Aj Brahm "expelled" over ordination of women. Your Thoughts?

[stuka]

While I deplore Aj Bhram's stance against those of us who do not embrace superstitions, I must commend and stand in awe of him for standing forward on the issue of the ordination of women. Your thoughts?:

From Aj Sujato's website:

http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/black-sunday/
Black Sunday

On Sunday November 1st, Ajahn Brahm went to North-east Thailand on the request of the senior Ajahns of the Wat Pah Pong tradition. Having announced on the previous Wednesday in their visit to Somdet Buddhajahn that they intended to expel Ajahn Brahm, this was their day to put the ultimatum to him: recant or be expelled.

The opposition to Ajahn Brahm was led by a small, tightly focused and aggressive group. Many of the other senior Thai monks spoke in favour of gentleness and proportion.

Most of those who have heard about this issue overseas have been incredulous. It is really difficult to conceive that something like this could happen, with so little wisdom or reflection – don’t even think about compassion. But WPP is a little world unto itself. There is no possibility of reflection or engagement with a wider sphere, no acknowledgement of the genuine issues that Ajahn Brahm was addressing. Any broader considerations that might be brought to bear were just water off a duck’s back.

Ajahn Brahm tried to point out that Ajahns Pasanno and Amaro, respected Ajahns of the WPP tradition in Abhayagiri Monastery in California, had recently presided over a large bhikkhuni ordination in the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas. This was ignored. He presented the letters of support from so many people all over the world. They were ignored (but not by us! keep the letters coming!)

Attempts to communicate on the basis of Dhamma-vinaya were doomed from the beginning. Ajahn Brahm found it difficult to even convey some basic facts, such as that he was not the preceptor at the ordination, as the preceptor for a bhikkhuni ordination is a bhikkhuni, not a bhikkhu. Anyone who took the trouble to read the four pages of the Vinaya Pitaka that detail the procedure would know this. But repeated attempts simply failed to get this elementary point across.

When Ajahn Brahm asked what the actual Vinaya objections were, the only substantive response was that the ordination was flawed because there was diṭṭhivipatti, a ‘failure of view’. Failure of view is described in the Anguttara Nikaya (AN 3.117) as the denial of the fruits of merit and the existence of other realms. But when Ajahn Brahm asked what the monk meant by ‘failure of view’, the answer was that Ajahn Brahm was acting on his own view, not that of Wat Pah Pong. So much for rationality.

Ajahn Brahm went so far to accommodate the WPP Ajahns that he even expressed his willingness to not ordain any future bhikkhunis. But this was not enough. The hard core opposition demanded that he recant his existing ordination and declare that the bhikkhunis were mae chis. Of course, they were not mae chis and never have been, as mae chi is a category that only exists in Thailand. In other words, they were asking him to make a bald-faced lie in the midst of the Sangha, and only then could he be allowed to stay. Of course, he knew that the ordination had been done properly, irrespective of anyone’s opinions or opposition, and so he could not do this.

Then the Sangha decided to expel him. A minority of monks grunted their approval, and Ajahn Brahm alone voted against his expulsion.

A number of revealing requests followed. One of the monks said (incorrectly) that Bodhinyana was established as a branch of WPP, and suggested that therefore Ajahn Brahm should be expelled as abbot (!) and a new abbot appointed by WPP.

Another monk said (again incorrectly) that since the funds to build Bodhinyana came from Thai people who donated out of faith in Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Brahm should give a huge cheque to WPP to repay the Thai people!

Another monk opined that since Ajahn Brahm was now out of WPP he was a Mahayanist. (Stay with me here, folks, these things actually happened. I’m not just making it up.)

Ajahn Liem pointedly said that the motion was to deregister Bodhinyana from being a branch monastery of WPP, ‘no more’ (tao nun). He and other monks spoke kindly to Ajahn Brahm afterwards, reaffirming their friendship.

But already there are signs that the excommunication will be taken much further. It was suggested by one monk, for example, that a monk who took part in the ceremony should not join a pilgrimage to India that includes WPP monks.

A more dysfunctional and illegitimate process of making decisions in the Sangha is scarcely imaginable. I can only encourage all Sangha members to actually study the Vinaya and demand of their senior Sangha that proper procedure be followed. Accept no substitute.

There is a deep personal anger and resentment at work here that will soon enough find its expression in various forms of punitive action. Already one of the bhikkhunis who took part in the ordination has been told that she could not do her retreat at Vimutti Monastery in New Zealand as already planned. That’s okay for her, she can come to Santi FM. But what else are these monks brewing up?

Don’t worry, I’ll blog it when I hear about it.



http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/10/31/ ... -happened/


How Australia’s first Theravada bhikkhuni ordination happened

22nd October 2009: remember that date. That’s when it all changed. That’s when the Sangha of Bodhinyana Monastery and Dhammasara Nun’s monastery, with the support of an international group of bhikkhunis, performed the first Theravada bhikkhuni ordination in Australia, and the first bhikkhuni ordination in the Thai Forest Tradition anywhere in the world. Here’s how it all came about.

Bhikkhuni ordination has been a live topic in international Buddhism since at least the 1970s, when Tenzin Palmo took full ordination. Actually, it was discussed long before that, as shown by the support for bhikkhuni ordination given by Jetavan Sayadaw in his paper of 1949, where he referred to contemporary discussions on the topic.

The Western, or more accurately, English-speaking bhikkhu community of Ajahn Chah started in the 1960s and gained momentum in the 1970s with the establishment of the first Western monastery in Thailand, Wat Pa Nanachat (International Forest Monastery), and in the 1980s with a number of overseas branches.

The question of how to support women’s ordination aspirations became pressing in the new environment, and the English communities responded by developing an entirely new ordination platform called the sīladharā. This is superficially similar to the canonical sāmaṇerī platform for young girls, or the modern Sinhalese dasasīlamātā, but in fact is based on a new system of rules, invented by Ajahn Sucitto in discussion with the English community in the 1980s. These new rules are structured around the canonical pāṭimokkhas for the bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, but introduce many changes of substance. This sīladharā platform has survived in Amaravati and Chithurst monasteries, and currently numbers around 15 nuns.

At the time, the English Ajahns new little about bhikkhuni ordination, and while it was sometimes said that the sīladharā ordination was intended to be a stepping stone to bhikkhuni ordination, there has been no signs of any actual effort to make this possible. Rather, the question of bhikkhuni ordination has been silenced every time it is raised.

Meanwhile, the community of Ajahn Jagaro and later Ajahn Brahm in Perth had the long term intention to establish a nuns’ community. This became possible in the late 1990s, when Ajahn Vāyāmā was invited to establish a community at Dhammasara. Ajahn Vāyāmā, while having a respectful connection with the English community, was not ordained there, but in Sri Lanka. I was present at some of her initial discussions with Ajahn Brahm, and she made it clear that she did not wish to follow the English model. Ajahn Brahm responded by saying that Bodhinyana was not a branch of Amaravati.

The Dhammasara community was based on the 10 precept sāmaṇerī ordination, which they supplemented with their own monastery rules.

The international community had, meanwhile, been making great strides forward in bhikkhuni ordination. The first Theravadin bhikkhunis were ordained in the 1980s, with perhaps the first being Ayyā Khemā, who was incidentally was one of Ajahn Vāyāmā’s first teachers, and was an original trustee on the land that has now become Santi Forest Monastery. Many more followed, and during the 1990s a series of well-publicized and large scale bhikkhuni ordinations took place in India and Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan bhikkhuni order received a lot of opposition in the early days, but now there are several hundred bhikkhunis, and now that the hooha has blown over they just get on with their lives.

Chatsumarn Kabalsingh, a prominent Thai academic and media figure, took bhikkhuni ordination in Sri Lanka in 2003 under the name of Dhammanandā, becoming the first of a new generation of Thai bhikkhunis. Many have followed, and there are now perhaps 20-30 bhikkhunis in Thailand.

Cambodia, too, has a small bhikkhuni community, with a group of around 20 bhikkhunis supported by one of the Sangharajas there.

Burma has the most shameful record in their oppression of bhikkhunis. Bhikkhuni Saccavadī ordained in Sri Lanka and on her return to Burma was thrown in jail, abused and traumatized, and finally forced to disrobe. I should add, though, that most of the Burmese monks who I know overseas fully support bhikkhuni ordination and have gone out of their way to express this. In addition, ‘Mahayana’ bhikkhunis are at least allowed to stay and practice in the Burmese meditation monasteries, which they are still denied in the Thai forest tradition.

While all this was going on, and progress was being made internationally in almost all Theravadin lands, the Ajahn Chah tradition did nothing. There was no dialogue, no inquiry, no talk of change.

From around 2002 or so, I started to speak to the monks about this, in person and in letters raising it as an issue that needed addressing. With the exception of Ajahn Brahm and to some extent Ajahn Sucitto, I got no response from the leadership, although many of the junior monks, and also senior monks who did not have institutional roles, were receptive. I kept talking, writing, and researching. I focussed on three issues: the purported technical Vinaya objections to bhikkhuni ordination; the psychological problems informing the debate; and the practical business of setting up a nuns’ community.

I think it was in 2006 that Ajahn Brahm told me that he was now fully convinced that bhikkhuni ordination was the way to go. He was supported by his monks, especially Ajahn Brahmali, and started to encourage Ajahn Vāyāmā to take bhikkhuni ordination. Meanwhile, Ajahn Vāyāmā and the nuns at Dhammasara had visits from several bhikkhunis, allowing them to have discussions, find commonalities, and see what a future as bhikkhunis could become.

By this time, Santi FM had become well known as a center for support of bhikkhunis internationally. We had many women candidates interested in bhikkhuni ordination, but for one reason or another none of them proceeded to full ordination. It’s not an easy thing, and it’s made so much harder by the bad vibes radiating from much of the bhikkhu Sangha. For a time we were discussing holding a joint bhikkhuni ordination with the Dhammasara nuns, perhaps in February 2010. But our potential candidate decided she was not ready for that step. In addition, the Dhammasara community wanted to do a quiet ceremony, which focussed on the real meaning of the ordination – acceptance within the Sangha – rather than making a media event out of it.

During the vassa of 2009, Ajahns Brahm and Vāyāmā had a series of discussions, where they decided they wanted to go ahead with bhikkhuni ordination. They felt their communities were ready, and did not want to have to deal with the kinds of organized opposition that would inevitably follow an announcement of the date. They invited an international group of eight bhikkhunis to participate, who were: Venerables Tathāālokā (preceptor), Sucintā & Sobhanā (reciters of the formal Act), Ātāpī, Satimā, Santinī, Silavatī, and Dhammanandā (Vietnam). Ajahn Brahm and myself were the reciters of the Act on the bhikkhus’ side. All four of the nuns from Dhammasara were to be ordained, that is, Venerables Vāyāmā, Nirodhā, Serī, and Hassapaññā.

The bhikkhunis had all received their ordination from the Theravadin tradition, and are well known as sincere practitioners. It was decided not to include any bhikkhunis from the Mahayana tradition, since some conservative Theravadins might object to this. For the same reason, the two Korean bhikkhus who were staying at Bodhinyana were respectfully asked to remain outside the sīmā boundary. This by no means implies that the presence of Mahayana Sangha would in any way affect the ordination. On the contrary, as qualified bhikkhus and bhikkhunis ordained according to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, they are clearly saṁvāsa (in communion) according to the Vinaya, and none of the monastics who took part in the ordination had any problem with including them. Nevertheless, many Theravadin Sangha perceive Mahayanists as belonging to a fundamentally different order, if not indeed a different religion, and could use their inclusion as a way of criticizing the procedure.

In the days leading up to the ordination, the Sangha at Bodhinyana was repeatedly consulted as to whether they were supportive. This happened at the uposatha meeting on the previous Sunday; I spoke with them again on the Wednesday; and Ajahn Brahm consulted them again on his return from overseas shortly before the ordination itself on Thursday. All the relevant messages from the various Ajahns that were received were printed out and made available, and the monks were encouraged to read them so they could make an informed decision. All of the monks remained unified in their support of bhikkhuni ordination. However, one monk asked to be excused from the ceremony itself as he was ordained by Ajahn Sumedho, and would have preferred if the ordination had gone ahead following the planned WAM in December.

In this time Ajahn Brahm was away, visiting his sick Mum in England, as well as taking on several teaching engagements in England, Norway, and Singapore. On the Sunday before the ordination, he visited Amaravati, where he paid respects to Ajahn Sumedho and told him they were to do bhikkhuni ordination the following Thursday. Ajahn Sumedho advised against it. Following that meeting, it seems that emails were sent to the Western Ajahns around the world, and there was an instantaneous reaction against the ordination.

Most of the Ajahns responded in a reasonable manner, expressing their respects and stating their view that it was not wise to go ahead with the ordination without consulting the wider Sangha. The majority of the messages we received expressed support for bhikkhuni ordination in principle, but not the way it was done. Ajahn Brahm responded to this immediately by pointing out that he had in fact consulted widely with his broad community, including Wat Pa Pong. I also responded with a letter detailing how discussion on bhikkhuni ordination had been comprehensively silenced in the Western Ajahn Chah Sangha.

A few responses were much more aggressive, with implied and explicit threats from Ajahns expressed in email, fax, and phone calls. I called their bluff in emails on Tuesday and Wednesday, and the threatening, aggressive messages stopped cold.

I raised a number of important issues in those emails, and since then have received not a single substantive response. The Ajahns were lightning fast to point out a couple of factual mistakes in Ajahn Brahm’s email, and to try to point out a mistake in mine (which was in fact just a misreading of my original letter). But they continue their total, blank silence in the face of the real questions: discrimination against women in the Sangha and the transformative potential of bhikkhuni ordination.

The communities in Perth were coping well with this pressure. We were all relieved to speak with Ajahn Brahm on the phone on Tuesday evening, when he said he felt happy and calm and that the opposition was pretty much what he expected. The nuns were coping well and remained firm and clear – they’re used to this kind of pressure.

There was some discussion about the exact details of how the two Sanghas should be arranged in the limited space in the Bodhinyana hall. Eventually it was decided to have the bhikkhunis on one side of the shrine, and the bhikkhus on the other side. Each Sangha was arranged in two rows, so that the candidates could come inside the Sangha. The ceremony was conducted precisely in accordance with the Pali Vinaya, with the addition at the beginning of a few ceremonial flourishes as in the Thai tradition.

The ordination ceremony began at 7.15pm, Perth time. Ayyā Tathāālokā, a respected bhikkhuni of 13 years standing, was formally appointed as the preceptor (pavattinī) by the bhikkhuni Sangha. Since no more than three should be ordained at one time, the candidates were ordained in two groups of two. The full procedure is carried out by the bhikkhuni Sangha, with the candidates requesting their preceptor, being instructed outside the Sangha and questioned inside the Sangha, before the final ‘Motion and Three Announcements’ (ñatticatutthakamma), which is the ordination proper.

When the two pairs had been ordained among the bhikkhuni Sangha, they were led in pairs to the bhikkhu Sangha. The ordination in front of the bhikkhus is much simpler, as there is no questioning of the candidates or appointment of a preceptor. The role of the bhikkhu Sangha, according to the Pali Vinaya, is simply to confirm the ordination, stamping it with their seal of approval, and acknowledging the acceptance of the candidates. Ajahn Brahm and I did the chanting, and I confess to more than one shower of rapture as the auspicious words finally came true: evam etaṁ dhārayāmi – thus I will bear it in mind. The ceremony concluded around 9.00pm.

Then the new bhikkhunis sat in the midst of the two Sanghas as we all recited the Metta Sutta in blessing. It is impossible to describe the feeling of joy and exultation that filled the hall – unforgettable. There was a light and a clarity which felt just so right under the crystal clear Perth sky that I remember so well from my childhood. Since the ordination, a flood of support and rejoicing has poured in from around the world. The future has never been brighter.

[stuka]

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rajagaha in the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' Sanctuary. Then Visakha the lay follower went to Dhammadinna the nun and, on arrival, having bowed down to her, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to her, "'Self-identification, self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"There are these five clinging-aggregates, friend Visakha: form as a clinging-aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a clinging-aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. These five clinging-aggregates are the self-identification described by the Blessed One."

Saying, "Yes, lady," Visakha the lay follower delighted & rejoiced in what Dhammadinna the nun had said. Then he asked her a further question: "'The origination of self-identification, the origination of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which origination of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"'The cessation of self-identification, the cessation of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which cessation of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"The remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving: This, friend Visakha, is the cessation of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"'The way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification, the way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification,' it is said, lady. Which way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification is described by the Blessed One?"

"Precisely this noble eightfold path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration: This, friend Visakha, is the way of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification described by the Blessed One."

"Is it the case, lady, that clinging is the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates or is it something separate?"

"Friend Visakha, neither is clinging the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, nor is it something separate. Whatever desire & passion there is with regard to the five clinging-aggregates, that is the clinging there."

"But, lady, how does self-identification come about?"

"There is the case, friend Visakha, where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He assumes feeling to be the self...

"He assumes perception to be the self...

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how self-identification comes about."

"But, lady, how does self-identification not come about?"

"There is the case where a well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He does not assume feeling to be the self...

"He does not assume perception to be the self...

"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. This is how self-identification does not come about."

"Now, again, lady, what is the noble eightfold path?"

"This is the noble eightfold path, friend Visakha: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration."

"Is the noble eightfold path fabricated or unfabricated?"

"The noble eightfold path is fabricated."

"And are the three aggregates [of virtue, concentration, & discernment] included under the noble eightfold path, lady, or is the noble eightfold path included under the three aggregates?"

"The three aggregates are not included under the noble eightfold path, friend Visakha, but the noble eightfold path is included under the three aggregates. Right speech, right action, & right livelihood come under the aggregate of virtue. Right effort, right mindfulness, & right concentration come under the aggregate of concentration. Right view & right resolve come under the aggregate of discernment."

"Now what is concentration, lady, what qualities are its themes, what qualities are its requisites, and what is its development?"

"Singleness of mind is concentration, friend Visakha; the four frames of reference are its themes; the four right exertions are its requisites; and any cultivation, development, & pursuit of these qualities is its development."

"Now, lady, what are fabrications?"

"These three fabrications, friend Visakha: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, & mental fabrications."

"But what are bodily fabrications? What are verbal fabrications? What are mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabrications? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabrications? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"Now, lady, how does the attainment of the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to attain the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am attaining the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have attained the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, which things cease first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is attaining the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, verbal fabrications cease first, then bodily fabrications, then mental fabrications."1

"Now, lady, how does emergence from the cessation of perception & feeling come about?"

"The thought does not occur to a monk as he is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling that 'I am about to emerge from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I am emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling' or that 'I have emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling.' Instead, the way his mind has previously been developed leads him to that state."

"But when a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, which things arise first: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, or mental fabrications?"

"When a monk is emerging from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, mental fabrications arise first, then bodily fabrications, then verbal fabrications."

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, how many contacts make contact?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, three contacts make contact: contact with emptiness, contact with the signless, & contact with the undirected."2

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, lady, to what does his mind lean, to what does it tend, to what does it incline?"

"When a monk has emerged from the cessation of perception & feeling, friend Visakha, his mind leans to seclusion, tends to seclusion, inclines to seclusion."3

"Now, lady, how many kinds of feeling are there?"

"These three kinds of feeling: pleasant feeling, painful feeling, & neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"What is pleasant feeling? What is painful feeling? What is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as pleasant & gratifying is pleasant feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as painful & hurting is painful feeling. Whatever is experienced physically or mentally as neither gratifying nor hurting is neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"In what way is pleasant feeling pleasant, lady, and in what way painful?"

"Pleasant feeling is pleasant in remaining, & painful in changing, friend Visakha. Painful feeling is painful in remaining & pleasant in changing. Neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling is pleasant in occurring together with knowledge, and painful in occurring without knowledge."

"What obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling? What obsession gets obsessed with painful feeling? What obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Passion-obsession gets obsessed with pleasant feeling. Resistance-obsession gets obsessed with painful feeling. Ignorance-obsession gets obsessed with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"Does passion-obsession get obsessed with all pleasant feeling? Does resistance-obsession get obsessed with all painful feeling? Does ignorance-obsession get obsessed with all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"No..."

"But what is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling? What is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Passion-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to pleasant feeling. Resistance-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to painful feeling. Ignorance-obsession is to be abandoned with regard to neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"Is passion-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all pleasant feeling? Is resistance-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all painful feeling? Is ignorance-obsession to be abandoned with regard to all neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"No... There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With that he abandons passion. No passion-obsession gets obsessed there.4 There is the case where a monk considers, 'O when will I enter & remain in the dimension that those who are noble now enter & remain in?' And as he thus nurses this yearning for the unexcelled liberations, there arises within him sorrow based on that yearning. With that he abandons resistance. No resistance-obsession gets obsessed there.5 There is the case where a monk, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. With that he abandons ignorance. No ignorance-obsession gets obsessed there."6

"Now what, lady, lies on the other side of pleasant feeling?"

"Passion lies on the other side of pleasant feeling."

"And what lies on the other side of painful feeling?"

"Resistance lies on the other side of painful feeling." 7

"What lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling?"

"Ignorance lies on the other side of neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling."

"What lies on the other side of ignorance?"

"Clear knowing lies on the other side of ignorance."

"What lies on the other side of clear knowing?"

"Release lies on the other side of clear knowing."

"What lies on the other side of release?"

"Unbinding [stuka's note: this "Unbinding" is Thanissaro's translation for the Pali word, "Nibbana". His rationale for this particular (and unique) translation is described in his book, Mind Like Fire Unbound"] lies on the other side of release."

"What lies on the other side of Unbinding?"

"You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it."

Then Visakha the lay follower, delighting & rejoicing in what Dhammadinna the nun had said, bowed down to her and, keeping her to his right, went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he told the Blessed One the full extent of the conversation he had had with Dhammadinna the nun. When this was said, the Blessed One said to him, "Dhammadinna the nun is wise, Visakha, a woman of great discernment. If you had asked me those things, I would have answered you in the same way she did. That is the meaning of those things. That is how you should remember it."

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Visakha the lay follower delighted in the Blessed One's words.



[stuka's note: and, by extension, the Bhikkhuni Dhammadina's words, as well]

[Element]

While I deplore Aj Bhram's stance against those of us who do not embrace superstitions, I must commend and stand in awe of him for standing forward on the issue of the ordination of women. Your thoughts?

Thank you Stuka

My thoughts are Ajahn Brahm has done something potentially excellent. However, over the years, his style has increasingly separated him from the Thai Forest Tradition and now his karma has come to fruition. This is the pile of bricks on top of the pile of straw that broke the camel's back.

That said, it is only natural Ajahn Brahm follows his kamma (actions) and creates a new tradition. As such, the response of both Ajahn Sujato & the cry babies on dhammawheel.com to me lack wisdom because the expulsion from the Thai tradition was certainly inevitable. Buddhists like Ajahn Sujato & the babies on dhammawheel.com should not be having tantrums & accusing others of negative actions due to one's own inevitable kamma. The expulsion is such a definite kammic result, one should not even bat an eye-lid.

It is now for Ajahn Brahm & little brother Sujato to do their own thing and continue with their progress. They have spend years teaching superstition to very wealthly supersitious Singaporeans & Malaysians and the impression gained (unsubstantiated) is to have reaped substantial financial return on their investment.

However, the downside is they are now a small sect. In small sects, when the central personalities die, their grand plans of building multi-million dollar meditation centres & monasteries can potentially turn into white elephants. As the elders said at Wat Pa Pong in inimitable cutting Thai style, they have now become Mahayanans.

That said, that women can ordain as bhikkhunis is cool but the robe does not guarrantee enlightenment or solitude. If they can nurture some good practitioners to create a strong tradition for the future, that is good. But this is not easy. Generally, monasteries are not void of emotional co-dependent relationships between monks & nuns. Often, it is just another family, with daddy monk, his wives & his children.

May all the bhikkhunis gain enlightenment & the perfect solitude (viveka) of Nibbana.

[Noodle]

Hi Stuka,

I'm just flabbergasted. If you have time, can you explain from the Theravada point of view why a female shouldn't be ordained? I know that a female can't become a Sammasam buddha (sp?), but I haven't heard before that women shouldn't be ordained. In fact, I thought that the Buddha's former wife became one of his disciples, but perhaps she wasn't a nun?

Any and all explanations are welcome. I feel sad for Aj Brahm-that he's been expelled from Sangha. That must feel terrible, it's seems very serious. But they did offer him the opportunity to recant and he chose not to.

Do you know what the most general opinion is about this? Does anyone know if the lay people in general are supportive of this decision to expel him? That's why I'm curious to read the facebook page.

Thanks in advance,
Laura

[Noodle]

Hi Element,

Re: your post above, can he continue teaching if he's been expelled? He can't possibly ordain women, I realize. How can he continue to the progress as he's done so far? Is there something we can do from far away to help, if we're limited on funds? I thought it was wonderful when I heard that the nun in Australia was ordained.

Thanks,
Laura

[Element]

Re: your post above, can he continue teaching if he's been expelled?

Hi Noodle

Ajahn Brahm is simply expelled from the Ajahn Chah lineage, in the same way the Dalai Lama expelled Sugden monk worshippers from his lineage. Ajahn Brahm remains a monk.

Whilst I have no actual understanding, under Thai law, if the Sangha wish to disrobe a monk, they can create a civil charge he is impersonating a monk. But because Ajahn Brahm is not a Thai citizen and due to the triviality of the matter, the Australian government would not extradite him to Thailand (just as the USA govt did not deport a certain Ajahn Tantra).

Ajahn Brahm is now simply a renegade monk, free to do as he wishes in Australia.

Australia was one of the first countries in the world where women could vote thus Ajahn Brahm is following good old Aussie tradition.

[Yeshe]

The refusal to accept the ordination of women seems to be a cultural problem afflicting several world religions. It would be easy to dismiss this as resisting a change to modern values, but the issue is clearly quite different.

In this case, the irony is that he is being expelled for adhering to a traditional practice.

I see a parallel here, not only with the Pope's nonsense within Christianity, but also with the behaviour of Tibetan Buddhists. It reminds me of the expulsion of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso for......refusing to abandon a traditional practice.

Of course, a sect has every right to expel someone if they see fit, but it also seems to be the fashion for them to seek to grab any money or property thery can in doing so. Thankfully, unlike the case of the Shugden monks, this sect cannot grab the guy's home from him.

It' may seem important to Theravadans I guess, becuase of his fame, but the real issue is the ordination of women, which will probably simply result in a schism. Nobody has died or been beaten up and thrown on the streets.

I doubt that this act will erode his 'power base' and may even gain him more followers. They haven't even made him disrobe. It may actually be a very positive outcome in achieving publicity for the issue, and I suspect he knew that before acting becoming involved in the ordination ceremony.

There are many issues concerning the power and morality of monaastic institutions. Let's not let the personality become bigger than the need to dismantle theocratic and medievally politicised religious organisations and restore the true values of the religions they have perverted.

Ironically, in meeting Western cultures and the western media, the focus upon these authoritarian and self-serving institutions is sharpened. This can only be a good thing IMHO.

[Element]

It reminds me of the expulsion of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso for...

Indeed. Ajahn Brahm is now the Geshe Kelsang Gyatso of the Thai Forest Sangha.

[Caz namyaw]

It reminds me of the expulsion of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso for...

Indeed. Ajahn Brahm is now the Geshe Kelsang Gyatso of the Thai Forest Sangha.

Oh well at least he's practising purely then

Having read that its upsetting to see retrograde attitude amongst these thai monks with regards to ordaination of bhikkhunis.

[Element]

Is there something we can do from far away to help, if we're limited on funds?

I trust Brahm's timing was good. He was a little short of his $8 million building fund the last time I looked. He has probably met that goal by now, so funding is probably not an issue.

Personally, I prefer to support children in Africa & environmental charities that by land than each Western monk that wants to start his own Dhamma centre.

Ajahn Brahm is very savvy and very well connected.

Be at ease.

---