Is it "easier' to reach non-dual states as a male?

[Sunmaster14]

8 hours ago, Nos7algiK said:

If you believe men are more non-dual then I implore you to talk to more women. If you believe more women are non-dual then I implore you to talk to more men.

I never said I believe men are more non-dual than women. That would be silly. Nor do I try to push a gender agenda by creating neat and convenient boxes.

My question arises from a simple observation, which can be verified whether you're male or female biased, whether you're on the red, blue, orange, green or yellow stage: The vast majority of spiritual masters/teachers are male. 

This has nothing to do with some kind of pride or sense of superiority as you're implying. I'm well aware that gender is transitory. I'm male today. I was and will be female in another incarnation. 
 

[Sunmaster14]

8 minutes ago, OneHandClap said:

The historical issue is one of continuing consequence. On a broad level, women were excluded from monastic circles in most areas of the world for thousands of years. It's not a stretch to believe that culturally, globally, humans may have assumed men to have a more prevalent place in "spiritual seeking." It takes time to "mend the gaps" in areas like this. Already, we are seeing more and more female spiritual leaders emerging, as you said. But since the entire lineage of most religious orders has been male (and in many religions, still is), the teachings are often passed down by men, through men. 

Ok, but awakening and enlightenment are not only restricted to religious communities. Traditional monastic circles may be biased towards men, but nowadays there are countless other sources of wisdom available to the honest seeker, male and female alike.

The question is, if there seemingly are more females at the base of the spiritual quest, why are there predominantly males who emerge at the top?

Do females get stuck somewhere in between? Seems unlikely.
Are they prevented from going higher by society/religion/history? I very much doubt that.
Are they more at ease serving All-There-Is from behind the scenes, rather than becoming leaders? I think there is some truth to this.

 

[Nos7algiK]

19 minutes ago, Sunmaster14 said:

I never said I believe men are more non-dual than women. That would be silly. Nor do I try to push a gender agenda by creating neat and convenient boxes.

I never said you did. But, you did say "My personal explanation is that maybe a male incarnation is more conducive to reach higher states of consciousness. Or maybe being male drives one to actively seeking these higher states more than being female." To the question of: "Is it "easier" to reach non-dual states as a male?"

 

19 minutes ago, Sunmaster14 said:

This has nothing to do with some kind of pride or sense of superiority as you're implying. I'm well aware that gender is transitory. I'm male today. I was and will be female in another incarnation. 
 

 I'm not implying that. 

My only aim was to show there are many biases in our perception. Just because we perceive something, like more male spiritual teachers, does not mean a male incarnation is more conductive to reach higher states than female. I don't believe you are being sexist or hateful. I just think you are asking a question and I'm just trying to answer the best I can lol.

I would give the counter point that: Wouldn't it be females that have reached more non-dual states because their ego doesn't feel the need to teach/preach what they have learned?

It can be spun either way, but our own personal biases will attempt to see it a certain way. When it comes to things like this though, there really is no way or should I say due to the circumstances of what we are trying to find out: "Is it easier to reach non-dual states as a male?" the answer would be difficult to find real definitive answers of who has truly reached such states in the first place.

Since the idea of sex/gender is null in those states I don't believe one side or the other would have an easier time accessing it.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Nos7algiK

[Mafortu]

Teal Swan is on my top 3 spiritual teachers and shes female.

But yeah, the numbers are quite low... its annoyingly rare to find females with a passion for videogames and films too.

[Proserpina]

3 hours ago, OBEler said:

@Proserpina It makes biological sense that females are more selfish. Men are replaceable, women not. she is the one who give birth to life. A woman need to take care of herself first and only so there is higher chance of surviving her children. 

a woman is physical weak compared to a man and also lacks on other deep connections. she never experience real companionship, it is total shallow how friendships are between women. If a girl gets too beautiful she will be bullied from other girls. if a girl gets fat and ugly, other females will support her to stay in her ugliness (because less competition for men). Look at facebook, when a bad looking girl posts her ugly body only women will compliment her how "beautiful" she is. They are all lying to her, so she can think everything is ok with her. No improvement welcomed 

One of the most selfless and guruish personality types there are is a feminine type,  INFJ (Teal Swan). In that case women simply may have not been given the opportunities that men had, and we will see that shift in the future.  

A woman's personal connections are not necessarily 'shallow' in her POV. Fe types and SF types can appear shallow but that's just how they enjoy communicating.  

Again, from personal experience I would say it's the path of least resistance rather than inherent selfishness. I think when a woman does step out of her comfort zone and sacrifices herself for the collective the karma she clears is massive.  You can see this with most protagonists in stories,  who typically have a feminine personality (although they are male). Those archetypes and stories don't come from thin air.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Proserpina

[vladorion]

There are no less enlightened women. Just less enlightened female teachers.

[Sunmaster14]

2 minutes ago, vladorion said:

There are no less enlightened women. Just less enlightened female teachers.

Less enlightened? Or do you mean fewer enlightened female teachers?

[Proserpina]

3 hours ago, Sunmaster14 said:

Are they more at ease serving All-There-Is from behind the scenes, rather than becoming leaders? I think there is some truth to this.

I think so.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Proserpina

[Ry4n]

As a guy if anything a woman is more likely too lol.

Men are too in their heads and as a result cut off from their intuition which itself is crucial to enlightenment. Enlightenment may as well be the literal definition of the word "intuition"; it's a purely creative form of intelligence. Nothing intellectual about it all. 

It seems more women get into this stuff but the fewer men who do seem to go more hardcore with it. And even though less men would awaken their "headiness" may make talking about this stuff in a technical way somewhat easier (maybe). The intellectual contemplation of this stuff does still have its place I think. 

The embodiment process from my experience involves a lot of heart opening practice so again women would find this process easier. 

Take what I said here with a grain of salt though, it's mostly speculation and generalisations. 

[Sunmaster14]

6 hours ago, BenG said:

This was by far the wisest line this thread produced. 

No, it wasn't. 

[OneHandClap]

10 hours ago, Sunmaster14 said:

Ok, but awakening and enlightenment are not only restricted to religious communities. Traditional monastic circles may be biased towards men, but nowadays there are countless other sources of wisdom available to the honest seeker, male and female alike.

The question is, if there seemingly are more females at the base of the spiritual quest, why are there predominantly males who emerge at the top?

Do females get stuck somewhere in between? Seems unlikely.
Are they prevented from going higher by society/religion/history? I very much doubt that.
Are they more at ease serving All-There-Is from behind the scenes, rather than becoming leaders? I think there is some truth to this.

 

I disagree with your assertion that women being excluded from monastic circles has not been a significant factor in why women are not "leaders" of spiritual circles. This is tantamount to saying racism is not a factor in society anymore because overtly racist laws have been repealed. If you look at the modern "leaders" of spirituality, most of them received training directly from other males in established lineages (Adyashanti, Shinzen Young, etc). They were trained by male spiritual teachers who hailed from male-dominated spiritual lineages. In another hundred years, we will see how the leadership composition looks. Right now, however, it is important to look at it from a holistic point of view. Monastic circles do not hold dominance over awakening, no, but they have produced the largest number of accomplished seekers from a historical POV. Psychedelics have evened that out a bit, but still, monastic traditions provided the line of knowledge that most leaders today used. 

As far as the "serving behind the scenes angle"? Well, that is an interesting viewpoint to take. I suppose there could be truth to it. 

[4201]

Nobody had the experience of awakening as a male and awakening as a female to compare the "difficulty" of both.

Likewise you cannot compare the difficulty of your life to the one of others. You can assume someone else's life is easier by judging it from your life, but you cannot live it, you can only live yours.

That being said there's absolutely no difficulty in awakening, because you already are awake. You can make it difficult for yourself, by creating a process and imagining yourself to not be awake and needing to do something to wake up, but that is all a play.

[TripleFly]

4 minutes ago, 4201 said:

Nobody had the experience of awakening as a male and awakening as a female to compare the "difficulty" of both.

Likewise you cannot compare the difficulty of your life to the one of others. You can assume someone else's life is easier by judging it from your life, but you cannot live it, you can only live yours.

That being said there's absolutely no difficulty in awakening, because you already are awake. You can make it difficult for yourself, by creating a process and imagining yourself to not be awake and needing to do something to wake up, but that is all a play.

Acknowledge Noble man, and Woman of Love; And the actual understanding of Heaven on Earth becomes just a tad bit more real. Just a tad really

 

 

[Carl-Richard]

Women tend to have an easier time letting go.

[SgtPepper]

I don't think so. A person must be balanced which can be done by anyone.

[mandyjw]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster14 said:

No, it wasn't. 

Ok, then what was? What exactly did you seek to gain by asking this question? I mean, you're male. Why ask? 

[mandyjw]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Women tend to have an easier time letting go.

I will resent you for making this comment forever. 

[Carl-Richard]

16 minutes ago, mandyjw said:

I will resent you for making this comment forever. 

Let go

[Leo Gura]

There may be strong cultural factors at work. Women are not as encouraged to pursue hardcore spiritual practice akin to a Zen monk. It's less socially acceptable for women to do that, and the ones who would do that are more masculine-skewing. Women are more people-oriented while men are more thing/fact-oriented. Women are more feeling-oriented while men are more truth-oriented.

Of course both halves must be balanced out in a healthy and integrated way. But culture creates some strong pressures and norms. Hormones and biology does too.

[Nahm]

@Sunmaster14

And why two?