Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Discussion of ordination, the Vinaya and monastic life. How and where to ordain? Bhikkhuni ordination etc.
santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:19 pm

Sam Vara wrote:Because my point about kamma is intended to be universally true, so no context is required. Your point about body and mind is not universally true, but is phrased as if it were, whether you intended it or not.
But everyone knows that and more importantly it doesn't help countering my position on the importance of providing context to some quote. You tried to lump together the cases of an old man at the end of his life and a young guy by brushing aside context. I proved the case otherwise and even asked you a question to prove my point which you didn't answer.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:44 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sam Vara wrote:Because my point about kamma is intended to be universally true, so no context is required. Your point about body and mind is not universally true, but is phrased as if it were, whether you intended it or not.
But everyone knows that and more importantly it doesn't help countering my position on the importance of providing context to some quote. You tried to lump together the cases of an old man at the end of his life and a young guy by brushing aside context. I proved the case otherwise and even asked you a question to prove my point which you didn't answer.
We don't need to provide context in the case of disproving a general proposition, and that's what the statement "A sound mind is in a sound body" is. As a general proposition, it has no context. That's what makes it general, and what I objected to. You might have intended it to have some, but if so, you neglected to give it. What I provided was the disproving counter-example of Nakulapita. Where the counter example comes from is irrelevant as to whether it disproves the general proposition, providing it is true, of course.

Your statement is propositionally similar to "Swans are white". It means "If there is such a thing as a swan, then it must be a white thing". I presented you with a black swan in the form of Nakulapita. For purposes of disproof, context is irrelevant.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:17 am

Sam Vara wrote:We don't need to provide context in the case of disproving a general proposition, and that's what the statement "A sound mind is in a sound body" is. As a general proposition, it has no context. That's what makes it general, and what I objected to.
Context is totally relevant. You have not provided any "black swan" for you didn't even want to acknowledge the difference between black and white. The question I gave simply asked for this acknowledgement. The fact that you have continuously dodged my very simple question to demonstrate a case in point just proved that you have not proved anything.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:17 am

Bhikkhu_Jayasara wrote:i was told by a buddhist friend who lived and taught in china that the majority of "monks" and "monasteries" in china are really tourist attractions , including Shaolin, so I'm not quite sure mr. stands on fingers is following any kind of actual monasticism, although as someone who use to practice kung fu for years, sometimes I wish I still could
Glad to see another martial arts enthusiast and practitioner. I trained in Judo and while Judo doesn't require conditioning the fingertip (which is important for strikers' martial arts like kung fu, karate, taekwondo, etc.), it does require conditioning the strength of the finger's sides and the grip. While resorting mostly to cardios like running/biking nowadays, I still have leftover calluses on the finger sides from those long hours of pulling and pushing those coarse judogi lapels. I also don't know if that dude is a real monk or not, one thing we do know is that if you eat one of those fingers, you'll walk funny the rest of your life!

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:56 am

santa100 wrote: Context is totally relevant. You have not provided any "black swan" for you didn't even want to acknowledge the difference between black and white. The question I gave simply asked for this acknowledgement. The fact that you have continuously dodged my very simple question to demonstrate a case in point just proved that you have not proved anything.
Nakulapita is the "black swan", as here is a person with a sound mind in an unsound body. Which is, as I said, a refutation of the general statement that you made. There may well, of course, be others, such as the Gilana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html, and probably the Sakkali Sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .wlsh.html The difference here between "black" and "white" is the difference between a sound body and an unsound body. Nakulapita, according to the sutta, has an unsound one. I'm very happy to explore the difference between "sound body" and "unsound body", and indeed my initial comment on this expressed unease at your excessive generality in rendering Juvenal's phrase. My point is precisely that this general statement is not about "fat, lazy young dudes", etc, but that it excludes all those in an unsound body from soundness of mind; which is not the case. If you want to modify that statement to refer to "fat, lazy, young, etc" rather than unqualified unsound bodies in general, then that's fine. But if you want to stand by it, then expect counter-examples.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:18 pm

Sam Vara wrote: I'm very happy to explore the difference between "sound body" and "unsound body", and indeed my initial comment on this expressed unease at your excessive generality in rendering Juvenal's phrase.
I don't think you really meant it when you said about being happy to explore the meaning of "sound body" for you haven't even answered another question I posed to you earlier:
You simply over-interpreted that statement. What exactly does a "sound body" mean to you in that statement? I already gave my position that a "sound body" is not that of mr. stands on fingers, but is "sound" enough to allow one to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight. Was that too much to ask?

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:35 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sam Vara wrote: I'm very happy to explore the difference between "sound body" and "unsound body", and indeed my initial comment on this expressed unease at your excessive generality in rendering Juvenal's phrase.
I don't think you really meant it when you said about being happy to explore the meaning of "sound body" for you haven't even answered another question I posed to you earlier:
You simply over-interpreted that statement. What exactly does a "sound body" mean to you in that statement? I already gave my position that a "sound body" is not that of mr. stands on fingers, but is "sound" enough to allow one to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight. Was that too much to ask?
I'm happy to answer it, although I don't think it is all that relevant to my point, or indeed on-topic. A sound body is one that is healthy, not decrepit or diseased, that enables one to do the physical activities consistent with one's role and desires. There are of course considerable cultural differences in what this means, but that is the gist of the Juvenal quote and what most people tend to mean by it.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:44 pm

Sam Vara wrote:I'm happy to answer it, although I don't think it is all that relevant to my point, or indeed on-topic. A sound body is one that is healthy, not decrepit or diseased, that enables one to do the physical activities consistent with one's role and desires. There are of course considerable cultural differences in what this means, but that is the gist of the Juvenal quote and what most people tend to mean by it.
Good, now we're getting somewhere. Putting aside cultural differences and stuff, for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet, if his body is not "sound" enough to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight, then is it possible that s/he will be able to attain a "sound mind"?

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:57 pm

santa100 wrote: Putting aside cultural differences and stuff, for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet, if his body is not "sound" enough to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight, then is it possible that s/he will be able to attain a "sound mind"?
Yes, of course.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:03 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
santa100 wrote: Putting aside cultural differences and stuff, for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet, if his body is not "sound" enough to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight, then is it possible that s/he will be able to attain a "sound mind"?
Yes, of course.
Good, then please provide sutta references to back up your statement: "Yes, of course is is possible to attain a sound mind without regularly practice Virtues, Meditation, and Insight"?

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:51 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sam Vara wrote:
santa100 wrote: Putting aside cultural differences and stuff, for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet, if his body is not "sound" enough to maintain a regular practice of Virtues, Meditation, and Insight, then is it possible that s/he will be able to attain a "sound mind"?
Yes, of course.
Good, then please provide sutta references to back up your statement: "Yes, of course is is possible to attain a sound mind without regularly practice Virtues, Meditation, and Insight"?
Something can be the case without it being referenced in a sutta, but there are the Nakulapita Sutta, the Gilana Sutta, and Vakkali Sutta, as already cited. Also the Bahiya Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:10 pm

Sam Vara wrote:Something can be the case without it being referenced in a sutta, but there are the Nakulapita Sutta, the Gilana Sutta, and Vakkali Sutta, as already cited. Also the Bahiya Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
You forgot my premise to the question: "for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet". You mentioned Nakulapita, Gilana, Vakkali right? Then let me give a simple description of Nakulapita:
Ven. Nyanatiloka's Dictionary wrote:[About Nakulapita and Nakulamata:]A man and his wife, householders of Sumsumāragiri in the Bhagga-country. When the Buddha visited the village and stayed at Bhesakalāvana, they went to see him. They immediately fell at his feet, calling him "son" and asking why he had been so long away. It is said that they had been the Bodhisatta's parents for five hundred births and his near relations for many more. The Buddha preached to them and they became sotāpannas. The Buddha visited their village once more when they were old. They entertained him, telling of their devotion to each other in this life and asking for a teaching which should keep them likewise together in after-life.
Oh, how about Vakkali, another simple description about him:
Ven. Bodhi's quote in Connected Discourses wrote:Vakkali was declared by the Buddha the foremost bhikkhu of those resolved through faith (etadaggam saddhadhimuttanam ; AN I 24,15)
:jawdrop:
From the highlighted infos above, I don't think neither me or you are the Nakulapita, Gilana, nor Vakkali of the suttas. Being great suttas and inspirational as they are, they don't satisfy the premise I posed to you and hence cannot serve as proofs to the point you're trying to make.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:55 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sam Vara wrote:Something can be the case without it being referenced in a sutta, but there are the Nakulapita Sutta, the Gilana Sutta, and Vakkali Sutta, as already cited. Also the Bahiya Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
You forgot my premise to the question: "for someone who has not attained a "sound mind" just yet". You mentioned Nakulapita, Gilana, Vakkali right? Then let me give a simple description of Nakulapita:
Ven. Nyanatiloka's Dictionary wrote:[About Nakulapita and Nakulamata:]A man and his wife, householders of Sumsumāragiri in the Bhagga-country. When the Buddha visited the village and stayed at Bhesakalāvana, they went to see him. They immediately fell at his feet, calling him "son" and asking why he had been so long away. It is said that they had been the Bodhisatta's parents for five hundred births and his near relations for many more. The Buddha preached to them and they became sotāpannas. The Buddha visited their village once more when they were old. They entertained him, telling of their devotion to each other in this life and asking for a teaching which should keep them likewise together in after-life.
Oh, how about Vakkali, another simple description about him:
Ven. Bodhi's quote in Connected Discourses wrote:Vakkali was declared by the Buddha the foremost bhikkhu of those resolved through faith (etadaggam saddhadhimuttanam ; AN I 24,15)
:jawdrop:
From the highlighted infos above, I don't think neither me or you are the Nakulapita, Gilana, nor Vakkali of the suttas. Being great suttas and inspirational as they are, they don't satisfy the premise I posed to you and hence cannot serve as proofs to the point you're trying to make.
The point I am trying to make is that these people had a sound mind in an unsound body. Once their mind became sound, it was evidently capable of remaining so despite a catastrophic decline in the body. So "A sound mind is in a sound body" is disproved by these examples.

santa100
Posts: 3189
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by santa100 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 4:52 pm

Sam Vara wrote:The point I am trying to make is that these people had a sound mind in an unsound body. Once their mind became sound, it was evidently capable of remaining so despite a catastrophic decline in the body. So "A sound mind is in a sound body" is disproved by these examples.
Whether the sound mind's capable of remaning can be saved for another topic. Evidently, I still see no proof to the topic at hand.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Why many Buddhist monks are over weight?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Mar 13, 2017 5:39 pm

santa100 wrote:
Sam Vara wrote:The point I am trying to make is that these people had a sound mind in an unsound body. Once their mind became sound, it was evidently capable of remaining so despite a catastrophic decline in the body. So "A sound mind is in a sound body" is disproved by these examples.
Whether the sound mind's capable of remaning can be saved for another topic. Evidently, I still see no proof to the topic at hand.
The proof looks like this. Nakulapita, whose body is old and enfeebled and falls far short of the "sound body" criterion, is judged by the Buddha to be capable of further training, which meets the sound mind criterion. As the Blessed One says,
"This, householder, is how one is afflicted in body but unafflicted in mind."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests