Available in Russian
Author: Vladislav Tolstykh
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2026-2-184-198
Keywords: comparative law; constitutionalism; human rights; discrimination; Southeast Asia; Buddhism; Theravāda; religious organizations
On 16 June 2025 the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka issued a landmark ruling requiring state authorities to issue identity cards with a special designation to women who have been ordained as nuns (bhikkhunis). Many commentators consider the ruling a turning point in the history of Buddhism, which will result in the restoration of the female order and a reorientation of Buddhist teachings toward gender egalitarianism. The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka used two sets of arguments: the first involves recognizing ordination as bhikkhunis as valid within the religious order; the second involves refusing to apply canon law with reference to the concept of public order. The second set of arguments is not explicitly stated, but it is the most important and has the most transformational potential. In fact, the Court placed the principles of gender non-discrimination enshrined in the Constitution above the canonical provisions regarding the ordination of women. This implies not only that, in the event of a conflict between the two sets of rules, the principles of non-discrimination must take precedence over the canonical provisions, but also that these principles must guide the interpretation of those provisions. The question of restoring the female order is relevant not only for the Theravāda tradition, which is widespread in Southeast Asian countries, but also for Tibetan Buddhism and, consequently, for its Russian branch, represented in Buryatia, Kalmykia, the Altai Republic, and Tyva. The first paragraph of this article examines the history of the Theravāda female order, which ended with its disappearance, attempts to restore it at present, and the controversy over the legitimacy of these attempts. The second paragraph summarizes the aforementioned ruling of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka; the third paragraph reviews the reactions to this ruling by Buddhist organizations, Buddhologists, and lawyers. The fourth paragraph presents the author’s comments on the ruling.
About the author: Vladislav Tolstykh – Doctor of Sciences in Law, Chief Researcher, Sino-Russian Comparative Law Research Center, Shenzhen MSU-BIT University; Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Citation: Tolstykh V. (2026) Reshenie Verkhovnogo Suda Shri-Lanki ot 16 iyunya 2025 goda: vazhnaya vekha v istorii buddizma ili yuridicheskaya oshibka? [Shri-Lanka Supreme Court decision of June 16, 2025: a milestone in the history of buddhism or a legal error?]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 184–198. (In Russian).
References
Absalyamov K.K. (2016) Formy zhenskogo monashestva v buddizme Tkheravady [Forms of female monasticism in Theravada Buddhism]. Progressivnyy zhurnal “Genezis”, no.2, pp.53–62. (In Russian).
Anālayo Bhikkhu (2013) The Legality of Bhikkhunī Ordination. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, vol.20, pp.309–333.
Anālayo Bhikkhu (2023) Bhikkhunī Ordination: From Ancient India to Contemporary Sri Lanka, New Taipei City: Āgama Research Group.
Battaglia L.J. (2015) Becoming Bhikkhunī? Mae Chis and the Global Women’s Ordination Movement. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, vol.22, pp.25–62.
Bodhi Bhikkhu (2008) The Revival of Bhikkhunī Ordination in the Theravāda Tradition. Available at: https://snfwrenms.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/the-revival-of-bhikkhuni-ordination-in-the-theravada-tradition.pdf (accessed: 21.05.2026).
Brahmali Bhikkhu (transl.) (2026) Theravāda Collection on Monastic Law. Vol.V. Kd 11–22. The Lesser Division. Cūḷavagga, Eastwood: SuttaCentral.
Edirisinghe T.T. (2025) Legal Recognition of Bhikkhunis in Sri Lanka — A Case Study of Ven. Welimada Dhammadinna Bhikkhuni v. Department of Registration of Persons and Others. In: Proceedings of the International Research Conference of the Open University of Sri Lanka (IRC-OUSL 2025), pp.1–9. Available at: http://repository.ou.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/94ousl/3677/ID%20334_IRC_OUSL_2025_Law.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed: 21.05.2026).
Falk N.A. (1980) The Case of the Vanishing Nuns: The Fruits of Ambivalence in Ancient Indian Buddhism. In: Falk N.A., Gross R.M. (eds.) Unspoken Worlds: Women’s Religious Lives in Non-Western Cultures, San Francisco: Harper & Row, pp.207–224.
Ito T. (2012) Questions of Ordination Legitimacy for Newly Ordained Theravāda Bhikkhunī in Thailand. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, vol.43, no.1, pp.55–76.
Kawanami H. (2007) The Bhikkhunī Ordination Debate: Global Aspirations, Local Concerns, with special emphasis on the views of the monastic community in Burma. Buddhist Studies Review, vol.24, no.2, pp.226–244.
Lindberg Falk M., Kawanami H. (2018) Monastic Discipline and Communal Rules for Buddhist Nuns in Myanmar and Thailand. Buddhism, Law & Society, vol.3, no.1, pp.39–68.
Mrozik S. (2011) In the Company of Spiritual Friends: Sri Lanka’s Buddhist Nuns. The Voices and Activities of Theravada Buddhist Women, vol.4, no.2, pp.4–11.
Schonthal B. (2025) Judging Bhikkhunis. A Landmark Case for Buddhism and Law in Sri Lanka. Tricycle, 6 September. Available at: https://tricycle.org/article/bhikkhuni-ordination-sri-lanka (accessed: 21.05.2026).
De Silva D. (2025) A Landmark Ruling for the Buddhist World: Supreme Court of Sri Lanka Recognises Bhikkhuni Identity, 20 June. Available at: URL: https://island.lk/a-landmark-ruling-for-the-buddhist-world-supreme-court-of-sri-lanka-recognises-bhikkhuni-identity (accessed: 21.05.2026).
Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu (2018) The Question of Bhikkhunī Ordination. Available at: https://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/Ebooks/TheQuestionofBhikkhuniOrdination_211217.pdf (accessed: 21.05.2026).
(1912) The Mahāvaṃsa or the Great Chronicle of Ceylon, W.Geiger (transl.), London: Pali Text Society.
Tolstykh V. (2024) Shri-Lanka: konstitutsionalizatsiya religioznykh otnosheniy i problema diskriminatsii men'shinstv [Sri Lanka: constitutionalisation of relations of religious groups and the problem of discrimination against minorities]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.33, no.1, pp.161–182. (In Russian).