I honestly can't recall.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:52 pmThank you.
It is a hard sale that a yakkha can be 'eunuch' but lets leave that aside.
I think the question is whether a human male/female can also be a human pandaka.
On face value i think the answer seems to be no.
Do you know if they ask both questions when ordaining, are you a male, and are you a pandaka?
What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
Re: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
“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: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
I must say that i've become convinced that there is reasonable doubt as to it meaning gay.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:01 pmI honestly can't recall.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:52 pmThank you.
It is a hard sale that a yakkha can be 'eunuch' but lets leave that aside.
I think the question is whether a human male/female can also be a human pandaka.
On face value i think the answer seems to be no.
Do you know if they ask both questions when ordaining, are you a male, and are you a pandaka?
Re: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
Yes, it's difficult to say it just means "gay men" and even harder to say it means "homosexual" since it doesn't seem to refer to lesbians at all.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:05 pmI must say that i've become convinced that there is reasonable doubt as to it meaning gay.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:01 pmI honestly can't recall.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:52 pm
Thank you.
It is a hard sale that a yakkha can be 'eunuch' but lets leave that aside.
I think the question is whether a human male/female can also be a human pandaka.
On face value i think the answer seems to be no.
Do you know if they ask both questions when ordaining, are you a male, and are you a pandaka?
“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: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
Re: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
You’re welcome.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:32 pmAnyway thank you for bearing with me and methodically correcting my view. I appreciate it a lot
“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: What is Pandaka? (Paṇḍaka) Gay?
Apparently there is a termCeisiwr wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 4:01 pmI honestly can't recall.User13866 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:52 pmThank you.
It is a hard sale that a yakkha can be 'eunuch' but lets leave that aside.
I think the question is whether a human male/female can also be a human pandaka.
On face value i think the answer seems to be no.
Do you know if they ask both questions when ordaining, are you a male, and are you a pandaka?
itthipaṇḍaka - womanpandaka as well
Appears in the in the Bhikkhunikkhandhaka and Bhikkhu Saṅghādisesa 3 and 5
The females when ordaining are also asked as to whether they are female and whether they are pandaka
In the Bhikkhu Saṅghādisesa 3 it is asserted that a monk can perceive a female pandaka to be a woman‘You are not without [sexual] organs, are you (1)? You are not with incomplete [sexual] organs, are you (2)? You are not without [regular] menstruation, are you (3)? You are not with continuous menstruation, are you (4)? You are not one who continuously has to use a sanitary cloth, are you (5)? You are not incontinent, are you (6)? You are without uterine prolapse, are you (7)? You are not a fe-male paṇḍaka, are you (8)? You are not androgynous, are ‘You are not without [sexual] organs, are you (1)? You are not with incomplete [sexual] organs, are you (2)? You are not without [regular] menstruation, are you (3)? You are not with continuous menstruation, are you (4)? You are not one who continuously has to use a sanitary cloth, are you (5)? You are not incontinent, are you (6)? You are without uterine prolapse, are you (7)? You are not a fe-male paṇḍaka, are you (8)? You are not androgynous, are you (9)? You are not one whose [urethra and anus] are conjoined, are you (10)? You are not a hermaphrodite, are you (11)? Do you have a disease such as leprosy (12), boils (13), eczema (14), tuberculosis (15), or epilepsy (16)? Are you a human being (17)? Are you a woman (18)? Are you a free woman (19)? Are you without debts (20)? You are not in royal service, are you (21)? Do you have the permission of your parents and your husband (22)? Are you fully twenty years old (23)? Are your robes and bowl complete (24)? What is your name? What is the name of your pre-ceptor (pavattinī)?’”
[CV X 17.2]
Saṅghādisesa 5 seems to imply that two pandakas can get togetherReferring to the private parts of two beings of different kinds
It is a woman and a paṇḍaka, but he perceives both as women, and he has lust.
https://suttacentral.net/pli-tv-bu-vb-s ... ript=latin
I found this in a SC discussion hereAt one time a monk acted as a matchmaker for paṇḍakas. He became anxious … “There’s no offense entailing suspension, but there’s a serious offense.”
https://suttacentral.net/pli-tv-bu-vb-s ... ript=latin
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/th ... ures/12894
I'll post some excerpts that i found interesting
In the early Jain scriptures, we see 3 classes of people who are not allowed to ordain, the paṇḍaka (in the meaning of ‘eunuch’), klība and vyādhita (ill person). In the later scriptures (Sthananga Sutra ca. 200 BC) there are more classes of persons barred from ordination6 4 10, but with the word paṇḍaka replaced by napuṃsaka. As it was no longer possible to determine this by seeing the person’s body, the candidate for ordination had to be questioned to determine if they were a ‘third-sex’ person or not. However, in the course of time, the ban against ordination of all third-sex persons was ameliorated to a very large extent. First, exceptions were made on an individual basis, later certain typs of third-sex people were considered fit for ordination, like for instance homosexuals.
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/th ... ures/12894
Also Ceisiwr's reference Atharva Veda is interestingKama Sutra states in one of its chapters, that there are two types of males who are napumsaka: those that were effeminate, and those who were more masculine. And it says as well that sometimes two would get together and form a bond (parigraha).
“A male child is produced by a greater quantity of male seed, a female child by the prevalence of the female; if both are equal, a third-sex child ( napumsa ) or boy and girl twins are produced; if either are weak or deficient in quantity, a failure of conception results.”
( Manusmriti 3.49)
“Those who like men but dissimulate the fact maintain a manly appearance and earn their living as barbers or masseurs.”
( Kama Sutra 2.9.6)
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/th ... s/12894/16
I haven't reached a definitive conclusion but as far as i can tell it's not clear that a pandaka is identified by a physiological trait but such traits can't be ruled a disqualification either.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Thu May 14, 2020 6:44 pm Interestingly I’ve found this on the potential meaning of pandaka in the Atharva Veda, although I’m still searching through the Veda to verify it.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aK0 ... aka&f=true