(South Asia Research) Alice Collett - Women in Early Indian Buddhism - Comparative Textual Studies (2013, Oxford University Press)

Women in Early Indian Buddhism
SOUTH ASIA RESEARCH
SERIES EDITOR
Martha Selby
A Publication Series of
The University of Texas South Asia Institute
and
Oxford University Press
THE EARLY UPANISADS BETWEEN THE EMPIRES

Annotated Text and Translation Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE
Patrick Olivelle Patrick Olivelle
INDIAN EPIGRAPHY MANAGING MONKS

A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Administrators and Administrative
Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo- Roles in Indian Buddhist Monasticism
Aryan Languages Jonathan A. Silk
Richard Salomon
SIVA IN TROUBLE
A DICTIONARY OF OLD MARATHI Festivals and Rituals at the Pasupati-
S. G. Tulpule and Anne Feldhaus natha Temple of Deopatan
Axel Michaels
DONORS, DEVOTEES, AND
DAUGHTERS OF GOD A PRIEST’S GUIDE FOR THE
Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu GREAT FESTIVAL
Leslie C. Orr Aghorasiva’s Mahotsavavidhi
Richard H. Davis
JIMUTAVAHANA’S DAYABHAGA
The Hindu Law of Inheritance in Bengal DHARMA
Edited and Translated with an Intro- Its Early History in Law, Religion, and
duction and Notes by Ludo Rocher Narrative
Alf Hiltebeitel
A PORTRAIT OF THE HINDUS
Balthazar Solvyns & the European POETRY OF KINGS
Image of India 1740-1824 The Classical Hindi Literature of
Robert L. Hardgrave Mughal India
Allison Busch
MANU’S CODE OF LAW
A Critical Edition and Translation of THE RISE OF A FOLK GOD
the Manava-Dharmasastra Viṭṭhal of Pandharpur
Patrick Olivelle Ramchandra Chintaman Dhere
Translated by Anne Feldhaus
NECTAR GAZE AND POISON
BREATH WOMEN IN EARLY INDIAN
An Analysis and Translation of the Raj- BUDDHISM
asthani Oral Narrative of Devnarayan Comparative Textual Studies
Aditya Malik Edited by Alice Collett
Women
in Early Indian
Buddhism
Comparative Textual Studies
z
Edited by
ALICE COLLETT
1
1
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide.
Oxford New York

Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press

in the UK and certain other countries.
Published in the United States of America by

Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016
© Oxford University Press 2014

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior
permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law,
by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization.
Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights
Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above.
You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Women in early Indian Buddhism : comparative textual studies / [edited by] Alice Collett.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978–0–19–932604–4 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Women in Buddhism—Comparative
studies. 2. Buddhism—India—History. 3. Buddhism—Sacred books. 4. Buddhist
literature—History and criticism. I. Collett, Alice, editor of compilation.
BQ4570.W6W64 2013
294.3082’0934—dc23
2013004852
9780199326044
1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2
Printed in the United States of America

on acid-free paper
Contents
Contributors vii
A Note on Non-English Words x
Abbreviations xi
Introduction—alice collett 1
1. The Bajaur Collection of Kharoṣṭhī Manuscripts: Mahāprajāpatī
Gautamī and the Order of Nuns in a Gandhāran Version of the
Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra—ingo strauch 17
2. The British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments: Behind the Birch
Bark Curtain—timothy lenz 46
3. Pāli Vinaya: Reconceptualizing Female Sexuality in Early
Buddhism—alice collett 62
4. Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya:
The Intersection of Womanly Virtue and Buddhist
Asceticism—amy paris langenberg 80
5. Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-āgama: Outstanding Bhikkhunīs
in the Ekottarika-āgama—bhikkhu anālayo 97
6. Saṃyutta-nikāya/Saṃyukta-āgama: Defying Māra—Bhikkhunīs
in the Saṃyukta-āgama—bhikkhu anālayo 116
7. Therīgāthā: Nandā, Female Sibling of
Gotama Buddha—alice collett 140
8. Apadāna: Therī-apadāna: Wives of the Saints: Marriage and
Kamma in the Path to Arahantship—jonathan s. walters 160
vi Contents
9. Avadānaśataka: The Role of Brahmanical Marriage

in a Buddhist Text—karen muldoon-hules 192
10. Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā/Saddharmaratnāvaliya:
Women in Medieval South Asian Buddhist
Societies—ranjini obeyesekere 221
Bibliography 247
Index 267
Contributors
Bhikkhu Anālayo completed a Ph.D. on the Satipaṭṭhanasutta at the

University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, in 2000 and a habilitation re-
search through a comparative study of the Majjhima-nikāya in the
light of its Chinese, Sanskrit, and Tibetan parallels at the University
of Marburg in 2007. At present he is a professor of Buddhist Studies
at the Sri Lanka International Academy in Pallekele. He teaches at
the Center for Buddhist Studies of the University of Hamburg and
researches at the Dharma Drum Buddhist College in Taiwan. His
main research area is early Buddhism and in particular the topics
“Chinese Āgamas,” “Meditation,” and “Women in Buddhism.”
Alice Collett is currently a Fellow of the Arts and Humanities Council
of Great Britain (AHRC) and Lecturer at York St John University. She
received her M.A. from the University of Bristol in 1999 and her
Ph.D. from Cardiff University in 2004. Since then she has worked
in different universities in North America and the United Kingdom
and published several articles on women in early Indian Buddhism,
including two that look at reception history and review the modern
scholarly debate on the subject. She is currently working on a mono-
graph entitled Pāli Biographies of Buddhist Nuns, for which she is in
receipt of an Arts and Humanities Research Council award.
Amy Paris Langenberg is Instructor of Religion at Auburn Univer-
sity, where she also teaches in the Women’s Studies Program. She
holds a 2008 Ph.D. in Religious Studies from Columbia University
and has taught at Brown University, Brandeis University, and Dart-
mouth College. Her research interests include Buddhist law, the in-
tersection of aesthetics and religion, Buddhism and medicine, and
the gender history of Indian Buddhism. She is currently working on
a project concerning Indian Buddhist understandings, ritualization,
and critiques of human fertility.
viii Contributors
Timothy Lenz is an Acting Associate Professor in the Department of

Asian Languages and Literature at the University of Washington,
working on the Early Buddhist Manuscripts Project, headed by Rich-
ard Salomon. He received a B.A. in Music and Religion from West-
ern Michigan University (1979), pursued Asian Studies at the Uni-
versity of Michigan (1980–1987) and received an M.A. and Ph.D. in
Asian Languages and Literature from the University of Washington
(1994, 1999). His main research interests are in Sanskrit and Prakrit
language and literature, narrative traditions, Gandhāran Buddhist
language and literature, and canon formation and transmission.
He is the author of A New Version of the Gāndhārī Dharmapada and
a Collection of Previous Birth Stories: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Frag-
ments 16 + 25, Gandhāran Buddhist Texts 3 (2003) and Gandhāran
Avadānas: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 1–3 and 21 and Supple-
mentary Fragments A–C, Gandhāran Buddhist Texts 6 (2010).
Karen Muldoon-Hules finished her Ph.D. in Asian Languages and
Cultures at the University of California, Los Angeles, in 2011. Her re-
search focuses on north Indian Buddhist narrative literature and the
interaction of Buddhism and Hinduism in classical India, particu-
larly with regard to women and marriage. She is currently a visiting
lecturer for UCLA and an instructor for UCLA Extension.
Ranjini Obeyesekere obtained her Ph.D. in English Literature from
the University of Washington, Seattle, taught in the English Depart-
ments at the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, and after moving
to the United States, at the University of California, San Diego. For
the last ten years she was a Lecturer in Anthropology at Princeton
University where she taught courses in South Asian Literature and
Culture. She has published extensively in foreign and local journals,
and has translated Sinhala prose and poetry for anthologies. Her
published books include: A Treasure in the Forest and Other Stories,
1969; Sinhala Writing and the New Critics, 1974; A Grief Ago, 1991;
Jewels of the Doctrine: Translations from the Saddharmaratnāvaliya,
1991; Sri Lankan Theatre in a Time of Terror: Political Satire in a Per-
mitted Space, 1999; and Portraits of Buddhist Women: Stories from the
Saddharmaratnāvaliya, 2001. She is presently editor of a translation
of the 14th-century text of the Sinhala Jataka Stories of which the first
volume of two hundred stories is complete and awaiting publication.
Now retired, she lives in Kandy and Manhattan.
Contributors ix
Ingo Strauch (Lausanne) is Professor for Sanskrit and Buddhist Stud-

ies at the University of Lausanne. He studied Indology and Iranian
Languages at Humboldt University Berlin, Moscow State University,
and at Freie Universität Berlin, where he also received his Ph.D. de-
gree (2000) and his habilitation (2011). His research focuses on the
history and culture of Buddhism in South Asia, ancient and early me-
dieval Indian history and Indian epigraphy. Since 2005 he has been
working on early Buddhist manuscripts from Gandhāra.
Jonathan S. Walters is Professor of Religion, George Hudson Ball En-
dowed Chair of Humanities, and currently Director of Global Studies
at Whitman College, Walla Walla, Washington, USA. He earned his
B.A. in History and Religion at Bowdoin College (1983) and his A.M.
(1986) and Ph.D. (1992) in the History of Religions at the Univer-
sity of Chicago Divinity School. Prior to his appointment at Whit-
man he taught Pāli at Northwestern University (1987–88) and the
University of Chicago (1989–90), and Comparative Religions at the
University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka (1990–91). He is the author of
The History of Kelaniya (1996), Finding Buddhists in Global History
(1998), and more than twenty book chapters and journal articles on
various periods and issues in Indian and Sri Lankan Buddhist history
and culture, in addition to numerous reviews, encyclopedia entries,
and special projects. He is also the co-author (with Ronald Inden and
Daud Ali) of Querying the Medieval: Texts and the History of Practices
in South Asia (2000) and the co-editor (with John Holt and Jacob
Kinnard) of Constituting Communities: Theravāda Buddhism and the
Religious Cultures of South and Southeast Asia (2003). He is currently
translating the Pāli Apadāna into English verse, which will be the
first-ever complete translation of this important canonical text into a
Western language.
A Note on Non-English Words
within this volume, with the exception of names and titles, non-
English words from the Indo-Aryan language group used in the text have
been standardized to either Sanskrit or Pāli. Chapters 1, 2, 4, and 9 have
been standardized to Sanskrit, and the remainder to Pāli. When a non-
English word appears in the plural, it is italicized, as is standard practice,
but with a non-italicized -s to follow—for example, therīs. When non-
English words are used with other English grammatical conventions (-ic,
-ship, etc.), the word appears with diacritical marks but without italics—
for example, dharmaśāstric, arahantship.
Abbreviations
AN Aṅguttara-nikāya
AN-a Aṅguttara-nikāya commentary
Ap. Apadāna
Avś Avadānaśataka
Be Burmese edition
BJTS Buddha Jayanti Tripiṭaka Series
BL British Library
Ce Ceylonese edition
D Derge edition
DĀ Dirgha-āgama (T 1)
DN Dīgha-nikāya
Dhp-a Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā
Divy Divyāvadāna
DS Dharmasūtra
EĀ Ekottarika-āgama (T 125)
GS Gṛhyasūtra
It-a Ittivuttaka-aṭṭhakathā
MĀ Madhyama-āgama (T 26)
MBh Mahābhārata
MDh Mānava Dharmśāstra
MN Majjhima-nikāya
Mp Manorathapūraṇī
MŚS Mānava-Śrauta-Sūtra
Ps Papañcasūdanī
PTS Pali Text Society
Q Peking edition
SĀ Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99)
SĀ2 ‘other’ Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100)
Se Siamese edition
xii Abbreviations
Skt. Sanskrit
SHT Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden
Sn Sutta-nipāta
SN Saṃyutta-nikāya
Sp Samantapāsādikā
Spk Sāratthappakāsinī
SR Saddharmaratnāvaliya
ŚSG Śrāvakabhūmi Study Group
T Taishō (CBETA)
Tha Theragāthā
Thī Therīgāthā
Thī-a Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā
Vin. Vinayapiṭaka
Vism. Visuddhimagga
Women in Early Indian Buddhism
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction
Alice Collett
Like a lion [ freed] from a cage

she will achieve Awakening.1
the path of practice as taught in ancient India by Gotama Buddha was,

as far as the evidence allows us to judge, a path open to both women and
men. The texts of early Indian Buddhism indicate to us that women were
both lay followers of the Buddha and were also granted the right to ordain
and become nuns.2 Not only this, but they also report that certain women
were conferred the privilege to ordain other women, while others were
known as influential teachers of men and women alike and, as the inscrip-
tional evidence bears out, considered qualified as experts in certain as-
pects of Gotama’s dhamma. While all of this has come to be accepted by
modern Buddhist studies scholarship, it is imperative that we bear in
mind that, in actuality, for this to occur within an ancient religion prac-
ticed within traditional societies is really quite extraordinary. This is ap-
parent especially if we bear in mind the continued problems, experienced
by practitioners of many religions today, involved in challenging instilled
norms and practices and conferring the status of any high office upon
women.
In previous articles on women in Buddhism, I have discussed the his-
tory of modern scholarship on the topic (Collett 2006a; 2009a). I have
argued that, historically, there has been an overemphasis on certain texts,
1. . . . sīho va pañjaraṃ hetvā pāpuṇissati bodhiyaṃ. Yasodharā Ap. at II, 588, v. 56, tr. Walters,
chapter 8, page 187. Pāli references appear in this volume with a citation of either one or
some of the book/chapter/section/verse numbers, whichever is appropriate, followed by the
PTS edition volume and page number. In places in which the text is discussed by name or
text number, only the PTS reference is given.
2. The word “nun” is used throughout as a translation of bhikkhunī/bhikṣuṇī and equiva-
lents, and at other times as a translation of therī.
2 women in early indian buddhism
which has led to the prevalence of certain misapprehensions about women

in early Buddhism. It was through a consideration of this historical schol-
arly debate that the current project was conceived. My desire was to bring
together, in one collection, studies of a variety of Buddhist texts from early
Indian Buddhism to reiterate and reinforce a point I made in an earlier
article: that the simple fact that there is such a plethora of texts from early
Indian Buddhism in which women figure centrally should in itself speak
volumes. While I do not want to ignore the fact that there are negative
conceptualizations of and attitudes toward women expressed in early Bud-
dhist texts, neither do I want to occlude the opposite. For so many texts
that concern women—from an ancient religion that existed within tradi-
tional societies—to have been composed, collated, and preserved is cer-
tainly worthy of note. The simple fact that we have so many named nuns
and laywomen in the Buddhist textual record, as well as the preserved bi-
ographies of them, surely attests to a relatively positive situation for
women. There are some other positive representations of women and
female divinities from ancient worlds, for example, the oracle bone in-
scriptions from the Shang Dynasty period of Chinese history that tell us
there were venerated “mother” ancestors, and Indus Valley archeology and
texts of the Veda that inform us that in India itself goddesses were vener-
ated. But, with the possible exception of the revering of Egyptian queens,
there is no textual record of named women from an ancient civilization
that comes close to matching what we have in early Indian Buddhism.
Comparative Textual Study

The present volume includes chapters in which authors translate and
study texts, text fragments, or sections of texts that focus on women in
some way or another. Each chapter focuses on a particular text or genre of
texts, and the texts studied are either canonical, noncanonical, or com-
mentarial. The aim in providing comparative textual study of this selec-
tion of texts is to provide a range of analyses across genres and types of
texts—from vinayas, through canonical discourse and poetic verse to nar-
rative apadānas and avadānas and commentarial stories. The volume
offers comparative study of texts in five different languages—Gāndhārī,
Pāli, Sanskrit, Chinese, and Sinhala. Each chapter is a study and transla-
tion, with some chapters focusing more on translation and some more on
comparisons between parallel and similar texts, while others are more
discursive and thematic.
Introduction 3
A volume of comparative textual study such as this enables us to see

certain things. Comparisons between parallel versions of the same sutta,
such as in chapter 1, can enable a review of potential differences in local
beliefs and practices within different Buddhist communities. The region
of Gandhāra is one of the most discussed locations, as it offers not only
manuscripts’ fragments but also a rich art history. Further, the region of
Greater Gandhāra has been the location of many major archeological exca-
vations that focus on the early historic period in North India.3 In chapter 1,
Ingo Strauch presents a new Gāndhārī version of a sutta that features a list
of worthy recipients of gifts. A key feature of this new Gāndhārī version of
the sutta is the way in which nuns are represented on the fragment. The
sutta ends with a list of those who are worthy recipients of gifts, and the
Order of nuns is enumerated on this list. In most other versions, the Order
of nuns appears only once on the list but in the Gāndhārī version it seems
to appear twice. Unfortunately, the key phrase is lost, but as Strauch rightly
points out, there is really only one way to read the lacunae. The list of
worthy recipients usually begins with the Order of monks headed by the
Buddha. This part of the list appears to relate to a period during the life-
time of the Buddha. The next usual items on the list refer to the period
following the death of the Buddha, and here the Order of monks and Order
of nuns are each listed. However, there are two variations to this list. In the
Pāli version, the initial item on the list is “both Orders”—ubhatosaṅghe,
rather than the usual monks’ Order headed by the Buddha. In the Gāndhārī
this first item is followed by a second, for which only part of the phase
exists—this part is “as long as the Tathāgata is living, . . . headed by the
Buddha” (tr. Strauch chapter 1, page 38). Strauch has reconstructed this,
offering a fill to the lacunae such that the whole phrase reads “as long as
the Tathāgata is living, (one gives a gift to the Order of nuns) headed by the
Buddha.” This phrase, the Order of nuns headed by the Buddha, is not well
attested to in early Buddhist literature, unlike the male version, which is a
commonplace phrase. Therefore, the Gāndhārī fragment is an important
find, as it proffers a phrase about the nuns’ Order not known elsewhere. It
3. Writing in the early nineties, Fussman notes that, due to Marshall’s extensive excavations
of Taxila between 1913 and 1934, and various other more recent digs, Taxila is “the town in
ancient India we know the best” (1993, 83). Kenoyer, more recently, surveys some of the ar-
cheological projects completed since then—at Charsada, Gor Khutree-Peshawar, and Hund,
Attock district, as well as one outside Greater Gandhāra, in Akra, Bannu District (2006,
33–49).
is not possible to know what the original to the list looked like; however,
what is strikingly clear from this evidence is that the extant Gāndhārī ver-
sion puts a more positive gloss on the nuns’ position within the early com-
munity than do the versions of the list extant in other traditions.
As well as potentially enabling us to identify regional differences in
relation to how women are perceived, revered, included, excluded, or have
some agency in the redaction process, comparative textual study also en-
genders the possibility for consideration of differences between the early
Buddhist schools in their view of or attitudes to women. This can be seen
in the present volume by the inclusion of two chapters that look at vinaya
literature of two different schools. Both chapters begin with some discus-
sion of the structure of the extant nuns’ vinayas of each school, and a
considerable difference is revealed between the two. In relation to the San-
skrit vinaya studied in this volume, Amy Langenberg’s first concern is to
inform us of the unique characteristics of this Vinaya. She says:
The Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottarvāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya is remarkable in

that it appears have been edited in order to provide a comprehen-
sive set of rules, principles, and procedures for nuns, easily detach-
able from the monks’ vinaya (Roth 1970, xxix–xxxii; Hüsken 1997,
202–4). In it, the story of the founding of the nuns’ Order along
with an account of the eight grave duties (gurudharmas) are sup-
plied at the beginning of the text as an introduction, just before the
nuns’ prātimokṣa (the list of vows taken at higher ordination). In the
Pāli and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinayas, by contrast, these appear much
later with the miscellaneous (khandaka) rules. (chapter 4, page 81)
The structure of the extant Pāli nuns’ Vinaya has previously been the sub-
ject of some discussion. Unlike the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī
Vinaya, which can be easily detached from the monks’, the Pāli nuns’
Vinaya follows the monks’ sequentially and includes within it only the
rules that do not pertain to both communities. Horner, many years before
the publication of Roth’s edition of the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda
Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya, in her introduction to her translation of the Pāli Vinaya
suggests that the nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga may have, at some point, been sepa-
rate to that of the monks’ ([1942] 2004, 3: xxxi–xxxiii). She insightfully
adduces this from two things: first, a surviving fragment of a few lines
from a Sarvastivāda Bhikṣuṇī Prātimokṣa, and second, from the inclusion
of the indeclinable pi. The Sarvastivāda fragment, published by Finot and
Introduction 5
Huber (1913), “contains only the end of one article and the beginning of
another,” but these can be “easily identified” as saṅghādisesa rules for nuns
that in the Pāli, as they are also rules for monks, do not appear in the
nuns’ section. Horner’s second deduction is equally based upon slight
evidence. In the Pāli, the nuns have eight pārājikas, but only four are listed
in the nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga as the other four are shared with the monks.
However, in what is the first pārājika in the nuns’ section, the word pi
(“too, also”) appears in the phrase ayam pi pārājikā hoti, “she too becomes
one who is defeated.” The use of pi here suggests that this rule was not
initially the first in a list, but followed another, such that the use of “too”
was appropriate. Thus Horner suggests that this rule was formerly part of
a list, likely in the nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga, of the entire eight pārājikas to
which nuns should adhere.4
Whatever was originally the case with the Pāli Vinaya, the extant ver-
sions of two texts are organized quite differently. This may well be due to
differences in transmission and preservation processes, as well as tradi-
tional and/or regional differences. While it is not always possible to asso-
ciate texts with a specific region, the Mahāsāṅghika school is particularly
associated with the region of Magadha, and most especially with
Pāṭaliputra, as the Chinese pilgrim Făxiăn brought a manuscript of the
Mahāsāṅghika Vinaya back to China from Pāṭaliputra, from his travels in
Indian in the 5th century ce. This manuscript was translated into Chinese
and is believed to be the Chinese text still extant in the canon and trans-
lated by Hirakawa into English. The Sanskrit manuscript, however, dates
to a later time, the 12th century, although Roth notes that “both the ver-
sions are very closely related as far as the content and the sequence of the
cases is concerned” (Roth 1970, xll).
As well as the comparative textual study within this volume highlight-
ing potential regional or sectarian differences, other chapters illuminate
broader themes and issues in relation to women and raise challenges to
our understanding of pervasive social constructs. The theme of sexuality
is the focus of chapter 3, but also raised and discussed in chapters 2, 6,
and 10. This is a topic that has received detailed attention in the past, and
as I have noted elsewhere:
4. See the discussion in chapter 3 for more on the question of the structure of the extant Pāli
Vinaya, including a review of some other features of the extant bhikkhunīvibhaṅga that sup-
port Horner’s argument.
A general theory of female sexuality seemingly encased in early

Indian Buddhism is advanced along the lines that women are posi-
tioned as sexual predators, existing in their tempting and tempestu-
ous forms to lure men away from the good path through their
sometimes insatiable sexual appetites. Such a theory is advanced by
Gross, in order to critique it, by Sponberg, in order to nuance it, and
by Serinity Young, in order to develop it. (Collett 2009a, 108)5
Sponberg’s insightful nuancing of the early Buddhist view of female sexu-

ality, which he delineated based solely on Pāli sources, imbricates a di-
chotomy by which, on the one hand, an astute awareness of the psychol-
ogy of male desire is demonstrated, and on the other, a misogynous
psychopathology is revealed (Sponberg 1992, 20). In chapter 2 of this
volume, Lenz notes that within the Gandhāran avadāna collection, al-
though prostitutes (gaṇikās) do feature on some of the fragments, in a
story which tells of male desire we do not find the psychopathology under
which women are blamed, but rather an astute awareness of the problem
of desire. The translation and study in chapter 6 ventures the female per-
spective. Here, women are subject to attempted seduction but rebuke all
advances in favor of their practice. In chapter 10, by way of contrast, in the
later medieval setting, a similar type of psychopathology to that noted by
Sponberg can be discerned. In chapter 3, the very notion of women with
salacious sexual appetites as the underpinning of the social construct of
female sexuality in the early North Indian communities is challenged.
Through a study of certain rules of the Pāli Vinaya, which prohibit and
prescribe certain behaviors, female and male sexuality is reconceptualized.
Another issue raised by the volume is the question of female author-
ship. This is explored in chapter 8, the subject of which is the Apadāna. In
this chapter, Jonathan S. Walters compares the extent to which marriage
forms part of the present- and past-life narratives on the monks and nuns
who are the subject of the apadānas. In focusing on the emphasis on mar-
riage in certain apadānas of nuns, Walters identifies what he goes so far
5. See Sponberg (1992), Gross (1993) and Young (2004). In the above cited article (Collett
2009a) are references to other works that look at or touch upon aspects of female sexuality
(Horner[1930] 1990, Wilson 1996, etc.). Since then, John Powers (2009) has produced a
volume on masculinity in early Indian Buddhism, and while his discussion is an important
and valuable contribution to a little-studied side of the debate—male sexuality—
unfortunately, his views on women in early Indian Buddhism are rather one-sided (see my
review, Collett 2010).
Introduction 7
as to call a “feminist edge.”6 Placing the nuns’ apadānas as later than

those of the monks, Walters argues, convincingly, that the nuns’ narra-
tives can be read as an insistence that the agency of women be taken seri-
ously. The argument for female authorship has been dealt with skillfully
by Blackstone (2000) in relation to the Therīgāthā, and there are, in later
works, other indications of this—a woman is said to have handed down
the Itivuttaka for example (von Hinüber 1996, 47, It-a I, 29), and a
Mahāvihāran nun or nuns have been suggested as possible authors of the
Dīpavaṃsa (see Walters 2000, 114). With the inclusion of Walters’s chap-
ter in this volume, the very real possibility for female authorship is evoked
again. Related to this question is the question of women being written out
of the texts, written in, kept in, ignored at the point of composition or, as
in the Saṃyutta-nikāya/Saṃyukta-āgama example in this volume, re-
corded to prosper more than male counterparts. Horner([1930] 1990, 62)
made an appeal for consideration of the possibility, many years ago, that
monks edited women out of the Pāli canon, and the evidence such as
Strauch’s three versions of the list of worthy recipients reinvigorates such
debates.
Although certain of the texts studied in this volume can be regionally
and temporally located, others are extant as the result of both short- and
long-distance transmission and preservation processes. In this volume,
we see texts now extant in Sri Lanka and China that are the result of at-
tempted preservation processes, as well as others that are reformulations
of older texts, such as the medieval Sinhala Saddharmaratnāvaliya. In
comparing attempts at preservation, in the Pāli and Chinese projects,
Bhikkhu Anālayo highlights both details and broader structuring that
chart between the two, as well as elucidating difference. The comparisons
at times demonstrate a striking level of synchronicity between the Chi-
nese and Pāli versions, which appears to attest to the success of the pres-
ervation projects of past practitioners and scholars of the tradition, al-
though how we are to understand concord and divergence in the textual
record is a tricky business (see below). The comparisons between the Chi-
nese and Pāli also highlight what can happen if a text is left open, such as
with the Chinese version of the Ekottarika-āgama, and how additions that
favor a particular stance on women might be imbricated into the textual
record.
6. This picks up on a theme Walters began developing some years ago (cf. Walters 1994).
As well as discussion of attempts at preservation, the volume offers a

look at how texts can change over time when the emphasis is on adapta-
tion and reformation, rather than conservation. In the final chapter, Ran-
jini Obeyesekere considers a text that is at least twice, if not three times,
removed from the ancient Indian context. The Saddharmaratnāvaliya is a
medieval Sinhala work based upon the Dhammapada commentary and
perhaps also some earlier Sinhala commentaries, now lost. In contrast to
the motivation to preserve, the author of this text, either wittingly or un-
wittingly, reformulates the stories of early Buddhist women into a medi-
eval Sri Lankan context. Here, as Obeyesekere illuminates, the stories are
retold in a manner that often reveals aspects of medieval Sinhala culture.
Acculturation is clearly in evidence, which is in stark contrast to the rela-
tive paucity of acculturation revealed in the texts extant through Chinese
and Pāli preservation projects.
Although comparative textual analyses can provide the opportunity to
refresh our understanding of women in early Indian Buddhism, such an
enterprise is not without its difficulties. Reading texts as sources of history
is highly problematic, and with regard to the Buddhist texts such as those
under discussion in this volume, some of the most salient problems are
how to interpret similarity and difference. Some of the chapters in the
volume deal with parallel or similar versions of texts or sections of texts
belonging to different Buddhist and non-Buddhist traditions. Some of
these chapters, and others, also include assessment of different recen-
sions of a text within one tradition. Across the chapters various analyses of
similarity and difference are offered. Strauch assesses difference, in the
case study of his chapter, as an indicator of interpolation. Lenz uses paral-
lel and similar versions as reconstruction tools. Anālayo understands sim-
ilarity between Chinese and Pāli sources as an indication of the success of
preservation processes. Karen Muldoon-Hules, looking outside the Bud-
dhist tradition, identifies textual overlap in prescriptions on marriage rites
between Buddhism and Brahmanism.
A related cautionary note on reading texts is Schopen’s highlighting of
the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya passage that proffers something of a solution
to the perennial problem of fallible human memory (1997). Commenting
on oral transmission, the passage from the Kṣudrakavastu prescribes that
those who have feeble or imperfect memories can restore lacunae in their
knowledge with recourse to stock repository of people and place names.
While this is a conscious operation instilled with the knowledge of fallibility,
there are other axes at work in transmission, preservation, and adaptation
Introduction 9
processes. Chapter 7 of this volume warns against over-attachment to the

extant textual record as an index or representation of historical reality. The
potential problems highlighted in relation to the textual record in that chap-
ter suggest that, even though Buddhist traditions understand their records
as authentic, we must, at all time, in relation to any text, bear in mind that
any facet of any record could be fiction, fantasy, or fabrication. Further, the
textual records studied here are about a linguistic expression of religio-social
life, and in that articulation the texts are already once removed from his-
torical reality. Thus, texts need to be considered to be borne from what
Steven Collins has termed the “imaginaire” (2006), but I prefer to call the
“articulated world” of the complex authors.
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1
Strauch’s chapter, chapter 1 of the volume, is a translation and study of
Fragment 01 of the Bajaur collection. The Bajaur collection is a collection
of nineteen birch-bark fragments that were discovered in 1999 in the
Bajaur agency of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan. Frag-
ment 01 is the Gāndhārī version of sūtra known in the Pāli as the
Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta (MN 142), which also occurs in the Chinese
Madhyama-āgama with a title that corresponds to a Sanskrit title of
Gautamīsūtra. As Strauch notes in his chapter, “(o)n the basis of the or-
thography of the Bajaur version, the reconstructed Gāndhārī title can be
established as *Dhakṣinavibhaṃgasutra” (Chapter 1, page 18–19). Strauch
assesses the manuscript fragment in relation to both direct and indirect
parallels. He provides detailed editions and translations of sections of the
manuscript set alongside other versions of the sūtra. Also included is
some discussion of the key features of the Gāndhārī version that set it
apart from other versions—most notably the new itemization on the list of
worthy recipients as discussed above, which is pertinent to the role of the
nuns’ community within early Buddhist traditions.
Chapter 2
In chapter 2, Timothy Lenz compares British Library fragments of
Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts with parallel texts. The British Library collection
contains seven or eight different scrolls with numbered series of avadāna,
which collectively contain approximately fifty-two different stories. Five of
these concern women, and it is these five that Lenz provides editions of
and translates. These avadānas reveal only a partial story or skeleton ac-
count of each of the women, as their author assumes that his readers will
be familiar enough with the summarized stories to be able to restore from
memory all the rich twists and turns of plot that the summaries lack. Typ-
ically, the extant Gandhāran avadānas contained in the British Library col-
lection conclude with an abbreviation formula, such as “Expansion. All
should be according to the model” (see for example chapter 2, pages 51, 53
and 54) that expressly directs the reader to flush out the skeleton narrative
by means of their own command of Buddhist lore. In his chapter, Lenz
compares the Gāndhārī fragments with Sanskrit, Pāli, and Chinese texts,
and while noting that there are some parallels, he also notes that in rela-
tion to women the fragments only enable us to “sketch faceless women
who lack any personality or obvious attributes that would clearly suggest
some motive for their inclusion in one or more of the Gandhāran avadāna
texts.” Nonetheless, from his survey of these fragments, alongside re-
course to the potsherds inscription in which the British Library manu-
scripts were apparently found, he concludes that the situation for women
in Haḍḍa in the first half of the 1st century ce appears to have been a rela-
tively positive one.
Chapter 3
The Pāli Vinaya is the subject of chapter 3. In this chapter, I address the
topic of female sexuality and present a revalorization of what has come
to be understood as a pervasive social construct of female sexuality in
early Buddhism as evident formally through, on the whole, Pāli sources.
The prevailing view, similar to Brahmanical ideation, understands
female sexuality as voracious. Women are conceptualized with a sala-
cious sexual appetite, and portrayed (at worse) as viperous enticers of
men, seeking to drag them back, unwilling, from the true path. Through
an assessment of the saṅghādisesa rules of the Pāli Vinaya, some of the
most elucidating on sex, I argue that differences between the rules for
monks and those for nuns reveal divergent sexualities; here it is the
monks and men who attempt to pursue, cajole, and manipulate women
into having sex with them, rather than the other way around. In the
chapter, I concentrate on seven different saṅghādisesa rules to illustrate
my point, the most poignant of which—saṅghādisesa no. 4 for monks—is
translated. The origin story connected to this rule features the monk
Udāyin who, when a beautiful laywoman asks him what she might offer
Introduction 11
in way of dāna, rejects her offer of the usual prerequisites and instead
suggests that she offer herself for sex.
Chapter 4
Amy Langenberg’s chapter is a study of the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda
Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya. Langenberg’s focus in the chapter is on exploring the
question of the social identity of Buddhist nuns as expressed in the text,
and the way in which nuns appear to occupy a “frontier position at the
intersection of two well-established social identities, those of ‘virtuous
woman’ and ‘Buddhist ascetic’” (chapter 4, page 85). Langenberg argues
that as Buddhist nuns are “social hybrids,” defined neither by their sexual-
ity and fertility nor by relational status to male kin, it was necessary to
formulate a social and public identity for them such that they could con-
tinue to be considered women of virtue while the same time upholding
their renouncer status. She highlights these questions through detailed
study and translation of several rules—pācattika dharmas 79 and 84, and
bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇakas 15–18 and 31. Pācattika dharma 79 is an intervention
in a martial spat between a former husband and wife, now monk and nun,
and no. 84 is concerned with the domestic sphere, revealing a situation in
which nuns offer to do cleaning, carding, and spinning of raw cotton.
These two together, Langenberg notes, forbid nuns from playing the part
of wife or domestic worker. Bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇakas 15–18 are concerned with
menstruation, and in her elucidation of these rules, Langenberg reveals
how the provisions of these rules enable a management of the nuns’
bodily functions such that they continue to appear, to the external com-
munity, as pure, unsullied, and spotless. Lastly, bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 31
allows a nun to don the dress of a female householder—that is, to discard
the physical indicators of monasticism—only in appropriate circum-
stances, such as when she considers herself under threat.
Chapter 5
This chapter is the first of two that compare Chinese and Pāli sources. In
this chapter, Bhikkhu Anālayo focuses on the Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-
āgama. There are two complete Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-āgama texts
extant, one in Pāli and the other in Chinese, although the two versions
vary considerably. It has been established for some time that there are
several redactions of the text (see Waldschmidt 1980, 169–74) and as
noted by scholars previously, the extant Chinese Ekottarika-āgama shows
evidence of Mahāyāna influence and includes longer sūtras and sūtras of a

composite nature.7 In this volume, Anālayo provides a translation of the
lists of preeminent nuns in the Ekottarika-āgama and a comparison
between this and the Pāli version. The number of outstanding nuns listed
in the Ekottarika-āgama is far greater than in the Pāli. The Ekottarika-
āgama records fifty-one preeminent nuns, while the Pāli has only thirteen.
Qualities identified, sanctioned, and eulogized range from broad ethical
characteristics, through mental ability or agility to teaching and other ben-
eficial activities. As Anālayo notes in his conclusion, the nuns named on
each list are each noted as foremost of all nuns, which presupposed that
many other nuns also exemplify such noble characteristics.
Chapter 6
There is extant a complete version of the Saṃyutta-nikāya in Pāli and two
substantial versions in Chinese. As well as this, and some other partial
fragments in Chinese, as Glass notes (2007, 26) in his volume on a
Gāndhārī fragment from the Senior collection, “we have other sūtras—in
sets, individually, or as fragments—belonging to the Saṃyuktāgama class
in Sanskrit, Gāndhārī, and Tibetan.”8 In this volume, the bhikṣuṇīsaṃyukta
in the complete Saṃyukta-āgama, Taishō 99, is translated. Bingenheimer
(2008; 2011) has previously translated the bhikṣuṇīsaṃyukta from the par-
tially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama, Taishō 100. The short discourses that
make up the bhikkhunīsaṃyutta are brief vignettes about nuns in their daily
lives. The picture painted of the nuns here is very positive, and as Anālayo
comments in his conclusion, in considering the strength of responses to
adversity between the genders, “the present set of discourses on challenges
to Māra is a clear instance where the bhikkhunīs are presented in a more
favorable light than their male counterparts” (chapter 6, page 137).
Chapter 7
The focus in this chapter is the relationship between the Therīgāthā and the
Pāli narrative biographical tradition. This relationship is explored through
an analysis of Therīgāthā verses and biographies of nuns with the name
7. See Allon (2001, 9–22) for a detailed study of extant Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-āgama

texts and fragments.
8. See Glass (2007, 26–33) for a detailed discussion of these.
Introduction 13
Nandā. An intimate relationship between the Therīgāthā and subsequent

biographies has been long established, and in this chapter I problematize
the relationship. The extant Therīgāthā has two sets of verses on nuns called
Nandā, and the first verse of each is identical. Beginning with the two sets
of verses, I argue that this possible transmission error has been valorized by
the tradition, which adheres to the inviolability of the canon, as verses of two
historical disciples called Nandā and from this interpretation two accounts,
still just discernible, for two separate Nandās have been inaugurated and
instilled into the Pāli textual tradition. One Nandā is the female (half-)sibling
of Gotama Buddha; the other is the daughter of a Sakyan called Khema.
Chapter 8
The subject of this chapter is the Apadāna, a text of biographies (or hagi-
ographies), based on the Theragāthā and Therīgāthā. The Apadāna in-
cludes past-life stories, and here we find accounts of women practicing in
the Buddhist past. Within the community of each of the previous Buddhas
mentioned in the text are female disciples. Thus, women were not only
allowed to commit to their practice and ordain within the community of
Gotama Buddha, but this also happened during the remote past, during
the aeons of previous Buddhas. Within his chapter, Walters takes up this
idea—of the text representing an attempt to establish and “write” women
into the Buddhist past—as the starting point for his discussion. Due to
extant colophons and the content of the Therī-Apadāna, Walters suggests
that it was composed in response to the monks’ Therāpadāna. Focusing
particularly on the apadānas of two former wives—Bhaddā-Kāpilāni and
Yasodharā—Walters argues that the nuns’ narratives attempt to reinsert
these women into the past-life narratives of their former husbands, re-
spectively Mahā-Kassapa and Gotama Buddha. Controversially, Walters
suggests a possible reading for Yasodharā’s apadāna as “a bold claim that
she has enabled the Buddha’s Buddhahood” (chapter 8, page 188). Walters
asserts that the content of the nuns’ biographies illuminates an insistence
that women are included in the narrative of Buddhist history and practice
that forms the bedrock of the monks’ biographies.
Chapter 9
This chapter also focuses on marriage. In this chapter, Karen Muldoon-
Hules discusses how “the Brahmanical system of marriage in northern
India was widespread, well-entrenched, and at least partially entwined

with local customs, making it probably difficult to challenge” (chapter 9,
page 212). She sets her discussion around five conversion stories in the
Avadānaśataka, in which women, rather than choosing a marriage partner
for themselves, chose the Buddha as “bridegroom” and renunciation as
their status. Muldoon-Hules highlights how Brahmanical marriage rites
were ironically used to facilitate Buddhist female renunciation in a series
of stories. This chapter examines the evidence for marital rites in early
Buddhism and suggests that Brahmanical marriage rites were used by
early Buddhists, as they seem to have been by Jains, and that Buddhist
monks participated in but did not officiate at these rites. Concluding with
some reflections on why there was so much emphasis in the Avadānaśataka
placed on the need for women to evade marriage, Muldoon-Hules situates
this discourse within a social milieu in which, due to changes to the
āśrama system, there may have been an increased demand for young, fer-
tile brides.
Chapter 10
The final chapter of this volume deals with commentarial literature and
a later text based upon a commentary. Buddhaghosa compiled commen-
taries relating to many major works of the Pāli canon, and included in
chapter 10 are extracts from and a discussion of a commentary, appar-
ently authored by him, on the well-known Dhammapada. Some of the
biographies and stories of women contained within commentaries of
Buddhaghosa and other well-known Pāli commentators can be sourced
from earlier literature. Some were drawn from the Pāli canon, from the
Apadāna, for example, while Buddhaghosa himself says that he relied in
part on older Sinhala commentaries, which are no longer extant, as Ran-
jini Obeyesekere notes. Certain of these commentarial stories about
women appeared to capture the imagination of the Sinhalese Buddhists
and were used as a basis for narratives within later Sinhala works. In her
chapter, Obeyesekere compares the Pāli stories from the Dhammapada
commentary with their counterparts in a 13th-century Sinhala text, the
Saddharmaratnāvaliya. In this chapter, as noted above, Obeyesekere
notes similarities and differences between the texts, composed in differ-
ent time periods, in different cultural contexts, and with varying agen-
das. The focus in the Saddharmaratnāvaliya is on adaptation, but Obeye-
sekere notes that issues such as acknowledgement of female intellect
Introduction 15
and education appear to have remained fairly static between the early
and later text. Other issues, such as the option of female seclusion, while
evident in early texts, appear to have become antiquated by the medieval
period. Elsewhere, in looking at the issue of divorce and remarriage, Ob-
eyesekere discerns a range of possible arrangements evident in the re-
framing of the narrative topography between the different stages of tex-
tual transmission.
New Perspectives
It is my hope that the present volume provides some fresh perspectives on
women in early Indian Buddhism through this standpoint of comparative
analysis. In the first two chapters, which deal with material that can be
dated and located within a specific region, we have an opportunity to
assess potential regional views/attitudes or modalities in relation to
women. Although both sets of fragments from both collections represent
only a paucity of evidence, from what is extant we can begin to consider
that perhaps women faired well in Gandhāran Buddhism. If the Bajaur
fragment attests to women writing themselves back into the picture, as
can be seen to happen from Walters’s assessment of the nuns’ apadānas,
this is significant. Nonetheless, even a more conservative appraisal of the
Gandhāran manuscript fragments attests to a positive situation for
women, in the articulated world of the texts at least.
This relatively positive situation identified in the Gandhāran manu-
scripts sets the scene for the rest of the volume. Although in the vinaya
rules we do come across women who appear to act out a pronounced, and
less than healthy, sexuality, within the broad purview of the rules studied
in chapter 3, some of the most salient in relation to sexuality, the blanket
application of a salacious social construct on female sexuality can be tem-
pered. Continuing in the same vein, of a re-ordering of our understanding
of women in early mainstream Buddhism, questions of the need to invent
a social identity for nuns emerge and sit alongside texts that establish (and
reestablish and maintain through the transmission and preservation pro-
cess) early nuns as an exalted and revered foundation for the continuing
nuns’ saṅgha. Further to this, in both the Saṃyutta-nikāya/Saṃyukta-
āgama and the Apadāna, we find discourses and narratives on women
who overcome adversity to flourish, and who through their stories then
act as exemplars for the community. The majority of the time, we do not
know who the authors of our Buddhist corpora are, but implicit in Walters’s
assessment, as has been clearly documented by Blackstone previously, the

content of some texts dictates that we take seriously the possibility of
female authorship and remain prepared to continue to bear in mind the
option that women had some agency and control within the composition
and transmission process. It is only when we come to consider texts two
or three times removed from the early Indian context, in medieval Sri
Lanka, that we encounter negative attitudes toward women being ex-
pressed. While it cannot be denied that there are misogynist statements
and portrayals of women in the texts we associate with early Indian Bud-
dhism, this volume attests to the strength of the opposite—there is a great
deal that is positive as well.
In the past decades there has been a resurgence of interest in the study
of women in early Indian Buddhism. During this period, many articles
have been published on the subject, and it has been addressed within a
range of books, such as those of Gregory Schopen who, while nuns are not
the sole focus of his study, writes prolifically on nuns in the Mūlasarvāstivāda
Vinaya. Nonetheless, a work such as the current volume, with its more
intent focus on women and nuns in early Indian Buddhism, will hopefully
add to the developing array of rich and thought-provoking works on the
subject, and with the focus here on the positive within the textual record,
lay to rest some of the old assumptions that women in early Indian main-
stream Buddhism didn’t fair so well.
1
The Bajaur Collection of Kharoṣ ṭ hıˉ
Manuscripts
mah āprajāpatī gautamī and the order
of nuns in a gandh āran version
of the DAKṢ I Ṇ ĀVIBHAṄ GASŪTRA
Ingo Strauch
the position of women in early Buddhism is closely connected with

the question of the existence and role of the nuns’ Order within the four-
fold system of the Buddhist community consisting of monks, nuns,
laymen, and laywomen. Oskar von Hinüber (2008) has recently argued
that a nuns’ Order probably did not exist during the Buddha’s lifetime.
Von Hinüber says that, if we consider
the very rare presence of individual nuns in the suttanta texts and
the astonishing absence of any suttanta mentioning the Buddha
talking to an individual nun directly and personally, it is hard to
avoid the conclusion that during the lifetime of the Buddha the
Buddhists had an order of monks only and that is exactly the situa-
tion as reflected in the suttantas. (2008, 24)
Only few months later, this view was categorically refuted by Anālayo, who
criticized von Hinüber’s methodological approach, which is mainly based
on the Pāli Nikāya texts. He writes:
in order to reach conclusions about the history of early Buddhism,

a study of all relevant sources is an indispensable requirement. For
conclusions of such significance, attempting a major revision of the
history of early Buddhism, it is not possible to restrict one’s re-
search to the four Pāli Nikāyas alone . . . Given that we do not pos-
sess archaeological or epigraphic material on the foundation of the
order of nuns and thus have to rely entirely on textual records—
with all the problems that this entails—it is all the more imperative
that the extant textual records are used in as comprehensive a
manner as possible. (2008, 114)
In order to address this imperative expressed by Anālayo, that the extant

textual record be utilized in “as comprehensive a manner as possible,” it is
the aim of the present chapter to introduce a new version of a story that is
closely connected with the foundation of the nuns’ Order and has been
discussed by von Hinüber and Anālayo in the cited studies. This new ver-
sion is part of the “Bajaur Collection of Kharoṣṭhī Manuscripts” being
studied in the framework of a project financed by the German Research
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) at Freie Universität
Berlin. This collection of nineteen birch-bark manuscripts was discovered
in 1999 in the Bajaur agency of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province (former
North-Western Frontier Province) of Pakistan. It comprises texts from a
wide range of Buddhist genres—including vinaya, āgama and Mahāyāna
texts—which can be dated on palaeographic grounds to the first two cen-
turies of the Common Era.1 One of the manuscripts (= BajC 1) contains the
hitherto unknown Gāndhārī version of the sūtra, which is known in the
Theravāda Pāli canon as Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta (MN 142). The Chinese
Madhyama-āgama (T 26) lists this text as no. 180 under the title 瞿曇彌經
qútánmí jīng corresponding to the Sanskrit title Gautamīsūtra. Although
both titles were obviously known in various traditions, the present chapter
will use the Sanskrit form Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra when referring to the tex-
tual tradition of this sūtra in general.2 On the basis of the orthography of
1. For more information regarding the Bajaur Collection see Strauch (2007/8) and Strauch
(2008). A more comprehensive evaluation of the contents of the Bajaur Collection in com-
parison with Buddhist Gāndhārī literature as a whole will soon be available—see Falk and
Strauch (forthcoming).
2. For a discussion of the various titles see Anālayo (2011b, 810, fn. 261).
Bajaur Collection of Kharoṣṭhı̄ Manuscripts 19
the Bajaur version, the reconstructed Gāndhārī title can be established as

*Dhakṣinavibhaṃgasutra.
The sūtra’s connection to the foundation of the Order of nuns is two-
fold. First, its narrative part refers to Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī, who tries to
offer the Buddha a robe. As is well known, the figure of the Buddha’s aunt
and foster mother Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī (Pāli Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī) is
also closely connected with the foundation of the Order of nuns. The way
these two incidents—the robe gift and the foundation of the nuns’ Order—
are described is quite similar in both stories and offers a number of op-
portunities for comparison. The second association of the sūtra with the
Order of nuns is found in the dogmatic part of the text. After refusing
Mahāprajāpatī’s robe offer, the Buddha presents several lists that catego-
rize and qualify various kinds of gifts—hence the title of the Pāli sutta:
dakkhiṇāvibhaṅga, “analysis of offerings.” Among the possible recipients
of gifts the Buddha also lists the bhikṣuṇīsaṅgha, “Order of nuns.” This
inclusion of the bhikṣuṇīsaṅgha on this list has been a topic of controversy
among scholars in the past, even prior to the most recent articles by von
Hinüber and Anālayo. In this chapter, I will introduce the Gāndhārī ver-
sion of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra. The main focus of this chapter will be a
comparison of this version with its numerous parallels from other Bud-
dhist traditions, including the Chinese, Tibetan, and Pāli canons. Based
on this comparative analysis, I will conclude with an assessment of how
this new piece of evidence contributes to the debate on the foundation of
the Order of nuns.
1. The manuscript
The sūtra is preserved on the obverse of a relatively large birch-bark scroll
that is now kept in three different glass frames. Its last line is written on
the reverse of the scroll and thus shows that the end of the birch-bark
manuscript is completely preserved and that this sūtra was the only text
inscribed on it. Another scribe used the empty reverse to add another text
in large, carelessly written letters. Although some portions of the original
scroll are missing, its state of preservation is generally good (see Fig. 1.1)
and allows the reconstruction of large portions of the text. With the help
of image processing it is possible to establish the original size of the scroll,
which would have been 17.5 cm in width and 70.5 cm in length. The text
is written in 80 lines of about 42 akṣaras.
figure 1.1 Part of the scroll containing the Gāndhārī version of the
Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra (BajC 1) © The Bajaur Collection Project, Freie Universität
Berlin.
2. The structure of the text

Unfortunately, the beginning part of the text including the nidāna is lost.
Thus we cannot say when and where the reported events took place. The
only word of the nidāna portion that survived is bhagavato (§ 0). The next
section narrates that the Buddha is approached by Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī,
who wants to offer him a robe. Again this passage is preserved only in
fragments, but it is obvious that the Buddha refuses this gift and asks
Mahāprajāpatī to direct her present to the Buddhist saṅgha as a whole (§ 1).
After Mahāprajāpatī repeated her request two more times and received
the same response, Ānanda intervenes. He reminds the Buddha of the
services done by Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī to him and asks him to accept
her gift (§ 2.1). Although the Buddha acknowledges these services, he
points to his own services done for Mahāprajāpatī and adds a passage that
generalizes this reply by listing a number of persons to whom one owes a
debt due to their merits for one’s own spiritual biography (§ 2.1 + § 3). This
part of the sūtra forms the narrative core of the story.
Following this dialogue between the Buddha and Mahāprajāpatī, and
the intervention by Ānanda, the Buddha expounds two different lists,
which form the dogmatical core of the sūtra and are not particularly closely
related to the described event. The first of these lists enumerates fourteen
individual offerings, called in the Gāndhārī paḍipogaliga dhakṣina. The list
is arranged hierarchically and starts from gifts to animals, classified here
as the lowest recipients, and progresses upward in a chain of worthy re-
cipients that culminate in the Tathāgata Samyaksaṃbuddha (§ 4). A par-
allel list follows that describes the fruits of the respective gifts. This list is
arranged in the same sequence, beginning from gifts to animals (§ 5).
Both lists of individual offerings are followed by a list of gifts to the Bud-
dhist Order. The Gāndhārī text calls them saṃghagada dhakṣina. Seven
different items are mentioned (§ 6). This list is supplemented by a passage
that dwells on the merits that are to be expected from the offering of each
type of gift (§ 7). The Buddha’s instruction is concluded by a fourfold list,
which contains the kinds of purifying a gift (dhakṣinapariśodhi) (§ 8). This
is also the topic of the five gāthās, which conclude the whole sūtra (§ 9).
The five verses of the Gāndhārī version are by and large identical with
those of the Pāli text. If the sūtra is divided into parts, the Gāndhārī version
contains the following structural elements:
0. nidāna
1. The Buddha refuses to accept Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī’s gift
2. Ānanda’s intervention
2.1. The service done by Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī
2.2. The service done by the Buddha
3. The persons to whom one owes a debt
4. The fourteen individual gifts
5. The fruits of the fourteen individual gifts
6. The seven gifts directed to the Order
7. The fruits of the seven gifts directed to the Order
8. The four kinds of purifying a gift

9. The gāthās
3. The parallels
In general terms, the parallels of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra can be divided
into two major groups, which I call direct and indirect parallels. The direct
parallels comprise texts that represent complete or incomplete versions of
the same text. The indirect parallels consist of different sorts of texts,
which show more or less identical textual passages, which are due to a
parallelism in content or in structure. A complete survey of the parallels
with the exact bibliographical data will be provided in Table 1.1, below.3
Indirect parallels
The largest group of indirect parallels is associated with the foundation of
the nuns’ Order. This event is not only described in the vinayas of several
schools, but is also the subject of an individual sūtra which is usually
named Gautamīsūtra and is found in the Pāli Aṅguttara-nikāya
(Gotamīsutta) and the Chinese Madhyama-āgama (T 26, no. 116).4 The
narrative included in a second independent Chinese translation of a dis-
course (T 60) is, according to Analāyo, “in most aspects so similar to that
of MĀ 116 that it seems safe to conclude that this version stems from a
closely related line of transmission” (2011c, 270, fn. 8). The parallel pas-
sages in the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra and the texts describing the foundation
of the Order of nuns usually cover the initial part (§§ 1–3) of our sūtra.5 The
3. The parallels and their main bibliographical data as well as references to their translations
are collected and described in the respective chapter of Anālayo’s outstanding work, “A Com-
parative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya” (2011b, 810–19, 1054). Anālayo’s analysis of the
Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta also considers the Gāndhārī version provided by the author in form
of a preliminary transliteration. The vinaya parallels are found in Heirman (2001) and
Anālayo (2011c). These three works form the basis of the bibliographical survey subsumed
in the table, especially with regard to the Chinese and Tibetan parallels. For a comprehen-
sive collection of parallels see now also Chung and Fukita (2011, 153–54).
4. The text of T 26, 116 is translated by Anālayo (2011c, 272–87).
5. The various texts concerning the foundation of the nuns’ order have been analysed by
Ann Heirman (2001) and Anālayo (2011c). I want to thank Bhikkhu Anālayo, who gener-
ously provided me with the interlinear translations of most of the vinaya passages.
report of the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya (T 1421) occupies a special position

among them, in that it incorporates the robe gift into the description of
events leading to the foundation of the nuns’ Order, and thus combines
both episodes in one narrative thread. This is clearly a secondary develop-
ment based on the structural parallelism of both narratives.
A second group of indirect parallels is related to the so-called
Maitreyavyākaraṇa tradition (cf. Lamotte 1988, 699–710). In some of
them the intended robe gift of Mahāprajāpatī is reinterpreted within the
framework of the prediction of the future Buddha Maitreya. In most of the
versions Śākyamuni hands over the robe, which had just been given by
Mahāprajāpatī to the saṅgha, to Maitreya.6 The golden robe is perceived
here as a sign of his future Buddhahood.7 Among these texts the Maitri-
simit deserves special attention.8 Due to the thematic parallelism its
Uighur version contains almost the entire Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra in-
cluding the dogmatical part with the various lists.
Direct parallels
Two of the direct parallels of our sūtra are part of a Madhyama-āgama or
Majjhima-nikāya. The Majjhima-nikāya of the Theravāda canon contains
this sūtra under the title Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta in its vibhaṅgavarga sec-
tion (MN 142).9 The Chinese Madhyama-āgama, which was translated by
the Kashmirian monk Gautama Saṅghadeva at the end of the 4th century,
calls the same text 瞿曇彌經 qútánmí jīng, corresponding to the Sanskrit
Gautamīsūtra (MĀ 180). Currently, scholars attribute the Chinese
Madhyama-āgama to the Sarvāstivāda school of Buddhism (cf. Anālayo
2011b, 7, fn. 64. For an opposite view see Chung & Fukita 2011, 13–34).
6. A variant of this Maitreyan version of the robe gift episode is found in the individual
discourses T 202 and T 203. Here after the Buddha’s refusal Mahāprajāpatī continues to
look for a recipient of her gift among the monks of the saṅgha. Nobody dares to accept it,
until Maitreya finally took it (Lamotte 1988, 704; Anālayo 2011b, 812, fn. 268).
7. The works, which contain this story, are listed and shortly described by Lamotte (1988,
702–705). For the role of the robe gift episode in the Maitreyavyākaraṇa context see also Silk
(2003, 195–97).
8. As shown by Hüsken (2000, 46, fn. 9) and Anālayo (2008, 106–8), the Maitrisimit ac-
count does not refer to the foundation of the Order of nuns, but reports the robe gift epi-
sode, which is described in the different versions of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra.
9. The story of Mahāprajāpatī’s robe gift is also referred to in the paracanonical Milindapa-
ñha (ed. Trenckner 1962, 240f., tr. Horner 1964, 44–46).
The Madhyama-āgama version, however, is not the only Chinese text

among the direct parallels. Another Chinese version is preserved as an
independent sūtra (T 84). It is said to have been translated between 980
and 1000 by Dānapāla from Uḍḍiyāna (Swat). Its title 分別布施經 (“Sūtra
on the division of gifts”) corresponds to the Pāli title of this sūtra (cf. Tsu-
kamoto 1985, 1097).10 A fourth, rather valuable direct parallel is part of
Śamathadeva’s commentary on the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya, the Upāyikā
Abhidharmakośaṭīkā, extant today only in the Tibetan translation of Jayaśrī.
According to Schmithausen (1987, 338–343), Śamathadeva’s quotations
are more closely related to parallels from Mūlasarvāstivāda texts of the
Chinese Saṃyukta-āgama than to texts of the Sarvāstivāda Madhyama-
āgama. It can therefore be suggested that Śamathadeva quoted from a
Madhyama-āgama of the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition (cf. Strauch 2008:
118–119).
These parallels from translated canonical collections can be supple-
mented by two fragments from Sanskrit traditions. The first of them is
part of the Berlin Turfan Collection. It consists of a single folio (SHT III
979, Waldschmidt 1971, 241–242). The preserved text, which corresponds
to parts of §§ 2 and 3 of the Gāndhārī sūtra, is largely parallel to the version
of the Chinese Madhyama-āgama (T 26) and can therefore probably be
attributed to the Sarvāstivādins.11 The second Sanskrit version was identi-
fied by Peter Skilling among the manuscript fragments of the Schøyen
Collection (MS 2379/15, yet unpublished). Again, it consists of only a
small part of one folio. Its preserved text corresponds to a later part of the
Gāndhārī sūtra, namely to parts of §§ 3–8. The school affiliation of this ver-
sion is uncertain. It is possible that it belongs to a Mahāsāṅghika-
(Lokottaravāda) tradition, as the vinaya texts that can be identified among
the Schøyen fragments can be attributed to this school (Chung 2002;
2006; Karashima 2000; 2002; 2006). However, the school affiliation of
the āgama material from the Schøyen Collection is less clear, although the
possibility of a Mahāsāṅghika affiliation cannot be ruled out (Hartmann
2002, 1–2.; 2004, 127).
According to this classification, the parallels and their school-affiliation
(if uncertain, preceded by *) can be subsumed in the following table
(Table 1.1):
10. Both Chinese versions (T 26, 180 and T 84) were translated by Tsukamoto (1985, 1093–
1100).
11. The exact parallel to the Chinese MĀ is: T 26, 722a4–19 (Chung and Fukita 2011, 153).
Table 1.1 The parallels of the Gāndhārī *Dhakṣinavibhaṃgasutra
School affiliation Indirect Direct
Maitreya Foundation of the Order of nuns
Vinaya Non-Vinaya
Theravāda Pāli: Vinayavibhaṅga Pāli: Aṅguttara-nikāya Pāli: Majjhima-nikāya

Vin. II 253–256 AN 8,51 (Gotamīsutta) MN 142 (Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta)
= IV 274–279 = III 253–258
Mahīśāsaka Chin.: Vinaya (T 1421)
185b19–186a28
Mahāsāṅghika Chin.: Vinaya (T 1425) *Skt.: Schøyen fragment
471a25–476b11 2379/15 (unpublished)
Mahāsāṅghika- Skt. Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya
Lokottaravādins ed. Roth (1970, 4–21)
Dharmaguptaka Chin.: Vinaya (T 1428)
922c7–923c12
Sarvāstivāda - Maitrisimit Chin.: Vinaya (T 1435) *Chin.:Madhyamāgama *Chin.:Madhyamāgama
Vaibhāṣika Uighur: 293b29–c9, 345b29–c22, T 26 (no. 116): 瞿曇彌經 T 26 (no. 180): 瞿曇彌經
ed. Geng (1988, 191–209), 410a10–11 qútánmí jīng qútánmí jīng (Sūtra on Gautamī):
ed. Tekin (1980, 69–70) Skt. Bhikṣuṇī-Karmavācanā (Sūtra on Gautamī): 721c–723a
Tokharian: ed. Schmidt (1993, 242–8) 605a8–607b16 *Skt.: Turfan fragment
ed. Xianlin (1998, 169–89) SHT III 979
ed. Waldschmidt (1971, 241–2)
(continued)
Table 1.1 (continued)
School affiliation Indirect Direct
Maitreya Foundation of the Order of nuns
Vinaya Non-Vinaya
Mūlasarvāstivāda Chin.: Vinaya (T 1451) *Tib.:Śamathadeva:

350b10–351c2 Abhidharmakośaṭīkā
Tib.:Vinaya D (4094) ju 254a1–257a6
D 6 da 100a4–104b5 Q (5595) tu 289a8–293a3
Q 1035 ne 97a7–101b8
(Haimavata?) Chin.: Vinayamātrkā (T 1463)
̊
803a22–b24
? Chin. T 60
856a6–858a6
佛瞿曇彌記果經
“discourse spoken by
the Buddha [in reply to]
Gotamī’s declaration
regarding the fruits [of
recluse-ship]” (Anālayo
2011c, 269, fn. 8)
? Chin.: T 84分別布施經
“Sūtra on the division of gifts”:
903b–904b
In order to clarify how the position of the Gāndhārī version fits within
these various textual traditions I will next examine two significant pas-
sages of the sūtra. The first of them is taken from the narrative part, which
has a number of parallels in the vinaya material and can therefore help to
evaluate and place the Gāndhārī version within the group of the indirect
parallels and also ascertain its relation to the various reports about the
foundation of the Order of nuns. The second passage is taken from the
dogmatic core of the sūtra and will more precisely define its position
among the direct parallels. In the final section of the chapter, to conclude,
special attention will be given to an assessment of the delineation of the
nuns’ Order in the Gāndhārī version, as compared to other versions of
the text.
4. The suˉtra’s narrative: Mahaˉprajaˉpatıˉ ’s request

The narrative part of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra and the introductory por-
tion of the ordination story are largely parallel. They share the following
elements:
1. Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī approaches the Buddha with a request. This is

repeated three times and three times refused by the Buddha.
2. Ānanda intervenes. In the case of the gift of the robe episode the
Buddha maintains his position. With regard to the request for ordina-
tion he eventually agrees.
The argument used by Ānanda to “convince” the Buddha and his high-
lighting of the “mother service” done by Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī12 is
largely identical in all versions, which seem to go back to a common core.13
In the Pāli versions it is expressed with the phrase:
12. This subject has been extensively discussed—on the basis of texts in Indian languages—
by Ohnuma (2006).
13. According to the structural analysis provided by Ann Heirman (2001, 279–81) the par-
allel text portion of the versions of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra and that of the versions of the
ordination story as contained in the vinayas and the Gautamīsūtra would correspond to sec-
tions (c) “Ānanda acts as a mediator” and (e) “Ānanda refers to the extensive merit of
Mahāprajāpatī towards the Buddha. She nursed and raised him.”
1. Ordination story: Cullavagga (Vinaya-piṭaka)
bahūpakārā bhante mahāpajāpatī gotamī bhagavato mātucchā

āpādikā posikā khīrassa dāyikā bhagavantaṃ janettiyā kālakatāya
thaññaṃ pāyesi (Vin II 254–55)14
2. Robe gift episode: Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta (Majjhima-nikāya)
bahūpakārā bhante, mahāpajāpatī gotamī bhagavato mātucchā

āpādikā posikā khīrassa dāyikā, bhagavantaṃ janettiyā kālakatāya
thaññaṃ pāyesi (MN III 253)
Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī has been very helpful to the Blessed One,

venerable sir. As his mother’s sister, she was his nurse, his foster
mother, the one who gave him milk. She suckled the Blessed One,
when his own mother died. (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1102)
This portion—albeit incompletely preserved—is also part of the Gāndhārī

text (§ 2.1):
///(mahaprayava)[di] go[dami] madu-janitri-kalagada[e] avaia

po[ṣi](g̱ a)///(BajC 1, line 7)
Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī (was) the nurse who nourished (him) when

the mother who gave (him) birth had passed away.
In most of the parallels, this argument of Ānanda is countered by the

Buddha with a reference to his own services to Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī.
As noted by Anālayo:
According to the main Chinese and Tibetan parallels to the

Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta, in reply to his reminder by Ānanda the
Buddha explained that he also had benefited Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī,
as due to him she had gone for refuge and taken the five precepts,
was free from doubt in the three jewels, and had acquired insight
into the four noble truths. This listing of benefits implies that she
had become a stream-enterer. (2011b, 813)
14. Cf. the nearly identical text in the Gotamīsutta of the Aṅguttara-nikāya: bahupakārā,
bhante, mahāpajāpatī gotamī bhagavato mātucchā āpādikā posikā, bhagavantaṃ janettiyā
kālaṅkatāya thaññaṃ pi (AN IV 276).
The items included in this list vary in the different texts. Not all the ordi-
nation accounts contain this counter-argument of the Buddha. It is there-
fore possible that this element of the robe gift story was later interpolated
into the ordination narrative. If such an interpolation did take place, it
does not appear to have been dependent upon school affiliation.15 This
portion is only fragmentarily preserved in the Gāndhārī sūtra (§ 2.2). Only
the beginning and the reference to the five precepts survive in the pre-
served part of the manuscript:
(ma)[ha]prayavadi godamie bahokaro ta kisa hetu ma[ma]///(panadi)

[pa](tadepradi)[vira]da adiṃnadanade prativirada (*kameṣu michaca-
rade prativirada) (mu)[ṣa]vadade pradivirada suramereamaja-
pramati[tha](nade prativirada) (BajC 1, lines 8–10)
(And I was) of great service to Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī. Out of what

reason? (*It is due to) my (*support) (. . .) (that Mahāprajāpatī
Gautamī) refrains from killing living beings, refrains from taking
what is not given, (*refrains from misconduct in sensual plea-
sures), refrains from false speech, refrains from wine, liquor and
intoxicants which are the basis of negligence.16
In many of the parallel versions this passage is mirrored by an enumera-

tion of persons to whom one owes a debt. This enumeration takes up the
list of the preceding paragraph. In the Pāli Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta the pas-
sage is introduced by:17
15. Remarkably, the Pāli versions of the ordination account in the vinaya and in the
Gotamīsutta omit this passage. It is also missing in the Chinese vinayas of the Mahāsāṅghikas
(T 1425), the Sarvāstivādins (T 1435), and the *Haimavatas (T 1463), in the Tibetan vinaya of
the Mūlasarvāstivādins and in the Sanskrit Bhikṣuṇīkarmavācanā of the Sarvāstivādins. As
seen in Table 1.2, below, other versions of the Mahāsāṅghikas-(Lokottaravādins) and of the
(Mūla-)Sarvāstivādins do contain this passage. I am grateful to Anālayo who checked the
Chinese references for me.
16. For sake of coherence the terminology of the translation corresponds to Ñānamoli (2005,
1103).
17. This passage is closely related, but not identical with the list in AN 3,24, where three
bahukārā puggalā are enumerated (AN I 123). This parallel, which explicitly refers to attain-
ing stream-entry and full awakening among those acts, which characterize the merits of a
bahukāra- puggala-, is a further argument for the lay status of Mahāprajāpatī. As Anālayo
says: “From this listing it would seem that, had Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī already reached full
awakening by the time of the present discourse, this would merit explicit mentioning”
(2011b, 814, fn. 282). Anālayo’s suggestion, that Mahāprajāpatī’s “offering of a robe to the
Buddha could find a placing at some point during the time period between her going forth
and her attainment of full liberation” (2011b, 815, fn. 282) seems to me less straightforward.
1. yaṃ hi ānanda, puggalo puggalaṃ āgamma buddhaṃ saraṇaṃ gato hoti,

dhammaṃ saraṇaṃ gato hoti, saṅghaṃ saraṇaṃ gato hoti. Imassānanda,
puggalassa iminā puggalena na suppatikāraṃ vadāmi, yadidaṃ abhivādana
paccuṭṭhāna-añjalikamma-sāmīcikamma-cīvara-piṇḍapāta-senāsana-
gilāna-paccaya-bhesajja-parikkhārānuppadānena (MN III 254)
When one person, owing to another, has gone for refuge to the
Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Saṅgha, I say that is not easy for the
former to repay the latter by paying homage to him, rising up for
him, according him reverential salutation and polite services, and
by providing robes, almsfood, resting places, and medicinal requi-
sites (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1103).
The same phrase is repeated three more times for the following persons:
2. a person who has taken the five precepts

3. a person possessing “unwavering confidence in the Buddha, the
Dhamma, and the Saṅgha” and “the virtues loved by noble ones” (tr.
Ñānamoli 2005, 1103): buddhe aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti,
dhamme aveccappasādena samannāgato hoti, saṅghe aveccappasādena
samannāgato hoti, ariyakantehi sīlehi samannāgato hoti.
4. a person without doubt in the four noble truths, that is, “who has
become free from doubt about suffering, about the origin of suffering,
about the cessation of suffering, and about the way leading to the cessa-
tion of suffering” (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1103): dukkhe nikkaṅkho hoti,
dukkhasamudaye nikkaṅkho hoti, dukkhanirodhe nikkaṅkho hoti,
dukkhanirodhagāminiyā paṭipadāya nikkaṅkho hoti.
Again the Gāndhārī scroll does not preserve the whole text, but allows re-
construction of at least its basic shape (§ 3):
3.1. (yo ho anaṃda pugalo) (pu)[ga]l(o) agamo budha janati [dha]ṃ(ma

janati saṃgha janati) (*anaṃda tasa pugalasa na sukaro paḍhihato
yamida civara-piṃḍavada-śenasano-gilana-pracea-bheṣajo-parikharo
3.2. yo ho anaṃda pugalo pugalo agamo) /// [pano gado] ? ? [anaṃda ta]sa
[p](u)[g](alasa na s)u[karo] paḍhihato yamida civara-piṃḍavada-
śenasano-gilana-pracea-bheṣajo-parikharo
3.3. yo ho anaṃda pugalo pugalo agamya budho nikaṃkṣo dhaṃmo nika(ṃ)-
kṣo saṃghe nikaṃkṣo (anaṃda ta)[sa] pugalasa na s(u)[karo] paḍi[ha]to
yami(da) civara-piṃḍavado-śenasano-gilana-pracea-bheṣaja-pari[kha](ro)
3.4. yo ho anaṃda pugalo pugalo agamya) /// yig[i]ra ? ? ? /// (anaṃda tasa)
pugalasa na (sukaro paḍihato yam)[i](da) [civara-piṃḍava]do-
ś(e)nasano-gilana-pra[c](e)[a-bhe]ṣaja-parikha[rena] (BajC 1, lines 13–18)
3.1. (Ānanda, when one person,) owing to another, knows the Buddha,
(knows the) dharma (and knows the saṅgha,) (*this person, Ānanda,
is not easily rejected with regard to robes, almsfood, resting places
and medicinal requisites for the sick.)
3.2. (Ānanda, when one person,) owing to another, (. . .) this person,
Ānanda, is not easily rejected with regard to robes, almsfood, resting
places and medicinal requisites for the sick.
3.3. Ānanda, when one person, owing to another, is without doubt about
the Buddha, without doubt about the dharma and without doubt
about the saṅgha, this person, (Ānanda), is not easily rejected with
regard to robes, almsfood, resting places and medicinal requisites for
the sick.
3.4. (Ānanda, when one person, owing to another,) (. . .) this person,
(Ānanda), is not easily rejected with regard to robes, almsfood, rest-
ing places and medicinal requisites for the sick.
As we can see, two of the four elements in the Gāndhārī passage are
missing. However, we know from the preceding passage that the five pre-
cepts would have been part of this enumeration, thus only one element
remains unknown. If we compare this passage of the Gāndhārī version
with its direct and indirect parallels we get a list of doctrinal issues, which
are part of these various lists:
A Three jewels (triratna): Buddha, dharma, saṅgha

B Five precepts (śīla, śikṣāpada)
C Four Noble Truths (āryasatya)
D Five Noble Treasures (āryadhana): śraddhā, śīla, śruta, tyāga, prajñā
These Buddhist core doctrines are combined with the following elements:
1 “knows” ( jānāti)
2 “takes refuge” (śaraṇaṃ gacchati)
3 “has no doubt” (niḥkaṅkṣa-)
4 “has (unwavering) confidence” (Pāli aveccapasādena samannāgata-)
5 “believes in” (abhiprasanna-)
6 other verbal forms
An analysis of the texts considering these structural elements yields the

following picture (Table 1.2):18
Table 1.2 The list of persons to whom one owns a debt
Direct parallels Indirect parallels
Vinaya Non-Vinaya
Sarv—Turfan SHT III 979
Theravāda—Pāli MN 142
Dharmaguptaka (T 1428)
Mah-Lok (ed. Roth 1970)
* Sarv—T 26, sūtra 180

*Mūl—Tibetan D 253
Mahīśāsaka (T 1421)
Gāndhārī—Bajaur 1
Mūl (T 1451)
T 60
T 84
A1 A2 A5 A5 A2 A2 A2 A1 A5 A1 A2 A2
*B B A3 A2 A+C3 B B A2 A2 A3 A+C3
A3 A4 A2 A3 D6 A3 D6 B B C3 D6
? C3 C3 C3 B C3 C1 C1 C3 D+B B
From the above tabulation, it is clear that nearly every version has its
own structure. All the versions agree in their inclusion of the three jewels
(A: triratna) in the list. Most add other items like the five precepts
(B: pañcaśīla), the Four Noble Truths (C: āryasatya) and the Five Noble
Treasures (D: āryadhana), while others repeat the already mentioned ele-
ment with other verbal forms. Among the different versions, the three
that stem from (Mūla-)Sarvāstivāda sources (bold frame) are the most
similar to one another. But even here the texts are not identical. If the
Chinese Madhyama-āgama (T 26) does indeed belong to the Sarvāstivāda
tradition, it uses a completely different formula in this passage. It is pos-
sible that the textual variants represent rather different local or regional
traditions than formulae which are characteristic for a specific school.19
18. For the texts which do not contain this passage, see above fn. 15. In T 1421 only one item
is mentioned. The treatment of this passage in the Maitrisimit versions differs considerably
from that of the other texts and cannot be used for a comparison.
19. As indicated by Chung and Fukita (2011, 154), a part of this passage is quoted in the
Karmavibhaṅga 61.6–9 (ed. Kudō 2004, 122). The quotation is introduced by yathā cāha
*Bhagavān Dakṣiṇāvibhaṃgasūtre. It refers to triratna + śaraṇaṃ gam- (A 2) and to the
On the basis of this evidence alone it is not possible to make any reli-
able statements about a suggested affiliation of our text to any of these
versions or schools. Neither the Dharmaguptaka nor the Mahāsāṅghika
parallels as preserved in the vinayas of these schools are especially close to
the Gāndhārī text. The versions that most closely relate to, but are not
identical with, our Gāndhārī text are the Pāli version and the independent
Chinese translation of T 84 (grey shadow).
5. The dogmatical core: The classification of gifts

The dogmatical core of the sūtra (§§ 4–7) is only part of the direct parallels
and the Uighur version of the Maitrisimit. According to the structure of
this part, two groups can be distinguished (see Table 1.3):
Table 1.3 The narrative part of the sūtra (§§ 4–9) and its parallels
Sarv—Turfan SHT III 979
TheravādaPāli—MN 142

*Mūl—Tibetan D 253
Gāndhārī—Bajaur 1
Schøyen fragment
Maitrisimit
T 84
4 The fourteen individual 4 4 6 6 6 4 4 6

gifts
5 The fruits of these fourteen 5 5 7 5 5 7
individual gifts
6 The seven gifts directed to 6 6 4 4 6 4
the Order
7 The fruits of the seven gifts 7 7 5 5 5
directed to the Order
8 The four kinds of purifying 8 8 8 8 8
a gift
9 The gāthās 9 9 9 9 9
Groups B II BI A A A B II BI A
śikṣāpadas (B). The passage and its parallels are discussed by Kudō (2004, 265–6, fn. 40). A
nearly identical passage is quoted from a “Dadiṇāṃvibhaṃgasūtra”, probably corrupt for
Dakṣiṇāvibhaṃgasūtra (61.5, ed. Kudō 2004, 123).
The first group (A) starts the introduction with the enumeration of the
seven saṅgha-oriented gifts and continues with the 14 individual gifts.
This group consists of the following versions: the Chinese Madhyama-
āgama sūtra (T 26, no. 180), the Turfan fragment, and the Tibetan version
in Śamathadeva’s commentary. As far as we can judge, these versions
most probably belong to the Sarvāstivāda or Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition.
Accordingly, this feature can be regarded a peculiarity of this branch of
Buddhist textual tradition. The fact that the parallel text of the Maitrisimit
shares this sequence might give an indication of its source, which should
to be looked for in Sarvāstivāda circles. Our Gāndhārī sūtra obviously be-
longs to the second group (B), which shows the reverse order of these ele-
ments and is shared by all the remaining versions.
However, other differences can be observed that allow a further sub-
grouping: The first of these differences concerns the sequence of elements
in the list of individual gifts. As can be seen from the above table, this list
occurs twice in the sūtra: the first instance enumerates the gifts, and in the
second instance the enumeration is repeated for the sake of specifying the
reward that is to be expected from each respective gift. With regard to
these two subsequent lists, two subgroups can be distinguished: The first
of them (I) starts its enumeration with the highest recipient and continues
the subsequent list of rewards in the reverse order. This structure is found
in all texts of group A, but it is also found in some texts of group B. The
Pāli version begins its list of recipients with the sentence:
tathāgate arahante sammāsambuddhe dānaṃ deti, ayaṃ paṭhamā

pāṭipuggalikā dakkhiṇā.
One gives a gift to the Tathāgata, accomplished and fully enlight-

ened; this is the first kind of personal offering. (tr. Ñānamoli 2005,
1103)
The list ends with:
tiracchānagate dānaṃ deti, ayaṃ cuddasamī pāṭipuggalikā dakkhiṇāti.
One gives a gift to an animal; this is the fourteenth kind of personal

offerings. (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1104)
Its second listing—of the rewards—is arranged in the reverse order and
begins with:
tiracchānagate dānaṃ datvā sataguṇā dakkhiṇā pāṭikaṅkhitabbā.
By giving a gift to an animal, the offering may be expected to repay

a hundredfold. (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1104)
This part ends with a gift to a Tathāgata:
ko pana vādo tathāgate arahante sammāsambuddheti.
What should be said about a giving a gift to a Tathāgata, accom-

plished and fully enlightened? (tr. Ñānamoli 2005, 1104)
The same structure is found in the Sanskrit text, which is preserved on the
fragment of the Schøyen Collection. The only texts that show a different
order and are therefore to be attributed to subgroup II are the separate
Chinese version translated by Dānapāla (T 84) and our Gāndhārī sūtra,
which begins its first chain with the lowest recipient:
ciric̄anugadasa pracea[dano] deti (BajC 1, line 19)
One gives an individual gift to an animal.
The last recipient on the list is the highest:
(tasa)[g̱ a](da)[sa] (arahadasa samasabu)[dha]sa prac(e)adano det[i]

(BajC 1, line 24)
One gives an individual gift to the Tathāgata, accomplished and

fully enlightened.
In the subsequent list of rewards, the text begins again with the lowest
recipient:
[ciric̄anuga](da)[sa] praceadano dai(ta) [śa]tauno vivao paḍiakṣidave

(BajC 1, lines 24–25)
Having given an individual gift to an animal, a hundredfold fruition

(of the gift) is to be expected.
And concludes again with the highest:
[ko vana va](vo ta)[sag̱ adasa araha](da)[sa] (samasabudhasa) (BajC 1,

line 32)
What should be said about a gift to a Tathāgata, accomplished and

fully enlightened?
Analyzing this comparison on a structural level, the Gāndhārī text is most

closely related to the later independent Chinese translation T 84 with
whom it shares two distinctive features: the sequence of the listing and
the internal sequence of elements. Moreover, to situate these two as struc-
turally close is in general accord with our observations with regard to the
narrative part, where T 84 was also among those texts that were particu-
larly close to the Gāndhārī sūtra. This preliminary result might be sur-
prising, but reminds us of the necessity to evaluate the historical authen-
ticity of a version not according to the age of its translation or manuscript
evidence. Old features may be hidden in new translations, while new fea-
tures can show up in an old manuscript. In this case the arrangement of
the lists with the individual gifts mentioned first is without doubt an old
feature (= Group B). It can be found in all non-Sarvāstivāda versions. The
new feature—the rearrangement of the sequence of the individual items—
is restricted to only two versions, including the “old” Gāndhārī tradition.
But we should not forget that even this tradition stands at the end of a
process of textual development, which had already lasted for some centu-
ries. That this peculiar combination of old and new features is preserved
as well in the oldest as in the youngest of our textual witnesses might be
due to a common school affiliation of both texts. But it cannot be denied
that the parallelism may also be caused by the common provenance of
both texts and can therefore be characterized as a regional variant.
Dānapāla, the 10th-century translator of the Chinese text, came from
Swat. Perhaps he utilized in his translation a version that was in use in his
home area. If this was the case, it may be the reason this version is closely
related to our Gāndhārī text.
6. The seven gifts to the saṅgha and the Order of the nuns
In all the versions the enumeration of the individual gifts is either pre-
ceded or followed by another list that contains the various kinds of gifts
directed to the Buddhist community. The term used for this category is
saṅghagatā dakṣiṇā (P. saṅghagatādakkhiṇā, G. saghag̱ ada dhakṣina). The
passage has provoked a number of comments with regard to its implica-
tions for the history of the nuns’ Order. As already mentioned, von Hinüber
briefly discusses Mahāprajāpatī’s robe gift as part of his argument that
there was no Order of nuns at the time of the Buddha. One of his main
pieces of evidence for this is the apparent lack of direct interactions be-
tween the Buddha and nuns in the first four nikāyas. The story of the
Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra does not negate von Hinüber’s assertion, since
Mahāprajāpatī is introduced here not as a Buddhist nun, but still seems to
be a laywoman.20 Nonetheless, the Pāli version of the sūtra enumerates,
among the communities that are the recipients of the gifts to the Order,
the bhikkhunīsaṅgha—which is clearly a contradiction to the narrative
frame, at least if we concede that the tradition according to which the
foundation of the Order of nuns goes back to Mahāprajāpatī is true. Von
Hinüber wants to explain this paradox by a kind of absentmindedness and
refers to L. Schmithausen, who drew his “attention to the remarkable fact
that some Chinese versions correctly preserve a most likely older version
of the text without any reference to the nuns” (2008, 21, fn. 59).21 How-
ever, von Hinüber does not exclude the possibility “that an attentive later
redactor removed the bhikkhunīsaṃgha from the text” in these versions
(2008, 21–22, fn. 59).
The existence, in this sūtra, of Mahāprajāpatī as a laywoman alongside
a mention of the Order of nuns does indeed present something of a
problem for how we understand the founding of the nuns’ Order, given
that the most common and accepted account gives her as the first woman
to receive ordination. Another solution with regard to this “anachronism”
was brought forward by Liz Williams. She argued that it is either “evi-
dence of the existence of bhikkhunīs before Mahāpajāpatī requested the
going forth” or that “this sutta may be an assimilation of one story with
another” (2000, 170). This second explanation, which regards the Pāli
version “as the outcome of a merger of two originally different texts”, was
also favored by Anālayo (2008, 110).22 I want to use this opportunity to
introduce here for the first time23 the respective passage of the Gāndhārī
20. Only one version (T 84) calls Mahāprajāpatī a bhikṣuṇī, but it also mentions her as taking
only the five precepts. The controversial issue of Mahāprajāpatī’s assumed lay status has
been repeatedly discussed by Anālayo, who does not exclude the possibility that the robe gift
episode falls within a time after her going forth (2008, 109; 2011b, 814–81).
21. In his criticism of von Hinüber’s article Anālayo rightly points out, that this omission is
only true for one particular phrase in the whole passage. Otherwise the Chinese versions
“refer repeatedly to the nuns” (2008, 114).
22. For more references with regard to this problem cf. Anālayo (2008, 136, fn. 23 + 24).
23. A short reference to the Gāndhārī version, “where the bhikṣuṇīsaṃgha is almost cer-
tainly mentioned”, is given by von Hinüber (2008, 22, fn. 59) on the basis of an oral
version of this sūtra and to discuss the role of the bhikṣuṇīsaṅgha in com-
parison with its parallels. For this purpose I will first cite the text as con-
tained in the Gāndhārī version (in an abbreviated manner). Although it is
not completely preserved, its coherent and repetitive structure allows its
reconstruction with a high degree of certainty:
6. [satime] anaṃda saṃghagada dhakṣina (. . .) kadara sata
6.1. iśaṃnada tasagado tiṭhaṃti yave budhap[r]amu[hasa] (bh)[ikh](u)

(saṃghasa) [da]ṇo deti aya [anaṃ]da paḍhama saṃghag̱ ada dhakṣina
(. . .)
6.2. (punavaro anaṃda ta)[sa]g̱ ado tiṭhaṃto yaveto budhapramuhasa
(bhikhunisaṃghasa daṇo deti aya anaṃda *dudiya saṃ)[gha]g̱ ada
dhakṣina (. . .)
6.3. p(u)navaro anaṃda tasag̱ ade parinivude bhikhusa(ṃ)ghasa dano deti
aya [a](naṃda *tatiya) saṃghag̱ ada dhaṃkṣina (. . .)
6.4. punavaro ana(ṃ)da tasa[g̱ a](de parinivude bhikhunisaṃghasa dano deti
a)[yaṃ a]naṃda cauṭ́ha saghag̱ ada dhakṣina
6.5. punavaro anaṃda [ta]sag̱ ade pari[nivute]///(da)[n](o) deti ayaṃ anaṃda
paṃcama saṃghagada dhaṃkṣina (. . .)
6.6. ///(*tasag̱ ade pariṇivu)[de evam aha etaya bhikhu]saghade agachaṃtu
aya ana(ṃ)da ṣaṭha saṃghag̱ a(da dhakṣiṇa
6.7. punavaro anaṃda tasag̱ ade parinivu)[de] etaya bhikhunisaṃghade
agachaṃtu ayaṃ sa(tama saṃghag̱ ada dhakṣina)(. . .) (BajC 1, lines
32–50)
6. “Ānanda, there are these seven kinds of gifts directed to the Order . . .
Which are these seven?
6.1. Here, Ānanda, as long as the Tathāgata is living, one gives a gift to the
Order of monks, headed by the Buddha. This Ānanda, is the first gift
directed to the Order . . .
6.2. And again, Ānanda, as long as the Tathāgata is living, (one gives a gift
to the Order of nuns), headed by the Buddha. (This, Ānanda, is the
second) gift directed to the Order . . .
communication with the author. The beginning of this passage and its relation to Pāli
parallels from the MN and AN are discussed in Strauch (2007/8, 21–2).
6.3. And again, Ānanda, if the Tathāgata has passed away, one gives a gift
to the Order of monks. This, Ānanda, is the (third) gift directed to the
Order . . .
6.4. And again, Ānanda, if the Tathāgata (has passed away, one gives a gift
to the Order of the nuns.) This, Ānanda, is the fourth gift directed to
the Order.
6.5. And again, Ānanda, if the Tathāgata has passed away, one gives a gift
to . . . This, Ānanda, is the fifth gift directed to the Order . . .
6.6. (. . .) if (the Tathāgata) has passed away, one says: May so many from
the Order of monks come forward (to receive the gift). This, Ānanda,
is the sixth gift directed to the order (. . .)
6.7. (And again, Ānanda, if the Tathāgata) has passed away, (one says):
May so many from the Order of nuns come forward (to receive the
gift). This is the seventh (gift directed to the order) (. . .).”
As we see, the first two items in the list are introduced by the phrase: “as
long as the Tathāgata is living”: tasagado tiṭhaṃti yave/(ta)[sa]g̱ ado tiṭhaṃto
yaveto. Accordingly, only these two items could signify the order as bud-
dhapramukha “headed by the Buddha.” The remaining five omit this at-
tribute and begin with “when the Tathāgata has passed away”: tasag̱ ade
parinivude. The same distinction is met in all other versions, although not
always expressed in this explicit way (see Table 1.4). Virtually all of the
texts start their enumeration from the perspective of the narrative, that is,
during the lifetime of the Buddha.
The first item of the Gāndhārī text—including the attributes “as long
as the Tathāgata is living” and “Monks’ Order headed by the Buddha”—is
matched exactly by the Chinese Madhyama-āgama sūtra (MĀ 180):
Gāndhārī *Dhakṣinavibhaṃgasutra:
iśaṃnada tasagado tiṭhaṃti yave budhap[r]amu[hasa] (bh)[ikh](u)

(saṃghasa) [da]ṇo deti (BajC 1, lines 34–35)
Chinese Madhyama-āgama (MĀ 180)
得大廣報。信族姓男. 族姓女。佛在世時。佛為首。施佛及

比丘。是謂第一施。 (T 26, 722a22–23)
If a believing son or daughter of a good family, while the Buddha is

in the world, gives to the Buddha and to the assembly of bhikṣus
with the Buddha at its head, that is called the “first group of gifts”.
. . . (tr. Tsukamoto 1985:5: 1094)
Table 1.4 The seven gifts to the order in the parallel versions
No. Direct Parallels Indirect
Gāndhārī Bajaur 1 Pāli Theravāda MN Chin. T 26, 180 Chin. T 84 Tibetan D 253 Maitrisimit (Uighur)
142 (corrupt)
1 Buddha alive (*Buddha alive) Buddha alive (*Buddha alive) Monks’ order ???
Monks’ Order Both orders headed Buddha and monks’ Monks’ order in the Headed by the
headed by the by the Buddha order headed by the presence of the Buddha
Buddha Buddha Buddha
2 Buddha alive Buddha deceased 1. Buddha deceased Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) ???
*Nuns’ order Both orders Both orders Monks’ order Monks’ order
headed by the 2. (*Buddha deceased)
Buddha Monks’ order
3 Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) 3. (*Buddha deceased) Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) ???
Monks’ order Monks’ order Nuns’ order Nuns’ order Nuns’ order
4 Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) 4. (*Buddha deceased) Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) (*Buddha deceased)
*Nuns’ order Nuns’ order Group of monks Both orders Both orders Nuns’ order
5 Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) 5. (*Buddha deceased) Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) (*Buddha deceased)
*Both orders? Group of monks and Group of nuns Itinerant monks Group of monks Group of monks
nuns
6 Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) Non-vigorous monks Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) (*Buddha deceased)
Group of monks Group of monks gotrabhū, etc. Itinerant nuns Group of nuns Group of nuns
7 Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) Perfect monks Buddha deceased (*Buddha deceased) Undisciplined
Group of nuns Group of nuns Itinerant monks and Group of monks and monks
nuns nuns gotrabhū, etc.
Other versions, such as the text quoted by Śamathadeva, mention only the
attribute buddhapramukha (indicated below in bold print):
Śamathadeva (Tibetan)
saṅs rgyas la mṅon du phyogs te dge sloṅ gi dge ‘dun la sbyin pa byin na
dge ‘dun yon gnas yin no (D 4094 ju 255a)
The second class of items is characterized as offerings made after the

Buddha’s mahāparinirvāṇa. Again some versions signify these actions or
the first of them explicitly with an expression corresponding to Gāndhārī
tasag̱ ade parinivude “when the Tathāgata has passed away” (Theravāda MN
142, T 26 (180), T 84). It can therefore be suggested that this binary struc-
ture belongs to the original shape of the list. Thus the items on the list can
be divided into two sections:
1. Buddha alive
2. Buddha passed away
With regard to the actions in the Buddha’s lifetime we observe an impor-

tant difference between the versions. With the exception of the Gāndhārī
version, all texts mention only one item to be placed in the Buddha’s life-
time. Usually this is the “Order of the monks headed by the Buddha.” Only
the Pāli version refers to “Both Orders headed by the Buddha.” The
Gāndhārī version is the only text in which two entries are introduced by an
expression referring to the Buddha’s life. Unfortunately the fragmentary
state of the manuscript forces us to reconstruct the second of these en-
tries. But according to the structure of the entire list there is only one
reasonable conjecture possible: the preserved text of the manuscript ///[sa]
g̱ ado tiṭhaṃto yaveto budhapramuhasa/// has to be reconstructed—as sug-
gested above—as (punavaro anaṃda ta)[sa]g̱ ado tiṭhaṃto yaveto budha-
pramuhasa (bhikhunisaṃghasa daṇo deti aya anaṃda *dudiya saṃ)[gha]
g̱ ada dhakṣina . . .. Therefore, we have only two texts—the Pāli version and
the Gāndhārī version—that mention the Order of the nuns during the
Buddha’s lifetime. They do this in a way that is both different from each
other and different from all other versions. Thus, the majority of the extant
texts have only one item listed under the rubric of “Buddha’s lifetime,” and
in all cases other than the Pāli this item is the Order of monks. As Scho-
pen’s analysis of different versions of a vinaya passage has shown (1985;
1997, 25–29), we can no longer assume that the simple fact of agreement
between the majority of sources attests to antiquity on the part of the pas-
sage in question. However, in this case it does seem probable that the ver-
sion in the majority of texts is the original. The version in T 84, which is
otherwise close to the Gāndhārī version, in this instance agrees with the
(Mūla-)Sarvāstivāda versions. It could well have been the case, of course,
following Schopen’s logic, that the redactive homogenizing of the passage
between traditions occurred after the 1st or 2nd century, thus T 84 was
altered and our Gāndhārī text was not. However, such an assumption
would hold more weight if the two alternative lists in the Pāli and Gāndhārī
were identical. In which case, it might seem reasonable to argue for a
cross-traditional redaction in all but two cases. Moreover, as the compara-
tive analysis above showed, the texts of the (Mūla-)Sarvāstivāda versions
and T 84 belong to completely different branches of transmission and do
not show any traces of having ever been subject of any kind of common
redaction. Given the available evidence, it is therefore hard to avoid the
conclusion that these two texts secondarily introduced this item into a
given list by disturbing its internal structure. If we consider all available
versions the initial list probably comprised the following items (Table 1.5):
Table 1.5
1 Buddha alive
Monks’ Order
2 Buddha deceased
Monks’ Order
3 (*Buddha deceased)
Nuns’ Order
Both Orders
Group of monks
Group of nuns
Group of monks and nuns
The Pāli version corrupted this order by replacing the original word
“monks’ Order” (bhikṣusaṅgha) by “both Orders” (ubhatosaṅghe). The
strategy of the Gāndhārī is different: it introduced an additional item—the
nuns’ Order headed by the Buddha during the Buddha’s lifetime—into
the list. Consequently it had to skip one of the original items. Which one
was left out is difficult to say due to the fragmentary state of the manu-
script, but according to the internal logic of the list it seems that the
Gāndhārī version skipped the last entry—“group of monks and nuns.”
The result of both modifications is the somewhat odd idea of a “nuns’
Order headed by the Buddha” (buddhapramukha- bhikṣuṇīsaṅgha-), which
is otherwise unattested in Buddhist literature, at least as far as I am able
to ascertain.
What can this evidence tell us about the textual history of this passage
and its implications for the history of the Order of nuns? The most prob-
able scenario seems to be: the original version of this sūtra contained a list
of gifts to the saṅgha, which did not contain any reference to the existence
of a nuns’ community during the Buddha’s lifetime. The fact that the list
knew the Order of nuns among the communities after the Buddha’s
parinirvāṇa shows, however, that it was composed after its foundation.
Some versions made independent attempts to revise this list and to
include the bhikṣuṇīsaṅgha among the communities that were active
during the Buddha’s lifetime.24 In revising the list, these versions did not
care for its seemingly anachronistic character within the narrative frame
of the robe gift episode. Two of the supposedly earliest versions, which are
transmitted in Indian languages, show clear traces of this process. If the
Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra is indeed the result of a merger of different tradi-
tions—combining the robe gift story with the various lists of gifts (as as-
sumed by Williams and Anālayo)—this process of revision obviously took
place after this merger. The preserved versions of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra
clearly show that the lists were already part of the sūtra when the revision
was carried out.
What are the implications of this scenario for the history of the Order
of the nuns? Does it mean that this list contained a kind of “historical
24. A similar explanation was offered by Ñāṇamoli (2005, 1356, fn. 1291): “We might resolve
the discrepancy (unnoticed by the commentator) by supposing that the original discourse
was later modified after the founding of the Bhikkhunī Saṅgha to bring the latter into the
scheme of offerings to the Saṅgha.”
memory” about a phase in the history of the Buddhist community, when

the Order of the nuns was not yet founded? And did this phase coincide
with the lifetime of the Buddha? I see no way to prove such an assump-
tion. Other explanations cannot be ruled out. Thus, it is also possible that
the list was from the very beginning composed as a hierarchy—beginning
of course with the monks’ Order headed by the Buddha. The expressions
referring to the Buddha’s lifetime were in this case mere indicators of the
possibility for the monks’ Order to be headed by the Buddha. They would
not refer to any historical sequence.25 Of course, in the case of this expla-
nation, we would have to assume that the explicit reference to the Buddha’s
parinirvāṇa was originally restricted to the second item in the original list,
the monk’s Order after the Buddha’s death, before it was secondarily ex-
tended to all of the remaining items. As discussed in chapter four of this
volume (see page 102), there are vinaya rules that present a strict hierarchy
in terms of offerings to the saṅgha. According to these rules, nuns cannot
receive gifts unless or until monks have first received an offering. Further,
in preceding passages in all versions of the Dakṣiṇāvibhaṅgasūtra, gift
giving is conceptualized under a rubric of hierarchy. It is clear that the
order of gift giving and the subsequent rewards of it are intertwined with
an awareness of the worthiness of the recipient. However, to extend the
importance of hierarchy in gift giving procedures to the present problem
remains speculative, and so I leave it open to colleagues who are more
familiar with the textual sources on the early history of the Order of nuns
to evaluate the strength of this evidence.
But the diversity of variants that can be observed in the different canon-
ical versions seem to indicate that the redactors of the canonical traditions
already considered this list problematic. If our reconstruction of the orig-
inal list can be accepted, their discomfort might well have been caused by
the missing of the Order of nuns among the communities during the
Buddha’s lifetime. In order to harmonize the list with the accepted tradi-
tion of the foundation of the nuns’ Order by the Buddha himself, the re-
dactors of the Gāndhārī and the Pāli versions created new versions of this
canonical list, each according to their own predilections.
The result of this limited comparative analysis of the versions of an
early Buddhist āgama sūtra clearly forces us to show extreme caution
25. For this alternative explanation I am indebted to Bhikkhu Anālayo, with whom I had a
series of elucidating discussions during the XVIth conference of the International Associa-
tion of Buddhist Studies, held in Jinshan, New Taipei City, Taiwan in 2011.
when handling these texts. Repeatedly we face the fact that two of our sup-
posedly most valuable sources of early Buddhist literature—and valuable
because they are old witnesses—are characterized by obvious traces of a
later revision. Without consulting their parallels in other Buddhist tradi-
tions it is quite dangerous to draw any historically reliable conclusions on
the basis of the evidence of a single text, even one as old as a Gandhāran
sūtra.
2
The British Library
Kharoṣ ṭ hˉı Fragments
behind the birch bark curtain
Timothy Lenz
one question that has arisen during the study of the avadāna texts
contained in the British Library collection of Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts,
namely, “Where are the women in Gandhāran Buddhist texts?,” has
opened up an especially interesting avenue of inquiry.1 This question, ini-
tially articulated by Sonya Quintanilla, curator of Asian art at the San
Diego Museum of Art,2 was raised several years before the recent prolif-
eration of Gāndhārī manuscripts available for examination by experts in
the fields of Gāndhārī language and literature.3 Thus when the question
was first entertained, the existence of Gandhāran texts especially associ-
ated with woman, such as the Bajaur fragment containing a Gāndhārī
version of the well-known story about Mahāprajāpatī’s robe gift to the
Buddha,4 was little on the minds of scholars examining Gandhāran liter-
ary documents. Accordingly no definitive answer was offered when the
1. An early version of this paper was presented at the XVIth conference of the International
Association of Buddhist Studies, held in Jinshan, New Taipei City, Taiwan in 2011.
2. This question was posed at the XIVth conference of the International Association of Bud-
dhist Studies, held in London in 2005.
3. For discussion of recent manuscript discoveries, see Mark Allon (2007, 131–41).
4. For a thorough description of the Bajaur collection, see Ingo Strauch (2008, 103–36); for
discussion of the Mahāprajāpatī legend, see Strauch’s chapter in this volume (chapter one).
British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 47
question was raised. But now, after carefully searching the British Library
collection for stories that primarily concern women and after significant
research on manuscripts in the British Library collection has been com-
pleted, it is possible to shed light on some women, both legendary and
historical, who might have made their mark in the Gandhāran Buddhist
milieu. The picture that has so far emerged is that women did play a fairly
prominent and noble role in Gandhāran Buddhism, at least in the avadāna
texts preserved in the British Library collection of Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts
and in the pot inscriptions associated with these documents.
The now well-known British Library collection of Kharoṣṭhī manu-
scripts was acquired in 1994 with the generous support of an anonymous
benefactor. The collection itself consists of twenty-nine birch bark scrolls
containing texts written in Gāndhārī Prakrit using the Kharoṣṭhī script
(Salomon 1999, xv). The fragmentary scrolls differ widely in size and con-
dition of preservation, ranging from small pieces to fairly large sections of
scrolls as long as two meters (Salomon 1999, 17). The texts that comprise
the collection are varied, including sūtras, scholastic commentaries,
verses, and, of course, avadānas, the texts that are of immediate concern
here (Salomon 1999, 24–39). There are seven or eight fragmentary scrolls
in the collection containing avadāna texts. These documents consist of
sequentially numbered series of stories that are invariably the second text
on scrolls containing two texts. The avadāna texts are located immediately
after the conclusion of a primary text such as a sūtra or abhidharma-like
commentary, which is indicated by a large circular punctuation mark
utilizing the blank space on the recto and continuing on and presumably
filling all of the verso (Fig. 2.1). The individual avadānas are unfortunately
not extensive narratives such as those found in Sanskrit texts like the
Avadānaśataka or the Divyāvadāna.5 Rather, each Gandhāran avadāna is a
skeleton story, providing little more than a title or label, the identity of the
protagonists, and one or more key scenes that serve to define the plot,
provided the reader already knows the story.
The seven or eight different scrolls with numbered series of avadānas
collectively contain approximately fifty-two individual stories6 of varying
5. See chapter nine of this volume for a study of avadāna stories from the Avadānaśataka.
6. BL Fragment 1 contains 10 (= 1/10), 2/5, 3/3, 4/17, 21/1, Supplementary Fragments/1,
12 + 14/9, and 16 + 25/6. See Timothy Lenz (2003, part II, and 2010) for discussion concern-
ing all the fragments except 4 and 12 + 14, which are currently being editing in collaboration
with Jason Neelis.
figure 2.1 Transition between the Ekottarikāgama-type sūtra text and a series of
avadānas (BL Fragment 12 + 14). © British Library Board (detail of Or.14915. 28).
lengths and states of preservation. Five of them clearly concern women,

which is nearly 10 percent of the total. Of these, three have parallels in
well-known languages, namely, Pāli and Chinese, and two remain uniden-
tified. These five avadānas have no obvious thematic, doctrinal, or topical
connection, other than that among them there are two stories about
gaṇigas (Skt. gaṇikāḥ) or prostitutes occurring consecutively on one scroll
(BL Fragments 12 + 14). However, all the Gandhāran avadānas are clearly
linked in space and time and by author. The proposed find spot and age of
these Kharoṣṭhī documents are fairly certainly established and are almost
universally recognized among Buddhist studies scholars as Gandhāra,7
most likely coming from the vicinity of Haḍḍa (south of Jalalabad; see
Fig. 2.2) and dating to approximately the first half of the first century of
the Common Era. First-hand accounts of their discovery, as is typical for
such antiquities, are nonexistent, but as far as can be determined from
hearsay and comparative analysis, the texts were found buried in a pot
(Fig. 2.3) in a single location, presumably on the grounds of a Buddhist
7. For a delineation of the boundaries of Gandhāra, see Salomon 1999, 3.

figure 2.2 Greater Gandhāra. From Richard Salomon, Ancient Buddhist Scrolls
from Gandhāra, map 1. © British Library Board.
figure 2.3 British Library pot D with manuscripts inside. From Richard Salomon,
Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhāra, pl. 5. © British Library Board.
figure 2.4 Comparison of handwriting: Big Hand on the left; Slanted Hand on
the right. © British Library Board (details of Or.14915.33 and 13).
monastery (Salomon 1999, 20–22). As for authorship, names are lacking,

as is usual for most Buddhist texts, but fortunately in the Gandhāran case
unambiguous identification can be attributed by means of handwriting
analysis. All but one of the Gandhāran avadāna texts were written by a
single scribe whom I have dubbed Big Hand, as his handwriting is char-
acterized, at least to my eyes, by large flowing akṣaras (Fig. 2.4). The other
scribe I have dubbed Slanted Hand, because his handwriting is notewor-
thy for its pronounced slant form top right to bottom left (Fig. 2.4). Big
Hand is particularly worthy of note as his seven texts are all of a single
genre, namely avadānas, and he can therefore confidently be pigeonholed,
as by association can Slanted Hand, as a member of an exclusive subset of
monastic functionaries, namely, avadānists (Lenz 1994, 197–215). Because
of the unique pedigree of these texts, the images of women in Gandhāran
Buddhism that can be extracted from them have the unusual feature of
being demonstrably representative of portraits that were known to and
transmitted by a specific group of monks in a specific, though unidenti-
fied, monastery located somewhere in or near Haḍḍa. Thus, rather than
carefully picking stories that will advance one or more of my own theses,
I have the luxury here of being able to examine a group of avadānas that
were selected in antiquity by monks, by avadānists, who had their own
agenda, one that is untainted by my own research goals.
It is not always clear what the agenda of these avadānists might have
been, as their avadānas are often quite brief and frequently fragmentary.
Thus, when attempting to use them to draw out images of women, it is
more often than not only possible to sketch faceless women who lack any
personality or obvious attributes that would clearly suggest some motive
for their stories’ inclusion in one or more of the Gandhāran avadāna texts.
And this is especially true for the two previously mentioned avadānas
concerning gaṇigas, as will be painfully obvious from the translations pre-
sented here. The two avadānas concerning prostitutes are drawn from
British Library Fragments 12 + 14, a series containing nine avadānas that
follows immediately after a triad of sūtras, dubbed the Three Gāndhārī
Ekottarikāgama-Type Sūtras by their editor, Mark Allon (2001):
Gaṇiga-avadāna 18
89. evo ṣuyadi nagare palaḍipu ? [tr. n.] ? ? ///
90. namo ganiga hovadi ◦ yavi ? ujani[ge] graha///(*vadi)
91. ca la ? ya muchido bh[u]mi parivartadi bhi ///
92. aryadharma praüṇ[idi vistare yas-a]///(*yupamano)
[89] Thus it was heard. In the city Pāṭaliputra . . . [90] . . . there was
a prostitute . . . by name. At that time, an Ujjaini householder
. . . [91] . . . fainted and rolled on the ground. [92] . . . attained the
noble dharma. The expansion (*should be) according to the
model.
Gaṇiga-avadāna 2
93. eva śruyadi [ga]niga [a] ? kṣo ? ///
94. ten[o] suta[ga]lo va matredi agaro [śa] ///
95. yadarthino nimatridago vistaro [ya](*s-a)y(*u) ///
[93] Thus it was heard. A prostitute . . . [94] . . . right at the time for
sleeping . . . said: “The abode . . .” [95] . . . then the suitor was
invited. The expansion (*should be) according to the model.
Obviously, these two gaṇiga-avadānas are barely intelligible as they stand,

and can be used to do little more than confirm that prostitutes figured
8. Line numbering here and elsewhere, unless noted otherwise, follows that assigned in
preliminary transcriptions produced but not previously published by Timothy Lenz and
Jason Neelis. The conventions of transcription are those used in the Gandhāran Buddhist
Texts series (University of Washington Press), which, as its name suggests, is dedicated to
the publication of Gāndhārī materials written in the Kharoṣṭhī script. The gaṇiga-avadānas
are currently being edited by Jason Neelis.
prominently in Gandhāran Buddhism, much as elsewhere in Buddhist

corpora. Nevertheless, it can be hypothesized on the basis of the assertion
at the end of the first gaṇiga-avadāna that someone attained the noble
dharma (aryadharma praüṇ[idi] = Skt. āryadharmam prāpnoti) and that the
Gandhāran gaṇigas partake of the grand tradition of the “benevolent
hetaerae”—in good company with Āmrapālī, Padumavatī, and Aḍḍhakāsī—
and somehow acted in support of the Buddha’s dharma and were por-
trayed in a favorable light.
In this regard, it is noteworthy that nowhere in the Gandhāran
avadānas, at least as far as I can determine, are women directly portrayed
as obstacles to the progress of monks. In fact, in the sole avadāna that ad-
dresses the negative effects of sexual desire, the apparent lesson to be
learned is that a monk himself is responsible for sublimating any lustful
tendencies that he may harbor and that a lack of dedication to monastic
training will inevitably lead to ill consequences. The legend in question
concerns an unnamed disciple of Mahakaṣava (Skt. Mahākaśyapa):
Mahakaṣava-avadāna
214. [ra]yagahami ṇagarami aïśpado mahakaśavasaśpasao ? ///
215. /// [pu]trago prio maṇa[vo] kṣati apaḍikulo darśaṇaā tasa
ṇacirajadasa pido kalagado ///
216. /// [uva]samada ṇa bahadi śi[kṣa]va〈*de〉ṇo yavi pramatro hodo
yavi sakṣiteno evo pramatro ///
217. /// ? ? ṇ. ? gami ramadi so avarakalami giriagrasamayi aramaṇo
año ga ? ///
218. /// ? ? [di a] ṇa bahiadi [va]raṇo yavi civaragami liṭhate mad(*o)
h(*o)do ///
219. (vi*)///praḍisari [hodo] so gado kaśavasa [va]di tado kaśave
dharmadeśaṇo kakarodi ///
220. /// ? + + + + + + + + ? [ma]geṇa ca kici dharm[i]-[ca] ? ? + + +.u
.o? ///
221. /// ? kilamehi abhavo aṣo pugalo dharmacakṣu upadaïdo ma[do]
///
222. /// .o ṣavagañaṇo ṇa asti ajanito asamav[a]jito ṣavagaso ñaṇo ṇa
vijadi ///
223. (*ṣa)///agoñaṇo vista[re] janidave siyadi ○ traya ◦ ◦ ◦ 3 ◦ ◦ (BL
Fragment 4)
[214] In the city of Rājagṛha, the venerable Mahakaṣava (*had) a
confidant. [215] The boy was dear, charming, patient, pleasant,
and handsome. But not long after his birth, his father died. [216]
(*The boy) did not renounce his ordination, (*but) became care-
less with his moral vows. In short, he became careless (*with his
training). [217] . . . enjoyed. He enjoyed himself at a mountain
festival and (*partook of ) other (*pleasures). [218] (*Yet he did
not) renounce (*his monastic training). At another time then,
he met with misfortune on his monastic robe. He became sexu-
ally roused. (*Later), [219] he became remorseful. He went and
told Mahakaṣava (*everything). Then (*Maha)kaṣava gave a
lesson concerning the teachings of the Buddha. [220] . . . and by
the path some dharma . . . [221] . . . because of fatigue, it is not
possible for this person to generate the dharma eye. [222] . . .
(*And, therefore), the insight of a śrāvaka does not exist. It was
not produced. It was not attained. The insight of a śrāvaka is not
found. [223] . . . the insight of a śrāvaka. The expansion ought to
be known. (*Avadāna) three. 3.
Unfortunately, the avadāna ends abruptly, so it is difficult to fathom pre-

cisely how to explain what the author had in mind when singling out the
“insight of a śrāvaka.” But in any case, the lesson to be learned appears to
be quite clear: a monk is responsible for his own actions and women are
not a primary cause of his straying from certain monastic vows, even in
cases where there might be an alluring prostitute lurking about.
Such a conclusion may be a little premature, but as far as can be de-
duced from the texts available for examination, the Gandhāran avadānists
of Haḍḍa generally try to portray women in a favorable light, and this ten-
dency is strongly suggested by three other avadānas contained in the Brit-
ish Library collection. The image of women portrayed in the first of these
stories is somewhat out of focus, as the avadāna from which it is drawn is
incompletely understood. I have assigned it the English title The Unfortu-
nate Kumariga (Skt. Kumārī), assuming that this is descriptive of its con-
tent. The first half of the avadāna is hopelessly obscure due to the poor
preservation of the portion of the birch bark scroll containing it. But at
about the middle of the text, the plot becomes fathomable, and here it
seems that a young woman is repeatedly harassed and beaten:
The Unfortunate Kumariga

304. avadano raṣrigae kaḍamahasa///
305. /// ? [a] ? ? ? ? gramage[h](*i i)st[r]i [ṭ] ? ist[r]i ? ? ///
306. /// .igo ughuṭhago so prucha pruchi〈*da〉go ta goṭhoga///

307. /// p[r]atige teṇo okṣarige vealido yavi l.///
308. /// ? ? ? go so ṇa śato yavi tena kumariga tado ti ? ///
309. (*pi)///[ḍido] dito brado agado tasa kumariga teṇo tado c[e] vo
piḍi///(*do)
310. /// ? d[o] tasa kumariga agado teno taso piḍido ya ? ? ? ///
311. ///+ + + + .u ñaṇaviśeṣa budhaṣa[va]ga [pra] ? ? ? bu ? ? ///
312. (*yasay)///u[pamano] siyadi ○ [cad](*u)d(*a)ś(*a) [10 4 ○] (BL
Fragment 4)
[305] Avadāna. In [Rājagṛha] . . .9 of Kaḍamaha . . . [306] . . . village
. . . the women . . . the women . . . [307] . . . proclaimed. He asked
a question. He told him . . . [308] . . . arrived . . . by him [a young
woman] was agitated. Up to . . . [309] . . . He was not calm. Up
to: “a young woman was struck by him.” [310] . . . harassment
was given. (*Her) brother came along. Then the young woman
was struck by him and also harassed. [311] (*Up to) . . . (*Then
the father) came to the young woman. She was harassed by him.
[312] . . . superior knowledge . . . disciples of the Buddha . . . [313]
. . . should be according to the model. (*Avadāna) fourteen. 14.
This avadāna is obviously not an encomium to the potential of women.

But speculating on the basis of the incomplete conclusion in line 312, ///
+ + + .u ñaṇaviśeṣa budhaṣa[va]ga [pra] ? ? ? bu ? ? ///, which apparently
clarified some detail concerning the wisdom of the Buddha’s disciples, it
is possible to at least propose that the avadāna constitutes a commentary
on the ill effects of treating women poorly. And if this is indeed the case,
it is a rather novel avadāna.
The last two avadānas to be discussed here concern Puniga (Skt.
Pūrṇikā, Pāli Puṇṇā or Puṇṇikā), a servant girl of the well-known house-
holder Anāthapiṇdaka,10 and Aśoka, perhaps the most famous king of
India. Unlike the previously mentioned stories, these two legends ad-
dress themes in a manner that clearly lauds the potential and capability
of women, partially justifying my positive interpretations of all of the
Gandhāran avadānas concerning women. First, in the legend of Puṇiga,
a woman is seen to make a significant contribution to the Buddhist
9. This represents a provisional and uncertain translation of raṣrigae.

10. See Allon (2001, appendix 2) for an edition and study of the Puniga-avadāna.
community and, second, in the legend of Aśoka, a woman realizes an

important Buddhist attainment.
Puniga-avadāna
73. puniga avadano vistara ka///(*ryamido)
74. evo śuyadi · anas-apiḍigasa grahavadisa puni[g.] ///
75. da bhagava rayeno p[r]asen[i]g[e]no matriadi budho [na uv](*e)
[ch]///(*adi)
76. ya sarv[e]ṣo grahavadino na uv[e]chadi puniga ? ? ///
77. vistare avadano ◦ 1 (BL Frag. 12 + 14)
[73] The Puniga Avadāna. The expansion (*is to be done thus) [i.e.,
according to the summary]. [74] Thus it was heard. Puniga (*was
the servant) of the householder Anāthapiṇḍika. [75] . . . the
Bhagavat was addressed by King Prasenajit. The Buddha did not
consider (*his request) [76] and he did not consider (*the re-
quest) of any of the householders. Puniga (*addressed the
Buddha) [77] . . . expansion . . . avadāna. (*Avadāna) 1.11
The Gāndhārī avadāna is obscure in its terseness, but since the legend
of Puniga is known from several other versions, the skeleton story con-
tained in the Gāndhārī manuscript can be securely expanded. In his
Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, Malalasekara summarizes the version
of the legend given in Buddhaghosa’s commentary on the Aṅguttara-
nikāya, and this story facilitates a complete understanding of the
Gāndhārī:
On one occasion, when the Buddha was about to set out on a tour,
Anāthapiṇḍika and the other chief patrons of the Buddha, loath to
lose him for several months, begged him to remain with them. But
the Buddha declined this request, and Puṇṇā, seeing Anāthapiṇḍika
very dejected and learning the reason, offered to persuade the
Buddha to stay. So she approached him and said that she would
take the Three Refuges with the Five Precepts if he would postpone
11. The line numbers correspond to those in his Allon’s edition (see n. 17). My transcription
follows Allon’s, with the exception of the reconstruction of (*ryamido) in line 73. The trans-
lation is my own, differing from Allon’s in minor respects.
his tour. The Buddha at once agreed, and Puṇṇā was freed and ad-
opted as Anāthapiṇḍika’s daughter.12
Close comparison of the Gāndhārī with the Pāli leaves little doubt that an
expanded version of the Gandhāran avadāna would be more or less the
same as the Pāli vignette and accordingly one underlying message of both
can be confidently proclaimed: “women have the capacity, and indeed the
ability, to be faithful and influential lay devotees.” And here as an aside, I
would hazard a guess that the previously mentioned gaṇiga-avadānas
would fall under this or a similar rubric, though only subsequent manu-
script finds will substantiate such a hypothesis. In any case, the message
espoused by both the Pāli and Gāndhārī legends is hardly a surprising or
radical one, for the Buddhist tradition lays claim to quite a number of ad-
mirable laywomen, Mṛgāramātā (Viśākhā) to name but one. Being a faith-
ful lay devotee is, however, not the pinnacle of Buddhist achievements for
either men or women, and the micro portion of the Gandhāran tradition
under examination here, namely, the Gandhāran avadānas from Haḍḍa,
do not maintain that it is. This is made especially clear in a Gandhāran
version of a legend about King Aśoka and the women of his harem:
The Avadāna of King Aśoka and the Women of His Harem

223. avadaṇo rayasa aśo[ga]///(sa*)
224. /// ? ? ? ? + + + triśavaṣe ṣamane praviśadi [dharma]deśano te
praviṭhe ///
225. /// ? vo ṇa adibaho ṇa adistuo paḍaga atariga ṭhadave pac̄amukho
istrige ? ///
12. In Malalasekara 1998, 227–28 (s.v. Puṇṇā Therī); see also Allon (2001, 303–4). The
legend as it appears in the Aṅguttara-nikāya commentary (Manorathapūraṇī) is as follows:
Rājā Pasenadi-kosalo Anāthapiṇḍiko gahapati Visākhā mahā-upāsikā aññe ca bahujanā
Dasabalaṃ nivattetuṃ nāsakkhiṃsu. Anāthapiṇḍiko gahapati “satthāraṃ nivettetuṃ nāsakkhin”
ti raho citayamāno sisīdi. Atha naṃ Puṇṇā nāma dāsī disvā “kin nu kho te sāmi na pubbe viya
indriyāni vippasannānī” ti pucchi. “Ama Puṇṇe, satthā cārikaṃ pakkanto, tam ahaṃ nivattetuṃ
nāsakkhiṃ; na kho pana sakkā jānituṃ puna sīghaṃ āgaccheyya vā na vā, tenāhaṃ cintayamāno
nisinno” ti. “Sacāhaṃ Dasabalaṃ nivatteyyaṃ, kiṃ me kareyyāsī” ti. “Bhujjassaṃ taṃ
karissāmī” ti. Sā gantvā satthāraṃ vanditvā “nivattatha bhante” ti āha. “Mama nivattanapaccayā
tvaṃ kiṃ karissasī” ti. “Tumhe bhante mama parādhīnabhāvaṃ jānātha, aññaṃ kiñci kātuṃ
na sakkomi; saraṇesu pana patiṭṭhāya pañcasīlāni rakkhissāmī” ti. “Sādhu sādhu Puṇṇe” ti
satthā dhammagāravena ekapadasmiññeva nivatti. Vuttaṃ h’etaṃ: dhammagaru bhikkhāve
Tathāgato dhammagāravo ti. Satthā nivattitvā Jetavana-mahāvihāraṃ pāvisi. Mahājano
Puṇṇāya sādhukārasahassāni adāsi. Satthā tasmiṃ samāgame dhammaṃ desesi. Caturāsīti
pāṇasahassāni amatapānaṃ piviṃsu. Puṇṇā pi seṭṭhinā anuññātā bhikkhunī-upassayaṃ
gantvā pabbaji. (AN-a IV, 34–35)
226. /// [ya]vi ṣamaṇo pra[viṭha] dharma deśayadi spargaṇo varno

bhaṣayadi yavi istrega ///
227. /// .o aïkṣa[si] ṇaṇu tado vi cavana dukho bhaviśadi tado
dharmadeśana karodi arya ///
228. /// istri(*ga) tasa bhadatasa pade nivaïdo ṇa ca rayaṇeṇo anatago
vaca va[do] na ki ? ///
229. /// is[tri]tri rayaṇasa uvasakramato aïgadi ahadi vaśa ? spi ki va
ka[hi]vo so aho ? ///
230. /// ci dharmacakṣu uparṇo aha suṭhu aha kṣato me bhavadu istu
ṇa [śa]ki [pa]racito ajaṇi[to] ///
231. /// ? g[a] yado kuvaci khaladi añabudho akhalado vistare jaṇidavo
sarvo yasay///(*upamaṇo)
232. (*siyadi)///cadure ○ ○ 4 ○ ○
[223] Avadāna. Of King Aśoka . . . [224] . . . a thirty-rain-retreat
monk13 entered (*the palace) to give instruction in the dharma.
They [the women] entered. [225] A screen that is neither exces-
sively wide nor excessively bulky is to stand in between (*the
monk and the women), the women, facing away from the
[screen]. . . . [226] Then the monk entered; he taught the dharma.
He gave a description of heavenly worlds. Then a woman [227]
thought: “This is not the case. Because of that rebirth, there will
be suffering.” After that, he [the monk] gave an explanation of
the (*Four) Noble (*Truths. Then) [228] the woman threw her-
self at the feet of the venerable monk. But this was not allowed
by the king. (*She) spoke words: “Is there not. . . .” [229] (*Then)
the woman went to the king. She saw him and said: “I am not
obedient. Just what is to be done?” He said: (*“What has hap-
pened?”) [230] (*She said:)“. . . the dharma eye has arisen.” (*He)
said: “Excellent.” (*She) said: “Let there be forbearance for me,
who does not now have the ability to know the minds of others.”
[231] In those cases in which a (*woman) wavers, one awakened
to a perfect state of knowledge (*remains) unwavering. The
expansion should be known. All (*should be) according to (*the
model). [232] (*Avadāna) four. 4.
13. The monk is identified by age in order to emphasize his elderliness against the presum-
ably young age of his female pupils. A thirty-rain-retreat monk would probably not be a
temptation to the young maidens in King Aśoka’s harem, and, therefore, Aśoka probably
would be confident that his prohibition of contact between the women and the monk pre-
ceptor (alluded to in line 228) would not be abrogated.
If my provisional translation is generally correct, especially with regard to

the conclusion, then this avadāna is noteworthy, especially in light of the
conclusion drawn in a parallel version of the legend in the Sūtrālaṅkāra
(story 30), preserved in Chinese.14 In the Chinese version, Aśoka’s re-
sponse to the news that a woman from his harem achieved something
significant, śrotāpannā-hood in the Chinese, is considerably different than
the one put in his mouth in the Gandhāran version. In the Chinese,
Aśoka’s words contain a decided thread of male-centered arrogance:
王聞是已於佛法中倍生敬心。而作是言。嗚呼佛法。大力世尊厭
生死道。嗚呼佛法。有信向者皆得解。何以知之。女人淺智尚
能解悟。過六師故。我今向阿耨多羅調御丈夫坊處生歸依心。南
無救一切眾生大悲者開甘露法。男女長幼等同修行。
若謂女人解　　名為淺近者諸餘深智人　　敬尚方能悟 (T 4
no. 201 (大莊嚴論經) 286b)15
When he (*Aśoka) heard (*his concubine), he greatly increased his
respect in the teachings of the Buddha and said: “Oh, the teachings
of the Buddha. The Tamer of Men, the Bhagavan, detested saṃsāra
with great force. Oh, the teachings of the Buddha. Those who ap-
proach it with faith, attain deliverance. How does one know this?
Because even women whose intelligence is shallow can comprehend
it and because it has subdued the six heretical teachers. I now take
refuge in the abode of the dharma and in the hero without equal.
Homage to the compassionate one who saves all living beings, to the
one who has proclaimed the elixir of the dharma with which men
and women and elders and youths ought to practice these teachings.”
“If someone says that the dharma is shallow because someone says
that a woman can understand it, then people with deep profound
intelligence will only be able to realize the teaching with great re-
spect . . .”16
14. There are Sanskrit fragments containing some pregnant phrases such as yeṣāṃ su[bh]
(*āṣitarasā)yanabrṃhitāni striṇā(*m) = ma[hī]., but due to the poor state of their preserva-
̊
tion the precise nature of the conclusion in the Sanskrit version remains obscure. See
Lüders 1926, 153.
15. A French translation of this story can be found in Huber 1908, 150–57.
16. Thanks go to Lin Qian for improving the translation.
Though there are only five Gandhāran avadānas concerning women, and
of those only two that are understood more or less completely, the image
of women that the group of stories as a whole projects appears to me to be
quite a favorable one, something that is made especially clear in the leg-
ends of Puṇiga and of Aśoka and the women of his harem. And this favor-
able depiction of women is, interestingly enough, mirrored in inscrip-
tions. There are five water pots (Fig. 2.5) associated with the British Library
figure 2.5 British Library pot B with inscription. © British Library Board (cf.
Richard Salomon, Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhāra, pls. 24–25; figs. 24–27).
collection of manuscripts. Although it is not entirely certain that all five

pots came from the same find spot as the manuscripts, this can be sur-
mised on the basis of three points. First, the physical similarity of the pots;
second, the fact that one of the pots contained the manuscripts now in the
British Library collection (Fig. 2.3); and third, the fact that the pots and
manuscripts were acquired as a unit (Salomon 1999, 183–224). The pot
inscriptions strongly suggest that women were prominent in the Buddhist
community in Haḍḍa as lay donors. Of the five pots, three were donated
by women: Vasavadatta, wife of Susoma (pot A); Viratata, wife of Srva-
hiama (pot C), and Hastadata, wife of Teyavarman (pot E); the inscriptions
on the remaining two pots do not specify a donor, one saying only that it
is in the possession of the monk Catula, the other that it is in the posses-
sion of the Dharmaguptakas:
Inscription of Vasavadatta, Wife of Susoma

ayaṃ pānaya ghaḍedeyaṃdharme va[sa]vadatae susomabharyae atma-
nasa arogadakśinae svamiasa suhasomasa saṃmepratyaśae madapi[t]
rina saṃmpratya + + + + + + + saṃmepratyaśae mitrañatisa lohitana
saṃmepratya[śa]e bhava[tu]
This water pot is the pious gift of Vasavadata [Skt. Vāsavadattā], wife
of Susoma, for the benefit of her own health. May it be for a proper
share on the part of (her) mother and father, for a proper share on
the part of [all beings], for a proper share on the part of her friends,
kinsmen, and blood relatives (Salomon 1999, 198).
Inscription of Viratata, Wife of Srvahiama

[a]ya panighaḍa [da]ṇaṃmokh[o] viratatae [srava]hiama-bharae nirya-
teti saṃghecaturdiśe rayagahami acaryaṇam sarvastivatinaṃ
k[r]isvatiṇaṃ viryavatinaṃ hetuvatiṇaṃ [.i] + + + + + + [rm.] + +
[naṃb.] pratiga
This water pot [is] the pious gift of Viratata, wife of Srvahiama; [she]
presents [it] to the universal community at Rayagaha (Skt. Rājagṛha),
in the possession of the Sarvāstivādin teachers, who teach actions,
who teach energy, who teach causation . . . , (who teach karma), . . .
(Salomon 1999, 205).
Inscription of Hastadata, Wife of Teyavarman

aya pa[ni]yaghaḍae hastadatae teyavarmabharyae deyadharma saghe
catudiśe atmanasa arogadakṣine tevarmasa aramiyasa bhikuniyae
ra[kṣa] ? [ṇi]e sudaṣ-asa sudarśanasa gu[ha]datae ga[śa] ? [pri] ? ? saṃ ?

[sa] ? taga[na]sa sakṣe ? ? [va]e sastasatvana da[gha]pacheya bhavatu
yine bhra[do puya]
This water pot is a pious gift of Hastadata [Hastadattā], wife of Tey-

avarman, to the universal community, for the benefit of her own
health. May it be for the benefit (?) of the monastery attendant (?)
Tevarman, of the nun ?, of Sudaṣṇa, of Sudarśana, of Guhadata
[Guhadattā], of ?, of ?, of ?, of ?; in short (?), of all beings (?); and in
honor of [her] brother (Salomon 1999, 218).
Thus, it would seem that in ancient Haḍḍa women were actively deemed
capable of attaining the fruits of the Buddha’s teachings (e.g., the
dharmacakṣu) and were important and prominent lay supporters of the
monastic community. But curiously, the laudable Buddhist potential of
women and their important role as donors might not have led to vibrant
support for a community of nuns. In the micro world of Buddhist docu-
ments from Haḍḍa, nuns are mentioned only once. Hastadata, the afore-
mentioned donor of one of the water pots in the British Library collection
(pot E), saw fit to include one nun in the list of recipients mentioned on
her donated pot (translated above). But in any case, now that some depic-
tions can be made of laywomen peeking out from behind Haḍḍa’s “birch
bark curtain,” the significant role of lay women, if not of nuns, in one area
of Gandhāra can be highlighted with both inscriptions and texts in a way
that was not possible prior to the recent and prolific expansion of the once
meager collection of Gāndhārī literary documents that were available for
scholarly inspection (See Salomon 1999, 57–68; see also Allon 2007
131–41).
3
Paˉli Vinaya
reconceptualizing female sexuality
in early buddhism
Alice Collett
there are many contradictions expressed about women in the Pāli

Canon, the texts of the Theravāda tradition. There are contradictory re-
marks about women’s nature (itthibhāva), concerning whether women are
“weak in wisdom,” “uncontrollable,” and “envious” or, conversely, “wise
and virtuous,” or indeed whether male and female nature are of any impor-
tance at all.1 There are contradictions expressed in relation to women’s
ability both to tread the path outlined by Gotama Buddha and to attain high
levels of religious experience.2 There are contradictions expressed in rela-
tion to their domestic roles, ranging from, for example, a passage that clas-
sifies various types of wives and approves of, among others, the slave-type
1. In the Aṅguttara-nikāya (4.80 at II 82–83), Ānanda asks the Buddha why women do not sit
on courts of justice, embark on business, or reach the essence of any deed. The Buddha replies
by listing certain negative characteristics of women such as that they are, by nature, weak in
wisdom, uncontrollable, greedy, and envious. In the Saṃyutta-nikāya (3.16 at I.86), the Buddha
is talking to King Pasenadi when the king hears his wife has given birth to a daughter. The king
is disappointed by the news, but the Buddha tells him that women too can be wise and virtuous.
The well-known verse attributed to Somā in the Therīgāthā (verses 60–62 at 129–30) raises the
question as to whether male and female nature is of any relevance to one treading the path.
2. Many of the Therīgāthā verses contain expressions that suggest the nuns—to whom the
verses are attributed—had attained Awakening. Also see the Mahāvacchagotta-sutta (MN 73 at
I 491), which reports the Buddha stating that he had far more than 500 arahant nuns and far
more than 500 laywomen followers who had become non-returners. The most quoted verse on
the topic of women’s inability is the verse connected with Somā (see chapter six of this volume.
The verse also appears in the Thī v.60). This assertion that women lack the ability to advance
because of their dull intellect is put into the mouth of Māra, who, Anālayo argues in chapter
six, may represent “challenges posed by outsiders to members of the Buddhist community.”
Pāli Vinaya 63
of wife, through to acknowledgements that a woman’s duty to serve a man

is a form of suffering.3 As well as this, there are contradictions in relation
to female sexuality. Although a popular choice of topic for scholarly debate,
research on female sexuality in the Pāli Canon has not tended to focus on
nuances of the characteristics of female sexuality and female sexual desire
as expressed in the texts, but more on female sexuality as expressed in rela-
tion to male desire. Often, when female sexuality is referred to in the Pāli
Canon, it is commented upon in a male voice; that is, women are depicted
as enticers of men, seeking to bait or ensnare them. Such depictions of
women occur in the Theragāthā, and in a well-known passage from the
Aṅguttara-nikāya:
I do not see, Monks, even one other form so enticing, so desirable,

so intoxicating, so binding, so infatuating, such a hindrance to win-
ning the supreme peace from bondage than, Monks, the form of a
woman. Monks, those who cling to a woman’s form—impassioned,
greedy, enslaved, infatuated, attached—they grieve for a long time,
besotted by the female form.
I do not see, Monks, even one other sound . . . scent . . . taste . . .
or touch,4 so enticing, so desirable, so intoxicating, so binding, so
infatuating, such a hindrance to winning the supreme peace from
bondage than the sound, scent, taste and touch of a woman. Monks,
those who clings to the sound, scent, taste and touch of a woman—
impassioned, greedy, enslaved, infatuated, attached—they grieve
for a long time, besotted by female sound, scent, taste, or touch.
Monks, a woman, even when going along, will stop to entice the
heart of a man, whether standing, sitting, lying down, laughing,
speaking, singing, weeping, stricken, or dying, she will stop to
entice the heart of a man. Monks, if it is right to say of anything,
“this is wholly a snare of Māra,” then it is right to say this of wom-
ankind, “this is wholly a snare of Māra.” (AN 5.55 at III.68–69)5
3. Aṅguttara-nikāya (7.59b at IV.92–93) and Saṃyutta-nikāya (4.37.3 at IV, 239).

4. In the Pāli the passage is repeated four times, once for sound, then scent, taste, and finally
touch.
5. This passage is not found in parallel texts to the Aṅguttara-nikāya, so is only extant in the
Pāli. Also, the context of this story, leading up to the declaration, is the narrative of a mother
and son, both of whom ordain and engage in sexual intercourse with one another. As such,
although it is found in a sutta collection, this is a vinaya-type story as it concerns the misbe-
havior of a monk and nun.
Depictions such as these, coupled with less incriminating ones, such as

advice that monks should avoid women (DN 16,5.9, II.141), and with the
occasional non-Pāli sources, such as Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita, have led
scholars to the conclusion that early Indian—or rather, Pāli—Buddhism
has one pervasive view of female sexuality.6 Accordingly, Pāli Buddhism is
charged with conceptualizing women with active, voracious sexual appe-
tites contstantly seeking to drag unwilling men back from path. Certainly,
such a depiction is the thrust of the above and similar passages. So much
is this the nature of woman, according to Aṅguttara-nikāya quotation
above, that a woman might even rise up from her deathbed in one last
effort to ensnare the heart of a man! However, although it cannot be
denied that such passages do exist, they are far from the only depiction of
female sexuality in the Pāli literature.
Other recent scholarly discussions of female sexuality include consid-
erations of the bhikkhunīsaṃyutta of the Saṃyutta-nikāya (Collett 2009a:
108–12), a Chinese parallel of which is the subject of chapter six of this
volume, in which nuns demonstrate that they have gone beyond the afflic-
tion of sexual desire. In verses attributed to Āḷavikā, her initial response to
an attempted seduction is:
Sensual pleasures are like sword stakes,

the aggregates the executioner’s block.
What you call delight in sensual pleasure
has become non-delight for me.7
As in other of the sections of the bhikkhunīsaṃyutta of the Saṃyutta-

nikāya, this verse is spoken in response to an attempted seduction, by a
male, of the nun in question.8 This aspect of female sexuality, as a re-
sponse to male advances, although evident in the texts of early Indian
Buddhism, has received little scholarly attention. While in contrast to
what can appear as a pervasive social construct of female sexuality (both
within and outside of early Indian Buddhism), evidence can be sought and
6. See the introduction to this volume, pages 5–6, for references to the history of the debate
in modern scholarship.
7. Saṃyutta Nikāya (5.1 at I, 128) sattisūlūpamā kāmā khandhāsaṃ adhikuṭṭanā yaṃ tvaṃ
kāmaratiṃ brūsi arati mayha.
8. The “man” is Māra, in the guise of a human male.
Pāli Vinaya 65
found that portrays men as sexual predators and women as either pas-
sively consenting or trying (and sometimes failing) to repel male advances.
Evidence of women as passive and responsive in sexual situations and
potential sexual situations can be found in the Pāli Vinaya. The present
study of the saṅghādisesa rules in the Pāli Vinaya highlights that the differ-
ences between the rules for monks and those for nuns, and the stories
behind each rule, indicate different sexual behaviors of monks and nuns
and men and women and allude to differences in male and female
sexuality. It can be ascertained from a study of these rules that, on the
whole, male sexuality is represented as aggressive, potent, and proactive,
while female sexuality is passive and responsive. While there are some
indications in other sections of the Pāli Vinaya that women did experience
sexual desire, such as in the pācittiya rules (3, 4, and 5) on female mastur-
bation, there are less instances of women actively seeking out sex than
there are of women responding to the sexual behavior of others. Rather
than the rules and origin stories revealing women with voracious sexual
appetites who are intent upon as much sexual activity as possible, when-
ever they can and with whomever they can, it is instead the men’s attempts
to persuade, cajole, and manipulate women into sex acts with them that
stand out.
-
Saṅghadisesa - Vinaya
rules in the Pali
Saṅghādisesa rules are the second group of rules in vinaya texts. The first
are the pārājikas, the most serious offences by which one is usually per-
manently expelled from the saṅgha.9 Breach of a saṅghādisesa rules is less
serious. The consequences of committing a saṅghādisesa offense is not
fixed. If a monk or nun commits such an act, a formal meeting of the
saṅgha must take place in order to determine what sort of consequences
would be most fitting in each instance. In the Pāli Vinaya nuns have sev-
enteen saṅghādisesa rules, ten of which are specific to them and seven of
which are the same as the rules for monks. Monks have thirteen, so not all
of theirs apply to the nuns. Of the nuns’ saṅghādisesa rules that- relate to
sex acts or sexuality, only one is shared with monks. There are four rules
9. See Clarke (2009a) on a pārājika story missing from the Pāli but in all other extant vi-
nayas. Clarke highlights that inclusion of this story can lead to a different, and lesser, form
of punishment for transgression of the first pārājika. According to this story, permanent
expulsion from the saṅgha is not the only result of committing the first offense.
for nuns that specifically relate to sex, although, as is the case with other
classes of rules, other of the rules can be applied to or come out of situa-
tions relating to sex. For monks there are five saṅghādisesa rules specifi-
cally to do with sex.
As noted in the introduction to this volume, the extant Pāli Vinaya is
structured so that monks’ rules and accompanying stories appear first,
and the nuns’ sections follows that. Any rules for nuns that apply to both
monks and nuns are not repeated in the nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga. So, for ex-
ample, in the nuns’ saṅghādisesa section there are only ten rules, as the
seven they share with monks are not repeated. As noted by Horner (see
the introduction to this volume, page 3–4), the extant structure to the Pāli
Vinaya, with the nuns’ rules after those for monks, may not have been the
original structure. Horner asserts this on the basis of two pieces of evi-
dence: a fragment of a Tibetan text and the (mis-)placement of the inde-
clinable pi. Further evidence for her argument comes at the beginning
and end of most sections of the extant nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga. With the ex-
ception of the first section on pārājikas, each section both begins and ends
with a summary line or passage which details the rules to be recited or
which have been told.10 For example, the concluding paragraph in the
nuns’ pārājika section—concluding the telling of four pārājikas, as the
four the nuns share with monks do not appear—the text reads: “Told,
Venerable Ones, are the eight offenses involving defeat” (uddiṭṭhā kho
ayyāya aṭṭha pārājikā dhammā, Vin. IV, 222). At the beginning of the sec-
tion on saṅghādisesa rules we find: “Venerable Ones, these seventeen rules
come up for recitation” (ime kho pan’ ayyāyo sattarasa saṃghādisesā dhammā
uddesaṃ āgacchanti, Vin. IV, 223), and to conclude that section, “Told,
Venerable Ones, are the seventeen saṅghādisesa rules” (udditthā kho ayyāyo
sattarasa saṃghādisesā dhammā, Vin. IV, 242), when, in fact, only ten rules
have been detailed, as the seven that apply to both monks and nuns have
not been repeated. In the extant Pāli Vinaya, it is not stated which of the
seven missing saṅghādisesa rules for nuns are the seven that they share
with monks, but Buddhaghosa does enumerate these in his commentary
to the Pāli Vinaya. According to Buddhaghosa, the monks’ saṅghādisesa
rules that also apply to nuns are rule number 5 and rules 8–13. Buddhag-
hosa’s commentary is obviously a late text, but if we compare his classifica-
tion with the full list of saṅghādisesa rules for nuns in the other extant
10. The opening statement is missing in the pārājika section.

Pāli Vinaya 67
Indic vinaya—the Sanskrit Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya,

we find almost exactly the same rules listed, although not in the same
order.11 Thus, it seems fairly clear which of the saṅghādisesa rules apply to
nuns and which do not.
Although there are rules to do with sex in other sections of the Pāli
Vinaya, the saṅghādisesa rules stand out as those most suitable for analy-
sis. With the exception of the stories connected with the first pārājika,
here we find the most comprehensive stories concerned with sex. The first
pārājika is problematic in relation to analysis of male and female sexual
behavior due to the extant structure of the Pāli Vinaya outlined above. In
the monks’ Suttavibhaṅga, there are many supplements to the first
pārājika, more so than for any other rule. As this rule is shared between
monks and nuns, it is not in the nuns’ Suttavibhaṅga, which is presum-
ably an indication that the stories told in relation to monks should apply
equally to nuns. However, such an application is not easy. Many of the
supplemental stories involving monks are concerned with sex acts that
would be impossible for nuns to perform, as they are concerned with
penile penetration of orifices, and so cannot apply to nuns because of the
obvious differences in biological makeup. These are concerned with, for
example, penetration of animals or human or animal corpses, or of inani-
mate objects, such as plaster decorations. Therefore it is not easy to ex-
actly ascertain the extent to which the whole section on this rule is being
suggested as being applicable to nuns. If it is only generally applicable,
this hinders analysis as much as any speculative attempts at detailed
comparison.
There are also other rules to do with sex and rules that can be under-
stood to relate to sex in other parts of the Vinaya. In these stories, we find
instances of what appear to be mutual consent (to the act in question,
which is often only implicitly not explicitly about sex) as well as instances
of apparent and actual female desire, and also of male desire and sexual
aggression. For example, pācittiya rules 11, 12, 13, and 14 are concerned
with nuns talking with men on their own and at inappropriate times or
in unsuitable places. These rules may relate to sex—that is certainly the
11. The Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya has 19 rather than 17 saṅghādisesa

rules. It includes one rule not known in other vinayas, but also misses out one in other lists.
It has more than 17 because it has saṅghādisesa 3 (see below) as three separate rules. The
saṅghādisesa rules under discussion in this chapter, both those for monks and nuns, appear
in either all or almost all other extant vinayas.
implication—but sex is not explicitly mentioned in these cases. In

pācittiya 14 the intent seems clearest, as in this story Thullanandā dis-
misses her companion and whispers in the man’s ear. Thus, this could be
an example of active female sexual desire, as are the rules on female mas-
turbation (pācittiyas 3, 4, and 5). These rules against activities that would
cause sexual arousal and potentially orgasm, such as slapping the vulva
or inserting things in the vagina, attest to an active sexuality on the part
of some nuns. However, none of these rules nor the amount of them—
there are few—attest to a voracious female sexual appetite. There are
other rules to do with not keeping company with men on individual occa-
sions or developing ongoing intimate relationships with men, such as
pācittiya 36, in which the nun Caṇḍakālī is said to have too close a rela-
tionship (saṃsaṭṭhā viharati) with a householder and his son, but in a case
such as this sex is not the sole factor in question. Thus, while in other
parts of the Pāli Vinaya there are some cases of apparent mutual consent
in sexual, romantic, or intimate encounters, as well as indicators of active
sexuality in the part of both sexes, the saṅghādisesa rules present a par-
ticularly interesting paradigm. In this study I present female sexuality in
the saṅghādisesa rules as passive and responsive. It is not my intention to
deny female agency or to deny instances and examples of an active and
healthy sexuality, but rather instead to proffer an alternative—seen
through one set of serious and detailed rules—to what has been a some-
what overarching view of a pernicious and overactive female sexuality.
-
Saṅghadisesa - vinaya
rules for monks in the Pali
Saṅgha-disesa 3: Not to speak inappropriately about sex
This Suttavibhaṅga rule is said to have been made because of Venerable
Udāyin. His dwelling was particularly picturesque, and many women
came to Anāthapiṇḍika’s park to see it. It was while showing women the
toilets that he would speak inappropriately to them about sex, and engage-
in other reproachable speech. The text does not detail exactly what it is he
is supposed to have said and simply recounts that after showing them the
toilets, he “spoke in praise and spoke in blame, he begged and implored,
asked and inquired, related, exhorted, and abused.”12 It is initially the
12. vaṇṇaṃ pi bhaṇati avaṇṇam pi bhaṇati yācati pi āyācati pi pucchati pi paṭipucchati pi

ācikkhati pi anusāsati pi akkosati pi. (Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 3 at Vin. III, 127).
Pāli Vinaya 69
commentary attached to the extant Suttavibhaṅga that first indicates what

he may have said, defining “vulgar words” (duṭṭhullā vācā) as speech con-
nected with toiletry functions and sex and relating his abusive words as,
for example, saying “you are defective in sex, . . . you are a deformed
woman.”13 Some women laughed at Udāyin when he did this, but others
complained. The monks told the Buddha, who scolded Udāyin and made
a rule that monks, when filled with desire, should not offend women with
vulgar words about sex.
The stories in the supplement to this rule give further indication as to
the types of things Udāyin might have said. Many of these addenda are
concerned with monks making sexual innuendos to women to whom they
are attracted. For example, a monk said to a women who was wearing a
rough blanket, “is that thick, short hair yours?”14 Similarly, to a woman
wearing a newly woven blanket, a monk asked, “is that your matted hair?”15
Other innuendos include, to a woman working in a field, “has there been
some sowing?”16 On each occasion the text notes that the women did not
understand the innuendo and replied innocently with, for example, “Yes,
it is a rough blanket.”17 Each time, the monk expresses remorse at having
spoken as he did. This shows that the innuendos were not made acciden-
tally, by a slip of the tongue, but intentionally said to attractive women
presumably from salacious motives.
-
Saṅghadisesa 4: Not to try to persuade a woman to engage in
sexual intercourse
This is perhaps the most illustrative of the rules under discussion on the
question of male and female sexuality. Udāyin is again the culprit here,
and in this case he speaks inappropriately to a laywoman when she asks
him what the monks need and offers the usual donations. He tells her
these items are plentiful and that a better offering would be to offer herself
to him for sex, as this is hard to come by for monks. The origin story for
this rule is as follows:
13. nimittamattāsi . . . itthipaṇḍakāsi (Suttavibhaṅgha saṅghādisesa 3 at Vin. III, 128).

14. kakkasalomaṃ kho te (Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 4 at Vin. III, 130).
15. ākiṇṇalomaṃ kho te (Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 4 at Vin. III, 130).
16. vāpitaṃ kho te (Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 4 at Vin. III, 131).
17. ām’ . . . khārakambalako ‘ti (Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 4 at Vin. III, 130).
At one time the Buddha, the Blessed One, was staying at Sāvatthī in
the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍika’s park. At that time the venerable
Udāyin was dependent on families in Sāvatthī [for alms], and he
approached many families. At that time there was a certain woman
who was a beautiful, good-looking, lovely widow. Then, the vener-
able Udāyin, rising in the morning and taking his bowl and robe, he
approached that woman’s dwelling, and having approached he sat
down on the appointed seat. Then the woman approached the
venerable Udāyin; having approached and having greeted the ven-
erable Udāyin she sat down to one side. The venerable Udāyin in-
structed, roused, enthused, and delighted with talk on dhamma this
woman who was seated to his side. Then this woman, delighted
with talk on dhamma, said to the venerable Udāyin:
“Do say, Venerable One, what [will be] of benefit? We are able to
give to the noble one the requisites of robes, alms-bowl, lodgings,
and medicines for illness.”
“Sister, these are not hard for us to come by, that is, the requisites
of robes, alms-bowl, lodgings and medicines for illness. You should
give us what is hard to come by.”
“What is that, Venerable One?”
“Sexual intercourse.”
“[Will it be] of benefit, Venerable One?”
“[It will be] of benefit, Sister.”
“Come, Venerable One”. Entering the inner room, she took off
her outer garment and lay back on the bed. Then the venerable
Udāyin approached her. Having approached, he said, “Who would
touch this foul-smelling wretch?” and he departed spitting.
Then this woman became enraged, angry, annoyed and said,
“These renouncers, sons of the Sakyan, are without shame, of low
morality, liars. They pretend to be dhamma-farers, possessing tran-
quillity, living a holy life, speakers of the truth, virtuous, of good
conduct. Among them, there is no renunciation, no leading of a
holy life. Among them, renunciation is lost, the holy life destroyed.
Where is renunciation among them? Where is holiness among
them? Fallen from renunciation are these, fallen from the holy life.
How can the wanderer Udāyin, having himself begged me for
sexual intercourse, say ‘Who would touch this foul-smelling
wretch?’ and depart spitting? What in me is evil? What in me is
foul-smelling? In what am I inferior to whom?” Other women
Pāli Vinaya 71
became enraged, angry, annoyed and said, “These are without

shame . . . how can the wanderer Udāyin, having himself begged
this one for sexual intercourse, say, ‘Who would touch this foul-
smelling wretch?’ and depart spitting. What is evil in her? What is
foul-smelling in her? In what is she inferior to whom?” The monks
heard these women who were enraged, angry, and annoyed. Those
who were modest monks became enraged, angry, annoyed and
said: “How can this venerable Udāyin speak in praise of servicing
his own desires in the presence of women?” Then these monks
told this matter to the Blessed One. Then the Blessed One, for this
reason, on this occasion, having the order of monks convened,
questioned the venerable Udāyin: “Is it true as said that you,
Udāyin, spoke in praise of servicing your own desires in front of
women?”
“It is true, Blessed One.” The Buddha, the Blessed One, admon-
ished him: “It is not right, foolish man, it is not appropriate, it is not
suitable, not worthy of a recluse, not fitting, it is not to be done.
How can you, Foolish Man, speak in praise of servicing your own
desires in front of women? Is not, Foolish Man, the dhamma taught
by me, in various ways, for the destruction of the passions, not for
the sake of the passions, taught by me for the sake being without
fetters, not for the sake of being bound, taught for the sake of not
grasping, not for the sake of grasping? Then, Foolish Man, while
the dhamma is being taught by me for passionlessness, you strive
after passion, while the dhamma is being taught for the sake of
being free from fetters, you strive to be bound to the world, while
the dhamma is being taught for the sake of not grasping, you are
intent on grasping. Is not, Foolish Man, the dhamma taught by me,
in various ways, for the stilling of passion, for freedom from con-
ceit, for the disciplining of thirst, for the uprooting of attachments,
for cutting through the rounds of rebirth, for the destruction of
craving, for passionlessness, for cessation, for nibbāna? Have I not,
Foolish Man, declared in various ways, the abandoning of sensory
pleasures, full understanding of the desires, subduing of the thirst
for sensory pleasure, uprooting of thoughts of pleasure, calming of
the fever of desire? It is not, Foolish Man, for the benefit of unbe-
lievers, nor for the increase of believers. But this is, Foolish Man,
disparaging for both unbelievers and believers and for some causes
doubt.”
Then the Blessed One, having admonished the venerable Udāyin

in many ways, spoke in disapproval of his difficulty in supporting
and maintaining himself, his arrogance, his discontent, his cling-
ing (to defilements), his indolence. He spoke in many ways in
praise of supporting and maintaining oneself, contentment, happi-
ness, giving up (the defilements), of being morally scrupulous, of
geniality, of the decreasing (of obstructions), of zeal. Having spoken
dhamma that is suitable and fitting for monks, he addressed the
monks and said: “Monks, I will make known the path of training
for monks, that is founded for ten reasons: the excellence of the
saṅgha, the comfort of the saṅgha, restraint of malevolent men, for
the convenience of well-behaved monks, for the restraint of the
āsavas in this world, for the combating of the āsavas in future
worlds, for the benefit of nonbelievers and the increase of believers,
for the establishing of dhamma, and for the following of the disci-
pline. Thus, monks, this course of training should be set forth:
‘whatever monk, affected by desire, with perverted mind, should
speak in praise of servicing one’s own desires in front of women,
saying, “Sister, the foremost of honors that a woman can give one
like me, virtuous, of good conduct, living the holy life, in this way
would be service connected with sexual intercourse.” This is an of-
fense involving a formal meeting of the saṅgha.’ ”
In the narrative on the origin of this rule, we can see that, although
the laywoman agrees to the monk’s request, they do not then engage in
the sexual intercourse. Udāyin has a sudden change of heart when the
moment comes, instead turning on the woman and verbally abusing her.
This event appears somewhat incongruent, given the foregoing intent of
the monk, and is not specified in the rule, which is simply that monks
should not manipulate women into having sex with them by telling them
that it is the highest gift they can give. However, although not specified in
the rule, it is necessary for the making of it. Each of the addenda that
follow are about a monk attempting to persuade a woman to have sex with
him by making this same claim, that offering sex is an exalted “gift.” But
in no case does sex ensue. If it did, of course, the issue at hand would not
be the attempted persuasion, but rather the question—dealt with already
in the Suttavibhaṅga—of sexual activity, which comes under pārājika of-
fences rather than saṅghādisesa. Thus, Udāyin’s sudden disgust for the
woman he had just attempted to seduce, a woman, it would appear, he had
Pāli Vinaya 73
his eye on for some time, helps the narrative polemic reach its goal: to
conclude with a rule about manipulation of women by monks swept up by
carnal urges.
There is no opposite of this rule in the nuns’ saṅghādisesa, a fact
which, while an argument ex silencio, suggests that nuns were not in the
habit of trying to persuade men to have sex with them. However, accounts
of laywomen—but not nuns—who appear to be sexual aggressors do
occur in some of the supplemental stories to the first pārājika rule on
abstention from sexual intercourse. These stories recount women accost-
ing monks who were sleeping or napping and sexually assaulting them.
In two of these instances, it is stated that the woman in question acted in
this way because she was of the view that offering sex to monks is the
highest gift to offer them. In the first of these two instances, the text
reads:
Now, at that time, in Rājagaha, there was a female lay disciple called
Supabbā, who had faith in the Buddha. She held this view: whoever
offers sexual intercourse [to a monk], she gives the highest gift.
(Vin. III, 39)18
It would seem, then, from the story of Udāyin above, that the reason cer-
tain women were of this view is because the monks were encouraging it.
In one other instance, when a group of women sexually assault a sleeping
monk, they are said to do so out of desire for sexual gratification. On one
other occasion, after sexually assaulting a monk, the woman in question
laughs at him. On this occasion, it would appear that the sexual assault
was an attempt to humiliate the monk. None of the other recounted epi-
sodes specify why it is that women sexually assault or accost the monks.
Therefore, it is not possible to ascertain whether the women acted in this
way maliciously, to humiliate monks, whether they did so out of sexual
desire, or whether they sat on top of the sleeping monks in order to per-
form sex acts because they believed that to do so was a way to offer monks
what they desired. As motive is only mentioned in four of the nine in-
stances recounted, and the latter motive is mentioned more than the
others—on two occasions rather than one—a conclusion that the outlined
18. Tena kho samayena rājagahe supabbā nāma upāsikā buddhappasannā hoti, sā evaṃ diṭṭhikā
hoti yā methunaṃ dhammaṃ deti sā aggadānaṃ detīti.
behavior of the women in question was a result of female sexual appetite

would be spurious.
-
Saṅghadisesa 2: Not to engage in bodily contact with a woman
This rule is as follows:
Whatever monk, affected by desire, with a perverted heart, should

come into bodily contact with a woman, holding her hand or hold-
ing a braid of her hair, or rubbing against any one or other of her
limbs, this is an offense involving a formal meeting of the saṅgha.
(Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa 2 at Vin. III, 120).
This rule for monks is similar to a pārājika rule for nuns, as follows:
Whatever nun, filled with desire, should consent to rubbing, or rub-

bing against, or taking hold or touching or pressing against a man
filled with desire below the collar-bone, above the circle of the
knees, she also becomes one who is defeated, she is no longer in
communion, being one who touches above the circle of the knee.
(Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga pārājika 1 at Vin. IV, 213)
It also bears some resemblance to another pārājika rule for nuns, although
this one is closer to a pācittiya rule for monks:
Whatever nun, filled with desire, for the sake of indulging in that
which is not dhamma, should consent to holding the hand of a man
filled with desire or should consent to holding the edge of his outer
cloak or should stand with or talk to or should go for a rendezvous
with or should consent to a man’s approaching (her) or should enter
a concealed place or should dispose of the body for such a purpose,
she also becomes one who is defeated, she is no longer in commu-
nion, being a doer of eight things (Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga pārājika 4 at
Vin. IV, 220).
As pārājika rules are most severe for women who commit the transgres-
sion of intentionally coming into bodily contact with a man for the sake of
sexual arousal, that woman is to be, according to the text, permanently
Pāli Vinaya 75
expelled from the saṅgha. However, if a monk acts in the same way the
consequences for him are less. A monk is not expelled from the commu-
nity for such behaviour. Commenting on this situation, scholars such as
In Young Chung (1999, 34–7) and Juo-Hsüeh Shih (2000, 172–3) highlight
this as testimony to the harsher treatment of women as opposed to men
in Buddhist vinayas. In both of the pārājika rules, the causative of the verb
sad is used in the optative (sādiyeyye) meaning “to permit, yield, consent.”
In the first of the two pārājikās it is used once at the end of the rule, imply-
ing that the rule is to be enforced if the nun consents to being touched,
caressed, et cetera. In the second of the pārājikās it is used three times: in
relation to consenting to hand-holding, to consenting to touching the
clothes of another, and consenting to the man approaching her. Conversely,
there is no language denoting yielding or consent on the part of the
monks, suggesting instead that the monk is the active one in the interac-
tion—not simply one who is permitting or consenting to contact, but
rather one who is initiating.
Shih notes that this difference, the use of the word meaning “consent”
in the nuns’ versions of the rule, is particular to the Pāli. In the vinayas of
other schools the word for “consent” does not occur in either monks’ or
nuns’ rules; therefore Shih concludes that it is “of no significance” (2000,
214). I have, nevertheless, included mention of it for two reasons: first,
because the origin story in relation to this first pārājika rule in the Pāli is
concerned with the issue of consent. Although the two protagonists in the
story—the nun Sundarīnandā and the builder Sāḷha—fall in love, it is the
layman who conspires to get Sundarīnandā alone with him. Her offense is
simply that she consents. The second story, however, which is exception-
ally brief, is concerned with nuns who act out of their own sexual desire.
But the story is little more than a statement that a group of nuns were
behaving inappropriately, followed by the ruling. Further, in considering
the relevance of the use of the word for “consent,” recent comparative
study of vinaya and other literature is suggestive of some differences in
relation to views about or portrayals of women between the early schools
of Buddhism.19
19. See for example Anālayo (2008) and also his study of a Tibetan version of the story of
Dhammadinnā, in which Dhammadinnā herself approaches the Buddha, as opposed to the
Pāli version, in which her interlocutor, Visākha, reports their conversation to the Buddha
(2011a:17).
Saṅghaˉdisesa 5: Not to act as a go-between

This saṅghādisesa rule applies to both monks and nuns. Effectively, the
rule prohibits monks and nuns from any sort of involvement with sexual
and/or romantic unions. Although the rule specifically states that a monk
must not act as a go-between “for a woman with a man in mind or a man
with a woman in mind” (itthiyā vā purisamatiṃ purissassa vā itthimatiṃ,
Vin. III, 138), all the examples given, with the exception of the first, are
about men having monks persuade a girl, young woman, or the girl or
woman’s family to give the girl or woman to the man or men. That all
stories told in relation to this rule are concerned with monks is, again,
because this rule is related in the monks Suttavibhaṅga. However, this
does not account for why it is almost always women being persuaded into
sexual or romantic encounters. In the initial sections, the go-between ac-
tivities appear as simple misdirected desires to match-make that go
wrong. However, following that is a section on men asking a prostitute
(vesiyā) to join them in a pleasure grove. She refuses, as she does not
know them, until persuaded by the monk to do so. Then follow several
sections on monks procuring certain types of women for men, and the
whole section ends with some examples of monks going to “examine”
women, presumably to see if they will make suitable wives or suitable
sexual partners.
-
Saṅghadisesa - Vinaya
rules for nuns in the Pali
Saṅgha-disesa 3: Not to go to the village alone, cross the river
alone, stay away at night alone, stay behind in a group
In this nuns’ rule, four specific instances are recounted that lead to a four-
fold rule being made. First, an unnamed nun quarrels with other nuns so
goes alone to see her relatives in a neighboring village. The issue is with
her having gone alone. When the other nuns who have been dispatched
to find her come across her they ask if she was violated. She replies that
she was not but, nevertheless, a rule is made forbidding nuns to do this
due to an apparently strong possibility they will be sexually assaulted if
they travel alone. The next section concerns two nuns traveling together
and their experience of coercion by a boatman who tells them he cannot
take them both across the river at the same time; they must go one at a
time. Once separated, each nun is violated. A rule is made that not only
must nuns not travel to villages alone, but they must not cross rivers
Pāli Vinaya 77
alone. Third, a man conspires to get alone a certain nun, who is part of a
group staying overnight in his village. A rule is made that nuns must not
be away from the group overnight. Last, a nun stays behind from a group
to defecate. This very temporary separation was enough for her to be
accosted and violated, so a rule was made that nuns must not stay behind
a group.
The form of this rule is different from those discussed so far. With
the other rules, in each case the story is concerned with a monk or nun
behaving in a way considered inappropriate. In this instance, the obvi-
ous culprits are not the nuns who suffered abuse and mistreatment, but
rather the men who attempted to seduce, coerce, and manipulate in
order to either bring about situations of consensual sex or who sexually
assaulted the nuns. A superficial reading of this rule might suggest that,
as the nuns are the ones who are admonished for their actions, they are
being held responsible for the actions done to them—essentially, being
blamed for being sexually assaulted. However, this goes against the
grain of the majority of vinaya rules, which deem an action an offense if
it is intentionally done. In this rule, nuns are not being admonished for
engaging in sex acts, but rather for putting themselves in dangerous or
potentially dangerous situations. Other rules in the vinayas are preven-
tative and protective, and a similar rule for monks is found in pācittiya
10. In the story, the monk Anuruddha agrees to sleep on a couch in a
woman’s house alone with her, which results in him having to rebuff her
advances. The rule is made that monks should not, at night, lie down
near a woman. The punishment for transgression of this offense is
lighter than for the nuns in the saṅghādisesa rule, but this could be be-
cause the consequences of not adhering to the monks’ rule—having to
fight off amorous advances—is much less severe than in two of the cases
for nuns, which resulted in sexual assault. Although in the pācittiya rule
laywomen making sexual advances to monks is attested to again, the
nuns’ rule exposes an aggressive, and in two instances violent, male
sexuality.
This is the first rule specifically concerned with nuns rather than
monks, but here we do not see a reversal of the trend identified thus far.
So far, monks have acted and women responded, and here the change is
not in that sexual dynamic, but only in who is the ordained and who the
layperson. Here laymen act, and nuns attempt to respond or are subjected
to unwanted events, in two instances being subjected to sexual assault and
in the other having to fend off male advances.
Saṅghaˉdisesa 5: Not to accept and eat food offered by men

who desire her when she is herself filled with desire
Saṅghaˉdisesa 6: Not to persuade another nun to accept food
from one filled with desire
It would appear from these two rules20 that physically attractive nuns were
presented with better food offerings on some occasions, simply because
men were sexually interested in them. In these two very short sections,
nuns are told not to accept food or water for brushing their teeth by anyone
who is—obviously, one would assume—sexually attracted to them. Next,
they are told not to try to persuade other nuns to accept better food offer-
ings in these situations. Again, with these two rules there are no equiva-
lents for monks. This is perhaps the closest we come to a rule for women
equivalent to the monks’ rule prohibiting them from attempting to per-
suade women to engage in sex with them. But if this rule is seen as the
closest equivalent, then a conclusion must be drawn that women do not
need to persuade, because men are sexually ready and available, and all
the nuns are being regulated against is not encouraging men in instances
when they are making their availability known.
The nature of these two rules are indicative of a general pattern that
can be observed through this analysis of the saṅghādisesa rules of the Pāli
Vinaya on sex. Indications within the rules of male and female sexuality
are that men are the initiators and sexual aggressors, and women the ones
who are, on the whole, propositioned, courted, coerced, manipulated, or
assaulted. The two above rules demonstrate again male desire as the ini-
tiator of potential sexual situations between men and women. The men
are giving some indication to the nuns of their sexual interest, and the
rules are concerned with whether the nuns respond or not. In general,
within discussion of this set of rules, the parameters are circumscribed
around female response to male advances. In none of the instances in the
saṅghādisesa are females the sexual initiators or sexual aggressors and
men the ones courted, coerced, or manipulated. While this is the case with
the rules under discussion, such an indication of the nature of female
sexuality is potentially challenged by the above-mentioned addenda to the
first pārājika, which describes women sexually assaulting men. However,
this potential challenge is tempered by the indications that, in some
20. Saṅghādisesa 5 and 6 have recently been translated by Shih (2000, 99–109).
Pāli Vinaya 79
instances at least, such behavior is again responsive; the women are re-
sponding to their perceived idea that offering sex to monks is the highest
gift they can give as laywomen.
Setting the above rules alongside each other, we can conclude the fol-
lowing: for monks, the basic admonitions are that they should not speak
inappropriately to women about sex, try to pursue women to have sex with
them, come into bodily contact with a woman, or act as go-betweens in
sexual encounters. For nuns, they should not come into bodily contact
with a man, put themselves in dangerous situations in which they might
be sexually assaulted, respond inappropriately to men who display sexual
intent, or act as go-betweens. Thus, in this set of rules the indicators are
clear—men actively seek sex and women need to be aware of the potential
danger of male sexuality, not encourage it, and ensure they keep them-
selves out of harm’s way. As mentioned above, in other parts of the Pāli
Vinaya there are examples of active and healthy male and female desire,
and other examples of mutual consent, but here the case is unequivocal—
men are the ones with the more potent and potentially dangerous sexual
appetites.
4
Mahaˉsaˉṅghika-Lokottaravaˉda
Bhikṣ uṇ ˉı Vinaya
the intersection of womanly virtue
and buddhist asceticism
Amy Paris Langenberg
the mahāsāṅghik a-lokot taravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya is one of two

complete nuns’ vinayas surviving in an Indic language, the other being
the Pāli vinaya, the subject of the preceding chapter in this volume.1 In the
1930s, Rahul Sāṅkṛtyāyana photographed a manuscript of this text, which
he dates to the 12th century, at Zhalu monastery in Tibet. After returning
to India, he deposited the negatives at the Bihar Research Society in Patna.
Gustav Roth (1970) is responsible for producing an excellent edition of
this valuable document.2 It includes an account of the eight grave duties,
the nuns’ prātimokṣa with commentary, the miscellaneous rules for nuns,
and an abbreviated list of the miscellaneous rules for monks, all in the
Prakrit-cum-Sanskrit that is characteristic of Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottarvāda
texts (Roth 1980, 78–135 and 1972, 211–18).
1. I would like to sincerely thank Bhikkhu Anālayo and Alice Collett for their help with this
essay. In addition to detailed and patient editing, Professor Collett contributed a number of
substantive clarifications at key places in the text. Any mistakes are, of course, my own.
2. For a complete French translation, see Nolot 1991. Akira Hirakawa (1982) has translated
the entire Chinese nuns’ Vinaya of the Mahāsāṅghika school into English. There are many
differences in detail between this text and that of the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin school,
but structurally, the two are very similar. See also J. W. de Jong (1974, 63–70), Hüsken
(1997b, 202–37), von Hinüber (1994, 109–22).
Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya 81
Although their family resemblance is strong, the various Buddhist

vinaya traditions also display unique features. The Mahāsāṅghika-
Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya is remarkable in that it appears to have
been edited in order to provide a comprehensive set of rules, principles,
and procedures for nuns, easily detachable from the monks’ vinaya (Roth
1970, xxix–xxxii and Hüsken 1997, 202–4). In it, the story of the founding
of the nuns’ Order along with an account of the eight grave duties (gurud-
harmas) are supplied at the beginning of the text as an introduction, just
before the nuns’ prātimokṣa (the list of vows taken at higher ordination).
In the Pāli and Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinayas, by contrast, these appear much
later with the miscellaneous (khandaka) rules. Ute Hüsken brings to our
attention the eight gurudharmas’ priority and contiguity to the prātimokṣa
proper in this text, a unique organizational feature that she finds both
logical and compelling. She points out that, after all, the eight grave duties
are supposed to be “the very first rules formulated for nuns” and are de-
clared “never to be transgressed” (1997b, 203).3 In the Mahāsāṅghika-
Lokottarvāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya, moreover, the relevant karmavācanās
(formal monastic procedures) are handily collected under each gurud-
harma. Furthermore, unlike the Pāli Bhikkhunīvibhaṅga (the canonical
exposition of the nuns’ pāṭimokkha) that only lists nuns’ rules not shared
by the monks, the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya includes
the shared rules, though in an extremely abbreviated form.4 Overall, the
text exhibits a tendency to rearrange, reconcile, and, as Ute Hüsken ob-
serves, “rationalize the material” so as to create a smooth, coherent, logi-
cally organized document ideal for recitation and study by nuns (Hüsken
1997b, 228).
Perhaps a nun-centered editing program explains another noteworthy
feature of the text: its foregrounding of the figure of Mahāprajāpatī
Gautamī. Here, after her acceptance of the eight grave duties for nuns, she
is invested before her band of nuns with the titles of community eldress
(saṅgha-sthavirī), community eminence (saṅgha-mahattarī ), and commu-
nity leader (saṅgha-pariṇāyikā) (pārājika dharma 1, Roth 1970, §111, 75, and
xxxix–xli). When the nuns encounter a difficulty in the Pāli Vinaya, they
3. For instance: ayaṃ gautami bhikṣuṇīnāṃ caturtho guru-dharmo yo bhikṣuṇīhi yāvaj-jīvaṃ

satkartavyo yāvad an ati-kramaṇīyo velā-m-iva mahāsamudreṇa. Gurudharma 4 (Roth 1970,
§92, 62).
4. See the previous chapter for a discussion of the structure of the Pāli Vinaya.
typically report to the monks, who bring the matter to the attention of the
Buddha. Although meetings between the Lord Buddha (bhagavān) and
Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī do occur in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, the
monks often play an intermediary role.5 In the Mahāsāṅghika-
Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya, on the other hand, Mahāprajāpatī main-
tains her right of access to the Lord, bringing almost all matters of
discipline to his attention personally (Roth 1970, xl).
This vinaya text differs from others in another significant way: it con-
tains one gurudharma for nuns that does not appear elsewhere, except in the
Chinese Mahāsāṅghika Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya (Nolot 1991, 534–35, Roth 1970,
xxx–xxxi, Hirakawa 1982, 83–85). By combining the gurudharma that nuns
may not admonish monks with another that states that nuns may not rebuke
monks, the Lokottaravādins have made room for the new gurudharma while
still keeping the total number at eight.6 The additional dharma forbids nuns
from accepting donations of food, clothing, and shelter first from lay people
who have not yet donated anything to the monks. According to the exposi-
tion of the rule, the issue at stake is not the overall amount donated to the
monks’ versus the nuns’ community, but simply the order of giving. Thus,
the Lord assures Mahāprajāpatī that “If the assembly of nuns causes even as
much as one bowl of rice to be offered to the assembly of monks, then,
should it accept even hundred-flavor food, this does not constitute a fault.”
Similarly, if the nuns cause so much as a bamboo platform or cow-dung hut
to be donated to the monks, then should they accept even a bed of white
sandalwood or a seven-story monastic building, there is no fault.
A. Gurudharma 4 (Roth 1970, §89–92, 61–62)

89. Now how is it, Gautamī, that the nuns’ community must not
avail themselves of first-time offerings of food, beds and seats, and
housing before the assembly of monks do?
Someone who makes a food offering to the nun’s community
should be told, “You must do it following the most excellent proce-
dure.” Then if he says, “There is no faith in that for me, no grace,”
5. According to Anālayo, the other vinayas resemble the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya in the
number of reported meetings between Mahāprajāpatī and the Buddha (Anālayo 2008,
116–17 n. 59).
6. Nolot (1991, 534–35) points out that this is done by attaching the commentary usually as-
sociated with the gurudharma forbidding nuns to abuse monks (ākroṣṭum) to the gurud-
harma forbidding nuns to admonish monks (vacanapatho).
he is to be told, “As for us, we do not accept [this offering].” Now he

says, “My mother, my father, a member of my men’s organization,
a professional associate, one of my friends, have all previously given
[a food offering] to them but I [myself ] have never previously made
an offering to the noble ones. Let the noble ones receive [a food of-
fering].” If [in this way] the assembly of nuns causes even as much
as one bowl of rice to be offered to the assembly of monks, then,
should it accept even one-hundred-flavor food, this does not consti-
tute a fault.
90. Now what about a first offering of beds and seats? Someone
who gives bedding and seating to the assembly of nuns should be
told, “You must give it following the most excellent procedure.”
Then if he says, “There is no faith in that for me, no grace,” he is to
be told, “As for us, we do not accept it.” Now he will say, “My mother,
my father, a member of my men’s organization, a professional as-
sociate, one of my friends, have all previously given [bedding and
seating] to them. Let the noble ones receive [bedding and seating].”
If [in this way] the assembly of nuns causes even so much as a cot
or bamboo platform7 to be given to the assembly of monks then,
should it accept beds and seats of white sandalwood, this does not
constitute a fault.
91. What about the first offering of a monastic dwelling? Some-
one who establishes a monastic dwelling for the nun’s assembly
should be told, “Establish it following the most excellent proce-
dure.” Then if he says, “There is no faith in that for me, no grace,”
he is to be told, “As for us, we do not accept it.” Now he says, “Noble
ladies, my mother, my father, a member of my men’s organization,
a professional associate, one of my friends, have all previously
caused monastic dwellings to be made for them. May the noble
ones accept this monastic dwelling.” If [in this way] the assembly of
nuns causes even so much as a hut made of cow dung or a pile of
rubble to be given to the assembly of monks then, should it accept
even a monastic building of seven stories, this does not constitute a
fault.
92. If a particular nun having disrespected [the monks] with in-
sults like “dirty monk” or “ignorant monk” or “mean stupid old
7. Roth (1970), §90 antamasato khayu[?]kā maṃcaṃ. Em. antamasato khaṭvā maṃcaṃ.
man” avails herself of the first-time offerings of food, bedding and

seating, and housing before the monks do, she transgresses a grave
duty. So, Gautamī, the nuns are to avail themselves of a first-time
offering of food, bedding and seating, and monastic dwellings after
the monk’s community does so. This, Gautamī, is the fourth grave
duty of the nuns, which, for as long as they live, the nuns must
faithfully and solemnly execute, honor, respect, and refuse to trans-
gress, just as the great ocean respects the shore.
Gurudharma 4 is interesting for reasons beyond its singularity. It is one of

many passages in the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya that
does not obviously fulfill one of the “ten purposes” (daśārthavaśa) for
vinaya listed in the introduction to the Bhikṣu Prātimokṣa Sūtra of the
Lokottaravādins.8 It is difficult to see how the sort of ritualized assertion of
male priority found in this rule, which is subsequently defanged by casu-
istry, would engender any of the enumerated benefits. How might it, in
reality, unify or increase the merit of the community, chastise the sinful or
encourage the virtuous, generate faith in the unfaithful and faithful alike,
remove karmic stains and prevent the accumulation of karmic residues in
the future, or preserve and propagate the well-explained dharma?9 The
issues at stake in gurudharma 4 seem not to be moral, nor what one might
term “spiritual,” but rather sociopolitical. While ensuring that they need
not actually give up material comforts to monks, this proscription requires
nuns to perform a publicly visible ritual act of gift-giving that underlines
the higher status of the male community. Nuns are also warned against
openly giving vent to any resentments that might arise with respect to the
monks’ community.
Contemporary scholarship offers additional explanatory frameworks
for assessing the meaning and purpose of the vinaya rules for monks and
nuns. Rupert Gethin (1998, 91–94) proposes that vinaya is concerned
8. See Tatia (1976, 5.26–6.4), Roth (1979, 321), Prebish (1996b, 48). This list is not unique
to the Mahāsāṅghika Lokottaravādin tradition. According to Anālayo, the different vinayas
“agree fairly closely on a listing of ten benefits to be expected from the rules” (Personal com-
munication, 3/8/2012). For the ten reasons in the Pāli Vinaya, see page 72 in the previous
chapter of this volume.
9. Staying very close to this traditional interpretation, Karma Lekshe Tsomo (1996, 4, 8)
suggests that vinaya recitation was for the purpose of “maintain[ing] the standards of behav-
ior and ethical integrity of the order” and also comments on the primacy of śīla as the basis
of concentration (samādhi) and wisdom (prajñā).
with realizing four aims, two of which (promoting the unity of the com-
munity and cultivating the spiritual life) concur with the traditional
explanation mentioned above. The third and fourth aims he mentions,
managing lay-monastic interactions and safe-guarding the community’s
reputation, offer more possibilities for interpreting vinaya rules like gu-
rudharma 4. Still, up to this point, many scholarly discussions of
lay-monastic interactions, including the one Gethin offers, have focused
on the need for Buddhist monks and nuns to be clean and neatly dressed,
conduct themselves with dignity, and refrain from offending the laity.
Here, I would like to suggest that, important as they are, something
beyond unity, spiritual cultivation, etiquette, dignity, and hygiene are at
play in certain nuns’ rules. The Lokottaravādin Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya demon-
strates an additional concern that is unique to the female monastic
community: their occupation of a social location at the intersection of
womanly virtue and Buddhist asceticism.
Technically, what makes a nun different than an ordinary laywoman
can be clearly defined in terms of Buddhist monastic ritual. The glosses
for many nuns’ rules inform us that “‘Nun’ means an ordained woman.”10
While fully adequate to the social organization of the ordained community
itself, Buddhist ordination may not always have carried monastic women
safely past the rocky shoals of public scrutiny. Mari Jyväsjärvi has recently
completed an excellent study of rhetoric about female asceticism in the
medieval Buddhist commentarial tradition of Guṇaprabha, as compared
with a Jain monastic commentary and Brahmanical dharmaśāstra and lit-
erary traditions. Jyväsjärvi argues that female ascetics were viewed gener-
ally as women of “fragile virtue,” in need of protection, chastening, and
oversight. The male community saw themselves as obligated to step in as
their guardians.11 Though we address different layers of the textual tradi-
tion and somewhat different historical periods, I see the present study as
complementing Jyväsjärvi’s insights by suggesting that the social
vulnerability of Buddhist nuns (perceived and actual) derived not simply
from their public image as unguarded females of questionable virtue, but
also more generally from the fact that they were attempting to occupy a
frontier position at the intersection of two well-established social identi-
ties, those of “virtuous woman” and “Buddhist ascetic.” By all available
10. See, for instance, pācattika dharmas 79 and 84, below.

11. Unpublished thesis, Jyväsjärvi 2011.
accounts, virtuous householder women in ancient India were supposed to

be submissive to and under the guardianship of male authority. In matu-
rity, virtuous householder women were also, however, required to be
fertile and therefore capable of bringing forth sons. The Dharmaśāstra lit-
erature indicates that brahmin lawgivers understood female submission to
male authority largely in terms of the need to corral and bring to fruition
what was perceived as a powerful female sexuality through marriage.
Buddhist ascetics were, by contrast, celibate and nonreproducing by defi-
nition. If a woman of virtue was thus to be conceived generally as both
fertile and under the guardianship of their male relatives; if, indeed, wom-
anly virtue was commonly defined in terms of wifehood; how then was a
nun to display both full womanly virtue and celibacy? Buddhist nuns’ oc-
cupation of this underarticulated, even paradoxical, social position at the
crossroads of female virtue and Buddhist asceticism made them difficult
for the laity to understand or accept and challenging for monastic lawyers
to legislate.
Feminist legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw describes this type of social
“intersectionality,” one also experienced by North American women of
color (who are both female and non-white) as “a location that resists
telling” (1991, 1241). In other words, because Buddhist nuns were social
hybrids, they were continuously in danger of disappearing from the social
map, their special role and status misunderstood, mistrusted, and over-
looked. Many passages in the nuns’ Vinaya assimilate the category of
“nun” to, or differentiate it from, specific and identifiable female behav-
iors or occupations in response to this problem. By legally constructing
nunhood out of a patchwork of already familiar social roles for women,
the authors of the Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya were able to shore up and more clearly
articulate the nebulous social position that Buddhist nuns’ occupied.
The selections translated and discussed below are a sampling of the
vinaya passages that perform this sort of quilting work. In these examples,
we can find evidence of attempts to negotiate a social and public, as well as
a “private,” identity for Indian Buddhist nuns, engendered by the need for
them to appear as women of virtue at all times while simultaneously uphold-
ing and maintaining their renouncer status. In the first example, pācattika
dharma 79, it is stated that “Any nun who stands by a monk with fan and
water while he eats commits a fault requiring expiation.” While not immedi-
ately obvious, this rule and the introductory story related to it reveal a need
to enable (former) husbands and wives (or any pairing of monk and nun that
might be construed in spousal terms) to conduct themselves appropriately
in relation to one another. Interestingly, the story is not about sexual tempta-
tion. Rather it concerns an old married couple who have together committed
themselves formally to the spiritual life. At mealtime, the woman stands by
her former husband, fanning him and pouring his water. They squabble
and, angered, she overturns the water pot onto his head, beats him with her
fan, and abuses him verbally. This scenario leads to the rule.
B. Pācattika Dharma 79 (Roth 1970, §193, 216–17)

193. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. Gartodara (“Hollow-belly”),
Gartodara’s mother, and Gartodara’s father wandered forth from
householdership into homelessness. Gartodara’s father and mother
wandered forth with the Śākyas, Gartodara among the heterodox
groups. Gartodara’s father was eating. Fanning him, Gartodara’s
mother stood opposite and held his water pot. He prattled on about
various events of the past that were unpleasant to her. She jammed
the water pot onto his head, then she hit him about the head with the
fan handle. “You ignorant useless spiteful old man!” she said. “You
are speaking of things that should not be mentioned!” She was seen
by the nuns. They told her, “Don’t do that, noble lady! A member of
the superior assembly is not meant to act thus.” She replied, “But just
now, this ignorant, unhappy wretch was prattling on about things that
shouldn’t be mentioned.” The nuns briefed Mahāprajāpati Gautamī
on the matter. [Mahāprajāpati Gautamī told the Lord.]12 The Lord
said, “You have done ill, mother of Gartodara. This is not the teaching
(dharma), this is not the discipline (vinaya). You stand by this monk
with water and fan while he eats. It is not suitable to stand by with fan
and water in this way.” The Lord pronounced [the rule] as follows:
“Should any nun stand by a monk with fan and water while he
eats, she commits a fault requiring expiation.”
“Nun” means: an ordained woman. And so forth.13
12. I have supplied this phrase, which has precedence in this vinaya, in order to clarify the
transition.
13. This text uses the terms peyālaṃ and pe to indicate ellipses. It is typical of vinaya texts to
abbreviate in this way. In this case, the reader is to supply the following phrase: sūpasampannā
traivācikena karmaṇā jñapti-caturthena anāghāta-pañcamena samagreṇa saṅghena ubhayataḥ
saṅghena iyaṃ bhikṣuṇī (pārājika dharma 1, Roth 1970, §114, 76). This translates as, “One
who is well ordained by the entire monastic community, by the twofold monastic commu-
nity by means of the threefold speech with a formal monastic resolution as the fourth, [and]
not struck down as the fifth, this is a nun.”
“Monk” means: an ordained man. And so forth.

“Eating” means: five courses, or five things mixed, or the like, or
any hard or soft food. “Should she stand by with fan and water”
means: should she hold his water pot or give air with a fan, it is a
fault requiring expiation. Thus the statute is declared.
A nun who holds the water pot but does not fan transgresses the
monastic discipline. The one who fans but does not hold the water
pot transgresses the monastic discipline. One who does both com-
mits a fault requiring expiation. For one who does neither, there is
no fault. One nun [attending to] one monk constitutes a fault. If
there are many monks, it is not a fault. If she fans any monk who is
father or brother to her, it is not a fault. Thus, the Lord said:
“Should any nun stand by a monk with fan and water while he
eats, she commits a fault requiring expiation.”
The commentary informs us that the rule does not apply if a nun wishes
to fan and serve her father or brother, or a group of monks collectively.
Despite the introductory narrative, it seems likely that a former husband
and wife reverting to their customary relationship at mealtime is viewed
as a problem for reasons beyond the potential for disagreement and abuse.
In any case, nuns’ abusing and scolding monks is proscribed by Guru-
dharma 3 in the Lokottaravādin Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya. The casuistry associated
with this rule also makes it clear that a nun fanning and serving water to
monks is not itself the problem since she may legally fan or serve her
father, brother, or a group of monks. Sexual tension also is not implicated.
The problem seems to come, rather, when the nun behaves in the tradi-
tional manner of a wife at mealtime, fanning and pouring water for her
actual husband, or a solitary monk who might be “husband material.”
This is a problem for nuns and their lawyers because, while nuns should
display female virtue, their virtue should not resemble that of a wife.14
This point is somewhat obscured by the way the scene is played for
laughs (and it often is in Buddhist vinaya literature) (see Schopen 2007 and
Clarke 2009b). Gartodara’s mother does not suffer fools gladly. Though she
14. Several rules for monks also may be aimed at dispelling any marital overtones in monk-
nun interactions. One of the four praṭinideśanīya dharmas (faults to be confessed) found in
the Pāli, Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin, and Mūlasarvāstivāda Bhikṣu-Prātimokṣas says that
monks should gently admonish nuns if they attempt to direct the feeding of monks at lay-
people’s houses. Another of the praṭinideśanīya dharmas forbids monks to accept, eat, and
enjoy food from the hands of a nun who has begged alms and who is not related to him
(Prebish 1996b, 94–95; Oldenberg and Rhys Davids, tr. [1882] 1991, 37).
performs the ritual functions of a devoted wife, the sincerity of her devotion
is clearly (and appropriately—she is a nun, after all) in doubt. She neither
defers nor submits nor reveres. In short, she is not feeling like a devoted
wife, merely nominally acting like one. This distinction, subtly emphasized
by the addition of a bit of rather unsubtle schtick, underlines my point: nuns
must not engage in what might be interpreted by fellow nuns, monks, or
passing townspeople as wifely behavior. The role of “wife” has no place in
their social portfolio. While their subjective states are also of concern, as
will eventually be made clear when we turn to an analysis of bhikṣuṇī
prakīrṇaka 31, subjectivity is not what is at issue in pācattika dharma 79.
The introductory story to pācattika dharma 84 describes a group of
nuns who, invited for a meal by the devout laywoman Viśākhā, return the
favor by cleaning, carding, and spinning her raw cotton. Viśākhā scolds
them, expressing her preference that they behave as specialized religious
rather than ordinary women. This scenario leads to the rule: “Should a nun
perform work for a householder, it is a transgression requiring expiation.”
C. Pācattika Dharma 84 (Roth 1970, §198, 222–23)

84. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. Viśākhā, mother of Mṛgāra,
invited both communities for a meal. Some nuns, going there early
in the morning, said, “Pious lady, since you have invited both com-
munities for a meal, can we perform a service for the pious lady (in
return)?” She replied, “What service should the noble ones per-
form? You explain. You recite. You think deeply. In that way you do
me a service.” “But we will also perform this service. After some go
to the roof to get the cotton, others will treat it. Some others will tear
it off [the husk]. Others will clean it. Some others will separate it.
Others will spin it. Then taking the ball of thread, they will ap-
proach the pious lady, [saying] ‘Pious lady, a service has been ren-
dered.’” She replied. “That the noble ones would clean or roll or
rend or spin cotton is not a service to me. Rather I benefit if you
noble ones, having eaten my food, explain and recite [the sūtras] so
that you are established in the teachings of the Buddhas.” Now the
nuns heard about the concerns of that pious laywoman. The nuns
briefed Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī on the matter. [Mahāprajāpatī
Gautamī told the Lord.]15 The Lord said, “That is badly done, nuns.
15. peyālaṃ.
It is not appropriate to do household services. Therefore: Any nun

who performs work for a householder, commits a fault requiring
expiation.”
“Nun” means: an ordained woman.
“Householder” means: someone who lives in a house.
“Work” means: if she should spin or clean [cotton] etc., or thresh
or grind or cook or sew or perform work of any kind for a house-
holder she commits a fault requiring expiation. Thus the statute is
declared. It is not suitable for a nun to perform household work.
“But what of the offering of garlands and the wafting of scent?” one
said. “That is to be performed jointly by the noble ones.16 If some-
one causes scent to be ground or jasmine to be bound, it is not a
fault. A monk who performs work for a householder also trans-
gresses the monastic discipline.” The Lord spoke in this way.
Thus, should a nun perform work for a householder, it is a trans-
gression requiring expiation.
In pācattika dharma 79 and pācattika dharma 84 nuns are forbidden to

play the parts of wife and domestic worker.17 Elsewhere, they are also
forbidden from acting or appearing to act as costumers (bhikṣuṇī
prakīrṇaka 6), thread-sellers (bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 30), garland-makers
(bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 28), beauticians (bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 25), herbalists
(pācattika dharma 82), midwives (bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 32), and brothel
madams (bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 7).18 They are encouraged, however, to play
certain other roles, some shared by all respectable women, others particu-
lar to their status as nun. Gurudharma 4 and pācattika dharma 84 encour-
age nuns, for instance, to behave as hierarchically subordinate females
and learned sūtra reciters respectively. Thus they should in some respects
resemble the general populace of womankind in this sociohistorical
16. Roth (1970), §198, 222 āryamiśrakāhi, so obviously just the female noble ones, i.e., the
nuns.
17. Pācattika dharma 84 also forbids monks to perform work for a householder, although if
a monk does so, this constitutes a minor offense, not a fault requiring expiation.
18. Gregory Schopen notes a Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya rule prohibiting nuns from standing
in the door of the nunnery, as this behavior was apparently associated with prostitution. It is
at Kṣudrakavastu, Derge ‘dul ba Da 151a.5 (Schopen 2008, 237 n.14). See also Jyväsjärvi (2011,
241). Schopen also notes a series of scenarios in the same vinaya in which the nun
Sthūlanandā sets herself up in business as a tavern keeper, brothel madam, and, pimp, re-
sulting in rules regulating such behaviors (Schopen 2009, 259–380).
milieu, but also behave as learned, erudite, and accomplished practitio-

ners of their tradition.
Rules concerning menstruation provide a particularly clear case of the
way the architects of Buddhist nunhood employed commonly accepted
ritual categories and practices for women in order to carve out a recogniz-
able and respectable social niche for nuns. As celibate women, nuns
would have menstruated more frequently than laywomen engaged in the
business of pregnancy and lactation. As women who ventured outside of
the domicile daily, it would have been more difficult for nuns to retreat to
their rooms wearing stained garments as respectable women did during
their periods of menstruation.19 Bhikṣuṇī prakīrnaka 15–18 of the
Lokottaravādin Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya prescribe a special toiletry item called an
āṇicolaka, literally, “a garment [like] an axle-pin” at times of monthly bleed-
ing and legislate the washing of this garment.20 In permitting the use of
the āṇicolaka, bhikṣuṇī prakīrnaka 15 provides a hygienic and practical so-
lution to the problem of menstrual mess. It also, by prescribing how far
the nuns may insert the item, explicitly guards against nuns’ satisfying
their sexual desires.21
D. Bhikṣuṇī Prakīrṇaka 15–18 (Roth 1970, §268–71, 309–10)

Pra. 15. 268. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. The nuns got their
menstrual periods month after month. The blood ruined the bed-
ding and seating. Mahāprajāpati Gautamī briefed the Lord about
this matter. “Is it suitable, lord, to wear a cloth shaped like an axle
pin (āṇicolaka) for the purpose of protecting the bedding and seat-
ing?” The Lord replied, “A cloth shaped like an axle pin is suitable.
The one whose period has come and whose blood flows is to wear a
cloth shaped like an axle pin, that is, a bundle of scraps. Pushing it
in too shallowly is not suitable but neither is pushing it in too deeply
in order to dispel the passion of desire. On the contrary, it should be
19. See, for instance, Baudhāyanagṛhyasūtra 1.7.22.1–3.

20. In the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, transgression of the rule prescribing a menstrual gar-
ment (Tib. sme gab; Skt. rajaścoḍa) for nuns is a fault requiring expiation (Derge ‘dul ba Ta
20a.5). The rule takes a different form in the Pāli Bhikkhunī Pātimokkha. Here, “A nun who
uses the household cloth (āvasathacīvara) without relinquishing it is an offense requiring
expiation” (pācittiya 47).
21. Though, realistically, I suspect one would be hard pressed to locate a woman, ancient or
modern, who finds feminine hygiene articles erotic.
pushed into the wound entrance22 loosely. Whichever nun inserts it

too deeply, or too shallowly, in that way slaking her lust, commits a
gross sin.” This is said regarding the matter of the cloth shaped like
an axle pin.
Indian Buddhist menstrual rules also exist within a broader cultural con-
text that ascribes ritual significance to female blood. This broader context
is apparent in bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka rules 16–18, which proscribe the wash-
ing of nuns’ āṇicolakas at public washing and bathing areas (tīrthas).
Pra. 16. 269. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. At that time, the
nuns were washing their menstrual cloths in the bathing place for
women. The women looked upon them with contempt, [saying],
“This entire place has been made impure by [their] blood.” [The
nuns briefed Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī] on the matter. [Mahāprajāpatī
Gautamī told the Lord.]23 The Lord said, “Therefore, it is not suit-
able to wash menstrual clothes in the women’s washing place. Re-
garding women’s washing places, a nun who washes her menstrual
cloth in the women’s washing place transgresses against monastic
discipline.” This is said regarding the women’s washing place.
Pra. 17. 270. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. The Lord pre-
scribed a moral precept. At that time, the nuns were washing their
menstrual cloths in the washing place for men. And so forth.24 A
nun who washes her menstrual cloth in the men’s washing place
transgresses against monastic discipline. This is said regarding the
men’s washing place.
Pra. 18. 271. The Lord was staying at Śrāvastī. [The nuns were to
wash their menstrual cloths] at the launderer’s washing place [and
so forth].25 The Lord said, “Therefore, it is not suitable to wash [your
menstrual cloths] at the launderer’s washing place. Rather, having
fetched water, they should be washed together in a basin, a pot, an
22. Skt. vraṇamukha. This term refers to the mouth the vagina.
23. pelāyaṃ.
24. pelāyaṃ. Here, the reader is to fill in the complaints of the bathers, and the chain of com-
munication reaching up to the Buddha.
25. Here the reader is supplied with even less information, but the scenario is easily inferred
from preceding passages.
earthen bowl, or a water bucket. There, [all the blood] should be

exhausted. If there is an outside water source, [menstrual cloths]
should be washed at the place where the water drains. After those
scraps are dried, they are to be relinquished until the monthly
period comes again. A nun who washes a menstrual cloth in the
launderer’s washing place transgresses against monastic disci-
pline.” This is what is said regarding the launderer’s washing place.
The rule against washing menstrual cloths in the women’s, men’s, or

washermen’s tīrthas is ordained after laypeople complain that the “entire
place has been made impure by blood.” Since the relatively small amount
of blood involved would not redden an entire stretch of river, this com-
plaint must concern the perceived power of even a small amount of female
blood to ritually pollute a body of water. The further rule requiring nuns
to wash menstrual cloths at home in basins and pots provides a solution.
Thus, by prescribing for nuns protections against menstrual mess that
still allow them to circulate normally through the town, and by requiring
that nuns respect customs and beliefs surrounding blood pollution when
they use public bathing areas, Bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 15–18 ensure that Bud-
dhist nuns can pass in the community as properly observant and respon-
sible menstruators.26 Here, the problem of particular types of female
bodily fluids, made worse by ascetic practice, is occluded from public view.
In this way, a location for nuns’ virtue is established whereby the monastic
female body remains, to all appearances, ritually clean.
Bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 31 further demonstrates how the authors and prac-
titioners of Buddhist discipline adapted themselves in complicated ways
to the mores surrounding female virtue, modesty, and sexuality in the
ancient Indian milieu, taking up and discarding appearances according to
a specific vinaya logic. Roth tells us that the beginning of this rule is miss-
ing from the manuscript. We can fill in the first few lines from the Chi-
nese Mahāsāṅghika Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya, which records that, after the layman
Sudinna27 died, his wife Sudinnā entered the religious life. Unfortunately,
26. Other vinaya rules about menstruation were apparently influenced by brāhmaṇa custom.
See, for instance, Ute Hüsken’s study (2001) of pācittiya 47 from the Pāli Vinaya. I discuss
vinaya menstrual rules more fully in forthcoming works.
27. In other vinayas, Sudinna is the well-known monk whose sexual lapse occasioned the
establishment of the first pārājika rule for monks. In the Mahāsāṅghika tradition, he is
known as Yaśas (email communication with Anālayo, 3/8/2012).
Sudinna’s brother claims levirate rights to her and pursues her through
the streets. At the beginning of the passage, she has taken refuge in the
home of a wealthy laywoman (Hirakawa 1982, 403).28
E. Bhikṣuṇī Prakīrṇaka 31 (Roth 1970, §283, 316)

“I think I will be forced to abandon my state of purity (brah-
macarya),” [Sudinnā] said. “By whom?” [the lady] asked. “My hus-
band’s brother is harassing me. He wishes to marry me,” she
answered. “Come inside, Mother. We will protect you.” She replied
“I will go to the Āryā. The Āryā will protect me.” They attached an-
klets, affixed earrings, put on bracelets, ornamented her, draped her
with red garments, concealed her [under a veil], and surrounded
her by four or five female attendants. That man, standing in the
doorway, watched them [thinking], “When she comes out, I will
grab her.” When he saw her coming out [he thought], “She must be
a housewife surrounded by servants. That one is no nun.” Now,
when that nun reached [her] place of refuge, she was seen by the
[other] nuns. They said, “Āryā, that Sudinnā has run away from [the
nunnery].” [Sudinnā] said, “I have not run away. It is just that my
husband’s brother wishes to take me away. Fearful of him and de-
siring protection, I [dressed] in this way.” [Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī
briefed the Lord about this matter.]29 The Lord asked about
everything. She complied. The Lord said, “You have violated at least
the letter of the code of deportment. It is not appropriate to violate
the code of deportment. The nun who violates the code of
deportment with a mind abandoned and free, becomes not-a-nun.
The one who, wishing for protection, violates the code of deport-
ment transgresses the monastic discipline but does not become
not-a-nun. A monk who violates the code of deportment with a
mind neither abandoned nor free also does not commit a fault.”
This was explained regarding violating the code of deportment.
The kind woman dresses and adorns Sudinnā as if she were an affluent
housewife and surrounds her with servants. In this disguise, she is able to
28. Hirakawa identifies the man in question as Sudinnā’s uncle, but the Zhalu text clearly
indicates that he is her husband’s brother or devaro (Skt. devṛ).
29. Here the text reads peyālaṃ yāvat etad eva.
escape from her brother-in-law and make her way safely back to the nun-
nery. There, she is seen and criticized for abandoning the deportment of a
nun. As a result, the Lord issues a rule that a nun who abandons the
proper deportment and dress of a nun out of ethical wantonness becomes
“not-a-nun” (abhikṣuṇī bhavati). Those who do so only out of a wish for
protection do not commit a fault.
Here, a nun is permitted to assume a social position that is specifically
forbidden for nuns, that of adorned and well-dressed housewife.30 She is
allowed to do so, however, only because it is a temporary disguise donned
for expedient purposes and not reflective of any unhealthy subjective state.
This is not an uncommon situation with regard to vinaya rules. Other
roles enjoined upon nuns by the vinaya are likewise essentially surface
disguises, designed to safeguard nuns’ public standing, that need not re-
flect an inner state of being. Examples of such roles include, as seen above,
observant menstruator and submissive woman. A nun might, for exam-
ple, follow aspects of dharmaśāstric menstrual custom, or at least give the
appearance of doing so, without subscribing to brāhmaṇa understandings
of female blood, female sexuality, and ritual cleanness. Likewise, she
might outwardly submit to monks, as was required by both the monks’
community and the greater social environment, without relinquishing her
own aspirations to ungendered spiritual perfection. Here we can see the
negotiation between public and “private” identity for Buddhist nuns. Be-
cause nuns’ public identities are patched together using social behaviors
chosen in some situations from those appropriate to women of virtue, and
in others from those appropriate to Buddhist renunciates, their outward
behavior may not always strictly align with their ascetic goals or values.
Other roles recommended for nuns, on the other hand, positively re-
flect rather than run counter to what we might reasonably assume is a
nun’s preferred subjective state. A nun might recite sūtras in the home of
a lay supporter, for instance, with all the piety, sincerity, and clarity of pur-
pose appropriate to an aspirant on the Buddhist path. Other roles for nuns
are disapproved of in the vinaya though they seem unlikely to reflect or
produce subjective states in conflict with the religious life. Examples of
these include the roles of herbalist healer or thread spinner. These are
censured, I would argue, because, for a variety of complex and historically
30. Bhikṣuṇī prakīrṇaka 4 and 5 (Roth 1970, §258, §259, 303–4). Pācattika dharma 112 forbids
nuns to carry umbrellas and wear leather sandals since to be so nicely outfitted might draw
criticism from the townspeople (Roth 1970, §226, 257–58).
specific reasons, the public display of such skills was deemed unbecoming
or weakening to the social fabric of an always vulnerable Buddhist nun-
hood.31 Still other roles proscribed for nuns both contravene commonly
held notions of female virtue and are unlikely to produce spiritually ben-
eficial subjective states. Examples of these include the roles of business
tycoon and brothel madam. In conclusion, the cultivation of properly
virtuous subjective states was obviously just one of several factors deter-
mining which behaviors were to be forbidden to nuns and which
permitted. Other factors included, of course, the unity of the saṅgha and
the dignity, safety, and health of its members. A further factor, the one
brought to light here, involved the need within Buddhist communities to
create a public identity for nuns that was readily recognizable and likely to
be accepted. In order to do so, nuns and monastic lawyers carefully se-
lected from the behaviors and roles appropriate for virtuous women,
excluding those that were deemed unmonastic. In this way, the Buddhist
community sought to embolden the outlines of a shadowy social identity,
that of Buddhist female ascetic.
Indian Buddhist nuns occupied a social position at the crossroads of
womanly virtue and female asceticism that, in the words of legal scholar
Kimberlé Crenshaw, “resist[ed] telling.” Here, the Mahāsāṅghika
Lokottaravādin Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya is read as a record of Buddhist monks and
nuns selecting from the roles and functions available to respectable
women in order to piece together a public identity for nuns that neither
resisted telling nor repelled the donations and good opinion of the laity.
Such an analysis allows us to appreciate the vast social intelligence at work
in this nun-centered vinaya. It also allows us to recognize its potential
usefulness as a guide for Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin nuns in their ne-
gotiation of a complex and sometimes hostile social environment.
31. All of the major vinayas include prohibitions against nuns and monks practicing and
teaching various healing or magical arts, especially for payment. See, for instance, Derge
Kangyur ‘dul wa Ta 302b.1–303a.6. See also Pāli Bhikkhunī Vibhaṅga pācittiya 49–50 and
Cullavagga V.33.2. The Brahmajāla Sutta from the Pāli Dīgha-nikāya also provides a list of
money-making occupations practiced by ascetics and brahmins but forbidden to Buddhist
monks. These include various sorts of divination and healing, as well as match-making,
Dīgha-nikāya 1.1.21–28.
5
Aṅguttara-nikaˉya/Ekottarika-aˉgama
outstanding BHIKKHUNIˉ S in the EKOTTARIKA - A
ˉ GAMA
Bhikkhu Anaˉlayo
in this chapter, I translate and study the list of outstanding bhikkhunīs

found in the extant Chinese Ekottarika-āgama, which was translated
toward the end of the 4th century of the present era. This Ekottarika-
āgama is a counterpart to the Aṅguttara-nikāya preserved in Pāli, both
being collections of early Buddhist discourses arranged according to a nu-
merical principle. While the Aṅguttara-nikāya is part of the Theravāda
canon, the Ekottarika-āgama is a collection transmitted by a different
school, whose precise identity is still a subject of ongoing discussion
among scholars.1 The list of outstanding bhikkhunīs is part of a survey of
all four assemblies, which comprises bhikkhus, bhikkhunīs, male lay fol-
lowers and female lay followers. Each of these four assemblies is consid-
ered an integral and necessary part of a Buddhist community, which is
only complete once it possesses all four.2
Overall, the number of outstanding disciples listed in the Ekottarika-
āgama is greater than the number in its Aṅguttara-nikāya counterpart. In
the case of the bhikkhunīs, the Ekottarika-āgama lists fifty-one outstanding
bhikkhunīs, whereas the Aṅguttara-nikāya has thirteen.3 The two listings
I am indebted to Alice Collett, Friedrich Grohmann, Shi Kongmu, Giuliana Martini and Ken
Su for comments and suggestions on a draft of the present chapter.
1. For a survey of various aspects of the Ekottarika-āgama cf. Anālayo (2009a).
2. On the four assemblies cf. also Anālayo (2010a, 65–72).
3. This difference has already been noted by Skilling (2000, 55).
have eleven bhikkhunīs in common.4 Another listing of eminent disciples

in a discourse preserved in Chinese translation and a reference to such a
listing in a fragment preserved in Uighur both speak of fifteen outstanding
bhikkhunīs, headed by Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī.5 Thus, although these two
texts refer to slightly more outstanding bhikkhunīs than are found in the
Pāli, they do not come anywhere near the long listing given in the Ekottarika-
āgama, which is by far the longest extant list of distinguished bhikkhunīs.
The purpose of according preeminence to a particular bhikkhunī, in-
stances of which are also found in other texts, such as the Avadānaśataka,6
appears to be to arouse inspiration. The Naḷakapāna-sutta of the Majjhima-
nikāya and a parallel found in the Madhyama-āgama preserved in Chinese
translation explain why the Buddha would declare the level of rebirth of some
disciples who had passed away. The two versions agree that the Buddha made
such a declaration in order to inspire other disciples, a principle the texts
apply to each of the four assemblies. In the case of bhikkhunīs, for example,
the two versions describe how a bhikkhunī might hear the Buddha’s declara-
tion that another bhikkhunī, whom she may have personally met or else have
heard about, passed away as an arahant. On hearing the Buddha’s declara-
tion, this bhikkhunī might reflect on the qualities of the other bhikkhunī, on
her morality and her wisdom, et cetera, and thus be inspired to follow her
example.7 The same holds in the case of hearing that a bhikkhunī passed away
as a non-returner, as a once-returner, or as a stream-enterer. In each case, an-
other bhikkhunī reflects on the qualities of the deceased bhikkhunī and thereby
gains the inspiration required to progress toward the same goal.
The same principle of inspiration occurs in other passages, in which
the Buddha presents two of his disciples from each of the four assemblies
as the models for other disciples to emulate. In the case of the bhikkhunīs,
according to two Pāli discourses and a Chinese parallel, a bhikkhunī should
4. The following two bhikkhunīs are not mentioned in the Ekottarika-āgama listing: the
bhikkhunī Nandā, who is reckoned foremost among those engaging in meditation
( jhāyīnaṃ), AN 1.14.5 at I 25,23, and the bhikkhunī Sigālamātā (Be: Siṅgālamātā), foremost
among those of resolute faith or confidence (saddhādhimuttānaṃ), AN 1.14.5 at I 25,31. Al-
though the latter is absent from the Ekottarika-āgama listing, a reference to Sīgālakamāta
(following the identification in Akanuma [1930] 1994, 614) appears in another listing of
eminent bhikkhunīs, found in T 126 at T II 833c20, where she is reckoned outstanding for
having gone forth out of faith, aspiring to [the attainment] of great fruits. See chapter seven
of this present volume for a discussion of the bhikkhunī Nandā.
5. T 126 at T II 833c8 and von Gabain (1954, 55).
6. For a study of outstanding bhikkhunīs in Mūlasarvāstivāda literature cf. Skilling (2001).
7. MN 68 at I 466,10 and MĀ 77 at T I 545c29.
Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-āgama 99
aspire to be like Khemā or Uppalavaṇṇā.8 A Sanskrit fragment counter-

part to one of these Pāli discourses differs inasmuch as it presents
Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī and Uppalavaṇṇā as the models for other
bhikkhunīs.9 Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, Khemā, and Uppalavaṇṇā are also the
first three bhikkhunīs mentioned in the Aṅguttara-nikāya listing of out-
standing bhikkhunīs as well as in its Ekottarika-āgama counterpart, a posi-
tion that would similarly reflect their eminence in the early Buddhist
community.
Translation and study

The list of outstanding bhikkhunīs in the Ekottarika-āgama falls into five
sections. In what follows, I translate these,10 with a brief study following
each section.
-
Chapter five on bhikkhunıˉ s in the Ekottarika-agama, [Part] One
(1) Among my [ordained] disciples,11 the foremost of those bhikkhunīs
who have gone forth to train for a long time and are thus respected
8. SN 17.24 at II 236,15, its parallel EĀ 9.2 at T II 562b21, and AN 2.12.2 at I 88,16. The
Mahāvastu, Senart (1882a, 251,21), lists Kṣemā and Utpalavarṇā as the two chief female mo-
nastic disciples of the Buddha.
9. Tripāṭhī (1995, 198 [28, Z2]), parallel to AN 2.12.2.
10. The translated text is EĀ 5.1 to 5.5 at T II 558c20 to 559c7, which was previously translated
into French by Huyen-vi (1987). In my translation, I have at times followed what seem to be
preferable readings found in a recapitulation of the list of eminent bhikkhunīs in T 2040 at T
L 12a13 to 12c5. In order to facilitate comparing my translation with the Pāli parallel, I use Pāli
terminology in the translation and throughout the article, without thereby intending to take a
position on the original language of the Ekottarika-āgama or on Pāli terminology being in
principle preferable. In the notes to my study I do not attempt to cover information provided
in Pāli commentarial literature, or in the Pāli Apadāna collection. Information on bhikkhunīs
that includes Theravāda commentarial literature can be found in other chapters in this
volume, as well as s.v. in Malalasekera 1937/1995 and 1938/1998; for a translation of the com-
mentary on the list of eminent bhikkhunīs in the Aṅguttara-nikāya cf. Bode 1893; a rendering
of the commentary on the Therīgāthā can be found in Pruitt 1998/1999; cf. also Murcott 1991.
11. The translators of the lists in the Ekottarika-āgama introduce foremost bhikkhus and
bhikkhunīs in one way and foremost lay disciples in another. In the case of monastics, the
formulation uses a rendering of śrāvaka, while the expression employed for laity would cor-
respond to śiṣya, although both Chinese terms can be translated as “disciple.” In order to
honor the distinction that the Ekottarika-āgama translator(s) apparently endeavored to make
by using two different terms, I add “[ordained]” to the “disciple” in the present case, in-
tending this to stand in contrast to the “[lay] disciple” used in the subsequent part of the
listing of eminent disciples, which is, however, no longer part of the extract translated here.
by the king of the country is the bhikkhunī called Mahāpajāpatī

Gotamī;12
(2) . . . of those who are wise and intelligent is the bhikkhunī called
Khemā;13
(3) . . . of those who excel in supernatural powers, being able to summon
divine beings, is the bhikkhunī called Uppalavaṇṇā;
(4) . . . of those who undertake ascetic practices, the eleven restraints, is
the bhikkhunī called Kisāgotamī;
(5) . . . of those [possessing] the divine eye, having supremely unob-
structed vision, is the bhikkhunī called Sakulā;
(6) . . . of those who, sitting in meditation, enter concentration with a
mind that is not scattered, is the bhikkhunī called Sāmā;
(7) . . . of those who analyze the meaning, widely teaching the develop-
ment of the path, is the bhikkhunī called Padumarañjanā;
(8) . . . of those who respectfully uphold the disciplinary rules without
infraction is the bhikkhunī called Paṭācārā;
(9) . . . of those who have irreversibly attained liberation by faith is the
bhikkhunī called [Bhadda]kaccānā;
(10) . . . of those who have attained the four analytical knowledges, being
without timidity in the heart, is the bhikkhunī called Vijayā.14
12. The names of the bhikkhunīs in the Ekottarika-āgama are at times difficult to reconstruct.
When translating an Indic original into Chinese, a proper name was often represented by
Chinese characters that at the time of translation more or less approximated the sound of the
Indic original. Alternately, at times, parts of the name or even the whole name were instead
translated. The final result of this can occasionally be rather puzzling. This difficulty com-
bines with the fact that proper names generally do not fare too well in orally transmitted texts,
unless they refer to particularly well-known individuals. This is the case not only for personal
proper names, but also for locations, etc. Hence the proper names in my translation of the
Ekottarika-āgama list of outstanding bhikkhunīs are at times just tentative reconstructions
and should not be taken to represent certain biographical data. For ease of cross-reference, in
my translation I have introduced a number for each bhikkhunī, which is not found in the
original. Here and below, I list the bases for my identifications of the names of the bhikkhunīs
in order of reliability, beginning with the fairly certain identifications given in the Fóguāng
edition of the Madhyama-āgama. In the case of the names of Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī (1), Khemā
(2), Uppalavaṇṇā (3), Kisāgotamī (4), Sakulā (5), Sāmā (6), Paṭācārā (8) and [Bhadda]kaccānā
(9) I follow the indications given in the Fóguāng edition (for (9) Huyen-vi 1987: 47 instead
suggests Kātyāyanī, cf. also note 29 below), for Vijayā (10) I follow Huyen-vi 1987: 47 (here
and elsewhere, I replace Huyen-vi’s Sanskrit reconstructions with Pāli proper names). In the
case of Padumarañjanā (7), the first two characters employed are the standard rendering of
paduº in paduma, while the following three characters could be rendering a term like rañjana.
13. Here and below, the abbreviations are found in the original.
14. Here and below, the names of the bhikkhunīs are repeated, at times in an abbreviated
fashion, at the end of each part in a summary verse (uddāna), which I have not translated.
Study of Part One

The Aṅguttara-nikāya list of outstanding bhikkhunīs agrees with the
Ekottarika-āgama version that Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī (1) was foremost for
being of long standing, although without mentioning that she was re-
spected by the king.15 The reference to the longevity of her discipleship is
reminiscent of the well-known story of how she requested permission
from the Buddha for women to go forth and then eventually came to be
the first bhikkhunī. In other words, behind her eminence in this respect
stands not only the regard traditionally afforded in Buddhist monastic
circles to those who have been ordained for a long time, but also her role
in having requested the Buddha to start an order of bhikkhunīs in the first
place.16
The two listings agree that Khemā (2) was foremost in wisdom.17 Her
fame for being wise is also recorded in another Pāli discourse, in which
she replies to the questions posed by a king regarding the destiny of a fully
awakened one, a tathāgata.18 The eminence of Uppalavaṇṇā (3) in regard
to supernatural powers is another point of agreement between the two
lists.19 A famous tale related to her supernatural abilities describes how
she transformed herself into a universal monarch in order to move easily
to the front of a large crowd and receive the Buddha, who was returning
15. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,18: rattaññūnaṃ. T 126 at T II 833c10 indicates that she had gone forth
long ago from a royal clan, without mentioning her being respected by the king. A detailed
study of Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī can be found in Dash 2008; for stanzas attributed to her cf.
Thī 157–62.
16. A comparative study of the different canonical accounts of this event can be found in
Anālayo (2011c). A critical review of the suggestion by Williams (2000, 170) that Buddhist
nuns were in existence before Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī went forth—which would imply that
she could not be reckoned foremost in being of long standing—can be found in Anālayo
(2008, 108–10).
17. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,19 indicates that Khemā was foremost among those who are of great
wisdom, mahāpaññānaṃ, a rank similarly accorded to her in the Avadānaśataka (Speyer
1970, 50,9), which additionally also mentions her eloquence; a reference already noted in
Skilling (2001, 143).
18. In the introductory narration, SN 44.1 at IV 374,24 reports her being famous for her
wisdom and eloquence; for a study of Khemā cf. Krey (2010).
19. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,20: iddhimantānaṃ (Be and Ce: iddhimantīnaṃ); stanzas attributed to
her can be found in Thī 224–35, her being challenged by Māra is reported in SN 5.5 at I
131,26, SĀ 1201 at T II 326c26 and SĀ2 217 at T II 454b20. On Utpalavarṇā in the
Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition cf. Silk (2009, 137–63).
from a long sojourn in heaven.20 This tale is significant insofar as it seems

to challenge the belief that women by nature cannot fulfill the position of
a wheel-turning king.21
The list of eminent bhikkhunīs in the Aṅguttara-nikāya presents
Kisāgotamī (4), whom it mentions as the twelfth in its listing, as foremost
for wearing coarse robes,22 whereas according to the Ekottarika-āgama
presentation she was outstanding in respect to ascetic practices in gen-
eral, specified as comprising eleven types of restraints.23 Such ascetic
practices could involve wearing only rag robes, but could also include beg-
ging for food; living at the root of a tree, in a cemetery, in an open place,
et cetera; or not lying down to sleep, but maintaining the sitting posture
instead.24
The two listings agree that Sakulā (5), found as the eighth bhikkhunī in
the Aṅguttara-nikāya list, was foremost among those possessing the divine
eye,25 with the Ekottarika-āgama adding that she was supreme in
20. This tale can be found in the same Ekottarika-āgama collection, EĀ 36.5 at T II 707c4,
and in its commentary T 1507 at T XXV 37c29; cf. also, e.g., the Divyāvadāna (Cowell 1886,
401,24) or SĀ 604 at T II 169c25; for further references cf. Lamotte ([1949] 1981, 634 n. 1).
Bapat (1950, 42) in note 10 to his translation of a version of this tale in the Chinese counter-
part to the commentary on the Aṭṭhakavagga, T 198 at T IV 185c9, notes that in Thī 229
Uppalavaṇṇā proclaims to have magically created a four-horsed chariot and paid homage at
the Buddha’s feet. It is possible that this stanza could reflect a similar narrative; cf. also
Young (2004, 194), although Dhp-a III 211,21 (cf. also Mp I 356,13) only reports that at an
earlier moment in the narrative she volunteered to transform herself into a wheel-turning
king, which the Buddha declined.
21. Cf. Strong (2010, 974); for a study of this stipulation cf. Anālayo (2009c). The
*Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra, T 1509 at T XXV 137a13, in fact indicates that she transformed her-
self into a wheel-turning king “wishing to get rid of the bad reputation of women” (my transla-
tion differs from Lamotte ([1949] 1981, 636: “pour dissimuler son sexe mal famé”), which could
be read as a challenge to the notion that women are unable to be wheel-turning kings.
22. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,30: lūkacīvaradharānaṃ; stanzas attributed to her can be found in Thī
213–23, her being challenged by Māra is reported in SN 5.3 at I 130,9, SĀ 1200 at T II
326b29, and SĀ2 216 at T II 454a27.
23. Another reference to eleven types of ascetic practices can be found in EĀ 49.2 at T II
795a26; cf. also EĀ 49.3 at T II 795c10 (which has a variant reading referring to twelve in-
stead). The listing of outstanding bhikkhus, EĀ 4.2 at T II 557b8, speaks of twelve types (al-
ready noted in Boucher [2008, 191 n. 8]). On variations in such listings cf. also Bapat (1937),
Ganguly (1989, 21–23), Dantinne (1991, 24–30), and Ray (1994, 293–323).
24. AN 5.182–86 at III 219,25; for the last type of ascetic practice a parallel can be found in
SHT III 820 bB3 (Waldschmidt 1971, 37).
25. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,25: dibbacakkhukānaṃ (Be gives her name as Bakulā); stanzas attributed
to her can be found in Thī 97–101, where stanza Thī 100 explicitly indicates that she had
well developed, sādhu bhāvitaṃ, this clairvoyant ability.
unobstructed vision. The notion of a divine eye represents the ability,

gained after mastery of the four absorptions, of seeing the passing away
and rebirth of other living beings in accordance with their former deeds.
This is one out of three higher knowledges that, according to the canonical
texts, the Buddha attained during the night of his awakening.26
A bhikkhunī by the name of Sāmā (6) is not mentioned in the Aṅguttara-
nikāya list, although the same name is known from the Therīgāthā.27 The
Aṅguttara-nikāya describes Paṭācārā (8), whom it presents at the fourth
bhikkhunī in its list, as foremost among those who uphold the discipline.28
This appears to have the sense of remembering the code of discipline,
while in the Ekottarika-āgama version her eminence in this respect is up-
holding the disciplinary rules without infraction; that is, scrupulously ob-
serving them.
The list in the Aṅguttara-nikāya has Bhaddakaccānā (9) as its eleventh
bhikkhunī, reckoned outstanding for having attained great supernormal
knowledges,29 whereas the Ekottarika-āgama listing highlights her having
attained liberation by faith.30 The notion of supernormal knowledges
refers to a range of abilities based on mastery of the four absorptions.
Such abilities are usually listed as six: supernatural powers (levitation,
etc.), divine ear (hearing sounds at a great distance), telepathic knowledge
of the minds of others, recollection of one’s own past lives, the divine eye,
and the attainment of full liberation through the destruction of the influxes
(āsava). Liberation by faith designates a stream-enterer, a once-returner, or
a non-returner, who by dint of their realization possess unshakeable faith
(or confidence) in the Buddha.31
26. MN 36 at I 248,19 and EĀ 31.8 at T II 672a6.

27. Two different bhikkhunīs by the name of Sāmā are mentioned as the authors of Thī 37–38
and Thī 39–41.
28. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,21: vinayadharānaṃ; stanzas attributed to her can be found in Thī
112–16; she is also frequently mentioned in stanzas by other bhikkhunīs, on which see, e.g.,
Thī 119, Thī 125, and Thī 178.
29. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,29: mahābhiññappattānaṃ. Notably, AN 1.14.7 at I 26,24 lists the lay
woman Kātiyānī as foremost among female lay disciples for her faith, thus corresponding to
the alternative rendering suggested by Huyen-vi (1987, 47) for the Chinese characters used
for the present case; cf. note 12 above.
30. The reference to being liberated by faith reminds of the quality associated with
Sigālamātā in AN 1.14.5 at I 25,31; cf. note 4 above.
31. MN 70 at I 478,32 and MĀ 195 at T I 751c23.
A bhikkhunī by the name of Vijayā (10) is not mentioned in the

Aṅguttara-nikāya list of outstanding bhikkhunīs, although a bhikkhunī by
this name occurs elsewhere in the Pāli canon.32 Her eminence in regard to
the four analytical knowledges refers to a particular type of knowledge,
paṭisambhidā, which is to know the meaning or sense of things as well as
the principle or dharma that underlies them, as well as knowing the
[proper use of ] language and having [ability in] in eloquence in regard to
these.33
[Part] Two
(11) Among my [ordained] disciples, the foremost of those bhikkhunīs
who recollect their own past lives for innumerable aeons is the
bhikkhunī called Bhaddhākapilānī;34
(12) . . . of those who are of upright countenance and thus respected and
liked by the people is the bhikkhunī called Himajātā;
(13) . . . of those who convert outsiders, establishing them in the right
teaching, is the bhikkhunī called Soṇā;
(14) . . . of those who analyze the meaning, widely discoursing on divisions
and parts [of the teaching], is the bhikkhunī called Dhammadinnā;
(15) . . . of those who are not ashamed of wearing rough robes is the
bhikkhunī called Uttarā;
32. A bhikkhunī by the name of Vijayā occurs in SN 5.4 at I 130,26 and its parallels SĀ 1204
at T II 327c17 and SĀ2 220 at T II 455b3; stanzas attributed to Vijayā can be found at Thī
169–74.
33. AN 4.173 at II 160,21 reports Sāriputta’s attainment of the four paṭisambhidās. According
to AN 5.86 at III 113,12, other bhikkhus will highly esteem a bhikkhu who possesses five
qualities, four of which are the paṭisambhidās. AN 5.95 at III 120,1 indicates that a bhikkhu
will quickly attain the highest if he is endowed with five qualities, which again include the
four paṭisambhidās. These passages reflect the high regard in which the four analytical
knowledges were held.
34. In this second part, for Bhaddhākapilānī (11), Soṇā (13), Dhammadinnā (14), Jentī (17) and
Dantikā (18) I follow the indications given in the Fóguāng edition, for Uttarā (15) and Pabhā
(16) I follow Huyen-vi 1987: 48, who differs from the above in suggesting Sūrā for (13) and
Dattā for (18). In the case of (12), I follow an indication given in T 2130 at T LIV 1001c5 that
this name translates the terms “snow” and “birth.” The rendering employed for (19) could
stand for Devadinnā (or else Devadattā). Judging from Akanuma 1930/1994: 214, the charac-
ters for (20) could intend Gopī or Gopikā, a name also found as no. 1071 in a list of Buddhist
disciples in the Mahāvyutpatti, Sakaki 1926: 82, although not given in the Chinese characters
used in the present instance; for other renderings of Gopī cf. also Peri 1918: 9 note 2.
(16) . . . of those who have calm senses, being always with unification of
the mind, is the bhikkhunī called Pabhā;
(17) . . . of those who wear the robes in an orderly manner, always ac-
cording to the instructions of the dharma, is the bhikkhunī called Jentī;
(18) . . . of those who are able to discuss in various ways without doubt or
hesitation is the bhikkhunī called Danti[kā];
(19) . . . of those who compose stanzas in praise of the virtues of the
Tathāgata is the bhikkhunī called Devadinnā;
(20) . . . of those who are widely learned, but in their kindness reach out
to even the most inferior, is the bhikkhunī called Gopī.35
Study of Part Two

The list of outstanding bhikkhunīs in the Aṅguttara-nikāya agrees with its
Ekottarika-āgama parallel that Bhaddhākapilānī (11) was foremost among
those who recollect past lives, differing only in mentioning her in the
tenth position in its list.36 As mentioned above, recollection of one’s own
past lives is a supernormal knowledge whose acquisition is based on
having cultivated the four absorptions. Similar to the divine eye, this is
also one of the three higher knowledges that the Buddha is reported to
have attained on the night of his awakening.
The two listings differ in regard to Soṇā (13). The Pāli version,
which presents her as the seventh bhikkhunī in its list, records her as
foremost among those who are energetic,37 whereas the Chinese list
speaks of her converting outsiders and establishing them in the right
teaching.
In the case of Dhammadinnā (14), the fifth bhikkhunī in the Pāli list,
the two versions agree in mentioning her capability as a teacher.38 Her
35. The rendering of her quality is based on a variant reading.

36. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,27: pubbenivāsaṃ anussarantīnaṃ (Be and Ce give her name as
Bhaddākāpilānī); stanzas attributed to her can be found in Thī 63–66, with stanza 65 explic-
itly mentioning her attainment of the three higher knowledges (and thus implicitly of recol-
lection of past lives).
37. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,24: āraddhaviriyānaṃ (Be: āraddhavīriyānaṃ); stanzas attributed to her
can be found in Thī 102–6.
38. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,22 qualifies Dhammadinnā as foremost among speakers on the dharma,
dhammakathikānaṃ. T 126 at T II 833c17 similarly highlights her ability to well expound the
sublime dharma. A stanza attributed to her can be found in Thī 12.
ability in this respect is documented in another discourse, in which she

replies to a series of questions regarding several profound aspects of the
dharma. On being informed about her exposition, the Buddha declared
her answers so apt that he would have explained the matter in just the
same way himself.39
The remaining bhikkhunī s in this part of the Ekottarika-āgama
list of outstanding bhikkhunī s are not mentioned in the Aṅguttara-
nikāya version. Bhikkhunī s by the name of Uttarā (15), Jentī (17), and
Dantikā (18) are, however, known as authors of stanzas in the
Therīgāthā . 40
Regarding the qualities of the bhikkhunīs mentioned in this section,
the reference to the calm senses possessed by Pabhā (16) reflects the im-
portance of sense-restraint as a basis for the gaining of deeper levels of
concentration, a recurrent theme in the standard descriptions of the grad-
ual path to liberation. Jentī’s wearing of the robes in an orderly manner
expresses a quality esteemed among monastics, whose dignified conduct
serves as an inspiration to those who happen to meet them.41 Praising the
qualities of the Buddha (19) and thereby giving poetic expression to the
regard the disciples would have felt for their teacher is another quality
highly valued in the discourses. The Ekottarika-āgama listing of out-
standing bhikkhus reckons the illustrious poet Vaṅgīsa as foremost in this
respect.42
39. MN 44 at I 304,34, MĀ 210 at T I 790a29 and D 4094 ju 11a4 or Q 5595 tu 12a8. A trans-
lation of the Tibetan version with a comparative study can be found in Anālayo (2011a), cf.
also Foley (1894) and Krey (2010).
40. The name Uttarā is mentioned as the author(s) of Thī 15 and Thī 175–81, a bhikkhunī by
the name of Jentī is given as the author of Thī 21–22 (Be and Ce: Jentā, Se: Jantā), and a
bhikkhunī by the name of Dantikā as the author of Thī 48–50.
41. AN 8.10 at IV 169,6 and its parallel MĀ 122 at T I 611b4 indicate that a genuine bhikkhu
is expected to wear his robes well, so much so that evil bhikkhus will imitate such behavior
in order not to be detected. The expression used to describe Jentī’s way of wearing robes
recurs in the Dharmaguptaka vinaya as part of a description of another bhikkhunī whose
awe-inspiring behavior arouses joyful inspiration in the mind of an onlooker, T 1428 at T
XXII 768b12.
42. EĀ 4.3 at T II 557b22. AN 1.14.2 at I 24,21 reckons him foremost among those of im-
promptu delivery. A collection of his poems can be found in the Vaṅgīsasaṃyutta, SN 8.1–11
at I 185–96, with counterparts in SĀ 1208–1219 at T II 329a–32b and SĀ² 224–30, SĀ² 250
and SĀ² 252–53 at T II 456b–62c; cf. also Th 1209–79. A long series of verses praising the
Buddha, spoken by the freshly converted lay disciple Upāli in front of his former teacher, the
leader of the Jains, can be found in MN 56 at I 386,3, with a Sanskrit parallel in Waldschmidt
(1979) and a Chinese parallel in MĀ 133 at T I 632b6; cf. also von Hinüber (1982).
[Part] Three
who are always in secluded quiet places, instead of living among
people, is the bhikkhunī called Abhayā;43
(22) . . . of those who beg alms [even when] physically ill, without choos-
ing between rich and poor [donors], is the bhikkhunī called Visākhā;
(23) . . . of those who sit alone in a single place, without moving at all, is
the bhikkhunī called Bhaddapālā;
(24) . . . of those who wander everywhere, begging [alms] among a range
of people, is the bhikkhunī called Manoharī;
(25) . . . of those who quickly accomplish the fruits of the path, without in
the course of that [encountering any] obstruction, is the bhikkhunī
called Damā;
(26) . . . of those who keep to the three [main] robes, never being separate
from them, is the bhikkhunī called Sudamā;
(27) . . . of those who always sit at the root of a tree with an unmoving
mind is the bhikkhunī called Līnā;
(28) . . . of those who always live out in the open, without caring for a
cover, is the bhikkhunī called Satā;
(29) . . . of those who delight in empty and secluded places, not in being
among people, is the bhikkhunī called Upacālā;
(30) . . . of those who continually sit on a grass mat, without [even] putting
a cloth on it, is the bhikkhunī called Vinā;
(31) . . . of those who, wearing rag robes, go to beg [alms from houses] in
the proper order, is the bhikkhunī called Anopamā.44
Study of Part Three

None of the bhikkhunīs in this third part appear in the Aṅguttara-nikāya
list of outstanding bhikkhunīs, although bhikkhunīs by the name of Abhayā
43. In this third part, for Abhayā (21), Visākhā (22), and Anopamā (31) I follow the indications
given in the Fóguāng edition; for Bhaddapālā (23), Damā (25), and Sudamā (26) I follow
Huyen-vi (1987, 49). In the case of (24), (29), and (30), the characters employed suggest the
possibility that the respective names could have been Manoharī, Upacālā, and Vinā. My ren-
dering of (27) follows an alternative spelling of her name found in T 2040 at T L 12b10. My
rendering of (28) is based on the indication in Soothill and Hodous ([1937] 2000, 370) that the
character couplet renders śāṭhya, corresponding to saṭha in Pāli. Since this results in a rather
improbable name, perhaps the original could have been something like Satā (from smṛ).
44. The rendering of her going begging is based on a variant reading.
(21), Visākhā (22), Upacālā (29), and Anopamā (31) have verses attributed
to them in the Therīgāthā.45
Several of the qualities of the bhikkhunīs in this section are related to se-
cluded and ascetic conduct, following the ideal of the monastic life depicted in
the early discourses. Thus Abhayā (21) stands out for keeping away from con-
tact with people and living in seclusion, which according to the Mahāsuññata-
sutta and its Chinese and Tibetan parallels is an important requirement for
being able to develop deeper levels of concentration and attain liberation.46
Most of the other qualities are self-explanatory. Keeping to only three robes
(26), wearing rag robes (31), and living out in the open (28) are ascetic prac-
tices. The notion of not being separate from one’s robes (26) relates to a vinaya
regulation, according to which a monastic should not be apart from his or her
set of robes at dawn.47 Begging food in order (31) refers to the practice of
begging at each house in turn on the road one has taken,48 not leaving out
45. A bhikkhunī by the name of Abhayā is mentioned as the author of Thī 35–36; a bhikkhunī
by the name of Visākhā as the author of Thī 13; a bhikkhunī by the name of Upacālā as the
author of Thī 189–195; and a bhikkhunī by the name of Anopamā as the author of Thī 151–
156. Upacāla also occurs in SN 5.7 at I 133,6 and the parallels SĀ 1206 at T II 328b17 and SĀ2
222 at T II 455c24.
46. MN 122 at III 110,16, MĀ 191 at T I 738a19 and the Tibetan version in Skilling (1994,
194,12).
47. The corresponding rule can be found in the Dharmaguptaka vinaya, T 1428 at T XXII
727c7, translated in Heirman (2002, 441); cf. also the Dharmaguptaka bhikṣuṇī prātimokṣa,
T 1431 at T XXII 1033c4, as well as in the Mahīśāsaka vinaya, T 1421 at T XXII 83a21; cf. also
the Mahīśāsaka bhikṣuṇī prātimokṣa, T 1423 at T XXII 208c2, and in the Mūlasarvāstivāda
vinaya, T 1443 at T XXIII 944b4, cf. also the Mūlasarvāstivāda bhikṣuṇī prātimokṣa, T 1455 at
T XXIV 510c10. In the case of the Mahāsāṅghika vinaya and the Sarvāstivāda vinaya, the
bhikṣuṇī vibhaṅgas do not give the corresponding rule in full, as the text should be supplied
from the same regulation for bhikkhus; cf. the survey in Hirakawa (1982, 194 n. 4). Thus the
Sanskrit manuscript of the Lokottaravāda Mahāsāṅghika bhikṣuṇī vinaya in Roth (1970,
165,2), translated in Nolot (1991, 159), gives only an abbreviated reference; cf. also the indica-
tion given in the Chinese version, T 1425 at T XXII 524b8. The Sarvāstivāda bhikṣuṇī vinaya,
T 1435 at T XXIII 313b5, begins its section on the niḥsargika pācittika rules with an explana-
tion by the translator; cf. Waldschmidt (1926, 104), that the rules observed also by bhikkhus
are not given explicitly. In the case of these two vinayas, however, a translation of the bhikṣuṇī
prātimokṣa is extant in Chinese, which gives the rule in full, cf. T 1427 at T XXII 558b22 for
the Mahāsāṅghika version and T 1437 at T XXIII 481c3 for the Sarvāstivāda version. In the
case of the Theravāda vinaya, according to the explanation given in Sp IV 919,10 (cf. Hüsken
1997a, 135 n. 108), the text should be supplemented from the corresponding rules for bhik-
khus, which in this particular case can be found in Vin III 198,22. For a translation of the
different bhikṣuṇī prātimokṣas cf. Kabilsingh (1998), with a comparative study in Kabilsingh
(1984).
48. See, for example, the reference to sapadānacārī in Sn 65, where the practice is combined
with not being greedy for flavors and not being mentally bound to families.
any dwelling in anticipation that one might not receive food or might be given
only low-quality alms.
[Part] Four
(32) Among my [ordained] disciples, the foremost of those bhikkhunīs who de-
light in [staying] in abandoned cemeteries is the bhikkhunī called Uttamā;
(33) . . . of those who dwell much in benevolence, thinking of [all] forms
of life with empathy, is the bhikkhunī called Candā;
(34) . . . of those who have compassion for living beings that have not yet
reached the path is the bhikkhunī called Somā;
(35) . . . of those who joyfully attain the path, aspiring to reaching it com-
pletely, is the bhikkhunī called Mātalī;
(36) . . . of those who are restrained during all activities, with the mind
not straying away, is the bhikkhunī called Kālakā;
(37) . . . of those who keep to emptiness and hold on to vacuity, under-
standing that there is nothing [substantial in the world], is the
bhikkhunī called Devasu[tā];
(38) . . . of those whose heart delights in signlessness and in the eradica-
tion of all attachments is the bhikkhunī called Suriyapabhā;49
(39) . . . of those who cultivate wishlessness, with their mind always
[willing] to help [others] everywhere, is the bhikkhunī called Manāpā;
(40) . . . of those who are free from doubt in regard to all teachings, limit-
lessly delivering people, is the bhikkhunī called Vimadā;
(41) . . . of those who are able to explain widely the meaning and analyze
profound teachings is the bhikkhunī called Samantapabhāsā.
Study of Part Four

The bhikkhunīs in this fourth part do not recur in the Aṅguttara-nikāya list of
outstanding bhikkhunīs. However, bhikkhunīs by the name of Uttamā (32), Candā
(33), and Somā (34) are mentioned as authors of stanzas in the Therīgāthā,50
49. The original actually speaks of the absence of perceptions, instead of the absence of
signs. The two terms are, however, frequently confused with each other in Chinese transla-
tions, so that the appropriate rendering has to be decided in each case based on the context.
For a survey of examples cf. Anālayo (2011b, 274 n. 54). On signlessness cf. the study by
Harvey (1986).
50. Two different bhikkhunīs by the name of Uttamā are mentioned as the authors of Thī
42–44 and 45–47 respectively, stanzas attributed to Candā can be found in Thī 122–126, and
stanzas attributed to Somā in Thī 60–62.
with Somā also featuring in a discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya and its Chinese
parallels.51
The present section begins with a bhikkhunī outstanding for dwelling
in cemeteries (32), one of the ascetic practices. The references to empti-
ness (37), signlessness (38), and wishlessness (39) correspond to three
ways of concentrating the mind so as to reach the deathless.52 The same
three are the types of contact a meditator is said to experience on emerg-
ing from the cessation of perception and feeling,53 a particularly profound
meditative attainment.
[Part] Five
who cherish patience in their heart, just like the earth tolerating [an-
ything], is the bhikkhunī called Dhammadhī;
(43) . . . of those who are able to teach and transform people, inducing
them to make gifts to the monastic community of utensils, beds, and
seats is the bhikkhunī called Suyamā;54
(44) . . . of those who have a mind that is always calm, not generating ag-
itated perceptions, is the bhikkhunī called Indajā;
(45) . . . of those who never tire of contemplating the teachings with un-
derstanding is the bhikkhunī called Nāgī;
(46) . . . of those who have a strong and courageous mind, without being
polluted by attachment, is the bhikkhunī called Kuṇālā;
(47) . . . of those who enter concentration on water, totally turning [things]
into moisture, is the bhikkhunī called Vasu;
51. SN 5.2 at I 129,14 and its parallels SĀ 1199 at T II 326a28 and SĀ2 215 at T II 454a5 report
Somā being challenged by Māra. The Avadānaśataka reckons Somā to be outstanding in
learnedness (Speyer [1909] 1970, 22,4); for a study of the bhikkhunī Somā cf. Collett
(2009b).
52. SN 43.4 at IV 360,13.
53. MN 44 at I 302,22, although the parallel versions MĀ 211 at T I 792a19 and D 4094 ju
9a6 or Q 5595 tu 10a8 instead list imperturbable contact, nothingness contact, and signless
contact.
54. My rendering follows T 2040 at T L 12b26. The passage in the Ekottarika-āgama men-
tions Suyamā twice, first as foremost for her ability to teach and transform people, inducing
them to make gifts to the monastic community, and then a second time as foremost among
those who prepare beds and seats. As this double reference stands in contrast to the pattern
observed throughout and the preparation of beds and seats also does not seem to fit the con-
text too well, it seems safe to assume that the Ekottarika-āgama presentation has been af-
fected by some textual error, either during transmission or else at the time of translation.
(48) . . . of those who enter concentration on fire, fully illuminating any-

thing, is the bhikkhunī called Candī;55
(49) . . . of those who contemplate impurity and analyze dependent aris-
ing is the bhikkhunī called Cāpā;
(50) . . . of those who support people, giving them what is lacking, is the
bhikkhunī called Sukkā;
(51) Among my [ordained] disciples who attain final realization, the fore-
most of those bhikkhunīs is the bhikkhunī called Bhaddā Kuṇḍalakesā.56
Study of Part Five

Of the bhikkhunīs mentioned in this final part, the bhikkhunīs Cāpā (49)
and Sukkā (50) are recorded as authors of stanzas in the Therīgāthā, the
bhikkhunī Sukkā is also mentioned elsewhere in the Pāli discourses.57
The last of the bhikkhunīs in this section is the only one that is also re-
ferred to in the list of outstanding bhikkhunīs in the Aṅguttara-nikāya,
which indicates that Bhaddā Kuṇḍalakesā (51), who is mentioned as the
ninth bhikkhunī in its list, was foremost among those who are of quick
realization.58
The illustration of the patience of Dhammadhī (42) as being compa-
rable to the earth parallels an image used in another discourse, where the
chief disciple Sāriputta is wrongly accused of an offence by another bhik-
khu. In reply, he proclaims that his mind is free from any resentment,
being humble and patient like the earth, which does not react even when
various impure substances are thrown on it, such as excrement, urine,
spittle, et cetera.59
55. My rendering follows T 2040 at T L 12c2.

56. My rendering of her quality follows T 2040 at T L 12c5; the passage in the Ekottarika-
āgama appears to have suffered from a textual loss.
57. Cāpā is mentioned as the author of Thī 291–311 and Sukkā as the author of Thī 54–56. A
bhikkhunī by the name of Sukkā occurs in SN 10.9 at I 212,21 and again in SN 10.10 at I
213,1, with a parallel in SĀ 1327 at T II 365a25 and in SĀ2 327 at T II 483b27; cf. also Roth
(1970, 111,2).
58. AN 1.14.5 at I 25,25: khippābhiññānaṃ. A bhikkhunī by the name Bhaddā who is out-
standing for quick realization is also mentioned in T 126 at T II 833c23. Stanzas attributed
to Bhaddā, the former Jain, can be found in Thī 107–11.
59. AN 9.11 at IV 374,25 and MĀ 24 at T I 453a18.
Concentration on water (47) and on fire (48) refer to kasiṇa meditation.

The original meaning of the term kasiṇa is a “totality,” although in the
course of time the expression came to connote the devices employed for
developing a perception of totality.60 The basic principle employed in such
forms of meditation is that a particular object—which could be a color or
an element like earth, water, fire, et cetera—is made the sole object of
one’s attention until the mind becomes totally immersed in this object to
the exclusion of anything else. Concentration developed in this way is held
to yield some degree of mastery over the respective element.
Contemplation of impurity is one of the exercises given in the Satipaṭṭhāna-
sutta and its parallels for the development of mindfulness of the body.61
The undertaking of such contemplation requires reviewing the anatomical
constitution of the body in terms of its hair, nails, teeth, et cetera. The pur-
pose of this exercise is to act as an antidote to conceit and to sensual desire.
Conclusion
Looking back on this survey of outstanding bhikkhunīs, the acknowledge-
ment that Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī (1) is considered outstanding in regard to
having gone forth for a long time obviously implies that she was foremost
among several bhikkhunīs that were of long standing, and this same prin-
ciple holds throughout the listing. Thus each of the bhikkhunīs in the
above listing should not be considered an exceptional case, where a single
bhikkhunī has a particular quality or ability. Rather, a bhikkhunī would only
be declared foremost in some respect if at the same time there were other
bhikkhunīs who had similar qualities or engaged in comparable conduct.
Viewed from this perspective, then, the listing of outstanding bhikkhunīs
is a survey of qualities and modes of behavior that were held to be to some
degree common among a number of the early Buddhist bhikkhunīs.
The net result of applying this perspective gives a rather impressive
survey of the broad variety of areas in which bhikkhunīs apparently
engaged. These can conveniently be organized under the three headings
of morality, concentration, and wisdom, a basic scaffolding of central
60. In fact one item in listings of kasiṇas is the consciousness-kasiṇa; cf., e.g., AN 10.26 at
V 47,16 and its parallels MĀ 215 at T I 800b7 and SĀ 549 at T II 143a25, an experience of
totality corresponding to the second of the four immaterial attainments, which, however, is
not easily related to the employment of a physical device; cf. also Anālayo (2009b).
61. MN 10 at I 57,13, MĀ 98 at T I 583b4, and EĀ 12.1 at T II 568a17.
importance in early Buddhism. In addition to these three, a fourth cate-

gory that emerges from the list of outstanding bhikkhunīs is activity for the
benefit of others. Although from an early Buddhist perspective developing
morality, concentration, and wisdom inevitably benefits others as well, the
early discourses do also emphasize the need of engaging actively for the
benefit of others, which is in turn an integral part of one’s advancing on
the path to liberation.62 Under the heading of morality and strict conduct,
bhikkhunīs are on record for:
– upholding the disciplinary rules without infraction (8);

– keeping to the three [main] robes, never being separate from them
(26);
– wearing the robes in an orderly manner (17);
– not being ashamed of wearing rough robes (15);
– wearing rag robes, begging in order (31);
– wandering everywhere begging [alms] among a range of people (24);
– begging alms without choosing between rich and poor (22);
– continually sitting on a grass mat, without [even] putting a cloth on it
(30);
– always being in secluded quiet places instead of living among people
(21);
– delighting in empty and secluded places, not in being among people
(29);
– always living out in the open without caring for a cover (28);
– undertaking ascetic practices (4); and
– delighting in [staying] in abandoned cemeteries (32).
In relation to the development of mental tranquility and the powers and

abilities that, according to early Buddhism, are possible based on the de-
velopment of concentration, bhikkhunīs appear to have been proficient in
the following ways:
– entering concentration with a mind that is not scattered (6);

– being restrained during all activities, with the mind not straying (36);
– having calm senses, always being with unification of the mind (16);
– sitting alone in a single place without moving at all (23);
62. Cf. also Anālayo (2010b).

– always sitting at the root of a tree with an unmoving mind (27);

– having a mind that is calm, without agitated perceptions (44);
– dwelling much in benevolence and empathy (33);
– having compassion for living beings (34);
– cherishing patience in the heart, just like the earth tolerating [anything]
(42);
– entering concentration on water (47);
– entering concentration on fire (48);
– having supernatural powers (3);
– recollecting past lives (11); and
– possessing the divine eye (5).
In regard to the gain of insight and the development of wisdom, bhikkhunīs

are reported to have possessed the following qualities:
– being widely learned and kind (20);

– being wise and intelligent (2);
– analyzing the meaning, widely discoursing on the teaching (14);
– contemplating the teachings with understanding (45);
– being liberated by faith (9);
– having a strong and courageous mind, without being polluted by at-
tachment (46);
– having acquired the four analytical knowledges (10);
– joyfully attaining the path, aspiring to reach it completely (35);
– quickly accomplishing the fruits of the path (25);
– contemplating impurity and analyzing dependent arising (49);
– cultivating wishlessness (39);
– delighting in signlessness and in the eradication of all attachments
(38);
– keeping to emptiness and holding on to vacuity (37); and
– attaining final realization (51).
When it comes to benefiting others and engaging in teaching activities,

bhikkhunīs are described as engaging in the following activities:
– supporting people, giving them what is lacking (50);

– composing stanzas in praise of the virtues of the Tathāgata (19);
– discussing in various ways without hesitation (18);
– converting outsiders, establishing them in the right teaching (13);
– being of upright countenance, being respected and liked by the people

(12);
– teaching and transforming people (43);
– being free from doubt, delivering people without limits (40);
– widely teaching the development of the path (7); and
– widely explaining the meaning of and analyzing profound teachings
(41).
In sum, it seems there is hardly a praiseworthy quality or activity left in

which bhikkhunīs were not proficient.63 In this way, the list of outstanding
bhikkhunīs in the Ekottarika-āgama does seem to accomplish its purpose:
providing a source of inspiration for bhikkhunīs of later generations, who
on coming to know of these different fields of excellence of bhikkhunīs in
the past might develop the inner confidence and dedication to emulate
their predecessors.
63. Notably, the list in the Ekottarika-āgama does not yet exhaust the type of qualities in
which according to tradition nuns excelled; for a study of Kacaṅgalā/Kajaṅgalā, reckoned
foremost as a sūtrāntavibhāgakartrī, cf. Collett (forthcoming, chapter 1).
6
Saṃ yutta-nikaˉya/Saṃ yukta-aˉgama
defying maˉra— BHIKKHUNIˉ s in the SAṂ YUKTA - A
ˉ GAMA
Bhikkhu Anaˉlayo
Introduction
in the present chapter, I translate and study a set of ten discourses,
found in the Saṃyukta-āgama preserved in Chinese translation (Taishō
no. 99), in which bhikkhunīs are the main protagonists. This Saṃyukta-
āgama appears to stem from a Mūlasarvāstivāda line of transmission and
was translated into Chinese in the 5th century of the present era, based
on a manuscript that perhaps came from Sri Lanka to China (Glass 2010;
cf. also Anālayo 2010c, 67–69.). The ten discourses translated in the
present chapter have counterparts in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta of the Pāli
canon, transmitted by the Theravāda tradition, as well as in another
Saṃyukta-āgama (Taishō no. 100) that has been partially preserved in
Chinese translation and whose school-affiliation is at present still a
matter of discussion.1
In what follows, I briefly examine the significance of Māra, who makes
his appearance in each of the ten translated discourses, challenging the
bhikkhunīs in their practice. Traditional exegesis recognizes several
I am indebted to Rod Bucknell, Shi Kongmu, and Giuliana Martini for comments and sug-
gestions.
1. Recent contributions are Bingenheimer (2011, 23–44) and Bucknell (2011); both argue in
favor of attributing T 100 to the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition.
Saṃyutta-nikāya/Saṃyukta-āgama 117
aspects of Māra.2 Thus Māra may have a symbolic significance, represent-

ing the five aggregates (affected) by clinging;3 or else Māra can be a god
(devaputta), believed to be dwelling in the highest heaven of the sensual
realm,4 whose role is to act as an antagonist to the Buddha and his disci-
ples. In this role, Māra tends to advocate enjoyment of sensual pleasures
instead of renunciation, or else he challenges the Buddha’s attainment of
awakening.
In spite of a considerable body of scholarly literature on Māra,5 the
significance of the challenges posed by Māra requires clarification.
According to a recurrent interpretation of episodes in which Māra acts as
a challenger, it is assumed that he acts out inner uncertainties or
defilements of those he challenges. Recourse to a few select examples can
demonstrate the continuity of this mode of interpretation throughout the
history of Buddhist studies.
When Māra challenges a bhikkhunī or even the Buddha, according to
Barua (1915, 203–4) this means that the bhikkhunī had a “momentary
weakness”; in fact “even Lord Buddha had his moments of gloom or
weariness which invaded him in the midst of his spiritual work.” In a study
of the psychological implications of awakening, Johansson (1969, 129)
2. A frequently found presentation distinguishes four aspects of Māra: defilements, aggre-

gates, a god, and death. This is found, for example, in EĀ 52.7 at T II 827a21, the Lalitavistara
(Lefmann 1902, 224,18), the Mahāvastu (Senart 1897, 281,7), and the Śrāvakabhūmi (ŚSG
2007, 262,3 and T 1579 at T XXX 447c17). Five aspects are instead mentioned in Vism 211,7,
which adds karmic formations to the above four, a fivefold reckoning found also, for exam-
ple, in T 732 at T XVII 530c12.
3. SN 23.11 at III 195,4 and its parallel SĀ 124 at T II 40b25.
4. According to Ps I 34,1, Māra lives in the paranimmittavasavattidevaloka, which is also in-
dicated in the Yogācārabhūmi (Bhattacharya 1957, 75,7); cf. also DĀ 30 at T I 115a28, accord-
ing to which his palace is between this highest heaven of the sensual realm and the Brahmā
world, and EĀ 43.5 at T II 760b3, which confirms that Māra is indeed supreme in the sen-
sual realm.
5. Cf., e.g., Oldenberg ([1881] 1961, 286–90), Senart (1882b, 166–87), Windisch (1895), Old-
enberg (1899), Barua (1915), de La Vallée Poussin (1915), Przyluski (1927), Law ([1931] 2004),
Dayal ([1932] 1970, 306–17), Thomas ([1933] 2004, 145–47), Malalasekera ([1938] 1998,
611–20), Foucher (1949, 151–54 and 156–60), Rao (1954), Wayman (1959, 112–25), Ling
(1962), Boyd (1971), Jayatilleke (1973, 36–38), Boyd (1975, 73–133), Haldar (1977, 153–57),
Bloss (1978), Rahula (1978, 108–14 and 177–80), Verclas (1978, 50–74), Southwold (1985,
135–37), Bareau (1986), Falk (1987), Seo (1987), Guruge ([1988] 1997), Clark (1994, 2–37)
and 46–93, Wilson (1996, 33–37), Yoshiko (1996, 32–33), Wikramagamage (1997), Hamil-
ton (2000, 207–10), Marasinghe (2002), Batchelor (2004, 17–28), Kinnard (2004), Radich
(2007, 198–201), Werner (2008, 20–28), Choong (2009, 40–42), and Bingenheimer (2011,
113–16).
concludes that when “arahants are tempted . . . by Māra,” this means that
“although their conscious life perhaps was completely purified, the deeper
and unconscious layers in their personality were not so. Some traces of the
old desires and insecurities were still there and found their outlet in the
only way still permitted to them: projected as external appearances.” In a
recent study of the “devil” in Buddhist thought, Batchelor (2004, 20–1)
sees Māra “as a metaphoric way of describing Buddha’s own inner life,”
“Mara’s tireless efforts to undermine Buddha by accusing him of insincer-
ity, self-deception . . . are ways of describing the doubts within Buddha’s
own mind.” In sum, according to Batchelor (2004, 28) Māra “is really
Gotama’s own conflicted humanity.”
Yet, the notion that the Buddha still had doubts about whether his
claim to awakening was a case of self-deception is difficult to reconcile
with the way the early discourses depict him elsewhere. Thus, for exam-
ple, qualities of the Buddha reckoned by tradition to be intrepidities
(vesārajja) are precisely his total certainty of having indeed awakened and
destroyed the influxes.6
Moreover, some of the challenges by Māra in the early discourses in-
volve actions such as changing himself into an ox and walking close to the
begging bowls of a group of bhikkhus, in order to distract them from lis-
tening to a talk given by the Buddha.7 At the time of a previous Buddha,
the Māra who lived during that period is on record for hitting an arahant
bhikkhu so that the bhikkhu’s head started bleeding.8 It would be difficult
to arrive at meaningful interpretations of such instances as mere symbolic
enactments of inner defilements or uncertainties, all the more in the last
mentioned instance, since according to the early discourses in the case of
an arahant any defilement or fear would not be there in the first place.9
Contrary to what appears to be a common opinion among Buddhist
scholars, it seems to me that in early Buddhist texts Māra is not invariably
meant to be personifying defilements of the person he challenges. Instead,
6. For a survey of sources that refer to these four intrepidities cf. Anālayo (2011b, 109–13).
7. SN 4.16 at I 112,15 and its parallel SĀ 1102 at T II 290a16.
8. While according to MN 50 at I 336,33 Māra took possession of a boy to perform this deed,
according to the parallels MĀ 131 at T I 622a7, T 66 at T I 866a7 and T 67 at T I 868a11 Māra
was himself the perpetrator of the action.
9. DN 29 at III 133,23 and its parallel DĀ 17 at T I 75b18 indicate that an arahant is beyond
fear and any other defilement.
he can personify challenges posed by outsiders to members of the Buddhist

community. Outsiders may indeed have had doubts about the Buddha’s
awakening or tried to tempt an arahant, even going so far as to attack an
arahant physically. In this way, contemporary prejudices and other prob-
lems the Buddha’s disciples had to face are interpreted as the work of Māra.
The didactic function of such interpretation would be to provide an exam-
ple of how such challenges should be faced by showing the way the Buddha
and his arahant disciples dealt with Māra.10 Interpreting an external threat
or challenge as the work of Māra in this way inculcates the proper attitude,
which is to remain balanced by recognizing what is happening as a chal-
lenge to one’s mental equipoise, instead of reacting to it. This is precisely
the way an arahant would act in such a situation, in fact arahants do not fail
to recognize Māra, no matter how well he may have disguised himself.
In the set of ten discourses translated below,11 Māra can be seen to im-
personate attitudes of contempt and derision toward women who have
fully embarked on a spiritual life.
Translation
[Connected Discourses on Bhikkhunıˉ s]

(1) [Āḷāvikā]
12
Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in
Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. At that time, there was a bhikkhunī,
Āḷāvikā, who was staying in a community of bhikkhunīs in the Rājakārāma
10. Other scholars have reached similar conclusions, for example Kloppenborg (1995, 154)
comments that Māra “can be regarded as an exponent of stereotypes that existed in . . . soci-
ety.” Abeynayake (2003, 3), commenting on the Somā incident, notes that Māra’s challenge
“is nothing but the condemnation that the society had towards women during this period.”
In relation to the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta in general, Witanachchi (2009, 750) explains that
these episodes are probably representative of “actual problems Buddhist nuns had to face
from pleasure-seeking males.”
11. The translated section ranges from T II 325c16 to 329a22, with counterparts in the Pāli
Saṃyutta-nikāya, SN I 128,1 to 135,26 (corresponding to pages 281 to 297 in Somaratne’s
new edition of the Sagātha-vagga) translated by Bodhi (2000, 221–30), and in the partially
preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100), T II 453b28 to 456b20, translated by Bingenheimer
(2011, 151–81). For ease of comparison, in my translation I employ Pāli terminology, without
thereby intending to take a position on the original language of the Saṃyukta-āgama manu-
script used for translation, which according to de Jong (1981, 108) would have been Sanskrit.
12. SĀ 1198, parallel to SN 5.1 and SĀ2 214. In my translation I have numbered the dis-
courses, with the present one counted as the first of the set of ten, and added the name of
the respective bhikkhunī as a title, neither of which are found in the original.
in Sāvatthī.13 In the morning, bhikkhunī Āḷāvikā put on her robes, took her
bowl and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her
meal, she returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, washed
her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her right shoulder and entered
the Andhavana to sit in meditation.14
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The recluse Gotama is now staying
at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. He has a disciple, the
bhikkhunī Āḷāvikā, who is staying in a community of bhikkhunīs in the
Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she has put on her robes, taken
her bowl, and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having fin-
ished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and
bowl, washed her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her right shoul-
der and entered the Andhavana to sit in meditation. I shall now approach
and disturb her.”15 He then transformed himself into a youth of handsome
appearance and went to that bhikkhunī.16 He said to the bhikkhunī:
“Lady, where do you want to go?”
13. The Rājakārāma is not mentioned explicitly in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta or the partially pre-
served Saṃyukta-āgama, although it is mentioned in a sutta quotation paralleling SĀ 1202,
found in Śamathadeva’s commentary on the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya, D 4094 nyu 82a2 or Q
5595 thu 128a3: rgyal po’i dge slong ma’i dbyar khang. In other Pāli discourses the Rājakārāma
features as the venue of a teaching given by the Buddha to a large congregation of bhikkhunīs,
SN 55.11 at V 360,15, and as the location where a group of bhikkhunīs, on having received teach-
ings from the monk Nandaka, reach high realization, MN 146 at III 271,4; for a comparative
study of this teaching and the realizations reached by the bhikkhunīs cf. Anālayo (2010c).
14. The standard description in the discourses in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta does not mention a
return to the monastery, putting away bowl and robe, washing the feet, and taking the sitting
mat, but directly continues with the respective bhikkhunī approaching the Andhavana. The
discourses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) have such a depiction, although
in a shorter form. Without mentioning a return to the monastery, only cleaning the bowl and
going to the Andhavana are described. The Tibetan parallel to SĀ 1202, D 4094 nyu 82a3 or Q
5595 thu 128a4, is closer to the pericope found in the fully preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99),
as besides washing the bowl this version also mentions putting away bowl and robe as well as
taking the sitting mat. The sitting mat is regularly mentioned elsewhere in Āgama discourses,
but often absent from Pāli parallels; cf. Minh Chau ([1964] 1991, 29) and Anālayo (2011b, 20).
15. Māra’s reflection is not reported in the discourses in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta. The dis-
courses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) and the Tibetan parallel to SĀ
1202, D 4094 nyu 82a4 or Q 5595 thu 128a5, however, report his reflection, which repeats
the introductory narration.
16. A transformation of Māra into a youth is not mentioned in the discourses in the
Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta. The discourses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) and
the Tibetan parallel to SĀ 1202, D 4094 nyu 82a5 or Q 5595 thu 128a8, however, do mention
such a transformation.
The bhikkhunī replied: “Friend, I am going to a secluded place.”17

Then Māra, the Evil One, spoke in verse: [326a]
“In the world there is no escape.

Of what use is searching for seclusion?
Return to partaking of and consuming the five sense pleasures,
so that you do not later come to have regrets!”
Then the bhikkhunī Āḷāvikā thought: “Who is this, wanting to frighten

me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming to
seduce me?”18 Then she had the thought in her mind: “This certainly is
the evil Māra wanting to confound me.” Having realized this, she spoke in
verse:
“In the world there is an escape,

I have come to know it for myself.
Mean and evil Māra,
you do not know that path.
Just like being harmed with sharp knives,
like this are the five sense pleasures.
Just like flesh-cutting torture,19
such is the dukkha of the aggregates [affected] by clinging.
Such is what you have just spoken about,
partaking of and delighting in the five sense pleasures.
Therefore I cannot delight
in that condition, which is to be greatly feared.20
Separated from all rejoicing and delight,
having completely relinquished the great darkness [of ignorance],
by having realized cessation,
17. This question and answer exchange is not found in SN 5.1, which instead directly contin-
ues from the introductory narrative section to the stanza spoken by Māra. A similar ex-
change occurs in SĀ2 214 at T II 453c6.
18. The bhikkhunīs in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta and in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-
āgama (T 100) only wonder whether the speaker of the stanzas is a human or a non-human,
without reflecting upon whether this person might want to seduce them.
19. The translation is based on a variant reading.
20. Instead of fear, mentioned also in SĀ2 214 at T II 453c19, SN 5.1 at SN I 128,25 just
speaks of a lack of delight, arati.
I dwell in peace, established in seclusion from the influxes (āsava).21

I recognize you, evil Māra,
you have been discovered, make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “That bhikkhunī Āḷāvikā has under-
stood my intentions.” Worried, sad and unhappy he then vanished and
was seen no more.
(2) [Somā]
22
Thus have I heard. . . . [Māra] said to the bhikkhunī:
“Lady, where do you want to go?”
The bhikkhunī replied: “Friend, I am going to a secluded place.”23
Then Māra, the Evil One, spoke in verse: [326b]
“The state wherein seers dwell,

this states is very difficult to attain.
One with [just] two finger wisdom
is unable to attain that state.”
Then the bhikkhunī Somā thought: “Who is this, wanting to frighten me?
Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming to seduce
me?” Then, having considered it, certainty of knowledge arose in her and
she knew: “This is the evil Māra who has come wanting to confound me.”
She then spoke in verse:
“[Once] the mind has entered a [concentrative] attainment,

what has a female appearance to do with that?
21. This last set of stanzas, which with slight variations is spoken by each bhikkhunī as a dec-
laration of having reached full awakening, is without a counterpart in the discourses in the
Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta. A comparable declaration is found, however, at the end of the stanzas
spoken by the bhikkhunīs in the discourses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100).
22. SĀ 1199, parallel to SN 5.2 and SĀ2 215. Here and below I have abbreviated the introduc-
tory narration, which follows the pattern established in relation to bhikkhunī Āḷāvikā, i.e., the
bhikkhunī in question goes begging, etc., and eventually enters the Andhavana, followed by
Māra reflecting that the bhikkhunī in question has gone begging, etc., and entered the And-
havana, deciding that he will approach to disturb her and transforming himself into a hand-
some youth for this purpose.
23. This question and answer exchange is not found in SN 5.2, which instead directly con-
tinues from the introductory narrative section to the stanza spoken by Māra. A similar ex-
change occurs in SĀ2 215 at T II 454a2.
If knowledge has arisen,

the unsurpassable state will be reached.
[But] if in regard to the perception of being a ‘man’ or a ‘woman,’
the mind has not reached complete separation,
then such a one will speak like you, Māra,
You should go and speak to such a one.
Separated from all dukkha,
having entirely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
having attained and realized cessation,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.
make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Somā has understood
my intentions.” Harboring sadness and regret within, he then vanished
and was seen no more.
(3) [Kisāgotamī]
24
Thus have I heard . . . [Māra] said in verse:
“Why are you, having lost your child,

weeping and with sad and worried face [326c]
sitting alone under a tree?
Are you searching for a man?”
Then the bhikkhunī Kisāgotamī thought: “Who is this, [trying] to frighten

me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is he scheming to seduce
me?” Then, having considered it, certainty of knowledge arose in her:
“Māra, the Evil One, has come [trying] to flirt with me.” She then spoke
in verse:
“Without limit are the sons,

who all have died and been lost.25
This, then, is the end of men [for me],
I have gone beyond [the attraction of ] men’s external appearance.
24. SĀ 1200, parallel to SN 5.3 and SĀ2 216.

25. No reference to the countless sons who have died is found in the parallel versions.
Not troubled, not sad or worried,

I have done what should be done in the Buddha’s dispensation.
Separated from all craving and dukkha,
having entirely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
I have realized cessation,
I dwell in peace and at ease, with the influxes eradicated.
now make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Kisāgotamī has under-
stood my intentions.” Being worried and sad, afflicted and annoyed, he
then vanished and was seen no more.
(4) [Uppalavaṇṇā]
26
“What a beautiful flowering sālā tree

under which you have come to stay,
alone, without a companion,
are you not afraid of evil men?”
Then the bhikkhunī Uppalavaṇṇā thought: “Who is this person, wanting

to frighten me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person
scheming to seduce me?” Then, having considered it, [327a] she realized:
“This is certainly the evil Māra. The Evil One wants to confound me.” She
then spoke in verse:
“Even if there were a hundred thousand men,

all scheming to seduce me,
just like you, evil Māra,
coming to where I am,
they could not [even] stir a hair of mine,
I am not afraid of you, evil Māra.”
Māra spoke again in verse:
“I will now enter your belly,

and stay hidden inside,

or stay between your eye-brows,

you will not be able to see me.”27
Then the bhikkhunī Uppalavaṇṇā spoke again in verse:
“My mind has great might,

having well cultivated the supernatural powers,
Being liberated from the great bondage,
I do not fear you, evil Māra.
I have vomited out the three stains (mala)
which are the root of fear.
Being established in the state of fearlessness
I do not fear Māra’s army.28
In regard to all craving and rejoicing,
I am completely separated from the darkness [of ignorance],
having realized the quietude of extinction,
you should make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Uppalavaṇṇā has un-
derstood my intentions.” Harboring sadness and worry within, he then
vanished and was seen no more.
(5) [Selā]
29
Thus have I heard . . . [327b] [Māra] said in verse:
“How has this being been born?

Who is its creator?
27. In SN 5.5 at I 132,11 (cf. also Thī 232) it is Uppalavaṇṇā who threatens that she will get
into Māra’s belly. SĀ2 217 at T II 454b28 agrees with SĀ 1201 that this threat was made by
Māra; cf. also the discussion below.
28. This set of stanzas has no counterpart in SN 5.5, although a comparable set can be found
in SĀ2 217.
29. SĀ 1202, parallel to SN 5.10 and SĀ2 218; cf. also Enomoto (1994, 42) and D 4094 nyu
82a1 or Q 5595 thu 128a2. In the present case, a confusion of names appears to have hap-
pened, as the stanzas associated in SĀ 1202, SĀ2 218 and D 4094 or Q 5595 with Selā are
instead spoken by Vajirā in SN 5.10.
Whence has this being arisen?

Where will it go?”
Then the bhikkhunī Selā thought: “Who is this person, wanting to

frighten me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person schem-
ing to seduce me?” Then, having considered it, the realization arose:
“This is the evil Māra, wanting to confound me.” She then spoke in
verse:
“Your speaking of the existence of a being,

this, then, is [just] evil Māra’s view.
There is only a collection of empty aggregates,30
there is no being [as such].
Just as when the various parts are assembled,
the world calls it a chariot,
[so] in dependence on the combination of the aggregates
there is the appellation: ‘a being.’
The arising of that [being] is then [just] the arising of dukkha,
its persistence is then also [just] the persistence of dukkha.
Nothing else arises but dukkha,
dukkha arises and dukkha itself ceases.
Having relinquished all craving and dukkha,
therefore make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Selā has understood
my intentions.” Harboring sadness and sorrow within, he then vanished
30. Vetter (2000, 157) suggests that the Chinese character employed in the present instance,
which usually renders the term “aggregates,” might rather be referring to “formations,” in
keeping with the Pāli and Sanskrit parallels. I have decided not to follow his reasonable sug-
gestion, as saṃskāra is not found among the equivalents listed for this character in
Hirakawa (1997, 1214), hence it seems safer to me to stick to the original and translate as
“aggregates.”
(6) [Vīrā]
Thus have I heard . . . 31 [Māra] said in verse: [327c]
“How has this bodily shape been created?

Who is its creator?
Whence has this bodily shape arisen?
Where will this bodily shape go?”
Bhikkhunī Vīrā thought: “Who is this person, coming to frighten me? Is

he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming to seduce
me?” Considering like this, she then gained the realization: “This is the
evil Māra, wanting to confound me.” She then spoke in verse:
“This bodily shape is not self-created

nor is it created by another.
It has arisen through the conjunction of conditions,
and by the dissolution of conditions it will then be obliterated.
Just as any seed in the world
arises in dependence on the great earth,
[and grows] in dependence on earth, water, fire, and wind,32
so it is also with the aggregates, elements, and sense-spheres.
Through the coming together of conditions they arise,
and through being separated from those conditions they will
therefore be obliterated.
I have relinquished all craving and dukkha,
Evil Māra, I know [who] you are,
make yourself disappear and go!”
31. SĀ 1203, parallel to SN 5.9 and SĀ2 219. Corresponding to the confusion of names in the
previous discourse, in the present case the stanzas associated with a nun by the name of
Vīrā in SĀ 1203 and SĀ2 219 are spoken by Selā in SN 5.9. On Vīrā and Vajirā cf. Bingen-
heimer (2011, 156–59).
32. SN 5.9 at I 134,26 instead mentions the essence of the earth and moisture as the condi-
tions for the growth of a seed. SĀ2 219 at T II 455a23 mentions just the earth, which Bingen-
heimer (2011, 173 n. 46) suggests to be due to a loss of text.
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Vīrā has understood
my intentions.” Giving rise to great sadness and sorrow, he then vanished
(7) [Vijayā]
33
“Now you are young,

I am also young.
Let us, in this place,
perform the five types of music,34
and enjoy ourselves together!
Of what use is this meditative musing?”35 [328a]
Then the bhikkhunī Vijayā thought: “Who is this person, wanting to frighten
me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming to seduce
me?” Having considered like this, she then gained the realization: “This is
Māra, the Evil One, wanting to confound me.” She then spoke in verse:
“Singing, dancing, doing various kinds of performances,

all sorts of enjoyments,
I now grant them all to you,
I have no need of them.36
With the quietude of extinction rightly experienced,
I take the five sense pleasures of even gods, or of humans
and give them all [to you],
I have no need of them.37
Having relinquished all rejoicing and delight,

34. The five types of music stand for music performed with five different instruments; cf.,
e.g., Spk I 191,24.
35. A reference to meditative musing is not found in the parallels.
36. In SN 5.4 at I 131,9 Vijāyā instead expresses her disinterest in the objects of the five
senses. SĀ2 220 at T II 455b17 mentions singing and dancing together with the five sensual
pleasures.
37. SN 5.4 at I 131,11 instead continues with a set of stanzas on being repelled by the putrid
nature of the body.

by having realized the quietude of extinction,
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Vijayā has understood
my intentions.” Harboring sadness and sorrow within, he then vanished
(8) [Cālā]
38
“Understand that to experience birth is delightful,

having been born one partakes of the experience of the five sense
pleasures.
Whose teaching did you receive
that made you weary of birth?”39
Then the bhikkhunī Cālā thought: “Who is this person, wanting to frighten
me? [328b] Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming
to seduce me?” [She understood: “This is the evil Māra],40 who has come
here wanting to confound me.” She then spoke in verse:
“For those who are born, there certainly will be death,

to be born is therefore just to experience all [kinds] of dukkha.
It is being whipped by vexations and dukkha,
all of which exists in dependence on birth.
One should eradicate all dukkha
and transcend all births.
With the eye of wisdom [one should] contemplate the noble truths,
the teaching that has been proclaimed by the Sage:
Dukkha and the arising of dukkha,
38. SĀ 1205, parallel to SN 5.6 and SĀ2 221; cf. also Enomoto (1994, 43).
39. While SĀ2 221 proceeds similarly, in SN 5.6 at I 132,22 Māra first asks Cālā what she does
not approve of. She replies that she does not approve of birth. This initial conversation fits
the context well, explaining why Māra would take up the theme of being weary of birth.
40. The text supplemented in square brackets appears to have been lost.
cessation and being separated from all dukkha,

cultivation of the eightfold right path
to peace and ease, which inclines to nibbāna.41
The impartial teaching of the Great Teacher,
in that teaching I delight.
Because I understand that teaching,
I no longer delight in experiencing birth.
Being separated from all craving and rejoicing,
having completely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Cālā knows my inten-
tion.” Harboring sadness and sorrow within, he then vanished and was
seen no more.
(9) [Upacālā]
42
“In the Heaven of the Thirty-three, [or in] higher ones,

in the Yāma and Tusita [heavens], [328c]
in the Nimmānarati and the Para[nimmita]vasavattin [heavens],
aspire to attain rebirth there!”
Bhikkhunī Upacālā thought: “Who is this person, wanting to frighten me?

Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person scheming to seduce
me?” Considering on her own she realized: “This is certainly the evil
Māra, wanting to confound me.” She promptly spoke in verse:
“In the Heaven of the Thirty-three, [or in] higher ones,

in the Yāma and Tusita [heavens],
in the Nimmānarati and the Para[nimmita]vasavattin [heavens],
all these types of heavens, [or] higher ones,
41. Instead of this and the next set of stanzas, in SN 5.6 at SN I 133,1 Cālā indicates that
beings of the form and formless realm come back to existence because of not having under-
stood cessation.
are not separated from existence and from being a product of

formations,43
therefore they are in Māra’s power.44
The whole world
is entirely a collection of various formations.45
The whole world
is entirely of a shakeable nature.
The whole world
is afflicted by fire, constantly ablaze.
The whole world
has become entirely enveloped in smoke and dust.
The imperturbable and unshakeable,
which is not cultivated or approached by worldlings,
which does not accord with Māra’s inclinations,
this is the place to be enjoyed.
Being separated from all craving and dukkha,
therefore make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Upacālā has under-
stood my intentions.” Being sad and sorrowful within, he then vanished
(10) [Sīsupacālā]
46
Thus have I heard . . . [329a] [Māra] said:
“Lady, in what method do you delight?”47
The bhikkhunī replied: “I do not delight in anything!”
43. SN 5.7 at I 133,15 instead indicates that all these celestial beings are still bound by the
bondage of sensuality, while SĀ2 222 at T II 456a12 points out that they have not yet sepa-
rated themselves from the view of self.
44. On Māra’s power over the different heavenly realms of the sensual field cf. also note 4 above.
45. For parallels to these stanzas cf. Chung (2008, 229).
46. SĀ 1207, parallel to SN 5.8 and SĀ2 223; cf. also SHT VI 1399, Bechert and Wille (1989,
118), and SHT X 4236, Wille (2008, 331).
47. In SN 5.8 at I 133,27 Māra inquires what creed she approves, while in SĀ2 223 at T II
456b3 he wants to know which of the ninety-six methods she prefers; on the count of ninety-
six heretical teachings cf. Deeg (2005, 310 n. 1512).
Then Māra, the Evil One, said in verse:
“What council did you receive,

that you shaved your head and became a recluse?
You wear yellow robes on your body
and have the marks of one who has gone forth,
[yet] you do not delight in any method—
you dwell [just] preserving your stupidity.”
Then the bhikkhunī Sīsupacālā thought: “Who is this person, wanting to

frighten me? Is he a human or is he a non-human? Is this person schem-
ing to seduce me?” Having considered like this, she then realized: “Māra,
the Evil One, wants to confound me.” She then spoke in verse:
“All paths outside of this teaching,

are entangled in views.
Being bound by any view
one is always in Māra’s power.
Yet, there has arisen, in the Sakyan clan,
a naturally endowed and incomparable great teacher,
who is able to subdue all Māra’s enmity
and who will not be subdued by him.
Purified and entirely liberated,
with the eye of the path he contemplated all,
with complete knowledge knowing all,
the supreme victor, separated from all influxes.
He, then, is my great teacher,
I delight only in his teaching.
Having entered his teaching,
I attained the aloofness of the quietude of cessation.
Being separated from all craving and rejoicing,
thus make yourself disappear and go!”
Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: “The bhikkhunī Sīsupacālā has under-
stood my intentions.” Harboring sadness and sorrow within, he then van-
ished and was seen no more.
Study
A comparison of the above-translated discourses with their Pāli counter-
parts brings to light relatively few major differences. One such difference
concerns names, as the stanzas associated in the Pāli version with Vajirā are
spoken in the parallel versions by Selā, and those spoken in the Pāli version
by Selā are attributed to a bhikkhunī by the name of Vīrā in the parallels.48
Another difference is that the stanzas spoken in the Saṃyukta-āgama
by each bhikkhunī at the end of their reply to Māra make it clear that they
are all fully awakened. While comparable stanzas are not found in the Pāli
version, several bhikkhunīs in this collection nevertheless give clear indi-
cations of the high level of their realization.49 The present difference thus
does not seem to imply a major divergence on the spiritual status of these
ten bhikkhunīs.
Another noteworthy difference is that, according to the Pāli account,
Uppalavaṇṇā threatens to enter Māra’s belly. Apart from the fact that it is
not clear if Māra was believed to have a digestive system, it seems rather
odd for a bhikkhunī to threaten that she will enter someone else’s belly.
According to the parallel versions, it is rather Māra who makes this
threat.50 For Māra such an action is more easily conceivable, as another
discourse reports that he got into the belly of an arahant bhikkhu.51 Hence
it seems that the Pāli version has probably suffered an error in transmis-
sion, and that the original sense was indeed that Māra threatened to get
48. Cf. notes 29 and 31 above.

49. In SN 5.2 at I 129,26 Somā indirectly indicates that she has no longer any notion of an
I, asmi, which would imply her realization of full awakening. According to SN 5.3 at I 130,23,
Kisagotamī dwells free from the influxes, viharāmi anāsavā, a standard reference to arahant-
ship. SN 5.4 at I 131,12 records that Vijayā has uprooted sensual craving, kāmataṇhā, and is
also free from the darkness of ignorance in relation to the peaceful attainments. If this is an
indication that she has also gone beyond desire for the immaterial, arūpa-rāga, she would
have realized full awakening. In SN 5.5 at I 132,14 Uppalavaṇṇā indicates that she is free
from all bondages, sabbabandhanamuttāmhi, hence she has also reached arahantship. In
fact, according to Ling (1962, 49) “there is the theme, running through the Pāli Canon, that
it is primarily the Buddha, and besides him, only the Arahats, who can discern Māra at all.”
This further supports the impression that the bhikkhunīs mentioned in the Saṃyutta-nikāya
and the Saṃyukta-āgama were all arahants, as all of them without fail recognize Māra.
50. Cf. note 27 above.
51. MN 50 at I 332,4 and its parallels MĀ 131 at T I 620b11, T 66 at T I 864b7 and T 67 at
T I 867a7 report that Māra entered the belly of Mahāmoggallāna, but was immediately
recognized. According to T 5 at T I 165a12, on yet another occasion Māra entered Ānanda’s
belly; the text does not mention that Ānanda recognized Māra.
into Uppalavaṇṇā’s belly. This also accords better with the overall attitude
maintained by the bhikkhunīs, who do not react to being threatened by
threatening back, but instead remain equanimous and unimpressed by
whatever Māra does.
The challenges posed by Māra cover several distinct themes. A particu-
larly prominent theme is sensuality, evident in Māra’s invitation to “con-
sume” the five sense pleasures (1) and in his recommendation to rejoice in
rebirth as a way to partake of the five sense pleasures (8) or of the pleasure
of the sense-sphere heavens (9). Pertaining to the same theme of sensuality
is the presumption that a woman who is alone must be wishing for a man
(3), the threat posed to a lone bhikkhunī by a man with evil intentions, evi-
dently of a sexual type (4), and the invitation to enjoy herself with a young
male to the accompaniment of music (7). The topic of sexual threat is in
fact a theme that forms an undercurrent in the entire set of ten discourses,
where a male approaches a bhikkhunī who is all alone by herself in a forest.
This much is evident in the recurrent reflection by each bhikkhunī in the
Saṃyukta-āgama whether the speaker might be scheming to seduce them.
Other challenges have a more doctrinal slant, such as in cases in which
two bhikkhunīs refute Māra’s views about a truly existing being or “bodily
shape” (5 and 6). Also related to the doctrinal sphere is the idea of delight-
ing in some outside teaching (10). Moreover, one case questions the spiri-
tual abilities of women (2).
The main themes of Māra’s challenges are thus:
(a) sensuality:
– enjoying sensual pleasures: Āḷāvikā (1)
– sorrow about loss of children and wishing for a man: Kisāgotamī (3)
– fear of men with evil intentions: Uppalavaṇṇā (4)
– enjoying herself with a young male: Vijayā (7)

– rejoicing in rebirth: Cālā (8) and Upacālā (9)
(b) doctrinal challenges:

– belief in a truly existing being or “bodily shape”: Selā (5) and
Vīrā (6)
– delight in another teaching: Sīsupacālā (10)
(c) women’s abilities:

– inability of women to gain awakening: Somā (2)
Some of these challenges voiced by Māra appear to be specifically di-

rected at the bhikkhunī he has decided to approach. Thus in the case of
Kisāgotamī (3), the reference to her being sad on having lost her child
seems to reflect awareness of the tale of her bereavement when her son
passed away.52 As her verses make clear, any concern with children or a
male partner is something she has forever left behind. Similarly, the chal-
lenge Māra poses to Uppalavaṇṇā (4) appears to be related to the story of
her being raped when dwelling alone in a forest.53 Her reply makes it
clear that even the horrible experience of being violated does not trauma-
tize an arahant bhikkhunī.
It is noteworthy that the present set of discourses contains three
instances where Māra overtly acts as a sexual aggressor, by insinuating
that withdrawal into solitude implies looking for a man (3), by in one
instance even apparently insinuating rape (4), and by inviting the
bhikkhunī to enjoy herself with him (7). This sets a remarkable con-
trast to sexual aggression by Māra’s daughters, of which in the whole
Māra-saṃyutta and its parallels there is just one single instance, when
Māra’s daughters unsuccessfully try to tempt the recently awakened
Buddha.54
This makes it clear that early Buddhism does not unilaterally con-
sider females as Māra’s forces who lure innocent males into sexual
desire. Instead, as the present set of discourses plainly shows, it is the
male Māra—and by definition only a male can be Māra55—who stands
for sensual temptation and sexual aggression, while those who are disin-
terested in sex are females.
This finding provides an important corrective to a mode of presenta-
tion current among some scholars. For example, Lang (1986, 69) holds
that “the pattern of identifying women with sensual desire . . . occurs with
depressing regularity throughout the androcentric literature of early Bud-
dhism.” According to Sarao (1989, 56) “to ancient Indian Buddhism all
women were daughters of Māra.” In a similar vein, Wilson (1996, 36)
52. Thī-a I 169,10; cf. also, e.g., T 212 at T IV 618b12.

53. Cf., e.g., the Mahīśāsaka and Theravāda vinayas, T 1421 at T XXII 25b27 and Vin III
35,1.
54. SN 4.25 at I 124,23 and its parallels SHT V 1441 R, Sander and Waldschmidt (1985, 257),
SĀ 1092 at T II 287a1 and SĀ 31 at T II 383c2; cf. also the Lalitavistara, Lefmann (1902,
378,14), and the Mahāvastu, Senart (1897, 282,4).
55. For a comparative study of the dictum according to which only men can occupy certain
positions, one of them being Māra, cf. Anālayo (2009c).
speaks of a “tendency to cast all human women in the role of Māra’s

daughters . . . women are essentially minions of Māra.”56
The circumstance of many discourses being addressed to a male mo-
nastic audience, simply because bhikkhus regularly accompanied the
Buddha during his journeys, makes it natural that these discourses feature
recurrent references to female attraction as Māra’s bait. This, however,
needs to be placed into perspective with the help of the Māra-saṃyutta and
Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta, which reflect a different mode of presentation. Taking
all discourses in these two collections into account, a single case of female
sexual advance stands against three cases of male sexual advance, one of
which is combined with an open threat. These discourses reflect another
perception of the relationship between gender and sexual aggression: the
more frequent case of a sexual advance is coming from the male side.57
As already pointed out by Collett (2009a, 111–2), in such instances, “far
from women being themselves the snare of Māra, instead . . . Māra is rep-
resentative of male sexuality, which is positioned as a potential danger for
the women he approaches.” Overall, then, just “as the female form is seen
as a snare of Māra for men, so a sexual male is a snare of Māra for women.”
Notably in one instance in the Māra-saṃyutta male Māra approaches a
group of bhikkhus with the challenge that they should enjoy sensual plea-
sures instead of living the life of one gone forth.58 In this case the advance
and its rebuttal are both by males, further corroborating that there is no
unilateral bias against women as the sole agent of sexual temptation and
56. Wilson (1996, 36) supports her conclusion by referring to a statement in AN 5.55 at III
68,28, according to which womankind is entirely a snare of Māra. When evaluating this
statement, it needs to be taken into account that according to the preceding narration a
mother and her son ordained as Buddhist monastics and then had sex with each other; cf.
also Silk (2009, 126–7). Thus the statement needs to be considered as a response to the
event that precedes it in the discourse. Moreover, this discourse is without any known paral-
lel in Chinese, Sanskrit, or Tibetan. Instead of taking such isolated passages out of context
as representing the early Buddhist evaluation of women, I think it would be preferable to
build an assessment of the early Buddhist attitude toward women on a broad range of
sources that are extant in parallel versions and that are evaluated within their narrative con-
text. As Collett (2006a, 82) points out, “Wilson rather overemphasizes the negative portray-
als of women she finds and essentially extrapolates from her sources to construct an over-
arching view of women in early and medieval Buddhism that is one-sided and unbalanced.”
57. On this topic cf. also the revealing findings by Collett in chapter three of the present volume.
The same holds also for the Therīgāthā, where Rajapakse (1992, 71) notes that, contrary to the
stereotype according to which “women figure . . . as seductresses bent on luring away male re-
cluses from their spiritual strivings,” the stanzas spoken by the Therīs present “men as seducers.”
58. SN 4.21 at SN I 117,23 and its parallel SĀ 1099 at T II 289a16.
that Māra, his daughters, and his baits simply stand for sensual desire in
general, independent of gender.
In line with this corrective, something else of note can be gathered
from the present set of ten episodes, where each bhikkhunī immediately
recognizes Māra and sends him away. A telling juxtaposition emerges
once the present set is compared to cases where Māra challenges bhik-
khus. The Māra-saṃyutta reports that several bhikkhus are not able to rec-
ognize Māra and need the Buddha’s personal intervention to deal with the
situation. For example, in the above-mentioned story where Māra trans-
forms himself into an ox and starts walking close to their begging bowls,
the bhikkhus fail to recognize him.59 He is thus successful in distracting
them from listening to the talk given by the Buddha. Again, in the in-
stance where Māra tempts a group of bhikkhus with the suggestion that
they should enjoy sensual pleasures, although they are able to give a fit-
ting reply, they fail to recognize him.60 The same pattern, with the bhik-
khus unable to recognize Māra, recurs in another two cases.61 Thus some
male monastics were evidently depicted as not being able to handle Māra
on their own in the way their monastic sisters did. In contrast, not a single
bhikkhunī is on record for having failed to recognize Māra or for having
been unable to dispatch him singlehandedly with a self-confident rebuttal.
This obviously reflects the situation that these bhikkhunīs are arahants,
whereas some of their male colleagues had evidently not yet reached the
same level of perfection. Nevertheless it is worthy of note that, in contrast
to the way some scholars see the representation of females in early Bud-
dhist literature, the present set of discourses on challenges by Māra is a
clear instance where the bhikkhunīs are presented in a more favorable
light than their male counterparts.

61. The first instance involves a group of bhikkhus, the second a single bhikkhu. In both
cases, the Pāli versions SN 4.17 at I 113,14 and SN 4.22 at I 119,14 report that Māra makes a
frightful noise, whereas according to their parallels SĀ 1103 at T II 290b2 and SĀ 1100 at
T II 289b26 he creates a frightening appearance. In each of these cases the bhikkhu(s) fail
to recognize him. Not all bhikkhus, however, are unable to recognize Māra. In the above-
mentioned case of Māra getting into the belly of an arahant bhikkhu (cf. note 51 above), the
bhikkhu immediately recognizes Māra. Another case is a tale that involves the bhikkhu
Nanda, who on being addressed by Māra recognizes him; cf. EĀ 16.1 at T II 578c22.
Regarding the topic of gender in the present set of discourses, the case
of Somā (2) is particularly noteworthy, since to my knowledge this is the
only instance among the early discourses were the ability of women to
reach awakening is put into question. Needless to say, the dictum that a
woman cannot be a Buddha is different, as this only implies that there will
not be a female Buddha, presumably because in the ancient Indian setting
a woman teacher would have stood less chance of being taken serious
than a male.62 No such considerations apply to the attainment of full
awakening as an arahant. Hence the present instance is unique in voicing
this prejudice regarding women’s abilities to realize arahantship.
Somā’s self-confident reaction to the derogatory remark about a wom-
an’s two-finger wit—apparently a pun on women’s use of two fingers
when doing household chores63—has been quoted repeatedly in writings
about the role of women in early Buddhism.64 Due to the way Māra’s chal-
lenges are often interpreted, however, and also since in the Pāli version
Somā’s status as an arahant is not as explicit as in the Chinese parallels,
the significance of Somā’s exchange with Māra has not always been fully
appreciated. The prejudice voiced by Māra does not imply that Somā had
any doubt about women’s ability to gain awakening. Having already
reached full awakening, how could there be any doubt about her own abil-
ity to reach it? Instead of reflecting Somā’s uncertainties, the point made
by the present episode is that, from an early Buddhist perspective, doubt-
ing women’s ability to reach awakening is so foolish that it can only be the
work of Māra.65
62. Cf. in more detail Anālayo (2009c, 162–3).

63. This may have been a popular saying, as it recurs in a different context in the Mahāvastu,
Senart (1897, 391,19 and 392,13); cf. also Gokhale (1976, 104), Kloppenborg (1995, 154),
Bodhi (2000, 425 n. 336), Abeynayake (2003, 3) and Collett (2009b, 99 n. 7).
64. Just to mention a few examples: Horner ([1930] 1990, 164), Dhirasekara (1967, 157),
Church (1975, 57), Lang (1986, 77), Bancroft (1987, 82), Kusumā ([1987] 2010, 26), Jootla
(1988, 44), Falk (1989, 161), Sponberg (1992, 9), Kloppenborg (1995, 154), Rajapakse (1995,
13), Devaraja (1999, 67), Harris (1999, 60), Harvey ([2000] 2005, 359); Abeynayake (2003,
3), Faure (2003, 120), Bentor (2008, 126), Anālayo (2009c, 137), Choubey (2009, 6), Collett
(2009b, 99) and Anālayo (2010a, 74).
65. Horner ([1930] 1990, 165) notes “that a woman could be represented as making such an
utterance is a proof that the old life of Hinduism in which women were regarded merely as
child-bearers and as commodities was . . . not passing entirely unquestioned.” Rajapakse
(1995, 13 n. 14) comments that “it is interesting to note that the doubts in question are raised
by Māra . . . who thus assumes the role of a ‘male chauvinist’ in this setting.”
That disbelief in women’s ability to reach awakening was considered a

foolish idea can also be seen in a verse in the Apadāna collection, accord-
ing to which the Buddha told Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī that she should make
a display of her supernatural abilities to remove the erroneous views of
those who doubt that women can gain realization:
“In order to dispel the view

of those fools who have doubts
about women’s full realization of the dhamma
perform a supernatural feat, Gotamī.”66
66 Ap. 17.79 at II 535,24: thīnaṃ dhammābhisamaye, ye bālā vimatiṃ gatā, tesaṃ

diṭṭhipahānatthaṃ, iddhiṃ dassehi gotami, which continues by describing the miracles she
performed.
7
Therıˉgaˉthaˉ
nandaˉ, female sibling of gotama buddha
Alice Collett
the therīgāthā is a text that has received a great deal of attention

within modern scholarship since its first publication in English in 1909
by C. A. F. Rhys Davids. However, one aspect of the text that has not been
the subject of detailed study is its relationship to subsequent biographical
accounts of the nuns who are the apparent authors of the verses within it.
There are two main sets of sources that contain biographical prose and
verse narratives of these early Buddhist nuns: first, the Apadāna, a text
dated to the post-Asokan era and likely composed in India, and second,
certain texts of the commentarial tradition of Sri Lanka, composed some
centuries later. The Apadāna, being closest in date and geographical loca-
tion to the Therīgāthā, provides the most fertile ground for comparison
and can stand as representative of the biographical tradition as the recon-
stituted biographies in the later commentaries appear to have been
sourced from the accounts in the Apadāna. Although the relationship be-
tween the Therīgāthā and the section of the Apadāna on women has not
undergone thorough examination previously, the relationship between,
more broadly, the Therāgāthā, Therīgāthā, and entire Apadāna has been
commented upon by several scholars. Warder, for example, suggests that
the biographies of the monks in the Therā-Apadāna are “almost a com-
mentary on the Therāgāthā.”1 Bechert (1958, 14), commenting on both the
Therāgāthā and Therīgāthā, assigned the Apadāna collection as “pre-birth
1. Warder, introduction to Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli’s translation of The Path of Discrimination

(1982, xxxviii).
Therīgāthā 141
stories” of the monks and nuns of the Therāgāthā and Therīgāthā. Von
Hinüber (1996, 61) calls the Apadāna “a supplement” to the Therāgāthā
and Therīgāthā, while Norman suggests it is “almost an appendix to the
Therīgāthā and Therāgāthā, since it connects together the past and present
lives of the theras and therīs” (1983, 89). Evidently, there is a close connec-
tion between the two texts, although it is not the case that all the same
monks and nuns appear in both, as Norman notes:
[The Apadāna] . . . includes many theras who do not appear in the

Therāgāthā, and does not include all the therīs who are in the
Therīgāthā. On the other hand, there is an Apadāna for Yasodharā,
although there is no poem or her in the Therīgāthā. (1983, 90)
Cutler, looking for the origin of the collection, suggests that the Apadāna
was likely complied from the existing canon overall, given that “[s]nippets
of biographical information and stories” concerning the monks and nuns
can be found throughout the Pāli canon (1994, 25). However, this does
presuppose that the authors had access to the entire (oral) canon. In this
chapter I want to attempt to reinforce the view that the Therīgāthā verses
form the basis of the narrative life accounts of the Apadāna, especially in
instances in which little or no other biographical information is available.
Assessing the extant textual evidence, it appears that the verses were the
main inspiration for the biographies in the majority of cases.
With regard to the extant versions of the Therīgāthā and Apadāna, two
particular relationships are immediately evident: first, that some of the
Therīgāthā verses contain actual biographical information that is part of the
Apadāna biography, and second (and this much more often), that the verses
spoken are reflections of those who have experienced the predicaments
detailed in the biography. That is, the verses appear as (often) first-hand
accounts of responses to the events described in the biographies. By way of
exemplifying this, we can consider some of Kisāgotamī’s verses. Kisāgotamī’s
well-known story is the story of the mustard seed. Following the death of
her son, the birth of whom had caused favor for her among her in-laws,
Kisāgotamī was overcome with grief. She refused to let go of the small ca-
daver, continuing to cradle the body in her arms. She was advised to go and
see Gotama, who asked her to collect a mustard seed from any house in
which the family had not experienced the grief of loss, and not being able
to find a house that had been spared this powerful human experience
proved a successful teaching for her. In her Therīgāthā verses, Kisāgotamī
laments the suffering experienced by women as wives and mothers:
The state of women has been said to be painful by the charioteer of

men who are to be tamed; even the state of being a cowife is pain-
ful; some, having given birth once, even cut their throats; some
tender ones take poisons; reborn as murderers in hell, both suffer
misfortunes. (v. 216–17)2
To add a few other brief examples, in her verses Aḍḍakāsī talks of her ex-
periences as a prostitute, which is the core of her biography; Bhaddā
Kāpilāni speaks of Kassapa, her husband in many previous lives whom
she followed into the order, and Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī mentions Māyā, her
sister and cowife according to numerous accounts.
In many ways this relationship of the verses as a core part of the biog-
raphy appears to have been a successful one, such that, some two thou-
sand years later, in the extant literature the relationship remains firmly
discernible in many cases, although with some notable exceptions.3 One
case in which the relationship appears to waver is that of the nun Nandā.
The Therīgāthā has two sets of verses apparently authored by nuns called
Nandā, although the first verse of each set is identical:
“See the body, Nandā, diseased, impure, putrid. Devote the mind,
collected and one-pointed, to contemplation of this impurity.
And develop the signless, cast out the latent tendency to conceit.
Then, by the full understanding of conceit, you will wander, at
peace.” (v. 19–20)4
“See the body, Nandā, diseased, impure, putrid. Devote the mind,
collected and one-pointed, to contemplation of this impurity.
2. Dukkho itthibhāvo akkhāto purisadammasārathinā, sapattikaṃ pi dukkhaṃ appekaccā sakiṃ

vijātāyo. Gale apakantanti sukhumāliniyo visāni khādanti, janamārakamajjhagatā ubho pi
byasanāni anubhonti. See Collett’s chapter on Paṭācārā in Pāli Biographies of Buddhist Nuns
for a discussion of certain problems with Kisāgotamī’s Therīgāthā verses (Collett, forthcom-
ing). All translations in this chapter are my own, but I have also made use of and at times
based my translations upon the published translations of Norman (1966), Pruitt (1999),
and Burlingame ([1921] 1995).
3. Some other exceptional cases, ones in which the relationship between the Therīgāthā
verses and Apadāna biographies are less obvious, are Sumedhā and Isidāsī. Both of these
two have long sets of verses attributed to them in the Therīgāthā, forty verses in the case of
Isidāsī and seventy-five in the case of Sumedhā. Isidāsī has no apadāna, but instead a long
biographical account is told in her forty verses, and Sumedhā’s two stories are each very dif-
ferent from one another. See Collett (2011, 218–20) for more on Sumedhā.
4. Āturaṃ asuciṃ pūtiṃ passa Nande samussayaṃ, asubhāya cittaṃ bhāvehi ekaggaṃ susamāhitaṃ.
Animittañ ca bhāvehi mānānusayam ujjaha, tato mānābhisamayā upasantā carissasi (Thī 125).
Therīgāthā 143
As this is, so is that; as that is, so is this. It emits a putrid, vile

smell, it is what fools delight in.”
Looking at it in this way, not relaxing day or night, then analyzing
it by my own wisdom, I saw.
Thoroughly, with diligent examination, I saw this body as it really
was, inside and out.
Then I became disgusted with the body, and I was disinterested
internally. Vigilant, unfettered, I am at peace, stilled. (v. 82–86)5
The verses appear in different places in the extant text, as the extant
Therīgāthā is structured according to length, so that paired verses are in
the second section and sets of four in the fourth. There are several pos-
sible reasons as to why these two sets of verses exist within the Therīgāthā.
First, a reason is suggested by an addenda in the extant text itself. In-
cluded directly after verses 19 and 20 in the PTS edition is the phrase,
“Thus, the Blessed One often advised the novice Nandā with these verses”
(itthaṃ sudaṃ bhagavā nandaṃ sikkhamānaṃ imāhi gāthāhi abhiṇhaṃ
ovadati) (Thī 125). Perhaps then, the second set of verses are simply a
second incident of the Buddha tutoring Nandā? Another possible, if not
probable, reason is transmission error. The resounding evidence from
recent studies of early manuscripts is that different versions of the same
text can vary considerably. For example, the number and order of verses
can change or verses can be found in one chapter in one version and an-
other chapter in another.6 Thus, it could easily be surmised that the exist-
ence of two sets of verses apparently spoken by a female disciple named
Nandā with an identical first verse could be explained away as having
originally been one set of verses spoken by one eponymous nun. A third
but less obvious answer from a scholarly perspective is that the verses
pertain to two different nuns, both of whom were called Nandā. This ap-
pears to have been the explanation favored by the tradition, such that
5. Āturaṃ asuciṃ pūtiṃ passa Nande samussayaṃ, asubhāya cittaṃ bhāvehi ekaggaṃ susam-
āhitaṃ. Yathā idaṃ tathā etaṃ yathā etaṃ tathā idaṃ, duggandhaṃ pūtikaṃ vāti bālānaṃ
abhinanditaṃ. Evaṃ etaṃ avekkhantī rattindivam atanditā, tato sakāya paññāya abhinibbijja
dakkhisaṃ. Tassā me appamattāya vicinantiyā yoniso, yathābhūtaṃ ayaṃ kāyo diṭṭho
santarabāhiro. Atha nibbind’ ahaṃ kāye ajjhattañ ca virajj’ ahaṃ, appamattā visaṃyuttā upas-
anta mhi nibbutā (Thī 132).
6. For some examples of this, see chapters one and two of this volume. Also, see n. 13 below
for an example of the typical sorts of changes seen.
certain biographical texts produced subsequent to the Therīgāthā speak

of two different Nandās. However, and interestingly given the similar
content of the verses in the Therīgāthā, these two Nandās do not appear,
from the textual evidence, to have attained fully separate status, but
appear to have remained somewhat conjoined. The separation into two is
most firmly established in terms of lineage and family history: one Nandā
is the daughter of King Suddhodana and Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī and thus
a (half-)sister to the Buddha, while the other is also a Sakyan by birth, but
the daughter of Khemaka the Sakyan.7 The separation is incomplete in
terms of ownership of Therīgāthā verses, that is, there is not a clear af-
fixation of one Nandā to one set of verses and the other woman to the
other. Further, the separation appears to potentially have, at one time,
been full in relation to biography—it is possible to discern two potentially
different biographies for the two—but this was rescinded in later texts.
Finally, there is a partial separation in terms of name, but again, this is
not substantive.
There is no extant text that contains more than two accounts of nuns
called Nandā, although the two Nandās in the various texts do not have the
same name (see Table 7.1). There are four other names associated with
these female Nandās—Sundarīnandā, Abhirūpanandā, Rūpanandā, and
(Nandā) Janapadakalyāṇī—and in some cases, a mixture of these names is
used. Each of these four other names refer to the outstanding beauty of
the women in question, as does the name Nandā itself.8 To the extent that
it is possible to identify two different Nandās in the texts, Abhirūpanandā
is the daughter of Khemaka the Sakyan, and she became one of the harem
7. The notion of a child that shares one parent with their sibling being termed a half-brother
or half-sister only occurs in some patterns of kinship relations. In the Buddhist literature,
Nandā and her brother, male Nanda, are simply said to be brother and sister to the Buddha.
According to Dravidian kinship networks, the children of sisters should not be termed cous-
ins but rather brothers and sisters (Trautmann 1981)
8. Nandā can be rendered as “Delightful One,” which appears to be the meaning here, as
she brings delight by her beauty. Sundarīnandā, Abhirūpanandā and Rūpanandā can be
rendered as “Beautiful Nandā,” with the latter two including some implication of pos-
session of a beautiful figure, and Janapadakalyāṇī as “the beauty of the district,” with the
implication that she was the most beautiful. Most of the biographical accounts under-
line the relationship between the physical beauty of the protagonist and the name,
saying, for example, “she was known as Abhirūpanandā because of the excessive beauty
of her own body, she was beautiful, pleasing to look at, lovely” (sā attabhāvassa ativiya
rūpasobhaggappattiyā abhirūpā dassanīyā pāsādikā abhirūpanandā tveva paññāyittha,
Thī-a II.1 at 24).
Therīgāthā 145
women in the court/palace of the bodhisatta.9 Nandā (with various other

names) is the daughter of Suddhodana and Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, and her
biography is the story of obsession with beauty. In what follows I will
examine the biographies of Nandā that appear sourced from the Therīgāthā
verses and attempt to illustrate the partial separation within the biograph-
ical tradition into two discreet Nandās and then the subsequent recapitu-
lation into one. The texts I will use are two of the known recensions of the
Apadāna, Dhammapāla’s commentary on the Therīgāthā, the Aṅguttara-
nikāya commentary (Manorathapūraṇī) (and the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā
(Table 7.1).10
Textual Evidence
Apadāna I contains biographies of two female Nandās, Abhirūpanandā
and Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī; however, the biographies of each of them, in
the extant version, tell essentially the same story. This is a story that came
to be the narrative center of the biography of the female Nandā in almost
all other versions. The very same story has also come to be the narrative
center of the biography of another nun, Khemā, who is better known than
Nandā.11 The story is essentially one of obsession with beauty. The pro-
tagonist (Nandā or Khemā) appeared lovely at birth and grew to be an
exquisitely beautiful woman. Intoxicated with her own physical beauty,
she avoided the Buddha, knowing that he disparaged those interested in
sensual beauty, seeing it as a meaningless preoccupation. However, by
9. The texts of the Pāli tradition do not mention the royal connection in the earliest life
stories of the Buddha, although Aśvaghoṣa does. This is true of most other traditions, apart
from the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, which talks of more than sixty thousand wives. Accord-
ing to Strong, only the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya develops the harem women scene (see Strong
1997, 114–15, and on the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, p.124 n. 2).
10. A third recension of the Apadāna was used by the authors/compliers of Paramatthajotikā
II. I will call the Apadāna that exists in what appears to be a complete form “Apadāna I” and
the sections that exist within the Therīgāthā commentary “Apadāna II.” See chapter eight of
this volume.
11. For more on Khemā, see the chapter in Collett (forthcoming). In the Pāli tradition, this is
the usual story of Khemā, but there is a different account of her in the Avadānaśataka, a text
connected to the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition. The story of obsession with beauty fits better
with Nandā’s Therīgāthā verses, which are an admonition against such folly. Khemā’s
Therīgāthā verses appear as a conversation between lovers, although in the Samyutta-
nikāya/Saṃyukta-āgama they are conceived as a conversation between Māra and Khemā/
Kṣemā, and his attempts to seduce her (see chapter five of this volume).
Table 7.1 Nandā in the Pāli Texts
Aṅguttara- Therīgāthā Apadāna Therīgāthā Manorathapūraṇī Dhammapada-

Nikāya commentary aṭṭhakathā
Nandā Distinguished 2 sets of Daughter of

in meditation verses on the Mahāpajāpatī, also
diseased and called Rūpanandā
impure body, & Janapadakalyāṇī,
19–20, 82–86 beauty story
connected with
meditation.
Abhirūpanandā Daughter Dhammapala
of Khemaka section—Daughter
the Sakyan, of Khemaka the
beauty story, Sakyan, beauty
Thī v. 82–86 story, Thī v.19–20.
Apadāna
section—born
in the Sakyan family,
in harem, different
story.
Nandā Daughter to Wife of Nanda,
Janapadakalyāṇī Suddhodana, the brother of the
sister of Buddha, Buddha
beauty story,
Thī v. 82–84,
Sundarīnandā Dhammapāla
section—Sister to
the Buddha, beauty
story (says—see
Abhirūpanandā
story), connected
to meditation, Thī
v. 82–84. Apadāna
section—the story of
Nandā
Janapadakalyāṇī
from the Ap.
Janapadakalyāṇī Sister to the
Rūpanandā Buddha, beauty story
one way or another, eventually she meets Gotama and he, knowing about
her obsession, performs a miracle to teach her about the impermanence
of physical beauty. The Buddha conjures up an apparition before her, a
beautiful woman more exquisite then herself, then, by one means or an-
other, causes the apparition to turn old, ugly, deformed, or a mixture of
these. In each instance of the telling of narrative, for both Khemā and
Nandā, this apparition and its subsequent subversion have the desired
effect and cause the disciple to see the errors of her thinking. Sometimes
the event causes the disciple to experience a profound religious shift and
attain the status of an arahant, and on other occasions the experience ap-
pears to prime the candidate for arahant status, which follows soon after-
ward with the help of a further teaching.
This basic story arc is followed in both of the Apadāna I biographies of
Abhirūpanandā and Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī; however, the two versions of
it are entirely different in their detail.
Apadaˉna I
Abhirūpanandā
The biography of Abhirūpanandā begins in the era of Buddha Vipassī. At
that time, Abhirūpanandā is born in Bandhumati, into a rich and prosper-
ous (iddhe phīte) family.12 Among her own kinsmen and others, she was
known for her beauty (surūpa). She worshiped Buddha Vipassī and then,
journeying on through the worlds of gods and men, she was born in her
last existence inKapilavatthu as the daughter of Khemaka the Sakyan.
Even at birth, she was beautiful (abhirūpa) and so was called Nandā, and
as she grew into a young women she maintained her beautiful form
(rūpavaṇṇa). Having been advised to go forth as a member of the Sakyan
clan and become a disciple of the Buddha, she did so, apparently out of
respect for her family. However, having gone forth, knowing the Buddha
was disparaging of beauty, she did not go to see him. She was eventually
led into his presence, and he made appear a woman as beautiful as a heav-
enly nymph, who then turned old and died in front of her eyes. The
Buddha spoke to her, and she replied, in verses almost identical to the
second set of verses in the Therīgāthā:
12. See Collett (forthcoming, chapter on Paṭācārā) for a discussion of the importance of
family status and wealth in the biographies of early Buddhist women.
Therīgāthā 149
“See the body, Nandā, diseased, impure, putrid, oozing, and drip-
ping, it is what fools long for.
Devote the mind, collected and one-pointed, to contemplation of
this impurity. As this is, so is that; as that is, so is this.”
Looking at it in this way, not relaxing day or night, then analyzing
it by my own wisdom, I dwelt.
Thoroughly, with diligent examination, I saw this body as it really
was, inside and out.
Then I became disgusted with the body, and I was disinterested
internally. Vigilant, unfettered, I am at peace, stilled.13
The concluding verses recount that she mastered the supernormal powers,
including the divine ear and divine eye, and had knowledge of previous
births. Essentially, she was Awakened, having “done the Buddha’s teaching.”
Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī
The biography of Abhirūpanandā in Apadāna I is not a lengthy one, being
only twenty-five verses long. The biography of Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī is
just over twice that, being fifty-four verses in total. This second Apadāna
biography of a female Nandā stands out among the other biographies in
the text as the style is particularly poetic. There are other occasions of
these sorts of poetic style within Apadāna I, but these stylistic features are
more abundant in the biography of Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī than is gener-
ally the case.14 The biography begins during the era of Buddha Padumut-
tara. At the time of Buddha Padumuttara, Nandā was born in Haṃsavatī
in the family of a wealthy merchant. She heard an exposition by the
Buddha that she describes as “undying, of the greatest sweetness, making
13. Apadāna I omits the second line of verse 83 in the Thī—duggandhaṃ pūtikaṃ vāti
bālānaṃ abhinanditaṃ—and instead has a different second half to the first verse (no.
15)—uggharantam paggharantaṃ bālānaṃ abhipatthitaṃ. Although the two lines are in dif-
ferent places, they say very similar things. Two other changes in Lilley’s edition are the re-
placement of dakkhisaṃ with vacchasi and vicintantiyā with vincinant’ idha.
14. The biography begins during the time of Buddha Padumuttara; however, instead of the
much more typical single verse stating this, there are six verses devoted to extolling the
many virtues of this lineal Buddha: “One hundred thousand eons ago, a leader was born, the
conqueror named Padumuttara, who had reached perfection. He advised, offered instruc-
tion to all beings, was brilliant, skilled in teaching, a Buddha, who enabled many people to
cross over. Sympathetic, compassionate, desiring the welfare of all beings, he established
adherents of other sects who came to him in the five precepts. His emptiness was undis-
turbed by those adherents, and it was ornamented by the arahants, unique ones having
known the highest good” (amataṃ paramassādaṃ paramattha-nivedakaṃ

Ap. II 572), and as a result of that offered a gift and then requested to
become the foremost of nuns who are meditators. The content of the bi-
ography differs here from other accounts. In instances such as this, it is
much more often the case that the request from the disciple to become a
preeminent nun in the future is preempted by the Buddha in question
conferring the same position on a nun in his own community of commit-
ted female disciples. This is the case for, for example, Paṭācārā, Bhaddā
Kuṇḍalakesā, Khemā, Kisāgotamī to name but a few. For Nandā, Padu-
muttara then, as typical, predicts that she will attain that position in the
future under Gotama Buddha. Following this, Nandā journeys on through
the worlds of gods and men, as again is typical of the narrative accounts in
the text. During these sojourns in various realms, she is said to rule as
chief queen to both gods and men, which is not unusual and is a role she
has in common with others whose biographies are told in the Apadāna. In
her last existence, she is born in Kapilavatthu, in the family of Gotama, the
daughter of King Suddhodana, so thus a sister to the Buddha-to-be.15 Once
again, as she was beautiful she was called Nandā, and it was said of her
that she was the most beautiful of all the young women in Kapilavatthu,
with the exception of Yasodharā.16 Her mother urged her to go forth, as
her elder brother was foremost of the three worlds (tilokaggo), her middle
brother (the male Nanda) was an arahant, and she alone was left as a lay-
woman. Her mother said:
mastery. He was fifty-eight ratana tall; the great sage had the appearance of a golden flower
garland, possessing the thirty-two excellent marks. His lifespan lasted one hundred thou-
sand years, and while he remained, he enabled many people to cross over.” (Padumuttara
nāma jino sabbadhammāna pāragū, ito satasahassamhi kappe uppajji nāyako. Ovādako
viññāpako tārako sabbapāṇinaṃ, desanākusalo buddho tāresi janataṃ bahuṃ. Anukampako
kāruṇiko hitesī sabbapāṇinaṃ, sampatte titthiye sabbe pañcasīle patiṭṭhapi. Evaṃ nirākulaṃ āsi
suññataṃ titthiyehi ca, vicittaṃ arahantehi vasībhūtehi tādihi. Ratanān’ aṭṭhapaññāsaṃ uggato
so mahāmuṇi kañcanagghiyasaṅkāso battiṃsavaralakkhaṇo. Vassasahasahassāni āyu tiṭṭhati
tāvade, tāvatā tiṭṭhamāno so tāresi janataṃ bahuṃ) (Ap. II 572) If this set of verses is com-
pared to the first verse of Abhirūpanandā’s biography—“Ninety-one eons ago, the leader
Vipassī was born, beautiful leader, wise in all phenomena” (ekanavute ito kappe vipassī nāma
nāyako uppajji cārunayano sabbadhammesu cakkumā, Ap. II 608)—the difference is evident.
Abhirūpanandā’s preface is more typical of the text overall, and the general style overall is
more telegraphic than poetic, but that is only a generalization, as there are other examples
of the stylistic features evident here.
15. This account does mention her mother, but does not specify who her mother is, as others
do (see below).
16. This caveat, of course, complicates her eponymous accolade as Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī
if it is taken to imply she is the most beautiful in the district.
Therīgāthā 151
O Child, you were born in the Sakyan family. You are the younger
sister of the Buddha. How can you remain at home being without
Nanda?17
Her mother implores Nandā to renounce, telling her that her youth and
beauty will end in old age and disease before too long, and that to be pre-
occupied with these is a pointless endeavor. At her mother’s request,
Nandā does go forth, but she remains unconvinced in her mind. The
Buddha sees that Nandā remains intoxicated with youth and beauty, and
here he performs the miracle that converts her. However, here again the
wording is entirely different from the other account in Apadāna I. The
Buddha makes the stunning beauty appear before her eyes, and Nandā is
again transfixed. However, in this version Nandā speaks to the apparition,
in words that would be more fitting as a discourse between lovers. Nandā
first asks the woman her family, name, and clan, and then suggests she
come hither so that Nandā may rest her head on the woman’s lap. This
she does, and while they are enjoying their intimacy the apparition falls
asleep. Then, a forbidding spider falls upon the apparition’s forehead.
This causes a boil to quickly develop and then burst, oozing pus and
blood. Further, her mouth begins secreting impurities, which have a
rotten stench about them, causing swelling and discoloration, and she
also begins to excrete bodily pus and to tremble. This pus-ridden ghoul
then spoke to Nandā, complaining of being afflicted by misery and in
pain. Nandā asks her:
Where is the opening of your mouth? Where is your long nose?

Where has you mouth gone with its excellent dark red lips?
Where is your face shaped like the moon? Where has you neck
that is shaped like a couch shell gone? Your ears like waving swings
have lost their color.
Your breasts are like dried up buds, burst open and producing
the foul smell of a festering corpse.18
17. Sākiyamhi kule jātā putte buddhānujā tuvaṃ, nandena pi vinā bhūtā agāre kiṃ na acchasi
(Ap. II 574).
18. Kuhiṃ vadanasobhan te, kuhiṃ te tuṅganāsikā? Tambabimbavaroṭṭhan te vadanaṃ te
kuhiṃ gataṃ? Kuhiṃ sasiṃ nibhaṃ vattaṃ, kambugīvā kuhiṃ gatā? Dolālolā ca te kaṇṇā
vevaṇṇaṃ samupāgatā. Makulakhārakākārā kalasā va payodharā, pabhinnā pūtikuṇapā
duṭṭhagandhitvam āgatā (Ap. II 575. Two emendations of Lilley—dolālolā for dolālocā and
makulakhārakākārā for makulakhārak’ ākārā)
In this section of Nandā’s biography we can see some linguistic features

that suggest this account is one that exemplifies Norman’s comment about
the text overall that it “did not undergo the usual editing procedure” visible
in extant Pāli texts (1983, 92). Usually, as well, a more discursive, poetical
style such as this would be considered likely a later interpolation. How-
ever, as suggested by Collett Cox in her recent study of British Library
fragments 20 and 23, it may well be the case that the more formalized
sections of Pāli (and other) texts might not have been a product of the oral
period, but instead a formalization of an earlier, more discursive style.19
Following her poetic contemplation of the astonishing rescinding of
beauty, Nandā continues:
You, with narrow waist and wide hips, have become full of impuri-
ties, like sinful ones lead off to a slaughterhouse. O beauty is not
eternal!
All this putrid smell produced by the body is frightful. It is as
loathsome as a cemetery in which the foolish delight.20
Nandā has seen through her false views; she has understood that beauty
does not last and only fools are intoxicated with it. Following these verses,
the Buddha speaks to Nandā and again here we find the same second set
of verses from the Therīgāthā, as was the case with the biography of
Abhirūpanandā. The verses in this case are identical to Therīgāthā verses
82–84, but verses 85 and 86 are absent. Hearing these verses, Nandā at-
tained the status of arahant and in the usual telegraphic style of Apadāna
I then recounted that “whenever I sit, I am always given over to medita-
tion” (yattha yattha nisinnā ‘haṃ tadā jhānaparāyanā Ap. II 576) so the
Buddha placed her as foremost of female disciples who are meditators.
Apadaˉna II
Apadāna II, the other recension of sections of the Apadāna preserved and
contained within Dhammapāla’s commentary on the Therīgāthā, does not
19. Collett Cox, unpublished conference paper entitled “Formalized Scholasticism: Frag-
ments 20 and 23 in the British Library Collection of Gāndhārī Manuscripts,” delivered at the
XVIth Congress of the International Association for Buddhist Studies, Dharma Drum Bud-
dhist College, Jinshan, New Taipei City, Taiwan, June 2011.
20. Vedimajjhā puthussoṇī sūṇā ‘va nītakibbisā, jātā abhejjabharitā. Aho rūpam asassataṃ.
Sabbaṃ sarīrasañjātaṃ pūtigandhaṃ bhayānakaṃ, susānam iva jegucchaṃ ramante yattha
bālisā (Ap. II 575. Em. abhejja to amejjha, following Cone 2001, 226).
Therīgāthā 153
proffer its own names for its two extant accounts. The accounts are in-
cluded under the names Dhammapāla gives for the two women—
Abhirūpanandā and Sundarīnandā, although for the latter he says her
name was initially Nandā. The Apadāna II verse narrative included in
Dhammpāla under the name Sundarīnandā is the same as those in Apadāna
I on Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī. However, although those listed under the
name Abhirūpanandā in Apadāna II share the name with the biography in
Apadāna I, the biographical account is almost entirely different.
Abhirūpanandā
There are twenty-five verses included in the Apadāna II that are said to be
the Apadāna verses of Abhirūpanandā, but in fact only verses 20–22 are
the same as the Apadāna I account of Abhirūpanandā, and these three
verses (on attainment of certain powers, such as the divine eye) are a stan-
dard set of verses that appear in identical and similar form in many other
of the Therī-Apadāna accounts.21 The narrative of these twenty-five verses
does not provide much biographical content, but does tell us that
Abhirūpanandā was born previously (although it does not state this is
during the era of Buddha Vipassī) in Bandhumati and was the wife of a
khattiya king, Bandhumā. One day, while sitting and quietly reflecting,
Abhirūpanandā becomes aware that she had not herself done any good
deeds that might lead to a better rebirth and that, in fact, instead, at death,
she will “go to a hell that is extremely hot, terrible, of horrible appearance,
completely pitiless.”22 Thereupon, she resolves to do some good and asks
her husband, the king, to give her a recluse whom she could feed. Having
filled the bowl of the recluse with the most excellent food, she covers the
bowl with cloth worth a thousand coins and offers it. This virtuous deed
serves her well in further births. At death she journeys on among the
worlds of gods and men, becoming chief queen to both thousands of deva
kings and, in the human realm, equally thousands of wheel-turning mon-
archs. In the present existence, she is born into the Sakyan family, and
becames the “foremost of a thousand women of the son of Suddhodana”
(nārīsahassapāmokkhā suddhodhanasutass’ ahaṃ, Thī-a 25), which could be
21. See for example, Dhammadinnā’s verses 32–33 (Ap. II 569), Sakulā’s verses 28–29 (Ap.
II 571), Uppaladāyikā’s verses 20–22 (Ap. II 603), Sigālamātā’s verses 25–27 (Ap. II 605)
Aḍḍakāsikā’s verses 11–13 (Ap. II 611), and Puṇṇikā’s verses 14–16 (Ap. II 612). Two other
verses in Abhirūpanandā’s biography in Apadāna II (1–3) are the same as verses attributed
to Ekapiṇḍadāyikā in Apadāna I (verses 1–3, Ap. II 515–16).
22. Mahābhitāpaṃ kaṭukaṃ ghorarūpaṃ sudāruṇaṃ, nirayaṃ nūna gacchāmi . . . (Thī-a II.1 at 25)
a reference to her being a chief consort in the bodhisatta’s harem. The next
verse then tells that she went forth because she was disenchanted with
household life, but does not connect this to the previous verse about her
relationship with the Buddha-to-be. The remaining verses essentially tell
of all the good that came out of her gift to the recluse: receipt of immea-
surable nuns requisites, no rebirth into places of misery, only ever being
born into deva or human realms, and in exalted families, and only experi-
encing pleasure. The final verses conclude by noting her mastery of the
supernormal powers, including attainments of the divine eye and ear, and
her attainment of Awakening.
Therıˉgaˉthaˉ commentary
Abhirūpanandā
Although this Apadāna II account of Abhirūpanandā is quite different than
the usual story of Nandā, Dhammapāla, in his section on Abhirūpanandā
in his commentary, retells the more usual story of obsession with beauty.
This lack of concord between Dhammapāla’s version and the one in
Apadāna II that sits alongside it is not too unusual, appearing at several
other points throughout the text. Norman has already noted that this lack
of concord raises the question as to whether the Apadāna II excerpts were
added into Dhammapāla’s commentary at some later date (1983, 135). In
the section on Abhirūpanandā, the Apadāna II excerpt comes at the end,
but in other cases, such as for example, that of Mittā (Thī-a II.7 at 34), if the
Apadāna II excerpt is removed, Dhammapāla’s narrative flows easily and
appears unbroken. However, Dhammapāla was certainly aware of the
Apadāna as, at the end of his commentary (Thī-a 269), he notes that one
way of classifying nuns is by whether they have an apadāna or not. In com-
paring Dhammapāla’s account with that of Apadāna II, it can be seen that
he maintains the lineal and family details said to be those of Abhirūpanandā
in Apadāna I and Apadāna II, that she was the daughter of Khemaka the
Sakyan, but other than that he renders no other concurring details.23
23. It might seem tenable to speculate that the reason for this could be that Dhammapāla
sought to downplay any suggestion of the Buddha-to-be delighting in concubines of his
court. But such an argument would be easily subverted by a quick check of Dhammapāla’s
biographies of other nuns whose stories are not told in the Apadāna. Several of the nuns he
provides accounts of, otherwise little known nuns, are said to have been concubines in the
Bodhisatta’s royal court (see the accounts of the two nuns named Tissā, the second of which
includes mention of several other nuns, Thī-a I.4 at 11–12).
Therīgāthā 155
According to Dhammapāla, Abhirūpanandā was born during the era of

Buddha Vipassī into the family of a wealthy merchant, in the town of
Bandhumati She followed the teaching of Vipassī, and at death, journeyed
on through various existences. During the era of Gotama Buddha, she was
born as the daughter of Khemaka the Sakyan in Kapilavatthu. She was
named Nandā because of her beauty and known as Abhirūpanandā
because of the beauty of her physical form. Thus far, Dhammapāla’s nar-
rative repeats the account attributed to Abhirūpanandā in the Apadāna I.
At this juncture, Dhammapāla diverges. He recounts that, on the eve of
Abhirūpanandā’s marriage to the Sakyan Varabhūta, her husband-to-be
died and so her parents reluctantly had her go forth. In the Apadāna I
account, Abhirūpanandā goes forth essentially because she is a member
of the Sakyan clan, which is —not, in that account, a particularly convinc-
ing reason. The concord between the two versions is that Abhirūpanandā
was herself reluctant to go forth on each occasion, as she was intoxicated
with her own beauty. In both versions, she avoids the Buddha knowing he
finds fault with beauty, but eventually does see him, in this case because
the Buddha ordains it by asking Mahāpajāpatī to instruct all the nuns to go
and see him in turn. He requested this simply so that Abhirūpanandā
could have an audience with him, but when her turn came, she sent some-
one else in her place. This attempt to avoid him failed, and she was ordered
to go and see him in the end. Again, the Buddha causes the apparition to
appear then shrivel up in front of her eyes, and this brings forth a reli-
gious experience for her (saṃvegaṃ uppādetvā, Thī-a II.1 at 24). At this,
the Buddha utters Therīgāthā verses 19 and 20 to Abhirūpanandā.
Sundarīnandā
With regard to Therīgāthā verses 82–86, attributed to the other Nandā,
Dhammapāla comments on them in his section on Sundarīnandā. Ac-
cording to Dhammapāla’s commentary, Sundarīnandā was born during
the era of Buddha Padumuttara into a good family in the town of
Haṃsavatī. She heard Buddha Padumuttara place a nun as foremost of
those women who meditate and she aspired to that position. She jour-
neyed on and in the era of Gotama was born into his own Sakyan family.
She was named Nandā, came to be called Sundarīnandā because of the
beauty of her form (rūpasampattiyā), and was known as the beauty of the
district (janapadakalyāṇī).24 The next section notes that, although she
24. This connection to a beautiful form is more often stated in relation to Abhirūpanandā.
could light up an entire room with the radiance of her body, Yasodharā
shone brighter than she.25 The next paragraph lists events that occurred
following the Awakening of the Buddha, which culminated in Nandā
going forth. First, her brother Nanda and Rāhula went forth, then her
father Suddhodana attained final release (parinibbuta), then Mahāpajāpatī
and Rāhula’s mother went forth, and so she pondered on the fact that all
of her family had renounced the world to follow the world-honoured one.
Deciding there was no point in her remaining within the household life
without her family, she too went forth but because of love for her relatives
(ñātisinehena), not because she was instilled with faith or confidence in the
teachings. Then follows the story of the apparition, although Dhammapāla
does not repeat it in full, but refers the reader back to the prior story
of Abhirūpanandā. However, he notes, there is a difference here:
Sundarīnandā saw the form of the woman overcome by old age, and her
mind was turned toward meditation. Seeing her ability to reflect upon and
contemplate impermanence, misery and non-self, the Buddha taught her
about the impermanence of the body with verses 82–84, and as a conse-
quence she attained entry into the stream. Then follows the Apadāna I
account of Nandā Janapadakalyāṇī, at the end of which Dhammapāla
comments that Sundarīnandā attained arahantship, and reflecting upon
her attainments, she uttered Therīgāthā verses 85–86.
Aṅguttara-nikaˉya commentary
The Manorathapūraṇī, which contains narrative biographies of the nuns
noted in the Aṅguttara-nikāya as distinguished in one quality or another,26
includes a biographical account of the nun Nandā, distinguished accord-
ing to the Aṅguttara-nikāya for her meditative ability. In this account, she
is called not only Nandā, but also Rūpanandā and Janapadakalyāṇī. She is
said to be the daughter of Mahāpajāpatī, born before the Buddha-to-be and
so again is his sister. The story here is very similar to that of Dhammapāla’s
commentary on Sundarīnandā. All the activities of her family are listed;
Nanda and Rāhula joined the Order, Suddhodana has died, and
Mahāpajāpatī and Rāhula’s mother have gone forth. She is left alone again
25. Pruitt notes that the Burmese and Sinhalese editions suggest this passage was a later
addition (Pruitt 1999, 107 n6).
26. See chapter five in this volume.
Therīgāthā 157
and so decides to go forth, and then follows the story of her obsession with
her beauty and the Buddha’s apparition. Both end with a quotation of a
Dhammapada verse, although only the beginning of the verse is recorded
in the Manorathapūraṇī. One noteworthy difference is that the
Manorathapūraṇī does not recount the story in full, as Dhammapāla does,
instead referencing an earlier telling of it. However, here the other version
referenced is the story of Khemā.
Dhammapada commentary
Janapadakalyāṇī Rūpanandā
Finally, the Dhammapada commentary includes a story of a nun called
Janapadakalyāṇī Rūpanandā. The verse that this story is a comment upon
is the same verse as noted above, one that is repeated in both the
Manorathapūraṇī and in Dhammapāla’s commentary on the Therīgāthā.
It is a city made of bones, plastered with flesh and blood

Where lodge old age and death and pride and deceit.27
The verse, from the chapter in the Dhammapada on old age, teaches that
the body is a mere collection of bones, flesh, and blood, and thus the
story of Nandā and the Buddha is a fitting story to illustrate this. The
story in the Dhammapada commentary begins with Janapadakalyāṇī re-
flecting on that fact that her entire family has renounced the world. The
Buddha she calls her eldest brother, and she mentions her mother having
gone forth, but in this case does not name her. She does not mention her
brother Nanda, but instead reflects upon that fact that her husband has
become a monk. In another story in the Dhammapada commentary,
Nanda, the brother of the Buddha, is married to a Janapadakalyāṇī, which
is perhaps a confusion of their more usual relationship of brother and
sister. She decides to become a nun out of love for her family, and once
ordained comes to be known as Rūpanandā because of her outstanding
beauty. The same story as above, of her meeting with the Buddha,
follows,with some added detail on the moment of the “death” of the
apparition:
27. Aṭṭhīnaṃ nagaraṃ kataṃ maṃsalohitalepanaṃ, yattha jarā ca maccu ca māno makkho ca
ohito ti (Dhp-a 11.4 at III 118, Thī-a V.4 at 80, Mp 364).
Suddenly, her body began to bloat, from its nine openings oozed
lumps of pus and worms. Crows and other animals gathered and
tore at the carcass.28
The Buddha then gives her the teaching similar to Therīgāthā verses
82–83, and she attains the fruit of conversion.29 At the conclusion of the
story, the text reverts to calling her Nandā, although she has been
Janapadakalyāṇī at the beginning and Rūpanandā for the most part.
Conclusion
To conclude, let us summarize the above. As per the table on pages 146–7,
if we trace evidence for Nandās through the textual record in the trajectory
we assume to be early to late, we find the first texts speak of a Nandā dis-
tinguished in her skill in meditation, with verses attributed to her that
prefigure the beauty story in the Therīgāthā. In Apadāna I we find the two
Nandās with different lineal descent—the daughter of Khemaka the
Sakyan and the half-sister of Gotama. Here, however, is the same life ac-
count for both—the beauty story. It is only in Apadāna II, now only extant
in the Therīgāthā commentary, that there remains evidence of a separate
biography, although this does not have much content. The text composed
by Dhammapāla himself provides accounts of both the daughter of Khe-
maka and the daughter of Suddhodana, but in the two cases the biography
is the same. In the Manorathapūraṇī we find again Gotama’s sister and the
beauty story and finally in the Dhammapada commentary a Nandā who is
a wife to Nanda, brother to Gotama, and another Nandā who is his female
sibling.
With the exception of the account of Abhirūpanandā in Apadāna II, all
other biographical accounts of Nandā can be traced back to the two sets of
verses in the Therīgāthā. Although this is the case in the extant literature,
it does appear that biographies of nuns called Nandā have not remained
static through their history within the manuscripttradition. It appears to
28. . . . yeva uddhumātakabhāvaṃ āpajji navahi vaṇamukhehi pubbavaṭṭiyo c’ eva puḷavā ca

pagghariṃsu kākādayo sannipatitvā vilumpiṃsu (Dhp-a 11.5 at III 117).
29. Āturaṃ asuciṃ pūtiṃ passa nande samussayaṃ uggharantaṃ paggharantaṃ bālānaṃ
abhipatthitaṃ. Yathā idaṃ tathā etaṃ yathā etaṃ tathā idaṃ dhātuyo suññato passa mā lokaṃ
punar āgami bhave chandaṃ virājetvā upasantā carissasī (Dhp-a 11.5 at III 117).
Therīgāthā 159
be the case that there was some attempt within the textual tradition to es-
tablish historical accounts of the two female disciples called Nandā, al-
though this was only partially successful. Perhaps this lack of success was
in part due to the enterprise being spun on the shaky foundations of trans-
mission error. If, indeed, as would be the scholarly perspective, the two
sets of verses exist as a result of the fallibility of the transmission process,
the subsequent quest within the textual tradition to establish two from
one falters in this case on content—the content of the verses being identi-
cal, maintaining a second story with little scriptural/historical basis thus
proved too problematic in the end.
8
Apadaˉna: Therıˉ-apadaˉna
wives of the saints: marriage and KAMMA
in the path to arahantship
Jonathan S. Walters
Introduction
the apadāna is an early post-Asokan (ca. 2nd–1st century bce) collection
of hagiographical texts in Pāli verse, which is included in the Khuddaka-
nikāya of the Pāli Tipiṭaka as perhaps the latest and final addition to that
canon.1 It opens with brief, putative autobiographies of the Buddha
(Buddhāpadāna) and of the Paccekabuddhas, unnamed men who in the past
achieved Buddhahood without teaching and establishing a religious com-
munity (Paccekabuddhāpadāna). But the bulk of the collection narrates the
lives of monks (Therāpadāna) and nuns (Therī-apadāna) who became saints
(arahants) in the dispensation (sāsana) of the historical Buddha. These too
are presented as autobiographical (or more precisely, “autohagiographical”)
1. This chapter has been composed as part of a larger project to translate the entire Apadāna
into English, which at this writing (2012) I am pursuing with the generous support of sab-
batical leave from Whitman College, and for which I express my gratitude. The Apadāna is
the only text of the vast Pāli Tipiṭaka that remains untranslated into a Western language,
though portions of it have appeared in various publications, including my own (Walters
1995). It figures centrally in Walters (1990); Walters (1994); Walters (1997); Walters (2003).
For fuller studies of the entire text than I am able to provide or engage here, see also Bechert
(1958); Cutler (1994). All translations of the Apadāna in this chapter are my own, and I pro-
vide them in English verse approximating the meter of the original Pāli due to my conviction
that these texts were meant for rhythmic performance. Filler words, odd alternate forms,
repetitious phrases, fudged grammar, and so forth in the text betray the centrality of metrical
composition to the original authors and editors, and so I have followed suit. While my trans-
lations aim to be literal ones, in small ways I have taken poetic license in order to meet the
daunting challenge of making the Pāli meter work in modern English. In this chapter I have
not reproduced the critical apparatus that indicates those junctures, but the interested reader
can find it in the scholarly version of the full translation, which will be available for free at
www.whitman.edu/Penrose once it is completed. Cf. also notes 3, 5, and 7, below.
Apadāna: Therī-apadāna 161
narratives, in which each monk or nun explains, in the first person, the
process that led to his or her achievement of arahantship.
Some of these men and women are well known from other (often earlier)
sources, but the majority of them are known only to Apadāna. This majority
is listed therein as personifications of meritorious deeds (with names like
“Lamp-Giver” or “Foot-Worshiper”) rather than being assigned names of
historical individuals believed to have played important roles in the early
Buddhist community.2 In their apadānas particularly, but even in those of
the otherwise famous monks and nuns, Apadāna often merely alludes to, or
even fails altogether to mention, certain details. The sorts of details of the
present/final life that might be expected of a biographical or hagiographical
narrative and that, in the case of the famous monks and nuns, are known
from other sources are often absent. Instead, in all cases, apadānas narrate
the process leading to arahantship (or in the case of the Buddha, Buddha-
hood) as the result primarily of meritorious deeds performed in previous
lives, during the times of previous Buddhas and Paccekabuddhas. Thus in a
typical apadāna a monk or nun begins by describing the meritorious deed
he or she performed during the time of a previous Buddha, details the sub-
sequent happy rebirths (both human and divine) experienced as results of
that deed, and concludes by portraying his or her present-life arahantship as
the culmination of that same kammic trajectory.
In other work (Walters 1997) I have interpreted this focus on pieties
performed during previous lives in light of the expansion of the Buddhist
community after the 3rd century bce. The earlier texts in the Pāli canon
had certainly established by then the expectation that good deeds per-
formed by laypeople and less advanced monks and nuns would result in
good rebirths among people and in various heavens. However, the achieve-
ment of arahantship—which entails the end of all rebirth, nibbāna—was
narrated as the exclusive domain of advanced monks and nuns, whose in-
tellectual penetration and meditative effort produced that religious goal.
Ordinary people could look forward to future lives as advanced monks and
nuns, during which they too could pursue arahantship. But the sorts of
religious activities that they typically performed in the present life (and
which most Theravāda Buddhists still typically perform today)—giving
alms; building temples and monuments; worshiping bodhi trees, thūpas,
and similar reminders of the Buddha; adopting special moral codes during
full moon day celebrations; listening to sermons—were not explicitly
2. Waldschmidt identifies this method of “naming” in a manuscript colophon from Central

Asia, whereby a key event of a story takes the place of the name in the colophon (1980).
linked to that eventual goal. This limitation became problematic when,

after the advent of Asoka Maurya in the 3rd century bce, whole populations
came to embrace the Buddha’s religion. It then became vital to provide re-
ligious paradigms that laypeople and less advanced monks and nuns could
emulate and thereby progress toward the soteriological goal of nirvana.
The authors of Apadāna overcame this limitation with the remarkable
insight that if the present-life biographies of the arahants serve as appro-
priate paradigms for advanced monks and nuns, then their previous-life
biographies, when they too were ordinary men and women, must serve
as appropriate paradigms for less-advanced people. By doing now what
the arahants did then, the Apadāna assures its audience, one can expect
in the future to achieve the same release from suffering and rebirth that
the arahants achieved as a result of having done those pious deeds.
Apadāna’s great contribution here was to draw an explicit link between
pieties performed in the present life and the achievement of arahantship
during a future one. To make this revelation Apadāna provides biograph-
ical details of the previous lives of the arahants that sometimes are and
always seem extensive especially in light of the short shrift given their
present-life biographies. In most cases Apadāna provides names, occupa-
tions, places of residence, dates (either the name of the previous Buddha,
or the number of aeons ago during which he lived), descriptions of the
piety performed, and more or less detailed accounts of the intermediate
human and divine results each arahant experienced prior to the present
life. Because the collection is also very large (it narrates the apadānas of
some 5503 male and 40 female arahants), the result of this variation in
3. The Pali Text Society edition of Apadāna (Lilley 1925–27) includes 547 apadānas of males
(theras); the Buddha Jayanti Tripiṭaka Series Apadāna (Vajirajñāṇa et al., 1961–1983) includes
559; the commentary (Godakumbura 1954) includes 561. The PTS and BJTS editions agree in
relating 40 apadānas of females, though there are some reasons to believe that the collection
once contained additional nuns’ apadānas (see Collett 2011, 210). While I have not taken on the
monumental project of constructing a critical edition of the text (for a model of which see
Cutler 1997), my translation does take into account the variance in readings between the PTS
and BJTS editions. Where they disagree, the critical apparatus (see n. 1) indicates the disagree-
ment in a footnote and indicates why I have chosen one over the other; where one edition in-
cludes verses not found in the other, I translate them anyway at the appropriate juncture,
double-numbering each verse according to both the PTS and the BJTS reckonings so that
readers can track the differences in the two editions. This too I refrain from reproducing in the
present chapter, for reasons of space, and I encourage the interested reader to pursue it via the
critical apparatus supplied in the scholarly version of the complete translation online. In the
present instance I have found it sufficient to refer only to the PTS edition, which will be most
accessible to readers of English. I number the verses only according to the PTS edition, and
accordingly also adopt the occasionally archaic transliteration system which the PTS edition
also employs, notably the use of “ŋ” for the now-more-common “ṃ” to denote the anusvāra.
detail is a vast catalog of efficacious pieties coupled with an almost uni-

versal appeal. People in all walks of life, castes, occupations, and regions,
young and old, male and female—even animals and supernatural
beings—could find a homologue among the previous lives of the arah-
ants. Put differently, Apadāna embraced the whole of society and offered
it a vast number of possible pieties that could be performed to effect
future arahantship.
Yet for all this interest to address the real lives of ordinary people by
detailing the previous-life biographies that the arahants are believed to
have recalled, the apadānas ascribed to male arahants—constituting the
bulk of the whole Apadāna collection—curiously have virtually nothing
to say about marriage and previous-life spouses. Marriage is not one of
the categories of biographical detail provided in the monks’ past-life sto-
ries, let alone in the present-life ones, and the wives of these saints thus
remain almost entirely unmentioned and unnamed.4 Reading the
Therāpadāna one might well conclude that there were no women at all
behind these great men. This is curious because marriage is an institu-
tion that centrally defines lay life and distinguishes it from monastic ex-
istence. Even though these stories all narrate the eventual escape from
such worldly bonds, in many or most cases that escape itself presumably
would have involved certain struggles. These would have included the
struggle to give up the pleasures of marriage, as well as struggles with
abandoned spouses, and such struggles in turn would have been highly
relevant to the audience of laypeople and still-struggling monks and nuns
addressed by these texts. Interestingly, husbands and wives do figure
4. The only clear exception to this statement which I have found is in the apadāna of one
Khomadāyaka Thera (“Cloth Provider,” #30; Ap. I:80, v. 1) who is made to say:
In the city Bandhumatī
I [lived as] a trader back then.
In that way supporting [my] wife (dāraŋ)
I planted the seeds of [great] wealth.
There are a number of additional instances in which the becoming-arahants refer more
generally to “friends, family, and relatives” whom they gathered together to perform their
root pieties, as a collective agent which presumably included their wives and other women.
We know from inscriptions that women were included in many such group pieties during
the historical period of Apadāna’s composition (see below, n. 13), and women surely are in-
tended to be among its audience (and presumably were included among its authors, on
which see my next note). But the fact that this phrase specifically fails to mention wives is
really a case-in-point, as becomes explicit in Bhaddā-Kāpilāni-apadāna’s refusal to let Mahā-
Kassapa-apadāna get away with it (see below, section 2).
regularly in the roughly contemporary, parallel jātaka stories of the Bud-

dha’s previous lives, in which many of the “rebirth precursors,” to borrow
Frank Reynolds’ (1991) salubrious phrase, of the famous arahants also
play roles. Husbands and wives also figure in various ways in the this-life-
focused biographical accounts of the famous monks and nuns found in
earlier canonical texts such as the Pāli vinaya and the Theragāthā and
Therīgāthā.
Indeed, it appears from a close reading of the parallel Therī-apadāna
that this elision of wives from the monks’ apadānas troubled some Bud-
dhists of the day, too. While still not given the prominence we might
expect, marriage plays a number of interesting roles in the nuns’
apadānas. There, marriage is one of the details of previous, intermediate,
and even present lives that the authors regularly are concerned to relate.
In two of the nuns’ apadānas in particular—that of Bhaddā-Kāpilāni Therī
(“Auspicious Woman of the Kapila Clan,” #27), this-life wife of the arah-
ant Mahā-Kassapa, and that of Yasodharā Therī (“Famous,” #28), this-life
wife of the Buddha himself—we are provided in-depth reflections on the
role of marriage in the kammic trajectory that leads from root piety to
arahantship.
Thus we can note at the outset that concern with marriage was gen-
dered. So it behooves us to examine that concern for the insight it might
provide into the larger gendered contexts of the historical period during
which, and for which, Apadāna was composed. This chapter therefore
proceeds by exploring in Section 1 the generalized concern with marriage
evinced in the Therī-apadāna accounts, and interpreting it vis-à-vis the
absence thereof in the Therāpadāna. It then nuances that examination
through close attention to the apadānas of Bhaddā-Kāpilāni (Section 2)
and Yasodharā (Section 3). It concludes by returning to the collection as a
whole and the gendered differences between those apadānas written about
(and presumably by) men, and those written about (and presumably by)
women.5
5. The strongest argument for female authorship of Therī-apadāna—and not of

Therāpadāna—is a qualitative one: the nuns’ apadānas reflect women’s experience in very
distinct ways (see Walters 1994; Collett 2011). The Therī-Apadāna not only focuses on
women as its main subject but also narrates a world in which goddesses, laywomen, and
female attendants replace the gods, laymen, and male attendants who usually figure in the
monks’ apadānas. But the authorship of the text—even its date and region of composition—
remain open questions for future work. Cf also n. 1 above and n. 7 below.
1. Marriage in the Therıˉ-apadāna

The Therāpadāna constitutes about two-thirds of the whole Apadāna
collection. Generalizations about even this portion of the Apadāna are dif-
ficult because it contains such a variety of texts. The individual apadānas
of the monks range in size from just a few verses to well over two hun-
dred. In some only a single root piety under a single previous Buddha is
mentioned, but in others the becoming-arahants perform pieties during a
succession of Buddha eras. Some apadānas pursue literary interests that
sometimes digress from the soteriological focus of the genre,6 and the
poetic quality of individual apadānas likewise varies greatly. It is thus
likely that the collection represents the work of multiple authors.7
Yet there are certain conventions in Therāpadāna which create a sense of
consistency amidst all this variation. For example, with a few exceptions all of
the monks’ apadānas conclude with this formulaic statement of arahantship:
The four analytical modes,

and these eight deliverances,
six special knowledges mastered,
[I have] done what the Buddha taught!8
6. For example, the apadāna of the Buddha’s chief disciple Sāriputta Thera (#1; Ap. I:15–31)
opens with a minutely detailed description of the flora, fauna and geography of his hermit-
age during a previous life as the ascetic Saruci (v. 1–33), followed by a lengthy passage de-
scribing the virtues of his students during that time (v. 35–65). It also contains two beautiful,
extended speeches in which Saruci praises the knowledge of Buddha Anomadassī (v. 77–92)
and then, reborn as Sāriputta, he praises the Buddha Gotama (v. 159–208). The apadāna of
Upāli Thera (#6; Ap. I:37–48) is similarly rich with extended metaphors describing the vir-
tues of the Buddha and his followers, and the positive effect discipleship had upon Upāli,
which seem more a display of poetic skill than a necessary detail of the kammic trajectory.
7. The tradition, which maintains that these verses were actually spoken by the monks to
whom they are ascribed, would lead us to believe that there were more than five hundred
authors of just the Therāpadāna.
8. Beginning with #371 (Pattipupphiya Thera, who is #374 in the BJTS edition) the manu-
scripts conclude almost all the texts in Therāpadāna with a fuller three-verse refrain that
prefaces the main formula quoted here with two additional verses. There is some variation
in the first twenty or so subsequent apadānas, which sometimes invert the order of the two
prefaced verses, and in some instances the text substitutes a different two feet (“All my out-
flows are exhausted”) for “Like elephants . . . without constraint.” But the “inverted version”
(below) becomes the consistent reading for all the rest of the Therāpadāna and for all of the
Therī-apadāna:
This is followed by an equally formulaic colophon that “thus indeed Ven-

erable [so-and-so] Thera spoke these verses. The apadāna of [so-and-so]
Thera is finished.” As well as this formulaic conclusion, various verses
and especially individual feet of verses recur over and over throughout the
texts, similarly creating a sense of consistency. Most notably, many of the
famous monks are said to have received a prediction of their future arah-
antship from a previous Buddha, and multiple-verse parts of that narrative
are also shared, verbatim, across numerous apadānas. Buddhas are regu-
larly referred to in strings of epithets that likewise are shared across the
texts, as are the dates (in numbers of aeons ago that they lived) ascribed to
the previous Buddhas.
I begin with this structural introduction to the Therāpadāna in order to
suggest that the brief sections attributed to the Buddha (Buddhāpadāna)
and to the Paccekabuddhas (Paccekabuddhāpadāna), as well as the section
attributed to the nuns (Therī-apadāna), are fruitfully interpreted as subse-
quent additions to an original core of texts about the male arahants.
Buddhāpadāna follows none of these conventions of the monks’ apadānas,
being in fact a very unique text not only for Apadāna but for the whole
Theravāda tradition (it is described in detail below). Paccekabuddhāpadāna
similarly is lacking these same conventions, being as it consists mostly of
[My] defilements are [now] burnt up;

all [new] existence is destroyed.
Like elephants with broken chains,
I am living without constraint.
Being in the Best Buddha’s midst
was a very good thing for me.
The three knowledges are attained;
[I have] done what the Buddha taught!
[I have] done what the Buddha taught.
It would thus appear that this full three-verse refrain was being worked out and played with
during the composition of the texts prior to about #390 of Therāpadāna (although the BJTS
manuscripts also add the [non-inverted] full version to some of the first ten monks’
apadānas). The fact that Therī-apadāna consistently employs this finalized “inverted ver-
sion” of the three-verse refrain may be taken to confirm the point suggested below, namely
that Therī-apadāna’s composition was subsequent to that of Therāpadāna, i.e., to the work-
ing out of the three-verse refrain. The four paṭisambhidās or analytical modes, eight
vimokkhas or deliverances, and six abhiññās or special knowledges are generalized attain-
ments of arahants well known in the earlier canonical texts.
the much earlier Padhāna-sutta of Sutta-nipāta.9 These two would have

been added to the core in order to contextualize the monks’ apadānas,
which all involve meeting the Buddhas and Paccekabuddhas during previ-
ous lives.
The narratives in Therī-apadāna on the other hand do follow most of
the conventions found in the monks’ apadānas. They do conclude with
the formulaic statement of arahantship and the colophon,10 share whole
verses and especially individual feet of verses with each other and with the
texts of Therāpadāna—in the case of the famous nuns they also share the
narrative in which a previous Buddha predicts their future arahantship—
employ the same epithets for Buddhas (exhibiting the same interest in
their deployment), and follow the same dating scheme of the previous
Buddhas. Yet there are various reasons to consider Therī-apadāna a subse-
quent addition as well. It is much shorter, containing less than a tenth of
the number of individual apadānas, and only about one-fifth as many
verses as are found in Therāpadāna. The manuscripts used by the Pali
Text Society editor conclude Therāpadāna with a colophon suggesting that
the nuns’ apadānas were at some stage not included in the collection.11
Further, the 13th-century commentary, Visuddhajanavilāsinī, likewise con-
cludes after the Therāpadāna without mention of the nuns’ biographies.
Beyond these structural considerations, two stylistic divergences similarly
suggest separate and subsequent authorship. One of them is a consistent
concern to flesh out the biographical situations of the female arahants,
during previous as well as present/final lives, with richer detail than is
found in any of the monks’ apadānas. The other is a sort of “feminist
edge” that can be discerned in many of the nuns’ biographies, as though
they were responding to an already existent text about males (cf. Walters
1994). The inclusion of details about marriage intersects both these stylis-
tic divergences, which I therefore proceed now to describe more fully.
9. This is SN 3.2, a brief sutta in which Māra (Death) approaches the Bodhisatta during the
six years of severe asceticism he undertook prior to attaining Buddhahood. Māra points to
his emaciation and similar bodily suffering as a reason to give up the quest, then departs
when this ploy fails to undermine the Bodhisatta’s determination.
10. See, however, n. 8, above: their consistent employment of the finalized, “inverted ver-
sion” of the three-verse refrain may confirm that they are later/separate compositions.
11. Ettāvatā Buddhâpadānañ ca Paccekabuddhâpadānañ ca Therâpadānañ ca samattā ti.
Nibbānapaccayo hotu. “To this extent the apadānas of the Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, and
Theras are finished. Let it be the foundation for nibbāna!” (Ap. I:511).
Many of the Therī-apadāna references to marriage are merely off hand

ones that establish biographical context for the main story. Thus both
Ekapiṇḍadāyikā Therī (“One Ball [of Food] Donor,” #6) and Uppaladāyikā
Therī (“Lotus Donor,” #33) open by naming a king from the past and indi-
cating that “I was the wife of that king” (tassa rañño ahaŋ bhariyā). This
wife, reflecting on her failure to perform any meritorious deeds, and
thereby her consequent destiny for rebirth in hell, asks her husband to
provide her with a monk to whom to give alms (Ap. II:515–16, v. 1–4;
Ap. II:601, v. 1–5). In each of the two narratives, the wife is granted this
opportunity and proceeds to perform the root piety that eventuates her
arahantship. Similarly, Uppalavaṇṇā Therī (“Lotus-Colored,” #19) relates
that in one of her intermediate births she, “having been the chief queen
of the king of Benares” (kāsirañño mahesī ‘haŋ hutvā), gave birth to no
fewer than 500 royal sons. In their youth, while sporting in the water,
they all become Paccekabuddhas after seeing fallen lotus leaves. Bereft of
them she dies in grief, but reborn in the next life, while providing alms to
eight Paccekabuddhas, she remembers her former sons and in her mater-
nal love milk then flows from her breasts (Ap. II:555, v. 58–62). In her
present/final life Paṭācārā Therī (“Wanderer in a Cloth,” #20) marries a
commoner (naraŋ janapadaŋ, “a man of the countryside”) and goes off
with him against the wishes of her opulent parents. When she is preg-
nant with her second child, however, she sets out to visit her parents,
carrying the first-born with her. Her husband, displeased, chases after
her, but when he reaches her a terrible storm arises. Going off to build a
shelter, he is killed by a serpent. Grieving and beset with labor pains she
crosses a river and gives birth, but when she then goes back across the
river to retrieve her elder son the infant is carried off by an osprey, while
the older boy is swept away in the current of the river. She then returns to
her home only to discover that her parents and siblings have all died and
are being cremated together at that very moment. Thereupon meeting the
Buddha, she is quickly able to grasp his teaching that sons, parents, and
relatives offer no protection against suffering and attains arahantship
(Ap. II:558–59, v. 22–35). Kisā-Gotamī Therī (“Lean Gotamī,” #22) is like-
wise born in a millionaire’s clan during her present/final life, but her own
family is destitute. She marries into a well-off family (gatā . . . sadhanaŋ
kulaŋ) but other than her husband (patiŋ ṭhapetvā) the rest of them de-
spise her poverty until she gives birth to a son, upon which she is much-
beloved. When, however, the son then dies she goes mad with grief and
wanders about with the corpse in hand, trying to find a medicine to revive
him. She finally meets the Buddha who famously tells her that he can
bring the son back to life with a white mustard seed obtained from a
home that has experienced no death. Going from home to home she
eventually comes to understand death’s terrible universality, and like
Paṭācāra makes this realization the foundation for her own arahantship
(Ap. II:565–66, v. 19–25). Dhammadinnā Therī (“Given by Dhamma,”
#23) “goes to another family” (parakulaŋ gantvā) and lives happily until
her husband (sāmiko) hears the dhamma and becomes a non-returner;
she then also goes forth and becomes an arahant (Ap. II:569, v. 24–26).
Like her, Sonā Therī (“Cleansed,” #26) “goes to a husband’s family”
(gantvā patikulaŋ) and gives birth to ten sons, but when to her displeasure
they all renounce the world along with their father, she tracks them to the
monastery where they are staying. Meeting a nun who instructs her in the
nature of suffering, she quickly achieves arahantship (Ap. II:577, v. 10–17).
In each of the foregoing examples, the fact of marriage is a necessary
contextualizing detail, in the absence of which the main story could not be
narrated. This no doubt reflects a historical situation in which a grown
woman’s status was largely defined by her husband (and after his death,
her sons), just as an unmarried girl’s status was largely defined by her
father and other male relatives.12 Marriage (or birth) to powerful men
largely determined the power of women. Alice Collett (2011) has persua-
sively argued that a central goal of the Therī-apadāna narratives was “to
establish a female past for the [Buddhist] tradition” in which, we know
from inscriptional and archaeological evidence, women did play signifi-
cant roles as nuns and lay donors.13 Given that historical situation, it
12. It is important to recognize that some of the nuns’ apadānas refer to fathers and other
male relatives as a contextualizing detail that functions much like marriage does in the
foregoing examples. This is especially clear in the repeated narrative about the seven daugh-
ters of Kikī the King of Kāsi (Benares) studied by Alice Collett (2011). They—including sev-
eral of the nuns just mentioned (Uppalavaṇṇā, Paṭācārā, Kisā-Gotamī, and Dhammadinnā)—
were sisters (during the time of the previous Buddha Kassapa) who, refused permission by
their father to become nuns, nevertheless remained in the home unmarried and devoted
themselves to performing meritorious deeds. In Therī-apadāna a number of other nuns
similarly perform their root pieties “while tagging along with father,” e.g., Sigālaka-mātā
Therī (#34; Ap. II:603, v.3) and Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī Therī (#17; Ap. II:537, v. 97). This dis-
placement of woman’s agency onto her husband and other male relatives was formalized in
the classical law books of Brahmanism (dharmaśāstras), which maintained that marriage
was the single and definitive life-cycle ritual (saṃskāra) for women. See the next chapter of
this volume, chapter nine, for a discussion of some Brahmanical notions of marriage.
13. For a discussion see Walters (1994, esp. p. 371 and references provided in the notes
there); cf. Walters (1997, esp. p. 186, n. 42).
should come as no surprise that this past was often established on the
basis of a given woman’s marriage (or parentage).
The necessity of marriage to establish this female past becomes espe-
cially apparent when we consider another category of marriage references
found in the Therī-apadāna. The text contains a stock claim made by many
of the individual female arahants that during her intermediate lives she
“was fixed in the chief queen’s place” (mahesittaŋ akārayiŋ) of a certain
number of kings of the gods, and likewise of a certain number of human
kings, some of whom usually are specified to have been wheel-turning
(cakkavatti, Skt. cakravarti) monarchs.14 This claim is best understood in
light of the parallel Buddhist history constructed in Therāpadāna. Here a
great number of male arahants, using parallel stock phraseology, claim
the obverse. During their intermediate lives they were kings of the gods
and wheel-turning or lesser human kings some specified number of times
(usually bearing personal names reflective of the root piety that led them
into those exalted stations).15 This sovereign achievement is sometimes
included among the predictions that the previous Buddhas make of them.
The history of divine and human rulership thus constructed—which is
populated by becoming-arahants and fuelled by the good kamma of their
root pieties—opens an obvious space for female counterparts because
divine as well as human kings famously enjoy superior (and oftentimes
numerous) wives.16 Sometimes the previous Buddha’s prediction speci-
fies, as in the case of Sāriputta (“Sāri’s Son”) Thera, that:
14. This stock claim recurs in the apadānas of Sumedhā Therī (“Wise” #1); Tīṇinaḷamālikā
Therī (“Three Reed Garland-er” #5); Ekapiṇḍadāyikā Therī (“One Ball [of Food] Donor”),
#6; Kaṭacchubhikkhadāyikā Therī (“A Spoonful of Begged-for Food Donor” #7);
Sattuppalamālikāya Therī (“Seven Blue Lotus Flower-er”, #8); Pañcadīpikā Therī (“Five
Lamps” #9); Udakadāyikā Therī (“Water Donor”, #10); Ekūposathikā Therī (“One Full Moon
Observance”, #11); Ekāsanadāyikā Therī (“One Seat Donor” #14); Pañcadīpadāyikā Therī
(“Five-Lamps Donor” #15); Sālamālikā Therī (“Sal Garland-er” #16); Khemā Therī (“Peace”
#18); Bhaddā-Kuṇḍalakesā Therī (“Auspicious Curly-Hair” #21); Nandā or Janapadakalyāṇi
Therī (“Joy” or “Beauty of the Countryside” #25); Uppaladāyikā Therī (“Lotus Donor”, #33).
Several more nuns, including Bhaddā-Kāpilāni Therī (#27) and Yasodharā Therī (#28), who
are discussed in the next two sections, also claim to have been married to human and/or
divine kings without however employing this stock phraseology.
15. This theme, in one variation or another, is found in virtually all the monks’ apadānas,
even those which are only a few verses long (and in which, therefore, this claim becomes the
most salient biographical detail provided). I leave off listing them here for considerations of
space.
16. For a provocative examination of just how seriously human kings’ superior sexuality was
taken see Ali 2004.
Women numbering sixteen thousand,

ladies who’re all-ornamented
with varied clothes and jewelry
and wearing earrings made of gems
with long eyelashes, lovely smiles
and slim waists, pleasant to look at
will ceaselessly surround this one;
that’s the fruit of Buddha-pūjā.
(Ap. I:22, v.106–7)17
And the wheel-turning monarchs are regularly introduced with the epi-
thet “possessor of the seven gems” (sattaratanasampanno), among which
the “woman gem” (itthiratana, Skt. strīratna) was reckoned an especially
significant one.18 But none of the texts of the Therāpadāna draws the obvi-
ous (and marvelous) conclusion, namely that the superb female consorts
of such becoming-arahant god-kings and human-kings were (and in the
context of the day, are) themselves becoming-arahant god-queens and
human-queens. Only in Therī-apadāna does this possibility becomes ex-
plicit. In its opening verses, Sumedhā Therī (“Wise,” #1) states that “being
the chief queen of one who possessed the seven gems, I was the woman-
gem” (Lilley II:512, v. 3: sattaratanassa mahesī itthiratanaŋ ahaŋ bhaviŋ). As
Therī-apadāna proceeds to enumerate the vast number of times that par-
ticular nuns were chief queens of god-kings and human-kings, it repopu-
lates Therāpadāna’s universal history with the women who later became
arahants in the dispensation of Gotama Buddha. This establishes further
place for women in the Buddhist past and likely proved especially poi-
gnant to those in the Apadāna’s audience who were themselves Buddhist
queens.
The necessity of marriage that I have been discussing certainly points
to the dependence of Buddhist queens on Buddhist kings. This is the case
whether we are talking about legendary queens in a constructed Buddhist
past or real ones in a then-present Buddhist audience. But as John Strong
17. Virtually identical (future) pleasures are predicted of Upāli Thera (#6, Ap. I:40, v. 38–39)
and Upavāna Thera (#22, Ap. I:73, v. 40–41). Additional prediction sequences too numerous
to detail here assure the becoming-arahant of more generalized pleasures in heaven.
18. The other six gems of a wheel-turning monarch were his wheel (cakka, sometimes un-
derstood to mean the chariot, and sometimes a more symbolic representation of his power),
elephant, horse, gem, steward (or wealth), and advisor.
(2003) has provocatively suggested in his study of “Buddhist Queenship,”

dependence was only one-third of the case. In his reading of the story of
Asoka Maurya’s queen, Asandhimittā, Buddhist queens and kings were
also to some extent interdependent: possessing the “seven gems” made
marriage a requirement for the cakkavattin kings too. Also, we know from
inscriptional evidence that Buddhist and later non-Buddhist kings relied
upon their queens to perform Buddhist pieties for them (cf. Walters 2000,
110–11; Walters 2008, 174–77, 179). More important, according to Strong,
Buddhist queens were also to some extent independent. We start to see
what I have dubbed the “feminist edge” in Therī-apadāna when we re-
member that these women became queens of divine and human kings not
because of those males, but because of the root pieties that they them-
selves performed during their own previous lives. This point is made ex-
plicit in the way Bhaddā-Kuṇḍalakesā Therī’s apadāna (#21) presents the
generalized attainment:
In whichever place I’m reborn,

as a result of that kamma
I was fixed in the chief queen’s place
of kings in this and that [heaven].
Fallen from there, among humans,
of kings who turned the wheel [of Law]
as too of kings in [their] circles.19
(Ap. II:561, v. 11–12)
The repetition of these two verses in the apadāna of Nandā (Janapadakalyāṇi)

Therī (#25) adds emphasis to its explicit revelation that one becomes a
Buddhist queen through one’s own meritorious kamma.
Many of the additional Therī-apadāna passages about being the chief
queen of so many kings of gods and cakkavattins nuance this point. The
stock claim is phrased in such a way as to emphasize that these exalted
marriages during the intermediate lives were about female, in addition to
male, power. Thus Ekapiṇḍadāyikā Therī (#6) states:
19. That is, kings whose underlordship to world-conquering emperors was enacted through
their participation in his imperial circle (rājamaṇḍalā), on which see especially Inden (1981);
Inden (2000). For its playing out in the ancient and medieval Sri Lankan Buddhist king-
doms that preserved the Apadāna see Walters (2000); Walters (2008).

of thirty kings among the gods.
Whatever my mind wishes for
comes into being as desired.20
of twenty kings who turned the wheel.
With accumulated [merit]
I transmigrated through lifetimes.
(Ap. II:516, v. 8–9)
Similarly, the previous Buddha Tissa predicts of the becoming-arahant

Kaṭacchubhikkhadāyikā Therī (#7) that:
Giving this spoonful of begged food,

you will go to Tāvatiṃsa.21
You’ll be fixed in the chief queen’s place
of thirty-six kings of the gods.
You’ll be fixed in the chief queen’s place
of fifty kings who turn the wheel.
Everything your mind may wish for
you will receive [it] every day.
Having enjoyed [great] happiness
you will go forth possessionless.
Destroying all [your] defilements,
you’ll reach nibbāna, undefiled.
(Ap. II:517, v. 3–5)
In a stronger statement still, Sattuppalamālikāya Therī (#8) claims:

of seventy kings of the gods.
Everywhere a female ruler
I transmigrated life to life.
20. These same two feet are repeated in the same context in the apadāna of Sālamālikā
Therī (#16; Ap. II:529, v. 4).
21. The highest heaven.
of sixty-three wheel-turning kings.

They all conform to my [wishes];
I’m she whose words are listened to.
(Ap. II:518, v. 11–12)
The rulership of the queens, and the good kamma that produced it, was
their own. Many of the individual nuns’ apadānas also stipulate that Bud-
dhist queens enjoyed many pleasures, including being happy, being
wealthy, being attended upon by others, and enjoying fabulous heavenly
mansions. These were likewise their own, experienced independently of
their royal husbands.
Strong’s threefold analysis of the Buddhist queen as simultaneously
dependent, interdependent, and independent helps us make sense of the
complexity found in the apadānas of the two most famous wives of saints,
Bhaddā-Kāpilāni and Yasodharā. Both of them were likewise chief queens
to their present-life husbands (Mahā-Kassapa and the Buddha, respec-
tively) when the latter were enjoying their intermediate lives as divine and
human kings. In the apadānas of those therīs, too, we see ways in which
they were dependent on their husbands, but also ways in which they and
their husbands were interdependent, and an insistence that in some ways
they were independent of their husbands. I turn to these detailed pictures
of kammic marriage in the following two sections. But I conclude this sec-
tion by pointing to a final apadāna in which this “edgy” independence of
wives from their husbands is especially clear, that of Bhaddā-Kuṇḍalakesā
Therī (#21).
Though not a queen, in her present life Bhaddā-Kuṇḍalakesā was the
daughter of an opulent millionaire. Becoming infatuated with a thief she
sees being led for execution, she soon marries him after her father pur-
chases his freedom. She lives as his “trustworthy, very loving and friendly”
wife but “that enemy, being greedy for [her] valuable ornaments,” leads
her to a mountain precipice on the pretense of performing a sacrifice. In
fact, he intends to murder her. Discerning his plan she attempts to save
her life by offering him her finery freely and lowering herself to the status
of “bed-slave” (mañca-dāsī). But then he replies:
Take it off, o beautiful one,

[and] do not feel a lot of grief;
I am unable to accept
wealth that I did not kill to get.
For as long as I remember

since I attained to puberty
I’ve accepted no other one
more beloved than you [to me].
(Ap. II:562, v. 28–29)
She quickly devises a ruse to get him to the edge of the cliff, then throws
him into the precipice, reveling:
The man is not the one who’s wise

in every single circumstance;
paying attention here and there
the woman is the one who’s wise.
The man is not the one who’s wise
in every single circumstance;
quickly thinking strategically
the woman is the one who’s wise.
(Ap. II:562, v. 31–32)
2. Bhadda-Kāpilāni as the wife of a saint

Bhaddā-Kāpilāni Therī (“Auspicious Woman of the Kapila Clan” #27) of
the Therī-apadāna (Ap. II:578–84, 70 verses), was the this-life wife of
one of the Buddha’s chief disciples, the arahant Mahā-Kassapa (“Great
Kassapa”) Thera. Mahā-Kassapa was reckoned the male member of the
early community most advanced in austere practices, and his own
apadāna appears as #3 in the Therāpadāna (Ap. I:33–35, 22 verses). In
this section of the chapter I compare the apadānas of husband and wife
because together they allow me to further illustrate a number of the gen-
eral themes introduced in the previous section, and because Bhadda-
Kāpilāni’s apadāna provides a particularly detailed account of the inter-
section of marriage and kamma in the trajectory from root piety to
arahantship.
Mahā-Kassapa’s apadāna is typical of the Therāpadāna. It is completely
silent about Mahā-Kassapa’s marriages, but in his case this is particularly
jarring because, as we shall see, their multi-life conjugality figures so cen-
trally in the apadāna of his wife. The husband’s comparatively brief
apadāna opens with a description of his root piety: building a splendid
thūpa for the departed Padumuttara Buddha (100,000 aeons ago) in con-
cert with his “family and friends” (v. 1–6). This is followed by thirteen
verses (v. 7–19) detailing the heavenly mansion he enjoyed among the
gods; the worldly palace he enjoyed as the cakkavattin named Ubbiddha
60,000 aeons ago (during which aeon he was a cakkavattin, presumably
by the same name, “fully thirty times”); and the great city Rammaka that
those cakkavattins ruled. The text concludes with the briefest allusion to
his present/final life:
Having lived there and having left

I returned to the world of gods.
In this, my final existence,
I’m born in an accomplished clan.
Born into a brahmin family
I had a massive heap of gems.
Eight hundred million [worth of ] gold
abandoned, I renounced [the world].
[I have] done what the Buddha taught! (v. 20–22)
The wife’s apadāna also opens in the time of Padumuttara, but it tells the
back-story to the building of the thūpa then. At that time, Mahā-Kassapa
was then named Videha, a leading millionaire with many gems in the city
of Haṃsavatī. One time, along with his servants, he went to hear Padu-
muttara Buddha preach and on that occasion the Buddha praised the dis-
ciple who was foremost in the practice of austerities. The millionaire
served the Buddha alms for a week then aspired to attain that state him-
self, making everyone in his retinue smile. At that very instant Padumut-
tara Buddha predicted the future arising of Gotama Buddha and the mil-
lionaire’s rebirth as Kassapa, who would indeed be foremost among the
disciples who practice austerities. Gladdened by that he then lovingly
served Padumuttara Buddha the rest of his life (v. 1–9). Only then does the
Buddha pass away (v. 10) and:
When that World-Chief reached nibbāna

assembling [his] kinsmen and friends
to do pūjā to the Teacher
with them [Videha] had constructed

a thūpa that was made of gems
rising up seven leagues [in height]
which blazed forth just as does the sun;
like a regal sal tree in bloom. (v. 11–12)
The wife’s apadāna here unmistakably refers to the opening of her husband’s
apadāna by mentioning the detail that he acted in concert with his family and
friends; it even borrows the imagery of blazing like the sun or a blooming sal
(Vateria acuminata) tree from the husband’s apadāna. But as though all the
details of the back-story weren’t enough, Bhaddā-Kāpilāni then proceeds to
describe the thūpa itself in far greater detail than even Mahā-Kassapa’s some-
what elaborate (for these texts) account. Her apadāna supplies, in nine verses,
a description of the thūpa’s architectural features and the rituals that, she
says, her husband performed there for the rest of his life (v. 13–21).
Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna proceeds to describe a series of additional
root pieties performed by her husband during previous lives:
1. As a Brahmin living in Bandhumatī who gave Vipassi Buddha (91,000

aeons ago) a cloak (v. 24–30).
2. As a “ruler of the earth” in Benares who gave costly alms and various
gold objects to eight Paccekabuddhas (v. 30–35).
3. As one of three brothers in a happy landholding family outside the
Benares gates who gave alms to a Paccekabuddha (v. 35–41).
4. As a sage named Sumitta, again in the region of Benares, who gave an
unspecified number of Paccekabuddhas a[nother] cloak (v. 47–48).
5. As a member of the Koliya clan in the Kingdom of Kāsi (Benares) who
with 500 kinsmen served 500 Paccekabuddhas alms for three months
then gifted them all with monastic robes (v. 49–51).
6. As a king named Nanda whose specific piety is unmentioned (v. 52).
7. As the world-ruling King Brahmadatta who personally served 500 Pac-
cekabuddhas (v. 53–55).
Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna further provides details of Mahā-Kassapa’s

present/final life, including his given name, birthplace, and parentage (v.
56), and the details of his arahantship (which occurs when he is moved at
the sight of a crow devouring some creature, v. 59). None of these de-
tails—not even a reference to the austere practices for which he is best
known—is found in Mahā-Kassapa’s own apadāna.
On first blush the subject of the wife’s apadāna is thus actually the
husband, but the interest of the text goes beyond mere reportage of bio-
graphical details about Mahā-Kassapa. Throughout this narrative, Bhaddā-
Kāpilāni gently but consistently is inserted into the rich kammic biography
thus produced of her husband:
There was then in Haṃsavatī

a leader known as Videha,
a millionaire with many gems;
I was the wife of him [back then]. (v. 2)
Along with that millionaire I,
as long as I lived [also] did
those merit-filled deeds thoroughly;
[and] with [him] I [had] good rebirths.
Experiencing happiness
both as a human and a god,
I was reborn along with him,
like a shadow with the body. (v. 22–23)
And at that time, of the same mind,
I was his brahmin woman [wife] . . . (v. 26)
. . . he spoke these [words] to me [just then]:
“Approve of this great good kamma,
the cloak given to the Buddha.”
Then clasping hands together I,
well-satisfied, did [then] approve:
“Husband, this cloak is gifted well
to Best Buddha, the Neutral One.” (v. 28–29)
I was the chief queen of that [king],
supreme in his troupe of women.
I was extremely dear to him
due to past love for [my] husband. (v. 31)
. . . I gave that very almsgiving
with the Kāsi king [way] back then. (v. 35)
I was [the Sage Sumitta’s] wife,
happy, joyful and [much] beloved . . . (v. 48)
[I] too sharing in that merit
approving of that great alms gift . . . (v. 49)
I was the [Koliyan’s] wife then
following [his] path of merit . . . (v. 51)
. . . I was [King Nanda’s] chief queen [then];

my every desire was fulfilled. (v. 52)
. . . dwelling in the royal garden
I [too] worshiped those Gone-Out Ones. (v. 54)
My father having adorned me
with a thick golden ornament
gave me to the wise Kassapa
who’d avoided desire for me. (v. 58)
When wise [Kassapa] had renounced
I followed him in renouncing . . . . (v. 61)
Though many of these passages are indicative of her dependence on her

husband—“like his shadow”—Bhaddā-Kāpilāni clearly takes this to be a
good thing:
After not a very long time

I achieved the arahant-state.
O! Being the “beautiful friend”22
of the resplendent Kassapa! (v. 63)
And as with the Buddhist queens discussed in the previous section, de-
pendence is not the end of the story here.
Many of the passages just quoted are suggestive of the interdepen-
dence of husband and wife, who perform these pious deeds together. The
brahmin who gives Vipassi Buddha a cloak seems to need his wife’s
approval (which she gives). Also, it takes but a small stretch of the imagi-
nation to realize that the wife would have been integral to any of these pi-
eties: the duties of a wife would include organizing things, cooking the
food, and sewing and then replacing the cloak that had been given away.23
In Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s account of Mahā-Kassapa’s almsgiving to a Pacceka-
buddha, when he was one of three landholding brothers (v. 35–41), we get
22. Kalyāṇa-mittā is a term the Buddha uses in the suttas to indicate the sort of companion
who enables, encourages, and entwines one in meritorious things. It is juxtaposed with the
“ugly (akalyāṇa) friend” who enables, encourages, and entwines one in demeritorious
things.
23. Such domestic service is an especially prominent theme in Yasodharā Therī’s apadāna,
discussed in the next section.
a particularly rich glimpse into what must indeed have been the complex
inner-workings of a household committed to performing acts of merit.
The eldest brother (who is Mahā-Kassapa’s rebirth precursor) is away from
the house when the Paccekabuddha comes for alms. The youngest brother
offers the Paccekabuddha his eldest brother’s portion of food. When the
eldest returns and his wife (Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s rebirth precursor) tells him
what has happened, he “does not rejoice about that almsgiving”
(nābhinandittha so dānaŋ), so the wife takes the food back from the Pac-
cekabuddha and gives it to her husband. When he then gives it back to the
Paccekabuddha himself, the wife is enraged.24 She retrieves the bowl for a
second time, throws away the food, fills it up with mud, and then gives it
once again to the Paccekabuddha! But when she then notices the Pacceka-
buddha’s equanimity—he has remained unmoved by the whole scene,
and accepts the bowl of mud without any difference from the way he ac-
cepted the home-cooked meal—she has a change of heart. She takes back
the bowl for a third time, cleanses and perfumes it, fills it with clarified
butter (ghata, ghee) and offers it to him with proper reverence (sakkāraŋ
adaŋ). This restores to the whole household the meritoriousness of giving
alms to a Paccekabuddha, which means that in that instance, anyway, Kas-
sapa’s rebirth precursor, in several ways, would not have made merit
except for the actions of his wife.
This interdependence of husband and wife becomes explicit at two
points near the end of Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna. Here the syntax of the
text, otherwise narrated in the third person, with first person interjections,
suddenly shifts to the second person plural:
24. The text does not specify why that makes her so angry (ruṭṭhā); it assumes that its audi-
ence will immediately understand the reason. I imagine something like this: the husband
expresses his displeasure in terms that implicate the wife—“I come home for lunch and
there’s nothing for me to eat”—so she does something unthinkable in the context of
Apadāna (and Theravāda Buddhist culture), taking alms back from a Buddha so her hus-
band can eat the food himself. When he then turns around and gives the food back to the
Buddha again, he reveals that his intention was not to get fed, but rather to earn the merit
for himself. (He is responding to what may have already been a tense situation, if the initial
return of the food struck him as an already-angry insult on the part of his wife, perhaps be-
cause she made a sarcastic comment, “Fear not, here’s your lunch”). The wife, who presum-
ably cooked the meal in the first place, has now been chastised for a lapse in her domestic
responsibility. She has turned a merit-making (puñña-kamma) opportunity into an act of
demerit (pāpa-kamma) in order to rectify that lapse, only to realize that the real lapse was in
her husband’s greediness for merit even at her expense. So she would have had plenty of
cause to become enraged, especially if the return of the food had already been a volley in a
marital spat.
Both of us having built thūpas,

going forth [renouncing the world]
experienced the boundless states
[and] then we went to Brahma’s world. (v. 55)
Seeing the dangers in the world
we both [went forth] as renouncers.
We are now free of defilements;
tamed, cooled off, gone to nibbāna. (v. 67)
Though in Mahā-Kassapa’s apadāna his kammic trajectory involves only

himself, in Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna the story is about a team effort; her
husband’s kammic trajectory is intimately interlinked with her own. The
support, approval, work, and co-participation she provides her husband,
life after life, enables both of them to progress toward their eventual arah-
antship. Being his wives she enriches his lives, paralleling the way in
which the wife’s apadāna enriches the husband’s by adding numerous
bare-bones details and fleshing them out with human texture, struggle,
and humor. In this concern with the human texture of the details, and
with finding women a place in an otherwise all-male Buddhist history,
Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna is as typical of Therī-apadāna as is Mahā-
Kassapa’s of Therāpadāna.
Finally, in the denouement of the story about the bowl of mud we catch
a glimpse of the wife’s independence from her husband, too. The almsgiv-
ing, in the end, is entirely her own doing, and produces kammic results
accordingly. For several verses Mahā-Kassapa uncharacteristically disap-
pears from the narrative, which is explicitly only about Bhaddā-Kāpilāni:
In whichever place I’m reborn,

because [I gave] alms I’m gorgeous;
through [giving] Buddha tasteless food
my breath has a horrible stench.
Again when Buddha Kassapa’s
thūpa was being completed,
delighted, I [then] gave [for it]
an excellent tile made of gold.
Through four lifetimes having applied
scented [substances] to that tile
every one of [my] limbs was freed
from the defect of bad odor.
Having made seven thousand bowls

[each adorned] with the seven gems
and filled with clarified butter,
placing [in them] a thousand wicks
with a mind that was very pleased
I proceeded to light [them all]
and laid them out in seven rows
to do pūjā to the world’s lord
and at that time especially
I was the merit-receiver . . . . (v. 42–47)
In light of this, we can understand that even when she was following after
her husband it was she who gave alms, she who approved of the cloak, she
who followed after him, she who worshipped the Paccekabuddhas. Accord-
ingly, Mahā-Kassapa also disappears in the narrative of her own arahant-
ship (v. 61–63). Ultimately, these are all her deeds, not his.
3. Yasodharā as the wife of a saint

The female arahant’s interdependence with, and independence from,
even a saintly husband like Mahā-Kassapa is even clearer in the other text
of the Therī-apadāna that takes up the intersection of marriage and kamma
as a central theme, namely the apadāna of Yasodharā Therī, this-life wife
of the Buddha (#28, Ap. II:584–90).25 Like Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna,
Yasodharā’s autohagiography also provides biographical details not found
in the parallel apadāna of her husband (the Buddhāpadāna). The most
notable absent detail is the very fact that he was, after all, married to her
throughout that kammic biography. In providing these details, the Therī-
apadāna forcefully inserts Yasodharā into that biography and makes
explicit that she was integral to the Buddha’s eventual Buddhahood
(interdependence). Further, her apadāna asserts that through her own
merit-making, service, and final/present life religious practice she became
25. The discussion which follows is based on the Pali Text Society edition, and rather than
attempting to exhaust the story of Yasodharā it merely highlights those passages most rele-
vant to our discussion of marriage and kamma. For fuller accounts the interested reader
should certainly consult Sally Mellick Cutler’s (1997) ground-breaking critical edition, trans-
lation, and study of the Pāli text, as well as Ranjini Obeyesekere’s (2009) excellent transla-
tion and study of two medieval Sinhala retellings of it. For a non-Theravādin parallel see also
Strong (1997).
a fully liberated arahant in her own right (independence). Following the

format of the previous section, I begin with a synopsis of the husband’s
apadāna then proceed with a close study of the wife’s, exploring the ways
in which it responds to the absences in the former, and thereby furthers
the Apadānic reflection upon the role of marriage in the kammic trajec-
tory from root piety to arahantship.
There are actually two separate texts bearing the name Buddhāpadāna
(or Buddhāpadāniya). One is the first section of the whole work (Ap. I:1–6).
The other is tucked away as #387 of Therāpadāna (Ap. I:299–301). Here its
thirty-three verses are titled “The Rags of Previous Kamma” [Pubba-
kamma-piloti] even though its colophon, and the absence of the otherwise-
universal concluding refrain, make clear that this is an apadāna of the
Buddha, not of one of the theras per se.26 Both of these apadānas are highly
creative, unique in the whole collection and the wider tradition, and also,
especially in the case of “The Rags of Previous Kamma,” very controversial
(Walters 1990).
The Buddhāpadāna proper is even more silent about expected bio-
graphical details than the apadāna of Mahā-Kassapa. It mentions no
names at all and, except for his perfection of the ten precepts over numer-
ous lives (v. 73–75), it does not even allude to the well-known stories of the
Buddha’s previous lives (jātaka). Except for a brief mention of the “twofold
raying miracle” (yamakā raŋsivāhanā, v. 65) it likewise does not even
allude to that most famous of Buddhist biographies, the this-life biogra-
phy of the Buddha. Rather, it opens with an extraordinarily detailed ac-
count of the root piety (v. 1–48), followed by a general description of the
pleasures enjoyed as ruler of gods and of men in the intermediate lives (v.
49–62) and a homiletic conclusion that eulogizes Buddhahood and en-
courages reader-listeners to take the Buddhas as models for their own
practice (v. 63–77). Here the root piety is not actually performed; it is
merely an act of the imagination that reads more like a Tibetan sādhana
than a kammic biography. The Buddha, during a previous life, constructs
a vast, elaborately described palace and populates it with all the Buddhas,
Paccekabuddhas, and disciples of Buddhas of the past and present, who
then engage each other in discussion and display their various powers.
The pleasant results in the intermediate lives involve no specific names or
26. As already mentioned in Section 1, the Buddhāpadāna proper also does not follow this
standard convention of the monks’ apadānas.
numbers of kings, but merely a general depiction of the pleasures divine

and human kings receive by “just stretching out [their] hand” (v. 52–61).
These pleasures include, detailed in a series of repetitious verses, savory
foods, fabulous precious gemstones, clothes of various sorts, divine foods,
all gemstones, all perfumes, all vehicles, all garlands, all ornaments, all
maidens, granulated sugar, and all solid foodstuffs. The final eulogy, like
the visualization of the palace, appears surprisingly Mahāyānistic in its
invitation to reader-listeners to perfect the ten perfections (of a Buddha)
themselves, and to marvel in the unfathomableness of Buddhahood
(which is itself the root piety performed by the Buddha).27
The other, “disguised” Buddhāpadāna, “The Rags of Previous Kamma,”
does, conversely, allude by name and event to specific previous lives and
especially to the final/present life of the Buddha. After a prologue indicat-
ing that these verses were preached by the Buddha to the whole commu-
nity of monks (nuns are not mentioned) at the mythic Lake Anotatta (Skt.
Anavatapta, v. 1–3), it details twelve incidents in the life of the Buddha and
describes the kammic cloth from which that “rag” remained (v. 4–31).
These are not however the positive acts and happy intermediate lives we
would expect from an apadāna. Rather, the twelve incidents from this life
are all comparatively bad things that befell the Buddha: physical ailments,
slander, attacks from his wicked cousin Devadatta, and the six years of
extreme asceticism he endured prior to becoming Buddha. The acts of
which these were the remaining “rags” were all of a depraved and evil sort,
mostly known nowhere else in the vast Theravāda literature on the Bud-
dha’s previous lives. The intermediate lives they produce entail countless
aeons the Buddha’s rebirth precursors spent “roasting in hell” and suffer-
ing on earth. The text concludes with a pithy statement of his turn to
merit-making and eventual Awakening (v. 32) and a reiteration of the con-
text in which he declared the text (v. 33).
While both these texts are worthy of further comment, the point for us
to notice here is that marriage plays no role in either of them. The closest
we come is in the mention of maidens in Buddhāpadāna (v. 59) and the
27. Buddhāpadāna also resonates with Mahāyāna Buddhist texts in referring to Buddhas in
the plural, including multiple Buddhas in a single time-space; in its somewhat cryptic refer-
ences to “Buddha-fields” (buddhakhetta = Skt. buddhakṣetra); and in the fact that like a
Mahāyāna sūtra the mere hearing of it is productive of Buddhahood, given that what one
hears and imagines is precisely what the Buddha himself imagined as he set out on the path
toward Awakening.
stories of the slanderers Sundarī and Ciñcamānavikā, who both accuse the
Buddha of having impregnated them in “The Rags of Previous Kamma”
(v. 9, 14). Here too, this absence even of a mention of marriage is particu-
larly apparent given its centrality to the apadāna of his wife, Yasodharā.
Yasodharā’s apadāna is also a remarkable one, with a complex liter-
ary structure. Unlike most apadānas, but closely paralleling that of the
Buddha’s stepmother Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī (#17; see Walters 1994;
Walters 1995), it begins with a prologue (v. 1–25). 28 On the day of her
final passing into nibbāna (death), she tells the Buddha that her time
has come:
I’m seventy-eight years old now,

the last of old age has arrived;
I’m reporting to the Great Sage:
I’ve attained [sainthood] in a cave.
Old age has ripened for me [now];
verily my life’s a trifle.
Giving all you up I will go:
my refuge is made in myself.
In the final days of old age,
death breaks [the body into bits];
today at nighttime, Great Hero,
I shall achieve my nibbāna.
Where there’s no birth, no growing old,
nor sickness and death, O Great Sage,
I’m going to the [great] city29
[which,] unconditioned, has no death. (v. 3–6)
She asks that any lapse in their long transmigration together be forgiven,
to which he replies:
28. Sinhala editions such as Vajirajñāṇa et al., 1961–1983 IIa (1983):158, v. 952–57 provide six
verses at the beginning of the text which are not found in the Lilley/PTS edition. The PTS
edition begins (Ap. II:584, v. 1) at what corresponds to the seventh verse (v. 958) of the Sin-
hala/BJTS edition. The six extra verses spell out that, as with Gotamī, Yasodharā came to the
realization of the time of death by reasoning it out for herself, then went to report it to the
Buddha. The PTS begins as it were in media res, with Yasodharā at the head of 500 nuns on
her way to report the realization to the Buddha.
29. That is, nibbāna.
Put on a show of miracles

to disciples of my teaching;
let all doubt be cut off [thereby]
in all the teaching’s assemblies. (v. 9)
She proceeds to thus demonstrate her achievements with great spectacle

(v. 10–24).
Then, in that same context, she declares her actual apadāna (v. 25–87),
concluding (v. 85–87) with the standard “inverted” three-verse refrain.
The core section of her autohagiography contains three distinct move-
ments, each of which constitutes a “mini-apadāna” in its own right. In the
first (v. 25–40) Yasodharā addresses the Buddha directly, in the second person,
referring to him in the vocative “O Great Sage” (mahāmune) or “O Great Hero”
(mahāvīra). She recalls all the service she provided to him over the “tens of
billions of lives” she gave to an equal number of his rebirth precursors, as
their wives and attendants. She spells out this service in considerable detail—
waiting upon him, cooking for him, dressing and undressing for him, giving
up everything for him to acquire merit (including money, treasure, villages,
small towns, fields, sons, daughters, elephants, horses, cows, slaves, slave
girls, and all the wealth he gave her). All of this is portrayed as being done “for
your sake” without distress despite all the suffering it admittedly entailed.
The second mini-apadāna (v. 41–62) recalls a moment in the time of
Dīpāṅkara Buddha (some 100,000 regular aeons plus four incalculable
aeons ago) when the Bodhisatta (future Buddha, Skt. bodhisattva), then
reborn as the ascetic Sumedha, made his initial vow to become a Buddha
and received his first prediction of its future realization. This famous nar-
rative, absent from both the Buddha’s own apadānas (and so, in the
Apadāna, supplied only here), is however told from Yasodharā’s perspec-
tive: she was then a maiden named Sumittā. Seeing Sumedha in the crowd
assembled to honor Dīpāṅkara Buddha, and immediately smitten with
him, she gives him five of the eight handfuls of the flowers she is carrying,
retaining three handfuls for herself, with the aspirations that as a result of
them offering her flowers to the Buddha together she should “always
know [Sumedha]” (v. 49). He takes the flowers and offers them to the
Buddha “for the sake of knowing [Yasodharā]” (v. 50) and after predicting
Sumedha’s future Buddhahood
The Great Sage named Dīpāṅkara

predicted [too] that my kamma
would for numberless aeons hence

be exalted, that Sage So Great:
“She will be a like-minded [wife],
with kamma and conduct like [yours];
through this kamma she’ll be loving
for your [own] sake, O Great Rishi.
Nice looking and much beloved,
desirable, speaking sweet words,
she will be a loving woman,
[and] an heir among [your] doctrines.
Just as husbands are protecting
the goods that they accumulate
so this one likewise will protect
[all] the things that are most wholesome.
Compassionate for [future] you,
she will fulfill the perfections.
Like a lion [freed] from a cage
she will achieve Awakening.” (v. 52–56)
Thrilled at his words, she dedicates her future lives to Sumedha, then fi-
nally is born a Sākyan and becomes the chief woman of his harem when
he has been born as Prince Siddhattha (v. 57–62).
The third “mini-apadāna” (v. 63–87) returns to the topic of the first:
service. In a speech addressed (to the Buddha? the Buddha’s father? some-
one in the text’s audience?) in the vocative “O Great King” (mahārāja),
Yasodharā details the mind-boggling numbers of Buddhas, Paccekabud-
dhas, and arahants to whom she provided vast almsgivings (mahādānaŋ
pavattayiŋ). These are reckoned finally in the hundreds of thousands of
billions and are proof of her repeated claim that “[her] service (adhikāraŋ)
was constant” across that vast swathe of cosmic time:
Thus every day I practiced dhamma

for those who practiced dhamma;
a doer of dhamma I am at ease,
in this world and the next one. (v. 80)
Here the text once again returns to her final/present life, her renuncia-
tion, and her achievement of arahantship, concluding with the standard
refrain (v. 81–87).
Unlike Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna, that of Yasodharā really adds only

one salient detail to the biography of her husband, namely that throughout
his lives, starting with the birth as Sumedha, she was his wife. This succes-
sive remarriage in each rebirth is something she intends and vows; it is
predicted of her from the very beginning, but she makes it happen herself,
through those tens of billions of lifetimes of suffering and serving as the
Bodhisatta’s wife. Thus the repeated claim that she did this all for the Bud-
dha’s sake appears less an indication of her dependence and subservience
than a bold claim that she has enabled the Buddha’s Buddhahood. For it
was after all through all those lifetimes of worshiping previous Buddhas,
Paccekabuddhas, and disciples of Buddhas with her that the Buddha
became Buddha at all. This would indicate the sort of “interdependence”
Strong isolates among Buddhist queens. Bolder still, we can read
Yasodharā’s apadāna to mean that she, rather than her husband, was in
some ways the actual agent of his Buddhahood. She gives him the flowers
for the worship that first puts Sumedha on the path to Buddhahood, and
even presents herself (in the quotation above, v. 50) as the reason he wor-
shiped that Buddha (i.e., became a Bodhisatta) in the first place. Moreover,
she does all the cooking, serving, giving, abandoning, suffering, and expe-
riencing that constitute his own progress toward that goal. In her apadāna,
the verbs are all in the first person, and large portions of the text do not even
mention the Buddha except as the one to whom all of this is being declared.
Remembering that the whole poem is set in the context of the wife declar-
ing to the Buddha that on the basis of her own exalted religious achieve-
ments she is now leaving him forever for nibbāna, this reading can be taken
as an indication that the thrust of the text is primarily not even interdepen-
dence, but rather the independence that Strong says Buddhist queens like-
wise enjoyed. Yasodharā’s all-seeing ability to discern by herself the circum-
stances of her final passing, one of the six special knowledges (chaḷ-abhiññā)
that are among the attributes of arahants signaled in the universal Apadāna
refrain, exemplifies this independence from her husband. She need not
depend on him to foresee this, but foresees it by herself.
Adding to the richness and force of Yasodharā’s apadāna is the fact
that, reminiscent of the apadāna of her husband, it is followed by three
additional apadānas in the collection (#29–31, Ap. II:591–97) that are all
closely connected to Yasodharā. These are ascribed not to individuals but
to large groups of female arahants who constitute Yasodharā’s retinue. In
previous lives (and the first part of the final/present life) all these women
were co-wives living in the harem. Now, like her, they are all nuns in the
early community who have attained the highest goal. Their apadānas—
constructed largely on the basis of verses or parts of verses found in
Yasodharā’s apadāna—completely parallel hers. Thus the apadāna of “The
10,000 Nuns Headed Up by Yasodharā” (#29) has them all, during the
time of Dīpāṅkara Buddha, vow to be (and receive a prediction that they
will be) the perpetual wives of the ascetic Sumedha. This is fulfilled up to
and including their co-birth as beautiful women in the Buddha’s clan who
then join his harem and who renounce and attain arahantship in unison
with Yasodharā. The apadāna of “The 18,000 Nuns Headed Up by
Yasodharā” (#30) makes them even more exact, mirror-images of
Yasodharā, reproducing the text of her first two “mini-apadānas” verba-
tim, except for minor changes (such as tweaking the first person pronouns
and verbs from the singular to the plural). All 18,000 of these women ap-
proach the Buddha along with Yasodharā, and declare to him in unison
that they too will now pass away. Like the first 10,000 their perpetual wife-
ship for his sake was the fulfillment of a vow and prediction during the
time of Dīpāṅkara Buddha. They are even made to say “We are Yasodharās,
Great Sage,” in the passages where she identifies herself to the Buddha as
part of her/their spectacular miracle show! The third group, “18,000
Kṣatriyan Maidens Headed Up by Yasodharā” (#31), declare with a lot less
fanfare (and in a brief twelve verses) that they were also women of the
inner chambers, born together after serving alms “for [Buddha’s] sake”
during previous lives, who thereafter renounced and became arahants.
Taken together, these additional texts amplify the anyway strong mes-
sage of Yasodharā’s own apadāna that marriage is a kammic matter that
can extend over many lifetimes. Like Yasodharā herself, these parallel
women all serve the Buddha both actually and metaphorically, wanting for
themselves what he wants them to do (whether formerly, in terms of erot-
icism and political power, or presently, in terms of Buddhist accomplish-
ments and religious power). In performing this service they collectively
enable him to pursue his own Awakening, and even drive that process
themselves. These texts contribute to the general Therī-apadāna project of
finding space for women in Buddhist history, and find them a very wide
space indeed: all 46,000 of these “Yasodharās” aspired to and achieved
the station of “Buddha’s wife.”30 Like the special rankings in the monastic
30. In making this station a widespread achievement of religious women the texts call to
mind—despite a very different cultural setting—the widespread claim among medieval
Christian nuns and mystics, even some males, to be the “brides of Christ.”
community (Mahā-Kassapa as foremost among those who practice aus-

terities) this is here generalized as a station to which numerous women
can aspire among future Buddhas. While the numbers seem fantastic, we
must recall the Indian expectation that at least kings, in the heavens as
well as on earth, should indeed have vast numbers of wives. According to
Yasodharā’s apadāna (v. 11) there were in fact many more women in the
becoming-Buddha’s harem—a total of 100,096—than became arahants
and sang these apadānas. In recalling that so many women followed in
Yasodharā’s footsteps these texts also redress the general imbalance be-
tween male and female apadānas. If we take the numbers seriously, we
must conclude that even though there are significantly more male than
female apadānas, in fact the female arahants recorded in Apadāna as
members of the early Buddhist community vastly outnumber their male
counterparts.
Conclusion: wives of the saints in the Apadāna

If nothing else, the great variety of Therī-apadāna references to marriage
makes clear that despite (or perhaps even because of ) the Therāpadāna
silence about the topic, some Buddhists—those who wrote about women,
who were presumably women themselves—considered marriage an inte-
gral dimension of the kammic trajectory from root piety to arahantship.
Following Alice Collett I have suggested that this concern with marriage
was part and parcel of the project to establish a place for women in Bud-
dhist history. At least for the women whose apadānas we have reviewed—
and presumably also for many of the historical women who heard them
recited as members of the text’s audience—marriage was a centrally im-
portant institution through which women found such place. By linking
marriage with the kammic trajectory that leads to arahantship, the
Apadāna was able to insert many of its female subjects into the otherwise
all-male history it constructed and thereby to address the historical females
as well as the males who read or listened to these poems. In the process
emerges a sort of sacralization of the institution, which like rebirth turns
out not merely to be opposed to, but rather to be an important stage in the
path that leads to Awakening. The nuns’ apadānas do, to an extent, rein-
force the dependence upon and subservience to husbands enjoined upon
wives by the larger culture. However, they simultaneously empower
women with the knowledge that their husbands’ kammic trajectories are
intertwined with their own and that they enjoy a degree of independence
in which, even while married, they can pursue their own arahantship and
can act as driving forces in the progress their husbands, and others, may
make.
Yet at the end of her long kammic biography, it is important to under-
line, Yasodharā, like Bhaddā-Kāpilāni and each of the previous-life wives
of the saints, human and divine, ultimately left her husband behind to
realize her own Awakening. Arahantship entails the end of all ties to the
world, even the world of the gods, and marriage in particular is an institu-
tion that finally must be transcended in order to become a monk or nun
who can reach the end of the long, gradual path to Awakening that I have
dubbed “the kammic trajectory.” In the Therī-apadāna no less than
Therāpadāna, this is the central point. Though the former rebuts the latter
by reflecting so widely on the important roles played by marriage during
the earlier stages of that path, it agrees in taking the end point as the main
point in each and every autohagiography it contains. The standard refrain
encapsulates the real focus of each of the monks’ and nuns’ apadānas,
namely his or her arahantship. The Apadāna provides all that rich bio-
graphical detail, with such poetic flourish, only in the service of narrating
the final achievement of nibbāna. And as much as the Therī-apadāna
weaves marriage into the kammic trajectories of all the saints, males as
well as females, it also contains plenty of narratives of past lives as well as
present lives of nuns in which marriage is not involved. These include the
shared narrative of the seven sisters who explicitly resist marriage despite
remaining in the house so that they can dedicate themselves indepen-
dently and completely to religious activity (Collett 2011). However impor-
tant it may be in some cases, in others marriage certainly is not a neces-
sary condition of sainthood. But for the authors of the Therī-apadāna, and
the wives who heard it recited, it was important to recognize that marriage
does not preclude sainthood, either. In the early stages of the path, mar-
riage can even be a positive soteriological force.
9
Avadaˉnaśataka
the role of brahmanical marriage
in a buddhist text
Karen Muldoon-Hules
Introduction
the avadānaśataka is a Sanskrit collection of Buddhist stories that was
redacted in North India sometime during the first five hundred years of
the Common Era.1 The broad geographical distribution of its extent ver-
sions, ranging from early fragments found near Bamiyan in Afghanistan
to a number of later complete manuscripts located in Nepal, attests to its
wide circulation and enduring popularity. In addition, variants of the
Avadānaśataka’s stories appeared in at least six other North Indian Bud-
dhist narrative collections, and some also appear in the voluminous north-
ern Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya. The Avadānaśataka is organized into ten
chapters, or vargas, of ten stories each, for a total of exactly one hundred
avadānas. The term avadāna originally seems to have meant a portion of
something offered in a Vedic sacrifice, but underwent a shift in meaning
over the centuries and perhaps as it moved between traditions, coming to
1. On the dating of the Avś see, most recently, Demoto Mitsuyo (1998), and her article on the
fragments in the Schøyen Collection (Demoto 2006, 207–44). She suggests the original
redaction of the Sanskrit Avadānaśataka took place sometime between the 2nd and the early
6th centuries ce. Demoto’s argument for a new terminus ad quem rests primarily on her
proposed redating of the Chinese Avadānaśataka, the Zhuan ji bai yuan jing (撰集百緣經,
T 200), from the 3rd century ce to the mid-5th to late 6th century ce (2006, 209–12). The
2nd-century terminus a quo for the Sanskrit Avś is based on the dīnāra mentioned in the 83rd
avadāna and was suggested by the editor of the editio princeps (Speyer 1902–9, I, xv).
Avadānaśataka 193
mean a “heroic deed” or “heroic story” in the Buddhist context.2 This ar-
ticle focuses on the sometimes surprising use of Brahmanical marital
forms in the 8th varga.
Avoiding the altar

The 8th varga of the Avadānaśataka could be called the “women’s chapter”
or the “nuns’ chapter” since its stories center on women who become
nuns and then arhats. Only a few other women’s stories appear here and
there in this collection. The most striking feature of the 8th varga of the
Avadānaśataka is the use of Brahmanical marriage rites and norms in five
stories, Avś 71, 73, 76, 77, and 79, shown in Table 9.1 below.
These five stories seem to form a fairly cohesive subset. As the table indi-
cates, there appears to be some symmetry to the distribution of these stories.
Each half of the varga has one of the svayaṃvara stories plus a pair of stories
sharing a similar motif, if we consider Avadānaśataka 72 as well.
Avadānaśataka 72 may also have been influenced by Brahmanical marital
norms although this is less certain. A closer look at these six stories may sug-
gest some reasons for the redactor’s apparent preoccupation with marriage.
Suprabhā and Kāśisundarī

Two of these stories are built around a Brahmanical premarital ceremony
called a svayaṃvara or “self-choice” ceremony, in which a girl selects her
own bridegroom, however circumscribed that choice may actually have
been. In these two nearly identical tales, a merchant’s daughter named
Suprabhā (Avś 71) and a princess named Kāśisundarī (Avś 76) each pres-
ent the Buddha as their chosen “bridegroom” at a svayaṃvara by arriving
in a chariot decked with the Buddhist monastic color, carrying a portrait of
2. Speculation on the exact meaning and the origin of the term avadāna has generated a
considerable amount of scholarly discussion. Edgerton did not hazard a guess, just noting
that the precise meaning was “much disputed” (Edgerton 1953 [1998], II:72). In the preface
to his translation of the Avś, Feer lamented the difficulty in defining it, a difficulty he felt
Asian Buddhists suffered from as well ([1891] 1979, ix.). Speyer argued that the word
avadāna was derived from the root ava √dā in the sense of “to cut off ” or “to select” (1902–9,
ii, Preface, II–IV). This accords very well, for example, with the use of avadāna in Gobhila
GS (1, 8, 5–12, 18) where it represents a piece of the sacrificial offering that is cut off. In
terms of later Buddhist usage, Winternitz defined avadāna as “a great religious or moral
deed” or the “history” of such ([1912] 1987, 244). Summaries of the scholarly discussion on
the origin and meaning of avadāna can be found in Sharma (1985, lxi–lxiii).
Table 9.1 Marital Motifs in the 8th Varga of the Avadānaśataka
Avś Title Key Theme/Element
71 Suprabhā, a merchant’s Svayaṃvara 1

daughter
72 Supriyā, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Precocious spirituality 1
daughter
73 Śuklā, the white-clad girl Precocious spirituality 2
74 Somā, the female scholar Learning, memory & high social status
75 Kuvalayā, the dancer Beauty transformed into ugliness
76 Kāśikasundarī, a princess Svayaṃvara 2
of Kāśī
77 Muktā, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Marriage alliance 1
daughter-in-law
78 Kacaṅgalā, the slave Ignorance & slavery
79 Kṣemā, King Prasenajit’s Marriage alliance 2
daughter
80 Virūpā, King Prasenajit’s Ugliness transformed into beauty
ugly daughter
the Buddha, and announcing him as her choice before all the assembled
suitors. As I have argued elsewhere (Muldoon-Hules, forthcoming), these
actions echo steps of the Brahmanical svayaṃvara, and the use of the
chariot (ratha) also evokes the Brahmanical wedding ceremony. The re-
dactor of the Avadānaśataka seems to be cleverly subverting a well-known
Brahmanical marital convention—and a common literary motif of this
period—to make a dramatically framed case for Buddhist female renun-
ciation: a girl who can choose her own husband should be able to choose
to renounce.
It is important to note here that none of the Brahmanical law codes of
this period recognized the svayaṃvara as a marriage in its own right. In
fact, in Brahmanical literary sources of the period, a svayaṃvara was typi-
cally followed by a full wedding ceremony, as in the case of Indumatī’s
marriage to Prince Aja in Kālidāsa’s kāvya, the Raghuvaṃśa (Devadhar
[1981–84] 1993, II:122–24, 7.18–28). Similarly, Draupadī’s svayaṃvara and
inadvertent betrothal to the five Pāndava brothers in the Mahābhārata—a
self-styled “fifth Veda” (Fitzgerald 1980) and hence a religious text as well
as a literary masterpiece—is followed by five separate weddings, one for
Avadānaśataka 195
each brother (I: 186–90).3 The lone exception to this constant coupling of
a svayaṃvara to a wedding seems to be Bhīṣma’s inclusion of the
svayaṃvara in his somewhat self-serving list of marriages as he abducts
three girls from their svayaṃvara in the Mahābhārata (I: 96.8–14),4 an in-
clusion at odds with both other literary sources and the lists of marriages
given in the legal literature of the era.
At the same time, the Mahābhārata offers one somewhat parallel case to
Avadānaśataka 71 and 76’s use of the svayaṃvara in Madhavī’s choice of the
forest as her bridegroom at her svayaṃvara over an impressive array of suit-
ors. The forest, in this case, represents a celibate, spiritual life. Significantly,
this comes after Madhavī’s four marriages and four sons, all carried out in
the service of a brahmin’s wild quest for the perfect gift for his guru and all
made possible by her conveniently renewable virginity (V.104–21, especially
v. 112–18).5 Like the forest in Madhavī’s story, the presentation of the Buddha
as a chosen bridegroom at the svayaṃvaras of Suprabhā and Kāśisundarī in
Avadānaśataka 71 and 76 also represents a choice quite the opposite of mar-
riage, a celibate life as a Buddhist nun. Unlike Madhavī, however, neither
Suprabhā nor Kāśisundarī will marry or have a child. Thus, while Madhavī
had fulfilled the marital and procreative imperatives that Brahmanical Hin-
duism6 presented as a woman’s dharma, Suprabhā and Kāśisundarī com-
pletely sidestep any engagement with those imperatives.7
3. This unusual situation is presented in the text as a mistake made by their mother, Kuntī,
when she, without looking, instructs Arjuna to share the results of his day’s work equally
with his brothers as usual. She is taken aback when she discovers the reward is a girl but
cannot take back her words. The result is a rare case of polyandrous marriage in this source.
All Mahābhārata citations follow the critical edition (Sukthankar et al. 1927–71).
4. H. P. Schmidt noted that this was a “passage that is clearly tendentious” (1987, 87). See also
Sternbach (1951, 89–93). Unlike the legal sources, the Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra, and most schol-
ars, Sternbach gives eleven forms of marriage and includes two forms of svayaṃvara on the
list. However, his inclusion of the svayaṃvara seems untenable for the reasons stated above.
5. See Jamison (1996, 208–10); Dasgupta (2000). This parallel is discussed in more detail
in Muldoon-Hules (forthcoming).
6. “Brahmanical Hinduism” or “Brahmanism” herein refers to pre-Purāṇic Hinduism, the
strands of Hinduism active between roughly 100–600 ce.
7. Neither marriage nor procreation were part of the early Buddhist paradigm for ideal prac-
tice, despite the care taken in the biographies of the Buddha to portray him as fulfilling these
essentially Hindu imperatives. That care, reflected in sources such as Aśvaghoṣa’s 2nd-
century-CE Buddhacarita, reflects some of the same tension between Brahmanical marriage
and Buddhist renunciation that we see in these stories of the 8th varga. On the other hand,
none of the stories in the 7th varga of the Avś, which gives stories of men who renounce,
show any tension or concern about marriage, suggesting that the tension at the time of the
redaction of the text centered on female renunciation.
Oddly, in Avadānaśataka 71 and 76, the catalyst for the girl’s choice to
renounce is not any overt spirituality on her part but rather her father’s
dilemma when faced with a horde of suitors all vying for the girl’s hand in
marriage. Each father fears making enemies of the rejected suitors, the
sons of powerful men, as expressed in Avadānaśataka 71:
Then, besieged by them, her father, having put his cheek in his
hand, sat there depressed, saying, “If I give her to any one of them,
the others will become my enemies.”8
Fear of retaliation seems to be the keynote here, and this resonates with
the violent attack Draupadī’s rejected suitors launch on her father and
brother after her svayaṃvara in the Mahābhārata (I.180.1–10).9 A similar
attack on Indumatī and her new husband Aja in the Raghuvaṃśa as the
newlyweds leave her father’s city and protection suggests that such fears
were neither unfounded nor unfamiliar, at least as literary themes
(Devadhar [1981–84] 1993, II:126–33, 7.34–66).10 In Avadānaśataka 71 and
76, the attacks and their outcomes take on a Buddhist flavor, and the agent
who responds is not male, as in the Brahmanical texts, but female: each
girl confronts her angry suitors and performs pratihāryas (magical feats)
to demonstrate her spiritual attainment and convince them she is unfit for
marriage.
On another level, this focus on the father’s dilemma may have been an
attempt to make sense of what would not have been normal action in
these circumstances, given two factors: first, the pressure to marry girls
8. Tatas tair upadrūyamāṇaḥ pitā cāsyāḥ kare kapolaṃ dattvā cintāparo vyavasthitaḥ, yady
ekasmai dāsyāmi anye me amitrā bhaviṣyantīti (Speyer 1902–9, ii, 16.6–.7). According to Hi-
raoka, this phrase kare kapolam dattvā cintāparo vyavasthitaḥ “having put his head in his
hands, sat there depressed,” occurs twice in the Divyāvadāna, four times in the extant San-
skrit portion of the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, and six times in the Avś (2002, 158). However,
this does not include numerous other occurrences of this trope in the complete
Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, extant now in Tibetan translation only. See Schopen (2000,
158–59, n. V.4), for a list of these and a discussion of this hand-to-cheek pose in Indian art
and drama. It seems that the redactor of the 8th varga was taking a set phrase and inserting
it into a new context, a beleaguered father unable to choose a suitor out of the pack clamor-
ing for his daughter’s hand.
9. There is a strong element of interclass tension in this particular attack since the angry
kings specifically take issue with a brahmin (the disguised Arjuna) entering the vīryaśulka
contest in this svayaṃvara, which they see as a kṣatriya event.
10. It is ironic that, in the Raghuvaṃśa, the rejected suitors have enjoyed the hospitality of
the bride’s family and the wedding feasts for several days prior to this attack.
Avadānaśataka 197
off by the start of their menses in the Brahmanical context lest the father
incur the sin of brūṇahatya or “embryo-killing,” and, second, the strategic
use of the kanyādāna (“gift of a girl”) marriage as a form of marital alliance
to strengthen a man’s connections in his community or region. However,
neither of these factors are directly referenced in Avadānaśataka 71 and
76. It is unclear, also, whether Buddhist fathers would have been con-
cerned about a Brahmanical sin, but it is notable that neither Suprabhā
nor Kāśisundarī seem to come from households clearly marked as Bud-
dhist. In fact, in the 8th varga, only one girl, Supriyā (Avś 72), belongs to
what might be termed a “Buddhist household.”11 On the other hand, as we
will see, two other stories do address the issue of marital alliance in this
varga.
In any case, it seems the redactor needed a rationale to justify a father
who supported his daughter’s wish to renounce and that the fear of retali-
ation from rejected suitors provided a convincing one since he12 deploys it
again in two other stories in this same chapter (Avś 73 and 77) with almost
identical wording. This gives us a total of four stories in the 8th chapter
with the motif of the fearful father, all located in this subset that focuses
on Brahmanical marital forms and norms.
This rationale of the fear of retaliation by vengeful suitors seems to
be otherwise quite rare in Buddhist texts. I have only found one appear-
ance of this rationale in a Pāli story of this period although that same
story appears in two texts. In the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā and the
Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā, the father of the famous Uppalavaṇṇā finds him-
self overwhelmed with suitors asking for her hand. While more econom-
ical in wording, this Pāli passage is very similar to the Sanskrit phrasing
of the four Avadānaśataka stories. In the Avadānaśataka stories, however,
11. If we take the term “Buddhist household” to mean an exclusive family commitment to
Buddhism, such a commitment is evident only in the story of Supriyā (Avś 72), the daughter
of the exemplary layman, Anāthapiṇḍada. In the stories in the 8th varga that focus on a ten-
sion between marriage and female renunciation or feature early renunciation, some of the
girls’ households seem to be non-Buddhist, as in Avś 73 and possibly 79 and 80, or possibly
hybrid in their religious identification.
12. We know very little about who redacted the 8th varga or the Avś except that the primary
audience repeatedly and directly addressed in these stories consists of monks, suggesting a
monastic redactor or perhaps a committee of monks. Whether any nuns might have been
involved is unknown. Hence, the male singular used herein for the redactor merely stands
for an unknown person or persons of either sex, albeit someone with considerable knowl-
edge of marital customs and rites.
the girls propose the solution of renunciation to solve their fathers’ prob-
lem, whereas in the Pāli story, the father, out of fear, urges Uppalavaṇṇā
to renounce while the girl herself plays a far more passive role.13 Thus,
the most significant difference is that the agency attributed to the girls in
the northern Avadānaśataka is assigned instead to Uppalavaṇṇā’s father
in the Pāli texts that describe this incident. This makes the agency at-
tributed to the young women of the 8th chapter of the Avadānaśataka all
the more remarkable, but whether it was meant to portray an existing
and realizable independence for young women in northern India or
merely to model an idealized course of behavior is debatable.
Supriyā and Śuklā

The second pair of stories in our subgroup is comprised of Avadānaśataka
72 and 73, which are linked by a theme of precocious spirituality. In
Avadānaśataka 72, Supriyā, the daughter of the exemplary Buddhist
layman, Anāthapiṇḍada [= Anāthapiṇḍika], speaks at birth, making her
family fear that she is a demon. She convinces her grandmother of her
innocence by exhorting her family to make donations to the Buddha. It is,
therefore, unsurprising when Supriyā asks for and receives permission to
enter the nunnery at the age of seven. This is the only specific age for
female renunciation given in the 8th varga, and seven may not be an arbi-
trary choice since Mānava Dharmaśāstra 9:94 stipulates, “A 30-year-old
13. See Dhammpada-aṭṭhakathā. 1992, 1993, 2007 [1906-15], vol. 2, 48–49. A very similar
version of this story is told in the Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā (Thī-a XV.1 at 177), but this is actu-
ally one of two different stories about Uppalavaṇṇā’s going-forth. A second story of
Uppalavaṇṇā’s renunciation, a story of marriage and double incest, follows the Apadāna
verses included in this commentary in the Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā (Thī-a XI.1 at 188.23–
190.5). Silk compared this second story to a much more elaborate tale about Utpalavarṇā in
the Vinaya-vibhaṅga of the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, a tale that he translates in full (2009,
139–56). For another translation of the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya story of Utpalavarṇā’s last
life, see von Schiefner ([1882] 1926, 206–15). On the other hand, the Therī-Apadāna verses
about Uppalavaṇṇā’s renunciation seem to give her more agency in both Lilley’s edition
(#19, Ap. II, 556) and the Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā (Thī-a XI.1 at 187.48–49). In these, she states
that she was much sought after for marriage, but went forth instead. However, these two
accounts provide no detail of the actual moment of decision and so do not directly contradict
the story of her father’s proposing renuuciation as a solution to the suitor dilemma. The
Bhikkhunī-samyutta does not deal with Uppalavaṇṇā’s renunciation, focusing instead on her
defeat of Māra. My remarks on her lack of agency are confined to the particular incident
described above and in no way meant to undercut this nun’s generally assertive character.
Avadānaśataka 199
man should marry a charming girl of 12 years or an 18-year-old, a girl of

8 years—sooner if his fulfilling the Law would suffer.”14
Is it a coincidence that Supriyā renounces at seven and eight is the
youngest specific age for girls to marry that is mentioned in this law code
of the early centuries ce,15 one which quickly became the most quoted
legal text of the first millennium?16 Perhaps. After all, girls going forth at
this age are not unknown in Pāli sources,17 and in Avadānaśataka 82 and
8418 we have two stories about boys who renounce at seven, so Supriyā’s
entering the nunnery at seven may have simply been a conventional
choice for the redactor of the text. However, Supriyā’s avadāna also makes
no mention of suitors, suggesting that she is renouncing before the
normal marital age. In contrast, suitors for the girl’s hand appear in all of
14. Triṃśad varṣo vahet kanyāṃ hṛdyāṃ dvādaśavārṣikīm, tryaṣṭavarṣo “ṣṭavarṣāṃ vā dharme
sīdati satvaraḥ” (Olivelle 2005, 763–64, tr. 194). The use of the MDh as representative of the
Brahmanical legal literature of the time here is due to restrictions on space and is in no way
an attempt to oversimplify a rich and complex legal and cultural landscape.
15. After extensive research on this and other early law codes, Olivelle has presented a strong
argument for a date of 2nd–3rd centuries CE for the redaction of the MDh (2005, 20–25).
16. The influence of the MDh is evident not only in the dharmaśāstras that immediately
follow it and the surviving nine commentaries written on it, but also in the subsequent me-
dieval Nibandhas that continue to regard the MDh as the authority on dharma (Olivelle
2005, 66–70).
17. For Pāli examples of girls renouncing at seven, see the verses for Pañcadīpikā and
Ekūposathikā in the Therī-Apadāna (9, Ap. II, 520.18, 11, Ap. II 523.16) and for Uttamā and
Selā in the Apadāna and the Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā (Thī-a 46.16, 62.18). The age of seven is
much younger than the stipulated age in the ordination texts. For unmarried women, a re-
quired question at ordination is whether the candidate for ordination is twenty years of age,
an age that would have ensured the candidate was well past what appears to be the normal
age for marriage in the Avś. The wording of the question for married women is unclear as
to whether it refers to the candidate being at least twelve years of age or married for twelve
years. For discussions of female ordination age in the vinaya texts of a number of Buddhist
traditions, see Shih (2000, 479–96), and Kieffer-Pülz (2005); von Hinüber (2008, 222–27)
focuses on the Pāli evidence. The meaning of the discrepancy between the vinaya sources
and the Avś is unclear.
18. Speyer (1902–9, ii, 68.9 and 79.6). In the first instance, after many stillbirths, a desper-
ate couple promises their next baby to the monk Aniruddha if the child lives. When a boy is
born, Aniruddha gives him monastic robes and wishes him long life. The parents fulfill
their promise by giving him the boy at age seven. Avś 84, on the other hand, features a motif
also found in the Śuklā story (Avś 73), in which a son of King Prasenajit is born with robes
of the monastic color. Since he has the memory of his past lives, he soon asks about the
whereabouts of the Buddha and his main disciples. When the king invites the monks to re-
ceive a meal at his house and brings the infant to see the Buddha, the Buddha wishes him
good health, and the baby responds, hailing him as “Tathāgata, Arhat, Samyaksambuddha.”
The princeling renounces at seven, giving us another case of precocious spirituality.
the other stories in this subgroup, signaling that those girls had all reached
the usual age for marriage.19 So it seems that Avadānaśataka 72 models an
early renunciation—before marriage would have been an issue—by a spir-
itually advanced girl from the only clearly Buddhist family in the 8th varga.
In Avadānaśataka 73, the other story featuring precocious spirituality,
Śuklā is an only child born to an apparently infertile couple after her father
has offered numerous sacrifices to all the gods. Her family is thoroughly
Brahmanical in its religious practices, and the Buddhist text delivers a
stock condemnation of her father’s ritual choices, one that appears seven
times altogether in the Avadānaśataka, as well as in other northern
sources.20 Moreover, just before her birth, her father threatens to turn
both wife and child out of the house if the baby is not male, as would have
been his legal right after a certain number of years under Brahmanical
19. In the Brahmanical context, the presence of suitors was an important factor in calculat-
ing the number of occurrences of bhrūṇahatyā, according to the Dharmasūtra of Baudhāyana
4.1.12–13:
If a man does not give his daughter in marriage within three years after she has
reached puberty, he undoubtedly incurs a guilt equal to that of performing an abor-
tion.
That is the case if there is no suitor; but if there are suitors, then he incurs that guilt
each time. Manu has declared that he becomes guilty of a grevious sin causing loss of
caste at each of her menstrual periods. (tr. Olivelle 1999, 228)
See also the Dharmasūtra of Vāsiṣṭha 17.71 and Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra I.64. Therefore the
appearance of suitors in these stories would signal the clock was running, and the father was
under considerable pressure to fulfill his duty in time. The designated period varied be-
tween three months and three years after the appearance of her menses, depending on the
law code used. Moreover, if a father could not arrange a marriage within the stipulated time,
he would lose whatever benefit he might have gained from an advantageous marriage since
his daughter would be free to arrange her own marriage. The range of penances prescribed
for bhrūṇahatyā is discussed in Sternbach (1967, 30–57). A detailed discussion of the father’s
responsibilities for arranging a marriage for his daughter in the Brahmanical context can be
found in Jamison (1996, 237–40). See also Schmidt (1987, 76–109); Sternbach (1965–1967,
385–387). For a fuller discussion of bhrūṇahatya in relation to Avś 71 and 76, see Muldoon-
Hules (forthcoming).
20. Everything in this section of Avś 73 from taking a wife of a suitable family through the
condemnation of Śuklā’s father’s sacrifices to the gods comprises a series of stereotyped
passages that also occur multiple times in the Divyāvadāna and the extant Sanskrit
Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya (cf. Hiraoka 2002, 157–59). The frequent occurrence of this stock
condemnation of other people’s practices in the Avś, Divyāvadāna and Mūlasarvāstivāda
vinaya suggests there was a perceived need to discourage such practices in the Buddhist
community. In the Avś, the redactor criticizes such actions as mistaken since birth is due to
three conditions: love, timing, and the presence of a gandharva. For a discussion of the as-
sociation of gandharvas with birth, see Wijesekera (1994, 175–212). See also Fitfield (2008,
30 and 95–96 [re Avś 3]); Collett (2006b, 155–85).
Avadānaśataka 201
law.21 Only Śuklā’s miraculous birth fully clad in pure white saves them
from this fate, and the girl is named for this white clothing, which grows
with her yet never grows dirty.
Later, when Śuklā’s father, besieged by suitors, fears retaliation from
the rejected ones, she offers to renounce and he readily accepts. Yet with-
out the evidence of precocious spirituality and purity symbolized by the
white clothes, her father’s acceptance would probably have seemed strange
to an audience in the first millennium ce. According to the Brahmanical
law codes of the time, a female only-child was a putrikā, a “female son,”
whose son would inherit her father’s property and conduct rituals for her
father and his ancestors instead of for the boy’s biological father, as at-
tested by Mānava Dharmaśāstra 9:136–37 and 9:139:
When a daughter, whether she is appointed or not, bears a son by a

man of equal status—by that son his maternal grandfather becomes
a man who has a son’s son, and the latter shall offer him the rice-
ball and inherit his property. (v. 136)
Through a son a man gains the worlds; through a son’s son he ob-
tains eternal life; but through the son’s grandson he attains the
crest of the sun. (v. 137)
....
The world does not acknowledge any difference between a son’s

son and a daughter’s son, for a daughter’s son also rescues him in
the hereafter, just like a son’s son. (v. 139)22
The importance accorded to a putrikā and her son in this passage, and also
in Gautama Dharmasūtra 28:18–19, may explain why a dual justification
(precocious spirituality and the fear of alienating powerful suitors) is given
in Avadānaśataka 73. Indeed, in Śuklā’s story the suitors obligingly disap-
pear, in sharp contrast to the suitors in Avadānaśataka 71, 76, and 77, our
other three occurrences of the trope of the fearful father. In Suklā’s story,
21. For example, MDh 9:81 provides for superseding a barren wife in the eighth year and a
wife who bears only daughters in the eleventh (Olivelle 2005, 761, tr. 194).
22. Akṛtā vā kṛtā vāpi yaṃ vindet sadṛśātsutam, pautrī mātāmahastena dadyātpiṇḍaṃ hared
dhanam. Putreṇa lokāñjayati pautreṇānantyamaśrute, atha putrasya pautreṇa bradhnasyāpnoti
viṣṭapam . . . Pautradauhitrayor loke viśeṣo nopapadyate, dauhitro’pi hy amutrainaṃ saṃtārayati
pautravat (Olivelle 2005, 771–72, tr. 197).
the suitors’ quiet withdrawal may reflect the standard warnings in the law
codes against marrying a brotherless girl who might be a putrikā, exempli-
fied in Gautama Dharmasūtra 28:20; Mānava Dharmaśāstra 3:11; and
Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra I.53.23 Avadānaśataka 72 and 73, then, could be
said to model uncomplicated early renunciation by spiritually precocious
girls who come from two types of families, Buddhist and Brahmanical.
Muktā and Kṣemā

The third and final pair consists of Avadānaśataka 77 and 79, the stories of
Muktā and Kṣemā. Both invoke the convention of the marriage alliance, not
only the political version that is familiar to all students of early Indian history
but also the mundane version used to unite two families for their mutual
economic and social benefit. In Avadānaśataka 77, Muktā offers to renounce
to solve her father’s fear about choosing a suitor, giving us the fourth occur-
rence of this new trope, but what happens next is unique to this story:
Muktā’s most ardent suitor is so smitten with her that his father, the Bud-
dhist layman, Anāthapiṇḍada, intercedes on his behalf.24 Anāthapiṇḍada’s
chief argument in pushing for his son’s marriage to the reluctant Muktā is
that a mutually beneficial marriage alliance will result from it: “Let the girl
Muktā be bestowed upon my son. In this way, an alliance will be made and
there will be lifelong happiness.”25 Muktā agrees, but only on the condition
that she and her new husband both renounce. Anāthapiṇḍada’s son accepts
her condition, and they do just this. In Avadānaśataka 77, then, we have an-
other model that twists the institution of Brahmanical marriage to Buddhist
ends: a girl can marry and immediately renounce with her new husband
without entering into married life. Furthermore, this new model resonates
with several rules in the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya that govern how husbands
and wives may interact after entering the Order. Indeed, the vinaya stories
associated with these rules suggest that the real innovation here may be the
relative youth and inexperience of Muktā and her groom.
23. In addition, Śāṅkhyāyana Gṛhyasūtra I, 15, 16 (echoed in Pāraskara Gṛhyasūtra I, 8, 18)

suggests that a hundred cows and a chariot should be given to a father who has only daugh-
ters when marrying one of them (Oldenberg [1886] 1964, 39, 285). One commentator,
Nārāyaṇa, states that this payment is “to destroy the guilt brought about by marrying a girl
who has no brother” (quoted in ibid., 39, n.1).
24. Hence this young man is a brother of the girl Supriyā, the heroine of Avś 72.
25. Dīyatāṃ muktā dārikā mama putrāya, evaṃ kṛtaṃsāmbandhikaṃ yāvajjīvasukhyaṃ kṛtaṃ
ca bhaviṣyatīti (Speyer 1902–9, ii, 37.8–.9).
Avadānaśataka 203
In a new book on the family in Buddhism, Clarke (2014, 230–65)

discusses a number of vinaya stories involving joint renunciation by
married couples, pointing out,
The authors/redactors of Buddhist monastic law codes seem to have

envisioned the formal maintenance of marital ties not only between
monastics and their lay spouses, but also between married monks
and nuns. Although aware of legal provisions for the dissolution of
marriage, Buddhist jurists seem not to have required monks or
nuns thereby to dissolve their marriages. Rather, the canonical law-
yers negotiated the boundaries between acceptable and unaccept-
able behavior for married monastic couples. (2014, 193)
Thus it seems that couples that renounced together were not entirely
rare in the vinayas, but most of them seem to have led a full, conjugal life
together before entering the Order, and some may have been elderly. 26
The sole exception here is one of the monastic couples discussed by Wal-
ters in the previous chapter, Mahākāśyapa and Kapilabhadrā. In the
Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, these two are said to have lived together but
maintained celibacy without lustful impulses for over twelve years after
a marriage arranged to please their parents. Their secular marriage lasts
until his parents die, and then both go forth, although Bhaddā initially
enters a non-Buddhist order before joining her husband in the Buddhist
saṅgha.27 In addition, the Pāli biographies of Dhammadinnā provide a
26. In a 2010 article, Schopen examines several Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya stories with a nar-
rative trope that typically precedes an old man joining the order in which he laments his
poverty and lack of relatives to support him, a pattern that is relatively common in such
stories about male renunciation, noting:
All these men are not young people, but mature men of considerable years and domes-
tic experience, with, in the main, probably limited formal education, and yet this is
only a very small sampling of what is found in this Vinaya. In the first examples cited
here the men in question are very old, at or even beyond the end of their productive
years, and one cannot help but be reminded of the classical description of the men
who become renouncers in the āśrama system: these men become Buddhist monks
when they are unable or too old to do anything else. (2010, 128)
While some of these men left wives behind when they renounced, Clarke’s research sug-
gests that elderly joint renunciation would not have been a problem even if his stories of
married monastics do not specifically identify their protagonists as elderly.
27. Clarke (2014, 260–261). For a translation of the Tibetan version of their story, see von
Schiefner ([1882] 1926, 186–205).
second example of joint renunciation. Dhammadinnā’s husband, after

some years of wedded bliss, abruptly tells her he is leaving home to join
the Buddhists and offers her the house, but she tartly rejects this bit of
largesse and obtains his permission to become a Buddhist nun.28
In the light of this material, it seems that the Muktā avadāna (Avś 77)
was innovative in its portrayal of marriage for the express purpose of re-
nouncing and of a young bride who goes forth with her husband immedi-
ately after the wedding. This timing would, in theory, have forestalled the
consummation of the marriage since newlyweds were supposed to live
together chastely for at least three days after the wedding before having
intercourse according to a number of the gṛhysūtras, the Brahmanical
manuals for domestic rites.29 Indeed, some gṛhysūtras advocated waiting
as long as a year before having intercourse. Muktā’s wedding thus under-
cuts the ritual and procreative purposes of Brahmanical marriage. Never-
theless, her story implicitly promises that a marital alliance will continue
to benefit the families even after the joint renunciation of the newlyweds,
underscoring the value placed on even ordinary marital alliances.
Kṣemā’s case in Avadānaśataka 79 differs significantly from Muktā’s,
despite the appearance of the marriage-alliance motif in both stories. In
Avadānaśataka 79, a marriage alliance contracted at Kṣemā’s birth be-
tween her father, King Prasenajit, and the neighboring king, Brahmadatta,
leads to the cessation of hostilities between the two kingdoms. This fits
the definition of the suvarṇa saṃdhi or “golden treaty” given in Kauṭilīya
28. For Dhammadinnā, see Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā (Thī-a I.12 at 15–19), Dhammapada-

aṭṭhakathā (xxvi.38 at III, 336–38) and Manorathapurāṇī (I, 360), as well as Apadāna (Ap. II,
567–69, esp. v. 24–26). This emphasis on obtaining the husband’s permission reflects the
vinaya rules requiring this. In the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya Bhikṣuṇī Prātimokṣa, the rele-
vant rules are Pāyantika 85, which stipulates permission of her bdag bo (or po), a word that
could be understood as “owner” or “guardian” (Tsomo 1996, 110, 167) or “husband” (Rock-
hill 1884, 180), and Saṅghāvaśeṣa/Saṅghādisēra 10, which receives very different translations
in Tsomo (1996, 85) and Rockhill (1884, 15). The Pāli vinaya’s Bhikkhunī Pācittiya 80 (Vin.
III, 394–95) stipulates permission of parents and husband. In the Mahāsāṅghika and the
Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda vinayas, the corresponding rule is Bhikṣuṇī Saṅghātiśeṣa 7
(Mahāsāṅghika: Hirakawa 1982, 150–52; Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda: Nolot 1991, 124–27;
Roth 1970, 135–37). In the Dharmagupta vinaya, see Pāyantika 134 (Tsomo 1996, 55). In ad-
dition, specific questions are asked in the ordination ceremony for nuns to ascertain if the
appropriate people have given consent (Hirakawa 1982, 60; Roth 1970, 32; Wijayaratna
2001, 34). It seems the nunnery could not risk being a haven for wives fleeing their
husbands.
29. For detailed citations, see the notes for the steps in Brahmanical weddings given later in
this article, particularly those for steps 11 and 12.
Avadānaśataka 205
Arthaśāstra 7.3.29.30 When Kṣemā, whose name means “peace,” later con-
verts to Buddhism and asks for permission to become a nun, her father re-
fuses because the alliance and the peace it produced depend on her marry-
ing Brahmadatta’s son, Kṣemaṅkara (“Peacemaker”). He claims that only
her betrothed can grant such permission, a claim that may have some valid-
ity given the Mānava Dharmaśāstra’s treatment of betrothal in its section on
contract law.31 When Kṣemā finds out that her father has secretly summoned
Brahmadatta and his son for a hasty wedding, she implores the Buddha for
help. The Buddha secretly appears and instructs her to the point of her de-
veloping ṛddhi (“supernatural or magical power,” Edgerton [1953] 1998, ii,
151b). During the wedding, at the key moment of the pānigraha when the
groom takes the bride’s hand, Kṣemā rises into the air “like a goose king on
extended wing”32 and—like Suprabhā and Kāśisundarī in our two svayaṃvara
stories—works prātihāryas (magical feats) that finally convince everyone
that she is truly unsuited to marriage. Thus, while Muktā’s marriage alli-
ance in Avadānaśataka 77 facilitates her becoming a nun, Kṣemā’s marriage
alliance poses a major hurdle that she can and must learn to overcome.
Brahmanical marriage in the Avadaˉnaśataka

Why was the redactor of this northern text so preoccupied with depicting
girls avoiding connubial entanglement that he devoted fully half of the sto-
ries in the 8th varga of the Avadānaśataka to this topic? A number of schol-
ars, including Law (1926), Gross (1990, 116–120) and Young (2004, 85),33
have noted that marriage in early Indian Buddhism was conducted using
local rites. In the case of North India during the first millennium ce, this
would most likely have meant using Brahmanical marital rites and forms.
30. Kangle ([1965–72] 1992–2003, I, 172, tr. II, 329).

31. MDh 9:71 forbids giving a girl in marriage who is already betrothed to anyone else
(Olivelle 2005, 759, tr. 193).
32. vitatapakṣa iva haṃsarājo (Speyer 1902–9, ii, 49.6–.7).
33. In complete opposition to these scholars, A. K. Sur, in his ethnographic survey of Indian
marital customs, asserted that there was a distinct but simple Buddhist rite of marriage in
ancient times (1973, 52–53). However, his statements appear to have been based on jātaka
texts though little actual evidence was given. Some decades later, Gombrich and Obeye-
sekere researched the origins of so-called “traditional Buddhist” wedding rites in present-
day Sri Lanka, but were unable to trace them back to any ancient antecedents. They con-
cluded that these rites were actually modern innovations (Gombrich and Obeyesekere 1998,
265–67).
Unfortunately, little documentation has been published to date on the mar-

riage rites used in early Buddhism, and what has been published has relied
almost exclusively on Pāli sources that may not accurately represent the
North Indian context in which the Avadānaśataka was redacted. For exam-
ple, Law, in a brief article on marriage in the early Buddhist context, ob-
served that Buddhists made only limited use of Brahmanical marriage
forms, but his evidence was drawn entirely from Pāli texts, apart from a
passing reference to a 10th-century text by Kṣemendra. Therefore, the wed-
ding described in the Kṣemā avadāna (Avś 79) provides some useful evi-
dence for the use of Brahmanical marriage rites in North Indian Buddhist
literature:
yāvat saptame divase vivāhakāle saṃprāpte pratyupasthite rājakumāre

anekajanaśatasahāye vedīmadhyagatāyāṃ brāhmaṇena purohitena
lājā ghṛtasarpiṣānupradattāḥ | tato dārakadārikāhastasaṃśleṣaṇe
kriyamāṇe kṣemā paśyatām anekeṣāṃ prāṇiśatasahasrāṇāṃ
vitatapakṣa iva haṃsarājo gaganatalam abhiruhya vicitrāṇi
prātihāryāṇi vidarśayitum ārabdhā tato rājā prasenajit kauśalo rājā
ca brahmadattaḥ kṣemaṅkaraś ca rājakumāro ‘nye ca kutūhalābhyāgatāḥ
sattvā vismayam upagatāḥ pādayor nipatya vijñāpayitum ārabdhāḥ |
marṣaya bhagini ya ete tvayā dharmāḥ sākṣāt kṛtā, asthānam etad yat
tvaṃ kāmān paribhuñjīthā iti (Speyer 1902–9, ii, 49.4–10)
On the seventh day when the time for the wedding came, after the
prince had arrived with many people and a hundred companions,
and she had gone to the middle of the altar, the brahmin royal chap-
lain offered fried grains with sprinkled ghee. Then, when the join-
ing of the hands of the young man and young woman was being
performed, while many hundreds of thousands of beings were
watching, Kṣemā, having risen up into the vault of the sky like a
goose king on extended wing, began to display various magical
feats. Then King Prasenjit of Kauśala and King Brahmadatta and
Prince Kṣemaṅkara and other beings whose wonder was aroused,
were amazed, and having fallen at her feet, began to entreat her:
“Forgive us, sister! Since these dharmas have been realized by you,
it is impossible that you should enjoy desire.”
This description fits closely with gṛhyasūtra descriptions for proper

kanyādāna (“gift of a girl”) weddings. In the gṛhyasūtras, wedding
Avadānaśataka 207
ceremonies were built around homa (fire) sacrifices officiated by a brah-

min priest, which involved oblations to Agni, the fire god, as the tradi-
tional witness to the marriage. This Brahmanical wedding ceremony took
place in two, or sometimes three, separate locations. A large part of the
rite was conducted at the bride’s home and the celebrants would move
midway through the ritual to the groom’s new house or his family home,
depending on where the new couple would reside. The order of ritual
steps varies somewhat from one gṛhyasūtra to another, but all or almost all
of the gṛhyasūtras surveyed for this study include the following steps,
many of which are accompanied by Vedic recitations:
1. In the ceremony at the bride’s house, the groom offers oblations to the
sacrificial fire, with bride seated behind him and touching him.
2. The groom grasps the hands of bride (pāṇigraha/pāṇigrahaṇa).
3. The bride is made to tread on a stone.
4. The bride, standing, sacrifices fried grains into the fire.
5. The groom and bride circumambulate the fire, keeping their right
sides to it.
6. After repeating steps 3–5 several times, the bride and groom take
seven steps together.
7. The couple are wiped and/or sprinkled on their heads with conse-
crated water by the ācārya conducting the ceremony or by the water
pot carrier.
8. Fees are distributed to the brahmin who officiated and gifts made to
other local worthies.
9. The groom has the bride mount the chariot or wagon for the trip to
his house, taking the nuptial fire with them.
10. The new couple view the polestar together.
11. The newlyweds spend a minimum of three nights cohabitating in
chastity.
12. On the day they break chastity, the husband makes oblations to the
fire and various deities, and they then have intercourse for the first
time.34
34. See Śāṅkhāyana GS, I, 12, 11–13 to 18, 1–5; Āśvalāyana GS I, 7, 3 to 8, 10–11; Pāraskara GS
I, 5, 1–12 to 11, 1–6; Khādira GS I, 3, 7–16 to 4, 12–14 (Oldenberg [1886] 1964, 34–44, 167–71,
279–89, and 380–85); Gobhila GS 2, 1, 19–26 to 5, 1–10; Hiraṅyakeśin GS I, 6, 19, 4–8 to 7,
25, 4; and Āpastamba GS 2, 4, 9–10 to 3, 8, 10–11 (Oldenberg [1892] 1964, 44–52, 187–200,
and 259–68).
Kṣemā’s wedding ceremony in Avadānaśataka 79 is, first of all, a homa

sacrifice with offerings made to the fire representing Agni.35 Second, the
officiant is a brahmin priest, and third, the wedding is interrupted at what
turns out to be a crucial moment, the pāṇigraha or pāṇigrahaṇa, the
moment when the groom takes the bride’s hand.36 Several of the gṛhyasūtras
describe in detail exactly how this should be done in order to specify the
kind of offspring desired from this union.37 The pāṇigraha is therefore an
iconic moment, full of sexual and procreative significance, so it seems no
accident that Kṣemā’s wedding is interrupted at this key point. In fact, the
same strategic interruption of a wedding occurs in a number of other sto-
ries in northern Indian Buddhist sources, including two stories in the
35. See, for example, Śāṅkhāyana GS I, 5, 2 (Oldenberg [1886] 1964, 20), which lists a wed-
ding as one of five occasions for making offerings to the fire.
36. References in the gṛhyasūtras that use the pāṇigraha[ṇa] as emblematic of the whole mar-
riage ritual include Śāṅkhāyana GS 1, 5, 5; Āśvalāyana GS I, 9, 1–2; Pāraskara GS I, 4, 5–7;
and Gobhila GS 1, 1, 8 and 20. In all of these sources, the pāṇigraha[ṇa] is a climatic moment
rather than the formal conclusion of the rite. In dealing with the grounds for litigation with
respect to the cancellation of a sale or purchase, MDh 8:227 asserts: “The ritual formulas of
marriage are a sure sign that she is the wife, and learned men should recognize that they
reach their completion at the seventh step” (tr. Olivelle 2005, 179, and see 317, n. 8.227; and
704). The seventh step for the MDh was the conclusion of the transfer or gift of the girl;
however, it should be noted that this statement occurs in the section concerned with con-
tracts, in the context of discussing penalties for violations of marriage contracts. Neverthe-
less, this statement may partly explain the primacy given to the seven steps in later medieval
and modern discussions of marriage, which generally accord the MDh pride of place among
the law codes. A more detailed discussion of marriage occurs in Ch. 3 of the MDh.
37. See, for example, Āśvalāyana GS I, 7, 3–5 (Oldenberg [1886] 1964, 167–68), where grasp-
ing the thumb of the bride’s hand with the palm side up indicates a desire for male off-
spring, while taking the other fingers meant female offspring were desired, and grasping
both the thumb and the hand with the back of the hand held up meant both male and female
offspring. Some of the other gṛhyasūtras offer different associations between grasping the
hand and procreation. See Hiraṅyakeśin GS 1, 6, 20, 1–2 (Oldenberg [1892] 1964, 189–90)
and Āpastamba GS 2, 4, 11–15 (ibid., 259). MDh 3:43–44 adds some unusual varṇa specifica-
tions into this moment: “The consecratory rite of taking the hand in marriage is prescribed
only for brides of equal class. The following should be recognized as the procedure for the
rite of marriage when brides are of unequal class. When marrying an upper-class man, a
Kṣatriya bride should take hold of an arrow, a Vaiśya bride a goad, and a Śūdra bride the hem
of his garment” (tr. Olivelle 2005, 110). The gṛhyasūtras surveyed for this study seem to have
no such provisions, but Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra I.62 echoes the MDh in stipulating the
arrow and the goad for women marrying men of a higher class (Stenzler 1970, Sanskrit 10
and German 9; Goodall 1996, 303). However, this is hardly surprising since the author of
the Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra relies quite heavily on the MDh.
Another indicator of the iconic nature of this moment is the range of vocabulary derived
from it. These lexical items included words for “marriage” (pāṇigrahaṇa-saṃskāra or simply
pāṇigraha), “groom” (pāṇigrāhavat, pāṇigrahītṛ), and “bride” (pāṇigṛhītā/-tī), among others
(Monier-Williams [1899] 2002, 615b).
Avadānaśataka 209
Karmaśataka (Feer 1901, 266–69), as well as in the Dharmadinnā/

Dharmadattā avadāna in the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, where the intended
wedding is virtually reduced to that moment. Nor are examples lacking in
non-Buddhist literature, for one of the young heroes in Daṇḍin’s
Dasakumāracarita interrupts a wedding at this very point in order to slay
the groom and claim the bride as his own (Kale 1925, 101.14–102.4).38
The depiction of the Brahmanical marriage rite in the Kṣemā avadāna
(Avś 79) is strikingly similar to the depiction of the marriage of Śākyamuni
and Yaśodhāra in three Gandhāran reliefs discussed by Verardi (1994).
Like Kṣemā’s wedding, these reliefs show a homa sacrifice officiated by a
brahmin priest, and two of the three reliefs seem to show the pāṇigraha
rather than the circumambulation of the fire suggested by Verardi. Hence
Avadānaśataka 79 and the art historical evidence confirm that the Brah-
manical homa-style wedding ceremony was known in northwest Indian
Buddhist communities. Furthermore, Avadānaśataka 79 suggests that
these same Brahmanical rites may have been used in early North Indian
Buddhist communities, depending on how we view Prasenajit’s religious
affiliation. Interestingly, this seems to have also been the case for at least
some Jain communities in this period.39
38. Recent studies suggest Daṇḍin lived in the late 7th–early 8th century ce. While he is pri-
marily associated with the Tamil Nadu region of South India, he was forced into exile for
twelve years, traveling extensively during that time, according to a surviving section of his
Avantisundarī[kathā] (Onians 2005, 24–25). Kale placed Daṇḍin a little earlier, ca. 550–650 ce,
but leaned toward 650 (Kale 1925, xx–xxi). Given the influence achieved by Daṇḍin’s
Kāvyādarśa, it might not be surprising if his novel had begun to influence northern narrative
literature, at least by the time of Demoto’s hypothetical revision of the Avś around the 8th
century ce. However, for now it is difficult to say what impact Daṇḍin’s work may have had on
this particular story.
39. In his discussion of marriage as a Jain Śarīrasaṃskāra, Sangave (1956, 143–45) gives a list
of eight forms of marriage: brāhma, daiva, ārṣa, prājāpatya, āsura, gāndharva, rākṣasa, and
paiśāca, based on the Jaina Vivāha Paddhati. The titles match those given in the MDh and
other Brahmanical sources, and the Jain definitions of the forms closely overlap the Brah-
manical definitions. Moreover, Jain ācāryas also labelled the first four forms of marriage as
lawful primarily because, Sangave reports, “such marriages are contracted with the mutual
consent of the parents of the bride and the bridegroom and the bride is given by her father
as a gift to the bridegroom . . .” (ibid., 145). In other words, the notion of the kanyādāna as
the ideal form of marriage found in the Brahmanical context carried over into the Jain con-
text. As to when these forms were adopted, Sangave notes:
The Jaina sacred books that prescribe these ceremonies [i.e., the Jain saṃskāras] are
not very old. The Digaṁbara’s Ādi-purāṇa was written in the ninth century A.D. and
Āchāra-dinakara was written in Saṁvat year 1468 [A.D. 942]. Thus as the ceremonies
are prescribed sufficiently late, it is likely that the Jaina ceremonies might have been
designed after the Hindu ceremonies. Whatever might be in theory, in practice at least
the Jaina ceremonies look like the Hindu ceremonies. (1956, 267)
Brahmanical marriage rites as normative?

A concommitant question remains: Why did Buddhists not try to develop
their own marriage rites? A common explanation, though by no means
the only one, is that Buddhists were only interested in pursuing mokṣa and
nirvāṇa. Gross attributes this lack of a separate Buddhist marriage rite to
several factors: First, “a typical Buddhist avoidance of unnecessary theory,
dogma, ritual, or regulations”; second, a blanket precept against sexual
misconduct, which Gross argues obviated the need for detailed rules about
marriage; and third, an emphasis on renunciation as the primary path to
spiritual achievement (1990, 116–20; the quotation occurs on 117). How-
ever, there may have been another factor at work that has not yet been
considered. A survey of eight key Brahmanical sources for this period
shows that the Brahmanical system of six or eight forms of marriage was
remarkably stable across the legal sources available during the classical
period, as shown in the chart below:40
In the sources surveyed and listed in Table 9.2, the marriage forms show
only slight variations in nomenclature,41 definition, and the designation of
Moreover, these were not the only Hindu marital customs adopted by the Jains since, ac-
cording to Sangave, in Ādi Purāṇa 16.247, Jinasena advocated the anuloma rule for mar-
riages and Jains later followed some of the same exogamous restrictions as Hindus (1956,
154–61). However, there seems to have been little exploration of these issues in the early Jain
context so far, apart from Sangave’s study, and further research is needed.
40. Sources: Āśvalāyana GS 1, 6, 1–8; Kauṭīlya Arthaśāstra 3.2.1–9; Āpastamba DS 2.11.17–
2.12.4; Gautama DS 4.6–15; Baudhāyana DS 1.20.1–16;Vasiṣṭha DS 1.28–38; MDh 3:20–34;
and Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra I.58–61. The Āśvalāyana GS is unusual in that most gṛhyasūtras
do not give a list of forms. While dating these documents is difficult, after detailed studies of
the four dharmasūtras and of the MDh, Olivelle has suggested the following schema:
Āpastamba Dharmasūtra c. beginning of the 3rd cen. bce.

Gautama Dharmasūtra c. mid-3rd cen. bce.
Proto-Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra c. mid-2nd cen. bce.
Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra 1st cen. bce–1st cen. ce.
Mānava Dharmaśāstra 2nd–3rd cen. ce.
(Olivelle 1999, xxviii–xxxiv; Olivelle 2005, 20–25). Despite its association with the south of
India today, Olivelle would place the initial redaction of the Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra in the
north of India, along with the rest of the Dharmasūtras cited above and the Mānava Dharmaśāstra.
41. Only two sources show any variation in the nomenclature for these marital forms and that is
minor. The relatively late Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra refers to the āsura marriage as the mānuṣa mar-
riage and the rākṣasa form as the kṣatriya form; the latter is a logical variation, given the repeated
association of the rākṣasa form with the kṣatriya class. The Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra, the latest
source among those surveyed for this study, renames the prajāpatya form kāya and defines the
paiśāca form slightly differently as an abduction carried out by deception rather than a rape.
Nevertheless, the definitions for the other marriage forms do not vary in any substantial way.
Table 9.2 Marriage Forms in Brahmanical Sources
Source brāhma daiva ārṣa prājāpatya gāndharva āsura rākṣasa paiśāca
Marital Form
Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra X X X X X X X X
Kauṭīlya Arthaśāstra X X X X X X X X
Āpastamba Dharmasūtra X X X X X X
Gautama Dharmasūtra X X X X X X X X
Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra X X X X X X X X
Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra X X X X X X
Mānava Dharmaśāstra X X X X X X X X
Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra X X X X X X X X
“proper” or “acceptable” forms of marriage. The nomenclature is derived

from the style of wedding, not the status of the union itself, and in this they
differ significantly from the lists of women in Buddhist vinayas, which clas-
sifies them partly in terms of the type of wedding and partly by the type of
union contracted, the last of which is tatkṣaṇikā “[a mate] for a few mo-
ments,” and clearly a paid transaction.42
Whether the marital forms given number six or eight, the sources
listed in Table 9.2 all regard the first half of their lists (i.e., those to the left
of the grey dividing line in Table 9.2) as preferred forms of marriage while
those on the second half of the list (those to the right of the dividing line)
were presented as undesirable. Thus the brāhma, daiva, ārṣa, and
prājāpatya forms—all marriages in which the father formally gave the girl
to another man—were deemed proper kanyādāna (“gift of a girl”) mar-
riages that conferred on the bride the status of a patnī, a ritually empow-
ered wife who could assist her husband in carrying out his Brahmanical
ritual obligations (Jamison 1996, 30–31). In contrast, the marital forms in
the second half of the list do not confer this status. These latter forms in-
cluded the unions called gāndharva (a union of two lovers without paren-
tal involvement), āsura (payment of a bride-price), rākṣasa (abduction mar-
riage), and paiśāca (rape of an insensible girl, which is condemned by all
sources). Regardless of their lower status, these four nevertheless were
recognized as marriages; thus, a female rape victim could be considered
wed, protecting her reputation in the community somewhat and confer-
ring legitimacy on any offspring that resulted from the rape.
In addition, some gṛhyasūtras advocated incorporating local customs in
conducting Brahmanical wedding rites.43 The sum total of this evidence
suggests that, even before the beginning of the Common Era, the Brah-
manical system of marriage in northern India was widespread, well en-
trenched, and at least partially entwined with local customs, making it
probably difficult to challenge.
Buddhist monks and Brahmanical marriage

Rather than fight the system, Buddhists in early North India seemed to
have opted to find a place within it that suited their own purposes.
42. For a discussion of these lists, see Clarke (forthcoming, 224–26).

43. Āśvalāyana GS I, 7, 1 (Oldenberg [1886] 1964, 167); Pāraskara GS 1, 8, 11–13 (ibid., 285);
Āpastamba GS I, 2, 12–15 (Oldenberg [1892] 1964, 255).
Avadānaśataka 213
Schopen observed that, according to various vinayas, Buddhist monks

were required to play a role in certain life-cycle rites, including weddings:
More than once recently it has again been suggested that Buddhist
monks had little or no role in life-cycle ceremonies in early India. I
do not know on what evidence these suggestions are based, but it
does not seem that it could be the Pāli texts. In fact, Buddhist vinaya
texts in Pāli, Sanskrit, and what Roth calls “Prākrit-cum-Sanskrit”
seem to suggest quite otherwise. They seem to suggest and assume
that monks regularly had a role in such ceremonies and that their
ritual presence and performance at such ceremonies was of some
importance. Most passages, indeed, employ language that suggests
“obligation” (karaṇīya). (1997, 72)
As Schopen goes on to demonstrate, evidence from the Pāli,

Mūlasarvāstivāda and Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravāda vinayas show that
Buddhist monks were expected to attend certain life-cycle events if sum-
moned by a upāsaka or upāsikā, a devout layfollower. The Vassupanāyika-
khandhaka in the Pāli vinaya gives an example of how and why an upāsaka
might summon a monk, even out of the rain retreat:
This is a case, monks, where a dwelling place for an Order comes to

have been built by a layfollower. If he should send a messenger to
monks, saying: “Let the reverend sirs come. I want to give a gift,
and to hear dhamma, and to see the monks”, you should go, monks,
if you are sent for and if the business can be done in seven days, but
not if you are not sent for.44
The Pāli vinaya goes on to stipulate a wide variety of other events that
monks must attend if summoned, two of which directly concern our dis-
cussion here:
This is the case, monks, where a dwelling comes to have been built
by a layfollower for himself . . . or there comes to be his son’s
marriage, or there comes to be his daughter’s marriage, or he be-
comes ill, or he speaks a well known discourse. If he should send a
messenger to monks, saying: . . . “Let the reverend sirs come.
44. Vin. I, 139, tr. Horner Vol. IV [1951] 1962, 186, quoted in Schopen (1997, 73).
I want to give a gift, and to hear dhamma, and to see the monks”,
you should go, monks, if you are sent for and if the business can be
done in seven days, but not if you are not sent for.45
The first Pāli vinaya passage quoted above focuses on the obligation to
accept donations from the devout laity and to teach dhamma in exchange,
while the second passage suggests contexts for such donations. Notice that
the formula of the invitation and the lay follower’s expectation do not change
with the occasion. In the case of marriage, at least, such an invitation would
seem to correspond to the gifts required to be made to brahmins at or after
Brahmanical weddings, as attested to by the gṛhyasūtras (see no. 8 in the list
of wedding steps above). These gift recipients do not have to be present at
the ceremony itself. Thus, it seems that Buddhist monks could be included
within the preexisting structure of Brahmanical weddings, with only a sub-
stitution of guests to be honored with donations.46
An analogous list of obligations, couched in similar language, can be
found in the corresponding Varṣāvastu in the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, but
Schopen notes that “[i]t does not list all of the same occasions, however,
referring explicitly only to marriage and serious, if not terminal, illness”
(Schopen 1997, 76). Clearly, then, marriages of upāsakas or their family
members brought important invitations for monastic saṅghas in both Sri
Lanka and North India. Moreover, the Abhisamācārikā of the Mahāsāṅghika-
Lokottaravāda school gives—along with detailed directions for etiquette at
such events—specific verses for assigning the reward (i.e., merit) of a
meal or food donation given in connection with births, deaths, marriages,
and housewarmings in lay households (Singh and Minowa 1988, 91–94,
tr. 126–29).47 For each of these four occasions, the text sets forth both
45. Vin. I, 140, tr. Horner Vol. IV, [1951] 1962, 186 also quoted in part in Schopen (1997, 74).
46. Such a substitution calls to mind chapter 26 of the Pāli Dhammapada, which redefines
a “brahmin” as, essentially, a Buddhist monk. This and other attempts to redefine a “brah-
min” in terms of actions and not mere birth may have been crucial in getting donations re-
directed to Buddhist monks in ceremonies like weddings.
47. See also Schopen (1997, 78–79). In the Abhisamācārikā’s introduction to these dedica-
tory verses, the list of possible reasons for the offering of a meal is longer and includes
family gatherings and separations, illness, [invitations to?] the king’s palace, or misfortune,
plus meals offered by outgoing monks and food donations made to individual monks. How-
ever, no verses are provided to dedicate the merit for these occasions, suggesting they may
have been less frequent. The text also stipulates that upon the receipt of any invitation, effort
has to be expended to make sure the invitation is real and not a trap or a ruse (Singh and
Minowa 1988, 88–90, tr. 122–24).
Avadānaśataka 215
inappropriate and appropriate verses. The verses for assigning the benefit
of a meal donated in connection with a wedding are:
Atha dāni vevāhikaṃ bhavati, nāyam dakṣiṇā ādiśitavyā

Nagnā nadī anodakā nagnaṃ rāṣṭraṃ arājakaṃ
Istrīpi vidhavā nagnā sacesyā daśa bhrātaro
Nāyam evaṃ dakṣiṇā ādiśitavyā
Atha khalu dakṣiṇā ādiśitavyā

Istrīpi peśalā bhavatu śraddhā bhavatu pativratānugā
Śilavati yogasampannā samyagdṛṣṭi ca yā iha
Puruṣo pi peśalo bhavatu śraddho bhavatu vratānugo
Śilavāṃ tyāgasampanno samyagdṛṣṭi ca yo iha.
Ubhau śraddhāya sampannā ubhau śilehi saṃvṛtā
Ubhau puṇyāni kṛtvāna samaśilavratā ubhau.
Vidhinā devalokastu modantu kāmakāmino.
Tām eva bhāryā careyā yā asyā śilehi saṃvṛtā
Asatiṃ parivarjeyā mārgaṃ pratibhayaṃ yathā
Evam dakṣiṇā ādiśitavyā.48
This passage might be translated as:
Now if it is related to a wedding, the reward should not be assigned:49

Naked is a river without water, naked is a kingdom without a king,
Naked is a woman without a husband,50 even if she has ten brothers.
The reward should not be assigned in this way.
On the contrary, the reward should be assigned:

May the woman be pleasant, devout, and a loyal companion to her
husband,
Well-behaved, accomplished in her work, and a holder of right views.
May the man be pleasant, devout, and a loyal companion,
48. Singh and Minowa (1988, 92–93). See also Jinananda (1969, 19–20) and Prasad (1984,
46, n. 3 and 47, n. 1). According to Prasad, the verse that is not to be recited can be found in
the Jātaka-aṭṭhakathā in the commentary on the Ucchana Jātaka, while the verses that should
be recited instead appear in Cowell and Francis (1895–1913, Vol. III, Pt. I, 214 [1984, 46–47]).
49. Two commentaries on the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya extant in Tibetan explicitly state that
the phrase dakṣiṇā[m] ā √diś means “assign the reward (i.e., the fruit of the merit)” in similar
texts in that tradition (Schopen 2004, 41–42, n. 48). The same reading seems appropriate here.
50. Reading this as two parts, vi + dhava, but vidhavā can be translated as “widow.”
Well-behaved, accomplished in [giving] gifts, and a holder of right

views.
Both are accomplished in faith, both are guarded in their behavior,
Both have made merit, just as both have made a vow of [good]
behavior.
By this method51 may they be happy from following their desire [and
attain] the world of the gods.
Only the wife who is restrained in her behavior should be coupled with.
An unchaste wife should be avoided like a perilous road.
In this way the reward should be assigned.52
It is interesting that, according to these verses, marriage—if properly

practiced—is said to produce exactly the same results as those promised
in Mānava Dharmaśāstra 3:79 and other Brahmanical sources: happiness
and heaven. Furthermore, all the evidence presented above from the Pāli
vinaya, the Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya, and the Abhisamācārikā, indicates
that the role of monks was limited to receiving donations of meals in
connection with the weddings of upāsakas’ children and assigning the
reward of the donation to the new couple. Nothing in this evidence sug-
gests that monks ever officiated at the wedding rite itself.53 Yet, clearly
51. The term vidhi could also mean “law,” “means,” “act,” or even “rite,” etc. (Monier-Williams
1899 [2002], 968b).
52. The translation here is mine, but see also Singh and Minowa (1988, 127) and Prasad
(1984, 46–47). Prasad points out that there appear to be no similar verses for assigning
merit after a meal given in connection with a marriage in the Pāli vinaya, raising the ques-
tion of exactly what Buddhist monks did for this occasion in the premodern Sri Lankan
context (ibid., 219–20).
53. Gombrich and Obeyesekere could find no evidence of monks playing any role in Sri
Lanka weddings before the 1980s (1988, 265–67). In fact, there were strong feelings against
having monks at such a ceremony:
The majority of Sinhalese Buddhists still find it strange for a monk to appear at a wed-
ding at all, let alone take any part in the formal proceedings. A monk is traditionally as-
sociated with sterility or even with death, so that the mere sight of one is—or used to
be—inauspicious in a secular context; for example, to see a monk as one sets out on a
journey is a bad omen. By the same token weddings are always held on secular premises.
However, now it is gradually becoming popular to have monks recite pirit, the all-
purpose rite of blessing, at middle-class weddings. It does not conflict with traditional
practice for the bride or groom or both to make merit before the wedding by inviting
monks to recite pirit and accept alms—though we suspect that even this is a relatively
modern custom. However, it is decidedly innovative to have monks recite pirit at the
wedding itself. (1988, 265)
Avadānaśataka 217
monastic attendance at meals offered in connection with weddings was

deemed important enough to warrant breaking the rain retreat for up to
seven days and required careful thought as to etiquette. Thus, Buddhist
monks’ activities in connection with weddings as documented in these
sources seem to fit within the Brahmanical marital system rather than
challenging it, and to represent a redirection of some wedding donations
from the traditional recipients, brahmins, to Buddhist monks.
Conclusion
The Buddhist use of Brahmanical marriage rites may have brought with it
some unwanted baggage in the form of Brahmanical marital laws and
customs. As noted above, there are three possible examples of unstated
adherence to Brahmanical marital laws in the 8th varga of the
Avadānaśataka. First, the stipulation of seven as the age of renunciation
for Ānathapiṇḍada’s daughter in Avadānaśataka 72 happens to be one year
shy of the earliest specified age for a girl to marry in the Mānava
Dharmaśāstra, though seven is also mentioned in two other Avadānaśataka
stories as an age at which some boys renounced and in some Pāli texts for
girls. Second, Muktā and her groom renounce immediately after the wed-
ding ceremony in Avadānaśataka 77 and therefore probably before the
consummation of the marriage, according to the timing specified in sev-
eral of the gṛyhasūtras. Third, the repeated motif of the father who fears
making enemies of rejected suitors, which resonates with attacks on fam-
ilies and couples in the Mahābhārata and the Raghuvaṃśa. Fourth, we
have the strategic interruption of the wedding at the paṇigraha in Kṣemā’s
tale, which mirrors an interrupted wedding in the Dasakumāracarita and
several other Buddhist tales. Set side by side, these four elements suggest
that Brahmanical marital customs and perhaps marital laws continued to
exert some force within Buddhist communities of North India. Similarly,
the redactor’s condemnation of the Brahmanical sacrifices offered by
Śuklā’s father to secure the birth of a son in Avadānaśataka 73 suggests the
Gombrich and Obeyesekere also discuss one secular official who had interpolated Buddhist
elements into the upper-class weddings he conducted, claiming that he was following the
example of Siddhārtha and Yaśodharā’s wedding (1988, 269–71). This is ironic since the
Bodhisattva’s wedding would have followed Brahmanical and/or local precedents, and, as
the art historical evidence discussed by Verardi shows, Siddhārtha’s wedding was certainly
envisioned as a Brahmanical ceremony in Gandhāran Buddhist communities. The same
was probably true elsewhere.
use of Brahmanical customs was not limited to marriage as there is little

need to condemn something which would not occur in the community.54
Yet, more than this, the very position of marriage as the cornerstone of the
Brahmanical ritual system may have been problematic in Buddhist use of
Brahmanical marital forms.
The Brahmanical tradition required a man to be married to perform
even basic household rites and the rites necessary to care for his ances-
tors. His ritual fires were kindled at his marriage, and they died when his
patnī died, for the man had lost an essential ritual partner as discussed by
Jamison (1996, 31).55 The loss of a patnī, therefore, rendered a man inca-
pable of performing his ritual obligations, and Mānava Dharmaśāstra
5:168 urged widowers to remarry quickly in order to reestablish their
ritual fires. In addition, several significant socioreligious changes in the
Brahmanical context during the classical period seem likely to have inten-
sified the demand for brides, and these might explain some of the urgency
with which the redactor puts his case for youthful female renunciation.
Olivelle’s research on the āśrama system has shown that the early
system of four equally valid lifelong career paths (āśramas) for men under-
went two significant changes during the classical period. First, around the
beginning of the Common Era, the four āśramas were reconfigured into a
sequence of life stages (1993, 131).56 This change is amply reflected in the
Mānava Dharmaśāstra, which relegated brahmacārya (studenthood) to a
man’s youth and limited the saṃnyāsin (“renouncer”) phase to the very
end of his life.57 Meanwhile, the third of the original four life paths, the
54. Along the same lines, see Freiberger (1998) on three ways in which certain Pāli texts
reinterpreted brahmanical sacrifice in order to bring it into line with Buddhist priorities.
55. See also Mānava Śrautasūtra (1961–63, vol. 1, 182 and vol. 2, 247). MDh 5:167 specifies
that the wife be cremated “with [her husband’s] sacred fire and sacrificial implements”
(dāhayedagnnihotreṇa yajñapātraisca dharmaviti, tr. Olivelle 2005, 147).
56. The notion of dividing a male’s life into stages also appears in earlier literature not as-
sociated with the āśrama system, like the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (Olivelle 1993, 132).
57. MDh 3:1–2 gives a duration of 9, 18, or 36 years for as an appropriate period of study for a
youth, after which he should marry. Meanwhile, MDh 6:33 stipulates that a man should become
an ascetic wanderer during the last quarter of his life but, according to MDh 6:35, “[o]nly after he
has paid his three debts . . .” (tr. Olivelle 2005, 150). The emphasis in the MDh is on performing
the four stages consecutively, as is quite clear from MDh 6:87–88. Meanwhile MDh 6:89–90
assert once again the superiority of the householder over the other three āśramas. MDh 6:86
and 6:94–95 also seem to undercut the renouncer āśrama by offering a comfortable alternative
for an elderly man to stay at home and follow certain practices, which he terms vedasaṃnyāsika:
“. . . retiring from all ritual activities, being self-controlled, and reciting the Veda, he should live
at ease under the care of his son” (tr. Olivelle 2005, 153).
Avadānaśataka 219
vānaprastha or “forest hermit” āśrama, seems to have all but disappeared

by the time the Mānava Dharmaśāstra was redacted (Olivelle 1993, 236).
The net result was that men who followed the āśrama system were now
supposed to spend the bulk of their lives as a gṛhastha, a married “house-
holder.”58
The second major change to the āśrama system was a significant
broadening of its reach as the reconfigured āśramas became linked with
the varṇa system. Originally intended for a small subset of men in the
brahmin class, the new sequential āśrama system gradually became the
life paradigm to be followed by all men in the top three varṇas or “classes.”
Only śūdras, the lowest class, were excluded (Olivelle 1993, 24–27). For
example, some statements in the sixth chapter of the Mānava Dharmaśāstra
(e.g. 6:1, 6:37, and 6:91) indicate that twice-born men, those of the top
three classes, could follow all four of the now sequential āśramas, but
statements like Mānava Dharmaśāstra 6:88, 6:93, and 6:97 still seem to
reserve the highest attainments for brahmins who do this.59 On the other
hand, the authors of the Mahābhārata know of the four āśramas and use
them as the yardstick against which kṣatriya actions are measured. In
book 12, this new sequential order of the āśramas is invoked to counter
Yudhiṣṭhira’s desire to abdicate his newly won throne and renounce early.
However, the Mahābhārata outside of the Śāntiparvan does not consis-
tently follow this view (Olivelle 1993, 149–50, 153–55). According to Oliv-
elle, the first text to explicitly link the classes to the āśramas is the
Vaikhānasa Smārtasūtra (c. 5th century ce), which stipulates:
For the Brāhman there are four orders, for the Kṣatriya the first
three, for the Vaiśya only the first two. They who belong to the
orders are the following four: the Veda-student, the householder,
the hermit, the ascetic.60
58. Of course, this change would have had greatest force within the mainstream of Brah-
manical society, and less outside of the mainstream where the āśramas seem to have contin-
ued, in at least some groups, as separate life paths. Buddhists and Jains, for example, did not
employ the āśrama vocabulary (Olivelle [1993] 2004, 25), and both continued to view ascetic
renunciation as a separate life path. This, however, does not rule out the possibility of their
being aware of the āśrama system or affected indirectly by changes in it, particularly where
marriageable women were concerned. There was no parallel institutionalized system for
women in the Vedic or Brahmanical traditions that provided a path to renunciation.
59. For MDh Chapter 6, see Olivelle (2005, 594–612, tr. 148–53).
60. Vaikhānasa Dharmasūtra 8.1 (Caland 1982, 184). The same correlation between varṇa
and āśrama is repeated in section 8.9b in the same source (ibid., 192).
Whether this text is summarizing a situation already happening on the

ground or is introducing a new idea is unclear. Nonetheless, according to
this paradigm, the āśramas common to all three of the top classes are lim-
ited to Vedic studenthood and married householder. Given the reduced
length of studenthood indicated for non-brahmin twice-born, the āśrama
of the married householder would have been the longest life stage for
kṣatriyas and vaiśyas, especially for the latter class.
The evidence of the 8th varga of the Avadānaśataka demonstrates
that Brahmanical marital norms and forms played a significant role in
the lives of young women in North Indian Buddhist communities and
suggests they posed an obstacle to Buddhist female renunciation during
the first five hundred years ce, the period of the probable redaction of
the Avadānaśataka. The restructuring and broadening of the āśrama
system during this period and its linkage to the varṇa system seem likely
to have placed a renewed emphasis on marriage and increased or
strengthened the Brahmanical demand for brides. Interestingly, Jamison
(2006, 191–214) has reported a sharp increase in anti-nun rhetoric in
key Brahmanical sources of this period, which supports the idea of in-
creased tension between Buddhist female renunciation and the Brah-
manical need for brides. These factors may explain, in large part, why
the emphasis of fully half of the stories in the 8th varga of the
Avadānaśataka seems to be on modeling ways for young women to enter
the Buddhist Order before they wed, an emphasis not found in the Pāli
texts of this same period.61
61. In fact, only one story out of the ten in this chapter models the renunciation of an older
woman, Avś 78, and she, as the Buddha’s former mother in five hundred previous lives, is
clearly a unique case. See Durt (2005) and Muldoon-Hules (2009).
10
Dhammapada-aṭ ṭ hakathaˉ/
Saddharmaratnaˉvaliya
women in medieval south asian buddhist
societies
Ranjini Obeyesekere
in this chapter, I intend here to look at certain aspects of women’s

lives as revealed in the stories from the Sinhala Saddharmaratnāvaliya.1
With this text we have here a rare chance to contextualize our inferences
to a particular period, because this Sinhala text has been clearly identified
as the work of the 13th-century monk named Dharmasena who claims
authorship in the body of the text itself. In a colophon to his text the author
states that his work is a translation of an earlier work, the Pāli Dhammapada-
aṭṭhakathā, believed by scholars to date from the 5th century ce. We thus
have two texts—translations or transformations—of the same stories, but
almost eight centuries apart. What is of even greater interest is that the
author of the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā has a colophon to his text that
states that his work is in turn a translation of an even earlier Sinhala text
found in Sri Lanka. I quote the relevant passage that refers to the earlier
version on which the 5th-century Pāli Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā was based:
“A subtle commentary thereon has been handed down from gen-

eration to generation in the island of Ceylon. But because it is
1. My translations are from the Sinhala edition of the Saddharmaratnāvaliya of Dharmasena

Thera, edited by the monk Kirielle Ghanavimala Thera. SR references are to page numbers
in this edition.
composed in the dialect of the island, it is of no profit or advantage

to foreigners. It might perhaps conduce to the welfare of all man-
kind.” This was the wish expressed to me by the Elder Kumāra
Kassapa, self-conquered, living in tranquillity, steadfast in resolve.
His earnest wish was made to me because of his desire that the
Good Law might endure. Therefore I will discard this dialect and its
diffuse idiom and translate the work into the pleasing language of
the Sacred Texts.2
The 4th to 6th centuries, during which many of the Pāli commentaries of
the Pāli canon were written, was a period when monks from South India,
such as Buddhaghosa, the apparent author of the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā,
came to the major monasteries in Sri Lanka, famed for their Buddhist
scholarship. There they learned the Sinhala language and translated into
Pāli many Buddhist commentarial texts, composed by generations of
erudite Sinhala monks. The original collection of these stories in Sinhala
that were translated into Pāli thus dates back to a period prior to the 5th
century ce.
Sadly, over the centuries, especially after the 10th century ce, these
early Buddhist texts in Sinhala were gradually lost, destroyed by wars, pe-
riods of neglect, or the vicissitudes of time.3 Then in the 13th century,
during a period of Buddhist revival, several of these lost commentaries
were translated back into Sinhala from the Pāli. In relation to this, the
author of the 13th-century Sinhala “translation” of the Pāli text thus states:
We have abandoned the strict Pali method and taken only the themes
in composing this work. It may have faults and stylistic shortcom-
ings, but [you the reader should] ignore them. Be like swans that
separate milk from water even though the milk and water be mixed
together; or like those who acquire learning and skills even from a
teacher of low status, because it is with the acquisition of knowledge
2. Paramparābhatā tassa nipuṇā atthavaṇṇanā yā tambapaṇṇīdīpamhi dīpabhāsāya saṇṭhitā.

Na sādhayati sesānaṃ hitasampadaṃ, appevanāma sādheyye sabbalokassa sā hitaṃ. Iti āsiṃsa-
mānenena samacārinā kumārakassapenāhaṃ thherena thiracetasā. Saddhammaṭṭhitikāmena
sakkaccaṃ abhiyācito, taṃ bhāsaṃ ativitthāragataṃ ca vacanakkamaṃ. Dhp-a I.1, tr. Burlin-
game [1921] 2009, 145 (correction from Burlingame sp. subtile > sublte).
3. The absence of literary works for this period is accepted by literary historians as being due
to these factors.
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā/Saddharmaratnāvaliya 223
that he is concerned. So consider only its usefulness, and apply the

healing slave of the Saddharmaratnāvaliya to remove the hazy film
of delusion that clouds the Eye of Wisdom . . . and go happily and
with clear vision along the highway of Right Actions to the city of
nirvana.4
We therefore have two versions of stories that claim to be from the same
text, but which belong to two (perhaps three) different periods, that are
retold by two monks working in two very different language traditions.
The first is a succinct Pāli shorn of excessive ornamentation, and the
other is in the “diffuse idiom,” with extended metaphors and imagery
that characterized works in Sinhala. Yet they are retellings of the same
stories. The fact that the texts can be dated gives us material that can
provide insights into the social world of women in early Buddhist Sri
Lanka. It also enables us to potentially discern the norms and values that
conditioned the fabric of the stories prior to or around the 5th century ce,
the transformations that might have occurred as they were retold in Pāli
by an Indian Buddhist monk for a wider Indian readership, and also still
further changes when retranslated back into the world of 13th-century
Sri Lanka.
In this chapter, I intend specifically to look at references in the two
texts to norms that conditioned social institutions such as marriage, di-
vorce, the education, role, and status of women and the transformations,
if any, that may have occurred between the periods of composition of the
two extant texts, nearly eight centuries apart. I conclude the chapter with
some reflections on how the values expressed and reinterpreted in the
texts permeate into 20th-century Buddhist Sri Lankan society, and con-
tinue to affect Buddhist women practicing today.
Buddhist monasticism had become strongly institutionalized in Sri
Lanka between the 3rd and 10th centuries ce. The two major monastic
complexes, the Mahāvihāra and Abhayagiri, attracted Buddhist scholars
and monks from India, China, and other Buddhist countries, who studied
4. Pāli krama maga hära artha pamaṇak gena apa kalāvū prabandhayehi krama vilanghanādī
adu väḍi ätat, ē nosalakā, pän saha kiri musu vūvat kiri pamanak tōrā häragannā hansayan men
da, śāstra dannavungē jāti aḍuvūvat ungē taram nosalakā, śāstra pamaṇak salakā śāstra ugan-
navun men, prayōjana pamaṇak sitā nuvaṇa nämati äs hi mōha nämati paṭalaya väsi akusal
mahā valaṭa väda nivan purayaṭa gosin tubū kusal maha vata nodaknavun, saddharmaratnāvali
nämati behedin mōha nämati paṭalaya näti koṭa, nuvaṇäsa ańduru hära, kusal maha vataṭa
nivan purayaṭa suvayen yā yutu. SR 2, tr. Obeyesekere (1991, xii).
texts and Buddhist commentaries and translated them into many lan-
guages.5 The period between the 10th and 13th centuries, however, was
punctuated by South Indian conquests and rule by Kālinga, Chōla, and
Pāndyan kings. The influence of Hinduism where the Mānava Dharmaśāstra
had begun to hold sway must no doubt have left its impact on the society
and culture of Buddhist Sri Lanka during that period. Is this reflected in
the content and manner of the telling and retelling of these stories?
The 13th-century Saddharmaratnāvaliya was written at a time of Bud-
dhist revival that followed the periods of South Indian wars. Texts de-
stroyed during the South Indian conquests were rewritten or translated
back from the Pāli. Ironically, since Buddhism still flourished in many
parts of South India during this period, when one South Indian power at-
tacked and destroyed the Sri Lankan monasteries, as with Māgha of
Kālinga, it was monks from another South Indian state, such as the Chōla
kingdom, who were invited by Sinhala kings to reintroduce lost texts back
to Sri Lanka. Many commentarial texts were written or rewritten during
this period, probably including the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā, as well as
other such as the Jātaka-aṭṭhakathā. Text such as these, which use stories
to illustrate aspects of Buddhist doctrine, can potentially provide an inter-
esting reflection of the social worlds of the translators and the shifts that
occurred over time.
I plan to deal in this chapter with issues that center around women,
and so I have decided to confine myself to stories from the two texts—the
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā and Saddharmaratnāvaliya—that have women
as central characters.6 I shall focus on a few important themes: women in
their relationship to parents; to husbands; women as cowives; as courte-
sans; and as nuns.
I begin with the story of Kuṇḍalakēsī (Pāli Kuṇḍalakesā) whose biogra-
phy in the Therī-Apadāna has been mentioned by Walters in chapter eight
of this volume.7 The story of her, in both the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā and
5. See von Hinüber (1996, 100–53) and Norman (1983, 118–37) for a discussion of commen-
tators working within this commentarial tradition, such as Buddhaghosa. (On Buddhaghosa
specifically see von Hinüber [102–3] and Norman [1983, 120–30]).
6. These stories appear both in Burlingame’s English translation of the Dhammapada Com-
mentary (3 vols. [1921] 1995–2009) and in my translations from the Saddharmaratnāvaliya
(1991) and (2001).
7. The basic story arc of Kuṇḍalakēsī remains fairly static between the Apadāna version, and
the two versions under discussion here.
the Saddharmaratnāvaliya, introduces an extraordinarily beautiful young

woman of sixteen. After noting her age, the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā inserts
an interesting parenthetical comment with a slightly negative implication:
When women reach this age they burn and long for men.8
The Saddharmaratnāvaliya, several centuries later, introduces a somewhat

more tolerant note:
Young women of that age are intoxicated with their youth and so
are sexually attracted to men. To prevent any loose behavior her
parents shut her up in a room at the topmost floor of a seven-storied
palace with only a serving maid to attend on her. It was as if she was
imprisoned for being born beautiful.9
The 13th-century Sinhala monk’s implicit criticism of the practice per-

haps suggests that the custom of confining young women to such seclu-
sion, which may have been accepted in early medieval India and Sri
Lanka, especially among the wealthy, was no longer operative by the
13th-century in Sri Lanka. Many of the stories do however refer to this
practice of confining young women to the top floors of seven-storied
buildings. One wonders whether, over time, it had become merely a liter-
ary trope.
The content of several of these stories indicate that such confinement,
even when it existed, did not prevent young women from falling in love
and eloping. Paṭācārā, though confined like the others, fell in love with a
young man of the household and eloped with him (Obeyesekere 2001,
126). Likewise the rich merchant’s daughter saw the hunter Kukkutamitta
(Pāli Kukkuṭamitta) from her top story apartment, fell in love with him,
and secretly ran away following his cart as he left the city (Dhp-a II.217,
Obeyesekere 2001, 667).
8. Tasmi ca vaye ṭhitā nāriyo purisajjhāsaya honti purisalolā. Dhp-a II.217, tr. Burlingame
([1921]1995, 2:227).
9. Ē vayasa pirī siṭi sthrīhuda yavvana madayen mat heyin puruṣayan kerehi lolkam attōya.
Unge demavpiyōda un mityācārayen navatanu nisā eka kellaka meyaṭa pāvā dīlā sat mal
māligāvē uda mālē śrī yahan gabaḍāvaka rūpatva upannāta pāṭopayaṭa sira geyaka lūva sē lūha.
SR 595, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 117).
Similarly, Kuṇḍalakēsī, though confined to a top floor room, as with

her biography in the Apadāna, sees from her window a thief being taken
for execution, falls in love with him, and wants none other for a husband.
She takes to her bed and rejects all food. The rejection of food is a power-
ful symbolic gesture in South Asian societies even today. The response
from those around is equally predictable. They will make every effort to
prevent a person from “fasting to death.” The extension of this to the po-
litical arena as with Gandhi’s fasts and with the more recent fast of Harare
against political corruption in India indicate the continuing power of this
symbolic act. As the story goes, Kuṇḍalakēsī’s parents try to do everything
to dissuade her:
“Dear child . . . do you think we intend to keep you confined in the

house now that you have reached maturity? We will find you a hus-
band suited to you in birth and status.”
“I do not want anyone else. If I don’t get this man I shall die,” [the
daughter replied].10
When all persuasion fails, the father
secretly sent a thousand gold coins to the executioner with the mes-
sage, “Take this money and do not kill the man. Release him and
send him to us.”
The executioner agreed, sent the man to the nobleman, killed
another in his place and informed the king, “I have executed the
thief.”11
The cavalier attitude of the executioner who kills another in his place is
stated without comment, suggesting that such actions were common and
so did not even register as morally wrong. The daughter is then given in
marriage to the released thief. Thereafter she does everything in her power
to try to win his affection:
10. Putanḍa, e sē sitannē häyida? Mumba vardaṇa va siṭiyavun heyin geyi tabā gena hińdumōda?
Jāti ādin sari samāna tänakaṭa pāvā diya hakkäyi” kivūya. “Anik kavurunut nokämättēya. Mun
noladot miyamī.” SR 595, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 118).
11. Ēē soru maranṭa gena yana tänättavunṭa masū dahasak sorā yavā, “telē hära gena tulū
nomarā apaṭa evanu mänavayi” kiyā yävūya. Eyit givisa ū siṭānanṭa häralā anikaku marā piyā
“soru marā pīmhäyi” rajjuruvanṭa kivūya. SR 595, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 118).
From then on, in order to win his affection, the young woman
would adorn herself in all her jewelry, prepare his meals herself,
feed him, give him drinks, wash his hair and bathe him.12
The Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā merely says:
She resolved to win the favor of her husband; and from that time
on, adorned in all her adornments she prepared her husband’s
meals with her own hand.13
Both texts imply that cooking the meals herself is not what a woman from
a wealthy family would normally do. It is a special act of abnegation on
Kuṇḍalakēsī’s part in order to win the husband’s affection. The
Saddharmaratnāvaliya with its more detailed description adds to this a
note of excess, suggesting that the woman in her infatuation subjects her-
self to doing very menial tasks, ones not expected of a woman of noble
birth.
The husband however is not won over and is determined to kill her
and rob her of her ornaments. His cruelty and cold indifference come out
in the sparse harsh words in which he tells her of his decision to kill her.
She begs for her life in every way she knows, but fails to move him.
Kuṇḍalakēsī’s slow reversal from a state of complete and abject infatua-
tion to one of cold cunning is brilliantly described and made completely
understandable. She now takes control:
The noblewoman thought, “This fellow’s plan is truly wicked. In-

telligence after all is intended to be put to use. It is not there just to
be consumed. Therefore irrespective of what I may have thought
or done in the past let me now unflinchingly do to him what I
must.”14
12. Situ duyaniyot evak paṭan ohu sit ganṭa savbharaṇa lā särahī gena tumūma ō haṭa bat mālu
pisati. Kavati. Povati. Isa sodāvati. Nāvati. SR 595, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 118).
13. Sā tato paṭṭhāya sāmikaṃ ārādhessāmī ti sabbābharaṇapaṭimaṇḍitā sayam eva tassa
yāguādīni saṃvidahati. Dhp-a II.218, tr. Burlingame ([1921]1995, 2:228).
14. Siṭu duvaniyo sitannō, “mūgē kaṭayutak itā napuru niyāya. Nuvaṇa nam äti vannā pala hā
gena kanṭa novat prayōjana nisā vūva. Ādi kumak sitā kumak kelem namut taṭat kalamanā deya
dän tarayē karami sitāla . . .” SR p.597, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 120).
Using her sharp intelligence she tricks him, pushes him down the cliff,
and kills him. The deity residing on the rock applauds her action saying:
It is not men who always have the best stratagems. In certain situa-
tions women too know what to do.15
The Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā has a similar stanza of applause in verse

by the deity. However, the monk translator of the 13th-century
Saddharmaratnāvaliya, no doubt aware of the need to ameliorate the enor-
mity of the act of killing by one who was later to become an arahant, adds
a rationalization not found in the Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā version:
The young woman hurled the robber down from the rock with the
help of his enemy his own bad karma, and herself escaped death by
the grace of her friend, her own good karma.16
While the earlier killing by the executioner is told without moral comment
by both authors, in this latter killing, the 13th-century author feels con-
strained to shift the blame off Kuṇḍalakēsī. He therefore brings in the
kamma argument, making the man merely the victim of his own bad
kamma. The issue of moral culpability for a killing is again raised by the
monks at the assembly hall at the end of the story. There the monks said:
Kuṇḍalakēsī did not hear much of a sermon and yet she has become
an arahat. Besides she fought and overcame a robber.
The Buddha answers saying:
Do not say I preached too little or too much . . . That stanza is

blessed if by hearing it human beings attain nirvana.17
15. Häma tänadīma pirimin upades daniti näta. Samahara tänaka gänuda upades daniti”
kīyēya. SR 597, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 121).
16. Siṭuduvaniyō da sorugē akusal nämati saturat sahāya koṭa gena soru galin helāla, tamangē
kusal nämati mitrayānan sahāya koṭa gena tumū gälavi gena siṭannā hu. SR 597, tr. Obeye-
sekere (2001, 121).
17. Kundalakēsin äsu baṇakut bohō noveyi. Etakudu vūvat rahat vūya. Ek soraku hāt yuddha koṭa
uyit paradavā avu yayi . . . buduhu väḍa. . . . “mā desū baṇa madekäyi kiyat bohōvakäyi kiyat
nokiyava . . . yam katāvak asā satvayo nivan dakit nam ē ma yahapata.” SR 600, tr. Obeye-
sekere (2001, 124).
Kuṇḍalakēsī becoming an arahant is explained as the result of hearing the

Buddha’s doctrine. The moral implications of the killing are not touched
upon.
From the point where Kuṇḍalakēsī reverses her role of victim and
takes control of her life, her brilliant intellect guides her every move. She
decides not to go back home as no one will believe her husband tried to
kill her, nor understand why she had to kill him. She sheds all her jewelry,
realizing it would be dangerous to wear it or carry it, and wanders alone in
the forest until she comes to a nunnery, which she joins. There she is told
she can follow the path of meditation or decide on the study of texts.
Knowing her own propensities she chooses the study of texts and quickly
learns all there is to learn. The nuns, realizing they have no more to teach
her, and aware of her powerful yearning for yet more knowledge, send her
out into the world as a wandering ascetic nun. She soon becomes famous
throughout Dambadiva18 for her enormous erudition and her sharp debat-
ing skills. The Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā states:
No one was able to match question and answer with her; in fact
such a reputation did she acquire that whenever men heard the an-
nouncement, “Here comes the Nun of the Rose Apple” they would
run away.19
The Saddharmaratnāvaliya elaborates further:
She travelled all over the land engaging in debates with whomever
she met. She encountered no one who could defeat her in a debate.
Men living in those areas fled the moment they heard the wander-
ing female ascetic was approaching, afraid of her very name.20
Both texts over a time span of almost eight centuries have no inhibitions
about the fact that a woman of enormous intelligence and learning routed
monks and men in debate. Her being a woman was not an issue. Neither
18. This is the Sinhala term for India.

19. Tāya saddhiṃ kathetuṃ samattho nāma na hoti ito jambuparibbājikā āgacchatī ti sutvā va
manussā palāyanti. Dhp-a II.223, tr. Burlingame ([1921]1995, 2:230).
20. Eyin nikma, duṭu duṭu kenakun hā vāda keremin ävidati. Un hā vāda kaṭagena kenek samba
nuvūya. Ē ē täna minissu jambu-parivrājikāvō etī basak äsū kalama ungē namaṭama duru bā
palā yeti. SR 598, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 122).
text adds comment or qualification to this part of her story. One might
therefore infer that both in the early period and in the medieval period,
Buddhism not only provided a space for women to acquire learning, but
also the freedom to display that knowledge in public debate and argu-
ment. For a nun to travel the length and breadth of the land alone was also
not an issue. There are innumerable references in other stories in the
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā and Saddharmaratnāvaliya to the learning that
women had acquired. The brahmin mother of Māgandi in the story of
Udēnī (Pāli Udeni) is more learned than her brahmin husband. She sees
the footprint of the Buddha and immediately reads the signs. The
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā text states:
Now the brahmin’s wife was familiar with the three Vedas including
the verses relating to signs. So she repeated the verses relating to
signs, considering carefully the signs borne by the footprint before
her. Finally she said, “Brahmin, this is no footprint of one who fol-
lows the five Lusts.” So saying she pronounced the following stanzas:
“The footprint of a lustful man will be squatty
That of a wicked man, violently pressed down
Of one infatuate the footprint will be shuffling
This is the sort of footprint made by one who
has rolled back the veil of passion.”
Then said the Brahmin to her, “Wife, you are always seeing croco-
diles in the water vessel and thieves hiding in the house. Be still.”
She insists, “Brahmin, you may say what you like but this is no
footprint of one who follows the five lusts.”21
The Saddharmaratnāvaliya author keeps the argument between the hus-

band and wife as in the Pāli but introduces a misogynist diatribe into the
21. Brāhmaṇī salakkhaṇamantānaṃ tiṇṇaṃ vedānaṃ paguṇatāya lakkhaṇamante parivattetvā

padalakkhaṇaṃ upadhāretvā nayidaṃ brāhmaṇa pañcakāmaguṇasevino padaṃ ti vatvā imaṃ
gātham āha:
rattassa hi ukkhuṭikaṃ padaṃ bhave
duṭṭhassa hoti sahasānupīlitaṃ
mūḷhassa hoti avakaḍḍhitaṃ padaṃ
vivattacchadassa idaṃīdisaṃ padan ti
Atha naṃ brāhmaṇo evam āha: bhoti tvaṃ udakapātiyaṃ kumbhīle gehamajjhe ca pana core
vissamante passanasīlā tuṇī hohī ti. Brāhmaṇa yaṃ icchasi taṃ vadehi nayidaṃ pañcakāmagu-
ṇasevino padaṃ ti. Dhp-a I.201, tr. Burlingame ([1921]2009, 1:276).
translation of the verse. The impurities of the human body are often the
subject of contemplation by Buddhists during meditation. They are seen
as being subject to transience and decay and thus part of the human con-
dition. Here the monk author describes them as specifically female impu-
rities. What is more he has a woman say it. It is as if the monk has no
problem accepting the woman’s superior learning and education but it is
female sexuality that he berates. I quote the Saddharmaratnāvaliya au-
thor’s rendering of the perfectly innocuous Pāli verse from the
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā:
Since she was well learned in the three vēdasand the science of
signs, she recognized the markings on the footprint and said,
“Brahmin, what are you saying? This is not the footprint of one who
will ever pollute himself by laying his chest on that lump of flesh
called a “woman’s breast”. Nor is it the footprint of a lustful one who
will bring his face to touch a woman’s mouth, that toilet full of im-
purities such as spittle, and her body with its thirty-two kinds of
filth. What is the use of saying more? This is definitely not the foot-
print of one who seeks the pleasures of the five senses.”22
When the brahmin tries to belittle the woman’s learning, the wife firmly
puts him down, saying:
Look here, brahmin, you have been born into the brahmin caste
and yet without the smallest iota of knowledge of the sciences you
insist on saying only what you wish. Whatever you may say, I say
that this is not the footprint of one who seeks to indulge in the plea-
sures of the five senses.23
Here again is a woman who has acquired learning and is completely con-
fident of her knowledge. She refuses to be silenced by a husband she
22. Bämiṇi piyavara balā piyā tamā vedatrayehi kela pämiṇi bävin hā lakṣana mantra dannā
heyin hā piyavara salakuṇu balā, ‘Bamuṇa, tō kumak kiyayi da? Mē gänunge tana nämati mas
ganḍuvehi tamangē laya paharavā apavitra karaṇa kenekun ebū piyavarak noveyi. Detis kuṇu
koṭasakin yuktavū gähäniyagē bol kela nämati asūci pirunu muka nämäti väsikilyaṭa tamangē
muhuna yomu karaṇa kāmātura kenekunge piyavarek noveti. Bohōkoṭa deḍīmen kimda? Ekāntayen
paňca kāma sēvanaya karaṇa kenekungē piyavarek noveti. SR 231, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 54).
23. Hembala bamuṇa, tā bamuṇa kulayehi ipadat me pamaṇa śāstra mātrayak pavā dannā
nokala tā kämättekma kīya. Tō kumak kīyayi namut mē paňcakāmi guṇayan sēvanaya karaṇa
keṇekungē piyavarek nove mayi’ kī va. SR 231, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 55).
knows to be unlearned. Both texts accept the woman’s superior learning

as a given fact in the story, which suggests that during this long period, at
least in the South Asian Buddhist world, learning was not confined to
males.
It is perhaps this same tradition that continued into the 20th century
in Sri Lanka. As soon as educational opportunities opened up with the
government’s scheme of “free education” after independence from Brit-
ain, even in rural areas parents readily educated both male and female
children. By the mid-20th century women moved rapidly into all universi-
ties and professions and rose to high office in almost every sector. They
had equal pay as men doing the same job and did not have to contend with
the glass ceiling that so many women in other parts of the world had to
face.24 The only area in Sri Lanka where education did not readily pene-
trate was in the plantation sector, where Indian indentured labor brought
in by colonial powers for work on the tea estates did not have the same
opportunities or the same incentives to educate their female children. Per-
haps both their dire economic straits and some of the cultural constraints
they carried over from Hindu India further inhibited the move toward
female education.
Another feature that comes up again and again in these stories is the
question of parental responsibilities and duties toward daughters. In
both texts, it is accepted that parents had a duty to find suitable hus-
bands for their daughters when they came of marriageable age. In
doing so the happiness of the daughter was an important consideration.
In the story of Ghōṣaka (Pāli Ghosaka) and his adopted daughter
Sāmāvatī there is a reference to the responsibilities of a father, even
toward an adopted daughter (Obeyesekere 2001, 42). On a day of city
festivities, Sāmāvatī, accompanied by her five hundred women, went
across the palace court to bathe in the river. King Udēnī stood at his
window, saw her, fell in love with her, and sent word to the noble mer-
chant Ghōṣaka that he send his daughter to his harem. Ghosaka re-
fuses, saying:
“Your majesty we householders do not give our young girls for fear
people will say they are abused and maltreated.” Angered by the
24. See the works of Goonesekere (e.g., 1990), Kiribamuna (e.g., 1999) and the work done
under the auspices of the Sri Lankan Centre for Women’s Research (http://www.cenwor.lk).
treasurer’s reply the king caused the treasurer’s house to be sealed

and the treasurer and his wife to be seized and turned out of doors.25
Here is a reference to a father’s refusal to give his daughter even to a king

for fear she will be abused and maltreated. The author of the
Saddharmaratnāvaliya is more explicit:
“I will not give our daughter in bondage,” replied the merchant. “If
you ask for what reason it is that according to the customs of our
farmer caste we do not expose our female children to feel ashamed
and made the subject of peoples’ disparaging remarks. Therefore
fearing the scornful words of others I will not give my daughter,” he
said. At these words the king was enraged, ordered the nobleman’s
house sealed and sent the nobleman and his wife out of their home.26
Ghōṣaka, though a nobleman, in the Sri Lankan context, would belong to

the govikula or “farmer caste.” Unlike in India, in Buddhist Sri Lanka,
where the brahmins have no superior status, nobles came from the farmer
caste, respected as the highest in the land. Only the kings were considered
of a higher caste as they claimed to be khattiya. To give a daughter, even to
a king to be part of the harem, would be considered an indignity by wealthy
nobles of the farmer caste. Parents had a responsibility to see that their
daughters were not abused, maltreated, or placed in an inferior position.
This is the reason for the adopted father’s refusal. However, there is an
interesting turn when Sāmāvatī arrives and finds the parents expelled
from their house:
“What does this mean dear father?”
“Dear daughter, the king sent for you for his harem: and when we
refused, saying ‘We do not give our daughters in bondage,’ he
caused the house to be sealed and us to be turned out of doors.”
25. Mayaṃ gahapatika nāma kumārikānaṃ heṭhetvā viheṭhetvā kathana-bhayena na dema devā
ti. Rājā kujjhitvā gehaṃ lañchāpetvā seṭṭhiñ ca bhariyañ c’assa hatthe gahetvā bahi kārāpesi.
Dhp-a I.191, tr. Burlingame ([1921] 2009, 1:269).
26. Apagē diyaniyō pāvā nodemha. Kumak piṇisadäyi yata hot, apa govingē cāritra nam apagē
gähänu daruvanṭa nindā koṭa vehesa kiyan basaṭa lajjā ätiyamha. Esē heyin nindā basaṭa bayen
nodemhäyi. E pavat asā rajjuruvo kipī siṭānangē geya as obbavā siṭānan hā ämbeniyan pamanak
gen piṭatkara vūya. SR 222, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 45).
“Dear father, you made a great mistake. When one who is king
commands, you should not say ‘We do not give.’ You should rather
say, ‘If you will take our daughter with her retinue we will give her
to you.’”27
The father agrees to her wishes and the king then conducts Sāmāvatī
and her retinue to the palace and confers on her the status of chief
consort.
A subtle distinction is being made here. Not being a woman of the
khattiya caste, if Sāmāvatī went to the king without her retinue she
would be just another member of the harem and have no status. But if
she is accepted with her retinue of “ladies in waiting,” then her status is
that of a consort of the king. Sāmāvatī, with her usual intelligence and
practical good sense, as displayed on an earlier occasion (in the matter
of the arrangements at the alms hall), comes up now with a practical
solution to the problem facing her adopted parents. The father readily
accepts the daughter’s advice and does as instructed, just as he had done
on the earlier occasion. In the story of Uttarā, her father, the nobleman
Bahudhana:
. . . is reluctant to give his daughter to the noble merchant Sumana’s

son, because he was not a follower of the Buddha while his daugh-
ter had already attained the Path and the Fruits and was fully com-
mitted to her faith.28
Sumana, the wealthy nobleman, kept pressing him on the grounds of

their past close associations. Though the nobleman Bahudhana at first
was reluctant, anticipating future unhappiness for his daughter, when
many pleaded with him and gave many reasons, he finally gave his daugh-
ter in marriage to Sumana’s son. When Uttarā moved to a non-Buddhist
27. Mē kimdäyi vicārā. “Hembā put. Rajjuruvō topa tamange antappurayaṭa kändavā evūha. Ē
asā apa, “apigē daruvan pāvā nodemhäyi kīmha. Eheyin rajjuruvō apa geya as obbavā apat gen
piṭataṭa lavā pū yäyi,” kīha. E pavat asā Sāmavati ‘rajjuruvan kī bas nogivisse napura. Idin kiya-
tot “magē diyaniyan ovun pirivara hā samaga gannā sēk vī nam demyī” kiyā yutuyäyi kīvā. SR
223, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 46).
28. Bahudhana siṭāno da sumana siṭānange putaṇuvan sädä näti heyin hā tamangē diyaniyan
mārga gata vu acala śraddhāvehi pihiṭi heyin unṭa saraṇa denṭa mäli vu ha. SR 880, tr. Obeye-
sekere (2001, 194).
household where she had no chance to engage in any Buddhist activities

she was very unhappy and sent a message to her father thus:
On the grounds of making a marriage why have you put me in this

prison? If you intended to do this, no matter that I was your daugh-
ter, it were better if you had branded me and sold me, because in a
buyer one does not check whether he is a devotee.29
This is a powerful critique by a daughter of a father’s failure in his duties

as a parent. The passage suggests that in the medieval world in situations
where marriages were arranged, parents had a duty not just to find suit-
able husbands for their daughters but also to ensure that the daughters
were happy in the marriage. Such duties and expectations are referred to
in several stories and were very likely the norm in the early medieval world.
Until relatively recent times, in the central hill country of Sri Lanka
where neither dowry nor bride price were a custom, parents either married
their daughters to cross-cousins whom they knew well as they were close
kinsmen or used third parties to investigate the background and character
of the families into which they married their daughters. The happiness of
the daughter was a strong consideration, and if unhappy in her marriage
she had the right to return to the parental home. This is unlike the situa-
tion that developed in Hindu India over time, where arranged marriages
became a much harsher imposition on the woman and her happiness in
the marriage was seldom an issue that was given consideration.
In the story of Uttarā, the father is very upset when he gets his daugh-
ter’s message. His earlier hesitations and fears seem to have been justi-
fied. He then sent 15,000 gold coins and said:
Child, listen to me. There is a courtesan named Sirimā in this city.

She charges a thousand gold coins a day for her services. Send her the
15,000, bring her and give her to your husband to perform the duties
of a wife. During those fifteen days, you engage in Acts of Merit.30
29. Saraṇa piṭa lālā mesē vu hirageyaka lūyē häyi däyi? Melesa karaṇa kala dū kam kuma vūvat
vikiṇā hära gannavun mithyādruṣtikayäyi niyama näti heyin sanak gasā piyā vikiṇīmama ya-
hapata. SR 883, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 195).
30. Puta, hembā mē nuvara sirimā nam veśyā duvak äta. Ō tomō davas patā peheṇaya piṇisa
masu dahasak häragannīya. Tela pasalos dahasa oba yavālā ä genvāgeṇa pasalos davasaṭa siṭu
putrayanṭa ä pāvādī taman pin kala mänavayi kīha. SR 884, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 195).
Again the father’s solution to secure the happiness of his daughter is not
unlike that of Kuṇḍalakēsī’s father. Here again money is used, this time to
obtain the services of a courtesan. Courtesans, we know, were an accepted
part of South Asian society and served many people in many different
ways. The father’s suggestion and the daughter taking it up as a solution
to her immediate problem demonstrates just how accepted their role was
in the society of the time. The 13th-century text states:
Uttarā had Sirimā come and said, “Friend, take these 15,000 gold
coins, and spend fifteen days ministering as a wife to our wealthy
nobleman.”31
There is no specific mention that the nobleman is her husband but the
use of the phrase “our wealthy nobleman” carries a hint of it. Such an ar-
rangement was a monetary temporary arrangement that was perhaps not
at all unusual in the society of that time, and so had none of the overtones
of prostitution or illicit sex.
Again, in the story of the Elder Sunderasamuddha (Pāli Sundar-
asamudda) (Obeyesekere 2001, 213), the parents hire a courtesan to seduce
their son who has now become a monk. In return, they promise to make
the courtesan his bride if she succeeds in bringing him back to a lay life.
There is no moral opprobrium attached either to the parents who hire the
courtesan or to the courtesan who takes on the task. It is the monk’s near
capitulation to sexual desire that is a matter of concern in the manner in
which the story is told, as it undermines the monk’s commitment to the
Order and his chance of attaining nirvana. In this story he is saved by the
intervention of the Buddha.
It is perhaps the Buddhist stress on parental responsibility to ensure
the happiness of a daughter in marriage that made divorce a much easier
arrangement among Buddhist Sri Lankans in medieval times. It was the
practice prior to colonial contact and continued in the hill country even
after British rule was established and the Roman Dutch Law introduced to
replace the traditional laws of the land, that a woman had the right to
return to her parental home if she was unhappy in her marriage. Not only
did the parents and family accept her back, but if she chose not to return
31. Uttaravōda Sirimāvan genvāgena ‘yeheli, mē pasalos dahasak vitara masuran hära gena
pasalos davasak apage siṭu putrayāṇanṭa pādaparicārikā vāvayi. SR 884, tr. Obeyesekere
(2001, 195).
to her husband, the marriage, after a specific period, was considered ter-
minated and both parties were free to marry again. In the story of Kāṇa,
this practice is described:
She was about to return to her husband after a visit to her mother.
Not wanting her to return empty-handed her mother prepared
honey cakes. However on four successive occasions four monks
came begging for alms and each time the honey cakes that had
been prepared were given as alms to the monks. Because Kāṇa’s
departure was thus delayed, her husband took another wife.32
Kāṇa is angry at the monks whose alms rounds delayed her return to her
husband and so resulted in her broken marriage. In the story, she makes
the monastics well aware of her displeasure; she rants and raves at them.
Interestingly, however, she does not blame her husband. Thus the impli-
cation is that the husband was well within his rights to consider the mar-
riage over as she had not returned from her visit to her parental home
within the customary amount of time. Finally she too is later married
again to a nobleman of good repute who “[t]ook her to his home and gave
her charge of all his wealth” (Obeyesekere 2001, 114). The 5th-century Pāli
text gives even more weight to the practice. It is described there as a pre-
cept set down by the Buddha:
. . . in accordance with the precept laid down by the teacher in such

cases, Kāṇa’s husband had taken to himself another wife.33
What is stated as a precept laid down by the teacher in the 5th-century Pāli
translation of the Sinhala text was very likely an accepted way of life in
pre-5th-century-ce Buddhist Sri Lanka as it was in during the 13th century.
It would appear that the practice has a long history in Buddhist Sri Lanka.
Even today, the practice continues as the accepted form of divorce for
those who live in the central hill country of Sri Lanka. It has even been
incorporated as part of the divorce law for that region. If the textual origin
32. Kāṇa nam vū upāsikāva samanangē oba yanni, sisatin nogiya mänā vē däyi mäṇiyan idikala
kavum, sataravārayakin kätiva satara namakaṭa dun kalhi, kāṇāvange gaman kal yana heyin
rakṣā kala samaṇan anik ambu kenek genā kalhi . . . SR 543, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 113).
33. Satthārā tasmiṃ vatthusmiṃ sikkhāpade paññatte . . . Dhp-a II.149, tr. Burlingame (1995,
2:190).
of this practice was the earlier, now lost, Sinhala commentary, as the prac-
tice seems to find a natural home on the island of dhamma (dhammadīpa),
it may have been the case that Buddhaghosa, the Indian monk, felt it nec-
essary to explain the probably unfamiliar practice to his Indian readers as
a “[p]recept laid down by the teacher.”
Marriage, in Sri Lanka, was never considered a sacrament until recent
postcolonial influences brought about considerable transformations. Prior to
the period of colonial rule, monks played no role in marriages; it was purely
a simple secular arrangement between families that was accepted by society
without need for legislation. Thus divorce was an equally simple arrange-
ment. Registration of marriages was introduced only after colonial contact in
the 19th century.34 Prior to that, neither religion nor the state were involved
in any part of the martial process. Both marriage and divorce were secular,
flexible processes, giving women considerable rights and options. This is
quite unlike what took place in Brahmanical/Hindu India, as discussed by
Muldoon-Hules in the previous chapter, where the influential dharmaśāstras
came into operation and took their hold over the subcontinent.
While in early and medieval Sri Lanka arranged marriages were the
norm, especially among the wealthier classes, these stories in the
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā and Saddharmaratnāvaliya relate many instance
of women falling in love and taking control of their own lives. That was the
case with Kuṇḍalakēsī who obtained the man of her choice, and did every-
thing she could to try to win the robber’s affection until he tried to kill her.
She escaped and from then on let her intellect rule her life. Beautiful
Paṭācārā was also confined to an apartment in the top floor of a seven-storied
mansion in order to prevent any misconduct. In spite of this she became
intimate with a young man of her own household. When her parents were
about to give her in marriage to another, she tells the young man:
If you love me, before I go there, take me now to any place you wish.35
He agrees and they elope.

Again, Vāsuladattā in the story of King Udēnī is told to learn a mantra
from the king. To prevent any possible sexual attraction occurring between
34. Even today according to the law of the land those who reside in the central provinces also
known as the Kandyan area can, if they choose, marry under what is termed “Kandyan law”.
35. Idin mā kerehi prēmayek ät nam oba noyan tek, dänma mā kändavā gena kämati tänakaṭa
yavayi” kivuya. SR 633, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 126).
the two young people, she is asked to sit behind a curtain and told that the
king is a leper. Conversely, with the same intention in mind, Udēnī is told
that the princess is a hunchback. One day, though he recited the formula
again and again, Vāsuladattā kept repeating it incorrectly. King Udēnī
became impatient and shouted at her:
“You good for nothing hunchback have your lips and tongue
become lifeless?” . . .
At that the princess equally angry said, “You leper, what was that
you said? Do you dare label someone like me a hunchback?” and
she pulled aside the curtain. The two stared at each other and real-
ized the truth of the situation. They knew the king had deceived
them because he feared they would be attracted to each other. They
were powerfully attracted and instantly made love behind that very
curtain. From that point on the lessons ended.36
While most of the stories deal with nuclear families, the practice of having
cowives, especially for kings, was not unusual. In addition to the women
of his harem, King Udēnī had three queens: Sāmāvatī (from a farmer
caste); Vāsuladattā (the daughter of a king and so of a khattiya caste); and
Māgandi (the daughter of a brahmin). However, once accepted as queens
and consorts, there do not seem to have been any status differences be-
tween them. Each queen had her own apartments, and according to the
story the king divided his time equally between them.
Since Māgandi had on a former occasion vowed vengeance on the
Buddha for his rejection of her, and Sāmāvatī by contrast was an ardent
follower of the Buddha, a tension develops between the two wives. Unable
to exact her revenge upon the Buddha, Māgandi instead turns her anger
on Sāmāvatī and tries to alienate her from the king:
In those days the king used to visit Sāmāvatī, Vāsuladattā, and

Māgandi in turn, spending seven days in each one’s apartments.
36. Udēni rajjuruvo kipī,’ embala duṣṭa kuda, tīgē diva saha detola bol va giyada? . . . Ē asā bisavu
kipī “embla śevata kuṣṭhaya, tā kiyannē kimekda? Apa sē vūvot kudun kerehi ätulat hu däyi?”
kadaturāva osavā ovunovun balā ovunovunge svarūpa vicārā, tat vū paridden däna, rajjuruvo
apa dedenā ovunovun hā viśvāsa veti yana bhayin valahā kī vanhayi niścaya koṭa ovunovun
kerehi anurāgha ätiva javanikāva atulehi dīma ovunovun ha sahāvāsaya kalaha. Etan paṭan
mantra iganvīma näti viya. SR 227, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 49).
Magandi, figuring that the king was due to visit Sāmāvatī the next
day or the day after, asked her uncle to bring her a cobra that had
medicinal preparations rubbed on his fangs to neutralize the
poison. She kept the snake with her.37
She then slips it into the king’s musical instrument and when it surfaces
in Sāmāvatī’s apartment, Māgandi accuses Sāmāvatī of a plot to kill the
king. These cowives have much more zeal in the stories than do women
in the harems. Thus these stories indicate a clear distinction between
“consorts” of the king who had the status of queens and women of the
harem, the queens being more powerful and agentive, as are the Indian
queens discussed by Walters in chapter eight.
While cowives are mainly found among the wealthy, on occasion as in
the Saddharmaratnāvaliya story of the demoness Kāli (Obeyesekere 1991,
98) a member of a poorer farmer family could also take on a cowife, in
this case because the first wife was barren. The subtly nuanced, complex,
and pragmatic pressures that condition marriage arrangements in medi-
eval Sri Lanka are well described in the Kāli story. A widowed mother sees
her son overburdened by his responsibilities and thinks that though she
cannot relieve him of all his chores, were she to arrange a marriage for
him at least he could leave the household chores to his wife and take a
little rest himself:
So one day she said, “Son shall I arrange a marriage for you?”
“Mother I don’t want that. Let us not introduce any such complica-
tion. I will care for you as long as I live.”
“Son, don’t say that. How can I be happy when I see you work so
hard?”38
Finally he gives in to her demands but when she is about to choose a wife
for him he sends her to the home “of one of his choice.” Unfortunately the
37. E samayehi rajjuruvō sāmāvatiya, vāsuladattāya, māgandīya yana tun denāge prāsāda tunehi
murayen mura tabā gena ekī ekī murayehi sat sat davasa veseti. E kalhi māgandi tomō seṭa hō aniddā
hō rajjuruvō sāmāvatīn gē prāsādayaṭa yeti niyama däna tamāge kudāpiyāṭa kiyā yavā dalehi
avusada galvā visa nätikala nayeku genvā gena tabāgata. SR 244, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 68).
38. Ek davasak, “puta topaṭa saraṇak genävut nila karamō däyi?” vicālōya. ohu ē asā, “mäniyan
vahansa ē nokämättemi. Ese vū avulak kara no la divi pamaṇinma mama muba vahansēṭa
upasthāna keremi.” . . . “Puta, esē nokiyava. Topa geyi daḍa ganna duk duṭu kalaṭa ma sitaṭa
säpa noveyi.” SR 101, tr. Obeyesekere (2001, 98).
young woman he chose as a wife is barren. As they lived thus, childless,

the mother again tries to persuade her son to take a cowife. She argues
that one needs a child to continue one’s lineage and provide for one in old
age. She asks him if she is to arrange a cowife for him. The son again re-
fuses. The barren wife hears the discussion and thinks that while a son
may twice or thrice refuse a parent’s request, as it is wrong to disobey, it is
likely that her husband will eventually agree. Were he to marry someone
of his choice and were they to have a child, then she reflects she might
then be relegated to servant status. So she decides to select a cowife her-
self. She persuades the family of a young woman by saying:
“I’m a barren woman. If your daughter gives birth to a son she will
be mistress of the family wealth. What use is wealth to me a barren
woman?” Thus like a figure disguised, thinking one thing but
saying otherwise she obtained their consent and gave her to her
husband.39
At this point the Saddharmaratnāvaliya author has a long discourse on the

subject of deceit. As in the story of Māgandi where the author introduces
a diatribe against women, here too the Saddharmaratnāvaliya author, in-
terpolating a digression on the topic of deceit, introduces a not-untypical
misogynist monkish aside that associates deceit mainly with women:
Deceit breeds in sin just as good needs knowledge to flourish. Be-

sides, since deceit is itself vile and needs to associate with vileness,
it associates with vile women, because deceit itself resides to a great
extent in women.40
The transaction in the story between the wife and the cowife is not unlike
that of Uttarā and the courtesan discussed previously. The wife makes a
purely pragmatic decision in selecting a cowife for her husband. However,
39. Mama vańda yemi. Mubagē duvaṇiyō daru keṇekun laddū nam ū sampataṭa himiveti. Mā
vańda kulu tänätiyaṭa sampatin kam kimdäyi” ves bańda pānā ruvak men sitin ekak sitā vūvat
basin elesak kiyā givisvā gena, samuṇanṭa pāvā dīlā . . . tr. Obeyesekere (1991, 171).
40. Māyāva nam akusal viṣayaṭa kusal viṣayehi praňgnāva sē vuvamanā bävin hā nävata ē
māyāva tamā nikruṣṭa bävin nikuṣṭa bajanaya karaṇa lesata guṇen nikruṣṭa vū strīin ma ba-
janaya kalak men strīin kerehima bohō koṭa pavatnā heyin . . . SR 102, tr. Obeyesekere (1991,
99).
tensions caused by jealousy develop on the part of the wife toward the
cowife when the latter becomes pregnant, just as the courtesan became
jealous of Uttarā and tried to throw hot oil on her. In the Kāli story this
conflict between the two wives is played out over several births in saṃsāra
and finally resolved only through the intervention of the Buddha and a
long-term reconciliation based upon his advice. Even in the case of the
cowives of King Udēni, although the king divided his time equally be-
tween them, and seems to have shown no preferences, tensions caused by
extraneous factors, such as Māgandi’s sworn enmity to the Buddha and
Sāmāvatī’s total acceptance of him, result in conflicts.
Thus while it was perhaps socially acceptable in medieval South Asian
society to have cowives, the stories suggest that such relationships were
generally fraught with tension and were the exception rather than the
norm. In the many stories that center on the lives of women in the
Saddharmaratnāvaliya, very few deal with situations between cowives. It
was perhaps a practice no doubt adopted for pragmatic reasons, but not
one that was popularly followed. Similarly, while polygamy was never a
general practice in Sri Lanka in the society at large, polyandry, for very
practical, often economic, reasons, was fairly common especially among
peasant communities.
The establishment of an order of nuns was one of the most important
factors in the emancipation of women in South Asian Buddhist societies.
The early poems of the Pāli canon, the Therīgāthā, discussed earlier in this
volume, reiterate the sense of liberation that came with the chance for
women to leave the life of the household, a choice that Indian society had
up until this point likely given only to men. The women in the stories of
the Saddharmaratnāvaliya again and again make this choice. For
Kuṇḍalakēsī it led to an enormous expansion of her intellectual world. For
Utpalavarṇa, born so beautiful that when she came of age every prince in
Dambadiva came asking for her hand, it was a way out. Her father, realiz-
ing that if he to give her in marriage to one, he would have to face the
enmity of the rest, decided to ask her to join the monastic order, a choice
she readily agreed to. For Paṭācārā who lost husband, children, parents,
and siblings in disaster upon disaster, joining the order of nuns brought
her relief from her overpowering grief and finally a sense of equanimity.
However, not all the women in these Saddharmaratnāvaliya stories become
nuns. Some, like Sāmāvatī, become followers of the Buddha and learn to
exercise enormous compassion even toward those who perform acts of
enmity toward them. Others like Visākhā become ardent lay followers of
the Buddha and spend their lives engaged in acts of merit. Likewise, the
courtesan Sirimā becomes a follower of the Buddha and spends her wealth
in gifts to the saṅgha. And even while she is a benevolent and generous lay
donor, we are not told that she gives up her profession. But for almost all
of them their lives are changed dramatically and even those who do not
become nuns bring to their lives and worlds a new sense of liberation.
As noted by Collett in the introduction to this volume, the fact that the
Therīgāthā and related texts like the Apadāna and others discussed in this
volume were considered important enough to be included in the Pāli
canon and handed down from generation to generation suggests the im-
portant role played by nuns within some early Buddhist communities.
These texts also attest to the enormous respect with which they were
treated. Important women for the tradition, women like Prajāpati Gōtami
and Yasōdharā, both discussed in some detail in this volume, were never
raised to the status of deities but were always considered very human
women, who by their human efforts had achieved the same status of arah-
ant, as had their counterparts, the monks.
The status and position given to women in the texts studied in this
volume, as in the early medieval Buddhist world, was clearly subject to
many shifts and changes over the centuries. While, as this volume demon-
strates, much that is recorded within the central texts of the early tradition
is notably positive, this is not always the case, as the anti-feminist asides in
many of the stories of the 13th-century Saddharmaratnāvaliya demonstrate.
To conclude with some reflections on how textual stories can and have
impacted upon the lives of real women, let us now turn to a consideration
of the place of women in modern Buddhist Sri Lanka. In the 20th century,
the egalitarian thrust for education among Sri Lankan women came from
rural sections of society, still steeped in early traditional Buddhist norms
that encouraged education for both males and females. When, in the
1950s and ’60s the state engineered free education system and the new
language policies opened access to university education, it was women
from the less privileged classes that flooded the universities. It was they
who moved rapidly into the professions and the administrative services in
the country. By contrast, women from among the wealthier westernized
elites, coming from regions exposed to several centuries of colonial rule,
that had absorbed some of the puritan Victorian values of their British
peers, were at first hesitant to educate themselves in public universities.
Thus these women, on the whole, lived more restricted and secluded lives
than their rural counterparts.
Modern Sri Lanka seems today to be facing a complete reversal of this

earlier situation. While the women of the westernized elite classes and
English-educated wealthier sections of society now enjoy enormous free-
dom in their personal, sexual, and professional lives, the very sectors in
society that made the biggest gains in the mid-20th century seem to be
moving in the opposite direction. Women from the middle and lower
middle classes, especially in the upwardly mobile sections of society, seem
now to be clamping down on women working and on the freedoms that
come with an independent income. Divorce is no longer a simple secular
option for most of the country now under Roman Dutch law. Today, a new
Puritanism has arrived. Places of Buddhist worship that never exercised a
dress code for worshipers, now insist that women cover their arms and
wear long garments when entering important Buddhist shrines like the
Temple of the Tooth in Kandy. Several young women I know, though edu-
cated and even professionally qualified, once married were not allowed by
their husbands to work—a decision that they readily accept.
In the universities today, there are hardly any women undergraduates
who run for office in the student societies. Such societies are once again
male dominated. Women are not expected to or encouraged to contest for
such office. This was not the case in the fifties and sixties, when women
enthusiastically contested elections in the universities and in parliamen-
tary elections. Similarly, while Sri Lanka had the world’s first woman
prime minister in the 1960s, the percentage of women in parliament
today is miniscule.
Further, within Sri Lankan society at large violence against women and
abuse seems to be increasing. The high incidence of alcohol consumption
among the male population seems to be one reason for this abuse. The
large-scale migrations of females for domestic employment in the Middle
East has resulted in broken homes, incest, and other forms of violence
against young women and female children.
Have the long years of war and the militarization of Sri Lankan society,
with its huge young army, ushered in new patriarchal attitudes and norms
into the very fabric of the social and family lives of the younger genera-
tions? Many young women today marry army personnel. Is the disciplined
patriarchy of military life spilling over into the domestic arena? It is the
wives of soldiers that are the first to be told that they should not work as
their husbands can support them. There remains a large workforce of
women in the poorer segments of society, who might be employed in gar-
ment factories, go abroad for employment as domestics, or be employed
in lower levels of bureaucracy. However, the middle and lower middle

classes of society seem to favor restrictions on women’s freedom as a
matter of asserting status. Even young women who were happily employed
and earning have given up their jobs when they marry and accepted a
more restricted lifestyle, which now is becoming generally considered to
be a mark of a superior social status.
Is the absence of women in present-day Sri Lanka willing to stand for
elected office, whether in student societies or in the parliament and local
government institutions, a sign of the increasing violence and animosity
that has taken control of these institutions and society in general? Is it a
new fear of harassment, with the breakdown of the rule of law, where
those whose duty it is to protect and serve instead are involved in the pro-
liferation of arms, which has spread a culture of fear and impunity that
has slowly pushed women out of their space and deprived them of the
freedom that early Buddhist societies experienced? Or is it a return to a
certain Puritanism and patriarchy now seen as a nationalist and Buddhist
way of life, as opposed to the permissive westernized values that have
come with globalization and the media? I have merely raised these ques-
tions. It is an important area for feminist Buddhist scholars to research
because such trends have seriously undermined the liberal ethos that
early Buddhism provided for women and that was reflected in the texts
that have been discussed in this volume.
This page intentionally left blank
Bibliography
Abeynayake, Oliver. 2003. “Reappraisal of the Position of Women in Buddhism.”

Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies, Sri Lanka 1: 1–16.
Akanuma, Chizen. [1930] 1994. A Dictionary of Buddhist Proper Names. Delhi: Sri
Satguru.
Ali, Daud, 2004. Courtly Culture and Political Life in Early Medieval India. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press/Cambridge Studies in Indian History and
Society.
Allon, Mark. 2001. Three Gāndhārī Ekottarikāgama-Type Sūtras: British Library
Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 12 and 14. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
———. 2007. “Recent Discoveries of Buddhist Manuscripts from Afghanistan and
Pakistan and their Significance.” In Art, Architecture and Religion on the Silk Road
and Across Inner-Asian History, Ken Parry, ed., pp. 131–41. Silk Road Studies. Pro-
ceedings from the Fifth Conference of the Australian Society for Inner Asian
Studies (A.S.I.A.S.), Macquarie University, November 27th to 28th, 2004. Turn-
hout: Brepols.
Anālayo. 2008. “Theories on the Foundation of the Nuns’ Order—A Critical
Evaluation.” Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies, Sri Lanka 6: 105–42.
———. 2009a. “Zeng-yi A-han.” In Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, W.G. Weeraratne,
ed., 8, 3: 822–27. Sri Lanka: Department of Buddhist Affairs.
———. 2009b. “Viññāṇañcāyatana.” In Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, W.G. Weer-
aratne, ed., 8, 3: 667–68. Sri Lanka: Department of Buddhist Affairs.
———. 2009c. “The Bahudhātuka-sutta and its Parallels on Women’s Inabilities.”
Journal of Buddhist Ethics 16: 137–90.
———. 2010a. “Women’s Renunciation in Early Buddhism—The Four Assemblies
and the Foundation of the Order of Nuns.” In Dignity and Discipline, The Evolv-
ing Role of Women in Buddhism, T. Mohr and J. Tsedroen, ed., pp. 65–97. Boston:
Wisdom.
———. 2010b. “Exemplary Qualities of a Monastic—The Saṃyukta-āgama Counter-
part to the Mahāgopālaka-sutta and the Need of Balancing Inner Development
248 Bibliography
with Concern for Others.” Sri Lanka International Journal of Buddhist Studies 1:
1–22.
———. 2010c. “Fa-xian and the Chinese Āgamas.” In India on the Silk Route,
K. Sheel et al., eds., pp. 57–93. Delhi: Buddhist World Press.
———. 2010d. “Attitudes Towards Nuns—A Case Study of the Nandakovāda in the
Light of its Parallels.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 17: 332–400.
———. 2011a. “Chos sbyin gyi mdo, Bhikṣuṇī Dharmadinnā Proves Her Wisdom.”
Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 24: 3–33.
———. 2011b. A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya. Taipei: Dharma Drum
Publishing Corporation.
———. 2011c. “Mahāpajāpatī’s Going Forth in the Madhyama-āgama.” Journal of
Buddhist Ethics 18: 268–317.
———. 2012. “The Historical Value of the Pāli Discourses.” Indo-Iranian Journal
55: 223–53.
Aṅguttara Nikāya. Richard Morris, A. K. Warder, eds. [1885] 1961. The Aṅguttara
Nikāya. Part I: Ekanipāta, Dukanipāta and Tikanipāta. London: Pali Text Society.
Apadāna. Mary E. Lilley, ed. 1925–27. The Apadāna of the Khuddaka Nikāya. London:
Pali Text Society. Part I, 1925; Part II, 1927.
Bancroft, Anne. 1987. “Women in Buddhism.” In Women in the World’s Religions,
Past and Present, U. King, ed., pp. 81–104. New York: Paragon House.
Bapat, P.V. 1937. “Dhutaṅgas.” Indian Historical Quarterly 13: 44–51.
———1950. “The Arthapada-Sūtra Spoken by the Buddha, Second Book (Fasci-
cule).” Visva-Bharati Annals 3: 1–109.
Bareau, André. 1986. “L’allégorie de la mort dans le bouddhisme ancient.” Corps
Écrit 18: 39–45.
Barua, B.M. 1915. “Māra.” The Buddhist Review 7: 194–211.
Batchelor, Stephen. 2004. Living with the Devil: A Meditation on Good and Evil. New
York: Riverhead Books.
Bechert, Heinz, 1958. “Über das Apadānabuch.” In Wiener Zeitschrift für die Künde
Süd- und Ostasiens und Archiv für Indische Philosophie, E. Frauwallner, ed.,
pp. 7–9. Vienna: Verlag Brüder Hollinek 2.
Bechert, Heinz and Wille, Klaus. 1989. Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden,
Teil 6. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
Bentor, Yael. 2008. “Can Women Attain Enlightenment Through Vajrayāna Prac-
tices?” In Karmic Passages, Israeli Scholarship on India, D. Shulman and S. Weil,
eds., pp. 125–40. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Bhattacharya, Vidhushekhara 1957. The Yogācārabhūmi of Ācarya Asaṅga, The
Sanskrit Text Compared with the Tibetan Version. Calcutta: University of
Calcutta.
Bingenheimer, Marcus. 2008. “The Bhikṣuṇī Saṃyukta in the Shorter Chinese
Saṃyukta Āgama.” Buddhist Studies Review 25, 1: 5–26.
Bibliography 249
———. 2011. Studies in Āgama Literature, With Special Reference to the Shorter Chinese
Saṃyuktāgama. Taiwan: Shi Weng Feng Print Co.
Blackstone, Kathryn R. 2000. Women in the Footsteps of the Buddha: Struggle for
Liberation on the Therīgāthā. Delhi: Motilal Banarsiddass.
Bloss, L.W. 1978. “The Taming of Māra: Witnessing to the Buddha’s Virtues.” His-
tory of Religions 17: 156–76.
Bode, Mabel. 1893. “Women Leaders of the Buddhist Reformation.” Journal of the
Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 25: 517–66 and 763–98.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu. 2000. The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of
the Saṃyutta Nikāya. Boston: Wisdom Publication.
Boucher, Daniel. 2008. Bodhisattvas of the Forest and the Formation of the Mahāyāna,
A Study and Translation of the Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā-sūtra. Honolulu: University
of Hawai’i Press.
Boyd, James W. 1971. “Symbols of Evil in Buddhism.” Journal of Asian Studies 31, 1:
63–75.
———. 1975. Satan and Māra, Christian and Buddhist Symbols of Evil. Leiden: E.J.
Brill.
Bucknell, Roderick. 2008. “The Two Versions of the Other Translation of the
Saṃyuktāgama.” Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 21: 23–54.
———. 2011. “The Historical Relationship Between the Two Chinese Saṃyuktāgama
Translations.” Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 24: 35–70.
Burlingame, Eugene Watson, trans. [1921] 1995–2009. Buddhist Legends. 3 vols.
Charles R. Lanman, ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Cited after
reprints, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Caland, W., trans. 1982. Vaikhanasasmartasūtram: The Domestic Rules and Sacred
Laws of the Vaikhanasa School Belonging to the Black Yajurveda. New Delhi:
Ramanand Vidya Bhawan.
Choong, Mun-keat. 2009. “A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the
Māra Saṃyutta, A Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses on Māra, the Evil
One.” Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 10: 35–53.
Choubey, Asha. 2009. “Voices from the Yore: Therigatha Writings of the Bhikkhu-
nis.” Indian Review of World Literature in English 5, 2: 1–9.
Chung, In Young. 1999. “A Buddhist View of Women: A Comparative Study of the
Rules for Bhikṣuṇīs and Bhikṣus based on the Chinese Prātimokṣa.” Journal of
Buddhist Ethics 6: 29–105.
Chung, Jin-il. 2002. “Fragments of a Karmavācanā Collection: Karmavācanā for Or-
dination.” In Buddhist Manuscripts. Volume II (Manuscripts of the Schøyen Col-
lection), Jens Braarvig, ed., pp. 229–37. Oslo: Hermes Publishing.
———. 2006. “More Fragments of Karmavācanā Texts.” In Buddhist Manuscripts.
Volume III (Manuscripts of the Schøyen Collection), Jens Braarvig, ed., 177–87.
Oslo: Hermes Publishing.
250 Bibliography
———. 2008. A Survey of the Sanskrit Fragments Corresponding to the Chinese

Saṃyuktāgama. Tokyo: Sankibo.
———, and Takamichi Fukita. 2011. A Survey of the Sanskrit Fragments Corre-
sponding to the Chinese Madhyamāgama: Including References to Sanskrit Parallels,
Citations, Numerical Categories of Doctrinal Concepts, and Stock Phrases. Tokyo:
Sankibo Busshorin.
Church, Cornelia Dimmitt. 1975. “Temptress, Housewife, Nun: Women’s Role in
Early Buddhism.” Anima 2: 53–58.
Clark, Robert Warren. 1994. Māra: Psychopathology and Evil in the Buddhism of India
and Tibet. Ph.D. thesis, University of Virginia.
Clarke, Shayne. 2009a. “When and Where is a Monk No Longer a Monk: On Com-
munion and Communities in Indian Buddhist Monastic Law Codes.” Indo-
Iranian Journal 52, 2–3: 115–41.
———. 2009b. “Locating Humor in Indian Buddhist Monastic Law Codes: A Com-
parative Approach.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 37: 311–30.
———. 2014. Family Matters in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms. Honolulu: University
of Hawai’i Press.
Collett, Alice. 2006a. “Buddhism and Gender, Reframing and Refocusing the
Debate.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 22, 2: 55–84.
———. 2006b. “List-Based Formulae in the Avadānaśataka.” Buddhist Studies
Review 23, 2: 155–85.
———. 2009a. “Historio-Critical Hermeneutics in the Study of Women in Early
Indian Buddhism.” Numen 56: 91–117.
———. 2009b. “Somā the Learned Brahmin.” Religions of South Asia 3, 1: 93–109.
———. 2010. Review of A Bull of a Man: Images of Masculinity, Sex and the Body in
Indian Buddhism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Buddhist Studies
Review, 27, 1: 115–17.
———. 2011. “The Female Past in Early Indian Buddhism: The Shared Narrative
of the Seven Sisters in the Therī-Apadāna.” Religions of South Asia, 5, 1: 209–26.
———. Forthcoming. Pāli Biographies of Buddhist Nuns.
Collins, Steven. 2006. Nirvana and other Buddhist Felicities: Utopias of the Pali Imagi-
naire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cone, Margaret. 2001. A Dictionary of Pāli, Part I a-kh. Oxford: The Pali Text Society.
———. 2010. A Dictionary of Pāli, Part II g-n. Oxford: The Pali Text Society.
Cowell, E.B., and Neil, R.A. 1886. The Divyāvādana, A Collection of Early Buddhist
Legends, Now First Edited from the Nepalese Sanskrit Mss. in Cambridge and Paris.
Cambridge: University Press.
Cowell, Edward B., ed., and H.T. Francis et al., trans. [1895–1913] 1969. Jātaka or
Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births. 6 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. Cited after reprint London: Luzac for the Pali Text Society.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity
Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43, 6:
1241–99.
Bibliography 251
Cutler, Sally Mellick. 1994. “The Pāli Apadāna Collection.” Journal of the Pali Text
Society 20: 1–42.
———. 1997. A Critical Edition with Translations of Selected Portions of the Pāli
Apādana 2 (Yasodharāpadāna). Ph.D. diss., Oxford University.
Dantinne, Jean. 1991. Les qualités de l’ascète (dhutaguṇa): Étude sémantique et doctri-
nale, Bruxelles: Thanh-Long.
Dasgupta, Madhusraba. 2000. “Usable Women: The Tales of Ambā and Mādhavī.”
In Faces of the Feminine in Ancient, Medieval, and Modern India, Mandakranta
Bose, ed. pp. 48–55. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dash, Shobha Rani. 2008. Mahāpajāpatī, The First Bhikkhunī. Seoul: Blue Lotus
Books.
Dayal, Har. [1932] 1970. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Deeg, Max. 2005. Das Gaoseng-Faxian-Zhuan als religionsgeschichtliche Quelle, Der
älteste Bericht eines chinesischen buddhistischen Pilgermönchs über seine Reise
nach Indien mit Übersetzung des Textes. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
de Jong, J.W. 1974. “Notes on the Bhikṣuṇī-vinaya of the Mahāsāṅghikas.” In Bud-
dhist Studies in Honour of I. B. Horner, Lance Cousins, ed., pp. 63–70. Dordrecht-
Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
———. 1981. “Fa-Hsien and Buddhist Texts in Ceylon.” Journal of the Pali Text So-
ciety 9: 105–16.
de La Vallé Poussin, L. 1915. “Māra.” In Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, J. Hast-
ings, ed., 8: 406–7. Edinburgh: T.&T. Clarke.
Demoto, Mitsuyo 出本充代。1998. “Avadānaśataka no Bon Kan hikaku kenkyū.”
Avadānaśataka の梵漢比較研究. Ph.D. diss., Tokyo University.
———. 2006. “Fragments of the Avadānaśataka.” In Buddhist Manuscripts III, Jens
Braarvig, ed., pp. 207–44. Oslo: Hermes Publishing.
Devadhar, C. R., ed. [1981–84] 1993. Works of Kālidāsa. 2 vols. Delhi: Motilal Banar-
sidass.
Dewaraja, Lorna. 1999. “Buddhist Women in India and Precolonial Sri Lanka.”
In Buddhist Women Across Cultures: Realizations, Karma Lekshe Tsomo, ed.,
pp. 67–77. Albany NY: State University of New York Press.
Dhammpada-aṭṭhakathā. [1906–15] 1992, 1993, 2007. H. C. Norman, ed., The Com-
mentary on the Dhammapada, 5 vols. Oxford: The Pali Text Society.
Dhirasekara, Jotiya. 1967. “Women and the Religious Order of the Buddha.” The
Maha Bodhi 75, 5–6: 154–61.
Divyāvadāna. 1886. E. B. Cowell, R. A. Neil, eds. The Divyāvadāna, A Collection of
Early Buddhist Legends, Now First Edited from the Nepalese Sanskrit Mss. in
Cambridge and Paris. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Durt, Hubert. 1980. “Mahalla/Mahallaka et la crise de la communauté après le
Parinirvāna du Buddha.” In Indianisme et bouddhisme: Mé langes offerts à Mgr
Étienne Lamotte, pp. 79–99. Louvain-la-Neuve: Publications de l’Institut orien-
taliste de Louvain 23.
252 Bibliography
———. 2005. “Kajaṅgalā, who Could Have Been the Last Mother of the Buddha.”
Journal of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies (Kokusai
Bukkyōgaku Daigakuin Daigaku Kenkyū Kiyō 国際仏教学大学院大学研究紀要)
9: 65–90.
Dutt, Manmatha Nath. [1906–8] 1977. The Dharma Shastra or The Hindu Law Codes:
A Literal Prose Translation. Vol. 1. 2nd ed. Calcutta: Dutt. Varanasi: Chaukhamba
Amarabharati Prakashan.
Edgerton, Franklin. [1953] 1998. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary.
Enomoto, Fumio. 1994. A Comprehensive Study of the Chinese Saṃyuktāgama; Part 1:
Saṃgītinipāta. Kyoto: Kacho Junior College.
Falk, Harry, and Ingo Strauch (forthcoming). “The Bajaur and Split Collections of
Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts within the context of Buddhist Gāndhārī literature.” In
Proceedings of the Conference “Indic Buddhist Manuscripts: The State of the Field,”
Stanford, June 15–19, 2009 (in press), Paul Harrison, and Jens-Uwe Hartmann,
eds.
Falk, Nancy Auer. 1987. “Māra.” In Encyclopedia of Religion, M. Eliade ed., 9: 187–88.
New York: Macmillan.
———. 1989. “The Case of the Vanishing Nuns: The Fruits of Ambivalence in An-
cient Indian Buddhism.” In Unspoken Words, Women and Religious Lives, N.A.
Falk and R. Gross, eds., pp. 155–65. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Faure, Bernard. 2003. The Power of Denial: Buddhism, Purity and Gender. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Feer, Léon. 1883. “Comment on devient arhatī.” Journal Asiatique série J8, t. 1:
407–40.
———, trans. [1891] 1979. Avadāna-çataka, cent legendes (bouddhiques). (Annales du
Musée Guimet 18.) Paris: E. Leroux. Cited after reprint Amsterdam: APA– Ori-
ental Press.
———. 1901. “Le Karma-çataka.” Journal Asiatique série. 9, t. 17: 53–100, 257–315,
410–86.
Finot, Louis and Huber, É. 1913. “Le Prātimokṣasūtra des Sarvāstivādins, texte san-
skrit par L. Finot, avèc la version chinoise de Kumārajīva, traduite en français par
É Huber.” Journal Asiatique 2, 2: 465–558.
Fitfield, Justin A. 2008. “Faith, Miracles and Conversion in the Avadānaśataka: A
Translation and Analysis of the First Decade of Stories.” M.A. thesis, University
of Texas.
Fitzgerald, James F. 1980. “India’s Fifth Veda: The Mahābhārata’s Presentation of
Itself.” Journal of South Asian Literature 20: 125–40.
Foley, Caroline A. 1893. “The Women Leaders of the Buddhist Reformation as Il-
lustrated by Dharmapāla’s Commentary on the Therīgāthā.” In Transactions of the
Ninth International Congress of Orientalists, vol. 1 of Indian and Aryans Sections,
Ed Morgan, ed., pp. 344–61.
Bibliography 253
———. 1894. “The Vedalla Sutta, As illustrating the Psychological Basis of Buddhist
Ethics.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1–2: 321–33.
Foucher, Alfred 1949. La vie du Bouddha, D’aprés textes et les monuments de l’Inde.
Paris: Payot.
Freiberger, Oliver. 1998. “The Ideal Sacrifice. Patterns of Reinterpreting Brahmin
Sacrifice in Early Buddhism.” Bulletin d’études indiennes 16: 39–49.
Fussman, Gerard. 1993. “Taxila: The Central Asian Connection.” In Urban Form
and Meaning in South Asia: The Shaping of Cities from Prehistoric to Precolonial
Times, Howard Spodek and Doris Meth Srinivasan, eds. pp. 83–102. Hanover
and London: National Gallery of Art, Washington.
Gabain, Annemarie von. 1954. Türkische Turfan-Texte VIII. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Ganguly, Jayeeta. 1989. “Nisraya and Dhutanga in Buddhist Tradition.” Bulletin of
Tibetology, New Series 2:17–29.
Geng, Shimin et al. 1988. Das Zusammentreffen mit Maitreya, Die erstenfünf Kapitel
der Hami-Version der Maitrisimit. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
Gethin, Rupert. 1998. The Foundations of Buddhism. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Glass, Andrew. 2007. Four Gāndhārī Saṃyuktāgama Sūtras: Senior Kharoṣṭhī Frag-
ment 5. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press.
———. 2010. “Guṇabhadra, Băoyún, and the Saṃyuktāgama.” Journal of the Inter-
national Association of Buddhist Studies 31, 1–2: 185–203.
Godakumbura, C.E., ed., 1954. Visuddhajanavilāsinī nāma Apadānaṭṭhakathā.
London: Pali Text Society.
Gokhale, Balkrishna Govind. 1976. “The Image-World of the Thera-Therī-Gathās.”
In Malalasekera Commemoration Volume, O.H. de Wijesekera, ed., pp. 96–110.
Colombo: Malalasekera Commemoration Volume Editorial Committee.
Gombrich, Richard, and Gananath Obeyesekere. 1988. Buddhism Transformed: Reli-
gious Change in Sri Lanka. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gonda, Jan. 1969. “Eye and Gaze in the Veda.” Verhandelingen der koninkluke ned-
erlandse akademie van wetenschappen, AFD. letterkunde. Ser. 2, 75: 1: 3–73.
Goodall, Dominic, ed. and trans. 1996. Hindu Scriptures. Berkeley: University of
California Press/J. M. Dent.
Goonesekere, Savitri. 1990. Law and Economic Status of Women. Colombo: Institute
of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka (Governance Series).
Gross, Rita M. 1990. “The Householder and the World-Renunciant: Two Modes of
Sexual Expression in Buddhism.” In Marriage among the Religions of the World,
Religions in Dialogue 2, Arlene Anderson Swidler, ed., pp. 115–36. Lewiston, NY:
Edwin Mellon Press.
———. 1993. Buddhism After Patriarchy: A Feminist History, Analysis, and Recon-
struction of Buddhism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Guruge, Ananda W.P. [1988] 1997. The Buddha’s Encounters with Māra the Tempter:
Their Representation in Literature and Art. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society.
254 Bibliography
Haldar, J.R. 1977. Early Buddhist Mythology. New Delhi: Manohar.

Hamilton, Sue. 2000. Early Buddhism: A New Approach, The I of the Beholder.
Richmond: Curzon.
Harris, Elizabeth J. 1999. “The Female in Buddhism.” In Buddhist Women across
Cultures: Realizations, Karma Lekshe Tsomo, ed., pp. 49–65. Albany: State Uni-
versity of New York Press.
Harrison, Paul. 1997. “The Ekottarika Translations of An Shigao.” In
Bauddhavidyāsudhākaraḥ: Studies in Honour of Heinz Bechart on the Occasion of
His 65th Birthday, Petra Kieffer-Pülz and Jens-Uwe Hatmann, eds., pp. 261–84.
Indica et Tibetica 30. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
Hartmann, Jens-Uwe. 2002. “More Fragments of the Caṅgīsūtra.” In Buddhist Man-
uscripts. Volume II (Manuscripts of the Schøyen Collection,), Jens Braarvig, ed.,
pp. 1–16. Oslo: Hermes Publishing.
———. 2004. “Buddhism along the Silk Road: On the Relationship between the
Buddhist Sanskrit Texts from Northern Turkestan and Those from Afghanistan.”
In Turfan Revisited: The First Century of Research into the Arts and Cultures of the
Silk Road (MonographienzurindischenArchäologie, Kunst und Philologie, 17),
Desmond Durkin-Meisterernst et al., eds., pp. 125–28. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer
Verlag.
Harvey, Peter. 1986. “‘Signless’ Meditations in Pāli Buddhism.” Journal of the Inter-
national Association of Buddhist Studies 9, 1: 25–52.
———. [2000] 2005. An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics: Foundations, Values and
Issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hawkes, Jason, and Akira Shimada, eds. 2009. Buddhist Stupas in South Asia: Recent
Archaeological, Art-Historical and Historical Perspectives. Delhi: Oxford University
Press/SOAS Studies on South Asia.
Heirman, Ann. 2001. “The Discipline in Four Parts”: Rules for Nuns According to
the Dharmaguptakavinaya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Hinüber, Oskar von. 1982. “Upāli’s Verses in the Majjhimanikāya and the
Madhyamāgama.” In Indological and Buddhist Studies, Volume in Honour of Pro-
fessor J. W. de Jong on his 60th Birthday, L.A. Hercus, ed., pp. 243–51. Canberra:
Faculty of Asian Studies.
———. 1994. “Vinaya und Abhidhamma.” -Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, 19:
109–22.
———. 1996. A Handbook of Pāli Literature. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
———. 2008a. “The Foundation of the Bhikkhunīsaṅgha—A Contribution to the
Earliest History of Buddhism.” Annual Report of The International Research Insti-
tute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka 11: 3–29.
———. 2008b. “The Advent of the First Nuns in Early Buddhism.” Indogaku Chibet-
togaku Kenkyū (インド学チベット学研究) 12: 222–37.
Hirakawa, Akira. 1982. Monastic Discipline for the Buddhist Nuns: An English Trans-
lation of the Chinese Text of the Mahāsāṃghika-Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya. Tibetan Sanskrit
Works Series, 21. Patna: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
Bibliography 255
———. 1997. Buddhist Chinese-Sanskrit Dictionary. Tokyo: Reiyukai.

Hiraoka, Satoshi. 1998. “The Relationship between the Divyāvadāna and the
Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 26: 419–34.
———. 平岡聡. 2002. Setsuwa no kōkogaku: Indo bukkyō setsuwa ni shisō 説話
の考古学: インド仏教説話に思想 (The Archaeology of Legends: Ideology in
Indian Buddhist Legends). Tokyō: Daizō shuppan 大蔵出版.
Holt, John C., Jacob N. Kinnard, and Jonathan S. Walters, eds., 2003. Constituting
Communities: Theravāda Buddhism and the Religious Cultures of South and South-
east Asia. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Horner, I. B. [1938–52] 2001–7. The Book of the Discipline, 5 vols. Oxford and Lan-
caster: Pali Text Society.
———. [1930] 1990. Women under Primitive Buddhism, Laywomen and Almswomen.
———. 1961. “Women in Early Buddhist Literature: A Lecture to the All-Ceylon
Buddhist Women’s Association, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 18 January 1961.” Buddhist
Publication Society, Wheel Publication No. 30.
———. 1964. Milinda’s Questions. Volume 2. Sacred Books of the Buddhists 23.
London: Luzac and Company.
Huber, Édouard. 1908. Sūtrālaṃkāra: Traduit en Français sur la Version Chinoise de
Kumārajīva. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Hüsken, Ute. 1997a. Die Vorschriften für die buddhistische Nonnengemeinde im
Vinaya-Piṭaka der Theravādin. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
———. 1997b. “A Stock of Bowls Requires a Stock of Robes: Relations of the Rules
for Nuns in the Theravāda Vinaya and the Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya of the Mahāsāṅghika-
Lokottaravādin.” In Untersuchungen zur Buddhistischen Literature. Zweite Folge,
Gustav Roth zum 80, Gustav Roth, ed. pp. 201–38. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht.
———. 2000. “The Legend of the Establishment of the Buddhist Order of Nuns in
the Theravāda Vinaya-Piṭaka.” Journal of the Pali Text Society 26: 43–69.
———. 2001. “Pure or Clean?” Traditional South Asian Medicine 6: 85–96.
Huyen-vi, Thich. 1987. “Ekottarāgama.” Buddhist Studies Review 4, 1: 47–58.
Inden, Ronald B., 1981. “Hierarchies of Kings in Early Medieval India.” Contributions
to Indian Sociology 15, 1–2: 99–125.
———. 2000. “Imperial Purāṇas: Kashmir as Vaiṣṇava Center of the World.” In
Querying the Medieval: Texts and the History of Practices in South Asia, Ronald B.
Inden, Jonathan S. Walters, and Daud Ali, eds., pp. 29–98. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Inden, Ronald B., Jonathan S. Walters, and Daud Ali, 2000. Querying the Medieval:
Texts and the History of Practices in South Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jain, Kamta Prasad. 1928. “Marriage in Jaina Literature.” Indian Historical Quarterly
4: 146–52.
Jamison, Stephanie W. 1996. Sacrificed Wife/Sacrificer’s Wife: Women, Ritual and
Hospitality in Ancient India. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
256 Bibliography
———. 2006. “Women ‘Between the Empires’ and ‘Between the Lines.’” In Between
the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, Patrick Olivelle, ed., pp. 191–214.
Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Jayatilleke, K. N. 1973. Ethics in Buddhist Perspective. Kandy: Buddhist Publication
Society.
Jinananda, B., ed. 1969. Abhisamācārikā. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research In-
stitute.
Johansson, Rune E. A. 1969. The Psychology of Nirvana. London: George Allen and
Unwin.
Jootla, Susan Elbaum. 1988. Inspiration from Enlightened Nuns. Kandy: Buddhist
Publication Society.
Jyväsjärvi, Mari Johanna. 2011. Fragile Virtue: Women’s Monastic Practice in Early Me-
dieval India. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University.
Kabilsingh, Chatsumarn. 1984. A Comparative Study of the Bhikkhunī Pāṭimokkha.
Delhi: Chaukhambha Orientalia.
———. 1998. The Bhikkhunī Pāṭimokkha of the Six Schools. Delhi: Sri Satguru.
Kale, M. R., ed. and trans. 1925. The Daśakumāracharita of Daṇḍin with a Commen-
tary. 3rd ed. Bombay: Gopal Narayan.
Kane, Pandurang Vaman. [1930–62] 1997. History of Dharmaśāstra. 3rd ed. Poona:
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Kangle, R.P., ed. and trans. [1965–72] 1992–2003. Kautilīya Arthaśāstra. 3 vols.
Bombay: Bombay University. Cited after reprint Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Karashima, Seishi. 2000. “A Fragment of the Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the
Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins.” In Buddhist Manuscripts. Volume I (Manu-
scripts of the Schøyen Collection), Jens Braarvig, ed., pp. 233–41. Oslo: Hermes
Publishing.
———. 2002. “Two More Folios of the Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-
Lokottaravādins.” In Buddhist Manuscripts. Volume III (Manuscripts of the
Schøyen Collection), Jens Braarvig, ed., pp. 161–76. Oslo: Hermes Publishing.
———. 2006. “The Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins
in Early Western Gupta Script.” In Buddhist Manuscripts. Volume II (Manu-
scripts of the Schøyen Collection), Jens Braarvig, ed., pp. 215–28. Oslo: Hermes
Publishing.
Kawanami, Hiroko, 2001. “Can Women be Celibate? Sexuality and Abstinence
in Theravada Buddhism.” In Celibacy, Culture and Society: The Anthropology of
Sexual Abstinence, Elisa J. Sobo and Sandra Bell, eds., pp. 137–56. Madison,
Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.
Kenoyer, J. Mark. 2006. “New Perspectives on the Mauryan and Kushana Periods.”
In Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, Patrick Olivelle, ed.,
pp. 33–50. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Kieffer-Pülz, Petra. 2005. “Ehe- oder Lebensjahre? Die Altersangabe für ‘verheira-
tete’ Frau (gihigatā) in den Rechtstexten der Theravādin.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen
Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 155, 1: 199–238.
Bibliography 257
Kinnard, Jacob N. 2004. “Māra.” In Encyclopedia of Buddhism, R.E. Buswell, ed., 2:

512–13. New York: Macmillan.
Kiribamuna, Sirima, ed. 1999. Women and Politics in Sri Lanka: A Comparative Per-
spective. Kandy: ICES.
Kloppenborg, Ria. 1995. “Female Stereotypes in Early Buddhism: The Women of
the Therīgāthā.” In Female Stereotypes in Religious Traditions, R. Kloppenborg and
W.J. Hanegraaff, eds., pp. 151–69. Leiden: Brill.
Krey, Gisela. 2010. “On Women as Teachers in Early Buddhism: Dhammadinnā and
Khemā.” Buddhist Studies Review 27, 1: 17–40.
Kudō, Noriyuki. 2004. The Karmavibhaṅga. Transliterations and Annotations of the
Original Sanskrit Manuscripts from Nepal. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica
Buddhica 7. Tokyo: International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology,
Soka University.
Kusumā, Bhikkhunī. [1987] 2010. The Dasasil Nun. A Study of Women’s Buddhist
Religious Movement in Sri Lanka, With an Outline of its Historical Antecedents.
Nedimala, Dehiwala: Buddhist Cultural Centre.
Lamotte, Étienne. 1958. Historie du bouddhisme indien: Des origins à l’ère Śaka. Bib-
liothèque du Muséon 43. Louvian: Université de Louvain. (English translation
by Sara Webb-Boin 1988. History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Śaka
Era. Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain 36. Louvain-la-Neuve: Uni-
versité catholique de Louvain, Institut Orientaliste.)
———. [1949] 1981. Le traité de la grande vertu de sagesse de Nāgārjuna
(Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra). Vol. 2. Louvain-la-Neuve: Institut Orientaliste.
Lang, Karen Christina. 1986. “Lord Death’s Snare: Gender-related Imagery in the
Theragāthā and the Therīgāthā.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 2, 2:
63–79.
Law, Bimala Churn. 1926. “Marriage in Buddhist Literature.” Indian Historical Quar-
terly 2, 3: 561–75.
———. [1931] 2004. “The Buddhist Conception of Māra.” In Buddhistic Studies, B.C.
Law, ed., pp. 257–83. Delhi: Low Price Publications.
Lefmann, S. 1902. Lalita Vistara, Leben und Lehre des Çâkya-Buddha, Textausgabe mit
Varianten-, Metren- und Wörterverzeichnis. Halle: Verlag der Buchhandlung des
Waisenhauses.
Lenz, Timothy. 1994. “Once Upon A Present Time: An Avadānist From Gandhāra.”
Buddhist Studies Review 21, 2: 197–215.
———. 2003. A New Version of the Gāndhārī Dharmapada and a Collection of
Previous-Birth Stories: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 16 + 25. Gandhāran
Buddhist Texts 3. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
———. 2010. Gandhāran Avadānas: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 1–3 and 21
and Supplementary Fragments A–C. Gandhāran Buddhist Texts 6. Seattle: Univer-
sity of Washington Press.
Ling, Trevor O. 1962. Buddhism and the Mythology of Evil: A Study in Theravāda Bud-
dhism, London: George Allen and Unwin.
258 Bibliography
Lopez, Donald S., Jr., ed. 1995. Buddhism in Practice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-
versity Press.
Lüders, Heinrich. 1912. A List of Brahmi Inscriptions from the Earliest Times to
About a.d. 400 with the Exception of Those of Asoka. Appendix to Epigraphia
Indica 10.
———. ed. 1979. Bruchstücke der Kalpanāmaṇḍitikā des Kumāralāta. Leipzig:
Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft, 1926. Reprint in Monographien zur
Indischen Archäologie, Kunst und Philologie, vol. 1, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner
Verlag.
Mahābhārata. J.A.B. van Buitenen, trans. and ed. 1973. Mahābhārata. Vol. 1: The
Book of the Beginning. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
———. trans. and ed. 1975. Mahābhārata. Vol. 2: The Book of the Assembly Hall; Vol.
3: The Book of the Forest. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Malalasekera, G.P. [1937] 1995 (vol. 1), [1938] 1998 (vol. 2). Dictionary of Pāli Proper
Names. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Mānava Śrautasūtra belonging to the Maitrāyani Saṃhitā. 1961–63. 2 vols. Fedor
I. Knauer and Jeanette M.van Gelder, eds.; Jeanette M. van Gelder, trans. New
Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.
Manorathapūraṇī. M. Walleser, ed. [1924] 1973. Manorathapūraṇī: Buddhaghosa’s
Commentary on the Aṅguttara-Nikāya. Vol. 1: Eka-nipatā-vaṇṇanā. London: Pali
Text Society.
Marasinghe, M.M.J. 2002. “Māra.” In Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, W.G. Weeraratne,
ed., 6, 4: 628–32. Sri Lanka: Department of Buddhist Affairs.
Milindapañho. Trenckner, V., ed. 1962. The Milindapañho. Being Dialogues Between
the King Milinda and the Buddhist Sage Nāgasena. London: Luzac and Company.
Minh Chau, Thich. [1964] 1991. The Chinese Madhyama Āgama and the Pāli Majj-
hima Nikāya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Monier-Williams, M. [1899] 2002. A Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Cited after the corrected ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Muldoon-Hules, Karen. 2009. “Of Milk and Motherhood: The Kacaṅgalā Avadāna
Read in a Brahmanical Light.” Religions of South Asia 3, 1: 111–24.
———. Forthcoming. “Brides of the Buddha: How Brahmanical Marital Motifs
Served Buddhist Ends.” In Conference Proceedings of the 4th International Vedic
Workshop, Joel Brereton, ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Murcott, Susan. 1991. The First Buddhist Women: Translations and Commentaries on
the Therigatha. Berkeley: Parallax Press.
Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu, trans. 2005. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A
Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya. Translation edited and revised by Bhikkhu
Bodhi. Boston: Wisdom.
Nolot, Édith, trans. and ed. 1991. Règles de discipline des nonnes bouddhistes: Le
bhikṣuṇīvinaya de l’école Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādin. Paris: Éditions de
Boccard.
Bibliography 259
Norman, K. R. 1983. Pāli Literature. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

———. trans. 1966. The Elders’ Verses II. Therīgāthā. London: Luzac.
Obeyesekere, Ranjini. 1991. Jewels of the Doctrine: Stories from the
Saddharmaratnāvaliya. Albany: State University of New York Press.
———. 2001. Portraits of Buddhist Women: Stories from the Saddharmaratnāvaliya.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
———, trans. 2009. Yasodharā the Wife of the Bodhisattva: The Sinhala Yasodharāvata
(The Story of Yasodharā) and the Sinhala Yasodharāpadānaya (The Sacred Biogra-
phy of Yasodharā). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Ohnuma, Reiko. 2006. “Debt to the Mother: A Neglected Aspect of the Founding
of the Buddhist Nuns’ Order.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 74, 4:
861–901.
Oldenberg, Hermann. [1881] 1961. Buddha, Sein Leben, Seine Lehre, Seine Gemeinde,
München: Wilhelm Goldmann Verlag.
———. [1886] 1964. Grihya-Sūtras: Rules of Vedic Domestic Ceremonies, Part I. Sacred
Books of the East 29. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Cited after reprint Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
———. [1892] 1964. Grihya-Sūtras: Rules of Vedic Domestic Ceremonies, Part II.
Sacred Books of the East 30. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Cited after reprint Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass.
———. 1899. “Der Satan des Buddhismus.” In Aus Indien und Iran, Gesammelte
Aufsätze von Hermann Oldenberg, pp. 101–7. Berlin: Wilhelm Hertz.
Oldenberg, Hermann, and T. W. Rhys Davids, tr. [1882] 1991 Vinaya Texts. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass.
Olivelle, Patrick. 1993 /2004. The Āśrama System: The History and Hermeneutics of a
Religious Institution. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1993. New Delhi: Munshi-
ram Manoharlal 2004.
———, trans. 1999. Dharmasūtras: The Law Codes of Ancient India. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
———, ed. and trans. 2005. Manu’s Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation
of the Mānava-dharmaśāstra. With editorial assistance of Suman Olivelle. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Onians, Isabelle, trans. 2005. What Ten Young Men Did. New York: New York Uni-
versity Press and JJC Foundation.
Padma, Sree, and A. W. Barber, eds. 2008. Buddhism in the Krishna River Valley of
Andhra. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Pāli Vinaya. H. Oldenburg, ed. [1879–82] 1999–2001. Vinaya Piṭakaṃ. Volumes
I–IV. Oxford: Pali Text Society.
Paramatthadīpanītherīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā. 1997. William Pruitt, ed. Therīgāthā Com-
mentary (Paramatthadīpanī VI). Oxford: Pali Text Society.
Peri, Noël. 1918. “Les Femmes de Çākya-muni.” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême
Orient. 18, 1: 1–37.
260 Bibliography
Powers, John. 2009. A Bull of a Man: Images of Masculinity, Sex and the Body in
Indian Buddhism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Prasad, Maulichand. 1984. A Comparative Study of Abhisamācārikā. Patna: Kashi
Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute.
Prebish, Charles S. 1996a. “Śaikṣa-Dharmas Revisited: Further Considerations of
Mahāsāṃghika Origins.” History of Religions 35, 3: 258–70.
———. 1996b. Buddhist Monastic Discipline: the Sanskrit Prātimokṣa Sūtras of the
Mahāsāṁghikas and Mūlasarvāstivādins. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Pruitt, William, trans. 1999. The Commentary on the Verses of the Therīs (Therīgāthā-
aṭṭhakathā, Paramatthadīpanī VI) by Ācariya Dhammapāla. Oxford: Pali Text So-
ciety.
Przyluski, Jean. 1927. “La Place de Māra dans la Mythologie Bouddhique.” Journal
Asiatique 210: 115–23.
———. 1929. “Fables in the Vinaya-Piṭaka of the Sarvāstivādin School.” The Indian
Historical Quarterly 5, 1: 1–5.
Radich, Michael David. 2007. The Somatics of Liberation: Ideas about Embodiment in
Buddhism from Its Origins to the Fifth Century C.E. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University.
Rahula, Telwatte 1978. A Critical Study of the Mahāvastu. Delhi: Motilal Banarsi-
dass.
Rajapakse, Vijitha. 1992. “An Inquiry into Gender Considerations and Gender Con-
scious Reflectivity in Early Buddhism.” International Studies in Philosophy 24, 3:
65–91.
———. 1995. “Therīgāthā: On Feminism, Aestheticism and Religiosity in an Early
Buddhist Verse Anthology.” Buddhist Studies Review 12, 1: 7–26.
Rao, S. K. Ramachandra. 1954. “Māra, the Tempter.” Aryan Path 25, 6: 243–49.
Ray, Reginald A. 1994. Buddhist Saints in India: A Study in Buddhist Values and
Orientations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reynolds, Frank E. 1991. “Rāmāyaṇa, Rāma Jātaka and Ramakien: A Comparative
Study of Hindu and Buddhist Traditions.” In Many Rāmāyaṇas, Paula Richman,
ed., pp. 50–66. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Rockhill, William Woodville. 1884. “Le traité d’émancipation ou Pratimoksha sutra
traduit du Tibétan.” Revue de l’histoire des religions 9: 3–26, 167–201.
Roth, Gustav. ed. 1970. Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya: Including Bhikṣuṇī-prakīrṇaka and a Sum-
mary of the Bhikṣu-Prakīrṇaka of the Ārya-Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin. Patna:
K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
———. 1979. “Notes on the Introduction of the Bhikṣu-Prātimokṣa-Sūtra of the
Ārya-Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin.” In Studies in Pāli and Buddhism: A Memo-
rial Volume in Honor of Bhikkhu Jagdish Kashyap, A. K. Narain, ed., pp. 317–26.
Delhi: B. R. Pub. Corp.
———. 1972. “Particle dāni in the Vinaya Texts of the Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottaravādin
and the Inscriptions of Aśoka.” Studies in Indo-Asian Art and Culture, I,
pp. 211–18.
Bibliography 261
———. 1980. “Particular Features of the Language of the Ārya Mahāsāṅghika-

Lokottaravādins and Their Importance for Early Buddhist Tradition.” In Die
Sprache der Ältesten Buddhistischen Überlieferung, Heinz Bechert, ed., pp. 78–135.
Göttingen: Vanderhoeck and Ruprecht.
Saddharmaratnāvaliya. Kirielle Ghanavimala Thera, ed. 1970. Saddharmaratnāvaliya
of Dharmasena Thera. Colombo: Gunasena and Sons.
Sakaki, Ryozaburo. 1926. [Mahāvyutpatti]. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation.
Salomon, Richard. 1998. Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in
Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Other Indo-Aryan Languages. New York: Oxford University
Press.
———. 1999. Ancient Scrolls from Gandhāra: The British Library Kharoṣṭhī Frag-
ments. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Saṃyutta-nikāya. M. Léon Feer, ed. [1881–98] 2000–8. Saṃyutta-Nikāya. 5 vols.
Oxford: Pali Text Society.
Sander, Lore, and Waldschmidt, Ernst. 1985. Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfan-
funden, Teil 5. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
Sangave, Vilas Adinath. 1959. Jaina Community: A Social Survey. Bombay: Popular
Book Depot.
Sarao, K. T. S. 1989. The Origin and Nature of Ancient Indian Buddhism. Delhi:
Eastern Book Linkers.
Schiefner, F. Anton von. [1882] 1926. Tibetan Tales Derived from Indian Sources.
Translated from the German by W. R. S. Ralston. London: George Routledge
and Sons.
Schmidt, Hans-Peter. 1987. Some Women’s Rites and Rights in the Veda. Post-graduate
and Research Department Series 29. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute.
Schmidt, Michael. 1993. “Bhikṣuṇī-Karmavācanā, Die Handschrift Sansk.
c.25(R) der Bodleian Library Oxford.” In Studien zur Indologie und Buddhis-
muskunde, Festgabe des Seminars für Indologie und Buddhismuskunde für Pro-
fessor Dr. Heinz Bechert zum 60.Geburtstag am 26. Juni 1992, Michael Hahn, ed.
pp. 239–88. Bonn: Indicaet Tibetica.
Schmithausen, Lambert. 1987. “Beiträge zur Schulzugehörigkeit und Textge-
schichte kanonischer und postkanonischer Materialien.” In Zur Schulzuge-
hörigkeit von Werken der Hīnayāna-Literatur, 2. Teil. (Abhandlungen der Akad-
emie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3.
Folge, Nr. 154), Heinz Bechert, ed., pp. 304–406. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht.
Schober, Juliane, ed. 1997. Sacred Biography in the Buddhist Traditions of South and
Southeast Asia. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Schopen, Gregory. 1985. “Two Problems in the History of Indian Buddhism: The
Layman/Monk Distinction and the Doctrines of Transfer of Merit.” Studien zur
Indologie und Iranistik 10: 9–47.
262 Bibliography
———. 1997. Bones, Stones and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on the Archaeol-
ogy, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India. Honolulu: University of
Hawai’i Press.
———. 2000. “Hierarchy and Housing in a Buddhist Monastic Code: A Translation
of the Sanskrit Text of the Śāyanāsanavastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya—Part
One [from the Sanskrit].” Buddhist Literature 2: 92–196.
———. 2004. Buddhist Monks and Business Matters: Still More Papers on Monastic
Buddhism in India. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
———. 2007. “The Learned Monk as a Comic Figure: On Reading a Buddhist
Vinaya as Indian Literature.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 35, 3: 201–26.
———. 2008. “On Emptying Chamber Pots Without Looking and the Urban Lo-
cation of Buddhist Nunneries in Early India Again.” Journal Asiatique 296,
2: 229–56.
———. 2009. “The Urban Buddhist Nun and a Protective Rite for Children in Early
North India.” In Pāsādikadānaṁ Festschrift für Bhikkhu Pāsādika (Indica et Ti-
betica 52), M. Straube et al., eds. pp. 359–80. Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
———. 2010. “On Incompetent Monks and Able Urban Nuns in a Buddhist Mo-
nastic Code.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 38, 2: 107–31.
Senart, Émile. 1882a (vol. 1). Le Mahāvastu, Texte Sanscrit publié pour la première fois
et accompagné d’introductions et d’un commentaire. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.
———. 1882b. Essai sur la légende du Buddha, Son caractère et ses origins. Paris: Ernest
Leroux.
———. 1897. Le Mahāvastu, Texte sanscrit publié pour la première fois et accompagné
d’introductions et d’un commentaire. Vol. 3. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.
Seo Sung-Won. 1987. Étude sur Māra dans le contexte des quatre Āgama. Ph.D. diss.,
Paris: Sorbonne.
Sharma, Sharmistha. 1985. Buddhist Avadanas: A Socio-political, Economic and Cul-
tural Study. Delhi: Eastern Book Linkers.
Shih, Bhikkhunī Juo-hsueh. 2000. Controversies over Buddhist Nuns. Oxford: Pali
Text Society.
Silk, Jonathan. 2003. “Dressed for Success. The Monk Kāśyapa and Strategies of
Legitimation in Earlier Mahāyāna Buddhist Scriptures.” Journal Asiatique 291:
173–219.
———. 2009. Riven by Lust: Incest and Schism in Indian Budddhist Legend and Histo-
riography. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Singh, Sanghasen, and Kenryo Minowa. 1988. “A Critical Edition and Translation
of Abhisamācārikā Nāma Bhikṣu-prakīrṇakaḥ, Chapter 1.” Buddhist Studies 12:
81–146.
Skilling, Peter. 1994. Mahāsūtras: Great Discourses of the Buddha. Vol. 1. Oxford: Pali
Text Society.
———. 2000. “Nonnen, Laienanhängerinnen, Spenderinnen, Göttinnen: Weib-
liche Rollen im Frühen Indischen Buddhismus.” In Aspekte des Weiblichen in
Bibliography 263
der indischen Kultur, U. Roesler, ed., pp. 47–102. Swisstal-Odendorf: Indica et

Tibetica.
———. 2001. “Eṣā agrā: Images of Nuns in (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādin Literature.” Journal
of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 24, 2: 135–56.
Soothill, William Edward and Hodous, Lewis. [1937] 2000. A Dictionary of Chinese
Buddhist Terms, With Sanskrit and English Equivalents and a Sanskrit-Pali Index.
Southwold, Martin. 1985. “Buddhism and Evil.” In The Anthropology of Evil,
D. Parkin, ed., pp. 128–41. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Speyer, J. S., ed. 1902–9/ 1970. Avadānaçataka: A Century of Edifying Tales Belong-
ing to the Hīnayāna. 1902–9 Bibliotheca Buddhica 3. St. Petersburg: Imperial
Academy of Sciences. 1970 Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag.
Sponberg, Alan. 1992. “Attitudes toward Women and the Feminine in Early Bud-
dhism.” In Buddhism, Sexuality and Gender, J. Cabezon, ed., pp. 3–36. Delhi: Sri
Satguru.
ŚSG (Śrāvakabhūmi Study Group). 2007. Śrāvakabhūmi, The Second Chapter, With
asamāhitā bhūmiḥ, śrutamayī bhūmiḥ, cintāmayī bhūmiḥ, Revised Sanskrit Text
and Japanese Translation, Śrāvakabhūmi Study Group, eds. Tokyo: Sankibo.
Stenzler, Adolf F., ed. 1970. Yājñavalkya’s Gesetzbuch: Sanskrit und Deutsch. Os-
nabrück: Biblio Verlag.
Sternbach, Ludwik. 1951. “Forms of Marriage in Ancient India and Their Develop-
ment.” Bharatiya vidya 12: 62–138.
———. 1965–67. Juridical Studies in Ancient Indian Law, Parts I and II. Delhi: Mo-
tilal Banarsidass.
Strauch, Ingo. 2007/8. The Bajaur Collection: A New Collection of Kharoṣṭhī Manu-
scripts. A Preliminary Catalogue and Survey. Online version 1.1 (http://www.
geschkult.fu-berlin.de/e/indologie/bajaur/publication/strauch_2008_1_1.pdf ).
———. 2008. “The Bajaur Collection of Karoṣṭhī manuscripts: A Preliminary
Survey.” Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 25: 103–36.
Strong, John S. 1997. “A Family Quest: the Buddha, Yaśodharā and Rāhula in the
Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya.” In Sacred Biography in the Buddhist Traditions of South
and Southeast Asia, ed. Juliane Schober, pp. 113–28. Honolulu: University of
Hawai’i Press.
———. 2003. “Toward a Theory of Buddhist Queenship: The Legend of
Asandhimittā.” In Constituting Communities: Theravāda Buddhism and the Re-
ligious Cultures of South and Southeast Asia, John C. Holt, Jacob N. Kinnard,
and Jonathan S. Walters, eds., 41–56. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
———. 2010. “The Triple Ladder at Saṃkāśya, Traditions about the Buddha’s De-
scent from the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven.” In From Turfan to Ajanta: Festschrift for
Dieter Schlingloff on the Occasion of his Eighteeth Birthday, E. Franco and M. Zin,
eds., pp. 967–78. Rupandehi:Lumbini International Research Institute.
264 Bibliography
Sukthankar, Vishnu S., and S. K. Belvalkar, et al., eds. 1927–71. Mahābhārata: For
the First Time Critically Edited. 19 vols. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute.
Sur, Atul Krishna. 1973. Sex and Marriage in India: An Ethnohistorical Study. Bombay:
Allied Publishers.
Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō. Takakusu Junjirō and Watanabe Kaikyoku eds., 100 vols.
1924–35. Tokyo: Taishō issaikyō kankōkai.
Tatia, Nathmal. 1976. Prātimokṣa-sūtram of the Lokottaravādamahāsāṅghika School.
Patna: K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
Tekin, Sinasi. 1980. Maitrisimit nom bitig. Die uigurische Übersetzung eines Werkes der
buddhistischen Vaibhāṣika-Schule. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Thera-Therīgāthā. H. Oldenburg and R. Pischel, eds. [1883] 1999. The Thera- and
Therīgāthā: Stanzas ascribed to Elders of the Buddhist Order of Recluses. Oxford:
The Pali Text Society.
Thomas, E.J. [1933] 2004. The History of Buddhist Thought. Delhi: Munshiram Mano-
harlal.
Trautmann, Thomas R. 1981. Dravidian Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Tripāṭhī, Chandrabhal. 1995. Ekottarāgama-Fragmente der Gilgit-Handschrift. Rein-
bek: Verlag für Orientalistische Fachpublikationen.
Tsomo, Karma Lekshe. 1996. Sisters in Solitude: Two Traditions of Buddhist Mo-
nastic Ethics for Women. A Comparative Analysis of the Chinese Dharmagupta
and the Tibetan Mūlasarvāstivāda Bhikṣuṇī Prātimokṣa Sūtras. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Tsukamoto, Zenryu 1985: A History of Early Chinese Buddhism,From its Introduction
to the Death of Hui-yüan, L. Hurwitz (trsl.), Tokyo: Kodansha International.
Upreti, Kalpna. 1991. “Position of Women as Reflected in Avadāna śataka and Its
Ideological Ramifications.” Buddhist Studies: The Journal of the Department of
Buddhist Studies 15: 149–54.
Vajirajñāṇa Sthavira, Paravāhära and Labugama Laṅkānanda Sthavira, eds., 1961–
83. Suttapiṭaka Khuddakanikāya Apadānapāli. Volumes I, II, IIa. Colombo: Gov-
ernment of Ceylon/Sri Lanka (Buddha Jayanthi Tripiṭaka Series, v. 30 [1961], 31
[1977], and 37, 2 [1983], respectively).
Verardi, Giovanni. 1994. Homa and Other Fire Rituals in Gandhāra. Supplemento
n. 79 agli Annali, Vol. 54, Fasc. 2. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale.
Verclas, Katrin. 1978. Die Āvaśyaka-Erzählungen über die Upasargas des Mahāvīra
im Vergleich mit den Versuchungen des Bodhisattva in der buddhistischen Literatur.
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hamburg.
Vetter, Tilmann. 2000. The ‘Khandha Passages’ in the Vinayapiṭaka and the Four Main
Nikāyas. Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Waldschmidt, Ernst. 1926. Bruchstücke des bhikṣuṇī-prātimokṣa der Sarvāstivādins,
Mit einer Darstellung der Überlieferung des bhikṣuṇī-prātimokṣa in den verschiedenen
Schulen. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus.
Bibliography 265
———. et al. 1971. Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden, Teil 3. Wiesbaden:

Franz Steiner.
———. 1979. “The Varṇaśatam, An Eulogy of One Hundred Epitheta of Lord
Buddha Spoken by the Gṛhapati Upāli.” Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissen-
schaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse, Jahrgang 1979 Nr. 1: 3–19.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
———. 1980. “Central Asian Fragments and their Relationship to the Chinese
Āgamas.” In Die Sprache der ältesten buddhistischen Überlieferung, Heinz Bechert
ed. pp. 136–81. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
Walshe, Maurice. 1987. Thus Have I Heard: the Long Discourses of the Buddha, Dīgha
Nikāya. London: Wisdom Publications.
Walters, Jonathan S. 1990. “The Buddha’s Bad Karma: A Problem in the History of
Theravāda Buddhism.” Numen 37, 1: 70–95.
———. 1994. “A Voice from the Silence: The Buddha’s Mother’s Story.” History of
Religions 33, 4: 358–79.
———. 1995. “Gotamī’s Story: Introduction and Translation.” In Buddhism in Prac-
tice, Donald S. Lopez, Jr., ed., pp. 113–38. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press Lopez.
———. 1997. “Stupa, Story and Empire: Constructions of the Buddha Biography
in Early post-Aśokan India.” In Sacred Biography in the Buddhist Traditions of
South and Southeast Asia, Juliane Schober, ed., pp. 160–92. Honolulu: Univer-
sity of Hawai’i Press. Slightly revised version reprinted in Buddhist Stupas in
South Asia: Recent Archaeological, Art-Historical and Historical Perspectives, Jason
Hawkes and Akira Shimada, eds., 235–63. Delhi: Oxford University Press/SOAS
Studies on South Asia.
———. 2000. “Buddhist History: The Sri Lankan Pāli Vaṃsas and their Commen-
tary.” In Querying the Medieval: Texts and the History of Practices in South Asia,
Ronald B. Inden, Jonathan S. Walters, and Daud Ali, eds., pp. 99–164. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
———. 2003. “Communal Karma and Karmic Community in Theravāda Buddhist
History.” In Constituting Communities: Theravāda Buddhism and the Religious Cul-
tures of South and Southeast Asia, John C. Holt, Jacob N. Kinnard, and Jonathan S.
Walters, eds., pp. 9–39. Albany: State University of New York Press.
———. 2008. “Dhānyakaṭaka Revisited: Buddhist Politics in Post-Buddhist Andhra
Pradesh.” In Buddhism in the Krishna River Valley of Andhra, Sree Padma and
A. W. Barber, eds., pp. 169–207. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Warder, A. K. “Introduction”. In The Path of Discrimination tr. by Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli,
xxxxviii–lv. Oxford: Pali Text Society, 1982.
Wayman, Alex. 1959. “Studies in Yama and Māra.” Indo-Iranian Journal 3, 1: 44–73
and 3, 2: 112–31.
Werner, Karel. 2008. “Death, Rebirth and Personal Identity in Buddhism.” Interna-
tional Journal of Buddhist Thought and Culture 10: 19–39.
266 Bibliography
Wijesekera, O. H. De A. 1994. Buddhist and Vedic Studies: A Miscellany. Delhi: Mo-

tilal Banarsidass.
Wijayaratna, Mohan. 2001. Buddhist Nuns: The Birth and Development of a Women’s
Monastic Order. Colombo: Wisdom.
Wikramagamage, Chandra. 1997. “Mara as Evil in Buddhism.” In Evil and the Re-
sponse of World Religion, W. Cenkner, ed., pp. 109–15. St. Paul, MN: Paragon
House.
Wille, Klaus. 2008. Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden, Teil 10. Stuttgart:
Franz Steiner.
Williams, Liz. 2000. “A Whisper in the Silence: Nuns before Mahāpajāpatī?” Bud-
dhist Studies Review 17, 2: 167–73.
Wilson, Liz. 1996. Charming Cadavers, Horrific Figurations of the Feminine in Indian
Buddhist Hagiographic Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Windisch, Ernst. 1895. Māra und Buddha. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.
Winternitz, M. [1907–12] 1987. Geschichte der indischen Literatur, Bd. 2. Die buddhist-
ische Literatur und die heiligen Texte der Jainas. Cited after the English translation
by Jha Bhaskara. History of Indian Literature, Vol. II, Part I: Buddhist Literature.
Delhi: Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan.
Witanachchi, C. 2009. “Women in Buddhism.” In Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, W. G.
Weeraratne, ed., 8, 3: 748–58. Sri Lanka: Department of Buddhist Affairs.
Xianlin, Ji. 1998. Fragments of the Tocharian A Maitreyasamiti-Nāṭaka of the Xinjian
Museum, China. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yoshiko Kamitsuka. 1996. “The Concept of Māra and the Idea of Expelling Demons.”
In A. L. Miller et al., trans. Taoist Resources 6, 2: 30–50.
Young, Serinity. 2004. Courtesans and Tantric Consorts: Sexualities in Buddhist Narra-
tive, Iconography, and Ritual. New York: Routledge.
Index
age, 36, 48, 57, 198–200, 217, 225, 242 assemblies, 39, 98–9
old, 151, 156–7, 185, 241 attachments, 71, 109–10, 114
aggregates, 64, 117, 121, 126–7 avadāna, 2, 9–10, 47–8, 50–8, 193
Allon, 12, 54–6, 61 Avadānaśataka, vi, 14, 47, 99, 101, 145,
alms, 70, 107, 113, 120, 161, 168, 177, 193–209, 213, 215, 217, 219–20
180–2, 189, 216, 237 avadānists, 50–1
almsfood, 30–1 awakening, 1, 29, 103, 105, 117–18,
Anālayo, 8, 12, 18–19, 22–3, 26, 28–9, 122, 133–4, 138–9, 156, 184, 187,
37, 43, 62, 82, 98, 101–2, 112–13, 189–91
120, 138 axle pin, 91–2
Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park, 68, 70, 119–20
Ancient Buddhist Scrolls, 49, 59 Bajaur Collection, 9, 18, 19, 21, 23, 27,
Andhavana, 120, 122 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 43, 45,
Aṅguttara-nikāya, v, xi, 25, 28, 62–3, 98, 46
100, 101–3, 105, 107, 109, 111, 113, Batchelor, 117–18
115, 156 beauty, 144–8, 151–2, 154–5, 157, 194
apadāna, v, xi, 6–7, 13–15, 140–2, beauty story, 146–7, 158
145–56, 158, 161–7, 169–75, 177, bedding, 83–4, 91
179–91, 199, 204, 226 beds, 70, 82–3, 110, 226
apparition, 148, 151, 155–7 begging, 102, 107–8, 113, 122, 237
arahant, 99, 118–19, 133, 137–8, 148–50, believers, 71–2
162–3, 166, 169, 171, 182, 187–90, Benares, 168–9, 177
228–9 Bhaddā-Kāpilāni, 13, 164, 174, 177–9,
becoming-, 163, 165, 170–1 181–2, 191
arahantship, v, x, 133, 138, 161–4, 166–9, Bhaddā-Kāpilāni’s apadāna, 177,
175, 177, 183, 187, 189–91 180–1
ascetic practices, 93, 102, 108, 110 bhikkhu, 98, 100, 104, 106, 108, 111,
Aśoka, 54–5, 57–9 118, 136–7
268 Index
bhikkhunī, v, 12, 37, 98–100, 101–17, Buddha’s lifetime, 41, 43–4

119–22, 131, 133–5, 137 Buddha’s parinirvāṇa, 43–4
Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta, 116, 119–22 Buddhism, iv, vii–viii, 1, 8, 64, 75, 197,
Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya, v, 4, 11, 67, 81–7, 89, 203, 205, 224, 230
91, 93, 95 Buddhist asceticism, v, 85–6
Bingenheimer, 12, 116–17, 119, 127 Buddhist ascetics, 11, 85–6
biographical accounts, 144, 153, 156, 158 Buddhist commentarial texts, 222
biographies, 13–14, 140–2, 144–5, 148–50, Buddhist community, 3, 36, 44, 62, 96,
153, 158, 167, 182, 188, 195, 224, 226 98, 119, 161, 200
present-life, 162 early, 100, 190
birth, 28, 53, 104, 129–30, 141, 144–5, Buddhist context, 193
148, 153, 168–9, 185, 188, 198, Buddhist female renunciation, 14, 194,
200, 214, 241–2 220
blood, 91–3, 151, 157 Buddhist history, 13, 189–90
Bodhisatta, 145, 167, 186, 188 Buddhist household, 197
body, 74, 93, 112, 117, 128, 132, 141–4, Buddhist manuscripts, ix
149, 152, 156–8, 178, 185, 231 Buddhist marriage rite, 210
bowl, 70, 120, 153, 180, 182 Buddhist monks, 14, 85, 96, 203,
Brahmanical marriage, vi, 202, 204–5 213–14, 216–17
Brahmanical marriage and Buddhist Buddhist monks and Brahmanical
renunciation, 195 marriage, 212
Brahmanical marriage rites, 14, 193, Buddhist nuns, vii, 11, 85–6, 93, 95, 101
209–10, 217 Buddhist Order, 21, 220
brahmin, 96, 177, 179, 196, 207, 214, Buddhist queens, 171–2, 174, 179, 188
217, 219, 230–1, 233, 239 Buddhist saṅgha, 20, 203
bridegroom, 14, 193, 195, 209 Buddhist Sri Lanka, 224, 233, 237
brides, 207–9, 212, 216, 218, 220, 236 Buddhist traditions, 8–9, 19, 45, 56, 199
British Library Kharoṣṭhī fragments, v, Buddhist women, viii, 223
viii, 47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 61
Buddha, 3, 19–21, 26–31, 37–44, 53–6, cakkavattin, 172, 176
101–3, 117–20, 136–9, 147–52, Cālā, 129–30, 134
155–8, 164–9, 182–90, 242–3 castes, farmer, 233, 239
Buddha Padumuttara, 155 Chinese translation, 99, 109, 116
time of, 149 classes, 66, 208, 219–20
Buddha-to-be, 150, 154, 156 Collett, Alice, ii, iv–v, vii, 1, 62, 98, 140,
Buddha Vipassī, 148, 153, 155 169
Buddhaghosa, 14, 66, 222, 224, 238 colophon, 161, 167, 183
Buddhaghosa’s commentary, 55, 66 commentary, 14, 24, 34, 47, 54, 66, 69,
Buddhahood, 23, 167, 184, 186, 188 82, 100, 102, 140, 154, 198–9, 215
Buddhāpadāna, 166, 182–4 communities, 4, 9, 13, 15, 37, 43–4,
Buddha’s declaration, 99 55, 61, 75, 82, 84–5, 89, 93, 95,
Buddha’s disciples, 54, 119 119–20
Index 269
concentration, 84, 106, 108, 110–13 divorce, 15, 223, 236–8, 244
consent, 74–5, 241 donations, 69, 96, 198, 214, 216
consenting, 65, 75 donors, ii, 60–1, 107, 168–70, 243
contact, bodily, 74, 79 dukkha, 121, 123–4, 126–7, 129–31
courtesans, 224, 235–6, 241–2 duties, 179, 200, 232, 235, 245
cowife, 142, 240–2 grave, 4, 81, 84
cowives, 188, 224, 239–40, 242
craving, 71, 124–7, 130–2 earth, 111–12, 127, 184, 190
Ekottarika-āgama, v, xi, 7, 12, 98, 100,
Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta, 9, 18, 22, 101–3, 105, 107, 110–11, 113, 115
25, 28 Ekottarika-āgama listing, 99
daughter, 13, 39, 62, 135–7, 144, 150, 156, eminence, 100, 101, 103–4
169, 174, 186, 197–8, 200–2, 226, eminent bhikkhunī, 99–100, 102
232–6, 239 era of Buddha Vipassī, 148, 153, 155
adopted, 232 Evil, 120–6, 128–32
daughter’s son, 201 evil Māra, 121–7, 129–32
death, 3, 117, 129, 141, 153, 155, 157, 167,
169, 185, 214, 216 families, 39, 70, 108, 141, 148–51, 155–7,
defilements, 72, 117–18, 166, 173, 181 163, 168, 177, 198, 200, 202–4,
delight, 64, 107, 109, 121, 128, 130–2, 217, 235–6, 238
134, 144 father, 53–4, 60, 83, 88, 169, 174, 179,
dhamma, 30, 70–2, 74, 139, 169, 187, 196–8, 200–2, 204–5, 209, 212,
213–14, 238 217, 226, 232–5
Dhammadinnā, 75, 104–5, 169, 204 fault, 82–3, 86–8, 90–1, 94–5, 155, 222
Dhammapada-aṭṭhakathā, 8, 14, 145, fear, 118, 121, 125, 134, 196, 198, 201,
157–8, 197, 222, 224–5, 227–8, 217, 233, 235, 245
230–1, 238 female authorship, 6–7, 16, 164
Dhammapāla, 154–8 female children, 232–3, 244
Dhammapāla’s commentary, 145, 152, female sexuality, 6, 10, 15, 63–5, 69, 78,
154–7 86, 95, 231
dharma, ii, 31, 53, 56–8, 87, 104–6, 199, five sense pleasures, 121, 128, 134
206 flowers, 186, 188
dharmasūtras, 210 followers, 1, 98, 165, 234, 242–3
Dīpāṅkara Buddha, 186, 189 food, 78, 82–4, 88–9, 102, 108–9, 168,
disciples, 54, 73, 99–100, 103–4, 106–7, 170, 179–80, 226
109–10, 117, 120, 148, 150, 176, first-time offerings of, 82, 84
186, 199 footprint, 230–1
disciples of Buddhas, 183, 188 forest, viii, 134–5, 195, 229
discourses, 14–15, 22, 99, 106, 110, 111,
116, 119–20, 122, 134, 136, 151 Gandhāra, 3, 48–9, 59, 61
divine, 161, 170, 172, 174, 191 Gandhāran avadāna, 48, 52, 54, 56
divine eye, 102–3, 105, 114, 149, 153–4 Gandhāran avadāna texts, 10, 50–1
270 Index
Gandhāran Buddhism, 15, 47, 50, 52 ignorance, 121, 123–7, 129–33

Gandhāran Buddhist texts, viii, 46, 51 illness, 70, 214
gaṇiga-avadānas, 51–2, 56 impurities, 111–12, 114, 142, 149, 152,
Gartodara’s father, 87 231
Gartodara’s mother, 87–8 inscriptions, ii, 59–61, 163
Gautamī, 25, 82, 84 intelligence, 58, 227, 229, 234
gems, 171, 176–8, 182 intentions, 68, 122–6, 128–32, 180, 239
gifts, 3, 19–23, 27, 33–40, 43–4, 72, 110, intercourse, sexual, 63, 69–73
150, 154, 197, 206–9, 212–14, 216,
243 Janapadakalyāṇī, 144, 146–7, 155–8
highest, 72–3, 79
individual, 21, 33–6 kamma, v, 170, 172, 174–5, 178, 182,
list of, 21, 43 186–7
pious, 60–1 kammic trajectory, 161, 164–5, 181, 183,
recipients of, 3, 214 190–1
girls, 76, 193–202, 205–6, 208, Kāśisundarī, 193, 195, 197, 205
212, 217 Khemā, 100, 101, 145, 148, 150
gods, 150, 164, 170, 172–3, 176, 183, 191, Khemaka, daughter of, 144, 148, 154–5,
200, 216 158
gold coins, 226, 235–6 killing, 29, 228–9
Gopī, 104–5 kings, ii, 57, 62, 101, 153, 168, 170,
Gotama Buddha, 1, 13, 62, 140, 150, 155, 172–3, 177–8, 184, 190, 199, 215,
171, 176 233–4, 238–40
grasping, 71, 208 wheel-turning, 102, 174
Great Sage, 150, 185–6, 189 Kisāgotamī, 102, 123, 134–5, 141, 150
gṛhyasūtras, 195, 202, 206–8, 211–12, 214 knowledge, 8, 57, 103–5, 122–3, 138, 149,
grief, viii, 141, 168, 174 165–6, 190, 197, 222, 229–31,
gurudharma, 4, 81–2, 84–5, 88, 90 241
analytical, 104, 114, 165–6, 176
Haḍḍa, 10, 48, 50, 56, 61 Kuṇḍalakēsī, 224, 226–9, 238, 242
harem, 56, 58–9, 144, 146, 187–9,
232–4, 239–40 Lamotte, 23, 102
heavens, 102, 130, 171–2, 190, 216 laywoman, 37, 69, 72
home, 93–5, 168–9, 180, 204, 218, 229, laywomen, 2, 56, 73, 79, 91, 164
233, 237, 240 learning, 55, 194, 222, 229–30, 232
parental, 235–7 legends, 52, 54–6, 58–9
householder, 55, 68, 89–90, 218–19, 232 Lenz, Timothy, 8, 10, 50
human kings, 170, 172, 174, 184 liberation, 29, 103, 106, 108, 113, 242–3
husband, 11, 86–8, 163–4, 168–9, 174–5, life
177–82, 187–8, 190–1, 202–4, 215, final/present, 182, 184, 187–8
226–7, 229–31, 235–7, 241, 244 present, 161–2
interdependence of, 179–80 present/final, 161, 168, 176–7
Index 271
Madhyama-āgama, 23–4, 99 monastery, 50, 120, 169, 222

Māgandi, 230, 239, 241 monastic discipline, 88, 90, 92–4
Mahā-Kassapa, 174–8, 181–3, 190 monastic dwellings, 83–4
Mahābhārata, 194–6, 217, 219 monks, 3–7, 10–11, 38–42, 57, 63–9,
Mahāpajāpatī, 37, 146, 155–6 71–9, 81–4, 86–90, 93–6, 140–1,
Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, 28–9, 99–100, 163–8, 213–14, 216, 222–4, 236–8
101, 112, 139, 142, 144–5 assembly of, 82–3
Mahāprajāpatī, 20–1, 23, 27, 29, 37, 82 famous, 161, 164, 166
Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī, v, 19–21, 27–9, group of, 43, 50, 88
81–2, 89, 92, 94 stories recount women accosting, 73
Mahāsāṅghikas, 25, 29 thirty-rain-retreat, 57
Mahāyāna Buddhist texts, 184 Monks’ Order, 39, 40, 42
Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, 23, 108, 145 deceased, 42
Majjhima-nikāya, vii, 22–3, 25, 28 mother, 28, 60, 63, 83, 87, 89, 94, 136,
Mānava Dharmaśāstra, 198, 201–2, 210, 141, 150, 157, 195, 220, 237, 240–1
216–19, 224 Muktā, 194, 202, 204, 217
Manorathapūraṇī, 56, 145, 156–8 Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, 8, 16, 82, 91,
manuscripts, 3, 5, 18–19, 29, 41, 43, 46–7, 108, 145, 196, 198, 202–3, 209,
49, 55, 60, 93, 116, 152 214–16
Māra, 12, 62, 64, 101–2, 110, 116–38, music, viii, 128, 134
145, 167, 198
early Buddhist texts, 118 Ñānamoli, 28–30, 34–5
snare of, 63, 136 Nanda, 151, 156–8
work of, 119, 138 Nandā, v, 13, 99, 140, 142–5, 147–53,
Māra’s daughters, 136 155–6, 158–9, 170, 172
marriage, v, viii, 13–14, 163–5, 168–72, 182, noble truths, 28, 30–2, 129
184–5, 189–91, 193–200, 203–10, Norman, K. R., 141–2, 152, 154, 224
212, 214, 216–18, 234–8, 240 nunnery, 90, 94–5, 198–9, 204, 229
marriage alliance, 194, 202, 204 nuns, 3–7, 9–13, 15–16, 18–19, 22–3,
marriage forms, 210 36–44, 64–8, 73–9, 81–2, 84–96,
meals, 89, 120, 180, 199, 214–17, 227 140–4, 154–6, 161–4, 169–71, 242–3
mealtime, 87–8 assembly of, 82–3
medicinal requisites, 30–1 forbidding, 76, 82
meditation, vii, 99, 112, 120, 146–7, 152, group of, 75, 89
156, 158, 229, 231 lists, 81
menstrual cloths, 92–3 preeminent, 12
merchant’s daughter, 193–4, 225
merit, 27, 29, 84, 173, 178, 180, 186, Obeyesekere, Ranjini, 8, 14, 205, 217,
214–16, 235, 243 223, 225–9, 231–41
mind, 1, 9, 16, 46, 53, 57, 76, 94, 103, occupations, 85–6, 162–3
105–6, 109–14, 118, 121–3, offense, 66, 72, 74–5, 77, 91
142, 173 offerings, 41, 43–4, 208
272 Index
Oldenberg, Herman, 117, 202, 207–8, pots, 48, 60–1, 92–3

212 prātimokṣa, 4, 81
Olivelle, Patrick, 199–201, 205, 208, precepts, five, 28–32, 37, 55, 149
210, 218–19 previous Buddhas, 13, 118, 161–2, 166–7,
order, 3–4, 6, 18–19, 21–3, 25–7, 33, 170, 188
35–44, 81–2, 91, 96, 99–100, Previous kamma, 183–5
165–7, 202–3, 207–9, 218–19 prostitutes, 6, 48, 51, 76, 142
non-Buddhist, 203 Puniga, 54–5
Order of monks, 3, 38–9, 42–3, 71 putrikā, 201–2
Order of monks and Order of nuns, 3
Order of nuns, v, 3, 18–19, 22–3, 25–7, queens, 172, 174, 239–40
37–9, 43–4, 242 chief, 150, 153, 168, 171–2, 174, 178–9
outstanding bhikkhunīs, 98–100, 101, qútánmí jīng, 18, 23, 25
104, 106–7, 109, 112
list of, 98, 111, 113, 115 Raghuvaṃśa, 194, 196, 217
realization, 103, 111, 120, 126–8, 133,
pācattika dharma, 11, 85–7, 139, 169, 185–6
89–90, 95 rebirth, 57, 71, 99, 103, 130, 134, 153–4,
Paccekabuddhāpadāna, 166 161–2, 168, 178, 188, 190
Paccekabuddhas, 161, 166–8, 177, 180, recluse, 71, 132, 153–4
182–3, 187–8 redactor, 37, 44, 193–4, 196–7,
pācittiya, 68, 77, 91, 93 199–200, 205, 218
Pāli texts, 21, 182, 198, 206, 213, 217–18, refuge, 28, 30, 55, 58, 94, 185
220, 222, 237 relatives, male, 86, 169
Pāli Vinaya, v, 4–6, 10, 62–3, 65–9, 71, renunciation, 14, 70, 117, 187, 198, 210,
73, 75, 77–9, 81, 93, 164, 213, 216 217, 219–20
pāṇigraha, 208–9 requiring expiation, 86–91
pārājikas, 5, 65–7, 73–5 robe gift episode, 23, 28, 37, 43
parallels, 2, 8, 10, 19, 22, 24, 27–9, robes, 19–20, 23, 29–31, 70, 104–8, 113,
33, 38, 45, 99–100, 111–12, 122–5, 120, 199
127–31 root pieties, 163–4, 168–70, 172, 175,
direct, 22–4, 27, 32–3 183–4, 190
indirect, 9, 22–3, 27, 31–2 Roth, Gustav, 4–5, 25, 81–4, 87, 89–91,
parents, 144, 155, 168, 199, 203–4, 209, 93–5, 111, 204, 213
224–5, 232–3, 235–6, 238, 242 rules, 4–6, 10–11, 15, 44, 65–9, 72–9,
passions, 71, 91, 230 81–2, 84–93, 95, 108, 150, 202,
path, v, 1, 6, 10, 53, 62, 64, 72, 107, 109, 204, 219, 224
113–15, 121, 132, 178, 190–1 disciplinary, 103, 113
paṭisambhidā, 104, 166 Rūpanandā, 144, 146–7, 156–8
peace, 122–7, 129–32, 142–3, 149, 170,
205 Saddharmaratnāvaliya, viii, 8, 14, 223–5,
pieties, 95, 161–2, 165, 177, 179 227–30, 233, 238, 242–3
Index 273
Saddharmaratnāvaliya stories, 240, 242 past-life, 13, 163

saints, v, 163, 174–5, 182, 190–1 second, 75, 159, 198
Sakyan, 13, 70, 144, 146, 148, 154–5, 158 skeleton, 47, 55
Salomon, 47–8, 50, 60–1 supplemental, 67, 73
Saṃyukta-āgama, v, 116, 133–4 svayaṃvara, 193, 205
Saṃyutta-nikāya, v, 12, 62–4, 110 well-known, 46, 101, 141, 183
saṅgha, 15, 23, 30–1, 34, 43–4, 65, 72, women’s, 193
74–5, 96, 243 Strauch, Ingo, 3, 7–9, 18, 24, 38, 46
saṅghādisesa rules, 5, 10, 65–8, 77–8 Suddhodana, 145, 147, 153, 156, 158
Sarvāstivāda versions, 42, 108 suitors, 51, 195–7, 199–202
Sarvāstivādins, 24, 29 rejected, 196–7, 217
Sāvatthī, 70, 119–20 Sumedha, 186–8
Schopen, Gregory, 8, 88, 90, 196, 203, Sundarīnandā, 75, 144, 153, 155–6
213–15 Suprabhā, 193–5, 197, 205
Schøyen Collection, 24, 35 Supriyā, 194, 197–9
scrolls, 9, 19–20, 30, 47–8 sūtra, 9, 12, 18–19, 21–7, 29, 32–8, 43–4,
seats, 82–3, 110 47, 51, 89, 95
Selā, 125, 127, 133–4, 199 Suttavibhaṅga, 4–5, 66–7, 72
sensuality, 131, 134 Suttavibhaṅga saṅghādisesa, 68–9, 74
sex, 10–11, 65–9, 72–3, 78–9, 135–6, 197 svayaṃvara, 193–6
sex acts, 65, 67, 73, 77
sexual aggression, 67, 135–6 Tathāgata, 3, 34–6, 38–9, 41, 101, 105,
sexuality, male, 6, 65, 77, 79, 136 114, 199
signlessness, 109–10, 114 teacher, 1, 105–6, 176, 222, 237–8
Sinhala, 2, 222–3 teachings, 12, 53, 58, 87, 89, 96, 104,
Sinhalese Buddhists, 14, 216 109–10, 114–15, 120, 129–30, 132,
sisters, 70, 72, 142, 144, 147, 150, 156–7, 134, 148–9, 155–6
169, 191, 206 texts
sons, 63, 68, 70, 86, 123, 136, 141, 153, avadāna, 46–7
168–9, 186, 195–6, 201–2, 217–18, canonical, ix, 103, 164, 166
240–1 Therāpadāna, 163–7, 170–1, 175, 181,
Sponberg, Alan, 6, 138 183, 191
Sri Lanka, vii–ix, 140, 216, 222–5, 232, Theravāda Buddhism, ix
238, 242, 244 therī, x, 1, 56, 136, 141, 168, 170, 172, 174
stories, 8–9, 14–15, 47–8, 53–5, 58–9, Therī-apadāna, v, 13, 161, 163–7, 169–73,
65–7, 75–7, 141–2, 145–7, 156–8, 175, 177, 179, 181–3, 185, 187, 189,
181–2, 193, 197–205, 222–6, 235–43 191, 199, 224
commentarial, 2, 14 Therīgāthā, v, 7, 12–13, 62, 100, 111, 136,
five, 193 140–6, 148–9, 151–3, 155, 157–9,
introductory, 86, 89 242–3
ordination, 27–8 Therīgāthā verses, 12, 62, 141, 144–5,
origin, 10, 65, 69, 75 152, 155, 158
274 Index
thūpas, 161, 176–7, 181 washing, 91–2, 120

transgression, 65, 74, 77, 89–91 water, 78, 86–8, 93, 110, 112, 114, 127,
168, 215, 222
Udāyin, 69, 71–3 water pot, 60–1, 87–8
venerable, 68, 70–2 weddings, 194–5, 204–6, 208–9,
Udēnī, King, 232, 238–9 212–17
Uppalavaṇṇā, 100, 101, 124–5, 133–5, wife, 11, 62–3, 88–90, 153, 158, 168,
169, 198 174–5, 177–80, 182–3, 187–8,
Uttarā, 104, 106, 234, 236, 241–2 200–1, 230–1, 233, 235–7,
240–2
Vāsuladattā, 238–9 devoted, 89
vinaya, 2, 4, 18, 22, 25–7, 29, 33, 65, this-life, 164, 175, 182
67–8, 75–7, 81–2, 84, 86–7, 95–6, wife of Susoma, 60
203–4 wives, v, 13, 62, 86, 141, 145, 163–4, 170,
vinaya rules, 15, 44, 77, 84, 93, 95, 204 174, 181, 186, 190–1, 202, 239,
vinaya stories, 202–3 242
vinaya texts, 24, 65, 82, 87, 199 women, 7, 54–5, 57–8, 63–4, 69–70,
Vipassi Buddha, 177, 179 72–4, 76–7, 86–7, 138, 175, 215,
virtue, 85–6, 88, 93, 96 227, 229, 231–2, 234–6
women of, 11, 86, 95 barren, 241
Visākhā, 56, 107–8, 242 faceless, 10, 51
image of, 50–1, 53, 59
Walters, Jonathan S., ix, 1, 6–7, 13, 15, marriageable, 219
17, 161, 164, 167, 169, 172, 183, 185, portrayals of, 16, 75
203, 224, 240 virtuous householder, 86

(South Asia Research) Alice Collett - Women in Early Indian Buddhism - Comparative Textual Studies (2013, Oxford University Press)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

(South Asia Research) Alice Collett - Women in Early Indian Buddhism - Comparative Textual Studies (2013, Oxford University Press)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Women in Early Indian Buddhism

SOUTH ASIA RESEARCH

THE EARLY UPANISADS BETWEEN THE EMPIRES

INDIAN EPIGRAPHY MANAGING MONKS

Oxford New York

Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press

Published in the United States of America by

© Oxford University Press 2014

You must not circulate this work in any other form

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Printed in the United States of America

9. Avadānaśataka: The Role of Brahmanical Marriage

Bhikkhu Anālayo completed a Ph.D. on the Satipaṭṭhanasutta at the

Timothy Lenz is an Acting Associate Professor in the Department of

Ingo Strauch (Lausanne) is Professor for Sanskrit and Buddhist Stud-

Like a lion [ freed] from a cage

the path of practice as taught in ancient India by Gotama Buddha was,

which has led to the prevalence of certain misapprehensions about women

Comparative Textual Study

A volume of comparative textual study such as this enables us to see

The Mahāsāṅghika-Lokottarvāda Bhikṣuṇī Vinaya is remarkable in

A general theory of female sexuality seemingly encased in early

Sponberg’s insightful nuancing of the early Buddhist view of female sexu-

as to call a “feminist edge.”6 Placing the nuns’ apadānas as later than

As well as discussion of attempts at preservation, the volume offers a

processes. Chapter 7 of this volume warns against over-attachment to the

evidence of Mahāyāna influence and includes longer sūtras and sūtras of a

7. See Allon (2001, 9–22) for a detailed study of extant Aṅguttara-nikāya/Ekottarika-āgama

Nandā. An intimate relationship between the Therīgāthā and subsequent

India was widespread, well-entrenched, and at least partially entwined

assessment, as has been clearly documented by Blackstone previously, the

the position of women in early Buddhism is closely connected with

in order to reach conclusions about the history of early Buddhism,

In order to address this imperative expressed by Anālayo, that the extant

the Bajaur version, the reconstructed Gāndhārī title can be established as

2. The structure of the text

8. The four kinds of purifying a gift

report of the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya (T 1421) occupies a special position

The Madhyama-āgama version, however, is not the only Chinese text

School affiliation Indirect Direct

Maitreya Foundation of the Order of nuns

Theravāda Pāli: Vinayavibhaṅga Pāli: Aṅguttara-nikāya Pāli: Majjhima-nikāya

Maitreya Foundation of the Order of nuns

Mūlasarvāstivāda Chin.: Vinaya (T 1451) *Tib.:Śamathadeva:

4. The suˉtra’s narrative: Mahaˉprajaˉpatıˉ ’s request

1. Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī approaches the Buddha with a request. This is

1. Ordination story: Cullavagga (Vinaya-piṭaka)

bahūpakārā bhante mahāpajāpatī gotamī bhagavato mātucchā

2. Robe gift episode: Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta (Majjhima-nikāya)

bahūpakārā bhante, mahāpajāpatī gotamī bhagavato mātucchā

Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī has been very helpful to the Blessed One,

This portion—albeit incompletely preserved—is also part of the Gāndhārī

///(mahaprayava)[di] go[dami] madu-janitri-kalagada[e] avaia

Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī (was) the nurse who nourished (him) when

In most of the parallels, this argument of Ānanda is countered by the

According to the main Chinese and Tibetan parallels to the

(ma)[ha]prayavadi godamie bahokaro ta kisa hetu ma[ma]///(panadi)

(And I was) of great service to Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī. Out of what

In many of the parallel versions this passage is mirrored by an enumera-

1. yaṃ hi ānanda, puggalo puggalaṃ āgamma buddhaṃ saraṇaṃ gato hoti,

2. a person who has taken the five precepts

3.1. (yo ho anaṃda pugalo) (pu)[ga]l(o) agamo budha janati [dha]ṃ(ma

A Three jewels (triratna): Buddha, dharma, saṅgha

得大廣報。信族姓男. 族姓女。佛在世時。佛為首。施佛及