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.