The Mar Ngok Summer Teachings 2022: Day 3
Poṣadha
Karmapa opened the teaching session with an introduction to the meaning and practice of the early sangha’s rituals. According to the Japanese scholar Umada Gyokei, at the completion of the rains retreat and before sangha members set out on their travels, they performed the ritual of ‘pravāraṇa’. As mentioned earlier, the designated confession time was every two weeks during the ‘poṣadha’ (Tib.: ‘sojong’) ritual. However, speaking of offences that violate the precepts was disallowed during the rains retreat so the time of ‘pravāraṇa’ was allocated for each of the monastics to reveal their violations and downfalls without withholding. A punishment corresponding to the severity of the downfall would follow.
Kaṭhina
The Indian scholar S. R. Goyal states that, following ‘pravāraṇa’, the monks would perform the ceremony of spreading the ‘kaṭhina’ (a frame for sewing robes used in Buddha’s time). The lay community would offer fabrics, and the robes would be sewn and distributed among the bhikshu sangha.
The Tibetan “Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya” has a complex ritual: at the time of “spreading the ‘kaṭhina’” (Tib.: ‘sa kyang’ = “stable spreading”) the sangha members would make three new dharma robes and spread them on a wooden ‘kaṭhina’ frame the size of a large dharma robe (Skt.: ‘saṃghāṭī’). Two groups of four bhikshus would stand guard while others were allowed to go on their travels for five months. During those five months there were no downfalls regarding food, and no matter how many offerings the sangha received during that time, they could collect a share if they returned in time to perform the transference of the blessing to the new robes. Those who did not sit for the rains retreat had no right to participate in the ‘kaṭhina’ ritual and it followed that they had no share of the wealth accumulated during the spreading and were awarded no five-month relaxation or vacation.
In Tibet, during the later spread of the teachings, Damko Khyimpa Yeshe Lama did practice the ‘kaṭhina ritual’. However, some bad omens appeared at that time. Consequently, the ‘kaṭhina’ ritual was discontinued and it disappeared from the tradition. Therefore, even though some scriptures say that the ‘kaṭhina’ ritual was never adopted, we can assume that it was practiced in Tibet only at the beginning of the later transmission of teachings.
The Origin of Monasteries
S. R. Goyal proposes that monasteries (‘vihāras’) began to take shape because the sangha’s numbers increased and the tradition of the rains retreat developed. Some Japanese scholars say that a considerable length of time elapsed from a purely nomadic lifestyle to being settled in one, fixed location. Although this transition happened gradually, it did occur during the period of the original monastic community (likely during the lifetime of the Buddha) and indicates its development.
The vinaya rules evolved progressively: as incidents would occur, deriving from them – the rules would be made. Then, as the vinaya regulations became complete, the sangha no longer needed to wander from place to place but could become a monastic community settled in one place, they explain.
These scholars also say that the places mentioned earlier (‘ārāma’ = “pleasant groves/parks/gardens” and ‘āvāsa’ = “dwelling places”) were merely venues for sangha’s temporary retreat. Wishing for the sangha to come back and teach, the owners of those places offered them and that lead to a gradual formation of grounds for religious gatherings: for listening, contemplation and meditation. A place like that was known as ‘saṅghārāma’ (Tib.: ‘chelang’) which means “sangha grove”. The Japanese scholar Umada Gyokei remarks that this term has been used from ancient times to this day and should be understood to mean a “monastery”.
According to some Japanese scholars, the sponsors of those pleasant groves not only offered them to the sangha, but also took on the responsibility of maintenance. With time, the travelling sangha members settled in those places, and they became more permanent centres for listening, contemplation and meditation. Likewise, the development of the ceremonies which required the sangha to gather (like ‘poṣadha’, the rains retreat, ‘pravāraṇa’, and ‘kaṭhina’) engendered a need for permanent, more practical, structures and they began to construct assembly halls (Pāli: ‘upaṭṭhāna-sālā’) for the sangha to gather in. This is how the form of the monasteries (Pāli: ‘leṇa’) developed.
There were five different types of ‘leṇa’:
- ‘vihāra’ (Pāli): originally meant a “lodging” but because it was the place where monks stayed, it came to mean “the lodging place of monks” i.e. “temple”,
- ‘aḍḍhayoga’ (Pāli): unclear because there are different explanations,
- ‘pāsāda’ (Pāli): an elaborate building, resembling a royal palace,
- ‘hammiya’ (Pāli): a multi-storied building and
- ‘guhā’ (Pāli): a cave, both natural and excavated (sometimes assembly halls were actually excavated caves).
As a result, both built structures and excavated caves were adopted as permanent residences. The initial function of ‘vihāras’ was merely the individual bhikshu’s lodging during the rains retreat. As the custom of the sangha’s settling became the new norm, ‘vihāra’ changed into a type of place for general ceremonies, eventually transforming into a temple for the general sangha’s communal usage (Pāli: ‘saṃghavihāra’) with added cells (Pāli: ‘pariveṇa’) as dwellings for individual monastics. The temples were built in varying sizes and the larger ones became organized complexes with different buildings.
“Cave dwellings” were both man-made caves and natural ones initially used during the Buddha’s time as places for the monks’ dhyana meditation. The Vindhya mountain range forms a natural boundary which separates Northern and Southern India. To its north, the structures were predominantly made of brick and rock walls, while in the South, at elevated localities, most were caves carved into cliffs. Thus, all the facilities necessary for a functioning monastery were complete.
Karmapa displayed photographs of the ruins of the ‘vihāras’ at Thotlakonda and Shalvan . Though perhaps not from the time of the Buddha himself, they were probably built during the 1st/2nd century C.E.
In addition, he presented photographs of the famous caves of Ajantā and Ellorā, elaborately carved into a cliff – quite different from Tibetan natural caves used for practices, he commented.
In summary, according to Umada Gyokei, the sangha was originally an autonomous group who stayed in the presence of the Buddha. As a rule, the monastics were wandering freely and the fact that they resided in numerous, unspecified localities made it difficult to establish their exact numbers. At the beginning, there was no vinaya and they would examine their own situation in terms of right and wrong and in terms of practices.
Following the Buddha’s instructions, Maudgalyayana, Shariputra, Mahakashyapa, and other great disciples began to guide larger groups. They each had several hundred students whom they nurtured and to whom they conferred instructions. As their individual monastic communities grew, they gradually settled in various places and the practice of gathering as a single assembly no longer happened. Thus, it became important to have systematic rules and regulations that would carry over different localities. The bhikshus held meetings in quite a democratic fashion and the workings of those sangha meetings were called “rituals of actions”. Consequently, systematic rules and rituals became more and more important so the vinaya began to take form.
Even at such events as the Buddha’s passing into parinirvana, many sangha members from distant places were unable to attend the Buddha’s cremation. The number of Buddhist monks was vast, however, an exact count seems impossible to ascertain. His Holiness compared some estimates and explained that after the Buddha reached enlightenment, within a year or two, the sangha numbered around 1250. After that, many people continued to enter the sangha; there is no definite count but it is likely there were 1500 to 2000.
The Classification of the Sangha
In the “Four Agamas” there is the sutra called the “Sutra on the Results of the Spiritual Way” which mentions the heads and teachers of the sangha (‘saṃghin’) of the six non-Buddhist schools, all of whom possessed vast knowledge, good conduct and great renown. After a considerably long time had passed since they had taken their vows, they became elders with excellent experience and founders of specific schools, so everyone held them in a very high regard. The assemblies which came under the umbrella of their spiritual guidance were called a sangha or a ‘gaṇa’. As explained yesterday, the words sangha and ‘gaṇa’ were commonly used in society in social and political contexts, and the religious groups were merely a slightly different form of group.
Thus, the teachers of each school had their own assemblies of wandering disciples. At the time when Buddhism first began to spread, Buddhist monastics were called “monastics of the son of the Shakyas” (Pāli: ‘sakyaputtiya samaṇa’) in order to differentiate them from other monastics. And the Buddha’s teachings were called the “dharma of the son of the Shakyas” (Pāli: ‘sakyaputtiya dhamma’). What does this show? The Buddhists was just one of many wandering groups of various schools of the time.
In any case, when it first appeared, Buddhism wasn’t a separate system in a rigid sense. That happened later. They didn’t identify themselves as “Buddhists” and they had no “us-and-them” bias in terms of schools.
The Buddha was called “the completely perfect buddha” but his aim was not to start a separate school or religion. Having gone through many hardships in order to attain realization, his primary aim was to share his experience with others as a teacher.
Furthermore, when the Buddha passed into parinirvana, he only said, “You must be your own protector,” and “In the future, when I am no longer present, you should go for refuge to the Dharma.” He did not say: “In the future, you must uphold our so-called Buddhism.” And he passed on without appointing anyone as the leader of teachings.
The Six Communities or Seven Communities of the Sangha
What does the sangha community consist of? First, the word ‘monastic’ primarily refers to bhikshus and bhikshunis, along with the supporting strata of novice monks, novice nuns, as well as nuns-in-training. ‘Nuns-in-training’ (Pāli: ‘śikṣamāṇā’) are nuns who, after becoming novices, spend two years on probation before it’s permissible for them to be ordained as bhikshunis. These five sets of monastics comprising the sangha are also called “the five Buddhist communities”. In Pāli texts they are called “the five internal communities”.
But in its looser sense, the word ‘sangha’ actually denotes seven groups as it implies the inclusion of lay students who have gone for refuge and taken the five precepts, namely: male lay practitioners (‘upāsakas’) and female lay practitioners (‘upāsikās’). Additionally, there are those who take the one-day fasting vows (‘aṣṭāṅga-śīla’).
Lay people with the five precepts who also took the additional precepts to permanently give up wearing scent, garlands, not sit on high seats and so forth (‘upavasta’ = “dwelling near”).To elaborate somewhat on this last group of practitioners, HH Karmapa pointed to the following sources:
- In the Tibetan tradition, they are called “venerable lay practitioners” (Tib.: ‘gomay genyen’).
- In Abhayakāra’s “Ornament of the Sage’s Thought”, it says: “The venerable lay vows are to take only the sojong vows for the rest of one’s life, and this is an oral instruction.”
- In Lama Dorje Denpa’s “Commentary on the Eight Lay Vows”, he writes that taking the eight vows of the fast for the rest of one’s life is taking the vows of a venerable lay practitioner.
- Acharya Daṃṣṭrasena’s explanation corresponds with Lama Dorje Denpa’s
- Dīpaṃkāra Śrī Jñāna (Atisha) said that in the Sarvāstivāda school, there are no venerable lay practitioners, but in the Mahāsāṃghika school, there is the ‘puṇya śrī’ (Lama Dorje Denpa). “Venerable” (Tib.: ‘gomey’) means “monastic”. Though the fasting vows are lay vows, they wear monastic-style robes as a factor in keeping vows stably, so they are called venerable However, they are venerable only nominally.
There was an Indian master Candragomin, Candrakīrti’s contemporary (according to Tibetan tradition), and he was known to be a venerable lay practitioner – someone who wears the monastic robes and keeps the precepts but is, in actuality, a householder. This type of practitioner was probably what Atisha was referring to when he said that there is no venerable lay practitioner in Sarvāstivāda but there is Mahāsāṃghika school.
When the following are put together: bhikshus and bhikshunis, male and female lay precept holders, novice monks and nuns, and nuns in training – the entire group may be called “the seven communities of the sangha”. The sangha can also be divided by gender into the male (bhikshu) and female (bhikshuni) sanghas. Or it can be divided in terms of whether they have attained liberation or not. The former may be called the “venerable or honourable sangha” and the latter the “conventional sangha”.
The Visible Sangha
The above classification of the sangha distinguishes according to the individuals’ levels of practice, in terms of which vows they were holding or according to gender. However, there is another way of dividing the sangha into groups: the “local/visible sangha” and the “sangha of the four directions”.
The late Japanese scholar Akira Hirakawa who was one of the leading contemporary researchers of Buddhism, did extensive studies on vinaya. He primarily used Pāli as the basis of his research even though he was very skilled in Sanskrit and Chinese, and took some interest in Tibetan as well. In particular, he wrote an acclaimed history of Indian Buddhism where he states that the term ‘local sangha’ means “a sangha actually present here”. If four or more bhikshus gather in a single location, they may be called “a local sangha”. Thus, the number of sangha members clearly must be no less than four bhikshus or four bhikshunis in order to be called a “sangha”. The bounds of the place where the sangha resides is a ‘sīmā’ or boundary.
These days we talk in terms of monasteries: we ask each other about our parent monasteries. The absence of monasteries in early Buddhism—or at least not properly formed ones—meant sangha members did not identify with them. To take Bodhgaya as an example: there’d be five or six bhikshus around the Mahabodhi temple and five or six bhikshus around Tergar monastery. The bhikshus who stayed in the area of the Mahabodhi would make a boundary (Pāli: ‘sīmā’) around their area, and the bhikshus of Tergar would do the same. If there was a bhikshu within that boundary, they were required to attend all sangha meetings enclosed by that boundary. The workings of those sangha meetings were called “rituals of action”, and the chairperson of the meeting was called the “master of the action”. As a basic principle, all members were required to gather for the sangha meetings, but for important gatherings such as ‘poṣadha’, rains retreat, the appointment of stewards, and so forth, attendance was a definite requirement.
Supposing all members were required to attend every meeting of the sangha, it would interfere with their practice, thus, a smaller number of sangha members would designate a sectional boundary in which to gather and perform the rituals of action.
- If four or more bhikshus were gathered, it was permissible to perform ordinary rituals of action.
- On the occasion of the ‘pravāraṇa’ ceremony observance, there had to be five or more bhikshus.
- For the performance of a full ordination, there must be ten bhikshus (consisting of three masters—a khenpo, master of the action, private questioner and seven witnesses). An exception was made, in remote places, where five bhikshus (three masters and two witnesses) may perform full ordination.
- If a bhikshu committed a downfall with remainder, then twenty bhikshus were required to gather to perform the ritual of confession and purification.
The local sangha was an autonomous unit and, as such, it was allowed to make internal regulations of conduct that accorded with the vinaya.
They could make their own rules if a new situation occurred. It autonomously conducted rituals such as ‘poṣadha’, rains retreat, ‘pravāraṇa’ and so on. Further, communal property such as the sangha’s residences, the temple, and so forth could be used in an equitable fashion; food and clothing offered to the sangha were split equitably among the bhikshus and they lived a lifestyle in harmony with dharma.
The Sangha of the Four Directions
The vinaya discipline is the basis of the monastic code, and the local sanghas were not allowed to change it at will. The vinaya discipline was superior to the local sanghas’ decision making. The local sanghas were permitted to use the communal property of the sangha, such as temples, but they could not sell them. For these two reasons, must there be a sangha that is above the local sangha? This is what is called the “sangha of the four directions”. The ‘sangha of the four directions’ should be understood as “abstract sangha” – all the sanghas of all time without distinction of time or place. In terms of location, its extent is limitless (not just in India or Nepal, not just in this world), and in terms of time, it is continuous.
Since the vinaya is made for the people and not the other way around, the universal sangha is superior to the vinaya rules so the sangha of four directions could probably change the vinaya rules. That said, since the universal sangha extends to other worlds even, changing the vinaya rules would be extremely difficult.
The Bhikshuni Sangha
At first, the Buddha did not wish to allow women to go forth and enter the sangha, but his aunt Prajapati, second of Shuddhodana’s two main wives (his first wife was Mahadevi, Buddha’s mother), who had raised him since he was a baby, requested him repeatedly. It was only when Ananda supported her requests, that the Buddha consented and eight ancillary rules for women who wished to go forth and enter the sangha were introduced. These are called the “eight heavy dharmas” (Skt: ‘aṣṭha gurudharma’, Pāli: ‘aṭṭha garudhamma’), namely:
- Even if she has been ordained for a hundred years, a bhikshuni must pay homage to new bhikshus. No matter what a bhikshu’s seniority is, bhikshunis must pay homage to all of them, regardless of seniority.
- Bhikshunis may not conduct the rains retreat in a place where there are no bhikshus nearby.
- During the ‘poṣadha’ ceremonies every fifteen days, the bhikshunis must invite a bhikshu from the bhikshu sangha to read the “Pratimoksha Sutra” and give instructions
- ‘Pravāraṇa’ must be performed with a dual sangha (i.e., both bhikshu and bhikshuni sanghas)
- It is inappropriate to mock bhikshus.
- Full bhikshuni ordination must be bestowed by both bhikshu and bhikshuni sanghas.
- Admonishing bhikshus for downfalls is not allowed.
- If a bhikshuni commits a downfall with remainder, she must undergo penance before both sanghas.
Generally, in the Vibhajyavāda and Sarvāstivāda traditions, the eight heavy dharmas are asserted to have been made by the Buddha, and they are also said to be the root precepts of going forth. Conversely, in the Mahāsāṃghika vinaya, it is said that bhikshunis must keep the eight heavy dharmas – but they are not precepts.
The great Chinese modern master Yin Shun doubts whether the eight heavy dharmas were made by the Buddha. His principal argument is that their formation differs to the usual genesis of the rules i.e. Buddha founding them on incidents as they occurred. Though it is possible that the rationale for them did occur during the Buddha’s lifetime, women’s going forth led to a dispute between Mahakashyapa and Ananda, so it is plausible that they were instigated on the suggestion of the traditionalist, rigid bhikshus, he says.
There is a story related to this. Once, while the Buddha was staying in Shravasti in a monastery donated by Anathapindada, Mahakashyapa was staying at the older monastery of Deer Call in Shravasti. One morning, he put on his robes, took his alms bowl, and went to beg for alms in Shravasti. The bhikshuni Sthūlanandā (quite possibly the most problematic character in bhikshuni sangha) also got up in the morning, put on her robes, took her alms bowl, and went to beg for alms. She didn’t like Mahakashyapa at all, for whatever reason. When she saw Mahakashyapa, she thought: “I’ll do something to make this fool upset.” She walked quickly and, arriving first at the house where Mahakashyapa was going to beg for alms, sneaked inside and hid behind the doorway. When he rang the bells on his staff to announce his presence, she said: “Noble one, there’s no food now. Go away.” So Mahakashyapa left and went to another house. Sthūlanandā continued to go ahead of him, repeatedly doing this. After this had happened several times, Mahakashyapa began to be suspicious. He was an arhat so he had clairvoyance. He entered samadhi. and saw that this was Sthūlanandā’s doing. He said to her: “Sister (the proper form of address to a bhikshuni by a bhikshu), it is not your fault. It is venerable Ananda’s fault. He asked Buddha to ordain women. It is his fault that they became bhikshunis.” This situation led the Buddha to make a rule that bhikshunis may not beg for alms at a home where bhikshus are going for alms.
Another time, Sthūlanandā was teaching her followers dharma, when she saw Mahakashyapa coming down the road. Everyone else got up out of respect, but Sthūlanandā did not lift her behind even a little bit. She just sat there. Seeing this, her followers said to her: “Mahakashyapa is worthy of veneration by gods and humans. He’s such a great being. We all got up, but you did not budge from your seat. That is not right.” She said: “He’s not really a good Buddhist. He was a Hindu who went forth and is the most stupid of idiots. I went forth from the Shakya clan, I have memorised the Three Baskets of teaching, so why should I get up from my seat when I see him?” Because of this event, the rule was made that bhikshunis must rise from their seats as soon as they see a bhikshu.
At one time, in Shravasti, Mahakashyapa put on his robes and went begging for alms. It must have been summer as the rivers were full and Mahakashyapa was unable to ford the river and had to cross by a bridge. When he was crossing the bridge, Sthūlanandā saw him, rushed to the bridge and began swinging it (it would have been a rope bridge), causing Mahakashyapa to fall into the water. Although he got entirely wet, his alms bowl sank and his staff was carried away by the river, he did not get angry but said: “Oh Sister! This is all Ananda’s fault!” When the Buddha heard of this incident, he made a new rule: bhikshunis are not allowed to be on a bridge at the same time as bhikshus.
The Karmapa commented, there are even worse stories such as when she got Mahakashyapa to fall in a cesspool full of excrement. I don’t understand why she didn’t like him but bhikshunis at the time must have looked down on Mahakashyapa.
Following Buddha’s passing, before the First Council, Mahakashyapa threw Ananda out of the assembly because he had made many problems, one of which was advocating the ordination of bhikshunis which decreased the continuance of the Buddhaharma by 500 years.
This is why the Chinese master Yin Shun said that there are various debates and situations that arose between them. He thinks that the eight heavy dharmas were made at the request of the rigid traditionalist bhikshus.
The Development of Vinaya Rules
Some Japanese scholars say that, according to the “Sutra of Brahma’s Net”, which belongs to the “Four Agamas” (important scriptures, probably from original Buddhism, extant in Sanskrit, Pāli and Chinese but only partially translated into Tibetan) there are greater, middling, and lesser disciplines. The “Sutra of the Results of the Spiritual Way” (another section of the “Four Agamas”) is similar in content but it combines all the disciplines into one “aggregate of noble discipline” and says that if that aggregate of discipline is perfected, the mind will gain stainless peace. The Sanskrit word for discipline, ‘śīla’, can be understood to mean nature, character, habituation and practice. It contains the meaning of “developing good habits, developing the practice of virtue, changing bad habits into good habits, changing from the practice of non-virtue to the practice of virtue”.
“Perfecting discipline” means giving up all behaviour that violates discipline, anything contrary to it. Thus, discipline is not someone commanding you: “Thou shalt not do this!” but rather, it implies your own resolve, hope, expectation and an ability you develop within yourself.
The “lesser discipline” is the discipline of initially giving up killing, taking that which is not given, unchaste conduct and lying, which accords with non-Buddhist discipline as well. The “four defeats” taught in the vinaya are, in terms of their meaning, exactly the same as the forementioned four disciplines. What this shows is that the vinaya was determined in a manner that fit with the general traditions of wandering mendicants.
In brief, ‘śīla’ or discipline must be maintained through your own enthusiasm and it goes along with a clear resolve to practice dharma, empowering it. There is the discipline of practicing householders and of those who went forth. In particular, monastics must uphold and administer the sangha community which is necessary for the communal life. The set of rules they must keep is called the vinaya of the sangha. Among the 250 or so rules, the most important are the four defeats. If you break them, you are expelled from the sangha. The next worst are the thirteen remainders.
The Karmapa brought today’s teaching to a close with an announcement about the Anniversary of Gampopa’s Parinirvana occurring on the 12th of August. On that day, the sangha community was to practice together “Gampopa’s Guru Sadhana”. Among the several guru sadhanas of Gampopa, His Holiness singled out the one most appropriate for this occasion: a text written by the First Rabsang Khenpo Rabje who was said to be an emanation of Gampopa. The sadhana he wrote is rooted in his pure vision of Gampopa and was subsequently compiled by Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Thaye Rinpoche. Then, for the ganachakra, the one written by Karma Chakme Rinpoche was to be used.
Another invaluable sadhana he touched upon (though too long for this occasion) was hidden as a treasure by Gampopa and discovered by Rindzin Jamtsun Nyingpo. He was the terton who discovered the “Kun Chok Chi Du” practice. Among many different editions, the most well- known is the 15th Karmapa’s Khakhyab Dorje’s.
Co-occurring is the marking of the day when the face of the 3rd Karmapa Rangjung Dorje appeared on the moon. He passed away on the 14th day of the 6th Tibetan month and on the full moon night of the same month, the likeness of his face manifested on the surface of the moon.
To this end, the Karmapa advised the monasteries to offer 100 butter-lamps and, as the moon rises, play music (like Dawa Yab Tse) on the roof while reciting “Three Short Texts” by Rangjung Dorje which are related to shentong views.
Though there won’t be a teaching on the day, His Holiness expressed the wish to offer some insights into the lives and activities of Gampopa and 3rd Karmapa Rangjung Dorje.
