Bones, Stone and Buddhist Monks:

·期刊原文
Bones, Stone and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India
Reviewed by John Clifford Holt
TThe Journal of Religion
VVol.78 No.3

JJuly 1998

PPp.486-487

CCopyright by University of Chicago

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schopen, Gregory. Bones, Stone and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers
on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in
India. Studies in the Buddhist Tradition. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press, 1997. xvii+298 pp. $58.00 (cloth); $31.95 (paper).

This book is not an easy read. In the first place, since it is a
collection of twelve scholarly articles previously published in
journals devoted to the study of various aspects of Asian religious
cultures, it is not a tightly woven single piece. It was not
intended to be. Although related issues do arise repeatedly
throughout the essays (how death was handled predominates), targets
of Gregory Schopen's criticisms are constantly shifting and thus the
particularity of each essay requires a corresponding effort on the
part of the reader to reorient. Second, many sections of these
articles, sections accompanied by detailed footnoting (such that
some footnotes contain "subplots" or fine bibliographic essays on
their own), are further ladened with copious references to finer and
often quite technical points of epigraphic and philological
significance. Though these are often necessary for Schopen to
buttress his major contentions, readers can be easily saturated.
Third, and most importantly, if Shopen is right, and most of his
arguments appear to be quite convincing indeed, then many
generalizations about the religious life of Indian Buddhist
monasticism set forth by some of the major players in the history of
Buddhist studies, generalizations frequently preserved, distilled,
or recapitulated in the most accessible and standard presentations
of Buddhism (what Schopen calls the "received tradition" of Buddhist
studies), need a very serious revisioning. This may prove unsettling
to some, especially those who have grown comfortable with this
"received tradition." In short, while a difficult read for a number
of reasons, no serious scholar of Buddhist studies can afford
(despite the relatively expensive price) to ignore this
argumentative, challenging, and provocative set of essays.
There is a clear pattern found in most of Schopen's articles. He
begins by noting a general assertion advanced by major scholars,
past and present, in the field of Buddhist studies (for instance,
Heinz Bechert, Richard Gombrich, Andre Bareau, J. W. de Jong,
Etienne Lamotte, Louis de la Vallee Poussin, Sylvain Levy, T. W.
Rhys Davids, or Hermann Oldenberg) and proceeds to undermine their
claims by appealing to archaeological and epigraphic evidence,
evidence that, all too often in the past, he argues, has been
ignored largely due to the propensity of most scholars to focus
explanations and interpretations almost exclusively on texts
produced by a monastic elite. Throughout these essays, Schopen often
warns against the theoretical disposition in which "textuality
overrides actuality" while doctrine, especially in its most abstract
forms of buddhological expression, is privileged over a
consideration of everyday practice. Schopen is also concerned that
too many scholars in the past have too easily assumed that the
Buddhist monastic religious life idealized in a selected genre of
sacred texts can be regarded as evidence for the manner in which
Buddhists historically constructed their worlds of meaning and their
disciplines of practice. He also demonstrates how some have assumed,
unwittingly or naively, that the ideal religious life of Indian
monasticism somehow reflects the types of religiosity (generally
Protestant) congenial to their own idealistic religious imaginations
(the Buddha imagined as a "Victorian gentleman," for instance).
While these are some of the theoretical and methodological issues
addressed throughout these essays, here are some of the important
substantive general assertions about Indian Buddhist monasticism
that Schopen is at great pains to refute: that filial piety only
became an important dimension of Buddhist monasticism once the
tradition had migrated to East Asia and the Chinese had
"transformed" Buddhism; that Buddhist monks played virtually no
roles in the ritual life of the laity or in relation to life-cycle
rites, monastic and lay; that monks did not participate in the cult
of the stupa; that the laity (and not monks and nuns) were the
exclusive or primary donors of images or monastic buildings; that
the cultic understanding of relics does not include an understanding
of a Buddha who continues to live as a real presence; and that most
popular monastic practices were the result of an elite strata of
monks caving in to pressures exerted by the "vulgar" orientation of
the less sophisticated. There are many other issues at stake as
well, tot) many to note for this brief review.
Readers should note, as indicated at the beginning of each chapter,
where Schopen originally chose to publish his essays. His selection
was always judicious and readers can thus determine his particular
intentions in relation to his audience. In each case, Schopen's
arguments are refreshing, honest, often brilliant, and always
cogently presented. The clarity and scope of his conclusions are
especially well drawn. The editor of this series promises that a
second set of Schopen's collected essays, these concerned with the
rise of Mahayana, is in the pipeline. Very good news!