What is the reason the rules of the Khandhaka and the Patimokkha are separated into different categories?
While some of the categories of the Khandhaka collection make sense as separate categories. It certainly seems like some of the rules in the Khandhaka, such as the minor matters collection, are pretty similar in origin story and type of offense to what you see in the formal monastic code in the Patikmokkha.
Mahayana includes many of these and that is where you get those “extra rules” that Theravada “does not have”
Half joking… the patimokkha would be too long. It really would be … because there are so many of these rules. They appear in different books as well… cūḷavaggapāḷi and mahāvaggapāḷi. The patimokkha rules appear only in the pārājikapāḷi and pācittiyapāḷi books.
I personally think it makes some sense but not all.
I guess you have to draw the line somewhere, and I guess they did.
Oh how interesting. I was wondering why Mahayana monks had more precepts than Theravada monks (255? to 227 I think)
Supposedly, there are not many extra rules already written down in Theravada texts. But I guess they asked the same questions you did and put them in the patiomokkha