.
Yet we are told that there was a monk called Subhadda, a former barber, who had entered the order in his old age. Upon hearing of Buddha’s death, he voiced his long harbored resentment at having to abide by all the rules for monks laid down by the Sangha. The Elder Maha Kassyapa heard Subhadda saying, as consolation to many grieving monks:
"Enough your Reverences, do not grieve, do not lament. We are well rid of this great recluse (Buddha). Were we not tormented when he said, 'this is allowable to you, this is not allowable to you'? But now we will be able to do as we wish and we will not have to do what we do not wish."
These unexpected words spoken by a monk directly after the death of the Great Teacher, caused the Venerable Maha Kassyapa, (the disciple who assumed a ‘de facto’ leadership of the Sangha after Buddha’s death) to consider the possibility of calling a meeting of the leading arahants in order to protect and preserve the teachings.Whether the Elders actually convened the meeting at the suggestion of Maha Kassyapa or if Maha Kassyapa simply had sufficient power to convene it himself is not known, but Maha Kassyapa made the following statement according to the Cullavagga XI 1.1
Cullavagga XI 1.1
All should be considered and put in order "before non-dhamma (adhamma) shines forth, and dhamma should be withheld before non-vinaya (avinaya) shines forth, and vinaya should be withheld before those who speak non-dhamma become strong and those who speak dhamma become weak, before those who speak non-vinaya become strong and those who speak vinaya become weak"
All the Elders agreed to the council, deciding that the Dharma and the Vinyana must be preserved and not altered by dissenting monks. King Ajatasattu was informed of this intention and made all the necessary arrangements for them to meet at the entrance of the Sattapanni Cave in Rajagaha.
Then a question arose. Who was best able to collect and
compile the treasury of Buddha’s teachings? Gavampati,
a learned arahat and one of the four friends of Yasa,
capable of handling the task because he was well versed
in both the Sutras and Vinyana, had died on that same day
.
Upali, Maha Kassyapa and the Ananda Question
The Vinaya
After Gavamapati, there was no doubt who was the prime expert on the Vinaya. The foremost among them was Upali, who had always been noted for his strict observance of the rules and disciplines. Whenever the monks or nuns had any doubts about them, they had always consulted him. When Buddha entered Nirvana, Upali was in his seventies. It was quite logical, therefore, that because of his seniority as an early disciple, Upali be selected to summarize the rules of the order at the First Great Council.
At first, according to the Sudarçana-vinaya, Upali declined the offer, suggesting that Ânanda be chosen for the position, but this was not accepted by the assembly. Finally, at Venerable Maha Kassyapa’s insistence, Upali accepted and was briefly examined to confirm this choice. He then demonstrated that he was able to speak of the rules with accuracy and to say when, where, to whom and why the rules were given.
The Sutras
The question then arose of who was capable of the most
important task of directing the Sutras and the words of
Buddha. We are told that the Venerable Aniruddha
declared, "Among Buddha’s disciples, Venerable Ananda
constantly assisted and was close to Buddha.
He heard the scriptures and has retained them and
Buddha always praised him, saying, 'This Ananda is able
to collect and compile the treasury of scriptures.”
But the records of the Maha-sanghika school say that Upali spoke and blamed Ânanda before the assembly telling the convention that Ananda had committed the “seven faults.” This, however, seems inconsistent if his former suggestion that Ananda be responsible for the Vinaya compilation is correct.
In other scriptures it is Maha Kassyapa who is said to have been opposed to the selection of Ananda, and that after dhyana absorption he declared that Ananda was the only one of the assembly who had not gone beyond the first stage of Awakening and should therefore be expelled from the assembly. Was it indeed the Elder Upali who made the accusations, perhaps on his own account, or was he perhaps instructed to do so by Maha Kassapya?
Although Ananda made a confession in reply to each accusation, it was not a confession of guilt. It only meant that that he acknowledged that the event had occurred. In the ancient texts when they refer to the event, all Ananda’s replies end with the words: "I do not see any wrong in that. Nevertheless, out of deference to you (ayusmantanam sddhaya) I confess this error.”
Let us look more closely at the details of these encounters.
According to The Sudarçana-vibhâshâ-vinaya, Mahâ Kassyapa insisted on the exclusion of Ânanda from the Convocation in order to protect it against all the reprehension that might arise from admitting one who was still in the stage of training; thus he was shown to be perhaps less puritanical and more inclined to admit Ananda if there would be no later repercussions. The rest of the arahats thought it impossible to compile the Sûtras without Ânanda, so they admonished Ananda to exert all his spiritual powers for the attainment of Arhatship, which he appears to have done.
The Caturvarga-vinaya of the Dharmagupta school, and the Pañcavarga-vinaya of the Mahîcasaka school, give the following interesting account:
This incident occurred after the severe censure by Maha Kassyapa of what in this text is claimed to be eight misdemeanors committed by Ânanda. The Caturvaga-vinaya text states that Maha Kassyapa at first considered what would be the proper way of treating Ânanda, whether with a severe condemnation or with a gentle encouragement.
When he had determined to take the first course, Ânanda was brought before the congregation, centered out and it is reported that Maha Kassyapa said: "You must leave this place. This congregation of worthy [Bhikshus] (cannot ) be associated with you in their work.
The text says, "Hearing this, Ânanda felt as if his heart were being pierced with arrows, and, trembling all over his body, he pleaded with MahaKassyapa not to exclude him from the congregation, as he was not conscious of any faults in his eight misdemeanors, which caused Ânanda at last to retire from the assembly and to train himself for the attainment of Arhatship.”
In the Mahâsanghika-vinaya, Ânanda is stated to have received an even more humiliating treatment from Maha Kassyapa.
“When Maha Kassyapa was requested by Bhikshus to admit the former to their assembly, he said: "No. If such a one of (low) training should be admitted into a congregation of those who are above training and are perfect in their meritorious powers, he would appear like a leprous fox in an assemblage of lions.
When this ignominious comparison was communicated by a deva to Ananda, who was traveling towards Râjagriha, it did not please him at all. But he thought that Maha Kassyapa, who well knew to what family he belonged, would not have referred to him in such a way if he had been free from prejudices.
In the meantime, having attained final deliverance, Ânanda hastened through the air to the Convocation. Maha Kassyapa, it is stated, then explained to him that he had used such a vigorous expression, only as he wished to encourage him to reach the stage of Arhatship.”
It is then difficult from the different reports to see precisely Kassyapa’s motivation. His manner varied from strict but concerned in some reports to prejudiced in others.
Ânanda’s Errors
Ananda’s apparent errors are spoken about in several ancient works, all naturally written long after the council had taken place. Among them were:
the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya,
the Caturvarga-vinaya of the Dharmagupta school
the Vinayamâtrikâ Sûtra
the Pañcavarga-vinaya of the Mahîçâsaka
the Sûtra on Kâçyapa's compilation of the Mahayana
the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ-Çâstra of the Mahayana
the Life of Açoka of the Mahayana
the Mahâ-samghika-vinaya.
The number of censures of Ananda by Maha Kassyapa or Upâli vary between six and twelve depending on the account. The following are the various charges against him:
1. He pressured Buddha for the admittance of women into the Sangha. This is mentioned in all eight versions.
2. He did not ask Buddha for the prolongation of his life, when the latter expressly suggested this to him, by saying that those who were trained in the four supernatural powers could either prolong or shorten their life. This too appears in all versions
3. When Buddha preached in parables, Ânanda made, at one moment, some superfluous remark on them. This appears only in the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya version and thus can be discounted.
4. Ânanda trod on Buddha's golden-colored robe, either while washing it or mending it. This too appears in all versions.
5. Being asked by Buddha to give him some water when deathly ill, he either gave him muddy water or did not give him any. This also appears in all versions.
6. When Buddha told Ânanda that Bhikshus might dispense with minor precepts, he did not make any inquiry as to what precepts should be regarded minor. This appears in all versions except the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra.
7. He exposed the genitals of Buddha in the presence of women, thinking that the act would tend to the cessation of their passions.
This appears in all except the Caturvarga-vinaya of the Dharmagupta school and the Pañcavarga-vinaya of the Mahîçâsaka. We can then conclude that this was probably a charge.
8. He showed the gold-colored body of Buddha to a multitude of women, allowing them to defile it with their tears. This appears in only four versions so it can probably be dismissed as hearsay.
The following appear in few texts and are therefore unlikely to be certain.
9. He allowed women to worship the remains of Buddha.
10. When he was a one time reproached by Buddha, he secretly cherished ill-will, and was mischievous to others. How one can know about this cherishing of ill will in someone well advanced is not clear.
11. He was not yet free from the three evil passions: lust, malice, and ignorance, while all the other Bhikshus assembled in the Convocation were free there-from.
12. Buddha asked Ânanda three times to serve him as one who offers things to Buddha, but he declined it.
The Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra merely states that Maha Kassyapa accused Ânanda for his seven faults, but does not particularize any of them. It does, however, stress the problem of his fault of supporting women and gives nine disadvantages arising from that.
The Sudarçana-vinaya does not make any reference to Ânanda's errors.
In any case, Ananda was accused and as we saw previously, with new determination, went that night and attained the arahat state before the meeting had really got under way and thus there was no valid reason for his exclusion. How fortunate we are indeed for his courage and determination at that time.
Textual Differences in the Gavampati Incident
To give some idea of the great differences which occur in the reporting of such events, we can look at the Gavampati incident in which, when Gavampati was sent for to attend the assembly, it was found that he had already died, creating a problem as to who could relate and help classify the Sutras and Vinyaya.
In the Mahâyâna literature mentioned above, The Life of Açoka, the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra, the Sûtra of Kassyapa's Compilation, and two other texts: the Mahayana Record of the Transmission of the Dharmapitaka, and the Mahayana Record of the Compilation of the Tripitaka, the following incident is recalled.
It is recorded that upon hearing the great bell rung by Maha Kassyapa, the five hundred Bhikkhus (one thousand according to the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra mentioned before), hastened to the place of meeting. When Maha Kasyapa found that Gavâmpati had not yet joined them, he asked Anuruddha where he was. He was told of his death and is quoted as saying that he was “enjoying a peaceful life in one of the Heavens.” Maha Kassyapa, it is said, sent a message to Heaven to invite him to the convocation.
Gavâmpati surprisingly, we are told, knew nothing about the late events relating to Buddha’s death and the convocation, and asked the messenger why Maha Kassyapa, instead of Buddha himself, stood at the head of the congregation and what was the object of such a great convention.
When he was informed of all that had been going on below, he was so greatly afflicted that he said he had now no inclination to descend to the earth, which was made entirely desolate by the eternal departure of Buddha. So saying, Gavâmpati entered into a state of deep meditation, and suddenly rose in the air shining with supernatural brilliancy, consuming himself in a heavenly fire.
According to the Mahâsamghika-vinaya:
Maha Kassyapa sent several messages to Heaven to summon all the departed Arahats who were abiding there, but all of them, having learned that Buddha had already entered into Parinirvâna, were so exceedingly dismayed that they disappeared one after another in the same manner.
Maha Kassyapa then declared that no more messages would be dispatched to Heaven, and commanded that no more Arahats who were living on earth could enter into Nirvana until their work of great importance had been completed.
On the other hand, the Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra, the Caturvarga-vinaya, the Pañcavarga-vinaya, and the Sudarçana-vinaya, all of which belong to documents of the Non-Mahayana class, make no extensive statement about the Gavâmpati demise.
This important conflict and the different reports of it point to another difference:
In this same text it is Upali who speaks first at the Council, being tested by the assembly about his knowledge of the Vinaya. It is most logical to assume that they spoke about the Vinaya first, since that was, after all, the main reason for the reunion. It also makes sense that Upali was elected first, although the Sutras did form the base and the prime reference.
Before Ananda took on his role, however, he was briefly questioned like Upali and showed his prodigious recollection of Buddha’s teachings as well as the times and places where each Sutra was given, together with the names of those present.
Mahâ Kassyapa announced that as Bhikshus in future generations would be inferior in their natural endowment and lacking in the power of concentration, the assembly would first compile, for the sake of such, the Gâthâs (verses) in which the Sûtra, Vinaya and Abhidharma were treated in comprehensive brevity.
It appears that the compilation of these short Gathas was the first order of business and was quite a logical step and an excellent idea. We notice that in the Vinaya text of the Sarvastivadin group, Maha Kassyapa is making decisions, which is quite in keeping with his character.
Now there are various reports given of the proceedings. The most noticeable difference between reports is in the order in which the Dharma and Vinaya were discussed. It is most logical to assume that it was the Vinaya first,, since that was after all the main reason for the re union, although the Sutras did form the base and the prime reference. In the Sudarçana-vinaya. It is said that:
When the five hundred Bhikshus were seated, Maha Kassyapa asked them what they would first compile, the Dharmapitaka or the Vinayapitaka, and to this they answered: "Venerable Sir, the Vinayapitaka is the life of Buddhism, and so long as the Vinayapitaka exists, Buddhism will also exist. Therefore, let us first produce the Vinayapitaka."
The text then declares that the Brâhmajâla, as it then stood, and the Sramana-phala (relative to the giving up of caste to become “Sramana”, sons of Sakya) were first recited. This was probable, as they were clearly known by all as a basic standard and needed little discussion.
The council then continued with the recital of the rules of the monastic discipline by Ven. Upali.
The First rule of the Patimokkha
The disciplinary rules (Vinaya) were only laid down 20 years into Buddha’s ministry and is coincident with that date. After that time, Buddha presented no more major discourses.
The great Book of the Discipline tells the story concerning the introduction of the first rule.
Upali Takes the Lion’s Seat
Upali then sat upon the lion’s seat, and spoke about the
rules that had been up to that point accepted but not
given form. He began with the formulation of the first
rule set by Buddha.
"Thus I have heard at one time, Buddha was at Vaisali. At that time, Sudinna, son of Kalanda, first indulged in concupiscence. For this reason, Buddha formulated the first major rule.”
The area of Veranja was suffering from famine at the time, and alms food was difficult to obtain; so bad was the famine that even food ration tickets were issued.
Some horse-dealers of Uttarapathaka had arrived at the vihara area with five hundred horses and were preparing grain for the horses in the horse-corrals. The arahats went into the horse-corrals for alms food and were given a small measure of steamed grain of low quality. They took it back to the park where they pounded it ready to be eaten. The venerable Ananda, having crushed one part on a stone, took it to Buddha, who ate it.
At that time the arahats were concerned about two matters: "Shall we teach dhamma?" or "Shall we declare the course of training for the disciples?" Clearly many in the sangha had not yet reached the arahat stage, and Buddha was now 56 years old and no longer a young man.
From the Sutra Group of the Book of Disciplines
In the Name of the Potter: Defeat (within the Parajikkha)
“Then the lord addressed the venerable Ananda, saying: "What, Ananda, is this sound of a mortar?"
Then the venerable Ananda told this matter to the lord.
"It is good, Ananda. Ananda, those who come after will disdain the meaty boiled rice and the gruel won by you who are men indeed."
Then the venerable Moggallana the Great came up to the lord, and sitting to one side, spoke thus:
"At present Veranja is suffering from famine, and alms food is difficult to obtain; and food-rationing tickets are issued, and it is not easy to keep oneself going by gleaning or by favor. Bhagava, the under surface of this great earth is fertile, even as a flawless honey-comb. Good it were, lord, if I were to invert the earth, so that the monks might enjoy the nutritive essence of the water-plants."
"But what will you do with those beings, Moggallana, who are supported by the earth?"
"Bhagava, I will make one of my hands broad, like the great earth, and I will move those beings who are supported by the earth over to that hand. Then with the other hand I will invert the earth."
"Take care, Moggallana, please do not invert the earth, or beings may meet with derangement."
Far from taking this passage seriously, for it is doubtful if either really believed that turning the earth could be done, it seems that Moggallana and Buddha are taking part in a little light humor. This is seen little in the sacred texts, but for those with sensitivity, it gives the rather sombre Buddha image projected by the sutras a more human color. He then shows concern about the whole sangha looking for alms at the same time in Uttarkauru.
"It is well, lord, the whole order of monks may go to Uttarakuru for alms?"
"Take care, Moggallana, let not the going of the whole order of monks to Uttarakuru for alms seem good to you."
Then Sariputta came to discus a problem that was in his mind about the possible demise of Buddha. While in meditation he had noticed a thought about the life span of other Buddhas of the past and wanted to know how long their Dharma lasted.
The Book of Discipline relates:
“Then the venerable Sariputta, rising up at evening time from his meditation, came up to the Bhagava and having come up he greeted him and sitting to one side, the venerable Sariputta related the thought that he had had during his meditation.
"Sariputta, while Vipassin was Buddha, while Sikhin was Buddha, and while Vessabhu was Buddha the Brahma-life did not last long. Sariputta, while Kakusandha was Buddha and while Konagamana was Buddha and while Kassyapa was Buddha the Brahma-life lasted long.
"Sariputta, Buddha Vipassin and Buddha Sikhin and Buddha Vessabhu were idle in preaching dhamma in detail to the disciples; and these had few Suttas in prose or in prose and verse, few Expositions, Songs, Verses of Uplift, Quotations, Jatakas, Miracles, Miscellanies; the course of training for the disciples was not made known, the Patimokkha was not set down.
“After the disappearance of these enlightened ones, after the disappearance of the disciples enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of the various clans, of various social strata, who had gone forth from various families, allowed this Brahma life rapidly to disappear.
“It is as if, Sariputta, various flowers, loose on a flat piece of wood, not tied together by a thread are scattered about, whirled about and destroyed by the wind. How come? Because they are not held together by a thread
“In the same way, Sariputta, at the disappearance of those enlightened ones, the Brahma life rapidly disappeared. And these lords were untiring in their teaching of the disciples, for they read their minds with their own.
"Sariputta, Buddha Kakusandha and Buddha Konagammana and Buddha Kassyapa were diligent in giving dhamma in detail to the disciples; and these had many Suttas in prose or in prose and verse, Expositions, Songs, Verses of Uplift, Quotations, Jatakas, Miracles, Miscellanies; and the course of training for the disciples was made known, and the Patimokkha was set down.
“At the disappearance of these enlightened ones, after the disappearance of the disciples enlightened under these enlightened ones, those last disciples of the various clans, of various social strata, who had gone forth from various families, established the Brahma life for a very long time.
“It is as if, Sariputta, various flowers, loose on a flat piece of wood, well tied together by a thread are not scattered about, whirled about and destroyed by the wind. How come? Because they are held together by a thread, even so, Sariputta, at the disappearance of these enlightened ones, the Brahma-life lasted for a very long time.
We can see that Buddha saw a clear relation between the diligence and importance of giving the dharma in detail in prose and verse, and the duration of those teachings in the world by past Buddhas. Nevertheless, we see that all disappeared eventually after their respective deaths.
Vipassin, Sikhin, and Vessabhu, past buddhas Buddha tells us, were negligent and as a result, the teachings easily disappeared from the world after their death and that of their disciples. On the other hand, Kakusandha, Konagamana and Kassyapa (also past buddhas) taught correctly and their teachings lasted.
Now that might seem like a fairly logical conclusion, but here we must look at ourselves and ask now about the true meaning of developing every intention and action “for the benefit of all sentient creatures”, for that is related to this concept of the duration of the Dharma after the death of a buddha and his disciples.
Buddha did not speak about the benefit of individuals who had a real and separate existence, but about the “totality of living creatures”. The end goal of all correct attitudes, intentions and actions is not to be directed at individuals, it is to keep alive the spoken Dharma itself for as long as possible.
In this age of Buddha Sakyamuni’s teachings, we now have an opportunity to let those teachings continue indefinitely this time until the eventual demise of all sentient creatures. But this depends upon two things. First, it depends upon the profundity of the understanding of the Dharma by all who are Buddhists and second, it depends upon not allowing “intellectual Buddhism” to hold sway on one hand and “unfounded and ungrounded dogma, ritual, ceremony and superstition” to take hold on the other.
The two critical questions
After Buddha had made this clear, Sariputta asked the two critical questions: "Shall we teach dhamma?" or "Shall we declare the course of training for the disciples?"
“Then the venerable Sariputta, having risen from his seat, having arranged his outer robe over one shoulder, and having held out his joined palms in salutation to the Bhagava, said: "It is the right time, Bhagava, it is the right time, Fortunate-one, that is, for the Fortunate-one to make known the course of training for disciples and appoint the Patimokkha, in order that this Brahma-life may persist and last long."
But Buddha replies:
"Wait, Sariputta, wait, Sariputta. The Tathagata will know the right time for that. The teacher does not make known, Sariputta, the course of training for disciples, or appoint the Patimokkha until some conditions causing the Asavas appear here in the Order. And as soon, Sariputta, as some conditions causing the Asavas appear here in the Order, then the teacher makes known the course of training for disciples, he appoints the Patimokkha in order to ward off those conditions causing the Asavas (impediments).
Some conditions, Sariputta, causing the Asavas do not appear here in the Order until the Order has attained long standing. But at such a time, Sariputta, and at the appearance of such, the teacher makes known the course of training for disciples, he appoints the Patimokkha in order to ward off those conditions causing the Asavas.
Some conditions, Sariputta, causing the cankers do not appear here in the Order until the Order has attained full development. . . .
Some conditions, Sariputta, causing the cankers do not appear here in the Order until the Order has attained the chief greatness of gain. . . .
Some conditions, Sariputta, casing the cankers do not appear here in the Order until the Order has attained great learning. . . .
Sariputta, at this time the Order of monks is devoid of immorality, devoid of danger, stainless, purified, based on the essential. Sariputta, the most backward of these five hundred monks is one who has entered the stream, not liable to be reborn in any state of woe, assured, bound for enlightenment.
So we see that Buddha was waiting for the correct moment when the conditions were such that would lead to the necessity of training and rules. What were the conditions that would lead to the necessity of the laying down of both training and rules of conduct? They were considered by Buddha to be “full development”, “the chief greatness of gain” and “great learning”.
It seems that he is saying that these three necessities might lead to immorality in the Sangha by a non grasping of the essentials of the Dharma, or that the Sangha would need to have developed those qualities. He further mentioned that the lowest level of attainment in the Sangha at that moment was that of stream enterer.
This seems to suggest that he was not concerned about the morality of the Sangha at that moment. Why would full development, understanding the chief greatness of gain and having great learning constitute a danger?
Full development meant an increase in membership with a corresponding great diversity. For rules to be effective, there would need to be maturity in the higher understanding of the dharma as well as great learning. Whether Buddha’s hand was forced by the next incident mentioned in the Book of Discipline we cannot know.
Then Buddha addressed the venerable Ananda, saying: "Now, Ananda, it is the custom for tathagatas not to tour the country for alms food without having taken leave of those by whom they have been invited to spend the rains. Let us go, Ananda, to the brahmin of Veranja, and we will take leave."
"So be it, Bhagava,"
Then the lord, having remained at Veranja for as long as he found suitable, eventually found his way to Vasali. And there he stayed in the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood.
Not long after, an important event did take place that led to the institution of the first rule. It concerns the son of a wealthy merchant who lived not far from Vasili, where Buddha and his group were staying at the time.
The Incident of Sudinna and the First Rule
Some time before, Sudinna, the son of a merchant had gone to Vesali together with many friends, on some business. There he saw Buddha , surrounded by a great company of people, teaching dharma. He drew near to this company, and sat down to one side to listen.
He considered what Buddha was saying and thought about joining the group and becoming homeless. When all had departed, Sudinna went to Buddha and, having greeted him and sitting down to one side, asked to join Buddha and the Sangha.
Now Sudinna was not yet an adult, but he was married in the sense that he had completed the first ceremony of betrothal, although the matrimony had not been consecrated. Buddha asked if he had the consent of his parents and Sudinna, replied that he did not.
Buddha then declared that Tathagatas do not ordain children without the parents’ consent, so Sudinna returned to his parents who, as might be expected, refused his request. He thereupon, with great determination, went on a hunger strike until, after his friends persuaded them that it was better to have a live Sudinna as a beggar, than a dead Sudinna as a corpse, they agreed.
After a few days of rest to renew his strength, having gained his victory, Sudinna went to Buddha and received ordination. He then became a jungle dwelling beggar who wore rags taken from the dust-heap, and went on continuous alms-begging from house to house, depending on a certain village of the Vajjians for alms.
Then came the famine.
“Now the venerable Sudinna thought to himself: "At present the Vajjians are suffering from famine, but in Vesali my relations are rich, with great resources and possessions, having quantities of gold and silver, immense means and immense resources in corn. What now if I should dwell supported by my family? Relations will give gifts for my support, they will do meritorious actions; and the beggars will profit and I will not go short of alms food."
So the Ven. Sudinna, set out for Vesali, where he arrived in due course, staying at Vesali in the Gabled Hall in the Great Wood.
When they first heard of his presence, the relations of the Ven. Sudinna came with sixty offerings of barley. Then the venerable Sudinna, gave these sixty offerings of barley to other beggars and, rising early and taking his bowl and robe, entered the village of Kalandaka, his father’s village, for alms. As he was going about Kalandaka, he came to his father’s house.
At that time the female slave of his father was about to throw out the barley gruel of the previous evening. Sudinna asked her to put it in his bowl. She recognized him and told his father of his presence.
His father, astonished at his son taking meagre old grain when better grain was available, took him into the house. Sudinna went with his father but refused an additional meal, having eaten once that day.
The next day when Sudinna came for his alms meal, he was tempted by his father with the entreaty that he could have a foot in both worlds, but he refused again and again finally declared correctly:
"I am not able to do so, father, I cannot. Delighted, I lead the Brahma-life."
And again and again the father entreated and the son refused, until finally the exchange ended in Sudinna politely telling his father that he would be better off dumping the wealth into the Ganges than suffering the anxieties connected with wealth.
His mother tried another tactic and persuaded Sudinna’s unconsummated wife to attend him. She came, touched his feet, and showing her clear lack of comprehension of the bhikkhu life, asked :
"What are these nymphs like, son of my lord, for whose sake you lead the Brahma-life?"
"I do not lead the Brahma-life, sister, for the sake of nymphs."
At these words, being addressed as sister, she fainted.
That interaction was quickly terminated but when the Ven. Sudinna had eaten the meal for which he had come, his mother laid her final card.
She told Sudinna, that when they died their considerable fortune would be confiscated and that the only way to prevent that was have an heir. Sudinna thought for a moment and then uttered the words that led to his problem.
"It is possible for me to do this, mother," he said.
Mother and daughter-in-law did not lose the opportunity. When the time was right, his ex-wife came to him. Since there was no rule made known to him, he indulged in sexual intercourse with her. It is difficult to consider this as an impartial union, but well it might have been, though more than one interaction would clearly have been necessary to ensure pregnancy, which could not be known until the following month.
As a result a child was conceived.
The strange thing related in the text was that his mother had arranged that her daughter-in-law should be at the end of her menstruation cycle when she visited Sudinna for the first time, although the cycles of fertility were well known at that time. Since it is improbable that Sudinna would have frequent contact with his ex-wife, perhaps his mother wished to prolong the encounters in the hope of creating a craving in him for more intercourse.
The text now poetically declares the following, justifying perhaps the severity of the infraction and the consequences:
And at this, the near-earth-gods made this hair raising sound heard:
"Good sirs, the company of monks is without immorality, it is not beset by danger, but immorality is evoked, danger is evoked by Sudinna, the Kalandaka."
The Gods of the Four Quarters, having heard the sound of the near-earth-gods, made this sound heard . . .
The Gods of the Thirty and Three . . .
The Yama Gods . . .
The Gods of Delight . . .
The Gods of Creation . . .
The Gods of Power . . .
The Gods of the retinue of Brahma made this sound heard:
"Good sirs, the company of monks is without immorality, it is not beset by danger, but immorality is evoked, danger is evoked by Sudinna, the Kalandaka."
Thus in this very moment, this very second, the sound went forth as far as the Brahma-world.
In other words, inferno broke loose.
The important point ns this text is to see that there was an un-stated rule against any sexual activity and almost a repressive indignation against Suddina’s action, for we see that his companions in the Dharma spoke to him, giving strong condemnation.
"Reverend Sudinna, you ought to feel remorse, reverend Sudinna, you ought to have a bad conscience, because you, having gone forth under dhamma and the discipline which are well taught, could not during your life-time lead the Brahma-life, complete and purified. Is not, your reverence, dhamma taught by the lord in various ways for the sake of passionlessness, not for the sake of passion; is not dhamma taught for the sake of being without fetters, not for the sake of being bound; is not dhamma taught for the sake of being without grasping, not for the sake of grasping?
How can you, your reverence, while this dhamma is taught by the lord for the sake of being passionless, strive after passion; how can you while this dhamma is taught by the lord for the sake of being without fetters, strive after being bound; how can you while this dhamma is taught by the lord for the sake of being without grasping, strive after grasping?
Is not, your reverence, dhamma taught in many ways by the lord for the waning of passion, is not dhamma taught for the subduing of conceit, for the restraint of desire, for the abolition of clinging, for the annihilation of the round of becomings, for the destruction of craving, for passionlessness, for stopping, for waning?
Has not, your reverence, the destruction of the pleasures of the senses been declared in many ways by the lord, full understanding of ideas of the pleasures of the senses been declared, restraint in clinging to the pleasures of the senses been declared, the elimination of thoughts of pleasures of the senses been declared, the allaying of the fever of the pleasures of the senses been declared? It is not, your reverence, for the benefit of non-believers and believers, and it causes wavering in some."
You can see that the pressure heaped upon Suddina was enormous and it had a tragic effect. One must wonder where compassion existed among them.
Sudinna suffered remorse and was conscience-stricken, and became ill. He became haggard, wretched, his skin became yellowish, the veins showing all over his body, melancholy, of sluggish mind, miserable, depressed, repentant, weighed down with grief. Buddha was told of the situation and he spoke with Suddina.
"Is it true, as is said, Sudinna, that you indulged in sexual intercourse with your former wife?"
"It is true, lord," he said.
The enlightened one, the lord, rebuked him saying:
"It is not fit, foolish man, it is not becoming, it is not proper, it is unworthy of a recluse, it is not according to dhamma, it ought not to be done. How is it that you, foolish man, having gone forth under this dhamma and discipline which are well taught, are not able for your lifetime to lead the Brahma-life which is complete and wholly purified?
“How can you strive after passion, foolish man, while dhamma is taught by me in various ways for the sake of passionlessness, for the waning of passion, for the destruction of pleasures of the senses, for the allaying of the fever of the pleasures of the senses?
“It were better for you, foolish man, that your male organ should enter the mouth of a terrible and poisonous snake, than that it should enter a woman.
“It were better for you, foolish man, that your male organ should enter the mouth of a black snake, than that it should enter a woman.
“It were better for you, foolish man, that your male organ should enter a charcoal pit, burning, ablaze, afire, than that it should enter a woman.
“How come? Because, foolish man, because of that you would go to death, or to suffering like death, but not on that account would you pass at the breaking up of the body after death to the waste, the bad-bourn, the abyss, hell. But for this reason, foolish man, at the breaking up of the body after death you would pass to the waste, the bad-bourn, the abyss, hell.
“For this deed, foolish man, you entered on what is not dhamma, upon village dhamma, upon a low dhamma, upon wickedness, upon final ablution, upon secrecy, upon having obtained in couples.”
Now it is clear that Buddha was scathing in his condemnation, but at this point, one must wonder if there is more to the story than has been presented so far. After all, it appears that Suddina’s fall my not have been of incorrect intention.
When we see Buddha’s following remarks, we must perhaps re-evaluate the situation.
“Foolish man, you are the first-doer of many wrong things. It is not, foolish man, for the benefit of un-believers, nor for the increase in the number of believers (that this is condemnable), but, foolish man, it is (that such actions are) to the detriment of both unbelievers and believers, and it causes wavering in some."
“Then the lord, having rebuked the venerable Sudinna in various ways, and having spoken in dispraise of his difficulty in supporting and maintaining himself, of his arrogance, of his lack of contentment, of his clinging and of his indolence.
After declaring that there was no political motivation involved, Buddha condemned Sudinna’s weakness in going to his parents’ town for food. You perhaps remember his thoughts. “What now if I should dwell supported by my family? Relations will give gifts for my support, they will do meritorious actions; and the beggars will profit and I will not go short of alms food."
Then came the charges of arrogance, probably in thinking himself above the unstated norms of celibacy, which was accepted as essential among all the ascetics of the era; a lack of contentment, and finally clinging and indolence. With this last charge, it almost seems that Suddina is being accused of sacrificing his chastity for food, which might well have been the case, considering his later remorse.
Although Sudinna was criticized by his fellow Sangha members, Buddha ordered no punishment, first because the rules had not formally been established and secondly, because Sudinna was an ádikammika, a beginner. However, Buddha gave him a Dharma talk explaining the situation and presenting the first rule of training.
Thus, monks, this course of training should be set forth:
"Whatever monk should indulge in sexual intercourse, even with an animal, is one who is defeated, he is no longer in communion."
And thus this course of training for the monks was set forth by Buddha.
“Sexual intercourse means: what is not verily dharma, village dhamma, low-cast dharma, wickedness, the final ablution, secrecy, having obtained in couples.
Indulges means: whenever the male organ is made to enter the female, the male member to enter the female, even for the length of a fruit of the sesame plant, this is called indulges.
Even with an animal means: indulging in sexual intercourse with a female animal
Three kinds of females: human woman, non-human females, female animals. . . . There is an offence involving defeat if he commits sexual intercourse with human women in three (by vagina, anus, mouth). Also with non-human women and with female animals. Also with human, non-human and animal hermaphrodites.
There is an offence involving defeat using a human eunuch in two ways (anus and mouth). Also non-human and animal eunuchs. There is an offence involving defeat for human males, non-human males and male animals if they commit sexual intercourse in these two ways.
If a woman is forced on a beggar . . . if he agrees to application, agrees to entry, if he agrees to remaining, if he agrees to taking out . . . If he agrees to nothing there is no offence.
. . . whether the female is awake, asleep, intoxicated, mad, drunk, dead but undecomposed, dead and practically undecomposed, dead and practically decomposed . . . if he agrees.
. . . whether or not the one or the other is covered or uncovered . . . if he agrees.
The text continues in this manner and ends with the exceptions to this rule. The interesting point is the excuse of being a beginner, but once again we are faced with the lack of a definition of who is a beginner. Presumably it is one below the stream enterer stage.
…If one is ignorant, if one has not agreed, if one is mad, unhinged, afflicted with pain, or a beginner, there is no offence.
The key to the offence is then the presence of cognitive
intention to engage in a sexual act for any reason,
knowing it to be an offence.
This then was the first rule, but you can see that the
greatest proportion of the important rules were tinted
with this preoccupation to potentially inhibit the sex drive
in the members of the Sangha.
The Question of the Elimination of Minor Rules
During the First Council, some special matters concerning the Sangha were discussed. Among them, the venerable Ananda mentioned that Buddha, shortly before his death, had permitted the abolishment of minor rules. When Ananda was asked whether he had inquired from Buddha what these minor rules were, he had to admit that he had neglected to do so.
Here is what the Digha Nikaya says about that moment:
Now the Blessed One spoke to the Venerable Ananda, saying: "It may be, Ananda, that to some among you the thought will come: 'Ended is the word of the Master; we have a Master no longer.' But it should not, Ananda, be so considered. For that which I have proclaimed and made known as the Dhamma and the Discipline, that shall be your Master when I am gone.
"And, Ananda, whereas now the bhikkhus address one another as 'friend,' let it not be so when I am gone. The senior bhikkhus, Ananda, may address the junior ones by their name, their family name, or as 'friend'; but the junior bhikkhus should address the senior ones as 'venerable sir' or 'your reverence.'
"If it is desired, Ananda, the Sangha may, when I am gone, abolish the lesser and minor rules.
Here is where Ananda supposedly should have asked about those rules.
"Ananda, when I am gone, let the higher penalty be imposed upon the bhikkhu Channa."
"But what, Lord, is the higher penalty?"
"The bhikkhu Channa, Ananda, may say what he will, but the bhikkhus should neither converse with him, nor exhort him, nor admonish him."
Here Buddha says that the higher penalty should be given, which is simply a verbal ex-communication.
Channa, Buddha’s ex servant, had shown disrespect while being admonished by an Elder and did not mend his ways after his faults were pointed out to him. When criticized he replied:
"Who do you think you are to admonish me? It is I who should admonish you! Buddha is mine, the Dhamma is mine, it was by my young master that the Dhamma was realized. Just as a great blowing wind would gather up grass, sticks, leaves, and rubbish, or a mountain-born river would gather up water weeds and scum, so you, in going forth, have been gathered up from various names, various clans, various ancestries, various families. Who do you think you are to admonish me? It is I who should admonish you!"
He was later taught by Ananda and forgiven.
Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "It may be, bhikkhus, that one of you is in doubt or perplexity as to Buddha, the Dhamma, or the Sangha, the path or the practice. Then question, bhikkhus! Do not be given to remorse later on with the thought: 'The Master was with us face to face, yet face to face we failed to ask him.'"
But when this was said, the bhikkhus were silent. And yet a second and a third time the Blessed One said to them: "It may be, bhikkhus, that one of you is in doubt or perplexity as to Buddha, the Dhamma, or the Sangha, the path or the practice. Then question, bhikkhus! Do not be given to remorse later on with the thought: 'The Master was with us face to face, yet face to face we failed to ask him.'"
And for a second and a third time the bhikkhus were silent. Then the Blessed One said to them: "It may be, bhikkhus, out of respect for the Master that you ask no questions. Then, bhikkhus, let friend communicate it to friend." Yet still the bhikkhus were silent.
And the Venerable Ananda spoke to the Blessed One, saying: "Marvelous it is, O Lord, most wonderful it is! This faith I have in the community of bhikkhus, that not even one bhikkhu is in doubt or perplexity as to Buddha, the Dhamma, or the Sangha, the path or the practice."
"Out of faith, Ananda, you speak thus. But here, Ananda, the Tathagata knows for certain that among this community of bhikkhus there is not even one bhikkhu who is in doubt or perplexity as to Buddha, the Dhamma, or the Sangha, the path or the practice. For, Ananda, among these five hundred bhikkhus even the lowest is a stream-enterer, secure from downfall, assured, and bound for enlightenment."
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
All present then had a chance to ask about those rules, and particularly the great Aniruddha, who was also present. Why was Ananda singled out?
Now various opinions about this matter were expressed in the assembly. As there was no consensus, the venerable Maha Kassapa asked the assembly to consider that if they were to abolish rules arbitrarily, the lay followers and the public in general would reproach them for being in a hurry to relax discipline so soon after the Master's death. Hence Maha Kassapa suggested that the rules should be preserved intact without exception. And so it was decided (Culavagga, XI).
The Caturvarga Vinaya: The vinaya in four divisions, says that Upâli was requested to recite the Vinaya, beginning with the first of the Principal Infringements (Pârâjika), as to the individual, the circumstance, and the nature of the crime.
The Vinaya text of the Mahâsanghika school adds more information and declares that Upali “then recited the nine divisions of the Vinaya, to wit: (1) Pârâjika, (2) Samghâvaçesa, (3) two Aniyatas, (4) thirty Naissargika, (5) ninety-two Prâyaçcittika, (6) four Pratideçanîya, (7) Çikshâ, (8) seven Adhikara.naçamathas, and (9) rules conforming to the Doctrine.
He also explained in addition various meanings of the Vinaya: for example, as to the distinction between the dreadful sins (pârâjika) and serious offences (sthûlâtyaya), or as to a different classification of the Vinaya-text.
Gradually the two hundred and fifty prohibitions were
built
up as a verbal code and we see that some were actually
added during this First Council.
Mahakassapa’s oration
The compilation of the Vinaya being thus finished, it now occurred to Mahâkâçyapa that, as the people in coming generations would be so lacking in intelligence and so poor in natural endowment that they could not comprehend the deep significance of the Doctrine by studying the text only, he himself would recite the list of important elements (Mâtrikâ), that is, Abhidharma, whereby to prevent the spirit of the Sûtra and the Vinaya from being obliterated by arbitrary interpretations.
Having obtained the sanction of the Convocation, he comprised under the Mâtrikâ the following subjects: the four Objects of Smriti (recollections), the four Right Efforts, the four Supernatural Powers (Riddhi), the five Indriyas (lit. root), the five Powers (Bala), the seven Bodhyangas (constituent parts of enlightenment), the Eightfold Noble Path, the four Abhayas (fearlessness), the four Pratisamvids (unimpeded knowledge), the four Sramanaphala (obtainment of Sramanaship), the four Dharmapadas, the Âranya (solitude), Wish, Knowledge, the Dhyâna of Boundary (the fourth Dhyana), Emptiness (Sunyata), Unconditionality (Animitta), Freedom from Desire (Apranihita), miscellaneous Disciplines, various Meditations, the Right Entering, Presentation (or perception), Knowledge of Phenomena, Samatha (tranquilization), Vipassana (insight), the Dharmasamgraha, and the Dharmaskandha.
Thus the rules remained until 83 BC when, during the reign of the pious Sinhalese king, Vatta Gamani Abhaya, a Council of Arahants was held in Sri Lanka and the Tipitaka, for the first time in the history of Buddhism, was put down in writing on leaves.
Perhaps we can now see the rules in their context and view them as part of one whole Dharma. Perhaps too we can see why the Sangha had begun to fall apart. When the human mind controlled by Mara holds sway, those very rules that are meant to build cohesion lead to division.
There is an incident that shows one serious rift, although not evident as dissent, within the group of the council that framed the Vinaya.
The Purana Incident
According to the Vinaya text of the Mahâsanghika school:
“When thus they had finished compiling the Pitaka, the ten hundred Bhikshus staying outside were called in and informed of the work of the Convocation.
A vehement discussion now arose in the assembly as to what was meant by Buddha when he said to Ânanda that the precepts of minor importance could be dispensed with. A certain group of six Bhikshus went so far to the extreme as to say that "if the World-Honored One were still living, he would have everything at once abolished."
Maha Kassyapa, whose majestic dignity and authority were equal to those of Buddha, then sternly ordered them to keep silence, and made a declaration that all which had ever been forbidden should be forbidden, and what had not been forbidden should not be forbidden, and that they should not give any chance to the heretics who were willing to blame the congregation at all costs.
One thousand Bhikshus staying outside were summoned in. It has been suggested by scholars that the Mahâsanghika school, being excluded from the assembly of the Sthavira school, had their own compilation, meeting to the west of Maha Kassyapa’s convocation. They may have been members of that group.
According to the Caturvarga-vinaya, another (or perhaps the same) event occurred in the following manner:
“Having heard that the Convocation was taking place in Râjagriha, Sthavira Purâna hastened thither, accompanied by his party, which consisted of five hundred Bhikshus. He went to Maha Kassyapa and asked if he also might be allowed to learn all that had happened. Maha Kassyapa thereupon again summoned the assembly, requested Upâli to rehearse what he had recited, and had other things repeated as they had been done before.”
Purana expressed his satisfaction with the general proceedings of the Convocation, except as to the insertion of the following eight indulgences, which had been plainly approved by Buddha, and unmistakably kept in memory by himself.
The eight things were: (1) Keeping food indoors; (2) Cooking indoors; (3) Cooking of one's own accord; (4) Taking food of one's own accord; (5) Receiving food when rising early in the morning; (6) Carrying food home according to the wish of a giver; (7) Having miscellaneous fruits; (8) Eating things grown in (or by?) a pond.
These indulgences, said he, were not against the rule that forbids the taking of the remnant of food.
Maha Kassyapa told him that he was correct in saying so, but that Buddha permitted them only on account of a scarcity of food, when the Bhikshus could not get a sufficient supply of it by going their rounds, and that therefore when this circumstance was removed, Buddha again bade them to abstain from these eight indulgences.
Purâna, however, protested, declaring that Buddha, who was all-wise, would not permit what otherwise was forbidden, nor would he forbid what otherwise was permitted.
To this Mahâkâçyapa replied: "The very reason of his being all-wise has enabled him to permit what otherwise was forbidden, and to forbid what otherwise was permitted. Purâna, we will now make this decision: That whatever Buddha did not forbid shall not be forbidden, and whatever Buddha forbade shall not be disregarded. Let us train ourselves in accordance with the disciplinary rules established by Buddha."
Such trivia may not seem important to us, but we are talking about day to day rules that were real, not theoretical. Certainly, in any event, the tone of the discussion was not one of understanding or cooperation on either part. That becomes particularly clear when we see another report from the Khudakka Sutra.
Now at that time, Ven. Purana was wandering on a tour of the Southern Hills with a large community of monks, approximately 500 in all. Then, having stayed as long as he liked in the Southern Hills while the elder monks were standardizing the Dhamma and Vinaya, he went to the Bamboo Park, the Squirrels' Sanctuary, in Rajagaha.
On arrival, he went to the elder monks and, after exchanging pleasantries, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, they said to him, "Friend Purana, the Dhamma and Vinaya have been standardized by the elders. Switch over to their standardization."
(Purana replied) "The Dhamma and Vinaya have been well-standardized by the elders. Still, I will hold simply to what I have heard and received in the presence of the Blessed One."
In other words, Ven. Purana, having had this conversation before meeting with MahaKassapa, had already fixed his mind about the possibility of the acceptance of his own experiences by the council and the doubtfulness of his acceptance of their standardization. He maintained and undoubtedly taught his followers what he had gathered from his own personal experiences and what he had actually heard himself from Buddha. His version may have been different from any standard version, but nevertheless equally valid.
There were certainly others too with personal memories of Buddha’s ministry who would have recounted those stories as they perceived them. Sometimes they may have been included in later commentaries, sometimes they may have been forgotten, so latter additions may not have been pure inventions but may have represented earlier information that may have been recuperated.
We cannot discount the presence of these other important arahats, for as we see, they traveled with large groups of monks who listened to them daily, performed diligently the practices handed down and presumably adhered to the main rules.
Whatever were the original words and thoughts of Buddha, they have really less import than the fact that the truth rests in the eating of the pudding, so to speak. If what the texts suggest are practiced and the results are Awakening, then it matters little what history records.
It is perhaps after the Purana Incident that Ananda began his task.
Ananda Takes the Lion’s Seat
Ananda, then, after paying his respects to the assembly,
took the lion’s seat and Maha Kassyapa uttered this verse,
which set the second part of the council in motion.
“Buddha is the sovereign of all the holy lions.
The [Venerable] Ananda is a son unto Buddha.
He now sits in the place there upon the lion's throne,
Surveying this Assembly that is now without Buddha.
This legion of great virtue which here appears just so,
In absence of Buddha has lost its awesome spirit.
It now appears like night when lacking brightness of the moon.
Replete with constellations, it still is not enhanced.
And now, you greatly wise one, it's time for you to speak.
You, scion of Buddha, you ought now set it forth.
Just where did first Buddha expound [the holy Dharma]?
Now this you should array for us and show.
Here it was Ananda who, on being questioned by the
venerable Maha Kassapa, recited all those texts that
were later compiled in the Five Collections (Nikaya)
of the Sutta Pitaka. He began by pressing his palms
together, faced the direction of Buddha’s Nirvana and
spoke thus:
When first Buddha spoke the Dharma,
It was at a time I did not see.
Like this, I heard it round about that
Buddha was at Varanasi.
Buddha for the five bhikshus spoke it (the dharma),
And first opened there the sweet dew gate.
The Four Truths Dharma then he spoke.
Of suffering, cause, extinction and the Way.
Ajnata Kaundinya, was very first then
To gain the seeing of the Way.
A host too of gods, eighty- thousand in number
All entered as well there, the track of the Way.
We can then assume that the council proceeded in this
way point by point and that any host of Gods perceived
by Ananda might have been well pleased.
It is further said that after one thousand arhats heard
these words, they rose into the air to a height of seven
tala trees and all said, "Alas! The power of impermanence
is extreme. It is like when we saw Buddha speaking the
Dharma.
But now he (Ananda) says, 'Thus I have heard!'
Now do not believe for a moment that those who
recounted these stories were crazy or that indeed that the
y all rose in the air the height of seven tala trees (trees
of great esteem in India believed to grant wishes).
That is just a way of expressing their great awe and joy.
That was perhaps how each may have felt (seven times
more than their greatest wish had been fulfilled).
Indeed, if you have any awareness at all of this moment,
perhaps you can feel that same joy, maybe not to the
same height as those assembled, but at least swelling
within you. Remember that now it was clear that Buddha
was not dead, that his spirit within his words was with
them. It was as though Buddha himself were transmitting
the Dharma, with the addition of the phrase
“Thus I have heard”.
Finally the Truth, from Buddha’s first Turning the Dharma
Wheel Scripture up to his final words, was collected and
compiled, to be learned by heart and checked and
crosschecked repeatedly until they were finally written.
Probably after this event Ananda began his great task.
The Vinaya Text of the Sarvâstivâda School says that Ânanda, being requested by Mahâ Kassyapa and the Sangha to select and compile them, began.
Ananda first reflected upon the impermanence of things, which is a very correct thing to do before starting on such an awesome task, being conscious that all things even rules about the Dharma are transient and never permanent.
"Among those Sutras which I heard personally from Buddha, some are traditional (with which all are conversant), some are preachings in the Naga (Serpent) Palace, others are preachings in the heavens.
It is logical to assume that these were distinct teachings and Mahayana followers may perhaps correctly claim that they consist of different levels of teachings.
“As I keep them all in memory and do not forget any of them, I shall now recite them."
All Devas expressed their willingness to listen, and Mahâ Kassyapa praised the words of Buddha as the foremost of all doctrines.
Ananda then presented the first three Sutras as he had heard them.
Ajñâta Kaundinya, being present in the assembly, confirmed the recitation and told Maha Kassyapa how at that time he gained the eye of the Law, the first stage of the awakening.
Hearing this, devas as well as those Bhikshus who were not yet freed from attachment (not present in the assembly, probably those excluded), uttered a pitiful cry as if their hearts were being pierced with thousands of arrows, and lamented that they could not hear those words of Buddha any more from his own mouth.
In this lamentation the Bhikshus of the assembly also joined. When they recovered from the shock of deep feeling, Maha Kassyapa declared that this first Sutra (the Truth of Suffering), taught by the Blessed One, having been accepted by all, should be recognized as the genuine doctrine of Buddha.
The second Sûtra, Ânanda now went on, which was also preached in Benâres for the sake of the five Bhikshus, consisted in the elucidation of the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Correct Paths. Kaundinya's confirmation and Mahâ Kâssyapa's conclusion were declared as before.
The occasion which induced Buddha to preach the third Sûtra was also in Benâres for the sake of the five Bhikshus. He taught that the five Skandhas (aggregates) have no Âtman, that they are subject to transformation, that they cause misery, that one can save oneself from misery through a right comprehension of the nature of things. The conclusion of Mahâ Kassyapa was the same as before.
In this way all the other Sûtras taught by Buddha in several places were recited by Ânanda and confirmed by the Arhats of the assembly. They were all classified in proper forms according to the subject: for example, Sûtras which treated the five Skandhas were grouped under the heading of Skandha, those which treated the six Âyatanas or the eighteen Dhâtus were classified under the Âyatana or Dhâtu; and so on with the (twelve) Chains of Causation, the (four) Noble Truths, the speeches of Çrâvakas, the speeches of Buddha, the (four) subjects of Recollection, the (four kinds of) Right Effort, the (four) Supernatural Powers, the (five) Indriyas, the (five) Balas, and the (eight) Bodhyangas.
In the Pañcavarga-vinaya:The Vinaya in Five Divisions (pre-Mahayana), we are told:
Those Sûtras which are in coincidence with the Gâthâs (verse parts), were called the Miscellaneous Âgama; those which consist of lengthy teachings, the Longer Âgama; those which are of medium length, the Middling Âgama; those in which the subjects are numerically arranged, the Âgama Increasing by One (Ekottara as well as ). "There are," says Mahâkâçyapa, "no other Âgamas than these" now compiled.
It was Maha Kassyapa who also decided, quite logically, how the groups of texts should be divided. He declared:
"Those longer Sûtras which are now compiled in one group shall be called the Longer Âgama (Digha Nikâyo).”
Such Sûtras as the Brahma-jâla (translated Brahma-moving), the Ekottara (increasing by one), the Daçottara (increasing by ten), the Formation and Destruction of the World, the Sangîti (chorus), the Mahanidana (great cause), the Questions of the Çakradeva (Indra), were included.
“Those Sûtras which are neither long nor short, and are now compiled in one group, shall be called the Middling Âgama (Majjhima Nikâyo).”
“Those which are miscellaneously preached to Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upâsakas, Upâsikâs, Devapûtras, and Devis (also Çakra, Mâras, and Brâhmarâjas), and now compiled in one group, shall be called the Miscellaneous Âgama (Samyutta Nikâyo).”
This was so called because of its dealing with miscellaneous subjects concerning predisposition; power(bala), enlightenment (bodhi), and the path (mârga).
“Those Sûtras which start with one dharma and increase by one, up to eleven dharmas, and are now compiled in one group, shall be called the Âgama Increasing by One (Anguttara Nikâyo).”
“The remainder, all consisting of miscellaneous teaching, and now compiled in one group, shall be called the Miscellaneous Pitaka (Khuddaka Nikâyo). And to them all shall be given a collective name, Sûtrapitaka.”
Also included were such Sûtras as the Jâtaka (stories), Itivrittika (incidents), Nidâna (circumstantial notes relating to Pratyekabuddhas and Arhats, which are written in verses, Vaipulya, Adbhûta, Avadâna, Upadeça, Nirdeça (the Explanation of Aphorisms), the Udâna (narratives), the Dharmapada, Pârâyana and Miscellaneous Discussions.
It was suggested by Suzuki that the collective name Sutra-pitaka was a later addition, as many groups call the collective works of the assembly by that name. Probably the sutra collection was simply called the “words of Buddha”.
The Yoking, mutually enclosing (Dhamma Sangani), the Correlating (Yamaka), and the Place of Birth (Patthâna?) The Discursive (Kathâ Vatthu Treatise), the Non-discursive (Vibhanga Treatise) and the Regions (Dhâtu Kathâ made up the Abhidharma pitaka, which may or may not have been actually included in the convention.
“We have now finished compiling the Law, and henceforth let us not put any unnecessary restraint on what was not restrained by Buddha; let us not violate what has already been restrained by Buddha; let us sincerely train ourselves according to the teachings of Buddha."
Within each group, the speeches of Buddha, the Sudarçana-vinaya, (Pre Mahayana) are divisible into the first speech, the last speech, and those speeches which were delivered between them.
Finally closing the convention, the Mahaprajñâpâramitâ Çâstra of the Mahâyâna declares that Ânanda was again requested to recite the first Abhidharma taught by Buddha.
He addressed the Sangha: "Thus have I heard: Buddha was at one time in Srâvasti, when he told the Bhikshus that those who neither removed nor exterminated the five dreadful [errors], the five misdemeanors, and the five sorts of malice, would suffer in consequence innumerable misfortunes in this life, bodily as well as spiritual, and in the future would fall down into the evil paths;
that those, however, who were free from these five dreadful [sins], five misdemeanors, and five sorts of malice, would enjoy in consequence various blessings in this life, bodily as well as spiritual, and in the future be born in a pleasant heavenly abode.
What are those five dreadful [sins] which are to be kept away? They are: (1) killing, (2) stealing, (3) unlawful lust, (4) lying, and (5) drinking spirits."
All such matters were comprised under the Abhidharmapitaka. Thus ended the compilation of the three Dharma pitakas.
How the result compared to what Buddha may have considered correct is difficult to say and he certainly made no great provision for the future. The Maha-Parinibbana Sutra of the Digha Nikaya 16 quotes him as setting up four references before his death for future discussion of his teachings and of the Vinyana. Each of you may judge if his wishes were fulfilled.
The Four Great References
7. "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:
"So be it, Lord."
8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief.
Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dharma, the Discipline, and the Summaries.
Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dharma, the Discipline, and the Summaries.
Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'
"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline.
If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it.
But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference.
These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."
Thus, Buddha’s teachings were to be judged, not on the authority of anyone, but on the principle of internal consistency. We must remember that the Dharma was not Buddha’s invention. Other Buddhas before had discovered it and it had been lost again and again.
Clearly we have seen that a number of teachings associated with Buddha may have been pre- or post-dated, but they form a part of the Dharma as taught. Certainly there is no question about what constitutes Dharma; there is, however, still a question of what truly should constitute the Vinaya. Certainly for internal well being they were essential, but were they paramount?
Seven Conditions Leading to the Welfare of the Bhikkhus
6. Then, soon after Vassakara's departure, the Blessed One addressed the Venerable Ananda thus: "Go now, Ananda, and assemble in the hall of audience as many bhikkhus as live around Rajagaha."
"Very well, Lord." And the Venerable Ananda did as he was requested and informed the Blessed One: "The community of bhikkhus is assembled, Lord. Now let the Blessed One do as he wishes."
Thereupon the Blessed One rose from his seat, went up to the hall of audience, took his appointed seat there, and addressed the bhikkhus thus: "Seven conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus,:
so long as they assemble frequently and in large numbers; meet and disperse peacefully and attend to the affairs of the Sangha in concord;
so long as they appoint no new rules, and do not abolish the existing ones, but proceed in accordance with the code of training (Vinaya) laid down;
so long as they show respect, honor, esteem, and veneration towards the elder bhikkhus, those of long standing, long gone forth, the fathers and leaders of the Sangha, and think it worthwhile to listen to them;
so long as they do not come under the power of the craving that leads to fresh becoming (identity);
so long as they cherish the forest depths for their dwellings;
so long as they establish themselves in mindfulness, so that virtuous brethren of the Order who have not come yet might do so, and those already come might live in peace;
so long, bhikkhus, as these seven conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
7. "Seven further conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus,
so long as they do not delight in, are not pleased with, and are not fond of activities, talk, sleep, and company;
so long as they do not harbor, do not come under the spell of evil desires;
so long as they have no bad friends, associates, or companions;
and so long as they do not stop halfway on account of some trifling achievement.
So long, bhikkhus, as these seven conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
Seven Good Qualities
8. "Seven further conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus,
so long as they shall have faith,
so long as they have moral shame and fear of misconduct, are proficient in learning, resolute, mindful, and wise.
So long, bhikkhus, as these seven conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus, and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
Seven Factors of Enlightenment
9. "Seven further conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus,
so long as they cultivate the seven factors of enlightenment, that is: mindfulness, investigation into phenomena, energy, bliss, tranquility, concentration, and equanimity.
So long, bhikkhus, as these seven conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus, and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
Seven Perceptions
10. "Seven further conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus, so long as they cultivate the perception of impermanence, of egolessness, of (the body's) impurity, of (the body's) wretchedness, of relinquishment, of dispassion, and of cessation.
So long, bhikkhus, as these seven conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus, and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
Six Conditions to be Remembered
11. "Six further conditions leading to welfare I shall set forth, bhikkhus. Listen and pay heed to what I shall say."
"So be it, Lord."
"The growth of the bhikkhus is to be expected, not their decline, bhikkhus,
so long as they attend on each other with loving-kindness in deed, word, and thought, both openly and in private;
so long as in respect of what they receive as due offerings, even the contents of their alms bowls, they do not make use of them without sharing them with virtuous members of the community;
so long as, in company with their brethren, they train themselves, openly and in private, in the rules of conduct, which are complete and perfect, spotless and pure, liberating, praised by the wise, uninfluenced (by mundane concerns), and favorable to concentration of mind;
and in company with their brethren, preserve, openly and in private, the insight that is noble and liberating, and leads one who acts upon it to the utter destruction of suffering.
So long, bhikkhus, as these six conditions leading to welfare endure among the bhikkhus, and the bhikkhus are known for it, their growth is to be expected, not their decline.
Counsel to the Bhikkhus
12. And the Blessed One, living at Rajagaha, at the hill called Vultures' Peak, often gave counsel to the bhikkhus thus:
"Such and such is virtue; such and such is concentration; and such and such is wisdom, Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when it is fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration; utterly freed from the taints of lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom."
Perhaps then we can now see the rules in even better context and view them as part of one whole Dharma. Perhaps too we can see why the Sangha had begun to fall apart.
"Such and such is virtue; such and such is concentration; and such and such is wisdom, Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when it is fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration; utterly freed from the taints of lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom."
It is certain that if this set of criteria were adhered to by all Buddhists, then rules would be quite superfluous, but the human creature, lost in this modern wilderness seems far from that sort of dedication.
Exercise 4
What conclusions do you make with respect to the first council. You may be critical or positive. One full page is sufficient.