[Buddha-l] Brahma & Abraham

[Dee]

I've been 'lurking' on this list for some little while and it 'seems' that hardly anyone is willing to engage in discussion on a topic that does not fall into their own comfort zone. I personally find this quite perplexing for an academic forum. My peception of 'academic' is that of open-minded enquiry that does not necessarily agree with, but is willing to debate, any resonable hypothesis on a given topic. Perhaps I have not understood the rules of engagement. I sincerely invite somebody to explain them to me. Please bear in mind that i may not be very bright and would appreciate someone taking the time to explain them with transparency.

yours sincerely,
Dee

--- On Sun, 3/7/10, JKirkpatrick <jkirk at spro.net> wrote:

> From: JKirkpatrick <jkirk at spro.net>
> Subject: Re: [Buddha-l] Brahma & Abraham
> To: "'Buddhist discussion forum'" <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
> Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 2:53 PM
> Hi Joy
> 
> If you'll reflect for a minute, the Buddha was very
> sensitive to
> local customs, as reflected in various vinaya rules, for
> ex., and
> as I've also stressed a few times on this list. 
> 
> You are addressing the wrong person with this remark: "I
> don't
> see the Vinaya as a sort of Revelation." In fact, who on
> this
> list does, pray tell?
> 
> In case you are getting ready for another long argument,
> leave me
> out of it.
> 
> Joanna
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
> 
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>