Buddhist monk on Gender Equality (video)

Claralynn N.(United Kingdom); Dhr. Seven, Ashley Wells, Seth Auberon, Amber Larson, Wisdom Quarterly; Abbot Ajahn Brahmavamso (BuddhistSocietyWA, June 27, 2014)

PERTH, Western Australia - Ajahn Brahm -- an enlightened Western Buddhist monk from England living in Australia after a decade in Northeast Thailand (Isan) at Wat Pah Nanachat, the International Forest Monastery -- talks about the banning of his United Nations' speech on gender equity, equality of the sexes.

Viewers who support Wisdom Quarterly and women's right to full ordination in Theravada Buddhism as well as supporting Ajahn Brahm's work striving for the equality of females within all Buddhist schools, particularly his more traditional and monastic tradition, are encouraged to consider signing the online petition here.

• 

  Sangha: nuns, monks, female, male supporters.

  Traditionally, it was thought that women could no longer secured full ordination due to a rule the Buddha laid down when his foster mother ordained. However, evidence found in the background stories (Vibhanga) of the Nuns' Disciplinary Code (Bhikkhuni Vinaya), research by the Theravada nun Ayya Tathaloka, shows that those rules or garudhammas are a historical impossibility. Had the Buddha laid them down with all the fanfare in front of the Shakyan women as is claimed, questions would not have arisen regarding etiquette between male and female monastics and ordination, as those would have been settled issues. But that questions did arise, as recorded in the stories accompanying the formation of each rule, those sexist and patriarchal garudhammas could not have been preexisted. The function of these additional rules seems to be little more than to subordinate female Sangha members to males and was clearly in the interest of monks to have hastily inserted at some point in time.

Let's invite Ajahn Brahm to present his gender equality paper at the 2015 UNDV conference

3,242 signers so far. Let's reach 10,000 United Nations' Day of Vesak (UNDV)
 
Supporting Buddhist women at the U.N.

Nuns are necessary for a complete Sangha

We, the undersigned, are astounded and deeply disappointed by the banning of Ajahn Brahm's paper on gender equality at the 2014 United Nations' Day of Vesak (UNDV) conference in Vietnam.

 

The paper was clearly aligned with the UN’s Millennium Development Goal 3 (Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women), which the UNDV is committed to uphold through its connection with the UN. Moreover, Ajahn Brahm's paper had already been approved for presentation when it was suddenly banned 36 hours before its scheduled presentation.

 

We value free and open dialogue. We therefore ask that the UNDV, in accordance with Millennium Development Goal 3, promotes dialogue about the participation of women in contemporary Theravada Buddhism by inviting Ajahn Brahm to publicly present his gender equality paper at the next UNDV conference in 2015.

• READ: Ajahn Brahm's paper
• Remembering Asherah, the Western God's wife
• NUNS: Alliance for Bhikkhunis (bhikkhuni.net)
• Ongoing: Israel's Gaza offensive – Ebola outbreak – Ukrainian unrest 

(To view signers, go to petition2014.org. This petition will remain open until October 1st, 2014. The petition can be read in Chinese (petition2014.org/2001325991.html), Thai and Vietnamese (petition2014.org/3616363436253634365236073618-vi7879t.html), and Sinhalese (petition2014.org/35233538345835243517.html).

Love, Sexuality, and Awakening: Retreat

Ven. Amma Thanasanti Bhikkhuni (awakeningtruth.org) and Dr. Sharon Beckman-Brindley (metta.org); Amber Larson and Dhr. Seven (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

Fragrant blossoming lotus flower, the symbol of opening (tvladusi/flickr.com)

 

Dr. Beckman-Brindley, Ven. Thanasanti

The theme of this retreat is our relationship with various facets of love as part of a path of Buddhist awakening. "Love" includes a broad range of experience -- from a sense of friendliness and compassion, to appreciation toward ourselves, to the desire to release our masks and defenses and rest in a shared intimacy with others [a loss of self and merging with someone or something larger].

Sometimes in our daily life, this shared intimacy is expressed through romantic sexual involvement. [Other times it is sought diving within through asceticism and spirituality.] Ultimately, resting in love, we can embody an unconditional love that has no expectations, where love is an essential quality of "being" rather than a state or circumstance we long for [a trait rather than a temporary state].

 

Time for reflection (true-enlightenment.com)

This will be an eight precept retreat in which we refrain from killing and harming, and from stealing, any sexual activity, incorrect speech, and/or substances which cloud the mind. There will be two meals and an evening snack. We will begin the week using the Foundations of Mindfulness in silent practice. After a few days of silence, we will introduce sessions of Insight Dialogue to explore the theme.

It runs from Saturday May 23-30 in Loveland, Colorado, at Sunrise Ranch within easy access of Denver Int'l airport, yet secluded from the bustle of city life, in the Rocky Mountain foothills. Program contact: Katherine Wolfe (wolfalohalani@gmail.com). More 
 
ELIGIBILITY: This retreat is suitable for anyone self-identified as a woman who has a regular meditation practice and has done a seven-day mindfulness retreat.

DONATION: The teachings are offered on a dana basis (the Pali word for "generosity," the Buddhist practice of giving to one’s capacity).

SCHOLARSHIP: Dana has played an essential role in the Buddhist tradition. In the spirit of this tradition, Awakening Truth does not want cost to be an obstacle to participation and so, are committed to offering financial assistance to those who need it. If you cannot attend the retreat due to cost, please contact the retreat committee: 720-295-1321 or awakeningtruth.retreats@gmail.com.

SPONSORED BY: Awakening Truth, a 501(c)3 organization based in Colorado with the intention of supporting Buddhist nuns, bringing the teachings into the modern world and building a training monastery for [blended-Theravada] Forest Tradition bhikkhunis.

TEACHERS

Sharon Beckman-Brindley, Ph.D., is a Senior Insight Dialogue Teacher who teaches Insight Dialogue retreats worldwide. A clinical psychologist, she has served as team leader for Metta’s Relational Insight Meditation Program; she also serves on the Metta Programs Teachers Council. She has practiced vipassana (insight) meditation for over 30 years. Since 2001 she has studied and practiced the Dhamma and Insight Dialogue intensively with Gregory Kramer. She is also a co-founder and a guiding teacher of the Insight Meditation Community of Charlottesville, Virginia and is a graduate of the Community Dharma Leaders Program at Spirit Rock Meditation Center. She also has over 30 years of practice as a psychotherapist, who has led workshops and retreats on meditation and its integration with psychotherapy for over 15 years. She is a stepmother and a grandmother and lives with her husband and their two cats in Charlottesville.
 
Amma Thanasanti Bhikkhuni is a guest in Metta’s Teacher Training program. She has been meditating for over 30 years, a [Theravada or more eccentric American monastic] Buddhist nun for over 20 years, and has been teaching internationally for over 15 years. He work spans rigorous understanding of Buddhist teachings, non-dual meditation, depth psychology, subtle body energies, and the Divine Feminine. She teaches meditation as an art and skill, integrating body, heart, and mind with finesse and compassion. She founded Awakening Truth [whose rainbow motif suggests a particularly welcome climate for lesbians and gays], whose mission is to create a nun (bhikkhuni)'s training monastery and seeks ways for monastics and lay practitioners to work together to support whole-life practice. She is currently based at the Shakti Vihara Hermitage in Colorado Springs.

"Unlawful Sexual Practices"

Maya, Ashley Wells, Wisdom Quarterly; "Ask Maya" with commentator Jeffery Kaung

Sex is bad? Don't look at it. Don't think about it. And whatever you do, don't wish for it. That's what our parents teach us, but that's not what the Buddha taught lay Buddhists.

  

According to an abbot in Theravadan Burma, the words "unlawful sexual practice" would be more clear and effective than simply "sexual misconduct" for defining the Pali term kamesu micchacara.

In the Pali discourses expounded by the Buddha, he described altogether 20 types of females [not 10, Jeffery Kaung?] with whom males should avoid having penetrative sexual intercourse.

• See Buddhism's "Sexual Misconduct" Defined for the ten types of females who are off limits, at least from the perspective of ancient Indian society and possibly universally. We are awaiting Kaung's list of 20.
  

What did the Buddha teach any why? (HSUN)

Every male who is engaged in these forms of sexual relations with any of these females was said to be guilty of dire misconduct that results in the worst kinds of karmic consequences.

But for females, not every female from the given group of 20 is similarly guilty. In other words, only 12 women from the group are guilty for engaging in sex, and most of these females have already been married off or become "owned" by a particular male and his family. [It should not come as a surprise to Western readers that women were treated like chattel in European marriage contracts until very recently, and the practice is followed to this day in many places including Asia and India in particular.]

The rest of the females in the classification are not guilty since they are not married or have no contractual "owner" yet. Besides, in some of the Buddha's sutras, he encouraged most lay disciples to practice celibacy. 

Believe it or not, females have sexual agency

[We do not know of a single discourse that encourages lay celibacy except as an occasional practice for uposatha lunar observance days and periods of intensive Buddhist practice, such as meditation retreats, temporary ordination, or as the natural consequence of spiritual attainments such as the blissful absorptions and the permanent liberations beyond stream entry and once returning. Please specify, Kaung. We would be very happy to examine these sutra references.]

However, the Buddha said that if one fails to be completely celibate, because s/he is already married, then one should always refrain from "unlawful sexual practices" in his/her everyday life -- as a person with clean feet [avoids a puddle of urine on the road].

Besides, the Buddha also described four (4) features that lead a sexual relationship between a male and a female to be "unlawful conduct." In fact, the Buddha had already mentioned in his discourses how it was "noble" [enlightened] for one [with noble attainments] to stay celibate. However, he said that if one could not practice celibacy because he/she was already married...

[Kaung, if you cite these sutras, we can respond and clarify. Maybe the Buddha wants everyone to be happy, and maybe celibacy is the supreme (brahma-acharya) vehicle/teaching toward that, but it's not something he said lay Buddhists should do or had to do.  Living beings are reborn into this Kama Loka, Sensual Sphere, because of their sensual cravings. Denying them or forcing celibacy on people is not the way to transcend craving. To be reborn into the more blissful Fine Material Sphere, the Immaterial Sphere, or the supremely blissful attainment of ending rebirth (enlightenment and nirvana) requires seeing things as they really are, seeing sensuality as it really is, penetrating the disappointment (dukkha) articulated in the Four Ennobling Truths. We want living beings to be happy, the Buddha wanted people to be happy, and you probably want people to be happy. Truth is the way to that, not oppression and imposing rules on how people have to live. If we are wrong, please show us. We can show how open minded the Buddha was, how the Dharma is a path that avoid extremes, and leads beyond sensual craving to supersensual bliss and then insight and liberation from the bondage of craving, aversion, and delusion. We arrive there step by step, not by behaving like ascetic renunciants. There is a much easier way to let go than brute force and self-denial -- and it is "calm and insight," blissfully happy absorptions and systematically contemplating the 12 links of Dependent Origination. "There is no path to happiness; happiness is the path!"]

 

Males, Females, and Sex

Dhr. Seven and Amber Larson, Wisdom Quarterly (COMMENTARY)

The Buddha, Battambang, Cambodia, S.E. Asia (Kim Seng/captainkino.com/flickr)

 

We have already been responding to Jeffery Kaung's letter in brackets. But let us go more deeply.

Kaung, everybody should always avoid "unlawful sexual practices." One need not avoid sex; yet, one need always avoid misconduct in regard to satisfying one's sexual desires. And that is easy to do... except in a repressive society that denies one sexual access. Our societies, East and West, now deny us, or try to deny us, legitimate avenues of sexual expression outside of marriage. That may make sense in conservative parts of Asia, as in rural or small communities, but it does not make a lot of sense in urbanized city environments which emphasize the individual to the detriment of extended familial affiliations.

This has to apply to females just as much as males even if India was already a patriarchal and sexist society that assumed sexual agency only for males. Females have the same agency and, therefore, are liable to get in the same sort of karmic trouble as males. Who can believe that when, for example, a man has sex with a married woman, only she is guilty of cheating on her husband? From a literal and closed minded reading of Buddhist texts (i.e., AN X.206), only he would be guilty. She would be said to have seduced him into a great deal of karmic trouble, but no mention is made of her infidelity to her husband, presumably because she has no agency and therefore no ability to make an intentional choice to cheat, which of course is ridiculous.

And with regard to child molestation, which is a severe form of "sexual misconduct" or "unlawful sexual practices," a female can certainly molest just as a male can. Would anyone in this day and age think, "Oh, she's a female, she has no sexual agency, so she can't possibly be guilty of intentional sexual conduct, how much less misconduct"? It's preposterous. Wisdom Quarterly speculates that it was the sexism influencing the Dharma, and not the Dharma itself, which left us with this one-sided set of rules for males only. We hear precious little about the nuns, Buddhist females at the time of the Buddha, or Buddhist girls and women today. 

That is our era's sexism continuing to diminish women aided and abetted by the sexism of the past, and the male Monastic Order, the Bhikkhu Sangha, has much to answer for keeping this unequal state of affairs in place. The status quo, which the Buddha did so much to overturn, was quickly set back up and given legitimacy as if the Buddha had participated in oppressing females when he was the first world-teacher to elevate them to equal status. 

If one says that the Buddha didn't go quite that far, but instead subordinated them to the Monastic Order, then one has not read the Bhikkhuni Vinaya (The Nuns' Code of Discipline with its origin stories explaining each rule), which enumerates ahistorical garudhammas or "additional nuns' rules" that could NOT have come from the Buddha (see the scholarship of Ayya Tathaaloka). 

• The Extra Rules for Nuns Ven. Tataaloka (Ayya Tathaaloka) on the eight "Principles to be Respected" by nuns (garudhammas) and the formation of the female Buddhist Order (bhikkhuni-sangha). The additional monastic rules for women are a "definite historical impossibility." (See also The Buddhist Nuns of California)

But we are all taught that he offered eight or more additional rules to his stepmother, Maha Pajapati, the world's first Buddhist nun, who gladly accepted them to wear like a beautifying head dress or hair piece. Someone, likely sexist male monastics, inserted those to ensure the supremacy of the male Monastic Order. The abbot from Burma you quote without naming is neither likely to realize that nor admit it if he does.

The nun Khema, Foremost in Wisdom (sutra)

Dhr. Seven and Amber Larson, CC Liu, Wisdom Quarterly translation based on Ven. Thanissaro (aka Geoffrey DeGraff, Abbot of Wat Metta), Khema Sutta (SN 44.1)

Venerable Khema, the Buddha's chief female disciple (-William/flickr.com)

 

First Buddhist Women (Susan Murcott)

On one occasion the Blessed One was residing near the city of Savatthi at Jeta's Grove in the millionaire's monastery. At that time the nun Khema [the Buddha's chief female disciple, "foremost in wisdom"], wandering on tour among the Kosalan peopple, had taken up her residence between Savatthi and Saketa at Toranavatthu. 

Then King Pasenadi Kosala, while traveling from Saketa to Savatthi, took up a one-night residence between Savatthi and Saketa at Toranavatthu. He addressed a certain man, "Come, now, my good man. Find out if in Toranavatthu there is any Brahmin [priest] or wandering ascetic (shraman) I might visit today."

 

"As you wish, sire," the man replied. Having roamed all over Toranavatthu, he did not see any. However, he did see the nun Khema. And seeing her he went to King Pasenadi Kosala and reported: "Sire, in Toranavatthu there is no Brahmin or wandering ascetic of the sort your majesty might visit. But there is a [Buddhist] nun named Khema, a disciple of the Blessed One, worthy and rightly self-awakened.

Khema "foremost in wisdom"

"And of this lady this commendable report has spread: 'She is wise, competent, intelligent, learned, a fluent speaker, admirable in her ingenuity.' Let your majesty visit her."

 

King Pasenadi Kosala went to the nun Khema. When he arrived, he bowed and sat respectfully to one side. Sitting there he said: "Now then, lady, does the Tathagata [the "Wayfarer," the Buddha] exist after death?"

 

"This, great king, has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata exists after death.'"

 

"Well then, lady, does the Tathagata not exist after death?"

 

"Great king, this too has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata does not exist after death.'"

 

"Then does the Tathagata both exist and not exist after death?"

"This also has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death.'"

 

"Well then, does the Tathagata neither exist nor not exist after death?"

 

"This, too, has not been declared by the Blessed One: 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.'"

 

"Now, lady, when asked if the Tathagata exists after death, you [answer no to each of the four exhaustive options]. Now, what is the cause, what is the reason, why that has not been declared by the Blessed One?"

 

Khema, Buddha, and Uppalavanna? (BreenJones)

"Very well, then, great king, I will question you in return about this very same matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think, great king: Do you have an accountant or actuary or mathematician who can count the grains of sand in the river Ganges as 'so many grains of sand,' or 'so many hundreds of grains of sand,' or 'so many thousands of grains of sand,' or 'so many hundreds of thousands of grains of sand'?"

 

"No, lady."

 

"Then do you have an accountant or calculator or mathematician who can count the water in the great ocean as 'so many buckets of water,' or 'so many hundreds of buckets of water,' or 'so many thousands of buckets of water,' or 'so many hundreds of thousands of buckets of water'?"

 

"No, lady. But why is that? The great ocean is deep, boundless, hard to fathom!"

 

"Even so, great king, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him -- that the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future rearising. Freed from the classification of form, great king, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the ocean. 

Modern Theravada "ten precept nun" dressed in white in Burma (As1974/flickr.com)

 

"'The Tathagata exists after death' does not apply. 'The Tathagata does not exist after death does not apply. 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death' does not apply. 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death' does not apply.

 

"Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental formation...

"Any consciousness [form, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are the Five Aggregates of Clinging unenlightened beings cling to and regard as self] by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him -- that the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future rearising. 

"Freed from the classification of consciousness, great king, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the ocean. 'The Tathagata exists after death' does not apply. 'The Tathagata does not exist after death' does not apply. 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death' does not apply. 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death' does not apply."

• The Commentary and Sub-commentary try to go further than this discourse and to describe the Liberated One's indescribability. To paraphrase: He is freed from the classification of form [and the other aggregates] because for him there will be no rearising [rebirth] of form and so on in the future, after passing into final nirvana. In addition, he is deep in terms of the depth of his character and the depth of his qualities. As for any description in terms of "a being" which might be used in relation to someone with such deep qualities, when one sees the inapplicability of the description "being," owing to the (future) non-rearising of the Five Aggregates of Clinging, one sees that none of the four statements with regard to the Tathagata are invalid after passing into final nirvana. [Wayfarer is an early English translation of the term Tathagata, which means "welcome one" and "well gone one," sometimes translated in Mahayana Buddhism as "Thus Come One." He is gone-and-going, after having arisen and arrived. He is a welcome teacher of freedom destined for complete freedom.] This explanation, which borrows from Sister Vajira's verse in SN 5.10, misses an important point raised in SN 22.36 and SN 23.2. In SN 22.36 the Buddha states that one is measured and classified by what one is obsessed with or clinging to. If one is not obsessed with anything and no longer clinging even unconsciously, then one is not measured or classified by it in the here and now. In SN 23.2 the Buddha points out that the term "being" or "becoming" (bhava) applies only where there is craving and passion [rooted in ignorance/unenlightenment and therefore leading to the future rearising of a rebirth-linking consciousness, which entails rebirth in samsara yet again for the umpteenth time]. The Tathagata, freed from craving and passion, is indescribable in the present, even though he obviously still functions in the present. SN 22.86 elaborates on this point in great detail. Another problem raised by the Commentary's explanation for this brief discourse is how it would define the Tathagata's qualities and character, for what are they composed of aside from the aggregates.

Then King Pasenadi Kosala, delighting in and approving of the nun Khema's words, got up from his seat, bowed, and -- respectfully keeping her to his right -- departed.

 

Asking the Buddha

A great Indian king (maha raja) meets the Buddha.

At another time he went to the Blessed One. When he arrived, he bowed, and sat respectfully to one side. Sitting there [he asked the Buddha the same four questions asked of the nun Khema, and he received precisely the same responses and analogies. Then he exclaimed:]

 

"Amazing, venerable sir! It is astounding how the meaning and phrasing of the teacher and disciple agree, coincide, and do not diverge from one another with regard to the supreme teaching! 

 

Recently, venerable sir, I visited the nun Khema. And when I arrived I asked her regarding this matter, and she answered me with the same words, the very same phrasing as the Blessed One. Amazing, venerable sir! It is astounding how the meaning and phrasing of the teacher and disciple agree, coincide, and do not diverge from one another with regard to the supreme teaching!

 

"Now, venerable sir, we must go. Our duties are many, and many are our responsibilities."

 

"Then do as you see fit, great king."

 

So King Pasenadi Kosala, delighting in and approving of the Blessed One's words, got up from his seat, bowed, -- respectfully keeping the Blessed One to his right -- departed.