To be born as a human being is a glorious privilege. Man’s dignity consists in his capability to reason and think and to live up to the highest ideal of pure life, of calm thought, of wisdom without extraneous intervention. In the“Saimanna phala Sutta”As a student of the subtleties of language, I became interested in the way language expresses cultural assumptions when the feminist revolution of the early seventies came my way. The special problem, in my eyes, was language that suggests men are the elevated and knowledgeable creature, that is, the really human, while women . . . well, women had their place. This was true in 1892, when American women could not even vote. There is still a question that floats around in Buddhist places, Can a woman achieve enlightenment, or must one be born in a male body? It bothered me for some time.Buddha says that man can enjoy in this life a glorious existence, a life of individual freedom, of fearlessness and compassionateness. This dignified ideal of manhood may be attained by the humblest, and this consummation raises him above wealth and royalty. “He that is compassionate and observes the law is my disciple,” saysBuddha .
Anagarika Dhamapala, from an 1892 address to the World Parliament of Religions
Dharmapala was a follower of Madame Blavatsky, so it seems probable that he could see woman as an equally spiritual, intelligent being. But in this talk, he used the language of his time, the language many people use today. I think Tricycle was right to retain his usage in publishing this excerpt, in which he used the word man to stand in for human. I honor the past, but that usage troubles me, for I see it as reinforcing the assumptions of patriarcy. So I felt like rewriting this paragraph so it speaks to women, much as Elizabeth Cady Stanton was moved to rewrite the Bible when the King James version came out, right around the time of Dhamapala's talk. This gives me a warm feeling, a sense that it speaks to me.
To be born as a woman is a glorious privilege. Woman’s dignity consists in her capability to reason and think and to live up to the highest ideal of pure life, of calm thought, of wisdom without extraneous intervention. In the“Saimanna phala Sutta”It is also possible to rewrite something like this to use the term human being rather than man. I am not agitating to revise our Constitution, but I always wish it didn't begin - "all men are created equal," and I remember that back then, that reflected belief.Buddha says that a woman can enjoy in this life a glorious existence, a life of individual freedom, of fearlessness and compassionateness. This dignified ideal of womanhood may be attained by the humblest, and this consummation raises her above wealth and royalty. “She that is compassionate and observes the law is my disciple,” saysBuddha .
[image: Mother Theresa]
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI didnt notice the effect of that before (although I was aware of the issue), but yes, it does sound exclusive when written that way. I can only imagine how men will feel if that were really written using woman instead of man. Goes to show, how we take things like this for granted, not knowing their subtle effects on the psyche.
ReplyDeleteIn my country, we follow the grammar rules taught us, English being a second language. Ie, using the masculine pronouns when both sexes are meant. In my language we dont even have that kind of distinction. We dont have a he or she, him or her, so we always use they or them. For singular persons, we have one genderless pronoun. Ask us if an object is masculine or feminine, we'd all probably scratch our heads and say (without the Western or Freudian influence), it's not a person, it's an object. An object can't procreate so why think of them as female or male? Sex of course AND gender are two different things, but that only confuses us more. In our real world, women rule and the men are glad.