The Position of
Women in Buddhism
by
Dr. (Mrs.) L.S.
Dewaraja
The Wheel Publication No. 280
Copyright (C) 1981
Buddhist Publication Society
Buddhist Publication
Society
P.O. Box 61
54, Sangharaja Mawatha
Kandy, Sri Lanka
For free distribution
only.
You may print copies
of this work for your personal use.
You may re-format
and redistribute this work for use on computers and computer networks,
provided that you
charge
no fees for its distribution or use.
Otherwise, all
rights reserved.
This essay is chiefly based
on a research paper presented in August 1979 to the International Conference
of Indian Ocean Studies, held in the University of Western Australia. A
talk on the same subject was given by the author in 1978 at the London
Buddhist Vihara, reproduced in the Buddhist Quarterly, vol. 11,
Nos 2-3. A few sections from the latter have been incorporated in the present
version.
* * *
Today, when the role of Women in
Society is an issue of worldwide interest it is opportune that we should
pause to look at it from a Buddhist perspective. In the recent past, a
number of books have been written on the changing status of women in Hindu
and Islamic societies, but with regard to women in Buddhism, ever since
the distinguished Pali scholar, Miss I.B. Horner, wrote her book on Women
under Primitive Buddhism, as far back as 1930, very little interest
has been taken in the subject.
It seems, therefore, justified to
raise again the question whether the position of women in Buddhist societies
was better than that in non-Buddhist societies of Asia. We will look briefly
into the position in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma and Tibet, at a time before
the impact of the West was ever felt.
Hugh Boyd who came as an envoy to
the Kandyan Court in 1782 writes,[1]
The Cingalese women exhibit
a striking contrast to those of all other Oriental Nations in some of the
most prominent and distinctive features of their character. Instead of
that lazy apathy, insipid modesty and sour austerity, which have characterized
the sex throughout the Asiatick world, in every period of its history,
in this island they possess that active sensibility, winning bashfulness
and amicable ease, for which the women of modern Europe are peculiarly
famed. The Cingalese women are not merely the slaves and mistresses, but
in many respects the companions and friends of their husbands; for though
the men be authorized by law to hold their daughters in tyrannical subjection,
yet their sociable and placable dispositions, soften the rigor of their
domestic policy. And polygamy being unknown and divorce permitted among
the Cingalese, the men have none of that constitutional jealousy, which
has given birth to the voluptuous and unmanly despotism that is practiced
over the weaker sex in the most enlightened nations, and sanctioned by
the various religions of Asia. The Cingalese neither keep their women in
confinement nor impose on them any humiliating restraints.
The above quotation is just one selected
from a series of comments which European observers have made on the women
of Sri Lanka. Many of these European visitors to our shores came during
the 17th, 18th and early 19th centuries. There were among them, envoys,
missionaries, administrators, soldiers, physicians and ship-wrecked mariners.
They had first-hand knowledge of the women in Europe and many of them came
through India having observed the women in Hindu and Islamic societies
Hence their evidence is all the more
valuable. The recurring comments made by these widely traveled visitors
on the women of Sri Lanka have evoked our curiosity to conduct this inquiry.
The discussion that follows will deal with condition that prevailed up
to the middle of the nineteenth century. Prior to this our sources are
so meager that we cannot detect any major social changes. After this, due
to the impact of Western imperialism, commercial enterprise and Christian
missionary activity, incipient changes in the traditional structures become
perceptible.
It is only in European writings that
one finds lengthy accounts of the social conditions prevailing in the island.
The indigenous literature, being mainly religious, lacks information regarding
mundane topics like women. But from circumstantial evidence one could surmise
that the liberal attitude towards women in Sri Lanka is a trend that has
continued from the remote past. When one thinks of women in the traditional
East, the picture that comes to our minds is that of the veiled women of
Islamic societies, the zenanas where high class Indian ladies lived in
seclusion, the harems of Imperial china where lived thousands of royal
concubines guarded by eunuchs, the devadasis who in the name of
God were forced into a life of religious prostitution; all manifesting
different aspects of the exploitation of women in the East. It is little
known that there were societies in Asia where the position of women was
a favorable one, judging even from modern standards. Thailand and Burma
too belong to this category. In those instances also we have based our
conclusions mainly on the observations of Europeans who lived in these
two countries in various capacities in the 19th and 20th centuries. R.
Grant Brown, who was a revenue officer for 28 years in Burma (1889-1917)
has remarked,
"Every writer on Burma has
commented on the remarkable degree of independence attained by the women.
Their position is more surprising in view of the subjection and seclusion
of wives and daughters in the neighboring countries of India and China..."[2]
A British envoy to the Court of Ava
was struck by the equal treatment accorded even to royal ladies.
"The queen sat with the
king on the throne to receive the embassy. They are referred to as 'the
two sovereign Lords'. It is not extraordinary to the Burmans for with them,
generally speaking, woman are more nearly upon an equality with the stronger
sex than among any other Eastern people of consideration."[3]
Lieutenant General Albert Fytche, Late
Chief Commissioner of British Burma and Agent to the Viceroy and Governor
General of India, wrote in 1878, "Unlike the distrustful and suspicious
Hindus and Mohammedans, woman holds among them a position of perfect freedom
and independence. She is, with them, not the mere slave of passion, but
has equal rights and is the recognized and duly honored helpmate of man,
and in fact bears a more prominent share in the transactions of the more
ordinary affairs of life than in the case perhaps with any other people,
either eastern or western."[4]
Further inquiries have revealed that
in Thailand too, though not to the same extent, the women enjoyed considerable
liberty. For instance, J.G.D. Campbell,[5]
Educational Adviser to the Government of Siam wrote in 1902,
"In Siam at any rate whatever
be the causes, the position of women in on the whole a healthy one, and
contrasts favorably with that among most other Oriental people. No one
can have been many days in Bangkok without being struck by the robust physique
and erect bearing of the ordinary woman...It can be said of Buddhism that
its influence has at least been all on the right side; and when we remember
the thousand arguments that have been advanced in the name of both religion
and morality to degrade and debase the weaker sex, this is indeed saying
much to its credit."
Sir Charles Bell, British Political
Representative in Tibet, Bhutan and Sikkim, writes in 1928, "When a traveler
enters Tibet from the neighboring nations of India and China few things
impress him more vigorously or more deeply than the position of the Tibetan
woman. They are not kept in seclusion as are Indian women. Accustomed to
mix with the other sex throughout their lives, they are at ease with men
and can hold their own as well as any women in the world." Bell continues,
"And the solid fact remains that in Buddhist countries women hold a remarkably
good position. Burma, Ceylon and Tibet exhibit the same picture."[6]
These comments on the freedom and
independence enjoyed by the women in certain pre-industrialized and sometimes
isolated Asian societies are startling. It is not suggested that in any
of these countries, Sri Lanka, Burma and Thailand, the women are on a par
with the men both in theory and practice. But they have been favorably
compared with the women of the neighboring countries of India and China,
where Hindu, Confucian and Islamic doctrines held sway. This statement
may appear contradictory for Burma and Thailand were synthesis of Indic
and Sinic civilizations. In Sri Lanka too the impact of Hinduism was very
strong. The question arises as to how the situation with regard to women
in those three societies should be different from the major cultures of
Asia. The common feature predominating in those countries is that they
are intensely Buddhist. It is tempting therefore to conclude that Buddhism
has helped to better the position of women in Sri Lanka, Burma and Thailand.
This conclusion would take us back
to the question of the Buddhist attitude towards women and how it differs
from that of other religions. Examining the position in ancient India it
is clear from the evidence in the Rigveda, the earliest literature of the
Indo-Aryans, that women held an honorable place in early Indian society.
There were a few Rigvedic hymns composed by women. Women had access to
the highest knowledge and could participate in all religious ceremonies.
In domestic life too she was respected and there is no suggestion of seclusion
of women and child marriage. Later when the priestly Brahmins dominated
society and religion lost its spontaneity and became a mass of ritual,
we see a downward trend in the position accorded to women. The most relentless
of the Brahmin law givers was Manu whose Code of Laws[7]
is the most anti-feminist literature one could find. At the outset Manu
deprived woman of her religious rights and spiritual life. "Sudras, slaves
and women" were prohibited from reading the Vedas. A woman could not attain
heaven through any merit of her own. She could not worship or perform a
sacrifice by herself. She could reach heaven only through implicit obedience
to her husband, be he debauched or devoid of all virtues. Having thus denied
her any kind of spiritual and intellectual nourishment, Manu elaborated
the myth that all women were sinful and prone to evil. "Neither shame nor
decorum, nor honesty, nor timidity", says Manu, "is the cause of a woman's
chastity, but the want of a suitor alone".[8]
She should therefore be kept under constant vigilance: and the best way
to do it was to keep her occupied in the tasks of motherhood and domestic
duties so that she has no time for mischief. Despite this denigration there
was always in Indian thought an idealization of motherhood and a glorification
of the feminine concept. But in actual practice, it could be said by and
large, Manu's reputed Code of Laws did influence social attitudes towards
women, at least in the higher rungs of society.
It is against this background that
one has to view the impact of Buddhism in the 5th century B.C. It is not
suggested that the Buddha inaugurated a campaign for the liberation of
Indian womanhood. But he did succeed in creating a minor stir against Brahmin
dogma and superstition. He condemned the caste structure dominated by the
Brahmin, excessive ritualism and sacrifice. He denied the existence of
a Godhead and emphasized emancipation by individual effort. The basic doctrine
of Buddhism, salvation by one's own effort, presupposes the spiritual equality
of all beings, male and female. This should mitigate against the exclusive
supremacy of the male. It needed a man of considerable courage and a rebellious
spirit to pronounce a way of life that placed woman on a level of near
equality to man. The Buddha saw the spiritual potential of both men and
women and founded after considerable hesitation the Order of Bhikkhunis
or Nuns, one of the earliest organizations for women. The Sasana or Church
consisted of the Bhikkhus (Monks), Bhikkhunis (Nuns), laymen and laywomen
so that the women were not left out of any sphere of religious activity.
The highest spiritual states were within the reach of both men and women
and the latter needed no masculine assistance or priestly intermediary
to achieve them. We could therefore agree with I.B. Horner when she says
Buddhism accorded to women a position approximating to equality.[9]
Moving from the sphere of philosophy
to domestic life one notices a change of attitude when we come to Buddhist
times. In all patriarchal societies the desire for male offspring is very
strong for the continuance of the patrilineage and, in the case of Hindus,
for the due performance of funeral rites. For only a son could carry out
the funeral rites of his father and thus ensure future happiness of the
deceased. This was so crucial to the Hindu that the law allowed a sonless
wife to be superseded by a second or a third one or even turned out of
the house.[10]
It is said "through a son he conquers the world and though a son's son
he attains immortality."[11]
As a result of this belief the birth of a daughter was the cause for lamentation.
In Buddhism future happiness does not depend on funeral rites but on the
actions of the deceased. The Buddhist funeral ceremony is a very simple
one which could be performed by the widow, daughter or any one on the spot
and the presence of a son is not compulsory. There is no ritual or ceremonial
need for a son and the birth of a daughter need not be a cause for grief.
It is well known that the Buddha consoled king Pasenadi who came to him
grieving that his queen, Mallika, had given birth to a daughter. "A female
offspring, O king, may prove even nobler than a male..."[12]
a revolutionary statement for his time. Despite the spiritual quality of
the sexes and the fact that a son is not an absolute necessity in securing
happiness in the after life, yet even in Buddhist societies there is a
preference for male offspring even today, so potent is the ideology of
male superiority.
Marriage and family are basic institutions
in all societies whether primitive or modern and the position of woman
in a particular society is influence by and expressed in the status she
holds within these institutions. Has she got the same rights as her husband
to dissolve the marriage bond? Has she the right to remarry or is this
a man's privilege? The answers to these questions will undoubtedly determine
the position accorded to women in any society. Let us examine the Buddhist
attitude to the question. In Buddhism, unlike Christianity and Hinduism,
marriage is not a sacrament. It is purely a secular affair and the monks
do not participate in it. In Sri Lanka, Thailand and Burma there is a good
deal of ceremony, feasting and merry-making connected with the event but
these are not of a religious nature. Sometimes monks are invited to partake
of alms and they in turn bless the couple. Although there are no vows or
rituals involved in the event of a marriage, the Buddha has laid down in
the Sigalovada Sutta the duties of a husband and wife:
"In five ways should a wife
as Western quarter, be ministered to by her husband: by respect, by courtesy,
by faithfulness, by handing over authority to her, by providing her with
ornaments. In these five ways does the wife minister to by her husband
as the Western quarter, love him: her duties are well-performed by hospitality
to kin of both, by faithfulness, by watching over the goods he brings and
by skill and industry in discharging all business."[13]
The significant point here is that the
Buddha's injunctions are bilateral; the marital relationship is a reciprocal
one with mutual rights and obligations. This was a momentous departure
from ideas prevailing at the time. For instance Manu says, "Offspring,
the due performance of happiness and heavenly bliss for one's ancestors
and oneself depends on one's wife alone."[14]
Confucius, an older contemporary of the Buddha, spoke in the same tone:
"in this way when the deferential obedience of the wife was complete, the
internal harmony was secured, and a long continuance of the family could
be reckoned with."[15]
Confucius gives in detail the duties of the son to the father, the wife
to the husband and the daughter-in-law to the mother-in-law but never vice-versa;
so that the wife had only duties and obligations and the husband only rights
and privileges. According to the injunctions of the Buddha given in the
Sigalovada Sutta, which deals with domestic duties, every relationship
was a reciprocal one whether it be between husband and wife, parent and
child, or master and servant. Ideally, therefore, among Buddhists, marriage
is a contract between equals.
However it does not necessarily follow
that social practice conforms to theory. The egalitarian ideals of Buddhism
appear to have been impotent against the universal ideology of masculine
superiority. The doctrine of Karma and Rebirth, one of the fundamental
tenets of Buddhism, has been interpreted to prove the inherent superiority
of the male. According to the law of Karma, one's actions in the past will
determine one's position of wealth, power, talent and even sex in future
births. One is reborn a woman because of one's bad Karma. Thus the subordination
of women is given a religious sanction. It is not unusual even in Sri Lanka
for women, after doing a meritorious deed, to aspire to be redeemed from
womanhood and be reborn as a man in future. Despite the remarkable degree
of sexual equality in Burman society, all women recite as a part of their
Buddhist devotions the following prayer: "I pray that I may be reborn as
a male in a future existence."[16]
In Thailand in 1399 A.D., the Queen Mother founded a monastery and commemorated
the event in an inscription in which she requested, "By the power of my
merit, may I be reborn as a male..."[17].
Several examples could be quoted from the popular parlance of all three
societies to show that even women, whatever their station, have accepted
the idea of female inferiority and this has influenced the husband-wife
relationship in varying degrees in the societies concerned. In Sri Lanka
where this idea is least perceptible, it is considered becoming even in
modern times to maintain a facade of husband domination. The wifely control
is unobtrusive and subtle. This ambivalent attitude is more pronounced
in Burma where women are a specially privileged lot. They control the family
economy; socially, politically and legally they are on a par with men.
But the wife makes a show of deference to the husband which in itself is
no measure of male dominance but an adaptation to a cultural norm. On the
other hand, the fact that men could have multiple spouses whereas the women
were restricted to one, placed the husband in a privileged position. The
reverse was true in Sri Lanka where polygamy was unknown except in the
royal family, polyandry was practiced (though not widespread) till recent
times. In traditional Thailand the subordination of the wife in the family
hierarchy was sanctioned by law. Till 1935 polygyny was legally recognized.
"Fundamental to the family
law in the Law Code of 1805 was the conjugal power of the husband, which
meant that he managed the property held jointly by the spouses, that he
could sell his wife of give her away and that he could administer bodily
punishment to her, provided the degree of punishment was in proportion
to the misdeed."[18]
From the nature of the marriage contract
one passes on to the question whether both parties had the same facilities
for terminating the contract. It is seen that in most cultures the woman
is irretrievably bound by the chains of matrimony while the man can shed
his shackles with ease. The Confucian code of discipline provides the husband
with several grounds for divorce. Not only leprosy and sterility, even
disobedience and garrulity were valid reasons to get rid of a wife. Among
the Hindus marriage was an indissoluble sacrament for the woman, while
the man had the right to remarry even when the first wife was alive. Says
Manu, "A barren wife may be superseded in the 8th year. She whose children
all die in the 10th, she who bears only daughters in the 11th, but she
who is quarrelsome without delay."[19]
In addition a man could abandon a blemished, diseased or deflowered wife.[20]
Under Islamic law the contract may be dissolved by the husband at his will
without the intervention of a court and without assigning any cause. But
a wife cannot divorce herself from her husband without his consent except
under a contract made before or after marriage. If the conditions of the
contract are not opposed to Muslim law then the divorce will take effect.[21]
In Buddhism marriage received no
religious sanction and in the absence of a Buddhist legal code comparable
to the Laws of Manu or the Sharia Law of the Muslims, the dissolution the
marriage contract was settled by the individuals concerned or their families.
With regard to Sri Lanka, there is a document dated 1769 which gives an
orthodox and official view on the subject. The Dutch who were ruling the
maritime provinces of Sri Lanka wished to codify the laws and customs of
the island. The Dutch Governor I.W. Falck sent a series of questions to
the eminent monks of Kandy and the answers to these are given in the document
known as the Lakrajalosirita. The governor raised the question whether
divorce was permitted among the Sinhalese. The reply was,
"A man and a woman who have
been united in marriage with the knowledge of their parents and relations
and according to the Sinhala custom cannot become separated at their own
pleasure. If a man wishes to obtain a divorce it must be by proving that
his wife, failing in the reverence and respect due to a husband, has spoken
to him in an unbecoming manner; or that she has lavished her affection
on another and spends his earning on him, and if her improper conduct is
proved before a court of justice he will be permitted to abandon her."
The next question is for what faults
on the part of the husband may the wife sue for and obtain a divorce from
him. The Bhikkhus reply,
"If being destitute of love
and affection for his wife, he withholds from her the wearing apparel and
ornaments suitable to her rank; if he does not provide her with food of
such a quality as she has a right to; if he neglects to acquire money by
agriculture, commerce and other honorable means; if associating with other
women, he squanders his property upon them; if he makes a practice of committing
other improper and degrading acts such as stealing, lying or drinking intoxicating
liquors, if he treats his wife as a slave and at the same times behaves
respectfully to other women, on proof of his delinquency before the above
mentioned court, the wife may obtain a divorce."[22]
The significant point is that even in
theory the Sinhala laws were equally applicable and binding to both husband
and wife. One clearly sees the influence of the injunctions of the Sigalovada
Sutta in the development of these institutions.
However, litigation being a tedious
process then as now, it is unlikely that the average Sinhalese of the 19th
century resorted to this lengthy judicial procedure. The Lakrajalosirita
was written by Buddhist monks for the information of a foreigner, and judging
from the rest of the document they tried to depict ideal conditions. Only
the very well-to-do could afford the luxury of a court case. A more realistic
account has been left by Robert Knox who spent 19 years in the company
of poor peasants:
"But their marriages are
but of little force and validity for if they disagree and mislike one another
they part without disgrace. Yet it stands firmer for the Man than for the
Woman: howbeit they do leave on the other at their pleasure."[23]
According to Sinhala laws of the 18th
century the wife was treated very liberally at the time of divorce. She
got back all the wealth that her parents gave her at the time of marriage
and half of all the property acquired by the couple after marriage. Also
she was given a sum of money sufficient to cover her expenses for the next
six months. It is worthy of note that in Sri Lanka prior to European occupation
both sexes had equal facilities for divorce, both in theory and in practice.
The situation changed, however, with the impact of Christianity and the
introduction of Roman Dutch Law by the Hollanders in the areas under their
control.
In traditional Burma too a code of
divorce provided for ill assorted unions. Where there was a mutual desire
for separation due to incompatibility or other causes, parties can divorce
each other by an equal division of property. If one is unwilling the other
is free to go provided all property is left behind. A woman can demand
a divorce if her husband ill-treats her or if he cannot maintain her; and
a man in case of sterility or infidelity of the wife. Another method, not
uncommon, is for the aggrieved party to seek refuge in monastic life; for
this would at once dissolve the marriage bond. This easy availability of
divorce in Burma has been condemned by Father Bigandet, the Roman Catholic
Bishop of Rangoon as "damnable laxity". Despite this censure, it is said
that this easy and equal facility for divorce has rendered the Burman spouses
more forbearing and that serious connubial quarrels are rare among them.[24]
In Thailand although women had legal
disabilities, they could initiate divorce proceedings which enabled them
to escape from a tyrannous husband. As far back as 1687 the French envoy
to the Siamese court observed,
"The Husband is naturally
the Master of Divorce but he never refuseth it to his wife when she absolutely
desires it. He restores her portion to her and their children are divided
among them in this manner..."[25]
Although the conjugal power of the husband
was fundamental to the 1805 Code, yet the wife's right to divorce was preserved
and she was treated generously when the marriage was annulled.
Moving on to the question of the
remarriage of widows and divorcees, one notices that in certain societies
the wives were regarded as the personal property of their husbands. As
such the custom of slaying, sacrificing or burying women alive to accompany
their deceased husbands along with their belongings has been found in many
lands as far removed as America, Africa and India. The best known example
is the soti puja or self immolation of high-caste Hindu widows.
This custom which was unknown in the Rigveda, developed later: it was never
very widespread but there were isolated instances continuing even up to
early British times. The British had to introduce legislation to prevent
it. Among the Hindus a widow was expected to lead a life of severe austerity
and strict celibacy for she was bonded to her dead husband. Further she
lost her social and religious status and was considered an unlucky person.
The question of the remarriage of divorcees did not arise because a Hindu
wife could not repudiate her husband; even if she was rejected by the latter
she had to remain celibate.
In Buddhism death is considered a
natural and inevitable end. As a result a woman suffers no moral degradation
on account of her widowhood. Her social status is not altered in any way.
In Buddhist societies she does not have to advertise her widowhood by shaving
her head and relinquishing her ornaments. She is not forced to fast on
specific days and sleep on hard floors for self-mortification has no place
in Buddhism. Nor does she have to absent herself from ceremonies and auspicious
events. Above all there is no religious barrier to her remarriage.[26]
The remarriage of rejected wives is also known in Buddhist literature.
Women whose marriages break up were
free to remarry with no stigma attached,..."But if they chance to mislike
one another and part asunder...then she is fit for another man, being as
they account never the worse for wearing."[27]
Even the Lakrajalosirita, which gives an orthodox Buddhist view,
permits the remarriage of women after separation from their spouses. It
was common even in the highest rungs of society. In Burma and Thailand
too women had the right to remarry after divorce. As far back as 1687 La
Loubere the French envoy noticed that in Thailand, "After the Divorce both
can remarry and the woman can remarry on the very day of the Divorce."[28]
It is clear, therefore, that Buddhism
has saved the daughter from indignity, elevated the wife to a position
approximating to equality and retrieved the widow from abject misery.
The social freedom that women enjoyed
in Buddhist societies, above everything else, has evoked from Western observers
the comments that we have quoted earlier in this paper. It is not so much
the equality of status but the complete desegregation of the sexes, that
has distinguished the women in Buddhist societies from those of the Middle
East, the Far East and the Indian subcontinent. Segregation of the sexes
only leads to the seclusion and confinement of women behind veils and walls.
The Confucian code lays down detailed rules on how men and women should
behave in each other's presence. Manu went to the furthest extreme of segregation
by warning that one should not remain in a lonely palace even with one's
own mother and sister. Sexual segregation pervades all aspects of life
in Islamic society.
In early Buddhist literature one
sees a free intermingling of the sexes. The celibate monks and nuns had
separate quarters, yet the cloister was not cut off from the rest of the
world. It is recorded that the Buddha had long conversations with his female
disciples. The devout benefactress Visakha frequented the monastery decked
in all her finery, and accompanied by a maid servant she attended to the
needs of the monks. Her clothes and ornaments were the talk of the town,
yet neither the Buddha nor the monks dissuaded her from wearing them. It
was after she developed in insight and asceticism that she voluntarily
relinquished her ornaments.
This free and liberal attitude certainly
had its impact on the behavior of both men and women in Buddhist societies.
In Sri Lanka in the 17th century, "the Men are not Jealous of their Wives
for the greatest Ladies in the land will frequently talk and discourse
with any Men they please, although their Husbands be in presence."[29]
It has been remarked that the women visited places of worship always dressed
in their best attire. This is quite a contrast to the stand taken by Manu
according to whom the love of ornamentation was an evil attribute of women;
and the Koranic injunction that the pious woman should hide all beauty
and ornamentation behind the veil. Burmese women of all ranks went unveiled
and ornamented and added color to all occasions, though flanked by India
and China, where customs such as purdah and foot binding prevailed. In
Thailand it has been noticed that the women of the upper classes, though
by no means confined to lives of strict seclusion, did not appear much
in public.
In conclusion we could say that the
secular nature of the marriage contract, the facility to divorce, the right
to remarry, the desegregation of the sexes and above all else the right
to inherit, own and dispose of property without let or hindrance from the
husband, have all contributed to the alleviation of the lot of women in
Buddhist societies. Conflicting with the Buddhist ethos and negating its
effects in varying degrees is the universal ideology of masculine superiority.
So that in all three societies __ Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma -- there is
an ambivalence in the attitudes towards women. Yet their position is certainly
better than in any of the major cultures of Asia.
References
1.The Miscellaneous
Works of Hugh Boyd, with an account of his Life and Writings by L.D.
Campbell (London 1800), 54-56. Boyd was sent in 1782 as an envoy to the
Kandyan court by the British Governor at Madras. [Go back]
2. R. Grant
Brown, Burma as I saw it 1889-1917 (London 1926). Grant, who was
a member of the Indian Civil Service, was a magistrate and revenue officer
in Burma for 28 years. [Go back]
3.Journal
of an Embassy from the Governor General of India to the Court of Ava
by John Crawfurd, 2nd ed. in 2 vols. (London 1824), I, 243. [Go
back]
4.Burma
Past and Present, Lt. General Albert Fytche, 2 vols. Vol. II London
1878. [Go back]
5.Siam
in the Twentieth Century, Being the Experiences and Impressions of a British
Officer, by J.G.D. Campbell (London 1902) 112-113. Campbell was Inspector
of Schools and later Educational Adviser to the Siamese Government. [Go
back]
6.The
People of Tibet, Charles Bell, Oxford 1928, p. 147. [Go
back]
7.Laws
of Manu, trans. G. Buhler, Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXV
(Oxford 1866). [Go back]
8.Ibid.,
IX, 10. [Go back]
9. I.B. Horner,
Women under Primitive Buddhism: Laywomen and Alsmwomen (London 1930),
XXIV. [Go back]
10.Laws
of Manu, IX, 81. [Go back]
11. Ibid.,
IX, 137. [Go back]
12. Quoted
by I.B. Horner in Women in Early Buddhist Literature, The Wheel
Publication, No. 30 (Colombo 1961), 8-9. [Go back]
13.Dialogues
of the Buddha, trans. C.A.F Rhys Davids, part III, 181-182. [Go
back]
14.Laws
of Manu, IX, 28. [Go back]
15.The
Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Confucianism, trans. James Legge
(Oxford 1879) Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXVIII. 431. [Go
back]
16. Quoted
by Melford E. Sprio in, Kinship and Marriage in Burma: A cultural and
Psychodynamic Analysis (London 1977), 260. [Go back]
17. Quoted
by C.J. Reynolds in "A Nineteenth Century Thai Buddhist Defence of Polygamy
and some Remarks on the Social History of Women in Thailand", a Paper prepared
for the Seventh Conference International Association of Historians of Asia,
Bangkok, 22-26 August 1977,3. [Go back]
18.Ibid.,
6-7. [Go back]
19.Laws
of Manu, IX, 81. [Go back]
20.Laws
of Manu, IX, 72. [Go back]
21. D.F.
Mulla, Principles of Muhammedan Law (Calcutta 1955). 264. [Go
back]
22.Lakrajalosirita,
ed. and trans. Bishop Edmund Pieris, Published by the Ceylon Historical
Manuscripts Commission, 10 and 11. [Go back]
23. Robert
Knox, An Historical Relation of Ceylon (Glasgow 1911), 149. Knox
was a ship-wrecked British sailor who spent 19 years from 1660 to 1679
as a prisoner in the Kandyan Kingdom. [Go back]
24. Fytche,
Vol. II, 75. [Go back]
25. Simon
de la Loubere, The Kingdom of Siam, With an Introduction by David K.
Wyatt (London 1968) 53. De la Loubere was an envoy sent to Siam by
Louis XIV of France in 1687. He was in Siam for four months only. [Go
back]
26. I.B.
Horner, Women Under Primitive Buddhism, 72 sqq. [Go
back]
27. Knox,
149. [Go back]
28. De la
Loubere, 53. [Go back]
29. Knox,
104. [Go back]
The
Buddhist Publication Society
The Buddhist Publication
Society is an approved charity dedicated to making known the Teaching of
the Buddha, which has a vital message for people of all creeds.
Founded in 1958, the
BPS has published a wide variety of books and booklets covering a great
range of topics. Its publications include accurate annotated translations
of the Buddha's discourses, standard reference works, as well as original
contemporary expositions of Buddhist thought and practice. These works
present Buddhism as it truly is -- a dynamic force which has influenced
receptive minds for the past 2500 years and is still as relevant today
as it was when it first arose.
A full list of our
publications will be sent free of charge upon request. Write to:
The Hony. Secretary
BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
P.O. Box 61
54, Sangharaja Mawatha
Kandy
Sri Lanka
or
Barre Center for Buddhist
Studies
149 Lockwood Road
Barre, MA 01005 USA
Revised: 9
November 1998
http://world.std.com/~metta/lib/bps/wheels/wheel280.html
Update: 01-06-2001
Computer:
Vuong, Tam & Jasmine