A Trojan horse: Thanissaro bhikkhus response to Bhikkhu Analayo

[Dhammanando]

Great to see this article by the Venerable.
Is there a link to the discussion at suttacentral?

It's here...

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/a- ... layo/11354

It's just reached the 150th post.

[Faelig]

Dear all,

One of Ajahn Thanissaro's main concern is the lack of trained senior bhikkhunis in order to train younger ones. He uses this as one of his main argument to conclude that the order of nuns should not be re-instated.

Now, his own lineage goes back to Ajahn Mun. But Ajahn Mun was not trained by an experienced senior bhikkhu, he was on his own mostly, learning by trials and errors and the help of some heavenly beings (see his biography by Ajahn Maha Boowa). Do you know if Ajahn Thanissaro address this apparent paradox somehwere in his writings? or how do you address this paradox?

[AgarikaJ]

Now, his own lineage goes back to Ajahn Mun. But Ajahn Mun was not trained by an experienced senior bhikkhu, he was on his own mostly, learning by trials and errors and the help of some heavenly beings (see his biography by Ajahn Maha Boowa).

While Ajahn Mun was alone and learned much of his meditation techniques by trial and error, formally he had -- of course -- a preceptor and was properly ordained into a lineage. So your reading of his biography is not entirely right.

Now we would need to discuss how much teaching a teacher actually should provide... but Ajahn Thanissaro's argument stands insofar as at least theoretically this teacher would have been available.

p. 4:
At the age of fifteen he ordained as a novice in his village monastery where he developed an enthusiasm for the study of Dhamma, memorizing the texts with exceptional speed. A young novice of affable character, he never caused his teachers or fellows any trouble.
...
When he reached age twenty-two, he felt an urge to ordain as a monk. So, for that purpose, he took leave of his parents. Not wanting to discourage his aspirations and having also kept the hope that their son would ordain again someday, they gave their permission. To this end, they provided him with a complete set of a monk’s basic requisites for his ordination. On June 12, 1893, 2 he received his Bhikkhu ordination at Wat Liap monastery in the provincial town of Ubon Ratchathani.
His upajjhãya was the Venerable Ariyakawi; his kammavãcariya was Phra Khru Sitha; and his anusãsanãcariya was Phra Khru Prajuk Ubonkhun. 3 He was given the monastic name “Bhýridatta”. After his ordination, he took residence at Wat Liap in Ãcariya Sao’s vipassanã meditation center.

[robertk]

http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=59

This is a thread with posts from 12 -15 years ago (some by ven Dhammanando) about the issue.

[Faelig]

[...] formally he had -- of course -- a preceptor and was properly ordained into a lineage.

Yes, but it is not the time when he developed his wilderness practice, his meditation etc, he did not learn the ways of the Thai Forest Tradition with his preceptor.

but Ajahn Thanissaro's argument stands insofar as at least theoretically this teacher would have been available.

There was no teacher to teach him the practice and meditation that he developed and became famous for, right? So I don't see how Aj. Thanissaro's argument still stands for now...

[AgarikaJ]

[...] formally he had -- of course -- a preceptor and was properly ordained into a lineage.

Yes, but it is not the time when he developed his wilderness practice, his meditation etc, he did not learn the ways of the Thai Forest Tradition with his preceptor.

but Ajahn Thanissaro's argument stands insofar as at least theoretically this teacher would have been available.

There was no teacher to teach him the practice and meditation that he developed and became famous for, right? So I don't see how Aj. Thanissaro's argument still stands for now...

I saw my omission too late to add another sentence, to prevent people lto fall into this misunderstanding. But the explanation is right in my quote: "he took residence at Wat Liap in Ãcariya Sao’s vipassanã meditation center."

Meant here is of course Ajahn Sao Kantasīlo, with whom Ajahn Mun spent several years together as Tudong monks. There is a criticism in the teaching ability (or willingness) to teach, but Ajahn Mun could have chosen to wander with any other teacher; he was not bound to this situation in any way.

p.5 ff.:
When Ãcariya Mun first began practicing vipassanã at Ãcariya Sao’s center, he meditated constantly, internally repeating the word “buddho”, the recollection of the Buddha, as he preferred this preparatory Dhamma theme above all others.
...
This was a dream nimitta, an omen confirming his belief that if he persevered in his efforts, he would undoubtedly discover a path for attaining what he sought. From then on, with renewed determination Ãcariya Mun meditated intensively, unrelenting in his efforts to constantly repeat “buddho” as he conducted all his daily affairs. At the same time, he very carefully observed the austere dhutanga practices which he undertook at the time of his ordination, and continued to practice for the rest of his life.
...
At one point during his meditation training at Wat Liap, Ãcariya Mun’s citta ‘converged’ into a state of calm and a vision arose spontaneously." ... "For a full three months, Ãcariya Mun continued to meditate in this way.

p. 16:
In his early years of practice, Ãcariya Mun often wandered dhutanga in the company of Ãcariya Sao, comforted in the knowledge that he had a good, experienced teacher to lend him support. But when he asked his teacher to advise him on specific problems arising in his meditation, Ãcariya Sao invariably replied: “My experiences in meditation are quite different from yours. Your citta is so adventurous, tending always toward extremes. One moment it soars into the sky, only to plunge deep into the earth the next. Then, after diving to the ocean floor, it again soars up to walk meditation high in the sky. Who could possibly keep up with your citta long enough to find a solution? I advise you to investigate these matters for yourself and find your own solutions.” Ãcariya Sao never gave him enough concrete advice to really help him, so Ãcariya Mun was forced to solve his own problems. Sometimes, he nearly died before discovering a way past some of the more intractable problems he faced.
Ãcariya Mun described his teacher as someone with a smooth, serene temperament who inspired deep devotion.
p. 18:
Ãcariya Mun often accompanied Ãcariya Sao on his excursions wandering dhutanga across the provinces of the Northeast region. Due to differences in personality, their meditation experiences varied in some respects; but each very much enjoyed the other’s company. By nature, Ãcariya Sao preferred to say very little. He was a reluctant teacher, especially of the laity. Occasionally obliged to give instruction to lay supporters, he was always very frugal with words.

Also, and I did not know this myself, even though Ajahn Mun did not sit in the formal Pali exams of the Thai government, he seems to have been more or less fluent in Pali. So he was not naive about the Dhamma in a scholastic sense, and of course he was i8n later years closely aligned with Chao Khun Upãli, wo was quite a renowned Buddhist scholar in Thailand.

p. 320:
à CARIYA M UN ’ S PROFICIENCY in chanting the suttas was unrivaled. He chanted suttas alone for many hours every night without fail. He would chant long discourses, like the Dhamma-cakka-pavattana Sutta and the Mahã Samãya Sutta, nearly every night. Occasionally, he translated the meaning of the suttas for our benefit, translations based on his own personal experience. He spoke directly to their essential meaning, often bypassing the strict rules of Pãli grammar normally used to maintain uniformity in translations.
The undeniable clarity of his translations allowed his audience to glimpse the fundamental message of the ancient texts he quoted. Amazingly, he translated Pãli better than the accomplished scholars, though he had never studied Pãli in any formal way. No sooner had he mentioned a Pãli phrase than, without even a pause, he had translated it as well in a quick, fluent style that defied belief.

-------------------------

To not totally derail this thread; even though in this instance, we have a Bikkhu who did maybe not lack in opportunity to have a proper preceptor and teacher, it is undeniable that this situation might have occured many times in Theravada lineages.

There have been several attempts to revive the Dhamma, either by going to Sri Lanka in search of the Tipitaka, or giving it back to there. Centuries of Theravada history are shrouded in complete mystery, with no documentation of a lineage unbroken in its understanding of the Vinaya at all; archaeological findings rather give the impression, that Theravada teachings in the whole of Southeast Asia were never free from Mahayana thoughts, with ordination never being as strictly separated from each other as we suppose it today.

That Bikkhu Thanissaro bases his whole argument on the availability to have an unbroken lineage of pure Theravada preceptors opens to my mind the criticism, that -- by putting up the hurdle of acceptance so high -- he himself creates doubt, if he can assume that such a situation exists for any living monk today.

And, reading through the excellent thread @RobertK posted, he is going over old, well-trodden ground without having varied or evolved his argument on this matter from a discussion already one and a half decades old (which makes it not wrong of course, but to see this is slightly disappointing to me).

[Volo]

There was no teacher to teach him the practice and meditation that he developed and became famous for, right? So I don't see how Aj. Thanissaro's argument still stands for now...

I think the main concern of Ven. Thanissaro is their Vinaya training, when the rules, they don't like are rejected (very serious offenses, like sanghadisesa):

Further, I examine the kind of training he himself is offering to bhikkhunīs by looking at his treatment of the First Council, the council at which the beginnings of the Dhamma and Vinaya as we know it were laid down. In an attempt to question the validity of some of the garudhammas, he asserts in FHNO and Saṅgīti that the monks at this council, as led by Ven. Mahā Kassapa, represented a faction of the Saṅgha whose views and practices were at odds with the Buddha’s.

However, even though it has no basis in the texts, Anālayo’s interpretation of this issue shows what kind of training is being offered to new bhikkhunīs: a training that calls the whole Dhamma and Vinaya into question, and opens the way for bhikkhus and bhikkhunīs to reject any rule in the Vinaya that doesn’t fit in with their untrained ideas of wisdom or compassion.

Ajahn Mun definitely had a Vinaya training.