དགག་དབྱེའི་གཞི།
The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions
Notes
Pravāraṇāvastu
འདུལ་བ་གཞི་ལས། དགག་དབྱེའི་གཞི།
’dul ba gzhi las/ dgag dbye’i gzhi
The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions” from The Chapters on Monastic Discipline
Vinayavastu Pravāraṇavastu
Toh 1-3
Degé Kangyur, vol. 1 (’dul ba, ka), folios 221.b–237.b
Imprint
First published 2024
Current version v 1.0.11 (2025)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.
This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions is the third of The Chapters on Monastic Discipline’s seventeen chapters. It recounts the origins, timing, and procedures for a rite—held at the end of the rains retreat as an adjunct to the Rite of Restoration (poṣadha)—known as the Rite of Lifting Restrictions (pravāraṇa). During this rite, monastics invite other monastics who have passed the rainy season with them to speak of any unconfessed offenses they have seen, heard, or suspected the inviting monastic of committing during the rains retreat. If a monk thus prompted recalls an offense, he must make amends before the members of the saṅgha can communally verify their purity. This rite helps to ensure harmony in the saṅgha by providing monks with a forum in which they may air and address concerns about their fellow monks’ conduct before they disperse, either to wander the countryside or go to another monastery. This semi-public affirmation of the saṅgha’s purity would also help preserve its reputation among the laypeople. At the conclusion of the rite, goods that have been offered to the saṅgha during the rains are distributed to those monastics who are entitled to a share, that is, those who stayed on site for the duration of the rains.
The Rite of Lifting Restrictions is the second of the “Three Rites,” along with the Rite of Restoration and the Rite of Pledging to Settle for the Rains, as set out in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite and The Chapter on the Rains respectively. The regular observance of the “Three Rites” at an officially demarcated monastic site is considered a crucial component in ensuring the integrity of the monastics living there and nearby.
Acknowledgements
This text was translated from Tibetan and checked against the Sanskrit original and Yijing’s Chinese translation by Robert Miller. Matthew Wuethrich served as style and editorial consultant to the translator. Paul Thomas reviewed the translation against the extant Sanskrit. Ven. Hejung Seok, Dr. Alex von Rospatt, and Dr. Sally Sutherland Goldman all provided useful insight into the term pravāraṇā.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Nathaniel Rich and John Canti edited the translation and the introduction, and Ven. Konchog Norbu copyedited the text. André Rodrigues was in charge of the digital publication process.
Text Body
The Translation
From The Chapters on Monastic Discipline
The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions
The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions
Notes
For a short summary of The Chapters on Monastic Discipline (Vinayavastu), see the introduction to The Chapter on Going Forth (Toh 1, ch. 1), i.9. For more on the chapter order of The Chapters on Monastic Discipline, see Hu-von Hinüber 1997a and 1997b.
In his Vinayasūtra, Guṇāprabha digests these two rites in their temporal sequence, giving his summary of the rains retreat pledge first, followed by the rite of lifting restrictions. See Toh 4117 and Toh 4119.
I.e., The Chapters on the Monks of Kauśāmbī (Toh 1, ch. 9), Formal Acts of the Saṅgha (Toh 1, ch. 10), A Group of Troublesome Monks (Toh 1, ch. 11), Types of Persons (Toh 1, ch. 12), Penitents (Toh 1, ch. 13), Suspending the Restoration Rite (Toh 1, ch. 14), and Disputes (Toh 1, ch. 16).
The Degé Kangyur reads seven to eight days (F.223.a.2). Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.a.2) cites the root text as saying “ten days or half a month” but adds that some sources say the period lasts seven or eight days. Like Kalyāṇamitra, Guṇaprabha says there are two positions on when the announcement of the upcoming rite of lifting restrictions is made, one that states seven to eight days beforehand, the other saying ten to fourteen days.
The actual rite begins, and must conclude, before dawn on the fifteenth of the Āśvina month for monks who have settled for the earlier part of the rains, or on the fifteenth of the Kārttika month for those who have settled for the later part of the rains.
This is the “invitation” or “lifting of restrictions” (Tib. dgag dbye bya ba; Skt. pravāraṇam pravārayitum). Other monks may then “prompt” (Tib. gleng ba; Skt. codanā) him with evidence of or well-grounded suspicion for an offense he has failed to confess.
For more on The Chapter on Disputes, see Borgland 2014. Citing the Pāli parallel to The Chapter on Disputes, the Adhikaraṇasamatha Skandhaka, Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu explains how the procedure takes place outside of the pavāraṇā rite, during the uposatha (i.e., poṣadha) rite: “If, when the Community has met for the uposatha, Bhikkhu X suspects Bhikkhu Y of having an unconfessed offense, he may bring up the issue before the Pāṭimokkha is recited. The usual pattern is first to make a formal motion, authorizing oneself or another bhikkhu to ask a question about the Vinaya in the assembly. Similarly, the bhikkhu answering the question must be authorized through a formal motion, made by himself or another bhikkhu” (Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu 2001, p. 11).
This order reflects the Buddhist hierarchy of ordination, in descending order: monks, nuns, nun postulants, male novices, and female novices.
Khenpo Shenga 2007, p. 275.
Venerable Jampa Tsedroen (Roloff 2020) has studied and translated the sections of The Chapter on Minor Matters of Monastic Discipline that present this story and the ensuing ordination rites for nuns as related in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya. The interested reader is encouraged to seek out the volume, which is freely available online through the Hamburg Buddhist Studies series of the Numata Center for Buddhist Studies.
The Chapter on Minor Matters of Monastic Discipline (Toh 6, vol. 11, F.120.a) : deng phan chad ming ’di zhes bya ba’i mkhan mo la mar ’du shes gzhag par bya’o/ /mkhan mos kyang de la bu mor ’du shes gzhag par bya’o/ /deng phan chad khyod kyis mkhan mo la nam ’tsho’i bar du bsnyen bkur byos shig/ mkhan mos kyang khyod la nam ’tsho’i bar du bsnyen bkur byos shig/ deng phan chad ming ’di zhes bya ba khyod kyis ’jigs pa’i dbang du byas shing bla ma dang tshangs pa mtshungs par spyod pa dang/ gnas brtan ma dang/ bar ma dang/ gsar bu rnams la ri mo byos shig/ ming ’di zhes bya ba khyod deng phan chad lung nos shig/ lhogs shig/ kha ton gyis shig.
Dharmamitra (Toh 4120, F.77.b) : rdzogs par bsnyen pa la yang ji ltar shes par bya zhe na/ de’i phyir rdzogs par bsnyen pa la ni de gsol ba la sogs pa’i las byed pa las gzhan pa’i ’o zhes bya ba smras te/ rdzogs par bsnyen pa ni dge slong zhes bya ba’i gnas thams cad du dge slong ma zhes brjod par bya ste/ ’di ltar de gsol ba la sogs pa’i las byed pa zhes bya ba rdzogs par bsnyen pa gsol ba la sogs pa’i las byed pa’i dge slong smos pa gang yin pa’i dge slong las byed pa de ma gtogs pa de las gzhan pa’i gnas su dper na/ gsang ste ston pa dang/ mkhan po la sogs pa dge slong zhes smos pa der dge slong ma zhes brjod par bya’o.
See Tib. skyes pa’i cho ga nyid bud med la kha spo ba dogs gsal dang bcas pa and sngar skyes pa’i rab byung bsnyen rdzogs kyi cho gar bstan pa de nyid bud med la ’don pa spo ba, respectively, in Butön, vol. 21, F.59.b.1 (p. 258).
This term in the Pāli and Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinayas is given with a long ā (compared to the short a of Classical and Epic Sanskrit), which indicates a technical usage, in this case to denote the rite or the event of lifting restrictions.
Kalyāṇamitra (F.313.a) : dgag dbye zhes bya ba ni dbyar gnas par khas blangs pa’i dge slong rnams kyis mthong ba dang/ thos pa dang/ dgos pa’i gnas gsum gyis gleng pa’i skabs ’byed pa’o.
pravāraṇaṃ zhes bya ba pramuktavāraṇa zhes bya ste/ dbyar gnas par dam bcas pa’i tshe thos pa dang mthong ba dang dgos pas rgol zhing rtsod du mi gnaṅ ba las skabs phye bas na dgag dbye zhes bya.
See Heirman 2008 and Kishino 2013 for Yijing and his translations into Chinese.
For a history of the excavations, see Clarke’s introduction to Vinaya Texts (2014).
Clarke 2014, p. 20.
See von Hinüber 2004.
Nishimoto (1933–38, vol. 22, pp. 354–67).
Here, in place of the usual Tibetan translation spyi sdom, or “global summary,” the Tibetan reads bsdus pa’i sdom, or “inclusive summary.” The Sanskrit for this is not extant but bsdus pa’i sdom is presumably an alternative Tibetan translation of the Skt. piṇḍoddāna, or “global summary.”
The extant Sanskrit fragments do not begin until 1.52 (F.225.b). See the Table of Concordance (p. 49) in Chung 1998. The root text cited by Kalyāṇamitra in his commentary diverges at several points from the extant Tibetan versions cited in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma). There are several cases in which Kalyāṇamitra’s citations expand on what is found in the extant Tibetan texts and a few instances in which the order of sentences differs. These differences may indicate that the translation of Kalyāṇamitra’s commentary was not revised. See, e.g., F.223.a. Another possibility is that the translation and/or composition of Kalyāṇamitra’s commentary may never have been finished; such variants are relatively rare in his comments on The Chapter on Going Forth and The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, and the commentary comes to an abrupt end in this, the third chapter.
The Tibetan here reads zlos though in the corresponding summary below (4.2), it reads mang po bsgre. In both cases, we may take them to mean a “repetition” or “extrapolation” (Skt. peyāla; P. peyyāla), sections whose content is to be repeated or extrapolated from a similar section that precedes it. In this case, the relevant content must be drawn from The Chapter on the Restoration Rite.
The exact referent for the word “latter” (Tib. phyi ma) is not clear. There is no separate section that corresponds to it, Kalyāṇamitra makes no mention of it, and there is no Sanskrit for this first portion of the text to check it against. Most likely it refers to the “later part of the rains.”
The phrase “pledged to settle for the rains” here translates the Tib. dbyar bzhugs par dam bzhes, which also appears in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya as dbyar gnas par khas blang pa, dbyar gnas dam bcas pa, dbyar gnas par zhal gyis bzhes pa, and dbyar gnas par dam bzhes pa. Although Sanskrit parallels are not available in each instance, we take them all to be translations of varṣā (Tib. dbyar, the “rains” or “rainy season”) plus forms of upa√gam, e.g., varṣopagata, varṣāṃ upagacchati. The Tibetan translations of these forms add gnas, which Kalyāṇamitra (F.271.b) seems to gloss as the “site for the rainy season” (Tib. dbyar gyi gnas; Skt. varṣāvāsa): “pledging to observe the rains retreat, that is, first reciting the formula, then pledging to remain at one rains-retreat site” (dbyar gnas par zhal gyis bzhes so zhes bya ba sngags sngon du btang bas dbyar gnas gcig tu gnas par zhal gyis bzhes pa’o). Thus, a literal translation of the Tibetan dbyar gnas dam bcas pa (Skt. varṣopagata) might read “committed to a rainy season site.” The Tibetan-language sources then suggest that Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya authors understood upa√gam in a specialized sense, meaning “to pledge or commit,” which is closely related to the more common senses of “to enter into” or “undertake.” Thus, the Tibetan translations emphasize the commitment made to undertake the rains retreat, alluded to by Kalyāṇamitra above. The Pali sources generally take upagacchati and its cognates in this context to mean “to undergo,” “to begin,” or “to undertake.” In his translation of the Vassūpanāyikakkhandaka, Bhikkhu Brahmali renders this with admirable economy and accuracy as “enter the rainy-season residence.” We translate dbyar gnas dam bcas pa as “enter the rains retreat,” “observe the rains retreat,” and “commit to observe the rains retreat” according to context. Note that Yijing’s translations also give typically economical forms (Ch. 夏坐 in The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions and 夏安居 in The Chapter on the Rains) that do not reflect the more expansive Tibetan translations.
Translation of the Tib. ljongs zhig tu follows Yijing’s translation “in another place” or 於餘處 (Taishō 1446, 1044c15).
Kalyāṇamitra’s glosses of “prompt” and “remind” read, “ ‘Should not prompt,’ that is, announce a fault,” and, “ ‘Should not remind,’ that is, give assistance while [the confessant] is confessing.” See Kalyāṇamitra (F.319.a): gleng bar mi bya zhes bya ba ni nyes pa bsgrags pas so/ /dran par mi bya zhes bya ba ni bshags pa’i dus dang grogs brjod pas so.
I.e., of having committed a naturally blameworthy act. Kalyāṇamitra (F.324.b): tshul khrims nyams pa zhes bya ba ni rang bzhin gyis kha na ma tho ba dang bcas pa lhag par spyod pa’o.
I.e., of entertaining views of the self. Kalyāṇamitra (F.324.b): lta ba nyams pa zhes bya ba ni bdag tu lta ba la sogs kun tu spyad pa’o.
Kalyāṇamitra cites cho ga in place of spyod pa and glosses it as “i.e., having committed an act blameworthy because of having been proscribed.” (Kalyāṇamitra, F.324.b.3–4): cho ga nyams pa zhes bya ba ni bcas pa’i kha na ma tho ba dang bcas pa lhag par spyod pa’o.
I.e., a wrong livelihood. Kalyāṇamitra (F.324.b.3–4): ’tsho ba nyams pa zhes bya ba ni log par ’tsho ba’o.
While the Tibetan rendering in the versions in all Kangyurs is lag brda’i sgra byas (Degé, F.222.a.2), suggesting that a sound is made with the snap of the fingers or a clapping of the hands, the translation follows Kalyāṇamitra, who gives lag brdas and glosses it with lag pa’i mtshan ma brtan pa (Kalyāṇamitra, F.324.b.5–6). Note that Yijing’s translation reads “to summon with the hands,” 以手喚 (Taishō 1446, 1044c19).
This Tibetan says simply ljongs zhig, a “place,” “region,” or “country.”
Tib. bsod snyoms kyis kyang brel bar ma gyur to; Skt. na vā stha klāntāḥ piṇḍakena.
Kalyāṇamitra cites a slightly different wording in the root text here. Where this chapter reads “living with the enemy,” Tib. gnas mal la dgra dang lhan cig gnas pas, Kalyāṇamitra reads “like befriending the enemy,” which he then explains to mean “remaining silent like when with one’s enemy.” See Kalyāṇamitra (F.324.b): dgra bo dang ’grogs pa bzhin du zhes bya ba ni dgra dang lhan cig ’khod pa bzhin du cang mi smra ba’o.
Monks who are not free to confess their offenses cannot be at ease, and since such confessions should not be done publicly, monks who live with non-Buddhists (i.e. without access to a monastic community) cannot be at ease.
The problem with vows of silence here is that, in vowing to be silent, the monks were pledging not to confess their own faults and to ignore those of others. So here “silence” is akin to not confessing and hence concealing offenses. Kalyāṇamitra clarifies that a “pledge of silence” is taken as part of temporary discipline adopted for spiritual or training purposes; (F.324.b): mi smra ba zhes bya ba ni tshig med par ’dug pa’o/ /mi smra ba’i yi dam bca’ bar mi bya’o zhes bya ba ni yi dam bca’ ba sngon du btang ste mi smra ba’i brtul zhugs blang bar mi bya’o.
This is to inform the people who live nearby that there will be an opportunity to gain merit, a reference to what Kalyāṇamitra calls the “lifting of restrictions on material goods” (Tib. rdzas kyi dgag dbye). See Kalyāṇamitra (F.326.a): dgag dbye bgyir rung ngo zhes bya ba ni mchod pa’i phyir mgron du gnyer du rung ba’o/ /’di ni sbyin par byed pa rnams kyi bsod nams kyi ’du ba’i sgo’i bye brag bstan pa’i phyir bcas te ’di ltar dgag dbye byas pa’i dge slong gi dge ’dun ni dge legs kyi bsam pa can yin pa’i phyir shin tu yongs su dag pa dang byams pa’i sems dang ldan pa’i phyir shin tu dang bar ’gyur ba yin pas de’i phyir bsod nams kyi zhing ches khyad par ’phags pa yin pas de la sbyin pa byin na ’bras bu ches mang por ’gyur ro/ /de’i ’og tu dge tshul rnams la dgag dbye bya’o zhes bya ba ni rdzas kyi dgag dbye byas pa’i ’og tu dgag dbye byed pa des dge tshul rnams la dgag dbye ba’o.
Tib. gnas ’cha’ ba’i dge slong; Skt. niśrayagrahaṇo bhikṣuḥ. That is, new monks who are “monk wards” (Tib. dge slong lhan gcig gnas pa; Skt. sārdhaṃvihārī bhikṣuḥ) or “monk apprentices” (Tib. dge slong nye gnas pa; Skt. antevāsiko bhikṣuḥ). For at least five years after ordination, monks and nuns must live with or near a monastic mentor or “support” (Tib. gnas; Skt. niśraya). If a new monk or nun wishes to travel, while their mentor does not, the monk or nun must take a new support at their final destination. See The Chapter on Going Forth (Toh 1, ch. 1, 1.628–1.678). A narrative relayed in The Chapter on Minor Matters of the Discipline describes the rule adopted (Tib. khrims su bca’ ba; Skt. kriyākāra) at one monastery where monks were not allowed to spend even a single night without taking such a support from among the monastery residents or visitors. See The Chapter on Minor Matters of the Discipline (Toh 6, vol. tha; F.72.a) : ji tsam na de gnyis gtsug lag khang du dong ba dang/ de na nub gcig kyang mi gnas par ’dug par mi bya ba’i khrims su bya ba yod. Kalyāṇamitra’s gloss (F.325.a) records a different wording (dge slong gnas par bya ba dag gis) that nevertheless means the same thing: dge slong gnas par bya ba dag gis zhes bya ba ni gnas la rag las pa dag gis te/ mkhan po dang slob dpon la brten pa dag gis zhes pa’i tha tshig go.
Tib. dri gtsang khang; Skt. gandhakuṭi. Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.a) elaborates on the preparatory work: mchod pa’i dbang du byas pa zhes bya ba ni mchod pa rtsom pa ste/ gtsug lag khang brgyan pa dang/ khang pa brtsegs pa brtsigs pa dang/ mchod rten dag gso ba dang/ byi dor bya ba la sogs pa’o.
Yijing’s translation omits the previous sentence and here reads that the preceptors and instructors should make all “disciples” 有門徒皆 perform the following cleaning tasks (Taishō 1446, 1045.a11–12).
In commenting on The Chapter on Going Forth (F.106.b, 4.226), Kalyāṇamitra (F.296.b.4) explains “rich goods” (Tib. snum bag gi rnyed pa) to be rich foods like milk, curd, butter, fish, and dried meat: snum bag gi rnyed pa zhes bya ba ni ’o ma dang zho dang mar dang nya sha dang sha skam mo. Note that Kalyāṇamitra thus seems to be reading snigdhalābha rather than snehalābha (“gifts of fondness”) that one sees elsewhere in the Divyāvadāna. Edgerton defines snehalābha as “an acquisition due to affection (of the giver), a loving gift (on the part of laymen to monks),” and cites Divyāvadāna 336.22: saṃghasya ca snehalābhe saṃpanna āgantukā bhikṣava āgatāḥ. Yijing translates only “offer to the saṅgha” (Taishō 1446, 1045a1: 供養僧伽).
Starting on the evening of the fourteenth, the day before the lifting restrictions rite is performed. The upholders of the sūtras, the vinaya, or the mātṛkā should decide what teachings they will discuss based on how much time they have before the act of lifting the restrictions begins before dawn. The act to lift restrictions must be completed before dawn, so they should leave enough time between the end of their talk and dawn to perform the act of lifting restrictions (Kalyāṇamitra, F.325.b.2–3) . Note that Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.b) records chos mnyan pa sbyin par bya’o (“should give a Dharma hearing” i.e. a teaching or recitation) in place of chos bshad par bya (“should explain the Dharma”). See Kalyāṇamitra, F.325.a–b : mtshan thog thag tu chos mnyan pa sbyin par bya’o zhes bya ba ni tshes bcu bzhi la seng ge’i khri brgyan pa bshams nas do nub mtshan thog thag chos mnyan pa ’byung bar ’gyur gyi der tshe dang ldan pa dag gis chags pa sbyin par bya’o zhes spyod yul du brjod nas/ mdo sde dang ’dul ba dang/ ma mo ’dzin pa gsol ba gdab pa dag gis tshes bcu bzhi’i mtshan thog thag tu kha ton du ’don par chos mnyan pa sbyin par bya’o.
The extant Sanskrit begins here with tataḥ paścāt pravārako bhikṣuḥ saṃmantavyaḥ.
If one monk is able to carry out the act on his own, one monk should be appointed. If a second or third is needed, a second or third can be appointed but no more than three monks should be appointed, because it is not appropriate for an assembly to carry out an act of the assembly (Kalyāṇamitra, F.325.b.5) . For this, the Sanskrit says simply, “Then the restriction-lifter monk should be appointed.”
The Sanskrit differs slightly here.
The extant Sanskrit drops out briefly after this and picks up again at F.225.b. We have consulted Chung 1998, who provides relevant Sanskrit parallels drawn from other texts. For complete textual concordances, see Clarke 2014.
Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.b.5) cites the root text as rtsva ku sha rather than ’jag ma.
Kalyāṇamitra explains that the monastics are to hold this grass between their two hands while the act and activities of the ceremony proceed. The meaning of the gesture derives from the grass’s association with purity so that, in holding it, the monastic is declaring that they have made amends for any offenses they have committed and are thus pure. See Kalyāṇamitra, F.325.b : de ni dgag dbye go bar byed pa’i dus na dgag dbye bya ba dang/ dgag dbye byed pa gnyis ka’i lag pas phan tshun nas gzung bar bya ba yin te/ de’ang ji ltar rtswa ku sha ’di dag ’dud par byed pa de bzhin du bdag kyang ltung ba chos bzhin du phyir bya ba’i phyir/ dge slong rnams la ’dud par byed do zhes bya ba ni don ’di bstan pa’i phyir bya’o zhes ’dul ba ’dzin pa dag gi man ngang las shes par bya’o.
Following Y, Q, H: gsol ba ’ba’ zhig gi las instead of D: gsol ba ’ba’ zhig gis las.
Here, where the Tibetan reads “should stand” (’greng bar bya), Yijing translates “sit squatting” 蹲踞而住 (Taishō 1446, 1045b15–16). Later in the text (1.48), the Buddha formulates the rules of customary conduct for a monk offering his lifting of restrictions, stipulating that the monk should squat (Tib. tsog por ’dug; Skt. utkuṭukena niṣadya). Dharmamitra states that the monk who directs the lifting of restrictions is to “sit” in the sense of “squat” before each monk, who in turn squat as they take their turn lifting restrictions. Dharmamitra (vol. yu, F.145.b): dgag dbye byas zin gyi bar du dge slong re re’i mdun du ’dug par bya’o zhes bya ba ni/ dgag dbye byed pas dge slong ji snyed la dgag dbye byed par ’gyur ba de snyed kyi dge slong re re’i mdun du ’dug par bya ba ste/ ji ltar dgag dbye bya ba tsog tsog por ’dug cing l+h+wam bud de/ bla gos phrag pa gcig tu byas te ’dug pa de bzhin du dgag dbye byed pa yang ’dug par bya’o.
That is, “Tell me what actions are appropriate.” Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.b): gdams su gsol zhes bya ba ni bya bar ’os pa nyid du rjod cig pa’o.
That is, “Tell me what actions are inappropriate and not to be done.” Kalyāṇamitra (F.325.b): rjes su bstan pa gsol zhes bya ba ni bya bar mi ’os pa mi bya ba nyid du rjod cig pa’o.
To “sit” here means to “squat.” See note n.54: “the monk who directs the lifting of restrictions should stand in front of the saṅgha elder.”
This portion of the rite marks the beginning of “lifting the restrictions on goods” (Tib. rdzas kyi dgag dbye). Here, the monk who directs the lifting of restrictions offers a small object of his own such as a needle or a blade, thereby lifting restrictions on goods offered to the saṅgha. It is during this part of the rite that offerings received by the saṅgha during the rains may be distributed to the individual saṅgha members. See Yijing (Taishō 1446, 1045c09–10) 大徳此等諸物頗得與安居竟人作隨意施不 and Dharmamitra (vol. yu, F.146.b–147.a) : rang gi rdzas gang yang rung ba than khab tsam gyis kyang dge ’dun la rdzas kyi dgag dbye brtsam par bya ste/ de blangs na tshig gis so zhes bya ba ni/ de ltar thams cad kyis legs par dgag dbye mdzad do/ /shin tu dgag dbye med do zhes bsgrubs ma thag tu dgag dbye byed pa des rang gi rdzas kyi dge ’dun la rdzas kyi dgag dbye ba rtsam par bya’o/ /rdzas kyi dgag dbye zhes bya ba ni/ sbyin par bya ba’i rdzas gang la dge ’dun spyan drang ba’o/ /gang yang rung ba zhes bya ba ni/ chung du yang rung ba’o/ /tha na kha ba tsam gyis kyang zhes bya ba ni chung du na khab kyi mtha’ yan chad kyang rung ba’o/ /ji ltar bya zhe na/ de’i phyir de blangs nas tshig gis so zhes bya ba smras te/ dgag dbye byed pa des khab la sogs pa de lag tu blangs nas rgan rims kyi mdun du ’dug ste/ dge ’dun la tshig gis rdzas kyi dgag dbye brtsam par bya’o.
Kalyāṇamitra’s commentary ends abruptly on F.326.a in the midst of comments on the “lifting of restrictions on material goods” (Tib. rdzas kyi dgag dbye). No colophon is given and the text even appears to end on an incomplete sentence (F.326.a): rang gi phyogs ma rdzogs par phyogs gzhan la ’jug par mi rigs pas des na dge slong. The Narthang adds sarvamaṅgalaṃ in Tibetan transliteration. Two further textual variations should be noted. First, Kalyāṇamitra comments on the “lifting of restrictions on goods” before glossing the line “nuns, nun postulants, male novices, and female novices should be made to lift restrictions after that,” thus reversing the order in the Kangyur text, the implication being that the nuns, nun postulants, etc. would not receive a portion of the offerings made to the saṅgha. Yijing’s translation, however, confirms the order given in the Kangyur version of The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions, placing the “lifting of restrictions on goods” after both of the two saṅghas, of monks and of nuns, have lifted restrictions (Taishō 1446, 1045c05): 二部僧伽，已作隨意竟.Kalyāṇamitra (F.326.a): de’i ’og tu dge tshul rnams la dgag dbye bya’o zhes bya ba ni rdzas kyi dgag dbye byas pa’i ’og tu dgag dbye byed pa des dge tshul rnams la dgag dbye ba’o/ /de’i ’og tu dge slong ma rnams la dgag dbye bya ba’o zhes bya ba ni dge tshul rnams la dgag dbye byas pa’i ’og tu dgag dbye byas pa des dge slong ma rnams la dgag dbye bya ba’o. And second, Kalyāṇamitra includes a few comments on lines that do not appear in this portion of the received Kangyurs (F.326.a): de tsam gyis nad pa ngal pa dang/ /gnas mal phan phun du ’gyur ba dang/ dus las yol ba dang/ gnod pa ’byung na lan gnyis bzlas so zhes bya ba ni lan gsum bzlas pa de tsam gyis nad pa la ngal ba ’byung ba’am/ gnas mal phan phun du gyur pa byung ngam/ dus las yol ba byung ngam/ gnod pa ’byung ba lta na dgag dbye go bar bya ba’i sngags lan gnyis bzla bar bya’o.
The translation follows the Sanskrit: nirgacchati bhikṣavo ratriḥ. The nye’i (or nyes, depending on the Kangyur recension) appears to be extraneous.
We insert the lines “I, the monk so-and-so, profess that I am pure of hindering qualities. I also profess my purity for the lifting of restrictions” following the Sanskrit and Chinese. Chung (p. 151): so ’ham evaṃnāmā bhikṣuḥ pariśuddham antarāyikair dharmair ātmānaṃ vadāmi. pravāraṇāyāṃ me pāriśuddhim ārocayāmy. ārocitāṃ ca pravedayāmi. Yijing (Taishō 1446, 1045c27–28): 我苾芻某甲，自陳無諸障法，為病患因緣故。彼如法僧事，我今與欲，此所陳事，當為我說. Note, however, that a corresponding formula that includes the lines missing here can be found in the Tibetan Chapter on the Restoration Rite, where a sick monk offers his purity prior to the restoration rite; see Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 3.16 (vol. ka, F.149.b).
Following Y, Q, N, H: dge ’dun gyi nang du instead of D: dge ’dun gyis nang du.
I.e., as a divided saṅgha. Chung suggests the Skt. vyagrāḥ (p. 151) here for the Tib. ma tshogs par.
Though the phrase “spill over onto a causeway” (Tib. chu lkog ma nub tsam la ’bog par mi bya’o) does not appear here in any of the Kangyur recensions we consulted, we have included it for consistency since it appears in an otherwise identical stencil in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 3.20 (F.152.b–153.b), where the Buddha formulates the duties for receiving consent from and acting as another monk’s proxy. The exact meaning of the phrase chu lkog ma nub tsam is unclear and it does not appear in the Sanskrit. Kalyāṇamitra (F.317.a.7) notes that this is allowed if there is no other path: chu lkog ma nub tsam la ’bog bar mi bya’o zhes bya ba ni ’gro ba’i lam gzhan yod na ste med na ni nyes pa med do.
The extant Sanskrit fragments begin here with the recto side of folio 69 in the Gilgit Manuscripts and plate 6.1054 in the Facsimile Edition.
This last sentence (Skt. pravāraṇe ’sya chandaṃ ca pravāraṇāṃ cārocayāmi ārocitāṃ ca pravedayāmi) does not appear in Tibetan.
The words “the monk who has received a profession of purity” have been added to the translation here to make the question clear.
In this case, the only remaining contingency would be if the monk who has received another’s lifting of restrictions were to die while among the saṅgha, in which case the lifting of restrictions should be considered “received” and the monks need not be receive it again. See The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 3.25–3.36 and 4.15–4.26.
Tib. chos bsgrag par bya; Skt. dharmaśravaṇaṃ dātavyam. This same expression is rendered in Tibetan as chos mnyan pa sbyin par bya’o in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 3.10 Commenting on that passage, Kalyāṇamitra explains that this expression means that everyone on site should willingly embrace the opportunity to listen to the Dharma, set up a lion’s throne, and not talk so as not to create a clamor (Kalyāṇamitra, F.316.a): chos mnyan par bya’o zhes bya ba ni der thams cad kyi spro ba bskyed par bya zhing seng ge’i khri bshams pa la sogs pa thams cad kyis brjod par mi bya ste ca cor ’gyur ba’i phyir ro.
The Sanskrit adds pravārayiṣye dṛṣṭena śrutena pariśaṅkayā (Chung 1998, p. 153).
This part is marked by an “intervening summary” (Tib. bar sdom; Skt. antaroddāna) rather than the expected “summary” (Tib. sdom; Skt. uddāna). Note that this “intervening summary” covers all of the topics in a single section without even a nidāna, or “narrative introduction.”
Our translation is rather uncertain here as the intervening summary speaks of tshig gcig where the body of the text uses brjod pa and lan gcig bzlas pa. Chung 1998, p. 154, gives the Skt. adhārmikaṃ sthāpanīyam | ekavācā pravāraṇā | kasminn ekā hi kā vācā | kriyā upagate hi ca.
Yijing (Taishō 1446, 1046b17) 大衆一時都説. According to Dharmamitra, “a lifting of restrictions as an assembly” occurs when a disturbance in the area around a monastic site forces the monks to leave the site. In that case, before departing, the monks who are intent on leaving should inform the foremost monk among those monks within eyesight that they “collectively” or “as an assembly” lift restrictions. Dharmamitra (vol. yu, F.148.a): gnas par mi nus pa nyid yin na spyod yul du gyur ba’i dge slong la tshogs kyi dgag dbye sa go bar bya’o zhes bya ba ni/ gnas par khas blangs pa’i gnas su yul ’khrug pa la sogs pa’i rgyus gnas par mi nus pa nyid yin na de’i tshe rang gi mig lnga’i spyod yul du gyur pa’i dge slong mdun na gnas pa de la dge slong ’gro bar rtsol ba des tshogs kyis dgag dbyes dgag dbye bgyid do zhes go bar byas te ’gro bar bya’o zhes bya ba’i tha tshig go. Upasak explains the “gaṇa-pavāraṇa” of the Pali Vinaya to be “a pavāraṇa performed by a ‘group’ of monks consisting of two or three or four monks, i.e. by a Gaṇa, not by the Saṅgha. The Saṅgha consists of at least five monks” (Upasak 1975, p. 79). See also Viśeṣamitra (F.173.b): de la tshogs kyi dgag dbye bya ba ni ’jigs pa chen po byung na rnam par bltas la/ phan tshun brjod par bya ste/ tshe dang ldan pa dag deng dge ’dun gyi dgag dbye bco lnga pa ste/ ’di dang ’di lta bu’i ’jig pa byung ste/ gang gi tshe dge ’dun tshogs pa rnyed pa dag de’i tshe dge ’dun dang lhan cig dgag dbye brgya’o.
The section ‘Monk’ includes first, an ‘intervening summary’ (Tib. bar sdom; antaroddāna) and later a ‘summary’ (Tib. sdom; Skt. uddāna) at 3.48–3.49.
This is the lone appearance of the term “monk crier” (Tib. sgrogs par byed pa’i dge slong; udghoṣako bhikṣuḥ) in the Tibetan canon. A related term in Pali, anussāvaka bhikkhu, refers to the monk who announces the saṅgha’s acts, which would refer to the “monk who directs the lifting of restrictions” in this text.
The translation follows Yijing who writes that these offerings would require the monk crier to pray for the donors. Yijing (Taishō 1446, 1046b27): 令其呪願。苾芻竟夜呪願極大辛苦.
Tib. snyan pa snyan par smra ba’i dge slong dag gis chos snyan dgu bton pa. A similar phrase (Tib. snyan pa snyan pa’i chos snyan par byed; Skt. madhuramadhuraṃ dharmaṃ deśayati) is found elsewhere in The Chapters on Monastic Discipline (e.g., The Chapter on Schisms in the Saṅgha, Tib. vol. ga, F.233.b; Skt. Gñoli 1978, p. 61) and The Hundred Deeds (Toh 340), 10.382; Yijing does not translate this phrase. It is unclear whether “nine” (Tib. dgu) simply means “many” or refers to a specific list of nine teachings. The Yogācārabhūmi mentions “nine types of speaking sweetly that lead to happiness in this and other lives” (’di dang gzhan du bde bar ’gyur ba’i snyan par smra ba rnam pa dgu: Orgyen Nordrang 2008, bar cha, pp. 1989–90), which, in essence, amount to an exhortation to abandon the ten nonvirtues. We might therefore take this phrase to refer to a monk who teaches the laity.
Yijing has them simply chanting: 此解三藏苾芻竟夜誦經 (Taishō 1446, 1046c04).
The “four matters of dispute” (Tib. rtsod pa’i chos bzhi) may simply refer to the four grounds of dispute (Tib. rtsod pa bzhi) discussed in The Chapter on Disputes: disputes over (1) quarrels (Tib. dgyed phyir rtsod pa; Skt. vivādādhikaraṇa); (2) nonadmonishment (Tib. mi gdams pa’i phyir rtsod pa; Skt. anavavādādhikaraṇa); (3) an offense (Tib. ltung ba’i phyir rtsod pa; Skt. āpattyadhikaraṇa), and (4) formal acts of the saṅgha (Tib. bya ba’i phyir rtsod pa; Skt. kriyādhikaraṇa).
The Chapter on Disputes describes the seven means for “quelling” or “settling” a dispute as (1) quell in person (Tib. mngon sum zhi ba; Skt. saṃmukhaṃ śamatha); (2) through recourse to memory (Tib. dran ’dul ’os; Skt. smṛtyāvinaya); (3) dismissing by reason of insanity (Tib. ma myos ’dul ’os; Skt. amūḍhavinaya); (4) by votes (tshul shing dag ni blang ba; Skt. chalākāgrahaṇa); (5) carrying out an investigation into the nature of an issue (Tib. de yi ngo bo tshol gzhug; Skt. tatsvabhāvaiṣīya); (6) by sweeping it under the rug or, more literally, spreading over with grass (Tib. rtswa bkram lta bur ’os pa; Skt. tṛṇaprastāraka); and (7) by taking an oath (Tib. khas blang bar ‘os pa; Skt. pratijñākāraka). See Borgland 2014.
This presumably means “builders” or “army engineers.”
The Skt. grāmaṃ … nagaraṃ vā nigamaṃ goes in ascending order of size from village to town to city. The Tibetan, however, reads “a town, a city, or the countryside” (Tib. grong/ grong khyer/ yul).
The Sanskrit resumes here; see Dutt (1950) Gilgit Manuscripts, F.71.a.
Yijing’s translation specifies that these are malevolent spirits lacking faith in the Buddha and his Dharma. Taishō 1446, 1046c24–25: 不信天魔諸惡鬼神.
Supplying Tib. nyal khri dag kyang sgyur bar byed; Skt. mañcān api saṃparivartayanti to conform with the stock passages that follow.
Gilgit Manuscripts 71.b (6.725).
The Tibetan says the monks made a satchel with their robes (Tib. gtur bu; Skt. visikā, vṛṣikā, elsewhere meaning “cushion”: de nas dge slong rnams kyang gtur bu dag tu chos gos rnams thum po byas te thogs nas). The Sanskrit suggests that the monks tied up their pitchers (Tib. ril ba spyi blugs; Skt. kuṇḍī) and their robes (tatra bhikṣubhir cīvaravisikāsu cīvaraṃ ca kuṇḍīṃ baddhvā).
Tib. nye du; Skt. jñāti.
That is, he should be “invited” to make an accusation against other monks in the rains retreat.
“Matter” refers to the incident a monk may be accused of. Sometimes an accusation is made against a monk but the prompter might not identify the monk, in which case the matter is known but the person is not. See 5.15–5.20.
Tib. bdag nyid du shin tu rnam par dag pa; Skt. ātmaviśuddhi.
See The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 4.37–4.72 for these ten, which detail ten different scenarios in which a monastic may confess an offense just prior to the restoration rite. Here, the text is instructing the reader that a monastic may follow these same procedures to confess an offense just prior to the lifting of restrictions.
Tib. shes; Skt. pratijānāti; Ch. 憶知.
The Sanskrit here reads nāśayitvā (“having removed”), though this is presumably equivalent to a pravāsanīya, or “should be expelled/expulsion” (Tib. bskrad pa; Ch. 擯出).
Tib. byin gyis brlab nas; Skt. adhiṣṭhāya. That is, the offending monk discloses his offense, resolves to make amends later, and requests to be excused. Yijing renders this as “afterward, [he] should be punished” (Ch. 後當治罪).
Kalyāṇamitra explains that every fortnight before performing the restoration rite, if they have not already done so, monastics should scrutinize themselves for things that should be curbed (Tib. bsdam par bya ba; Skt. saṃvarakaraṇīya), that is, subtle mental faults; things that should be confessed (Tib. bshags par bya ba; Skt. deśanīya), that is, simple atonements, confessable offenses, and misdeeds; and things that should be sanctioned (Tib. byin gyis brlab pa; Skt. adhiṣṭheya), that is, saṅgha remnants and transgressions requiring forfeiture. Kalyāṇamitra (F.244.a) : ’di dang snga ma’i byin gyis brlab pa’i skabs dag tu ha cang yun ring na mi mdzes pas sngags lan re bzlas pas chog ste lan gsum ni mi nyes pa de yang gang zhe na/ de’i phyir bsdam par bya ba dang/ bshags par bya ba dang/ byin gyis brlab par bya ba dag ces bya ba gsungs te/ bsdam par bya ba zhes bya ba ni yid kyi nyes byas phra mo’o/ /bshags par bya ba zhes bya ba ni ltung byed dang/ so sor bshags par bya ba dang/ bshags pa’i nyes byas so/ /byin gyis brlab par bya ba dag ces bya ba ni dge ’dun lhag ma dang/ spang ba’i ltung byed dag go/ /de dag la so sor brtag par bya zhing zhes bya ba ni/ bdag la nyes pa de dag gang byung ba la so sor brtag par bya zhing ngo.
The four types of mastery over the Tripiṭaka discussed here and in the next three sentences (uphold, elucidate, skilled in, knowledgeable in) are introduced in the “Support” (Tib. gnas; Skt. niśraya) section of The Chapter on Going Forth, 1.650–1.652. See vol. ka, F.66.b–67.b and sūtra 82 (piṭakābhijñatvam) of Guṇaprabha’s Vinayasūtra.
Gilgit Manuscripts 73.a (6.728). Note that here, in The Chapter on Lifting Restrictions, the third member “experienced in” (Tib. gzo; Skt. kovida) is phrased slightly differently than in The Chapter on Going Forth, where it is given as “knowledgeable in” (Tib. rig pa; Skt. vida) and appears as the fourth member, following “skilled in” (Tib. mkhas pa; Skt. kuśala).
Though the text does not explicitly say so, the list should be understood to continue up to the thirteenth saṅgha remnant.
Concerning “to contradict one’s own account” (Tib. gnas nas gnas su sbed pa; Skt. sthānāsthānaṃ saṃkrāmati; Ch. 前引後違), see the Bhikṣuṇī Vinayavibhaṅga (The Analysis of the Nuns’ Monastic Discipline, Toh 5), F.51.b.3: ji ltar gnas nas gnas su sbed pa yin zhe na gnas gang du bzhag pa’i gnas de nas spos nas gnas gzhan du ’jog par byed pa ste de ltar na gnas nas gnas su sbed pa yin no.
Reading N, H: gsum for D: gnas.
Most of the contents for this summary must be supplied from the previous chapter, as described below.
In The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, see the “Several Repetitions” summary verse (Tib. sdom gyi tshig su bcad pa; Skt. uddānagāthā) and related contents at 5.1–5.164.
Tib. gnod pa’i ched dkyil ’khor; Skt. āpadarthikaḥ maṇḍalakaḥ. This is a smaller site, demarcated by special ad hoc boundaries, established to carry out formal acts of the saṅgha in times of duress.
That is, through having won them over by mending their begging bowls and mantles. Tib. mgu zhing rab tu mgu bar byas; Skt. pātracīvareṇāmohayitvā pramohayitvā. Edgerton suggests pramohayitvā be read as pramodayitvā, which accords with the Tibetan. Thus, read pātracīvareṇāmodayitvā pramodayitvā.
These conciliatory gestures match the treatment resident monks should extend to visiting monks who uphold the sūtras, the vinaya, or the mātṛkā, as described in The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, which reads, “He should be welcomed with friendly words and his begging bowl and robes taken. He should be bathed and supplies of oil offered to him and the saṅgha as well” (The Chapter on the Restoration Rite, 3.10). In explaining that passage, Kalyāṇamitra writes, “ ‘Should be bathed,’ should massage and rub and wash with water as appropriate to the season” (F.316.a.6).
This too is part of the protocol for receiving a visiting teacher. There, Kalyāṇamitra explains that to “give a hearing of the Dharma” (Tib. chos sgrags par bya; Skt. dharmaśravaṇaṃ dātavyam) is to listen to the visiting monk’s teachings. Everyone on site should happily embrace the opportunity to receive teachings, set up a lion’s throne, and not talk so as not to create a clamor (Kalyāṇamitra, F.316.a).
The Indian monsoon season is traditionally said to last for four months; monks may choose to reside for the first or last three of its months. Those who settle for the rains at the onset of the first month would perform the lifting of restrictions just before the start of the fourth month. Those who settle for the rains at the onset of the second month, however, would not perform the lifting of restrictions until the end of the fourth month. The implication here seems to be that the quarrelsome monks entered the rains retreat at the beginning of the monsoon and are expecting to perform the rite of lifting restrictions that very day. The other monks, who fear quarrel and conflict with these monks, are thus advised to make a ruse by performing the restoration rite instead of the rite of lifting restrictions. This may induce the quarrelsome monks to think the others still have one more month of rains retreat, at which point they will perform the rite of lifting restrictions on their own and depart, leaving the harmonious group out of danger and free from adversaries.
“Not ill,” i.e. “healthy”; Tib. mi na ba; Skt. aglāna. The translation of the Tib. nad pas mi na ba’i dgag dbye ’jog na is guided by the Skt. glānaḥ aglānasya pravāraṇāṃ sthāpayati.
A colophon to the Tibetan text only appears at the very end of The Chapters on Monastic Discipline (Toh 1, ch. 17, vol. nga F.302.a) , but a translation is included here for the benefit of readers while the final chapter remains unpublished. It reads as follows:
May those beautiful flowers that have rained downFrom the Great Sage’s moon-like visageRemain among beings for a long time to come,Overcoming evil views without being snared.Translated by the Kāśmirī preceptor Sarvajñādeva, the Indian preceptor Vidyākāraprabha, the Kāśmirī preceptor Dharmākāra, and the translator and monk Palgyi Lhunpo. The Indian preceptor Vidyākāraprabha and the chief editor of translations, the monk Paltsek, retranslated and proofed the text before settling upon the final version.
The Buddha said that acceptance is the supreme hardship, acceptance is the supreme nirvāṇa.One who harms other renunciants and does violence to them is not an ascetic.ye dharmā hetuprabhavā hetuṃ teṣāṃ tathāgata uvāca, teṣāṃ ca yo nirodha evaṃvadī mahāśramaṇaḥ
Bibliography
Kangyur and Tengyur Sources
dgag dbye’i gzhi (Pravāraṇāvastu). Toh 1, ch. 3, Degé Kangyur vol. 1 (’dul ba, ka), folios 221.b–237.b.
dgag dbye’i gzhi. bka’ ’gyur (dpe sdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 1, pp. 517–53 and pp. 786–92.
dge slong ma’i ’dul ba rnam par ’byed pa (Bhikṣuṇīvibhaṅga). Toh 5, Degé Kangyur vol. 9 (’dul ba, ta), folios 25.b–328.a.
Kalyāṇamitra. ’dul ba gzhi rgya cher ’grel ba (Vinayavastuṭīkā). Toh 4113, Degé Tengyur vol. 156 (’dul ba, tsu), folios 177.b–326.b.
Śūra. so sor thar pa’i mdo’i gzhung ’grel (Prātimokṣa Sūtrapaddhati). Toh 4104, Degé Tengyur vols. 150–51 (’dul ba, du–nu): vol. du, folios 1.b–239.a; vol. nu, folios 1.b–87.b.
Vimalamitra. so sor thar pa’i mdo’i rgya cher ’grel pa ’dul ba kun las btus pa (Pratimokṣasūtraṭīkāvinayasamuccaya). Toh 4106, Degé Tengyur vols. 152–54 (’dul ba, pu–bu): vol. pu, folios 1.b–312.a; vol. phu, folios 1.b–281.a ; vol. bu, folios 1.b–150.a.
Viśeṣamitra. ’dul ba bsdus pa (Vinayasaṃgraha). Toh 4105, Degé Kangyur vol. 146 (’dul ba, nu), folios 88.a–255.b.
Sanskrit Sources
Bagchi, Sitansusekhar. Mūlasarvāstivādavinayavastu, 2 vols. Darbhanga: Mithila Research Institute, 1970.
Chung, Jin-il. Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Vinaya-Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998.
Chung, Jin-il, and Klaus Wille. Pravaranavastu. Computer input version based on the edition by Jin-il Chung, Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Vinaya-Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin: GRETIL version 2020-07-31.
Dutt, Nalinaksha, ed. Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. III, Part IV. Calcutta: Calcutta Oriental Press, 1950.
Chinese Sources
Secondary Sources
84000. The Chapter on Going Forth (Pravrajyāvastu, rab tu ’byung ba’i gzhi, Toh 1 ch. 1). Translated by Robert Miller. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.
84000. The Chapter on the Rains (Varsāvastu, dbyar gyi gzhi, Toh 1 ch. 4). Translated by Robert Miller. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2024.
84000. The Chapter on the Restoration Rite (Poṣadhavastu, gso sbyong gi gzhi, Toh 1 ch. 2). Translated by Robert Miller. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2024.
84000. The Gaṇḍī Sūtra (Gaṇḍīsūtra, gaN+DI’i mdo, Toh 298). Translated by Annie Bien. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Brahmali, Bhikkhu, trans. The Chapter on the Invitation Ceremony (Pavāraṇākkhandhaka). SuttaCentral.
Borgland, Jens Wilhelm. “A Study of the Adhikaraṇavastu: Legal Settlement Procedures of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya.” PhD diss., Department of Culture Studies and Oriental Languages, University of Oslo, 2014.
Butön Rinchen Drup (bu ston rin chen grub). ’dul ba’i mdo’i rnam par ’byed pa ’dul ba rgya mtsho’i snying po rab tu gsal bar byed pa. In gsung ’bum/ rin chen grub [Delhi reprint of the Zhol xylograph], vol. 21 (zha), pp. 140–730. Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965–71. BDRC W22106.
Chung, Jin-il. Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Vinaya-Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998.
Clarke, Shayne. Vinaya Texts. Gilgit Manuscripts in the National Archives of India: Facsimile Edition. Volume 1. New Delhi and Tokyo: The National Archives of India and the International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, 2014.
Dungkar Losang Trinlé (dung dkar blo bzang phrin las). dung dkar bod rig pa’i tshig mdzod chen mo [Dungkar’s Dictionary], vols.1–2. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2002.
Geshé Tsewang Nyima (dge bshes tshe dbang nyi ma). dam chos ’dul ba gtso gyur gyi gzhung sne mang las btus pa’i tshig mdzod mun sel sgron me [A Lamp to Dispel Darkness: A Dictionary Drawing on a Variety of Texts but Focusing on the Sublime Vinaya]. Taipei: The Corporate Body of the Buddha Educational Foundation, 2009.
Heirman, Ann. “Indian Disciplinary Rules and the Early Chinese Adepts: A Buddhist Reality.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 128, no. 2 (2008): 257–72.
Hinüber, Oskar von. Untitled review of Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Vinaya-Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin. Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 124, no. 4 (Oct.–Dec. 2004): 806–10.
Hu-von Hinüber, Haiyan (1997a). “On the Sources of Some Entries in the Mahāvyutpatti, A Contribution to Indo-Tibetan Lexicography.” In Untersuchungen zur buddhistsichen Literatur II, Gustav Roth zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet, edited by Heinz Bechert and Petra Kieffer-Pülz, 183–99. Göttingen (Sanskrit-Wörterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden, Beiheft 8), 1997.
Hu-von Hinüber, Haiyan (1997b). “The 17 Titles of the Vinayavastu in the Mahāvyutpatti. Contribution to Indo-Tibetan Lexicography II.” In Bauddhavidyāsudhākaraḥ Studies in Honour of Heinz Bechert on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Edited by Petra Kieffer-Pülz and Jens-Uwe Hartmann, 339–45. Swisttal-Odendorf (Indica et Tibetica, 30), 1997.
Khenpo Shenga (mkhan po gzhan dga’). ’dul ba mdo rtsa ba’i mchan ’grel(Annotated Commentary on the Vinayasūtra). Chauntra: Dzongsar Chokyi Lodroe College of Dialectics, 2007.
Kishino, Ryoji. “A Study of the Nidāna: An Underrated Canonical Text of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-Vinaya.” PhD diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 2013.
Monier-Williams, Monier. Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary (digitized version), 2008.
Negi, J. S. Tibetan-Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993–2005.
Orgyan Nordrang (o rgyan nor brang). gangs can rig brgya’i chos kyi rnam grangs mthong tshad kun las btus pa ngo mtshar ’phrul gyi sde mig chen po [A Great and Wondrous Key: A Compendium of All the Enumerations from the Snowy Land’s One Hundred Fields of Knowledge]. Vols. 1–3. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2008.
Roloff, Carola (Bhikṣuṇī Jampa Tsedroen). The Buddhist Nuns’ Ordination in the Tibetan Canon: Possibilities of the Revival of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Bhikṣuṇī Lineage. Hamburg Buddhist Studies 15. Bochum: Projektverlag, 2020.
Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu. Buddhist Monastic Code II: The Khandaka Rules Translated & Explained. Valley Center: Metta Forest Monastery, 2001.