Is Buddhism is a very patriarchal religion ???

[DooDoot]

Dear forum

I read the following idea on the internet:

Regarding family, my family is very patriarchal. My wife and children respect my decisions, as head of the household and understand that it is in their best interest. Buddhism is a very patriarchal religion.

Is Buddhism is a very patriarchal religion, particularly in respect to the household life ??? Please discuss. Thank you

[JamesTheGiant]

This sutta seems pretty patriachal... Man is the undisputed head of the household...in Anguttara Nikaya(7:59; IV 91-94)
There is no sutta about the seven types of husband!

11. Sujata and the Seven Types of Wives

Sujata came from a wealthy family and was married to the son of Anathapindika. She was arrogant, did not respect others and did not like to listen to the instructions of her husband and his parents. As a result of her attitude there was trouble in the family every day.

One day, when the Buddha visited the house of Anathapindika, he heard an unusual uproar in the house and asked what it was about.

Anathapindika replied, "Lord, it is Sujata, my daughter-in-law. She does not listen to her mother-in-law, her father-in-law or to her husband. She does not even honour nor pay respect to the Exalted One."

The Buddha called Sujata to him and spoke kindly to her, "Sujata, there are seven types of wives a man may have. Which of them are you?"

"What are the seven types of wives, Venerable Sir?" asked Sujata.

"Sujata, there are bad and undesirable wives. There is a wife who is troublesome. She is wicked, bad tempered, pitiless, and not faithful to her husband."

"There is a wife who is like a thief. She wastes the money earned by her husband."

"There is a wife who is like a master. She is lazy, and thinks only about herself. She is cruel and lacking in compassion, always scolding her husband or gossiping."

"Sujata, there are the good and praiseworthy wives. There is a wife who is like a mother. She is kind and compassionate and treats her husband like her son and is careful with his money."

"There is a wife who is like a sister. She is respectful towards her husband, just as a younger sister to her brother, she is modest and obedient to her husband's wishes."

"There is a wife who is like a friend. She rejoices at the sight of her husband, just like a friend who has not seen her friend for a long time. She is of noble birth, virtuous and faithful."

"There is a wife who is like a handmaid. She behaves as an understanding wife when her shortcomings are pointed out. She remains calm and does not show any anger although her husband uses some harsh words. She is obedient to her husband's wishes."

The Blessed one asked, "Sujata, which type of wife are you like, or would you wish to be like?"

Hearing these words of the Blessed One, Sujata was ashamed of her past conduct and said, "From today onwards, let the Exalted One think of me as the one in the last example for I'll be a good and understanding wife." She changed her behaviour and became her husband's helper, and together they worked towards enlightenment

[DooDoot]

This sutta seems pretty patriachal... Man is the undisputed head of the household...in Anguttara Nikaya( 7:59; IV 91-94)
There is no sutta about the seven types of husband!

I am not sure about the above because it seems to be warning men about certain types of wives and recommending other types of wives. I personally don't read it as patriarchal. It seems to be about family harmony.

“Householder, what’s with the people making that dreadful racket in your home? You’d think it was fishermen hauling in a catch!”

“Sir, that’s my daughter-in-law Sujātā. She’s been brought here from a wealthy family.

She doesn’t obey her mother-in-law or father-in-law or her husband. And she does not honor, respect, esteem, and venerate the Buddha.”

[Sam Vara]

I don't personally see it as patriarchal. (And I checked this with my wife, who said that she doesn't see it as patriarchal either, and that's just as well, or else she would stop me practising... )

I think one of the problems with finding evidence of patriarchy in suttas is that we need to clearly differentiate between the Buddha offering advice to householders in a patriarchal society, and his advocating or even endorsing that patriarchy. He seemed to be more interested in marital harmony and maintaining sila, and presumably would have praised that if it were manifested in an egalitarian relationship. I think an endorsement of patriarchy would require evidence of the Buddha actively recommending it as a good in itself, or chastising otherwise happy moral people for being insufficiently patriarchal. And I can't think of any suttas where that happens.

[Manopubbangama]

I don't personally see it as patriarchal. (And I checked this with my wife, who said that she doesn't see it as patriarchal either, and that's just as well, or else she would stop me practising... )

I think one of the problems with finding evidence of patriarchy in suttas is that we need to clearly differentiate between the Buddha offering advice to householders in a patriarchal society, and his advocating or even endorsing that patriarchy. He seemed to be more interested in marital harmony and maintaining sila, and presumably would have praised that if it were manifested in an egalitarian relationship. I think an endorsement of patriarchy would require evidence of the Buddha actively recommending it as a good in itself, or chastising otherwise happy moral people for being insufficiently patriarchal. And I can't think of any suttas where that happens.

Can the Buddha be a woman?

In this age or any other?

If not, why not?

[DooDoot]

I think an endorsement of patriarchy would require evidence of the Buddha actively recommending it as a good in itself, or chastising otherwise happy moral people for being insufficiently patriarchal. And I can't think of any suttas where that happens.

I think a starting point may be finding an actual example of patriarchal religious doctrine to compare Buddhism with, such as from the Biblical 1 Corinthians 11; spoken by Saul of Tarsus (Hebrew: שאול התרסי), aka, Saint Paul:

I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. 3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.

7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God ; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man ; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man .

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV

My view of Buddhism is man was created for woman rather than woman created for man. That is why the men left the household life, so they would not spend their life in the service of the needs & wants of women; doing the dharma of family obligation. When I lived in traditional Thai Buddhist village culture, it appeared quite Matriarchal to me. But then, Thai culture may not represent Buddhism.

[Manopubbangama]

This sutta seems pretty patriachal... Man is the undisputed head of the household...in Anguttara Nikaya(7:59; IV 91-94)
There is no sutta about the seven types of husband!

Agreed and agreed.

Patriarchy leads to stable, harmonious households, as the Buddha teaches here.

The family is strong in patriarchal societies such as Burma and Poland, weak in nations such as, say, England, where women are promiscuous, children are born out of wedlock and the state becomes the "father" of the family. Patriarchal cultures take over weak cultures such as Islam taking over England right now.

The Patriarchy = 1
Orgasmic Buddhism = 0

[DooDoot]

Patriarchy leads to stable, harmonious households, as the Buddha teaches here.

The family is strong in patriarchal societies such as Burma and Poland, weak in nations such as, say, England, where women are promiscuous, children are born out of wedlock and the state becomes the "father" of the family. Patriarchal cultures take over weak cultures such as Islam taking over England right now.

The Patriarchy = 1
Orgasmic Buddhism = 0

Personally, the above sounds like mere personal doctrines to me rather than Buddhism. For example, Poland has a Catholic, Feudal & Communist histoy. Could we kindly quote some suttas. Thanks

[Manopubbangama]

Patriarchy leads to stable, harmonious households, as the Buddha teaches here.

The family is strong in patriarchal societies such as Burma and Poland, weak in nations such as, say, England, where women are promiscuous, children are born out of wedlock and the state becomes the "father" of the family.

The Patriarchy = 1
Orgasmic Buddhism = 0

Personally, the above sounds like mere personal doctrines to me rather than Buddhism. For example, Poland has a Catholic, Feudal & Communist histoy. Could we kindly quote some suttas. Thanks

What roots does Burma have?

[DooDoot]

What roots does Burma have?

First, you probably need to provide evidence Burma is strongly patriarchal. Respectfully, the impression is you are creating these countries (Poland where you live and Burma which you worship) out of your own image. Its best to quote suttas on this topic, imo.

Can the Buddha be a woman?

In this age or any other?

If not, why not?

The above does not sound relevant because this topic is generally about the household life rather than the arising of a SammasamBuddha (Original Buddha that starts the Buddhist religion).

[Manopubbangama]

What roots does Burma have?

First, you probably need to provide evidence Burma is strongly patriarchal. Respectfully, the impression is you are creating these countries (Poland where you live and Burma which you worship) out of your own image. Its best to quote suttas on this topic, imo.

How can we quote suttas about Burma, exactly?

Anyway, I think JamesTheGiant pretty much nailed it regarding suttas.

Sorry if you don't feel that way.

Can the Buddha be a woman?

In this age or any other?

If not, why not?

The above does not sound relevant because this topic is about the household life rather than the arising of a SammasamBuddha.
[/quote]

You think the fact that the Buddha is always a man and never a women, never ever ever has nothing to do with the fact that Buddhism is a patriarchal religion?

[DooDoot]

Anyway, I think JamesTheGiant pretty much nailed it regarding suttas. .

The above is merely your opinion. Sam Vara nor his wife shared the view of James. I think its best we have have scholarly discussion rather than posting personal doctrines.

You think the fact that the Buddha is always a man and never a women, never ever ever has nothing to do with the fact that Buddhism is a patriarchal religion?

It seems the Buddha often taught differently for monks as compared to householders. My impression is your views might be influenced by Christianity, where the male god is imputed upon the Christian believers. The Buddha is not a God. The Buddha made clear distinction between the monastic life and household life. Women have zero power & authority in the monastic life because the monastic life was the male renunciation of family life.

[Manopubbangama]

Anyway, I think JamesTheGiant pretty much nailed it regarding suttas. .

The above is merely your opinion. Sam Vara nor his wife shared the view of James. I think its best we have have scholarly discussion rather than posting personal doctrines.

You want me to focus on the suttas and then cite Sam Vara's wife as an example of why Buddhism is not patriarchal?

[DooDoot]

You want me to focus on the suttas

I think if you don't have knowledge of sutta than this topic may beyond your capacity to participate in a scholarly way. The question is about whether Buddhism is patriarchal thus knowledge of the suttas (rather than of Burmese, Polish or Islamic history) seems important.

and then cite Sam Vara's wife as an example of why Buddhism is not patriarchal?

Sam Vara's wife appeared to be commenting on a sutta. I will search for more suttas.

OK below:

"In five ways, young householder, should a wife as the West be ministered to by a husband:

(i) by being courteous to her,
(ii) by not despising her,
(iii) by being faithful to her,
(iv) by handing over authority to her,
(v) by providing her with adornments.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nara.html

Another:

“Women have a man as their ambition. They’re preoccupied with adornments. They’re dedicated to their children. They insist on being without a co-wife. Their ultimate goal is sovereignty.”

https://suttacentral.net/an6.52/en/sujato

Now since polygamy was common in the Buddha's time yet the Buddha highlighted women don't like polygamy seems to show Buddhism might not be patriarchal.

[Manopubbangama]

You want me to focus on the suttas

I think if you don't have knowledge of sutta than this topic may beyond your capacity to participate in a scholarly way. The question is about whether Buddhism is patriarchal thus knowledge of the suttas (rather than of Burmese, Polish or Islamic history) seems important.

and then cite Sam Vara's wife as an example of why Buddhism is not patriarchal?

Sam Vara's wife appeared to be commenting on a sutta. I will search for more suttas.

OK below:

"In five ways, young householder, should a wife as the West be ministered to by a husband:

(i) by being courteous to her,
(ii) by not despising her,
(iii) by being faithful to her,
(iv) by handing over authority to her,
(v) by providing her with adornments.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nara.html

Why would handing something to someone imply anything other than complete control of the one who hands it?

Also, can the Buddha be a women?

If not, why then?

Sam Vara's wife appeared to be commenting on a sutta.

Where is that written?

Women have zero power & authority in the monastic life

Doodoot my dear pal, I think that is the most correct thing I have ever heard you say - I agree 100%.