Sexism in Buddhism
QUESTION: Sexism in Buddhism?
DHARMAVIDYA: I was recently talking to a monk of another tradition. He knew that in our ceremonies at Amida the celebrant is often a woman. When the celebrant comes into the room, we all stand to show respect. Actually, it is not really just respect for the person, it is respect for what he or she represents, since the celebrant in a ritual acts on behalf of the whole community. However, this monk would not stand up if the celebrant was a woman. Why not? "It is against our tradition." "But surely that is the wrong thing to do. We should not have sexism in Buddhism." "Well it is just the same in..." he named some other large Buddhist traditions. "But, I noticed that you used to do it." "Yes, but I have been thinking about it and I realise I should not do it. It is against the tradition."
This monk clearly thinks that his tradition represents the true Buddhist way. It seems to be true that adherence to his tradition has brought about a change in his behaviour - but it is one for the worse. This is alarming. I sense that his critique actually goes a lot further than just this article of behaviour. He thinks that his tradition is actually the only right one - and I am aware that a great many members of his tradition think the same. This sort of thing deeply saddens me. If the great way of the Buddha is reduced to exclusivism, sexism and condescention, many ordinary, supposedly less enlightened, people will correctly very soon realise that it is worthless in that form. What is amazing, however, is that such forms continue to flourish - and are even supported by large numbers of women making a free choice in the matter.
When one discusses this problem seriously with some other members of such traditions, it is quite common in the West to get a response along the lines of: "Well, yes, it is wrong, and we minimise the effect of the sexist discriminatory rules in our own community, but it would simply be too difficult or complicated to get the rules themselves changed." This means that groups of more enlightened members of such a tradition remain marginalised and disempowered. If you talk to other members of the same tradition, especially those who have spent time in the East, you get a robust assertion that the male dominated way of doing things is the correct way.
If a tradition is incapable of reforming itself in such an obvious respect, something is deeply amiss. If it is really the case that there is little actual will to change and those in authority in the tradition personally think this kind of discrimination is the true Buddhist way - or just want to keep it that way because they happen to be men in this life - then the situation is even worse. It is, therefore, very important that we develop women leaders in our Buddhist institutions, projects and initiatives so that this antiquated way of thinking is dislodged. In the time of Shakyamuni, there were many women arhats. But where are the records of women arhats after his time. The tradition fell into the hands of people who had sexist ideas. The Buddha himself did not make rules that were difficult to change - only those who came after did that. Now many Buddhist traditions are burdened by the millstone of statutes that are oppressive that they fear to change. This is not the true spirit of Buddhism and no sincere Buddhist of either gender should conform to it.
DHARMAVIDYA: I was recently talking to a monk of another tradition. He knew that in our ceremonies at Amida the celebrant is often a woman. When the celebrant comes into the room, we all stand to show respect. Actually, it is not really just respect for the person, it is respect for what he or she represents, since the celebrant in a ritual acts on behalf of the whole community. However, this monk would not stand up if the celebrant was a woman. Why not? "It is against our tradition." "But surely that is the wrong thing to do. We should not have sexism in Buddhism." "Well it is just the same in..." he named some other large Buddhist traditions. "But, I noticed that you used to do it." "Yes, but I have been thinking about it and I realise I should not do it. It is against the tradition."
This monk clearly thinks that his tradition represents the true Buddhist way. It seems to be true that adherence to his tradition has brought about a change in his behaviour - but it is one for the worse. This is alarming. I sense that his critique actually goes a lot further than just this article of behaviour. He thinks that his tradition is actually the only right one - and I am aware that a great many members of his tradition think the same. This sort of thing deeply saddens me. If the great way of the Buddha is reduced to exclusivism, sexism and condescention, many ordinary, supposedly less enlightened, people will correctly very soon realise that it is worthless in that form. What is amazing, however, is that such forms continue to flourish - and are even supported by large numbers of women making a free choice in the matter.
When one discusses this problem seriously with some other members of such traditions, it is quite common in the West to get a response along the lines of: "Well, yes, it is wrong, and we minimise the effect of the sexist discriminatory rules in our own community, but it would simply be too difficult or complicated to get the rules themselves changed." This means that groups of more enlightened members of such a tradition remain marginalised and disempowered. If you talk to other members of the same tradition, especially those who have spent time in the East, you get a robust assertion that the male dominated way of doing things is the correct way.
If a tradition is incapable of reforming itself in such an obvious respect, something is deeply amiss. If it is really the case that there is little actual will to change and those in authority in the tradition personally think this kind of discrimination is the true Buddhist way - or just want to keep it that way because they happen to be men in this life - then the situation is even worse. It is, therefore, very important that we develop women leaders in our Buddhist institutions, projects and initiatives so that this antiquated way of thinking is dislodged. In the time of Shakyamuni, there were many women arhats. But where are the records of women arhats after his time. The tradition fell into the hands of people who had sexist ideas. The Buddha himself did not make rules that were difficult to change - only those who came after did that. Now many Buddhist traditions are burdened by the millstone of statutes that are oppressive that they fear to change. This is not the true spirit of Buddhism and no sincere Buddhist of either gender should conform to it.
posted by Dharmavidya at 7:52 AM
4 Comments:
Yes, this is very saddening. I suppose in some ways that it isn't so surprising, in view of the position of women in some of the societies we are talking about, as the similar attitude here in the U.K. vis-à-vis women's place in the Christian Church. That is changing, slowly, though such changes are still unacceptable to some. We should not accept this attitude wherever we find it and I feel very fortunate, in the Amida family, to have the opportunities I do, to be part of that change and, thereby, with my Dharma sisters, to be able to encourage others by our actions.
I must first say that this is my first encounter with this page, I am in search of a deep understanding of Buddhism first, and therefore myself, and others.
I am considering studying psychotherapy with the Amida Trust.
My comment is that I am in a same sex relationship and would probably be described as a feminist. Although not an activist. I left a Brahmincal faith and the Hare Krishna movement as the issue of my choice of partner became an issue, and I found that the teachings were in particular offensive towards women. "Wome are of lesser intelligence" being one of the statements made. I find myself happier when following a disciplined approach to life and am investigating embracing the teachings of Buddha, but, am seriously looking at each "branch" of the teachings.As although I understand pain and suffereing to be a part of this life on earth, I cannot accept that any teachings of compassion would exclude women, at which ever level the woman is placed. I would like to know if there are any objections to this lifestyle?
I have had the good fortune to have travelled in Tibet with the Honorable Akong Rimpoche among others, and have listened to his teachings, and am currently reading Zen therapy.
I agree with Dharmavidya's and Sujatin's perspective on this. I am part of an Order that ordains women on an equal basis, and women are ordained by women. I still feel that there is still too little awareness of the priviledge men have in the institutional structure of my Sangha. I am left wondered how you challenge this kind of thing according to the Buddhist precepts. When I reflect on the pitfalls of my experience of gender equality work outside the Sangha, I would say that sometimes:
- there is an unwillingness to take responsibility for addressing our own conditioning as women
- an enjoyment of the self righteous position
- an unwillingness to change a situation by taking a leadership role instead of just complaining about not having one
so I am thinking "what is the skillful way to do this?"
I am starting to read and learn more about buddhism, but am very new to it. Buddhism appeals to me but I am hesitant to follow another religion that says they believe in equality and kindness yet do not treat women equally. Isn't buddhism a philosophy rather than a religion and it is the only belief system that allows change according to new proven facts...if this is true, shouldn't the traditional beliefs that are sexist be eliminated?
Post a Comment
<< Home