佛教與性小眾=Buddhism and LGBTQIA+; 性／別二元=gender binary; 無我=anātman (no-Self); 菩薩=Bodhisattva; 觀音=Avalokiteśvara
摘要
性小眾（LGBTQIA+ persons）的公民權利已經成為全球性議題。某些一神教派對性小眾的恐懼和打壓，大家時有耳聞。對比之下，西方國家的居士普遍認為佛教是涵容一切性／別的宗教。然而，佛教國家中的性小眾知道，慈悲對待一切有情眾生的佛家理想，未必等同於性／別涵納，正如受佛家父權體制禁錮的女眾知道，佛家無我的概念未必能與性／別二元的解構劃上等號。此外，鑽研文本的學者樂於指出佛教典籍中的確有反對性小眾的說法。而在台灣舉行反同公投前的幾個月，我們也看到一些佛教徒加入這股反同的潮流。佛法真的容許、甚至支持反對性小眾的觀點和活動嗎？ 舉世聞名的佛教女性主義學者與行者麗塔．葛羅思（Rita M. Gross）曾在〈佛法與性別〉一文中指出，「儘管佛教徒大多不認為有恆存的自我，但他們的態度和行為卻顯示他們相信性別實有。」更明確地說，大多數佛教徒的態度和行為顯示出他們相信二元性／別是真實存在的，因而對於自我性／別相當執著。堅守二元性／別的人，會難以容忍任何模糊或跨越性／別界線的舉動。本文主張，不論是從無我的哲學觀點出發，或是從發薩大願救度一切有情的修行層面來看，佛家教誨並不支持任何以二元為基礎的偏見，遑論對性／別他者的仇恨。事實上，觀音菩薩所展現的，正是泯除二元性／別認同、不起分別心而慈悲攝受一切有情的佛家理想。
The civil rights of LGBTQIA+ persons have become a global issue. While anti-LGBTQIA+ sentiments and propaganda from certain monotheistic religious denominations have been well known, Buddhism is generally perceived by western practitioners to be inclusive of gender and sexual minorities. LGBTQIA+ persons in Buddhist countries, however, know that the Buddhist ideal of loving-kindness and compassion for all sentient beings does not necessarily translate to inclusivity in practice, just as women under the yoke of Buddhist patriarchy know that the central Buddhist teaching of anātman does not necessarily translate to deconstruction of the gender binary. Moreover, textual scholars are eager to point out that there are anti-LGBTQIA+ judgments in Buddhist texts, and in the months leading up to the voting on anti-LGBTQIA+ referenda in Taiwan we see some Buddhists hopping on the anti-LGBTQIA+ bandwagon. Do Buddhist teachings condone or even support anti-LGBTQIA+ sentiments and activities? In “Dharma and Gender,” world-renowned Buddhist-feminist scholar-practitioner Rita M. Gross points out, “while most Buddhist do not believe in the existence of a permanent, abiding self, their attitudes and actions nevertheless indicate that they do believe in the real existence of gender.” More specifically, the attitudes and actions of most Buddhists indicate that they consider the gender binary “real” and are stubbornly attached to their gendered self. Insofar as the gender binary is firmly upheld, any blurring or transgression of the binary becomes problematic. This paper argues that, whether in philosophical views such as anātman, or in spiritual practices such as taking the bodhisattva vow of liberating all sentient beings, Buddhist teachings do not lend themselves to any binary-based prejudice, much less hatred, against the gendered or sexual others. In fact, the example of Bodhisattva Guanyin manifests the Buddhist ideals of eliminating attachment to binary gender identity and of being compassionate and affirming to all sentient beings without discrimination.
目次
Background: Buddhism’s Ambivalence toward LGBTQIA+ Issues? 27 Separate Teachings for Monastic and Lay Sexual Conduct 30 No-Self as a Critique to the Sex/Gender Binary 37 Reproduction—Not a Central Concern in Buddhism 44 Bodhisattva Guanyin as Exemplar of Empathy to Diverse Beings 48 Implications of Thirty-Three Forms and Mythical/Multimorphic Beings 51 Affirming Yet Transcending Embodied Identities 57 Conclusion: The Buddhist Commitment to Alleviate Suffering 62
