Given only the opportunity and the training, women can outshine men in the combat sports (here’s the analogy with monastic life). Some years ago, the president of one of the largest global MMA organizations stated publicly he’d never allow women in his promotion. Now, some of the female fighters are top draws to his events, and are main event fighters. All it took was the opportunity, and women proved their mettle and excellence in spades. I can say that as a judge, women fighters are often more technically sound than the men, and bring as much intensity to their fights as the men do.
Opportunity + Training + Support = Success and Equality.
How are these considerations relevant? The Buddha recommended abandonment of the household life. Why does it matter, then, for the protection of the dhamma, which classes of people might or might not be physically capable of defending households against marauders?
I think the misogyny lies in the idea the the nuns will be the sole cause of the Dhamma’s downfall. Now, if the monks also contributed to the downfall of the Dhamma, then maybe it would not be misogynistic. But because the weight of eliminating the Buddha’s teachings is placed entirely upon the women, there is the idea that there is something inherent in them that will bring about destruction.
I see what you’re trying to do here and I find it commendable, but I don’t think one can flip the paradigm from a male Buddha to a female Buddha and say they are equal paradigms. What I mean by this is that there’s a reason the texts are written and spoken largely by men, as the women during (and after) the Buddha’s time would not have had the same voice or high role in society as the men. Though it is an interesting thought experiment, imagining a scenario in which women would have dictated to the men is implausible precisely because the social hierarchy likely would not have allowed it to occur.
DKervick,
Sorry. I quoted a line from your post and responded to it not as a personal response to you or against any of the points you made in your post, it just reminded me of a historical fact that irks me personally.
For those who are interested in the origin of bhikkhuni ordination here’s a lecture conducted by Dr. Richard gombrich based on Ven. Analayo’s academic work . http://ocbs.org/category/events/
Ok, I see your point. The english translation says, if there were no nun order formed, True Dhamma would last 1000 years. Because of forming the nun order, it would last 500 years (only half as long). There are ways to state those facts without being misogynistic, but looking again at the english, I can more clearly see how those english words are perceived as misogynistic.
the english translation the discussion was based on :
It seems to me the entire 500 year argument falls when one takes a good look at the evidence in Ven. Analyo’s essay in The controversy on bhikkhunī ordination - Thubten Chodron. The suggestion that the Buddha understood that the ordination of women into the Sangha would compromise it, or compromise the lifespan of Dhamma, runs afoul of the Buddha’s own attitudes re: the imporance of the full Sangha to the longevity of the Dhamma. It seems to me such a theory runs counter to the Buddha’s own awakened wisdom, and pure sense of reasoned, gender nonspecific, and balanced ethics.
The order of bhikkhunīs: the duration of the teaching
The passages surveyed so far help to set into context the prophecy that because an order of bhikkhunīs had come into existence during the lifetime of the Buddha, the duration of the teachings will be shortened to 500 years (Cv X.1). Now this prophecy is surprising, since once would not expect the Buddha to do something which he knew in advance would have such an effect. In fact, the prophecy in the way it is recorded in the Vinaya has not come true, as after 2,500 years the teaching is still in existence. Even the bhikkhunī order was still in existence in India in the 8th century and thus more than a 1,000 years after the time of the Buddha.
It also needs to be noted that the basic condition described in this prophecy has been fulfilled when an order of bhikkhunīs came into existence during the Buddha’s lifetime. The prophecy has no relation to whether an order of bhikkhunīs continues or is revived nowadays.
It seems, then, that here we have another presentation that is not entirely straightforward. On following the same principle of the four mahāpadesas, we now need to examine what other passages have to say about possible causes for a decline of the teaching. A discourse in the Aṅguttara-nikāya describes how each of the four assemblies can contribute to the thriving of the Buddha’s teachings. Here a bhikkhunī can stand out for illuminating the Buddhist community through her learnedness (AN 4.7). Another discourse in the same collection indicates that a bhikkhunī also illuminates the community through her virtue (AN 4.211). These two discourses reflect a clear appreciation of the contribution that learned and virtuous bhikkhunīs can make to the Buddhist community, instead of seeing them as something detrimental.
Other discourses more specifically address what prevents the decline of the teaching. According to a discourse in the Saṃyutta-nikāya, such a decline can be prevented when the members of the four assemblies, including bhikkhunīs, dwell with respect for the teacher, the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, the training, and concentration (SN 16.13). Here the bhikkhunīs actually contribute to preventing decline, rather than being themselves its cause.
Similar presentations can be found in three discourses in the Aṅguttara-nikāya. In agreement with the Saṃyuttanikāya discourse just mentioned, these three discourses present respectful behaviour by the members of the four assemblies, including bhikkhunīs, as what prevents decline (AN 5.201, AN 6.40, and AN 7.56). Besides respect for the teacher, the Dhamma, the Saṅgha, and the training, these three discourses also mention respect of the four assemblies for each other, heedfulness, and being helpful (to one another).
These passages clearly put the responsibility for preventing a decline of the teaching on each of the four assemblies. It is their dwelling with respect towards essential aspects of the Buddha’s teaching and each other that prevents decline.ControversywithTranslations_Analayo-2015.pdf (3.7 MB)
I don’t know if “true Dhamma” lasted more than 500 years. What Ven. T (Thanissasro) said makes sense to me, that 2500 years later, this doesn’t mean that “true Dhamma” can not be found at all, but that counterfeit Dhamma has become the norm, and true Dhamma no longer the dominant currency. At what point in history this happened, I don’t know, but even a number less than 500 years wouldn’t surprise me. Just my opinion, and it has nothing to do with women at all, just what I perceive as the difficulty for the Dhamma that is true and beneficial but diametrically opposed to people’s base desires naturally would have difficulty surviving.
Just like if I want to start a restaurant I can guarantee failure in less than 2 years, because I’m going to prepare food that is healthy, optimal meditation fuel, not food designed to appeal to people’s addiction to stimulate their taste buds.
I see your point, Frank. I have a sense that Ajahn Geoff was more than a little militant in supporting the opposition to Bhikkhuni ordinations. I had spent some time at Wat Metta some years ago, but was disappointed in his written brief opposing the ordinations of women, and his verbal responses to women who asked him why females couldn’t ordain (that there was no one to teach or train them (?) ). I’m of the view that the “true” Dhamma is actually healthier than it has been for very many years. Sure, in the US, for example, there is a built in bias for Zen, and the odd cultural artifacts left by teachers like Chogyam Trungpa. But, thanks to the internet and ajahns such as we have here on SC, people actually finding the western dharma lacking are able to put in the effort and find and study a “true” Dhamma. I’m bullish on the Dhamma’s future, especially as the west progresses to higher and faster screwed up states of greed, aversion and delusion.
The best argument against the 500 years theory seems to be the evidence that the Buddha saw Bhikkhunis as indipensable to the establishment, growth and survival of the Sangha and the Dhamma. To hold Bhikkhunis in such esteem, and yet at the same time suggest that they will be a root cause of a future failure, is completely inconsistent. Ven. Analayo makes this case well in his essay.
It is inescapable that, whatever the reading, according to the early texts the Buddha did not have “normal” genitals. And the only reading actually supported by a canonical text is that the Buddha was intersex, and his genitals looked like a woman’s.
Buddha was a hermaphrodite? He was married and had children at one point right? Sorry this is all new to me.
BD.5.356 “If, Ānanda, women had not obtained the going forth from home into homelessness in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth-finder, the Brahma-faring, Ānanda, would have lasted long , true dhamma would have endured for a thousand years. But since, Ānanda, women have gone forth … in the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth-finder, now, Ānanda, the Brahma-faring will not last long, true dhamma will endure only for five hundred years.
what is interesting is seeing how nobody ask if the fault of that time decrement because the admission of women it was in men instead in women. Note the Buddha never said the fault of that decrement was in the women.
It can leave an uncomfortable land to ask for some unconsciouss or implicit misogyny when managing that episode, even to defend sex equality. Which is funny
Do you know some essay arguing if perhaps were the lacks in men what caused the time decrement after accepting women?. I have never found one.
Sorry my ignorance, I’m aware about the tons of papers with this issue. Although I believe this passage don’t have some high special interest because it says something of common sense. In a community of people who are under celibacy, etc… and with many integrants still to be purified, the inclussion of both sex can cause difficulties for the goal. This is nothing strange, I believe. Anyone can study the arising problems after including roosters and hens in a corral, although I wonder where is the special mistery to clarify or discover. What the Buddha said is fully logical.
The strange thing would be reading in a text of 2.500 years ago: “Ananda, after including women there will be no difference”. It isn’t something of common sense?.
Hermaphrodite refers to specifically to a being (human or otherwise) that has both male and female genitals. Intersex is a more general term that encompasses a range of non-standard presentations.
There is no suggestion that the Buddha had female genitalia, and, as you say, he had a son. So in terms of reproductive sexuality he was male. Clearly, however, his genitals were emphatically said to appear unusual, and the wording used to describe this is elsewhere used of female genitals. Perhaps intersex is not the best term for this, I am open to suggestions.
Thanks. These might also be appropriate terms, although at a first glance, they appear to be treated as medical problems, rather than as a simple variation in anatomy.
I find this Western obsession with sex somewhat weird. I think the only ‘sexual organ’ we need to be concerned with is his head; or specifically the mind and I would argue that it’s the only sexual organ there is! It’s like saying if someone had a mole on their bum, it undermines who they are! It’s actually discrimination!
True, all those terms are from a perspective of “problem”.
There is also the saying “a grower not a show -er”. On a taboo topic, that might be all that is said.
