by T. W. Rhys Davids | 1881 | 137,074 words
The Cullavagga (part of the Vinaya collection) includes accounts of the First and Second Buddhist Councils as well as the establishment of the community of Buddhist nuns. The Cullavagga also elaborates on the etiquette and duties of Bhikkhus....
1. Now at that time the Blessed One was staying at Rājagaha, in the Bamboo Grove, in the Kalandaka Nivāpa. And at that time the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus, when bathing, used to rub their bodies—thighs, and arms, and breast, and back—against wood. The people were annoyed, murmured, and became indignant, saying, 'How can the Sakyaputtiya Samaṇas do so, like wrestlers, boxers, or shampooers?' The Bhikkhus heard the people so murmuring, &c.; and they told the matter to the Blessed One.
Then the Blessed One, on that occasion and in that connection, having convened a meeting of the Bhikkhu-saṃgha, asked the Bhikkhus: 'Is this true, O Bhikkhus, what they say, that the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus, when bathing, rub (&c., as before)?'
'It is true, Lord.' The Blessed Buddha rebuked them, saying, 'This is improper, O Bhikkhus (&c., as usual, see I, 1, 2, down to the end).' And when he had rebuked them, and had delivered a religious discourse, he addressed the Bhikkhus, and said: 'A Bhikkhu, when bathing, is not, O Bhikkhus, to rub his body against wood. Whosoever does so, shall be guilty of a dukkaṭa.'
2. Now at that time the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus: when bathing, used to rub their bodies—thighs, and arms, and breast, and back—against a pillar—against a wall (&c., as in last section, down to the end).
3. Now at that time the Chabbaggiya Bhikkhus used to bathe on an Aṭṭāna (a sort of shampooing stand). The people (&c., as before). The Bhikkhus (&c., as before). Then the Blessed One (&c., as before, down to) addressed the Bhikkhus, and said: 'You are not to bathe, O Bhikkhus, on an Aṭṭāna. Whosoever does so, shall be guilty of a dukkaṭa.'
[Paragraphs similar in every respect to the last follow as to
4. Now at that time a certain Bhikkhu had the scab, and he could not bathe with comfort without a Mallaka.
They told the matter to the Blessed One.
'I allow, O Bhikkhus, to a sick man the use of a Mallaka not (artificially) made.'
5. Now at that time a certain Bhikkhu who was weak through old age was not able to shampoo his own body.
'I allow you, O Bhikkhus, the use of an Ukkāsika.
Now at that time the Bhikkhus, (fearing to offend against these rules,) were afraid to shampoo one another.
'I allow you, O Bhikkhus, the ordinary mode of shampooing with the hand.'
Footnotes and references:
Ugghaṃseti. The simple verb occurs below, V, 9, 2, 4, X, 10, 2, and at Jātaka, vol. i, p. 190. It is the Sanskrit root gharsh.
On malla-muṭṭhikā Buddhaghosa merely says muṭṭhika-mallā. His note on gāma-poddavā (already given by H.O. at p. 3.15 of the edition to the text) says, 'town’s people given to adorning themselves by painting their skin' (on which compare below, V, 2, 5). But it is difficult to see how that fits in with the connection here.
So Buddhaghosa loc. cit.
A wooden instrument in the shape of a hand, which was firs; covered with chunam (fine lime), and then rubbed over the body. See Buddhaghosa's note at p. 315 of H.O.'s edition of the text.
Apparently a string of beads which was first covered with the chunam made from Kuruvindaka stone (a ruby-coloured stone), and then held at both ends and rubbed over the body. See Buddhaghosa's note loc. cit.
As Buddhaghosa, loc. cit., explains this by 'rubbing their bodies up against each other'(!), vigayha has here probably nothing to do with gāh, but is simply vigṛhya.
A kind of back-scratcher, made according to Buddhaghosa, loc. cit., by placing together, by the roots, hooks made of the teeth of crocodiles (makara-dantaka; see V, 11, 6; VI, 3, 2), which had previously been split. Such hooks of split crocodiles' teeth are mentioned in the text itself below, V, 9, 2; and pins or hooks made of raga's teeth at V, 9, 5, and VI, 3, 5 (nāga-dantaka), and V, It, 7 (nāga-danta).
Buddhaghosa, loc. cit., makes this phrase mean only 'made of teeth that had not been previously split.'
Buddhaghosa, loc. cit., explains this word by vattovaṭṭi; which is to us equally unintelligible.
Pudhu-pāṇikan ti hattha-parikammaṃ vuccati. Tasmā sabbesaṃ hatthena piṭṭhi-parikammaṃ kātuṃ vaṭṭati (B.).