Lay followers correcting venerables
Lay followers correcting venerables
Let me heavily qualify this question. What is the etiquette for a lay follower to correct a venerable on a point of factual inaccuracy when relevant? I ask only because on a couple different occasions with Chinese monks, one would say something that was simply not true and generally outside the realm of dharma study. In one case it was a claim that homosexuality caused AIDS; I was respectful and mindful that this was a question of epidemiology, not Buddhist teaching, but I was shouted down by other people for contradicting a teacher. Another occasion, a nun was using "Hinayana" interchangeably with "Theravada" and was obviously not aware of the inaccurate and pejorative content of the word. I tried to educate her on this point linguistically and was treated like an idiot. I don't go looking for arguments, but I do think some points need to be addressed. And when addressing someone in a position of knowledge above me, I'd like to know the correct way to proceed. Thanks!
"We do not embrace reason at the expense of emotion. We embrace it at the expense of self-deception."
-- Herbert Muschamp
-- Herbert Muschamp
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
I think there is a difference in opinion on this between schools, mahayana and particulary Vajrayana seem to discourage correcting a Venerable, however in Theravada (in my understanding) one is allowed to do so with being looked down on, as long as its not done without intent to humiliate or some other unwholesome intention ( i must stress though i may be wrong and unaware of some convention)
Metta
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- pink_trike
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
- Contact:
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
It's good to remember that we're honoring the robe, not the body/personality in the robe. Anything can be said as long the robe and what it represents is respected.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss
- Dawa Gyaltsen
---
Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss
- Dawa Gyaltsen
---
Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Hello mexicali,
I would not 'correct' or argue with a Venerable of any tradition in front of others. What I would do, is make my point by asking polite and interested questions. "Venerable - my understanding is that the original derivation of the word 'hinayana' rose out of sectarian conflict in the early days in India, and that it means 'inferior vehicle' ... is this your understanding?" If they respond with the way they have been taught in their tradition, and you know it is incorrect, simply bow and say, "Thank you venerable, for letting me know your understanding." And drop the matter. or - "Venerable - that is very interesting. Could you point me to any article or medical research that proves homosexuality causes AIDS? "
It would be better, if you are Theravadin, to only attend teachings by Theravada teachers. If you are a guest in a Mahayana or Vajrayana teaching, keep silent - you know what their Tradition believes.
With my own Theravada tradition, Bhante sets aside two sessions each weekend for questions from lay followers. Everyone learns from them, and all join in the discussion.
metta,
Chris
I would not 'correct' or argue with a Venerable of any tradition in front of others. What I would do, is make my point by asking polite and interested questions. "Venerable - my understanding is that the original derivation of the word 'hinayana' rose out of sectarian conflict in the early days in India, and that it means 'inferior vehicle' ... is this your understanding?" If they respond with the way they have been taught in their tradition, and you know it is incorrect, simply bow and say, "Thank you venerable, for letting me know your understanding." And drop the matter. or - "Venerable - that is very interesting. Could you point me to any article or medical research that proves homosexuality causes AIDS? "
It would be better, if you are Theravadin, to only attend teachings by Theravada teachers. If you are a guest in a Mahayana or Vajrayana teaching, keep silent - you know what their Tradition believes.
With my own Theravada tradition, Bhante sets aside two sessions each weekend for questions from lay followers. Everyone learns from them, and all join in the discussion.
metta,
Chris
Last edited by cooran on Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
- Ordinaryperson
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:09 pm
- Location: West
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
I think you have to be really diplomatic without offending if you intend to correct or alternatively search for other venerables.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
~Actively trying to destroy the Three Unwholesome Roots of Greed, Hatred and Ignorance~
~ Greed is the greatest danger of them all ~
~Actively trying to destroy the Three Unwholesome Roots of Greed, Hatred and Ignorance~
~ Greed is the greatest danger of them all ~
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Mexicali,
Jason
I don't know if it's "the correct way to proceed" when addressing a Buddhist monk, nun or lay-teacher, and this is just my personal opinion, but I see nothing wrong with questioning questionable assertions by others, regardless of their social position. I would do the same whether it was a Buddhist teacher claiming that homosexuality caused AIDS, or whether it was the Pope claiming that condoms increase the problem of AIDS in a country where 22.5 million people are living with HIV. I think you're right that certain points need to be addressed, especially when people's health and well-being are at stake. If we don't, then I think all those people who generally accept whatever is said by a religious authority as fact will be poorer for it. Don't be afraid to do what you feel is right.Mexicali wrote:Let me heavily qualify this question. What is the etiquette for a lay follower to correct a venerable on a point of factual inaccuracy when relevant? I ask only because on a couple different occasions with Chinese monks, one would say something that was simply not true and generally outside the realm of dharma study. In one case it was a claim that homosexuality caused AIDS; I was respectful and mindful that this was a question of epidemiology, not Buddhist teaching, but I was shouted down by other people for contradicting a teacher. Another occasion, a nun was using "Hinayana" interchangeably with "Theravada" and was obviously not aware of the inaccurate and pejorative content of the word. I tried to educate her on this point linguistically and was treated like an idiot. I don't go looking for arguments, but I do think some points need to be addressed. And when addressing someone in a position of knowledge above me, I'd like to know the correct way to proceed. Thanks!
Jason
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).
leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
if Ajahn Chah (I think it was) can be corrected by a young novice about his appearance and accept it graciously, then if they want to take offence the offence if theirs not yours.
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
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
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Manapa wrote:if Ajahn Chah (I think it was) can be corrected by a young novice about his appearance and accept it graciously, then if they want to take offence the offence if theirs not yours.
What a wonderful post
Ajahn Chah
Metta
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Certainly, but keep in mind that any Bhikkhu will do their best not to take offence no matter how outrageous the behaviour that they are confronted with is. Therefore I would caution against using lack of visible disapproval as an excuse for boorish behaviour...Manapa wrote:if Ajahn Chah (I think it was) can be corrected by a young novice about his appearance and accept it graciously, then if they want to take offence the offence if theirs not yours.
Another thing to keep in mind is the state of one's own mind. One takes the Noble Sangha as a refuge and the regular Bhikkhu Sangha as representatives of that. From my point of view being argumentative with a Bhikkhu and feeling superior about my knowledge is detrimental to my feelings of respect.
I would therefore advocate Chris' approach of non-argumentation. And if I were completely disillusioned with Monastery I would simply stop going there...
Metta
Mike
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Well said, Mike!
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Greetings,
I find that if you preface your comments with something like "It is my understanding that...." and provide what you believe to be true, you give the other person the opportunity to accept your view if they come to see it as correct, and you don't put them in the awkward position of having to be formally corrected (if in deed you are correct). This applies to everyone, ordained or otherwise.
Metta,
Retro.
I find that if you preface your comments with something like "It is my understanding that...." and provide what you believe to be true, you give the other person the opportunity to accept your view if they come to see it as correct, and you don't put them in the awkward position of having to be formally corrected (if in deed you are correct). This applies to everyone, ordained or otherwise.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Same etiquette as with any other person. Do it tactfully, and not in public.Mexicali wrote:Let me heavily qualify this question. What is the etiquette for a lay follower to correct a venerable on a point of factual inaccuracy when relevant? I ask only because on a couple different occasions with Chinese monks, one would say something that was simply not true and generally outside the realm of dharma study. In one case it was a claim that homosexuality caused AIDS; I was respectful and mindful that this was a question of epidemiology, not Buddhist teaching, but I was shouted down by other people for contradicting a teacher. Another occasion, a nun was using "Hinayana" interchangeably with "Theravada" and was obviously not aware of the inaccurate and pejorative content of the word. I tried to educate her on this point linguistically and was treated like an idiot. I don't go looking for arguments, but I do think some points need to be addressed. And when addressing someone in a position of knowledge above me, I'd like to know the correct way to proceed. Thanks!
~ swimming upstream is tough work! ~
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Thank you, I will take this all under advisement. Do we have any words of the Buddha on the subject?
"We do not embrace reason at the expense of emotion. We embrace it at the expense of self-deception."
-- Herbert Muschamp
-- Herbert Muschamp
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
I can't think of any Suttas that talk specifically about how to correct a teacher, but here are some references to Right Speech: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Mexicali wrote:Thank you, I will take this all under advisement. Do we have any words of the Buddha on the subject?
And here are some references to Teachers: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-su ... l#teaching" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta
Mike
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Lay followers correcting venerables
Exactly
mikenz66 wrote:Certainly, but keep in mind that any Bhikkhu will do their best not to take offence no matter how outrageous the behaviour that they are confronted with is. Therefore I would caution against using lack of visible disapproval as an excuse for boorish behaviour...Manapa wrote:if Ajahn Chah (I think it was) can be corrected by a young novice about his appearance and accept it graciously, then if they want to take offence the offence if theirs not yours.
Another thing to keep in mind is the state of one's own mind. One takes the Noble Sangha as a refuge and the regular Bhikkhu Sangha as representatives of that. From my point of view being argumentative with a Bhikkhu and feeling superior about my knowledge is detrimental to my feelings of respect.
I would therefore advocate Chris' approach of non-argumentation. And if I were completely disillusioned with Monastery I would simply stop going there...
Metta
Mike
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
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