Sisters in Solitude: Two Traditions of Buddhist Monastic
Ethics for Women. By Karma Lekshe Tsomo. Albany, New York: State
University of New York Press, 1996. Pp. xii + 198. ISBN 0-7914-3089-8
(Cloth). $59.50; 0-7914-3090-1 (Paper), $19.95.
Reviewed by
- Charles S. Prebish
Religious Studies Program
Pennsylvania State University
csp1@psu.edu
This volume, published in the "Feminist Philosophy" series of the State
University of New York Press, presents translations of the Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa
Suutras of the Dharmaguptaka and Muulasarvaastivaadin schools of Buddhism, along with
a comparative analysis of their contents.
The author, christened Patricia Jean Zenn, became interested in Buddhism as a young
child, eventually earning a Bachelor's degree in Oriental Languages from the University of
California, Berkeley, and a Master's Degree in Asian Studies at the University of Hawai'i
(in 1971). In 1977 she took the vows of a novice nun ("sraama.nerikaa)
in the Tibetan tradition in southern France, and in 1982 completed her full ordination by
taking the bhik.su.nii precepts at Beomeo Temple near Pusan, Korea. The details of
her life are presented as a short spiritual autobiography in the Preface to Sisters in
Solitude. For many years she studied at the Library of Tibetan Works and
Archives and the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics in Dharamsala. Throughout her
career she has been interested in the role of women in modern Buddhism. She was a
founding member of Sakyadhita ("Daughters of the Buddha"), an international
alliance of women devoted to Buddhist practice, and has been instrumental in facilitating
conferences in Thailand (1991), Sri Lanka (1993), Ladakh (1995), Cambodia (1997), and
California (1998). Previously, she edited Sakyadhita: Daughters of the Buddha
(Snow Lion) and Buddhism Through American Women's Eyes (Snow Lion). Her
motivation in publishing Sisters in Solitude falls clearly in line with the
sentiment expressed in a passage near the end of her Preface:
Since receiving the bhik.su.nii precepts myself, I have been involved in a
burgeoning international Buddhist women's movement and have worked to gain acceptance for
the bhik.su.nii ordination in countries and traditions where it does not now
exist. Despite serious educational and economic disadvantages, Buddhist women in
Asia, both lay and ordained, are becoming increasingly aware of their spiritual and social
worth. In this fertile climate of awakening feminist consciousness, fostered through
continual networking, publications, discussions, and conferences, the potential exists for
reinstituting an order of fully ordained nuns in all Buddhist countries. The
restitution of the Bhik.su.nii Sa"ngha would stand as a symbol of women's spiritual
power and equality and serve as a bridge linking women in Buddhist cultures with women's
movements in other countries (p. xi).
To be sure, the above statement suggests that Karma Lekshe Tsomo's volume will be very
different in style and content from the vast majority of research on nuns' Vinaya
that has preceded her work. It is of course widely acknowledged that I. B.
Horner's landmark work in translating the Paali texts of both the monks' and nuns' Vinaya
tradition (published in six volumes between 1938 and 1966), as well as her important early
book Women Under Primitive Buddhism (1930), are pioneering efforts at recognizing
the importance of the role of women in Buddhism. Nonetheless, Horner's translations
and interpretations are certainly more fully characterized by her impressive philological
skills than her feminism. Additionally, until quite recently nearly all the
subsequent research on nuns' Vinaya reflected philology more than feminism.
As such, Akira Hirakawa's Monastic Discipline for the Buddhist Nuns (1982), which
translates the Chinese version of the nuns' Vinaya of the Mahaasaa.mghika school,
Gustav Roth's Bhik.su.nii-Vinaya: Manual of Discipline for Buddhist Nuns (1970), an
edition of the Sanskrit version of the nuns' Vinaya of the
Mahaasaa.mghika-Lokottaravaadin school, and Chatsumarn Kabilsingh's A Comparative Study
of the Bhikkhunii Paa.timokkha (1984), are all known to her, but rarely utilized due
to their almost exclusively philological, historical, and text-critical content.
There is no indication she is aware of Édith Nolot's important Règles de
Disciplinedes Nonnes Bouddhistes: Le Bhik.su.niivinaya de l'École
Mahaasaa.mghika-Lokottaravaadin (1991) or my own A Survey of Vinaya Literature
(1994), each of which might have informed her study.
The book is organized into five chapters. The first chapter contextualizes the
place of the nuns' Praatimok.sa in the development of Buddhist history and
literature. It progresses from a consideration of Vinaya as the foundation of
Buddhist monastic life to a short presentation of the role and function of Buddhist
monastic life. She then briefly reviews some of the major studies of Buddhist
monastic life, moves ahead to an explanation of the structure and function of the Praatimok.sa,and
concludes the chapter with a summary of the historical background of the Bhik.su.ni
Praatimok.sa Suutra. Although Tsomo seems to understand the profound difference
in meaning and function between the terms Vinaya and "siila, this
distinction is seriously underdeveloped. Moreover, she sides with Jotiya Dhirasekera,
author of Buddhist Monastic Discipline (1982), in presuming that once the Praatimok.sa
became ritualized as part of the Po.sadha ceremony, "its disciplinary function
was severely weakened" (p. 15). My own work suggests that this conclusion is
wrong. As I wrote in "Vinaya and Praatimok.sa: The Foundation of Buddhist
Ethics" (published in A.K. Narain [ed.], Studies in the History of Buddhism
[Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation,1980], p. 248):
With the maturation of the monastic order in Buddhism, it also became critically
apparent that pragmatic considerations had to be reckoned with. By having all
offenses...confessed and dealt with before the actual Po.sadha ceremony,
more time was freed for other monastic concerns. Thus, the ritualized recitation of
the Praatimok.sa becomes intensely meaningful. It seems to become the formal embodiment
of a tradition, by this time long in practice, of expecting and demanding the highest
cultivation of ethical life by practitioners of Buddhism. In so doing, the ritualization
of the Praatimok.sa reveals not that ethics and morality were overlooked, but rather that
they continued as strongly as ever, simply recast into the formalistic mould that Buddhist
monastic life had adopted. Considered in this perspective, Praatimok.sa is not just
monastic "glue," holding the sa.mgha together, but the common ground on which
the internally enforced life of "siila is manifested externally in the community.
Tsomo's section on the Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa Suutra is very useful, not only
for outlining the various versions of the text in the various nikaaya Buddhist
schools, but because she emphasizes the critical importance of the Chinese and Tibetan
versions, thus highlighting why they were selected for translation in this volume. A
bit of sectarian history relating the nature and development of the Dharmaguptaka and
Muulasarvaastivaadin schools would have further accented why these texts were chosen, but
in fairness to the author, such a discourse might also have been seen as ancillary, and
especially so since it has been examined by many other scholars.
Chapters Two ("The Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa Suutra of the Dharmaguptaka
School) and Three ("The Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa Suutra of the
Muulasarvaastivaadin School") follow, presenting the translations of the respective
texts. Like all Praatimok.sa texts, each of the categorical sections is presented
as a bare compendium of rules pertinent to that category. As such, even when combined with
the preliminary and concluding verses to the Praatimok.sa recitation, each text is
compact, with the Dharmagupta text occupying forty-eight pages and the
Muulasarvaastivaadin text occupying fifty-five pages. In keeping with the purpose of
the book, Tsomo's notes are kept to a minimum, avoiding lengthy philological arguments,
and instead offer useful commentary on the meaning and application of technical terms.
Chapter Four, "A Comparison of the Chinese Dharmagupta and the Tibetan
Muulasarvaastivaadin Bhik.su.nii Praatimok.sa Suutras," is a slimchapter of
thirteen pages outlining the structure of each text, and comparing the texts in a highly
superficial way in the paaraajika, sa"nghaava"se.sa, ni.hsargika-paayantika,
pratide"saniiya, and "saik.sa categories of offenses, as well as a
short statement about the adhikara.na-"samatha section of the text. She
notes the Dharmaguptaka text to have 341 rules and the Muulasarvaastivaadin text to have
365, excluding the adhikara.na-"samatha portion of the text, which contains an
additional seven items in each case. It is here that a highly fruitful comparative
examination might have been made, with interesting conclusions drawn. In the monks' Praatimok.sa
much could be learned about the specific behaviors and values of each sect from the
textual disparities, particularly in the "saik.sa dharma section. A
cursory examination of the translations of each nuns'text suggests similar findings.
For example, the Dharmaguptaka text includes twenty-six regulations for proper worship at
a stuupa, while the Muulasarvvastivaadin text posits no stuupa regulations.
It is also highly interesting that both the monks' and nuns' Praatimok.sa texts
present precisely the same number of stuupa regulations. As I have speculated
elsewhere (see "Saik.sa-dharmas Revisited: Further Considerations of Mahaasaa.mghika
Origins," History of Religions 35, 3 [1996], 258-270), it may be possible to
postulate that it is the incorporation of these stuupa regulations that explains
why the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya was the most widely accepted Vinaya in China. This is
no small point. In the 1989 issue of the Journal of the Pali Text Society,
Gregory Schopen wondered creatively about the absence of stuupa regulations in the
Paali Vinaya in his article,"The Stuupa Cult and the Extant Paali Vinaya"
(pp. 83-100), prompting Richard Gombrich to respond in the following year's issue with
"Making Mountains Without Molehills: The Case of the Missing Stuupa." One can
only presume that matters not germane to the issue of feminism were excluded from detailed
consideration here.
Chapter Five, "Linking Past and Future," is a short six-page conclusion.
Tsomo is absolutely accurate when she comments that "The regulations date to a time
when the nuns and monks were reclusive mendicants and some had to be adjusted when the
Sa"ngha became settled in monastic communities" (p. 149). She acknowledges
that although the regulations may not be applicable in modern society they provided a
comprehensive ethical basis for Buddhist women who were courageous enough to undertake the
profoundly rigorous training of a nun in an often less than supportive environment. At the
end, Tsomo concludes:
The challenge now for the new generation of Buddhist women practitioners is to capture
the spirit behind the precepts and interpret them in an authentic yet viable way,
conducive to personal growth. It is doubtful that nuns today will feel bound to a simply
legalistic interpretation of the precepts;more likely their approach will be to awaken and
renew the spiritual life force of the tradition (p. 150).
It is here that the book disappoints me. Although there are now likely in excess
of 100 nuns from Western countries who have received bhik.su.nii ordination, none
is better equipped to reflect on this future challenge than Karma Lekshe Tsomo. Yet
she ends the book just as one's appetite for more reflection is thoroughly whetted and
one's intellect provoked. No doubt, the book offers much in its translations, presented in
an easily accessible fashion, and in its important contribution to continuing studies of
nuns' Vinaya. This reviewer hopes that Karma Lekshe Tsomo's next book will
pick up where this one concludes and offer her understanding of the shape of that
"new generation of women Buddhist practitioners" and the way in which it might
"awaken and renew the spiritual life force of the tradition."