Becoming a Nun in the Dharmaguptaka Tradition

Buddhist Studies Review 25(2) 2008, 174–93 ISSN (print): 0256–2897 doi: 10.1558/bsrv.v25i2.174 ISSN (online): 1747–9681

Ann Heirman

Ghent University

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the formal issues involved in the two stages (novice and probationer) that precede the full ordination of Buddhist religious women, as they are given in the early textual background of the Dharmaguptaka tradition: the age of the candidates, the precepts to be followed, the ordination procedures, and the role played by the full members of the community, nuns and monks.

One of the most current discussions within the Buddhist communities is the position of women, and more particularly of bhikṣuṇīs (nuns). This discussion naturally also gives rise to many relevant questions on the two stages that precede the full ordination of a bhikṣuṇī: the stage of śrāmaṇerī (novice) and of śikṣamāṇā (probationer). The present research focuses on all formal issues involved in these stages, aiming at deﬁ ning them within the early textual background of the Dharmaguptaka vinaya tradition, the present-day living tradition of China, Taiwan, Korea and large parts of Vietnam. The Dharmaguptaka-vinaya (Dgv) was translated into Chinese in the early ﬁ fth century. At around the same time, three more full vinayas were also translated.1 Later, at the beginning of the eighth century, the monk Yijing2 義淨 translated large parts of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (根本說一切有部毘奈耶 Genbenshuoyiqieyou bu pinaiye, T 1442–T 1451),3 as well as other vinaya texts belonging to the same school.4 In the meantime, however, the Dgv (四分律 Sifen lü) had

1. In the beginning of the ﬁ fth century, four complete vinayas were translated into Chinese. In chronological order, these are: 十誦律 Shisong lü (T 1435), Sarvāstivāda-vinaya; 四分律 Sifen lü (T 1428), Dharmaguptaka-vinaya; 摩訶僧祇律Mohesengqi lü (T 1425), Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya; and 彌沙塞部和醯五分律 Mishasai bu hexi wufen lü (T 1421), Mahīśāsaka-vinaya. For details, see Yuyama (1979). 2. Throughout the article, Pinyin transcription has been used for Chinese terms. 3. Of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, a Tibetan translation as well as many Sanskrit fragments are extant. For details, see Yuyama (1979, 12–33). 4. Besides the above mentioned vinayas, two major vinaya texts have survived in an Indian language. The most important one is the Theravāda vinaya written in Pāli. Although a Pāli vinaya was translated into Chinese at the end of the ﬁ fth century, the translation was never presented

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008, Unit 6, The Village, 101 Amies Street, London SW11 2JW HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 175 been strongly promulgated in China by inﬂ uential Buddhist masters, such as Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667). Around 705–710, the latter vinaya was even imposed by imperial decree as the only vinaya to be followed in the Chinese empire.5 The Dgv consequently became the reference point for monastic discipline in China, and all ordinations have since then been based on its guidelines. Following the tradition of the Chinese masters, we will also compare the Dharmaguptaka information with details given in the other extant vinayas. It is hereby important to point out that vinayas diﬀ erent from the Dharmaguptaka tradition have no explanatory relevance for the Dharmaguptaka tradition itself.6 Still in China, vinaya masters regularly consulted several vinayas at the same time in order to discuss monastic matters. Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667), for instance, explicitly emphasized that the Dgv is the basic vinaya text, but that, if needed, other vinayas can be consulted.7 The principle is applied to all vinaya issues, including the topic of the present article, the śrāmaṇerī and śikṣamāṇā steps towards the full ordination. Therefore, in order to understand the Chinese view on these study periods for women, we will cautiously follow Daoxuan’s approach.

THE ŚRĀMAṆERĪ ORDINATION: STEPS AND DETAILS

The age of the candidate

The ﬁ rst step in the monastic career of a woman is the going forth (chu jia 出家 pravrajyā). The Dgv does not indicate the age at which one can become a novice (shamini 沙彌尼 śrāmaṇerī). It does indicate, however, the minimum age for a male novice (shami 沙彌 śrāmaṇera; T 1428 810c22–811a3): a boy cannot be younger than twelve, unless he is able to chase away crows. The strength one needs to chase away these powerful birds is connected by the Dgv to the necessary strength to keep up the precepts and to eat one meal a day only. If a young boy is capable of doing this, he can be granted the going forth. The other vinaya traditions have similar rules. The Pāli Vinaya (Vin I 79,5–6 and 79,19–20) and the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya

to the emperor and was subsequently lost (see Heirman 2004, 377–8; 2007). The second text to have survived in an Indian language only, is the chapter for bhikṣuṇīs (bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga) of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins, preserved in a transitional language between Prākrit and Sanskrit (Roth 1970, lv–lvi). It has never been translated into Chinese. 5. Heirman (2002b, 414, 419–23; 2007). 6. When strictly interpreting the vinaya rules, vinayas can never, as rightfully pointed out by the Chinese monk Yijing 義淨 (635–713), be intermingled (Yijing, 南海寄歸內法傳 Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan, Account of Buddhism Sent from the South Seas, T 2125 205b28–c5, trans. in Takakusu [1896, 13]). This is the result of the gradual redaction of these legal texts: no matter to what extent they developed independently or in symbiosis with each other, at a certain point they were ﬁ nalized as separate legal codices that mutually exclude each other (see von Hinüber 1999, 89–91; Heirman 1999). 7. Daoxuan, 四分律刪繁補闕行事鈔 Sifen lü shanfan buque xingshi chao, An Abridged and Explan- atory Commentary on the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya (T 1804 2b19–20).

(T 1435 151b21–c1), for instance, indicate that a boy cannot be younger than ﬁ f- teen, unless he can chase away crows. The same birds are also mentioned in the other vinayas. The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya (T 1421 117a27–8) accepts young boys as śrāmaṇeras provided they can chase away crows. The two boys given as exam- ples are seven and eight years old. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya (T 1425 461b9–12) mentions three kinds of śrāmaṇeras: those between seven and thirteen, those between fourteen and nineteen, and those between twenty and seventy. The ﬁ rst category is also called ‘the śrāmaṇeras who can chase away crows’. Finally, the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition (T 1453 484c4–9) mentions two conditions: a boy has to be at least seven years old and has to be able to chase away crows.8

The ordination procedure of a śrāmaṇerī

The ordination ceremony of a śrāmaṇerī (pravrajyā) as described in the Dgv, bhikṣuṇī-skandhaka (chapter on nuns; T 1428 923c15–924a16) starts with the shaving of the hair (ti tou 剃頭, (śirastuṇḍa-) muṇḍana).9 The legal procedure is carried out by the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha on the basis of a jñapti-karman (see further). The saṃgha needs to be a legally constituted assembly of fully ordained members. According to the Dgv (T 1428 886a23–b8), there are four such legal assemblies, saṃghas, that can carry out formal procedures: a saṃgha composed of four, ﬁ ve, ten or twenty members.10 A saṃgha consisting of four members can carry out all formal acts, with the exception of the invitation (zi zi 自恣, pravāraṇā),11 the full ordination of a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī (shou da jie 受大戒, upasaṃpadā), and the rehabilitation ceremony (chu zui 出罪, ābarhaṇa).12 For a full ordination in a border area or for an invitation ceremony, a saṃgha of ﬁ ve members is needed. A full ordination in a central area has to be carried out by a saṃgha of ten. Finally, for a rehabilitation, twenty fully ordained bhikṣus or bhikṣuṇīs need to be present. If the necessary quorum is not obtained, the procedure is not legal. The Dgv adds that it is not possible to call in a bhikṣuṇī (in a bhikṣu-saṃgha) or to call in a śikṣamāṇā, a śrāmaṇera, or a śrāmaṇerī in an attempt to obtain the necessary quorum.13 Since the organization of the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha is based on the bhikṣu-saṃgha, we in all

8. T 1453 is a karma-vācanā text of the Mūlasarvāstivādins translated by the monk Yijing in 703 CE (Yuyama 1979, 18). 9. In the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga, pācittika 121, a parallel description is given (T 1428 755b4–c5). 10. This is also the case for other vinaya traditions. For details, see Chung (1998, 26–7). 11. The pravāraṇā (or invitation) ceremony is held at the end of the summer retreat. On this occa- sion, every bhikṣu (and bhikṣuṇī) is expected to invite his (her) fellow bhikṣus (bhikṣuṇīs) to point out his (her) wrongs, if any, whether seen, heard, or suspected. 12. A bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī who violates a saṃghāvaśeṣa precept, is temporarily, for the duration of one or more periods of penance, suspended from the main activities of the saṃgha. After this, the saṃgha can re-admit the punished bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī by means of a jñapti-caturtha-karman. This is called ‘the rehabilitation’, chu zui 出罪, ābarhaṇa. 13. T 1428 886b1–2.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 177 probability also have to interpret the rule as follows: it is equally not possible for a bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha to call in a bhikṣu, a śikṣamāṇā, a śrāmaṇera, or a śrāmaṇerī in order to obtain a legal quorum. The above regulations imply that for the ordination of a śrāmaṇerī and of a śikṣamāṇā, four fully ordained bhikṣuṇīs constitute the minimum quorum. Slightly diff erent is a passage of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1451 352a26–7). Here it is explained to the bhikṣuṇīs that there are three kinds of saṃghas: a saṃgha of four, one of fi ve, and one of twelve. The text does not say what the responsibilities of these three saṃghas are. The saṃgha consisting of twelve members in all probability refers to the quorum of bhikṣuṇīs needed in case of the full ordination of a new bhikṣuṇī as shown in a Sanskrit manuscript of the same tradition.14 All other traditions request only ten witnesses for the full ordination ceremony in a central area.15 In this context, it is important to point out that all procedures have to be carried out by a samagra-saṃgha (T 1428 885c14–15; he he 和合, samagra).16 The terms samagra and saṃgha imply that there has to be unity in legal procedures and unity in the recitation of the precepts, this is unity in the recitation of the prātimokṣa at the poṣadha ceremony;17 that all bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs who are present in the legal district (sīmā) have to attend the ceremony;18 and that there have to be enough bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs to carry out a formal act in a legally valid way.19 In the Dgv, two motions (bai 白, jñapti) are needed to fully confer the going forth: fi rst a motion on the shaving of the hair, and second, a motion on the actual going forth. Both these acts are jñapti-karmans (bai jiemo 白羯磨), a procedure (jiemo 羯磨, karman) consisting of a motion (bai 白 jñapti). Such a motion is presented to the saṃgha by a ceremony master (jieshi 戒師, karma-kāraka, f. karma- kārikā). It formally requests the approval of the saṃgha. A jñapti-karman is a rela- tively simple procedure, in comparison to the two other possible procedures of the saṃgha, the jñapti-dvītiya-karman (bai er jiemo 白二羯磨) and the jñapti-caturtha-karman (bai si jiemo 白四羯磨). These procedures start with a motion, followed

14. See Schmidt (1993, 256). 15. See Heirman (2001, 294–5). 16. This is also the case in the other vinaya traditions. See for instance, Pāli Vinaya, Vin I 315–316; Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 161c17; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 422b9–14; Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1435 220a13–14, c3–5; Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition, T 1453 496b16–22. 17. A ceremony held every fortnight and attended by all bhikṣus/bhikṣuṇīs of the district (sīmā), so that the unity of the saṃgha is re-affi rmed. At this ceremony, the prātimokṣa (list of precepts) is recited. 18. Any formal act has to be carried out within a well defi ned district (sīmā). In order to have a legally valid formal act, every bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī present in that district has to attend the ceremony. Within the area of a large sīmā, a small sīmā can be defi ned, enabling the carrying out of formal acts without the presence of all the members belonging to the large sīmā. See Kieff er- Pülz (1992, 27–8, 242–59). 19. For details, see Hu-von Hinüber (1994, 219–226); Tieken (2000, 2–3, 10–11, 13, 26–7); Heirman (2001, 296; 2002a, part II, 282, nn.53–5, 327, nn.290–92).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 178 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW by respectively one or three propositions. Then follows a conclusion.20 As we will see below, the ordination of a śikṣamāṇā is based on a jñapti-caturtha-karman. Since this procedure is much more elaborate than the procedure of a śrāmaṇerī, it is a possible indication that the status of a śikṣamāṇā is above the one of a śrāmaṇerī. An essential person at the ordination ceremonies of the śrāmaṇerī and of the śikṣamāṇā is, apart from the ceremony master, the upādhyāyinī, the teacher.21 The teacher is a bhikṣuṇī who guides the new candidate from the going forth until at least two years after the ordination.22 Not mentioned in the ceremonies of śrāmaṇerī and śikṣamāṇā is the adviser (jiao shou shi 教授師, anuśāsaka, f. anuśāsikā) who at the full ordination ceremony of a bhikṣuṇī investigates whether the candidate meets the conditions of the saṃgha.23 Equally not mentioned is the second teacher, the master (asheli 阿闍梨, ācārya, f. ācāryā, ācāryikā), who appears in the full ordination process only at the end of the ceremony.24 The Dgv says in this respect that in case a bhikṣu or a bhikṣuṇī who has only recently received the ordination , lose their teacher (upādhyāya/upādhyāyinī), they have to be guided by an ācārya/ācāryā who has been ordained (as a bhikṣu or bhikṣunī) for at least ten years (for a female master at least twelve years) and who possesses the necessary quali- ﬁ cations to give guidance.25 Some passages in the Dgv, however, indicate that a śrāmaṇera/ī, already from the start of his/her career, possibly has two instructors (an ācārya/ācāryā and an upādhyāya/upādhyāyinī).26 It seems probably that these two instructors have a diﬀ erent task. In any case, in the Dharmaguptaka tradition it is the upādhyāya/upādhyāyinī who prepares the candidate for the ordination.27

20. For technical details on these procedures, see Chung (1998, 28–30). 21. he shang 和上, upādhyāya; f. he shang ni 和上尼, upādhyāyinī. 22. Dgv, T 1428, bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga, pācittika 128, p.760a8–b14. See also Heirman (2002a, part I, 65– 79). 23. T 1428 757a14 and 924c10. 24. T 1428 758c9 and 926a20. 25. T 1428 761b11–c12, and T 1428 803a27–804a19. 26. See, for instance, T 1428 810c11–12. 27. The functions of upādhyāya/upādhyāyinī and ācārya/ācāryā have, according to my knowledge, not yet been thoroughly studied. However, for some traditions, a few observations have been made. According to Kieﬀ er-Pülz (1992, 130–31), in the Pāli tradition, an ācariya (Skt. ācārya) takes over the tasks of an upajjhāya (Skt. upādhyāya), in case the latter, for some reason, is no longer there. Still, an ācariya cannot replace an upajjhāya in an ordination ceremony. According to Bechert et al. (1994, 232), s.v. ā-cārya (Sarvāstivāda tradition), an ācārya instructs recently ordained members in theoretical items, while an upādhyāya instructs in discipline. The Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition unambiguously states that a candidate, from the going forth, asks for two instructors, whose tasks are diﬀ erent (see, for instance, T 1453 455c10–25; for details see Heirman [2002a, part II, 658–9, n.140]).

The ten precepts of a śrāmaṇerī

At the end of the ceremony of the going forth, the new candidate is given ten precepts. These precepts are the same for both śrāmaṇerīs and śrāmaṇeras.28 The items of these precepts are also included in the precepts for bhikṣuṇīs, as listed in the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga.29 The ban on killing any living being (1) is expressed in the third pārājika,30 and in the forty-sixth pācittika precept for bhikṣuṇīs.31 ‘Not to steal’ (2) corresponds to the second pārājika,32 while the rejection of unchaste behaviour (abrahmacarya) (3) is parallel to the fi rst pārājika.33 Lying (4) is expressed in the fourth pārājika,34 which deals with lying about one’s spiritual achievements, and in the fi rst pācittika,35 which concerns deliberately lying on all kinds of other matters. The ban on alcohol (5) corresponds to pācittika thirty-six.36 The prohi- bition to use perfume (6) is at stake in pācittikas 150, 177 and 178,37 while wear- ing fl owers, singing, dancing, and making music (7) are among the ‘bad habits’ of unworthy bhikṣuṇīs.38 Not being allowed to go to listen to music is the theme of pācittika seventy-nine.39 The shape of the bed (8) is discussed in pācittika sixty- eight.40 A śrāmaṇerī may not eat at an improper time: from noon until sunrise (9). For a bhikṣuṇī this constitutes a pācittika (pācittika twenty-four).41 Finally, a śrāmaṇerī may not personally touch gold, silver, or money, or tell others to touch it (10). For a bhikṣuṇī, this is a niḥsargika-pācittika.42 The above ten precepts are

28. T 1428 755b19–c5, 810b17–c1, 924a2–16. 29. For details on the Pāli tradition, see von Hinüber (1999, 24–6). 30. The third pārājika concerns the killing of a human being (T 1428 714c19–25, bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga; 575c11–577b12, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga). Transgression of a pārājika off ence leads to a permanent exclusion from the status of bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī. On the possibility of still maintaining a certain, though minor, position within the saṃgha, see Clarke (2000). For the development of the eight pārājikas for bhikṣuṇīs, see Heirman (2003). 31. Pācittika 46 concerns the killing of an animal (T 1428 735c21, bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga; 676c25–677b14, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga, pācittika 61). Pācittika, Pāli pācittiya and variants: an off ence that needs to be expiated. 32. T 1428 714c11–18 (572b6–575c2, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga). 33. T 1428 714a7–c10 (568a7–572b5, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga). 34. T 1428 714c26–715a5 (577b13–579a9, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga). 35. T 1428 734c11 (634a9–c11, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga). 36. T 1428 735b24 (671b21–672b19, bhikṣu-vibhaṅga, pācittika 51). 37. T 1428 768c9–28 (in this case, and in case of the next two pācittika off ences, a bhikṣu is said to commit a duṣkṛta, ‘a bad action’, a light off ence, see T 1428 768c25, 777c7, 778a3–4), T 1428 777b20–c13, and T 1428 777c14–778a7. 38. T 1428 724a9–17. Similarly for bhikṣus, see T 1428 596c20–597a1, 890b25–c3. 39. T 1428 740a27–b23. A bhikṣu commits a duṣkṛta (T 1428 740b18–19). 40. T 1428 736b29–c1 (bhikṣu-vibhaṅga, pācittika 85, T 1428 693b9–c8). 41. T 1428 735a27 (bhikṣu-vibhaṅga, pācittika 37, T 1428 662b8–c24). 42. Niḥsargika pācittika, Pāli nissaggiya pācittiya and variants: all these precepts, with the exception of one, concern unlawfully obtained objects that have to be given up. One precept concerns a robe from which a bhikṣu or bhikṣuṇī is separated in an unlawful way. The above precept on gold, silver and money is niḥsargika-pācittika 9 (T 1428 728a20–21). It corresponds to niḥsargika- pācittika 18 of the bhikṣu-vibhaṅga (T 1428 618c22–619c25).

THE ŚIKṢAMĀṆĀ ORDINATION: STEPS AND DETAILS

The age of the candidate

At the start of the chapter on the śikṣamāṇā (shichamona 式叉摩那 probationer) ordination, the Dgv states that a girl (tongnü 童女) of eighteen has to study the precepts for two years (T 1428 924a16–17). This is one of the eight ‘important rules’ (gurudharma) said to have been accepted by Mahāprajāpatī as a condition for the creation of a bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha.44 By using the term tongnü 童女, ‘girl’, the Chinese Dgv introduces a non-monastic term in a monastic procedure. Tongnü is the standard Chinese term for a young unmarried girl, seen as a virgin.45 Given her age of eighteen in the above Dharmaguptaka passage, it is clear that it concerns a sexually mature girl. Consequently, in the Dgv passages on ordination, the term tongnü in all probability refers to a sexually mature girl who has not yet had sexual relations with a man.46 As such, she is opposed to a married woman. This interpretation is supported by those passages in which the term tongnü 童女, ‘girl’, is explicitly opposed to the term huijia (fu)nü 會嫁 (婦) 女, a ‘married

43. See Pāli Vinaya, Vin I 83–84; Vin IV 343 (see also BD III 411; IV 105–6); Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 116c25–117a4; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 281a7, 460c4–10; Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1435 150a19– b8; Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition, T 1453 456b25–29 (karma-vācanā for bhikṣus). 44. For details, see Heirman (1997, 34–43); Hirakawa (1998, 58–74). As for the reason why a woman, unlike a man, has to go through an additional stage, the vinayas have very diﬀ erent opinions. The Pāli Vinaya (Vin IV 318–20), the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya (T 1421 92a7 and 186b14–15) and the Dharmaguptaka-vinaya (T 1428 756a16–c25) state that a probationary period is necessary to learn about right and wrong. The Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya (T 1425 534c12–18) says that it is for the determination of the right age of the candidate. It remains unclear what this exactly implies. Pregnancy control is given as a reason by the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1435 326b17–18), while the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1443 1004c1–10) says that young women, who are actually fully ready to assume the tasks of a grown-up, should be given the possibility to gain more responsibilities at an earlier age than the ordination age. For more details, see Heirman (2008, 119–20). 45. See, for instance, Ciyuan, vol. 3, 2340–41, s.v. 童女 and s.v. 童男女. 46. In some other vinaya texts, the term tongnü 童女 is explicitly explained as ‘one who has not yet been together with a man’. See Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 91b10: 未經男子, wei jing nanzi, ‘who has not yet had intercourse with a man’; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 534c5–6: 未壞梵行, wei huai fan xing, ‘who has not yet broken the pure conduct’; Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1443 1006c8–9: 未嫡男家, ‘who has not yet gone (as a wife) to the house of a man’. For the Pāli tradition, see note 50.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 181 woman’,47 who, unlike a ‘girl’, is allowed an exception:48 she is allowed to become a śikṣamāṇā at the age of ten.49 Especially revealing is the wording of pācittika rule 126 (p.759b25–27). It says: ‘If a bhikṣuṇī admits a young married woman (huijia funü 會嫁婦女), gives her two years in the precepts, and, when she is fully twelve years old, confers on her the ordination without informing the saṃgha, she commits a pācittika’. This is very similar to the parallel rule for ‘girls’, pācittika 124 (p.758c18–20): ‘If a bhikṣuṇī gives to a girl (tongnü 童女) of eighteen two years of study in the precepts and (gives her) the six rules, and when she is fully twenty years old, confers on her the ordination without the permission of the saṃgha, she commits a pācittika’. These two pācittika rules diﬀ er only in one essential point: pācittika 126 concerns a married woman, pācittika 124 an unmarried girl. These categories are clearly contrasted.50 The above implies that a girl can become a śikṣamāṇā at the age of eighteen, but that an exception is allowed for a married woman (huijia funü 會嫁婦女): she can become a śikṣamāṇā at the age of ten, and receive the full ordination of a bhikṣuṇī at the age of twelve. This exception is allowed in all vinayas, although the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition deviates from the other traditions by saying that a married woman needs to have reached the age of twelve to start the probationary period (T 1443 1004c8–10).51 This particular situation for married women has led to discussion. In fact, in all vinayas, including the Dgv, the wording of this guideline for married women is ambiguous. The text is unclear as to whether the guideline indicates the biological age, or the years of marriage. In two vina-

47. The term huijia funü 會嫁婦女 is not a common Chinese term. It is composed of huijia and funü. The term huijia consists of hui, ‘to meet,’ and jia, ‘to marry a husband’. The term funü, on the other hand, is a more common term for ‘a married women’ (cf. Ciyuan, Vol.1, 759, s.v. fu 婦: an already married woman). As a total concept, the term huijia funü 會嫁婦女 thus means some- thing like ‘a married woman who met her husband in marriage’. In passages other than those concerning the ordination of women, the term tongnü 童女, unmarried woman, is frequently opposed to funü 婦女 (not huijia funü 會嫁婦女), married woman (T 1428 571c12, 580b6, 596c25 et passim; in all these passages the context makes it clear that both the terms funü 婦女 and tongnü 童女 refer to sexually mature women). The use of the more complex term huijia funü 會嫁婦女 indicates that in the context of ordination, not only the fact that a woman is married, but also the fact that she has actually had sexual relations with her husband is of importance. A similar diff erence is singled out by Kieff er-Pülz for the Pāli tradition (see note 50). 48. See the pācittikas 125 and 126 (T 1428 759a22–24; 759b25–27). 49. On the interpretation of ‘age’, see the discussion mentioned below. 50. A parallel opposition between an ‘unmarried girl’ (kumāribhūtā) and a ‘married woman’ (gihigatā) is studied by Kieff er-Pülz for the Pāli tradition (2005, 217–29). According to Kieff er- Pülz, the use of the term kumāribhūtā, instead of the more common term kumārī, in the context of the ordination of women, refers to the fact that it concerns a sexually mature, but not yet married girl (kumāribhūtā = one who has become a kumārī, interpreted in the narrow sense of a sexually mature girl). Also the term gihigatā is limited to the context of ordination, the common term for a married woman being itthi. Just as expressed by the Chinese term huijia funü 會嫁婦女 (see note 47), the term gihigatā refers to a married woman who has gone to her husband (i.e. who has joined her husband in married life, in all probability at the age of sexual maturity). 51. See, however, a Mūlasarvāstivāda commentary by Guṇaprabha (probably seventh century), which mentions ‘ten years’ (Heirman 2002a, Part I, 85–6).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 182 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW yas, the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya52 and the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, the introductory story, however, clearly indicates that the biological age is to be understood.53 Also the Sarvāstivāda tradition takes this position: although the Sarvāstivāda- vinaya itself is ambiguous, an Indian commentary on it, the ‘Vinayavibhāṣā of the Sarvāstivādins’ (T 1440), explicitly indicates that the biological age is the correct interpretation.54 For the Pāli Vinaya, a detailed study by P. Kieff er-Pülz shows that also in this tradition, in all probability, the biological age of the candidate is indicated. Kieff er-Pülz concludes that in the Theravāda tradition, a married woman can be ordained at the age of twelve.55 The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya and Dgv remain ambiguous.56 However, some arguments can indicate that also in these vinayas, the biological age is to be understood. In all vinayas, also in the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya and Dgv, the terms used to indicate the length of marriage or the age of a married woman are very similar to the terms used to indicate the age of an unmarried woman.57 In no vinaya, however, do the naked rules themselves allow us to decide whether, for a married woman, the age or the length of her marriage is to be understood. Only introductory stories, a commentary, and a detailed analysis of all passages dealing with the concepts of ‘girl’ and ‘married woman’ allow us to decide for the respective traditions. On the other hand, since, for a girl, it is naturally understood that the biological age is indicated, it seems logical to me that, in case we have to interpret the parallel rule for a married woman diff er- ently, the commentary following upon the rule would indicate it, so as to make

52. This is parallel to the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins, a tradition closely related to the Mahāsāṃghikas, of which the Prākrit -vibhaṅga text for bhikṣuṇīs is extant (see Nolot [1991, 392–3]). 53. Mahāsaṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 535c21–27; Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1443 1004c1–10. Both vinayas argue that young married women have the same capacities as single women of the age of eighteen and therefore should be allowed into the probationary period. For details, see Heirman (2002a, part I, 82–8). 54. T 1440 559b15–16 (T 1440, Sapoduo pini piposha 薩婆多毘尼毘婆沙, has probably been translated after the translation of the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya and before 431, see Yuyama [1979, 8–9]). See also Shih 2000, 489. 55. Kieﬀ er-Pülz (2005). This study is a continuation of earlier discussions on the same matter by, for instance, U. Hüsken (1997, 255–260) and O. von Hinüber (2000, 79–82). While Hüsken argues that a married woman can become a probationer at the age of ten, von Hinüber states that she can only do so after a marriage of ten years. In a recently published paper, O. von Hinüber (2008: 6–16) further continues the discussion. Focusing on the term gihigatā (see note 50) he convincingly argues that the original meaning of the term probably is ‘a woman known among householders’. It implies a fully diﬀ erent understanding of the ordination rules of a gihigatā: an exception is allowed for a woman known among householders for twelve years. The original meaning, however, quickly became lost, making the rule very ambiguous and forcing later interpreters to reformulate the guidelines. 56. Still, as pointed out by Juo-Hsüeh Shih (2000, 486–7), the use of the term ‘young (xiao nian 小年) married woman’ by the Dgv (T 1428 759b26), points to a young girl, rather than to a woman who has already been married for twelve years. Also the Chinese vinaya master Daoxuan (596–667), in a commentary on the Dgv, in all probability, interprets the passage concerned as the indicat- ing the biological age (T 1804 155a5–7; see also Heirman [2002a, part I, 85]). 57. For details, see Heirman (2002a, part I, 83).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 183 sure that the reader understands the text correctly.58 This is, however, never the case. Since, according to my opinion, a parallel structure easily leads the reader to a parallel interpretation, I think that it is not too far-fetched to hypothesize that in both cases, the biological age of the candidate is to be understood. Moreover, given the fact that no vinaya text contradicts the latter hypothesis – while this is the case for the alternative hypothesis, I am inclined to conclude that in all traditions, the vinaya texts refer to the biological age of a married woman. As shown by O. von Hinüber (2008: 6–16), however, the ordination rules of married women do not really ﬁ t into the Buddhist legal system and are probably the result of a very ancient mistake by early vinaya interpreters.

The jñapti-caturtha-karman

In the Dgv, the ordination of a śikṣamāṇā is carried out on the basis of a jñapti- caturtha-karman (bai si jiemo 白四羯磨). The procedure consists of a motion (bai 白, jñapti), three propositions (karma-vācanā), and a conclusion. As said above, this is a rather elaborate procedure, a possible indication that the status of a śikṣamāṇā is above that of a śrāmaṇerī. The motion is presented to the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha by a ceremony master (jieshi 戒師, f. karmakārikā) and formally requests the approval of the saṃgha. The three propositions explicitly ask the members of the saṃgha whether or not they approve the motion. Those who agree remain silent. Those who do not agree speak up. If nobody presents any protest, the motion is accepted, as stated in the ﬁ nal conclusion at the end of the jñapti-caturtha-karman. The text further mentions that the ceremony master is appointed ‘as above’ (ru shang 如上, T 1428 924a25). This refers to similar statements on the appoint- ment of a person capable of carrying out a formal act, such as explained at the beginning of the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga (T 1428 717b13–14): one should appoint a com- petent person, that is the superior one,59 the vice superior one,60 one who recites the precepts,61 or one who does not recite the precepts, but is capable of carrying out the karman, the ‘procedure’.

The six rules of a śikṣamāṇā

Immediately following upon the jñapti-caturtha-karman is the announcement of the six rules (法 fa, dharma) that a śikṣamāṇā has to particularly take into account. This is very similar to the ordination procedure for bhikṣuṇīs: just after the jñapti-

58. A similar argument is used by Kieﬀ er-Pülz (2005, 231). 59. Sthavīrā or sthavīrī, the bhikṣuṇī with the highest seniority. 60. The one with the highest seniority after the superior one. 61. Compare Dgv, T 1428 825a17–18: a bhikṣu who has a seniority of ﬁ ve years may recite the precepts.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 184 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW caturtha-karman of the ordination, one announces to the candidate the eight pārājika rules. Only if she accepts these rules one by one can the ordination ceremony of the bhikṣuṇī be completed.62 The rules to be followed by a śikṣamāṇā are not the same in all vinayas. The Pāli Vinaya, the Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, the Dgv and the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya mention six rules, the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya eighteen, and the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya twelve.63 According to A. Hirakawa, the six rules of the Pāli Vinaya and of the Dgv are probably the oldest ones.64 In the Dgv, the fi rst four of these six rules coincide with the fi rst four pārājika rules for bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs, being against: (1) sexual intercourse, (2) stealing (anything with a value of fi ve coins or more), (3) killing a human and (4) lying about one’s spiritual achievements. The other two rules are: (5) a śikṣamāṇā may not eat at an improper time, that is after noon, and (6) she may not drink alcohol. In the Pāli Vinaya (Vin IV 319) and in the Mahīśāsaka- vinaya the order is parallel to the fi rst six precepts for śrāmaṇerīs, dealing with: killing any being, stealing, sexual intercourse, lying, alcohol, and eating at an improper time. In the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, the six rules coincide with the fi rst six pārājika rules for bhikṣuṇīs, on: sexual intercourse, stealing, killing a human, lying, allowing a man with impure thoughts to touch her between the hair and wrist or knee, and doing eight wrong things together with a man with impure thoughts (all these things concern physical contact). The rules of the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya and of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya diff er from both the pārājika rules for bhikṣuṇīs and the precepts for śrāmaṇerīs. In most vinayas, the śikṣamāṇā thus has to follow six rules, four less than a śrāmaṇerī. In this sense, it does not seem to be a step forward.65 In the Dgv, however, the latter conclusion is not that straightforward. The vinaya namely mentions that, apart from these six rules particularly to be taken into account, a śikṣamāṇā should also observe all the precepts for bhikṣuṇīs, except for the precept on off ering and accepting food with one’s own hands (T 1428 755c23–24, 924c2–4). It seems likely that this exception has to be linked to the fi rst pratideśanīya precept for bhikṣus (T 1428 695c17–696b13),66 where it is said that a bhikṣu may not, with his own hands, accept food from a bhikṣuṇī, except when he is ill or when the bhikṣuṇī is one of his relatives. The commentary following this precept indi-

62. T 1428 758a3–b22, and 925b17–926a5. 63. Pāli Vinaya, Vin IV 319; Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 186b16–18; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 471c2– 15; Dgv, T 1428 924b6–c2; Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1435 327a7–c2; Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1443 1005a3–19. In the Chinese context, the six rules of the Dgv are considered to be the point of reference. Often referred to is also the ﬁ rst rule of the Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya that states that a probationer has to take a seat below the one of bhikṣuṇīs and above the one of śrāmaṇerīs (for details, see Heirman [2008, 120–21]). 64. Hirakawa (1982, 53–4, n.17). 65. This conclusion had led to the hypothesis that the probationary period has to stand apart from the training of a novice. See, for instance, Shih Chao-hui (2000) and Shih, Juo-hsüeh (2000, 406–53; 2003; see also Heirman (2008, 108–9). 66. Those who violate a pratideśanīya (Pāli pāṭidesanīya) precept have to confess their oﬀ ence. All pratideśanīya precepts concern food, or the begging of food.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 185 cates that for a bhikṣuṇī this is similar, which means that, in all probability, she may not, with her own hands, accept food from a bhikṣu (taking into account the usual inversion of gender roles). The precept also implies that a bhikṣuṇī cannot place food in the hands of a bhikṣu, or vice versa. The Dgv thus seems to point out that this rule does not apply to a śikṣamāṇā.

The status of the śikṣamāṇā

The above again raises the question on the status of the śikṣamāṇā.67 What is her position in the hierarchy of the saṃgha? She certainly has not yet reached the status of a bhikṣuṇī, since just as a śrāmaṇerī, she cannot, for instance, participate in ceremonies reserved for bhikṣuṇīs. On the other hand, a few passages indicate that her status might be above that of a śrāmaṇerī: the ceremony of the ordination of a śikṣamāṇā is a lot more elaborate than the ceremony of the śrāmaṇerī, and a śikṣamāṇā is explicitly ordered to follow all the rules for bhikṣuṇīs, with the exception of one. Still, if we take into consideration the full Dgv, it also becomes clear that, at least for the Dharmaguptaka tradition, the rules for śikṣamāṇās are in fact parallel to the rules for śrāmaṇerīs: the Dgv namely mentions in the commentary that follows upon every rule for bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs whether or not this rule is also valid for śrāmaṇerīs and śikṣamāṇās.68 These commentary passages show no diff erence between a śrāmaṇerī and a śikṣamāṇā: both always commit the same off ence (a duṣkṛta, ‘a bad deed’) for breaking exactly the same rules. Interesting in this context, is the commentary of the Dgv on the four pārājika rules for bhikṣus (which are parallel to the fi rst four of the eight pārājika rules for bhikṣuṇīs):69 the commentaries mention (p.572b2, p.575b27–28, p.577b5–6, p.579a3) that a śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī or śikṣamāṇā who goes against one of these pārājika rules commits a duṣkṛta, and has to be expelled (miebin 滅擯).70 This implies that not only the rules, but also the punishments are similar for both śrāmaṇerīs and śikṣamāṇās. For the śikṣamāṇā, these punishments are explicitly repeated in

67. For a detailed discussion on this matter, see Heirman (2008, 120–21). 68. In some cases, the rules for bhikṣuṇīs cannot be applied to śrāmaṇerīs or to śikṣamāṇās. This is, for instance, the case for those rules that prescribe which pupil a bhikṣuṇī can accept and to whom she may grant the ordination. 69. In the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga, the rules for bhikṣuṇīs that are parallel to the rules for bhikṣus are given without introduction and commentary. An exception is the fi rst pārājika rule for bhikṣuṇīs, which is followed by a commentary. The commentary mentions that a śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī or śikṣamāṇā who goes against this rule, needs to be expelled (T 1428 714c6–7). The Mahīśāsaka- vinaya indicates in the text on the fi rst two pārajikas in the bhikṣu-vibhaṅga (T 1421 5a26–27; 7a13–14) the punishments imposed upon a śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī or śikṣamāṇā: if they go against the fi rst or the second pārājika rule, they commit a duṣkṛta, and have to be expelled (驅出 qu chu). 70. This is not the case for the last four pārājika off ences for bhikṣuṇīs. For these precepts, the Dgv only mentions that a śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī and śikṣamāṇā commit a duṣkṛta, but it does not give any punishment.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 186 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga, pācittika 123, which gives the six rules for the śikṣamāṇā (p.756c10–17): if the śikṣamāṇā violates one of the fi rst four rules of a śikṣamāṇā, rules that are parallel to the fi rst four pārājikas for bhikṣuṇīs, she has to be expelled (miebin 滅擯). In case she commits a lesser off ence, or in case she violates the fi fth or the sixth rule of a śikṣamāṇā, her study period has to be lengthened (geng yu jie 更與戒, ‘to further give the rules’).

Expulsion and screening of a śikṣamāṇā

The above rules involve that for four kinds of off ences, a śikṣamāṇā has to be expelled. Although it is unclear what an expulsion practically involves, it seems improbable that a śikṣamāṇā can still be ordained as a bhikṣuṇī after having violated a rule parallel to a pārājika precept. The saṃgha namely wants to prevent the ordination of unworthy persons. It therefore screens the candidates before they enter the saṃgha as a bhikṣu or as a bhikṣuṇī. If a candidate fails to pass the screening, he or she should not be ordained.71 Just as the other vinayas, the Dgv thus contains a list of questions to be asked to a candidate bhikṣu (p.814c12–17 and p.814c24–815a2) or bhikṣuṇī (p.924c15–22). The fi rst question asked to the bhikṣu candidate is whether he ever committed a pārājika off ence (bian zui 邊罪).72 Since a pārājika off ence can only be committed by a bhikṣu or a bhikṣuṇī,73 this question must aim at an earlier period spent as a bhikṣu, and does in fact not refer to any preparatory period.74 This is further supported by the karma-vācanā text 曇無德律部雜羯磨 Tanwude lübu za jiemo, ‘Karma-vācanā of the Dharmaguptaka School’ (T 1432 1042b14) in which the question is replaced by the question on whether or not he has ever been a bhikṣu.75 Other questions equally deal with subjects included in the pārājika off ences and generally concern the candidate’s life without point- ing to a defi nite period. These questions can be applied to a former period as a bhikṣu, but also to his life as a layman or as a śrāmaṇera. The candidate is asked, for instance, whether he has ever committed sexual intercourse with a bhikṣuṇī,

71. On screening novice and śikṣamāṇā candidates, see also Sok, Zikwan (1998, 62–4). 72. Nakamura (1985, 1214, s.v. 邊罪). 73. A śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī and śikṣamāṇā can violate a pārājika precept, but do not commit a pārājika off ence. Their off ence is qualifi ed as a duṣkṛta. Still they have to be expelled (see also note 69). It is unclear what expulsion exactly involves, although it seems likely that transgression of one of the fi rst four pārājika off ences leads to a permanent exclusion from the status of bhikṣu and bhikṣuṇī, just as this is the case for a bhikṣu or a bhikṣuṇī who go against a pārājika rule (see note 30). 74. When properly done, a bhikṣu is allowed to leave the saṃgha without this involving any nega- tive eff ect on future possibilities of re-entering the saṃgha. 75. Although most Chinese catalogues attribute the translation of this text to the Indian master 康僧鍇 Kang Sengkai (Saṃghavarman) in the middle of the third century, analysis of the extant text T 1432 has shown that it is in all probability a compilation based on the Dgv, and made after the Dgv had been translated into Chinese in the early fi fth century. For details, see Hirakawa (1970, 202–18, 252–3); and Heirman (2002b, 402–7).

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 HEIRMAN BECOMING A NUN IN THE DHARMAGUPTAKA TRADITION 187 whether he falsely presents himself as a candidate with the purpose of getting material wealth, whether he has ever killed his mother, his father, or an arhat, or also whether he has debts. For several questions, the Dgv also mentions that, even if the candidate has received the ordination, it is not valid if it is later revealed that he did not meet the conditions stipulated in the above questions.76 The irreg- ularly ordained person should be expelled (miebin 滅擯). For bhikṣuṇīs, the Dgv contains a list of questions that is shorter than the one for bhikṣus (T 1428 924c15–22). Of the above questions, only that on debts is mentioned. The karma-vācanā text 四分比丘尼羯磨 Sifen biqiuni jiemo, ‘Dharmaguptaka Karma-vācanā for Bhikṣuṇīs’ (T 1434 1066c10–21), however, contains a list that is parallel to the one for bhikṣus. The fi rst question asked to the candidate is whether or not she has ever committed a pārājika off ence.77 In addition, various rules for bhikṣuṇīs prohibit the ordination of unworthy women: the fi fth saṃghāvaśeṣa for bhikṣuṇīs forbids ordaining a woman known as a thief (p.719c15–18);78 pācittika 127 (p.759c26–27) and 135 (p.763a13–15) respectively forbid ordaining a prostitute or a woman who is in love with a boy or with a man; and pācittika 168 (p.774b17–c20) forbids ordaining a woman who has debts. Interesting in this context is also that the commentaries on the above precepts for bhikṣuṇīs add that in all these cases, a bhikṣu commits a duṣkṛta (p.719c29; p.760a3–4; 760b9; p.774c16–17). This commentary is in fact ambiguous. Does it mean that a bhikṣu who admits, for instance, a male thief, commits a duṣkṛta, or does it mean that he commits a duṣkṛta in case he participates in the ordination of a woman thief? This question can be solved by making a comparison with the bhikṣuṇī-vibhaṅga precepts on the ordination of a pregnant woman (pācittika 119, p.754b12–c15) or of a woman who is breast-feeding a child (pācittika 120, pp.754c16– 755a19). Also these women are not qualifi ed for ordination. The commentaries on these precepts equally state that a bhikṣu commits a duṣkṛta (p.754c8; p.755a12). Given the fact that a male candidate can obviously not be pregnant or cannot be breast-feeding a child, the commentary must indicate that a bhikṣu participating in a wrongful ordination of a woman candidate commits a duṣkṛta. This is not all that surprising, since both the bhikṣuṇī- and the bhikṣu-saṃghas are responsible for the bhikṣuṇī ordination of a woman candidate. In conclusion, we see that the saṃgha carefully screens new candidates. Although the Dgv does not explicitly say that a śikṣamāṇā who has violated a pārājika precept in the past can never be ordained as a bhikṣuṇī, the screening seems to impose such an interpretation. Bhikṣus or bhikṣuṇīs who have committed a pārājika off ence cannot be fully re-ordained, and, crimes such as inappropriate

76. See T 1428 811c24–27, 812a9–11, 813a14–16, a26–28, b5–7. 77. Although T 1434 is said to have been translated by 求那跋摩 Qiunabamo (Guṇavarman, 367– 431), it is most probably a compilation based on T 1433, 羯莫 Jiemo, a karma-vācanā text of the Dharmaguptakas, itself in all probability a compilation based upon the Chinese Dgv (Hirakawa 1970, 202–218, 252–253; Yuyama 1979, 35). 78. Saṃghāvaśeṣa, Pāli saṃghādisesa, an oﬀ ence that leads to a temporary expulsion from the order.

The presence of bhikṣus at the ordination ceremony of a śikṣamāṇā

As brieﬂ y mentioned above, both the bhikṣuṇī- and the bhikṣu-saṃghas are responsible for the bhikṣuṇī ordination of a woman candidate, as explicitly stated in the eight gurudharmas. In all vinayas, these rules mention a few issues for which the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha has to rely on the bhikṣu-saṃgha.79 The Dgv states:

• that a bhikṣuṇī candidate has to be ordained by both saṃghas (ﬁ rst in the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha and then in the bhikṣu-saṃgha); • that if a bhikṣuṇī commits a saṃghāvaśeṣa oﬀ ence, she has to undergo the mānatva penance before both saṃghas;80 • that every fortnight the bhikṣuṇīs have to ask the bhikṣus for instruction; • and that at the end of the rains/summer retreat, the bhikṣuṇīs have to carry out the pravāraṇā ceremony also before the bhikṣu-saṃgha.81

The gurudharmas diff er only slightly from vinaya to vinaya.82 A notable diff erence in the context of the present research, however, is to be found in the (Chinese) Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya: the fi rst of the eight gurudharmas mentions that not only the full ordination has to be carried out in the presence of bhikṣus, but also the going forth (T 1451 351a1–3). On the other hand, the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1451 352a27–b1) explicitly mentions that the bhikṣu- and the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha func- tion separately, except for the rehabilitation,83 the full ordination, and the matters that have to be settled every fortnight (i.e. in all probability, the bimonthly request for instruction, as mentioned in the gurudharmas). In the latter enumera- tion, the going forth is not mentioned.

79. Pāli Vinaya, Vin II 255; Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 185c20–29; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 471b1– 476b11; Dgv, T 1428 923a28–b19; Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1435 345c8–18; Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1451 351a1–25. 80. See Edgerton (1985, 429): ‘It thus appears that, according to both northern and southern tradition, this penance consisted in, or at least involved, some kind of ceremonial homage paid by the culprit to the general community of monks’. For bhikṣuṇīs, this period of penance lasts two weeks (Pāli Vinaya, Vin II 255 [see also Hüsken 1997, 350–52]; Mahīśāsaka-vinaya, T 1421 185c26–28; Mahāsāṃghika-vinaya, T 1425 475a8–13; Dgv, T 1428 923b10–12; Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1435 345c11–12; Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, T 1451 351a20–22). 81. For pravāraṇā, see note 11. Dgv (T 1428 765c14–766b9, pācittika 142) explains how this has to be organized practically: the bhikṣuṇīs should appoint a representative who goes to bhikṣu- saṃgha on behalf of the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha. For her safety on the road, she has to take two or three bhikṣuṇīs with her. 82. For details, see Heirman (1997, 34–43). 83. See note 12.

From the above, we can conclude that, at least in the Dharmaguptaka tradition, the presence of the bhikṣu-saṃgha is only needed for the last step that leads to the full membership of the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha. The presence of the bhikṣu-saṃgha is not required for the ordinations of a śrāmaṇerī or of a śikṣamāṇā. A remarkable passage in the chapter on the rains retreat (p.833a17–29), however, seems to sug- gest that a bhikṣu can also formally be involved in the ordination ceremony of a śikṣamāṇā:84

• a śikṣamāṇā, who has violated the rules asks for the presence of a bhikṣu so that she can confess her oﬀ ence and resume her study period85 (in addition, the text also mentions the śikṣamāṇā’s request for the presence of a bhikṣu for her full ordination ceremony as a bhikṣuṇī). • a śrāmaṇerī asks for the presence of a bhikṣu so that she can receive the six rules (六法 liu fa).

Given these remarks, the question arises as to whether the presence of a bhikṣu is indeed formally requested in case one wants to lengthen the study period of a śikṣamāṇā, and in case one confers the six rules on a śikṣamāṇā candidate. Or can we say that the presence of a bhikṣu is not obligatory, but that a bhikṣu is at least entitled to formally lengthen the study period of a śikṣamāṇā or to formally grant such a study period to a new candidate? Or do we have to interpret the above passage in a diﬀ erent way? The lengthening of a study period does in fact not involve any formal act. It is the logical consequence of the wrong behaviour of a śikṣamāṇā during her study period, as explained above. So, in this case, a bhikṣu, when called in, can only come to give some advice to the wrongdoer, but he cannot help her in any formal way. According to my opinion, this is also the case when a śrāmaṇerī asks for the help of a bhikṣu when she is on the verge of entering the śikṣamāṇā study period. Given the fact that a bhikṣu can be called in for help without there being any formal act, and given the fact that no other passage of the vinaya refers to the presence of a bhikṣu in the formal procedure of the ordination of śikṣamāṇā, the logical conclusion is, I believe, that in the two above mentioned cases, the woman candidate asks for the moral support of a bhikṣu and does not and cannot even ask him to participate in any formal act. For the full ordination ceremony, this is diﬀ erent, since this ceremony has to be carried out in both saṃghas. In this case the presence of a quorum of bhikṣus is needed. The Dgv is not the only vinaya that contains a similar passage in the chapter on the rains retreat. Similar guidelines are also mentioned in the Pāli Vinaya, the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, and the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya. The Pāli Vinaya (Vin I 145–7)

84. I wish to express my gratitude to Ven. Jampa Tsedroen for attracting my attention to this passage. 85. By implication, the four rules that are parallel to a pārājika oﬀ ence are excluded, since a śikṣamāṇa who violates a pārājika precept cannot resume her training.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd 2008 190 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW allows a bhikkhu to leave his rainy season residence to go and help a sikkhamānā who is troubled by dissatisfaction, remorse, or wrong views. A bhikkhu can also leave when the study period of the sikkhamānā has been interrupted and he wants to help her to resume the training. He can equally go and help a sikkhamānā to obtain the ordination, or help a sāmanerī to obtain the sikkhamānā training. In case a sikkhamānā is preparing herself for the full bhikkhunī ordination, the text adds that a bhikkhu can, if needed, also participate in the formal procedure of the ordination. The latter remark is only logical given the fact that the full ordination of a woman candidate formally has to take place before both saṃghas. In all other above mentioned cases that allow a bhikkhu to leave his residence during the rains retreat, the Pāli Vinaya does not say anything on any kind of participation in a formal procedure. The conclusion for the Pāli Vinaya is thus similar to the Dgv: a bhikkhu is allowed to temporarily stop his rains retreat in order to give moral support. Only in case of a full ordination ceremony can he participate in a formal act. The Sarvāstivāda-vinaya mentions that a śrāmaṇerī can ask a bhikṣu to come and give assistance when she is about to enter the śikṣamāṇā study period (T 1435 175a13–16). This passage ﬁ gures amidst many other cases whereby a śrāmaṇerī who is in some kind of trouble asks for the moral support of a bhikṣu (T 1435 174c15–175a23). She can, for instance, call in the help of a bhikṣu when she has some doubt on her choice to lead a monastic life. The same moral support can also be requested by a śikṣamāṇā (T 1435 175b7–c17). In the latter context, the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya mentions that a śikṣamāṇā can ask a bhikṣu to come and give assistance when she has broken one of the last two rules of the set of six that are the focus of her study period,86 or when she is about to receive the full ordination (T 1435 175c5–11). Finally, the Chinese Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1445 1043b8–12) says that bhikṣus and bhikṣuṇīs alike can leave their rainy season residences when a śikṣamāṇā is inviting the bhikṣu- and bhikṣuṇī-saṃghas to grant her the full ordination. It is important to note that the text explicitly says that in the case of a full ordination, both saṃghas (眾 zhong) can go, thus clearly referring to the necessary quorum for the ordination ceremony. This is opposed to the next passage of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya (T 1445 1043b13–16) in which a single bhikṣu is given the permission to leave his residence to assist a śrāmaṇerī who wants to enter the śikṣamāṇā study period. Given these facts, it seems to me that we have to interpret the Sarvāstivāda- and Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinayas in the same way: a bhikṣu is allowed to leave his rainy season residence in order to give moral support to a śrāmaṇerī and to a śikṣamāṇā, and is allowed to go and give formal support in case of the full ordination of a bhikṣuṇī.

86. A śikṣamāṇā has to follow six rules: in the Sarvāstivāda-vinaya, these rules are parallel to the ﬁ rst six pārājika precepts for bhikṣuṇīs. If a śikṣamāṇā breaks any of the ﬁ rst four rules, she cannot resume her study period. This is not the case for the two remaining rules: a violation of these rules leads to an automatic lengthening of her study period. It is in these latter two cases that a śikṣamāṇā can ask a bhikṣu for help.

The other two extant vinayas, the Mahīśāsaka- and Mahāsāṃghika-vinayas, do not have the same regulation. The Mahīśāsaka-vinaya (T 1421 130a5–9) only mentions in the chapter on the rains retreat, that a bhikṣu can leave his rainy season residence in case he wants to admonish a bhikṣuṇī who is misled and who is behav- ing improperly. The text adds that he can also leave to admonish a śikṣamāṇā.

CONCLUSION

As a conclusion, we can say that the Dgv describes three steps that lead to the full ordination: śrāmaṇerī, śikṣamāṇā and the full ordination ceremony of a new bhikṣuṇī. All three steps involve formal acts. As a general rule, we see that the higher up the formal act is, the more elaborate the ceremony will be. The career of a new candidate starts with two jñapti-karmans: the jñapti-karman on the shaving of the hair, followed by the one on the actual going forth. These two procedures guide the candidate to her fi rst step, the step of a śrāmaṇerī. When she has reached the age of eighteen, or, for a married woman the age of ten, she can start the śikṣamāṇā study period. The granting of this study period involves a more complex ceremony, with, at its central point, a jñapti-caturtha-karman. The candidate has now reached the second step, the step of a śikṣamāṇā. The fi nal step, the full ordination, involves a still more elaborate ceremony, that, contrary to the fi rst two ceremonies, has to be carried out before both saṃghas, fi rst the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha and then the bhikṣu-saṃgha. After this ceremony, the candidate has obtained the full membership of the bhikṣuṇī-saṃgha.

ABBREVIATIONS

BD The Book of Discipline (Vinaya-Piṭaka), 6 vols, translated by I. B. Horner (London: Pali Text Society, 1938–66). Dgv Dharmaguptaka-vinaya T Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經, edited by J. Takakusu & K. Watanabe. Tōkyō. Vin The Vinaya Piṭakaṃ, edited by H. Oldenberg (London: Pali Text Society, [1879–83] 1969–2001)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bechert, H., G. von Simson, M. Schmidt et al. 1994. Sanskrit-Wörterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden und der kanonischen Literatur der Sarvāstivāda-Schule, vol. 1, vowels. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck § Ruprecht. Chung. J. 1998. Die Pravāraṇā in den kanonischen Vinaya-Texten der Mūlasarvāstivādin und der Sarvāstivādin. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck § Ruprecht. Ciyuan 辭源, Xiuding ben 修訂本 [1979–1983] 1986, 4 vols. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan. Clarke, Sh. 2000. ‘The Existence of the Supposedly Non-existent Śikṣādatta-śrāmaṇerī, A New Perspective on Pārājika Penance’. Buddhist Studies, Bukkyō Kenkyū XXIX: 149–76. Edgerton, F. 1985. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Vol. II: Dictionary. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Originally published (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1953).

Heirman, A. 1997. ‘Some Remarks on the Rise of the Bhikṣuṇīsaṃgha and on the Ordination Ceremony for Bhikṣuṇīs according to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya’. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 20(2): 33–85. Heirman, A. 1999. ‘Vinaya: Perpetuum Mobile’. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques LIII(4): 849–71. Heirman, A. 2001. ‘Chinese Nuns and their Ordination in Fifth Century China’. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 24(2): 275–304. Heirman, A. 2002a. The Discipline in Four Parts, Rules for Nuns according to the Dharmaguptakavinaya, 3 parts. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Heirman, A. 2002b. ‘Can we trace the Early Dharmaguptakas?’. T’oung Pao 88: 396–429. Heirman, A. 2003. ‘The Pārājika Precepts for Nuns’. Buddhist Studies Review 20(2): 169–81. Heirman, A. 2004. ‘The Chinese Samantapāsādikā and its School Affi liation’. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 154(2): 371–96. Heirman, A. 2007. ‘Vinaya from India to China’. In The Spread of Buddhism, eds. A. Heirman & S.-P. Bumbacher, 167–202. Leiden: Brill. Heirman, A. 2008. ‘Where is the Probationer in the Chinese Buddhist Monasteries?’. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 158(1): 105–37. von Hinüber, O. 1999. Das Pātimokkhasutta der Theravādin, Studien zur Literatur des Theravāda-Buddhismus II. Mainz: Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur/Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. von Hinüber, O. 2000. ‘Die Nonnen im Theravāda-Buddhismus. Zu einer weiteren Göttinger Dissertation über das buddhistische Recht’. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 44: 61–85. von Hinüber, O. 2008. ‘The Foundation of the Bhikkhunī saṃgha, A Contribution to the Earliest History of Buddhism’. Annual Report of the International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology XI: 3–29. Hirakawa 平川, A. 1970. 律蔵の研究 Ritsuzō no Kenkyū, A Study of the Vinaya-Piṭaka. Tōkyō: Sankibō Busshorin. Hirakawa, A. 1982. Monastic Discipline for Buddhist Nuns. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute. Hirakawa 平川, A. 1998. 比丘尼律の研究 Bikuniritsu no Kenkyu, A Study of the Bhikṣuṇī vinaya. Tōkyō: Sankibō Busshorin. Hu-von Hinüber, H. 1994. Das Poṣadhavastu, Vorschriften für die buddhistischen Beichtfeier im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādins. Reinbek: Dr. Inge Wezler Verlag für Orientalische Fachpublikationen. Hüsken, U. 1997. Die Vorschriften für die buddhistische Nonnengemeinde im Vinaya-Piṭaka der Theravādin. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag. Kieff er-Pülz, P. 1992. Die Sīmā, Vorschriften zur Regelung der buddhistischen Gemeindegrenze in älteren buddhistischen Texten. Berlin: Dieter Reimer Verlag. Kieff er-Pülz, P. 2005. ‘Ehe- oder Lebensjahre? Die Altersangabe für eine “verheiratete” Frau (gihigatā) in den Rechtstexten der Theravādin’. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 155(1): 199–238. Nakamura 中村, H. [1981] 1985. Bukkyōgo Daijiten 佛教語大辞典. Tōkyō: Tōkyō Shoseki Kabushikikaisha. Nolot, É. 1991. Règles de discipline des nonnes bouddhistes, le bhikṣuṇīvinaya de l’école Mahāsāṃghika- Lokottaravādin. Paris: Collège de France. Roth, G. 1970. Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya, Including Bhikṣuṇī-Prakīrṇaka and a Summary of the Bhikṣu-Prakīrṇaka of the ārya-Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādin. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute. Schmidt, M. 1993. ‘Bhikṣuṇī-Karmavācanā, Die Handschrift Sansk. c25(R) der Bodleian Library Oxford’. In Studien zur Indologie und Buddhismuskunde für Professor Dr. Heinz Bechert zum 60. Geburtstag am 26. Juni 1992, eds. R. Grünendahl, J.-U. Hartmann and P. Kieff er-Pülz, 239–88. Bonn: Indica et Tibetica. Shih Chao-hui 釋昭慧 2000. ‘有關受具前階規定之種種 – 沙彌（尼），式叉摩那與「異學四月共住」規定之研究’ (‘On the regulations on the period before the full ordination: a study on the regulations regarding novices, probationers and women of other doctrines who have to train for four months’). 法光學壇 4: 19–39. Shih, Juo-hsüeh 釋若學 2000. Controversies over Buddhist Nuns. Oxford: Pali Text Society. Shih, Juo-hsüeh 釋若學 2003. ‘「式叉摩那」考’ (‘A study on ‘śikṣamāṇā’). 正觀﹕佛學研究雜誌 25: 5–70.

Sok, Zikwan 釈智観 1998. ‘律蔵に見られる沙弥と式叉摩那について’ (‘śrāmaṇera and śikṣamāṇā as Found in the Vinaya’). パーリ学仏教文化学 12: 61–6. Takakusu, J. 1896. A Record of the Buddhist Religion as Practised in India and the Malay Archipelago (AD 671–695). Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tieken, H. 2000. ‘Aśoka and the Buddhist Saṃgha: A Study of Aśoka’s Schism Edict and Minor Rock Edict I’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 63(1): 1–30. Yuyama, A. 1979. A Systematic Survey of Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.