[Buddha-l] Brahma & Abraham

[Joy Vriens]

Hi Joanna,



That's too many competing speculations to deal with for me.



Here is a list of some of my current working dogmas (that nobody has asked
for :-)).

1. Pali Buddhism (or any other Buddhism) doesn't allow me to know what the
Buddha thought or what his intentions were.

2. I don't give much credit to Buddhist utopias (or eutopias) if not
interpreted in a rather symbolic way.

3. Hypothetical : The Buddha/Buddhism didn't fundamentally question the
saṃsāra-karma-moksa ideal and associated mythology, but developed his own
method, which required some redefinitions. A Golden Delicious instead of a
Granny Smith, but still very much an apple. This would be an important part
of my personal explanation for the boom of later "deviations" from
"Ur-Buddhism". Already the need to explain the "deviations" in itself is
suspicious. Based on what criteria?

4. The reasons for allowing or refusing bhikkhunis in the sangha or the
general attitude towards women and the compliance with the original precepts
of Vinaya have more to do with local customs and religious legislation than
with personal choices of the Buddha (that we don't know anything about, see
dogma #1). If on the basis of these locally and historically bound precepts
a sangha of bhikkhunis becomes impossible, then it should be possible to
adapt them. I don't see the Vinaya as a sort of Revelation.



At some time there must have been debate around the moksa status of women,
but not necessarily at the Buddha's time (dogma #1).


Joy