A Brief Talk about Bhikkhunis - by Bhante Sujato

but it is impossible to securely establish relative chronology of Bhadda Kundalakesa’s and her companions’ ordination and Mahapajapati’s, isn’t it?

I just so happen to be following this thread while staying at Dhammadharini vihara in CA, and just so happen to have a copy of the Therigatha on hand.
@sujato from what I read in my copy here the title of the commentary is Paramatthadīpanī, written by Dhammapala and translated by William Pruitt. I hope that’s correct.
@LXNDR I wonder if you have read Bhantes book ‘White Bones, Red Rot, Black Snakes’? I’m about halfway through now and I’m finding it thoroughly answers a lot of the questions you ask, even this last one- what can we rely on as fact…really? Something I like to ponder regularly…
Anyway one argument re: Bhadda Kundalakesa’s ordination predating Mahapajapati’s is that in the Therigatha, Bhadda’s verse reads ‘He said to me “Come, Bhadda.” That was my ordination.’(vs 109)
“Come Bhadda” = “Ehi bhaddeti” in the pali.
Bhante explains it much better in his book but the ‘Ehi’ ordinations are believed to predate the more formal ones, which include precepts, etc.
I don’t have the resources in front of me so I’ll leave it at that before I mangle the explanation. But really ‘White Bones…’ is a great read- highly recommended!

7 Likes

Hi Cara

no, i didn’t, i appreciate the explanation and will make sure to give Ven Sujato’s work a read

1 Like

No, not really. I think it is plausible to read the evidence as pointing to Mahapajapati’s ordination as being later, but it is certainly not definitive.

2 Likes

I think this is an important point. This particular passage is part of the third chapter of the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta, a section which overall has a lot of strange elements. This is where you find the, in my opinion, unconvincing story of the Buddha hinting to Ānanda that he could live on for an aeon if he is asked to do so, but because Ānanda is blinded by Mara he does not ask. The Buddha is in effect allowing Mara to make his decision for him, something confirmed in the next few paragraphs where the Buddha is presented as conversing with Mara and making his decision based on Mara’s request. Does the Buddha really operate in this way? On top of this the Buddha is later on presented as blaming Ānanda for not getting the hint. I find it hard to take all this seriously. And it is in the middle of his conversation with Mara that the Buddha’s early intention to establish a nuns’ order is mentioned.

Next, in the same section, you have the odd inclusion of various sets of Dhammas (the eight assemblies, the eight bases of mastery, the eight liberations) that seem to have no relation to the text overall. Rather, the inclusion of these elements seems to be based on the precedent of the eight causes for earthquakes, which are mentioned first. In other words, one set of eight seems to have triggered the inclusion of other sets of eight, regardless of whether they really fitted into the text in a meaningful way. Moreover, the set of eight reasons for earthquakes is itself quite likely a later elaboration on an earlier list of three, as shown by Frauwallner in his study “The Earliest Vinaya and the Beginnings of Buddhist Literature.” This list of three seems more “reasonable” than the full list of eight: earthquakes happen because of natural causes, because of the supernormal powers of a meditator or a deity, and because of the Buddha’s imminent passing away. (This is based on my fallible memory, and I hope I am not misleading anyone with this!) So, much of this text shows an iterative sequence of late developments, leading to the main story of the Buddha’s last days almost being lost sight of.

After these sets of eight, there is a long section on how Ānanda is at fault on multiple occasion for not asking the Buddha to remain for the aeon. Again, it all seems over the top.

At the very end of this chapter comes the only part which to me has a powerful message: the Buddha is reminding Ānanda of the impermanence of all phenomena and he then speaks of how his Teaching should be safeguarded so as to last long into the future, that is, by remembering, investigating, and practising the 37 aids to awakening (bodhipakkhiya dhammas).

Although this needs further study, especially comparison with other versions of this sutta, my overall impression is that the statement that the Buddha intended to establish a bhikkhunī Sangha from the beginning is embedded in a problematic and late section of the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta. I doubt whether this is really authentic.

Having said this, I don’t really think this point is as important as it is sometimes made out to be. There is enough evidence in the suttas that the Buddha considered the bhikkhunī Sangha an integral part of his efforts, the Mahāvacchagotta Sutta (MN 73) being especially important in this respect. Moreover, even though the present passage in the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta may not be authentic in a strict sense, it says much about how the early Buddhist community viewed the bhikkhunī Sangha, and to me this is the important take-away message. The Buddhist community has always viewed the bhikkhunī Sangha as a fundamental part of the Buddha’s ministry.

9 Likes

The MPS is comprised of many different layers and sources, and it’s not really possible to generalize on the mere basis of inclusion or exclusion from this text. However there is, in my view, every reason to think that the overall narrative is very old, and so too for many of the component parts.

When evaluating individual elements we should, as you do here, see how they fit in with the rest of the suttas. (In fact this is just one criteria.) It is because of the widespread support for the idea that the 4 parisa is fundamental to the Buddha’s conception of his following that I think the MPS passage is likely to be authentic.

3 Likes

Hi… Where is this sutra?

1 Like