Comparing Reading Leona Anderson And Pamela Young's Book Women In Religious Traditions

Quote: “What mattered for the early Buddhists was obviously the individual’s progress on the path toward enlightenment, and not the individual's gender” (p. 86)

“...early nuns were full members...recognized for their extraordinary intellectual and spiritual talents…” (p. 86)

Question: Reading Leona Anderson and Pamela Young’s book Women and Religious Traditions “Women in Buddhist Traditions” I was intrigued, and later upset, to learn that early Buddhist nuns were not stereotyped as a result of their gender but became stereotyped a few centuries later. What intrigues me is that cultural gender stereotyping can have such an impact on religious groups as well as countries across the world. As a result, many organizations have been created in order to eliminate these stereotypes and regain the rights they once had. As countries slowly
begin to modernize and work at eliminating stereotypes, should we expect to see a change in the way Buddhist nuns are viewed? Also, should we expect to see nuns regaining some of the titles they once had centuries ago?

Response: Leona Anderson and Pamela Young’s book Women and Religious Traditions “Women in Buddhist Traditions” is an informative read that gives a better understanding of women in Buddhist traditions.
Being comprised as an informative read, the chapter gives a better understanding of Buddhist women including their official and unofficial roles, the rules they must follow, and the social changes they have had to endure. Growing up as a devoted Christian, I have always known the church to be a place where men were leading the services, not knowing that a women could lead services in other religions. Reading Anderson’s chapter on Buddhism I was intrigued to learn that many Buddhist nuns had the same positions as the monks did within their religion. The nuns were “full members of the monastic order and were recognized for their extraordinary intellectual and spiritual talents and accomplishments” (p. 86). Anderson also states that “during the first 200 years of Buddhism the difference between the nuns’ and monks’ orders were insignificant” showing again the direct relation that women and men had within their Buddhist traditions (p.
87).
Instead of basing the nuns on their gender, the Buddhists looked at “...the individual’s progress on the path toward enlightenment...” and viewed them based on what they could could do and not an arbitrary fact like sex (p. 86). Anderson also discusses how Buddhist nuns in South and Southeast Asia were also viewed according to their accomplishments given “advanced education as well as family fortunes” regardless of their sex (p. 95).
However, it wasn’t long before gender stereotyping was inflicted on their religion through “political functionaries” (p. 87). Learning of the power that the women had in Buddhist traditions I was distraught and upset to learn that the “Buddhist nuns [of our time] ... are striving to gain access to the higher education … reserved for monks,” an education that they themselves once had (p. 86). Many began to view womens “sexualty as a threat” (p. 97), a perspective I believe continues to be instilled in our country.
Concluding, I am still fascinated to learn that many early Buddhist nuns were not stereotyped as a result of their gender. Growing up in the strict Christian religion that I had it was instilled in me that men were the leaders of our religion. Knowing now that other religions once had women in the lead gives me hope for the future of women. While Buddhist women in many traditions are still fighting for their rights some have been able to faithfully attain them and I believe one day they all will be able to fully claim their rights once again. Social stereotypes do have an impact on religions however small or large it may be. But I do strongly believe that as our world continues to push back against these stereotypes we will see gender equality spread throughout religious traditions.