2006 Seminars

2006 Seminar Series







Venerable Sujato, Santi Forest Monastery

White Bones and Red Rust: How the bhikkhuni order came and went

The role of women in monasticism is perhaps the most controversial issue affecting modern Buddhism. It is apparent that female renunciates play a decidedly secondary role in most traditional Buddhist cultures. Increasingly, this assumed secondary status is coming under close scrutiny, and sometimes direct challenge.

It is well known that the Buddha set up a two-fold monastic community – the male bhikkhus and the female bhikkhunis. The existence of a monastic community specifically founded by the Buddha would seem to render the position of bhikkhunis unassailable.

Of the three main Vinaya traditions alive today, only the Chinese tradition, following the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, retains the bhikkhuni lineage. It can be no coincidence that wherever this tradition is followed – for example, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam – there are many nuns, and they play a central role in religious life. In the Theravada and Tibetan (Mulasarvastivada) traditions, there is traditionally no bhikkhuni ordination, and hence the opportunities for women to renounce are poor.

In recent years there has been a revival of the bhikkhuni lineage in both Theravada and Tibetan Buddhism. This, however, has not been accepted by the majority of monks in these traditions. While this opposition is usually gentle but trenchant, in some cases women have been jailed simply for being a bhikkhuni.

An inquiry into the reasons for this opposition takes us back to the canonical sources of the order. The canonical passage on the founding of the bhikkhuni order depicts the Buddha’s foster-mother Mahapajapati begging for ordination and being repeatedly refused. Even when the Buddha relents, he pronounces that the ordination of women will bring about the doom of Buddhism in 500 years. In addition, the Buddha laid down eight ‘rules of respect’ governing the relationships between male and female Sanghas, rules that are usually interpreted as subordinating the female Sangha. This passage is found, with the usual variations, in all the existing Vinayas (and sometimes Suttas). This story makes it seem as if the bhikkhuni order was forced on a reluctant Buddha, and hence exerts a powerful influence weighing against the reintroduction of bhikkhunis.

This forum will examine some of the issues around bhikkhuni ordination. In particular, we will focus on some specific strategies of revisioning the early texts, with a keen ear for the ‘minority report’ – the voices of the nuns themselves.



Primoz Picenko, UQ

Pali texts and their manuscripts: a case of ‘lost’ manuscripts mentioned in old Pali bibliographic sources

In this seminar I will discuss my research of the Pali subcommentaries on the first four Nikayas and show that there exist two sets of such subcommentaries and not just a single set which we have in printed form. The works of modern Pali scholarship, which in this case agree with the Theravada tradition, also usually mention only one set of the subcommentaries. However, according to some Pali bibliographic sources and catalogues of Pali manuscripts held in various libraries in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, there seem to exists another set of the subcommentaries on the four Nikayas which has been ignored/omitted by the Theravada tradition and also considered either “lost” or “non-existent” by modern Pali scholarship.

My recent discovery of a Pali manuscript of one of the “lost” subcommentaries in Myanmar gives a completely new perspective on the historical development of the two sets of the subcommentaries and in a wider sense also on our understanding of the available information about the history of Pali literature. I will attempt to discuss the following important issues which issued from this discovery:

1. The existence of the “lost” manuscript proves that the information in some older Pali bibliographic sources-where both sets are mentioned-is correct and that both the Theravada tradition as well as modern Pali scholarship ignored the ‘lost’ texts and the bibliographic information about them. Why?

2. The analysis of the available printed editions and catalogued manuscripts also indicates that the information about the sub-commentaries given in the works of modern Pali scholarship seems to be influenced by the traditional Theravada scholarship (both mention only one set)-although the information about the “lost” texts was available.

3. My discovery of the above mentioned manuscript, which is listed in the oldest Pali bibliographic text (Saddhammasangaha), also proves that this oldest bibliographic text-often considered less reliable by modern Pali scholarship-seems to be much more reliable than the later bibliographic sources (e.g. Sasanavamsa) which have been considered a very important source for modern history of Pali literature. Therefore the sources for the available “history” of Pali literature as well as the “history” itself need to be re-examined in the light of the information given in the older bibliographic texts, catalogues of Pali manuscripts and the manuscripts which have not been researched yet.

4. Considering all this, our understanding of the traditional Theravada transmission of the texts will have to be re-examined as well.



John Powers, ANU

A War of Words: The Creation of Tibetan Histories by the People’s Republic of China and Tibetan Exiles

This talk will look at attempts by historians in the People’s Republic of China and Tibetan exiles to develop coherent discourses relating to Tibetan history. The focus will be on the tropes and language both sides use in their constructions and how these are influenced by traditional and modern Chinese historiography and Tibetan Buddhist narratives, and how their texts function as persuasive documents aimed at changing the minds of Western audiences. The early period of Buddhism’s dissemination in Tibet will be the centre point of this talk; I will examine how historical figures are portrayed in the two narratives as either Chinese patriots or devout Buddhists and how later concerns are retrospectively projected onto the histories of this period.



Jay Garfield, Smith College

Buddhist Studies, Buddhist Practice and the Trope of Authenticity

Scholars and practitioners of Buddhism often use the terms “authentic” and “inauthentic” and their cognates as terms of approbation and disapprobation for texts, teachers, interpretations, and practices. This turns out to be an inauthentic Buddhist rhetorical practice.



John Wu, USYD

Primordiality and the Abyss: Heidegger, Greek Theurgy and Tibetan Dzogchen

My research is based mainly on the following Heidegger texts: Contributions to Philosophy and Mindfulness. (The latter is translation of Besinnung and will be available in bookshops in mid-July. Besinnung is Heidegger’s own commentary on Contributions to Philosophy.) I also draw upon the very informative lecture courses given by Heidegger on the pagan poet Friedrich Holderlin. Heidegger’s notion of the fourfold is derived from Holderlin’s yearning for the restoration of pagan festivals: the festive (Feste) as the coming into history of the destiny of a people. In Scandinavian religion of the past, such festivals were called “blot”. The ganapuja of Tantra and Dzogchen, of which I had direct experience, also bears some resemblance to this phenomenon.



Rod Bucknell, UQ

The notion of Pali-Chinese sutra parallels: theoretical and practical issues

Sutra correspondence tables identify numerous sets (usually pairs) of Pali-Chinese parallels; their existence raises some difficult interpretative issues. An obvious possible interpretation is that the Pali sutta and its Chinese parallel(s) are divergent derivatives of a single original discourse – with attractive implications about the possibility of reconstructing the common ancestral discourse; but how viable is this interpretation?



Phra Monchai Saitanaporn, USYD

A proposed method of meditation; samatha and vipassanā

This work provides an analytical study of the two interrelated processes of Buddhist meditation, samatha and vipassanā. Despite their frequent appearance in the Buddhist scriptures, most scholars have not settled the exact role of samatha and vipassanā in the path of enlightenment. They are still divided over the question as to how samatha and vipassanā are related. This paper aims to determine the answer of this question on the condition that the cankers are eradicated. The determination will be performed through the investigation of the main characteristic, functions and benefits of samatha and vipassanā and then their precise role of the destruction of cankers.



Bhante Santi, Santi Forest Monastery

Schism, communion and harmony in the Pali Vinaya

The initial motivation for my research on schism was that it seems to me that the concepts of schism and its closely related opposite, harmony, are frequently misused in a way that suppresses genuine, well-intentioned calls for reform within the Buddhist monastic Order. My intention is to clarify the precise meaning of the interrelated concepts of schism in the Order (saṅghabheda), harmony (samaggī) and communion (saṃvāsa) in order to diffuse the unreasonable fear of schism that obstructs resolution of the issues creating disharmony in the Buddhist community now. However, in this presentation I will try to focus on the aspects of schism more relevant to academics not personally involved with the issue.

The points I will address in my presentation will include:
What exactly is schism? At what point does a schism formally occur? Are the accounts of this in the Saṅghabhedakkhandaka and the Upālipañcaka (Parivāra) consistent or compatible? How do modern Theravādins understand schism? How meaningful are the traditional concepts of schism, harmony and communion within the Saṅgha today? Do all schismatics go to hell regardless of their intention? Is schism really always wrong? I will try to compare and critique briefly modern comments by IB Horner, Ven. Thanissaro and Ven. Brahmavaṃso with the Vinaya texts.

How can we make sense of the scattered references to saṃvāsa? I will explain two kinds implicitly differentiated in the texts and how they might apply in different cases. What does the precise definition of schism mean for the process of sect formation in Indian Buddhism? Does nikāyabheda always equal saṅghabheda? If not, how can we tell the difference in the literary and epigraphical records?

How many different sects are there actually within modern ‘Theravāda’? I will propose a nomenclature that I think would be acceptable to both the sects themselves and their opponents.

This topic is part of a much larger research project on the communal side of the Vinaya and the historical evolution of Buddhist monastic cultures since the earliest texts. I would also like to summarise the other topics I am researching and appeal for feedback and discussion.