Maybe you are reading things into - seeing a uniformity - that is not really there. I am not judging nuns I am encouraging them as best I can. I am giving voice to matters that also extend beyond he bhikkhuni-community - to our interdependent needs as part of ever larger circles of life and living.
Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis can do anything they like - we all can do as we wish - but there are repercussions that impact on all of us as a consequence of our individual and collective choices. If any one feels they have been bullied by me please let me know - and I will shut-up without hesitation?
Look, I’m sorry if I’ve been too harsh. I have a long history with these issues! You haven’t been bullying or anything, in fact you’ve been very nice.
I just wish we stopped talking about these things. Really, it doesn’t accomplish anything. Celebrate the achievements of the bhikkhunis, support them to build for the future, look to the inspiring stories in the Therigatha, which make up a much larger portion of early texts on bhikkhunis than the “rules”!
We need to shift the dialogue. Imagine you’re a newbie to Buddhism, and you are interested in nuns. So you Google it, what do you see? What is the general dialogue around nuns in Buddhism? A lot of it—like really a lot—consists of narrow, rigid arguing about keeping rules. There’s nothing inspiring or interesting about it. It’s silly, and we need to move on.
That has been what I have been doing all along - as far as I can tell - but I could be wrong. If any offence has been taken I apologise - this was not my intention.
It is disturbing to consider that any nuns’ community may be choosing to keep rules which they do not believe are in accordance with Dhamma mainly because they do not wish to upset the faith of the laity! Especially as (I believe) most of us (including myself) are woefully uninformed about this and other similar matters.
I would just love to see views and facts like those expressed in Bhikkhuni Vinaya Studies become common knowledge.
Well said.
Diversity among the communities is a strength. It seems to me, that whenever in history someone went about trying to make everyone be the same or hold everyone to some higher ideal…things went rather badly wrong.
I don’t want to change the nuns and I agree it’s their business to do so. But I would love for the context they are supported by - the lay communities - to become more informed. Because my sneaky suspicion is that this would lead to more kindness and acceptance and support - regardless of what the nuns choose. Indeed, it may even result in a greater respect for and understanding about why they must be supported in making their own choices.
But then again…it may lead to people being unhelpfully passionate and forceful in their efforts to change what they see as terrible injustices towards the nuns… Sigh… I don’t know now…
Reckon I might bow out of this one…at least for now…
I’m getting the impression that people assume that gender inequality would be removed if we abolished the garudhammas. But this is actually only the tip of the iceberg. The discrimination is much deeper and much more systemic in the vinaya.
To give a few examples:
In order to become bhikkhunis in the first place in line with the vinaya, the ordination has to be confirmed by the monks. So the male sangha will always have control over who can join the female sangha.
Many garudhammas are also rules in the pacittiya class of offenses that is included in the patimokkha and recited every two weeks. Even if you accept that the garudhammas as a separate group are late, you can’t change the pacittiyas in the patimokkha. Besides these “garudhamma-pacittiyas”, there are also other pacittiya rules that subjugate nuns to monks.
The parajikas (the heaviest class of offenses that lead to immediate expulsion from the sangha) are much stricter for nuns. Since the Buddha only allowed minor rules to be abolished, this is not something that can be changed.
Similar to the ordination procedure, nuns require the monks’ participation in several other sangha acts in order to carry them out in line with the vinaya. Thus the communities cannot be independent and depend on the goodwill of the monks. This gives the monks a lot of control over the nuns.
It is a big misunderstanding to assume that only the garudhammas are the problem.
Hi Vimalanyani
I am very sorry for the experience of your plight as a nun.
I can relate to you as I have similar experience due to racial discrimination.
I handle it in two ways.
Firstly I asked what is my goal in a certain situation. So I concentrate on my goal. (In your case this should be Nibbana)
Secondly, I use that unpleasant experience to get out of the place as soon as possible. (in your case Nibbana not to quit as a nun)
Thirdly, fight to end total discrimination like Buddha.
Fourthly, Know discrimination is universal and will be eradicated only by Arahant.
Fifthly, Evaluate your situation. In this case, I think the rules by Buddha for the protection of women.
I recently spent a few months at a bhikkhuni monastery keeps that garudhammas and I was surprised by how okay I was with it. If you’ve known me even for a short period of time, you’ll know that I have the tendency to react to the garudhammas with something resembling unmitigated outrage. But in practice the garudhammas (at least in this monastery) did not seem like a big deal. In fact, it was kind of amusing to see that when greeting a monk with anjali the nun might bend her body different levels depending on said monk’s seniority and how much respect the nun had for him. And then the nuns just got on with things and ran the monastery like they wanted it to be run – and it was beautiful because they weren’t ignorant about the garudhammas – but they knew a certain level of stability was necessary in order for growth to occur. And if keeping said rules keeps the peace then for the time being that’s what they do. What I’ve learned a lot recently is that there are times to stir the pot and times to avoid creating a big gooey mess that might take a number of years to clean up; and further, a gooey mess that diminishes both trust and wellbeing.
Sadhu, Bhante! I think (as laypeople) focusing our efforts on promoting all bhikkhunis and bhikkhuni monasteries is what is needed right now. We could all sit here arguing about the patriarchy while bhikkhunis need - yah know - food! And money to pay their mortgages! And health insurance! And most importantly unwavering support! I know these things because I’m on the board of organization that fundraises for bhikkhunis’ needs, and as long as bhikkhunis are asking for basic things like travel and healthcare funds, then there are fundamental things that aren’t being done by the laypeople to support the bhikkhuni sangha. So can we focus on things like fundraising and giving bhikkhunis platforms for their voices to be heard? Please?
This is the second time in 2 days that the systemic gender inequality existing between Monks and nuns has been compared to an experience of racism. To me this is just further evidence that the depth of the issue is hard for men to really understand. I think this delusion, that has been conditioned in lifetime after lifetime, is perhaps one of the hardest to see through and eradicate.
I agree.
Your wound always more painful than the wound of someone else.
Ask Mohomed Ali what is the most painful.
But be realistic.
Pain is the pain how small or large.
I agree, pain is pain. But the solution to one type of pain is not the same as the solution to another kind of pain - except for Nibbana… Still it would be wise to reduce our pain while in this existence if we can, rather than just endure and perpetuate it.
I generally speaking elect not to participate in the endless cycles of this conversation mostly because I just find it too severely punishing on the soul and in equal measure, pointless (I must really stress that I’m responding solely from a personal point of view, and that I do fully understand why individuals coming from various perspectives feel the need, and see the potential benefit to pursue iteration after iteration of discussion on this issue). In this particular instance, however, I did want to register my sadhus and gratitude for what to me are rare rays of light in threads on this theme:
Brenna, I don’t think there is a better answer to Laurence’s very reasonable comment than yours (I’d only add there’s may well also room for non-material support as well, practical help and such).
That is my point as well - we need to get rid of all gender discrimination in Buddhism - finish the job and not quit before it’s completed. We don’t see the point in window-dressing - it also involves what goes on inside the house. The argument seems to be who is entitled to have a voice - a role - in the process. Why not accept and appreciate support and help from everywhere. A groundswell of popular support that helps in the realisation of positive change - standing together. Why not use our intelligence and develop an action-plan? The initial phase of which, has been explored in this thread!
Sometimes, reform is extremely difficult within closed and insular groups - almost impossible! Sometimes, a situation requires change because it is in our collective interest - not just those who are inside the house, the group, the institution. We are increasingly impacted by social/environmental issues that are interdependent - everybody is effected.
We need to wisely and compassionately scrutinise the entire tradition. The Buddha taught to practice that which is found to be beneficial - his advice to the Kalama-clan - this included his teachings (correct)? His teachings include Vinaya (correct)? Why not take the Buddha’s sage advice to heart - and reexamine some of his teachings in the light of modern findings - like ‘feminism’ for instance?
In the EBT’s - it is said - the Buddha could understand that which he turned his attention to (correct)? Perhaps, this is a place where he did not look - for reasons unknown? As a consequence it might be an area where ‘we’ - as Dhamma heirs - need to open our eyes and, apply our best coordinated efforts, for the benefit of one and all? Is this misguided thinking - hmm…
@Brenna, it’s brilliant to hear your response!! And I agree with everything you’ve said - completely. 100% We must support all bhikkhuni communities. It’s urgently needed.
This negotiation with rules etc. will be sorted out one way or another… In the example you’ve given, the nuns seem to hold these rules very lightly, with little focus on them and more focus on the many positives of their monastic lives. Sadhu to that. I believe this is what the Dhammasara nuns do too. Clearly from what @vimalanyani has said, despite separation and independence in almost every way, the nuns communities will be dependent on the monks in some respects. Taking my lead from the new perspective offered by Brenna, perhaps this should be viewed as yet another instance of how we’re all dependent on someone or something to some degree. I mean, all monastics are dependent on the laity.
I do want to address a couple of things though. And I hope Brenna will forgive me for using her as an example here.
You went from the above to a very different, more peaceful and positive place.
But part of your journey to that place was the chance to speak and be listened to. Your voice, your concerns, as a woman aspiring to be part of Bhikkhuni communities in some way or another, needed to be listened to as well. I don’t know who the most important listeners were or if there were defining moments in your turn around that revolved around such discussions; or whether it was primarily observing the nuns in action or a combination thereof. The point is, part of your journey was asking these questions and having these conversations. Currently I personaly know at least 2 women who are asking these questions and I imagine most nuns are happy to have conversations with such aspirants. Perhaps then, it’s important to take these questions directly to those who are living them - and perhaps face-to-face or even over the phone, is best.
After all when we talk about supporting Bhikkhunis and supporting them in making their own decisions… We are not talking about a static group which exists in isolation, a group that will magically grow and flourish without any direct input of human resources from aspiring lay women. There are women in the lay community currently watching, listening, reading this thread perhaps. How many will think they should not ask questions, express their concerns? How many will walk away? And what impact will this have upon the growth of the Bhikkhuni Sangha that so many have tried so hard to revive and maintain?
I imagine the boundary around the nuns that separates them from us lay folk is not rigid. I imagine it is rather fluid and they are open to, new aspirants in particular, asking questions and seeking conversation.
What I have seen, even just through engaging here on D&D is that even the nuns are hesitant to discuss these matters openly. Suggesting that we leave them to get on with it is a wonderful and meritorious suggestion which I support whole-heartedly. However, I would hope that such suggestions do not mean the Bhikkhunis themselves feel pressured in anyway to “get it right” and to stop having conversations in their own communities and with their lay supporters.
I agree with this and I can’t tell you how hesitant I am to make further comments here.
Nevertheless…
I would just like to say that the solution is not to gag people and ask that they repress their concerns. I know that is not the intention - I know the intention is coming from
And it is out of compassion for the Bhikkhunis (and probably everyone else too!) that Bhante has asked us to focus on the positives and stop engaging with these negatives. I do whole-heartedly agree.
However, I wonder if instead of not engaging with the nuns communities, lay people should begin to engage even more with the monks and be encouraged to complain loudly about the bad monks!!
We’re all on different journeys and some of us have arrived in places where we no longer want to be overly active…for various reasons. Despite all my comments here…I’m, at least right now and for the foreseeable future, one of those too.
I used to think that the Buddha laying down rules because the laypeople complained was simply par for the course - the organic nature of how the rules developed.
Now I am wondering if the unenlightened meddling of layfolk is at the heart of the baggage we’re all attempting to make sense of.
Because, an equanimous Buddha, would, I imagine, have said “yes” more often than he would have sought out an argument over something that wasn’t directly related to his central Teachings. Afterall, we all, lay or monastic, have boundaries and burdens and injustices we have to live with, perhaps he thought, these were just more of the same.
I can see the contradictions in some of what I’ve said here, even as I write them. Yet, they all stand and point to something that has meaning and relevance to me…at least for now.
@Brenna, thank you again for saying all you’ve said. I, and I’m sure others, really needed to read that and be reminded of another way…a gentler way. Thank you.
The modern Sangha has shown a complete incapacity for meaningful reform, and lay criticism will be a driving force if reform is to happen at all. Most lay people are terrified that if they criticize monks they’ll go to hell; which is of course against everything in the EBTs, where the lay folk frequently criticize the Sangha, and the Buddha never once reprimands them for being critical.
At the same time, though, the fact is that these things are entrenched in deep and powerful hierarchies and we as outsiders have no hope of effecting meaningful change. That’s why I try to focus on education and encouraging people to read the EBTs and make up their own minds.
Respectfully, this strikes me as a very conservative approach, and one that in only likely to be able to move away from any oppressive traditionalism at a snail’s pace, if at all.
The EBTs paint a picture of a very different society from ours, one in which male supremacy is the norm not just in religious life, but throughout the political society and the household as well. If people are determined to take all their lessons from the norms that seem to prevail in those texts taken as a whole, they probably won’t change much.
Yes, occasionally, after some excruciating effort of scholarship, some especially egregious paragraph might be safely declared as “late”. But what about all the rest?
Since the Buddha’s teaching takes place within that ancient traditional context, it will always be impossible to decide, in many crucial cases, whether the Buddha actually endorses the norms he appears to accept, for some deep reason, or whether he was just going with the flow to work skillfully with the sensibilities of his audience. Reading the texts over and over might not help. The texts are silent on many questions we would like to have answers to.
Perhaps people have to take a more judicious attitude toward the texts, and lean most on the ones that are most meaningful to them, and the core elements of practice, rather than treat the texts as though they are all divinely inspired and unchallengeable revelations, prophecies or eternal laws produced by an omniscient God-man. The dhamma isn’t a mountain of words. It’s something that can only be found in the heart, and is open to all. The Buddha was just a man, and he found the dhamma the same way we do. We can look to him as an especially important spiritual guide, and be glad that some of his insights and teachings have survived, but also understand he is a person of his time, and not infallible. The words are only pointers, and have come down to us through who knows what convoluted and distorting transmission channels. The rules are only ad hoc provisions that seemed to make sense to him at the time as he was improvising the establishment of a community.
I’m sorry if my words cause some pain, but I have read above the accounts of so much suffering, and some of that suffering seems to me to be due to the fact that people are ensnared in the coils of their own fundamentalism and conservative traditionalism.
I think people who want to live the holy life in a community should write down the rules they intend to live by, and then see if they can get other people to materially support a community that plans to live by those roles.
The Buddha went forth without being “given” the going forth. Nobody has to give anyone a special license and seal of approval to seek their own liberation.
I know it’s more complicated than that, since getting inducted into “official” Buddhism means accessing the vast official support system it is connected with, and striking out on one’s own is more risky. But the drawback to the conservative approach is that you then have to grovel to thousands of years of patriarchal authority and tradition to get acceptance. Apparently, even the King of Thailand commands a piece of your life then.
I think (as laypeople) focusing our efforts on promoting all bhikkhunis and bhikkhuni monasteries is what is needed right now. We could all sit here arguing about the patriarchy while bhikkhunis need - yah know - food! And money to pay their mortgages! And health insurance! And most importantly unwavering support! I know these things because I’m on the board of organization that fundraises for bhikkhunis’ needs, and as long as bhikkhunis are asking for basic things like travel and healthcare funds, then there are fundamental things that aren’t being done by the laypeople to support the bhikkhuni sangha. So can we focus on things like fundraising and giving bhikkhunis platforms for their voices to be heard? Please? 
