........and now back to our petty bickering, egoism, and negative posting
We should be thanking James for being as open as he was about his motivations and actions. Not everyone would be, and his account is useful to many people.
........and now back to our petty bickering, egoism, and negative posting
Hi ZomZom wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2017 2:16 pmThere are a lot of suttas about gradual path and its stages, I think you know them well. MN 107, 125 and DN 2-10 are the most evident, but also there are others. While this is true that Buddha didn't forbid lay people to ordian if they whished so, this doesn't mean they should start their practice directly from ordaining and meditating. In some cases he even wasn't pleased with the excessive desire of certain monks to do intensive practice, like in AN 10.99, AN 9.3 - simply because they were not ready for it. I have an idea why he didn't introduce a kind of "sandbox" for lay people who were going to ordain (unlike many monasteries nowadays, by the way, including Ajahn Brahm's Bodhinyana). If you want, I can go in details.Do you have some links to where the Buddha taught the "preliminary stages" to non-monastics and framed the teaching in that way. ie Do not go forth stay as a lay person, do this and do that and then in time it will be appropriate to go forth.
He did say that even a stream-winner's practice can last up to 7 lifetimes, not speaking about someone below that stage. People often forget this "nuance".Did the Buddha teach for enlightenment in a future birth? Did he say start your practice now and then perhaps in a few life times time you may achieve the goal?
This is because there is no such thing as a Path for monks and a Path for others .) The stages themselves require certain level of behavior and mental clarity/strength, which itself can correspond to "very worldly lay people" and "advanced ascetic renunciates" and no matter if you are officially ordianed or not. This is why we see very "monkish" laypeople in the texts (usually depicted as non-returners).Thanks for the reply. Yes, I appreciate that the Buddha taught gradual path but I don't recall it as being practice as a lay person and then practice as a monk.
Here I am thinking about observing simple five precepts.Isn't it supposed to take several lifetimes to get rid of all craving, to become enlightened?
Yes, it is not too well articulated, but still the evidences are there in the texts. The very idea of gradual approach actually speaks for itself in this case. No need to introduce it if there was/is no such correlation. As for the instances... well, I'll go into details then, especially that ryanM also asked. This won't be short, thoughWell you can make that correlation but it is not supported by sutta, as far as I know. There were certainly a number of monastics whose behaviour was not great even when the Buddha was still teaching. Are there instances of the Buddha telling someone not to go forth due to being not advanced enough?
That is what I exactly meant.
James already presented a list of benefits one can get in the monkhood - this is why. For a prepared person monkhood can offer best conditions for advancing further. However, it is not obligatory, as we see from the suttas (yes, I mean all those non-returners, Citta was the best of them and hailed as "standard" by the Buddha himself), so if you are good (and may be lucky) enough, you can make similar good conditions for further advancing in your own lay life.If you can get the university education why do you have to enroll?
Zom wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2017 11:50 pmYes, it is not too well articulated, but still the evidences are there in the texts. The very idea of gradual approach actually speaks for itself in this case. No need to introduce it if there was/is no such correlation. As for the instances... well, I'll go into details then, especially that ryanM also asked. This won't be short, thoughWell you can make that correlation but it is not supported by sutta, as far as I know. There were certainly a number of monastics whose behaviour was not great even when the Buddha was still teaching. Are there instances of the Buddha telling someone not to go forth due to being not advanced enough?
So, how did that happen, that in all serious monasteries you are not allowed to ordain as soon as you like - while, as you notice, Buddha allowed that. Why is that?
Here is my answer. As we know from suttas, Buddha didn't want to teach at first, however, he surveyed the world and saw that there are many, who "can see Dhamma". That means, many spiritually developed people. And yes - as soon as he started, he almost immediately "made" more more than 1000 arahants. As it seems (and Commy confirms that) all those people were there because of their excellent past kamma and paramis (and even direct past-life connections with the Buddha and best disciples personally). That is, their minds were strong and clean, while defilements, clingings, delusions - very weak. Almost no dust in the eyes (c). They were ready, they were waiting, and he came to pick them up -) There were also others - "more difficult cases", as they say.. ))). This was no one minute work for him. It required much more time and patience to grow them up into arahants. But he still succeeded, because he was an omniscient Buddha, he knew how to do it and that it is possible to do. With the most difficult, but highly potent people, he dealt himself directly. The best example here is such unthinkable and abnormal case like Angulimala story. But there were also others - who could make it to arahantship in their very life without Buddha's personal interference. They could make it (relatively easily) but only in the right circumstances - like monkhood. Buddha knew that, saw that, and understood that he just can't handle it all alone - handle all those personal instructions and so on. So he established Sangha and opened its gates for everyone. Ehi bhikkhu! He knew many would fail, I think, he even knew, some would fall in hell because of their misdeeds.... but still he wanted those many potent people from different regions to reach arahantship or non-returning as soon as possible - so they could stay in the world and keep Dhamma pure and clean, helping many more people around and in the future.
Short answer: he could make restrictions, this would certainly make Sangha more "clean", but at the same time that would slow down the increment of arahants. Actually on a certain moment of history he did start to introduce "restrictions" to keep the balance, but it didn't work too well anyway (not because Buddha miscalculated, but because those "spiritually potent people" simply came to an end). In MN 65 there is a VERY interesting conversation: "Venerable sir, what is the cause, what is the reason, why there were previously fewer training rules and more bhikkhus became established in final knowledge? What is the cause, what is the reason, why there are now more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge?” - That is how it is, Bhaddli. When beings are deteriorating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, then there are more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge".
This passage is very important, because it shows that fact of tangible decrease of "potent people" already during Buddha's lifetime. Beings are deteriorating ---> this is what he said. Less and less arahants. All those who were ready to start their practice with the highest stages of the path and fulfil them in no time, thus reaching final goal - they all made it and less and less such people remained to be found.
Now, if we extrapolate that (deplorable) trend in the future, and up to the present time... well... no words are needed here - everything is on the blackboard ))).
From here one can understand why all these monasteries - unlike Buddha - introduced "sandboxes" for modern sincere spiritual seekers allowing them to receive bhukkhu status only after years of supervision. The absense of this "defence" showed one thing: Sangha is being filled to the brim with spiritually weak people - while (ideally) it should be filled with exemplary ones, those, who could (like in good old times) pick up jhana practice and become an arahant in 7 days! . By the way, in Korean Zen monasteries it is even stricter: one needs to spend not less than 10 years before he'll be granted the full ordination. Again, the answer is short: "people are coming, but they are not ready". Gone are the days when people put on ochre robes and became enlightened in 7 days or at least 7 years. Sandboxes, though not too efficient, at least block the most unprepared spiritual seekers, making it easier for the community of those who are at least somehow prepared. It is not that senior monks and abbots are elitists or smth - no. It is just life dictates these rules.
The "sandboxes", as far as I know are mainly for non native Bhikkus in Thailand and are only at some monasteries (originating at Wat Nong Pha Pong, I believe). Perhaps it has changedWe all have had the good fortune to be born as human beings and to hear the teachings of the Buddha. This is an opportunity that millions of other beings do not have. Therefore do not be careless or heedless. Hurry and develop merits, do good and follow the path of practice in the beginning, in the middle and in the highest levels. Don't let time roll by unused and without purpose. Try to reach the truth of the Buddha's teachings even today. Let me close with a Lao folk-saying: ''Many rounds of merriment and pleasure past, soon it will be evening. Drunk with tears now, rest and see, soon it will be too late to finish the journey''.
Well, easily maintained (for a long period of time, without a lapse) wholesome bodily, verbal, mental behavior is specific enough and observable. Also, the level of positive and negative mental qualities is also specific and observable. While this knowledge doesn't guarantee that you are ready for high level practice, you can still see if you are really ready for that or if you just want that because of desire, while ignoring the very question about whether you are fit for that or not.My original point is that there are not certain specific and identifiable "preliminary stages" which need to be developed/reached before ordaining.
It depends on tradition. In Thailand most of monks don't even consider monkhood as a condition to take up advanced practice. Most of them know they will disrobe for sure, most of them don't meditate, don't pick up ascetic practices, etc.. and don't even interested in Dhamma. In Thailand Buddhism is strongly intertwined with social life and traditions, where monkhood is more a social role rather than a personal spiritual way of life.The "sandboxes", as far as I know are mainly for non native Bhikkus in Thailand and are only at some monasteries (originating at Wat Nong Pha Pong, I believe). Perhaps it has changed