Happy Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent for most Christians. Wisdom Quarterly's Mexican Buddhist Crystal Q. is torn between celebrating abstinence, the FiveEight or Ten Precepts, Ten Commandments, and reverting to simplicity. Since ancient Indian times, ashes from the pyre have been used by wandering ascetics as a way of getting clean. (Ashes are absorbent, and when collected from a funerary pyre, they are a strong reminder of this body's mortality). Buddhist David Bowie perhaps quoted the Anglican prayer book best when he sang, "Ashes to ashes, funk to funky, we know Major Tom's a junkie" (David Bowie's "Ashes to Ashes").
So it's time for a field trip to church (Catholic mass) to see these smearing of cremation ashes across foreheads in Los Angeles. Ananda is eager to see what this is all about. CC took us to the giant Buddhist temple east of Los Angeles in the very Asian San Gabriel Valley, where we enjoyed the Aztec dancers dancing for the Chinese Mahayana Humanist Buddhist crowd. So this explosion/clash of Mexican and European church tradition ought to be a Roman spectacular.
Pasadena, California, has many Catholics, and "church" (mass) was packed. The one we attended is beautiful inside, much more beautiful than the usual Holy Roman Empire version. It has a picture of God unlike any other Euro Catholic church building we've ever seen, a massive mural. And next to the God are beautiful devas ("angels"), drawn in gold and very colorful. The many pews were full, and there is a Spanish language service going on in the school building across the street. This church building is on the corner of Fair Oaks and the 134 Freeway, with a big belfry and clock (campanile). Inside, it's like a mausoleum of imported stone. And the attendees are a mix of Hispanics, Italians, Europeans, and a sprinkling of Blacks and Asians. Everyone is very nice and seem repentant as they line up for their pyre ashes, almost certainly incense stick remnants and coal. Wine and gluten crackers are served, if one doesn't mind mixing saliva with everyone else, but it's wiped with a white towel between sips, which is certainly sterilizing through prayer and God's power or the priest's magic. The officiant and his altar boy assistants said some nice words, encouraged people to be good and observe the RamadanLenten (Latin Quadragesima, "Fortieth") self-purification practices for the next month and ten days, and to do acts of abstinence, restraint, charity, and kindness, all beautiful sentiments for those who live up to the best of their religion. It is very much like the Buddhist Rains Retreat (Pali Vassa).
Meat eating during the Holy Season?
We agree: Let animals live by not eating them.
Historically, abstinence from meat was a requirement on the days of the Lenten season, including Sunday, the "Lord's Day") [20]. In Eastern Christianity -- including Eastern Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, Eastern Lutherans, and Oriental Orthodox -- Great Lent is observed continuously without interruption for 40 days starting on Clean Monday and ending on Lazarus Saturday before Holy Week [21, 6] and the big finale of the real New Year's Day, Easter, the first day of spring (time of renewal, when the "son" rises after being as dead as the winter, as explained by Astrotheology). More
In India, cremation ashes are called phool ("flowers"). They are collected from the pyre in a rite-of-passage called asthi sanchayana then dispersed. This signifies redemption of the dead in waters (like those of the "holy" Ganges or Jordan River) considered to be sacred and a closure for the living (Hinduism, Note 28).
American Pope's first Lent
Kendrick Lamar's Lefty Gunplay, Grammy Award winning LA Latino
Dr. Dre made mad money signing Eminem, so Kendrick adopted Lefty Gunplay (F. Scott Holladay)
(HP) Christianity erased the truth, but the evidence remains: Viking "berserkers" were said to fight in a trance of unstoppable fury. Some historians believe this rage may have been triggered by psychoactive plants like henbane or hallucinogenic mushrooms. Seeds found in a Viking grave in Denmark suggest these substances were known and possibly used. Christians systematically destroyed much of the old pagan knowledge. This video explores the evidence behind one of Viking history’s strangest questions. More
For the Buddha so loved the mother who raised him that he made her the first Buddhist nun.
Thus have I heard. One day the Blessed One (the Buddha) was staying in Vesali, in the Hall with the Peaked Roof in the Great Forest.
[His foster mother, the Scythian/Shakyian former queen, the sister of his biological mother and second wife of his father, the world's first Buddhist nun] Maha Pajapati Gotami went to the Blessed One, bowed, stood respectfully to one side, and said:
"Venerable sir, it would be good if the Blessed One were to teach me the Doctrine (Dhamma) in brief so that, having heard it from the Blessed One, I might dwell apart, secluded, heedful, ardent, and resolute [withdrawn into calm-and-insight meditation]."
"Gotami, qualities of which it may be said, 'These qualities lead to
"As for the [opposite qualities], you may categorically maintain: 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Training [Discipline], this is the Teacher's instruction.'"
That is what the Buddha said. Gratified, Maha Pajapati Gotami rejoiced in his words.
Contentment
Satthusasana Sutta: "Contentment Discourse (to Upali)," The Teacher's Instruction
Scythians lived in peace thanks to him
Venerable Upali went to the Blessed One, bowed, sat respectfully to one side, and said: "Venerable sir, it would be good if the Blessed One were to teach me the Doctrine in brief so that, having heard it from the Blessed One, I might dwell apart, secluded, heedful, ardent, and resolute."
"Upali, those qualities of which it may be said, 'These things do not lead to complete:
"you may categorically maintain, 'This is not the Doctrine, this is not the Training, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'
"As for the qualities of which [the opposite may be said], you may categorically maintain, 'This is the Doctrine, this is the Training, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"
Ayya Tathaaloka and the Buddhist nuns of the Alliance for Bhikkhunis (bhikkhuni.net)
Global Congress on Buddhist Women, Hamburg, Germany
Special rules for females that subordinate Buddhist nuns to monks (garudhammas or "heavy offenses") are not what they first appear to be.
American Theravada Buddhist nun Ayya Tattaaloka reveals what her research, as well as that of other Buddhist scholars, found. There appears to be no gender difference. (How could that be? We are all led to believe women are subordinate to men in the monastery).
Both monks and nuns have sanghadisesa (calling for a meeting and subsequent meeting of the Sangha) disciplinary rules, which are rather heavy.
In the same way, both males and females have "heavy offenses," that is, garudhammas.
2
3
4
Ayya Taathaloka (videos); Dhr. Seven, Wisdom Quarterly, originally compiled on 9/17/10
(Magnify) April 9, 2023. Here are seven surprising differences between the later Christian and earlier Jewish versions of The Decalogue or "Ten Words" or verses or statements, never commandments.
Today Mag is at the largest version of the Ten Commandments in the world (Fields of the Wood in Murphy, North Carolina).
These "tablets" are over 300 feet wide and 600 feet tall, and each individual letter is roughly three feet wide and four feet tall.
Even though they are thousands of years old, the Ten Commandments continue to be an influential document in both the Christian and Jewish traditions, and it has been adopted by many cultures as a cornerstone of their moral and legal systems.
In the United States in particular, the display of the Ten Commandments in public spaces has been seen as a symbol of the country's declining religious and cultural heritage.
However, it's worth noting that there are significant differences between the Jewish and Christian versions of the Ten Commandments.
For starters, in English they are commonly referred to as the Ten "Commandments," but in Hebrew, they are called the "Ten Sayings," or Aseret Hadibrot/Hadevarim.
This is a translation the ancient Greek agreed with when they called it the Deka Log LOG ("Ten Words") as well as the Latin Vulgate Verba Decem. Even in the 1500s, William Tyndale was still referring to the list as the "Ten Verses," which is much more neutral but still means words.
Then with the poorly translated by near universal standard of the King James Version we have this curious switch to the Ten "Commandments."
00:00 - Huge Monument
00:50 - The Name
1:40 - Different Items
2:44 - "Steal"
03:29 - "Kill"
5:05 - Duplicate Tablets
6:19 - Both Sides
6:57 - Secret Structure
Now why would a king who is sponsoring a translation of the Bible in order to cement his political power be interested in rebranding this list as the Ten Commandments? 🤔
Beyond the name, there are many fascinating differences between individual items on the list as well as their popular interpretations.
Producer Rick Rubin; System of a Down (SOAD) as reviewed by The Charismatic Voice; T.W. Rhys Davids (trans.) SuttaCentral.net; Dhr. Seven, Seth Auberon (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly
What did the Buddha teach about suicide?
Attanipātanapañha—T.W. Rhys Davids (trans.), The Questions of King Milinda, Book 4: The solving of dilemmas, Chapter 4 (Mil. 5.4.5), "On Suicide" (PTS cs 13 PTS vp Pali 195)
“Venerable Nāgasena, it has been said by the Blessed One: ‘O meditators, a monastic is not to commit suicide. Whosoever does so shall be dealt with according to the dharma.”
“But on the other hand [members of the Monastic Order] say: ‘On whatever subject the Blessed One was addressing the disciples, he always, with various similes, preached to them in order to bring about the destruction of rebirth [life], old age, disease, and death. And whoever overcame rebirth, old age, disease, and death, that person did he honor with the highest praise.”
“Now if the Blessed One said suicide [is wrong and forbidden] that saying of yours must be wrong. But if not then the prohibition of suicide must be wrong. This, too, is a double-edged dilemma now put to you, and you have to solve it” (PTS cs 14).
“O king, the monastic [disciplinary code] rule you quote was laid down by the Blessed One yet the saying you refer to is also true. There is a reason for this, a (PTS vp En 274) reason for which the Blessed One both prohibited [the destruction of life] and also [in another sense] instigated us to [bring about the destruction of rebirth].”
“What, Nāgasena, might that reason be?”
“A good person, O king, perfect in uprightness, is like medicine to humans, an antidote to the poison of unskillful karma. Such a person is like water to people, bringing down the dust and impurities of unskillful dispositions. That person is like a jewel treasure to people, bestowing upon them all attainments in righteousness. That person is like a boat to people, inasmuch as one conveys them to the further shore of the four flooded streams (of lust, separation, delusion, and ignorance). Such a person is like a caravan owner to people, bringing them beyond the sandy desert of rebirth. Such a person is like a mighty rain cloud to people, filling their hearts with satisfaction. Such a person is like a teacher to people, training them in all that is good. Such a person is like a guide to people, pointing out to them the path to ultimate peace. It was in order that so good a person as that, one whose good qualities are so many and various, so immeasurable (PTS vp Pali 196), in order that so great a treasure mine of good things, so full of benefit to all beings, might not be done away with that the Blessed One, O king, out of his mercy towards all living beings, laid down that injunction, when he said: 'O meditators, a monastic is not to commit suicide. Whoever does so shall be dealt with according to the dharma.'
“This is the reason for which the Blessed One prohibited [self-murder]. And it was said, O king (PTS vp En 275) by the Ven. Elder Kumāra Kassapa, the eloquent, when he was describing to Pāyāsi the Rājanya the other world:
“‘So long as shamans (wandering ascetics or samaṇas) and Brahmins (brahmanas) of uprightness and beauty of character continue to exist — however long that time might be — just so long do they conduct themselves to the advantage and happiness of the great number of people, to the good and gain and benefit of devas and human beings!’” (PTS cs 15)
“And what is the reason for which the Blessed One instigated us [to put an end to rebirth]? Rebirth, O king, is full of pain, and so is old age, and disease, and death. Sorrow is painful, and so is lamentation, and pain, and grief, and despair. Association with the unpleasant is painful, and separation from the pleasant is painful. The death of a mother is painful, or of a father, or a brother, or a sister, or a son [or a sister], or a wife, or of any relative. Painful is the ruin of one’s family, and the suffering of disease, and the loss of wealth, and decline in goodness, and the loss of insight (PTS vp En 276). Painful is the fear produced by despots, or by robbers, or by enemies, or by famine, or by fire, or by flood, or by the tidal wave, or by earthquake, or by crocodiles or alligators. Painful is the fear of possible blame attaching to oneself, or to others, the fear of punishment, the fear of misfortune. Painful is the fear arising from shyness [bashfulness or inhibition due to misconduct] in the presence of assemblies of one’s fellows, painful is anxiety as to one’s means of livelihood, painful the foreboding of death (PTS vp Pali 197).
“Painful are [the punishments inflicted on people accused of crimes], such as being flogged with whips, or with sticks, or with split rods, having one’s hands cut off, or one’s feet, or one’s hands and feet, or one’s ears, or one’s nose, or one’s ears and nose. Painful are [the tortures inflicted on those accused of being traitors] — being subjected to the Gruel Pot (that is, having boiling gruel poured into one’s head from the top of which the skull bone has been removed) — or to the Chank Crown (that is, having the scalp rubbed with gravel till it becomes smooth like a polished shell) — or to the Rāhu’s Mouth (that is, having one’s mouth held open by iron pins, and oil put in it, and a wick lit therein) — or to the Fire Garland or to the Hand Torch (that is, being made a living torch, the whole body, or the arms only, being wrapped up in oily cloths and set on fire) — or to the Snake Strips (that is, being skinned in strips from the neck to the hips so that the skin falls in strips round the legs), or to the Bark Dress (that is, being skinned alive from the neck downwards and having each strip of [PTS vp En 277] skin as soon as it is removed tied to the hair so that these strips form a veil around one) — or to the Spotted Antelope (that is, having one’s knees and elbows tied together and being made to squat on a plate of iron under which a fire is lit) — or to the Flesh-Hooks (that is, being hung up on a row of iron hooks) — or to the Pennies (that is, having bits cut out of the flesh, all over the body, of the size of pennies) — or to the Brine Slits (that is, having cuts made all over one’s body by means of knives or sharp points and then having salt and caustic liquids poured over the wounds) — or to the Bar Turn (that is, being transfixed to the ground by a bar of iron passing through the root of the ear and then being dragged round and round by the leg) — or to the Straw Seat (that is, being so beaten with clubs that [PTS vp En 278] the bones are broken and the body becomes like a heap of straw) — or to be anointed with boiling oil, or to be eaten by dogs, or to be impaled alive, or to be beheaded. Such and such, O king, are the manifold and various pains which a being caught in the whirlpool of births and rebirths has to endure. Just, O king, as the water rained down upon the Himalayan Mountain flows in its course along the Ganges, through and over rocks and pebbles and gravel, whirlpools and eddies and rapids, and the stumps and branches of trees which obstruct and oppose its passage — just so has each being caught in the succession of births and rebirths to endure such and such manifold and various pains. Full of pain, then, is the continual succession of rebirths. A joy is it when that succession ends. And it was in pointing out the advantage of that end, the disaster involved in that succession, that the Blessed One, great king, instigated us to get beyond rebirth, and old age, and disease, and death by the realization of the final end of that succession of rebirths.
“This is the sense, O king, which led the Blessed One to instigate us (to put an end to rebirth).”
“Very good, Nāgasena! Well solved is the puzzle (I put), well set forth are the reasons (you gave). That is so, and I accept it as you say.”
The Sudinna Tale in the Pāli Vinaya and Its Interpretation
Restraint of the eyes is good.
[Then the Buddhist monk Ven. Sudinna had sex with his ex-wife and was the first to commit such an offense which was not yet a specific violation of the Vinaya or Monastic Disciplinary Code.]
Filled with remorse (kukkucca), Sudinna returned to his fellow monks and confessed his deed. They scolded him harshly, and "then these monks, having rebuked Venerable Sudinna in various ways, told this matter to the Buddha."
The Buddha, after questioning Sudinna, again rebukes him in a similar way as the monks had done. Mocking Sudinna as a "foolish person" (moghapurisa), he tells him that what he has done is unfit (ananucchaviyam), disorderly (ananulomikam), unseemly (appanirūpam), not samana [wandering ascetic]-like (assāmanakam), unsuitable (akappiyam), and not to be done (akaranīyam).
"Why are you...unable to exert the supremely complete full ascetic behavior for as long as you live?" [9].
"Has not the Dhamma [Dharma] been taught by me in manifold ways in order to be free from passion (virāgāya), and not in order to have passion (sarāgāya)?" [10]. "How can you, O foolish person, when the Dhamma is taught by me in order to be free from passion, be intent on (cetessasi) having passion?" [11].
"The Dhamma has been taught for the sake of being without fetters (visamyogāya), being without attachment (anupādānāya)," and still, the Buddha says, Sudinna is intent on doing the opposite.
"The Dhamma has been taught to subdue haughtiness (madanimmadanāya) [12] and so on, for cessation (nirodhāya), and for nirvana. The abandoning of the sensual pleasures has been taught, and the calming of the fever of [craving for] sensual pleasures (kāmaparilāhāna), too.
It would be better if Sudinna (or any "foolish person") were to put (pakkhitta) his "specific organ [or limb]" (angajāta) into the mouth of a venomous snake or a fire-pit rather than into the "specific organ" of womenfolk (mātugāmassa angajāte).
Why is that so? It is because with the former he will die or experience agony
(maramamatta, vā dukkham, lit. "suffering as if dying"), but he will not go to hell [niraya, naraka, purgatory, perdition], to
a lower realm [13]. But with the latter (i.e. sexual intercourse), he will go to hell, to the lower
realms (niraya).
Through that karmic deed, Sudinna will enter (samāpajjissasi) upon the untrue
dhamma (asaddhama), "village dhamma" (gāmadhamma), vile dhamma (vasaladhamma), badness (dutthulla), "what ends with ablution" (odakantika), secrecy
(rahassa), "coming together of the two" (dvayamdvayasamāpatti) [14] ― Sudinna has just
done the first of many unwholesome things [15].
Finally, the Buddha states ten reasons why sexual intercourse is forbidden for monastics, such as:
for the excellence of the Sangha (sanghasutthutāya),
for the comfort of the Sangha (sanghaphāsutāya),
for the suppression of badly confused persons (dumma puggalāna, niggahāya),
so that the well-behaved monastics may live with ease (pesalāna, bhikkhūna, phāsuvihārāya),
for restraining the inflows/defilements (āsavāna, samvarāya),
for the piety of those who are not pious (appasannāna, pasādāya),
so that those who are pious may increase (pasannāna, bhiyyobhāvāya),
so that the true Dhamma may be stable (saddhammatthitiyā),
for assistance in the vinaya (vinayānuggahāya) [16].
Thus the Buddha proclaims the prohibition of sexual intercourse for monastics, the transgression of which makes one liable to the state of asamvāsa, a loss of "fellowship or communion" with other members of his monastic community [17].
Interpretation of the Story
Hmm, what dos this story tell us?
THE PROHIBITION What, then, do the single elements of the narrative tell the reader? Ven. Sudinna himself is shown as not actively interested in sexual pleasure.
There is also no real danger that he would break away from the community: The agreement with his mother was clear, and for his part, Ven. Sudinna was ready to remain in the community as before [18].
From the point of view of lay ethics, there were no objections of caste, and the act happened with the
consent of his wife's superior in the family hierarchy, Ven. Sudinna's mother, who accepted the fact that Ven. Sudinna had neglected his duties as a husband and was intent on doing so in the future.
Therefore, I think the message of the story is as follows: Even if the conditions are highly favorable, even if there is apparently no harm to a third party, sexual intercourse is forbidden. That is to say, under no circumstances should any monastic have sexual intercourse or contact [19].
Soteriology: The liberation of the individual
Ven. Sudinna is accused of not having inferred the prohibition of sex from the fundamental precept of the Dhamma: moving away from sensual craving towards the cessation of sensual desire. That is, of course, a soteriological goal [20].
And indeed, celibacy fits in well with the general ascetic lifestyle, which consists of restraint of the senses for goals such as overcoming craving (tanhā, lit. "thirst") or the attainment of peace [21].
That being true, how does expulsion from the ascetic community fit in here? Does Ven. Sudinna's single transgression really endanger his ascetic lifestyle to such an extent that there is no hope for his return to his formerly exemplary monastic discipline? Is it really justified to truncate the career of a wandering ascetic such as Ven. Sudinna, giving him up as a hopeless case? More
They have sex! They're hypocrites, liars, deceiving the world for minimal gains. We knew it!
.
(II) Relationships
It's hard not to stare when you're still only human.
Buddhist monastics cannot live in complete isolation from laypeople, for their mutually supportive relationship is intrinsic to the monastic way of life.
However, it should never become an intimate or sexual relationship, for that would go against the whole purpose of leaving behind the "family or household life" with its endless "closed in" complications [43],
The "supreme life" (brahmacariya) is one that checks the display of any form of erotic desire through the actions, speech, and thoughts of a monastic. In fact, restraint from gross sexual misconduct is already part of the Five Precepts. [See Note 4].
The Eight Precepts as well as the Ten Precepts immediately refine this then the Monastic Disciplinary Code (Vinaya) manages it with even greater subtlety. One's Dharma life can then advance toward the letting go of all craving through development of the heart/mind through meditation (cultivation).
The most potent object for strong sexual craving, which the mind/heart is pining for and grasping after, is usually associated with the other sex. Therefore, many rules involve this relationship [44].
The first offense of the 227 listed major rules of the Rules Recitation (Patimokkha) concerns a monastic engaging in sexual intercourse.
It is a hot issue, perhaps more today than before, going by the number of sex scandals that rock the Buddhist world in the East and West. Ven. Thiradhammo writes:
"While some of the guidelines may seem somewhat rigid or prudish, it is important to reflect upon the volatility and durability of rumor, even if untrue. The incessant sex-scandals in religious circles may provide a sufficient incentive to encourage the greatest measure of prevention and discretion" (HS, Chp.13).
The rule of celibacy (chastity) was originally laid down because of rich Ven. Sudinna. He was the son of a rich merchant, who left home to become a wandering ascetic (Buddhist monastic) only after great opposition from his family. He went away to practice Dharma, and when he came back to visit, his parents were overjoyed to see him.
So they plotted to lure him back into the lay life again. They invited him for a meal then laid out their wealth in front of him, piled up in two huge heaps of gold, while the wife he had left behind dressed herself in her most irresistibly alluring way.
Ven. Sudinna remained unmoved by all of this. After telling them to throw the gold away in the river, he referred to his former wife as "sister."
Nevertheless, when his elderly mother pleaded with him at least to give them a grandson and heir, he foolishly gave in. He had sexual intercourse with his former wife.
This first defeat offense is summarized: "A monastic who engages in any form of sexual intercourse [penetration] is defeated" (Parajika 1, BMC, p. 45).
Every form and variety of sexual intercourse with sexual penetration — be it genital, oral, or anal, whether with a female, male, or animal — is forbidden. The penalty is the heaviest one of defeat (parajika).
The modern West is full of stories of sexual harassment. The ways the Buddha dealt with such matters should therefore not seem very strange.
If a monastic touches a person in a sexual way, one commits a very serious offense requiring formal meetings of the Monastic Community (sangha) and probation (sangha-disesa).]
The scrupulous monastic wants to remain above suspicion so, if able, will avoid all physical contact.
Hence monk's and nun's attitude toward shaking hands is to avoid them. Or if one wishes to avoid offending, because it is a warm social custom, they are kept brief. This also explains why, at least in Thailand, a receiving cloth is used to receive offerings from females. (See EN 85).
Buddhist monks are not alone in this. Catholics.
The rule was first set down by the Buddha after a Brahmin and his wife had gone to inspect Ven. Udayin's fine dwelling. [See Udāyī (2).] As Ven. Udayin was showing them around, he came up behind the lady and "rubbed up against her limb by limb."
After they had left the husband praised Ven. Udayin, but the wife was critical and explained what had happened. The Brahmin then complained, "Isn't it even possible to take one's wife to a monastery without her being molested?" This rule was then set down:
"Should any monastic overcome by lust, with altered mind, engage in bodily contact with a woman, or in holding her hand, holding a lock of her hair, or caressing any of her limbs, it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Monastic Community" (Sanghadisesa 2, BMC, p. 100).
To be at fault the monastic must usually do some action to bring himself in contact with a female as lust overcomes his mind [45]. If he accidentally stumbles and bumps into a female, or vice-versa, or if he is accosted by one, as long as there is no intention to come into lustful contact with her, there is no offense.
However, the average monastic's mind tends to be so quick and unruly — for one is, after all, still in training and therefore not yet enlightened — that one may prefer to be super-cautious about such situations.
If a monastic touches his mother out of affection, this is still an offense but the lesser one of wrong-doing (dukkata) [46]. While gratitude to parents was strongly emphasized by the Buddha, the monastic having left the home-life and family should not cling to worldly relationships.
The only true way to fulfill one's filial obligations is by gaining insight into the Dharma and then teaching one's parents.
If a monastic is acting with lustful intentions, one incurs a grave (thullaccaya) offense for making bodily contact with a pandaka ("sex-aberrant") [homosexual, deviant, pervert, transgender, transsexual, prostitute, or eunuch] and an offense of wrong-doing for sexual contact with a male. (See BMC, p. 103).
The previous rules dealt with the monastic's physical actions. The next two rules are offenses — again of the very serious category — that concern his wrong speech towards females.
Flirting
Are you still a monk? - That was just temporary.
This rule came into being when many female visitors came together to look over Ven. Udayin's dwelling. He spoke to them in a lewd, flirtatious way so that some of them said, "It is improper. Even from our husbands we wouldn't like to hear this sort of thing." Therefore, the Buddha laid down this rule:
"Should any monastic, overcome by lust, with altered mind, address lewd words to a female in the manner of young men to a young woman alluding to sexual intercourse, it entails initial and subsequent meetings of the Monastic Community" (Sangh. 3, BMC, p. 110).
Propositioning
The following rule is very relevant today when some misguidedly believe that submitting to sex with spiritual teachers can help in their spiritual development.
Again, it was originally a lustful Ven. Udayin who was the cause of this offense. This time, he suggested to a beautiful and devout female follower that she make a "special offering" to him, that of sexual intercourse. The Buddha then set forth this rule:
"Telling a female that she would benefit from having sexual intercourse with oneself is [an offense requiring initial and subsequent meetings of the Monastic Community]." (Summary [47] Sangh. 4, BMC, p. 117).More
In Western countries compassionate and environmental vegetarianism is increasing in popularity, and this has led to questions about Buddhist monastics and meat eating.
The question of monks and nuns' eating meat is an old one, which was once explicitly raised by the "renegade monk" Ven. Devadatta (Buddhism's Judas figure, who was the brother of Prince Siddhartha's wife and his cousin, who was a monk for a long time practicing to develop psychic powers rather than wisdom or compassion).
He asked the Buddha to prohibit wandering ascetics from eating fish and flesh of all kinds in a ploy to usurp the Buddha and take over the leadership of the Monastic Community (Sangha).
It was Devadatta's "stricter ascetic" tactic, suggesting he would be a better leader with purer standards. The Buddha had already established a strict rule for both monastics and laypeople about not taking life (see Killing), so he disagreed with Devadatta's ploy.
The Buddha allowed monastics to eat meat and fish [88] except under the following circumstances:
If a monastic sees, hears, or so much as suspects that it has been killed for one, that monastic is forbidden to eat it [89] (M.I,369).
A modern Theravada monk on alms round in England (Ajahn Manapo/Forest Monastery).
.
If a monastic is given meat on alms round and has no knowledge about how the animal was murdered [90], that monastic has to "receive it with attentiveness." To receive it does not necessarily mean to eat it. (See the Sekhiya Trainings.)
One should be grateful and recollect that food one is given is what enables one to continue to live the monastic, wandering ascetic, mendicant life, and as a mendicant one is not in a position to choose what one is given.
If one later comes to know the family and they ask about the Dharma, one will be able to explain the precept about not killing. This may cause them to reflect on their attitude toward meat eating.
An individual layperson can choose whether to be a vegan, vegetarian, or whatever. Problems usually arise only when vegetarians try to impose their choice on others. As meal times are normally a family or shared affair, this can create tensions and misunderstandings.
An individual monastic who lives on alms food cannot make such choices. Often the donors are unknown — perhaps not even Buddhist, or just starting to find out about Dharma — and to refuse their generosity may so offend them that they never have anything to do with Dharma again.
Karma: Wish I'd donated pure vegan food!
Finally it comes down to the laypeople who go to the market to buy food to give to monastics [who commit a kind of killing by paying others to kill when buying slaughtered and butchered animals, being complicit in that killing by paying for it].
If they are vegetarian themselves or like to give pure food, then the monastic should receive that food with "appreciation" — especially if it means that fewer animals are being tormented and slaughtered.
Nevertheless, it should not become a political issue where other people are attacked for their behavior.Source
COMMENTARY: Note the strong bias of meat eating monks and scholars who present the Buddhist view on this subject. For it is easier to change anyone's religion than his or her diet. Ask a vegan and get a whole different reading of what the Buddhist Monastic Code says, as one can point to many back stories and examples where vegetarianism was the norm for wandering ascetics, yogis, shamans, Brahmins, and spiritual seekers in the East. Few people, who themselves rarely ate meat, would ever think to give it to renunciants. For there was a time when everyone knew, which is to say it was common knowledge, that flesh does not conduce to dispassion, letting go, and purity. But it is not by diet alone that one would ever gain these three things, which is what Buddhism contributed to ancient Indian spirituality. Diet is a component of a spiritual life, not a be all end all. Practice compassion and wisdom.
All materials on this site are submitted by editors and readers. All images, unless otherwise noted, were taken from the Internet and are assumed to be in the public domain.
In the event that there is still a problem, issue, or error with copyrighted material, the break of the copyright is unintentional and noncommercial, and the material will be removed immediately upon presented proof.
Contact us by submitting a comment marked "private."
Do not follow this journal if you are under vinaya or parental restrictions. Secure protection by Sucuri.
Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at creativecommons.org/about/licenses.
