Abstract

A generalized view of women in Buddhism is imposed by almost one hundred additional rules and the "Eight Rules" upon nuns. Some scholars, writers, and practitioners have asserted that the rules in the Praatimok.sa subordinate nuns to monks. However, I argue that the additional paaraajikas for nuns treat sexual matters seriously because of the fertility of females. Some sa.mghaava"se.sas for nuns provide safeguards against falling victim to lustful men. Some ni.hsargika-paayantikas for monks forbid them from taking advantage of nuns. Two aniyatas for monks show a landmark in trust in women. Furthermore, seven adhikara.na"samathas provide evidence of the equality of men and women. Many of the additional paayantikas for nuns originated because of nuns' living situations and social conditions in ancient India. Finally, the totally different tone and discrepancies in penalties for the same offenses between the paayantikas and the "Eight Rules" suggest that the "Eight Rules" were appended later.

INTRODUCTION

I will make known the course of training for monks, founded on ten reasons: for the excellence of the Order, for the comfort of the Order, for the restraint of evil-minded men, for the ease of well-behaved monks, for the restraint of the cankers belonging to the here and now, for the combating of the cankers belonging to other worlds, for the benefit of non-believers, for the increase in the number of believers, for establishing dhamma indeed, for following the rules of restraint. Thus, monks, this course of training should be set forth.(1)

Vinaya-Pi.taka

There is a generalized view of women in Buddhism implied in the Buddhist monastic rules for bhik.su.niis(2) and bhik.sus(3) in the vinaya.(4) Referring to the monastic rules for bhik.su.niis, most Buddhist scholars, writers and practitioners agree that the rules in the vinaya subordinated the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha(5) to the Bhik.su Sa"ngha.(6) Many people are also potentially misled into thinking that the rules in the vinaya are unfairly more harsh for bhik.su.niis because of the larger number of rules, including the "Eight Rules,"(7) which are only for bhik.su.niis. In addition, many bhik.sus and even bhik.su.niis believe that bhik.su.niis must be subordinated to bhik.sus because of the prescriptions set forth in the Eight Rules. As a result, some Buddhist scholars, writers, and practitioners claim that bhik.su.niis as women have been discriminated against in the monastic rules. For example, Kate Wheeler asserts:

He [Gautama Buddha] required nuns to submit to Eight Special Rules(8) explicitly subjugating them to monks ... and later added at least 84 additional precepts for nuns on top of the monks' 227, often stipulating worse penalties for similar infractions.(9)

Diana Y. Paul explains the vinaya:

The first text translated below describes the subordination of the nun's community to that of the monks, indicating the lack of autonomy among the women's community and their subsequent deprivation of the power to define their religious obligations along norms that they themselves established. Unlike the Christian organizational structure of nuns which was separate from that of monks, the Buddhist nuns in ancient Indian society were accountable to the monks, and their organizational structure was subordinate to that of the monks. They were directly governed by the monks at joint meetings of both orders.(10)

Rita M. Gross also describes the vinaya rules as:

... placing all nuns lower in the hierarchy than any monks ... .(11)

Nancy Schuster Barnes explains the rules:

However, by imposing rules on nuns which would place them in a permanently inferior position in all their interactions with monks, the monks reserved for themselves the control and leadership of the entire sa"ngha.(12)

Richard H. Robinson and Willard L. Johnson say:

The Blessed One [Gautama Buddha] conceded that women are able to attain arhant-ship but laid eight special regulations on the nuns, subordinating them strictly to the Order of Monks.(13)

Susan Murcott mentions:

The nun's sa"ngha modeled itself after the monks' sa"ngha, only the nuns' rules and regulations were stricter. The purpose of these stricter rules was to keep women's supposedly more wayward nature under control and to keep final authority in the hands of the monks.(14)

Richard Gombrich contends:

... [T]here were two social hierarchies he [Gautama Buddha] never questioned: age and sex.(15)

Uma Chakravarti comments:

A wide range of restrictions were placed on bhik.su.niis, who were even required to offer their alms to the monks if they ran into them.(16)

Audrey Mck. Fernandez mentions:

However, even today there are a couple of hundred more rules for women than men, which has rankled women and has kept who knows how many from leaving lay life.(17)

Although most Buddhist scholars and writers contend that bhik.su.niis were subordinated to bhik.sus by having so many additional rules and the Eight Rules imposed upon them, I disagree. Rather, a close and comparative examination of the Buddhist monastic rules for both bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus reveals a compassionate and practical regulation of the daily monastic life of both men and women, based on the realities of life at the time the rules were formulated. This is seen in the meticulous care and compassionate understanding of women's "alms life"(18) in the vinaya. It is perhaps a mistake to depend solely on the existence of the additional monastic rules for bhik.su.niis, without examining their origin or social context, to form a generalized Buddhist view of women.

Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to examine the rules for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus in the Praatimok.sa.(19) I believe that the guidelines for discipline set down in the rules in the Bhik.su.nii and the Bhik.su Praatimok.sas allow us to infer a Buddhist attitude toward women. This paper, by comparing the rules for both bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus, presents a different interpretation of the rules.

The text used in this paper is primarily from the Chinese Ssu fen lu, the vinaya of the Dharmaguptaka School.(20) However, because no English translation of the Chinese Ssu fen lu is available, when the rules are the same in both the Chinese and the Paali Vinayas,(21) I prefer to use an English translation of the Paali vinaya because this text is easily accessible to Westerners. According to W. Pachow,

The Dharmaguptaka [vinaya] follows very closely the Paali texts in most cases, not merely in numbering the series but also in contents, except the VII section in which, it adds 26 prohibitory rules regarding the Stuupa.(22) And that is unique among all the available texts.(23)

E. Frauwallner also says that the Dharmaguptaka vinaya is one of the most complete and well preserved of the vinayas. Its numbers and contents are very close to those of the Paali vinaya.(24) Sukumar Dutt says:

The most complete body of the monastic laws, however, is to be found in the Vinayapi.taka of the Theravaada Paali canon.(25)

Chatsumarn Kabilsingh also explains that although there is no definite proof that the Paali vinaya is the oldest and the only original text, through a comparative study of the rules in six vinaya schools,(26) she suggests that the Paali vinaya did not have any rules added to it later as did the other vinayas, and that its contents are very old because the rules in the Paali vinaya are always shared with either one or more of the other schools.(27) The Paali vinaya has been transmitted by the Theravaada School and is observed by Theravaadin bhik.sus today. The translations of the Paali vinaya available in English are: Hermann Oldenberg's translation,(28) T. W. Rhys David's and H. Oldenberg's(29) and I. B. Horner's.(30)

On the other hand, the Dharmaguptaka vinaya was translated into the Chinese as the Ssu fen lu tsung or Caturvaga vinaya by Buddhayasas with Chu Fo-nien, possibly between 410 and 412 C. E. in the capital of China, Ch'ang-an.(31) The Chinese Ssu fen lu (vinaya of the Four Divisions) consists of four parts: Bhik.su-vibha"nga,(32) Bhik.su.nii-vibha"nga,(33) Skandhaka,(34) and the appendices. The Ssu fen lu has been very influential and widely used in East Asian Buddhist countries.

The Praatimok.sa of Dharmaguptaka was used in all convents of China as the disciplinary code. Beside, the vinaya school (Ssu-fen-Lu tsung), founded in China by Tao-hsuan, also accepted the disciplinary rules of the Dharmaguptaka as the most authoritative work.(35)

The rules contained in the Ssu fen lu are still observed by the Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese bhik.sus and bhik.su.niis today. Even though the only Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha existing in the world is in the tradition of the Dharmaguptaka vinaya, so far as I have been able to discover the Chinese Ssu fen lu is not available in English, particularly the rules for bhik.su.niis. In her book A Comparative Study of Bhikkhunii Paa.timokkha, Kabilsingh says that she used the Chinese Dharmagutaka vinaya which had been translated into Thai.(36) In the following, I give the meanings of the rules, rather than translating word for word. In order to understand the rules more easily, I have included comparative tables of the rules for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus side by side in each category of the Praatimok.sas.

The Praatimok.sa is a collection of monastic rules contained in the vinaya Pi.taka(37) (Basket of Discipline), one of the three large collections of the Buddhist canon known as the Tripi.taka. In addition to the vinaya Pi.taka, the Tripi.taka includes the Suutra Pi.taka (Basket of Discourses), and the Abhidharma Pi.taka (Basket of the Special Teaching). Many scholars have explained the possible meaning of the Sanskrit word Praatimok.sa(Paali: Paa.timokkha), but these explains remain speculative. Sukumar Dutt and Gokuldas De, who represent the majority opinion, say:

Paa.timokkha ... can be equated to Skt. Praatimok.sa, which from its etymological parts lends itself to interpretation as something serving for a bond, the prefix praati meaning "against" and the root mok.sa meaning "scattering," though I have not been able to discover any instance of the use of the word precisely in this sense in Sanskrit.(38)
The term 'Paa.timokkha' is best derived from the word 'mok.sa' meaning freedom with the prefix 'prat' which reverses its meaning when joined to it (cf. pratisrota, pratigaami, pratikula, etc.). Praatimok.sa, an adjective, meaning 'opposed to freedom,' 'bound down,' when changed to a noun becomes Praatimok.sa which in Paali takes the form 'paa.timokkha' meaning that which is 'binding upon' and it is exactly in this sense that the code 'Paa.timokkha' is used.(39)

The Praatimok.sa contains the Bhik.su Praatimok.sa and the Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa because it concerns both bhik.sus and bhik.su.niis. The Dharmaguptaka vinaya, the Ssu fen lu, also contains the monastic rules for bhik.sus and bhik.su.niis in the sections known as the Bhik.su Ssu fen lu and the Bhik.su.nii Ssu fen lu. The Bhik.su.nii Ssu fen lu has seven categories of rules, while the Bhik.su Ssu fen lu contains eight categories, adding the aniyata dharmas(undetermined rules).(40) In order to make a complete comparative analysis of the rules in each category in the Praatimok.sa, I will cover each category of the rules chapter by chapter in turn: paaraajika dharmas(defeat), sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas(formal meeting), aniyata dharmas(undetermined), ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas(forfeiture), paayantika dharmas(expiation), pratide"saniiya dharmas(confession), "saik.sa dharmas(training), and adhikara.na-"samatha dharmas (legal questions).(41) Finally, I will explore the interpolation of the Eight Rules which are mandated for bhik.su.niis only, by comparing the Eight Rules and the Bhik.su.nii paayantika Rules.

PART I - Paaraajika Dharma (Defeat)

The categories of rules in the Ssu fen lu and the Paali vinaya are arranged in order of the severity of the offenses. The most serious offenses against monastic life are the paaraajika dharmas(Paali: paaraajika) for both bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus. I. B. Horner explains the term paaraajika as follows:

Burnouf's idea (adopted by Childers and others) is that paaraajika is derived from para + aj, meaning a crime which involves the expulsion or exclusion of the guilty party. Para + aj may be a better source, grammatically speaking, for paaraajika then is para-ji. Yet, that the sense intended is "defeat," seems to me rather less doubtful than that it is expulsion, and aj, though a Vedic root, meaning "to drive away," is unknown as a root in Paali.(42)

E. J. Thomas says that "Buddhaghosa interprets paaraajika as suffering defeat, and the Muulasarvaastivaadins appear to do the same, but the earliest commentary in the vinaya gives no suggestion of this meaning."(43)

In explaining the term paaraajika dharmas(Chinese: po luo yi fa) the Ssu fen lu says that if a bhik.su [or bhik.su.nii] commits a paaraajika offense, he [she] is compared with "a person whose head is cut off." The offender totally loses his [her] monastic status and is no longer in association with the pure bhik.su.niis or bhik.sus.(44) In this category, we see that bhik.su.niis have four additional rules concerning sexual behaviors. If a bhik.su is involved in a sexual offense in this category, the bhik.su is required to leave the Bhik.su sa"ngha. In the same way, if a bhik.su.nii has committed a sexual offense in this category, she is also required to leave the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha. However, the result of the bhik.su.nii's sexual offense may lead to pregnancy because bhik.su.niis are potentially fertile. For this reason, the four additional rules in this category are restricted rules to bhik.su.niis. The paaraajika dharmas are as follows.

TABLE NO. 1

Paaraajika dharmas (Defeat)
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.su.niis)

As table number one shows, bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus share the first four paaraajika dharmas. There are four additional rules (#5, 6, 7, 8) for bhik.su.niis. Violation of any one of the paaraajika dharmas has no possibility of rehabilitation and entails permanent expulsion from the sa"ngha.(50) Two rules (#5, 6) of the additional rules for bhik.su.niis deal with sexual offenses, number seven with concealing another bhik.su.nii's paaraajika offense, and number eight with a bhik.su who is suspended by the sa"ngha. Without having sufficient knowledge of the Buddhist view of women, some may think that the four more rules were added because of women's unrestrained sexual desires. For example, a Korean (male) Buddhist scholar, Jung-shup Han, comments on the Bhik.su.nii Paaraajika additional rules:

We should understand the reasons why Gautama Buddha refused to found the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha and laid down four additional rules for bhik.su.niis than for bhik.sus in this category. Because bhik.su.niis' sexual desires were lustful and uncontrollable, they had sexual relations with Buddhist lay people, non-Buddhists or even bhik.sus. Thus they created serious problems in the Buddhist community and caused the fall of the pure dharma during the time of the Buddha.(51)

However, Richard F. Gombrich points out:

... [I]t is noteworthy that the Buddha did not hold the view, so widespread in traditional India and elsewhere, that sexual desire is the women's fault and sexual intercourse the result of female temptation of the male ... . More substantial is his sermon which describes sexual desire of men for women and of women for men in identical terms.(52)

Gross also mentions:

Interestingly, though many modern commentators feel that one of the major concerns of the monastic rules was to separate the monks and the nuns to protect celibacy, neither monks or nuns are tempted by each other, with very few exceptions. The real struggle is between monastics and lay people.(53)

Nagata Mizu additionally claims a practical reason for the two additional rules (#5, 6) concerning sexual prohibition for bhik.su.niis. He notes that these rules prohibit bhik.su.niis from physical contact with men at any time and in any situation because of the bhik.su.niis' potential fertility, childbearing being contrary to monastic life.(54)

The Ssu fen lu does not elaborate on how the seventh paaraajika dharma for bhik.su.niis came to be formulated.(55) However, the Paali vinaya gives an historical account of how the rule was formed. The bhik.su.nii Sundariinandaa was involved in sexual relations with the layman Saa.lha, Migaara's grandson, and became pregnant. She was forced to leave the sa"ngha after she could no longer conceal her condition. Her sister, Thullanandaa, concealed Sundariinandaa's offense even though she knew that Sundariinandaa had committed a paaraajika offense. So even though rule number seven of the paaraajika dharmas at first glance seems to deal with the concealment of an offense, it also indicates a concern with sexual matters between men and women.(56)

Although Gautama Buddha laid down the rules that bhik.su.niis should learn the dharma from bhik.sus who were authorized by the Bhik.su sa"ngha,(57) he also established rule number eight to protect bhik.su.niis from abuse by a man who was no longer a bhik.su. This rule may be a relic of the early period of the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha when some bhik.su.niis were used by a bhik.su who had been expelled by the sa"ngha.(58) The additional rules for bhik.su.niis in the paaraajika dharmas look varied, but the case histories establish them as generally concerning sexual offenses. Rule number eight is one of the most important rules of the monastic life for bhik.su.niis; however, violation of the rule is not an offense until the third admonition. Chatsuman Kabilsingh comments on rule number eight:

It is interesting to note that the structure of paaraajika 8 stands out from the rest. A bhik.su.nii is defeated only after the third admonition, the form resembles that of sa.mghaava"se.sa more than paaraajika. Could it be possible that it has been shifted from sa.mghaava"se.sa? If that was the case, then it must have occurred at a very early period before the separation of the various sects, for all of them share this rule.(59)

Nagata Mizu contends that if a bhik.su.nii is involved in sexual relations, she is required to leave the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha. Additionally, the result of the offense can cause her pregnancy, and this can result in a serious external problem for the Buddhist community as well as the individual. In contrast, if a bhik.su is involved in sexual relations, the punishment of the offense could be inwardly limited only to the bhik.su.(60)

From a close examination of the comparative study of the paaraajika dharmas for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus, we see that the four additional paaraajika dharmas for bhik.su.niis actually deal with sexual matters. It seems that Gautama Buddha put great emphasis on providing stronger guards for the life of chastity for bhik.su.niis than for bhik.sus, and strong guards against sexual behavior for bhik.su.niis because of their potential fertility. As Nagata Mizu asserts, the results of sexual offenses of bhik.su.niis can be greatly different from those of bhik.sus. The result of the sexual offense of a bhik.su.nii is not simply settled by only leaving the sa"ngha herself, because of her motherhood and childbearing.

PART II - Sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas (Formal Meeting)

The second most serious group of monastic rules in the Praatimok.sa are the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas(Paali: sa"nghadisesa). The meaning of the term sa.mghaava"se.sa is also controversial among scholars. Kabilsingh explains that "[i]n some of the Sanskrit texts the word occurs in the form sa.mghaava"se.sa, sa"nghadise.sa would thus be an old Maghadhi form of sa"nghavasesa, a later Sanskrit rendering of the original sa"ghadisesa."(61) Horner notes:

Like the meaning of paaraajika, the meaning of sa"nghadisesa [Skt. sa.mghaava"se.sa] is controversial. Again B. C. Law and I follow vinaya Texts in rendering sa"nghadisesa as offenses (or rules or matters) which require a formal meeting of the Order [sa"ngha].(62)

Sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas translates into the Chinese as seng ts'an fa, which means "remaining in the sa"ngha."(63) The Chinese Shih sung lu explains the term sa.mghaava"se.sa as the offenses despite which one could still remain in the sa"ngha. When a bhik.su [or bhik.su.nii] confesses to the sa"ngha his [or her] offense, he [or she] can be expiated from the wrongdoing.(64) In this category, we see that bhik.su.niis have four more rules than bhik.sus. Even though there are four additional rules for bhik.su.niis in this category, the punishment for violation of them shows a compassionate way for bhik.su.niis because it requires three admonitions. As a result, the four additional rules for bhik.su.niis provide more opportunities for bhik.su.niis for self-training in their alms life. Sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas are as follows.

TABLE NO. 2

Sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas (Formal Meeting)
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.su.niis)

TABLE NO. 3

Sa.mghaava"se.sa Dharmas for bhik.sus
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.sus)

The seventeen rules for bhik.su.niis and thirteen rules for bhik.sus in this category represent the second severe breach of the monastic discipline. Seven rules (#1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13 for bhik.su.niis, #5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 for bhik.sus) are common to bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus. Of the ten sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas which are different for bhik.su.niis and for bhik.sus, rule number four for bhik.su.niis deals with behavior with lay people; rule five with false ordination; rule six with restoring a suspended bhik.su.nii without permission from the sa"ngha; rule seven is about those who go alone into the village or cross the bank of the river, and spend a night alone; rules eight and nine are related to safeguarding bhik.su.niis from the dangers of lustful men; rules fourteen and fifteen forbid bhik.su.niis from concealing the offenses of others; rule sixteen concerns the bhik.su.nii who shows disrespect to the Buddha, Dharma and the sa"ngha; and rule seventeen deals with a quarrelsome bhik.su.nii.

Just as bhik.su.niis have rules which apply only to them in this category, bhik.sus likewise have rules specific to their situations (Table No. 3). The six different rules for bhik.sus in this category cover such matters: four rules (#1, 2, 3, 4) are related to sex; and two (#6, 7) are concerned with the construction of a hut or a large dwelling place. These rules, which are only for bhik.sus, also provide glimpses into the lives of bhik.su.niis. For example, with regard to the two rules about building dwelling place, Kabilsingh claims that, because these rules "are not shared by the bhik.su.niis, it might be understood that usually the nuns are not themselves in charge of construction."(69)

The first nine of the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus become offenses at once when a bhik.su.nii or a bhik.su transgresses any of these rules, whereas the final seven (#10-17) for bhik.su.niis and final four (#10-13) for bhik.sus do not become offenses until a third admonition of bhik.su.niis or bhik.sus is necessary. The offenses of the four additional rules (#14, 15, 16, 17) for bhik.su.niis in this category require three admonitions of the bhik.su.nii involved.(70)

When a bhik.su commits any one of the sa.mghaava"se.sa offenses, he is subjected to a period of parivaasa(71) [Paali: parivaasa] for as many days as the offense is concealed. If a bhik.su informs another bhik.su at once about his offense of the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharma, he is required to undergo only a period of the six nights of the maanatva(72) [Paali: maanatta] in the Bhik.su sa"ngha. However, if a bhik.su conceals his offense, first he must go through a period of the parivaasa for as many days as it is concealed, and then a further period called maanatva must also be spent in the Bhik.su sa"ngha.(73)

In contrast, when a bhik.su.nii has violated one of the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas, she is required to undergo only the period of maanatva for a half month in both Bhik.su and Bhik.su.nii Sa"nghas, no matter whether she has concealed her offense for some period or not.(74) bhik.su.niis are not required to do the parivaasa. However, bhik.su.niis are subjected to a period of the maanatva in both sa"nghas for half a month. She has to approach both Bhik.su and Bhik.su.nii Sa"nghas, and beg for the period of the maanatva.(75) The Paali Bhik.su.nii vinaya states that:

A nun having fallen into one or other of these shall spend a fortnight in maanatta [Skt. maanatva] discipline before both Orders. If, when the nun has performed the maanatta discipline, the Order of nuns should number twenty, then that nun may be rehabilitated. But if the Order of nuns, numbering less than twenty even by one, should rehabilitate that nun, that nun is not rehabilitated, and those nuns are blameworthy; this is the proper course there.(76)

On the other hand, the Bhik.su.nii Ssu fen lu requires a larger sa"ngha members stating that:

If a bhik.su.nii violates any one of the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas, she must perform a period of the maanatva for one half month in both sa"nghas. When the bhik.su.nii has performed the maanatva discipline, she must ask for expiation of her offense in the presence of both sa"nghas of the twenty bhik.sus and twenty bhik.su.niis. If there is less than forty even by one, she cannot be rehabilitated, and those bhik.sus and bhik.su.niis (in both sa"nghas) are blameworthy (for not having a required number to rehabilitate her).(77)

In comparing the two versions above, we note that they disagree in the required numbers for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus. The Paali vinaya requires only twenty bhik.su.niis as a sufficient number for rehabilitation, but it does not specifically give the number required for bhik.sus. However, the Chinese Ssu fen lu requires twenty bhik.sus and twenty bhik.su.niis in each sa"ngha as a sufficient number for the rehabilitation.(78) Perhaps during the long history of translation of the vinaya, the additional sufficient numbers may have been added to the Chinese Bhik.su.nii Ssu fen lu.

Taking a look at "performing the maanatva discipline before both sa"nghas for bhik.su.niis," it might be thought that the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha subordinated its position to the Bhik.su sa"ngha and that bhik.su.niis are subjected to a heavier penalty than bhik.sus for an offense of the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas. However, Ian Astley argues:

Actually, although many parts of the vinaya reflect a very petty-minded way of thinking which may be regarded as holding almost anything from monkeys to women in an unfavorable light, the basic considerations behind this difference in the relative status of the two orders should not be misconstrued. In those days (and this still applies to much of present Indian society) a woman who had left the life of the household would otherwise have been regarded more or less as a harlot and subjected to the appropriate harassment. By being formally associated with the monks, the nuns were able to enjoy the benefits of leaving the household life without incurring immediate harm. Whilst it is one thing to abhor - as any civilized person must do - the attitudes and behavior towards women which underlie the necessity for such protection, it is surely misplaced to criticize the Buddha and his community for adopting this particular policy.(79)

I fully agree with Astley that the formal acts required for bhik.su.niis before both sa"nghas, and some of the additional rules, were generated because of the specific social and cultural context during the time of Gautama Buddha. In the vinaya there are several examples of Brahmins who spoke of bhik.su.niis as "harlots or whores." These stories provide a glimpse of bhik.su.niis in the midst of the Brahmin social milieu during the time of Gautama Buddha. For example:

Now at that time several nuns, going to Saavatthii through the Kosalan districts, having arrived at a certain village in the evening, having approached a certain Brahmin family, asked for accommodation. Then that Brahmin woman spoke thus to these nuns:
"Wait, ladies, until the Brahmin comes." ...
Then that Brahmin having come during the night, spoke thus to that Brahmin women: "Who are these?"
"They are nuns, master."
Saying: "Throw out these shaven-headed strumpets," he threw them out from the house.(80)

* * *

... . Then that man, defeated, looked down upon, criticized, spread it about, saying:
"These shaven-headed (women) are not (true) recluses, they are strumpets. How can they have the store-room taken away from us?"(81)

* * *

... . Then that Brahmin ... spread it about, saying:
"These shaven-headed strumpets are not true recluses. How can they let a pot fall on my head? I will set fire to their dwelling," and having taken up a fire-brand, he entered the dwelling.(82)

Within these social conditions, Gautama Buddha opened up new horizons for women by founding the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha. This social and spiritual advancement for women was ahead of the times and, therefore, drew many objections from men, including bhik.sus. He was probably well aware of the controversy that would be caused by the harassment of his female disciples. In Buddhist history, the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha was founded five years later than the Bhik.su sa"ngha.(83) In the early stage of the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha, bhik.su.niis learned all forms of disciplinary acts and various aspects of knowledge from bhik.sus. The Paali Cullavagga (The Less or Lesser Division of the vinaya)(84) shows how the Bhik.su sa"ngha was modeled on the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha.

Now at that time the Paa.timokkha was not recited to nuns. They told this matter to the Lord. He said:
"I allow you, monks, to recite the Paa.timokkha to the nuns." ...(85)

* * *

The nuns did not know to recite the Paa.timokkha. They told this matter to the Lord. He said:
"I allow you, monks, to explain to the nuns through monks, saying:
'The Paa.timokkha should be recited thus.' "(86)

* * *

The nuns did not know how to confess offenses. They told this matter to the Lord. He said:
"I allow you, monks, to explain to the nuns through monks, saying:
'An offense should be confessed thus.' "(87)

* * *

The nuns did not know how to acknowledge offenses. They told this matter to the Lord. He said:
"I allow you, monks, to explain to the nuns through monks, saying:
'An offense should be acknowledged thus.' "(88)

* * *

Nuns did not know (formal) acts should be carried out. They told this matter to the Lord. He said:
"I allow you, monks, to explain to the nuns through monks, saying:
'A (formal) act should be carried out thus.' "(89)

As I have discussed, the performance of the formal acts for bhik.su.niis before both sa"nghas provided a close tie between the two sa"nghas. By legitimately associating with the Bhik.su sa"ngha, the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha had benefits and protection from outside harm in ancient India. When we especially consider the cultural context of ancient India, the formal acts before both sa"nghas might have been necessary for the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha. As I have already mentioned, the four additional rules for bhik.su.niis (#14, 15, 16, 17) in this category belong to the last eight rules which require three admonitions before punishment. This requirement of three admonitions for the offenses of the four additional rules for bhik.su.niis, I believe, provides more opportunities for bhik.su.niis to develop their religious lives without overly strict punishment. These also encourage bhik.su.niis to expand their self-cultivation with the three admonitions, adding a compassionately accommodating limit to behavior.

PART III - Aniyata dharmas (Undetermined)

The third category of the rules for bhik.sus is the aniyata dharmas(Paali: aniyataa) which do not exist in the Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa. Aniyata has been defined as "[s]ince the nature of the offense is uncertain, this section of the Paa.timokkha is called aniyata dharma, that is, 'to be decided.' "(90) Charles S. Prebish says that "[t]his category of offenses is referred to as "undetermined offenses."(91) Aniyata dharmas translates into Chinese as pu ting fa,(92) which means indefinite or undetermined. In this category, the two rules for bhik.sus show an astonishing degree of trust in women to testify against a bhik.su who has committed one of the aniyata dharmas. Aniyata dharmas are as follows.

TABLE NO. 4

Aniyata Dharmas for only bhik.sus (Undetermined)

My discussion of these two rules for bhik.sus may seem irrelevant. However, they contain a Buddhist view of women. As Prebish points out, "[t]he two [aniyata] offenses in this category reflect an outstanding and somewhat surprising degree of trust in the female lay follower."(94) If a bhik.su has taken a seat together with a woman in a secret place which is convenient for sexual relations or in an open place unsuitable for lustful desires, he may be charged with one of the offenses of the paaraajika, sa.mghaava"se.sa or paayantika dharmas. The punishment may vary from the paaraajika to the paayantika according to the eyewitness testimony of a female lay follower, based on her personal word.(95) It is noteworthy that the word of a woman was held in such high regard, and certainly unusual given the general low status of women at the time the rules were formulated. In the penalties for the offenses of the aniyata dharmas for bhik.sus, these two rules put a considerable trust in women, even though the aniyata dharmas are not applicable to bhik.su.niis. Horner notes:

These two Aniyata rules indicate the respect and deference that was, at that time, paid to women. They were not scornfully brushed aside as idle gossips and frivolous chatter-boxes, but their words were taken seriously.(96)

PART IV - Ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas (Forfeiture)

The ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas(Paali: nissaggiya paacittiya) are particularly concerned with conduct concerning material possessions. They follow the sa.mghaava"se.sa dharmas in the Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa, while they follow the aniyata dharmas as the fourth category in the Bhik.su Praatimok.sa.

From internal evidence, paacittiya [Skt. paayantika ] is a (minor) offense to be confessed, aapatti desetabbaa[Skt. aapatti desayitavya], a statement common to all the Nissaggiyas. But etymologically the word paacittiya has nothing to do with confession. I have therefore kept to the more literal translation, and have rendered it "offense of expiation" throughout, and the two words nissaggiya paacittiya as "offense of expiation involving forfeiture."(97)

The term ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas translates into the Chinese as she to fa.(98) In the Chinese she means to abandon, while the Chinese to means to fall. The Sanskrit term paayantika in the Chinese refers to roasting, boiling and falling. If a bhik.su [or bhik.su.nii] commits an offense of the ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas, it is believed that he [or she] will fall into hell and suffer by being boiled and roasted.(99) Even though there are the same numbers of the rules both for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus in this category, some rules for bhik.sus do not allow them to demand from bhik.su.niis feminine tasks which would interfere with the bhik.su.niis' own religious pursuits. The ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas are as follows.

TABLE NO. 5

Ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas (Forfeiture)
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.su.niis)

The ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas contain thirty rules for both bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus. However, the contents of some rules differ. Nineteen rules for bhik.su.niis have been taken from the rules for bhik.sus, while the remaining eleven rules for bhik.su.niis are different from those for bhik.sus. The ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus cover such topics as robes, bowls, medicine, money, funds, etc. Violation of any of the ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas requires a bhik.su.nii or a bhik.su to abandon those robes or bowls, etc., and then to formally confess the offense in the presence of the Bhik.su.nii sa"ngha or the Bhik.su sa"ngha, providing that the sa"ngha not be less than five members.(106) Therefore, the transgression of the ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas does not require any punishment, per se, only confession.(107)

The ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas for bhik.su.niis are comprised of seventeen rules (#1-8, 13-15, 17, 26-30) dealing with robes; three (#9, 10, 11) with gold and silver, and buying and selling; three (#12, 24, 25) with bowls; one (#16) with medicine; two (#18, 19) with appropriating sa"ngha property and asking for food; and four (#20, 21, 22, 23) with misuse of funds. In contrast, the ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas for bhik.sus which are different from those for bhik.su.niis number eleven, as follows.

TABLE NO. 6

Ni.hsargika-paayantika Dharmas for bhik.sus
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.sus)

Six of the rules for bhik.sus above (#11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16) deal with the use and making of various types of rugs; two of the rules (#27, 29) deal with robes. Three rules (#4, 5, 17) actually prevent bhik.sus from taking advantage of bhik.su.niis. This is clearly shown in rule number seventeen for bhik.sus, which is illustrated in the following story given in the Bhik.su-vibha.ngha:

At that time the group of six monks had sheep's wool washed and dyed and combed by nuns. The nuns, through washing, dyeing, combing the sheep's wool, neglected the exposition, the interrogation, the higher morality, the higher thought, the higher insight... .
"Gotamii, I hope that the nuns are zealous, ardent,(with) a self that is striving?"
"Where, lord, is there zeal in the nuns? The masters, the group of six monks, have sheep's wool washed and dyed and combed by nuns. The nuns ... neglect the exposition, the interrogation, the higher morality, the higher thought, the higher insight." ...
"Foolish men, those who are not relations do not know what is suitable or what is unsuitable, or what is pleasant or what is unpleasant to those who are not relations. Thus you, foolish men, will have sheep's wool washed and dyed and combed by nuns who are not relations? It is not, foolish men, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased... . And thus, monks, this rule of training should be set forth."(110)

Horner also points out:

Besides the giving of robes, the washing of robes also became subject to various regulations. It was said that robes were not to be washed (by the almswomen [bhik.su.niis] for the almsmen [bhik.sus]) unless they were related; old garments were not to be washed, dyed or beaten by the almswomen for the almsmen, unless they were related.(111)

In comparing the ni.hsargika-paayantika dharmas for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus, we see that some rules for bhik.sus forbid them from taking advantage of bhik.su.niis. Thus freed from abuse, bhik.su.niis can put more attention into their spiritual practice. Gross notes:

Furthermore, the monastic code protected nuns from demanding monks who might ask nuns to do housework for the monks or to give them food and clothing - feminine tasks in the renounced world. Such rulings are remarkably considerate and recognize that women renounce the world for their own religious pursuits, which should not be undermined by the demands of men used to female service.(112)

PART V - Paayantika dharmas (Expiation)

The paayantika or patayantika dharmas translates into the Chinese tan t'i fa,(113) or tan to fa.(114) They are even less severe than the previous categories for bhik.su.niis and bhik.sus, and cover a wide a range of topics. There are one hundred seventy-eight rules for bhik.su.niis and ninety rules for bhik.sus in this particular category. Horner explains:

A curious feature of the Paacittiyas is that the Old Commentary on the rules nowhere explains what is meant by paacittiya, the offense which gives its name to this whole section. It is from the phrase aapatti desetabbaa, occurring in the Vibha"nga on each Nissaggiya, that we infer that paacittiya is an offense to be confessed; and even as forfeiture and confession are to be made to an Order or to a group or to an individual, so we may conclude that the same holds good when the offense is one whose penalty is merely that of expiation, of confession unaccompanied by forfeiture.(115)

While paayantika [Paali: paacittiya] is a transgression which causes the breaking down of ku"sala-karma (good acts), nevertheless, it is an aapatti (offense), which one merely needs to be mindful of.(116) This category includes a great difference in the number of rules for bhik.su.niis from those for bhik.sus. The purpose of these rules, which is mainly based on the historical realities of the daily life of bhik.su.niis, is to encourage bhik.su.niis to be mindful of speech, behavior, and the regulations of the sa"ngha, etc. Wijayaratna points out "[t]he paacittiyas [Skt. paayantikas] deal with offenses requiring only confession."(117) When a bhik.su.nii or a bhik.su violates one of the paayantika dharmas, the offender is required to confess to another bhik.su.nii or bhik.su, or a group or the sa"ngha.(118) paayantika dharmas are as follows.

TABLE NO. 7

Paayantika dharmas (Expiation)
(Emphasizing Rules for bhik.su.niis)