In early Buddhist texts, paṇḍakas are portrayed as individuals primarily associated with non-normative sexual behavior, particularly passive homosexual acts. Their exclusion from monastic ordination, as well as broader ethical assessments, was deeply shaped by concerns over celibate discipline, perceived promiscuity, and prevailing social taboos.
The Vinaya recounts a case that led the Buddha to prohibit the ordination of paṇḍakas. A paṇḍaka monk reportedly approached young monks, novices, and even grooms, asking to be “defiled”. While some rejected him, others complied, and rumors spread that monks engaged in such behavior — thereby harming the Saṅgha’s reputation. This incident portrayed paṇḍakas as promiscuous and sexually available, which, in a celibate male community, was considered disruptive .
The Theravāda commentator Buddhaghosa describes paṇḍakas, along with prostitutes and “coarse young girls,” as being “dominated by lust” and longing for companionship with anyone. He labels them “non-males” (napuṃsakā) filled with defilements and unquenchable desire. This framing equated paṇḍakas with a kind of dangerous sensuality, not compatible with monastic discipline .
Accordingly, monks were instructed not to sit alone in private with a paṇḍaka — though this was considered a lesser offence than sitting privately with a woman. Still, it reflected the perception that paṇḍakas were a source of sexual temptation .
Interestingly, a monk being penetrated by another man or paṇḍaka did not automatically make him a paṇḍaka. The implication is that paṇḍakahood was associated not merely with the sexual act but with a disposition or role, often passive and potentially transgressive. In fact, some texts distinguish paṇḍakas from men who simply have the “lusts of a woman” or enjoy being treated as one — indicating a more complex typology of sexual identity and behavior in pre-modern Buddhist discourse .
Modern scholars such as Zwilling characterize paṇḍakas as a socially stigmatized class — passive, possibly transvestite homosexuals — whose exclusion from the monastic order was likely a practical concession to social convention, rather than a reflection of intrinsic spiritual inferiority .
In conclusion, the sexual behavior of paṇḍakas, as portrayed in early texts, was understood within a framework of celibate control, social stigma, and gender role anxiety. While Buddhism did not necessarily condemn homosexuality more harshly than heterosexual misconduct, it clearly viewed paṇḍakahood as incompatible with monastic ideals — a view modern interpreters continue to re-examine through more inclusive and compassionate lenses.