Queering Buddhist Traditions

Abstract

Buddhist traditions intersect with queer lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans*, intersex, queer/querying (and more) subjectivities and belongings in a multifaceted way. Queer theory (QT) can enrich Buddhist thought and practices as well as Buddhist studies by inserting a challenging method of deconstruction, troubling and resisting oppressive and harmful socioreligious scripts with regards to, and beyond, sexuality and gender. There is a nascent reception of the queering impulses within Buddhist traditions, yet QT and foundational queer theorists lack comprehensive Buddhist appraisal: Queer “dharmology” has yet to be systematically developed. When discussing perspectives and practices regarding sexuality/ies and sex/gender in Buddhist thought and cultures, a distinct genealogy of nonheterosexual desires and sex/gender diversity emerges. Buddhist views on sexualities anchor on the psychology of desire and attachment in terms of religious philosophy and soteriology; at the social level, biopolitical regulations of Buddhist life focus on the dichotomy of celibate monastic vs. householder lay contexts. The variety of sex/gender subjectivities in Buddhist traditions include the historical stigmatized third and fourth sex/gender categories of the paṇḍaka (“gender-deficient,” usual thought of as “male-deficient”) and the ubhatobyañjanaka (“both-sexed”). However, neither category maps neatly onto contemporary queer and trans* subjectivities, leading to confusion, debate, and discretion in contemporary Buddhist cultures. The complex picture of both surprisingly pragmatic and inclusive as well as discriminatory and hostile paradigms emerges from Buddhist thought and practices in the divergent traditions of Theravāda, East Asian Mahāyāna, Tibetan Buddhism, and in ecumenic or demi-/post-denominational forms of Buddhism and Neo-Buddhism in the Global North (“Western” Buddhism), both historically and in contemporary global-glocal-local traditions. Queer (post)modern Buddhist subjectivities are increasingly emerging as powerful voices within constructive-critical and reflective emic modes of Buddhist thought and practice. A contemporary queer Buddhist “theology” or queer (/trans*-affirmative) dharmology can be successfully developed in a framework of five parameters: (1) reflexivity, (2) hermeneutics, (3) conceptualization, (4) signification, and (5) application. Focusing on the parameter of conceptualization, QT-immersed queer dharmology can start with the specific, “messy,” complex, contextual, ever-changing and conditioned human experiences, and interactional negotiations or be(com)ing and interbe(com)ing. A “this-worldly” (socio-saṃsāric) focus also averts the danger of spiritual bypassing and “dharma-splaining.” Instead, complex Buddhist notions such as karma and interdependence become powerful instruments of Buddhist queering, that is, challenging any normative societal script that causes suffering.

Blossoming From the Mud: Learnings About Compassion From 2SLGBTQ+ Canadians for Queer Subversion and Socio-Cultural Transformations

“…The potential connections between how different traditions may understand compassion might foster further engagement and mutual refinement. Work is well underway to identify intersections between Eastern and Western theoretical frames, exploring linkages between post-structuralism and Buddhism (Bandara, 2014; Park, 2006), and working to generate a “queer dharmology” (Corless, 2004; Gleig, 2012; Scherer, 2021), with the intention not to reduce or gloss over their socio-historical and cultural differences but rather to enhance and inform their future development through dialogue. Future studies may also explore more deeply the connection between Buddhism, queerness, ethnicity, and the legacy of colonialism.…”

“…It is important to note a potential tension between post-structuralist and queer understandings of desire and Buddhist understandings of desire; for the latter, desire (including sexual desire) is often used synonymously with attachment, craving, and greed within the concept of tanha, thus the longstanding tradition of celibacy (brahmacariya) within Buddhist traditions (Scherer, 2016). Meanwhile, in queer and post-structuralist theory, desire is understood as a foundational drive toward connection (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987); for Ahmed (2014), queer desire and pleasure are the disruptive elements needed to shake cis-heteronormativity from their territorialized place and open new spaces for queer becoming.…”

“…The attempt is always to move away from the fixity of the normal mind and its attitude toward the world'' (Rinpoche & Mullen, 2005). Buddhist practices of compassion depend on recognizing anatta, the ''non-self'' or absence of a static essence to the self (Augustine & Wayne, 2019), which often sets it apart from Western practices of compassion but, in fact, holds strong affinity to the fluidity of identities within post-structuralist and queer theories of self (Park, 2006;Scherer, 2016). Where these different traditions intersect is in their critique of normative reifications (of Self as well as Other) as groundless entrapments, against which resistance can be cultivated through a compassionate practice of deconstruction (Edelman, 2004;Park, 2006).…”

Buddhist Studies in the United States: New Turns and Future Directions

“…Also of note for stretching explorations of gender in Buddhist Studies is trans-nonbinary scholar Bee Scherer's groundbreaking work on queering Buddhism, which puts Buddhist Studies into conversation with queer theory, intersectionality, and critical theory. 9 Two initiatives that place embodiment at the center of Buddhist Studies pedagogy also deserve mention. Under the visionary leadership of inaugural director Frances Garrett, the Ho Center for Buddhist Studies at the University of Toronto has developed a number of programs aimed at recovering and centering neglected bodies in both the scholarship and teaching of Buddhist Studies.…”

“… 9 9 See, for example, Bee Scherer, “Queerying Buddhist Traditions: Texts and Traditions,” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion (2021): 1–29. …”