འདལ་བ་གཞ intro.108

intro.108

Kapphiṇa’s story seems to be a narrative about the need for a quorum—the presence or consent of all monks on site—during the restoration rite.²³ The need for a quorum reflects an important function of the restoration rite, which is to affirm the purity of the saṅgha on a regular basis. Here, for a monk or nun to be “pure” means either (1) that they have not incurred any offenses or (2) that they have confessed and made amends for them. Many scholars have observed that the saṅgha’s reputation for upstanding moral conduct was inextricably tied to patronage, that the saṅgha’s purity was the form of currency famously described by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu as “symbolic” and “cultural capital.”²⁴ That the saṅgha communally affirms its members’ monastic purity every fortnight assures the laity that the saṅgha is the proper recipient of alms—that giving to the saṅgha will yield desirable karmic fruits—which helps to ensure continued lay support. This was a pressing social concern for Buddhist monastics, as can be discerned in the narrative that begins this chapter, which portrays a group of laypeople admiring the upavasatha observances of non-Buddhist ascetic communities.