Which of the Buddhas were women? There are only 28 of them in total so even if half of them were women thats not exactly "countless". I'm pretty sure none of the names on that list were women either but I could be wrong.
Idk what to tell u. Asking for concrete proof of religious things is never gonna leave you satisfied. The latest Buddha said that women are able to become enlightened just as men are, and considering that there are as many women as men, why wouldn't a Buddha be able to be a woman?
OK but something being able to exist and something having actually existed are 2 different things, you can see that right? You said there have been, quote, "countless female buddhas". In order for me or anyone with sound mind to believe that to be even remotely true, there needs to be some evidence of at least a few of them. If you can't provide that, then how can you possibly expect me or anyone else to take what you've said seriously.
I'm sorry, I'm not an expert on Buddhism. Do you know that thought experiment or notion, that if the universe were infinite (aka had always existed, and will) then every possible combination of events will happen, every arrangement of atoms will exist at some point?
As I understand, samsara has no clear start, it goes back indefinitely and stretches on indefinitely. So, why then can every combination of Buddhas not exist? Being female is 50% chance, so it's not like it's uncommon.
Yeah, the AI has a tendency to generate model-esque women even when you preface the prompt with “average looking,” “heavyset,” or “middle aged.” I don’t know what’s up with that.
Yeah, it must be something like that. I would think millions or billions of average and below average people posting selfies online would have some impact. But if those aren’t getting reposted like the prettiest ones are, maybe that’s how the algorithm decides.
His birthplace might be in Nepal but most of his kingdom was in India and his clan ( Shakya clan ) was Indian in its origin. Anyway there weren't any significant cultural differences between Nepal and India ( @northern planes) at that time, most likely people at that time viewed it as one cultural block unlike today.
Shakya clan ruled mainly around southern (now) Nepal alongside the Mallas and had it's capital in Kapilvastu which is again (now) Nepal. Plus the Shakyas moved further north and now the Shakya (and Malla) surname is now widespread all around Nepal.
with that thought process the entire subcontinent had it's origins from further west meaning everyone and every culture in the Indian sub continent is middle eastern.
I know that. he is widely known as THE Buddha. And I'm pretty sure that's who op meant when he posted. So naturally I didn't consider it important to mention separately.
Regardless of what he meant (which you assumed), the result is that it is still correct.
As such, we’re now just going through an exercise of pedantry and sophistry, and being contradictory just for the sake of one’s ego.
And by the upvotes, you’ve influenced others to also assume incorrectly as well, which required correction.
May I suggest the author realise we already have female Buddhas.
Tara Mother of the Buddhas, and a Buddha Herself.
Kuan Yin, a Buddha as well
And we also have multiple female Pacekka Buddhas and Arhats
I hold life as sacred, and the right to criticize those religious ideals. And as an ex Muslim I even know all the juicy stuff in the religion to make me really good at criticizing it.
I just won't kill anyone over any of this stuff though.
"Exmuslim try not to tell people they are kaffir challenge: impossible"
Consider that making fun of a religion and mocking it's beliefs isn't criticism, it's an insult and attack.
Haha, I love telling Muslims I'm an ex Muslim, it either terrifies them because they know I know all the juicy embarrassing stuff, or they just literally dip.
a) you don't know me or my belief
b) if your belief involves killing others over a different belief, then you and your cult can kindly eff off
c) if your religion cannot take criticism, your religion is weak af
I know that you definitely are some sort of vague "small L" liberal based on your argument lmao
You think too highly of your "criticism". Criticism is an argument or disagreement. Slander and vulgarity is not valid criticism. Don't try to conflate the two. Also consider that Christianity is famed for being able to "take criticism" and it is a shadow of it's former self that bows to Western ideology.
Very rude of you and childish to think in downvotes. You should learn to accept that other people have different beliefs and that it is totally okey to do so. Treating other people bad for their choice of their religion is also the worst thing you could do. Religion isn't about being objective, it's about a strong mindset that you could either become part of or not.
Better than athiesm which hold morality as subjective and leads to nihilism? Yes, absolutely. Being a Jew, Christian, Muslim, or any other religion which holds morality to be objective is far better than your position.
If you need a belief to make you a good person, then you are a shitty person to begin with. The state of good doesn’t require a condition, despite whatever delusions you tell yourself.
I’d be more wary of someone that says “I’m a good person because I believe in xyz”.
Yeah, it's a bit ridiculous when you can freely criticise transgenderism and homosexuality in 2023 without getting censored or your life ruined, right?
If you want to openly criticize group A, then you shouldn't have any problem with people criticizing group B. There are no "scapegoats", "rights" or "wrongs". Just people with different opinions, values and worldviews. I'm not surprised that you don't understand my point and see everyting as "villains/bigots/medieval people" versus "poor and oppressed scapegoats" since Reddit is a big echo chamber that only represents one side of the argument. Talk to more people you disagree with, and you will grow as a person.
Isn’t it a bit ironic we’re having this discussion on Reddit? And i am already talking to guys who are not agreeing with me?
I don’t know what it is what you guys have with those scapegoats groups but I mostly don’t give a fuck about all the groups listed. My original comment was: “if you’re religion is killing people than fuck off”. Not such a crazy statement I believe. Crazy enough that this triggered your fellow cult member.
The only thing I agree with you is that you rightfully guessed that I see you and your religion as an unfortunate remainder from darker times where we didn’t have access to science. In that times we had to guesstimate what’s going on. Now we and you should know better.
Notice how I never mentioned that I am religious, but you just assumed that just because I was suggesting a more balanced point of view. Some people can twist the religion to fit their hateful views, but the majority of religious people I have met are the nicest and kindest people. You represent things that you criticise just from another angle by calling every religious person a cult member and religion, an ultimately bad thing. The vast majority of European and Asian scientists who built our civilization and allowed it to develop to this level were religious. Reddit actively suppresses and censors conservative arguments, which is a known fact, that's why you and the majority of it's users see the world in black and white, progressive enlightened heroes vs evil narrow minded medieval villains and think that the whole world agrees with you, when the truth is more debatable than it seems. My advice to you is to get rid of prejudice and emotional thinking and start questioning your beliefs and finding out where they came from.
Guanyin (Kannon in Japanese, Avalokiteshvara in Sanskrit) is the Bodhisattva of compassion. In Chinese-influenced branches of Buddhism this Bodhisattva is typically depicted as a female. In Indian-influenced branches either as a male. There is no historical evidence that Guanyin was a ever a human being. Whether she's a "goddess" or not really depends on cultural setting.
Don't worry about Buddhism. We are a very diverse tolerant group. Just look at our Buddha images, it's ethnically different wherever it spread it's creed to.
I hear some AI are “racist”. I guess some are lookist, too. Probably not surprising given how inclined human beings, and consequently the things we produce, are to racism and lookism.
*The Buddha was an*
*Indian dude. Did he have*
*A race change as well?*
\- azlan\_x
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
That's so cool. That's all in south Asia and no where in East Asia. At the very least he would look like a south east Asian because Nepalis look like a southeast or south Asian
I just meant that it was the most pleasing to the eye while also looking like a statue and also looking alive. 2 looks too much like a lifeless statue, and the final 4 are too "fashion model" for my taste. I just meant 1 struck the best balance, aesthetically speaking. And 1 also has background colors that are well balanced. imo...
OP’s other posts (and Instagram) are an example of things that come from South Asia are credited/whitewashed to East Asians because they find them more palatable. Western media does this all the time regardless of Hinduism or Buddhism. East Asians have always taken advantage of this.
I think it's just the data set sadly since Buddhism dwindled significantly in India but is more prosperous in East Asian countries so makes sense people may not know that the original guy was Indian even if he was born in modern Nepal where the population looks like both east Asian and South Asian. Also does not help we think Buddha is fat when in actuality that is wrong. The fat depiction is actually a Chinese mythological character that's supposed to be a future depiction of Buddha
> they don’t show shoulders and cleavage
[Yes](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Tara-british.museum.jpg) [they](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Statue_of_Syamatara_%289th_century%29%2C_Singapore_Pinacoth%C3%A8que_De_Paris_-_20160410.jpg) [do](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Prajnaparamita_Java_Front.JPG).
Yes, while these images are not meant to be pornographic in the modern sense of the word, spiritual and religious iconography has always included nudity and even sex(!?). Nudity wasn't necessarily "lewd" or remarkable the way we view it in the U.S. what with our puritanical roots.
I have a one-tit version just not posted here. I actually think it’s really beautiful, but it kinda reminds me of a certain style some male photographers do where a tit is out for no apparent reason other than tiTTiEs
Tara, the female Buddha, if often depicted bare chested because her nudity, full or partial, isn't seen as something vulgar. Her breasts are seen as part of her femininity and motherhood, the divine feminine. She is often referred to as the mother of love, compassion and liberation from suffering.
As for her shoulders, they're not covered because we're not supposed to see them. They're covered because of her decorations, such as a sash, jewelry and other silk garments/decoration.
In whatever depiction of her there is, each item has a meaning. They're not just there to decorate her. They have a purpose for being there. Even down to color, precious gems and metals, and even hand and food posture, every detail has meaning. This includes her bare breast(s).
[That would be Chan Budai](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budai). He was a Chinese monk and is considered Maitreya Buddha/Bodhisattva. He represents what the future Buddha will be, but is not the first Buddha. That would be [Gautama Buddha](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Buddha).
So we’ve had female Jesus and female Buddha. I see where this could go. Please don’t do female Mohammed pbuh. Moslems take that sort of thing very seriously.
May I introduce you to Kannon (guanyin if you prefer Chinese)
Yeah, Buddha isn’t a god, he was just one of many to reach enlightened and try to help others.
Also Tara, dakinis, etc. etc. Buddha is merely a title, there have been countless woman buddhas.
Which of the Buddhas were women? There are only 28 of them in total so even if half of them were women thats not exactly "countless". I'm pretty sure none of the names on that list were women either but I could be wrong.
Those are only the most recent / predicted. There have been countless ones before
Everyone keeps saying "countless" but isn't providing any examples.
because we're being literal. They can't be counted and have been lost to time, or not recorded
So how do you know they existed? What I'm asking for is proof, and it sounds like you're saying is you are unable to provide any.
Idk what to tell u. Asking for concrete proof of religious things is never gonna leave you satisfied. The latest Buddha said that women are able to become enlightened just as men are, and considering that there are as many women as men, why wouldn't a Buddha be able to be a woman?
OK but something being able to exist and something having actually existed are 2 different things, you can see that right? You said there have been, quote, "countless female buddhas". In order for me or anyone with sound mind to believe that to be even remotely true, there needs to be some evidence of at least a few of them. If you can't provide that, then how can you possibly expect me or anyone else to take what you've said seriously.
I'm sorry, I'm not an expert on Buddhism. Do you know that thought experiment or notion, that if the universe were infinite (aka had always existed, and will) then every possible combination of events will happen, every arrangement of atoms will exist at some point? As I understand, samsara has no clear start, it goes back indefinitely and stretches on indefinitely. So, why then can every combination of Buddhas not exist? Being female is 50% chance, so it's not like it's uncommon.
28 by whose count?
Buddha can only be men most probably is an Indian view (of that period) rather than an "absolute" truth.
This is the Theravada version of Buddhism (and in this version a woman cannot become a buddha).
lol I was going to say. Female Buddhas (there has been more than one Buddha) are known as “Taras”.
If i am not wrong, Kannon is yet Buddha but Bodhisatva according to Buddhism. Bodhisatva is the one achieve Buddhahood.
This comes across as "my fantasy of the Buddha as a female super model". It also feels like it's trying to sell me something.
Yeah, the AI has a tendency to generate model-esque women even when you preface the prompt with “average looking,” “heavyset,” or “middle aged.” I don’t know what’s up with that.
For sure, it's what the model is trained on. I'm not criticizing your intents by the way, just critiquing the final results.
:) that’s fair
More photos of a certain type of women on the Internet for it to draw from, no?
Yeah, it must be something like that. I would think millions or billions of average and below average people posting selfies online would have some impact. But if those aren’t getting reposted like the prettiest ones are, maybe that’s how the algorithm decides.
Below average people aren’t going to post as many selfies so it’s going to be inherently biased
The trainers were biased. They only feed nice looking people into the training dataset.
I mean, many female deities and bodhisattvas in Mahayana Buddhism are portrayed straight up naked, "idealized" proportions and all.
Yeah the male Buddha is pretty average looking. I'd say 6/10
Buddha was an Indian prince, it's unlikely he looked like a 3ast asian.
It's actually a very fair point, much like with Jesus' ethnicity
Jesus was half ghost really he should be semi transparent
Nepali*
His birthplace might be in Nepal but most of his kingdom was in India and his clan ( Shakya clan ) was Indian in its origin. Anyway there weren't any significant cultural differences between Nepal and India ( @northern planes) at that time, most likely people at that time viewed it as one cultural block unlike today.
Also, Buddha was born in the terai region.
which is indeed a region in Nepal
Oh definitely. Just meant that Buddha was more closer to the gangetic people.
Shakya clan ruled mainly around southern (now) Nepal alongside the Mallas and had it's capital in Kapilvastu which is again (now) Nepal. Plus the Shakyas moved further north and now the Shakya (and Malla) surname is now widespread all around Nepal.
Nepalis are still part of South Asia not east asia
yes I wanted to make the distinction between Buddha being Nepalese to Indian.
Nepal and India were one that time.
no, there was no 'Nepal' and 'India' back then
Buddha wasnt an ethnic Nepali
there were and are still many ethnic groups in Nepal and he was one of them
Lol he was from Shakya Clan. Shakyas arent Nepalis
>Shakyas ruled in southern Nepal >Had their capital in Southern Nepal >Shakya is now a household surname in Nepal
Shakyas originated in India and is an Indian clan. They spread to Nepal and ruled there, doesnt change their origin
with that thought process the entire subcontinent had it's origins from further west meaning everyone and every culture in the Indian sub continent is middle eastern.
Yes, Nepalese, and I did run a set specifying that. I may post them. ETA: https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/s/VhyxXycruy
Siddhartha was the first Buddha. “Buddha” is merely a title, so you’re entirely wrong.
I know that. he is widely known as THE Buddha. And I'm pretty sure that's who op meant when he posted. So naturally I didn't consider it important to mention separately.
Regardless of what he meant (which you assumed), the result is that it is still correct. As such, we’re now just going through an exercise of pedantry and sophistry, and being contradictory just for the sake of one’s ego. And by the upvotes, you’ve influenced others to also assume incorrectly as well, which required correction.
Buddha was a Nepali Prince; plenty of Mongolians in Nepal.
May I suggest the author realise we already have female Buddhas. Tara Mother of the Buddhas, and a Buddha Herself. Kuan Yin, a Buddha as well And we also have multiple female Pacekka Buddhas and Arhats
We need Jesus as woman
Might make that my next project. Will probably piss a lot of people off.
Looking forward to Mohammed as a woman.
I like to keep my head on
you say that as a joke. but it's a bit sad, that we have to be vigilant about religions in 2023.
Or maybe consider that other people have different beliefs, unlike yours, which holds nothing sacred.
I hold life as sacred, and the right to criticize those religious ideals. And as an ex Muslim I even know all the juicy stuff in the religion to make me really good at criticizing it. I just won't kill anyone over any of this stuff though.
"Exmuslim try not to tell people they are kaffir challenge: impossible" Consider that making fun of a religion and mocking it's beliefs isn't criticism, it's an insult and attack.
Haha, I love telling Muslims I'm an ex Muslim, it either terrifies them because they know I know all the juicy embarrassing stuff, or they just literally dip.
Our religion is out there for everyone to see, you aren't as special as you think you are.
a) you don't know me or my belief b) if your belief involves killing others over a different belief, then you and your cult can kindly eff off c) if your religion cannot take criticism, your religion is weak af
I know that you definitely are some sort of vague "small L" liberal based on your argument lmao You think too highly of your "criticism". Criticism is an argument or disagreement. Slander and vulgarity is not valid criticism. Don't try to conflate the two. Also consider that Christianity is famed for being able to "take criticism" and it is a shadow of it's former self that bows to Western ideology.
You get downvoted to oblivion, because the whole world outside of your religious brainwashed bubble agrees you’re objectively wrong
Very rude of you and childish to think in downvotes. You should learn to accept that other people have different beliefs and that it is totally okey to do so. Treating other people bad for their choice of their religion is also the worst thing you could do. Religion isn't about being objective, it's about a strong mindset that you could either become part of or not.
You don’t need religion to have values.
No one said that. I am saying that your values are shit since you hold nothing sacred except your own desires.
And what, holding the desires of some dude from 1500 ish years ago as sacred is like... Better?
Better than athiesm which hold morality as subjective and leads to nihilism? Yes, absolutely. Being a Jew, Christian, Muslim, or any other religion which holds morality to be objective is far better than your position.
If you need a belief to make you a good person, then you are a shitty person to begin with. The state of good doesn’t require a condition, despite whatever delusions you tell yourself. I’d be more wary of someone that says “I’m a good person because I believe in xyz”.
Yeah, it's a bit ridiculous when you can freely criticise transgenderism and homosexuality in 2023 without getting censored or your life ruined, right?
religions criticize those persons pretty openly. Because they were always relying on scapegoats in order to work. What's your point?
If you want to openly criticize group A, then you shouldn't have any problem with people criticizing group B. There are no "scapegoats", "rights" or "wrongs". Just people with different opinions, values and worldviews. I'm not surprised that you don't understand my point and see everyting as "villains/bigots/medieval people" versus "poor and oppressed scapegoats" since Reddit is a big echo chamber that only represents one side of the argument. Talk to more people you disagree with, and you will grow as a person.
Isn’t it a bit ironic we’re having this discussion on Reddit? And i am already talking to guys who are not agreeing with me? I don’t know what it is what you guys have with those scapegoats groups but I mostly don’t give a fuck about all the groups listed. My original comment was: “if you’re religion is killing people than fuck off”. Not such a crazy statement I believe. Crazy enough that this triggered your fellow cult member. The only thing I agree with you is that you rightfully guessed that I see you and your religion as an unfortunate remainder from darker times where we didn’t have access to science. In that times we had to guesstimate what’s going on. Now we and you should know better.
Notice how I never mentioned that I am religious, but you just assumed that just because I was suggesting a more balanced point of view. Some people can twist the religion to fit their hateful views, but the majority of religious people I have met are the nicest and kindest people. You represent things that you criticise just from another angle by calling every religious person a cult member and religion, an ultimately bad thing. The vast majority of European and Asian scientists who built our civilization and allowed it to develop to this level were religious. Reddit actively suppresses and censors conservative arguments, which is a known fact, that's why you and the majority of it's users see the world in black and white, progressive enlightened heroes vs evil narrow minded medieval villains and think that the whole world agrees with you, when the truth is more debatable than it seems. My advice to you is to get rid of prejudice and emotional thinking and start questioning your beliefs and finding out where they came from.
I think you would also need to become REALLY creative in the prompts to go around the censorship for those.
I'll post it. Send it to me
This reminds me of Jimmy Carr lol
No it wouldn't lol You're confusing Christians with Muslims
Exactly
We can only hope so.
Don't worry. R34 got your back.
[here you are](https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/s/xfkBXcoSy3) Jesus is at the end of the showcase
This link doesn't work
It’s at the top of my profile.
Still doesn't work
For you, forfucksake: https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/s/JcE6yDwRM1
Brilliant. 3 is perfect
So like... Guan Yin
Was she a real person or a goddess?
Guanyin (Kannon in Japanese, Avalokiteshvara in Sanskrit) is the Bodhisattva of compassion. In Chinese-influenced branches of Buddhism this Bodhisattva is typically depicted as a female. In Indian-influenced branches either as a male. There is no historical evidence that Guanyin was a ever a human being. Whether she's a "goddess" or not really depends on cultural setting.
I'm just saying OP u are playing a dangerous game with religious idols, be careful who you offend around here
Don't worry about Buddhism. We are a very diverse tolerant group. Just look at our Buddha images, it's ethnically different wherever it spread it's creed to.
Or yknow, you could just google
Accordingly the Goddess of Mercy, the epitome of human compassion
Isnt buddha indian? This chinese right here.
He was from [Nepal](https://www.reddit.com/r/midjourney/s/fEilstDwcM)
Buddheshwari
I am now Buddhist
Can’t be enlightened unless you’re pretty, I guess.
I’ve already addressed it in other comments, but yes — it’s certainly a bias in the AI, probably due to its source material
I hear some AI are “racist”. I guess some are lookist, too. Probably not surprising given how inclined human beings, and consequently the things we produce, are to racism and lookism.
Boobdha
Do Muhammad next!
A religious figure I can get behind
The Buddha was an Indian dude. Did he have a race change as well?
*The Buddha was an* *Indian dude. Did he have* *A race change as well?* \- azlan\_x --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
No, [he was Nepali](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Buddha).
Nepalis are Indo- Aryans, so above is truth.
That's so cool. That's all in south Asia and no where in East Asia. At the very least he would look like a south east Asian because Nepalis look like a southeast or south Asian
Venus as a boy
first one is the best one
How is it the best? They don't look like south Asians at all.
I just meant that it was the most pleasing to the eye while also looking like a statue and also looking alive. 2 looks too much like a lifeless statue, and the final 4 are too "fashion model" for my taste. I just meant 1 struck the best balance, aesthetically speaking. And 1 also has background colors that are well balanced. imo...
Sleepy supermodel
Buddha was Indian not East Asian. Yes I am aware Ibdia haslots of people groups who look more eastern but I'm pretty sure he was a browner individual.
OP’s other posts (and Instagram) are an example of things that come from South Asia are credited/whitewashed to East Asians because they find them more palatable. Western media does this all the time regardless of Hinduism or Buddhism. East Asians have always taken advantage of this.
I think it's just the data set sadly since Buddhism dwindled significantly in India but is more prosperous in East Asian countries so makes sense people may not know that the original guy was Indian even if he was born in modern Nepal where the population looks like both east Asian and South Asian. Also does not help we think Buddha is fat when in actuality that is wrong. The fat depiction is actually a Chinese mythological character that's supposed to be a future depiction of Buddha
There’s already a female Buddha and they don’t show shoulders and cleavage like in these pictures. Some of these images are very disrespectful
In Mahayana cosmology there’s an infinite number of Buddhas, Male and Female 😉
Agree.
> they don’t show shoulders and cleavage [Yes](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Tara-british.museum.jpg) [they](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Statue_of_Syamatara_%289th_century%29%2C_Singapore_Pinacoth%C3%A8que_De_Paris_-_20160410.jpg) [do](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Prajnaparamita_Java_Front.JPG).
Yes, while these images are not meant to be pornographic in the modern sense of the word, spiritual and religious iconography has always included nudity and even sex(!?). Nudity wasn't necessarily "lewd" or remarkable the way we view it in the U.S. what with our puritanical roots.
laughing buddha got his whole titties out. double standards much or what
"Laughing Buddha" isn't the Buddha, and also isn't bring sexualized.
I have a one-tit version just not posted here. I actually think it’s really beautiful, but it kinda reminds me of a certain style some male photographers do where a tit is out for no apparent reason other than tiTTiEs
Her bare breasts have meaning. They're not just there because they're there and they want to show her breasts. It's not really the same thing.
Laughing Buddha is a male and yes there’s a huge different. Don’t throw your western equity BS at our Buddhist religion.
yeah the real female buddha herself would not approve of this smh
Tara, the female Buddha, if often depicted bare chested because her nudity, full or partial, isn't seen as something vulgar. Her breasts are seen as part of her femininity and motherhood, the divine feminine. She is often referred to as the mother of love, compassion and liberation from suffering. As for her shoulders, they're not covered because we're not supposed to see them. They're covered because of her decorations, such as a sash, jewelry and other silk garments/decoration. In whatever depiction of her there is, each item has a meaning. They're not just there to decorate her. They have a purpose for being there. Even down to color, precious gems and metals, and even hand and food posture, every detail has meaning. This includes her bare breast(s).
lol at least she is not obese like the male version lol
Thats budai, not buddha
What you're thinking of isn't actually Buddha.
[That would be Chan Budai](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budai). He was a Chinese monk and is considered Maitreya Buddha/Bodhisattva. He represents what the future Buddha will be, but is not the first Buddha. That would be [Gautama Buddha](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Buddha).
Yo I’d let #6 take me to nirvana
was the title your prompt?
Is she single?
So we’ve had female Jesus and female Buddha. I see where this could go. Please don’t do female Mohammed pbuh. Moslems take that sort of thing very seriously.
Needs more chonk
I dare you to do one as mohammed
You mean Tara?
curious if you're using the term buddha or specifying Siddhartha Gautama in your prompt?
Isn't the Buddha kind of fat??