Vinaya Pitaka (3): Khandhaka

by I. B. Horner | 2014 | 386,194 words | ISBN-13: 9781921842160

The English translation of the Khandhaka: the second book of the Pali Vinaya Pitaka, one of the three major ‘baskets’ of Therevada canonical literature. It is a collection of various narratives. The English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka (third part, khandhaka) contains many Pali original words, but transliterated using a system similar to the I...

The story of one gone forth when old

Kd.6.37.1 Then the Lord having stayed in Kusinārā for as long as he found suiting, set out on tour for Ātumā[1] together with the large Order of monks, with the twelve hundred and fifty monks. Now at that time a certain (person), formerly a barber,[2] who had gone forth when old, was living in Ātumā. He had two boys, sweet-voiced,[3] intelligent,[4] skilled, accomplished in their BD.4.345 craft,[5] in the barber’s profession (as learnt from) their own teachers.[6]

Kd.6.37.2 Then that (man) who had gone forth when old[7] heard: “They say that the Lord is coming to Ātumā together with a large Order of monks, with twelve hundred and fifty monks”. Then that (man) who had gone forth when old spoke thus to his boys: “It is said, my dears,[8] that the Lord is coming to Ātumā together with a large Order of monks, with twelve hundred and fifty monks. Do you go, my dears, and taking a barber’s equipment,[9] tour from house to house for nāti measures of offerings,[10] and collect salt and oil and husked rice and solid food, and when the Lord comes we will make him a conjey drink.”

Kd.6.37.3 “Very well, father,” and these boys, having answered him who had gone forth when old in assent, taking a barber’s equipment toured from house to house for nāti measures of offerings, collecting salt and oil and husked rice and solid food. Those people who, having seen these sweet-voiced, intelligent boys, but had not wanted to have (offerings) made, even they had them made, and having had them made, also gave much. So these boys collected much salt and oil and husked rice and solid food.

Kd.6.37.4 Then the Lord, walking on tour, in due course arrived at Ātumā. The Lord stayed there in Ātumā in the House with BD.4.346 the threshing-floor.[11] Then he who had gone forth when old having had a quantity of conjey prepared towards the end of that night, brought it to the Lord, saying: “Lord, may the Lord accept conjey from me.” Vin.1.250 Now Truth-finders (sometimes) ask knowing,[12] and knowing (sometimes) do not ask; they ask, knowing the right time (to ask), and they do not ask, knowing the right time (when not to ask). Truthfinders ask about what belongs to the goal, not about what does not belong to the goal; there is bridge-breaking for Truth-finders in whatever does not belong to the goal. Awakened ones, Lords, question monks concerning two matters, either: “Shall we preach dhamma?” or, “Shall we lay down a rule of training for disciples?” Then the Lord spoke thus to him who had gone forth when old:

“Where is this conjey from, monk?” Then he who had gone forth when old told this matter to the Lord.

Kd.6.37.5 The awakened one, the Lord rebuked him, saying: “It is not suitable, foolish man, it is not fitting, it is not becoming, it is not worthy of a recluse, it is not allowable, it is not to be done. For how can you, foolish man, one who has gone forth, cause (others) to take what is not allowable? It is not, foolish man, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …” And having rebuked him, having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks, saying:

Monks, one who has gone forth should not make (others) take what is not allowable. Whoever should make (others) take (these things), there is an offence of wrong-doing. Nor, monks, should one who was formerly a barber carry about a barber’s equipment. Whoever should carry it about, there is an offence of wrong-doing.


Kd.6.38.1 Then the Lord, having stayed at Ātumā for as long as he found suiting, set out on tour for Sāvatthī. In due course, walking on tour, he arrived at Sāvatthī. The Lord stayed there at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s BD.4.347 monastery. Now at that time there was a great quantity of solid food that was fruit[13] at Sāvatthī. Then it occurred to monks: “Now, what solid food that is fruit is allowed by the Lord, what is not allowed?” They told this matter to the Lord. He said: “I allow, monks, all solid food that is fruit.


Kd.6.39.1 Now at that time seeds belonging to an Order were sown on ground belonging to an individual, and seeds belonging to an individual were sown on ground belonging to an Order. They told this matter to the Lord. He said: “When, monks, seeds belonging to an Order are sown on ground belonging to an individual, having given back a portion,[14] (the rest) may be made use of. When seeds belonging to an individual are sown on ground belonging to an Order, having given back a portion, (the rest) may be made use of.”

Footnotes and references:

1.

Mentioned also at DN.ii.131.

2.

vuḍḍhapabbajito nahāpitapubbo, identified by Buddhaghosa at DN-a.599 with the Subhadda mentioned at DN.ii.162 who felt relief at the Lord’s death. In neither the Dīgha Nikāya passage nor above is he called āyasmā, the venerable, and Dictionary of Pali Proper Names says that at the time of the Buddha’s visit to Ātumā he had been a sāmaṇera. DN-a.599f. refers to the above Vinaya episode at some length.

3.

mañjuka. I see no reason to object, as does Vinaya Texts ii.140, n.2, to Buddhaghosa’s exegesis as madhuravacana, sweet-voiced.

4.

paṭibhāneyyaka, explained at Vin-a.1103 as “endowed with paṭibhāna in their own craft”. Here again Vinaya Texts ii.140, n.3 objects to Buddhaghosa’s exegesis, and translates as “skilled in discourse”. Cf. AN.i.25, paṭibhāneyyakānaṃ (of Radha), translated at GS.i.21 as “of impromptu speakers”. Childers, besides giving “understanding, intelligence, wisdom; readiness or confidence of speech, promptitude, wit”, refers to Ja.i.60 and translates paṭibhāna as “skill”, a rendering followed by Rhys Davids in Buddhist Birth Stories, p.79. The whole Vinaya context above suggests the meaning of “persuasive”.

5.

At Vin.4.6 the barber’s is placed among the “low crafts”.

6.

sake ācariyake. Cf. sakaṃ ācariyakaṃ uggahetvā at DN.ii.104. DN-a.ii.556 explains as “the speech of their own teachers”, attano ācariyavādaṃ.

7.

Vinaya Texts ii.140 now and henceforth calls him “dotard” on the grounds that “it is impossible to repeat this long phrase” (translated at Vinaya Texts ii.140 in the first instance as “a certain man who had entered the Order in his old age”), and that vuḍḍhapabbajita “connotes contempt, and even censure”, thus justifying the translation “dotard”. At AN.iii.78 there are two not entirely disparate lists of things hard to attain by one gone forth in old age. But it would be against the whole spirit of Buddhism to censure or penalise anyone for not having entered the Order when young.

8.

tāta, not tātā, although more than one person is being addressed, as pointed out at Vinaya Texts ii.141, n.1. But tātā at DN-a.599 where this passage is quoted.

9.

khurabhaṇḍa. That this is not “a barbers’ lad” (Vinaya Texts ii.141) is made clear at Vin.2.134: “I allow a razor(khura), a whetstone (khurasilā), a razor-case (khurasipāṭikā), a piece of felt (namataka), a whole barber’s equipment (sabba khurabhaṇḍa).” It is a shaving set, the outfit for a razor.

10.

nāḷiyāvāpakena. Vin-a.1103 says nāḷiyā ca āvāpakena ca, and adds that āvapaka is also wherever they offer (āvapanti), deposit what is received. On nāti see BD.1.12, n.2; BD.1.103, n.1.

11.

Reading here and in Siamese edition bhūsāgāra. Sinhalese edition and DN.ii.131 read bhusāgāra, as also Dictionary of Pali Proper Names under Bhusāgāra, but bhūsāgāra under Ātumā; cf. bhusāgāra at AN.i.241. DN-a.ii.569, AN-a.ii.355 explain by khala-sālā, hall with a threshing-floor, which I follow. Bhūsāgāra would mean the House with the Ornaments.

12.

As at Vin.1.59, Vin.1.158, Vin.3.6, etc.

13.

phalakhādaniya. Cf. above, Kd.6.17.8, Kd.6.17.9; Kd.6.21.1, and cf. piṭṭhakhādaniya and note at above Kd.6.36.6.

14.

bhāgaṃ datvā. There is no justification for Vinaya Texts ii.143 “half the produce, O bhikkhus, you may have”. Vin-a.1103 says “having given a portion that is a tenth. This, they say, is an old practice in India, therefore having made ten shares, one share should be given to the owners of the ground”. So presumably if the Order is the owner it gets one share.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: