The Skillful Way to Relax (Monks Rules)

Author
Topic
#411

Why are there so many rules? Because human beings have so many defilements.
In the early years of the Buddha’s dispensation the monks soon became Noble Ones, even ¬Arahants. Such pure-hearted individuals instinctively knew what was suitable for a recluse, as they were intent on realising the various stages of the Path. As the years went by, men began to join the Saṅgha for less noble reasons, and they neglected to practise meditation. Most of the rules were made due to the shameless behaviour of the group of six monks. More than two thousand five hundred years since the Buddha’s demise, the situation has degenerated even further. Monks now need more rules to protect themselves from the tempta¬tions of modern life, not fewer rules.
Those who advocate relaxing the rules to suit modern times have not understood the purpose of the Vinaya. The meaning of the word ‘Pāṭimokkha’ given in the Visuddhi¬magga is: “Pāṭimokkha is the virtue of the training precepts; for it frees (mokkheti) him who protects (pāti) it and guards it, it sets him free (mocayati) from the pains of the states of loss, etc., that is why it is called Pāṭimokkha.” (Vism. 16)
Instead of abandoning the rules, monks need to abandon their pride and attachment. They should have confidence in the wisdom of the Omniscient Buddha, who laid down the training rules for his disciples.
It is like the confidence needed when learning to swim. Poor swimmers are afraid to put their head into the water, but the head is heavy, and it is hard to hold it out of the water when swimming. Confident swimmers fully immerse the head in the water, turning the mouth just enough to breathe, thus they can relax in the water and float horizontally. They can use all of their strength to propel themselves along, without any fear of drowning. Monks should suppress their ego and immerse themselves fully in the monastic discipline, then they will be able to use all of their strength to study, to teach, or to meditate.
Refer to the Bhaddāli Sutta and other Suttas in the Bhikkhu Vagga, Majjhimanikāya. The Buddha said to the monks, “I keep myself healthy by eating only one meal. You should do the same.” When the monks told Venerable Bhaddāli about this, he declared his inability to follow that practice. They then advised him to keep back a portion from the morning meal to eat later (i.e. before midday), but he complained that even that was too hard. For three months the Buddha said nothing, but he admonished Venerable Bhaddāli severely at the end of the Rains Retreat: “Surely, Bhaddāli, a transgression overcame you, in that like a fool, confused and blundering, when a training precept was being made known by me, you publicly declared in the Saṅgha of bhikkhus your unwillingness to follow the training.” (M.i.437)
Monks used to walk for alms soon after dawn, taking the meal on their return to the monastery or at some suitable place outside the village. Most monks would have eaten about 9:00 am, well before noon, and before it started to get uncomfortably hot.
Those who do not wish to follow the strict one-sessioner’s practice can eat twice or more, but all food must be finished before midday. For each mouthful taken after midday, a monk should confess an offence of expiation. If it is after midday, but he thinks it is not, or if he is doubtful, it is an offence of expiation. If it is before midday, but he thinks it is not, or if he is doubtful, it is an offence of wrong-doing for each mouthful. A monk should check the time before eating. If there is no clock, and he is doubtful about the time, he should not eat.

Bhikkhu Pesala » Sun Nov 10, 2013 5:21 am
Bankei wrote:Touching money is not such an issue in my opinion, it is the becoming attached to it and the businessisation of monks that concerns me.i

If they were not attached to it, they would not accept it.

This section on rules entailing Expiation with Forfeiture explains what should be done with money if it is accepted by a monk.

It is a major issue in my opinion. There are other more serious offences, such as sexual misconduct of various kinds, but if lay people didn’t offer money to monks, most corrupt individuals would soon leave the Saṅgha, as there would be no advantage in remaining. We get free meals, and free accommodation so that we can meditate, study, and teach the Dhamma. We do not need to be paid for the work that we do as our basic needs are provided by lay supporters.
AIM Website • My Forums • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

Saadhu Bhante.

Kevin
___________________________

” Unrighteous Giving (Adhammadāna)

Here, I must digress to clarify how one can make demerit by giving, as many people may be doubtful about this. There are two kinds of donation: dhammadāna and adhammadāna — righteous giving and unrighteous giving. The first is always meritorious, while the second is demeritorious.
How can giving result in demerit? If something corrupts the morality of others it should not be given. If it is given, it results in demerit. Alcohol, weapons, and poison should not be given. Animals for slaughter should not be given. Prostitutes should not be given. Foolish entertainments and pornography should not be given. Bribes should not be given. Giving such things is demeritorious.
Whatever is not allowable for monks should not be given to them. Money should not be given, almsfood should not be given at the wrong time. Music and entertainments should not be given. The meat of animals killed for the purpose of giving alms should not be given.
In the Jīvaka Sutta of the Majjhimanikāya, the Buddha said, “Whoever offers to the Tathāgata or to his disciples what is not allowable makes much demerit.” Here, the Buddha did not say, “meat that is not allow¬able,” but just “what is not allowable,” so we should take this as an inclusive statement. The Pāḷi word used here for ‘offer’ is ‘āsādeti,’ which means ‘invite to accept.’ So demerit is made even if a monk refuses what is offered.
If you consider the awkward position that a scrupu¬lous monk faces when offered unallowable things, then you should be able to appreciate that urging him to break his precepts is a demeritorious deed. It is like offering a bribe to an honest official. Even if a monk is unscrupulous, condoning and supporting his shameless behaviour cannot be a meritorious deed.”

http://www.aimwell.org/heart.html#OffencesRequiringExpiation


Kevin

From: http://www.dhammawhe…tart=20#p267389
Bhikkhu Pesala » Sun Nov 10, 2013 5:21 am
Bankei wrote:Touching money is not such an issue in my opinion, it is the becoming attached to it and the businessisation of monks that concerns me.i

If they were not attached to it, they would not accept it.

This section on rules entailing Expiation with Forfeiture explains what should be done with money if it is accepted by a monk.

It is a major issue in my opinion. There are other more serious offences, such as sexual misconduct of various kinds, but if lay people didn’t offer money to monks, most corrupt individuals would soon leave the Saṅgha, as there would be no advantage in remaining. We get free meals, and free accommodation so that we can meditate, study, and teach the Dhamma. We do not need to be paid for the work that we do as our basic needs are provided by lay supporters.
AIM Website • My Forums • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

Bhikkhu Pesala Posts: 1627 Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Saadhu Bhante.

Kevin
______________

I like that as well, it has just one invalid thought, that is that a Monks task would be teaching or to serve any community. It isn’t. If you have such tasks that it is – no matter how you do – natural, that you fall into corruption.
And one point the article does not include, is that it is not so that you can put your trusty to do this or that. Its really no problem to act like a king, without touching money at all. In the times I was still a mercantilist i also nearly never touched money.
The actually point is to let go of “I want it in this or that way”.
Btw. just that you get no problem, if that is your site “You may not use any of the site content on your own website”. You understand what I mean

So a monk is not worthy of gifts and hospitality because you get benefit from it, but because of his virtue at the first place. That is why your gift will no more nourish samsara at all and will not cause you backwards which are not beneficial for you.

If he is able to teach and does like to do that, out of compassion, you are blessed if you meet such a sage. But in no way, there is a task to do such or even any allowance to make a livelihood out of such. Actually such is called animal business at least and normally leads soon to SD13.

You really can relax if your virtue is poor, but if not, if you still make things for a livelihood, that you have to run and be a slave all the time. Justifying your “tasks” and ways.

One should not make an effort everywhere,
should not be another’s hireling,
should not live dependent on another,
should not go about
as a trader in the Dhamma.
Johann,

  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.