The Indus civilization is the culture that introduced equality to India. It is the country's oldest civilization. In this society, women held a high status, and evidence indicates that it was a matriarchal culture.
However, in the later period, with the arrival of the Aryans in India and the decline of the Indus civilization, the emergence of Vedic culture saw a slight improvement in the status of women initially. Yet, in the subsequent non-Vedic period, their position deteriorated significantly.
Manu, a knowledgeable yet destructive scholar of this era, played a role in this decline. He says:
पिता रक्षती कोमारे,भरता रक्षति यौवने
रक्षती स्थवीर पुत्रा, न स्त्री स्वतंत्र महर्ती !!
The father protects in childhood, the husband protects in youth,
the sons protect in old age; a woman is never fit for independence.
By asserting this, women were subordinated to men at every stage, denying them an independent existence. He further explains that for women, the marriage ceremony is akin to a sacred rite, serving their husbands is equivalent to their time in the gurukul, and performing household chores is their evening and morning ritual.
This, he claims, constitutes the true religion for women. These ideas from non-Vedic texts illustrate the restrictions imposed on women during the post-Vedic period.
In this context, 2500 years ago, Siddhartha Gautama was born in this country. At the age of 28, he renounced his home to seek the causes of suffering and discovered the path of truth, becoming renowned as the fully enlightened one, or Samyak Sambuddha.
This Buddha was not merely an individual but embodied an entire science
He was a thinker of right thoughts, the Tathagata, who rejected thousands of years of slavery and inequality, offering the common people a path of truth and scientific Dhamma.
Because of this, women also became eligible to follow the Dhammic path. Tathagata had immense respect for women, which is why, when he refused to support the war over the distribution of water from the Rohini River between the Koliyas and the Shakyas and accepted the punishment of exile, he asked his wife Yashodhara, "Yashodhara, tell me, what do you think about my decision to take renunciation?"
In response, controlling her emotions, Yashodhara said, "If I were in your place, what else could I have done? I certainly would not have participated in the war against the Koliyas. Your decision is correct. Now that you are becoming a renunciant, find a new path of life that will be beneficial for all humankind."
Doesn't this demonstrate equality between men and women in the family when a man understands a woman's perspective, as Siddhartha does by understanding his wife Yasodhara's thoughts?
When Siddhartha first visits Kapilavastu, all the possible family members are welcomed, but Yasodhara was not present. However, the Tathagata Siddhartha Gautama himself goes to meet her at Yasodhara's palace. This role signifies the respect he held in his minds for the woman.
Perhaps he might have felt that even though I was her previous husband, I am now the Buddha.
"I am the Tathagata, should I go to her on my own?"
Without entertaining such thoughts, Siddhartha accepted the circumstances and understood Yashodhara's meeting as per his own nature, showing his maturity of thought, innate greatness, and rejection of male egoism.
Mahaprajapati Gautami, the aunt of the Tathagata, Gautama Buddha, along with her five hundred female disciples, repeatedly requested permission from Siddhartha to become renunciants. However, the Tathagata consistently refused their requests, leading to confusion and misunderstanding among many. But through dialogues such as those with his disciple Ananda, it becomes clear that the Buddha was not opposed to women.
Mahaprajapati Gautami repeatedly requested permission from Lord Gautama Buddha to allow her and other women to become renunciants, but the Buddha consistently denied her request. This caused Mahaprajapati great sorrow. Ananda, realizing this, questioned the Buddha why he does not grant women permission to renounce household life and accept the Dhamma and Vinaya to live a homeless life.
The Buddha responded to Ananda that it is not appropriate to allow women to do so.
Stavira Ananda reflects on this and wonders if it is because Brahmins believe that Shudras and women are impure and low caste, and thus they cannot attain liberation. The Buddha knows this and does not permit Shudras and women to renounce. Is the Buddha's view same as Brahmins?
Why was permission given to Shudras to renounce, but discrimination shown towards women in this regard? What does the Buddha perceive as the reason why women are not capable of accepting the Dhamma and Vinaya, attaining Nibbana?
The answer given by the Tathagata on this issue was deeply insightful and challenging to the prevailing patriarchal mindset of that time.
When giving his response, the Tathagata said, "Ananda, do not misunderstand. Women are also capable of attaining Nibbana through accepting the Dhamma and Vinaya. This is my view. Do not misunderstand me, Ananda, on this matter of the inequality between women and men. I do not endorse the doctrine of inherent inequality between women and men."
The denial given to Mahaprajapati was not based on the inequality between women and men in principle, but rather on practical considerations. Following this, upon the establishment of the Eight Rules, Mahaprajapati Gautami and her five hundred female disciples, including Yasodhara, were allowed into the Sangha.
This reflects that in the Buddha's teachings, there was no distinction or inequality based on gender or mental capacity and courage. Therefore, Ananda confirms that women, just like men, are capable of attaining the state of Nibbana according to the Buddha's thoughts.
Once, while conversing with King Prasenjit of Kosala, a messenger arrived and informed them about Queen Mallika's giving birth to a girl child.
Observing the change in King Prasenjit's expression upon hearing this news, the Buddha discerned the situation and explained to King Prasenjit, "O King! A daughter can bring more benefit than a son. She can become a wise and virtuous wife, mother, and queen. If she has a son, he will undertake heroic deeds and build a great kingdom. Truly, a daughter, just like a son, can become a guiding light for her country."
The Buddha exemplifies true equality of personality in highlighting the importance of daughters over sons.
In the mango grove of Vaishali city a lady named Amrapali came to know about Buddha's presence. It is known that Amrapali, a courtesan, extended an invitation to the Buddha and his monastic community for a meal, which the Buddha accepted without any hesitation or conditions.
However, at times, a young Licchavi prince also approached the Buddha and requested him for a meal. Yet, due to the words spoken by the Buddha to Amrapali, he did not accept the invitation from the Licchavi prince at that time.
Despite being a courtesan, Amrapali's offering of food to the Buddha and his monastic community was considered auspicious.
This incident illustrates that the Buddha did not discern any distinction between genders, castes, or religions in his teachings.
The teachings of the Tathagata were meant to transcend the divisions of gender, caste, and society. The Tathagata considered a woman's offering of a single bowl of food to be as supremely virtuous as offering seven treasuries.
He went beyond societal distinctions, even accepting women from the lowest castes, such as Chandala women, into the Sangha after they became fully awakened through renunciation. When considering all aspects of his teachings, it becomes clear that Lord Buddha viewed women through the lens of equality.
He believed that women had the potential to uplift their families and societies, which reflects his deep faith in their capabilities to contribute to spiritual liberation.
The understanding that Lord Buddha was thoroughly supportive of women emerges because during his time, prevailing beliefs asserted that women could not attain liberation (moksha), achieve heavenly realms, and were considered the gateway to hell.
Despite these contemporary views, Lord Buddha alone deemed women worthy of entering his monastic community and achieving nirvana. Granting them this authority meant directly challenging the patriarchal Brahmanical norms of his time, effectively establishing his stance as proto-feminist.