The use of "Bhante"

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 4646
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

The use of "Bhante"

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala »

Split from the topic:
The title 'Ajahn' http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=13274" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
MikeNZ66


Ajahn derives from Pāli ācariya meaning "teacher" and in the Thai tradition it is also applied to Nuns or lay teachers. Nuns of the Thai Forest Sangha of more than 10 Rains are addressed as Ajahn.

The Burmese words "Saya" or "Sayādaw" (royal teacher) are also derived from the same Pāl word (ca in Burmese is pronounced as sa). Burmese nuns are addressed as "Sayalay" and female meditation teachers are addressed as "Sayama" while male lay teachers are addressed as "Sayagyi."

Bhante is a vocative so should only be used when addressing a monk directly, and without using the name (unless several bhikkhus are present and its not immediately obvious to whom you are speaking). To say "Bhante Bodhidhamma gave a talk at the Buddhist Society" is incorrect. One should say instead, "Bhikkhu Bodhidhamma gave a talk." In the Thai tradition they put the name first, e.g. "Sumedho bhikkhu gave a talk."
BlogPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
greggorious
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:40 pm

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by greggorious »

Thanks for your replies. There is a Sri Lankan Vihara centre near me which I've been too, I've also practiced Zen, though I don't know if it's right for me. I've voiced these concerns on this forum before, so no need to talk about it now.
"The original heart/mind shines like pure, clear water with the sweetest taste. But if the heart is pure, is our practice over? No, we must not cling even to this purity. We must go beyond all duality, all concepts, all bad, all good, all pure, all impure. We must go beyond self and nonself, beyond birth and death. When we see with the eye of wisdom, we know that the true Buddha is timeless, unborn, unrelated to any body, any history, any image. Buddha is the ground of all being, the realization of the truth of the unmoving mind.” Ajahn Chah
BKh
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:43 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by BKh »

marc108 wrote: that's my understanding as well, Ajahn is a Thai title for a monk who has been ordained for at least 10 years.
It should be pointed out that the 10-year thing is just within the western Ajahn Chah tradition. In Thailand monks are often addressed personally as ajahn on the day they ordain. And to be clear, ajahn is used for all teachers in Thailand, not just in a Buddhist context.
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: To say "Bhante Bodhidhamma gave a talk at the Buddhist Society" is incorrect. One should say instead, "Bhikkhu Bodhidhamma gave a talk."
According to Pali grammar this is true. In modern usage in the US, however, the first example is very common and not seen as incorrect. If your organization refers to monks as "Bhante so and so" it will really confuse people if you try to start changing that. And people won't realize that they should still continue to use the vocative "Bhante" when addressing them personally.
| One sutta per day to your inbox | ReadingFaithfully.org Support for reading the Suttas | Citation lookup helper | Instant sutta name lookup | Instant PED lookup | Instant DPPN lookup |
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by Cittasanto »

I believe ayasama is for directly speaking to and bhante is for speaking about a particular bhikkhu as found in the pali texts anyway, although modern practice is obviously as stated above
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: To say "Bhante Bodhidhamma gave a talk at the Buddhist Society" is incorrect. One should say instead, "Bhikkhu Bodhidhamma gave a talk."
BKh wrote:According to Pali grammar this is true. In modern usage in the US, however, the first example is very common and not seen as incorrect. If your organization refers to monks as "Bhante so and so" it will really confuse people if you try to start changing that. And people won't realize that they should still continue to use the vocative "Bhante" when addressing them personally.
It would seem encumbent on the bhikkhu in question to advise people of the correct usage, so that they themselves don't become known as "Bhante so and so" in the first place. Short of being taught, lay people can't really be expected to know that the aforementioned use of the word "bhante" is incorrect.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
BKh
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:43 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by BKh »

retrofuturist wrote:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: To say "Bhante Bodhidhamma gave a talk at the Buddhist Society" is incorrect. One should say instead, "Bhikkhu Bodhidhamma gave a talk."
It would seem encumbent on the bhikkhu in question to advise people of the correct usage, so that they themselves don't become known as "Bhante so and so" in the first place. Short of being taught, lay people can't really be expected to know that the aforementioned use of the word "bhante" is incorrect.
If we were all speaking in Pali, then what Bhante Pesala says makes perfect sense. But we aren't. We speak in English or other modern languages. It is quite conventional now a days to use Bhante as a title. If it helps, think of it as a new English loan word. Of course it's find to use Bhikkhu as a title, I was just encouraging people to go along with whatever convention has already been established in their community in the same way Ajahn is used in some.

Bhante Gunaratana told me that years ago when he first came to the US people asked what to call him. He wasn't sure what to use (Sri Lanka has many words they use for monks, none of which are mentioned in this thread). He tried "Venerable" to which people asked, "Vulnerable?" So he decided to use Bhante. And somewhere along the line I guess he started using it in front of his name as a title.

[Notice if I had said "Bhikkhu Gunaratana" you might not have known exactly who I was talking about.]
Cittasanto wrote:I believe ayasama is for directly speaking to and bhante is for speaking about a particular bhikkhu as found in the pali texts anyway, although modern practice is obviously as stated above
Don't you mean the opposite? Think of all the Evaṁ Bhante's in the suttas.
| One sutta per day to your inbox | ReadingFaithfully.org Support for reading the Suttas | Citation lookup helper | Instant sutta name lookup | Instant PED lookup | Instant DPPN lookup |
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by danieLion »

I'm trying out Reverend for Bhante, Ajahn, Venerable etc... until justly rebuked/persuaded otherwise.
Kind wishes,
Daniel
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
danieLion wrote:I'm trying out Reverend for Bhante, Ajahn, Venerable etc... until justly rebuked/persuaded otherwise.
See how it goes. "Sir" is another English language alternative to consider when speaking to a monk.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 4646
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala »

If you use terms like "bhante" or "bhikkhu" "then you are speaking Pāli. It is no great surprise that people get it wrong at first, but that's no reason for not explaining the correct usage, and putting it right for future generations. There's no need to obsess about it, but if you can learn something new, why not do it?

I used to call myself "Venerable Pesala" at one time, but when I learnt that the term is used for Christian clergy who are regarded as saints I see that it inappropriate to use that term for just any ordained monk, and especially to adopt it for use about oneself. Some use the term "Reverend," but I think it is better for Buddhists to learn the Pali terms, and to learn the correct usage.

Āyasma is used when speaking in the third person about a bhikkhu, thus:
Evaṃ vutte, āyasmā Mahāmoggallāno āyasmantaṃ Sāriputtaṃ etadavoca —
That having been said, the Venerable Moggallāna the great said to the Venerable Sāriputta: — (no problem using "Venerable" here, since they were both Arahants).
“Ko nu kho, āvuso Sāriputta
What, friend Sāriputta ...

Again, āvuso is a vocative form of address used by a senior bhikkhu when speaking to a junior one. A junior bhikkhu uses "bhante" when addressing a senior bhikkhu. That was stipulated by the Buddha before he passed away in his last words to the Sangha:
Yathā kho pan’Ānanda, etarahi bhikkhū aññamaññaṃ āvusovādena samudācaranti, na kho mamaccayena evaṃ samudācaritabbaṃ. Theratarena, Ānanda, bhikkhunā navakataro bhikkhu nāmena vā gottena vā āvusovādena vā samudācaritabbo. Navakatarena bhikkhunā therataro bhikkhu ‘Bhante’ti vā ‘Āyasmā’ti vā samudācaritabbo.

Just as now, Ānanda, the bhikkhus address one another with the word "āvuso," that should not be done after my passing. An elder may address a junior bhikkhu by name or by clan or with the word "āvuso." A junior bhikkhu should address an elder as "Bhante" or "Āyasma."
Last edited by Bhikkhu Pesala on Wed Jul 25, 2012 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BlogPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by danieLion »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Some use the term "Reverend...."
Thanks Bhikkhu Pesala for your informative response.

Here's my logic (illogic?) behind using "Reverend". I've heard the Buddha said his disciples should teach the Dhamma in the audience's native language. My language is English, but my heritage is Protestant. As such, "Reverend" seems the best non-Pali choice (I value Pali too) as "Sir" is too British and "Venerable" is too Catholic (as with "Father"--and the Evangelical "Pastor" and the Mormon "Bishop" are obviously out, right?)

Why do some Bhikkhu's, like Bhikkhu Bodhi, retain the "Bhikkhu"? For the same reasons you've given?

I presume you'd not like to be called Reverend Pesala? ;)

Best wishes,
Daniel
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by Cittasanto »

Cittasanto wrote:I believe ayasama is for directly speaking to and bhante is for speaking about a particular bhikkhu as found in the pali texts anyway, although modern practice is obviously as stated above
Don't you mean the opposite? Think of all the Evaṁ Bhante's in the suttas.[/quote]
Hi BKh,
yes :), I was thinking of instances such as the "inviting admonition" (Ahaṃ bhante āyasmantaṃ pavāremi) in the Mahavagga but on checking notice bhante there also & the absence of ayasama in the formula for a full Sangha :) LOL at me & Thank-you.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by Cittasanto »

danieLion wrote:I'm trying out Reverend for Bhante, Ajahn, Venerable etc... until justly rebuked/persuaded otherwise.
Kind wishes,
Daniel
I noticed allot of Sri Lankans would say Reverend, not so many Thais but it is a comparative term found in some early translations.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by Kim OHara »

I'm just pointing out the obvious here, I know, but 'reverend' and 'venerable' are English words :tongue: and because of that they carry different baggage even if they notionally mean the same thing as the Pali and Thai words.
In many Western contexts, 'Reverend' would be assumed to mean a Christian minister and would therefore need clarification. And 'venerable' primarily means 'old', not 'worthy of respect'. These are not reasons to completely avoid using the English terms, but enough reason to be careful with them.

:namaste:
Ajahn Kim
(Yes, I'm a teacher ... a school teacher. Don't call me 'bhante' or 'reverend' because I'm not entitled to either word, and if you call me 'venerable' I might just say, "Hey! I'm not that old!' :jedi: )
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by danieLion »

Kim O'Hara wrote:In many Western contexts, 'Reverend' would be assumed to mean a Christian minister and would therefore need clarification.
Hi Kim,
If I call a Buddhist teacher Reverend and I know he/she's not a Christian minister, and he/she knows it too, why would clarification be necessary? The subtext here (and in this topic) seems to be that you need to keep titles Asian, or at least Thai, Burmese, Sinhalese, and Pali.

Kind intents,
Daniel
BKh
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:43 am

Re: The title 'Ajahn'

Post by BKh »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: Āyasma is used when speaking in the second person about a bhikkhu, thus:
Evaṃ vutte, āyasmā Mahāmoggallāno āyasmantaṃ Sāriputtaṃ etadavoca —
That having been said, the Venerable Moggallāna the great said to the Venerable Sāriputta: — (no problem using "Venerable" here, since they were both Arahants).
“Ko nu kho, āvuso Sāriputta
What, friend Sāriputta ...
Don't you mean "third person"? Isn't the second example second person?

Is Bhikkhu ever used as a title along with a name in the canon?

In my experience venerable is a very common term used in the west for bhikkhus and bhikkhunis. It's good because it is both respectful and generic, so lay people don't need to know the exact ordination status of someone. And I'm sure few people have ever heard of it's technical usage regarding Catholic saints. One dictionary I checked says it is a title given to an archdeacon in the Anglican Church. And while it does have the meaning of worthy to be venerated because of age, it can also just mean worthy to be venerated. Words have multiple meanings.

I think part of this discussion has to do with proscriptive vs. descriptive. There is what is in the dictionaries and grammar book and then there is what people use in actual practice. I'm just trying to point out that lots of things are now acceptable in practice and encourage people to go with the flow as long as they are not being disrespectful.

Personally I think that using bhikkhu as a generic title for monks is good. And I think venerable is a good English term as well. But if I'm going to mention the senior monk Bhikkhu So-and-so to someone, I really would like to have a term that involved some level of respect. I guess I could say "The elder monk Bhikkhu So-and-so" or "Bhikkhu So-and-so Mahathera". But really I'd just like to call him Bhante So-and-so. Especially since lots of people use that term.
| One sutta per day to your inbox | ReadingFaithfully.org Support for reading the Suttas | Citation lookup helper | Instant sutta name lookup | Instant PED lookup | Instant DPPN lookup |
Post Reply