http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Ven. PANDITA (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Theravādin Buddhist Nuns: Their Lost Vinaya and Living Pātimokkha
Ven. PANDITA 불교학연구회 2022 불교학연구 Vol.72 No.-
The extant Vinaya-vibhaṅga for nuns in the Theravādin canon covers rules exclusive to nuns, not those shared with monks, even though the shared rules can be found in the Pātimokkha for nuns, and are also identified by Buddhaghosa. This has led scholars like Horner to wonder whether the extant Vinaya-vibhaṅga for nuns is an adbridged version of a more complete Vinaya-vibhaṅga for nuns. Regarding this issue, I interpret a particular piece of Buddhaghosa’s writing as evidence indicating that Theravādin monks and nuns preserved different versions of the Vinaya for nuns, i.e., a concise version with the former, which is the extant version, but a complete one with the latter, which has disappeared together with the latter. Then, I construct a hypothesis, using the Fourth and Eighth Revered rules, to explain how these two versions came to exist: I argue that by using monks as a bridge to let nuns know about new rules, or the updates to old rules, the Buddha ensured that monks be well-informed on the rules for nuns; this in turn has led monks and nuns to preserve the Vinaya of the latter in their own respective ways, hence two versions, one concise whereas the other complete. I also argue that the complete Pāli Pātimokkha for nuns is probably a remnant from the complete Vinaya of nuns preserved by them while their Order existed, and that it has survived until now as part of the monks’ legal curriculum. Finally, I look at other schools whether they might have similar issues. argue that the complete Pāli Pātimokkha for nuns is probably a remnant from the complete
-
Gihigatā vs. Kumāribhūtā: A Legal Perspective on the Candidate Types of Buddhist Nunhood
Ven. PANDITA 불교학연구회 2023 불교학연구 Vol.75 No.-
According to the traditional interpretation of relevant Vinaya rules, the gihigatā (“married”) candidate type for Buddhist nunhood can be ordained at the minimum age of twelve, whereas the kumāribhūtā (“maiden”) type, at that of twenty. There are several issues with the aforesaid interpretation: (1) A compulsory question that a candidate must answer before ordination seemingly disqualifies any candidate under twenty years of age, (2) The minimum age requirement is supposedly required because only those old enough can be resilient to hard monastic life, but it hardly makes sense when one claims that a mere loss of virginity in marriage or otherwise is equivalent to an eight-years worth of maturity and resilience, and (3) The minimum age of twelve years for the married type suggests a marriage before ten, but there is no evidence of common child marriages at the time. However, the issue (1) exists only when we understand such compulsory questions as of polar type; if we interpret them instead as susceptible of explanatory answers, this issue would disappear. The remaining two issues can be resolved if we redefine gihigatā as a woman having had the experience of life in a non-paternal household, and kumāribhūtā as one without. Moreover, the vast difference in minimum age requirements makes much more sense if we realize that the Buddha might have wished to keep a distance between kumāribhūtās and gihigatās after their admission to the Order so that the former’s innocence can be protected during their sensitive years of life.
-
The Prohibition of Non-given Food: A Response to Schlingloff
Ven. PANDITA 불교학연구회 2023 불교학연구 Vol.74 No.-
In this paper, I attempt to derive an interpretation of the Pācittiya rule no. (40) of the Pātimokkha for Buddhist monks from its background narrative; I call this “the narrative interpretation.” This version is different from the version that its canonical commentary gives, which I call “the canonical interpretation.” Then, based on legal logic and textual evidence, I argue that the narrative interpretation actually reflects the original intent of the rule. I also explore another context where the rule is implicitly referred to. Finally, I observe that this rule is a rare case where the background narrative has retained the original intent of the rule, whereas the canonical commentary has lost it. Consequently, I suggest the need to reconsider Oldenberg’s theory, which views the background stories as the youngest layer in the Vinaya.
KCI
스콜라연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
