Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Theravāda in the 21st century - modern applications of ancient wisdom

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby chownah » Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:33 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Chownah,

chownah wrote:I think your comment was meant to describe thoughts of western imperialism as being a journey into fantasy.

Actually, it was only meant to demonstrate that there is no single homogenized "Asian culture" we are dealing with. The small sample of three (and the difference in your thoughts on the subject vis-a-vis pilgrim & ven. Appicchato) was sufficient to show that. As I have said though, this is about Theravada Buddhism... and having it framed it as a supposed attack on "Asian culture" by "Western culture" is quite unfortunate, and is a complete red herring, as Daverupa pointed out above.
[My reply: Odd that you would expect that mention three attitudes expressed by westerners would "only" mean that there is no single Asian culture but I accept your explanation...I missed it first time around. Many Asians, and more specifically many Thai people are well aware of western imperealist tendencies which is expressed politically, economically, and socially. Thai people don't like foreigners trying to tell them how to run their lives; what to think and what to do; what to value and what to strive for. People are a product of their culture while following the path probably means that eventually culture must be overcome I don't think that many of us are ready yet to jettison our cultures.]In another recent topic - viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10445 - pilgrim anecdoctally observes a decline in the Theravada bhikkhu population in traditional Theravada countries over recent decades, so if Theravada Buddhism is facing a challenge in maintaining relevance in the face of modernity, then this is a relevant concern to Theravada Buddhists without anyone even mentioning the word "Western".
[My reply: I think that if Thais are worried by the decline in the number of monks then it is Thai people who will do whatever they think is necessary to correct this.....it is beyond my imagination to think that any foreign influence will play a significant part in this.....what doe people in the USofA think when Chinese diplomats confront the lack of personal freedom in the USofA?....scoff and scorn....even though people in the USofA fear to walk at night in public places because of the prevelance of violence.....good intentions receiveing scoff and scorn because of cultureal differences. Chinese diplomats will not have much influence on the development of personal freedom in the USofA and I doubt that Gombrich's approach will have much influence on the development of Thai Buddhism.]
chownah wrote:You say what we have in common is our common Buddhist heritage. You are wrong. We do not have a common Buddhist heritage culture....it is shear fantasy to think that Buddhists throughout the world have a common Buddhist heritage culture....Buddists can't even agree on some of the most fundamental points of doctrine.....and clearly it all diverges from there....there is no common Buddhist heritage.

If all there is is refuge in the Triple Gem - then that is a start. If there is not even that, Theravada Buddhism may as well pack up and go home.
[My reply: Belief in the Triple Gem does not constitute a culture. I agree that most Theravadans have this one beilef in common....but my view is to say that this is a common Buddhist heritage culture is beyond reasonable extrapolation.}

Also, I want to note that it matters little to me personally what Gombrich says at these conferences. My practice is pretty much not depending on temple monks....I do my best to make my practice not dependent on anything in the world.
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2411
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 16, 2011 4:13 am

manasikara wrote:
Richard Gombrich wrote:We are therefore dealing not just with a misguided ritual obsession but with true misogyny, a horror and dread of women, a fear that the slightest contact with a female is seductive and may inspire lust.
By him making this extreme statement, I feel justified in wondering whether Gombrich has any idea of how challenging it is to practice strict, long-term celibacy (for a normal male). We don't have the Buddha, or nearly as many Arahants around nowdays, to support our practice of strict brahmacariya (for those men who choose it). If monks have found a little extra way to safeguard their minds from lust arising, then why not? If Bhikkhunis requested the same procedure regarding offerings from male laymen, would we object, calling it 'misandry'? I think not!

I know this diverges a little from what people are currently talking about, but I add it because it shows once again how we need to be careful when reading critiques of Buddhist monastic culture if they are written by a scholar rather than a practitioner, even when that scholar is sympathetic to Buddhism. There can be certain things they misconstrue, imo.
Yes, well, how much dread of sex and anything sensual have we seen expressed here on good old DW? One has to wonder if long term celibacy generates unwholesome mind states, if it is a worthwhile practice for the individual who putting himself through the ordeal.

And, yes, we have to be careful about critiques Buddhist monastic culture as well as the culture in which they are embedded.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18384
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby ground » Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:36 am

pilgrim wrote:"Ven Sugandho has asked why the dissemination of Theravāda Buddhism is no longer as successful as it used to be. ...


Maybe the idea of "dissemination of {a tradition}" is no longer appropriate for "the modern world"?

Just to add another idea ... :shrug:

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 2592
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby manas » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:20 am

tiltbillings wrote:Yes, well, how much dread of sex and anything sensual have we seen expressed here on good old DW? One has to wonder if long term celibacy generates unwholesome mind states, if it is a worthwhile practice for the individual who putting himself through the ordeal.
Tilt, if you are referring to repression of the sex drive without using concentration and insight - just repression - then I would agree. But we could also look at it this way: letting go of sexual activity, and striving to let go of the desire for it, hurts; but not as much as dying, then being reborn again. (Or so I've heard).

with metta,
manas.
Primum non nocere: "first, do no harm."
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:02 am

manasikara wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Yes, well, how much dread of sex and anything sensual have we seen expressed here on good old DW? One has to wonder if long term celibacy generates unwholesome mind states, if it is a worthwhile practice for the individual who putting himself through the ordeal.
Tilt, if you are referring to repression of the sex drive without using concentration and insight - just repression - then I would agree. But we could also look at it this way: letting go of sexual activity, and striving to let go of the desire for it, hurts; but not as much as dying, then being reborn again. (Or so I've heard).

with metta,
manas.
What I talking about is how some here have talked about sex and sensual pleasure. Dealing with sexuality from a place of meditative insight and precept practice is something that I do not see as needing to generate "dread" and negativity.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18384
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby manas » Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:40 am

tiltbillings wrote:
manasikara wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Yes, well, how much dread of sex and anything sensual have we seen expressed here on good old DW? One has to wonder if long term celibacy generates unwholesome mind states, if it is a worthwhile practice for the individual who putting himself through the ordeal.
Tilt, if you are referring to repression of the sex drive without using concentration and insight - just repression - then I would agree. But we could also look at it this way: letting go of sexual activity, and striving to let go of the desire for it, hurts; but not as much as dying, then being reborn again. (Or so I've heard).

with metta,
manas.
What I talking about is how some here have talked about sex and sensual pleasure. Dealing with sexuality from a place of meditative insight and precept practice is something that I do not see as needing to generate "dread" and negativity.
Yes I see what you were getting at now...anyway, my problem was with Gombrich making the accusation of 'misogyny' regarding monks using a piece of cloth when receiving offerings from women. My point was that as a scholar rather than a practitioner as such, he could easily be misconstruing why this practice exists. It is not because women are seen in a negative way, afaik. I see it as just an admission of how much harder it has become to practice brahmacariya when most of the world at present is mad after, and seems to glorify, sex. Let's be honest, what is the number one reason for monks disrobing? I bet it's not the quality of the food being offered...I really admire anyone who, going against the grain of what the world seems hell-bent on, sincerely strives to practice brahmacariya purely, for the sake of the ending of all stress. All I'm saying is, Gombrich's accusation of misogyny is misplaced.

metta,
manas.
Primum non nocere: "first, do no harm."
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:59 am

manasikara wrote: All I'm saying is, Gombrich's accusation of misogyny is misplaced.
Yes.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18384
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby Mr Man » Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:38 am

manasikara wrote: Let's be honest, what is the number one reason for monks disrobing?


I don't think that not being able to remain celibate is the number one reason for monks disrobing (going off topic).
User avatar
Mr Man
 
Posts: 1052
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby daverupa » Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:07 pm

manasikara wrote:My point was that as a scholar rather than a practitioner as such, he could easily be misconstruing why this practice exists. It is not because women are seen in a negative way, afaik. I see it as just an admission of how much harder it has become to practice brahmacariya when most of the world at present is mad after, and seems to glorify, sex.


This is tantamount to saying "if the Buddha was alive today, this would be Vinaya", is it not? After all, the world "at present" is comprised of humans little different than those of yesteryear when it comes to sexual behavior, so the idea that this cloth was introduced purely as a capitulation to the difficulties of us moderns is hardly supportable.

I wish we would all pursue this question, in terms of whether Gombrich has misapplied a criticism: what is the history of this piece of cloth, and what was the reason for its introduction - despite a lack of it in other Theravadan Buddhist countries, and a clear lack of it in the Vinaya?

From Bhikkhu Ariyesako:

If a bhikkhu touches a woman in a sexual way, he commits a very serious offence requiring formal meetings of the Community and probation (Sa"nghaadisesa). The scrupulous bhikkhu wants to remain above suspicion so, if he can, he will avoid all physical contact. (Hence his attitude to shaking hands. This also explains why in Thailand a receiving cloth is used to receive offerings from women.


So the use of the cloth is here claimed to be motivated by a desire to "remain above suspicion", but this Rule exists in countries where this practice is not followed. Therefore, the Rule does not explain why this tradition only exists in Thailand. A cultural explanation is more likely.

Now, consider the following:

Q: The Thai Sangha Council’s position on Bhikkhunis seems to be neither for or against - they seem to just letting things ride ….

Ven. Dhammananda. That’s right, in fact they cannot say anything because according to their charter the word ‘Sangha’ is defined as Bhikkhu Sangha, so in that sense they have no right to say yes or no to the Bhikkhuni Sangha. They would need an official Sangha Council Act to change this and that means passing a Parliamentary Bill....

Q: So it seems they want to let things develop slowly rather than make a big sudden change to Thai culture…

VEN DH: I was at a function and sat close to one of the head monks of Thailand - one who had forbidden the Mae Chees in his temple from ordaining as Samaneris [Novice Bhikkhunis] but who later said let them do as they wish and we will see what happens. One of the issues is they want to make sure that once we are here we are of good quality. That is a big issue; even in the Bhikkhu Sangha it is very difficult to control the quality of the monks, without the complication of female monks.

Q. How many of the Mae Chees do you think actually want to become Bhikkhunis?

VEN DH: They are scared … No we are not expecting Bhikkhunis to come out of Mae Chees. Within the social structure they are scared, especially as they have not had the nod from the monks. If they get the nod, then maybe they will do it.


This is deplorable, and I have no problem agreeing with Dr. Gombrich in calling this sort of environment misogynistic since the constellation of variables supports this 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]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby chownah » Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:01 pm

I can see how a person could be mysogynistic but I don't see how an environment could be mysogynistic.
What is the constellation of variables that supports this criticism?
What is a variable that supports criticism?
just wondering...
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2411
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby daverupa » Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:39 pm

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.

chownah wrote:What is the constellation of variables that supports this criticism?


The fracas over bhikkhunis is a story replete with evidence of this sort. Dhammananda mentions quite a bit in the link, above. There were some threads on this topic here on DW as well. It's all quite apparent.
    "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]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby Zom » Wed Nov 16, 2011 5:49 pm

.By him making this extreme statement, I feel justified in wondering whether Gombrich has any idea of how challenging it is to practice strict, long-term celibacy (for a normal male). We don't have the Buddha, or nearly as many Arahants around nowdays, to support our practice of strict brahmacariya (for those men who choose it). If monks have found a little extra way to safeguard their minds from lust arising, then why not? If Bhikkhunis requested the same procedure regarding offerings from male laymen, would we object, calling it 'misandry'? I think not!

I know this diverges a little from what people are currently talking about, but I add it because it shows once again how we need to be careful when reading critiques of Buddhist monastic culture if they are written by a scholar rather than a practitioner, even when that scholar is sympathetic to Buddhism. There can be certain things they misconstrue, imo.



:goodpost:
User avatar
Zom
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby manas » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:07 pm

Mr Man wrote:
manasikara wrote: Let's be honest, what is the number one reason for monks disrobing?


I don't think that not being able to remain celibate is the number one reason for monks disrobing (going off topic).
Let me make this absolutely clear: I was talking about the desire being an obstacle, and them leaving in the honourable way due to this. I do hope this was clear. I believe that remaining celibate while in robes is not the issue, but dealing with the mental agitation that can torment one - that's a different matter. (I had a stint as a 'brahmacari' in a Hindu ashram before turning to Buddhism, so I know a little bit about how tough it can be).

Now I'm wishing I had never commented at all on Gombrich's 'misogyny' accusation, and just let that comment slip past, as all I've done is (re)open a can of worms (sexism, Thai Sangha, Bhikkhunis, etc, etc) :(

:anjali:
Last edited by manas on Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Primum non nocere: "first, do no harm."
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby manas » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:20 pm

daverupa wrote:
This is tantamount to saying "if the Buddha was alive today, this would be Vinaya", is it not?
No, I did not say or imply that at all! Quite the opposite, in fact.

with metta,
manas.
Primum non nocere: "first, do no harm."
User avatar
manas
 
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby daverupa » Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:36 pm

manasikara wrote:
daverupa wrote:
This is tantamount to saying "if the Buddha was alive today, this would be Vinaya", is it not?
No, I did not say or imply that at all! Quite the opposite, in fact.

with metta,
manas.


Indeed, I could have not written that and that post of mine would have been better for it.

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...

:heart:

Richard Gombrich wrote:Our leaders must fearlessly stand up and tell the world that Buddhism is meant to apply to the whole of life, public and private. We have to understand, and act accordingly, that ritual has no intrinsic value and must be jettisoned if it gets in the way of living the Dhamma. We must acknowledge that Buddhism is for all, including foreigners and women: all must be the objects of our love and compassion, just as all are equally responsible moral agents.
    "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]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby Zom » Wed Nov 16, 2011 8:51 pm

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.
User avatar
Zom
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby daverupa » Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:34 pm

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]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby chownah » Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:50 am

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
chownah
 
Posts: 2411
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby daverupa » Thu Nov 17, 2011 12:41 pm

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]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Richard Gombrich - Comfort or Challenge?

Postby chownah » Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:09 pm

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
chownah
 
Posts: 2411
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Theravāda for the modern world

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests