2v.703 "It is not thus that one becomes a mendicant,
Just because one begs others for alms.
If one has taken up a domestic practice,
One still has not become a bhikkhu. [n.480] Ee1 bhikkhavo in pāda b should be amended to bhikkhate. Spk explains vissaṁ dhammaṁ in the next pāda as duggandhaṁ akusaladhammaṁ, "a foul smelling unwholesome state," assuming that vissa < Skt visra, raw meat. Spk-pṭ adds: "It produces a putrid smell, thus it is vissa, i.e., foul smelling" (virūpaṁ gandhaṁ pāsavāti ti visso duggandho). Dhp-a III 393,2 (commenting on the verse at Dhp 266) says: "Vissa is an uneven doctrine (visamaṁ dhammaṁ); or else, a putrid-smelling state of bodily action, etc. (vissagandhaṁ va kayakammadikaṁ dhammaṁ), having undertaken which one is not called a bhikkhu." As Brough points out, however, the original Pali term is probably derived from Vedic veśman, domestic (Gandhari Dharmapada, pp. 191–92, n. to 67). Vesma occurs in Pali at Ja V 84,17. Uv 32:18, the Skt parallel to the present verse, has veśmaṁ dharmaṁ.
In the next verse, in pāda b, I read brahmacariyava, with Se and SS, as against brahmacariyaṁ in the other eds. The latter does not seem to fit into the syntax, as it is neither subject nor object of the verb. Since the Buddha here defines a bhikkhu as one who has expelled both merit and evil (puññañ ca papañ ca bahitva), this means he is equating the real monk solely with the arahant.

3v.704 "But one here who leads the holy life,
Having expelled merit and evil,
Who fares in the world with comprehension:
He is truly called a bhikkhu."

2"Na tena bhikkhako hoti,
yāvatā bhikkhate pare;
Vissaṁ dhammaṁ samādāya,
bhikkhu hoti na tāvatā.

3Yodha puññañca pāpañca,
bāhitvā brahmacariyaṁ;
Saṅkhāya loke carati,
sa ve bhikkhūti vuccatī"ti.