Chapter 40
arise.
‘Dispersing in harmony’
may also mean rising up together eagerly to take responsibility
to carry out the resolutions made at the assembly such as participation in Sangha acts
concerning
simÈs
or volunteering for chastising an errant
bhikkhu
.
‘Attending to the affairs of the Sangha in harmony’
means a readiness, on the part of
every
bhikkhu
, to live as a community, never being selfish. For instance, if a guest
bhikkhu
arrives, he should be given a warm welcome instead of being directed to another
monastery, or making undue inquiries about his identity. This is particularly important in
respect of a sick
bhikkhu
needing shelter and attention. Finding
bhikkhu
requisites, such
as alms-bowl, robes, medicine, for the needy is also an act of harmonious discharge of
bhikkhu
obligation. Where there is a dearth of learned
bhikkhus
at a certain place and
there is the danger of the PÈli text or the correct meaning thereof going to extinction, the
bhikkhus
of that place should find a competent
bhikkhu
to teach the text and interpret the
meaning thereof, and he should be looked after properly, by way of the four
bhikkhu
requisites.
iii) In the third factor of non-decline, prescribing a
bhikkhu
undertaking which
is not in accordance with the Doctrine amounts to prescribing something
that had not been prescribed by the Buddha.
An example of such undertaking: There is a certain provision in the Vinaya rules called
NisÊdÈnasantata
rule or
PurÈÓasantata
rule in the PÈrÈjika PÈli, 2-Kosiya Vagga (the fifth
rule at page 336, Myanmar translation). When the Buddha was staying in SÈvatthi at the
Jetavana Monastery, He said to the
bhikkhus
: ‚
Bhikkhus
, I wish to remain in seclusion for
three months. No
bhikkhu
shall come to Me except the one who brings My meals.‛ The
bhikkhus
then made an undertaking among themselves that any
bhikkhu
who went to the
Buddha, other than the one bringing food for Him, should be liable to
pÈcittiya
offence,
and breach of this offence should be conveyed to the Sangha. Now this is overdoing the
Buddha's orders. These
bhikkhus
had no right to classify breach of the Buddha's words on
that particular occasion as one of
pÈcittiya
offence, nor any right to declare (by their own
undertaking) the breach a cause for confession. Such undertaking is against the Dhamma-
Vinaya, and amounts to prescribing something which the Buddha had not prescribed.
Disregarding what the Buddha prescribed is best illustrated by the case of VajjÊputtaka
bhikkhus
of VesÈlÊ when they tried to introduce ten unlawful rules of their liking, in
flagrant disobedience to the Buddha's Vinaya rules. That event took place on the
hundredth year of the Buddha's passing away. (Ref: Vinaya C|Äaovagga PÈli
,
Satta
Satikakkhandhaka).
During the time of the Buddha, there were Bhikkhus Assaji and Punabbasuka who
intentionally infringed minor rules of the Discipline. However trifling the offence might
be, non-observance of what the Buddha prescribed is nothing but non-observance.
In the story of Puranasantata, the Arahat Upasena, (brother of SÈriputta) refrained from
making an (novel) undertaking as a
bhikkhu
rule of conduct. This is a case of not
prescribing rules that had not been prescribed by the Buddha.
The Venerable Yasa, who headed the Second Council, taught the Dhamma-Vinaya to the
bhikkhus
. This is an instance of not disregarding the training rules prescribed by the
Buddha.
On the eve of the First Council, a lively discussion took place among the Sangha whether
minor offences should be dropped from the code of Vinaya because the Buddha, when
His passing away was near, gave this option to the Sangha after He was gone. The
Venerable Kassapa, head of the First Council, made a formal proposal at the Sangha
congregation to uphold all minor offences as prescribed by the Buddha. This is a case of
observing well the training rules prescribed by the Buddha.
iv) With reference to this factor of non-decline,
bhikkhu
-elders would give
spiritual guidance only to those
bhikkhus
who are courteous and reverential