How Women Are Remaking Buddhism

[sabaijai]

How women are remaking Buddhism By Joan Halifax Roshi

March 8, 2013

Since the mid-sixties, I have practiced Buddhism. From my point of view, Buddhism is more of a philosophy and, as well, a method to train the mind and heart. At its base, there should be no gender bias in Buddhism, if we examine Buddhism’s basic tenets. But in fact there is, as we learn that female monastics observing the full nun’s Patimokkha (around 348 rules), or precept body (the Vinaya), are subject to eight precepts that favor their brother monks, precepts that imply nuns are less worthy than individuals of the opposite sex. These are called “the eight heavy rules” and were reputedly crafted by the Buddha, who resisted ordaining women until he was persuaded otherwise by his cousin Ananda and the power of the presence of his step mother and her women associates.

These rules were created some 2,500 years ago, and though faithfully observed by women monastics for centuries, are now being examined in the light of the 21st Century, with the intent to honor the equal rights and capacity for awakening of both men and women.

Although it has not been typical for women to have positions of authority within traditional Buddhism, in our time, we are seeing a dramatic and positive change for women in all Buddhist orders. For example, I believe there are more women roshis (Zen masters) in the United States than there are in Japan. In the United States, more and more women find themselves head of monasteries and Buddhist institutions. And women are setting policies in place that guarantee practitioners ethical treatment, honor families, insure democratic processes in their organizations, and are dedicated to environmental justice and social engagement.

This means that Buddhism is not only good for women, but good for the world, and much of this has arisen as a result of women being empowered in various Buddhist schools in our time. For this, we must thank not only women but men as well, as the transmission process for the most part, has come from them. In this regard, I look at my own lineage chart, and there are 81 men’s names, names of ancestors, from the Buddha on, and my own living teacher, until the 82nd name, which is my own, the first woman’s name on the lineage chart, except for Prajnaparamita, the so-called Mother of all Buddhas, whose large circle at the top of the chart is the womb from which all Buddhas flow. And still, the historical and social significance that this lineage chart reveals can’t go unnoticed.

That women are receiving transmission in our era is an extraordinary shift away from a patriarchal religion toward a religion that honors gender parity, and practices what it preaches about inclusivity. This bodes well for Buddhism and all religions, as women have much to contribute to the psycho-social body of religion, as well as the philosophy, ethics, and practices that ground religious institutions.

As a Western woman and a Buddhist, my own work is not only in the West but in the East as well. I, like some of my sister practitioners, return to Asia, year after year. We go as ordained Buddhist priests, practitioners, and nuns to share with Asian men and women the relevance of Engaged Buddhism in our world today. I do not take for granted the responsibility that my sisters and I have in carrying the dharma into diverse and fairly inaccessible worlds, from remote hospices and clinics in India and Nepal, to refugee communities in Thailand and the Americas. We also find ourselves invited to such places as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and renowned Buddhist universities in Asia and the Americas to present our views regarding modern Buddhism, a Buddhism that is grounded in the essential teachings of the Buddha, but one that is socially engaged, systems-based, and environmentally active.

Buddha said, “My dharma is against the stream.” I believe that we women who have been given the opportunity to teach in countries other than their own have had the wonderful chance to push the river of gender parity in the right direction, toward women’s rights, including the right to fully ordain and to be fully authorized at the highest level by their schools of Buddhism. We also have been given the opportunity to challenge the relevance of Buddhism as it relates to modern life in our profoundly imperiled world, and to set in place educational programs, policies and projects that are focused on social as well as personal transformation, places like Upaya Zen Center in New Mexico or the International Women’s Partnership for Peace and Justice and its BEST program in Buddhist Education in Social Transformation.

I want to share one intimate experience I had in Thailand some years ago. For many years, it was against the law for a woman to do alms round in Thailand. In this practice, a monastic walks silently with an alms bowl in the hands and receives food from lay people as an expression of respect. I was fortunate to have met Dr. Chatsumarn Kabilsingh (now known as Bhikkhuni Dhammananda), a scholar of the Bhikkhuni Patimokkha, who was the first Thai woman to take full bhikkhuni ordination, which was, at this time, also against Thai law.

Kabilsingh, a mother of two, had made a commitment to fully ordain. She received full Bhikkhuhini vows in Sri Lanka on February 28, 2003 in the Dharmaguptaka Lineage. Shortly after her ordination, I had the privilege of staying in her nunnery, Wat Songkhammakalayani, some distance outside of Bangkok in the city of Nakhon Pathom.

Though she was subjected to death threats at this time as a result of choosing to be ordained as a nun, she invited me to join her in her daily alms round. With bare feet and her in her russet robes, and me in my black Zen robes, we made our way through the neighborhood adjacent to the nunnery. As we slowly walked in the heat of an early Thai morning, some households closed their doors tightly as we neared them. Others opened their doors, and men and women brought food to us. Though my eyes were cast down, I became aware that some of the women wept, as they stood before us. I saw men with their hands shaking as they put rice into our begging bowls.

At the time, I had no idea how radical an act this was. I only knew that my head was bare to the sun, my feet were bare to the road, and my heart was bare as I received food from these lay women and men. Later, I realized that we had not only broken the law, but we had broken open the door that separates women practitioners from being who they really are in that country.

There are no photographs of these hot morning walks on the stinging pavement of Nakhon Pathom. But the sense that the rights of women to practice as they see fit were being established in some small way as we made our way down the old roads of this neighborhood is now strongly in my bones.

I believe that we are experiencing a powerful phase shift in the world religions today, where gender parity is being deeply acknowledged and valued. The empowerment of women, the protection of children, the cultivation of ethics-based organizations, and the rights of all species is a vision whose time has come. And it is women who are contributing significantly to this vision and actualizing it in our world today, as their role in religious communities is acknowledged and strengthened.

Joan Halifax Roshi is a Buddhist teacher, Zen priest, anthropologist, and author. She is Founder, Abbot, and Head Teacher of Upaya Zen Center, a Buddhist monastery in Santa Fe, New Mexico

© The Washington Post Company

[thaigold]

Santa Fe New Mexico is a center of the New Age phenomenon in the US. It no more represents Buddhism in America than the Hare Krishna's in LAX. Santa Fe is better known for quaint art galleries, New Age ashrams, and some of the best Tex-Mex restaurants in the US.

Let's keep it that way.

[JurgenG]

I recently read about the problem Ajahn Brahm had because he was involved in the ordination of female nuns.

On a personal level I really appreciate Ajahn Brahm. I had the chance to meet a number of Ajahn Chah students and Ajahn Brahm was the one who was the more able to translate Ajahn Chah teaching in a way that makes sense in my every day life.

On the other hand, if you belong to a group, an association, a church, you have to respect the rules.

I believe women can bring a lot to Buddhism but it is not in trying to gate crash established association that they will achieved the most.

[fabianfred]

http://www.sdsweb.orgwww.facebook.com/sdsface

[Sheryl]

Minor correction to an otherwise very nice article: Ven. Bhikkuni Dhammananda was not the first Thai woman to take full Bhikkuni ordination. That honor belongs to her mother, Ven. Bhikkuni Tu Tao (Voramai Kabilsimngh) who ordained in Taiwan in 1971 and was the founder and long time Abottess of Wat Songkhammakalayani.

[khaowong1]

It's coming. I hear a lot of women in my part of the world who want to become Bhikkhuni's.. women monks. However, it's still not allowed among Theravada sanctions.. I salute Ajahn Brahm for his actions. I respect him.. He's a great teacher. But I don't expect Theravada Bhikkhuni ordination in my lifetime..

[khaowong1]

I meant to say, I don't think I will see Theravada sanctioned Bhikkhuni ordination in Thailand in my lifetime..

[Several]

We are human. Being a man or woman is a subsection of that. The difference is slight and balanced. We are celibates. Our gender should be irrelevant. Sadhu to all seekers.

[Sheryl]

I meant to say, I don't think I will see Theravada sanctioned Bhikkhuni ordination in Thailand in my lifetime..

A necessary correction, since Theravada Bhikkuni ordinations are already taking place, e.g. in Sri Lanka.

As to whether they will occur in Thailand in your lifetime I suppose it depends on your age and general state of health. I expect to see it within mine.

[lungmi]

Here a link concerning the important role of women inThai Buddhism

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21936656

[khaowong1]

Santa Fe New Mexico is a center of the New Age phenomenon in the US. It no more represents Buddhism in America than the Hare Krishna's in LAX. Santa Fe is better known for quaint art galleries, New Age ashrams, and some of the best Tex-Mex restaurants in the US.

Let's keep it that way.

Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Sedona, Arizona. Yes, your right. They no more represent Buddhism than the Hare Krishna's.

And also, I would like to ad, "Zen" Buddhism really doesn't represent Buddhism so much either. In order to study Buddhism at a Zen temple, you have to agree to pay a certain amount each month. I really don't believe the Buddha would approve. Just my thoughts.

[khaowong1]

I meant to say, I don't think I will see Theravada sanctioned Bhikkhuni ordination in Thailand in my lifetime..

A necessary correction, since Theravada Bhikkuni ordinations are already taking place, e.g. in Sri Lanka.

As to whether they will occur in Thailand in your lifetime I suppose it depends on your age and general state of health. I expect to see it within mine.

I understand they have now stopped in Sri Lanka.. a little dispute with the Thai Sangha I hear.

[dutchguest]

Although also male dominated Tibatan buddhism has some female family lines of buddhist teachers. I recently listened on Youtube to some talks of Jetsun Kandro Rinpoche and I think she is not only a good speaker but also has something to say.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khandro_Rinpoche

http://mjkr.org/

[beautifulthailand99]

Women would bring much needed reform to the Sangha and since here in the UK they represent the vast majority of the laity it seems only fair. The Buddha ordained women in his lifetime so it's just a patriarchal cultural thing. Ajahn Brahm has done a noble and courageous act - somebody had to be the first.

[dutchguest]

A talk of Khandro on Nagarjuna:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQX4FYitEo4

[dutchguest]

Women would bring much needed reform to the Sangha and since here in the UK they represent the vast majority of the laity it seems only fair. The Buddha ordained women in his lifetime so it's just a patriarchal cultural thing. Ajahn Brahm has done a noble and courageous act - somebody had to be the first.

I have some general ideas why there is male dominance in religion:

If you look at many primitive tribes there is often a matriarchal organization: woman do all the work in the fields and in the house, heredity goes in the female line. There is common property of land and sharing things is highly valued.

Man generally don't do very much and have all the time to sit and think, look after the children a bit and devote themselves to the “higher” things, art, filosofying about all kind of things etc. The woman generally do the more direct productive work, the man helped with some production facilitating jobs, like building houses, travel and fighting with other tribes if needed.

In the course of history, as tribal organization was replaced by first city-states and later the present nation-states, this division of tasks leaded to man being more active in the political and religious field and woman in and around the house. This created slowly a reversal of the power balance between man and woman and often also the heredity laws were changed in favor of man. Private property became the rule.

Now, especially in the western world, the role of woman in all fields becomes more important so they may also give some new impulses to the religions.

Much more can be said about this developments (among others that matriarchal organization and heredity in the female line mean more sexual freedom as it is not so important who is the father of the children, while in a patriarchal organization the freedom of especially the woman is very much restricted so that there can be no doubt who the father is), but I leave it with this. Those interested can have a look at the following links:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000E8LQM4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo

[AYJAYDEE]

I recently read about the problem Ajahn Brahm had because he was involved in the ordination of female nuns.

On a personal level I really appreciate Ajahn Brahm. I had the chance to meet a number of Ajahn Chah students and Ajahn Brahm was the one who was the more able to translate Ajahn Chah teaching in a way that makes sense in my every day life.

On the other hand, if you belong to a group, an association, a church, you have to respect the rules.

I believe women can bring a lot to Buddhism but it is not in trying to gate crash established association that they will achieved the most.

Challenging the established association is the ONLY way to achieve the most!

[dutchguest]

I have some general ideas why there is male dominance in religion:

If you look at many primitive tribes there is often a matriarchal organization: woman do all the work in the fields and in the house, heredity goes in the female line. There is common property of land and sharing things is highly valued.

Man generally don't do very much and have all the time to sit and think, look after the children a bit and devote themselves to the “higher” things, art, filosofying about all kind of things etc. The woman generally do the more direct productive work, the man helped with some production facilitating jobs, like building houses, travel and fighting with other tribes if needed.

In the course of history, as tribal organization was replaced by first city-states and later the present nation-states, this division of tasks leaded to man being more active in the political and religious field and woman in and around the house. This created slowly a reversal of the power balance between man and woman and often also the heredity laws were changed in favor of man. Private property became the rule.

Now, especially in the western world, the role of woman in all fields becomes more important so they may also give some new impulses to the religions.

Much more can be said about this developments (among others that matriarchal organization and heredity in the female line mean more sexual freedom as it is not so important who is the father of the children, while in a patriarchal organization the freedom of especially the woman is very much restricted so that there can be no doubt who the father is), but I leave it with this. Those interested can have a look at the following links:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000E8LQM4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo

After some more research and reading I will now try to give broadly a somewhat more complete picture of evolution of the gender roles in historic perspective as I see it:

There is an increasing amount of evidence that before the present patriarchal situation there was a more matriarchal situation. Thousands of years of patriarchy have conditioned many people in such a way that they think this is the natural situation for mankind and this conditioning has also had its influence on science (anthropology) in the sense that this prejudice has colored the observations of many scientists and that the present situation (of a -preferably- lifelong monogamous marriage as the central institution around which reproduction is organized) is projected upon the past. (By the way, historically seen matriarchy is not just the opposite of patriarchy in the sense that woman rule. The Greek word “arche” means as well “beginning” as “rule” and the term “beginning” is more right in the case of matriarchy as it concerned an egalitarian, democratic organisation in which the female or mother-goddess stood at the beginning and in the center of everything. In the case of patriarchy the meaning of “archy” as “rule” is more right).

The calender may begin counting with Christ or the Buddha, human history does not begin there. A feature of the rise patriarchal rule is that history is (for the first time) written in verbal form and that rational logic takes the place of the more matriarchal awareness in symbols, magic, images and pictures. The mind functions via language and a duality between the words and the reality is created. Mankind became more or less imprisoned in his mind by identification with it and lost contact with reality. Alienation of nature and also of the own nature was the result. The mind became separated from (and was far superior to) nature, the former unity with nature was lost (this objectification of nature may have been a historic necessity to develop the science (of nature). So primitive tribal people have a more direct awareness of reality and are generally much less alienated (and stand in many ways much closer to the Buddhist ideals then modern man).

There is a certain parallel between the development of the individual and the evolutionary/social development of the species: before his birth the embryo follows in 9 months the millions of years of natural evolution of organic life from one-cellular organisms to human, after his birth he follows the social evolution of mankind. For the same reason why most people cannot remember the first years of their life very well, the time before they could talk, humanity does not remember his (matriarchal) unwritten history very well. Not accidentally little children and primitives have much in common. This forgetfulness became the collective and personal unconscious. So “the lost paradise”, the lost unity with nature, is as well a personal as a social phenomenon.

There is a way beyond the duality of male and female which is also a way beyond sex. To realize this way the female side in yourself and also in the evolution of mankind, the social history (inside and outside, psychology and sociology are two sides of the same reality) has to be brought to the surface. This side has been repressed in the present patriarchal situation and has become as well the collective as the personal unconscious. By making the unconscious conscious all duality evaporates, inside/outside, subjective/objective, mind/body, culture/nature etc. The energy lost in the fight with(in) yourself comes free and becomes undivided freedom.

A few websites to support these views:

http://www.hagia.de/en/international-academy-hagia.html

http://www.matriarchiv.info/?lang=en

A general overview of the anthropological ideas concerning the gender roles in the evolution of man can be found here. It is clear that the “nuclear family” as we know it is relatively recent, in the west generally speaking from about 1000 BC (the development of humanity around the world does not go synchronous in this respect). Other forms of sexual relations and upbringing of children were more common as still can be seen in primitive tribes here and there. The development goes from a more group/kinship/clan identification and organization of the reproduction to a more individualistic/egoistic attitude, reproduction is essentially a business of a single man and woman.

There is also archeological evidence that before the present male domination there was a very long historic period in which the female aspect was more dominant. The development of new techniques and ways to determine the age of old remains give a proof that everywhere in the world there was first a motherland and a mother-goddess. From 40.000BC on this book gives an overview of that.

To focus more specific on Thailand this article gives an impression of the gender roles in historic perspective. Thailand is a comparatively young civilization and has still some matriarchal remains especially in the countryside. Although things are changing quickly, traditionally Thailand was (and still is) a matrilinear and matrifocal society: inheritance in the female line and the man moving in with the (family of the) woman. The practice of the “dowry” eg is in Thailand opposite to that in older civilizations like India (google “dowry Thailand” and “dowry India”). Also a sign is the greater sexual freedom compared with the west, where only recently woman (and man) are beginning to emancipate from their Victorian armor/corset and the strict monogamous marriage patriarchal rules. This greater freedom in Thailand attracts many foreigners (just imagine what would happen if so many foreigners were going to some Islamic, Arabic, patriarchal country and starting sexual relations with the woman there. Also in the west there is -IMO- still more male jealousy and possessiveness then in Thailand and woman are sexually more free in Thailand. Of course also economic factors play a not unimportant role).

[rockyysdt]

I have some general ideas why there is male dominance in religion:

If you look at many primitive tribes there is often a matriarchal organization: woman do all the work in the fields and in the house, heredity goes in the female line. There is common property of land and sharing things is highly valued.

Man generally don't do very much and have all the time to sit and think, look after the children a bit and devote themselves to the “higher” things, art, filosofying about all kind of things etc. The woman generally do the more direct productive work, the man helped with some production facilitating jobs, like building houses, travel and fighting with other tribes if needed.

In the course of history, as tribal organization was replaced by first city-states and later the present nation-states, this division of tasks leaded to man being more active in the political and religious field and woman in and around the house. This created slowly a reversal of the power balance between man and woman and often also the heredity laws were changed in favor of man. Private property became the rule.

Now, especially in the western world, the role of woman in all fields becomes more important so they may also give some new impulses to the religions.

Much more can be said about this developments (among others that matriarchal organization and heredity in the female line mean more sexual freedom as it is not so important who is the father of the children, while in a patriarchal organization the freedom of especially the woman is very much restricted so that there can be no doubt who the father is), but I leave it with this. Those interested can have a look at the following links:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000E8LQM4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo

After some more research and reading I will now try to give broadly a somewhat more complete picture of evolution of the gender roles in historic perspective as I see it:

There is an increasing amount of evidence that before the present patriarchal situation there was a more matriarchal situation. Thousands of years of patriarchy have conditioned many people in such a way that they think this is the natural situation for mankind and this conditioning has also had its influence on science (anthropology) in the sense that this prejudice has colored the observations of many scientists and that the present situation (of a -preferably- lifelong monogamous marriage as the central institution around which reproduction is organized) is projected upon the past. (By the way, historically seen matriarchy is not just the opposite of patriarchy in the sense that woman rule. The Greek word “arche” means as well “beginning” as “rule” and the term “beginning” is more right in the case of matriarchy as it concerned an egalitarian, democratic organisation in which the female or mother-goddess stood at the beginning and in the center of everything. In the case of patriarchy the meaning of “archy” as “rule” is more right).

The calender may begin counting with Christ or the Buddha, human history does not begin there. A feature of the rise patriarchal rule is that history is (for the first time) written in verbal form and that rational logic takes the place of the more matriarchal awareness in symbols, magic, images and pictures. The mind functions via language and a duality between the words and the reality is created. Mankind became more or less imprisoned in his mind by identification with it and lost contact with reality. Alienation of nature and also of the own nature was the result. The mind became separated from (and was far superior to) nature, the former unity with nature was lost (this objectification of nature may have been a historic necessity to develop the science (of nature). So primitive tribal people have a more direct awareness of reality and are generally much less alienated (and stand in many ways much closer to the Buddhist ideals then modern man).

There is a certain parallel between the development of the individual and the evolutionary/social development of the species: before his birth the embryo follows in 9 months the millions of years of natural evolution of organic life from one-cellular organisms to human, after his birth he follows the social evolution of mankind. For the same reason why most people cannot remember the first years of their life very well, the time before they could talk, humanity does not remember his (matriarchal) unwritten history very well. Not accidentally little children and primitives have much in common. This forgetfulness became the collective and personal unconscious. So “the lost paradise”, the lost unity with nature, is as well a personal as a social phenomenon.

There is a way beyond the duality of male and female which is also a way beyond sex. To realize this way the female side in yourself and also in the evolution of mankind, the social history (inside and outside, psychology and sociology are two sides of the same reality) has to be brought to the surface. This side has been repressed in the present patriarchal situation and has become as well the collective as the personal unconscious. By making the unconscious conscious all duality evaporates, inside/outside, subjective/objective, mind/body, culture/nature etc. The energy lost in the fight with(in) yourself comes free and becomes undivided freedom.

A few websites to support these views:

http://www.hagia.de/en/international-academy-hagia.html

http://www.matriarchiv.info/?lang=en

A general overview of the anthropological ideas concerning the gender roles in the evolution of man can be found here. It is clear that the “nuclear family” as we know it is relatively recent, in the west generally speaking from about 1000 BC (the development of humanity around the world does not go synchronous in this respect). Other forms of sexual relations and upbringing of children were more common as still can be seen in primitive tribes here and there. The development goes from a more group/kinship/clan identification and organization of the reproduction to a more individualistic/egoistic attitude, reproduction is essentially a business of a single man and woman.

There is also archeological evidence that before the present male domination there was a very long historic period in which the female aspect was more dominant. The development of new techniques and ways to determine the age of old remains give a proof that everywhere in the world there was first a motherland and a mother-goddess. From 40.000BC on this book gives an overview of that.

To focus more specific on Thailand this article gives an impression of the gender roles in historic perspective. Thailand is a comparatively young civilization and has still some matriarchal remains especially in the countryside. Although things are changing quickly, traditionally Thailand was (and still is) a matrilinear and matrifocal society: inheritance in the female line and the man moving in with the (family of the) woman. The practice of the “dowry” eg is in Thailand opposite to that in older civilizations like India (google “dowry Thailand” and “dowry India”). Also a sign is the greater sexual freedom compared with the west, where only recently woman (and man) are beginning to emancipate from their Victorian armor/corset and the strict monogamous marriage patriarchal rules. This greater freedom in Thailand attracts many foreigners (just imagine what would happen if so many foreigners were going to some Islamic, Arabic, patriarchal country and starting sexual relations with the woman there. Also in the west there is -IMO- still more male jealousy and possessiveness then in Thailand and woman are sexually more free in Thailand. Of course also economic factors play a not unimportant role).

How does one make the unconscious (subconscious) become conscious?

Is this through practicing the eightfold path?

Greater sexual freedom appears to also involve greater levels of education and social awareness.

I'm noting that those with greater levels of education, prosperity, and consumerism tend to be less likely to embrace religion.

Many equate Buddhism with religion.

I'm suggesting that the Thai Buddhist community will continue to embrace patriarchy along with its diminished roles for women due to:

• The newer generations, with their global education/culture/consumerism brought about by the homogenizing affects of the internet/smartphones/popular culture/education/facebook no longer need religion.
• Most who identify as Buddhists never practice the eightfold path and so will never rise above their delusion.
• The cultural and animisticly styled Thai Buddhism is more likely to attract the poor/uneducated who are more likely to be patriarchal.

Edited September 16, 2013 by rockyysdt

[dutchguest]

How does one make the unconscious (subconscious) become conscious?

Is this through practicing the eightfold path?

Greater sexual freedom appears to also involve greater levels of education and social awareness.

I'm noting that those with greater levels of education, prosperity, and consumerism tend to be less likely to embrace religion.

Many equate Buddhism with religion.

I'm suggesting that the Thai Buddhist community will continue to embrace patriarchy along with its diminished roles for women due to:

• The newer generations, with their global education/culture/consumerism brought about by the homogenizing affects of the internet/smartphones/popular culture/education/facebook no longer need religion.
• Most who identify as Buddhists never practice the eightfold path and so will never rise above their delusion.
• The cultural and animisticly styled Thai Buddhism is more likely to attract the poor/uneducated who are more likely to be patriarchal.

As I see it, the Buddhist path can certainly be a help to make the unconscious conscious if you don't stick to much its outside form but try to grasp the essence, if you don't take the words to literally, but try to translate the meaning to a personal relevant level. Many enlightened people have the same message in different words, so you can see what suits you the best. I take from as many sources as possible what I can use. After all it is a personal journey and we are not all the same. We live in different times under different circumstances.

The eightfold path may generally speaking be good guidelines to keep in mind, but not to follow blindly. The journey goes inwards so you must try to develop your own conscience to know for yourself what is the right thing to do in certain concrete circumstances. There are societies and primitive tribes that have different sexual norms then existed in the Buddha's time, there can be circumstances where stealing can be a good thing to do and not stealing can produce bad karma (see the video “karma” in the Thai video's forum). So there are higher natural laws of karma that can overrule the relative truths of the eightfold path. I see karma as absolute, objective laws of nature to try to keep in mind in deciding what to do or not to do. The problem is they are often not so easy to understand, but I think intuitively everybody has some feeling for it.

As I see it generally speaking in Thailand the outer forms of Buddhism are more important, in the west the self-development aspect. In themselves the outer forms can also be useful, but if it is just a mechanical practiced conditioning it is not of much value, if it is done with mindfulness and awareness it can be a way to develop yourself. Via the outer forms you can also come to inner core. And may be in the course of time the emphasis in Thailand will shift more to the inner values of Buddhism. Then the male/female aspect will become rather irrelevant.

[sabaijai]

Thailand's nuns fight for equality

After Venerable Dhammananda Bhikkhuni was ordained in Sri Lanka, she set out to elevate women's religious status in her Thai homeland.

http://www.dw.de/thailands-nuns-fight-for-equality/a-17260110