Brahm preceptor status revoked

[Bankei]

It seems the Thai authorities have revoked the Upajjhaya (preceptor) status of Aj Brahm.
see point 2 at http://www.dhammalight.com/official/Som ... -2009.html

I thought anyone with more than 10 vassa was legally qualified to ordain monks. Is this another example of state regulations overriding the regulations of the Buddha?


Bankei

[Laurens]

I think that the actions taken by the Thai authorities are unjust considering that Ajahn Brahm is simply trying to bring the monastic order back to the way that the Buddha intended it to be.

[pilgrim]

Even if under Thai laws he cannot act as uphajjaya, he can still act as one under the Vinaya. Just that these monks won't get the official Thai certificate.

[appicchato]

I thought anyone with more than 10 vassa was legally qualified to ordain monks.

My understanding is that 10 Vassa is one of the requirements, but not the only one...and not 'anyone with...'

[BlackBird]

Let the ecclesiastical officials play their politics, just another nail in the coffin for 'Thai Buddhism'

I actually feel kinda angry, so I won't say anything more.

[Dmytro]

Hi Bankei,

It seems the Thai authorities have revoked the Upajjhaya (preceptor) status of Aj Brahm.
see point 2 at http://www.dhammalight.com/official/Som ... -2009.html

Well, the Thai Sangha actions seem decisive, and they seem determined to uphold the traditions.
That's definitely a good sign. Though I'm not sure how long they will last under all the mediacratic pressure.

Metta, Dmytro

[pink_trike]

Let the ecclesiastical officials play their politics, just another nail in the coffin for 'Thai Buddhism'

I actually feel kinda angry, so I won't say anything more.

Might as well be angry at the wind. This is just a natural process - conditioned things rise, age, degenerate, and dissolve...creating the conditions for regeneration.

I'm surprised they found room for another nail in that nail-encrusted coffin.

[BlackBird]

Hi PT, good point.

[Cittasanto]

anyone he now ordains would be outside the thai sangha, in otherwords don't get the paperwork and other bits the thai government give the Thai sangha.
he is still a Theravadan maha-thera monk just not a preceptor for or member of the Thai sangha.

[Oleksandr]

Well, the Thai Sangha actions seem decisive, and they seem determined to uphold the traditions.
That's definitely a good sign.

What's particularly good about this?

[Dmytro]

What's particularly good about this?

Hi, Oleksandr,

A good tradition, like a greeting, seems useless, but makes a great difference.

"What have you heard, Ananda: do the Vajjis neither enact new decrees nor abolish existing ones, but proceed in accordance with their ancient constitutions?"

"I have heard, Lord, that they do."

"So long, Ananda, as this is the case, the growth of the Vajjis is to be expected, not their decline."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .vaji.html

Metta, Dmytro

[Anders Honore]

Ajahn Brams acted in accord with what he understands the Vinaya to be and did not establish any new decrees. The thai sangha differs, but his interpretation is supported by a significant part of the sri lankan sangha, including Bhikkhu bodhi.

This isn't a question of 'new decrees' but rather of correctly interpreting what the old decrees state.

[Oleksandr]

Hello Dmytro,

There is something good in keeping traditions, and something good in modernization.

But in this particular case, do you consider adhering to traditions is better than modernization for Thai sangha? Why?

[Cittasanto]

Ajahn Brams acted in accord with what he understands the Vinaya to be and did not establish any new decrees. The thai sangha differs, but his interpretation is supported by a significant part of the sri lankan sangha, including Bhikkhu bodhi.

This isn't a question of 'new decrees' but rather of correctly interpreting what the old decrees state.

While the Sri Lankan Sangha may agree, the Burmese and Thai Sanghas don't, although there is some difference of opinion. correct and incorrect is a perception not the absolute, what is the correct way of pronouncing potato?

[Dmytro]

Hi Anders,

Ajahn Brams acted in accord with what he understands the Vinaya to be and did not establish any new decrees. The thai sangha differs, but his interpretation is supported by a significant part of the sri lankan sangha, including Bhikkhu bodhi.

Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi revoked his support for Australian ordination:
http://www.dhammalight.com/corresponden ... _06_B.html

His links to Sri Lankan Sangha are now tenuous.

Why do you think that "a significant part of the Sri Lankan Sangha" supports Ajahn Brahms interpretation?

This isn't a question of 'new decrees' but rather of correctly interpreting what the old decrees state.

And who will decide what's correct?

[Dmytro]

Hi Oleksandr,

There is something good in keeping traditions, and something good in modernization.

But in this particular case, do you consider adhering to traditions is better than modernization for Thai sangha? Why?

The Australian events are not about modernization, and even not about Bhikkhuni ordination.

It's just that Ajahn Brahm and his colleagues wanted to split from Forest Sangha and establish their own rules. This course of events has been prepared for a long time - see, for example, the works of Sujato like

It's time
http://santipada.googlepages.com/it%27stime

A History of Mindfulness
http://santipada.googlepages.com/bhante ... work#books

They have been waiting all along to distance themselves from Theravada and acquire a brand of "original, pre-sectarian Buddhism". It's just the question of politics and acquiring own brand name.

They use the issue of Bhukkhuni ordination for their own purposes.

[Modus.Ponens]

Hi Dmytro.

Those are some serious acusations. How do you know their intentions?

Metta

[Cittasanto]

some of this has already been gone over in the other thread, do we need another thread doing the same thing?

Edit - this link was already posted there 5 days before this thread started

[Dmytro]

Hi Modus.Ponens,

Those are some serious acusations. How do you know their intentions?

I have given the links to articles where Sujato attacks Theravada and puts forward the idea of 'pre-sectarian Buddhism', for example:

It's time
http://santipada.googlepages.com/it%27stime

(This article originally had a warlike heading "Call to arms for reasoned & critical perspective on Buddhism")

Similar statements can be found in the talks of Ajahn Brahmavamso.

[Vardali]

...
I have given the links to articles where Sujato attacks Theravada and puts forward the idea of 'pre-sectarian Buddhism', for example:

It's time
http://santipada.googlepages.com/it%27stime
....

Hm, I wanted to stay out of this, but after reading the article you linked, I fail to see where this is an attack on Theravada.
Frankly, I haven't read anything in there that wouldn't be perfectly consistent with an academic approach to any sort of validation and authentification, be they religious in nature or not.
And unlike many other religions, Buddhism seems to encourage a to explicitly use one's facilities (including the brain) rather than to do anything due to "blind faith".

Seems a valid - standard academic - approach to validate authenticity claims suggested there, so what is so shocking about this?