I definitely got creepy vibes from that monk! I almost hoped I was proliferating but the vibe was palpable.
3 Likes
I think the scary thing is howong he spent trying to make “Bhikkhunis gone wild!” a thing.
It’s bringing me back to my historical studies, namely medieval european religious attitudes, in that women have no control over their emotions and were of little capability in spiritual concerns.
Yeah, I got the impression that this was intentional on the part of the director.
Notice how the Bhikkhunis and the Sri Lankan-American monk supporting them were all filmed with stupas or nature or a shrine in the background, while the Thai “hardliner” was filmed in a comfortable chair with a dirty wall and a boombox behind him 
Notice also how he was the only interviewee wearing a mask, which further helped otherize him. The camera angle (close and a bit underneath) also helped make him look imposing and dangerous. All good clues to the audience that we’re not supposed to trust this guy.
#cinematography
8 Likes
True, but if they had Ajahn Jayasaro calmly explaining why we can’t have bhikkhunis in front of a nice tree*, it still wouldn’t be any more inspiring.
*such a video in fact exists.
6 Likes
Yeah, to be clear the view is genuinely repugnant and I support the director underlining that in their editorial choices.
My quibble isn’t with the cinematography but with the casting. There’s already a meme among conservatives that Bhikkhuni ordination is a Western import undermining (“authentic, true, Asian”) Buddhism. This VOA video somewhat reinforces that meme by showing mostly American supporters and a Thai hardliner. I believe this is in service of their own political agenda: VOA is literally the propaganda arm of US foreign policy, after all, so it is their purpose to make Americans look good. But it might have been more helpful to the Bhikkhuni’s cause if they had highlighted an American hardliner like Ajahn Geoff and found Thai monks to support, to show that this isn’t an “East vs West” thing. What do you think?
12 Likes
I agree. But most anti-bhikkhuni monks prefer to stay away from any media where they might face scrutiny.
1 Like
I’ve noticed that RE the Ajahn Chah lineage, but when has Ajahn Geoff ever been shy about defending his beliefs in the media? 
2 Likes
Could you link it please? I suspect that Ven. Jayasaro must have some other arguments than ‘nuns going wild’, so that would be something I would be interested in watching. It won’t change my own opinion, but at least it would allow me a glimpse into the mindset opposite to mine that I wokld care to investigate.
2 Likes
No, I can’t link it sorry, it would be awkward for me, as a bhikkhuni. But it undoubtedly exists.
6 Likes
I’d like to preface the following outpouring, by declaring my respect, gratitude and admiration for all those who have worked so tirelessly for the Rights of Female ordination and reinstating the Bhikkhuni order.
On the one hand I find all these debates (about whether it is right/possible to have Bhikkhunis) disheartening (to say the least) and on the other hand quite ridiculous.
I find the ENTIRE issue of gender irrelevant - in every permutation and in every sense.
At an even more fundamental level it just feels surreal to continually be reminded about my ‘body’, my current rupa khanda… It is temporary… it alters between re-births … it is something to be seen for what it is and any attachments to form are to be let go of… it is completely irrelevant to practice, to attaining liberation. It is a hindrance.
Am I a woman? YOU may conceptualise me as a woman! I do not do so myself. I don’t conceptualise my bodily form as representing anything beyond a particular arrangement of elements, flesh, blood, bone and sinews. Form is not me or mine.
Why construct this incredible hell like edifice of fabrication around it – why subjugate the 50% of humans who are in this form to a ridiculous set of rites and rituals, expectations, constraints and limitations???
The REALLY disappointing thing about this issue is that it keeps attaching us to form - to mundane conceptualisations - it traps us and binds us to Samsara.
Sure the ‘wordlings’ may choose to keep being bound by and attaching to these fetters…
– but the whole aim and purpose of the Buddhist path is to leave that behind! To move beyond it! It is ironic and tragic beyond belief that these things are so clung to by so many monastics… If I indulge in a little bit of fantasy I can’t help wondering what the Buddha would make of it all 
SAMSARA
Now, those of you who know me a little, know that in spite of this empassioned outpouring I am a complete realist and understand all the many layers of complications that exist in this quagmire and cesspit of an issue, but I would just like to remind people that it is just a samsaric tangle and that the aim is to rise above them all.
I’ve been by nature quite conservative, but recently it was pointed out to me how utterly ridiculous some of these rules are. It was like a slap in the face – wake up!
I’ve avoided all these issues by by-passing them - simply by emulating the earliest of the Buddhas disciples. By declaring in my deepest being that “from this moment forth I am a disciple of the Buddha for life”… I actually don’t need anyone at all to give me permission to do this. As long as I don’t expect to be recognised or treated in any particular way by others – it is an internal matter.
Quite frankly nothing else matters. Ordained or not ordained
However, one must put up with living in the midst of those who will continually discriminate and who will treat ‘me’ according to their perceptions of who/what I am . So naturally it is more pleasant to be secluded from all that crazy delusion.
Really, a worry about offending some people who in my view have missed what the Buddha was teaching, and to let this actually hinder those of us who are currently inhabiting a female form (or any form perceived as lesser), from progressing on the path, is a criminal waste of the precious opportunity we have to practice in this life. Mara is laughing his head off.
I’m not surprised at the little gardens that pop up of spiritual communities.
This isn’t a scholarly presentation – it is just an outpouring from the heart. I won’t be responding to any ‘arguments or debates’ about whether it is ‘correct’. Correct doesn’t even apply at this level… ‘Correct’ (in this sense) is part of all the fabrications I no longer want to have any part of …
I’m not advocating abandoning the Vinaya, or not continuing to work hard to reinstate a full and complete dual sangha… but that the issue actually goes much deeper than that.
The words I heard recently, have had quite a profound effect, and leave me questioning many things.
In the Buddhas day he had to deal with the prevalent conditions – those made equality among human forms impossible. That is no longer the case 2500 years later. It is possible to have equality across all bodily forms. I would say that it is time to have a single Vinaya.
While sexual attraction among bodily forms is a huge issue for many – that’s fine… Groups of forms can practice the Path in communities without this presence – to enable sense restraint until it is let go of (male communities or female communities etc).
But the PRACTICE is the same. The Path is the same. The conditions leading to beneficial states are the same. It’s time for the rules to be the same.
15 Likes
This made me laugh
1 Like
Dear Venerables and Dhamma friends,
My inbox yesterday let me know about the discussion started here by Ayyā Suvirā – thank you Ayyā!
A few points in response to what i’ve read -
I was approached by VOA documenter, Khun Waan (Warangkana Chomchuen), with VOA news back this last spring. Waan had grown up in Thailand and then moved to the US, and recently come to learn about the progression of the Theravāda bhikkhunī revival. She was interested, and then thought there might be quite a lot of other young Thai people who didn’t know much either, and might be interested like her to learn more. The idea of making a documentary that would be accessible to them and give a short introduction was born. A vision write-up was prepared and an application was submitted for a grant to make this documentary for VOA. Amazingly, out of so many great applications, this documentary concept won the grant.
Khun Waan came to visit our Dhammadharini Monastery and Aranya Bodhi Hermitage in North America over a two day period to learn about our bhikkhunīs’ community’s way of life. We had two interviews, (1) at the simple little pavilion in the forest where i normally meet visitors during these Covid years (no special work to make that a great scene, it’s just like that), and (2) at my meditation platform at my kuti (a bit more rarified and private, but really where i spend much of my time {none of that footage was included}). We also walked around our forest hermitage to several of my other favorite meditation spots (meditation footage was not much included), including the simple, little beach just at the gulch bottom of our hermitage’s creek, that we often go to for sitting and walking meditation. So, it might seems special and rarified, but it’s just our real hermitage environment.
Likewise, for the filming with venerable Thai bhikkhunī Loung Mae Dhammanandā Therī – the environs are just her normal temple place and life, where she normally meets and greets people. What she said, she’s said in many interviews before, as also true for me and my interview – so what we are sharing, i can say, is for us, very true to form.
For Susan Pembroke, founder of the Alliance for Bhikkhunis, i was so impressed that she was willing to come out of the woodwork and share some of her precious archival footage from the extremely many hours of interviews that she conducted back in the earlier days of the Thai bhikkhuni revival, and as that spread through Southeast Asia.
I was also glad to see another American bhikkhuni, Ayyā Santussikā, and her interview, and the interview with her friends and supporters. During this time of Covid, with the pandemic still at large in California, we meet people in-person outside to be safe. It looked like an ordinary real San Francisco Bay Area Dhamma scene to me, not staged or unnatural. For her supporters willingness to speak – Western women talking about their support is much much easier, socially, than for a Thai woman, or man, or monk to do so. The context is so different. The impact on that supporter’s life for having been filmed speaking their thoughts is going to be much, much less, than for a South or Southeast Asian woman, man, or monk to do so. The repercussions much, much less. This is important to understand. There are many Thai people, and monks, who are supportive; but to be filmed speaking supportively in a documentary like this – that would require a level of self-sacrifice of one’s reputation that not so many people are willing to make. Quietly supporting behind the scenes, is something else.
I could have got it wrong, but my understanding is that the Thai monk who spoke was a spokesman from the Thai Dept of Buddhism who was invited to speak to the topic. This was his personal space he invited the interview into (he wore a mask because they were indoors together and the pandemic was raging), and the angle has to do with it being appropriate for the interviewer, as a layperson, to be in a respectful position down lower, while the monk sits up higher – this is normal in Thai culture. I don’t think the camera angle was meant to be demonizing. Also what the monk chose to say in his position is, in some or many ways, the official party line. Whether that seems appropriate and proper, or seems awful, depends on the lens through which the viewer is seeing and hearing what is said. Here in the United States, it’s common for an interview to sit on chairs together, to the angle might be different for that reason. Bhante Piyananda (Aggamahāpandita Dr. Walpola Piyananda Nāyaka Mahāthero), the Sri Lankan senior monk who was interviewed, has lived in the US for a long time, and is used to American culture in this regard.
Thai VOA on Facebook has 52K views this past week, and there are many Thai comments. Many people are supportive and appreciative, and express just the sentiments that the film-maker thought they might if they had this opportunity to be introduced and learn more, including surprise that the Theravāda Bhikkhuni Sangha revival had gotten so big and so diverse, and that there are senior western bhikkhunīs, and appreciation to learn more that they did not know. Others express thoughts through words very similar to the Thai monk interviewed – sometimes even stronger. Just noting, there is much more than that, and some viewers appreciated what was said as needed, necessary and highly appropriate. I am just acknowledging this; that is, the diversity of responses. I’m glad to see that Thai people are watching, and sharing their thoughts and feelings about it. I also note that although there are lots of comments, mostly they don’t speak to or respond directly to one another. This is an important aspect of Thai culture, to not be directly confrontational. The diversity of views shown in the documentary mirrors in many ways the diversity of responses and their presentation. That is, they all have their moment to speak, but none are speaking directly to one another – so, a little different than this forum here, where there can be more somewhat more direct engagement in a way that may be more comfortable and familiar for many of other cultures.
I deeply appreciate the sensitivity of the documentary filmmaker – the respect, consideration, and aim to portray our bhikkhunis lives, our environments, and our shared words truly.
What i missed to see:
→ The title, in Thai, mentions “bhikkhunīs on two continents.” Buddhism on this North American continent is incredibly diverse. The majority of Buddhists in America are not white. And the majority of the Theravāda Buddhist monastic Sangha in North America is not white. Theravāda bhikkhunīs here in North America are nearly half of Euro-heritage, and a bit more than half of Asian-heritage. I missed seeing an interview with any Asian-American bhikkhunīs in the Theravāda tradition. I know this may have to do with two things: (1) budget (the US portion of the documentary was filmed only in California), and (2) wishing to show a simple contrast between groundbreaking American-born bhikkhunīs in America, and a groundbreaking Thai bhikkhuni in Thailand.
→ I want to acknowledge that in South and Southeast Asia also, the Theravāda bhikkhunīs are diverse, from Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Cambodia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Vietnam, as well as in Thailand. There are also Theravāda bhikkhunis from Korea, Japan, Taiwan and mainland China. In Thailand as well, the bhikkhunīs are quite diverse. The bhikkhunī leaders and bhikkhunīs’ communities do not all look the same or share the same views. Other bhikkhunīs communities that have grown greatly include that of Nirotharam led by bhikkhuni Phra Ajahn Nanthayani, and the Buddha Catu Parisa community, as well as others. I missed to see and hear a counterbalancing Thai bhikkhunī leader speak, to share this diversity of approaches. But this in part may have to do again with limited budget, and with Ven. Dhammananda’s accessibility. She regularly makes herself available for English-language interviews; many of the other bhikkhunīs do not engage with the media and spotlight in the same kind of way; or they might prefer their engagement to be only through sharing Dhamma.
I acknowledge that acknowledging diversity is necessarily complex; and to make something accessible for the masses often calls for simplification and being brief - amidst the great deluge of diverse media. Even what i’ve written here is far too long 
.
Thank you if you’ve read this far ~ I appreciate it.
P.S. There really are fears of competition with bhikkhunīs for support and patronage in the Bhikkhu Sangha and of the best laywomen supporters becoming bhikkhunīs if they could, but i’m not sure how widespread these concerns are–i know there are many bhikkhus who did not see and frame things in this way at all. In the US, with the interest in Buddhism, there are bhikkhus who look at bhikkhuni as important allies and partners in their work of effectively sharing the Buddha’s teaching and practice with vast populations with interest and who are suffering, in need. In Thailand as well, i’ve heard some bhikkhus say, there are so many temples, especially in rural areas, falling empty, and the number of monks ordaining from a young age to get an education or have a better materially supported life is on the decline, not to mention those who ordain out of sincere dedication to the Buddha’s Path well lived purely in the monastic life; they ask: wouldn’t it be good if those capable women with such sincere dedication where allowed and empowered to serve the Buddha Sāsana, to fill this need and gap?
There do seem to have been at least some such concerns from long ago – Gregory Schopen has written an interesting article largely translated from the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, as translated into and recorded in Tibetan, which includes bhikkhunī precepts that bhikkhunīs cannot accept an offering from a lay supporter until ascertaining that this supporter has first made an offering–of whatever size small or large–to the Bhikkhu Sangha. Our Pāli-text Bhikkhunī Vinaya does not have such a precept. The presence of the precept in the MSV shows that for some monks at some time somewhere, this issue of bhikkhunīs actually superseding the bhikkhus in support was enough of a concern and issue that it was felt a precept was needed. The Pāli texts express a diversity of views on this topic, some texts recording bhikkhunīs saying that support and requisites are hard to come by for bhikkhunīs as compared to bhikkhus, other bhikkhunīs expressing the abundant support that they received–so there may have been variety of views and experiences in this regard.
P.P.S. I’m not sure, but Ayyā Suvira might have been referring to the earlier “Buddha’s Forgotten Nuns” documentary by Wiriya Sati, in which Ajahn Jayasāro was interviewed. It’s what came to mind when reading this thread anyway.
Much mettā to all! ~ thank you for watching, discussing, and caring.
27 Likes
Dear Ayya T,
Thank you for always providing a beautiful, well rounded and spacious perspective, that is also inclusive and kind!
Acala Bhikkhuni
5 Likes
Vinaya has this allowance;
Now at that time the features of a woman appeared on a certain monk. They told the Blessed One about this matter. [He said,] “Monks, I allow the same teacher, the same ordination, the same rainy seasons together with the nuns. I allow reinstatement among the nuns for those offenses that nuns share in common with monks. According to those offenses of monks that are not shared in common with nuns, there is no offense.
Now at that time, the features of a man appeared on a certain nun. They told the Blessed One about this matter. [He said,] “Monks, I allow the same teacher, the same ordination, the same rainy seasons in relation to the monks. I allow reinstatement among the monks for those offenses that monks share in common with the nuns. According to those offences of nuns that not shared in common with monks, there is no offense” (Vin III.35).
I am not an expert on this but afaik it’s more or less like this;
According to a text included in the Canon, Buddha was hestitant in allowing Bhikkhuni ordination, he did however allow it and imposed 8 particular restraints.
At that time there were no Bhikkhunis and he allowed Bhikkhus to ordain women as to start the nun-order.
After this, as far as we can establish ordinations were preformed exclusively by their respective gender as unilateral ordinations.
Nowadays most monks are trained to think that the allowance for monks to ordain women (aka bilateral ordination) was rescinded once the Nun’s order was established, that nowadays only the unilateral ordinations are permitted.
Many think that women won’t have any teachers and that they will be ‘out of control’ and somehow damage something.
Some nuns and supporters seem to dislike the text which imposed the 8 particular restraints and permitted the female ordination in the first place. Some people have tried to make a case for it being a ‘fake’ but not much has come out of it.
Either way, not following the 8 restraints and trying to dismiss the canonical text seems to only antagonize the opposition.
There is also a case being made based on the initial hestitancy of The Buddha in allowing females to get full ordination, it is said that it made the Dhamma not last as long as it could’ve.
Because of this people don’t like the idea of a ‘revival’ of a bhikkhunisangha thinking that it will further accelerate the disappearance of good things.
I personally think that the ordinations are probably valid, in part because mn142 says that in the future there will be immoral “members of the clan” or “members of the spiritual family” [who will be ‘yellow-necks’ or ‘wearing yellow scarf around their neck’] and that gifts to them will be given on account of the sangha.
As it’s not saying ‘in future there will be immoral bhikkhus’ which would imo be natural if the sangha had at that time become unilateral, i think it’s likely that both orders are around at the time of yellownecks.
I also think that even if female ordinations weren’t valid they can still be said to be having gone forth into homelessness out of dedication to The Blessed One, be allowed to keep as many precepts as they like and be called Bhinkhunis because Pukkusati was called a bhikkhu by The Blessed One and was said to have gone forth in these terms without ever receiving a full ordination. See mn140
1 Like
Dear @anon92904629 I heard your confusion and pain. I’m glad @inb4dead was able to answer your question 
And I hope you have a bit more understanding and peace now 
And @inb4dead Sadhu for raising Pukkusati and MN140 
That sutta has been an inspiration for my own practice I just imagine Pukkusati as Pukkusata
So the Buddha said to Pukkusāti, 5.1“In whose name have you gone forth, reverend? Who is your Teacher? Whose teaching do you believe in?”
5.2“Reverend, there is the ascetic Gotama—a Sakyan, gone forth from a Sakyan family. 5.3He has this good reputation: 5.4‘That Blessed One is perfected, a fully awakened Buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, holy, knower of the world, supreme guide for those who wish to train, teacher of gods and humans, awakened, blessed.’ 5.5I’ve gone forth in his name. 5.6That Blessed One is my Teacher, 5.7and I believe in his teaching.”
…
…
“Sir, may I receive the going forth, the ordination in the Buddha’s presence?”
34.2“But mendicant, are your bowl and robes complete?”
34.3“No, sir, they are not.”
34.4“The Realized Ones do not ordain those whose bowl and robes are incomplete.”
35.1And then Venerable Pukkusāti approved and agreed with what the Buddha said. He got up from his seat, bowed, and respectfully circled the Buddha, keeping him on his right, before leaving.
35.2But while he was wandering in search of a bowl and robes, a stray cow took his life.
36.1Then several mendicants went up to the Buddha, bowed, sat down to one side, and said to him, 36.2“Sir, the gentleman named Pukkusāti, who was advised in brief by the Buddha, has passed away. 36.3Where has he been reborn in his next life?”
36.4“Mendicants, Pukkusāti was astute. He practiced in line with the teachings, and did not trouble me about the teachings. 36.5With the ending of the five lower fetters, he’s been reborn spontaneously and will become extinguished there, not liable to return from that world.”
1 Like
I’m not disagreeing with your analysis of the director’s attitude and intention towards this monk. 
For this particular part, I would say that it was possible that the cameraman’s angle just simply represented where laypeople are supposed to sit when talking to a Thai monk (lower position). 
3 Likes
A very good Thai monk that I have high respect for told me that it was true that some monks were afraid that lay supporters would prefer to move their support to ‘female monks’ because
- Laywomen like to seek advice from monks as they regards monks as being wise. (Yes, I know that monastics are not psychiatrists or counsellors, but that was a common relationship between monks and laypeople in my country.)
However, when it comes to romantic or husband-and-wife relationship issues, male monks tend to advise women to be patient and kind and forgiving (which is, of course, good), so it sounds more like preaching or reciting a morality book rather than paying attention to a particular situation of that individuals.
Having female monks means that women can feel more open when they talk about their problems.
- Males in my country get ordained as per the tradition. Some love the teachings and stay in robes to live a life in the footsteps of the Buddha. Some just stay on because they don’t have ambition to succeed in any secular career. Some just see this as an opportunity for free accommodation and food and cash.
Women who ordained as Bikkhunis have to go through lots of difficulties to get ordained, which shows their determination to practicing the dhamma. Hence, most, if not all, of them are totally inspiring!
3 Likes
I know. I was unpleasantly surprised to hear him say that. And though he said that with a calm and kind voice, I got a feeling that he was not really being kind and understanding towards women at all…
This is the video: The Buddha's Forgotten Nuns (2013) - YouTube
2 Likes
I didn’t really get a creepy vibe from the Thai monk—he just seemed like a regular monk in a typical Thai city temple office. But his remarks were repugnant… a shame, really.
Glad to see the bhikkhunī sangha growing, though, and receiving some positive media attention.
3 Likes