Are Theravadins Simpler ?

[Dhammanando]

Can you give us your view of the other point. If I am your disciple and I decide to gift you a Louis Vuitton suitcase, will you accept it.

Puggalika-dāna or saṅgha-dāna? If it were the former —an offering that you intended for my personal use— then I would decline it because I don’t use suitcases and there’s no other monk to whom I could easily give it away. If it were the latter, then I would accept it and hand it over to my monastery’s lay stewards. It would then be their responsibility to either barter it for whatever the monastery needs or auction it to pay the bills. Refusing a saṅgha-dāna would be out of the question, unless the gift were something unallowable or the lay donor were under the saṅgha’s interdiction. Luxury French suitcases are not unallowable, however much one might wish them to be. (Although in the case of a Louis Vuitton you’d first need to remove the suitcase’s pretentious monogram, since it’s made out of gold).

Now to continue in this hypothetical vein, suppose I did happen to be a suitcase-using bhikkhu who lacked a suitcase? If you came to me and offered to get me one, and invited me to express some preference, then I would certainly go for something inexpensive. Perhaps a nice sensible product like the Trunki Gruffalo. It’s only £39.99 and no reasonable person could deny that it makes a decorous, yet suitably understated, accoutrement for a bhikkhu.

.

Gruffalo_Front_RGB720.jpg (272.16 KiB) Viewed 3455 times

.

But if you made no such invitation and simply brought me a suitcase that you’d selected yourself, I would accept it no matter what sort it was. Whether it was a poncey over-priced doodah from Paris or a battered old relic that you’d picked up at a jumble sale, or (heaven grant us!) a Trunki Gruffalo, I should accept it with gratitude.

Note that in both of these scenarios my aim would be that of being an easy burden to my lay supporters (subharo) and of light livelihood (sallahukavutti). These are two of the sixteen qualities mentioned by the Buddha in the opening of the Karaṇīyamettā Sutta, upon which the successful practice of mettabhāvanā (and no doubt of bhāvanā in general) depends. In the first scenario I select something cheap so that I don’t burden your bank account. In the second I take what you’ve selected for me so that I don’t waste your time (i.e. by requesting you to go back and change the Louis Vuitton for a Gruffalo or whatever).

As for your other hypothetical scenarios, you can just apply the following rubric:

1. Puggalika-dāna and I need it; I accept it.
1.1. If invited I go for inexpensive.
1.2. If not invited I accept what’s offered.

2. Puggalika-dāna and I don’t need it – I decline it.

3. Saṅgha-dāna – I accept it whether or not I have any personal use for it.

[arijitmitter]

Realy? Do you realise that a monastic movement in that direction would inevitably cause a schism?

Schism of what ? Most of those who posted a reply, asked me to accept any possible transgressions with blind faith that the monks in question were allowed by the Vinay or they will not have done so . But the world is way past that point of blind faith.

Please understand there are two types of Theravadins (and / or Buddhists) (at least) in present day -

1 ) Those who put a lot of faith in the structure, the rules, the system. To them any change in status quo might be annoying. (I am not speaking of Bhikkhus but disciples)

2 ) Those who in course of searching for a body of knowledge chanced upon Theravada (and / or Buddhism) and was attracted by its simplicity. A person like me. To me Theravada will go on existing with or without monks. It has been printed into books. Knowledge of mindfulness has spread to non monk teachers who teach it both in secular and orthodox way. Once a religion becomes democratic in this manner the fate of the clergy does not matter any more (specially since Theravada has very little liturgy unlike Hinduism)

I do not accept that a person in ochre robes is necessarily a Noble One. I do not accept that a person not in an ochre robe is necessarily not a Noble One.

A few days back there was a massive brouhaha because a respected Ajahn had disrobed after some 38 years and married. It seemed to people like me much ado about nothing. Let the man do what he is happy with. Why put a notional burden on his shoulder.

How utterly ludicrous it was. The man was happy being a monk for many years. The man fell in love. The man left being a monk and married. Matter finished.

As for your other hypothetical scenarios, you can just apply the following rubric:

1. Puggalika-dāna and I need it; I accept it.
1.1. If invited I go for inexpensive.
1.2. If not invited I accept what’s offered.

2. Puggalika-dāna and I don’t need it – I decline it.

3. Saṅgha-dāna – I accept it whether or not I have any personal use for it.

Venerable Dhammanando thank you for very succinct and suitable explanations. It is on Bhantes like you Sir that Theravada in wider and more educated world depends on for understanding based faith.

May I also commend you about your excellent choice of luggage.

Arijit

[Sanjay PS]

Lord Buddha once asked the Bhikkus to rub and powder down a sandalwood imperial throne chair that was gifted to him. The powder was then made as a medicinal eye ointment .

i think it is entirely uncalled for us laity to evaluate or contemplate a" perceived " or factual short coming of those who have donned the robe . There is the proper Sangha in place to deal and manage any conducts that spills over the Vinaya . Whenever we pay our deep respects to the members of Sangha it is the qualities of the Sangha to which we stand inspired , devoid of the individuals inclination . And i am sure , a natural feeling of gratitude emanates with reverence making us want to provide the best .

i am reminded of an incident during Emperor Ashokas time .

Emperor Ashoka had a younger brother called Vitashoka , who was quite troubled in seeing the best of dana that was being bestowed on the Sangha by his elder brother . This discontent came onto the ears of the Emperor , and he immediately gave order that his younger brothers head to be chopped off , however , this punishment be resorted after a lapse of 7 days . During these 7 days Vitashoka was pampered with the best of food and other senses of gaiety and ultra luxurious comfort . On the 7th day morning , Ashoka himself went on to check on his younger brother , and found Vitashoka , pale and shriveled with worry . The Emperor asked him why was this so , even though no stone was left unturned in providing the best of luxuries that were bestowed upon him all through the 7 days . Vitashoka replied how was he expected to enjoy all the fine living , when he knew that in 7 days time , he would be executed .

Emperor Ashoka said that Vitashoka was indeed very wise , and should go on to broaden his understanding of the efforts that the Sangha does in living as closely as possible to the truth of the " here and now" execution of our living .

The younger brother of Emperor Ashoka went on to become an Arhant .

sanjay

[Modus.Ponens]

Realy? Do you realise that a monastic movement in that direction would inevitably cause a schism?

Schism of what ? Most of those who posted a reply, asked me to accept any possible transgressions with blind faith that the monks in question were allowed by the Vinay or they will not have done so . But the world is way past that point of blind faith.

Please understand there are two types of Theravadins (and / or Buddhists) (at least) in present day -

1 ) Those who put a lot of faith in the structure, the rules, the system. To them any change in status quo might be annoying. (I am not speaking of Bhikkhus but disciples)

2 ) Those who in course of searching for a body of knowledge chanced upon Theravada (and / or Buddhism) and was attracted by its simplicity. A person like me. To me Theravada will go on existing with or without monks. It has been printed into books. Knowledge of mindfulness has spread to non monk teachers who teach it both in secular and orthodox way. Once a religion becomes democratic in this manner the fate of the clergy does not matter any more (specially since Theravada has very little liturgy unlike Hinduism)

I do not accept that a person in ochre robes is necessarily a Noble One. I do not accept that a person not in an ochre robe is necessarily not a Noble One.

A few days back there was a massive brouhaha because a respected Ajahn had disrobed after some 38 years and married. It seemed to people like me much ado about nothing. Let the man do what he is happy with. Why put a notional burden on his shoulder.

How utterly ludicrous it was. The man was happy being a monk for many years. The man fell in love. The man left being a monk and married. Matter finished.

As for your other hypothetical scenarios, you can just apply the following rubric:

1. Puggalika-dāna and I need it; I accept it.
1.1. If invited I go for inexpensive.
1.2. If not invited I accept what’s offered.

2. Puggalika-dāna and I don’t need it – I decline it.

3. Saṅgha-dāna – I accept it whether or not I have any personal use for it.

Venerable Dhammanando thank you for very succinct and suitable explanations. It is on Bhantes like you Sir that Theravada in wider and more educated world depends on for understanding based faith.

May I also commend you about your excellent choice of luggage.

Arijit

Nothing of what you said contradicts the phrase that I wrote: If there was a monastic movement in that direction, there would be a schism.

[arijitmitter]

Nothing of what you said contradicts the phrase that I wrote: If there was a monastic movement in that direction, there would be a schism.

"Schism of what" in my previous post to be read as "does it matter." If Thai Buddhism vanished tomorrow or Dharamsala Buddhism vanished tomorrow - if there were no longer any ordained monks (assume all ordained monks were abducted by aliens tonight) will our search for Dhamma end or slow down ?

There appears to be a clear divide among those who have read this thread. I am more democratic and unwilling to accept anything on blind faith and question anything that seems slightly inappropriate. Perhaps this comes, because as a householder I lead a life that can be called an urban monk.

Yesterday at the monastery I attend, I was asked by the abbot that since I am already following Dhamma with such gusto and am single why do I not think of becoming a monk. I said I have been toying with the idea for last 2 months but I have to look after my mother and can only consider it once she passes away. I am already 43 and change and do not think becoming a Bhikkhu at a reasonably advanced age of 44 to 60 is a good idea.

The abbot appreciated my candor and said the door is always open for me (Please bear in mind that on June 1, 2013 I walked into his monastery and declared I want to be converted to being a Theravadin Buddhist so my rise in his eyes has been quite fast. Not all lay devotees get an invitation to be a monk after 4 months and 25 days. So I must have some "monk" potential). This is not to be arrogant but to show that i am apart from being argumentative at times a deeply dedicated person on path of Dhamma.

What struck me is he was willing to bring up the discussion of becoming a monk with a person as unorthodox as me. That itself speaks volumes about any possible "schism"

Arijit

[chownah]

i think it is entirely uncalled for us laity to evaluate or contemplate a" perceived " or factual short coming of those who have donned the robe . There is the proper Sangha in place to deal and manage any conducts that spills over the Vinaya . Whenever we pay our deep respects to the members of Sangha it is the qualities of the Sangha to which we stand inspired , and not an action of any individual . And i am sure , its only with a natural feeling that what we provided the best .

Sanjay,
I am confused as to who "we" refers to......from my experience what you say does not apply to all Buddhists.
chownah

[Sanjay PS]

i think it is entirely uncalled for us laity to evaluate or contemplate a" perceived " or factual short coming of those who have donned the robe . There is the proper Sangha in place to deal and manage any conducts that spills over the Vinaya . Whenever we pay our deep respects to the members of Sangha it is the qualities of the Sangha to which we stand inspired , and not an action of any individual . And i am sure , its only with a natural feeling that what we provided the best .

Sanjay,
I am confused as to who "we" refers to......from my experience what you say does not apply to all Buddhists.
chownah

Chownah ,

We applies to anyone who has great reverence to The Buddha , The Dhamma and The Sangha , immaterial of whether one calls himself or herself as a Buddhist or not . And i am sure, i am just but a drop in the ocean of gratitude .

sanjay

[Modus.Ponens]

Nothing of what you said contradicts the phrase that I wrote: If there was a monastic movement in that direction, there would be a schism.

"Schism of what" in my previous post to be read as "does it matter." If Thai Buddhism vanished tomorrow or Dharamsala Buddhism vanished tomorrow - if there were no longer any ordained monks (assume all ordained monks were abducted by aliens tonight) will our search for Dhamma end or slow down ?

There appears to be a clear divide among those who have read this thread. I am more democratic and unwilling to accept anything on blind faith and question anything that seems slightly inappropriate. Perhaps this comes, because as a householder I lead a life that can be called an urban monk.

Yesterday at the monastery I attend, I was asked by the abbot that since I am already following Dhamma with such gusto and am single why do I not think of becoming a monk. I said I have been toying with the idea for last 2 months but I have to look after my mother and can only consider it once she passes away. I am already 43 and change and do not think becoming a Bhikkhu at a reasonably advanced age of 44 to 60 is a good idea.

The abbot appreciated my candor and said the door is always open for me (Please bear in mind that on June 1, 2013 I walked into his monastery and declared I want to be converted to being a Theravadin Buddhist so my rise in his eyes has been quite fast. Not all lay devotees get an invitation to be a monk after 4 months and 25 days. So I must have some "monk" potential). This is not to be arrogant but to show that i am apart from being argumentative at times a deeply dedicated person on path of Dhamma.

What struck me is he was willing to bring up the discussion of becoming a monk with a person as unorthodox as me. That itself speaks volumes about any possible "schism"

Arijit

Jesus. Man, your attitude is the one of intelectual pride, not intelectual rigour. If you stop to think for half an hour you'll understand why it would be catastrophic if the ordained sangha disapeared tomorrow. But think about it, not from the perspective of "organised religion is crap", but from the objective perspective. I've seen many, many people along the years come here with the same I-know-better attitude. And it's all the same: intelectual vanity. Most people like you don't have the courage to think in a different manner. You are so proud of your own understanding of things, your own views, that you think such an absurd thing as the ordained sangha being obsolete. You went for refuge 5 months ago. Don't be so proud of views on something you know little of.

[arijitmitter]

i think it is entirely uncalled for us laity to evaluate or contemplate a" perceived " or factual short coming of those who have donned the robe . There is the proper Sangha in place to deal and manage any conducts that spills over the Vinaya . Whenever we pay our deep respects to the members of Sangha it is the qualities of the Sangha to which we stand inspired , devoid of the individuals inclination . And i am sure , a natural feeling of gratitude emanates with reverence making us want to provide the best .

Can you explain this by your concept of self correcting Sangha ?

http://news.yahoo.com/scandal-jet-setti ... 38071.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOaLYryhivQ

These monks did not buy their ipod and sunglasses and expensive luggage the day the video was shot. It must have been on going.

How is this different than the German Bishop who spent $ 43 million to renovate his home and $ 15000 on a bathtub ?

http://news.yahoo.com/pope-banishes-ger ... 54932.html

[arijitmitter]

Nothing of what you said contradicts the phrase that I wrote: If there was a monastic movement in that direction, there would be a schism.

"Schism of what" in my previous post to be read as "does it matter." If Thai Buddhism vanished tomorrow or Dharamsala Buddhism vanished tomorrow - if there were no longer any ordained monks (assume all ordained monks were abducted by aliens tonight) will our search for Dhamma end or slow down ?

There appears to be a clear divide among those who have read this thread. I am more democratic and unwilling to accept anything on blind faith and question anything that seems slightly inappropriate. Perhaps this comes, because as a householder I lead a life that can be called an urban monk.

Yesterday at the monastery I attend, I was asked by the abbot that since I am already following Dhamma with such gusto and am single why do I not think of becoming a monk. I said I have been toying with the idea for last 2 months but I have to look after my mother and can only consider it once she passes away. I am already 43 and change and do not think becoming a Bhikkhu at a reasonably advanced age of 44 to 60 is a good idea.

The abbot appreciated my candor and said the door is always open for me (Please bear in mind that on June 1, 2013 I walked into his monastery and declared I want to be converted to being a Theravadin Buddhist so my rise in his eyes has been quite fast. Not all lay devotees get an invitation to be a monk after 4 months and 25 days. So I must have some "monk" potential). This is not to be arrogant but to show that i am apart from being argumentative at times a deeply dedicated person on path of Dhamma.

What struck me is he was willing to bring up the discussion of becoming a monk with a person as unorthodox as me. That itself speaks volumes about any possible "schism"

Arijit

Jesus. Man, your attitude is the one of intelectual pride, not intelectual rigour. If you stop to think for half an hour you'll understand why it would be catastrophic if the ordained sangha disapeared tomorrow. But think about it, not from the perspective of "organised religion is crap", but from the objective perspective. I've seen many, many people along the years come here with the same I-know-better attitude. And it's all the same: intelectual vanity. Most people like you don't have the courage to think in a different manner. You are so proud of your own understanding of things, your own views, that you think such an absurd thing as the ordained sangha being obsolete. You went for refuge 5 months ago. Don't be so proud of views on something you know little of.

Well thankfully my abbot has a different idea

I never said organised religion is crap and never said Sangha is obsolete. Then I will not have been a dutiful disciple of Buddha. But yes I question the "do not question" mindset you so amply display. Sorry for the "schism".

All I said was if aliens abducted the whole Sangha of monks tonight our search for Dhamma will continue unabated. How is that intellectual vanity / lack of intellectual rigor. Are you saying my self confidence that I can do it on my own with or without Sangha is a bad thing ? Well Ajahn Brahm was excommunicated. He is following the path of Dhamma quite well on his own. Will you not agree ?

All that few of us said here was that perhaps a small change in keeping with the times is needed instead of blind allegiance. If you feel threatened by that suggestion then you lack intellectual rigor since the ability to entertain opposing ideas in the mind is mark of an intellectual.

Kindly do not use words like Jesus. It is taking the Lord's name in vain. No reason why we cannot be polite to other religions.

[daverupa]

Kindly do not use words like Jesus. It is taking the Lord's name in vain. No reason why we cannot be polite to other religions.

Well, it's part of certain colloquial speech phrases in the West, so to that extent it's not taking the Lord's name in vain, it's speaking casually.

Besides, "Jesus" is based on a mistranslation. The lad's name was Joshua.

[Mr Man]

If we look at the "The Ten Reasons For Setting Down The Rules Of A Mendicant" http://cittasanto.weebly.com/2/post/201 ... 11511.html (thank you Cittasanto).

That is a very free translation. This is mine:

1. For the excellence of the Saṅgha (Saṅghasuṭṭhutāya).
2. For the well-being of the Saṅgha (Saṅghaphāsutāya).
3. To control wicked individuals (Dummaṅkūnaṃ puggalānaṃ niggahāya).
4. For the comfort of well-behaved bhikkhus (Pesalānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ phāsuvihārāya).
5. To restrain present taints (Diṭṭhadhammikānaṃ āsavānaṃ saṃvarāya).
6. To prevent the arising of future taints (Samparāyikānaṃ āsavānaṃ paṭighātāya).
7. To arouse faith in those who lack faith(Appasannānaṃ pasādāya).
8. To strengthen faith in those who have faith(Pasannānaṃ bhiyyobhāvāya).
9. To establish the true Dhamma (Saddhammaṭṭhitiyā).
10. To support the Vinaya (Vinayānuggahāya).” (A v 70)

Thank you Bhikkhu Pesala. Cittasanto does say on his blog "All translations here are from Pali to English by Cittasanto, done for personal reflection and understanding, not as expert translations. Please read translations by other translators who are far more skilled in the Pali language such as Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Ajahn Geoff) or Ven. Bhikkhu Bhodhi." So possibly it wasn't the best source.

[Modus.Ponens]

Jesus. Man, your attitude is the one of intelectual pride, not intelectual rigour. If you stop to think for half an hour you'll understand why it would be catastrophic if the ordained sangha disapeared tomorrow. But think about it, not from the perspective of "organised religion is crap", but from the objective perspective. I've seen many, many people along the years come here with the same I-know-better attitude. And it's all the same: intelectual vanity. Most people like you don't have the courage to think in a different manner. You are so proud of your own understanding of things, your own views, that you think such an absurd thing as the ordained sangha being obsolete. You went for refuge 5 months ago. Don't be so proud of views on something you know little of.

Well thankfully my abbot has a different idea

I never said organised religion is crap and never said Sangha is obsolete. Then I will not have been a dutiful disciple of Buddha. But yes I question the "do not question" mindset you so amply display. Sorry for the "schism".

All I said was if aliens abducted the whole Sangha of monks tonight our search for Dhamma will continue unabated. How is that intellectual vanity / lack of intellectual rigor. Are you saying my self confidence that I can do it on my own with or without Sangha is a bad thing ? Well Ajahn Brahm was excommunicated. He is following the path of Dhamma quite well on his own. Will you not agree ?

All that few of us said here was that perhaps a small change in keeping with the times is needed instead of blind allegiance. If you feel threatened by that suggestion then you lack intellectual rigor since the ability to entertain opposing ideas in the mind is mark of an intellectual.

Kindly do not use words like Jesus. It is taking the Lord's name in vain. No reason why we cannot be polite to other religions.

First of all I was responding to alan. He said "I suggest we throw away the old rulebook, and come up with a new way of understanding how to live and teach.". If being against this is having blind faith, I don't know what to tell you.

I was writing more text to reply, but I realise it's futile and, worse, food for mine and your defilements. I just hope that you reflect on the outstanding value of the ordained sangha in this world.

[mikenz66]

If Thai Buddhism vanished tomorrow or Dharamsala Buddhism vanished tomorrow - if there were no longer any ordained monks (assume all ordained monks were abducted by aliens tonight) will our search for Dhamma end or slow down ?

Sure would have for me. In my experience, Buddha-Dhamma isn't just some intellectual pursuit based on analysing ancient texts. [In my day job I do intellectual analysis, so I do actually tend to do a lot of it when it comes to Dhamma, but I don't think it's as important as many modern Buddhists think...]

I've not been a monk, but, like anyone who hangs around a monastery for a while, it becomes obvious that there is more to Buddhism than intellect, and that many of the lay people who get up early to feed the monks are actually much more developed than I am, though they probably can't quote all the suttas that I can... Without the focus of our monastery, developing a long-term approach to Dhamma would be very difficult for m.

As I said, I haven't been a monk, but I have had some retreat experience that has some relevance to the topic of discussion. On retreats I'm treated roughly as a novice monk, eating at the same time as the monks (at a different table), and having lay people almost tripping over each other to put the food they cooked on my tray. The food is usually amazing, and generally 3-4 times what I could usefully eat. Occasionally it's not so amazing. After a few days of this routine, it's interesting to see how the mind is working with it: The hope that I'll get one of my favourite dishes; the disappointment when I don't; sometimes the realisation that this whole eating thing is a bit of a waste of time, getting in the way of my practice by both taking up time and making me sleepy for the next couple of hours.

My impression is that a large part of the monastic training is to deal with such feelings in the long term. Sometimes having wonderful food, sometimes not, sometimes being taken somewhere, sometimes not.

I could easily find things to criticise about monastics I've observed, here or in Thailand. However I would question the usefulness of that (apart from the truly outrageous, of course). The monastic training is like the precepts - it's a training. Some are doing well with it, some not.

Overall, the whole system has given me an enormous amount of help in understanding Dhamma. I personally wouldn't have any understanding if I had only had ancient books to rely on. Of course, others may have different experiences.


Mike

[PeterB]

Kindly do not use words like Jesus. It is taking the Lord's name in vain. No reason why we cannot be polite to other religions.

Well, it's part of certain colloquial speech phrases in the West, so to that extent it's not taking the Lord's name in vain, it's speaking casually.

Besides, "Jesus" is based on a mistranslation. The lad's name was Joshua.

Not so actually. That's another latinisation.
The lad's name is Y'shua.