WAM

Theravāda in the 21st century - modern applications of ancient wisdom

WAM

Postby bodhabill » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:40 pm

Hi All

I wanted to find out more about the WAM meeting that was to be held at Bodhinyana in Perth this month (December) but because of other issues is now apparently going to be held at Wat Nong Pah Pong

Who gets to go, is it truly a World Abbots meeting eg all Buddhists or just Theravadin, or just Ajahn Chah affiliated monasteries?

What are the topics under discussion?

Can anyone attend?

Can lay Buddhists or non attending monks raise points of discussion?

What effect does any decision made at WAM have on Buddhists in general?

I have googled to find out more but there is a total lack of information on the web :shrug:

With Metta
Bill
"Complaining is finding faults, wisdom is finding solutions" Ajahn Brahm
User avatar
bodhabill
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:38 am
Location: NSW Australia

Re: WAM

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:54 pm

Hi Bill,

I believe that it is essentially just the Abbots of the Western Ajahn Chah monasteries. I believe there some discussion of the technicalities (how big a monastery has to be for their Abbot to have voting rights, etc) somewhere on Ven Sujato's blog: http://sujato.wordpress.com/ but I can't find it with a quick search.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10563
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: WAM

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:25 pm

Here is an extract from a comment by Ven Sujato in his Blog:
http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/ ... -nanachat/
... the WAM (Western Abbots Meeting) is an informal gathering of senior western Ajahns from the Ajahn Chah tradition – no more, no less. It has no charter, no procedures, and by its own explicit and emphatic declaration, no decision making powers. ...

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10563
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: WAM

Postby Cittasanto » Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:16 am

it is the meeting of all the abots of branch monasteries of WPP, I believe it is the letter from the forest sangha called where we are now has some info in it regarding the meeting and who attends, and the attendees put forward things to go on the agenda. there is also a representivive from each of the monasteries sanghas also who goes (typically a thera) but not just anyone can put forward things for the agenda, and I don't know about who else can attend, but this is to the best of my knowledge and may not be accurate!
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: WAM

Postby cooran » Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:12 am

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Bill,

I believe that it is essentially just the Abbots of the Western Ajahn Chah monasteries. I believe there some discussion of the technicalities (how big a monastery has to be for their Abbot to have voting rights, etc) somewhere on Ven Sujato's blog: http://sujato.wordpress.com/ but I can't find it with a quick search.

Metta
Mike

Hello Mike,

Ajahn Dhammasiha is an Abbot in the Ajahn Chah Forest Tradition and will be flying out of Brisbane on Friday 4th December for the WAM meeting in Thailand.

Presently we only have three bhikkhus at the Hermitage - Ajahn Dhammasiha, Ajahn Ariyasilo, and Ven. Paramito. Ajahn Dhammasiha is the permanent Abbot, Ven. Paramito has been with us nearly a year from Amaravati in U.K. and Ajahn Ariyasilo is with us only for a month or so, from England via Melbourne.

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
cooran
 
Posts: 7720
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: WAM

Postby bodhabill » Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:58 am

Hi All

Thanks for the information about WAM

Just wanted to touch base and see if anyone knows if it is over yet and if so what was discussed and what decisions were made

My obvious interest is that apparently Bhikkhuni ordination was supposed to be on the agenda

With Metta
Bill
"Complaining is finding faults, wisdom is finding solutions" Ajahn Brahm
User avatar
bodhabill
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:38 am
Location: NSW Australia

Re: WAM

Postby Cittasanto » Thu Dec 10, 2009 2:13 am

Don't think it has happened yet?

but you would be better to contact one of the monestaries or forest sangha directly with queries regarding there workings.

iof you are wondering if they are about to change the rule regarding Bhikkhuni ordination or closer to doing so, it is doubtful as it is part of the thai councils rules they adhere to - see the letter on Dhammalight regarding Brahms preceptor status for the details.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: WAM

Postby David N. Snyder » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:34 am

The meeting was held in Thailand December 7 to December 9.

It is still Dec, 9 where I am located, but in Thailand it is well into Dec. 10 right now, so the meeting must have just finished. Hopefully, we should hear something in the next day or two.
User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: WAM

Postby Bankei » Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:23 pm

Wonder if any protesters turned up?
-----------------------
Bankei
Bankei
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:40 am

Re: WAM

Postby bodhabill » Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:52 am

Bankei wrote:Wonder if any protesters turned up?

I'm not sure about protesters but I do know that a petition regarding the Bhikhuni ordination was presented to those attending WAM

An update from Bhante Sujato's blog

The following is an email fromm Jacqui McGirr one of the facilitators for the petition.


Dear contacts,

Ajahn Sona, who attended the WAM meeting, has agreed with Ayya Tathaaloka to give a report from WAM to a public meeting in Vancouver, at 1pm on Sunday 13 December. (GMT/UTC +8).

From A.Tathaaloka’s email:

Additionally, on request, Ajahn Sona, the abbot of Birkin Forest Monastery in Canada, a WAM participant, has accepted an invitation to speak publicaly on the subject of the WAM and answer questions about it when he returns to Vancouver, Canada on Sunday the 13th at 1:30 pm GMT. A hall has been booked with seating for 50 persons in Vancouver, all seats already reserved. This afternoon, i suggested the possibility of video conference calling via Skype, so that those who would like to participate in the meeting would be able to.

Brenda from bhikkuni.net is making access to the conference (it’ll be 8am Monday on Sydney time, I think) more widely available through skype.

If you would like to participate, please contact Brenda Batke-Hirschmann at the email address below by 8 pm GMT tomorrow with your Skype name. You do not need a video camera to see Skype video or to be heard when you speak. You do need a mic and speakers or headphones.

Please know, there may be the possibility for some questions to be asked and answered. It will not be possible to ask or answer all questions.

Brenda’s email is: batke@bhikkhuni.net

If you are interested in hearing WAM’s response, I hope you are able to join the skype conference to hear WAM’s response. If not, I’ll pass on the transcript and any other information I recieve.

In her email, Ayya Tathaaloka also said:

Abhayagiri co-abbot Ajahn Pasanno has written me expressing appreciation for the input that i and so many others contributed to the WAM. He said that a written statement is being drafted by several Ajahns and will be coming forth in a few days.

We live in interesting times.

With metta,

Jacqui


With Metta
Bill
"Complaining is finding faults, wisdom is finding solutions" Ajahn Brahm
User avatar
bodhabill
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:38 am
Location: NSW Australia

Re: WAM

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:50 am

Shame I am too late to arrange hearing it!
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: WAM

Postby roni » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:54 pm

Posted today on the facebook forum "Women & Forest Sangha" by Thanissara:
(http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1 ... opic=11886)

The gathering of elders, Dec. 2009
The latest gathering of Western elders of the Ajahn Chah Sangha (referred to informally as
WAM) took place from the 7-9th December 2009 at Wat Pah Nanachat, in Ubon, Northeast
Thailand. The gathering was attended by some twenty-eight elders, including Ven. Ajahn
Sumedho, abbot of Amaravati Buddhist Monastery in England, the senior Western disciple of
Ajahn Chah. Luang Por Liem, the abbot of Wat Pah Pong, (Ajahn Chah's monastery) kindly
gave an opening address.
The gathering this year was dominated by discussion of the unfortunate events
surrounding the delisting of Bodhinyana Monastery in Perth, Western Australia from the
Ajahn Chah Sangha, and the estrangement of an old friend and erstwhile member of the
group, Ajahn Brahmavamso.
The events of the last two months have caused an unprecedented storm in our
communities, both monastic and lay, and feelings of division have run high throughout the
wider Buddhist world. Evidence of this was clear in a petition and various letters presented to
the gathering. Several elders noted how many familiar names appeared in the documents.
Sympathy with the feelings expressed in them was mixed with a regret that they were often
based on an interpretation of events that differed markedly from our own. There was a sense
of frustration that we had not as yet been able to adequately transmit our understanding of
the various issues raised, accompanied by an acknowledgment that it was hard to see how it
could have been any other way. Our commitment to the principle of consultation and
consensus meant that we had no choice but to delay crafting a coherent response until we
could come together as a group and discuss the matter face to face.
It might be worthwhile at this point to give a brief overview of the nature of our
Sangha. The first thing that must be said is that the Ajahn Chah Sangha is far from being the
monolithic Vatican-like entity that some have portrayed it as. It is in most senses a noticeably
loose and flexible association of monastics. It currently consists of well over 300 monasteries,
with perhaps 2200 Thai monks and nuns and some 170 of various other nationalities, 40 of
whom reside in Thailand with the remainder living in branch monasteries throughout the
world.
Membership of the Ajahn Chah Sangha is voluntary and contingent on accepting
certain basic standards and principles. The Western Sangha is a subset of the whole,
1
autonomous in the running of all its own affairs overseas – except in cases whereby they
directly oppose the wishes of the larger group. In turn the Ajahn Chah Sangha in Thailand
operates within constraints overseen by the Thai Sangha governing council (Maha-thera
Samakom) and, through respecting those, is able to maintain its own distinct character.
Ajahn Chah is one of the most loved and revered figures in the Buddhist world.
Association with his name confers privileges and responsibilities, both spiritual and material.
It is no surprise then that the elders of the Ajahn Chah Sangha consider it their duty to care
for the integrity of the lineage. For the Ajahn Chah Sangha the crux of the problems leading
up to Ajahn Brahmavamso's delisting was his determination to follow his own highly
controversial agenda, without consultation and contrary to the wishes of the elders. The
particular topic on his agenda – the ceremony performed in Perth on the 22nd of October – was
an important but not the crucial element.
One of the reasons that we have found it difficult to respond to matters surrounding
that ceremony has been our feeling that the issue has been framed in a seriously misleading
way. It seems to us that a number of factors have been conflated that need to be dealt with
separately. In addition, the delisting of Bodhinyana monastery by the Ajahn Chah Sangha has
been presented on the web as a patriarchal knee-jerk. The situation of the siladharas in
England has been cited as a proof of our unwillingness to give the appropriate respect to
women's spiritual aspirations. We do not see things in this way.
Here we will offer an explanation on what we see as three related but separate topics:
1. The event in Perth and its repercussions
2. Bhikkhuni ordination
3. The Siladhara Order
1. The event in Perth and its repercussions
In mid-October Ajahn Brahmavamso informed Ven. Ajahn Sumedho that he would
conduct a bhikkhuni ordination in Perth before the end of the month. When the news reached
the larger Sangha the reaction was one of surprise and a deep dismay. The source of these
feelings was not outright opposition to bhikkhuni ordination as such (in fact a number
of our Western elders consider the arguments supporting its legitimacy to be well-founded),
but the sense that the way the ordination had been arranged constituted a serious betrayal of
trust.
What made us feel that way? Well, a meeting of the Western elders of the Ajahn Chah
2
Sangha had been planned for December, and one of the main items on the agenda was to be
the topic of bhikkhuni ordination. This meeting was to be hosted by Ajahn Brahmavamso and
his Sangha in Perth. Given the importance the elders attached to the coming discussion, we
could not understand why the ordination should be rushed through before our meeting.
Why, we wondered, could it not have been performed after our meeting? Why despite a long
period of preparation were we given so little notice? And why should the preparations have
been deliberately concealed? We were to be presented with a fait accompli. A major and
controversial innovation, considered illegitimate by the Thai Sangha, would be performed
unilaterally. The message to us seemed to be that this ordination was none of our business.
Our part was merely to get used to it.
We still feel that we have not received any satisfactory answers to these questions. We
do not understand why Ajahn Brahmavamso should have felt able to act in this manner,
given that both verbally and in writing he had affirmed that he would not do so. In fact as
recently as last year, in a written response to one of our elders, he had stated that he felt hurt
that anyone could believe that he would consider such a move. We have been told that Ajahn
Brahmavamso subsequently changed his mind and that we ‘should move on.’ But, given the
emphasis we as bhikkhus place on keeping our word, we do not consider this to be an
adequate response.
To the Ajahn Chah Sangha elders the issue was thus primarily one of a disregard for
the agreed standard of seeking and gaining consent for actions that affect the whole group. In
June 2009 the Ajahn Chah Sangha at Wat Pa Pong reaffirmed its willingness to conform with
the Thai Sangha governing council's current position: that bhikkhuni ordination has ceased to
exist and cannot be legitimately revived. It was taken as given that continued membership of
the group would be contingent on upholding that resolution. In our monastic culture, the
disrespect perceived in Ajahn Brahmavamso's actions is, in other words, profound. It is
comparable to a slap in the face.
Having decided to go ahead with his plan come what may, Ajahn Brahmavamso did so
without informing either his preceptor, Somdet Buddhajahn, (currently also the acting head
of the Thai Sangha), or Luang Por Liem, the head of the Ajahn Chah Sangha. The reason that
that is significant is that he was performing a ceremony considered highly controversial by
the Thai Sangha, and one bound to fail to receive their acceptance.
Ajahn Brahmavamso had, over the years, received permission to act as a preceptor and
had been granted a royal ecclesiastical title – these are no small things for a Western monk to
be honoured with. These signify tremendous recognition, trust and responsibility. In acting as
3
he did Ajahn Brahmavamso seemed to render them meaningless. It was widely perceived as
gross ingratitude, particularly amongst the Thai Sangha.
At the November 1st meeting at Wat Pah Pong, Ajahn Brahmavamso was given the
opportunity to reconcile himself with the Sangha of Wat Pah Pong, and by extension the Thai
Sangha at large, by acknowledging the invalidity of the ordination ceremony. Having been
formally presented with the option three times, he still felt unable to do so. The Sangha felt in
turn that it had no alternative but to delist his monastery. As can be heard clearly on the
recording of the meeting the resolution was by no means a matter of 'a few grunts,' as it has
been widely represented, but rather it was a rousing agreement on the part of the 160 strong
monastic assembly, with Ajahn Brahmavamso himself providing the solitary voice of dissent.1
The resolution was not intended as a punishment but as a formal recognition of a parting of
ways. From this point on Ajahn Brahmavamso could no longer consider himself to be
representing the Ajahn Chah community.
2. Bhikkhuni ordination
There are reasonable arguments in favor of bhikkhuni ordination, and reasonable
arguments against it. Within our community opinions on the matter vary. In the light of this,
the situation we currently find ourselves in is a balancing act of daunting proportions; on the
one side there is the need to be faithful to our origins, and on the other the need to be faithful
to the time and societies we live in.
As part of a larger tradition rooted in Thailand, any changes of this magnitude which
we might wish to initiate would require the consent of the wider Sangha. In order not to
become ripped apart, all the members of the Sangha body must proceed in the same
direction. Since our lineage does not, at least at present, formally accept the legitimacy of
Theravada bhikkhuni ordination, we do not have the authority to carry it out on our own
initiative, without breaking that connection with our roots. This view is not just restricted to
the Ajahn Chah Sangha. For example, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, at the conference he
called on bhikshuni ordination in 2007, said he could not go ahead with reinstating the
bhikshuni order without the full consent of the Tibetan Sangha, despite the unanimous
agreement of the conference that it should be.
1 To hear the recording of this, please visit http://www.forestsangha.org
4
The way we see it is that, in order to effect significant change in the status of practice
opportunities for women in the Theravada world, it is not just a matter of going our own way
with sanctioning bhikkhuni ordinations and hoping, let alone expecting, that the wider
Sangha will just go along with that. Rather the effect of such a move would be to drive a
wedge between the Western branches of our community and the other 300 or so based in
Thailand. From our point of view it seems that there would be very little positive result from
this orphaning of ourselves from the roots of our community. We realize that this is probably
not the view of many Buddhists in the West, however, this kind of severance is something we
see as being a damaging wound that would compromise the spiritual welfare of all women
and men, lay and monastic, that are a part of this lineage of Dhamma practice.
The Sangha is an ancient institution; it is the longest surviving organization that still
operates under its original bylaws. It is also almost 1000 years since the last recorded
Theravada bhikkhunis of the classical era lived in Sri Lanka. For such a huge change as this to
take place, to reinstate this venerable and rich lineage of Dhamma practice with the full
approval and sanction of the wider Sangha, it seems reasonable to take the time to gain a
broad consensus.
Even though changes in such an ancient organism must necessarily occur slowly, it is
also the case that change can come. There are high-ranking and esteemed elders of the Thai
Sangha, notably the acting supreme patriarch, Somdet Buddhajahn, who have made it their
business to investigate the status and training of bhikkhunis. It is also the intention for some
of those who attended this meeting of Western abbots of the Wat Pah Pong lineage to consult
with members of the governing body of the Thai Sangha in order to discuss further research
on the topic of the bhikkhuni lineage and opportunities for renunciant practice of women in
Theravada Buddhism.
The Theravada tradition is like a gnarled and deeply rooted oak, yet one that still bears
abundant and fertile seeds. The depth of its roots and the thickness of its branches are some
of the reasons why it has lasted for so long. If it was a flimsy sapling, to change and mold it
would be easy but its ability to withstand the vagaries of weather and disease would be
significantly less. It is our concern to treat this venerable entity with the respect that it
deserves and to tend its seeds so that they too may flourish and their potential be fulfilled.
5
3. The Siladhara Order
A shared goal, a specific opportunity
In the case of the Siladhara and the 'five points' our sense is that there has been a
miscommunication regarding the overall perspective of how the established Bhikkhu Sangha
seeks to support a modern nuns' order, as well as misinformation regarding the 'five points.'
However we do feel that we share the concerns of the petition in that we are aware of the
limited opportunities that there are for women to train in Dhamma-Vinaya, and also have a
wish to support women's aspirations towards liberation.
The Bhikkhu Sangha has preserved and sustained the Buddha's dispensation for more
than two thousand years and we acknowledge that it is its responsibility to pass it on. As in
Theravada there is no consensus on the re-establishment of the bhikkhuni training, and no
lineage or present company of great Theravada bhikkhuni teachers to instruct newcomers,
what we can offer at this time has to operate within the Sangha vehicle as it is working in this
day and age.
Of course anyone can practise morality, meditation and renunciation; but to belong to
an order of Buddhist nuns means being accepted into the larger monastic Sangha, of which
the only element that remains universally recognized is the Bhikkhu Sangha. Through being
connected to such a body, one has access to the resources of monastic teachers, and the trust
and welcome of lay people who have faith in the established Sangha, as well to the material
requisites and infrastructure of monasteries. This set of opportunities underpins the vehicle
that has come to be known as the 'Siladhara' (= those who uphold virtue) training.
History of the Siladhara Order
In 1983, Ven. Ajahn Sumedho, having received the permission of the Thai Sangha that
had authorised him as Preceptor, gave the Ten Precepts to a small group of women who had
already trained under the Eight Precepts for more than three years at Cittaviveka Monastery
in England. Ajahn Sumedho's aim was to provide an opportunity for women to train as almsmendicants
within the conventions that were held by the Bhikkhu Sangha. Subsequently, he
asked that a training be developed that would flesh out the basic moral structure that the Ten
Precepts represent with details that could support the nuns as an autonomous Order. So a
training was developed that drew from the Bhikkhuni-Vinaya in order to cover issues that
might occur for women, as well as protocols that would enable them to manage their own
affairs. Through the ensuing years the training evolved through discussions with the nuns,
consultations with Ven. Ajahn Sumedho and the elders of his community, and presentations
to Thai and Sri Lankan elders.
6
There was no intention or authorisation however to establish a Bhikkhuni Order, or
any new independent Sangha. Therefore the relationship between the Siladhara Order and
the Bhikkhu Sangha was held to be one in which the siladhara would receive ordination from
an authorised bhikkhu preceptor. Moreover the convention of 'seniority' would apply as a
relational guide. This is the case in the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhuni Vinaya, and also defines the
relationship between the Bhikkhu and Bhikkhuni Sanghas as set up in the Vinaya. Such an
understanding is basic to the monastic form; it was there at the beginning and was not a new
structure imposed upon the nuns.
Seniority isn't a power structure
The convention of seniority in Theravada Buddhism acknowledges that the Bhikkhu
Sangha preceded that of the nuns. In daily life it covers matters of courtesy, like who sits
where in a formal group gathering, who stands where in a queue for the meal, and who pays
respects to whom in the act of formal greeting. Seniority also implies that the senior person in
the relationship is expected to look after, encourage and otherwise offer support to the junior.
However, the nuns may occupy positions of authority both in terms of teaching
Dhamma, and of training members of their nuns' community. They are shareholders of the
charitable Trust that owns and is legally responsible for Amaravati and Cittaviveka. They also
occupy positions on the Council of Elders that oversee 'Sangha business' in the group of
monasteries that were established in the name of Ven. Ajahn Sumedho.
It also has to be borne in mind that the aims and structures of Buddhist monastic life
are not designed to implement power over each other, or power in terms of management,
rather they are intended to establish the authority and inner strength to combat the fires of
ignorance in one's own mind. In this respect there is full equality of opportunity for women
and men. That said, as unenlightened beings, we recognize that there also need to be
safeguards against the abuses of position that may occur in the course of community life.
The 'five points' and the future
In the last few years, there has been growing divergence between the Bhikkhu Sangha
and the Siladhara in terms of the understanding of the relationship between these two
communities at Amaravati and Cittaviveka. At the same time, Ajahn Sumedho's recent
concern has been to firm up the understanding of the terms under which the Siladhara Order
receives its authorisation from the Bhikkhu Sangha. Recognizing that he will pass away in
due course of time, Ajahn Sumedho's intention is that the Bhikkhu Sangha within these
monasteries should act as guarantors of the Siladhara Order in the future, and that steps
7
should be taken now to carry this through. This is the origin of the 'five points.' Please bear in
mind that these are not a manifesto of a global vision for all women who aspire to liberation,
but a memo that outlines what these particular monasteries can offer. It seemed important to
get these clearly laid down so that interested parties would know from the outset what they
were committing to in terms of the relationship to the Bhikkhu Sangha. Then any aspirant
could make an informed choice as to whether to get on board, or to look for another vehicle.
We acknowledge that there may have been failings in the way that these five points
were presented to the nuns, and some of us sense that this point will need to be addressed in
the future. One agency that has been implemented to improve the process of feedback and
consultation is that of a 'liaison bhikkhu' who should be acceptable and respected by the nuns
and act as a channel of communication whenever dissonances arise in each dual-gender
community. The intention is to continue to develop ways of improvement, this being the
principle whereby the Buddha established the Vinaya.
One of Ven. Ajahn Chah's phrases about the mode and environment of Dhammapractice
was that it should be 'good enough' for enlightenment. Whatever the feelings and
views that may be aroused when a conservative Asian contemplative tradition meets the
psychological zeitgeist of the modern West, our intention has always been to offer something
'good enough' – something both immediate and workable. Still this is no small matter. The
Siladhara Order depends on the commitment of women of integrity to make it a lived-in
reality, and we feel that the efforts and results of the nuns' practice has been seriously
understated in the articles that have been generated around this topic. This is unjust,
particularly in the light of the rigor with which they apply themselves to their training.
Meanwhile, the Siladhara Order is currently sending out a branch to America at the
same time as it is receiving positive comments from the renowned bhikkhu-scholar P. A.
Payutto2 and the acting head of the Thai Sangha, Somdet Buddhajahn. We hope that, modest
as the origins of the Order have been, it may yet spread wherever there is interest in the
Buddha's teachings and be a source of light for both East and West.
4. How to move on?
Respect is an important quality in Buddhism. In its widest sense it means respect for
Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. It also means the quality of mutual respect between people
and it was reiterated, specifically in terms of respect for elders, as a foundational principle by
2 Tan Chao Khun Brahmagunaporn
8
the Buddha in his last days. Herein he defined it as one the seven causes of the long-lasting
welfare of his dispensation.
Respect for elders is signified in the very name for this tradition. 'Theravada' means 'the
way of the elders' and the defining spirit of this way of Dhamma practice is one that can
accurately be referred to as 'conservative.' It aims to conserve the way the teachings and the
monastic discipline were formulated in the earliest days as a path to liberation. The
movement to the West was not initiated in order to develop and modify Buddhism, but to
continue the practice of Dhamma-Vinaya wherever lay people had made invitation and
offered to support it. Nevertheless, if this meeting of timeless aspiration and contemporary
contexts is conducted in harmony, the fine-tuning of how Dhamma-Vinaya is applied in the
present is a natural consequence.
Disharmony is an obstacle to this, and we wish that all of us who have concern in this
area take steps to avoid the danger of polarization in the Buddhist world. Meanwhile, we
hope that this preceding article has helped to generate the kind of understanding that can be
a step in the right direction.
9
User avatar
roni
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:58 pm
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Re: WAM

Postby Bankei » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:08 pm

Seems to me the first loyalty of the WPP monks is to Thailand. More Thai than Buddhist.
-----------------------
Bankei
Bankei
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:40 am

Re: WAM

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:32 am

Bankei wrote:Seems to me the first loyalty of the WPP monks is to Thailand. More Thai than Buddhist.


How so?
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: WAM

Postby BlackBird » Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:34 am

Many of the things stated there make pretty good sense really. I can't really understand why they're so upset about the way Ajahn Brahm acted, but that's most likely a failing of mine, not a failing of the Wat Pa Pong sangha.

The 'How to move on' section is a bit of a stock Thai Buddhism passage, but however, the wounds take time to heal.

Anyway, back to the Zafu.

:anjali:
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta
User avatar
BlackBird
 
Posts: 1861
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: WAM

Postby Bankei » Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:44 pm

Manapa wrote:
Bankei wrote:Seems to me the first loyalty of the WPP monks is to Thailand. More Thai than Buddhist.


How so?


They seem very concerned about the rules of the Thai authorities, rather than the vinaya. This is despite the fact the monks overseas are mainly not Thai and are not even living there. They are imposing extra rules over and above the vinaya - eg revoking Bhikkhu Brahm's preceptor status even though he qualifies under the vinaya.

I wonder if they have pictures of the Thai royal family hanging in the 'wats' in the west?

Also, my use of the word wat reminds me on this. The forest sangha monks adopt Thai titles too. Such as Ajahn, Loong Po, etc instead of the Pali equivalent. There must be other Thai customs they have adopted too - such as not returning greetings or accepting things from the hand of a woman without touching. There is a link to some photos on another thread and it is interesting to see forest sangha westerners participating in the blessing of babies and houses, building stupas, Buddha statues etc.

However, this is to be expected considering the senior monks all trained in Thailand. Maybe over time this reliance on things Thai will wane and the Indian side of Buddhism will come out. Afterall there are many young monks who are ordaining in the West and have not trained in Thailand.
-----------------------
Bankei
Bankei
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:40 am

Re: WAM

Postby bhikkhuni sobhana » Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:25 pm

This is a first reaction to the recent statement from World Abbots Meeting. It's time for the women to move on.

I hope the bhikkhuni sangha may thrive, in a wholesome relationship to the bhikkhu sangha, that there will be opportunities for men and women to train together and opportunities for them to practice in their own spaces.

I hope the bhikkhunis and siladharas will not remain as strangers, but will have frequent meetings, and opportunities for cross-training. May each siladhara nun obtain her ideal practice situation, in whatever form is optimal.

I hope that lay persons will have the full spectrum of practice places, from being fully engaged in the world to full seclusion -- without necessarily taking on the traditional forms, and without being alienated from the ordained sangha.

In the Theravada, we put our faith in the early texts and grant them great authority, as if every chapter were really the word of the Buddha. By and large, this works for the harmony, fairness, and dignity of individuals and communities. That is part of the brilliance of the early texts.

So I pray that monastic communities will thrive, which respect Dhamma-Vinaya as stated in the earliest text. And those monastic communities that have drifted away will leave us alone.

I do not yet wish for multi-traditional monastic forms, but rather for friendship and frequent visitation among the traditions.

p.s. The training situations for bhikkhunis are still far from perfect. We really could use your talents and energy to make it happen. The perks are: lots of work, lunch every day, and hope.
bhikkhuni sobhana
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 6:11 am

Re: WAM

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Dec 15, 2009 9:05 am

here is the version on the Forest sangha with the relevant links down the bottom

http://www.forestsangha.org/index.php?o ... 5&Itemid=8
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5846
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin


Return to Theravāda for the modern world

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests