No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 December 2020
In August 2018, revelations of the sexual, financial, and administrative misconduct of a high-profile Chinese Buddhist monk named Xuecheng 學誠 were in the spotlight of domestic and international attention. The validity of the allegations and their social and religious impact have been widely debated, and this article focuses on the legal procedures used in handling the allegations and traces their source back to the Republican era (1911–1949). The state's governance of Buddhism and the efficacy of the Buddhist clergy's jurisdictional self-governance operating in Xuecheng's case in China today are significantly older than the People's Republic of China. As early as 1929, ordained Buddhists collectively denounced personal clerical privileges, in exchange for the state law's protection on monastic properties. Then, while protesting against unfavorable articles in the Charter of the Buddhist Association of China (Zhongguo fojiaohui zhang cheng 中國佛教會章程) proposed by the Nationalist government in 1936, the Buddhist clergy lost their legal jurisdiction over adjudicating internal disputes among ordained Buddhists. These two events have come to define the relationship between the state and the Buddhist establishment in contemporary China, where state law is harsh on religion while enforcement through legal practice is lax.
1 For the document that circulated online, see Xianjia 賢佳 and Xianqi 賢啟, “Zhongda qingkuang huibao” 重大情況匯報 [Report on important matters], accessed September 20, 2018, http://xqdoc.imedao.com/164f59c8b1799c43fe3a7953.pdf.
2 For more on the rise of Longquan monastery, see Javier C. Hernández, “China's Tech-Savvy, Burned-Out and Spiritually Adrift, Turn to Buddhism,” New York Times, September 7, 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/world/asia/china-longquan-monastery-buddhism-technology.html.
3 For a few examples, see Shi Zhaohui 釋昭慧, “Tongding sitong: Jiexi fomen zhong de jiegouxing zui'e” 痛定思痛: 解析佛門中的結構性罪惡 [A bitter lesson: An analysis of the systemic evil in the Buddhist community], Duan chuanmei 端傳媒, August 16, 2018, https://theinitium.com/article/20180816-opinion-buddism-sexualharrasment/; “Senior Chinese Monk Resigns Amid Sexual Misconduct Claims,” Guardian, August 15, 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/15/senior-chinese-monk-shi-xuecheng-resigns-sexual-misconduct-claims; Ian Johnson, “#MeToo in the Monastery: A Chinese Abbot's Fall Stirs Questions on Buddhism's Path,” New York Times, September 15, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/15/world/asia/metoo-china-monastery.html.
4 Ch'en, Kenneth, Chinese Transformation of Buddhism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), 66, 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Yu, Anthony C., State and Religion in China: Historic and Textual Perspectives (Chicago: Open Court, 2005), 105Google Scholar.
6 Yu, State and Religion in China, 133–34.
7 Welch, Holmes, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968), 137Google Scholar.
8 Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 132.
9 Welch, 135–36.
10 Welch, 135.
11 Other scholars have also discussed the relationship between the state and Buddhism from other perspectives. Timothy Brook observes three postures in the interaction between the state and Buddhism: patronage, prohibition, and regulation. See Brook, Timothy, “The Politics of Religion: Late-Imperial Origins of the Regulatory State,” in Making Religion, Making the State: The Politics of Religion in Modern China, ed. Ashiwa, Yoshiko and Wank, David L. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009): 22–42Google Scholar. Focusing on the interaction between the state and the Buddhist institutions in the implementation of economic projects, Ji Zhe concludes that such interactions involve but are not limited to the monasteries’ cooperation with the state. See Zhe, Ji, “Buddhism and the State: The New Relationship,” China Perspectives, no. 55 (2004): 1–13Google Scholar.
12 In certain contexts, a monk who had sex could remain in the monastic community. For detailed discussion on such examples in the Buddhist canon law, see Clarke, Shayne, “Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 37, no. 1 (2009): 1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
13 See Liu, Cuilan, “Hybrid Courts and Hybrid Laws: The Legal Governance of Buddhism in Imperial China,” Journal of Chinese Religions 47, no. 2 (2019): 152–92Google Scholar.
14 For the official statement, see Longquan Monastery, “Yanzheng shengming” 嚴正聲明 [A solemn declaration], accessed September 21, 2018, https://fo.ifeng.com/a/20180802/45097173_0.shtml.
15 See Beijingshi shishi Zhonghua renmin gongheguo funü quanyi baozhangfa banfa xiuding cao'an 北京市實施《中華人民共和國婦女權益保障法》辦法 (修訂草案) [A revised draft on how to implement in Beijing the law of the People's Republic of China on the protection of women's rights and interests], accessed September 21, 2018, http://www.bjrd.gov.cn/zdgz/lfgz/lfgs/201212/t20121207_102561.html.
16 See Wufen lü 五分律 [Five-part Vinaya] (T. 1421), 80bc3–80c9. It is noteworthy that this advice is absent in the sections elaborating on the same Saṃghāvaśeṣa rule in all the other Vinaya texts. Therefore, the extent to which this passive attitude in the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya represents a Buddhist approach to handling cases of sexual assault is uncertain.
17 I discuss examples on the use of these other Vinaya texts in Dunhuang in a paper in preparation, “Buddhist Monasteries and the Circulation of Legal Knowledge in Dunhuang.”
18 For citations from the Mahīśāsaka Vinaya, see page 27 of the ninety-five-page document. For studies on the resurgence of monastic discipline among Buddhists in modern and contemporary China, see Ester Bianchi, “Dangdai zhongguo fojiao de jielü fuxing yu sengtuan zaisheng” 当代中国佛教的戒律复兴与僧团再生 [The rebirth of the Buddhist monastic community and the revival of Vinaya in contemporary Chinese Buddhism], in Ershi shijie zhongguo fojiao de liangci fuxing 二十世纪中国佛教的两次复兴 [The two revivals of Chinese Buddhism in the twentieth century], ed. Ji Zhe 汲喆, Daniella Campo, and Wang Qiyuan (Shanghai: Fudan daxue chubanshe, 2016), 153–63; and Bianchi, Ester, “Yijie weishi 以戒为师: Theory and Practice of Monastic Discipline in Modern and Contemporary Chinese Buddhism,” Studies in Chinese Religions 3, no. 2 (2017): 111–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Daniela Campo, “Minguo shiqi de jielü fuxing chushen” 民国时期的戒律复兴初探 [A preliminary examination on the Vinaya revival in Republican China], in Ji, Campo, and Wang, Ershi shiji zhongguo fojiao de liangci fuxing, 133–48; Campo, Daniela, “A Different Buddhist Revival: The Promotion of Vinaya (jielü戒律) in Republican China,” Journal of Global Buddhism, no. 18 (2017): 129–54Google Scholar. More information on the revival of Buddhist monastic discipline can be found at the website of the research project Vinaya Revival in Twentieth Century China and Taiwan, accessed May 28, 2019, https://vinayarevival.com.
19 See Jiandu simiao tiaoli 監督寺廟條例 [Regulations on the supervision of Buddhist monasteries] (1929); Menggu lama simiao jiandu tiaoli 蒙古喇嘛寺廟監督條例 [Regulations on the supervision of Mongolian Lama monasteries] (June 15, 1931); and Guanli lama simiao tiaoli 管理喇嘛寺廟條例 [Regulations on managing Lama monasteries] (December 23, 1935). Article 11 in the 1929 legislation explicitly states that this regulation does not apply to the Buddhist monasteries in Central Tibet, Eastern Tibet, Xinjiang, and Qinghai.
20 On October 21, 1993, the Buddhist Association of China passed the Quanguo hanchuan fojiao siyuan guanli banfa 全国汉传佛教寺院管理办法 [The regulations on the national management of Chinese Buddhist monasteries], accessed July 14, 2020, https://baike.baidu.com/item/全国汉传佛教寺院管理办法.
21 On September 29, 2010, this office passed Zangchuan fojiao simiao guanli banfa 藏传佛教寺庙管理办法 [Methods for managing Tibetan Buddhist monasteries], accessed July 14, 2020, http://www.china.com.cn/policy/txt/2010-10/08/content_21080463.htm.
22 See Yunnansheng diqing zangzu zizhizhou zangchuan fojiao siyuan guanli tiaoli 云南省迪庆藏族自治州藏传佛教寺院管理条例 [Regulation on managing Tibetan Buddhist monasteries in the Diqing Tibetan autonomous region in Yunan province], accessed July 14, 2020, http://pkulaw.cn/fulltext_form.aspx?Db=lar&Gid=a71889f0b9d2783983ecb24e67f490c0bdfb&keyword=&EncodingName=&Search_Mode=accurate&Search_IsTitle=0.
23 See Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 129–42. For a discussion on the 1913 and 1915 legislation on managing monasteries and temples during the Beiyang government, see Guo Huaqing, “Beiyang zhengfu de simiao guanli zhengce pinxi” 北洋政府的寺廟管理政策評析 [An analysis of the Beiyang government's policy on managing Buddhist monasteries], Guangzhou daxue xuebao 廣州大學學報 no. 1 (2005): 23–27, 43. For a detailed discussion of the history and content of the legislation on managing monasteries and temples in the Republican era, see Chen Jinlong 陳金龍, “Minguo simiao guanli tiaoli de banbu yu feizhi” 民國寺廟管理條例的頒布與廢止 [The promulgation and abolishment of the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries in republican China], Fayin 法音 no. 4 (2008): 54–59.
24 For these articles, see Zhengfu gongbao 政府公報 [Governmental Gazetteer], no. 403 (1913): 2–3.
25 For the 1921 legislation, See Xiuzheng guanli simiao tiaoli 修正管理寺庙条例 [Revised regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Shanghai lüshi gonghui baogaoshu 上海律师公会报告书 no. 2 (1921): 44–47; for the January 1929 legislation, see Simiao guanli tiaoli 寺廟管理條例 [Regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Sifa gongbao 司法公報 no. 4 (1929): 1–3.
26 See Guanli simiao tiaoli 管理寺廟條例 [Regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Jinghan jubao 京漢局報 (1915): 536–39.
27 For an introduction on these criticisms from the Buddhist community, see Chen, “Minguo simiao guanli tiaoli de banbu yu feizhi,” 56.
28 See “Simiao guanli tiaoli” 寺廟管理條例 [Regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Sifa gongbao 司法公報 no. 4 (1929): 1–3.
29 As conveyed in a telegraph from the Buddhist Association of Sichuan Province to the Nationalist government, reproduced in Sichuan fojiaohui, “Sichuan fojiaohui wei xinban simiao guanli tiaoli shang guofu dian” 四川佛教会为新颁寺廟管理条例上国府电 [A telegraph from the Buddhist Association in Sichuan Province to the Nationalist government concerning the newly promulgated regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Hongfa shekan 弘法社刊 no. 9 (1929): 53–55. My translation. (Unless otherwise noted, all translations from the Chinese in this article are mine.)
30 See Shoupei守培, “Shoupei fashi wei simiao guanli tiaoli shang neizhengbu han” 守培法師為寺廟管理條例上內政部函 [A letter from Ven. Shoupei to the Ministry of the Interior concerning the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Haichao yin 海潮音 10, no. 3 (1929): 2–3; Xingzhengyuan, “Ling fa Jiangzhe fojiao lianhehui suocheng simiao guanli tiaoli xiugai ziju yifen yang heyi jufu you” 令發江浙佛教聯合會所呈寺廟管理條例修改字句一份仰核議具覆由 [Review and reply to a petition to revise the newly promulgated regulations on managing the Buddhist monasteries from the Buddhist Association of Jiangsu and Zhejiang], Xingzhengyuan-gongbao 行政院公報 no. 35 (1929): 9–10; Sichuansheng fojiaohui, “Chengqing xiuzheng simiao guanli tiaoli daidian yi 呈请修正寺廟管理條例代电一 [A telegraph requesting a revision to the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Shijie fojiao jushili linkan 世界佛教居士林林刊 no. 23 (1929): 1–9; Honghu 宏護, “Fojiao tuanqi qingqiu gaiding xinban simiao guanli tiaoli zhi dianwen” 佛教团体请求改订新颁寺廟管理條例之电文 [A telegraph from the Buddhist communities requesting a revision to the newly promulgated regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Dayun foxueshe yuekan 大雲佛學社月刊 26, no. 92 (1929): 51–65.
31 See Jishan 寂山, et al., “Zhi Lifayuan Yuanzhang qing caina gefang yijian xiuzheng simiao guanli tiaoli bing congzhong yuanzhu bing qingshi fuhan” 致立法院院长请采纳各方意见修正寺廟管理條例从中援助并请示复函 [A request for the president of the Legislative Yuan to revise the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries based on comments from various sources, provide assistance, and reply], Zhongguo fojiaohui yuekan 中國佛教會月刊 no. 4 (1929): 1. These ordained and lay Buddhists include Jishan 寂山, Taixu 太虛, Yuanying 圓瑛, Renshan 仁山, Huizong 惠宗, Xie Zhuchen 謝鑄陳, Wang Yiting 王一亭, Guan Jiongzhi 關炯之, and Zhong Kanghou 鍾康候.
32 Guanli simiao tiaoli 管理寺廟條例 [Regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries] (1915), Article 23.
33 Xiuzheng guanli simiao tiaoli 修正管理寺庙条例 [Revised regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries] (1921), Article 19.
34 Simiao guanli tiaoli 寺廟管理條例 [Regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries] (January 25, 1929), Article 17.
35 I use the term community bylaw to refer to qinggui 清規 rules established for ordained residents in individual Buddhist monasteries or nunneries in China. Similar sets of rules (Tibetan bca’ yig) were also established in Tibet.
36 See Xingzhengyuan, “Xingzhengyuan neibu de guanyu Wang Zhen de tiyi de xunling” 行政院對內政部的關於王震的提議的訓令 [An instruction from the Executive Yuan concerning the proposal by Wang Zhen submitted by the Ministry of Interior], Xingzhengyuan-gongbao 行政院公報 no. 35 (1929): 9–10.
37 Xingzhengyuan, “Ling fa Sichuan fojiaohui qing shanding xinban simiao guanli tiaoli shuotie yijian yangbing anhe fuyou” 令發四川佛教會請删定新頒寺廟管理條例說帖一件仰倂案核覆由 [Review and reply to a petition to revise the newly promulgated regulations on managing the Buddhist monasteries from the Buddhist Association of Sichuan], Xingzhengyuan-gongbao 行政院公報 no. 36 (1929): 21–22.
38 See Guomin zhengfu, “Chi jiang simiao guanli tiaoli xunji heyi ju fuyou” 飭將寺廟管理條例迅卽核議具復由[Immediately review the regulations on managing Buddhist temples], Guomin zhengfu gongbao 國民政府公報 no. 315 (1929): 1.
39 See Guomin zhengfu, “Wei ju xingzhengyuan zhuan ju neizhengbu chengzhun simiao guanli tiaoli zheng weijing xiuzheng gongbu Yiqian zanhuan shixing yang chazhao shenhe ju fuyou” 爲據行政院轉據內政部呈准寺廟管理條例征未經修正公布以前暫緩施行仰查照審核具覆由 [Postponing the implementation of the unrevised regulations for managing Buddhist monasteries], Sifa gongbao 司法公報 no. 22 (1929): 38.
40 Guomin zhengfu, “Cheng simiao guanli tiaoli qing zhuanchi lifayuan congsu shending gongbu you” 呈寺廟管理條例請轉飭立法院從速審定公布由 [A petition to transfer the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries to the Judicial Yuan for immediate review and promulgation], Xingzhengyuan-gongbao 行政院公報 no. 79 (1929): 24.
41 See Guomin zhengfu, “Wei qianqing congsu shending simiao guanli tiaoli jing chengjiao lifayuan” 爲前請從速審定寺廟管理條例經呈交立法院 [The earlier petition to immediately review the regulation for managing Buddhist monasteries transferred to the Judicial Yuan], Xingzhengyuan-gongbao 行政院公报 no. 82 (1929): 2, 26.
42 See “Chi jiang simiao guanli tiaoli xunji heyi ju fuyou,” 1.
43 See “Jiandu simiao tiaoli cao'an” 監督寺廟條例草案 [Draft regulations on the supervision of Buddhist monasteries], in “Simiao guanli tiaoli shencha baogao” 寺廟管理條例審查報告 [A report on the inspection of the regulations on managing Buddhist monasteries], Lifayuan gongbao 立法院公報 no. 12 (1929): 196–99.
44 Jiandu simiao tiaoli 監督寺廟條例 [Regulations on the Supervision of Buddhist Monasteries], Jiangxisheng zhengfu gongbao 江西省政府公報 no. 39 (1929): 13–14.
45 For a discussion of the history of this office and the state policy on religion between 1949 and the present, see Yang, Fenggang, “Regulating Religion under Communism,” in Religion in China: Survival and Revival under Communist Rule (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 65–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
46 Its earlier versions include the Zongjiao shiwu guanli tiaoli 宗教活动场所管理條例 [Regulations on Managing Places of Religious Services], effective January 31, 1994, revised March 1, 2005.
47 My discussion below focuses on the negotiation over the jurisdiction of the Buddhist Association of China. For detailed studies on the history and development of the Buddhist Association of China and its charter, see Huang Xianian 黃夏年, “Zhonghua fojiao zonghui de chengli jiqi zhangcheng yanjiu” 中華佛教總會的成立及其章程研究 [Research on the establishment of the Buddhist Association of China and its charter], in Xingyun dashi renjian fojiao lilun shijian yanjiu 星雲大師人間佛教理論實踐研究 [Research on the theory and practice of Master Xingyun's humanistic Buddhism] (Taibei: Foguangshan renjian fojiao yanjiuyuan, 2014), 100–23; 汲喆, Ji Zhe, “Buddhist Institutional Innovations,” in Modern Chinese Religion II: 1850–2015, ed. Kiely, Jan, Goossaert, Vincent, and Lagerwey, John (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 748–56Google Scholar.
48 For a detailed study on the establishment of this association in mainland China, see Li Gang 李刚, “Zhongguo fojiao xiehui chengli jingguo kaolüe” 中國佛教協會成立經過考略 [An examination of the establishment of the Buddhist Association of China], Dangdai zhongguo shi yanjiu 當代中國史研究 12, no. 2 (2005): 110–14.
49 Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 141.
50 Welch, Holmes, Buddhism under Mao (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972), 17Google Scholar.
51 See “Zhonghua fojiao zonghui zhangcheng” 中華佛教總會章程 [Charter of the General Buddhist Association of China], Foxue congbao 佛學叢報 no. 1 (1912): 1–10.
52 See Zhongguo fojiaohui, “Xiuzheng zhongguo fojiaohui zhangcheng cao'an” 修正中國佛教會章程草案 [Revised draft charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Hai chao yin 海潮音 16, no. 5 (1935): 118–19.
53 See Zhongguo fojiaohui, “Xiuzheng zhongguo fojiaohui zhangcheng” 修正中國佛教會章程 [Revised charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Foxue banyuekan 佛學半月刊 no. 112 (1935): 26–27; 23.
54 For an introductory note on this revision, see Zhongyang minxunbu, “Zhongyang minxunbu xiuding fojiaohui zhangcheng cao'an” 中央民訓部修訂佛教會章程草案 [The draft charter of the Buddhist Association revised by the Central Department for Military Training], Renhaideng yuekan 人海燈月刊 3, no. 8 (1936): 308–21. This version has also been published in two other Buddhist journals: see Zhongyang minxunbu, “Zhongguo fojiao hui zhangcheng cao'an” 中國佛教會章程草案 [The draft charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Zhongguo fojiaohui bao 中國佛教會報 no. 6 (1936): 65–79; Zhongyang minxunbu, “Zhongguo fojiaohui zhangcheng cao'an” 中國佛教會章程草案 [The draft charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Foxue banyuekan 佛學半月刊 no. 132 (1936): 13–20.
55 See Benseng 本僧, “Xiuding fojiaohui zhangcheng zhi shangque” 修訂佛教會章程草案之商榷 [A discussion of the revised draft charter of the Buddhist Association], Haichao yin 海潮音 17, no. 8 (1936): 108–10.
56 See Zhongguo fojiaohui, “Jiyao shengming” 急要聲明 [An urgent declaration], Zhongguo fojiaohui huibao 中國佛教會會報 no. 8 (1936): 32.
57 See “Fulu” 附錄 [Appendix], Zhongguo fojiaohui bao 中國佛教會報 no. 8 (1936): 32–68; “Fulu” 附錄 [Appendix], Zhongguo fojiaohui bao 中國佛教會報 no. 7 (1936): 57–86.
58 See “Xiuding zhongguo fojiaohui zhangcheng” 修訂中國佛教會章程 [The revised charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Anhui zhengzhi 安徽政治 2, no. 27 (1939): 18–21; for the charter published in 1948, see “Zhongguo fojiaohui zhangcheng” 中國佛教會章程 [The charter of the Buddhist Association of China], Henansheng zhengfu gongbao 河南省政府公報 no. 38 (1948): 7–10.
59 See Guojiao zongjiao shiwuju 國家宗教事務局, “Guanyu dui jubao Xuecheng he Beijing Longquan si youguan wenti de diaocha heshi qingkuang” 关于对举报学诚和北京龙泉寺有关问题的调查核实情况 [An announcement on the investigation and verification concerning the report on Xuecheng and Beijing Longquan Monastery], accessed July 14, 2020, https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_2372945.
60 For a discussion of the offense of sexual intercourse in the Buddhist monastic law in the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, which is predominant in China, see the Chinese translation, Sifen lü 四分律 [Four-part Vinaya] T. 1428: 568c7–572b5.
61 In his article in the New York Times, Johnson states that Xuecheng has been banished to a small temple in Fujian province. See Johnson, “#MeToo in the Monastery.”
62 For the case, see Yuan dianzhang 元典章 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2011), 53.1759.
63 For examples of such privileges, see Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 132.
64 See Huang Shaohong 黃紹竑, “Wei sifayuan jieshi gonggong chusuo ji simiao anguan yingfou bianru lülin ji sengdao yingfou renwei jumin ji gongmin yi'an you” 為司法院解釋公共處所及寺廟庵觀應否編入閭鄰及僧道應否認為居民及公民一案由 [An explanation on behalf of the Judicial Yuan on whether public spaces and Buddhist and Daoist institutions should be registered within a borough and whether ordained Buddhists and Daoists should be considered residents and citizens], Neizheng gongbao 內政公報 5, no. 24 (1932): 16–17.
65 For the inquiry and the reply, see Jiangsusheng zhengfu, “Zhun zi wei sengni xishi yapian yinffou yi bushou qinggui lun wu bei xuanwei simiao zhuchi zhi zige” 准咨為僧尼吸食鴉片應否以不守清規論無被選為寺廟主持之資格 [A reply to the inquiry on whether ordained Buddhist monks and nuns who had consumed opium are disqualified to be appointed abbots of monasteries for disobeying monastic rules], Neizheng gongbao 內政公報 10, no. 6 (1937): 272–73.
66 I discuss examples of these clerical privileges, such as immunity in lay court and penalty reduction, in Liu, “Hybrid Courts and Hybrid Laws.”