The prohibition on ordaining eunuchs is not one of the rulings that's preceded by a reasoned discourse on why the ruling is being made. This is most often the case with rulings given in the Khandhakas, the section of the Vinaya Piṭaka that covers procedural matters. For example, in the case of those persons who are absolutely prohibited to be ordained, it's only the ruling on animals that's accompanied by a reason: animals are incapable of growth in the Dhammavinaya.
Pannobhasa on LGBT
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6512
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
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: Pannobhasa on LGBT
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 1:02 amThe Vinaya doesn't allow the ordination of napuṃsakas (men born without testicles) or opakkamikas (men who've lost their testicles), but this is the first time I've heard it claimed that a bhikkhu would have to disrobe if he were to lose his testicles after getting ordained.
I've just posted a query about it to Sutta Central.
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/th ... s/12894/38
If it’s true could that possibly shed some light on the meaning of “pandaka”. If a monk could be expelled from the sangha for losing his testicles, and the literal translation of pandaka is eunuch, then wouldn’t it lend credence to the argument that pandaka simply meant “eunuch”?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
So does that mean eunouchs can be ordained?Dhammanando wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 6:33 amThe prohibition on ordaining eunuchs is not one of the rulings that's preceded by a reasoned discourse on why the ruling is being made. This is most often the case with rulings given in the Khandhakas, the section of the Vinaya Piṭaka that covers procedural matters. For example, in the case of those persons who are absolutely prohibited to be ordained, it's only the ruling on animals that's accompanied by a reason: animals are incapable of growth in the Dhammavinaya.
- Dhammanando
- Posts: 6512
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
No. It merely means that unlike with the case of animals, the Buddha didn't give any reason for the absolute prohibition against ordaining eunuchs.
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: 6512
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
- Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
For me at the moment that would be a very big "if".Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 8:18 am If it’s true could that possibly shed some light on the meaning of “pandaka”. If a monk could be expelled from the sangha for losing his testicles, and the literal translation of pandaka is eunuch, then wouldn’t it lend credence to the argument that pandaka simply meant “eunuch”?
I'm quite positive that in the Vinaya Piṭaka there's no direct statement to the effect that a monk must disrobe if he loses his testicles after ordaining. That being so, Paññobhāsa's view will probably be either (1) his own inference from something or other in the Vinaya Piṭaka; (2) something stated in the commentaries; or (3) some Burmese Buddhist folk belief with no textual support.
At present I'm leaning most strongly towards #3.
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: Pannobhasa on LGBT
Thanks Bhante. I’m still confused.com, but cheers. I’m off to watch the telly now
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
Is there any reasoning that a eunuch cannot progress in dhamma? This seems outdated and perhaps added after buddha died, this should be modernized and corrected.
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
I imagine eunuchs were banned from ordination because of the negative views layfolk would have had of the sangha if they were ordained.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
Thats seems extremely cruel of the buddha to allow this.
Also what is the ruling about an amputee not being able to ordain?
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
He had to balance admitting people into the sangha with ensuring that the sangha would be supported by layfolk with their alms, thus safeguarding the sangha. Let’s say he did allow eunuchs in and the lay community turned their backs on the sangha because of it. If that happened we wouldn’t even know about Dhamma. Nor would all the people between now and then.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
Disabled people need extra care. Care that would have been difficult for the sangha to provide at the time.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/M7XKMR/amputa ... M7XKMR.jpgCeisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:04 pmDisabled people need extra care. Care that would have been difficult for the sangha to provide at the time.
Really???
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
I had more in mind legs and such. In relation to that I imagine it was to preserve the image of the sangha in the eyes of the layfolk again. Did ancient India cut off fingers for punishment for a crime? If so we can understand why the Buddha put the ban in place.thepea wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:13 pmhttps://c8.alamy.com/comp/M7XKMR/amputa ... M7XKMR.jpg
Really???
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
I’m sorry but this is prejudice and just wrong on many levels, I’m glad I’m associated with an organization that accepts anyone who can do the work.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:19 pmI had more in mind legs and such. In relation to that I imagine it was to preserve the image of the sangha in the eyes of the layfolk again. Did ancient India cut off fingers for punishment for a crime? If so we can understand why the Buddha put the ban in place.thepea wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:13 pmhttps://c8.alamy.com/comp/M7XKMR/amputa ... M7XKMR.jpg
Really???
Buddhists should change this, and quickly.
Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT
thepea wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 amI’m sorry but this is prejudice and just wrong on many levels, I’m glad I’m associated with an organization that accepts anyone who can do the work.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:19 pmI had more in mind legs and such. In relation to that I imagine it was to preserve the image of the sangha in the eyes of the layfolk again. Did ancient India cut off fingers for punishment for a crime? If so we can understand why the Buddha put the ban in place.thepea wrote: ↑Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:13 pm
https://c8.alamy.com/comp/M7XKMR/amputa ... M7XKMR.jpg
Really???
Buddhists should change this, and quickly.
No, we shouldn’t.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”