Vinaya Texts

Author(s): T W Rhys Davids, Hermann Oldenberg
Publisher: Oxford

Page 30

INTRODUCTION.
xxvii
council. Surely, if the Edict had been addressed to such a council, the fact would have been plainly intimated.
It is just possible that Vinaya-Samukase may refer to the Old Commentary as well as to the Pâtimokkha; but this is not probable, for there is no reason to believe that in Asoka's time the Old Commentary any longer existed apart from its setting in the Vibhanga. And VinayaSamukase cannot for the reasons above stated mean, as has been supposed, the Parivara-pâtha.
As regards the meaning of the word Pâtimokkha we have the explanation of the Old Commentator in that single passage of his work found, as above pointed out, in the Khandhakas?. He there describes it as 'the origin, the front (mukha), the chief of the good Dhammas;' where the word Dhammâ means 'qualities,' and where the evident inference is that the commentator? derived Pâtimokkha from mukha. But, on the other hand, the tradition of the Northern Buddhists, in whose Sanskrit works the word is replaced by Prátimoksha, points to a derivation from the root muk.
It seems scarcely open to doubt that we must, in accordance with this last interpretation, connect the word with muk, and not with mukha. "Pratimukha' means in Sanskrit over against, standing close in front.' How is it possible to derive from that any meaning appropriate as a title for the liturgy of confession called Pâtimokkha? On the other hand, the derivation from muk is straightforward and simple. Prati-niuk (âtmanep.) means 'to free oneself, to get rid of;' and it is precisely through the recitation of this formular, and the answering of the questions contained in it, that the conscience of the member of the Brotherhood
Pâtimokkhan ti adim etam mukham etam pamukham etam kusalânam dhammânam, tena vukkati pâtimokkhan ti. Mahâvagga II, 3, 4.
? We use the phrase Old Commentator' for convenience only. The commentary was, no doubt, handed down by tradition in the Buddhist schools; and there is no reason to believe that it was the work of any one mind.
Digitized by Google