Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Discussion of ordination, the Vinaya and monastic life. How and where to ordain? Bhikkhuni ordination etc.
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

In the letter quoted above, Bhikkhu Bodhi says The opinion I express here is in full accord with the qualifications that I made in the full version of my Hamburg presentation, which I will cite as an appendix to this letter.
Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's statement from the Hamburg conference of 2007, instigated by HH Dalai Lama, about how he regards Bhikkhuni ordination.

The Revival of Bhikkhunī Ordination in the Theravāda Tradition ~ Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi

My paper focuses on the legal and ethical issues involved in the revival of the Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha. The paper is divided into three parts. In Part I, I review the arguments presented by Theravādin traditionalists who see a revival of bhikkhunī ordination as a legal impossibility. In Part II, I offer textual and ethical considerations that support the claim that bhikkhunī ordination should be restored. And in Part III, I briefly consider the legal mechanics of restoring the bhikkhunī ordination to the Theravāda tradition, that is, how the ordination can best be harmonized with the stipulations of the Vinaya.
Monastic ordination as a bhikkhunī involves three stages: (1) pabbajjā, the novice ordination; (2) the sikkhamānā training; and (3) upasampadā or full ordination. Theravādin Vinaya experts posit hurdles at all three stages. In my paper, I discuss all three stages from two points of view: in terms of the objections posed by the conservative legalists, who claim that it is impossible to revive them; and from the point of view of those who favor reviving the bhikkhunī ordination. Since the time allotted for the oral presentation is limited, I will be focusing exclusively on the upasampadā. To anticipate my conclusion: I hold that neither position can be derived unambiguously from the Vinaya, but that interpretation depends upon the setting under which the interpretation of the Vinaya is made and the set of presuppositions and purposes that the interpreters bring to the task of interpretation.

I. The Case Against the Revival of Bhikkhunī Ordination

For Vinaya legalists, the upasampadā presents the most formidable barrier to reviving the Bhikkhunī Sangha. The main legal objection the legalists raise against bhikkhunī upasampadā is that it is a dual-ordination. It must be given by both the Bhikkhunī Sangha and the Bhikkhu Sangha, and to be a purely Theravāda ordination it must come from an existing Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha. This leads to a predicament, for in the absence of an existing Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha, a legitimate Theravāda bhikkhunī ordination itself cannot be granted. There is thus simply no possibility of reviving the Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha. Bhikkhunī ordination will remain out of reach throughout the duration of the present Buddha's dispensation. Those women who want to live a life of renunciation will have to be content with surrogate forms of renunciant life, such as that of the dasasilmātā, the thila-shin, or the maechee.

II. The Case for a Revival of Theravāda Bhikkhunī Ordination

After sketching the legal arguments that conservative Vinaya authorities raise against restoring the bhikkhunī ordination to the Theravāda tradition, I look at some factors, textual and ethical, that favor its restoration. I distribute these factors into two groups: one I call “ancient mandate”; the other, compelling contemporary circumstances.
The primary ancient mandate is the Buddha's own decision to create a Bhikkhunī Sangha as a counterpart to the male Bhikkhu Sangha. When Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī and the five hundred Sakyan women came to the Buddha, they did not ask the Buddha to establish an order of nuns. They simply asked him for permission to go forth into the homeless life. Although the Buddha at first denied this request, he finally yielded. In yielding, however, he did not simply allow women to go forth, but constituted renunciant women into a distinct order, a community governed by its own rules and regulations. Though he subordinated this order to the Bhikkhu Sangha with respect to certain functions, he still made it largely autonomous. This shows that he recognized the Bhikkhunī Sangha as an essential component of his Sāsana, and without the Bhikkhunī Sangha the Sāsana is imperfect and incomplete.
Reflection on contemporary conditions also supports the case for a revival of bhikkhunī ordination. Our own age has been shaped by the ideas of the European Enlightenment, a movement that affirmed the inherent dignity of the human person and brought demands for political equality and equal justice for all under the law. From the mid-nineteenth century on, people around the globe came to perceive discrimination based on gender as arbitrary and unjust, a system that had been imposed on society simply because of the dominant roles that men had played in eras when social stability depended on physical strength and military force. Thus discrimination based on gender has been challenged almost everywhere in the secular sphere, and its role in religious life has also come up for serious scrutiny. Religion remains one of its most persistent strongholds, and Buddhism is no exception to this. It is true that the Vinaya makes bhikkhunīs subordinate to bhikkhus, and the Bhikkhunī Sangha subordinate to the Bhikkhu Sangha, but we have to remember that the Buddha lived and taught in India in the fifth century B.C. Practices that pertain to etiquette must be evaluated in the light of altered social and cultural conditions. When we ask what line of action would be appropriate for today, we should not ask what the Buddha did twenty-five centuries ago, but what he would want us to do today.
If people see Theravāda Buddhism as a religion that includes male renunciants but excludes female renunciants, or which admits them only through some unofficial ordination, they will suspect that something is fundamentally askew, and defensive arguments based on appeals to arcane principles of monastic law will not go very far to break down distrust. This will be an instance of the type of behavior that we meet so often in the Vinaya where “those without confidence do not gain confidence, while among those with confidence, some undergo vacillation.” On the other hand, by rousing the courage to restore to women the right to lead a full religious life, that is, by reviving the Bhikkhunī Sangha, Theravādin elders will show that they know how to apply the Vinaya in a way that is appropriate to the time and circumstances, and also in a way that is kind and embracing rather than rigid and rejecting.

III. Addressing the Legalist Challenge

Nevertheless, while there might be strong textual and ethical grounds favoring a revival of the Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha, such a step would not be possible unless the legal objections to such a movement can be addressed. The legalists object to resuscitating bhikkhunī ordination, not so much because of bias against women (though some might have such a bias), but because they see such a measure as a legal impossibility. To restore the Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha, the three challenges posed by Theravāda Vinaya legalists would have to be overcome. These are the challenges based on: (1) the problem of pabbajjā (novice ordination); (2) the problem of sikkhamānā ordination and training; and (3) the problem of upasampadā.
Here I will deal only with the question of upasampadā. Before doing so, however, I first want to note that Theravāda legal theory often merges stipulations on legal issues that stem from the canonical Vinaya texts and the Commentaries with interpretations and assumptions that have gained currency through centuries of tradition. I do not want to undervalue tradition, for it represents the accumulated legal expertise of generations of Vinaya specialists, and this expertise should certainly be respected and taken into account in determining how the Vinaya is to be applied to new situations. But we also must remember that tradition should not be placed on a par with the canonical Vinaya or even with the secondary authorities, the Aṭṭhakathās and Ṭīkās. These different sources should be assigned different weights of authority according to their different origins. When our understanding of the Vinaya is strongly grounded in tradition, however, without realizing it we may become entangled in a web of traditionalist assumptions that obstructs our ability to distinguish what derives from the canonical Vinaya from what is prescribed by tradition. Sometimes simply changing the assumptions can recast the principles of the Vinaya in a whole new light.
I will illustrate this point with an analogy from geometry. A straight line is drawn through a point. As this line is extended, the distance between its two ends widens. It is thus obvious that the two ends will never meet, and if anyone expresses doubts about this, I would almost question their rationality. But this is so only because I am thinking within the framework of traditional geometry, Euclidean geometry, which held sway over mathematics up until the twentieth century. When, however, we adopt the standpoint of spherical geometry, we can see that a line drawn through a particular point, if extended far enough, eventually encounters itself. Again, in traditional geometry we are taught that a triangle can have at most only one right angle and that the sum of the angles of a triangle must be 180°, and this can be proven with absolute rigor. But that is so only in Euclidean space. Give me a sphere, and we can define a triangle with three right angles whose angles make a sum of 270°. Thus, if I break away from my familiar assumptions, a whole new range of possibilities suddenly opens up to my understanding.
The same applies to our thinking about the Vinaya. For conservative theory, the fundamental assumptions are: (i) that the dual-Sangha ordination was intended to apply under all circumstances and admits of no exceptions or modifications to accord with conditions; (ii) that the Theravāda is the only Buddhist school that preserves an authentic Vinaya tradition. Once these assumptions are accepted, there is no escape from the conclusion that the Bhikkhunī Sangha is forever extinct. Those who favor revival of the Bhikkhunī Sangha, however, work with different assumptions. For them, the fundamental starting point was the Buddha’s decision to create the Bhikkhunī Sangha. The procedure of ordination was merely the legal mechanics to implement that decision. From this standpoint, to block the implementation of that decision because of a legal technicality is to hamper the fulfillment of the Buddha’s own intention. This is not to say that the proper way to implement his intention should violate the guidelines of the Vinaya. But within those broad guidelines the two assumptions of conservative legalism can be circumvented by holding either or both of the following: (i) that under exceptional circumstances the Bhikkhu Sangha can revert to a single-Sangha ordination of bhikkhunīs, based on the Buddha’s statement: “I allow you, bhikkhus, to ordain bhikkhunīs”; and (ii) that to preserve the form of dual-Sangha ordination, the Theravāda Bhikkhu Sangha can collaborate with a Bhikkhunī Sangha from an East Asian country following the Dharmaguptaka “Four-Section” Vinaya.
This approach to ordination may not satisfy the most rigorous demand of conservative Theravāda Vinaya legal theory, namely, that it be conducted by Theravāda bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs who have been ordained by Theravāda bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs in an unbroken lineage. But to make that impossible demand the uncompromising requirement for restoring the Bhikkhunī Sangha would seem unreasonably stringent. In the view of many learned Theravāda monks, mainly Sri Lankan, adopting either of the above routes will culminate in a valid bhikkhunī ordination and at the same time will grant to women the chance to live the spiritual life in the way that the Buddha intended them to live it—as fully ordained bhikkhunīs.
The grand ordination held at Bodhgaya in February 1998, under the auspices of Fo Guang Shan, combined both approaches mentioned above. This method yielded a more satisfactory ordination than either could if taken alone. The grand ordination ceremony assembled bhikkhus from several traditions—Chinese Mahāyāna, Theravāda, and Tibetan--along with Taiwanese and Western bhikkhunīs to conduct the full dual-ordination in accordance with the Chinese tradition. The women who were ordained included Theravāda nuns from Sri Lanka and Nepal, as well as Western nuns following Tibetan Buddhism. One might think that this was a Mahāyāna rite which made the nuns Mahāyāna bhikkhunīs, but this would be a misunderstanding. While the Chinese monks and nuns were practitioners of Mahāyāna Buddhism, the monastic Vinaya tradition they observe is not a Mahāyāna Vinaya but the Vinaya of the Dharmaguptakas, which belonged to the same broad Vibhajyavāda tradition to which the southern Theravāda school belongs. They were virtually the northwest Indian counterpart of the Theravāda, with a similar collection of suttas, an Abhidharma, and a Vinaya that largely corresponds to the Pāli Vinaya. Thus the upasampadā ordination performed by the Chinese Sangha at Bodhgaya conferred on the candidates the bhikkhunī lineage of the Dharmaguptakas, so that in Vinaya terms they were now full-fledged bhikkhunīs inheriting the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya lineage.
However, the bhikkhunīs from Sri Lanka wanted to become heirs to the Theravāda Vinaya lineage and to be acceptable to the Theravāda bhikkhus of Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan bhikkhus who sponsored their ordination, too, were apprehensive that if the nuns returned to Sri Lanka with only the Chinese ordination, their co-religionists would have considered their ordination to have been essentially a Mahāyānist one. To prevent this, shortly afterwards the newly ordained bhikkhunīs traveled to Sarnath, where they underwent another upasampadā conducted in Pāli by Theravāda bhikkhus from Sri Lanka. This ordination did not negate the earlier dual-ordination received from the Chinese Sangha, but supplemented it and gave it a new direction. The dual-Sangha ordination at Bodhgaya made the women bhikkhunīs, but heirs of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya lineage; the subsequent ordination by a Sangha of Theravāda bhikkhus at Sarnath inducted them into the Theravāda Sangha. They were now entitled to follow the Vinaya of the Pāli Canon and to perform the necessary sanghakammas together with their brothers in the Theravāda Bhikkhu Sangha of Sri Lanka.
While dual-Sangha ordination should certainly prevail whenever conditions make it feasible, a case can also be made to justify ordination solely by a Sangha of Theravāda bhikkhus. It might be argued that under the exceptional circumstances when a Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha has vanished, Theravāda bhikkhus are entitled to take as a precedent the original case when there was no Bhikkhunī Sangha and revive the allowance that the Buddha gave to the bhikkhus to ordain bhikkhunīs on their own. This allowance might be defended on the principle of analogy: When an exceptional method is used in one set of circumstances to achieve a desirable goal, then in circumstances that are similar in all relevant respects, if there is no other feasible method to achieve that goal, the exceptional method again becomes permissible. In this case, the original situation is that found at the inception of the Bhikkhunī Sangha, when the Sangha was placed in a double-bind. The sixth garudhamma required a dual-Sangha ordination for bhikkhunīs, but there was no Bhikkhunī Sangha to give the ordination. So how was the Sangha to escape this predicament? According to the account, the Buddha said: “I authorize bhikkhus to ordain bhikkhunīs.” And thus bhikkhus continued to ordain bhikkhunīs until the dual-Sangha ordination was prescribed. This situation is almost exactly analogous to the one we faced until recently, when there were women who wanted Theravāda bhikkhunī ordination but no Theravāda bhikkhunīs to ordain them. So one solution proposed was to allow Theravāda bhikkhus to use that authorization, never withdrawn, to ordain bhikkhunīs until a functional Bhikkhunī Sangha came into being. This was the method the Sri Lankan monks employed at Sarnath to give the Sri Lankan nuns a second ordination that inducted them into the Theravāda Sangha.
However, now that the Bhikkhunī Sangha has been reconstituted in Sri Lanka, there is no longer any justification for using ordination by a Sangha composed solely of bhikkhus. If any woman wants to receive bhikkhunī ordination in the Theravāda tradition, she should receive training as a sikkhamānā and eventual bhikkhunī ordination in Sri Lanka itself. No doubt, in time the opportunity for bhikkhunī ordination will also spread to the West.

Conclusion
The disappearance of the Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha has presented us with a situation not explicitly addressed in the Vinaya and thus one for which there is no unambiguous remedy. As I see it, the Vinaya cannot be read in any fixed manner as either unconditionally permitting or forbidding a revival of the Bhikkhunī Sangha. It yields these conclusions only as a result of interpretation, and interpretation often reflects the attitudes of the interpreters and the framework of assumptions within which they operate as much as it does the words of the text they are interpreting.
In my opinion, in dealing with this issue, the question that should be foremost in our minds is this: "What would the Buddha want his elder bhikkhu-disciples to do in such a situation, now, in the twenty-first century?" Would he want us to apply the regulations governing ordination in a way that excludes women from the fully ordained renunciant life, so that we present to the world a religion in which men alone can lead the life of full renunciation? Or would he instead want us to apply the regulations of the Vinaya in a way that is kind, generous, and accommodating, thereby offering the world a religion that truly embodies principles of justice and non-discrimination?
The answers to these questions are not immediately given by any text or tradition, but I don’t think we are left entirely to subjective opinion either. From the texts we can see how, in making major decisions, the Buddha displayed both compassion and disciplinary rigor; we can also see how, in defining the behavioral standards of his Sangha, he took account of the social and cultural expectations of his contemporaries. In working out a solution to our own problem, therefore, we have these two guidelines to follow. One is to be true to the spirit of the Dhamma--true to both the letter and the spirit, but above all to the spirit. The other is to be responsive to the social, intellectual, and cultural horizons of humanity in this particular period of history in which we live, this age in which we forge our own future destinies and the future destiny of Buddhism. Looked at in this light, the revival of a Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha can be seen as an intrinsic good that conforms to the innermost spirit of the Dhamma, helping to bring to fulfillment the Buddha's own mission of opening "the doors to the Deathless" to all humankind, to women as well as to men. At the same time, the existence of a Bhikkhunī Sangha can function as an instrumental good. It will allow women to make a meaningful contribution to Buddhism in many of the ways that monks do--as preachers, scholars, meditation teachers, educators, social advisors, and ritual leaders--and perhaps in certain ways that will be unique to female renunciants, for example, as counselors and guides to women lay followers. A Bhikkhunī Sangha will also win for Buddhism the respect of high-minded people in the world, who regard the absence of gender discrimination as the mark of a truly worthy religion in harmony with the noble trends of present-day civilization.
http://www.buddhistfellowship.org/cms/i ... ation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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 ---
BudSas
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:12 am

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by BudSas »

I posted on 07 Aug 2009:
BudSas wrote:
I don't know if the "Five Points" story raised in Ven Sujato's Blog is true? He mentioned that those "Five Points", originally drafted by Ajahn Sumedho, were presented by two bhikkhus from the English Council of the Elders to the siladharas in August 2009. The last point is: "The siladhara training is considered to be a vehicle respected in our tradition as suitable for the realization of liberation. It is complete as it stands, and is not an evolution towards a different form such as bhikkhuni ordination." Read the story at:

http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/the-five-points/

If it's true, the Elders Council already made up their mind (of not accepting bhikkhuni ordination). Then, what's the point to discuss the bhikkhuni ordination at the December WAM (now cancelled)?
It's now official. The story is true. Read it at:

http://www.forestsangha.org/index.php?o ... 2&Itemid=8


BDS
BudSas
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:12 am

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by BudSas »

BudSas wrote:I posted on 07 Aug 2009:
...
Sorry! It's a mistake. Should read: I posted on 05 Nov 2009.

BDS
User avatar
catmoon
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 1:59 am

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by catmoon »

Remember what I said about delay? :(
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by cooran »

BudSas wrote:I posted on 07 Aug 2009:
BudSas wrote:
I don't know if the "Five Points" story raised in Ven Sujato's Blog is true? He mentioned that those "Five Points", originally drafted by Ajahn Sumedho, were presented by two bhikkhus from the English Council of the Elders to the siladharas in August 2009. The last point is: "The siladhara training is considered to be a vehicle respected in our tradition as suitable for the realization of liberation. It is complete as it stands, and is not an evolution towards a different form such as bhikkhuni ordination." Read the story at:

http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/the-five-points/

If it's true, the Elders Council already made up their mind (of not accepting bhikkhuni ordination). Then, what's the point to discuss the bhikkhuni ordination at the December WAM (now cancelled)?
It's now official. The story is true. Read it at:

http://www.forestsangha.org/index.php?o ... 2&Itemid=8


BDS
What are you refering to as "official" ? The World Abbots Meeting is in Thailand in December ~ that is the only place from which an Official Statement will be made.

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 ---
BudSas
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:12 am

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by BudSas »

Chris wrote:
BudSas wrote:I posted on 07 Aug 2009:
BudSas wrote:
I don't know if the "Five Points" story raised in Ven Sujato's Blog is true? He mentioned that those "Five Points", originally drafted by Ajahn Sumedho, were presented by two bhikkhus from the English Council of the Elders to the siladharas in August 2009. The last point is: "The siladhara training is considered to be a vehicle respected in our tradition as suitable for the realization of liberation. It is complete as it stands, and is not an evolution towards a different form such as bhikkhuni ordination." Read the story at:

http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/the-five-points/

If it's true, the Elders Council already made up their mind (of not accepting bhikkhuni ordination). Then, what's the point to discuss the bhikkhuni ordination at the December WAM (now cancelled)?
It's now official. The story is true. Read it at:

http://www.forestsangha.org/index.php?o ... 2&Itemid=8


BDS
What are you refering to as "official" ? The World Abbots Meeting is in Thailand in December ~ that is the only place from which an Official Statement will be made.

metta
Chris

As I understand, that's the "official" stand of the UK Council of the Elders, as it has been published at the "Forest Sangha" website.

However, I am also interested to see what the outcome would be at the December WAM in Thailand.

BDS
User avatar
Anders
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by Anders »

whatever one may think about the way Ajahn Brams has gone about this, I find myself asking if this is still a pertinent issue more than a month down the line?

The genie is out of the bottle, and continuing to protest the way the bottle was opened seems to me a bit like shying away from adressing the fact that the genie is out and not coming back to his bottle and what we're going to do about that.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by Cittasanto »

Anders Honore wrote:whatever one may think about the way Ajahn Brams has gone about this, I find myself asking if this is still a pertinent issue more than a month down the line?

The genie is out of the bottle, and continuing to protest the way the bottle was opened seems to me a bit like shying away from adressing the fact that the genie is out and not coming back to his bottle and what we're going to do about that.
the genie was already out of the bottle! there were Bhikkhunis in theravada before this ordination.
Has Brahms actions of secrecy and lieing made wider acceptance within the various Theravadan traditions less likely in the short run or have they solely undermined trust between members of the sangha who are on either side?
the sangha which is harmonious is stronger than the sangha which is scattered, arguing, and hurt.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Anders
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:52 pm

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by Anders »

Manapa wrote: the genie was already out of the bottle! there were Bhikkhunis in theravada before this ordination.
Has Brahms actions of secrecy and lieing made wider acceptance within the various Theravadan traditions less likely in the short run or have they solely undermined trust between members of the sangha who are on either side?
the sangha which is harmonious is stronger than the sangha which is scattered, arguing, and hurt.
Not in the forest tradition.

What's done is done. Is it a question worth asking still (that is, if the circumstances were proper) now that it can't be undone? Isn't it time to be looking towards what this means now?

Belamenting the circumstances of the ordination won't change anything at this point and it won't make the new situation go away.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by Cittasanto »

Anders Honore wrote:
Not in the forest tradition.

What's done is done. Is it a question worth asking still (that is, if the circumstances were proper) now that it can't be undone? Isn't it time to be looking towards what this means now?

Belamenting the circumstances of the ordination won't change anything at this point and it won't make the new situation go away.
they don't allow Bhuikkhunis because they are a thai tadition who operate in thailand aswel as other place, they do have nuns caled siladharas (ten precepts), which is equivelent to the Samaneri althugh with th added benefit that they are accepted by the Thai authorities, and can travel in thailand and be protected by the sangha there. they work with what they have and have found a compromise for women to be in the in the thai tradition which may enable thai Bhikkhunis in the long run.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by Cittasanto »

LEARNING TO LISTEN - Ajahn Chah
Later, the Master went on to say, .Practice is not moving forward, but there is forward movement. At the same time, it is not moving back, but there is backward movement. And, finally, practice is not stopping and being still, but there is stopping and being still.
So there is moving forward and backward as well as being still, but you can't say that it is any one of the three.

this is similare to his advice to Ajahn Sumedho about being an Abbot & setting up monasteries
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19944
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by mikenz66 »

Anders Honore wrote: What's done is done. Is it a question worth asking still (that is, if the circumstances were proper) now that it can't be undone? Isn't it time to be looking towards what this means now?
It means that certain Theravada groups ordain Bkhikkhunis and certain others don't, which is no different from how it was before except that this particular ordination has a higher profile in some circles because it involves someone from Ajahn Chah's group. Some of those who don't ordain Bhikkhuni's chose not to cooperate with some of those who do, which is why Ajahn Brahm's monastery is no longer part of the group it used to be part of.

So it really doesn't mean anything new. Different groups will continue to do what they feel is most effective. I hope that in the long term more groups will ordain Bhikkhunis, but I'm dismayed by the oversimplifications that are put forward in some circles about the most effective way to proceed.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by pink_trike »

The whole debate seems framed and focused oddly - a matter-of-fact obsession with and clinging to structures and forms, rules and politics, entrenched beliefs - all being used in the service of an unacknowledged, deeply ingrained traditional fear of women, and mind's tendency to fetishize how things have been done in the past...while the importance and urgency of people's quest for liberation seems to fade into the background.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19944
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi PinkTrike
pink_trike wrote:...while the importance and urgency of people's quest for liberation seems to fade into the background.
Well, that's the point isn't it? Liberation. There are serious problems with clinging to views and forms on both sides that devalue this point. There are people who clearly want to facilitate liberation for all on both sides.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination performed - by Ajahn Brahmavamso

Post by cooran »

This is your view - what you wish to believe - and not related to the truth of the situation as it unfolded. Do you personally know even one of the Abbots involved? ( Ven Dhammasiha, Abbot of Dhammagiri, Brisbane, will be attending the Meeting in Thailand in December).

You seem to be impugning the characters of highly respected Abbots, not based on any understanding of the issues involved. It is also greatly disrespectful to the many ethical Ordained Sangha working with hope and goodwill towards the resolution within the Ajahn Chah tradition of Bhikkuni Ordination.

This quite unnecessary problem caused by Brahmavamso's less than open and honest behaviour, has been distorted and magnified by slanted posts by Sujato on his Blog, and by he and Brahmavamso encouraging the 'taking of sides' by lay people, most of whom only see it as a debate about equality of women - which has little if anything to do with the stance taken by the Ajahn Chah sangha around the world ~ many of whom are not Thai and are not bound by Thai laws.

I view things much the way Bhikkhu Bodhi does - equality is one thing, the unwholesome methods used give pause for thought about the ethics involved, and may be counter productive.
---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 ---
Post Reply