Women cannot become Buddhas?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by dagon »

i came across this thread "The Wisdom of Ariyan Women" and thought it relevant to the discussion.

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... lder#p5627

metta
paul
dxm_dxm
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 2:32 am
Location: Romania, Bucharest
Contact:

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by dxm_dxm »

There are 3 times more buddhist nuns than monks and females even have some skills necesary for practice more developed than man (patience, resistance to pain, things like this) but the differences between the 2 sexes are insignificant as far as meditation practice is concerned.
Maitri
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:43 am
Location: United States of America

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Maitri »

The original question is not whether women could be enlightened, but if they could become Buddhas. From my reading, the answer is no. According to the Bahudatuka Sutta MN 115:
“He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a woman could be an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One—there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a man might be an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One—there is such a possibility.’ He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a woman could be a Wheel-turning Monarch…that a woman could occupy the position of Sakka [66]…that a woman could occupy the position of Māra…that a woman could occupy the position of Brahmā—there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a man might be a Wheel-turning Monarch…that a man might occupy the position of Sakka…that a man might occupy the position of Māra…that a man might occupy the position of Brahmā—there is such a possibility.’
This assertion from that you have to go beyond "male" and "female" concepts to become a Buddha clearly has nothing to do with what is found in the texts. From this it's clear that a male body is required to be a fully awakened Buddha.

The goal in Theravada practice is not to become a Buddha, but to attain liberation. The arising of a Buddha is a very, very rare occurrence.
"Upon a heap of rubbish in the road-side ditch blooms a lotus, fragrant and pleasing.
Even so, on the rubbish heap of blinded mortals the disciple of the Supremely Enlightened One shines resplendent in wisdom." Dhammapada: Pupphavagga

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by beeblebrox »

Maitri wrote:The original question is not whether women could be enlightened, but if they could become Buddhas.
Hi Maitri,

Thank you for pointing this out. I noticed it, too... but couldn't figure out how to mention it, and still be confident that there will be a useful discussion.
“He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a woman could be an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One—there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a man might be an Accomplished One, a Fully Enlightened One—there is such a possibility.’ He understands: ‘It is impossible, it cannot happen that a woman could be a Wheel-turning Monarch…that a woman could occupy the position of Sakka [66]…that a woman could occupy the position of Māra…that a woman could occupy the position of Brahmā—there is no such possibility.’ And he understands: ‘It is possible that a man might be a Wheel-turning Monarch…that a man might occupy the position of Sakka…that a man might occupy the position of Māra…that a man might occupy the position of Brahmā—there is such a possibility.’
This assertion from that you have to go beyond "male" and "female" concepts to become a Buddha clearly has nothing to do with what is found in the texts. From this it's clear that a male body is required to be a fully awakened Buddha.
It also seems interesting in that passage, it mentions that it's impossible for a woman to be Mara... what could that mean? Does this modify (or clarify) the statement of not being a Buddha into something else at least different?

Also, I think we should take care in saying that a male body "is required" to be a fully awakened Buddha. The way that I read the text, the Buddha only said that it's impossible for a woman, and possible for a man... and that was said for every position including Mara, apparently.

What does that mean?

:anjali:
Maitri
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:43 am
Location: United States of America

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Maitri »

Hello beeblebrox,
It also seems interesting in that passage, it mentions that it's impossible for a woman to be Mara... what could that mean? Does this modify (or clarify) the statement of not being a Buddha into something else at least different?

Also, I think we should take care in saying that a male body "is required" to be a fully awakened Buddha. The way that I read the text, the Buddha only said that it's impossible for a woman, and possible for a man... and that was said for every position including Mara, apparently.


It is among the classes of beings that will not be female- not only Buddhas and Chakravartins but leaders of the God realms. As a result of karma beings are born into those stations, sans Buddha who achieves it due to cultivation. A woman who is now female may be reborn as Mara, but it will be in the body of a male. It falls within the concept of Mahapurisa http://www.palikanon.com/namen/maha/mahapurisa.htm and most importantly, the idea that the male privates are covered in a sheath.

I say "required" because a Buddha is born as a human. Humans are either male or female biologically speaking. As the Buddha states a female human may not become a Buddha, a human male body is required. These scenarios of the lineage of each Buddha are mentioned in Mahâpadāna Sutta DN14.

I'm not saying I agree with this, just that this appears to be the textual presentation of these concepts. So often nowadays, Theravada and Mahayana teachings get cross-wired and one doesn't necessarily speak for the other. Although it's out of bounds for this forum, the Mahayana tradition has its own problems with women becoming Buddhas.
"Upon a heap of rubbish in the road-side ditch blooms a lotus, fragrant and pleasing.
Even so, on the rubbish heap of blinded mortals the disciple of the Supremely Enlightened One shines resplendent in wisdom." Dhammapada: Pupphavagga

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by beeblebrox »

Well... it seems impossible to argue with that.

But on the (small?) upside, when someone thinks he's encountered Mara, he needs to keep in mind that it's not the female.

:anjali:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by tiltbillings »

Modus.Ponens wrote:
Jhana4 wrote: Do not Buddhas have abilities that arahants do not, like the ability to communicate the dhamma well?
There was a very good discussion a few months ago about the (absence of) differences between some arahats and the Buddha. I remember Tiltbillings participated actively in that one, so maybe he knows which thread is it.
I an not sure which thread you are referring to, but this may be of interest: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 4&#p149864 this msg and several of mine that directly follow it in that thread.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Feathers
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:14 pm

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Feathers »

I don't know Pali or Sanskrit, so can anyone tell me: in that text about how only male's become Buddhas, Mara etc. are the words for male/female strictly indicative of biology, or could they be taken as gender detached from biology, or was that distinction simply not in existence at the time?
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by manas »

I wonder what the official, traditional explanation is, as to why a human being with a female body, could not also discover the Four Noble Truths on their own after much striving over many lifetimes, as the Buddha did. I for one cannot see how having a womb could prevent this, from being at least a possibility. Maybe in some other Universe, a female Buddha is appearing right now, and will soon give Her first sermon.

manas
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Maitri
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:43 am
Location: United States of America

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Maitri »

What also may be interesting is a more academic review of the Sutta in question:
When it comes to the issue of being a Buddha, however, tradition takes the position that only a male is capable of fulfilling such a role. In the early discourses, the locus classicus for this position is the Bahudhatuka-sutta of the Majjhima-nikaya, according to which a woman is incapable of occupying various positions, one of them being that of a Buddha. (9) The Bahudhatuka-sutta has several parallels which show some variations in their presentation of these impossibilities. Of particular significance is a Madhyama-agama parallel which does not mention any inability of women at all.

This Madhyama-agama parallel to the Bahudhatuka-sutta was translated into Chinese by Gautama Sarighadeva towards the end of the fourth century, (10) apparently based on a Prakrit original transmitted within the Sarvastivada tradition(s). (11) Besides this Madhyama-agama discourse and the Pali Bahudhatuka-sutta, other parallel versions are a discourse translated individually into Chinese; (12) a discourse preserved in Tibetan translation; (13) a full satra quotation in the Dharmaskandha of the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, preserved in Chinese; (14) and a full satra quotation in Samathadeva's commentary on the Abhidharmakosabhasya, preserved in Tibetan. (15)
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+bahud ... 0229832356

The author then goes on to state that the Pali version of the text may reflect a newer development in which women had become more excluded from Buddhist religious life.
In sum, since an accidental loss or an intentional omission of an exposition on the inabilities of women in the Madhyama-agama discourse seems improbable, the most straightforward conclusion would be that the theme of women's inability is a later addition to the exposition on impossibilities in the different versions of the Discourse on Many Elements. Thus in this respect the Madhyama-agama version quite probably testifies to an early stage, when the theme of what women cannot achieve had not yet become part of the discourse.
I think the important thing is not to endlessly debate the text's contents or if it really means what it says- it's pretty clear that it does discriminate against women- but rather how do we work with a perspective that is not in accord with our modern paradigm. The agama version may then supersede the Pali version for our preference in this case.
"Upon a heap of rubbish in the road-side ditch blooms a lotus, fragrant and pleasing.
Even so, on the rubbish heap of blinded mortals the disciple of the Supremely Enlightened One shines resplendent in wisdom." Dhammapada: Pupphavagga

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/
Maitri
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:43 am
Location: United States of America

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Maitri »

manas wrote:I wonder what the official, traditional explanation is, as to why a human being with a female body, could not also discover the Four Noble Truths on their own after much striving over many lifetimes, as the Buddha did. I for one cannot see how having a womb could prevent this, from being at least a possibility. Maybe in some other Universe, a female Buddha is appearing right now, and will soon give Her first sermon.

manas
You question is addressed in this thread:

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=407

The official explanation is pretty clear. The can't attain Buddhahood because they are women. Whether you agree with it or not is another issue.
"Upon a heap of rubbish in the road-side ditch blooms a lotus, fragrant and pleasing.
Even so, on the rubbish heap of blinded mortals the disciple of the Supremely Enlightened One shines resplendent in wisdom." Dhammapada: Pupphavagga

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by cooran »

The second article The Buddha and The Arahant by Lily de Silva is interesting:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el407.html

With metta,
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Dhammanando »

manas wrote:I wonder what the official, traditional explanation is, as to why a human being with a female body, could not also discover the Four Noble Truths on their own after much striving over many lifetimes, as the Buddha did.
It’s part and parcel of the general doctrine that in their final life bodhisattas will be reborn in circumstances that permit them to have the optimal impact upon devas and men.[1] For example, it is said that they will be reborn in whatever happens to be reckoned as the highest social class at that time; the place of their birth will be a cultured and not a barbarous one; they will be physically attractive, possessed of a good voice, etc. etc.

The texts don’t spell out precisely why it would be better for them to be men rather than women, but it's not hard to guess. As far as we know, all human societies are patriarchal, always have been, and most probably always will be.[2] So, if you’re intent on making a really big splash in the world, other things being equal, possession of a male body will stand you in better stead than possession of a female one.


_______
Notes

[1] This point is very commonly misstated, with claims being made to the effect that a bodhisatta, in his penultimate life in the Tusita heaven, gets to choose the circumstances of his final birth. But this isn’t what the Suttas say. They say only that before passing away he foresees what the circumstances of his final life will be, not that he chooses them. As with any other saṃsāric being, the bodhisatta, after passing away from Tusita, fares according to his kamma. It just happens that by the time he is ripe for awakening, the power of his accumulations of paramī and his resolve for sammāsambodhi will be such as will lead to rebirth in optimal circumstances. Pace the Tibetans, it doesn’t mean that he is in possession of the power to say: “Let my rebirth be such and such!”

[2] For any readers who've been taken in by the matriarchal myth-making peddled by loony feminists (i.e., supposedly matriarchal prehistoric societies, or presently existing ones among the Iroquois, or in the South Seas, etc.), I offer the following reading suggestions (especially Goldberg’s book, which in its most recent edition carries the new title, Why Men Rule):

• Cynthia Eller, The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Won't Give Women a Future (Boston, Beacon Press, 2001).
• Donald E. Brown, Human Universals (Philadelphia, Temple University Press, 1991)
• Joan Bamberger, The Myth of Matriarchy: Why Men Rule in Primitive Society, in M. Rosaldo and L. Lamphere, Women, Culture, and Society, (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1974).
• Steven Goldberg, The Inevitability of Patriarchy, (William Morrow & Company, 1973).
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by Modus.Ponens »

Thank you Tilt. I'm not sure if it was that one but, looking at it quickly, it probably has the relevant information.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
zamotcr
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:11 am

Re: Women cannot become Buddhas?

Post by zamotcr »

Dhammanando wrote:
manas wrote:I wonder what the official, traditional explanation is, as to why a human being with a female body, could not also discover the Four Noble Truths on their own after much striving over many lifetimes, as the Buddha did.
It’s part and parcel of the general doctrine that in their final life bodhisattas will be reborn in circumstances that permit them to have the optimal impact upon devas and men.[1] For example, it is said that they will be reborn in whatever happens to be reckoned as the highest social class at that time; the place of their birth will be a cultured and not a barbarous one; they will be physically attractive, possessed of a good voice, etc. etc.

The texts don’t spell out precisely why it would be better for them to be men rather than women, but it's not hard to guess. As far as we know, all human societies are patriarchal, always have been, and most probably always will be.[2] So, if you’re intent on making a really big splash in the world, other things being equal, possession of a male body will stand you in better stead than possession of a female one.
Venerable Dhammanando, so, if we make the hypothetical assumption that in a long future, the dominant society is matriarchal, we could expect a female Buddha? Hypothetically talking of course, because you already said with strong bibliography that is highly unlikely that such society could exist.
Post Reply