Pannobhasa on LGBT

Some topics tend to get heated and go off track in unwholesome ways quite quickly. The "hot topics" sub-forum is a place where such topics may be moved so that each post must be manually approved by moderator before it will become visible to members.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by thepea »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:54 am
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:19 pm

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.
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.
Buddhists should change this, and quickly.


No, we shouldn’t.
So no answers on this from the top brass, suspicisious.
And no response from you, suspect.
C-mon you have to elaborate on this you can’t just blindly follow.
User avatar
Volo
Posts: 1065
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Volo »

Dhammanando wrote: Thu Feb 06, 2020 12:56 pm For me at the moment that would be a very big "if".

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.
Moreover, there is a story in Vinaya (Cv.V.7) about a monk, who cut off his penis (aṅgajātaṃ). Buddha said it's thullacaya, but no disrobing. I would assume that at that time people weren't really familiar with all the details of the reproductive system, and cutting off the penis was (probably) considered similar to cutting off the testicles.
Commentary adds that cutting off other organ (not penis) is a dukkata:
251. na bhikkhave attano aṅgajātanti aṅgajātaṃ chindantasseva thullaccayaṃ. aññaṃ pana kaṇṇanāsāaṅguliādiṃ yaṃkiñci chindantassa tādisaṃ vā dukkhaṃ uppādentassa dukkaṭaṃ. ahikīṭadaṭṭhādīsu pana aññāabādhapaccayā vā lohitaṃ vā mocentassa chindantassa vā anāpatti.
So, I'm also puzzled where did Ven Paññobhāsa took that information. I contacted him, but no reply yet.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Ceisiwr »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:31 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:54 am
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 am

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.
Buddhists should change this, and quickly.


No, we shouldn’t.
So no answers on this from the top brass, suspicisious.
And no response from you, suspect.
C-mon you have to elaborate on this you can’t just blindly follow.

You literally just quoted my answer.
“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.”
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6491
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Dhammanando »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 am Buddhists should change this, and quickly.
There is no mandate for the sangha to do so.
For a disciple who has faith in the Teacher's instruction and lives in unison with it, monks, it is a principle that:

"The Teacher is the Lord, a disciple am I;
The Lord knows, I do not know."
(MN 70. Horner tr.)
The Blessed One said: “And which seven are the conditions that lead to no decline?

[1] “As long as the monks meet often, meet a great deal, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[2] “As long as the monks meet in harmony, adjourn from their meetings in harmony, and conduct Sangha business in harmony, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[3] “As long as the monks neither decree what has been undecreed nor repeal what has been decreed, but practice undertaking the training rules as they have been decreed, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[4] “As long as the monks honor, respect, venerate, and do homage to the elder monks—those with seniority who have long been ordained, the fathers of the Sangha, leaders of the Sangha—regarding them as worth listening to, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[5] “As long as the monks do not submit to the power of any arisen craving that leads to further becoming, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[6] “As long as the monks see their own benefit in wilderness dwellings, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[7] “As long as the monks each keep firmly in mind: ‘If there are any well-behaved fellow followers of the chaste life who have yet to come, may they come; and may the well-behaved fellow-followers of the chaste life who have come live in comfort,’ their growth can be expected, not their decline.

“As long as the monks remain steadfast in these seven conditions, and as long as these seven conditions endure among the monks, the monks’ growth can be expected, not their decline.”
(AN 7.23. Thanissaro tr.)
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by thepea »

Dhammanando wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:48 pm
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 am Buddhists should change this, and quickly.
There is no mandate for the sangha to do so.
For a disciple who has faith in the Teacher's instruction and lives in unison with it, monks, it is a principle that:

"The Teacher is the Lord, a disciple am I;
The Lord knows, I do not know."
(MN 70. Horner tr.)
The Blessed One said: “And which seven are the conditions that lead to no decline?

[1] “As long as the monks meet often, meet a great deal, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[2] “As long as the monks meet in harmony, adjourn from their meetings in harmony, and conduct Sangha business in harmony, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[3] “As long as the monks neither decree what has been undecreed nor repeal what has been decreed, but practice undertaking the training rules as they have been decreed, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[4] “As long as the monks honor, respect, venerate, and do homage to the elder monks—those with seniority who have long been ordained, the fathers of the Sangha, leaders of the Sangha—regarding them as worth listening to, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[5] “As long as the monks do not submit to the power of any arisen craving that leads to further becoming, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[6] “As long as the monks see their own benefit in wilderness dwellings, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[7] “As long as the monks each keep firmly in mind: ‘If there are any well-behaved fellow followers of the chaste life who have yet to come, may they come; and may the well-behaved fellow-followers of the chaste life who have come live in comfort,’ their growth can be expected, not their decline.

“As long as the monks remain steadfast in these seven conditions, and as long as these seven conditions endure among the monks, the monks’ growth can be expected, not their decline.”
(AN 7.23. Thanissaro tr.)
What exactly is the training issue for these restrictions?
Your a monk you are an arahant, you get into a car wreck in transportation your testicals become infected they are surgically removed. Ex-communicato.
Ridiculous.
Or someone with a small portion of finger cut off say from a carpentry accident, never can this individual ordain.
Ridiculous.
I’m embarrassed for buddhists today.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Ceisiwr »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:55 pm
Dhammanando wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:48 pm
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:22 am Buddhists should change this, and quickly.
There is no mandate for the sangha to do so.
For a disciple who has faith in the Teacher's instruction and lives in unison with it, monks, it is a principle that:

"The Teacher is the Lord, a disciple am I;
The Lord knows, I do not know."
(MN 70. Horner tr.)
The Blessed One said: “And which seven are the conditions that lead to no decline?

[1] “As long as the monks meet often, meet a great deal, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[2] “As long as the monks meet in harmony, adjourn from their meetings in harmony, and conduct Sangha business in harmony, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[3] “As long as the monks neither decree what has been undecreed nor repeal what has been decreed, but practice undertaking the training rules as they have been decreed, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[4] “As long as the monks honor, respect, venerate, and do homage to the elder monks—those with seniority who have long been ordained, the fathers of the Sangha, leaders of the Sangha—regarding them as worth listening to, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[5] “As long as the monks do not submit to the power of any arisen craving that leads to further becoming, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[6] “As long as the monks see their own benefit in wilderness dwellings, their growth can be expected, not their decline.

[7] “As long as the monks each keep firmly in mind: ‘If there are any well-behaved fellow followers of the chaste life who have yet to come, may they come; and may the well-behaved fellow-followers of the chaste life who have come live in comfort,’ their growth can be expected, not their decline.

“As long as the monks remain steadfast in these seven conditions, and as long as these seven conditions endure among the monks, the monks’ growth can be expected, not their decline.”
(AN 7.23. Thanissaro tr.)
What exactly is the training issue for these restrictions?
Your a monk you are an arahant, you get into a car wreck in transportation your testicals become infected they are surgically removed. Ex-communicato.
Ridiculous.
Or someone with a small portion of finger cut off say from a carpentry accident, never can this individual ordain.
Ridiculous.
I’m embarrassed for buddhists today.


Why should we change the Vinaya to please your feelings?
“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.”
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6491
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Dhammanando »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:55 pm What exactly is the training issue for these restrictions?
As I've already said, this is one of the cases where the Vinaya narrative doesn't report the Buddha as giving any reason. Of course we're free to speculate on what the reasons might have been, but the status of the fruits of any such speculation will be merely personal opinion (attanomati), which is traditionally classed as the weakest source of authority.

My own conjectures would be as follows:

In the case of the man born without testicles I think the reason would be the same as for animals: the impossibility of decisive progress in the Dhammavinaya for such persons. By this I don't mean that the testicles themselves play any particular role in a man's progress in Dhamma, but rather, that being born without them may have been taken as a sign (and in later texts was taken as a sign) that the man hadn't been born with the type of relinking consciousness that makes progress in Dhamma possible.

In the case of a man who was born with testicles but later lost them, I suspect the Vinaya ordinance was more socially engineered. Since the commonest reason for getting castrated in those days was in order to become a particular sort of sex worker, the presence of eunuchs in the bhikkhusaṅgha would likely have given rise to ill rumours and damaged its reputation.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:55 pmYour a monk you are an arahant, you get into a car wreck in transportation your testicals become infected they are surgically removed. Ex-communicato.
Ridiculous.
Your quarrel here is with Ven. Paññobhāsa, not me. I've already voiced my scepticism about his opinion.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by thepea »

Dhammanando wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:26 pm
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:55 pm What exactly is the training issue for these restrictions?
As I've already said, this is one of the cases where the Vinaya narrative doesn't report the Buddha as giving any reason. Of course we're free to speculate on what the reasons might have been, but the status of the fruits of any such speculation will be merely personal opinion (attanomati), which is traditionally classed as the weakest source of authority.

My own conjectures would be as follows:

In the case of the man born without testicles I think the reason would be the same as for animals: the impossibility of decisive progress in the Dhammavinaya for such persons. By this I don't mean that the testicles themselves play any particular role in a man's progress in Dhamma, but rather, that being born without them may have been taken as a sign (and in later texts was taken as a sign) that the man hadn't been born with the type of relinking consciousness that makes progress in Dhamma possible.

In the case of a man who was born with testicles but later lost them, I suspect the Vinaya ordinance was more socially engineered. Since the commonest reason for getting castrated in those days was in order to become a particular sort of sex worker, the presence of eunuchs in the bhikkhusaṅgha would likely have given rise to ill rumours and damaged its reputation.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 4:55 pmYour a monk you are an arahant, you get into a car wreck in transportation your testicals become infected they are surgically removed. Ex-communicato.
Ridiculous.
Your quarrel here is with Ven. Paññobhāsa, not me. I've already voiced my scepticism about his opinion.
Now what about the amputation part of my questioning, is this actually true?
I see no practical reason why an amputee could not progress on the path and reach the final goal other than holding a bowl and walking on alms round depending on the removed appendage.
If living in a community of monks they could forgo alms round and do another aspect of service.
This doesn’t upset you? It just feels wrong to me, I would reject this.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by thepea »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:19 pm
Why should we change the Vinaya to please your feelings?
Because it’s ridiculous, embarrassing, and no one can give a decent reason not to other than a mistranslated or prejudice monk wrote this to make certain that they did not have to associate with such people.
Guaranteed gotama did not intend for this.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Ceisiwr »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:52 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 6:19 pm
Why should we change the Vinaya to please your feelings?
Because it’s ridiculous, embarrassing, and no one can give a decent reason not to other than a mistranslated or prejudice monk wrote this to make certain that they did not have to associate with such people.
Guaranteed gotama did not intend for this.

What is the basis of your claim that said rules didn’t come from the Buddha?

A lot of my friends find my beliefs ridiculous etc. I’m not going to change them because they don’t understand Dhamma.

If we start changing the Vinaya, where does it end?
“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.”
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by thepea »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:50 pm
What is the basis of your claim that said rules didn’t come from the Buddha?

A lot of my friends find my beliefs ridiculous etc. I’m not going to change them because they don’t understand Dhamma.

If we start changing the Vinaya, where does it end?
There is no reason to shun these people other than to appease the prejudices of layfolk who do not understand dhamma. If a muderous wretch such as Angulimala can ordain after murdering all those people and attain arahantship I see no reason why an amputee or a person with no balls cannot and should not be offered the same opportunities. At the very least it should be discretionary of the head monk.
If you adjust the Vinaya to accommodate modern more liberal views it is a good thing. More open and acceptance to women is another example.
If dhamma is understood there is no reason for this fear, it seems another reason to point towards the monastics heading towards a faith based practice opposed to one deep with wisdom.
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6491
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Dhammanando »

thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pm Now what about the amputation part of my questioning, is this actually true?
You keep asking me to repeat myself. As I've already said, missing fingers, whether congenitally or by amputation, are an impediment to going forth but not an absolute one. Such persons aren't supposed to get ordained, but if they do then the ordination is held to be valid.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pmThis doesn’t upset you?
No, because I know that in actual monastic practice exceptions are made for individual cases. Provided he isn't in one of the eleven "incapable" classes (patricides, matricides, rapers of nuns, etc.) almost any man will be able to find some abbot somewhere who's willing to take him. Once he's been ordained, though abbots of stricter observance might tut in disapproval they still have to accept that the fingerless or legless or tattooed or hunchbacked monk's ordination is valid.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pmI would reject this.
I doubt your late teacher would. Goenkaji knew the Vinaya rules well and required bhikkhus who took his meditation courses to observe them to the last dot and comma.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22390
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Ceisiwr »

Dhammanando wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:28 am
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pm Now what about the amputation part of my questioning, is this actually true?
You keep asking me to repeat myself. As I've already said, missing fingers, whether congenitally or by amputation, are an impediment to going forth but not an absolute one. Such persons aren't supposed to get ordained, but if they do then the ordination is held to be valid.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pmThis doesn’t upset you?
No, because I know that in actual monastic practice exceptions are made for individual cases. Provided he isn't in one of the eleven "incapable" classes (patricides, matricides, rapers of nuns, etc.) almost any man will be able to find some abbot somewhere who's willing to take him. Once he's been ordained, though abbots of stricter observance might tut in disapproval they still have to accept that the fingerless or legless or tattooed or hunchbacked monk's ordination is valid.
thepea wrote: Fri Feb 07, 2020 8:47 pmI would reject this.
I doubt your late teacher would. Goenkaji knew the Vinaya rules well and required bhikkhus who took his meditation courses to observe them to the last dot and comma.


Is it against the Vinaya to have a tattoo?
“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.”
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by mikenz66 »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:30 am Is it against the Vinaya to have a tattoo?
Many bhikkhus (including some high in the Thai hierarchy, judging from some of the pictures on the walls of my local monastery) have tattoos, but I'd be interested in knowing what the actual rules are.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6491
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Pannobhasa on LGBT

Post by Dhammanando »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:30 am Is it against the Vinaya to have a tattoo?
The prohibition against applying dyes to one's skin is usually interpreted as including a ban on bhikkhus getting tattoos.

As for ordaining men who already had tattoos, if the tattoos were a punishment to mark the men as criminals then they would fall into the "undesirable" (but not the "incapable") class.

Ven. Thanissaro explains:
Those marked with severe punishments. The Canon mentions two sorts of applicants here:

(a) A person who has been whipped or caned as a punishment. The Commentary extends this prohibition to other forms of beating as well — such as being hit with the elbows, the knees, coconuts, or rocks. The applicant may be given the Going-forth after the wounds have healed and bruises have subsided.

(b) A person who has been branded or tattooed as a punishment. Again, the applicant may be ordained after the wounds have healed as long as they don't show when he is fully robed with his right shoulder open. The texts mention tattooing only in the context of punishment, so it would seem reasonable to assume that applicants who have voluntarily had themselves tattooed are not prohibited. Still, if tattoos visible when fully robed contain words or designs that are blatantly contrary to a bhikkhu's ideals, it would be wise to have them removed.

(Buddhist Monastic Code II ch. 14)
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Post Reply