|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | 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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|theory}} that a
| |
| − | [[married]] woman should be [[married]] for twelve years before she can
| |
| − | receive the [[ordination]]. Among the most important defenders of this
| |
| − | {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|equal}} to 4 or 5 English {{Wiki|miles}}, but more correctly « 4
| |
| − | KroSas or about 9 {{Wiki|miles}}; according to other calculations = 256 English {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|urine}} and
| |
| − | '{{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 .{{Wiki|purify}} herself of Iter offenses
| |
| − | and to help others to {{Wiki|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
| |
| − | {{Wiki|rules}}*, does not confer the [[ordination]] to this woman, her act constitutes a Pac.
| |
| − | offense.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * These {{Wiki|rules}} are the {{Wiki|rules}} that, according to T.1443, have to be taken into
| |
| − | 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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|rule}} that an [[ordination]] {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|rules}}, admission {{Wiki|ceremonies}} and offenses against these
| |
| − | {{Wiki|rules}} and {{Wiki|ceremonies}} as they arc described above, display the exact
| |
| − | ‘{{Wiki|theoretical}}’ career of a [[nun]] in the [[Buddhist community]]. In this commu¬
| |
| − | nity, two orders can be {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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.
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | {{Wiki|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¬
| |
| − | {{Wiki|nation}} should take place by means of a formal act in which the {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|community}}) and to enjoy all the
| |
| − | rights and privileges attributed to these members. In the first stage, one
| |
| − | becomes a {{Wiki|novice}} ( srdmanera ) whose [[standing]], rights and duties are
| |
| − | different from those of a [[monk]] who has received the [[full ordination]]!
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Bad {{Wiki|behavior}} of young [[monks]] further induces [[Buddha]] to determine
| |
| − | the minimum age fof [[ordination]] as twenty years 181 , while the minimum
| |
| − | - age for the {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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]]
| |
| − | {{Wiki|community}}, and both orders further developed in the same general
| |
| − | [[direction]]. ,
| |
| − |
| |
| − | However, the bhiksunisamgha is not completely {{Wiki|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’
| |
| − | {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|rules}} specific to women and
| |
| − | [[nuns]] arc added to the {{Wiki|rules}} for [[monks]], e.g., the {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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
| |
| − | {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|community}},
| |
| − | a woman first has to go forth and to become a {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|community}}, depends 6n her
| |
| − | being singlc'or. [[married]]. Neither a srdmaneri nor a [[siksamana]] can partic¬
| |
| − | ipate in the formal acts and in the {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|social}} rank in the {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|rule}}, p. 35; note 6
| |
| − | ptikarman (P. nattikamma ): formal act consisting of a {{Wiki|motion}}, p. 37, note 20
| |
| − | pticaturthakarman (P. iiutticatutthakanima ): formal act in which the {{Wiki|motion}} is
| |
| − | fourfold, p. 37, note 20
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ptidvitiyakarman (P. iiattidutiyakannan ): formal act in which the {{Wiki|motion}} is twofold,
| |
| − | p.37, note 20
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ikria (P. [[dukkata]] ): bad [[action]] (a very {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|ceremony}}), p. 36, note 10
| |
| − | Kidesatuya (P. pdtidesamya ): requiring {{Wiki|confession}} (a minor offense), p.48, note 76
| |
| − | tvarana (or pro varan a) (P .[[pavarana]]) *. invitation (a {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|etymology}}), p.37, note 17
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[sapada]] (P. [[sikkhapada]] ): [[precept]], p.44
| |
| − |
| |
| − | samdna (P. sikkhamand) \ probationer,p.36,note 14
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Imancra (P. sdmanera ): ({{Wiki|male}}) {{Wiki|novice}}, p. 48
| |
| − |
| |
| − | imatieri (P. [[samaneri]] ): ({{Wiki|female}}) {{Wiki|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
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[vinaya]])
| |
| − |
| |
| − | 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
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[Dharmaguptaka School]])
| |
| − |
| |
| − | 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]] {{Wiki|Grammar}} and {{Wiki|Dictionary}} , [[Delhi]]: Motilal
| |
| − | Banar-sidass, 1985 5 ,2 Vols. (Vol.2: BHSD).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | FraUWALLNER, E., The Earliest [[Vinaya]] and the Beginnings of [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|Literature}} ,
| |
| − | Roma: ls.M.E.O., 1956.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Heirman, A., “Some Remarks on the [[Definition]] of a [[Monk]] and a [[Nun]] as Members of
| |
| − | a {{Wiki|Community}}, and the [[Definition]] of ‘Not to Live in {{Wiki|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 {{Wiki|French}},
| |
| − |
| |
| − | * .1958).
| |
| − |
| |
| − | MONIER-W1LL1AMS, M., A Sanskrit-English {{Wiki|Dictionary}} (SED\ [[Oxford]]: Clarendon
| |
| − | Press, 1990 11 *
| |
| − |
| |
| − | NAKAMURA, H., [[Indian Buddhism]] , a Survey with {{Wiki|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, {{Wiki|Paris}}: {{Wiki|College}} dc {{Wiki|France}}
| |
| − | (Publications dc Hnstitut dc {{Wiki|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, {{Wiki|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., {{Wiki|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, {{Wiki|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]] {{Wiki|Literature}}, Erster Teil,
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[Vinaya]]- Texte, [[Wiesbaden]]: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, 1979
| |
