Which could also be the answer to the question asked in the topic title. Why not have a new radically progressive Buddhist Council? Well, that’s why.
3 Likes
Possibly because 1) not enough people want it, is prepared to run it or take responsibility for it, or its outcome. 2) It’s already been done- its called Mahayana.
with metta
thank you all for helping to clarify my thoughts
on the topic at hand i wonder if this model of progressive buddhist practice would create any waves with regard to the orthodox theravadin establishment?
what if there were new aspirants to the ‘homeless life’ who were presented with an option within a six-fold assembly to adopt a level of discipline and commitment comparable to the ordained theravadin sangha but with a separate and distinct ‘code of discipline’ without the abuse of human rights?
the theravada monastics within this wider community dynamic could bless, teach, provide moral support and guidance to this neo-buddhist order and in exchange receive the appreciation and devotion that we all feel with regard to our traditional sangha.
this new monastic option would not be ‘ordained’ by the theravada sangha as this would be impossible and unnecessary. it is against the precepts to take that which is not freely given! the new-monastic community would not expect or wish to receive anything that was not freely given and that would compromise the solemn undertakings of the theravada sangha. it would just be a relationship of mutual understanding and respect that the theravada sangha would not discourage - having understood the reasons why Buddhist ‘moderns’ - who feel they should do their utmost to respect the values of equality and human dignity in the modern world - would find it better to adopt a contemporaneous code of practice. the lay component of this expanded 6-fold assembly may also embrace with open-hearts a new and expanded Buddhist assembly that we could all celebrate together - if we wished. then, if we did see our sons, brothers, daughters, sisters, mothers etc going forth into this new buddhist order we would have nothing to cause us remorse and sorrow. i think it would expand the community of buddhist practitioners and draw a lot of positive feedback from the wider community. benefitting more and more people in the process?
is there anything that could prevent this from happening if people took the time to make it happen? Perhaps, by organising a progressive Buddhist summit meeting, convention or, council? It could probably be done as a video conference. As easy as!
i assume everybody understands by now why this is ethically appropriate - you know - the sex discrimination thing, the treat females with greater respect thing, the human rights thing? no, still a bad idea?
it would be an expanded hybrid community that extended the reach of buddhist teachings and practices in the world that is arising - moving forward.
we are talking about buddhists whose practice is grounded in the EBT’s not later developments
i think i will leave you keystone-buddhist-cops to go and chase another buddhist puppy with them new-fangled ideas - there may be more on the horizon - you never know your luck 
my old-man use to split his sides laughing when he saw this kinda stuff!
Sorry for being inferior to you and spotlessness of your shining armour. Have a good hunt.
1 Like
it was nice having our little talk together in the PM best wishes for your journey in the Dhamma 
I feel more inclined to back @laurence up now, just because @feymman is on the other side. 
But I’ll just try to clarify and reaffirm the main point I tried to make, probably with too much confusion, and then add a few other related points:
Any effort to effect large-scale changes in the way Theravada Buddhist religious communities around the world organize themselves, and practice their disciplines, is unlikely to bear fruit unless it is strongly grounded in Buddhist values and teachings. It will not be enough to argue from the premises of some modern political ideology, with a few random ideas about Buddhist niceness thrown it.
Also any such effort that has even the appearance of being yet another incidence of western cultural imperialists attempting to “fix” Asian societies, and Asian social traditions of ancient standing, and impose western values on those societies via some new mission civilisatrice, will generate a strong and counterproductive backlash.
Any efforts to reform the way of life of Buddhist renunciate communities should begin with, and be guided by people who are walking the walk of renunciation, and attempting to live such a life. These are people who know intimately the demands of living a life of renunciation from direct experience with that life, who are the most deeply acquainted with the ideals it aims to realize and perfect, and who also know the details of the existing disciplines and practices within the Buddhist monastic order. For example, monks have to recite the entire patimokkha on every lunar observance day. How many of us lay supporters could come close to replicating that familiarity with the discipline?
Any effort simultaneously to promote and reform the order of bhikkhunis and that isn’t guided by finding out what Buddhist women who are drawn to the renunciate life actually want, and is not led by the bhikkhunis themselves, but is instead driven by males mansplaining to Buddhist women what some contemporary political or moral ideology demands of them, is also unlikely to bear wholesome fruit. And if it bears fruit at all, that fruit is likely to be yet another male projection of what men think women should be, imposed upon women from the outside, rather than an authentic reflection of women’s own inner path of spiritual liberation.
It will be hard to draw on the modern human rights tradition for much support in transforming Buddhist religious orders. That tradition took shape in modern, liberal and secularizing societies, and is mostly focused on securing the equal rights of individuals within societies of those kinds. Human rights activists have had a lot to say about about the rights of individuals to practice the religions of their choice in the context of a liberal society, but hasn’t had much to say about how those religions should be organized internally.
5 Likes
I accepted and met your criteria in the final proposal. I suggested the possibility of a different process.
Not a reform process but an ‘expansion’ of a Buddhist practice community/communities that accommodated a more diverse range of monastics i.e. 4 or, possibly ‘3’ - one being gender neutral - instead of 2 options.
A wider, more inclusive and tolerant Buddhist assembly that recognised and respected the practice needs of those with different values.
A process initiated by monastics for monastics and not imposed but welcomed.
Not a political process that involved the imposition of Western cultural norms and values in an Eastern context.
A process driven by matters of personal conscience and ethical convictions. Convictions that do not contradict the letter and spirit of the teachings.
The Dhamma is universal it does not belong to the East or the West.
I reject the notion of ‘cultural imperialism’ when it comes to these valid matters of conscience. There is no genuine east/west divide - and never has been - with regard to matters of conscience.
This does not mean that cultural imperialism and hegemony does not exist and is bad news. However, it cannot be used as a scapegoat to justify a false claim.
The islamist-terrorists say the satanic West is practicing cultural imperialism when it challenges their right to abuse and kill in the name of their twisted ideology and culture of death.
We have to be careful where and when we refer to cultural imperialism and hegemony otherwise these ideas become vacuous - stripped of valid and useful meaning.
If you continue to be troubled by the use of the term ’ progressive’ as it sounds to political to your ideological ears, employ another term that you find less troubling.
It’s not the label that’s important but the principals and values that need to be recognised and respected. A mutual 2 way respect - don’t you think?
A capacity to respectfully disagree and honour difference within a more diverse and inclusive Buddhist community whose practice is grounded in the EBT’s.
This does not not mean any old nonsense passes muster - this being a view that is supported among some mittas who frequent this site.
Would you find anything objectionable about a more inclusive, tolerant and, diverse model of Buddhist community? An expanded assembly guided by the EBT’s?
It may even be a model that could help to ease some of the difficulty that has arisen between some of Ajahn Chah’s wonderful disciples?
It might be a model that both groups were able to endorse as it does not involve Theravada ordination - only mutual support and loving kindness? At least, an offer of cooperation and mutual support could be extended that may be appreciated even if it is declined.
As a gesture of respect movement between the old and new orders could be made easier - perhaps dropping the requirement for anagarika training.
Allowing for this opportunity would allow practitioners to explore the benefits and shortcomings of the different rules of training and may increase the number of monastics in both traditions due to the spirit of open inquiry and natural curiosity it would foster.
The laity would have an opportunity to extend their goodwill and generosity to yet another field of merit for the world.
I was asked to produce some concrete proposals in an earlier related thread and I have delivered.
The neo-monastics would have to be treated with respect and related to on ‘equal’ terms. They could enjoy seperate gatherings and share in others with regard to traditional requirements.
Take another look at my last ‘topic specific’ comment and let me know just what is wrong with it? How it would not represent a do-able path forward in the right direction. Nothing is being imposed on anyone - OK ?
3 Likes
If it is a doable path, then it is up to monastics to take it from here. The role of lay supporters, as I have said many times before, is to support those monastic communities that are living in a way one can support.
1 Like
So are you just ridiculing now or do you understand what is being proposed and find it disagreeable and morally offensive? You could consider interest and constructive engagement in the topic or, if you are not interested in that you could focus on something else that genuinely interests you - just a thought? Try to be a bit more supportive and constructive with regard to the best efforts of sincere practitioners. The topic is not meant to be a source of ridicule - is that OK?
And I should have added: lay people also have the option of withdrawing support from monastic communities that do not live in a way one can support.
1 Like
I find this proliferation of thought pretty funny, in a frustrating kind of way.
It reminds me that one may know the dhamma without understanding it or putting it into practice. @Laurence you do leave yourself wide open by the way that you ‘blindly’ keep on reacting, without seemingly any/much reflection on what others say.
I do hope that at some stage you manage to slow down enough to take on board the instructive comments that many many experienced and wise people have given you in this forum.
Please don’t write another monologue about why you are right, and that you mean no offence. That is the hamster wheel.
As Ajahn Brahm would say - invoke the AFL code - Accept Forgive and Learn. Each of these 3 is vitally important, including the Learning.
With Metta
M
4 Likes
Well of course! Now, is that problematic? Buddhism is voluntary that seems fairly obvious? Now, you have an option to say something positive instead of critical - will you take that opportunity? You said earlier, you were looking for that opportunity?
No. But I just repeated what I said a long time ago. I think before you were unhappy with it.
So, I asked you, what do you now still find problematic in the light of my last 2 comments. I fully accommodated your objections.
I am glad you are amused but there are different reasons for amusement. Please reconsider ridicule for your own benefit. Perhaps this topic for wise reflection - which you have ridiculed as merely ’ mental proliferation’ is not a beneficial subject for you to focus on?
If it’s just meaningless proliferation to you why not focus on something else that you have a genuine interest in that is Dhamma related. Instead of sniping from the sideline?
Yes I agree, people should support a model of Buddhist community that they find meaningful. That was a basic premise implicit in the opening piece. That is what is being explored!
Sorry, the U.N. charter on human rights and its perspective on women’s rights does have something to say about the discriminatory practices ‘within’ religious institutions. It calls for change!
‘Ajahn Brahm’ also draws on the U.N. development goals as an explanation for his anti discrimination initiative - his bhikkuni related activities. You might want to get your facts straight and do a bit more research?