samseva wrote:Now, please consider the following:
The Buddha preached generosity, giving alms and donating requisites.
The Buddha didn't go around teaching lay followers to give gold and silver, or having lay followers do this.
Generosity and giving are probably very much less than 5% of what the Buddha taught, as well as of importance.
Generosity and giving wasn't a large/major part of his teachings—and donating gold and silver was not at all what he taught.
The Buddha and the monks that followed him followed the laws of the land. They modified their behaviours and even made numerous Vinaya rules—as well as including aspects to most Vinaya rules—to live according to the people around them.
The Buddha didn't have issues with the law, nor did he flee the authorities. There were no monetary scandals, no political scandals, nor scandals of land ownership associated with him.
The Buddha encouraged simplicity and even austerity.
The Buddha and the monks that followed him didn't amass large fortunes of gold and silver, and they didn't live in huge and very luxurious monasteries.
You use money to run the v-star project to help thousands of children. You use money to create Buddhist movies and Buddhist music for the school children. You use money to build a giant monastery which attracts 3 million people to practice the religion. You use money to propagate the religion to other countries. You use money to run the worlds only all buddhist television channel. You use money to ordain 10,000 monks twice yearly. The ordination of one single monk can cost 50-100 thousand baht. If every monk lived up to your ideal of living in a shack, eating only two pieces of rice every week, in the forest, then the religion would just die. Then the people in society would be stuck in suffering forever. Money is good. A giant temple for attracting people to practice the religion is good. Comfort and a safe place to meditate is good.