Questions on AN1.279-283

Q & A
1

I don’t understand what is the purpose of the Buddha saying this and why a woman cannot be Buddha and so on. Were these indeed the Buddha’s words?

AN1.279 (Bikkhu Sujato’s translation)

“It is impossible, mendicants, it cannot happen for a woman to be a perfected one, a fully awakened Buddha.But it is possible for a man to be a perfected one, a fully awakened Buddha.”

4 Likes
2

Welcome to the forum, @xuan !

Bhikkhu Anālayo once wrote an essay on this exact question: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/5-personen/analayo/bahudhatuka.pdf

And this is the conclusion he comes up with:

In sum, since an accidental loss or an intentional omission of an exposition on the inabilities of women in the Madhyama-āgama discourse seems improbable, the most straightforward conclusion would be that the theme of women’s inability is a later addition to the exposition on impossibilities in the different versions of the Discourse on Many Elements. Thus in this respect the Madhyama-āgama version quite probably testifies to an early stage, when the theme of what women cannot achieve had not yet become part of the discourse.

9 Likes
3

That is not correct, Arahant and fully awakened Buddha are quite different. The suttas state that woman can be Arahant but not fully awakened Buddha, at least not until they give up on being a woman.
The purpose of the suttas seem to be in stating what is possible and impossible. Like for example it is not possible for a man to give birth to a child. Just like for man, there are tasks he is unable to accomplish, there are for woman as well, it seems to me.

4 Likes
4

A reasonable explanation I’ve heard is that since most societies are patriarchal, it would be hard for a woman Buddha to eatablish her voice and roll forth the Dhamma. And since Buddhas are said to have incredible merit, you can understand why they’d be born as men in a patriarchal society.

I’m personally aboard the “later addition to the Suttas” train though.

4 Likes
5

Yes, this is also precisely the reason why Buddha was born in king’s family. Quite possibly there are also other resons, since it is established by respectable psychology that there are differences between man and woman, no need to reject certain suttas just because they contradict our modern ideas on sex iquality.

The most important thing is that woman can attain arahood, and any male practitioner should be ready to learn Dhamma from such “Noble Lady”.

Quotes mark because arahood is actually liberation from any sexual identification.

Then the bhikkhunī Somā, having understood, “This is Māra the Evil One,” replied to him in verses:

“What does womanhood matter at all

When the mind is concentrated well,
When knowledge flows on steadily

As one sees correctly into Dhamma.

“One to whom it might occur,

‘I’m a woman’ or ‘I’m a manʹ

Or ‘I’m anything at all’—

Is fit for Māra to address.”

SN 5:2

4 Likes
6

That makes sense, because you’re dealing with views and perceptions of people and societies at large. It reminds of a famous (I think) Ajahn Chah teaching I heard. Something about “it’s easier to move a mountain because you can blow it up with dynamite, but to change a person’s views, that’s something else entirely.” (heavily paraphrased)

2 Likes