You would have heard by now that the English/Australian monk Ajahan Brahmavamso has been excommunicated by the Ajahn Chah organization and the senior monks of Wat Pah Pong and censured by the Thailand’s monastic hierarchy. I imagine Thai monks and the Thai expatiate community will start distancing themselves from him. The reason for this? No, not because he keeps telling the same jokes in his talks. Rather, it is because he has given ordination to a group of woman. Most better-informed and intelligent Western Buddhists have described this act as ‘courageous’, ‘an historic step’ and ‘laudable’ and I agree completely. However I see the courageousness, the historical significant and the laudability of this ordination somewhat differently. It affirms the Buddhist ideal of gender equality and that is important. It allows women to share with men the benefits (and challenges) of the monastic life, which is only right. But I doubt that simply having properly ordained nuns is thereby going to advance the Dhamma in the West. ‘Proper’, ‘legally valid’ ordination ‘in conformity with Vinaya’ is one thing – genuine renunciation, spiritual commitment, learning, humility, openness, etc, is another thing altogether. None of this is transmitted through a ‘valid’ ordination.
No, to me, Ajahn Brahmavamso's ordination of these woman is significant for other reasons. Without putting a too finer point on it, Theravada Buddhism in its traditional homelands is, for the most part, spiritually moribund, tradition-bound and retrograde. If Western Buddhists continue to conform to Asian traditions, if they keep depending on it, if they consider it the ideal to emulate, if they wait for it to make reforms, they will simply be held back. Sooner or later there has to be a parting of the ways. Ajahn Brahmavamso is certainly not the first Western Buddhist to make a break and whether being now persona non grata with the Thai Sangha will give him the confidence to make other reforms and innovations remains to be seen. But his high profile and the respect he has, may give others the encouragement to begin more robustly evolving a Buddhism relevant to the West.
Nearly ten years ago I wrote of a possible new approach to Buddhism which I called ‘Buddhayana’. Concerning this new Buddhism’s attitude to the ordination of women I said: 'Even when open-minded Theravadins discuss the possibilities of reestablishing the nun’s Sangha the deliberations always seem to revolve around how to reconcile doing this with what the Vinaya says. Such discussions could go on for centuries. Whatever the Buddha said or is supposed to have said, Buddhayanists would believe that it is wrong to exclude woman from the monastic life, that it is inappropriate in the 21st century to require them to always take second place to a male and that it is degrading to treat them as if they had some sort of contagious disease. They would take as their guide on this and several other issues the Kalama Sutta in which the Buddha says: ‘Do not go by tradition…do not go by the sacred text … But when you yourself know that certain things are right, good, skillful and when followed or practiced results in happiness and benefit, then follow them’ (A.I,188). If no other solution to the problem could be found the first women candidates to the monastic Sangha would be ordained by monks and all subsequent ones would receive the double ordination. If these women were not accepted as real nuns by traditional Theravadins they would not lose too much sleep over it. In Buddhayana nuns and lay woman teachers would have respect, recognition and opportunity in accordance with their commitment and achievements, just like anyone else’. The Broken Buddha, p.151.
No, to me, Ajahn Brahmavamso's ordination of these woman is significant for other reasons. Without putting a too finer point on it, Theravada Buddhism in its traditional homelands is, for the most part, spiritually moribund, tradition-bound and retrograde. If Western Buddhists continue to conform to Asian traditions, if they keep depending on it, if they consider it the ideal to emulate, if they wait for it to make reforms, they will simply be held back. Sooner or later there has to be a parting of the ways. Ajahn Brahmavamso is certainly not the first Western Buddhist to make a break and whether being now persona non grata with the Thai Sangha will give him the confidence to make other reforms and innovations remains to be seen. But his high profile and the respect he has, may give others the encouragement to begin more robustly evolving a Buddhism relevant to the West.
Nearly ten years ago I wrote of a possible new approach to Buddhism which I called ‘Buddhayana’. Concerning this new Buddhism’s attitude to the ordination of women I said: 'Even when open-minded Theravadins discuss the possibilities of reestablishing the nun’s Sangha the deliberations always seem to revolve around how to reconcile doing this with what the Vinaya says. Such discussions could go on for centuries. Whatever the Buddha said or is supposed to have said, Buddhayanists would believe that it is wrong to exclude woman from the monastic life, that it is inappropriate in the 21st century to require them to always take second place to a male and that it is degrading to treat them as if they had some sort of contagious disease. They would take as their guide on this and several other issues the Kalama Sutta in which the Buddha says: ‘Do not go by tradition…do not go by the sacred text … But when you yourself know that certain things are right, good, skillful and when followed or practiced results in happiness and benefit, then follow them’ (A.I,188). If no other solution to the problem could be found the first women candidates to the monastic Sangha would be ordained by monks and all subsequent ones would receive the double ordination. If these women were not accepted as real nuns by traditional Theravadins they would not lose too much sleep over it. In Buddhayana nuns and lay woman teachers would have respect, recognition and opportunity in accordance with their commitment and achievements, just like anyone else’. The Broken Buddha, p.151.
The Buddha said that householders are like the peacock in that they are beautifully colored but a clumsy flier while monks and nuns are like the goose, drably colored but able to soar into the sky (Sn.221). Vangisa addressed the Buddha saying: ‘Quickly send forth your melodious voice, Oh Beautiful One. Like geese stretching out their necks, honk gently with your soft sonorous voice’ (Sn.350). Bar-headed geese are often seen in India during the winter, feeding in swamps and fields until mid-March when they fly off to nest in around Manasarovar and other Tibetan lakes. To the Buddha, this migratory behaviour was suggestive of detachment. He said: ‘Mindful people exert themselves. They are not attached to any home. Like geese that fly from their lakes, they leave one abode after another behind.’ (Dhp.91). ‘Geese fly the path to the sun, sages fly by their psychic powers. Having defeated Mara and his army, the wise are led away from the world’ (Dhp.175). Pingiya used the geese’s arrival back in northern India in October as a metaphor for the coming of something wonderful. ‘Just as a bird might leave a small grove to dwell in a forest full of fruit, so do I, having left narrow-minded teachers, come to He of Wide Vision, like a goose arriving at a great lake.’(Sn.1134). 
