@Rosie I’ve also found the likes very ‘addictive’. I find it’s nice to give them, but receiving them without conceit is difficult! Sadhu for your honesty
=D what i especially like about your poem is word play between beagle and bagel; whether consciously intended or a gift from auto correct or creative spelling, it just delighted me. Because… well, something like this?:
Indeed the Ego is ever present ready to demand attention. It is interesting though that a web site dedicated to the Buddhist principle of non-self would concurrently seem to celebrate the self with a ‘Like’ button.
And in ironic conclusion…Thanks, with Metta!
Well, I was doubtful about the spelling, even as I wrote it.
English is not my mother tongue.
But in a haiku, some waywardness may be welcome.
Anyhow, the delicious eatable delicacy, is not exactly “emptiness”.
It is the hole in it, that contributes to philosophy. … not the whole!
by the way: it was the first haiku I ever wrote, in the last 70 years.
Thank you for posting the beagle with the two bagles!
Can you write the musical notation and someone can play and sing it and become a country music dhamma-star. A good Dhamma outreach for the sensitive new-age cowboys. I would like to see a meditating cowboy at home on the range and eating vegan burgers and camping under the stars singing your song on youtube. I know the guy for the job!
Someone read a book.
Please, guiding meditator,
Don’t tell me to think!
long day, aching thoughts
long await, final release
good solutions, are hard to come by
emptiness. blowing. steam
Assumed air of peace
sleeves of Dharma waved about
the vessel is full
the “means” is the end.
a e i o u
damn; stupid logical mind
it cannot haiku.
Okay so I know that I may qualify as pedantic, but some of youse don’t know or care that:
- a Japanese poem of seventeen syllables, in three lines of five, seven, and five, traditionally evoking images of the natural world.
So here’s mine
I can’t do Haiku
Maybe you don’t know how too
Haiku make you blue?
“No female buddhas”
They man-splain, not wrongly
Silently she nods
The comma is a pause that I count as a syllable for meter.
Or cheap package tour?
‘Not wrongly’? I think it’s a rather absurd idea, no? Like the bhikkhuni politics that the later community added in, no?
A Buddha is a fully enlightened being who teaches, having been the first to become independently fully enlightened in his particular era. A paccekabuddha (that is, a “silent buddha”) is an independently fully awakened one who cannot or will not teach. There are two reasons why a teacher cannot or will not teach: either the teacher cannot express ideas to others or there is no one who can learn. In this haiku, the man, blinded by his own views and conceit, shows himself to be unable to receive teachings from a woman. Furthermore, there is a woman who—right under his nose—may very well be a silent buddha who knows the man is too deeply mired in his views to learn from her. Considering what happened to early bhikkhunis (if I recall correctly one was raped by an obsessed cousin in her forest home, prompting the Buddha to ask the king to build city monasteries for the bhikkhunis; others endured sexual harassment from men; in the jataka tales a female ascetic is abducted to be a wife for a king) and what continues to happen today to women in male-dominated intellectual professions such as mathematics and software engineering, it would be impossible for a female teaching buddha to arise. Not because she couldn’t become independently enlightened, but because teaching would be so onerous in the midst of patriarchal view and conceit that not even Sacca himself would be able to convince her to take on such tiresome, bothersome work. The man in the haiku holds the view, however, that because a female wouldn’t be able to fulfill various roles of the Bodhisatta (wheel-turning king, etc.); and due to stereotypically female traits, she wouldn’t be able to become independently enlightened in the first place. So he’s not wrong that there couldn’t be a female buddha, just perhaps wrong as to why—and he certainly doesn’t see that he is part of the problem!
I hope that clears up my succinct quasi-haiku “pet peeve about Buddhism”. I am not attached to this view of how the world works, but it is supported by my personal experience.
Well remember that the current situation is rather irrelevant, since according to doctrine, a buddha cannot arise until Buddhism is totally gone, which may take centuries, by which time society may be quite different. Although even if Buddhism were gone today, this climate would not stop a female buddha. There are some great awakened female teachers, even outside of the Buddhist context. Take a look at Byron Katie for example, who awakened not even through any religion.
Anyway, it’s worth remembering that the Buddha was an arahant. The only thing that makes an arahant a buddha is it the arahant is in a world devoid of Buddhism.
I think it’s as dumb an idea as many of the Republicans in the US come up with personally. No logic to it, just illogical sexist dogma.
Please. Keep it classy.
I don’t want to push any point, but, just curious - do you actually think that it’s impossible for any woman to become a buddha (i.e. in any future, even millenia in the future)? I guess I assumed that well educated Westerners would never buy that Asian dogma, but am very interested to hear if you do believe that. Don’t worry I won’t fight against it any more, just curious.
Justin, it’s not about my beliefs. Though I’m glad you’re not criticizing Acalaa directly, I don’t see how calling their idea “dumb” will move the conversation forward. A conversation which, by the way, would be more suitable for another topic: as you surely know, this thread is specifically about Haiku pet peeves and not so much about the gender of buddhas. Additionally, I think it’s important to be careful about criticizing political parties, so as to keep an inclusive and focussed environment.
Just some friendly recommendations
To answer your question: no, I don’t think it’s impossible for women and nonbinary people to become a buddha.