If someone who has been a monk in the past wants to order again, will he be considered a novice monk again and has to go through having a preceptor for few years, or not?
1 Like
Hi, I have re-ordained in July this year after my time in robes from 2016-2023 so I can speak from direct experience as well. 
As per bhikkhu vinaya (i.e., the monastic rules for bhikkhus), there is no need to undergo a lengthy training period as a novice (sÄmaį¹era) at all; in fact, all that is technically required is to be a sÄmaį¹era for a few minutes during the ordination ceremony to become a monk (bhikkhu). However, in Sri Lanka it is rare to find a place that would ordain one as a bhikkhu without up to one year or more as a sÄmaį¹era and that includes those who have been bhikkhus before. It is much easier, and in fact quite common, to get ordination as a bhikkhu without prior training as sÄmaį¹era in Thailand and Myanmar, although some monasteries and lineages have policies in place similar to those in Sri Lanka (e.g., Ajahn Chah monasteries, especially for Westerners). I myself got sÄmaį¹era (pabbajjÄ) and bhikkhu ordination (upasampadÄ) in Thailand as part of the same ceremony and on the same day.
If there is a suitable preceptor (upajjhÄya) or teacher (ÄcÄriya) that fulfills the necessary standards to be eligible to have students living under nissaya (the five-year dependence period) with him, then any bhikkhu is required by vinaya to enter this time period under him (unless heās on a journey and so on), regardless of the time he previously spent as a bhikkhu and regardless of his spiritual attainment and knowledge. Note: Changing teachers and monasteries during this time is possible under the right circumstances.
9 Likes
Interesting and valuable insight, Bhante @Thanuttamo.
For counting Vassa, does it reset or is it kept from when you left off?
2 Likes
Have to start all over again ā¦ Good for humility.
8 Likes
Thank you Bhante. Can you please explain about this part? What necessary standards are these? You said earlier it is not necessary by vinaya to go through the 5years. So are these standards something extra-ordinary that are not so common ?
1 Like
Hmm, right, but I think I only mentioned this before during personal conversations. Did we meet before somewhere by any chance? As to the matter at hand: There are monasteries in Thailand that I know of that do not give formal nissaya since they understand the texts in a way that there are virtually no suitable teachers around these days (with a few exceptions), following in that the TheravÄda tradition (i.e., canon + commentaries) very closely. How so?
In the Vinayapiį¹aka, we find two sets of lists that outline what the teacherās qualifications are in order to be eligible to give nissaya (SuttaCentral). Each list consists of five or six factors. Now, the commentaries explain that missing some of the factors makes only for an unsuitable (ayutta) teacher (such as not being an arahant), while others constitute an offense if not met (Äpattiaį¹ ga). āUnsuitableā means that it is not binding to not give nissaya, whereas the latter is. Important for our purposes, they (i.e., the commentaries) make clear that the factor of being ālearnedā (bahussuto), which is contained in the fourth list, must be fulfilled for a teacher so as to avoid an offence when giving nissaya. It explains that the opposite of bahussuto, i.e., appassuto, refers to the absence of knowledge required to maintain a following:
Yattakaį¹ sutaį¹ parisaį¹ pariharantassa icchitabbaį¹, tena virahitattÄ appassuto. yaį¹ tena jÄnitabbaį¹ ÄpattÄdi, tassa ajÄnanato duppaƱƱo. imasmiį¹ paƱcake purimÄni tÄ«į¹i padÄni ayuttavasena vuttÄni, pacchimÄni dve Äpattiaį¹ gvasena (SamantapÄsÄdikÄ, UpasampÄdetabbapaƱcakakathÄ).
What being learned means can, in turn, be clarified from another passage to include, among other things, that one knows the two Vibhaį¹ gas by heart (not the two MÄtikas or PÄtimokkhas, but the whole Vibhaį¹ gas from the Vinayapiį¹aka), as it says:
Ayaį¹ pana bahussuto nÄma tividho hoti ā nissayamuccanako, parisupaį¹į¹hÄpako, bhikkhunovÄdakoti. [ā¦] parisupaį¹į¹hÄpakena upasampadÄya dasavassena sabbantimena paricchedena parisaį¹ abhivinaye vinetuį¹ dve vibhaį¹ gÄ paguį¹Ä vÄcuggatÄ kÄtabbÄ (SamantapÄsÄdikÄ, OvÄdasikkhÄpadavaį¹į¹anÄ).
But this learned one is indeed threefold: one released from nissaya, one serving a community (parisupaį¹į¹hÄpako), one exhorting bhikkhunÄ«s. [ā¦] To lead a community when it comes to the Vinaya, the two Vibhaį¹ ghas must be well-rehearsed and learned by heart by one serving a community, having at a minimum boundary ten year from his higher ordination.
The following legalese may be a bit hard to follow, but perhaps I may still lay out some further relevant details for anyone potentially interested (in the very least, that is myself ). I discussed this with a few vinaya teachers here in Sri Lanka as well. They basically agreed with this understanding but one stressed that only the teacher would incur an offence when giving nissaya, not the student. In any case, the teacher would only fall into an offence if he doesnāt know about the rules under discussion (in fact, any other vinaya rules) since to know what an offence is and what not is a must for giving nissaya (see lists Nos. 7 and 8 + commentary). If he knows about this ruling and accepts it but proceeds anyway to give nissaya, it would technically make him āunsuitableā because of being a teacher without moral shame when it comes to unwholesome qualities, ahiriko, i.e., consciously acting contrary to a vinaya rule (see list No. 3 + commentary). This, however, is a scenario that would avoid any technical offences, as far as I can see.
1 Like
No weāve never met. Amazing details. Thank you bhante.
1 Like