Can women become Buddhas?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

There are, of course, better and worse political systems. However the idea of a "perfect or ideal political system" is an oxymoron according to the 1st Noble Truth. Perfection is not attainable on that level.

[maybay]

Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58

gassho
Rory

"However, Saicho's position seemed to contradict his use of the phrase "realization of buddhahood with this very body," since if death intervened between stages, buddhahood could hardly have been realized with the practitioner's current body (genshin)."

[maybay]

When people rail against patriarchy, what they're really opposed to is a hierarchical social structure. Since this type of structure typically favour the men, we talk about patriarchy. Even if there are women in the mix, its structurally the same. The alternative is matriarchy, which is to say a flat social structure, equality under the ruler. When the power relations are too chaotic we talk about anarchy. What I'm saying is, if you abandon one, you make way for the other. And if you resist, or try to have both, you end up with a destabilizing chaos that other less troubled societies can take advantage of (though not necessarily maliciously), or where the society simply collapses under its own weight.
If there were many Changchub Dorje encampments in today's infrastructured world they would in any case have to form a hierarchy to preserve their individualities.

So if you follow this line of thinking out to its logical conclusion, and understand that the answer to any problem generates its own set of problems, you'll end up with some understanding of the 1st Noble Truth and the "suffering of change".

True. But that should not be seen as an alibi for laziness.

[maybay]

The topic Men/Women is about duality. The topic Buddhahood is about non-duality.

The topic of Buddhahood is no exception. It connotes a state of dignity, something further, higher, more exalted. There are other ways of describing total realization, such as the discovery and manifestation of our primordial condition. So as a topic it is conditioned, with characteristics and associated concepts (such as elitism and patriarchy). As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

That's quite a statement! Do you not see room for improvement?

[Grigoris]

The topic Men/Women is about duality. The topic Buddhahood is about non-duality.

The topic of Buddhahood is no exception. It connotes a state of dignity, something further, higher, more exalted. There are other ways of describing total realization, such as the discovery and manifestation of our primordial condition. So as a topic it is conditioned, with characteristics and associated concepts (such as elitism and patriarchy). As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

So now positing equal rights for women is an attack on Buddhahood?

[maybay]

When people rail against patriarchy, what they're really opposed to is a hierarchical social structure.

And I guess that, according to you, there is something inherently wrong with non-hierarchical social structures?

It depends on the context. It's like in a family. You've got the father, the hierarchy, the mother, the equality, and the kids, the anarchy. It's a natural order. When that natural order crumbles, when the family collapses, when children dictate societal values, when people vote for people like Trump, great suffering follows.

The alternative is matriarchy, which is to say a flat social structure, equality under the ruler.

No. 1. It is not the ONLY alternative. 2. Matriarchy is a hierarchical social structure where women have the positions of power.

I already explained how I understand that.

When the power relations are too chaotic we talk about anarchy.

Yes, some people do call a chaotic power relations "anarchy". Anarchism though is not about chaotic power relations, it is about non-hierarchical order.

It is the opposite of order.

Power imbalances cause chaos, equality brings order.

Not necessarily.

If there were many Changchub Dorje encampments in today's infrastructured world they would in any case have to form a hierarchy to preserve their individualities.

What does this statement even mean? It is gibberish.

It means that as a nomad there is no shared infrastructure between groups, so no common governance is needed, and each group is equal. But if they had to interact on a continual basis, sharing responsibility of a power station for example, they would need to work out a hierarchy of who will do what. Failing to organize themselves would allow a takeover from other more powerful groups, just as the Romans, with their shared infrastructures of roads, aqueducts etc, did when they took over the equal (warring) tribes of Europe. Or as the Chinese with their roads, railways, and disciplined military did to Tibet. Our ancestors didn't dream up hierarchies as a kind of joke, there's a necessity for them. They are natural.

Have you ever heard of Anarchist Federalism?

Do you have an example?

[maybay]

As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

That's quite a statement! Do you not see room for improvement?

As I said, there are other ways of describing it that don't get peoples' backs up. But here we're discussing Buddhahood.

[maybay]

The topic Men/Women is about duality. The topic Buddhahood is about non-duality.

The topic of Buddhahood is no exception. It connotes a state of dignity, something further, higher, more exalted. There are other ways of describing total realization, such as the discovery and manifestation of our primordial condition. So as a topic it is conditioned, with characteristics and associated concepts (such as elitism and patriarchy). As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

So now positing equal rights for women is an attack on Buddhahood?

strawdog.jpg (38.66 KiB) Viewed 3705 times

Woof!

[Grigoris]

It is the opposite of order.

No it is not. Chaos (χάος) is the opposite of order (τάξη). Anarchy (αναρχία) is the opposite of hierarchical power (αρχή).

It means that as a nomad there is no shared infrastructure between groups, so no common governance is needed, and each group is equal. But if they had to interact on a continual basis, sharing responsibility of a power station for example, they would need to work out a hierarchy of who will do what.

Bzzzzzzzzttt... wrong on all fronts!!! Nomadic groups can (and do) interact on a continual basis WHEN NEEDED. They have shared responsibility of natural resources (without which they would die). You do not need a hierarchy to organise a power station. It can be run just fine based on direct democracy. You don't need an authority figure to tell the plumber that they are responsible for the plumbing. Mutual Aid works just fine.

Failing to organize themselves would allow a takeover from other more powerful groups, just as the Romans, with their shared infrastructures of roads, aqueducts etc, did when they took over the equal (warring) tribes of Europe. Or as the Chinese with their roads, railways, and disciplined military did to Tibet. Our ancestors didn't dream up hierarchies as a kind of joke, there's a necessity for them. They are natural.

Yes, we know that hirearchies are necessary for organising killing and oppression.

Do you have an example?

Kobane, Syria. A city run using direct democracy, without access to funding from world powers and/or oil sales has managed to fight off and defend itself from numerous hierarchically organised, well-armed and heartily funded groups of psychotic lunatics (and the Turkish state).

[Grigoris]

You said:

The topic of Buddhahood is no exception...So as a topic it is conditioned, with characteristics and associated concepts (such as elitism and patriarchy). As long as it is seen as something dignified, it will be a target for many angry people.

ie You are saying that elitism and patriarchy are qualities of Buddhahood, in which case positing equality and non-patriarchal structures is an attack on Buddhahood.

Unless you are saying that the association between Buddhahood and elitism and patriarchy is a false association. Is that what you are trying to say?

Do you even know what you are trying to say anymore?

[maybay]

Life can be so confusing but also compelling at the same time don't you think? I'm blown away by it all I have to admit.

[Tiago Simões]

Life can be so confusing but also compelling at the same time don't you think? I'm blown away by it all I have to admit.

I'm blown away by the fact this topic is still going on . . .

[Astus]

Arya Asanga, a Third Ground bodhisattva, says in his Bodhisattvabhumi that women cannot reach annutarasamyaksambodhi. Because they have too many mental afflictions and inferior wisdom.

During the first of the three big kalpas bodhisattvas use female bodies if they wish, but after that time period (a mere 10 to the 59th power years) the use only male bodies. So women can become great bodhisattvas, but not full Buddhas.

See Engle's new translation The Bodhisattva Path to Unsurpassed Enlightenment, pp 169-70.

The Astasahasrika says otherwise, attributing the freedom from female birth to much higher level bodhisattvas.

"Endowed with these attributes, tokens and signs a Bodhisattva should be borne in mind as irreversible from full enlightenment. Furthermore, an irreversible Bodhisattva does not pander to Shramanas and Brahmins of other schools, telling them that they know what is worth knowing, that they see what is worth seeing. He pays no homage to strange Gods, offers them no flowers, incenses, etc., does not put his trusts in them. He is no more reborn in the places of woe, nor does he ever again become a woman."
(PP 8000 17.1, tr Conze)

[rory]

Rory:

Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58

Maybay:"However, Saicho's position seemed to contradict his use of the phrase "realization of buddhahood with this very body," since if death intervened between stages, buddhahood could hardly have been realized with the practitioner's current body (genshin)."

Oh Maybay it's so sweet that you are making an effort and trying to understand the material! When quoting always indicate the reference and page number.
Keep trying I am sure you will understand eventually

Saicho was discussing the Dragon King's daughter.

"Since not all sentient beings possessed the same abilities, Saicho admitted that those with lesser abilities might still require additional time to realize buddhahood..." Groner, p. 62

[/quote]

The Dragon Girl had the highest abilities & she was a young female snake! but don't feel badly as Saicho says you will need more time. No matter how long it takes keep at it!
gassho
Rory

[maybay]

Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)"

There are no women in the Brahma realm.

[Nicholas Weeks]

Arya Asanga, a Third Ground bodhisattva, says in his Bodhisattvabhumi that women cannot reach annutarasamyaksambodhi. Because they have too many mental afflictions and inferior wisdom.

During the first of the three big kalpas bodhisattvas use female bodies if they wish, but after that time period (a mere 10 to the 59th power years) the use only male bodies. So women can become great bodhisattvas, but not full Buddhas.

See Engle's new translation The Bodhisattva Path to Unsurpassed Enlightenment, pp 169-70.

The Astasahasrika says otherwise, attributing the freedom from female birth to much higher level bodhisattvas.

"Endowed with these attributes, tokens and signs a Bodhisattva should be borne in mind as irreversible from full enlightenment. Furthermore, an irreversible Bodhisattva does not pander to Shramanas and Brahmins of other schools, telling them that they know what is worth knowing, that they see what is worth seeing. He pays no homage to strange Gods, offers them no flowers, incenses, etc., does not put his trusts in them. He is no more reborn in the places of woe, nor does he ever again become a woman."
(PP 8000 17.1, tr Conze)

No PDF yet, so I have been too lazy (until now) to quote the full passage:

All buddhas are the same in every respect and free of differences, except for these four things: life span, name, caste, and physical size. The distinction among buddhas is due to a variation in these four qualities and not to anything else whatsoever.

A woman cannot attain unsurpassed true and complete enlightenment. Why is that?

Once a bodhisattva has passed beyond the first [period of a] countless number of kalpas he abandons the state of being a woman, and [from then on] until he sits at the seat of enlightenment, he will never again become a woman.
The entirerty of womankind naturally possesses a great many mental afflictions and is subject to inferior wisdom, and it is not possible for [a person with] a mind stream that naturally possesses a great many mental afflictions and is subject to inferior wisdom to attain unsurpassed true and complete enlightenment.

The first short graph giving the only four distinctions among buddhas does not list sex.

As to what exactly Astus means by 'much higher level bodhisattvas', I do not know. In any case both this sutra and Asanga agree that at some point the woman state is not used. That does not mean that female buddhas or bodhisattvas do not appear. At the 8th Ground the power to appear as any sort of being, even buddhas, is gained.

The main reason for bringing up this subject again is that I tired of seeing all the sociology supposedly ruling the buddhadharma.

[Losal Samten]

"Irreverisble" refers to the 8th bhumi which requires two incalculable kalpas to reach. Being that the words from a sutra trump that of a sastra, Asanga is incorrect in this case if the translations are correct.

And as pointed out, at any rate beings do not realise buddhahood in a female body in sutrayana, and saying that they do is both extra-textual and contra-textual.

[Malcolm]

"Irreverisble" refers to the 8th bhumi which requires two incalculable kalpas to reach. Being that the words from a sutra trump that of a sastra, Asanga is incorrect in this case if the translations are correct.

And as pointed out, at any rate beings do not realise buddhahood in a female body in sutrayana, and saying that they do is both extra-textual and contra-textual.

No, this is a miastake. If this is the case, then it would be possible to identify a tathagata through marks, a possibility excluded by the Vajrachedika among other sutras.

[Nicholas Weeks]

"Irreverisble" refers to the 8th bhumi which requires two incalculable kalpas to reach. Being that the words from a sutra trump that of a sastra, Asanga is incorrect in this case if the translations are correct.

The Arya Asanga quote says 'passed beyond the first [period of a] countless number of kalpas'. Well, the second countless (Asankya) kalpa is 'beyond' the first - so no problem.