Second recitation section

The monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī heard: “They say that Yasa, the son of Kākaṇḍakā, is willing to attend to this legal question, is looking about for a faction, and they say that he is acquiring a faction.” Then it occurred to the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī: “This legal question is hard and ^BD.5.419 troublesome. How could we acquire a faction through which we could be stronger in regard to this legal question?” Then it occurred to the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī: “This venerable Revata is one who has heard much, one to whom the tradition has been handed down, he is expert in dhamma, expert in discipline, expert in the headings; he is wise, experienced, clever; conscientious, scrupulous, desirous of training. If we could acquire the venerable Revata for the faction, thus could we be stronger in regard to this legal question.”

Then the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī prepared abundant requisites for recluses—bowls and robes and pieces of cloth to sit upon and needle-cases and waistbands and strainers and regulation water-pots. Then the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī, taking these requisites of recluses, went in a boat upstream^[1] to Sahājati; ^Vin.2.302 having disembarked from the boat, they participated in a meal at the root of a certain tree.

^Kd.22.2.2 Then as the venerable Sāḷha^[2] was meditating in private a reasoning arose in his mind thus: “Which now are the speakers of dhamma—the monks from the East or those from Pāvā?” Then as the venerable Sāḷha was considering dhamma and discipline it occurred to him: “The monks from the East are not speakers of dhamma; the monks of Pāvā are speakers of dhamma.” Then a certain devatā of the Pure Abodes, knowing by mind the reasoning in the mind of the venerable Sāḷha, as a strong man might stretch out his bent back arm or might bend back his outstretched arm, even so, vanishing from the devas of the Pure Abodes, did she appear before the venerable Sāḷha. Then that devatā spoke thus to the venerable Sāḷha: “It is right, honoured Sāḷha, the monks from the East are not speakers of dhamma, the monks of Pāvā are speakers of dhamma. Well then, revered Sāḷha, stand firm according to dhamma.”^[3]

“Both formerly and now I, devatā, have stood firm according to dhamma. Nevertheless I am not making known my views until I may be agreed upon in regard to this legal question.”

^{Kd.22.2.3 BD.5.420} Then those monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī, taking those requisites for recluses, approached the venerable Revata; having approached, they spoke thus to the venerable Revata: “Honoured sir, let the Order accept these requisites for recluses—bowls and robes and pieces of cloth to sit upon and needle-cases and waistbands and strainers and regulation water-pots.”

He said: “No, your reverences, I am complete as to the three robes” (for) he did not want to accept. Now at that time a monk named Uttara, of twenty years’ standing was the venerable Revata’s attendant. Then the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī approached the venerable Uttara; having approached, they spoke thus to the venerable Uttara: “Let the venerable Uttara accept these requisites for recluses—bowls and … regulation water-pots.”

He said: “No, your reverences, I am complete as to the three robes,” (for) he did not want to accept. They said: “Reverend Uttara, people used to bring requisites for recluses to the Lord. If the Lord accepted them, they were glad; but if the Lord did not accept them, they brought them to the venerable Ānanda, saying: ‘Honoured sir, let the elder accept these requisites for recluses, thus will this (gift) be as though accepted by the Lord.’ Let the venerable Uttara accept ^Vin.2.303 these requisites of recluses, thus will this (gift) be as though accepted by the elder.”

Then the venerable Uttara, being pressed by the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī, took one robe, saying: “Let the reverend ones tell me what they have need of.”

“Let the venerable Uttara say this much to the elder: ‘Honoured sir, let the elder say this much in the midst of the Order: Awakened Ones, Lords, arise in the Eastern districts, the monks from the East are speakers of dhamma, the monks of Pāvā are speakers of what is not dhamma’.”

“Very well, your reverences,” and the venerable Uttara, having answered the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī in assent, approached the venerable Revata; having approached, he spoke thus to the venerable Revata: “Honoured sir, let the elder say this much in the midst of the Order: Awakened Ones, Lords, arise in the Eastern districts, the monks from the East are speakers of dhamma, the monks of Pāvā are speakers of what is not dhamma.”

^BD.5.421 Saying: “You, monk, are inciting me to what is not dhamma,” the elder dismissed^[4] the venerable Uttara. Then the monks who were Vajjis of Vesālī spoke thus to the venerable Uttara: “What, reverend Uttara, did the elder say?”

“Evil has been done to us, your reverences. Saying, ‘You, monk, are inciting me to what is not dhamma,’ the elder dismissed me.”

“Are not you, your reverence, a senior of twenty years’ standing?”

“Yes, your reverences.”

“Then we shall take up guidance under (you as) teacher.”^[5]

---

^Kd.22.2.4 Then the Order assembled wishing to investigate that legal question. The venerable Revata informed the Order, saying: “Your reverences, let the Order listen to me. If we were to settle that legal question here, it might be that the monks who had taken it up originally might open it up for a further (formal) act.^[6] If it seems right to the Order, let the Order settle this legal question wherever this legal question arose.”

---

Then the monks who were elders went to Vesālī willing to investigate that legal question. Now at that time Sabbakāmin^[7] was the name of an elder of the Order, (the oldest) on earth;^[8] it was a hundred and twenty years since his ordination; he had shared the cell of the venerable Ānanda, and he was staying at Vesālī. Then the venerable Revata spoke thus to the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth: “I, your reverence, am going up to the dwelling-place where the venerable Sabbākamin is staying. Do you, having gone up early to the venerable Sabbākamin, ask him about these ten points.”

“Very well, honoured sir,” the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth, answered the venerable Revata ^BD.5.422 in assent. Then the venerable Revata went up to that dwelling place where the venerable Sabbakāmin was staying. A lodging was made ready for the venerable Sabbakāmin in an inner room, and one for the venerable Revata on the veranda of the inner room. Then the venerable Revata, thinking: “I This ^Vin.2.304 elder is old, but he is not lying down,” did not lie down to sleep. The venerable Sabbakāmin, thinking: “This incoming monk is tired, but he is not lying down,” did not lie down to sleep.

^Kd.22.2.5 Then at the end of the night towards dawn, the venerable Sabbakāmin spoke thus to the venerable Revata: “Because of what abiding do you, dear,^[9] abide now in the fullness thereof?”

“Because of abiding in loving-kindness, do I, honoured sir, abide now in the fullness thereof.”

“They say that you, dear, because of abiding in friendship^[10] now abide in the fullness thereof. This abiding in friendship, beloved, this is loving-kindness.”

“Formerly, honoured sir, when I was a householder loving-kindness was practised by me, and because of that abiding in loving-kindness I now abide in the fullness thereof, and moreover perfection was attained by me long ago. Honoured sir, because of what abiding does the elder now abide in the fullness thereof?”

“Because of abiding in (the concept of) emptiness^[11] do I, beloved, now abide in the fullness thereof.”

“They say that the elder, honoured sir, because of the abiding of great men^[12] now abides in the fullness thereof. This ^BD.5.423 abiding of great men, honoured sir, this is (the concept of) emptiness.”^[13]

“Formerly, beloved, when I was a householder emptiness was practised by me, and because of that abiding in emptiness I now abide in the fullness thereof, and moreover perfection was attained by me long ago.”

^Kd.22.2.6 Then^[14] this chance talk of the monks who were elders was interrupted, because the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth, arrived there. Then the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth, approached the venerable Sabbakāmin; having approached, having greeted the venerable Sabbakāmin, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth, spoke thus to the venerable Sabbakāmin:

“Honoured sir, these monks who are Vajjis of Vesālī are promulgating ten points: the practice concerning a horn for salt is allowable … gold and silver are allowable. Honoured sir, much dhamma, and discipline has been mastered^[15] by the elder at the feet^[16] of a preceptor. As, honoured sir, the elder was considering dhamma and discipline, what occurred to him? Who are the speakers of dhamma—the monks from the East or those of Pāvā?”

“By you too, your reverence, has much dhamma and discipline been mastered at the feet of a preceptor. As you, your reverence, were considering dhamma and discipline, what occurred to you? Who are the speakers of dhamma—the monks from the East or those of Pāvā?”

“As I, honoured sir, was considering dhamma and discipline, this occurred to me: ‘the monks from the East are speakers of what is not dhamma, the monks of Pāvā are speakers of dhamma.’ Nevertheless I am not making known my views until I am agreed upon in regard to this legal question.”

“As I too, your reverence, was considering dhamma and discipline, this occurred to me: ^Vin.2.305 the monks from the East are speakers of what is not dhamma, the monks of Pāvā are ^BD.5.424 speakers of dhamma. Nevertheless I am not making known my views until I am agreed upon in regard to this legal question.”

---

^Kd.22.2.7 Then the Order assembled, willing to investigate that legal question. But while they were investigating that legal question both endless disputations arose and of not one speech was the meaning clear. Then the venerable Revata informed the Order, saying: “Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. While we were investigating this legal question both endless disputations arose and of not one speech was the meaning clear. If it seems right to the Order, the Order may settle this legal question by means of a referendum.”^[17] He selected four monks from the East, four monks from Pāvā—of the Eastern monks the venerable Sabbakāmin and the venerable Sāḷha and the venerable Khujjasobhita^[18] and the venerable Vāsabhagāmika; of the monks from Pāvā the venerable Revata and the venerable Sambhūta, the wearer of coarse hempen cloth, and the venerable Yasa, the son of Kākaṇḍakā, and the venerable Sumana.^[19] Then the venerable Revata informed the Order, saying:

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. While we were investigating this legal question both endless disputations arose and of not one speech was the meaning clear. If it seems right to the Order, the Order may agree upon the four monks from the East and the four monks from Pāvā to settle this legal question by means of a referendum. This is the motion. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. While we were investigating this legal question … was the meaning clear. The Order is agreeing upon the four monks from the East and the four monks from Pāvā to settle this legal question by means of a referendum. If the agreement upon the four monks from the East and the four monks from Pāvā to settle this legal question by means of a referendum is pleasing to the venerable ones, they should be silent; he to whom it is not pleasing should speak. The four monks from the East ^BD.5.425 and the four monks from Pāvā are agreed upon by the Order to settle this legal question by means of a referendum. It is pleasing to the Order, therefore it is silent. Thus do I understand this.”

---

Now at that time Ajita was the name of a monk of ten years’ standing; he was a reciter of the Pātimokkha for the Order. Then the Order further agreed upon the venerable Ajita as appointer of seats for the monks who were elders.^[20] Then it occurred to the monks who were elders: “Now where should we settle this legal question?” ^Vin.2.306 Then it occurred to the monks who were elders: “This Vālika monastery^[21] is pleasing, with little noise, with little disturbance. Suppose that we should settle this legal question in Vālika monastery?” Then the monks who were elders went to Vālika monastery, willing to investigate that legal question.

^Kd.22.2.8 Then the venerable Revata informed the Order, saying: “Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. If it seems right to the Order, I can ask the venerable Sabbakāmin about discipline.” Then the venerable Sabbakāmin informed the Order, saying: “Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. If it seems right to the Order, I, questioned about discipline by the venerable Revata, can answer.” Then the venerable Revata spoke thus to the venerable Sabbakāmin:

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning a horn for salt allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is this practice concerning a horn for salt?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable to carry about salt in a horn, thinking: ‘I will enjoy whatever may be unsalted’?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“In Sāvatthī, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[22]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation for eating what has been stored.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This first point, investigated by the Order, this is a point that is against dhamma, ^BD.5.426 against discipline, not of the Teacher’s instruction. This is the first (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning two finger-breadths allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is this practice concerning two finger-breadths?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable to eat a meal at the wrong time if the shadow has passed beyond two finger-breadths?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“At Rājagaha, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[23]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation for eating at the wrong time.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This second point … This is the second (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning ‘among the villages’ allowable?”

What, your reverence, is this practice concerning ‘among the villages’?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable, thinking: ‘I will go now among the villages,’ having eaten, being satisfied, to eat a meal that is not left over?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“At Sāvatthī, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[24]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation for eating what is not left over.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This third point … This is the third (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning residences allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is this practice concerning residences?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable for several residences belonging to the same boundary to carry out various Observances?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

^BD.5.427 “In Rājagaha, in what is connected with the Observance.”^[25]

“What offence does one fall into?”

An offence of wrong-doing for going beyond discipline.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This fourth point … This is the fourth (voting-) ticket that I cast.”

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning assent allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is the practice concerning assent?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable for an incomplete Order to carry out a (formal) act, thinking: ‘We will advise monks who arrive’?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.” ^Vin.2.307

“Where was it objected to?”

“In a matter of discipline on things pertaining to (the monks of) Campā.”^[26]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of wrong-doing for going beyond discipline.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This fifth point … This is the fifth (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning what is customary allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is this practice concerning what is customary?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable, thinking: ‘This is what is habitually done by my preceptor, this is what is habitually done by my teacher,’ to conduct oneself according to that?”

“Your reverence, the practice concerning what is customary is sometimes allowable, sometimes not allowable.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This sixth point … This is the sixth (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is the practice concerning unchurned buttermilk allowable?”

“What, your reverence, is the practice concerning unchurned buttermilk?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable having eaten, being satisfied, to drink whatever is milk that is not left over but which has ^BD.5.428 passed the stage of being milk (although) it has not arrived at the stage of being curds?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“At Sāvatthī, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[27]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation for eating what was not left over.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This seventh point … This is the seventh (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is it allowable to drink unfermented toddy?”

“What, your reverence, is this unfermented toddy?”

“Honoured sir, is it allowable to drink whatever is fermented liquor, but which has not fermented and has not arrived at the stage of being strong drink?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“At Kosambī, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[28]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation for drinking fermented liquor and spirits.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This eighth point … This is the eighth (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, is a piece of cloth to sit upon that has no border allowable?”

“Your reverence, it is not allowable.”

“Where was it objected to?”

“At Sāvatthī, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[29]

“What offence does one fall into?”

“An offence of expiation involving cutting down.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This ninth point … This is the ninth (voting-) ticket that I cast.

“Honoured sir, are gold and silver allowable?”

“Your reverence, they are not allowable.”

“Where were they objected to?”

“At Rājagaha, in the Suttavibhaṅga.”^[30]

“What offence does one fall into?”

^BD.5.429 “An offence of expiation for accepting gold and silver.”

“Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. This tenth point, investigated by the Order, this is a matter that is against dhamma, against discipline, not of the Teacher’s instruction. This is the tenth (voting-) ticket that I cast. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. These ten points, investigated by the Order, these are matters that are against dhamma, against discipline, not of the Teacher’s instruction.”

“This legal question, your reverence, is concluded, and being settled is well settled. Nevertheless you, your reverence, may also question me in the midst of the Order^[31] on these ten points in order to convince these monks.”^[32]

So the venerable Revata also questioned the venerable Sabbakāmin in the midst of the Order on these ten points, and the venerable Sabbakāmin, being questioned, answered.

^Kd.22.2.9 Now because^[33] seven hundred monks—not one less and not one more—were at this chanting of the discipline, this chanting of the discipline is called “that of the Seven Hundred.”^[34]

Told is the Twelfth Section: that on the Seven Hundred. ^Vin.2.308

Told is the Lesser Division.^{[41] Vin.2.309}

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

ujjaviṃsu.

[2]:

Ānanda’s pupil, Vin-a.34–Vin-a.35.

[3]:

Or, according to the rule, yathādhammo tathā tiṭṭhāhi. Cf. Mahāvaṃsa iv.29 dhamme tiṭṭha, stand firm in dhamma.

[4]:

paṇāmesi. Cf. Kd.1.27.2 where this word is used of the formal dismissal by a preceptor of the one who shares his cell. See also Mahāvaṃsa iv.30.

[5]:

garunissaya. Garu no doubt = guru. On nissaya see Kd.1.73.

[6]:

See Bu-Pc.63.

[7]:

Psalms of the Bretheren p.226, n.1 suggests that the Sabbakāma of the Theragāthā is the same as the Sabbakāmin of Vinaya Dictionary of Pali Proper Names identifies the two. Called Sabbakāmin at Vin-a.i.34. He took a vow to purify the teaching of some Buddha in a birth during the time of Padumuttara Buddha.

[8]:

pathavyā saṅghathero.

[9]:

bhummi, a term of affection, says Vin-a.1298.

[10]:

kullaka. Vin-a.1298 explains by uttāna, stretched; clear. Kullaka is probably derived from kaulya = Pali kulla, belonging to the family, and possibly meaning that loving-kindness has been extended to others and that they have been suffused with his loving-kindness of mind.

[11]:

suññatāvihāra. Cf. MN.iii.104, MN.iii.294. MN-a.v.105 explains as abiding in the attainment of the fruit of emptiness—or phala-samāpatti may mean “sustained fruition”; therefore “as abiding in the sustained fruition of emptiness.” On suññatā see especially Buddhist Psychological Ethics, p.91, n.2; Atthasālinī 221–Atthasālinī 225; Kv.iii.2. At Atthasālinī 221 it is said that suññatā is applied to the purification formula, that it is a name of the transcendental Way, and that when one sees the sankhāras as “void” of self this insight is called suññatā. “Voidness” or “Emptiness” is the usual translation of suññatā, and must remain until something better is found.

[12]:

mahāpurisavihāra. Cf. MN.iii.294. MN-a.v.106 explains as the abiding of great men: buddhas, individual buddhas, tathāgatas and great disciples.

[13]:

This phrase occurs at MN.iii.294.

[14]:

carahi, as at Vin.2.292.

[15]:

As at Kd.21.1.2.

[16]:

mūle.

[17]:

Cf. Kd.14.14.19 where the proceeding to be used in such an emergency as arose and is recorded in subsequent sentence above, is laid down.

[18]:

Probably not to be identified with the thera of the same name at Thag.234, as perhaps suggested at Mahāvaṃsa iv.57.

[19]:

Names given at Vin-a.i.34–Vin-a.i.35; but there classified by reason of their being cell-sharers of Ānanda or Anuruddha. Cf. Mahāvaṃsa iv.47–Mahāvaṃsa iv.49.

[20]:

Elders were allowed to sit down while the Pātimokkha was being recited.

[21]:

See also Mahāvaṃsa iv.50; but Dīpavaṃsa v.29 says the Ten Points were settled at the Gabled Hall (Vesālī).

[22]:

Bu-Pc.38.

[23]:

Bu-Pc.37.

[24]:

Bu-Pc.35.

[25]:

Kd.2.8.3. Uposathasaṃyutta; saṃyutta here being used, as noted at Vinaya Texts iii.410, n.2 for khandhaka, section.

[26]:

Kd.9.3.5. Campeyyake vinayavatthusmiṃ. Vin-a.1299 here explains that this matter of discipline is handed down in the Campeyyakkhandhaka.

[27]:

Bu-Pc.35.

[28]:

Bu-Pc.51.

[29]:

Bu-Pc.89.

[30]:

Bu-NP.18

[31]:

Not only, that is, before the special committee.

[32]:

bhikkhūnaṃ saññattiyā; cf. Kd.14.14.26, Kd.17.4.1; also Kd.17.3.14.

[33]:

Quoted at Vin-a.i.34.

[34]:

Cf. Kd.21.1.16, the Five Hundred. This second recital, that of the Seven Hundred, is also called the Recital of Yasatthera at AN-a.ii.10 = MN-a.iv.114.

[35]:

Oldenberg’s text and Siamese and Sinhalese editions read puna rūpañ ca. Oldenberg suggests (Vin.2.330) antepurañ ca (see Kd.22.1.4), but I think it may be an abbreviation for jātarūparajata, the subject of Kd.22.1.4, Kd.22.1.5.

[36]:

Oldenberg’s text: Sahamjāti ca, majjhesi, assosi; Sinhalese edition: Aggaḷaṃ Sahajātaṃ ca assosi; Siamese edition: as Oldenberg’s text but reading Sahajātiṃ. Oldenberg suggests (Vin.2.330) ajjhesi (in place of majjhesi). The verb in Kd.22.1.10 is ajjhesissati.

[37]:

Oldenberg’s text: Sahamjāti ca, majjhesi, assosi; Sinhalese edition: Aggaḷaṃ Sahajātaṃ ca assosi; Siamese edition: as Oldenberg’s text but reading Sahajātiṃ. Oldenberg suggests (Vin.2.330) ajjhesi (in place of majjhesi). The verb in Kd.22.1.10 is ajjhesissati.

[38]:

Oldenberg’s text: Sahamjāti ca, majjhesi, assosi; Sinhalese edition: Aggaḷam Sahajātaṃ ca assosi; Siamese edition: as Oldenberg’s text but reading Sahajātiṃ. Oldenberg suggests (Vin.2.330) ajjhesi (in place of majjhesi). The verb in Kd.22.1.10 is ajjhesissati.

[39]:

Oldenberg’s text: sa ujji. Sinhalese edition ujjavī.

[40]:

Oldenberg’s text: dūraho pi udāmassa / dārukaṃ, saṅgho; Sinhalese and Siamese editions: raho’ si upanām’ āyam garusaṅgho.

[41]:

Here ends Oldenberg’s Vol. II.