According to Abhidhamma even the embryo has the sex determination even though there is no visible sex organs.
And that is absolutely positively possible.
In his past lives, Buddha was a woman, a man, an animal, even a Mara. It does not matter what form any of the future buddha has now, when he enters his last life, he âautomaticallyâ assumes a certain form. Apparently, all buddhas are more or less similar.
Besides, the future Buddha Metteyya is though to already reside in Tusita World, before being reborn as human in his last life. So none of the currently living humans is the next buddha.
AFAIR, suttas too have these statements. Even biology thinks so. Because chromosomes.
Yes, but there are more variations than XX and XY arenât there? Should we ask for one Buddha of each? Does it matter? Are we assuming Buddhaâs have a choice in the matter, or is it more like only women can bear children? What about other genetic combinations- maybe we should have a sheep or an insect or even a bacteria - to represent the most successful organism on the planet. I think we should think about what is masculine and feminine âtraitsâ, as opposed to physical characteristics as well. Some men and women can display the opposite trait, from time to time- this completely natural. Should the Buddha be feminine or masculine? I doubt there will be a satisfactory answer. As the Buddha said âI donât have a fight with the world, the world has a fight with meâ âŚparaphrasing.
with metta
2 Likes
As far as I know, the Pali suttas have numerous stories of women attaining Nirvana.
However, despite some less positive images of women in Early Buddhism, there are also examples in the Theravada Sutta Pitaka that suggest that the very concept of gender differentiation can serve as a hindrance to attaining nirvana, or enlightenment. For example, in the Bhikkhuni-samyutta,[10] found in the Sagatha-vagga of the Samyutta Nikaya, gender discrimination is stated to be the work of Mara, a personification of temptation from the Buddhist spiritual path. In the Soma Sutta, the bhikkhuni Soma states: âAnyone who thinks âIâm a womanâ or âa manâ or âAm I anything at all?â â thatâs who Maraâs fit to addressâ,[11] linking gender neutrality to the Buddhist concept of anatta, or ânot-selfâ, a strategy the Buddha taught for release from suffering.[12] In a sutta titled âBondageâ, the Buddha states that when either a man or a woman clings to gender identity, that person is in bondage.[13]âŚ
In Theravada Buddhism, the modern school based on the Buddhist philosophy of the earliest dated texts, Buddhahood is a rare event. The focus of practice is primarily on attaining Arhatship and the Pali Canon has examples of both male and female Arhats who attained nirvana. YasodharÄ, the former wife of Buddha Shakyamuni, mother of his son Rahula, is said to have become an arhat after having joined the Bhikkhuni order of Buddhist nuns.
Women in Buddhism - Wikipedia
Just curious, do you have a source for the idea that the Bodhisatta Metteyya is currently residing in Tusita heaven? I have also heard a Bhikkhu say that the Bodhisatta could be on earth now - doing a lot of very friendly things!
Hotei is traditionally a historical person who, after his death, came to be regarded as an incarnation of Maitreya:
Heâs basically the Buddhist version of Santa Claus, in the sense that St. Nicolas was once a historical person as well, who was embellished after his death.
Sure,
Not a great source (as the link to the actual textual proof is not provided), but a quick one.
If, of course, we are concened about digging deeper and trying to find at least some solid info in the EBT, there will be a challenge. The book of Venerable Analayo, âGenesis of the Bodhisattva Idealâ, deals with the emergence of late Mahayanic âBodhisattva idealâ as well as stories regarding interaction of the Buddha Gotama and Budda Kassapa (past one), and Buddha Metteyya (who, at the time of Gotama was a monk). And from the analysis of the text it appears that the story of Metteyya is a later addition at all, and was invented after Buddha Gotamaâs parinibbana. In short: it is quite possible that Metteyya was never mentioned by âourâ Buddha at all.
Buddhist tradition, however, talks about him all the time, and the information about current residence in Tusita comes not so much from the early texts, but from tradition. Who is right: the tradition or the analysis - is an open question.
You can have a quick read here too: https://sites.google.com/site/theconceptofbodhisatta/6-01
chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com