View Full Version : Gender imbalances in Buddhism
Gender imbalances in Buddhism - do they exist?
What are your thoughts on the subject?
(This was a topic kindly suggested by KoolAid.)
Mmmm... maybe if KoolAid can help us with a little more elaboration about what she/he means by "Gender Imbalances". In my personal experience attending zazen in a Zen dojo I have never felt such things as Imbalances... in some way we are all the same in there, we just do sitting meditation and attend when we can the teishos or the seshins given there.
;D
KoolAid900
03 Sep 10, 03:31
I am a he :)
While I have not felt the there are inherent gender biases in my experience with various Buddhist tradition as far as teachings and teachers (like your experience in the dojo), it does seem that there is a slant towards the male side of the species in some ways. For instance, there are many more monks than nuns. The Buddha originally denied women the opportunity to be become nuns, though he did allow it afterward. It seems that the majority of influential figures are male. Any female practitioners care to add to the list...?
KoolAid900
03 Sep 10, 04:52
I feel still in the stage of just beginning to understand this, if at all. The only thing I can really think is has been influenced by the society's views on gender differences. Seems to have some truth to it, but also seems odd. Like that doesn't really seem to be a good enough reason to allow partiality to continue unless the practitioners themselves are partial.
I don't think its always been a straightforward male/female imbalance in Buddhism either, there have also been some issues related to prejudice against gay practitioners too.(though not in all traditions)
The Buddha originally denied women the opportunity to be become nuns, though he did allow it afterward.
Yes I have read about the Buddha's dislike with having women... Later I will give the source of it.
t seems that the majority of influential figures are male.
True, and not only for Buddhism... in all spheres of life...
Off the record:
I worked in the past for some feminist circles and I agree with some and disagree with others. There is the idea about not being different women from men. I do not hold this. We are different from men. But the problem, that many feminists do not see clearly, is that those difference that are natural and healthy, end in hierarchies, when they should not.
Differences are not bad, they are desirable, they are indispensable also... but the wrong thing is to build hierarchies from them... Even when we all harbor needed differences in terms of sex, gender, sexual orientation and religious practices... this should never lead us to build hierarchies and dominance...
;)
KoolAid900
05 Sep 10, 01:48
But the problem, that many feminists do not see clearly, is that those difference that are natural and healthy, end in hierarchies, when they should not.
Differences are not bad, they are desirable, they are indispensable also... but the wrong thing is to build hierarchies from them... Even when we all harbor needed differences in terms of sex, gender, sexual orientation and religious practices... this should never lead us to build hierarchies and dominance...
Very much how I see it.... unfortunately these hierarchies are often built on the interpersonal level and therefore are hard to perceive clearly from a distance. This is part of the problem I have in understanding gender imbalances in Buddhism. I have a female friend who insists that Buddhism is very sexist. My mother feels that ultimately it is not at all. My girlfriend & I feel that there are some imbalances, we've mostly been exposed to Tibetan Buddhism though not exclusively, though we can't really pinpoint them except that the numbers of Buddhist practitioners seem to be waaay higher for men, at least formally. My thinking is that this is probably part of Tibetan culture. However, I know that this male oriented view occurs in other asian societies, so probably effects other Buddhist traditions as well. Anyone care to share any experiences of such imbalances? Dazzle, what have you seen/experienced?
though we can't really pinpoint them except that the numbers of Buddhist practitioners seem to be waaay higher for men, at least formally.
Well yes, but I think it is not a special case for Buddhism because something in Buddhism promotes it... you can watch this in other aspects of human activity... for example... music directors (orchestral directors) there is an outstanding number of male ones... like airplane pilots, politicians, etc... but anyway we have been fighting for a place in any sort of human activity and slowly we are growing in number.
;)
Dazzle, what have you seen/experienced?
Hi KoolAid,
Most of my offline experience up until fairly recently, has been with Tibetan Buddhism. It has seemed like female lay followers are in the majority, whilst teachers/tulkus are almost exclusively male. I think this is beginning to change in that a very small number of women in the west have been made lamas (not tulkus) after doing 3 year closed retreats or much longer and are able to teach some things, but not all - and they don't preside over/direct rituals such as empowerments, for example. At least not in my experience anyway.
Full gelongma ordination hasn't been possible either and women have had to go abroad to get it ...Sri Lanka is it? not absolutely sure. However I think HHDL and the Karmapa are supposed to be reviewing the situation. I'm a bit out of touch ( because I'm focused on another tradition now) so it might have changed already.
KoolAid900
05 Sep 10, 19:31
It has seemed like female lay followers are in the majority, whilst teachers/tulkus are almost exclusively male.
So unfortunate because such an important aspect of humanity has been left out. I have found Tibetan Buddhism to reflect much truth to me, however, the female aspect is quite unrepresented in both numbers of people and in so far as principle... I actually had to go elsewhere to learn this balance before I could continue to practice without the over analytical or penetrating male aspect. I personally found teachings on Druidry and Tao to be very helpful in learning how to integrate the two aspects.
An interesting side note, a Taoist teaching I was reading referred to males as having the greater capacity for rapid spiritual growth and attainment due to explosive Yang energy, whereas females were considered as being closer to the source and therefore having a shorter and smoother journey. This seems like an expansion on Kaarine Alejandra's comment and something that I find very useful. Unfortunately, I have not had the fortune to connect with or recognize powerful symbols or examples of feminine accomplishment. Of course, following this model the feminine example could very well be harder to recognize.
I have personally always found that the concept of a matriarchal society to be much more sensible than patriarchal. Metaphorically because the female is the source of all manifestation and practically because the archetypal female is stronger internally than male (which imo is a much better model for a society). Of course, not all women or men fit the archetypal roles...
I personally found teachings on Druidry and Tao to be very helpful in learning how to integrate the two aspects.
An interesting side note, a Taoist teaching I was reading referred to males as having the greater capacity for rapid spiritual growth and attainment due to explosive Yang energy, whereas females were considered as being closer to the source and therefore having a shorter and smoother journey.
Hmm, that's way too New Agey for me, KoolAid .I used to be interested in that kind of thing in my teens but then eventually put it aside as irrelevant to my own spiritual path because I don't find it very helpful to mix and match.
I can't quite see how it's relevant to this topic about gender imbalances in Buddhism.
KoolAid900:
I can see why it'd be necessary to look outside Tibetan Buddhism for elements of practice that include and value women. However, fortunately, as far as the very core teachings that are what people actually should be doing? There's nothing really in the Four Noble Truths or Eightfold Path that excludes women (even if the religious systems built around those teachings seem to do so pretty regularly and pervasively).
There are gender disparities in Buddhism that reflect the general cultural bias throughout much of the world towards women. As some of you may know, last year, Ajahn Brahm caused a stir within the Thai Forrest Tradition for his ordination of bhikkunis (http://www.shambhalasun.com/sunspace/?p=12956). The ordination of nuns has a precedent of at least several hundred years (to be conservative) in the Vinaya Pitaka. There is no reason, in context of the dharma itself, for the Thai monks to have reacted the way they did or for their subsequent justifications.
As Buddhism moves into the West, we're seeing a gradual shift to align with the centuries of acquired humanistic values already in place here. What is tradition in Asia is foreign and oftentimes unconscionable here. As Buddhism establishes a presence here, I think the gender disparity will more closely resemble that in any other Western institution -- which isn't perfect (in many occupations, women still make less than men for the same amount of work), but IMO, a step in the right direction.
As Buddhism moves into the West, we're seeing a gradual shift to align with the centuries of acquired humanistic values already in place here. What is tradition in Asia is foreign and oftentimes unconscionable here.
With respects Glow, in my experience, your post does not come from an appreciation of & familiarity with Thai culture. Please consider, Thailand has preserved the purity of the Buddha Dhamma for many centuries. The Thai people started the Western Sangha. The Thai's have their reasons.
Also, I am not really sure what you are saying by "centuries of acquired humanistic values already in place here". What are you referring to? Slavery in the USA? Genocide of the American natives? Child labour during the Industrial Revolution? Dispossession of aboriginal lands in Australia? Colonial exploitation and violence? Two world wars?
I can only stress to "demonize" the Thai Sangha is to speak not in accordance to reality. It is a false view; a wrong view.
Kind regards
E
;D
Hello Element. Thank you for your thoughtful response.
I think you're reading into my post value judgments that were not there. I am not saying the Thai culture is some inferior woman-hating backwater group or that Western culture is some superior bastion of light. The monks may have had their reasons to having reacted the way the did. Were they good reasons? That depends on the context you're coming from and if it's a Western one, probably not. As a person of Indian descent myself, I would not be so ignorant as to demonize another Asian culture in such simplistic terms. What I meant was simply that, whatever reasons the Thai monks had to uphold their tradition will not generally be understood in the West (at least not among those Westerners who are attracted to Buddhism), and thus likely not find much support here. The Western Sangha will likely go it's own route regardless of what the Asians do. Unlike Christianity, whose cultural peculiarities are part and parcel of the Western culture, Buddhism will have a more difficult time making its cultural manifestation understood. That is all I meant by "foreign."
As for the humanistic values (what you listed aren't technically humanistic "values" any more than human trafficking is a value of a Buddhism culture), again, read my post. I did not make a value judgment there demonizing Thai culture. All I meant was that without humanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism), the women's suffrage and liberation movements, as well as the civil rights movements, would have had no traction. If there was any implied condescension towards the Thais in that line, I apologize because that was not my intention. (Also, I realize "a step in the right direction" may have come across as dismissive of Thai culture; my comment was only directed at the specific gender disparities dealt with in this discussion -- not a generalized dismissal of Thai or any other Asian culture.)
KoolAid900
09 Sep 10, 22:09
Quote from: KoolAid900 on September 06, 2010, 03:31:50 AM
I personally found teachings on Druidry and Tao to be very helpful in learning how to integrate the two aspects.
An interesting side note, a Taoist teaching I was reading referred to males as having the greater capacity for rapid spiritual growth and attainment due to explosive Yang energy, whereas females were considered as being closer to the source and therefore having a shorter and smoother journey.
Hmm, that's way too New Agey for me, KoolAid .I used to be interested in that kind of thing in my teens but then eventually put it aside as irrelevant to my own spiritual path because I don't find it very helpful to mix and match.
I can't quite see how it's relevant to this topic about gender imbalances in Buddhism.
Ok, we can go back on topic then. People come from different places and I tend to get lost on tangents. There are a number of relations to me between the Taoist reference and BuddhaDharma, but there is no need to go there. :)
What I meant was simply that, whatever reasons the Thai monks had to uphold their tradition will not generally be understood in the West (at least not among those Westerners who are attracted to Buddhism) and thus likely not find much support here.
Ajahn Chah's Western disciples have no issues with the matter because Ajahn Chah said all that is required for enlightenment is an environment that is "good enough". I would suggest you find Ajahn Amaro's lecture about "transmitting the message". The message is Emptiness, that in reality, there is no 'man', no 'woman', no 'Westerner', no 'Thai', no 'monk', no 'layperson'. There is just not-self elements and aggregates.
As for Ajahn Brahm, he is not really transmitting Emptiness is his teachings. Ajahn Brahm is more interested in developing a 'metta tradition', that is attractive to laypeople. Ajahn Brahm has certainly found alot of support from certain people but not from those interested in higher dhamma. For those Westerners interested in higher dhamma, Ajahn Brahm's actions are simply more Emptiness, more Suchness.
...the women's suffrage and liberation movements, as well as the civil rights movements, would have had no traction.
Thailand is traditionally a matriarchial culture. Your point about Western efforts to free itself from patriarchal Christian culture is not really applicable. In short, the Thais, especially Thai women, are not interested in having women dressed in burkas as female role models. It is an example of restraint, of repression. Unlike in the West, women in Thailand have never been repressed and restrainted. You see in Thailand, each man ordains as a monk for a short period of training, generally before he gets married. Women, especially mothers, wish their sons to do this so a man can learn restraint and obedience. The traditional Thai culture is the opposite of traditional Western culture. Man/woman in the West is freedom/restraint and man/woman in Thailand is restraint/freedom.
As for Westerners who are inspired by women in robes, this is generally disconnected from their reality and just a kind of devotional worship. Really, how can anyone assert a bhikkhuni is a fitting example of liberation for laypeople? In short, I would say most Western Buddhists do not really care. Buddhism instructs liberation (rather than clinging to rites, rituals and saffron robes). Western Buddhism has existed for decades now, in lay traditions and without bhikkhunis and even bhikkhus. The matter is neither here nor there, not bad, not good. It is mostly more worldliness.
Kind regards
E
;D
What I meant was simply that, whatever reasons the Thai monks had to uphold their tradition will not generally be understood in the West (at least not among those Westerners who are attracted to Buddhism) and thus likely not find much support here.
Ajahn Chah's Western disciples have no issues with the matter because Ajahn Chah said all that is required for enlightenment is an environment that is "good enough". I would suggest you find Ajahn Amaro's lecture about "transmitting the message". The message is Emptiness, that in reality, there is no 'man', no 'woman', no 'Westerner', no 'Thai', no 'monk', no 'layperson'. There is just not-self elements and aggregates.
As for Ajahn Brahm, he is not really transmitting Emptiness is his teachings. Ajahn Brahm is more interested in developing a 'metta tradition', that is attractive to laypeople. Ajahn Brahm has certainly found alot of support from certain people but not from those interested in higher dhamma. For those Westerners interested in higher dhamma, Ajahn Brahm's actions are simply more Emptiness, more Suchness.
...the women's suffrage and liberation movements, as well as the civil rights movements, would have had no traction.
Thailand is traditionally a matriarchial culture. Your point about Western efforts to free itself from patriarchal Christian culture is not really applicable. In short, the Thais, especially Thai women, are not interested in having women dressed in burkas as female role models. It is an example of restraint, of repression. Unlike in the West, women in Thailand have never been repressed and restrainted. You see in Thailand, each man ordains as a monk for a short period of training, generally before he gets married. Women, especially mothers, wish their sons to do this so a man can learn restraint and obedience. The traditional Thai culture is the opposite of traditional Western culture. Man/woman in the West is freedom/restraint and man/woman in Thailand is restraint/freedom.
As for Westerners who are inspired by women in robes, this is generally disconnected from their reality and just a kind of devotional worship. Really, how can anyone assert a bhikkhuni is a fitting example of liberation for laypeople? In short, I would say most Western Buddhists do not really care. Buddhism instructs liberation (rather than clinging to rites, rituals and saffron rags). Western Buddhism has existed for decades now, in lay traditions and without bhikkhunis and even bhikkhus. The matter is either here nor there, not bad, not good. It is mostly more worldliness.
Kind regards
E
;D
Thanks again for the thoughtful response, Element. Very interesting information regarding the matriarchal nature of Thai culture. If what you say is true, then I was indeed incorrect in my initial impression of what was happening. I'll refrain from adding anything to the discussion until I've checked out the Ajahn Amaro lecture you've mentioned and the specifics of the situation with Ajahn Brahm. Thank you again. :)
JadeRabbit
10 Sep 10, 08:47
And here's an interesting section from Cittaviveka's latest newsletter (to provide a different view), from Ajahn Sucitto:
"Nuns’ situation
The unfortunate news regarding the nuns is that our two senior nuns have left or will be leaving the community. Ajahn Thitamedha revised her plan to live as a nun outside this community to one ofdisrobing altogether. Ajahn Kovida has decided to leave Cittaviveka in November, spend some time in Burma and then take up life as a solitary nun in Britain. Many of you will have read their farewell letters and are understandably shocked or saddened by this news, especially as they point to
perceived problems in the community dynamic. It’s a sensitive area, and because rumours and interpretations abound, I offer a few thoughts for consideration.
To speak in general terms, each of us requests permission for the Going Forth and entrance to this lineage after careful consideration, and many choose to leave it after a similar process. The sense of how needs, aims and directions change is part of the changing nature of spiritual life. This is nothing new; nor is the sense of loss and disappointment that occurs, especially when a monk or nun of long-standing leaves the group. To my knowledge, even amongst senior monks, more have left our group than now remain.
To address the nuns’ situation more specifically, I will speak from my own limited understanding of the situation. It seems to me that at this time our lineage sits at the edge where a conservative Asian tradition meets a liberal Western one, and that brings with it the crunch point of gender equality - which is the aspired aim of the West, but which is in direct contradiction to the fact that in all Buddhist monastic lineages,the male line is held to be ‘senior’ to the female. Seniority is a way of forming line-ups and protocols within a group, to avoid competition or jealousy - so that who goes first is not a matter of who’s wisest, but who’s senior. This too is nothing new here, and it is so much the standard that to change that would require broad Sangha consent.
Another crucial point is that men and women experience and relate to the world in distinctly different ways. Over time, these differences can bring with them a frustration that we’re not on the same
wave-length, and interpretations that so-and-so is not following the agreed-upon norms, or that so and-so isn’t listening or is out of touch. In situations when a man and a woman live together, I’d imagine that these issues can get sorted out (though not always), because of the intimacy that is part of the commitment to live with a chosen partner. When such issues occur amongst 25 people, who haven’t chosen to live in a close relationship, and who are in many ways barred from forming one,and who incline towards silence and solitude, resolving these differences is a major challenge.
Some feel that more dialogue is needed; greater separation is also a considered option - either through creating another vihara, or, regrettably, through a more complete leave-taking. At Cittaviveka we have attempted to give the Rocana Vihara a good degree of autonomy, with the nuns being in charge of their routines and internal governance. Recently this has extended to having meal offerings for the sisters down at Rocana on the last Friday of each month (you are all very welcome to make offerings there to the sisters). We are also establishing an inter-monastic committee to look into how sharing these wonderful places can become smoother. Naturally after all the time and effort that’s gone into establishing a training for women in the west, I’m keen to find a satisfactory resolution."
I think that there are other complexities to the situation and seemingly Ajahn Brahm had not followed normal procedure and consulted with the rest of the tradition to which he belonged, before going ahead with the ordination.
I am also particularly unhappy at seeing Ajahn Sumedho brought into this controversy in a negative way, especially as he's elderly and there would be little benefit in him getting excommunicated by his superiors.
However I'll hopefully leave it to Element to continue with this because he knows a lot more about it than I do.
Personally, Bhikkhuni issues aside, from what I've seen of his videos, I think Ajahn Brahm isn't following some of the essential core aspects of the Forest Tradition which make it so special anyway.
JadeRabbit
10 Sep 10, 09:05
I think the article # 19 may not fully address the complexities of the situation and the fact that Ajahn Brahm had not followed normal procedure and consulted with the rest of the tradition to which he belonged, before going ahead with the ordination.
I am also particularly unhappy at seeing Ajahn Sumedho brought into this controversy in a negative way.
However I'll leave it to Element to continue with this because he knows a lot more about it than I do.
I totally agree. It's very difficult to find a balanced view on this issue, and I'm definitely not looking to cause any inflammatory remarks. I look forward to Element's view on it as well. :hands:
Dear Dazz and Jade
Thank you for your invitations. However, I do not want to get overly involved. I personally have lived in monasteries as a layman and have found this situation sufficient for practice. I have also witnessed men and women get very distracted by ordaining. Therefore, I agree with the sentiment, which was Ajahn Chah's view:
The siladhara training is considered to be a vehicle fully suitable for the realization of liberation, and is respected as such within our tradition. It is offered as a complete training as it stands, and not as a step in the evolution towards a different form, such as bhikkhuni ordination.
However, I see both sides. The Ajahn Sumedho side is about respecting their Thai tradition. I personally would speculate Ajahn Sumedho has no personal views against female ordination. Ajahn here is simply respecting the views of his lineage about a matter that is not crucial regarding the matter of liberation.
The alternative view is the life of a Bhikkhu or Bhikkhuni does include the element of Right Livelihood. Right Livehood includes being able to teach the Dhamma. From personal experience, I know through teaching the Dhamma, alot of challenges are faced and eventual wisdom is found and matured. Plus there is the simple basic ethic of equal opportunity.
So I personally agree with Ajahn Brahm for ordaining the women in Australia. However, I disagree with how the matter was politicized & how the Thai Sangha were demonized because it was always the natural way of things (dhammaniyamata, suchness) that Ajahn Brahm would be expelled.
About the senior nuns leaving Cittaviveka, that is their choice. Whether or not their minds are liberated, the fact remains not all monks and nuns are enlightened or liberated. There was a time during the 1990's where senior monks in the Ajahn Chah tradition were disrobing in droves, generally to be laypeople people living in ordinary man and woman relationships.
I think the nun who will live as a solitary nun is showing the spirit of liberation.
Personally, as I said, I have lived in monasteries. I have seen monks & nuns come & go, robe & disrobe. I have seen monks & nuns still living in an emotionally dependent way, just like laypeople. So personally, I do not perceive the whole matter with starry eyes.
Kind regards
Element
;D
Thanks as always for your greatly valued input, Element.
:hands:
JadeRabbit
10 Sep 10, 13:12
Thank you for your response Element, it's difficult for me to remain impartial when it comes to alleged inequality, however I think a middle way is preferable in this particular instance.
Your post reminded me that all is in a state of change and flux.
May the Forest Sangha in the UK flourish in the future for the benefit of all, irrespective of current issues. :hands:
May the Forest Sangha in the UK flourish in the future for the benefit of all, irrespective of current issues.
I'll most definately second that. :hands:
I think there are some possible later add-ons which look like hindu influences which degrade the place of women in Dhamma in general. For example, the Bhikkuni vinaya. I am sure folks will jump into explain to me why Bhikkuni vinaya is rational and acceptable etc but noone has ever given me a good enough explanation why a Bhikkuni who has been ordained even 100 years should stand up when a Bhikku who ordained today walks into the room. It is highly likely that the Buddha never imposed such ridiculous vinaya to his disciples. Buddhism has been around 2500 years or so after the Buddha's death; what else can you expect ;)
Ajahn here is simply respecting the views of his lineage about a matter that is not crucial regarding the matter of liberation
Whether or not ordaining is necessary for enlightenment is another matter. Point is, if a particular Buddhist community directly or indirectly discourages a person from making that choice because of that person's gender or otherwise then the ajhans have some sort of obligation to address that rather than turn a complete blind eye to it.
An ordained bhikku certainly gets more support from the lay followers which is supportive for their practice. Women should also be given that opportunity. As far as I know, most nuns specially in the Eastern societies do not get the same support because lay folks think that they are below the Bhikku sangha. Women are generally discouraged from taking the robes. There is a clear disparity there
The Eight Garudhammas detail a set of rules for female Buddhist monastics (Bhikkhunis). The rules present a series of subordinations towards their male counterparts (Bhikkhu).
What is interesting about the Eight Garudhammas is they appear to not have their source in the suttas. They are found in the Commentaries.
They appear to be in conflict with the Maha-parinibbana Sutta (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html), which states:
42. "There was a time, Ananda, when I dwelt at Uruvela, on the bank of the Nerañjara River, at the foot of the goatherds' banyan-tree, soon after my supreme Enlightenment. And Mara, the Evil One, approached me, saying: 'Now, O Lord, let the Blessed One come to his final passing away! Let the Happy One utterly pass away! The time has come for the Parinibbana of the Lord.'
43. "Then, Ananda, I answered Mara, the Evil One, saying: 'I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding by appropriate conduct and, having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma.
;D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.