Women can't become Buddhas?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

Individual wrote:Right here and now, yes. Aeons from now, in a human realm not unlike our own, possibly not.
Individual

Your view is contrary to the Buddha. The Buddha has said a woman cannot be a Sammasambuddha, either in the past or in the future.
Individual wrote:There are more female religious leaders in modern days than in the past, and in western countries than elsewhere. You should consider the possibility that cultural patriarchy and misogyny are impermanent.
I hold your post is irrelevent to the subject. Further, most female teachers have taken refuge in and reliance on a male master. There are some realised female teachers in Buddhism but most are just parrots for their master.
Individual wrote:...which might be a woman, considering that women have larger portions of their brains devoted towards speech.
The very reason you cite above is one of the reasons woman struggle to gain Arahantship, let alone Sammasambuddha. Dispassion and silence forms the foundation of enlightenment. The Buddha spoke the Dhamma perfectly. If you cannot discern it now you will not discern it in the future.

Best to work on our own discernment rather than hoping someone will save us. :hug:

Kind regards,

Element
User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by jcsuperstar »

i dont know if i brought this up here or on the other forum but
i think women cant be buddhas in the same way a woman cant be a king
a woman can be a queen, she can rule with the same same authority and power of a king, but she is always a queen, never a king

maybe there is the female equivilent to a buddha? who knows.
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
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

Individual wrote:There are more female religious leaders in modern days than in the past, and in western countries than elsewhere. You should consider the possibility that cultural patriarchy and misogyny are impermanent.
Individual

Are you inferring the Lord Buddha was a misogynist?

When our minds are free from sexual lust, then it can see clearly.

Kind regards,

Element
User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by jcsuperstar »

there have always been women religious leaders, but no matter how good their teachings seem to be they seem to either get upstaged by a male student, or their sect gets relegated to cult status. most societies seem to find the idea of a female religious leader a threat , this goes for women as well as men. i've known many christian woman who believe women are inferior to men , or shouldnt teach men.
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
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

By nature, it is a woman's role to teach a man morality. However, once a man is moral, it is not a woman's role to teach a man about the supramundane.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by tiltbillings »

By nature, it is a woman's role to teach a man morality. However, once a man is moral, it is not a woman's role to teach a man about the supramundane.
Says who?
>> 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
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Jason,
Elohim wrote:Therefore, teachings that state a woman is incapable of becoming a Fully Awakened Buddha are taken to mean that women are incapable of ever achieving this level of spiritual attainment, and at least one commentary states that, "The masculine sex is superior, the women inferior" (Pe Maung Tin, The Expositor, 420).
The Expositor passage is on page 421 and you have misquoted it. It says: "The masculine state is superior, the feminine is inferior."

Taken in context, this passage is not about 'men' and 'women'. Rather, as one would expect from an Abhidhamma treatise, it's about the derivative rūpa dhammas called masculinity faculty and femininity faculty. These are kammically produced rūpas that are present in certain material octads spread throughout the body, and which lead to the conventionally observable marks of sexual distinction, such as breasts, rounded hips, beards, moustaches etc. Here 'inferiority' and 'superiority' are attributes of the kinds of kamma that generate these rūpa dhammas, not of the conventional realities called 'men' and 'women'.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

tiltbillings wrote:Says who?
Me! :jumping:

I am not talking Buddhadhamma. Just natural evolution. It is just a mere opinion.

If you question me further, I may answer further.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by tiltbillings »

I am not talking Buddhadhamma. Just natural evolution. It is just a mere opinion.

If you question me further, I may answer further.
No need.
>> 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
User avatar
Jason
Posts: 595
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Jason »

Dhammanando wrote:The Expositor passage is on page 421 and you have misquoted it. It says: "The masculine state is superior, the feminine is inferior."

Taken in context, this passage is not about 'men' and 'women'. Rather, as one would expect from an Abhidhamma treatise, it's about the derivative rūpa dhammas called masculinity faculty and femininity faculty. These are kammically produced rūpas that are present in certain material octads spread throughout the body, and which lead to the conventionally observable marks of sexual distinction, such as breasts, rounded hips, beards, moustaches etc. Here 'inferiority' and 'superiority' are attributes of the kinds of kamma that generate these rūpa dhammas, not of the conventional realities called 'men' and 'women'.
I see. Thank you for the clarification, Ven. Dhammanando. (I took both the page number and quote from this post by robertk2.)

Even taken in context, though, it still seems like it is saying roughly the same thing, i.e., that the conventionally observable marks of the male sex are produced from superior kamma while the conventionally observable marks of the female sex are produced from inferior kamma. It begs to question why "male" characteristics such as beards, moustaches, etc. are produced from superior kamma while "female" characteristics such as breast, round hips, etc. are produced from inferior kamma. I would appreciate it if you could explain the meaning of this passage in more detail when you have the time.
Last edited by Jason on Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:49 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).

leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

I don't see why we have to tiptoe around the fact that most cultures on earth today are male-dominated. If I were a Buddha about to come here and teach I would choose a male form. Buddha's are wise [understatement here]. As I understand it, Buddhas are able to know all things that are knowable, and Lord Buddha explained what to expect in the future from teaching-buddhas.

If this is a horrid or politically incorrect thing to say, I'm sorry. I just don't see why anyone would find it disturbing, it's just how things are. There's been improvement regarding the position of women in society over time, but we've still got a ways to go.

Just my two cents :namaste:
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

Drolma wrote:I don't see why we have to tiptoe around the fact that most cultures on earth today are male-dominated.
Society was once female dominated. This is theorised by the multitude of ancient Goddesses. However, the female dominated societies gave birth to the accumulation of wealth and the need for men to protect it. When this militarism occurred, men began dominating society.

Thus it is not possible for a Buddha to arise in a female dominated society because these societies occur during the "upside" of sensual and material development rather than the peak. Women are by nature nest builders thus being accumulators of good things, man must always protect what women value. When a Buddha renounced the world, he basically renounces female materialistic values.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Cittasanto »

Element wrote:
Manapa wrote:If that is the case I think what ever form the next Buddha will take will be the form most easily listened to, and understood.
Dhamma is always the same. The last Buddha is always with us in the suttas. If one does not listen and understand the last Buddha, one will not listen and understand the next one.

:popcorn:
well considering the next Buddha will be after the teachings have vanished from the world, so listening and understanding one is not a prerequisite for listening and understanding the next.
liking one person is not a prerequisite for liking another
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Jason,
Elohim wrote:Even taken in context, though, it still seems like it is saying roughly the same thing, i.e., that the conventionally observable marks of the male sex are produced from superior kamma while the conventionally observable marks of the female sex are produced from inferior kamma. It begs to question why "male" characteristics such as beards, moustaches, etc. are produced from superior kamma while "female" characteristics such as breast, round hips, etc. are produced from inferior kamma. I would appreciate it if you could explain the meaning of this passage in more detail when you have the time.
I don’t know if this is ever spelt out in the texts, but I doubt it, for the abhidhammikas’ priority is to describe the dhammas themselves, rather than their conventional consequences. I would suggest, however, that the sexual differences produced by the gender-controlling faculties are indeed of a sort that tend to make a male body something more to be wished for than a female one, all other things being equal. If one considers those features of men's and women's bodies that are differentiated by the gender-controlling faculties, it seems that in every case the male features are stronger, less susceptible to injury, and more versatile for nearly every end save that of attracting mates and child-rearing.

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by jcsuperstar »

i guess this is a modern phenomenon but i keep comming across asian teachers saying females make better meditators then men, that they advance quicker.
i mostly see it in burmese traditions
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
Locked