Seven77 wrote: ↑
Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:00 pm
I have been pondering questions surrounding Therevada nuns and the law of kamma. It seems to me that one would do wisely to look at ones own intentions in this matter. Weather or not you are for, or against Theravada nuns is not as important as why. This gives 4 categories instead of 2 (encouraging and discouraging).
- Encouraging with bad intention. Could be anything from don't liking monks, don't liking Thais, wanting women to be at the front of the food queue, etc. (Anything with intentions from greed, aversion, delusion basically).
- Encouraging with good intentions. Genuine metta for all humans regardless of gender, generosity, belief that it will benefit the Sangha. Any wholesome reason.
These are all just examples of motives, there could be any number of them and combinations of different ones. It's not up to me to judge anyone for their view on this. But I feel it could be helpful to offer this for your reflection. Please look at your own motives and consider if you are making bad kamma for yourself.
Many thanks for a relevant and thought-provoking post.
I've largely kept clear of the debate regarding Theravada nuns. In fact I was quite surprised some years ago to find that people I knew at the monastery and who never mentioned it were very actively campaigning on social media for full bhikkhuni ordination and getting very heated about it. Obviously, as this post says towards the end, ones own motivations are important, rather than the intentions of others. But I do wonder whether anyone's motives can be so neatly pigeonholed so as to fall into either (1) or (2) above.
Obviously, the people concerned - strongly encouraging bhikkhuni ordination - think that their intentions are genuinely good. It looks to me as if they are bandwagon-jumping, virtue-signalling, or just reacting due to prejudices they carry around. If it furthers the cause of female equality in any sphere whatsoever, then they are for it. This would presumably put them in (1). But it's also the case that they genuinely express their goodness, and concern for others, in such terms. For them, equality is perceived as an almost unmitigated good, akin to feeding the hungry or saving a drowning person, and it genuinely puzzles them as to why others don't see things in this way. Leaving aside the actual outcomes for a moment (i.e. splitting the Sangha, offending traditionalists, etc.) their intentions
are as good as any others they have. They think they are helping women to make spiritual progress, developing the Sangha in a positive direction, and unlocking the potential of people who can become full monastics and help countless others.
They may well be wrong, of course. The law of unintended consequences might intervene and reveal them to be ignorant blunderers. But, according to their own worldview, their intentions are good.