{"id":2523,"date":"2017-05-26T13:34:04","date_gmt":"2017-05-26T11:34:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/?p=2523"},"modified":"2017-05-28T09:23:42","modified_gmt":"2017-05-28T07:23:42","slug":"bhikkhunis-in-thai-monastic-education","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/2017\/05\/26\/bhikkhunis-in-thai-monastic-education\/","title":{"rendered":"Bhikkhunis in Thai Monastic Education"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Bhante Sujato <\/em>
\nOriginally published on 18\/6\/2008<\/em><\/p>\n

In the debate about bhikkhuni ordination, information plays a key role. We have made
\nsubstantial strides in our understanding of Buddhism in history, the relation between
\ndifferent Buddhist traditions, and so on. Unfortunately, little of this information has
\npermeated into the tradition Sangha bodies. It seems to be assumed that organizations like
\nthe Thai Sangha are a preserve of profound Dhamma knowledge, full of experts who are
\nthoroughly versed in the issues. But this is, alas, far from the case. The reality is that the
\nvast majority of Thai monks recieve no more than a basic Buddhist education, which is
\nlargely based on a set of textbooks compiled around a hundred years ago.<\/p>\n

At that time, Thai Buddhism was being rapidly modernized, and the leaders of the Thai
\nSangha, were foremost in promoting a re-evaluation of their own tradition based on the
\nearliest teachings available in the texts. This tradition was initiated by Prince Mongkut and
\ncarried on by Prince Vajira\u00f1\u0101\u1e47a during their time in robes. By rediscovering the central
\nimportance of the Pali Canon, and promoting a rational, non-superstitious approach to
\nDhamma, they laid the foundations for modern Thai Buddhism. However, they had access
\nto only a small sector of the Buddhist scriptures, and our textual, archaeological, and
\nhistorical understanding has developed rapidly since then. But due to the royal prestige of
\nthese texts, it has proven almost impossible to update them. Thus the Sangha today clings
\nto the outdated and often incorrect conclusions of these texts, while ignoring the spirit of
\ninquiry and exploration on which they were founded.<\/p>\n

In the debate on bhikkhunis, the following passage stands as one of the most influential
\nstatements on the matter. It is found in Prince Vajira\u00f1\u0101\u1e47a\u2019s Vinayamukha, the basic Vinaya
\ntext learnt by all Thai monks. Later, I will show how its conclusions about bhikkhunis are
\nwrong, but we must appreciate that this criticism is entirely in the spirit of the text itself.
\nThe text does not assert a dogmatic ideology, it bases itself on reasons and tries to establish
\na historical case. We are able to criticize it from a rational perspective precisely because the
\ntext itself is rational. But, as the Buddha said, what is hammered out by reason is not
\nnecessarily correct.<\/p>\n

Vinayamukha vol.III Standard text<\/strong>
\nLiengchieng Press, Bangkok, pg. 170.<\/p>\n

The Bhikkhuni Sangha started in the middle of the Buddha\u2019s time. But at the time of
\nthe great passing away of the Buddha there was no mention of the bhikkhunis. That
\ntime it was a great event, so if the bhikkhunis still existed they should have come
\nfor the cremation, or been part of the celebration of the relics. With this evidence,
\nbhikkhunis might have already disappeared after the Buddha passed away for a
\nhundred years.<\/p>\n

There was a story [from the time of the Second Council, 100 years after the
\nBuddha\u2019s parinibbana] of Ven. bhikkhuni Nand\u0101 Ther\u012b, King K\u0101la\u015boka\u2019s sister, who
\ninformed him that the Vajjiputtaka monks were propagating wrong understanding
\n[of the Vinaya].<\/p>\n

Then there was a long story during King A\u015boka\u2019s reign in B.E.236 when
\nSa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101, King Asoka\u2019s daughter, was ordained as bhikkhuni. The King sent her
\nto Sri Lanka to establish the bhikkhuni Sangha there. At the same time
\nMahindathera, King Asoka\u2019s son, was already there establishing Buddhism.
\n1Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 Ther\u012b gave ordination to Sri Lankan women with princess Anul\u0101 as
\ntheir chief.<\/p>\n

Regarding these two stories, Ven. Nand\u0101 Ther\u012b\u2019s story was not found in the Pali<\/strong>
\nSattasatikkhandaka [the canonical source for the Second Council]<\/strong>, but in the
\nMahava\u1e41sa, which was written after the commentaries [in the fifth century C.E.].<\/p>\n

The story of Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 is told in the [Vinaya] commentary [Samantap\u0101s\u0101dik\u0101].
\nThere were no names of the accompanying bhikkhunis, unlike in the case of
\nMahinda [who traveled to Sri Lanka with a group of monks whose names are given].
\nIt was recorded only that King A\u015boka Mah\u0101r\u0101ja invited the Ther\u012b and her followers
\naboard the ship. There was no details of her followers, number of bhikkhunis or
\ntheir names. If she went alone how can she give ordination? Also the commentator
\ndid not think that one bhikkhuni cannot give ordination every year. With this
\nreasoning we cannot depend on this evidence. So it is agreed that the bhikkhunis
\nhave disappeared since then. [Translation supplied by Bhikkhuni Dhammanand\u0101.]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This passage would appear on the surface to be in consistent: for if bhikkhunis had
\ndisappeared by the time of the parinibbana, how could they have survived until the time of
\nA\u015boka? However, while the reasoning used is not always entirely clear, it seems to me that
\nthis passage develops a perfectly rational argument. I think we can rephrase the logic like
\nthis.<\/p>\n

The canonical texts suggest that the bhikkhunis had disappeared even by the time of the
\nparinibbana. There are, however, occasional references to bhikkhunis in later literature.
\nBut these passages occur in texts that include much unhistorical information, and so may
\nwell be incorrect. Nevertheless, if the bhikkhunis did survive until the time of A\u015boka, then
\nthe fact that Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 did not have a full Sangha to perform ordination means that the
\nlineage died out then.<\/p>\n

Let us take this one piece at a time.<\/p>\n

1. The bhikkhunis were not present at the Buddha\u2019s parinibbana.<\/em><\/p>\n

The Mah\u0101parinibb\u0101na Sutta, the standard Pali text on the Buddha\u2019s passing away, does not
\nmention the bhikkhunis being present at the Buddha\u2019s deathbed. The Vinayamukha, while it
\nis not completely clear, seems to think that this shows that the bhikkhunis had already
\ndisappeared. But this conclusion is obviously wrong, not just because of the many
\nreferences to bhikkhunis through history, but even in the Mah\u0101parinibb\u0101na Sutta itself.<\/p>\n

The first reference to bhikkhunis in the Mah\u0101parinibb\u0101na Sutta is where the Buddha
\nmentioned a bhikkhuni who had recently died, Nand\u0101, and praised her as a non-returner.<\/p>\n

More importantly, it is recorded that the Buddha said to M\u0101ra:<\/p>\n

I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and
\nbhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples \u2014 wise, well
\ndisciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the
\nDhamma, abiding by the appropriate conduct, and having learned the Master\u2019s
\nword, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it
\nin detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to
\nrefute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating
\nDhamma. [This and following passages from the Mah\u0101parinibb\u0101na Sutta are from Sister Vajira & Francis<\/span>
\n Story\u2019s translation at<\/span> http:\/\/www.accesstoinsight.org\/tipitaka\/dn\/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html<\/a>.]<\/span><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Thus not only were bhikkhunis present, but they were an essential part of his dispensation.
\nThe Buddha would only pass away when the bhikkhunis were well established. This
\nstatement, found widely in the different versions of this text, was said to have been made
\nby the Buddha shortly after his Awakening. It was his stated aspiration, right from the start
\nof his teaching, to establish the bhikkhunis.<\/p>\n

A little later the Sutta refers to bhikkhunis yet again as a positive and essential sector of
\nhis dispensation:<\/p>\n

But, Ananda, whatever bhikkhu or bhikkhuni, layman or laywoman, abides by the
\nDhamma, lives uprightly in the Dhamma, walks in the way of the Dhamma, it is by
\nsuch a one that the Tathagata is respected, venerated, esteemed, worshipped, and
\nhonored in the highest degree. Therefore, Ananda, thus should you train
\nyourselves: \u2018We shall abide by the Dhamma, live uprightly in the Dhamma, walk in
\nthe way of the Dhamma.\u2019<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And a little further down the same theme recurs:<\/p>\n

These, Ananda, are the four places that a pious person should visit and look upon
\nwith feelings of reverence. And truly there will come to these places, Ananda, pious
\nbhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, reflecting: \u2018Here the Tathagata
\nwas born! Here the Tathagata became fully enlightened in unsurpassed, supreme
\nEnlightenment! Here the Tathagata set rolling the unexcelled Wheel of the
\nDhamma! Here the Tathagata passed away into the state of Nibbana in which no
\nelement of clinging remains!\u2019 And whoever, Ananda, should die on such a
\npilgrimage with his heart established in faith, at the breaking up of the body, after
\ndeath, will be reborn in a realm of heavenly happiness.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And once more:<\/p>\n

Capable and judicious is Ananda, bhikkhus, for he knows the proper time for
\nbhikkhus to have audience with the Tathagata, and the time for bhikkhunis, the
\ntime for laymen and for laywomen; the time for kings and for ministers of state; the
\ntime for teachers of other sects and for their followers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It is perfectly obvious that, according to the Pali version of the Mah\u0101parinibb\u0101na Sutta,
\nbhikkhunis existed at the time of the Buddha\u2019s parinibbana and, moreover, were regarded
\nas a regular, essential part of the Buddha\u2019s community. The fact that no bhikkhunis appear
\nin the text as actually present at the Buddha\u2019s passing away must be due to other factors.
\nPerhaps the redactors of the texts, who were of course monks, simply didn\u2019t mention the
\nbhikkhunis. Or perhaps there were no bhikkhunis in the nearby districts who could be
\nsummoned in time.<\/p>\n

A search of the (very many) alternative versions of this Sutta available in Chinese,
\nTibetan, and Sanskrit would also be necessary before reaching any firm conclusions. But,
\nsadly, hardly any monks in Thailand even know of the existence of these texts. For them
\nanything outside the Pali Canon is \u2018Mahayana\u2019 and therefore wrong and irrelevant. This
\nna\u00efve, sectarian misuse of textual criticism is, again, largely based on 19 th Century ideas.
\nMongkut and Vajira\u00f1\u0101\u1e47a, with their western-influenced education, introduced the notion
\nof a skeptical scrutiny of the received texts. But this was based on the state of knowledge of
\nBuddhist texts in the wider academic sphere at the time. The Chinese and Tibetan texts had
\nhardly been read by any Westerners, and it was widely believed, even among Western
\nscholars, that the Mahayana traditions were nothing more than later degenerations. The
\ncourse of 20 th century scholarship has systematically corrected this bias, while retaining
\nrespect for the Pali Canon. Yet the existence of several different versions of the Vinaya, of
\n3several collections parallel to the Pali Nik\u0101yas, of large quantities of manuscript material
\nrecovered from Central Asia and elsewhere, has had no practical effect on the ideological
\nstand that regards the Pali Canon as the be-all and end-all of Buddhism.<\/p>\n

2. Bhikkhuni Nand\u0101\u2019s story is not mentioned in the canonical version of the Second<\/em>
\n Council.<\/em><\/p>\n

This is true, but we cannot use this as an argument to say the bhikkhunis did not exist.
\nThere are many details of the later accounts that are not mentioned in the canon. King
\nK\u0101\u1e37a\u015boka is not mentioned in the canonical account, and we do not infer from this that
\nthere were no kings at the time. Nor is there any mention in the canon of the recitation of
\nthe scriptures, or of any connection between the Vajjiputtakas and the Mah\u0101sa\u1e45ghikas, and
\nso on. That does not stop these \u2018facts\u2019 being repeated endlessly in Theravadin accounts.<\/p>\n

It is entirely appropriate that the canonical accounts do not mention the bhikkhunis, for
\nthe Second Council was essentially a disciplinary action taken against the miscreant
\nVajjiputtaka monks, and bhikkhunis would not be present at such a meeting. King K\u0101\u1e37a\u015boka,
\nBhikkhuni Nand\u0101, and the rest, entered the story much later.<\/p>\n

But the story of Nand\u0101 shows the influence of bhikkhunis in ancient Indian Buddhism.
\nWhether or not the story is historical it shows that bhikkhunis could been seen in such a
\npowerful role.<\/p>\n

3. Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 had no bhikkhuni companions, therefore could not have done bhikkhuni<\/em>
\n ordination correctly.<\/em><\/p>\n

This conclusion was made on the basis of the Samantap\u0101s\u0101dik\u0101 and also the Mah\u0101va\u1e41sa.
\nThe Vinayamukha acknowledges that the Samantap\u0101s\u0101dik\u0101 does indeed mention that
\nSa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 traveled with a group, but points out that there is no evidence that they were
\nbhikkhunis. But the Mah\u0101va\u1e41sa is just a later retelling of the D\u012bpava\u1e41sa, which was earlier
\nand more historically reliable. [Elsewhere (Sects & Sectarianism) I have criticized certain aspects of the D\u012bpava\u1e41sa, but as I made\u00a0<\/em>clear there, this was only relevant for the earlier sections, not the events in Sri Lanka.]<\/em><\/span> The D\u012bpava\u1e41sa does, indeed, mention the names of Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101\u2019s companions: ten bhikkhunis, all arahants with psychic powers. [D\u012bpava\u1e41sa 13.2.77-8: Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101 mah\u0101pa\u00f1\u00f1\u0101 uttar\u0101 ca vicakkha\u1e47\u0101\/Hem\u0101 ca m\u0101sagall\u0101 ca aggimitt\u0101\u00a0<\/em>mit\u0101vad\u0101\/Tapp\u0101 pabbatachinn\u0101 ca mall\u0101 ca dhammad\u0101sik\u0101\/Ettak\u0101 t\u0101 bhikkhuniyodh\u016btar\u0101g\u0101 sam\u0101hit\u0101.\u00a0<\/em><\/span>Retrieved from:<\/span> http:\/\/www.sub.uni-<\/a><\/em>goettingen.de\/ebene_1\/fiindolo\/gretil\/2_pali\/3_chron\/dipava2u.htm<\/a>. English translation:<\/span><\/em><\/span>
\n Hermann Oldenburg, 3rd reprint, New Delhi 2001. p.205 chapter 18.11-13.]<\/em><\/span> But this text
\nwas little known in Thailand.<\/p>\n

Given the evident concern shown by Mahinda for the Vinaya, it is inconceivable that
\nordination would be given without bhikkhunis present. But the text as it has come down to
\nus is far more interested in weaving legends around the bringing of the Bodhi tree than
\nabout describing Vinaya procedures. Arguments from absence are always dubious, as what
\nis left out is determined entirely by the redactors.<\/p>\n

Not only this, but the Samantap\u0101s\u0101dik\u0101 itself mentions bhikkhunis several times. The
\nnames of Sa\u1e45ghamitt\u0101\u2019s preceptor and teacher are given. And at a great assembly, it is said
\nthat 9 600 000 bhikkhunis were present. [The Chinese Sudassanavinayavibh\u0101s\u0101 has the more modest, if still improbable, number of 960 000.]<\/em><\/span> An impossible number, no doubt, but a clear indication of a substantial bhikkhuni community.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

All the above evidence was available to the author of the Vinayamukha, and there is no
\nexcuse for not taking it into account. However, since that time substantial new evidence has
\ncome to light. The most substantial evidence of all is the A\u015bokan edicts, which do mention bhikkhunis; in fact, they always mention bhikkhus and bhikkhunis together. According to the research of Gregory Schopen, the inscriptions found in India mention bhikkhunis roughly the same number of times as bhikkhus, and they play similar roles, including being
\nteachers, reciters of texts, sponsors of major building projects, etc. Similarly, throughout
\nthe scriptures of Indian Buddhism, bhikkhunis play their role, even if it is a quiet one.<\/p>\n

Of course, we could not expect that the author of the Vinayamukha would have known of
\nsuch matters. Nor could he have known of the historical records telling of the transmission
\nof the bhikkhuni lineage from Sri Lanka to China; or of the fact that the Chinese
\nDharmaguptaka Vinaya lineage is essentially identical to the Theravada; or of the
\nsubstantial evidence for bhikkhunis in Thai history. Nor, sadly enough, could we expect him
\nto be responding in a meaningful way to the spiritual aspirations of women in our modern
\ntimes. It seems that he, like many in Thai Buddhism, believed that the higher spiritual
\nattainments were not available in our degenerate times, and his main goal was to construct
\na religious basis to support Thai nation-building.<\/p>\n

But we can, and should, expect that today\u2019s Sangha should know these things. The tragedy is not that a Dhamma book was written that contains obvious mistakes; this is normal. The tragedy is that the mistakes are perpetuated again and again, without investigation or revision. The spirit of inquiry and reason on which the 19 th Century Thai Sangha reforms were based has disappeared. The criticisms I am making are nothing new or unusual. They have been voiced many times by Thai monks and within the Thai community. But the Thai Sangha no longer appears to be capable of reforming itself to become relevant for our times. The spirit of reform which inspired prince Vajira\u00f1\u0101\u1e47a has long departed from the institutions that he set up. [See, for example, Thanissaro, \u2018The Traditions of the Noble Ones\u2019, http:\/\/www.dhammatalks.org\/Archive\/Writings\/CrossIndexed\/Uncollected\/MiscEssays\/The%20Traditions%20of%20the%20Noble%20Ones.pdf<\/a>; Phra Paisan Visalo, \u2018When Buddhist Monks Cheat in Exams\u2019, http:\/\/www.buddhistchannel.tv\/index.php?id=70,6289,0,0,1,0<\/a> .]<\/em> Today, we must seek the Dhamma elsewhere.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Bhante Sujato Originally published on 18\/6\/2008 In the debate about bhikkhuni ordination, information plays a key role. We have made substantial strides in our understanding of Buddhism in history, the relation between different Buddhist traditions, and so on. Unfortunately,…
Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2523","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2523","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/14"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2523"}],"version-history":[{"count":33,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2523\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2649,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2523\/revisions\/2649"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2523"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2523"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.samita.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2523"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}