According to Osho, Jain scriptures declare women cannot attain liberation because Jain sadhana arises from a 'masculine' mind (aggressive, ascetic, will-based), so it cannot imagine feminine surrender achieving moksha. In Mahavira's lineage a woman must be reborn male to undertake that method. By contrast, Krishna's path is 'feminine' (surrender), so even men become inwardly feminine. Scriptures mirror their path's psychology; liberation depends on matching inner polarity to method, not biological sex.
They reflect a tough, willpower path suited to a masculine mindset, so they assumed women couldn’t do it; other paths of loving surrender say the opposite—so it’s about inner style, not gender.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Osho, why do the Jain scriptures say that women cannot attain liberation? The topic will shift a bit. There’s a small question. Since the topic will change, let’s do it briefly, then we’ll sit for meditation. The question is: Why do the Jain scriptures say that women cannot attain liberation (moksha)?
The reason is that the Jain scriptures were created out of a masculine mind. Jain sadhana is a masculine sadhana. Its whole process is aggressive, attacking. And so the Jain scripture cannot even conceive how a woman could attain moksha. If we ask a devotee of Krishna, he will be in great difficulty! He will say, how could anyone other than a woman attain liberation? How will a man be liberated? Because a Krishna devotee, even if he is a man, makes himself a woman and falls in love with Krishna. When Meera went to Vrindavan she was stopped from entering the temple, because the priest there would not look at women. When Meera was stopped she said, ask that priest one question: Is there any man other than Krishna? And being a priest of Krishna, are you still a man? Then the priest said, let her come. I have…
Questioner: why do jaina scriptures say that there is no liberation for women?
This question will change the context of our discussion and therefore I would deal with it briefly and then we will sit for meditation. You ask why the Jaina scriptures say that women cannot attain to freedom. The reason is that Jaina scriptures are the handiwork of the male mind. The truth is, the whole of Jaina discipline is male-oriented, it is aggressive. Therefore Jaina scriptures cannot think how women, who represent passive energy can attain to liberation. But devotees of Krishna think otherwise. If you ask one of them about it he will immediately say women alone can attain to it, no one except them can. The male mind is simply incapable of reaching God, according to Krishna's philosophy. Even male devotees of Krishna turn into feminine minds so they can fall in love with Krishna. There is a beautiful anecdote in the life of Meera, the renowned devotee…
Questioner: there is truth in this statement.
This is not the question. This is not the question at all. There is a relative truth in this statement; it is true from the side of Buddha. It is true from his side, because his path -- or for that matter, Mahavira's path -- is not meant for women. Women don't have much scope on Buddha's path, which is male-oriented. Nonetheless women rush to them because they are so charismatic. So Buddha's statement is relatively true in the context of his path, but it is not an absolute truth. There is no difficulty for women in achieving moksha; they can achieve it as much as men can, but certainly their path will be different. They cannot make it on the path of the Jaina tirthankara. It is like there are two pathways for going to a mountain, one of which is straight, steep and short with a sign on…
Osho, in this connection someone has asked: Mahavira was a champion of equality, yet why was the order of nuns neglected in his sangha?
The entire mind of woman is poetic—of dreams, of imagination. It is passive: it cannot do, it can only imagine. There are reasons for this too. In truth, a poet means a passive mind. He can sit and imagine; he cannot do anything. He can build palaces—but only in imagination! Palaces that can be built sitting—those he can build. The ones that require standing up, breaking stones, collecting bricks—that is not his capacity. He can build palaces of words, because that can be done sitting. More interesting still: in science one has to do—one discovers; the masculine mind discovers, uncovers what is covered. The poet does not discover; he simply sits silently. In fact, when a great poem descends into him, he is utterly passive, totally feminine. Something descends into him. Rabindranath says, “What did I sing? When I am not, O God, you sing through me. When I am…
Osho, the scholars of scripture say that for women the recitation of the Vedas, listening to the Gayatri Mantra, and uttering the word Om are forbidden. Master, Om slips out of my mouth spontaneously; especially during Nadabrahma meditation one has to chant it. So a kind of fear arises in the mind—why has this been said? Should women not pronounce Om? Kindly have mercy and explain.
Mallibai must truly have been an extraordinary, dignified woman! She must have had a powerful presence—radiant, luminous! So luminous that while she was alive even the Jains had to accept her as a tirthankara. But after her death, the crafty cannot help their craftiness—they simply changed the name. As a child when I read the list of tirthankaras, it never occurred to me that Mallinath was not Mallinath but Mallibai. And one thing is certain: in those days there were no operations as there can be now—turning a woman into a man or a man into a woman. There is no mention anywhere of such operations. There is one possibility: occasionally, by accident, some women become men and some men become women, due to a disturbance in hormones. The difference in hormones between male and female is a matter of degree; a little more or less and a woman can…