Comments on: Bhikkhuni Order http://www.gavihara.org/2009/11/bhikkhuni-order/ Theravada Buddhist Temple and Vipassana Meditation Center Thu, 11 Aug 2011 10:09:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Eric Kaufman http://www.gavihara.org/2009/11/bhikkhuni-order/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Eric Kaufman Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:55:00 +0000 http://www.gavihara.org/?p=155#comment-44 I'll answer my own question for those interested- this only goes up until 2006 which is significant because of The bhikkuni ordination into the Thai Forest tradition overseen by Ajahn brahm in June of that year. I find it interesting that the buddha actually gave explicit permission for Bhikkus to ordain Bhikkunis (he later created the dual ordination ceremony but never renounced the bhikku-only ordination. This seems to refute the primary argument that bhikkunis cannot be ordained because there must be a bhikkuni present to participate in the ordination, and the bhikkuni order died out a long time ago. I am not an expert on the vinaya but I can't see how anyone could argue that the Buddha would have considered a bhikku-only bhikkuni ordination to be invalid today, given that such ordinations took place during his lifetime with his blessing.The fact that a different ceremony was later authorized and became the standard isn't evidence that the former practice was invalid; if he didn't invalidate it explicitly, he didn't validate it. Given the emphasis in Therevada on a literal interpretation of the vinaya, I find it hard to understand why this would be in dispute: the Buddha said "I give you, O monks, permission to ordain bhikkunis"- that seems pretty straightforward to me. The emphasis on requiring dual ordination by those opposing bhikkuni ordination seems a little to convenient and disingenuous. On a related but slightly different note, I want to play devils advocate for a moment: the vinaya wasn't something that the Buddha laid out all at once as a definitive and complete code of conduct for monks and nuns: rules were added and ammended constantly as new problems arose... So obviously the Buddha considered it to be a fluid code aimed at practicality and intended as an expedient means to help monks and nuns attain enlightenment. Why then, do we consider it to have been "complete" after te Buddha died? Why are bhikkus still not allowed to dig or put a stake even an inch into the ground when that rule was only made out of respect for a common religious belief at the time which is now defunct? I’ll answer my own question for those interested- this only goes up
until 2006 which is significant because of The bhikkuni ordination into the Thai Forest tradition overseen by Ajahn brahm in June of that year. I find it interesting that the buddha actually gave explicit permission for Bhikkus to ordain Bhikkunis (he later created the dual ordination ceremony but never renounced the bhikku-only ordination. This seems to refute the primary argument that bhikkunis cannot be ordained because there must be a bhikkuni present to participate in the ordination, and the bhikkuni order died out a long time ago. I am not an expert on the vinaya but I can’t see how anyone could argue that the Buddha would have considered a bhikku-only bhikkuni ordination to be invalid today, given that such ordinations took place during his lifetime with his blessing.The fact that a different ceremony was later authorized and became the standard isn’t evidence that the former practice was invalid; if he didn’t invalidate it explicitly, he didn’t validate it. Given the emphasis in Therevada on a literal interpretation of the vinaya, I find it hard to understand why this would be in dispute: the Buddha said “I give you, O monks, permission to ordain bhikkunis”- that seems pretty straightforward to me.
The emphasis on requiring dual ordination by those opposing bhikkuni ordination seems a little to convenient and disingenuous.

On a related but slightly different note, I want to play devils advocate for a moment: the vinaya wasn’t something that the Buddha laid out all at once as a definitive and complete code of conduct for monks and nuns: rules were added and ammended constantly as new problems arose… So obviously the Buddha considered it to be a fluid code aimed at practicality and intended as an expedient means to help monks and nuns attain enlightenment. Why then, do we consider it to have been “complete” after te Buddha died? Why are bhikkus still not allowed to dig or put a stake even an inch into the ground when that rule was only made out of respect for a common religious belief at the time which is now defunct?

]]> By: Eric Kaufman http://www.gavihara.org/2009/11/bhikkhuni-order/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Eric Kaufman Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:06:45 +0000 http://www.gavihara.org/?p=155#comment-43 What is the state of the bhikuni order today? I know there is a movement in Sri lanka and bhikkunis who are practicing there and Ajahn Brahm participated in an ordination ceremony for a dew bhikkus in Australia (at which point the Thai forest monastery system in Thailand severed ties with him and buddinyanarama. What has happened since then? What is the state of the bhikuni order today? I know there is a movement in Sri lanka and bhikkunis who are practicing there and Ajahn Brahm participated in an ordination ceremony for a dew bhikkus in Australia (at which point the Thai forest monastery system in Thailand severed ties with him and buddinyanarama. What has happened since then?

]]>