What Mendicants Hold Most Dear contains the Buddha’s answer to a question by Upāli, the Buddha’s foremost disciple in knowledge and mastery of the Vinaya. Upāli asks the Buddha to teach about the nature, types, and obligations of mendicants and about the meaning of this term. For the benefit of the assembled mendicants and mendicants in general, the Buddha explains that their nature is restraint, their obligations consist of disciplined conduct, and their types are the genuine mendicants who abide by disciplined conduct and those who are not genuine and thus do not so abide. When one of the Buddha’s answers given in similes seems obscure, he offers further clarification upon Upāli’s request. The Buddha explains the advantages of maintaining disciplined conduct, thus urging the mendicants to treasure it, and he warns against disregarding it while wearing the mendicant’s robes.
This sūtra was translated from Tibetan by the Achi Translation Group under the guidance of Khenchen Nyima Gyaltsen from Kagyu College in Dehradun, India, who provided many detailed explanations. Konchog Tenzin (Mark Riege) served as the main translator, and Yeshe Metog (Claudia Jürgens) and Virginia Blum as the main reviewers. Meghan Howard contributed valuable research and additional review.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
What Mendicants Hold Most Dear contains the Buddha’s response to a question from Upāli. It is set in a monastery called Blooming Lotus in Śrāvastī, where Upāli supplicates the Buddha in front of a large assembly of mendicants (Skt. bhikṣu; Tib. dge slong) and asks him about the nature, types, and obligations of mendicants, as well as the meaning of the term itself. To benefit mendicants generally, the Buddha addresses Upāli’s questions by praising disciplined conduct, emphasizing its importance, and encouraging the listeners to maintain it. When one of the Buddha’s answers given in similes seems obscure, he offers further clarification upon Upāli’s request. The Buddha explains the advantages of maintaining disciplined conduct, thus urging the mendicants to treasure it, and he warns against disregarding it while wearing the mendicant’s robes.
The monk Upāli is remembered as one of the “ten close disciples” (Tib. nyan thos nye ’khor bcu) of the Buddha and foremost in his mastery of the monastic discipline, or Vinaya. Before becoming a monk, Upāli was a low-caste barber attending the Śākya princes, and he received ordination together with them. Many conversations about the Vinaya between the Buddha and Upāli are recorded in the various Vinaya collections,1 and, according to early Buddhist texts, Upāli was often consulted by others about matters of monastic discipline, even during the Buddha’s lifetime. Following the Buddha’s passing, Upāli was chosen to recite the Vinaya at the First Buddhist Council.2
Very little is known about the sūtra’s history. There do not appear to be any translations into Chinese, and no Sanskrit version is extant.3 However, as we discuss below, one verse of the sūtra is cited in a commentary in the Tengyur.4 Just as we know very little about the sūtra’s Indic origins, we know even less about the origins of the Tibetan translation. The text’s colophon is rudimentary and does not offer any information on the translator. Additionally, two Kangyur catalogs list the translator as unknown.5 In terms of the date of its translation, the sūtra is not listed in the Denkarma (ldan/lhan dkar ma) or Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) catalogs, the earliest available lists of Buddhist texts translated into Tibetan, which were prepared in the ninth century. We do, however, find a reference to the sūtra in Butön’s (1290–1364) extensive catalog of scriptures and treatises, but he does not list the translator either.6
The sūtra is included in many of the Kangyurs. For example, Resources for Kanjur and Tanjur Studies at the University of Vienna7 lists twenty-nine different Kangyurs that contain the sūtra, including representatives from all the important groups, such as the Tshalpa, Thempangma, Ladhaki/Mustang, Independent/Mixed groups, and Bhutan Kangyurs. Except for the Namgyal Kangyur—which lists it as The Noble Sūtra of Upāli’s Questions (’phags pa nye bar ’khor gyis zhus pa zhes bya ba’i mdo)—all the titles and colophons are similar. While the Sanskrit title was originally specified by Tibetans as Bhikṣuprarejusūtra, modern scholars have reconstructed it as Bhikṣupriyasūtra, possibly due to the obscure meaning of prareju.8 Our translation is based on the version of the text contained in the Degé Kangyur. When comparing the Tibetan versions in the different Kangyurs (including the Lhasa, Stok Palace, Choné, Narthang, and Lithang Kangyurs), we found only minor differences beyond questions of spelling. The text has previously been translated several times: by W. W. Rockhill in 1883, by Bhikkhu Thubten Kalsang and Bhikkhu Pāsādika in 1970, and in two recent translations into English and Spanish, respectively, which have been published on the internet.9 We are not aware of any modern research dedicated to this text.
Throughout the centuries, Buddhists have turned to this sūtra for its explanation of the value of disciplined conduct. The example from the Tengyur is a citation of a verse from the sūtra in the Śīlakathāvṛtti, a commentary on Vasubandhu’s Śīlaparikathā (Sermons on Disciplined Conduct), to explain the harmful results of a loss of disciplined conduct:10
- “It is explained that like branches that grow
- For a long time from a strong trunk,
- If that person has only the outer attributes for a long time,
- Reprehensible talk will increase,
- And misdeeds too will increase.”
Several Tibetan masters quote verses from the sūtra to emphasize the importance of keeping monastic discipline. For example, Jé Tsongkhapa (1357–1419) says in his Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path:11
“There are very grave consequences for you if you undertake an ethical discipline and then fail to keep it. The Sūtra Beloved of Monks (Bhikṣuprarejusūtra) says that, once you undertake a training, it will proceed in either an advantageous or disadvantageous direction:
“Therefore, you should also think about the drawbacks of not keeping to ethical discipline and thereby generate great respect for the training.”
Another example is the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Losang Gyatso (1617–82), who quotes a verse in his regulations for Drepung monastery:12
“If, due to a specific condition, one cannot keep the vows, it is more beneficial to give them up than to keep them hypocritically. For [the Bhikṣupriyasūtra] says:
The verse cited by the Fifth Dalai Lama embodies one of the sūtra’s key points—the importance of disciplined conduct, which the Buddha urges mendicants to treasure, warning them of careless discipline. The Buddha also affirms the value and benefit of monastic vows, urging those who have gone forth to protect their discipline and to hold it dear. For example, he eloquently likens discipline to an unparalleled balm, monastic robes to unparalleled garments, and disciplined conduct to supreme happiness. He says, moreover, that the merit accumulated through it brings forth the result of buddhahood.
Lastly, it should be noted that in the title and throughout the translation, we have rendered the term bhikṣu (Tib. dge slong) as “mendicant.” The Sanskrit term technically refers to a fully ordained monk, but in the plural, it may also implicitly include fully ordained nuns (Skt. bhikṣuṇī) and sometimes even practicing lay people.13 Moreover, we know that the Buddha’s disciples in Śrāvastī included nuns. He addresses them explicitly in the Bhikṣuṇīvinayavibhaṅga,14 and several Pali suttas of the Saṃyutta Nikāya also mention the presence of nuns in Śrāvastī.15 While of course we cannot know whether the sūtra’s original audience included nuns, its subject matter clearly concerns monks and nuns equally, so we felt it was desirable to render the term bhikṣu with the more inclusive “mendicant,” rather than just “monk.” This choice is also supported by the original meaning of the term bhikṣu, which, in its most literal sense, simply means “one who begs (Skt. bhikṣati) for a living.”
[F.125.a][F.125.b]Homage to the Omniscient One.
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in the Blooming Lotus Monastery in the great city of Śrāvastī together with a retinue that consisted of a saṅgha of 12,500 mendicants. At that time, among the assembled retinue of the Blessed One, there was a noble one called Upāli, whose senses were disciplined, who was well learned, and who had profound wisdom. He was devoted to the Dharma and Vinaya excellently taught by the Blessed One, and he held them in the highest esteem. Upāli rose from his seat, draped his upper robe over one shoulder, and, kneeling on his right knee with palms joined at his heart, he smiled and supplicated the Blessed One with these words:
Thus proclaimed the Blessed One, and Upāli and the other mendicants praised what the Blessed One had said.
This completes “The Sūtra on What Mendicants Hold Most Dear.”
What Mendicants Hold Most Dear contains the Buddha’s answer to a question by Upāli, the Buddha’s foremost disciple in knowledge and mastery of the Vinaya. Upāli asks the Buddha to teach about the nature, types, and obligations of mendicants and about the meaning of this term. For the benefit of the assembled mendicants and mendicants in general, the Buddha explains that their nature is restraint, their obligations consist of disciplined conduct, and their types are the genuine mendicants who abide by disciplined conduct and those who are not genuine and thus do not so abide. When one of the Buddha’s answers given in similes seems obscure, he offers further clarification upon Upāli’s request. The Buddha explains the advantages of maintaining disciplined conduct, thus urging the mendicants to treasure it, and he warns against disregarding it while wearing the mendicant’s robes.
This sūtra was translated from Tibetan by the Achi Translation Group under the guidance of Khenchen Nyima Gyaltsen from Kagyu College in Dehradun, India, who provided many detailed explanations. Konchog Tenzin (Mark Riege) served as the main translator, and Yeshe Metog (Claudia Jürgens) and Virginia Blum as the main reviewers. Meghan Howard contributed valuable research and additional review.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
What Mendicants Hold Most Dear contains the Buddha’s response to a question from Upāli. It is set in a monastery called Blooming Lotus in Śrāvastī, where Upāli supplicates the Buddha in front of a large assembly of mendicants (Skt. bhikṣu; Tib. dge slong) and asks him about the nature, types, and obligations of mendicants, as well as the meaning of the term itself. To benefit mendicants generally, the Buddha addresses Upāli’s questions by praising disciplined conduct, emphasizing its importance, and encouraging the listeners to maintain it. When one of the Buddha’s answers given in similes seems obscure, he offers further clarification upon Upāli’s request. The Buddha explains the advantages of maintaining disciplined conduct, thus urging the mendicants to treasure it, and he warns against disregarding it while wearing the mendicant’s robes.
The monk Upāli is remembered as one of the “ten close disciples” (Tib. nyan thos nye ’khor bcu) of the Buddha and foremost in his mastery of the monastic discipline, or Vinaya. Before becoming a monk, Upāli was a low-caste barber attending the Śākya princes, and he received ordination together with them. Many conversations about the Vinaya between the Buddha and Upāli are recorded in the various Vinaya collections,1 and, according to early Buddhist texts, Upāli was often consulted by others about matters of monastic discipline, even during the Buddha’s lifetime. Following the Buddha’s passing, Upāli was chosen to recite the Vinaya at the First Buddhist Council.2
Very little is known about the sūtra’s history. There do not appear to be any translations into Chinese, and no Sanskrit version is extant.3 However, as we discuss below, one verse of the sūtra is cited in a commentary in the Tengyur.4 Just as we know very little about the sūtra’s Indic origins, we know even less about the origins of the Tibetan translation. The text’s colophon is rudimentary and does not offer any information on the translator. Additionally, two Kangyur catalogs list the translator as unknown.5 In terms of the date of its translation, the sūtra is not listed in the Denkarma (ldan/lhan dkar ma) or Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) catalogs, the earliest available lists of Buddhist texts translated into Tibetan, which were prepared in the ninth century. We do, however, find a reference to the sūtra in Butön’s (1290–1364) extensive catalog of scriptures and treatises, but he does not list the translator either.6
The sūtra is included in many of the Kangyurs. For example, Resources for Kanjur and Tanjur Studies at the University of Vienna7 lists twenty-nine different Kangyurs that contain the sūtra, including representatives from all the important groups, such as the Tshalpa, Thempangma, Ladhaki/Mustang, Independent/Mixed groups, and Bhutan Kangyurs. Except for the Namgyal Kangyur—which lists it as The Noble Sūtra of Upāli’s Questions (’phags pa nye bar ’khor gyis zhus pa zhes bya ba’i mdo)—all the titles and colophons are similar. While the Sanskrit title was originally specified by Tibetans as Bhikṣuprarejusūtra, modern scholars have reconstructed it as Bhikṣupriyasūtra, possibly due to the obscure meaning of prareju.8 Our translation is based on the version of the text contained in the Degé Kangyur. When comparing the Tibetan versions in the different Kangyurs (including the Lhasa, Stok Palace, Choné, Narthang, and Lithang Kangyurs), we found only minor differences beyond questions of spelling. The text has previously been translated several times: by W. W. Rockhill in 1883, by Bhikkhu Thubten Kalsang and Bhikkhu Pāsādika in 1970, and in two recent translations into English and Spanish, respectively, which have been published on the internet.9 We are not aware of any modern research dedicated to this text.
Throughout the centuries, Buddhists have turned to this sūtra for its explanation of the value of disciplined conduct. The example from the Tengyur is a citation of a verse from the sūtra in the Śīlakathāvṛtti, a commentary on Vasubandhu’s Śīlaparikathā (Sermons on Disciplined Conduct), to explain the harmful results of a loss of disciplined conduct:10
- “It is explained that like branches that grow
- For a long time from a strong trunk,
- If that person has only the outer attributes for a long time,
- Reprehensible talk will increase,
- And misdeeds too will increase.”
Several Tibetan masters quote verses from the sūtra to emphasize the importance of keeping monastic discipline. For example, Jé Tsongkhapa (1357–1419) says in his Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path:11
“There are very grave consequences for you if you undertake an ethical discipline and then fail to keep it. The Sūtra Beloved of Monks (Bhikṣuprarejusūtra) says that, once you undertake a training, it will proceed in either an advantageous or disadvantageous direction:
“Therefore, you should also think about the drawbacks of not keeping to ethical discipline and thereby generate great respect for the training.”
Another example is the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Losang Gyatso (1617–82), who quotes a verse in his regulations for Drepung monastery:12
“If, due to a specific condition, one cannot keep the vows, it is more beneficial to give them up than to keep them hypocritically. For [the Bhikṣupriyasūtra] says:
The verse cited by the Fifth Dalai Lama embodies one of the sūtra’s key points—the importance of disciplined conduct, which the Buddha urges mendicants to treasure, warning them of careless discipline. The Buddha also affirms the value and benefit of monastic vows, urging those who have gone forth to protect their discipline and to hold it dear. For example, he eloquently likens discipline to an unparalleled balm, monastic robes to unparalleled garments, and disciplined conduct to supreme happiness. He says, moreover, that the merit accumulated through it brings forth the result of buddhahood.
Lastly, it should be noted that in the title and throughout the translation, we have rendered the term bhikṣu (Tib. dge slong) as “mendicant.” The Sanskrit term technically refers to a fully ordained monk, but in the plural, it may also implicitly include fully ordained nuns (Skt. bhikṣuṇī) and sometimes even practicing lay people.13 Moreover, we know that the Buddha’s disciples in Śrāvastī included nuns. He addresses them explicitly in the Bhikṣuṇīvinayavibhaṅga,14 and several Pali suttas of the Saṃyutta Nikāya also mention the presence of nuns in Śrāvastī.15 While of course we cannot know whether the sūtra’s original audience included nuns, its subject matter clearly concerns monks and nuns equally, so we felt it was desirable to render the term bhikṣu with the more inclusive “mendicant,” rather than just “monk.” This choice is also supported by the original meaning of the term bhikṣu, which, in its most literal sense, simply means “one who begs (Skt. bhikṣati) for a living.”
[F.125.a][F.125.b]Homage to the Omniscient One.
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in the Blooming Lotus Monastery in the great city of Śrāvastī together with a retinue that consisted of a saṅgha of 12,500 mendicants. At that time, among the assembled retinue of the Blessed One, there was a noble one called Upāli, whose senses were disciplined, who was well learned, and who had profound wisdom. He was devoted to the Dharma and Vinaya excellently taught by the Blessed One, and he held them in the highest esteem. Upāli rose from his seat, draped his upper robe over one shoulder, and, kneeling on his right knee with palms joined at his heart, he smiled and supplicated the Blessed One with these words:
Thus proclaimed the Blessed One, and Upāli and the other mendicants praised what the Blessed One had said.
This completes “The Sūtra on What Mendicants Hold Most Dear.”
For example, in the Pali Canon there is the Upālipañcaka, and in the Chinese canon there is a translation of the Upāliparipṛcchā from the Sarvāstivāda Vinaya. See Norman (1983), pp. 28–29. In the Kangyur, the Upāliparipṛcchā of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya is found in the Vinayottaragrantha (Toh 7 and Toh 7a).
The meaning of the word prareju in the transliterated Sanskrit of the title remains uncertain. There are different renderings of the title in other Kangyur versions as plareju (bla re dzu in Y and K) and prariju (pra ri dzu in S, L, and Z). The origin of the term prareju/prariju in the Tibetan transliteration is uncertain. We can speculate that it may capture prarju, i.e., pra + ṛju. If so, the sūtra’s Sanskrit title would mean “Sūtra on Upright Mendicants.” However, although the Sanskrit term ṛju and its Pali equivalent uju/ujju, meaning “upright,” appear in the Vinaya as a quality of monks, the compound term prarju is not attested in Indic literature.
tshul khrims kyi gtam gyi ’grel pa (Śīlakathāvṛtti), Toh 4165. See Hahn and Saito 2009, p. 179, who mention that the author of this commentary, the ācārya (Tib. slob dpon) *Prakāśakīrti (Tib. gsal grags), quotes mainly from older Mahāyāna works, the earliest being from the fifth century
See Situ Panchen Chökyi Jungné, p. 460, and Eimer 1998, p. 75: dge slong la rab tu gces pa’i mdo ’gyur byang med pa (“The Sūtra on What Mendicants Hold Most Dear has no translator’s colophon”).
See Tsong-kha-pa 2000, p. 405; Tohoku 1934, p. 58; and Steinkellner 1998, p. 65. Steinkellner, who gives Bhikṣupriyasūtra, identifies Baron Schilling de Canstadt’s Index de Gandjour, published in 1831, as the source of the Sanskrit sūtra titles (ibid.). The Tohoku catalog, which also uses priya in the sūtra’s name, was published in 1934 and states that some Sanskrit titles were corrected by the compiler. Note that priya was never used by any Tibetan sources in the title of this sūtra. The Sanskrit term priya means “dear” or “beloved.” If we search the Kangyur and Tengyur for other instances of rab tu gces pas (“most dear”) where there is a surviving Sanskrit original, we find the Avadānakalpalatā by Kṣemendra (eleventh century, translation completed 1267–75), where it corresponds to priyataraṃ (“the most beloved”; -tara is the superlative suffix in Sanskrit). In his entry on gces pa (but not rab tu gces pa), Negi cites it as a translation of priya in another passage in the same text (Negi 1993, s.v.). On the other hand, the Mahāvyutpatti dictionary gives several translations for priya, as well as compounds including priya, and none of them are gces pa. Another point to note about priya is that it has a different number of syllables than prareju. If, for example, prareju were the result of a scribe miscopying the text at some point, we must ask why we do not find any versions with an incorrect title that has the same number of syllables or letters as the hypothetical “original” priya. That said, a final possibility (perhaps an explanation of last resort) is precisely that what we have is a scribal mistake that crept in early in the text’s transmission in Tibet, though a faulty back-translation into Sanskrit is probably more likely.
tshul khrims kyi gtam gyi ’grel pa (Toh 4165), folio 171.a. See also Hahn and Saito 2009, p. 195. The quote in the commentary uses the spellings ’khrungs pa instead of ’khrung ba (“trunk”), yun rings instead of yun ring (“for a long time”), and kha na ma tho rtag instead of kha na ma tho’i gtam (“reprehensible talk”).
See Tsong-kha-pa 2000, p. 343. The translation given here is by the Lamrim Chenmo Translation Committee.
Quoted from Jansen 2013, pp. 121–22, except for the sūtra quote, where we use our own translation, since Jansen offers a different interpretation. The Great Fifth also uses two lines of the sūtra in his biography of Tsarchen Losal Gyatso (1502–66). See Mohr 2010, p. 304.
See dge slong ma’i ’dul ba rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 5), which shows instances of the Buddha addressing nuns in Śrāvastī’s Jeta Grove (see, for example, folio 118.b).
See Bodhi 2000, pp. 221–30, who shows that the discourses with bhikkhunis all take place in Śrāvastī, although the exact location mentioned there is Jeta’s Grove and not the Blooming Lotus Monastery.
Note that these two lines are in verse even though they are spoken neither by the Buddha nor by Upāli, but by the narrator.
This refers to the central inner pillar or tree trunk that is said to give life to a stūpa or sacred statue.
This is likely playing on the word for “vows” (Skt. samvara, Tib. sdom pa), which in both Sanskrit and Tibetan shares a root with “restraint” (Skt. samvṛta, Tib. bsdams pa).
This is the approximate number of precepts for fully ordained monks. Nuns have roughly one hundred additional precepts, the exact count depending on the lineage.
Though the Tibetan does not actually make this explicit, we have read “exhausted” here as referring to the afflictions, which are the basis of saṃsāra, becoming depleted. It may reflect a common Pali definition of bhikkhu as being so called due to bhinnakilesattā, “the state of having broken (bhinna) the afflictions (kilesa, Skt. kleśa).” See the respective aṭṭhakathās to the Abhidamma Vibhaṅga (PTS 328) and to the Vimānavatthu (PTS 29, 114, 310) and Petavatthu (PTS 51, 146) in the Khuddakanikāya. This definition is based on a traditional etymological analysis of the word bhikkhu.
“Arouse wholesomeness” (Tib. dge slong) is a literal translation of the Tibetan term for bhikṣu, rendered throughout as “mendicant.” Note that the Tibetan uses the same verb for “arouse” wholesomeness and “beg for” food, creating a wordplay that is lost in the English translation.
This passage presents a list of traditional definitions of the term bhikṣu. The first three definitions are traditional etymologies of the word bhikṣu. These are not actual linguistic etymologies but more akin to folk etymologies. They work by using homophones to elucidate a word’s meaning, and they are tied to ancient Indian beliefs about the power of language to both shape and embody reality. Rather than being etymologies, the last five definitions cited in this verse are synonyms that encapsulate the defining characteristics of a bhikṣu. Like the folk etymologies, these lists of synonyms have ancient roots in Buddhist literature.
This may be a play on the Sanskrit words bhikṣu and vibhūṣaṇa (“adornment”), which sound similar. The Buddha seems to be defining bhikṣu by pointing to an etymology based in wordplay, suggesting that bhikṣu and “adornment” come from the same root (Skt. dhātu) and therefore bhikṣu means “adornment.” Without the original Sanskrit text, we cannot confirm that the word for “adornment” is a semi-homophone to bhikṣu. Thus, while our interpretation remains speculative, it is in accord with the frequent wordplay in the rest of the sūtra. If this interpretation is correct, the Buddha here is adding a new etymology of the word “mendicant” (not found in other discourses) to the list of classic etymological definitions of the term just rehearsed in the preceding paragraph.
“Color” here probably refers to colored powders applied to the body, such as those used by Hindus for the “bindi” on the forehead.
While the preceding verse contains wordplay on the meaning of the term bhikṣu, in this list of a mendicant’s adornments, the Buddha instead employs a symbolic mode, playing further on the meaning of “adornment.” Taken literally, the list appears counterintuitive and surprising, since it contains luxurious items that are restricted by a mendicant’s vows. However, the meaning of these items is symbolically inverted from examples of unwholesome indulgence to supremely wholesome characteristics, as the Buddha continues to explain later.
Note that, as in the case above, these two lines are kept in verse even though they are spoken neither by the Buddha nor by Upāli, but by the narrator.
The Tibetan skad kyi byings, which we translate as “derivation,” is a grammatical term for the “root” (Skt. dhātu) of a word. If our interpretation is correct, “derivation” (Tib. skad byings, lit. “verbal root”) refers to the Buddha’s deriving the term for “mendicant” (Skt. bhikṣu) from the word for “ornament” (perhaps Skt. vibhūṣaṇa), which is not found among the standard etymologies given for the term in Buddhist literature (see note 24). Since this derivation is both unique and counterintuitive, Upāli here asks the Buddha for further explanation. Another possible interpretation of skad byings in this context would be “concealed speech,” by which Upāli might refer to the preceding coded series of surprising adornments listed by the Buddha (see note 25).
“Ascetic discipline” (Skt. vrata, Tib. brtul zhugs) refers to the twelve ascetic practices (dvādaśadhūtaguṇāḥ, sbyang pa’i yon tan bcu gnyis) regarding food, clothing, and residence. These include practices like begging for alms, wearing castoff clothing, and living in seclusion.
Degé reads gnyis (“two”) for the number of other types, but our translation follows that of several other Kangyurs (H, Y, J, K, N, C) that read gcig (“one”).
“Bearing the Well-Gone One’s victory banner” refers to wearing monastic robes, which are the outer signs of being a follower of the Buddha.
While the Tibetan in most Kangyur versions uses the term for “body” (Tib. gzugs po, lit. “one with form”) here, it carries the same meaning as the term for “form” (Tib. gzugs) or “outer appearance” used in the verses above. We should therefore understand this as referring to the outer appearance of wearing the monastic robes. Even though the Comparative Edition does not list this, some Kangyur versions (S, F, and possibly also D) use gzugs bor (lit. “casting off the form”), changing the Tibetan letter pa into ba, since the letters look very similar. Since this explains the additional por/bor syllable, we are following this alternate reading.
A possible understanding of these two lines is that if we lose our life, we will regain it in rebirth, but if we lose our discipline, we may not get a chance to regain it, particularly if we are not reborn in a precious human body with the opportunity to be liberated. “Once lost” has been read by implication in the second line of this verse. Literally the Tibetan here might be rendered, “You are reborn after you lose your life, but not so after disciplined conduct.”
Refers to the twelve ascetic virtues (sbyang pa’i yon tan bcu gnyis) concerning food, clothing, and residence, such as begging for alms, wearing castoff clothing, and living in seclusion.
Epithet of a buddha, who has subdued (Tib. bcom) all afflictions, possesses (Tib. ldan) all awakened qualities, and transcended (Tib. ’das) saṃsāra and passed into nirvāṇa. This is how the Skt. bhagavat is translated in Tibetan.
Name of a monastery (vihāra) in Śrāvastī.
Literally, “verbal root,” with “root” (Tib. byings) being a grammatical term for the word stem that forms the basis of a word. Here it refers to the Buddha’s derivation of the word bhikṣu from the term for “ornament.”
Conduct based on abandoning lack of discipline in body, speech, and mind.
These may refer to the traditional possessions of mendicants, which Prebish 2002, p. 4, lists as “begging bowl, razor, needle, girding for the robes, and water strainer” in addition to the three robes.
The four root downfalls (Tib. rtsa ba’i ltung ba bzhi, here shortened to Tib. rtsa ba bzhi) are killing, taking what is not given, sexual activity, and lying about one’s spiritual attainments.
Central inner pillar or tree trunk that is said to give life to a stūpa or sacred statue.
Although the Tib. (dge slong) and Skt. (bhikṣu) terms usually refer to fully ordained monks, in the plural they may encompass nuns as well. Rendering it as “mendicant” in English remains faithful to the original meaning of bhikṣu as “one who begs for alms.”
Honorific term for someone who has gained the realization of the path of seeing.
An epithet of the buddhas. The homage to the Omniscient One at the beginning of a Buddhist scripture usually indicates that it belongs to the Vinaya Piṭaka.
Among other things, this term is applied to the sour fermented remainder from beer brewing, certain types of lemons, and the sour part of yogurt. Here it refers to overly sour liquids in general, such as overly fermented vinegar.
A dish of rice cooked in milk that the Buddha was offered to break his fast after six years of austerities.
An epithet of the Buddha Śākyamuni. The Sanskrit term connotes “silence” or “quiescence,” which is regarded as a central quality of sages. The Tibetan thub pa means “capable one.”
“Cyclic existence,” the cycle of birth and death driven by mental afflictions and karmic actions.
Ancient capital of the kingdom of Kosala, where the Buddha gave many teachings, spent most of his summer retreats, and defeated the six heretical teachers by performing fifteen miracles. Located in present-day Uttar Pradesh in northern India.
The three robes (Skt. tricīvara, Tib. chos gos gsum) of the fully ordained are the lower robe (Skt. antarvāsa, Tib. mthang gos) wrapped around the waist, the outer or upper robe (Skt. uttarāsaṅga, Tib. bla gos) covering the upper body, and the ceremonial robe (Skt. saṃghāṭī, Tib. snam sbyar).
One of the ten closest disciples of the Buddha. He is known for having mastered the Buddha’s teachings on the Vinaya, the code of discipline. After the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa, Upāli was the Vinaya’s chief compiler.
One of the three piṭakas, or “baskets,” of the Buddhist canon. It codifies the disciplined conduct and training of monks and nuns.
One of the standard epithets of the buddhas. A recurrent explanation offers three different meanings for su- that are meant to show the special qualities of “accomplishment of one’s own purpose” (svārthasampad) for a complete buddha. Thus, the Sugata is “well” gone, as in the expression su-rūpa (“having a good form”); he is gone “in a way that he shall not come back,” as in the expression su-naṣṭa-jvara (“a fever that has utterly gone”); and he has gone “without any remainder” as in the expression su-pūrṇa-ghaṭa (“a pot that is completely full”). According to Buddhaghoṣa, the term means that the way the Buddha went (Skt. gata) is good (Skt. su) and where he went (Skt. gata) is good (Skt. su).
This refers to the three monastic robes, which are the outer signs of being a monastic follower of the Buddha.
dge slong la rab tu gces pa’i mdo (Bhikṣuprarejusūtra). Toh 302, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 125.a–127.a.
dge slong la rab tu gces pa’i mdo (Bhikṣuprarejusūtra). bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur 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). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 72, pp. 337–41.
dge slong la rab tu gces pa'i mdo. Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 54 (mdo sde, ga), folios 357.a–358.b.
dge slong ma’i ’dul ba rnam par ’byed pa (Bhikṣuṇīvinayavibhaṅga). Toh 5, Degé Kangyur vol. 9 (’dul ba, ta), folios 25.b–328.a.
tshul khrims kyi gtam gyi ’grel pa (Śīlaparikathāvṛtti). Toh 4165, Degé Tengyur vol. 172 (spring yig, ge), folios 169.b–173.b.
’dul ba gzhung bla ma (Vinayottaragrantha). Toh 7, Degé Kangyur vol. 12 (’dul ba, na), folios 1.b–92.a.
’dul ba gzhung dam pa (Vinayottaragrantha). Toh 7a, Degé Kangyur vol. 12–13 (’dul ba, na–pa), folios 92.b (na)–313.a (pa).
Bodhi, Bhikkhu. The Connected Discourses of the Buddha. A New Translation of the Saṃyutta Nikāya. Vol. 1. Somerville: Wisdom Publications, 2000.
Collett, Alice, and Bhikkhu Anālayo. “Bhikkhave and Bhikkhu as Gender-inclusive Terminology in Early Buddhist Texts.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 21 (2014): 760–797.
Eimer, Helmut, ed. The Brief Catalogues to the Lhasa and the Narthang Kanjurs: A Synoptic Edition of the Bka’ ’gyur rin po che’i mtshan tho and the Rgyal ba’i bka’ ’gyur rin po che’i chos tshan so so’i mtshan byang dkar chag bsdus pa. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 40. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, 1998.
Gyatso, Upasaka Losang, trans. Sūtra llamado Lo que es lo Más Precioso para un Monje. 2015. Accessed January 15, 2021.
Hahn, Michael, and Naoki Saito. “Vasubandhus Mahnrede über die Sittlichkeit mit dem Kommentar des Prakāśakīrti.” In Pāsādikadānaṃ: Festschrift für Bhikkhu Pāsādika, edited by Martin Straube et al, 177–204. Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag, 2009.
Jansen, Berthe. “How to Tame a Wild Monastic Elephant: Drepung Monastery According to the Great Fifth.” In Tibetans Who Escaped the Historian’s Net: Studies in the Social History of Tibetan Societies, edited by Peter Schwieger and Alice Travers, 111–139. Kathmandu: Vajra Books, 2013.
Kalsang, Bhikkhu Thubten, and Bhikkhu Pāsādika. Bhikshu-Prateju-Sutra: The Discourse Named “The Bhikshu’s Predilection.” Bangkok: Visakha Puja, Annual Publication of the Buddhist Association of Thailand, 1970.
Lekden, Gyalten, trans. The Sūtra on What is Most Precious to a Monk. Sera Je, India: The Union of Teaching and Accomplishment Publishing Group, 2013.
Mohr, Thea, and Jampa Tshedroen, ed. Dignity and Discipline: Reviving Full Ordination for Buddhist Nuns. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2010.
Negi, J. S. Tibetan-Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). Sarnath, Varanasi: Dictionary Unit, Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993.
Ngawang Lobzang Gyatso (ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, 1617–82). ’bras spungs bca’ yig. chos sde chen po dpal ldan ’bras dkar spungs pa’i dgon gyi bca’ yig tshul ’chal sa srung ’dul ba’i lcags kyo kun gsal me long. In bod kyi snga rabs khrims srol yig cha bdams bsgrigs, edited by tshe ring dpal ’byor et al, 275–323. Lhasa: bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1989.
Nishioka, Soshū. “Index to the Catalogue Section of Bu-ston’s ‘History of Buddhism’ (III).” Annual Report of the Institute for the Study of Cultural Exchange, The University of Tokyo 6 (1983): 47–201.
Prebish, Charles S. Buddhist Monastic Discipline. The Sanskrit Prātimokṣa Sūtras of the Mahāsāṃghikas and Mūlasarvāstivādins. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2002.
Rockhill, W. W. “Translation of Two Brief Buddhist Sūtras from the Tibetan.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 11 (1885): clxxi–clxxiv.
Situ Panchen Chökyi Jungné (si tu paN chen chos kyi ’byung gnas). rgyal ba’i bka’ ’gyur rin po che’i bzhugs byang dkar chag ces bya ba bzhugs so. Chengdu: si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2008.
Skilling, Peter. “Theravādin Literature in Tibetan Translation.” Journal of the Pali Text Society 19 (1993): 69–201. Oxford: Pali Text Society, 1993.
Resources for Kanjur and Tanjur Studies. Universität Wien. Accessed April 23, 2019.
Thera, Nyanaponika, and Hellmuth Hecker. Great Disciples of the Buddha: Their Lives, Their Works, Their Legacy. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1997.
Thiṭṭila (Seṭṭhila), Paṭhamakyaw Ashin, Aggamahāpaṇḍita. The Book of Analysis (Vibhaṅga): The Second Book of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka. Bristol: Pali Text Society, 2010.
Tsong-kha-pa. The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment. Vol. 1. Translated by Lamrim Chenmo Translation Committee. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2000.
Ui, Hakuju et al, eds. A Complete Catalogue of Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Degé Edition of Kangyur and Tengyur). Japan: Tohoku Imperial University, 1934.
C Choné
D Degé
H Lhasa (Zhol)
J Lithang
K Peking Kangxi
L London (Shelkar)
N Narthang
S Stok Palace
Y Peking Yongle
Z Shey Palace
