Why not have a progressive ‘Buddhist Council’ and the formation of a progressive monastic alliance (post discrimination)?

The Watercooler
81

I understand. We all try our best.

I don’t so much need to do any additional experiment beyond the experiment of my regular life. I have many real positions I feel aren’t especially popular. I try to assess where I might usefully contribute an alternative perspective, where I might best hold my peace and where I might best use a combination of the two.

Mounting a relentless dogged defence of my ideas will pretty much always fall into the ‘not especially skilful’ category. Why:

1a) I recognise the fallibility of my ideas and being too concerned with staunchly defending them does neither me nor anyone else any favours;

1b) I rate listening as the far superior skill than telling;

2) if after a few back-and-forths I get the sense that I’m just trying to assert my views repetitiously I have to conclude I haven’t really connected with whomever I’m talking to in any meaningful way and that I have to review how I’m talking, with (rather than ‘at’) whom I’m talking and the value of continuing talking;

3) I’m relatively at ease with people not agreeing with me on various - sometimes quite important - things and don’t quite feel the attraction/need to go to pains to set out the validity of my views (and if I did, in all honesty, I’d take it as an indicator that my views might be a bit off the mark);

4) The attakavagga is one of my favourite collections of texts;

5) I think there are probably some other reasons, but that will do for now.

Of course, this is just an impression of how I personally look at things, and in the first instance I’m just outlining it show that the experiment you’ve invited me to take part in is based on an assumption I have a fundamental difficulty with: the task of “explain[ing] and justify[ing my] position” is in most situations one I am a bit suspicious of.

Having said all this, I do have real regard for what I understand to be your basic wish, all the more so because it appears to be driven by love for your daughters. My own father wasn’t especially fussed about the concept of fatherhood, so I have quite a clear sense of what a precious, beautiful thing a caring father is and I very much wish you all the best in finding ways to channel your caring energies into something that genuinely brightens the future for your daughters.

7 Likes
82

Nope, sorry. Pluralism. If someone other than moderators is pointing out to you that your manner of speech is inappropriate, the sun will still rise tomorrow, won’t it?

It’s not about the Sangha or your divergent opinions, it is about you posting in a passive aggressive and openly aggressive mode as soon as someone expresses an opinion even slightly critical of your own views: you take their words and present them in a highly disparaging and distorted fashion, using connotation-laden words like ‘obfuscating’, ‘for unknown reasons’, ‘having agenda’, etc. When people point this out to you, without even criticizing the content of your primary argument, you don’t seem to be happy with that, which is slightly hypocritical if you ask me. I don’t think that being nice to people is a regressive, reactionary, and un-Buddhist attitude.

8 Likes
83

I understand how you see it and I respect your point of view. I guess we have different ways of looking at the issue - in some ways but not all. Thanks for sharing! :fireworks:

1 Like
84

I don’t see how you could have arrived at those conclusions. However, I would like to commend you for your interesting input into the discussion. Keep up the good work! Best wishes, Laurence

85

Laurence, I have to agree with Vstsken. The position in favor of both reviving the Bhikkhuni order and equalizing the status of Bhikkhunis within the sangha is not unpopular here. I get the impression that a few participants oppose it, but more probably support it. But discussing things with you sometimes feels like being run over by a truckload of passion and zeal. It’s alienating and exhausting, and doesn’t allow for much breathing space for the other participant. It doesn’t change things much if, after the pedestrian is hit by the truck, the truck driver comes over and puts a smiley-face sticker on the victim’s forehead.

5 Likes
86

While I am confident that, from your own perspective, this seems like a congenial and friendly remark, other people are likely to respond very differently to it. You just addressed Vstaken as though he were a kindergarten student and you were his teacher.

4 Likes
87

If you want to know what was my reaction to it, I’d like to quote my favourite moment in the entire Pali Canon :nerd_face::

When this had been said, Upaka, the Naked Ascetic, having said, “It may be (so), your reverence,” having shaken his head, went off taking a different road.
Pi Tv Kd 1

3 Likes
88

It gives me sympathetic joy that you and the other Mitta are liking each others input but, we may be drifting away from the topic. Maybe you two should enjoy a few quiet moments together. Is that what they are called? I don’t know how to access that system?

89

Dear Ajahn Sujato, I just had an idea that may be do-able i.e. it doesn’t break the traditional protocol. Am I mistaken? I am wondering if it would be ‘technically’ OK?

There is no problem - is there - if fully ordained Theravada monastics recieve support from any community as long as they observe the Vinaya rules etc.

What if, there was a transitional hybrid community established that supported Theravada monastics while new aspirants to a homeless form of practice had the option of taking the traditional route of monastic ordination and practice or, ordaining and practicing in a neo-Buddhist code of discipline that did not have the sexist elements in it or, the sexist etiquette? I remember a nun speaking about another code that monastics could chant and train in that is not the Vinaya but, contains all the essential elements for a high standard of monastic discipline. I think it was ‘Sister Vimalanyani’ who mentioned it in a post? The neo-monastics could benefit from the teachings and association of the traditional monastics and live in mutual respect and support with the lay community fully supporting this hybrid - possibly transitional - assembly. This would be a 6-fold assembly? Could a progressive summit of some sort be convened as an international Buddhist gathering - whose practice is grounded in the EBT’s, in order to create a situation where progressives can begin to join this six-fold assembly and train in a neo-monastic discipline? Would there be anything that could prevent such a development coming into being and not compromising anybodies commitments in any way whatsoever?

90

I do believe in the cause of Bhikkhuni equality and I admire your devotion to your cause and to your daughters. I must admit, however, that I was taken aback by the preceding statement. If this was not meant to be as offensive as it seems to be to me, perhaps you could explain what you did mean by it?

I don’t mean this to be criticism but as a chance to clarify things. :heart:

2 Likes
91

I have had some conversations with people in a system I now understand is called a ‘PM’ (private message). I don’t know how to access this system on this site but others have contacted me using it. All I was trying to say is if the two mittas wished to continue in the line of discussion they were interested in pursuing - which was not directly related to the topic - then they may know how to access the PM system. If they wished to continue to discuss the ‘topic’ with me then I would try to contribute in some way.

1 Like
92

Thank you for clarifying. That makes perfect sense now. :pray:

93

I completely understand and, from a certain angle, agree with your point. I hope you don’t feel my contributions here today likewise took you overly away from the main subject (there’d be a legitimate point if you did). One of the reasons I felt it suitable to pursue this line in this particular case, is actually because I think it very much is absolutely directly related to the main topic: kind, effective communication; listening and compromising and connecting with people in such a way that inspires rather than alienates are, in my view, essential ingredients for forming any alliance (such as that mentioned in the OP) that might go on to do meaningful, positive work.

5 Likes
94

Allow me to take a moment to remind everyone that, as a moderator may not read every post that is made, we rely on the community to judiciously employ flagging to draw our attention to problems. We appreciate all the efforts that go into making this a welcoming environment.

7 Likes
95

I found our discussion constructive and useful as it also gave me an opportunity to look at various aspects of the process that are not readily apparent.

The following reflection may go some way to clarifying some aspects of what I have said above - and elsewhere - that have been completely misunderstood or, taken to mean ‘something else’ that they simply did not mean.

I hope this helps in understanding the actual purpose of what was said:

There is more than ‘one’ reason why we can get annoyed, upset, outraged about things of this nature in Buddhist discussion groups.

Sometimes, it is fairly straightforward and easy to understand and at other times its more complex and involved.

Sometimes, people are simply feeling some kind of inner tension and they are just seeking to vent their spleen!

This would be fine - in some instances - if it genuinely made them feel better and they did not have a malicious intent at the same time?

There can be instances, where something like this is taking place inwardly - is this so? It’s a Buddhist question of relevance in our practice.

Sometimes, people may say they are seeking to engage constructively in order to move towards a deeper or conciliatory form of understanding when, in fact, they are motivated by something else that has not been disclosed.

In other cases, the motivation is clear and unambiguous - which is good!

Sometimes, people just want to register a complaint and pretend they actually have an interest in what someone else was doing or saying that they disapproved of?

Sometimes, people have strong ideological commitments that informs there views and opinions etc. It is the case, as you probably know, that people ‘can’ have hidden agendas when they engage in discussion and other activities.

They may take a rhetorical line that does not state ‘explicitly’ what it is they are attempting to do, by way of their comments.

A tell-tale sign that something like this may be going on is when the idea being conveyed makes next to no sense at all? In other words, it muddies the waters!

In situations like this, it may be best to point out the absurdity of the comment - it’s lack of valid and useful meaning. In order to steer the discussion back in a ‘meaningful’ direction.

Sometimes, our motivations are fully conscious but not always?

Sometimes, participants are simply incoherent when it comes to many of their thought-processes and, sometimes, there are considerable language barriers. In situations like this, I have received negative feed-back in PM’s from mittas who had not made it clear that they actually understood what it is I was trying to say!

Perhaps the term: ‘hidden agenda’ is not what I was looking for! It’s a bit hard to always be word-perfect in the way we express ourselves? Particularly, when you’re communicating with a number of people - simultaneously.

I think I meant to use the term: ‘ulterior motive’ but, not in a sinister way - if that makes sense? If anyone would like further clarification we could start a PM conversation?

I hope these fairly straightforward observations are readily understood and are not also found to be overly problematic - as well!

I hope this goes some way in explaining some of my comments in a bit more detail in the hope it brings greater understanding.

2 Likes
96

That last part gives what, in my assessment, is a misleading judgement. Misleading to @laurence I mean and giving him false encouragement. I don’t conflate quality with quantity.
In my assessment he is way below my class for instance.

FYI:
I am only following parts of this tread because because I pay attention to posts from @Aminah 's and a few others.

The OP lost me at the political naivete of the title. As a counter proposal I suggest, only half in jest, the

Donald Trump council for Buddhist Wisdom and Radical Social Change

Replace the first two words with the unlikely seeming advocate of your imagination.

97

I guess we have parrallel assessments of each other’s creative endeavours.

The only thing I would not share is your reference to superiority. Regarding @laurence being way below your class! It sounds a bit excessive but, it could be a creative flourish? Only joking, I would not actually initiate a comment like the one you have just made as I would be concerned that it would be insensitive and coming from a sad and sorry place?

Personally, I don’t ascribe to a class-conscious mentality. I believe we all are participating on a level playing field in this forum. As to the rest of your comment, are you not describing yourself?

I do love you Feynman - keep up the vigilance! :fireworks:

98

I wish my self discipline was a bit stronger. I can’t seem to stop looking at this thread - it’s like watching a car crash in slow motion… Just Samsara :rofl:

9 Likes
99

Oh my! Didn’t you read the bit about the fallibility of my ideas? :grin: It is interesting though, because I only started reading the thread because I saw Bhante Sujato had commented. Beyond that and having some vague sense of moderator-y responsibility…

Couldn’t have put it better. :joy:

2 Likes
100

i know its a bit like one of those old black and white movies.

1 Like