Lably
Skip to content

Buddhism and LGBTQ

Perspective of Buddhism on gender and sexual minorities

  • 20 min read
  • 7 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Buddhism, Menstrual cycle and Transgender

Lab · Class 6–12Buddhist Art at SanchiLabLesson film — Human ReproductionLabHuman ReproductionLab · Class 9–11Cell Cycle & Division

Buddhism is more likely to accept homosexuality than Confucianism and marriage is largely considered to be a secular issue within Buddhism.

Buddhist texts

Early texts

According to the Pāli Canon and Āgama (the early Buddhist scriptures), there is nothing saying that same or opposite gender relations have anything to do with sexual misconduct, for lay people.

Within the earliest monastic rules known as the Vinaya (c. 4th century BCE), male monks are explicitly forbidden from having sexual relations with any of the four genders: male, female, ubhatovyañjanaka and paṇḍaka; various meanings of these words are given below. Later, the Buddha allowed the ordination of women, forbade ordination to these other types of people, with exceptions to a few particular types of paṇḍaka. The Buddha's proscriptions against certain types of people joining the monastic sangha (ordained community) are often understood to reflect his concern with upholding the public image of the sangha as virtuous; in some cases, this is explicitly stated. Social acceptability was vital for the sangha, as it could not survive without material support from lay society.

Ubhatovyañjanakas

The word ubhatovyañjanaka is usually thought to describe people who have both male and female sexual characteristics, and thus are intersex. In the Vinaya, it is said that ubhatovyañjanaka should not be ordained, on account of the possibility that they would entice a fellow monk or nun into having sex. It has been seen by some that the category of ubhatovyañjanaka is of later addition to the early Buddhist texts, since it does not appear in the early suttas, the Pāṭimokkhas, nor in the early parts of the Vinaya.

Paṇḍakas

The paṇḍaka is a complex category that is variously defined in different Buddhist texts. In the earliest texts, the word seems to refer to a socially stigmatized class of trans-feminine and/or cross-dressing people, some of whom may have been sex workers. Paisarn Likhitpreechakul argue that these people are grouped together with groups who are excluded from ordination as well; those with physical disabilities such as deafness or dwarfism, or those who have committed crimes. "The Story of the Prohibition of the Ordination of Pandaka" from the Vinaya claims that the ban is a response to the example of a paṇḍaka monk with a desire to have sex. Being refused by other monks, he had sex with animal handlers, who then told the wider community and brought disgrace upon the sangha. Since the word paṇḍaka does not appear in either of the early Suttas nor in the early parts of the Vinaya, it has been seen by some as a possible indication that pandaka's inclusion in the Vinaya did not happen in the Buddha's lifetime but was added later.

The Lotus Sutra reads that a Bodhisattva should not go near a Paṇḍaka, similar to the rules for monks in the Vinaya. The Theravadin text Milinda Panha claims that Paṇḍakas betray secrets because of their alleged imperfection.

LGBTQ+ people in later traditions

Some modern commentators interpret the word ubhatovyanjañaka as including those who are not physically intersex, but display behavioral and psychological characteristics of both sexes, such as a woman who is attracted to other women. 5th-century Buddhist writer Buddhaghosa describes ubhatobyanjanaka as people with the body of one sex but the "power", or gender of the other. Leonard Zwilling argues that in this account Buddhaghosa does not in fact describe "hermaphroditism" but rather bisexuality or homosexuality. Janet Gyatso pointed out that Zwilling destroys his own argument that pandakas are homosexuals when he writes, "The Vinaya, in fact, goes so far as to distinguish sexual activity between normative males from sexual relations between a socially normative male and a pandaka."

In other texts, the term paṇḍaka can include those born sexually indeterminate or with no sex, eunuchs, those whose impotence changes every half month, males who gain sexual potency by absorbing other men's semen, or spying on other people having sex. It sometimes includes males or females with any sexual dysfunction, such as impotence or irregular menstrual cycles. The common element seems to be those whose sexuality is either limited physiologically, or those who are sexually impotent. Together these impotence types are almost always portrayed negatively as a pariah class, especially in the earliest texts. In modern contexts, paṇḍaka is sometimes alleged to include lesbians, gay men, and transgender and intersex people, although in ancient times, a man who sexually penetrated another man or a paṇḍaka was not himself considered a paṇḍaka.

Some texts of the Abhidharma state that a paṇḍaka cannot achieve enlightenment in their own lifetime, but must wait for reincarnation as a man or woman. Ananda — Buddha's cousin and disciple — was said to be a paṇḍaka in one of his many previous lives, as was the Buddhist nun Isidāsī (from the Therigatha). In both cases, birth as a paṇḍaka was a result of poor karma, and the idea that being a paṇḍaka stems from bad behaviour in a previous life is common in Buddhist literature. Asanga and Vasubandhu discussed if a pandaka was able to be enlightened or not.

In the Samantapasadika, a work of the 5th century CE Theravadin commentator and scholar Buddhaghosa, paṇḍaka are described as being filled with defiling passions (ussanakilesa), unquenchable lusts (avapasantaparilaha) and are dominated by their libido (parilahavegabhibhuta). Nevertheless, Buddhaghosa did not forbid all Paṇḍakas from becoming ordained as monks; indeed, the "āsittapaṇḍaka" was allowed to join. Notably, the "āsittapaṇḍaka" was a male that gained "satisfaction from performing oral sex on another man". Hence, there does not appear to be a consistent exclusion of homosexual Paṇḍakas by Buddhaghosa. The 4th century Mahayana Buddhist writers Vasubandhu and Asanga contend that the paṇḍaka has no discipline for spiritual practice, due to their defiling passions of both male and female sexes. They lack the moral fortitude to counter these passions because they lack modesty and shame. Incapable of showing restraint, such a being is abandoned by their parents and lacking such ties are unable to hold strong views. Asanga, like Vasubandhu, refuses the pandaka recognition as a layman on the grounds that such persons are unfit to associate with or serve the Sangha. Asanga, however, considers them capable to practice the path of a layman individually if they so desire, but without receiving recognition as a layman or being introduced in the sangha. A position similar to Asanga view was also featured in the Lotus Sutra, where sangha members were advised to avoid the paṇḍaka.

Buddha's proscriptions against certain types of people joining the monastic sangha (ordained community) are often understood to reflect his concern with upholding the public image of the sangha as virtuous. Peter Jackson, the scholar of sexual politics and Buddhism in Thailand, speculates that the Buddha was initially reluctant to allow women to join the sangha for this reason. Jackson explains:

Buddhism, the middle path, has always been concerned with the maintenance of social order and since the Buddha's time the sangha has never claimed to provide a universal vehicle for the spiritual liberation of all individuals in society, explicitly excluding those who are considered to reflect badly on the monkhood in terms of prevailing social norms and attitudes.

Social acceptability was vital for the sangha, as it could not survive without material support from lay society.

Several Theravada Buddhist texts state that the members of the paṇḍaka are excluded from a variety of Buddhist practices (in addition to ordination):

  • acting as preceptors in ordination ceremonies
  • making donations to begging monks
  • meditating and
  • ability to understand the Dharma.

Classical Mahayana scholars like Shantideva and Aśvaghoṣa considered non-vaginal sex (including sex between men) to be sexual misconduct. Shantideva based his views on quotes from the Saddharma-smrtyupasthana Sutra. According to Mizuno Kōgen's study, Saddharma-smrtyupasthana Sutra is related to Ghoṣa's Abhidharmāmṛtarasaśāstra, and is compiled by Sarvastivada sect (possibly from someone related to Ghoṣa after the 2nd century). In the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom (Sanskrit: Mahā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra), the Madhyamaka scholar Nagarjuna mentioned the non-vagina sex restriction as based on coerced action toward one's own spouse.

In contrast, later texts, particularly Tibetan Buddhist writings, occasionally value paṇḍaka positively for their "middleness" and balance. The paṇḍaka in these Tibetan works is translated with the term ma ning — "genderless" or "without genitals". The 13th-century Tibetan monk Gyalwa Yang Gönpa, who was one of the significant figures in the early Drukpa Kagyu sect, writes about ma ning as a balanced state between maleness and femaleness. Yang Gönpa describes ma ning as "the abiding breath between male exhalation and female inhalation" and "the balanced yogic channel, as opposed to the too tight male channel, and the too loose female one".

Most Mahayana teachings assert that all beings who correctly practice the dharma may reach enlightenment, since all possess innate Buddha nature, enlightenment being achievable even in a single life.

Sign in to keep reading

6 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Religion

PinyinRomanization scheme for Standard ChineseHindusAdherents of HinduismTraditional Chinese charactersStandardized set of Chinese charactersLiteral translationWord-for-word translation of a textReligionSocial-cultural systemTheologyStudy of the nature of deities and religious beliefs