[Buddha-l] women & , er, religion

[Franz Metcalf]

Sally et al.,

You wrote,

> To me, words (e.g. "ordination") are context dependent. If one uses it
> in the context of the FWBO it means one thing, but in the context of
> an organisation that has monks, nuns and laypeople, it means something
> else.
>
> Language is always going to be elastic and meanings will always change
> according to context.

Precisely (if once can say such a thing about elastic meaning).

> Buddha-L is a place where different usages of the same words will
> often crop up, because members come from a whole range of backgrounds.
> So why not just acknowledge this, and try to develop an awareness of
> each other's specific nuances and clarify one's own usage?

The reason, as you mention in your post, is that this would give us  
nothing to argue about. On the other hand, it would go some distance  
towards clarifying our differences and appreciating our commonalities.  
I *believe* that is the point of scholarship, but I'm sure someone can  
tell me I'm totally confused and they have nothing in common with my  
view.

Seriously, I think the container of buddha-l, being large than any one  
sangha or dharma-stream, is a natural place of confusion and,  
hopefully, true dialogue. I think we're approaching it here. Glad to  
be engaging in it with you.

Franz