Talk:Mendicant orders

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Jesuits as mendicants

The Jesuit page says that order is mendicant yet it is not listed on the Mendicant Orders page. Why?

No one has made the change yet. Perhaps they were waiting for you to do it ;-)? Time to be bold?

Atlant 13:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bikkhus only in SEA?

the article says that in buddhism, bikkhus 'survive' only in theravada countries. But the vinaya is afaik not different in mahayana countries (not in a significant way; the shravaka sarvastivadins would surely have been considered bikshus in ancient India, and modern mahayana uses either their vinaya or the even more similar dharmaguptaka vinaya); has same rules and uses the same term (or equivalent in sanskrit instead of pali). There was even some back-and-forth crosspolination for the purposes of revivals of female orders, first some time in the history the female lineage in china was 'strengthened' from sri lanka nuns, and recently the reverse happened, since the female tradition was lost in theravada. So clearly their rules are highly similar and even compatible. Some short info on this http://www.thubtenchodron.org/BuddhistNunsMonasticLife/the_present_status_of_the_bhikshuni_ordination.html The only exception would afaik be the Japanese zen 'priests' since they can marry and dont follow the vinaya, but they dont claim to be bikshus anyways. In short, I think this is incorrect and will remove it. --83.131.150.68 13:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dervishes

Added Dervishes under non-christian mendicant orders. Technically, though, do they count as an 'order?' Peter Deer (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)