actually helps to explain the rule. In some cases, the origin story is terse, adding little
information to what is in the rule. In others, the origin story is extremely long (the
English translation of the origin story to the first rule in Mv.I takes up 51 pages in BD)
and yet has very little to do with the rule it introduces. For instance, the origin story to
the rule permitting bhikkhus to accept gifts of robe-cloth from lay donors tells the life
story of Jıvaka Kom›rabhacca, the first lay person to give such a gift to the Buddha.
Although Jıvaka’s story is fascinating in and of itself, providing many interesting
insights into attitudes in the early Saºgha, it is largely irrelevant to the rule at hand.
Thus the primary way the discussions use the Canon in helping to explain the rules
is by placing each rule in connection to those related to it. From this placement one may
gain a picture of how the rules fit into a coherent whole.
Given this picture, it is then possible to add explanatory material from other sources.
These sources include Buddhaghosa’s Commentary to the Vinaya (the Samantap›s›dik›), two sub-commentaries (S›riputta’s S›rattha-dıpanı and Kassapa’s Vimativinodanı), two Thai Vinaya guides (the Pubbasikkh›-va˚˚an› and Prince Vajirañ›˚a’s
Vinaya-mukha), and—occasionally—oral traditions concerning the rules. Very few
scholars have written on the Khandhakas of other early Buddhist schools, so references
in this volume to other early Buddhist canons are rare. As in BMC1, I give preference to
the earlier Therav›din sources when these conflict with later ones, but I do so with a
strong sense of respect for the later sources, and without implying that my
interpretation of the Canon is the only one valid. There is always a danger in being too
independent in interpreting the tradition, in that strongly held opinions can lead to
disharmony in the Community. Thus, even in instances where I think the later sources
misunderstand the Canon, I have tried to give a faithful account of their positions—
sometimes in great detail—so that those who wish to take those sources as their
authority, or who wish to live harmoniously in Communities that do, may still use this
book as a guide.
And—again, as in BMC1—I have tried to include whatever seems most worth
knowing for the bhikkhu who aims at using the Khandhaka rules to foster the qualities
of discipline in his life—so as to help train his mind and live in peace with his fellow
bhikkhus—and for anyone who wants to support and encourage the bhikkhus in that
aim.

part

one

General

C HA P TE R O NE

Personal Grooming
A bhikkhu should be clean, neat, and unostentatious in his appearance, as a reflection of
the qualities he is trying to develop in his mind.
Bathing. Although Pc 57 forbids a bhikkhu from bathing at intervals of less than half
a month, we noted in the discussion of that rule that it was apparently intended as a
temporary disciplinary measure for bhikkhus who had inconvenienced King Bimbis›ra
when he wanted to bathe in the hot spring near R›jagaha. When the Buddha later
added exemptions to the rule, he so relaxed it that he virtually rescinded it. In addition,
Mv.V.13 explicitly rescinds the rule in all parts of the world outside of the central
Ganges Valley.
In the time of the Buddha, bathing was done in a river, a bathing tank, a sauna, or a
showering place. Instead of soap, people used an unscented powder called chunam,
which was kneaded with water into a dough-like paste. Bhikkhus are explicitly allowed
to use powdered dung, clay, or dye-dregs; according to the Commentary, ordinary
chunam would come under “dye-dregs.” A bhikkhu with an itching rash, a small boil,
or a running sore, or whose body smells bad (in the words of the Commentary, “with a
body odor like that of a horse”) may use scented fragrant powders. At present, the
Great Standards would allow soap under the allowance for clay, and scented soaps or
deodorants under the allowance for scented powders for a bhikkhu with a strong body
odor. Otherwise, the use of scents is listed among the bad habits prohibited by Cv.V.36
(see Chapter 10).
The etiquette when bathing in a group is that a junior bhikkhu should not bathe in
front of an elder bhikkhu or, if bathing in a river, upstream from him. If one is able and
willing (and, of course, if the elder bhikkhus are amenable), one may look after the
needs of elder bhikkhus while they are bathing. An example of this, given in the
Commentary, is scrubbing them. When scrubbing another or oneself, one may use
one’s hand or a rope or pad of cloth. Sponges, which apparently were not known in the
time of the Buddha, would probably be included under pad of cloth.
One is not allowed to rub one’s body with a wooden hand, a string of red powder
beads—according to the Commentary, this means bathing powder mixed with
powdered stone (cinnabar?) and formed into beads—or with a scrubber incised with a
“dragon-teeth” pattern. A bhikkhu who is ill, however, may use an unincised scrubber.
In the time of the Buddha, young men while bathing would rub their bodies against
trees, against walls, against one another (this was called a “fully immersed massage”),
or against rubbing posts (a˛˛h›na, which according to the Commentary, took their name
from their being incised with a pattern like a chess board (a˛˛hapada)) in order to
toughen their muscles. Bhikkhus are explicitly forbidden from rubbing their bodies in

any of these ways. However, they are allowed to massage themselves and one another
with their hands.
In another context—cleaning one’s feet before entering a dwelling—one is allowed
to step on foot wipers made of stone, stone fragments, and pumice (“sea-foam stone”),
so it would seem reasonable that the use of pumice or other stones to scrub off
stubborn dirt while bathing would also be permitted.
When leaving the water after bathing, one should make way for those entering the
water.
One is allowed to dry oneself with a water wiper—which the non-offense clauses for
Pc 86 say may be made of ivory, horn, or wood—or with a piece of cloth.
Care of the teeth. Toothbrushes, dental floss, toothpaste, and tooth powders were
unknown in the time of the Buddha. However, there is an allowance for tooth wood,
which is the same thing as the tooth-cleaning stick discussed under Pc 40. The Buddha
extolled the virtues of using tooth wood as follows: “There are five advantages in
chewing tooth wood: It makes the mouth attractive, the mouth does not smell foul, the
taste buds are cleaned, bile and phlegm do not coat one’s food, one enjoys one’s food.”
At present, toothbrushes and dental floss would come under the allowance for tooth
wood. Because tooth wood should not be less than four fingerbreadths long, many
Communities extend this prohibition to include toothpicks less than four fingerbreadths
as well. Toothpaste and tooth powder, because they are composed of mineral salts,
would come under the allowance of salts for medicine.
Hair of the head. The hair of the head should not be worn long. It should be shaved
at least every two months or when the hair has grown to a length of two
fingerbreadths—whichever occurs first, says the Commentary. In Thailand there is the
custom that all bhikkhus shave their heads on the same day, the day before the full
moon, so that the Community can present a uniform appearance. Although this is not
obligatory, a bhikkhu who does not follow the custom tends to stand out from his
fellows.
A razor is one of a bhikkhu’s eight basic requisites. He is also allowed a whetstone, a
razor case, a piece of felt (to wrap the razor in), and all razor accessories (such as a
strop). At present, this allowance would cover all types of safety razors as well. The
Commentary to Pr 2 insists that the razor case not be multicolored.
Unless ill—e.g., he has a sore on his head—a bhikkhu may not use scissors to cut his
hair or have it cut. The question of using electric razors to shave the head is a
controversial one. Because their cutting action—even in rotary shavers—is like that of
scissors, many Communities will not allow their use in shaving the head.
A bhikkhu may not have gray hairs pulled out. (The wording of the Commentary
here suggests that this prohibition covers hair of the body as well as hair of the head,
but it goes on to say that ugly hairs growing, e.g., on the eyebrows, forehead, or beardarea may be removed.) He may not arrange the hair of his head with a brush, a comb,
with the fingers used as a comb, with beeswax mixed with oil, or with water mixed with
oil. Hair dressing mousse and creams would also come under this prohibition. The
Commentary gives permission to use one’s hand to smooth down the curled-up ends

of one’s body hair—for example, on the arm or chest—and to rub the head with a wet
hand to cool it off or to remove dust.
Beard. The beard should not be grown long, although—unlike the hair of the
head—there is no explicit maximum length, unless the two month/two fingerbreadth
rule is meant to apply here as well. One may not dress the beard as a goatee, a
rectangle, or in any other design. The moustache may not be dressed, e.g., by making
its ends stand up. Because there is no prohibition against using scissors to cut the beard,
electric razors are clearly allowed in shaving the face.
Face. One may not gaze at the reflection of one’s face in a mirror or bowl of water
unless the face has a wound or a disease. According to the Commentary, mirror here
covers any reflective surface; bowl of water, any liquid surface. The Commentary also
gives permission to look at one’s reflection to check for any signs of aging to be used in
meditating on the theme of impermanence. The Vinaya-mukha, noting that the
prohibition against using a mirror comes in the context of rules against beautifying the
face, argues that looking at one’s reflection for other purposes—for example, as an aid
in shaving the head or the beard—should be allowed. Alternatively, it might be argued
that the use of a mirror while shaving would lessen the danger of wounding oneself
with the razor, and so should be allowed under the exemption made for “disease.”
Except in the case of an illness, one should not apply lotions, powders, or pastes to
the face. The reference here is apparently to beautifying lotions, etc. Medicinal lotions,
powders, and pastes are allowable (see Chapter 5). There is also a prohibition against
applying a mark to the face (such as a caste mark or auspicious mark) with red arsenic.
The Commentary interprets red arsenic as covering any coloring agent. The face and
body are also not to be painted or dyed (e.g., with cosmetics, henna, or greasepaint).
This rule would prohibit a bhikkhu from having his body tattooed as well, although
any tattoos done before his ordination would not have to be removed (see Chapter 14).
Although medicinal eye ointments are allowed, the above rules would prohibit eye
cosmetics as well.
Hair of the body. Nasal hairs should not be grown long. (In the origin story to this
rule, people objected to bhikkhus with long nasal hairs “like goblins”). Tweezers are
allowed for pulling them out; by extension, scissors should also be allowed for
trimming them. The Vinaya-mukha notes that nasal hair performs a useful function in
keeping dust out of the lungs, and so interprets this rule as applying only to nasal hairs
so long that they grow outside the nostrils.
The hair of the chest or stomach should not be dressed. Hair in a “confining”
region—which the Vibhaºga to the bhikkhunı’s parallel rule, their Pc 2, identifies as the
armpits and the pubic area—should not be removed unless there is a sore in those areas
and a need to apply medicine.
Nails. Fingernails and toenails are not to be grown long.
Now on that occasion a certain bhikkhu with long nails was going for alms. A
certain woman, on seeing him, said to him, ‘Come, venerable sir. Engage in
sexual intercourse.’
“Enough, sister. That isn’t allowable.”

“But, venerable sir, if you don’t engage (in sexual intercourse), I’ll scratch my
limbs now with my own nails and make a fuss: ‘I’ve been wronged by this
bhikkhu!’”
“Do you know (what you’re doing) (§), sister?”
Then the woman, having scratched her limbs with her own nails, made a fuss:
“I’ve been wronged by this bhikkhu!”
People, rushing up, grabbed hold of the bhikkhu. But they saw skin and
blood on the woman’s nails. On seeing this, (and saying,) “This was done by this
woman herself. The bhikkhu is innocent,” they let him go.
The nails should be cut even with the flesh—a nail clipper is allowed for this
purpose—and may be polished only to the extent of removing dirt and stains. The
Commentary interprets this last point as an allowance also to remove the dirt under the
nails.
Ears. Instruments for removing dirt from the ears are allowed but may not be made
of fancy materials. Allowable materials are bone, ivory, horn, reed, bamboo, wood, lac
(resin), fruit (§) (e.g., coconut shell), copper (metal), or conch-shell. Under the Great
Standards, plastic would currently come under this list as well. This list of ten items
should be memorized, as it recurs frequently in the Khandhakas.
Ornamentation. The following ornaments are not to be worn (the Pali word for
wear here—dharati—also means to keep or to own): an ear ornament (according to the
Commentary, this includes any decoration of the ear, even a palm leaf), a chain, a
necklace, an ornament for the waist (even a thread, says the Commentary), an
ornamental girdle, an armlet, a bracelet, and a finger ring. None of these rules make an
exception when one’s motivation is other than ornamentation. Thus a wristwatch worn
for practical purposes, a copper bracelet worn for reasons of health, or mala beads
worn for meditative purposes would all be forbidden under these rules.

Rules
Bathing
“I allow powders as medicines for one who has an itch, a small boil, a running sore, or
an affliction of thick scabs; or for one whose body smells bad. I allow (powdered) dung,
clay, and dye-dregs for one who is not ill. I allow a pestle and mortar.”—Mv.VI.9.2
“The body is not to be rubbed against a tree by a bhikkhu who is bathing. Whoever
should rub it (in such a way): an offense of wrong doing.”—Cv.V.1.1
“The body is not to be rubbed against a wall by a bhikkhu who is bathing. Whoever
should rub it (in such a way): an offense of wrong doing.”—Cv.V.1.2
“One should not bathe at a rubbing post. Whoever should bathe (there): an offense of
wrong doing” …. “One should not bathe with a wooden hand. Whoever should bathe
(with one): an offense of wrong doing” …. “One should not bathe with a string of

cinnabar-powder beads. Whoever should bathe (with one): an offense of wrong
doing.”—Cv.V.1.3
“One should not have a ‘fully immersed’ massage made [C: rubbing one’s body up
against another person’s body]. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing” ….
“One should not bathe with a scrubber incised like dragon teeth. Whoever should do
so: an offense of wrong doing” …. “I allow an unincised scrubber for one who is ill.”—
Cv.V.1.4
“I allow a pad of cloth (or: a rope of cloth) (for scrubbing the body)” …. “I allow
ordinary hand [C: massaging].”—Cv.V.1.5
“I allow three kinds of foot-wipers: stone, stone fragment(s), pumice (literally, ‘seafoam stone’) (§).”—Cv.V.22.1
“I allow a water wiper, and to wipe oneself dry even with a cloth.”—Cv.V.17.1
“If one is able/willing, one may perform a service for the elder bhikkhus even in the
water. One should not bathe in front of the elder bhikkhus or upstream from them.
When coming out of the water after bathing, make way for those entering the
water.”—Cv.VIII.8.2
Care of the Teeth
“There are five advantages in chewing tooth wood: It makes the mouth attractive (§),
the mouth does not smell foul, the taste buds are cleaned, bile and phlegm do not coat
one’s food, one enjoys one’s food. I allow tooth wood.”—Cv.V.31.1
“A long piece of tooth wood is not to be chewed. Whoever should chew one: an offense
of wrong doing. I allow tooth wood eight fingerbreadths long at most. And novices are
not to be flicked with it. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing” …. “An
overly short piece of tooth wood is not to be chewed. Whoever should chew one: an
offense of wrong doing. I allow tooth wood four fingerbreadths long at the very
least.”—Cv.V.31.2
Hair of the Head
“The hair of the head should not be worn long. Whoever should do so: an offense of
wrong doing. I allow two-month (growth) or two fingerbreadths.”—Cv.V.2.2
“I allow a razor, a whetstone, a razor case, a piece of felt, and all razor accessories.—
Cv.V.27.3
“One should not have the hair of the head cut with scissors. Whoever should do so: an
offense of wrong doing. I allow that you have the hair of the head cut with scissors in
the case of illness (origin story: a bhikkhu had a sore on his head and couldn’t shave)”
…. “Hair of the nostrils should not be worn long. Whoever should do so: an offense of
wrong doing” …. “I allow tweezers” …. “One should not have gray hairs taken out.
Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing.”—Cv.V.27.5

“One should not arrange the hair of the head with a brush … with a comb … with the
fingers used as a comb … with beeswax mixed with oil … with water mixed with oil.
Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing.”—Cv.V.2.3
Beard & Hair of the Body
“The beard is not to be dressed. The beard is not to grown long. It is not to be dressed
as a goatee. It is not to be trimmed as a rectangle. The hair of the chest is not to be
dressed. The hair of the stomach is not to be dressed. (The translation of these last two
statements follows the Commentary. An alternative translation, not supported by the
Commentary, reads them as prohibitions connected with facial hair, in which the first
one (parimukhaª) could be read as “moustache” and the second (a˜˜harukaª or
a˜˜hadukaª) as “a mutton-chop beard.”) Whiskers are not to be arranged (made to
stand up). Hair in a confining region is not to be removed. Whoever should do so: an
offense of wrong doing” …. “I allow that hair in a confining region be removed in the
case of illness.”—Cv.V.27.4
Face
“One should not gaze at the reflection of one’s face in a mirror or in a bowl of water.
Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing” …. “I allow that, on account of a
disease, one gaze at the reflection of one’s face in a mirror or in a bowl of water.”—
Cv.V.2.4
“The face is not to be smeared (with lotion). The face is not to be rubbed with paste. The
face is not to be powdered. The face is not to be marked with red arsenic. The limbs are
not to be painted/dyed. The face is not to be painted/dyed. The limbs and face are not
to be painted/dyed. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing” …. “I allow
that, on account of a disease, the face be smeared (with lotion).”—Cv.V.2.5
Nails
“Nails are not to be worn long. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong doing.”—
Cv.V.27.1
“I allow a nail-clipper” …. “I allow that the nails be cut down to the extent of the flesh”
…. “One’s 20 nails should not be polished. Whoever should do so: an offense of wrong
doing. I allow them to be polished away to the extent of dirt/stains.”—Cv.V.27.2
Ears
“I allow an instrument for removing dirt from the ears” …. “One should not use fancy
instruments for removing dirt from the ears. Whoever should use one: an offense of
wrong doing. I allow that they be made of bone, ivory, horn, reed, bamboo, wood, lac
(resin), fruit (§) (e.g., coconut shell), copper (metal), or conch-shell.”—Cv.V.27.6
Ornamentation

“An ear ornament should not be worn. A chain should not be worn. A necklace … an
ornament for the waist … an ornamental girdle (§) … an armlet … a bracelet … a finger
ring should not be worn. Whoever should wear one: an offense of wrong doing.”—
Cv.V.2.1

C HA P TE R TW O

Cloth Requisites
A bhikkhu has four primary requisites—robe-cloth, food, lodgings, and medicine—and
a variety of secondary ones. This and the following five chapters discuss requisites that
are allowable and not, along with the proper use of allowable requisites. The suttas
provide a background for these discussions by highlighting the proper attitudes that a
bhikkhu should develop toward his requisites: He should reflect on their role, not as
ends in themselves, but as mere tools toward the training of the mind; and he should
develop an attitude of contentment with whatever requisites he receives.
“And what are the effluents to be abandoned by using? There is the case where a
bhikkhu, reflecting appropriately, uses robe-cloth simply to counteract cold, to
counteract heat, to counteract the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and
reptiles; simply for the purpose of covering the parts of the body that cause
shame.
“Reflecting appropriately, he uses almsfood, not playfully, nor for
intoxication, nor for putting on bulk, nor for beautification; but simply for the
survival and continuance of this body, for ending its afflictions, for the support of
the holy life, thinking, ‘Thus will I destroy old feelings (of hunger) and not create
new feelings (from overeating). I will maintain myself, be blameless, and live in
comfort.’
“Reflecting appropriately, he uses lodging simply to counteract cold, to
counteract heat, to counteract the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and
reptiles; simply for protection from the inclemencies of weather and for the
enjoyment of seclusion.
“Reflecting appropriately, he uses medicinal requisites that are used for
curing illness simply to counteract any pains of illness that have arisen and for
maximum freedom from disease.
“The effluents, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to use these
things (in this way) do not arise for him when he uses them (in this way). These
are called the effluents to be abandoned by using”—MN 2
“And how is a bhikkhu content? Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its
wings as its only burden, so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for
his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes
only his barest necessities along. This is how a bhikkhu is content.”—DN 2
“‘This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent.’ Thus
was it said. With reference to what was it said? There is the case where a bhikkhu
is content with any old robe-cloth at all, any old almsfood, any old lodging, any
old medicinal requisites for curing illness at all. ‘This Dhamma is for one who is