On the dispute among the monks from Kosambī

At one time the awakened one, the Lord was staying at Kosambī in Ghosita’s monastery. Now at that time a certain monk had fallen into an offence; he saw that offence as an offence but other monks saw that offence as no offence. After a time he saw that offence as no offence, while the other monks saw that offence as an offence. Then these monks spoke thus to that monk: “You, your reverence, have fallen into an offence. Do you see this offence?”

“There is not an offence of mine, your reverences, that I can see.” Then these monks, having obtained unanimity, suspended that monk for not seeing the offence.

But that monk had heard much, he was one to whom the tradition had been handed down; he was an expert on dhamma, an expert on discipline, an expert on the summaries; he was wise, experienced, clever; he was conscientious, scrupulous, desirous of training. Then that monk, having approached monks who were his comrades and intimates, spoke thus: “This is no offence, your reverences, this is not an offence; I am unfallen, I have not fallen; I am unsuspended, I am not suspended; I was suspended by a (formal) act that was not legally valid, reversible, not fit to stand. Let the venerable ones be my partisans on account of the rule, on account of discipline.” And that monk gained as partisans the monks who were his comrades and intimates. And he sent a messenger to monks in the country who were his comrades and intimates, saying: “This is no offence, your reverences … not fit to stand. Let the venerable ones be my partisans on account of the rule, on account of discipline.” And that monk gained as partisans those monks in the country who were his comrades and intimates.

Then these monks who took the part of the suspended one approached those monks who had suspended him; having approached, they spoke thus to the monks who had suspended him: “This is no offence, your reverences, this is not an offence; this monk is unfallen, this monk has not fallen; this monk is unsuspended, this monk is not suspended; he was suspended by a (formal) act that was not legally valid, reversible, not fit to stand.” When they had spoken thus, the monks who had suspended him spoke thus to the monks who took the part of the suspended one:

“This is an offence, your reverences, this is not no offence; this monk has fallen, this monk is not unfallen; this monk is suspended, this monk is not unsuspended; he was suspended by a (formal) act that was legally valid, irreversible, fit to stand. Do not you, your reverences, take the part of this suspended monk, do not side with him.” But those monks who took the part of the suspended (monk), although being spoken to thus by the ones who had suspended him, still took the part of that suspended monk and sided with him.

Then a certain monk approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, that monk spoke thus to the Lord: “This is a case, Lord, where a certain monk has fallen into an offence. He saw that offence as an offence but other monks saw that offence as no offence. After a time he saw that offence as no offence, while the other monks saw that offence as an offence. Then, Lord, those monks spoke thus to that monk: … as in Kd.10.1.1 ‘… Do you see this offence?’ He said: ‘There is not an offence of mine, your reverences, that I can see Then, Lord, these monks, having obtained unanimity, suspended that monk for not seeing the offence. But, Lord, that monk had heard much, he was one to whom the tradition had been handed down … desirous of training. Then, Lord, that monk, having approached monks who were his comrades and intimates … as in Kd.10.1.2 … And, Lord, that monk gained as partisans the monks who were his comrades and intimates … And, Lord, that monk gained as partisans those monks in the country who were his comrades and intimates. Then, Lord, those monks who took the part of the suspended one … as in Kd.10.1.3 … When they had spoken thus, Lord, the monks who had suspended him spoke thus: … But those monks, Lord, who took the part of the suspended (monk) although being spoken to thus by the ones who had suspended him, still took the part of that suspended monk and sided with him.”

Then the Lord, thinking: “The Order of monks is divided, the Order of monks is divided”, rising from-his seat approached the monks who had suspended (that monk); having approached, he sat down on the appointed seat. As he was sitting down, the Lord spoke thus to the monks who had suspended (that monk): “Do not you, monks, thinking: ‘It appears so to us, it appears so to us deem that a monk should be suspended on every occasion.

“This is a case, monks, where a monk has fallen into an offence. He sees that offence as no offence; other monks see that offence as an offence. If, monks, those monks know concerning that monk: ‘This venerable one has heard much, he is one to whom the tradition has been handed down … desirous of training. If we suspend this monk for not seeing the offence we cannot carry out the Observance together with this monk, we will carry out the Observance without this monk—from this source there will be strife, dispute, contention, brawls, for the Order, there will be schism in the Order, dissension in the Order, altercation in the Order, differences in the Order.’ Monks, that monk should not be suspended for not seeing an offence by monks bent on a schism.

“This is a case, monks, where a monk has fallen into an offence. He sees that offence … as in Kd.10.1.6 ‘… if we suspend this monk for not seeing the offence we cannot invite together with this monk, we will invite without this monk; we cannot carry out a (formal) act of the Order together with this monk, we will carry out a (formal) act of the Order without this monk; we cannot sit down on a seat together with this monk, we will sit down on a seat without this monk; we cannot sit down to drink conjey together with this monk, we will sit down to drink conjey without this monk; we cannot sit down in a refectory together with this monk, we will sit down in a refectory without this monk; we cannot stay under one roof together with this monk, we will stay under one roof without this monk; we cannot, according to seniority, carry out greeting together with this monk, rising up before (one another), saluting with joined palms, doing the proper duties, but we will, according to seniority, carry out greetings … doing the proper duties without this monk—from this source there will be strife … differences in the Order.’ Monks, that monk should not be suspended for not seeing an offence by monks bent on a schism.”

Then the Lord, having spoken on this matter with the monks who had suspended that monk, rising from his seat, approached those monks who were taking the part of the suspended (monk); having approached, he sat down on the appointed seat. As he was sitting down, the Lord spoke thus to the monks who were taking the part of the suspended (monk): “Do not you, monks, having fallen into an offence, deem that amends should not be made for the offence, thinking: ‘We have not fallen’. This is a case, monks, where a monk has fallen into an offence; he sees that offence as no offence; other monks see that offence as an offence. If, monks, that monk knows concerning those monks: ‘These venerable ones have heard much … as in Kd.10.1.2 … desirous of training. It is impossible for them, because of me or because of anyone else, to follow a wrong course through desire, through hatred, through stupidity, through fear. If these monks suspend me for not seeing the offence, if they do not carry out the Observance together with me, if they carry out the Observance without me … if they do not invite together with me, if they invite without me … if they, according to seniority, carry out greetings without me, rising up before (one another), saluting with joined palms, doing the proper duties—from this source there will be for the Order strife … differences in the Order’. Monks, the offence should be confessed even out of faith in others by a monk who is bent on a schism.” Then the Lord, having spoken on this matter with the monks who took the part of the suspended (monk), rising from his seat, departed.

Now at that time monks taking the part of a suspended (monk) carried out the Observance just there within the boundary, and carried out a (formal) act of the Order; but the monks who had suspended (him), having gone outside the boundary, carried out the Observance and carried out a (formal) act of the Order (there). Then ascertain monk who had suspended him, approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, that monk spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord, these monks who are taking the part of a suspended (monk) are carrying out the Observance just there within the boundary, they are carrying out a (formal) act of the Order; but we, the monks who have suspended him, having gone outside the boundary, are carrying out the Observance, we are carrying out a (formal) act of the Order (there).”

“Monk, if these monks who are taking the part of the suspended (monk) are carrying out the Observance just there within the boundary and are carrying out a (formal) act of the Order, these (formal) acts of theirs will be legally valid, irreversible, fit to stand because a motion and a proclamation have been laid down by me. If, monk, you monks who suspended him, carry out the Observance just there within the boundary, if you carry out a (formal) act of the Order, these (formal) acts of yours are also legally valid, irreversible, fit to stand, because a motion and a proclamation have been laid down by me.

“What is the reason for this? These monks belong to a different communion from yours and you belong to a different communion from theirs. Monk, there are these two grounds for belonging to a different communion: either, of oneself one makes oneself belong to a different communion, or a complete Order suspends one for not seeing or for not making amends for or for not giving up. Monk, there are these two grounds for belonging to a different communion. Monk, there are these two grounds for belonging to the same communion: either, of oneself one makes oneself belong to the same communion, or a complete Order restores one who was suspended for not seeing or for not making amends for or for not giving up. Monk, there are these two grounds for belonging to the same communion.”

Now at that time monks, causing quarrels, causing strife, falling into disputes in a refectory amidst the houses, behaved unsuitably towards one another in gesture, in speech; they came to blows. People looked down upon, criticised, spread it about, saying: “How can these recluses, sons of the Sakyans, causing quarrels … come to blows?” Monks heard these people who … spread it about. Those who were modest monks … spread it about, saying: “How can these monks … come to blows?” Then these monks told this matter to the Lord. He said: “Is it true, as is said, monks, that monks … came to blows?”

“It is true, Lord.” Having rebuked them, having given reasoned talk, he addressed the monks, saying:

“Monks, if an Order is divided, if it is behaving not according to the rule, if there is unfriendliness, you should sit down on a seat thinking: ‘At least we will not behave unsuitably to one another in gesture, in speech; we will not come to blows.’ Monks, if an Order is divided but if it is behaving according to the rule, if there is friendliness, you may sit down on a seat next (to one another).”

Now at that time monks, making quarrels, making strife, falling into disputes in the midst of an Order, wounded one another with the weapons of the tongue; they were not able to settle that legal question. Then a certain monk approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he stood at a respectful distance. As he was standing at a respectful distance, that monk spoke thus to the Lord: “This is a case, Lord, where monks, making quarrels … are not able to settle that legal question. It would be good, Lord, if the Lord out of compassion were to approach those monks.” The Lord consented by becoming silent. The Lord approached those monks; having approached he sat down on the appointed seat. As he was sitting down, the Lord spoke thus to those monks:

“Enough, monks; no strife, no quarrels, no contention, no disputing.” When he had spoken thus, a certain monk who spoke what was not- dhamma spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord let the Lord, the dhamma-master wait; Lord, let the Lord, unconcerned, live intent on abiding in ease here and now; we will be (held) accountable for this strife, quarrel, contention, disputing.” And a second time the Lord spoke thus to these monks: “Enough, monks; no strife … no disputing.” And a second time the monks who spoke what was not-dhamma spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord, let the Lord, the dhamma-master wait; … we will be (held) accountable for this … disputing.”

The story of Dīghāvu

“Now, monks, if such is the forbearance and gentleness of kings who wield the sceptre, who wield the sword, herein, monks, let your light shine forth so that you who have gone forth in this dhamma and discipline which are thus well taught may be equally forbearing and gentle.” And a third time the Lord spoke thus to these monks: “Enough, monks; no strife, no quarrels, no contention, no disputing.” And a third time that monk who spoke what was not dhamma spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord, let the Lord, the dhamma-master, wait; Lord, let the Lord, unconcerned, live intent on abiding in ease here and now; we will be (held) accountable for this strife, quarrel, contention, disputing.” Then the Lord, thinking: “These foolish men are as though infatuate; it is not easy to persuade them,” rising up from his seat, departed.

The First Portion for Repeating: that on Dīghāvu

Then the Lord, having dressed in the morning, taking his bowl and robe, entered Kosambī for almsfood; having walked for almsfood in Kosambī, bringing back his almsbowl after his meal, having packed away his lodging, taking his bowl and robe and standing in the midst of the Order, he spoke these verses:

“When all in chorus bawl, none feels a fool,
nor though the Order is divided, thinks otherwise.

With wandering wits the wiseacres range all the held of talk;
with mouths agape to full extent, what leads them on they know not.

They who (in thought) belabour this: That man has me abused, has hurt,
has worsted me, has me despoiled: in these wrath’s not allayed.

They who do not belabour this: That man has me abused, has hurt,
has worsted me, has me despoiled: in them wrath is allayed.

Nay, not by wrath are wrathful moods allayed here (and) at any time,
but by not-wrath are they allayed: this is an (ageless) endless rule.

People do not discern that here we straitened are (in life, in time),
but they who herein do discern, thereby their quarrels are allayed.

Ruffians who maim and kill, steal cattle, steeds and wealth, who plunder realms—
for these is concord. Why should there not be for you?

If one find friend with whom to fare rapt in the well-abiding, apt,
surmounting dangers one and all, with joy fare with him mindfully.

Finding none apt with whom to fare, None in the well-abiding rapt,
As rājā quits the conquered realm, fare lonely as bull-elephant in elephant jungle.

Better the faring of one alone, there is no companionship with the foolish,
fare lonely, unconcerned, working no evil, as bull-elephant in elephant-jungle.”

On going to Bālakaloṇaka

Then the Lord, having spoken these verses as he was standing in the midst of the Order, approached Bālakaloṇakāra village. Now at that time the venerable Bhagu was staying in Bālakaloṇakāra village. Then the venerable Bhagu saw the Lord coming from afar; seeing him, he made ready a seat, set out water for the feet, a footstool, a foot-stand, and having gone to meet him, he received his bowl and robe. Then the Lord sat down on the seat made ready; as he was sitting down he had his feet bathed. And the venerable Bhagu, having greeted the Lord, sat down at a respectful distance. As the venerable Bhagu was sitting down at a respectful distance, the Lord spoke thus to him: “I hope, monk, things are going well, I hope you are keeping going, I hope you are not short of almsfood.”

“Things are going well, Lord, I am keeping going, Lord, and, Lord, I am not short of almsfood.” Then the Lord, having delighted, rejoiced, roused, gladdened the venerable Bhagu with talk on dhamma, rising from his seat, departed for the Eastern Bamboo Grove.

On going to Pācīnavaṁsadāya

Now at that time the venerable Anuruddha and the venerable Nandiya and the venerable Kimbila were staying in the Eastern Bamboo Grove. The keeper of the Grove saw the Lord coming from afar; seeing him he spoke thus to the Lord: “Do not, recluse, enter this Grove; there are three young men of respectable families staying here desiring self; do not cause them discomfort.” The venerable Anuruddha heard the keeper of the Grove conferring with the Lord; having heard, he spoke thus to the keeper of the Grove: “Do not, good grove-keeper, impede the Lord. It is our teacher, the Lord, who is arriving.” Then the venerable Anuruddha approached the venerable Nandiya and the venerable Kimbila; having approached, he spoke thus to the venerable Nandiya and to the venerable Kimbila:” Go forward, venerable ones, go forward, venerable ones; our teacher, the Lord is arriving.”

Then the venerable Anuruddha and the venerable Nandiya and the venerable Kimbila, having gone out to meet the Lord, one received his bowl and robe, one made ready a seat, one set out water for the feet, a footstool, a foot-stand. Then the Lord sat down on the seat made ready; as he was sitting down he had his feet bathed. Then these venerable ones, having greeted the Lord, sat down at a respectful distance. As the venerable Anuruddha was sitting down at a respectful distance, the Lord spoke thus: “I hope that things are going well with you, Anuruddhas, I hope you are keeping going, I hope you are not short of almsfood.”

“Things are going well, Lord, we are keeping going, Lord, and, Lord, we are not short of almsfood.”

“I hope that you, Anuruddhas, are living all together on friendly terms and harmonious, as milk and water blend, regarding one another with the eye of affection?”

“Yes, certainly, Lord, we are living all together on friendly terms and harmonious, as milk and water blend, regarding one another with the eye of affection.”

“And how is it that you, Anuruddhas, are living … of affection?”

“As to this, Lord, it occurred to me: ‘Indeed it is a gain for me, indeed it is well gotten by me, that I am living with such Brahma-farers.’ On account of this, Lord, for these venerable ones amity as to bodily conduct, whether openly or in private, has risen up in me, amity as to speech, amity as to thought, whether openly or in private, has risen up. Because of this. Lord, it occurred to me: ‘What now, if I, having surrendered my own mind, should live only according to the mind of these venerable ones?’ So I, Lord, having surrendered my own mind, am living only according to the mind of these venerable ones. Lord, we have divers bodies, but assuredly only one mind.”

And the venerable Nandiya too, and also the venerable Kimbila spoke thus to the Lord: “And it occurred to me too, Lord: ‘Indeed it is a gain for me … only one mind’. It is thus, Lord, that we are living all together on friendly terms and harmonious, as milk and water blend, regarding one another with the eye of affection.”

“And I hope that you, Anuruddhas, are living zealous, ardent, self-resolute?”

“Yes, certainly, Lord, we are living … self-resolute.”

“And how is it that you, Anuruddhas, are living … self-resolute?”

“As to this, Lord, whichever of us returns first from the village for almsfood, he makes ready a seat, puts out water for washing the feet, a footstool, a foot-stand; having washed a refuse-bowl he sets it out, he sets out water for drinking and water for washing. Whoever returns last from the village for almsfood, if there are the remains of a meal and if he so desires, he eats them; if he does not desire to do so he throws them out where there are no crops or drops them into water where there are no living creatures; he puts up the seat, he puts away the water for the feet, the footstool, the foot-stand, having washed the refuse-bowl, he puts it away, he puts away the water for drinking and the water for washing, he sweeps the refectory. Whoever sees a vessel for drinking water or a vessel for washing water or a vessel (for water) for rinsing after an evacuation, void and empty, he sets out (water). If it is impossible for him (to do this) by a movement of his hand, having invited a companion to help us by signalling (to him) with the hand, we set out (water); but we do not, Lord, for such a reason break into speech. And then we, Lord, once in every five nights sit down together for talk on dhamma. It is thus, Lord, that we are living, zealous, ardent, self-resolute.”

On going to Pārileyyaka

Then the Lord, having delighted, rejoiced, roused, gladdened the venerable Anuruddha and the venerable Nandiya and the venerable Kimbila with talk on dhamma, rising from his seat, set out on tour for Pārileyya. Walking on tour in due course he arrived at Pārileyya. The Lord stayed there at Pārileyya in the Guarded Woodland Thicket at the root of the lovely sāl-tree. Then as the Lord was meditating in private a reasoning arose in his mind thus: “Formerly, beset by those monks of Kosambī, makers of strife, makers of quarrels, makers of disputes, makers of brawls, makers of legal questions in the Order, I did not live in comfort; but now that I am alone with no other, I am living in comfort removed from those monks, makers of strife … makers of legal questions in the Order.”

Now a certain large bull-elephant was beset by elephants and cow-elephants, by elephant calves and sucklings; he ate grass already cropped by them, and they ate bundles of branches as he broke them off; and he drank muddied water and when he crossed over at a ford the cow-elephants went pushing against his body. Then it occurred to that large bull-elephant: “Now I am living beset by elephants and cow-elephants … I eat grass already cropped by them and they eat bundles of branches as I break them off; and I drink muddied water and when I cross over at a ford the cow-elephants go pushing against my body. Suppose I were to live alone secluded from the crowd?”

Then that large bull-elephant, leaving the herd, approached Pārileyya, the Guarded Woodland Thicket, the lovely sāl-tree and the Lord; having approached, he set out by means of his trunk drinking water for the Lord and water for washing, and he kept the grass down. Then it occurred to that large bull-elephant: “Now formerly, beset by elephants and cow-elephants, by elephant calves and sucklings, I did not live in comfort; I ate grass already cropped by them and they ate bundles of branches as I broke them off; I drank muddied water and when I crossed over at a ford the cow-elephants went pushing against me; but now that I am alone with no other I am living in comfort removed from the elephants, the cow-elephants, the elephant calves and sucklings.”

Then the Lord, having understood his own seclusion and knowing by mind that bull-elephant’s reasoning of mind, at that time uttered this utterance:

“Herein agreeth mind with mind,
of sageand bull-elephant of plough-pole tusks,
since each delights in forest (solitude).”

Then the Lord, having stayed at Pārileyya as long as he found suiting, set out on tour for Sāvatthī. Walking on tour in due course he arrived at Sāvatthī. The Lord stayed there at Sāvatthī in the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s monastery. Then the lay-followers of Kosambī thought: ‘These masters the monks of Kosambī, have done us much mischief; the Lord is departing, harassed by these; come, we should neither greet the masters, the monks of Kosambī, nor should we stand up before them, nor should we salute them with joined palms or perform the proper duties; we should not revere, respect, esteem or honour them, and neither should we give them almsfood when they come (to us); thus they, when they are neither revered, respected, esteemed nor honoured by us, will depart unrevered, or they will leave the Order, or they will reconcile themselves to the Lord’.

Then the lay-followers of Kosambī neither greeted the monks of Kosambī, nor stood up before them, they did not salute them with joined palms or perform the proper duties, they did not revere, respect, esteem or honour them and they did not give them almsfood when they came (to them). Then the monks of Kosambī, as they were not being revered, respected, esteemed or honoured by the lay-followers of Kosambī, spoke thus: “Come now, your reverences, let us, having gone to Sāvatthī, settle this legal question in the Lord’s presence.”

On eighteen cases

Then the monks of Kosambī, having packed away their lodgings, taking their bowls and robes, approached Sāvatthī.

Then the venerable Sāriputta heard: “It is said that the monks of Kosambī, makers of strife, makers of quarrels, makers of disputes, makers of brawls, makers of legal questions in the Order, are coming to Sāvatthī.” Then the venerable Sāriputta approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance the venerable Sāriputta spoke thus to the Lord: “It is said, Lord, that the monks of Kosambī, makers of strife … makers of legal questions in the Order, are coming to Sāvatthī. How am I, Lord, to behave in regard to these monks?”

“Well now, Sāriputta, as dhamma is so must you stand.”

“How am I, Lord, to find out what is dhamma and what is non-dhamma?”

“Now, Sāriputta, a speaker of non-dhamma is to be known by eighteen points: In such a case, Sāriputta, a monk explains non-dhamma as dhamma, he explains dhamma as non-dhamma; he explains non-discipline as discipline, he explains discipline as non-discipline; he explains what was not spoken, not uttered by the tathāgata as spoken, uttered by the tathāgata, explains what was spoken, uttered by the tathāgata as not spoken, not uttered by the tathāgata; he explains what was not practised by the tathāgata as practised by the tathāgata, he explains what was practised by the tathāgata as not practised by the tathāgata; he explains what was not laid down by the tathāgata as laid down by the tathāgata, he explains what was laid down by the tathāgata as not laid down by the tathāgata, he explains what is no offence as an offence, he explains an offence as no offence; he explains a slight offence as a serious offence, he explains a serious offence as a slight offence; he explains an offence which can be done away with as an offence which cannot be done away with, he explains an offence which cannot be done away with as an offence which can be done away with; he declares a very bad offence as not a very bad offence, he explains not a very bad offence as a very bad offence. Sāriputta, a speaker of non-dhamma is to be known by these eighteen points.

And, Sāriputta, a speaker of dhamma is to be known by eighteen points. In such a case, Sāriputta, a monk explains non-dhamma as non-dhamma, he explains dhamma as dhamma; he explains non-discipline as non-discipline, he explains discipline as discipline; he explains what was not spoken, not uttered by the tathāgata as not spoken, not uttered by the tathāgata … not practised … practised … not laid down … laid down … he explains an offence as an offence … no offence as no offence … a slight offence as a slight offence … a serious offence as a serious offence an offence which can be done away with as an offence which can be done away with … an offence which cannot be done away with as an offence which cannot be done away with … a very bad offence as a very bad offence, he explains not a very bad offence as not a very bad offence. Sāriputta, a speaker of dhamma is to be known by these eighteen points.”

The venerable Moggallāna the Great heard … the venerable Kassapa the Great heard … the venerable Kaccāna the Great heard … the venerable Koṭṭhita the Great heard … the venerable Kappina the Great heard … the venerable Cunda the Great heard … the venerable Anuruddha heard … the venerable Revata heard … the venerable Upāli heard … the venerable Ānanda heard … the venerable Rāhula heard: “They say that the monks of Kosambī … = Kd.10.5.3–Kd.10.5.5. Read Rāhula instead of Sāriputta “… Rāhula, a speaker of dhamma is to be known by these eighteen points.”

Mahāpajāpatī the Gotamid heard: “It is said that the monks of Kosambī … as in Kd.10.5.3 … are coming to Sāvatthī.” Then Mahāpajāpatī the Gotamid approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, she stood at a respectful distance. As she was standing at a respectful distance Mahāpajāpatī the Gotamid spoke thus to the Lord: “It is said, Lord, that the monks of Kosambī … are coming to Sāvatthī. How am I, Lord, to behave in regard to these monks?”

“Well then, do you, Gotami, hear dhamma on both sides; having heard dhamma on both sides, choose the views and the approval and the persuasion and the creed of those monks who are there speakers of dhamma, and whatever is to be desired by the Order of nuns from the Order of monks, all that should be desired only from one who speaks dhamma.”

Anāthapiṇḍika the householder heard: “It is said that the monks of Kosambī … are coming to Sāvatthī.” Then Anāthapiṇḍika the householder approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, Anāthapiṇḍika the householder spoke thus to the Lord: “It is said, Lord, that the monks of Kosambī … are coming to Sāvatthī. How am I, Lord, to behave in regard to these monks?”

“Well then, do you, householder, give gifts to both sides; having given gifts to both sides, hear dhamma on both sides; having heard dhamma on both sides, choose the views and the approval and the persuasion and the creed of those monks who are there speakers of dhamma.”

Visākhā, Migāra’s mother, heard: “It is said that the monks of Kosambī … are coming to Sāvatthī.” Then Visākhā, Migāra’s mother, approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, she sat down at a respectful distance. As she was sitting down at a respectful distance Visākhā, Migāra’s mother, spoke thus to the Lord: “It is said, Lord, that the monks of Kosambī … are coming to Sāvatthī. How am I, Lord, to behave in regard to these monks?”

“Well then, do you, Visākhā, give gifts to both sides … as in Kd.10.5.8 … choose the views … of those monks who are there speakers of dhamma.”

Then in due course the monks of Kosambī arrived at Sāvatthī. Then the venerable Sāriputta approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, the venerable Sāriputta spoke thus to the Lord: “They say, Lord, that these monks of Kosambī, makers of strife … makers of legal questions in the Order, have arrived at Sāvatthī. Now what line of conduct, Lord, should be followed in regard to lodgings for these monks?”

“Well now, Sāriputta, separate lodgings should be given (to them).”

“But if, Lord, there are no separate lodgings what line of conduct should be followed?”

“Well then, Sāriputta, having made (some) separate they should be given. But I in no way say this, Sāriputta, that a senior monk’s lodging should be withheld (from him). Whoever should withhold it, there is an offence of wrong-doing.”

“But what line of conduct, Lord, is to be followed in regard to material gains?”

“Material gains, Sāriputta, should be distributed equally amongst all.”

Allowance to restore

Then while that monk who had been suspended was reflecting on dhamma and discipline, it occurred to him: “This is an offence, this is not no offence, I have fallen, I am not unfallen, I am suspended, I am not unsuspended, I am suspended by a (formal) act that is legally valid, irreversible, fit to stand.” Then the suspended monk approached those monks who were taking the part of the suspended (one); having approached, he spoke thus to those monks who were taking the part of the suspended (one): “This is an offence, your reverences, it is not no offence … fit to stand. Come, venerable ones, restore me.”

Then those monks who were taking the part of the suspended (one), taking that suspended monk (with them) approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, they sat down at a respectful distance. As they were sitting down at a respectful distance, those monks spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord, this suspended monk speaks thus: ‘This is an offence, your reverences … Come, venerable ones, restore me’. What line of conduct, Lord, is to be followed in these circumstances?”

“This, monks, is an offence, this is not no offence, this monk has fallen, this monk is not unfallen, this monk is suspended, this monk is not unsuspended, he was suspended by a legally valid (formal) act, irreversible, fit to stand But since, monks, that monk who has fallen and was suspended sees (his offence)—well then, monks, restore that monk.”

On harmony in the Saṅgha

Then these monks who were taking the part of the suspended (one), having restored that suspended monk, approached the monks who had suspended (him), having approached, they spoke thus to the monks who had suspended (him): “Concerning that case, your reverences, about which there was for the Order strife, quarrels, contention, disputes, schism in the Order, dissension in the Order, altercation in the Order, differences in the Order that monk has fallen and was suspended, but he sees and is restored. Now, your reverences, let us achieve unanimity in the Order for settling this case.” Then those monks who had suspended (him) approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, they sat down at a respectful distance. As they were sitting down at a respectful distance, they spoke thus to the Lord: “These monks, Lord, who are taking the part of the suspended (monk) speak thus: ‘Concerning that case … for settling this case.’ Now what line of conduct, Lord, is to be followed?”

“Since, monks, that monk has fallen and was suspended but sees and is restored—well then, monks, achieve unanimity in the Order for settling that case. And thus, monks, should it be achieved: One and all should gather together, both the ill and the well, leave of absence should not be declared on account of anyone. Having gathered together, the Order should be informed by an experienced, competent monk, saying: ‘Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. Concerning that case about which there was for the Order strife, quarrel, contention, dispute, schism in the Order … differences in the Order—that monk has fallen and was suspended, but he sees and is restored. If it seems right to the Order the Order should achieve unanimity in the Order for settling this case. This is the motion. Honoured sirs, let the Order listen to me. Concerning that case … and is restored. The Order is achieving unanimity in the Order for settling this case. If the achieving of unanimity in the Order for settling this case is pleasing to the venerable ones, they should be silent; he to whom it is not pleasing should speak. Unanimity in the Order for settling that case is achieved by the Order. Dissension in the Order is put down, schism in the Order is put down. It is pleasing to the venerable ones; therefore they are silent. Thus do I understand this’. Observance may be carried out at once, the Pātimokkha recited.”

Questions of Upāli on harmony in the Saṅgha

Then the venerable Upāli approached the Lord; having approached, having greeted the Lord, he sat down at a respectful distance. As he was sitting down at a respectful distance, the venerable Upāli spoke thus to the Lord: “Lord, in regard to a case where there is strife for an Order … differences for an Order, if the Order not having investigated that case, not having got to the root of it, achieves unanimity in the Order, is that unanimity in the Order legally valid, Lord?”

“Upāli, in regard to a case where there is strife for an Order … that unanimity is not legally valid, Upāli.”

“But, Lord, in regard to a case where there is strife for an Order … differences in an Order, if the Order having investigated that case, having got to the root of it, achieves unanimity in the Order, is that unanimity in the Order legally valid, Lord?”

“Upāli, in regard to a matter where there is strife for an Order, quarrels, contention, dispute, schism in an Order, dissension in an Order, altercation in an Order, differences in an Order, if the Order, having investigated that case, having got to the root of it, achieves unanimity in the Order, that unanimity in the Order is legally valid, Upāli.”

“How many (kinds of) unanimity in an Order are there, Lord?”

“There are these two (kinds of) unanimity in an Order, Upāli. There is, Upāli, unanimity in an Order that has not arrived at the meaning but has arrived at the letter; there is, Upāli, unanimity in an Order that has both arrived at the meaning and arrived, at the letter. And what, Upāli, is unanimity in an Order that has not arrived at the meaning but has arrived at the letter? Upāli, in regard to a case where there is strife for an Order … differences in an Order, if the Order, not having investigated that case, not having got to the root of it, achieves unanimity in the Order, this is called, Upāli, unanimity in an Order that has not arrived at the meaning but has arrived at the letter. And what, Upāli, is unanimity in an Order that has both arrived at the meaning and arrived at the letter? Upāli, in regard to a case where there is strife for an Order … differences in an Order, if the Order, having investigated that case, having got to the root of it, achieves unanimity in the Order, this is called, Upāli, unanimity in an Order that has both arrived at the meaning and arrived at the letter. These, Upāli, are the two (kinds of) unanimity in an Order.”

Then the venerable Upāli, rising from his seat, having arranged his upper robe over one shoulder, having saluted the Lord with joined palms, addressed the Lord with verses:

“In the Order’s affairs and deliberations
and in matters arising for investigation,
what kind of man is here most needed?
How is a monk fit for leadership here?

“Above all, one blameless in moral habit,
of careful conduct, his faculties well controlled,
opponents do not censure him in respect of a rule,
for there could be nothing to say against him.

“Such a one, firm in purity of moral habit,
is confident, he speaks ably,
he is not afraid at an assembly, he does not tremble,
he does not sacrifice the meaning to irrevelant talk.

“When asked a question in an assembly,
he neither hesitates nor is ashamed,
his timely sensible words,
fitting as explanation, delight the learned assembly.

“With esteem for senior monks
and confident in his own teachers, able to weigh,
familiar with what should be spoken,
and skilled in obstructing his opponents,

Opponents come under his control,
and the many-folk come under his tuition,
and he does not neglect his own creed,
(skilful) at question and answer, unhurting.

“Able in doing a messenger’s duty,
and well-informed in what they tell him of the Order’s affairs,
sent by a group of monks he is obedient,
but he does not therefore think, ‘I am doing this’.

“Into whatever matters one falls,
whatever is an offence and how one removes it—
both these analyses are well handed down to him.
He is skilled in the features of offences and removal,

“Being sent away and good habits—he goes by these:
he is sent away and what are the grounds,
restoration of a person who has completed this—
he knows this too, skilled (as he is) in analysis.

“With esteem for senior monks, for newly ordained,
for elders and for those of middle standing,
a helper of the multitude, clever herein,
monk such as this is fit for leadership here.”

The Tenth Section: that on (the monks of) Kosambī

Finished is the Great Division