1 Memorandum on Titles Preface The following document was written during summer 2010 by Bikkhu VajraSimha, socially known as Richard Kollmar. After reading it, I saw fit to officially include this memorandum in the Mahājrya priesthood documentation. It is essential to understand the origins of the terminology we use in our clergy to indicate one’s level of accomplishment in the clergy, and differentiation of path. I have also taken the liberty to comment the text to explain why I chose to use some of VajraSimha’s recommendations. In order to benefit from expedient means, we are to use a hierarchy nomenclature that will facilitate the transmission of the Dharma, more than one that respects historical values, unless the respect of historical values is what facilitates the transmission of the Dharma. While any of our advanced students, agile with ego recognition, would not care about titles and hierarchical structures, they are nonetheless essential to preserve the future of our tradition from charlatanism and self-infatuation. Throughout the text, I’ve added a few asterisks (*) to indicate specific points that I address in my comment at the end of the text. - MahaVajra
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Memorandum on Titles
Preface
The following document was written during summer 2010 by Bikkhu VajraSimha,
socially known as Richard Kollmar. After reading it, I saw fit to officially include this
memorandum in the Mahājrya priesthood documentation. It is essential to understand
the origins of the terminology we use in our clergy to indicate one’s level of
accomplishment in the clergy, and differentiation of path. I have also taken the liberty
to comment the text to explain why I chose to use some of VajraSimha’s
recommendations. In order to benefit from expedient means, we are to use a
hierarchy nomenclature that will facilitate the transmission of the Dharma, more than
one that respects historical values, unless the respect of historical values is what
facilitates the transmission of the Dharma. While any of our advanced students, agile
with ego recognition, would not care about titles and hierarchical structures, they are
nonetheless essential to preserve the future of our tradition from charlatanism and
self-infatuation. Throughout the text, I’ve added a few asterisks (*) to indicate specific
points that I address in my comment at the end of the text.
- MahaVajra
www.Mahajrya.org 2
Memorandum on Titles, Nomenclature, and Hierarchical
Distinctions among Students and Teachers of Buddhism
in the Mahājrya Lineage
PRÉCIS
After summarizing the historical development of Buddhist monasticism, and
comparing it to the development of non-monastic forms of investiture, I make three
related arguments. (1) As the early Sangha was made up of men and women whose
way of life distinguished them from householders in matters of dress, sexual activity
and means of livelihood, it is unnecessary and misleading to apply the terminology of
monasticism to the ordained persons of the Mahājrya lineage, who are householders.
(2) The manner of ordination in Mahājrya Buddhism is closer to that of tantric
initiation in the East, and Christian ordination in the West, than it is to the “leaving
home” and “reception” initiations of early monastic Buddhism. (3) The Indian
terminology of training, instructorship and esoteric spirituality in general, provides
one viable basis for constructing a nomenclature of hierarchy in teaching and a variety
of terms for different kinds of practitioners. A system parallel to Christian Holy Orders
and ecclesiastical titles is another viable option. I offer a list of English and Sanskrit
words for possible adoption.
1
The Buddha and his immediate followers chose to separate themselves from the
social and economic practices of villagers and townspeople. To that end they adopted
a way of life that was essentially homeless. For most of the year the bhikkhus would
wander about, alone or in groups, stopping only during the months of the annual
rains, when travel was extremely difficult. A (P.) bhikkhu and bhikkhuni (S., bhikśu or
bhikśuni) is, literally, one who is sustained by alms. As a means of reinforcing their
resolve to remain apart from society, bhikkus and bhikkhunis wore robes that were a
patchwork of rags died to a reddish-brown or yellow color, easily distinguishable
from the typically white garments of householders. They limited the number of their
possessions to what could be carried inside the alms bowl, and lived according to a
rule that severely restricted their interactions with those upon whom they depended
for food. Even today, Buddhist monks trained in the forest traditions of Southeast Asia
go door to door for food once a day, use no money, and make their residence under
trees, in caves, and in crudely built huts. In this they resemble the sadhus of India.
Those disciples of the Buddha who remain householders are called upasakas (m.) and
upasikas (f.). They were and are expected to observe the five precepts and support the
monks.
The process of monastic initiation has two stages. After proper vetting, the candidate
presents herself to any fully-ordained monk and is shaven, invested with the
patchwork robe, and given ten precepts to keep. In a ceremony of pabbajjā s/he “goes
www.Mahajrya.org 3
forth” from the householder’s life, and thereafter may not engage in remunerative
work or keep money. The candidate is now known as a samanera (novice ascetic). A
period of training and instruction follows that can last from a few days to a year or
more, after which the samanera is inducted into the Sangha as a full member in a rite
known as Upasāmpadā (“Reception”). Even in non-Buddhist countries, a minimum of
five fully ordained monks is required in order for this ceremony to be valid. The newly
accepted samanera or bhikkhu has two primary masters, namely his preceptor
(uppājhāya) and his instructor or guide in religious history, doctrine, etc. (P. acariya, S. ācārya).
In the centuries following the Buddha’s death, stable monastic communities appeared.
The earliest monasteries were associated with the sites of reliquary mounds (S. stupa or caitya) where the Buddha’s remains were interred. With the passage of time, the
permanent monastic community became the norm, and the number of homeless
bhikkhus gradually declined, although the practice of going forth into homelessness
remains the ideal, and wandering has never entirely died out as a practice. However,
the homeless life could not survive the transition to China, Korea and Japan. East
Asian cultural norms were not favorable to either idleness or begging. Therefore
Buddhist monastic communities had to choose between two options if they were to
find acceptance in societies strongly influenced by Confucian ethical standards. The
first was to seek out the patronage of wealthy and powerful persons. The second was
to become as self-sufficient as possible (*1). Some Buddhist communities made a
noteworthy effort to support themselves by means of their own labor. Monastic rules
and regulations, called vinaya, were modified in acknowledgement of the necessary
changes in monastic conduct.
Buddhism’s geographical expansion was matched by a parallel elaboration of
doctrine, the proliferation of scholastic movements, and a gradual transformation of the bhikkhu’s primary role from ascetical to priestly. Whereas the early followers
of the Buddha devoted the greater part of their waking hours to reviewing the
Buddha-Dharma and practicing meditation in the quiet of the forest, latter day monks
spend much of their time and energy in ministering to householders, mainly through
the performance of elaborate liturgies and rites of passage, as well as counseling,
healing and even such activities as divination, magic and exorcism. In addition, many
monks hold academic posts.
In addition to the cultural factors that modified Buddhist monasticism in East Asia,
politics played an important part in changing the overall character of the Sangha. Not
only did the government act on numerous occasions to exercise control over monastic
communities and to regulate the number and kind of induction ceremonies, a
successful campaign was waged to make the larger monasteries virtual extensions of
the government bureaucracy. In this way the role of the educated monk came increasingly to resemble that of his secular counterpart, the mandarin scholar.
In short, it is crucial that we be aware of the de facto transformation of the bhikkhu
from ascetic to cleric.
www.Mahajrya.org 4
We should not be surprised, then, to find that during the two thousand five hundred
years of Buddhism’s evolution there have been many reform movements and many
accusations of heterodoxy. Given the secularization of the monasteries and the clerical
status of monks, it was nearly inevitable that sooner or later members of the clergy
would think it appropriate to marry. The earliest instances of Buddhist clergy openly
taking wives occurred in Japan, furtively and somewhat shamefully at first. By the
Tokugawa period, however, married clergy were crucial to a system wherein village
temples passed in succession from father to son. In Tibet, lineages of householder
teachers (lamas), many of them familial, are common and well accepted.
2
The growing importance of householders in the transmission of Buddhism is
acknowledged in such scriptures as the Srimala-simhanada Sutra and the Vimalakirti-nirdesa. That trend, which was accompanied by a corresponding independence and
rising aspirations among the Buddhist laity, accelerated during the epoch that
commenced roughly a thousand years after the Buddha’s demise. That same period of
Indian religious history was marked by rise of both devotionalism (bhakti) and
esoteric practices rooted in Vedic ceremonial (tantra). Early Buddhism, which had
been relatively egalitarian and democratic in its institutional structure, was replaced
by forms that reflected the changes in social and political life toward feudal and
monarchical hierarchies. The structure of esoteric Buddhist mandalas illustrates the
imperial metaphor, as do many tantric communities in their guru-chela relations. In
India and Central Asia, spiritual lineages of Buddhists sprung up that stood outside of
both the monastic tradition and caste society, with comparable developments among
Hindu ascetics such as the Nath yogins.
To further clarify the differences between monastic and household Buddhist groups, it
is helpful to consider a distinction that became prominent in the Buddha’s day, that
between brahmana and śramana. Brahmanas were the members of a hereditary
priesthood who recited the Vedas and officiated at rites of passage and sacrifices. In
contrast, śramanas were men and women of any class or caste who left home for the
purpose of devoting themselves to the acquisition of knowledge and wisdom. Among
this growing number of outcastes, the social distinctions and taboos deemed normal
for Aryan society were not observed. Certain of the śramana groups, such as the
followers of the Buddha and of the sage Mahavir (the Jains), adopted specific ascetical
rules. Others did not, but simply wandered about while living on alms. The status of
the śramana is a social role that greatly facilitates the practice of the Way.
Esoteric-outcaste Buddhist and Hindu yogins combine the rôles of brahmana and śramana. In contrast to male and female ascetics, tantric sādhakas can marry or
not, as they wish. Whereas the monk undertakes to go forth from the housholder’s life
in dependence upon a preceptor (S. uppādhyāya), the tantric sādhaka’s work begins
with the personal transmission of the mantra (diksha) by the guru, and is confirmed
www.Mahajrya.org 5
and empowered by means of consecration (abhishekha). The function of the monastic
preceptor is to induct monks into the monastic community and to guide them with
respect to their way of life. The tantric guru inducts the initiates into the family (S.
kula) of esoteric practitioners, and through subsequent initiations and
empowerments, intensifies the sādhaka’s inner transformation, regardless of the
whether the trainee is a bhikkhu or a householder. Thus, the householder-sādhaka
becomes, in time, the officiant (priest) of his own rites. In matters of practice, a given
person may be both a monk and a tantric sādhaka. One’s guru may be both a monastic
preceptor and an initiating master. On account of these complexities it is important to
distinguish clearly between two sets of concepts, which function independently,
namely, (1) the monk’s lifestyle vs. the householder’s and (2) monastic Going Forth vs.
tantric-priestly ordination/empowerment.
3
The salient fact about disciples in the Mahājrya lineage is that we are householders
and not monks. There is no good reason to pretend otherwise. We do not take any
version of pabbajjā (going forth), but all practice the same ten precepts regardless of
occupation or status. There can be no doubt that if you trace the lineage far enough
back through the centuries, at some point you will meet with an ancestor who was a
bhikkhu or a bhikkhuni. Indeed, the preservation of a sense of continuity with ancient
practice can inspire us. And while the occasional wearing of robes may serve to
remind us of our connection to that noble tradition, we have no need of monastic garb
for everyday life.
A note on sustained, intensive practice: it would greatly benefit the Mahājrya
community were every committed trainee given the opportunity to perform intensive
practice, over a period of months at a minimum, at least once in her life. Let us hope
that in future a retreat facility of some kind can be acquired for that purpose. In the
unlikely event that a monastic movement arises, provisions can easily be made for it
(*2).
The Mahajrya lineage is unique among Buddhist groups in several ways. Its
founder, Mahā-ācārya Mahavajra, is not merely an enlightened exemplar of the
Buddha-Dharma and an accomplished tantric adept, but a master of multiple spiritual
traditions. His openness to on-Buddhist teachings is well known, and he illustrates his
teachings with methods and wisdom drawn from wide range of texts.
Moreover, the Ven. Mahāvajra’s spiritual ancestry is in part derived from the Tendai,
the most diverse and inclusive of all Buddhist schools. Esoteric, PureLand, Zen and
numerous other practices have their place within the broad embrace of Tendai.
Although in recent years the Mahā-acārya’s teaching has focused upon esoteric
practices and the cultivation of paranormal powers, there is no doubt that he has
much else to teach as well. Moreover, MV is also a Christian priest in a lineage that
www.Mahajrya.org 6
holds a valid apostolic succession. As MV draws to himself an increasing number of
disciples with backgrounds in diverse religious and spiritual paths, it is natural that
the interests and dispositions of some students will incline them to non-tantric
disciplines and non-Buddhist sources of inspiration. Fortunately for us, there is no
teacher better equipped than MV to guide and minister to a multi-religious group. The
Great Field itself embraces and sanctifies all forms of spiritual aspiration and their
manifestations without exception. We live in an epoch that closely resembles the late
Roman Empire not only in its political structure but in the great diversity of religious
and spiritual phenomena that are to be encountered in the public space. Knowledge of
the esoteric and mystical depths of several religions can make it easier for trainee
priests to see beyond the divisive rhetoric and posturing of religious fundamentalists,
and to minister to people of all faiths with compassion and understanding (*3).
It is to be expected, therefore, that the scope of practice within the Mahājrya lineage will continue to widen with the passage of time. As diversity increases we
might also consider making use of the titles and ranks of Western—and, in particular,
Christian—religious hierarchies. The advantages of doing so are obvious, and the risk
of distortion is slight. There is plenty of room for tinkering and experimentation
within the framework of, for instance, Minor and Major Sacred Orders: acolyte,
exorcist, doorkeeper, reader; deacon, (archdeacon), priest, bishop and archbishop.
Ecclesiastical titles might also be considered, such as Rector, Curate, and Canon.
I have appended a list of Sanskrit terms that may be useful in re-thinking the way we
map the progress of trainees through the various paths and levels of Mahājrya
practice. Because not everyone will take the same route to realization, we can take
advantage of the various distinctions that permit us to acknowledge the attainments
of people with different temperaments and interests.
A LIST OF POSSIBLE TITLES
Not Necessarily in Order of Rank
Upasaka (m.), upasika (f.), householders who have received the minimum of five
precepts from their master and entered upon the path of self-training taught by the
Buddha.
Sādhaka, one who has made a commitment to undertake a specific course of spiritual
discipline; an initiate.
Yogacārin, one who practices yoga (integration) under the guidance of a master.
Mantrin, one whose spiritual practice centers upon mantras.
Vajrin, one whose practice incorporates the vajra or exemplifies its qualities; a
seasoned practitioner.
www.Mahajrya.org 7
Vidyadhāra, one who has acquired one or more of the higher kinds of knowledge,
spiritual or paranormal; also, a holder of the lineage.
Parivrājaka, one who practices wandering, or who has overcome attachment to place.
Anāgārika, literally, one who is homeless; a householder who, wishing to live under a
more demanding rule of life, takes eight precepts and lives alone or as an attendant in
a monastery; a state midway between those of householder and monk.
Siddha, one who has acquired one or more of the paranormal powers or siddhis.
[Bhauddh]ādhyāpaka, a teacher or professor of Buddha-dharma; variants:
Bhāvanādhyapaka, teacher of meditation, etc.
Ācārya, master adept and instructor of meditation, especially esoteric methods of
psychospiritual development; capable of giving empowerments and initiations for the
practices of his lineage with the permission and supervision of his master.
Mahā-ācārya, senior teacher of a lineage.
VajraSimha
Summer 2010
(*) COMMENTS AND ANSWER FROM MAHAVAJRA
In the far past, where little or no social structure were in place, a hierarchy was
required to help people function in a religious order. It was a necessity so that
religious people could adopt ways of functioning in their respective society. As the
religious hierarchy was adapted to a specific cultural condition, each attempts to
transmit the religious structure to a different cultural situation required adaptation,
which in turn transformed the role and function of each title in that hierarchy. This is
due to the process of expedient means, to find efficacious ways to keep transmitting
the Dharma. Any religion that did not adapt to a new culture simply did not transmit
itself, or was quickly eliminated from that culture. For the sake of keeping the
transmission of the Dharma, it is required to modulate our ways so that it will
correspond to a new cultural and social situation.
Nowadays, most of our governments are not religious, and a set of economic
structures are in place to keep the system running. It is not required anymore to use
religious hierarchy to define social function. In fact, it seems that in an industrialized
society, either in a capitalist or socialist system, having a religious social function
would even hinder the emancipation of the clergy member, further preventing the
transmission of the Dharma. I would even add that in most classes of our society, the
level of study and the amount of accumulated wealth is much more considered than
www.Mahajrya.org 8
any level of spiritual accomplishment. While we do not endorse these materialist
principles, we neither wish to force the exposure of our religious title, especially if it
would hinder the credibility of our member.
We do not promote shameful stealth, nor exposed propaganda. We are to find ways to
transmit the Dharma in ways that it will be accepted, even if it means, for a while, to
neglect to mention to our social colleagues, that we are a part of a religious order. We
vowed not to lie, nonetheless we also vowed to find expedient means to keep
transmitting the Dharma. I can recall a personal experience where if I had mentioned
anything of a spiritual nature, it would have terminated my participation in a business
situation. I used the business situation to teach personal growth to a businessman in
training, pretending to speak only of philosophy, paying attention to the words that I
used. After three years of this stealthy use of expedient means, this business partner
became an adept of spiritual teachings, to the point of experiencing enlightenment.
Thus, in the Mahājrya , the clergy titles have nothing to do with the social function of a
member, and relates only to the religious or spiritual function. Moreso, in times when
a religious person would take a way of life along with a title, the title itself had much
more meaning. In our modern society, it is close to impossible to live by alms, and
transmit the Dharma efficiently. Therefore, the use of the title Bikkhu/ni does not
relate anymore to the function of living from alms and begging, as it would be unwise
to adopt a way of life that prevents the transmission of the Dharma. We will follow
with the comments.
*1 In the Mahājrya tradition, we promote self-sufficiency. In our cultural situation, a
minimum of income is required to stay socially functioning. If we encourage our clergy
members to abstain from any other income than their students, the result will be a
dependency of the clergy on the students, which in turn will motivate clergy members
to give teachings in hope to earn income, rather than put the Dharma in priority.
I’ve seen myself, where classes were organized in function of financial gain rather
than efficient transmission of the Dharma. Clergy members would give less attention
to those in need, and give more attention to those with more financial means. Clergy
members would teach less about the ego to the wealthy, so not to offend them, hoping
them to assist and pay the next class or seminar, thus hindering the spiritual progress
of the wealthy person. Wealth is a blessing in our society, but it is not to be a pretext
to modulate the teaching and allow the deterioration of the Dharma. There are
enlightened people amongst our wealthy members, because I never feared to offend
them when a teaching about the ego was in the best of their spiritual interest.
In our tradition, it is highly recommended to earn income from another source than
spiritual teachings unless the student base of a teacher is very sufficient to provide for
all basic needs. In any case where a clergy member’s income would not be sufficient to
maintain a comfortable lifestyle, the clergy member is highly encouraged to go get a
job considered to be normal, rather than pressure the students in the participation,
www.Mahajrya.org 9
and payment, of classes and seminar that are not primarily engaged for the purpose of
the progression of the students. There are many ways to bring the Dharma, if only
through the silent radiance of consciousness in society.
*2 I am a defender of the absence of permanent infrastructures for our movement.
The Mahājrya should remain free of permanent buildings unless our cultural situation
changes. For now, where most people have a living room big enough to handle less
than 10 people, it would be a waste of resource to acquire a teaching place if there are
less than 10 students in a group. If a group has more than 10 students, and no place
can be offered out of charity for the sporadic meetings, then a place can be rented only
for the time of the events. In this case, a room is available for each use, paid for each
use, and there is still no need to manage a big infrastructure that would remain empty
most of the time. For this reason, there will probably be no available permanent
infrastructure in the Mahājrya organization. Thus, it would be unlikely that in our
tradition, a place would become available for the length of time required to perform
the prolonged practices suggested in the memorandum. This would be possible only if
a member who operates commerce would grant us the use of part of his
infrastructures for prolonged retreats.
I understand VajraSimha’s intentions, and share his viewpoint on the matter. Of all
those who spiritually evolved quickly, wisely and powerfully, they are those who did
sacrifices over a long period of time, enough to break their habits and reveal their
hidden animal nature. To compensate for the lack of infrastructure to this end, we
have developed practices that can be done at home, under no supervision, where the
disciple is only driven by the pure goal of breaking the power of the ego over the Self.
Although it is less motivating form the disciple, once the prolonged practice
accomplished, the disciple has even more willpower, since no one was there to
motivate them in times of trial. We have techniques of fasting, continuous prayer,
abstinence from sleep sustained by mantra for 3 days, and many other sort of
demanding practice, that will break the ego at some point. These practices are to be
instructed only by priests who have accomplished them with success.
*3 Although the Mahājrya is to remain multidisciplinary, there is a core set of practice
and wisdom that must not be altered. We do encourage everyone to explore at least
one tradition different than ours, Buddhist or other, to broaden the perception of
spirituality as a whole. However, in the Mahājrya tradition, the core wisdom will
remain intact, for it has delivered results beyond the expectations of even the most
spiritually experienced people. In the far future, another who has achieved
Buddhahood will slightly adapt the core wisdom and practices of Mahājrya to the new
cultural situation of his own time.
The Buddha Shakyamuni explained that enlightenment is the only possible result of
evolution, and Buddhahood will be granted to all, as they invest the required effort in
the process. While in most other traditions they proclaim that enlightenment is
unachievable and no other Buddha will come except in a dreamlike far future, we
remain firm with the teachings of the Buddha Shakyamuni. In our tradition, we do not
hesitate to mention that some people enlightened, more often than the common belief,
www.Mahajrya.org 10
and although rare, some do achieve Buddhahood. This is one of the advantages of
observing spirituality from different angles. We can trust the Christ Jesus when he
said other will come and do greater things than him. We can as well trust the Krishna
Narayana who proclaimed all could become an avatar of Vishnu. Hence, may each
member of our tradition never be so arrogant to pretend that we are the only ones to
hold the truth, and still, have faith in our practice and wisdom, enough to believe in
themselves to potentially achieving Buddhahood.
THE NEWLY ADOPTED HIERARCHICAL NOMENCLATURE
The following list is a series of titles that apply to whoever participates in the
Mahājrya tradition. They are appointed by celebration or ordination, in their
progressive order. More information will be found in the Clergy guide.
Upasaka / Upasika: A Lay person, householder or not, who engaged in personal study
of spirituality. In English, we will name them student, or one who wishes to remain
autonomous on his path, and inquires the teachers in times of need. They receive
support mostly at the intellectual level. The clergy will assist them in the
understanding of the teachings.
Sādhaka: A person, householder or not, who officially engages in a serious spiritual
process under the supervision of a teacher, in relationship with a spiritual master. In
English, we will name them disciple, for they also engage in a relationship with a
teacher and/or a master. They receive intellectual and spiritual support. The clergy
will assist them in integrating the spiritual principles, and guide them in a profound
personal transformation.
Ādhyāpaka: Simply put, a teacher. We consider them also to be priests, for not only do
they organize classes and seminars, and manage the transmission of the Dharma, they
also celebrate rituals that concern social situations, such as birth, marriage and
funerals. The teacher-priest, is not yet acquainted with the principles of transmission
of consciousness through initiation, and thus are not to perform rituals of the spiritual
office, such as confirmation of a disciple to a master, ordination of a priest, and so
forth. They may, however, do the welcoming ritual, also named baptism by our
Christian enthusiasts, which consists in the explanation and taking of the five precepts
by the students (Upasaka).
At this point, I had to engage in a great period of pondering, after reading
VajraSimha’s memorandum. Before I move on in the establishment of a hierarchical
nomenclature with the title Acharya, there is a need for another important step. An
Acharya, from my experience and in the viewpoint of most Buddhists, is one of great
wisdom, of a high level of accomplishment, only worth being held by those who are
spiritual masters. An Acharya is one who can face any challenge, who does not require
a master to teach them anymore, who will in time succeed in resolving any personal
www.Mahajrya.org 11
issue they face. One does not go directly from teacher to spiritual master. There is a
need for another very important step in the clergy, where one is fully capable of
addressing any matter of spiritual nature, and lives an exemplary life of virtue, while
they are not yet deemed be considered to be spiritual masters. This next step is, and
will remain, the most important one in anyone’s experience of the Mahājrya .
While I can only agree with VajraSimha that the term Bikkhu/ni does not correspond
to our social function at this level, it is a term used by most Buddhist traditions.
Regardless of its meaning, this title would well serve well in indicating efficiently the
level of accomplishment of the clergy member, in relation to other Buddhist
traditions.
I’ve met monks and priests of various traditions, be them Buddhist, Christian or
Hindu. Amongst the Buddhist ones, while most are examples of the application of the
Dharma, some use the title they were given as a prestigious means to establish their
authority over their Buddhist community. They do follow the precepts, they do adhere
to the rules, but their teachings are filled with rigidity that goes directly against the
essential wisdom of expedient means. They often put the ritualistic and hierarchical
aspect before the wellbeing of their students. Although rare, these are monks and
priests who use the title of Bikkhu only so they could benefit from a certain level of
security brought by their religious institution. In this sense, their apparent asceticism
is a masquerade while they use their religious order in the form of a welfare program.
To remain in their religious order, the embodiment of virtue is also essential, and for
this reason, some of them early learn to fake it very well. We are far from the original
errant beggars of the time of the Buddha Shakyamuni. We can recognize the true
adept of the Dharma when one stays close to the people, expresses compassion, and
does not mind facing a bit of disquietude only for a student to find more happiness.
For this reason, if some use the title Bikkhu/ni to pretend in asceticism and reject the
fundamental nature of the Dharma, may we please be so arrogant to use the same title
to openly support the true nature of the Dharma, and not lie about our absence of
asceticism. If in our society, we can’t be true ascetics and efficiently transmit the
Dharma, may we be ascetic in our hearts and minds, living how we must, yet never
believe that anything is acquired. Hence, I have made a decision about the next title.
Bikkhu/ni or Dikshaka: In the past, we have been using the title Bikkhu/ni, out of habit
and ignorance of a better word. I do not recommend a drastic change in this usage, but
I do recommend a progressive adaptation that will allow us to use both antique and
new title. As stated earlier by VajraSimha, the Sanskrit word Bikkhu/ni refers to the
concept of a lifestyle supported by alms and begging. We have demonstrated that this
lifestyle does not promote the transmission of the Dharma in our cultural situation.
Rather we will use this title to indicate the state of non-attachment of the clergy
member, who adopts a socially normal lifestyle simply because it is more efficient to
transmit the Dharma in this fashion. The Bikkhu/ni must show obvious sings of
absence of materialism, and partly lives with donations from his students. In English,
www.Mahajrya.org 12
we will call them priest, because of their religious functions, both in teaching and
operation of rituals. Even more, we will call them accomplished (or full) priest, for they
show the traits philosophically implied by the Sanskrit name Bikkhu/ni, where their
own apparent wealth and material ressources are used primarily for the sake of
transmitting the Dharma. It is mentioned in the Lotus Sutra, introduction chapter, that
some Bodhisattvas are poor and live by alms, and other Bodhisattvas are wealthy and
remain true Bodhisattvas because of their use of wealth as a means to transmit the
Dharma.
As long as this memorandum, along with its comment, is published openly, I do not
mind using the title Bikkhu/ni, especially when addressing members of other Buddhist
traditions. We must always find expedient means to avoid misunderstandings.
However, I decided to use a word that would simply describe the basic nature of the
priest in our tradition. Diksha is an initiation. A Dikshaka is someone who initiates. In
the Mahājrya tradition, a Dikshaka, an initiator, or accomplished priest, is someone
who has sufficient experience, wisdom and spiritual radiance to initiate others. An
initiation is much more than the verbal transmission of intellectual knowledge. An
initiation is the influence of consciousness, when a teaching is passed through
experience and directly by consciousness, in addition to the essential intellectual
wisdom. They may perform religious rituals, such as confirmation, healing, initiation, and when well trained, exorcism.
Ācārya: A spiritual master. I know here, that I use this term in a different way than
VajraSimha would, but it remains, in so many traditions, a title used to indicate the
highest level of spiritual accomplishment. I can only adapt to the most expedient mean
of usage of the term, and reserve it to those who are wise and competent enough to
ordain priests. A certain level of experience in management is required at this point.
The Acharya can face, if given enough time, any challenge of spiritual nature, or daily
life.
Mahā-ācārya: The grand-master of our tradition. Only one is appointed at any given
time. This person would usually keep his position for the most of his life.
Dharma-ācārya: The master of wisdom of our tradition. Only one is appointed at any
given time. This person must absolutely keep his position for the most of his life. It is
the only way to ensure the continuity of the conscious charge of all mantras in the
collective consciousness.
www.Mahajrya.org 13
THE NEWLY ADOPTED ACCOMPLISHMENT NOMENCLATURE
The following list is a series of titles that apply only to those who have accomplished
the specific traits that apply to the title. Some of those titles are incompatible one with
another. These titles are not given through ordination, but via a simple celebration of
the accomplishment.
Yogacārin, one who practices the Mahajrya yoga (integration) under the guidance of a
master.
Mantrin, one whose spiritual practice centers upon mantras.
Vajrin, one whose practice incorporates the vajra or exemplifies its qualities; a
seasoned practitioner of vajrayana.
Vidyadhāra, one who has acquired one or more of the higher kinds of knowledge,
spiritual or paranormal; also, a holder of the lineage.
Parivrājaka, one who practices wandering, or who has overcome attachment to a
place.
Siddha, one who has acquired one or more of the paranormal powers or siddhis.
Mahā, a Great One, who achieved the incarnation of all virtues.