Majjhima Nikāya
III. Upari Paṇṇāsa
1. Devadaha Vagga

The Middle Length Sayings
III. The Final Fifty Discourses
1. The Devadaha Division

Sutta 104

Sāmagāma Suttaɱ

Translated from the Pali by I.B. Horner, O.B.E., M.A.
Associate of Newham College, Cambridge
First Published in 1954

Copyright The Pali Text Society
Commercial Rights Reserved

For details see Terms of Use.

[29]

[1][chlm][ntbb][upal] THUS have I heard:

At one time the Lord was staying among the Sakyans at Samagāma.^[1]

At that time Nātaputta the Jain had [30] recently died at Pāvā.

On his death the Jains broke up;
splitting into two,
striving, quarrelling, disputing,
they lived wounding one another with the weapons of the tongue, saying:

‘You^[2] do not understand this Dhamma and discipline,
I understand this Dhamma and discipline.

How can you understand this Dhamma and discipline?

You are one who fares wrongly,
I am one who fares aright.

There is sense in what I say,
no sense in what you say;
you say at the end what should be said at the beginning
and say at the beginning what should be said at the end.

What you pondered^[3] so long^[4] is reversed;
your words are refuted;^[5]
you are shown up.

Get away, think out the argument,^[6]
or unravel it if you can.’^[7]

It seems that death verily stalked among the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils.^[8]

Even the white-clad householders who were followers of Nātaputta the Jain were disgusted, disaffected, put off^[9] by the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils
in that the Dhamma and discipline were badly set forth,
badly expounded,
not leading onwards,
not conducing to peace,
expounded by one who was not fully self-awakened,
the foundations wrecked,
without an arbiter.

Then Cunda the novice,^[10]
having kept the rains at Pāvā,
approached the venerable Ānanda at Sāmagāma;
having approached and greeted the venerable Ānanda,
he sat down at a respectful distance.

As he was sitting down at a respectful distance,
Cunda the novice spoke thus to the venerable Ānanda:

“Revered sir, Nātaputta the Jain has recently died at Pāvā.

On his death the Jains broke up;
splitting into two,
striving, quarrelling, disputing,
they lived wounding one another with the weapons of the tongue, saying:

‘You do not understand this Dhamma and discipline,
I understand this Dhamma and discipline.

How can you understand this Dhamma and discipline?

You are one who fares wrongly,
I am one who fares aright.

There is sense in what I say,
no sense in what you say;
you say at the end what should be said at the beginning
and say at the beginning what should be said at the end.

What you pondered so long is reversed;
your words are refuted;
you are shown up.

Get away, think out the argument,
or unravel it if you can.’

It seems that death verily stalked among the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils.

Even the white-clad householders who were followers of Nātaputta the Jain were disgusted, disaffected, put off by the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils
in that the Dhamma and discipline were badly set forth,
badly expounded,
not leading onwards,
not conducing to peace,
expounded by one who was not fully self-awakened,
the foundations wrecked,
without an arbiter.

When this had been said, the venerable Ānanda spoke [31] thus to Cunda the novice:

“Certainly this, reverend Cunda,
is a subject on which to see the Lord.

Come, reverend Cunda,
we will approach the Lord;
having approached,
we will tell this matter to the Lord.”

“Yes, revered sir,”
Cunda the novice answered the venerable Ānanda in assent.

Then the venerable Ānanda
and Cunda the novice
approached the Lord;
having approached and greeted the Lord,
they sat down at a respectful distance.

As he was sitting down at a respectful distance the venerable Ānanda spoke thus to the Lord:

“This novice Cunda, revered sir, speaks thus:

“Revered sir, Nātaputta the Jain has recently died at Pāvā.

On his death the Jains broke up;
splitting into two,
striving, quarrelling, disputing,
they lived wounding one another with the weapons of the tongue, saying:

‘You do not understand this Dhamma and discipline,
I understand this Dhamma and discipline.

How can you understand this Dhamma and discipline?

You are one who fares wrongly,
I am one who fares aright.

There is sense in what I say,
no sense in what you say;
you say at the end what should be said at the beginning
and say at the beginning what should be said at the end.

What you pondered so long is reversed;
your words are refuted;
you are shown up.

Get away, think out the argument,
or unravel it if you can.’

It seems that death verily stalked among the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils.

Even the white-clad householders who were followers of Nātaputta the Jain were disgusted, disaffected, put off by the Jains who were Nātaputta’s pupils
in that the Dhamma and discipline were badly set forth,
badly expounded,
not leading onwards,
not conducing to peace,
expounded by one who was not fully self-awakened,
the foundations wrecked,
without an arbiter.

It occurs to me, revered sir,
that we should take care lest,
after the Lord’s passing,
dispute arises in the Order –
dispute for the woe of the manyfolk,
for the grief of the manyfolk,
for the misfortune of the populace,
for the woe,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.”^[11]

“What do you think about this, Ānanda?

Those things taught by me to you
out of super-knowledge,^[12]
that is to say
the four applications of mindfulness,
the four right efforts,
the four bases of psychic power,
the five controlling faculties,
the five powers,
the seven links in awakening,
the ariyan eightfold Way –
do you, Ānanda, see even two monks
professing differently about these things?”^[13]

“Revered sir, those things taught to me by the Lord
out of his super-knowledge,
that is to say
the four applications of mindfulness,
the four right efforts,
the four bases of psychic power,
the five controlling faculties,
the five powers,
the seven links in awakening,
the ariyan eightfold Way –
I do not see even two monks
professing differently about these things.

Yet, revered sir, those people who dwell dependent on the Lord
might, after the Lord’s passing,
stir up dispute in the Order
concerning either the mode of living
or the Obligations^[14] –
this dispute would be for the woe of the manyfolk,
for the grief of the manyfolk,
for the misfortune of the populace,
for the sorrow of devas and mankind.”

[32] “That dispute which concerns either the mode of living or the Obligations is a trifle, Ānanda.

But, Ānanda, if there should arise in the Order a dispute
either concerning the Way
or concerning the course,
this dispute would be for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

These six are the sources of dispute,^[15] Ānanda.

What six?

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is angry and bears ill-will.

Ānanda, whatever monk is angry and bears ill-will,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is harsh,
unmerciful.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is envious and grudging.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is crafty and deceitful.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is of evil desires and wrong views.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is infected with worldliness.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

■

As to this, Ānanda, a monk is obstinate and stubborn.

Ānanda, whatever monk is harsh,
unmerciful,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
he lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
he lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and he does not complete the training.

Ānanda, whatever monk lives without deference and respect towards the Teacher,
lives without deference and respect towards Dhamma,
lives without deference and respect towards the Order,
and does not complete the training,
he stirs up dispute in the Order,
and that dispute is for the woe of the manyfolk,
the grief of the manyfolk,
the misfortune of the populace,
the sorrow of devas and mankind.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive a source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should strive therein
to get rid of precisely that evil source of disputes.

If you, Ānanda, should perceive no source of dispute like this among yourselves
or among others,
you, Ānanda, should therein follow a course
so that there be no overflowing into the future
of precisely that evil source of disputes.

There is thus the getting rid
of that evil source [33]of disputes,
there is thus no overflowing into the future
of that evil source of disputes.

These, Ānanda, are the six sources of dispute.

These four, Ānanda, are the legal questions.^[16]

What four?

A legal question arising out of disputes,
a legal question arising out of censure,
a legal question arising out of offences,
a legal question arising out of obligations.

These, Ānanda, are the four legal questions.

But these seven (rules^[17]) which are for deciding legal questions
are for the deciding and the settlement of legal questions arising from time to time:
a verdict in the presence of^[18] may be given,
a verdict of innocence may be given,
a verdict of past insanity may be given,
it may be carried out on (his) acknowledgement,
(there is) the decision of the majority,
the decision for specific depravity,
the covering up (as) with grass.

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict in the presence of’?^[19]

As to this, Ānanda, monks dispute, saying:

‘It is Dhamma‘
or
‘It is not Dhamma‘
or
‘It is discipline’
or
‘It is not discipline.’^[20]

Ānanda, one and all of these monks should assemble in a complete Order;
having assembled,
what belongs to Dhamma^[21] should be threshed out;
having threshed out what belongs to Dhamma
according to how it corresponds here,
so should that legal question be settled.

Thus, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict in the presence of’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the verdict in the presence of.

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘decision of the majority’?^[22]

If these monks, Ānanda, are not able to settle that legal question in this residence,
then, Ānanda, these monks must go to a residence where there are more monks,^[23]
and there one and all must assemble in a complete Order;
having assembled,
what belongs to Dhamma must be threshed out;
having threshed out what belongs to Dhamma
according to how it corresponds here,
so should that legal question be settled.

Thus, Ānanda, is
‘the decision of the majority’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the decision of the majority.

■

[34] And what, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict of innocence’?^[24]

As to this, Ānanda, monks reprove a monk for a serious offence like this:
one involving defeat^[25]
or one bordering on defeat, saying:

‘Does the venerable one remember having fallen into a serious offence like this:
one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat?

If he says:

‘I, your reverences, do not remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat,’

to that monk, Ānanda, a verdict of innocence should bo given.

Thus, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict of innocence’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the verdict of innocence.

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict of past insanity’?^[26]

As to this, Ānanda, monks reprove a monk for a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.’

If he says:

‘I, your reverences, do not remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat,’

then, denying this,
he is pressed (by the monks), saying:

‘Please, venerable one,
do find out properly
whether you remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.’

If he says:

‘I, your reverences, had become crazy
and had lost my mental balance;^[27]
while I was crazy,
much was perpetrated and said by me
that was not worthy of a recluse.

I do not remember that.

That was done by me while I was insane,’

to that monk, Ānanda, a verdict of past insanity should be given.

Thus, Ānanda, is the
‘verdict of past insanity’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the verdict of past insanity.

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘carrying out (of a formal act) on the acknowledgement of (a monk)’?^[28]

As to this, Ānanda, a monk
whether reproved or not reproved
remembers an offence,
reveals it,
discloses it.

That monk, Ānanda,
having approached an older monk,
having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder,
having saluted the older monk’s feet,
having sat down on his haunches,
raising his joined palms,
should speak thus to him:

‘I, revered sir, have fallen into such and such an offence which I confess.’

He speaks thus:

‘Do you see it?’

‘I see it.’

‘Will you be restrained in the future?’

I will be restrained.’

Thus, Ānanda, is the ‘carrying out [35] (of a formal act) on the acknowledgement of a monk’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the carrying out (of a formal act) on the acknowledgement (of a monk).

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘decision for specific depravity’?^[29]

As to this, Ānanda, monks reprove a monk for a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat,
saying:

‘Does the venerable one remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat?’

If he says:

‘I, your reverences, do not remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering or defeat,’

then, denying it,
he is pressed (by the monks) who say:

‘Please, venerable one,
do find out properly
whether you remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.’

If he says:

‘I, your reverences,
do not remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat;
but I remember, your reverences,
having fallen into such and such a slight offence,’

then, denying this,
he is pressed (by the monks) who say:

‘Please, venerable one,
do find out properly
if you remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.’

If he speaks thus:

‘Certainly, your reverences,
although I have not been asked,
I will acknowledge having fallen into this slight offence;
then how could I,
since I have been asked,
not acknowledge having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat?’

Someone^[30] says to him:

‘If you, your reverence,
when not asked,
will not acknowledge having fallen into this slight offence,
how will you,
when asked whether you have fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat,
acknowledge it?

Please, venerable one, do find out properly whether you remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.’

He then says:

‘I do remember, your reverence, having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat.

When I said:

‘I do not remember having fallen into a serious offence like this,
either one involving defeat
or one bordering on defeat –
I was speaking thus for fun,
I spoke in jest.’

Thus, Ānanda, is the
‘decision for specific depravity’;
but here there is the settle- [36] ment of a particular type of legal question, namely by the decision for specific depravity.

■

And what, Ānanda, is the
‘covering up (as) with grass’?^[31]

As to this, Ānanda, while monks live striving,
quarrelling,
disputing,
much is perpetrated and spoken
that is not worthy of a recluse.

Ānanda, one and all of these monks
should gather together in a complete Order;
having gathered together,
an experienced monk from one of the factions of monks,
rising from his seat,
having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder,
having joined his palms in salutation,
should inform the Order,
saying:

‘Revered sirs, let the Order listen to me.

While we were striving,
quarrelling,
disputing,
much was perpetrated and spoken
that was not worthy of a recluse.

If it seems right to the Order,
I would confess whatever is the offence of the venerable ones
as well as whatever is my own offence,
both for the sake of the venerable ones
and for my own sake,
unless it is a heavy sin,^[32]
unless it is connected with the laity,^[33]
(so as to obtain) a covering up (as) with grass.’

After that, an experienced monk from the other faction of monks,
rising from his seat,
having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder,
having joined his palms in salutation,
should inform the Order,
saying:

‘Revered sirs, let the Order listen to me.

While we were striving,
quarrelling,
disputing,
much was perpetrated and spoken
that was not worthy of a recluse.

If it seems right to the Order,
I would confess whatever is the offence of the venerable ones
as well as whatever is my own offence,
both for the sake of the venerable ones
and for my own sake,
unless it is a heavy sin,
unless it is connected with the laity,
(so as to obtain) a covering up (as) with grass.’

Thus, Ānanda, is the
‘covering up (as) with grass’;
but here there is the settlement of a particular type of legal question,
namely by the covering up (as) with grass.

Ānanda, these six things are to be remembered;^[34]
making for affection,
making for respect,
they conduce to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

What six?

Herein, Ānanda, a monk should offer his fellow Brahma-farers a friendly act of body
both in public and in private.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

■

And again, Ānanda, a monk should offer his fellow Brahma-farers a friendly act of speech
both in public and in private.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

■

And again, Ānanda, a monk should offer his fellow Brahma-farers a friendly act of thought
both in public and in private.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

■

And again, Ānanda, whatever are those lawful acquisitions,
lawfully acquired,
if they be even but what is put into the begging bowl –
a monk should be one to enjoy sharing such acquisitions,
to enjoy them in common with his virtuous fellow [37] Brahma-farcrs.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

■

And again, Ānanda, whatever are those moral habits that are faultless,
without flaw,
spotless,
without blemish,
freeing,
praised by wise men,
untarnished,
conducive to concentration –
a monk should dwell united in moral habits such as these
with his fellow Brahma-farcrs,
both in public and in private.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

■

And again, Ānanda, whatever view is ariyan,
leading onwards,
leading him who acts according to it
to the complete destruction of anguish –
a monk should dwell united in such a view as this
with his fellow Brahma-farers,
both in public and in private.

This is a thing to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduces to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

Ānanda, these are the six things to be remembered,
making for affection,
making for respect,
which conduce to concord,
to lack of contention,
to harmony
and unity.

If you, Ānanda, undertaking these six things to be remembered
should practise them,
would you, Ānanda, see any way of speech,
subtle or gross,
that you could not endure?^[35]

“No, revered sir.”

“Wherefore, Ānanda, undertaking these six things to be remembered,
practise them;
for a long time it will be for your welfare and happiness.”

Thus spoke the Lord.

Delighted, the venerable Ānanda rejoiced in what the Lord had said.

Discourse at Samagaina:
The Fourth

^[1] The introductory part of this Sta. is the same as D. iii 117-118 (Pāsādika Suttanta). The strifes following Nātaputta’s death are also repeated at D. iii 210. Another Discourse given by Gotama while he was staying by the lotus-pool near Sāmagāma is recorded at A. iii. 309.

^[2] Cf. M. ii. 3, D. i. 8, and see notes at Dial. i. 14-15.

^[3] aviciṇṇa. Most contexts have v.l. adhiciṇṇa.

^[4] MA. iv. 33 gives cirakālasevanavasena.

^[5] Cf. Vin. i. 60, M. ii. 122, S. i. 160.

^[6] cara vādappamokkhāya. MA. iv. 33 says, “Taking a bag with food, and approaching this (person) and that, go along seeking further for thinking out the argument,” vādappamokkhatthāya. But DA. i. 91 says, “Go away so as to free yourself from anger, train yourself having gone here and there.” Cf. cara at Vin. iv. 139, and also see Dial. i. 15, n. 3.

^[7] “Free yourself from the speech that has been refuted by me,” MA. iv. 33.

^[8] Nātaputtiyesu, among Nāta’s sons, explained at MA. iv. 33 as Nātaputta’s antevāsika, his (resident) pupils.

^[9] paṭivāṇarūpa, no longer respectful.

^[10] samaṇuddesa defined by sāmaṇera at Vin. iv. 139. Cunda was, according to MA. iv. 36, Sāriputta’s younger brother, called “the novice” before he was ordained. Thag. 141-142 ascribes verses to Mahā-Cunda, also said to be Sāriputta’s younger brother; see Pss. Breath. p. 119, n. 1.

^[11] Last phrase also at Vin. ii. 89, D. iii. 246, S. ii. 255, A. i. 19.

^[12] As above, p. 25.

^[13] MA. iv. 37 honourably points out that the dispute between two monks (recorded in the Kosambakkhandhaka, Vin. i. 352 ff.) grew to such great proportions that the people split into two factions.

^[14] adhipātimokkha. MA. iv. 38 gives rather an elaborate explanation: a monk who claims a state of further-men falls into a Pārājika offence (No. IV); beginning with this, six rules of training are laid down in the Parivāra; with the exception of these, all the remaining rules of training are called adhipātimokkha.

^[15] Cf. Vin. ii. 89 with the following, and see B.D. v. 118; also D. iii. 246.

^[16] adhikaraṇa, or adjudication. The four adhikaraṇa are explained at Vin. ii. 88. See also Vin. iii. 164, iv. 126, 238.

^[17] dhammā at Vin. iv. 207, but Dhamma as “rule” is more or less Vinaya in usage. Cf. also D. iii. 254, A. iv. 144.

^[18] On these ways of settling legal questions, see Vin. iv. 207 and B.D. iii. 153 f. for notes and further references.

^[19] See Vin. ii. 93.

^[20] Cf. Vin. ii. 88.

^[21] dhammanetti. P.E.D. says netti = niyāma.

^[22] Here the usual order is altered. On yebhuyyasikā see Vin. ii. 93 ff.

^[23] Even two or three more, MA. iv. 48.

^[24] sativinaya. See Vin. i. 325, ii. 79 f., 99 f.; and G.S. i. 85, n. 7.

^[25] A pārājika offence.

^[26] amūḷhavinaya. See Vin. ii. 80 f. 100, and cf. Vin. i. 123.

^[27] The words here are slightly different from those at Vin. ii. 81. Cf. S. i. 126.

^[28] patiññālakaraṇa. See Vin. i. 325, ii. 83.

^[29] tassapāpiyyasikā. See Vin. ii. 85 f., A. iv. 347.

^[30] so. Chalmers: “the spokesman,” Neumann: “jener.”

^[31] tiṇavatthāraka. Cf. Vin. ii. 86 f.

^[32] MA. iv. 50, a pārājika or saṅghādisesa offence.

^[33] MA. iv. 50 says that this refers to a monk reviling or insulting householders.

^[34] As at M. i. 322.

^[35] For the last sentence, cf. M. i. 129.