SuttaCentral
What examples do we have in the EBTs of beings who either have their form changed by someone else, or chose to change their form? Are there any who did this permanently?
I’ll start:
Can you define “EBTs” for the sake of this thread? What texts should we include or not include in our search space here?
I’m going to go with the definition we use in search:
ebt search
Narrow search to “Early Buddhist Texts” (ebt). This is a shortcut and not a definitive list of what is early. Searches within the following:
dn, da, mn, ma, sn, sa, sa-2, sa-3, an, ea, ea-2, kp, iti, ud, snp, dhp, thig, thag, pli-tv, lzh-mg, lzh-mi, lzh-dg, lzh-sarv, lzh-mu, lzh-ka, lzh-upp, san-mg, san-lo, up, ea-ot, d, sf
Though I guess I was more thinking of Theravada sources.
Non-commentarial.
Are you only interested in beings that change from / into an animal form?
Mara can take any form. Here’s a sutta where he becomes an ox: SN4.16
And I believe that supannas (phoenixes) can also change into human forms, just like nagas, but I don’t have an EBT reference at the moment.
If we include non-animal beings, we have devas and asuras transforming into humans to offer dana to Mahakassapa, Ud 3.7.
There’s an instance where a newly reborn deva wants to speak with the Buddha but their form isn’t stable and the Buddha advises them to assume a grosser body, but I can’t find the sutta right now.
In the vinaya, we also have humans changing into other humans, e.g. men changing into women and vice versa.
I’m just interested in the scope of what different kinds of beings were understood to be capable of. Mainly non-humans to humans, or humans to other humans.
Other than tv-bu-PJ1 examples?
Also, seeing as you are in the thread 
is there any chance that you can point me to a translated version of the instance which appears in the Theravada Parajika 1 in the Chinese vinaya? I have heard it’s a different context but haven’t tracked it down yet.
I only translate the bhikkhuni vinayas. That means that if the parallel is somewhere in the shared rules, for example in their parallel to pj1, it would be outside of the scope of my project.
In the Chinese canon, there are the vinayas of 5 schools. Luckily, 3 of them do include the sex change rules in the bhikkhuni vinaya (see below).
Mahasanghika (MgPn37-38)
There are three reasons for which someone is no longer a bhikkhu. Which three? He decides to give up the training, there are valid reasons for the sangha to expel him, or he turns into a woman. These are called the three reasons for which someone is no longer a bhikkhu. (If she has turned into a woman,) she should be sent to a bhikkhunī monastery. She may not be in a concealed place together with the bhikkhunīs, and should stay apart. If she later turns back and acquires male genitals, he should return to the bhikkhu sangha. He’s still called fully ordained, and also keeps his previous seniority.
(and reversed for bhikkhunīs)
Sarvastivada
(SarvDm54) The Buddha was in Sāvatthī. At that time, a bhikkhu lost his male organs which turned into female organs. The bhikkhus didn’t know what to do. They told the Buddha of this matter, and the Buddha said: “Sent them to join the bhikkhunī sangha with their previous seniority from when they went forth and received the full ordination.”
(SarvDm55) The Buddha was in Sāvatthī. At that time, a bhikkhunī lost her female organs and obtained male organs. The bhikkhunīs didn’t know what to do. They told the Buddha of this matter, and the Buddha said: “Sent them to join the bhikkhu sangha with their previous seniority from when they went forth and received the full ordination.”
Mulasarvastivada
Location as before. Then the venerable Upāli asked the World-honored One: “Venerable, if a bhikkhunī changes genitals, what should be done?” The Buddha said: “According to their old seniority, based on their number of vassa, they should move to the bhikkhu monastery.” He again asked the Buddha: “World-honored One, when a bhikkhunī changes genitals, then they’ll be sent to the bhikkhu monastery and keep their former seniority. If a bhikkhu changes genitals, do they also go to the bhikkhunī monastery and keep their former seniority?” The Buddha said: “They’ll also be sent to the bhikkhunī monastery.” “Venerable, when these two people have gone to these places and their genitals change back, what should be done?” The Buddha said: “They should return to their former places.” “Venerable, if they then again change a third time in this way, what should be done?” The Buddha said: “If they change a third time, they’re no longer a bhikkhu or bhikkhunī. They must be expelled. Don’t have any doubts.”
It’s AN 3.127, with Hatthaka.
Wow, this is amazing Venerable! Thank you for your sharing! I love how this was post on Sydney Mardi Gras. Happy Pride Day! 
I just love the Buddha! He was so practical and so chill about it! 
Thanks Venerable 
I really appreciate your effort. I have some questions about the translations, which I will do some study on and maybe DM you.
I don’t want this thread to get too bogged down on the particular subject of sex/gender change of humans.
Let’s try and keep this a broader overview of the laws of form change of different beings. Imagine that we were creating a game and we needed to know the rules of shapeshifting in the EBTs 
SN 51.11 and SN 51.20 give some details about developing the iddhipādas in order to gain mastery over the “appearance” of the body.
I’ve been thinking about how the iddhipadas interplay with shapeshifting from one kind of being to another, or the same kind of being with a different appearance. I’m not sure, but undecided, if this is the same kind of thing.
Those who have mastered the iddhipadas seem to have a different relationship with material form, but still return to their original form after passing through external material form in the various ways listed. The iddhipadas don’t have people transforming into a different class (aristocrat to brahmin for example), or gender, or even being type. The changing of being type being the most common, and maybe only kind of change we see outside of parajika 1.
Do you think that the same mechanics of the iddhipadas are what is at play for a deva, a dragon or pheonix?
All of this is pure hypothetical fun, even for me who isn’t really a fantasy nerd.
The only sutta (I believe) we have where the Buddha instructs such a being in this ability is AN 3.127 mentioned above. There, the verb the Buddha uses is “abhinimmināhī”ti. This is the same verb used in DN 10 to describe:
When their mind has become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they project it and extend it toward the creation of a mind-made body.
So evaṁ samāhite citte parisuddhe pariyodāte anaṅgaṇe vigatūpakkilese mudubhūte kammaniye ṭhite āneñjappatte manomayaṁ kāyaṁ abhinimmānāya cittaṁ abhinīharati abhininnāmeti.
From this body they create another body—formed, mind-made, whole in its major and minor limbs, not deficient in any faculty.
So imamhā kāyā aññaṁ kāyaṁ abhinimmināti rūpiṁ manomayaṁ sabbaṅgapaccaṅgiṁ ahīnindriyaṁ.
abhi-nimminanta = higher-nimmita-ing
Or in DN 18:
When the divinity Sanaṅkumāra appears to the gods of the thirty-three, he does so after manifesting a solid incarnation.
Yadā, bhante, brahmā sanaṅkumāro devānaṁ tāvatiṁsānaṁ pātubhavati, oḷārikaṁ attabhāvaṁ abhinimminitvā pātubhavati.
That both a human and a god manifesting a different body are described using the same verb tells me that they weren’t thought of as categorically different actions. Obviously, it’s natural for a god to do it (apparently needing a little practice in Hatthaka’s case!) and it evidently takes extraordinary talent and practice for a human to do it, so there is a difference! But it seems to not be categorical.
The occasion was this. Once when Devadatta was alone in retreat this thought arose in his mind: “Who is there whose confidence I can win over and thereby acquire much gain, honour and renown?” Then he thought: “There is Prince Ajātasattu. He is young with a glorious future. Suppose I win over his confidence? Much gain, honour and renown will accrue to me if I do so.”
So Devadatta packed his bed away, and he took his bowl and outer robe and set out for Rājagaha, where he at length arrived. There he discarded his own form and assumed the form of a youth with a girdle of snakes, and in that guise he appeared on Prince Ajātasattu’s lap. Then Prince Ajātasattu was fearful, anxious, suspicious and worried. Devadatta asked: “Are you afraid of me, prince?”
“Yes, I am afraid. Who are you?”
“I am Devadatta.”
“If you are Devadatta, Lord, then please show yourself in your own form.”
Devadatta discarded the form of the youth and stood before Prince Ajātasattu, wearing his patched outer cloak, bowl and robes. Then Prince Ajātasattu felt prodigious confidence in Devadatta owing to his supernormal powers. After that he waited on him evening and morning with five hundred carriages and five hundred offerings of milk-rice as a gift of food. Devadatta became overwhelmed with gain, honour and renown. Ambition obsessed his mind, and the wish arose in him: “I will rule the Sangha of bhikkhus.” Simultaneously with the thought his supernormal powers vanished.
Vin. Cv. 7:2; cf. S. 17:36
Thanks Venerable! I had forgotten about this story.
This is a really interesting passage when examining the two main words used for these kinds of transformations. We have both abhinimminitvā and pātubhavati right there next to each other. A similar thing happens in the example given by Ven Knigarian of Devadatta at AN3.127:2.2
These don’t seem to be synonyms though, as they don’t always show up like this.
Abhinimminitvā seems to be the magical process of shape shifting, whereas pātubhavati seems to be how the form is then understood.
When the Buddha commands Hatthaka to transform from a deva to a human form he uses abhinimmitvā.
“Hatthaka, manifest a solid incarnation.”
“oḷārikaṁ, hatthaka, attabhāvaṁ abhinimmināhī”ti. AN3.127:2.2
With no use of pātubhütaṃ.
This differentiation is further emphasised in the suttas on the divine messengers, where it is only the concept which manifests.
‘The messengers of the gods have shown themselves to you. Grey hairs can be seen growing on your head.’
‘pātubhūtā kho devassa devadūtā, dissanti sirasmiṁ palitāni jātānī’ti. MN83
Literally, no figure of a god or its messenger appears. It is purely figurative; that is the concept of old age appears (or does not!) to the subject.
Mostly, a nerdy aside. If anyone has thoughts on this I’d be happy to hear them.
One that appears is that a God can only create a lower manifestation and cannot manifest in a higher heaven or as a higher deity.
This is the kind of thing I’m curious about next. I’m not very good about the different heavenly realms so I’m hoping it’ll lodge something in my brain.