Women can't become Buddhas?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Locked
thecap
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:19 am
Location: Germany

Women can't become Buddhas?

Post by thecap »

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?
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?"
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by mikenz66 »

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
User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Jechbi »

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.
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by kc2dpt »

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."
Just to echo what was said...

"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.
Why?
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.
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
thecap
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by thecap »

Thanks, that makes sense. I understand now that Buddha-enlightenment was meant, rather than Arahant-enlightenment.
Peter wrote:
Why?
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.
Hi Peter,

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.)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Ceisiwr »

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.

:namaste:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by cooran »

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
---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
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

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.
That's been my personal theory too. :)
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by mikenz66 »

thecap wrote: what you said used to make sense from a political/social perspective. However, I don't agree that men have more influence.
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.

Metta
Mike
thecap
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by thecap »

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.
Indeed. That was then. Lets not confuse the causality. The Buddha was male, because female teachers at that time were not taken seriously.

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.
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.
Sorry, I don't believe in rebirth, but in conditioned arising. ;)
Individual
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Individual »

thecap wrote:Why?
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.
thecap wrote:Sorry, I don't believe in rebirth, but in conditioned arising. ;)
Snarky and irrelevant.

With metta :heart:,
Individual
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Ben »

Dear members

Just a reminder that this is the Classical Theravada sub-forum.
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.
Given that we are in the Classical forum, it maybe useful to frame any answer in reference to the early sources.

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 ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

The teaching from MN 115 is a woman cannot become a self-enlightened Buddha and establish the Buddhist religion.
Element

Re: Women can't be enlightened?

Post by Element »

Individual 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.
Dear Individual

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. :heart:

For your consideration,

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 »

It is like on Buddhachat. I little birdie has told me you have a female admirer.
huh?
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