Introduction

Overview

i.1The Chapters on Monastic Discipline narrates the history of the Buddhist saṅgha as a frame story for its record of rulings on the communal life of Buddhist monks and nuns. This grand narrative, as remembered by the compilers of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, begins in The Chapter on Going Forth with the early life of the Buddha and the growth of his community. At first, ascetic seekers were simply invited to join the Buddha in living a holy life conducive to liberation. This early saṅgha was still peripatetic and unorganized by any hierarchy. Monks, or more properly “mendicants,” wandered the countryside, and as they did so people from faraway places began to seek out the Buddha. When the Buddha heard of one aspirant who had died while on the way to see him to get ordained, he formulated a simple rite by which those who wanted to live the holy life according to the Dharma and Vinaya he had taught could be ordained by monks other than himself.

i.2Once ordained, though, new monks were left to find their own way, with no monastic mentor or spiritual director to tutor and teach them. Not surprisingly, with no one to instruct the newly admitted, some Buddhist monks began to gain a reputation for bad behavior among the influential householders and the other ascetic orders of the day. In response, the Buddha required that the newly admitted live and train under a monastic elder or “support” for at least five years. The Chapter on Going Forth depicts monks living both sedentary and itinerant lives, the former staying in huts and even multistoried buildings built in parks near the main urban and trading centers of the day, while the latter traveled the countryside, staying on the outskirts of villages and begging alms as they went. Different preferences for these diverging lifestyles must have led to a dilemma for many monastic mentors and those they were mentoring. A narrative in The Chapter on Going Forth tells us that when the summer rains came to an end, some monks whose elderly preceptors did not want to travel the countryside were torn between their obligation to stay with their support and their wish to travel the countryside like other wandering mendicants. This prompts the Buddha to allow monks in training to seek a new support, whose lifestyle or instruction better suits them.

i.3In this second chapter, The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, the monastic mentor or support is never explicitly mentioned. But the chapter does emphasize that a proper monastery has on site at least one upholder of the sūtras, the vinaya, and the abhidharma‍—most specifically, someone who knows how to recite The Prātimokṣa Sūtra‍—so that every two weeks the monks can gather there, listen to the elder recite The Prātimokṣa Sūtra, and make amends for their offenses. Since this knowledge of the sūtras, the vinaya, and the abhidharma, including knowing how to recite The Prātimokṣa Sūtra, is a quality attributed to the mentor in The Chapter on Going Forth, it seems clear that the elder at a restoration rite site described in this chapter would also have at least one or two wards or apprentices living with and training under him on site.

i.4The Chapter on the Restoration Rite opens on the upavasatha ‍—a holiday fast undertaken during the full or new phase of the moon‍—with the Buddha staying in a park within the boundary of a monastic site known as the Kalandakanivāpa. A group of Buddhist lay vow holders wish to pay respect to the Buddhist saṅgha but, knowing that the monks will be meditating at that early hour, decide to visit a different park. There, they find a group of wandering mendicants from a non-Buddhist order with a threefold upavasatha observance consisting of seated meditation, formal protocols, and a rite to mark the holiday. Impressed, the lay vow holders return to the Kalandakanivāpa, where they enjoin the Buddha to institute a formal upavasatha observance for Buddhists. The Buddha’s response to this request takes up the remainder of The Chapter on the Restoration Rite as the Buddha articulates a threefold observance consisting of “a seated practice, a protocol, and a restoration rite.”

i.5In The Chapter on Going Forth, the Buddha defines the range of acceptable shelter for monks, praising the foot of a tree as best but also allowing monks to live in multistoried buildings, halls, large estate buildings, and so on. Here, in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, we are given the backstory of how itinerant Buddhist mendicants encouraged to live at the foot of trees came to live in increasingly elaborate settlements supported by permanent endowments. According to The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, the monks’ need for a place to practice meditation undisturbed is what drives the growth of Buddhist monastic settlements. Monks try but fail to practice meditation in several places before the Buddha consents to the construction of small meditation residences. Small clusters of huts give way to larger clusters until the Buddha allows a community meditation hall to be built with monastic dwellings in a three-sided ring around the hall. Eventually, when the monks do not fit even into single-story halls, the Buddha consents to the building of a second story, and so on. And, since such facilities require management, the Buddha also consents to the appointment of five kinds of caretakers, who serve as a monastery administrative committee, each with individual responsibility over the site, the residences and hall, the work roster, the monastery resources and supplies, and the attendants on site, respectively.

i.6The distinction between preceptor/ward and instructor/apprentice that is introduced in The Chapter on Going Forth is here augmented with distinctions between resident and occupant monks, as well as resident and visiting monks. These designations speak to a mobile Buddhist saṅgha and suggest that the freedom of movement promised after five years to qualified monks was eagerly embraced. Such movement is well documented in both medieval China and Tibet, where monks traveled for business, pilgrimage, study, and more. The Chapter on the Restoration Rite picks up from The Chapter on Going Forth, as Buddhist monks living in parks form communities united around a shared restoration rite site. There, they meet fortnightly to restore their training through meditation and confession. The compilers of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya cite numerous difficulties that interfere with the monks’ ability to meditate as the pretext for the increasingly complex monastic settlements.

Structure and Contents

i.7Like the other chapters of The Chapters on Monastic Discipline, The Chapter on the Restoration Rite includes a “global summary” or piṇḍoddāna. In this case, the global summary groups the contents of The Chapter on the Restoration Rite into five sections under the headings Tīrthika, Kapphiṇa, Site, The King, and Several Repetitions.

Tīrthika: The Seated Practice of Yoga

i.8In this first section, Tīrthika, the Buddha prescribes a “seated practice” called “yoga” that is to be done on the upavasatha:

“Not knowing what a seated practice, a protocol, or a restoration rite ought to be, the monks appealed to the Blessed One, who replied, ‘Come, monks. The seated practice is called yoga.’ ”

i.10Nowadays, yoga is generally associated with haṭhayoga or one of its derivatives, which emphasize bodily postures and breath control. But the aṣṭāṅgayoga or “eight-limbed yoga” taught by Patāñjali in the Yogasūtra includes much more, such as vows, social duties, and obligations. Here, in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, yoga refers to the seated practice of meditation or samādhi. Kalyāṇamitra explains that yoga here refers to samādhi and includes under its umbrella of meditations the practice of smṛtyupasthāna or “application of mindfulness”:

“Yoga: samādhi, the close placement of mindfulness on the body and so on.”

i.12For the upavasatha yoga, the practice that the Buddha prescribes in this chapter is a “contemplation of the repulsive”:

“ ‘Reflect on this: No matter how you sit or what you do, the whole of this body, from the soles of the feet up to the hair on the crown and all the skin in between, is filled with all sorts of impurities‍—the hair on the head and face, the nails and teeth, the dirt, the grime, and the skin, flesh, bones, sinews, veins, kidneys, heart, spleen, lungs, intestines, colon, stomach, guts, bladder, liver, feces, tears, mucus, oils, lymph, marrow, fat, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, brains, meninges, and urine.’ ”

i.14Bhikkhu Anālayo explains how contemplating the repulsive helps nurture attention and insight, as Ācārya Śūra and other (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin commentators maintain:

“The purpose of contemplating the nature of the body is to bring its unattractive aspects to the forefront of one’s attention, thereby placing the attractive aspects previously emphasized in a more balanced context. The aim is a balanced and detached attitude towards the body. With such a balanced attitude, one sees the body merely as a product of conditions, a product with which one need not identify.”

i.16Various versions of the contemplation of the repulsive and other yogas are known to have been practiced in northwest India and Central Asia, including areas populated by Mūlasarvāstivādin monastics. Scholarship has also shown that meditation, and visualization in particular, was often regarded as a key component of Buddhist repentance practices in these northerly regions.

i.17It is in this section that (as mentioned above) the Buddha takes mercy on the monks‍—as they struggle with the absence of a dedicated place to practice yoga, encountering interruptions as they try to meditate in front of the monastery gates, on the outskirts of town, and then in the jungles and forests‍—and allows the building of meditation residences, where yoga can be cultivated free of disturbance. Since facilities need managing, the Buddha then stipulates the duties of a meditation residence manager.

Kapphiṇa: A Narrative on the Need for Quorum

i.18The second and third components of the Buddhist upavasatha observance‍—the “protocol” for agreeing on a “restoration rite site” and the “restoration rite” itself‍—are introduced in the second section, denoted in the chapter’s global summary by “Kapphiṇa.”

i.19One upavasatha day, the monk Kapphiṇa, who reckons himself to be pure of all wrongdoing and offenses, wonders whether he should join the saṅgha in observing the restoration rite. The Buddha intuits Kapphiṇa’s thoughts and appears before him to remind him that:

i.21The Buddha insists that Kapphiṇa attend, which Kalyāṇamitra interprets as rebuking Kapphiṇa. In Kalyāṇamitra’s interpretation, the Buddha is putting the abstemious but proud monk in line and reminding him of his responsibility to listen to the The Prātimokṣa Sūtra recitation every two weeks. For the Buddha had already declared:

“ ‘What is the restoration rite? Monks, it is the recitation of The Prātimokṣa Sūtra that I have taught. From now on, you should recite it every two weeks.’ ”

i.23Kapphiṇa’s story seems to be a narrative about the need for a quorum‍—the presence or consent of all monks on site‍—during the restoration rite. The need for a quorum reflects an important function of the restoration rite, which is to affirm the purity of the saṅgha on a regular basis. Here, for a monk or nun to be “pure” means either (1) that they have not incurred any offenses or (2) that they have confessed and made amends for them. Many scholars have observed that the saṅgha’s reputation for upstanding moral conduct was inextricably tied to patronage, that the saṅgha’s purity was the form of currency famously described by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu as “symbolic” and “cultural capital.” That the saṅgha communally affirms its members’ monastic purity every fortnight assures the laity that the saṅgha is the proper recipient of alms‍—that giving to the saṅgha will yield desirable karmic fruits‍—which helps to ensure continued lay support. This was a pressing social concern for Buddhist monastics, as can be discerned in the narrative that begins this chapter, which portrays a group of laypeople admiring the upavasatha observances of non-Buddhist ascetic communities.

i.24After the Buddha convinces Kapphiṇa to attend the restoration, the two of them go together to where the other monks have gathered. There, the Buddha teaches the assembled monks how to demarcate the boundaries of a monastic “site” or precinct. Once the matter of sites and boundaries has been thoroughly clarified through a series of prescriptions and supplementary prescriptions, prohibitions, and consents, the Buddha explains that the entire Prātimokṣa Sūtra does not need to be recited during the restoration rite. Instead, the reciter must recite the opening narrative to The Prātimokṣa Sūtra. After that, the reciter can choose whether to communicate the heading‍—that is, to name only the class, e.g., the four defeats, the thirteen saṅgha remnants, and so on‍—or to individually recite each offense in a class. Once the reciter has begun to recite the individual offenses that comprise a class, he must continue reciting to the end of that class or the recitation will be considered improper. In short, The Prātimokṣa Sūtra must be recited in one of five ways, whether reciting classes simply by heading or in full. At its simplest, a proper recitation of The Prātimokṣa Sūtra may therefore be a very abbreviated recitation in which the opening narrative is recited in full followed by the recitation only of the classes’ names, with no mention of individual offenses.

The Prātimokṣa Sūtra

i.25The commentator Ācārya Śūra tells us that the early saṅgha committed no offenses during the first twelve years of the Buddha’s ministry. There was thus nothing to confess or amend for, and so no formal rules‍—that is, no Prātimokṣa Sūtra as we know it‍—to recite on the upavasatha. Instead, the Buddha would recite two now-famous verses when the community gathered on the upavasatha. As Śūra recounts:

“The Blessed One’s śrāvaka saṅgha had no faults or ruptures for twelve years after the Blessed One had perfectly awakened and amassed a following of śrāvaka disciples. The Blessed One would recite the śrāvaka saṅgha’s prātimokṣa concisely as:

“And thus, no śrāvaka training precepts were decreed for the Vinaya.”

i.27Then, in the thirteenth year, Sudinna left the household life and joined the Buddha’s order. Śūra continues:

“While staying in a grass hut in the forest, Sudinna was misled by his own mother to resort to the unchaste act of intercourse with his former wife. Seeing that Kalandakaputra Sudinna’s engaging in sex would be the first of many incidents that could spill over, the Blessed One gathered the saṅgha of monks on account of this occurrence, this situation, and this circumstance. He, who saw ten benefits to decreeing training precepts, decreed the śrāvaka training precepts in the Vinaya and from that point forward presented the five classes of offense by decreeing a training precept for every cause of each situation.”

i.29Prior to this, Ācārya Śūra tells us, the Prātimokṣa Vow (prātimokṣa­saṃvara) did not consist of specific prohibitions. With the decreeing of training precepts, the generic exhortation to restraint urged by the Buddha becomes a formal Rule with offenses organized into five classes, and Sudinna’s act becomes the first of 253 specific offenses that Mūlasarvāstivādin monks are to restrain themselves from.

i.30The exact meaning of the word prāti- in the title Prātimokṣa Sūtra and the related term prātimokṣa­saṃvara (“Prātimokṣa Vow”) has been the subject of debate for centuries. Ācārya Śūra relates the three (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin interpretations in his Guide to The Prātimokṣa Sūtra. The first interpretation reads prati (with a short a) to mean “first.” Mokṣa here, as in the next two interpretations, means “liberated,” so pratimokṣa means “first liberated.” Ācārya Śūra explains that Buddhist vow holders first obtain a vow or saṃvara after repeating a pledge three times. Thus, a prātimokṣa­saṃvara is the “vow” by which one is “first liberated” from not having that vow. Here, the Sanskrit prefix prati is apparently used in its sense of “in opposition to, against, counter,” as suggested by Ācārya Śūra’s opposition of vow-holding and not vow-holding.

i.31The second interpretation reads prati (with a short a) to mean “individual,” as in “an individual person,” while mokṣa again means “liberation.” This yields the most familiar interpretation of pratimokṣa, meaning “individually liberated.” Importantly, however, Ācārya Śūra does not suggest that the Buddhist vow holder cares only for their own “individual liberation.” He appeals rather to the basic principles of karmic cause and effect; observance of a vow liberates only the individual vow holder and not others.

i.32The third interpretation reads prāti as a compound prefix (pra+ati) with a long ā, which yields the meaning “on account of” and hence, “method.” Here, mokṣa or “liberation” refers to “freedom,” that is, niryāna or nirvāṇa. Thus, in the third interpretation, prātimokṣa means that the prātimokṣa is the “method” by which a vow holder is “liberated” from saṃsāra.

i.33Tshonawa Sherab Zangpo, the thirteenth-century Tibetan authority on the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, records the same three etymologies:

“Fourth, regarding etymology, there are three [interpretations] of pratimokṣa [in the compound pratimokṣa­saṃvara]: (1) the vow of individual liberation, (2) the vow of initial liberation, and (3) the vow that is a method for liberation. Of those three, [the first takes] prati as “individual” and mokṣa as “liberation,” thus yielding “individually liberated” in the sense that the person who safeguards pure conduct will themselves, as an individual, be liberated from the lower realms and saṃsāra; the safeguarding of pure conduct by another [person] does not liberate some other [person]. [The second takes] prati as “initial” and mokṣa as “liberation,” thus yielding “initial liberation” in the sense that one is liberated from one’s former state without the vow from the first moment that one obtains the vow. [The third takes] prāti grammatically to mean “method” and mokṣa to mean “liberation,” thus yielding “method of liberation.” Hence, [pratimokṣasaṃvara], in its turn, can be read as “the vow that is the method of liberation.” These three etymologies are given in the text of The Fifty Fascicles.”

The Etymology of Poṣadha

i.35After The Prātimokṣa Sūtra’s narrative introduction or nidāna has been recited, a motion is made to recite the remainder. Then, the saṅgha elder charged with reciting The Prātimokṣa Sūtra asks whether any monk present has incurred a fault to which he has not yet confessed. Remaining silent at that point is taken to be a profession of purity. Monks are again called upon to profess their purity after each class of offense has been recited. If a monk has an offense to confess, at the appropriate juncture he says:

“ ‘Venerable, please listen. I, the monk named so-and-so, have incurred this offense. I, the monk named so-and-so, confess and disclose each and every one of those offenses before you, venerable; I do not conceal them. If I confess and disclose them, I will be at ease. If I do not confess and disclose them, I will not be at ease.’

“That should be repeated verbatim a second and third time.

“He is then asked, ‘Do you recognize the offense?’

“The monk should reply, ‘I do.’

“He is then asked, ‘From now on, will you refrain from it?’

“He replies, ‘I will.’

“That should be repeated verbatim a second and third time.

“The confessor should then say, ‘That is proper.’

“The confessant should then reply, ‘Excellent.’ ”.

i.37For this reason, the present chapter is sometimes described as “the chapter on confession,” though confession must be followed with a pledge of restraint. This pattern of confession and restraint is found also in other classic confession practices like the “Three Sections” (triskandhaka) rite and tantric Vajrasattva practices. According to the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, the monastic should confess to a particular class of offense, acknowledge it to have been wrong, and declare their intention to restrain themselves from the offense in the future.

i.38In translating the Sanskrit poṣadha (Tib. gso sbyong) as “restoration rite,” we have tried to capture both (1) the term’s origins in the wider Indian upavasatha observance and (2) the unique interpretations of poṣadha advanced by Mūlasarvāstivādin authorities. The Vedas, for instance, prescribe daylong purificatory fasts that culminate in sacrifices on the upavasatha. During the fast, the sacrificer refrains from eating, sexual activity, and polluting behaviors in the hopes that the gods will “dwell near” during the ensuing sacrifice. To wit, the Śatapata Brāhamaṇa derives upavasatha from the prefix upa (“near”) and the verbal root √vas (“dwell”):

“Therefore all the gods betake themselves to his house, and abide near [him or the fires], in his house; whence this [day] is called upavasatha .”

i.40The Mahāvyutpatti, a ca. ninth-century Sanskrit-Tibetan lexicon, does indeed record this sense of upavasatha , but under the entry upoṣadham, which is defined as “either observing a fast or doing the restoration.” More commonly, Mūlasarvāstivādin sources give poṣadha. Other Buddhist Vinayas give similar variants: Sarvāstivādin sources give poṣatha, the Mahāsaṃghīka-Lokottaravāda Vinaya has upoṣadha, while the Pāli Vinaya has uposatha. Linguistically speaking, the Mūlasarvāstivādin term poṣadha is almost certainly derived from the Sanskrit upavasatha through a process of translation between Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Middle Indic vernaculars. To reach the Mūlasarvāstivādin form of poṣadha, the u- prefix from upavasatha must be dropped, the -ava becomes -o, and the unvoiced -tha becomes the voiced -dha. (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin exegetes explain poṣadha via the root √puṣ (“to nurture, to grow”) rather than upa+√vas (“dwell near”), which would account for the final change, from sa to ṣa.

i.41Vasubandhu, whose work is closely associated with Sarvāstivādin traditions, explains the term poṣadha as it is used in the eightfold observance undertaken by Buddhists on the upavasatha. He acknowledges the derivation from upavasatha as above, and also proffers a hypothetical derivation of poṣadha from √puṣ (“to nurture, to grow”) and √dhā (“to foster”):

“Some say it is called upavāsa in imitation of their fast because by it one dwells near to arhats. Or, because by it one dwells near to lifelong restraint. Or, it is called poṣadha because of the nurturing of roots of virtue from trifling roots of virtue and thus one fosters the growth of mental virtue. That is why the Buddha said, ‘This is assuredly poṣadha.’ ”

i.43Vasubandhu’s etymological explanation or nirukti echoes Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha (Recital of Verbal Roots). In commenting on sūtra 17 of the Aṣṭādhyāyī (Collection of Eight Chapters), the author’s list of verbal roots, Pāṇini records that the verbal root √dhā has the sense of dhāraṇa­poṣaṇayoḥ, that is, “fostering or nurturing.”

i.44The authors of The Two-Volume Lexicon (sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa), a late eighth-century commentary on the contemporaneous Mahāvyutpatti, give a slightly different etymology. They derive poṣadha from √puṣ, “to nurture,” and √dhāv, “to purify,” which give us the Tibetan gso and sbyong, respectively:

“Poṣadha from poṣa, as in puṣṇate, meaning ‘to nurture virtue and cause it to grow’; and dha as in dhava gatiśuddhau, meaning ‘to run’ or ‘purify.’ Generally speaking, gso sbyong is a word that means to take the eight vows at the six times or to nurture and purify those parts of a monk’s rule that have lapsed.”

i.46Thus, (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin commentators recognize poṣadha as a term for the eightfold upavasatha observance and the monastic restoration rite. And in both cases, the poṣadha observance is understood to be a rite that “nurtures and purifies,” that is, a “restoration rite” for Buddhists training in pure conduct. As the prolific Mūlasarvāstivādin commentator Kalyāṇamitra writes:

“Poṣadha, to nurture and purify pure conduct, ‘to cause to nurture.’ ”

i.48As discussed earlier, The Chapter on the Restoration Rite prescribes a twofold upavasatha observance, beginning with the seated practice of yoga and concluding with recitation of The Prātimokṣa Sūtra. (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin commentators, including Guṇaprabha, Kalyāṇamitra, and Vimalamitra, describe these two poṣadha observances as (1) śamatha-poṣadha or restoration through meditation, and (2) sāmagrī-poṣadha or restoration by an assembly. They tell us that the first nurtures the training in attention and insight while the second purifies the training in pure conduct. The two poṣadha observances are thus understood to be an exercise in “restoration” via the three trainings. As Vimalamitra records in his Compendium of the Vinaya:

“Poṣadha is what nurtures and purifies the three trainings. There are two types: restoration by an assembly and restoration through meditation. The restoration by an assembly concerns pure conduct; an assembly is obtained through site, assembly, and rite. The restoration through meditation concerns attention and insight; it is the cultivation of the limbs of meditation.”

Restoring the Prātimokṣa Vow

i.50It is unclear when this twofold poṣadha rubric was introduced but it is widespread in the materials translated from Indic languages into Tibetan during the eighth through tenth centuries ᴄᴇ. As far as we are aware, the Indic (Mūla-)sarvāstivādin commentators cite no textual precedent for this, in which case it may be considered to be of novel Mūla- or Sarvāstivādin coinage. It is worth noting, however, that the upavasatha observance described in the present chapter reflects wider Indian ideas about penance and expiation. In the Dharmaśāstras, Brahmanical texts on custom and law that date from roughly the same period as the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, sins are understood to have both soteriological and social effects. For example, a single negative act may both impede a favorable rebirth and also entail loss of caste or ostracism.

i.51Similarly, the seated yoga and The Prātimokṣa Sūtra recitation purify two different kinds of transgression: offenses and wrongdoings. Offenses are violations of a decree, while wrongdoings are acts that are wrong for moral reasons: killing and stealing, for example. Offenses and wrongdoings are not mutually exclusive since the Buddha decreed against many acts that are also wrong on moral grounds. In the case of an act that qualifies as both an offense and a wrongdoing, the offending monk must purify both, but through distinct methods. The restoration through meditation neutralizes the karmic effects of wrongdoing. The restoration by an assembly removes the offense, and the attendant impediments to the monk or nun’s full participation in saṅgha affairs. Ratnākaraśānti, the prolific late tenth–early eleventh-century commentator on all things Buddhist, writes:

“An offense is the transgression of a decree, so called because it causes a fall and impedes. [An offense] is an impediment because it impedes formal acts of the saṅgha and paths . The rest are to be regretted, that is, to be rued.”

i.53An offense can be expunged and good status restored by making amends appropriate to the class of offense and participating in the restoration rite. The Mūlasarvāstivādin Prātimokṣa Sūtra records 253 offenses for monks, which are grouped into five classes of decreasing degrees of severity:

four defeats;

thirteen saṅgha remnants;

two types of transgressions:

thirty transgressions requiring forfeiture, and

ninety simple atonements;

four confessable offenses; and

112 misdeeds.

i.54In The Chapter on Going Forth, the Buddha groups faults into three categories according to how one makes amends for them:

“When the monks are seated and assembled, they should each individually investigate whether they have incurred any faults in the past half a month that need to be restrained, confessed, or sanctioned. Recognizing those faults, they should make amends by resolving to restrain themselves, confessing them, or sanctioning them before taking their places.”

i.56Commenting on this passage, Kalyāṇamitra maps faults that must be “restrained, confessed, or sanctioned” onto the familiar classification of five classes of offense :

“Every fortnight before performing the restoration rite, if they have not already done so, monastics should scrutinize themselves for things that should be restrained, that is, subtle mental faults; things that should be confessed, that is, simple atonements, confessable offenses, and misdeeds; and things that should be sanctioned, that is, saṅgha remnants and transgressions requiring forfeiture.”

i.58Simple atonements, confessable offenses, and misdeeds‍—classes 3b, 4, and 5 in the list above‍—do not require the saṅgha’s intervention. They can be expunged by confessing them “as a class” prior to, immediately before, or, as the present chapter states, during the restoration rite. Misdeeds do not even need to be confessed out loud, in fact. Resolving to refrain from them in the future is sufficient to expunge the offense.

i.59Saṅgha remnants and transgressions requiring forfeiture‍—classes 2 and 3a‍—must be sanctioned, either by issuing a probation, penance, and recission, or forfeiting a surplus item, respectively. Since these offenses require a multi-step expiation, they ought to be confessed immediately or as soon as possible, so as to allow the saṅgha sufficient time to impose the appropriate probation or penance, etc. That is why, Kalyāṇamitra says, they should be confessed at least one day prior to an ordination, the restoration rite, or the rite of lifting restrictions. Probations, penances, and recissions for saṅgha remnants are described in The Chapter on Penitents.

i.60No amendments can be made for defeats‍—class 1. One can, however, be given a training and continue living among the saṅgha as a śikṣadāttaka penitent, as discussed in The Chapter on Penitents and The Chapter on Persons. Yet none of this is discussed in The Chapter on Restoration.

Site

i.61The Chapter on the Restoration Rite’s third section is denoted by the term “Site” in the chapter’s global summary. The material in this section emphasizes that every monastic community, as defined by its members’ sharing of a restoration rite site, should include a saṅgha elder who is able to recite The Prātimokṣa Sūtra. In the event that there is no saṅgha elder, one must be invited to preside over the restoration. Thus, this section also describes the protocol for receiving an upholder of the sūtras, the vinaya, or the mātṛkā. Next, instructions are given on receiving the consent and profession of purity from sick monastics unable to attend the restoration rite, which allows the saṅgha to proceed by the complete saṅgha. The section concludes with instructions for monastics who cannot make it to a restoration site on upavasatha.

The King

i.62The fourth section, included under “The King” in the global summary, details the various circumstances‍—apart from illness, which is dealt with in the previous section‍—that may legitimately prevent a monastic or even a whole community from performing the restoration rite. As above, the Buddha explains how consent should be sought from those monastics who are absent, whether because they are being detained by a king or have some business elsewhere. The Buddha then explains how a standing exemption from participating in the restoration rite may be given to monastics who are mentally unfit. This section concludes with instructions for handling confessions on the day of the restoration rite and what to do if an entire saṅgha has incurred the same offense and therefore cannot expiate it.

Several Repetitions

i.63The fifth and final section, “Several Repetitions,” takes its name from the many paryāya, stock passages that are repeated with slight permutations, that collectively establish the criteria for a proper restoration rite, namely, the presence of all monks on site. The text discusses several scenarios in which monks perform the restoration rite‍—knowingly or unknowingly‍—before all the monks have gathered. Through the many repetitions, a simple principle becomes clear: if the restoration rite is started with the intention of excluding others who have not yet arrived, the result is a violation, and those who so start it will be guilty of a breach. The Tibetan text enumerates each of these scenarios individually, leading to extensive repetition.

Translations & Other Studies

i.64The present translation is based on the Tibetan text of the version of the chapter in the Degé Kangyur with emendations based on the annotations in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) of the Kangyur. We consulted the Sanskrit edition prepared by Dr. Haiyan Hu-von Hinüber and published in her 1994 study and German translation, Das Poṣadhavastu: Vorschriften für die buddhistische Beichtfeier im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādavinaya, which remains the foremost academic study of the present chapter. See Clarke 2014 for the extant Sanskrit manuscripts and a concordance of the Sanskrit and Tibetan. There is no extant Chinese translation of this chapter, though relevant material can be found in Genben shuo yiqie you bu bai yi jiemo (根本説一切有部百一羯磨, Taishō 1453), Yijing’s translation of the Ekottara­karmaśataka, a compendium of monastic procedure, and his travelogue Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan (南海寄歸內法傳, Taishō 2125), though neither is referred to in our notes. The translation of Vinaya technical terms given here has benefitted greatly from discussion with the 84000 Vinaya Team. But these choices remain provisional and may require revision as work on the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya progresses.