While the story of the Magadhan king Ajātaśatru’s seeking the Buddha’s advice on attacking the Vṛjis is well known and much studied, rather less known and little studied are stories of his war or conflict with the Vṛjis embedded in Indian Buddhist monastic law codes. This paper explores these lesser-known stories of Ajātaśatru’s warfare, primarily focusing on their function as narrative frames for monastic rules or exceptions (anāpatti) that have no necessary relation to war. It investigates the rationale behind Indian Buddhist jurists’ utilization of these stories to account for monastic legislation, and discusses the perceptions of war reflected therein. Moreover, the paper shows that Indian Buddhist jurists of different sects or schools do not seem to have shared the same stance on predicting warfare, some arguably more ambivalent than others, especially when a prediction proves wrong and is thus liable to shake the laity’s faith and/or harm the mutual trust between monks themselves.

玛加丹王阿贾塔舒特鲁（Ajātaśatru）向佛陀提出的攻击佛ṛ的建议的故事是众所周知的，并且经过了很多研究，而鲜为人知的关于他与印度佛寺法典中的佛or发生战争或冲突的故事。本文探讨了这些鲜为人知的关于阿贾塔舒特鲁战争的故事，主要关注它们作为修道院规则或例外（anāpatti）的叙事框架的功能。）与战争没有必要的联系。它调查了印度佛教法学家利用这些故事来解释修道院立法的背后原因，并讨论了其中反映出的战争观念。此外，该论文还表明，不同派别或流派的印度佛教法学家似乎在预测战争方面没有采取相同的立场，其中有些人可能比其他人更为矛盾，特别是当预测被证明是错误的并因此有可能动摇宗教信仰和/或损害僧侣之间的相互信任。