Unit MBI 104
LESSON 7
A good question to begin this lesson with may be to ask what Buddha called “Buddhism” or “Buddha Dharma” in his day. He called it Dhammavinaya,-- a term that means “doctrine of the natural law”(dhamma), and “discipline” or “correct behavior” (vinaya). The word “vinaya” is brought into focus here because of the wealth of difference between “correct behavior”, which clearly demands restraint, and “discipline”, which can be either auto-regulated or imposed.
The First Sangha was without doubt ruled by correct behavior directed by personal diligence and enthusiasm. However, it appears that sometime between the spontaneous generation of the natural Sangha and the First Council, which was held three months after Buddha’s death, a big change took place and external discipline appears to have been imposed. The question is why, by whom and how?
Lesson 7 Patimokkha
It is probable that the change from auto-regulated to imposed discipline took place with the increment of Buddha’s followers. Imposed discipline became particularly important during the rainy season (wassa), between July and October, when mendicants and beggars customarily gathered together for refuge, teachings and practice. For the those who had taken the homeless path but who did not wish to wander, the times of refuge slowly extended until they became the basis for the monastic life.
The monasteries at that point were not essentially different from the long established ashrams that already existed, which were loosely structured groups led by a principal master who gathered self disciplined disciples around him to hear his teachings and practice various forms of asceticism.
That the holy life outside of Buddha’s group had been corrupted, we see by Buddha’s remarks concerning “ascetics and Brahmins who receive food from the faithful”, who were seen to be somewhat less than correct in their behavior.
During the first twenty years after Buddha’s awakening, these groups, both the forest dwellers and the new monastic followers of Buddha maintained pure and correct behavior so that it was not necessary to impose either rules or restrictions. Only when faults arose and were repeated frequently was there a need for injunction. Clearly the size of the Sangha and the separation of the monastic groups from Buddha for a great part of the year did not allow the constant vigilance and training that close contact may have provided.
Who actually stayed in those monasteries and who went as wanderers? If human nature is any guide, those who stayed in the monasteries were unable to journey because of age or ill health or were simply seeking a life free from whatever problems they perceived in the mundane world. One can imagine that the younger warrior class and Brahmins who really were sincere, serious and fit to travel would go with Buddha.
Originally the rules arose from Buddha’s admonitions, “ Do not do this…, do not commit such acts…; if you allow yourself to commit such faults, it will entail such consequences…". At first, just the presence of automatic mundane and transcendental karma was enough, but gradually the admonitions were converted into rules.
These rules of “vinaya”, which probably arose within the monastery community, were conducive to breaking up or dispelling hindrances. They were called Patimokkha, which means “thorough bond”, thus the idea of Patimokkha was to prevent the breaking up of the Sangha through the strong bondage of the rules. They were not laws,-- as there is a subtle difference between laws and rules. With rules, the first path is restraint and the rules are only imposed if restraint fails.
The rules of the Sangha were designed as a framework that best suited the practice of renouncement and the training in concentration. In the dharma, moral auto-discipline is the pillar of all practices, of all actions. But Buddha didn't lay out all the rules at once; they developed over time as the occasion demanded, and a system was introduced to replace any failed auto-discipline.
Some of Buddha's followers, headed by Ven. Upali, gathered the major rules into a set code, the Patimokkha, that eventually contained 227 rules. The minor rules, which came to number several hundred, were gathered into chapters loosely organized according to topic, called Khandhakas.
Upali was the logical choice to head the project. He had been a royal barber by profession, and had normally served the six royal princes of Sakkyan birth.,-- Bhaddiya, Anuruddha, Kimbila, Bagu, Dewadatta and Ananda. The princes all joined the order at the same time, each one distinguishing himself, except for Devadutta, whose jealousy betrayed him and he was forced to leave.
By common consent, Upali, who was respected by the princes, was ordained before them so that according to precedence, the princes were bound to pay respect to him. They were thus tested immediately and it was in this way that caste distinctions began their clear elimination in the Sangha.
Originally, Upali had sought to be a pure forest dweller, but Buddha dissuaded him from this in order that he might learn better in his wanderings as he listened directly to Buddha. He rapidly became an expert on the ethical ways, being of discriminative temperament, and when the moment came for formalization, he was the ideal choice.
The Patimokkha, as we now have it, is embedded in a text called the Sutra Vibhanga. Buddha, in laying down rules, was probably not entirely pleased about need to do so, so he gave his reasons for their establishment:
• For the excellence and well being of the Community,
• For the control of ill-behaved monks and the comfort of well-behaved monks,
• For the restraint of bad habits in this life and the prevention of bad habits in the next life,
• For the arousing of confidence in the non-confident and for the increase of confidence in the confident,
• For the establishment of the Dharma and the support of vinaya (correct behavior).
We can see here that rules would not have been deemed necessary if it had not been for the presence of ill-behaved monks with bad habits incorrectly restrained or monks with a lack of confidence.
The paradox of rules is that the more precisely a definition is given for a particular situation or culture, the more difficult is its application to other situations. Therefore, when reading the rules, one must capture the significance, while at the same time not broadening the concept too much.
There is a rule about 'not handling gold and silver', so a literal acceptance would allow the handling of paper money. The spirit of this rule is about giving up the power of financial or barter transactions. If one does not see this, then there are problems from those who wish to “hedge”.
To help with the interpretation of rules in difficult situations, there were the Four Great Standards: encourage comparison with existing rules, determine what situation suitably compared with what rule, evade an individual decision and obtain the consent of the resident community.
Rules Related to Sexual Interactions
The most difficult of the developed 227 rules to understand were some of the less important rules related to sex and male-female interaction. There are 34 sex related rules, which constitute about 15 percent of the Patimokkha. It is true that there is an overwhelmingly strong male propensity to be interested in the pursuit of sexual encounters in one way or another, although this is well masked today by social custom and restraint, so it is logical also that these rules would take first place.
Novices who entered after the first Sangha had been established would require some form of basic rules as a guide in personal sexual restraint. Yet we see that those also advanced on the path, including Ananda, fell prey to these Identity urges.
Parajikas
For ascetics, clearly one of the four Parajikas rules,-- to “refrain from sexual intercourse”-- is logical. To show how serious this rule was considered to be, one can compare it with the other three Parajikas: not to steal, not to commit murder and not to claim supermundane attainments that have not been achieved.
The breaking of these rules entailed expulsion from the Sangha. If one of these four rules were broken, signifying “defeat”, then that person could never be re-ordained. They are obviously critical rules and were taught to new members of the Sangha immediately upon ordination.
Sanghadisesas
We also find that 5 of the 13 Sanghadisesa rules were directed at this same sexual theme. These were important enough infractions to entail an initial and subsequent full meeting of the Sangha to discuss the issue. The rules were:
Not to masturbate.
Not to touch a woman.
Not to have a sexually oriented conversation with a woman.
Not to propose sexual intercourse to a woman.
Not to be involved in the sexual assignations of others.
Infringement of any of these was considered as a major transgression and the rectification involved quite a long judicial process, which was aimed not at punishment, but at increasing mindfulness in these areas. This process required clear humility and recognition of the error on the part of the transgressor, who was placed on probation for six days, during which time he lost seniority, lived apart from the community, and was not permitted to go anywhere unaccompanied.
In addition, he had to confess his offense to every monk who lived in or happened to visit the monastery. At the end of his probation, twenty monks had to be convened to reinstate him to his original status.
These sexual rules were directed at the adept’s own psychological problems, but the Sangha also sought to protect itself from external criticism. Hence two Aniyata (indefinite) rules were introduced.
Aniyatas
These were offenses that required a formal inquiry by the Sangha because the difficult and delicate nature of each of the situations required a clear judgment.
Not to be found alone with a woman in a remote place that could arouse suspicions about a sexual intercourse.
Not to be found alone with a woman in an isolated place that could arouse suspicions about conversations on lustful subjects.
Nissaggiyas
Eight of the major nineteen rules we have considered so far among the serious offenses,-- Parajikas, Sanghadisesas and Aniyatas,-- were sexual in nature, but only two were sexually related among the 30 Nissaggiya rules. They resulted in forfeiture of the (inappropriate) item, in this case the robe in question, and confession. These two rules were related to potential seduction.
Not to have a robe washed or dyed by a bhikkhuni who is not a relative.
Not to accept a robe from a bhikkhuni who is not a relative.
Now we may consider it remarkable that those seriously on the Dharma path would need to beware of such traps. However, instead of thinking about the rule, one must look at the human male and see the traps that the mind plays when natural sensitivity, discrimination and intelligence are used by the Identities. It may be difficult for many women to see the universal force of the male sexual drive, which in itself is natural and correct when the Identity is absent, but any man who introspects will understand the situation.
Certainly the possibility that women would have been interested in the seduction of monks appears to us remote, but one must be aware that those who joined the Sangha were normally from wealthy families, well educated and a good “matrimonial” catch if they could be persuaded to leave the Sangha. That this actually occurred is suggested by the rule’s introduction.
Pacittiyas
Fifteen of the 92 Pacittiyas, which entailed just confession, were also sexually oriented. That is over sixteen percent of the total. In Buddhism, we often hear the word “confession” used, but the word actually means an “admission of error”. It required serious introspection about the act and its consequences both at the level of intention and action.
The admission usually took place fortnightly on the moon day, although this was not essential. Two monks would meet and the junior monk would pay respects to the senior monk. The formal ceremony was chanted with the aim of reinforcing attention on the problem. The admission was a series of questions and answers repeated four times:
'Venerable Sir, several times I have transgressed these rules and I now confess this to you.'
'Do you clearly see where you have transgressed?'
'Yes, Venerable Sir, I clearly see my faults.'
'In future you should practice restraint in these matters.'
'Well spoken Venerable Sir, I will indeed practice restraint.' [Repeated 3 times - to reinforce this intention].
The fifteen rules of the Pacittiyas that were sexually oriented were:
Not to teach bhikkhunis without a permission taken from the Sangha.
Not to lie down in a building in which there is a woman.
Not to teach to a woman more than six consecutive words of dharma.
Not to teach the dharma to the bhikkhunis after nightfall.
Not to proceed to a monastery of bhikkhunis in order to teach.
Not to give a robe to a bhikkhuni.
Not to sew a robe for a bhikkhuni.
Not to plan a trip with a bhikkhuni.
Not to take a boat with a bhikkhuni.
Not to eat food prepared by a bhikkhuni.
Not to sit with a bhikkhuni in a remote spot.
Not to remain near the place where a man and his companion lie when these are in the house.
Not to remain alone with a woman in an isolated place.
Not to sit next to a woman in a place remote from others' ears.
Not to make a trip with a woman having planned it with her.
Not to affirm that things such as sexual pleasures are not an obstacle to the development of ariya stage or to jhana realizations.
Perhaps the strangest of these required that the bhikkhus not teach a woman more than six consecutive words of dharma. It is not, as one might suppose when taken out of context, that this was because women were considered inferior and unintelligent, although this was certainly considered to be true at the time. It was introduced because lengthy teaching of women might well create conditions in which incorrect intentions might arise.
Patidesanyas
Two of the 4 Patidesanyas only required acknowledgement of the fault to be freed from its effects. They were:
Not to accept food from a bhikkhuni.
Failing to order any bhikkhunis who manage the service of food to go somewhere else during the meal.
Rules about Relations between Members of the Sangha
Important within any large group, and so in the monastic community, are rules concerning the correct relations between its members. Second only to rules related to sexual matters, there are 29 important rules concerning other relationships within the Sangha. These include seven Adhikaranasamathas, or ways of resolving disputes between members. The most important of these are five that appear within the eight remaining Sanghadisesa rules:
Adhikaranasamathas
Not to groundlessly accuse a bhikkhu of having committed a Parajikas.
Not to pretend that one bhikkhu has committed a parajika by deliberately accusing a second one who shows similarity with the first.
Not to create a division within the Sangha.
Not to encourage a bhikkhu who works to divide the Sangha.
Not to reject admonishments made on his behavior.
There clearly existed sufficient conflict within the Sangha at that time to justify the imposing of rules in order to prevent the actual destruction of the Sangha. Those disputes must have been quite serious and probably reflect the decline in auto-control, spiritual diligence and perhaps genuine dissent with regard to the dharma or the rules themselves.
A review of most of the other rules might make one believe that the monks must have been rather dull witted or extremely foolish. Most of the behaviors proscribed seem so clearly incorrect, particularly those dealing with mundane and trivial matters, which in most modern families would be considered not as rules but as “good manners”. However, this perception of stupidity is not correct, for we must consider not natural intelligence, but the culture which prevailed at the time.
Look at the following rules among those concerning eating. These may tell us a little about the prevailing customs. However, if one looks closely, one can see greed elements present within each.
1. Not to eat by inserting large morsels in the mouth.
2. To prepare mouthfuls of suitable proportions.
3. Not to open the mouth before the food is at its level.
4. Not to put the hand in the mouth, not even a finger.
5. Not to speak with a full mouth.
6. Not to throw pieces of food into the mouth.
7. Not to eat cutting pieces de food with the mouth.
8. Not to fill the mouth with food inflating the cheeks
9. Not to agitate the hands when eating.
10. Not to scatter the rice when eating.
11. Not to let the tongue out when eating.
12. Not to make noise in with the mouth when eating.
13. Not to make noise (slurp) when absorbing a liquid.
14. Not to lick one's hand.
15. Not to wipe the inside of the bowl when eating.
16. Not to lick the lips when eating.
17. Not to hold a vessel of water or a plate with a dirty hand.
Suppose we then take away the sexual rules, those concerning internal relations, those concerning the wearing of robes and denying of personal comfort, and those that would appear to be logical for a cultured person within a sangha dedicated to correct attitude, intentions and comportment. What would we have left of more serious nature to add to the three Parajikas before mentioned? (Not to steal, not to commit murder, not to claim attainments not achieved.)
There are these four important Parajika rules.
Not to accept money.
Not to use money.
Not to exchange things.
Not to divert for one’s own benefit a donation made to the Sangha.
In a resident community in which there is much opportunity for selfishness and opportunity to act without detection, among the 92 Pacittiyas there are:
Not to lie.
Not to consume alcohol or other intoxicating substances.
Not to kill animals.
Not to use water containing living beings.
Not to destroy plants.
Not to associate with a samanera who develops erroneous views.
Not to use a robe without having applied one or more maroon, brown, or black marks to it (against vanity).
It is important to note that there was a real consideration for even the small animals that may have their home in water and an equal concern for plants. In fact, there was a rule prohibiting defecating, spiting or urinating on green plants.
Now a rule that will bring a smile to those who live in the modern world of the senses
Do not wash more than twice per month if the body is not dirty.
Finally, we have the rule that is perhaps the strangest of all:
Not to give food to naked ascetics or other persons clinging to erroneous views.
We can see then that the rules were finally accepted by the three types of Sangha,-- the Sangha of Buddhist Wanderers led by Buddha himself, the Sangha of Forest Dwellers, who required great dedication and self discipline since there was no readily available guide, and the Sangha of the Monasteries. All were expected to follow the Patimokkha rules.
Patimokkha Rules for Bhikkhunis
The part played by women in the original spread of Buddhism before their sanghas disappeared after the death of Buddha, cannot be brushed aside as of little importance.
Buddha originally rejected the inclusion of women in the sangha, when Maha Pajapati Gotami, his foster-mother, requested permission to establish the Order of Bhikkhunis. However, he at last yielded to the well reasoned appeal of Venerable Ananda, who pleaded correctly that gender should not stand in the way of attaining perfection. Thereupon Buddha finally agreed, but he laid down certain conditions. Among them, the following seem to show great subservience of the female to the male.
However old a bhikkhuni may be, she must pay respect even to a newly ordained monk.
A bhikkhuni must invite a bhikkhu every fortnight to fix the date of Sabbath and the day to listen to the exhortation (Ovada) of the monks.
A bhikkhuni must perform the ceremony of Confession, taking advice both from the bhikkhu Sangha and the bhikkhuni Sangha.
A bhikkhuni must not revile a bhikkhu.
A bhikkhuni must not admonish a bhikkhu.
Bhikkhunis were also given the general directions not to indulge in such acts which would give rise to Desire (Raga), Attachment (Sannoga), Acquisition (Acaya), or Dissatisfaction (Asamtutthu) in the bhikkhus. Great care was taken to keep the bhikkhus and bhikkhunis apart. The bhikkhunis were, for their own safety, not allowed to dwell in forests.
In addition, all ceremonies had to be taken twice, first from the bhikkhu and then from the bhikkhuni, for them to be recognized as complete.
Now all those rules relating to female practitioners who followed the homeless path were clearly a later addition, for originally there were no women in the Sangha. When finally they entered, thanks to the repeated petitioning of Ananda, there was a special set of rules immediately established that had not 227 precepts but 311.
This difference often leads to misunderstanding, because it was clear that Buddha did not want women to join the order. However, these additional rules were not set up as a deterrent.
The Aniyaya section is exclusively for monks. In this section, you will remember, there are two rules. One of them forbids the monks to stay alone with a female in a covered place and another forbids them to stay alone with a female in an open place beyond the hearing of others. This rule was introduced by Visakha, the leading female lay supporter of early Buddhism.
In Parajika, the first section of the patimokkha that is concerned with the most severe offences, it is the same for any monk or nun who has transgressed. All are "defeated" at the moment of committing that act. But there are four rules for monks and eight rules for nuns. Most of the extra rules that nuns have to observe in this section may be found also for monks in other sections. However, two of them are classified for bhikkhus under Sanghadisesa, which is less severe.
Having transgressed these Sanghadisesa rules, a bhikkhu sometimes had to go through 'manatta' period, a temporary self-expulsion from the Sangha, but for the bhikkhuni, for the same rule, now raised to a level of “defeat”, this was always considered sufficient for expulsion.
This fifth “defeat” rule for bhikkhunis is the equivalent of the bhikkhu rule not to touch a woman.
Should any bhikkhuni, lusting, consent to a lusting man's rubbing, rubbing up against, taking hold of, touching, or fondling (her) below the collar-bone and above the circle of the knees, she also is defeated and no longer in communion for being "one above the circle of the knees”.
The sixth is rule the same as the bhikkhu’s fault in the Pacittiya set of rules, but, as was mentioned, it is raised to the severity of a “defeat”.
Should any bhikkhuni, knowing that a bhikkhuni has fallen into an act of defeat, neither accuse her herself nor inform the group, then she also is defeated and no longer in communion for being "one who concealed a fault”.
The following rule, number seven, is related to the female tendency to follow a man with whom she has a bond, either physically or mentally, by leaving the sangha. Normally that bond arose from a state of being “attracted to” or “believing in” a man, a situation not too foreign in these times either.
Do not follow a bhikkhu suspended by a Community (of bhikkhus) acting in harmony, in line with the Dharma, in line with the Vinaya, in line with the teacher's instructions, and he is disrespectful, has not made amends, has broken off his friendship (bhikkhu alliance).
The eighth rule for Bhikkhunis is the equivalent of the two Sanghadisesa rules “not to have a sexually oriented conversation with a woman and not to propose sexual intercourse to a woman”. A third, concerning seduction on the bhikkhu’s part, is also included.
Should any bhikkhuni, lusting, consent to a lusting man's taking hold of her hand or touching the edge of her outer robe, or should she stand with him or converse with him or go to a rendezvous with him, or should she consent to his approaching her, or should she enter a hidden place with him, or should she dispose her body to him -- for the purpose of that unrighteous act -- then she also is defeated and no longer in communion for (the rule of) "eight grounds."
The three rules that were really only applicable to a bhikkhu are explained here at length:
Should any bhikkhu, overcome by lust, with altered mind, engage in bodily contact with a woman, or in holding her hand, holding a lock of her hair, or caressing any of her limbs, it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.
Should any bhikkhu, overcome by lust, with altered mind, address lewd words to a woman in the manner of young men to a young woman alluding to sexual intercourse, it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.
Should any bhikkhu, overcome by lust, with altered mind, speak in the presence of a woman in praise of ministering to his own sensuality thus: "This, sister, is the highest ministration, that of ministering to a virtuous, fine-natured follower of the celibate life such as myself with this act" -- alluding to sexual intercourse -- it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.
Yet strangely, we see that the bhikkhu rule against masturbation, which is the first of the bhikkhu’s Sanghadisesa rules, is reduced to a twofold Pacittiya offense for women.
Slapping (genital, even to the extent of consenting to a blow with a lotus-leaf) is to be confessed.
The use of a dildo is to be confessed.
The differences between the two sets of rules, and the placement seems to suggest that rather than being a simple reproduction and copy of the Bhikkhu rules they were a separate written set, probably actually written by Bhikkhunis themselves.
To see how subtle the Sanghadisesa and lower rules concerning sexual acts were, look at the following:
Should any bhikkhuni, lusting, having received staple or non-staple food from the hand of a lusting man, consume or chew it: this bhikkhuni, also, as soon as she has fallen into the first act of offence, is to be driven out (while judgment is being made on the case), and it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.
In the Patidesaniya section, there are many rules for bhikkhunis expanded from a single bhikkhu rule, most often founded upon lower infractions. This is one of the reasons for the bloated increment in bhikkhuni rules.
In the Pacittiya section, bhikkhunis follow 166 rules as compared to 92 for bhikkhus. There are 70 common rules shared by both Sanghas. Bhikkhus have a set of 22 rules exclusively for bhikkhus, and bhikkhunis have a set of 76 rules exclusively for bhikkhunis.
Within the 76 rules exclusively for bhikkhunis, there are many rules regarding the ordination requirements of bhikkhunis that the bhikkhus also have to follow, but for the bhikkhus, few are counted in the Patimokkha.
Perhaps because the rules were written when the order was new, a greater understanding was required to put the rules into practice. In case you were wondering, the bhikkhunis also only washed once every two weeks, unless of course there was a special reason for doing so, which needed justification.
We find also many rules related to feminine tendencies learned and conditioned before the adept joined the order, mostly concerned with personal vanity. However, many of these rules are tainted with the “concept” of seduction or a clinging to the female body identity.
Should any bhikkhuni wear a hip ornament, it is to be confessed. Should any bhikkhuni wear a women's ornament, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni bathe with perfumes and scents, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni bathe with scented sesame powder, it is to be confessed
Should any bhikkhuni have another bhikkhuni rub or massage her, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni have a probationer rub or massage her, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni have a female novice rub or massage her, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni have a woman householder rub or massage her, it is to be confessed.
This type of addition also increases the number of bhikkhuni rules.
It is not too difficult then to accept the idea that women might have a greater number of rules than men. However, the greatest problem conceptually for women today is to accept the apparent subservience to men. It is here that the Buddhist rules get their greatest criticism. These rules apply with respect to the behavior of the most illustrious bhikkhuni before the most recently ordained male novice.
In addition to Buddha’s first response, that “however old a bhikkhuni may be, she must pay respect (bowing included) even to a newly ordained monk” we find these rules.
Should any bhikkhuni sit down in front of a bhikkhu without asking permission, it is to be confessed.
Should any bhikkhuni ask a question (about the Sutras, Vinaya, or Abhidhamma) of a bhikkhu who has not given leave, it is to be confessed.
It is true that these are only minor rules, but they still exist even today. Why is this?
Exercise 7
Your task is to explain all the possible reasons you can imagine for the justification of the following rule. Do not to give food to naked ascetics or other persons clinging to erroneous views, or give reasons why the rule is not valid. Then choose between them.
Now let’s see if you can imagine why the lower place of women members of the women’s Sangha before the male Sangha is justified.
Next, talk about the incredible sexual focus of the rules for both men and women in the Sanghas. Is it justified?
Finally, it is clear that the Dharma aims at freedom and depends on self-reliance, wouldn't it be better to let the monks develop their own innate sense of right and wrong, unfettered by legalisms?
These are difficult questions to answer if you think deeply about them. Write three pages on these, because it is important that you understand them.