Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by Zom »

I can also understand the 'can of worms - alas!' response, but isn't that rather the point Gombrich is driving at? Cans of worms, left unopened, seem to sicken the fourfold Sangha (some would prefer it be/remain threefold, for example). Open such cans, until such cans aren't around to be opened. Buddhists oughtn't to shy away from uncomfortable facts...
Actually can of worms is not such problems as bhikkhuni, thai sangha, ect.. but it is the very "lack of practice" among monks.
Even if thai sangha will be reformed, even if bhikkhunis will be ordained - that won't change anything ;)

So Gombrich is missing the real point.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

Zom wrote:the very "lack of practice" among monks... So Gombrich is missing the real point.
If "lack of practice" means what I think it means, Gombrich is not missing this point, he is making it.

:heart:
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by chownah »

daverupa wrote:
chownah wrote:I can see how a person could be mysogynistic but I don't see how an environment could be mysogynistic.
Misogynistic - reflecting or exhibiting misogyny. An environment can easily do this.
Thanks for the clarification....If you think there is an environment which reflect or exhibits misogyny then I guess there must be some people who are misogynists who create the environment.....it seems that an environment could only reflect something that coming form someone or it can only exhibit that which someone has made manifest.....so who are these someones who are misogynists.......I'm hoping you can name some names....or relate some specific instances where a monk did some specific act to warrant being labeled a misogynist......if a monk has a view that a legitimate lineage of female monks can not be constituted (not necessarily my opinion) then that is one thing....but it is not in and of itself misogynistic...seems that the Buddha resisted the creation of female monks at first....if this is correct then was the Buddha a misogynist?
chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

chownah wrote:seems that the Buddha resisted the creation of female monks at first....if this is correct then was the Buddha a misogynist?
chownah
But that isn't correct. Scholarly consensus considers it likely that it's a later forgery.

Consider that a nun recounts, in the Therigatha, that she ordained via the short, early phrase: "Come, Bhadda" (if I recall the name correctly). This cannot have happened if the traditional origin story is true. Also, the Jains had female renunciates at the time, so it wouldn't have been that remarkable. The scholarly evidence points to a misogynist streak beginning within the Theravadan tradition itself, one which simply continues to this day in various ways. It is this, inter alia, which is being criticized by Gombrich.
chownah wrote:if a monk has a view that a legitimate lineage of female monks can not be constituted (not necessarily my opinion) then that is one thing....but it is not in and of itself misogynistic
It continues such attitudes via legalism, but this takes us off-topic.

As to the rest: I'm not calling this or that person a misogynist, and neither was Gombrich. People can be part of a misogynistic environment, of course - but so can a received textual tradition, or a cultural attitude, all of which involve people but which aren't people. Furthermore, misogyny isn't a black/white affair, as there are shades of manifestation in any particular case. Trying to reduce it to a list of names is overly simplistic and misrepresents the original criticism.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by chownah »

daverupa wrote:
chownah wrote:seems that the Buddha resisted the creation of female monks at first....if this is correct then was the Buddha a misogynist?
chownah
But that isn't correct. Scholarly consensus considers it likely that it's a later forgery.

Consider that a nun recounts, in the Therigatha, that she ordained via the short, early phrase: "Come, Bhadda" (if I recall the name correctly). This cannot have happened if the traditional origin story is true. Also, the Jains had female renunciates at the time, so it wouldn't have been that remarkable. The scholarly evidence points to a misogynist streak beginning within the Theravadan tradition itself, one which simply continues to this day in various ways. It is this, inter alia, which is being criticized by Gombrich.
chownah wrote:if a monk has a view that a legitimate lineage of female monks can not be constituted (not necessarily my opinion) then that is one thing....but it is not in and of itself misogynistic
It continues such attitudes via legalism, but this takes us off-topic.

As to the rest: I'm not calling this or that person a misogynist, and neither was Gombrich. People can be part of a misogynistic environment, of course - but so can a received textual tradition, or a cultural attitude, all of which involve people but which aren't people. Furthermore, misogyny isn't a black/white affair, as there are shades of manifestation in any particular case. Trying to reduce it to a list of names is overly simplistic and misrepresents the original criticism.
Of course you are not naming names because you have no names to name....you are casting aspersions on the Sangha by supposition and inuendo.....there has been nothing presented which taken for what it is supports a charge of misogyny.....environement are misgynistic only if they reflect those attitudes as expressed by individuals...a cultural attitude can only be misogynistic if it is expressed by individuals in that context....your arguement is false....if you still wish to defend your charges then bring something here that is to the point of misogyny such as one act or statement by a living Sanga member which addresses women in and of themselves in even a negative light much less a misogynistic light.....
chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

chownah wrote:you are casting aspersions on the Sangha by supposition and inuendo.....there has been nothing presented which taken for what it is supports a charge of misogyny.....environement are misgynistic only if they reflect those attitudes as expressed by individuals...a cultural attitude can only be misogynistic if it is expressed by individuals in that context....your arguement is false....if you still wish to defend your charges then bring something here that is to the point of misogyny such as one act or statement by a living Sanga member which addresses women in and of themselves in even a negative light much less a misogynistic light.....
chownah
One act or statement? Easy.
In the modern era, there have been a number of women who have tried to ordain as bhikkhunis. The first attempt was made in 1928 by two sisters, Sara and Chongdi Bhasit, who received samaneri ordination along with six other women... In 1932, the women underwent bhikkhuni ordination, but it was considered invalid as they only received their vows from bhikkhus and not bhikkhunis.

They met with strong opposition from the sangha and state. In 1928, the Sangha Council of Elders responded by passing an order forbidding Thai monks from ordaining women, either as bhikkhuni, samaneri, or sikkhamana (a female novice in training to become a bhikkhuni), a rule which still is in force today.
Dhammananda Bhikkhuni’s ordination was a historic development, the first - and at the present time, only - instance of a properly ordained Theravadan bhikkhuni to emerge in Thailand. Yet it was naturally also highly controversial, and upon her return to Thailand after her ordination as a samaneri she was met by an onslaught of criticism.
source
Bhikkhuni ordination is permitted under the Thai constitution, but the Thai Sangha Council, a government-linked religious advisory group, does not accept Bhikkhunis' legal status or right to be ordained within the country. It cites a 1928 Sangha Act, which banned ordination of women following the last known attempt to recognise Bhikkhunis.

A new constitution in 1932 made that religious order void, says Mr. Nititawan.

But the Thai Sangha and some Bhikkhu - who remain largely unaware of the revitalized campaign - continue to cite the 1928 order, which recognises only Bhikkhu, along with Vietnamese and Chinese male monks.
source
According to Wat Pah Pong, the Western monks must adhere to the laws of the Thai Sangha and Thai state which oppose female ordination. Ajahn Brahm violated this ground rule. By concealing the ordination from the Wat Pah Pong elders both here and abroad, his action was tantamount to deceit, total disrespect, and a serious breach of trust and communal decision-making based on consultation and consensus.

When given the chance, he refused to declare the Perth ordination null and void and to downgrade the new four Bhikkhunis to mae chee or ten-precept nuns.
source

And so forth.
Richard Gombrich wrote:If there are women who want to restart a Sangha, why should they be stopped? Should we not thank and congratulate them? What does it matter that the continuity of the ordination ritual has been interrupted? What is that but a ritual? Must we all live in a world of obsessive neurotics? Let people who only care about ritual fuss away to their hearts’ content, and let those who care for the spirit, not the letter, and for living according to the Buddha’s teaching and principles, welcome the one development which, I believe, has the power to preserve Theravāda Buddhism for many future generations.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by chownah »

daverupa,
Sincere thanks for presenting some interesting historical information about ordination of Bhikkhunis. What you have shown is that it seems that those people who control the policies of the Sangha have done their best to bar the ordination of Bhikkhunis. This is not misogyny....as far as I know the reasons which those barring the ordination of Bhikkhunis have given for wanting to bar the ordination of Bhikkhunis has been that it is not possible to do so from the standpoint of what the Buddha taught .......that the rules which were formulated by the Buddha and which have been passed down through the "lineage" of Bhikkhus and the "lineage" of Bhikkunis does not allow for ordination as the requirements can no longer be met.....this is a policy matter and is directed at rules....it is not directed at women that I can see....maybe you can produce something which seems to be directed at women and not rules.
chownah
P.S. I want to add that in my view it is important to not use the false argument of misogyny in attacking the Bhikkhuni ordination issue in that if misogyny is not the problem then certainly accusations of it will not solve the problem but probalby just end up in a witch hunt....my view is that there is alot of "lineage worship" going on which is something which In my view the Buddha did not intend as evidenced by his never having referred to a "lineage" of monks at all as far as I have been able to determine.........and also as evidenced by the Buddha's declaration that he is of the "lineage of Noble Ones".......
chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

chownah wrote:as far as I know the reasons which those barring the ordination of Bhikkhunis have given for wanting to bar the ordination of Bhikkhunis has been that it is not possible to do so from the standpoint of what the Buddha taught... this is a policy matter and is directed at rules....it is not directed at women that I can see
Bhikkhu Bodhi addressed this Legalism a while ago, and I agree that the most charitable interpretation is not one of misogyny, but of strict Vinaya respect. I quote his conclusion at length, which perhaps may get us back on track in terms of the OP:
Amidst the spectrum of opinions that might be voiced, the two main categories of interpretation are the conservative and the progressive. For conservatives, bhikkhunī status absolutely requires a dual-Sangha ordination with the participation of a Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha; hence, since no Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha exists, and for conservatives non-Theravādin bhikkhunīs cannot fill this role, the Theravāda bhikkhunī lineage is irreparably broken and can never be restored. For progressives, bhikkhunī ordination can be restored, either by permitting bhikkhunīs from an East Asian country to fulfill the role of the Bhikkhunī Sangha at a dual-Sangha ordination or by recognizing the right of bhikkhus to ordain bhikkhunīs until a Theravāda Bhikkhunī Sangha becomes functional.

In my opinion, in deciding between the conservative and the progressive approaches to the bhikkhunī issue, the question that should be foremost in our minds is this: “What would the Buddha want his elder bhikkhu-disciples to do in such a situation, now, in the twenty-first century?” If he were to see us pondering this problem today, would he want us to apply the regulations governing ordination in a way that excludes women from the fully ordained renunciant life, so that we present to the world a religion in which men alone can lead the life of full renunciation? Or would he instead want us to apply the regulations of the Vinaya in a way that is kind, generous, and accommodating, thereby offering the world a religion that truly embodies principles of justice and non-discrimination?
Perhaps misogyny is too strong of a word; I'm not inclined to think so, but we all know I'm often wrong. In any event, I think the Venerable has asked a significant question here, and I think Gombrich was definitely asking something similar.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by beeblebrox »

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: What we do have in common though is our common Buddhist heritage - the Dhamma of the Buddha. That seems the most appropriate medium by which we could be "trying to find common ground". If that involves relinquishing some "comfort", we should not be surprised - the Dhamma does go against the grain, and always has.
On that point, I've found it good exercise to let go of the craving to know what exactly is going on in situations where people are not speaking English... There are positive and negative aspects of all situations...

:anjali:
Mike
It's a bit funny, because in my situation everyone speaks English at this temple that I go to... but I'm deaf. I think that some people on here will find that if you just show up (especially if you do it consistently, and with sincerity), you'll find that they'll be more than happy to help you, and become a part of your own practice.

Changes don't just happen overnight... no matter how much "anicca" you try to force yourself into seeing it... but they still do happen. Not to mention that the nibbana is the absence of greed, hatred, and delusion (which to me, basically means you're winding yourself up within this papanca that there's a huge separation that is existing between you and others, due to the (subtle) idea of a permanent self)... try to think about that, also.

:anjali:
LastLegend
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 7:17 am

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by LastLegend »

From my understanding, there exists no female monks in Cambodian Theravada tradition in Vietnam. Note that there is also Vietnamese Theravada tradition which is constituted of mostly ethnic Vietnamese while the Cambodian Theravada tradition is constituted of ethnic Cambodians. Vietnam has many people from different ethnic backgrounds such as Hmongs, Chinese, Cambodians, ethnic tribes, etc.

And Theravadin monks do follow strict Vinaya rules. Not directly looking at women or touching women is like one of those rules.
Last edited by LastLegend on Fri Nov 18, 2011 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

LastLegend wrote:And Theravadin monks do follow strict Vinaya rules. Not directly looking at women or touching women is like one of those rules.
"Like" one of those rules? It is not one of those rules at all, the way you've written it here - it is a matter of intention, not ritual avoidance.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
LastLegend
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 7:17 am

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by LastLegend »

daverupa wrote:
LastLegend wrote:And Theravadin monks do follow strict Vinaya rules. Not directly looking at women or touching women is like one of those rules.
"Like" one of those rules? It is not one of those rules at all, the way you've written it here - it is a matter of intention, not ritual avoidance.
Yes...ritual avoidance is not intentional?
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by daverupa »

LastLegend wrote:Yes...ritual avoidance is not intentional?
:?

The rule states:
Should any bhikkhu, overcome by lust, with altered mind, engage in bodily contact with a woman, or in holding her hand, holding a lock of her hair, or caressing any of her limbs, it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Community.
You stated:
LastLegend wrote:Not directly looking at women or touching women is like one of those rules.
You did not mention the altered mind bit, only the behavior, so I said you were neglecting to note intention and instead focusing on mere behavior - in other words, you forgot the ethics and focused on the ritual. The Buddha strongly criticized brahmins for this.

:focus:
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
LastLegend
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 7:17 am

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by LastLegend »

ok point taken.

however, prevention or caution is also important as a certain consciousness arises when there is a certain contact with the object of that consciousness.
User avatar
appicchato
Posts: 1602
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Post by appicchato »

...a certain consciousness arises when there is a certain contact with the object of that consciousness.
Maybe, maybe not...all the time actions, and thoughts, get lumped into a single category of, or universal to, human behavior, and that just isn't so...(in my experience)...
Post Reply