Aaa
In this way, the question whether the interpretation of T.1425, of the Bhiksunivibhahga of the Mahasamghika-Lokottaravada School,* and of T.1443 also applies to the other yinayas remains. The answer to this question cannot be found in the Vinayas themselves. More information is to be found in some commentaries:
In T. 1804*^2, p. 155a5-7, Tao-hsiian (596-667 AD) seems to indicate that, in T.1428, the real ag: of the married woman is to be understood*
i.c. “In the
Vinaya in Four Parts, a young girl, aged eighteen, ought to study the precepts for two years [i.e. the siksamana period]. It further says that a young married woman, aged ten, [ought] to be given the six rules [to be particularly taken into account by a siksamana ]”. Since the text calls the married woman, a young (/]'*£) married woman, we opt for the inter¬ pretation ’a young marrfed woman, aged ten’.
Also Buddhaghosa’s (fifth century AD) commentary on the Pali Vinaya says that, after having given a married girl of ten the agreement to study, the ordination may be conferred to her when she has completed twelve years of age (TAKAKUSU, J. and NAGAI, M., Samaniapasddikd, Vol. IV, p. 941: Chatthe, dasavassaya giliigataya sikkhasammutim datvd paripunnadvddasavassam upasampadetunt vattati). Since the text does not inform us that "paripunnadvddasavassam" has to be related to the duration of the marriage, we opt for the interpretation ‘when she has completed twelve years of age".
Finally, the commentary written by Gunaprabha 13 -’ related to the Mulasarvastivada tradition 134 , clearly indicates that the real age of the married woman is to be understood: BAPAT, P.V. and GOKHALE, V.V., Vinayasutra, p.52 (the transcription is based on NOLOT, E., 1991 p.393):
upasampat-kalasyddih \ sa dvi[vi]dho 'sydh \ kumdrikaydh vimsali-varsatvaip grhositdydh dvadasa-varsatvam ...; grantho 'Ira bhiksunivibhaiige yd grhositd dasa-varsa kumarikd-bhutd va astddasa-varsa | tasydh dve varfe siksdsamvrtir deyd ti |
132. T.1804 is a commentary written by Tao-hsiian (596-667 AD). It focuses on
T.1428, but also gives commentary on the other Chinese Pinayas(T 1421
T.1425, and T.1435).
133. According to Nakamura, H., 1980, p. 147, king Harsa adored Gunaprabha as a spiritual teacher. The reign of king Harsa can be situated in the beginning of the seventh century (Renou, L. ct Filuozat, J„ 1985, Tome Premier, p. 266).
134. Cf. BAPAT, p. V. and GOK.ll ALE, V.V., 1982. p.xvii.
Translated in NOLOT, E. op. cit., p.393:
Terminus a quo pour Tordination - il cst de deux sortes pour une [femme]: pour unc jcune ftllc, il consistc a avoir vingt ans; pour une femme mariee, il consiste a avoir douzc ans1c libel 1c s*cn trouve dans le Bh°: “Quand une femme marine a dix ans, ou quand unc jcune fillc a dix-huit ans, on peut lui donner l’agrement pour I’instruction durant deux ans”.
Wc can thus conclude that the three above mentioned commentaries all seem to indicate that the real age of the candidate is to be understood, and not the duration of the marriage. \
As wc have said before, T. 1443 states that the siksatndna period can be conferred to a married woman aged twelve, while the commentary of Gunaprabha says that a married woman can become a siksamana at the age of ten, and can be ordained when she is twelve years old. This latter statement coincides with the other Vinayas (providing we accept that all the Vinayas indicate the real age of the married candidate).
On the other hand, some modem authors defend the theory that a married woman should be married for twelve years before she can receive the ordination. Among the most important defenders of this theory arc WALDSCMMIDT, E., 1926, p. 138, ROTH, G., 1970, p.245, note 3, and HORNER, I.B., BD y Vol.HI, pp.Ui*”. G. ROTH gives no arguments for his statement. E. WALDSCHMIDT bases his statement on a sentence in a Sanskrit fragment of a Buddhist ordination cc/emony discovered and edited by C. BENDALL 136 . C. BENDABL regards the text as probably earlier than the Christian era, and attributes it to the Mula- sarvastivada School. On the ordination of a married woman, the text says: stri clvadasavarsagrJiayuktd , “a woman must be married for twelve years”. However, C. BENDALL himself considers the yukta in this sentence as being a doubtful reading, and, later, NOLOT, E., 1991, p.392, notes that it probably has to be vustd instead of yukta. Conse¬ quently, this sentence cannot be used to support the theory that a married woman only can receive the ordination after twelve years of marriage. Finally, I.B. HORNER, refers to the above mentioned WALDSCHMIDT, E., 1926, p. 138 for her statement. She further states that since a girl is often married at eight, she attains the age of twenty after twelve years of marriage, which is the usual age to receive the ordination. Only at this
135. In an earlier work, however, I.B. HORNER stated that the real age of the woman is to be understood, and that, consequently, a married woman can receive the ordination at twelve (HORNER, I.B., 1930, p. 27).
136. BENDALL. C. 1903, pp. 373-376.
age, women are able to endure the hard life of the nuns. This calculation is certainly true. However, a girl can also be married at a different age, which, after twelve years of marriage, consequently would lead to a different and unusual age for the ordination. Moreover, if she is married at an age later than eight, she would, after twelve years of marriage, bd older than twenty, but she still would haVc to wait till she has been married for twelve years to be able to become a nun. This seems very . illogical. A married woman, older than twenty, certainly is as able to endure hardships as other women of twenty. It thus seems more logical to say that a married woman, because of her married life, is able to endure hardships at an earlier age than a single woman, who has not the same duties to fulfill.
We thus have to conclude that, since the introductory stories to this precept in T.1425, in the Bhik?unlvibhanga of the Mahasamghika- Lokottaravada School and in T.1443 clearly indicate that in the above mentioned precept concerning the married woman candidate, the real age of the candidate, i.c. twelve years, has to be understood and not the duration of the marriage, and since, moreover, three important commentaries, i.c. the commentaries by Tao-hsuan, Buddhaghosa and Gunaprabha, all appear to understand the precept in this way, and since, finally, as far as our knowledge goes, no text contradicts this statement - whereas this is the case for the inverse statement - , an exception is allowed for the age on which a married woman can receive the ordination: while a single woman has to be twenty years old to receive the ordination, a married woman can receive it at the age of twelve.
f T.1428, Bhiksunivibhaiiga, Pac. 127 (pp.759c7-760a7, particularly p.759c26-27) 137 ;
137. T.1421, pp.9Ic28-92a5, Pac. 112; T.1443, p. 1014 a8-20, Pac. 160.
T. 1435, p^328bl 1-26, has a somehow different precept It says that if a bhik$uni admits a prostitute into the prdcr, she should withdraw her to a distance of five or six yojanas* (Pac. 115).
- MONIER-WlLLlAMS, M., SED f p. 858: “esp. a partic. measure of distance,
sometimes regarded as equal to 4 or 5 English miles, but more correctly « 4 KroSas or about 9 miles; according to other calculations = 256 English miles, and according to some * 8 KroSas.”
“If a bhiksuni knows that she is such a person [= prostitute 138 ], and she
confers her the ordination 139 , then it is a paciltika.”
19^/7
- "If a bhiksuni knows that a woman is a hermaphrodite and she confers
her the ordination 143 , then it is a paciltika."
j. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac.167 (p. 774a 18-b 16, particularly p. 774b I-2) 144 :
“If a bhiksuni confers the ordination to someone whose two tracts arc united 145 , then it is a paciltika."
g. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 135 (pp.762cl7-763a26, particularly,
p.763al3-I5)' 4 ®:
"If a bhiksuni knows that a woman makes love to a boy or to a man and that she is a sad and angry woman, and she admits her into the order, lets her go forth and confers her the ordination 141 , then it is a paciltika.”
h. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 165 (p.773b20-c20, particularly, p.773cl 1-12):
“If a bhiksuni knows that a woman cannot hold up urine and 'excrements and that mucus and saliva often run out, and she admits her into the order and confers her the ordination, then it is a paciltika.”
i. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 166 (pp.773c21-774al7, particularly, p. 774a8-9) 142 :
138. Both in the introductory stoty to the precept (p. 759c8 IT.) and in the commentary
on the precept (p. 759c27), ‘such a person’ is explained as ’a prostitute’.
139. This coincides with T.1421. In the precept itself, the Vinaya only says that a bhiksuni admits (Iff) a prostitute. From the commentary to the precept, however, it is dear that also the ordination has to be understood. T.1443 says that a bhiksuni lets a prostitute go forth.
140. This precept only coincides with a precept in the Pali Vinaya: Oldenberg, H., Vinaya Pitakam, Vol.IV, pp. 333-334, Pac. 79.
Other Vinayas have closely connected precepts:
T.I425 and the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L SchopI say that a bhikfuifi may not ordain a probationer who stays with a man (T. 1425, p.534al2-b2, Pac.95; Bhiksutfivibhaiiga of the M.-L, School, ROTH, G., 1970, p.237, §209, P2c.95).
Both T.1435 and T.1443 contain two precepts that refer to the character of the candidate: T.1435, pp. 328c28-329aI4, Pic. 118, says that a nun may not admit into the order a woman who is mourning; T.1435, p.329b3-15,
Pac. 120 s„ys that a nun may not admit into the order (th& 5K) a woman who has a bad character. T.1443, pp..l006c21-1007al4, Pac.117, says that a nun may not confer the going forth and the ordination to a woman who has a bad character, T.1443, p. !007al5-29, Pac. 118, says that a nun may not confer the going forth to a sad and mourning woman.
141. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya. See also note 140.
142. T.142l.p.97c 1-7, Pac. 176.
k. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 168 (p.774bl7-c20, particularly
p.774c9-10) 146 :
“If a bhiksuni knows that someone has difficulties because of debts, or difficulties because of an illness, and she confers her the ordination, then it is a paciltika.”
2) The upadhyayini < ’
a. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 131 (p.761 b 11 -cl2, particularly p.761c4-6) l i 7 ;
143. In the precept ofT.142I, it is said that if a nun admits (IS) a hermaphrodite, her
act constitutes a Pic. offense. From the commentary to the precept, it is clear that
’to admit’ should be understood as ’to be her upadhyayini', and that the
bhiksuni, as an upadhydyint, commits a paciltika offense when she confers the
ordination.
144. T. 1421, p. 97c8-12, Pic. 177.
145. In tile precept of T.1421, it is said that if a nun admits (IS) a woman whose two tracts arc united, her act constitutes a Pac. offense. The commentary to this precept refers to the commentary to the preceding precepts, which means that ‘to admit* should be understood as ‘to be her upadhyayini' (see note 143). T’.c commentary to the parallel precept in T.1428 (p.774b7) explains that ‘the two tracts arc united* means that the tracts of urine and excrements arc not separated.
146. T.1421 contains two precepts that arc closely connected with this precept of T.1428; Pac. 125 (p.93a6-I I) says that if a nun admits a woman who has been ill for a long lime, her act constitutes a Pac. offense; Pac. 127 (p. 93a 17-21) says that if a nun admits a woman who has debts, her act constitutes a Pac. offense. The commentaries on the precepts refer to the commentary on preceding precepts, from the latter we know that ‘to admit* should be understood as ‘to be her upadhydyint (see note 143).
147. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.lV, p. 329, Pac.74; T. 1421, p. 90c 1-18, Pac. 102; T.1425, p. 533a20-b20, Pac.92; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G.* 1970, pp.232-233, §206, Pac.92; T.1435, p.325b2-!6, Pac. 106; T.1443, p. 1004a 10-21,.Pac. 106.
“If a bh ksunt who has no* been [a bhiksunt] for fully twelve years yet,
confers someone the ordination 1 * 48 , then it is a pacittika" .
b. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhahga , Pac.133 (p.762al5-b20, particularly, p.762b7-9) 149 :
“If a bhiksunt , not having been given the permission by the order to confer someone the ordination 150 , says: ‘The santgha has desire, has hatred, has fear and has foolishness 151 . What it wants to agree to, it agrees to. What it docs not want to agree to, it does not agree to.’, then it is a pacittika
148. This coincides with the Pali Vi nay a and T.1443.
In T. 1421, it is said that a bhiksunt who has not been a bhiksunt for fully twelve years yet, may not accept disciples. The commentary to this precept adds that ‘to ** accept disciples* should be understood as ‘to be their upadhydyinV (see note 143). This coincides with T.1425 and with the Bhiksunmbhahga of the M.-L. School. ' • ' ' .
T.1435 only says that the bhiksunt who has not been a bhiksunt for fully twelve years yet, may not admit someone into the order (1*®).
149. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.IV, p.331, Pac.76; T.1421, p.9ic4-12, Pac. 109; T.1425, p. 537b8-24, Pac. 109; Bhiksuntvibhohga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 254-255, §223, Pac. 109.
All the above mentioned precepts have in common that the order does not give the permission to a nun (either the permission to confer the ordination or the permission to take on disciples), after which the nun criticizes this decision.
T.1435 contains a somehow different precept saying that, if a bhiksunt, although the order told her to stop [to admit someone into the order], admits someone into the order (iS3gR), she commits a Pac. offense (p.326al2-b3, Pac. 110). This latter precept is closely connected with a precept in T.1443, saying that, if a bhiksunt accepts a lot of disciples although the order did not give her the permission to accept as many disciples as she wanted, she commits a Pac. offense (p. I005bl0-c24, Pac. 110). From the commentary to this precept, it is clear that To accept disciples* is to be understood as ‘to confer them the going forth and the ordination*.
150. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya.
151 . These reproaches arc also to be foynd in the commentary on the precepts of the Pali Vinaya and of T. 1421.
3) The ordination procedure
a . T.1428 , Bhiksunmbhahga , Pac. 122 (p. 756a 16-b 17, particularly, p.756b7-9) and b. T.1428 t Bhiksunmbhahga f Pac. 123 (p.756bl8-c25, particularly, p.756c8-9) 152 : .
“If a bhiksunt , when a girl is eighteen, does not give her the two-year instruction in the precepts, but, when she is fully twenty years old confers her the ordination, then it is a pacittika."
This precept clearly states that a woman cannot be ordained without a two-year probation period.
“If a bhiksunt , when a girl is eighteen, gives her the two-year instruc¬ tion in the precepts, but does not give her the six rules, and, when die is fully twenty [years] old, she then confers her the ordination, then it is a pacittika .”
152. To T.1428, Bhiksunmbhahga, Pac. 122 correspond: OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya
Pitakam, Vol.IV, pp. 327-328, Pac.72; T.1425, pp.534cl2-535al6, PSc.97;
Bhiksunmbhahga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 240*242, §211,
Pac.97; T.1435, p.329bI6-c4, Pac. 121 (T.1435 docs not explicitly say that the
bhiksunt ordains the woman, but only states that the bhiksunt admits her into the
order (^&SR)); T.1443, p. 1006cl 1-20, Pac. 116.
The Pali Vinaya, T.1435, and T.1443 specify that, during this two-year probation period, the woman probationer has to study the rules that die particularly has to take into account (see note 71):
To T.1428, Bhiksunmbhahga, Pac. 123 correspond: OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam, Vol.IV, pp.318-320, Pac.63; T.1421, p.92a!8-23, Pac. 115; T.1435, pp. 326b5-327c21, Pac. 111 (T.1435 does not explicitly say that the bhiksunt ordains the woman, but only states that the bhiksunt admits her into the order T.1443, p. 1007bl-12, Pac. 119.
There is, however, a small difference between the precept in T.1428 and the precepts in the other Vinayas . Whereas the precept in T.1428 says that the bhiksunt did not give the six rules to the candidate, the precepts ( n the other Vinayas say that the candidate herself docs not study the rules she has to Mow.
Closely connected to the latter precept, T.1421, T.1425, and the Bhikfurf- vibhanga of the M.-L. School have another precept saying \3xfL if a bhiksunt ordains a siksamand who has not completed the two-year instruction in the precepts, she commits a Pac. offense: T.1421, p.92a6-U, Pac. 113; T.1425, p. 535al7-b8, Pac.98; Bhiksunmbhahga of the M.-L. School, ROFii, G., 1970, pp. 242-243, §212, Pac.98. The latter two Vinayas explain that ‘not to have completed the probationary period* means that the siksamand did not study the rules she particularly has to take into account This links the precept in these two Vinayas to the above mentioned Pac. 123 of T.1428.
This precept states that a woman candidate, even when she has done a
two-year probation period, cannot be ordained if, during this probation
period, she did not study the six rules (/\j£) 153 .
c. T. 1428/ Bhiksimivibhanga, Pac. 124 (pp.756c26-758c28, particularly/ p. 758c 18-20)»54; •* '
“If a bhiksuni , when a girl is eighteen, gives her the two-year instruc¬ tion in the precepts and gives her the six rules, and, when she is fully twenty [years] old, she then confers her the ordination without the per¬ mission of the samgha , then it is a pacittika."
ci T.1428, Bhiksunivibhaiiga, Pac.126 (p.759b3-c6, particularly, p.759b 25-27) 155 :
“If a bhiksuni admits a young married woman and gives her the two- year instruction in the precepts, and, when she is fully twelve years old she then confers her the ordination without the permission of the samgha , then it is a pacittika ”
153. See note 71.
154. OLDENBERG, IL, Vi nay a Pitakam, Vol.IV, pp.320-321, Pac.64 and pp.328- 329, Piic.73. These two precepts arc closely connected: in Pac.64, it is said that, ■ without the permission of the order, a nun may not ordain a probationer who has studied the precepts for two years, while in Pac.73, it is said that without the permission of the order, a nun may not ordain a twenty-year old girl, who has studied the precepts for two years.
T.1421, p.92a 12-17, Pac.114. T.1425, p.535b9-c!0, Pac.99. Bhiksuni- vibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G„ 1970, pp. 243-245, §213, Pac. 99. T.1435, pp.327c22-328a9, Pac.112, p.328cl2*27, Pac.l 17, and p.329c5-22, Pac. 122. These three precepts are closely connected: in Pac. 112, it is said that without the permission of the order, a nun may not admit a disciple who has studied the precepts for two years into the order; in Pac. 117, it is said that, without the permission of the order, a nun may not admit a twenty-year old girl into the order; in Pac. 122, it is said that, without the permission of the order, a nun may not admit a twenty-year old girl who has studied the precepts for two years into thc.ordcr.
155. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pijakam , Vol.IV, pp.323-324, Pac.67; T.1421, p. 9la22-b5, Pac. 105; T.1425, p. 536a29-b8, Pac. 103; Bhiksunivibhaiiga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp.247-248, §217, Pac. 103; T.1435, pp.325c25-326al 1, Pac. 109 (T.1435 docs not explicitly say that the bhiksuni ordains the woman, but only states that the bhiksuni admits her into the order
e. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 130 (pp.760c20-761bl0, particular! p.761b2-3) ,s6 :
“If a bhiksuni confers someone the ordination's? without the pc mission of the samgha, then it is a pacittika."
f. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhaiiga, Pac. 132 (pp. 761 c 13-762a 14, particularly p.762a7-8)'5«:
“If a bhiksuni, who has been [a bhiksuni] for fully twelve years confers someone the ordination'^ without the permission of the saniglu. then it is a pacittika.”
156. T.1443, p. 10O4a22-b27, Pac. 107.
157. The precept in T.1443 says that, without the permission ofthe order, a nun ma> not accept someone as a disciple. The commentary to this precept furthci explains that ‘to accept someone as a disciple’ should be understood as ‘to givi
. , the going forth and the ordination’.
158. OLDENBERG, H„ VinayiP Pitakaip, Vol.IV, pp. 330-331, Pac.75; T 1421 pp.90c!9-91al4, Pac. 103; T.1435, p. 325bl7-cl0, Pac. 107.
. T.1425 and the Bhiksunivibhaiiga of the M.-L. School contain two precepts that are closely connected to the Pacittikas 130,131 (see p.33) and 132 of T.1428: Pac.93 (T.1425, p.533b2l-c8; Bhiksunivibhaiiga ofthe M.-L. School, ROTH. G., 1970, pp. 234-235, §207) says that a bhikfuifi who has been in the order for fully twelve rainy seasons but who has not fulfilled lire ten requirements cannot take on disciples, while PSc.94 (T.1425, pp. 533c9-534al 1; Bhiksunivibluniga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 235-236, §208) says dial a 'bhikfuni who has fulfilled the ten requirements cannot take on disciples without t ic permission ofthe order.
These ten requirements refer to the requirements that a bhiksuni has to fulfill in order to become a teacher: she has to uphold the precepts (I), she has to be learned in Abhidharma (2) and in Vinaya (3), she must study morality (4). meditation (5) and wisdom (6), she must be able to .purify herself of Iter offenses and to help others to purify themselves of their offenses as well (7), she must be able to remove a disciple who is being pressed by her relatives to quit her spiritual training to another place, or to have someone else remove such person to another place (8), she must be able to nurse her disciple when the latter is sick or to have someone else nurse the latter (9), she must have been in the order for fully twelve rainy seasons or more (10).
159. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya. In T. 1421, it is said that a bhikstuii who has been a bhikfuni for fully twelve years may not accept disciples without the permission of the order. The commentary to this precept refers to the commen¬ tary to the preceding precept (= Pac.102), according to which ‘to accept disciples’ should be understood as ‘to be her upadhyayint, and that the b hikfu ni, as an upadhyayint, commits a pacittika offense when she confers the nnlinMi^ ’
g. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac.134 (p.762b21-cl6, particularly, p.762c7-9) 160 :
“If a bhiksuni confers the ordination 161 without the permission of the parents and the husband 162 , then it is a pdcittika .”
T.1435 only says that the bhiksuni who has been a bhiksuni for fully twelve years may not admit someone into the order (iSXR) without the permission of the order.
160. OLDENBERG, II., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.IV, pp.334-335, Pac.80; T.1421, p. 93a 12-16, Pac. 126; T.1425, p. 5l9b2-c6, Samghatise?a 7; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G.. 1970. pp. 135-137, §§158-159, Samghatisesa 7; T.1435, p.330b3-cl, Pac. 124;T.1443,p. I007b29-cl9, Pac. 121.
161. This oincidcs with the Pali Vinaya, In T.1421, it is said that a bhiksuni may not accept a married woman who is subject to her husband into the order. The commentary to this precept says that ‘to admit into the order’ should be understood as ‘to confer the going forth and the ordination* (this corresponds to Pac. 102, p. 90c 17-18).
In T.1425, and in the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, it is said that the bhiksuni may not accept a woman as a disciple without the permission of the woman’s masters ( j{&: see note 162). The commentaries on the precepts explain that ‘to accept as a disciple* has to be understood as *to confer the v ordination*.
T.1435 docs not explicitly say that the bhikfurf ordains the woman, but only states that the bhiksuni admits her into the order (iB-feSR)* 'N
Finally, in T. 1443. it is said that a bhiksuni may not confer the going forth to a married woman without the permission of her husband.
162. It is not clear who exactly has to give the permission to* whom. Since the candidate to be ordained is not qualified as a single girl (3£^C) or as a married woman (tUMIX) (cf. p. 27), it could well be that both of them are equally to be understood/ A single girl is to be given permission by her parents, while a married woman certainly is to be given permission-by her husband, but, maybe, also the parents' opinion is decisive.
The precept in the Pali Vinaya is similar to the one in T.1428.
A similar situation is to be found in the precepts of T.1425, of the Bhikfuni- vibhahga of the M.-L. School, and of T.1435, ail saying that a bhikfugi may not erdain a woman without the permission of her masters (3E). The commentaries on the precepts ^)f T.1425 and of the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School distinguish two situations: a single girl has to have the permission of her parents, a married woman should have the permission of her husband, her mother-in-law, her father-in-law and her husband’s younger brother.
Explaining ‘masters*, the commentary on the precept of T.1435 distinguishes tlircc situations: a single girl has to have the permission of her parents, a marned woman who has not gone to her husband's house yet has to have the permission of both her parents and her husband, and, finally, a married woman who has gone to her husband’s house, has to have the permission of her husband.
h. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 136 (p. 763a27-b28, particularly p.763bl7-19) 163 :
“If a bhiksuni says to a siksamana : ‘Sister, drop this. Study this. I will confer you the ordination,’ but she does not take measures to confer her the ordination, then it is a pdciilika
i. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 137 (pp. 763b28-764a3, particularly p.763c21-23) 164 :
“If a bhiksuni says to a siksamana : ‘Bring me a robe 163 .1 will confer you the ordination 166 ,’but she docs not take measures to confer her the ordination 166 *, then it is a pdcittika
finally, in T.1421 and in T.I443, it is said that a bhiksuni may not accept a married woman wl vf is subject to her husband into the order.
163. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pifakam, Vol.IV, p.333, Pac.78; T.1425, p.537b25- cl7, Pac. 110; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp.255- 256, §224, Pac. 110; T.1435, p.330c2-27, Pac. 125 (T.1435 docs not explicitly say that the bhiksuni ordains the woman, but only slates that the Mkfurf admits her into the order (tgf)).
T.1443 contains two precepts that arc closely connected with the above men¬ tioned precept: T.1443, p. I008a5«28, Pac. 123, stales that if a bhiksuni docs not confer the going forth to a woman who has done some household work for her, although she, i.e. the bhiksuni, previously, had promised this woman to do so! providing she did this household work, her act constitutes a P5c. offense! T.1443, p. 1007b 13-28, Pac. 120, states that if a bhiksuni\ although she knows that a woman finished the two-year study of the six rules and the six additional rules*, does not confer the ordination to this woman, her act constitutes a Pac. offense.
particular account by the probationer. See note 71 .
T.1421 contains a precept that is closely connected to the latter precept of T.1443. It says that a bhiksuni who, although there are no problems, does not confer the ordination to a probationer who has finished the two-year instruction, but, instead, says that the probationer should go on studying, commits a Pac offense (T.1421, p. 91cl9-27, Pac. 111).
164. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.IV, p.332. Pac.77; T. 1421, p.91b24-c3, Pac. 108; T.1425, p. 526al6-b5, nihsargika-pacattika 18; the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 176-177. §179, nihsargika-pacattika 18; T.1435, p. 330a6-b2, Pac. 123; T. 1443, pp. 1007c20-l008a4, P2c.l22.
165. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya , T.1421, T.1425, the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, and T.1443. In the precept of T.1435, the bhiksuni i$ said to ask for an alms bowl, a robe, a door-key, and medicines.
166. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya , T.1425, (he Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L.
j. T.1428. Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac. 138 (p.764a4-bl2, particularly, p.764b2-3) 167 :
“If a bhiksum, when one full year has not passed yet, confers someone the ordination, then it is a pdcittika ”
k. T.1428, Bhiksunivibhanga, Pac.139 (p.764bl3-cl 1, particularly, p.764b29-c2) 168 :
School, and T. 1443. In the precepts ofT.1421 andT.1435, it is only said that the bhiksuni promises a woman to admit her into the order (ffi). Although nothing is mentioned as to the exact meaning of the term IS, the introductory stories to this precept give some indication, informing us how the bhiksuni made the promise to admit (J&) her, after the woman had requested the going forth.
167. This precept is closely connected with Pac.83 in the Pali Vinaya , stating that a ' nun may net ordain two persons within one year (OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Voi.lV, pp. 336-337).
Moreover, all the Vi nay as contain another precept saying that a nun may not ordain a person every year, precept which is closely connected with Pac. 138 of T.1428: OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , VoUV, p.336, Pac.82; T.1421, p.92b 13-19, Pac. 118; T.1425, p.536ct3-23, Pac. 106 (the precept says that a nun may not take on disciples every year; the commentary to this precept adds that ‘to take on disciples’ is to be understood as ‘to confer the ordination’); Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 250-251, §220, Pac. i 06 (the precept says that a nun may not take on disciples every year; the commentary to this precept adds that ‘to take on disciples’ is to be understood as before, i.c. as ‘to confer the ordination’); T.1435, pp.330c28-331a!5, Pac. 126 (the precept only says that a nun may not accept disciples OUftrf-) every year); T.1443, p. 1008a29-bl3, Pac. 124.
168. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.1V, pp.335-336, Pac.81; T.1421, p. 92b20-27, Pac. 119; T.1425, pp.536c24-537a 16, Pac. 107; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp.25l-253, §221, Pac. 107; T.1435, pp.331al7- 334c29, Pac. 127.
Common in all these precepts, is the rule that an ordination ceremony has to be performed within one day. However, while all the introductory stories to this precept indicate that the ordination in the nun’s order and the ordination in the monk’s order should be held on the same day, not all precepts focus on the same aspect. According to T.1421, an ordination ceremony may not be interrupted and has to be held within one day. If not, the bhiksuni who confers the ordination
- commits a pdcittika. On the other hand, according to T.1428, T.1425, the
Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, and T.1435, if a bhiksuni lets a woman stay overnight after having ordained that woman in the nun’s order, but before conferring her the ordination in the monk’s order, this bhiksuni's act constitutes a Pac. offense. Finally, according to the Pali Vinaya % there may be no day between the permission to ordain and the actual ordination. If not, the nun who ^ confers the ordination commits a Pac. offense.
“If a bhiksuni, after having conferred the ordination to someone goes
to the bhiksusamgha to confer hcr'thc ordination only after one night has
passed, then it is a pdcittika."
4) The period following the ordination ceremony
p.760b7-8) P5C ' 128 (p - 760a8 - b14 ’ Particularly,
“If a.bhiksuni admits many disciples, but docs not tell them to study the precepts for two years 1 ™ and docs not give them support in two things 171 , then it is a pdcittika. 112 '*
169. OLDENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam, Vol.IV, pp.324-325, Pac.68' T 1421
p.92c6-ri, P a c.l21 : T.1425, p.536b9-25, Pac. 104; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G„ 19?0, pp. 248-249, §218, Pac. 104; T.1435 o 328a23- bl °* P5c ; 1 14 (T.1435 docs not explicitly say that the bhiksuni ordains the woman, but only states that the bhiksutti admits her into the order (SfAShv T.1443, p. 1006a6-19, Pac. 112 and p. 1006a20-b3, Pac. 113. ’
170. This coincides with the Pali Vinaya, T.1425, the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M -L School, and T.1435. According to T.1421, the support has to last for six years’
while in T.1443, no duration oftlic support is mentioned.
171. After the ordination, an upadhyayini has to help her disciples for another two
years and has to support them regarding two things: (1) in the law (2) in clothing and food. ' v
This coincides with T.1435. In the Pali Vinaya, in T.1421, in T.1425 and in the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, the teacher only has to help her disciples regarding the law. T.1443 has two precepts: in Pac. 112, it is said that a teacher ought to help her disciples regarding the precepts, while in Pac. 113, it is said that a teacher ought to support and protect her disciples.
172. The Pali Vinaya and T.1421 add the possibility that a teacher has her disciples
helped by someone else. s
173. 0LUENBERG, H., Vinaya Pitakam , Vol.IV, pp. 325-326, Pac.69; T.1421 p. 92b28-c5, Pac. 120; T.1425, p. 536b26-cl2, Pac. 105; Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L. School, ROTH, G., 1970, pp. 249-250, §219, Pac. 105; T.1435. p. 328al0- 22, Pac. 113.
“If a bhiksuni docs not follow 174 her upddhydyini for two years 175 , then it is a pacillika. 116 "
HI. Conclusion
The admission rules, admission ceremonies and offenses against these rules and ceremonies as they arc described above, display the exact ‘theoretical’ career of a nun in the Buddhist community. In this commu¬ nity, two orders can be distinguished, a monk’s order (bhiksusanigha) and a nun’s order ( bliiksunisamgha ), the latter being dependent on the former. These orders gradua'ly came into being, first the bhiksusanigha and then the bhiksunisunigha, and, as the number of monks and nuns continuously grew, the need was felt to have more regulations in order to organize this growing community.
In this organization, the admission into the order is a fundamental institution This admission has been established for the monk’s order first. The way these admission procedures developed and in which cere¬ monies they finally resulted, is described in the several Vinayas . ,77 A survey has been given by FRAUWALLNER, E„ 1956, pp. 70-78. Apply¬ ing this survey to T. 1428, we come to the following outline:
First, Buddha himself performs the ordination, i.e. by calling the first disciples to join the order by means of the formula: “Welcome,.monk.” (&$ktkSx). This formula simultaneously covered admission and ordi-
174. Wh : ’.c according to T.1428, the new bhiksuni, above all, has to listen to her
icaciicr, the Pali I'inaya, T.I421, T.1425, the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.-L.
School, and T.1435 all emphasize that the new nun has to serve her teacher.
175. After having been ordained, the new bhiksuni has to follow her teacher for another two years and listen to her teachings.
This coincides with the Pali I'inaya, T.1425, the Bhiksunivibhanga of the M.- L. School, and T.1435. According to T.1421, the new nun has to serve her teacher for six years.
176. T. 1421 adds the possibility that the new nun has her teacher helped by someone else.
177. OLDENUERG, IT., ^inava Pitakam, Vol.l, Mahavagga 1, pp. 1-100; T.1421,
£J0«£- (Chapter on Ordination), pp. 101al2-121a25; T.1425, several passages in 3Tj if It ili (Chapter on Miscellaneous Items), pp.412b24-499al6;T.1428,
'jcTKIilfE (Chapter on Ordination), pp.779a6-816c4; T.1435,
(Chapter on ordination), pp. 148a5-157c27; T.1444, tKTfcJft - WTlSlUfiSS
(Chapter on Going Forth of the Mulasarvaslivadavinaya), pp. 1020b 23-104la20.
nation. 178 Later, He permits the monks to perform the ordination by
having the candidate recite the formula of the triple refuge (refuge in
Buddha, in the law and in the order). 179 Also this formula covered both
the admission and the ordination. Finally, He lays’down that the ordi¬
nation should take place by means of a formal act in which the motion is «
fourfold (a jhapticaiunhakarman 1 ^*)} 80 Hereby, a clear diffe ren ce was
made between the going forth ( pravrajya ) and the full ordination (upa-
sampada). Hence two stages became necessary to acquire the full .
of a monk (and a full member of the community) and to enjoy all the
rights and privileges attributed to these members. In the first stage, one
becomes a novice ( srdmanera ) whose standing, rights and duties are
different from those of a monk who has received the full ordination!
Bad behavior of young monks further induces Buddha to determine the minimum age fof ordination as twenty years 181 , while the minimum - age for the novice is fixed at twelve 182 , In ease candidate novices are at least as grown that they can scare away the crows, the age may be less than twelve. 183 Many rules are further added to regulate who can be a candidate and who not, and who can accept disciples and who not.
\ At the moment Mahaprajapati Gautami was allowed to become a nun, •
\ # the monk’s order (bhiksusamgha) was already well organized. This
t explains why she can go to a monk’s monastery in or^ier to ask for the
permission to go forth. Most likely, in the beginning, the order of mm« (bliiksunisamgha) took over the organizational pattern of the monk’s community, and both orders further developed in the same general direction. ,
However, the bhiksunisamgha is not completely independent and relies; on tjie bhiksusamgha in severe 1 ways. This dependency is laid down in the eight rules to be followed by the nuns in their relation with the monks. The fact that a woman can only become a nun if she is ordained by both the bhiksunisamgha and the bhiksusanigha is essential in they’ rules. This fact implies a control over the membership of the order by the monks.
178. T.1428, p.799bl-3.
179. T.1428, p.793al3-21.
180. T.1428, p.799cl2-29. .
181. T.1428,p.808b25-26.
182. T. 1428, p. 810c22-23.
183. T.1428,pp.810c24-811a3.
In addition, the bhiksunisamgha possesses some regulations, different from the ones of the bhiksusamgha. For the bhiksunisamgha, a stage between the going forth (pravrajya) anti the ordination ( upasampada ) is added. This is a probationary period that lasts two years, during which the woman candidate, as a probationer ( siksamana ), has to prove that she is fit to become a nun. Furthermore, some rules specific to women and nuns arc added to the rules for monks, e.g., the rules relating to married women.
As it was the ease for the bhiksusamgha , also the formation of the bhiksunisamgha was not accomplished in one day. As suggested by I.B. HORNER 184 , the probation period for a woman candidate was the result of a gradual development: it is only when the need w o .s felt, that an additional stage between the going forth and the ordination was intro¬ duced. This additional stage rapidly became a necessary condition to become a nun. In T.1428, this necessity is evident from the ordination proceedings as they arc described in the Bhiksuniskandhaka 4 *: three compulsory steps leading to full membership of the community: 1) the going forth, 2) the two-year probation period and 3) the ordination. Also the Bhiksunivibhaitga, pdciltika 121 draws attention to the necessity of these three steps, while the pacitlikas 122 and 123 emphasize that a nun may not confer the ordination to a woman candidate who has not done the two-year probation period. Furthermore, also the fourth gurudharma 6 * states that this period must precede the ordination.
It is, however, to be noticed that some precepts do not take the proba¬ tion period into account: the introductory story to the fifth samghava- sesa precept relates how a woman thief rapidly goes forth and receives the ordination, so that her persecutors arc confronted with a ‘fait accompli’ and cannot arrest her anymore. In the pacitlikas 119 and 120, respectively a pregnant woman and a breast-feeding-woman arc accepted into the order and immediately receive the ordination. We thus have to conclude that, at the time these latter three precepts were issued, the probation period did not exist or was not taken into account. This can only be understood if we consider the probation period as a practice that has been introduced after the order of nuns had existed for some time:
184. HORNER, I.B.. BD, Vol.V, p. 354, note 3:"... this practice [the probation period] will no doubt have been introduced later, after an Order of nuns had been in being for some time."
since the organization of the bhiksunisamgha is founded on that of the bhiksusamgha, the nuns arc likely to have taken over the going forth and the ordination from the monk’s community, and later introduced a third step in between these two. At the very beginning, this third step might not have been compulsory. Since the Vinaya texts do not mention that a woman candidate could freely decide whether or not to pass two years as a probationer - while frequently mentioning the three obligatory steps leading to full membership of the community - it seems safe to say that when the probation period was introduced, it rapidly, if not immedi¬ ately, became compulsory, and that, consequently, there never has been a choice whether or not to become a probationer.
We have to conclude that to become a full member of the community, a woman first has to go forth and to become a novice (srdmaneri). Secondly, she has to pass two years as a probationer ( siksamana ), and, finally, she receives the ordination and becomes a nun ( bhiksuni ). The minimum age at which sfic can become a nun, enjoying all rights and privileges attributed to full members of the community, depends 6n her being singlc'or. married. Neither a srdmaneri nor a siksamana can partic¬ ipate in the formal acts and in the ceremonies performed by the order. „Thcrc is no essential difference between the position of a srdmaneri and the one of a siksamana, except for the social rank in the community, a siksamana holding a higher position than a srdmaneri.
HEIRMAN
\BS 20.2 82
u of technical terms
ill first appearance and reference to explanatory note)
isampadd (P. upasampada ): ordination, p.43 tdhydyinl (P. upajjha ): teacher, p. 44, note 66 man (P. kamma ): formal act, p. 37 udharma (P. garudhanwia) : severe rule, p. 35; note 6 ptikarman (P. nattikamma ): formal act consisting of a motion, p. 37, note 20 pticaturthakarman (P. iiutticatutthakanima ): formal act in which the motion is fourfold, p. 37, note 20
ptidvitiyakarman (P. iiattidutiyakannan ): formal act in which the motion is twofold, p.37, note 20
ikria (P. dukkata ): bad action (a very light offense), p. 48, note 79 i\ dsa (P. parivasa): ncriod of residence (a kind of penance), p. 37, note 22 'ittika (P. pacittiya ): expiation? (ominor offense),p. 41, note 45 ajika : an offense that leads to a permanent, lifetime exclusion from the order, p.47, note 72
uidha (or uposadha) (P. {u)posatha ): observance (a ceremony), p. 36, note 10 Kidesatuya (P. pdtidesamya ): requiring confession (a minor offense), p.48, note 76 tvarana (or pro varan a) (P .pavarana) *. invitation (a ceremony), p.36, note 11 ivrajya (P. pabbajjd ): the going forth, p.43
'ksu (P. bhikkhu ): monk, p. 35 v
iksunt (P. bhikkhunt ): nun, p, 33
tksunisamgha (P. bhikkhunisamgha ): order of nuns, p. 33
iksusamgha (P. bhikkhusamgha) : order of monks, p. 33
natva (P. mdnatta ): i.c. a kind of penance (doubtful etymology), p.37, note 17
sapada (P. sikkhapada ): precept, p.44
samdna (P. sikkhamand) \ probationer,p.36,note 14
Imancra (P. sdmanera ): (male) novice, p. 48
imatieri (P. samaneri ): (female) novice, p.45
mgha (P. samgha ): order (of monks or nuns), p. 36
mghavasesa (P. samghadisesa) : remainder in the order (an offense leading to a temporary exclusion from the order), p. 37, note 16
List of consulted works
Taishd Shinshu Daizokyo , Takakusu, J. and Watanabe, K. (eds )
Tokyo, 1924-35
— Vol.22,
No. 1421 : Mi-sha-sai Pu Ho-hsi Wu-fen Lu (Mahi&asaka
No. 1423 : Wu-fen Pi-ch’iu-ni Chieh-pen (Pratimokfa for bhiksu- '
fits of the Mahl&asaka School)
No. 1425 : Mo%>-seng-ch’i LQ (Mahasaipghikavinaya)
No. 1428: Szu-fen Lu(Dliarmaguplakavinaya)
No. 1429 . m ft Szu-fen Lu Pi-ch’iu Chieh-pen, Pratimokfa for bhiksus ofthe Dharmaguptaka School)
No. 1430 . Szu-fen Seng Chieh-pen ( Pratimokfa for bhiksus of the
No- 1431 : Szu-fen Pi-ch'iu-ni Chieh-pen Pratimokfa for bhikfu-
nis of the Dharmaguptaka School)
No. 1434 . Szu-fen Pi-ch*iu-ni Chieh-mo-fa (Karmavacana for
bhiksunis of the Dharmaguptaka School)
— Vol.23,
No. 1435 : Shih-sung Lu (Sarvastivadavinaya)
No. 1442: SJWuRHstS® Kcn-pcn-shuo-i-ch’ieh-yu Pu P*i-nai-y©
(Mulasarvastivadavinaya)
No. 1443 : Kcn-pcn-shuo-i-clfich-yuPu Pi-ch’u- ..
ni P’i-nai-ye (MulasarvasUvada-bhik$univinaya)
No. 1444 : 01ft® i£$ i® Ul Ik ^ Kcn-pcn-shuo-i-ch’ich-yu Pu P*i-nai-
ye Ch* u-chia Shih (Mulasarvasti vadavinaya-praynijyavasiu)
— Vol.24,
No. 1451 : Ken-pen-shuo-j-ch*ieh-yu Pu P'i-nai-ye
Tsa-shih (Mulasarvastivadavinaya-k§udrakavastu)
No. 1453 : Ken-pen-shuo-i-ch*ich-yu Pu Pai-i Chieh-
mo(Mtilasaivastivada-eka&takarman) V
— Vol.40,
■No. 1804: Szu-fen LuShan-fan Pu-ch’uch Hsing-shih
JIA3S 20.2 84
BAPAT, P.V. and GOKHALE, V.V., Vinaya-Sutra, Patna: K.P. Jayaswai Research
Institute. 1982.
BENDALL, C., “Fragment of a Buddhist Ordination-Ritual in Sanskrit”. Album-Kern ,
, Opstellen geschrcven ter Eere van Dr, H. Kern, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1903. pp. 373-376.
Buddhaghosa. Samantapdsadika , Takakusu, J. and Nagai, M. (cds.). Vol. IV, London, Pali Text Society. Luzac & Company. Ltd., 1967 2 . • -
EDGERTON, F., Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary , Delhi: Motilal Banar-sidass, 1985 5 ,2 Vols. (Vol.2: BHSD).
FraUWALLNER, E., The Earliest Vinaya and the Beginnings of Buddhist Literature , Roma: ls.M.E.O., 1956.
Heirman, A., “Some Remarks on the Definition of a Monk and a Nun as Members of a Community, and the Definition of ‘Not to Live in Community*”, Indian Journal of Buddhist Studies , vol. 7,1995, pp. 1 -22.
VON fitNOBER, 0. f “Kullurgcschichtlichcs aus dem Bhiksunt-Vinaya: die samkak$ika*\ Zeitschrift der Deutschcn Morgcnldndischen Gesellschaft , No. 125, 1975, pp.133- 139.
HIRAKAWA, A., Monastic Discipline for the Buddhist Nuns , Patna: K.P. Jayaswai Research Institute, 1982.
HORNER, I.B., I Vomen under Primitive Buddhism, New York: E.P. Dutton and Company, 1930.
— 77ic Book of the Discipline (BD), London: Pali Text Society, Luzac & Company, Ltd., 1938*1966,6 Vols.
LAMOTTE, £. History• of Indian Buddhism , Louvain-la-Ncuvc: Institut Oricntaliste dc rUniversite Catholiquc dc Louvain, 1988 (translated from the French,
- .1958).
MONIER-W1LL1AMS, M., A Sanskrit-English Dictionary (SED\ Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990 11 *
NAKAMURA, H., Indian Buddhism , a Survey with Bibliographical Notes, 1 lirakata City (Osaka Pref.): Kufs Publication, 1980.
— Bukhvgo Daijiten ( BGD), Tokyo: Tokyo Shoji Kabu-
shikikaisha, 19855
NOLOT, £. Regies de discipline des nonnes bouddhisles, Paris: College dc France (Publications dc Hnstitut dc civilisation indienne), 1991.
OLDENBERG, H. (cd.), Vinaya Pitakam , London: Pali Text Society, Luzac & Company, Ltd., 19645,5 Vols.
RENOU, L. ct FlLLlOZAT, J., Linde classique , manucl des etudes indiennes, Paris, Libruiric (TAmcrique ct d’Orient, 1985 (2 vols).
RHYS Davids, T.W. and STEDE, \V„ The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary (PED), Oxford: Pali Text Society, 1992*.
ROTH, G. (cd.), Bhiksunt- Vinaya, Manual of Discipline for Buddhist Nuns, Patna: K.P. Jayaswai Research Institute, 1970.
HEIRMAN
SAKAKI, R. (cd.), Mahavyutpatti Suzuki Gakujutsu Zaidan Tokvo
1973 5 ,2 Vols. ’
UPASAK, C.S., Dictionary of Early Buddhist Monastic Terms (Based on Pali Literature) [DEBMT), Varanasi: Bharati Prakashan, 1975.
WALDSCHMIDT, E., Bruclistucie des Bhiksuni-Pratimoksa der Sarvastivadins, Leipzig: Deutsche Morgcnlandischc Gesellschaft, 1926.
— (cd.), Sanskrit-handschriften aus des Turfanfunden, Teil I
Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH 1965.
WlJAYARATNA, M„ Les moniales bouddhistes, naissance ct devchppemcnt du mona- chismejeminin, Paris: Les fiditions du Cerf, 1991.
WOGIHARA, U., et alii, Bonwa Daijiten JJ4 (BIV), Tokyo: Kodansha, 1974.
YUYAMA, a., A Systematic Survey of Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, Erster Teil,
