I’m translating Therīgāthā into Turkish to practice my Pāli and hopefully serve as a gateway to Dhamma in my country, Turkey.
There are curious passages that would challenge the sensibilities of modern readers - particularly as it concerns “Leaving behind my son and my daughter” as in Thig 5.7.
This made me curious, I’m pretty sure monks need their parents’ permission for ordination, but what are the rules for nuns (parents, husbands, children, etc.?)
If either a monk or a nun has underage children, are there any special clauses for their ordination?
I’m woefully unequipped to delve around Vinaya to find the specific rules. If anyone could help me it would be much much appreciated.
EDIT: Just so I’m clear on this subject, this post has nothing to do with contemporary matter of bhikkhuni ordination.
I’m merely looking for explicit Theravāda Vinaya rules for nuns who might or might not have familial obligations and whether they’re an obstacle on ordination.
Then, understanding this matter, on that occasion the Buddha expressed this heartfelt sentiment:
Atha kho bhagavā etamatthaṁ viditvā tāyaṁ velāyaṁ imaṁ udānaṁ udānesi:
“> When she came he was not glad,
“Āyantiṁ nābhinandati,
when she left he did not grieve.
pakkamantiṁ na socati;
Victorious in battle, freed from chains,
Saṅgā saṅgāmajiṁ muttaṁ,
that’s who I call a brahmin.”
tamahaṁ brūmi brāhmaṇan”ti.
I remember some story where a lady wanted to ordain, parents deny permission, she got married, got permission from husband, husband ok, then she got in pregnant. Then devadatta wanted her out, the case was investigated, then declared that she got pregnant before she became a nun, so no offence.
I remember that the age drops down to 12 if she is married.
Here it is… How I found it… I installed the extensions to tpr and searched for “twelve years” with control + F… Parajika didn’t have it but pacittiya (which has the nuns rules does). You might want to look at pacittiya pali and translation. It is available by pts for free.
ūnadvādasavassā, bhikkhave, gihigatā akkhamā hoti sītassa uṇhassa jighacchāya pipāsāya ḍaṁsamakasavātātapasarīsapasamphassānaṁ duruttānaṁ durāgatānaṁ vacanapathānaṁ.
a married girl less than twelve years old is unable to endure cold and heat; hunger and thirst; contact with horseflies, mosquitoes, wind, the burning sun, and creeping animals and insects; rude and unwelcome speech;
uppannānaṁ sārīrikānaṁ vedanānaṁ dukkhānaṁ tibbānaṁ kharānaṁ kaṭukānaṁ asātānaṁ amanāpānaṁ pāṇaharānaṁ anadhivāsakajātikā hoti.
and she’s unable to bear up with bodily feelings that are painful, severe, sharp, and destructive of life.
dvādasavassāva kho, bhikkhave, gihigatā khamā hoti sītassa uṇhassa jighacchāya pipāsāya ḍaṁsamakasavātātapasarīsapasamphassānaṁ duruttānaṁ durāgatānaṁ vacanapathānaṁ.
but a married girl who is twelve years old is able to endure these things.
Please be careful to not post suttacentral discussion links. If it has a reference, then simply copy it here. I’m getting tired of seeing them on our site.
I remember this too. And as far as I can remember, there are rules to the affect of nuns requiring their husband’s permission? I remember Ven. Dhammapala talking to this effect but I don’t know the Vinaya passage.
Less compendious interpretations that support virtues and samadhi but don’t explicitly oppose gandhabba or subtle vinnana (eg: Anthologies of suttas)
More poetic and inspiring material (eg: Dhammapada and Jātakas)
Moderate Vinaya summaries (eg: Summaries with less dukkata rules and less Parivarapali analysis)
… etc.
Third case would be, material that are
More analytical of vinnana (eg: Abhidhammatthasangaha, Abhidhamma compendiums)
More compendious summaries of path (eg: Visuddhimagga)
Compendious and analytical on Vinaya (eg: Khankhavitarani, Samantapasadika, Vinaya compendiums in parivarapali way)
More analytical of causes (eg: Paticcasamuppada summaries)
… etc.
Bhante, have you heard how other Vinaya teachers justify it?
Why are only 14 years old married females qualified enough for higher ordination while 14 years old married males, unmarried females and unmarried males are not qualified?
Some monks say that it’s because married females are able to bear sufferings of life (heat, cold, deadly pains, verbal attacks) like 20 years old people, even though they are 14 years old. They say it, may be, due to the “qualification for upasampada” given there (and for 20 year old people) by the Lord. It can be assumed if she is currently living with her husband. But as you mentioned, if she is still living with her parents (after the marriage), then what would be the reason for her qualification?
Did you mean about husband’s permission? Then why are 14 years old parent-less unmarried children are not given higher ordination?
Honestly, I would be fine with being Uccheda-bent in this classification (even if that’s a wrong view! But still I probably do lean that way. ). For the most part, I wanted to start with something simple and less contentious - and in a sense, Thig is exactly that, as far as doctrine is concerned. There’s abundant occurrence of general terms, but less so in their specifics - I can translate “samadhi” or “ayatana” or “khanda” with a proper analysis of the word, without getting into the trouble of trying to decipher a more doctrinally charged part of Suttas, let alone the greatly technical Abhidhammas or Visudhimagga.
So I’m confident I can do a proper job of explaining the basics of Thig without a formal education, of course always checking with monastics I trust to clarify more obscure passages or nuances (like now).
However, Thig is greatly challenging for a whole different reason - because it contains phrases and descriptions related to ordinary life. Is it a pot of vegetables sun dried or boiled dry? Perhaps these nuances are moot but still they’re a good challenge to improve my Pāli skills and to have a better grasp of the culture which shaped these verses.
For later projects, I’ve got my eyes on Udana and Itivuttaka, again for similar reasons. More doctrinally charged, obviously, but still brief works with rather straightforward treatment of the topics (even if some of their passages get a bit hairy with some technicalities). Where would you classify those?
But I’m trying to tread carefully not to cause any more confusion with Dhamma, and this foray into Thig’s allowing me a correspondence with monastics which would no doubt prove greatly valuable for later works (hopefully!)
It is 12 years. I’m not sure why you changed it to 14.
In any case… we learned this in class as this way. I’m not sure what the commentaries say (if anything at all). Ven Maggavihari didn’t seem to have an answer and only speculated as I said (if I recall correctly).
I gave the translation and pali. I’m not sure what is to blame.
ūna-dvādasa-vassā
Should be clear as “less-than…12…years (old)”
Sorry bhante it’s my fault that mentally adding sikkhamana 2 years without checking. You are correct and the commentary says 10 years old married girl can be trained as a sikkhamana for 2 years and get the upasampada at 12.
Yes bhante, many monks can only speculate on that point. Some say it should be believed by faith. Some say we have to believe that married underage women possess the “qualification for upasampada” given by the Blessed One.
The Buddha rebuked them … “How can nuns do this? A married girl less than twelve years old is unable to endure cold and heat; hunger and thirst; contact with horseflies, mosquitoes, wind, the burning sun, and creeping animals and insects; rude and unwelcome speech; and she’s unable to bear up with bodily feelings that are painful, severe, sharp, and destructive of life. But a married girl who is twelve years old is able to endure these things. This will affect people’s confidence …” (Brahmali translation)
I just asked to know about the opinions of different Vinaya teachers on this regard, because they don’t seem to be in an agreement.
Interestingly I.B. Honer has translated it as follows.
The enlightened one, the lord, rebuked them, saying:
“How, monks, can nuns ordain a girl married for less than twelve years? Monks, a girl married for less than twelve years is not able to endure cold … bodily feelings … miserable, deadly. It is not, monks, for pleasing those who are not (yet) pleased …
The last quote by IB honer is interesting. As you said, interpretations can be the translator’s mind… I don’t know what he was thinking and I doubt the commentaries explain anything in that way.
Just thinking aloud. Marriage might have different meanings in those days, culture and region. It could very well mean “no longer a virgin” since even today (in Sri Lanka), it is synonymous with “sex” or “sexual experience”. A prostitute is often considered a temporary wife in Myanmar of this century (maybe not today but definitely 20 years ago). And perhaps, this was a way to help her remain in the celibate and a restrained life. If we take extreme Muslim culture as a possible example, even a rape victim might be blamed during those times. She might be difficult to get a long term husband. It could mean many things that our culture finds difficult to imagine.
