Creating an alternative seems like a good, and achievable, approach. What is unrealistic is imagining that one can quickly and decisively end discrimination in Buddhism, which is a sprawling global religious tradition of about half a billion people, most of whom will go on practicing their religion in the way they like, independently of what a few western converts might think about them.
2 Likes
That is what I am proposing, nothing more, nothing less! 
Iâm not sure if you read the article I linked to by Bhante Hiriko, but he makes a fair point. Each Sangha is independent. That is; the Sangha of nuns at x monastery is vinaya-legally independent to the sangha of monks at y-monastery and any other sangha of monks or nuns.
They can choose to live entirely autonomous from the monks (including ordination if they wish). The monks must be invited before they are allowed to visit and cannot meddle with the nuns affairs.
Where we run into problems is in mixed gender monasteries or where the monks and nuns associate with each other overly often.
Then itâs down to what @DKervick has been proposing; support the community where the above is happening. Really support the nuns. If the nuns feel well supported and autonomous then they will be empowered to hold and of the rules which are questionable in an empowering way.
The independent of each sangha is what has allowed BhikkhĆ«nÄ« ordination to be revived. This independent nature is also why we canât âreform Buddhismâ.
3 Likes
People were doing that at the time of the Buddha already and none achieved anything. Christians have monks too, even more serious than buddhist ones if we think about the Mount Athos ones. Mahayana also has monks. Yet, none of these people will ever achieve stream entry. None will achieve security from possible countless rebirths.
The important thing in theravada is not the existence of monks. They exist in most religions. What is by far the most important thing are the teachings of the historical Buddha, particularly the higher dhamma part of them that can make one a stream enterer. All the rest comes at 0.00001% importance compared to that.
By the way, remember when Buddha was asked weather everybody will achieve enlightenment at one point since they have an ininite amount of time to do it and he answered âNoâ ? I had a topic answering that, itâs a statistical problem. Although counter-intuitive, there really is the possibility of never achieving that not even in an infinity of years, thatâs why Buddha answered âNoâ. Whatever benefits a christian or mahayana monk might have in terms o detachment, they are peanuts compared to what can be achieved through having access to the dhamma. And now just think about the fact that almost no asian theravada monk ever read the dhamma. If one wants to do activism, thatâs the place where their actions will bring the most benefit.
There were paccekabuddhas who became enlightened without ever having heard the dhamma. I see no reason to think that the great spiritual adepts of other non-Indian traditions have not achieved the same state.
1 Like
And the success rate is something like literally a million times lower than one would do if he had it explained to him by someone else. It is like taking a broken airplane to the jungle and asking a bushman to fix it. The success rate will be much lower than if you had a mechanic explain it all to him in advance. That guy has to reinvent the automobile by himself and it was pretty hard to be discovered in the first place.
1 Like
I did not see an essay on your link just a brief statement. I see what you mean now and thatâs a good sign - more independence in decision making. I do support the bhikkhunis - I always have respected them.
Itâs up to Buddhists to decide for themselves how they wish to live. As long as the 3-fold training in one form or another is being practiced in accord with Buddhist guidelines then practitioners will benefit. I would never dictate to Buddhists how they have to practice together.
If monastics see the value in not practicing discriminatory rules at all then that would gladden my heart and the hearts of many others. Those who are already Buddhists and probably many others who will want to practice in the future.
I would be happy to be part of a process that makes a transition out of discriminatory forms of practice permanently.
I feel that Buddhists are exercising their human rights whether they are lay or monastic, if they donât practice sexual discrimination because they find it morally offensive. I would like to be part of a form of Buddhism where this is accepted as normal standard practice.
It is not normal to not practice discriminatory rules in traditional Buddhism so a genuinely progressive Buddhism needs to be fully established and supported - IMO.
I donât feel nuns or monks should have to segregate their communities as much as possible in order to protect their autonomy and independence.
I believe all forms of discrimination should be done away with and we should openly celebrate that. If others want to say that Buddhists who practice this way - now or in the future - are not real Buddhists thatâs fine. May they be well and happy! Each to their own in a pluralistic society!
I think the gender segregation is a good idea. It might not be a problem for anyone but I think that Aj. Brahmaliâs argument below is pretty solid. Plus it avoids other forms of gender streotypes which would otherwise happen. ie the men doing the chainsawing and brushcutting (because theyâre stronger) and the women the cleaning.
Here is the article I was talking about from Bhante Hiriko.
2 Likes
Ayya Khema believed âMeister Ekhartâ may have been a fully awakened being. She had the advantage of being able to read his teachings in the language he used. Ayya also held âTheresa of Avilaâ in high regard. Saint Theresaâs writings were monitored, modified and heavily edited by the church-fathers. I think Ayya engaged in dialogue with some Carmelite nuns who wanted to understand Theresaâs âinterior castlesâ and access them but did not know how to go about it. Ayya helped them to understand their teachings so they could deepen in tranquility. 
1 Like
You think the gender segregation thing is a good idea. If you find others who share that perspective who wish to practice in that way then fine. I prefer the idea of open, inclusive and, mutually supportive communities.
I didnât used to. Then I stayed in a mixed monastery and it was just not as relaxed. Having gender segregated monastics doesnât mean gender segregated laity. Itâs more to do with the day to day living arrangements and delegation of duties.
4 Likes
Its great that you have found an opportunity to practice segregation - in the past or the present - if its good for you. Hopefully, we will arrive at a place in our practice where we can be relaxed and at peace with whatever conditions we encounter - inwardly and outwardly. That would be a sure sign that we were heading in the right direction - unconditional freedom.
1 Like
Its much easier to quit cocaine if you are not living in a room full of it. Thatâs the idea behind the invention of monkhood in the first place, otherwise all would be doing it from home. Gender segregation is of course good and in line with this purpose of monkhood: to have a good environment for removing clinging
The idea of âI am gona drop cocaine while standing in the middle of a room full of itâ or âfor the great ones it doesnât matter the environment cause they are super strongâ - this is starting from the idea that the person who ordains is already an arahant, while in reality people ordain so that they can move towards that goal faster than they would do as a lay person
That is probably true when it comes to cocaine addiction or, if you see or interact with people and feel something like cocaine withdrawal.
We may experience social anxiety or be easily irritated by people.
If there is addiction and withdrawal it may be best to avoid the problem until we regain our equanimity, our equilibrium. In situations where we learn to be more patient, kind and, care-full, it might be better for our practice to be in the company of others.
We can be very busy inwardly in solitude and we can be serene and at peace in a crowd. Which is preferable - the former or the latter?
We are moving in the right direction when we are able to remain peaceful wherever we find ourselves. We donât need to eradicate people - men and/or women - in our lives to realise the hearts sure release.
I am not saying that people should not have preferences - we should live in a way that meets our needs. This can change over time - everything does!
An excellent selection! Please elaborate on your efforts so far, and plans for the future.
âYet, none of these people will ever achieve stream entry. None will achieve security from possible countless rebirths.â
You cannot know this, friend.
Once again Ajahn @Brahmali provides a level-headed and compassionate voice. This talk, regarding the Bhikkhuni Sangha and how to change the current situation is worth watching.
Sadhu anumodana
1 Like