"The Hardcore Dharma Movement," article at Wandering Dhamma

Hokai Sobol just posted a link from his Twitter to an article titled, "The Hardcore Dharma Movement." It's mostly about Daniel Ingram, but Kenneth Folk is talked about as well.

wanderingdhamma.wordpress.com/2010/07/16...ore-dharma-movement/

Just thought I'd pass this on.

~Jackson

"Hokai Sobol just posted a link from his Twitter to an article titled, "The Hardcore Dharma Movement." It's mostly about Daniel Ingram, but Kenneth Folk is talked about as well.

wanderingdhamma.wordpress.com/2010/07/16...ore-dharma-movement/

Just thought I'd pass this on.

~Jackson"

I really liked the article. Holy Letdown when I read the comments, though. Whatever.

I have a lot of respect for Brooke Schedneck, having seen her work before on Buddhist Geeks Magazine. I think she does a great job again with this article. What interesting times we live in...

Thanks for posting the Article. It was a fun read. Like I said with Vince's Podcast reaching so many I think it would be hard to underestimate the effect this movement will have on western dharma... Of course there will be growing pains... but I think overall the effect will be very very positive...

In my experience much of the negative reaction to Daniel Ingram's works, claims and commentary comes from his long-standing denial that there is any realization in addition to arahtatship in the four path Theravada model. For those with extensive experienced in the Mahayana tradition and with deep realization of non-dual awareness, kensho, what have you, it appears to be ridiculous. So it causes those folks to question most, maybe all, of what Daniel claims. That belief is largely responsible for the melt down at the DhO last summer, too.

Interesting article. The comments were disappointing but not surprising. However, there was a comment about the gender balance on KFDh and DhO being about 90% male and insinuations that these forums are for testosterone-charged uber-achievers. The latter accusation is amusing, but as for these sites being male-dominated, I too have wondered about that. Would be interested to know what others think...?

I think there are more female posters here than at the DhO. It seems like that to me. I may be wrong. I haven't done any research And I am assuming from some things I've seen that there are a lot of female lurkers here who may not feel the need to post yet, but they are slowly starting to participate which is a good thing of course. It "seems" like it is more common for male practitioners to take the gungho insight practitioner approach and post openly about it here. Whereas perhaps female practitioners are getting more help and advice beind the lines through PM's as opposed to openly talking about it. I am no expert on the sexes and their differences. Men are from Mars and women are from Venus, I have no idea what this means but perhaps it has something to do with it.

Maybe Roomy should post more! I would love to hear about your practice as I really don't know much about it at all. I know you are a very experienced practitioner as well. How about helping us ignorant fools? Roomy, how about your own commentary thread a la AugustLeo? It could help with this imbalance. I think you could really participate more....hehe

This is overwhelmingly a male dominated site. There's no denying it. I'm afraid that may be a self-perpetuating situation, as we've seen a few women come, post a bit, and then stop posting or leave. It would be interesting to hear from Khara, Roomy and any other women who've posted here over the last year. What is their reaction to this place? I'm afraid we're rather testosterone oriented but I'm not sure how to change that. I do know that diversity is better, however, and we need feedback from those who feel uncomfortable, to get to the source of their discomfort, in order to do something to change it.

"
This is overwhelmingly a male dominated site. There's no denying it. I'm afraid that may be a self-perpetuating situation, as we've seen a few women come, post a bit, and then stop posting or leave. It would be interesting to hear from Khara, Roomy and any other women who've posted here over the last year. What is their reaction to this place? I'm afraid we're rather testosterone oriented but I'm not sure how to change that. I do know that diversity is better, however, and we need feedback from those who feel uncomfortable, to get to the source of their discomfort, in order to do something to change it.

"

This seems like a crucial if mysterious topic. It does seem that much of the culture here is extremely masculine, and while that can be the object of naive caricature as in some of the comments, it also should be investigated. As you so clearly say Chris, from an emperical standpoint this site is posted on almost exclusively by men. That there are some psychosocial reasons for this seems a reasonable hypotheses.
And by inquiring openly into this there may be an opportunity for males AND females to both outgrow stale social stances and attitudes, while learning to hear past our preconceptions about each other to get to the heart of the others' perspective.

Exactly!

"There was a comment about the gender balance on KFDh and DhO being about 90% male and insinuations that these forums are for testosterone-charged uber-achievers."-Dadriance

Great topic.

A couple of months ago, I was talking on the phone with AugustLeo, musing aloud about the gender imbalance here on the forum and wondering if there is anything we could do fix it. AugustLeo said, "Forget about KFDh for a minute and forget about dharma forums. Do you know of any online forums of any kind that are NOT dominated by male posters?"

Hmmm...

Perhaps we are too self-absorbed to see the forest for the trees. Generally speaking, posting to public online forums is an activity that appeals more to men than to women. So, while we may be "testosterone drenched," it may be less about our message and more about our medium.

Among the students I work with one-on-one, although the gender ratio is still skewed toward men, there is a noticeably better balance. Having said that, if it does turn out that the "hero's journey" orientation that is built into goal-oriented dharma tends to attract more men than women, that would be okay... men matter too! I love the fact that some women are willing to brave the apparent boy's club vibe here and participate anyway; I hope the women who post here keep doing so and I hope more women post here in the future. At the same time, I'm getting over the idea that we have to change our culture in some as yet unknown way in order to attract women. We just do what we do and everyone is welcome, male, female, and trans-gender alike.

Kenneth, I'm not sure we need to change our culture, or that we could even if we wanted to. I'd just like to hear from some of the women who have posted here so that we have some facts on which to base even a potential conversation about the culture. I agree that the male dominated situation it's something that appears all over the Net on many, many dharma sites. But while that's apparently true it's not something I take comfort in. Again, diversity is a really great thing and my experience in business and in other areas tells me it's very much worth working toward. I'm glad this issue was raised.

I have been away on retreat for a week, so today is my first sight of this thread. In the 'halo effect' of having been 'real, real gone' I'm not entirely coherent in the usual sense of the word. I'd like to hear from what the Taoists call the 'Valley Spirit' or what Trungpa called 'the Feminine Principle'-- from whomever of whatever gender can give it voice. It tends to whisper rather than shout or declaim, is the thing. It seems to have no NEED to be heard, but continuously sings its little brook-burble variations on the infinite theme... nothing to prove. Nowhere to go. And yet moving.

It's an interesting contrast that this site is mostly about vipassana and the nuts and bots of daily practice and the posters are mostly male. At the vipassana retreat I recently went to, about 70 of the 100 or so yogis were women. That retreat center definitely didn't cater to the mushroom culture at all since the teachers are all highly qualified dead-serious Burmese Sayadaws. The only differences that I found between the culture at that center and the discourse here is the aversion to placing people on the maps (the Sayadaws have a clear idea where people are on the maps, but don't tell them, though they do describe the maps almost daily), no claims to attainments by yogis when talking was allowed on the last day and a strict adherence to one technique (which is also what makes the retreat serious) without tricks or innovative shortcuts. Most of the women there weren't there for their first retreat, they knew what they were getting themselves into. The center itself is run by both women and men. My first retreat there had the same gender balance. While most of the yogis were from traditionally Buddhist populations (mostly Vietnamese), there were about as many non-Asian women as men, so at least from what I saw there I'd have to conclude that women are far more into what we do than men. I can only assume that the gender balance here is an online forum issue. One thing I did notice when looking at old pictures of the center is that they seemed to have started out as a small meditation group led by U Silananda that had a core of guys. It may simply be that successful groups that start out mostly with men tend to stay that way initially until they attract a wider audience and then eventually end up having a mostly female membership once they gain mainstream acceptance within the larger community (that's going on the assumption that more women meditate than men). The vajrayana groups I've been in the past also had female majorities.

Hmm-- the other thing that comes to mind is a story I read in "Wanting Enlightenment Is a Big Mistake": one of Seung Sahn's [female] students reported to him in high dudgeon that a visiting teacher [traditional, Asian, I think] had said that women couldn't get enlightened. She expected her outrage to be supported, as many other advanced students in the sangha were also women. Instead, after hearing her out, he said the other teacher was right: women can't get enlightened. She sputtered, but, but you've always treated us equally and and. And are you saying I can't get enlightened? He answered-- 'So: you are "a woman"?'

[The story would probably be even harder to take if you substituted any other self-identification for that of gender...]

I bristle at the accusation that this is male-oriented. Is "doing something towards a goal" a male-only thing? Are female yogis only interested in the wishy-washy, get-in-touch-with-your-feelings type of practice noted in the article? I find that incredible to believe and don't understand why this should be. But clearly, if you look at the "Members" tab on this site, sort by contribution date, the data is undeniable.

from the comments section of the article:

"Steven
If these people claiming to be arhants where indeed what they claimed then, according to the sage Nagasena in the text 'Questions of King Milinda' they would have to be ordained as monks on the very day of enlightenment or the five aggregates would break up and they would die.

If these people are not monks and they are clearly still alive then who does one believe, them or Ven. Nagasena? My money is on Nagasena!



on July 18, 2010 at 11:01 am | Reply JoelG
Steven, you have to be kidding, right?



on July 18, 2010 at 2:25 pm | Reply Steven
No I am not kidding. If you read the text it is clear.

I have also spoken with several monks who have been credited with this attainment and their comments make it clear that one who has attained enlightenment becomes totally disenchanted with lay life and sees the life of a mendicant has the only vehicle for continued existence.

In regard to the other three levels of ariya, it is possible to be at these levels and remain a layperson."

"if you read the text it is clear" wow!
there are so many text from so many places on so many things -- if you had Steven's attitude how would one ever know which text to decide to believe? Why not the "book of morman?" or the Koran, or L. Ron Hubbard or etc. etc. etc. .... it's scary

I started trying to engage the guy on this topic, but it's like "what's the point?"
He really believes people will disappear if they don't put on robes the day they attain arahatship. Wow.

Yeah that is just a dharma tragedy. If someone really believes that they are beyond human aid. I always wonder if the suttra thumping we see by neo orthodox theravadan white guys is not in some ways derived from the western christian sola scriptura background... I can totally see why a monk arahant would think that way. I mean by the time they become an arahant they have been conditioning themselves for years. Just because they do what needs to be done doesn't mean they still don't have thier previous conditioning....

"Yeah that is just a dharma tragedy. If someone really believes that they are beyond human aid. I always wonder if the suttra thumping we see by neo orthodox theravadan white guys is not in some ways derived from the western christian sola scriptura background... I can totally see why a monk arahant would think that way. I mean by the time they become an arahant they have been conditioning themselves for years. Just because they do what needs to be done doesn't mean they still don't have thier previous conditioning.... "

In one of those interviews, Kenneth said something to the effect of, "Look, you can have wonder as an experience through realization, or you can settle for a false echo of wonder by becoming fascinated with one of the traditions and seeking it there."
It's a shame. But maybe it's a phase that we go through and eventually grow out of.

On the gender thing, it would be important to find out the demographics of the Buddhist Geeks podcast, wouldn't it?
My guess is that the vast majority of folks in the hardcore dharma movement discovered that movement through Buddhist Geeks.
(I could be wrong, of course.)
If Vince were to indicate that the vast majority of his listeners were male, that might provide at least some hint of why the site is weighted this way.

Yeah I know Joel. The scary thing is if I haden't been listening to BG I could very easily have gone down the orthodox Therevada road.... whew frightening just thinking about it... Here's to actually tasting Nirvana as opposed to imagining it based on reading... thanks Vince, Daniel, and Kenneth...

"Yeah I know Joel. The scary thing is if I haden't been listening to BG I could very easily have gone down the orthodox Therevada road.... whew frightening just thinking about it... Here's to actually tasting Nirvana as opposed to imagining it based on reading... thanks Vince, Daniel, and Kenneth... "


I would think that traditional Theravada Buddhism doesn't have to be a disaster--so long as people take seriously the Buddha's injunction to question everything. believe nothing and find out for yourself. It's pretty amazing that he asserted this in 500 BC.
I think you're onto something about a certain type of Western practitioner who approaches this stuff literally and with a heavy emphasis on textual authority. It's what we know. Maybe disappointment eventually forces people out of this....

I got on there as "Dharma Geek" and jumped into the fray. Still not sure if that was a wise move, because I do not think the people posting can be swayed from their VERY rigid thinking.

But, then like Clayton I thought about my own journey and when I was still in the dark about all this stuff, how confused and hungry I was for real information. And then I thought about all the people reading who aren't posting but might be engaged, a handful of them might be at the point I was at half a year ago when I first heard Kenneth on Buddhist Geeks. Back then, I was struck by how practical, human and down to earth he made the path sound. So, I thought "what the heck" if there is one person who reads the comments and decides to come to this site or read Daniel's book, they could be helped.

Maybe I'm naive for trying to lock horns like that, but hopefully someone out there got something out of it.

In situations where people have strong differing views I find it better to avoid going into those dualistic or intellectual topics like "is arahat or not", but gently sway the discussion back to how the practice has helped me. Somehow that helps to connect deeper on an interpersonal level, and maybe through that and time it will be easier for them to see the practice actually works for someone else, and than those rigid mental constructs will dissolve.