Sacred-Texts Buddhism SBE 11 Index Previous Next
THE PÂRÂGIKA RULES1.
Here these four Rules, concerning those acts which bring about Defeat2, come into recitation.
1. Whatsoever Bhikkhu who has taken upon p. 4 himself the Bhikkhus' system of self-training and rule of life, and has not thereafter withdrawn from the training, or declared his weakness, shall have carnal knowledge of any one, down even to an animal, he has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion1.
2. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall take, from village or from wood, anything not given--what men call 'theft2'--in such manner of taking as kings would seize the thief for, and slay, or bind, or banish him, saying, 'Thou art a thief, thou art stupid, thou art a fool, thou art dishonest,'--the Bhikkhu who in that manner takes the thing not given, he, too, has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion.
3. Whatsoever Bhikkhu shall knowingly deprive of life a human being, or shall seek out an assassin against a human being, or shall utter the praises of death, or incite another to self-destruction, saying, 'Ho! my friend! what good do you get from this sinful, wretched life? death is better to thee than life!'--if, so thinking, and with such an aim, he, by various argument, utter the praises of death or incite another to self-destruction--he, too, is fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion3.
4. Whatsoever Bhikkhu, without being clearly conscious of extraordinary qualities, shall give out regarding himself that insight into the knowledge of the noble ones has been accomplished, saying, 'Thus do I know,' 'Thus do I perceive:' and at some subsequent time whether on being pressed, or without being pressed, he, feeling guilty, shall be desirous of being cleansed from his fault, and shall say, 'Brethren! when I knew not, I said that I knew; when I saw not, I said that I saw--telling a fruitless falsehood;' then, unless he so spake through undue confidence he, too, has fallen into defeat, he is no longer in communion1.
Venerable Sirs, the four Conditions of Defeat have been recited, of which when a Bhikkhu has fallen into one or other, he is no longer allowed to be in co-residence with the Bhikkhus. As before, so afterwards, he is defeated, he is not in communion2.
In respect of them I ask the venerable ones, 'Are you pure in this matter?'
A second time I ask, 'Are you pure in this matter?'
A third time I ask, 'Are you pure in this matter?'
The venerable ones are pure herein. Therefore do they keep silence. Thus I understand.
Here endeth the recitation of the Pârâgikas.
Next: Pâtimokkha - Samghâdisesâ Dhammâ
1 The whole of the following portion of the Pâtimokkha, together with the ancient commentary upon it, is contained in the first book of the Vibhanga, also called the Pârâgikam.
Dickson translates throughout Dhammâ by 'offences.' He is no doubt right in taking the word, not in its ordinary sense of condition or quality, but in a more strictly technical, legal, sense. 'Offences' is however not the right direction in which to limit the general sense. Dhammâ must here be 'Rules,' in accordance with the passages quoted in our Introduction, pp. xxviii-xxx.
2 Childers (sub voce) follows Burnouf (Introduction, &c., p. 301) in deriving the word Pârâgika from AG with parâ prefixed, taking that compound in the sense of 'to expel.' Dickson's translation 'deadly sin' rests upon the same basis. The Buddhist commentators refer the word to the passive of GI with parâ. prefixed, in the sense of 'to suffer defeat.' So the Samanta-Pâsâ.dikâ: Pârâgiko hoîti parâgito parâgayam âpanno. Now the root AG belongs to the Vedic dialect only, and is not met with in any Buddhist expressions, and even in the Vedas it does not occur with parâ prefixed. The Buddhist forms of speech have quite different and settled terms with which to convey the idea of expulsion. On the other hand, there was a considerable group of words in use in the Buddhist community with which pârâgika stands in close connection: parâgi, 'to suffer defeat;' parâgita, 'defeated;' parâgaya, 'defeat.' We cannot therefore but think that the native commentators are right in associating pârâgika also with this group, and that the word really means 'involving defeat.' This may mean specifically defeat in the struggle with Mâra the Evil One; but more probably defeat in the struggle against evil generally, defeat in the effort to accomplish the object for which the Bhikkhu entered the Order, in the effort to reach the 'supreme goal' of Arahatship.
1 'Declared his weakness' refers to the permission (on the ground that it was better to leave the Order than to burn) for a Bhikkhu to acknowledge himself unfit for the discipline, and throw off the robe. 'Withdrawn from the training' is the formal expression for thus throwing off the Robes. See below, Mahâvagga II, 22, 3.
On sikkhâsâgîvam, which is by no means only 'Rules of the Order,' see the Vibhanga (Pâr. I, 8, 1).
2 The Vibhanga (Pâr. II, 3) takes theyya-samkhâtam as meaning 'with dishonest intent.'
3 The deviations here from Mr, Dickson's version will, we hope, justify themselves. There is no commentary on hâraka, though the Vibhanga (Pâr. III, 3, 1) explains the different kinds of Sattha. Pâpaka must be 'sinful,' not merely 'poor;' the suggestion is: 'by destroying your life you will escape from the possibility of sinning.'
1 The extraordinary qualities (literally, 'superhuman qualities') are defined to be the Vimokkhas, Samâdhis, the Samâpattis, the Ñânadassana, the having experienced the Noble Path, and having realised the Fruit thereof; that is to say, Arahatship and the highest forms of spiritual emotion and intelligence which can accompany Arahatship. They are in fact, therefore, superhuman only in the sense of extraordinary; as it is precisely human beings, and only human beings, who were supposed to be able to acquire these qualities.
Uddhakka, 'Self-righteousness,' is also the last but one of the ten Samyoganas, or 'Fetters,' which the Arahat has to break.
2 The sentences which follow in the text, but are not here translated, and in which it is declared that all the following portions of the Pâtimokkha have already been heard, do not occur in the Vibhanga. They are not part of the Pâtimokkha; but only the form to be used, when the Pâtimokkha cannot be recited in full, and all the remaining Rules are to be omitted. According to Mahâvagga II, 15, 1, 4 this abridged recital may be used in certain cases of danger.
On Yathâ pure tatha pakkhâ there is no explanation in the Old Commentary. The phrase probably means that the Bhikkhu is irrevocably defeated. He must remain for ever in the condition (of permanent exclusion from the Order) into which he has brought himself.