156
JULIAN F. PAS
monastic temple are not the same at all. A monastery is a residence for monks or nuns usually not open to the public, whereas a monastic temple is usually a public worship hall built on the monastic premises, but open to outsiders. Of great importance here is the difference between the large monasteries and the hereditary temples controlled by a small number of monks (or nuns), as discussed by Holmes Welch (The Practice of Chinese Buddhism). Both types do not operate in the same manner, and although Welch's observations do not necessarily apply to Taiwan, the distinction has to be kept in mind. What is a 'bone temple' and how is it different from a pagoda? The term 'bone temple' is peculiar: does it mean that bones are stored in the temple hall? From my own field work experience, I know that there are pagodas in which urns are stored, containing the ashes of Buddhist devotees who have been cremated. Is such a pagoda a bone temple? The word 'bone' does not seem appropriate. In Buddhist temples I also have seen side altars with large numbers of name-tablets of Buddhist believers, but no ashes or bones are to be found in these places. So I do not quite understand what 'bone temple' refers to. Bones are often placed in large urns after cleaning them for second burial but as far as I know, they are then reburied in a graveyard.
Besides this lack of precision of terms, some inaccuracies have to be pointed out. The author states (p. 114) that a monk by leaving home, eliminates the fundamental difference between his own ancestors and those of others. This enables him "to perform many services which might not otherwise be possible..." How is it then that Taoist priests, who are "fire dwellers”, are able to perform the same services? Further, the author says that "Because the monk has cut off his family ties, he becomes available as a surrogate descendant for others, and is able to take over their ancestral services. Because he has fundamentally broken the Confucian code of filiality, he needs not obey its sanctions against worshipping other people's ancestors." (p. 117). The two sentences are very distorted. The idea of causality, twice expressed by 'because' is a mere assumption and in fact unwarranted. The Buddhist monk shares these functions with Taoist priests and even with married Buddhist masters; moreover he does not become a surrogate descendant, he only performs the ancestral services in the place of the family, which is ultimately responsible. When families invite him to perform his services, it is not because he has broken the Confucian code: that