You lost me at woke.
Define woke
Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean by Definite woke…
It was a joke. Most people who pretend woke doesn’t exist or that it isn’t obnoxious will say, “define woke” as if it’s a trap or challenge. Then, no matter what the other person says, they say, “Gotcha! That’s not what it means! Woke is actually about being a nice person!” Or some other ridiculously simplistic definition that ignores tons of negatives about the movement.
If you’re not pretending and really don’t know what the deal is I suggest you read New York Times author John Mcwhorter’s book “Woke Racism.” There is no better book on the topic. It defines the issue and traces it to its roots and also substantiates the problem with real life examples. Then it offers a positive alternative.
I prompted Gemini Pro to give a definition of woke and to explain how it is applied to “Woke Buddhism”.
Here is a breakdown of the term “woke,” how it applies to Buddhism, and how it intersects with the actions and translations of Ajahn Sujato, Bhante.
The Definition of “Woke”
The term “woke” originated in African American Vernacular English (AAVE) in the early to mid-20th century, meaning to be awake to or alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.
In recent years, the definition has broadened and become highly politicized:
- Progressive Usage: It is used to describe a broad awareness of systemic social inequalities, including issues related to race, gender, sexual orientation, and environmental justice.
- Conservative/Critical Usage: It is frequently used as a pejorative term to mock or criticize progressive ideologies, often associating them with identity politics, performative activism, or “cancel culture.”
For a formal reference, Merriam-Webster defines “woke” as: “aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).”
“Woke Buddhism”
“Woke Buddhism” is generally used as a critical label by traditionalists to describe the integration of modern Western progressive values—such as feminism, LGBTQ+ rights, social justice, and anti-racism activism—into Buddhist institutions and teachings.- The Traditionalist Critique: Critics who use this term argue that adopting these modern socio-political frameworks risks secularizing the Dhamma. They argue that it shifts the focus away from the ultimate goal of liberation (Nibbāna) and the strict adherence to the Vinaya, replacing it with worldly political ideologies and identity politics.
- The Progressive View: Those who advocate for these changes generally do not use the term “woke” to describe themselves. Instead, they frame their actions as “Engaged Buddhism” or simply as the correct application of mettā (loving-kindness), karuṇā (compassion), and right view to systemic suffering and modern societal structures.
The Context of Ajahn Sujato
Ajahn Sujato, a prominent Australian Theravāda monk and scholar, is frequently cited in debates regarding traditionalism versus progressivism in Western Buddhism. His critics sometimes use the “woke” label regarding his work, specifically concerning two main areas:
- The Promotion of Bhikkhunī Ordination
Ajahn Sujato has been a leading advocate for the revival and recognition of the bhikkhunī (fully ordained nun) lineage in the Theravāda tradition. In 2009, he played a central role in organizing a bhikkhunī ordination in Australia.
- The Controversy: Traditionalists argue that the bhikkhunī lineage died out nearly a millennium ago and, according to strict interpretations of the Vinaya, cannot be legitimately revived without existing bhikkhunīs to confer the ordination. Ajahn Sujato’s involvement led to his temporary excommunication from the Thai Forest Tradition lineage of Ajahn Chah.
- The Progressive Stance: Supporters view his actions as a necessary correction of historical gender inequality, arguing that the Buddha explicitly intended for a fourfold Saṅgha (monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen) and that legalistic Vinaya interpretations should not be used to justify systemic discrimination.
- Gender-Neutral Pāḷi Translations
As a primary translator for SuttaCentral, Ajahn Sujato has made deliberate choices to use gender-neutral language in his English translations of the Pāḷi Canon. For example, he frequently translates the plural vocative bhikkhave (literally “O monks”) as “mendicants.”
- The Translation Rationale: Ajahn Sujato argues that in many contexts, the Buddha was addressing the entire assembly or that the teachings apply universally to all practitioners, not exclusively to male monastics. He posits that using gender-neutral English better reflects the inclusive intent of the Dhamma.
- The Criticism: Critics argue that this is an anachronistic projection of modern gender politics onto ancient texts. They contend that altering the literal translation of bhikkhu to fit modern egalitarian sensibilities obscures the historical reality of the texts and compromises the accuracy of the Pāḷi transmission.
1 Like
I understand all that, I just didn’t understand what “Definitely woke” was directed towards and I still don’t. I suppose that doesn’t really matter anyway.
What surprises me is using a pejorative is in a Buddhist environment. I can’t imagine pejorative speech to be anything other than Wrong Speech, as there is contempt at the root.
Even the most cursory understanding of the most basic of the Buddha’s teaching is understanding the downside and danger of ill will, anger and contempt and the exhortation to eradicate it. In fact, there is an entire sutta where the Buddha instructed his son Rahula to not use Wrong Speech, even in jest. To see contempt openly expressed in a Buddhist conversation is rather shocking and its seemingly acceptance causes me to question the integrity of the community.
2 Likes
Other websites are OVERRUN with the USA culture war stuff (have been for ten years nearly). Could you not have found a more appropriate place on the internet to grind your axe?
MN114:
They don’t repeat in one place what they heard in another so as to divide people against each other.
Instead, they reconcile those who are divided and support those who are united, delighting in harmony, loving harmony, speaking words that promote harmony.
They give up harsh speech. They speak in a way that’s mellow, pleasing to the ear, lovely, going to the heart, polite, likable and agreeable to the people.
They give up talking nonsense.
Their words are timely, true, and meaningful, in line with the teaching and training.
They say things at the right time which are valuable, reasonable, succinct, and beneficial. That kind of verbal behavior causes unskillful qualities to decline while skillful qualities grow.
Sāleyyaka Sutta
He speaks maliciously; he repeats elsewhere what he has heard here in order to divide [those people] from these, or he repeats to these people what he has heard elsewhere in order to divide [these people] from those; thus he is one who divides those who are united, a creator of divisions, who enjoys discord, rejoices in discord, delights in discord, a speaker of words that create discord.
He speaks harshly; he utters such words as are rough, hard, hurtful to others, offensive to others, bordering on anger, unconducive to concentration.
He is a gossip; he speaks at the wrong time, speaks what is not fact, speaks what is useless, speaks contrary to the Dhamma and the Discipline; at the wrong time he speaks such words as are worthless, unreasonable, immoderate, and unbeneficial.
That is how there are four kinds of verbal conduct not in accordance with the Dhamma, unrighteous conduct.
[……..]
Abandoning malicious speech, he abstains from malicious speech; he does not repeat elsewhere what he has heard here in order to divide [those people] from these, nor does he repeat to these people what he has heard elsewhere in order to divide [these people] from those; thus he is one who reunites those who are divided, a promoter of friendships, who enjoys concord, rejoices in concord, delights in concord, a speaker of words that promote concord.
Abandoning harsh speech, he abstains from harsh speech; he speaks such words as are gentle, pleasing to the ear, and loveable, as go to the heart, are courteous, desired by many, and agreeable to many.
Abandoning gossip, he abstains from gossip; he speaks at the right time, speaks what is fact, speaks on what is good, speaks on the Dhamma and the Discipline; at the right time he speaks such words as are worth recording, reasonable, moderate, and beneficial.
That is how there are four kinds of verbal conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, righteous conduct.
In short, I don’t think it’s beneficial or skillful to talk nonsense on this forum, to delight in pointing out the flaws of others you have seen elsewhere in order to feel better/wiser/smarter than them.
Especially as there are already 1000s of websites where people can take delight in talking nonsense.
3 Likes
woke is usa or modern western culture, isn’t it?
2 Likes
Thank you, Hara. I also found this an inappropriate place to use the term woke.
2 Likes
It was a joke on the humor section of the forum. Also I never wrote “Definitely woke.” You misread it.
“Woke” references an incredibly racist hate movement. Sure decades ago the term referred to something else. And even recently some use the term in a benign or positive way. But today the movement tied to the term and what it denotes the majority of the time is just awful as it morphed into a racist thing that is borderline its own religion.
There is nothing wrong with using the term “woke” to joke about the hate movement. Hate movements don’t have feelings lol!
Again I suggest you read “Woke Racism.” New York Times journalist John Mcwhorter, the author, is very knowledgeable and skilled at explaining it.
The Buddha said he is not a god, just a woke peron.
The “Woke” under discussion is the hate movement “Woke Racism” as commonly known in the US by the countless people targeted by it and elucidated and substantiated by John Mcwhorter in his book “Woke Racism.”
The Buddha was never “Woke” in that sense. He was awake, enlightened. Quite the opposite actually of the modern use of “woke” in the sense Im using it as and most understand it as.
2 Likes
Yes, I misread it. I stand corrected!
2 Likes
The Classical Theravāda website is an orthodox Buddhist website. It is not interested in having modern ideologies here. If we use the word “woke,” it is intended as discussed above by Gemini in this topic thread. You can read the FAQ and see that Orthodox Theravāda ideologies are allowed and defending other sects (including modern woke Buddhism) is not allowed. Right speech is always good. No question about that … labeling something as woke is an acceptable term here because it is not used as “racism.” If you know what woke means in the context, then you should not ask what it means. In fact, that is part of the “woke personality.” Let me be clear, woke is a personality and ideology that often imposes on others.
If you want gender-neutral terms, pronouns, etc., SuttaCentral supports that fully and has gone so far as changing the clearly stated pronouns of the Buddhist teachings in its translations. Slowly they are becoming a sect by mixing with other traditions and will complete the “separate sect” if they do ordinations together with Mahāyāna to supplement the needed quorum. Or if they go so far as to do ordinations in English which Bhikkhu Sujato has gone on the record to say he would do so. If that continues for generations of ordinations as their own, then it will be complete without the need for schism technicalities. They will be considered by most orthodox monks as “self-ordained” at that point. They are already booted from the Ajahn Chah tradition. They do things the way they want to do them.
The quote from Gemini is posted below and this topic is now locked.
3 Likes