I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.

Anyone?

"Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>
> Anyone?

The observation in my precious post, to the effect that there have never
been Bikkunhi in Thailand, may be in error. I recall my wife telling me
that the rule was that a bikkhuni could only be ordained by a bikkhuni, so
when the last bikkhuni died (mid-19th cent?), the bikkhuni order died with
her. ;-/

-- 
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !

wrote in message 
news:20060303184949.399$QG@newsreader.com...
> "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
>> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>>
>> Anyone?
>
> The observation in my precious post, to the effect that there have never
> been Bikkunhi in Thailand, may be in error. I recall my wife telling me
> that the rule was that a bikkhuni could only be ordained by a bikkhuni, so
> when the last bikkhuni died (mid-19th cent?), the bikkhuni order died with
> her. ;-/


Nick, this issue (and others) are being addressed by Sakyadhita, the world 
wide association for buddhist women.   They have a conference every year 
with top notch buddhist speakers on many issues concerning women in 
buddhism.
-- 

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

"Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
>  wrote in message
> > "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
> >> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
> >> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
> >>
> >> Anyone?
> >
> > The observation in my precious post, to the effect that there have
> > never been Bikkunhi in Thailand, may be in error. I recall my wife
> > telling me that the rule was that a bikkhuni could only be ordained by
> > a bikkhuni, so when the last bikkhuni died (mid-19th cent?), the
> > bikkhuni order died with her. ;-/
>
> Nick, this issue (and others) are being addressed by Sakyadhita, the
> world wide association for buddhist women.   They have a conference every
> year with top notch buddhist speakers on many issues concerning women in
> buddhism.

Thanks, Evelyn. I met a Korean Bikkhuni, many years ago. She was
unassuming, clear and erudite. I've given Ayya Khema's book, "Being Nobody,
Going Nowhere" to many women over the years. She is a very inspirational
Bikkuni. I've met three Buddhist nuns in Thailand. One was a Tiger, I would
trust her to cover my six or be my attorney anytime. One was a sweet old
lady, who I would have been lucky to have had as a Mother. The third was a
prideful, deceitful, snake.

I wish the Sakyadhita great success. The world is in great need of Metta
Caruna and Satti.

-- 
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !

wrote in message 
news:20060303193509.912$qR@newsreader.com...
> "Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
>>  wrote in message
>> > "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
>> >> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>> >> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>> >>
>> >> Anyone?
>> >
>> > The observation in my precious post, to the effect that there have
>> > never been Bikkunhi in Thailand, may be in error. I recall my wife
>> > telling me that the rule was that a bikkhuni could only be ordained by
>> > a bikkhuni, so when the last bikkhuni died (mid-19th cent?), the
>> > bikkhuni order died with her. ;-/
>>
>> Nick, this issue (and others) are being addressed by Sakyadhita, the
>> world wide association for buddhist women.   They have a conference every
>> year with top notch buddhist speakers on many issues concerning women in
>> buddhism.
>
> Thanks, Evelyn. I met a Korean Bikkhuni, many years ago. She was
> unassuming, clear and erudite. I've given Ayya Khema's book, "Being 
> Nobody,
> Going Nowhere" to many women over the years. She is a very inspirational
> Bikkuni. I've met three Buddhist nuns in Thailand. One was a Tiger, I 
> would
> trust her to cover my six or be my attorney anytime. One was a sweet old
> lady, who I would have been lucky to have had as a Mother. The third was a
> prideful, deceitful, snake.
>
> I wish the Sakyadhita great success. The world is in great need of Metta
> Caruna and Satti.


Nick, Oh yes, and let's not forget Pema Chodron, who has written so many 
inspirational buddhist books.  Also Robina Courtin, and there are so many 
other top notch buddhist women teachers.....

-- 

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

"Evelyn Ruut"  wrote in message
news:fU4Of.5615$4%1.5460@news-wrt-01.rdc-nyc.rr.com...
>
>  wrote in message
> news:20060303184949.399$QG@newsreader.com...
>> "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
>>> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>>> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>
>> The observation in my precious post, to the effect that there have
>> never
>> been Bikkunhi in Thailand, may be in error. I recall my wife telling me
>> that the rule was that a bikkhuni could only be ordained by a bikkhuni,
>> so
>> when the last bikkhuni died (mid-19th cent?), the bikkhuni order died
>> with
>> her. ;-/
>
>
> Nick, this issue (and others) are being addressed by Sakyadhita, the
> world wide association for buddhist women.   They have a conference
> every year with top notch buddhist speakers on many issues concerning
> women in buddhism.

how many annual conferences does it take to ordain a bikkhuni?

: )

if it's any help i got ordained as a brownie elf by the bish of lichfield.


> -- 
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Evelyn
> (to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')
>
>
>

"Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
>  wrote in message
> > "Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
> >>  wrote in message
> >> > "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
> >> >> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult"
> >> >> to reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
> >> >>[ . . . ]
> Nick, Oh yes, and let's not forget Pema Chodron, who has written so many
> inspirational buddhist books.  Also Robina Courtin, and there are so many
> other top notch buddhist women teachers.....

Thanks, Evelyn. I'll take a look at their books. Ayya Khema's book, "Being
Nobody, Going Nowhere" saved an elderly lady friend's life, which had
become so hopeless that she was considering suicide.

I look forward to your reports on the Sakyadhita conference.

-- 
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !

wrote in message 
news:20060303222051.799$WV@newsreader.com...
> "Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
>>  wrote in message
>> > "Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
>> >>  wrote in message
>> >> > "Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote:
>> >> >> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult"
>> >> >> to reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>> >> >>[ . . . ]
>> Nick, Oh yes, and let's not forget Pema Chodron, who has written so many
>> inspirational buddhist books.  Also Robina Courtin, and there are so many
>> other top notch buddhist women teachers.....
>
> Thanks, Evelyn. I'll take a look at their books. Ayya Khema's book, "Being
> Nobody, Going Nowhere" saved an elderly lady friend's life, which had
> become so hopeless that she was considering suicide.
>
> I look forward to your reports on the Sakyadhita conference.


Nick, I am sorry but I won't be able to attend the conference this year in 
Kuala Lampur.  I just thought you'd like to know that the ordainment of 
Bhikkuni's is an issue they are working on actively.

This is their website, which may be of some interest.

http://www.sakyadhita.org/events/index.html
-- 

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

"Evelyn Ruut"  wrote:
> [ . . . ]
> Nick, I am sorry but I won't be able to attend the conference this year
> in Kuala Lampur.  I just thought you'd like to know that the ordainment
> of Bhikkuni's is an issue they are working on actively.
>
> This is their website, which may be of some interest.
>
> http://www.sakyadhita.org/events/index.html

Saved. Thanks again, Evelyn. ;-)

-- 
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !

Peter Holmgren wrote:
> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>
> Anyone?

Ok - I made contact. Now all we need is the support to build a bhikkhuni 
monastery in denmark, which also functions as a retreat centre. The order 
will be fully functional with bhikkhuni ordinations and all.

Thanks for all inputs.

If anyone are interested I can update on the progress.

"Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote in message 
news:zchOf.3599$Qd1.2126@news.get2net.dk...
> Peter Holmgren wrote:
>> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>>
>> Anyone?
>
> Ok - I made contact. Now all we need is the support to build a bhikkhuni 
> monastery in denmark, which also functions as a retreat centre. The order 
> will be fully functional with bhikkhuni ordinations and all.
>
> Thanks for all inputs.
>
> If anyone are interested I can update on the progress.



Post it here when you have any news.
I am sure someone will find it of interest.

-- 

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

Peter Holmgren wrote:
> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>
> Anyone?

Hi there,

            One of the requirements to ordain a new bhikkhunis is that,
not less than five bhikkhunis must participate in the ordaination
process. Bhikkhus can't ordain a new bhikkunis, only bhikkhunis can
ordain new bhikkhuni. Once people can't find five bhikkunis  for the
ordination of a new one, the order dried up.

That is the stumbling block in reestablishing the order of bhikkunis.
These rules are made by Buddha for good reasons too. The very first
bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are ordained by Buddha himself and since then,
the old members ordained the new members according to the rules. So, to
ordain a new bhikkhuni, we need atleast five bhikkunis or Buddha
himself!

It is very disappointing that the bhikkhuni order did not survive to
this day. It is sad and sickening to see the situation of the Buddhist
nuns who truely whished to be a bhikkhuni and stuck in the
predicatment. The right to become a offspring of the Buddha is forever
denies to half of the humanity!

But what can we do? What ever we do to revive the order, we must be
careful not to bend the Buddha's rules and regulations on bhikkhus and
bhikkhunis. The bending or changing the rules is unacceptable. If we
started changing the rules to suit the situations and wishes, that will
be the bad precedent and will be the beginning of the decline and end!

We can just blame our ancient socieities for their lack of political
will to protect and sustain the bhikkuni orders. I don't know how and
where the orders end, the ends must have been in different places and
different times overcomed by different situations. But, I am pretty
sure that the order never reached to Thailand or Burma or Laos. The
five bhikkuni needed to propagate never reached to shores of mainland
southeast asia.

The hope of reestablishing the order squarly lies on finding a
continuous true bhikkuni order. They must be bhikkunis even if they are
from different traditions, nuns can't ordain bhikkunis. All people
believe that there is no such order any more any where. If someone can
prove them wrong, it will be one of the biggest good deed of all times.

Thanks

Moe wrote:
> Peter Holmgren wrote:
>> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>>
>> Anyone?
> 
> Hi there,
> 
>             One of the requirements to ordain a new bhikkhunis is that,
> not less than five bhikkhunis must participate in the ordaination
> process. Bhikkhus can't ordain a new bhikkunis, only bhikkhunis can
> ordain new bhikkhuni. Once people can't find five bhikkunis  for the
> ordination of a new one, the order dried up.
> 
> That is the stumbling block in reestablishing the order of bhikkunis.
> These rules are made by Buddha for good reasons too. The very first
> bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are ordained by Buddha himself and since then,
> the old members ordained the new members according to the rules. So, to
> ordain a new bhikkhuni, we need atleast five bhikkunis or Buddha
> himself!
> 
> It is very disappointing that the bhikkhuni order did not survive to
> this day. It is sad and sickening to see the situation of the Buddhist
> nuns who truely whished to be a bhikkhuni and stuck in the
> predicatment. The right to become a offspring of the Buddha is forever
> denies to half of the humanity!
> 
> But what can we do? What ever we do to revive the order, we must be
> careful not to bend the Buddha's rules and regulations on bhikkhus and
> bhikkhunis. The bending or changing the rules is unacceptable. If we
> started changing the rules to suit the situations and wishes, that will
> be the bad precedent and will be the beginning of the decline and end!


Or the beginning of clear thinking not hindered by rules designed for an 
earlier time and place.

Moe wrote:

> Hi there

Hi there

But the rule is fair and simple, and it is for a good reason and made
by Buddha. It said, we need five bhikkunis to ordain a new bhikkuni and
five bhikku to ordain a new bhikku.

Can we find five bhikku who are willing to under go sex changes to
become bhikkunis? If they do that are they sill legable as bhikku or
bhikkunis? Or do they just become lay womens?

One thing is for sure, not everyone, who ware a yellow or dark or brown
robe and shaved head can become a bhikku or bhikunis. We can't regard
them as bhikkus and bhikkunis by just by their appearences. What if
they are just happen to be a bunch of skinheads wearing a yellow beach
towel?

Only if and when they follow the rules, we can regard them as such.
Ordination by five peers is part of the rules.

Thanks

Hollywood Lee wrote:

>
> Or the beginning of clear thinking not hindered by rules designed for an
> earlier time and place.

Hi Peter,

Yes, I am interested. As you would already imagine, I wonder who is you
contact. Is your contact from Sirilanka?
I am looking forwar to hear from you.

Thanks

H. Moe wrote:
> But the rule is fair and simple,


It is simple.  Whether it is fair has been the subject of much
discussion.  See, for example,
http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha220.htm


> and it is for a good reason and made by Buddha. It said, we need five
> bhikkunis to ordain a new bhikkuni and five bhikku to ordain a new
> bhikku.


Many things are said.  I don't necessarily agree with them, even if they
are attributed to the Buddha.


> Can we find five bhikku who are willing to under go sex changes to 
> become bhikkunis? If they do that are they sill legable as bhikku or 
> bhikkunis? Or do they just become lay womens?


Thanks for the silly aside.


> 
> One thing is for sure, not everyone, who ware a yellow or dark or
> brown robe and shaved head can become a bhikku or bhikunis.


Ideally, yes.  Unfortunately, it seems that those with little skill do
make it through at times.


> We can't regard them as bhikkus and bhikkunis by just by their
> appearences.


No, I think mere appearances, like outdated rules, should be set aside,
and the focus should be on a person's commitment to the dhamma.


> What if they are just happen to be a bunch of skinheads wearing a
> yellow beach towel?


Would such a vision disturb you?



> Only if and when they follow the rules, we can regard them as such.


For you, perhaps.  Others seem to be willing to change the rules after
reflection and thought.  That the Theravada order resists the change is
one of the various reasons I find the tradition unappealing despite my
preference for much of the early canon over the Mahayana sutras.


> Ordination by five peers is part of the rules.


That's why I try to avoid clinging overly tightly to too many rules.

Hollywood Lee wrote:
> H. Moe wrote:
> > But the rule is fair and simple,
>
>
> It is simple.  Whether it is fair has been the subject of much
> discussion.  See, for example,
> http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha220.htm
>

Yes it is fair. Buddha was fair. He regulated that five bhikkus are
need to ordain a man. And five not six not four,  five bhikkunis are
also needed to ordain a woman. It is nothing else but fair and equal.
No wonder it was done by Buddha.

The link above you show me. Do you think I like what happening to nuns?
I feel what happening is sad sickening, I already mentioned that in my
first response to Peter. But it is nothing to do with the rules,  the
rules are not to deter bhikkunis from propagating. The rules are there
to protect, guide and help propagate them. The rules are there to help.

It is the shortcoming of the society, which dried up the bhikkuni order
800 years ago.  At that time in Indian society women exist as a
property of men, so they can't act with their own will. That is the
reason the bhikkunis order dried up. Southeast Asian woman are more
free to pursuit their own wills, but, southeast asia never received
much needed five bhikkuni to propagate the order.

You got to see things more clearly. It is not the fault of the rules.
It is the fault of the ancitent societies that the bhikkuni order run
dry. Even today, the only Buddhist regulatory problem stand against the
reestablishment the order is to find five bhikkunis. The other problems
facing by the prospected bhikkunis are of social and cultural,
educational, promotional problems.


> > and it is for a good reason and made by Buddha. It said, we need five
> > bhikkunis to ordain a new bhikkuni and five bhikku to ordain a new
> > bhikku.
>
>
> Many things are said.  I don't necessarily agree with them, even if they
> are attributed to the Buddha.

Many things are said, yes. Many of these we don't understand and we
can't follow. Many of these we understand and we can't follow. Many of
these we understand and we can follow. So it is for us to make use of
some of these many things(Dhamma) which we can understand and leave
that many things intact for other to help themselves. We can't change
it just because it suit in our case. There will be some other people
and some other times (ages) that many things can help.
So we got to keep the Dhama at the original form. We got to propagate
the Dhamma at the original form. If I like to bent it to fit in my own
situation, I should do it only for myself. But I mut keep the original
copy clean for the next time, next person.

> > Can we find five bhikku who are willing to under go sex changes to
> > become bhikkunis? If they do that are they sill legable as bhikku or
> > bhikkunis? Or do they just become lay womens?
>
>
> Thanks for the silly aside.
>
>
> >
> > One thing is for sure, not everyone, who ware a yellow or dark or
> > brown robe and shaved head can become a bhikku or bhikunis.
>
>
> Ideally, yes.  Unfortunately, it seems that those with little skill do
> make it through at times.
>
>
> > We can't regard them as bhikkus and bhikkunis by just by their
> > appearences.
>
>
> No, I think mere appearances, like outdated rules, should be set aside,
> and the focus should be on a person's commitment to the dhamma.

True, the focus should be on the person who is practicing dhamma. That
is what the rules are for. The rules are all for helping a person to
practice dhamma. The rules should not and must not stop or hinder a
person from practicing dhamma.
If a person find that a certain rule stopping him/her from practing
dhamma, then s/he should not follow that rule and just follow the
dharmma practice. But the rules are there, they have stand the test of
the time for more than 2500 years. What is said is already said. We
must keep it as it's, for the next person, for the next time, for the
next age.

Say, if a person want to practice dhamma and at the same time needed
stay at home, he can and he should stay home and practice dhamma. But
rules should not be bend to fit his need and ordain him as a 'home stay
monk'.

The Buddhist nuns can practice/study/teach dhamma, they can wear what
they see fit with the dharmma practice. They can follow  Buddhist
codes, practices. But to become a bhikkunis we need atleast five
preexisting bhikkunis.
Well I feel like a bigot spelling out those.

> > What if they are just happen to be a bunch of skinheads wearing a
> > yellow beach towel?
>
>
> Would such a vision disturb you?

I have no problem with the skinheads at the beach wearing beach towel.
Well as long as they don't claim to be buddhist monks and people
regards them as such.

>
> > Only if and when they follow the rules, we can regard them as such.
>
>
> For you, perhaps.  Others seem to be willing to change the rules after
> reflection and thought.  That the Theravada order resists the change is
> one of the various reasons I find the tradition unappealing despite my
> preference for much of the early canon over the Mahayana sutras.
>
>
> > Ordination by five peers is part of the rules.
>
>
> That's why I try to avoid clinging overly tightly to too many rules.

I am not suggesting you to follow all the rules. I don't follow well
any of them. I am not a monk. But we should leave them as they are,
while we only follow what we are able to follow.

Thanks

H. Moe wrote:
> Hollywood Lee wrote:
> 
>>H. Moe wrote:
>>
>>>But the rule is fair and simple,
>>
>>
>>It is simple.  Whether it is fair has been the subject of much
>>discussion.  See, for example,
>>http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha220.htm
>>
> 
> 
> Yes it is fair. Buddha was fair. He regulated that five bhikkus are
> need to ordain a man. And five not six not four,  five bhikkunis are
> also needed to ordain a woman. It is nothing else but fair and equal.
> No wonder it was done by Buddha.

You seem to be happy with your rules and the resulting arisings.  Good luck.

Moe wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>            One of the requirements to ordain a new bhikkhunis is that,
> not less than five bhikkhunis must participate in the ordaination
> process. Bhikkhus can't ordain a new bhikkunis, only bhikkhunis can
> ordain new bhikkhuni. Once people can't find five bhikkunis  for the
> ordination of a new one, the order dried up.
>
> That is the stumbling block in reestablishing the order of bhikkunis.
> These rules are made by Buddha for good reasons too. The very first
> bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are ordained by Buddha himself and since then,
> the old members ordained the new members according to the rules. So,
> to ordain a new bhikkhuni, we need atleast five bhikkunis or Buddha
> himself!

I know the story. It was made like this in around 1070 AD, by a group of 
monks that was invited to re-establish the sangha in Sri Lanka. It was also 
those monks, that declared the bikkhuni order as defunct.They also imported 
several Hindu concepts into their pracsis.

>
> It is very disappointing that the bhikkhuni order did not survive to
> this day. It is sad and sickening to see the situation of the Buddhist
> nuns who truely whished to be a bhikkhuni and stuck in the
> predicatment. The right to become a offspring of the Buddha is forever
> denies to half of the humanity!
>
> But what can we do? What ever we do to revive the order, we must be
> careful not to bend the Buddha's rules and regulations on bhikkhus and
> bhikkhunis. The bending or changing the rules is unacceptable. If we
> started changing the rules to suit the situations and wishes, that
> will be the bad precedent and will be the beginning of the decline
> and end!

It is not impossible. See - buddhism is non-discriminative. To be 
non-discriminative also means that we as practisioners look beyond the body 
and acknowledge the mind . The mind itself sexless. So there's really no 
problem other than what is made up.

> We can just blame our ancient socieities for their lack of political
> will to protect and sustain the bhikkuni orders. I don't know how and
> where the orders end, the ends must have been in different places and
> different times overcomed by different situations. But, I am pretty
> sure that the order never reached to Thailand or Burma or Laos. The
> five bhikkuni needed to propagate never reached to shores of mainland
> southeast asia.

Nah! We don't need anybodys authorisation for women to study and practise 
dhamma the vinaya way. The vinaya is only people who have they space and the 
clinical environment to be able to train to the fullest. That's all they 
are. Noone needs permission to the dhamma.

> The hope of reestablishing the order squarly lies on finding a
> continuous true bhikkuni order. They must be bhikkunis even if they
> are from different traditions, nuns can't ordain bhikkunis. All people
> believe that there is no such order any more any where. If someone can
> prove them wrong, it will be one of the biggest good deed of all
> times.

Dhamma proves them wrong. The block was only made by people to maintain a 
monopoly.
If we let dhamma speak for us - there's no hindrance for the bhikkhuni order 
to revive itself.

H. Moe wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Yes, I am interested. As you would already imagine, I wonder who is
> you contact. Is your contact from Sirilanka?
> I am looking forwar to hear from you.
>
> Thanks

Ayya Dhammananda(Thailand) and Ayya Sucinta(Travelling; ordained by Ajahn 
Sumedho)

"Hollywood Lee"  wrote in message 
news:120n2glc0a7ac12@corp.supernews.com...
> Moe wrote:
>> Peter Holmgren wrote:
>>> I'd like to know more of why it is "impossible" or so "difficult" to
>>> reestablish the order of theravadin bhikkhunis.
>>>
>>> Anyone?
>>
>> Hi there,
>>
>>             One of the requirements to ordain a new bhikkhunis is that,
>> not less than five bhikkhunis must participate in the ordaination
>> process. Bhikkhus can't ordain a new bhikkunis, only bhikkhunis can
>> ordain new bhikkhuni. Once people can't find five bhikkunis  for the
>> ordination of a new one, the order dried up.
>>
>> That is the stumbling block in reestablishing the order of bhikkunis.
>> These rules are made by Buddha for good reasons too. The very first
>> bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are ordained by Buddha himself and since then,
>> the old members ordained the new members according to the rules. So, to
>> ordain a new bhikkhuni, we need atleast five bhikkunis or Buddha
>> himself!
>>
>> It is very disappointing that the bhikkhuni order did not survive to
>> this day. It is sad and sickening to see the situation of the Buddhist
>> nuns who truely whished to be a bhikkhuni and stuck in the
>> predicatment. The right to become a offspring of the Buddha is forever
>> denies to half of the humanity!
>>
>> But what can we do? What ever we do to revive the order, we must be
>> careful not to bend the Buddha's rules and regulations on bhikkhus and
>> bhikkhunis. The bending or changing the rules is unacceptable. If we
>> started changing the rules to suit the situations and wishes, that will
>> be the bad precedent and will be the beginning of the decline and end!
>
>
> Or the beginning of clear thinking not hindered by rules designed for an 
> earlier time and place.


Yes, exactly.  Sticking to the "letter of the law," rather than the spirit 
of it.

-- 

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

Hello
Ajahn Sumedho's western forest sangha have what can be argued is the closest 
modern incarnation of the bhikkuni order. They follow the own full version 
of the the vinaya. They have a number of seniors nuns now  based in forest 
sangha around the world. I doubt any of them worry out the loss of the 
bhikkuni order. search forest Sangha in google for monastries. They are 
treated with increasing levels of respect and acknowledgement, for the high 
standards of their training,  by the conservative patriarchy in Thailand.
Sam Halter
samhalter@tiscali.co.uk
"Peter Holmgren" <info@[theravada].[dk]> wrote in message 
news:WbTOf.74$9C1.54@news.get2net.dk...
> Moe wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>>            One of the requirements to ordain a new bhikkhunis is that,
>> not less than five bhikkhunis must participate in the ordaination
>> process. Bhikkhus can't ordain a new bhikkunis, only bhikkhunis can
>> ordain new bhikkhuni. Once people can't find five bhikkunis  for the
>> ordination of a new one, the order dried up.
>>
>> That is the stumbling block in reestablishing the order of bhikkunis.
>> These rules are made by Buddha for good reasons too. The very first
>> bhikkhus and bhikkhunis are ordained by Buddha himself and since then,
>> the old members ordained the new members according to the rules. So,
>> to ordain a new bhikkhuni, we need atleast five bhikkunis or Buddha
>> himself!
>
> I know the story. It was made like this in around 1070 AD, by a group of 
> monks that was invited to re-establish the sangha in Sri Lanka. It was 
> also those monks, that declared the bikkhuni order as defunct.They also 
> imported several Hindu concepts into their pracsis.
>
>>
>> It is very disappointing that the bhikkhuni order did not survive to
>> this day. It is sad and sickening to see the situation of the Buddhist
>> nuns who truely whished to be a bhikkhuni and stuck in the
>> predicatment. The right to become a offspring of the Buddha is forever
>> denies to half of the humanity!
>>
>> But what can we do? What ever we do to revive the order, we must be
>> careful not to bend the Buddha's rules and regulations on bhikkhus and
>> bhikkhunis. The bending or changing the rules is unacceptable. If we
>> started changing the rules to suit the situations and wishes, that
>> will be the bad precedent and will be the beginning of the decline
>> and end!
>
> It is not impossible. See - buddhism is non-discriminative. To be 
> non-discriminative also means that we as practisioners look beyond the 
> body and acknowledge the mind . The mind itself sexless. So there's really 
> no problem other than what is made up.
>
>> We can just blame our ancient socieities for their lack of political
>> will to protect and sustain the bhikkuni orders. I don't know how and
>> where the orders end, the ends must have been in different places and
>> different times overcomed by different situations. But, I am pretty
>> sure that the order never reached to Thailand or Burma or Laos. The
>> five bhikkuni needed to propagate never reached to shores of mainland
>> southeast asia.
>
> Nah! We don't need anybodys authorisation for women to study and practise 
> dhamma the vinaya way. The vinaya is only people who have they space and 
> the clinical environment to be able to train to the fullest. That's all 
> they are. Noone needs permission to the dhamma.
>
>> The hope of reestablishing the order squarly lies on finding a
>> continuous true bhikkuni order. They must be bhikkunis even if they
>> are from different traditions, nuns can't ordain bhikkunis. All people
>> believe that there is no such order any more any where. If someone can
>> prove them wrong, it will be one of the biggest good deed of all
>> times.
>
> Dhamma proves them wrong. The block was only made by people to maintain a 
> monopoly.
> If we let dhamma speak for us - there's no hindrance for the bhikkhuni 
> order to revive itself.

Thanks for the info. But, as you already notice,  bhikkuni order in
Thailand is yet to establish. The orders in Sir Lanka might be better
able to help you. All the best any way.

But, I admit that there are room to improvement. I also admit that the
performance of today Theravada order is not satisfactory. There are
things to learns from Mahayana order (especially in social engagements
with the wider community).

 But, I still believe that the 'rules' Vinaya should be kept as it is.

Thanks for the link you show me before.
I like show you something in that link.

http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha136.htm

The author said, "Theravada and Mahayana. The two must be friendlier
with each other and be more united in contributing their shares to
everlasting peace of the world."

Mahayana and Theravada should find each other helpful.

Good luck
Thanks

"H. Moe"  wrote:
> But, I admit that there are room to improvement. I also admit that the
> performance of today Theravada order is not satisfactory. There are
> things to learns from Mahayana order (especially in social engagements
> with the wider community).
>
>  But, I still believe that the 'rules' Vinaya should be kept as it is.
>
> Thanks for the link you show me before.
> I like show you something in that link.
>
> http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha136.htm
>
> The author said, "Theravada and Mahayana. The two must be friendlier
> with each other and be more united in contributing their shares to
> everlasting peace of the world."
>
> Mahayana and Theravada should find each other helpful.
>
Thank you for providing an excellent web source, H. Moe. As one who was
trained by Khmen (Cambodian) Busshist monks, after years of studying Zen, I
deeply appreciate the need for all followers of Dhamma to find common
ground.

I don't think you need to label your recognition of this as an admission.
To me, it is more an admonition.

With Metta Caruna,

-- 
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled War on Terror Veterans and
their families:
http://saluteheroes.org/ & http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !