Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motherhood is a relational concept by its very nature. Biologically, it is tied to the children a woman produces. It is tied to concepts like fertility, pregnancy, abortion, and loss. But motherhood is more than a biological fact. The way motherhood is imagined and interpreted affects women’s direct experiences socially, politically, and medically. When motherhood is limited to a biological fact, it can limit women’s lives. But as this entry will hopefully make clear, motherhood is more than that. It is also a paradigm, a metaphor, even a religious practice. Among the themes highlighted here, we will consider specific mothers first—the Buddha’s two mothers (Māyā and Mahāpajāpatī [Skt. Mahāprajāpatī]), along with other famous mothers in Buddhist narrative (such as the mother of the Buddha’s son). We will consider one of the most important doctrines related to motherhood—namely, that one must love all beings the way a mother loves her only son—and the paradox such a teaching embodies. Pollution is an important challenge presented by motherhood (with the famous Blood Pond Hell that all mothers are destined for), along with filial piety (so that sons might save their mothers instead). Buddhist literature often shatters the concept of motherhood with tales like that of Kisā Gotamī, who only achieves awakening after losing her son, and yet motherhood is also sometimes carried over into discussions of renunciation, as monastics might embody motherhood (or parenthood) despite shaved heads. Some of the themes discussed here appear in other entries of this bibliographic collection, because when we study one piece of a tradition, we inevitably find ourselves studying all of it.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".