This essay investigates fundamental contradictions within Buddhist philosophy and practice. The paper examines how the core teachings of emptiness and dependent origination—which emphasize interconnectedness and the absence of ego—appear to contradict the Eight Heavy Rules (Garudhammas) that establish hierarchical relationships between female and male monks. Through textual analysis of the Gotami Sutta, the author argues that the Eight Heavy Rules were likely later additions to Buddhist doctrine and considers whether Buddhist teachings can still empower contemporary women despite these institutional constraints. The paper concludes that individual courage and commitment to enlightened ideals remain essential for driving genuine change within religious traditions.
To investigate the question of contradictory ideals between emptiness, dependent origination, and the Eight Heavy Rules, we must first understand the significance and meaning of all three terms. What is emptiness in the realm of Buddhism? While a standard dictionary definition describes emptiness as the state of containing nothing, Buddhist philosophy understands this differently.
The concept of emptiness is illustrated in The Matrix, a film that explores philosophical themes. In the scene, a young boy bends a spoon with his mind while Neo, the protagonist, watches and then attempts to replicate the action unsuccessfully. The boy then tells Neo, "Do not try and bend the spoon... only try to realize the truth. There is no spoon. Then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is yourself." This dialogue captures the Buddhist understanding that emptiness is not complete nothingness. The Dalai Lama explains that emptiness is "the true nature of things and events"—a recognition that fixed, independent selfhood is illusory.
Dependent origination is the Buddhist principle that everything is interconnected. Everything affects everything else; everything that exists does so because other things exist. A useful metaphor is the relationship between a wave and the ocean. A wave is not a separate piece of the ocean in the way a brick is a distinct unit within a wall. Rather, a wave is ocean—it is a distinct expression, but it cannot be detached from its source. When conditions produce a wave, nothing is added to the ocean. When a wave ceases, nothing is taken away. This principle teaches that all phenomena arise in dependence on causes and conditions.
These two core Buddhist teachings—emptiness and dependent origination—form the philosophical foundation for understanding why the Eight Heavy Rules appear contradictory. If everything is interconnected and ego-based distinctions are illusory, how can rules establishing hierarchy and discrimination be justified?
To understand why the Eight Heavy Rules contradict Buddhist philosophy, we must first examine their origins. According to the Gotami Sutta, the dialogue establishing these rules proceeded as follows:
"The Buddha said to Ananda, 'Ananda, if Maha Pajapati Gotami can accept the 8 Garudhammas, the rules of training for a Bhikkhuni, then I will allow her to take ordination. These Garudhammas are: 1) a female monk should pay respect to a monk and should learn and practise dhamma through life, 2) a female monk should reside in where there is a monk, learn and practice dhamma through life, 3) a female monk should listen to dhamma from a monk twice a month and should learn and practice dhamma through life, 4) a female monk should take a vow from two sanghas, male and female sanghas and should learn and practice dhamma through life, 5) when a female monk happens or intends to break the serious precepts, she should say sorry to two sanghas and then behave and discipline herself and should learn and practice dhamma through life, 6) a female monk has to find two teachers in two sanghas and learn from them for two years as a female novice monk before becoming a female monk and should learn and practice dhamma through life, 7) a female monk should not blame a monk at all, speak only word of wisdom, and should learn and practice dhamma through life, 8) since having become a female monk, she should be teachable to a teacher and should learn and practice dhamma through life.'"
A bhikkhuni is a member of the order of female renunciates in Theravada Buddhism. At first glance, the Eight Heavy Rules established structural subordination of female monks to male monks. Upon careful analysis, one might initially conclude that such rules were not contradictory at the time of their establishment. In the historical context of ancient India, these rules were revolutionary—they allowed women to pursue ordination at all, which was radically different from prevailing practice.
However, a critical tension emerges when we test these rules against Buddhist philosophy itself. If emptiness teaches that ego-based distinctions are illusory, and if dependent origination teaches that all phenomena are fundamentally interconnected, then why does Buddhism institute rules that segregate and establish hierarchy between women and men?
Emptiness and dependent origination both support the teaching of egolessness—the absence of a separate, permanent self. If the Buddha achieved enlightenment, he would have fully realized these truths. He would have understood that the apparent distinction between male and female monks is, in Buddhist terms, ultimately empty of inherent reality. Yet the Eight Heavy Rules impose precisely such distinctions, treating female and male monastics as fundamentally different categories requiring different rules.
Similarly, dependent origination teaches that everything is one and interconnected. The Eight Heavy Rules, however, suggest a divide between female nuns and male monks. They establish a sense of duality and gender hierarchy within the religion. Rules requiring female monks to show deference to male monks, to reside where male monks are present, and to be disciplined by male monastic authority contradict the principle that all beings are interdependent expressions of one reality.
This internal contradiction raises an important historical question: Were these rules part of the Buddha's original teachings, or were they added later? The Gotami Sutta provides crucial evidence. The text shows that the Buddha initially resisted ordaining women at all. When Maha Pajapati Gotami, the Buddha's foster mother, first asked for women to be permitted ordination, he refused three times. He told her, "Gotami, please do not be delighted with that, it is very hard to live a monastic life in the Dhamma and Vinaya."
Gotami's response was remarkable. She gathered other like-minded women, they shaved their heads and donned monastic robes, and they traveled to find the Buddha. When they arrived exhausted at the monastery gates, Gotami was in tears. The Buddha's attendant, Ananda, asked why she was crying. When she explained, Ananda asked the Buddha directly, "Can women attain enlightenment?" The Buddha replied affirmatively. Ananda then asked, "If they can, why don't you allow them to join the Sangha?"
Only after this persistent questioning did the Buddha agree—but he made his agreement conditional on acceptance of the Eight Heavy Rules. The narrative suggests that the Buddha's initial reluctance was not based on philosophical principle but on concern about social cohesion and the opinions of his existing followers. The rules appear to have been a compromise: a way to appease conservative elements within the sangha while technically allowing women to ordain.
Understanding the historical context helps clarify why the Eight Heavy Rules were likely a later institutional addition rather than a core teaching. In ancient India, the practice of "going forth"—renouncing household life to pursue spiritual practice—was held in high esteem. However, it was strictly reserved for higher castes: kings, Brahmins, and merchants. The social order prescribed four life stages (asramas) for men of these castes: Brahmacarya (celibate study as a youth), Garhastha (married householder life), Vanaprastha (forest-dwelling in middle age), and Sannyasa (renunciation and ascetic life).
Women were categorically excluded from this path. They were forbidden from studying the Vedas, which were regarded as sacred knowledge reserved for men. In this context, the Buddha's willingness to allow women to pursue monastic ordination was genuinely radical, regardless of the hierarchical rules attached. Many women without access to spiritual practice elsewhere were drawn to Buddhism's relative openness.
However, the Eight Heavy Rules suggest that this openness came with strings attached. The rules may represent a compromise between the Buddha's enlightened understanding (that all beings can attain enlightenment) and the conservative expectations of his male followers and the broader society. Rather than declaring that enlightened wisdom demands gender equality, the Buddha accommodated patriarchal expectations while still technically granting women access to the path.
"Modern women's agency and institutional reform efforts"
Buddhism does have contradictions in some of their methods. No one religion is perfect though. Despite the Eight Heavy Rules and whatever flaws Buddhism as a whole possesses, it will always be each and every individual that has the courage to engage upon their enlightened ideals that will ultimately empower others to create genuine change in the world, let alone within the religion.
You’re 77% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.