Introduction

In the present chapter, I translate and study a set of ten discourses, found in the Saṃyukta-āgama (T 99) in which nuns are the main protagonists. The ten discourses translated in the present chapter have counterparts in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta of the Pāli canon, as well as in another Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) that has been partially preserved in Chinese translation and whose school affiliation is at present still a matter of discussion.[n.1] Recent contributions to this question are Bingenheimer 2011: 23–44 and Bucknell 2011; both argue in favour of attributing T 100 to the Mūlasarvāstivāda tradition.

In what follows I briefly examine the significance of Māra, who makes his appearance in each of the ten translated discourses, challenging the nuns in their practice. Traditional exegesis recognizes several aspects of Māra.[n.2] A frequently found presentation distinguishes four aspects of Māra: defilements, aggregates, a deva, and death. This is found, e.g., 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, e.g., in T 732 at T XVII 530c12. Thus Māra can have a symbolic significance, representing the five aggregates of clinging;[n.3] SN 23.11 at SN III 195,4 and its parallel SĀ 124 at T II 40b25. or else Māra can be a celestial being, a devaputta, believed to be dwelling in the highest heaven of the sensual realm, whose role is to act as an antagonist to the Buddha and his disciples.[n.4] According to Ps I 34,1, Māra lives in the paranimmittavasavattidevaloka, an indication also made in the Yogācārabhūmi, Bhattacharya 1957: 75,7; cf. also DĀ 30 at T I 115a28, according to which his palace is between this highest heaven of the sensual realm and the Brahmā world. EĀ 43.5 at T II 760b3 confirms that Māra is indeed supreme in the sensual realm. 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,[n.5] Cf., e.g., Oldenberg 1881/1961: 286–290, Senart 1882a: 166–187, Windisch 1895, Oldenberg 1899, Barua 1915, de La Vallée Poussin 1915, Przyluski 1927, Law 1931/2004, Har Dayal 1932/1970: 306–317, Thomas 1933/2004: 145–147, Malalasekera 1938/1998: 611–620, Foucher 1949: 151–154 and 156–160, Rao 1954, Wayman 1959: 112–125, Ling 1962, Boyd 1971, Jayatilleke 1973: 36–38, Boyd 1975: 73–133, Haldar 1977: 153–157, Bloss 1978, Rahula 1978: 108–114 and 177–180, Verclas 1978: 50–74, Southwold 1985: 135–137, Bareau 1986, Falk 1987, Seo 1987, Guruge 1988/1997, Clark 1994: 2–37 and 46–93, Wilson 1996: 33–37, Yoshiko 1996: 32–33, Wickramagamage 1997, Hamilton 2000: 207–210, Marasinghe 2002, Batchelor 2004: 17–28, Kinnard 2004, Radich 2007: 198–201, Werner 2008: 20–28, Choong 2009: 40–42, and Bingenheimer 2011: 113–116. the significance of the challenges posed by Māra requires clarification. A recurrent interpretation of episodes where Māra acts as a challenger assumes 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 nun or even the Buddha, according to Barua (1915: 203f) this means that the nun 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) 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: 20f) sees Māra "as a metaphoric way of describing Buddha's own inner life"; "Mara's tireless efforts to undermine Buddha by accusing him of insincerity, 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. For example, qualities of the Buddha reckoned by tradition to be intrepidities (vesārajja) are precisely his total certainty of having indeed awakened and destroyed the influxes (āsava).[n.6] For a survey of references to the four intrepidities cf. Anālayo 2011b: 109–113.

Moreover, some of the challenges by Māra in the early discourses involve actions such as changing himself into an ox and walking close to the begging bowls of a group of monks, in order to distract them from listening to a talk given by the Buddha.[n.7] SN 4.16 at SN I 112,15 and its parallel SĀ 1102 at T II 290a16. At the time of a previous Buddha, the Māra who lived at that time is on record for causing an arahant monk to be hit on the head so that it started bleeding.[n.8] Whereas according to MN 50 at MN 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. 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.[n.9] DN 29 at DN III 133,23 and its parallel DĀ 17 at T I 75b18 indicate that an arahant is beyond fear and any other defilement.

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, 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 problems 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 example of how such challenges should be faced by showing the way the Buddha and his arahant disciples dealt with Māra.[n.10] Other scholars have reached similar conclusions, e.g., Kloppenborg 1995: 154 comments that Māra "can be regarded as an exponent of stereotypes that existed in … society". 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 pleasureseeking males". 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 challenge 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, Māra can be seen to impersonate attitudes of contempt and derision, even of threat, towards women who have embarked on a life of renunciation.

---

Translation

[Connected Discourses on Nuns][n.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), and in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100), T II 453b28 to 456b20, translated by Bingenheimer 2011: 151–181.

1) [Āḷavikā][n.12] SĀ 1198, parallel to SN 5.1 and SĀ2 214. In my translation I have numbered the discourses, the present one counted as the first of the set of ten, and added the name of the respective nun as a title, neither of which is found in the original.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Āḷavikā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī.[n.13] The Rājakārāma is not mentioned explicitly in the Bhikkhunī-saṃyutta or the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama, although it is mentioned in a discourse quotation paralleling SĀ 1202, 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 nuns, SN 55.11 at SN V 360,15, and as the location where a group of nuns, on having received teachings from the monk Nandaka, reach high realization, MN 146 at MN III 271,4; for a comparative study of this teaching and the realizations reached by the nuns cf. above p. 155ff. In the morning, the nun Āḷavikā 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.[n.14] The standard description in the corresponding discourses in the Bhikkhunīsaṃyutta 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 nun approaching the Andhavana. The corresponding discourses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100) do have such a depiction, although in a shorter form. Without mentioning a return to the monastery, this description just refers to cleaning the bowl and going to the Andhavana. 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). 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.

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 nun Āḷavikā, who is staying in a community of nuns 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 finished 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 shoulder, and entered the Andhavana to sit in meditation. I shall now approach and disturb her."[n.15] Māra's reflection is not reported 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 82a4 or Q 5595 thu 128a5, however, report his reflection, which repeats the introductory narration.

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance and went to that nun.[n.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, do mention his transformation into a youth. He said to the nun:

"Lady, where do you want to go?"
The nun replied: "Friend, I am going to a secluded place."[n.17] This question-and-answer exchange is not found in SN 5.1, which instead directly sets in with the stanza spoken by Māra. A similar exchange occurs in SĀ2 214 at T II 453c6.

Then Māra, the Evil One, spoke in verse: "In the world there is no escape.
Of what use is searching for seclusion?
Return to partake of and consume the five sense pleasures,
So that you do not later come to have regrets!"

Then the nun Āḷavikā 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?"[n.18] The nuns 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 on whether this person might want to seduce them.

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 that are the five sense pleasures.
Just like flesh-cutting torture,[n.19] The translation is based on adopting the variant reading 刑 instead of 形; cf. also Yìnshùn 1983c: 194 note 4.
Such is the dukkha of the aggregates of clinging.
Such is what you just spoke about,

Partaking of and delighting in the five sense pleasures.
Therefore I cannot delight
In that condition, which is to be greatly feared.[n.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.
Separated from all rejoicing and delight,
Having relinquished all the great darkness [of ignorance],
By having realized cessation,
I dwell in peace, established in seclusion from the influxes.[n.21] This last set of stanzas, which with slight variations is spoken by each nun as a declaration 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 nuns in the discourses in the partially preserved Saṃyukta-āgama (T 100).

"I recognize you, evil Māra, you have been discovered, make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "That nun Āḷavikā has understood my intentions." Worried, sad, and unhappy he vanished and was seen no more.

2) [Somā][n.22] SĀ 1199, parallel to SN 5.2 and SĀ2 215.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Somā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Somā is staying in a community of nuns 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 finished 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 shoulder, and entered the Andhavana to sit in meditation. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance and went to the nun Somā. He said to the nun:

"Lady, where do you want to go?"
The nun replied: "Friend, I am going to a secluded place."[n.23] This question-and-answer exchange is not found in SN 5.2, which instead directly sets in with the stanza spoken by Māra. A similar exchange occurs in SĀ2 215 at T II 454a2.

Then Māra, the Evil One, spoke in verse: "The state wherein seers dwell,
This state is very difficult to attain.
One with [just] a two-fingers' wisdom
Is unable to attain that state."

Then the nun 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?"

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 spoke in verse:
"[Once] the mind has entered a [meditative] attainment,
What has a female appearance to do with that?
If knowledge has arisen,

The unsurpassable state will be reached.
[But] if the mind has not reached complete separation
from the perception of being a 'man' or a 'woman',
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.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Somā has understood my intentions." Harbouring sadness and regret within, he vanished and was seen no more.

3) [Kisāgotamī][n.24] SĀ 1200, parallel to SN 5.3 and SĀ2 216.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Kisāgotamī was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she put on her robes, took her bowl and approached the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down cross-legged under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. Then the nun Kisāgotamī, who is staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī, in the morning has put on her robes, taken her bowl, and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down cross-legged under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance and went to the nun Kisāgotamī. He said in verse:
"Why are you, having lost your child,
Weeping and with sad and worried face
Sitting alone under a tree?
Are you searching for a man?"

Then the nun 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?"

Having considered it in this way, certainty of knowledge arose in her: "Māra, the Evil One, has come [trying] to flirt with me." She spoke in verse:
"Without limit are the sons,
Who all have died and been lost.[n.25] No reference to the countless sons who have died is found in the parallel versions.
This, then, is the end of men [for me],
I have gone beyond [the attraction of] men's external appearance. 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.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, now make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Kisāgotamī has understood my intentions." Being worried and sad, afflicted and annoyed, he vanished and was seen no more.

4) [Uppalavaṇṇā][n.26] SĀ 1201, parallel to SN 5.5 and SĀ2 217.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Uppalavaṇṇā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she put on her robes, took her bowl, and entered Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Uppalavaṇṇā, who is staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī, in the morning has put on her robes, taken her bowl, and entered Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, approached the nun Uppalavaṇṇā and said in verse:
"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 nun 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?"

Having considered it in this way, she realized: "This is certainly the evil Māra. The Evil One wants to confound me." She 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 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 eyebrows,
You will not be able to see me."[n.27] In SN 5.5 at SN I 132,11 (cf. also Thī 232) it is Uppalavaṇṇā who threatens to get into Māra's belly. SĀ2 217 at T II 454b28 agrees with SĀ 1201 that this threat was made by Māra.

Then the nun 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
Which are the root of fear.
Being established in the state of fearlessness
I do not fear Māra's army.[n.28] This set of stanzas has no counterpart in SN 5.5, although a comparable set can be found in SĀ2 217.
In regard to all craving and rejoicing,

I am entirely separated from the darkness [of ignorance],
Having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, you should make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Uppalavaṇṇā has understood my intentions." Harbouring sadness and worry within, he vanished and was seen no more.

5) [Selā][n.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. The stanzas associated in SĀ 1202, SĀ2 218, and D 4094 or Q 5595 with Selā are in SN 5.10 instead spoken by Vajirā. On such confusion of names in general cf. Anālayo 2007g.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Selā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Selā is staying in a community of nuns 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 finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance and went to the nun Selā. He said in verse:
"How has this being been born?
Who is its creator?
Whence has this being arisen?
Where will it go?"

The nun Selā 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 it, the realization arose: "This is the evil Māra, wanting to confound me." She 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,[n.30] Vetter 2000: 157 suggests that the Chinese character 陰 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 not followed his suggestion, as I am not aware of an instance in Āgama literature where 陰 renders saṅkhāra, hence it seems preferable to me to stick to the original and translate as "aggregates".
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 [just] the arising of dukkha,
Its persistence is also [just] the persistence of dukkha.
Nothing else arises but dukkha,
Dukkha arises and dukkha itself ceases.
Having relinquished all craving and dukkha,

I am entirely separated from the darkness [of ignorance],
Having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, therefore make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Selā has understood my intentions." Harbouring sadness and sorrow within, he then vanished and was seen no more.

6) [Vīrā][n.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. Bingenheimer 2011: 156–159.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Vīrā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Vīrā is staying in a community of nuns 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 finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, approached the nun Vīrā and said in verse:
"How has this bodily shape been created?
Who is its creator?
Whence has this bodily shape arisen?
Where will this bodily shape go?"

The nun 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 in this way, she gained the realization: "This is the evil Māra, wanting to confound me." She 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 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,[n.32] SN 5.9 at SN I 134,26 instead mentions the essence of the earth and moisture as the conditions for the growth of a seed. SĀ2 219 at T II 455a23 mentions just the earth, which Bingenheimer 2011: 173 note 46 suggests to be due to a loss of text. So it is also with the aggregates, elements, and sense-spheres. Through the coming together of conditions they arise,
Being separated from those conditions they will be obliterated. I have relinquished all craving and dukkha,
I am entirely separated from the darkness [of ignorance],
Having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"Evil Māra, I know you, make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Vīrā has understood my intentions." Great sadness and sorrow arose [in him], he vanished and was seen no more.

7) [Vijayā][n.33] SĀ 1204, parallel to SN 5.4 and SĀ2 220.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Vijayā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "This recluse Gotama is staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. His disciple, the nun Vijayā, is staying in a community of nuns 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 finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, went into her presence, and said in verse:
"Now you are young,
I am also young.
Let us, in this place,
Perform the five types of music,[n.34] This would be music performed with five different instruments; cf. Spk I 191,24.

And enjoy ourselves together!
Of what use is this meditative musing?"[n.35] A reference to meditative musing is not found in the parallels.

Then the nun 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 it in this way, she gained the realization: "This is Māra, the Evil One, wanting to confound me." She 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.[n.36] In SN 5.4 at SN I 131,9 Vijayā 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.
With the quietude of extinction rightly experienced,
I take the five sense pleasures of even devas, or of humans
And give them all [to you],
I have no need of them.[n.37] SN 5.4 at SN I 131,11 instead continues with a set of stanzas on being repelled by the putrid nature of the body.
Having relinquished all rejoicing and delight,
I am entirely separated from the darkness [of ignorance],
By having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, you should make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Vijayā has understood my intentions." Harbouring sadness and sorrow within, he vanished and was seen no more.

8) [Cālā][n.38] SĀ 1205, parallel to SN 5.6 and SĀ2 221; cf. also Enomoto 1994: 43.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Cālā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and went to the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Cālā is also staying in Sāvatthī, in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma. In the morning she has put on her robes, taken her bowl, and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, has taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, went into the presence of the nun Cālā, and said in verse: "Understand that to experience birth is delightful,
Being born one partakes of the five sense pleasures.
Who taught you,[n.39] Adopting the variant 授 instead of 受; cf. also Yìnshùn 1983c: 195 note 16.
Making you weary of birth?"[n.40] [39] Whereas SĀ2 221 proceeds similarly, in SN 5.6 at SN 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 then takes up the theme of being weary of birth.

Then the nun Cālā 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?"

[She understood: "This is the evil Māra],[n.41] [40] The text supplemented in square brackets appears to have been lost. who has come here wanting to confound me." She spoke in verse:
"For those who are born, there certainly will be death,
To be born is thus 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 contemplating the noble truths
This teaching has been proclaimed by the Sage:
The affliction of dukkha, and the arising of dukkha,
cessation and being separated from all dukkha,
Cultivation of the eightfold right path
To peace and ease, which inclines to Nirvāṇa.[n.42] [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 realm of form and the formless realm come back to existence because of not having understood cessation.
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 entirely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
By having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, you should make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Cālā knows my intention." Harbouring sadness and sorrow within, he vanished and was seen no more.

9) [Upacālā][n.43] [42] SĀ 1206, parallel to SN 5.7 and SĀ2 222.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Upacālā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning, she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Upacālā is also staying in Sāvatthī, in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma. In the morning she has put on her robes, taken her bowl, and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, has taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now approach and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, went to the nun Upacālā, and said in verse:
"In the upper Heaven of the Thirty-three,
In the [heavens] of Yāma, Tusita,

The Nimmānaratī, and the Paranimmitavasavattī,
Aspire to attain rebirth there!"

The nun 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 spoke in verse:
"In the upper Heaven of the Thirty-three,
In the [heavens] of Yāma, Tusita,
The Nimmānaratī, and the Paranimmitavasavattī,
All these upper types of heavens,
Are not separated from being a product of formations,[n.44] [43] SN 5.7 at SN I 133,15 instead indicates that all these celestial beings are still bound by the bondage of sensuality, whereas SĀ2 222 at T II 456a12 points out that they have not yet separated themselves from the view of self.
Therefore they are in Māra's power.[n.45] [44] On Māra's power over the different heavenly realms of the sensual field cf. also above note 4.
The whole world
Is entirely a collection of various formations.[n.46] [45] For parallels to these stanzas cf. Chung 2008: 229.
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 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,

Having entirely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
By having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, therefore make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Upacālā has understood my intentions." Being sad and sorrowful within, he vanished and was seen no more.

10) [Sīsupacālā][n.47] [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.

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. At that time the nun Sīsupacālā was staying in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma in Sāvatthī. In the morning she 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, finished washing her feet, took her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and went to the Andhavana, where she sat down under a tree for the day's abiding.

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The recluse Gotama is now staying at Sāvatthī in Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's Park. The nun Sīsupacālā is also staying in Sāvatthī, in a community of nuns in the Rājakārāma. In the morning, she has put on her robes, taken her bowl, and entered the town of Sāvatthī to beg for alms. Having finished her meal, she has returned to the monastery, put away her robe and bowl, finished washing her feet, has taken her sitting mat, placed it over her shoulder, and entered the Andhavana, where she has sat down under a tree for the day's abiding. I shall now go and disturb her."

He transformed himself into a youth of handsome appearance, went to the nun Sīsupacālā, and said:

"Lady, in what method do you delight?"[n.48] [47] In SN 5.8 at SN I 133,27 Māra enquires what creed she approves of, whereas 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 hetorodox teachings cf. Deeg 2005: 310 note 1512.
The nun replied: "I do not delight in anything!"
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 nun Sīsupacālā 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 it in this way, she realized: "Māra, the Evil One, wants to confound me." She 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,
Having entirely relinquished the darkness [of ignorance],
By having realized the quietude of extinction,
I dwell in peace, established in the eradication of the influxes.

"I recognize you, evil Māra, thus make yourself disappear and go!"

Then Māra, the Evil One, thought: "The nun Sīsupacālā has understood my intentions." Harbouring sadness and sorrow within, he vanished and was seen no more.

---

Study

A comparison of the above-translated discourses with their Pāli counterparts 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 nun by the name of Vīrā in the parallels.[n.49] [48] Cf. above notes 29 and 31.

Another difference is that in the Saṃyukta-āgama all of the nuns make it clear, at the end of their reply to Māra, that they are fully awakened. Although comparable stanzas are not found in the Pāli version, several nuns in this collection nevertheless give clear indications of the high level of their realization.[n.50] [49] In SN 5.2 at SN 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 SN I 130,23, Kisagotamī dwells free from the influxes, viharāmi anāsavā, a standard reference to arahantship. SN 5.4 at SN 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 the last 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 SN 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 nuns mentioned in the Saṃyutta-nikāya and the Saṃyukta-āgama are all arahants, as all of them without fail recognize Māra. The present difference thus does not seem to imply a major divergence on the spiritual status of these ten nuns.

Another 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 nun to threaten to enter someone else's belly.

According to the parallel versions, it is rather Māra who makes this threat.[n.51] [50] Cf. above note 27. For Māra such an action is more easily conceivable, as another discourse reports that he got into the belly of an arahant monk.[n.52] [51] MN 50 at MN 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. Hence it seems as if the Pāli version has suffered an error in transmission, and that the original sense was indeed that Māra threatened to get into Uppalavaṇṇā's belly.

This also accords better with the overall attitude maintained by the nuns, who do not react to being threatened by threatening back, but instead remain equanimous and unimpressed by whatever Māra has come up with.

The challenges posed by Māra cover several distinct themes. A particularly prominent theme is sensuality, evident in Māra's invitation to consume 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 single woman must be wishing for a man (3), the threat posed to a lone nun by a man with evil intentions, evidently 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 in fact forms an undercurrent in the entire set of ten discourses, where a male approaches a nun who is all alone in a forest. This much is evident in the recurrent reflection by each nun in the Saṃyukta-āgama about whether the speaker might be scheming to seduce her (although such a reflection is not found in the parallel versions).

Other challenges have a more doctrinal slant, such as in cases in which two nuns refute Māra's views about a truly existing being or a 'bodily shape' (5 and 6). Also related to the doctrinal sphere is the idea of delighting in some outside teaching (10). One case moreover involves questioning the spiritual abilities of women (2).

The main themes of Māra's challenges are thus:

Sensuality:

• enjoying sensual pleasures: Āḷavikā (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)

Doctrinal Challenges:

• belief in a truly existing being or 'bodily shape': Selā (5) and Vīrā (6)
• delight in another teaching: Sīsupacālā (10)

Women's Abilities:

• inability of women to gain awakening: Somā (2)

Some of these challenges voiced by Māra appear to be specifically directed at the nun he has decided to approach. 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 had passed away.[n.53] [52] Thī-a I 169,10; cf. also, e.g., T 212 at T IV 618b12. As her stanzas make clear, any concern with children or a male partner is something she has forever left behind. Similarly, the challenge Māra poses to Uppalavaṇṇā (4) appears to be related to the story of her being raped when dwelling alone in a forest.[n.54] [53] Cf., e.g., the Mahīśāsaka and Theravāda Vinayas, T 1421 at T XXII 25b27 and Vin III 35,1. Her reply shows that even the horrible experience of being violated does not traumatize an arahant nun.

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 nun to enjoy herself with him (7). This sets a remarkable contrast 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.[n.55] [54] SN 4.25 at SN I 124,23 and its parallels SHT V 1441 R, Sander and Waldschmidt 1985: 257, SĀ 1092 at T II 287a1, and SĀ2 31 at T II 383c2; cf. also the Lalitavistara, Lefmann 1902: 378,14, and the Mahāvastu, Senart 1897: 282,4.

This makes it clear that early Buddhism does not unilaterally consider 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 Māra – who stands for sensual temptation and sexual aggression.[n.56] [55] For a comparative study of the dictum according to which only men can occupy certain positions, one of them being Māra, cf. Anālayo 2009a. In contrast, those who are disinterested in sex are females.

This finding provides an important corrective to a mode of presentation 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 Buddhism." According to Sarao (1989: 56) "to ancient Indian Buddhism all women were daughters of Māra." In a similar vein, Wilson (1996: 36) speaks of a "tendency to cast all human women in the role of Māra's daughters … women are essentially minions of Māra."[n.57] [56] Wilson 1996: 36 supports her conclusion by referring to a statement in AN 5.55 at AN 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: 126f. Thus the statement needs to be considered as a response to a specific event that precedes it in the discourse. Moreover, this discourse is without any known parallel. 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 towards women on a broad range of sources that are extant in parallel versions, and these then need to be evaluated within their narrative context. As Collett 2006: 82 points out, "Wilson rather overemphasizes the negative portrayals of women she finds and essentially extrapolates from her sources to construct an overarching view of women in early and medieval Buddhism that is one-sided and unbalanced."

The circumstance that many discourses are addressed to a male monastic audience, simply because monks 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 the 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.[n.58] [57] On this topic cf. also the revealing findings by Collett 2014. 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 recluses from their spiritual strivings", the stanzas spoken by the therīs present "men as seducers".

As already pointed out by Collett (2009a: 111f), in such instances, "far from women being themselves the snare of Māra, instead … Māra is representative 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 monks with the challenge that they should enjoy sensual pleasures instead of living the life of one gone forth.[n.59] [58] SN 4.21 at SN I 117,23 and its parallel SĀ 1099 at T II 289a16. 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 agents of sexual temptation. 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 this set of ten episodes, where each nun instantly recognizes Māra and sends him away. A telling juxtaposition emerges once this is compared to cases where Māra challenges monks.

The Māra-saṃyutta reports that several monks are not able to recognize Māra and need the Buddha's personal intervention to deal with the situation. For example, in the above-mentioned story where Māra transforms himself into an ox and starts walking close to their begging bowls, the monks fail to recognize him.[n.60] [59] Cf. above note 7. He is thus successful in distracting them from listening to the talk given by the Buddha.

Again, in the instance where Māra tempts a group of monks with the suggestion that they should enjoy sensual pleasures, although they are able to give a fitting reply, they fail to recognize him.[n.61] [60] Cf. above note 59. The same pattern, with the monks unable to recognize Māra, recurs in another two cases.[n.62] [61] The first instance involves a group of monks, the second a single monk. In both cases, the Pāli versions SN 4.17 at SN I 113,14 and SN 4.22 at SN 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 monk(s) fail to recognize him. Not all monks, however, are unable to recognize Māra. In the above-mentioned case of Māra getting into the belly of an arahant monk, the monk immediately recognizes Māra (cf. note 52). Another case is a tale that involves the monk Nanda, who on being addressed by Māra recognizes him; cf. EĀ 16.1 at T II 578c22. Thus some male monastics are clearly depicted as not being able to handle Māra on their own in the way their monastic sisters did.

In contrast, not a single nun is on record for having failed to recognize Māra or for having been unable to dispatch him singlehandedly with a self-confident rebuttal.[n.63] Payutto in Payutto and Seeger 2014: 41 draws attention to another related contrast, where "the Bhikkhunī Saṃyutta contains stories of bhikkhunīs chasing off Māra, and the Vana Saṃyutta contains stories of devatās admonishing monks." This obviously reflects the circumstance that these nuns are arahants, whereas some of their male colleagues had 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 Buddhist literature, the present set of discourses on challenges by Māra is a clear instance where the nuns are presented in a more favourable light than their male counterparts.

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 where 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 female teacher would have stood less of a chance of being taken seriously than a male.[n.64] [62] Cf. in more detail Anālayo 2009a: 162f. 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 woman's two-fingers wit, apparently a pun on women's use of two fingers when doing household chores,[n.65] [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 note 336, Abeynayake 2003: 3, and Collett 2009b: 99 note 7. has been quoted repeatedly in writings about the role of women in early Buddhism.[n.66] [64] To mention just 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, Dewaraja 1999: 67, Harris 1999: 60, Harvey 2000/2005: 359, Dhammavihari 2002/2011: 6, Abeynayake 2003: 3, Faure 2003: 120, Bentor 2008: 126, Anālayo 2009a: 137, Choubey 2009: 6, Collett 2009b: 99, and Anālayo 2010j: 74. Due to the way Māra's challenges 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 ability to reach it? Instead of reflecting Somā's uncertainties, the point made by the present episode is that, from an early Buddhist perspective, doubting women's ability to reach awakening can only be the work of Māra.[n.67] [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 note 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 stanza in the Apadāna collection, according to which the Buddha told Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī that she should make a display of her supernatural abilities to remove the erroneous views of those fools 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 Dharma
Perform a supernatural feat, Gotamī.[n.68] [66] Ap 17.79 at Ap 535,24: thīnaṃ dhammābhisamaye, ye bālā vimatiṃ gatā, tesaṃ diṭṭhipahānatthaṃ, iddhiṃ dassehi gotami, which continues by describing the miracles she performed.