No, at least not emically.Mr Man wrote:Could "Theravada" be considered a club?
Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
So is the Theravada distinct from other schools? For example Dharmaguptaka?Dhammanando wrote:Yes, inasmuch as the separatedness of the Theravada is basically rooted in the Vinaya's prescriptions for handling disputes and for ostracizing any bhikkhu or groups of bhikkhus which are incorrigible in view or recalcitrant in conduct.Mr Man wrote:In the Buddha's teaching is there a mandate for the "Theravada"?
Last edited by Mr Man on Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Can you give an example of a Buddhist Club?
Amarapura, Mahayana, Ajhan Chaha etc.
Why do you call it a club?
Amarapura, Mahayana, Ajhan Chaha etc.
Why do you call it a club?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
The Theravada is a vāda/school. The Amarapura Nikāya is a nikāya/monastic division within the Theravada school. The Mahayana (in India) was a movement that arose within several different schools. The Mahayana (outside India) became, for all practical purposes, a school in its own right, although its two extant monastic lineages both derive from non-Mahayana schools — the Dharmaguptaka in East Asia and the Mulasarvastivada in Tibet.SarathW wrote:Can you give an example of a Buddhist Club?
Amarapura, Mahayana, Ajhan Chaha etc.
As for the various monasteries of the Ajahn Chah tradition, these I call the Ajahn Chah club, which is to say, a sub-group within a nikāya characterized by its own distinctive interests, habits and views, but most of all, by its devotion to the person of Ajahn Chah.
Because of the various English words for an association of persons, it was "club" that struck me as being the second best. The best would probably be sodality, but I decided not to use it as some non-native speakers of English might be unfamiliar with it.SarathW wrote:Why do you call it a club?
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
The Dharmaguptaka does not exist any more as a Buddhist doctrinal school. It exists only as a monastic ordination lineage whose ordained members espouse Mahayana doctrines and engage in Mahayana practices.Mr Man wrote:So is the Theravada distinct from other schools? For example Dharmaguptaka?
Now if it were the case that the Dharmaguptaka school still held to Dharmaguptaka doctrines, then its difference from the Theravada would be very slight indeed. If memory serves me right, the doctrinal disagreements between the two schools were few in number and confined to relatively minor and arcane matters, such as the question of whether it's more meritorious to give a gift to a Buddha or to the bhikkhusangha. However, since the Dharmaguptaka is now wholly in the hands of Mahayana Buddhists, it differs very drastically from the Theravada.
Edit:
Similar considerations apply also to the Mulasarvastivada lineage of Tibet, though with the difference that even before this lineage had been taken over by the Mahayanists its doctrinal differences with the Theravada were a lot more momentous than those of the Dharmaguptaka with the Theravada.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
But as an ordination lineage it is distinct? Or are they the same (Theravada and Dharmaguptaka)?Dhammanando wrote:
The Dharmaguptaka does not exist any more as a Buddhist doctrinal school. It exists only as a monastic ordination lineage whose ordained members espouse Mahayana doctrines and engage in Mahayana practices.
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Thank you Bhante.
Where would now Ajhan Braham fitting to this religion tree?
What is the reason behind this various traditions (clubs)?
What are the advantages or disadvantages?
May I ask which tradition you are in, according to the religions-tree?
http://funki.com.ua/ru/portfolio/lab/wo ... ions-tree/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Where would now Ajhan Braham fitting to this religion tree?
What is the reason behind this various traditions (clubs)?
What are the advantages or disadvantages?
May I ask which tradition you are in, according to the religions-tree?
http://funki.com.ua/ru/portfolio/lab/wo ... ions-tree/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
WowSarathW wrote:
http://funki.com.ua/ru/portfolio/lab/wo ... ions-tree/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
The Dharmaguptaka lineage is distinct from the Theravada lineage. The Dharmaguptaka vinaya is different, for example, although the differences are rather minor because the Dharmaguptaka school was the last school to split from the Theravada school.Mr Man wrote:But as an ordination lineage it is distinct? Or are they the same (Theravada and Dharmaguptaka)?Dhammanando wrote:
The Dharmaguptaka does not exist any more as a Buddhist doctrinal school. It exists only as a monastic ordination lineage whose ordained members espouse Mahayana doctrines and engage in Mahayana practices.
The non-doing of any evil,
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.
The performance of what's skillful,
The cleansing of one's own mind:
This is the Buddhas' teaching.
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Mr Man wrote:But as an ordination lineage it is distinct? Or are they the same (Theravada and Dharmaguptaka)?
I would say that there is: (1) a sense in which the two lineages are not distinct, (2) a sense in which they are distinct, and (3) a sense in which it is a moot point whether they are distinct or not distinct.
To expand on this...
1. Assuming that the Buddha founded only one bhikkhu-sangha (and everybody except the Tibetans does assume this) and that both the Theravada and the Dhammaguttikas are descended in an unbroken lineage from that original bhikkhusangha, then obviously they are not distinct — the two lineages proceed from a common origin.
On the other hand...
2. Given that monastics in the two lineages have lived for many centuries in (more or less) geographical isolation from each other; given that even when living in close proximity to each other there is no record of their ever getting together to carry out joint sanghakammas (nor even discussing the possibility of doing so); given that one lineage has retained mainstream Indian Buddhist teachings while the other has embraced Mahayanism; given that one lineage has retained the same Vinaya throughout while the other has liberally modified it to suit East Asian conditions, etc. etc., the lineages as living traditions are distinct in the sense of having far more differences than points in common.
And finally...
3. The sense in which it is a point of dispute whether the two lineages are distinct or not distinct arises in connection with the subject of this thread.
On the one hand there are liberal bhikkhus who favour the revival of the bhikkhuni-sangha and believe that this can be done (and in recent years has been done) by cooperating with Dhammaguttika bhikshunis. On the other hand there are conservative bhikkhus who believe either that the bhikkhuni-sangha cannot be revived at all, or, that it cannot be revived in this particular way (though they would be amenable to bhikkhuni ordinations that were carried out by the Theravada bhikkhu-sangha alone).
In defence of their position, conservative bhikkhus will take their stand on the Theravada’s official history of early Buddhist sectarianism as given in the Dīpavaṃsa and later repeated in the Katthāvatthu Atthakathā. According to this all of the non-Theravadin schools are schismatical. The Theravada is compared to a tree, and the other schools to thorns sprouting on the tree. Regarding the Dhammaguttikas, the official history says that the Mahisāsakas and the Vajjiputtakas broke away from the Theravada in the second century after the Parinibbana, and later the Sabbatthivādins and Dhammaguttikas broke away from the Mahisāsakas. That being so, the doubly schismatical pedigree of the Dhammaguttikas makes them unfit people to carry out sanghakammas with.
In reply, those bhikkhus who support cooperation with Dhammaguttika bhikshunis will justify their position by rejecting the Theravada’s official history and championing an alternative one. This alternative one is derived from academic scholarship based on a study of the surviving chronicles of all the Buddhist schools, but without privileging any particular one of them, archaeological evidence, etc. In the revisionist history, the origin of separate schools is treated as a more or less benign development that is unlikely to have involved schism in the strict Vinaya sense. And so according to this view, Theravadin cooperation with Dhammaguttikas in ordinations or other sanghakammas would not constitute any sort of infraction and the outcomes would be lawful and valid.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Thank you Bakmoon and Bhante, I believe that at Ajahn Brahm's monastery in Australia monks who have a Dharmaguptaka lineage are allowed to take part in sanghakamma (patimokha recitation, confession etc). What made me think of all this was SarathW mentioning that he had heard that a talk where Ajahn Brahm had mentioned he is not a Thervadist.
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
We're both Theravadin bhikkhus ordained in the Mahānikāya of Thailand. I don't think monastic nikāyas are shown on your tree.SarathW wrote:Thank you Bhante.
Where would now Ajhan Brahm fitting to this religion tree?
May I ask which tradition you are in, according to the religions-tree?
They come about in various ways, but I think the commonest cause would be the devotion inspired by a certain teacher's charisma. The next most common would be commitment to a particular meditation method.SarathW wrote:What is the reason behind this various traditions (clubs)?
I can't think of any advantages. The main disadvantage is that for many of the club members the charismatic teacher will end up becoming more important than the Buddha.SarathW wrote:What are the advantages or disadvantages?
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Thank you Bhante.
If you are travelling (say going to Sri Lanka), can you ask for the lodging from a temple outside your (club) tradition?
Or do you have to make your travel arrangements before your departure?
How do they know if you are a real monk?
For example if I am a monk will you let me come and stay with you?
How long?
If you are travelling (say going to Sri Lanka), can you ask for the lodging from a temple outside your (club) tradition?
Or do you have to make your travel arrangements before your departure?
How do they know if you are a real monk?
For example if I am a monk will you let me come and stay with you?
How long?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6491
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Here in Thailand I could show up at any monastery in the country and the monks would be obliged by Thai sangha regulations to accommodate me up for up to three nights. If I were going to Sri Lanka I would probably make prior arrangements, though if I didn't I expect most monasteries would let me stay, at least for a night or two.SarathW wrote:If you are travelling (say going to Sri Lanka), can you ask for the lodging from a temple outside your (club) tradition?
We have ID cards issued by the National Office of Buddhism.How do they know if you are a real monk?
The Thais are very hospitable to foreign monks, even Mahayana ones. I've never heard of anyone being turned away. As to how long you'd be allowed to stay, typically it would be like this:SarathW wrote:For example if I am a monk will you let me come and stay with you?
How long?
Dhammayuttika Nikaya wats: as long as you like outside the vassa. If you want to stay for vassa then you'd need to re-ordain as a Dhammayutt.
Mahanikaya wats — mainstream: as long as you like, subject to availability of accommodation. You wouldn't be required to re-ordain unless you were a Mahayana monk and wanted to stay for the vassa.
Mahanikaya wats — non-mainstream: very variable. Long-term residence will be dependent on the visiting monk's willingness to get with the program in some way or another. For example, at Wat Dhammakaya and at vipassanā centres they'll expect you to take up their particular meditation method; at some study monasteries you'll be obliged to enroll in a course; at Ajahn Chah wats they'll expect you to take up their manner of Vinaya observance, quirky way of wearing the lower robe, etc. If you're not willing to adapt then you'll only be granted residence for a short period — perhaps no more than the three nights that the law requires.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.
In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Re: Ajahn Brahm on why he was excommunicated
Thank you Bhante.
It is such a beautiful tradition.
I hope we keep it as it is without divisions.
By the way what about nuns.
Can they stay with monks?
Can they sleep with the same residence?
It is such a beautiful tradition.
I hope we keep it as it is without divisions.
By the way what about nuns.
Can they stay with monks?
Can they sleep with the same residence?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”