Asking about parajika

[whynotme]

Hi,

Parajika is rules for expulsion from the Sangha. I want to ask whethere parajika forbids that person become a bhikkhu again in the future?

Regards

[Hanzze]

For this life, as far as I know, yes.
It would not make much sense otherwise, wouldn't it?

[Cittasanto]

Hi,

Parajika is rules for expulsion from the Sangha. I want to ask whethere parajika forbids that person become a bhikkhu again in the future?

Regards

Yes in this life they are banned from the order.

[whynotme]

Thank you Hanzze and Cittasanto

Could you please cite some references in the vinaya?

Regards

[Cittasanto]

Thank you Hanzze and Cittasanto

Could you please cite some references in the vinaya?

Regards

The only copy I have available only has the patimokkha so can not cite propperly. however Thanissaro Bhikkhu relays this in the opening of the parajika section of the BMC1

This term, according to the Parivāra, derives from a verb meaning to lose or be defeated. A bhikkhu who commits any of the four following offenses has surrendered to his own mental defilements to such an extent that he defeats the purpose of his having become a bhikkhu in the first place. The irrevocable nature of this defeat is illustrated in the Vibhaṅga with a number of similes: "as a man with his head cut off... as a withered leaf freed from its stem... as a flat stone that has been broken in half cannot be put together again... as a palmyra tree cut off at the crown is incapable of further growth." A bhikkhu who commits any of these offenses severs himself irrevocably from the life of the Saṅgha and is no longer considered a bhikkhu.

but just to note the Parajika1 (sexual intercourse) starts with how to disrobe as it is recognised that those young in the training could still be swayed to break the rule but if they disrobe they are not goverened by the rules.

[Hanzze]

Good question

But like most, we find most in the "should-s" and not so much in the "not-s". No I can not recite

The Patimokkha classifies its rules into seven levels:

pārājika, defeat;
saṅghādisesa, entailing Communal meetings;
nissaggiya pācittiya, entailing forfeiture and confession;
pācittiya, entailing confession;
pāṭidesanīya, entailing acknowledgement;
sekhiya, trainings; and
adhikaraṇa samatha, the settlement of issues.

If a monk breaks one of the four most serious rules — the pārājikas (Pr) — he is expelled from the Community for life. If he breaks one of the next most serious classes of the rules — the saṅghādisesas (Sg) — he is put on probation for six days, during which time he is stripped of his seniority, is not trusted to go anywhere unaccompanied by four other monks of regular standing, and daily has to confess his offense to every monk who lives in or happens to visit the monastery. At the end of his probation, twenty monks have to be convened to reinstate him to his original status.

[whynotme]

Thank you guys again

[Modus.Ponens]

There's an interesting question to be made in this topic: if the ofender is a samanera, and not a bhikkhu, is he also expelled for life?

[Hanzze]

Interposed question: Are this questions here from theoretical nature, from intentions of defend/conquere or just out of interest (or to get things more understood)?

[Cittasanto]

There's an interesting question to be made in this topic: if the ofender is a samanera, and not a bhikkhu, is he also expelled for life?

no the Parajika are Bhikkhu/ni rules not samanera/i rules.
for a samanera (I am not sure about samaneri) if they have sex or mollest a bhikkhuni they are expelled.

'I prescribe, O Bhikkhus, that you expel a novice (from the fraternity) in the following ten cases: When he destroys life; when he commits theft; when he commits impurity; when he is a liar; when he drinks strong drinks; when he speaks against the Buddha; when he speaks against the Dhamma; when he speaks against the Samgha; when he holds false doctrines; when he has sexual intercourse with Bhikkhunîs1. In these ten cases I prescribe, O Bhikkhus, that you expel the novice (from the fraternity).'

I am not aware that the vinaya spells out what this means (whether perminent or not) But the BMC2 explains the commenteries position

Expulsion. As stated under Pc 70, a misbehaving novice may be subject to two types of expulsion: expulsion from his status as a novice and expulsion as a punishment. As with punishment, expulsion is the responsibility of the novice's mentor. Pc 70 covers the second form of expulsion. Here we will discuss the first.

There are ten grounds for a novice's expulsion:

he is a taker of life,
he is a taker of what is not given,
he engages in unchastity,
he is a speaker of lies,
he is a drinker of intoxicants,
he speaks dispraise of the Buddha,
he speaks dispraise of the Dhamma,
he speaks dispraise of the Saṅgha,
he holds wrong views, or
he is a molester of a bhikkhunī.

The Commentary details the extent to which any of these acts would subject the novice to expulsion: with regard to the first precept, killing ants or smashing bed bug eggs; with regard to the second, stealing a blade of grass; with regard to the third, genital, anal, or oral intercourse; with regard to the fourth, telling a lie even in jest; with regard to the fifth, intentionally drinking alcohol. As stated above, a novice who commits any of these acts has broken his Triple Refuge. If he sees the error of his ways, he may take the Triple Refuge again. If not, he should be expelled from his status as a novice.

Dispraise of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha, the Commentary says, means speaking in terms contradictory to those used in the standard chant of praise to the Triple Gem — asserting, for instance, that the Buddha's Dhamma is poorly taught, or that his disciples practice crookedly. An offender in this case should be reprimanded. If he sees the error of his ways, he should be punished with an appropriate prohibition and then given the training rules again. If he doesn't, he should be expelled. The same holds for a novice espousing wrong views — which, according to the Commentary, means espousing either the extreme of eternalism or the extreme of annihilationism. Only a molester of a bhikkhunī is automatically expelled without further ado. Such a novice also makes himself ineligible from taking the Going-forth or receiving Acceptance ever again in this lifetime.

this possition seams reasonable to me as everyone can be wrong, make mistakes...

[Cittasanto]

Interposed question: Are this questions here from theoretical nature, from intentions of defend/conquere or just out of interest (or to get things more understood)?

look at your own motivations before questioning others!
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=13947&start=0

[Hanzze]

What is (could be) the problem with it, but yes, always very importand?

[Modus.Ponens]

Thanks Cittasanto. That was really clarifying.

[appicchato]

Interposed question: Are this questions here from theoretical nature, from intentions of defend/conquere or just out of interest (or to get things more understood)?

look at your own motivations before questioning others!

+1

[Hanzze]

Yes, I hear...

[Cittasanto]

Thanks Cittasanto. That was really clarifying.

no worries.

[Hanzze]

Somehow it seems that it is much more complicated to resist as a novice then as a Bhikkhu, isn't it?

[theY]

Number 44:

44.‘‘Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhūnaṃ sikkhāsājīvasamāpanno sikkhaṃ apaccakkhāya dubbalyaṃ anāvikatvā methunaṃ dhammaṃ paṭiseveyya antamaso tiracchānagatāyapi, pārājiko hoti asaṃvāso’’ti.

http://www.tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/vin01 ... xml#para44

Translated:

Should any bhikkhu — participating in the training and livelihood of the bhikkhus, without having renounced the training, without having declared his weakness — engage in sexual intercourse, even with a female animal, he is defeated and no longer in affiliation.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... .ch04.html

Number 55:
[b]Pārājiko hotīti seyyathāpi nāma puriso sīsacchinno abhabbo tena sarīrabandhanena jīvituṃ, evameva bhikkhu methunaṃ dhammaṃ paṭisevitvā assamaṇo hoti asakyaputtiyo. Tena vuccati – ‘pārājiko hotī’ti.[/b]
http://www.tipitaka.org/romn/cscd/vin01 ... xml#para55

Translated:

"Pārājiko hoti" refer to bhikkhu who haven't been monk(samaṇa) who is sakyaputti(buddha current life family name). That is similar to a headless man reach a dead end to join that head with body.
(TrnMan: me)

All from: Tipitaka Vol.1 Number.55