I’m currently going over the Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga’s translations by Ajahn @Brahmali and I noticed an inconsistency in how a Bhikkhuni is defined.
In Pārājika 5, the first rule that is mentioned especially for nuns in the Bhikkhuni Vibhaṅga, a nun is defined as:
Nun means: she is a nun because she is a beggar for alms, she is a nun because she submits to walking for alms, she is a nun because she is one who wears the patch-work robes, she is a nun by the designation (of others), a nun because of her acknowledgement, a nun (to whom it was) said, ‘Come, nun,’ a nun is one ordained by the three goings to a refuge, a nun is auspicious, a nun is the essential, a nun is a learner, a nun is an adept, a nun is ordained by both complete Orders by means of a (formal) act at which the motion is put and followed by three proclamations, irreversible and fit to stand. In this way is this nun one who is ordained by both complete Orders by means of a (formal) act at which the motion was put and followed by three proclamations, irreversible, fit to stand, and this is how nun is to be understood in this case. (Translation I.B. Horner)
However, in the Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga, a nun is defined as:
A nun: she has been given the full ordination by both monastic Orders.
So the Bhikkhuni Vibhaṅga mentions all ordination forms that have existed, including
ehi bhikkhunīti bhikkhunī (i.e. ‘Come, nun’), which has been widely accepted as the first ordination form for Bhikkhus, the ordination of going for 3 refuges as well as the ordination by both monastic Orders. In the Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga this has been reduced to only the last ordination form and the one we still use today.
Next to that is of course the famous passage in Therīgāthā 5.9:
‘Ehi bhadde’ti maṃ avaca, sā me āsūpasampadāāsūpasampadā. (“Come, Bhadda”, he said and this was my ordination).
So can we conclude from this that the definitions in the Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga are from a later date when the order was more established and the first forms of ordination were no longer in use, but that those first forms of ordination did in fact exist for Bhikkhunis as well in the beginning?
But this also begs another question: why is the ordination by just the monks (one side) not mentioned in the definition?