Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

buddhist monasteries

2»

Comments

  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Palzang wrote:
    ................................

    It is true that some Tibetan Buddhist women have taken bhikshuni ordination, but not within the Tibetan tradition. They've had to go to Taiwan or somewhere where the tradition still exists to take that ordination. It ceased to exist in Tibet when King Langdarma, who was anti-Buddhist, eliminated (i.e. killed) all the nuns, so the full ordination lineage for women was broken and never restored. Our nuns have requested full ordination vows from H.H. Penor Rinpoche, the head of our lineage, but he has been unable to find a pure tradition that can trace its lineage back to the Buddha. So take that for what it's worth.

    Palzang

    This continues to confuse me, Palzang. The article by Thubten Chodron cited by Genryu has helped a little but still leaves me with questions. For example, your own Lama at Sedona, Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo, is described as a tulku and gives empowerments. Is she not ordained?

    And what does it say about H.H. Penor Rinpoche's decision (above) that Thubten Chodron had to go to Taiwan to be ordained and yet her ordination appears to be accepted by Tibetan and other traditions?

    As for the difference between monks' and nuns' vows, I am trying to address this is another thread in "Buddhism in the Modern World".

    P.S. I may be seeing this whole question through the lens of distaste at the notion of "apostolic succession".
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited January 2006
    This continues to confuse me, Palzang. The article by Thubten Chodron cited by Genryu has helped a little but still leaves me with questions. For example, your own Lama at Sedona, Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo, is described as a tulku and gives empowerments. Is she not ordained?

    And what does it say about H.H. Penor Rinpoche's decision (above) that Thubten Chodron had to go to Taiwan to be ordained and yet her ordination appears to be accepted by Tibetan and other traditions?

    As for the difference between monks' and nuns' vows, I am trying to address this is another thread in "Buddhism in the Modern World".

    P.S. I may be seeing this whole question through the lens of distaste at the notion of "apostolic succession".

    No, my lama is neither ordained nor does she give empowerments. That's not her role. As you know, there are many lamas in the Nyingma tradition that are not ordained. This is somewhat unique in the Tibetan tradition, and actually goes back to good ol' King Langdarma once again. During his reign of terror against Buddhists, many lamas dropped their robes for self-protection and went underground (much like they did in Mongolia in the 20th Century), so thus began the tradition of lay lamas. It's pretty much their choice. My teacher was recognized late in life, so she did not have the training tulkus ordinarily receive, so she does not have the training to give empowerments. At the time of her recognition, she asked whether she should become ordained or not, and H.H. felt she would be more effective as a laywoman. Her role as a dakini is to attract students to the path. Then they can receive training and empowerment from the lamas of our tradition.

    As for Thubten Chodron and H.H. Penor Rinpoche, they belong to different traditions. His decision not to recognize any of the existing bhikshuni traditions has nothing at all to do or say about their recognition by other traditions. That's not the way these things work. He's not saying, "Oh, your ordination isn't right! Bad nun, bad nun!" He's simply saying he hasn't been convinced as yet. As he has said before, he calls 'em like he sees 'em, and he really doesn't care what anybody thinks about his decisions as he's the one making them. As for your dig about "apostolic succession", that's a Christian concept that has nothing at all to do with the recognition of the reincarnation (yes, reincarnation, not rebirth) of bodhisattvas who have returned to cyclic existence once again for the sake of their students. The recognition exists so that students can have confidence that their teacher is the real thing, especially in these dark times when there are so many phonies running around. Have you noticed how many Maitreyas there are?!

    Palzang
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Thank you, bhante. I understand much more clearly now.

    My 'dig' about the Apostolic Succession was not aimed at the bodhisattvas whose presence in the world and heroic compassion bless all beings. It was aimed more at the notion that there has to be an 'unbroken' line of ordination all the way back to the Shakyamuni Buddha. As you say, it is a Christian notion and one which I have noticed is very important to some people. I was surprised to learn that it occurs in the Noble Sangha too.
  • edited January 2006
    Well, there is an unbroken line and it does matter. I know a lot of scholars nit pick and dispute whether or not there is such a lineage, just as some think that there can't possibly be the mind to mind Transmission as spoken of in Zen, but there is, as any Zen student who's studied for a long time with a genuine teacher can affirm. But when that lineage is used to justify not ordaining someone who is suitable, particularly when that is solely because of their gender, then to my mind, it has ceased to be a vehicle of the Dharma. It has become ossified and belongs in a museum. It's no longer a way that leads to awakening. Sexism has nothing to do with the Dharma, except that we become aware of it in ourselves and others and do not allow it to masquerade as Buddhism.

    This is not a criticism of Penor Rinpoche, or indeed any particular teacher. Some teachers have conditions for their ordinations that others do not and that's natural and appropriate. In the Zen tradition in Japan for example, some teachers will ordain students at a very young age, as children really. Here in the West, usually at least one awakening, Kensho or whatever you wish to call it, is a minimum requirement for ordination and children are not ordained. As another example, in one Soto teacher's lineage, as it exists in the West, celibacy for those who are ordained is the rule, but not a single Japanese tradition, Zen, Shingon, or any other has vows of celibacy any more. And in that same teacher's lineage (a female Roshi if that's relevant) and other lineages, the Kensho of a layman would never be confirmed. In others, it would. To some extent we can and should take these differences into account when we consider ordination and choose accordingly.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Sorry, Simon, for the misunderstanding. Obviously the whole tulku thing is one of my "buttons". But I agree with Ven. Genryu. I don't claim to understand H.H. Penor Rinpoche's reasoning. I think when he feels the time is right, he'll take some action. I really don't go around second guessing Living Buddhas!

    Just for clarification, you do see children running around in robes at Namdroling Monastery, our mother monastery in India, and other Tibetan monasteries as well, but they don't carry adult ordination vows. Their vows are temporary while in school, and they can choose to continue them or not when they leave school.

    As for the vows of celibacy, I was heartened to learn that Shasta Abbey and their affiliates have reinstituted this vow for Zen. I don't mean to imply that that's the only way to go, but I think it's good to have a choice, and now there is for Zen students.

    Palzang
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Palzang wrote:
    ..................... Obviously the whole tulku thing is one of my "buttons". .........................

    One of mine, too, Palzang. Perhaps it's because we have met some: it does make a difference. Just reading about them can hardly do justice to the direct experience.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Good point, Simon. It has been my experience that most of the people who are anti-tulku either haven't ever known one or couldn't get themselves out of the way enough to benefit from them, so instead they externalize the tulku and blame them for their own inadequacies, as is our wont as ignorant humans. Hard habit to break!

    Palzang
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited January 2006
    Made all the harder if it is one we are reluctant, for whatever evident or hidden reason, to release.....?
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited January 2006
    What's a tulku?
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited January 2006
    A 'Tulku' is a child or person who has been recognised as a re- born Lama or Teacher... from my scant understanding....
    The Dalai Lama was a Tulku when he was found....

    This is from where I got the answer...
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited January 2006
    Thank you, Fede.
  • edited February 2006
    I see that you are an Arkansan so I figured I would point you towards Wat Buddhasamakeedham in Fort Smith, Arkansas. It's a Buddhist temple/monastery in the Thai/Laosian Theravadian tradition.

    Best wishes.

    -Eric
  • edited February 2006
    thanks eric for the info. i'm actually going to visit there tomorrow. im very excited about it. i'll post back about how the trip went. thanks again!
  • edited February 2006
    has anyone been to india and stayed at a monastery? for like a month.
    iv looked into it briefly.. even the plane fare.
    its been a passion of mine..
    just wunderin?
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2006
    Yes, Coleen, though it wasn't for a month. I visited India and Nepal in 1996 for 5 weeks along with my teacher and a group of fellow sangha members. We stayed at out mother monastery, Namdroling, located in Karnataka State, South India, for two weeks. They have a very nice guest house and welcome serious students to stay. It's pretty cheap, though I don't know exactly what it costs. It's also fairly easy to get to from Bangalore. They have a beautiful new temple that is huge, seats about 1500 monks! They were just starting to build it when we were there. If you'd like more info, message me or go to www. palyul.org.

    Palzang
  • edited February 2006
    Colleen, there's a very good monastery a lot closer to you than India. In fact right in Toronto.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited March 2006
    Also one in Nova Scotia (Gampo Abbey), and you're right, you don't have to go to Asia anymore.

    Palzang
  • edited March 2006
    Ah yes, Gampo Abbey. Thank you for reminding me Palzang.
  • edited March 2006
    THANX
    for your directions.. im sure if i had dug deeper i would have
    found some more closer ones..
    guess i like to do things the hard way..
    just kidding..
    maybe a plan to visit someone more local..i had alil chat with one
    of the members here.. she made me open my eyes to a few things.

    and may i take this time to again say i love to read what each one
    has wrote..
    well off to read read read.. im really lovin our study book
    cya's
Sign In or Register to comment.