Main Page

Goal and Content of WikiVinaya

The goal of WikiVinaya is to create a free online resource of information on the Buddhist monastic discipline – 'Vinaya'. The two Buddhist monastic Orders (Saṅghas) for monks (bhikkhus) and for nuns (bhikkhunīs) each have a Pātimokkha in which the major rules are summarised and it is recited in their communities of four or more every lunar fortnight on the Uposatha day. We aim eventually to cover every rule in the bhikkhu and bhikkhunī Pātimokkhas, each chapter of the Khandhakas and Parivāra (and cognates) individually, and with synoptic examinations of topics that are spread out throughout the texts as well. (Initially the order of the rules will be according to the Pāli recension, I suggest classifying cognate rules from other recensions according to the Pāli order unless anyone has a better idea, if or when we eventually get around to including rules from the other recensions not found in the Pāli we will need a new idea!)

It is hoped that WikiVinaya will be more closely based on the earliest texts than current manuals in English (using direct translations of essential passages), with a more acutely historical analysis of 'what comes from where' (for a start, distinguishing root texts, commentaries and later traditions) and that gradually it will grow into a comprehensive and well organised library. Now we are just beginning and we invite you to help if you can. There are very similar but slightly different recensions of the earliest Vinaya texts in other Indic dialects, including Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Prakrit and Gandhāri, and in Chinese and Tibetan translations, belonging to six or seven of the early schools. It is not yet fully understood in what way these 'schools' were seperate and on what grounds.

These early texts are so similar in content and structure that there can be no reasonable doubt that they stem from a common source. The Vinaya texts must therefore have initially been compiled before the sectarian period. The Canon was probably re-edited several times, most likely between the 2nd and 3rd Councils (according to the Pāli chronology), and more or less closed after that. Initially we will start with the Pāli Vinaya recension because it is the mostly widely practiced and the initial contributors are more familiar with it but we would welcome contributors who can help us learn more about the other language recensions. Most of these recensions also come with traditional commentaries and manuals from later periods than the canonical texts. The Buddhist monastic Order is the oldest monastic Order in the world (the Jaina monastics apparently do not have a communal ideal so they are not reckoned as an 'Order', although the Jaina monastic tradition is contemporary or slightly older).

In its two and a half thousand year history Buddhism has faced many challenges and adapted to them as well as the Buddhist community could. The two most crucial periods of change in Buddhist history are probably the move out of India and the move from traditional Asian cultures to modern Western cultures. Adaptation is natural and necessary but if the essence is not to be compromised clear and thorough understanding is essential. For full understanding a non-judgemental attitude is a prerequisite part of the methodology, or in other words analysis should come before evaluation. The interaction between the meaning and the expression of Buddhist monastic ideals, or between the essential principles and the not-intrinsically-essential means of establishing those principles needs to be understood. It may be that in a different cultural context the same essential principle has to be inculated in different ways. An antihistorical bias, the definining characteristic of fundamentalism, is one of the attitudes not welcome at Wiki Vinaya. The academic method is useful for avoiding a priori assumptions in studying Dhamma & Vinaya, but our purpose is not merely academic. The initial contributors to Wiki Vinaya are all practicing Buddhist monks from the Theravāda forest tradition, so for us Vinaya is a devotional practice, something that helps us maintain mindfulness of our highest aspirations throughout our daily lives. Dhamma & Vinaya is the only valid authority for the monastic community allowed by the Buddha after his death. So our practice of Vinaya is for us a devotional offering to our founding Teacher, the foundation of the communal ideal of the Saṅgha and also for our own personal benefit.

Adding to the WikiVinaya

Since WikiVinaya is a wiki, the writing of all pages of the WikiVinaya is principally a community-effort, and the contents of these pages can be altered. Also this page, and any of the other pages. So feel free to change and add things. However, you need to create an account on WikiVinaya in order to be able to edit pages and make new pages.

More information for newcomers to wikis can be found at the welcomepage for newcomers at wikipedia WikiVinaya is not the same as Wikipedia, but it uses the same software as Wikipedia and mostly the same ethos. The two differences in ethos are:

• 1 We want a resource of information that is fundamentally sympathetic to the Vinaya and the ideal of the monastic Saṅgha as essential parts of Buddhist practice. Points of view that are fundamentally unsympathetic to these basic ideals may not be given a 'fair' representation.

• 2 We may overstep the boundary of providing dry 'facts' sometimes and say something inspiring! Also, 'original research', which is not allowed in Wikipedia because it is an encyclopedia, is allowed here. However, as in Wikipedia it should always be accompanied with reasons and references not as mere personal opinion.

Fundamental Guidelines

• Always be polite, especially when you don't agree.

• Don't assume that all Buddhists share the same 'views about views' as you. The view that 'all fixed views are wrong' is also a fixed view and no evidence in support of it from the earliest scriptures has yet been shown to me.

• Within religious debates sometimes a viewpoint is seen as inherently 'offensive' even if stated politely. Whilst this is a complex issue open to varying approaches, our policy is: we do not support the antihistorical tendency which considers (some) historical facts based on verifiable and falsifiable evidence as inherently 'offensive'. 'Offensive' within WikiVinaya shall mean ad hominem arguments and abusive language. We will question whether the commentaries are always right; and perhaps whether they ever claimed infallibility themselves. We may mention in passing evidence about the history of the development of the Abhidhamma and other books regarded as 'Word of the Buddha' by the Theravādin tradition (perhaps) but as later, sectarian developments by scholars, historians and Buddhists whose faith is focussed on 'early Buddhism' or seeking early Buddhism. If the perception of historical authenticity in the claims that the Abhidhamma is literally 'Word of the Buddha' and the commentaries are infallible is absolutely sacrosanct to you, you might find it less upsetting not to get involved with the community of Wiki Vinaya.

About origins of rules

Nowadays many different rules exist in the different Buddhist monasteries and the various Buddhist monastic lineages. One may hear different interpretations of the same rule, which can be quite confusing for the newcomer to Buddhism, and see some rules being emphasized in some monasteries, and unheard of at other monasteries.

WikiVinaya tries to clear things up by trying to always make a distinction concerning the origin of a certain rule:

1. Is the rule Buddha-Vinaya (contained in the oldest scriptures (the Vinaya Pitaka), and very likely to have been proclaimed by Buddha himself?
2. Is it one of a number of variant interpretations of a passage or rule in the Vinaya Pitaka, which subsequently lead to different practices of the very same rule.
3. Is it a commentarial comment on the Vinaya, written down (many) centuries after the passing away of the Buddha?
4. Or is it a current practice, of which it maybe cannot be said that it has a basis in any rule contained in the old scripture of the Tipitaka and her (ancient) commentaries?