Dear Ven,


Thanks for a sane contribution! Yes, the subject did drift a little,
but this is merely a discussion forum.

If they broke a sanghadisesa as

> accords with the Theravada vinaya, they would still be able to

join

> in an ordination unless undergoing parivassa or manatta, am I
> correct?

As far as i'm aware this is correct.

>
> I don't think a problem regarding ordination arises directly from
> the ten famous points, but it might be from the following:
>
> If a monk were banished, say through the thirteenth Sanghadisesa

or

> the 68/69th paccitiya, would they still be able to fit a quorom

for

> ordaining monks or not? It is said that they should not, but if
> they do, is the ordination invalid?

Again, as far as my understanding goes (and i am very far from being
a Vinaya expert), they could not make up the quorum. But if they sat
in the assembly this would not invalidate the kamma, as long as
there were 5 'regular' bhikkhus.

>
> Apart from this, is there any basis beyond parajika or
> parivasa/manatta to invalidate a bhikkhu's fitting the quorum of

an

> ordination?

Not as far as i know. (there are other things stopping one
participating, such as being a patricide, etc., but these stop one
from being a bhikkhu at all so don't affect the question directly)

> I would like to know what, according to reverend sirs like
> Dhammanando and Sujato, constitutes a valid ordination? What
> nullifies a monk from partaking in ordination? It would be
> interesting to me to know whether, according to the Pali,

ostracism

> invalidates a monk from participation in an ordination (i.e. that

he

> doesn't count towards the five or ten).
>
> Then, if you're still with me, I would like to ask as to whether

the

> Pali records show anything that thus invalidates all of the other
> schools from being monks in the proper Theravada sense of the word.

Nothing in the Vinaya itself. The penalty for banishment of a monk
with serious wrong view has been brought up in this context. Some
may feel that those of 'Mahayana' bent would fall in this category.
Whether they are right or not, the banishment offense only takes
affect when properly carried out with the three announcements. Thus
from a strictly Vinaya point of view, even serious wrong view would
not disqualify them from making up a quorum, as long as the
punishment procedure had not actually been implemented.

>
> I suppose I might add my own two cents, that the Lord Buddha gave
> clear instruction on the desputes raised in the past ten days -

that

> if the monks disputed over the vinaya it was no big deal to Him.
> But if the monks were to dispute over the dhamma, this would be A
> Very Big Deal.

And here the grey areas become challenging. What about monks who
deny kamma and rebirth? Or dispute over the necessity for jhana?
(this involves our understanding of the eightfold path itself) Or
one-lifetime PS? What about the antarabhava? Presumably we would not
want to be schismatic on the question whether space is
unconditioned - or would we? It affects our understanding of
Nibbana, the third noble truth.

I really don't know. But i do believe that a friendly, harmonious
environment is the most conducive for us to understand why we al
believe such different things.

This is more than enough reason for me to bury my

> head in the sand and say "My tradition is the best" and not share
> communion (or even tea) with monks who hold what is in my opinion
> adhamma, whether they be real monks or not. I would humbly
> encourage other traditions to do the same :)

Of course, it is up to each monk to decide whether they want to
participate in Sanghakamma, and no-one in this discussion has
proposed or supported a promiscuous mixing of traditions willy-
nilly.

The Australian Sangha Association takes as a basic principle that we
respect each tradition and are not about trying to force or impose
views or practices on anyone. Despite the dark fantasies that have
been woven around my personal agendas, i was asked (repeatedly) by
the senior Theras and Theris to do the job of secretary, and my
function is to facilitate what they, and the rest of the Sangha,
want. The subject of performing Sanghakamma together has never
arisen.

>
> Peace be with us all,
>

and also with you


Sujato