I read n Karen Armstrongs book Buddha, that Siddhartha opposed allowing females to join the sangha. According to Armstrong, The Buddha only relented after imposing strict guidlines for women to join, Did The Buddha really see womem as a source of suffering? What should I make of these claims?
Buddha was a monastic renunciate, and he didn't think women could be, but he relented after many many women over his career desired to also take vows and follow him. I'm not sure Buddha perceived women as a source of suffering, or as bad or evil. In fact, I cannot think of any actual words of Buddha to that effect. I may be wrong there. Nonetheless, women have been assimilated, especially into the vajrayana or tantric Buddhism, so you may well find seemly aspirants who are also easy on the eyes at most tantric empowerments. Of course if you're going to the empowerments to hook up then that's not really Buddhist. Not talking strictly Buddhist here in the Pali/Theravadin sense, but in the larger sense, woomen have had a major influence on Buddhism, especially Tibetan. Nobody can forget Machig lapdron who founded Chod as a Mahamudra practice of the highest order. Nor should people forget the amazing Yeshe Tsogel, my particular deity for practice. There were plenty of other women who featured strongly in the life of Guru Padmasambhava. You have to be ok with women though to utilize this wisdom on the path. Myself, I get quickly depressed without women around. Actually, I once was celibate and a monk for a couple years and that was ok, but in society I need the support of women to make me comfortable in my skin. I guess many men don't like to feel dependent on women for their happiness. It's, I guess, anti-Buddhist sounding too reliant on the female as a source of liberation. When truthfully, the materialism surrounding most relationships is anything but spiritual. But that said, the woman is the Dakini, and so for the sake of refuge in the Three Roots the Dakini is an integral aspect of that.
Moreover, it's a great path to be able to experience the joy of union within the path, and very few actual lineages exist in the tantras which teach this. Most of those lineages have close ties to female Deities, Buddhas, Lamas, etc... They could be called 'Shakta' after the Dravidian or pre-Vedic feminine cults.... which still exist or have developed...especially the Sri Vidya and Kali/Tara/Chinamasta cults. In Buddhism a specific cult which uses the feminine exclusively and is fairly easy to understand and follow is the Vajrayogini cult. Check into it!!!
I would think that the problem was not women but rather the men; that women may prove a distrurbance to a man, reminding him of his nature. There's the old story of two monks that approach a stream and help a woman cross over. As they continue on their path one monk keeps talking about helping the woman. The second monk says (to the affect), "I left the woman on the bank of the river, why do you keep thinking of her?" Meaning, that his meditation was not disturbed, that he acted and was not thinking about her repeatedly. But as an Enlightened being, Buddha probably knew that it is easier for a woman to attain Liberation than a man. Deep down Man wants to be superior, so religion is bound to keep Woman down. Mahaviera supposedly said the same things, that a woman will have to be born a Man before she can attain Liberation. The only thing Man has over a woman is that his mind is divorced from his heart and his body: he is not as loving as a woman and he is not as easily influenced by changes in the body; therefore he is more mental, the prime reason to seek Liberation from the mind. But if you think about it, the problem with a man is that he must go past his mind and reach his heart before he can transcend both. The woman is already there, so the woman has less of an obstacle to overcome. But they're not likely to seek it, seeing it as nonsense. That is the danger posed to man.
It is more a segregation of sexes. This is because being in the company of women is a source of attraction for man, which takes him away from meditation. Same for a woman. Further in the times of the buddha, it was not safe for a woman monk, wandering alone and penniless. A very easy target for the unscrupulous.
I have read that Buddha thought that Women would be able to achieve enlightenment faster than men and he did not want to create problems that would keep his followers stay away from there journey.
Buddha, Jesus, and other highly advanced being in realizing and knowing the one consciousness, had to speak and get across things not only for future generations through what is passed down from them, but they must communicate to the people of the times... and gain thier respect in order to be in a position where people will listen and get things flowing with them, thus how the teachings spread... Yet the people around them would never respect them if they went too against the cultural trends of the time... If Buddha had been like sure like women in and let them run it and so on and so forth... he would have ran into resistance from his flock and those that were sympathetic, thus he pretended to be resistant to the idea and eventually let women in with strict sexist guidelines... If he had not been at least a little bit sexist, he might have lost all his followers, and nothing would have ever been written about him.
What is a women? The baby grows male or female part inside of the woom according to the x's y's. But is i just a baby regarless. Male and female until that part grows in either direction. Regardless, women and men are born as human creations more than men or women. We can both have long hair and nails. Do not think that humans are different. male or female darks skinned or light. It call all be seen from both side of the fence. This is what Buddha should advocate. Sex is not part of the story. Sex is a moment were we ste out of our existence. Procreation is inevitable, for those who are compatible couterpoints of one another. Buddha advocates this. But relations with women is, in a differnt realms from eternal enjoyment of ones moments on earth. Buddha would say one should be happy always, and not have to find happiness through anything else, nor anyone else. Just happy.
Part two Because humans have for so long classified women with sex, some monks find it hard to overcome this thought. so they make it easier on tehmselves, by distancing themselves from women. Whicch doesnt sound very buddhist to me. I have ovecome sexuality, thus anyone can. Like I said a human is a human. just as a flower is a flower, and as well as all else. Do not beielve in difference.
