Resolution

The Buddha spent his tenth rainy season retreat there in the jungle under the Sal trees near the village of Parileyyaka. When the rainy season retreat was over he went to the Jeta Grove Monastery in Shravasti. In the meantime, things were not going so well for the monks at Kosambi as the consequences of their actions caught up with them.

Meanwhile the lay followers of Kosambi thought: “These venerable Kosambi monks are doing us great harm. They have plagued the Blessed One till he has gone away. Let us no longer pay homage to them or rise up for them or give them reverential salutation or treat them with courtesy, let us not honor, respect, revere or venerate them, let us give them no more almsfood even when they have come for it. So when they get no honor, respect, reverence or veneration from us, when they are regularly ignored, they will either go elsewhere or leave the Sangha or make amends to the Blessed One.”

They acted accordingly. In consequence the Kosambi monks decided: “Let us go to Shravasti, friends, and settle this litigation in the Blessed One’s presence.” So they put their resting places in order, took their bowls and outer robes and set out for Shravasti. (Life of the Buddha, p. 117)

The householders of Kosambi did not act rudely to the monks, but they did not any longer support them or give them special treatment. This reveals something about the relationship between the monastics and the householders. The householders were not members of an institution that they were obligated to support. Rather, their contributions of food, robes, medicine, and other items was part of an understanding. The monastic side of the understanding was that the monks and nuns would dedicate their lives to practicing the Dharma, teaching the Dharma, attaining liberation, and upholding a pure and admirable way of life in harmony with each other and the householders as spelled out by the precepts. If the monks and nuns did not fulfill their end of the bargain, then they were misusing the contributions of the householders who would then no longer have any obligation to support them. So the monastics were very much accountable to the householders, and the householders in the Buddha’s time did not hesitate to criticize the behavior of the monastics.

Today, it is Buddhist teachers and Buddhist institutions and organizations that need to be held accountable to their membership. In turn, the members should feel no obligation to support teachers, leaders or organizations that are not practicing or teaching the Dharma correctly. This means that the members themselves need to educate themselves about the teachings and develop a discerning mind. They need to make sure they are being led towards liberation and not being exploited or manipulated for ulterior purposes. And if the teachers, leaders, or organizations are not conducting themselves in a way that does credit to the Buddha Dharma, then the general membership must also take responsibility and either vote with their feet and/or their wallets. This is what the householders of Kosambi did, and in doing so they succeeded in doing what even the Buddha was unable to do – they got the monks of Kosambi to stop fighting and seek out a way to reconcile their differences.

When the Buddha’s followers at Shravasti heard that the monks of Kosambi were coming, they were perplexed about how to deal with them. Shariputra, followed by the other leading monk disciples, all asked the same question: “Lord, it seems that those Kosambi monks who quarrel, brawl, dispute, wrangle and litigate in the midst of the Sangha are coming here to Shravasti. How am I to treat them, Lord?” (Ibid, p. 117)

The Buddha told them all to “Follow the Dharma.” When asked to clarify this, the Buddha explained in so many words that they should listen carefully and then double check to make sure that what anyone claims is actually a part of the teaching or monastic rules is actually in accord with what the Buddha has taught. In regard to the Vinaya, the monastic rules, they should make sure that they are not being abrogated by some or that offences are not being made more or less severe than the Vinaya specifies. Basically, the Buddha is telling them to “go by the book” and not to take sides. The Dharma and the Discipline set down by the Buddha are to function as an objective standard by which to weigh the merits of each side’s case.

Then Mahaprajapati on behalf of the nuns asked the Buddha how they should treat the monks from Kosambi. The Buddha’s replied along the same lines as before: “Hear the Dharma from both sides, Gotami. When you have done so, approve the views, the liking, the opinions and judgments of those who say what is Dharma. What the Sangha of nuns has to expect from the Sangha of monks should be expected from those who speak according to Dharma.” (Ibid, p. 118)

Then the householder supporters of the Sangha like Sudatta and Visakha asked the Buddha for guidance. He told them: “Give gifts to both sides. Approve the views of those who speak according to the Dharma.” (Ibid, p. 118) In this case, the Buddha approved their giving of food and other essentials to the monks of Kosambi because they were coming not to cause trouble but to seek reconciliation with each other and with the Buddha.

So in the cases of the monks, the nuns, and the householders, the Buddha asked them not to take sides but to give each faction a fair hearing. He trusted that they all knew the Dharma and Discipline well enough to listen impartially to both sides and discern for themselves who is in accord with the Buddha’s teachings. The Buddha expected his followers not to take the word of others for anything, especially disputing factions, but to always find out the truth for themselves. In this, the Buddha showed great respect for his followers and insisted that the Dharma be the final authority and not the opinions of factions or authority figures. This is something that applies to us today more than ever, as there are many more factions and differing opinions among those who call themselves Buddhists, but at the same time more people than ever are literate enough that they can read the Buddha’s teachings and judge for themselves what makes sense and what would be the best way to practice. This does not mean that we should not avail ourselves of teachers, guides, and senior practitioners, but it does mean that we should not regard anyone as infallible and that ultimately the responsibility to discern what is correct lies with ourselves.

When the monks finally arrived, the Buddha directed Shariputra to lodge the different factions in separate quarters until they had worked out their differences. At the same time he cautioned Shariputra to follow the rules in regard to lodging the monks by seniority, and to make sure that food is distributed evenly. In other words, all the usual monastic procedures are to be followed even while making an effort to separate the two groups for the time being to give them a chance to cool off.

After arriving at Shravasti the discourse teacher who had forgotten to empty the water jar admitted his negligence and the rules expert who had suspended him agreed to reinstate him without any further recriminations. The discourse teacher and the rules expert dropped the banners of their pride and both they and their supporters reconciled with each other in the presence of the Buddha.

After peace had been restored, Upali approached the Buddha and asked him if unanimity could really be legally restored within the Sangha if the root of the problem had not been investigated. The Buddha replied that it could not. It would not be enough to simply create an artificial harmony for the sake of appearances. The Sangha would need to investigate the problem, get to the root of it, and then restore unanimity according to both the letter and meaning of the rule. Or as we would say, the Sangha should restore harmony according to both the letter and spirit of the law. In the case of the monks from Kosambi, the rules and procedures were followed in order to restore harmony, but more importantly the disputants had put aside the pride and self-righteousness that had been the root of the problem. Mutual respect and loving-kindness had finally prevailed.