Hi friends
In the Majjhima Nikaya, in the Discourse on Many Element (115) it is said: "It is impossible that a woman should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One. It is possible that a man should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One."
Why?
Women can't become Buddhas?
Women can't become Buddhas?
Last edited by retrofuturist on Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Subject line changed to reflect the true nature of the question and hopefully keep the replies a bit more on topic. Formerly "Women's Can't Be Enlightened?"
Reason: Subject line changed to reflect the true nature of the question and hopefully keep the replies a bit more on topic. Formerly "Women's Can't Be Enlightened?"
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Greetings,
This is a statement about becoming a Buddha. There are many Suttas describing Women becoming Arahants (which is what I would understand by "Enlightenment" in a Theravada context).
Metta
Mike
This is a statement about becoming a Buddha. There are many Suttas describing Women becoming Arahants (which is what I would understand by "Enlightenment" in a Theravada context).
Metta
Mike
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Here's some inspiration from enlightened nuns.
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Just to echo what was said...thecap wrote:In the Majjhima Nikaya, in the Discourse on Many Element (115) it is said: "It is impossible that a woman should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One. It is possible that a man should be the perfect rightfully Enlightened One."
"perfect rightfully Enlightened One" means sammasambuddha aka "the Buddha".
A woman can certainly be enlightened aka arahant. Many women became arahants under the Buddha's teachings.
I don't know. My personal theory is that by "woman" the Buddha means "non-dominant gender". In other words, in a male dominated society such as ours a Buddha would never be a woman. Why? Because a female Buddha would have far less influence on the world than a male Buddha. Likewise, in a female dominated society a male Buddha would have far less influence than a female Buddha.Why?
When a Buddha-to-be in the Tusita heaven is getting ready to take rebirth in the human realm, he chooses the circumstances (gender, caste, location) most ideal to helping the most people.
- Peter
Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Thanks, that makes sense. I understand now that Buddha-enlightenment was meant, rather than Arahant-enlightenment.
what you said used to make sense from a political/social perspective. However, I don't agree that men have more influence.
Find one person who isn't born of a woman's womb, or one political leader who has no strong woman on his side.
What I'm saying is, nowadays men bring so much destruction on humanity through war, economic exploitation and ego-politics, that perhaps it's time to rethink whether women can reach "perfect Enlightenment".
Here, the fact that women are often busy having children seems like the smaller of two obstacles to Buddhahood, don't you think?
(But then again, I understand that this is probably not 'Classical Theravada'-thinking. So excuse me if it's an inappropriate question.)
Hi Peter,Peter wrote:I don't know. My personal theory is that by "woman" the Buddha means "non-dominant gender". In other words, in a male dominated society such as ours a Buddha would never be a woman. Why? Because a female Buddha would have far less influence on the world than a male Buddha. Likewise, in a female dominated society a male Buddha would have far less influence than a female Buddha.Why?
When a Buddha-to-be in the Tusita heaven is getting ready to take rebirth in the human realm, he chooses the circumstances (gender, caste, location) most ideal to helping the most people.
what you said used to make sense from a political/social perspective. However, I don't agree that men have more influence.
Find one person who isn't born of a woman's womb, or one political leader who has no strong woman on his side.
What I'm saying is, nowadays men bring so much destruction on humanity through war, economic exploitation and ego-politics, that perhaps it's time to rethink whether women can reach "perfect Enlightenment".
Here, the fact that women are often busy having children seems like the smaller of two obstacles to Buddhahood, don't you think?
(But then again, I understand that this is probably not 'Classical Theravada'-thinking. So excuse me if it's an inappropriate question.)
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
The statement refers to a time when men had more influence. If buddha had been a women she would not have been taken as seriously and wouldnt have been able to help as many people. If for example the buddha 2,500 years ago never came but would appear in our time instead then there would be more chance of the buddha having female body because in most modern societies women are seen as equal and can have just as much influence as men.
As a futher note in a real sense the buddha of anytime is neither male nor female, only the body are these things and you cant identify the buddha with a physical body.
As a futher note in a real sense the buddha of anytime is neither male nor female, only the body are these things and you cant identify the buddha with a physical body.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Hello thecap, all,
All this means is that a being who in this rebirth is a human female cannot become that rarest of all beings, a Sammasambuddha. Every other being who has re-become in human form as a male, also cannot become a Sammasambuddha. A Sammasambuddha is one who discovers the Truth of the Dhamma for himself after all knowledge of it has completely vanished from the world. After discovering it, he sets up the Four pillars of Buddhism: bhikkhu or. male monk, bhikkuni or female monk, upasaka or layman, and upasika or laywoman and, out of compassion, teaches the Dhamma to the world once again. Enlightened beings are Arahants of either gender, but not Sammasambuddhas.
Males, in this world, of all species, are usually stronger and more aggressive. Therefore they rule and take most of the important positions as the human world develops after each formation of the universe - especially in rural and more less industrial populations where the first glimmerings of questioning 'why are we here' 'where did we come from' 'where are we going after death' arise. This is usually the time when it is most effective for a great being, a Bodhisatta, to take rebirth and become a Fully Enlghtened Sammasambuddha.
Arahants have the same enlightenment as a Buddha.
metta
cooran
All this means is that a being who in this rebirth is a human female cannot become that rarest of all beings, a Sammasambuddha. Every other being who has re-become in human form as a male, also cannot become a Sammasambuddha. A Sammasambuddha is one who discovers the Truth of the Dhamma for himself after all knowledge of it has completely vanished from the world. After discovering it, he sets up the Four pillars of Buddhism: bhikkhu or. male monk, bhikkuni or female monk, upasaka or layman, and upasika or laywoman and, out of compassion, teaches the Dhamma to the world once again. Enlightened beings are Arahants of either gender, but not Sammasambuddhas.
Males, in this world, of all species, are usually stronger and more aggressive. Therefore they rule and take most of the important positions as the human world develops after each formation of the universe - especially in rural and more less industrial populations where the first glimmerings of questioning 'why are we here' 'where did we come from' 'where are we going after death' arise. This is usually the time when it is most effective for a great being, a Bodhisatta, to take rebirth and become a Fully Enlghtened Sammasambuddha.
Arahants have the same enlightenment as a Buddha.
metta
cooran
---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 ---
---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 ---
- Ngawang Drolma.
- Posts: 805
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
That's been my personal theory too.Peter wrote:I don't know. My personal theory is that by "woman" the Buddha means "non-dominant gender". In other words, in a male dominated society such as ours a Buddha would never be a woman. Why? Because a female Buddha would have far less influence on the world than a male Buddha. Likewise, in a female dominated society a male Buddha would have far less influence than a female Buddha.
When a Buddha-to-be in the Tusita heaven is getting ready to take rebirth in the human realm, he chooses the circumstances (gender, caste, location) most ideal to helping the most people.
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
The point is that it would have been more difficult for others to take him seriously at the time. He would have had a lot more trouble wandering about teaching. And apart the gender, the Buddha-to-be also chose a time and place and a high position in society that helped him to be taken seriously.thecap wrote: what you said used to make sense from a political/social perspective. However, I don't agree that men have more influence.
Metta
Mike
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Indeed. That was then. Lets not confuse the causality. The Buddha was male, because female teachers at that time were not taken seriously.mikenz66 wrote:The point is that it would have been more difficult for others to take him seriously at the time. He would have had a lot more trouble wandering about teaching.
However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the Buddha-to-be has to be male in order to be taken seriously. Now we have different conditions.
Sorry, I don't believe in rebirth, but in conditioned arising.And apart the gender, the Buddha-to-be also chose a time and place and a high position in society that helped him to be taken seriously.
-
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Before trying to provide a good answer to your question, it would be good to first distinguish several bad answers to this question. A person could not rightfully say that women cannot become Buddhas because it's been repeatedly said, because it's traditional belief, because it's in scripture, because it's logical, it's an assumption of Theravada, it's a bias, or because it has been said by many monks over the years.thecap wrote:Why?
Theravada asserts that Buddhas and Arahants are essentially equal (that the Buddha's enlightenment isn't superior to the Arahant's), but only that Buddhas achieve such enlightenment of their own effort, without outside help, but Arahants rely on Buddhas. In this regard, Buddhas might have more siddhis and more expansive knowledge, but the essential enlightenment (into the nature of notself, impermanence, dukkha, and liberation from samsara) is said to be same.
Now, considering that a Buddha's enlightenment is roughly the same as an Arahant's, and considering that there have been female Arahants, it seems difficult to claim that women can never be Buddhas... ever. We also have to consider that fatalism is a wrong view, so saying that women can't become Buddhas, doesn't seem to be justified. Peter's and Drolma's theory seems to be the correct one, although I'm not certain if it's a Classical Theravadin perspective.
Snarky and irrelevant.thecap wrote:Sorry, I don't believe in rebirth, but in conditioned arising.
With metta ,
Individual
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Dear members
Just a reminder that this is the Classical Theravada sub-forum.
Kind regards
Ben
Just a reminder that this is the Classical Theravada sub-forum.
Given that we are in the Classical forum, it maybe useful to frame any answer in reference to the early sources.The Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada sub-forums are specialized venues for the discussion of the Abhidhamma and the classical Mahavihara understanding of the Dhamma. Within these forums the Pali Tipitaka and its commentaries are for discussion purposes treated as authoritative. These forums are for the benefit of those members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of these texts and are not for the challenging of the Abhidhamma and/or Theravada commentarial literature.
Kind regards
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
The teaching from MN 115 is a woman cannot become a self-enlightened Buddha and establish the Buddhist religion.
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
Dear IndividualIndividual wrote:Before trying to provide a good answer to your question, it would be good to first distinguish several bad answers to this question. A person could not rightfully say that women cannot become Buddhas because it's been repeatedly said, because it's traditional belief, because it's in scripture, because it's logical, it's an assumption of Theravada, it's a bias, or because it has been said by many monks over the years.
Theravada asserts that Buddhas and Arahants are essentially equal (that the Buddha's enlightenment isn't superior to the Arahant's), but only that Buddhas achieve such enlightenment of their own effort, without outside help, but Arahants rely on Buddhas. In this regard, Buddhas might have more siddhis and more expansive knowledge, but the essential enlightenment (into the nature of notself, impermanence, dukkha, and liberation from samsara) is said to be same.
Now, considering that a Buddha's enlightenment is roughly the same as an Arahant's, and considering that there have been female Arahants, it seems difficult to claim that women can never be Buddhas... ever. We also have to consider that fatalism is a wrong view, so saying that women can't become Buddhas, doesn't seem to be justified. Peter's and Drolma's theory seems to be the correct one, although I'm not certain if it's a Classical Theravadin perspective.
A woman cannot attain Buddhahood through her own efforts and then establish the Buddhist religion. That is impossible.
First, a woman has little natural spiritual authority & power and would be readily dismissed by spiritual seekers, kings, the powerful, etc. For a person to establish a religion, they must exude a natural authority and awe, as we read of the Buddha or Jesus.
Second, I theorise, much of a woman's attainment depends in part or initially on the sublimation of her feminine affections upon a man. Most female practitioners are caught up in some kind of guru yoga.
Temples and churches are full of women but the world is not full of female arahants. If Jesus or the Buddha was a woman, the temples and churches would not be full of women, praying for their hopes and wishes and fears.
It is like on Buddhachat. I little birdie has told me you have a female admirer, who thinks you have authority.
For your consideration,
Element
- jcsuperstar
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
- Location: alaska
- Contact:
Re: Women can't be enlightened?
huh?It is like on Buddhachat. I little birdie has told me you have a female admirer.
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat