I have done something similar, once looking at the Bodhisatva vows to see if they matched the pali canon with a view to take-up the corresponding pali equivalent... before deciding to look at the precepts and understand them fully through the Vinaya and other Sutta texts. The canon itself has many precepts, vows, and practices that can be committed to or used to enhance the five, or eight precepts. so I have no issue with the intention behind these vows.
I find some of the rules to be almost repeats. do you need to help whenever asked, and care for the sick... and do one act of charity, as separate rules? and these are not the only ones which could be grouped together with a simple explanation in a commentary form.
I undertake the training rule to refrain from being alone with a member of the opposite sex who is not my partner.
I know a lot of bhikkhus for whom this rule isn't a problem and hasn't been so far for me. Perhaps I should add something about intentionally sequestering myself with a member of the opposite sex?
At the end of the day, this isn't the only situation you can be alone with a member of the opposite sex, intentional or not. a Bhikkhu doesn't have the issue when there is a known possibility because there is an understanding that monks aren't going to do certain things because of celibacy... and arrangements can be made.but if I remember correctly the rule in the Vinaya is regarding how it looks not the explicit possible situation the two are in, in reality. but a lay person with work, that is a different matter. a supervisor wants a word, and they are female, what do you do? doesn't this rule potentially contradict your rules for caring for the sick..., and to wholeheartedly engage with situations and people that I find difficult and troublesome?
I too know lots of Bhikkhus and some have pointed out that people can not be monks and laity at the same time and the ones that try often fall short, get disheartened....
I undertake the training rule to accept all blame and responsibility without hesitation.
I only mean when people are directing blame at me. What use is it to argue with someone who's convinced of your wrongdoing?
and what do you do if you are accused of being a paedophile, or a rapist? this can have real consequences even if it is a false accusation. the mere mention of that sort of accusation has ruined innocent people's lives, and the accusation has been enough for beatings, loss of job, ruined a family life... all because the accusation is enough to convince some of your wrongdoing.
I have never liked this rule because it can allow fantasy, not heedfulness.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill